"Babies found in Iraqi mass grave"

"A mass grave being excavated in a north Iraqi village has yielded evidence that Iraqi forces executed women and children under Saddam Hussein.
US-led investigators have located nine trenches in Hatra containing hundreds of bodies believed to be Kurds killed during the repression of the 1980s.

The skeletons of unborn babies and toddlers clutching toys are being unearthed, the investigators said.

They are seeking evidence to try Saddam Hussein for crimes against humanity...

The victims are believed to be Kurds killed in 1987-88, their bodies bulldozed into the graves after being summarily shot dead. "

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3738368.stm

Beyond belief that people are still doing this to each other and it's STILL going on around the world today.

P.

Or is this a new batch?

that these things happened under Saddam?

Abu Graib

murdered at Abu Garib? Please, share it with us.

Basra, Kirkuk, Najaf. Did I leave any out?

But you are right, I have no evidence of babies dying at Abu Garib.

My apologies.
:eyes:

When you make a bogus statement, expect to get called on it.

Peace.

Thanks for keeping me honest. I now feel obligated to reciprocate.

:hi:

there are much better choices the AG.

...you're just being argumentative like you always are.

SAID. And he was wrong. Why accuse our soliders of things they have NOT done?

I believe very little so called news any more--- that comes out of IRAQ

See My

Soldiers Maintain Security and Win Over Residents on the Streets of Samarra

POST ABOVE

That's why when the "other side" does it they're killing babies.
When we do it it's called "taking out suspected insurgents", now move along...nothing to see here.

Tends to eliminate all within 100 yards.

This is how we now eliminate "suspected terror meeting sites"

"To hell with anyone who gets in the Way"---(the NEW Motto of the Bush Criminals.)

Ya that works

...helped feed false intelligence about Iraqi WMDs into our intelligence networks via the Pentagon-based OSP?

Were the dead Iraqis victims of the Iran-Iraq War? In other words, were they killed back then in the same way that we're killing Iraqis today?

Or are we talking about the alleged use of gas by Saddam's trrops against the Kurds? I say "alleged" because it appears that the type of gas used to kill those people could have only come from Iran, not Iraq.

So, tell us exactly HOW those people were killed...is that possible after so many years?

And by the way, I seriously doubt ANYTHING being reported by the captive mainstream press.

That in 1987-88, Saddam was our friend. The US didn't seem to be all that concerned then.

What this amounts to is nothing more then crocodile tears for people that the Reagan/Bush administration had no concern for.

We have a winnah!

Cheney's Halliburton made their business deals? We're not saying Saddam wasn't evil, we're saying the Reagan-Bush admins were evil for propping up his dictatorship.
And no, that does not mean we support killing thousands of innocent Iraquis to remove him from power either.

The US didn't do anything about in the 80's except togive Saddam more and more weapons and look the other way. Now this is in the north where we know that Saddam fought with the Kurds to put down their "insurgency' against the nation of Iraq. What's a leader to do?

Now what about the mass graves in central and southern Iraq where our bombs have killed thousands men, women, and children since 1990? I guess the people we kill don't count because there is usually nothing left of them to be buried after being blown away by a bunker buster?

Sorry, but we have no moral authority about this. It's just another attempt of trying to justify the invasion of Iraq in retrospect. There really is nothing new here, just dredging up old information. I think these graves have been dug up at least 3 times.

Were these the faked inncubator babies of Gulf War I?

I don't believe any news coming from Bush's world any more. Weren't we in bed with Sadam anyway in the time frame in question?

Why do we expect more from third world dictators, when we aren't even human ourselves?

If that's true then the U. S. shares an equal responsibility for these atrocities. We bankrolled Saddam and turned a blind-eye to his actions. Holding Saddam accountable 15-20 years AFTER THE FACT serves no purpose.

...if some of the old Reagan/Bush guys could be tried as accomplices?

All of us on "our side" harshly condemned Saddam's massacre of the Kurds in 1988, and called on the Reagan Administration to cut of ties with Iraq and stop sending him aid (including compounds used to make chemical weapons). But those pleas were ignored. We were told to shut-up, that the enemy of the enemy (Iran) was our friend.

Belated outrage. We opposed Saddam before opposing Saddam was cool.

"When criminals are compelled to cite the law, we know that justice is within our reach."

Said about Powell's invocation of the Convention against Genocide (Ethnic Warfare as Policy), but applicable here.

My post posted twice. It does this everytime I run the spellcheck!

That's what happens when you use a pack of lies to illegally invade a sovereign nation. Your word ain't shit.

"They are seeking evidence to try Saddam Hussein for crimes against humanity ..."

===========================

This is a joke, right?

"Look passed those bodies we killed yesterday, fellas. We need to find some of Saddam's victims ..."

if these are children killed by Iraqi forces, or by U.S. bombs, guns and sanctions? Oh yes, history is written by the victor...

Can't justify your record? Paint as ugly a picture as you possibly can, and show it off as soon before the election - so the image in fresh in everyone's mind - as possible.

I'm waiting for somebody to call 'em on it - someone besides a bunch of DU forum people, that is.

DUH!

in that we gave the creature anthrax our strain and like another post said-we said nothing when Kurds were gassed in 1988-there is plenty of sin to hang around the necks of the democracies of Europe and here(all for oil)-the constant GOP gift has been the short term violent solutions that sow evil long into the future-witness the great reagan afghan taliban surprise-that came back to haunt us on 9/11-in this "christian nation" I truly wish we could put away the sword-and all we can do is pray for the poor people of Iraq who suffered from a vampire in charge and faced aerial bombardment and wars and have typhus and more killing them at a rate where lifespan is now under 60. Of course there were mass graves-these people should have the opportunity to identify their dead and bury them like any of us would-does it matter that children or adults died? The creature enjoyed killing-that has been proven- But our country used violence to accomplish its end-does it matter to the child that died in a bombing that the vampire is dead?-this debacle or war is the greatest accusation in the face of our "goodwill". We don't recognize the mass suffering of a decent people-for the love of these may Kerry be elected and get Europe and fellow islamic countries together with us so that the Iraqis can have peace and good health-this is my prayer

At worst the US aided Saddam in his actions against the Kurds at best we turned a blind eye to the atrocities.

just how well preserved would the bodies be in a mass grave nearly twenty years old?

Skeletons of unborn babies? Toddlers clutching toys? Wouldn't the decay and disintegration of the bodies and toys be nearly complete? It's just too neat a description.

Not that Hussein was a nice guy, not that he didn't kill lots of Kurds, but this is a little too good to be true.

with a high mineral content, lasting 20 years is very easy. And any manmade materials in clothes and toys would last that long too. Fabrics like cotton might degrade (that might depend on the conditions; it looks quite a dry place in the photo, which would probably mean they'd last lgoner too).

Reagan and Poppy Bush were unwilling to call this monster on his human rights abuses.

Bastard did it with US blessing.

http://images.google.es/images?hl=es&lr=&q=saddam+rumsfeld







What do you think will be the next invasion?

Tossed in the air and caught on bayonets by Yankee soldiers in the Civil War, by Spanish Soldiers in Cuba, by German soldiers during WWI. Every war has had it's atrocities but every war has also had it's fake atrocities for propaganda purposes.

You don't think he would lie???????? fuckhead

Bush is losing ground rapidly and has to find some way to win back his base constituency. What better way than to piss off everyone by "finding mass graves of dead babies". First off, I doubt that the Iraqi army would have separated babies from adults. They would have just thrown them all in a grave and covered them. Then the line about "the skeletons of unborn babies and toddlers clutching toys are being unearthed" just sounds like a load of crap to me. Did they ABORT the unborn babies first and then separate them from the mothers so that they could dig a second mass grave? And the babies clutching toys really pulls at your heartstrings. My guess is that the Iraqi army would have just tossed the bodies in the grave so any toys they may have been "clutching" would have been knocked loose.

I'd like to know who the "investigators" are and what is the original source of the story. The article gives no specifics as to where the story came from. Apparently not from their own reporters because they don't give them credit.

Don't get me wrong. Very bad things did happen during Hussein's reign. I just find this one a little too convenient for the right-wingers. I think it's designed to anger the voter base and make them feel that Bush's decision to invade was justified.

could this be any more blatant a lie?

I'm with the poster above. Did they abort these babies/fetuses first? If not, why not "skeletons of pregnant women"?

is much less apt to anger some people than skeletons of unborn babies, ya know? It's all in the wording.

Do you know the effects of depleted uranium bombs over "liberated" population?

The number of babies born deformed and children suffering leukaemia have soared because of the "deadly legacy" of depleted uranium shells used by British and American forces in Iraq, human rights campaigners claimed yesterday.
Releasing details of health problems and human rights violations suffered by Iraqi children in the past year, they claim the country's youngsters faced a worse existence today than they did under Saddam Hussein's dictatorship.
Depleted uranium was widely used by Allied forces to penetrate Iraqi tank armour in the Gulf Wars of 1991 and again last year.
Opponents claim the dust it releases upon impact is rapidly absorbed into the body, causing an upsurge of serious health problems inherited by Iraqi children during the past 13 years from their parents.

In addition they were treating several new cases of leukaemia every week - before 1991 the condition was very rare.
"Women in Basra are afraid to become pregnant because there are so many deformed babies," she said. "We are leaving a deadly legacy for generations to come."
She made the claims at the launch in London of a new charity, Child Victims of War (CVW), to help Iraqi youngsters "innocently suffering malnutrition, disease, disability and psychological trauma".
The amount of depleted uranium used by coalition forces in the two Gulf Wars is not known, but some estimates suggest it was 300 tons in 1991 and five times as much last year.
CVW says the number of Iraqi babies born with serious deformities has risen from 3.04 per thousand in 1991 to 22.19 per thousand in 2001.


Do you believe that bombing cities of Iraq was necessary AGAIN???

Old US-promoted atrocities are always dialed into the news cycle to distract from the current US-promoted atrocities to prevent the so-called 'pro-lifers' from rejecting Operation Global Oil Grab for its obvious conflict with their own revered Ten Commandments.

Keeps people from thinking, y'know.
Keeps 'em rejecting 'Massachusetts libruls' deep down in their anxious guts.

in which pregnant women (both Rebel and Loyalist) were given c-sections before they were murdered.

But I agree, this sounds like a hyped-up story to try to justify the unilateral action we took against Hussein.

What pisses me off is that Shrubby knew about this sort of brutality well before he fabricated WMD stories. If we'd had Al Gore in the White House, Hussein could've been extracted with UN help, and with far fewer civilian casualties.

Number two : Why would anyone phrase it that way anyway unless it is for the WH "apalling saddam" effect? Why not "Pregnant women and children" in the grave?


<The victims are believed to be Kurds killed during 1987-88. One trench contains only women and children, apparently killed by small arms. Another contains only men, apparently killed by automatic gunfire.

"I’ve been doing grave sites for a long time, but I’ve never seen anything like this, women and children executed for no apparent reason," added Kehoe, who spent five years in the Balkans.>


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,7374-1307896_2,00.html

just spin. Yes, they could have said 'pregnant women and children'. But, after almost 20 years, the soft tissue may well be gone, so the way that they know they were pregnant is by finding the bones. The anthropologist was describing what they found.

Quoting another story on it that leaves out the mention of pregnancy or unborn babies does not show the BBC story to be a lie.

And the continuing search for a "reason" for the invasion of Iraq.

They didn't remind everybody that this atrocity occurred when Reagan was in the White House, Bush Sr was his VP, and Saddam was our good friend.

could also have mentioned Blair and Straw's parliamentary appearances yesterday and today and the need to distract from the awkward fact that (two years too late) MI6 has now withdrawn its intelligence which led to the 45 minutes claim...

Much wriggling and sanctimonious rhetoric now gushing over the aisles of the Commons.

VC had them. North Koreans had them. Japanese had them. Hell, the Japanese were selling theirs to butcher shops, as I'm sure everybody's heard.

Seems like every war we get into we always find those evil foreigners chopping up babies in purely coincidental correllation to all those evil despots killing firstborns in the Bible, just waiting for God's wrath to fall on them. Since we're White America, that makes us the instrument of God's Wrath(tm) so we can feel good about ourselves again.

Until this is proven otherwise, I'm going to assume those long lamented dead babies have just been drug out of the closet again to demonize yet another of our enemies. We've heard this one before.

...only this time, they were the bad guys and they were allegedly killing French babies.

Same story...different setting.

And when the U.S. finally changed its mind and decided that Saddam was indeed a bad man, it continued to ignore similar acts that were being perpetrated by Turkey.

:nuke: :shrug:

Well then we'd best not be attacking any more cities.

Especially w/ clusterbombs and artillery.

And the following doesn't include DU disease.

Ms. Bellamy (UNICEF) noted that if the substantial reduction
in child mortality throughout Iraq during the 1980s had
continued through the 1990s, there would have been half
a million fewer deaths of children under-five in the country as
a whole during the eight year period 1991 to 1998. As a
partial explanation, she pointed to a March statement of
the Security Council Panel on Humanitarian Issues
which states: "Even if not all suffering in Iraq can be imputed
to external factors, especially sanctions, the Iraqi people
would not be undergoing such deprivations in the absence of
the prolonged measures imposed by the Security Council
and the effects of war."

http://www.unicef.org/newsline/99pr29.htm

And here:

After Baghdad fell to US-led coalition forces one year ago,
infant mortality rose, according to NGOs working on
health issues in Iraq and health officials, including
Dr Naeema al-Gasseer, the World Health Organization
(WHO) representative for Iraq who is currently based in
Amman, Jordan.

www.irinnews.org/report.asp?ReportID=40480& SelectRegion=Iraq_Crisis&SelectCountry=IRAQ

Back in 1998, one of Halliburton's offshore subsidiaries did $23 million worth of business with Saddam. Last year, Dick Cheney collected over $175,000 from Halliburton in deferred compensation. How much of the money Cheney pocketed last year come from the blood and bones of the massacred?

There are a lot a photos in the net. I don´t know if they are true or not.

Who sold the weapons to Mr Saddam? What do you believe?





What do you think about this?

Do you want more images bombing cities full of innocent people "to liberate" them?




Why could be useful intelligence services? Do we need to bomb cities full of people "to liberate" them? In XXIst Century? Do you believe it?

Since Turkey has been slaughtering the Kurds for decades and still are.

And how about the babies we've killed over the past 18 months? No need to go back over 20 years. We have nice new mass graves full of babies.

By the by on a forensic side of things...after 20+ years, how is it there are any "toys" remaining to be "clutched"???

Ashes to ashes, dust to dust...

"Downing Street has admitted to The Observer that repeated claims by Tony Blair that '400,000 bodies had been found in Iraqi mass graves' is untrue, and only about 5,000 corpses have so far been uncovered."
-- July 18
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1263899,00....

This new event might have happened, it might not, but I'm getting tired of mustering up a bunch of outrage for things that don't turn out to be credible.

the 300,000 body mass graves were mentioned again for the first time in over a year. Strange how they never actually found these bodies, but the story reemerges.

The upscale corporate hand-job is what is now heard at Nat'l Petroleum Radio.

Much of the commentary comes from the Heritage Foundation and American Enterprise Institute in the news shows that white-collar types listen to at the beginning and end of their work day.

What's left of the middle class is being given a (false) narrative to explain their imminent extinction...and NPR is helping.

Bush and Blair will just say "oh well, it is possible that he could have done this, so it is all the same thing anyway."

Here is a mass-graves site run by some Iraqis. Take a look, and pass your own judgement on whether it's a political fake-out. Regardless of which way you decide, it's a more informed viewpoint.

http://massgraves.info/

We know what is a Dictator.
Bombing cities FULL of innocent people to stop just ONE Dictator is the solution?

Judge for yourself.



Here there isn´t any massgrave. Is this the solution "to save" children and innocent people?

Unfortunately, this doesn't prove anything about culpability. There are undoubtedly mass graves in Iraq, but the question is who is responsible for them? The Iraq-Iran War caused untold deaths and mass graves, as did the Iraq-U.S. war of 1991 (thousands of Iraqi conscripts were plowed under the sand, alive, by U.S. armored bulldozers, for example) and now the U.S./U.K. invasion. It is entirely likely that the rebellions related to these various conflicts also resulted in mass killings and mass graves.

I don't doubt Hussein's directives created a lot of death and misery, though. Unfortunately, the lies of Bush and Blair have created a "poisoned chalice" problem, when it comes to any claims made by U.S. or U.K. officials. Especially given the nearness to the U.S. election.

Someday, one hopes a full and honest accounting will be possible.

to "cover their tracks".

it's a bit more recent..

There's also one dug near where my friend Qasima's apartment used to be in Najaf, also in a ripped up block in Madinat as-Sadr ... new ones popping up everywhere, really. -- Past < Present, no? Or perhaps not.. :shrug:

cuz our graves are righteous graves.:eyes:

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/video1/2iraqiwar.rm

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/video1/aztlan_thief_host_your_own_video_iraqiwar.wmv


http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/7c4d08d9b287a42141256739003e636b/fe20c3d903ce27e3c125641e004a92f3?OpenDocument

and we kill tens of thousands, starve and torture the rest. If truthful accounting is ever done, Saddam will look like Albert Schweitzer compared to the US war and occupation.

here is why this is coming out today. Bush and the military have known about this grave-site for a long time and have probably been excavating it for a while. SUDDENLY, the news breaks today, just before the last debate!!! Imagine that!!!! I think it's safe to say Bush will mention this grave site many times tonight, maybe as many times as he mentioned how hard he works in the first debate.

Saddam was an evil, sick SOB. But we've known about these victims for many years. This is not news.

Now George, when are you going to do something concrete to help the poor people of Sudan?

"With Our Support."

"Remember we discovered mass graves with hundreds of thousands of men and women and children clutching their little toys, as a result of this person's brutality."

-Bush, November 16, 2003
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/frost/transcript.html


Blair admits Iraq graves claim untrue

British Prime Minister Tony Blair's office has admitted that repeated claims that 400,000 bodies had been found in Iraqi mass graves were untrue, The Observer newspaper reported on Sunday.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6509.htm

http://www.ciceuta.es/informacion/noviomuerte.mp3

The death penalty, also known as capital punishment, was reinstated in the USA in 1976. Since then, more and more states have brought back the death penalty, and the total number of executions is increasing each year. Since 1990, some states have begun to execute teenagers, the mentally ill, and the mentally retarded. One state – TEXAS - has led the nation in executions in every year since 1976; FLORIDA is second. This is occurring just as the rest of the world, particularly the modern democratic countries of Europe and Latin America, are imposing moratoriums and outright bans on the imposition of the death penalty.

http://www.wolkoff.net/capital.html

These garves WERE found LAST YEAR...and have been under investigation SINCE then..

How "fortuitous" that they are front page "news" , only now...:eyes:

"We're putting a package together on each body removed - pictures of bones, clothes, a forensic report."

Who is doing the forensics? I'd like to know whether it is an impartial party. The ammunition used is a big clue in who killed these people. The Iranians were after control of the Darbandikhan dam. That's who really gassed the Kurds there, apparently.

http://members.aol.com/apollo711/war/gasx.html

"In fact, those who really feel that the disaster at Halabja has bearing on today might want to consider a different question: Why was Iran so keen on taking the town? A closer look may shed light on America's impetus to invade Iraq.

We are constantly reminded that Iraq has perhaps the world's largest reserves of oil. But in a regional and perhaps even geopolitical sense, it may be more important that Iraq has the most extensive river system in the Middle East. In addition to the Tigris and Euphrates, there are the Greater Zab and Lesser Zab rivers in the north of the country. Iraq was covered with irrigation works by the sixth century A.D., and was a granary for the region.

Before the Persian Gulf war, Iraq had built an impressive system of dams and river control projects, the largest being the Darbandikhan dam in the Kurdish area. And it was this dam the Iranians were aiming to take control of when they seized Halabja. In the 1990's there was much discussion over the construction of a so-called Peace Pipeline that would bring the waters of the Tigris and Euphrates south to the parched Gulf states and, by extension, Israel. No progress has been made on this, largely because of Iraqi intransigence. With Iraq in American hands, of course, all that could change.

Thus America could alter the destiny of the Middle East in a way that probably could not be challenged for decades — not solely by controlling Iraq's oil, but by controlling its water. Even if America didn't occupy the country, once Mr. Hussein's Baath Party is driven from power, many lucrative opportunities would open up for American companies.

"Saddam killed CHILDREN and WOMEN and even LITTLE BABIES still clutching their TEDDY BEARS!

Can you think of a better reason to bomb the everlasting fuck out of that country? If we have to kill a few thousand or even a few million children in order to avenge the ones Saddam killed fuckin' 16 years ago, then by God, we will."

buried? America is filled to the brim with vicious hypocrites