It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Every one knows about Malala Yusafzai, Here is why you will Never know anything about Nabila

page: 1

log in


posted on Jun, 27 2015 @ 01:55 AM

The celebration of Malala in the West has long inspired conspiracy theorists who view her as a CIA stooge -- and that she is now the youngest recipient for the Nobel Peace Prize is likely to prove more fodder for the same. But you don't have to be paranoid to ask the question raised by Murtaza Hussain in Al-Jazeera: What about Nabila Rehman?

Nabila's story is no less moving. The 10-year-old girl survived a drone attack in 2012 (she was eight then) and has testified before the US Congress to describe the horror of these attacks. Hussain notes that the strike killed Nabila's grandmother Momina Bibi, severely injured seven children.

Nabila, along with her 13-year-old brother who survived the attack and her father Rafiq ur Rehman, a Pakistani primary school teacher, appeared on Capitol Hill last November to testify against the US drone strike and demand justice. But where the US Congress was sufficiently moved by Malala's heroism to award her a Congressional gold medal, only five out of 430 representatives showed up for Nabila's testimony, as the Al-Jazeera report points out.

Husain argues this vast discrepancy between the reception of the two Pakistani girls reflects the United States' priorities, where Malala "was seen as a potential tool of political propaganda to be utilised by war advocates," to justify the war on terror, which can then be portrayed as crusade to liberate Muslims from their oppressors.

Nabila's story, on the other hand, turns the spotlight on the actual human costs of the war on terror, and puts a face to what is otherwise dismissed as 'collateral damage'. She puts the focus on the tough questions about civilian deaths in drone strikes (close to 900 people according to an Amnesty International report last year), about torture, illegal imprisonment and more.

Where Malala allows Americans to play the role of the knight in shining armour, Nabila's tale casts Americans inevitably in the role of villains. Last year when Malala wasn't given the Noble peace prize, Max Fisher in the Washington Post argued that "the entire West [was] trying to co-opt Malala, as if to tell ourselves: 'Look, we're with the good guys, we're on the right side. The problem is over there.'"

"While Malala was feted by Western media figures, politicians and civic leaders for her heroism, Nabila has become simply another one of the millions of nameless, faceless people who have had their lives destroyed over the past decade of American wars," writes Hussain.

There will be no Nobel prizes for Nabila, no fawning acknowledgements of her heroism, no tears of sympathy for the plight of Pakistani girls like her, who leave alone the right to education, are not even accorded the right to life.

I Initially only wanted to post the important points but the entire Article seems to be pretty good so i posted most of what i found relevant. This should really throw some light on how much real importance is given to human rights and how "human rights" can be used as a political weapon for your own personal agenda's.I am in no way Criticizing Malala but the fact is, Malala's cause has been hijacked by the West to justify this war on terror.
edit on 27-6-2015 by maddy21 because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 27 2015 @ 02:31 AM
a reply to: maddy21

Here's the example I used to give friends in regards to the War on Terror. Part of the justification in the US to fight the Taliban was because of its treatment of women. But I would ask them, since when has the United States cared about the treatment of Muslim women? People here don't even want us to build mosques but we're supposed to believe our government suddenly cares about brown skinned Muslims on the other side of the planet?

If they really cared about the plight of Muslim women, they'd be going after Saudi Arabia. Or working to improve the conditions of Bangladesh's garment workers, since the majority of them are Muslim women. Or they'd at least push for laws in the West to allow Muslim women to wear any head coverings they want to, including burkas. (Burkas are not requirements in Islam but contrary to popular belief, some women actually like wearing them & similar coverings.)

Instead, we're attacking these very women with our wars, and killing them, their husbands, children, parents, and relatives. And we're destroying their neighborhoods & communities. But somehow, we're doing all of this damage to everything they love in order to protect them? That doesn't make sense.

posted on Jun, 27 2015 @ 03:17 AM
a reply to: maddy21

Hi Maddy.

It is all about spin and tokenism - media shows and pats on the back for the very monsters who cause these atrocities. I give ALL their media circus shows a wide berth and try to see the bigger picture. You have certainly revealed the bigger picture with your thread.

I actually think Obama's two terms have been even worse than Bush's for trouble making in the Middle East and the Muslim states. Under his watch Christians have been decimated in the Middle East by constant genocide. There have been continued drone strikes in Pakistan and surrounding areas, on going civil wars in Iraq, Libya, Syria, new civil conflict in Yemen and now Tunisia, mass shootings and bombing in U.S, all the carnage in France. In fact, the only result is utter strife, genocide and destabilization of the whole region and the Muslim world. To conclude, Obama's foreign policy during his two terms has seen the rise of IS, carnage and slaughter on an unprecedented scale and the decimation of some very old Christian traditions in societies. Don't ever say Obama is a peace President. He has cultivated that illusion, but is a indeed a wolf in sheep's clothing and his administration, too. Seems like he is a great supporter of Sunni Muslims (Saudi royal family).

I have to be careful as I get very angry about all this so I try to chose my words as carefully as possible, but this whole scenario (the so called war on terror and stirring up hatred and civil war in Muslim countries) disgusts me and so do the perpetrators.

I hope that people will see beyond the spin of these token cases like Malala.

The only thing Obama and his team seem honestly interested in is gay marriage and trans gender rights. Way to go, Obama. Even Black people have had a harder time under his leadership, becoming target practice for the police.

Paint the whole world with a rainbow, oh and lots of BLOOD!
edit on 27-6-2015 by Revolution9 because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 27 2015 @ 04:24 AM
a reply to: Revolution9

To be fair, Christians in the Middle East have had it hard under both Both & Obama. Something like 2 million Iraqi Christians left Iraq as exiles during the Iraq War. And people tend to forget or overlook the fact that roughly 10% of the Palestinians are Christians. They've been getting hammered in Syria and in Lebanon too (especially during that last war between Israel & Hezbollah).

posted on Jun, 27 2015 @ 06:16 AM
Ever since war became a reality tv show ,

with no obvious enemy ,

the entire population has lapped

the lies on a daily basis .

Celebrity status and the truth

are inversely proportional.

The puppetmasters run a tight circus

posted on Jun, 27 2015 @ 07:28 AM
a reply to: maddy21

More details of Drone Strike

It sounds like the area had been hit a full handful of times previously. Reports vary as to 2 or 3 missiles launched and 3 to 4 terrorists being killed as well as the mother and some livestock.

Drones aren't foolproof and mistakes will happen and civillans nearby will get killed on occasion. It sucks to be stuck living in an area of close proximity of a known Taliban stronghold.

posted on Jun, 27 2015 @ 08:09 AM
"Wars" like this always make my blood boil . The whole Iran/Afghanistan fiasco . If you look deep , other than the location it is an exact copy of the Vietnam War
Drawn in partially (or mostly) by the UN
Started as "observers and trainers"
Escalated on shaky terms
No entrance strategy
No strategy for fighting
No ending strategy
Excuse to try out new weapons and equipment
Massive civilian casualties
Ended with pulling the troops out , again no strategy
Where does the madness end ?

top topics


log in