Burn them alive

[forgethell]

http://www.thisislondon.com/til/jsp/modules/Article/print.jsp?itemId=10169441

I have no comment; I am beyond speechless at people who would do, or even threaten, such a thing.

[plaguepuppy]

1. Would it be in bad taste?

...to point out that the US military used incendiaries to "clean up" accumulations of Iraqui troops during the invasion a year ago? In fact they acknowledged it as if there was obviously nothing to trouble anyone's conscience about the practice.

[stopthegop]

4. there's a difference between...

using incendiaries on troops still opposing you vs. using them on a hostage under your control..

[DulceDecorum]

8. Tell that to the torture masters at Gitmo

You know, the S&M interrogators there.

[stopthegop]

10. got proof of that? n/t

[DulceDecorum]

23. Do YOU have proof

that it is NOT happening?
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/content_objectid=14042696_method=full_siteid=50143_headline=-MY-HELL-IN-CAMP-X-RAY-name_page.html

[forgethell]

29. Jamal al-Harith

wouldn't have an agenda, would he? I don't know if he does, or not, but his unsupported word is not proof.

[DulceDecorum]

42. And

your word counts for naught.
Par for the course.

[forgethell]

54. But I am making no claims,

that are unsupported.

[frankly_fedup2]

93. Well we should protest if this is going on at Gitmo and

get those prisoners out of there if they are being mistreated. "Jamal al-Harith" may belong (I have no proof) to a group of people that have proven that they hate America, all America stands for, and will kill as many Americans as possible. If you are an American, he wants you just as dead as he does any other American on this board if he is a true Al Quada warrior.

Since Gitmo is so horrible, we need to assure that if they are suspicious for being terrorists, and/or associated with terrorism, then we must immediately remove these men from such subhuman existence by our troops and send them immediately to Egypt for questioning and holding. Their can be trials for them all and if found innocent they should be released . . . that is . . . if they live through the questioning. I believe Egypt may be a little tougher on Jamal al-Harith an his fellow detainees.

I think Jamal needs a real dose of reality. Some things almost sounded plausible until I read about the prostitutes smearing her menstrual fluid on them.

I'm sure in Egypt, there may be things worse than menstrual fluid smeared on them. Don't you think?

[DulceDecorum]

98. The college that Barbara Bush & Nancy Reagan

both attended, showed up with swastikas painted in menstrual blood on the third floor of Baldwin dorm situated just off Elm Street, Route Nine, Northampton, Massachusetts.

Maybe one of the fine lasses who attend that institution is whoring for the government in the Gitmo facility.
I would not be in the least bit surprised to discover such a thing.

[stopthegop]

31. no...but I also don't have proof you're not an ostrich..

how would you prove it wasn't happening...your 'thought processes'
need work

on edit: I will take your asking if I have proof it isn't happening to mean "no..I have no proof"

[DulceDecorum]

52. Maybe Private Jessica Lynch

or her compatriot Shoshana can tell us more about hhow they were treated by the Iraqi when they were POWs.

[stopthegop]

53. ummm....your point?

what are you struggling to say?

[frankly_fedup2]

94. Yeah, there were multiple rapes on that 19-year-old . . .

girl. Also, bones being broken slowly and painfully. A lot of other things that I haven't read all of it, but they pretty much put that young lady through hell. I bet they didn't give her a Bible either.

They were given hats to cover their heads (oh the inhumanity), mats to pray on five times a day (ohh, major fanaticism), each one their on Koran, even had signs pointing towards Mecca (not really, the signs pointed toward New York -- hehee, paybacks are hell).

They should be sent to Egypt IMMEDIATELY.

[DulceDecorum]

99. Sarcasm?

I do hope that you were being sarcastic
when you said that Jessica Lynch had been raped by Iraqi men.
http://www.disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=Jessica_Lynch
The reality is that none of them found her in the least bit attractive.
A real downer.
And with all due respect, Jessica is not quite a sweet little angelic girl.
However she did stand up to the Penta-PR and say that
she was NOT repeat NOT repeat NOT mistreated by the Iraqi people
and that is why Mr. Larry Flynt did NOT publish the raunchy photographs
she allowed to be taken of herself cavorting with her fellow soldiers in the barracks.

As for Shoshana Johnson:
Nasiriyah residents first looted the American trucks, then turned their wrath on the soldiers. "A couple of people punched me, a couple of people hit me in the back with sticks," said Miller.
Not Johnson. They opened her chemical weapons suit "and noticed I was a female," she said. Then they treated her "very well. I don't know why."
http://stripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=14196&archive=true

Deliverance came loudly and without warning. Suddenly today at the house in Samarra the prisoners heard someone kicking in the doors and shouting: "Get down! Get down!"
"I was sitting there," Miller recalled a few hours later. "Next thing I know the Marines are kicking in the door, saying get down on the floor. They said, 'If you're an American, stand up.' We stood up and they hustled us out of there."
By this time, the male prisoners had grown light beards and their shoulders had sagged; in their Iraqi prison pajamas, they could be mistaken for the other side. The Marines had trouble distinguishing Johnson as an American. "At first," she said, "they didn't realize I was American. They said, 'Get down, get down,' and one of them said, 'No, she's American.' "
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A19192-2003Apr13?language=printer

That is the sanitized version.
When the Marines demonstrated a marked reluctance to include her,
the other POWs then refused to leave the Iraqi prison without Shoshana.
THAT is the ONLY reason why Shoshana's naturally black ass
was returned to the United States
where nobody gives a damn as to whether or not she was raped.
Maybe she should dye her hair blonde.
http://www.jsonline.com/news/metro/nov03/184040.asp?showheadlines=all
Anything, as long as she does not complain too much
about her treatment at the hands of the US military,
considering that her roomate, Lori Piestewa is dead.

BAGHDAD, Iraq - Iraqi doctors took good care of captured Army Pfc. Jessica Lynch and labored hard but unsuccessfully to save her best friend, according to Iraqi television videotape shot during the soldiers’ captivity in Iraq last spring....
Lynch, 20, of Palestine, W.Va., appears in the videotape along with her best friend, Pfc. Lori Piestawa, 23, who died after Iraqi doctors failed to stop brain swelling as they treated her for serious injuries. The identities of Lynch and Piestawa were verified for NBC News by Spec. Shoshana Johnson, one of the soldiers who was rescued....
“It was a little shocking to see Lori, but it also gave me a little peace to know that they tried, they did their best for her,” said Johnson, 30, of El Paso, Texas. “I mean, it was obvious they tried to bandage her up and give her medical care.”
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3842398/

And that, my friends,
is how the Iraqi people treat
the black and the white and the native American women of the United States
when they manage to get their hands on them.
Wanna hear how the US men treat these women when they are fighting alongside them?

[forgethell]

13. What is the exact count

of enemy combatants, held by the United States, that have been burned alive? I didn't read about that one, but I can't read everything.

[DulceDecorum]

34. Lost count

And I can't read everything either.

[LARED]

80. Lost count

Ok, how about providing the count up to the point you lost count?

[forgethell]

12. Don't you see any difference between a military attack

and killing helpless hostages?

[DulceDecorum]

25. A military attack upon CIVILIANS

and holding an entire CITY hostage?

[forgethell]

27. There are

enemy fighters in the city. C'mon, be reasonable here. You and I may agree that we should never have gone in to Iraq. But we are there now. The American troops want to live and go back home as much as anybody. They will do what it takes to increase their odds of survival while carrying out their mission. If they have to go into an enemy city, they will.

I have every confidence that they will do their best to minimize enemy casualties, not becasue of *, but because they are Americans. I also have every confidence that they will shoot at those shooting at them.

Other than withdrawal, which will no happen until a new administration takes place, what is your idea? It's easy to complain, I do it all the time, but it's harder to come up with a good alternative plan, especially if it's your ass that is getting shot off by adherents of the religion of peace.

[DulceDecorum]

33. Yeah yeah yeah

Kill them all let God sort them out.

[forgethell]

41. Man, you really

don't read very well. I neither said, nor implied, that. I just said the Marines will defend themselves. Nothing wrong with that. So if people attack, there will be consequences. this is not a judgment, good or bad, on this fact, just a statement that it is a fact.

[DulceDecorum]

43. I do not call that defense

I call that attacking.
"Pacifying"
"Subduing"
"Crushing"
And killing hundreds of men women and children whose greatest crime is to live atop oil.

The Marines are there to rid the oil of the Iraqi.
And THAT is NOT defense.

[forgethell]

46. Well, some people have said that, yes

and other people, me included, have had other reasons for opposing the war in Iraq. But my original comment, which I really wish you would concentrate on concerns the burning alive of innocent hostages, not even Americans. Whatever the sins of *, and the American armed forces, that does not excuse this truly primitive behavior, which you have yet to condemn.

[frankly_fedup2]

96. You need to fix your avatar . . .

Morons is spelled wrong. You have it "morans." Should be "morons. FYI

[parasim]

97. true, but...

It's taken from the infamous image of the freeper protester that everyone loves to make fun of:



fyi

[Heyo]

2. Unfortunately...

Those are the kind of enemies we're dealing with over there....

[ret5hd]

3. What...the kind that need to be burned alive?

[Heyo]

5. No...

The kind that would hold people hostage and burn them alive...

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

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

[Heyo]

14. I don't doubt that...

..not for a second.

Heyo

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

17. Your posts seem awfully negative today

And you haven't got many posts despite being a member for a long time...

[Heyo]

19. Hey now....

almost 500 is alot for me.... sometimes I don't have a lot of time to spend online...

I'll admit, I'm a little sick of alot of the BS lately that's *everywhere*... (not just referring to here)

We all have our ups and downs, but I always speak my mind while trying to respect others doing so...

:toast:

Heyo

[forgethell]

15. I think he meant the kind

that burn people alive. Islamic fundies, so to speak.

[DulceDecorum]

9. And they wouldn't be your enemies

if you didn't try to impress them with Hellfire missiles launched INSIDE a mosque.
THAT is the kind of enemy THEY are facing there.

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

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

[forgethell]

18. I'm not supporting the

people that got us into this mess, but I do support the troops. If you fire on American Marines, you should expect to be fired back upon. Even if you are in a mosque. I'd even extend it to a church. the death of civilians that happen to be there rest squarely on the barbarians that used it for cover.

[DulceDecorum]

21. So the Marines are to live

and everyone else is to die at their hands?
Even Jesus died. Why should the Marines be spared?

Especially when they are avenging FOUR GODDAMN MERCENARIES
who sold their minds bodies and souls for the money that the Pentagon has cut from the soldiers pay and equipment.

FOUR GODDAMN MERCENARIES are the reason behind todays deaths.
Before you go out for revenge, dig TWO graves,
and in the case of Falluja, prepare to occupy one yourself.

[forgethell]

24. So you prefer that the Marines die?

Hey, don't screw around with the USMC. If you do, your blood is on your head, to coin a phrase. Stupidity often deserves the rewards it brings. The Marines arae at war and will defend their lives and their mission. They do not ask whether it is right or wrong, popular at home, or unpopular.

But, as you seem to approve the lynching of American civilians, why don't you just come out and say so.

[DulceDecorum]

26. Why are the Marines avenging MERCENARIES?

And NO I do not approve of lynching CIVLIANS And unlike you I do not give a DAMN what nationality they are.

Soldiers are supposed to fight soldiers.
Ever heard of the Geneva Conventions? They were written to PROTECT soldiers not MERCENARY SCUM and those who sniff the butts of the Dog of War.
"Stupidity often deserves the rewards it brings."

[forgethell]

37. You seem to

be a careless reader. I said that I disapproved of anybody getting killed. Perhaps you missed it. Mercenaries?? so security guards are mercenaries? if you say so.

Soldiers fight whoever shoots at them. Look, my initial post was about burning innocent CIVILIANS, not mercenaries, not soldiers, not guards, alive. But it doesn't matter if they were any of the aabve. They are totally in the power of these savages. the fact that Iraq is being occupied does not mean that it is right that they should be killed, let alone burned alive. Not in a firefight, or military strike of anykind, but to EXTORT their governments.

Now, I find this outrageous, and you want to turn the subject to the occupation. Sorry. I care about the occupation, also, but more about this right this very instant.

[DulceDecorum]

83. When 3,000 Americans perished

in the Twin Towers,
the USA went off to war without even bothering to find out who did it.

Everyone the US was furious.
Everyone in the US wanted the perpetrators dead.
How DARE they come into OUR COUNTRY and KILL us in our homes?

NEWSFLASH
The Iraqi feel exactly the same way.
And they had NOTHING to do with the collapse of the WTC or the hijacking of those planes.
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/iraq/comment/0,12956,1036687,00.html
And yet they were shocked and awed
and NOW they have a chance to get their hands on the people who rained those bombs down on them.
For nothing.
http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0127-08.htm
NOW they have a chance to nail the SOBs who
for almost fifteen years
have poisoned Iraqi children with Depleted Uranium.
http://free.freespeech.org/americanstateterrorism/iraqgenocide/HighwayofDeath.html
NOW they have a chance to assault the military that
MURDERED THOUSANDS of RETREATING Iraqis
on the Highway of Death.
http://free.freespeech.org/americanstateterrorism/iraqgenocide/HighwayofDeath.html

Meanwhile, Pretzeldent Bush ain't answering any questions in public
and if you are going to ask him questions in private,
he is not going without Unka Dick.

WHO is the real villain?
Please,
tell me,
you with the beautiful mind.
http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0416-09.htm

[forgethell]

87. You seriously doubt that

Osama was behind the WTC??

I am not interested, in this thread, about WHY the US is there. Start another damn thread. I just see that some savages are holding hostages and threatening to BURN THEM ALIVE!!!! You cannot possibly send me enough links to change my mind that this is OUTRAGEOUS, that these people are EVIL BEYOND BELIEF.

Did you read my comment about the GORDIAN knot? When push comes to shove, I am an American, not a 'citizen of the world'. I care more about my own people than I do about strangers. I want my problems solved, same as any body else, and my energy will go to that first.

And how are they striking at America by BURNING alive some innocent Japanese?


And must you descend to sarcastic insult?

[Heyo]

What's the deal...

.. with the reports that those 4 guys were delivering food?

I know they worked for Blackwater and all.. but I've been hearing this report everywhere....

Heyo

[DulceDecorum]

39. Yeah Dominos

opened up a franchise.
And the Iraqi's really like that pork salami.

[Heyo]

50. Dominos...

.. has salami as a topping?

:9

Heyo

[Heyo]

35. What's the deal...

.. with the reports that those 4 guys were delivering food?

I know they worked for Blackwater and all.. but I've been hearing this report everywhere....

Heyo

[DulceDecorum]

30. And if you fire on an Iraqi

who just so happens to have a gun,
WHAT the heck do you think he is going to do?

And if ever ANYONE fired upon a church during prayers,
we would NEVER hear the end of it.
But when the Marines bomb a MOSQUE during prayers, that is kosher?

I can hardly wait to for that International Court to convene.

[forgethell]

44. Well,

I assume he will defend himself, also. I have no problem with that. And, I suppose that if someone fired at a church where insurgents were holed up, we'd all feel pretty much the same way as we do now.. Are the Marines a Jewish outfit?

The International court will do nothing, it can do nothing. If you remeber, * in his wisdom, has kept us out of it, and it has no authority. Hell, even the World Court, which does have some authority, only has as much as the signatories will follow. Have you followed the ruling about the US executing foreign nationals.

[LARED]

81. launched INSIDE a mosque?

Don't you mean launched from inside a mosque?

[DulceDecorum]

82. USMC v Allah

On Wednesday, U.S. Marines attacked a mosque complex in Fallujah with two 225-kg. bombs and rockets, after Sunni insurgents had taken refuge inside the complex.

The strike came as worshipers had gathered for afternoon prayers at the Abdul-Aziz al-Samarrai mosque and went on for six hours. At least 25 people were killed.

Brig.-Gen. Mark Kimmitt defended the attack on the holy site, which normally is protected from attack under the Geneva Convention.

"It can be attacked when there is a military necessity brought on by the fact that the enemy is storing weapons, using weapons, inciting violence and executing violence from its grounds,'' Kimmett told CNN.
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1081344818006_75/?hub=TopStories

Despite earlier indicating that up to 40 suspected insurgents were killed in the air strike on the mosque, a marine officer later admitted that US forces had failed to find any bodies inside.
"When we hit that building I thought we had killed all the bad guys, but when we went in they didn't find any bad guys in the building," Lieutenant Colonel Brennan Byrne told AFP.
Instead, he speculated the insurgents may have fled after a Cobra helicopter gunship fired a Hellfire missile at the mosque, and before an aircraft dropped a laser-guided precision bomb.
http://www.hipakistan.com/en/detail.php?newsId=en60618&F_catID=&f_type=source

WHAT NO INSURGENTS?
AND NO WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION?

More than 300 local inhabitants were killed in a five-day-old offensive by U.S. occupation forces on Fallujah – now sealed off by American soldiers with corpses littering the streets after the only hospital was taken over.
U.S. civil administrator in Iraq Paul Bremer Friday, April 9, declared a suspension of the military offensive on Fallujah.
A few minutes later, F16s were seen shelling the city, much to the consternation of ordinary Iraqis hoping for an end to a one-year occupation.
http://www.islam-online.net/English/News/2004-04/09/article03.shtml

THE FIRST CASUALTY WAS TRUTH.

"You have a small number of terrorists, a small number of militias, coupled with some demonstrations and some lawlessness. And it's a serious problem," Rumsfeld said.
http://www.hipakistan.com/en/detail.php?newsId=en60618&F_catID=&f_type=source

A number so very small that a few good men are BOMBING MOSQUES!!

I recently received an email from a reliable administration source. This highly reputable source tells me that between campaign fundraisers, watching Major League baseball games, and vacationing at his Texas ranch, his top advisors told President Bush of the Sadr Offensive and the deteriorating situation in Iraq via conference call. On being informed that many poor US foot soldiers were dying or dead, he listened on in silence. Mr. President, what will we do?" he was asked. According to this official, President Bush hesitated for a second, then smirked, "Let them eat lead."
http://lewrockwell.com/wiggins/wiggins10.html

And the good people of Iraq,
will be obedient to their new master who is busy tending his own barbecue,
just as enthusiastically as they have obeyed his earlier directive to "bring 'em on."

Where will you be when these Marines come home?
Will you be one of those sneering at them, saying "get a job?"
What say you of the men holed up in Fort Stewart?
Do you REALLY support the troops?
Then BRING THEM HOME
before they do something else to offend the deity.

[DulceDecorum]

7. Shocked and awed

at the lengths that people will go to STOP their nation from being massacred wholesale?

Or does it only bother you when COALTION troops die?
How did you feel when Bagdad was being bombed?

In order for the ALL the killing to stop
THE COALITION MUST WITHDRAW IMMEDIATELY.

[forgethell]

20. It bothers me when

anybody dies. But, I support the American troops, even if they are not being wisely used.

But your premise is ridiculous. If all the coalition troops withdrew by midnight, by dawn the various factions in Iraq would be killing each other, as they have for decades. I would NOT want to be a Sunni in such a situation, as they are vastly outnumbered by the Kurds and Shiites. And now the later two are armed.

Why do people without an rgument to make always attack the motives of those they disagree with? Perhaps you can tell me?

[DulceDecorum]

38. So?

Why should you care if they start killing each other?

I thought you were complaining because they were killing MARINES and taking COALITION nationals hostage.

What is this?
The White Man's Burden.
Only saving them from themselves?
Damn savages can't rule themselves.
GET OUTTA THERE.
Already.

[forgethell]

47. It is not me

that doesn't care if they kill each other, it is you. But yes, I was expressing my disgust at animals who would BURN innocent people, or even guilty one, ALIVE. and those who cannot see this as evil.

[jobycom]

11. So they should play nice while we slaughter their children?

Damn right that's what I'd threaten to do. What would you do if a foreign nation invaded your land and killed thousands of people? Oh wait, we know, because it happened on 9-11. We went to Afghanistan, blew up everything that moved (including thousands of children), slaughtered perhaps 100K people there (certainly close), packed thousands into container crates to suffocate, fired bullets into the crates from time to time, and beat to death many who we wanted to testify, whether they had any connection to what happened on 9-11 or not.

WHo do you think THEY think are the monsters?

Americans wanted war? This is war. People tend to fight back when you try to kill their kids. We need to grow up and realize what we are doing. When the kids from Lord of the Flies take over, things get messy.

[forgethell]

22. They're killing hostages,

civilians who are trying to help, not even Americans, or Israelis. Hey, we can spare a few Israelis can't we?? (that was called sarcasm for those too angry to get it).

and no country is going to change its foreign policies to spare a few lives of hostages. If they do, hostages will be taken from that country from then own. So in addition to being evil, these individuals are stupid. All that they will get is a few dead hostages and their own, richly deserved, demise.

[DulceDecorum]

28. And with a bit of luck

the CIVILANS in the nations of the hostages will say ENOUGH.
LEAVE our fellow CIVILANS in Iraq alone.

[forgethell]

55. so basically

you're saying it's alright to kill innocent people, if you want something badly enough??

[jobycom]

63. No, I wouldn't, killing innocent people is wrong, but we are the ones

doing it. I do, however, believe that a person can kill in self-defense. When soldiers are invading your land and killing your family, fighting back is self-defense.

I don't like what the hostage takers are doing. But I think it is the height of hypocrisy, and of evil, to pretend that we are the victims, that we aren't the cause of all of this, that the blood of those hostages isn't primarily on our hands. War makes people do evil things. That's why we should have avoided it in the first place.

[forgethell]

74. Sure, you can kill in self-defense

but killing a hostage is NOT self-defense. We are not the 'cause' of their mudering ways, they are. War doesn't 'make' people do evil things, they do them because they choose to. I will admit it gives them more opportunity and incentive to choose evil, but all people remain responsible for what they do. You HAVE heard of the Nuremberg trials, haven't you?

And besides, 'we', Americans, are not the victims. It's some poor Japanese citizens who were there for humanitarian purposes. God!

[jobycom]

60. They aren't evil or stupid, they are desparate beyond reason. nt

nt

[forgethell]

64. Why?

are they so desperate? America WANTS to bring the troops home. And whether or not you agree with the reasoning that got us into Iraq, they are much better off without Saddam. All they have to do is work together peacefully, and soon enough America will be gone. Maybe with all the oil, maybe without.

They ARE evil and stupid. No desperation is sufficient justification for burning 3 people to death.

[jobycom]

70. There is so much you don't get

I'm not trying to insult you in any of this, but you are extremely naive about Iraq, it's variety of peoples, it's needs, and our role in the country. And you seem to have no interest in learning anything, you seem to want to shout out some popularized bumper-sticker level platitudes about them.

There are 13 different major factions in Iraq, and many sub factions amongst them. As in any complex society, a simple democracy will be fatal, literally, to some of those groups. The reason Iraq was at peace, and somewhat stable given the deep divisions, was because of the brutality of Hussein. I don't like him, he's a bad man, but we now see why such a brutal man took and held power in Iraq for so long. That is the type of leader who could control the factions. Without him, there would have been terrorism, there would have been constant battling amongst the different factions-- in other words, there would have been what we see now.

Each of those factions fears the others taking control. No matter who takes control, it will mean death to some of the others. So each is going to try to take control before the others do. Into that mix our troops were thrown. We are the big old stick laying on the ground. Each side wants to use us to knock down the other guys. We are being used, like big, stupid pawns, to ensure victory for some faction or another.

So the other factions are not going to like us. Our being there means they will die. They are going to do what they can to drive us out. First, the Sunnis wanted us gone, because it was clear they were the ones who would get shafted when we left. So they stayed loyal to Hussein. But now, the Shiites see us about to leave, and they see us trying to organize things so that other groups can gang up on the Shiites, endangering their culture, their religion, and their existence. So they are now trying to seize power before we leave. They are even allying with the Sunnis-- a historically amazing thing, since they hate the Sunnis far worse than Americans, and have for a millenium-- to defeat us, because they are terrified that when we leave the other factions will overrun them.

Throw into this mix instigators like Al-Queda, who could never get a foothold in Iraq before, because of Hussein, who are now the next biggest stick. Someone will pick them up to hit us with it. At first, that was the Sunnis, since Al-Queda is Sunni. But now, the Shia need a big stick, so they are looking at Al-Queda too, at least indirectly.

There are other sticks lying around. Syria, Hamas, Palestine, China maybe... And then there is the WMD-- world opinion. If they can turn world opinion against us, we might be forced to leave. That's what this threat to burn hostages is about. They are trying to horrify our allies, to make them question whether supporting our illegal invasion is worth it. They know approval of our actions is already weak. They have seen that violence can work-- it did in Spain. And so they are trying it.

They have nothing to lose, because we have left them nothing to lose. Bush is blowing this in every way. He had no plans to handle Iraq after the invasion. He has no idea what to do now. He isn't even paying much attention. So there is no fair and equitable plan being discussed. There is no hope in Iraq that things will be better soon. Hussein is gone, but there is only the spectre of anarchy, civil war, and bloodshed in his place. So they are trying to take care of themselves before the inevitable maelstrom erupts.

I'm sure you won't get any of that. You'll say "support our troops" again, or claim that the Iraqis are "evildoers." But the picture is complex, and that complexity is what Bush never got. It's why we should have stayed out in the first place. Negotiations and diplomacy were offered by Hussein to head off the invasion, but Bush invaded anyway. He wanted this war. So blame him for burned civilians, and dead soldiers, and the massacres to come. It's what happens when you put single-minded morons into positions of power.

[pberq]

72. U.S. instigation

What about the active instigation of much of the recent violence by the U.S. - Bremer shutting down Sadr's newspaper, the terrorism by U.S. troops against the residents of Fallujah?

Justin Raimondo at anitwar.com suggets that things are going exactly as planned by the neocon junta in Washington. Check out the April 5 column:

http://www.antiwar.com/justin

"Events that may seem negative … while unfortunate in themselves, are actually part of the hawks' broader agenda. Each crisis will draw U.S. forces further into the region and each countermove in turn will create problems that can only be fixed by still further American involvement, until democratic governments – or, failing that, U.S. troops – rule the entire Middle East."

[forgethell]

75. NO, you are the one

who doesn't get it. I understand all that. But it is somewhat irrelevant to us. Our troops are being shot at; they will take care of the situation. I suggest you study the tale of the Gordian knot. Very instructive for these kinds of situations involving great comlexity.

Look, the Iraq war was a bad idea. But we are not responsible for the fact that these people hate each other. As Rodney King might say, 'why can't they all just get along?' (/sarcasm off). I am only concerned with the hostages. I am concerned with the evil-doers that have them, and those that support them. I am not condemning Iraqis in general.

[Heyo]

40. Alot of accusations there....

Alot of big figures there....

can you back any of that up?

Heyo

[DulceDecorum]

45. Why should I?

Listen carefully, when the charges at the International Court when the perpetrators of these BRUTAL attacks on CIVILIANS are read.
Then look closely at the evidence that will be presented. It will hold up better than any presentation Colin Powell has ever made.

[forgethell]

48. I'll listen very carefully

, but I'm not holding my breath till it happens.

[Heyo]

49. How come whenever it's American soldiers..

.. it's "brutal attacks on civilians".. but when our soldiers get killed for no reason it's an "insurgency"..

I don't buy it...

I have more faith in our soldiers than any nutcases who would drag burned bodies through the streets.... sorry if this offends anyone..

If our soldiers did not get attacked, this WOULD NOT HAPPEN...

And that is a fact...

These soldiers are your friends and neighbors and children, borthers, sisters of your friends and neighbors... do they know you think so low of them?

Personally, I don't buy anything anyone related to that hard core Islamic extremism has to say... I just don't and probably never will.

Heyo

[jobycom]

61. For no reason, eh?

Our soldiers aren't being killed for no reason, they are being killed because they have invaded a nation at peace, slaughtered thousands of people, and won't leave. Would that be a good enough reason if it were another nation's soldiers killing your family?

[forgethell]

65. It would be if we had not already

been beaten, and the enemy was in control. But not under the current circumstances in Iraq. And in any event, I don't know your nationality, but I am an American, and will support the troops.

[Heyo]

67. We have not been beaten....

.. that goes beyond distortion of truth.. it's an outright lie. Sorry to have to say that,I really am.

We are showing more restaint than any military conflict in history that I have ever heard of in human history... doesn't mean we have been beaten...

Will you retract that statement when it turns out to be wrong?

Heyo

[forgethell]

76. Heyo

I think you misunderstood what I said. I was replying to a hypothetical situation where America had been succesfully invaded, not that the US forces had been beaten in Iraq.

[Heyo]

79. Okay...

Gotcha..

:toast:

[jobycom]

68. I'm not sure what you are trying to say

Are you saying that since we had already beaten Iraq they don't have the right to rebel? In which case you are calling the French Resistance bad.

The current circumstances in Iraq is that they are living under an oppressive regime that overthrew their last oppressive regime, and they want us gone.

As for supporting the troops, the Iraqis have no reason to support the troops that invaded them, so I'm not sure what you are saying there, either. If this is one of those Bush-esque attempts to end an argument by implying you are more patriotic than me, you are doing so in the wrong place. This isn't a discussion about supporting our troops, this is a discussion about why Iraqis are threatening horrific violence against our allies. But if you want to discuss supporting our troops, then let's get them out of a place they should have never been sent and quit setting them up as targets so that Bush can enrich his oil buddies. "Support our troops" means making sure they are not being used in exactly the way they are now being used.

[forgethell]

77. Yeah,

basically I'm saying that the Coalition is in control, and has the right to defend their control. That doesn't mean the fact that they are there is right, however. Stop trying to change the damn subject. French Resistance my ass! Are you comparing the US to tha Nazis, because Saddam seems a much better fit.

Also, the regime is not nearly so oppressive as Saddam's. At least there will not be mass graves uncovered. And I'm pretty sure that if US troops rape any women, they won't do it in front of their husbands.

You last paragraph puzzles me. I support the troops. They are not Iraqi troops, so no, I don't think the Iraqis are obliged to 'support' them. I have no idea what you are trying to say.

And it is not a discussion about why some evil-doing animals in Iraq are threatening innocent civilians. It doesn't matter, and I don't give a damn. It is about expressing dismay that such demons from hell, I can think of no better description, are able to walk the earth looking like people.

YOur last statement is especially deceptive. OK, let's work to bring the troops home. But while they are there, let's admit that they have the right to defend themselves.

[Heyo]

66. A nation at peace?

sure about that?

Correction, it's not for no reason... it's to create chaos and to make life miserable for the regular citicenz trying to go about their lives, but directly, and indrectly because of the necessary response...

Killing people to try and turn the country into a cesspool of bloodshed is even worse then "no reason"...

If they'd stop attacking our troops, there wouldn't be a shot fired...

Heyo

[jobycom]

69. Iraq was not at war with anyone when we invaded

Which means we fired the first shots, we are the guilty party. If WE weren't over there, in their lands, in their homes, uninvited, they would not attacking our troops.

What part of that are you unable to get? Do you think we own Iraq, or have some claim on it? What do you think makes it acceptable for us to be there? It's there house, not ours. A burglar that breaks into your house doesn't have the right to kill you for trying to make him leave, even if you are doing so by force.

[Heyo]

71. We are not "stealing" Iraq....

We are there to depose the dictator and ensure that another dictator doesn't take power...

I am totally fine with dictators being removed and ALL people living in freedom.... the freedom many of us take for granted.

Is there a price? absolutely...do we like to pay it? No way. but nobody should have to live under that kind of tyranny...

And the insurgency know WANTS that country returned to tyranny, and it's because of THEM that there is all the bloodshed now after the fact.

If they didn't attack our soldiers.. left us alone and let us continue building schools and hospitals and the like, there wouldn't be so much as a shot fired...

Heyo

[jobycom]

73. Why the quotes, I didn't say stealing

We invaded. ANd I'm glad you are okay with dictators being deposed. We will depose one in November.

As for Hussein's excesses, they were overblown, just as the WMD story was. There were no human shredding machines. People weren't cowering in fear for their lives. Hussein was tough on dissidents, terrorists, and criminals, but he did little that we haven't been doing since taking over. You're sense of absolutes would work well in Hollywood scripts, but in the real world Iraq under Hussein was better than it is now, "free" or not.

Hussein built hospitals and schools, too, remember? We checked one of our soldiers out of one. We pretended we needed guns to do it, but it was a good hospital, that saved her life.

And you keep reciting that silliness that if they hadn't shot at us we wouldn't have had to shoot them. The reverse is just as true. If we had not invaded, they wouldn't be killing us. And has it entered your thoughts yet that if they were happy we were there they wouldn't be shooting in the first place?

We are the bad guys, they are the victims. Hussein's sins in no way excuse ours. And for the record, I don't blame our troops. I blame Bush, and I blame the wimpass Americans who let him invade. They betrayed our troops, and Iraq.

[Heyo]

78. There's a fundamental thing here...

.. That we will never agree on..

You are truly a Saddam appologist, and if you want to argue against that point, read your post again and prove yourself wrong....

There's no point in arguing with somebody like you, you are obviously totally okay with Saddam.

I know alot of people who oppose the war are accused of being appologists for him, I don't agree with how that's thrown around...

YOU my freind really ARE one.... and I truly feel sorry for you because of it....especially seeing the tremendous amount of evidence contrary to what you say...

I'll give you this piece of advice.. pay close attention to his trial.... you have alot to learn from it..

Best of luck to you.

Heyo

[DulceDecorum]

85. If the soldiers CAME HOME

they would NOT be attacked.
They are the invaders.
They are the occupiers.
And they are getting their asses kicked.
Why do you think morale is low?
The US military man KNOWS that he is fighting on the side of injustice.
That is why so very many of them have chosen to put themselves out of their misery.

Obviously, American and Iraqi authorities have branded the Iraqi insurgency a criminal -- and indeed, terrorist -- enterprise, and branded its acts unlawful as a result. But there is at least a colorable argument that there should be combatant immunity on the part of the Iraqi insurgents. And if the Blackwater employees can indeed be categorized as combatants, then the incident was merely one more case of soldiers killing soldiers in war -- a tragic, but hardly criminal, occurrence.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/04/05/carter.iraq/

[Name removed]

103. Deleted message

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

[DulceDecorum]

105. Since when have Muslims been able

to suspend the laws of physics?

Since you are making a concerted attempt to convince that you are yourself a Muslim, tell us that.
Tell us how come there were no Muslim names on ANY of the manifests.

And then if you are still around, there are other questions we would like you to answer before we pull that sheet off your head.

[jobycom]

62. Yes

Nothing I said hasn't been widely reported in mainstream media sources. What part do you doubt, and why don't you know the basic facts of something you are so certain of?

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

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

[Woody Box]

36. Put them into a sealed container

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article3267.htm

I have no comment; I am beyond speechless at people who would do, or even threaten, such a thing.

[forgethell]

51. Yes, that is horrible.

If it happened. As I have not seen the video, I have no way to judge. But barbarity on one side does not excuse barbarity on the other. Where is your outrage over the 'burning alive' bit?

[Woody Box]

56. Outrage

First, they didn't burn them yet.

Second, I keep my outrageous feelings with me. If I would start a thread everytime I find something outrageous I would have no time to do anything else. I don't excuse coming barbarities by mentioning barbarities in the past.

The point is: You startet the thread. You seemingly never heard of Hiroshima, Dresden and other cities where hundreds of thousands of people were burned alive. And you are outraged at the intention of some people to burn other people? Something that never happened before?

In which world are you living?

[forgethell]

57. Of course, I've heard of them

very bad. But that was a long time ago, it was war, the Japanese and German governments could defend themselves. It probably was a war crime, and is probably the reason that the Allies didn't prosecute the AXIS for the same type of activities, instead picking up 'genocide', and other charges. Aand there is not much to be done about it now.

This is TODAY, this is THIS VERY MINUTE. This is something that can be prevented.

Why do people without a valid argument to their name always want to change the subject and question other people's motives? I ask rheotorically, but I think I know th eanswer.

Look, unlike you and God, I can't be concerned about all problems all the time. so I pick and choose the ones that are most important to me. What does Hiroshima have to do with these barbarian animals in Iraq?

[Bolo Boffin]

58. Concerning the "attack" on an Iraqi mosque

http://cnn.netscape.cnn.com/news/story.jsp?floc=NW_1-T&oldflok=FF-APO-1107&idq=/ff/story/0001%2F20040407%2F1738483403.htm&sc=1107

The fight began when a Marine vehicle was hit by a rocket-propelled grenade fired from the mosque, wounding five Marines, and a large U.S. force converged on it, Byrne said.

...Witnesses said part of a wall surrounding the mosque compound was destroyed but the main building was not damaged.

In Baghdad, Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt told CNN that from photos of the mosque he had seen, ``the actual mosque structure itself'' was not damaged.

I realize that there are those here who won't accept the word of a Pentagon spokesperson. I can't help that. This is their story, and they're sticking to it.

[Woody Box]

59. The problem with pentagon statements is

they are not always wrong (then we would know the opposite is true), just sometimes, 50% estimated. This is maximum redundancy, i.e. nil information can be extracted from a pentagon statement.

[DulceDecorum]

84. PSYOPS personnel and CNN

TRUTH SUPPRESSION TECHNIQUES

1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil. Regardless of what you know, don't discuss it -- especially if you are a public figure, news anchor, etc. If it's not reported, it didn't happen, and you never have to deal with the issues.

2. Become incredulous and indignant. Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus on side issues which can be used to show the topic as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the "How dare you!" gambit.

3. Create rumor mongers. Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations. Other derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well. This method which works especially well with a silent press, because the only way the public can learn of the facts are through such "arguable rumors". If you can associate the material with the Internet, use this fact to certify it a "wild rumor" which can have no basis in fact.
http://www.universalway.org/Foreign/truthsuppression.html

THE AWFUL TRUTH.

FAIR commends CNN for acknowledging that the presence of PSYOPS personnel in the newsroom was, in its words, "inappropriate." It is unfortunate that the network came to that conclusion only after the program's existence was revealed in February by the Dutch newspaper Trouw (2/21/00).
http://www.fair.org/activism/psyops-response.html

"And then there was the office of strategic influence. <...> I went down that next day and said fine, if you want to savage this thing fine I'll give you the corpse. There's the name. You can have the name, but I'm gonna keep doing every single thing that needs to be done and I have." - Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, 2002-11-18
http://www.disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=Office_of_Strategic_Influence

An uneasy ceasefire in Fallujah ended Marines complained they were being attacked. Five days of fighting has killed more than 280 Iraqis and four Marines. The people of Fallujah carried their dead to the city's soccer stadium and buried them under the field on Friday, unable to get to cemeteries because of a U.S. siege of the city. And hundreds of women, children and the elderly streamed out of the city.
<snip>
Iraq's top U.S. administrator, L. Paul Bremer, said the unilateral pause was also aimed at allowing humanitarian aid to enter the city and Fallujah residents to tend to their dead.

Many families, emerging from their homes for the first time in days, buried slain relatives in the city football stadium.

A stream of hundreds of cars carrying women, children and elderly headed out of the city after Marines announced they would be allowed to leave. Families pleaded to be allowed to take out men, and when Marines refused, some entire families turned back.
The heavy fighting in Fallujah — during which mosques have been damaged and buildings demolished — has made the city of 200,000 a symbol of resistance for some Iraqis and threatens to divide the Iraqi Governing Council and the U.S. administration that appointed it.
Military hesitation over the halt in fighting was clear. After initially being ordered to cease all offensive operations, Marines quickly demanded and received permission to launch assaults to prevent attacks if needed.
"We said to them (the commanders): 'We are going to lose people if we don't go back on offensive ops.' So we got the word," Marine Maj. Pete Farnun told The Associated Press.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/02/24/iraq/main541815.shtml

The Pentagon is developing alternatives to bombing mosques. Fallujah shows why such technologies should move forward
Is it better to blow up mosque -- or just slime it? It's a serious question, and one that the Pentagon brass should be asking itself after the furor surrounding an American missile strike on a mosque in the Iraqi city of Fallujah on Apr. 7. The move enraged both Sunnis and Shiites, not just in Iraq but across the Muslim world. And it tainted an otherwise perfectly justifiable military action -- the troops were trying to subdue insurgents who had perpetrated unspeakable acts against foreign contractors
(OUTLAW MECENARIES WHO ARE SUCKING THE PAY OF THE MARINES NOW SENT TO AVENGE THEM)
when they ambushed and killed four U.S. citizens
(WHO WERE UNDISPUTEDLY ILLEGAL COMBATANTS AND WHOSE DEATHS ARE PERFECTLY LEGAL),
dismembered their bodies, and hung them from a nearby bridge.
(OK, THAT WAS ABOVE AND BEYOND THE CALL OF DUTY)
The U.S. retaliation in the epicenter of Iraq's dangerous Sunni Triangle killed at least 40 Iraqis, some of them women and children, witnesses claim. The U.S. military said the bombing simply knocked down walls, hadn't killed anyone, and was only a last-resort action to root out insurgents subjecting U.S. Marines to withering fire from within the holy site.
http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/apr2004/tc2004049_0745_tc120.htm


Finally, Ambassador Bremer issued a third statement today, stating that today at 1200 coalition forces initiated a unilateral suspension of offensive operations in Fallujah in order to hold a meeting between members of the Iraqi Governing Council, Fallujah leadership, and leaders of the anti-coalition forces; to allow delivery of additional supplies provided by the Iraqi government; and to allow residents of Fallujah to tend to wounded and dead. During the suspension period, coalition forces retain the inherent right of self-defense and will remain fully prepared to resume offensive operations unless significant progress in these discussions occurs.
<snip>
We of course have out in the west the Al Anbar province, with the key towns of Ar Ramadi and Fallujah. As you know, at 1200 today we announced a unilateral suspension of operations in Fallujah. As Mr. Senor said, the purpose of those -- that unilateral suspension of operations is to give a political track an opportunity to attempt to reduce the violence. They are conducting those discussions at this time, and we'll let them work. However, it is important to understand that the coalition remains firm that, should these discussions break down, the coalition military forces are prepared to go back on the offensive operations, and at no time during the suspension of offensive operations do soldiers forfeit the inherent right of self-defense. If fired upon, they will fire back.
<snip>

Q And for Mr. Senor, two Governing Council members, Dr. Pachachi, and another individual who my Western tongue cannot get around quite yet, were both on television criticizing the Fallujah offensive and saying that it was illegal and amounted to collective punishment. I'm curious if you could respond to that.

MR. SENOR: I think everyone understands that we have a responsibility to address a situation that is hostile, and address a situation in which four American contractors, four American civilian contractors were not only killed but were mutilated and dragged through the streets; a situation in which five soldiers were recently killed there. This is not something that we can just turn our heads and look the other way. This is a situation we have to address head on. And General Kimmitt has spoken to -- over the past few days has spoken to the things -- the steps the coalition military has taken in order to address the situation.
<snip>

Q (Through interpreter.) Sadeq Mahim (ph) from Al Zaman newspaper. General Kimmitt, since you have suspended activities -- offensive activities in Fallujah, we heard that after an hour and a half there was a violation of this. We would like some details as to why does this violation it happened and where did it happen from. Is it from the coalition, or what?
My second question: In Fallujah there was a crime that was condemned by the people of Iraq, but is it possible to treat an error by another error? Yes, we know that there was a crime that was committed by some people. If in the United States somebody committed a crime, is it fair to punish a whole city for that? Thank you.

GEN. KIMMITT: That's a very good question because I think that may be some of the blather that we're seeing over some of the other media. There's trying to be painted a picture that somehow the combat operations running in Fallujah are collective punishment to the city of Fallujah because of the crimes of one or two people or a larger crowd. Nothing could be further from the truth. We run extraordinarily precise operations focused exclusively on people that we suspect of, and have intelligence on, being perpetrators of crime, of violence against the coalition, of violence against the Iraqi people.
Those citizens in Fallujah who are just trying to live their life until the day Iraq turns into a functioning democracy have absolutely nothing to fear from the coalition. The operations are not punitive. The operations are extremely precise. And we go out of our way to use every method, every technique, every tactic we know to make sure that the focus of our combat operations is against people that would do violence to the people of Iraq and people who would do violence to the coalition, and try to keep the non-combatants as safe as possible.
This comment you made about a potential violation in the suspension this afternoon: again, at 1200 hours today, the coalition unilaterally suspended offensive operations. If there was a violation, it could well be that some of the enemy that were fighting in Fallujah, for some reason, whatever reason, didn't agree with that suspension. They were not ready to put down their weapons. They were not ready to stop killing civilians and stop killing soldiers and stop killing Marines, so they probably continued to fire. And with the inherent right of self-defense that every one of our soldiers and Marines possesses, they returned (aimed ?) shots. And my estimation is that they were probably quite effective in that process.
http://www.dod.mil/transcripts/2004/tr20040409-0591.html

Hellfire missiles bring damnation upon those who fire them.

[DulceDecorum]

86. Burning Issues

I have no comment.

Did you know that the United States is the only western nation to still use the death penalty.
This topic is important because it costs us, the people a significant amount of money. Each capital punishment trial alone costs twice as much as sentencing the criminal to life in prison. This cost does not even include the execution it self. One execution is about 3.2 million dollars, or about six times the cost of a life-imprisonment sentence.
I feel that I am a credible source to inform you about the death penalty because I myself have done extensive research on it.
Capital punishment has been executed throughout the world for centuries and is continued to this day in the United States.
<snip>

Throughout history there have been many different styles of execution. One historical method was burning at the stake. This was a popular death sentence and means of torture, used mostly for heretics, witches, and suspicious women. Burning dates back the Christian era where in 1643 and edict declared it illegal to burn witches. The last legal execution by burning at the stake came with the end of the Spanish Inquisition in 1834.

<snip>
Capital punishment is performed in Five different methods in the United States. The most popular form is by lethal injection. It is the most common used means of execution in the U.S. On December 7th 1982, Texas became the first state to use lethal injection. The prisoner is secured on a gurney and receives several drugs intravenous. The inmate is secured with lined ankle and wrist restraints to a gurney in the preparation room outside the chamber. Cardiac monitor leads and a stethoscope are attached. Two saline intravenous lines are started, one in each arm, and the inmate is covered with a sheet. Sodium Thiopental causes unconsciousness. Pancuronium Bromide stops respiration. Potassium Chloride stops heart. The saline intravenous lines are turned off and the thiopental sodium is injected which puts the inmate into a deep sleep. A second chemical agent, procuronium bromide (the generic name for Pavulon), follows. This agent is a total muscle relaxer. The inmate stops breathing and dies soon afterward.
Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware Idaho Illinois Indiana Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Mississippi Missouri Montana Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee (starting Jan 1, 1999) Texas Utah Virginia Washington Wyoming all use lethal injection as their main way of execution.

Electrocution is also another method. It produces visibly destructive effects as the body's internal organs are burned; the prisoner often leaps forward against the restraining straps when the switch is thrown. The body changes color, the flesh swells and may even catch fire. The prisoner may defecate, urinate or vomit blood. Witnesses always report that there is a smell of burning flesh.
Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Nebraska, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia all have electrocution as a means of execution.

http://www.ic.sunysb.edu/Stu/gnwilson/

More than 350 people have been executed in the USA since 1990. The USA has the highest known death row population on earth: over 3,300 people await their deaths at the hands of US authorities.
International human rights standards seek to restrict the scope of the death penalty. They forbid its use against juvenile offenders, see it as an unacceptable punishment for the mentally impaired, and demand the highest legal safeguards for all capital trials. The USA fails to meet these minimum standards on all counts.
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Human_Rights/Death_Penalty_USA_RFA.html

LET US NOT FORGET THE EVER CHIVALROUS ENGLISHMEN FROM THE LAND OF BLAIR.

No words can adequately describe the disgraceful ingratitude and apathy of Charles and his advisers in leaving the Maid to her fate. If military force had not availed, they had prisoners like the Earl of Suffolk in their hands, for whom she could have been exchanged. Joan was sold by John of Luxembourg to the English for a sum which would amount to several hundred thousand dollars in modern money. There can be no doubt that the English, partly because they feared their prisoner with a superstitious terror, partly because they were ashamed of the dread which she inspired, were determined at all costs to take her life. They could not put her to death for having beaten them, but they could get her sentenced as a witch and a heretic.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08409c.htm
And so,
they torched her.

And it is so very nice to see that the US military and the people of Japan have gotten over that little bit of unpleasantness in Hawaii. And Formosa. And Hiroshima. And Nagasaki.
"...for a century and a half now, America and Japan have formed one of the great and enduring alliances of modern times. From that alliance has come an era of peace in the Pacific."
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/02/20020218-2.html

Say, did any of those guys catch on fire when those atomic bombs landed on them?
You know, the ones that saved lives.
I am beyond speechless at people who would do, or even threaten, such a thing.

And what is happening to the Coalition of the Bribed and the Bullied?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1188897,00.html
Or, in view of the US/UK hired and very well-paid hit-men,
http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,1103566,00.html
perhaps we should we refer to it as the Coalition of the Billing.

Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.
http://www.poets.org/poems/poems.cfm?prmID=1369

Ahh, the Ukrainians have been forced out of their base in Kut.
Oh well, they'd better those weapons close by. Never know when they'll be needing them.

History is full of irony. Only yesterday Ukraine was praised for voluntarily renouncing its gigantic nuclear arsenal. Today the country finds itself under the U.S.'s careful watch. Once an example of peaceful denuclearization (much needed at present), Ukraine is now recognized as a threat to NATO members.
http://www.expressnews.ualberta.ca/expressnews/articles/ideas.cfm?p_ID=4383&s=a

Kazakhstan.
http://archive.tol.cz/transitions/oct98/cold-war.html
Sealed, signed, and delivered to Tampa, Florida.
http://www.usembassy-kazakhstan.freenet.kz/press-releases/franksmod.html
Come to papa!!!
Meanwhile, the Army Corps of Engineers is studying bids from about a dozen firms looking to land pieces of a $500 million infrastructure project for the Persian Gulf region, including Iraq. The Army Corps has already tapped KBR to take the lead in putting out fires in Iraq's southern oil fields. And according to Pentagon sources, KBR also recently won a contract from the Defense Threat Reduction Agency to oversee a group of companies and specialists that will handle and dispose of any weapons of mass destruction found in Iraq. Since 2001, KBR has done similar work in Kazakhstan and Russia for the Defense Threat Reduction Agency.
http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/0403/041103nj1.htm

In late February, Pentagon chief Donald Rumsfeld visited the country's capital, Astana, on a swing through Central Asia to talk about expanding military relations. Of the five former Soviet Central Asian states, Kazakhstan is currently receiving the most U.S. aid - some US$92 million last year, more than half of which went to security and military assistance, including helicopters, military cargo aircraft, and coast guard vessels for use in defending the country's interests in the Caspian Sea.
"Kazakhstan is an important country in the global war on terror and has been wonderfully helpful in Iraq , and I came here to personally say 'thank you' and express our appreciation," Rumsfeld said during his visit.
While cooperating with Washington, however, the Nazarbayev government has also compiled a record of manipulating elections. Observers from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), of which the U.S. is a member, found that the country's 1999 presidential and parliamentary elections did not meet international standards.
<snip>
Over the past year, according to a recent report by the Financial Times, however, the Nazarbayev government has retained several influential lobbying firms in Washington, including the largest, Patton Boggs, and in other western capitals to enhance the Kazakhstan's image in Congress, the Bush administration, and the media.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/ips/lobe73.html

The new independent states of the former Soviet Union and the nascent democracies of Central and Eastern Europe have overturned communism but have not fully replaced the socialist legal system. Even in those states which have adopted significant substantive laws, there remain problems of enforcement. Our attorneys advise the foreign investor on how to structure and implement an investment in this fluid atmosphere. Recently, as one example, we managed the reorganization of the legal and capital structure of the Caspian Pipeline Consortium project in Western Kazakhstan/Southern Russia. The resultant enterprise accommodates the corporate structuring, financing, tax and liability concerns of seven of the world's major oil companies leading to their purchase of 50% ownership in the $2+ billion project.
Islamic countries can also present a formidable challenge to foreign investors. Over the past ten years, more than 40 lawyers from our Washington office have been working on the ground in the Middle East offering clients a depth of experience in a culture whose legal system is much older than that of the United States. With an office located in the United Arab Emirates, there is no single part of the world where Patton Boggs has more experience than in the Middle East.
http://www.pattonboggs.com/practiceareas/a-z/19.html

Again in the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce, the firm brought an action on behalf of a Fortune 5 company against a Russian oil company arising from breaches of oil financing agreements in the former Soviet Union. We successfully overcame various impossibility defenses under Russian law and obtained a judgment for the full amount of the claim, in excess of $25 million, plus interest and attorneys fees.
Also in Stockholm, Patton Boggs obtained a significant arbitral award against the Republic of Kazakhstan on behalf of an American joint-venture investor. The case involved breach of contract and expropriation claims relating to the development of a Kazakh oil field. The award is the first one granted under the bilateral investment treaty (“B.I.T.”) between the United States and the Republic of Kazakhstan. Although the Tribunal determined that Kazakhstan was not a party to the contract, we were able to prevail in the arbitration on the basis that the Kazakh Government interfered with our client's contract with a Kazakh Government-owned entity, thus violating the Kazakh-U.S. B.I.T.
http://www.pattonboggs.com/practiceareas/a-z/27.html

PT Barnum said that there was one born every minute.
He wasn't kidding.

Apr 5, 2004
The Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) supervising the occupation of Iraq, is giving Baghdad 10 million dollars to spend in the next three months to “beautify” the Iraqi capital, which has been neglected by years of war, sanctions and abuse.
But there is a catch, said CPA spokesman Michael Hardiman, “The funds will be divided equally among Baghdad’s nine municipalities, but must be used before sovereignty is transferred on June 30”.
<snip>
Those who knew the city in the 1950s, ‘60s and ‘70s, before a series of wars and years of international sanctions brought the country to its knees, remember parks, manicured lawns and graceful palm trees.
Now, residents bemoan the lack of services. Garbage litters the streets, given the erratic schedule of refuse collection, unlike that before the 2003 invasion, when the old regime ruled with a rod of iron.
http://www.mmorning.com/ArticleC.asp?Article=1232&CategoryID=6

Good Morning Iraq.
Brave New World that has such people in it.

[forgethell]

88. why, yes, I am aware of that little fact, but

I am totally unaware of any relevance to my original post. So what? How does this justify BURNING PEOPLE ALIVE? How does what happened in the West hundreds of years ago justify BURNING PEOPLE ALIVE? How many people has the United States government, or any state, executed by BURNING THEM ALIVE? Yes, there were people BURNED ALIVE in the territory that became the United States, but wasn't that done by the noble Native Americans? Should we hold that against their descendants? I don't think so.

And, in any event, are you seriously comparing lynchings to legal executions? We had lynchings in the United States, too. The people who did them probably thought that they were defending themselves, too. But we know they did evil.

Look, if you are going to try to blow me away with facts, at least make sure that they have some relevance to the case at hand. You can only solve problems one step at a time. All they problems in the world do NOT have to be solved before the United States is entitled to take action.

Consider an example: You slander and libel your neighbor. Instead of taking you to court, he and his two grown sons waylay you outside you house one evening and beat the crap out of you. Are you therefore entitled to waylay him the next day, with a gun, and blow him away? No. Instead, you take him to court. He goes to jail. But he is still entitled to sue you for slander and libel. The two actions are judged separately, on their individual merits.

I admit the analogy is far from perfect; analogies comparing individuals and nations can never be that. But the US does not have to withdraw to justify defending themselves.

Rather than give an unambiguous, unequivocal denunciation of those INDIVIDUALS who are taking hostages and threatening to BURN THEM ALIVE, you keep trying to bring in other things. I can only assume that you do not denounce these actions and individuals because you approve of these actions and individuals. Am I wrong?

[Woody Box]

89. Stop yelling; watch CNN

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x478200

The japs may be released. Maybe no burning alive. Come back when they're burning.

I can only assume that you do not denounce these actions and individuals because you approve of these actions and individuals.

This is an ridiculous insult. I just wonder why you make this threat (no action yet) the biggest crime of mankind. Go to freerepublic.com, and you will learn what kind of phantasies are growing in "conservative" american brains.

Your outrage is not genuine. That's the point.

[forgethell]

90. My outrage is completely genuine,

I hope the Japanese are released. By the way, isn't jap slightly racist? I always thought that it was.

The threat to burn someone alive is enough to remove them from the company of decent people. As for my insult, I still haven't heard you denounce these tactics, regardless of cause, so I am assuming that I was correct.

I'd wish you 'best of luck' but I don't really know that I would mean it. x(

[Woody Box]

91. The Japanese journalists are free

If "japs" has a "slightly racist" sound, I apologize. I'm not living in the USA and didn't know that. Thanks for the insulting, again.

To make it clear, I denounce the tactics to burn people alive and even the threat to do that. So your assumption is not correct.

With your outstanding morale standards, why don't you go to freerepublic.com? One of them suggests to make fertilizer out of the killed insurgents and feed them to the pigs. And this is not the worst opinion there. God bless America.

Atrocities are common among mankind since we are living on Earth. To take this threat, not even an action, and declare it the most evil atrocity that ever happened is ridiculous. It is propaganda.

Again: Your outrage is not genuine.

[forgethell]

92. Well, then, I'm glad that

you denounce these tactics. You seem to be a somewhat judgmental individual. It is hardly an 'outstanding moral standard' to be against killing innocent people. Also, I'm no expert on the rules, but I'm pretty sure that it is frowned upon on DU to call other members Freepers. If you think my attitude deserves ut, alert the mods, but don't insult me.

OK, atrocitites have been common place since before history. So how does that make my outrage less genuine? Do I have to list them all and complain specicifically aginst eac one before I can get to the current one that I am {geniunely interested in at this point in time? I don't think so, and I do think you are trying to blow smoke up my ass.

[Durandal]

101. Thank God the're ok (n/t)

[frankly_fedup2]

95. Wow, you really put a lot of work into that post . . .

to try to educate others. I want to thank you for the extra hard work of your post. Some will read; however, those that do not want the truth will not even read it.

[Durandal]

100. This sickens me

I don't see how anyone on this form can actual support burning people alive. It's one thing to throw rocks at people with guns, and another entirely to BURN THEE INOCENT PEOPLE ALIVE! Killing civilians is wrong, no matter who is doing it. Didn’t you ever hear of "two wrongs don't make a right?" If the Iraqi’s want to go out a fight our military, they can go right ahead, but to capture and torture innocent people?

[Bolo Boffin]

102. Just taking hostages is a war crime.

Threatening to burn them to death is unspeakable.

[DulceDecorum]

104. Gitmo, Hiroshima

Criminalbecause it is your friends who are wielding the whip.

What do you have to say about the incineration of 403 civilians, including 52 children, when two US missiles hit the Amariya shelter on Feb. 13, 1991?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/inatl/longterm/fogofwar/archive/post021391_2.htm
What no tears?
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article5422.htm
No wails of anguished protest?
http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0002/13/wv.09.html
Nah, damn Muslims ain't worth jack.
Incinerating hundreds of them is just not the same as threatening one rightwingnut.

Where is your voice when Coalition soldiers are found to have taken photographs of themselves engaged in bizarre sexual activities involving bound and gagged Iraqi men?
Is this not unspeakable?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,967528,00.html

Where is your complaint When Coalition soldiers are involved in the widespread and wholesale torture of Iraqi men women and children?

The silence emanating from certain individuals here is deafening.

Twelve months on from the invasion of Iraq by the US-led coalition, the Iraqi people still suffer from serious human rights violations. The past year has seen scores of unarmed people killed due to excessive or unnecessary use of lethal force by Coalition forces during public demonstrations, at check points and in house raids. Thousands of people have been detained, often under harsh conditions, and subjected to prolonged and often unacknowledged detention. Many have been tortured or ill-treated and some have died in custody.
<snip>
In November 2003 the US military said it had paid out US $1.5 million to Iraqi civilians to settle claims by victims or relatives of victims for personal injury, death or damage to property. Some of the 10,402 claims reportedly filed concerned incidents in which US soldiers had shot dead or seriously wounded Iraqi civilians with no apparent cause. Beyond such payments, however, there has been little recourse for the families of the dead and injured. No US soldier has been prosecuted for illegally killing an Iraqi civilian. Iraqi courts, because of an order issued by the US-led authority in Baghdad in June 2003, are forbidden from hearing cases against US soldiers or any other foreign troops or foreign officials in Iraq. In effect, US soldiers are operating with total impunity.
http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE140052004?open&of=ENG-IRQ

When people think about bombing Iraq, they see a picture in their heads of Saddam Hussein in a military uniform, or maybe soldiers with big black mustaches carrying guns, or the mosaic of George Bush Sr. on the lobby floor of the Al-Rashid Hotel with the word “criminal”. But guess what? More than half of Iraq’s 24 million people are children under the age of 15. That’s 12 million kids. Kids like me. Well, I’m almost 13, so some are a little older, and some a lot younger, some boys instead of girls, some with brown hair, not red. But kids who are pretty much like me just the same. So take a look at me—a good long look. Because I am what you should see in your head when you think about bombing Iraq. I am what you are going to destroy.
http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0218-05.htm


http://www.homsonline.com/Irak/AmericanAgressionVictimsPhotos.htm