Iraq has between 25 and 50 percent unemployment, a dysfunctional parliament, rampant disease, an epidemic of mental illness, and sprawling slums. The killing of innocent people has become part of daily life. What a havoc the United States has wreaked in Iraq.

UN-HABITAT, an agency of the United Nations, recently published a 218-page report entitled State of the World’s Cities, 2010-2011. The report is full of statistics on the status of cities around the world and their demographics. It defines slum dwellers as those living in urban centers without one of the following: durable structures to protect them from climate, sufficient living area, sufficient access to water, access to sanitation facilities, and freedom from eviction.

Almost intentionally hidden in these statistics is one shocking fact about urban Iraqi populations. For the past few decades, prior to the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, the percentage of the urban population living in slums in Iraq hovered just below 20 percent. Today, that percentage has risen to 53 percent: 11 million of the 19 million total urban dwellers. In the past decade, most countries have made progress toward reducing slum dwellers. But Iraq has gone rapidly and dangerously in the opposite direction.

According to the U.S. Census of 2000, 80 percent of the 285 million people living in the United States are urban dwellers. Those living in slums are well below 5 percent. If we translate the Iraqi statistic into the U.S. context, 121 million people in the United States would be living in slums.

If the United States had an unemployment rate of 25-50 percent and 121 million people living in slums, riots would ensue, the military would take over, and democracy would evaporate. So why are people in the United States not concerned and saddened by the conditions in Iraq? Because most people in the United States do not know what happened in Iraq and what is happening there now. Our government, including the current administration, looks the other way and perpetuates the myth that life has improved in post-invasion Iraq. Our major news media reinforces this message.

I had high hopes that the new administration would tell the truth to its citizens about why we invaded Iraq and what we are doing currently in the country. President Obama promised to move forward and not look to the past. However problematic this refusal to examine on the past — particularly for historians — the president should at least inform the U.S. public of the current conditions in Iraq. How else can we expect our government to formulate appropriate policy?

More extensive congressional hearings on Iraq might have allowed us to learn about the myths propagated about Iraq prior to the invasion and the extent of the damage and destruction our invasion brought on Iraq. We would have learned about the tremendous increase in urban poverty and the expansion of city slums. Such facts about the current conditions of Iraq would help U.S. citizens to better understand the impact of the quick U.S. withdraw and what are our moral responsibilities in Iraq should be.

Adil E. Shamoo is a senior analyst at Foreign Policy In Focus, and a professor at the University of Maryland School of Medicine. He writes on ethics and public policy. He can be reached at: ashamoo@umaryland.edu

I’m sure it’s just a coincidence that Gen. David Petraeus almost simultaneously began giving interviews to The New York Times, the Washington Post, NBC, Meet the Press and others voicing his opinion that a withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan would be unwise.

Cover of the August 9 edition of 'Time' magazine.

Solomon, author of “War Made Easy: How Presidents and Pundits Keep Spinning Us to Death” and president of the Institute for Public Accuracy http://www.accuracy.org/, visited Kabul last year.

Lucinda Marshall said Monday, “On Meet the Press on Sunday, Petraeus cited the recent Time cover story featuring a young Afghan woman with her nose cut off. Said Petraeus: “If you lose, it has, I think, some significant repercussions, not just for this country, although they would be enormous, and start with the cover of Time magazine for starters.”

Marshall is director of the Feminist Peace Network, which just posted the article “Time’s Story About Afghan Women – Questions Raised About Author’s Vested Interests And Accuracy Of The Story.”

See also: “Time Magazine Once Again Trots Out the Tired and Inexcusable ‘We’re in Afghanistan (and Have to Stay) to Protect Women’ Mantra”

But you don’t have to be an American to see the dangers of the military setting a nation’s agenda.

This is from an article by Tony Iltis in Green Left, an Australian-based alternative weekly that describes itself as “a proudly independent voice committed to human and civil rights, global peace and environmental sustainability, democracy and equality.” Tony’s article was headlined, accurately, I believe, “‘Time’ exploits victim to promote war.”

“…what happened to Aisha took place in Afghanistan under Western occupation.

“Once again, it is molding the oppression of women into a propaganda tool to gain support and staining their hands with ever-deepening treason against Afghan women.”

Malalai Joya, who also is a politician the BBC called “the bravest woman in Afghanistan” for denouncing the warlords in the parliament, toured the United States earlier this year in an effort to get support for pulling out U.S. troops from her country.

This was her message to Americans:

“Democracy will never come to Afghanistan through the barrel of a gun, or from the cluster bombs dropped by foreign forces. The struggle will be long and difficult, but the values of real democracy, human rights and women’s rights will only be won by the Afghan people themselves.

“So do not be fooled by this façade of democracy. The British and other Western governments that claim to be bringing democracy to Afghanistan ignore public opinion in their own countries, where growing numbers are against the war.

“In my tours to countries that have troops in Afghanistan, I’ve met many bereaved parents who have lost their loved ones in the war in my home. I am very sorry to see governments putting the lives of their soldiers in danger in Afghanistan in the name of bringing democracy. In fact the soldiers are serving the strategic and regional interests of the White House and the consequences of their occupation so far have been devastating for my people.

“The worst casualty of this war is truth. Those who stand up and raise their voice against injustice, insecurity and occupation have their lives threatened and are forced to leave Afghanistan, or simply get killed.

“We are sandwiched between three powerful enemies: the occupation forces of the U.S. and NATO, the Taliban and the corrupt government of Hamid Karzai.

“My people are fed up. That is why we want an immediate end to the U.S. occupation.”

But, of course, the current media blitz by Gen. Petraeus and his willing media accomplices isn’t aimed at the people of Afghanistan. It’s aimed at us.

Where do you stand? What will you do?

Reprieve
April 6, 2010

Reprieve launches emergency legal action for Guantánamo prisoner Ahmed Belbacha as US government makes worrying deal with Algeria

Lawyers for former British resident Ahmed Belbacha yesterday submitted an emergency plea to the US courts seeking to prevent his forced return to persecution and torture in Algeria.

Ahmed’s legal team is deeply concerned by the Obama Administration’s Easter weekend announcement of a deal with the Algerian government.

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder will travel to Algiers tomorrow (Wed., April 7) “to discuss cooperation on combating terrorism and enhancing law enforcement coordination” and to sign a “mutual legal assistance treaty” with the Algerian Minister of Justice.

Ahmed, a 39 year-old accountant, was visibly terrified during his attorney visit last week and remains a tragic figure in Guantánamo. Cleared of all charges by the Bush Administration, he has consistently chosen to stay imprisoned rather than face his fate in Algeria, a country he originally fled after threats on his life by the terrorist group Group Islamique Armé (GIA).

Ahmed’s plight, together with his gentle nature, has attracted private offers of help from both sides of the Atlantic, but no government has come to his rescue. Reprieve is appealing worldwide – to the governments of Britain, Ireland and Luxembourg – for help.

Ahmed’s attorney, Reprieve’s Tara Murray said:

“As Attorney General Holder travels to Algeria, all signs now point towards Ahmed’s imminent forced transfer to torture and persecution. We implore the European nations of Ireland, Luxembourg and the UK to stand up and put an end to Ahmed’s agony.”

BACKGROUND:

Ahmed Belbacha lived for years in the seaside town of Bournemouth, UK, where he studied English and worked; during a Labour conference he was responsible for cleaning the hotel room of Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott, from whom he received a healthy tip and note of appreciation. He is now in his eighth year of imprisonment without charge in Guantánamo Bay.

Ahmed’s fears about Algeria were confirmed by an alarming “conviction” delivered in absentia by an Algerian court last November. In a disgraceful show trial, where no lawyer was appointed to defend Ahmed, the court sentenced him to 20 years in prison for belonging to an “overseas terrorist group.” Despite repeated requests and extensive investigation, Reprieve’s lawyers have been unable to discover what exactly Ahmed is supposed to have done. No evidence has been produced to support his “conviction,” which appears to be retaliation against Ahmed for speaking out about the inhumane treatment he would be subjected to if sent to Algeria.

Ahmed had been protected by an injunction barring the U.S. government from repatriating him against his will, but a U.S. judge dissolved the injunction in February. Reprieve immediately requested the decision be reversed, citing the U.S. Supreme Court’s ongoing consideration of a related case, Kiyemba v Obama (Kiyemba II), in which it was decided that U.S. courts could not prevent the Obama Administration from forcibly repatriating prisoners to countries where they face persecution. Worryingly, on Monday, 22nd March, the Supreme Court decided not to review Kiyemba II; Reprieve then submitted another plea to D.C.’s federal district court on 24th March, followed by an emergency motion over the Easter weekend following Holder’s announcement.

Ahmed has been given a room in a flat by a Bournemouth resident, and the Massachusetts town of Amherst has offered him refuge in defiance of Congress. So far, however, no government has come forward to help.

For more information please contact Katherine O’Shea at Reprieve’s Press Office: katherine.oshea@reprieve.org.uk 020 7427 1099/ 07931592674 or go to http://www.reprieve.org.uk/ahmedbelbacha.

(Reprieve, a legal action charity, uses the law to enforce the human rights of prisoners, from death row to Guantánamo Bay. Reprieve investigates, litigates and educates, working on the frontline, to provide legal support to prisoners unable to pay for it themselves. Reprieve promotes the rule of law around the world, securing each person’s right to a fair trial and saving lives. Clive Stafford Smith is the founder of Reprieve and has spent 25 years working on behalf of people facing the death penalty in the USA. Reprieve’s current casework involves representing 33 prisoners in the U.S. prison at Guantánamo Bay, working on behalf of prisoners facing the death penalty, and conducting ongoing investigations into the rendition and the secret detention of “ghost prisoners” in the so-called “war on terror.”)

On Tuesday, a string of bombings killed nine people in two of Iraq’s largest cities, Baghdad and Mosul.

Examiner.com posted a slide show from these attacks here.

Last week, suicide bombings in Baghdad killed 127 people and wounded more than 500. Bombings in August and October, also in Baghdad, killed another 250 people.

According to The Associated Press, in Baghdad on Tuesday, “Three parked cars packed with mines and other bombs exploded within minutes of each other around 7:30 a.m. just outside different entrances to the Green Zone, just as Iraqis were coming to the area for work.”

The blasts killed five people and wounded at least 16.

The AP report said, “Four hours later and 225 miles away, in the northwestern Iraqi city of Mosul, two more car bombs and a roadside mine killed four people. The attacks appeared to target a busy neighborhood and a church, wounding up to 40 people.”

Of course, U.S. officials are quick to point out that violence, nationwide, is at its lowest level since 2003, a statistic that Iraqis may not find very comforting. It’s probably hard for many everyday Iraqis to see how the surge has changed their lives, with at least 386 people killed in bombings since August, let alone, the countless people killed in day-to-day violence.

The good news, for the United States, I suppose, is that Iraq’s prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki, doesn’t see the bombings and other daily violence preventing the exit of U.S. troops, who are scheduled to leave by the end of 2011. Of course, that’s good news, too, for most Iraqis.

In the email, McDermott said, “Last week the President outlined the administration’s policy about the war in Afghanistan.

“I appreciate the time he took to carefully study all of our country’s options and inform our citizens of his plan.

“But at the end of the day, he simply did not convince me that escalating our country’s involvement in the War in Afghanistan is in our national interest…

“There is support in Congress to press for a vote on funding for new troops prior to sending them.

Congressman Jim McDermott

McDermott said he couldn’t support Obama’s troop surge because our country faces no immediate threat from Afghanistan and committing more troops to combat is not in our national interest.

He said: “We should be withdrawing troops from combat, not sending more of them into a conflict that the military cannot solve. At the end of the day, we will wind up with more people, both civilian and military, killed.”

On Dec. 2, right after Obama announced his Afghan surge, McDermott issued the following statement:

“The President’s speech tonight did not convince me that his policy is worth supporting. Last week, I attended a memorial service for seven servicemen from the same striker brigade from Fort Lewis who were killed on the same day in Afghanistan. I will not vote to send another troop to Afghanistan until I’m convinced that this strategy will succeed.

“No matter how many troops we commit, the United States cannot bring about the change necessary to stabilize Afghanistan. This responsibility ultimately falls on the Afghani government and its people, and no outsider can force this change to occur.

“Not only is this war costly in human terms, but it is bleeding our ability to provide for our own people and construct economic recovery and security at home.

“The Bush administration made a fatal mistake when it led us into Iraq and away from finishing the task in Afghanistan, and we have been paying the price ever since. I fear that we are asking our troops to fix a problem of our own making that the military cannot solve alone.”

In the fundraising email today, McDermott said, “Our country’s foreign policy toward the war in Afghanistan is another in a long list of difficult issues that Republicans will use in next year’s mid-term elections. They will also use our support of Health Care Reform and the much-needed jobs and stimulus programs in a desperate attempt to take over the Congress.

“Those of us who are outspoken advocates of progressive issues will be among their prime targets. But we cannot back down on our issues. Instead, all of us need to be ready to fight them next year.”

“Today, I will begin circulating two privileged resolutions which will trigger debate and votes on a timely withdrawal of U.S troops from Afghanistan and Pakistan.

“Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution of the United States makes it Congress’ responsibility to determine whether or not we go to war or stay at war. Consistent with Article 1, Section 8, the privileged resolutions will invoke the War Powers Resolution of 1973. I ask for your support of these resolutions, which will be introduced in the House in January.

“Yesterday, with the US Secretary of Defense at his side, the President of Afghanistan declared that his country’s security forces will need financial and training assistance from the United States for the next 15-20 years.

“We cannot afford these wars. We cannot afford the loss of lives. We cannot afford the cost to taxpayers. We cannot afford to fail to exercise our constitutional right to end the wars.

“Please sign onto the privileged resolutions to end the wars and to bring our troops home.
Stand up for the troops. Stand up for the truth. Stand up for the Constitution and Congress’ responsibility.”

Kucinich also sent the following letter to his colleagues under the heading, Require the President to Withdraw from Afghanistan and Pakistan:

“According to ABC News, Hamid Karzai, the president of Afghanistan, in a joint press conference with Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, remarked that his country’s security forces will need financial and training assistance from the United States for the next 15-20 years. This is especially disturbing since the Administration is already sliding back the timeline the President established only last week. What Mr. Karzai did not say is that would cost U.S. taxpayers an additional $2-3 trillion.

“As President Obama prepares to escalate military operations in Afghanistan and Pakistan, we must reassert our Constitutional prerogative as it relates to war. The United States has been involved in military action both in Afghanistan and Pakistan since the inception of the Obama Administration, despite the fact that the President has never submitted a report to Congress pursuant to Section 4(a) (I) of the War Powers Resolution.

“When Congress returns in 2010, I intend to bring to the floor of the House privileged resolutions reasserting this prerogative. My bills, which would trigger a timeline for a timely withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan and Pakistan, invoke the War Powers Resolution of 1973 and are intended to secure the Constitutional role of Congress, as directly elected representatives of the people, under Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution, to decide whether or not America enters into war, continues a war, or otherwise introduces armed forces or materiel into combat zones.

“Despite the President’s assertion that previous Congressional action gives him the authority to respond to the attacks of September 11, 2001, a careful reading of the Authorization of Use of Military Force (AUMF) makes clear that the AUMF did not supersede ‘any requirement of the War Powers Resolution’ and therefore did not undermine Congress’ ability to revisit the constitutional question of war powers at a later date.

“I invite you to join in reasserting Congress’ Constitutional right and obligation in these matters…”

Draft copies of the Kucinich bills can be read here and here.

And the protests are continuing. On Saturday, Seattle activists are gathering at 2 p.m. in Westlake Park at the urging of ANSWER (The Act Now to Stop War and End Racism coalition). The planned demonstration and protest is also endorsed by The World Can’t Wait, a group that began organizing in opposition to the Bush administration.

ANSWER described its opposition in a statement issued right after Obama said he was sending more troops to Afghanistan:

“The U.S. cannot ‘win’ the war in Afghanistan. It was losing the war when Barack Obama took office. In March 2009, President Obama ordered another 30,000 troops. Rather than reverse the outcome, the U.S. and NATO effort lost even more ground. Now President Obama has ordered another 30,000 troops to Afghanistan…

Bush and Cheney ordered the invasion thinking it would be easy going. They thought Iraq would be easy, too. They were going to wipe out the governments in Iran, Syria and North Korea. This colonial-type fantasy, nourished by ‘great nation’ arrogance and the acquiescence of a caste of corrupt politicians in Congress, set the stage for the current catastrophe of a war without end.

After eight years of war, more than 140 armed insurgent groups of Afghans now exist as a response to the invasion and they control large parts of the country. The people in Afghanistan perceive the occupation as a colonial-type takeover of their country. September 11 was a pretext, but there were no Afghans or Iraqis who hijacked the planes. The people of Afghanistan, like the people in Vietnam, will never accept foreign military occupation in their country.”

Meanwhile, violence in the region continues.

In Rawalpindi, Pakistan, news reports said, militants attacked a mosque near army headquarters, killing at least 36 worshippers, including six military officers, during Friday prayers. Officials said they sprayed gunfire and threw grenades before blowing themselves up.

The Associated Press said, “Violence in nuclear-armed Pakistan has escalated since the army launched an offensive in mid-October against Taliban militants in the northwestern tribal area of South Waziristan near the Afghan border.”

In Afghanistan, U.S. Marines launched a major operation today,

According to The Associated Press, “Hundreds of troops from the 3rd Battalion, 4th Marines and the Marine reconnaissance unit Task Force Raider were dropped by helicopter and MV-22 Osprey aircraft behind Taliban lines in the northern end of the Now Zad Valley of Helmand province, scene of heavy fighting last summer.”

World March organized a number of events for today in the United States and elsewhere. Ed Asner and Martin Sheen are among those joining the protests in Los Angeles. Chris Wells, the North America spokesperson for World March, said today: “We keep going down the same road. It’s important to denounce war, but we must build peace – we must change our entire mindset. During the Vietnam War, Martin Luther King Jr. said that the U.S. was the greatest purveyor of violence in the world and that if we didn’t end that military mindset we’d be protesting war in country after country. We’ll be participating in a tribute to King at the Lincoln
memorial this afternoon.”

The March has been endorsed by the presidents of eleven countries, and also by Desmond Tutu, Jimmy Carter, Noam Chomsky, Cornel West, Dennis Kucinich, Daniel Ellsberg, Cate Blanchett, Yoko Ono, Art Garfunkel, Philip Glass and hundreds more.

For more information, including a complete list of events in the United States, go to http://www.worldmarchusa.net .For events in other parts of the world, got to http://www.theworldmarch.org .

The IPA news release this morning also said Michael McPhearson, national executive director of Veterans For Peace, recently sent a letter to Obama saying: “With millions of U.S. people feeling the fear and desperation of no longer having a home; with millions feeling the terror and loss of dignity that comes with unemployment; with millions of our children slipping further into poverty and hunger, your decision to deploy thousands more troops and throw hundreds of billions more dollars into prolonging the profoundly tragic war in Afghanistan strikes us as utter folly. We believe this decision represents a war against ordinary people, both here in the United States and in Afghanistan. The war in Afghanistan, if continued, will result in the deaths of hundreds if not thousands of U.S. troops, and untold thousands of Afghans.”

Also, IPA listed a unique and more solitary protest by Thomas Mahany, a Vietnam veteran and a stonemason and artist from Michigan. Mahany has been protesting with a water-only fast in front of the White House since Veterans Day. Today, he sent a letter to Congress calling for an end to the military’s stop-loss policy, which is the involuntary extension of a service member’s active duty service in order to keep them in the military beyond the time they signed up for:

“The horrible mass murder at Fort Hood on November 5th was an alarm going off. On that day I decided I could no longer remain indifferent to such an obviously unjust Pentagon policy of troop procurement leading to rampant Post Traumatic Stress Disorder among our combat soldiers and placing unbearable hardship on the families of a very limited sector of our population.

“A new Army mental health survey of soldiers in Afghanistan shows that morale is down and mental stress increases with an increased number of deployments. Action is well past due to deal with the cruel and self-serving stop-loss strategy implemented by our military on a severely undermanned fighting force.”

While these protests are praiseworthy, it is also worth noting that Obama is only living up to his campaign promises. He said he would shift the war to Afghanistan, and he is doing that. On the domestic front, we got some “hope.” On the international front, we got a lot of goodwill toward the United States just for electing Obama. But as far as U.S. actions abroad, it’s still pretty much business as usual. We will still send our soldiers to fight for our business interests wherever those interests take us.

The Associated Press reported that Porfiro Lobo, a wealthy and very conservative cattle rancher known affectionately as Pepe, called the race “the cleanest in the history of the country.” Pepe asked nations to recognize his government despite the controversy sparked by the military coup five months ago that ousted President Manuel Zelaya.

“We ask them … to see that they are punishing the people who went to vote, do so every four years and have nothing to do with what happened on June 28,” Lobo said, according to AP and other press reports on Monday.

The coup government has been ostracized internationally and most nations have said they would not recognize anyone elected under that coup government. On Tuesday, leaders from Argentina, Brazil, Venezuela, Spain and Portugal released a statement calling the coup “unacceptable,” saying that reinstating President Zelaya was “a fundamental step” the Central American country needed to take to return to constitutional normality. The leaders of Colombia, Peru and Costa Rica, however, had individually endorsed the election. The statement was released at the end of a three-day Iberoamerican summit in Estoril, Portugal.

“Respect for a democratic way of life has, especially in the Latin American region, a tragic history and because of that we have to defend democracy unconditionally,” Argentine President Cristina Kirchner, told a press conference.

The president of Spain, Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, said all leaders opposed the coup but that “differences centered on how we evaluated the elections and their consequences.” The majority are refusing to recognize the results.

The Obama administration had previously indicated it would not recognize the results of any election unless Zelaya was first restored to power. But last week, the U.S. State Department said it backed the election process as an “essential part” of the solution to the crisis.

U.S. Ambassador Hugo Llorens went much farther on Monday, calling the election “a great celebration of democracy.”

“Pepe Lobo is a man of great political experience,” Llorens said. “I wish him luck, and the United States will work with him for the good of both our countries. … Our relations will be very strong.”

To its credit, the U.S. State Department did say that negotiations to create a unity government should continue. That unity government would hold power until Lobo takes office Jan. 27. Under a U.S.-brokered pact, Honduran lawmakers will vote Wednesday on whether Zelaya should be restored until Lobo takes office.

Zelaya, however, told BBC on Tuesday that the official turnout figures of some 60% were fraudulent. He also said he would refuse reinstatement even if Congress votes to restore him to serve out his term.

A Honduran political analyst, Eduardo Bahr, said the newly elected president would be a puppet of the United States.

“The winner in these elections has to follow the guidelines of Washington and act as an ideological cap on the progressive ideas in the south of the continent,” Bahr, director of the Honduran National Library and a political observer during the elections, in an interview to news agency TELESUR Monday.

Is this train wreck bound for a banana republic?

One would think, with President Obama poised to send more troops to Afghanistan, that a book tour by a woman who became the youngest person to be elected to Afghanistan’s new parliament in 2005, would be a big deal for our local news folks. But, it wasn’t. I only found out about it after seeing a mention of it on an Afghan site, and then finding her itinerary on a local activist web page, Peace Action of Washington. The lesson, I guess, is that I should tune in to KUOW more often.

Malalai on Wednesday spoke about her country’s struggle and about her new memoir, A Woman Among Warlords at Antioch

Malalai Joya's new book

In May 2007, Malalai, who, incidentally, has survived five assassination attempts, was suspended from the parliament on the grounds that she had insulted fellow representatives (War lords and drug lords are a sensitive lot). Her suspension, which she is appealing, has been protested by lawmakers, activists and intellectuals around the world.

Since most of us missed her talks, I’m reprinting some of Malalai’s key messages, taken from an essay she wrote for Britain’s The Independent just after the August elections in Afghanistan and from an article she wrote for the San Jose Mercury News on Tuesday:

“Democracy will never come to Afghanistan through the barrel of a gun, or from the cluster bombs dropped by foreign forces. The struggle will be long and difficult, but the values of real democracy, human rights and women’s rights will only be won by the Afghan people themselves.

“So do not be fooled by this façade of democracy. The British and other Western governments that claim to be bringing democracy to Afghanistan ignore public opinion in their own countries, where growing numbers are against the war.

“In my tours to countries that have troops in Afghanistan, I’ve met many bereaved parents who have lost their loved ones in the war in my home. I am very sorry to see governments putting the lives of their soldiers in danger in Afghanistan in the name of bringing democracy. In fact the soldiers are serving the strategic and regional interests of the White House and the consequences of their occupation so far have been devastating for my people.

“The worst casualty of this war is truth. Those who stand up and raise their voice against injustice, insecurity and occupation have their lives threatened and are forced to leave Afghanistan, or simply get killed.

“We are sandwiched between three powerful enemies: the occupation forces of the U.S. and NATO, the Taliban and the corrupt government of Hamid Karzai.

“Now President Obama is considering increasing troops to Afghanistan and simply extending former President Bush’s wrong policies. In fact, the worst massacres since 9/11 were during Obama’s tenure. My native province of Farah was bombed by the U.S. this past May. A hundred and fifty people were killed, most of them women and children. On Sept. 9, the U.S. bombed Kunduz Province, killing 200 civilians.

“My people are fed up. That is why we want an immediate end to the U.S. occupation.”