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.

 

Iraqi women to hang for acts of resistance!

page: 5
11
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 21 2007 @ 09:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by psyopswatcher

Is Kurdistan feeding the Iraqi now? No, look at Marg's link... Australia is. And the food being imported is rotten. More systematic genocide.


funny but after I read that article I am very worry if the whole purpose of occupation is to kill as many Iraqis as possible so the the oil of Iraq will fall into the hands of the waiting and willing US private sector that are all behind the fall out and take over of Iraq starting with Dick cheney.

Kill them with sectarian violence, raids on terrorist or supposedly terrorist hide out, then finish them with poisonous food that people even have to pay a high price from the private companies to be able to eat.

Interesting and very worrisome.




posted on Feb, 21 2007 @ 09:21 AM
link   
Can anyone provide any information on how much money Dick Cheney has made off of this war, seeing as how it's his goal to kill off as many Iraqis as possible, so that his friends in the oil industry can make even more obscene profits?



posted on Feb, 21 2007 @ 09:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by BlueRaja
Can anyone provide any information on how much money Dick Cheney


Here is some food for thoughts on the background of our elected president and his right hand man Dicky.

enjoy and no nick picking, is nice to know how corrupted our political elected officials are . . .

www.jang.com.pk...



Cheney’s business interests in oil and arms, temporarily divested while he helps direct American policy in energy and defence, rival those of former President George Bush Senior and his son. The Bush family has close connections to the Washington-based Carlyle Group, a $ 12 billion private equity firm that has parlayed a roster of former top-level government officials, largely from the Reagan and Bush Senior administrations, into a money-making machine.





[edit on 21-2-2007 by marg6043]



posted on Feb, 21 2007 @ 10:01 AM
link   
Marg, I saw nothing in that article that suggested any criminal wrong doing. There's no question that oil is a strategic resource interest of a nation, so looking for ways to ensure stability in terms of supply are certainly a reasonable endeavor for a government. It's also not ridiculous for oil/energy companies to be interested in stable locations and profitability.

A few things I did note in that article though were the following statements-

"Cheney spent much of the 1990s scheming with his fellow oil barons ......"

with regards to Bush- "It has long been suspected but never proven that the money came directly from Salem bin Laden."

"Hidden behind President Bush’s invasion of Afghanistan, could there be an Oil Agenda?"

Those statements are somewhat leading, and show an obvious bias.



posted on Feb, 21 2007 @ 10:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by BlueRaja
Can anyone provide any information on how much money Dick Cheney has made off of this war, seeing as how it's his goal to kill off as many Iraqis as possible, so that his friends in the oil industry can make even more obscene profits?


Here you go BlueRaja, you can start by researching Cheney's Secret Energy Panel (aka Cronies, Inc.).

[edit on 21-2-2007 by psyopswatcher]



posted on Feb, 21 2007 @ 10:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah

"When you have a DIRTY Occupation, you have a DIRTY Resistance!"


Thats funny, you mentioned about a democratic govt. should never fight fire with fire when insurgents decided to do things dirty.



posted on Feb, 21 2007 @ 10:44 AM
link   
Souljah didn't say that Deltaboy. He was quoting an Iraqi as saying it.

But I agree.. that they've ALL lowered themselves to dishonorable levels. Because it's NEVER been a just war.



posted on Feb, 21 2007 @ 11:48 AM
link   
It keeps getting asked that if US soldiers were captured would it be ok to kill them... isn't that exactly what has happened to every US soldier captured by insurgents?

These women are not enemy soldiers who attacked US soldiers, they attacked their own people... Does that make any sense? Would you not try to work within the system to try and change things or would you create a terrorized populace which in the end serves nothing but the agents of chaos?

Anyone who feels the blame rests on the US only, then you are naive and misguided... The Iraqi people have an opportunity to create the country they want, if only they would step in and stop the insurgents. If they quit fighting, we would leave, it might take a year, but we want to leave as badly as they want us to. Then once we are gone vote in whatever fanatical leaders you want, as that seems to be their goal.



posted on Feb, 21 2007 @ 12:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by MasterJedi

The Iraqi people have an opportunity to create the country they want, if only they would step in and stop the insurgents.


Is not as simple as that, we have been geared to believe that Iraqis and middle eastern civilizations can be just like the US . . .

The politics of war are a lot different of what has been marketed by the enjoyment and manipulation of western way of thinking and to help support this war.

The differences in tribal divisions are something that can not be erased overnight, rivalry span thousands of years. . .

Right now the Bush administration has helped put in power a government that will be friendly to the goals of the powers behind this war . . .

Through briberies, powerful money ridden lobbyist and promises . . .

That puts the rest of the population at disadvantage, the divisions are not only making Shiites fight their own tribal men but also Sunnis has been targeted by both groups, the US friendly rising elite that wants to control the countries wealth with the help of the US and the Shiites that see the Iraqi friendly US government for what it is and are fighting against having their resources stolen from them.

Then you have the Sunnis that no only lost control of the nation with the down fall of Saddam but now have to struggle to stay alive in thorn sectarian violence nation with a ruling class looking for revenge.

No, Iraq is not going to be an easy nation to fix . . . specially when is too many outside influences trying to control the government and the resources that is the only thing that Iraqi have of value.

Remember that is our own government the one that are calling the shots, they are ones that has use the tagging of the Iraqi unhappy population as, insurgents, terrorist and militias. . .

Is an irony that our own govenrment is supporting what they want while helping fight against the rest of the nation that disapprove what is going on and fight against what is becoming a new elite in power.

Is a reason why . . .money and greed.

[edit on 21-2-2007 by marg6043]



posted on Feb, 21 2007 @ 12:11 PM
link   
Blueraja and others none of this would be happening if the US had not invaded Iraq, and are you preparing your excuses now for when you do the same to Iran. I'm sure you will all support the bombing of the USA in just the same manner as it would only be fair as many of you seem to think they (Iran) have nukes and would use them. Well so has the US and it has used them so therefore under the reasoning of many Americans we should all attack America because its a threat to the peace of the world with a proven track record of violence and mass murder.

Perhaps you would also support the bombing of Israel as they have nukes and have said they will use them.

Also I take it that you would have applauded the Nazis for murdering and torturing all those freedom fighters who opposed them, I mean they passed laws did they not, they installed puppet regimes so their actions must have been right. What do you think?

And something close to your heart, no doubt you would applaud the deaths of those who fought resisting British rule before and during the war of independance.



posted on Feb, 21 2007 @ 12:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by magicmushroom
Blueraja and others none of this would be happening if the US had not invaded Iraq, and are you preparing your excuses now for when you do the same to Iran. I'm sure you will all support the bombing of the USA in just the same manner as it would only be fair as many of you seem to think they (Iran) have nukes and would use them. Well so has the US and it has used them so therefore under the reasoning of many Americans we should all attack America because its a threat to the peace of the world with a proven track record of violence and mass murder.

Perhaps you would also support the bombing of Israel as they have nukes and have said they will use them.

Also I take it that you would have applauded the Nazis for murdering and torturing all those freedom fighters who opposed them, I mean they passed laws did they not, they installed puppet regimes so their actions must have been right. What do you think?

And something close to your heart, no doubt you would applaud the deaths of those who fought resisting British rule before and during the war of independance.


I don't support any group that attacks civilians intentionally to achieve a their political aims. I have no sympathy for terrorists, or those that torture and murder anyone. American Colonists used assymetric(i.e. guerilla or unconventional, which are a far cry from terrorism) warfare against the British soldiers. They most certainly didn't randomly commit terrorist acts against noncombatants.
As for attacking America for possessing nukes- yes it's true we used 2 nukes to end WW2, and save millions of lives, which is a far cry from using nukes as weapons of terror, or to annihilate a people(which is the purpose that any of the Arab nations would have). It's not the possession of nukes that's a problem. It's whether a nation is responsible enough in the society of civil nations to possess them or not. There are certain nations that just aren't trustworthy enough to be allowed to have these types of weapons.



posted on Feb, 21 2007 @ 01:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by BlueRaja
There are certain nations that just aren't trustworthy enough to be allowed to have these types of weapons.


Can you please tell me the last time Iran attacked another nation?

Face it, the US is the bully on the block. And [back on topic] allowing women to be hanged is one more awful spectre of America's Mideastern Nightmare.



posted on Feb, 21 2007 @ 04:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by psyopswatcher

Originally posted by BlueRaja
There are certain nations that just aren't trustworthy enough to be allowed to have these types of weapons.


Can you please tell me the last time Iran attacked another nation?

Face it, the US is the bully on the block. And [back on topic] allowing women to be hanged is one more awful spectre of America's Mideastern Nightmare.


Your outrage at the treatment of women in the middle east might be more credible, if it was even handedly applied across the entire region, and at the human rights records in Arab countries in general.

As for Iran attacking other nations- it does so through proxy by using terrorist groups. That's why nations like that can't be trusted with the bomb, because they can't be trusted to not give it to terrorists to use on their behalf.

So long as the rhetoric supports your anti American world view, you conveniently overlook all manner of despicable behaviors in that region.



posted on Feb, 21 2007 @ 06:01 PM
link   
So, BlueRaja, are you saying that governments of nations should be responsible and in the moral control of their citizenry? Is that how they can be trusted not to give terrorists the opportunity to do as they will?

This is exactly what the mullahs would wish to do, controlling from the mosque. And is what Sharia law is in the first place. You may wish to rethink that arguement.

Because it doesn't exactly jive with the liberty and freedom the US says they are bringing to the occupied Iraq.



posted on Feb, 21 2007 @ 08:08 PM
link   
Forgive my ignorance but did Iraq even sign the Geneva Convention pact? Should non-signers be afforded the protections of the treaty if they disagreed with it enough to refuse adding their signature to it? Just curious.



posted on Feb, 22 2007 @ 02:15 AM
link   
timeless test


My comment was something of a low blow, I apologise for belittling your passion.


Appology accepted.

-----------------------------

What makes this especially ditestable, is it isn't just a random event born out of anger, It's CONDONED by legistlation, it's standard procedure! I bet they have done this to hundreds of people, but we here about these 3 because they are women.

Meaning, under the guise of the puppet regime, the US has been executing POW's since the begining!
This a time of war no matter how much you declare that it's mission accomplished or that iraq is "soveriegn". Words don't wash over the facts. If these three fighters are to be kept prisoner, they should be under US controll, not puppet traitor controll where the US can do whatever crime it wants to them and keep their hands clean of blood.

This is just a way for the US to commit war crimes without having any accountability, get their stooges to do it for them!!!!!!!!!!!!! they think they can get away with it.

like they did in afghanistan. Does anyone remember that image of the south vietnamese soldiers shooting a vietcong prisoner in the head on camera?

KRIEGSVERBRECKERS, THEY SHOULD BE SENT TO THE HAGUE!!!!!!!!!

-----------

As for the way the resistance treats prisoners, the resistance is several different factions, not one entity that condones murder as something that's just law. Each group acts on its own. But there is alot of psy-ops out there against them, for instance the killing of margret hassan, which all the resistance groups condemned.

There are so many instances resistance have released prisoners, even when at times those prisoners where mercinaries (who deserve to be shot) or US soldiers. When the resistance captures a prisoner they google his/her name to find out if they just journalists or something more sinister like a spy or a mercinary. Jill carrol held then released by the resistance gained 10 kilo's of weight during that time.

[edit on 22-2-2007 by Syrian Sister]

[edit on 22-2-2007 by Syrian Sister]



posted on Feb, 22 2007 @ 02:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Syrian Sister
What makes this especially ditestable, is it isn't just a random event born out of anger, It's CONDONED by legistlation...


So what you're saying is that it is part of the process of law. Surely that is a good thing even if you don't like the outcome of that process?


Meaning, under the guise of the puppet regime, the US has been executing POW's since the begining!


They're not PoWs, they were not operating in a manner covered by the Geneva Conventions and are still subject to the law.


Does anyone remember that image of the south vietnamese soldiers shooting a vietcong prisoner in the head on camera?


Yes vividly, and superficially it was shocking but I have no idea of the detailed story behind that shooting. I imagine a photograph of one of these women shooting the Iraqi policemen would look equally shocking.



posted on Feb, 22 2007 @ 04:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Syrian Sister
What makes this especially ditestable, is it isn't just a random event born out of anger, It's CONDONED by legistlation, it's standard procedure! I bet they have done this to hundreds of people, but we here about these 3 because they are women.


You are right (OMG, I almost can't believe I agree with you on something)! It is CONDONED!! Condoned, by the (very publically elected) Iraqi llegislation.
The IRAQI legislation.

I'm still not sure why you are making this a 'U.S.' thing. We are not the ones who, freely, execute women.

Women, in the U.S., are the most difficult to convict! Especially, MOTHERS!

That's your punishment, Sister! You are the one who represents a facism; a group who very freely, and easily, execute women. Women, including MOTHERS (pregnant, nursing) who are sentenced to death, without even so much as legal representation.

Legal representation: A privilege awarded only to MEN, in some of the M.E. countries (which are proudly represented, praised, and defended by YOU, sister). [I suppose it could be argued as a 'right', and not 'privilege', since it's not prevy to those of a certain gender, no matter status.]

You, and your (majorily, on my part, speaking) M.E. people, will follow through with a death sentence. Gender being prescedent, no matter the crime, in the sentence!

A slap on the hand for my husband, in your country, is death for me. Isn't it, Sister?

Women are disposable! WOMEN ARE DISPOSBLE!! Aren't they, SS?

You are female, after all. You are disposable

SS, are YOU disposable? How do you feel about that? In MY HOUSE, toilet paper is disposable.

Clean up your own back yard, SISTER!






[edit on 22-2-2007 by SourGrapes]



posted on Feb, 22 2007 @ 05:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Syrian Sister
timeless test


My comment was something of a low blow, I apologise for belittling your passion.


Appology accepted.

-----------------------------

What makes this especially ditestable, is it isn't just a random event born out of anger, It's CONDONED by legistlation, it's standard procedure! I bet they have done this to hundreds of people, but we here about these 3 because they are women.

Meaning, under the guise of the puppet regime, the US has been executing POW's since the begining!
This a time of war no matter how much you declare that it's mission accomplished or that iraq is "soveriegn". Words don't wash over the facts. If these three fighters are to be kept prisoner, they should be under US controll, not puppet traitor controll where the US can do whatever crime it wants to them and keep their hands clean of blood.

This is just a way for the US to commit war crimes without having any accountability, get their stooges to do it for them!!!!!!!!!!!!! they think they can get away with it.

like they did in afghanistan. Does anyone remember that image of the south vietnamese soldiers shooting a vietcong prisoner in the head on camera?

KRIEGSVERBRECKERS, THEY SHOULD BE SENT TO THE HAGUE!!!!!!!!!

-----------

As for the way the resistance treats prisoners, the resistance is several different factions, not one entity that condones murder as something that's just law. Each group acts on its own. But there is alot of psy-ops out there against them, for instance the killing of margret hassan, which all the resistance groups condemned.

There are so many instances resistance have released prisoners, even when at times those prisoners where mercinaries (who deserve to be shot) or US soldiers. When the resistance captures a prisoner they google his/her name to find out if they just journalists or something more sinister like a spy or a mercinary. Jill carrol held then released by the resistance gained 10 kilo's of weight during that time.

[edit on 22-2-2007 by Syrian Sister]

[edit on 22-2-2007 by Syrian Sister]
This is the same old stuff you pop on here with some story and cry about it and find a few people that have never seen war to agree with you .What is your point ?I as an American have been their and have not seen the "mob" rule talked about a few pages back it is nothing like the news you watch .The only point you have is this is all you can do ,you cant fight for your cause so you try and devide people in hopes it will become so bad America will have to leave.I am glad these CRIMINALS will die its the price they pay for the risk they took its people like SS that will never have my RESPECT.So keep up the great work Tokyo rose most people see right through you.



posted on Feb, 22 2007 @ 07:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by psyopswatcher
So, BlueRaja, are you saying that governments of nations should be responsible and in the moral control of their citizenry? Is that how they can be trusted not to give terrorists the opportunity to do as they will?

This is exactly what the mullahs would wish to do, controlling from the mosque. And is what Sharia law is in the first place. You may wish to rethink that arguement.

Because it doesn't exactly jive with the liberty and freedom the US says they are bringing to the occupied Iraq.





Are you implying that Iran hasn't sponsored terrorism time after time, providing training and fundind for Hezbollah, Hamas, etc.. If the Mullahs were telling their followers to love thy neighbors and treat them as they'd like to be treated rather than- death to the infidel, I might feel a bit more at ease. Obviously a government can't be held responsible for the behavior of a citizen, but if it's government policy to encourage citizens to behave anti socially towards the citizens of other countries, they should be held responsible for that. Civilized nations don't recruit suicide bombers to murder innocents in other countries.



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join