kill the journalist to undermine the media

The key justification of western and their military wing, NATO, presence in Afghanistan is bringing democracy. Neither Afghans nor westerners believe in hunting down 9/11 suspects anyore but rather saving Karzai from definite collapse in the hands of Taliban and their alikes nesting inside the regime.

The story of Parvez Kambaskhsh reminds us where Afghanistan is actually standing. Parviz a 23 years old journalist was detained three months ago. The allegations are downloading an article written by an Iranian scholar that allegedly contains Anti Islamic sentiments. the accused was sentenced to death by hanging by primary court of Balkh. Neither the accused have been given the chance nor has the advocate been appointed to exercise his/her rights to defence.

Mawlawi Shams has reportedly said that ‘he has insulted Islam and it can’t be tolerated’. Mawlawi Shams, a religious figure, has the power to make significant decisions which are unconstitutional and undemocratic. This power is vested in him by the government. This is a power game, Karzai government has been critical of media for awhile, this incident allowed the religious scholar to rampage a journalist. In big picture it shows where power lies and where Karzai can rely. Parviz is a victim of the politics game. Media has a voice in the Afghan society, media feeds values into the power system. This game is about whose voices are heard and whose voices are marginalised. media has made a lot of noise after the Taliban, far more than mullahs and Karzai government don’t want the power to go out of the classical circles into the hands of ordinary people. Mullahs and religion is a good tool to sanction unwanted groups which are perceived banal and dangerous. 

The notion of freedom of expression and freedom of thought is that society can produce an objective and verifiable measure of meaning for media content as well as production. This is impossible to achieve if fanaticism rules. Fundamentalists ignores the issue of perspective and denies the textual meaning of media content. Polysemy and diversity in the meaning of media content and allowing individual thought and interpretation is not only the characteristic of advanced western democracy. Media content of many Islamic countries could be interpreted variously; as long as fundamentalism, in its primitive form, is not the social ruler. Fundamentalists can tolerate media content and messages as long as it creates noise; media content could be tolerated by fundamentalists if it serves their power politics purpose. A good example is Taliban not only tolerating but working with media. Karzai regime is made of fundamentalists which are not much different than Taliban in character and media is no more serving their power politics purposes, unlike the Taliban. A fundamentalist vision of society is served by creating a culture of code-governed meaning which is not susceptible to rational reconstruction, as a matter of fact fundamentalism is an opponent of any reconstruction. We witnessed this vision under Taliban rule. However, historically speaking the fundamentalists and fanatic warlords of Karzai government have failed to create such a society because they were too corrupt to maintain any social order and eventually resulting in the emergence of Taliban. 

پول سیاه

بیش از چهار صدهزار نفربنابردریافت پول ازمدرک  قاچاق مواد مخدر، درج لست سیاه(بلک لست) می باشند .

فهرست سیاه را ایالات متحده تهیه نموده است و در دسترس دولت افغانستان قرار داده است. چون حجم این لست بسیار بزرگ است امریکا نتوانسته است آنرا بصورت مکمل تهیه نماید، در نتیجه جزیات بعضی از قاچاقبران به اسم شان مختص میگردد. تعداد اسم های مروج در اجتماع افغانستان محدود است، در نتیجه چهارصد هزار نام که در لست است، فراگیر تمام اسم های میگردد که در افغانستان استفاده میشود. به این لحاظ این لست قابل استفاده نیست.

دوم اینکه تطبیق این لست به دوش بانک مرکزی میباشد تا در هماهنگی با بانک های خصوصی کار نماید. در حالی که هیچ هماهنگی وجود ندارد، و هیچ بانک قادر به تطبیق لست نیست. 

به گفته آقای ابراهیمی معاون بانک مرکزی تا حال کسی باداشتن این نوع پول برای انتقال به این بانک مراجعه نموده است.

شاید مراجعه کرده باشند اما برای بانک نا ممکن است که تسبیط نماید که ایا مراجع صورت گرفته است یا نی بخاطر که لست تطبیق نمیشود.

پول سیاه جهت تمویل دهشت افگنی، باند سالاری، جنگ سالاری و دیگر جرایم استفاده میگردد.

Bin Laden: Europeans should end US help in afghanistan

CAIRO, Egypt - Al-Qaida chief Osama bin Laden called on Europeans to stop helping the United States in the war in Afghanistan. Bin Laden said it was unjust for the United States to have invaded Afghanistan for sheltering him after the Sept. 11 terror attacks, saying he was the "only one responsible" for the deadly assaults on New York and Washington.

"The events of Manhattan were retaliation against the American-Israeli alliance's aggression against our people in Palestine and Lebanon, and I am the only one responsible for it. The Afghan people and government knew nothing about it. America knows that," the al-Qaida leader said.

The message appeared to be another attempt by bin Laden to influence public opinion in the West. In 2004, he offered Europeans a truce if they stopped attacking Muslims, then later spoke of a truce with the U.S. In both cases, al-Qaida then denounced those areas for not accepting its offer.

State Department spokesman Sean McCormack dismissed the new tape as typical of bin Laden's tactics and expressed faith in the European allies.

"I think our NATO allies understand quite clearly what is at stake in Afghanistan as well as elsewhere around the world in fighting the war on terror," he told reporters. "It's going to require a sustained commitment over a period of time and we have seen that kind of commitment from our European allies."

FBI analysts were reviewing the tape but were not immediately able to say how long it was or when it might have been recorded nor could they provide other details. Spokesman Richard Kolko said it was being examined "to determine if it is authentic and for any intelligence value."

"As the FBI has said since 9/11, bin Laden was responsible for the attack," Kolko said in a statement. "In this latest tape, he again acknowledged his responsibility. This should help to clarify for all the conspiracy theorists, again — the 9/11 attack was done by bin Laden and al-Qaida."

This has been the deadliest year in Afghanistan since the U.S.-led invasion in late 2001, with more than 6,100 people killed — including more than 800 civilians — in militant attacks and military operations, according to an Associated Press tally of figures from Afghan and Western officials.

In the new tape, bin Laden said European nations joined the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan "because they had no other alternative, only to be a follower."

"The American tide is ebbing, with God's help, and they will go back to their countries," he said, speaking of Europeans.

Bin Laden urged Europeans to pull away from the fight.

"It is better for you to stand against your leaders who are dropping in on the White House, and to work seriously to lift the injustice against the believers," he said, accusing U.S. forces and their allies of intentionally killing women and children in Afghanistan.

Al-Jazeera aired two brief excerpts of the audiotape, titled "Message to the European Peoples," which al-Qaida had announced Monday that it would release soon.

Bin Laden issued four public statements earlier this year — on Sept. 7, Sept. 11, Sept. 20 and Oct. 22. The Sept. 7 video was his first in three years and was issued to mark the sixth anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks.

Al-Qaida has dramatically stepped up its messages — a pace seen as a sign of its increasing technical sophistication and the relative security felt by its leadership. Bin Laden is believed to be hiding along the Afghan-Pakistan frontier.

Bin Laden's message was the 89th this year by Al-Qaida's media wing, Al-Sahab, an average of one every three days, double the rate in 2006, according to IntelCenter, a U.S. counterterrorism group that monitors militant messaging.

The true enemy: human tribalism

The clash of civilizations we're living through is widely seen as a battle
between Islam and Christendom. I'm convinced it's more basic than that. The
reason Iraq and Afghanistan remain unsettled battlefields isn't that our two
civilizations can't agree on the nature of God. It's because we can't agree
on the nature of man.

In the West, we take it for granted that human beings are autonomous
individuals. We decide for ourselves how we dress, where we work, whom we
marry. Our political system is an atomized democracy, in which everyone is
expected to vote according to their own idiosyncratic values and interests.
Our pop music and movies are about misunderstood loners. The ethos of
individual empowerment fuels daytime talk shows.

Individualism has become so fundamental to the Western world view that most
of us cannot imagine any other way of conceiving human existence. But in
fact, there are billions of people on Earth -- including most of the world's
Muslims -- that view our obsession with individualism as positively bizarre.

In most of South Asia and the Middle East, humans are viewed not primarily
as individuals, but as agents of a family, tribe, clan or sect. As Rutgers
scholar Robin Fox wrote in a brilliant essay -- excerpted in last month's
issue of Harper's magazine -- this explains why so many Arabs marry their
cousins. In tribal societies, your blood relations are the only people you
can trust.

This fundamental difference in outlook explains much of what we find
barbaric about traditional Muslim cultural practices. Honour killings -- to
take a newsworthy example -- strike Westerners as a particularly horrific
species of murder. But that's because we think of people as individuals. If
you instead see a woman primarily as a low-status breeding agent of her
patriarch's clan, everything changes. By taking up with an unapproved male,
she is nullifying whatever value she once had as a human. In fact, her life
has negative value in the sense that her shameful lifestyle is an ongoing
humiliation to the men expected to enforce discipline within the clan's
ranks.

An intractably tribal outlook also makes Western-style democracy impossible
-- which explains why nation-building in Afghanistan and Iraq has become
such a thankless slog.

The reason many of us post-9/11 hawks had such high hopes for these
campaigns is that we shared George W. Bush's sunny claim that "Freedom is
universal. Freedom is etched in everybody's soul." It turns out that's not
true. As Fox notes, freedom and individualism are relatively recent
development in human history. Tribalism, on the other hand, is a deeply
rooted instinct that has been "etched" on our evolutionary psychology since
simian days. Even in Western societies, you can still see it rise to the
surface when tensions flare (a point Paul Haggis made with exquisite
artistry in his Oscar-award winning film Crash).

Democracy requires consensus-building and shared values. But in tribal
societies, politics is viewed as a battle of all-against-all, in which the
strongest tribe openly appropriates the state apparatus to enrich itself at
everyone else's expense.

In this regard, Saddam Hussein was the ultimate tribal leader. Not only did
he restrict his inner circle to Sunnis, but they were Sunnis from his own
narrow Tikriti sub-clan. The idea of creating a "representative" government
that includes Kurds and Shiites with their own independent power bases would
have struck him as completely insane. So would the idea of handing over
power to another tribe merely because its leaders chalked up more votes in
an election. During most of human history, letting another tribe lord over
yours meant yielding the power to pillage your granaries and rape your
women. (In parts of Africa, it still does.)

This explains why the United States and NATO have gotten nowhere with grand
national political projects in Iraq and Afghanistan, which are both
intensely tribal societies. Instead, progress has come at the micro level --
with military commanders sitting down with individual tribal patriarchs and,
essentially, bribing them with guns and money. In the West, we call that
corruption. In tribal societies, it's politics.

Is there something about Islam that serves to lock in mankind's inherently
tribal instincts? Perhaps. The word Islam translates to "submission." And
empirically speaking, there seems to be something within the faith that
discourages individualism and the democratic freedoms associated with it.

On the other hand, the non-Muslim nations of sub-Saharan Africa are every
bit as tribalized as the Muslim nations of North Africa and Asia. And for
all the media focus on Aqsa Parvez, several of Canada's first honour murders
actually were performed by Sikhs. In any case, the successful integration of
hundreds of thousands of Muslims into Canadian society shows that, after a
generation or two, at least, the faith hardly prevents immigrants from
coming around to our democratic, individualistic ways.

As for foreign entanglements, it's worth noting Fox's warning that our own
Western march to individualism took centuries -- a grinding process in which
we moved "from tribalism, through empire, feudalism, mercantile capitalism
and the industrial revolution shrugging off communism and fascism along the
way."

In Iraq and Afghanistan, we are essentially asking the locals to cram all of
this into a few years. We shouldn't be surprised if it takes a little
longer.