Home > War Crimes - World Tribunal on Iraq

War Crimes - World Tribunal on Iraq

by Open-Publishing - Wednesday 13 July 2005
26 comments

Wars and conflicts Justice International

I just returned from Istanbul, where I attended the last sitting of the World Tribunal on Iraq (WTI) and heard three days of testimony from researchers, scientists, and witnesses from all over the world (including Iraq) on crimes against humanity and against this planet-for detailed information see www.worldtribunal.org.

This was the culminating session of the WTI (modeled after the Bertrand Russell World Peace Foundation tribunal of the late 1960s on crimes committed in Vietnam), after having convened in cities in 20 different countries around the world since June 2003. WTI’s purpose was to challenge the silence around the aggression against Iraq and to seek the truth about the invasion and occupation of that country.

The session took place in Istanbul (at the Imperial Ottoman Mint, located beside a Byzantine church named Haigha Irini, in the gardens of the Topkapi Palace), at a time when, spurned by the European Union, Turkey is forging closer ties with the U.S. and is gradually being nudged towards a transformation from a laïc Republic into an Islamic one. This may seem absurd given the tremendous contempt for Islam expressed by the U.S. Administration and U.S. forces, but the U.S. wants a “model” Islamic state in the region-“model” meaning docile, cooperative and welcoming-to serve as a base and a bridge in its “Greater Middle Eastern” project.

So while hordes of tourists strolled in the lanes shaded by giant plane trees, 1,500 people from 24 different countries gathered to listen to 55 thorough and wrenching testimonies. A Jury of Conscience -led by writer and activist Arundhati Roy and made up of 16 people from Turkey, Malaysia, the U.S., South Africa, Belgium, Brazil, Mexico, Israel, Argentina, and Iraq-sat in judgment, as did the rest of us.

A quotation from John Berger, on the inside cover of the Tribunal’s program booklet, stressed the crucial task before us, restoring memory:
“The records have to be kept and, by definition, the perpetrators, far from keeping records, try to destroy them. They are killers of the innocent and of memory. The records are required to inspire still further the mounting opposition to the new global tyranny. The new tyrants, incomparably over- armed, can win every war-both military and economic. Yet they are losing the war (this is how they call it) of communication. They are not winning the support of world public opinion. More and more people are saying no. Finally this will be the tyranny’s undoing. But after how many more tragedies, invasions and collateral disasters? After how much more of the new poverty the tyranny engenders? Hence the urgency of keeping records, of remembering, of assembling the evidence, so that the accusations become unforgettable, and proverbial on every continent. More and more people are going to say no, for this is the precondition today for saying yes to all we are determined to save and everything we love.”

This tribunal was not sitting in order to mete out punishment, but to bear witness, and to set the record straight. “The WTI aspires both to start the process of accountability and to register history, so that what happened in Iraq is not forgotten. This involves registering history against the rewriting of history by sovereigns; exposing the destruction incurred upon the people of Iraq and humanity, and discussing the alternatives. The scope of this tribunal also comprises the threats that nature, world resources and human security are confronted with as a direct result of the assault.”

Arundhati Roy, in her opening speech as spokesperson of the Jury of Conscience, reiterated this purpose: “The Jury of Conscience at this tribunal is not here to deliver a simple verdict of guilty or not guilty against the United States and its allies. We are here to examine a vast spectrum of evidence about the motivations and consequences of the U.S. invasion and occupation, evidence that has been deliberately marginalized or suppressed.”

Roy also countered the accusation (in some newspapers) that the Tribunal was a “kangaroo court”: “Now this view seems to suggest a touching concern that in this harsh world, the views of the U.S. government and the so-called Coalition of the Willing headed by President George Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair have somehow gone unrepresented. That the World Tribunal on Iraq isn’t aware of the arguments in support of the war and is unwilling to consider the point of view of the invaders. If in the era of the multinational corporate media and embedded journalism anybody can seriously hold this view, then we truly do live in the Age of Irony, in an age when satire has become meaningless because real life itself is more satirical than satire can ever be. Let me say cate- gorically that this tribunal is the defense.”

I will not attempt to summarize all of the grueling testimony (which made me weep more than once) that we heard. For that, I urge you to explore the website. I was
deeply disturbed by the description of young former U.S. soldier Tim Goodrich-of house raids, systematic torture, and the culture of militarism that makes it all seem ordinary. Goodrich described how young U.S. recruits practiced shooting on targets with human forms, were taught to follow orders without questions, to consider all Moslems infidels who should be killed, and how they de-humanized Iraqi people in a way that makes brutality seem acceptable. “Don’t be fooled by my youthful appearance,” he said, “the war has aged me.” He added, “Resistance in the military is increasing.”

Iraqi lawyer Amal Sawadi gave details of arbitrary detention and systematic torture of ordinary civilians, including women. “All Iraqi land has turned into a prison. Even a ten-year-old child can be arrested.” Iraqi journalist Fadhil al Bedrani described mass murders during the attack on Fallujah, including the incineration of 420 women and children with Bunker Busters, and the killing of 680 civilians before his eyes, 260 of them children.

Many of us were stunned nonetheless when U.S. scientist, Joel Kovel, stated the U.S. is waging a nuclear, biological, and chemical war in Iraq, setting loose “an eco- catastrophe.” Iraqi environmental engineer, Dr. Souad Naji Al- Azzawi, who with six other scientists had done a survey on the radiation in the air, land, and water in Iraq, described the devastating radioactive contamination whose effects will spill into the future long after the war ends. “The Admin- istration and the Pentagon decided to make the Iraqi people and Iraq’s environment a guinea pig laboratory for the testing of all types of depleted uranium, radioactive, thermaboric, chemical, robust earth penetrators, microwave, and other types of weapons,” she said, and added: “They’re killing scientists who dare to do research on the effects of depleted uranium-55 scientists have been killed in Iraq and many are detained.”

The witnesses (or “advocates”) described how the U.S. deliberately provoked various factions in Iraqi society in order to divide and rule the country, and how it has devastated the heritage of thousands of years of history in Mesopotamia, wiping out the memory of Western civilization. An ancient, deeply rooted culture is being destroyed, brutalized, thrown into chaos.

Argentinian jury member Taty Almeida (wearing a white head -scarf with Madres de la Plaza de Mayo written on it) stood up to tell Iraqi witnesses that the Argentinian Madres were in unconditional solidarity with Iraqi women.

I felt both a crazy longing to remain with the people and a crazy shame that, while I would resume my modest life in Ankara, the Iraqi participants would re-enter their imperial hell. Yet the sense that solidarity is not a sentimental nicety, but a huge, transforming reality, has remained with me.

The jury’s verdict was announced on Monday, June 27 by Arundhati Roy (see Preliminary Declaration, pages 5-7). The tribunal has judged and condemned the U.S. and its allies. It has defined this war as one of the most unjust in history, and has established charges against the Security Council of the UN for failing to stop war crimes and crimes against humanity, among other failures.

Read the Preliminary Declaration of the Journal of Conscience.

http://www.zmag.org/ZMagSite/JulAug2005/reinart0705_2.html

http://zmagsite.zmag.org/JulAug2005/reinart0705.html

Forum posts

  • On Bellaciao.org :

    – Media Alert : The mysterious case of the vanishing World Tribunal on Iraq
    – Wake up Calls
    – The Perfect Storm: the World Tribunal on Iraq in Istanbul
    – More Evidence Indicts U.S.
    – World Tribunal on Iraq : PRESS RELEASE about JURY STATEMENT
    – WTI: PRELIMINARY DECLARATION OF THE JURY OF CONSCIENCE
    – Censoring the carnage in Iraq
    – "To top off the U.S./British lies...
    – Iraq is now worse than it was under Saddam
    – A former US Air Force pilot called on US troops in Iraq to "resist"
    – US caused more deaths in Iraq than Saddam
    – Bush: the world holds you accountable

    From truthout.org’s special coverage: The World Tribunal on Iraq :

    – Is This What They Call Democracy?
    – Dahr Jamail | War Crimes
    – Brendan Smith | The "Tribunal Movement"
    – Jayan Nayar | Media Wrongs against Truth and Humanity
    – Mete Çubukcu | Moral Responsibility of War Journalism
    – David Miller | Media Wrongs against Humanity: Witness Statement Including Evidence of Media Wrongs
    – Saul Landau | The Role of the Media
    – Larry Everest | History of US and UK Intervention in Iraq
    – H.C. von Sponeck | The Conduct of the UN before and after the 2003 Invasion
    – Phil Shiner | Illegality of Preventive Attack and Unilateral Use of Force
    – Richard Falk | Opening Speech
    – Arundhati Roy | The Most Cowardly War in History

    Indymedia coverage: Global IMC, Washington DC, New-York, ...

    Dahr Jamail’s report: Iraqi Hospitals Ailing Under Occupation (PDF: English, Nederlandse, Francais) (See also: Images From The War In Iraq)

    And of course: The World Tribunal on Iraq web site.

  • oh boy. this is a very interesting diversion from realty. supposedly, this is an inquiry about "crimes against humanity and against this planet" and yet the name "Saddam Hussein" doesn’t even appear in this article.

    the WTI is basically a collective of professional protest groups. it’s not as if it were comprised of any officiating government representation.

    take a look at some of the endorsers listed at the site...
    "Action Indict Bush-Blair", "Bush Must Go!", "Iraqi Democrats Against Occupation", "Jews Against the Occupation", "New York City Labor Against the War", "Not in Our Name Project", "Occupation Watch Center", "StopUSA", "Theater of the Oppressed Laboratory".

    come on man! this is a kangaroo court stacked with a panel of anti-conservative bigots. there’s no objectivity involved in the process. where are the "Saddam Hussein must pay" organizations? where are the groups that represent the iraqi who are happy to be on a new path that doesn’t included being fed to lions, gassed, electrocuted, dismembered alive, or a host of other nice little games he, his wonderful sons and other family members used to enjoy playing with the citizenry.

    of course the iraqi people want us out of there. no one WANTS their country to be occupied by another nation. but there have been plenty of casual interviews of average iraqi’s who want us to stay long enough to insure the security of their freedom, which is still very fragile right now.

    i see nothing here but an all left-sided and quite unofficial kangaroo court. plain and simple. it is painfully amusing to find no mention of saddam and his despicable deeds. this is a clear demonstration of the hatred and contempt exuded by SOME "socially enlightened" liberals towards conservatives. the fact that you are perfectly willing to ignore the deeds of some of the most grotesque members of the human race ever to exist, namely saddam hussein, osam bin-hidin’ and abu musab al-zarkawi, and the fact that you are willing to attempt shifting the blame for all of this madness to the lap of the conservative conscience says everything about your cause that I need to know. of course there’s also the unlikely possibility that there are few professional sensationalists trying to milk the cow. but that doesn’t happen here, right? no, of course not.

    Dave G.
    Acworth, GA

    • Do you really want to hear more about Saddam Hussein ?
      Easy, just switch on your TV or buy any corporate newspaper.

      (BTW, have you at least READ some of the above articles and testimonies from the World Tribunal on Iraq before writing your comment ?)

    • This is the culminating session of the World Tribunal on Iraq. It is of particular significance that it is being held here in Turkey, where the US used Turkish air bases to launch numerous bombing missions to degrade Iraq’s defences before the March 2003 invasion and has sought and continues to seek political support from the Turkish government, which it regards as an ally.

      All this was done in the face of enormous popular opposition by the Turkish people. As a spokesperson for the jury of conscience, it would make me uneasy if I did not mention that the government of India is also, like the government of Turkey, positioning itself as an ally of the US in its economic policies and the so called war on terror.

      The testimonies at the previous sessions of the World Tribunal on Iraq in Brussels and New York have demonstrated that even those of us who have tried to follow the war in Iraq closely are not aware of a fraction of the horrors that have been unleashed in Iraq.
      Testimonies

      The jury of conscience at this tribunal is not here to deliver a simple verdict of guilty or not guilty against the US and its allies. We are here to examine a vast spectrum of evidence about the motivations and consequences of the US invasion and occupation, evidence that has been deliberately marginalised or suppressed.

      Every aspect of the war will be examined — its legality; the role of international institutions and major corporations in the occupation; the role of the media; the impact of weapons such as depleted uranium munitions, napalm, and cluster bombs; the use of and legitimation of torture; the ecological impacts of the war; the responsibility of Arab governments; the impact of Iraq’s occupation on Palestine and the history of US and British military interventions in Iraq.

      This tribunal is an attempt to correct the record. To document the history of the war, not from the point of view of the victors, but of the temporarily—and I repeat the word temporarily—vanquished.

      Before the testimonies begin, I would like to briefly address as straightforwardly as I can a few questions that have been raised about this tribunal.

      The first is that this tribunal is a kangaroo court. That it represents only one point of view. That it is a prosecution without a defence. That the verdict is a foregone conclusion.

      Now this view seems to suggest a touching concern that in this harsh world, the views of the US government and the so called coalition of the willing headed by US president George Bush and British prime minister Tony Blair have somehow gone unrepresented. That the World Tribunal on Iraq isn’t aware of the arguments in support of the war and is unwilling to consider the point of view of the invaders.

      If in the era of the multinational corporate media and embedded journalism anybody can seriously hold this view, then we truly do live in the age of irony, in an age when satire has become meaningless because real life is more satirical than satire can ever be.

      Let me say categorically that this tribunal is the defence. It is an act of resistance in itself. It is a defence mounted against one of the most cowardly wars ever fought in history—a war in which international institutions were used to force a country to disarm and then stood by while it was attacked with a greater array of weapons than has ever been used in the history of war.

      Second, this tribunal is not in any way a defence of Saddam Hussein. His crimes against Iraqis, Kurds, Iranians, Kuwaitis and others cannot be dismissed in the process of bringing to light Iraq’s more recent and still unfolding tragedy.

      However, we must not forget that when Saddam Hussein was committing his worst crimes, the US government was supporting him politically and materially. When he was gassing Kurdish people, the US government financed him, armed him, and stood by silently.

      Saddam Hussein is being tried as a war criminal even as we speak. But what about those who helped to install him in power, who armed him, who supported him—and who are now setting up a tribunal to try him and absolve themselves completely?

      And what about other accomplices of the US in the region, including the government of Turkey, that have suppressed Kurdish peoples and other people’s rights?
      Evidence

      There are remarkable people gathered here who, in the face of this relentless and brutal aggression and propaganda, have doggedly worked to compile a comprehensive spectrum of evidence and information that should serve as a weapon in the hands of those who wish to participate in the resistance against the occupation of Iraq.

      It should become a weapon in the hands of soldiers in the US, Britain, Italy, Australia and elsewhere who do not wish to fight, who do not wish to lay down their lives — or to take the lives of others — for a pack of lies. It should become a weapon in the hands of journalists, writers, poets, singers, teachers, plumbers, taxi drivers, car mechanics, painters, lawyers — anybody who wishes to participate in the resistance.

      The evidence collated in this tribunal should, for instance, be used by the International Criminal Court (whose jurisdiction the US does not recognise) to try as war criminals George Bush, Tony Blair, John Howard, Silvio Berlusconi, and all those government officials, army generals and CEOs who participated in this war and now profit from it.

      The assault on Iraq is an assault on all of us — on our dignity, our intelligence, our humanity and our future.

      We recognise that the judgment of the World Tribunal on Iraq is not binding in international law. However, our ambitions far surpass that.

      The World Tribunal on Iraq places its faith in the consciences of millions of people across the world who do not wish to stand by and watch while the people of Iraq are being slaughtered, subjugated and humiliated.

    • The war was based on lies and fabrications which amount to "cooked" intelligence and we all know that. Why Bush has not been impeached for high crimes and endangering our country is something none of us know. It appears that with our one party government of "representatives" which only represent themselves we probably will never get any truth or justice but just more warmongering for which we will be forced to pay the bills. The capitalist model of profiteering from wars and phony security provisions are what is driving this "terrorist" war. The more our government is composed of multi-billionairs who profit from non-bid contracts to keep us "safe" the more we are really in danger. Meanwhile our treasure is being divided up by those in power who are nothing more than crooks on the take. The news media are composed of whores who work for the highest bidder with no regard for truth or doing any independent investigation into the propoganda issued by the criminals in charge of the government. What is the average citizen supposed to do? Are we supposed to sit by and just remain silent? Are we supposed to pretend we do not see what is happening? There appears to be nothing we can do about our government that is a monster out of control and not accountable.

  • WTI supporters are ineed prefectly willing to stand by and watch as the people of the free and law abiding world are "slaughtered, subjugated and humiliated". this "jury of conscience" chooses to treat fanatical terrorists benignly and to make exuses for their butchery by gathering up every conceivably anti-estableshment nutball and throwing a mud slinging party at the heros of the day.

    the fact that Saddam Hussein is "being tried as a war crimanl as we speak" is a good thing that was accomplished by bush, blair, leaders of other countries, citizens who supported them, and most importantly, the soldiers who lay it down for the sake of the free world. it is something that folks who think as you do haven’t got the stomach for and yet it is something that MUST be done.

    you are not intellectually honest when you espouse the idea of free existance while you continue making exuses for the bad guys and throw dung at the good guys just because you don’t agree with some of their social policies.

    you can’t "correct the record" without having supporting testimony as well as opposing testimony. why that would be most unconcienable and undemocratic, especialy coming from the "jury of concience".

    in other words... you guys are full of beans!

    Dave G
    Acworth, GA

    • 320636.jpg 320637.jpg

      Saddam hussein gets the keys to the city of detroit after he bailes out a local church for millions.

    • ???
      I found nowhere on statments from the World Tribunal on Iraq that they are making excuses for the butchery of the terrorists, neither state terrorists, nor "street" terrorists. Are you sure you haven’t followed a web link to a Bush’ speech ?

      What are the charges that make Saddam Hussein arrested but leave G.W. Bush free ?
      It’s not the civilian death toll, as the US lead war has now made more civilian victims than the attacks in New-york, Washington, Madrid and London all together ( 1 , 2 , 3 ). It’s not the WMD, as we all know by now that, as the weapons inspectors told us very soon, Iraq was not a treat to even the neiborghood countries (USA, however, still produce, stockpile, and USE weapons of mass destruction). It’s not either the "Saddam gazzed the Kurds", as the US governement refrained to add that event as a charge against our ex-allied dictator (the reasons are probably in the pages removed illegally by the USA, from the 12,000 pages report about Iraq’s weapons Saddam Hussein was sending to the UN on their request.)
      Could it be that the Justice we are promoting does not apply to us ???

      Iraq has nothing to do with 9/11.
      Iraq did not treat the USA and was not capable to do so.
      Iraqis haven’t ask the USA to "liberate" them, they are shouting loud they want the occupying armies to leave.
      The invasion of Iraq, and the concept of preventive war, is a crime. The exact same kind of crime we condemn at the Nuremberg Trial.

      Switch off TV, start searching. Time to wake up !

    • > "it is something that folks who think as you do haven’t got the stomach for and yet it is something that MUST be done."

      We haven’t got the stomach to bomb Washington to get rid of the snipper who was terrorizing the country in 2002 and yet it is something that HAD to be done... in the logic of the "war on/of terror" defended by some of us.

    • > "WTI supporters are ineed prefectly willing to stand by and watch as the people of the free and law abiding world are ’slaughtered, subjugated and humiliated’."

      Only the Ministry of Oil was carefully preserved from destruction. Protecting oil field was a high priority. Protecting civilians, as stipulated in the Geneva Conventions, was less important. Schools, radio and TV stations, water and electricity plants were dispensable. Torture ? So, what ?

      "Spreading Democracy" ? I heard that from another dictator in the past.

    • i will quote a small sample of a headline on todays albawaba.com/iraq middle east news site...

      "A suicide car bomber drove up to an American military Humvee swarming with Iraqi children and detonated his explosive on Wednesday, killing up to 27 other people, U.S. and Iraqi officials said. One U.S. soldier and about a dozen children were among the dead.

      At least 21 others, including three U.S. soldiers, were wounded in the attack. The explosion also set a nearby house on fire.

      Hospitals and police said between 11 and 13 children were killed, The AP reported."

      now there’s something to consider for you all. here’s a humvee-load of soldiers passing out candy and smiles to local children and up pulls one of these insane suicide bombers with a car-load of death to dole out instead. and just think you are encouraging more of it by emboldening these killers with all of this crud. they just love it when you throw those grenades into your own foxhole like that. the idea that george bush or tony blair are to blame for it is rubbish. it’s a safe bet that the louder you rant the more bin hidin’ is encouraged to continue. soldiers and children continue falling. enjoy the knowledge!

      Dave G
      Acworth, GA

    • The British and the U.S. provided their friend Saddam Hussein with biological and chemical weapons to be used on Iranians and Kurds. Saddam had the full support and backing in his crimes when our crimminal government wanted to use him to do their dirty work. But when he got uppity we had to pretend to have the moral high ground and go after him. These facts as well as others are all out there for anyone who wants to know the truth. All you have to do is Google the name Saddam Hussein and the whole ugly truth is right there. The U.S. government was then and now involved in unspeakable criminal acts in Iraq and everywhere else in the middle east.

    • Hey Dave, George Bush and Tony Blair ARE responsible for every death over there since occupation began based on lies. The Americans and British have no business being there and it is their presence there that is causing all of the death and destruction there. If the Americans and British would just leave, it would all stop. The Iraqi people want their country back and they will stop at nothing to get it. And just like in Vietnam, they will be defeated and they will have another shameful chapter in the history books detailing the oil war for the corporate war profiteers who were responsible for not only Saddam Hussein, but also for the murder of 1million children who starved to death while we blockaided their country before the latest war against the Iraqi citizens and also the 150thousand civilian deaths caused to the Iraqi people during the bombings and military attacks on the cities of Iraq. If this is what makes you so proud, you need to go do some soul searching along with your fact checking.

    • ^ Well said. Do you really think the people in London would be dead without Tony and George’s little overseas adventure? Bush is a sad, deranged maniac and Blair is the biggest coward on the planet.

    • Hey Dave. You are an example of the complete brainwashing and propaganda campaign here in america being so successfull. I can’t believe you don’t see the laughable descrepancy in your statements. If I came to your house with a group of armed friends and camped out with you, took your possesions, bank account, etc., cut off the electricity, water, etc. and then gave your kids some candy that would make everything cool? right. Some of your friends would be killed because they resisted my generosity but that is the price of progress. My point is there shouldn’t be any injustice in the world. To that end we need a World court, and World police system (which means getting rid of the military systems each country has). Bush refuses to join a world court or be held accountable for crimes against humanity because he would be in jail. Zorro

    • you believe that because we liberated iraq from the grip of the devil himself by use of force that it was understandable for that NON-IRAQI citizen to blow up those children and those soldiers. if we didn’t take out the infrastructure of the country there would have been far more death than what we’ve seen thus far. the oil ministry was left in place because it is the best way for the iraqi economy to get back on its feet and because we are likely looking for evidence of the "oil for food" scandal.

      you remember the "oil for food" scandal don’t you? that was the money that was supposed to feed and provide medical care for the people of iraq during the oil embargo against iraq that was mandated by that great problem solving institution - the un. it seems that everybody from the french and the russians to saddam and his sons and kofi and his offspring got a piece of that pie.

      do you read any of what the iraqi government has been saying about what they want and how things are going? if so, have you ever thought for a moment about giving them some degree of creedence? consider it please.

      Dave

    • Dave,

      Please stop saying that Iraq has been "liberated", this is getting insulting. Even if you take your information only from Fox News, you can see that Iraq is now burning ! Fact is Iraq is now worse than it was under Saddam Hussein. There was no terrorism (aside dictatorship) in Iraq prior to 2003.

      > "you remember the "oil for food" scandal don’t you?"

      You are missing some names here. The economical sanctions (embargo) and the oil-for-food program itself were - at least - questionable. Not only the herdness of the sanctions against a defeated country was unprecedented, it was also the first time a devasted nation had to pay such a high price for humanitarian help. As we learn very soon, the people paid that price while the dictatorship was strenghtening.

      Inquired about the UNESCO reported half million children death after the sanctions against Iraq, the then ambassador to the U.N. had these words: "I think this is a very hard choice, but the price — we think the price is worth it" - Madeleine Albright, May 12, 1996.

      As for corruption and other not-so-ethical deals with the dictatorship regime, there is a lot to learn from the pages illegally removed by the U.S. government from the 12,000 pages report on Iraq’s weapons Saddam Hussein was sending to the U.N. on their request.

      > (About the Iraqi government) "if so, have you ever thought for a moment about giving them some degree of creedence?"

      There is not yet any credible Iraqi government. The one in place is a puppet government build by the USA to protect the interests of Uncle Sam. Search for the clauses that are imposed to Iraq by the occupying forces (hint: one of them forbid the so-called democratically elected Iraqi governement to sue a US soldier or to initiate any judicial procedure for war crimes against the USA.)

      I don’t ask you to believe me, but to take the time to find yourself the information that will help to get closest to the truth.

      Switch off TV, start searching. TIME TO WAKE UP !

    • where do you get your facts? the new york times? washington post? the gaurdian? sfgate?

      you’ve made your choice. i’ve made mine. we could go on like this forever it seems.

      my perspective is that "your side" hands out paragraphs of understanding for terrorists while laying all of the blame on western leaders based on broad speculation made by leftward leaning news sources.

      basically, what i want is the demise of osama bin hidin’ and anyone like him. i believe the way to do it is to go after them. i don’t think it’s wise to ignore them. iraq has been a very good tool for drawing their attention as well as a likely candidate for setting up a democracy. in very simple terms, i see us killing bad guys and helping good guys. i know you don’t agree.

      consider this... not everyone at the top is dishonest. it’s a popular way to think. but it isn’t right.

      some other time then

      Dave
      Acworth

    • > " where do you get your facts?"

      TV news (several channels), video documentaries, various newspapers and monthly publications, books, many, many sources from Internet, first hand and second hand testomonies from Iraqi citizens and from people who have worked in Iraq or in relation with Iraq. I try to get news from the closest possible source of information, and I compare how various media are relaying an event to the public opinion. That gives me a larger "freedom of mind" from which I can build my own "enlighted" opinion.

      I find the testimonies from, e.g., the participant of the World Tribunal on Iraq very valuable as they fill a gap on a (hidden) reality of the war (deliberately) not covered by the mainstream media. To name just a few ones :
      – Scott Ritter, ballistic missile expert under General Norman Schwarzkopf, joined Unscom in late 1991. Weapon inspector for the U.N. from 1991 to 1998.
      – Denis Halliday, Assistant Secretary-General of United Nations (94-98), was appointed by Secretary-General Kofi Annan to the post of UN Humanitarian Coordinator in Iraq and administrator of the Oil-for-Food program as of 1 September 1997. (He resigned from his post in Iraq and from the United Nations as a whole in September 1998, protesting the economic sanctions and the inefficiency of the program.)
      – Hans Von Sponeck, former United Nation’s Assistant Secretary-General, succeded Denis Halliday as UN Humanitarian Coordinator for Iraq and administrator of the Oil-for-Food program in October 1998. (Resigned in February 2000, in protest of the international policy toward Iraq, including sanctions.)
      – Dahr Jamail, American independent journalist who went to Iraq after the invasion to bring attention to how the Iraqi people and US soldiers were being affected, with his internet journal Iraq Dispatches.
      – ...

      > "you’ve made your choice. i’ve made mine."

      Choice ? Yes, there are choices to be made at some levels.

      I don’t feel the need to decide from the begining who are the friends and who are the enemies, and then stick with that "choice". I don’t have to range everything in a "back or white" scheme (good / bad, left / right, with us / against us, ... and so on) as I can use a large palette of grey scale. I can see and accept that there is black in the white and white in the black. I can face and denounce wrong doings without first checking if it comes from a black or white category I previously built.

      One of the choices I made is to not remain silent when I hear such stupid things like: "We can’t be wrong because we are so good" or "they are killing us because they are just evil barbarians, they hate our freedom, they have no respect for life, they are not human like us".

      > "we could go on like this forever it seems."

      I usually gave up if I realize I’m talking with someone who don’t want to hear, or if there is nothing constructive to be made from a discussion. I don’t have time to waste for flame wars or trolling.

      > "my perspective is that ’your side’ hands out paragraphs of understanding for terrorists while laying all of the blame on western leaders based on broad speculation made by leftward leaning news sources."

      Again, I don’t feel the need to become the flag holder from "one side" to be able to speak my mind. I don’t have to accept the terrorists methods to be capable of understanding that sometimes, terrorism is the last resort for some oppressed people to be HEARD. I’m not satisfied by easy and confortable answers like "THEY are doing that because THEY are the bad ones". If I’m in fact belonging to "a side", that does not mean I endorse every decisions from that side, nor I will be blind to questions like "What’s the point for terrorists to blow up their own people, their own children ? What can be their ’benefits’ of doing such a thing ?" or "Why are we doing those things abroad we cannot accept on our own ground ?".

      > "i see us killing bad guys and helping good guys"

      Let’s say you are seing two guy fighting each other. You can distinguish one is wearing the American flag on his clothes, and the other is having a long beard. You can’t heard them saying "God Bless America" or "Allah Akbar". You can’t even see one is using a riffle and the other a long knife. How do you tell which one deserve to die ?

      In other words, with your radical point of view, how do you base your selection of the "good guy" and the "bad guy" ?
      Are the civilians, children and women, killed in Iraq the "bad guys" because they are Iraqis ?
      Why haven’t our politics, our media, called for a one minute of silence in commemoration of the victims of terrorism in Iraq ?

      > "what i want is the demise of osama bin hidin’ and anyone like him. i believe the way to do it is to go after them. i don’t think it’s wise to ignore them"

      "I don’t know where he is. You know, I just don’t spend that much time on him... I truly am not that concerned about him." (Bush, Press Conference, 3/13/02)

      These words from Bush shouldn’t come in a surprise when you understand the basement of the "public diplomacy" (propaganda). We don’t need the Osama scarecrow anymore as he is not as exportable as the ’Al-Qaeda" treat (nobody really knows what/who/where is Al-Qaeda, which is more convenient than the "Communists" word of fear in the McCarthism days). Osama was of no use in our Iraq agenda, as Saddam Hussein the laic and Osama Bin Laden the islamist were both enemies. So we forgot Bin Laden and focused on the Hussein’s "imminent treat to the world". We can also speculate on a possible agreement between the Bush family and the still important and influent Bin Laden family (remember the Bin Ladens were allowed to leave the USA on a C-130 on Sept.12, 2001, althought all the planes were ordered to stay on the ground.).

      But anyway, do you really believe that bombing, shooting, burning everything is the "good" way to catch someone ?

      > "not everyone at the top is dishonest."

      Haa, I knew your were capable of seing grey too. You just need more practice. As a first step, try to consider the opposite: "not everyone at the top is honest". ;-)

    • okay. line by line. here’s your lunch.

      well what do you know. my information gathering habits are similar to yours. i wonder if you find that hard to believe. i too, like to draw my own conclusions from a much broader perspective than the picture that just one or two news sources put together. one of my favorite sources for fresh perspective is “national geographic” magazine. you should try it out. the cultural bits can be very enlightening.

      you have to be careful when it comes to a “documentary” source. they are certainly an integral part of the recording of history and they have done much good towards changing the world for the better. when documentaries are done with a preconceived notion of who is right and who is wrong then you must make a judgment about the clarity of the perspective it provides.

      as you already know, i do not value the objectivity of the world tribunal. as for the mainstream media conspiring to ignore atrocity, i really doubt it. they were all over the naked pyramid story, the hood wearing, the pants pissing, the quran flushing, the wearing girls clothes, the playing american music. incidentally, none of that bothers me. none of those tactics are “horrific” interrogation methods in my mind. that’s beside the point, but hey, there’s more fodder for you.

      ritter is a colorful individual. he quit his post as un weapons inspector during bill clinton’s term. i think his main deal was that he didn’t like the united states using the un weapons inspectors guise to spy on saddam’s weapons activity. personally, i don’t have a problem with the idea of spying on a guy like saddam. it is dirty pool, but in saddam’s case it was worth it.

      dennis halliday blames the west for the hardships of the iraqi people. he didn’t like the effect of the sanctions on the citizenry. at that time, the fate of iraq was in saddam’s hands but somehow he blames the consequences of the sanctions on us. he’s probably a true believer, but i can’t see how he could foster the notion that it was better to leave saddam and crew in place, even knowing all that he does.

      von sponeck seems to be more of the same to me.

      as far as the whole black and white thing, let me just say that there are some things that are clearly right and there are some things that are clearly wrong. i’m sure you understand that notion. to you, i am clearly wrong. there doesn’t seem to be a spot for me on your palette of grey.

      “we can’t be wrong because we are so good” does sound pretty bad. but i think it’s a little off the mark. try something more along the lines of “homocide bombers, kidnappers or gangsters who behead perfect strangers are bad and people who are not homocide bombers, kidnappers or gangsters who behead perfect strangers are good. that would be a little closer to the point.

      that you are willing to discuss this whole matter without too much name calling save the occasional wry rebuttal is refreshing and i appreciate that. i just figured we were about done is all.

      let’s be clear. you ARE on one side and i AM on the other. you are advocating all that “your side” espouses in a very complete manner. i don’t see where you are disagreeing with anyone but me, bush and blair.

      your parable of the two fighting men is an easy riddle to solve. if i am required to chose, then for me it must be the assailant who dies. you’re problem is that you do not know how to recognize the difference.

      when bush said he didn’t know where osama was and that he wasn’t that concerned about him it seemed quite obvious to me that it was a slight intended for osama and anyone who reveres him. perhaps it could have been the “never let ‘em see you sweat’ mentality taking over. there’s no great mystery there.

      police chase bad guys, as they should. they will shoot to kill if you resist in a way that threatens their or the public safety in a serious enough manner. i would say that al qaida fits that description. i would say that hamas fits that description. i would say that the ira fits that description. i would say that saddam fits that description. zarkowi. homicide bombers. kidnappers. yes they should be hunted down and killed or imprisoned.

      not everyone at the top is dishonest. it is wrong to persecute based on rumor. i like to assume the best about someone until they prove me wrong.

      chow,
      Dave

  • Regarding the recent bombing of children in Iraq: An iraqi muslim would not blow up iraqi children. An Isreali would. In a heartbeat.
    And there are hundreds of Israeli mercenaries in Iraq who have been doing this for 2 years now. Have we all been so brainwashed by the zionist media to hate muslims that we really believe now that they are blowing up their own children? God help us.

    • so... let me see if i have this right... you want the USA to get rid of its armed forces and submit to a "world court" with a panel of judges from where? iran? algeria? nigeria? france? china? supervised by the un perhaps? what a sit-com! of course, we would rely on the un to protect us. afterall they were so good at protecting the iraq and somalian. you are out of your mind. no friggin way man! you couldn’t sell that even if you plopped a bright red cherry on top. i guess it’s back to the drawing board then.

      Dave

    • Dave you are brainwashed and your kind is part of the reason that the U.S.A. is viewed as a country full of hatemongers and warmongers racist and prejudiced by intolerance for other races, religions, cultures and others right to be left alone and determine their own national policies and share the planet and its resources without being bullied or threatened by the U.S. Where is it written the the U.S. owns and controls the world?

      Nothing is going to change your mind, you sadly are one of those Americans who believe that might makes right and that your government never does anything wrong. All of the facts that are out there will never change your warped mind. But what is very strange is that you come to this site knowing that you are basically alone with your points of view based on your ability to believe lies of any kind as long as it is coming from your hero d’jour which appears to be Bush and the Republican party. Why do you do that? Do you really thing you are going to change someone’s mind? I can’t imagine going to GOP.org and floating a bunch of made up crap and expecting someone to decide to believe me. Tell us all how you think you are changing some minds here about an administration full of liars who have been caught a million times almost on a daily bases telling lies about EVERYTHING. No one with the ability to think critically believes a word from your party or your hero Bush. So what is the point?

    • i am quite confident that you and i have participated in the changing of at least one mind out there.

      as far as party loyalty goes, i happen to be independent. i will vote for who i feel is best able to help my country. i don’t think a used car salesman like john kerry would have been right for the job. bush has the integrity and he has the courage. frankly, i haven’t seen any likely republican candidate that would garner my vote in ’08. i might be forced to vote for clinton the next time around. i can’t stand her. but at least she is savy enough and has the nuts.

      it is most unfortunate that you believe that i am "intolerant". but that’s alright. i don’t suppose it changes anything really. intolerance. no, there’s not a trace of that in you. mmm-hmm. i can say this much for you. you are at least partially correct in that i am extremely intolerant when it comes to al qaida or hamas or the ira, or any other group that would target civilians. the motto at the top of this page reads "to rebel is right, to disobey is a duty, to act is necessary!". that is exactly what we are doing. we are defying al qaida. it is "right", it is "a duty" and is is most certainly "necessary". and we better succeed. neither you or i would be tolerated in the world that they are trying to create.

      Dave

  • > > > Media Alert : Biased, Blinkered, Culpable

  • .

    > > > Final Declaration of the Jury of Conscience

    .