Malalai Joya: “Afghans live under the shadow of the gun with the most corrupt government in the world”

It’s too bad Barack Obama didn’t consult with Malalai Joya before giving his Nobel acceptance speech on Thursday. The ex-Afghan Parliamentarian could have helped the president to see that the ongoing US occupation is damaging to both American and Afghan interests. Afghanistan is not the “Just War” that Obama defends so passionately in his speech. It’s part of a larger US geopolitical strategy which Joya outlines in her new book A Woman Among the Warlords: The extraordinary story of an Afghan who dared to raise her voice. US policymakers have decided to establish a beachhead in Central Asia to monitor the growth of China, surround Russia, control vital resources from the Caspian Basin, and provide security for US mega-corporations who see Asia as the “market of the future.” It’s the Great Game all over again. “Victory” in Afghanistan means that a handful of weapons manufacturers, oil magnates, and military contractors will get very rich. It has nothing to do with al-Qaida, “democracy promotion” or US national security. That’s all just public relations pablum.

A Woman Among the Warlords is an explosive narrative that takes a scalpel to many of the illusions surrounding the US invasion of Afghanistan. For example, most Americans have never heard about the “Warlord Strategy,” a term that is commonplace among Afghans. That’s because it doesn’t mesh with the media’s story about Afghan “liberation.” The truth is, US war-planners, led by Sec Def Donald Rumsfeld, settled on a plan to hand over entire regions of Afghanistan to the warlords even before the first shot was fired. The whole “liberation”-meme was just a ruse to elicit support for the war. How many Americans would support sending more troops if they knew that the original justification of the war was a bunch of baloney?

Here’s how Joya sums it up in her own words:

“The people of Afghanistan are fed up with the occupation of their country and with the corrupt, Mafia-state of Hamid Karzai and the warlords and drug lords backed by NATO…. It is clear now that the real motive of the U.S. and its allies, hidden behind the so-called “war on terror,” was to convert Afghanistan into a military base in Central Asia and the capital of the world’s opium drug trade. Ordinary Afghan people are being used in this chess game, and western taxpayers’ money and the blood of soldiers is being wasted on this agenda that will only further destabilize the region….Afghan and American lives are being needlessly lost.”

Joya is focused and uncompromising; a one-woman wrecking crew. She’s also an electrifying speaker who can bring an audience to their feet when she rails against the war. People can sense her intensity, her honesty, and her unwavering commitment to justice. Unlike Obama, she isn’t disposed to lofty-sounding platitudes that only serve to perpetuate war and suffering. Joya’s goal is peace; an end to 30 years of war, an end to US occupation and religious fanaticism. Regrettably, Obama’s military escalation ensures that the conflict will drag on for years to come bringing misery to even more people.

Malalai Joya: “As I write these words, Afghanistan is getting progressively worse. We are caught between two enemies: the Taliban on one side and US/NATO forces and their warlord hirelings on the other…. Obama’s military build up will only bring more suffering and death to innocent civilians…. I hope that the lessons in this book will reach President Obama and his policymakers in Washington, and warn them that the people of Afghanistan reject their brutal occupation and their support of the warlords and druglords.” (A Woman Among the Warlords, p5)

A Woman Among the Warlords gives readers a glimpse of the vast destruction brought on by the US invasion. Joya repeatedly denounces Rumsfeld’s strategy which replaced the fanatical Taliban with war criminals and human rights abusers. She also takes aim at the media which gave cover to the warlords by referring to them as the “Northern Alliance”–or the equally misleading–“United Islamic Front for the Salvation of Afghanistan”. As Joya points out, attitudes about the conflict have largely been shaped by disinformation, omissions and propaganda. Obama’s Noble speech proves that those same lies will now be delivered by a more competent spokesman.

Malalai Joya: “While the United States bombed from the sky, the CIA and special forces had already arrived in the northern provinces of Afghanistan to hand out millions of dollars in cash and weapons to Northern Alliance commanders. They were the same extremists whose militias had pillaged Afghanistan during the civil war: Dostum, Sayyaf, Khalili, Rhabbani, Fahim, General Arif, Dr. Abdullah, Haji Qadir, Ustad Atta, Mohammad, Daoud, and Hazrat Ali among others. … Fahim, another ruthless man with a dark past. The western media tried at the time to portray these warlords as “anti-Taliban resistance forces and liberators of Afghanistan,” but in fact Afghan people believed they were no better than the Taliban.” (Ibid, p 52)

As the Taliban fled across the Pakistan border amid heavy aerial bombardment, the warlords seized entire provinces reestablishing their iron-fisted rule over the local population. No attempt was ever made to establish democracy. Even today, many of the warlords are still on the US payroll, a point which Obama somehow failed to mention in his “Peace Prize” speech.

From the New York Times November 19, 2001: “The galaxy of warlords who tore Afghanistan apart in the early 1990s and who were vanquished by the Taliban because of their corruption and perfidy are back on their thrones, poised to exercise power in the ways they always have.”

Joya provides biographical sketches of many of the warlords, including Abdul Rasul Sayyaf, a rabid fundamentalist “who massacred thousands in Kabul during the 1990s.” In one Kabul purge he ordered his soldiers, “Don’t leave anyone alive–Kill them all.” Sayyaf was “the person who invited international terrorist Osama bin Laden to Afghanistan during the 1980s. He also trained and mentored Khalid Sheikh Mohammed , the man who the US claims was the mastermind of the 9-11 attacks.” (p 67)

How many people would continue to support the war if they knew they were protecting friends of bin Laden and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed?

Malalai Joya again: “Most people in the west have been led to believe that intolerance, brutality, and severe oppression of women in Afgahnistan began with the Taliban regime. But this is a lie, more dust in the eyes of the world from the warlords who dominate the American-backed, so-called democratic government of Hamid Karzai. In truth, some of the worst atrocities in our recent past were committed during the civil war by the men who are now in power.”

During the blackest days of the Afghan civil war in 1992, a group of warlords seized Kabul razing much of it to the ground. “The militias of Dostum, Sayyaf, Massoud, Mazari, and Hekmatyar pillaged the city, robbing families and slaughtering and raping women. Eventually, anywhere from 65,000 to 80,000 innocent people were killed in Kabul alone, though there are no official figures for the staggering death toll. According to the United Nations, more than 90 percent of the city was destroyed. (Eventually) “the country was split up into fiefdoms, ruled by the whims of rival thugs and warlords.” (p 26)

These are the monsters the US continues to support in Afghanistan today.

JOYA’S SOLUTION: “Withdraw All Foreign Troops”

Malalai Joya: “Some people say that when the troops withdraw, a civil war will break out. Often this prospect is raised by people who ignore the vicious conflict and humanitarian disaster that is already occurring in Afghanistan. The longer the foreign troops stay in Afghanistan, the worse the eventual civil war will be for the Afghan people. The terrible civil war that followed the Soviet withdrawal certainly could never justify… the destruction and death caused by that decade-long occupation.” (p 217)…Today we live under the shadow of the gun with the most corrupt and unpopular government in the world. (p 211)

The war that one reads about in the media is not the real war. It’s a fiction created to justify occupation. A Woman Among the Warlords shreds many of the myths surrounding the war and reveals the truth behind the hype; that the United States deliberately handed over Afghanistan to a group of genocidal maniacs. The same policy persists to today, which is why it’s time to bring the troops now.

Mike Whitney lives in Washington state. He can be reached at: Read other articles by Mike.

31 comments on this article so far ...

Comments RSS feed

  1. Shabnam said on December 14th, 2009 at 11:37am #

    I have warned people at this site that Zionists including Zmag are promoting Malalai Joya, a racist Pashtun who has never spoken a word against Zionism and their war crime activities against Palestinian people but she has repeatedly attacked Iran and the northern alliance who fought Taliban. she has never said one word against Israel and her policy but she has directed her attack on Iran, like Israel and Saudi Arabia, to stir up the hatred of Pashtun people against Persian speaking in Afghanistan and elsewhere besides the fighters in the Northern Alliance who fought Taliban. This behavior benefits NO ONE EXCEPT ISRAE. The northern alliance mainly was consisted of Tajik, Uzbek and Shi’ite Hezare Persian speaking people in Afghanistan who were massacred by Taliban in thousands. Many are saying she was born in Pakistan and is widely believe to be an ISI agent of Pakistan where is controlled by the CIA.
    She, like other Iranian professional whores who at the service of the empire like Shadi Sadr, Shireen Ebadi, Makhmalbaf, Mohsen Kadiva, has received NUMEROUS AWARDS by the ‘human rights’ organization, feminist Organizations close to intelligent services of the West. She has insulted men and women in the parliament and surprisingly has been supported by the zionist in the West. They are the US front in the phony ‘war on terror.’ She is not very educated and has no job yet she travels like a stateswoman person throughout the world. I wonder who pays her huge expenses!!!!!
    The closet Zionist, Norman Solomon, has this to say about Malalai Joya:
    [At the end of August, when I interviewed the courageous Afghan antiwar feminist Malalai Joya in Kabul, she put it this way: You can give a warlord a shave, a haircut and an expensive suit, but he’s still a warlord.] She is also supported by Hollywood, the zionist propaganda organ where all the propaganda films against Muslims are made. For those who have Persian language skill, please consult the following link.

  2. Shabnam said on December 14th, 2009 at 12:04pm #

    Malalai Joya has no fight with the Zionist war mongers otherwise she would have not appeared numerous times on VOICE OF AMERICA. Do you think she goes on VOA and speak against the Zionist war? The VOA will cut you off if anyone ask a question regarding the plan of the war criminals in Washington and Tel aviv. Read her speeches in Persian to see what she is preeching.

    Shakila Hashemi, a woman serving in Parliament of Afghanistan does not agree with Malalai Joya and her supporters, Zionists, and their phony ‘human rights’ organizations in the West.
    In the following youtube, Hashemi is shouting ‘down with Malalai Joy’, ‘down with human right’ organizations of the West.

  3. Shabnam said on December 14th, 2009 at 2:41pm #

    All the propaganda regarding Iran are controlled by the zionists war criminals. The zionist Jews like in case of IRAQ and SUDAN, ‘child slavery’ and ‘Save Darfur’, are cooking all the lies about Iran. Please read the following:

    Spinwatch has uncovered evidence that an apparently London based organisation offering expertise on Iran to journalists and politicians is a covert propaganda operation run by a pro-Israel organisation in the United States.

    The organisation, which is called Réalité-EU, has direct connections to The Israel Project, a hard-line pro-Israel organisation based in Washington DC. Both Réalité-EU and The Israel Project also appear to be connected to a Jewish organisation – B’nai B’rith International, which is also active in pro-Israel campaigning.

    Réalité-EU was at one time linked to the former Shadow Security Minister Patrick Mercer, raising further concerns about the Conservative MP’s links to individuals and groups involved in exaggerating and even fabricating domestic and international threats for personal and political ends. These activities have previously been reported by Spinwatch as well as other sources.

    Réalité-EU has claimed to be based at offices in London, but e-mails received from the organisation were sent from a mail server registered to the Washington offices of B’nai B’rith International. An expert from Réalité-EU who spoke to Spinwatch denied ‘any connection whatsoever’ with B’nai B’rith.

    Asked whether Réalité-EU receives any funding or direct support from the pro-Israel pressure group, the expert replied, ‘Definitely not,’ but added, ‘I’m not at all involved in any development [i.e. funding] questions so I really don’t know exactly who the individuals are and where they come from.’
    When Ms Gerber was confronted with evidence directly linking Réalité-EU with B’nai B’rith she said that her organisation rents ‘services and space on their server for cost saving reasons,’ but that it had no ‘ideological or other connection to B’nai B’rith’. She also stated that the expert Spinwatch had spoken had no knowledge of this arrangement.

  4. Deadbeat said on December 14th, 2009 at 3:06pm #

    Thank you Shabnam for your information. Apparently Whitney should stick with what he knows best.

  5. Kim Petersen said on December 14th, 2009 at 5:44pm #

    With all due respect, you have veered into bizarre territory with your comments here. Why should someone opposing the Afghani warlords speak out against Zionists?
    It is entirely possible for someone to be opposed to Iranian policy without making them a Zionists.
    If everyone who appears on VOA is a Zionist, then there are many more Zionists in the world than I thought. The same rationale must also apply for Fox, CNN, NBC, CBS, BBC, CBC, NYT, Wash Post, Nat Post, …
    Besides, being a Zionist does not mean that a person cannot be principled on other social justice issues.
    It would seem prudent to point where in the article Joya’s comments/ positions are in error and factually refute them.

  6. Shabnam said on December 14th, 2009 at 7:07pm #


    You read my message incorrectly. I wrote:
    [I have warned people at this site that Zionists including Zmag are promoting Malalai Joya, a racist Pashtun..] or
    [She, like other Iranian ……..has received NUMEROUS AWARDS by the ‘human rights’ organization, feminist Organizations close to intelligent services of the West.]
    [The closet Zionist, Norman Solomon, has this to say about Malalai Joya…]
    [Malalai Joya has no fight with the Zionist war mongers otherwise she would have not appeared numerous times on VOICE OF AMERICA. Do you think she goes on VOA and speak against the Zionist war?]
    And I stand by every single of them. She cannot be trusted. Did I say she is a Zionist? I said she is supported by the closet Zionists. Did I say she is a Zionist because she goes to VOA? Of course not.
    You can interpret as you wish. I said: if she is outspoken against the US policy then how she is allowed to go on VOA. Have you ever listened to her in Persian on VOA? I suppose you have not. I have. She does not talk about the atrocities of the United States. What she does, she goes after people in the Parliamnent and Iran. She never talks about Zionist policy against Muslims. Why is that? Everyone does only those who think is better to be on site of zionism to be protected. She does exactly the same as the Iranian profession whores who have received numerous awards by the ‘human rights’ organizations, majorities are close to intellignet services of the west including Canadian “right and democracy.’ Zionists are very much involved with policies of the central Asia including India. She similar to United State and Israel direct her attacks only on Iran not that much about Taliban. She repeatedly criticizes names that are not Patshtun as warlords and leave the real Taliban off the hook. I have watched many you tube of her speeches in Persian and found them very racist against half of the population of Afghanistan meaning non-Pashtun where like Pakistan she refers to them as ‘Northern Alliance’ meaning Tajik, Hezareh, Uzbek and other Afghani groups who were fighting against Taliban. The leader of Northern Alliance, Ahmad Shah Masoud was assassinated, widely believed by Pakistan. I personally believe that Shah Masoud was assassinated by US, ISI and Saudi Arabia. You people must realize that Taliban was brought to power by US, ISI and financial support of Saudi Arabia to place a hostile enemy on Iranian border next to Afghanistan. She is accused of being an ISI agent. Do you know what she did say in the Parliament? Please consult the interest. Please read the following link with Google translator.

  7. bozh said on December 14th, 2009 at 7:07pm #

    kim peterson,
    just spotted your response to shabnam in which u state that one can be zionist and at the same support some social justice.
    with due respect i assert that the label “zionist” is vastly sanitized. And,of course, by ‘zionists’ and their supporters.
    Supplant the word “zionist” with the words “land robbers with intent to murder and expel people” and with evil empires’ blessings, to boot, and one easily concludes that numero uno and zwei right: rights to life and to remain in one’s habitat are not respected by land thieves.

    In addition, the label “jew” does not denote an ethnicity nor nationality; it solely denotes or stands for belonging to one of the worst cults ever or connectedness to it or a ‘quality called “jewishness”.
    And i thank my devil i am only 00001% shemitic just as ‘jews’ are.
    Actually all land robbers and the cultists composed of hundred of ethnicities
    deny pal’ns all the basic human rights.
    Indeed, the land robbers called “jews” may respect some or all rights but only for friends and israelis. tnx

  8. joed said on December 14th, 2009 at 7:34pm #

    i recently read a quote that said something to the effect that,
    [all the good and moral actions the u s has done and might do in the future will never erase or mitigate the evil the u s has done in iraq. and iraq is simply one obvious example of the depths of u s evil. the same is true of israel and the zionists. and this includes the silent populations of these countries.]
    there is nothing redeming about either nation. Fallujah was such a beautiful city, wonderful people.

  9. Kim Petersen said on December 14th, 2009 at 8:46pm #

    Quite right Shabham. You never stated that Joya was a Zionist. It is very fair to question who the people are that purport to represent some cause, but that does not mean that their viewpoints on an issue are incorrect.
    I submit that the thrust of the article was that foreign troops should get out of Afghanistan, and the rightness or wrongness of that position holds despite VOA, Zionist support, etc.

    bozh, I never commented on the label “Zionist” being sanitized or not;
    and a land thief might support equality of rights for gays, the sexes, and an end to Jim Crow, so I submit that my point holds

  10. Shabnam said on December 14th, 2009 at 10:03pm #

    [It is very fair to question who the people are that purport to represent some cause, but that does not mean that their viewpoints on an issue are incorrect.]

    Kim: I agree with you. I know, for example, Iranians who are at the service of empire like Soroush, Mohsen Kadivar, Payam Akhavan, Makhmalbaf and many other opposition groups, are talking about ‘democracy’ in Iran and I have no problem with it, however, since I know these people are closely working with zionism and imperialism forces, then regardless of their rhetoric about ‘democracy’ I expose them whenever I get a chance because if someone is for ‘democracy’ and against war crimes then should say something when sees it including war crimes in Afghanistan and occupied Palestine. These agents not only do not condemn it rather they justified, and say nothing about US war crimes but Makhmalbaf, a film director, who is the green spokesperson goes to Washington to beg for more sanction, like Israel Lobby, against Iranian people in order to weaken the government to fall. Makmalbaf and other Iranian feminists against the government are closely working with Zionist Islamphobe like Bernard Henri Levy – has been identified as imposer by European intellectuals – and Ayan Hershi Ali to portrait Muslim as a threat to world peace to please the war criminals.
    Thus, as you wrote we should question the messenger as well, but at the same time a message like American and all other foreign forces should be out of Afghanistan, Central Asia, Middle East, and North Africa is legitimate.

  11. Hue Longer said on December 15th, 2009 at 2:56am #


    You think you have a shot at explaining ad hominem to the caps wielding? I tried, good luck!

  12. Rehmat said on December 15th, 2009 at 6:44am #

    Malalai Joya was the youngest member of US Army’s approved Kabul parliament. She was quite happy to work with invaders, who needed 1,600 new prostitutes for their soldiers and the Northern Alliance, whose leaders are no better than the way Taliban treated the women during their short-lived rule.

    The one thing which made Joya the darling of the western mainstream media – is her hatred towards Islamists and Shari’ah. A few years ago, a Canadian lesbian, Irashad Manji, was promoted by the Jewish-controlled American and Canadian media as “Muslim Reformer” – because she wants to change Islam in the mirror-image of immoral western culture. She too refused to answer the Canadian Jew academic, Henry Makow PhD, who asked her opinion about Israeli Zionazi actions in occupied Palestine during her Vancouver lecture (2006), which was sponsored by the Jewish CanWest and Canadian Jewish Women Right group.

    Canada’s “Taliban dupe” diplomat

  13. bozh said on December 15th, 2009 at 7:22am #

    No, u did not comment on the label “zionism” as being sanitized or not.
    A ‘zionist’ has no connection to zion. The label is thus quite misleading.
    It is a fake symbol.
    When macedonians of former yugoslavia retained the name “macedonia” for their republic, Greeks were upset. Yet their republic was a part of ancient macedonia.
    So, what is smthing called does matter. As u say, land robbers may be taking the right stand on some issues.

  14. bozh said on December 15th, 2009 at 7:49am #

    Wishful thinking is OK. As long as one is aware one is wishing. I wish iran were a democracy with a social structure that wld be much different than that of US and most lands.
    There seems to be some awakening going on in US, which spurns such sharp differences bwtn classes.
    I hope americans wld lead the world in the new democratization process even tho they are less or seem less democratic than some european countries.
    ‘Religions’ [vastly sanitized label] do, imo, retard the democratic process. So, the question is, how to get clergy onside? With bns of pious people listening to their masters who support strongly modern and ancient aghas, beys, deys, amirs, kings, lords, earls, counts, boyars, princes, ceos, et al, we can only expect worsenings and not any easing-ups on control and abuse of most people. tnx

  15. Shabnam said on December 15th, 2009 at 10:19am #


    Please speak for yourself. You have no glue what is going on. Americans and the Westerners including Russians NEVER allow a democratic government takes root in the region to defend the interest of her/his people first in the resource rich region of the Middle East, central Asia and North Africa. They want a puppet in place to deliver so they can support the life style of the Westerners on expense of others to keep the fools busy shopping at the Malls so they don’t question their war crime activities around the world, similar to what is happening now.
    We defend our borders from the war criminals, white and black, which are hidden under phony slogan like ‘democracy’ and ‘human rights’ to deceive people in the region.
    Who was defending Iran’s independence and integrity against British Empire, was under control of the Rothschild family, and Russian Tsar? Iranian people, both non religious and religious groups fought against British and Russian imperialism in Iran in late 19th century and beginning of the 20th century. The role of the religious faction was crucial in Constitutional Revolution in 1905-1909. The majority of Iranian educated class came from religious faction of the society in the beginning of the 20th century . It was the non religious group who started to fell in love with the racist messages coming from the western ‘civilizing mission’ project. Nationalism had no roots in Islamic world because Islam does not recognize BORDER. Nationalism came from Europe to be used in divide and conquer game. Now, since West has the upper hand over our us wants to remove borders to steal easier. We defend our borders at any cost. It is obvious that they want to kill other civilizations with their people to place them in the museum to destroy their contribution to world civilization like what they have done in Iraq. There are no doubts that WE and Israel were responsible for stealing Iraq museum’s treasure. They want to place people with their culture in the museum, like what they did to Native Americans. It is clear that the ‘left’, especially Trotskyite groups, are acting as ENABLERS against people of the region who are labeled as ‘Islamists.’ We expose these agents where ever they might be. These servants go after those who do not want to be a colony.
    Jalal Al-e-Ahmad (December 2, 1923 – September 9, 1969) was a prominent Iranian writer, thinker, and social and political critic.
    Jalal was born into a religious family in Tehran. His father was an Islamic cleric originally from the small village of Owrazan in Taleghan Mountains. After elementary school Al-e-Ahmad was sent to earn a living in the Tehran bazaar, but also attended Marvi Madreseh for a religious education, and without his father’s permission, night classes at the Tehran Polytechnic.
    In 1946 he earned an M.A. in Persian literature from Tehran Teachers College [2] and became a teacher, at the same time making a sharp break with his religious family that left him “completely on his own resources.”[3] He pursued academic studies further and enrolled in a doctoral program of Persian literature at Tehran University but quit before he had defended his dissertation in 1951.

    I am sure people of this site are familiar with Edward Said’s work, Orientalism. Al-e-Ahmad in fact wrote a small book, Gharbzadegi, (translated in English as Westernstruck, Occidentosis) published in Iran in 1962 where was an influential work critic of imperialism. He was very popular and influential among political groups. Now, the Iranian ‘intellectuals’ at the service of Zionism and imperialism are very active to discredit Al-e-Ahmad and his work and to portrait him as ‘Islamist’ and anti west. These Zionist servants are doing the same with Edward Said and his work ‘orientalism’ to target and attack his influence in many areas of studies, from politics to music. Some of these imposters who pose as X-Muslim, Ibn warraq, Soroush, Namazi, Manji, Hershi Ali , Ibn Warraq, is an Indian Zionist, are spreading lies against Said and Al-e-Ahmad and preaching against’Islamist’ as the root causes of war crimes in the region. They didn’t dare to say anything while these influential figures were alive.
    After the establishment of Zionist entity in the region, Israel was trying to influence the regional countries through their intellectuals to fool the pubic in the region to support Israel. Al-e-Ahmad, a secular intellectual, who was very influential in Iranian society was invited to visit Israel for 2 weeks in 1962, on Israel‘s expense. I should say, the Iranian ‘intellectuals’ including Al-e-Ahmad were under the influence of the “European socialist” groups including Paul Sartre. Al-e-Ahmad greatly admired Paul Satre’s work. They read the western intellectual works as soon as they could get hold of them with great joy. So, no one can accuse Al-e-Ahmad of being ‘anti-west.’ At the time Israel was very popular among Iranian ‘left’ and secular. The only fraction that was against Zionism was THE RELIGIOUS FACTION warned the Iranian secularists on the nature of Zionist entity as extension of imperialism in the region. Iranian left, due to their opposition to Islam, never listened to this message. Besides, they were fed by lies of the “European socialist’ group where majority of whom were Zionists. In fact, the Iranian left, mainly trotskysts writing many articles in support of Israel and its ‘kibbutz.’
    Al-e-Ahmad came back from Israel with first hand information and wrote an influential manuscript, “A journey to Esrael,” ??????? (angle of death) which sound like ‘Israel’ and criticized the nature of zionist state to demand others do the same and expose the nature of the racist entity at once. He was influential to stop series of articles by the Iranian ‘socialists’ in defense of Israel’s kibbutz program. He holds European socialists including Paul Sartre responsible for such misleading information to get out about apartheid state and he claimed there is no solution except to share everything to establish ONE COUNTRY FOR ALL. He published this manuscript in Persian. No wonder he, like Edward Said, is a target of those who are at the service of Zionism and imperialism.
    Al-e-Ahmad’s manuscript ” a journy to angel of death’ can be found at the following link.

  16. bozh said on December 15th, 2009 at 12:47pm #

    Russians and others in the west don’t allow democracies in ME or Asia?
    U probably mean they don’t want all those lands to become democracies?
    Yes, nato/us/isr is actually frightened ab ME becoming democratic.
    That’s why the ad hoc alliance abets kings, amirs, aghas of n. afrika and ME.
    About russia, i don’t know if russia interferes in arab countries’ afffairs.

    It seems to me that US, iran, UK, s. arabia, jordan, iraq, et al are being, ruled by ‘patricians’ or theocrats. Thus, there is little chance any one of these countries becoming even fledgling democracy for decades or even centuries.

    West inded deserves some blame for feudal societies in many lands. However, i put 98% of blame on ‘nobility’ for that.
    I think that u do not like to hear this. So u go on an ad hominem trek! Remember, calling name people, what they say, or do doesn’t elucidate a situation.
    What illuminates a situation is facts, description of actuall events and not namecalling of actualities or facts.
    Facts have no names. Or to put it otherewise: first give me facts and u then call them whatever u like.
    So tell me please HOW does russia not allow democracies in ME? Also without supplying us with when-where-why of it all, one is not saying anything of value.

  17. dan e said on December 15th, 2009 at 1:12pm #

    Well Kim, with all due respect:) You know I usually agree with you; I greatly admired your recent article re “Who decides” and can’t imagine why further comments on it were closed. But I think you may have been a little impulsive when you posted your reaction to Shabnam’s comment. I too found things in Shabnam’s post I didn’t hundred pct agree with, but to me your reasoning re VOA, the Zionist gambit of taking a “principled” position on secondary issues in order to legitimize their stance on the central issue, and some of the other matters seems extremely shaky.
    I’m impressed by Shabnam’s historical knowledge, and grateful for her admonishment to “beware trotskyists bearing gifts”. However I have a hard time seeing the Northern Alliance warlords as “the good guys”.

    A note re the Soviet intervention: the notion that it was economically motivated seems to me farfetched. USSR policy prior to Gorbachev was to subsidize what was then Soviet Central Asia, the Uzbek, Tajik, Kazhak & Kyrgiz “Autonomous Regions” where the standard of living was below that of most Russians, while extracting net revenue from the Baltic republics where it was higher. (of course the Russian view that Baltic residents had largely supported Operation Barbarossa had a lot to do with it).
    So I think the USSR’s motives probably had more to do with geopolitics than with short term economic gain.
    As one who remembers when everybody was hanging on the daily reports from Stalingrad, I must admit I have difficulty seeing the pre-Yeltsin Soviet Union as no different from US/European imperialism or German/Italian/Japanese fascism.

  18. Shabnam said on December 15th, 2009 at 1:29pm #


    Do you know the history of Russia and Iran relations? First go and study that before saying anything more. Russia always has gone after her interest by killing millions and occupation of other people land. Iranian people have very bad experience with Russia as well as Britain and the US. The reason is these bast*rds are after you land and resources. Russia has annexed large territories since 19th century from Iran and added to her fu*king empire. Where have you been when Russia is using ‘Iranian Card’ to get more concessions from the west with the help of Israel Lobby? Are you following the events for the past 30 years? Or in 19th and 20th centuries when Russia occupied Iran? Do you know that Russia has squeezed Iran for billions of dollars for building of Bushehr reactor but has not delivered yet? This reactor should have been ready to function more than 10 years ago but Russia has humiliated Iran and Iranian people for her fu*king greed. This reactor is for scientific advancement of Iran. Science and technology has direct affect on your economy and that supports ‘democracy’, because democracy and economic development have direct relationship. Russia wants to keep Iran WEAK and dependent and deny her of NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY. Is that clear? If you have not understood this BASIC fact then start thinking about it. Russia is using the reactor to squeeze more concessions from both the West and Iran. Bohz: if you cannot connect the dots then don’t blame others and stop calling people names for your own shortcomings.

  19. Shabnam said on December 15th, 2009 at 1:58pm #

    Dan e

    I don’t support ’Northern Alliance.’ I mention it because I have noticed Malalai Joya does not go after Taliban as much as she goes after Northern Alliance, non Pashtun who were the victims of Taliban. In persian materialis people accuse her of not forming UNITY rather she preaches divisivness. One thing she has in common with zionist and imperialist forces is her opposition to ’islamists.’

    [Malalai Joya again: “Most people in the west have been led to believe that intolerance, brutality, and severe oppression of women in Afgahnistan began with the Taliban regime. But this is a lie, more dust in the eyes of the world from the warlords who dominate the American-backed, so-called democratic government of Hamid Karzai. In truth, some of the worst atrocities in our recent past were committed during the civil war by the men who are now in power.”]

    The above statement shows very well who is the target of Malalai Joy, obviously Northern Alliance fighters who fought Taliban she calls “Northern Alliance” like Pakistan. Taliban killed more than 11000 Hazarat at Mazare Sharif alone. People must understand that Pakistan has invested interest in Afghanistan and is trying to control Afghanistan through its pawns, Taliban. Ahmad Shah Masoud, the leader of Afghani people were not Pashtun. The United States used ’Northern Alliance’ , victims of Taliban, to get rid of Taliban since they exusted their useful roles in Afghanistan politics and it was time to force them out to bring in new arrivals as puppets, Karzia and his brother. The United States and Pakistan killed Ahmad Shah Masoud to get rid of Persian speaking leader by two suicide bombers posed as journalists, to remove him to eliminate someone as someone unfit in their strategic calculation. The United States have committed numerous war crimes against humanity where people of Afghanistan and the region will never forget for centuries to come. We have substituted the dark image of Mogul with the Zionist/imperialist warlords. The United States also used its agent, Osama Bin Laden against her enemies and then through propaganda demonize and fit to be killed. He was eliminated right after the 9/11 terrorist act where ALL evidence show that Bin Laden is not the responsible person for that crime. They thing they can distord history through elimination of their pawn but the history has shown over and over that they are wrong.

  20. bozh said on December 15th, 2009 at 2:42pm #

    Shabnam, i am aware that USSR had occupied parts of iran. Azeris obviously had a part in that invasion. I have always considered russia as an evil empire.
    Iran is also an evil empire but much smaller than russia. And being an evil empire and thus more disfunctional than if it wld have been as purely persian or mede, it is more vulnerable.
    Afgh’n and iraq are also evil empires set up by west. They were attacked because they were extremely disfunctional and not because they were evil.

    And of course persians had their own wars of conquest.
    I think that it is not possible to discuss things with u as long as u accuse people of not knowing this and that or intimate in any way that i am defending an evil empire like russia or approbating russian aggressions.
    U need to cool dwn and allow people to be wrong or not to know what u want them to know.
    UR showing a strain of authoritarianism which i hate with passion. So, either u drop ur demands and steady flow of insults or i don’t read anything u write. I’ts up to u and i haven’t called u names; so, u are resorting to lies as well.
    Only in this post i accuse u of what u do: “u’r showing a strain of athoritarianism”.
    This came only because of what u demanded from me or accused me of.

  21. Shabnam said on December 15th, 2009 at 2:48pm #

    Iran is not an evil empire and is target of zionism and imperialism. Furthermore, Iran has not been engaged in act of aggression for more than 250 years. Now, please use words with care. Good luck

  22. dan e said on December 15th, 2009 at 2:55pm #

    Shabnam writes:
    >[Malalai Joya again: “Most people in the west have been led to believe that intolerance, brutality, and severe oppression of women in Afgahnistan began with the Taliban regime. But this is a lie, more dust in the eyes of the world from the warlords who dominate the American-backed, so-called democratic government of Hamid Karzai. In truth, some of the worst atrocities in our recent past were committed during the civil war by the men who are now in power.”<

    I'm sorry but I don't see how this statement proves anything but that Ms Joya is opposed to the US-installed Karzai regime.
    Isn't the main theme of US/Nato/Zionist propaganda the idea that the Taliban is the main problem in Afghanistan? From your comments it seems to me that you view Iranian influence as a major threat, but at the same time you see Farsiphone Afghanis as "the good guys" and Pushtuns as the racist oppressors. Or am I confused?
    Well, I can answer that myself, yes I am:)

  23. Kim Petersen said on December 15th, 2009 at 4:41pm #


    Sorry, I have no idea what you mean by “the Zionist gambit of taking a ‘principled’ position on secondary issues in order to legitimize their stance on the central issue.” I certainly never stated that taking a “principled” position on secondary issues legitimized a stance on a central issue.

    Yes, I should have spent a little time formulating a reply. As you have probably noticed, there is some name calling in the comments section (DV comments policy coming out soon, I hope), and a number of people are getting turned off by rude comments. I like an open forum, and I wish we all would conduct ourselves with proper etiquette in mind.

    Right now, I monitor it alone, and I cannot do anywhere near a proper job. There were a spate of long comments (and comments, by convention, shouldn’t exceed the article in length) …

    As I noted, Shabham did not accuse Joya of being a Zionist, but I still fail to see what Zionism has to do with being opposed to the warlords in Afghanistan, with being opposed to foreign occupation troops being in Afghanistan. The tendency to see Zionism/Zionists behind every boulder without compelling evidence, I feel, detracts from criticism based on solid evidence.

    If one is going to postulate a Zionist involvement in an article that does not address Zionism, then such a link should be compellingly made. The connection drawn in the aforementioned comments, I submit, is purely speculative. There is plenty I would distance myself from in these comments.

    E.g., “She, like other Iranian professional whores ”
    Name calling, I submit, is resorting to the lowest level of discourse.

    E.g., “surprisingly has been supported by the zionist in the West”
    Joya cannot be criticized for this anymore than a progressivist writer whose article gets picked up by Stormtroopers can be criticized for White supremacist support.

    E.g., “she has never said one word against Israel”
    So what? What inference is to be drawn from this? I don’t know, maybe Shabham has never said one word about the occupation-coup regime in Haiti … but I do not then surmise that he is pro-occupation of Haiti or that he is supported by Haitian coup plotters; and even if he were supported by Haitian coup plotters, would that make him a pro-coup person?

    E.g., “to stir up the hatred of Pashtun people against Persian speaking in Afghanistan and elsewhere besides the fighters in the Northern Alliance who fought Taliban. This behavior benefits NO ONE EXCEPT ISRAE[L].”
    Really? Does it not also benefit certain US interests? Could it not benefit prejudiced Sunnis?

    E.g., “She is not very educated ”
    Hmmm… no comment here.

    E.g., “Malalai Joya has no fight with the Zionist war mongers otherwise she would have not appeared numerous times on VOICE OF AMERICA.”
    Please. So every person who appears on VOA is unopposed to Zionism!!?? What kind of logic is this?

    I write all this with due respect to Shabham, who does indeed exhibit a wealth of logic, as well as being versed in Persian, and, most importantly, being active in speaking out for social justice. I sense a deep frustration and anger at Zionist and imperialist crimes that I am in full sympathy with. Comments tend to be extemporaneous. However, sometimes our rhetorical formulation in our quest for social justice could be better worded, a fault I share.

    Yes, Zionist-imperialist-racist propaganda and disinformation, and the faces of such propaganda need to be fleshed out … but fleshed out with hard evidence, otherwise the language must be couched.

  24. dan e said on December 15th, 2009 at 5:44pm #

    Hey Kim! what happened to my last post before this one, where I ended by confessing to being confused?

    Agree that it’s usually best to “couch” language, especially when responding to something that has you irritated. He said, the Pot calling out the Kettle:)

  25. dan e said on December 15th, 2009 at 6:33pm #

    Kim, I’m astonished to read the following para:
    “Sorry, I have no idea what you mean by “the Zionist gambit of taking a ‘principled’ position on secondary issues in order to legitimize their stance on the central issue.” I certainly never stated that taking a “principled” position on secondary issues legitimized a stance on a central issue.”
    First, I didn’t mean to accuse you of ever stating what you state that you never stated, okay? That’s not the issue, it’s not what you ever stated but what the Zionist operatives DO that keeps them in control of political discourse & activism here in the USA.
    With all due respect I’m really surprised that you don’t display a greater understanding of Zionist SOP, but maybe it’s because you haven’t spent that much time trying to do grassroots activism in the US?

    How can I explain something that seems so elementary? Well, let me try to start by recounting my first encounter with the power of Organized Zionism: back in 1987 some of us in the local Nov 29 Coalition — no wait, by then it was the PSC/Pal Solidarity Cmte — some of us had the bright idea, since our local Human Rights and Fair Housing Commission had just passed a resolution condemning So African Apartheid, to approach the Commission & ask them to consider a resolution condemning racist policies of the Israeli government.

    Oh no, this will take forever. Well let me cut to the chase & just say that it was my first experience of being publicly labelled an “anti-Semite”. “Welcome to Hardball Politics, chump:)” Supposed “friends” & “allies” trampled each other trying to get as far away from me & the taint of being friendly with a “nazi sympathizer” as possible.

    Turns out the Commission was totally under the thumb of the local Jewish Fed/ADL; one Commissioner who had made the mistake of meeting with us to discuss the proposed resolution was summarily dropped from the Commission; the Zionist who had levelled the insinuation of antiSemitism was a few wks later appointed Chair of the Commission. Darrel Steinburg who had appeared on behalf of the Fed to back up the application of the antiSemite label is now the top Demo in the CA state senate.
    A key angle is that US Jews are officially considered a Persecuted Minority, so anytime representatives of minority groups come together, the “Jewish Community” has a seat at the table, which for some reason usually turns out to be the Chair:) Of course, the NAACP’s best friend back in the day was Organized Jewry, who still accounts for most of that org’s budget, likewise the Urban League. So seldom will you witness any grassroots Minority org or activist utter any sympathy with Palestinians. In Sacramento, never.
    Well, I’m stumbling around. Let me “regroup on the objective” & try to think of a concise way to explain this point, which really isn’t that complicated. “to be cont.”:)

  26. Shabnam said on December 15th, 2009 at 9:33pm #

    Malalai Joya repeatedly attacks ‘Northern alliance’ and leave others behind. In most of her speeches in English and Persian the following names frequently re- surfaced:

    [Malalai Joya: “While the United States bombed from the sky, the CIA and special forces had already arrived in the northern provinces of Afghanistan to hand out millions of dollars in cash and weapons to Northern Alliance commanders. They were the same extremists whose militias had pillaged Afghanistan during the civil war: Dostum, Sayyaf, Khalili, Rhabbani, Fahim, General Arif, Dr. Abdullah, Haji Qadir, Ustad Atta, Mohammad, Daoud, and Hazrat Ali among others. … Fahim, another ruthless man with a dark past.]

    People must know that one of the big problems in Afghanistan is hatred based on religious and ethnic divide. I, myself, did not understand this issue until I came to help a Pashtun person where I was faced with hatred. Afghanistan like other countries under attack needs unity more than anything else. I am not using this experience to draw a conclusion rather I look at the history of Afghanistan with its great geopolitical importance attractive to Empire to use divide and conquer game to weaken the country.
    One accusation against Joya is her constant attack against ‘northern alliance’ who is mainly non Pashtun. They say her rhetoric stirs up ethnic hatred and leads to disunity. They make the following remark about Joya:
    ????? ???? ?? ???? ??? ???? ???? ?? ??? 2002 ?? ???? ??? ???? ?? ?????? ? ???? ???? ??? ??? ????? ?? ?????? ?????? ???????. ???? ???? ?????? ???? ??????? ???? ????? ???? ? ???? ???? ????? ?? ??????? ? ??????? ????? ????? ? ?? ????? ?? ?? ???? ??? ? ????? ????? ?????? ? ??? ?? ??????

    (She is repeating herself since 2002 and has nothing new to talk about. When she is criticized, she attacks and insults the person based on no evidence and document acting like an immature person and steps out of civilized code of behavior using vulgar language.)

    Joya was born in 1978, one year before the Soviet occupation, which drove her family into exile in 1982. In a refugee camp in Pakistan, Joya was educated at a school run by the Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan (RAWA).
    After 16 years in exile, Joya returned Afghanistan ruled by the Taliban, which had emerged victorious in 1996. Taliban fled in 2001 after the US invasion.
    She entered the parliament but latershe has publicly denounced the presence of what she considers warlords and war criminals in the parliament. In May 2007, Joya was suspended from the parliament on the grounds that she had insulted fellow representatives. Malalai Joya described members of the Afghan parliament in 2007 as belonging in a “zoo or a stable”.

    She said: Her constituents have urged her not to compare Members of Parliament to animal ¬ because it makes the animals look bad.

    “‘You have to apologize on behalf of the animals, because you compared these people with those innocent animals,’” Joya said her constituents told her.
    So, I want to ask people who is going to accept such a behavior in any parliament of the Western countries or in the world. Are you going to treat Afghanistan’s members of the parliament whom majority is Muslims as ‘animals in stable and Zoo?’ Why does she reserve the right to insult other members of the same body where she is part of? No wonder Afghanis view her not well educated. (I repeat what Afghanis have said) she is using vulgar language against members of the parliament where is a place for political debate and discussion to solve people’s problem. If she thinks the parliament is a stable or a zoo then why she entered the parliament in the first place.
    I am surprise why a person like her is supported by majority of the ‘human rights’, feminist and Trotskyists organization of the West?

  27. Deadbeat said on December 15th, 2009 at 11:12pm #


    My experience was with the 2003 anti-war movement and once various members raised “Israel/Palestine” the anti-war movement collapsed.

  28. kalidas said on December 16th, 2009 at 9:09am #

    Well then, why do so many, including practically everyone here, believe or pretend to believe there is a dimes worth of difference between Zionists and Jews?
    Do you also pretend to believe the Zionists, who it’s plain to see are simply ‘active’ Jews, and all other Jews believe there is a dimes worth of difference between all of you, the existential “others?”
    If so, why, how could that be that you see this?
    And please, spare me the many good Jews theory.
    You all know there are Jews who do not believe in their own hearts and minds they are chosen ones. Myself, I don’t believe it for an instant. Nor do I pretend to.
    If so, they would not be Jews by their own definition and by the definition(s), histories, events, predictions, pronouncements and commands of their collection of Ponerology known as Torah and Talmud.

  29. bozh said on December 16th, 2009 at 11:02am #

    kalidas, ismael, yes i agree.
    Clearly [oh, how many times have i said this!] the label “jew” signifies or stands for having a connection to judaism and judaists-talmudniks and thus also zionism [theft of land] and does not denote belonging to any ethnicity but to at least a hundred ethnicities or nationalities.

    Some of these ‘jews’ who criticize isr may have been badly hurt by other ‘jews’ or even molested by their priests and are thus against them. But they do not base their criticism on a desirable principle, such as that no people have the right to atttack another people.

    I always do and often posit that principle; entirely spurning all and each rationalization: the war is failing, it cost too much, US will fall apart, we’re losing to many soldiers; there’s no end to this or that war, the war is dumb, it’s a mistake, etc.

    We all know or shld know that no person can turn mean as a spurned cultist.
    Yes, a women can be extremely furious and dejected when spurned but comparing a such a woman with a spurned `jew` wld be quite misleading!
    Remember jones` and koresh`s cultists? Some 700 jones` cultists have committed suicide rather than return to US! tnx

  30. dan e said on December 16th, 2009 at 2:02pm #

    Oh boy. Confusion confusion confusion.

    One set of problems arise from the article about Ms Joya, mostly having to do with how to accurately identify & describe Ms J’s political stances and impact.

    Another set arises from different definitions or understandings of terms like “Zionist”, “Zionizm”, “Jew, Jewish”, “Talmudist”, “Ashkenazim”.

    I think Kim is right that we anti-Zionists especially need to be careful how we use this kind of “loaded” terminology, because if we allow ourselves to be misunderstood we undermine our own purpose.

    One thing I think I’ve done in the past, when confronted with a statement which objectively serves the Zionist enterprise, is to label the author a “Zionist stooge”. To which the person often responds: “How dare you call me a Zionist”, I’m a longtime supporter of Palestinian rights and have repeatedly publicly opposed the Occupation and Israeli crimes in Gaza and elsewhere!”
    Actually in my mind I didn’t mean to say that the person was “a Zionist”, I meant to point out that they were serving the interests of the Zionists. So it seems that the burden falls on me to parse my nomenclature down to a grain so fine that there is no room for misunderstanding.

    How about if I distinguish between Conscious stooges, who are to some degree aware that there is a harmony between the views they are expressing and views expressed by spokespersons for the Israel Lobby, on the one hand, and Unconscious stooges, who intend to serve Justice & Peace, the good/true/beautiful etc, but who in their ignorance repeat various Israel-serving fables, like “the War in Iraq was/is a War for Oil”.

    Another term I’ve used that seems to require clarification is “gambit” as applied to Zionist political tactics. In chess, the term refers to the tactic of allowing your opponent to capture a minor piece or pieces, thereby putting you in position to capture more or more important pieces from your opponent a few moves later. When applied to actual warfare it means instead of chesspieces, you sacrifice a portion of your military forces or favorable position in order to lure the enemy into a disadvantageous position where he will be vulnerable to your attack.

    So as applied to politics, it means that the Oppressor will direct a portion of his political apparatus to seemingly go over to the side of the Oppressed, to actually oppose this or that Imperialist policy. By this strategem, persons who are actually taking their orders from the Imperial Headquarters, which in the current conjuncture means from the top echelon of the Zionist Power Config, are able to gain acceptance among the Oppressed and their allies as “Peace Activists just like everybody else”, which allows them to help perpetuate harmful ideas such as “Israelis are people just like people everywhere”, or “US foreign & Military policy is controlled by Big Oil”.

    I think I’m spinning my wheels again so I’ll post this & see if anybody salutes it:)

  31. kalidas said on December 16th, 2009 at 3:14pm #

    I certainly was not talking about Israelis.
    Who and what Israelis are, is a given.
    I’m talking about Israelis in disguise.
    You know, the American Israelis, the British Israelis, Aussie Israelis, etc., etc., etc., Israelis by any other name.

    It doesn’t take a bunch of fancy winded pussy footing around or some phony baloney timid polite perhaps they might not be sincere but lets not judge crappola.
    It only takes something as simple as being honest with yourself and trusting your lying eyes, ears and noses.
    That’s what I’m talking about.

    We’re ALL anti-Semites.
    Some know it and some just haven’t heard it yet.
    It’s right up there with death and taxes, don’t you know.