Fallujah war crimes

45 thoughts on “Fallujah war crimes”

1. http://fallujapictures.blogspot.com/
   CAUTION – GRAPHIC CONTENT

2. This is psy ops. The big war crimes are bombing of hospitals, not allowing aid into Fallujah, stopping civilians from leaving a war zone – these crimes were ordered from high levels.
   To now play up one marines crime is to take the eyes away from the big crime by the big guys.
   Pure psy ops – did work in Abu Ghraib, will work now too.

3. Psy-Ops – while you

4. To now play up one marines crime is to take the eyes away from the big crime by the big guys.
   B– I disagree. I’ve been opposed to the whole war since before it started, and think the whole concept of “preventive war” qualifies as a “crime of aggression” as per the Nuremberg Trials… And many of the sub-actions taken within the context of the Iraq invasion, at all levels, have equally much been criminal. I agree that the action of one (or a small # of) Marine(s) as in the present case is only a tiny portion of that….
   But it is a very graphic and well-documented image that — like the ARVN officer shooting the guy in cold blood in that striking old B&W still image — can help to bring home to people in the US who still think the war might be a good idea, just what a ghastly inhumane thing the war is.
   Also, I agree that w/ the Abu Ghraib “investigation” the Bushies of course tried to keep everyone’s attention focused on the poor bloody squaddies who committed the abuses. But the investigations there certainly went ways higher up the chain of command than they wanted– even if not as high as we wanted. And the same could certainly happen in this case too.
   In addition it’s quite possible that now that Sites has been brave and principled enough to break the embedded journos’ code of omerta, some of the others might be encouraged to do so too…
   Yeah, of course there is Psy Ops going on. Duh! But there is alsdo a very graphic image and some important questions behind that image that can help to educate the pro-Bush Americans…

5. I think your reference to Jenin is correct in this instance. I wish the reference were at hand, but read back in March-April that some soldiers were receiving special training in Israel in how to conduct house-to-house warfare. It looks like that has happened. I heard a soldier the other night saying how they knock holes in walls to go from house to house or house to alleyway. That and other techniques confirmed that this was correct information.
   I imagine step 1 of that training is consider your enemy to be vermin. Step 2 would be: they are all your enemies, even if they are kids throwing stones. Step 3 would then be, vermin should be exterminated.
   I recall being alarmed at the time that our soldiers would be turned into cold blooded killers, as are many in the IDF. That may have come to pass. I weep with shame and sadness.

6. Talking about “Jenin rules”; the following warning was recieved by all press organizations in Baghdad before the assault on Falluja:
   Keep govt line on Falluja, Iraq media body says
   11 Nov 2004 19:50:31 GMT
   BAGHDAD, Nov 11 (Reuters) – Iraq’s media regulator warned news organisations
   on Thursday to stick to the government line on the U.S.-led offensive in
   Falluja or face legal action.
   (…)
   It also asked media to “set aside space in your news coverage to make the
   position of the Iraqi government, which expresses the aspirations of most
   Iraqis, clear”.
   “We hope you comply … otherwise we regret we will be forced to take all
   the legal measures to guarantee higher national interests,” the statement
   said, without elaborating.
   Link:
   http://www.alertnet.org/printable.htm?URL=/thenews/newsdesk/NUE155965.htm

7. The routine blindfolding or hooding of prisoners is an Israeli invention too, afaik. I’m not saying no prisoner was ever blindfolded before, I’m saying ‘routine’. In genuine counter-intelligence sweeps, there is a whole repertory of sensory deprivation techniques of which blindfolding or hooding is just the first, but to treat all counter-insurgency as counter-intelligence is in itself an abuse, and one which I associate with the Israelis. A good article on this subject that appeared recently is:
   http://ncronline.org/NCR_Online/archives2/2004d/110504/110504a.php
   I agree with Helena that it is pointless to describe every concrete discovery as a psy-op designed to distract from some larger horror still hidden. I think this argument itself is a psy-op in that its only function is to demoralise the person who believes it. In logic it is an argument ‘obscurum per obscurius’, i.e. ‘from the obscure to the more obscure’. In other words, it is valueless.

8. Helena, a very good post, keep up the good work!
   Peace from Nadia

9. The routine blindfolding or hooding of prisoners is an Israeli invention too, afaik. I’m not saying no prisoner was ever blindfolded before, I’m saying ‘routine’.
   Actually, hooding was one of the “five techniques” used routinely by British troops in Ireland during the 1970s, and it was also standard practice in Communist Eastern Europe. The Israelis didn’t invent it.
   Your comment, though, calls to mind a phenomenon I’ve been seeing a great deal lately – the tendency to put a “made in Israel” stamp on everything bad that goes on in Iraq, sometimes to the exclusion of considering other causes. I don’t mean this personally toward you, Helena or anyone else, but what’s behind this perception of Israel as a shadowy corrupting force (because its alleged shadowy influence is never presumed to be for good)? Is the United States an innocent that knew not crime until it was taught by its Israeli puppetmaster? Were all our wars clean prior to this one? Do we have no other teachers in counterinsurgency – like, for instance, the aforementioned British veterans of the Troubles?
   Israel has done many things wrong. Placing it at the root of all evil is sheer mythmaking. Maybe it’s a form of blame-shifting, as with Marcia’s comment alleging that Israel has turned American soldiers into cold-blooded killers (as if we had none such in our army before). Maybe something else, or a combination of other things. Any explanation would be appreciated.

10. BTW, hooding was also suggested in a 1963 CIA interrogation manual, and taught at the School of the Americas.

11. Granted – I have just been reading the entire KUBARK package, on which the NCR article is based, at:
    http://www.parascope.com/articles/0397/kubarkin.htm
    et seq.
    The fact remains that I have never seen prisoners of war routinely blindfolded or hooded before I saw them in Israel. It is not an exaggeration to say that israel has pioneered the use of totalitarian population control methods in full public view, methods which were used by CIA-sponsored elements in Central America very much OUT of public view in the 80s.
    Nor is it irrelevant to point out that the vast majority of the psychologists, psychiatrists, and psychoanalysts who assisted the CIA in their research were Jewish. You may wish it WAS irrelevant, Jonathan, but, sadly, it isn’t.

12. Yes this one incident is a small thing compared to the totality of brutal, destructive and illegal acts that have made up the war.
    But it’s a concrete detail that people can latch onto. That’s just the way people think.

13. BTW when was the last time you heard the phrase “the end of major combat operations” used as a chronological marker?

14. Thanks God.. it seems that Site’s report got some effect : Louise Arbour reacted to it and not only to this single case, but also asked that the “disproportionate use of force” should be questionned. Here is an extract of a recent last
    Reuter’s wire :
    “GENEVA (Reuters) – Top United Nations human rights official Louise Arbour called on Tuesday for investigation of alleged abuses in Falluja, Iraq, including disproportionate use of force and the targeting of civilians. ”
    The press, the opinion and the authorities need some concrete cases and some pictures to get started.. it has been slow but humanitarian misdeeds will not stay hidden. Well, now let’s see how far this can go. Probably that the Pentagon doesn’t care at all, they just commits all the abuse they want and let then people talk and lament. At least there are some reaction.
    Thanks Helena, I’m sure that blogs like yours are able to make a difference, along with people calling officials.

15. The fact remains that I have never seen prisoners of war routinely blindfolded or hooded before I saw them in Israel.
    How much personal experience do you have with detainees in other locations, such as Northern Ireland or Central America?
    It is not an exaggeration to say that israel has pioneered the use of totalitarian population control methods in full public view
    In other words, your thesis is not that Israel invented the methods but that it used them where the press could see. I’m far from sure they were the first to do so – see Vietnam, Northern Ireland and the Boer War – and even if they were, that doesn’t prove a great deal. Governments and intelligence agencies don’t need TV footage to learn and develop torture techniques. Totalitarian population control methods have been known since well before Israel existed, and the Israelis themselves didn’t develop torture techniques in a vacuum.
    I’ll say it one more time. Israel didn’t invent torture.
    methods which were used by CIA-sponsored elements in Central America very much OUT of public view in the 80s.
    Oh, come on, those methods were used in Central America in the 1950s and NI in the 1960s-70s, and for that matter in South Africa during the Boer War. They aren’t new.
    Nor is it irrelevant to point out that the vast majority of the psychologists, psychiatrists, and psychoanalysts who assisted the CIA in their research were Jewish.
    Just out of curiosity, what’s your factual basis for this statement, and what do you believe the relevance is? Inquiring minds really, really want to know.

16. I just called my congressional reps. in Virginia about the war crimes. Sen. Warner’s office was the least apologetic. While not condemning the actions, the LA, Ryan Dean, said congress had passed legislation after the Abu Graib scandel requiring the military to abide by the Geneva convention. He said that in order for his office to send me a response they would need something from me in writing.
    I had a much more disturbing conversation with Jason Money in Sen. Allen’s office. At first he denied there were civilians on Fallujah because Allawi had ordered them out. Then he said any civilians there were responsible for the consequences because they were ordered out. He said shutting off the water was legal despite my offers to send him the relevant parts of the Geneva convention outlawing this. He refered to a state dept. webpage to support this claim. When I brought up the attack on medical services or the blocking of aid by the red cresent he said his office supported efforts to fight “terrorism”.
    I asked him if his office supported the denial of water to cities and he would not give me a straight answer. At the end of our call he said we would just have to “agree to disagree” because we saw things differently. I offered several times to send him articles backing up my claims but he declined. He said he would ask “credible” sources in the pentagon & state dept. and give me their response. I suggested he should also seek other sources but he found this idea outlandish.

17. Jonathan, go discuss your wounded Jewish amour-propre with someone who gives a damn about it, because I really don’t.

18. Ah, I see I’ve done my public service today – I’ve flushed one out. (Those not convinced by the above might be by the statements attributed to Mr. Berkeley here, here, here and here. The Father Feeney reference is a nice touch.)
    My question remains open for any other person who wants to discuss it – the question isn’t rhetorical, and I’d welcome any reasonable opinion.

19. Hehehe, “flushed one out”, indeed … has it occurred to you, Jonathan, that if I felt the slightest embarrassment about anything I post on the web, I would use a pseudonym?

20. Jonathan, I appreciate your sensitivity about Israel being considered the “font of all evil”. It’s not. The practice of hooding prisoners originated with the British in Northern Ireland, as you point out.
    At the same time I am EXTREMELY sensitive about the US adopting not just Israeli tactics, but Israeli views in our actions in the Middle East. Actually, the views preceed the actions, and in this case I am very afraid that the damage may already be done. I think that Israel and its supporters here have a great to answer for in terms of how they have dehumanized Arabs and Moslems, starting of course with Palestinians.
    On the ground the US seems to be adopting IDF attitudes towards Arab civilians as well as combatants. The mistreatment of Arab prisoners at Abu Ghraib was based on a book by an Israeli about “the Arab mind”. In fact, I believe that President Bush’s conviction that the only way to solve the I/P problem is to “democratize” all the surrounding countries comes from a book by an Israeli academic.
    All this has had a malign effect on US policy, and through that on the world. At the same time we have to acknowledge the homegrown basis of much of our current policy in longstanding American exceptionalism, and the influence of some (to me) misguided notions of Christianity.
    But in terms of tactics and the form of what we actually do, we seem to owe all too much to Israel. Unfortunately.

21. No Preference: Fair answer. I think there’s something to be said for the argument that the US has relied on Israel as a “regional expert” and that, consequently, some Israeli attitudes (such as those in Patai’s Arab Mind) have influenced the American decision-making structure. That’s a more nuanced and factually grounded argument, and it is indeed dangerous to view Arabs through the lens of Israel’s (or anyone else’s) stereotypes.
    All the same, I wouldn’t carry the argument as far as you do. Dehumanization of enemies (who in this case happen to be Arabs) happens in most conflicts, and Western powers such as Britain and France were no strangers to anti-Arab racism during colonial times. One might as well say that the US techniques in Iraq were developed in Algeria – and I have heard of The Battle of Algiers being used as a counterinsurgency training film. I also wouldn’t attribute the techniques of Abu Ghraib, specifically, to The Arab Mind. Some of the policies that led to the tolerance of Abu Ghraib may have come from there, while others were shaped by the very nature of counterinsurgency; occupations seem to have certain similarities no matter who carries them out.
    The bottom line is that the techniques used by the American occupation force come from a variety of places and were learned from a variety of teachers. I do not dispute that Israel is one of these teachers – it’s the primacy given to Israel that I dispute. I don’t think there’s a truth serving function in turning Israel into some kind of Middle Eastern bogeyman. If that’s my wounded Jewish amour propre speaking, please feel free to let me know.
    At any rate, I’ll stop hijacking Helena’s thread now, because the main topic – war crimes against civilians in Fallujah – is too important for distractions.

22. Dehumanization of enemies (who in this case happen to be Arabs) happens in most conflicts
    The dehumanization of Arabs by American supporters of Israel started long, long before Arabs became enemies of ours. In my view it laid the ground for this conflict.
    I also wouldn’t attribute the techniques of Abu Ghraib, specifically, to The Arab Mind.
    I think you’re wrong there. I don’t have a link, but I recall seeing an article about the US Army officer responsible for developing interrogation technoques talking about how brilliant “The Arab Mind” was, and how useful it had been.
    I don’t mean to wound your “Jewish amour propre”. “American Jews” and “Israel” are not identical. I don’t think that either supporters or critics of Israel should take the view that they are.

23. I don’t really desire to play the devils advocate, but it’s worth bearing in mind that the Geneva Conventions are a bit of an artifice. The Bush administration has made it pretty clear that it is going to ignore them when necessary, which pretty much guts their effectiveness.
    It is worth considering the French experience in Algeria, as the first example that comes to mind, to recall that counter-insurgency is an extremely brutal affair. But if Iraqis had any notions that the U.S. was going to play by humanitarian rules, I’m sure they have long since figured out that this was not the case. I doubt the Iraqi fighters expected any quarter.
    Still, this is an embarrassment for “our side”, and a propaganda coup for theirs. In fact the entire disgusting assault has been a positive for the insurgency. It is the invasion of Iraq in a nutshell: the more you destroy, the more ungovernable the place becomes. We watched this in Vietnam, and now it is happening all over again. I am saddened and disgusted by what our soldiers are being turned into.

24. The “amour propre” comment was sarcastic – look six comments up and you’ll see where it came from. I certainly agree that Israel and American Jews are two different things, although I’d also add that Israelis themselves are very diverse.
    Re Abu Ghraib and The Arab Mind, I think this may have been the article you read. This analysis by Ann Marlowe is also interesting. Now that I’ve read them both, I agree there’s more of a connection to Abu Ghraib than I’d previously thought.

25. The “amour propre” comment was sarcastic – look six comments up and you’ll see where it came from.
    Got you.

26. “Nor is it irrelevant to point out that the vast majority of the psychologists, psychiatrists, and psychoanalysts who assisted the CIA in their research were Jewish.”
    That observation tells us all we need to know about its author.

27. I linked to this post on my own blog (Dove’s Eye View). Also e-mailed my “politics” list asking them to read Helena’s post and then call their congressional representatives.
    A brilliant friend then suggested that anyone with North Carolina connections make a point of calling Libby Dole, the Republican Senator, who used to chair the American Red Cross. *She* at least might get it, and have some pull. (One can always hope)
    Wouldn’t it be the Red Crescent in Iraq? Just asking.

28. Re; “Nor is it irrelevant to point out that the vast majority of the psychologists, psychiatrists, and psychoanalysts who assisted the CIA in their research were Jewish.”
    That observation tells us all we need to know about its author.
    source: KUBARK bibliography:
    http://www.parascope.com/articles/0397/kub_xi.htm

29. Leila– thanks so much for your engagement on this! I thought that “Let the Red Cross in!” would resonate more easily for Americans… plus, the International Committee of the Red Cross is a very relevant actor in all such situations.
    You are right, however, that strictly speaking it is only the national-Iraqi Red Crescent that is currently able to attempt to provide aid since local militants succeeded in scaring the ICRC delegation out of Iraq some months ago. That was yet another of the really abominable things they’ve achieved.
    Internationally, there are two linked sets of bodies. The ICRC is a very august and stable, Switzerland-based organization that has been the official, internationally recognized “depository” for the Geneva Conventions and all the other int’l law-of-ar instruments concluded since its founding in the 1860s. It also carries out significant relief projects of its own, especially in tense and conflictual situations.
    Parallel with that is the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, which links all the national-level R. Cross and R. Crescent societies. All of them are also committed to pursuing the same humanitarian aims as the ICRC, and work alongside it in trying to ensure implementation of the laws of war.
    From that point of view, you could say “Red Cross” is sort of a generic name for the whole network of organizations…
    People are of course quite free to frame this in the way they think best! (And I think your point is a good one.)
    By the way, my blog template doesn’t show the homepages of commenters here. I’ll try to get that fixed. But here is Leila’s, and here is Jonathan’s.

30. Rowan, I think your comments on the (presumed) Jewishness of people advising US government agencies are borderline anti-Semitic and I’ll probably take them all off the blog at some point when I have a better connection than now.
    I am generally of the belief that the answer to speech that we consider hateful is more speech, rather than stifling the speech of others. (The classic ACLU position.) On the other hand I pay for the bandwidth here… I do value most of the discussions that go on in the Comments boards here very highly, and I appreciate everyone who contributes to them (including, many of your contributions, Rowan.)
    On the other hand, a little restraint and a spirit of respectful enquiry are always great attributes for a person contributing to a public discussion. I can’t tell you how many discussions among groups of friends I’ve sat through where one or two male people seek to dominate the discursive space and to “win” every argument, paying little heed to the need to seek the views of others or leave space for them to contribute.
    I know that not all men are like that. But I have to tell you: (1) I’ve found very few women who fit the paradigm of “discourse-hogger”, and (2) when confronted with it, I either get rather passive-aggressive or I try to develop effective discursive strategies to deal with it.
    Consider this comment one of the latter…

31. “Nor is it irrelevant to point out that the vast majority of the psychologists, psychiatrists, and psychoanalysts who assisted the CIA in their research were Jewish.”
    Rowan, I also thought this comment was at least borderline antisemitic.
    The sources cited in the bibliography don’t appear to be necessarily connected with the CIA. It doesn’t seem that “the vast majority” were Jewish. The “relevance” you claim looks dubious at best.

32. It’s otiose to ignore the fact that the entire left-right problematic, and indeed the entire politico-psychological landscape, in the US is constructed on Jewish terms. [There follows a lengthy rant that I edited out–HC.]

33. Uh oh : I didn’t see your comment, Helena, until I’d posted my own, which was a reply to ‘No Preference’. I shan’t post on your blog again, then, but if anyone wishes to pursue me to convey brickbats or bouquets, they can do so at MY blog:
    spookspot

34. having spent some years experimenting with conversion programs offered by various forms of it ranging from the extreme left to the extreme right, I am opposed to ‘Judaism’
    So you’re saying that you wanted to convert to Judaism, but that that attempt turned you off to Judaism altogether? Sounds like an interesting story.
    The paradox of American Judaism, though, is that the only alternatives offered to American Jews are either Jewish nationalism on the right, or total opposition to all forms of nationalism on the left.
    Alternatives offered by whom? Is this conclusion based on your conversion attempt? In any case, there is at least one more popular choice, which is Zionism and American patriotism mixed together in varying proportions.
    I agree that accusations of antisemitism are used to intimidate in the US. I also agree that while problematic aspects of Christianity and Islam can be freely discussed in the US, there are strong taboos about extending the same treatment to Judaism. But I don’t think that our entire political discussion is framed in Jewish terms, whatever that means.
    Maybe we all should spend more time away from cyberspace.

35. Helena,
    Thanks for explaining so well the structure of the ICRC and the national societies. The main difference between the ICRC and the national societies, is that the ICRC is supposed to be more neutral and as such only able to act in conflict zones and be seen as impartial. The relationship have alsways been somewhat difficult with the Muslim countries, because of the logo which isn’t universal. Hence it’s replacement with a crescent in the Arab countries.
    As to the ICRC activities in Iraq, they didn’t withdraw completely. They do still have offices in Erbil and in Basra. But they have no more permanent offices in Bagdhad due to security conditions (their building was attacked by a suiccide bomber). They have transferred everything that could be transferred to Jordan and they are working more with the national Red Crescent. But they are still visiting prisonners of war regularly. However, they try to remain as invisible as possible in order not to attract the attention of insurgents.

36. I have seen no mention made of the soldier who did the killing. The an early report that I saw quoted a member of the unit that the Marine had been shot in the face the day before in the fighting and had just returned to duty. If I have this straight, it lends some context to the shooting. For a soldier in combat the line between shooting an armed enemy and an unarmed enemy is not as clear as may be assumed. Soldiers exposed to over 60 days of combat tend to develope serious psychological problems, depression and PTSD, deep anger, resentment and psychic numbing, among others. Most of the combat troops in Iraq have been there much longer than 60 days and urban warfare is among the most stressful. The soldier is responsible for his behavior but if you think that we ourselves are not capable of such acts if put in the similar circumstances, you are mistaken. Combat soldiers are trained to kill, conditioned to be able to pull the trigger on someone. They are not warrior monks also trained in compassion. The application of the standards of the Geneva Convention to individual acts in war as a deterrant is mostly ineffective, however necessary. The hope is that the GC will keep acts like the above, from becoming a policy. I seriouly doubt the soldier was a cold blooded killer before he entered the military and was sent to an impossible war zone. He will now most likely spend the next good portion of his young life in prison another casualty of an unnecessary war. We are the warriors, we are the victims, we are the killers and we are the ones killed. We all need all the compassion we can get.

37. Jonathan:
    Military training and deliberate, systematic dehumanization along with demonization and dehumanization of the “enemy” turns troops into cold blooded killers. Israel does not.
    Israel is certainly not the root of all evil. However, there is no doubt that the Americans are following the Israeli playbook play by play in their conduct of the occupation of Iraq. We also know that they have engaged Israeli advisors, and received training from the Israeli military.
    That they would even consider emulating Israel’s clearly failed policies is as astonishing as the fact that the Israelis have not yet realized that as long as they keep doing the same things over and over they are going to get the same results over and over.

38. Oh, I’m glad we’ve got the discussion back to the topic at hand here.
    Christiane, thanks so much for the info re the ICRC. I learned something there.
    Carl, I think you’re completely right: no one of us can say for sure she/he would not, in the situation of battle and extreme battle-weariness, act similarly. That’s why I try not to judge other people.
    However, it’s also the case that people planning military engagements should make sure to have not only the discipline as clear and as broadly understood and enforced as possible at all levels of command, but also to have enough troops deployed that those suffering from combat fatigue and the resulting inevitable lapses in judgment–which can be lethal for the troops themselves as well as for others– can be rotated out of the theater and replaced if necessary with fresh troops.
    From this point of view, the ghastly behavior we saw on Sites’ tape should be attributed not only to those particular individual Marines but also–perhaps even more so–to a higher command that has systematically deployed fewer troops in Iraq than have been necessary to get the job done. Or, to get it done “humanely” and constructively.
    My dad was in the British occupying force in Germany, post-WW2. There are so many contrasts between the two cases! (See this March 2003 post on JWN.)
    Shirin, thanks for yr good sense, now as always…
    Actually, right now, looking at the pictures of Fallujah, I’m thinking “Grozny” more than I’m thinking “Jenin”. There is another totally tragic case of a militarily superior power thinking that by escalating their recourse to force they can cow a weaker people into submission.
    But in all my strategic studies, I was taught that the actual balance between two conflicting powers is composed of three parts: balance of physical power, balance of interests, and balance of wills — and the greatest of these is balance of wills. Neither the Palestinians, nor the Chechens, nor the Iraqi nationalists have cried “uncle” yet. I’m not sure how much difference an application of esclated force by the “stronger” power would make in any of these cases, except to deepen and prolong the suffering.
    Time to pray.

39. Carl, thank you for that intelligent, humane, and honest post.

40. Random Link Round-Up

    Lazy, lazy me. Here’s a little link round-up. Thanks for stopping by. I’ll be back for real when I’m back. Helena Cobban writes about war crimes in Fallujah. Amnesty International also has this to say: Recent reports from Falluja raise…

41. “I also wouldn’t attribute the techniques of Abu Ghraib, specifically, to The Arab Mind.”
    On the contrary, Jonathan, Patai’s book of ignorant self-serving 19th century racist nonsense is considered by the Pentagon and State Departments to be THE text on Arab mentality, culture, society, etc. It is the basis on which decisions are made for how to deal with Arabs at all levels. The decision to use sexual humiliation to break down prisoners was based on Patai’s take on Arab culture as shame based and sex obsessed, and on his general beliefs about Arab sexuality and sexual attitudes.
    I could go on, but I am already feeling sick.

42. Carl,
    There are no excuses – simply none – for the conduct of that soldier. He was shot because he is a member of a brutally violent invading force attacking people in their own towns, cities and homes. He was shot because he was part of a direct and immediate and mortal threat to those people.
    He shot a man who was wounded, unarmed and helpless.
    Sorry, but I have lost any capacity I may have had to feel any sympathy or understanding for American soldiers, and I cannot view them as victims. In the end, they have a choice – a tough one, but a choice none the less. The Iraqis have no choice whatsoever.

43. Shirin: As I said above, I changed my mind about Patai after reading Seymour Hersh’s article. It does seem to have been a destructive influence.
    No Preference: I don’t want to restart the off-topic discussion, but I do have answers to the points you made; please e-mail me privately if you’re interested.
    I’ll say only one more thing for the record: like Helena, I don’t believe in censorship, but I also don’t apologize for calling bigots on their bigotry.

44. Jonathan,
    I saw your second comments about the Patai book after writing my message.
    Regarding the issue of racism, bigotry, anti-Semitism, etc., if you hadn’t said something I probably would have.

45. Wow, I checked Rowan’s site and it turns out that he suffers from a painful spinal injury.
    Believe me I did not know that when I made some humorous references about Rowan not taking his medication. If I knew, I would not have used that line of humor.
    My apologies for an unfortunate choice of humor.
    Gonzalo

Comments are closed.