Call-out by Canadian Peace Alliance and friends for TROOPS OUT NOW action : IMC Maritimes

The Collectif Échec à la guerre, Canadian Peace Alliance the Canadian Labour Congress and the Canadian Islamic Congress are jointly calling for a pan-Canadian day of protest this October 28th 2006 to bring Canadian troops home from Afghanistan. On that day, people all across the country will unite to tell Stephen Harper that we are opposed to his wholehearted support for Canadian and US militarism.

This October marks the 5th anniversary of the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan, and the people of that country are still suffering from the ravages of war. Reconstruction in the country is at a standstill and the needs of the Afghan people are not being met. The rule of the new Afghan State, made up largely of drug running warlords, will not realize the democratic aspirations of the people there. In fact, according to Human Rights Watch reports, the human rights record of those warlords in recent years has not been better than the Taliban.

We are told that the purpose of this war is to root out terrorism and protect our societies, yet the heavy-handed approach of a military occupation trying to impose a US-friendly government on the Afghan people will force more Afghans to become part of the resistance movement. It will also make our societies more - not less - likely to see terrorist attacks. No discussion on military tactics in the House of Commons will change that reality. Indeed, violence is increasing with more attacks on both coalition troops and on Afghan civilians.

While individual Canadian soldiers may have gone to Afghanistan with the best of intentions, they are operating under the auspices of a US-led state building project that cares little for the needs of the Afghan people. US and Canadian interests rest with the massive $3.2 billion Trans Afghan Pipeline (TAP) project, which will bring oil from the Caspian region through southern Afghanistan (where Canada is stationed) and onto the ports of Pakistan. It has been no secret that the TAP has dominated US foreign policy towards Afghanistan for the last decade. Now Canadian oil and gas corporations have their own interests in the TAP.

Over the last decade, the role of the Canadian Armed Forces abroad has changed and Canadian foreign policy has become a replica of the US empire building rhetoric. The end result of this process is now plain to see with the role of our troops in Southern Afghanistan, with the enormous budget increases for war expenditures and "security", with the Bush-style speeches of Stephen Harper, and with the fear campaigns around "homegrown terrorism" to foster support for those nefarious changes. It is this very course that will get young Canadian soldiers killed, that will endanger our society and consume more and more of its resources for destruction and death in Afghanistan. We demand a freeze in defense and security budgets until an in-depth public discussion is held on those issues across Canada.

The mission in Afghanistan has already cost Canadians more than $4 billion. That money could have been used to fund human needs in Canada or abroad. Instead it is being used to kill civilians in Afghanistan and advance the interests of corporations.

On October 28th, stand up and be counted. Canadian Troops Out of Afghanistan Now!

For more information see: http://www.acp-cpa.ca ; http://www.echecalaguerre.org/ ; http://www.clc-ctc.ca/ ; http://www.canadianislamiccongress.com/

Let's re-cap shall we!

We want out of Afghanistan because:

1. a number of Canadian Soldiers have been killed

2. Civilians have been killed

3. It is costing too much money.

4. Our involvement has stirred up the criminals who planned and executed a number of terrorist acts..

Using this same logic, and criteria, then we should certainly withdraw the RCMP from Western Canada because:

1. 6 RCMP Constables have been killed there in the past 15 months.

2. Civilians have been killed during police actions.

3. It costs a lot of money to police those provinces.

4. Criminals have been stirred up by police actions.

On second thought, maybe we should apply this logic on a much smaller scale in our communities. IE:

If a criminal gang invades our neighbors house, don't go and help, or even call for help, even if they kill our neighbors wife and daughters because fighting is not the Canadian way.

If that band of misguided criminals launches an attack from the neighbors house, against ourshouse or another neighbors house, and happens to kill several of our children, and injure several more, don't fight with them, nor call for help, but send a message to these poor misguided people that it is time to sit down and talk because we are Canadians and fighting is not the Canadian way.

When we sit down to talk, and one of them in an understandable rage, splits open the skull of our son with an axe because he has a sincere belief that we are evil and are God's enemy, explain to them, that we only want to get along and don't wish to fight with anyone because we are Canadians and that is not the Canadian way.

I know you won't print this, because you think it is some sort of right wing diatribe. In Point of fact, I am a neither left or right, but a Canadian Dad, with children in the CAF and therefore stand to lose more than the editors of this rag could possibly understand or imagine. But unlike the editors, I have actually served my country.

Your blather reminds me of a quote from the Europe of 1939.
"They came for the jews, but I was not jewish, so I did not say anything"

"They came for the Poles, but I was not Polish, so I did not say anything"

"They came for the gypsies, but I was not Gypsy, so I did not say anything"

"When they came for me, there was no one left to speak for me"!

PS: Wear red on Fridays! Red Fridays signify our support for the young men and women who actually do care about our Country, our society and our neighbors welfare, unlike the young editors of this rag, who actually think they are performing a service here!

Yours truly,

Candad

Happy Muslamic Left-wing support of the Taliban Day!

http://www.cbc.ca/cp/Atlantic/061027/t102728.html

Interesting that the once-respected CBC has become little more than a cherleading squad for this Madness.

Can't bite the hand that feeds, I suppose ...

The modest crowds across the country Saturday come as a poll suggested a majority of Canadians still support the military's more aggressive role in Afghanistan.

The survey, conducted for the Canadian Defence and Foreign Affairs Institute, revealed that 55 per cent of Canadians are in favour of dangerous missions for the Forces, as long they believe the mission's goals are just.

cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2006/10/28/2155711-cp.html

Islamic Barbarian Theocracy: Invaders and Occupiers of Iran
Feb 26, 2006
Letter to editor, Amir

I have come across some sentiment that depicts the current Islamic Regime as a foreign occupying force in Iran. The term "second Arabo-Islamic invasion of Iran" has gained popularity. Are these sentiments based on the truth, or are they baseless and just rhetoric?

Indeed, these barbarians can only be thought of as foreign invaders. They call themselves Iranians, but are they really Iranians?

What does it mean to be Iranian? It means to hold dear the traditions, ideology, and ways of life of Iran. It means to love Iran itself, and more importantly, the citizens of Iran.

As we all know, Iran (land of the Aryans) is a country with very old and deep rooted traditions, going back at least 7000 years. A nation which is that old cannot be expected to remain static. Change is of course inevitable in its history. But what type of change can be deemed acceptable and simply an evolution of a society, and what type of change is deemed unacceptable and antagonistic to the foundations of that society?

Those changes that act to advance a society, both technologically as well as morally, while staying true to the basic principles of that society will be considered acceptable and should be integrated into that society. Those that set a society back, either technologically or morally, and are antagonistic to the founding principles of that society must be considered unacceptable.

So, let's examine Iran's history from the perspective of who in our history was a legitimate Iranian regime and who was merely a foreign occupying force. Let's review who merely brought changes that aimed to build upon and improve our existing Iranian culture, versus who brought changes that were designed to undermine and destroy the Iranian culture and Iran. As always, a historical perspective will help clarify the present circumstance.

The Achaemenians built upon the existing cultures of the Elamites and Medes. They accepted them as their own, stayed true to their tradition for the most part, and accelerated that society in an amazing way. There was technological, economic, military, as well as moral acceleration. Their impact was so great, and so positive, that they not only expanded Iranian culture but also became its primary defining feature.

After Alexander's conquest, Iran fell under a foreign occupying force. The subsequent Seleucid Empire was obviously not Iranian, but Greek. They did not arrive with the intent of evolving Iranian culture, but rather to dominate it, use it, and overwhelm it with another culture: Greek. Some of the results were positive, in so much as Greek culture is as rich as ours and has much to offer. Nevertheless, since it set out to overwhelm and subjugate Iranian culture instead of simply enriching its foundations, it can be viewed only as a foreign occupation. Fortunately, it did not succeed.

The Parthians, another Iranian tribe, drove out the Seleucids and restored Iranian culture. They remained true to the spirit and culture of Iran, and did their best to make positive contributions. Though their contributions were limited (although it may have been more involved than we think, only because our historical records regarding this period are so relatively scant), because they were loyal to Iranian citizens and culture, they must be viewed as players in the advancement of the nation.

The Sassanids, second only to the Achaemenids in their service to Iran were also a major defining feature of Iranian culture and identity. They considered themselves the direct descendants of the Achaemenids, and obviously sought to preserve Iranian culture and identity while serving their nation. They took a great role in advancing the foundations of Iranian civilization in many different aspects.

Then came a major turning point in our history: the Arabic barbarian invasion of our Iran. This was the second of many foreign occupying forces to dominate Iran. With the Arabic invasion, Iran was again faced with an enemy from within which aimed to undermine its civilization and identity. The first factor used to destroy a national identity was an attack on its predominant religion: "Zoroastrianism".

With physical and economic coercion, the Arabic barbarians were able to convert a large portion of Zartoshdtis to Islam. The Arabic language and customs were also forced on the native Iranians. The ruling Umayyads and Abbassids were Arabic dynasties, with loyalties only to themselves, their Arabic tribesmen, and their Arabic culture and religion. Iran was to them only a commodity, used for its natural resources and its people. The moral system that the Arabs brought with them was much more primitive and barbaric compared to the system which already existed under the Sassanids. And those Arabs were clearly determined to wipe out as much as they could from the Iranian culture and collective memory. Magnificent artworks were destroyed, and the Arabs had themselves a good old fashioned "book burning." You may recall the old Arabic edict "We need no other book other than the Quran." Clearly, this invasion served as a devolution of Iranian culture. Fortunately, the Arabs did not completely succeed in their goal of destroying Iranian identity. It is noteworthy that Iran was the only nation to be dominated by Arabic rule for so long yet retain its identity as non-Arabic. Others were not as fortunate. One of the greatest of ancient civilizations, Egypt, never recovered from the barbarian invasion and has remained Arabic forever. In that respect, Egypt's place in history remains very lamentable.

After the Arabic occupation, the Saffarids retained control over Iran. They identified themselves as Iranians, sought to regain Iranian culture and tradition, and aimed to serve the citizens of Iran instead of using them as a commodity for a foreign power. Yaqoub Saffarid made it a point to restore Persian language by making it the mandatory language of his court. The fact that we don't speak Arabic today is owed to the Saffarids and none other than Ferdowsi. The Saffarids kept the language alive long enough for it not to be completely extinguished, but were not able to completely restore it. However, they played a very important role, because they kept it alive long enough for a genius like Ferdowsi to come along centuries later and use it in such a way that only an epic poem can do. In doing so, he ignited a flame in all common Iranians to regain their language.

A multitude of different dynasties followed, most of which were foreign: Turkish, Mongol, Uzbek, etc. The vast majority of these had no interests in building upon the existing Iranian culture, and again, can only be viewed as foreign occupying forces with only self serving motives.

The Saffavids followed, which served a very important role. Their role in Iranian identity and culture was very ambivalent. They wished to promote an Iranian agenda and revive Persian culture. In that, they were quite successful. But in pushing for Persian unity, they used Shiite Islam as a tool. Forced conversions were implemented, as well as religious persecutions. Because of them, islam was here to stay. Since islam is clearly a foreign ideology and not at all conducive to Iranian culture and identity, as well as morally inferior to the original Iranian way of life, this act of the Saffavids had very clear anti-Iranian results. Hence the ambivalence of the Saffavids to truly serving Iranian identity and culture. Nonetheless, the Saffavids cannot be viewed as a foreign occupying force, and overall served the Iranian purpose.

A number of other mediocre dynasties followed :Afshar, Zand, Qajar, which were Iranian and clearly not foreign occupiers. Though Iranian, their contributions to Iran (with the exception of a few noteworthy individuals such as Amir Kabir) were minimal to none. It was a time of great incompetence and stagnation, which left Iran greatly vulnerable again to foreign interests in the twentieth century.

Enter the Pahlavi dynasty: the greatest Iranian dynasty since the Sassanids. The Iranian patriotism and service of this father and son to the Iranian nation, culture, and identity is unquestionable. After a millennium and a half, they were the first to truly recognize the important role that our pre-islamic heritage and civilization serve in our identity. They sought to rebuild Iran where the Sassanids had left off. They catapulted Iran forward by two centuries in a matter of half a century. The manner by which they served the traditions, culture, and citizens of Iran can only be viewed as a great evolutionary step forward. Unfortunately, their efforts were halted, undermined, and greatly reversed with the Revolution.

This was more a Revolution from without than a Revolution from within. Regardless of its origins, the result was obvious: a ruling theocratic Islamic regime from hell. Power was handed to Islamic Mullahs, people whose only intellectual interest is the religion that spurted from an Arabic, tribal, nomadic way of life. A religion which developed and has remained in medieval times. The mullahs and their Islamic followers' allegiance is understandably only to themselves and their ideology which binds them to Arabo-Muslims. Their education (if you can call it that) and upbringing had always been in relation to this foreign religion, which can only identify with the Arabic mentality and cause.

Their upbringing is Arabic, their thoughts are Arabic, their traditions are Arabic, their culture is Arabic, their religion is Arabic, their clothes are Arabic, their language is Arabic, and unfortunately, their morality is Arabic.

Are we really surprised that their allegiance is Arabic?

Now let's review part of the role that this theocracy has played in the last 27 years.

1. Changed the national flag. The lion and sun, which is unrelated to monarchy but represents ancient Iran, was replaced with the double swords of a Sikh symbol. What's a Sikh symbol doing on our flag?

2. Implemented religious persecution of any minority non-islamic (and even sometimes Islamic) religious group.

3. Persisted on the use and knowledge of the Arabic language, while de-emphasizing Farsi. Coercing students to learn Arabic if they wish to get an education.

4. Attacked ancient Persian cultural monuments and archeological sites. If not for the resistance of brave Iranians, Persepolis would have been demolished by now.

5. Insisted by coercion on naming Iranian newborns using foreign Arabic names instead of proud Iranian names, by refusing to issue birth certificates to those with purely Iranian names.

6. Attempted to suppress the ancient traditions of Nowruz and Chaharshanbeh Souri commemorating the Persian new year. Fortunately, this was yet another unsuccessful and pitiful attempt to subdue Iranian culture.

7. Falsely changed history books, giving misinformation to young students regarding Iran's history. Deceitfully and purposefully depicted the Iranian nationalists, patriots and kings as tyrannical while glorifying and legitimizing the barbarian Arabic invaders and their descendants as heroes.

8. Neglected Iran's citizens and infrastructure, while using its natural and human resources to achieve their goals: self-serve, and propagation and support of Arabo-Islamo-Fascism and terrorism.

Let's also not forget that Khomeini barely spoke any Farsi; Arabic was his first language. He always called for propagation, preservation, and expansion of Islam; he never said a caring or positive word about Iran. The only times he mentioned Iran was in relation to how it could serve Islam and the Islamic agenda. Iran has been made Islam's commodity since 1979.

Face of Evil
Have the current ruling mullahs behaved any differently than the Umayyads or Abbassids? Are they any less a foreign occupying force? Have they tried any less to destroy Iranian culture, identity and heritage? Have they oppressed and terrorized the legitimate Iranian citizens any less? Have they used Iran's human and natural resources in order to serve a foreign interest and ideology any less?

The name Islamic Republic of Iran is a misnomer. There is nothing Iranian about this regime, and these terrorists should not be allowed to use the word "Iran" to describe their regime. From now on, I refuse to refer to this illegitimate, tyrannical, barbaric, immoral, and foreign occupying force as "IRI," and will simply refer to it as "IR," or the Islamic Republic (and even the term Republic is a misnomer, since this regime is not represented by its people).

© Iranian.ws

http://iranianpersonals.com/?affiliateID=google4Ir&gclid=CNGH1d_arYgCFSa7YAodUF1z1w

Dishonest
by Harper Betrayed The Troops Wednesday, Nov. 08, 2006 at 3:08 PM

"The survey, conducted for the Canadian Defence and Foreign Affairs Institute, revealed that 55 per cent of Canadians are in favour of dangerous missions for the Forces, as long they believe the mission's goals are just. "

Yes, and there is no indication they believe this is the case in Afghanistan, as most Canadians oppose that war.

Doesn't exactly say what you've tried to make it, does it?

"Yes, and there is no indication they believe this is the case in Afghanistan, as most Canadians oppose that war."

So how come they didn't show their displeasure on the 28th?

Anyhow ...
by Harper Betrayed The Troops Thursday, Nov. 09, 2006 at 6:10 PM

The weather?

I don't know, but that poll doesn't say what you were trying to imply, and your Straw Man doesn't change the fact that, despite the increased Propaganda barrage, most Canadians oppose our altered role in Afghanistan.

What altered role you moron. We went there in 2002 to fight terrorists and have been doing so ever since.

No, we went there to Appease the US, but our troops were to provide security to the reconstruction.

Under Harper's Alliance Regime, loyal to PNAC, we've abandoned reconstruction, and instead now act as Colonial Auxiliaries for the US.

Fuck you is one dumb ass.

peaceniks are dumb assess.

No Response?
by Harper Betrayed The Troops Sunday, Nov. 19, 2006 at 5:44 AM

No, we went there to Appease the US, given our decision not to join them in the other Quaigmire, but our troops were originally to provide security to the reconstruction.

Under Harper's Alliance Regime, loyal to PNAC, we've abandoned reconstruction, and instead now act as Colonial Auxiliaries for the US, to put down the legitimate Afghan Resistance, to prop up US-installed Puppets and war/druglords, and make the country "safe" for UNOCAL's oil & gas pipeline from the Caspian.

Think for the good of the world!

Canadian reservists awarded medals

By MURRAY BREWSTER The Canadian Press
ADVERTISEMENT

KANDAHAR, Afghanistan — Most Canadians associate medals with old soldiers and wars long past, but that stereotype now clearly belongs to history as hundreds of young men began leaving the battlefields of southern Afghanistan this weekend, joining comrades on their long journey home.

The "citizen soldiers" of Charles Company, 1st Battalion Royal Canadian Regiment, received their campaign stars Saturday in a modest rain soaked ceremony in front of their fighting vehicles at Kandahar Airfield.

In pinning the medals on 14 reservists, Brig.-Gen Tim Grant asked them to reflect when they get home on what the last six months has meant to them, their country and the people of Afghanistan.

"You’re the ones who’ve made the unit proud, this task force proud and the country proud," he said.

"You have been significant in maintaining the reputation of NATO because last summer the Taliban said they were going to send NATO packing out of this country. You made sure that didn’t happen."

Thrown into battle in late August and early September, Charles Company saw some of the battalion’s fiercest firefights, its heaviest casualties and perhaps, the worst luck. The unit not only lost four members in one action, but were strafed by a U.S. warplane the following day, killing one and injuring 30.

Campaign medals — gold stars hung on a red, white and green ribbon symbolizing Afghanistan — will be pinned on regular army members at a huge ceremony planned for late April at their home base outside of Ottawa. The idea of holding a separate presentation will give soldiers’ families a chance to see them receive their decorations. In addition to the medals handed out Saturday, which all soldiers in theatre are entitled to wear, Grant presented wound stripes to soldiers injured in the accidental strafing at Ma’sum Ghar last September.

The Canadian Forces is currently looking at the idea of replacing the wound stripe, which soldiers can choose to wear or not, with an actual medal, similar to the Purple Heart, granted to injured U.S. soldiers.

"These are citizen soldiers," said Grant. "In the real world you wouldn’t call them professional soldiers, but they have been very professional in what they’ve done and they volunteered. They came over to serve their country and get a life experience and they got more than what they asked for."

Not long after the ceremony, the Taliban issued a reminder of the dangers of the Afghan mission when a suicide car bomber attacked a Canadian patrol east of Kandahar city.

The driver detonated his explosive payload early, killing only himself and causing minor damage to a military vehicle. No Canadians were injured in the attack, although the blast was large enough to be heard several kilometres away.
http://thechronicleherald.ca/Canada/558545.html

Ask Yourselves oh Muslims: Who's words do you believe? NATO or a Muslim?
Monday, 04 September 2006
I.T.S. Note: NATO(Disbelievers) is claiming that more than 200 Taliban soldiers have been killed. Taliban military commander for south and southeastern Afghanistan Mullah Dadullah(a Muslim) has said in an interview with the Associated Press(AP) that only 10 of their soldiers died. As Muslims, who's word do you take? Who's words are you supposed to take? Allah s.w.t. has said in the Qur'an: “O you who believe! If a Faasiq (liar — evil person) comes to you with any news, verify it, lest you should harm people in ignorance, and afterwards you become regretful for what you have done” [al-Hujuraat 49:6]

In regards to a Muslim, when we are told that Allah judges all actions by their intentions who are you to cast dispersions on them after that? Ask yourself that. If you still doubt Mullah Dadullah(who is a Muslim), you need to check your 'aqeedah becasue there is a serious problem with your belief.
Taliban: NATO inflating Afghanistan death toll
Source: CNN

KANDAHAR, Afghanistan (AP) -- The top Taliban military commander on Monday said that NATO's claims to have killed more than 200 insurgents over the weekend were propaganda and warned that his men would target journalists who reported "wrong information" given by the U.S.-led coalition or NATO.

"They are saying that they have killed 200 Taliban but they did not kill even 10 Taliban," said Mullah Dadullah, Taliban military commander for south and southeastern Afghanistan. "They are just destroying civilian homes and agricultural land. They are using the media to do propaganda against the Taliban."

Dadullah spoke to The Associated Press in a satellite phone call from an undisclosed location. The reporter has spoken to him in the past and recognized his voice.

"From today, I want to tell journalists that if in future they use wrong information from coalition forces or NATO we will target those journalists and media," Dadullah said. "We have the Islamic right to kill these journalists and media."

NATO reported Sunday that more than 200 Taliban fighters had died in the first two days of the joint NATO-Afghan operation in Panjwayi, a district near the southern city of Kandahar, and claimed it had disrupted the militia's command and control. The Afghan Defense Ministry reported 89 militants were killed and there were some civilian casualties.

The casualty counts could not be independently verified as reporters could not access the area of the battle, which was continuing Monday.

At least five Canadian soldiers have been killed in the fighting. The U.S. military has said warplanes involved in friendly fire incident that killed a Canadian soldier in Afghanistan and seriously wounded five others were U.S. A-10 Thunderbolts.

'Make every sacrifice'

Dadullah said he was speaking from a mountain where he was accompanied by a large group of mujahedeen, or holy warriors, who were ready to make "every sacrifice."

Dadullah claimed that the Taliban had registered 500 Afghans ready to be used as suicide bombers against "the intruders who have occupied our Islamic country" and that Taliban from outlying districts had entered cities to launch attacks. He warned local people to stay away from NATO and coalition troops.

"Now we are going to change our tactics, using a new weapon we did not have in the past, to target U.S. and allied forces," Dadullah said without elaborating. "We will create a big problem for them."

He said Mullah Omar -- the fugitive leader of the Taliban regime ousted by U.S.-led forces in late 2001 -- was still the movement's supreme commander.

Taliban-led insurgents have stepped up attacks this year, leaving hundreds of militants, Afghan and foreign security forces and civilians dead, mostly in the south and east. The insecurity has shaken faith in the elected, U.S.-backed government of President Hamid Karzai.

Dadullah, who lost a leg fighting for the Taliban during its rise to power in the mid-1990s, is regarded as the group's top military commander and is wanted by the U.S.-led coalition hunting Taliban and al Qaeda fighters.

NATO convoy targeted

A car bomb targeting a NATO convoy killed four Afghan civilians and one NATO soldier in Afghan capital on Monday, NATO and Afghan officials said. (Watch aftermath of car bombing -- 1:22)

The explosion happened on the Kabul-Jalalabad road at 10:15 a.m. and wounded four NATO troops, said Maj. Toby Jackman.

Maj. Luke Knittig, another NATO spokesman, said one the wounded troops later died of his injuries. He said one of the other wounded was in serious condition. Two sustained light injuries. NATO did not give the soldiers' nationalities.

Meanwhile, suspected Taliban militants attacked a district headquarters in a southern Afghan town early Monday, sparking fighting that left 16 militants and three police dead, an official said.

A "big group" of militants launched the attack in Garmser, in Helmand province, at around 1 a.m., and retreated after four hours of fighting, said provincial police chief Ghulam Nadi Malakhel.

Both sides used assault rifles, heavy machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades in the fighting, that damaged the headquarters compound, which is shared by the Garmser district administration and police.

Malakhel said the militants took away seven bodies of their comrades and 10 wounded, but left nine bodies behind, along with an array of weapons.

He said a Taliban group commander, Mullah Sattar, was among the dead.

KANDAHAR, Afghanistan (AP) -- The top Taliban military commander on Monday said that NATO's claims to have killed more than 200 insurgents over the weekend were propaganda and warned that his men would target journalists who reported "wrong information" given by the U.S.-led coalition or NATO.

"They are saying that they have killed 200 Taliban but they did not kill even 10 Taliban," said Mullah Dadullah, Taliban military commander for south and southeastern Afghanistan. "They are just destroying civilian homes and agricultural land. They are using the media to do propaganda against the Taliban."

Dadullah spoke to The Associated Press in a satellite phone call from an undisclosed location. The reporter has spoken to him in the past and recognized his voice.

"From today, I want to tell journalists that if in future they use wrong information from coalition forces or NATO we will target those journalists and media," Dadullah said. "We have the Islamic right to kill these journalists and media."

NATO reported Sunday that more than 200 Taliban fighters had died in the first two days of the joint NATO-Afghan operation in Panjwayi, a district near the southern city of Kandahar, and claimed it had disrupted the militia's command and control. The Afghan Defense Ministry reported 89 militants were killed and there were some civilian casualties.

The casualty counts could not be independently verified as reporters could not access the area of the battle, which was continuing Monday.

At least five Canadian soldiers have been killed in the fighting. The U.S. military has said warplanes involved in friendly fire incident that killed a Canadian soldier in Afghanistan and seriously wounded five others were U.S. A-10 Thunderbolts.

'Make every sacrifice'

Dadullah said he was speaking from a mountain where he was accompanied by a large group of mujahedeen, or holy warriors, who were ready to make "every sacrifice."

Dadullah claimed that the Taliban had registered 500 Afghans ready to be used as suicide bombers against "the intruders who have occupied our Islamic country" and that Taliban from outlying districts had entered cities to launch attacks. He warned local people to stay away from NATO and coalition troops.

"Now we are going to change our tactics, using a new weapon we did not have in the past, to target U.S. and allied forces," Dadullah said without elaborating. "We will create a big problem for them."

He said Mullah Omar -- the fugitive leader of the Taliban regime ousted by U.S.-led forces in late 2001 -- was still the movement's supreme commander.

Taliban-led insurgents have stepped up attacks this year, leaving hundreds of militants, Afghan and foreign security forces and civilians dead, mostly in the south and east. The insecurity has shaken faith in the elected, U.S.-backed government of President Hamid Karzai.

Dadullah, who lost a leg fighting for the Taliban during its rise to power in the mid-1990s, is regarded as the group's top military commander and is wanted by the U.S.-led coalition hunting Taliban and al Qaeda fighters.

NATO convoy targeted

A car bomb targeting a NATO convoy killed four Afghan civilians and one NATO soldier in Afghan capital on Monday, NATO and Afghan officials said. (Watch aftermath of car bombing -- 1:22)

The explosion happened on the Kabul-Jalalabad road at 10:15 a.m. and wounded four NATO troops, said Maj. Toby Jackman.

Maj. Luke Knittig, another NATO spokesman, said one the wounded troops later died of his injuries. He said one of the other wounded was in serious condition. Two sustained light injuries. NATO did not give the soldiers' nationalities.

Meanwhile, suspected Taliban militants attacked a district headquarters in a southern Afghan town early Monday, sparking fighting that left 16 militants and three police dead, an official said.

A "big group" of militants launched the attack in Garmser, in Helmand province, at around 1 a.m., and retreated after four hours of fighting, said provincial police chief Ghulam Nadi Malakhel.

Both sides used assault rifles, heavy machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades in the fighting, that damaged the headquarters compound, which is shared by the Garmser district administration and police.

Malakhel said the militants took away seven bodies of their comrades and 10 wounded, but left nine bodies behind, along with an array of weapons.

He said a Taliban group commander, Mullah Sattar, was among the dead.
http://www.islamicthinkers.com/index/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=566&Itemid=26

I believe the activists, who note that this War of Aggression was planned and in the staging when the 911 False Flag allowed the Fascists in DC/London to carry out their long-held plans to force the construction of UNOCAL's oil & gas pipeline from the Caspian Sea Basin.

I don't believe NATO because it is an illegitimate force with no business in the region, who empowered drug lords and warlords, and have a long history of lying.

Then why is there a UN mandate authorizing ISAF in Afghnaistan?

Actually, the UN mandate did not authorize the use of military force. And at the time, it was believed that this was a response to 911. Since that time, we've learned that this was a long-planned act of aggression (which awaited some useful crisis - like another Pearl Harbour), and that the Official Conspiracy Theory, unsupported by the "Saddam has nukes!!" guys, is contradicted by the existing facts.

But to answer your rather bigoted question:

I believe the activists, who note that this War of Aggression was planned and in the staging when the 911 False Flag allowed the Fascists in DC/London to carry out their long-held plans to force the construction of UNOCAL's oil & gas pipeline from the Caspian Sea Basin.

I don't believe NATO because it is an illegitimate force with no business in the region, who empowered drug lords and warlords, and have a long history of lying.

Then why is there a UN mandate authorizing ISAF in Afghnaistan?