US occupation forces attacks IFTU

[Blackberry]

On Saturday 6 December 2003 US occupation forces using about ten armoured cars and dozens of soldiers attacked the temporary headquarters of the Iraqi Federation of Workers Trade Unions (IFTU) in the Karkh District of Baghdad and arrested eight IFTU leaders who were subsequently released.

The soldiers ransacked and destroyed IFTU possessions, including posters and banners condemning terrorism, covering the federation's name with black paint, smashing windows, seizing documents, without any explanation or reason.

Click here (http://lnn.labourstart.org/more.php?id=103_0_1_0_M) for more information.

Click here (http://www.labourstart.org/cgi-bin/solidarityforever/show_campaign.cgi?c=22) to send a message to President Bush today demanding a full investigation.

[Loknar]

Were they communists?

[Ian]

Perhaps.

[Loknar]

Well I hate to sound insensitive but big deal. You guys will do anything to destabilize a nation, including destroying it's economy, infrastructure and bring mass famine if it would get you into power. Just look at the KWP. You guys earned this reputation in the past for the actions committed in Russia (btw, Lenin was placed there by the Germans, where was he getting his orders from?), so you have to live with it.

[Sabocat]

Yes Loknar, but so much for self determination for the Iraqi's eh?

What if the Iraqi's want and support this organization? What if when it comes time for an election the Iraqi's vote for a Communist to lead the country? What right does the occupation army have to determine the legitimacy of any particular labor organizations? Are you suggesting that here in the U$ the National Guard should storm into Union offices and ransack and destroy offices and arrest union organizers? If you aren't suggesting that for here, why would you support it in Iraq? It's not logical.

How many times is the U$ going to backpedal on everything that they said they were in Iraq for? What you're suggesting is that the U$ should have free will to create a servile client state in the Middle East.

[The Children of the Revolution]

Good post "Disgustapated".



Were they communists?


Why on Earth should it matter? Or does freedom have certain restrictions?

"You can only be free if you adopt a nice corrupt Capitalist "Democracy" and sell us cheap oil..."



(btw, Lenin was placed there by the Germans, where was he getting his orders from?)


Lenin was acting in the interests of the Proletariat; he took orders from no-one. The Germans funded his Bolshevik Party, yes - but the Tsar was hardly going to, was he?

[Loknar]

Oh I am sure if I were to move to North Korea and set up a Union in some poor rural community it'd be ok right?

Guys, the US is not 'freedom' like you think. Communism wouldn’t give cappies rights to speak their mind, I don’t see why America is obligated to do so.

And btw, we will allow anti government aside from commie and Islamist. That is how it is, it isn’t right or wrong.

[Sabocat]

Are you implying that trade unions shouldn't be allowed in the U$?

If we have trade unions in the U$, what possible reason could there be for not allowing them in Iraq? Could it be that the U$ has big plans to exploit the working class there? That'd be my guess. It's hard to enslave workers if they can strike and shut down your operations right?

I would guess that the answer is that the U$ really doesn't want them here, but doesn't have the balls to pull that shit here, so instead they are going to make sure not to make the same mistake in an occupied client state.