Why I oppose the happening war on Iraq.
-
might some1 bother to explain to mi in this article? esp atobe since u r a expert in this area.....
http://www.yaledailynews.com/article.asp?AID=21939
called Bush "a lunatic."
The protesters proceeded from the church to "storm" Skull and Bones, which the protesters called the "New Haven home" of Bush. The society's membership includes Bush and his father, George H.W. Bush '48. -
[Quote] Originally posted by doutiga83
might some1 bother to explain to mi in this article? esp atobe since u r a expert in this area.....
www.yaledailynews.com/art...?AID=21939
quote:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
called Bush "a lunatic."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The protesters proceeded from the church to "storm" Skull and Bones, which the protesters called the "New Haven home" of Bush. The society's membership includes Bush and his father, George H.W. Bush '48.
[/quote]
Good grief......expert
-
Good grief......expertOriginally posted by Atobe:[Quote] Originally posted by doutiga83
[b]
might some1 bother to explain to mi in this article? esp atobe since u r a expert in this area.....
www.yaledailynews.com/art...?AID=21939
quote:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
called Bush "a lunatic."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The protesters proceeded from the church to "storm" Skull and Bones, which the protesters called the "New Haven home" of Bush. The society's membership includes Bush and his father, George H.W. Bush '48.
[/b][/quote]
now then u know? i thought u know wad the father n son r worshipping.... -
BTW, could not open the file that you last posted... still don't know what you are trying to get at...Originally posted by duotiga83:now then u know? i thought u know wad the father n son r worshipping.... -
so sorrie....here it is..Originally posted by Atobe:BTW, could not open the file that you last posted... still don't know what you are trying to get at...
http://www.yaledailynews.com/article.asp?AID=21939 -
i hate to post this....but here goes.....
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=574&ncid=721&e=1&u=/nm/20030323/wl_nm/iraq_fighting_dc
Fighting Near Shi'ite Holy City on Road to Baghdad
1 hour, 35 minutes ago
SOUTHERN IRAQ (Reuters) - Iraqi troops fought U.S. advance units overnight near the central Shi'ite holy city of Najaf as an armored American advance moved closer to the capital Baghdad and President Saddam Hussein (news - web sites)'s power base.
Reuters correspondent Luke Baker, traveling with units of the U.S. 3rd Infantry Division, saw a limited clash with Iraqi troops 45 miles southeast of Najaf that held up the U.S. advance overnight.
At the southern tip of Iraq (news - web sites), a firefight between U.S. and Iraqi forces broke out on Sunday in the town of Umm Qasr, one day after U.S. officials said they had taken control of the strategic port there.
"U.S. forces have opened up with machinegun fire," Reuters correspondent Adrian Croft said, adding that the shooting began around an area that American forces had made their base in the town.
Inland, U.S. officers told Baker there was heavier fighting barring the way north, close to Najaf itself, which is just 100 miles south of the capital.
The Iraqi authorities also reported a battle in the desert near Najaf, an important religious center for the Shi'ite Muslim majority on the western bank of the Euphrates river.
Some U.S. advance columns have covered about two thirds of the 300 miles to Baghdad in two days since they and their British allies poured over the Kuwaiti border in an invasion to oust Saddam.
Najaf is the closest major ground fighting has come to the capital, which suffered another night of bombing, though nothing like the pounding it took the previous night.
Baghdad suffered fresh air raids on Sunday morning that made the earth shake. Iraq says three civilians have been killed in bombing so far, and scores wounded.
A Reuters correspondent also saw an overnight air raid on the northern city of Mosul. A correspondent for the al-Jazeera Arabic television network in Mosul said explosions had been heard before dawn west of the city near the border with Syria.
Iraq said in a broadcast statement that U.S. forces had fled after a desert clash near the city. The local leader of Saddam's Baath party was killed in the fighting, it added.
Speaking at about 3.00 a.m. from a point some 45 miles southeast of Najaf, Baker said the U.S. unit he was with was held up, but officers were confident of moving on toward the city where other U.S. units were meeting stiffer resistance.
U.S. commanders believe the Medina Division of Saddam's Republican Guard, better equipped than the regular army, is holding Najaf.
"U.S. officers say the tanks and armored infantry up ahead are involved in what they call 'small-scale enemy contact'," Baker said. "I've seen a couple of what look like muzzle flashes from tanks, but no incoming shells."
Further south, the U.S. military said it had secured a bridge across the Euphrates at the city of Nassiriya, 235 miles southeast of Baghdad.
Iraq's information minister said on Sunday that its forces were still putting up resistance around Nassiriya.
Reuters correspondent Andrew Gray, with the 3rd Infantry, said a battle raged on Saturday for an airfield near the city.
His unit skirted Nassiriya and drove through the night along a congested road north.
"There is an endless line of military vehicles along the road," he said, adding that they included rocket launchers and bridge-building equipment.
U.S. Marines were poised to strike north across the Euphrates river on Sunday after taking control of bridgeheads on the far bank at Nassiriya.
"U.S. officers said that U.S. Marines have crossed the Euphrates and are holding positions on the north bank at Nassiriya," Reuters correspondent Sean Maguire, who was with the First Marine Division, said. He was southeast of the city.
U.S. and British officials declined to say whether their forces had taken control of Basra, Iraq's second city in the far south, after a U.S. officer reported winning a battle on the outskirts on Saturday, taking many prisoners.
But al-Jazeera, quoting Iraqi medics, said 50 people were killed when U.S. F-16 planes bombed near Basra.
Raw video footage, beamed across the Arab world by the Qatar-based satellite channel, showed a child with half its head blown off.
"It's a huge mass of civilians," one angry woman told al-Jazeera, standing among the wounded. "It was a massacre."
The report could not be independently confirmed. U.S. officials declined to say whether their planes had bombed Basra.
In the north, Reuters correspondent Sebastian Alison saw anti-aircraft fire and explosions around midnight at Mosul, which had been hit by air raids a day earlier. He was watching from Kurdish-held territory 25 miles away. -
Hi doutiga83,
Thanks for reposting the site, but not too clear as to the intent of your efforts.
The Peace Rally like all rallies are started by someone with some agenda - those that are publicly expressed, and those that are kept secret and known only to those that move behind the scenes.
From your post, the New Haven Green Party was supposed to have organised the rally.
Green Party moving from Environment Issues to Politics, and associating themselves with the US radical group such as Nations of Islam ?
Each has their own agenda against the Establishment, and I would not put it pass them for being incapable to understand the pains and sufferings of the common people in IRAQ, who are pressed into silence, under the threat of death by Saddam's agents.
From the Afghanistan experience, BEFORE they were liberated - much has been capitalized by the Afghani "protests" shown on TV against US threats of invading Afghanistan.
Those same scenes of Afghani protests against US invasion of their country, literally evaporated, and changed into joyous dance, songs and merry welcome of the liberating armies from USA and the coalition North Afghan Alliance.
As matters stand, already there are TV reports of the happy citizens from the Iraqi Port City of Al Qam, welcoming the arrival of the US and UK soldiers.
Let us have some patience, and we will see the end story unfold.
Let us see the silence of the protests, which already are reported to be less attended, and being sidelined by the reports of welcoming Iraqi citizens from the "liberated" south. -
i am not talking bout the situation....i am talking about this..... ...i know wad the situation will b like.....but have consider about this b4? juz my thought though......if u do some checking on the illumnist plan....it mayb kinda shock to u..... ..that all the current situations ard the world r in plan....as though is all being scripted out.....
The protesters proceeded from the church to "storm" Skull and Bones, which the protesters called the "New Haven home" of Bush. The society's membership includes Bush and his father, George H.W. Bush '48. -
To those who believe that USA is into IRAQ for the sake of OIL only, perhaps it will be enlightening to read from the following site, that they are positioned as the TWELFTH country in the World with the largest oil and gas reserves.
The USA has not used much of their reserves, and prefer to purchase from oil and gas production from other countries, and only use their oil and gas reserves to break cartels - as happened during the time after the Six-Day War between Israel and her Arab neighbors.
It is so easy to create "catch phrase" to mobilise the common folks, but it will certainly be easier for Bush and his team to sit back, until the next 9-11 incident with WMD hit a US city.
By then, Bush and his Team will be incriminated for not taking appropriate actions to forestall such terrorists' plans; as had happened in the months after 9-11, when weaknesses and near miss capture of the Terrorists have been discovered in the many Congressional Hearings that took place.
It is a no-win situation for Bush and His Team, it is "Do and get Damned, and Not Doing also get Damned" - "might as well get it done, and be damned".
http://www.oilsurvey.com/php/link.php3?CoId=200207&chosenCategory=290003 -
btw this war is not about oil. i shall not say much
-
check this out.....
Bold Warning From Senator Byrd
War Based Upon Falsified Documents
"Sen. Robert Byrd: 'Today I Weep for My Country' ", Washington Post, 3/19/2003. ""Today I weep for my country," said West Virginia Democratic Sen. Robert Byrd. "No more is the image of America one of strong, yet benevolent peacekeeper. ... Around the globe, our friends mistrust us, our word is disputed, our intentions are questioned ... The case this administration tries to make to justify its fixation with war is tainted by charges of falsified documents and circumstantial evidence," Byrd said. Despite administration suggestions to the contrary, Byrd said, 'There is no credible information to connect Saddam Hussein to 9/11.'
The senator said, "We cannot convince the world of the necessity of this war for one simple reason. This is a war of choice."
These are strong words, indeed, from a very old and respected member of the U.S. Senate. Not only have we launched this war on "falsified documents and circumstantial evidence", we have launched this war flying in the face of strong, determined opposition within the United Nations General Assembly and key permanent members of the Security Council.
u b the judge...i would not say much.....but i know wad is going on now..... -
Originally posted by duotiga83:
The fact remains that those are mere opinionated charges of "falsified documents and circumstantial evidence".
check this out.....
Bold Warning From Senator Byrd
[b]War Based Upon Falsified Documents
"Sen. Robert Byrd: 'Today I Weep for My Country' ", Washington Post, 3/19/2003. ""Today I weep for my country," said West Virginia Democratic Sen. Robert Byrd. "No more is the image of America one of strong, yet benevolent peacekeeper. ... Around the globe, our friends mistrust us, our word is disputed, our intentions are questioned ... The case this administration tries to make to justify its fixation with war is tainted by charges of falsified documents and circumstantial evidence," Byrd said. Despite administration suggestions to the contrary, Byrd said, 'There is no credible information to connect Saddam Hussein to 9/11.'
The senator said, "We cannot convince the world of the necessity of this war for one simple reason. This is a war of choice."
These are strong words, indeed, from a very old and respected member of the U.S. Senate. Not only have we launched this war on "falsified documents and circumstantial evidence", we have launched this war flying in the face of strong, determined opposition within the United Nations General Assembly and key permanent members of the Security Council. u b the judge...i would not say much.....but i know wad is going on now.....[/b]
The facts remain on the table that the Iraqi Government could not satisfactorily account for the WMD stocks and raw materials that were discovered by the First UN Inspection Team (1992-1998 )
The facts remain that Saddam Hussein has been playing a delaying game in its conduct to respond to the UN Security Council to come clean with his program and accounting of his WMD.
The facts remain that AL-QAEDA operatives are given refuge inside Iraq, after they were dispersed from Afghanistan, and that they are CURRENTLY being supported by Saddam Hussein.
The facts remain that Saddam Hussein remains in power by using his Security Agents to suppress his population by torture, rape, and murder; and have no qualms in using his Republican Guards to conduct genocide against dissident IRAQI minority groups.
Senator Byrd is a respectable old war horse, and like all old war horse do, he sentimentally reminisce his own days past, and forget his own role during those days that contributed partly to the national disarray in the infamous Vietnam Wars.
During his active days in the US Congress and Senate, like most US Politicians, Senator Byrd was embroiled in controversies too - see the website below.
http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3a5c7b4b071f.htm -
the war is justified. dun be so superficial, u need a war b4 peace can come. i dun tink the ppl will oso enjoy their lives even if usa dun goto war. maybe usa just wants to take the oil, but they will bring liberation with them, freedom and free will, and equal rights to all. if war is needed to bring freedom by overthrowing saddam. so be it. i support fully, saddam is a monster.
-
okie... u all wanna talk about monster, then now and in the past, there are always tons of monster around...
China used to be called a monster too isn't it ? It killed a lot of University students when they go for protest, it attacked mongolia and tibet and it doesn't do much welfare to its people either. So, does US attack china then ? No. Why ? Because it has Russia as its allies and china has real powerful weopon of mass destruction. SO wat is the diff to Iraq now ? Iraq is weak. It has never fully recover its strength after the war 10 years ago. It doesn't have weopons of mass destruction. If they have, they would have used it now since he is described as such a monster. Wat is the morale of story ? All nations should have WMD to serve as a deterrent to protect itself from attacks. Face it, it works.
U wanna talk about liberation, then NOrth Korea really need it as they r starving and dieseased. At the very least, Iraq people don't go hungry. So who need liberation more ? About democracy, US itself has rejected the will of UN by ignoring the resolutions. It has rejected the Kyoto Protocol even though it produce 40% of world polution. Is French all alone in disapproving the war ? No. Russia and China and many other non permanent disapprove it too. WHat is the intention to start the law of using resolution to pass a war ? To Deter wars that was not justified.
The US give the carrot to nations who support while giving the stick to those who reject its policy. It doesn't allow nations to take a stand out of their own free will. By this, I do not talk about SIngapore. There r many instances that happened especially before they attack Afghanistan. They give the carrot by weakening their stand on Taiwan for China, give incentives for Russia and give the stick by cancelling all visas to MAlaysians and cancelling help package to Turkey. Why resort to legal corruption ?
U talk about NOrth Korean holds dialogue with Japan and South Korea. Iraq too holds talk with UN too isn't it ? U talk about sincerity, neither of them fits the bill isn't it ? How about Librya ? It too is friendless. Does being isolation give us reason to attack ?
About AFghan. I don't think it has stabilise itself yet. Guerillas force r abundant around. Its own armies isn't strong to face the resistance force itself yet. Isn't that the same as some Afrcan nation (the Tutsi and bla bla bla), that when the British troops left, they started their own internal war ? As chinese say it, even the best external magistrate cannot judge fairly to internal domestic affairs
Maybe we should do something to Iraq, but the method of war is too much. Not only it cost problems to world economic, the weopons used to attack Iraq aren't cheap either. The cost to Iraq is worst. Human lives and infrastructure r killed. Killing 30% of people, making the other 30% geurillas while liberating the resukting 40% isn't much of a liberation. -
Not sure how true this is... on FoxNews.com, there was a report saying that the US Army just captured a huge chemical weapons factory.
Uhh.. if this is true, UN and the war naysayers just got shot full of holes. -
i oppose to the iraqi army "pertend-to-surrender-then-shot-at-you-when-you-are-unaware" tatics. shame on them.Originally posted by the Bear:Not sure how true this is... on FoxNews.com, there was a report saying that the US Army just captured a huge chemical weapons factory.
Uhh.. if this is true, UN and the war naysayers just got shot full of holes.
i oppose war but if the situation is like that liao then fight like a man lah. cunning to pretend to surrender then ambuse the troops.
bastards ain't they? -
Originally posted by foga:i oppose to the iraqi army "pertend-to-surrender-then-shot-at-you-when-you-are-unaware" tatics. shame on them.
i oppose war but if the situation is like that liao then fight like a man lah. cunning to pretend to surrender then ambuse the troops.
bastards ain't they? their desperate move -
Ruse in war is often used.
Some believe that the only thing honourable in war is the will to destroy the enemy.Originally posted by duotiga83: their desperate move -
Views From A Former Marine - U.S. News Is Bogus & Dumb Tactics
March 24, 2003
Have you noticed that allot of the "scenes" that Fox news and others are showing of our boys in combat are totally bogus, total lies. HAVE YOU NOTICED THAT OUR BOYS ARE WEARING GREEN CAMMIES IN THESE SCENES. Why in the world would they be wearing green cammies????? When the ONLY uniforms you are allowed and issued for middle east-desert combat are the brown ones?
I just saw on Fox news that 2 more tomahawks "malfunctioned" and landed in Turkey the same way they malfunctioned and landed in Iran. Wonder if they will get a refund on those 1 mill a pop rockets?
A favorite Russian statement goes like this: "The only difference between the American people and the Russian people, is that the Russian people know there media is totally lies".
Another "dumb tactic" is being used. Our media keeps telling us all these cities are falling. This is totally bogus also. They are skipping small threats in the move to Baghdad, and the major cities they are just surrounding, not occupying. If they get to Baghdad they are going to have a big army at their back. Our news makes me sick.
Another thing that is funny is that the news keeps showing pictures of Iraq civilians giving Americans the thumbs up when they arrive. Do you know what this means in the middle east????? It means the same as an American flipping the middle finger! I never met a Iraqi over there that did not love Sadaam, and we are fools if we thing these people are glad to be "liberated". One of the first things you are told when you get over there are not to trust the people that give you the thumbs up, as it means the same thing as the middle finger over here.
And don't you just love these 24 hour cameras of Baghdad that the networks have that even after the "shock and awe" still look the same with cars driving around at normal speed, and the red light system still working. You would thing the first thing they would knock out is the power plants. I guess they don't want the liberated citizens to not be able to read the Koran at night. We have dropped "1,000's" of bombs there? yet civilians still drive around all day long driving to work, and you never see Iraqi soldiers in the streets. This has to be some of the dumbest stuff I have ever seen from a webby i found juz now.... -
regarding ppl protest in usa......c below.....
Oregon Bill Could Give LIFE In Prison To Peace Protestors
From Louanne M. From Tom Atlee
3-23-3
rense.com
Dear friends, This is serious and urgent. There is a clear and present danger to democracy in Oregon which could spread to other states. Senate Bill 742 proposed by Oregon State Senator Minnis (R-Dist. 25 / Fairview)(Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee) creates the crime of "terrorism" -- punishable by life imprisonment. Senator Minnis defines "terrorism" so broadly that even being present at a demonstration that is in any way "disruptive" could result in life imprisonment. I have given the relevant sections of the bill below, as well as the link to the whole bill. I have also provided information from the American Civil Liberties Union regarding this, including contact information for the relevant Oregon State Senators. Ever since laws began to be passed criminalizing "terrorism," I have been concerned that its definition would be expanded to include anything that authorities wished to suppress which could then be subject to extreme punishment, laying the groundwork for serious suppression. It seems that is now happening. It must be energetically nipped in the bud if we are to prevent its spread. If this law passes in Oregon, it is highly likely that other states will pass similar laws, especially in the current political climate. I trust you will act if you feel so moved. Whether you are an Oregon resident or not, you can express your dismay to the Oregon State Senators listed below.
If you are an Oregon resident you can, in addition, attend a hearing Monday morning Mar 24 in Salem, OR (specifics below). Coheartedly,
Tom PS: The law also sets aside (in terrorism cases) two other Oregon laws which prevent police from (a) spying on innocent people and organizations and (b) apprehending people solely for immigration violations. _____
Excerpts from the proposed new law: http://pub.das.state.or.us/LEG_BILLS/PDFs/SB742.pdf 72nd OREGON LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY--2003 Regular Session Senate Bill 742 Sponsored by Senator MINNIS SUMMARY: Creates crime of terrorism. Punishes by life imprisonment. SECTION 1. (1) A person commits the crime of terrorism if the person knowingly plans, participates in or carries out any act that is intended, by at least one of its participants, to disrupt: (a) The free and orderly assembly of the inhabitants of the State of Oregon; (b) Commerce or the transportation systems of the State of Oregon; or (c) The educational or governmental institutions of the State of Oregon or its inhabitants. (2) A person commits the crime of terrorism if the person conspires to do any of the activities described in subsection (1) of this section. .... (4) (a) A person convicted of terrorism shall be punished by imprisonment for life. (b) When a person is convicted of terrorism under this section, the court shall order that the person be confined for a minimum of 25 years without possibility of parole, release to post-prison supervision, release on work release or any form of temporary leave or employment at a forest or work camp.... _ _ _ _ _
The State Senator from Eugene (my hometown): Senator Vicki Walker Party: D District: 7 Capitol Phone: 503-986-1707 Capitol Address: 900 Court St. NE S-210, Salem Or 97301 Email Address: Web page Address: _ _ _ _ _
An opportunity to make your opinions known: Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2003 17:23:55 -0800 From: Harriet Merrick Subject: Monday March 24 in Salem I am forwarding a message from the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union). There is an important hearing this Monday, March 24th, at 8 a.m. in Salem at the Capital. If you can attend, please do. Representative Minnis is sponsoring a bill that is so vague and expansive that almost any activity that is considered "disruptive" could be considered "terrorist" activity and "earn" a life sentence with no parole. SB 742 in its original form lacks guidelines. Local law enforcement will decide what is disruptive. This could lead to very uneven application of the law. If this vague law existed during the civil rights movement, those opposing change could have declared boycotters, marchers and leaders such as Martin Luther King as "terrorists" and sentenced them to life imprisonment. One wonders what it would do today. There's more.
This bill is in committee and needs a sizable number of people to attend in opposition. If you cannot attend, please read the bill and let the committee know how you feel (contact numbers below). _ _ _ __ The Alert from the American Civil Liberties Union ACLU of Oregon Email Activist Network ---------------------------------------------------------------- *** ACLU-OR Action: SB 742 Hearing on Monday, March 24 ---------------------------------------------------------------- We need you in Salem at 8:00 a.m. on Monday. SB 742 has been set for a hearing on Monday, March 24 at 8:00 a.m. in Senate Judiciary, Room 343. SB 742 creates the crime of "terrorism" and defines it so broadly that individuals would be subject to life in prison if any other participant intended to disrupt commerce, transportation, educational, or governmental institutions (such as, strikes, protests, student food fights).
So you can read it for yourself, here's the link to the bill:
WE NEED YOUR HELP TO STOP THIS BILL NOW. 1) ATTEND MONDAYS 8AM HEARING. We want to pack the room with as many of our supporters as possible. We'll give you a sticker, identifying you as a supporter when you get to the hearing room. **Please know that there will be amendments to Section 1 to limit the current drafted definition of "Terrorism." BUT -- there are no amendments to Section 2, that allows for law enforcement to ignore ORS 181.575 & ORS 181.850 if they are investigating "terrorism." (See the attachment on 181 Campaign Talking Points. If you have difficulty opening attachments, we've also included the talking points below). 2) CONTINUE CALLS to Senators Burdick, Ringo, Walker, Courtney & Brown. 3) CALL Republican Senators Minnis, Starr and Ferrioli who sit on the Senate Judiciary to let them know you OPPOSE SB 742 (contact at end of e-mail) Please call them even if you are not in their District. This is an Oregon issue, not a district issue. Here's the contact information. Senator John Minnis, Chair Party: R District: 25 Capitol Phone: 503-986-1725 Capitol Address: 900 Court St. NE S-311, Salem Or 97301 Email Address: Web page Address: Senator Ginny Burdick, Vice-Chair Party: D District: 18 Capitol Phone: 503-986-1718 Capitol Address: 900 Court St. NE S-317, Salem Or 97301 Email Address: Web page Address: Senator Ted Ferrioli Party: R District: 30 Capitol Phone: 503-986-1730 Capitol Address: 900 Court St. NE S-217, Salem Or 97301 Email Address: Web page Address: Senator Charlie Ringo Party: D District: 17 Capitol Phone: 503-986-1717 Capitol Address: 900 Court St NE S-314 Salem, OR 97301 Email Address: Web page Address: Senator Charles Starr Party: R District: 13 Capitol Phone: 503-986-1713 Capitol Address: 900 Court St. NE S-312, Salem Or 97301 Email Address:
Web page Address: Senator Vicki Walker Party: D District: 7 Capitol Phone: 503-986-1707 Capitol Address: 900 Court St. NE S-210, Salem Or 97301 Email Address: Web page Address: Senate Leadership: Senate President Peter Courtney Party: D District: 11 Capitol Phone: 503-986-1600 Capitol Address: 900 Court St. NE S-203, Salem Or 97301 Email Address: Web page Address: Senator Kate Brown, Democrat Leader Party: D District: 21 Capitol Phone: 503-986-1700 Capitol Address: 900 Court St. NE S-323, Salem Or 97301 Capitol Fax:503-986-1080 Email Address: Web page Address: ------------------------------------------------------------------
181 CAMPAIGN TALKING POINTS Don't Let Oregon Police Be Used For Political Spying Or As Federal INS Agents. Current Status: SB 742 is set for a hearing on Monday, MARCH 24, 8:00 a.m in Senate Judiciary (Room 343). SB 742 creates crime of "terrorism" and defines it so broadly that individuals would be subject to life in prison if any other participant intended to disrupt commerce, transportation, educational, or governmental institutions (such as, strikes, protests, student food fights). More importantly, it would also allow state and local law enforcement to ignore both ORS 181.575 & ORS 181.850 if investigating "terrorism." This basically unravels the protections that these laws provide! Who We Are: We are a growing and diverse coalition of Oregon organizations. We include representatives of organizations working in civil rights, law enforcement, domestic violence, immigration, religious, labor, environmental, grassroots and advocacy communities. We share the common goal of preserving ORS 181.575 and ORS 181.850 because they encourage effective law enforcement and protect the constitutional rights of everyone who lives in Oregon. For a list of the dozens of coalition members see What are these "181 Laws" all about? ORS 181.575: Protects Against Police Spying on Innocent People and Organizations: The law prohibits law enforcement agencies from collecting or maintaining information about the political, religious, social views, associations or activities of any person or group unless that information directly relates to a criminal investigation. Oregon's History of Abuse: From the creation of the Portland Police "Red Squad" in the 1940s until the passage of this law in 1981, hundreds of political, religious and other organizations were the subjects of FBI and police surveillance for no valid reason. A recent series in the Portland Tribune (September 2002) uncovered Portland police intelligence files tracking groups such as ACLU of Oregon, American Friends Service Committee (Quakers), Coalition Against Domestic Violence, Ecumenical Ministries of Oregon, Hispanic Commission, Peace House, Planned Parenthood, Rape Relief Hotline, Sierra Club, United Farm Workers and many more. ORS 181.850: Allows State & Local Law Enforcement to Focus on Oregon Priorities: This law prevents state and local law enforcement agencies from targeting people based on their race or ethnic origin when those individuals are not suspected of any criminal activity. Local law enforcement is prohibited from using resources to apprehend people whose only offense is a federal immigration violation. The law allows state and local law enforcement to contact the INS after they have arrested someone. The law also permits state and local police to request information from the INS that may help solve a criminal case. This law does not prevent local law enforcement from working with federal law enforcement to investigate threats of terrorism. History:
In the 1980s, several local law enforcement agencies carried out raids and roadblocks in collaboration with the INS targeting Oregon's Latino community. Many lawful residents and US citizens were swept up in the raids and were treated harshly by local police and INS agents. Passage of ORS181.850 in 1987 has not completely eliminated such practices, but has helped create dramatic improvements in the relationship between immigrants and the police. Why We Need to Keep Both Laws: @ They Help Prevent & Solve Crimes: Many law enforcement officials support these laws because in communities where people are afraid to talk to police, more crimes go unreported, fewer witnesses come forward, and people are less likely to report suspicious activity. For example, without this law, domestic violence cases will go unreported, leading to injury or death. @ They Help Build Trust in Communities: Many immigrants come from countries where people are afraid of the police, and many Oregon police agencies have spent years building trust that would be undermined by asking local police to do the job of the INS. Police surveillance of lawful political and religious activity also undermines the credibility of law enforcement. Repeal of these laws would undermine the ability of police to carry out community policing. @ They Help Keep Priorities in Focus: State and local budgets have been cut to the bone. There are many federal agencies to enforce federal laws, but only our state and local police can enforce state and local laws. Especially in these times of tight budgets, they need to concentrate on local priorities and local crimes that the federal government won't enforce. -
http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/breaking_4.html
U.S. embassies closing
throughout Arab world
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Protests turn violent
SPECIAL TO WORLD TRIBUNE.COM
Sunday, March 23, 2003
ABU DHABI — U.S. embassies in the Arab world are shutting down amid violent demonstrations in support of Iraq.
Anti-U.S. riots were reported in such capitals as Amman, Jordan; Cairo, Egypt; Manama, Bahrain; and Sanaa, Yemen. In the Bahraini capital, pro-Iraqi demonstrators torched a police car after the officers inside fled. Bahraini riot police responded by firing tear gas at demonstrators. Several people were injured.
The embassies and consulates in Bahrain, and Yemen have already closed down indefinitely, U.S. officials said. The embassy in Riyad, Saudi Arabia closed over the weekend but reopened Sunday.
The violence began on Friday after Islamic preachers used their sermons to condemn the U.S.-led war against Iraq, Middle East Newsline reported. Soon, tens thousands of Arabs took to the streets in clashes with security forces throughout major cities in the Middle East.
Diplomatic sources said the move comes in wake of an assessment that U.S. embassies and consulates have served as a lightning rod for Arab protests. So far, they said, Arab security forces have succeeded in protecting U.S. embassies and consulates throughout the Middle East.
Several of the embassies, including that in the Saudi capital of Riyad, could be closed for the duration of the U.S.-led war against Iraq, the sources said. This would mean the suspension of consular services.
"Whoever defends the Iraqi people and himself and dies, will be considered a martyr," Sheik Mohammed Tantawi, Egypt's leading Muslim cleric, said. "Islamic law says we must defend the Iraqi people and stand by them. If we fail, we have wasted the trust that God has placed in us."
In Sanaa, two people were shot dead as 3,000 people tried to march on the U.S. embassy. In Cairo, thousands of protesters clashed with police after mosque prayers.
In Beirut, Lebanese police employed tear gas and a water cannon to stop hundreds of stone-throwers. Several people were injured. U.S. embassies closing throughout Arab world: Arab protestors turning violent -
http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/wire/sns-ap-war-islam-world-view,0,7403742.story
Iraq War Fuels Flames of Muslim Rage
By DONNA BRYSON
Associated Press Writer
March 23, 2003, 5:59 PM EST
CAIRO, Egypt -- From mosques to the Internet, Muslims around the world are increasingly expressing anger at the U.S. attack on Iraq in radical religious terms.
"The war between right and wrong has begun. This is a jihad," a holy war, Syed Ahmed Bukhari, one of India's most influential Islamic clerics, said in a sermon in New Delhi that drew cries of "God is great!" from worshippers.
A London-based Arabic Web site known for extremist commentary posted a fatwa, or religious ruling, declaring any Muslim ruler or official who helps the "aggressor forces" in the war on Iraq to be an apostate -- dangerous words when some fundamentalists say apostasy -- the renouncing of Islam -- should be punished by death.
The banned Muslim Brotherhood, which wants to transform Egypt into an Islamic state, is gaining exposure at anti-U.S. protests on a scale rarely seen in Cairo.
Dia'a Rashwan, an expert on radical Islamic groups at Egypt's Al-Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies, said he has noticed a trend as he navigated Web sites and chat rooms in recent days.
"Now we have many calls to jihad, and those calls aren't only coming from what we usually call radicals or extremists," he said. More moderate clerics are using similar language, as are Islamic thinkers who usually confine themselves to political analysis, not calls to arms, he said.
The mix of religious and political rhetoric when it comes to Iraq is worrying for pro-Western states like Egypt, whose secular governments have historically been at odds with radical Islam, and Saudi Arabia, a conservative kingdom that according to a strict interpretation of the Quran cuts off the hands of thieves and forces women to fully veil themselves in public.
Saudi Arabia, which has quietly aided the U.S. war effort, fears a backlash from extremists. In his Friday sermon broadcast on Saudi state television, the imam of Mecca urged worshippers to shun disputes and obey their rulers. A day earlier, a prominent preacher appeared on Saudi TV to tell Saudis that holy war could be waged just as effectively by boycotting U.S. products.
Ever since the United States girded for a war on terrorism following the Sept. 11 attacks, there have been Muslims accusing it of waging a war on their religion, despite constant U.S. protestations to the country. President Bush's use, shortly after Sept. 11, of the term "crusade" against terrorism has been thrown back at him repeatedly as evidence of anti-Islamic prejudice, even though he quickly repudiated the word.
Fundamentalists commonly promote Islam as the solution to the weakness and disunity of the Arab world. In the West, the Muslim voices that make the headlines are those that denounce Western values, attack Jews in anti-Semitic language and proclaim the superiority of Islam.
Earlier this month, the Islamic Research Center at Cairo's prestigious Al-Azhar University, decreed: "If the enemy descends on the land of Muslims, jihad becomes an Islamic obligation ... because our Arab and Islamic community will be facing a new Crusade targeting our land, honor, faith and nation."
Mohammed Sayed Tantawi, grand sheikh of Al-Azhar, chided the think tank for using the word crusade, saying it could be interpreted as an Islamic declaration of war on Christianity. But after the war broke out, Tantawi himself in a Friday sermon called for jihad to support the Iraqi people.
"Jihad in Islam is meant to defend religion, money, soul and freedom, and to support those who are subject to injustice," Tantawi said.
Al-Azhar, whose authority is widely recognized in the Muslim world, is usually moderate in its views, reflecting its close ties with the Egyptian government.
Arab Muslims feel it is not only their religious identity that is under siege, researcher Rashwan said. They fear the United States plans to redraw the region's map, starting with Iraq, and that threatens their political and ethnic identities. In reaction to being "surrounded," Rashwan said, Muslims are talking of jihad in the sense of legitimate self-defense.
Complaints the United States is targeting Islam have been building because of what is seen as unfair U.S. support for Israel against the Palestinians and for India against Muslims in Kashmir and the demonization of Muslims in the Western media since the Sept. 11 attacks. The war on Afghanistan that opened the post-Sept. 11 war on terror and now the war on Iraq, accused by the United States of threatening the world with alleged weapons of mass destruction, has fueled the fire.
Defenders of the United States point out that Washington twice went to war on behalf of oppressed Muslims in the Balkans. But Farish A. Noor, a Malaysian political scientist, says "This fear and suspicion of the U.S. cuts very deep in the collective imagination of ordinary Muslims, and this goes across lines of class, race and nationality."
Rashwan knows that secular leftist Egyptians like him have been killed for supposedly being insufficiently Islamic.
"I have four children. I am very concerned about the future," he said. "Egypt will be affected by this radicalization. It will be very bad, very bad."
Copyright © 2003, The Associated Press -
http://www.sftt.org/cgi-bin/csNews/csNews.cgi?database=DefenseWatch.db&command=viewone&op=t&id=15&rnd=169.5179537428947
03-20-2003
Why We All Should Support Those in War Far Away
By Matthew Dodd
The more things change, the more they – the important things – stay the same.
Remember this brief speech?
“The armed forces of the United States began an operation … to force Saddam Hussein to withdraw his troops …. I signed the executive order yesterday afternoon to undertake this operation …[which] was not to take place if there had been any last-minute diplomatic breakthroughs. [G]reat care has been taken to focus on military targets, to minimize U.S. casualties, and to do everything possible to avoid injury to civilians in Iraq …. Our focus is on the destruction of Saddam Hussein’s offensive military capabilities … that make him a continuing threat to the nations of the Middle East.”
Those words were spoken by then-Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney at a Pentagon news conference in January 1991 that signaled the start of the first Gulf War.
Similar words have now signaled the start of Gulf War II here in 2003:
“[A]t this hour American and coalition forces are in the early stages of military operations to disarm Iraq, to free its people and to defend the world from grave danger. On my orders, coalition forces have begun striking selected targets of military importance to undermine Saddam Hussein's ability to wage war. These are opening stages of what will be a broad and concerted campaign .... In this conflict, America faces an enemy who has no regard for conventions of war or rules of morality .... I want Americans and all the world to know that coalition forces will make every effort to spare innocent civilians from harm .... Our nation enters this conflict reluctantly, yet our purpose is sure. The people of the United States and our friends and allies will not live at the mercy of an outlaw regime that threatens the peace with weapons of mass murder.
That was part of President George W. Bush’s late-night announcement to the American people and the world that “Operation Iraqi Liberation” was underway at last.”
Formal rhetoric aside, there is one more similarity between events 12 years ago and today: the critical need for national support of our troops who as I write this are going in harmÂ’s way.
I am afraid that in light of the highly publicized diplomatic squabblings and rising anti-war activities, the main difference between 1991 and now is that too many Americans are losing sight of that critical national support.
The troops poised for combat against Iraq are not mere political pawns to be spoken of in cold, collective and statistical terms. They are mostly young men and women, proudly serving their country, confident of their abilities and contributions in this “extension of diplomacy by other means.” Having had weeks and months to face their fears, anxieties and thoughts of their own mortality, they are about to face combat with honor, courage and commitment. Those of us who are watching these heroic warriors from afar owe them and their families the common decency of keeping them in our thoughts and prayers.
Reporter Dennis OÂ’Brien, writing in The Virginian-Pilot on March 16, 2003 about the young Marines from Camp Lejeune, N.C., captured the basic human reality of the perilous situations that these brave warriors are facing:
“In military circles, it is known as “the letter” – or, more accurately, “the death letter.” Not everybody writes one, but those who do confront issues and emotions that are reserved for them alone. And when they're done, and they scrawl “Open only in the event of my death” across the front of the envelope, they are forced to face the reality of what might be ahead …. If he dies, Cpl. Joseph Nasrallah hopes that his letter to his wife, Amanda, will help her get through the ordeal. “I wrote it so she would know I love her and will miss her and had a great life with her, and that, just in case I die, I will be looking over her and looking out for her …. ” [Pfc. Caleb Green said,] “I was in the mood, and I knew I needed to do it …. A lot of it's like, ‘I love you,’ and talking about past times .… I wasn't crying or anything, but afterward I was thinking that it was some pretty mushy stuff, so I wanted to go back and change it. But I figured I'd just leave it alone .… And in case that does happen, I just want to leave [my family] with something to hold, something that tells them how much I loved them, to the day I died.”
While not all our deployed troops write these letters, my experience as a career military officer tells me that most will grapple with these kinds of thoughts. I, like most of our citizens, never had to contemplate such things when I was in my late teens and early twenties. I am now realizing how lucky I was.
I am not in favor of suppressing the voices of those who oppose this seemingly inevitable war with Iraq. I believe in freedom of speech, and in freedom to protest and speak out against our elected officialsÂ’ policies and decisions. I also believe that just because something is a right does not necessarily mean that doing it, especially to extremes and for self-serving purposes, is right.
What is needed is discretion and compassion from those who oppose the war and choose to exercise the freedoms we all enjoy as Americans. All I am asking from those who enjoy our freedoms to openly oppose the war is discretion and compassion towards those who are protecting and preserving those freedoms in a conflict of arms half a world away.
I am hearing a lot of bitterness and frustration on the part of those who actively oppose the war. They believe that President Bush did not listen to their concerns and arguments, because his decision is not what they wanted. I do not see how the president could not have heard their protests. I am confident that with all the information available to him, which is by necessity much more than we as citizens should expect to know, he carefully weighed all options and made the very best decision he could in keeping with the best interests of our country.
Now is the time for all Americans to accept that a decision has been made to put hundreds of thousands of our troops in harmÂ’s way. Whether or not we can all agree on the merits of such a decision, one decision we should all agree upon is the individual decision to support those troops, and not do anything to obstruct the war process. Let us never forget that two very important combat multipliers, morale and confidence, can easily be eroded by selfish and thoughtless words and actions of non-support.
I can think of no happier ending to our present situation than to have those “death letters” carried home by their authors to share with their loved ones. All Americans can and should help make that ending come true.
Lt. Col. Matthew Dodd USMC is a Senior Editor of DefenseWatch. He can be reached at [email protected]. -
So, in your opinion, what should be done then? Haven u consider why it took USA 12 long years to attack IRAQ? Likely one of the reasons is that it is giving Iraq time. So u got a better idea than war? Until someone can give a win-win option, a CONCRETE solution then just shouting "NO WAR NO WAR, PEACE PEACE.", war is still the best solution we have. Stop being an empty vessel making so much pointless noise.Originally posted by stupidissmart:Maybe we should do something to Iraq, but the method of war is too much. Not only it cost problems to world economic, the weopons used to attack Iraq aren't cheap either. The cost to Iraq is worst. Human lives and infrastructure r killed. Killing 30% of people, making the other 30% geurillas while liberating the resukting 40% isn't much of a liberation. -
Those Iraqis who "faked surrender", then approach and ambush the unsuspecting US Marines, are actually members of Saddam Hussein's Baath Party, and are considered "Irregulars soldiers" who are as well funded as the Republican Guards, but are trained to fight in urban warfare as guerillas.Originally posted by foga:i oppose to the iraqi army "pertend-to-surrender-then-shot-at-you-when-you-are-unaware" tatics. shame on them.
i oppose war but if the situation is like that liao then fight like a man lah. cunning to pretend to surrender then ambuse the troops.
bastards ain't they?
Their purpose of faking surrender, then ambushing and killing the unsuspecting US Marines, is to arouse the ire and anger of the other US-UK Coalition Force; who will then be trigger happy towards ALL FUTURE Iraqi soldiers who dare to surrender and will be killed if they make a small tiny wrong move.
First Objective achieved; and now for the Second Objective:-
When the other Iraqi soldiers learn that the US-UK Coalition Force is trigger happy, and will shoot any Iraqi soldiers who are prepared to surrender, this will cause fear and anger amongst the remaining Iraqi soldiers, who will then think twice before they consider giving up the fight, to surrender to any US-UK Coalition Force.
The only remaining solution is to stay and fight; and forget about surrendering.
Second Objective achieved.
Strang logic, but it helps to get the opposing force to instill discipline in a fractious and poorly trained military.
Almost like "Killing Two Birds with ONE Bullet"....