The Iraq thread 4

[ralphwiggum 6]

Verdicts are supposed to be based on evidence investigated, not evidence cooked to match the presupposed verdicts, as you repeatedly stress.

you should have told TBA that before they went to war. apparently it doesn't apply to TBA?

[shinRaiden 0]

Verdicts are supposed to be based on evidence investigated, not evidence cooked to match the presupposed verdicts, as you repeatedly stress.

you should have told TBA that before they went to war. apparently it doesn't apply to TBA?

I know that, I was just poking at their arguements with the sticks they handed me. How come they are encouraged to jump to conclusions, and TBA is to be condemned retroactively? I'm complaining about the double-standard.

I personally feel that the whole WMD issue was a PR excuse because TBA didn't feel that there was enough popular support for A) finishing the job, and B) forcing action in the ME via regime change. I do have personal reservations about leadership that has to creatively steer the population, but I'm more concerned about the apathy that allows that to happen.

The only people that know exactly what was known pre-911 and pre-Iraq haven't spoken about the details publically. Yes theres been all sorts of on-camera stuff such as the made-for-TV public sessions of the 911 commission, but there was a good deal of closed door testimony that wasn't publically covered.

Furthermore, the congressional and senate intelligence committees have the clearance and oversight responsibilities over the agencies and classified materials also available to the President and Defense agencies. In light of the rank partisanship on those committees, and the lack of presence by would-be CiC John Kerry, their effectiveness could also be called into question.

[billybob2002 0]

Oops...

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm....igation

Quote[/b] ]

Probe: Iraq U.N. Cash Sent to Bombers' Kin

1 hour, 31 minutes ago U.S. National - AP

By DESMOND BUTLER, Associated Press Writer

NEW YORK - Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) diverted money from the U.N. oil-for-food program to pay millions of dollars to families of Palestinian suicide bombers who carried out attacks on Israel, say congressional investigators who uncovered evidence of the money trail.

The former Iraqi president tapped secret bank accounts in Jordan — where he collected bribes from foreign companies and individuals doing illicit business under the humanitarian program — to reward the families up to $25,000 each, investigators told The Associated Press.

Documents prepared for a Wednesday hearing by the House International Relations Committee outline the new findings about how Saddam funneled money to the Palestinian families.

Investigators examining the oil-for-food program felt it was "important for us to determine whether the profits from his corruption were put toward terrorist purposes," committee chairman Henry Hyde, R-Ill., said of Saddam's well-known financial support of suicide bombers.

Wednesday's hearing, however, will focus on a French bank that handled most of the money for the program. An audit by a U.S. regulatory agency of a small sample of transactions out of the $60 billion U.N. escrow account managed by BNP-Paribas has raised serious questions concerning the bank's compliance with U.S. money laundering laws, investigators said.

"There are indications that the bank may have been noncompliant in administering the oil-for-food program," Hyde said in his statement to AP. "If, true these possible banking lapses may have facilitated Saddam Hussein's manipulation and corruption of the program."

While acknowledging that U.S. regulators have raised routine issues with BNP on compliance with banking laws, a lawyer for BNP said Hyde's statement was unfair.

"No departure from any standard caused or contributed in any way to the abuse at the oil-for-food program," the bank's lead counsel Robert S. Bennett said. "There are simply no connections."

The humanitarian program that let Iraq (news - web sites) trade oil for goods was set up in 1996 to help Iraqis get food, medicine and other items that had been scarce under strict U.N. economic sanctions imposed after the Gulf War (news - web sites). But investigators say Saddam made more than $21.3 billion in illegal revenue under the program as well as by evading the sanctions for more than a decade.

Iraq had thousands of secret bank accounts throughout the world, including over 1,500 in Jordan. Money from kickbacks on oil-for-food deals, illegal oil payments from the Jordanian government and other illicit funds were paid into accounts held by a Jordanian branch of the Iraqi government-owned Rafidain Bank, investigators said.

According to employees of the Iraqi Central Bank and the Rafidain Bank, the former Iraqi ambassador to Jordan, Sabah Yassen, withdrew money from the accounts to make payments ranging from $15,000 to $25,000 to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers, Hyde said.

Palestinians have said Saddam paid more than $35 million to families of Palestinians killed or wounded in the conflict with Israel that began in September 2000. Since then, Palestinians have carried out 117 suicide bombings, killing 494 Israelis and others.

Five congressional panels, including Hyde's, have been pressing a U.N.-appointed independent inquiry to hand over internal U.N. documents for their own oil-for-food probes.

On Tuesday, former Fed chairman Paul Volcker reiterated his independent inquiry's refusal to share documents in a letter to Sen. Norm Coleman (news, bio, voting record), R-Minn. and Carl Levin, D-Mich.,

In the current highly charged atmosphere, Volcker said, the panel wants to avoid release of "potentially misleading and incomplete information that could impair ongoing investigation, distort public perceptions, and violate simple concerns of due process."

At Wednesday's hearing, Hyde's panel will question two BNP executives and plans to transfer documents for a possible investigation to the House Committee on Financial Services.

BNP held the sole escrow account through which all of the more than $60 billion of Iraqi oil revenues generated through the program flowed while it was in place from 1996 to 2003.

BNP also wrote letters of credit for deals for the import of humanitarian goods which were approved by the United Nations (news - web sites) and paid for out of the escrow account.

Investigators said evidence from documents subpoenaed from BNP in July and received from U.S. regulatory agencies suggests that the French bank — which has New York offices — failed to comply with anti-money laundering laws passed under the U.S. Patriot Act in 2001.

"Evidence seems to indicate that in some cases, payments in the oil-for-food program were made by BNP at times with a lack of full proof of delivery for goods and other necessary documents contracted for in the oil-for-food program," Hyde said.

Investigators also said they had evidence BNP illegally allowed letters of credit, or payments for import deals, to be transferred to third parties.

BNP denied the allegations.

"The bank did not have any responsibilities to do due diligence regarding third parties," Bennett said. "Our only client and customer here was the United Nations."

The U.N. Security Council approved all deals under the oil-for-food program, Bennett said.

The House International Relations Committee's subpoenas did not include demands for documents related to the bank's letters of credit, Bennett said.

___

EDITORS: Associated Press writer Edith M. Lederer contributed to this report from the United Nations.

[shinRaiden 0]

Old news, that was public knowledge before even 911.

The numbers here still aren't matching, my understanding was Saddam upped the bounty to $35,000 when Bush told him to comply, but the payouts are still over 10x the number of hits. Maybe Arafat & Co. were trying to scam Saddam, or the money laundering was so bad everyone was confused? Then again, it may have been disbursement to secrete a backup slush fund in the event Saddam had to bail out of town.

[ralphwiggum 6]

Verdicts are supposed to be based on evidence investigated, not evidence cooked to match the presupposed verdicts, as you repeatedly stress.

you should have told TBA that before they went to war. apparently it doesn't apply to TBA?

I know that, I was just poking at their arguements with the sticks they handed me. How come they are encouraged to jump to conclusions, and TBA is to be condemned retroactively? I'm complaining about the double-standard

no, it's called someone knows how to correctly see things. read through Iraq thread 1-3, and most of the things that ppl worried is still going on. they have better analysis of current situation than TBA supporters.

if you want my side to poke things, how come TBA can jump to conclusion, while others can not?

Quote[/b] ]

I personally feel that the whole WMD issue was a PR excuse because TBA didn't feel that there was enough popular support for A) finishing the job, and B) forcing action in the ME via regime change. I do have personal reservations about leadership that has to creatively steer the population, but I'm more concerned about the apathy that allows that to happen.

The only people that know exactly what was known pre-911 and pre-Iraq haven't spoken about the details publically. Yes theres been all sorts of on-camera stuff such as the made-for-TV public sessions of the 911 commission, but there was a good deal of closed door testimony that wasn't publically covered.

and how can you know that what was not discussed is more important? do you have inside source? an intelligence apparatus that supercedes CIA?

funny that when Clinton did something, it was criticized, but when Bush does something, it can be brushed aside with comment 'sensitive intelligence'

[denoir 0]

Even more funny is how he criticizes us for believing that the execution happened, "just" because we sawed it filmed on video - while at the same time he expects us to believe that there was some good excuse for the Iraq war in intelligence that was never shown to the public.

[jackson42 0]

Is the marine supposed to say "Okay, I'll wait until you reach for that gun over there, pick it up, point it at me, then on the count of three we'll see who can pull the trigger faster"?

Is he supposed to hand him a grenade just in case he didn't have the time or munitions to boobytrap himself?

Is he supposed to take off his body armor and helmet to even the odds?

Is he obliged to give first aid to the insurgent to restore him to a 'fair' fighting capacity?

Does he have to strip and clean the insurgent's weapon to match the maintained level of his own weapon?

Does he have to radio his quartermaster to find a Iraqi Republican Guard uniform somewhere to give to the insurgent to make him a bonifide soldier and not a 'civilian'?

You should reread the third paragraph of the 4th geneva convention. Contains some very interesting facts. Oh, or is this a treaty that was not signed by the US like Kyoto or Den Haag? Maybe I missed something.

Thing is: torturing (sic! looky at that!) and executing civilians, surrendered combatants or wounded combatants is a big NO NO. There is absolutely no place for a 'but if he had a bomb' or 'he may have ...', you see?

Well. Second thought. There could be place for a 'but', in the same way like there is a 'but' in Guantanamo: Prisoners are not

regarded as prisoners of war but as captives. And bingo, Geneva does not apply. So this time one could come up with

something like "meta-wounded" or "falludjaing someone's death".

On the other hand this could be seen as a great chance to prove one's - well how shall I put it? - moral values.

Something in the key of "They may be faking their deaths. But we won't shoot them because our ethics in a christian society

forbids it. No matter what they would do in our place."

Sorry my fault. I looked up "moral values" in my dictinonary again and look what it says: "c. gay marriage".

Yes, you know all us commie bastards around the world also feel sorry for the todays newborn babies in Vietnam that are still born with the marks of Agent Orange.

Lucky arab devils, they don't have much trees in Iraq, have they?

So *hearing* something on the TV instantly makes you a credible expert on all the off-camera aspects as well?  

And where exactly did you get your information regarding Reagan? If you birthage in your profile is correct you

can't be able to remember much of the time he was president - that time was mostly gray and filled with abreviations like SALT, START and SDI.

Cheers, j

[denoir 0]

Old news, that was public knowledge before even 911.

Indeed, and what is coneveniently forgotten is that all the other arab countries are doing the same. Incidentally, the biggest contributor is your pal Saudi Arabia.

Also, what they just happen to conveniently forget is that those payments started when Israel started bulldozing the houses of the families of the suicide bombers.

"We rationalized destroying villages in order to save them. We saw America lose her sense of morality as she accepted very cooly a My Lai and refused to give up the image of American soldiers who hand out chocolate bars and chewing gum." -John Kerry

Indeed. I'll give you a good example from this thread:

It was a judgement call on that Marine, and given the current situation, IMO it seemed, not a correct course of action, but at the same time, not the "wrong" course of action.

It doesn't get more simple and clear than this - the cold-blooded execution of an unarmed, wounded prisoner. And yet Harnu thinks that it was "not the "wrong" course of action".

You see how simple it is? - That little step away from any basic moral standards. Take a good look and you'll get a bit better understanding of human nature - and history. This is in no way exclusive to Americans. Exactly the same process was in place when most Germans looked the other way when Jews were persecuted.

How little it takes..

[kerosene 0]

Does he have to radio his quartermaster to find a Iraqi Republican Guard uniform somewhere to give to the insurgent to make him a bonifide soldier and not a 'civilian'?

You cant execute unarmed wounded soldiers either.

If the Rules of Engagement the marines are issued are in violation of the geneva convention, well then that a whole different issue.

This'll all be water under the bridge on a week or two anyway, theres no way any thing will come of this, if its o.k to shoot up a wedding party, why is this going to make any difference?

Its makes me sick that there are people who will defend any action at all if it was done by their own, "we'll I was born in this country, therefore everything it does must be right" excellent way to look at the world.

[DarkLight 0]

Pffff soooo typical...

always the same bs

these days rules are only for the weak, those who have power don't give a fuck about rules i guess...

I've seen that a billion times already in this fucked up "war against terrorism" (=> haha)...

The powerful can just ignore the rules and do their thing without being punished. And the best part is that some ppl actually think stuff like this is justified...

You guys are the invading force, if you're too fucking afraid of a wounded man then get out of iraq... Saying stuff like he might've had a bomb is bullshit. It's your own fault that you're in iraq, now be a man and deal with it instead of acting like a bunch of triggerhappy jackasses...

[turms 0]

Quote[/b] ]WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Officers are investigating the deaths of other Iraqis seen on the same videotape that depicted a Marine shooting an apparently wounded and unarmed insurgent in Falluja, U.S. military officials said Tuesday.

CNN

[Tovarish 0]

The Marine in question really screwed the pooch here. Not only did he break the laws of warfare, and was dumb enough to do it on camera, but he's provided the insurgents with some nice propaganda. Not only is this likely to win some simpathy for the insurgents amongst Iraqis, but I'm sure many will now be counting out surrender as an option..

[kerosene 0]

Well reports said the other 3 had been treated had died from fresh wounds sustained afterwards, and there was already a sqaud of marines in the building, before the guy who did the shooting turned up.

[Tovarish 0]

Quote[/b] ]Police Say 31 Iraqi Cops Were Kidnapped

38 minutes ago Middle East - AP

BAGHDAD, Iraq - Police said Wednesday that 31 Iraqi policemen have been kidnapped in western Iraq (news - web sites) while returning from training in Jordan.

The police officers were ambushed Sunday in the town of Rutba near the Jordanian border, said a police spokesman in the city of Karbala, south of Baghdad.

"There was an attack on a hotel occupied by policemen coming back from training in Jordan," he said.

The spokesman, speaking on condition of anonymity, cited a Karbala policeman who returned from Rutba as saying that an armed group had kidnapped the policemen, many of whom were from Diyala province.

Insurgents have repeatedly targeted new members of the Iraqi security forces that the U.S. military has been training. On Oct. 23, gunmen ambushed a group of Iraqi soldiers returning home from a training course on a road east of Baghdad. Around 50 of the soldiers — who were unarmed — were killed execution-style with gunshots to the back of the head.

Also last month, nine Iraqi policemen returning from a training course in Jordan were ambushed and killed on their way home to Karbala.

The bus they were traveling in was attacked Oct. 16 in the insurgent hotbed town of Latifiyah, 25 miles south of Baghdad.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm....dnapped

Why do these people still travel unarmed?

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

Me got a question.

If you are a soldier and you fear that a wounded soldier may hide a grenade or gun under his body. What is the correct action to take? What is the Standard Operating Procedure.

I assume I would have a very loose finger too. I wouldnt be the one to shoot but I would have to ask my superior first.

--------------------------------------------------------

What I find very very disturbing is that every teen from the age of 15 to men age 60 were not allowed to leave the city before the battle,

...and now we hear everyone who remained in the city was bascially a fighter, no real civilian casualties.

Wait let me think that over again. So basically either every man in Faludja was fighting the US forces or they shot every man because age 15-60 means being a terorist.

Do that to my hometown and I would first try to exit the city, but being pushed back because I am 27 I would grap a rifle, fight for my life, and definetly booby-trap myself.

This battle declared all men to be terorists or turned all iraqis into resistance fighters.

Let me give you the german solution, since I guess we are more competent. Seperate men from women, kill the men first and use the women to rebuild what you have destroyed before. SS standard procedure!

[billybob2002 0]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm....tion_dc

Quote[/b] ]

Top Stories - Reuters

Reuters

Iraqis Angry, Distraught at Aid Worker's Murder

21 minutes ago

By Mussab al-Khairalla

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Iraqis reacted with anger and disbelief Wednesday to news that British-Iraqi aid worker Margaret Hassan, who worked in Iraq (news - web sites) for decades before being kidnapped a month ago, had been killed by her captors.

Irish-born Hassan, 59, moved to Iraq more than 30 years ago after marrying an Iraqi engineer. She learned Arabic and became a pillar of support in local communities, often helping the needy in the face of opposition during Saddam Hussein (news - web sites)'s regime.

Those who knew her, worked with her or were helped by her described Hassan as a formidable woman who went about her work with determination. She helped the disabled, the orphaned and those without water or sanitation calmly and efficiently.

One of the hospitals she regularly supported was a spinal cord clinic in Baghdad run by Qayder al-Chalabi, who said her loss was a huge blow to all Iraqis.

The killers "made a very big mistake. This was the wrong person," he told Reuters Wednesday.

"I cannot imagine that these things could happen to her because she was a very humanitarian person. She felt our suffering, she understood the suffering of the Iraqi people.

"We need to admire and remember her. We must have a ceremony every year to remember her," he said, adding that he believed a statue should be erected in her honor.

Hassan was kidnapped Oct. 19 as she was being driven to work in Baghdad, where she was the director of the local operation of aid organization Care International.

A video released to Arabic news channel Al Jazeera showed a hooded figure shooting a blindfolded woman in the head.

Hassan's husband and British foreign office officials have said they believe the video tape is "probably genuine" and her family has said they believe Margaret Hassan is dead.

'SAVAGE BEASTS'

Militant Islamists have waged a campaign of kidnappings and killings to try to force U.S.-led troops and foreigners to leave Iraq. More than 120 foreigners have been kidnapped in Iraq since April and more than three dozen have been killed.

If confirmed, Hassan would be the first foreign woman killed.

Several foreigners are still believed to be held, including at least one other woman, Polish-Iraqi Teresa Borcz Khalifa. Others include two American men and two French journalists.

"These people are savage beasts," said a man working close to the now shuttered Care offices in Baghdad. He would not give his name for fear of reprisals.

"The whole idea of kidnapping is completely wrong. If people want to resist the occupation they can fight American troops, not kill Iraqis or innocent foreigners," he said.

A campaign to gather information on Hassan's whereabouts was recently launched in Baghdad, with a picture of Hassan holding a sick Iraqi child posted on billboards around the city.

The billboards read: "Margaret Hassan is truly a daughter of Iraq ... She is against the occupation."

"She came to help us and give us prosperity," said Hashim Hassan, a 41-year-old security guard at a surgery. "These terrorists are outsiders ruining Iraq's image. Iraqis would not destroy their own country."

Unemployed Yusuf Ali, 35, said attacking or kidnapping aid workers was a development that would only harm the nation.

"The enemies of Iraq are attacking power stations, oil pipelines and kidnapping foreigners and aid workers at a time when we need them most. Aid workers would be flowing into Falluja right now if they didn't fear decapitation," he said.

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

Quote[/b] ]Aid workers would be flowing into Falluja right now if they didn't fear decapitation

and if they were allowed to enter it.

[billybob2002 0]

Update on the police story...

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm....iraq_dc

Quote[/b] ]

POLICE HELD UP

Iraq's fledgling security forces, set up under U.S. control to replace Saddam's discredited authorities, were targeted again. But for once, a group of unarmed police recruits was able to outwit guerrillas who have killed dozens of their comrades.

Held up by gunmen at a desert hotel in Rutba on their way home from training in Jordan, 35 recruits from the southern, Shi'ite city of Kerbala hid their police papers and pretended to be businessmen, Kerbala's police chief told Reuters. After three hours, the gunmen departed.

[kerosene 0]

I dont understand why Iraqi cops arent issued with a gun at all times, I know you could say they may run of with the gun, but the insurgents clearly arent facing a shortage of small arms so what differnce will it make?

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]I dont understand why Iraqi cops arent issued with a gun at all times, I know you could say they may run of with the gun, but the insurgents clearly arent facing a shortage of small arms so what differnce will it make?

Because they are recruits and not cops.

[Duke_of_Ray 0]

The Marine in question really screwed the pooch here. Not only did he break the laws of warfare, and was dumb enough to do it on camera, but he's provided the insurgents with some nice propaganda. Not only is this likely to win some simpathy for the insurgents amongst Iraqis, but I'm sure many will now be counting out surrender as an option..

Rules in war? Hah! This is a different type of war and these guys we are fighting are not soldiers. They do not fall under the "laws" of war. I am proud of that marine. I hate to say it, but he did what had to be done. These guys want give up, it is a sad thing but the truth. There are no rules in this war, but kill or be killed. They would have done the same thing to us, so I really do not care what we do to them. We just need to let the soldiers fight this war, and let em do whatever needs to be done.

[EiZei 0]

There are no rules in this war, but kill or be killed. They would have done the same thing to us, so I really do not care what we do to them. We just need to let the soldiers fight this war, and let em do whatever needs to be done.

So why are you fighting in the first place if you are not giving a shit about the welfare of the local populace? Yet another fine example of compassionate conservatism.

[Duke_of_Ray 0]

There are no rules in this war, but kill or be killed. They would have done the same thing to us, so I really do not care what we do to them. We just need to let the soldiers fight this war, and let em do whatever needs to be done.

So why are you fighting in the first place if you are not giving a shit about the welfare of the local populace? Yet another fine example of compassionate conservatism.

I wish this was worth responding too. Oh wait.............

[EiZei 0]

There are no rules in this war, but kill or be killed. They would have done the same thing to us, so I really do not care what we do to them. We just need to let the soldiers fight this war, and let em do whatever needs to be done.

So why are you fighting in the first place if you are not giving a shit about the welfare of the local populace? Yet another fine example of compassionate conservatism.

I wish this was worth responding too. Oh wait.............

If you cannot be arsed to do anything else but to troll and flame instead of even semi-rational discussion I suggest that you crawl under that rock you came from.

[Duke_of_Ray 0]

There are no rules in this war, but kill or be killed. They would have done the same thing to us, so I really do not care what we do to them. We just need to let the soldiers fight this war, and let em do whatever needs to be done.

So why are you fighting in the first place if you are not giving a shit about the welfare of the local populace? Yet another fine example of compassionate conservatism.

I wish this was worth responding too. Oh wait.............

If you cannot be arsed to do anything else but to troll and flame instead of even semi-rational discussion I suggest that you crawl under that rock you came from.

Will you help me lift it up?

Did I say I di not care about the civilians? No, I never said that. Yes, I do care more about our soldiers, but I also care about the civilians. I am talking about the terrorist, the people we are fighting. Everyone of them is a terrorist. I hate to say it, but the only way to beat them is to kill them.