Saddam looks innocent...

BlkbrryTheGreat · Post by **BlkbrryTheGreat** » 2004-06-24 01:55am

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2004-06-24 01:58am

He could be charged for so much based on his past actions that this article is amazingly pointless. The author is a git.

BlkbrryTheGreat · Post by **BlkbrryTheGreat** » 2004-06-24 02:00am

Care to elaborate?

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2004-06-24 02:03am

The article primarilly bitches about WMDs, and when it comes to the Kurdish situation, it conveniently ignore the fact that you can find mass graves, etc. all over the place. It's basically saying "Saddam didn't kill anyone! He was a GOOD MAN!"

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2004-06-24 02:07am

Not only that, but the HRW has lots to say about Kurdish genocide:

http://hrw.org/campaigns/iraq/#Anfal

Really, the piece this person wrote that you linked to is complete bullshit made solely to make the Bush administration look bad. And while I don't mind making them look bad, LYING to do it is unethical.

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2004-06-24 02:12am

Here look, to explain further, compare this statement from the introduction to the reports by the HRW:

"The locations of at least three mass gravesites have been pinpointed through the testimony of survivors."

"At least two other mass graves are believed to exist on Hamrin Mountain, one between Kirkuk and Tikrit and the other west of Tuz Khurmatu."

"Some of the gravesites contained dozens of separate pits, and obviously contained the bodies of thousands of victims."

"8: Other mass graves have been found elsewhere in Kurdish-controlled territory, containing the remains of Amn executions before, during and after the Anfal period."

to this statement by the writer if your article:

" Just call Human Rights Watch and ask if they have yet found the mass graves of those tens of thousands of Kurds and they will sheepishly admit they are still looking."

Yeah, they are indeed still looking. But theyre still looking in order to find the REST of them.

But maybe it's just me. Maybe my acceptance of HRW's word over someone elses word about what HRW's word is, is infact flawed. But I doubt that it is.

BlkbrryTheGreat · Post by **BlkbrryTheGreat** » 2004-06-24 02:13am

Guess you missed this part....

To tell you the truth, John, as far as I can recall, there have been no assertions of the “brutality” of Saddam’s regime from anyone but the Iraqi exiles associated with Ahmet Chalabi or those Kurds who fought on the Iranian side in the Iran/Iraq war....

The President also has it in his head that Saddam committed genocide against the Kurds in 1988, killing tens of thousands of them with poison gas and/or machine guns. If you lifted a little pinky to get to the bottom of this story, you will find it is also made of neo-con whole cloth. I’m not making wild assertions, John, because I have spent countless hours on this subject and find no loopholes left. Just call Human Rights Watch and ask if they have yet found the mass graves of those tens of thousands of Kurds and they will sheepishly admit they are still looking.

BlkbrryTheGreat · Post by **BlkbrryTheGreat** » 2004-06-24 02:14am

If they've been found, and contain the bodies of women and children and not killed Iranian/Kurdish soldiers, I stand corrected.

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2004-06-24 02:22am

I'm sorry but how does that refute anything I just posted? The article is saying that theres no evidence and the HRW will confirm this. The HRW clearly says its FOUND numerous graves. The author LIED. What is there to even discuss? That whole quoted segment is merely the author saying that theres no evidence, when there is and it has been demonstrated repeatedly by the very people that the author claims deny the existance of the evidence.

BlkbrryTheGreat · Post by **BlkbrryTheGreat** » 2004-06-24 02:31am

kojikun wrote:I'm sorry but how does that refute anything I just posted? The article is saying that theres no evidence and the HRW will confirm this. The HRW clearly says its FOUND numerous graves. The author LIED. What is there to even discuss? That whole quoted segment is merely the author saying that theres no evidence, when there is and it has been demonstrated repeatedly by the very people that the author claims deny the existance of the evidence.

Mass graves are a convinent way to bury people in a hurry... and has been employed countless times in history. Believe it or not the presence of a mass grave, in and of itself, does not indicate that attrocitites have been committed. The graves in question could be the graves of Kurdish/Iranian soldiers or the graves of Shia rebels (most nations have no problem with "lawful" governments putting down armed rebellions); there are completely different the mass graves filled with the bodies of innocent women and children. Thats why I stated that I conceed, if the graves are filled with women and children- and not soldiers.

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2004-06-24 02:41am

But that does not change a damn thing. The article said the HRW denies finding any graves at all. Thats a lie.

BlkbrryTheGreat · Post by **BlkbrryTheGreat** » 2004-06-24 04:07am

READ CAREFULLY

Just call Human Rights Watch and ask if they have yet found the mass graves of those tens of thousands of Kurds and they will sheepishly admit they are still looking.

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2004-06-24 07:58am

BlkbrryTheGreat wrote:READ CAREFULLY

I've read reports from US Troops who have driven onto mass graves,
with bones sticking out of the ground, I'll believe them.