Iraqi villagers kill 5 insurgents

[ga_tatze]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200502/s1295847.ht...

Last Update: Friday, February 4, 2005. 11:27am (AEDT)

By Middle East correspondent Mark Willacy


The residents of a small Iraqi village have killed five insurgents who had attacked them for voting in last weekend's national elections.

Several other insurgents were also wounded.

The insurgents raided the village of al-Mudhiryah south of Baghdad after warning its inhabitants not to vote in the election.

The villagers fought back, killing five of the insurgents and wounding eight others.

The insurgents' cars were then set alight.

Al-Mudhiryah's tribal sheikh says his people are sick of being threatened by Islamic extremists.

[bemildred]

1. Generally, one is limited to four paragraphs for fair use.

Since this is so brief, I dunno how the mods will take it.

The story sounds like propaganda and/or bullshit, but I'm willing to
be convinced, it might just be somewhat embroidered truth.

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LynnTheDem]

11. LOL!!! You're quite the dreamer.

Or something...

[Guaranteed]

12. I agree!

[LynnTheDem]

22. With the former or the latter?

[alittlelark]

38. You two are funny !!!

You and the original poster. Tag-team propaganda ! It's an art form...really.

[Blue_State_Elitist]

40. Bring them home NOW

[leesa]

151. Funny. And you believe this, eh?

[NYC]

3. Civil War?

Iraqis against Iraqis.

[Skittles]

7. it's not good

vigilantism is never good

[aikido15]

10. No it's not good..this will give Bush ....

an excuse to stay over there, to keep the peace. This sounds way too much like propaganda to me, and look at what news source it came from...plleeeeezzze.

[ga_tatze]

15. ABC is not credible? (n/t)

[ProudToBeLiberal]

it's abc.NET not abc.com

[Downtown Hound]

18. As someone who used to work for them...

No, they are definitely not.

[eridani]

134. This is Australia Broadcasting Company

I hope everybody realizes that. Aren't they like BBC?

[DoNotRefill]

19. Ummm....there were no US troops involved....

Once the Iraqis are taking care of their own security situation, a LARGE part of Bush's excuse to be there evaporates.

The sooner the Iraqis themselves can defend themselves, the better off EVERYBODY will be.

[aikido15]

26. Ummm...Bush will see it as a civil war...

and US will need to stay to keep the peace.

OMFG, I'm starting to think like them!

[Rockerdem]

89. lol - I catch myself doing that about once every week or so

Its like having ganglia grow into the inner reaches of my brain, leaving me with discomfort and a 103 degree fever.

[Skittles]

35. defending oneself is one thing

vigilantism is another; it lays the groundwork for civil war

[DoNotRefill]

47. So....

they came back with machineguns to deliver coffee?

If somebody says "Do this and I will kill you" and you do it anyway, and they come back in force and with guns, what would a reasonable person think they were there for?

Why should the people have assumed that they were there for some positive reason? And if the Klan came to your house, said "don't vote or we'll kill you" and you did, and then they came back, would you ASSUME that they didn't mean you harm? I sure as hell wouldn't...I'd shoot first and ask questions later, and the law here would say it's legal.

[Skittles]

51. this article in itself simply is not credible

period

[DoNotRefill]

71. So the rest of the violence in the articles below.....

isn't credible either?

I guess Iraq really HAS turned into a paradise then.

</sarcasm>

[Skittles]

131. *yawn*

I am talking about THE ARTICLE THAT IS THE SUBJECT.

[TheOriginalAmerican]

148. Exactly.

The Iraqis can defend their own country if need be. That's what I'd like to hope.

[NYC]

13. Is it vigilantism

or part of a burgeoning civil war?

[QC]

29. Or how about self defense? n/t

[Skittles]

36. see, that's the thing

this "article" explains none of the details necessary to know the difference; it smacks of simple propaganda.

[Zhade]

121. Indeed. Methinks it's meant to be vague.

Lets people draw their own conclusions based on personal bias.

[TahitiNut]

144. Yeah.. the cars really posed a threat.

Sounds like vigilantism and vandalism to me. Did they destroy evidence?

[traco]

153. I would think they burned the cars

to hit the insurgents where it might hurt them more; in the pocketbook. Loosing bodies don't hurt them too much, they send people out on suicide missions often. Loosing cars and weapons may hurt them worse.

[HEyHEY]

103. In a place where no one can offer protection - ya gota do for yourself

[DoNotRefill]

14. Excuse me....

but when five guys come to kill you and you kill them instead, that's not vigilanteism, that's SELF-DEFENSE.

Would you rather that the people who voted just allow themselves to be killed?

If it was your ass on the line, I HOPE you wouldn't be so quick to say that the innocent people should have just let themselves be killed...

Just because something is good for Bush does NOT mean that it's automatically bad, just as something that is bad for Bush is NOT automatically good. For example, if the rape rates in the US skyrocketed in the US under Bush's administration, would you be cheering it?????

THINK before typing, people...

[hootinholler]

17. Thanks, someone needed to say that. N/T

[Skittles]

49. I DO THINK

I smell PROPAGANDA

[DoNotRefill]

58. What part strikes you as propaganda?

the part which gives us more of a reason to be able to pull our troops the hell OUT of Iraq???

[Skittles]

63. the fact that they know WHY the killings occurred

but provide NO NAMES

[DoNotRefill]

65. ROTFLMAO!!!!!! NAMES??????

WHY NOT JUST PAINT HUGE FUCKING BULLS-EYES ON THEIR BACKS!!!!!!

ROTFLMAO!!!!!!!!

Do you think there were only 5 insurgents in Iraq?????

[Skittles]

80. ANY NAMES

of ANYONE or ANY WITNESSES. There were PLENTY when the people were hauled onto the BRIDGE.

[DoNotRefill]

92. Hmmm....

somehow, I think the surviving insurgents, who operate in a terroristic manner, might be HIGHLY interested in who was there. I'm sure that they'd question them in accordance with the Geneva Conventions, don't you agree?

Life in the US is generally seen as far more civilized than life in Iraq is right now, what with the insurgencies and beheadings and all, correct? Yet how much trouble do we have getting witnesses to come forward HERE in cases involving, say, gang violence?

[Skittles]

111. I'll believe this when I read a better source

and as far as it "HELPING BUSH" - that bastard created the situation that enables all kinds of killing to go on - he's a warmongering piece of SHIT.

[DoNotRefill]

116. No argument on Bush....

but if you automatically disbelieve anything that might be good for him just because it helps him, you're gonna spend a fortune on aluminum foil for your haberdashery....

[Skittles]

130. what do you mean GOOD FOR HIM?

don't buy into the propaganda PLEASE; we've already got half the voters doing that. That smarmy fascist thug CAUSED THIS QUAGMIRE - and stuff like suspicious stories aobut Iraqi civilians taking revenge should NOT "HELP" him.

[DoNotRefill]

145. If Bush manages to extract the US from Iraq....

because the Iraqi people are able to defend themselves while actually establishing a Democracy, it'll appear to be a "win" for him in the history books.

I'm not happy we're there. But at the same time, I don't want to see Iraq end up with the insurgents winning, and being able to do what they want when and where they want within Iraq. Just because the insurgents are anti-American does NOT mean that they are nice people. They aren't. They're murderous scum that are deliberately targeting the Iraqi people. If they were truly "freedom fighters", they'd be attacking MILITARY targets only, not civilian targets. If the decent people in Iraq (which I believe is a LARGE majority of the people there) stand up for themselves and refuse to allow terrorists to act at will, that's a GOOD thing.

The sooner Iraq is stabilized, the sooner we can get our people the hell OUT. And a stable, democratic Iraq is the best-case scenario we could achieve. The Iraqi people stepped up to the plate during the election. They voted despite real, credible threats of death if they did so. THEIR lives are on the line, far more so than the USGIs there, because they are relatively "soft" targets. So when the insurgents threaten to kill them and they kill the insurgents instead, that's a positive thing considering what the other outcomes could be.

There are some on this board who actually have said "I support the insurgents" because they're partially fighting the US occupation. Don't ask for a link, the mods pulled the entire thread, but one long-term poster who shall remain nameless actually said that. These people are misguided, and do far more harm to the cause of getting our people out than they do good. As long as Bush is in office and there's a real insurgency going on, our troops will NOT come home. And isn't bringing the troops home our real objective? Or is our objective rather to just bash Bush on general principles, regardless of how much it hurts ALL of us? If you're one of the "Support our troops by bringing them home" crowd, I don't see HOW you CAN NOT hope for Iraq to be stabilized quickly.

[Boosterman]

81. In other news Ahmed Mustapha killed an insurgent today

And later on we have that video tape that kills everyone who watches it in a network exclusive. Watch it live at 10.

[Zhade]

125. al-Jazeera Presents: "The Ring"! A sure winner!

NT!

[Zhade]

124. I think that part could and likely would be spun by the corporate media...

...to put forth an image of an errupting civil war that we would need to be around to quell. Classic imperialist strategy, and they own the networks.

[leesa]

152. The part that says Iraqis would kill fellow citizens who obstructed their

"voting" in a fraudulent election.

[Zhade]

122. I agree with this post, but the article is too easy to misinterpret.

It's so incomplete, anyone can believe it means anything they would be predisposed to thinking.

[seriousstan]

31. Vigilantism? How is this vigilantism?

They didn't go after anyone, they were defending themselves against an attack.

[Heyo]

34. I don't think it was vigilantism...

.. those people came with murder in their hearts, and if they weren't killed, they would have been doing some killing of their own.

This was self defense, not revenge.

Heyo

[Skittles]

37. see, now you sound like republicans

how do you KNOW that's what happened? How do you know they weren't killed for other reasons? The article leaves much to speculation.

[seriousstan]

39. And you sound like someone who would sacrifice innocent people

to satisfy your political agenda. What part of "The insurgents raided the village of al-Mudhiryah south of Baghdad after warning its inhabitants not to vote in the election." do you not understand?

[Skittles]

44. oh good LORD

there's no dates, times, names; the source is dubious - come on

[DoNotRefill]

45. The only facts we have to go on....

are the ones in the article.

Do you have some information that says that the people involved were NOT insurgents who had warned them not to vote, and then came back to punish people who did vote? If so, I'd love to see it.

We had people like this in the US in the South in the 1950's and '60s. People who didn't want people to vote, and who tried to intimidate them into not voting. If five of them had gotten their asses shot while on a retribution raid against people who voted anyway, you'd be with me in cheering at what happened to them.

Attempting to disenfranchise people, regardless of the reasons behind it, is an inherently EVIL thing IN AND OF ITSELF. It doesn't matter what uniform they wear, or what cause they support.

[Skittles]

46. no, with no facts I would NOT be cheering

nt

[DoNotRefill]

48. But we have some facts...

the ones reported in the article. Based upon THOSE facts, which are the ONLY facts we have "in hand", you wouldn't support their act of self-defense?

[Skittles]

50. you think this is a credible source?

nt

[DoNotRefill]

56. It's a lot more credible....

than no source at all.

Now if you had a source that said something different actually happened there, the credibility of BOTH sources would be at issue. But with only one source, you have to go with what you've got unless it's something like Newsmax.

[Skittles]

60. oh WHATEVER

you believe what you want to believe

[Boosterman]

57. google it

theres lots more sources w/the same story. Doesnt make it true but...

[Sterling]

67. That is NOT how it works.

Just because it was printed does not make it a fact. It lacks most of the things that would verify the CLAIMS in the article as fact.

IMHO if it were gospel truth I have no problem with these people fighting against people who threatened them. They are IMO already in a civil war. On the other hand this story sounds like bullshit and it never bothered to back up that bullshit with good journalism.

[DoNotRefill]

72. Just because it's printed does not make it fact....

but if you're trying to say it did NOT happen, or that something ELSE happened, when obviously there's an Iraqi police report out there saying it DID happen, you should have SOMETHING other than blind hatred of Bush to back it up, yes?

Imagine that you're a scientist, and somebody offers up a theory you don't like. Would you try to disprove the theory by shouting "Nuh-uh!!!" or would you offer some form of EVIDENCE to back up your assertation?

[Skittles]

132. give up, Sterling, I am

lost cause

[DrWeird]

90. LOL.

"and you sound like someone who would sacrifice innocent people to satisfy your political agenda."

This whole WAR is a sacrifice of innocent people to satisfy a political agenda.

[Zhade]

126. Skittles, Heyo still supports the Iraq War. Consider the source.

Just saying. No offense intended to Heyo, just how it is.

[Skittles]

133. pretty f***ing sad

nt

[Zhade]

138. Agreed.

NT!

[LynnTheDem]

141. A PROGRESSIVE who supports bush's illegal immoral unjust supreme crime

war of aggression which to date has killed over 1400 American men, women & teens and tens of thousands of Iraqi men, women, & kids???



Label me naive! I knew some who CALL themselves Dems or progressives still support bush's invasion & occupation of a nation that hadn't been threatening anyone or doing anything to anyone, but as we all also know, they aren't really Dems or progressives (lieberman, Hell's Zell etc)

But a real progressive supporting this bullshit?????!! No f*cking way!

[Zhade]

143. "But a real progressive supporting this bullshit?????!! No f*cking way!"

Exactly. No fucking way.

[DoNotRefill]

154. So if "real progressives" don't support the war....

who is left to vote for in 2008?

[Heyo]

149. because it doesn't surprise me and I could've seen it coming..

You can tell me a duck quacked.

Maybe I didn't see the duck quack, maybe I didn't hear it.

But it's a duck, it probably quacked.



This was bound to happen sooner or later.

Heyo

[Jack_DeLeon]

101. thats bullshit...

vigilantism can be useful.

Best used when the official government is either unable or unwilling to act.

[okieinpain]

146. says who.

[melnjones]

23. Many would argue

that the insurgents are not Iraqis necesarily, but are muslim extremists. Aren't they coming in from other countries as well? I'm not sure that would be anywhere in the realm of civil war.

[NYC]

24. Were today's dead insurgents foreign?

[melnjones]

32. honestly i don't know. nt

[Zhade]

127. That's false. Even the U.S. military admitted it's mostly native Iraqis.

NT!

[TheOriginalAmerican]

147. Civil war?

Possibly, but I see it more as Iraqis taking their country back from Islamic fundamentalists.

[indianablue]

4. Sounds Like BS to me will have to have more proof.

Sounds like BS and the timing makes sound more like BS

[Skittles]

53. THANK YOU

it is unbelievable the conclusions people are jumping to

[DavidMS]

5. If its true...

There is finaly some good news out of Iraq.

[DoYouEverWonder]

6. You think Iraqis killing Iraqis is good news?

n/t

[Sawber]

9. If they are defending themselves, sure

[Moderator]

8. is the link working?

[Igel]

16. It is for me. n/t

[Moderator]

20. working for me now

thanks

[LynnTheDem]

21. ABC.net is propaganda bullshit.

As one should be able to tell simply be reading the article.

[Skittles]

55. again, THANK YOU

SHEESH

[LynnTheDem]

73. ???

What the...???

Edited: yes, now I see...I'm not the "sheesh" target, lol!

Amazing what bullshit some supposed progressives take as gospel, isn't it.

[Skittles]

82. yes it IS

nt

[DoNotRefill]

75. The report has been picked up by papers in...

Turkey, Oman, and Lebanon.

[ckramer]

25. This village is waiting for something bad to happen if insurgents

have backups.

[INDIA]

27. Good for them..

I just wish they at least attempted to use the non-existant judicial system.

[DoNotRefill]

28. heh.

yup, a restraining order sure as hell would have stopped those guys with machineguns from killing the voters...

[seriousstan]

43. Don't forget a from talking to from the bench and maybe the threat

of extensive probation.

[Bouncy Ball]

30. I think it's good to have a reminder right here

that the "insurgents" wouldn't be attacking and killing people HAD WE NEVER INVADED IRAQ IN THE FIRST PLACE.

And the reason for invading Iraq?

WMDs.

I rest my case.

[hack89]

150. The "insurgents" would have been murdering innocent

Iraqis as members of Saddam's regime - what do you think all these guys were before the war? Where did all of Saddam's killers go? Freedom fighters mys ass - these are thugs trying to regain power before the Shia and the Kurds take their revenge.

[Heyo]

33. Well...

...the worm turns.

Looks like some of the Iraqi people, or these particular folks at least, have had their fill of the insurgency.

Flame me if you want, but I think this rocks. Those people did not come to bring flowers and congratulate them.

Heyo

[Name removed]

41. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Skittles]

135. BULL F***ING SHIT

I SIMPLY DO NOT BELIEVE EVERYTHING I READ. GOT THAT??????????????

WHY DO I SEND PACKAGE AFTER PACKAGE OF BABY CLOTHES AND TOYS TO THE SOLDIERS TO GIVE TO THE PEOPLE OF IRAQ IF I DON"T CARE ABOUT TEHM???

YOU ARE F***ING INSULTING BEYOND BELIEF.

I simply do NOT think that the sickening results of a f***ing SENSELESS QUAGMIRE is "GOOD NEWS" and neither do I believe that sowing the seeds for CIVIL WAR is "good news". THINK before you spout such UTTER NONSENSE.

[LynnTheDem]

139. good or bad...with us or against us...

I really do not care for that black-white mindset, regardless what side of the political aisle it comes from.

Glad you're able to read my "sick" mind for me.

[karlrschneider]

42. Bull

shit.

[daleo]

52. It sounds like propaganda

All being rolled out to support the Bush propaganda election. If there were people killed, the true story will be much different. Either killed by U.S. forces, or some kind of family or tribal vendetta that has nothing to do with the "elections". The details are suspiciously scant.

On edit - I seem to recall these kinds of stories from Viet Nam days too. In fact, I think John Wayne did a movie about it.

[Boosterman]

54. Hmmm i googled Iraqi insurgents villagers

and got lots of hits. same story pretty much. make of that what you will.

[daleo]

59. I googled too, and got lots of hits

Nothing like this story though. How about giving half a dozen or so links for those of us who are inefficient googlers?

On edit - There was a reference to it on a trascript from an Australian radio station, quoting the same fellow. It sounded vague there as well:

"MARK WILLACY: That's right, Tony. The Iraqi police have investigated a case in the village of al-Mudhariya, which is just south of Baghdad. The villagers there say that before the election insurgents came and warned them that if they voted in last weekend's election, they would pay.

Now the people of this mixed village of Sunni and Shia Muslims, they ignored the threat and they did turn out to vote.

We understand that last night the insurgents came back to punish the people of al-Mudhariya, but instead of metering out that punishment the villagers fought back and they killed five of the insurgents and wounded eight. They then burnt the insurgents' car. So the people of that village have certainly had enough of the insurgents."


Also, a vague reference in a South African site:

"In a rare case of civilians fighting back, villagers of Al-Mudhiryah, south of Baghdad, killed five insurgents who attacked them for taking part in the elections, police said."

Personally, I will need more substantive details, names, interviews, etc. We have been burnt too many times by Jessica Lynch type stories.

[Boosterman]

61. Man I even gave you the search terms and wasnt weighing in on the debate

But Ok
http://www.turkishpress.com/world/news.asp?id=050203182...

http://www.news24.com/News24/World/Iraq/0,,2-10-1460_16...

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,7374-1469954,00...

There theres three. maybe those sources suck too but its 3 stories on 3 different websites. I merely brought it up. All were on the front page too.

[daleo]

66. I got the News24 ref (it is in my edit)

Here is the Turkish reference:
In a rare case of civilians fighting back, villagers of Al-Mudhiryah, south of Baghdad, killed five insurgents who attacked them for taking part in the elections, police said.

Here is Times on-line:
But in a rare case of civilians fighting back, villagers in al-Mudhiryah, south of Baghdad, killed five insurgents who had attacked them for voting.

I think these journalists are just reading from a script at this point, a press release. Notice the sameness of the wording. I need something better than an echo chamber. If this is enough for you, I congratulate you on your lack of jadedness. Bush's lies have been too much for me.

[DoNotRefill]

70. Most of the articles I listed....

were compendiums of the violence that happened since the SOTU address. I somehow don't think that the other stories of violence listed trouble your mind regarding the veracity of the reporting.

To me, the fact that they are included along with the rest of the body count makes it more, rather than less, credible.

[daleo]

74. Extraordinary stories require extraordinary evidence

This account is out of the ordinary, and fits in well with what might be expected by propaganda considerations. The others are run of the mill for the current situation. Therefore I prefer some verification that doesn't amount to repetition (word for word ) of the same story taken off the wire with no names or details.

Jessica Lynch's tale was repeated by lots of sources too.

[Boosterman]

76. I would only ask if you subject

all news stories to such skepticism.

[DoNotRefill]

77. How do you figure it's extraordinary?

Almost everybody over there supposedly has an AK-47 or variant, right? You think it's extraordinary that a bunch of people would actually defend themselves against people who were trying to kill them?

Does that mean that the entire insurgency is really just propaganda?

If you tell people with guns that you're going to kill them, you shouldn't be surprised when they shoot you. That strikes me as common sense, not extraordinary propaganda.

[daleo]

84. Well it is the first such report.

I haven't read any stories of villagers killing insurgents yet, although there may have been such accounts. So it is extraordinary in that sense. It has propaganda value in as much as it supports the idea that the general population is against the resistance and in favor of the occupation government and the recent elections - or at least that is how it will be played if there is a basis to the account. I would be very surprised if Bush and the right wing media didn't do so.

If the facts of the case are true, I wouldn't be surprised by villagers shooting back. Who wouldn't shoot back? I am not particularly romantic about the resistance. Movements like this generally attract plenty of opportunists.

I will admit to some ambivalence about the whole thing, but frankly I think if this works out for Bush he will go on to another invasion and eventually something catastrophic will happen. So, I tend to favor the resistance on those tactical grounds.

I am withholding judgment on this particular story until a better account (more than just the say so of an unnamed police official) comes along. Bush and unnamed Iraqi supporters have lied enough times during this invasion and occupation that I don't give them the benefit of the doubt. When anything sounds too good to be true, it usually is.

But I don't expect everyone to agree with me. I just prefer us all to be civil when we do disagree.

[DoNotRefill]

88. I've seen footage...

"I haven't read any stories of villagers killing insurgents yet, although there may have been such accounts."

of an incident where locals caught an insurgent "red-handed" trying to plant a bomb under a car. They beat the shit out of him on videotape, while he was pleading for mercy (no translation was necessary, you could tell by his posture/body language/facial expression what he was saying, and the bomb was right there). As for what happened to him eventually, I have no idea, but the locals on camera were indeed highly pissed. So I don't think it's too far of a stretch to think that the locals would respond with automatic weapons fire when people who had previously threatened their lives showed up.

[daleo]

99. Sure it is possible - Iraq is a big country.

I imagine there are all kinds of complications, especially given the ethnic and tribal cleavages. Some will support the occupation. Some will just be pissed at bombers that are inept enough to kill their own side. Plenty of shakedown artists and the like use the cover of political instability for their own purposes, and people get fed up with that. Political and economic instability always breed crime of all sorts. People get fed up with that too.

On this particular story, though, I need some independent corroboration. It has been framed as a "strike back at insurgents" story, so we deserve corroborating evidence.

I suppose the real evidence of how much popular support the resistance has will, as always, be measured in the numbers of American dead, as a resistance needs the support of the local population to succeed.

[DoNotRefill]

64. OK...

http://www.turkishpress.com/world/news.asp?id=050203182...

"In a rare case of civilians fighting back, villagers of Al-Mudhiryah, south of Baghdad, killed five insurgents who attacked them for taking part in the elections, police said."

http://www.news24.com/News24/World/Iraq/0,,2-10-1460_16...
mentioned again

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,7374-1469954,00...
mentioned again

http://www.dawn.com/2005/02/04/top17.htm
mentioned again

http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=10&c...
mentioned again

Apparently, the Iraqi police are telling reporters about it, and it's been widely picked up.

[daleo]

68. Note the similarity in the reports

So far, this report has been picked up but not verified in any sense. Most of these are just rips from a wire service. I still reserve my judgment, until I see more corroborating details.

On edit: Just to clarify,
Dawn: In a rare case of civilians fighting back, villagers of Al Mudhiryah, south of Baghdad, killed five guerillas who attacked them for taking part in the elections, police said.

Times on-line: But in a rare case of civilians fighting back, villagers in al-Mudhiryah, south of Baghdad, killed five insurgents who had attacked them for voting.

News24: In a rare case of civilians fighting back, villagers of Al-Mudhiryah, south of Baghdad, killed five insurgents who attacked them for taking part in the elections, police said.

[DoNotRefill]

78. It sounds like the Iraqi police put out a release....

and reporters picked it up.

What, pray tell, do you need for corroboration? If a bunch more insurgents come in and slaughter them, THEN will you believe it?

[daleo]

86. The old fashioned journalistic standards

Corroboration of the story by several named sources (perhaps unnamed by the reporter, but with assurance that he or she has independently confirmed the report). Maybe some pictures, some interviews with witnesses or participants. At the minimum, the police spokesman has to have an identity. An unnamed police spokesman or press release just isn't enough. I don't think these are unreasonable standards. You probably wouldn't either, if this was a report from the U.S..

If there was a retaliatory attack that wouldn't be confirmation of the original report, but it would be circumstantial evidence. We still wouldn't know if the police report was true. For all we know the event had nothing to do with the election or insurgents - it could have had some other cause.

But if credible supporting evidence comes forth I would certainly change my view.

[DoNotRefill]

94. Heh. Yup, it's safe to be identifying police officers in Iraq...

after all, fewer than 200 of them were killed this month by insurgents, right???

If it was a report from the US, you're right. But Iraq isn't the US. More cops were shot and killed in Iraq last MONTH than were shot and killed in the entire US last YEAR, and we have many times their population of both people and cops.

When the insurgents have labeled the police as collaborators and have said they all must die, somehow I don't think publicly outing their spokespeople is such a good idea.

[daleo]

100. Well, we are at an epistemological impasse then.

Claims are being made that can't be verified. So we will just have to choose to believe them or not, based on our general sense of how reliable these unverified reports have been in the past.

[gottaB]

118. AFP also quoted Sheikh Abu Mohammed

Although it is possible that the AFP reporter patched together unrelated comments in order to create a false impression, on the surface it seems that the reporter made an effort to corroborate the story.

http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?sf=2813&click_id=2813&ar...

Is this an unimpeachable source? In April of 2003, Andrew North of the BBC told about a person known as Sheikh Abu Mohammed Sadiq al-Makiki, a.k.a. Sheikh Abu Mohammed.

A Shia cleric, Sheikh Abu Mohammed Sadiq al-Maliki, has recorded a message to Baghdad residents for broadcast around the city by US psychological-operations units.

"Go back to your jobs and stop stealing. It's against your religion, whether you're Shia or Sunni," he says.

The cleric has already helped US marines patrolling in eastern parts of the city, but he says he's not an American stooge. As soon as US forces have finished clearing out the remnants of Saddam Hussein's regime, Sheikh Abu Mohammed told the BBC, they should leave.

Some may be tempted to draw comparisons with Afghanistan, when US forces were similarly forced to work with local leaders who often had very specific agendas of their own.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/2943599.stm

That is sure to raise a few eyebrows. Personally, I am inclined to believe that both reports refer to the same Sheikh Abu Mohammed, and that he basically means what he says.

[LynnTheDem]

79. What a coinky-dink that those are pretty much all rightwing media sources.

Guess the "liberal media" just don't wanna report the "good news".

[Gman]

62. "Al-Mudhiryah's tribal sheikh says his people are sick of being threatened

by Islamic extremists."

Yeah, we know how they feel here in America after being threatened constantly by the "christian" fundie nuts here. They're all one and the same.

[Boosterman]

69. I wasnt going to get involved in this but

good for the Iraqis if the story is true. They are going to have to stand up for themselves one way or another. In this case I prefer to root for the common people of Iraq as oppossed to the insurgents.

[LynnTheDem]

83. That's odd...google in the line all the stories use and what ya get is...

nada:


No standard web pages containing all your search terms were found.

Your search - But in a rare case of civilians fighting back, villagers in al-Mudhiryah, south of Baghdad, killed five insurgents who had attacked them for voting - did not match any documents.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=But+in+a+rare+...

Wait...there we go! Turkey and S. Africa. Well heck yeah must be true then.

LOL!

[Boosterman]

85. My question for you

Why is it you want the story to be false?

The need for some in this thread for this to be false is palpable.

[LynnTheDem]

87. And my question for YOU.

Please show me where I said I "want the story to be false".

Thanks!

[Boosterman]

91. You didnt

Are you claiming total objectivity on this though? Do you subject all news stories to such scrutiny?

[LynnTheDem]

97. Correct; I didn't.

Yes actually, I am claiming objectivity, for one because there's no such village in Iraq that I can find any mention of, for two, because it reads like propaganda (Shia calling "insurgents" "Islamic extremists"?), three, because this article appeared many hours ago yet it's not being picked up by MSM.

And yes, actually, I certainly do subject all news stories to such scrutiny; why don't you?

I have no problem with Iraqis defending themselves, be it against foreign army invaders & occupiers (that would be us) or against "Islamic etremist insurgents", but this particular article reads like total bullshit, imo.

That answer all your Qs?

[Boosterman]

102. If you had bothered to read my posts

you would notice that I haven't said much about this. I got into this thread because I decided to google the story after everyone roasting it. Oddly enough I got a bunch of hits. Took me about 6 seconds. Now since I know NOTHING of any of these media sources I decided not to comment. It was implied that I was wrong even though I provided the search criteria. So I posted links. You yourself basically accused the OP of being a Freeper. So I chimed in. Note that I prefaced all my statements with the comment that if this is true...blah blah blah. To me thats objectivity. Not blanket denials.

[LynnTheDem]

107. I did read all your posts.

YOU asked ME a question; I didn't ask YOU. In fact, the only post I did to you was in reply to YOUR question to me.

All the "hits" refer back to the one same newsfeed. So far there is no backup of this one newsfeed, and this one newsfeed reads like propaganda. All your links lead back to the one same newsfeed. That's called an "echo chamber" and is useless in verifying anything.

No, I did not accuse the OP of being a freeper. A "search by author" is interesting, though.

You are inferring things. That's fine, but please don't accuse me of things you are inferring. Thanks.

[Boosterman]

114. actually it was the second guy who chimed in

You said he was a dreamer...or something. Perhaps you would care to clarify. As to to asking questions of you I humbly apologize.

[LynnTheDem]

117. "care to clarify"???

I called him a dreamer or something. For his remark.

And should he wish me to clarify, I could try, but not sure how to make it more clear.

Feel free to ask me questions; I just prefer you don't make flat assertions that I said or meant or thought something, based on your inference.

[Boosterman]

120. Read other post n/t

[daleo]

93. In one sense, it would be nice if it was false.

Imagine if the whole event just never happened. The villagers were never threatened, and there was no attack and nobody was killed. The whole thing was just a fabrication, made up for propaganda purposes. I think that would be OK.

Another possibility is that some people were killed in this village by somebody and this is a convenient cover story. That is why verification is necessary.

All that being said, I will admit that I tend to prefer that the Iraqis don't give into the occupation psychology. For those who believe that Bush is bringing democracy to Iraq, I suppose that statement will be objectionable. I say it because I fear Bush will take success in Iraq (or the appearance of success) as a sign that he should go ahead with his next invasion, and the next if that goes well (or appears to). That will end in general catastrophe, I fear. I would prefer that his program be stopped in Iraq and it looks like the Iraqi resistance is the only group capable of doing this.

But, it doesn't really matter what any of us want, what will be will be.

[Boosterman]

95. hey I am not happy for Bush

I try not to post on threads like this because passions run high. Heck I am not even sure the story is true. IF its true then good for them because the Iraqis are going to have to stand on their own two feet eventually. And frankly this is one of those threads that make all of us look bad IMO.

[daleo]

105. I don't understand this "look good" and "look bad" thing.

Most of us are just debating current events and our responses to them. Sometimes that includes our assessment of the reliability of sources, which seems like a perfectly reasonable point to debate.

With the exception of cheerleaders for death on either side (which don't usually last long) I don't see how any of this makes us look bad or good, and who is out there making these judgments.

Free speech is untidy, as Rummy might say, and I don't think anyone has to worry about what it looks like, to the mainstream media for example. They have pretty big beams in their eyes, and they know it. I do prefer it if people can remain reasonably civil, but I understand that isn't always possible. So be it.

[Boosterman]

108. I might be reading too much into it

It just seems though that some are too eager for some bad things and too negative whenever something (rarely) positive happens. This is what we get roasted for by the RW pundits and the moderates in the country do pay attention to that kinda thing.

[daleo]

110. They will roast us no matter what.

It just doesn't matter. Whatever is said, they will twist it around anyway. Look what they did about Kerry's Viet Nam experience.

[Boosterman]

112. Right but theres the moderate vote to consider

Thats all.

[DoNotRefill]

96. Yup....Damn that South African, Lebanese, Turkish, and Omani press...

for putting forth Bush's propaganda!

I thought the rest of the world hated Bush? If so, why are these places putting out his propaganda for him?

[LynnTheDem]

98. LOL!!! They're all copying from ONE news feed.

Funny tho how US MSM hasn't bothered, hours later, to pick up the story.

[Boosterman]

106. Yeah your probably right

I would wonder how you would reconcile that idea with your other theory that its all propaganda though. I mean I thought the MSM was controlled by the RW