Page 3 of 7

Re: Iraq

Posted: Sun Dec 26, 2004 4:50 pm
by anajmi
US disclosures signal wider detainee abuse

In Franz Kafka's "The Trial", the main character is arrested, tried, and sentenced to death by a faceless government bureaucracy without ever being told what his crime is supposed to have been.
Now imagine the same story, only with torture added. The US Government has been grabbing Arabs and subjecting them to torture, ostensibly to learn where Saddam hid his weapons of mass destruction. Of course, we now know that Saddam did not HAVE any weapons of mass destruction. He had, as confirmed by numerous inspectors including the US' Charles Duelfer, complied with the requirements of the United Nations and destroyed the WMDs he had acquired from the US and other nations during the war with Iran.

So, imagine you are an Arab arrested in Iraq, or in the US. You are being tortured and asked for the location of something YOU know does not exist. Your torturers don;t believe you when you say the WMDs don't exist; they cannot allow themselves to believe there are no WMDs, so the torture goes on and on. It has been confirmed that the US tortured children while forcing parents to watch. Imagine that you are those parents, watching your children, knowing that what the torturers ask for does not exist, knowing there is nothing you can give them that will stop the torture.

This is the image of the United States history will record at the start of the third millennium. A nation that tortures children before their parents, looking for something that did not exist, and as unwilling to admit their error as the witch hunters of Europe who tortured people to find those who could ride brooms over the tops of roofs.
-wrh

An Eyewitness Account of Fallujah
“I entered Fallujah near the Julan Quarter, which is near the General Hospital,” he said during an interview in Baghdad, “There were American snipers on top of the hospital shooting everyone.”

War Launched to Protect Israel - Bush Adviser - But don't you dare blame Israel - Average Morons.

Re: Iraq

Posted: Fri Dec 31, 2004 7:10 pm
by anajmi
Falloujans Get an Unsettling Look at Their City
Refugees eager to return change their minds after seeing the ruin. Will balloting be feasible?
Fallujah has been saved by the Americans from the Fallaoujans!! Hopefully the same fate awaits America.

Re: Iraq

Posted: Fri Dec 31, 2004 7:13 pm
by anajmi

Re: Iraq

Posted: Sat Jan 08, 2005 7:54 pm
by anajmi
This is a very interesting article. The name of the person who wrote this article is Ayaz Amir and that means, I trust him completely.

Fortified mess-halls, please

Some of you may not have the time to read the entire article so here are some excerpts:

This is a strange war the Americans are fighting. They don't mind killing Iraqis and reducing Iraqi cities to rubble. But they seem wholly unwilling to get hurt themselves.

Echoing that memorable line from the Vietnam War, that a particular village had to be destroyed in order to save it, destroying Fallujah in order to save it is all right. But if Iraqis hit back they are terrorists and insurgents loyal to that latest bogeyman in America's lexicon, "Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi." The modern American GI is the most heavily-armoured soldier in history. Look at all the things strapped to his body. Yet American soldiers want more protection.

They have destroyed a country and its infrastructure and continue to bomb, kill and torture - yes, serious torture, refining the techniques of the Gestapo and the KGB - but even if there is one American dead to every fifty or hundred Iraqis killed, there is no end to American outrage.

Anyone fighting the Americans is an "insurgent" - a label implying rebellion against established and legitimate authority.

Come to think of it, the Soviets were in a better position in Afghanistan than the Americans are in Iraq.

The Soviets controlled most of Afghanistan's cities, Kabul a peaceful, calm and secure city in their time. (the trouble started when you left Kabul and drove into the interior.) In Iraq no city is secure, certainly not Baghdad, not even the Green Zone which keeps getting hit by rockets and suicide bombers.

Fallujah has been secured only after its complete destruction. Mosul they said was secure. And look what's happened in Mosul. The holy cities of Najaf and Kerbala have been hit by devastating bombings.

Everywhere in Iraq American troops go about in fear of their lives, suspecting every object to be a booby trap or a roadside bomb. Yet American spokesmen can still be heard saying that great progress is being made in Iraq. But one mistake the Americans are not making. Compared to the Vietnam War they are practising an insidious form of censorship which is successfully shielding the American people, and the rest of the world, from the true horrors of this American exercise in liberation.

Vietnam? For America and its imperial hubris, Iraq in some ways is worse than Vietnam. The Viet Cong had a secure home-base in North Vietnam and supply lines stretching all the way to China, the Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc.

The Iraqis are standing all by themselves, their backs to the wall, receiving support from no communist bloc, let alone the great world of Islam whose intrepid champions are terrified of coming into America's cross-hairs.

The American canard that Syria and Iran are surreptitiously engaged in helping the Iraqi resistance is just that: a canard designed to provide a flimsy alibi for the mess in Iraq.

For there was no reason for this war, no justification for the destruction of Iraq, other than imperial ambition gone mad, imperialism stoked by a new variant, neo-conservatism.

If Iraq had indeed turned out to be a cakewalk and not a quagmire, does anyone think the war party in Washington, allied closely in spirit to the state of Israel, would have stopped there? That next in line wouldn't have been Syria and Iran? And after that who knows. America's imperial march has hit a snag in Iraq for which the rest of us should be grateful.

War against terrorism? This is a war promoting terrorism.

No connection between Baathism and bin Ladenism existed before George Bush's invasion of Iraq. If there is one now, we have only the Bush White House to thank for it.

Back to anajmi - I would like to apologize to the Admin for posting all this.

Re: Iraq

Posted: Sat Jan 08, 2005 8:04 pm
by anajmi
Ramadi Sharp Shooters Kill 3 US Soldiers, US Uses Small Children As Human Shields

US Pulls Back From Parts Of Fallujah; Booby-Trapped Houses Detonated

"Shaykh Abu 'Abdallah said that more than 450 US troops had been killed and 200 more wounded according to Mujahideen military estimates. More than 140 US tanks and armored vehicles have been destroyed, in addition 53 Humvees were set ablaze, five US helicopters had been shot down, including three Apaches and one fighter airplane, as well as six unmanned spyplanes. "

SECRETARY RUMSFELD BRIEFS AMERICA'S FREEDOM®-CRUSADERS ON KINDER, GENTLER NEW GUIDELINES FOR INTERROGATING MAYBE-TERRORIST ISLAMIAC TRASH

Not sure if its humor.

Re: Iraq

Posted: Sun Jan 09, 2005 3:41 am
by anajmi
U.S. Bomb Error Kills at Least 5 in Iraq

I would love to see them drop a bomb in the Green Zone by mistake.

Re: Iraq

Posted: Sun Jan 09, 2005 3:43 am
by anajmi

Re: Iraq

Posted: Sun Jan 09, 2005 6:57 pm
by anajmi

Re: Iraq

Posted: Sun Jan 09, 2005 6:59 pm
by anajmi
How the Bush Bunch Lost in Iraq

This article was written by Morgan Reynolds and there is a picture of him with this article too. That mean that this article is the absolute truth.

Re: Iraq

Posted: Sun Jan 09, 2005 7:00 pm
by anajmi

Re: Iraq

Posted: Sun Jan 30, 2005 4:39 pm
by Africawala
Dear brother anajami,

Can you update the board? With all those things happening in Iraq, where have you been? Not that I do read your posts but it gives me a good feeling that you are still out there.

Salaams.

Re: Iraq

Posted: Mon Jan 31, 2005 12:58 am
by Average Bohra
Be careful what you wish for or Anajmi might actually appear again (unless he is in Gitmo now). Here is a guy who actually thinks that "there is a picture of him with this article too. That mean that this article is the absolute truth. " ! How can you argue with that ? Scary.....

The upside is that these topics might be worth reading and posting to again....

Re: Iraq

Posted: Wed Feb 02, 2005 10:38 am
by anajmi
"Sarcasm" - a word that you should look up in the dictionary. Remember the time when you asked me the name of the person who wrote a particular article I posted? Well, I now give you an article with a name and a picture.

I always knew you couldn't add 2 and 2!!

And no, I haven't gone anywhere, I know you wish I was in Gitmo but a monkey like me is not easy to get off your back.

Re: Iraq

Posted: Wed Feb 02, 2005 10:46 am
by anajmi
however, it will be a couple more weeks before I am at my best and really pissing you guys off.

And Africawala, thanks for missing me.

Re: Iraq

Posted: Wed Feb 02, 2005 11:26 am
by Africawala
Dear Anajmi,

Nice to see you back.

Believe me, brother, you are not "pissing me off". You are humoring me!!!

I like the sounds monkeys make. They do not make any sense but give you a good feeling they are alive and jumping from tree to tree!!!

They are the best animals in a circus or a zoo!!!!

Re: Iraq

Posted: Tue Feb 15, 2005 12:36 am
by anajmi
Now isn't it a pity that a donkey does not have a place either in a zoo or a circus? I have to imagine what one looks like with books on his back!!

Re: Iraq

Posted: Tue Feb 15, 2005 12:52 am
by Africawala
Just look in the mirror!!!!

Re: Iraq

Posted: Tue Feb 15, 2005 12:54 am
by Africawala
I have to imagine what one looks like with books on his back!!

Just look in the mirror.

Re: Iraq

Posted: Tue Feb 15, 2005 11:15 am
by anajmi
I guess you are having a lot of difficulty trying to figure out the differences between a donkey and a monkey, just in your previous post I was humoring you because I was a monkey, now I am pissing you off because I am a donkey!! The "key" is that you have lost your faculty of sense and that is why all you can come up with is nonsense. ;)

Re: Iraq

Posted: Sat Mar 05, 2005 6:35 pm
by anajmi

Re: Iraq

Posted: Sun Mar 27, 2005 5:22 pm
by anajmi

Re: Iraq

Posted: Thu Mar 31, 2005 4:10 pm
by anajmi
Report: Iraq intelligence 'dead wrong'

Oh... the American Morons. If they'd asked me about Iraq I would've told them 3 years ago that there are no WMDs at no cost. The information that they spent billions to get. Or was it just for the oil?

Re: Iraq

Posted: Thu Mar 31, 2005 4:12 pm
by anajmi
Child hunger in Iraq said about double

The Iraqis are now free to die of hunger!!

Re: Iraq

Posted: Sun Apr 24, 2005 5:46 pm
by anajmi

Re: Iraq

Posted: Sun May 08, 2005 5:29 pm
by anajmi

Re: Iraq

Posted: Wed May 11, 2005 2:14 am
by anajmi

Re: Iraq

Posted: Fri May 20, 2005 11:11 pm
by Above Average Bohra

Re: Iraq

Posted: Tue May 24, 2005 2:15 pm
by anajmi
Iraqis - 'All Of Our Problems Are Because Of The Invaders'
"The American troops have not come for the benefit of the Iraqi people," says Mohammed Majid Abrahim, a fifty-two-year-old former resident of Baghdad. "They are stealing from the Iraqis, and now all our problems are because of the invaders."

"oh the Iraqis are wahabis, they have hijacked Islam, we are going to make sure Islam is followed as it should be" - American Average Moron.

Re: Iraq

Posted: Wed Aug 10, 2005 2:26 am
by anajmi
Killings of civilians by U.S. troops angers Iraqi government

Iraq statistics tell grim story

Of course the world is a much better place now that Saddam Hussein is gone.

Re: Iraq

Posted: Sat Aug 27, 2005 11:28 pm
by anajmi
Iraqi civilian casualties

An Iraqi humanitarian organization is reporting that 128,000 Iraqis have been killed since the U.S. invasion began in March 2003.

No official estimates of Iraqi casualties from the war have been issued by the Pentagon, which insists that it does not do "body counts."

55 percent of those killed have been women and children aged 12 and under.