Terrorists found in Fallujah

[The Sloth]

The cappies were right -- there are terrorists in Iraq.

Unfortunately, however, the terrorists seem to be concentrated within the imperial American army itself.

Surprised?

Let's see the resident apologists for terrorism justify this:


A 35 year-old merchant from Fallujah, Abu Hammad, starts telling us what he experienced, and barely breathes while doing so because he is so enraged.

“The American warplanes came continuously through the night and bombed everywhere in Fallujah! It did not stop even for a moment! If the American forces did not find a target to bomb, they used sound bombs just to terrorize the people and children. The city stayed in fear; I cannot give a picture of how panicked everyone was.”

He is shaking with grief and anger. “In the mornings I found Fallujah empty, as if nobody lives in it. Even poisonous gases have been used in Fallujah-they used everything-tanks, artillery, infantry, poison gas. Fallujah has been bombed to the ground. Nothing is left.”

[NOTE -- I am not too sure, but isn't the use of "poison gas" against international law? Like when Iran (not Saddam Hussein) gassed the Kurds?]


Abu Hammad continues, “Most of the innocent people there stayed in mosques to be closer to God for safety. Even the wounded people were killed. Old ladies with white flags were killed by the Americans! The Americans announced for people to come to a certain mosque if they wanted to leave Fallujah, and even the people who went there carrying white flags were killed!”

One of the men standing with us, a large man named Mohammad Ali is crying; his large body shuddering with each bit of new information revealed by Abu Hammad.

“There was no food, no electricity, no water,” continues Abu Hammad, “We couldn’t even light a candle because the Americans would see it and kill us.”

He pauses, then asks, “This suffering of the people, I would like to ask everyone in the world if they have seen suffering like this. The people in Fallujah are only Fallujans. Ayad Allawi was a liar when he said there are foreign fighters there.”

He continues on, “There are bodies the Americans threw in the river. I saw them do this! And anyone who stayed thought they would be killed by the Americans, so they tried to swim across the river. Even then the Americans shot them with rifles from the shore! Even if some of them were holding a white flag or white clothes over their heads to show they are not fighters, they were all shot! Even people who couldn’t swim tried to cross the river! They drowned rather than staying to be killed by the Americans.”

[This reminds me of the invasion of imperial Japan at the close of WWII -- the Japanese jumped off cliffs rather than risk being tortured and killed by the similarly imperial Americans with the diseased egos.]


As Mohammad no longer speaks, a 40 year-old refugee, Khalil, speaks up. “When the Americans come to our city we refuse to accept any foreigner coming to invade us. We accept the ING’s but not the Americans. Nobody has seen any Zarqawi. If the Americans don’t come in our city, who do Fallujans attack? Fallujans don’t attack other Iraqis. Fallujans only attack the American troops when they come inside or near our city.”

Rather than weeping like so many others I interviewed, Khalil is raging. His sadness is being covered with anger. “If we have a government-the government should solve the suffering of the people. Our government does not do this – instead they are always attacking us, our government is a dummy government. They are not here to help us. The Minister of Defense and Interior are speaking that we are their family – so why do they collapse our houses on our heads? Why do they kill all of us?”

American morals, eh?

"Amerikan" morals is more like it.



http://www.guerrillanews.com/articles/article.php?id=933



Have fun reading this article and refusing to comment on it.

K?

[Osman Ghazi]

[NOTE -- I am not too sure, but isn't the use of "poison gas" against international law? Like when Iran (not Saddam Hussein) gassed the Kurds?]


Umm, no he really did do that.

The incident you are referring to is probably Halabja, or the 1st Anfal as it was known in Iraq. It was definately Saddam Hussein who did the gassing there. Basically, what happened was that the PUK (Patritoic Union of Kurdistan) got a little full of themselves and thought that they could strike out at Halabja, a city of about 50,000, almost all Kurdish, with the help of the Iranians. On the second day after the PUK peshmerga and Iranian pasdaran entered the city to Kurdish fanfare, Saddam responded with a two-day chemical attack that left 5000 dead. He used both Russian fighter-bombers and rajima, or self-propelled chemical artillery.

And that was only a part (though it was the largest attack) of the al-Anfal ('the plunder') campaign. Basically, Ali Hasan al-Majid, the famed 'Chemical Ali' or 'Ali Anfal' was given total control over the Northern area centered on Kirkuk with a mandate to totally crush the PUK and KDP peshmerga.

The campaign basically used chemical attacks to force Kurdish peshmerga and civilians to withdraw from their strongholds, like the Balisan and Jafati valleys and the villages were then destroyed so that new, easily defendable, easily controlled could be built. In all, there were eight major sweeps titled first anfal to final anfal.

Over 100,000 Kurds are thought to have died as a result of this campaign.

Al-Anfal (http://www.hrw.org/reports/1993/iraqanfal/)

[Professor Moneybags]

This sounds like something straight out of the mouth of Comical Ali.

If the Americans has used poisonous gas, how did these people know (the gas the US has stocked is invisible) and how did they manage to survive ? Bearing in mind that if the destruction of Fallujah was their goal, a single MOAB would have done the trick without any need for gas or "sound bombs".

Just a quick recap of Mecca's worldview :

-America is the root of all evil and anyone who opposes it always tells the truth.
-Imperialism is okay, just so long as it isn't American.
-Any political system is accaptable, so long as it isn't capitalism.


American morals, eh?

Coming from Mr Might-makes-right, this is pretty rich.

[The Sloth]

Umm, no he really did do that.

The incident you are referring to is probably Halabja, or the 1st Anfal as it was known in Iraq. It was definately Saddam Hussein who did the gassing there. Basically, what happened was that the PUK (Patritoic Union of Kurdistan) got a little full of themselves and thought that they could strike out at Halabja, a city of about 50,000, almost all Kurdish, with the help of the Iranians. On the second day after the PUK peshmerga and Iranian pasdaran entered the city to Kurdish fanfare, Saddam responded with a two-day chemical attack that left 5000 dead. He used both Russian fighter-bombers and rajima, or self-propelled chemical artillery.

Hmmmmm....

Thousands were reported killed in the gassing of Iraqi Kurds in Halabja in the north of Iraq in March 1988 towards the end of Iraq's eight-year war with Iran. The gassing of the Kurds has long been held to be the work of Ali Hassan al-Majid, named in the West because of that association as 'Chemical Ali'. Saddam Hussein is widely alleged to have ordered Ali to carry out the chemical attack.

The Halabja massacre is now prominent among the charges read out against Saddam in the Baghdad court. When that charge was read out, Saddam replied that he had read about the massacre in a newspaper. Saddam has denied these allegations ever since they were made. But now with a trial on, he could summon a witness in his defense with the potential to blow apart the charge and create one of the greatest diplomatic disasters the United States has ever known.

A report prepared by the top CIA official handling the matter says Saddam Hussein was not responsible for the massacre, and indicates that it was the work of Iranians. Further, the Scott inquiry on the role of the British government has gathered evidence that following the massacre the United States in fact armed Saddam Hussein to counter the Iranians chemicals for chemicals.

Few believe that a CIA man would attend a court hearing in Baghdad in defense of Saddam. But in this case the CIA boss has gone public with his evidence, and this evidence has been in the public domain for more than a year.

...

[CIA officer Stephen C.] Pelletiere says the United States Defense Intelligence Agency investigated and produced a classified report following the Halabja gassing, which it circulated within the intelligence community on a need- to-know basis. ”That study asserted that it was Iranian gas that killed the Kurds, not Iraqi gas,” he wrote in The New York Times.

The agency did find that each side used gas against the other in the battle around Halabja, he said. ”The condition of the dead Kurds' bodies, however, indicated they had been killed with a blood agent -- that is, a cyanide-based gas -- which Iran was known to use. ”The Iraqis, who are thought to have used mustard gas in the battle, are not known to have possessed blood agents at the time.”

Pelletiere writes that these facts have ”long been in the public domain but, extraordinarily, as often as the Halabja affair is cited, they are rarely mentioned.”

Pelletiere wrote that Saddam Hussein has much to answer for in the area of human rights abuses. ”But accusing him of gassing his own people at Halabja as an act of genocide is not correct, because as far as the information we have goes, all of the cases where gas was used involved battles. These were tragedies of war. There may be justifications for invading Iraq, but Halabja is not one of them.”

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0703-01.htm


If the Americans has used poisonous gas, how did these people know (the gas the US has stocked is invisible) and how did they manage to survive ?

Ahhh, yes, the civilians are lying for their own personal gain.

Maybe, just maybe, not every single civilian was killed by this gas, or maybe, just maybe, certain civilians on the outskirts of specific neighborhoods witnessed the destruction by gas?

But that's besides the point...interesting to see that your post ONLY mentions "poison gas," a minor aspect of this thread, to evade the reality of everything else that is being brought up.


Bearing in mind that if the destruction of Fallujah was their goal, a single MOAB would have done the trick without any need for gas or "sound bombs".

Now, allow me to respond to your "point" by using your writing format:

1. Bearing in mind that if the occupation and destruction of Palestine is the goal of the Israelis, a simple army is able to do the trick without the need for the employment of rape, torture, and mutilation of women and children by the hands of the Israeli thugs; the "superfluous" stuff isn't necessary! After all, those are folks with morals, aren't they?!

Alas, these things are STILL used.

2. Bearing in mind that if the occupation and the containment of communism in Vietnam was the goal of the Americans, a few hundred thousand more soldiers would have been able to do the trick without the need for the employment of rape, torture and mutilation of women and children by the hands of the American terrorists with the diseased egos; the "superfluous" stuff isn't necessary! After all, those are folks with morals, aren't they?!

Alas, these things were STILL used.

3. Bearing in mind that the defeat of Japan was the goal of the Americans, an assault on the nation with the help of Europe would have been able to do the trick without the need for the employment of two atomic bombs; the "superfluous" stuff isn't necessary! After all, those are folks with morals, aren't they?!

Alas, the atomic bombs were STILL used.

Thus, why should I take your word for it that the "unnecessary" nature of certain weapons and/or acts automatically constitutes the Americans' refusal to use and/or partake in them, hmmmm?

The use of "sound" that you mentioned has already been discussed, and obviously, also used.


Just a quick recap of Mecca's worldview :

-America is the root of all evil and anyone who opposes it always tells the truth.

Prove it.


-Imperialism is okay, just so long as it isn't American.

Coming from an apologist for imperialism, this is quite laughable.

Anyway, prove that I think imperialism is "okay."

By the way...are you admitting that "American imperialism" is a constant reality? Seems like it.


-Any political system is accaptable, so long as it isn't capitalism.

Yes, because capitalism is a "political system" :lol:

Anyway...

Are you saying I am sympathetic towards Saddam Hussein's despotism?


Coming from Mr Might-makes-right, this is pretty rich.

Depending on who has the might and whether it is right.

Well, thank you for the morning entertainment, but I really must get going now.

Ciao!

[The Sloth]

Up.