You noticed that I didn’t write any thing yet about the video of British soldiers beating Iraqi teenagers.
The reason is I was searching for data’s about the ex-British colonies and this is what I came with:
At the old times of the British Empire sunrise that said not to know sunset, the Brit. colonial extension was huge in Africa and Asia.
Most of old British colonies were submitting to the Empirical control with little sporadic resistance here and there.
Only Iraq show fierce resistance and defiance against Brit.
Old Brit vets left nice memories 100 years ago about their residence Iraq just like their grandchildren are doing now and they hate to remember the name of Iraq !!.
I still don’t get it why people are surprised by seeing such images and videos, this is an occupation and this is what the occupiers do, killing and beating the natives.
John Simpson agrees with me.
No surprises in the war on terror
When the video apparently showing British soldiers beating up young stone-throwers was shown around the world on Sunday, a spokesman for al-Fadhila, an important moderate political party in Basra and southern Iraq, was asked for his reaction.
He was, he said, “shocked but not surprised”.
Many other moderate people throughout the Islamic world and beyond will feel the same way about this.
LadyBird the only thing that surprised me was why now? It was filmed in 2004 so was it the person who gave the newspaper who hold on to it since then or was it the newspaper who waited until now in both cases why now? I usually contact newspapers about these things, right now a bit tired, I’ll do it during the weekend.
As for what the occupation troops did it no news any longer, you just have to look at the soldiers who came in later and they did not even intervene to save the children, that it the reality of occupation.
She is a hero your grandmother!!!! My father’s grandfather fought against the British too, he was taken to a prison camp in India and stayed there for almost 2 years. So the British “interventions” are well known in my father’s family.
A few days ago, a large-scale opinion poll conducted by Maryland University showed that 87% of Iraqis (including 64% of Kurds) endorsed a demand for a timetabled withdrawal of the occupiers. The findings were mostly ignored by the British media.
I have contacted the university hopefully they’ll get back in a day or two with a link to the total poll.
I wouldn’t be surprised if a timetable were offered up as one of the chips as the political parties haggle for position. Apparently the training of Iraqi forces is moving along, and if sunni parties will commit to quelling the insurgency and liquidating AQ, then a cintingency plan for withdrawal would be a great idea.
“We commit in principle to withdrawing forces according to the following schedule if…”
It would actually be great if the coalition threw that out as a bone. If the freedom fighters really want the US to leave, they would comply. Naturally the terms would have to be reasonable like, um, NO MORE ATTACKS AGAINST COALITION AND GOVERNMENT TROOPS, NO MORE ATTACKS AGAINST CIVILIANS, NO MORE ATTACKS AGAINST INFRASTRUCTURE, etc.
It could be a staged withdrawal plan over 24–36 months, with caveat that the government can call coalition back if anyone starts major trouble.
Nadia,
Yes, the Shia and Kurds want a timetable now. However, the Accord Front has changed its tune. Now it is quite anxious for a renewed commitment from the Coalition to stay until the militias are disarmed. Since that is not going to happen until the terrorism the Sunni Arabs instigated and abetted is put down, I’d predict there there will be a highly tenitive timetable along with an extremely FIRM resolution from the Iraqi government that foreign troops will not be going anywhere.
“beating up young stone-throwers”
The media outlet that published the video said it was a violent riot and that the ‘innocent kids’ were also throwing grenades.
Inflicting gratuitous bruises should not be rewarded, but considering this happened during a violent riot, when tempers and adrenaline on all sides are running hot, the soldiers did not do anything especially bad. Abu Gharaib was a rotton affair and this isn’t anything close to that. Look a bit closer at the video. There is rough shoving, punching, and baton blows, but nothing out of the ordinary when it comes to any ‘police’ unit controlling violent protesters. Naturally the politicians will have to make noises this way and that…
The bottom line is that those kids should not have been throwing grenades.
If you throw grenades at soldiers you risk far more than a few bruises. A violent (potentially lethal) attack often provokes a violent response. This is considered proportional.
Many muslims should understand this because they go ape shit and are ready to kill people and destroy things at random based upon cartoons published thousands of miles away. This is not proportional.
The provincial council in Basra has suspended all relations with the British, including cooperation with the British consulate. The police chief in Basra said Iraqi security forces would cease joint patrols with British forces in the entire region.
Iraq Conflict: The Historical Background:
http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/home_page/165.php?nid=&id=&pnt=165&lb=hmpg1
Here’s your poll Nadia; think LB has already covered this.
You might click on the full report/method link or not cause it sure seems as though as bad as things may be a majority of those polled think it was worth it to get rid of Saddam. Wonder which facts some here are going to distort but of course we have the link now and can see what Iraqis think.
LB,
When you give your analysis on the phony British Abuse scandal in Basrah, I’m sure you’ll want to give this eye-witness report plenty of play (hyperlink).
Actually, I’ll be shocked if you say anthing about it anymore.
Whatever happened to the big push to deploy LTL weapons for crowd control? Did that fizzle up and blow away?
My latest idea for a t-shirt slogan: Guns don’t kill people. Cheney kills people.
Thank you M for the link!
———–
They have done that a couple of times the last couple of years and they still haven’t learned a thing.
CMARII how do you know that story is the truth? Adn when you know that it is in what way does that make what the occupation troops LEAGAL?
Here’s an article in part regarding Iraqi resistance during WWII.
Origins of Modern Arab Terror
by Chuck Morse
Tuesday, March 4, 2003
The agenda and political faith of Saddam Hussein, Yasir Arafat, Osama bin Laden, Hamas and the rest of the international Islamic terrorists can be traced back to World War II and two key figures, Adolf Hitler and Amin al-Husseini, known as the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem.
Much has been written about the Mufti, all well-documented, including chapters by such prominent authors as Connor Cruise O’Brien, former Irish ambassador to the U.N. Mountains of documented evidence is out there and available to anyone who cares to look.
The Nuremberg and Eichmann trials revealed that Nazi official Adolf Eichmann met with the British-appointed Mufti in Palestine in 1937. Following this meeting, the Mufti would become essentially an agent of Nazi Germany charged with the funding and organizing of pro-Nazi organizations in Egypt, Syria, Palestine and Iraq.
In 1941, along with Rashid Ali and Khairallah Tulfah, Saddam Hussein’s uncle, guardian and later father-in-law, the Mufti instigated a pro-Nazi coup in Iraq with Nazi-supplied weapons and aircraft. After the coup failed, the Mufti fled to Berlin, where he would hold his first of several meetings with Adolf Hitler.
At this meeting the Mufti was reported to have dissuaded Hitler from considering the deportation of the Jews to Palestine. Instead, the Mufti advocated and even possibly suggested what came to be known as the final solution against the Jews. In 1942, the Mufti would intervene and stop the Nazis from exchanging 10,000 Jewish children for Nazi POWs.
All in all, the Bosnian Muslim Hanzars assisted in the extermination of approximately 200,000 Christian Serbs, 40,000 Gypsies and 22,000 Jews.
In 1943, Hitler appointed the Mufti as head of a Nazi-Muslim government in exile. From his headquarters in Berlin, a confiscated Jewish mansion, the Mufti laid out plans for a concentration camp for Jews near Nablus in Palestine modeled after Auschwitz. Photos exist of the Mufti touring Auschwitz with Heinrich Himmler.
Deriving financial support from a fund of confiscated Jewish money known as the Sonderfund, the Mufti was installed as head of the Nazi-created Islamic Institute (Islamische Zentralinstitut) in Dresden, where he would begin the process of educating future Islamic leaders in Nazi ideology.
On that day, future Islamic terrorists received their marching orders.
Very interesting, Jon. And what a rather cruel characterization by Himmler:
|considering the punks were throwing bricks and chuncks of concrete [plus what ever else] they got what they deserved, an good ass whooping BFD.
you girls sound just like my female relatives.
“Oh not my boys they would never do that” Yeeaahhrriigghhtt! meanwhile the next day the little bastards are up to something else.
Nadia,
CMARII how do you know that story is the truth?
This is the testimony of a reporter who was there. Do you have counter eye-witness testimony? No? Not a single rock throwing mob member to say he was misunderstood? Lets try this: tell me why you *doubt* his testimony.
Adn when you know that it is in what way does that make what the occupation troops LEAGAL?
I guess I’ll have to say it again:
“Tyrannical dictators are by definition illegitimate. It does not matter who you are or what you’ve done before or why you are doing it: if you depose a tyrant and replace him/her with a representative democracy it is always legitimate and righteous. It needs no further qualification. It doesn’t justify everything or even anything else you do. But *that* act is pure, unadulterated justice.”
What makes the occupation legal? The desire of the freely elected representational government of Iraq that they be there. What YOU want, frankly, does not matter AT ALL.
“Adn when you know that it is in what way does that make what the occupation troops LEAGAL?”
This is interesting, Nadia. You and the rest of the world like to run around and say the war/invasion of Iraq was illegal. OK, sue the US and all the other countries in the court of public opinion, the world court, the court down the street. You win; it’s illegal cause the UN didn’t sanction it. Now of course that is open to debate, but you win, and let’s say it is illegal.
So now the UN comes along and says the new Iraq is a legal entity/country with legal sovereignty provided it meets certain electoral deadlines/processes blah, blah blah which it has done. The UN even sets out a timeline and includes the MNF in there for good measure. Can’t possibly be an occupation now, Nadia can it? You can’t really have it both ways. If your standard for legality is the UN, then the MNF are not occupiers, and any insurgency or outside pressures are now “illegal”. I don’t know, Nadia. Are you telling the UN they got it wrong with all those resolutions they passed on the sovereignty of Iraq and their election plans? What?
Interesting points of view, CMAR and M. It reminds me of a case where somebody built a house without having permission. At first the local authorities demanded the house to be dismantled, but when they saw how beautiful the house actually was, they ended up approving it. It’s usually not the right way to do it, since you’re taking the law in your own hands. I guess Iraq is such an ‘unusual’ case but you’re undermining the law doing it.
Keld Bach,
Sometimes the cops aren’t around to execute the law. Sometimes the don’t care. Sometimes the cops are dealing drugs or running prostitution rings. In those cases, when stop a deadly crime in progress, you are not undermining the law, you are establishing it: because you are saying, it doesn’t matter what the cops do. The law is the law.
Tyrants are illegitimate because they rule people without a social contract. It would be nice if the UN could be depended on to always bring them to justice. That has been empirically proven not to be the case. So when individual nations bring justice to the oppressed under tyrants and set up representational government without UN sanction, nothing could be more legitimate. When the UN sanctions it after the fact, it affirms the legitimacy of the act.
In your analogy, the city council affirmed that the house’s beauty legitimized its construction.
KB lets go the United States and do all these things that CMARII is so for…
As for you M you need to know that there is no resolution that has made the illigal invation legal. I had this discussion before and the fact remains the same no resolution have made the war legal.
“As for you M you need to know that there is no resolution that has made the illigal invation legal. I had this discussion before and the fact remains the same no resolution have made the war legal.”
Nadia,
Please reread my post again. I never said the UN passed a resolution making the invasion/war legal. I said they passed a resolution (actually a couple I think)affirming the new Iraq and his sovereigty. Furthermore part of those resolutions made accommodations for an election process, timetable, system of representation and security provided by the MNF. I’m not trying to trick you or trip you up; it’s all there in the resolutions.
If your logic tells you that the war was illegal because it lacked backing by the UN and the world, how do you now deny Iraqi sovereigty, the elections, the current government and the MNF as occupiers. Please explain your logic to me.
“KB lets go the United States and do all these things that CMARII is so for…”
There you go again, Nadia. Trying to overthrow the duly elected goverment of the United States, but you are welcome to try. While you may think W is a tyrant, the voters of this country do not because they elected him twice. There is a system in place, good or bad; it works, and it is monitered by the entire world. There is a slight bit of difference from what CMAR II is talking about with the exception of like Iraq, what you want doesn’t matter at all.
Perhaps you will be so kind as to tell the world your solution for the tyrant called Saddam.…his sons etc. or were Iraqis suppose to be content with waiting for the UN, you and the rest of the world to free them? Shame on all of us for letting Iraqis and others around the world suffer so in this day and age. Wonder what God really thinks of us for turning our backs.
Nadia says “KB lets go the United States and do all these things that CMARII is so for…”
Aside from the funny image of Sweden and Denmark actually attemping something like that, your comment reflects a funny-because-it-is-so-sad disconnect from reality.
CMAR,
Nothing so grand as that.
This would be an amphibious assault led by KB, Nadia, and LB. I doubt the countries of Sweden and Denmark would participate.
Imagine them in their litte row boat, taking turns rowing, arguing over which direction to go, and never making it out of thier home port.
I believe a short film could be made from it. Naturally, to win any awards, we would have to make Nadia bisexual so that a romantic dynamism would keep the audiences attention. The plot is rather thin otherwise.
KB: Stop drinking salt water LB — its not going to help!
LB: (white foam coming from mouth) you don’t love me anymore! What does it matter!
Nadia: Both of you shut up. We have 2000 more miles to row — and then we have to overthrow the elected government of the US let by Bushhitler himself. Now cut the shit and start rowing.
LB: (wimpering)
KB: Are you sure this is a good idea?
KB,
“It reminds me of a case where somebody built a house without having permission.”
Its more like a crack house/prostitution ring. The police won’t do anything — they never come to this part of town. So the neighbors get together, tear down the crackhouse, get rid of the pimps, rebuild a beautiful house with school and playground, and then give it back to the poor people who used to live there.
Natuarally some of the pimps/dealers that weren’t captured try to foil the plans by blowing up the sandbox, killing their former ‘girls’ who they think are ‘betraying’ them, etc.
Right now the rebuilding phase is not going smoothly. The rest of the world watches as the pimps slaughter and destroy, and they blame the people who are trying to rebuild. They don’t lift a finger to help.
CMAR, it’s a very delicate problematic and I agree that it sometimes can be justified to take the law in your own hands, e.g. in order to prevent a crime to be committed. In my country I’m allowed to make a civil arrest if there’s no policeman around, but I’m certainly not allowed to kill a murderer (except in self-defence).
“… when individual nations bring justice to the oppressed under tyrants and set up representational government without UN sanction, nothing could be more legitimate.
The UN is far from being a perfect organisation, but I think the US is weakening its authority by acting so selfishly. It’s a dangerous path to take, since international laws and conventions are being ignored, and it certainly makes it much more difficult for them next time the US decides to play the global policeman.
I hope Iraq one day will become such a ‘beautiful house’ that we all will say that Bush did the right thing, but I think it would rather be a bi-product of his real purpose of attacking Iraq.
I really appreciate your humour, Charles. But don’t forget that the French are on our side ;-)
BTW, this is quite funny, too: Welcome back, Saddam!.
Keld,
The UN is far from being a perfect organisation, but I think the US is weakening its authority by acting so selfishly.
Interesting that we agree on the facts but come to the opposite conclusion: I think the invasion of Iraqi, put a true sense of doom behind UN resolutions. It means that it might not be enough to buy off and otherwise corrupt Security Council members in order to avoid complying with a Security Council resolution. It means the system cannot be gamed with 100% certainty. I’m sure that’s on Iran’s mind right now. It should be. I was surely on Libya’s mind in 2003.
I hope Iraq one day will become such a ‘beautiful house’ that we all will say that Bush did the right thing, but I think it would rather be a bi-product of his real purpose of attacking Iraq.
Well, I agree democracy was not the *central* purpose of the war in Iraq. I *do* consider it a concomitant purpose, however. But I doubt we agree on what THE central reason for the invasion was. The fact is that there were probably a couple dozen reasons to use force to depose Saddam and his Ba’athist regime that all came to an apex after 9–11 (after 12 years of trying other ways).
oh and I say again…the act was righteous and lawful. It doesn’t matter why Bush did it. It doesn’t matter what happens afterward. If the Iraqis screw-up their democracy (I don’t think they will), then they do. But, as a tyrant, Saddam was THE criminal by the standard that founds the *concept* of “human rights”.
KB,
As Churchill said regarding the Italians at the start of WWII:
‘We had to have them on our team last time — now its your turn’
CMAR, of course we agree since we’re talking facts — only the rank of priorities may vary a bit. You didn’t mention Iraq’s oil and the security of Israel, but I assume they are included in your “couple dozen reasons”.
CMAR, “It doesn’t matter why Bush did it.”
Sure, I’ve noticed that Bush has put himself above the law…
The hunting incident is getting a little interesting now: The Real Story Emerges:
KB,
As someone recently said — ‘I’d rather go hunting with cheney than driving with kennedy…’
a born-again evangelical physician
????
LOL…What planet does RJ Eskow live on where evangelicals are freaky cultists so that the religious association of the attending physician has some conspiratorial significance??
But I never doubted a story like this was likely to emerge. The Huffington Post crowd has shown no deficiency in their ability to spin paranoid fantasies out of whole cloth. Before they’re done, they’ll have Cheny performing a drunken Black Mass over Whitttington’s dead body to bring him back to life as a zombie. In fact, that was Cheney’s plan (that of his two Devil’s Brides) all along.
“Cheney and Whittington went hunting with two women ”
Does that strike anyone as sexist?
I mean, can women do anything other than perform on their knees and backs? If I were a girl, I’d be insulted at the insinuation.
Wasn’t one of the ‘women’ the owner of the ranch where they were hunting, and the other an ambassador?
Or were they strippers they picked up for some down home drunken debauchery? Hmmmmm.
Charles,
That is exactly what I was thinking. But for the life of me I can’t find a news report that says who these women (not their wives) were.
I presume one of them was the owner of this 50K acre ranch. But Eskow must be a Islamic fundamentalist or something. He can’t imagine two women being in the presence of the VPOTUS and an attoney (and a squad of secret service agents) unless they were there as whores.
But this is typical of a certain psycho wing in this country. They claim to be secular and socially liberal, but when it comes to criticizing their political enemies, they turn into Puritan Churchladies: 1) If anyone (not necessarily the VP) had a beer that day, then “liquour” was involved (that’s the word Eskow used). It was a Lost Weekend. 2) There were women in their presence without a male relative. 3) Cheney has a gay daughter and Justice John Robert’s wife made a face when Bush mentioned her son…could he be gay??
–
CMAR,
The women (not their wives, nod, nod, wink, wink) were:
Armstrong — owner of ranch
Pamela Willeford — U.S. ambassador to Switzerland “who was hunting with the pair on the 50,000-acre Armstrong Ranch in South Texas.”
Fill in the blank. More often than not its dictator loving terrorist apologists.
You are absolutely right Ladybird.
I mentioned this before, and I think in light of the racist, ethnocentric beating of the children we should highlight it again.
Before the Jallianwala Bagh atrocity of 1919, British troops used to tie Indian rebels to the mouths of cannons and fire their load (12th June, 1857).
KB — “And what a rather cruel characterization by Himmler”
Sad, but true. It seems like these people are pretty easy to manipulate into becoming canon fodder. Why is that?
*
jon, that would be the terrorist and batthists you’re refering too, correct.
Jon, I guess they really do believe in a better life after this… There’s no return-ticket.
I would like to add for the English readers.
Nadia is linking to interviews made by “AlHayat” newspaper with the Iraqi teenagers who the whole world seen taking beats from the Brits.
Charles, “I’d rather go hunting with cheney than driving with kennedy…”
Well, I’m not so sure: Cheney’s Smoking Gun:
More cartoons: Saddam as… pin-up.
“The only explanation that fits the nature of Whittington’s injuries is that Cheney’s gun discharged at extremely close range. ”
Is this the same guy who insinuated that Cheney and his 78 year old buddy were slutting it up with the swiss ambassador?
First off, a 28 guage shotgun is WAY more powerful than a bb gun. That is just plain stupid.
But the spread pattern on the victim will clarify any range issues. Was it 30 feet? Or 30 yards? I have no idea.
I thought it was really nutty tonight the way ALL of the news channels devoted almost their entire news programs to covering this issue. I mean, sure its important to Cheney, the guy who shot his old buddy, as well as to the old buddy himself, who got shot. Its probably important to all of their friends and loved ones. But this just can’t be THE news story upon which the world turns. Can it? Is this all the ‘journalists’ can think about while prioritzing all the issues of the day? Its pretty pathetic. The MSM sucks.
“The MSM sucks.”
Couldn’t agree more.