It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


WAR: 15 Beheaded Corpses Found South of Baghdad

page: 1

log in


posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 04:05 PM
The corpses of 15 beheaded bodies have been found near an old military base south of Baghdad believed to be used by insurgents. The speculation is that the bodies are those of Shiite pilgrims that were headed to Karbala and Najaf.
Meanwhile, the Iraqi army said it found 15 beheaded corpses, both men and women, on an old military base near Latifiyah, south of Baghdad.

The corpses were found during an army raid on the old Hatin army base, now believed to be used by insurgents, said Captain Mohammed Abdul Hussein al-Saedi.

The soldiers launched the operation after reports some Shiite pilgrims on their way to the holy cities of Karbala and Najaf had disappeared near Latifiyah, around 40 kilometres (30 miles) from Baghdad, where rebels frequently launch attacks.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

If the bodies are those of Shiite pilgrims, the motivation for their killing could be to incite civil war between the Sunnis and Shiites as was reportedly proposed in an intercepted communication between al Zarqawi and bin Laden.

None of the bodies have yet been identified according to the article, but I am curious if any belong to missing foreigners in Iraq.

posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 07:09 PM
15 beheaded corpses and yet American troops are made-out as the evil ones? Ofcourse U.S. troops are held to a higher degree of integrity, but isn't war just war? oh wait.....we don't behead people.

posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 07:12 PM
It's funny how a beheading horrifies Americans and yet the thought of killing 100,000 people don't.

They are both dead, and certainly when you are dead, you don't need your head.

posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 07:16 PM
ATS members can be victims of media manipulation like anyone else.

Without being ghoulish, I don't think the "insurgents" are people who collect heads for trophies any more. Where are they?

posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 07:28 PM

Originally posted by Justanotherperson
It's funny how a beheading horrifies Americans and yet the thought of killing 100,000 people don't.

They are both dead, and certainly when you are dead, you don't need your head.

It's funny how quick you are to assert that Americans are naive as a preface to your arguement. The thought of killing 100,000 people? No, nobody thought of killing 100,000 people and your generalization of Americans is inexplicably ignorant. The difference is why people have been killed. Why were 15 people beheaded? Europe is outraged at the United States invasion of Iraq, but where was European outrage when Hussein gassed Kurds or when millions of Rhawandan's were slaughtered? There was none. There was none from either the United States or Europe or the U.N.
You see the institutions you believe holds such a high degree of integrity is not in Western culture, not in Europe, North America, South America, Oceania, or anywhere. Every European or American idea of how war should be or shouldn't be or how someone should handle themselves diplomatically is all apart of a cynical cycle of hypocrisy. One that each of us has played in from time to time.

There was plenty of outrage when Слободан Милошевић did what he did. Why was that? When Слободан Милошевић was doing it in a much different place on much smaller scale, yet he was dealt with swiftly with the help of many. Pondering.........................................................................

[edit on 8-3-2005 by National Security Agency]

posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 07:32 PM

as posted by Justanotherperson
It's funny how a beheading horrifies Americans and yet the thought of killing 100,000 people don't.

Let me guess, you believed that Lancet Report too, huh?
Haven't happened to read these yet?
Debunk #1
Debunk #2
Debunk #3
Debunk #4

As for the topic, question:
Are terrorists and insurgents immune from war crime charges?

I mean geeez, they get rights under the Geneva Convention don't they? Many here think they should be treated by the provisions of the Geneva Convention. If so, would they also be open to having war crimes charges placed on them?


posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 07:39 PM
There is no need to debunk debunks, except for this one from Seekerof:

That is crud, basing its argument on the statistical conclusion that if you haven't seen 183 Iraqi deaths on the news each evening, then they did not happen.

The figures are likely to be between what the IBC site reports and what Lancet's projections are. Nobody here or on any of the so-called 'debunking' sites has any claims to know the numbers, at all.

[edit on 8-3-2005 by MaskedAvatar]

posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 07:46 PM
No problem with the other three, I see?
Debunked x3.


posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 07:54 PM
I got rid of the "Chicago Boys" debunk for pre-school gangsters, and scanned the other three, drawing the conclusion at the bottom of my post. No-one has debunked and no-one has made an accurate assessment of the carnage caused by the invasion of Iraq, and that is what the incumbent government wants.

Lancet x ?

Debunk x 0

posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 08:07 PM
The only reason we will never know how many casualties of war deaths are out in Iraq, is because very conveniently US is exempt of keeping track of the death unless is US.

And the PM Allawi also forbid hospitals to keep taps of the death.

So I find it so convenient.

“It’s a tragedy that U.S. soldiers have killed so many civilians in Baghdad,” said Joe Stork, acting executive director of the Middle East and North Africa division at Human Rights Watch. “But it’s really incredible that the U.S. military does not even count these deaths. Any time U.S. forces kill an Iraqi civilian in questionable circumstances, they should investigate the incident.”

Well the mentality is that is a war and people die, so is a war so isurgents are decapitating people, sad but that is the reality of life in Iraq, after invation.

posted on Mar, 9 2005 @ 06:47 AM
I'm starting to believe there is a certain insurgent groups controled by the CIA. The insurgents might not the know where the arm's are coming from or the money. Agenda?

1. Create reason to remain in iraq
2. Mabe start a civil war
3. The whole insugency could be a controled entity, mabe the illumanti?
4. Remember the US supported iran and iraq to fight each other.

posted on Mar, 9 2005 @ 07:12 PM
No problems with that thought, TheTruth123


Remember the chummy retro 80s photo of Rummy shaking hands with puppet Saddam Hussein?

Remember who gave Osama bin Laden his start, and which US family that has produced two Presidents remains very friendly and strategically linked with the Saudi bin Laden oil and construction cartel?

[edit on 9-3-2005 by MaskedAvatar]

top topics


log in