http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=1&u=/ap/20041116/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_hostage_21


This is a war crime and yet OUR American soliders are being judged for minor senaros of tying up Iraqi Prisoners and having a bit fun with them !

If this woman was MURDERED may she RIP and her family be in our prayers!

The video shows a hooded militant firing a pistol into the head of a blindfolded woman wearing an orange jumpsuit, said Al-Jazeera spokesman Jihad Ballout. The station received the tape a few days ago but had not been sure of its authenticity until recently, he said.

"We invited British diplomatic officials to come and view it," he told The Associated Press. "It's now likely that the image depicts Mrs. Hassan."

Ballout said the station would not air the video and would not broadcast any acts of killing, outside war. Al-Jazeera has been under pressure not to show videos of kidnapped foreigners
I find it so comforting to know that un-biased Al-Jazeera will not show the film of these cowardly pieces of shit murdering this innocent women, but they will show that fake shit Dop keeps putting up in his pictures of supposed civilians being killed by U.S. forces. Real big of them. :mad: :rolleyes: :mad:

I agree, Havok.

It's one thing to behead a male contractor working for the United States, it's something else for the terrorists to execute a woman, who converted to Islam, denounced Bush's plan to invade Iraq and who spent practically her entire life trying to improve the lives of Iraqi citizens.

Yes, of course, they are not going to show that video of Ms Hassan being executed, it would show Al-Queda in a bad light. It's too bad we can't force those who are against the war in Iraq to view that video. Let the so-called peaceniks know EXACTLY who they are defending.

Originally posted by Darth Be'lal
It's too bad we can't force those who are against the war in Iraq to view that video. Let the so-called peaceniks know EXACTLY who they are defending. See, I think they do know who they are supporting. And no matter who it is, its not Bush.

uummm...aidworkers weren't contstantly killed before the war in iraq. remember, anything bad that happens now can be blamed on the situation NOW, not before the invasion.

See? Bush made them do it. What a country I live in. :rolleyes: :(

Originally posted by sandy73
This is a war crime and yet OUR American soliders are being judged for minor senaros of tying up Iraqi Prisoners and having a bit fun with them !


First of all, it was not “a bit of fun” that our troops had. Several murders were reported from the Prisoner Abuse Scandal. But I guess, to the Republicans, killing, torturing, attacking with dogs, punching, forcing them to commit sexual acts, making them bleed all over the ground…it just a bit of fun.

Secondly, we are fighting terrorists. We expect these acts to happen from them. We expect them (terrorists) to act inhumane. Which is why it isn’t as publicized as much, as when we (America) commits inhumane acts.

If you feel okay, acting just like the terrorists, then you are no better then the terrorists.
Bush claims this war is a war of “good vs. evil” So basically, if we want to stay on the “good” side, we cannot act or sink down to the level of these “evil doers” We are held to a higher standard, period.

Keep in mind I’m talking about the Prisoner Abuse Scandal…

I love the logic "well, we expect terrorists to be bad, so it's really no big deal when they shoot and behead innocent civillians."

Firstly, I never said it was “OK” that they commit these acts. Nor did I say it wasn’t horrible that they do indeed commit these acts. I’m just pointing out, that when we commit acts that they commit, we become no better then them. We are no longer the “good fighting the evil” We become equal. Which is not what we want to happen…

You insinuated that it was no big deal.

The fact is, the guy the marine shot was a terrorist, a combatant, and a threat, even if wounded gravely.

Hassan was not.

Big difference. You can say the acts are the same, but I don't even buy that. The capture, holding, beating, then finally the killing of an aid worker is far removed from killing an enemy combatant guilty of breaking probably half of the Geneva conventions himself.

Sorry.

Apparently even Al Quieda appealed for her release. Iraq is apparently appalled - she spent 30 years in Iraq helping people.

It's really an absolute shame she died. Tragedy.

OD their is a HUGE difference from what our soldiers did and what the Terrorist are STILL doing to INNOCENT CIVILIANS !
These people that our soldiers had a bit of fun with were PRISONERS aka "TERRORIST" !
Please explain to me why the terrorist can get away with the HORRID actions against INNOCENT CIVILIANS and we have soldiers on trial for FAR less actions done to PRISONERS aka " TERRORIST" ?
I really would like to know and I am sure I am not the only one on this board who wants this answer if not from you but by someone !

Showing us just how violent and desperate terrorists are...going after anybody and everybody who has even the slightest evidence of being a foreigner....truly a sad story, my prayers to her family.

Originally posted by sandy73

These people that our soldiers had a bit of fun with


Good to be warned, in case you would propose to "have a bit of fun" with you !

http://www.wagnerur.hu/vegyes2/torture.jpg


"Let's have a bit of fun".

The prison abuse was certainly a lot more significant than a few soldiers having a bit of fun...

But, it still comes no where near he inhumane acts committed by the kidnappers in Iraq, whoever they are.

Right. Anyway, using one to justify the other is in both cases inacceptable.

Being far more outraged by the prisoner abuse is also unacceptable. astrapol, in the French media and general public, was there more outrage over the prisoner abuse or the first beheading?

Originally posted by DaveTooner
Being far more outraged by the prisoner abuse is also unacceptable. astrapol, in the French media and general public, was there more outrage over the prisoner abuse or the first beheading?


A very intersting question. To answer it, i had to conduct various experiment on french people's brain. Here are the conclusions :

http://info.med.yale.edu/external/pubs/ym_su03/resources/photos/mri_brain_sm.jpg

Upper row : french brain reacting to prisoners abuse. Note it looks like an angry gorilla.

Middle row : french brain reacting to hostages beheading. It is clearly smiling. Disgusting.

Lower row : french brain reacting to yout question. Frankly hilarious. We show no respect.

Originally posted by sandy73
OD their is a HUGE difference from what our soldiers did and what the Terrorist are STILL doing to INNOCENT CIVILIANS !

Of course there was.

These people that our soldiers had a bit of fun with were PRISONERS aka "TERRORIST" !

Your idea of "a bit of fun" is scary, and the fact that you are willing to believe that all the prisoners at Abu Ghraib were "terrorists" is also scary. Some of the prisoners were merely the typical petty criminals that exist in any city, and some have been released because they were innocent of any crime.

Please explain to me why the terrorist can get away with the HORRID actions against INNOCENT CIVILIANS and we have soldiers on trial for FAR less actions done to PRISONERS aka " TERRORIST" ?
I really would like to know and I am sure I am not the only one on this board who wants this answer if not from you but by someone !

Because we are more civilized than the terrorists. We don't execute people to make a point. When our soldiers commit crimes they are punished for them.

I would like you to explain why you think the prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib was just "a bit of fun", and since presumably you also feel it should go unpunished, I'd like to know why.

Originally posted by DaveTooner
Being far more outraged by the prisoner abuse is also unacceptable.

Actually it's perfectly understandable.

Are you more outraged when you hear a person is killed by a wild animal, or when you hear someone is killed by another person?

Presumably the murder of a human by another human is more outrageous because the behavior is harder to understand, and is more unexpected.

Put another way, we expect terrorists to murder people in horrible ways. That's why we call them terrorists. We are more outraged when we hear American soldiers behaving in outrageous ways, even if they didn't kill people (which did happen), because we don't expect them to behave that way.

Originally posted by DrewM
The prison abuse was certainly a lot more significant than a few soldiers having a bit of fun...

But, it still comes no where near he inhumane acts committed by the kidnappers in Iraq, whoever they are.


Thank you Drew !!! THIS IS MY POINT !!!!

Are you more outraged when you hear a person is killed by a wild animal, or when you hear someone is killed by another person?

This is just making an excuse for terrorists. They aren't animals. They are human beings.

Put another way, we expect terrorists to murder people in horrible ways. That's why we call them terrorists. We are more outraged when we hear American soldiers behaving in outrageous ways, even if they didn't kill people (which did happen), because we don't expect them to behave that way.

Oh, so because we "expect" it, it is less outrageous. PLEASE. Beheading an innocent civillian is equally bad (and outrageous) no matter WHO does it.

Originally posted by DaveTooner
This is just making an excuse for terrorists. They aren't animals. They are human beings.

Yes, they are human beings, and no...I'm not making any excuses for their behavior. :rolleyes:

Oh, so because we "expect" it, it is less outrageous. PLEASE. Beheading an innocent civillian is equally bad (and outrageous) no matter WHO does it.

How do you define outrageous?

My definition implies a certain amount of shock and surprise. Perhaps your definition is just one of being outside the bounds of decency. In that case we have a conflict of terminology, nothing more.

Originally posted by Vilepagan

Put another way, we expect terrorists to murder people in horrible ways. That's why we call them terrorists. We are more outraged when we hear American soldiers behaving in outrageous ways, even if they didn't kill people (which did happen), because we don't expect them to behave that way. But isnt that a form of "acceptance" when we allow our expectations of another human being, regardless of political/social affiliation, to fall so low of them?

Perhaps your definition is just one of being outside the bounds of decency

Exactly.

Originally posted by DaveTooner
Exactly.

In that case we're both right. :)

out·ra·geous adj.

1.Grossly offensive to decency or morality.
2. Having no regard for morality.
3. Violent or unrestrained in temperament or behavior.
4. Extremely unusual or unconventional; extraordinary

I tend to think of "outrageous" in terms of definition #4, with aspects of the other three definitions.

Originally posted by HaVoK
But isnt that a form of "acceptance" when we allow our expectations of another human being, regardless of political/social affiliation, to fall so low of them?

Perhaps. I do agree that it's sad that we've become somewhat inured to this kind of behavior, to the point where it no longer shocks us as much as it should.

Originally posted by Vilepagan
Yes, they are human beings, and no...I'm not making any excuses for their behavior. :rolleyes:
Yes you were, and it was obvious.

Not only is this acceptance, we actually seeing a violent backlash to a movie put out about the horrors that were committed under Saddam's regime. The windows of the offices of the people who put out the video were actuall blow out. People don't want to admit or even watch what goes on and went on over there because it makes it easier for them to hate Bush and this war.

Originally posted by sandy73

Please explain to me why the terrorist can get away with the HORRID actions against INNOCENT CIVILIANS and we have soldiers on trial for FAR less actions done to PRISONERS aka " TERRORIST" ?

Ok.

Right after you explain to me how GWBush can get away with something that in terms of **HORRID** actions is right up there with the worst of them; publicly mocking and poking fun at a woman who was about to be put to death, who was begging for her life.

I would be hard pressed to think of something more vile and reprehesible that an American politician could do......yet you Righties WANT the heartless, inhuman person who did it to be your leader.

THAT i will never understand.

I do not excuse the beheading. It was horrific and brutal, and the people who did it should be punished.

BUT-----the hypocritical Conservative people in this country who voted for Bush choose to completly IGNORE Bush's despicable actions in the case of a woman about to be executed, yet will whine and wring their hands over the actions of people on the other side of the world who are --in their minds-- fighting a war of resistance.

Originally posted by HaVoK
I find it so comforting to know that un-biased Al-Jazeera will not show the film of these cowardly pieces of shit murdering this innocent women,

Probably just about as 'comforted' as I am in knowing that millions of people in this country would choose as their leader a smirking politician who publicly mocked and ridiculed a woman that the State he was Governor of was about to have executed. :confused: :mad: :confused:

Originally posted by Freethinker
Probably just about as 'comforted' as I am in knowing that millions of people in this country would choose as their leader a smirking politician who publicly mocked and ridiculed a woman that the State he was Governor of was about to have executed. :confused: :mad: :confused: Whats your point? The woman got what she deserved. If you had half the sympathy for the untold amount of unborn children you support being murdered every year as you do for a convicted murderer's "feelings being hurt", you would have at least a little credibility.

Originally posted by Freethinker
Probably just about as 'comforted' as I am in knowing that millions of people in this country would choose as their leader a smirking politician who publicly mocked and ridiculed a woman that the State he was Governor of was about to have executed. :confused: :mad: :confused:
Yeah, why does that get your panties in a bunch, Freethinker? Really, I'm curious...