[bassetman]

Originally Posted by LANMaster

Holy Warriors Bomb Girls' School

These are the people the reactionary left calls “Minutemen” and “freedom fighters”—gangs of barbaric savages: Deadly Car Bomb Explodes Near Iraq School.

Have any references for that claim?


*********************************************************

This thread is a continuation of "Breaking News/Updates from Iraq Only" Thread (# 1)


*********************************************************

[bassetman]

Originally Posted by Wino

Fox 'News'?

Not sure if this has been said, but ya know the two newspapers that printed the pics of Saddam in his undies were both owned by Rupert Murdock (of Fox News).

[LANMaster]

Originally Posted by bassetman

Have any references for that claim?

http://www.iran-e-azad.org/english/special/chap7.html

http://www.lossless-audio.com/usa/in...1242812435.htm

http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/004725.php

[bassetman]

Your first link does raise the question:
Chapter 7: Freedom Fighters or Terrorists?

I hardly think asking a question constitutes naming them yourself.

Your second link says:

U.S. contributions exploded, from $30 million in 1980 to over $600 million per year after 1987. 65,000 tons of U.S.-made weapons and ammunition a year were entering the war by 1987--including the high-profile Stingers used against Soviet helicopters. By the end of the 1980s, Mudjahadeen commanders were openly meeting with U.S. congressional leaders and with Ronald Reagan himself--they were part of a global network of such CIA-organized cutthroats that included the contras of Central America and UNITA in southern Africa. The U.S. media shamelessly called all these forces "freedom fighters."

Is this the Liberal Media that you are referring to? BTW it was Reagan funding them then!

I'm not even going to dig around on your third link!

[linskyjack]

Yeah, I didn't hear righty complain about all the Murdoch owned papers printing the Hussein underware shots? Doesn't Murdoch own the Fox Network---yeahhhhhhhhhhhh!

[xico]

Originally Posted by LANMaster

Holy Warriors Bomb Girls' School

These are the people the reactionary left calls “Minutemen” and “freedom fighters”—gangs of barbaric savages: Deadly Car Bomb Explodes Near Iraq School.

Lan, I really find it offensive to hear rightwing reactionaries tell us what the left thinks or says or calls. Mulder is also guilty of this sin. Why don't you let us speak for ourselves? What's happening now in Iraq is a civil war. But what we don't is who is setting off the blasts. Who profits from these acts of violence? And why are you upset over these acts of violence when you're not upset over the acts of US violence? I've never heard you complain when the US military was bombing Baghdad. I've never heard you complain about the use of cluster bombs or depleted uranium.

[WarC]

Perhaps LAN doesn't complain about US military action in Iraq because it does not target civilians as due course? Just my thoughts!

Now, if Bush came out with an announcement saying that it is okay to kill innocent people to further the war effort and we started carpet-bombing houses to kill as many as possible, that would change things...

The fact is, Zarqawi's organization just recently announced that it was okay and not a sin religiously to kill innocent Muslims as long as it is for the "greater good" of defeating the "occupation". Their car-bombings target everyone. The insurgent terrorists attack civilians as part of their strategy to defeat the new Iraqi government through disarray and chaos. They openly and without remorse murder countless numbers of innocents for all the world to see.

I find it funny that the anti-Iraq-war crowd uses the humanitarian issue as its greatest pillar, yet the enemies we face in the middle east and abroad are the most likely to and most routinely DO violate basic human rights...But the anti-war crowd is quick to dismiss this in view of the supposed "greater evil" that is the American presence, no matter what its objectives, purposes, or actions.

[LANMaster]

Originally Posted by bassetman

Your first link does raise the question:
Chapter 7: Freedom Fighters or Terrorists?

I hardly think asking a question constitutes naming them yourself.

Your second link says:

U.S. contributions exploded, from $30 million in 1980 to over $600 million per year after 1987. 65,000 tons of U.S.-made weapons and ammunition a year were entering the war by 1987--including the high-profile Stingers used against Soviet helicopters. By the end of the 1980s, Mudjahadeen commanders were openly meeting with U.S. congressional leaders and with Ronald Reagan himself--they were part of a global network of such CIA-organized cutthroats that included the contras of Central America and UNITA in southern Africa. The U.S. media shamelessly called all these forces "freedom fighters."

Is this the Liberal Media that you are referring to? BTW it was Reagan funding them then!

I'm not even going to dig around on your third link!

During the cold war, MSM/DNC referred to Communist dictators as the "Russian leader" or the "Chinese leader." MSM/DNC never referred to an opponent of Communism as a "leader" - only as a strongman, dictator, etc. Communists were never "dictators" and opponents of Communism were never "leaders."

In reporting today's issues, experts are either (1) "experts" (if they support the MSM/DNC view) or (2) "conservative lobbyists", "conservative fundraisers", "conservative activists" or "conservative" something else.

Islamic terrorists are "insurgents", "militants", "freedom fighters" "guerrillas" or "rebels" but never "terrorists."

[xico]

Originally Posted by WarC

Perhaps LAN doesn't complain about US military action in Iraq because it does not target civilians as due course? Just my thoughts!

Now, if Bush came out with an announcement saying that it is okay to kill innocent people to further the war effort and we started carpet-bombing houses to kill as many as possible, that would change things...

The fact is, Zarqawi's organization just recently announced that it was okay and not a sin religiously to kill innocent Muslims as long as it is for the "greater good" of defeating the "occupation". Their car-bombings target everyone. The insurgent terrorists attack civilians as part of their strategy to defeat the new Iraqi government through disarray and chaos. They openly and without remorse murder countless numbers of innocents for all the world to see.

I find it funny that the anti-Iraq-war crowd uses the humanitarian issue as its greatest pillar, yet the enemies we face in the middle east and abroad are the most likely to and most routinely DO violate basic human rights...But the anti-war crowd is quick to dismiss this in view of the supposed "greater evil" that is the American presence, no matter what its objectives, purposes, or actions.

WC,

We are not supposed to be there in the first place. The war is illegal. Have you read about the secret memos? Bush lied, and you swallowed the bait.
If I were a Muslim, I'd be complaining, and complaining bitterly, because I would be a part of the Muslim community. But I'm not a Muslim and I am a US citizen and an ex GI, and I think I have the moral obligation, not only to question, but to demand that we as a nation live up to International Law. To critisize the Iraqis for fighting back would be like critisiizing the French underground for fighting the Nazis. To critisize the Muslims would be to imply that they were wrong to fight for their country. Under International Law they have a right and a duty to fight for their country.

If the Soviet Union were in Iraq, and they had set up a puppet government as we have, what would you be calling the guys who were trying to kick the occupation forces out? What's happened is disgusting, and the whole world knows it. We have lost our moral faces, and it looks like we're about to lose our arses to boot, not to mention the billions of tax dollars that have been wasted. I would think that you reactionaries would be upset about the amount of tax dollars that are being wasted, but I don't hear anything. Not a sound. Strange.

[xico]

Originally posted by WarC:

Now, if Bush came out with an announcement saying that it is okay to kill innocent people to further the war effort and we started carpet-bombing houses to kill as many as possible, that would change things...

What do you think they're doing in Abu and Gitmo and elsewhere around the world? And what do you think we did in Falluja? And why was it off limits to the press? and why have so many reporters been killed in Iraq?

[angelize56]

UPDATE ON AL-ZARQAWI

Al-Qaida Asks For Prayers For Injured Al-Zarqawi

POSTED: 11:59 am EDT May 24, 2005
UPDATED: 12:51 pm EDT May 24, 2005

CAIRO, Egypt -- Al-Qaida's branch in Iraq, blamed for numerous terror attacks on U.S. and Iraqi targets, said Tuesday in an Internet posting that its leader, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, had been wounded and called on supporters to pray for his recovery.

The posting's authenticity could not be verified, but it was posted on a Web site known for carrying prior statements by al-Qaida in Iraq and other militant groups.

Asked about the reports al-Zarqawi had been wounded, State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said, "I don't know."

The statement, which purportedly was from the group's media coordinator, Abu Maysarah al-Iraqi, did not say how or when al-Zarqawi was injured. Al-Iraqi is known to be the group's media coordinator, but there was no way to confirm if the statement was true or that it was posted by al-Qaida in Iraq.

Al-Zarqawi, a Jordanian, has claimed responsibility for attacks on Iraqi civilians and security forces, kidnappings and beheadings of foreigners, and has a $25 million bounty on his head - the same as for al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden.

"Let the near and far know that the injury of our leader is an honor, and a cause to close in on the enemies of God, and a reason to increase the attacks against them," the statement said. (Any reason would be good to these terroristic motons!)

It ended with prayers for al-Zarqawi, calling on the nation of Islam to "pray for our Sheik Abu Musab al-Zarqawi to recover from an injury he suffered for God's sake."

Media reports earlier this month said the U.S. military was investigating whether al-Zarqawi was being treated at a Ramadi, Iraq, hospital. These reports were never confirmed.

The Washington Post reported May 5 that al-Qaida in Iraq had posted a statement at two mosques, including one in Ramadi, saying al-Zarqawi was at the hospital during the April 28 raid but escaped capture. Ramadi residents told The Associated Press at the time they had seen no such statements.

U.S. forces searched the hospital in central Iraq after receiving a tip from an informant about possible terrorist activities there related to al-Zarqawi, but no insurgents were found, the U.S. military said at the time.

The Jordanian born al-Zarqawi reportedly met with his lieutenants in Syria last month and ordered an increase in attacks in Iraq to follow the installation of the newly elected Iraqi government.

A senior U.S. military official, who briefed reporters on condition he not be named, said May 18 that al-Zarqawi and his key militant leadership had met at least five times in foreign countries during the conflict, most recently during the past 30 days in Syria.

At the time, the group denied al-Zarqawi went to Syria. It was unusual for the group to speak out about the condition of its leader and his likely whereabouts.

Last week, an audiotape purportedly recorded by al-Zarqawi surfaced in which he denounced Iraq's Shiites as U.S. collaborators and justified killing them.

"God ordered us to attack the infidels by all means ... even if armed infidels and unintended victims - women and children - are killed together," (What a stinkin' coward!) said the speaker purported to be al-Zarqawi. "The priority is for jihad (holy war), so anything that slows down jihad should be overcome."

http://www.clickondetroit.com/news/4524879/detail.html

[WarC]

Xico,

Many good points, and you are correct by and large...Although obviously I would disagree about the justifications of the war itself! Its the methods being used by the insurgents there that is most despisable. I take issue having their tactics compared to ours: because our military does not target civilians, and would prefer to fight outside of civilian areas.

Our greatest scandals, such as Abu Ghraib, are relatively isolated and mostly minor when compared to the actions the insurgent terrorists in Iraq take on a daily basis. All politics set aside.

Take care, man!

[xico]

Hi War C!

Nice post. I just finished a very good book, Ghost Soldiers: The Forgotten Epic Story of World War II's Most Dramatic Mission, a story about the Battan Death March in 1942, and the unbelievable Japanese atrocities. Just incredible. But Hampton Sides, the author, is fair. The Japanese had a very different culture than ours (which in some sense doesn't excuse them), and were taught that to be taken prisoner was to lose face, not only for them, but for their families and their country. They also had a tradition of slapping and beating the guy below them in rank. Officers beat lesser officers, and slapped them. So, when you get down to the private, a young kid from some little village, who has been taught that the Japanese are superior to these white devils, and suddenly he's in charge of "prisoners," they were unbelievable cruel . . . often purposely.

Ya gotta realize we're not fighting the guy down the block. And we're in his face and his house and he does the outrageous things he does because he's patriotic. He's fighting for the homeland, and against the infidel, white Satan.
I don't know how well the Iraqis are educated, or how sophisticated they are, but when you get their preachers and leaders telling them its okay to kill us and whoever opposes them, ya got the makings of some pretty monsterous siuations. But we aren't saints either. Lao Tzu said it takes two of the same trade to make war.

When I was your age, I was pretty gung ho, and had I been sent to Korea instead of Europe, I'd probably been a pretty rotten apple myself. But it's related to the propaganda we're fed. As Lt Calley said (the MyLai massacre) "They didn't tell me that communists were human beings>" It's self evident after you have an education and you've been socialized and have a couple of kids.

Have a nice day War C! I'm glad you decided to stay put on the home front.
Thomas Hardy has a nice poem on going into battle during the first world's war. It goes something like I'm going to shoot this guy that, under any other circumstances, I'd probably be buying a beer.

[LANMaster]

Duelfer: Saddam Created WMD 'Ambiguity'

UNITED NATIONS -- Saddam Hussein may have "created a certain ambiguity" about his weapons capabilities before the second Gulf War for two reasons: pride and the threat of Iran, the former top U.S. arms hunter said Tuesday.

Charles Duelfer told the Council on Foreign Relations that it was easy for the U.S. government to misinterpret Saddam's actions, but the former dictator didn't necessarily have only Washington in mind when he shut U.N. inspectors out of weapons sites after 1998.

That left the world to wonder whether he was rebuilding his banned weapons programs.
"There was a greater concern than we could appreciate sitting here in Washington of the threat posed by Iran," Duelfer said in a rare public appearance. "Our gut feeling for that was not the same as the gut feeling one would have sitting in Baghdad."

Duelfer's Iraq Survey Group announced in an Oct. 6 report that it had found no weapons of mass destruction. The suspected presence of the weapons had been a key reason for the U.S. invasion.

He told the council that there were intelligence failures on both sides. The United States couldn't discern Saddam's true motives, while he miscalculated just how much U.S. attitudes had changed in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks.

"There really was this element of mutual misunderstanding," Duelfer said.

Saddam likely feared renewed conflict with Iran in the years after a brutal 1980-88 war between the two neighbors in which 1 million people died, Duelfer said. In the 1990s, intelligence reports from elsewhere had also begun to raise questions about whether Iran was developing weapons of its own.

"Saddam was certainly aware of the WMD assessments of Iran and he created a certain ambiguity about what his capabilities were," Duelfer said.

U.S. officials may have also underestimated how much it offended Saddam to have weapons inspectors "poking around their most secure areas."

Duelfer's comments were reminiscent of those made by former U.N. chief weapons inspector Hans Blix, who said in 2003 he believed Iraq had destroyed most of its weapons of mass destruction years before, but kept up the appearance that it had them to deter a military attack.

Duelfer speculated that under the U.N. oil-for-food program, which began in 1996 and ended in 2003, Saddam came to believe that he could divide the U.N. Security Council and possibly bring an end to sanctions imposed after his 1990 invasion of Kuwait.

Saddam may also have thought that such an end was inevitable because from Baghdad he saw businesses taking more and more interest in his country.

"If you look at the Baghdad international fairs which took place every November, they were increasingly flooded with businessmen," Duelfer said. "So he had a great deal of reinforcement of the view that the perimeter around him was weakening."

link

[linskyjack]

Just to add--9 Americans have died since Monday-----