Obama, the prince of bait-and-switch

I interviewed a woman who had lost eight members of her family, including six children to a US bomb

By John Pilger Published 24 July 2008

On 12 July, the Times devoted two pages to Afghanistan. It was mostly a complaint about the heat. The reporter, Magnus Linklater, described in detail his discomfort and how he had needed to be sprayed with iced water. He also described the "high drama" and "meticulously practised routine" of evacuating another overheated journalist. For her US Marine rescuers, wrote Linklater, "saving a life took precedence over [their] security". Alongside this was a report whose final paragraph offered the only mention that "47 civilians, most of them women and children, were killed when a US aircraft bombed a wedding party in eastern Afghanistan on Sunday".

Slaughters on this scale are common, and mostly unknown to the British public. I interviewed a woman who had lost eight members of her family, including six children. A 500lb US Mk82 bomb was dropped on her mud, stone and straw house. There was no "enemy" nearby. I interviewed a headmaster whose house disappeared in a fireball caused by another "precision" bomb. Inside were nine people - his wife, his four sons, his brother and his wife, and his sister and her husband. Neither of these mass murders was news. As Harold Pinter wrote of such crimes: "Nothing ever happened. Even while it was happening it wasn't happening. It didn't matter. It was of no interest."

A total of 64 civilians were bombed to death while the Times man was discomforted. Most were guests at a wedding party. Wedding parties are a "coalition" speciality. At least four of them have been obliterated - at Mazar and in Khost, Uruzgan and Nangarhar provinces. Many of the details, including the names of victims, have been compiled by a New Hampshire professor, Marc Herold, whose Afghan Victim Memorial Project is a meticulous work of journalism that shames those who are paid to keep the record straight and report almost everything about the Afghan War through the public relations facilities of the British and American military.

The US and its allies are dropping record numbers of bombs on Afghanistan. This is not news. In the first half of this year, 1,853 bombs were dropped: more than all the bombs of 2006 and most of 2007. "The most frequently used bombs," the Air Force Times reports, "are the 500lb and 2,000lb satellite-guided . . ." Without this one-sided onslaught, the resurgence of the Taliban, it is clear, might not have happened. Even Hamid Karzai, America's and Britain's puppet, has said so. The presence and the aggression of foreigners have all but united a resistance that now includes former warlords once on the CIA's payroll.

The scandal of this would be headline news, were it not for what George W Bush's former spokesman Scott McClellan has called "complicit enablers" - journalists who serve as little more than official amplifiers. Having declared Afghanistan a "good war", the complicit enablers are now anointing Barack Obama as he tours the bloodfests in Afghanistan and Iraq. What they never say is that Obama is a bomber.

In the New York Times on 14 July, in an article spun to appear as if he is ending the war in Iraq, Obama demanded more war in Afghan istan and, in effect, an invasion of Pakistan. He wants more combat troops, more helicopters, more bombs. Bush may be on his way out, but the Republicans have built an ideological machine that transcends the loss of electoral power - because their collaborators are, as the American writer Mike Whitney put it succinctly, "bait-and-switch" Democrats, of whom Obama is the prince.

Those who write of Obama that "when it comes to international affairs, he will be a huge improvement on Bush" demonstrate the same wilful naivety that backed the bait-and-switch of Bill Clinton - and Tony Blair. Of Blair, wrote the late Hugo Young in 1997, "ideology has surrendered entirely to 'values' . . . there are no sacred cows [and] no fossilised limits to the ground over which the mind might range in search of a better Britain . . ."

Eleven years and five wars later, at least a million people lie dead. Barack Obama is the American Blair. That he is a smooth operator and a black man is irrelevant. He is of an enduring, rampant system whose drum majors and cheer squads never see, or want to see, the consequences of 500lb bombs dropped unerringly on mud, stone and straw houses.

http://www.johnpilger.com

Special Offer: Get 12 issues of New Statesman magazine for just £12

Tags: Barack Obama

View the discussion thread.

93 comments

Fri, 2008-07-25 00:04 — JC2

'Yes, yes...I don't care for Obama though I have his bumber sticker on my car.'
A: Well you must care for him a bit pugnax.

'You're generally right.'
A: Well put.

'His bellicose blustering on Jerusalem and threats against Iran are truly disturbing.'
A: All a charade, mate. Don't worry about it.

'But as an American voter, what am I supposed to do? I can't refrain from voting.'
A: Well then bugger off. Obama won't need your vote anyway.
As far as Afghanistan is concerned, my favorite president since I became aware of things, Jimmy Carter, ultimately started this tragic mess (in the process of "winning the cold war").
A: Yeah, and he was one of the better ones.

Father, forgive me for I am going to vote.
A: If it is for Obama then you are forgiven.
JC2

Mon, 2008-07-28 05:34 — stevenlind821

It’s like in the movies or Television drama series where CIA death squads are in operation to eliminate ‘enemies’ of the United States. In Afghanistan, this movie is being played in real time with real people being killed and at times entire villages razed by an angry mob called the CIA paramilitaries.

A United Nations investigator released a preliminary report citing widespread civilian deaths in Afghanistan, often at the hands of unaccountable units led by the CIA or other foreign intelligence agencies, including the Mossad – or Israel’s secret service.

The British Intel is also involved in the secret battle in which the target is mostly civilians who knows too much about the Taliban and Taliban close allies in villages and cities.

These ops – illegal according to the rules of wars – were condemned by Philip Alston who is the United Nations Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions Professor Philip Alston.
“My focus is on extrajudicial executions or what might be called unlawful killings. The principal actors whose conduct I have been examining include the Government, particularly the police, the international military forces and the anti-government elements, including the Taliban. The bottom line of my report is that there are many killings which are avoidable,” he said after delivering a devastating report that showed the CIA were killing civilians with impunity in Afghanistan.

Fri, 2008-07-25 00:11 — JC2

G'day knave. Hope you are well.

'I cannot understand the hatred for Pilger.'
A: I can. He is inconsistent. The result of that is that is polarization. Both sides are wrong, but one is more wrong than the other.

'I don't even think he a leftie in the true sense of the word.'
A: Correct. He has never, as far as I am aware described himself as 'left-wing'. He is a seeker of truth. Like me, but not as good. I had a run in with Jonny Mac over this the last couple of weeks. He still hasn't answered me properly. Coward.

'He gives an alternative view with passion.'
A: Yeah and it's a shame that the view of the best journalist in the world is considered 'alternative' isn't it.

'We are surrounded by journalists who give the neo con, economic liberal, US propaganda view. There are thousands of Cohens , Brights, Goves, Hitchens, O Keefes, Johnsons and Brownes. God the list is endless.'
A: Yep. All in all a pretty useless bunch.

'Surely even a right wingers ( like AL, claddarch and Johnny mac) want to see as many alternative views as possible.'
A: I think they do, actually. Because they think they are smart and want to show the world their intelligence. But all they are doing is embarrassing themselves in front of the ENTIRE GLOBAL POPULATION. hahahaha.

'Also if you hate him so much why do read his columns.'
A: See previous answer.

JC2

Mon, 2008-07-28 06:32 — mike111

vote nader 08' he'll have a good response plan on how to handle middle east u.s. occupation and hopefully compramise with the other western countries dipping their feet in the middle east. nader/gonzalez '08

Fri, 2008-07-25 00:19 — JC2

'Okay war criminal supporter:

'People here referring to the "right-wing Zionists" etc who have commented here would be interested to know my previous political background. It is anything BUT right-wing.'
A: Well congratufrigginlations.

'I am presently disenfranchised, for the simple reason that although the Tories and many in Labour understand the REAL issues ("join the dots", Blair once said) not ONE major party is telling it like it is.'
A: With comments like that I reckon I have just found my third fascist to go along side John Bolton and Australia's own Andrew Bolt (heraldsun.com.au)

'And the Lib Dems were WRONG about Iraq.'
A: They supported it then, did they?

'The reason we are hearing nothing on this issue? All major parties are intimidated by the fear of losing the inner-city ethnic vote. Nothing else. No point of principle. They all understand what's going on here in this land of ours.'
A: The reason we are hearing nothing is because the current crop have the blood of millions on their hands. And if they understood what was going on in this land of yours they would quit.

'Interesting how some here feel that you are surrounded by right-wing views. The right-wing feel the opposite.'
A: That's because you are surrounded. We snuck up on you fascist types.

'You only need to read our press- from the 'NOTIndependent' to The Guardian, The Mail, Express ad nauseum. They are all anti-the Iraq invasion and anti-Blair by and large. Yet HE was the one who got it right.'
A: Two wrongs in the one paragraph do not make a right, that has just been proven beyond any shadow of a doubt.

'So if we all feel hard done by re press coverage, perhaps the balance isn't all that much out of kilter after all.'
A: It is improving but it is still massively out of kilter and those responsible for putting it out of kilter will face justice.

'Guardianistos are the soul-mates for the pro-Pilgerites here.'
A: No they bloody well are not.

'They're all anti-Israel, anti-America, anti-Blair. In fact I can't recall who they're for.'
A: We are for Truth.

Oh yes, the poor misunderstood Islamist fundamentalists/terrorists.
A: Finally making some sense I see collaborator.

JC2

http://keeptonyblairforpm.wordpress.com/2008/07/22/islamists...

Mon, 2008-07-28 06:33 — mike111

nader 08

Fri, 2008-07-25 00:20 — JC2

Oh yeah, and this:

jimmykrongold.wordpress.com

JC2

Fri, 2008-07-25 00:22 — JC2

G'day timcampbellxyx. Welcome aboard.

'Pilger juxtaposes some incredible facts about reporting on Iraq and makes Time look like modern day Marie Antoinettes. Thanks.'
A: Yeah, thanks John.

'Pilgers was however, less convincing when he subsequently launched an attack on Barack Obama. Obama is not responsible for the efete concerns of Times journalists.'
A: Yeah, good call. I like you.

JC2

Fri, 2008-07-25 00:25 — JC2

Ooh. Mystical Beowulf is here.

'You hardly mention Obama as much as you go on about the murderers and bombers known to you as the American and British Forces. Do you REALLY believe our fathers, mothers, brothers and sisters of the military don't take every precaution to prevent harm to innocents? Do REALLY believe they are such sloppy shots that they are throwing bombs around willy nilly? Let me know when you pull your head out of your arse.
A: Yes. And it is your arse that is full of head. Yours.

A Real American LADY
A: Incorrect. Here is one:
http://www.jennifer-walcott.org/pictures/Jennifer-Walcott-Sexy-Photos/Je...

JC2

Fri, 2008-07-25 00:33 — BlairSupporter1

Oooh! JC2 is upset. Help. Mum!

So upset he can't stop writing. Soul.

Anyway, two can play at that game.

Q: BlairSupporter you are completely clueless. Give up would ya.
A: Nope!

Correction to this:

"It shows that there are enough good people in this country to take down people like your namesake."

Pilger and GOOD people like him, did NOT take down Blair. His party did, in their stupidity, for the sake of their own seats, since they had been told their 3 times winner would lose their seats for them! Who by? The agenda'd press, of course!

And they innocently thought that Brown would help retain those seats.

Get your facts straight. The people were never asked about Blair going - and now they know what they've lost.

http://keeptonyblairforpm.wordpress.com/2008/06/22/opinion-poll-53-want-...

The dead in wars:

Millions died in previous wars, thousands per day for years. For freedom. The conflicts in the Middle East are for OUR freedom. You MUST understand this, even if you don't agree with the Iraq decision. Politicians are put there in order to see the bigger picture. Precisely the reason Brown now understands Iraq, and Obama is getting there. If he is ever President HE will disappoint pacifists too! Such is life.

Of course he won't be elected.

What you are saying is weak and unforgivable as far as the future of democracy is concerned. I did not vote for Blair - (and no I am not Blair) - I was involved with another party for many years (not any more!) But our politicians are elected democratically and I accept the democratic decision. When and if it's Cameron, I'll accept that too.

As for being "poorly informed" how much do you know about the real threat to our freedoms? Not the civil/human righters nonsense - the REAL threat to democracy. Go and watch some of the videos at my latest post and then tell me there is no threat from fundamentalists who feign religious reasons for killing you and me.

Creeping Sharia Law - rubbish? Do YOU ever read the papers?

You betray yourself with this:

'In fact, politicians, as we know them, will no longer exist.'

A: This is actually correct. Lucky b******d.

Asterixed out the above. Sorry, but I consider abusive language ill-considered, unnecessary, the depths of bad manners and the measure of an opponent. Old fashioned? You bet!

You are clearly an anarchist. So what do you care about democracy?

For the ulitmate truth go here and click on the picture:

http://ibloga.blogspot.com/2008/07/hamas-say-lets-drink-blood-of-jews.html

Those are your enemies, not me, or Blair. We are opponents. Understand the difference.

My blog - not the ultimate truth - just MY opinions:

http://keeptonyblairforpm.wordpress.com/2008/07/22/islamists-accept-demo...