(http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/47689000/jpg/_47689284_muhammadbear466.jpg)
Muslims consider any physical representation of Muhammad to be blasphemous
Islamists have warned the creators of TV show South Park they could face violent retribution for depicting the Prophet Muhammad in a bear suit.
A posting on the website of the US-based group, Revolution Muslim, told Matt Stone and Trey Parker they would "probably wind up like Theo Van Gogh".
The Dutch film-maker was shot and stabbed to death in 2004 by an Islamist angered by his film about Muslim women.
The posting gave details about a home Stone and Parker reportedly co-own.
It also listed the addresses of their production office in California and the New York office of South Park's broadcaster, Comedy Central.
"We have to warn Matt and Trey that what they are doing is stupid and they will probably wind up like Theo Van Gogh for airing this show," warned the posting, written in the name of Abu Talhah Al-Amrikee.
"This is not a threat, but a warning of the reality of what will likely happen to them," it added.
Mr al-Amrikee later told the Associated Press the posting was not an incitement to violence. It had been published to raise awareness of the issue and to see that it did not happen again, he added.
A Comedy Central spokesman said the network had no comment.
In the 200th episode of South Park broadcast last week, Muhammad appears several times inside a bear suit. The prophets of the other main religions are also depicted, including a drug-snorting Buddha.
In 2006, Comedy Central banned Stone and Parker from showing an image of Muhammad in an episode that was intended to be part of a comment on the controversy caused by the publication of caricatures of the prophet by a Danish newspaper.
Muslims consider any physical representation of their prophet to be blasphemous and the caricatures sparked mass protests worldwide.
Sourced BBCi: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8636455.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8636455.stm)
This is exactly what Stone and Parker were going for.
It was a good oul episode too
It must be no craic at all being a towel head... :-X
I hope we've no Muslims on here or I could be in for a while kickin by the sounds of things...
Does anyone here have any muslim friends?
Just wondering how common these extreme views are within their community....
Last weeks episode was absolutely brilliant, on a par with the Imaginationland trilogy of a few years ago.
I would recommend people read this book for a better understanding of the Christian/Islamic conflicts. Though not comprehensive its a good start.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Infidels-Conflict-Between-Christendom-638-2002/dp/0670869422/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top
While Christians have long traditions of creating and worshipping effigies, painting biblical scenes etc, where as this was been seen as first of all as unnessesary for muslims, while also they did not have that tradition of painting and sculpture.
This is mainly due to the environment from which islam originated and the people it was for, ie nomadic people. At what point it became seriously blasphemous to depict Mohammed I'm not sure.
Much like Christianity, you need to understand that the political and environmental pressures lead more to the conflicts than religous obligations. 9/11 and the current wars in the Middle-East have little to do with religion or protecting anyones freedom either.
It's important to understand other cultures especially in these PC times with mass migration and 'multi-culturalism'. For instance, when Switzerland quite rightly refused to allow the construction of minarets, since they are merely architectural designs for acoustic purposes and have not required part of the religion. Switzerland has a rich architectural tradition that is distinct and unique to that country.
The problem arising from Multi-culturalism, pop culture and modernism then those that feel the need to accomodate everyone and everything is that you do so at the detriment to existing cultures and traditions.
While the idea of the melting pot might sound wonderful if you follow it to its ultimate conclusion it wont result in diversity but in fact we will all just end up the same.
Quote from: gallsman on April 22, 2010, 12:38:20 PM
Last weeks episode was absolutely brilliant, on a par with the Imaginationland trilogy of a few years ago.
I thought the Tiger Woods episode was the best I've seen in a few series. The diagnosis of Stan, Kenny and Butters with sex addiction was hillarious. ;D
The problem now is that this will be portrayed as South Park's attempts of having a go at Islamists when in reality Muhammad was no more a major plotline in the episode than Tom Cruise.
Quote from: Santino on April 22, 2010, 12:32:46 PM
Does anyone here have any muslim friends?
Just wondering how common these extreme views are within their community....
I have a great Jordanian-born Palestinian friend, and he and his friends (from Pakistan and Afghanistan) occasionally have prayed together in my living room.
Some of you folk need to get out into the world and remove the blinkers. It appears as if you're being sucked in by the pro Yank media ALL THE TIME.
I have a friend who is a Muslim
South Park is currently the best show on TV, bar none.
I know several - and they're just like us - some are sound, some are wankers - none of them behave like these idiots getting all worked up over a tv show.
I'm also particularly friendly with one who I suppose screenmachine (ignorant p***k) would describe as a "towel head" - there's few you could have better craic with.
Having lived in the middle east i can say my views on muslim society are not good, as race of people I found the majority to be a total nightmare, lowest of the low type of people. There laws and beliefs are ridiculous and are only there to suit a particular agenda.
I could go in to loads of true stories and I have on other threads but I couldnt be arsed. You only have to read ydays indo about a british tourist getting a month in jail for a peck on the cheek, where a 10yrs old testimony hold more sway. It is a sick and tyranic society to the core.
I think the ones that leave the middle east maybe better people and not quite so indoctrined so maybe its no suprise some have friends that are sound.
Quote from: pintsofguinness on April 22, 2010, 06:09:03 PM
I know several - and they're just like us - some are sound, some are w**kers - none of them behave like these idiots getting all worked up over a tv show.
I'm also particularly friendly with one who I suppose screenmachine (ignorant p***k) would describe as a "towel head" - there's few you could have better craic with.
I agree, my mate is Iranian, some of the stories he has about his time in the army there and fighting in the Iran-Iraq war are both brutal and hilarious at the same time, craic is always good with him
The Internet one was brilliant too :D & the one where Bono was the biggest shit, last one i saw was the facebook one a real classic
They kinda had to do this at some point as they've taken the piss outta all other religions. Anyone see the episode where Catholic priests were walking around with toddlers on dog leashes :D
Quote from: Rav67 on April 22, 2010, 08:02:59 PM
They kinda had to do this at some point as they've taken the piss outta all other religions. Anyone see the episode where Catholic priests were walking around with toddlers on dog leashes :D
FFS don't be having a go at priests and the church in this thread too. You'll have a few boys on this board giving out and I couldn't be bothered reading another thread about religion ;)
I wonder what George Lucas and Steven Spielberg made of this episode
(http://www.readjunk.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/pic_southpark12.jpg)
Quote from: SLIGONIAN on April 22, 2010, 06:15:42 PM
Having lived in the middle east i can say my views on muslim society are not good, as race of people I found the majority to be a total nightmare, lowest of the low type of people. There laws and beliefs are ridiculous and are only there to suit a particular agenda.
I could go in to loads of true stories and I have on other threads but I couldnt be arsed. You only have to read ydays indo about a british tourist getting a month in jail for a peck on the cheek, where a 10yrs old testimony hold more sway. It is a sick and tyranic society to the core.
I think the ones that leave the middle east maybe better people and not quite so indoctrined so maybe its no suprise some have friends that are sound.
There would be a lot of cultural diversity in Cliffoney ::)
You would be a brave man to question Islam.
its been brilliant so far this series, this scene was just pure bizarre
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7jMfpM4epLw&feature=related
Hardly a shocker in fairness...sure this is what they do
Quote from: AFS on April 22, 2010, 10:24:06 AM
This is exactly what Stone and Parker were going for.
Fcuk..talk about a feeble effort at justification in downplaying this....wonder was it a marketing ploy Theo Van Gogh
was going after when he was shot eight times then decapitated in Amsterdam :o
Anyone seen 201 yet?
It's ridiculously stupid this time around, they're making fun of themselves more than ever.
BEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEPPP!
And Tom Cruise likes semen.
*Giggles*
Quote from: Tyrones own on April 23, 2010, 04:37:22 AM
Hardly a shocker in fairness...sure this is what they do
Quote from: AFS on April 22, 2010, 10:24:06 AM
This is exactly what Stone and Parker were going for.
Fcuk..talk about a feeble effort at justification in downplaying this....wonder was it a marketing ploy Theo Van Gogh
was going after when he was shot eight times then decapitated in Amsterdam :o
Did you watch the episode?
Sligonian, there are Caucasian Muslims (Bosnia), African Muslims (sub-saharan), Middle Eastern Musllims, south Asian Muslims and east Asian muslims, so for you to comment on the Muslim "race" is wrong. Just as the Christians in Ireland are very different to those in the Philippines.
Sure there are many different factions of muslims the world
over however he did mention the middle east on more than
one occasion in his experienced opinion :-\
In any one is interested, here is a documentary which in a way outlines how Islam contributed to Western Europe in coming out of the Dark ages.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBsDDGCIFLQ&feature=related
Censored
So muslim society does not include Indonesia or Malaysia, both of which I have experience of? His use of the "race of people" clearly pigeon holes muslims to be of one ethnicity. That is not the case and that is what I was pointing out.
The fcukwits at the helm of the good ship Christian America are to be more feared especially in light of their recent performances throughout the world.
Well the way I see it Aerlik is this.... they obvioulsy must not mind being pigeon holed
along with the scum that are hell bent on terrorizing the world because where are the million
man marches in Kuala Lumpur, Jakarta or indeed Washington condemning, or at the very least
distancing themselves from the extreme radical terrorism and threats we're encountering on a daily basis
in the name of Allah ???
Quote from: Tyrones own on April 25, 2010, 12:47:39 AM
Well the way I see it Aerlik is this.... they obvioulsy must not mind being pigeon holed
along with the scum that are hell bent on terrorizing the world because where are the million
man marches in Kuala Lumpur, Jakarta or indeed Washington condemning, or at the very least
distancing themselves from the extreme radical terrorism and threats we're encountering on a daily basis
in the name of Allah ???
There's a narrow-minded viewpoint if ever I saw one... oh wait it's TO talking :D
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on April 25, 2010, 12:56:44 AM
Quote from: Tyrones own on April 25, 2010, 12:47:39 AM
Well the way I see it Aerlik is this.... they obvioulsy must not mind being pigeon holed
along with the scum that are hell bent on terrorizing the world because where are the million
man marches in Kuala Lumpur, Jakarta or indeed Washington condemning, or at the very least
distancing themselves from the extreme radical terrorism and threats we're encountering on a daily basis
in the name of Allah ???
There's a narrow-minded viewpoint if ever I saw one... oh wait it's TO talking :D
Hardly as narrow minded as your answer :-X but then that's right, you don't do answers :D
In fairness to you though, you're not the first to sidestep it and you'll hardly be the last !
Quote from: Tyrones own on April 25, 2010, 12:47:39 AM
Well the way I see it Aerlik is this.... they obvioulsy must not mind being pigeon holed
along with the scum that are hell bent on terrorizing the world because where are the million
man marches in Kuala Lumpur, Jakarta or indeed Washington condemning, or at the very least
distancing themselves from the extreme radical terrorism and threats we're encountering on a daily basis
in the name of Allah ???
Threat level up to orange again? ::)
Why the need for taking this to PM Hedley... are you embarrassed to let your buddies
see you interact with me online? I have of course noticed it's hip to shun me again lately
but to be towing their line out of fear of backlash is...well, pathetic and childish to say the least ::)
Don't mind them Hedley...I'm up for constructive criticism and debate on line anytime!
Quote from: Tyrones own on April 25, 2010, 07:30:42 PM
Why the need for taking this to PM Hedley... are you embarrassed to let your buddies
see you interact with me online? I have of course noticed it's hip to shun me again lately
but to be towing their line out of fear of backlash is...well, pathetic and childish to say the least ::)
Don't mind them Hedley...I'm up for constructive criticism and debate on line anytime!
The reason I pm'd you was because it was on the clerical abuse thread.
I'm up for the debate also, so I'll hold back on the fatwah ;)
TO we are in very different time zones, so I look forward to our future discussions......Insha'allah.
Quote from: Tyrones own on April 25, 2010, 12:47:39 AM
Well the way I see it Aerlik is this.... they obviously must not mind being pigeon holed
along with the scum that are hell bent on terrorizing the world because where are the million
man marches in Kuala Lumpur, Jakarta or indeed Washington condemning, or at the very least
distancing themselves from the extreme radical terrorism and threats we're encountering on a daily basis
in the name of Allah ???
Aerlik...I realize it's the 800 lb gorilla in the room here and probably quite difficult to
explain away but you could ask your two prayer buddies to see if they have a reasonable
explanation as to the deafening silence :-X
Quote from: Hedley Lamarr on April 25, 2010, 09:26:47 AM
Quote from: Tyrones own on April 25, 2010, 12:47:39 AM
Well the way I see it Aerlik is this.... they obvioulsy must not mind being pigeon holed
along with the scum that are hell bent on terrorizing the world because where are the million
man marches in Kuala Lumpur, Jakarta or indeed Washington condemning, or at the very least
distancing themselves from the extreme radical terrorism and threats we're encountering on a daily basis
in the name of Allah ???
Threat level up to orange again? ::)
Where exactly are you TO that you are encountering extreme radical terrorism and threats on a daily basis, I thought you were in the USA, but you must be in Iraq or Afghanistan or Pakistan :o
Its an interesting question.
Perhaps muslims in general do not see themselves as guilty by association, just because Al Qaeda and their imitators happen to share the shame basic religion. Does your bog-standard catholic or mainstream protestant feel that the ludicrous beliefs of American or Northern Irish fundamentalists, most cartoonishly represented by the likes of the Phelps family, are a poor reflection on them. If a sect turned to violence, in the name of Jesus, would they be expected to go march en masse? Maybe they would (although if the threat of violent reprisal existed...) Did the Irish go out and march when the IRA campaign reached its nadir in the late 80s/early 90s?
Perhaps the average muslim is intimidated. They might disagree with what the jihadists do, but are afraid.
Perhaps they disagree with their methods, but are pleased to see someone sticking it to the western powers, especially in light of the invasions/occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan and earlier colonialism/interference.
Or perhaps they approve.
I would doubt that only one or other explanation holds though. And I'm sure there are others.
All Muslims are evil and have bombs hidden in their mosques. Fox news said so. QED.
Quote from: Aerlik on April 24, 2010, 08:30:36 AM
So muslim society does not include Indonesia or Malaysia, both of which I have experience of? His use of the "race of people" clearly pigeon holes muslims to be of one ethnicity. That is not the case and that is what I was pointing out.
The fcukwits at the helm of the good ship Christian America are to be more feared especially in light of their recent performances throughout the world.
Hadnt look at this thread in while because i know myself nothing positive will come out of any debate. I think i was clearly going on muslims in the middle east to be honest. I havent a clue what other type of muslims are like either. Is there different type of muslim religion or is it the same throughout the world? I always give people the benefit of the doubt and dont judge on first impressions, but all the middle east muslims i crossed paths with showed there true colours after a certain length of time. The world would be a lot better place imo without any religion but especially so muslim, as there are brainwashed at an early age and there beliefs are interpretated to suit political agendas. Some of it is sick, im talking about child abuse sick.
Of course there are fuckwiths in every religion.
Quote from: SLIGONIAN on April 27, 2010, 01:32:58 AM
Quote from: Aerlik on April 24, 2010, 08:30:36 AM
So muslim society does not include Indonesia or Malaysia, both of which I have experience of? His use of the "race of people" clearly pigeon holes muslims to be of one ethnicity. That is not the case and that is what I was pointing out.
The fcukwits at the helm of the good ship Christian America are to be more feared especially in light of their recent performances throughout the world.
Hadnt look at this thread in while because i know myself nothing positive will come out of any debate. I think i was clearly going on muslims in the middle east to be honest. I havent a clue what other type of muslims are like either. Is there different type of muslim religion or is it the same throughout the world? I always give people the benefit of the doubt and dont judge on first impressions, but all the middle east muslims i crossed paths with showed there true colours after a certain length of time. The world would be a lot better place imo without any religion but especially so muslim, as there are brainwashed at an early age and there beliefs are interpretated to suit political agendas. Some of it is sick, im talking about child abuse sick.
Of course there are fuckwiths in every religion.
Put yourself in the shoes of a non catholic looking in to the catholic church. Would you not see a religion that has allowed the rape and cover up of rape in numerous countries across the world, a leader that has done the same? Would you then have the same opinion that all catholics are sick bastards? Sligonian, nothing is black and white like that. You have to allow for the fact that there will be good people as well as bad in all walks of life. I don't think Muslims are any worse than any other religion.
but all the middle east muslims i crossed paths with showed there true colours after a certain length of time.
That is some statement...what "true colours" did they show?
My issue arises with the fact that it is perfectly acceptable to take the piss out of certain religions and issues on tv but once you mention Allah or black people it is totally unacceptable. I am not in anyway racist but i recently received an email that addressed the double standards in society. Now the email was by no means gospel and was probably started by someone who is a racist but it does highlight some of the double standards in society. I am a firm believer of whats good for the goose is good for the gander. If we can accept fun being poked at us and, in this circumstance that is all it is, it isn't an attack on allah. Then i feel all races/religions should have a little sense of humour within certain boundaries.
Quote from: winsamsoon on April 27, 2010, 02:08:14 PM
My issue arises with the fact that it is perfectly acceptable to take the piss out of certain religions and issues on tv but once you mention Allah or black people it is totally unacceptable. I am not in anyway racist but i recently received an email that addressed the double standards in society. Now the email was by no means gospel and was probably started by someone who is a racist but it does highlight some of the double standards in society. I am a firm believer of whats good for the goose is good for the gander. If we can accept fun being poked at us and, in this circumstance that is all it is, it isn't an attack on allah. Then i feel all races/religions should have a little sense of humour within certain boundaries.
Was this the email by any chance?
http://gaaboard.com/board/index.php?topic=15988.0
Quote from: mylestheslasher on April 26, 2010, 09:25:01 PM
All Muslims are evil and have bombs hidden in their mosques. Fox news said so. QED.
*Yawn* Can you give a date, time and host of the show where this took place so we can verify you're not indeed full of dung
with yet more stereotypical blinkered hatred.........Thought so, grow up FFS ::)
Quote from: Aerlik on April 24, 2010, 08:30:36 AM
The fcukwits at the helm of the good ship Christian America are to be more feared especially in light of their recent performances throughout the world.
How so...and how does it compare with what Radical Islam has wrought throughout the world ???... just curious?
QuoteThe world would be a lot better place imo without any religion but especially so muslim, as there are brainwashed at an early age and there beliefs are interpretated to suit political agendas. Some of it is sick, im talking about child abuse sick.
Like actually poisoning young girls as they try to attend school and get an education for themselves in Afghanistan >:(...
real evil sick bastards!!
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/asia/2010/04/201042663711279658.html
QuoteOf course there are fuckwiths in every religion.
Indeed there are but my point that is conveniently overlooked here is that it's clearly OK to berate and insult Christianity or indeed the Catholic Church
while ignoring the gorilla in the room...very strange how all of that gets a pass on the board ::)
Quote from: mylestheslasher on April 27, 2010, 08:34:25 AM
Would you then have the same opinion that all catholics are sick b**tards? Sligonian, nothing is black and white like that. You have to allow for the fact that there will be good people as well as bad in all walks of life.
Fcuk.... you wouldn't run over to the clerical abuse thread with this sage bit of advice by any chance :-\
QuoteI don't think Muslims are any worse than any other religion.
Sure...along as you're not seen to be going against them or remotely insulting toward them and by God that doesn't take much :o
perhaps if the Catholic Church were to implement such a defense mechanism to insults and accusations
there'd be boys on here a whole lot quieter :-X :D
TO quote
QuoteSure...along as you're not seen to be going against them or remotely insulting toward them and by God that doesn't take much perhaps if the Catholic Church were to implement such a defense mechanism to insults and accusations there'd be boys on here a whole lot quieter
Are you suggesting that people who don't denigrate Islam on this board abstain from doing so because they are intimidated? Anonymous members of a gaelic sports internet forum?
TO quote
QuoteIndeed there are but my point that is conveniently overlooked here is that it's clearly OK to berate and insult Christianity or indeed the Catholic Church while ignoring the gorilla in the room...very strange how all of that gets a pass on the board
And the context has nothing to do with this? The fact that probably 95+% of the members of this board were raised as catholics is irrelevant? There aren't too many discussions about the evils of Nazi Germany either – that the vast majority of people finds what they represented totally abhorrent is a given. I would have thought it was the same with violent Islamic terrorism, just as I would think that most find the theocratic, repressive societies respresented by the likes of Saudi Arabia abhorrent (well I certainly do, but again, I take that as a given and not really a topic of debate). Whereas the existence of a god is a topic of debate. The role of the church in covering up child rape is a topic of debate. The irrationality (or not, depending on your opinion) of Christian dogma and scripture is a topic of debate. Members of the board have a range of opinions on these matters and some good discussion follows on from that. Given that we have no muslims here, there isn't a whole lot to say, given that most people will agree on most the issues. Personally, I don't find echo chamber exchanges very interesting.
Quote from: Tyrones own on April 28, 2010, 12:31:50 AM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on April 26, 2010, 09:25:01 PM
All Muslims are evil and have bombs hidden in their mosques. Fox news said so. QED.
*Yawn* Can you give a date, time and host of the show where this took place so we can verify you're not indeed full of dung
with yet more stereotypical blinkered hatred.........Thought so, grow up FFS ::)
Quote from: Aerlik on April 24, 2010, 08:30:36 AM
The fcukwits at the helm of the good ship Christian America are to be more feared especially in light of their recent performances throughout the world.
How so...and how does it compare with what Radical Islam has wrought throughout the world ???... just curious?
QuoteThe world would be a lot better place imo without any religion but especially so muslim, as there are brainwashed at an early age and there beliefs are interpretated to suit political agendas. Some of it is sick, im talking about child abuse sick.
Like actually poisoning young girls as they try to attend school and get an education for themselves in Afghanistan >:(...real evil sick b**tards!!
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/asia/2010/04/201042663711279658.html
QuoteOf course there are fuckwiths in every religion.
Indeed there are but my point that is conveniently overlooked here is that it's clearly OK to berate and insult Christianity or indeed the Catholic Church
while ignoring the gorilla in the room...very strange how all of that gets a pass on the board ::)
Quote from: mylestheslasher on April 27, 2010, 08:34:25 AM
Would you then have the same opinion that all catholics are sick b**tards? Sligonian, nothing is black and white like that. You have to allow for the fact that there will be good people as well as bad in all walks of life.
Fcuk.... you wouldn't run over to the clerical abuse thread with this sage bit of advice by any chance :-\
QuoteI don't think Muslims are any worse than any other religion.
Sure...along as you're not seen to be going against them or remotely insulting toward them and by God that doesn't take much :o
perhaps if the Catholic Church were to implement such a defense mechanism to insults and accusations
there'd be boys on here a whole lot quieter :-X :D
Fox news Kyle Thomas pretty much any time he appears as a guest on Today fm's Last Word on middle east affairs has said this on numerous occassions.
btw - we missed you on the clerical abuse thread, have you nothing to say on the rape of children or is it only when muslims do such things that it deserves comment - hypocrite. Never once did I say that all catholics were sick b**tards, many of my family are practicing catholics. Do I need to publically say that just cos you can't see that no reasonable person would say that about any group.
Now finally, could you do us a favour and take the tri colour of the republic down from your avatar and stick up the old stars and stripes. You're no republian so don't pretend you are.
OK lads. Calm down a small bit here. These topics always make for interesting discussions, but if you start hurling abuse it just weakens the point you are trying to make.
Of course it is also against Rule 1 of this forum, so please cease and desist.
Thanks
I think its time that we moved away from the PC cuddly culture of not being able to say anything about anything without fear of offending some one. Im not a fan of South Park but would defend their right to take the hand out of anyone or anything for comedic value, Im an Irish Catholic which means that we have to take a bit of stick from time to time which is fine.
On the fundamentalism of religion both sides both Christianity and Islam are at it. I just have an apocolytic vision of years down the line that it will come to an all out war between the two ideologies at some point, such will be the radicalisation at that point.
J70 quotes
"just as I would think that most find the theocratic, repressive societies respresented by the likes of Saudi Arabia abhorrent"
"Given that we have no muslims here"
You base your first statement on what? have you lived there or do you know many Saudis?
How do you know there are no Muslims on here? and do you really think they would flag it given the amount of bile spouted on here?
There is another theocratic, represssive society a lot closer to home....namely the Vatican.
I've lived in the ME for over 10 years and have found it a very positive experience.....just my opinion.
Quote from: Hedley Lamarr on April 28, 2010, 10:01:40 AM
J70 quotes
"just as I would think that most find the theocratic, repressive societies respresented by the likes of Saudi Arabia abhorrent"
"Given that we have no muslims here"
You base your first statement on what? have you lived there or do you know many Saudis?
How do you know there are no Muslims on here? and do you really think they would flag it given the amount of bile spouted on here?
There is another theocratic, represssive society a lot closer to home....namely the Vatican.
I've lived in the ME for over 10 years and have found it a very positive experience.....just my opinion.
Never been there. I am assuming that the likes of Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch aren't making it up as they go along though. I certainly would not want to be a woman or a migrant worker or incorrect flavour of muslim in Saudi Arabia.
But if your experience of SA is different...
As for the apparent lack of muslims on the board? Of course that is an assumption. None, to my knowledge, have revealed themselves. I do not see why they wouldn't. We get a wide range of opinions here and the vast majority of people are able to discuss things intelligently and respectfully. Its an anonymous internet forum - there's nothing to be afraid of.
As Harry Hill wouldn't say, there's only one way to find out. Poll!
Ah yes, Amnesty, HRW.....along with the UN, Greenpeace etc.....toothless tigers.
While I'll admit it isn't Utopia I'll say that in all the time I've been here:
I've never been mugged/assaulted
never had my car broken into/stolen
never had my house broken into
can walk the street at night without fear
Now which way is Mecca 8)
CHICAGO: On the banks of the sparkling green Chicago River, overlooking the vast expanse of Lake Michigan, the Sheraton Towers Hotel, venue of the first Saudi-American Business Opportunity Forum, was literally bursting at the seams and the action was as much in the corridors and lobbies as in the meeting halls.
In the lull between plenary sessions, in harmonious counterpart to official presentations, friends and colleagues gathered, relationships were forged or renewed, all in an atmosphere of palpable excitement. These spontaneous exchanges were not a distraction from formal program but rather the embodiment of the forum's primary theme: The commitment to a vital and enduring partnership between the two countries.
A notable aspect of the event was the turnout: over 1,000 attendees (many of whom braved skies tainted with ash and smoke in order to make it to Chicago).
The Organizing Committee had expected something close to 400. The overwhelming response on the part of both the US and Saudi delegates is testament to the sense of how vitally important this relationship is.
When asked about his initial reaction to the event, Omar A. Bahalwa of the Committee for International Trade said, "Marvelous! This event is unique. The number of registrants means that this is the largest-ever forum in the history of our two countries. And for the first time, we're targeting small- and medium-sized entrepreneurs. When someone said large crowds and a jam-packed schedule were 'bad news,' David Chaudron, representing Organized Change, laughed and added, 'It's absolutely wonderful that the bad news is the good news!'"
While the forum's theme of "The US and Saudi Arabia: A New Economic Order" was elaborated through a variety of lenses and business perspectives, the subtext of each panel's presentations was the recent global financial crisis and how the messages of that catastrophe have served to catalyze the need for increased communication and cooperation.
The morning panels glittered with heads of ministries and international corporations. Among the speakers on a variety of topics that included "Global Energy Interdependence, Global Responsibilities" and "Expanding US-Saudi Trade in a Competitive World" were Finance Minister Ibrahim Al-Assaf, Petroleum and Mineral Resources Minister Ali Al-Naimi, Capital Market Authority Chairman Abdul Rahman Al-Tuwaijri, former US Secretary of Commerce William Daley, Morgan Stanley's Richard Debs, J.P. Morgan Chase's Sir Andrew Crockett, GE's Ferdinando Beccalli, Chevron's John S. Watson and Acconia Energy's Peter DePrey.
Minister of Commerce and Industry Abdullah Zainal Alireza, CEO of the Arab-British Chamber of Commerce Afana Al-Shuaiby, James Albaugh of Boeing and US Secretary of Commerce Gary Locke spoke of the long relationship between the US and Saudi Arabia and how these two powerful and influential countries must partner even more extensively to strengthen the global economy.
The same underlying themes were expressed by each speaker: The need to diversify, the need to embrace the concepts of sustainability and environmentally friendly practices, the need for a firm stance against protectionism, and the recognition that the private sector is a vital part of the world economy - a rising tide that will lift all boats.
While they all recognized that challenges still exist that must be faced and overcome, including the still-fragile global economic recovery, they clearly felt that this forum truly marks a new chapter in US-Saudi Arabian friendship and a newly strengthened resolve to work together for prosperity and peace.
Saudi ministers remarked on how the Kingdom's future will be focused on knowledge-based initiatives and infrastructure development, stressing that "Saudi Arabia no longer wants to be the gas station of the world."
All noted that the real wealth of nations is its people. Alireza mentioned the late American President Abraham Lincoln who said, "I am a firm believer in the people. If you give the truth they can be depended upon to meet any national crisis."
Locke noted that currently four in every 10 citizens of the Kingdom are under 14. "As they grow up and enter the job market, the economy must be strong and vigorous so that they can prosper."
Perhaps he best summed up the atmosphere of hope that informed every speech, every deal envisioned or made: "We're here today so that the children of both of our countries can dream big and have their dreams come true."
:o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :
We all know the only "god" the americas love is the greenback :D :D
Wonder where they learnt these tactics ::)
HRW reveals horrific Iraq prison abuse
By AGENCIES
Published: Apr 29, 2010 00:53 Updated: Apr 29, 2010 00:53
BAGHDAD: Iraqi men held for months at a secret prison outside Baghdad were systematically raped, electrocuted, beaten up and forced to sign confession statements that they were forbidden to read, Human Rights Watch (HRW) said on Wednesday in a harrowing report reminiscent of the abuses that took place at Abu Ghraib.
Some of the detainees, mostly Sunnis from the northern city of Mosul, were beaten by Iraqi guards so badly they lost teeth and urinated blood for days afterward, said the report by New York-based HRW.
The watchdog interviewed 42 men who were recently transferred to another detention facility in Baghdad, after details of misconduct were passed to the government.
HRW described the prisoners' accounts of abuse as "credible and consistent," said there must be an independent and impartial investigation, and called for prosecutions at the highest level.
"The horror we found suggests torture was the norm in Muthanna," the watchdog's deputy Middle East director Joe Stork said, referring to the west Baghdad prison where the men were held until recently. "The government needs to prosecute all those responsible for this systematic brutality."
The men held at the prison were suspected Sunni Arab insurgents from the northern province of Nineveh, who had been arrested between September and December last year, according to the HRW report.
The existence of the jail has caused alarm for Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri Al-Maliki, whose officials said it was shut two weeks ago after the abuse allegations were first published in the Los Angeles Times.
According to HRW, prison guards hung blindfolded detainees upside down during interrogations, then kicked, whipped and beat them before placing a dirty plastic bag over suspects' heads to cut off their air supply. When prisoners passed out, they were awoken by electric shocks to their genitals or other parts of the body, the report said.
The detainees, who were interviewed at the Al-Rusafa detention facility in Baghdad on April 26, told HRW that interrogators and security officials sodomized some detainees with broomsticks and pistol barrels.
Some young men said they were whipped with heavy cables, burned with acid and cigarettes, and had their teeth smashed.
Another detainee, who was 21, said interrogators threatened to rape his mother and sisters if he did not confess. During one torture session, guards made another detainee rape him.
"What happened at Muthanna is an example of the horrendous abuse Iraqi leaders say they want to leave behind," Stork said. "Everyone responsible, from the top down, needs to be held accountable."
One of eight detainee accounts published by HRW described how an imprisoned doctor instructed guards that an abused cell mate, who he suspected had internal bleeding, required urgent medical treatment.
"The guards took the tortured man out but returned him an hour later saying that he was fine. He died in the cell an hour later," it said.
The HRW report bore similarities with the abuse that took place at Abu Ghraib prison, west of Baghdad, in 2004, where a US military unit tortured Iraqi prisoners in a scandal, which shocked the world.
Dalshad Zebari, a Kurdish lawmaker from Nineveh province, where most of the detainees were from, said a government investigation was not enough and there should be international involvement. "We will ask the UN and the International Red Cross for an urgent investigation of these human rights violations and to force the Iraqi government to make public the names of those involved in these cruel crimes and ensure they face justice."
The revelation has come at a sensitive time for Al-Maliki as he tries to negotiate alliances with other factions that would allow him to be reappointed as prime minister following an inconclusive election in March.
The Human Rights Ministry says three Iraqi Army officers have been arrested for questioning. The prison was illegal because it was not under the jurisdiction of the Justice Ministry and the Human Rights Ministry was not informed of it.
Conditions in legal Iraqi prisons are often not much better. The justice system relies on confessions for prosecutions, not evidence. That makes torture common though perhaps not as routine as under ousted dictator Saddam Hussein. The report has angered the Sunni population who sees it as another example of persecution at the hands of Shiite-led government.
In the interest of fairness and to back up what J70 says.....
JEDDAH: In an unprecedented twist, a court in Buraidah recently granted a 12-year-old Saudi girl a divorce from her 80-year-old husband.
According to reports, the girl was married against her will to her father's cousin for a dowry of SR85,000.
Like many other cases involving child brides, this case also sparked debate in the Kingdom as well as attracting international media concern.
The girl and her mother, who is separated from the girl's father, took the case to court seeking a divorce for the girl. The case prompted the governmental Human Rights Commission (HRC) to appoint a lawyer to assist the child bride.
An unexpected twist occurred, according to a source within the HRC, when the case was dropped by the girl's mother in February when the girl failed to appear at a court hearing. Her failure surprised the HRC committee which had been formed to investigate the case.
The source also alleged in a previous interview with Arab News that the girl, her mother, and her mother's lawyer had come to court and withdrawn the request for divorce. Other reports said that the mother had reconciled with the girl's father, who had married her off and this is what led to the sudden dismissal of the case. There has been no independent confirmation of any of these developments.
Arab News spoke to Dr. Bandar Al-Iban, president of the Human Rights Commission (HRC), who said, "The case was dropped by the girl when she appeared in court in front of the judge, lawyers, and media along with her mother and legal representative to say that she didn't have a case and that she wanted to get married and since there was no law prohibiting it, she believes that the HRC should not be involved and therefore the case should be dismissed," he said, adding that everyone was shocked by the girl's statement.
Al-Iban, commenting on the recent granting of divorce, said that the HRC had no information about how the divorce came about. "We don't know how the girl and her husband were divorced as it was all done very quietly," he said.
Less than a year ago, an eight-year-old Saudi girl from Onaizah won an annulment of marriage from her 58-year-old husband after receiving assistance from Qassim Gov. Prince Faisal bin Bandar and after she promised to return the SR 8,000 dowry her husband had given to her father.
Underage girls married to older men have been in the international news media recently. Barely two weeks ago, Elham Mahdi, a 12-year-old Yemeni girl, reportedly died of internal bleeding three days after marrying an older man.
"Her death is a painful reminder of the risks girls face when they are married too soon," said Sigrid Kaag, UNICEF regional director for the Middle East and North Africa.
In many cases, the girls are married off to older men to settle the father's "debt" and so that the girl will no longer be seen as a financial or moral burden on her family. In some cases, there are agreements made between the bride's family and the groom to wait until she is older before consummation of marriage but this is not always the case.
A minimum age for girls to marry is still being debated in both Yemen and Saudi Arabia. The HRC and the Shoura Council have said openly said that they are working on a law setting a legal minimum age for marriage.
"We are still working to create a law setting a minimum age for marriage in Saudi Arabia," Al Aiban told Arab News. "But it is very challenging as we are often dealing with conservative cultural bodies who do not believe that child marriage is a problem," he added.
Ah yes, interesting reading there alright hedley however
I must have skimmed over this too quickly as I didn't get
your take on the poisoning of the young girls trying to attend school :-X
Quote from: Hedley Lamarr on April 29, 2010, 12:42:36 PM
Wonder where they learnt these tactics ::)
HRW reveals horrific Iraq prison abuse
By AGENCIES
Published: Apr 29, 2010 00:53 Updated: Apr 29, 2010 00:53
BAGHDAD: Iraqi men held for months at a secret prison outside Baghdad were systematically raped, electrocuted, beaten up and forced to sign confession statements that they were forbidden to read, Human Rights Watch (HRW) said on Wednesday in a harrowing report reminiscent of the abuses that took place at Abu Ghraib.
Some of the detainees, mostly Sunnis from the northern city of Mosul, were beaten by Iraqi guards so badly they lost teeth and urinated blood for days afterward, said the report by New York-based HRW.
The watchdog interviewed 42 men who were recently transferred to another detention facility in Baghdad, after details of misconduct were passed to the government.
HRW described the prisoners' accounts of abuse as "credible and consistent," said there must be an independent and impartial investigation, and called for prosecutions at the highest level.
"The horror we found suggests torture was the norm in Muthanna," the watchdog's deputy Middle East director Joe Stork said, referring to the west Baghdad prison where the men were held until recently. "The government needs to prosecute all those responsible for this systematic brutality."
The men held at the prison were suspected Sunni Arab insurgents from the northern province of Nineveh, who had been arrested between September and December last year, according to the HRW report.
The existence of the jail has caused alarm for Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri Al-Maliki, whose officials said it was shut two weeks ago after the abuse allegations were first published in the Los Angeles Times.
According to HRW, prison guards hung blindfolded detainees upside down during interrogations, then kicked, whipped and beat them before placing a dirty plastic bag over suspects' heads to cut off their air supply. When prisoners passed out, they were awoken by electric shocks to their genitals or other parts of the body, the report said.
The detainees, who were interviewed at the Al-Rusafa detention facility in Baghdad on April 26, told HRW that interrogators and security officials sodomized some detainees with broomsticks and pistol barrels.
Some young men said they were whipped with heavy cables, burned with acid and cigarettes, and had their teeth smashed.
Another detainee, who was 21, said interrogators threatened to rape his mother and sisters if he did not confess. During one torture session, guards made another detainee rape him.
"What happened at Muthanna is an example of the horrendous abuse Iraqi leaders say they want to leave behind," Stork said. "Everyone responsible, from the top down, needs to be held accountable."
One of eight detainee accounts published by HRW described how an imprisoned doctor instructed guards that an abused cell mate, who he suspected had internal bleeding, required urgent medical treatment.
"The guards took the tortured man out but returned him an hour later saying that he was fine. He died in the cell an hour later," it said.
The HRW report bore similarities with the abuse that took place at Abu Ghraib prison, west of Baghdad, in 2004, where a US military unit tortured Iraqi prisoners in a scandal, which shocked the world.
Dalshad Zebari, a Kurdish lawmaker from Nineveh province, where most of the detainees were from, said a government investigation was not enough and there should be international involvement. "We will ask the UN and the International Red Cross for an urgent investigation of these human rights violations and to force the Iraqi government to make public the names of those involved in these cruel crimes and ensure they face justice."
The revelation has come at a sensitive time for Al-Maliki as he tries to negotiate alliances with other factions that would allow him to be reappointed as prime minister following an inconclusive election in March.
The Human Rights Ministry says three Iraqi Army officers have been arrested for questioning. The prison was illegal because it was not under the jurisdiction of the Justice Ministry and the Human Rights Ministry was not informed of it.
Conditions in legal Iraqi prisons are often not much better. The justice system relies on confessions for prosecutions, not evidence. That makes torture common though perhaps not as routine as under ousted dictator Saddam Hussein. The report has angered the Sunni population who sees it as another example of persecution at the hands of Shiite-led government.
Hedley, I presume you are blaming the yanks for this by the comment above. Lets be clear about one thing. The man who was previously in charge of Iraq, Sadam Hussein, was a psycho and a butcher as were his secret police. Robert Fisk would be no friend of the US but if you read his section on Iraq in his book "war for civilisation" you will see that what went on in his prisons was disgustng and just plain evil. That of course does not excuse the americans for what they did there but it is worth having a little balance.
"The man who was previously in charge of Iraq, Sadam Hussein, was a psycho and a butcher as were his secret police."
Wasn't he the one Rumsfield was very friendly with.
My point is Islam does not = terroist, just as America does not = asshole ;)
Quote from: Hedley Lamarr on April 29, 2010, 10:57:24 PM
"The man who was previously in charge of Iraq, Sadam Hussein, was a psycho and a butcher as were his secret police."
Wasn't he the one Rumsfield was very friendly with.
My point is Islam does not = terroist, just as America does not = asshole ;)
Yes he was due to the yanks flawed thinking of my enemy's enemy is my friend. Their backing of Iraq v Iran knowing full well what Sadam would and did do to "traitors" like the kurds was despicable.
Quote from: Hedley Lamarr on April 29, 2010, 10:57:24 PM
"The man who was previously in charge of Iraq, Sadam Hussein, was a psycho and a butcher as were his secret police."
Wasn't he the one Rumsfield was very friendly with.
Indeed he was Hedley...but lets not forget our very own Dixey and his BFF Gorgeous George
were also tight with Saddam and his family by all accounts, just to be unbiased like ;)
Quote
My point is Islam does not = terroist, just as America does not = asshole ;)
Don't think Anyone here has said that Islam = Terrorist ;)
And again............. :-\ .what's your take on the Afghan children being poisoned by the Taliban
for having the audacity to want a simple education :o
"And again............. .what's your take on the Afghan children being poisoned by the Taliban
for having the audacity to want a simple education"
My take is that every child has a basic human right to an education and that the Taliban are right up there with the Israelis in denying basic human rights.
It's not that long ago that America and the Taliban were "allies" against the Russians ::)
Tell meTO, what is your take on the fact that America with all its resources, "intelligence" and technology, have come as close to Bin Ladin in nearly 9 years, as Iris Robinson has to "curing" gays 8)
Quote from: Hedley Lamarr on April 30, 2010, 11:12:38 AM
Tell meTO, what is your take on the fact that America with all its resources, "intelligence" and technology, have come as close to Bin Ladin in nearly 9 years, as Iris Robinson has to "curing" gays 8)
Very simple really, they're completely inept through Political Correctness and fear of offending someone ::)
Case in point....Clinton had his shot and didn't take it :'(
Outside of the Taliban I don't think too many would be offended.
It reminds me of Gulf war 1 when Sadam was in the crosshairs and the order not to shoot came from the US :o
Some very interesting reading:
The truth about Hussein's brutality
by Jim Babka
If Hussein's brutal dictatorship warranted war then we might also need to invade Zaire, Zimbabwe, Syria, Libya, China, and a host of other countries. You've probably heard this argument before. But you probably haven't heard that our own government has been complicit in much of Hussein's brutality.
Except where noted, the details for what follows can be found in the definitive works on this subject by the award-winning journalist Dilip Hiro, Iraq and The Iran-Iraq War.
Our CIA placed Hussein's Ba'ath Party in power in 1963. Our politicians were complicit in the birth of this regime through an unconstitutional act of foreign aggression.
In the late '70s President Carter encouraged Hussein to invade Iran, hoping the secular Hussein would remove the Islamic regime there.
One consequence of this invasion, aside from hundreds of thousands of deaths, was the brutal suppression of Iraq's non-Ba'athist political groups. Our politicians didn't protest these violations of human rights because Hussein was working for us.
President Reagan continued Carter's pro-Hussein policy.
Hussein used chemical weapons against Iran. We didn't protest this brutal violation of international law. Instead, we worked to protect Iraq in the UN.
(Note: Bush, Jr. has repeatedly claimed that Hussein used chemical weapons against his own people during this time, but this claim has been disproved, as shown below.)
Our complicity in Hussein's brutality continued under Bush, Sr.
Bush, Sr. called on the Iraqi people to overthrow Hussein. The Iraqi people responded. They expected U.S. support. They didn't receive it.
Hussein's army crushed the rebels while our jets flew overhead. We could have stopped Hussein, but Bush, Sr. ordered our military not to intervene. The Bush administration felt the wrong people were responding to our call for revolt. They wanted Hussein's officers to remove him instead, so the dictatorial regime would remain in place, only without Saddam.
Colin Powell and Dick Cheney were on the National Security Council at that time. They were involved in these decisions. Our government was once again complicit in Hussein's brutality. (For an insider's view of these events see The World Transformed by Bush, Sr.'s National Security Advisor Brent Scowcroft—note the ironic title.)
continued below...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
After Gulf War I our politicians added to the brutality in Iraq by imposing trade sanctions.
These sanctions didn't just cover weapons materials. They mostly affected food and medicine. It's hard to see why. Our politicians have already made it clear they don't want the Iraqi people to revolt, so their purpose isn't to cause a general uprising. But the sanctions aren't likely to cause Hussein's officers to revolt either—he makes sure his officers have the best of everything. So all the sanctions have done is kill innocent people, and cause the Iraqi people to hate America more than they hate Hussein.
As with Castro in Cuba, trade sanctions against Iraq have only served to strengthen Hussein's grip on his people.
But the embargo has continued through the Clinton administration to the present day.
A minor exception has been made to allow Iraq to trade oil for small amounts of food and medicine. It isn't enough. The Iraqi people still starve and die.
Our politicians don't care. On May 12, 1996 Leslie Stahl interviewed Clinton Secretary of State Madeleine Albright on "60 Minutes." Stahl claimed that "More than 500,000 Iraqi children are already dead as a direct result of the UN sanctions." She then asked, "Do you think the price is worth paying?" Albright did not dispute the number of deaths, or that our policy caused them. Instead, she said, "It is a difficult question. But yes, we think the price is worth it."
That's easy for her to say. Her children aren't dying. And it's hard to see what, exactly, our politicians think is "worth it," since the sanctions can't cause either the Iraqi people, or Hussein's officers to revolt, and not even Hussein's full compliance with UN resolutions would lift the embargo.
Albright made this last point perfectly clear in another interview on "Meet the Press" on January 2, 2000. In that interview Albright admitted that the true purpose of the sanctions was regime change and not weapons control. She stated that the sanctions would not be lifted until Hussein was gone, even if he complied with all UN weapons controls. The current Bush administration has continued this policy.
Our embargo policy leads to a very serious moral question. Can we really expect Arabs to care about our thousands of victims from 9-11, when we are the heartless cause of hundreds of times as many Arab deaths? How would we feel if our children were starving and dying because of an Arab oil embargo? For that matter, how did we feel when the Arabs embargoed us in the 1970s? People who were alive then will remember that many Americans wanted us to invade them, conquer them, and even nuke them!
Can we really point to Hussein's brutality against his own people as justification for war, when our brutality against the Iraqi people has been so much worse?
continued below...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But even Hussein's brutality against his own people has been greatly exaggerated by our government, purely for propaganda purposes. Bush officials never tire of repeating the following stories as justification for their policy:
Hussein gassed his own people.
Hussein tried to assassinate George Bush, Sr.
Hussein's soldiers took babies out of incubators during the invasion of Kuwait.
These stories make for great propaganda, but none of them are true, and the Bush administration knows it.
Saddam Hussein did not gas his own people.
Supposedly Hussein gassed Iraqi Kurds at Halabja in March 1988 during the closing days of the Iran-Iraq war. But it isn't true. In 1990, the U.S. government found that the Kurds died by cyanide gas. It was the Iranians who used cyanide, while the Iraqis used mustard gas. This means it was the Iranians who accidentally killed the Kurds during battle. Hussein had nothing to do with it. (Source: Army War College, Stephen Pelletier & colleague)
In a related lie, Hussein is also said to have committed genocide in August 1988, killing 100,000 Iraqi Kurds with machine guns, then burying them in mass graves. U.S. intelligence services have uniformly dismissed this story. According to Stephen Pelletier of the U.S. Army War College, no such mass graves have ever been found because none exist. The incident never happened. Human Rights Watch, which originally reported the story, has since retracted it, but the lie lives on.
Saddam Hussein did not try to assassinate George Bush, Sr.
Bush, Jr. loves to tell the story of how Hussein "tried to kill my dad." But it's not true. Investigative reporter Seymour Hersh debunked the story in a December 5, 1993 article in The New Yorker titled "A Case Not Closed." The bomb was actually miles away from Bush, Sr. and was likely a set-up by Kuwait to keep Clinton from easing sanctions on Iraq.
Saddam Hussein's soldiers did not remove babies from incubators in Kuwait.
A New York public relations firm hired by the Kuwaiti government created this story to win American public support for U.S. military action against Iraq. The fiction was based on the tearful testimony of a Kuwaiti woman before the U.S. Senate as it debated war in 1990. The woman claimed to have witnessed the incubator incident with her own eyes, but she was really the daughter of the Kuwaiti Information Minister, and hadn't even been in Kuwait on the day the alleged atrocity took place. (See csmonitor.com/2002/ 0906/p01s02-wosc.html.)
In conclusion, Bush's claim that we should go to war because Hussein (our former client) is a brutal dictator is blatant hypocrisy. Our politicians have been the great creators and patrons of dictatorships around the world. They have...
Toppled the legitimate government of Iran for the benefit of U.S. oil companies, eventually leading to the Islamic revolution and its related problems,
Installed dictatorships in Central America for the benefit of the United Fruit Company,
Installed the current government of Iraq,
Destabilized a working democracy in Lebanon, leading to decades of civil war,
Assassinated the elected President of Chile,
And on and on and on...
Quote from: Hedley Lamarr on April 30, 2010, 08:35:37 PM
Some very interesting reading:
The truth about Hussein's brutality
by Jim Babka
If Hussein's brutal dictatorship warranted war then we might also need to invade Zaire, Zimbabwe, Syria, Libya, China, and a host of other countries. You've probably heard this argument before. But you probably haven't heard that our own government has been complicit in much of Hussein's brutality.
Except where noted, the details for what follows can be found in the definitive works on this subject by the award-winning journalist Dilip Hiro, Iraq and The Iran-Iraq War.
Our CIA placed Hussein's Ba'ath Party in power in 1963. Our politicians were complicit in the birth of this regime through an unconstitutional act of foreign aggression.
In the late '70s President Carter encouraged Hussein to invade Iran, hoping the secular Hussein would remove the Islamic regime there.
One consequence of this invasion, aside from hundreds of thousands of deaths, was the brutal suppression of Iraq's non-Ba'athist political groups. Our politicians didn't protest these violations of human rights because Hussein was working for us.
President Reagan continued Carter's pro-Hussein policy.
Hussein used chemical weapons against Iran. We didn't protest this brutal violation of international law. Instead, we worked to protect Iraq in the UN.
(Note: Bush, Jr. has repeatedly claimed that Hussein used chemical weapons against his own people during this time, but this claim has been disproved, as shown below.)
Our complicity in Hussein's brutality continued under Bush, Sr.
Bush, Sr. called on the Iraqi people to overthrow Hussein. The Iraqi people responded. They expected U.S. support. They didn't receive it.
Hussein's army crushed the rebels while our jets flew overhead. We could have stopped Hussein, but Bush, Sr. ordered our military not to intervene. The Bush administration felt the wrong people were responding to our call for revolt. They wanted Hussein's officers to remove him instead, so the dictatorial regime would remain in place, only without Saddam.
Colin Powell and Dick Cheney were on the National Security Council at that time. They were involved in these decisions. Our government was once again complicit in Hussein's brutality. (For an insider's view of these events see The World Transformed by Bush, Sr.'s National Security Advisor Brent Scowcroft—note the ironic title.)
continued below...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
After Gulf War I our politicians added to the brutality in Iraq by imposing trade sanctions.
These sanctions didn't just cover weapons materials. They mostly affected food and medicine. It's hard to see why. Our politicians have already made it clear they don't want the Iraqi people to revolt, so their purpose isn't to cause a general uprising. But the sanctions aren't likely to cause Hussein's officers to revolt either—he makes sure his officers have the best of everything. So all the sanctions have done is kill innocent people, and cause the Iraqi people to hate America more than they hate Hussein.
As with Castro in Cuba, trade sanctions against Iraq have only served to strengthen Hussein's grip on his people.
But the embargo has continued through the Clinton administration to the present day.
A minor exception has been made to allow Iraq to trade oil for small amounts of food and medicine. It isn't enough. The Iraqi people still starve and die.
Our politicians don't care. On May 12, 1996 Leslie Stahl interviewed Clinton Secretary of State Madeleine Albright on "60 Minutes." Stahl claimed that "More than 500,000 Iraqi children are already dead as a direct result of the UN sanctions." She then asked, "Do you think the price is worth paying?" Albright did not dispute the number of deaths, or that our policy caused them. Instead, she said, "It is a difficult question. But yes, we think the price is worth it."
That's easy for her to say. Her children aren't dying. And it's hard to see what, exactly, our politicians think is "worth it," since the sanctions can't cause either the Iraqi people, or Hussein's officers to revolt, and not even Hussein's full compliance with UN resolutions would lift the embargo.
Albright made this last point perfectly clear in another interview on "Meet the Press" on January 2, 2000. In that interview Albright admitted that the true purpose of the sanctions was regime change and not weapons control. She stated that the sanctions would not be lifted until Hussein was gone, even if he complied with all UN weapons controls. The current Bush administration has continued this policy.
Our embargo policy leads to a very serious moral question. Can we really expect Arabs to care about our thousands of victims from 9-11, when we are the heartless cause of hundreds of times as many Arab deaths? How would we feel if our children were starving and dying because of an Arab oil embargo? For that matter, how did we feel when the Arabs embargoed us in the 1970s? People who were alive then will remember that many Americans wanted us to invade them, conquer them, and even nuke them!
Can we really point to Hussein's brutality against his own people as justification for war, when our brutality against the Iraqi people has been so much worse?
continued below...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But even Hussein's brutality against his own people has been greatly exaggerated by our government, purely for propaganda purposes. Bush officials never tire of repeating the following stories as justification for their policy:
Hussein gassed his own people.
Hussein tried to assassinate George Bush, Sr.
Hussein's soldiers took babies out of incubators during the invasion of Kuwait.
These stories make for great propaganda, but none of them are true, and the Bush administration knows it.
Saddam Hussein did not gas his own people.
Supposedly Hussein gassed Iraqi Kurds at Halabja in March 1988 during the closing days of the Iran-Iraq war. But it isn't true. In 1990, the U.S. government found that the Kurds died by cyanide gas. It was the Iranians who used cyanide, while the Iraqis used mustard gas. This means it was the Iranians who accidentally killed the Kurds during battle. Hussein had nothing to do with it. (Source: Army War College, Stephen Pelletier & colleague)
In a related lie, Hussein is also said to have committed genocide in August 1988, killing 100,000 Iraqi Kurds with machine guns, then burying them in mass graves. U.S. intelligence services have uniformly dismissed this story. According to Stephen Pelletier of the U.S. Army War College, no such mass graves have ever been found because none exist. The incident never happened. Human Rights Watch, which originally reported the story, has since retracted it, but the lie lives on.
Saddam Hussein did not try to assassinate George Bush, Sr.
Bush, Jr. loves to tell the story of how Hussein "tried to kill my dad." But it's not true. Investigative reporter Seymour Hersh debunked the story in a December 5, 1993 article in The New Yorker titled "A Case Not Closed." The bomb was actually miles away from Bush, Sr. and was likely a set-up by Kuwait to keep Clinton from easing sanctions on Iraq.
Saddam Hussein's soldiers did not remove babies from incubators in Kuwait.
A New York public relations firm hired by the Kuwaiti government created this story to win American public support for U.S. military action against Iraq. The fiction was based on the tearful testimony of a Kuwaiti woman before the U.S. Senate as it debated war in 1990. The woman claimed to have witnessed the incubator incident with her own eyes, but she was really the daughter of the Kuwaiti Information Minister, and hadn't even been in Kuwait on the day the alleged atrocity took place. (See csmonitor.com/2002/ 0906/p01s02-wosc.html.)
In conclusion, Bush's claim that we should go to war because Hussein (our former client) is a brutal dictator is blatant hypocrisy. Our politicians have been the great creators and patrons of dictatorships around the world. They have...
Toppled the legitimate government of Iran for the benefit of U.S. oil companies, eventually leading to the Islamic revolution and its related problems,
Installed dictatorships in Central America for the benefit of the United Fruit Company,
Installed the current government of Iraq,
Destabilized a working democracy in Lebanon, leading to decades of civil war,
Assassinated the elected President of Chile,
And on and on and on...
That bit about gasing the Kurds is just wrong. Sadam most certainly did and the ingrediants for cyanide he used was provided by Germany if memory serves me right. Sadam was supplied with Gas with the Iran army starting kicking the shite out of Iraq and were massed at his border. Fearing a Islamic state in Iraq the west allowed and assisted Sadam in this heinous act. The cyanide factory was built with help from US scientists. Sadam also electrocuted 1000's of swamp people that happened to reside in Iraq on the border with Iran. He believed an invasion was imminent and didn't care one bit if he murdered people to stop Iran.
I believe in calling a spade a spade. Sadam was a wicked cruel and evil dictator who murdered 1000's of people to keep his dreams of empire alive. The yanks used him to try and look after their own interests in the middle east - in itself a greedy and reckless thing to do. I find it amusing that Tyrone Own would use Sadam as some sort of a barometer of what is acceptable for the US. The US is supposedly the global policeman, protector of peoples rights blah blah and Tyrone Own will say " oh the US may have killed 100's of innocent people but sure Sadam killed 1000's" Thats just a braindead bullshit simpleton US republican stand point. Hedley, your going to be as bad as him if you continue to play down the evil that was Sadam and blame the yanks for everything. Btw - the taliban are a scattering of brutal backward warlords, not some coordinated army. It disgusts me but does not surprise me that such warlords would poison children. Afghanistan is a country that does not even register in the 1st world. It is a brutal place that never heard of democracy. It is only famous cos it has some big mountains for hiding in.
Quote from: Tyrones own on April 30, 2010, 06:05:28 PM
Quote from: Hedley Lamarr on April 30, 2010, 11:12:38 AM
Tell meTO, what is your take on the fact that America with all its resources, "intelligence" and technology, have come as close to Bin Ladin in nearly 9 years, as Iris Robinson has to "curing" gays 8)
Very simple really, they're completely inept through Political Correctness and fear of offending someone ::)
Case in point....Clinton had his shot and didn't take it :'(
Thats the feckin democrats for ye, cant make a decision between them. ;)
I believe in calling a spade a spade. Sadam was a wicked cruel and evil dictator who murdered 1000's of people to keep his dreams of empire alive. The yanks used him to try and look after their own interests in the middle east - in itself a greedy and reckless thing to do. I find it amusing that Tyrone Own would use Sadam as some sort of a barometer of what is acceptable for the US. The US is supposedly the global policeman, protector of peoples rights blah blah and Tyrone Own will say " oh the US may have killed 100's of innocent people but sure Sadam killed 1000's" Thats just a braindead bullshit simpleton US republican stand point. Hedley, your going to be as bad as him if you continue to play down the evil that was Sadam and blame the yanks for everything. Btw - the taliban are a scattering of brutal backward warlords, not some coordinated army. It disgusts me but does not surprise me that such warlords would poison children. Afghanistan is a country that does not even register in the 1st world. It is a brutal place that never heard of democracy. It is only famous cos it has some big mountains for hiding in.
I am in no way attempting to play down Sadam's evil, but read the article again.......the US Sec of State justified the death of over 500,000 children because it was for the greater good :o Bush is as big a war monger
As for being the world's policeman......don't make me laugh......world's bully boy more likely.
As for Afghanistan....what are the yanks doing there then....playing hide and seek.
It is very easy to go to war when you are sending someone elses sons and daughters to do the fighting.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/7671750/South-Park-The-most-dangerous-show-on-television.html