Rape Rooms & Torture Chambers What is it that everyone knows about Saddam Hussein? The message-writer alludes to these things when he says, "The mass graves are being exhumed, not added to; the prison rape rooms are shut down." He didn’t bring up the gassing of the Kurds. He might also have mentioned the torture chambers — but for obvious reasons Saddam-haters have found it a bit embarrassing to mention those since we’ve become aware of the treatment of prisoners at Abu Ghraib and other prisons operated by the American military. As badly as George Bush has needed good news about Iraq and verification for his claims that it was worth going to war with Iraq, you’d think that we would constantly be seeing pictures of rape rooms and torture chambers on TV, on the Internet, and in newspapers and magazines — together with detailed 1-2-3 explanations of the way each sadistic apparatus operated. This is the way the media normally operates with such stories — showing scenes over and over and over again. But I haven’t seen a single one. Have you? But George Bush says . . . [well, you’ve heard it all a dozen times]. Fool me twice, shame on me. Gassing his Own People But of course we all know that Hussein gassed his own people at Halabja. After all, George Bush has told us so — and told us so and told us so. However, the verdict on that is far from settled. Because the event occurred on the battle line during the Iraq-Iran war, it’s entirely possible that the gas came from the Iranians (both sides used gas), or — if from the Iraqis — that it was directed at the Iranian soldiers. And if the gassing was done by Iraqi soldiers, it was done with chemical weapons that came from the United States. If it was such a terrible act, why did the Reagan administration make it possible? Lastly, if gassing your "own people" is such a heinous act, why did the U.S. government use gas against the Branch Davidians at Waco in 1993? The Mass Graves The "Mass Grave" atrocity has always puzzled me. Why is it somehow more heinous to bury people in mass graves, rather than in individual graves? Obviously, anyone wants his loved ones to be honored and buried in a respectable, individual grave. But it may be that the circumstances of someone’s death — in war or in an epidemic — preclude that possibility. However, whenever George Bush utters the words "mass graves," we’re all supposed to react in horror that someone would be so sadistic as to have authorized mass graves. But the relevant question is: why are there mass graves? I may have dozed off once or twice, but I haven’t heard anyone answer that question. I guess we’re supposed to assume that Saddam Hussein executed so many opponents of his regime that they had to dump all the dead bodies in huge, mass graves. So is that what happened? Possibly, but I haven’t seen any proof of it. No pictures, no eye-witness accounts. Just uttering the words "mass graves" over and over like a mantra. From what we’ve seen, you’d be hard put to believe there even are any mass graves. But in fact they do exist — some of them for certain, and several others possibly. Here are a few I’m aware of . . . 1. In February 1991, just after the start of the brief Gulf War, there was a large fight at the "Neutral Zone" located at the Iraq-Saudi border. American troops slaughtered thousands of Iraqi soldiers, after which American earth-movers plowed the Iraqis into the ground and covered them up. Possibly thousands of Iraqis were buried in the mass graves the American military created. 2. Near the end of the 1991 Gulf War, U.S. troops slaughtered thousands of Iraqi soldiers who were retreating from Kuwait. Once again, the dead soldiers were plowed into the ground. I can only wonder what weeds will grow from those seeds. 3. One mass grave near a Baghdad palace is known to contain Iraqi soldiers who died when American soldiers stormed Baghdad. 4. When the U.S. Marines destroyed Fallujah, at least 600 Iraqis died — and most of them were buried in mass graves set up in soccer fields, called the "Graveyard of the Martyrs" by Fallujah residents. Those four sets of mass graves have been documented. But (to the best of my knowledge) they haven’t been shown on TV — probably because it was the U.S. military that created them. There may be other mass graves as well. For example . . . 5. In the 1980s, Iraq and Iran fought a terrible war in which, most likely, hundreds of thousands of people died. It’s certainly possible that many of them were buried in mass graves. 6. Lastly, perhaps the ghastliest possibility has to do with the end of the 1991 Gulf War. George Bush Sr. exhorted the Iraqi people to "take matters into your own hands and force Saddam to step aside." This provoked a tremendous uprising that won a few victories against the Iraqi army. The Iraqi rebels naturally assumed that the U.S. military was going to help them "force Saddam to step aside." But George H.W. Bush suddenly reversed himself, and the U.S. military did everything possible to prevent the uprising from succeeding. As a result, the Iraqi Republican Army slaughtered thousands of Iraqis. A mass grave near Al Hillah was unearthed in the summer of 2003, producing the bodies of 900 of the Shiites who were massacred as a consequence of George H.W. Bush’s false promises. Fool me thrice, and a lot of Iraqis die. In 2003 the U.S. State Department produced a webpage designed to make us repulsed by the horrible mass graves in Iraq. However, for some unexplained reason, it doesn’t mention that some of the graves were created by the U.S. military. Fool me quadrupily, what’s the matter with me? P.S. Do you remember all the talk about the mass graves in which Serbs supposedly buried up to 100,000 innocent Kosovo civilians during the NATO war of 1999? Well, it turned out that the investigative teams of the War Crimes Tribunal couldn’t find evidence of even one grave that might be called "mass." Fool me quintupily, and I’d better see a therapist.
was it the u.s government who deliverd the chemicals ? .. http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frans_van_A. sorry its in dutch . .couldn't find an english one Basically its about a mister Van Anraat, who delivered chemical supplies to our friend Saddam. . enough for 700 tons (700.000 kilo's) of musterd gas. He got caught and was sentenced to 15 yrs.
Just like the soldiers at Abu Ghraib who were just following orders, Van Anraat (who was just making legitimate business deals at the time) is the scapegoat for the real culprits - in Washington - whose policies set the stage. Hmmm...do you think Bechtel might be next in the dock after the Dutch businessman? JUST KIDDING! :roll: How Reagan Armed Saddam with Chemical Weapons
How is any of this news, Nursey? The entire world has known that the weapons Iraq had were sold to them by the United States, probably got a little somethin' somethin' from the Soviets as well. We all know about the mass graves, and that the war in Iraq was a violation of international law, and arguably circumvented the U.S. Constitution. No shit the U.S. government has overstepped it's bounds, and no shit that Washington is just as bad, if not worse, than Baghdad was under Saddam. That's what governments do, protect themselves. They are self contained entities, with a strong urge for self preservation. The media doesn't care about what's right, they care about what sells. They're in the business of making profit, and there's profit in selling the U.S. as a good guy. How much money do you think they could make trying to sell Saddam Hussein, the righteous hero of Baghdad?
The peace between GWHB and SadHus must have made a lot of mass graves. I know people who fled after that agreement. The insurgents held something like 14 out of 19 admin centers. ( The other side is that teh allied probably did not believe in the strength of the insurgence ). But Quote Nursey going to war with Iraq, you’d think that we would constantly be seeing pictures of rape rooms and torture chambers on TV, on the Internet, and in newspapers and magazines — together with detailed 1-2-3 explanations of the way each sadistic apparatus operated. This is the way the media normally operates with such stories This speculative reasoning can apply to the holocaust or any other scenario. They dont show beheadings of schoolgirl on primetimeTV either. Do you believ they are spin from the western sionist capitalist media ? The truth is that there is a limit to how much crueltu we can show on television. Jeez ! It should be unneccesary to explain this to a semingly bright young thing like yourself.
What people seem too forget is we filled our own share of mass graves with indians mexicans and the like in the building of this country.
i think nursey's post was directed more towards the proponents of the war in iraq who always take a mysterious leave of absence from all questions and arguments cnn hasn’t prepared them for
I don't understand how anyone can possibly still support the war in Iraq. Anyone want to try and explain this to me. I must just be another liberal fag who just doesn't get why the Amurika has to go and attack ass backwards countries to defend itself?
Oh really? Well that's funny because i saw images of dead bodies from Halabja on ...ahem...'children's B.B.C.'...
Its not proportional coverage thats true. But there has been blown up bits of people and old bones and stuff not recognisable and at least a few concrete cell with many a dark stain. I saw footage of a man torn in two by two jeeps. ( Well, he lost his left arm at the socket ).
Dio wrote I must just be another liberal fag who just doesn't get why the Amurika has to go and attack ass backwards countries to defend itself? I write Because many want power, and all power is linked up in international capitalism. Wether its the US-conservative that wants a classic western ( cowboy ) historical dictomy, or a socialist-poor block that wants a classical marxist/downtrodden historical truth. ( Left power is also US-conected ). USA can not afford to be boucotted by oilrich countries, and if they do not have the garanties they need they will act. Western-Europe and Japan and others play a softyer ballgame, but its the same field. Soviat cant protect Carlos Illievich Sanches anymore. He is not living in Sudan, and Sudan is a mess. The post-cold-war stratagems needs to be understood. Not just criticised. Its to late to blame the guilty. ( The Petro-inustrial complex and their Saddams ) This is a prime example of counterproductive religion. ( Economically, they might still inherit the earth )
Was that an answer to my question? How does that explain why an individual would support the war in Iraq?
The individual would either do it out of percieved selfinterest or percieved solidarity with percieved providers of goods and entertainment. When it comes to the evergrowing need for energy to cars as big as the neighbours and all that its selfevident, but in the long run its not sure its a good strategy. Basic facts is that NOBODY provides a model living that makes it possible to hsare the energy and the water. We are in competition and the world holds more than 6billion people. So rethorically, why should you support human leech life on a basis broader than your friends and family and alliances ?
I don't. If you can't make your way through life on your own, doing some good for somebody or someone, then you can fall by the wayside and die for all I care. The only reason I have a job is because I provide something to help them get through and do what they want. Other than that I don't really worry about anyone else, they can take care of themselves. I'm beginning to become a bit of a psychological egoist.
I am a leach on society: I dont really contribute much, but ofcourse i must fight that description due to selfinterest. Tried some solidarity and communal non-profit work and a lot was good and fun. But stuff like that comes to an end
I did that shit for awhile as well, and then I got a job that paid me. If I'm going to have to deal with stressful bull-shit, I better be getting a check out of it. The only thing I would do as volunteer work now is coaching or something like that. Dealing with adults is too much of a pain in the ass. At least with the kids I can make them run.
