The Clash Of Un-Civilizations And Osama-ism

Re: Amit

Bravo! I agree with your conclusions and I would second that the thesis of the clash of civilization is more of a political-economic nature than a military one.

Re:Urstruly

Urstruly, I would love to discuss the ``sunset`` clauses with you, but would like to wait a few days. I have just emailed a few questions to my old consitutional law professor on this subject.

Secondly, please remember that power is diffused in the United States and the things are inacted in the United States, when all the three branches of the government compromise. Right now, the wild card is the supereme court and even if these laws are still on the book, there is no time limit and these laws can be brought before the court to judged as a consitutional or not.

Re: Shammi

I think that agreement was known as the Kansas Compromise and was agreed around the 1850s.

The threat of a British intervention was real and it was one of the reasons, why Lincoln freed the slaves. Your other points are valid, but the idea of foreign intervention was always present.

Ciao

Urstruly #43
``“The author begins with the premise that Osama is rightthinking”.Please show where I begin with that or is it the conclusion that you had drawn.``

1. ``On one hand we have Anglo-American duo who are openly representing the Western Civilization, which refers to itself as the ‘Free World’ and on the other hand we have Osama Bin Laden (also read Al-Qaeda) and Taliban, who, for the sake of argument we suppose that represent Islamic civilization``

2. ``Anyway the objectives Osama or his network Al-Qaeda had stated were... `` `` It is absolutely imperative to understand that all six objectives listed above are at the heart of Muslim World.``

3. In your own reply #31 : ``As far as objectivity is concerned, please answer one question. whether the six objectives mentioned in first part are a reality or not? ``

4. ``Please keep in mind that still neither Osama has taken credit for the 9/11 attacks nor US has been able to provide a credible proof against Osama to the community of nations.

There is nothing to keep in mind as far as 4 is concerned, you are making a wish into a fact. Osama has taken credit by stating there will be more attacks and asking Muslims to refrain from living in high rises. Moreover, there is enough evidence identifying the hijackers as the passengers named and evidence linking them to Al-Qaeda, even Musharraf agreed. The earlier attacks on embassies have been linked up too. There is enough evidence that the operation being run in Afghanistan aimed to cause maximum destruction to Bin Laden`s stated enemies. Among other things, literature on biological, chemical and nuclear weapons were found in Kabul. A Pakistani scientist Basheeruddin`s home in Kabul was found to have plans for a `anthrax bomb`. Al-Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden are not innocent.

5. It is misleading to think and give an impression that these issues will just disappear if Osama is captured or killed today. The ball is in the court of the US and the West. Whether they want to deal with these issues head on with justice and fairness and “kill” Osama for good or as in past they keep on ignoring and downplaying the issues and turn them into “Osama-ism”, is their call.

You donot hold Osama responsible for anything, but blame others for Osama`ism.

``So the long winding logic must follow``

There is no logic, overextended means cannot be supported by facts tending to outright lies.
Example
`` Right after the September 11 attacks the US government stated the following three objectives:
1. Punish/Destroy the country, which harbors anti-American elements a.k.a. terrorists. ..``

``..By now the first two of the three stated objectives of this war have been met successfully. ``

Tell me, how has Afghanistan been punished or destroyed? Why are Afghans celebrating if so?

When Prime Minister Gulbuddin Hekmatyar was provided ammunition and support by Pakistan from `92 to 96 to bomb Kabul to rubble and kill thousands of civilians, just because he was Pakistan`s favorite Pashtun, was Afghanistan being punished or destroyed?

``please answer one question, whether the six objectives mentioned in first part are a reality or not? If you intend to answer the question in a “no” then I must point out to the views of each and every Muslim head of states who had opined in the past twelve weeks-from Mahatir Mohammad to Musharaf’s speech in UN to Bashar Asad, to Khatami to Saudis. (Saudis will of course not point out to the American presence in Gulf for obvious reasons).``

Except for 4. Osama has never stated those objectives. He has never mentioned peace. As for being a voice for beleagured Muslims, the PLO disavowed him and his actions after the attacks, for the first time Palestinian police were called out to arrest Palestinian troublemakers. No Iraqi or Palestinian is part of his group. Osama is not offering negotiations or problem solutions, he is offering only violence against all who donot do as he says.

Hence these objectives as associated with Osama(as you associate them) are not part of the reality. The Muslims heads of state you mention wouldnot allow Osama into their countries or support Al-Qaeda in any form post Sept 11, much less endorse his actions. There is no `Osama-ism` in them, they have to live in the civilised world as civilised people, Musharraf and Mahathir cannot survive in caves in the mountainside nor can their countrymen starve like Afghans.

As for the Arab/Muslim street, there has been absolutely no report of any demonstrations from anywhere in the world in support of Osama except in Pakistan since Mazar-e-Sharif fell. Tell me where is Osama`ism now?

PS:
``The thesis is supported by facts-check the references``

I couldnot find a reference to your statement.
``On the other hand the retaliatory Anglo-American War on Afghanistan with the objective of hunting down the perpetrators of September 11 attacks has resulted in 4-5 million Afghan refugees, who fled to the neighboring countries of Pakistan and Iran for safety.``

``The rest of your response deals with “what should have been” whereas my article is all about “what is and what has been”

Urstruly, thats a cop out if ever there was one. But its your loss, not mine.

Urstruly #30,

I feel rusted after a semester of hardly posting on Chowk. So I`ll try to be coherent in what my overactive imagination spills out...

Third Estate?

The first thing that comes to mind is the advantage that this group possesses...I have no doubt that the greatest of changes come through from the victims of inequality and injustice/ or lack of all those virtues that are the coordinates of a healthy society... yet these victims should not believe in the cultivation of hatred for the ``achievers`` as an approach.

In simple terms, (I feel generalizing, although less accurate helps in reaching an over all understanding for real world application) There are two methods to all human motivations: love or fear, if it isn`t an inspiration towards it is a fear from...the latter`s longevity cannot be sustained.

The `third estate` has all the ingredients for sparking a positive change.

1. They are recipients of consequences of another`s choice, and hence have empathy for the negative impact enforced by the other two groups.

2. They have a history of inactivity, and lessons of non-participation in history`s movements.

3. They have a desire to move up the ``food chain`` and it is clearly reflected in their indifference/dislike of “non-third estate dwellers”.

4. They’ve shown to possess great speed when given the opportunity.

Of course Education is the only catalyst for these elements to work, and unfortunately this has to be invoked form the outside in. An example would be a ``New Rich`` Org. This group can use the anger of prejudice and frustration of not fitting in (within both the bourgeoisie and the original community) to create an awareness of problems in both ``civilizations`` and merits in the same.

Much like the ``Pakistani Americans`` or ``American Muslims`` in such a case a need for ``reform`` is much like the awakening from slumber that all great thinkers and poets have wished for. Something that is very apparent in Allama Iqbal`s discourse. Numerous untapped potential and a lot of talk on what`s wrong... that is the situation faced with I think all eras in one way or another. Wishful thinking is an unsuccessful venture, there is need to wish with plans.

What do I think of the ``Thrid Estates``?... First it was an anger towards them, of why they don`t try to get out of their situation, why they let the cycle of Poverty, be it in the media or literal, have the better of them. Then it transformed to an understanding of how hard it is to be aware when you are part of a certain civilization, especially one where self-criticism and questions are frowned upon. It occurred to me their situation is one in which its easier to think of survival, and life is nothing but existing. They don`t even know they are victims, much like a domestic violence victim: you don`t know what you are in until you are out of it....

So it’s not them I think of as much as I think of us, all those who can think read and write. And the responsibility we have to make things better in the places we abandon for greener pastures after we are fed. Civilization is thus between the literate and those who aren’t, generally.

PS: I have seen very literate people believe that the Taliban lost because they didn’t have enough faith. So really, it’s awareness and realization that is more important then just having the means to it. I wonder what greater test the Taliban have to go through to prove their faith. This false quest has consumed them completely.

-Aisha

First of all, regarding the so called CLASH OF CIVILIZATIONS, let us be clear that Huntington` definitions make no sense.

For example, the Pakistanis and Bengali Muslims are part of INDIAN CIVILIZATION, a civilization that encompassed Hindus, Jains, Sikhs, Muslims, Buddhists, Tribals, Christians and others.

At the end of the day, Paksitanis do the following:

-Speak Indic Languages like Urdu Punjabi Sindhi. These languages are classified as Sanskritic languages by all linguists. The only Pakistanis who dont fall into the Indic linguistic category are Baluch and Pathans, who speak languages of the Iranian branch of Indo European.

-Eat Indian food. The unique combination of spices used in Subcontinental food (coriander, etc.) are not to be found in any other cuisine in the same combination. Iranian and Middle Eastern food have very little similarity to Pakistani food.

-Are racially by and large of the Subcontinent. The Muslim Jats, Rajputs, Arains who form the bulk of the population of West Punjab and Sindh share the same origins as the Hindu/Sikh Jats of East Punjab, Haryana and Western UP and the Hindu Rajputs of the same area. The Jammu Muslims are very similar to the Jammu Hindu Dogras. Of course, a minority of Subcontinental Muslims have foreing origins (my family migrated from Iran) but have heavily intermarried. Large groups of Muslims, the Bangladeshis for example, are purely of Subcontinental Stock (in the case of Bengalis, they are Mongoloid Dravidian combination). The People of Pakistan and the Upper Caste Hindus are by and large of Indo Aryan stock.

-Islam as practiced by Pakistnis has a heavy Hindu overlay - worship at shrines, music (Qawwali), marriage customs and ceremonies, etc. For example in Sindh many Hindu river god shrines were converted into Dargahs of Sufi Shrines.

I could go on and on. The Pakistanis watch Indian movies and listen to Indian music. The list could go on and on.

So Pakistan is culturally part of INDIC CIVILIZATION.

I quote now from the Great Scholar of Islam at PRINCETON UNIVERSITY whom I have had the pleasure of meeting and hosting here in Jammu, Dr BERNARD LEWIS, who wrote this in the New Yorker November 19 Edition (page 52):

``THE NAME PAKISTAN, A TWENTIETH CENTURY INVENTION, DESIGNATES A COUNTRY DEFINED ENTIRELY BY ITS ISLAMIC RELIGION. IN EVERY OTHER RESPECT, THE COUNTRY AND PEOPLE OF PAKISTAN ARE - AS THEY HAVE BEEN FOR MILLENIA - PART OF INDIA.``

This is from the leading authority on Islam. Once this is accepted, the problems of the Subcontitnent can be managed peacefully by the SAARC nations. This is my fondest hope.

Dr Ali Akbar Poonawala

YLH

You say that Hinduism is a civilization. You are dead wrong. Neither is Islam a civiization. Please see my post on the topic. Also, the TNT, as you cutely call it, died a violent and morbid death the day Bangladesh was born. The Bengali nation was born out of a ceasearan procedure that tore up the womb of the mother. The mother (two nation theory) died on the hospital bed that day, and the 2 children, Pakistan and Bangaldesh, are now orphans of the mother, the so called 2 nation theory. If you do believe in 2 nation theory, then stop speaking Urdu (an Indic language) and converse in Arabic, desist from eating Indic food and fill yourself up with grape leaves and falafals, and burn all the Sufi Dargahs of the Subcontinent to the ground. Further adopt the white sheeted robes of Arabia for dress and prefix every name with an Al. Obviously I am being facetious to make a point. Further the two nation theory`s corpse is being mangled by Pakistan backed Afghans and Al Qaeedaists who are trampling on the indigenous peoples of Jammu and Kashmir, commiting atrocities that are far worse than those being committed by the Indian Army.

Let us agree to bury the already mutilated and mangled corpse of the 2 nation theory with full honors, so that she will rest in peace, never to rise and haunt us again. If you so wish, let us honor her with chants from the Quran Sharif and the Holy Ved, so that she may find the peace and rest in the herafter that she never found here on earth.

My feeling are strong. As a medical practicioner and writer, I am directly confronted with the brutal evidence of the failure of the 2 nation theory every day in the form of dead bodies, mutilated corpses and blown off limbs. I am not an armchair theorist sitting in comfort somewhere in a suburban development of Chicago or California.

I would be interested in your views.

Dr Ali Akbar Poonawala

Jammu India.

Amit-----48

And she(fill in your favourite country) was raped because she was beautiful and wore a lot of jewelry.She also was naive(innocent?)enough not to understand the purpose & motive of the peddler who had come from across the waters.How could she?

It was her old-fashioned parents who had brainwashed into believing that across the black waters inhabit the devils---better not even think of looking across.

So when the devil came pedaling his wares she was sweet & innocent to respond to his gropings and caressings.He crooned ``my little sonay kee chiryaa in her ears`` and she went limp.Little did she know that it was her jewellry he was after and if she was roused enough then of course it was not their fault that they obliged her.She cried rape only when they didn`t took her calicut-dyed cotton,golconda diamonds,& Orissa gold.

ETc ETC.

(this is called the victim being blamed for rape)

__________________________________________________

So the 60s movement or Castro or guevara were also fools?---frustrated,like the Islamic militants.Stupid,like the greenpeace anarchists?

Cowards,like Baader Meinhoff & the red-brigade?Obsessed like Mao Tse Tung?Fanatics,like the VietNamese.

It is a long list Amit.Try to get out of this image problem that if it is a-religious it ought to be `logical`.If it is done in english manners something profound must be there which a low desi/hindi IQ just cannot comprehend.

You just CANNOT think clearly if it is in another language than your own.Heck,even the englishman cannot think properly in Americanese.You cannot divest yourself from the bunyaan root-branches, like arteries, have spread throughout the curry-cultured genes.



If muslims are not dominant today it is because of the individual muslim has lapsed from the Islamic priniples & not the other way around.Even in one of the glory eras(1200s) it was almost ransacked,not by the technologically or culturally giant,but by the great ``terrorists`` Mangols....who as part of their creed were fanatically opposed to cities,city-dwellers,and literally `civilisation`.

It is they who embraced Islam.Islam has always come to the rescue of muslims,muslims have never safeguarded,let alone `save` Islam.Allah has promised us to guard Islam Himself.Muslims pay the price of their own follies & nobody cries over such losses.

The Mangols managed an empire the likes of which the world has never seen.Almost the entire world!From Japan to western europe.When was the last time you heard of the conquerers embracing the creed of the conquered?Abbasids & Baghdad rightfully desrved what they got and present day mushharrafs & mubaraks deserve exactly what they are worth.Those destined to rule & lead always put their life as the last & least priority.

If one cannot walk among his followers without the security machinery he is not a leader anywhere....Bush included(the mortgage-term leaders,the dummies of democracies).



Muslim `advancement` is an individual & collective result of the input---for SECULAR(worldly) purposes.Islam is a little beyond that.One can continue to practice the creed irrespective of the Spiritual Standard & Poors Index.

Yahooda Goldsteen:

I was born and raised in India.

Dear Urstruly:

First, let me laud you for the painstaking research (and to hell with the accusations of selectivity… as though Huntington did not do his filtering!). I have taken my own time responding simply because I prefer to read the complete article before certifying a person intelligent/unintelligent, though that too would reveal my biases. Be that as it may, these are some of my observations…

Part 1:

I do not agree that the first two objectives of the US have been met; anti-American elements are not just terrorist outfits, but large lobbies that are against the rampant misuse by the superpower of every avenue of justice. Besides, such regimes cannot be destroyed; they can merely be razed to the ground. Regarding OBL, I won’t be saying anything new if I state that the US needed an ‘ugly face’ to save its own skin and abysmal lack of security.

The objectives of OBL and Al-Qaeda are again loud assertions; you are right that capturing or doing away with them will not solve the problems of the Middle-East. But the existence of them will not work like a magic wand either.

If anything, at the moment OBL is an albatross round the neck of the Islamic world. This business about being a folk hero is again a tenuous link with an identity they need to desperately hold on to. There cannot be a universal Islamic hero. Was Malcolm X? Was Khomeini? Was Saddam? Is Arafat? Sympathy for most of the regimes has come for reasons of genuine concern for the innocents.

Part 2:

I do not believe that bringing down a capitalist citadel was the sole motivation. Islamic regimes do not claim to be Communist and the much-trumpeted austerity of the Islamic world is a bit of hogwash, as most of them have a history of ostentatiousness. They are about as true to their faith as the Roman Empire was to Christianity.

The economy was nose-diving even before Sept 11 and I know of at least one company, Boeing, which was in dire straits. This is not to say that the current crisis has not thrown things off-balance, but it happens during natural disasters as well. In our part of the subcontinent, one liquor tragedy can finish of villages.

Part 3:

I will not delve on Prof Huntington’s thesis and your response to them. Except to point out that it isn’t only Islam that identifies itself as a religion. Are you trying to say that there is no racial, regional, sectarian identity within Islam? If we see the Confucian civilization as a philosophy, then it works at the level of religion too, were we to broadbase our concept of what religion is. It can subsume culture, ethnicity, and ideology. The ‘brotherhood of Islam’ is only a dogma created by some to buffer their concept of its otherness.

At the end you ask, “And is there any wonder why Western Civilization is clashing with Islamic Civilization?” My take: It thought it had this leash in hand and now it has become a long rope with which it may well have to hang itself.

Regards,

Farzana

Re: Amit

You roughly stated the priorities that middle-eastern/muslim countries should pursue. However, you picked the hardest one first (i.e. democracy). I read an Economist survey which surmised that the three big challenges facing Muslim countries (in increasing order of difficulty) are: (a) modern finance, banking institutions and governance (b) treatment of women, and (c) democracy. That same article also highlighted things that the West can learn from Islamic values (family values, and morality) just as 1000 years ago the transfer of ancient Greek discoveries from the Arab world laid the foundation of Renaissance in Europe and emergence from the Dark Ages. For this, there is an enormous debt that the West owes the Islamic world.

That same article also pointed out that one source of middle eastern rage directed toward the US is not because what the US DOES (US support for Israel/MidEast monarchies), but for what the US IS. As evidence he points out that while the Soviets were busy occupying Afghanistan or C. Asian countries, and quelling Muslim rebellions within Russia, they were never targeted by Muslim rage on the Arab streets (even today), as the US is, inspite of the fact that the US humiliated both UK and France in the 1956 Suez crisis, and came out heavily in support of Egypt. Not to mention the various MidEastern tyrants who have inflicted unimagineable harm on their own people (Saddam Hussein, Hafez Assad, etc.). It is the very success of US political/economic and military dominance that makes it the target of Arab street rage. A lack of democracy, coupled with a `free` press that allows no criticism of the ruling regimes, but often unsubstantiated, extreme criticism of the US and Israel is also to blame. For example, Egypt does not like its citizens to be reminded that it receives $2 bn annual US aid, but govt.-appointed newspaper editors publish editorials stating that the food drops over Afghanistan contained poison added by the US to kill Afghans. These governments find it convenient to direct public rage away from their own lack of performance to the US.

.....like tahmed, i too didn`t bother to read urstruly`s whiney diatribe against big macs and razor blades .......

..... political islam, like communism, is a failed ideology that simply won`t go away because good muslims still can`t get over the fact that they were made to give up camels and tents for planes and skyscrapers.... as a matter of fact they are so mad that they want to crash planes into tall buildings .......civilization indeed ! .... even the headhunters and bushmen have given up on missionary stew ....the muslims continue to whine about having to give up maswak and watwani and continue to rail against mcdonalds and baywatch....... pamela anderson is no prize, but i will take her over any belly-dancing houri in the promised land ....

.... afghanistan is a good start, but the battle must be pursued until the evil of fundamentalism and the ideology of political islam is wiped out like the evil of marxism and historical materialism ........razor blades and big macs are collateral benefits .........

Re: Ferozk

There was no agreement called the Kansas Compromise. Kansas was a new territory under consideration for admission as a new state in the Union in the 1850s. The issue leading up to Lincoln`s election in 1860 was whether or not to give Kansans the right to self determination (aka `popular sovereignty`) for legalizing slavery in this new territory. Many northern Democrats, and virtually all southern politicians were in favor of giving Kansas this right. Lincoln was isolated in his opposition to letting Kansas alone decide what it should do on the matter (even his own party runners-up was opposed to Lincoln`s position). He was of the opinion that Congress could not legislate on this issue and that only a Constitutional Amendment could decide the issue. When Lincoln won the election, the south seceeded and attacked a Union garrison in Ft. Sumter. The war began.

As far as British intervention was concerned, early in the war it was feared by Lincoln that some Europeans countries might give political recognition to an independent Confederate States of America (CSA). However, Lincoln`s ambassador to the UK was quickly able to persuade the UK govt. to do otherwise. The emancipation of slaves did not occur till much later in the war (1863), fully 2 years after hostilities had begun, and after most danger of European intervention/recognition of CSA had passed. This proves that Lincoln was driven more by the military stalemate that prevailed until 1863, and by the fact that the South had changed the parameters of the debate on the issue of slavery by resorting to armed conflict in 1861. While Lincoln would have compromised on slavery in 1861, in 1863 he was clearly not ready for it anymore.

Center for Strategic and International Studies

Rising India and U.S. Policy Options in Asia

http://www.csis.org/saprog/sam40.htm

http://www.sulekha.com/redirectnh.asp?cid=155876

Tale of an American Taliban



In an exclusive, a U.S. citizen on the horror at Kala Jangi



By Colin Soloway

NEWSWEEK WEB EXCLUSIVE





Dec. 1 — Abdul Hamid is tall, thin and barefoot in a black tunic. A prisoner of the Northern Alliance, he sits with his elbows bound behind his back with a strip of cloth, his right leg and left foot bandaged for gunshot wounds. Hamid’s face is almost entirely covered in dirt and black soot, but it is quickly apparent that he is not just another beaten and frightened Taliban warrior. Abdul Hamid, age 20, is an American. He is not a naturalized citizen



or disaffected Arab-American youth rebelling



against Western culture. He is a white, educated-



sounding, apparently middle-class American, a convert to Islam who came to Afghanistan six months ago to help the Taliban build a “true Islamic state.”



HAMID IS ONE OF ONLY 86 survivors of a vicious, four-day battle in the Northern Afghan fortress of Kala Jangi. He refused to give more than the scantiest details about his U.S. origins, including his real name. But while waiting to be taken into detention along with over a dozen other wounded men, mostly Arabs, in a large cargo truck, Hamid talked to a Newsweek reporter about why he came to Afghanistan and how he survived the nightmarish battle of Kala Jangi.





He said he was originally from the Washington, D.C., area, but indicated he grew up elsewhere in the states. Well spoken, with a mid-Atlantic accent, Hamid said that he converted to Islam at 16 and later went to Pakistan to study the Koran. “In my travels, I came in contact with some of the original teachers of the leaders of the Taliban movement,” he said. “The ideas of the Taliban occupied my mind a lot.” Six months ago, he entered Afghanistan “to help the Islamic government” because “the Taliban are the only government that actually provides Islamic law.” When asked if he supported the September 11 attacks, he hesitated. “That requires a pretty long and complicated explanation. I haven’t eaten for two or three days, and my mind is not really in shape to give you a coherent answer.” When pressed, he said, “Yes, I supported it.”

Despite his confused state, Hamid also gave Newsweek what may be the most complete account to date of the prisoners’ uprising on Sunday morning, Nov. 25, and the horrific final three days after the end of the battle. Hamid said he had been fighting with the Taliban during the two-week siege of the city of Kunduz, about 100 miles to the east of Mazar e Sharif. Finally, under a negotiated deal, the foreign Taliban forces surrendered to the Northern Alliance forces of General Rashid Dostum. But almost as soon as Hamid and about 500 others were taken to the fortress. “Two of the [Taliban] threw grenades they had hidden in their clothes, and killed a couple of people,” Hamid says.

“After that they put us in the basement and left us over night. Early in the morning, they began taking us out, slowly, one-by-one, into the compound. Our hands were tied, and they were beating and kicking some of us. Some of the Mujahedin [Taliban] were scared, crying. They thought we were all going to be killed.

“I saw two Americans there. They were taking pictures with a digital camera and a video camera. They were there for interrogating us. As soon as the last of us was taken out of the basement, someone either pulled a knife, or threw a grenade at the guards, and got their guns, and started shooting. I don’t really know how it happened. As soon as I heard the shooting and the screaming, I jumped up and ran about one or two meters, and was shot in the leg. It’s not as bad as you would think, but after that I was down in the basement.”

The Americans were CIA agents Mike Spann and another called Dave. Spann was badly beaten, possibly to death, and then shot by the prisoners. Dave and local Red Cross doctors were able to escape with the help of a team of U.S. Special forces. Then, said Hamid, “they hit us with everything they had. The Americans were bombing us. It was horrible. Nearly everyone in the basement was wounded.”



After Tuesday, all resistance above ground stopped. Alliance soldiers poured diesel fuel into the basement and lit it, assuming that any remaining Taliban would be killed by the fire and the fumes. But when workers on Thursday went into the basement of a pink, one story building in the center of the compound to take bodies out, they ran into as many as 100 Taliban, mostly wounded, still alive in the cells. Two of the workers were wounded, and a third was abducted or shot.

The Alliance then spent Thursday afternoon dropping large artillery rockets into the basement and setting them off with fuses. “It was horrible,” said Hamid. “But the rockets were exploding in the hallway of the basement, and we were all hiding in the cells. The stairway was just a pile of rubble, and there were parts of bodies all over.” Still they survived, with no food or water.



Finally, on Friday, Alliance troops flooded the basement with water. “We spent the night in the freezing cold water,” said Hamid “Those who could stand up survived, but there were a lot of wounded who couldn’t stand, and they drowned. Most of the dead down there drowned yesterday. At that point we had one rifle with 15 bullets and one hand grenade.” On Saturday morning they gave up. They came out of the basement, soaking wet and shivering, clambering over the rubble and body parts. Saturday afternoon they sat and lay in the truck, waiting to be transported two hours away to a camp in Sherbagan. It is unclear what will happen to Abdul Hamid, who says he lost his U.S. passport in Kunduz. But he may well be headed for a U.S. military tribunal.

On the Goldsteen vs. Goldstein controversy: YLH, Bhardwaj, Urstruly. I see each one of you has pointed out that it should be EE not EI. Each one of you is wrong. Look up the internet (google) and you will come up with zillions of references to people with the same last name, and spelt EE. This may be hard for you people to believe, but there are lots of things you dont know.

madani #53 you wrote: ``jew keep out.`` You may disagree with someone`s views, but you have no right referring to any chowk poster in this manner (even jokingly). You insult all of us when you insult any individual in this manner.