Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
US Soldiers Unapologetically Admit to Massacring Iraqi Civilians
"They were men, women and children. That day we shot up a lot of cars."
'I just pulled the trigger'
By Bob Graham, Evening Standard, in Baghdad
19 June 2003
At first glance they appear to be the archetypal Band Of Brothers of Hollywood myth, brave and honest men united in common purpose.
But a closer look at these American GIs, sweltering in the heat of an unwelcoming Iraq, reveals the glazed eyes and limp expressions of those who have witnessed a war they do not understand and have begun to resent. By their own admission these American soldiers have killed civilians without hesitation, shot wounded fighters and left others to die in agony.
What they told me, in a series of extraordinary interviews, will make uncomfortable reading for US and British politicians and senior military staff desperate to prevent the liberation of Iraq turning into a quagmire of Vietnam proportions, where the behaviour of troops feeds the hatred of an occupied people.
Sergeant First Class John Meadows revealed the mindset that has led to hundreds of innocent Iraqi civilians being killed alongside fighters deliberately dressed in civilian clothes. "You can't distinguish between who's trying to kill you and who's not," he said. "Like, the only way to get through s*** like that was to concentrate on getting through it by killing as many people as you can, people you know are trying to kill you. Killing them first and getting home."
These GIs, from Bravo Company of the 3/15th US Infantry Division, are caught in an impossible situation. More than 40 of their number have been killed by hostile forces since 1 May - when President Bush declared major military operations were over - and the number of hit-and-run attacks is on the increase. They face a resentful civilian population and, hiding among it, a number of guerrilla fighters still loyal to the old regime. A lone Iraqi sniper nicknamed The Hunter is believed to have claimed his sixth American victim this week in a suburb of Baghdad.
The man, said to be a former member of the Republican Guard Special Forces, has developed a cult status among some Iraqis. One Baghdad resident, Assad al Amari, said: "He is fighting for Iraq on his own. There will be many more Americans killed because they cannot stop The Hunter. He will be given the protection of people who will let him use their homes for his shooting."
In this hostile atmosphere the men of Bravo Company are asked to maintain order, yet at the same time win hearts and minds. It is not a dilemma they feel able to resolve. They spoke to me - dressed in uniforms they have worn for the past six weeks - at their base in Fallujah. Here US troops killed 18 demonstrators at a pro-Saddam rally soon after the war and now face local fighters bent on revenge.
Their attitude to these dangers is summed up by Specialist (Corporal) Michael Richardson, 22. "There was no dilemma when it came to shooting people who were not in uniform, I just pulled the trigger. It was up close and personal the whole time, there wasn't a big distance. If they were there, they were enemy, whether in uniform or not. Some were, some weren't."
Specialist Anthony Castillo added: "When there were civilians there we did the mission that had to be done. When they were there, they were at the wrong spot, so they were considered enemy." In one major battle - at the southern end of Baghdad at the intersection of the main highways - the soldiers estimate about 70 per cent of the enemy's 400-or-so fighters were dressed as civilians.
Sgt Meadows explained: "The fight lasted for about eight hours and they just kept on coming all day from everywhere, from all sides. They were all in plain clothes.
"We had dropped fliers a couple of days prior saying to people to get out of the area if they didn't want to fight, so basically anyone who was there was a combatant. If they were dumb enough to stand in front of tanks or drive a car
towards a tank, then they were there to fight. On that day it took away the dilemma of who to fire at, anyone who was there was a combatant."
Cpl Richardson added: "That day nothing went with the training. There were females fighting; there were some that, when they saw you f****** coming, they'd just drop their s*** and try to give up; and some guys were shot and they'd play dead, and when you'd go by they'd reach for their weapons. That day it was just f****** everything. When we face women or injured that try to grab their weapons, we just finish them off. You've gotta, no choice."
Such is their level of hatred they preferred to kill rather than merely injure. Sgt Meadows, 34, said: "The worst thing is to shoot one of them, then go help him." Sergeant Adrian Pedro Quinones, 26, chipped in: "In that situation you're angry, you're raging. They'd just been shooting at my men - they were putting my guys in a casket and eight feet under, that's what they were trying to do.
"And now, they're laying there and I have to help them, I have a responsibility to ensure my men help them." Cpl Richardson said: "S***, I didn't help any of them. I wouldn't help the f******. There were some you let die. And there were some you double-tapped."
He held out his hand as if firing a gun and clucked his tongue twice. He said: "Once you'd reached the objective, and once you'd shot them and you're moving through, anything there, you shoot again. You didn't want any prisoners of war. You hate them so bad while you're fighting, and you're so terrified, you can't really convey the feeling, but you don't want them to live."
These soldiers have faced fighters from other Arab countries. "It wasn't even Iraqis that we was killing, it was Syrians," said Sgt Meadows. "We spoke to some of the people and Saddam made a call for his Arab brothers for a holy war against us, and they said they came here to fight us. Whadda we ever do to them?"
Cpl Richardson intervened: "S***, that didn't really matter who they were. They wanted to fight us so they were the enemy. We had to take over Baghdad, period, it didn't matter who was in there."
The GIs spoke of shooting civilians at roadblocks. Sgt Meadows said: "When they used white flags we were told to stop them at 400 metres out and then strip them down naked then bring them through. Most obeyed the order. We knew about others who had problems with [Iraqis] carrying white flags and then opening up on our guys. We knew about every trick they were trying to do. Then they'd use cars to try and drive at us. They were men, women and children. That day we shot up a lot of cars.
"We'd shoot warning shots at them and they'd keep coming, so we'd kill them. We'd fire a warning shot over the top of them or on the road. When people criticise us killing civilians they don't know that a lot of these civilians were combatants, they really were . And they still are."
The men have been traumatised by their experiences. Cpl Richardson-said: "At night time you think about all the people you killed. It just never gets off your head, none of this stuff does. There's no chance to forget it, we're still here, we've been here so long. Most people leave after combat but we haven't."
Sgt Meadows said men under his command had been seeking help for severe depression: "They've already seen psychiatrists and the chain of command has got letters back saying 'these men need to be taken out of this situation'. But nothing's happened." Cpl Richardson added: "Some soldiers don't even f****** sleep at night. They sit up all f****** night long doing s*** to keep themselves busy - to keep their minds off this f****** stuff. It's the only way they can handle it. It's not so far from being crazy but it's their way of coping. There's one guy trying to build a little pool out the back, pointless stuff but it keeps him busy."
Sgt Meadows said: "For me, it's like snap-shot photos. Like pictures of maggots on tongues, babies with their heads on the ground, men with their heads halfway off and their eyes wide open and mouths wide open. I see it every day, every single day. The smells and the torsos burning, the entire route up to Baghdad, from 20 March to 7 April, nothing but burned bodies."
Specialist Bryan Barnhart, 21, joined in: "I also got the images like snapshots in my head. There are bodies that we saw when we went back to secure a place we'd taken. The bodies were still there and they'd been baking in the sun. Their bodies were bloated three times the size."
Sgt Quinones explained: "There are psychiatrists who are trying to sort out their problems but they say it's because of long combat environment. They know we need to be taken away from that environment." But the group's tour of duty has been extended and the men have been forced to remain as peacekeepers. Cpl Richardson said: "Now we're in this peacekeeping, we're always firing off a warning shot at people that don't wanna listen to you. You make up the rules as you go along.
"Like, in Fallujah we get rocks thrown at us by kids. You wanna turn round and shoot one of the little f*****s but you know you can't do that. Their parents know if they came out and threw rocks we'd shoot them. So that's why they send the kids out." Sgt Meadows said: "Can you imagine being a soldier and being told 'you're fighting a war, then when you finish you can go home'.
"You go and fight that war, and you win decisively, but now you have to stay and stabilise the situation. We are having to go from a full warfighting mindset to a peacekeeping mindset overnight. Right after shooting at people who were trying to kill you, you now have to help them."
The anger towards their own senior officers is obvious. Cpl Richardson said: "We weren't trained for this stuff now. It makes you resentful they're holding us on here. It pisses everyone off, we were told once the war was over we'd leave when our replacements get here. Well, our replacements got here and we're still here."
Specialist Castillo said: "We're more angry at the generals who are making these decisions and who never hit the ground, and who don't get shot at or have to look at the bloody bodies and the burnt-out bodies, and the dead babies and all that kinda stuff." Sgt Quinones added: "Most of these soldiers are in their early twenties and late teens. They've seen, in less than a month, more than any man should see in a whole lifetime. It's time for us to go home."
On whether the war was one worth fighting, Sgt Meadows said: "I don't care about Iraq one way or the other. I couldn't care less. [Saddam] could still be in power and, to me, it wasn't worth leaving my family for; for getting shot at and almost dying two or three times, there's nothing worth that to me." Even though no Iraqis were involved, and there is no proof Saddam was behind it, the attack on the World Trade Center provides Cpl Richardson and many others with the justification for invading Iraq.
"There's a picture of the World Trade Center hanging up by my bed and I keep one in my Kevlar [flak jacket]. Every time I feel sorry for these people I look at that. I think, 'They hit us at home and, now, it's our turn.' I don't want to say payback but, you know, it's pretty much payback."
By Bob Graham, Evening Standard, in Baghdad
19 June 2003
At first glance they appear to be the archetypal Band Of Brothers of Hollywood myth, brave and honest men united in common purpose.
But a closer look at these American GIs, sweltering in the heat of an unwelcoming Iraq, reveals the glazed eyes and limp expressions of those who have witnessed a war they do not understand and have begun to resent. By their own admission these American soldiers have killed civilians without hesitation, shot wounded fighters and left others to die in agony.
What they told me, in a series of extraordinary interviews, will make uncomfortable reading for US and British politicians and senior military staff desperate to prevent the liberation of Iraq turning into a quagmire of Vietnam proportions, where the behaviour of troops feeds the hatred of an occupied people.
Sergeant First Class John Meadows revealed the mindset that has led to hundreds of innocent Iraqi civilians being killed alongside fighters deliberately dressed in civilian clothes. "You can't distinguish between who's trying to kill you and who's not," he said. "Like, the only way to get through s*** like that was to concentrate on getting through it by killing as many people as you can, people you know are trying to kill you. Killing them first and getting home."
These GIs, from Bravo Company of the 3/15th US Infantry Division, are caught in an impossible situation. More than 40 of their number have been killed by hostile forces since 1 May - when President Bush declared major military operations were over - and the number of hit-and-run attacks is on the increase. They face a resentful civilian population and, hiding among it, a number of guerrilla fighters still loyal to the old regime. A lone Iraqi sniper nicknamed The Hunter is believed to have claimed his sixth American victim this week in a suburb of Baghdad.
The man, said to be a former member of the Republican Guard Special Forces, has developed a cult status among some Iraqis. One Baghdad resident, Assad al Amari, said: "He is fighting for Iraq on his own. There will be many more Americans killed because they cannot stop The Hunter. He will be given the protection of people who will let him use their homes for his shooting."
In this hostile atmosphere the men of Bravo Company are asked to maintain order, yet at the same time win hearts and minds. It is not a dilemma they feel able to resolve. They spoke to me - dressed in uniforms they have worn for the past six weeks - at their base in Fallujah. Here US troops killed 18 demonstrators at a pro-Saddam rally soon after the war and now face local fighters bent on revenge.
Their attitude to these dangers is summed up by Specialist (Corporal) Michael Richardson, 22. "There was no dilemma when it came to shooting people who were not in uniform, I just pulled the trigger. It was up close and personal the whole time, there wasn't a big distance. If they were there, they were enemy, whether in uniform or not. Some were, some weren't."
Specialist Anthony Castillo added: "When there were civilians there we did the mission that had to be done. When they were there, they were at the wrong spot, so they were considered enemy." In one major battle - at the southern end of Baghdad at the intersection of the main highways - the soldiers estimate about 70 per cent of the enemy's 400-or-so fighters were dressed as civilians.
Sgt Meadows explained: "The fight lasted for about eight hours and they just kept on coming all day from everywhere, from all sides. They were all in plain clothes.
"We had dropped fliers a couple of days prior saying to people to get out of the area if they didn't want to fight, so basically anyone who was there was a combatant. If they were dumb enough to stand in front of tanks or drive a car
towards a tank, then they were there to fight. On that day it took away the dilemma of who to fire at, anyone who was there was a combatant."
Cpl Richardson added: "That day nothing went with the training. There were females fighting; there were some that, when they saw you f****** coming, they'd just drop their s*** and try to give up; and some guys were shot and they'd play dead, and when you'd go by they'd reach for their weapons. That day it was just f****** everything. When we face women or injured that try to grab their weapons, we just finish them off. You've gotta, no choice."
Such is their level of hatred they preferred to kill rather than merely injure. Sgt Meadows, 34, said: "The worst thing is to shoot one of them, then go help him." Sergeant Adrian Pedro Quinones, 26, chipped in: "In that situation you're angry, you're raging. They'd just been shooting at my men - they were putting my guys in a casket and eight feet under, that's what they were trying to do.
"And now, they're laying there and I have to help them, I have a responsibility to ensure my men help them." Cpl Richardson said: "S***, I didn't help any of them. I wouldn't help the f******. There were some you let die. And there were some you double-tapped."
He held out his hand as if firing a gun and clucked his tongue twice. He said: "Once you'd reached the objective, and once you'd shot them and you're moving through, anything there, you shoot again. You didn't want any prisoners of war. You hate them so bad while you're fighting, and you're so terrified, you can't really convey the feeling, but you don't want them to live."
These soldiers have faced fighters from other Arab countries. "It wasn't even Iraqis that we was killing, it was Syrians," said Sgt Meadows. "We spoke to some of the people and Saddam made a call for his Arab brothers for a holy war against us, and they said they came here to fight us. Whadda we ever do to them?"
Cpl Richardson intervened: "S***, that didn't really matter who they were. They wanted to fight us so they were the enemy. We had to take over Baghdad, period, it didn't matter who was in there."
The GIs spoke of shooting civilians at roadblocks. Sgt Meadows said: "When they used white flags we were told to stop them at 400 metres out and then strip them down naked then bring them through. Most obeyed the order. We knew about others who had problems with [Iraqis] carrying white flags and then opening up on our guys. We knew about every trick they were trying to do. Then they'd use cars to try and drive at us. They were men, women and children. That day we shot up a lot of cars.
"We'd shoot warning shots at them and they'd keep coming, so we'd kill them. We'd fire a warning shot over the top of them or on the road. When people criticise us killing civilians they don't know that a lot of these civilians were combatants, they really were . And they still are."
The men have been traumatised by their experiences. Cpl Richardson-said: "At night time you think about all the people you killed. It just never gets off your head, none of this stuff does. There's no chance to forget it, we're still here, we've been here so long. Most people leave after combat but we haven't."
Sgt Meadows said men under his command had been seeking help for severe depression: "They've already seen psychiatrists and the chain of command has got letters back saying 'these men need to be taken out of this situation'. But nothing's happened." Cpl Richardson added: "Some soldiers don't even f****** sleep at night. They sit up all f****** night long doing s*** to keep themselves busy - to keep their minds off this f****** stuff. It's the only way they can handle it. It's not so far from being crazy but it's their way of coping. There's one guy trying to build a little pool out the back, pointless stuff but it keeps him busy."
Sgt Meadows said: "For me, it's like snap-shot photos. Like pictures of maggots on tongues, babies with their heads on the ground, men with their heads halfway off and their eyes wide open and mouths wide open. I see it every day, every single day. The smells and the torsos burning, the entire route up to Baghdad, from 20 March to 7 April, nothing but burned bodies."
Specialist Bryan Barnhart, 21, joined in: "I also got the images like snapshots in my head. There are bodies that we saw when we went back to secure a place we'd taken. The bodies were still there and they'd been baking in the sun. Their bodies were bloated three times the size."
Sgt Quinones explained: "There are psychiatrists who are trying to sort out their problems but they say it's because of long combat environment. They know we need to be taken away from that environment." But the group's tour of duty has been extended and the men have been forced to remain as peacekeepers. Cpl Richardson said: "Now we're in this peacekeeping, we're always firing off a warning shot at people that don't wanna listen to you. You make up the rules as you go along.
"Like, in Fallujah we get rocks thrown at us by kids. You wanna turn round and shoot one of the little f*****s but you know you can't do that. Their parents know if they came out and threw rocks we'd shoot them. So that's why they send the kids out." Sgt Meadows said: "Can you imagine being a soldier and being told 'you're fighting a war, then when you finish you can go home'.
"You go and fight that war, and you win decisively, but now you have to stay and stabilise the situation. We are having to go from a full warfighting mindset to a peacekeeping mindset overnight. Right after shooting at people who were trying to kill you, you now have to help them."
The anger towards their own senior officers is obvious. Cpl Richardson said: "We weren't trained for this stuff now. It makes you resentful they're holding us on here. It pisses everyone off, we were told once the war was over we'd leave when our replacements get here. Well, our replacements got here and we're still here."
Specialist Castillo said: "We're more angry at the generals who are making these decisions and who never hit the ground, and who don't get shot at or have to look at the bloody bodies and the burnt-out bodies, and the dead babies and all that kinda stuff." Sgt Quinones added: "Most of these soldiers are in their early twenties and late teens. They've seen, in less than a month, more than any man should see in a whole lifetime. It's time for us to go home."
On whether the war was one worth fighting, Sgt Meadows said: "I don't care about Iraq one way or the other. I couldn't care less. [Saddam] could still be in power and, to me, it wasn't worth leaving my family for; for getting shot at and almost dying two or three times, there's nothing worth that to me." Even though no Iraqis were involved, and there is no proof Saddam was behind it, the attack on the World Trade Center provides Cpl Richardson and many others with the justification for invading Iraq.
"There's a picture of the World Trade Center hanging up by my bed and I keep one in my Kevlar [flak jacket]. Every time I feel sorry for these people I look at that. I think, 'They hit us at home and, now, it's our turn.' I don't want to say payback but, you know, it's pretty much payback."
For more information:
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article...
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
Vote to impeach the spOILed liar, who brought you this mass murder in Iraq, and needlessly caused the deaths of hundreds of U.S. armed forces.
For more information:
http://www.votetoimpeach.org/
hmm nation building.
Those damn UN people and socialist protestors made us do it.
Those damn UN people and socialist protestors made us do it.
Scottie's posts are so damn stupid that I can't figure out if the above was actually written by him or by someone parodying him.
These kids are saying that the only thing that keeps them going is the belief in the lie of the 9/11/01 Reichstag Fire. This proves, once again, that all anti-war rallies, all socialist newspapers, magazines and websites and all pro-peace radio/TV stations such as Pacifica (KPFA in the Bay Area, 94.1 FM) and Democracy Now program (both Pacifica radio and cable TV) must make FRONT and CENTER the FACT that the events of 9/11/01 in New York & Washington were a Reichstag Fire, an inside job, the CIA's Operation Northwooods realized. THERE CAN BE NO MORE EXCUSES.
As to the CIA’s Operation Northwoods, see Body of Secrets by James Bamford on the story of Operation Northwoods. There were no attacks from the outside; there were no hijackers on those planes as they were on automatic pilot, the cell phone calls were staged; the towers in New York were brought down with construction explosives and the Pentagon was hit by an American guided missile. The evidence is clearly stated all over the Internet and in such excellent books as:
The War on Freedom by Nafeez Mosaddez Ahmed;
Painful Questions by Eric Hufschmid (See http://www.dpgear.com )
Pentagate and 9/11: The Big Lie, both by Thierry Meyssan.
Every thinking person in the US and the rest of the world's peace movement, all of whom know 9/11/01 was a Reichstag Fire, DEMAND FULL DISCLOSURE IN EVERY ISSUE OF THE SOCIALIST AND PROGRESSIVE PRESS in text and photographs of what we now know of the Reichstag Fire of 9/11/01. Radio/TV programs such as Democracy Now and radio progam Flashpoints can and must have interviews with ALL of the people who understand 9/11/01 was a Reichstag Fire, and can and must play their videos. After all, if these programs can interview Democratic Party politicians and pro-capitalist professors with no apologies, they can interview the authors of the above books (Bernstein has interviewed Bamford, but that is not enough) and everyone else who has written, photographed or videotaped the evidence proving what the whole world knows: 9/11/01 was a Reichstag Fire.
We cannot have any more peace rallies that feature Democrats and religious parasites. I am not listening to that insulting drivel anymore.
It was a communist, George Dimitrov, who put the Nazis on the witness stand and proved to the world that the Nazis, not the communists, burned down the German congressional building, the Reichstag, to perpetrate war abroad and fascism at home. If American socialists cannot do that with the press, radio, TV and websites available, then they not only cannot lead a socialist revolution, they cannot lead a horse out of a barn!
These kids will not have long lives once they get out of the military as they have all been poisoned by depleted uranium, courtesy the US military. We now have 250,000 permanently disabled veterans from the First Persian Gulf Massacre, all unable to be productive members of society, all attempting to survive on our tax dollars, the few that they receive.
FRONT AND CENTER FOR THE PEACE MOVEMENT MUST BE TRUTH TELLING OF 9/11/01:
IT WAS A REICHSTAG FIRE.
As to the CIA’s Operation Northwoods, see Body of Secrets by James Bamford on the story of Operation Northwoods. There were no attacks from the outside; there were no hijackers on those planes as they were on automatic pilot, the cell phone calls were staged; the towers in New York were brought down with construction explosives and the Pentagon was hit by an American guided missile. The evidence is clearly stated all over the Internet and in such excellent books as:
The War on Freedom by Nafeez Mosaddez Ahmed;
Painful Questions by Eric Hufschmid (See http://www.dpgear.com )
Pentagate and 9/11: The Big Lie, both by Thierry Meyssan.
Every thinking person in the US and the rest of the world's peace movement, all of whom know 9/11/01 was a Reichstag Fire, DEMAND FULL DISCLOSURE IN EVERY ISSUE OF THE SOCIALIST AND PROGRESSIVE PRESS in text and photographs of what we now know of the Reichstag Fire of 9/11/01. Radio/TV programs such as Democracy Now and radio progam Flashpoints can and must have interviews with ALL of the people who understand 9/11/01 was a Reichstag Fire, and can and must play their videos. After all, if these programs can interview Democratic Party politicians and pro-capitalist professors with no apologies, they can interview the authors of the above books (Bernstein has interviewed Bamford, but that is not enough) and everyone else who has written, photographed or videotaped the evidence proving what the whole world knows: 9/11/01 was a Reichstag Fire.
We cannot have any more peace rallies that feature Democrats and religious parasites. I am not listening to that insulting drivel anymore.
It was a communist, George Dimitrov, who put the Nazis on the witness stand and proved to the world that the Nazis, not the communists, burned down the German congressional building, the Reichstag, to perpetrate war abroad and fascism at home. If American socialists cannot do that with the press, radio, TV and websites available, then they not only cannot lead a socialist revolution, they cannot lead a horse out of a barn!
These kids will not have long lives once they get out of the military as they have all been poisoned by depleted uranium, courtesy the US military. We now have 250,000 permanently disabled veterans from the First Persian Gulf Massacre, all unable to be productive members of society, all attempting to survive on our tax dollars, the few that they receive.
FRONT AND CENTER FOR THE PEACE MOVEMENT MUST BE TRUTH TELLING OF 9/11/01:
IT WAS A REICHSTAG FIRE.
I don't know who's more brilliant.
The government, for formulating, executing, and maintaining such an extraordinary conspiracy.
Or you geniuses around here, who -- against all odds -- have exposed it.
Wow, you people are geniuses. But not very good at publicity. Literally the most fascinating and newsworthy story in several decades -- and you are keeping it to yourselves. Why don't you present your sources and documents to the NY Times or Time Magazine? It could be like another Pentagon Papers -- but 100 times bigger. Seriously. You might not realize it, but this would be a HUGE story. Have some confidence and get it out into the mainstream.
The government, for formulating, executing, and maintaining such an extraordinary conspiracy.
Or you geniuses around here, who -- against all odds -- have exposed it.
Wow, you people are geniuses. But not very good at publicity. Literally the most fascinating and newsworthy story in several decades -- and you are keeping it to yourselves. Why don't you present your sources and documents to the NY Times or Time Magazine? It could be like another Pentagon Papers -- but 100 times bigger. Seriously. You might not realize it, but this would be a HUGE story. Have some confidence and get it out into the mainstream.
The strength of the anti war movement is that you can have stalinists, anrarchists, islamofacists all in the same march telling all of the moderates
If your message became specific to individual interest groups such as yours - then you would quickly have to face the fact that stalinists if they gain power will kill anarchists - islamo facists are to the RIGHT of the government you are protesting, and those people behind you chanting "Isreal is evil!" ARE actually NAZIs.
If your message became specific to individual interest groups such as yours - then you would quickly have to face the fact that stalinists if they gain power will kill anarchists - islamo facists are to the RIGHT of the government you are protesting, and those people behind you chanting "Isreal is evil!" ARE actually NAZIs.
behind your patetic masquerade your fascist mentality is evident. Sure you are pro-Bush and pro-zionism, I have to complement you, you are able to read some progressive stuff instead to read government propaganda, nor the so-called free press and your fascist sites.
Retardness is a republican, democrat and right-wing disease!
Retardness is a republican, democrat and right-wing disease!
"Retardness is a republican, democrat and right-wing disease!"
And those left-wingers who suffer from retardation make up words like 'retardness'.
And those left-wingers who suffer from retardation make up words like 'retardness'.
"We dropped a few civilians," Sergeant Schrumpf said, "but what do you do?"
"I'm sorry," the sergeant said. "But the chick was in the way."
New York Times
"I am starting to hate this country. Wait till I get hold of a friggin' Iraqi. No, I won't get hold of one. I'll just kill him."<
Times UK
You are correct, of course, nessie. When I used the term 'conspiracy', I was being sloppy. I should have said 'maintaining the secrecy of the conspiracy'.
In the official version of 9/11, the conspiracy (as you call it) was revealed quite quickly and it no longer was a secret.
In the official version of 9/11, the conspiracy (as you call it) was revealed quite quickly and it no longer was a secret.
"government’s long, thick rich and thoroughly documented history of lying through their teeth about stuff like this"
Yea but there has been no long, thick, rich, and thoroughly documented history of the government lying about the events of 9/11. In the legitimate media, that is (I don't care about the websites that publish crap for the consumption of the delusional). When I say "legitimate media", I am talking about the media that is, essentially, peer reviewed -- where that media outlet's reputation suffers if facts aren't checked. As opposed to the websites that report theories and heresy as fact.
Until I read or see your theories and heresy reported in the legitimate media (who would LOVE to have the story of the century -- remember Watergate), then I will consider your stories of the alternative 9/11 conspiracy to be just that -- stories.
As far as the supposed preposterous notion of finding Atta's passport. I don't find it unbelievable. It could end up down the street or under a million tons of debris. Neither disobey the laws of physics. Are you implying that Atta wasn't on the plane? If I see him alive, in an interview, on legitimate media, then I will say "nessie, you were correct. Atta wasn't on the plane".
Yea but there has been no long, thick, rich, and thoroughly documented history of the government lying about the events of 9/11. In the legitimate media, that is (I don't care about the websites that publish crap for the consumption of the delusional). When I say "legitimate media", I am talking about the media that is, essentially, peer reviewed -- where that media outlet's reputation suffers if facts aren't checked. As opposed to the websites that report theories and heresy as fact.
Until I read or see your theories and heresy reported in the legitimate media (who would LOVE to have the story of the century -- remember Watergate), then I will consider your stories of the alternative 9/11 conspiracy to be just that -- stories.
As far as the supposed preposterous notion of finding Atta's passport. I don't find it unbelievable. It could end up down the street or under a million tons of debris. Neither disobey the laws of physics. Are you implying that Atta wasn't on the plane? If I see him alive, in an interview, on legitimate media, then I will say "nessie, you were correct. Atta wasn't on the plane".
">You mean like the New York Times? "
Exactly. Great example. They learned from that mistake. The truth always eventually comes out.
By the way, that's a very poor example of argumentum ad verecundiam. I'm not trusting legitimate media as an authority. I'm trusting that they will check facts to a much greater degree than the "alternative" media (my experience with alternative media is pretty much limited to Indymedia and links from it. An unacceptable number of stories are lies or half-truths).
And your example of a straw man is also not appropriate. It's irrelevant whether his passport was found on the grounds (by the way, it's irrelevant that the black box was not found and the passport was -- it's chance. Are you saying that nothing on the plane was found? Or everything on the plane was found? Of course not. Some things survived, some things didn't). Assuming you think somebody named Atta existed, then where is he? Isn't there video of him going through security in New England that morning? I am saying that Atta disappeared that morning and evidence suggests he was on the plane. So the passport being found is irrelevant. Passports weren't found for other hijackers and I still believe they were on the planes as well. Chance. But no big deal.
Exactly. Great example. They learned from that mistake. The truth always eventually comes out.
By the way, that's a very poor example of argumentum ad verecundiam. I'm not trusting legitimate media as an authority. I'm trusting that they will check facts to a much greater degree than the "alternative" media (my experience with alternative media is pretty much limited to Indymedia and links from it. An unacceptable number of stories are lies or half-truths).
And your example of a straw man is also not appropriate. It's irrelevant whether his passport was found on the grounds (by the way, it's irrelevant that the black box was not found and the passport was -- it's chance. Are you saying that nothing on the plane was found? Or everything on the plane was found? Of course not. Some things survived, some things didn't). Assuming you think somebody named Atta existed, then where is he? Isn't there video of him going through security in New England that morning? I am saying that Atta disappeared that morning and evidence suggests he was on the plane. So the passport being found is irrelevant. Passports weren't found for other hijackers and I still believe they were on the planes as well. Chance. But no big deal.
EVERY soldier killed in Iraq is a victory for the international proletariat! This isn't a military draft. The soldiers went over there willingly ready to kill innocent Iraqi peoples. I have no pity for those butchers. DEFEND IRAQ! END THE OCCUPATION! LIBERATION THROUGH SOCIALIST REVOLUTION! NO CRAWLING FOR THE LIBERAL/STALINIST ALLIANCE!
I like how since 65% of the Iraqis WANT the US to stay until things are safe and secure (per the CBS poll) - the disempowered Baathists and other imported muslim terrorists are now targeting and killing the Iraqi people...they won't give up old tactics of intimidation easily.
Sometimes the only thing bullies understand is superior force....
Also notice what the Iraqi army protests were about - NOT about the US being in Iraq; rather they want pay.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Mayor's Office Attacked in Fallujah
Tuesday, June 24, 2003
FALLUJAH, Iraq — Iraqi insurgents fired a rocket-propelled grenade at the mayor's office in this restive city west of Baghdad -- the latest in a series of attacks against people thought to be cooperating with U.S. occupation forces.
Meanwhile, U.S. officials said that Syrian border guards detained during a firefight last week during an operation to hunt down suspected members of Iraq's ousted regime were still in U.S. custody.
U.S. troops shot and killed one of the ambushers on the mayor's office late Monday in Fallujah, a town 35 miles west of Baghdad, U.S. reports said.
Insurgents last week began targeting Iraqi civilians thought to be too close to Americans -- a new tactic in their campaign to disrupt the U.S.-led occupation.
Insurgents fired two more rocket-propelled grenades at U.S. troops in Habaniyah, about three miles west of Fallujah, but they exploded without causing injuries, reports said.
Details continued to emerge Tuesday on a previously undisclosed operation last week around the Iraqi town of Qaim, near the border with Syria.
U.S. special forces shot and captured several Syrian border guards during a firefight that broke out as the Americans attacked a convoy of suspected high-level fugitives linked to Saddam Hussein's government. They were apparently trying to cross into Syria.
U.S. officials announced Monday that the defeated and dissolved Iraqi army will be re-established within a year. To start, the new army will consist of a token force of one brigade of 12,000 men. It will grow to 40,000 in three years, a tenth of the size of the Saddam Hussein-era military.
The U.S.-led occupation administration will pay a $50 to $150 monthly stipend to as many as 250,000 former Iraqi soldiers. Officers of the rank of colonel or higher and senior members of the Baath party would receive nothing, said Walter Slocombe, a senior adviser on security and defense for the governing authority.
Former soldiers from the disbanded army have been mounting increasingly vehement protests, demanding pay.
Sometimes the only thing bullies understand is superior force....
Also notice what the Iraqi army protests were about - NOT about the US being in Iraq; rather they want pay.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Mayor's Office Attacked in Fallujah
Tuesday, June 24, 2003
FALLUJAH, Iraq — Iraqi insurgents fired a rocket-propelled grenade at the mayor's office in this restive city west of Baghdad -- the latest in a series of attacks against people thought to be cooperating with U.S. occupation forces.
Meanwhile, U.S. officials said that Syrian border guards detained during a firefight last week during an operation to hunt down suspected members of Iraq's ousted regime were still in U.S. custody.
U.S. troops shot and killed one of the ambushers on the mayor's office late Monday in Fallujah, a town 35 miles west of Baghdad, U.S. reports said.
Insurgents last week began targeting Iraqi civilians thought to be too close to Americans -- a new tactic in their campaign to disrupt the U.S.-led occupation.
Insurgents fired two more rocket-propelled grenades at U.S. troops in Habaniyah, about three miles west of Fallujah, but they exploded without causing injuries, reports said.
Details continued to emerge Tuesday on a previously undisclosed operation last week around the Iraqi town of Qaim, near the border with Syria.
U.S. special forces shot and captured several Syrian border guards during a firefight that broke out as the Americans attacked a convoy of suspected high-level fugitives linked to Saddam Hussein's government. They were apparently trying to cross into Syria.
U.S. officials announced Monday that the defeated and dissolved Iraqi army will be re-established within a year. To start, the new army will consist of a token force of one brigade of 12,000 men. It will grow to 40,000 in three years, a tenth of the size of the Saddam Hussein-era military.
The U.S.-led occupation administration will pay a $50 to $150 monthly stipend to as many as 250,000 former Iraqi soldiers. Officers of the rank of colonel or higher and senior members of the Baath party would receive nothing, said Walter Slocombe, a senior adviser on security and defense for the governing authority.
Former soldiers from the disbanded army have been mounting increasingly vehement protests, demanding pay.
>I like how since 65% of the Iraqis WANT the US to stay until things are safe and secure (per the CBS poll)<
what poll? please provide a link.
what poll? please provide a link.
Here's the results of a poll done by CBS News:
Sixty-five percent of Iraqis polled in Baghdad claimed they want the U.S. military to stay until Iraq is stable and secure; only 17 percent want American soldiers out now.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/06/20/iraq/main559521.shtml
Sixty-five percent of Iraqis polled in Baghdad claimed they want the U.S. military to stay until Iraq is stable and secure; only 17 percent want American soldiers out now.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/06/20/iraq/main559521.shtml
free TINKER, you're another of those who reads the number without interpretation. Iraqis didn't invite the American to bomb and invaded their country. As the (uninvited) occupation force, U.S. is obligated per the Geneva Convention to provide security forces to prevent lootings, crimes, unlawfulness and keep peace among the Iraqis. Sadly, the U.S. didn't do any except to protect the Oil Ministry and the Oil field. The poll doesn't mean the Iraqis want the American to stay and continue to occupy their nation.
You're a tinker who has been brain washed by the right wing conservatives. I'll give you an example I encountered recently.
CIGNA Retirment and Investment Services put out some flyers to my company about the "ABC's of Saving for College Education". The flyer shows a picture of a child playing with a fighter jet airplane. What does the picture tell you. "I want my kid to go to school so that he/she can design and manufacture better weapons to kill." I think NOT. Others in my company agreed with me, and all the flyers had been modified in-house and the picture of the child playing with a fighter jet is not shown any more.
You're a tinker who has been brain washed by the right wing conservatives. I'll give you an example I encountered recently.
CIGNA Retirment and Investment Services put out some flyers to my company about the "ABC's of Saving for College Education". The flyer shows a picture of a child playing with a fighter jet airplane. What does the picture tell you. "I want my kid to go to school so that he/she can design and manufacture better weapons to kill." I think NOT. Others in my company agreed with me, and all the flyers had been modified in-house and the picture of the child playing with a fighter jet is not shown any more.
... i'm not going to try and dispute the poll. that's never very useful. but i would love to know who conducted it, and if it was done on behalf of the iraqi people (i.e. the iraqi people get to see the results), or done simply to provide the crucial american voter back home with propaganda, that's all.
usually, polls results always come with info about who conducted the poll, and the specific number of people sampled in the poll. but at least as presented in the CBS story, this info is totally missing.
usually, polls results always come with info about who conducted the poll, and the specific number of people sampled in the poll. but at least as presented in the CBS story, this info is totally missing.
I know, kill the messenger, right? You really can't stand that you are wrong - so sorry.
I didn't conduct the poll, but CBS isn't exactly FOX News, now is it? I HAVE talked to Iraqis - have you? And I communicate with those in the war area - do you?
So who's better informed about this issue, eh?
I didn't conduct the poll, but CBS isn't exactly FOX News, now is it? I HAVE talked to Iraqis - have you? And I communicate with those in the war area - do you?
So who's better informed about this issue, eh?
My point is not about polling or even its number, it's the proper interpretation required in the process. Kinda like saying to the Liar-In-Thief "It's the Economy, Stupid"
The "poll" simply indicates the Iraqis demand law and order be restored after the pillaging and destruction committed by the invading forces. The law and order that the Iraqis did have under a dictator was still better than chaos, lootings, stealing, robbings, murderings and on and on. They're demanding to have their law and order restored!
If you're trying to say or even suggest that the Iraqis welcome the U.S. to stay, you're must be tinkering with propaganda disillusions.
The "poll" simply indicates the Iraqis demand law and order be restored after the pillaging and destruction committed by the invading forces. The law and order that the Iraqis did have under a dictator was still better than chaos, lootings, stealing, robbings, murderings and on and on. They're demanding to have their law and order restored!
If you're trying to say or even suggest that the Iraqis welcome the U.S. to stay, you're must be tinkering with propaganda disillusions.
So, since YOU know what is best for Iraq -
What have the Iraqis YOU talked to say?
The ones I talked to want democracy and DON'T want the US to leave until a new government is in place -
the last thing they want is a theocracy like Iran!
So enlighten all of us on the views of the Iraqis you converse with, okay?
What have the Iraqis YOU talked to say?
The ones I talked to want democracy and DON'T want the US to leave until a new government is in place -
the last thing they want is a theocracy like Iran!
So enlighten all of us on the views of the Iraqis you converse with, okay?
free tinker, you must have spoken w/ Ahmed Chalabi of the Iraqi National Congress. Yes, he likes America. There're certainly Iraqis who don't wanna see Iraq turn into another Iran, but per the ideal of democracy it's still the wish of the people.
[I personally met an older lady who has personal knowledge of how corrupted Chalabi was. She and her deceased husband both worked for World banks their whole life. Her hubby was a banker. She's seriously concerned about what Chalabi will do to further damage Iraq's finance.]
Chalabi is a crook. Clinton adminstration knew he was a crook and yet Bush supports him. He and his organization made $700 million dollars from Clinton adminstration vanished into thin air. He's still a wanted criminal by Egypt. Will anyone believe this is a sincere effort to start a democracy nation? From start, choosing a character like Chalabi already convinve me US ain't planning to build a democracy.
On the notion of Iran, it's more democratic than most outsiders think. What crimes have Iran committed? Any worse than any other nation has done, like the U.S.? This whole propaganda of crying Iran being the wolf is a mockery. Are the people in Iran better off than when Shah was in power? In my opinion, yes. The Iranians are far better off as a whole. In my opinion, they could have done even much better if there's no sabotage and obstacles put up by some foreign power. [I am not saying I prefer one system over another. I am merely my evaluation.]
[I personally met an older lady who has personal knowledge of how corrupted Chalabi was. She and her deceased husband both worked for World banks their whole life. Her hubby was a banker. She's seriously concerned about what Chalabi will do to further damage Iraq's finance.]
Chalabi is a crook. Clinton adminstration knew he was a crook and yet Bush supports him. He and his organization made $700 million dollars from Clinton adminstration vanished into thin air. He's still a wanted criminal by Egypt. Will anyone believe this is a sincere effort to start a democracy nation? From start, choosing a character like Chalabi already convinve me US ain't planning to build a democracy.
On the notion of Iran, it's more democratic than most outsiders think. What crimes have Iran committed? Any worse than any other nation has done, like the U.S.? This whole propaganda of crying Iran being the wolf is a mockery. Are the people in Iran better off than when Shah was in power? In my opinion, yes. The Iranians are far better off as a whole. In my opinion, they could have done even much better if there's no sabotage and obstacles put up by some foreign power. [I am not saying I prefer one system over another. I am merely my evaluation.]
Remember before the attack on Iraq? Oh, we must rid the world of Saddam Hussein, this evil dictator, "there must be a regime change" -- (who the hell writes this garbage???) We are attacking Iraq to "free" the people. And the big one "we are going to give Iraq back to the people"
When? When they've destroyed it?
The country is heading towards a guerilla war. Violence is everywhere. Soldiers are being killed, and are killing themselves.
And then, as you pointed out, there is the HUGE CROCK, Chalabi, who spent his life making a fortune outside the country whilst those left behind were suffering under the oppression of Hussein.
The moment the attack started, guess who is there like the proverbial leach searching for spoils? Chalabi, himself. Another puppet of the current and past administrations.
Funny how GWBush can go on about "terror" whilst his country is, and has been, supporting the likes of this.
Oh, I'm sure the long-suffering people of Iraq want a democracy. The only question remaining is whose definition of "democracy" is it going to be?
When? When they've destroyed it?
The country is heading towards a guerilla war. Violence is everywhere. Soldiers are being killed, and are killing themselves.
And then, as you pointed out, there is the HUGE CROCK, Chalabi, who spent his life making a fortune outside the country whilst those left behind were suffering under the oppression of Hussein.
The moment the attack started, guess who is there like the proverbial leach searching for spoils? Chalabi, himself. Another puppet of the current and past administrations.
Funny how GWBush can go on about "terror" whilst his country is, and has been, supporting the likes of this.
Oh, I'm sure the long-suffering people of Iraq want a democracy. The only question remaining is whose definition of "democracy" is it going to be?
The CBS poll that 'free thinker' thinks is so revealing really isn't. Putting aside the fact that we don't know what methods were used to survey Iraqi opinion, it isn't surprising that many in Iraq would say that they don't want the US to leave until security and stability have been restored. The question as it was presented gave those surveyed, in effect, the choice between a continuation of the present fucked up situation--chronic black-outs, destroyed infrastructure, eviscerated services, rampant crime (etc etc) *and* a power vacuum--OR the maintenance of the Anglo-American occupation which will, it is implied, improve conditions over time...In other words, this poll, by framing and circumscribing what Iraqi's are allowed to "say," is a subtle form of propaganda, the intent of which is to make this entire imperial enterprise appear legitimate and widely supported by the Iraqi people.
Here's some questions that I'd like to see asked by CBS which I'm sure wouldn't produce results that "free thinker" would be inclined to trumpet:
1. Has your life improved or become more difficult since the US/UK invasion of your country?
2. What do you think the US government's support for Saddam Hussein throughout most of the 80s says about its interest in the welfare of the people of Iraq?
3. What do you think of the fact that US administrators have suggested that Iraqi oil should be privatized and its pipelines re-routed?
4. What's more important to the Bush Administration: Helping forge a government that serves the interests of average Iraqi's OR one that furthers the interests of the US ruling class?
5. In light of the US' support for Hussein in the 80s, its imposition of sanctions, and the huge array of weapons it's dropped on your country, do you believe that it can be blamed for contributing to deteriorating living conditions in Iraq over the past twenty years?
Here's some questions that I'd like to see asked by CBS which I'm sure wouldn't produce results that "free thinker" would be inclined to trumpet:
1. Has your life improved or become more difficult since the US/UK invasion of your country?
2. What do you think the US government's support for Saddam Hussein throughout most of the 80s says about its interest in the welfare of the people of Iraq?
3. What do you think of the fact that US administrators have suggested that Iraqi oil should be privatized and its pipelines re-routed?
4. What's more important to the Bush Administration: Helping forge a government that serves the interests of average Iraqi's OR one that furthers the interests of the US ruling class?
5. In light of the US' support for Hussein in the 80s, its imposition of sanctions, and the huge array of weapons it's dropped on your country, do you believe that it can be blamed for contributing to deteriorating living conditions in Iraq over the past twenty years?
Your questions would produce exactly the results you want them to produce. Could you slant the questions any more? You could try. How about adding this to your poll:
1) Considering the fact that Americans are real assholes, how do you feel about America?
2) Does being slaughtered by an American ruling class which wants to steal your oil, rape your women, enslave your children, and force-feed you pork before you die, give you a positive or negative view of America?
3) If setting off a nuclear bomb in America would solve all the world's problems, would you be in favor of such action to bring peace to the world?
Then you could report that Iraqis overwhelmingly hate America, fear America, and want to destroy America. It's a wonder you're not top editor at the Washington Post.
1) Considering the fact that Americans are real assholes, how do you feel about America?
2) Does being slaughtered by an American ruling class which wants to steal your oil, rape your women, enslave your children, and force-feed you pork before you die, give you a positive or negative view of America?
3) If setting off a nuclear bomb in America would solve all the world's problems, would you be in favor of such action to bring peace to the world?
Then you could report that Iraqis overwhelmingly hate America, fear America, and want to destroy America. It's a wonder you're not top editor at the Washington Post.
Dumbass, I like your questions but they're very much different from aaron's. Yours are Mad Magazine material, and aaron's are neutral.
Allow me to add another. "Dumbass, front and center. About Face. Now, reveal your true self."
Allow me to add another. "Dumbass, front and center. About Face. Now, reveal your true self."
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$215.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network