'Sick' Saddam drugged: visitor

[Tinoire]

'Sick' Saddam drugged: visitor

By Peter Wilson in Baghdad
December 20, 2003

A STARTLING new photograph of a sick-looking Saddam Hussein suggests he is being drugged or given strong medication by his US captors.

The man who took the photo told The Weekend Australian last night Hussein appeared very sick when he was visited by Iraqi Governing Council member Ahmed Chalabi two days after being captured near Tikrit.

In the photo Hussein appears in much worse shape than when arrested, with pronounced bags under bloodshot eyes and a sticking plaster on the back of his right hand where he has reportedly been receiving intravenous injections.

<snip>

http://www.news.com.au/common/imagedata/0,3600,310072,00.jpg
The photo shows the former president, who once lived in a string of palaces, is now being kept in a converted bathroom lit by spotlights, with his bed right next to a toilet on a tiled shower recess.

<snip>
During the visit by Dr Chalabi, Hussein was wearing a plastic jacket over a white traditional-style robe, even though Monday was a warm day in Baghdad.

http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,8216785%255E401,00.html

[westman]

1. A fitting end for the genocidal maniac.

[sistersofmercy]

4. And propaganda is a beautiful thing

[Dirk39]

6. A long time ago...

the USA shamed the German Nazi Criminals, treating them with the respect, they didn't deserve, to simply show them, how civilized people act.
And if there is any "fitting end for genocidal maniacs", this is the way to go.
This is just about one criminal gang against another criminal gang.
In my eyes, the USA has lost the last kind of legitimacy or credibility, they ever had.

This is the most cynical kind of fashism, I have seen in a long time.

It rather reminds me of the way, the Nazis treated one another after they were defeated.

Hello from Germany,
Dirk

[hlthe2b]

8. Thanks, Dirk. I have to agree. Call me a bleeding heart...

and surely this man deserves no compassion. But, I truly believe we should be leading by EXAMPLE. That means we don't go to war without provocation, we adhere to international agreements, including the Geneva Conventions, and we do not go out of our way to bulley the rest of the world.

Go ahead and flame me. But, I AM bothered by this. I am particularly concerned with the long term impact among Arabs who will see this-- many who are already seething with resentment at US imperialism.

[burrowowl]

23. I agree with you eom

[LiberalFighter]

153. Not just the Arabs but the whole world.

[tlcandie]

11. Thanks Dirk....

I was appalled at this, but wasn't quite sure why as most were posting that it was fitting, etc.

Thank you for putting this into words for me because I feel as you that we should treat ALL with dignity n/m what they have or have not done.

It is horrible that someone from another country must remind us constantly what being civil means.

As a country we have so lost our way and I'm not sure if we will find our way back :cry: I think your statement following sums it up..


Quote: In my eyes, the USA has lost the last kind of legitimacy or credibility, they ever had.

[westman]

15. Many of those German war criminals were executed.

Would you support the execution of Saddam, if convicted?

[Dirk39]

26. What kind of question is this?

I don't care much, how the Bush-gang treats their former friends or the other way round.

Let's imagine for a moment, things would be different. People would have overthrown the government of the USA.
If I would see a picture of Bush like the one above of Hussein.
I would say to myself: Just another failed revolution, count me out.


I'm against death penalty in general.

If there would be any kind of legitimated trial against criminals like Bush, Cheney, Saddam Hussein etc. ppp.:
If I'd be a judge, I would sentence them to live long prison,
if you ask me as a human being, who's happy that he's not a judge: as long as they will never ever have any kind of influence anymore, to commit crimes, I don't care.

If there is any country in this world, who's government doesn't have any kind of right, to judge Saddam Hussein, than it's the USA.

The problem with Nuremberg, I always had, was that justice irrevocable implies the idea of balance. In one or the other way, the punishment has to have a rational relation to the commited crime. And this couldn't be the case in relation to the Nazi crimes. Replying to this, you could just do unjustice to the victims or start to resemble the ones, you judged. This was an indissoluble situation.

But "indissoluble situations" are for reflected people.
Neither Bush nor Saddam will even have the slightest idea, what I'm talking about,

Max Horkheimer commented on the Israeli assertion that the Eichmann trial was intended to enlighten “the youth in the own land and the peoples outside” about the true nature of the Third Reich. He said that if “such an insight cannot be mediated through the extensive literature, available in scientific as well as in generally approachable works in all civilized languages, but is to gain its appropriate meaning, as perceived by current and future genarations, only in the form of new trial reports and international sensations, it looks quite bad for such an insight”.

A bit of topic but maybe in the center of it,
Dirk

[westman]

70. I'm not sure I understand your answer.

Basically, I support the death penalty in cases where guilt of heinous crimes against humanity is incontrovertible. Such is the case with Saddam.

If found guilty, the Iraqis should off him.

[Zhade]

139. Do you then support the death penalty for Bush et al?

They are war criminals by every definition of the term - they just haven't been arrested, tried, and convicted yet.

[westman]

168. No, they're not.

Dislike them for other issues, but they are most certainly not war criminals.

[Tuttle]

65. Would you support Cheney's execution if he were convicted in France?

How about *'s (Oh, BTW, it looks like you just got here so when people use the asterisk, that means they are referring to the Preztel-dent).

If a court finds a plaintiff guilty, should the plaintiff receive a stiff penalty? I support the death penalty, but not in its present form - currently, it is NEVER applied to executives at tobacco companies, for example, who have profited off of pain, death and suffering: but they shouldn't be punished, according to some.

I could never understand this double standard - that is the difference between me and you, westman!

Tut-tut

[westman]

69. No, not in France.

I do not believe that the French have any jurisdiction over US matters.

What death penalty crime do you believe he is guilty of?

[Tuttle]

76. and why do we have jurisdiction over matters in Iraq?

who gave them to us? Kathrine Harris? Antonin Scalia? The UN?

I think the French have as much juridiction over us and we have over anyone else -- meaning NONE!!!

Tut-tut

Oh, BTW, what death penalty crime(s) do you think Cheney is innocent of?

[westman]

78. We have the jurisdiction to

defend ourselves against terror. It's paying off.

At the present time, the worst I see Cheney being guilty of are crimes that may get him locked up--not the DP.

[treepig]

84. thanks for coming here and spouting of mr. bush's

totally factless allegations that mr. saddam was a terror threat against the usa, and by attacking him we were actually defending ourselves.

pathetic!

[westman]

91. He WAS a terror threat.

He is no longer.

[treepig]

93. oh, so now he's a "threat"

good one!

and it's nice to see you're staying on your side's party line - just like the bush cabal, who at first claimed that mr. saddam had real wmd's, now they're stuck with saying, "umm, err, he had a "program" "!! wtf?

and just like whenever the right-winger's are challenged to prove that mr. saddam actually sponsored terrorism against the usa, they have to backtrack at light-speed to something much more nebulous like he was a "threat" - what the hell does that mean, and how does it justify killing tens of thousands of innocent people?

[westman]

95. So you feel that Saddam's an OK guy?

All the bodies in the mass graves did have smiles on their faces.

Re-enactment:

GUNSHOT!

Body falls into ditch.

Corpse screams, "Thank you sir, may I have another?

ANOTHER GUNSHOT!

Repeat 500,000+ times.

[Darranar]

102. That's NOT what he/she said...

he/she never said, nor implied, that Saddam was a good guy.

Please drop the straw-man.

What threat did Iraq pose to the US?

[treepig]

103. according to amnesty international

mr. saddam executed scores of people each year for political purposes(in case you don't know what a "score" is, it's 20).

sure, even one is way to many, but that's a long way from 500,000+ - but way to stay on message!

so where did the mass graves come from:

1) combatants killed in the war with iran

2) insurgents put down in combat operations after the gulf war I rebellion

3) iraqi's killed by the usa in the first gulf war

4) children killed by the usa's decade-long sanctions, which deliberately and knowingly targeted civilians

the point being, if you want to start ranking people's evilness by the effects that their actions had on the iraqi people - i doubt that saddam would be at the top of that list; several members of the current and past administrations would be considerably higher.

[Tuttle]

134. I think the record to date shows this:

BUSH LIED ABOUT WMDs - Saddam's reports have not been proven false: or in other words, Saddam told the truth!

I'm not saying that makes him a great guy but this is the record where Iraq's WMD is, indeed, this - Bush lied, Saddam didn't.

Sorry you won't/can't realize this, but I think you are a lurker from some other planet - so please take this message back with you -- Bush is a LIAR!!!! This is something conservatives used to hate about Clinton but doesn't bother them at all with Bush.

Can you explain that to us, westman? Why are you conservatives such hypocrites?

Tut-tut

[westman]

147. You need to broaden your research.

[treepig]

158. too bad you chose not to answer

about why you conservatives are such hypocrites - i suspect that tuttle, or myself for that matter, could do more research to find out - but it would have been nice to get some input straight from the horse's mouth (so to speak)!

[Name removed]

163. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Tuttle]

175. Can you explain that to us, westman?

Why are you conservatives such hypocrites?

I'm still waiting for your answer, 'westman'...

Tut-tut

[westman]

178. Taking a position different that yours

on one issue makes me a conservative?

Your frustration is showing.

Merry Christmas!

[Tuttle]

180. I'm not alone -- though you appear to be

to paraphrase westman

THREE DAYS AND THAT'S THE BEST YOU COULD COME UP WITH?


Happy Kwanzaa!

Tut-tut

[Darranar]

101. How?

[Darranar]

89. So how is the Iraq War defending ourselves against terrorism?

To me, it seems that the US has simply created a deadly quagmire and a terrorist haven, and in the process killed thousands.

[westman]

92. Keep throwing your support behind

Dennis. Fracture the party. Deny the obvious. We'll have GWB until January 2009.

[Darranar]

100. Deny the obvious?

The OBVIOUS is that this country has lost hundreds of soldiers and billions of dollars on a venture that was pointless.

Where are the WMD?

What is the evidence for an anti-American alliance between ideologically opposed factions?

How has the general population of the US (not the elite) benefitted from this tragedy?

[Tinoire]

116. Yeah but look at the bright side

Some people- freepers and Bush apologists- will be happy about having that murderous tyrant still in office. Something to do with tax-cuts, cutting social programs for the undeserving, putting all the common people in their place, and shouting "USA, USA, USA" as our military is used to ensure everyone remains sub-servient to us and that the mighty dollar remain the money behind the oil industry because without that we are doomed and the dollar will be worthless.

I hear Putin's considering the Euro now. Think we'll try to get him or Chavez out of the way first? Mighty tough decisions ahead for that inarticulate frat-boy!

Your concern about the party being fractured is... touching.

Bush is a murderous tyrant/ Kucinich 2004!

[Name removed]

154. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[zonmoy]

137. corporate executives

perhaps we should have the death penalty for any sort of corporate malfesance. That way the corporations would not be run by crooked fascists.

[westman]

142. Methinks you have

a greater problem with capitalism than you do with republicans.

[Tuttle]

174. Do you think corporations should be exempt from all laws?

It seems to me that if a person dies because of a bad policy call on the part of a company, then that company should bear some criminal repercussions - much like how when a Democrat, found to be in violation of laws, is punished (like Clinton lying).

Republicans, on the other hand, are free to lie as much as they like (like *'s WMDs claim) and many choose to ignore it and talk about what great 'leaders' we have.

So tell me 'westman' - do the laws apply to all? Or are corporations and Repukes exempt?

And please answer the question this time...

thanks,
Tut-tut

[westman]

176. First, define

"bad policy call". If we are to have an intelligent discourse, we must define our terms.

[Tinoire]

16. Thank you Dirk

It's always good to see you pop in:) What we are doing is appalling and will back-fire on us. Absolutely shameful- it's as if we have lost all reason.

:hi:

[Zhade]

21. A-fucking-MEN, Dirk.

Yeah, we CAN treat evil men like this. Doesn't mean we should sink to that level.

The whole propaganda campaign sickens me.

[ecarmody]

179. Please Stop!

I'm new to this site and I came across you crass language. I find it most offensive. could you please refrain from using this language again. Thank you kindly.

[Tinoire]

181. Put him on ignore if you don't like that language.

And Happy Cruising because that's not the last time you'll see such colorful language. I hope for your sake that there's no limit on the number of people you can put on ignore.

[koopie57]

33. I remember during a discussion over dinner,

someone said that the Germans were happy to be taken as POWs by Americans cuz they said they knew the Americans would be good to them. They knew Americans were fair and honorable.

[Dirk39]

38. You didn't just have a good dinner,

as far as I know, it was like this in most cases.

"Of one thing we may be sure. The future will never have to ask, with misgiving, what could the Nazis have said in their favor. History will know that whatever could be said, they were allowed to say. They have been given the kind of a Trial which they, in the days of their pomp and power, never gave to any man.

But fairness is not weakness. The extraordinary fairness of these hearings is an attribute of our strength."

MR. JUSTICE ROBERT H. JACKSON (Chief of Counsel for the United States)in Nuremberg, 1946

Judge by yourself,
Dirk

[loudnclear]

68. And just think about how many Arab friends we are making.

Their memories are long and they are patient.

[0007]

83. You got it right Drik

But I can't go for the death penalty

[LiberalFighter]

152. But the current admin know nothing about respect

Especially the whistle-ass jerk in the WH. He rather use the frat boy method commonly seen in the movies.

[KoKo]

172. Another thanks to Dirk........I won't go on in this post. It's enough for

me to see this.

[madrchsod]

9. he was the elected leader of his country

and more importantly he was our guy in iraq for years.the brits and the cia welcomed him when he came to power. we used him ,supplied him and looked the otherway for years . he was a genocidal maniac but there`s nothing to gain from these pictures and his torture.but maybe the bush klan is trying to drive him mad so he`ll never talk about his dealings with the klan and the european governments and companies that made billions from iraq.

[hlthe2b]

12. Could be the equivalent of a drug-induced lobotomy in progress.

God, I am so depressed being represented by these goons in our government....

[tlcandie]

25. Interesting you should say that about the drug-induced lobotomy

:think: Hmmm interesting take and you could be on to something there! Drug induced coma?

[hlthe2b]

66. I actually WAS NOT being facetious...

Enough of the right drugs over time can do enough brain damage to, essentially replicate a surgical lobotomy.

I'm afraid it doesn't take too much tinfoil to believe the BUSHIES might go for it (of course in the "name" of national security, interogation for critical information, etc., etc.)

[westman]

17. Yes...he had 100% of the vote!

The Iraqis LOVED him!

Don't make this human scum a hero. The more that people on our side do, the more we equate Saddam with republicans, the worse our defeat will be in '04 (Prez AND senate).

[Tinoire]

18. So what do you suggest people do? Re-write history to appease

Republican lovers?

[westman]

20. No, I suggest we

NOT rewrite history. In this case, the capture of Saddam should rate a 9.8 out of 10 from ALL of us. Like it or not, he really is worse than Bush. To suggest otherwise, as I stated previously, will doom us in '04.

[maggrwaggr]

29. I agree. Our bad guy beat up their bad guy.

but our bad guy is still a bad guy.

Saddam had it coming. From somebody.

Unfortunately our president lied, cheated, and stole in order to be the guy to do it.

[Kat 333]

31. Yes

Saddam was an unelected tyrant who didn't hesitate to take out whomever got in the way of what he wanted.
FAR worse than bush* :eyes:

[Dirk39]

32. I don't get it...

You've made two statements in your post:
1. He is worse than Bush
2. To suggest otherwise will doom "us" in '04

Both statements are related to a post that shows, HOW Saddam Hussein was treated, when he was captured, and about the circumstances of him, being captured. Does your statement 1. means: I think, he is worse than Bush - whatever that means - and according to this, the way he is treated is legitime?
Or do you propose, if Bush is captured, he should only get about one injection and half the beard, 'cause Saddam was worse?

Does your statement 2. implies: if Bush and his gang would have invaded four countries and killed millions of people: if this would "doom >us< in 2004, better shut your mouth and say it was o.k.?

Dirk

[westman]

71. I made no reference to Bush being captured.

Still not sure I get your drift...

[Tinoire]

35. Sorry. I see Bush as the ULTIMATE EVIL

Bush Inc and his allies have far surpassed any of the others in existence today. If we are doomed in 2004 it's because we don't have the balls to stand up for the truth and with the truth. Only truth can combat lies.

[westman]

72. You are, of course, entitled to that opinion.

However, you're wrong. If we were Iraqi, contributing to a board such as this would have put both of us in mass graves.

Your perspective is getting a lot of press, and much of the (voting) country is recoiling with disgust. Saddam is (was) a murdering tyrant. Bush, for ALL of his faults, is not.

Would you rather live in Iraq in 1998, or in the US in 2003?

[Tinoire]

115. Bush is not a murdering tyrant?!

Please stop- you're killing me!

Alleluia for that revelation! I can't wait to share that good news with the dead Iraqis, dead Afghans, and the parents of all our young and women who were killed in his wars (some who, by the way, have called Bush exactly that).

So just what are Bush's faults according to you? Picking his nose in private public?



I see you've bought into our government's propaganda lock, stock and barrel. You need to pick up a history book and read up on Iraq- try to buy something pre 1988 before the oil-men noticed Saddaam was no longer pliant enough and getting a little uppity with his resources.

[westman]

129. I guess there's just no arguing

with the marxist, leninist, socialist workers' paradise mindset. Enjoy the next red brigade recruiting meeting.

"There's a place in the world for the angry young man,
with his foot in his mouth and his head in the sand."
- Billy Joel.

[Tinoire]

133. You're not even making sense

I guess picking up a pre-propaganda era book is too much for you?

Figures :eyes:

Why read when you can let your mind rot and just accept whatever they tell you?

[westman]

143. Those who define the "propaganda-era"

tend to be the ones who spew the propaganda. I stand by my statement.

[arlib]

141. OK....

...making lame Bush apologies is one thing, but quoting from lame Billy Joel songs is well out of order!!!!

[westman]

145. Always one of my favorites!

I felt "Angry Young Man" was more in keeping with my theme than "Billy the Kid"!

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

150. From the gist of your previous comments, it sounds as if you

1. Believe that Iraq/Saddam posed a threat to the United States.

2. That another four years of Bush would be good in this new perpetual war against "terror."

3. That enforcing laws against corporate malfeasance is a form of communism.

4. That Socialism of any sort is a terrible thing.

I think that you may of made a mistake in trying to find a forum for people who share your opinions by coming to this board.

[westman]

161. I'm a Democrat,

many (most) Democrats share my views, and this IS Democratic Underground. Now, if this site has been taken over by the extreme left wing minority of our party, then rename the site "Extreme Left Wing Underground" and I'll stay away.

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

169. Do you REALLY believe that Saddam posed a threat to the US?

And that this war was justifiable?

If so, WHY?

Hey, I can say I'm a Republican, but my views give me away. You say your a Lieberman fan... He's so right wing even Gore disavowed him. Christ, just look at the man's poll numbers. The man is Rebublican Lite.

[Terwilliger]

45. doom or not...Bush has killed tens of thousands in an illegal war

which he lied backwards and forwards to initiate

Saddam was a brutal thug dictator murderer...who cares? The US sure as SHIT didn't care as long as he was doing our bidding. When it was politically expedient, the US made him Public Enemy #1 (not unlike Manuel Noriega...another CIA asset)

[westman]

73. Tens of thousands?

Please elaborate.

[Darranar]

77. Sure...

War killed 55,000 Iraqi civilians


The invasion, war and occupation of Iraq has cost up to 55,000 civilian lives, according to a shocking new report published by a UK-based charity.

Now the medical charity is lobbying the American and British governments to focus urgently on the healthcare needs of the Iraqi population, following the invasion of the country.

Medact's report, highlighting the devastating impact of war on the Iraqi population, reveals that between 22,000 and 55,000 Iraqi civilians died during the bombing of the country.

The report titled, Continuing Collateral Damage: the Health and Environmental costs of War on Iraq, says the American and British occupiers are obliged under international law to ensure the healthcare needs of the population are met.

Al Jazeera

If you believe that Al Jazeera is an anti-American rag, the DU discussion is here. A number of other links were posted there.

A few other links that might be of interest...

From HRW, on deaths of Iraqi civilians in Baghdad during the Occupation:

Based on interviews with witnesses and family members, Human Rights Watch confirmed the deaths of twenty Iraqi civilians in Baghdad in legally questionable circumstances between May 1 and September 30. Eighteen of these deaths are documented in this report. In addition, Human Rights Watch collected data on civilian deaths by U.S. forces from the Iraqi police, human rights organizations, Western media and U.S military statements on the topic. In total, Human Rights Watch estimates the U.S. military killed ninety-four civilians in questionable circumstances. Human Rights Watch did not verify each of these individual cases but, taken as a whole, they reveal a pattern of alleged illegal deaths that merit investigation.

http://www.hrw.org/reports/2003/iraq1003/1.htm#_Toc54183720

Human Rights Watch has no official position on whether or not the war was right, so please drop accusations of bias:

As in the case of other armed conflicts, Human Rights Watch thus does not support or oppose the threatened war with Iraq. We do not opine on whether the dangers to civilians in Iraq and neighboring countries of launching a war are greater or lesser than the dangers to U.S. or allied civilians - or, ultimately, the Iraqi people - of not launching one. We make no comment on the intense debate surrounding the legality of President George Bush's proposed doctrine of "pre-emptive self-defense" or the need for U.N. Security Council approval of a war.

http://www.hrw.org/campaigns/iraq/hrwpolicy.htm

Human Rights Watch on the use of cluster munitions in Iraq:

The United States and United Kingdom are failing to provide adequate data on their cluster munition strikes in Iraq, and this lack of information is endangering Iraqi civilians, Human Rights Watch charged today.

The U.S. Department of Defense has acknowledged using nearly 1,500 air-dropped cluster bombs, but has not revealed any information about ground-launched cluster munitions, which may have been much more numerous. The U.K. Ministry of Defense has admitted to using more than 2,000 cluster munitions, but like the Pentagon, it has not provided detailed information that deminers need to clear “dud� submunitions, which pose hazards to civilians.

“The United States and United Kingdom need to come clean on what they’ve done with these weapons,� said Reuben Brigety, researcher with the Arms Division of Human Rights Watch. “They are not doing all they can to protect civilians from the deadly after-effects of their cluster attacks.�

Submunitions from artillery projectiles and multiple launch rockets, as well as aircraft cluster bombs, may have produced tens of thousands of hazardous duds in numerous locations in Iraq, including urban areas, Brigety said. He urged the United States and United Kingdom to provide adequate warnings to civilians, including realistic images of dud submunitions, and assist in all ways possible with the clearance of cluster munition duds.

http://www.hrw.org/press/2003/04/us-uk042903.htm

According to a report in yesterday’s Newsday, a Central Command spokeswoman has anonymously confirmed that U.S. forces have hit urban areas of Baghdad with cluster munitions, stating that they were aimed at Iraqi artillery and missile systems located inside the city.
“U.S. commanders should never use cluster munitions in populated areas,� said Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch. “These are wholly inappropriate weapons when civilians are around. The reported use of cluster munitions in Baghdad is a serious charge and the Pentagon must respond publicly to it.�

Newsday’s reporter provided Human Rights Watch with a photograph he had taken inside a building in what he described as a clearly residential neighborhood well inside Baghdad. Human Rights Watch identified an unexploded cluster submunition in the photograph from either a ground-based Multiple Launch Rocket System (MLRS) or an artillery projectile. The damage to the surrounding walls and floor were also consistent with a cluster munition strike. Human Rights Watch has previously reported that, according to The Pentagon’s own data, these particular submunitions have an especially high failure rate.
********************************************
Human Rights Watch believes that the use of cluster munitions in populated areas may violate the prohibition of indiscriminate attacks contained in international humanitarian law. Despite the utility of cluster munitions in achieving certain military objectives, the wide dispersal pattern of their submunitions makes it very difficult to avoid civilians if they are in the area. Moreover, because of their high failure rate, cluster munitions leave large numbers of hazardous, explosive duds to terrorize civilians even after the attack is over.

The U.S. Army and Marine Corps may be taking less care to avoid civilian casualties with surface-delivered cluster munitions than the U.S. Air Force with air-delivered cluster munitions, Human Rights Watch said.
**********************************
It seemed that after Yugoslavia, U.S. commanders learned that cluster munitions cannot be safely used in populated areas,� said Roth. “The use of cluster munitions inside Baghdad represents a disturbing step backwards – with deadly consequences.�

It is not yet known if there were civilian casualties at the time of the strike, but Newsday reported on several deaths and injuries to children and others who encountered the explosive duds left by the cluster munitions which failed to detonate on initial impact as designed. The duds function as de facto antipersonnel landmines

http://www.hrw.org/press/2003/04/iraqclusterbombs.htm

Amnesty International on civilian deaths:

Amnesty International is deeply concerned about the mounting toll of civilian casualties in Iraq and the reported use of cluster bombs by US forces in heavily populated areas. Despite repeated assurances from US and UK authorities that they would do everything possible to protect the Iraqi people, since 20 March hundreds of civilians have reportedly been killed. Some have been victims of cluster bombs; some have died in attacks in disputed circumstances. The attacks in the vicinity of civilian targets continue and are likely to escalate as fighting moves into Baghdad.
***********************
The attack at al-Hilla's hospital on 1 April was an example of indiscriminate killing of civilians and a grave violation of international humanitarian law," Amnesty International emphasized.
***********************
"The devastating consequences of using cluster bombs in civilian areas are utterly predictable. If, as accounts suggest, US forces dropped cluster bombs in residential areas of al-Hilla, even if they were directed at military targets, this would be a grave breach of international humanitarian law," Amnesty International said. "An independent and thorough investigation must be held and those found responsible for any violations of the laws of war should be brought to justice. The US and UK authorities should order an immediate halt to the further use of cluster bombs. "

Iraqi civilians have also been placed at greater risk of being killed or injured by US and UK forces as a result of tactics used by the Iraqi military that violate international humanitarian law, such as perfidious attacks. Amnesty International is also concerned about reports that Iraq has been locating military forces and weaponry in close proximity to civilians in order to shield them from attack

[westman]

79. Present a credible, unbiased source, then I'll have a look.

I presume that you think Saddam's body count of 500,000+ (objectively verified by skull count) is just fine.

There is a real bad guy out there. Saddam Hussein. Attack him, and we'll have a chance in '04.

[Darranar]

87. What not credible source did I give?

Are you aware that Saddam's major atrocitiies occured when he was still a US ally?

He was a brutal dictator - that is clear, and his atrocities were despicable and inexcusable. But that didn't justify the slaughter of the sanctions; that doesn't justify killing thousands in a war for oil and, by selling Iraq to American firms, preventing any truly democratic government in there for decades. (How can a true democratic nation exist when its industries are under the control of foreign firms?) It does not justify denying the Iraqis freedom of speech.

How many more will die from left-over cluster munitions? How many more will die from the detoriating humanitarian situation? How many more will die from the depleted uraniam? How many will die from the continuing chaos and violence?

This war isn't over yet. More will die, both Americans and Iraqis, for corporate interests.

The Iraqi people are NOT better off. Bush, who has proven his lack of respect for democracy by stealing the election in 2000 and his lack of respect for freedom by signing the PATRIOT Act, is a hypocrite when he calls for democracy. He has no interest in democracy; he has an interest in making he and his friends richer.

What about Hitler's atrocities, the ones that Bush's grandfather exploited for personal monetary gain? What about the atrocities in Nicaragua, many of which were supervised and approved by several within the Bush Administration?

Saddam is not the only bad guy involved in all of this. It is not black and white.

[westman]

94. AI? HRW? Al Jazeera?

I don't need to connect the dots. OK, I will. Each organization has a "terrorists are fine, US is evil" spin.

You're angry. Your're hurt. You hate the present administration. I feel for you. However, do not allow your anger to manifest itself in such blatantly senseless positions and conclusions. Saddam is worse than Bush, Iraq is better off, the US is better off.

What about that 500,000+ skull count?

[Darranar]

99. Uh...

No, sorry, I don't believe any of that for a second.

HRW is a respectable and objective organization. They were not against the iraq war; they simply report the truth, unlike some.

What is your evidence for this great anti-American conspiracy among these human rights organizations?

How is the US better off?

[westman]

106. 1. They have political agendas.

2. We're better off because he is gone, and the dominoes are falling.

The US isn't such a bad country, you know.

[Darranar]

108. WHAT political agendas?

Because they do not ignore information that might possibly hurt the US, they have political agendas and are biased?

The US isn't a "bad" country. Countries aren't good and bad.

Once again, what has the US gained from this war?

[westman]

112. Countries are judged by their actions.

Iraq's have been far worse than our.

You strike me as a one-world, let's-cede-our-sovereignty-to-the-UN-type. Sorry, that ain't gonna fly. It's a sure recipe for a Saddam-like figure to have absolute control over nearly 4 billion people.

[treepig]

113. perhaps going back to your 500,000+ skull count

that you attribute to saddam as a point of comparison - the usa has been far worse - it has killed way more innocent people than that.

[Darranar]

114. 'Cede our sovereignty'?

Yes, I support US war criminals being charged and convicted the same way all others are.

Yes, I support strong efforts to get the UN and the international community to get involved in humanitarian efforts, and not simply blowing up the place for the interests of US firms.

Yes, I support peaceful means to solve problems, conducted mutlilaterally.

Yes, I support, eventually, a global proportionally elected Parliament.

I notice that you seem eager to protect the sovereignty of one state (the US) while ignoring the sovereignty of another (Iraq.)

We should be judging actions, not countries.

[westman]

149. I have deep concerns about HRW's objectivity--

Where's the condemnation of Mugabe in Zimbabwe? He's trying to supplant Idi Amin as the most despotic African dictator of the past 100 years, yet all HRW focuses on is food distribution anomalies (serious, I agree, but only the tip of the Mugabe iceberg).

[Darranar]

165. Er...

http://www.hrw.org/press/2002/01/zim0129.htm

http://www.hrw.org/press/1999/feb/zimltr.htm

http://www.hrw.org/reports/pdfs/Z/ZIMBABWE/ZIMBABWE904.PDF

http://www.hrw.org/reports/pdfs/Z/ZIMBABWE/ZIMBABWE90N.PDF

http://www.hrw.org/press/1999/feb/zim0209.htm

Try a Google search, and you'll find a lot more.

[Whoa_Nelly]

105. Just curious, WestMan...

Who do you support for '04?

[westman]

107. Haven't made up my mind,

I'm not truly happy with our field, but I'm leaning toward Lieberman or Gephardt.

How 'bout you?

[Whoa_Nelly]

111. Am watching

reading, learning and leaning toward Dean or Clark.

Quite frankly, the American voting public (those who don't research/learn/read about the people/issues), often throw thier votes to the latest just pre-election day media whore news, and won't vote for unmarried/stange (meaning: odd/foreign-sounding) names. The way of the sheeple is deeply ingrained. I am hoping, and pushing for everyone to vote no matter what their party/person vote is, as well as speaking up whenever possible for people to at least register to vote. It's a shame so many people are not registered, or will not vote because they feel it really doesn't make a difference.

on edit: typos :-)

[Tinoire]

120. Lieberman? Gephardt?

And you had the utter gall to ask a Kucinich supporter to please stop fracturing "our" party?

Now that is funny!!!

[westman]

130. The fracturing originates with

Kucinich, Dean, et.al.

I'm mainstream.

[Darranar]

132. Dean?

Because (now) he does not support the attack on Iraq?

Dean is a moderate.

[westman]

146. A perfect example.

The fact that you (and enough others) think Dean is a moderate will doom us in '04.

As much as I disagree with Zell Miller on other issues, he is right about the viability of our party. We are fracturing and turning on each other.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

159. Um Zell Miller supports Bush...I don't think he is qualified to comment on

what the Dem party needs to do...

[westman]

160. If you want to win,

you should listen.

Nader is the least of our worries.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

170. Funny we won the last election

until the 5 to 4 vote.

[Darranar]

166. Zell Milller has no right to speak...

about the fracturing of our party.

[truth2power]

151. `Human Rights Watch isn't a credible source??

Who knew?

[westman]

162. No.

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

171. Wow! Can you back up your opinion or what?

Most impressive! "No."

This one's for you, Mr. High Intellect:

[westman]

173. Just what I would expect

from someone hell bent on the destruction of the Democratic party.

[dax]

177. How do you know they didn't come from US bulldozers to trenches...

It is well documented that Iraqi dead were bulldozed into trenches, some even still alive during Gulf 1. AFTER the war was over and Iraqis were fleeing home on the road to Basra, the road was blocked and the trucks, cars and mostly NON-military vehicles were strafed and bombed until nothing but ashes and bones were left by our illustrious military who have demonstrated an uncanny ability to be brave when noone is shooting back...kind of like those macho men hunters nailing Bambi in the woods. You are either ignorant or incredibly naive...thousands of Iraqi babies have been born with grotesque deformities from the depleted uranium a true weapon of mass destruction US continues to use to destroy what was once an agriculturally self sufficient society which will be now dependent on US food exports for centuries (or until we get leadership willing to fund the technology to clean up the mess we made and paid for with our tax dollars. Saddam NEVER murdered 500,000 children but Janet Reno acknowledged on National TV that US SANCTIONS DID and that it was "worth it" get some perspective on YOUR responsability as an American. Just because they are different doesn't mean our needs are worth their deaths as collateral damage. If a bomb flew into your house and obliterated your family and neighbors because some Canadian military person targetted a terrorist nearby, YOU WOULD NOT THINK IT WAS WORTH IT. US murdured 15 children and their parents in 3 days last week because they thought they had a bead on a bad guy in Afghanistan. OOPS.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

98. yes "tens of thousands" of dead Iraqis in this war...40,000 at last count

[joeunderdog]

135. Here's a quick guide on what has been lost in this invasion.

http://www.iraqometer.com/

[0007]

88. This is not about what you think Saddam is and isn't

'Tis about why junior took us to a needless war in Iraq and why he thumbed his nose at the UN.

I don't buy into your "we" and "our" thingy concerning the democrats' and the election in 04 -

It is about George W. Bush and his lies, not how ruthless Saddam Hussein was, okay?

[westman]

148. No, it is about Saddam Hussein.

His crimes exceed those of the Bush administration by a large measure. His threat against us was real.

Don't let your hatred of the administration blind you. Support the good things when they happen.

We'll lose in '04 if you don't.

[Skittles]

57. our? our? our?

please

[Tinoire]

59. Lol

The Laissez-faire with the adjectival pronouns is astounding ;)

But then, look at Bush Inc and the difficulty they have in differentiating between 'mine' and 'thine'.

[westman]

74. What's your point?

Please be more receptive to other opinions. You'll learn a lot.

[Tinoire]

118. Naw, rots your brain

Kind of like getting your news from Fox. If you do that too much you start believing lies along the lines of "They hate us for our Freedom".

[Kat 333]

119. HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

This is from the person who just said in your previous post "You are, of course, entitled to that opinion. However, you're wrong."

So this is why everyone else should be "more receptive to other opinions" - Right ?

THEN - We'll All be as intelligent as you are ? LOL

[westman]

131. One can only hope!

[Kat 333]

10. Hopefully ...

We will see bush* meet the same fate. Better yet ... Worse

[Tinoire]

14. Ask and ye shall receive! The Leftist tooth fairy heard your plea!

--------------

"High Value Target" George W Bush was found caught in a dirt-tunnel hideout, 20 feet beneath the White House, 8 months after his defeat in the 2004 Presidential elections.

"Troops clear the opening of the tunnel, revealing a vertical shaft about 2m deep. They discovered George W. Bush, sitting in the bottom of the tunnel cradling a pistol in his lap. When asked who he was, he reportedly replied "George Dubya"

The URL of this article is: http://globalresearch.ca/articles/DBY312A.html

The Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG) at www.globalresearch.ca grants permission to cross-post original CRG articles in their entirety, or any portions thereof, on community internet sites, as long as the text and title of the article are not modified. The source must be acknowledged as follows: Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG) at www.globalresearch.ca . The active URL hyperlink address of the original CRG article and the author's copyright note must be clearly displayed.

[tlcandie]

24. OMG LoL .. absolutely cracking up here!! Yay Tinoire you did it YET again

:loveya: You are just so ahead of the game :+

[Kat 333]

27. lol

You Are on a roll tonight.
GO Girl ...

[maggrwaggr]

28. Wow! It's that guy who kidnapped Elizabeth Smart!

dead ringer. Creepy!

[IndianaGreen]

34. Bush will surely follow Saddam to a court of justice

and the ultimate penalty for their many crimes.

[Guaranteed]

39. You should have been here two weeks ago

Then I would have believed you.

[stevedeshazer]

2. As if

Ahmed Chalabi should get to see Saddam. I thought Saddam was being interrogated by the CIA.

The CIA should interrogate Ahmed Chalabi. Woops, I forgot, Chalabi IS the CIA.

[JailBush]

3. I sure hope we'll one day see photos of George W. Bush in similar

circumstances. Imagine Curious George being held in detention and drugged, then placed in a spiderhole in Nebraska, where U.S. troops can claim credit for capturing him. Cool!

[0007]

104. We will, but we'll probably be outnumbered by repukes 1000-1

I think junior has big plans for Qaddafi to off us.

[bvar22]

5. We already know what bush* looks like drugged & disoriented...

...all that's missing now are the shackles!

[tlcandie]

7. I would like to know why Chalabi had access and photos but not

the American press? Why wasn't this in our news? Why is everyone getting information, but us? What is the regime afraid of that we can't see the facts, the bodies, the truth?

<snip>
That photo and another in which he is talking to Dr Chalabi in an animated way, caused a stir in Baghdad when they were published on the front page of Al-Mutamar, the newspaper of Dr Chalabi's Iraqi National Congress, which said the meeting took place on Monday.

Dr Chalabi has refused to discuss his meeting with Hussein or to release copies of the photo, leaving the world's media to copy the image from his newspaper.
<snip>

[deminflorida]

13. Well he did steal anywhere between two and twenty billion...

dollars. They're probaly freaking out as to why they found him hiding out in hole. Maybe ole Saddam finally ran across some folks even badder than him, and they stole that money from him. Feel safer now?

Anybody?

I won't until they find out where all that money went, but then again he's the only that knows isn't he? So in that respect, at least they'er trying to find out. Of course Bush put us in the situation where an idiot like Saddam could have lost control of that much money to god know's who.

[DuctapeFatwa]

19. The US sets the standard for human rights. Over 100 thousand US troops

are currently deployed in foreign lands and subject to capture.

[Tinoire]

37. Just how many troops do we have out right now?

About 130,000 in Iraq
5000 in the Balkans (1700 in Bosnia 2500 in Kosovo and the rest scattered about & 33,000 foreign troops)
850 on the Sinai Peninsula
Afghanistan ?
Columbia ?
Phillipines?

[Bill of Rights]

22. I agree that the US military

should at least look like they are treating SH decently. I'm sure they are putting him through hell while trying to break him.

[bushedout]

30. Not enough evidence to say either way

I mean, a picture? Come on.

[Tinoire]

42. Maybe you should try reading the articles?

It would help you get a much clearer understanding of what people are discussing- in this thread and in the other one.

Surely you didn't just look at the picture before making that impressive statemet?

[bushedout]

44. The picture is cited in the article

The picture tells nothing either way.

[Tinoire]

51. I am baffled. A picture is cited so that's the only evidence

as far as you're concerned?



Warning. He didn't read the words either. Said there were enough pictures in the article ;)

You gotta read the words dude!

[54anickel]

61. Ha! I've never seen that pic before! LMAO!!!

[Tinoire]

63. I once heard

that it was photo-shopped. The scary thing though, is that, with that moron, you can never really know!

Frankly I wouldn't be surprised if Rove had them turn the book upside up and then claim it had been photo-shopped! ;)

Oh for the days of Clinton when such things didn't even cross your mind! What an idiot this new one is. Nancy Reagan herself once endearingly called him the "Idiot-in-Chief". When I find that link again, I'll post this on some other boards... just to see the public reaction :)

Peace

[VolcanoJen]

90. As much as that photo makes me laugh, it was photoshopped

Here's the AP's original photo:



And the article debunking the upside-down book is here, at Snopes:

http://www.snopes.com/photos/bushbook.asp

But I still like the upside-down photo. :D

[54anickel]

109. Thanks to both of you for setting me straight. It's still funny as hell!

[davsand]

36. Sounds like sleep depravation and Pentathol

Gee, he looks bad--as in really tired--his bed is under spotlights and he'd got marks from IVs? Some article here at DU says he's acting as if he's been drugged. Sounds to me like the man is being interrogated and tortured with sleep denial and some kind of drug cocktail. That is not exactly in compliance with the Geneva convention.

He's a bad man--and gosh whiz, nobody likes him--but I'm not exactly thinking the US is setting a high standard here if we are torturing the man. There are NO excuses for that.

Laura

[Emillereid]

40. Despise Hussein if you will, but he was the legitimate head

of a sovereign nation who we deposed via an illegal invasion/war. We have absolutely no right to arrest or charge him or interrogate him -- it is not our business. Now that we have destroyed their country, we should get the hell out and let the Iraqis put their country and their lives back together. If they want to try Hussein for crimes against humanity, it's their business. Our government is acting like fascist thugs in its treatment of Hussein and others. It is Bush and his cronies that should be tried for war crimes in an international court. But as much as I dislike Bush I would insist that he be treated humanely, with respect and be given every opportunity to defend himself.

[tlcandie]

41. Well stated Emillereid!

:toast:

[JailBush]

43. Saddam was a LEGITIMATE ruler???

Well, anyone who buys that would easily promote George W. Bush as a legitimate ruler. I agree with the rest of your post, except your sentiments regarding humane treatent for Saddam Hussein and George W. Bush. Frankly, I think George Bush deserves a taste of his own medicine.

[Emillereid]

53. Yup - his government was recognized around the world.

And so is the government of GW. That's not to say that Hussein or Bush took power legitimately. Different issues. While we have to figure out a way to get rid of Bush, it should have been up to the Iraqis, not us, to depose Hussein. I certainly don't want some third party invading the USA to give us regime change.

[bushedout]

46. You know who you sound like?

You sound like Dukakis answering that question about what if his wife was raped in his debate with Bush 41.

Nobody gives a rat's ass about all your little legal "niceties". Get real, get rid of Dean or watch this Party go so far down it may NEVER come back up.

It's time to take the gloves off.

[Emillereid]

52. Those legal niceties as you put it are the core of a constitutional

democracy. The process must be fair and transparent. We are presumably a society based on the rule of law, not thugs and personal revenge. Now that's something worth fighting for. Believe me, I can get quite passionate about justice.

[bushedout]

56. Good luck losing next year then

Ameicans have a tendency to not like those kind of technicalities.

Are you saying if Saddam is executed something is wrong with that?

[DuctapeFatwa]

121. And if you are accused of something and executed, what is wrong with that?

or if not you, maybe a family member?

The purpose of the rule of law is not to protect popular and sympathetic figures from angry mobs and/or corrupt despots.

Saddam, and every other human being is entitled to the same protection as your children are.

[Tinoire]

125. I'm afraid

he can't quite hear you well enough where he is to understand such trivial matters as international legal rights.

[DuctapeFatwa]

126. LOL Tinoire! I guess my John Edward classes were a bust :)

I'm going to demand my money back!

[foreigncorrespondent]

58. Can you please explain to me...

...what your feelings about Dean have to do with this thread?

If you want to talk about the candidate of your choice (which I suspect the surname of yours begins with a B), over in GD2.

[DemBones DemBones]

81. Comments like this one

give the rest of us who oppose Dean a bad name.

What do we "win" if we give up our principles to get there?

Dukakis stood by his principles, which included opposition to capital punishment, while Poppy Bush's campaign used Willie Horton to demonize him. Yeah, that was taking the gloves off. It was also throwing away morals and ethics. Lee Atwater masterminded that campaign. A few years later, dying of cancer, he was asking God to forgive him for all that he'd done.

Our present government was wrong to invade Iraq and their treatment of the captive Saddam is wrong, too. International law and basic principles of human decency should be respected, even when those we oppose don't observe them.

[calimary]

117. As I recall, Atwater also called Dukakis to apologize to him, when

he felt the Grim Reaper near. Ever the bully-chickenshit - don't REALLY get religion until you realize you're about to be Judged...

But at least he apologized, verifying and confirming that he had PLENTY to apologize ABOUT. Often, I wonder if - 20 years from now, we'll be hearing the same about a newly-chastened-nice-guy-now-that-he's-on-his-death-bed KKKarl Rove. Wouldn't surprise me.

I have to admit that an earlier poster here has a point.

To paint bush as worse than Saddam, WHILE I PERSONALLY CAN EASILY SEE THE SENSE IN THAT, it would be a loser with voters we really hope to reach: the independents and undecided. They'd just take it for reckless mean-ness, as good and worthy an argument for it as you COULD, INDEED, make.

There are still too many soporific Americans who believe in bush, and this would alienate them - from OUR side, not his. As unfair as that is.

on edit - punctuation

[bobbieinok]

183. Didn't W work on that campaign with Atwater??

..

[Terwilliger]

48. He was as "legitimate" as Bush is "legitimate"

But you're right...we treat other nation's dictators as legitimate heads of state (until the US decides that they aren't legitimate anymore, of course)

[Rex]

47. I wonder what kind of torture they are using on him.

And for what? To get him to confess to having once had a weapons program? To having owned WMD? To killing thousands of his own people?

That's not our job...no one put the US in charge of handing out punishment.

Even if we get him to admit to these things, it won't bring back the dead, or make WMD materialize out of thin air. I still say Saddam won't make it to any kind of trial. They can't risk it.

[bushedout]

50. I think they are having him listen to Dean speeches

[Rex]

54. whatever they are doing...the end result will end up with him

missing his court date due to a premature dirtnap.

[54anickel]

62. For What? They need to tie him to 9-11 and OBL! n/t

[Dirk39]

49. God bless America!

I posted this as a reply to one poster before, but I simply can't resist to post it again. The circumstances might be completely different, 'cause the Bush administration lacks any kind of legitimacy or right to judge Saddam Hussein, but just taking them serious for a waste second in history, on their claims that Saddam was worse than Hitler and Stalin (that was said by Bush and Co., when the war started):

"Of one thing we may be sure. The future will never have to ask, with misgiving, what could the Nazis have said in their favor. History will know that whatever could be said, they were allowed to say. They have been given the kind of a Trial which they, in the days of their pomp and power, never gave to any man.

But fairness is not weakness. The extraordinary fairness of these hearings is an attribute of our strength."

http://history1900s.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.courttv.com%2Fcasefiles%2Fnuremberg%2Fclose.html

MR. JUSTICE ROBERT H. JACKSON (Chief of Counsel for the United States)in Nuremberg, 1946

No comment necessary,
Dirk

[Emillereid]

55. Actually the difference in the way we honored due process

at Nuremberg in comparison to the way we conceive of justice now, sadly points out just how far down we've devolved as a civilized society. Just think about how Bush uses the word justice as a synonym for punishment or death. Justice is about fairness and due process.

[mouse7]

60. Drugging prisoners is against Geneva Convention

Regardless of what your feelings are about Saddam, we should be upholding the standards of the Geneva Convention. If nothing else, we want to ensure our people are treated properly if they become prisoners.

[pinniped]

67. POS BULLshyt must have seen "Red Dawn".

""Geneva Convention", never heard of it."

[uncle ray]

86. actually i think it was rummy...

that said specificaly, that saddam will be treated according to the geneva convention, NPR was pointing out that they already were humiliating him.

i'm sure its naieve of me to think that if we treat him well, and assure him of dying of old age, in comfort, that he may be of benefit to mankind to be kept alive, via his cooperation with us, but then our previous treatment of him has already ended the possibility of that.

[missile_bender]

110. We're assembling quite a list of war crimes against Saddam

1. Drugging him
2. Giving the press pictues and video of his capture
3. Torture
4. Exploiting his capture for political gain
5. Refusing him legal counsel

Anything else?

[Tinoire]

122. Destroying his own country, killing off over 500,000 children

I almost posted this at DU because I could not believe their gall but one administration official, justifying the looooong occupation required to suck out all that oil, had the temerity to say that Saddaam had neglected the country for 35 years and that they had to stick around to whip it into shape. Now as I recall my pre-BushI history, Iraq was a very modern country with a very competent bureaucracy- religious tolerance, womens rights, clean running water, electricity, six-line highways, a high literacy rate, free first-rate universities, a well-trained labor force, telephone service, state of the art hospitals. They were so modern that before Bush I came along, their number 1 problem was child obesity!

The sanctions, called the harshest in history by UNICEF staff in Baghdad, keep the nation from importing equipment for water purification and electricity generation, as well as medicines needed to treat common diseases. In additions, childhood leukemia and abnormal births have soared in the past 10 years–thought by many to be the result of radiation given off by US munitions used in the Gulf War. All in all, UNICEF estimates that the sanctions have led to the deaths of 500,000 Iraqi children in the past 11 years.

<snip>

"Failure to thrive" is the medical term for children whose bodies don't put on weight—like this child who weighs six pounds at one year of age. Malnutrition affects 55 percent of Iraqi children; prior to the imposition of sanctions, childhood obesity was the number one health concern for Iraqi parents.

http://www.brethren.org/genbd/witness/Iraqi/Iraqpostcard.htm

<snip>
For Haynes, a deep religious faith and compassion for Iraq's suffering parents greatly outweigh fear of imprisonment. Speaking from 14 years' experience as a grief counselor to parents who've lost children she says "It's inconceivable that those hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children that have died have not been mourned as deeply as these children here in America."

On her first trip to Iraq, Haynes entered a hospital ward filled with children dying from diseases almost non-existent there twelve years ago. She found herself across from a grieving mother, and without really thinking Haynes raised her hand to her chest and gently tapped in sync with her heartbeat. The Iraqi mother mirrored the gesture. Haynes then lowered her hands, holding them outward at waist-level. The Iraqi mother then collapsed into her arms.

She recounts that day going bed to bed embracing dozens of grieving mothers "whose babies were dying because they didn't have enough to eat, because they're drinking dirty water in one of the wealthiest countries in the world." Haynes says that in Iraq, before the extensive infrastructure damage caused by coalition bombing during the Gulf War "97% of the population had access to potable drinking water, and the worst medical problem was obesity." She explains that under the U.N. Oil for Food program, whose last two directors have resigned in protest, each citizen receives only $170 per year for "food, medicines, electricity to repair their system, absolutely everything."

<snip>

Taken from: Washington Physicians for Social Responsibility president explains decision to defy U.S. law http://www.scn.org/ccpi/source-2002may.html

http://www.commondreams.org/views/102300-103.htm
http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/s779232.htm

"With Iraq, you get the sense this is an almost modern country that's fallen on hard times, because they have modern, six-lane divided highways, they did have good electricity supply and they had a high level of education," Fritzler says.

Conditions in southern Iraq aren't the result of war but of a "long period of real neglect and real, crushing oppression," he says. "The war ((this war)) was just the latest in a series of catastrophes."
http://www.savethechildren.org/emergencies/iraq/nov_20_update.asp

[54anickel]

64. Is he POW or not? First Rummy said he would be, then I saw that the

Red Cross would be able to get involved if he was POW. Thought to myself then that Rummy would change his mind. Thought last I heard he was NOT considered a POW. I am afraid I have lost track.

[Rainbows]

75. No Mention of another reason for sickness ...

After seeing the original picture released I noted several differences between the original and follow up photos, and wondered of doubles etc.
Something I have wondered since the first "target of opportunity" struck Baghdad aiming at Saddam, is the probability that even if they missed a direct hit they would still nuke him with exposure to depleted uranium dust. A slow but steady killer. This might be another possibility to the look of haggard sickness though I do not discount drugs to find out where he stashed the loot. Spoils of war for the CIA.

[jmcgowanjm]

80. I am still waiting for independent confirmation of ID of Saddam

You know, something coming from someone who
has nothing to gain from Saddam's "capture".

Saddam could have escaped to any of the Arab
countries, Belarus, Russia, Afghanistan, or
Latin America – anywhere. He would have been
safer in Tel-Aviv than in Tikrit. If Saddam could
not make up his mind, he could have asked Bin
Laden for a good suggestion: holes in Afghanistan
are a much safer bet than holes in Tikrit. Instead,
we are expected to believe that Saddam could come
up with nothing better but to find the highest
concentration of US forces in Iraq, dig a hole in
the ground right in the middle of it and sit in there
on a suitcase full of cash and valuable intelligence
about the Iraqi resistance.

http://www1.iraqwar.ru/iraq-read_article.php?articleId=30016&lang=en

The World believes alot of things about Saddam.
The majority of what the World believes does not
have any relation to US Fantasyland.

[DemBones DemBones]

82. I don't know whether the man

in custody is Saddam or not, but my suspicions were aroused when they claimed to have a DNA test done so quickly. Perhaps there's a new technique I've not heard of, but I didn't think it was possible to get results in less than a week.

[treepig]

85. guess you missed the x-files episode

where dr. scully was able, all by herself, perform a definitive DNA analysis of alien genetic material in 2 hours or so. the fbi can do remarkable things these days . . . (perhaps, even having the results prepared in advance . . . )

[Rainbows]

138. Not lost on me either ....

:-)

[ElsewheresDaughter]

96. Fox News: pictures of dead Osay and Uday and bush* plastered all over

the walls of Saddams cell....this is sick!

[Tinoire]

124. It goes beyond sick... I am really ashamed of those people

The barbarity is mind-boggling.

I hope to live to see the day that Bush is up for war-crimes and paraded, exposed for the entire world to see. We can plaster his cell with photos of all the US, Afghan and Iraqi dead.

[ElementaryPenguin]

167. Would you love to see the principle BFEE players in a cell like that?

For not too long, say, only AN ETERNITY!!

[joanski01]

97. I don't approve of anything

the bush* administration does, and I don't believe anything they say. They don't belong in the White House. They are liars, cheats, and criminals.

[Toucano]

123. This country doesn't torture.

That's what we have big pharma for!

[Philosophy]

127. They're trying to turn him into a vegetable before the trial

So he can't say anything embarrassing about how he got all of his WMDs and the ok to use them on Iranians from Reagan, shook Rummy's hand, and got the ok to invade Kuwait from Bush I via April Glaspie.

[Character Assassin]

128. Oh, please. The photograph only suggests that he looks dishevelled

It isn't in the least 'startling'.

[zonmoy]

136. So

are they keeping him drugged up so that he cant implicate the rethug cabal for their parts in all the crimes of his administration.

[Matilda]

140. I wonder if they'd let the Red Cross examine him?

Just asking.

[tom_paine]

164. I dunno, did the Nazis allow the Red Cross into Buchenwald?

There's your answer.

[CWebster]

144. See how much better we are?

He used to be a friend and his torturous ways of little consequence, but now we torture him because of his torturous ways...

[ElementaryPenguin]

155. Stupid BFEE manages to make even Saddam look sympathetic!!

:puke:

[GRClarkesq]

156. I cant tell that much from this one picture

He is an old man who has been under constant stress and on the run for many months. He is not going to look good.

[lebkuchen]

157. Bremer described a drugged Saddam as "defiant"

Christ. How would Bremer describe "good in bed?"

[w4rma]

182. He is being treated better than his own political prisoners were. (n/t)