Friday, October 14, 2005

The Iraqi Bill of Rights

By Micah Holmquist

Read full article...

Posted 10/14 | Add a Comment

    Comments:

    You must register to comment.

    Login | Register

  1. So what’s you’re point?  Have you actually read the draft constitution or are you just engaging in preemptive complaining?

    Posted by Aaron from Ohio  on  10/16  at  06:46 PM

  2. I was preemptively complaining.

    Posted by micah holmquist from Cadillac, Michigan, United States  on  10/17  at  10:18 AM

  3. I liked the article. How can anything be legal in a country that is under Occupation?  Also, let us not forget about the 100 Bremmer Orders that were imposed on the people of Iraq to benefit U.S. corporations. This war and Occupation might just be the greatest scam ever in the history of the planet.

    Posted by rosemarie jackowski from  on  10/17  at  02:35 PM

  4. OK, preemptive complaining is allowed, I suppose.

    It seems the US is unfairly getting it both ways.  If the draft constition doesn’t have enough protections for women or has some other failing, then the US is at fault.  We should stop them.

    On the other hand, if the US intervenes to impose its own views about women’s rights or anything else, then the US is criticized for interfering, and the Iraqi government is called a puppet.

    Looking at the articles you cite, I see some of both styles of criticism.

    I was strongly opposed to the war, but I think the efforts to draft a constitution and elect a government are a passable effort to salvage a bad situation.  And it’s good to see Saddam Hussein on trial for murder, because he really was a horrible, murderous beast.

    Posted by Aaron from Ohio  on  10/20  at  12:19 AM

  5. Glad to see Micah up to his old ironic tricks.

    Please pardon the crass intrusion but I used to lurk around these parts on occasion when sparks used to fly far and fairly freely (I think I was threatened to be removed once, if that doesn’t happen, can’t call it much fun now can you?).

    I have a new paper posted at Israel Shamir’s site, please take a look folks: Technology and the Coming Technological Totalitarianism

    http://www.israelshamir.net/Contributors/Wilcox_Technology.htm

    Best, Rhino Rick

    Posted by Rhino Rick from  on  10/20  at  06:24 AM

  6. Aaron,

    That’s the problem with trying to impose your agenda on the rest of the world - where do you stop and once you have justified invading and occupying Iraq, there do not seem to be many principled, as opposed to pragmatic reasons, for not running every aspect of the country?

    However, these are more questions for supporters of the invasion and occupation than those opposed.

    Posted by micah holmquist from Cadillac, Michigan, United States  on  10/20  at  07:40 PM

  7. As far as imposing its will on other countries, this is also an area where the U.S. gets it both ways.  If we ignore tyrants, dictators, human rights abusers, etc., we are criticized for supporting/coddling/ignoring brutal dictators.  This was a common criticism from Edward Said, among many others.  Bernard Lewis describes it as a common criticism in the Arab world

    On the other hand, if we DON’T ignore it, if we try to force the dictators and others to change, we are bullies, imperialists, arrogant meddlers, etc. 

    My own impulse is that intervention is often better.  This is not to say we should have invaded Iraq, but I have no problems with the US using diplomacy or sanctions once in a while.  Look what the U.S. and France did in Lebanon.  They helped end a brutal, murderous Syrian occupation of Lebanon, and they did it without firing a shot.  That was a good thing, something for which the Lebanese are grateful.

    Posted by Aaron from Ohio  on  10/23  at  01:28 AM

  8. from where i stand all we see is you all complaining about something as useless as your own opinion.s your government doesnt care about your rights and when they start to annoy other countries then you have to expect a war now dont you

    Posted by natalie from australia  on  10/23  at  08:00 PM

  9. >"They helped end a brutal, murderous Syrian occupation of Lebanon, and they did it without firing a shot. “

    Good lord.. You need a history lesson badly. If you look at the history of Syrian presence in Lebanon, you could easily tell that they had 42,000 troops in Lebanon 10 years ago, and they started a series of withdrawals and redeployments. They barely had 13,000 troops there when they pulled out—all of them are outside major Lebanese cities.  It was already happening.

    Secondly, Syria’s baby colonialism is one of the most benign I’ve ever seen in ages.  It wasn’t even considered an “occupation.” Syria’s baby imperialism and baby colonialism had nowhere near the menace, power, and downright destructiveness and evil of the more traditional variety of Israel.

    And you support sanctions?  What kind of fucked up monster are you?  That comment reminded me of when that reprobate Madelyn Albright called the death of 500,000+ Iraqi children from starvation due to UN sanctions, “acceptable and worth it” during a CBS interview on “60 Minutes” some years ago.  In other words, it’s worth having 500,000 Iraqi children die in misery in order to safeguard Israel’s position?

    Posted by sam from  on  10/24  at  08:17 PM

  10. (A) Calm down.  I’m not a fucked up monster.  Get control of yourself and learn some manners.

    (B) I know more about the Middle East than the vast majority of Americans, more than most people in the Middle East themselves.  I can read and write Hebrew and Arabic.  I read about the Middle East on a daily basis.  I don’t need any history lessons from you.

    (C) You’re wrong about Syria.  They have killed and tortured thousands of Lebanese directly.  They have killed tens of thousands of additional Lebanese through their proxies.  Over the decades, at different times, they have armed the Phalangists, the Palestinians, Amal, Hizbollah and others.  They have kept the country in or on the verge of civil war since the 1970s.  They have controlled Lebanese politics with threats, bribes, torture and assasination. 

    Two months before Hariri was killed, Bashar Assad summoned him to Syria, set him down, gave him his orders, and said if Hariri misbehaved, “I will break you.” Hariri didn’t obey, and he was killed.  Is this really “benign colonialism” ?

    Even now, after Syrian troops have withdrawn, the flow of arms to Hizbollah is increasing, and several new brigade size units of Palestinians from Syria have moved into the Bekaa Valley.  So that’s hardly benign. 

    I haven’t even gone into Syria’s economic rape of Lebanon.  Lebanon once had a thriving economy.  Syria has taken over most major industries (e.g., construction) and pass them out as rewards to Syrian generals, relatives of the Assads, etc.

    (D) Even if it was “baby colonialism,” are you saying I’m a monster for opposing it?  What kind of reasoning is that?

    (E) Israel has nothing to do with it.  Regardless of whether Israel is good or bad, Syria is a violent, evil regime.  Are you saying we should let Syria kill all the people it wants because Israel is worse?  Again, what kind of logic is that?

    Posted by Aaron from Ohio  on  10/27  at  07:56 AM

  11. RE #7, there are other options besides supporting and overthrowing. The problem with proposing them is that they are both far off the radar of popular discussion and not in any way, shape or form what the people running the U.S. of A. want to do.

    RE #10, I fully admit to not being the most knowledgeable about this but if Syria is supporting proxies at a larger rate instead of formally occupying, how much of a positive is it that Syria formally left? Also, when did Syria have ties with the Phalange?

    Posted by micah holmquist from Cadillac, Michigan, United States  on  10/27  at  03:41 PM

  12. >"They have killed and tortured thousands of Lebanese directly. “

    And what evidence is offered in support of this assertion?

    >"Over the decades, at different times, they have armed the Phalangists, the Palestinians, Amal, Hizbollah and others.”

    Hezbollah?  So fucking what?  What could have Hezbollah have done with the arms?  Driving the IDF out of Lebanon in 2000?  I see the light!  What an evil regime!  Aiding to end a brutal, 22 year foreign occupation.  They’ve got fucking cheek, huh?  Today, as far as I know, Hezbollah retains a small fighting force and they fire anti-aircraft guns at Israeli air intrusions (a daily occurance) and occasionally battle the Israeli army in the occupied Shebba Farms area.

    >"They have kept the country in or on the verge of civil war since the 1970s. “

    Actually Syria was in Lebanon (at the behest of the entire rest of the Arab World) because those Lebanese kids couldn’t seem to stop killing each other without adult (Syrian) supervision.

    >"Two months before Hariri was killed, Bashar Assad summoned him to Syria, set him down, gave him his orders, and said if Hariri misbehaved, “I will break you.” Hariri didn’t obey, and he was killed.  Is this really “benign colonialism” ?”

    So who benefited from Hariri’s assassination? The only thing Syria got from Hariri’s assassination were mass demonstrations organized by anti-Syrian political forces demanding they withdraw their troops from the country, increased threats from Washington of anti-Syrian military aggression, and the possibility of Lebanon descending into civil war.

    The powers that most clearly stood to advance their aims by having Hariri assassinated and blaming the crime on Syria are obviously the US and Israel. Given these facts, and Israel’s long history of utilizing assassination as an instrument of state policy and blaming them on its enemies (I can list dozens of documented events proving this), I am convinced Israel did it.

    Your scenario is possible, but unless the Syrian regime is suicidal, I think it is highly unlikely. Say what you will about the Baathist regime in Damascus, but they are committed to their own survival and their leaders are not insane.

    >"Regardless of whether Israel is good or bad, Syria is a violent, evil regime.  Are you saying we should let Syria kill all the people it wants because Israel is worse?  Again, what kind of logic is that?”

    Rather than support Syria, I oppose imperialist-Zionist “regime change” in Syria since it is obviously an imperialist-Zionist plot. Not that I have any love for the regime. I will say however that Syria is one of the last patriotic Arab hold-outs, one of the last Middle Eastern states to stand up to the US-Zionist World Dictatorship and its rampages and bullying.  Syria, with all the faults, is one of the last patriotic Arab countries. They rest have basically surrendered to Zionist-imperialist onslaught and are owned.

    Posted by sam from  on  10/27  at  09:19 PM

  13. One more thing: YES! You ARE a fucked up, disgusting, and vile creature (I don’t want to call you human, you’re less than that) for saying you support sancitons which do NOTHING but punish the helpless poor.  Roughly 1.7 million Iraqis died from the deprivation directly caused by more than a decade of economic sanctions (1 million of these innocent victims were children under the age of 5), and you “have no problem with this?” Well, #### you, asshole.

    Secondly, your logic to justify use of sanctions was idiotic at best.  The sanctions actually facilitated Saddam’s control over the population, partly because of food rationing and partly because the Iraqi government was able to use sanctions as an excuse for its own shortcomings. They also enabled Saddam to appear as the elemental battler for Iraq against the rest of the world. The way to inflict maximum damage on Saddam’s regime would have been to lift the sanctions immediately. Depriving average Iraqis of food and medicine only hurts the helpless.

    Posted by sam from  on  10/28  at  01:19 AM

  14. It’s hard to believe anyone would defend Syria.  You really need documentation of Syrian massacres and torture?  A Google search on “Syria” and “torture” comes up with 2.3 million hits.  Why don’t you look at some of them?  Look at Amnesty International’s web page.  Look at Human Rights Watch.  I’ll give you a few places to start:

    This one lists a number of massacres and other atrocities committed by the Syrians in Lebanon.  Note:  It has some very graphic pictures of patriotic Syrians killing people. 
    http://www.lgic.org/en/help_syria_terrorism.php

    Here’s a good one on Syrian torture:
    http://www.lgic.org/en/help_syria_terrorism.php

    Lebanese political prisoners held in Syria:
    http://www.asianews.it/dos.php?l=en&dos=&art=2899

    Benign and patriotic:
    http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE240172003?open&of=ENG-SYR

    Nice people:
    http://www.mideastinfo.com/documents/Amnesty/lebanon.pdf

    The dead people must have deserved it:
    http://www.meib.org/articles/0001_l1.htm

    The Syrians killed 30,000+ of their own citizens at Hama.  But in Lebanon, the same army was “patriotic” and “benign?”

    You’re also wrong about Hizbollah, and you ignore Syria’s other proxies in Lebanon - the Palestinians.  Between the two of them, they have enough tanks, rockets and manpower to fight the Lebanese army to a standstill.  The weapons come from Syria and Iran, which are destabilizing Lebanon out of patriotism.

    Again, Israel has nothing to do with it.  It doesn’t matter whether Israel is bad.  What matters here is that SYRIA is bad.  Measuring by body counts, Syria is far, far worse.  Pushing Syrian out of Lebanon is an absolute good.  Israel may benefit (although not to any great extent), but more important, the Lebanese will benefit.

    I can’t debate about this any more.  I just don’t have the time.  Do some reading, and please stop swearing at strangers on the internet.

    Mr. Holmquist:  keep up the good work.  I don’t agree with very much that gets said on this web page, but I think you’re a good writer, and you often have something interesting to say.

    Posted by Aaron from Ohio  on  10/28  at  01:48 AM

  15. Oh, and I never said ANYTHING one way or another about sanctions in Iraq.  I never said whether I was for or against.  So I’m not sure how I got to be a monster on this point.  And I’m not sure how my logic to support sanctions in Iraq was childish.  Did you read what I said?  Basically you’re just doing a whole lot of swearing for nothing. 

    Stop swearing at strangers on the internet.  It’s childish and cowardly.

    Posted by Aaron from Ohio  on  10/28  at  02:08 AM

  16. I went to your “objective” links.  At least one of them did not work.  The others were equally laughable.  LGIC?  Some Phalangist sectarian propaganda site?  Got any real sources?  Some cherry-picked Amnesty International link about AI fearing Syria would torture some captured LF militiaman?  This is your proof?

    >"A Google search on “Syria” and “torture” comes up with 2.3 million hits.  “

    So? That’s pretty meaningless.  One could google any combination of nation-states and inhumane practices and achieve a similar result.  Here, I googled “Aaron from Ohio is an idiot.” 218,000 results.  Must be true, right?

    >"You’re also wrong about Hizbollah”

    That’s nice. But usually when you make such a claim you accompany it with a structured rebuttal of why it’s idiotic. Of course, this is something only intelligent people do. In that case, I’ll have to acquit you.

    >"Measuring by body counts, Syria is far, far worse.”

    Prove it.

    >"Oh, and I never said ANYTHING one way or another about sanctions in Iraq.  I never said whether I was for or against.  “

    You: “My own impulse is that intervention is often better.  This is not to say we should have invaded Iraq, but I have no problems with the US using diplomacy or sanctions once in a while. “

    Have you considered working for Fox News?

    Posted by sam from  on  10/28  at  03:46 AM

  17. Life is too short to deal with nasty people who can’t control their tempers.

    Posted by Aaron from Ohio  on  10/30  at  01:39 AM
    18. Commenting is not available in this weblog entry. {/if}

    Next entry: Georgie Best Died 30 Years Ago

    Previous entry: The Right to Armed Struggle (In memory of Filiberto Ojeda Rios)

    [ads]

    Support Press Action