BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 02 Feb 08 - 07:48 PM

You're right, Bobert. Just because they have executed physicians from Doctors Without Borders, captured and murdered defenseless Irish aid workers, detonated bombs in crowds of children collecting candy from GIs, assassinated Professors for the sin of teaching technology, slaughtered scores at wedding receptions, and accomplished numerous televised beheadings, surely they wouldn't stoop to using downs syndrome women as human bombs? I mean, that would cheapen the dignity of their cause wouldn't it?

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: Rapparee
Date: 02 Feb 08 - 07:54 PM

Forgot to end the italics....

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: Bobert
Date: 02 Feb 08 - 07:56 PM

No, Lonesome....

I'm not sayin that at all...

I'll type real slow here, my friend:

***Be carefull what you take in as bein' fact***

***WMDs***

***Mushroon Clouds****

***Uranium Cake from Niogeir****

***Mushroon clouds****

Tell me when you've had enough...

If you wanat to believe every PR stunt, fine, believe it... I'm not buyin' any more until I know what the real facts are... Way too soon to know here...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: Rapparee
Date: 02 Feb 08 - 08:04 PM

Bobert, you know I take 'most everything with whole heaping cups full of salt.

I believe this. I believe this because it's been done before.

Take for example the use of airplanes as missiles, crashing them into the structures of the "enemy." September 11, 2001 wasn't the first time it was done -- the Japanese kamikazis did it in 1944. The horror in 2001 was that it was a direct targeting of civilians.

Children were used as bomb carriers by the VC, by the Palestinians, by guerilla forces in Africa.

Children have been used as soldiers: in Africa, in WW2, in Vietnam, to name just a few.

There will be worse to come. That's all I can promise you. I have no doubt whatsoever of that.

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: skipy
Date: 02 Feb 08 - 08:08 PM

Religeon is the route of all evil, it alway has been & always will be.
Skipy

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: Bobert
Date: 02 Feb 08 - 08:14 PM

Don't add up, Rap...

I mean, in these days and times there are plenty of kids who have been sufficiently programed/brainwashed who will do the dirty work...

It just doesn't add up...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: Rapparee
Date: 02 Feb 08 - 08:35 PM

Because, Bobert, you believe that Then said he unto the disciples, It is impossible but that offenses will come: but woe unto him, through whom they come! It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones.

And you look at something like Qu'ran [6:151]: Say, "Come let me tell you what your Lord has really prohibited for you: You shall not set up idols besides Him. You shall honor your parents. You shall not kill your children from fear of poverty - we provide for you and for them. You shall not commit gross sins, obvious or hidden. You shall not kill - GOD has made life sacred - except in the course of justice. These are His commandments to you, that you may understand."

And you wonder about the world we live in.

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 Feb 08 - 08:44 PM

One of the trouble with false atrocities is that they have the effect of stopping people believe in the real atrocities when they come along.

Lies about German atrocities in Belgium in the Great War had the effect that in due course when people learnt they'd been lied to they didn't believe the stories about real atrocities that had taken place there - and when it came to the Second World War it meant that information about the mass murder brigades and the death camps were disregarded as being more atrocity stories.

That's why it matters to get to the truth about episodes like this. And more than likely we never will know one way or the other.

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: Bobert
Date: 02 Feb 08 - 08:47 PM

Nah, Rap...

Ain't like I am dilussional... I know that folks have twisted stuff to justify their actions...

I'm with Bob Dylan on that one when he wrote the "Masters or War" and "God on Our Side"...

But I'm also with Jesus who said in Luke (12:46) "Woe unto you, also, lawyers! For ye lade men with the burden grievious to be borne and ye yoursleves touch not the burden with one of your fingers."

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: Nickhere
Date: 02 Feb 08 - 09:36 PM

Rap "Children have been used as soldiers.."

How true. My grandad was just past 16 when he joined the British army in 1914. His obviously youthful looks didn't stop them sending him off to France.

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: Rapparee
Date: 02 Feb 08 - 10:03 PM

The Viet Cong used children as young as eight years. Some groups in Africa use children as young as six.

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: GUEST,Wesley S
Date: 03 Feb 08 - 08:17 PM

Bobert - I can understand your suspicions. What would make you believe the story - not that you have to ? Would a different source help - {not that I have one at the time}?

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: Joe_F
Date: 03 Feb 08 - 08:51 PM

"But unfortunately, the truth about atrocities is far worse than that they are lied about and made into propaganda. The truth is that they happen." -- George Orwell (1942)

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: Kent Davis
Date: 03 Feb 08 - 09:17 PM

Either the bombers were significantly mentally handicapped or they weren't.
If they were mentally handicapped, they could not have given meaningful consent to their mission. Thus they were not suicide bombers but rather murder victims.
If they were not mentally handicapped, they could have given consent. However, the other 68 who were killed presumbably did not give consent.
So the great question being debated here is whether 70 innocent people were deliberately killed, or only 68.
I'm with Bobert on this one. I could easily see how they might kill 68 innocent people by remote control, but 70?!?! No way!
Kent

P.S. to Kendall,
You wrote, "Don't forget, if a Muslim dies in defense of Islam against the infidel, they go directly to heaven. It's THEIR belief system that motivates them, not ours." That would be relevant if, in this attack, any Muslim had died in defense of Islam against the infidel. Where did you read that the 68 (or 70) who were killed were Islam-attacking infidels? I missed that part.
Kent

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: Nickhere
Date: 03 Feb 08 - 10:16 PM

Wes: "What would make you believe the story - not that you have to ?"

May I attempt to answer that question?

If our elected leaders admitted they'd been lying about oh, this and that up to now, and started ttelling the truth. As someone said back up along this thread (McGrath I think) if you systematically lie to achieve your aims no-one will believe you when you tell the truth. As you know there's an old saying about truth being the first casualty in war.

The Brits lied about German atrocities during WW1 to whip up anti-German fervour - so successfully so that German immigrant shopkeepers in the UK had their premises attacked, and the royal family changed their name from Saxe-Coburg de Gotha to Windsor (the latter being the name of a castle) in order to downplay their German connections (Kaiser Wilhelm was George V's first cousin!).

These atrocity stories included supposed massacres of Belgian civilians by the invading Huns, the nailing of nuns and children to barn doors, crucifixion style, etc., etc., Lord Ponsonby covered this in detail in his 1928 book "Falsehood in Wartime" and shown such stories to absoultely groundless.

Of course they weren't the only ones doing it. Liz Curtis has written an excellent book (title "Northern Ireland and the media war" or something like that) to show how propaganda and distortions were used in the UK to row in public opinion. The saddest thought there is that their propaganda efforts helped prolong the war by ensuring the British public had no proper understanding of what was going on. Thus Britian's shoot-to-kill policy as exposed by Stalker passed almost without comment among the largely unaware Brit public (Guardian readers aside, probably!). Those who did get to hear about it had probably been raised all their lives on a diet of 'mad Paddy terrorists that deserve whatever they get" until their critical faculties were dulled. That is, until it came home to roost in the form of the shooting dead a few summers ago of the Brazilian guy by London police as he ran from them. People were shocked. "How could this happen? Mistaken identity, panic, ok, but what if I'm next?" Suddenly shoot-to-kill was having local implications. And because no-one had a fuss over it when it was employed in the North, they now find themselves having to deal with it at home. That's what I mean about injustice anywhere being a threat to justice everywhere. Whatever happens around the world is our concern, as is the lies we are told to facilitate it happening.

One personal example, a friend of mine in Belfast, 1970s, a car pulls up on the street. Brit squaddies don't like the look of the car, open fire without trying to stop it or get a better idea of who's in it. They kill the guy inside. Turns out he's just some delivery guy, totally innocent. My friend sees this, sees the angry crowd that quickly gather, see the squaddies fire one or two live rounds into the crowd to disperse them - one person is injured. Later in the day my friend is driving south, turns on the national radio, hears the news. Only this time it's become an IRA hitman pulled up in a car, Brits (naturally) shot him, a crowd quickly gathered and got his gun and spirited it away (which explains why no gun was found) before attacking the squaddies and thus getting fired on in return (teh squaddies only ever fire in self-defense if attacked FIRST, you see).

My friend turned off the radio and thought 'that's it. I doubt I'll ever believe another official word I hear again"

Simon Hoggart, a UK journalist, commented that we should always treat news reports that begin 'senior security sources said.." or "a senior figure in the police stated..." with deep suspicion. Untraceable quotes that come from unaccountable people. 'Senior police sources' usually turns out to mean 'the police PR office' in the end of the day, with whom journalists have to maintain a 'good' relationship if they want to be in on the scoops.

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: GUEST,hmm
Date: 03 Feb 08 - 10:28 PM

Despicable though it is, it's no worse than using children (under 21?) stuffed with lies to do your fighting, or people of low intelligence. Most 'civilized' nations do that without batting an eyelid. At least these poor women didn't have to suffer the horror of what they were doing.

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: Nickhere
Date: 03 Feb 08 - 10:29 PM

So to keep a long post short (or at least broken into smaller posts) the bonanza of lying that's been going on in relation to the war in Iraq and the absoulte lack of even a shred of credibility among any of or so-called leaders has meant no one knows what to believe anymore, and everything is treated with suspicion until some solid fact or cross referencing allows it to be verified. Conspiracy theorists have a field day, and are probably right some of the time at least.

There should be some new verbs introduced into our langauge - 1) blair (n) - a bold-faced lie told with a smile and the blame on someone else if caught out; To blair (v) to tell such a lie. "How did you get on at the job interview?" "Oh, fine, I told a blair or two about my CV, but I think I got away with it"   Or "He blaired his way through the interview.."

"To beat about the bush" (idiom) - a change of meaning from the old meaning of being deliberately vague. The new meaning would be 'to tell a string of lies about the evil nature and bad behaviour of someone you don't like in a semi-articulate fashion, that ironically describe one's own behaviour and attitudes almost exactly'.

Any takers? Maybe we could get the ball rolling.

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: Nickhere
Date: 03 Feb 08 - 10:32 PM

Good point Guest. If I'm not mistaken the US army generally targets poor areas when recruiting. It's all very well to pay for someone's college, but it's an almost Faustian pact considering they'll soon be repaying the loan with blood sweat and tears. Mike Moore targetted Senators and congressmen to aks them why their kids weren't out in Iraq and their response (unless he edited the 'good' ones, as anything's possible) was to smile at him as though he were half-witted.

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: Kent Davis
Date: 04 Feb 08 - 12:29 AM

My previous post was an attempt at irony.
The following is not ironic, but is a serious, though rhetorical, question:
Is it logical to ASSUME that a reasonable claim is false, simply because the one making the claim is untrustworthy?
I consider former President Clinton to be untrustworthy. In spite of this, if he were to tell me it is cold outside, I would believe him. I realize that he could be lying. I realize that he has lied in the past. I would still believe him, unless there were evidence to suggest his claim were false. I would believe him, not because I trust him, but because it is February.   
In this incident, 68 people were killed (without their consent) by remote control bombs. It is claimed that 2 others were also killed (without their meaningful consent) by remote control bombs. Why then insist that "Anyone who believes this story should contact me immediately 'cuase I ahve a bridge to sell.."?   

Kent

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: GUEST,jimbob
Date: 04 Feb 08 - 12:31 AM

http://www.walter-c-uhler.com/Reviews/retarded.html

Reasonable reality check. The media knee-jerk reporting reminds me of engineers making ridiculous calculations based on misassumptions and not doing a simple reality check to show them they were FUBAR.

The article above gives as a source the same skeptical report I heard on News Hour. My first question was, How did they know these women had Down's syndrome? Down's syndrome does not cause severe retardation, in any case. And it was until recent decades that people with Down's didn't expect to live to be adulthood, though this has changed withn the US. But adults with Down's were rare and likely still are in Iraq.

Of course, the tone in the US is ideological, with anyone doubting the admin a leftist, one of those words that is as meaningless as conservative (why is it that conservatives create the biggest governments and the biggest deficits?). Forget what really happened, forget questions, accept or reject based solely on ideology. Or, in other words, what you want to believe.

This is blatant misuse of an event to gain support for the US in Iraq that is now "winning" the war. Maybe they can get McCain elected on the basis of his support of the surge.

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: GUEST,jimbob
Date: 04 Feb 08 - 01:00 AM

This is an interesting straight news article from Australia, in which the US military begins its customary backing down. I know all about this too, from my own experience with reality and the reported from another war.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/suicide-bombers-had-down-syndrome-photos-show/2008/02/03/1201973740744.html

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Feb 08 - 04:38 AM

The bombing occurred. That is indisputable.
There are independent professional journalists from many nations
reporting from Iraq, and many Iraqi bloggers.
There were reported to be many survivors who recognised the women and witnessed the explosions.
It is hard to believe that all this could be a PR stunt.
It would be exposed at once and bring ruin and disgrace to the perpetrators.
And if it is true, is it not right that we should oppose people who can do such things for political advantage?
Or should we allow such vermin to achieve power.

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: kendall
Date: 04 Feb 08 - 07:24 AM

No amount of belief can create a fact.

I don't know if those women were retarded or not. I do know that those radicals believe that they are duty bound to kill infidels.

At the turn of the 20th century the Hurst news media printed many stories about how horrible the Spanish were in Cuba. They got the people all riled up and insisted we go to war. Spain had done no such thing. We needed bases all around the world, and the best way to get them was to take them away from Spain.
We now have 800 bases around the world.

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: GUEST,JTT
Date: 04 Feb 08 - 07:39 AM

If this is true - and I have no reason to disbelieve it (apart, perhaps, from the source), then it's an atrocity.

What surprises me is that there have been no follow-up articles about the women, their families, their background, no quotes from parents or siblings or cousins. Or no articles I've seen, anyway. Seems to me that a feature like that would make the fortune of the foreign corr who wrote it.

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 04 Feb 08 - 07:49 AM

It is hard to believe that all this could be a PR stunt.
It would be exposed at once and bring ruin and disgrace to the perpetrators.

Not necessarily, not even probably. It's not at all hard to get away with this kind of thing, especially when the press is almost exclusively dependent on official sources, which is the case in Iraq at present. The one about Iraqi soldiers pulling babies out of incubators in Kuwait wasn't exposed for quite a long time. More often than not news stories get reported at the time, and never re-examined.

Is it logical to ASSUME that a reasonable claim is false, simply because the one making the claim is untrustworthy?

The logical thing in such a case is neither to believe nor disbelieve, until evidence emerges from a trustworthy source that makes it possible to decide.

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: Bobert
Date: 04 Feb 08 - 08:27 AM

Hmmmmmmm???

Where have all the drum pounders gone???

When I first questioned this story they were on me like ugly on Fred Thompson but now they seem to have disappeared back into their miserable little partisan bunkers...

As for "The Surge"... It isn't a military strategy... It's an economic one... While we can't afford to fund child health care here in the US we seem to have plenty of $$$ to pay off SDunni's not to kill our troops???

This is a surge on money leaving our treasury and nuthin else...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: Peace
Date: 04 Feb 08 - 10:18 AM

I am not a drum pounder, Bobert, but I am one of the people you are addressing with that remark. Those idiots have used women before. It would not surprise me that they would use women with Down's. So back off with that stuff. I cited a few newspapers. That is where the info came from. You know better, then PROVE otherwise. Leave the name calling to people who have only that to use on the site.

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: Teribus
Date: 04 Feb 08 - 10:35 AM

Why the shock and disbelief, they have after all done it before, during voting in the 2005 election a Downs Syndrome Boy with the mental age of four was fitted with an explosive vest and detonanted by remote control, the press covering that interviewed the boy's parents and an uncle.

Al-Qaeda in Iraq has followed the well worn path of all the Jihadist Groups, all full of piss and vinegar at the start then when they have gotten over the initial euphoria they realise that when they take on the infidels, the infidels shoot back, the quality and quantity of return fire normally being far superior. Even the darkness befriends their enemies. So what do these heroes do, go after unarmed civilians - you see they can't shoot back. They tried a damn sight harder to foment a civil war in Iraq a couple of years ago, this present spat like the last will fade.

The level of violence in both Iraq and Afghanistan is now so low it hardly registers, much less than Northern Ireland in the mid-1970's. Odd that for two countries that were in the midst of civil wars according to some here not so long ago.

If true it speaks volumes for strength of conviction of the warriors of Islam, so dedicated to their cause are they that they kidnap or con the mentally ill into wearing explosives then direct them to a crowded location where from a presumably safe distance they initiate detonation. They wouldn't dream about doing it themselves though. Anyone who deliberately plans attacks such as these are scum irrespective of what bloody name they go under. But one thing is certain - they won't get anywhere with it.

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: Bobert
Date: 04 Feb 08 - 12:55 PM

My apologies, Brucie...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: Peace
Date: 04 Feb 08 - 01:02 PM

Mine back to you, Bobert. Rough day.

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: Nickhere
Date: 04 Feb 08 - 03:29 PM

Yes Kent, but what if you had the sneaking suspicion that Clinton was telling you it was cold outside because he didn't want you going out, because he wanted to use the car instead. So, you stay indoors by the fire because Clinton says 'nahhh, it's WAY too cold to go out today. You just warm yerself by the fire, I'm juts going to the restroom for a mo,.....and out the window to the car...." ;-))

(in reply to "I consider former President Clinton to be untrustworthy. In spite of this, if he were to tell me it is cold outside, I would believe him. I realize that he could be lying. I realize that he has lied in the past. I would still believe him, unless there were evidence to suggest his claim were false. I would believe him, not because I trust him, but because it is February. ")

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: Nickhere
Date: 04 Feb 08 - 03:32 PM

"It would be exposed at once and bring ruin and disgrace to the perpetrators"

Yes, just as the Abu Gharib scandal brought ruin and disgrace all the way up to Rumsfeld. Why, even Bush was quaking in his seat for a while there, afraid his head would roll too, along with the fall guys.

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Feb 08 - 04:06 PM

Nickhere,
Abhu Ghraib involved the mistreatment of some prisoners.
It was carried out behind locked doors and high walls, and still it was exposed, and some perpetrators punished.
Here, a hundred are killed and hundreds more injured in a public place, with hundreds of witnesses ,in the full glare of publicity, and as has been said, in a way certain to attract the attention of the world's media.

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: Folkiedave
Date: 04 Feb 08 - 04:22 PM

The level of violence in both Iraq and Afghanistan is now so low it hardly registers, much less than Northern Ireland in the mid-1970's

Of course it is possible to choose particular periods and claim some sort of comparison. But let's scotch this myth before it starts.

The current level of US (NB US only) deaths in Iraq is just below 4,000.

http://icasualties.org/oif/US_chart.aspx

That chart shows the deaths month by month - they have not been especially high but not "so low it hardly registers" as Teribus claims. The deaths are close in numbers to those at the start of the conflict - see chart.

There were 14 military deaths in Afghanistan in January. (7 US, 7 others).

Current documented civilian deaths (almost certainly an underestimate) are over 80,000 in Iraq and they are going down - but NOT "so low it hardly registers".

The Northern Ireland conflict between 1969 and peace had a TOTAL of 3523. Soldiers and civilians.

Not a good comparison I would suggest.

I happen to think using a Downs syndrome woman as a suicide bomber is a despicable act of cowardice.

I happen to think using napalm on a civilian population is also a despicable act of cowardice. Lying about it makes it worse.

"Defense Minister, Adam Ingram, admitted that the US had misled the British high-command about the use of napalm, but he would not comment on the extent of the cover up. The use of firebombs puts the US in breach of the 1980 Convention on Certain Chemical Weapons (CCW) and is a violation the Geneva Protocol against the use of white phosphorous, "since its use causes indiscriminate and extreme injuries especially when deployed in an urban area."

I reckon both sides are as bad as one another. Let's condemn them both eh?

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: GUEST,dianavan
Date: 04 Feb 08 - 04:37 PM

I'm trying to imagine what I would do as a parent if I was living in a worn torn country with a Down's syndrome child. What future would this child have? If I were a radical Muslim, I might believe it was better that the child die a martyr than die of starvation or disease.

I don't really know what I would do.

I'm also not at all sure if this story is true. It should definitely be re-examined.

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: Wesley S
Date: 04 Feb 08 - 04:55 PM

"I'm trying to imagine what I would do as a parent if I was living in a worn torn country with a Down's syndrome child. What future would this child have?"

Well - as the parent of a special needs child - autism - not Down Syndrome - I can assure you that I would rip the heart out of anyone who tried to use my child to further their political agenda. Simple as that.

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: Peace
Date: 04 Feb 08 - 05:31 PM

Ditto what Wes said.

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: Teribus
Date: 04 Feb 08 - 05:55 PM

Folkiedave the comparison holds good with regard to number of bomb attacks being made.

Whatever you do pleased do not quote numbers and imply that Northern Ireland was anything like the lesser conflict, the numbers killed in Northern Ireland were relatively low but that had nothing to do with the paramilitaries lack of trying for far higher counts. What kept the numbers down was the service to the community as a whole provided by the Police, the Security Services and the Emergency Services.

The point I am making is that Al-Qaeda in Iraq must be really flush with volunteers fully prepared to take on the foreign invader if it has to kidnap, or con, the mentally challenged to perform the role as "Suicide Bomber" (Martyr as dianavan terms it). Hells teeth the brave and gallant Jihadist bastards who set them up didn't even have the guts to steer them towards what ever they could describe as a legitimate military/Police target.

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: Folkiedave
Date: 04 Feb 08 - 06:51 PM

Teribus - you said The level of violence in both Iraq and Afghanistan is now so low it hardly registers, much less than Northern Ireland in the mid-1970's.

I merely pointed out that it was an odious, wrong and idiotic comparison. What you said was the "level of violence". If you now want to change that to "bomb attacks" I still see no valid comparison. But then you can see a difference between Downs syndrome suicide bombers and bombing people with napalm.

I don't.

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 04 Feb 08 - 07:07 PM

"The level of violence in both Iraq and Afghanistan is now so low it hardly registers"

Talk about rose-colored glasses...

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: Nickhere
Date: 04 Feb 08 - 08:45 PM

Keith, if I remember well, the point about Abu Gharib is that the atmosphere and actions were encouraged from the top down. It was not an isolated case of just a few soldiers getting out of hand without their superiors' knowledge. They acted in that manner in the belief that is was the expected thing for them to do. Military people might lose the rag in a moment of panic, in the heat of battle and shoot someone they otherwise wouldn't, but they don't act as they did in Abu Gharib unless they feel scure their actions are approved from the top down.

Hence the guy who exposed Abu Gharib tried to do so anonymously fearful for his carrer at the least and his safety at the most. He wasn't able to remain anonymous for long, but he did try.

Some fall guys took the hit (and they didn't get anything like the treatment they'd meted out to their unfortunate victims) while the bigwigs that encouraged it got off scot-free. Plus the same bigwigs are still trying to re-define torture so they can engage in it qusai-legally (as if that makes it moral also) and don't seem to think waterboarding is torture. This despite the fact that it was a tool of the Inquisition for centuries, and teh admission of a top US military man that if done to him, he would regard it as torture.

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: Peace
Date: 04 Feb 08 - 08:47 PM

"as if that makes it moral also"

No point talkin' morals in a whore house.

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: Bobert
Date: 04 Feb 08 - 09:45 PM

Well, fine...

If the reported level of violence is so low in Iraq and Afganistan then let's get the heck out...

Okay???

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: GUEST,dianavan
Date: 04 Feb 08 - 10:13 PM

Wes, Peace and others - I did not see any reports that radical Islamists wrenched the Downs syndrome child from the parents. Was a kidnapping involved? It seems to me that the parents must have given their consent.

I don't condone this but try to imagine the alternatives from their point of view. Was it a parental decision? If so, what drove them to martyr their child. Could it have been no medical, special services or education and no opportunity for the future? I imagine that raising a disabled child in Iraq is quite a bit different than raising a disabled child in North America.

Before I believe this story, I would have to have the details. I don't think anyone should believe it until the story is reviewed in detail. Just because one person makes a remark and it is reported over and over again, worldwide, does not make it true.

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: Peace
Date: 04 Feb 08 - 10:17 PM

I don't recall saying a damned thing to you, lady. Address the people who did. Not me.

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: Teribus
Date: 05 Feb 08 - 07:33 AM

" But then you can see a difference between Downs syndrome suicide bombers and bombing people with napalm.

I don't." - (Folkiedave)

I most certainly do see the difference in unprincipled and unscrupulous religious nutters deliberately kidnapping, or conning, unwitting mentally challenged people into carrying explosives into a market place crammed with innocent civilians only to have those same unprincipled and unscrupulous religious nutters deliberately detonate those explosives from afar.

At least the pilot carrying out the bombing run is a) Deliberately putting his life on the line to carry out that attack and b) Is attacking a military target that is capable of firing back.

On the "Napalm" hysterics as reported by a forum representing Marxist Thought Online it can be seen that the USMC has used Mk-77 bombs during the initial stages of the conflict in 2003 against military targets and against fortified positions in Fallujah during the assault in 2004, it also notes that the vast majority of civilians had fled Fallujah before fighting began. While the US has signed up to the Convention it has so far refused to sign the Protocol. It is the Protocal that Marxist Thought outlines has been breached, and only then if the munitions were targeted at areas in which there was a known civilian presence. Now I would tend to think that you only ever fire at what you have to, or what you deem to be a threat to your troops. I would doubt very much if large numbers of civilians were present, they most certainly were not in the first reported instance - which was a manned Iraqi observation post in the desert close to the Kuwaiti border.

Exactly where the UK comes into this I don't know. We most definitely have not used these sort of munitions since the 1960's. last recorded use by UK armed forces was during attempts to ignite the oil escaping from the "Torrey Canyon". UK finished with Napalm type weapons while I was still in the navy.

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: SINSULL
Date: 05 Feb 08 - 08:29 AM

I took this story at face value until the news reported within hours of the bombing that they had found the woman's head and this was proof that she was the bomber (the screaming cream seller). Huh? Could she not have been a victim? How did they know she was the bomber? Something just did not ring true.

Sad but true, I believe nothing out of the mouths of politicians or newsmen. There was a time when the news was sacred and presented in factual form rather than editorialized. Now it sells toothpaste.

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: GUEST,Keith A o Hertford
Date: 05 Feb 08 - 09:03 AM

They have some experience of this type of explosion out there.
The head of a suicide bomber is usually launched upwards and is often found well clear of the explosion.
There would be plenty of other forensics, and there were eye witnesses here.

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: Folkiedave
Date: 05 Feb 08 - 10:17 AM

"Marxist thought on line". Interesting characterisation of the US Defence spokesman I quoted.

As for the difference of being bombed by suicide bombers or a brave pilot risking his life - ask those who are bombed if they can perceive any difference. I doubt if they could - were they still alive to speak.

Subject: RE: BS: Down Syndrome women used as bombers
From: GUEST,dianavan
Date: 05 Feb 08 - 12:49 PM

Its now being reported that this tid-bit was wild speculation based on an examination of the head that was found. Apparently, the woman had facial characteristics similar to those with Downs.

Take a downer, Peace. My earlier reply was in response to Wes. Since you dittoed his remark, I included you in my post. Relax. Its an open discussion. If I respond to your comments, its my choice, not yours. Relax. Smoke another dooby.