The Taliban are now accusing the United States of targetting civilians in the attacks on Afghanistan, which strikes me as the worst sort of hypocrisy. Anyone who watched Beneath the Veil on CNN knows that Taliban soldiers execute and rape civilians with regularity in their ongoing war against the United Front (aka Northern Alliance) and apparently think nothing of it. These are also the people who publicly execute women for wearing makeup, showing any of their skin in public, or teaching girls over a certain age.

I abhor the idea that innocent people are dying at the hands of Americans in Afghanistan, but I honestly do not believe that Americans are targetting them intentionally. It disturbs me greatly that the people who are marching in the streets around the world to decry America’s attacks on Afghanistan are seemingly willing to overlook the Taliban’s brutal treatment of the Afghani people. One of the most interesting things about the story I linked to yesterday was how the sentiments of the man interviewed seem so at odds with the actual behavior of the Taliban. I wonder whether he was lying to the interviewer or if he’s lying to himself.

Let’s talk politics for a minute. Right now, there are two versions of the anti-terrorism bill making their way through congress. If you’re keeping score at home, the one in the Senate is nasty, the one created by the House Judiciary Committee less so. I have no doubt that these bills will make it easier to catch terrorists, however, when assessing new laws the question must that must always be asked is: “What is the worst way in which this law can be misused?” In this case, the potential for abuse is extreme. Think about a law like this in the hands of a J. Edgar Hoover or Joseph McCarthy – just because the law is being passed with good intentions does not mean that it will always be applied with those same intentions. Here are some resources:

  • ACLU statement on the Senate bill.
  • ACLU chart comparing the House and Senate bills to the current statutes.
  • Declan McCullagh reports that Russ Feingold is leading the fight for toning down the Senate version of the bill. (Patrick Leahy seems to have caved in, and is a co-sponsor of the bill.)
  • CDT recommends calling your Senator and asking them to support the Feingold amendments.
  • The text and status of the bill.

The Times of India reports that recently fired Pakistani General Mahmud Ahmad, the former head of Pakistan’s intelligence service, had $100,000 wired to Mohammed Atta. Pakistan’s intelligence service, ISI, has a long history of support for the mujahideen and Arab Afghans in Afghanistan, and is also widely believed to support the constant flow of Pakistani insurgents into Kashmir. Of course, Pakistan is our ally because they’re helping us blow up Afghanistan. If the report is true, then it’s the Pakistani government that has clear links to the 9/11 attacks. (If you see this story covered on telelvision, please send me email. Searching the news feeds at Yahoo seems to turn up nothing.)

Taliban, West Eager for Al-Jazeera Coverage

Robert Fisk: A bold and original TV station that America wants to censor

William Saletan’s makes a great argument for addressing the accusations that Osama bin Laden made in his taped statement that saw wide airplay in the United States, and even wider airplay in Muslim countries. The interviewer for Al-Jazeera gave Tony Blair a tough time in the interview that I linked to yesterday, but he was just asking the questions that many Muslims want answered. Do we have to justify ourselves before the world? No, but I think it would help.