It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

U.S. forces rape, abuse and torture female Iraqi detainees - Including a woman in her 70's!

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 11:06 AM
link   
For our sakes, i hope this isnt quite as true as they are claiming it to be.

This would just be the icing on the cake. I still doubt that this one comes from orders of higher ups. God, I hope not.




posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 11:14 AM
link   
I was at a party a few weeks ago to welcome home a soldier from a tour in Iraq. He received the bronze star and 16 other medals. he told me the media coverage is BS, and 80% of the Iraqis are happy for their new found freedoms, and the vote really did turn the tide for us over there. Whether you like it or not, there are many, many more stories of bravery and herosim and compassion and kindness for every dispicable, disgraceful act.



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 11:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
I was at a party a few weeks ago to welcome home a soldier from a tour in Iraq. He received the bronze star and 16 other medals. he told me the media coverage is BS, and 80% of the Iraqis are happy for their new found freedoms, and the vote really did turn the tide for us over there. Whether you like it or not, there are many, many more stories of bravery and herosim and compassion and kindness for every dispicable, disgraceful act.



So then we should just brush these sorts of stories aside?

Sorry, but that is unacceptable - especally since *MY* tax dollars fund the military.

Also- did this soldier conduct a survey himself? I'm very curious where this 80% figure is coming from.

[edit on 22-4-2005 by negativenihil]

[edit on 22-4-2005 by negativenihil]



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 11:23 AM
link   
its too bad about the rape cases, they need to be more disiplined. have to be handle by Iraqi police or national guard not by troops that can't handle prisoners. they are train to kill not to keep prisoners. the only reason soldiers have to deal with prisoners is because its stretched limited and soldiers prefer to fight than to take care of prisoners.



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 11:30 AM
link   
Come on, that news source is as reliable as any otehr tabloid. As a matter of fact, Rense is a bit more reliable, and we all know that.

If such things were happening, our military-loathing, liberal-controlled media would be on it like flies and crap. Everyone would be shredding the whole military and Fox News would be shredding everyone for shredding the whole military. Meanwhile, viwership on both sides would go up and the advertisers would be happy.



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 11:31 AM
link   
The fact that some (and probably the vast majority) of our troops behave with courage and compassion in Iraq doesn't invalidate the possibility that some others are murdering, raping dirtbags. If this kind of thing is happening under orders from above, the people giving the orders should be charged. If it's just a few "bad apples" acting on their own, they should be charged. Remember that the DoD tried to hide the Abu Ghraib abuse until journalists exposed it.

Covering our behinds should come second to living up to our ideals.
Our credibility depends on it.

[edit on 22-4-2005 by xmotex]



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 11:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by negativenihil

Originally posted by astrocreep
This is not the case for Aljazeera, however and I am not calling foul here just yet but most of us who are impartial politically are going to have to see more concrete proof and a better source , I'm afraid. I know its easy to want it to be true so badly and I sypathize, believe me. However, the record for accurate news from Aljazeera is dismal and uncomparable with any other news sourc cept maybe newsmax..who I think get away with the same crap on the other side of that coin.


Unfortunately, i dont think it's possible to rely on a single news source these days - especially if you are really after the facts.

Don't get me wrong - i agree Al Jazeera has an agenda of it's own - all i'm saying is Fox News is the cloest thing to a US counterpart to AJ


As I said earlier, I think NewsMax rates in that place as it seems to enjoy no real competition. It serves the conservative base and thats about it. I don't want it construed that this is taking up for Fox News because I agree some of their commentators have conservative leanings and it comes through blatantly at times in their comments, however, and this is a big however...they cannot fabricate news without being lynched by the competitiors who champion the CRF, Socialist and liberal causes and are just waiting for some payback for what happened to Dan Rather. While Fox news may not like to report new terror strikes in Iraq, they do on a daily basis. Now, they may put their spin on it but the particulars mostly come from the same sources as their competitiors. If they had been the equal to Aljazeera, they never would have reported Abu_Graib. Of course they made it out to be a few who did not represent the whole US effort but they had to report it . Why, because if they didn't, people hit that remote and they lose profit. Its all money driven and money speaks louder than personal political opinion, especially for capitalists.

Aljazeera has no such competition (that I'm aware of) and no reason to worry about such trivial issues and credibility or factual research. It serves their purpose and the purpose of those they support. Their guiding principle is not money, at least not on the top of their list..and even if it was, would this not be the way to go for their audience.

Again, I am not downplaying the seriousness of these charges nor that they took place, just that before we etch them in stone, we need a better source than the servants of Comical Ali. I'm sure we all remember his press releases during the early days on Aljazeera.



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 11:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by astrocreep
Aljazeera has no such competition (that I'm aware of) and no reason to worry about such trivial issues and credibility or factual research. It serves their purpose and the purpose of those they support. Their guiding principle is not money, at least not on the top of their list..and even if it was, would this not be the way to go for their audience.


AJ has plenty of competition - including one US-run news network.

www.allied-media.com...
www.allied-media.com...

i will add some more links as i find them

edit- as promised:
www.spacedaily.com...
en.wikipedia.org...
en.wikipedia.org...

[edit on 22-4-2005 by negativenihil]



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 11:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by negativenihil

Originally posted by astrocreep
Aljazeera has no such competition (that I'm aware of) and no reason to worry about such trivial issues and credibility or factual research. It serves their purpose and the purpose of those they support. Their guiding principle is not money, at least not on the top of their list..and even if it was, would this not be the way to go for their audience.


AJ has plenty of competition - including one US-run news network.

www.allied-media.com...
www.allied-media.com...

i will add some more links as i find them



Yeah, these two link Aljazeera right on the front page so that would make them more sister agencies than competition.

[edit on 22-4-2005 by astrocreep]



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 11:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by astrocreep
Yeah, these two link Aljazeera right on the front page so that would make them more of conglomerates than competition.


That is allied-media.com's doing - not the networks. That web page seems to be a portal of sorts for locating arabic tv networks.

[edit on 22-4-2005 by negativenihil]



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 12:00 PM
link   
every tree has some bad apples... and some very rotten ones as well.
they are not superhuman or special... they are... human...
these same critiques could be said for any countries occupying military force...

that said in defense of our troops, If we weren't over there at all, then we wouldn't have skyrocketing gas prices, and civilian and american deaths, or the constant threat of reprisals...
and of course... it would be hard for the few bad seeds to victimize poor old iraqi ladies and young boys if we weren't there.

Now when are we going to go after a real threat like the little Korean troll doll with nukes?



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 04:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by LA_Maximus
So we're a buncha murderers and rapists huh?

No, not all of you, but some of you appearantly are...



America freed Iraq from a bunch of murderers and rapists and you have the nerve to call us those names? You quote from Al Jazeera and expect us to beleave you??


Yes, America freed Iraq from the criminal rule of Saddam Hussein whom America had supported and armed to the teeth for many years, during which America very well knew about his autrocities... But America did not free Iraq for the sake of the Iraqi people being free. America freed Iraq for several entirely selfish reasons. Iraq's and Afghanistan's invasion was just part of a major plan of controlling the entire Middle East, Caucasus and Central Asia -- The richest region in the entire world when it comes to natural resources. Iran was always considered the big prize, but it was also always considered the most trickiest of all. So the implementation of the plan has just begun. We haven't seen even half of it all yet! Hairiri's assassination was also part of this plan and so was the assassination of Ahmed Shah Massoud, the legendary pro-Iranian leader of the Northern Alliance who was assassinated two days before 9/11. But it's not only about money, it's also about imperialist ambitions - about showing the world that the Soviet Union is gone now, and that no country can stop the U.S. anymore - the U.S. can do whatever it please and will do just that without any regards to what the rest of the world thinks or says! And it's also about religion. Since the U.S. wants to control this vast area, it also sees the necessity of being able to maintain their control in the long term.

If you travel outside of the U.S., you will find that in most countries of the world it is not American troops that have invaded, but rather American "culture". I just picked up the TV guide for the small European country where I currently live, and counted that some 90% of all the programs showing this week on the different channels that I have originate in the U.S.! 90%!! And then there are all the locally produced shows that are copied from the original American ones, like all those boring reality shows of all sorts. If you head for the movies you will find the same results. Music for the youth - such as hiphop, rap and rock, is predominantly produced in the U.S. Most of today's teenage fashion is also inspired by the American homeboy culture of the ghettos. MTV can be seen virtually all over the world today, and FOX TV is part of my basic cable package where I live. American culture and values are also spread through news networks such as CNN, NBC, and MSNBC which can viewed via either cable or satellite TV in many parts of the world. Now, as long as there is nothing harmful involved, I do not oppose the export and import of culture as such. And in this case I think there are both harmful and not harmful comonents involved. But culture can also be used to extend influence and control over other societies. And while the exchange of culture does not need to involve direct governmental involvement, it can often serve the political and financial interests of the exporting country. And this is indeed the case for the U.S. Imagine how all the American films and series that we see here can in the long run change our values and norms, and even traditions. As a result we can see that Halloween and valentine's day, which have never in the past been celebrated here, now are celebrated in a rather major way.

Now, Iran has also started in a major way to get involved in the export of culture, but in a different way than the U.S. and with an entirely different cultural menu. Iran's menu largely consists of Radio and TV broadcasts in almost all the languages you can imagine - Iran has also launched a 24 hrs very sophisticated and professional news channel in Arabic, catering to the Arab world, the so called "Al-Alam" news channel. And it is reported that most Iraqis rely on Al-Alam for their news now. Iran also produces films, movies and documentaries that have recieved award after award at numerous international film festivals around the world and are being showed on TV in many countries including the U.S. Iran is one of the world's largest publishers of all kinds of newspapers, magazines, and books, that are printed in many languages and sold not only in the Muslim world, but also beyond. Art exhibitions of both traditional and contemporary art, the performing arts of various kinds, scientific symposiums, lectures and intellectual dialogues are all also part of Iran's increasing cultural activities inside and outside of its borders.

Now, let's go back to what I said about the real intentions of the U.S. in the Middle East, Caucasus and Central Asia, and that the big prize is Iran, and that the Bush junta is more determined than ever to cause the fall of Iran. The U.S. knows that the major obstacle for its desire to control this whole vast and extremely rich area is nothing and nobody less than ISLAM. The materialistic, sex and violence oriented American culture does not get along with the anti-materialistic, family and moral oriented Islamic traditional values. If the U.S. wants to maintain its control over this vast domain of the Islamic world in the long run without running into fierce resistance from all corners, it will need to change these traditional values of the people there. And the only way to do so is for the U.S. to get rid of Islam. This is the new crusades, and do not believe for one second that it was a mere coincidence that Bush jr in his speech right after 9/11 stated that a new crusade will be launched. He knew what he said and he meant it! 9/11 was part of this plan. It was the only way the U.S. could land its troops in the backyard of China and Russia without any resistance. How could any country say no to the U.S. "war on terror" after such a horrific ordeal as the WTC attacks? Something of that incredible and shocking scope was needed in order to shut the world up, and even create empathy on behalf of the rest of the world for the U.S. And the U.S. would gain a whole package of benefits so that it could implement its vicious plan, including the worldwide campaign to discredit and bash Islam and Muslims. And we see how things are continuing to unfold in this direction. As a result, people around the world are openly making racist remarks about Muslims that would have been unheard of prior to the U.S. campaign. People in many societies have increasingly become more racist in many ways. FOX TV News bluntly propagates racism and talks about a "Muslim invasion of Europe". And what happened to the religious freedoms and tolerance that these societies were taking so much pride in and which is part of their constitutions?

Meanwhile, Iran is taking steady and confident steps towards becoming an industrialised country. Iran is actively, very ambitiously and successfully working on developing into a largely self-sufficient, industrialised, and technologically advanced world power. Iran has a level of scientific, technological and infrastructural expertise at this point that it exports its expertise to third world countries primarily in Africa, Asia and even Latin America. And it is also culturally very active in these same regions. Ofcourse it still has a long way to go to become a fullfledged industrialised world power. But it's surely heading that way, and pretty much on its own. Iran is also very busy developing and expanding a sophisticated infrastructure Contrary to what many believe because of the EXTREMELY biased media coverage of Iran, Iran is actually very progressive in many social, cultural and political aspects. Surely there are many negatives involved as well, but the world would be very surprised if they knew about some of the progressive stuff going on inside Iran. Just this year some 80 dams are being built across the country, and that's in addition to the 274 which already exist. (Only a few of these were built during the Shah's time, prior to the Islamic revolution) Iran is also very busy developing its tourism industry and has set a side a budget of $80 billion for this year to develop and expand its tourism infrastructure. The president of the International tourism association or whatever it is called expressed his confidence that Iran within a few years will become one of the hottest tourist countries in the world because of its extremely varied climate and nature, with snowcovered mountains and skiing, dense woods, apl-like mountains, deserts, tropical landscapes and beaches, and because of its ancient and sophisticated civilization, highly refined arts, the biggest collection of museums in the Middle East and one of the biggest in Asia.

So, how would it look for the U.S. with its vicious plans in that vast region to have an Iran in the middle of it all, which is the only country except Egypt which is a real natural national state, and which has a historical and cultural influence that reaches far beyond its borders in every direction in that region - an ISLAMIC Iran that will be a powerful, progressive, modern, industrialized, advanced and highly influential power, and a popular tourist spot? It wouldn't look good at all! First of all it would send the signal to all other Muslim countries that an Islamic theocracy managed to do all that on its own. And it will also send a signal to the world telling it that its biased coverage about Iran and Islam was nothing else but just that, and it will show the world that an Islamic country can also be very progressive and advanced in all aspects.

But more than anything else, such a power in the middle of the delicious cake that the U.S. wants to cut up for itself will pose as a rival to the U.S. and Israel and their interests, and this is the biggest reason why the U.S. and Israel will do whatever is in its power to make sure that Iran falls. But they will not succeed, but that's another story alltogether.

The U.S. will loose this war on Islam - It has already gone too far so that it's beyond repair. However the furhter they go the worse the consequences will be for them eventually. It will thus also loose control over the Caspian Sea and Persian Gulf oil, and over the vast natural gas reserves of Central Asia, which is one of the reasons it also invaded Afghanistan. Surely the transgressions and agressions of the U.S will lead to a very nasty and devastating world war eventually. This is the reason why the Chinese, Russians, Indians and Iranians are expanding their military might. Then afterwards, an entirely new and fresh world order will emerge which will be much more fair than any that we have known until now.






The problem with Islam is people like you will never accept responsibility for their fellow Muslims crimes, instead you spread LIES about Americans to inflame other weak-minded folk who don't know any better.


"Fellow Muslim crimes" - that's very qute! Just as you as a Christian will not accept responsibilty for the crimes of the crusaders, whitch hunters, child molesting priests, anti-abortion terrorists, Adolf Hitler and the Nazis, KKK, or Jeffrey dahmer and other Christian serial killers, I as a Muslim REFUSE to accept responsibility for something that neither I nor any of my relatives or friends have any part of. Just how incredibly ignorant and stupid can you be? You are the one spreading lies about Muslims, and weak-minded is exactly what you and most others who voted that stupid and vicious Texas clown and murderer into office for a second time are!


Saddam and his sons committed rapes, murders, wars and atrocitys in the MILLIONS, yet you would never dream of attacking them...cause their Muslim also right? If a fellow Muslim commits these crimes.....thats fine right? Not worthy of your time.


Yes, and Saddam and his sons were supported by the U.S., armed by the U.S., and promoted by the U.S. for all those years, while the U.S. knew of all the autrocities they committed against their own people. You know it sounds to me that you have a pretty low iq and that you as a result have been brainwashed by the evil evangelic body snatchers the way you speak about us Muslims as if we were some horrible species from another planet. Did it ever cross your mind that Iran and Iraq were involved in an 8 year long war - well, Iranians are Muslim and Iraqis are Muslim too.....DUH!!! Get it??? And what about the 57 bodies of innocent Iraqi Muslims found in the Tigris river who the "Muslim" insurgents killed. You're just a waste of my time! You're too uneducated and unintelligent.


Your Islamic religion is Evil in the purest form, its still stuck in the 12th century and we Christian Americans are gonna drag Islam into the 21st century so Islam can have a future and perhaps more reasonable Muslims than you can start speaking out and confronting the Hypocrisy that I see in your ramblings.


You don't know anything about Islam to know whether it's evil or good. YOU are definitely the one stuck in the 12th century man!!!!! And you "Christian" American fascist criminals who steal money from poor innocent and utterly naive people are not going to drag us anywhere. You can drag yourselves to hell. And you shouldn't even take the word "hypocrisy" in your mouth before you have learnt what it means. And once you have learnt what it means you will know just who are the hypocrites! Heil Bush!




Model of Tehran monorail



Iranian female racer Laleh Seddigh



[edit on 22-4-2005 by Siroos]

[edit on 22-4-2005 by Siroos]



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 04:57 PM
link   
Calm down Siroos, if you were an Iraqi woman you would be Thanking Allah that America had the courage to free you. The woman in Afghanistan are free to go to school and vote because of US soldiers.

You think its about robbing your natural resources? if thats the case, why did America hand Kuwait back to their governent after we freed them? Can't answer that one huh? Its not about the money, its about forcing a change in a rotten part of the world that was turning into a "Martyr Factory"

Yeah, we are gonna drag Islam...kicking and screaming into the 21st Century weather you like it or not! America can't afford to wait for another 9/11 with 88,000 dead on the streets of NYC.

Maximu§



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 05:20 PM
link   
I read the article and the by line of this thread should be changed...

1. an old woman was 'ridden like a donkey'?
2. a woman said her cellmate was raped, over 17 times in one day....
3. thousands have been raped and impregnated.


well, first, 'ridden like a donkey' just sounds like bull, anyone can claim something happened to someone else because they do not have to prove it and please show us one of the 1800 kids.Just like Vietnam, many men fall in love with the women they meet after befriending them.

just propoganda, sorry.....



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 05:38 PM
link   
This would definitely be all over the news if it were true, but of course it most likely isn't. Anyways, it's kinda ironic to me to hear an Iranian voice so much concern for Iraqi prisoners, when Iran JUST released all the POW's from the Iran-Iraq war of the 80's.



BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) — Iran has agreed to release all prisoners from the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war and Iraq will release all Iranians in its jails, Iraq's Foreign Ministry said Thursday.
In an agreement signed Wednesday, the Foreign Ministry said, Iran would release 941 Iraqi prisoners of war later Thursday and Iraq would release 349 Iranian criminals in its jails on Monday and Tuesday. Iraq does not acknowledge holding Iranian prisoners of war.
www.usatoday.com...


Siroos, would you go as far as to say Iran did not mistreat Iraqi prisoners, besides holding them more than ten years after the war ended? Not that it makes it right for U.S. soldiers to mistreat prisoners, but I'm not sure any POW's are treated kindly in any war, by any country. I know, we should stop having wars!



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 07:07 PM
link   
The problem and the actual misunderstanding is that media lies to you... Lies openly and if you ask some news editor he/she might even admit it. Today is the age of the "pacifists" who believe that there shouldn't be any wars... But that is impossible, due to constant attacks coming from extremists, like the ones we have in Chechnya, or Al Qaeda. How come you forget so quickly the 9/11, the Beslan school siege the two planes hijack and bomb detonations in Russia on 24 August 2004... It is too much to be forgotten so quickly, and some incidents which might happen on the battlefield, is because the soldiers are sick of people sitting and telling that war in Chechnya, Iraq, Afganistan are not justified, the ones who complain about their tax money used for the bullets spent, and food eaten. Shame on you!



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 10:07 PM
link   
Siroos:
I am still waiting for your response to the question of " What say you about the murder of the sole survivor of the U.S Helicopter shot down in Iraq yesterday?" Was that acceptable Islamic action....to kill a P.O.W?

ticticticticitictictictictictictictic! Talk about American programming....Where's Morey Safer when you need him!



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 11:32 PM
link   

U.S. forces rape, abuse and torture female Iraqi detainees - Including a woman in her 70's!

www.aljazeera.com...


Not for nothin', but there is a difference between aljazeera.COM and aljazeera.NET, even though they are both anti-US.




posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 11:35 PM
link   
You can look at it this way and say Saddam wasn't a bad guy. The torture by his troops was just a few bad apples. They were isolated incidents. That is if you apply US standards to self judgement.



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 11:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Indy
You can look at it this way and say Saddam wasn't a bad guy. The torture by his troops was just a few bad apples. They were isolated incidents. That is if you apply US standards to self judgement.


No it isn't the same, because Saddam ordered the torture rooms to be staffed and used, and even committed torture himself. It was practically instituionalized in Iraq. There is not one bit of proof that these alleged incidents in this thread were a direct order of the top US brass.




top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join