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.

 

WAR: Iraqi PM Executed Six Prisoners: Witnesses

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 17 2004 @ 02:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bastet
Let's hope the world waits until the truth is established first. And that was NOT American-style justice anyway. But then, for some, why let the facts get in the way of a good story?


I admit emotional charge, but tell me this:

What is so different between Saddam shooting suspects in the back of the head and Iyad Allawi shooting suspects in the back of the head?

And what is the prime minister doing with a gun, I thought they used pens and microphones.

[edit on 17-7-2004 by shanti23]




posted on Jul, 17 2004 @ 02:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jamuhn

Fourth, if we leave them to their own devices because of its none of our business, why did we go over there?


Read the Butler report and UNMOVIC's latest report on Iraq's wmd. There you will find the reasons why we went to Iraq.



posted on Jul, 17 2004 @ 02:49 AM
link   
BTW those two witnesses are completly unreliable. Their accounts do not match in at least one point, let me quote.


The witnesses said that seven prisoners had been brought out to the courtyard, but the last man in the line was only wounded - in the neck, said one witness; in the chest, said the other.


One says the last man was injured in the neck, the other says in the chest. A pistol cannot injure in one shot both the chest and the neck.
The witnesses accounts differ and this points to their entire story most probably being fabricated. This was just probably a sham, perhaps they made this up to get paid, or they themselves could be insurgents trying to slander the Iraqi Prime Minister.



[edit on 17-7-2004 by Muaddib]



posted on Jul, 17 2004 @ 04:20 AM
link   
Here's the transcript of interview with journalist Paul McGeough. It's not a long read,
but it explains a couple of points.
www.abc.net.au...

Sanc'.



posted on Jul, 17 2004 @ 04:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by shanti23


I admit emotional charge, but tell me this:

What is so different between Saddam shooting suspects in the back of the head and Iyad Allawi shooting suspects in the back of the head?




I think you may have misunderstood me on this, shanti23. I was replying to your saying "American puppet prime minister dispensing American justice".

Now there's absolutely no difference between Saddam or Allawi doing the shooting, but it's really not the American way of justice, is it?

If the incident is verified, then the US will be in for a lot more criticism. And there again, my opinion regarding the US war in Iraq to overthrow a dictatorship & introduce democtatic rule [this reason will fit the bill until WMD's are definitely found!] - has always been - how naive to assume that Western-style democracy could be suddenly grafted on like a new limb.

I have never been in favour of the war in Iraq from the beginning.



posted on Jul, 17 2004 @ 04:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bastet
but it's really not the American way of justice, is it?


That was maybe a little strong, but answer me this:

pre-emptive strikes with no aggression implied
suspects killed with no trial

Is there a difference in reality?

And thanks for that link Sanc,



They are very detailed.

They were done separately.

Each witness is not aware that the other spoke.


That is the scary part.

Oh yeah,


Originally by Muaddib
A pistol cannot injure in one shot both the chest and the neck


Three words: Magic Bullet Theory (the irony of using that to argue against it)
It's a mute point anyway, argue away the small un-important details whilst the truth floats away. . .


Originally by Muaddib
One says the last man was injured in the neck, the other says in the chest.


Different people see different things anyhow, take this thread for example.

[edit on 17-7-2004 by shanti23]



posted on Jul, 17 2004 @ 05:18 AM
link   
Oh, I see we're arguing semantics here, shanti23! I already said that I disapproved of the war in Iraq.

Let's see if this more precise phrasing will remove all doubt as to my meaning then.

"It's not the PERCEIVED or ACCEPTED American way of justice".

I know what you're getting at, & I really think we're on the same side here.



posted on Jul, 17 2004 @ 05:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bastet
"It's not the PERCEIVED or ACCEPTED American way of justice".


Agreed
There is no malice in my post, Bastet.

[edit on 17-7-2004 by shanti23]



posted on Jul, 17 2004 @ 01:24 PM
link   


quote: Originally posted by Jamuhn
Fourth, if we leave them to their own devices because of its none of our business, why did we go over there?
Maudibb
Read the Butler report and UNMOVIC's latest report on Iraq's wmd. There you will find the reasons why we went to Iraq.


I don't think you understand. If we are just going to leave Iraq alone again to do whatever they want, what will stop them from becoming something like the Saddam regime again. There is no point going over there if we let this guy as PM doing what he is.

BTW I still don't believe we have found anything comparable to what was stipulated at the beginning of the war.

Chest, Neck, they are very close indeed. As I think of it, the neck and chest are connected, hmm.



posted on Jul, 17 2004 @ 10:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jamuhn


quote: Originally posted by Jamuhn
Fourth, if we leave them to their own devices because of its none of our business, why did we go over there?

I don't think you understand. If we are just going to leave Iraq alone again to do whatever they want, what will stop them from becoming something like the Saddam regime again. There is no point going over there if we let this guy as PM doing what he is.

I'll take a stab at it. We went over there to remove Saddam, ostensibly because of the WMD issue. Whether it was that, or revenge for the attempted hit on GHWB is debatable. Saddam had to go.

Next, we wanted to establish democracy in Iraq. This was done in several steps, most recently giving them back their country. Next will be their elections scheduled for January.

We hoped that they would follow good democratic principles when June 30 came. A parent hopes their child will be a productive member of society after investing in them for 23 years. But at this point, we have no further say in the matter. The child has achieved majority.

Allawi and Iraq may still turn out to be a beacon of hope in the mideast. After all, there are only allegations about the executions, and that is what we practice in the US - innocent until charged, tried, and found guilty. No charges have even been filed. Only a rumor of executions.

Allawi may turn out worse than Saddam. He may order the coalition troops out of Iraq tomorrow (suicidal and doubtful, but possible). Until he threatens the US, it is none of our business what they do now.




new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join