Troops, Terrorists, & Trials in the Kandahar and Boston Massacres

It was reasonable to expect that troops, who knew the errand they were sent upon, would treat the people whom they were to subjugate, with a cruelty and haughtiness which too often buries the honorable character of a soldier in the disgraceful name of an unfeeling ruffian.

John Hancock, in Boston on 5 March 1774, on the Anniversary of the Boston Massacre of 1770

There are several reasons why the Boston Massacre is not analogous to the recent massacre of 17 Afghan civilians by Staff Sgt. Robert Bales (& Co.). But this Hancock quote holds an irony I couldn’t ignore. I wrote about a similar theme here.

The Boston Massacre helped unify Bostonians against the military occupation by British troops, which began in earnest in 1768. Murray Rothbard, in Conceived in Liberty Vol. III, wrote that it “was the final straw that sent this most sensitive spot in the American colonies once again to the brink of revolution.” The Kandahar massacre may be helping to unify Americans against the military occupation of Afghanistan. Support for the war has hit an all time low, and more than 70% of Americans believe it isn’t worth it.

The analogy also highlights the correlation between the American revolutionaries and the insurgents in Afghanistan. The U.S. has tightened security following the massacre in Kandahar, fearing revenge attacks. Incidentally, Samuel Adams threatened British troops with an armed insurgency one day after the Boston Massacre. In a town meeting, the governor offered to withdraw one of the two regiments. To which Adams replied: “If you, or Colonel Dalrymple under you, have the power to remove one regiment you have the power to remove both. It is at your peril if you refuse. The meeting is composed of three thousand people. They have become impatient. A thousand men are already arrived from the neighborhood, and the whole country is in motion. Night is approaching. An immediate answer is expected. Both regiments or none!” Adams warned that “unless there was a total evacuation,” Rothbard recounts, “the troops would be destroyed.” Terrorism, in modern-day parlance.

It was around this time that King George decreed that crimes committed by disobedient colonists would be heard in British courts, not American ones. Afghan “terrorists” have met a similar fate in U.S.-controlled Bagram prison or even Guantanamo. Likewise, the King commanded, occupying British forces, if charged with a crime, would be brought to England to be tried, presumably under less threat of due justice. The British troops who killed 5 Bostonians served trial, justly, where the crime was committed. Staff Sgt. Robert Bales, who killed 17 civilians, was flown out of Afghanistan before his victims’ blood was dry.

9 thoughts on “Troops, Terrorists, & Trials in the Kandahar and Boston Massacres”

  1. RE: Terrorism alert: KGB total brainwashing technique

    It can be an illusion that these massacres are different. They can have the same source.

    US Ministry of Defense provides automatic guns and weapons to thousands of potential terrorists who can commit the same or similar crime as during this Kandahar massacre of civilians in Afghanistan or during the Fort Hood (Texas) shooting where on November 5, 2009 a single gunman killed 13 people and wounded 29 others. Why is it so? This is because some part of Russian KGB (not Moscow or Putin) uses a brainwashing technique that requires only a few hours and leads to total mind control. After GULAG KGB brainwashing, such military personnel people can take guns and kill many others and themselves. The technique was invented by KGB agents in GULAG labor camps where they experimented with and sacrificed more than 10 million Soviet people.

    I repeat this brainwashing technique requires only a few hours of intimacy for total submission or mind control (so that there is no confusion). This can be easily achieved due to, for example, prevalent promiscuity and lack of any public awareness about this method and KGB people who use such brainwashing. Note that such crimes are nearly impossible to prove, since the brainwashed people either kill themselves or, if they survive, will say only those things that were ordered them to say.

    There are obviously some reasons for those KGB bums to make, for example, US soldiers kill civilians in Afghanistan.

    Artour Rakhimov, PhD

    1. But wouldn't it be easier for you to use these secret KGB total brainwashing techniques to convince people rather than to cut and paste this message on every single last story on the internet related to Robert Bales?

      1. You want me to make original messages for each news channel and blog post? Or maybe write original messages for thousands of emails and letters that I sent?

        You probably did not read my CV: and you surely do not know how many massacres (in % of yearly total) are committed by these people who murdered over 10 million and are still running many parts of the KGB since nobody cares…..

    2. Here is a way more plausible theory:

      After the demise of Soviet Union, CIA hired KGB experts in the brainwashing techniques. They trained hundreds of CIA agents. When some of those agents retired they were hired by The Lobby who was interested in a perpetual war between the US and the Muslims. The Lobby first brainwashed Al-Qaeda bigwigs to attack WTC. It then brainwashed Bush to attack Afghanistan and Iraq. Due to superior US military might both the wars ended in no time. Hoping to rekindle the beloved perpetual war The Lobby brainwashed Iraqi and Afghan insurgents to fight the occupation. They also brainwashed Obama to make him continue Bush's policies. Brainwashing of Bales was just a small piece of this whole puzzle, the purpose is to help the brainwashed insurgents recruit more insurgents to fight the occupation.

      The only thing I cannot figure out is whether I have written this on my own or if The Lobby has brainwashed me into writing this. But what would they gain by it? Perhaps they want to show how much power they have over ordinary individuals, so no one would dare oppose the war.

  2. KGB BRAINWASHING MY ASS! This is what happens when you have no respect for human life, which is what wars of aggression for the sake of stealing other peoples resources is all about. We have become the terrorists! When you forget the lessons of history, you are bound to repeat them.

  3. My guess is that Obama has calculated, and concluded, this is not a "game changing" issue for the 2012 election. Deviating from the status quo is an "unnecessary risk" for him. His most likely "opponent" for his reelection bid says he would "listen to the generals" when it comes to this particular issue. Mr. Romney has no information to conclude Obama is doing otherwise…at least he doesn't have credible information which would change the mind of voters who would not vote for him anyway. Therefore, based on Obama's track record that seems to indicate he does not care about this in the first place, I would guess he's made up his mind that essentially: "the devil you know is better than the devil you don't". He knows what staying in Afghanistan means–the status quo, and the "status quo" is obviously "irrelevant" when it comes to the upcoming election…unless there were credible evidence voters would otherwise vote for him will not—based solely on this one issue. My guess is his "argument", to counter any such potential 'concerns', will be that: "we are on course" to be out of Afghanistan shortly after his reelection anyway…so why would such voters be concerned unless the 'evil' Romney gets elected and extends the war? So obviously this is a non-issue.

    IMHO, this was "over" a long time ago. I'm guessing we'll stick with the timeline established and leave enough troops in Afghanistan so we can continue drone strikes in the country on on the "boarder" with Pakistan

    1. Let's face it, power for the sake of power is what our putative leaders specialize in. They weigh the polls and are simply in it to maximize their advantages in a game which is essentially empty and without meaning. The "faces of the fallen" do not touch them or make them hesitate, except insofar as it might affect the outcome of the next election. There is no moral outrage, because they are all amoral.

      But if our seeming leaders are just there to win, who owns the team is the underlying question. And how do they propose to continue as the rich bankrollers they are? Well, as someone mentioned, it's about oil resources, now in contention both because of natural depletion and the rise of competitors for same. You can't make things without petroleum, and it had better stay relatively cheap, yet expensive enough to be desirable to hold exclusively, to call the shots on pricing. Industry is like a champagne fountain at a wedding, with oil as the liquid that is poured, and he who holds the bottle rules as it flows into the lesser industries.

      But why does it help to cling to a place like Afghanistan? Obviously it serves the powerful. Perhaps it is just an attempt to square the circle, and to hang on where no other outsider ever could. Perhaps it is just to prove we weren't suckers in the first place. It's a kind of trophy of denial. That too is necessary for someone asserting supremacy.

  4. I am direct to a provider who has recently issued banking instruments for a couple of my clients the provider is 100% check-able you can do your due diligence on them. I personally know the provider.
    Our instruments are only from triple ‘a’ rated banks and we issue from $1M to $5B . The provider is 100% verifiable. If you are genuinely seeking bank instruments. Contact me and i will furnish you with details.
    They deal with issuing of instruments such as Bank Guarantee and Standby letters of credit also Letters of credit. I only want serious buyers then i will put you in touch with the provider directly.
    – Bank Guarantee (BG)
    – Standby Letter of Credit (SBLC)
    – Direct Line of Credit (DLC)
    – Medium Term Note (MTN)
    – Letter of Credit (LC)
    I will be glad to share with you our working procedures.
    Contact : Nagesh S Belur
    Skype ID: bnsrlease.mandate

Comments are closed.