The Iraq thread 3

[Balschoiw 0]

Gunmen opened fire Sunday on a convoy carrying Iraq's minister of public works in northern Iraq, killing a driver and a bodyguard and injuring two others, the U.S.-led coalition said.

Quote[/b] ]In another attack in the city of Mosul, gunmen killed a Briton and a Canadian who were working as security guards for foreign electrical engineers at a power station. The ambush appeared to be part of a campaign to undermine U.S.-led reconstruction efforts in Iraq.

The attacks highlighted the tenuous security situation in Iraq's third-largest city, once a prime recruiting ground for the officer corps of Saddam Hussein's army.

In Baghdad, U.S. soldiers shut down a weekly newspaper run by followers of radical Shiite Muslim cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, saying its articles were inciting violence against the coalition. The Al-Hawza newspaper will be closed for 60 days, the coalition said. Hours later, 1,000 followers of al-Sadr demonstrated against the closure, saying it violated freedom of expression.

Berwari was returning to Mosul from a meeting in the city of Dohuk when her convoy was attacked, said Kristi Clemens, a coalition spokeswoman in Baghdad.

Saro Qader, an official with the Kurdistan Democratic Party, described the attack as an “assassination attempt.†Berwari is a member of the Kurdish party.

Quote[/b] ]U.S. military officials in Mosul say insurgents are shifting from attacks on American troops to targeting Iraqi security forces, and most recently civilians. The shift could be partly because there are fewer American soldiers in the area, and consequently fewer U.S. targets.

Iraqi Minister Escapes Attack

[walker 0]

Hi all

Too Few troops on the ground. We have been saying it for months.

Kind Regards Walker

[denoir 0]

locked down paper

Was this journalism, or was this terrorism, and where do you draw the line between treasonous conduct and democratic speech? We've had cases of this before since 1776, how will Iraq respond?

This is interesting but perhaps understandable. There always are and always will be limitations on what you can publish in public. In democratic countries you can't for instance publish unsbstantiated claims about people. It's considered slander and generally isn't allowed in the printed press. On the other hand, public officials are generally excluded from that.

Although the occupational forces are not democratically elected, they are the basis of the political systems. AFIK in the western world it is for the most part fully legal to advocate violence against governmental organizations, just as long as you actually don't act upon it. So the case should be the same in Iraq.

I can understand the dilemma though. The media can be a very powerful tool. On the other hand the situation is such because a significant portion of the Iraqi people are very resentful to the occupation. So the root problem is not with the media - it is only popular and influencial because it has a large base of people that agree with it.

[m21man 0]

Quote[/b] ]Was this journalism, or was this terrorism, and where do you draw the line between treasonous conduct and democratic speech? We've had cases of this before since 1776, how will Iraq respond?

The US has to create a line that these newspapers cannot cross. While this may seem tyrannical and hypocritical to people in countries where speech is a lot more free, you have to remember the situation in Iraq. If a newspaper in America publishes a lie-filled article about a politician, then maybe his career will be slightly damaged. If an Iraqi newspaper publishes a lie-filled article about the occupation forces, then people will die. And not just US soldiers will die, so will Iraqi policemen and civilians.

And the US didn't even permanently close this paper. They closed it for 60 days. In the US, a newspaper would run a serious risk of being sued into financial oblivion if it started publishing articles with messages like "It's patriotic to blow up abortion doctors!". Hopefully, once there is an actual Iraqi government in power, then there won't have to be military shutdowns of newspapers. Until then, the US military and Iraqi police should close newspapers if it's necessary.

[bn880 5]

m21man, why are you full of double standards? The US used a shitload of propaganda prior to the war to convince iraqis to let the coalition of the few invade their country and kill thousands of Iraqis. Can no one else have propaganda then?

[m21man 0]

Quote[/b] ]The US used a shitload of propaganda prior to the war to convince iraqis to let the coalition of the few invade their country and kill thousands of Iraqis.

Do the calculations out. Pretty much just as many Iraqis would have died under Saddam than under the occupation. The US forces may not be perfect little angels, but they aren't rounding people up and murdering them for the fun of it.

[bn880 5]

I have heard of people getting killed for the fun of it, and I've seen it to, by US forces. And don't change the subject, propaganda resulting in deaths is propaganda resulting in deaths. Innocent people died in Iraq now as well.

[SpecOp9 0]

Quote[/b] ]The US used a shitload of propaganda prior to the war to convince iraqis to let the coalition of the few invade their country and kill thousands of Iraqis.

Do the calculations out. Pretty much just as many Iraqis would have died under Saddam than under the occupation. The US forces may not be perfect little angels, but they aren't rounding people up and murdering them for the fun of it.

Said the words for me

[bn880 5]

OKay, so, it is ok to have propaganda from US, to take over a country, and also for the US to pound TV and radio stations as military targets. But it is not ok for some newspaper to push some of the writer's propaganda/lies. This is based on what, that US wants to bring democracy right? Well, that's another double standard. And not like that really is the objective, if anyhting the objective would be to create a business rich country, open to intimidation and business opportunity.

You've got a mass of human rights violations in Iraq, how can you defend this.

[m21man 0]

And I'm sure that while Saddam was controlling Iraq, the newspapers were pumping out gallons of "The US is going to be destroyed in Iraq" propaganda.

Quote[/b] ]But it is not ok for some newspaper to push some of the writer's propaganda/lies.

If his writings result in bombings that kill US soldiers, Iraqi policemen, or civilians, then the US is obligated to do something about it. Once Iraq is more stable, I'm sure that such censorship will be unnecessary. At the moment, you have to balance censorship with the fact that Iraq is a hotspot, and vicious lies about the US forces are only going to bring more pain to the Iraqi people.

Quote[/b] ]You've got a mass of human rights violations in Iraq, how can you defend this.

And Saddam was known for the cheerful, wonderful, CandyLand nature of his regime?

[bn880 5]

And I'm sure that while Saddam was controlling Iraq, the newspapers were pumping out gallons of "The US is going to be destroyed in Iraq" propaganda.

Yes and so what about that...

Quote[/b] ]

Quote[/b] ]But it is not ok for some newspaper to push some of the writer's propaganda/lies.

If his writings result in bombings that kill US soldiers, Iraqi policemen, or civilians, then the US is obligated to do something about it. Once Iraq is more stable, I'm sure that such censorship will be unnecessary.

Well, I'm sure it will be un necessary but will there be anyone left to voice any objections anymore. And will the censorship stop?

Quote[/b] ]

Quote[/b] ]You've got a mass of human rights violations in Iraq, how can you defend this.

And Saddam was known for the cheerful, wonderful, CandyLand nature of his regime?

Ok so Saddam regime, US occupation, same difference...

[m21man 0]

Quote[/b] ]Ok so Saddam regime, US occupation, same difference...

I haven't noticed any testicle zappings recently. Nor have I seen any women raped and thrown off balconies (I think that was Uday). Instead of digging new body pits, the US is searching for the old ones so they can find the bodies of the people slaughtered by Saddam. US soldiers aren't rounding up people and shooting them for entertainment. There are many huge differences between the US forces and Saddam's troops.

[turms 0]

I dont approve death sentencies in USA also, but that doesnt justify me to attack USA, does it?

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]US soldiers aren't rounding up people and shooting them for entertainment. There are many huge differences between the US forces and Saddam's troops.

Good morning.

The Geneva Convention and the US massacre of POWs in Afghanistan

Quote[/b] ]On December 1 the last of some 80 survivors of the US-British-Northern Alliance assault on the Qala-i-Janghi prison fortress outside Mazar-i-Sharif emerged from their underground hideouts and surrendered to their assailants. For six days, beginning Sunday, November 25, American and British special forces joined with troops loyal to Northern Alliance General Rashid Dostum in a massive and one-sided attack on 400 to 800 non-Afghan Taliban who had surrendered the previous day in Kunduz. The US, Britain and Northern Alliance justified their slaughter of the prisoners, most of whom were killed in two days of American air strikes, on the grounds that the Taliban captives had staged an uprising.

But news footage of American and Northern Alliance troops firing down on the POWs from the heights of the fortress walls, and fields littered with the corpses of dead and mutilated prisoners, provided clear evidence of a massacre. Even as the extermination of pockets of survivors continued, demands were being raised by human rights organizations for an investigation into violations of the Geneva Convention and other international laws of war.

Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch called for an inquiry into the events at the Qala-i-Janghi fortress, and were joined by Mary Robinson, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights.

The United States and Britain have rejected all such appeals. The American media, which paid only passing attention to the bloody events as they were unfolding, has gone completely silent in their immediate aftermath.

Shall I dig for some rape-stories from funny Iraq ?

Shall I ?

Even US soldiers are not immune to the temptation to kill or do things that are absolutely not right. They are no exception to other troops on this planet. Don´t try to make them look like the holy angels with US banner around their wrists.

There is already sufficient prove for that.

I don´t exclude me here. I am UN soldier and not free of "temptations" at missions. Even ran, the best frenchman I know, will agree here.

[Acecombat 0]

Quote[/b] ]If his writings result in bombings that kill US soldiers, Iraqi policemen, or civilians, then the US is obligated to do something about it.

What about the 'fake' written reports done by Rummy and co to invade Iraq? Going in under false pretenses of WMD? What about those words/writings which broke a countrys infrastructure in to two and killed many people ? What about that?

Let me see the answer for that would be again , Saddam would have done the same he was killing too ... so i guess US and Saddam are pretty much the same blokes just under different names

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]Yet the American government is the most vociferous advocate of war crimes trials against government leaders deemed to be inimical to US capitalism’s global interests.

I love Socialism sites.  hahahaha

Quote[/b] ]Many journalists and media pundits who are today covering up

I though majority of media is consider left.  

Quote[/b] ]But news footage of American and Northern Alliance troops firing down on the POWs from the heights of the fortress walls, and fields littered with the corpses of dead and mutilated prisoners, provided clear evidence of a massacre.

What about that dead Northern Alliance member rolling down the hill or media crews ducking for cover when gunfire coming from inside the jail. Must been seeing things.

Quote[/b] ]America’s “war on terrorism,â€

What does "" mean?

[Tex -USMC- 0]

Good morning.

The Geneva Convention and the US massacre of POWs in Afghanistan

Quote[/b] ]On December 1 the last of some 80 survivors of the US-British-Northern Alliance assault on the Qala-i-Janghi prison fortress outside Mazar-i-Sharif emerged from their underground hideouts and surrendered to their assailants. For six days, beginning Sunday, November 25, American and British special forces joined with troops loyal to Northern Alliance General Rashid Dostum in a massive and one-sided attack on 400 to 800 non-Afghan Taliban who had surrendered the previous day in Kunduz. The US, Britain and Northern Alliance justified their slaughter of the prisoners, most of whom were killed in two days of American air strikes, on the grounds that the Taliban captives had staged an uprising.

But news footage of American and Northern Alliance troops firing down on the POWs from the heights of the fortress walls, and fields littered with the corpses of dead and mutilated prisoners, provided clear evidence of a massacre. Even as the extermination of pockets of survivors continued, demands were being raised by human rights organizations for an investigation into violations of the Geneva Convention and other international laws of war.

Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch called for an inquiry into the events at the Qala-i-Janghi fortress, and were joined by Mary Robinson, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights.

The United States and Britain have rejected all such appeals. The American media, which paid only passing attention to the bloody events as they were unfolding, has gone completely silent in their immediate aftermath.

Shall I dig for some rape-stories from funny Iraq ?

Shall I ?

Before you do, let's address this steaming pile of garbage.

Quote[/b] ]On December 1 the last of some 80 survivors of the US-British-Northern Alliance assault on the Qala-i-Janghi prison fortress outside Mazar-i-Sharif emerged from their underground hideouts and surrendered to their assailants.

I'm just going to quote this right now so we don't miss it later on. If a massacre occurred, as the article claims, why would the perpetrators arbitrarily allow 80+ survivors to surrender? Just roll that around in your skull for a bit.

Quote[/b] ]For six days, beginning Sunday, November 25, American and British special forces joined with troops loyal to Northern Alliance General Rashid Dostum in a massive and one-sided attack on 400 to 800 non-Afghan Taliban who had surrendered the previous day in Kunduz. The US, Britain and Northern Alliance justified their slaughter of the prisoners, most of whom were killed in two days of American air strikes, on the grounds that the Taliban captives had staged an uprising.

That's very funny that they manage to cast doubt on the Coalition side of the story without actually addressing its veracity in any way. Here's a few accounts of the events sans thick coating of bullshit:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/1675769.stm

Quote[/b] ]And with gunfire and explosions continuing, our correspondent says there is little sign that the revolt is over.

...

The fighting began on Sunday when the prisoners killed some of their guards and seized weapons.

For a "one-sided" attack on unarmed prisoners, the Coalition sure did take its own sweet time in killing them all, and, as you'll see, their criminal-minded deviousness didn't end there.

http://wildcat.arizona.edu/papers/95/67/05_1.html

Quote[/b] ]"There was general pandemonium," said Simon Brooks, head of Red Cross operations for northern Afghanistan, who was at the prison to check on the detainees' condition when gunfire rang out.

Wow, what a bunch of criminal masterminds- they decided to initiate a fullscale massacre of POWs while the chief of Red Cross operations was at the compound? Brilliant, I tell you.

http://www.cnn.com/2001....ex.html

Quote[/b] ]MAZAR-E SHARIF, Afghanistan (CNN) -- Northern Alliance troops, along with U.S. and British special forces, fought Tuesday to snuff out a small pocket of resistance following a weekend uprising of Taliban prisoners.

"It is not yet fully under control, and I'm not sure what that amounts to in terms of numbers," Gen. Tommy Franks, chief of the U.S. Central Command, said at a Florida news conference. "There were 30 to 40 hardcore people still on the inside, and it is a matter of rooting them out."

Alliance commanders said they saw U.S. and British special forces entering the highly fortified compound near Mazar-e Sharif for what appeared to be a final storming of the fortress at around 9:30 a.m. (12 a.m. EST) Tuesday.

Their arrival was followed by a heavy exchange of gunfire and some occasional mortar fire.

The Taliban forces who continued to fight have access to mortars and machine guns and are putting up stiff resistance from inside one building, alliance soldiers said Monday.

Alliance commanders said the Taliban inside the compound were running out of ammunition, but the commanders made a similar claim a day earlier.

A U.S. airstrike hit an ammunition dump inside the compound overnight during a series of air attacks designed to quell the bloody uprising. Meanwhile, a Northern Alliance tank moved near the main gate of the fortress, which appeared to be under the control of alliance forces.

The revolt began Sunday by about 300 non-Afghan Taliban fighters inside the compound. The Taliban forces had said they were surrendering, but smuggled weapons into the camp and launched a rebellion.

Northern Alliance soldiers coming out of the compound Monday said they have lost between 100 and 150 fighters. As many as 400 Taliban fighters were killed, the soldiers said, the majority on Sunday after U.S. jets struck the area with precision-guided missiles.

Northern Alliance commanders have reported that two Americans had been killed. Pentagon spokesman Victoria Clarke said there were no known losses among U.S. troops, but she said one U.S. government employee is missing and American authorities are trying to ascertain his whereabouts.

Five U.S. soldiers were injured, one seriously, by a stray American bomb on Tuesday while helping put down the revolt, U.S. officials said Tuesday. The injured have been airlifted to Uzbekistan for treatment and will eventually be sent to a U.S. military hospital in Germany.

"A very small number" of British troops have also sustained injuries in Afghanistan, British Defense Secretary Geoff Hoon said Monday, but he would not provide any other details.

The Taliban who revolted were mainly fighters from Pakistan linked to the al Qaeda network of Osama bin Laden. They were brought to the compound as part of a deal to surrender the city of Konduz, about five hours away.

First let me address the gaping logical holes in the article. First, the lack of explanation for what, if the article were true, would be a completely arbitrary offer of surrender given to the holdouts of the uprising. Why stop then if the goal was slaughter? Second, how does the statement of a "one-sided" engagement reconcile with the death of an American, several Coalition casualties, and well over 100 Northern Alliance casualties? Third, how come the Red Cross official present can't be listed in the human rights folks who are concerned about the slaughter? It seems to me that he'd know. I'll stop there so you can respond to these questions without being snowed under.

Okay, now let's play the source game. You have the World Socialist Web Site, a bastion of level headed thinking that produces articles comparing US actions to Nazi aggression (http://www.wsws.org/articles/2002/sep2002/iraq-s09.shtml), apologist drivel for the abject failures of Marxism (http://www.wsws.org/exhibits/iss-98.htm), and whose maind activity is to present warmed over propagandizing drivel that even Stalin would cringe at as actual news and analysis. Me? I have CNN, the BBC, and assorted other newspapers that don't have the kind of political baggage your source does. The only "human-rights organizations" they mentioned specifically were Amnesty International and the UN Human Rights Commission, and of the two the only person mentioned by name was Mary Robinson. I did some checking, and here's Mary Robinson's address to the Commission on March 18th, 2002, just 5 months after the alleged atrocities took place: http://www.nhri.net/pdf/58CHR-HCStatement18%20March.pdf

Though she mentions Afghanistan, she manages to leave out any concerns as to atrocities committed during the uprising. Not only that, but she mentions Mazar-i-Sharif by name in addressing other human rights concerns, but still says absolutely nothing about the uprising. Interesting. The article offers nothing but a slanted perspective and nothing to back it up. This is what we call propaganda, and I'm dissapointed (but not surprised, given that I had to do this same routine back when you accused other American forces of different atrocities in Afghanistan months back) that you would come calling with such a pitiful support to your incindiery claims, claims which, if I may say so, are entirely more akin to flamebaiting than Bn's more general statements in the Mid-East thread that earned him a PR.

Oh yes, and I'm back. I've been watching, and you've had a free ride for entirely too long with this kind of weak argumentation- the echo chamber ends now.

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]

The second CIA agent fled the scene and contacted American officials via satellite phone, urging them to send in forces. US and British special forces arrived outside the fort and began directing an all-out assault on the POWs inside, which soon included massive bombings.

From CNN Transcript

Quote[/b] ]

DAVID, CIA AGENT: We control the north end of the fort. The south end of the fort is in their hands. There's hundreds of dead here at least and I'm not -- I don't know how many Americans are dead. I think one was killed. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. There were two at least need some other guys, just need help to free this place up. We need to have - and again, we can't hit it from the air. We're not talking coming...

Quote[/b] ]

STAUTH: It was hard luck, already sunset, and another of them on crutches made his way, which was really terrifying because it took him like a minute with his crutches and there was still gunfire. He crossed the roof, which was right in the line of fire, but he managed to get to the edge of the wall and disappear.

Quote[/b] ]US special forces were on the ground, firing at semi-defenseless prisoners

What the hell is semi-defenseless?

Also, how did Spann body become booty-trapped?

Three health officials were also shot went they tried to the basement of the "prison".

[m21man 0]

Now that the "massacre" claim has been pretty well rolled over, I'll get on to this:

Quote[/b] ]Shall I dig for some rape-stories from funny Iraq ?

Shall I ?

You can do if you wish. I'm sure that you can find some stories if you look hard enough. The sad truth is that rape and murder are inevitable parts of war. Until we have combat robots doing all of our fighting, we rely on humans to do our fighting, and humans have flaws. Throughout history, there are many instances in which war brings out the worst of these flaws. Adrenaline has a nasty way of colliding with testosterone and natural cruelty. You will always be able to find horror stories about what some soldiers have done, and I'm sure that some stories exist about the US occupying force.

Should US soldiers be punished for crimes they commit? Yes. If they rape, steal, and kill, then they should be tried and given the appropriate sentence. Still, the crimes of US soldiers don't even hold a candle to what Saddam's goons did. For every rape story you find about American soldiers, I could find ten worse stories about acts by the Hussein regime.

From the US Department of State:

Quote[/b] ]War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity

Saddam Hussein seized power in 1979. The list of war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by Saddam Hussein and his regime is a long one. It includes:

The use of poison gas and other war crimes against Iran and the Iranian people during the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war. Iraq summarily executed thousands of Iranian prisoners of war as a matter of policy.

The "Anfal" campaign in the late 1980's against the Iraqi Kurds, including the use of poison gas on cities. In one of the worst single mass killings in recent history, Iraq dropped chemical weapons on Halabja in 1988, in which as many as 5,000 people — mostly civilians — were killed.

Crimes against humanity and war crimes arising out of Iraq's 1990-91 invasion and occupation of Kuwait.

Crimes against humanity and possibly genocide against Iraqi Kurds in northern Iraq. This includes the destruction of over 3,000 villages. The Iraqi government's campaign of forced deportations of Kurdish and Turkomen families to southern Iraq has created approximately 900,000 internally displaced citizens throughout the country.

Crimes against humanity and possibly genocide against Marsh Arabs and Shi'a Arabs in southern Iraq. Entire populations of villages have been forcibly expelled. Government forces have burned their houses and fields, demolished houses with bulldozers, and undertaken a deliberate campaign to drain and poison the marshes. Thousands of civilians have been summarily executed.

Possible crimes against humanity for killings, ostensibly against political opponents, within Iraq.

As for rape, we'll go and look at another item from the DoS:

Quote[/b] ]Women in Iraq

Iraq is a nation rich in culture, with a long history of intellectual and scientific achievement, especially among its women. However, Saddam Hussein's brutal regime had silenced the voices of Iraq's women, along with its men, through violence and intimidation. In 1979, immediately upon coming to power, Saddam Hussein silenced all political opposition in Iraq and converted his one-party state into a cult of personality. Until Coalition forces ousted the Saddam regime in April 2003, the Iraqi people were systematically repressed, tortured, raped, and terrorized. The regime frequently imprisoned and executed people without any kind of trial. As a woman in Saddam's Iraq, you could have faced:

Beheading. Under the pretext of fighting prostitution, units of "Fedayeen Saddam" (the paramilitary organization led by Uday Hussein, Saddam's eldest son) beheaded in public more than 200 women, dumping their severed heads at their families' doorsteps.

Rape. The regime used rape and sexual assault of women to:

Extract information and forced confessions from detained family members;

Intimidate members of the opposition by sending them videotapes of the rape of female family members; and

Blackmail Iraqi men into future cooperation with the regime.

Torture. Saddam Hussein's thugs routinely tortured and killed female dissidents and the female relatives of Iraqi oppositionists and defectors. Children were imprisoned if they or their parents were not viewed to be faithful supporters of the Saddam regime.

Murder. In 1990, Saddam Hussein introduced Article 111 into the Iraqi Penal Code. This law exempted men from any kind of punishment if they kill their female relatives in defense of their family's honor.

DoD Report on Iraqi War Crimes During the Gulf War

[Balschoiw 0]

Wait a second. You all get on me but it looks you haven´t finished reading my post.

Noone is immune to temptations during military missions. I don´t even count myself out.

The Afghan example was a bad example, right.

I did not mention this massacre earlier. I did mention another massacre that is not mentioned here. I will search for link again.

To Iraq:

Court case against General Franks in Brussels

Quote[/b] ]Twenty victims of war crimes committed by U.S. troops during the recent war against Iraq are filing charges before the federal prosecutor of Belgium for violations of International Humanitarian Law.

The complaint is directed against soldiers—who are not identified at this stage—who have committed war crimes. It mentions General Tommy Franks in particular for ordering war crimes and for not preventing others from committing them or for providing protection to the perpetrators.

The plaintiffs have been seriously injured or have lost relatives as the result of:

- the use of cluster bombs

- attacks on the civilian population including journalists

- acts of aggression against health services and other Iraqi infrastructure

- looting protected by or under orders from the U.S. army.

I am not allowed to post pictures here, but you shouldn´t have a hard time verifying the claims on your own.

These were war crimes, no matter what.

Quote[/b] ]Oh yes, and I'm back. I've been watching, and you've had a free ride for entirely too long with this kind of weak argumentation- the echo chamber ends now.

You as anyone have / had the chance to argue with me whenever you wish. I´m here. I don´t remember my post being "weak argumentation". If you claim so, it´s your opinion.But you will have to prove it to me. I always try to have sources with my posts that are universally accepted.

It´s very lame you come up with some ranting like that now. You have the chance to participate, if you don´t do at the right time, don´t come up months later and dismiss it with generalizations. If you have / had something to say, why didn´t you do it. If you are on the search for an enemy here, go for it. I have plenty of material to share.

As you only believe in BBC here is their link:

US war crimes case 'going ahead'

Quote[/b] ]with such a pitiful support to your incindiery claims, claims which, if I may say so, are entirely more akin to flamebaiting than Bn's more general statements in the Mid-East thread that earned him a PR.

You are certainly not the one to judge this. To accuse me of flamebaiting or comparing to a Jew-Nazi comparison is so displaced as it can be. Don´t play big. The mod´s are here to judge wether something is flaming or not. Not you.

I agree the above example was bad researched by me. My fault. But the incident I wanted to post (couldn´t find a link in the hurry) is this one :

"Afghan massacre: The Convoy of Death"

Serach for it via Google because I don´t want to earn a PR for posting explicit images. You can´t debate this away.

Be careful. I won´t accept anyone calling me a flamebaiter. If you do you have to face consequences.

Here is something about the massacre in Afghanistan I wanted to mention.

Quote[/b] ]Documentary alleges U.S. complicity in Afghan massacre

By Mahvish Khan

Special to the Mercury News

A controversial documentary film, which aired in full for the first time last week on German television, charges that U.S. soldiers were complicit in the mass killing and burial of thousands of Afghan prisoners of war more than a year ago.

``Afghan Massacre: The Convoy of Death,'' directed by former BBC producer and Scottish filmmaker Jamie Doran, presents harrowing footage of human bones protruding from desert mass graves and interviews with eyewitnesses who say the mass killing and summary executions were committed under the watch of U.S. forces.

Washington officials expressed surprise and concern when they learned that the German television network, ARD, had agreed to show the inflammatory film. ``We are upset that a reputable television station would display a documentary that is shown to be inaccurate,'' State Department spokesman Larry Schwartz said.

Pentagon spokesman Lt. Col. David Lapan told the Mercury News that an internal military review found filmmaker Doran's allegations inconclusive. ``We queried all of our teams in that area. None of our servicemen witnessed nor heard of any atrocities committed. There is no need for us to investigate this further,'' he said.

Doran insists that the United States has not conducted a serious look into the charges, something he hopes the United Nations will now carry out. In September, the U.N. special envoy to Afghanistan authorized plans to exhume the mass grave, the first step toward a full investigation.

``Absolutely nothing in our film has been disproved,'' Doran said. ``It would be extremely difficult for U.S. authorities to disprove anything when they have continuously refused to be involved with or to carry out a proper inquiry.

The massacre allegedly took place late last year when Northern Alliance Gen. Abdul Rashid Dostum accepted the surrender of thousands of Taliban members in Kunduz in northern Afghanistan. Many of the captives were imprisoned in stark conditions at Sheberghan prison. But hundreds were reportedly tied and herded into sealed boxcars where they systematically suffocated. The bodies are believed to have been dumped in mass graves in the desert at nearby Dasht-e-Laili.

Initial evidence

Alleged evidence of the massacre first surfaced last January as the result of the efforts of the Boston-based Physicians for Human Rights. In August, Newsweek magazine published an extensive account of the alleged war crimes, based also on their own reporting. The Newsweek account raised the issue of U.S. responsibility for the actions of its allies in the Afghan war. But the magazine said it had found no evidence that American forces had advance knowledge of the killings, witnessed them or could have prevented them.

Doran, who investigated these events beginning last December, found what he believes are credible eyewitnesses who are recorded, on camera, stating that American soldiers were present as hundreds of bodies were cleared from boxcar containers and dumped into the mass graves. The survivors, eyewitnesses say, were executed as U.S. forces stood idle.

Doran aired portions of his film in June, including some of the footage containing the accusations of U.S. involvement. The Pentagon rejected the charges then, too. ``U.S. Central Command looked into this when the allegations first surfaced. They did not substantiate any knowledge, presence or participation of U.S. service members,'' said spokesman Lapan.

Doran has been invited to meet with senior European leaders in an effort to expedite a full investigation with complete eyewitness interviews. His film was aired last week at the German and Italian parliaments and has received coverage in the European media, though it has not received wide mention in the United States.

The office of the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights has recently announced plans to begin probing into the reported atrocities. U.N. officials express concern that potential eyewitnesses have reportedly been detained, tortured and executed. ``What we are talking about here are the people who we believe have information about the circumstances surrounding Dasht-e-Laili, potential witnesses who have been harassed in more or less violent ways,'' said Manoel de Almeida e Silva, U.N. Assistance Mission to Afghanistan spokesman.

Doran's film includes interviews with Northern Alliance soldiers, Afghan truck drivers and civilian observers who say U.S. troops were not only present but also helped try to conceal what happened.

``Everything was under the control of the American commanders -- two or three hundred bodies were put in each container, then they took them to their final destination, and buried them,'' a Northern Alliance soldier told the filmmaker. ``The Americans told the Sheberghan people to get rid of them before satellite pictures could be taken.'' In a coordinated operation, truck drivers reportedly had their vehicles commandeered by armed soldiers. One driver, who transported the sealed boxcars with prisoners inside, said they began to cry for air after about 20 minutes. Northern Alliance commanders ``told us to stop the trucks, and we came down. After that, they shot into the containers. Blood came pouring out. They were screaming inside,'' he said.

Others spoke of American soldiers present during the execution of survivors. ``Some of them were alive,'' said another truck driver recounting what happened when the container doors were unlocked at the mass grave site. ``They were brought here and shot,'' in view of American forces, he alleged in a recorded interview. ``Maybe 30 to 40'' American soldiers were present, he claimed.

``There is not a clear smoking gun in the film itself,'' said James C. Hathaway, a law professor at the University of Michigan, who has previewed the documentary. But the evidence is compelling enough to warrant an investigation. ``As a general rule, eyewitness evidence is considered the best evidence,'' he said. The diversity of the witnesses, including both soldiers and civilians, and the consistency of their accounts adds weight to their testimony, he said.

Excavation planned

Former Amnesty International United Kingdom chair and human rights attorney Andrew McEntee believes the evidence in the film regarding American involvement is at least grounds for further investigation. ``I am not saying they are guilty, but this is a sufficient and necessary basis to investigate,'' he said.

The first step of the investigation, excavation of the mass graves, is scheduled to begin this spring, when the ground thaws. This will provide the death toll, causes of death and possibly identities, said John Heffernan, a research consultant for Boston-based Physicians for Human Rights. Under the auspices of the United Nations, the doctors' group expects to perform autopsies on exhumed bodies.

U.N. officials said they have recently negotiated with Dostum's officers for the release of two witnesses who have been detained in a northern Afghanistan prison. Dostum, who now holds a senior position in the Afghan government, denies that any massacre took place. Doran has obscured eyewitness identities in his film and said he will not release their names because their safety is at risk.

``We must guarantee the protection of the witnesses definitively, not just during the time we interview them, but afterward as well,'' said U.N. official Scott Smith.

Documentary alleges U.S. complicity in Afghan massacre

[Balschoiw 0]

Clashes all over Iraq:

U.N. says better security vital for Iraq elections

Quote[/b] ]Meanwhile, a U.S. soldier was killed in a bomb west of Baghdad and British troops in the south fired rubber bullets to disperse anti-coalition activists.

Quote[/b] ]A bomb explosion near a U.S. military convoy west of Baghdad killed an American soldier, a U.S. official said. The attack occurred northwest of the restive city of Fallujah.

Late today, residents in Fallujah reported heavy gunfire in the city's al-Askari neighborhood. Fighting in the same area on Friday killed a U.S. Marine and at least five Iraqis, including an ABC News cameraman.

...

The fighting came a day after U.S. soldiers in the northern city of Mosul shot and killed four suspected rebels, the military said.

On Sunday, gunmen fired on a convoy carrying a government minister near Mosul, and killed a Canadian and a Briton in another attack.

Also in northern Iraq, the governor of Nineveh province, Ghanem al-Basso, resigned today after being questioned by coalition officials about alleged corruption, a senior U.S. official said. No charges were brought and the official did not elaborate on the allegations. Mosul is the provincial capital of Nineveh.

In Baghdad's Saydiyah neighborhood, a hand grenade was thrown from a car at a police checkpoint, seriously wounding one policeman, witnesses said.

In Baghdad, Carina Perelli, who led the U.N. team, told reporters after a two-hour meeting with Governing Council members that security was key.

"We need to make sure that between now and the 31st of January, there is a modicum of security that will make Iraqi people feel they can go to the polls, that they can run as candidates, without extreme fear," Perelli said.

"We put the expertise and the experience of the U.N. at the disposition of the Iraqi people in terms of the assistance it might need in carrying out this process," she said.

Perelli's team arrived in Baghdad Friday and will stay for several weeks. A second U.N. delegation, headed by top negotiator Lakhdar Brahimi, is expected in early April.

Perelli said the U.N. team, Governing Council and the coalition had to move quickly to meet the election deadline.

"If there is going to be an election on the 31st of January, then all the basic agreements need to be reached for the electoral frame no later than the end of May. Otherwise the date might be compromised," she said.

Mohsen Abdel-Hamid, a Sunni member of the Governing Council, said council members spoke about how to protect the elections. He said the council should set up a committee of Iraqis to oversee the vote.

[bn880 5]

@ Mar. 29 2004,21:48)]Okay, now let's play the source game. You have the World Socialist Web Site, a bastion of level headed thinking that produces articles comparing US actions to Nazi aggression (http://www.wsws.org/articles/2002/sep2002/iraq-s09.shtml), apologist drivel for the abject failures of Marxism (http://www.wsws.org/exhibits/iss-98.htm), and whose maind activity is to present warmed over propagandizing drivel that even Stalin would cringe at as actual news and analysis.

There is nothing wrong with comparing any action to Nazi actions of the past, it is only on this forum that someone has been asking for prefferential treatment for this not to be allowed. As far as I know it is OK to compare US actions on Islam to Nazi germany on Jews. It is just not right to bring Israel into it because that causes someone to realize what's going on, not appropriate.

You are trying to make another big conspiracy by silencing analysis, just like is done with the phrase "war on terror". If people want to compare to Stalin, Hitler or Ghandi they will do so, with the exception I noted above on this forum.

EDIT: Oops, wrong VIP icon in my sig...

[bn880 5]

@ Mar. 29 2004,21:48)]This is what we call propaganda, and I'm dissapointed that you would come calling with such a pitiful support to your incindiery claims, claims which, if I may say so, are entirely more akin to flamebaiting than Bn's more general statements in the Mid-East thread that earned him a PR.

Get off of it! I was PR'd for not following a moderators decision, not because there is anything wrong with making political comparisons in life. Again I state, the rule tha applies on this forum with not being able to compare to Nazi Germany actions stands only in this forum, and not because for some common respect or moral value in general, it is a direct response to someone complaining. So take it easy there, people everywhere can compare what they want to Nazi Germany, stop using it like "the war on terror"

[ralphwiggum 6]

bn880,

we(mods) have discussed this in ask a mod thread, and numerous PMs. Keep pressing that attitude and you will end up like many others who were either perm banned or had to force to control themselves.

and don't bother replying here, but if you want to reply, PM me. I do have a nice set of words, but i just don't have enough indecency to start a flamefest.

[bn880 5]

My comments in ME were used as ammunition for this thread, I replied to that.

I don't have any attitude to press.