Note the siege mentality: why the leap to the conclusion that the U.S. must have gratuitously entered Afghanistan in order to "destroy Islam"? And with the U.S. building hospitals and schools and roads in Afghanistan, the notion is laughable -- but that never stopped the conspiracy paranoia before. "Think tank: 92% of Afghans never heard of 9/11," by Daniel Tencer for Raw Story, November 19 (thanks to Mackie):
Fewer than one in 10 Afghans are aware of the 9/11 attacks and their precipitation of the war in Afghanistan, says a study from an international think tank.A report (PDF) from the International Council on Security and Development (ICOS) shows that 92 percent of those surveyed had never heard of the coordinated multiple attacks on US soil on September 11, 2001. It also shows that four in 10 Afghans believe the US is on their soil in order to "destroy Islam or occupy Afghanistan."
To be sure, the survey can't claim to be definitive: It only canvassed men, and relied primarily on respondents from Helmand and Kandahar, the two most war-torn provinces in the country. But the results nonetheless show that Western forces fighting insurgents in Afghanistan have largely failed to connect with the local population.
"We need to explain to the Afghan people why we are here, and both show and convince them that their future is better with us than with the Taliban," ICOS lead field researcher Norine MacDonald said in a statement....
Good luck with that, Norine.
It always makes me smile wryly when I see pictures of the vacant faces in Kabul with someone banging on about winning "hearts and minds." Excuse me? Hearts and minds? Absence on both counts in Afghanistan!
The wonders of a muslim mind
"...think U.S. is in country to "destroy Islam". They might consider that.
Take a look at the comments at that website. A real moonbat el dorado....
@ Raw Story: The survey also suggests that Afghans are skeptical of their own government's ability to protect them, and have little regard for the fledgling democratic institutions the country is building. Fully 43 percent could not name one positive aspect of democracy, and nearly two-thirds -- 61 percent -- said they didn't think Afghan forces would be able to keep up the fight against the Taliban if and when Western forces withdrew.
They're not totally clueless of what is going on over there. They just see it from an Islamic point of view, that ALL outsiders are bad, Taliban are only half-bad, and anything Islamic is good. For them 'democracy' is therefore bad, Americans are bad, American monetary and hospital/school/road/bridge/infrastructure building aid is only half-bad, and Western forces withdrawing, despite the negative outcomes, is good. That's Islamic logic for you!
"We need to explain to the Afghan people why we are here,
The US has been their nine years, I suppose it 'is' time for an explanation...
9/11?
The kids born after 9/11 won't know much about it if Sharia has it its own way in the US. It is easy to imagine the Islamists making it out that 9/11 was a Hollywood movie made by the Jooooose to conspire against the ROP, President Bush made it clear to everyone that Islam is a ROP.
There are plenty of morons in my own city who do not acknowledge 9/11 today. They really believe it was an inside job by the Joooose and CIA. These kind of butt heads are difficult to crack. Afghanies and Pakies are of the same ilk. They hate everything that inspires progress in the West.
Mo has taken over their hearts and minds since 7th century. They belong to Mo and nobody gonne take that away. MoSlums do not have theirs anymore. Mo takes it away soon after they are born.
By impeccably Islamic logic, it should follow that, as President Obama declares "America is not at war with Islam" ever more insistently, the less he will be believed, and fewer among the Umma will trust him.
"But the results nonetheless show that Western forces fighting insurgents in Afghanistan have largely failed to connect with the local population."
Of course , the billions of dollars given to the Afghanistan government to buy their help in educating the people has been a wasted effort also...Time to cut off the purse strings and let the Afghanistan to sink or swim in it's own love of Islam..
...or lack of one.
"Note the siege mentality: why the leap to the conclusion that the U.S. must have gratuitously entered Afghanistan in order to "destroy Islam"?"
Actually it makes a lot of sense to me. If they don't even know 9/11 had happened, then all they know is that the US suddenly invaded their country, totally unprovoked, and for no reason whtasoever, since Al Qaida operating from Afghanistan (if they know about it at all, which I assume most don't) is of no consequence if the US was never attacked by Al Qaida. So what could have possibly motivated the Americans? Of course, even if you've never heard of 9/11 there could be various motives other than to destroy Islam, but if you live in a society that is so insulated, where sources of information are so scarce and guarded that 92% of the population never heard of 9/11 even though it was the explicit reason for which their country was attacked, then what they get from those same sources of "information" must be that the "Crusaders" are there to destroy Islam, or they simply figure out that the US is there to conquer and occupy Afghanistan (that part is actually rational if you've never heard of 9/11).
Come to think of it, it's not that much worse than what many Westerners get from their media about the Arab-Israeli conflict. For instance, south Israel suffered 8 years of rocket, mortar and snipers attacks before the Cast Lead operation, yet many (I think most) Westerners got the impression from their media that this is nothing but a mere nuisance, nothing more than a bit of a noisy neighbor, and that these rockets can't cause any real damage and certainly not kill or maim anyone (they don't if you get to the shelter fast enough or if they land in uninhabited areas - there are many such areas in the south). I came across even some pro-Israel Americans who supported the Israeli operation who didn't know the attacks were going on for years, who thought the rocket attacks lasted "only" a few months (which is more than enough if you actually live in south Israel and not in your safe London appartment). In 2005 Israel completely withdrew from Gaza and it became far far worse. I don't actually need the media to tell me what's happening in south Israel because I have family living near Sderot, the prime target for the rocket attacks, and I live in a city in south Israel that was hit by Grad missiles fired from Gaza.
Sorry for this diversion, but the similarities between the Muslim and Arab media, and the Western media, particularly in Europe, are becoming too compelling to avoid noticing.
As I recall, the Taliban government of Afghanistan was sheltering Al Qaeda and refusing to give them up to the U.S. right after the 9/11 attacks. The fact that 92% of Afghans in the poll had not heard of the attacks that brought the U.S. military into their nation is obscene.
Maybe the U.S. military's information efforts need to include passing this minor data point along to the Afghans.
"Fully 43 percent could not name one positive aspect of democracy"
Well, what do you expect? It took Europe centuries of social and ideological evolution to develop a functioning democracy. How can we expect countries like Afghanistan to develop a working democracy in less than a decade, under war conditions, and when democracy is an idea wholly imported by the invading power which also happens to be an "infidel" power? We do have some examples of it happening in Asia, such as India and South Korea, but they started from a different culture altogether and had different leaders. Tyrants in general don't want the people to become aware of the positive aspects of democracy since they not just might, but are very likely to lose their power in a democratic system. I suppose those 43% of Afghans polled hardly know what democracy means and what good it can bring them, except it being man-made law and therefor arrogant, inferior and opposed to the notion of god-made law. It's not like they have very open media, education system and literary world where they get exposed to democratic ideas for decades or centuries, and can really make up their minds as to which kind of government is better for them, in which case they might have still chosen an Islamic government, but at least it would be an educated choice.
Agreed, the media are part of the ignorance problem and not just Islam and educational levels and such.
But on education, Afghanistan's similarities with Yemen, another failing highly troublesome Islamic state, are considerable. A 1987 Swiss study found that literacy rates among Yemeni workers over 10 years of age was 13%. This had increased by 2003 to 70% for men and 30% for women. But right now there are indications that these figures are slipping back (Colton, Yemen: A Collapsed Economy, Middle East Journal 2010).
From the ICOS report we learn that the Afghani adult literacy rate was 28% (2003-08). Respondents clearly did not place a high value on education (pp. 31, 44, 68, 89).
The high response percentages in the "no answer/don't know" categories given to many questions, and the fact that those surveyed were restricted to young Afghani males, raise considerable doubts about the reliability and validity of this report. But then, the no doubt high educational level of those who sponsored and conducted this survey and of those who might use the data therein as a basis for policy is itself absolutely no guarantee of the report's worth.
I'm not sure I entirely buy the excuse of insulation or ignorance. Remember that was the excuse many Germans gave to the Allies after the war; that they were really ignorant or insulated from what was going on. They didn't know what the Nazis were doing to the Jews and to other subhumans. Ignorance is not a good defense. The only innocent Germans were those who protested Hitler, don't you think?
Maybe the ancients had it right when wars were prosecuted not just against ideologies (or a nation's "gods") but against the nations themselves. Taliban, Al Qaeda was firmly planted in Afghanistan. Maybe there is a reason for it just as Hamas is firmly planted in Gaza. Are Gaza's citizens innocent?
So what's wrong with being there to destroy Islam?
I think that would be a laudable reason. After all, if we don't destroy Islam, it will eventually destroy us!
Yeah, and even if they got a vague understanding of the benefits of a democracy, they'd probably all just vote in sharia laws like death to apostates and stuff anyway.
If it was impossible for democracy to survive in Weimar Germany - a post-reformation, post-enlightenment society - then why should we expect democracy to work in a place like Afghanistan? An iron-fisted, ideological despot will prevail over a weak and undersupported democracy.
Under circumstances like these, where literacy rates are really low and people are basically very ignorant, the whole death-for-apostacy thing makes more sense (not that I'm trying to justify it!!). I mean, if all you know about your faith is what you've heard from your local imam (because you can't read, you don't have books and everything religious is in Arabic anyway), if you have no access to news from the rest of the world except hearsay and whatever your community leaders might tell you, then it means you won't even know how to begin to quetion your faith on grounds of reason or comparison to other belief systems/moral values. In the eyes of the community, apostacy must therefore look less like leaving a religion and more like turning your back on your community.
"Fewer than one in 10 Afghans are aware of the 9/11 attacks"
Good grief! What a pathetic, backwards, ignorant country. I do not blame the individual people themselves. I blame the Islamic culture as a whole.
What a perfect (and sad) example of what Islam does to a culture and a country. It's tragic to see so much human potential is being wasted, especially when you think of the children there. They COULD have a future, but they are held back and crippled by this ideology which envelopes their entire culture.
I find the statement that 92% of Afghans had never heard of the 9/11 attacks hard to believe, considering the mass celebrations all over the Moslem world at the time, with dancing in the streets, and firing off volleys from their Ak-47s. I might believe 32% or 42%, but not 92%. Plus, Moslems are such notorious liars that I would not put much credence in any poll of Moslems.
But the results nonetheless show that Western forces fighting insurgents in Afghanistan have largely failed to connect with the local population.
I know some American and British troops on the ground personally, I know what lengths they've said they have gone to in order that the village elders are involved and feel 'consulted'. I also know that they're remarked on how duplicitous these same people become when the need arises as it's how their 'culture of survival' has evolved in such a harsh environment.
Just to be clear: Who should be to blame for the lack of adequate communication here? It sounds like the West has done its due diligence.
Come to think of it, it's not that much worse than what many Westerners get from their media about the Arab-Israeli conflict. For instance, south Israel suffered 8 years of rocket, mortar and snipers attacks before the Cast Lead operation, yet many (I think most) Westerners got the impression from their media that this is nothing but a mere nuisance, nothing more than a bit of a noisy neighbor, and that these rockets can't cause any real damage and certainly not kill or maim...
How true! A very apt and disturbing observation that I may confirm from my own experience.
Still, the parallel is not perfect. I should think that many, maybe majority, Westerners if made to apprehend the extent and the viciousness of the Arab attacks would have no problem justifying the Cast Lead operation.
However, I am sure that a majority of as fiercely Islamic population as Afghanis wouldn't doubt that America had it coming - if only for being the Big Satan and the protector of the Little Satan. I, somehow, can’t forget the triumphant jubilations of moslem crowds reacting to the news of 9/11. In the moslem mind every moslem attack against infidel is justified and every infidel retaliation is an act of aggression.
There is a difference - at least most Gazan Arabs must know Hamas is firing rockets and missiles at Israel because they fire them from within civilian population and use civilian infrastructure to store weapons. It doesn't mean all the people in Gaza agree to that (not because they love Israel so much, but because when you fire rockets from within civilians, then civilians are going to get killed, and while some of them buy into the shuhadah propaganda on TV, not everyone wants to die), but they don't have a choice since saying 'no' to Hamas is even more dangerous. Anyhow they must know that Hamas is firing rockets.
Also Hamas was firing rockets BEFORE Hamas became the majority in parliament, and was elected nevertheless. On one hand, the PLO is extremely corrupt and Hamas were running in the elections as the Party for Change and Reform - and you know how the slogan "Change you can believe in" works magic on the voters. On the other hand, Israel unilaterally withdrew from Gaza - a step I can't believe I actually supported at the time - so it appeared as if Hamas with its rockets is scaring the Israelis out with no need for any peace agreement or compromise on the Arab side, so why not vote for Hamas? Many probably believed if Hamas will keep on shooting the Israelis will just leave Jerusalem and Tel Aviv just like they left Gaza and will drown themselves in the sea or something. This is also a result of disinformation regarding the nature of Israel, the Jews in Israel and what we really want. As long as they believe Israel is some kind of a Zionist-Crusader conspiracy to destroy Islam or to destroy the Arab nation or that it is a Jewish conspiracy to rule the world, they will believe against all evidence that we can be easily driven out if only the Arabs and/or the Muslims unite and fight with us hard and long enough.
In the case of Afghanistan, the attacks of Al Qaida took place far away in foreign countries, so if the authorities and the media don't tell them about it, they simply can't know. They might know there are Al Qaida people there - and Afghanistan is a big country, so not necesarilly everyone knew, - but even those who knew, didn't necessarily know what Al Qaida is doing abroad. Those who know might even be told that Al Qaida protects them from "Crusader" aggression and conspiracy to destroy Islam, and then they see the Americans invading without knowing anything about 9/11, so they will buy into the "protection" pretext.
Information and lack thereof is part of the problem.
And to me it's not about the guilt of the people, but about your (and our) right for self defense. Whether most Afghans knew or not, and whether they supported it or not, American citizens are not supposed to simply die and not do anything to try and prevent further attacks.
Continued below...
Continued...
Regarding those of the Germans and others who supported the Nazi "solution" (that might include some people who fought against the Nazis) - propaganda and disinformation were a big part of it in this case as well.
The infamous "Protocols of the Elders of Zion", a Russian fabrication, was created and first published in the late 19th century, and gained wide popularity in early 20th century. Many believed it to be an authentic document, and why wouldn't they? Sure, it played on pre-existing antisemitic sentiments and libels, but it was also signed by Sergei Nilus that vouched for its authenticity - Nilus was not only a clergy, but also an academic and a respectable man of high position, so the people believed it was a reliable source - why would they think a religious man and an academic would lie to them? Part of the media treated it seriously. In 1920 the London Times called for a serious investigation into the matter. Why would anyone distrust the London Times? Do people distrust the BBC today? Finally it was a reporter of the London Times who discovered it was a forgery and the paper published that too, but the damage was already done.
And that's how it happens. We are made to believe that it's mostly the uneducated masses who respond with violence to the mere sight of an "Other" out of xenophobia, but in reality it often comes from the top - the hoax, the libel, the conspiracy theory - and the masses respond to that. If you believe the "Protocols" are authentic - because academics told you so, because the media told you so, because respectable people and leaders told you so - then you will view the Jews as a mortal threat to the entire world, and the only way to save the world is to do away with the Jews.
Some translated versions of the "Protoclos" (that was translated to many languages, and managed to invoke antisemitism even in Japan, where there were no Jews) claim that this document was created in the Zionist congress in Basel. And that is, my friend, what is disseminated in much of the Muslim world and particularly in the Middle East. Google 'Hamas Covenant' - there's a translation on the website of Yale - and see for yourself. When they talk about Zionism they don't refer to the movement for Jewish national self determination - they believe Zionism is what is said in the "Protocols" - a conspiracy to rule the world. And it's most certainly not limited to Hamas.
And why was the "Protocols" published in the first place? Not because the czar or the Russian aristocracy simply wanted a pogrom - it was far more cynical than that. At the time there were various reformist movements that threatened their power, and they wanted the people to believe that every revolution and every war anywhere and all these revolutionary ideas - capitalism, socialism, democracy, equality, human rights - are really part of a Jewish plot to destroy Christianity and overthrow the current rulers in order to rule the world themselves, so whenever the common Russian was to hear of such notions, which according to the "Protocols" are all Jewish inventions, he should resist them with all his might, and instead support the czar, the Russian aristocracy and their privileges becasue these and the papacy are the only institutions that stand in the way of the devilish Jews from taking over the world. It played on the pre-existing antisemitic notions to try and prevent a revolution, any kind of revolution, that will lead to the loss of power of the ruling elites. When finally a revolution did come, and there were some Jews in high positions in the Bolshevik party, it came to be seen as an "evidence".
Small wonder then that the "Protocols" is an all-time hit for every dictator - from Hitler through Ahmedinajad to Chavez.
The idea of democrcy is a mortal threat to the Middle East dictators and Islamic dictators all over the world. It's even more of a threat when Muslims immigrate to the West and might absorb these ideas and bring them back to their countries of origin. People think the Saudis finance all these radical mosques in the west only to spread their version of Islam, but it also serves the purpose of insulating the Muslims against the western ideas. Instead they should believe the "infidels" are their enemies whome they should hate, and their ideas are a Crusader/Zionist/Crusader-Zionist plot to destroy Islam and rule the world.
Ebonystones makes a good point. Any polling done amongst the ummah will give results which can only make sense if the special semi-human herdlike mentality of everyone is applied to interpreting the data. Polling was not invented by the Muslims. It's a Western invention. Only non-Muslims could have invented such a thing as polling populations.
I agree. I don't say the disinformation, omissions and outright lies are the only cause, but that they are part of the problem. If there was a really open discussion in the media in all these Muslim majority states, a discussion that would allow also a meaningful amount of dissent and self-criticism and not just the occasional Wafa Sultan provocative interview, then maybe some of the people would have changed their minds. Exposure to a variety of ideas and opinions can make a difference over time.
I've never seen such a waste of skin in my whole life.
Why did the US/coalition even bother to put boots on the ground? What the hell is air power for?
The place should have been nothing but a depopulated crater given back to whatever wildlife might live there by now.
"I agree. I don't say the disinformation, omissions and outright lies are the only cause, but that they are part of the problem."
True, but a minor one. Islam doesn’t stand or fall on truth. It is truth that stands if it promotes Islam and falls if it doesn’t.
"If there was a really open discussion in the media in all these Muslim majority states, a discussion that would allow also a meaningful amount of dissent and self-criticism…"
Yes, but for a discussion to allow a minimum amount of dissent and self criticism, it must take place in a culture that allows, not kills, for a minimum amount of dissent and self criticism.
This is turning out like a bad re-make of Catch-22, only stupider, crazier and with a much worse outcome.
It's as if Joseph Heller along with Aristophanes, Oscar Wilde and George Orwell got together and composed this tragic farce in some demented corner of a half-rate hell.
All the military needs to do is kill jihadis and who cares what what Muslims (who only have contempt for us infidel dogs) think of us anyway?
The point is to crush the enemy, not convince them, much less charm them.
Destroy the core of Islam's imperialistic madness and sanctified Terror.
Or lose.
"The point is to crush the enemy, not convince them, much less charm them."
Excellent point.
"92% of Afghans have never heard of 9/11" -- story line
The story somewhat qualifies these statistics: "To be sure, the survey can't claim to be definitive: It only canvassed men, and relied primarily on respondents from Helmand and Kandahar, the two most war-torn provinces in the country."
I agree with ebonystone. These statistics are suspicious. They reek of political bias.
Destroy the core of Islam's imperialistic madness and sanctified Terror.
Unless you're talking about mecca there is no such a thing as "the core".
Paradoxically, destroying mecca is one of these strange things easier to do than to talk about.
There has never been a moment in man's history when a giant, indeed a "superman" of history would freely tie himself up to allow a physically puny, intellectually stunted, morally reprehensible and spiritually distorted punk to smother him to death while feasting on its body.
If the West won't identify and then destroy the core of its own madness and sanctified Stupidity soon, it will have to experience horrors of civil wars and face their uncertain outcomes later.
There was, though, a moment in man's history when Hannibal fought the Battle of Cannae. That's just something I console myself with at times. My own kind of wishful thinking.
And I agree that going straight at Mecca % Medina first- off is not a good strategy (Militarily speaking). A roll- back from the outside perimeter inward centripetally would be better.
They're just cultural differences is all... //sarc
Bunty Hoven: Totally correct...the islamic mindset, it's culture, its inability to process and control anger [locus of control], to engage in self-introspection, to always respond with violence [for to not respond violently to perceived insults is shameful to islam]...the list goes on and on an on. The islamic culture cannot process democracy or profit from it, unless islam is no longer islam.