NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

[1_dup16]

[img]http://www.dqc.org/~ben/image/cry.jpg[/img] Don't do it please! i am an innocent child!

[NOT Bolt Rifles]

(2002/12/02): "Iraq dossier: Key claims at-a-glance" Here are some of the key extracts from the UK government's dossier of alleged human rights abuses in Iraq. The dossier's introduction: Iraq is a terrifying place to live. People are in constant fear of being denounced as opponents of the regime. They are encouraged to report on the activities of family and neighbours. The security services can strike at any time. Arbitrary arrests and killings are commonplace. Between three and four million Iraqis, about 15% of the population, have fled their homeland rather than live under Saddam Hussein's regime. These grave violations of human rights are not the work of a number of overzealous individuals but the deliberate policy of the regime. Fear is Saddam's chosen method for staying in power. This report, based on the testimony of Iraqi exiles, evidence gathered by UN rapporteurs and human rights organisations, and intelligence material, describes the human cost of Saddam Hussein's control of Iraq. It examines in turn Iraq's record on torture, the treatment of women, prison conditions, arbitrary and summary killings, the persecution of the Kurds and the Shia, the harassment of opposition figures outside Iraq and the occupation of Kuwait. The United Nations Security Council and the UN Commission on Human Rights have repeatedly, over many years, condemned Iraq's human rights record. But Iraq continues to flout UN resolutions and to ignore its international human rights commitments. On 19 April 2002, the UN Commission on Human Rights passed a resolution drawing attention to "the systematic, widespread and extremely grave violations of human rights and of international humanitarian law by the Government of Iraq, resulting in an all-pervasive repression and oppression sustained by broad-based discrimination and widespread terror." On torture: Torture is systematic in Iraq. The most senior figures in the regime are personally involved. Saddam Hussein runs Iraq with close members of his own family and a few associates, most of whom come from his hometown of Tikrit. These are the only people he feels he can trust. He directly controls the security services and, through them and a huge party network, his influence reaches deep into Iraqi society. All real authority rests with Saddam and his immediate circle. Saddam is head of state, head of government, leader of Iraq's only political party and head of the armed forces. Saddam presides over the all-powerful Revolutionary Command Council, which enacts laws and decrees and overrides all other state institutions. Several RCC decrees give the security agencies full powers to suppress dissent with impunity. An RCC decree of 21 December 1992 guarantees immunity for Ba'ath party members who cause damage to property, bodily harm and even death when pursuing enemies of the regime. Saddam has, through the RCC, issued a series of decrees establishing severe penalties (amputation, branding, cutting off of ears, or other forms of mutilation) for criminal offences. In mid-2000, the RCC approved amputation of the tongue as a new penalty for slander or abusive remarks about the President or his family. These punishments are practised mainly on political dissenters. Iraqi TV has broadcast pictures of these punishments as a warning to others. According to an Amnesty International report published in August 2001, "torture is used systematically against political detainees. The scale and severity of torture in Iraq can only result from the acceptance of its use at the highest level." Over the years, Amnesty and other human rights organisations have received thousands of reports of torture and interviewed numerous torture victims. Although Iraqi law forbids the practice of torture, the British Government is not aware of a single case of an Iraqi official suspected of carrying out torture being brought to justice. Treatment of women and children: Under Saddam Huseein's regime women lack even the basic right to life. A 1990 decree allows male relatives to kill a female relative in the name of honour without punishment. Women have been tortured, ill-treated and in some cases summarily executed too, according to Amnesty International. The dossier says that BBC correspondent John Sweeney said he had met six witnesses with direct experience of child torture, including the crushing of a two-year-old girl's feet. Prison conditions: Conditions for political prisoners in Iraq are inhumane and degrading. At the "Mahjar" prison "prisoners are beaten twice a day and the women regularly raped by their guards. Arbitrary and summary killings: Executions are carried out without due process of law. relatives are often prevented from burying the victims in accordance with Islamic practice and have even been charged for the bullets used. Persecution of the Kurds: Under Saddam's rule Iraq's Kurdish communities have experienced terrible suffering. Documents captured by the Kurds during the Gulf War and handed over to the non-governmental oprganisation Human Rights Watch provided much information about Saddam's persecution of the Kurds. They detail the arrest and execution in 1983 of 8,000 Kurdish males aged 13 and upwards. Persecution of the Shia community: The Shia community, who make up 60% of Iraq's population is Iraq's biggest religious group. Saddam has ensured that none of the Shia religious or tribal leaders is able to threaten his position. He kills any that become too prominent. Harassment of the Opposition outside Iraq: The UN Special Rapporteur has received numerous reports of harassment, intimidation and threats against the families of opposition members living abroad. Occupation of Kuwait: Iraq invaded Kuwait on 2 August 1990. Iraqi forces committed robbery, raped Kuwaities and expatriates and carried out summary executions. Amnesty International documented many other abuses during the occupation of Kuwait. Methods of torture: Eye gouging Piercing of hands with electric drill Suspended from ceiling by their wrists Electric shock Sexual abuse Mock executions Acid baths Conclusion: This dossier does not include every Iraqi's personal story of suffering, caused by Saddam's regime, known to the British Government. There are sadly far too many to mention them all. But the evidence in the dossier is a faithful representation of what ordinary Iraqis face in their daily lives. It is no wonder that, according to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees in 2001, Iraqis have become the second largest group of refugees in the world. Iraqis also top the table of foreign nationals seeking asylum in the UK. Saddam Hussein has been ruthless in his treatment of any opposition to him since his rise to power in 1979. A cruel and callous disregard for human life and suffering remains the hallmark of his regime.

[tnb]

Originally posted by lliB: [quote] A cruel and callous disregard for human life and suffering remains the hallmark of his regime. [/quote]Now I can see how dropping 800 bombs on them will help. These will be mercy killings. That makes it OK???

[ViLo]

[quote]Originally posted by tnb: Now I can see how dropping 800 bombs on them will help. These will be mercy killings. That makes it OK???[/QB][/quote]Oh! boy, some people is really "hardheaded"!

[patrick_dont_fret]

[quote]Originally posted by ViLo: [b] [quote]Originally posted by tnb: Now I can see how dropping 800 bombs on them will help. These will be mercy killings. That makes it OK???[/b][/quote]Oh! boy, some people is really "hardheaded"![/QB][/quote]Yeah, I really don't see the difference between being tortured by your own people, and having your skin burned off by american bombs. (And yes, I know that american is uncapitalized). What is the difference? I can't see it...maybe our torture is worse. I forget what book it was, but one of my friends was reading this book about nuclear war, and it gave a very vivid description of what happens to a person when in the blast radius. And then the torture of living, with your skin haning off, sizzling, with radiation poisoning. Hmmm, I think I'll take Chinese water torture any day.

[ViLo]

Maybe we need to pray a lot........, well those who believe in praying!

[DanYmaL X]

[quote]Originally posted by ViLo: [b]Maybe we need to pray a lot........, well those who believe in praying![/b][/quote]Agreed! But maybe those that don't, too, huh? This is bigger than all of us. Think about it. DX

[alfonso]

I think that those who financed and supported Saddam to start his brilliant career, that...hey!..are the same that helped the talebans to take the power and had good business with Osama, should be punished! Do you think it's a good idea to throw some bombs to them? the civilians? well, some would die, of course, but the world would be free of those gangsters.... ...wait, you say they didn't know what mothe@#[rs where Saddam and the talebans? they thought they were nice guys? really? if so....poor idiots. poor world.

[DanYmaL X]

[quote]Originally posted by alfonso: [b]I think that those who financed and supported Saddam to start his brilliant career, that...hey!..are the same that helped the talebans to take the power and had good business with Osama, should be punished! Do you think it's a good idea to throw some bombs to them? the civilians? well, some would die, of course, but the world would be free of those gangsters.... ...wait, you say they didn't know what mothe@#[rs where Saddam and the talebans? they thought they were nice guys? really? if so....poor idiots. poor world.[/b][/quote]Don't piss off an Italian, folks... here's proof.. alfonso you rock! :thu: DX

[Joachim P. Dyndale]

[quote]Originally posted by alfonso: [b]I think that those who financed and supported Saddam to start his brilliant career, that...[/b][/quote]That would be America, so... The U.S. supported Saddam and considered him an important ally against Iran in the 80's. When Saddam attacked the Kurds with chemical weapons the U.S., after some debate, decided not to punish Saddam because he was considered an ally. The guns, bombs, chemical weapons etc. that Saddam used against the Kurds was provided by the U.S. When Saddam attacked Kuwait, he did so because he had, as far as he could tell, assurances from the U.S. Ambassador in Iraq, that the world wouldn't care. He assumed too much. The U.S. decided they cared... Didn't want the same mistake again. So they became enemies. There was the Gulf war, as you all remember(Me too, as I lived in the U.S. at the time). Since then Iraq has been penalized by the U.N. This has, for various reasons, worked against it's purpose. It has actually strengthened Saddams position. Because he now seems like the "good" guy, because he is the one giving out the food. Once again, a once important ally has become the U.S.'s enemy. The U.S. trained the Taliban when they were allies... And now the Taliban is an enemy. I'm not at all convinced that there isn't some double-play going on here... If the U.S. now decides to bomb Iraq and overthrow the government, then they will also have to provide food for the entire population afterwards. And it will take a long time to rebuild Iraq, and insert a new government. Actually, I think the very best way of handling the situation would be to do the same to Saddam as they did to Milosevic. War won't do any good at all, and the U.S. will only piss off the terrorists even more. That's pretty stupid. And by the way, I'm sure Osama Bin Laden is dead by now. New threats are being uttered while old pictures of him are shown. Still doesn't mean his organization isn't a threat anymore. there are too many sides to this conflict. I'm starting to get pretty confused. And I just saw the movie "The sum of all fears", and that doesn't help one bit. Let's all say: "I'm sorry", shake hands and be friends. OK?

[NOT Bolt Rifles]

[quote]Originally posted by 1: [b] Don't do it please! i am an innocent child![/b][/quote] http://www.dqc.org/~ben/image/cry.jpg http://www.dqc.org/index

[Anderton]

Joachim, well said. I think the Big Gamble that's going on here is that Bush assumes a massive show of force will be sufficient to cause the Iraqi government to implode, and that Iraqi citizens would like nothing better than to see Saddam ousted. Most of them remember when Iraq was a different place. The dark side of that gamble is if Saddam decides to go out in a blaze of glory, like the man who shoots his wife because "If I can't have her, no one will." We are dealing with a pretty sick individual so it's hard to tell how he will react. He could just turn cowardly to save his own skin, he might launch nuclear missles against Israel, he might be killed by one of his bodyguards. Right now events have been set in motion that are out of control but will lead to some kind of resolution. I have no idea what that resolution will be, but I hope for the best. If the Iraqi regime is overthrown by its own people with help from the US, we will be Major Good Guys in the eyes of the world, those who opposed the war will look irrelevant and timid, and the Republicans will steamroller the Democrats in the next election. If it turns really ugly, then the number of truly terrible things that could happen would be incalculable. Rendering large sections of the earth inhabitable, with millions dead and millions more wishing they were, is the worse case scenario. Have a nice day! :)

[Tedster]

Is there a true "good guy" anywhere (one can use "guy" to mean "world power" as well)? I mean, anyone in the world whose motives are pure and unquestionable? Do heroes really exist, or is everyone motivated by greed and/or a sense of self-preservation at others' expense? Or is it just a series of "That guy is a bastard, but right now less than that other guy, so I'll go with him, until my own greed forces me to change teams". Or is it that everyone is so suspicious that even if there [i]were[/i] a true "good guy"...no one would believe him. Heck, they'd probably kill him. Ya think?

[StoneKnife]

Some of the folks just don't seem to be getting the picture here! The Iraqi people are unarmed. They can't even say anything contrary to the regime there without being hauled off or suffering serious consequences. Never mind 'taking over'. Those that have chummed-up with Bin Laden and Hussein will not be happy until you are dead, the US collapses, Israel too. They have said this over and over. You think they are kidding? The best thing anyone can do to help them achieve their goals is to adopt this acquiescent attitude, because the less resistance to those guys we put up, the easier it will be to run over you. They do not want to "be friends". They want to kill you. This is not complex. It's as plain as a shot to the back of your head. Or an airplane into the World Trade Center. How quickly some folks have forgotten! It's amazing. The French reached out their hands in 'Friendship' when the Germans came rolling in, and look where it got 'em. And before we start boo-hooing too much over possible civilian casualties, remember millions of Japanese and German civilians lost their lives in the stone-age technology of WWII. It is not desirable to have a single civilian get injured in any war; but it's part of the nature of the proposition, and this Hussein doesn't give a damn about those Iraqis put in harm's way. It's his fault for endangering them in his megalomaniacal pursuit of power. Not ours.

[jeffbayson]

There is no good guy. Not everybody is greedy, either. I think everybody has left out (in this thread, at least) another major consquence of this war: how it affects the way the world views us. Whether the war happens or not - and I think it definitely will - the relations with our allies have changed drastically. After 9-11, a headline in France declared "We Are All Americans." Now look at France. After 9-11, Germany's Schroeder backed a war in Afghanistan; now he's a staunch opponent to the war in Iraq. Regardless of your feelings about whether the war is just and/or necessary, it is hard to deny that the Bush administration did a bang-up job of souring our relationships with Europe. You cannot drag the entire world into war - consequences be damned - and effectively tell Europe that we don't give a rat's ass what they think about it. The Bush Administration now is trying to back off, since it realizes that it can't go it alone... but the damage has already been done. Hell, Rumsfeld recently compared Germany to Libya and Cuba; he called France & Germany "Old Europe." Would somebody please explain to me how it is productive to completely alienate our allies with arrogance like this? Perhaps we don't need Europe on our side to win this war, but we sure as hell will need them afterwards. I'm terrified of war. Probably more so than of terrorism. I'm not 100% sure I oppose this war, although I it makes me pretty damn uncomfortable. Regardless, even if I support the war, there is still no reason to approach it in this manner. Clinton, Reagan, and plenty of other presidents have pursued military action in foreign countries against the will of European nations - but they took the time to win them over with diplomacy. The Bush Adminstration railroaded the rest of the world, pissed them off with hard-blown rhetoric, may have cost us some allies, and possibly destroyed NATO in the process. It is not too hard to imagine a world in the near future where major European nations no longer consider us an ally. A year and a half ago, the ashes of the WTC towers rained on my neighborhood. This morning, when I got on the train, there were dozens of cops patrolling my car, looking for suspicious activities. If you think we're paranoid now, wait until the moderates start joining the extremists in their condemnation of the United States.

[gtrmac]

Solar energy is looking better every day.

[swiggy]

I'm glad to see that, dependless of their country, a lot of people are questionning themselves about this war ; and that the bush propaganda is not "THE american way of thinking". This thing is pretty serious, guys. Like Craig said, Apocalypse is not far if we don't take care. Peace Swiggy

[CarmenC]

[quote]Originally posted by 1: [b] [img]http://www.dqc.org/~ben/image/cry.jpg[/img] Don't do it please! i am an innocent child![/b][/quote]Is that the child from one of the families of one of the 3000 dead in America on 9/11? No. 'Cause they never saw an attack coming. The American casualties in this war were innocent citizens, not soldiers. Killed by fucking cowards that will soon have a Marine rifle shoved up their ass. I never hear from the scared liberal pukes on this board about the suffering the families of the dead of the 9/11 attacks must endure for the rest of their lives. But poor Saddam and his people.... FUCK YOU!!!!!!! War is bad.....DUH!!!! What, terrorism is good? It's not the end of the world. It's the beginning of a safe one. What would the cheese - eating surrender monkeys do about our situation now? Live in fear and let their kids live under "high terror alerts" forever! Sorry about your oil leases with Iraq....but Fuck You, France! Go back under the sheets and wait until Daddy says it's OK to come out again. You're used to the view. America will not live in terror the way you do. See, we do something about our problems. So enjoy your cheese and whine.....while the grownups take care of the hard work you'll never do. Pussies. No wonder you sent the Statue of Liberty over here... you couldn't handle the awesome responsibility that symbol holds! Americans don't kill innocent people intentionally, we kill guilty governments intentionally. Now that America is finally acting in our own interests, our friends and enemies are making themselves known to the world. Funny how when you stand for something, you also see where everyone else stands. Thanx to the terrorists for helping set up a permament base of operations in Iraq to help fight the war on terrorism!!! God Bless our soldiers and bring them home safe and soon. PS FUCK YOU,FRANCE!

[Alndln]

[quote]Originally posted by CarmenC: [b]Killed by fucking cowards that will soon have a Marine rifle shoved up their ass. [/b][/quote]Oh how I wish that were true.While I have no love for Saddam and "Do" think he not only should be disarmed,but be removed entirely.The people responsible for 911 have been running around scott free for the last 2 years while our government tells us to wear gas masks,cover our windows in plastic or whatever the fuck,and George the whimp JR won't face the real problem head-on,only his personal agenda and the agenda of his buisness pals.Going after Saadamm first is like going after a bunch of pot smokers while the heroin dealers run amok.Both George SR and JR are a bunch of fucking cowards and liars who only care about buisness first.I never in my life thought I'd see a staunch Republican gorvernment wimp out even more than the liberals when it comes to a fiasco like 911.2 Years of being a first class coward is proof enough for me.You don't need a war to take out Saddam,but you need one to set up buisness there.Bush just might be greedy enough to start armageedeon.What a waste.

[Wewus432]

If there are any French musicians reading this forum, please note that CarmenC does not speak for all of us. Please don't let his rantings drive you away from here. Despite the political situation, please know that we are your friends and musical compatriots.

[Joachim P. Dyndale]

Um... There is NO PROOF that Iraq had anything to do with 9/11. Osama Bin Laden is an enemy of Saddam, and by attacking Iraq the U.S. is actually helping Bin Laden... Saddam is NOT as unpredictable as many say. He has solely acted in the interest of keeping himself in power. He has done nothing suddenly or unforeseeable. He has done terrible things, yes. But only in the interest of keeping himself in power. He is absolutely no threat to any Western country. I'm not defending Saddam. He should be removed from government, but his country and it's citizens shouldn't suffer for it. They've suffered enough already. 9/11 is NOTHING compared to what the people of Iraq have had to live with for two generations. War is NEVER the answer and/or solution. Bush should show a little respect for the international agreements/laws/treaties that the U.S. have commited themselves to. But it seems he's made up his mind a long time ago. It might not be too long before I name BUSH as the terrorist. Peace.

[Bunny Knutson]

[quote]Originally posted by TheWewus: [b]If there are any French musicians reading this forum, please note that CarmenC does not speak for all of us. Please don't let his rantings drive you away from here. Despite the political situation, please know that we are your friends and musical compatriots.[/b][/quote][b]VIVE LA FRANCE ! ! ![/b] [img]http://www.mra.org.uk/fac/june2000/images/lead_cup.jpg[/img] [b]World Cup Champions 1998[/b]

[midispaceho]

[quote]Originally posted by StoneKnife: [b]Some of the folks just don't seem to be getting the picture here! The Iraqi people are unarmed. They can't even say anything contrary to the regime there without being hauled off or suffering serious consequences. Never mind 'taking over'. Those that have chummed-up with Bin Laden and Hussein will not be happy until you are dead, the US collapses, Israel too. They have said this over and over. You think they are kidding? The best thing anyone can do to help them achieve their goals is to adopt this acquiescent attitude, because the less resistance to those guys we put up, the easier it will be to run over you. They do not want to "be friends". They want to kill you. This is not complex. It's as plain as a shot to the back of your head. Or an airplane into the World Trade Center. How quickly some folks have forgotten! It's amazing. The French reached out their hands in 'Friendship' when the Germans came rolling in, and look where it got 'em. And before we start boo-hooing too much over possible civilian casualties, remember millions of Japanese and German civilians lost their lives in the stone-age technology of WWII. It is not desirable to have a single civilian get injured in any war; but it's part of the nature of the proposition, and this Hussein doesn't give a damn about those Iraqis put in harm's way. It's his fault for endangering them in his megalomaniacal pursuit of power. Not ours.[/b][/quote]:thu: well said.

[sign]

Carmen, why so angry? What do you want to achieve by posts like that? Any sane person in Europe is solidair with any sane person in the US. We've all shed tears for 9/11. The old Europe is tired of war, we've had enough, it's to horrible. I wish your government was led by people like Craig and Joachim. What you do Carmen, is shouting things like George jr. and friends do, and it won't work. I was watching CNN last night and it seems that most Europeans see the Bush administration as a bigger threat than Saddam. Quite an achievement :( We want Saddam in The Hague next to Milosevic, but not by war and the cost of many lives of innocent people. Relax Carmen, lots of good people around you :thu:

[nursers]

[quote]Originally posted by dBunny: [b] [quote]Originally posted by TheWewus: [b]If there are any French musicians reading this forum, please note that CarmenC does not speak for all of us. Please don't let his rantings drive you away from here. Despite the political situation, please know that we are your friends and musical compatriots.[/b][/quote][b]VIVE LA FRANCE ! ! ![/b] [img]http://www.mra.org.uk/fac/june2000/images/lead_cup.jpg[/img] [b]World Cup Champions 1998[/b][/b][/quote]Oui :thu:

[Mats Olsson.]

[quote]Originally posted by sign: [b] We want Saddam in The Hague next to Milosevic, but not by war and the cost of many lives of innocent people. Relax Carmen, lots of good people around you :thu: [/b][/quote]What he said! /Mats

[Mark Borland]

OK this may be a long one but stick with me here! First off, governments (regardless of colour, religion, country etc) sole objective is to stay in power and enforce their policies. Terroists exist to cause terror and fear in those who don't act or belive in their cause. Governments may ignore terrorist groups if they think they are helping their cause (they then call them freedom fighters) but in their own self interest would never themselves commit acts of terrorism. Individual terrorists very rarely have any affiliation with any government or country they reside in but merely use them as a base to conduct terror campaigns. These are the people who need to be stopped in the war against terrorism. This will never be an overnight battle but will take many years of dedication. I believe that finding and stopping terrorist whoever or wherever they may be is agreeable to all countries of the world. This explains why everyone backed the war in afgahnistan. However we need to be careful as Afgahnistan shows, the allies can go in and win a war convincingly, however the fall out must be fallowed up comprehensivly. News now coming from Afgahnistan is that the country is in Chaos and the Taliban may yet return to power. Women are covering up again and many are in fear of retribution should the taliban return yet in the eyes of the western world the problem is solved. These issues need to be dealt with responsibly by those countries who take it upon themselves intervene in another country. I, as I am sure would everybody, agree that Saddam Hussein is an evil evil man and should be removed from power. I Where I have issues is the means to do this. Britain and America must remember that you cannot become Dictators of Peace in place of Dictators of terror. There can be no such thing as enforced peace. It is a contradicton in terms. The only true way for Iraq to be free, indeed any country, is for the people of that country to make a stand. Now I know this is difficult for those in a dictatorship but it has happened in other countries and will happen again. In this situation I am sure it would be acceptable to most countries to offer military aid. Finally, we reap what we sow. British colonialism and Americal power games are responsible for alot of the world we live in today. We need to remember that we should not be playing God and supporting different sides dependant on policy as it eventually creates more enemies than allies. I understand the need america feels to be proactive after the tragedy of 9/11 and thought more of Bush after the restraint he showed waiting for the UN before going into afgahnistan and I think the same restraint now would make for more UN co-operation. If the UN agrees that war is inevitable then I think most people will see the need and back it. To close, I am not pro or anti war. I am however against mindless destruction with no beneficial outcome. Remember if we go ahead with this on our own it may not be long before Britain and America are looked at as rogue states! Keep thinking, keep questioning, keep reasoning and keep talking. Mark

[swiggy]

quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Originally posted by TheWewus: If there are any French musicians reading this forum, please note that CarmenC does not speak for all of us. Please don't let his rantings drive you away from here. Despite the political situation, please know that we are your friends and musical compatriots. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Thank you TheWewus, we feel the same :thu:

[Jode]

People, I'm sure that it makes you feel good to go around hurling invectives about the US bombing women and children and grandparents and puppies. Please bear in mind that we do not target civilians, because there is no military value in it. Okay, let's say that we DID bomb civilians on purpose, and let's say that we ARE over there only "for oil." Does it make more sense to kill the men with guns guarding the oil, or the civilians that live down the street from it? On the other hand, moving troops and facilities and other targets into residential areas, trying to draw fire and get your own citizens killed, ON PURPOSE, for the sake of making the US look bad - what do you call that?

[Rog]

Carmen made the shit list a long time ago, I skip over his (and a few other's) posts now. It stops me wanting to hunt him down like a dog ;)