Thursday, March 03, 2005

In the hands of justice

In the last few Weeks, I didn't write any think in politics, because I found that my point of view is annoying to some of you, and I was, and still very keen to conserve your friendship. But those days there is a lot of things that deserve to be written, so I have to rewrite again in politics!

In the last 2 weeks, and almost on daily bases, Nineveh TV shows us a group of people arrested by the Iraqi police (IP), Iraqi national guards (ING), or the Iraqi army. They classify those people as terrorists, they confessed on the TV that they killed so many people , beheaded some, kidnapped, and raped others. Their number was about 85 or more. But the terrorism actions are still going on. Yes I know.......There are more to be caught!.

Some of them confessed that they received 200$ for every person they killed, some have fixed salary of 1500$ a month, Just to do what they were asked to do. Who paid those money? It is a question who need an answer.

The thing that made me write this post is that; during a recorded interview on the TV, some of those terrorists give the names of the persons they had killed but some of the names were proved to be fallacious, they gave the names and addresses of living persons who have no relation to anything as being killed. (the names given were proved to be of some of their relatives).!!! Very strange, I think.

In addition, in the interview on TV, they looked if they have underwent a severe torture. The person who made the interview with them always hide himself, and insult them with offensive words. They always repeated what he want them to say, If they say something different or not allowed he either mute the sound, or asked the questions again till they get the desired answer.

Those things make the audience suspicious about the truth!

In another interview on the TV with the commander of the (Qowat al-Theeb), it means in Arabic (The wolf force), the reporter asked him if he did fabricate those interviews?. But he denied that and insisted that everything was real. In addition, he (the commander) asked those people whose names are mentioned as being killed to represent themself to the authorities.

From the interviews and the conversations, anybody can concluded that there were two types of prisoners. The terrorists and the Jihadis.

You can recognize between the two from the type of their missions.
The jihadis never kill policemen or the civilians.

The terrorist did what they did to frighten the people, or for their own interest, to gain money by the easiest way available in those days.

They blamed the Syrian Mukhabarat for assisting and paying the salary of those terrorist (I thing this a type of pressure is against Syrian government for some dirty political reasons.)

As the condition is not very clear for me, I promise to update the subject when I get more information.

BTW, the commander says: "They are the Iraqi forces who did this great job."
There were an old rumors that the Americans freed the prisoners who didn't attack them who had been caught by the Iraqi police. This is really happened when the police arresed some of the criminals, the Americans took those criminal and freed them the next day after interrogated them and be sure they didn't attacked them. The Americans claimed that they have no place to keep those criminals. So they let them free!!!!. they are only interested in the terrorists (those who attacked them!).

After they have been displayed on the TV, and confess on air everything is settled, nobody can free them or blame the Americans any more.

You remember how we divided those people into 4 groups. But now we can divide them into only two.
1-The jihadis. (group of men fight to free their country)
2-Tthe terrorists which includes the other three groups (the criminals, saddams men, and those who are paid by foriegn country to ruin Iraq!)


Anonymous said...

"There were an old rumors that the Americans freed the prisoners who didn't attack them who had been caught by the Iraqi police. This is really happened when the police arresed some of the criminals, the Americans took those criminal and freed them the next day after interrogated them and be sure they didn't attacked them. The Americans claimed that they have no place to keep those criminals. So they let them free!!!!. they are only interested in the terrorists (those who attacked them!)."

Many criminals are set free because the proof is not of a high enough quality. In the west it is believed better to release 10 suspected criminals than to mistakenly punish one innocent. Without indisputable evidence or testimony even the most evil and vile people are set free.

Anonymous said...

You still think that there is more Jihadis..... I am an Iraqi..but I think we have differint view points and that won't effect our friendship I don't think there is any Jihadis right now , even if there is one , I think he will quit if he is a REAL Iraqi
he can't stand seeing the Jihad getting bad review with people let's be real, Frankly , if this Mujahid understand that the americans are going to be SO BAD with people, as a reaction of course, he would never attack an American....
bye and keep in touch


strykeraunt said...

Your comment that the US soldiers are freeing the prisoners who the IP have arrested because the US is only concerned about the prisoners who attack them does not make sense to me. Are you saying that terrorist don't attack the American soldiers? And the Jihadis don't attack Iraquis?

If you look at the two groups that you identified, it appears that both have a mission to attack US soldiers. And what about the mess hall bombing in December? The mess hall was used by both the American soldier and the Iraq National Guard. Was it a terrorists or a Jihadi (under your definition) who blew himself up in order to take the lives of both Americans and Iraquis?

Your conclusion that the terrorists are the criminals, saddams men, and those who are paid by foriegn country to ruin Iraq, is NOT in conflict with my beliefs. However, I would also add Bin Laden's buddies to that group. What is confusing to me with the classification is, if they are not coming through Syria, and not paid by Syria, from which foreign country do you think they are being paid? Or, are you saying that they are not coming across the Syria border but some other foreign border?

In regards to the the Jihadi group of men who fight to free their country, I can believe that there are individuals who do not directly attack Iraqius, but focus more on attacks against the US soldiers. I get the idea that you consider them to be the "good guys." While I know very little about the Quran, I am having a hard time believing that the intent of Jihad is what is even close to what is occuring under its name today. If these Iraquis that you call Jihadis are trying to free Iraq from the "U.S. occupation" then we are in what some Americans would call a "catch 22." The American soldier will not leave Iraq until the Iraquis can take care of their own security, and Iraq will not be secure until the situation with the terrorists and Jihadis is under control.

I frequently read the blog of a soldiers who recently returned to the US after serving in Mosul for a year. There are many entries in his blog where he talks about his best Iraqi friend Samir. Samir was an interpreter who would call the local media in Mosul to inform them about schools opening etc. He was also a husband and a father. Last September Samir was gunned down (shot in the back) in the streets of the same area he where he was born. Samir was captured by terrorists while on his way to work. He escaped from his captures and as he ran through the streets he kept asking for help. The people on the streets told him to get away you work for the Americans. After Samir was killed by his captures, he laid on the street for hours before anybody notified the American soldier. Some of his fellow countrymen chose to let his body rot in the street because he worked for Americans. Its ironic because he held a job as an interpretor for the Americans but the reality is he was working for the future of the people of Iraq. Samir loved his country and wanted to help create a free Iraq. He knew the risks because other Iraquis before him had also made the ultimate sacrifice. Please explain to me how the treatment of Samir by his countrymen is consistent with what the Quran teaches... Please explain to me why the American soldiers who worked with Samir seem to be the one's who also deeply mourn his loss. Even though I only know Samir through the writings of this American soldier, it just rips my heart out that this great man who loved his country would be treated in such a horrible way by his countrymen. What kind of logical explanation can there be for this???

just me said...

Don't worry if your opinion is annoying to some. It's your opinion and you have the right to it. I may not always agree with you, and I honestly question some of your opinions, but you're the one living the experiences, so call it as you see it. Besides for us Americans, we can't honestly say we want to know what Iraqis think if we then complain when they tell us. I try to read both the pessimistic and anti-american Iraqi blogs as well as the optimistic and pro-american iraqi blogs. You seem to be somewhere in the middle. But you also seem to be honest in your assessments whether positive or negative, and I appreciate that.

Heiko said...

There may be many people out there in Iraq who are killing American soldiers mainly out of "patriotism", and because they think that is the best way to help Iraq become a better nation. Others may be doing it because they honestly think that killing American soldiers is an act of self-defense that perfectly meshes with the call to Jihad (the lesser rather than the greater Jihad of getting closer to God).

However, if these are the objectives is "armed resistance" the best way of achieving them?

To me, even if the motives are right, it seems ineffective and/or counterproductive. Killing American soldiers "fair and square" somewhere out in the desert, where there are no civilians, or in the city, but clearly identifying yourself as a combatant, means a quick trip to the grave and most likely no dead American soldiers. Attacks via car bombs in civilian cars etc... are the reason why American soldiers shoot wildly at anything that moves, when they feel threatened.

The cost of attacking American soldiers is very high, particularly for Iraq. Yet, what is the true benefit to anyone?

Peaceful protest and action now carries much smaller potential costs than under Saddam, and is so much more likely to bear some positive fruit, why not try this first and foremost? Rather than violence that to my eye at least, seems to have only one consequence, suffering for Iraqis and to a lesser degree everybody else. For example, I'd love to come for a holiday to Iraq, or to do voluntary work there, as I did in Northern Ireland over ten years ago (to meet people, make friends learn English, and yes also to do my bit to make our world a better place), but I can't and while the "criminals" (and the cut-off between what's "criminal" and "acceptable" resistance is not all that straightforward) may be mostly responsible, the actions of the well intentioned "resistance" that involve bombs and shootings and killings, do contribute, and be it by focusing their efforts on American soldiers, rather than beheaders and hostage takers. Any "armed resistance" to my mind just turns Iraq even more into a war zone, and therefore makes it harder for people to help, to enjoy holidays, to travel, to live their lives in peace. Why do that, if other methods would seem to be so much more appropriate, less costly and more effective than "armed resistance"?

慢慢來 said...