|
|
Who Murdered 32 Iraqi Children? (Truth Comes Out)
By: Layth on: 19.07.2005 [15:45 ] (18019 reads)
|
(2609 bytes) [c]
|
|
Temporary offline
by Iranian-Shi'ite on 17.07.2005 [12:54 ]
|
|
|
Typical of U.S. atrocities.
Everyone should hear of this.
|
by Iranian-Shi'ite on 17.07.2005 [13:04 ]
|
|
|
I used to wonder why God would make a thing as terrible as Hell.
After seeing the crimes of the USA, I can see why a thing such as Hell is necessary for justice. The evils of the USA make it clear why such a thing as Hell was made.
|
by One on 17.07.2005 [13:13 ]
|
|
|
This must be translated into several languages, distributed and spread worldwide. It must be a small contribution against the usan's murders and lies. It's not proper to keep this information unavailable. This is one more of the terrible usan terrorist crimes.
Should it be fully translated into English, I could do the Spanish version and spread it from my country, with the arab link for anyone who wants to check the source.
QSVT!
|
by Yasis on 17.07.2005 [15:11 ]
|
|
|
The US bastards had already caused the death of millions of Iraqi children under the sanctions regime imposed by the US bastards at the end of the 1991 Gulf war.
From the link:
ht tp://www.davidicke.net/newsroom/america/usa/092801e.html
Stahl: "We have heard that a half a million children have died because of sanctions against Iraq. I mean that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And--you know, is the price worth it?"
Albright: "I think this is a very hard choice, but the price--we think the price is worth it."
Day of reckoning for the american bastards will come.
|
by verve on 17.07.2005 [16:40 ]
|
|
|
we, as children, were warned sternly to stay away from occupation soldiers and the RUC. Many of us who detested occupation stayed a 'stones' throw away. Palestinian children are taught to stay a stones throw away from the IDF, Iraqi parents mush teach their children likewise. When soldiers hand out candy to children, the locals should evacuate the area immediatly.
The blast dug a crater, I'll bet in the comming days we'll hear from locals of some seeing a rocket. Anyway, as a parent, I'd have to sholder some of the blame for not teaching my kids proper invasion etiquete. They have had over two years to prepare the kids. Something is severly wrong with the current picture.
|
by stopwar on 17.07.2005 [18:21 ]
|
|
|
Protest planned for coming Tuesday. See "Around the World"
|
by Finn on 17.07.2005 [21:58 ]
|
|
|
In my country pedofiles who "hunt" for children around schools and palygrounds are called candy men. They try to win the trust of children by giving them candy.
What ever was the the "truth" around this latest children killing is in the end Americans fault. American soldiers with children around them had been targeted already many times before. So the US soldiers knew very well that they put the children in great danger by collecting them around the military vechicles. If they would have wanted to act safely and in a deasent way they could have donated the schoolbags, toys and candies directly to the local schools or dropped them in a transparent plastic bag on the street. Real children lowing candy men these US soldiers.
|
by Iranian-Shi'ite on 18.07.2005 [00:23 ]
|
|
|
Why are privates shown videos of U.S. military massacres while playing Metallica in the background, thus causing us to scream with the joy of the killer instinct as brown bodies are obliterated? Why do privates answer every command with an enthusiastic, "kill!!" instead of, "yes, sir!!" like it is in the movies? Why do we sing cadences like these?:
"Throw some candy in the school yard, watch the children gather round. Load a belt in your M-60, mow them little bastards down!!" and "We're gonna rape, kill, pillage and burn, gonna rape, kill, pillage and burn!!"
These chants are meant to motivate the troops; they enjoy it, salivate from it, and get off on it. If one repeats these hundreds of times, one eventually begins to accept them as paradigmatically valid.
ht tp://www.trinicenter.com/selfnews/arc9-2002.html
|
by Iranian-Shi'ite on 18.07.2005 [00:24 ]
|
|
|
"Throw some candy in the school yard, watch the children gather round. Load a belt in your M-60, mow them little bastards down!!" and "We're gonna rape, kill, pillage and burn, gonna rape, kill, pillage and burn!!"
|
by Iranian-Shi'ite on 18.07.2005 [00:26 ]
|
|
|
The Israeli army has killed 15 Palestinian civilians for violating the curfew in West Bank cities reoccupied since June, and 12 of the dead were children, the Israeli rights group B'Tselem said in a report published today.
ht tp://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/10/16/1034561214845.html?oneclick=true
|
by Iranian-Shi'ite on 18.07.2005 [00:39 ]
|
|
|
Seven Palestinian Children Killed in Strawberry Fields by Israeli Anti-Personnel Shells
Israeli anti-personnel shells, which throw out thousands of metal darts in a deadly cloud that rips apart everything it encounters, killed seven children between the ages of ten and 17 in a strawberry field in northern Gaza yesterday. Dr. Mohamed Sultan of the Beit Lahiya hospital said eleven were also wounded, four critically. Two of the survivors had double leg amputations, another a single leg amputation.
ht tp://prague.tv/forum/viewpost.php?id=3091
|
by Iranian-Shi'ite on 18.07.2005 [00:41 ]
|
|
|
U.S. troops shot and killed at least ten Iraqi civilians – five of them small children – in a vehicle at checkpoint Monday in southern Iraq near Karbala, the Washinton Post reported today.
he Pentagon is turning to the Israelis for advice on urban warfare based on their experience in invading Palestinian cities like Jenin last year.
ht tp://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/2003/03
|
by Iranian-Shi'ite on 18.07.2005 [00:42 ]
|
|
|
The Pentagon is turning to the Israelis for advice on urban warfare based on their experience in invading Palestinian cities like Jenin last year.
|
by verve on 18.07.2005 [02:22 ]
|
|
|
occupation of Iraq is a carbon copy of how Israel deals with Palestine. The apple doen't fall far from the tree. Israel is providing the bulk of the lead on the merc companies working in Iraq. Both countries and all their occupants are worthy of being removed from the planet, correction, the entire universe, permanently. Toss in the imperial bastards from the house of Windsor and those who enable them to continue to destroy innocent lives and complete ecosystems all over the earth.
|
by adil_nazeem on 18.07.2005 [04:12 ]
|
|
|
and all countries which support this war Directly/indirectly to crush Muslims Minorities in their own countries eg Philippines,Thailand,India,Chechnya,Bosnia,Kosovo will all lose.
The allies which supported the creation if ISRAEL from Palestine (France,Germany,aUSTRALIA,Usa) should all collapse .
The days of these stooges of USA /pigs who rule these countries eg India, Thailand, Australia are numbered.
|
by Neal on 18.07.2005 [07:52 ]
|
|
|
The killing of children is unforgivable.
I saw those two news items and thought it was a setup.
Shit when these guys invade New Zealand I'm going to have a go.
It's time to keep the children away from these "slugs".
Too many Iraqis still love them.
|
by stopwar on 18.07.2005 [09:16 ]
|
|
|
based on the Spanish civil war.
Turning a blind eye to fascism inevitably allows it to spread negative emotion, gain new recruits, and subjugate the population.
|
by stopwar on 18.07.2005 [09:20 ]
|
|
|
You would be following the bold tradition of the International Brigades - except that they went one stage further - going to the assistance of another country that was being overrun by fascism.
The "foreign fighters" that are helping the resistance in Iraq appear to be following the principles of the International Brigades - but of course it is not in the interests of the invading powers and their puppet media to acknowledge this.
|
by paul pawlowski on 18.07.2005 [13:40 ]
|
|
|
Print it — 50 copies — hand it out at meetings — to expose what they are doing IN OUR NAME.
|
by greg-aussie on 18.07.2005 [14:48 ]
|
|
|
Hi there :) Here are my thoughts on heaven and hell.
It's true is it not, pain and suffering are ever present potentials in life, as are peace and happiness ever present potentials in life? They are two intrinsically opposing states of our own being, yes?. One is a state of being at ease and comfort within our Self, the other a state of being in dis-ease and turmoil within our Self, yes?
Perhaps, then these two intrinsically opposing states of our being (literally within us) are to guide us to know what is intrinsically 'good' for us and what is intrinsically 'injurious' to us? For without a deep gut-felt form of feedback perhaps we could not know what is healthy thought and action and unhealthy thought and action?
Heaven could then be a term to describe - healthy thought and action which harmonizes the forces within us and around us, bringing peace and stability to Self and to All; whereas hell could be a term to describe - unhealthy thought and action which causes chaos and disharmony of the forces within us and around us.
Heaven could the description for the prolonged state of being at peace with one's Self and one's environment, whereas hell could be the description for the prolonged state of being at war/dis-ease with one's Self and environment. Yes?
The way I see it, we are free to choose either state of being, however this freedom does not come without a price. The price is our time and effort in learning, discovery and the gaining of knowledge, in being aware, attentive and perceptive, and in passionately discerning the truth from the false.
The first lesson of life is so basic and fundamental it often goes completely unnoticed by many, that is, to learn we do actually have a choice, and to learn that this universe (physical AND spiritual) does proceed according to strict absolute universal law.
To be free (for example to fly a spacecraft free of earth's gravity and land it on the moon) human beings must understand and obey the absolute laws of physics of this physical universe.. in other words to be free we must learn, understand AND obey the laws of physics of this universe that govern us.
In the same way, to be spiritually-psychologically free and at peace, we similiarly must learn, understand and obey the absolute laws of the spiritual-psychological God-Self.
Freedom then, is not foolish disregard of these absolute laws of life, to the contrary, freedom is the very recognition of AND living of these universal laws.
To end, I believe, ultimately ALL people are good, however, clearly not all of us are manifesting our goodness at present here on plane earth. The idea I believe, is, for us All (eventually) to learn that we do have a choice in the state of our being (whether of hellish experience or of heavenly experience). We do have the freedom of choice to learn the laws of God-Self-Absolute-Universe-Life and to live in accordance with those absolute laws and thus enjoy the freedoms therein (re: the scientists who build space-craft in absolute accordance with the laws of physics are free to enjoy escaping earth's gravity to explore the heavens above) and we ALSO have the freedom to disregard these basic lessons of life, to create chaos and havoc within the Self and within our environment.
Thus, the states of heaven and hell are both intrinsic possibilities within us all. Yes?
Does God personally banish a person to Hell? Or does oneself banish oneself to Hell through ignorance and foolishness? And lastly, is the experience of Hell for eternity? I doubt it, I cannot believe so. I believe there is hope for All of us.. actually, I believe it is a certainty we All will one day be free and at peace with our Self and All others.
Lastly, we All have the freedom to hasten or delay the day of the arrival of our freedom.
|
by Melun-can on 18.07.2005 [16:05 ]
|
|
|
"If it happens that these means kill both the intended fighting nonbelievers and the unintended from women, children, and nonbelievers, what the scholars referred to as collateral damage, then this is permissible even if it leads to killing a number of Muslims that happen to be near the scenes of operations for some reason or another and it was not possible to avoid killing them and distinguish between them and the intended fighting nonbelievers. There is no doubt that killing a Muslim soul is an evil act, but sometimes you cannot avoid this evil act when fighting a bigger evil which is giving up jihad altogether." - Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
Zarqawi claimed responsibility for a very similar attack:
- Sept. 30, 2004: A series of bombs in Baghdad's al-Amel neighborhood kill 35 children and seven adults as U.S. troops hand out candy at a government ceremony to inaugurate a new sewage treatment plant.
ht tp://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-5147340,00.html
Public support for terrorist groups has gone down due to the large numbers of innocent Muslims they've killed. Zarqawi probably realizes this and is trying to change his methods, but the situation cannot be entirely under his control. Granted, handing out candy to children is a hollow gesture, but its intent is to develop a rapport with the civilian population. The insurgency and the terrorists have the greatest motivation to stop that relationship from forming. So they kidnap and decapitate and bomb mosques and do all they can to keep the moderate public afraid to cooperate with the Americans. There is absolutely no reason for the Americans to draw this negative attention to themselves.
Some US troops are essentially insane from the terrible things they've done, and seen. I personally know soldiers who've unintentionally killed dozens of civilians, and they struggle every day to cope with that reality. I know some who've turned their anger at themselves, or at the war in general into hatred and racism as a way of dehumanizing those they've killed. So I don't discount entirely the possibility that US soldiers have killed innocent Iraqis intentionally. What I dispute from this article, and the comments that followed, and the general sentiment of many posters to this site, is the idea that such atrocities are part of the strategy of the US.
The goal of the US soldier above all else is to complete his mission and return home safely and quickly. His mission is defined as providing security and fighting the insurgency until the Iraqi forces are capable of doing so themselves. Killing innocent civilians is contrary to that goal. Also, in this specific incident, credible reports continue to indicate that one US soldier was killed and several were wounded.
I'm not voicing my support for the war, however. I believe going into Iraq was a mistake because it has given the terrorists the ability and motivation to try and bog down US forces by doing things exactly like this. I'm also sickened by the oft-repeated notion that Americans are fighting 'over there' so that we don't have to fight 'over here'. I believe the situation is much more complicated than the neocon strategists claimed it would be. While I do what I can in my country to take the power back from them, and restore honor and credibility to my government, I would hope the Muslims around the world are doing the same to isolate and marginalize the radical Islamic fundamentalists who wish to murder and oppress in the name of religion. The peaceful majority of Muslims around the world should be our allies because we share a common enemy.
Terror is the only source of power for some. Unfortunately those with power in the US believe that the only answer to terrorism is war. The rest of us are caught in the middle. Some closer to the fire than others. With only our voices, and our votes to try and bring about change, we must unite and understand one another so that we can rise against these extremists.
Beautiful words, greg-aussie!
|
by stopwar on 18.07.2005 [16:27 ]
|
|
|
Many on this site believe that Zarqawi, like Al Quieda is a made up name to ease the apportionment of blame.
Before Fallujah 2, the people of Fallujah said that had never heard of Zarqawi - and of course this was never published in the west, save for independent websites. The US subsequently blew up Fallujah on the pretext that they were getting Zarqawi, and because no-one much in the west knew the extent of the lied, many believed them.
Here is that letter from the people of Fallujah:
ht tp://www.iraq-war.ru/article/29014
|
by paul pawlowski on 18.07.2005 [17:17 ]
|
|
|
Was it Army USA who did this monstrous frame-up?
I don't think so. Army USA is not trained to do things like that.
No dollars would make an american do this.
Army USA has no safe house to train monstrous criminals like that.
But terror-plotting NEWS NEWS NEWS-making safe-house TelAviv
could do this for Israel — do this to turn Iraq and the world against
the Resistance.
If the believing world believe that Resistance did it — Sharon wins and Bush Blair rewards Sharon for job well done.
But if the believing world disbelieves — Sharon lost — Bush Blair
disown Sharon — we The People win.
Blood of Brits is dripping from Blair hands — thats TREASON.
I want Blair answer TREASON in court of Law.
|
by Atheist on 18.07.2005 [17:26 ]
|
|
|
"Footage: Recent Attacks Against US Forces Inside Iraq
Here is a compliation of three clips from al-Jazeera that show recent attacks being carried out against US forces, including a direct hit to a humvee, inside the Iraqi quagmire. Please be patient as this wmv file downloads to your computer. More..."
ht tp://www.jihadunspun.com/intheatre_external.php?article=103568&list=/home.php&
Comment: A small battery-charging device named "STANDHBS" was filmed in Iraq. It was seen on a road. Was it responsible for charging a roadside bomb on the video? "STANDHBS" leads to a company at Shenzhen, China. The company's name is Stand Power Industrial Co., Ltd. Its website is
ht tp://www.standbattery.com
Something is getting too fishy. Seems like too many companies around the world, includes U.S., are implicated in creating a lot of Iraqi mess.
|
by ohm on 18.07.2005 [18:01 ]
|
|
|
Alot of posters here believe that the incident is a broader stratey by the occupation and its clab iraqi units, cause it is what it is. Your sympathies to the U.S. soldier and its emotional impact upon his/her psyche is of no condolence to the victims of their UNINTENTIONAL kills, whatre you trying say, The soldiers activated the bomb while trying to deactivate it causing the death of one soldier and children, thus labeling it a ACCIDENT. How does that change anything?Funny thing is , theres 10s of 1000s of the accidents in IRAQ, so when does it stop being viewed as an accident and starts being treated as what it is, A CRIME ?
|
by Layth on 18.07.2005 [18:34 ]
|
|
|
The criminal occupation and its masters are responsible for each and every death in Iraq simply by their presence.
As for Zarqawi, Al-Qaeda, and all the other 'booga booga' characters that Rumsfeld and monkey boy Bush throw out, they are just that: 'tools of propaganda being used by the occupation to hide their criminal actions'.
May God bless and streangthen the Resistance, while bringing shame and retribution to the occupation and their helpers/allies/supporters.
|
by Chris_Salam on 18.07.2005 [18:35 ]
|
|
|
.
|
by Peter on 18.07.2005 [18:37 ]
|
|
|
Joe Vialls has passed away.
ht tp://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/print.asp?ID=3361
God Bless you Joe RIP.
|
by stopwar on 19.07.2005 [03:47 ]
|
|
|
.
|
by stopwar on 19.07.2005 [04:54 ]
|
|
|
Link should have read:
ht tp://www.propagandamatrix.com/blair_protection.html
Although the previous one (linked completely by accident, and nothing to do with Mike James) is quite a shocker as well.
|
by Melun-can on 19.07.2005 [15:31 ]
|
|
|
I think he's little more than a boogey man... and may not exist at all. Also, Al Qaeda is likely not the tightly orchestrated international mafia organization that the fear mongers in power would like us to believe. However, as the bombings in London, Iraq & elsewhere indicate... there are terrorists, and they will fight under the name Al Qaeda. There are people who will cut off heads, and slaughter civilians like 'Zarqawi' advocates, and there are people who will follow and emulate his example, even if he does not exist. If it's believable that people are willing to follow this example, why is it unbelievable that people are willing to set this example?
I sympathize with American soldiers less than Iraqi civilians because they volunteered to be where they are... but I am sympathetic to anyone caught up in this terrible conflict from New York to Palestine to Beslam to Bali... because they are all fighting and dying in a war for the power of those who do not fight. Whether it's Bush, Rumsfield, Bin Laden, Yahweh or Allah.
As to the question of whether or not these attacks are being carried out by American forces, against themselves, and innocent children in order to divide Iraq... when the mission of every service person I've heard from has been to stabilize the country... well, it just doesn't add up. I see a lot of speculation here about potential motives that don't quite make sense... and very little evidence to support those theories. The Phoenix Program was something different. Horrible, and mostly unsuccessful, it would not be wise to emulate, and would hope we've grown beyond that, although I don't doubt such assassinations have occurred in Iraq. The assault on Fallujah would be closer to those kinds of tactics... tantamount to the razing of villages in Vietnam. The difference is that I do not believe the US military would use suicide bombers, IED's, etc. targeting themselves, and innocent civilians only to frame an otherwise benevolent insurgency.
One of my closest friends was in Iraq investigating suicide bombings... and I can tell you, it wasn't the Mossad, Israel, the Americans, or anyone else other than fundamentalists whose religious convictions told them they would be rewarded for their crimes in the afterlife, or Iraqi patriots who believed it to be their duty to expel the invading forces, whatever the cost.
There's nothing I could say to convince some of you that America is simply looking out for its own interests, rather than those of Israel. Or that the Jews, Zionists, or whatever you want to call them, are not responsible for every explosion in Iraq... but it's a viewpoint which I feel deserves to be represented.
|
by stopwar on 19.07.2005 [16:07 ]
|
|
|
Like many of us, you've come to the conclusion yourself that Zarqawi and Al Quieda are just media buzz words to provoke hate and fear.
However, in a climate of bombings, it seems that everyone with a motive COULD get involved because of the unlikelihood of getting caught, and therefore they evade justice.
Who created the climate of hate and mistrust where bombings could flourish? They are ultimately the ones responsible.
|
by Iranian-Shi'ite on 19.07.2005 [17:16 ]
|
|
|
Melun-can: "As to the question of whether or not these attacks are being carried out by American forces, against themselves, and innocent children in order to divide Iraq... when the mission of every service person I've heard from has been to stabilize the country... well, it just doesn't add up."
Right, because the people you met represented the policy makers making the decisions behind closed doors in the pentagon, right? The people you know represent all of the CIA spooks who operate clandestine activities in Iraq. And a spook would tell you the truth about targetting civillians anyways.
Melun-can: "I see a lot of speculation here about potential motives that don't quite make sense... and very little evidence to support those theories."
If you had read carefully, you would have seen well reasoned arguments that made plenty of sense. Are the Sunnis going to hit Shi'ite temples that are holy and sacred to them also? Are the Sunnis going to try to push away potential support from the Shi'ite and push the Shi'ite into the arms of the invaders?
But the U.S. wouldn't want to prevent the Shi'ite from sympathising with the Sunnis resistance?
Oh, and your theories, they ARE pure speculation without reasoned support. Read about operation Northwoods.
"The Phoenix Program was something different. "
Garbage!
The Phoenix program was the modus operandi of the U.S. that they've used in the Philipines, El-Salvador death squads, and other parts of the world. That's how the USA acts.
And you think that the USA has grown beyond that? As if it were something merely childish that required maturity? What plannet are you from. How dare you insinuate that such acts of bestial murder were mere acts of childishness. They were acts of indescribable evil from a nation that has matured fully into its evil.
The Phoenix program was representative of the USA's typical policy.
Melun-can "The difference is that I do not believe the US military would use suicide bombers, IED's, etc. targeting themselves, and innocent civilians only to frame an otherwise benevolent insurgency."
Oh, the USA would hire Nazi scientists to torture its own children in mind control experiments intended to induce multiple-personalities in operation MKultra, but it wouldn't target innocent civillians?
The USA would inject its own people with Syphillis in Alabama, but it wouldn't attack Iraqi civillians?
The USA would expose its soldiers to agent orange and depleted uranium (knowing full well its effects), and then deny the effects that it had on them, but it wouldn't target innocent Iraqi civillians?
The USA would use death squads in El-Salvador to hit villages friendly to the U.S. backed government in order to blame it on the rebels, but the U.S. would not hit innocent civillians in Iraq to blame it on the resistance?
The USA would lie to start wars in Iraq and Vietnam, knowing full well that it would kill many of its own soldiers, but the USA would not target innocent civillians?
Roosevelt would order Navy commander of the Far East desk, Arthur McCollum to initiate a plan that would provoke Japan to attack the U.S., but the U.S. would not attack innocent civillians?
The FBI would torture and asphyxiate and murder women and children in Texas by injecting tear gas into an enclosed space where they were hiding and saturating the air with CS gas for hours until they died or were paralyzed; but the U.S. would not target innocent civillians in Iraq?
The U.S. National Gaurd would shoot peaceful protesters in Kent state who were speaking out against the Vietnam war, but the U.S. would not target innocent civillians in Iraq?
It's people like you who give oppressors a free hand to obliterate people's lives. shame on you.
The USA would raze cities into the ground in Dresden, Tokyo, and Fallujah, it would nuke Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but it would not target civillians in order to blame the resistance? Even though it had done similar things in El-Salavador and Nicaragua?
The U.S. recruits are taught to chant songs glorifying killing innocent children, but then the U.S. would not target civillians?
Your recruits are singing songs like, "Throw some candy in the school yard, watch the children gather round . . . mow them little bastards down!"
Melun-can: "One of my closest friends was in Iraq investigating suicide bombings... and I can tell you, it wasn't the Mossad, Israel"
Right, because Mossad would make it so obvious that it was involved. They wouldn't use decades of espionage experience in order to fool investigations into making it look like it was done by whom Mossad wanted it to look like it was done by.
Melun-can: "anyone else other than fundamentalists whose religious convictions told them they would be rewarded for their crimes in the afterlife, or Iraqi patriots who believed it to be their duty to expel the invading forces, whatever the cost."
In hitting invader forces, yes. But in hitting Iraqi civillians, the religion says that they would go to Hell. So, if they were religiously motivated then they would not harm Iraqi civillians. But the USA would do such a thing in order to blame the resistance.
Melun-can: "There's nothing I could say to convince some of you that America is simply looking out for its own interests, rather than those of Israel."
Well, you could prove that there isn't an 800 pound Gorrilla running around Washington known as AIPAC along with several other extremely powerful pro-Israeli lobbies.
You could explain why U.S. policy in the Middle East has been detrimental to U.S. oil-interests but beneficial to Israel's imperialist interests (Isolating oil-rich Arabs in order to veto U.N. resolutions against Israel does not make for self-interest. Enraging Arabs by helping Israel occupy Lebanon does not make for U.S. interests.)
Melun-can: "Jews, Zionists, or whatever you want to call them, are not responsible for every explosion in Iraq.."
first, Torah true Judaism forbids Zionism. Jusaism is not the same as Zionism, and is infact mutually exclusive.
second, The explosions against occupying invaders are usually done by the resistance - but the resistance does not target Iraqi civillians and has repeatedly condemened attacks against civillians.
|
by Iranian-Shi'ite on 19.07.2005 [19:03 ]
|
|
|
The USA shot down an Iranian passenger plane, flight #655, killing about 280 passengers on board.
Everything that the USA said about the shooting turned out to be a lie. The U.S. said that the plane and the USS Vincennes were on international waters, later it turned out that they were both on Iranian territorial waters.
The U.S. said that the plane was off course, but later it turned out that it was on course.
The U.S. said that it thought that it was an F-14, but there was no way to confuse a giant airbus with a maneuverable F-14.
The U.S. said that the Iranian plane did not identify itself as a civillian plane, but that turned out to be false also.
The U.S. offered apologies. But that was for domestic consumption in the USA. The message of terror had already been sent to the Iranian people.
The USA overthrew the Iranian Mossadegh democracy in 1953 and replaced it with the tyranny of the xShah. The USA then shot down an Iranian civillian plane in 1988 over Iranian territorial waters.
And then you say that the USA would not attack civillians?
Melon-can: " but it's a viewpoint which I feel deserves to be represented."
response: If that's your feeling, then I would suggest that you reevaluate your emotions because that is a viewpoint that deserves to be treated as a mental insanity, not represented in daylight.
|
by Iranian-Shi'ite on 19.07.2005 [19:25 ]
|
|
|
So, the U.S. wouldn't attack innocent civillians?
Around the year 1901, U.S. Marines sluaghtered hunderds of thousands of Philipino civillians.
The U.S. promised the Cheyenne and Arapaho nations that they would be safe if they moved to Sand Creek by the Colorado river. They did so and they raised the U.S. flag over their tents and they also raised the wite flag of peace.
Then, U.S. Colonol Chivington came in with his army and massacred them. The Cheyenne and Arapaho survivors fled and then offered another peace treaty to the USA. That time, the U.S. army led by George Armstrong Custer came in and slaughtered the survivors.
Killing civillians is ingrained in the U.S. psyche. It is part of their inherent nature. It is part of their being. The U.S. has massacred so many innocent civillians that it is reasonable to say that the U.S. is a natural born killer.
The U.S. sends in economic hitmen to take over economies of weaker nations. If that doesn't work then the CIA engineers a coup d'tat that installs a government that is subservient to the USA. Then, by such means the USA steals the natural resources of that nation leading to poverty, hunger, and pestilence.
In Iraq, the U.S. bombed civillian infrastructure such as water treatment plants that led to wide spread cholera, dysentary, and typhoid. The World Health Organization documented this. Then the U.S. forbade chlorine from being imported into Iraq because it might have had "dual use" aspects. Chlorine is used to treat water also. So the disease in Iraq went rampant. Later, documents from the department of defense confirmed that this had been intentional to cause death.
All over the world, there are people who are maimed, sick, hungry, or sad from loss of loved ones because of U.S. atrocities.
What ignoramus thinks that the U.S. does not inflict civillian casualties. They bombed weddings in Iraq and Afghanistan. (as usual claiming that it was an accident, like when Israel bombed the Qana refugee camp in 1996 and then claimed that it was an accident even though U.N. troops were radioing Israel and telling them that it was a civillian site, like when the U.S. shot down the Iranian airbus and then claimed it was an accident even though that was impossible to be an accident.)
It is an utter ignoramus that believes that the U.S. does not intentionally attack civillians for reasons political terrorsim.
|
by Iranian-Shi'ite on 19.07.2005 [19:35 ]
|
|
|
The U.S. sent a Tomahawk cruise missile into the al-Rashid hotel in Baghdad in 1993 when it was hosting a conference of Muslims scholars. The U.S. pretended that was an accident even though witnesses saw the missile change direction and head toward the building.
The U.S. bombed to death 500 thousand civillians in Cambodia, but it wouldn't target civillians in Iraq?
The U.S. has been known to fire on peaceful protestors in Iraq such as opening up on protesters in Fallujah before the mercenaries were hung on the street lights. The U.S. tortured to death and raped prisoners in Abu-Ghraib, but the U.S. would not target innocent civillians?
If people would only wake up and think! If people would only open their eyes and see what a horrible monster the world is burdened with in the form of the USA, then we could do something about it.
But people who are intentionally ignorant and intentionally self-deluded make excuses for the U.S. juggernaut of oppression, and so the rest of the world has a harder time ending the evil of the U.S. reign of horror.
|
by stopwar on 19.07.2005 [19:50 ]
|
|
|
you've really woken up! And Britain was foolish indeed to trust its one means of Independence as a nation, the nuclear warhead, into US hands. Well done, I DON'T think, Margaret Thatcher.
|
by Iranian-Shi'ite on 19.07.2005 [20:55 ]
|
|
|
The U.S. list of atrocities is seemingly endless.
I had not yet mentioned the U.S. mining of the Haiphong harbor in Vietnam, the U.S. mining of Corinta in Nicaragua, U.S. support of the Contra terrorists who were blowing up hospitals and burning down wheat fields, etc,
I had not yet mentioned president Andrew Jackson's "Indian Removal act" which led to the Trail of Tears and its subsequent deaths of thousands of Cherokee people.
I had not mentioned that during World War 2, the U.S. injected prisoners in Chicago with Malaria to study its effects.
I ahd not yet mentioned that in New York, the United States Public Health Service injected black patients with live cancer cells.
The history of U.S. atrocities just goes on and on, and then there are the ones which we don't know about. Those are probably more numerous than the ones we do know about.
And yet I still see people making such insipid and idiotic remarks such as saying that the U.S. would not target civillians in order to blame someone else, implying that the U.S. would not stoop so low.
|
by stopwar on 19.07.2005 [21:22 ]
|
|
|
I think the word "deliberately" is what a lot of good USAns (and Brits) find hard to swallow. They could believe that a few civilians might have been hit "by accident". But... because the media presentation is so slick, even when they are doing bad their "boys" (the girls rarely feature in the videos) still come across as the good guys. So they wouldn't kill innocent people on purpose... would they! ??
|
by Iranian-Shi'ite on 20.07.2005 [00:15 ]
|
|
|
Killing civillians is ingrained in the U.S. mentallity.
In March 2002, the senior editor of the National Reiview, Rich Lowry called for nuking Mecca. This isn't some isolated U.S. person; this is a wells established media personality whose views represent many U.S. people.
More recently, the Repblican congressman from Colorado, Thomas Tancredo also suggested nuking Mecca. This is someone who was voted into office and whose views represents his constituency.
These aren't lone nuts walking the dark, hidden, alleys of U.S. corporations, these are representatives of the U.S. people.
When Nixon bombed the city of Hanoi and mined the harbor of Haiphong, then Nixon's approval rating went up!
Alot of people suggest that the U.S. people just don't know what atrocities their government committs. No, they know that their government is bombing people. They elect politicians and listen to journalists that advocate nuking civillians. They increase their approval rating of politicians who advocate death (Nixon).
Nixon wasn't chased out for murdering millions of people in South East Asia. He wasn't even chased out for bugging Watergate. He was chased out for lying about bugging Watergate.
And so does anyone still think that the U.S. does not deliberately target civillians? They know what murderers they are. They just consider other people to be subhuman and so they don't care that they are killing them. Why else do they vote for politicians like Tancredo, listen to media heads like Lowry or Coulter, and approve of Nixon's violence?
|
by Iranian-Shi'ite on 20.07.2005 [00:30 ]
|
|
|
The world needs to get together and make an air-tight ban on all economic activity with the USA.
All U.S. politicians who travel outside of the U.S. should be arrested and tried for crimes against humanity and war crimes.
Only those politicians like Kucinich should be allowed to be let free.
There should be a zero tolerance policy towards the USA. All countries should close their U.S. embassies and expell all U.S. diplomats. This sort of activity should continue until USAns realize that they are part of the world community and not above the world community. This sort of activity should continue until the U.S. stops treating the rest of the world like a bunch of insects.
Then, maybe the U.S. wont do things like ruin the Kyoto treaty. Then maybe the U.S. wont try to exclude itself from the world court. Then maybe the U.S. will stop invading soveriegn countries. Then maybe the U.S. will stop aiding international terrorists such as the MKO. Then maybe the U.S. will stop overthrowing democracies such as the Allende presidency in Chile. Then maybe the U.S. will stop aiding oppressor nations like Israel. Then mayeb the U.S. will join the rest of humanity in the attempt to make this a better world for our future generations.
|
by greg-aussie on 20.07.2005 [00:57 ]
|
|
|
Thank you for your enlightening list of USA atrocities against innocent people of this world. It's good to have knowledge, even knowledge of the disgustingly brutal malciousness of people against other people. Knowledge, true knowledge, eventually sets uf free, or so I believe anyway.
The trouble is, too many people in other countries, the elite AND ordinary people, in all areas of life, are profitting from having close ties with the USA government and business. Thus they refuse to put pressure on the USA to refrain from it's corrupt tyrannical ways, and thus the corrupt amongst the USA elite, AND the corrupt amongst the 'ordinary people', feel free to continue their abusive policies and actions upon the rest of the world.
Also, sadly, it's not only the USA who has brutal corruption within it's elite and ordinary people, too many other countries have ALSO abused, tyrannized and murdered-slaughtered the people of other nations for selfish benefit. These countries are hardly likely to confront USA oppression when they themselves are (or have been in the recent past) oppressors.
Tough times indeed for the world. Too many people are complacent and/or actively supporting the corruption, materially and psychologically, this creates such havoc that the peace makers amongst us are swamped with the chaos created.
|
by greg-aussie on 20.07.2005 [01:03 ]
|
|
|
It's more than only the leaders.
It's more than just the leaders who are responsible for the horrific carnage in Iraq.
For one thing, it takes many tens of thousands of 'ordinary people' dressed in military uniforms (ie the USA-Coaliation soldiers) with loaded deadly weapons to do the actual killing. Without those 'ordinary people' there could be NO war and brutal carnage in Iraq.
Here in Australia, our elections are almost certainly not rigged (as they may be in the USA). Here, the majority of 'ordinary people' voted BACK INTO POWER John Howard who is ultra-pro USA and ultra-pro war in Iraq, whereas the opposition party who campaigned they'd withdraw our Australian troops out of Iraq by last xmas if they got elected failed to be elected into power.
Thus, here in Australia (at least), the 'ordinary people' used THEIR OWN POWER to vote in a government that continues to actively contribute to the brutal killings and carnage in Iraq.
Clearly then, the perpetrators of this malicious war in Iraq are more than only the elite leaders, it is ALSO millions of 'ordinary people' who feel they get a pay-off by actively and/or passively supporting their corrupt government's policies.
|
by greg-aussie on 20.07.2005 [01:09 ]
|
|
|
Is it the 'elite-leaders' who go to the factories 8 hours/day and 5 days/week to build rifles, tanks, mortars, laser-guided missiles, nuclear bombs, aircraft carriers, nuclear capable submarines, spy-satelites, defence computer hardware and software, military uniforms, military boots, military food, military transport etc etc etc?
Nope it is not the elite-leaders who by hundreds of millions of man hours (that's my guess-timate) build this ESSENTIAL weaponary that literally ENABLES brutal oppressive warfare to occur against our fellow human beings.
War, tyranny and bloodshed REQUIRES the willing cooperation of millions of 'ordinary people'.
Where then does the responsibility lie for brutality, tyranny and oppression? It lies with EVERY SINGLE person, the 'the elite' AND the 'ordinary person' who actively or passively contributes to the machinery of war, in a psychological manner and in a material manner.
To resolve this problem of humanity, thus requires a change of heart within those that contribute to it. How to create that change of heart? Well, that is the age old problem of humanity, it's not a new problem, is the same old one as it has always been, with nothing else but a new face in Iraq, that's all.
|
by Yasis on 20.07.2005 [01:12 ]
|
|
|
"Then mayeb the U.S. will join the rest of humanity in the attempt to make this a better world for our future generations."
I wouldn't bet on that.
Iranian-Shi'ite, do you have good links on native american people's history? I am quite curious about the atrocities commited by the americans on the native folk. People concentrate too much on war crimes done by americans to the rest of the world.
But in actual fact, the indians are the biggest victims of the americans, they destroyed their entire civilisation and took their land away from them. Destroyed and decimated entire tribes.
The destroying, looting, colonisng aspect of the americans is a part of their history right from the start, when they broke free of the british yoke. This mentality of slaughter and carnage is something that we must understand in order to make sense of why americans can be so cruel.
|
by Iranian-Shi'ite on 20.07.2005 [01:35 ]
|
|
|
good point
|
by Iranian-Shi'ite on 20.07.2005 [01:39 ]
|
|
|
The oppression on native Americans in the USA is not over yet:
In November, president George Bush quietly rescinded a Clinton-era executive order that streamlined the cumbersome process tribal governments were required to complete while using their own money to buy back their own lands and returning the land to trust status.
Approximately 66% of tribal land holdings were removed from tribal control after the passage of the "infamous" Dawes act in 1884.
First Nations have attempted to buy back as much of this "lost reservation land" as possible but have been thwarted and impeded by the legal barriers placed in their way.
The Clinton-era executive order would have greatly aided First Nation's attempts to recover their own land.
The Bush administration bent to the will of State-attorney Generals, municipalities and governors that were concerned of a loss of tax revenues and feared, among other things, the possibility of "low income housing" being placed on such land.
The Bush administration, claiming the wording of the Clinton-era order was unclear, promised to issue a similar order with less ambiguous language. Months later, no action has yet been taken on this promise.
In December of 2001, an organization of tribal governments from across the nation met with Bush's Secretary of the Interior, Gale Norton, to protest the Bush administration's proposed re-organization of the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
The tribal leaders protested that tribes were not consulted in the process and had serious questions about the plan.
After the gathering unanimously rejected the proposal, Norton told the gathering that the plan would proceed without their support or consent.
In 2003, the Bush administration, effectively stopped completion of a decade long project, named Mni Wiconi..
The ambitious project was designed to pipe treated water from the Missouri River to the arid Pine Ridge Reservation.
Mni Wiconi, which means "water of life," would have brought water to what has been historically America's most economically depressed county.
Many of the 35,000 people on Pine Ridge do not have running water and many of the wells on the reservation are polluted by septic system percolation or contaminated by nitrates.
It is not uncommon for many of the Lakota People on Pine Ridge to get their water delivered by truck or transported in jugs.
As the pipeline was laid across the arid landscape of South Dakota, it brought water to Indian as well as non-Indian residents. The project was nearing completion in 2002, an election year.
George W. Bush hand-picked John Thune in 2002 to unseat incumbent Democratic Senator Tim Johnson.
An effort to register voters in the Indian communities of South Dakota resulted in large numbers of new voters, that voted overwhelmingly in favor of Johnson.
Pine Ridge voters voted in particularly high numbers.. The "Indian vote" propelled Johnson to the slimmest of victories. Thune's loss did not go unnoticed by the Bush White House.
Within months, the Bush administration, slashed funding to Mni Wiconi, that stopped the work on the project just as the pipeline was reaching the borders of Pine Ridge.
Without access to a dependable supply of fresh water, Pine Ridge has little hope of economic development.
Stopping the project just as it nears its destination is a cut of the cruelest sort, that perpetuates conditions normally associated with third world nations long suffered by the people of Pine Ridge.
ht tp://www.theramp.net/kohr4/HEROES.html
|
by greg-aussie on 20.07.2005 [01:42 ]
|
|
|
To resolve this age old problem of humanity requires us to get back to basics, beyond nationality, beyond religion, beyond categorizing people into the 'elite' or the 'public', beyond viewing people in black and white terms such as they the 'wicked people' versus we the 'good people' etc.
There is ONE God.. there is ONE ocean of life.. we, every single one of us, the so-called 'good' and the so-called 'bad' are born from and return to that ONE ocean of life.
There is so-called 'good' and 'bad' within us all. The issue at stake here is not 'good' versus 'bad, it is sickness and ignorance (of varying degree) of the people of this world, both in high up places AND in places further down the heirachy. Sickness (ie holistic) and ignorance are at the very roots of the problem we are witnessing in regard to human violence, tyranny and oppression.
In other words there is no such thing as an 'evil' person, there IS however such a thing as a grossly SICK person in the holistic sense. Thus, the battle for healing of this world is not between the 'good' people and the 'bad' people, the battle is how to gain the KNOWLEDGE and the ABILITY to firstly bring about Self-healing and secondly to bring about healing of the holistic sickness in those around us, from healing of the mildly sick, all the way up to the healing of the tragically, insanely and maliciously sick people of the world (in ALL tiers of the power heirachy of humanity, from the very bottom to the very top).
Do you see the difference in the battle we are faced with? There is a real difference here.. and to understand that difference means we may then be able to face the actual problem and therefore possibly bring about the real resolution to it.
Thus, to heal the violence and oppression in this world, we must first be able to see the truth of our inter-connectedness, secondly to see the truth of our own nature, and lastly and very importantly to see the truth of those around us, which means to be able to see the maliciousness of those that tyrannize innocent people, but ALSO to see the goodness (in actuality or potential) in those who are malicious.
Not easy to do.. I'm not claiming I succeed fully in this endevour, far from it! It is clearly a process of trying, re-evaluating and constantly updating our knowledge and techniques for living. Yet, no matter how difficult the path, the path of true knowledge is the path that will ultimately lead us to freedom and peace. Seeing and living the truth is the only way we can possibly be free.
|
by greg-aussie on 20.07.2005 [01:48 ]
|
|
|
The issue at stake is not of 'good' versus 'bad'. The real issue is of sickness and ignorance (of varying degree) of the people of this world, both in high up places AND in places further down the heirachy.
|
by Iranian-Shi'ite on 20.07.2005 [02:08 ]
|
|
|
You know, Dostoevsky had an interesting solution: He suggested that we all blame ourselves for the sins of others. I can't remember which of his books that was in. It was either in "Brothers Karamazov" or "Notes from the Underground."
Anyways, your idea reminded me of a secular version of his. You ought to check him out. You might like him.
|
|
RSS feed for articles and news
