What's new

The Afghan 'green-on-blue' attacker seen as a hero

Zarvan

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Apr 28, 2011
Messages
54,470
Reaction score
87
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Martyr' for Koran:An Afghan border policeman who killed two US soldiers in a so-called "green-on-blue" attack in 2011 has been venerated after his death by many in his community. His family have given the BBC's Firuz Rahimi and Johannes Dell a rare insight into what motivated him to carry out the attack.

On 4 April 2011, Samaruddin opened fire on two US soldiers in the northern province of Faryab, killing them both before fleeing.

It was one of dozens of "green-on-blue" attacks in which Afghan security personnel have targeted their Western allies since 2007. More than 100 soldiers in have been killed in one of the gravest security threats to Nato in recent years.

Samaruddin was tracked down three days later.

Nato said that "in the course of conducting an operation to detain him, he was shot and killed while trying to escape from the house he was hiding in".

Diligent soldiers
Samaruddin's victims were named as 32-year-old Sergeant Scott Burgess and 26-year-old Sergeant Michael Lammerts.


Samaruddin's grave has become an unofficial shrine for local people
They had been in Afghanistan for two months and were in Faryab to provide security at a meeting of US commanders and officials of the border police post in the provincial capital Maymana.

Colleagues have described them as diligent soldiers always ready to help fellow troops. Each left behind a wife and two children.

Continue reading the main story
“
Start Quote


We can't point the gun at our guest's forehead and kill them without committing any wrongdoing or sin”

Abdul Momen Makrit
Faryab cleric
Samaruddin's brother Qamar remembers the day of the killing clearly. He had heard there had been a shooting at the local headquarters of the border police in the morning.

"I was worried and I called Samarrudin to find out," he says.

"He picked up after the first ring. I asked - 'do you know that someone has shot two Americans in your base'? He asked where I was. I told him that I was in the city centre. He said 'leave town, it was me'. I was shocked and I didn't believe what he was saying."

It is unusual for insider attackers to escape and to leave a record of what they have done and why, but Samaruddin managed to flee and make his way back to the family house.

His cousin Gulam recalls how he rushed home on hearing the news, finding Samaruddin emotional and confused.

"When I got close to him, he started crying. I kissed his forehead and asked him not to cry."

Especially violent
The week leading up to the shooting had seen serious unrest across Afghanistan after news emerged that members of a small church in the US had burnt a copy of the Koran.


After the attack Samaruddin was described by his family as being emotional and confused
What Gulam said next gives a clue to what may have motivated Samaruddin to act as he did.

"I said to him - 'you killed them because of your religion and be proud of it'.

"We all were very angry."

Such sentiments may be shocking to outsiders, but the family says that many of their friends and neighbours feel the same as they do.

Protests over the burning turned especially violent in the northern city of Mazar-e Sharif where an angry crowd stormed a UN compound, killing several foreign workers.

The family say that Samaruddin was particularly affected by the events.

Another brother, Noor Mohammad, says Samaruddin took part in the protests and went to the mosque several times where the mullah remembers him sitting in the front row.

"The mullah said that as he [Samaruddin] heard about the Koran burning, he couldn't stop crying," Noor Mohammad recalled.

"That was on Sunday. Then later on Monday he killed the two Americans. Everyone knows that Samarrudin is a martyr. He laid down his life for his religion and the Koran."

The family say that Samaruddin stayed the night at their house before hiding in a mosque.

From there he contacted a friend to arrange a new hideout at a private house. It was there that Nato troops found him.

Shrine
Many local people seem to share the family's view of Samaruddin as a hero. The family say that thousands of people attended the burial.


"The whole river bed here was full of people," Samaruddin's uncle Nasraddin remembers. "It was unbelievable."

Samaruddin's grave in the local cemetery is covered in dark red ornamented cloth. It is framed by coloured banners with religious inscriptions, illustrations and poems dedicated to the deceased. It has become a place of pilgrimage.

His uncle says that a local mosque has even been named after his nephew, at the request of local people.

But some are concerned about the way in which a man who killed two allied soldiers could become a hero and martyr overnight.

Abdul Momen Makrit, a local cleric, says that there is no religious justification for an attack on soldiers who came to assist the country.

"They are here to serve us. We have to appreciate what they are doing for the country," he told the BBC.

"Afghans are famous for their hospitality. We can't point the gun at our guest's forehead and kill them without committing any wrongdoing or sin.

"Some people even go further and use titles such as 'martyr' and 'holy warrior'. Most of them do it without knowing the meaning of it. Islam doesn't allow us to do this."

Mr Makrit says illiteracy and ignorance have made people vulnerable to manipulation.

Likewise, Samaruddin's mother does not talk about her son having died for a greater cause. She says she tried in vain to dissuade her son, aged 19 at the time, from joining the police.

"I told him that if you don't leave your job, I will go to the border police post and kill myself," she recalls. "But he served 22 months. I brought him up with great difficulties. But in the end we lost him."

Normal upbringing
Back at the family home, visitors are greeted by a big portrait of Samaruddin, and an inscription praising him as a hero.


Mosques in Faryab province have been named after Samaruddin
His brother shows a set of small posters showing Samaruddin's image superimposed over a fighter jet and next to an open Koran. On other photos he poses with rifles and on the bonnet of an army jeep.

Samaruddin lived there until the age of 10. There was nothing unusual about his childhood. His cousin Gulam remembers him as a normal child and teenager.

"He was mischievous, but never meant harm to anyone. He liked football. He didn't like school," Gulam says.

Like many Afghans, the family was displaced by the constant conflict, moving to Pakistan for a while before returning to Faryab.

Unanswered questions
Many insider attacks are blamed on Taliban infiltration or arguments between foreign and local soldiers getting out of hand. But Samaruddin's case may point to something more troubling.


Green-on-blue attacks have led to a breakdown of trust between the Afghan army and Nato
US journalist Anna Badkhen researched the events and met Samaruddin's colleagues in the border police.

"I went to his supervisors and we sat in an office and drank lots of tea and smoked cigarettes," she recalls.

"Even active members of the Afghan security forces considered him a hero."

Attitudes like this, she says, actually pose much more of a serious threat to Western forces than insurgent infiltration.

Ms Badkhen says that the hatred directed towards Nato is more a case of an individual acting on their own initiative rather than organised insurgency violence.

In his eulogy at the two men's remembrance service, their commanding officer Lt Col John O'Grady spoke of disbelief over the killings among friends and colleagues.

"The questions of why and how this could happen still linger, and will perhaps forever," he wrote. "I'm not sure there will ever be a good answer."
BBC News - The Afghan 'green-on-blue' attacker seen as a hero
 
He killed 2 random soldiers, may Allah have mercy on his soul :(
 
He got what he asked for... but I hope the 2 families of the American Soldiers have strength of loosing their departed ones :( .
About samarudin , burn in hell ****** !!
U just dont killl some one coz they burned ur holy book.. a book just contains words put togather... let those words be in ur heart and then no one can burn/destroy it.

He killed 2 random soldiers, may Allah have mercy on his soul :(

Allah will not have mercey on them coz he killed 2 soldiers just coz someone burned a book.
 
The questions of why and how this could happen still linger, and will perhaps forever[/B]," he wrote. "I'm not sure there will ever be a good answer."
BBC News - The Afghan 'green-on-blue' attacker seen as a hero


That's pretty much the problem - US types are seeking a "good" answer - where the the only answer is the truth which they do not wish to accept. US MIL/GOV types, it's their indoctrination, fall hard, when they are told to fall - They refuse to accept that the side they have picked has not picked them because it loves them but for the utility of the US to further their interests.
 
He got what he asked for... but I hope the 2 families of the American Soldiers have strength of loosing their departed ones :( .
About samarudin , burn in hell ****** !!
U just dont killl some one coz they burned ur holy book.. a book just contains words put togather... let those words be in ur heart and then no one can burn/destroy it.



Allah will not have mercey on them coz he killed 2 soldiers just coz someone burned a book.

I personally won't kill anyone, but if someone else does I won't be a big hypocrite and blame them. Like you would kill me if I insulted your mother, I might kill you if you insulted my holy book which is dearer to me than every single person in the universe.
 
I personally won't kill anyone, but if someone else does I won't be a big hypocrite and blame them. Like you would kill me if I insulted your mother, I might kill you if you insulted my holy book which is dearer to me than every single person in the universe.

That my friend is something deeply wrong with you . You should visit some counselor/psychiatrist and discuss this issue .
 
That my friend is something deeply wrong with you . You should visit some counselor/psychiatrist and discuss this issue .

Does the psychiatrist have to be atheist? Because loving God is something to be celebrated.
 
Does the psychiatrist have to be atheist? Because loving God is something to be celebrated.

psychiatrist's religious affiliation doesn't matter at all unless he believes in killing people since they insulted their book/god .
 
Just a case of two distinct cultures clashing, it will not make sense to either side.
 
psychiatrist's religious affiliation doesn't matter at all unless he believes in killing people since they insulted their book/god .

Believing is one thing, but I don't kno what a person's reaction would be
 
Did the 2 murdered soldiers burn the holy book? I mean ...what if these two Yankee soldiers condemned this desecration of the holy book or better still were on their way to conversion to Islam or had recently converted to Islam without any fanfare...does this "martyr" still get 72 virgins? Gets kinda complicated when you start analysing the whole thing
 
I personally won't kill anyone, but if someone else does I won't be a big hypocrite and blame them. Like you would kill me if I insulted your mother, I might kill you if you insulted my holy book which is dearer to me than every single person in the universe.

One Question.. answer it truthfully..if Allah created this whole universe.. does he need a poxy person like U or Me to defend himself?? I think Not , what do U think my friend?

and U gave a lame example of "If U insulted my mother will I kill U ".. dont know , maybe.. as my Mother is stilll a human...and she might need her son to defend herself ... and vice-verse. Where does Allah say kill the person who disrespects Quran? Its people like YOU , who are deluded and do the damage to ur own religion and calll kafirs islamo-phobic . While he just said ... Do Ur Karma.. read Namaz 5 times a day and dont do bad.. rest leave it on me.. I have it sorted.

Do I need to defend my God? I mean seriously Dude? U make me chuckle.. this is the vastness of Sanatan-Dharm :).
Go figure.
 
WHY, WHY do they do such "evil" things like being ungrateful, the Ferenghi ask:


Afghanistan: Dalrymple’s lessons from history
By Ethan Casey
Published: April 2, 2013
Tweet
Share this article Print this page Email

The writer is the author of Alive and Well in Pakistan and Bearing the Bruise: A Life Graced by Haiti

William Dalrymple is such an affable fellow, such an engaging narrator, and so generous in sharing the fruits of his erudition, that he gets away with speaking some hard truths. Last week, he ended a little Guardian item on “William Dalrymple’s top 10 books on Afghanistan” by bluntly recommending Cables from Kabul by the diplomat Sherard Cowper-Coles as “the best account I have read of how post-colonial colonialism works, exposing the mixture of arrogance, overconfidence and rudderless dithering that has defined the current occupation.”

The description is striking, given that Dalrymple’s recent career has been all about documenting and popularising awareness of significant episodes in the history of colonialism version 1.0 (British edition). Dalrymple recently told an interviewer that he sees his three history books, of which the just-published Return of a King: Shah Shuja and the First Battle for Afghanistan is perhaps, the most compelling, “very much as the East India Company trilogy”. So, when he refers to “post-colonial colonialism” in today’s Afghanistan, using words like “arrogance, overconfidence and rudderless dithering”, we do well to take note.

But the problem is that the people with the greatest understanding are not the people who wield power. All that is within Dalrymple’s power is to invest years of his own life, researching the first Afghan war of 1839-42, then to leverage everything he has learned by writing that — all over again — “despite all the billions of dollars handed out [since 2001], the training of an entire army of Afghan troops and the infinitely superior weaponry of the occupiers, the Afghan resistance succeeded again in first surrounding then propelling the hated Kafirs into a humiliating exit”. It’s hard to drive home the point any more explicitly than that. But no writer can force the makers of imperial policy to change their views or their ways.

And the problem is not only power but money. Those billions of dollars — where did they go? As anyone who follows international humanitarianism knows, many of the dollars went straight back to the countries they came from. This is the nature of postcolonial colonialism. Kabul today is, Dalrymple told Stuart Jeffries in The Guardian, “almost like a French finishing school — lovely-looking French girls working for NGOs and handsome-looking French archaeologists, digging away”. Much of the damage the vaunted “international community” does in vulnerable countries like Afghanistan is in the sheer scale of the economic impact of their big institutions: exorbitant rents, financial and moral corruption, and so forth.

I haven’t seen this in action in Afghanistan as Dalrymple has, but I saw it in Cambodia in the 1990s, and I’ve been seeing it in Haiti for more than 30 years, where it’s been turbocharged since the January 2010 earthquake. “Every one of those 10,000 NGOs are here to live their own dream,” the Dutch journalist Linda Polman told the makers of the remarkable documentary film Haiti: Where Did the Money Go? “People are very poor, but they’re not stupid. They know that the money was raised from their suffering and their poverty, and it’s not being spent on them.”

As a Haitian proverb puts it, perhaps, explaining the motivation behind much, if not most, terrorism: the big guy does what he wants; the little guy does what he can. The elephant in the Afghan room today is that its post-colonial colonial occupation enjoys no credibility with the local population. Insisting otherwise or whistling in the dark changes nothing. The US has long leaned on the plausible deniability of not being overtly an imperial power; but that excuse wore thin decades ago in Vietnam.

A British writer like Dalrymple can approach the issues from a helpfully indirect angle because his country is further in time from the apogee of its imperial arrogance. For an American writer like me, the challenge is different. But for anyone writing in English, the question is: how do we get the American establishment and public to listen?
 
Back
Top Bottom