Yet Another Reason Helen Was Wrong

Question:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Yes Don, and there will be many more stories such as these, I’m sorry to say. Tell me why, therefore, did your government of the time treat with this beast? Why were they buddies with the regime, doing sneaky, snidey things with him, encouraging him to wage war on Iran? We had some reasons at the time. 52 of them as I recall. Please tell me that it was an aberration, a mistake, and that they didn’t know what he was capable of? Or perhaps is it more likely that they knew damn bloody *well*, and were just delighted that he was doing the dirty work for them? Saddam had only been in power a couple years — his coup was early 1979. Unfortunately we didn’t know what a right bastard he was compared to the other Arab leaders of the day.

Ah yeah, another fuckin’ little mistake. He was bolstered up, and being given the confidence to think that he could do any fucking thing that he wanted to do, *to anyone*, because – after all – he had the United States in his pocket – they LOVED him. He could do no wrong. No, we didn’t love him, but we thought we could use him.

Isn’t that what I’ve been saying? You would use him in all the dastardly deeds, pumping him up to think that he was invincible and could do no wrong. Just as you did in Afghanistan and countless other arenas. Someone else then has to pay for your costly little mistakes with their blood and tears. Your cynicism does you no credit. As did the French. As did the Russians. Remember them? Strange, you haven’t mentioned them at all.

They didn’t invade Iraq. The sheer hypocrisy of it all makes me puke. That’s your liquid lunch :-)

Your snide comments about drink wash right over me Stevie dear, because I rarely imbibe more than an occasional glass or two of good wine. You however, might be rather more concerned about your own intake, judging by your constant sip sip sip and what I imagine is your ‘dropped chest’. <eg Helen – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – steve

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I happen to be a Cuban exile and would love to see Castro toppled. No, I would rather not see bombs dropping on my family in Cuba. I would prefer a peaceful solution to the tyranny on the island. But if the deaths of several thousand Cubans means an end to tyranny then I believe the deaths to be the price we pay for the liberation of 11 million people. Today there are millions of people in Central America that thank the United States for ridding their countries of the communists. Because of United States’ involvement in Vietnam and Korea we ended the Cold War and brought down a monstrous empire in Russia. You’re welcome. Ginzo, thanks for explaining that. I have a good friend, cardiologist, who was born in Havana and whose parents put him on an airplane in ‘61, all by himself (they were able to get out themselves later). I’ve heard some stories from him that make me ill. Hope your family is safe. I just got word that my maid’s sister, Maria Beatrice Roque, has just been sentenced in Cuba for 20 years for speaking out against the government. This woman has high blood pressure and is being denied medical treatment. Fortunately she’s in a workers’ paradise (just ask Castro), with the hemisphere’s highest literacy rate (just ask the Cuban Information Minister) and the best health care (Americans line up to be treated there).

Yeah – they’ve done rather well *in spite of* the vicious sanctions imposed by the US. Helen – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – - Don

Response:

Fortunately she’s in a workers’ paradise (just ask Castro), with the hemisphere’s highest literacy rate (just ask the Cuban Information Minister) and the best health care (Americans line up to be treated there). Yeah – they’ve done rather well *in spite of* the vicious sanctions imposed by the US.

If by "done rather well" you mean run the country into the ground. And if we’re so evil, why would Castro WANT to do business with us? steve

Response:

In article No doubt when Fidel isn’t daydreaming about me he’s reading alt.adoption.

No doubt :-) steve

Response:

have oilmen running our government. But that being said, why can’t we rejoice in that some good will come out of this? Why can’t you have at least a shred of integrity and admit that no matter what the real reasons are for invading Iraq that at the very least a people are being liberated? How can you liberate someone by killing his family?

You don’t. You have a point or are you just babbling again? You and Don said you had *conquered* Iraq. Conquering and liberating are opposites.

Where did I say that? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – In this world nothing occurs in a vacuum. Think of those ‘regime changes’ that eventually came about through mostly non-violent methods – apartheid in South Africa, Marcos in the Philippines, Ceausescu in Romania. There are countless examples of the futility of the bomb and the bullet, and the success of radical non-violent methods. Sayagraha, Gandhi called it. I happen to be a Cuban exile and would love to see Castro toppled. No, I would rather not see bombs dropping on my family in Cuba. I would prefer a peaceful solution to the tyranny on the island. But if the deaths of several thousand Cubans means an end to tyranny then I believe the deaths to be the price we pay for the liberation of 11 million people. Would you give YOUR life? Would you offer YOUR family as collateral?

As a matter of fact, members of my family have given their lives. Some gave it for the revolution, some for its liberation (Bay of Pigs). Others have been involved in activism here and in Cuba. Given the opportunity I would risk my life to free the island of tyranny. Many in my family would also – both here and on teh island. Today there are millions of people in Central America that thank the United States for ridding their countries of the communists. <snort Created murder and mayhem, you mean. Everywhere they went in search of ‘communists’ they have bolstered corrupt regimes or funded ultra-right-wing coups.

Huh? Do you know any El Salvadorians? Nicaraguans? Columbians? Are you serious? Because of United States’ involvement in Vietnam and Korea we ended the Cold War and brought down a monstrous empire in Russia. You’re welcome. Well now, that’s some helluva a claim.

And its every bit true. Does this mean that people didn’t profit from these conflicts? Of course, not. But sometimes one has to look at both the good and the bad in every world conflict. The United States isn’t always right, but Lord Almight, when the chips are down they always call the Yanks. It’s nice to *wait* until you are called.

It is also sopmetimes impossibl;e to be called. Do you realize that Iraq was a tyranny? As a matter of fact the Iraqis in exiule have been calling for American involvment for several years.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I just got word that my maid’s sister, Maria Beatrice Roque, has just been sentenced in Cuba for 20 years for speaking out against the government. Your *maid*? Oh WOW. Do you have a point, Helen dear? This woman has high blood pressure and is being denied medical treatment. And you have done her a BIG favour by broadcasting her name on the internet. Again, what is your point?

No doubt when Fidel isn’t daydreaming about me he’s reading alt.adoption. Marley – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –

Response:

I just got word that my maid’s sister, Maria Beatrice Roque, has just been sentenced in Cuba for 20 years for speaking out against the government. Your *maid*? Oh WOW.

Do you have a point, Helen dear? This woman has high blood pressure and is being denied medical treatment. And you have done her a BIG favour by broadcasting her name on the

internet. Again, what is your point?

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Helen, I don’t think that the United States is some sort of altruistic organization seeking only to help the downtrodden and the helpless. I understand that there are political, economic and other forces at work here. I am certain that much of what is going on in Iraq at the moment has to do with oil. It is no coincidence that we are fighting Arabs at a time when we have oilmen running our government. But that being said, why can’t we rejoice in that some good will come out of this? Why can’t you have at least a shred of integrity and admit that no matter what the real reasons are for invading Iraq that at the very least a people are being liberated? Our success means Helen is wrong, and she hates that more than anything.

I would love to have been proved wrong. She would have preferred that hundreds of thousands of body bags be filled so that she could gloat on alt.adoption.

You are a triumphalist, vainglorious, pseudo *conqueror*. Helen – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – - Don

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Top posting: Yes Don, and there will be many more stories such as these, I’m sorry to say. Tell me why, therefore, did your government of the time treat with this beast? Why were they buddies with the regime, doing sneaky, snidey things with him, encouraging him to wage war on Iran? Please tell me that it was an aberration, a mistake, and that they didn’t know what he was capable of? Or perhaps is it more likely that they knew damn bloody *well*, and were just delighted that he was doing the dirty work for them? He was bolstered up, and being given the confidence to think that he could do any fucking thing that he wanted to do, *to anyone*, because – after all – he had the United States in his pocket – they LOVED him. He could do no wrong. The sheer hypocrisy of it all makes me puke. Helen Helen, I don’t think that the United States is some sort of altruistic organization seeking only to help the downtrodden and the helpless. I understand that there are political, economic and other forces at work here. I am certain that much of what is going on in Iraq at the moment has to do with oil. It is no coincidence that we are fighting Arabs at a time when we have oilmen running our government. But that being said, why can’t we rejoice in that some good will come out of this? Why can’t you have at least a shred of integrity and admit that no matter what the real reasons are for invading Iraq that at the very least a people are being liberated?

How can you liberate someone by killing his family? You and Don said you had *conquered* Iraq. Conquering and liberating are opposites. In this world nothing occurs in a vacuum.

It didn’t occur in a vacuum. It was a pre-planned and well organised pre-emptive war on a country that had already been disarmed. A country that was effectively told "unless you disarm we will come in and kill you". When they did, when they were in the process of disarming to the satisfaction of the UNSC, they were invaded anyway. Dishonourable, illegal and immoral, no matter what spin you put on it. Unfortunately, great change rarely occurs without some undesirable events occurring along the way as well. The American Civil war was not just about slavery, nor was the American Revolution only about taxation. Abraham Lincoln used the slavery issue in order to win a bloody war against the southern states. If we had allowed the United States to splinter we would not have had this great nation we have now (by ‘great’ I don’t mean ‘good’, btw. I mean a rich, powerful nation). The American Civil War was one of the bloodiest conflicts this world had ever seen in one nation, but the deaths were neccessary.

Think of those ‘regime changes’ that eventually came about through mostly non-violent methods – apartheid in South Africa, Marcos in the Philippines, Ceausescu in Romania. There are countless examples of the futility of the bomb and the bullet, and the success of radical non-violent methods. Sayagraha, Gandhi called it. I happen to be a Cuban exile and would love to see Castro toppled. No, I would rather not see bombs dropping on my family in Cuba. I would prefer a peaceful solution to the tyranny on the island. But if the deaths of several thousand Cubans means an end to tyranny then I believe the deaths to be the price we pay for the liberation of 11 million people.

Would you give YOUR life? Would you offer YOUR family as collateral? Today there are millions of people in Central America that thank the United States for ridding their countries of the communists.

<snort Created murder and mayhem, you mean. Everywhere they went in search of ‘communists’ they have bolstered corrupt regimes or funded ultra-right-wing coups. The CIA’s attempts fortunately failed in Venezuela for example. And killing Allende – a far better and more honourable leader than ever that murdering creep Pinochet was – resulted in the deaths of countless thousands of innocent people. Because of United States’ involvement in Vietnam and Korea we ended the Cold War and brought down a monstrous empire in Russia. You’re welcome.

Well now, that’s some helluva a claim. Does this mean that people didn’t profit from these conflicts? Of course, not. But sometimes one has to look at both the good and the bad in every world conflict. The United States isn’t always right, but Lord Almight, when the chips are down they always call the Yanks.

It’s nice to *wait* until you are called. Helen – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –

Response:

Your *maid*? Oh WOW. This woman has high blood pressure and is being denied medical treatment.

And you have done her a BIG favour by broadcasting her name on the internet. Helen – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –

Response:

Liberalism is satanic. Marley

Yeah well life’s a bitch and then we die. Kathy 1

Response:

Liberalism is satanic. Marley Yeah well life’s a bitch and then we die. Kathy 1

If you’re a liberal you believe everybody goes to heaven. Can’t we all get along? Marley – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –

Response:

Well we can’t all spend our days mired in doom and gloom. Some of us come up for air once in awhile I’ve known Marley for quite a while now, and I can assure you that she’s a very happy person. She’s just in denial about it. – Don

And I know that you’re really morose and in denial. BTW, Don really IS a happy person. Marley

Response:

Well that doesn’t seem like you Marley to tell people what it is they believe. Too much time spent with people like the Morriseys perhaps? Kathy 1

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Liberalism is satanic. Marley Yeah well life’s a bitch and then we die. Kathy 1 If you’re a liberal you believe everybody goes to heaven. Can’t we all get along? Marley Well that doesn’t seem like you Marley to tell people what it is they believe. Too much time spent with people like the Morriseys perhaps? Kathy 1

No doubt. It happens to the best of us. I think I’ll run for the Republican Central Committee or something. I already belong to the Christian Coalition, which I bet is more than most people would do for "the cause." Marley – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –

Response:

Liberalism is satanic. Marley

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Well we can’t all spend our days mired in doom and gloom. Some of us come up for air once in awhile Kathy 1 You are ALL a bunch of looney liberal idealists. OUT!! Marley Top Post: You are one broken record. Is that the best you can do? Kathy 1 Top posting: Yes Don, and there will be many more stories such as these, I’m sorry to say. Tell me why, therefore, did your government of the time treat with this beast? Why were they buddies with the regime, doing sneaky, snidey things with him, encouraging him to wage war on Iran? Please tell me that it was an aberration, a mistake, and that they didn’t know what he was capable of? Or perhaps is it more likely that they knew damn bloody *well*, and were just delighted that he was doing the dirty work for them? He was bolstered up, and being given the confidence to think that he could do any fucking thing that he wanted to do, *to anyone*, because – after all – he had the United States in his pocket – they LOVED him. He could do no wrong. The sheer hypocrisy of it all makes me puke. Helen New York Times <http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/11/opinion/11JORD.html?ex=1050638400&page wanted=print&position=top April 11, 2003 The News We Kept to Ourselves By EASON JORDAN TLANTA < Over the last dozen years I made 13 trips to Baghdad to lobby the government to keep CNN’s Baghdad bureau open and to arrange interviews with Iraqi leaders. Each time I visited, I became more distressed by what I saw and heard < awful things that could not be reported because doing so would have jeopardized the lives of Iraqis, particularly those on our Baghdad staff. For example, in the mid-1990’s one of our Iraqi cameramen was abducted. For weeks he was beaten and subjected to electroshock torture in the basement of a secret police headquarters because he refused to confirm the government’s ludicrous suspicion that I was the Central Intelligence Agency’s Iraq station chief. CNN had been in Baghdad long enough to know that telling the world about the torture of one of its employees would almost certainly have gotten him killed and put his family and co-workers at grave risk. Working for a foreign news organization provided Iraqi citizens no protection. The secret police terrorized Iraqis working for international press services who were courageous enough to try to provide accurate reporting. Some vanished, never to be heard from again. Others disappeared and then surfaced later with whispered tales of being hauled off and tortured in unimaginable ways. Obviously, other news organizations were in the same bind we were when it came to reporting on their own workers. We also had to worry that our reporting might endanger Iraqis not on our payroll. I knew that CNN could not report that Saddam Hussein’s eldest son, Uday, told me in 1995 that he intended to assassinate two of his brothers-in-law who had defected and also the man giving them asylum, King Hussein of Jordan. If we had gone with the story, I was sure he would have responded by killing the Iraqi translator who was the only other participant in the meeting. After all, secret police thugs brutalized even senior officials of the Information Ministry, just to keep them in line (one such official has long been missing all his fingernails). Still, I felt I had a moral obligation to warn Jordan’s monarch, and I did so the next day. King Hussein dismissed the threat as a madman’s rant. A few months later Uday lured the brothers-in-law back to Baghdad; they were soon killed. I came to know several Iraqi officials well enough that they confided in me that Saddam Hussein was a maniac who had to be removed. One Foreign Ministry officer told me of a colleague who, finding out his brother had been executed by the regime, was forced, as a test of loyalty, to write a letter of congratulations on the act to Saddam Hussein. An aide to Uday once told me why he had no front teeth: henchmen had ripped them out with pliers and told him never to wear dentures, so he would always remember the price to be paid for upsetting his boss. Again, we could not broadcast anything these men said to us. Last December, when I told Information Minister Muhammad Said al-Sahhaf that we intended to send reporters to Kurdish-controlled northern Iraq, he warned me they would "suffer the severest possible consequences." CNN went ahead, and in March, Kurdish officials presented us with evidence that they had thwarted an armed attack on our quarters in Erbil. This included videotaped confessions of two men identifying themselves as Iraqi intelligence agents who said their bosses in Baghdad told them the hotel actually housed C.I.A. and Israeli agents. The Kurds offered to let us interview the suspects on camera, but we refused, for fear of endangering our staff in Baghdad. Then there were the events that were not unreported but that nonetheless still haunt me. A 31-year-old Kuwaiti woman, Asrar Qabandi, was captured by Iraqi secret police occupying her country in 1990 for "crimes," one of which included speaking with CNN on the phone. They beat her daily for two months, forcing her father to watch. In January 1991, on the eve of the American-led offensive, they smashed her skull and tore her body apart limb by limb. A plastic bag containing her body parts was left on the doorstep of her family’s home. I felt awful having these stories bottled up inside me. Now that Saddam Hussein’s regime is gone, I suspect we will hear many, many more gut-wrenching tales from Iraqis about the decades of torment. At last, these stories can be told freely. Eason Jordan is chief news executive at CNN. Copyright 2003 The New York Times Company |Privacy Policy

Response:

You are ALL a bunch of looney liberal idealists. OUT!! Marley

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Top Post: You are one broken record. Is that the best you can do? Kathy 1 Top posting: Yes Don, and there will be many more stories such as these, I’m sorry to say. Tell me why, therefore, did your government of the time treat with this beast? Why were they buddies with the regime, doing sneaky, snidey things with him, encouraging him to wage war on Iran? Please tell me that it was an aberration, a mistake, and that they didn’t know what he was capable of? Or perhaps is it more likely that they knew damn bloody *well*, and were just delighted that he was doing the dirty work for them? He was bolstered up, and being given the confidence to think that he could do any fucking thing that he wanted to do, *to anyone*, because – after all – he had the United States in his pocket – they LOVED him. He could do no wrong. The sheer hypocrisy of it all makes me puke. Helen New York Times <http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/11/opinion/11JORD.html?ex=1050638400&page wanted=print&position=top April 11, 2003 The News We Kept to Ourselves By EASON JORDAN TLANTA < Over the last dozen years I made 13 trips to Baghdad to lobby the government to keep CNN’s Baghdad bureau open and to arrange interviews with Iraqi leaders. Each time I visited, I became more distressed by what I saw and heard < awful things that could not be reported because doing so would have jeopardized the lives of Iraqis, particularly those on our Baghdad staff. For example, in the mid-1990’s one of our Iraqi cameramen was abducted. For weeks he was beaten and subjected to electroshock torture in the basement of a secret police headquarters because he refused to confirm the government’s ludicrous suspicion that I was the Central Intelligence Agency’s Iraq station chief. CNN had been in Baghdad long enough to know that telling the world about the torture of one of its employees would almost certainly have gotten him killed and put his family and co-workers at grave risk. Working for a foreign news organization provided Iraqi citizens no protection. The secret police terrorized Iraqis working for international press services who were courageous enough to try to provide accurate reporting. Some vanished, never to be heard from again. Others disappeared and then surfaced later with whispered tales of being hauled off and tortured in unimaginable ways. Obviously, other news organizations were in the same bind we were when it came to reporting on their own workers. We also had to worry that our reporting might endanger Iraqis not on our payroll. I knew that CNN could not report that Saddam Hussein’s eldest son, Uday, told me in 1995 that he intended to assassinate two of his brothers-in-law who had defected and also the man giving them asylum, King Hussein of Jordan. If we had gone with the story, I was sure he would have responded by killing the Iraqi translator who was the only other participant in the meeting. After all, secret police thugs brutalized even senior officials of the Information Ministry, just to keep them in line (one such official has long been missing all his fingernails). Still, I felt I had a moral obligation to warn Jordan’s monarch, and I did so the next day. King Hussein dismissed the threat as a madman’s rant. A few months later Uday lured the brothers-in-law back to Baghdad; they were soon killed. I came to know several Iraqi officials well enough that they confided in me that Saddam Hussein was a maniac who had to be removed. One Foreign Ministry officer told me of a colleague who, finding out his brother had been executed by the regime, was forced, as a test of loyalty, to write a letter of congratulations on the act to Saddam Hussein. An aide to Uday once told me why he had no front teeth: henchmen had ripped them out with pliers and told him never to wear dentures, so he would always remember the price to be paid for upsetting his boss. Again, we could not broadcast anything these men said to us. Last December, when I told Information Minister Muhammad Said al-Sahhaf that we intended to send reporters to Kurdish-controlled northern Iraq, he warned me they would "suffer the severest possible consequences." CNN went ahead, and in March, Kurdish officials presented us with evidence that they had thwarted an armed attack on our quarters in Erbil. This included videotaped confessions of two men identifying themselves as Iraqi intelligence agents who said their bosses in Baghdad told them the hotel actually housed C.I.A. and Israeli agents. The Kurds offered to let us interview the suspects on camera, but we refused, for fear of endangering our staff in Baghdad. Then there were the events that were not unreported but that nonetheless still haunt me. A 31-year-old Kuwaiti woman, Asrar Qabandi, was captured by Iraqi secret police occupying her country in 1990 for "crimes," one of which included speaking with CNN on the phone. They beat her daily for two months, forcing her father to watch. In January 1991, on the eve of the American-led offensive, they smashed her skull and tore her body apart limb by limb. A plastic bag containing her body parts was left on the doorstep of her family’s home. I felt awful having these stories bottled up inside me. Now that Saddam Hussein’s regime is gone, I suspect we will hear many, many more gut-wrenching tales from Iraqis about the decades of torment. At last, these stories can be told freely. Eason Jordan is chief news executive at CNN. Copyright 2003 The New York Times Company |Privacy Policy

Response:

Well we can’t all spend our days mired in doom and gloom. Some of us come up for air once in awhile Kathy 1

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – You are ALL a bunch of looney liberal idealists. OUT!! Marley Top Post: You are one broken record. Is that the best you can do? Kathy 1 Top posting: Yes Don, and there will be many more stories such as these, I’m sorry to say. Tell me why, therefore, did your government of the time treat with this beast? Why were they buddies with the regime, doing sneaky, snidey things with him, encouraging him to wage war on Iran? Please tell me that it was an aberration, a mistake, and that they didn’t know what he was capable of? Or perhaps is it more likely that they knew damn bloody *well*, and were just delighted that he was doing the dirty work for them? He was bolstered up, and being given the confidence to think that he could do any fucking thing that he wanted to do, *to anyone*, because – after all – he had the United States in his pocket – they LOVED him. He could do no wrong. The sheer hypocrisy of it all makes me puke. Helen New York Times

<http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/11/opinion/11JORD.html?ex=1050638400&page – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – wanted=print&position=top April 11, 2003 The News We Kept to Ourselves By EASON JORDAN TLANTA < Over the last dozen years I made 13 trips to Baghdad to lobby the government to keep CNN’s Baghdad bureau open and to arrange interviews with Iraqi leaders. Each time I visited, I became more distressed by what I saw and heard < awful things that could not be reported because doing so would have jeopardized the lives of Iraqis, particularly those on our Baghdad staff. For example, in the mid-1990’s one of our Iraqi cameramen was abducted. For weeks he was beaten and subjected to electroshock torture in the basement of a secret police headquarters because he refused to confirm the government’s ludicrous suspicion that I was the Central Intelligence Agency’s Iraq station chief. CNN had been in Baghdad long enough to know that telling the world about the torture of one of its employees would almost certainly have gotten him killed and put his family and co-workers at grave risk. Working for a foreign news organization provided Iraqi citizens no protection. The secret police terrorized Iraqis working for international press services who were courageous enough to try to provide accurate reporting. Some vanished, never to be heard from again. Others disappeared and then surfaced later with whispered tales of being hauled off and tortured in unimaginable ways. Obviously, other news organizations were in the same bind we were when it came to reporting on their own workers. We also had to worry that our reporting might endanger Iraqis not on our payroll. I knew that CNN could not report that Saddam Hussein’s eldest son, Uday, told me in 1995 that he intended to assassinate two of his brothers-in-law who had defected and also the man giving them asylum, King Hussein of Jordan. If we had gone with the story, I was sure he would have responded by killing the Iraqi translator who was the only other participant in the meeting. After all, secret police thugs brutalized even senior officials of the Information Ministry, just to keep them in line (one such official has long been missing all his fingernails). Still, I felt I had a moral obligation to warn Jordan’s monarch, and I did so the next day. King Hussein dismissed the threat as a madman’s rant. A few months later Uday lured the brothers-in-law back to Baghdad; they were soon killed. I came to know several Iraqi officials well enough that they confided in me that Saddam Hussein was a maniac who had to be removed. One Foreign Ministry officer told me of a colleague who, finding out his brother had been executed by the regime, was forced, as a test of loyalty, to write a letter of congratulations on the act to Saddam Hussein. An aide to Uday once told me why he had no front teeth: henchmen had ripped them out with pliers and told him never to wear dentures, so he would always remember the price to be paid for upsetting his boss. Again, we could not broadcast anything these men said to us. Last December, when I told Information Minister Muhammad Said al-Sahhaf that we intended to send reporters to Kurdish-controlled northern Iraq, he warned me they would "suffer the severest possible consequences." CNN went ahead, and in March, Kurdish officials presented us with evidence that they had thwarted an armed attack on our quarters in Erbil. This included videotaped confessions of two men identifying themselves as Iraqi intelligence agents who said their bosses in Baghdad told them the hotel actually housed C.I.A. and Israeli agents. The Kurds offered to let us interview the suspects on camera, but we refused, for fear of endangering our staff in Baghdad. Then there were the events that were not unreported but that nonetheless still haunt me. A 31-year-old Kuwaiti woman, Asrar Qabandi, was captured by Iraqi secret police occupying her country in 1990 for "crimes," one of which included speaking with CNN on the phone. They beat her daily for two months, forcing her father to watch. In January 1991, on the eve of the American-led offensive, they smashed her skull and tore her body apart limb by limb. A plastic bag containing her body parts was left on the doorstep of her family’s home. I felt awful having these stories bottled up inside me. Now that Saddam Hussein’s regime is gone, I suspect we will hear many, many more gut-wrenching tales from Iraqis about the decades of torment. At last, these stories can be told freely. Eason Jordan is chief news executive at CNN. Copyright 2003 The New York Times Company |Privacy Policy

Response:

I just got word that my maid’s sister, Maria Beatrice Roque, has just been sentenced in Cuba for 20 years for speaking out against the government. This woman has high blood pressure and is being denied medical treatment.

Response:

I happen to be a Cuban exile and would love to see Castro toppled. No, I would rather not see bombs dropping on my family in Cuba. I would prefer a peaceful solution to the tyranny on the island. But if the deaths of several thousand Cubans means an end to tyranny then I believe the deaths to be the price we pay for the liberation of 11 million people. Today there are millions of people in Central America that thank the United States for ridding their countries of the communists. Because of United States’ involvement in Vietnam and Korea we ended the Cold War and brought down a monstrous empire in Russia. You’re welcome.

Response:

Ginzo, thanks for explaining that. I have a good friend, cardiologist, who was born in Havana and whose parents put him on an airplane in ‘61, all by himself (they were able to get out themselves later). I’ve heard some stories from him that make me ill. Hope your family is safe. I just got word that my maid’s sister, Maria Beatrice Roque, has just been sentenced in Cuba for 20 years for speaking out against the government. This woman has high blood pressure and is being denied medical treatment.

Grrr. My prayers are with Maria. steve

Response:

Yes Don, and there will be many more stories such as these, I’m sorry to say. Tell me why, therefore, did your government of the time treat with this beast? Why were they buddies with the regime, doing sneaky, snidey things with him, encouraging him to wage war on Iran?

We had some reasons at the time. 52 of them as I recall. Please tell me that it was an aberration, a mistake, and that they didn’t know what he was capable of? Or perhaps is it more likely that they knew damn bloody *well*, and were just delighted that he was doing the dirty work for them?

Saddam had only been in power a couple years — his coup was early 1979. Unfortunately we didn’t know what a right bastard he was compared to the other Arab leaders of the day. He was bolstered up, and being given the confidence to think that he could do any fucking thing that he wanted to do, *to anyone*, because – after all – he had the United States in his pocket – they LOVED him. He could do no wrong.

No, we didn’t love him, but we thought we could use him. As did the French. As did the Russians. Remember them? Strange, you haven’t mentioned them at all. The sheer hypocrisy of it all makes me puke.

That’s your liquid lunch :-) steve

Response:

Top Post: You are one broken record. Is that the best you can do? Kathy 1

Response:

Helen, I don’t think that the United States is some sort of altruistic organization seeking only to help the downtrodden and the helpless. I understand that there are political, economic and other forces at work here. I am certain that much of what is going on in Iraq at the moment has to do with oil. It is no coincidence that we are fighting Arabs at a time when we have oilmen running our government. But that being said, why can’t we rejoice in that some good will come out of this? Why can’t you have at least a shred of integrity and admit that no matter what the real reasons are for invading Iraq that at the very least a people are being liberated? In this world nothing occurs in a vacuum. Unfortunately, great change rarely occurs without some undesirable events occurring along the way as well. The American Civil war was not just about slavery, nor was the American Revolution only about taxation. Abraham Lincoln used the slavery issue in order to win a bloody war against the southern states. If we had allowed the United States to splinter we would not have had this great nation we have now (by ‘great’ I don’t mean ‘good’, btw. I mean a rich, powerful nation). The American Civil War was one of the bloodiest conflicts this world had ever seen in one nation, but the deaths were neccessary. I happen to be a Cuban exile and would love to see Castro toppled. No, I would rather not see bombs dropping on my family in Cuba. I would prefer a peaceful solution to the tyranny on the island. But if the deaths of several thousand Cubans means an end to tyranny then I believe the deaths to be the price we pay for the liberation of 11 million people. Today there are millions of people in Central America that thank the United States for ridding their countries of the communists. Because of United States’ involvement in Vietnam and Korea we ended the Cold War and brought down a monstrous empire in Russia. You’re welcome. Does this mean that people didn’t profit from these conflicts? Of course, not. But sometimes one has to look at both the good and the bad in every world conflict. The United States isn’t always right, but Lord Almight, when the chips are down they always call the Yanks.

Response:

Top posting: Yes Don, and there will be many more stories such as these, I’m sorry to say. Tell me why, therefore, did your government of the time treat with this beast? Why were they buddies with the regime, doing sneaky, snidey things with him, encouraging him to wage war on Iran? Please tell me that it was an aberration, a mistake, and that they didn’t know what he was capable of? Or perhaps is it more likely that they knew damn bloody *well*, and were just delighted that he was doing the dirty work for them? He was bolstered up, and being given the confidence to think that he could do any fucking thing that he wanted to do, *to anyone*, because – after all – he had the United States in his pocket – they LOVED him. He could do no wrong. The sheer hypocrisy of it all makes me puke. Helen

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – New York Times <http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/11/opinion/11JORD.html?ex=1050638400&page wanted=print&position=top April 11, 2003 The News We Kept to Ourselves By EASON JORDAN TLANTA < Over the last dozen years I made 13 trips to Baghdad to lobby the government to keep CNN’s Baghdad bureau open and to arrange interviews with Iraqi leaders. Each time I visited, I became more distressed by what I saw and heard < awful things that could not be reported because doing so would have jeopardized the lives of Iraqis, particularly those on our Baghdad staff. For example, in the mid-1990’s one of our Iraqi cameramen was abducted. For weeks he was beaten and subjected to electroshock torture in the basement of a secret police headquarters because he refused to confirm the government’s ludicrous suspicion that I was the Central Intelligence Agency’s Iraq station chief. CNN had been in Baghdad long enough to know that telling the world about the torture of one of its employees would almost certainly have gotten him killed and put his family and co-workers at grave risk. Working for a foreign news organization provided Iraqi citizens no protection. The secret police terrorized Iraqis working for international press services who were courageous enough to try to provide accurate reporting. Some vanished, never to be heard from again. Others disappeared and then surfaced later with whispered tales of being hauled off and tortured in unimaginable ways. Obviously, other news organizations were in the same bind we were when it came to reporting on their own workers. We also had to worry that our reporting might endanger Iraqis not on our payroll. I knew that CNN could not report that Saddam Hussein’s eldest son, Uday, told me in 1995 that he intended to assassinate two of his brothers-in-law who had defected and also the man giving them asylum, King Hussein of Jordan. If we had gone with the story, I was sure he would have responded by killing the Iraqi translator who was the only other participant in the meeting. After all, secret police thugs brutalized even senior officials of the Information Ministry, just to keep them in line (one such official has long been missing all his fingernails). Still, I felt I had a moral obligation to warn Jordan’s monarch, and I did so the next day. King Hussein dismissed the threat as a madman’s rant. A few months later Uday lured the brothers-in-law back to Baghdad; they were soon killed. I came to know several Iraqi officials well enough that they confided in me that Saddam Hussein was a maniac who had to be removed. One Foreign Ministry officer told me of a colleague who, finding out his brother had been executed by the regime, was forced, as a test of loyalty, to write a letter of congratulations on the act to Saddam Hussein. An aide to Uday once told me why he had no front teeth: henchmen had ripped them out with pliers and told him never to wear dentures, so he would always remember the price to be paid for upsetting his boss. Again, we could not broadcast anything these men said to us. Last December, when I told Information Minister Muhammad Said al-Sahhaf that we intended to send reporters to Kurdish-controlled northern Iraq, he warned me they would "suffer the severest possible consequences." CNN went ahead, and in March, Kurdish officials presented us with evidence that they had thwarted an armed attack on our quarters in Erbil. This included videotaped confessions of two men identifying themselves as Iraqi intelligence agents who said their bosses in Baghdad told them the hotel actually housed C.I.A. and Israeli agents. The Kurds offered to let us interview the suspects on camera, but we refused, for fear of endangering our staff in Baghdad. Then there were the events that were not unreported but that nonetheless still haunt me. A 31-year-old Kuwaiti woman, Asrar Qabandi, was captured by Iraqi secret police occupying her country in 1990 for "crimes," one of which included speaking with CNN on the phone. They beat her daily for two months, forcing her father to watch. In January 1991, on the eve of the American-led offensive, they smashed her skull and tore her body apart limb by limb. A plastic bag containing her body parts was left on the doorstep of her family’s home. I felt awful having these stories bottled up inside me. Now that Saddam Hussein’s regime is gone, I suspect we will hear many, many more gut-wrenching tales from Iraqis about the decades of torment. At last, these stories can be told freely. Eason Jordan is chief news executive at CNN. Copyright 2003 The New York Times Company |Privacy Policy

Response:

Filed under: American Activism

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

TrackBack URL | RSS feed for comments on this post.

Activism Change

Learn, read, react :: Activism