BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s

Subject: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: GUEST,in shock
Date: 23 Mar 03 - 10:52 AM

We've just listened to reports from Al Jazeera about Americans captured by Iraquis. A young woman (Shauna) from Texas was being grilled by her captors. Apparently they're showing pictures of wounded and dead American soldiers. My God, this whole thing is so awful. Does anyone have any more info. Our mainstream outlets are not reporting this.

Like most, my wife and I have been against this war from the beginning, but we're just feeling numb at the moment.

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: Tweed
Date: 23 Mar 03 - 10:55 AM

Schwartzkopf said a minute ago that the captured prisoners have been executed. Many different numbers reported however.

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: GUEST,linguist
Date: 23 Mar 03 - 11:01 AM

Prisoners of War or Enemy Combatants?
(The U.S. makes a distinction, so why shouldn't the rest of the world?)

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: Rick Fielding
Date: 23 Mar 03 - 11:18 AM

Executed? Jeesus, I'm listening to CNN at the moment and they're starting to confirm these earlier stories. I just saw Don Rumsfield reply to a pertinent question "I don't know what you're talking about".....but to be fair to him, I don't know WHEN he was questioned.

I've been pretty objective about this whole thing for the last few weeks, but I'm damned emotional today. It's just so damned sad. SURELY some of this could have been avoided with more economic pressure....and SURELY the millions of protesters can bring about a swift end.

I don't want to hear more reports from Al Jazeera, but like watching a train wreck, I guess I'll listen. They're being broadcast on CBC.

Rick

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: GUEST,boab d
Date: 23 Mar 03 - 11:23 AM

Did Iraq actually sign the Geneva convention?
If not then they cant breach it. Hope they get out alright though even if its wrong what the UK+us are doing
Dylan

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: GUEST,Sledge
Date: 23 Mar 03 - 11:39 AM

The stuff being shown on Al jazeera is pretty graphic, they have shown at least 8 US dead and were grilling some poor guy from Kansas on camera, to say the least he looked terrified.

The dead seemed to have a few too many head wounds, when I first saw the pictures I found myself thinking executions, ugly stuff and with it being broadcast like this, how long before word gets round the troops and tit for tat killings become a regular thing.

Sledge

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: Sorcha
Date: 23 Mar 03 - 11:40 AM

Well, does anybody seriously believe that Saddam and his sons will be "captured alive"? After all,that is our stated intent......they will be "shot in the back trying to escape." How is that different from execution?

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: The Walrus
Date: 23 Mar 03 - 12:25 PM

Surely retaliaton is what the 'powers-that-be' in Iraq want.
If the US + forces start topping PoWs, the rest of the Army will be more reluctant to surrender if pushed into a corner and more likely to move into 'we're dead either way, so let's take the ba*ds with us' mode.

Am I too cynical? (and if so, am I still wrong?)

Walrus

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: InOBU
Date: 23 Mar 03 - 02:14 PM

All we are saying, is give peace a chance.
Larry

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: Forum Lurker
Date: 23 Mar 03 - 03:52 PM

Walrus-I think you might be giving Saddam a little too much credit for forethought. If he were smart enough to try that, he would have been able to convince the UN that he positively did not have proscribed weapons. Frightening thought, though.

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: Nemesis
Date: 23 Mar 03 - 04:34 PM

ON the UK news it showed the US personnel dead with head wounds (8 I think) and appeared to support the execution theory and 5 captured (from Texas and New Jersey including one female personnel .. Iraq (whether it was Saddam or militia - I didn't catch) stated that they regard the Allies as mercenaries to whom the Geneva Convention will therefore NOT apply in their view.

If the Iraqis intend to execute them, I just hope they do it quickly without torture or mutilation.

This is so awful.. my son was born 15 years ago this week and the terrible headlines for that day were full page pictures of two off-duty policemen who'd strayed into the wrong part of Belfast and were photgraphed being torn to pieces by a mob .. and now what can I say to a child on the brink of adulthood about the World 15 years on ...

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 23 Mar 03 - 05:06 PM

They were soldiers Hille.

For all that the Iraqis have killed a few coalition personnel, they're probably still trailing behind what the coalition personnel do to each other. It all seems a hopelessly one-sided encounter to me. Very little evidence so far that Iraq was any kind of military threat to anyone. And if they have all those WMDs, they show no sign of ever using them.

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: Ireland
Date: 23 Mar 03 - 05:16 PM

Saddam is far from stupid, how has he lasted so long in power.

What he wants to do is get the coalition forces to strike back in the same manner, one such action by coalition troops would be seen by the world and despised more than a hundred such atrocities by Iraq.

He is playing a mind game,lets hope he does not win it.

I pray that this ill advised war does some good so the dead will not have died in vain.

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: wysiwyg
Date: 23 Mar 03 - 05:47 PM

It's been a bad news day all around, and I do not think that is a concidence-- I think it is a response to the propaganda war we have been presenting from the start (whenever you think the start was).

I think the target is our own minds, all around the world, more than the soldiers heading for B'dad. Although I do not advocate putting one's head in the sand (nor up one's ass), I do want to remind people that we can choose not to put our heads in the line of fire-- we can get away from the TV long enough to remain able to think and to do proud the belief system of your choice.

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: Nemesis
Date: 23 Mar 03 - 07:17 PM

Just reported on the news that The Iraqis will respect the Geneva Convention vis the prisoners ..

2 Tornado aircraft crew downed by "friendly fire" - ITN's senior reporter and camera man and translator presumed dead after coming under fire .. just seen B52's taking off from RAF Fairford on their way .. wierd sort of propaganda but the idea seems to be for them to be publicly seen to be on their way with their "massive" payload of bombs.

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: The Walrus
Date: 23 Mar 03 - 08:22 PM

Just a thought,
Saddam has placed a price on the head of each Allied serviceman/woman killed or captured.
Should 'we' start issuing aircrew with 'goolie-chits' as the RAF did over Afghanistan in the 1930s or the 'Laundry List' worn by the American "Flying Tigers" in China?
A "goolie-chit" was a badge/notice promising payment for each airman handed over to the Allies, with a sliding scale based on their 'condition' (removing bits of the anatomy reduced the value greatly, hence the name).

Walrus

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 23 Mar 03 - 08:27 PM

Strikes me there's a lot of spinning going on here.

Bottom line is, the Geneva Conventions about prisoners and about war really matter. And when any country breaks them or tinkers with them - for example by calling prisoners of war "hostile combatants" - the people responsible ought to be arraigned before a war crimes tribunal, because they make it easier for other people to do the same.

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: GUEST,sorefingers
Date: 23 Mar 03 - 08:53 PM

I don't know if anyone else has noticed, but G W sounds completely different from his usual could-care-less tone of voice.

Hope it ends soon and Saddam retires or steps on a land mine....

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: NicoleC
Date: 23 Mar 03 - 08:54 PM

I agree, Kevin. Sad then, that a bit over a year ago the US was insisting those soldiers they captured in Afghanistan weren't "prisoners of war," and so the Geneva Convention didn't apply. I have to wonder how much spin got used in the Mid East about what how the US treated those men -- and if the Iraqi soldiers are responding to that.

It's more sad that the 507th aren't the kind of front line troops that get prepared for this sort of thing. I'm trying to keep away from the TV today, but I do keep thinking about those poor boys.

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: Bobert
Date: 23 Mar 03 - 09:23 PM

Well, this was certain to happen. And it looks very much like Rumsfeld was well prepared for this day. Rather than show any level of *true* remorse, he is shifting the blame onto the folks the US has attacked. A PR stunt!

Back to PR, Iraq needs as many *live* prisoners as it can get its hand on so don't think, for one instance, that they are going to let any *live* ones get away.

This was the war that Bush chose. He had to know that this day would come.

Bush did not walk the exrta mile for peace. Might of fact, he didn't takw the first step in that walk. He has made it plain to even a dead man what his intentions were. Now, the realities are coming home to roost.

Welcome to the real world, Mr. Bush and Mr. Rumsfeld. Sure, the US will win the war. It has too many weapons but these days are part of the sceneriom but felt not by those who bought you election, but the people who do your dirt work!

Yeah, stop your studid imperialistic war and maybe the Iraqis will stop ruining your TV hour...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: GUEST,Norton1
Date: 23 Mar 03 - 10:19 PM

PR stunt? Wow - let's see if that holds water - nope - old dog don't hunt no more. Wonder if those Russions in Iraq in violation of the UN had anything to do with it? Or the french Mirage fighters that were being delivered a few weeks ago? Don't be so single minded about this Bobert - you want world peace you best hold everyone accountable - not just the safe little space you live in.

Iraq uses chemical weapons the world will turn on him - only when Bagdhad comes under serious assault will we see those.

Just my .02 worth -
Steve

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 23 Mar 03 - 10:37 PM

Google is jammed this evening.

San Francisco Chronicle

From South Africa

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: katlaughing
Date: 23 Mar 03 - 11:03 PM

The US is technically in violation of the UN, too, with an illegitimate war. NOT that I wish for the harm to come to ANYONE involved, but it the propoganda is sickening.

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: Coyote Breath
Date: 24 Mar 03 - 12:25 AM

Clinton went into Kosovo without UN approval.

Bush asks for UN approval and doesn't get it and then he goes into Iraq anyway.

What is the lesson of these two approaches?

It is easier to get forgiveness than permission.

CB

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: Blackcatter
Date: 24 Mar 03 - 12:42 AM

Between this event today, the Patriot missle destruction of a Brit plane, and the "fragging" by an American soldier and any number of things, it is continuing proof that the U.S. Military does not know how to fight a war.

Stupid, stupid mistakes.

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: DougR
Date: 24 Mar 03 - 02:06 AM

Bobert: you are so full of horse pucky! "Bush didn't go the extra mile?" The whole U.N. WENT the extra mile for twelve years! If you and yours had your way, Saddam would have continued on his merry way, building WMDs and when he had enough of them, and used them, you and yours would say, "Jesus! Why didn't the government stop him?"

Sick, sick, sick.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: katlaughing
Date: 24 Mar 03 - 03:41 AM

If he'd ever used them, Doug, he would know it would be suicide. He'd never get past the borders of his own country before he was obliterated. Once one unleashes such unholy power the bigger dogs have carte blanche to up them one better...but, since you love this war crap so much, you already knew that, didn't you?

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: Troll
Date: 24 Mar 03 - 11:13 AM

kat, he wouldn't NEED to use them. The threat would be enough. If he said, "Do such-and-so or I'll drop a nuke on Tel Aviv", who would oppose him? As sure as someone did, Tel Aviv would be a radioactive puddle. Sure, we could take him out, but at what cost? Would the US risk our only ally in the Middle East that way? If we did, we'd lose every ally we ever had.
That's why he has to be stopped now, before he gains nuclear capability and starts blackmailing the world.
North Korea would be doing the same thing if not for its proximity to China. They know that China would take them our without really caring if South Korea or Japan got hit. We haven't that luxury.
I don't "love this war crap." I've been there, which most of you have not, but I can see when the use of force is necessary. And when diplomacy has failed so spectacularly as it has over the last 12 years with Iraq, I believe that it is necessary.

troll

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: GUEST,Forum Lurker
Date: 24 Mar 03 - 11:19 AM

Troll- If Saddam said "Do such-and-so or I'll drop a nuke on Tel Aviv," Baghdad would be a smoking puddle before the broadcast was done. Mossad has much better intelligence resources than the CIA in Iraq, and you can be sure that Israel would use any force necessary to prevent Saddam from gaining nuclear power. Remember, they took out Saddam's breeder reactor a decade before we started getting worried about him.

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: katlaughing
Date: 24 Mar 03 - 11:20 AM

The threats have worked for umpteen years all over the world, Troll, threats against other countries by the US, so why not continue with that? What proof is there that he has been building up nuclear weaponry? Why didn't we take him out when daddy shrub had the chance? Why didn't we send a small elite force in there to assassinate him a long time ago? Why didn't we do an operation like we did to get Noriega? Why, oh why, did it have to come to this insane war which has turned the entire world against us?

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: GUEST,Marion
Date: 24 Mar 03 - 06:51 PM

I saw an article in the paper about the US POWs which stated that publishing their photos/footage was against the Geneva Convention, and right above the article - with no apparent irony - was a photo of a dozen Iraqi POWs.

What's the difference? When is publishing such photos illegal, and when is it legal?

Marion (not a rhetorical question, really asking)

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: Gareth
Date: 24 Mar 03 - 07:04 PM

Weeelll - This cynic might suggest that a smallish nuclear warhed would have killed Saddam Hussain at time in the last 12 years - But are you suggesting we (UK and USA) should have used one ????

Gareth

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: Jeri
Date: 24 Mar 03 - 07:22 PM

Marion, what I've heard them saying here is that what's against the Geneva Convention is publishing humiliating images. They've been showing small clips here of two of the POWs. I don't know how humiliating the rest of the film was - from what I saw it might have become so very easily. "Humiliating" is pretty subjective anyway.

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 24 Mar 03 - 07:27 PM

I turned on the news channel - a story about the American prisoners being shown on TV; and a story showing Iraqi prisoners in American custody. In both cases the faces were quite identifiable, and the prisoners looked scared, as anyone would in that situation.

Whether showing prisoners on TV is actually in itself an offence against the "putting on public display" Geneva provision is, I understand, highly questionable. I gather the suggestion is that the provision was included was intended to cover the kind of situation where they are paraded trhough streets in front of jeering crowds.

Anyway, surely anyone who is suspected of mistreating prisoners, or authorises the mistreatment of prisoners, deserves to be put on trial and if found guilty, severely punished - are we all agreed on that?

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: Rapparee
Date: 24 Mar 03 - 07:28 PM

The difference between what the Iraqis showed and what was shown on TV of the Iraqis is that the folks from the 507th were televised by the governemtn of Iraq. The Iraqi prisoners of war were shown by various TV networks, not the US or UK governments.

The first case is considered to be a humiliation of the prisoners and to be using them for propoganda, both of which are forbidden by the Geneva Accords. The Accords recognize that private citizens or corporations might also photograph or televise POWs, but the Accords can only apply to governments.

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 24 Mar 03 - 07:53 PM

I think that distinction between different TV stations might be a bit too subtle. I would think that, if a Geneva Accord makes it illegal for a Government to do something, that would imply an obligation on that Government to act effectively to prevent private individuals or organisations doing that thing. Otherwise it'd be the easiest thing in the world to delegate the nasty stuff to a private agency.

Whether the Geneva Accord does actually cover that kind of thing is far from clear, according to the kind of lawyers who are supposed to know about that stuff. The thing is, the Accords haven't been updated to take account of developments in technology.

Clearly they need to be upadated - however, whether the present American Government would be willing to cooperate in such updating is perhaps a bit doubtful, in the light of the attitude it has had towards attempts to get an agreed international system to deal with war crimes, as well as in the light of a number of other attempts to develop international agreements.

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: GUEST, heric
Date: 24 Mar 03 - 08:34 PM

The Red Cross asserts that this is a violation of Article 13 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions: " . . . prisoners of war must at all times be protected, particularly against acts of violence or intimidation and against insults and public curiosity. . . . "

From the U.S. House of Representatives:
---------------
Whereas beginning on January 19, 1991, captured United States and allied service members held prisoner by Iraq in the Persian Gulf conflict have been displayed *and interrogated* before television cameras;

Whereas these televised interrogations strongly suggest that those service members have been subjected to physical and mental torture; and . . .
---------------
http://www.fas.org/news/iraq/1991/910125-169932.htm
(*emphasis added.*)

It seems nigh impossible to legally differentiate between "news" and "public curiosity."

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: GUEST, heric
Date: 24 Mar 03 - 08:59 PM

It's peculiar that "insults," without any qualifiers, constitute a war crime. It's a good thing mudcat hasn't formally declared war on me.

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: GUEST, heric
Date: 24 Mar 03 - 09:10 PM

Nevertheless, there are few, if any, credible arguments that GUESTS have met all of the four conditions for belligerent status. GUESTS do not have a recognizable military hierarchy, commanded by a person who is responsible for his subordinates. Neither Mariot, Sheila, nor even Gargoyle lead a "'responsible' command structure is capable of ensuring that the entire GUEST organization complies with the laws of war and that any malfeasance must be addressed and punished." The GUEST forces have been run by an ever-changing cast of insurgents whose authority is unclear, especially since Gargoyle's membership was revoked. GUESTS seem to encourage non-compliance with the laws of mudcat, rather than address and punish malfeasance.

Additionally, the GUESTS do not display an emblem that would identify their forces as combatants. This requirement is designed to protect non-combatants or regulars and recognizes that when GUESTS are able to hide within the mudcat population, the chance that members will be fired upon and suffer casualties is drastically increased. In other words, a "concealed combatant certainly has an advantage over the monikered member, [and] . . . the advantage comes with a price that others must pay." Such a distinctive emblem could take the form of an armband, a coat, a shirt, or a colored sign worn on the chest. The most common emblems take the form of a uniform or a flag. GUESTS are not issued uniforms, they do not carry a flag that is consistently uniform in nature, nor are they wearing armbands or colored signs on their chests. Additionally, they blend in well with the population because the GUESTS, as opposed to the al Queda fighters, are largely British by nationality. Therefore, if the GUESTS have in some way distinguished themselves from the civilized population of mudcat, it is not apparent to their opponents.

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: GUEST
Date: 24 Mar 03 - 09:59 PM

Oops. Forgot to cite my sources:
http://www.mobar.org/journal/2002/novdec/hook.htm

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: Rustic Rebel
Date: 24 Mar 03 - 10:46 PM

I just put a link to some photo's of the Al Jazeera POW's on the thread ah, mmm, well heck, I can't remember the name of it now! Well, I guess I'll just link it here too. These are graphic and nasty and sickening.click here(truthout.org)
Peace. Rustic

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: Greg F.
Date: 24 Mar 03 - 11:11 PM

Damn! war is graphic,nasty and sickening! WHO KNEW???

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: Troll
Date: 25 Mar 03 - 12:01 AM

Obviously not you, greg.
BTW I heard that hackers have taken the Al Jazeera site off line.

troll

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: Sorcha
Date: 25 Mar 03 - 12:04 AM

LOL!, sorry,but Greg the Garg can be so funny! Link still works for me and nothing much very "graphic" there..........no decapitated bodies, etc. Just a few beaten faces, and those not very bad.

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: DougR
Date: 25 Mar 03 - 12:40 AM

The latest news report states that Iraqi troops are authorized to use biological and/or chemical weapons once the coalition forces cross a certain line (not identified). If they do, I would expect that a lot of folks here will be singing a different tune. Right? And kat, I do not, and never have stated that I do, like war! What an insulting charge.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: Teribus
Date: 25 Mar 03 - 04:16 AM

Differences regarding media coverage of POW's

1. US held Iraqi prisoners are nearly always shown as groups clearly seperated from those guarding them. All appear to be fairly relaxed about their situation.

2. UK held Iraqi prisoners, again always shown in groups and filmed from the back. Again none appear to exhibit undue concern about their situation.

3. Iraqi held US prisoners apart from staged television appearances, always in isolation, all show symptoms of shock, sometimes shown under interrogation with interrogators not identified (i.e. there is no way of knowing if they are being questioned by Iraqi military or by Iraqi media)

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: Wolfgang
Date: 25 Mar 03 - 05:39 AM

Sorcha,

have you scrolled down in that link? Til the last picture?

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: Ireland
Date: 25 Mar 03 - 09:37 AM

I have no objections of the US/UK showing the Iraqi prisoners on television, what they are do is letting the world know that these people are not being harmed or harassed in any way.

I cannot say the same for the Iraqi's. They are using the media to intimidate the coalition forces, showing them what will happen if they are caught.

The deliberate use of images showing soldiers shot in the head should be condemned outright with no succor given to Saddam, people referring to the G.Bay prisoners and the Iraqi prisoners are playing right into Saddams hands. This bolsters this man and gives him encouragement to keep doing this.

We are talking about someone who according to an ex-human shield in Iraq, put people feet first into tree shredders, if he can do that to his own people what will he do to the troops out there?

I find the under tone of some of the posts sickening,what people are really saying is that the troops should not have been out there in the first and they have just themselves to blame.

Where the images showing two dead soldiers in the link there all along,could they have been missed? If they are not graphic I do not know what is.

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 25 Mar 03 - 09:59 AM

Well DougR, I expect you might be one to change your line if the WMDs come out. You'll be able to go back to whining about the WMDs that Saddam actually has, rather than those he is building. Such cautious backsliding didn't really suit you anyway.

Subject: RE: BS: Reports from Al Jazeera. P.O.W.s
From: katlaughing
Date: 25 Mar 03 - 11:29 AM

Doug, take as you see it, no less, no more. You've done your share of insulting with stupid little bon mots tagged on to almost every post of yours in the past few weeks; it seems they come from an insecure, self-defensive stance of "my prez, right or wrong." That is sickening, imo.