I never liked Murray Dobbin, but really. Defending the Taliban? What is it with the modern left? Actually, what is it with the left? Not just the modern one, but all of the left going back through history.
They supported the Nazis, then Stalin, then Castro, and now the Taliban. The freaking Taliban. Of any of the West’s enemies, that one, more than any other is so obviously - right from the start - wicked.
This is what Dobbin says:
A village prayer leader, Mullah Omar, who lost an eye in the anti-Soviet jihad, armed a group of ‘talibs’ (religious students), and set about defending women from rape. Aided by Pakistan, Taliban stopped the epidemic of rape and drug dealing that had engulfed Afghanistan, and imposed order based on harsh tribal and Sharia religious law. [full article]
The Taliban the defenders of women? This is how they defended women:
Besides that you can add genocide - against the minority Hazaras. And while they certainly did take a hard line on heroin, they weren’t as strict about slavery.
The crimes of the Taliban were inumerable and denying them is the equivalent of holocaust denial.
And what is this about occupation? The Canadian left now talk about the illegal occupation of Afghanistan. Bloody ignorance. The Canadian armed forces are in Afghanistan at the invitation of Afghanistan’s elected government. The UN called the elections relatively free and fair and turnout was high. This government appears to be the legitimate choice of the Afghans.
And what of the Taliban? What right did we have to kick out the Afghanistan’s native government? First off the Taliban weren’t the choice of Afghanistan - they were the choice of the Pakistani security services and they were composed largely of Pakistanis and Arabs. Karzai was chosen by the people of Afghanistan and his government is made up of Afghans.
Dobbin again:
Much was made of the fact that the Taliban refused to hand over Osama bin Laden to the U.S. But Bin Laden was a national hero wounded six times in the anti-Soviet struggle — which the U.S. financed. When the Taliban offered to turn him over to an international tribunal upon seeing evidence of his guilt in 9/11, the U.S. refused.
First off, one reason the Taliban didn’t turn over Osama Bin Laden was probably that they were intimately connected with Al Qaeda and he was their defacto army chief. He and Mullah Omar were related by marriage, he was a guest of the Afghan government, and Al Qaeda supplied troops to the Afghan army.
So, since when was war prosecuted in the courts? And what is Dobbin implying here? Does he doubt that Osama was responsible for 9-11? His comments are - as they say on the left - “problematic”. And as for being a national hero, what is that based on? How does one gauge public opinion in a totalitarian terror state? I think the best way to do that would be to wait until such a state meets its end and then ask people right afterwards how they felt about the previous government. This is a report by the BBC during the liberation of Kabul - sorry, the illegal imperialist aggression and conquest of Kabul. Listen to the crowds of Afghans shouting ‘bring back Osama’ and ‘we love the Taliban’.
On a related issue - have you noticed the pro-authority stance of a lot of the left lately? Look above at Dobbin’s thing - he’s against Heroin cultivation. So he’s pro war-on-drugs? Look at some of the opposition to the Tory move to end the Long Gun Registry - lots of comments about how the police need it, it’s a vital tool for the police. Since when did the left care what the police need? I’m sure the police would find cameras in every home and id chips on our foreheads really really useful, but that doesn’t make it good public policy.
0 Responses to “Taliban Denial”