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.

 

Report: Iraqi Prime Minister Allawi Executed Six Insurgents

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 16 2004 @ 12:19 PM
link   
The following is the transcript of a program broadcast on Australian Broadcasting Corporation on 7/16/2004.

Iraqi PM executed six insurgents: witnesses


Let's go straight to the allegations that Iyad Allawi executed as many as six suspected insurgents at a Baghdad police station at the end of June.

The explosive claims in tomorrow's Sydney Morning Herald and Age newspapers allege that the prisoners were handcuffed and blindfolded, lined up against a courtyard wall and shot by the Iraqi Prime Minister.

Dr Allawi is alleged to have told those around him that he wanted to send a clear message to the police on how to deal with insurgents.

Two people allege they witnessed the killings and there are also claims the Iraqi Interior Minister was present as well as four American security men in civilian dress.


The story speaks for itself. The incident allegedly took place when Allawi was touring an Iraqi police station around June 19, after he was appointed Prime Minister, but before the transfer of sovereignty. If this is the type of thug that the United States has installed as its puppet in Iraq, we are in for a bumpy ride.




[edit on 7/16/2004 by donguillermo]

[edit on 7/16/2004 by donguillermo]

[edit on 7/16/2004 by donguillermo]




posted on Jul, 16 2004 @ 12:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by donguillermo
The following is the transcript of a program broadcast on Australian Broadcasting Corporation on 7/16/2004.

Iraqi PM executed six insurgents: witnesses


Let's go straight to the allegations that Iyad Allawi executed as many as six suspected insurgents at a Baghdad police station at the end of June.

The explosive claims in tomorrow's Sydney Morning Herald and Age newspapers allege that the prisoners were handcuffed and blindfolded, lined up against a courtyard wall and shot by the Iraqi Prime Minister.

Dr Allawi is alleged to have told those around him that he wanted to send a clear message to the police on how to deal with insurgents.

Two people allege they witnessed the killings and there are also claims the Iraqi Interior Minister was present as well as four American security men in civilian dress.


The story speaks for itself. The incident allegedly took place when Allawi was touring an Iraqi jail around June 19, after he was appointed Prime Minister, but before the transfer of sovereignty. If this is the type of thug that the United States has installed as its puppet in Iraq, we are in for a bumpy ride.


Couldn't wait to get this posted, not even long enough to look fifteen posts down the page much less do an actual search. Posted and refuted already. This thread speaks for itself, any possibility of the Bush administration in a negative light will be pushed into the spotlight regardless of facts or circumstances, as Intrepid would say "try again".



posted on Jul, 16 2004 @ 12:38 PM
link   
Mirthful Me says


Couldn't wait to get this posted, not even long enough to look fifteen posts down the page much less do an actual search. Posted and refuted already. This thread speaks for itself, any possibility of the Bush administration in a negative light will be pushed into the spotlight regardless of facts or circumstances, as Intrepid would say "try again".


Some posters on ATS express doubts about the veracity of the story and the story has been refuted? ROTFLMAO!!! You have a highly inflated idea of the importance of ATS. I suggest you "try again."

The Australian Broadcasting Corporation and two Sydney newspapers think this story is worth reporting. I respect their judgement of what is newsworthy more than the opinion of some Bush apologists posting on ATS.



posted on Jul, 16 2004 @ 01:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by donguillermo

Some posters on ATS express doubts about the veracity of the story and the story has been refuted? ROTFLMAO!!! You have a highly inflated idea of the importance of ATS. I suggest you "try again."

The Australian Broadcasting Corporation and two Sydney newspapers think this story is worth reporting. I respect their judgement of what is newsworthy more than the opinion of some Bush apologists posting on ATS.


No need to try harder with your lack of effort, and try to use better judgement.


from donguillermos "rock solid" source
MAXINE McKEW: Your sources of course will be sought out by other news agencies after tonight.

Will they stand up to scrutiny?

PAUL McGEOUGH: Well I don't know whether others will find them or not.

I won't be making them available to anyone.


Convenient.

The transcript of a late night broadcast, pandering to an Anti-American agenda in the Australian press. No agenda here folks... move along...

The New York, and L.A. Times won't even touch this... Oh, thats right they're Bush apologists as well.



posted on Jul, 16 2004 @ 02:03 PM
link   
Mirthful Me says


A duck that moos, or a cow that quacks...


Are you trying to make some point here? Is this what passes for argumentation in your circles?

I noticed you titled your previous post


Typical liberal research


I would like to know how to do research on a breaking story when no other sources are available. I suppose you think your two posts in this thread constitute research.


No need to try harder with your lack of effort, and try to use better judgement.


My lack of effort!!! Let's see. In your two posts you have insulted me several times, pointed out that several ATS posters doubt the veracity of the story, claimed the Australian Broadcasting Corporation panders to an anti-American agenda, and pointed out that the New York Times and Los Angeles Times have not yet covered the story. LOL. You call that effort?


quote: from donguillermos "rock solid" source


Excuse me, I did not say the source was rock solid. In my original post, I said "The incident allegedly took place. . ."


The transcript of a late night broadcast, pandering to an Anti-American agenda in the Australian press. No agenda here folks... move along...


I don't follow the Australian media. Perhaps you could provide some documentation that the Australian Broadcasting Corporation panders to an anti-American agenda. This is your idea of refuting a source? Claiming they have an agenda? Even if they do, that says nothing about the truth of this report.


The New York, and L.A. Times won't even touch this... Oh, thats right they're Bush apologists as well.


I assume you are citing this fact as proof the ABC report is false. I assume reporters from these two newspapers are investigating this story right now to determine its credibility. That is what I am doing. That is what you also should be doing, rather than claiming that the story has been refuted, and that the source panders to an anti-American agenda.








[edit on 7/16/2004 by donguillermo]



posted on Jul, 16 2004 @ 02:25 PM
link   
Where is this crap coming from...

Two UNIDENTIFIED Iraqies, ALLEGEDLY said this.

Question the info....I wouldn't beleive it for one second until more evidence came up, or at least until the credibilty of these 'alleged' witnesses can be tested.

Why doesn't someone go to the Interior Minister or try to identify those American soldiers, so we can get some questions sent their way?


[edit on 16-7-2004 by anjeeeee]



posted on Jul, 16 2004 @ 02:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by anjeeeee
Where is this crap coming from...

Two UNIDENTIFIED Iraqies, ALLEGEDLY said this.

Question the info....I wouldn't beleive it for one second until more evidence came up, or at least until the credibilty of these 'alleged' witnesses can be tested.

Why doesn't someone go to the Interior Minister or try to identify those American soldiers, so we can get some questions sent their way?


[edit on 16-7-2004 by anjeeeee]


Why is this so hard to believe? Allawi was an assasin for the Baath party in the '60s, and rose very high in their ranks before having his break with then in '75 or '76.

As for the "two unidentified Iraqis" - it's hardly unusual to have anonymous sources in a story like this, and the claim made by the reporter is that the two witnesses corroborated each other. It's entirely normal journalistic practice to report something told by two independent witnesses.

Does this mean the story is neccesarily true? Of course not - but it's hardly incredible either.



posted on Jul, 16 2004 @ 03:00 PM
link   
6 down, 5000 to go.



I LOVE this guy. I have it "BUSH/ALLAWI '04"



posted on Jul, 16 2004 @ 03:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by anjeeeee
Where is this crap coming from...

Two UNIDENTIFIED Iraqies, ALLEGEDLY said this.

Question the info....I wouldn't beleive it for one second until more evidence came up, or at least until the credibilty of these 'alleged' witnesses can be tested.


Well, we can begin by questioning the credibility of the reporter, Paul McGeough. According to the ABC transcript, McGeough is the chief correspondent for the Sydney Morning Herald, and has received the Walkley Award for his coverage of the Iraq War. I have no idea how prestigious the Walkley Award is, or if it compares to the Pulitzer in the United States. If you go to www.walkleys.com..., you will find this information about McGeough in a popup.


JOURNALISM LEADERSHIP

Paul McGeough

If ever there were a journalist who has demonstrated outstanding acts of courage and bravery in the practice of journalism, it must be Paul McGeough. For more than a decade, McGeough has covered the frontline of international war zones, from the Gulf War to, more recently, Afghanistan and Iraq. As writer-at-large for The Sydney Morning Herald since 2001, McGeoughs assignments have taken him from the Middle East to Central Asia and the US, reporting on international crisis and conflict. Few foreign correspondents find themselves in the right place at the right time as often as Paul McGeough.

The strength of his contribution to journalism over that time has been enormous. In 2001, he witnessed the murder of three of his colleagues when they were ambushed riding through the night on a Northern Alliance armoured car in Afghanistan. In the past year his reporting from Iraq before, during and after the conflict was exemplary. His decision to stay in Baghdad while his contemporaries were departing was both courageous and in the ultimate best interests of an informed readership. He remained as the only Australian journalist reporting in Baghdad for the entire duration of the war, with a breadth of coverage that mixed compassionate and evocative description with insightful analysis, and showed the depth of his experience and knowledge of the region.

During this time, he produced terrific journalism under extremely difficult circumstances, while his sheer body of work was the standout lead on the biggest story of the year. His dispatches and behind-the-scenes reflections on the chaos and anxiety of everyday reporting in extraordinary times were published in his book, In Baghdad: A Reporters War (Allen & Unwin). McGeoughs CV includes the 2002 Walkley for International Reporting for his work in Afghanistan and the US after September 11.

He previously won the Walkley for International Reporting in 1994 for his work in Papua New Guinea, and the Graham Perkin Journalist of the Year award in 1997.


The man has won three Walkley Awards, and is obviously a veteran journalist with credentials. I think we can drop the "ALLEGEDLY" from "Two UNIDENTIFIED Iraqis ALLEGEDLY said this."

Now we need to question the judgement of a veteran journalist in evaluating his sources as credible. Below I have excerpted what McGeough says about his sources.


What you have is two very solid eyewitness accounts of what happened at a police security complex in a south-west Baghdad suburb.

They are very detailed.

They were done separately.

Each witness is not aware that the other spoke.

They were contacted through personal channels rather than through the many political, religious or military organisations working in Baghdad that might be trying to spin a tale.

And they've laid it out very carefully and very clearly as to what they saw.

And versions of this story are on it and it was as a result of hearing this story as a rumour that I proceeded to check it to investigate it, to see if it had a factual base.

I used, as I said earlier, personal channels to make contact with the two witnesses to establish that they were in a position to know in terms of somebody trying to come at me with a story, that wasn't the case.

They did not come to me.

They weren't offered or volunteered to me.

There was an element of chance involved in meeting one of them, which would have made it impossible for him to have been a set-up for me, and listening to their stories, their stories sounded credible.

I had a colleague sitting in by accident on one of the interviews.

He was impressed by the credibility and something that's very important with a story like this in this part of the world, particularly where you're interviewing through interpreters I had a very sound, to me on the ground, a very valuable set of Iraqi eyes and ears listening and also believing the account.


A veteran reporter, whose job is to judge the credibility of sources, believes the eye witnesses are telling the truth. That doesn't prove the story is true, but this story is a long way from being refuted, as claimed by a previous poster.



posted on Jul, 16 2004 @ 03:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by x_y_no
As for the "two unidentified Iraqis" - it's hardly unusual to have anonymous sources in a story like this, and the claim made by the reporter is that the two witnesses corroborated each other. It's entirely normal journalistic practice to report something told by two independent witnesses.

Does this mean the story is neccesarily true? Of course not - but it's hardly incredible either.


Yeah, um... ok... 2 UNIDENTIFIED sources??? I think that any resonable person should be suspicious when such a sensational story is represented by anonymous or unidentified sources. I think that guy from the NYTimes taught us a valuable lesson (As other journalists have fallen since that story broke), journalists F A B R I C A T E things all of the time. Newspapers are printed and SOLD. It is FOR PROFIT. Sensationalism sells newspapers. Didn't the NYT just eat it's foot by announcing that Gephardt was Kerry's VP!? Um, yeah, I thought so... Please believe EVERYTHING that you read, especially when it is in a FOR PROFIT newspaper and corroborated by ANONYMOUS and/or UNIDENTIFIED sources. Give me a break



posted on Jul, 16 2004 @ 04:00 PM
link   
Here is a link to Paul McGeough's story in the Sydney Morning Herald.

Allawi shot prisoners in cold blood: witnesses

Here is a link to McGeough's story in The Age.

Iraqi PM executed six prisoners: witnesses

The two stories are virtually identical, but do contain some new information. including the names of three of the men allegedly murdered.

I found the following interesting, which confirms what x_y_no said upthread.


A former CIA officer, Vincent Cannisatraro, recently told The New Yorker: "If you're asking me if Allawi has blood on his hands from his days in London, the answer is yes, he does. He was a paid Mukhabarat [intelligence] agent for the Iraqis, and he was involved in dirty stuff."



posted on Jul, 16 2004 @ 04:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by kozmo

Yeah, um... ok... 2 UNIDENTIFIED sources??? I think that any resonable person should be suspicious when such a sensational story is represented by anonymous or unidentified sources. I think that guy from the NYTimes taught us a valuable lesson (As other journalists have fallen since that story broke), journalists F A B R I C A T E things all of the time. Newspapers are printed and SOLD. It is FOR PROFIT. Sensationalism sells newspapers. Didn't the NYT just eat it's foot by announcing that Gephardt was Kerry's VP!? Um, yeah, I thought so... Please believe EVERYTHING that you read, especially when it is in a FOR PROFIT newspaper and corroborated by ANONYMOUS and/or UNIDENTIFIED sources. Give me a break


Uh, OK. You just eliminated the majority of investigative reporting. I guess you think Nixon was innocent, just because we still don't know who deep throat was, right?

You need to step back and get yourself some perspective on this. I didn't assert that this story is definitely true. What I said and stand by is that given what is known of Allawi's past and of the reputation of this reporter, the story is very credible.



posted on Jul, 16 2004 @ 05:00 PM
link   
Here is a background story about Allawi for tomorrow's Sydney Morning Herald by Paul McGeough.

Hard man for a tough country


His enemies say he was an assassin for Saddam Hussein. Now Iyad Allawi is accused of personally executing prisoners. Paul McGeough examines the dark background of Iraq's new Prime Minister.

Hold the doctor up to the light and there are flaws in the glass. We are not quite sure how Iyad Allawi became Iraq's interim Prime Minister and no one knows just how and why he fell out with Saddam Hussein. It is unclear whether his preoccupation with security outweighs a professed love for democracy or what that might mean for Iraq's 25 million people.

His past is murky. His present is ambiguous. Allawi's every response to the Iraq mess is that of a hard man: he threatens martial law; he warns he might shut down sections of the media; he suggests he might delay elections. His Justice Minister is bringing back the death penalty; his Defence Minister warns he'll chop off insurgents' hands and heads.


Read the whole article. It is an eye opener. Allawi sounds like Saddam-lite to me. Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss.



posted on Jul, 16 2004 @ 05:17 PM
link   
The story is starting to be picked up by American Media.

Washington Times

Please note that the Washington Times is a right-wing news source, and the story is from United Press International, closely affiliated with the Washington Times.

WPMI, Channel 15, Mobile, Alabama

Matt Drudge and Rush Limbaugh, both right-wing news sources, have also picked up the story.

I thought this story was supposed to be some sort of anti-American, left-wing smear on Allawi.



posted on Jul, 16 2004 @ 07:23 PM
link   
I applaud allawi *applauds and says give it to the mother...* that is what they deserve to be shot and executed I would have cleaned the whole jail but I guess two is not a bad start they want to behead people and kill innocent people with car bombs we will execute you sound effective and fair to me.



posted on Jul, 17 2004 @ 02:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by x_y_no

Originally posted by anjeeeee
Where is this crap coming from...

Two UNIDENTIFIED Iraqies, ALLEGEDLY said this.

Question the info....I wouldn't beleive it for one second until more evidence came up, or at least until the credibilty of these 'alleged' witnesses can be tested.

Why doesn't someone go to the Interior Minister or try to identify those American soldiers, so we can get some questions sent their way?


[edit on 16-7-2004 by anjeeeee]


Why is this so hard to believe? Allawi was an assasin for the Baath party in the '60s, and rose very high in their ranks before having his break with then in '75 or '76.


I'm not big on beliefs. It's just in my nature to question information that comes my way, instead of "believing" something. I would much rather KNOW it for fact, wouldn't you? That's why i'm not a big fan of religion either


Alright, now knowing the credibility of the author, it sounds a bit more believable, but I guess you can never really know for sure...as with most things.

Excuse the initial scepticism...but you guys know just how much info coming from major media outlets is based on nothing closely resembling a fact that can be backed up. It's always he says she says type ramblings



posted on Jul, 17 2004 @ 11:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mirthful Me

The transcript of a late night broadcast, pandering to an Anti-American agenda in the Australian press. No agenda here folks... move along...

The New York, and L.A. Times won't even touch this... Oh, thats right they're Bush apologists as well.


You may be interested to know that the ABC (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) is a national government-funded public broadcaster in Australia. It is funded by the Australian government but is largely independent. Yes, that same Australian government who fully supports the Bush administration, sent troops to the Iraq War and is generally referred to as America's strongest ally.

American media is nowhere near as closely linked to the US government (openly anyway) as the ABC is to the Australian government. But ask yourself if American media truly has as much freedom to report as Australian media does. That may answer why the NY and LA Times won't touch it.



posted on Jul, 17 2004 @ 11:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by cargo
You may be interested to know that the ABC (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) is a national government-funded public broadcaster in Australia. It is funded by the Australian government but is largely independent. Yes, that same Australian government who fully supports the Bush administration, sent troops to the Iraq War and is generally referred to as America's strongest ally.



Uhhh. That means absolutely Jack. Just ask the BBC in the UK.



posted on Jul, 17 2004 @ 11:57 AM
link   
That's my point Leveller. Glad you understand.



posted on Jul, 17 2004 @ 12:01 PM
link   
Yes Cargoe.
But the problem is that the BBC were adjudged to be airing false stories. The fact that they had the freedom to do so is not an excuse.

Being independant of the government, one could also say that the BBC was working to it's own political agenda and not portraying the news in an entirely neutral way.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join