Tuesday, July 26, 2005

Abu Ghraib again ...!!!

This is an email I received today. It seemed to me as if Abu Ghraib scandal repeated it self. I publish it to let the world see and understand what is going on at dark.

Citizens for Fair Legislation
For Immediate Release
July 25, 2005
********************************
CFL ALERT: BUSH ADMINISTRATION TO LOBBY AGAINST LEGISLATION THAT WOULD BAR TORTURE AND INHUMANE TREATMENT OF PRISONERS.

This weekend the Pentagon blocked images from Abu Ghraib, in violation of a federal court order, that have been described by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld as "blatantly sadistic, cruel and inhumane." Republican Senators who have seen the images said they contained scenes of "rape and murder." The Pentagon refuses to release these images on the basis that it is bad PR for the United States. This
comes at the heels of intensive lobbying efforts by the Bush administration to block legislation that would bar the U.S. military from engaging in "cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment" of detainees, from hiding prisoners from the Red Cross, and from using interrogation methods not authorized by a new Army field manual. Take a moment to send our prewritten letter to the President and to your Representatives telling them that you are appalled that the American public is being kept in the dark about the abuse of Iraqi detainees and that you are outraged that the President is refusing to take measures to ensure these abuses don't occur again.

TALKING POINTS:
* A military report on the abuse at Abu Ghraib states that the images the Pentagon is blocking show detainees being threatened, sodomized with chemical lights and forced into sexually humiliating poses. After viewing these images, Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina told reporters, "'The American public needs to understand
we're talking about rape and murder here. We're not just talking about giving people a humiliating experience." A report by Maj. Gen. Antonio Taguba on the abuse says videotapes and photos also show naked detainees forced to masturbate while being photographed and videotaped, of guards having sex with female detainees, young boys
being sodomized and Iraqi women forced to expose their breasts for American soldiers. New York Times reporter, Seymour Hersh, who helped uncover the scandal, said in a speech before an ACLU convention:
"...There are women there. Some of you may have read they were passing letters, communications to their men....The women were passing messages saying 'Please come and kill me, because of what's happened.
...Boys were sodomized with the cameras rolling. The worst about all of them is the soundtrack of the boys shrieking that your government has. They are in total terror it's going to come out."

*Last week Vice President Cheney met with Republican Senators that publicly expressed frustration about the administration's failure to hold senior military officials responsible for the abuse and torture at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo. At that meeting Cheney stated his opposition to congressional intervention regarding the treatment of
detainees at either Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo. Later the White House issued a statement stating that President Bush would veto a $442 billion defense bill if representatives continued to attempt to impose restrictions on what the military can and cannot do to detainees.
That statement appeared to be directed at Republican Sen. John McCain who began circulating a letter to look into legislation that would outline the treatment of detainees held by the U.S. military. Sen. McCain's provisions would require that all foreign nationals in U.S. custody be registered with the Red Cross and would also prohibit "cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment" of anyone in U.S. custody.

*Please take a moment to write to your representatives to express outrage at the treatment of Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib and tell them that you resent that the Pentagon is keeping the American public in the dark about what is happening in Iraq. Tell the President that you expect him to stop taking measures in support of the crimes that happened at Abu Ghraib. By blocking legislation meant to prevent
torture, rape and cruel and unusual punishment the White House is clearly indicating approval for the barbaric treatment of men, women and children held in U.S. run detention centers.

EMAIL AND OR CALL THE WHITE HOUSE
WHITE HOUSE COMMENTS LINE: 202-456-1111
WHITE HOUSE SWITCHBOARD: 202-456-1414
WHITE HOUSE FAX: 202-456-2461
===============================
Citizens for Fair Legislation is a grassroots organization committed to encouraging a fair domestic and foreign policy with an emphasis on the US/Arab world.
http://www.cflweb.org


Please take it seriously and do what your moralistic principle ask you to do.

96 comments:

Lisa, New York said...

Correction. It didn't "repeat itself". This press release is talking about simply more of the same set of pictures, taken by the same group of soldiers, at the same time 2 years ago (Autumn of 2003). It's not a new set of pictures. All of these pictures were seen last year by members of Congress and used in prosecutions.

Maddog said...

This is a link to an orginal NY Times article detailing just what you have listed.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/23/politics/23abuse.html?

The article began:

"Lawyers for the Defense Department are refusing to cooperate with a federal judge's order to release secret photographs and videotapes related to the Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal.

The lawyers said in a letter sent to the federal court in Manhattan late Thursday that they would file a sealed brief explaining their reasons for not turning over the material, which they were to have released by yesterday."

This is a link to the "correction" of the original story.

http://www.nytimes.com/ref/pageoneplus/corrections.html

The "correction" states:

"An article on Saturday about a federal judge's order regarding photographs and videotapes related to the Abu Ghraib prison scandal misstated a deadline and the response by Defense Department lawyers. The government was given until Friday to black out some identifying details in the material, not to release it. Defense Department lawyers met that deadline, but asked the court to block the public release of the materials. They did not refuse to cooperate with an order for the materials' release."

This may explain the lengths that the left will go to distort the truth. As you can see, it didn't take a second for them to react. I wonder if the "Citizens for Fair Legislation" will offer a correction of their statement? Any bets? We'll see.

The "Citizens for Fair Legislation" certainly do have an agenda (http://www.cflweb.org/)

Their latest statement includes:

"CFL condemns the attacks that took place in London yesterday. We are all saddened by the loss of life and senseless acts of violence that occur around the world today in the name of religion. It is important for all to realize that Muslims and Islam have nothing to do with these attacks and should not be viewed as part of the problem."

This is an issue concerning many of us in the west. While we are concerned about "terrorism", it seems that while it is certainly true that not all Muslims are terrorists, a great, great, many of the terrorists are Muslims. To say as does CFL that Muslims are not a part of the problem seems innapropiate.

Maddog

Dan said...

Please see my comment on the family blog. I read it first as I thought this blog was going to focus on medical supplies.

I guess not.

---Dan

Dan said...

TT:

Here is an idea: Why don't you do a post outlining what you think should be done to stabilize your country and bring an end to hostilities. I know that your entire family is very well educated. You all either have advanced college degrees or are studying hard toward eventual graduation.

I will be more than glad to hear your learned solution(s).

---Dan

John said...

The stabilization of Iraq requires the immediate withdrawal of all occupation forces, an admission of wrong doing, an apology for conducting an illegal war, destroying Iraq's infrastructure and murdering thousands of innocent civilians. And of course billions of dollars to be paid for reparations!

Bush should stand trail as a war criminal along with Cheney and the entire board of Haliburton/Kellog for illegal profiteering!!

Lisa, New York said...

"Look, dear. It's a loon nesting ground. Aren't the loons lovely?"

:-)

Moron99 said...

Sorry John, ain't gonna happen. Wealthy baathi have 30 years of stolen national treasure in their bank accounts. It is enough wealth to topple the government prior to the deployment of an effective ISF officer corps. MNF is not going to withdraw prematurely and they are not going to pay reparations that will ultimately be used to further pad baathi bank accounts. Reparations are and will continue to take the form of rebuilding contracts in areas that are out of insurgent reach. Maybe you have a "plan B"?

If not, then we'll just have to keep arguing, while the baathi continue stalling tactics, destabilization, sabatauge, intimidation, and deflecting attention from their real goals. Which is fine for the governemnt. It gives them time to develop the officers they need. As I have said before, the sufferring of common Iraqi will continue until the cost of killing becomes more than the wealthy baathi are willing to pay.

John said...

I've heard that point raised and argued before Lisa, but I'm not sure if the "Loon" position would be considered by any reasonable or independent tribunal overseeing Bushs war crimes as a legitimate defense! True, when wars are demonstrably illegal and the consequence is untold innocent death, the "mastermind" (bit of a misnomer here) of such agression would likely claim mental incompetence or incapacity, but when the consequences of that dementia are so dramatically inhumane and destructive I doubt any court would consider insanity or "Loonism" to be a reasonable or accepted excuse!

That was the conclusion of a recent forum I attended that raised the same argument! Perhaps you could provide additional information that might lend support to Bush's insanity defense other than he's just looney???

jemyr said...

We'll continue medical discussions on the thread below for now. You guys can debate up here.

Lisa, New York said...

That was the conclusion of a recent forum I attended that raised the same argument!

Oh, so you were at the Loon Convention. How'd that go? Did you accomplish anything?

strykerdad said...

I'll bet John's 'forum' was something more properly described as a cross between a Star Trek convention and a Communist Party reeducation camp. You know, Moveon.org type get togethers.

johninnz said...

" ... Sen. McCain's provisions would require that all foreign nationals in U.S. custody be registered with the Red Cross and would also prohibit "cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment" of anyone in U.S. custody."
I remember reading with outrage of McCain's treatment at the hands of the North Vietnamese. Unlike Lisa, Maddog, Strykerdad, etc, he obviously knows what he is talking about. And doesn't approve of it.
I would be very ashamed of my country's troops if they behaved like the North Vietnamese. Or if they drove around in somebody else's country shooting at motorists who got too close to them, or looked suspicious, like the Iraqi Police General recently accidentally murdered by a passing US convoy.
No wonder the British soldiers are grudgingly respected in the South. And the US troops hated in the centre.

Bruno said...

Moron99 –


[m99] “Reparations are and will continue to take the form of rebuilding contracts in areas that are out of insurgent reach.”

Hmm. Yes, building contracts that were imposed upon the Iraqis by the US; building contracts which have soaked up billions of Iraqi dollars, together with other US ‘expenses’; building contracts that do not even go a fraction of the way towards restoring Iraqi infrastructure to the standards that it was before the sanctions and bombing that YOUR country so vicariously supported.

Here’s a measure of the progress of your wonderful rebuilding contracts:


Despite $2 Billion Spent, Residents say Baghdad is Crumbling
by Leila Fadel - July 26, 2005 - Knight Ridder

BAGHDAD - Talib Abu Younes put his lips to a glass of tap water recently and watched worms swimming in the bottom.

Electricity flickers on and off for two hours in Muthana Naim's south Baghdad home then shuts off for four in boiling July heat that shoots above 120 degrees. Fadhel Hussein boils buckets of sewage-contaminated water from the Tigris River to wash the family's clothes. The capital is crumbling around angry Baghdadis. Narrow concrete sewage pipes decay underground and water pipes leak out more than half the drinking water before it ever reaches a home, according to the U.S. military.
[...]
After nearly two years and hundreds of millions of dollars' worth of repairs to rebuild Iraq's crumbling power grid, electricity production remains below pre-war levels, according to State Department figures. (REUTERS/Namir Noor-Eldeen)

(Sidenote: Am I the only one who remembered the trumpeting by the US that the electricity production in Iraq had surpassed pre war levels? Methinks I smell the decaying carcass of yet another lie … )

But, of course, we all know that rebuilding is a HUGE PRIORITY for the Americans. Why the country is simply overrun with construction workers setting aright the war damage. I mean, look at this article excerpt from last year:


Harper's Magazine, September 2004 – Naomi Klein

“I had traveled to Iraq a year after the war began, at the height of what should have been a construction boom, but after weeks of searching I had not seen a single piece of heavy machinery apart from tanks and humvees. Then I saw it: a construction crane. It was big and yellow and impressive, and when I caught a glimpse of it around a corner in a busy shopping district I thought that I was finally about to witness some of the reconstruction I had heard so much about. But as I got closer I noticed that the crane was not actually rebuilding anything - not one of the bombed-out government buildings that still lay in rubble all over the city, nor one of the many power lines that remained in twisted heaps even as the heat of summer was starting to bear down. No, the crane was hoisting a giant billboard to the top of a three-story building. SUNBULA: HONEY 100% NATURAL, made in Saudi Arabia.” //end excerpt


Well now, that’s a little harsh perhaps. Perhaps THIS YEAR Baghdad is overflowing with reconstruction efforts:


Patrick Cockburn
Iraq: This is now an unwinnable conflict – 24 07 05 – The Independent

“The government, whose members seldom emerge from the Green Zone, make bizarre efforts to pretend that there are signs of a return to normality. Last week a pro-government newspaper had an article on the reconstruction of Baghdad. Above the article was a picture of a crane at a building site. But there are no cranes at work in Baghdad so the paper had been compelled to use a photograph of a crane which has been rusting for more than two years, abandoned at the site of a giant mosque that Saddam Hussein was constructing when he was overthrown.” //end excerpt

Uh, yeah, maybe NEXT year, when those stingy Iraqis have given even MORE oil revenues to the compassionate and hardworking Bechtel and Halliburton, maybe next year, we might see some progress.

Really, Moron99, do you want to go into the details of WHY the reconstruction efforts are a complete and utter flop? Do you want to go into the details of HOW Iraq’s money was spent (such as can still be ascertained) ? We can go there if you like, and we can drag out all the gory details that explain why Iraqis are drinking water with worms in it.


[M99] “If not, then we'll just have to keep arguing, while the baathi continue stalling tactics, destabilization, sabatauge [sic] , intimidation, and deflecting attention from their real goals. Which is fine for the governemnt [sic]. It gives them time to develop the officers they need.”

The officers they need to do what, exactly? Kill Sunnis? Kill Kurds? Kill Shia? Export the Revolution to Saudi Arabia? You realise that the US jaunt into Iraq is tearing the country apart into ethnic factions, don’t you?

So … I can only assume, then, that the US (and you, by your comments) is happy to assist the Iranian efforts at consolidating its control over Iraq. I can only assume that you are impressed with the trampling of women’s rights, secular freedoms and the burning / assassination of music stores, barbers, alcohol vendors, CD outlets and so forth. I bet that you are really proud that the US military has managed to extend the Islamic Revolution into Iraq. I bet that Ayatollah Khomenei is guffawing in his grave …

I can hear that you are protesting that these consequences were not what the US had planned for Iraq. Yet, these consequences were entirely predictable (and predicted), and, what’s worse, the US presence is exacerbating ethnic tensions and the violence. Your country is exploiting the divisions created within Iraqi society in order to prolong its occupation.

You are responsible for the mess.


Dan --

[dan] “Please see my comment on the family blog. I read it first as I thought this blog was going to focus on medical supplies. I guess not.”

Dan, the previous POST was the medical post. This is something else. Do try to keep up.


Truth Teller --

I think that in fact this is not a fresh round of horrors from Abu Ghraib, but people who are asking that more of the thousands of pictures from Abu Ghraib be released for public interest. Naturally what we have seen is only the tip of the iceberg, and doubtless the full extent of the scandal will start to seep through if too many pictures and videos are released. The fact that some of the abuse photos were used OPENLY as computer SCREENSAVERS in some sectors of the US military tells me that many more people than the half dozen or so that were punished were in fact involved. I have read the Taguba Report and there are clear references to rape in it. I suggest that you take a look at it yourself, some time. (I have a copy if you like.)

Moron99 said...

Nice try bruno. Too bad you had to change the entire meaning of my words in order to argue against them. If you ask me, it only reinforces the my base assertions when the counter-point strives to avoid them.

Bruno said...

"Change the entire meaning?"

In what way, pray?

Please, elucidate for us my alleged distortions, and then we shall see. Otherwise its just hot air

Moron99 said...

Bruno,
You ignored "out of insurgent reach" and you embarked upon a disingenous rant attempting to link the US to Iranian meddling.

I clearly when Iraqi sufferring would end. If the wealthy baathi are unwilling to accept any other path, then the Iraqi officers will make the price of sedition and killing too expensive for affluent baathi to bear. The choice lies not with the government, the sunni, the shia, the kurd, or the US. The choice of war versus peace lies in the hands of affluent baathi. It is only a matter of time until they have no more choice.

consider this:
The baathi coordinate the smuggling routes for people and explosives. They pay someone to build a bomb and another to steal a gas tanker. They pay a third to park the tanker in the streets of Musayyib. Then they hand a bomb belt and a map to the Queda. Yes, Queda did the act. But without baathi it would be impossible to happen. Which baathi have enough power and money to make all these things congeal into a single explosion?

Dan said...

Truth Teller said: "This is a good idea, I agree with you. Let's limit this post just for medical supplies." So "Truth Teller" posts about something that happened a couple of years ago. No wonder they call him "Truth Twister" on other blogs.

John:

How are your efforts to establish international non-American channels for the delivery of medical supplies coming?

And where is Hurriah? Is she posting under the name "Bruno" now?

---Dan

strykeraunt said...

Dan, I can see where a person could have miss understood. When I spoke of limiting the post to just medical supplies, I was just referring to the "Horror Story" post. I prefer to each article as a "post" not the entire blog site. I believe that Truthteller was referring to the same as I when he said, "Let's limit this post just for medical supplies." While I cannot get inside of the mind of Truthteller, I truly believe that he had no ill intend or deception on his mind when he made that statement agreeing with my suggestion. Sorry if I was the cause of any confusion.

jemyr said...

Incidentally guys, for those of you who can't afford to donate, I'm trying to track down a service that can ship referigerated goods from the airports in either Basra, Baghdad, or Ankara (in Turkey).

Your research would be helpful. Please post your results in the" Horror Story" post below. Also, TT, if you can think of any good refrigerated shipping companies that might be able to ship reliably to your hospital, let me know.

jemyr said...

Oh, I would prefer this not be military or US or NGO shipping companies. I'm pretty certain I can find a military organization that will provide this service to me, but this doesn't represent a long term shipping solution for the hospital. It would be preferable if we could set up something that the hospital could use as a permanent solution to their procurement problems. Of course, in the short term, we will use anything. But a long term solution would be better.

That way, all they have to do is get the MOH to pay the company directly, and everyone involved knows how to properly fill the order and ship it.

Rachel in London said...

I see that, for Americans, the reality depicted by the Abu Ghraib pictures is, verily, the 300lb gorilla in the room that everyone is pretending not to notice.

I have skimmed these comments and, so far, have not seen even one word of regret or contrition or horror from the Americans. Yet, I know from other media, you all know that these pictures represent faithfully what actually happened - were not faked. You are so in denial about the atrocities perpetrated in Iraq by your people, again and again, and in many places - your dishonesty is absolutely revolting.

Moron99 said...

rachel, no one denies what happened nor is anyone proud if it. But to be frank - the only reason people like you dwell upon it is simply because it has not happenned again. You onjections to something that happenned two years ago with nary a word about what is still happenning every day is a form of hypocrisy. The children maimed, the gas tanker exploding, the water lines and electrical system sabatauged, the arms caches intended for the next election, the assasinations, the kidnappings, the assasinations, the bombings, the shootings, the corruption ... all of that occurs daily and yet you never utter a word. That is true hypocrisy and true dishonesty.

Dan said...

Strikeraunt:

Thankyou for correcting me.

Truth Teller:

I offer my apologies for my misunderstanding.

Moron99:

I second your comment to Rachel-in-London.

---Dan

Crazygirl said...

Moron99, if you will recall, cameras were immediately banned from all prisons right after the Abu Ghraib scandal. For that reason, it's virtually guaranteed that no future photos will ever show abuse again, just because from here on out, there will never be any future photos of anything, period. However, what I personally think is the most disturbing issue is that the Bush admin would lobby against antitorture law now. I have yet to hear any good reason why anyone would go against such legislation. Even other members of the GOP are for it and rightly so. What has gone before cannot be changed but we should at least make every effort to make the appropriate moves now to try to rectify the situation. We as a country should clearly make our stand now that we are against torture.

olivebranch said...

I hit the media about Khalid, and I will hit the media about this also!

Your stories will get out. KEEP THEM ROLLING.

Pebble said...

Thanks and Hats Off to the level headed commentors such as Maddog & Dan!
This is the last thing certain inhuman people need to hear about AGAIN!

johninnz said...

Moron99, in his post at 2.06 am above, unintentionally sums up for us the essence of the US right-wing stance, when he complains about the Resistance tactics as a way of defending US tactics.
Mate, none of us out here in the real world defend or approve of Resistance activities that harm innocent civilians. But neither do we defend or approve of US tactics that harm innocents, be they the torture of "suspects" in prison, indiscriminate bombing, or casual shooting of Iraqi motorists.
If you can't show yourselves to be better, more moral, more civilised, more restrained than the terrorists, then you are no better than they are.
(The British, with very few lapses, have shown that an Army of Occupation can behave in a civilised way. Why can't you? Because of your leadership?)
It seems to me that this is what Truthteller and other Iraqi bloggers are saying: You didn't HAVE to come and "liberate" us. We posed no threat to you - your conquest of our country was entirely optional. So why haven't you "liberated" us properly? You are the mightiest power in the world - why have you made such a mess of Iraq? Why didn't you anticipate the insurgency, and prepare to contain it? You took total charge of our nation - where are our rebuilt hospitals and power stations, where is our security and safety? You became responsible for us - after the invasion we had no say in our future, Bremer decided everything.
Two years of US "liberation" has killed more of us than two decades of Saddam.
Why didn't you do it right?
(Am I correct, Truthteller? Is that how you feel?)

Bruno said...

Moron99 --

Your rant is long on speculation and short on facts; I’ll give examples shortly.

The point IS: ‘reconstruction’, such as it is, has been pathetic and inadequate. Projects that the US HAS managed to complete have fallen to pieces almost as soon as they were commissioned. A prominent sewage treatment plant comes to mind. This shoddy workmanship is hardly the result of insurgent action. Furthermore, the reality is that the monies paying for this crap work comes from IRAQI funds, appropriated by the US through its cronies. These contracts were unilaterally IMPOSED by the US on Iraq, at prices established by the *contractors* without any input from the Iraqi people. Where I come from that is armed robbery. This of course does not even address the fact that enormous amounts of Iraqi cash has simply vanished into thin air under your country’s stewardship, amounts that make the UN oil scandal seem like boys stealing sweets from the corner café.

Now, given this gross mismanagement of the *cough* reconstruction *cough*, I ask the questions of (a) has Iraq gotten its moneys worth? (NO!) and (b) is it in the interests of Iraq that the US continues to *hrumph* ‘reconstruct’ (NO!). My point is that you have done nothing worthwhile on this front, and have in fact stolen large sums of money from Iraq.

Secondly, the US * started * this war, and it is YOUR continued presence that prolongs it. It’s like beating a rape victim and justifying the beating because she is ‘resisting’. Of course, if the victim ceases resisting, then she will be chained to your arm forever, but will receive medical attention and food in exchange. What a deal, huh?

Thirdly, my point is that the consequences of invasion were entirely predictable. It was entirely predictable that a Shiite majority government would win any democratic election hands down, and that Iran would virtually own the place. Which is why, of course, the US tried its hardest to avoid anything approximating free elections. Nevertheless, now the predicted Shiite government is ‘in power’ … and the army that you are training for it is going to be used to further their ends, not yours. Hey, look, if they feel different enough from the rest of Iraq that they want Sharia imposed, that’s not my problem, good for them. Kinda sad for Kurds and secular Iraqis though. Of course you do realise that this IS the ultimate aim of SCIRI et al, don’t you? You do realise that effectively the US army is killing Ba’athi, as you call them, so that Islamic fundamentalists can take over? I ask you: are YOU happy about this? Do YOU think that this is a good way for America to spend its blood and money?


Alright, back to your post. You allege that Ba’athists have 30 years of Iraqi wealth in their bank accounts. I assume of course, that you can prove this. In which case, perhaps you ought to contact the CIA; I can assure you that those accounts will be frozen faster than a spitball in Antarctica. Think, you could be a hero!

Secondly, while I don’t dispute that the Ba’ath bankroll, finance and even carry out some attacks on the US Army, the reality is that the Resistance movement has transcended the Ba’ath and comprises people from every layer of society. There are many interviews with guerrillas available in which they reject the Ba’ath together with the Americans. It is rather telling that the national struggle picked up pace once Saddam was captured, is it not? This is because many Iraqis refused to fight as long as there was a chance that they would be fighting for the return of Saddam. His capture was a shot in the arm for national resistance, because Iraqis could then feel that they were truly fighting for their own freedom.

Furthermore, as I have monotonously pointed out, the ‘Resistance’ is not confined to Sunnis, or Ba’athists. The Ba’ath party had large amounts of Shia within its ranks. The Sadrist movement is neither Ba’ath nor Sunni, but is still anti Occupation. It comprises of large numbers of poor Shia (ie- the opposite of wealthy Ba’athists) who likewise do not see the US as welcome in Iraq.

Your entire argument is thus based on a distortion and drastic simplification of the nature of the Resistance movement.

It’s like me saying that this occupation is the direct result of British machinations and that Britain wants to return Iraq to the old colonial days and if they would only stop bankrolling the occupation all would be well, while completely ignoring the US presence and input.

To cap off this whole sorry parade of your lack of knowledge of the reality in Iraq, may I mention that Allawi is both a Ba’athist and in the employ of the CIA. May I mention that the US has paid many members of the old Ba’athist Iraqis Mukhbarat to continue on their old ways, except this time for a new master? Really, who IS paying and bankrolling Ba’athists in Iraq? That’s right – the USA itself.

Here’s but one example:

Old brutality among new Iraqi forces
By Jill Carroll, The Christian Science Monitor - Posted 5/3/2005


" [...] And in a report issued in January, Human Rights Watch said that torture and abuse by Iraqi authorities had become "routine and commonplace." The report detailed methods of interrogation in which prisoners were beaten with cables and pipes, shocked, or suspended from their wrists for prolonged periods of time — tactics that are more associated with Saddam Hussein's dictatorship than the democracy that is beginning to take root in that country.
[...]
In fact, many of the old members of Saddam Hussein's security forces are filling the ranks of the new police units and security forces. And many of these hardened soldiers practiced in the brutality of his regime initially received no Western-style training, says Robert Perito, an expert on post conflict security at the US Institute of Peace. "In the long run, with the assistance of the US military unfortunately ... [we are creating] a security force which is very much like the old Saddam security forces," says Perito. "That's not what we set out to do." " //end excerpt


That’s not what they set out to do?

It seems strange to me that time and time again, the rhetoric is not matched by the reality on the ground. Makes me wonder if there is any connection between the two concepts … and it seems as if the Ba’athist – hating US is just fine with Ba’athists, as long as those Ba’athists are on ITS side.

Can anybody other than me smell the dank reek of HYPOCRISY rising from US policy?


Dan --

I assure you that Hurria and I are two different entities entirely. She is Iraqi, I am not. What we have in common is a serious distaste for the adventures America routinely undertakes at the expense of other nations and peoples. It may be, in that case, that our rhetoric sounds the same. Get over it. There are thousands of us out here.


John in New Zealand –

[jinz] “If you can't show yourselves to be better, more moral, more civilised, more restrained than the terrorists, then you are no better than they are.”

War Groupie Answer: “Ah, but rest assured, the end result will be simply delicious! You have to break a few eggs to make an omelette. The ends justify the means. We kill for peace. We had to destroy the village to save it … ETC, ETC.”

I suspect your post hit the nail on the head.

johninnz said...

Bruno:
Cheers mate. You know me by another name (Circular) in another Blog.
What emerges from your posts, heavy on apposite quotations as usual, is the following: the US appears to be creating in Iraq a fundamentalist Shia Muslim state, repressive of women and aligned with Iran; and not averse to using totalitarian methods such as arbitrary detention and torture.
(Or alternatively, a fractured state, with one third as above, one third a separatist Kurdish entity likely to cause ongoing friction with Turkey and Iran, and one third a devastated Sunni wilderness.)
Was this what it was all for, Moron101? Lisa? Strykerdad?
Your nation, and your President, are supposedly leaders of the free world. Where are you leading us, exactly?

johninnz said...

Bruno:
Cheers mate. You know me by another name (Circular) in another Blog.
What emerges from your posts, heavy on apposite quotations as usual, is the following: the US appears to be creating in Iraq a fundamentalist Shia Muslim state, repressive of women and aligned with Iran; and not averse to using totalitarian methods such as arbitrary detention and torture.
(Or alternatively, a fractured state, with one third as above, one third a separatist Kurdish entity likely to cause ongoing friction with Turkey and Iran, and one third a devastated Sunni wilderness.)
Was this what it was all for, Moron101? Lisa? Strykerdad?
Your nation, and your President, are supposedly leaders of the free world. Where are you leading us, exactly?

johninnz said...

Oops. Sorry.

Moron99 said...

johninnz:
your argument is baseless. The so called "resistance" is the prime source of continued Iraqi sufferring. Statistics since June 2004 clearly show that most civillian deaths are the result of "resistance". The crime included in these statistics is above and beyond normal crime levels and includes assasinations by unknown parties. If you further compare these statistics to the number of US forces killed then it is clear that the primary target of the resistance is Iraqi people. Specifically, Iraqi people who support democracy.
Total including Fallujah
(16%) US - 1390
(84%) Insurgent/crime - 7143

Total without Fallujah
(8%) US - 615
(92%) Insurgent/crime - 7143

Bruno:
In his final speech the prophet said that anything taken from a muslim without his willing consent is illegitimate. The right of self-determination is a thing. The right to choose their own government is a thing. The rights of free speech and protection from unlawful arrest is a thing. The illegitimate resistance is far larger than the legitimate resistance. You wish to hide the illegitimate resistance behind a thin veneer of the legitimate resistance. In fact, you wish to use them as a moral shield for the purposes of propaganda. But the truth remains. The illegitimate resistance outnumbers the legitimate 10 to 1. Their goal is also patently obvious, to reclaim Iraq as their personal possession and defeat government by concensus approval. In short, there are two things that most shia and kurd hate even more than americans - baathi and wahabi. Perhaps this is why Sadr decided to stop his legitimate resistance? Maybe he is not so fat and stupid as to allow his legitimate cause to become intertwined with the so called "resistance". You will also note that the legitimate resistance is significantly decreasing as it realizes that its goals can be met through the political process. Yet, the illegitimate resistance assasinated two of their representatives on the constitutional committee. Now, ask yourself, why would the so called "resistance" assasinate their own members who wanted to achieve the stated goals through politics? That's easy. Becuase the real goal of the people who plan and coordinate the illegitimate resistance is power and money. They want 100% of the power and 100% of the oil revenues. Just like Saddam had. All of which is born out in the statistics provided above. The primary enemy of the so called "resistance" is the Iraqis themselves.

Moron99 said...

john
if the iraqi people go to the ballots and select a shia state in a fair and free election then yes. That is what it was all for. It is illegitimate for a government to be formed or a nation to be ruled without the free and willing consent of the majority. That's just the way democracy works.

johninnz said...

Moron101
Well OK, ain't democracy wunnerful.
Where we differ, I suppose, is that I prefer a society like mine, where women don't have to go around looking like tents, where they can hold jobs on an equal basis with men, where they can inherit equally, where a guy can buy a drink if he likes, and shave if he likes. And believe and think what he likes.
More or less as prescribed in the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
You presumably think that declaration is crap. In view of your support for fundamentalist Shia Iraq.

Moron99 said...

johninnz,

If the people of Iraq reject your vision in a free and fair election then it would be illegitimate for you to force it upon them. It is their country and the only legitimate form of governance is the one that they choose for themselves. If it is an Iranian style state, then so be it. If it is a baathi style regime, then so be that. It's their country, it's their choice. Democracy is not a predetermined result. Democracy is the free and willing consent of the people to be governed by the system of their own choosing.

Lynnette in Minnesota said...

Democracy: government by the people, usually through elected representatives

It will be up to the Iraqi people to decide. They have barely even started on this road, give them a chance.

Truth teller said...

johninnz

"(Am I correct, Truthteller? Is that how you feel?)"
You are right that is how most of us feel.

Dan said...

Here is some food for thought:

According to U.S. government Training manual No. 2000-25 for Army officers (published by the War Department on November 30, 1928):


Democracy: A government of the masses. Authority derived through mass meeting or any other form of “direct” expression. Results in mobocracy. Attitude toward property is communistic—negating property rights. Attitude toward law is that the will of the majority shall regulate, whether it be based upon deliberation or governed by passion, prejudice, and impulse, without restraint or regard to consequences. Results in demagoguism, license, agitation, discontent, anarchy.

Republic: Authority is derived through the election by the people of public officials best fitted to represent them. Attitude toward property is respect for laws and individual rights, and a sensible economic procedure. Attitude toward law is the administration of justice in accord with fixed principles and established evidence, with a strict regard to consequences. A greater number of citizens and extent of territory may be brought within its compass. Avoids the dangerous extreme of either tyranny or mobocracy. Results in statesmanship, liberty, reason, justice, contentment, and progress…

---Dan

Dan said...

...And since both Johninnz and Truth Teller have endorsed the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights(something NEITHER OF THEM ever spoke of when Saddam ruled):

Where would the UN be without the US paying 25% of its tab? For that matter, where would the UN be without the US? For that matter, where would the entire world be without the brave and farsighted vision of the American people and their government during the last 100 years? Will some other country PLEASE get this evil and tyrannical organization off of our consecrated US soil. Perhaps it would be best to relocate the United Nations headquarters to Mosul.

How about it guys? Would the UN better serve its purposes in Bagdad or Mosul where it can better keep an eye on things or should it stay in New York City where it can continue to suck off America's freedom and capitalism like a leech?

---Dan

PS
Oh, that's right, when the UN was the victim of its FIRST terrorist attack, it closed up shop, cut, and ran. COWARDS! ALL COWARDS!! Get THEM to PROTECT YOU!!!

---D.

Moron99 said...

Dan -

more food for thought. It is the nature of females to wish stability and safety for the raising of offspring, a period that lasts 15-30 years for humans. If their voices are counted, then the mobocracy you describe is neither sustainable nor desirable to the majority of voices. The old west is a perfect example. Once families became a majority voice, the mob desired the saftety and security of law and order which was established through the will of the majority. (didn't Clint Estwood did a movie about this?) I think your definition of democracy is based upon the assumption of male dominance and the erosion of family.

Lynnette in Minnesota said...

Moron99,

It's interesting that you should mention that. Steven Vincent mentioned in his book that the "softening" influence of women seemed to be absent in Iraq. Perhaps that is what is needed. More women in influential rolls.

What say you, Truth Teller? Maybe a woman for President?

Lynnette in Minnesota said...

rolls = roles
Aaaaaaaah! In too much of a hurry.

Moron99 said...

Is that the same Steve Vincent that does the "Red Zone" blog out of Basra? If so, it's intersting that he is so dependant upon Layla and holds her opinions in such high regard. Did he write his book before or after meeting her? (wonder what Michael Yon would think as another globetrotting philosophojournalist)

Lynnette in Minnesota said...

Yes, he wrote a book with the same name. I don't know about Layla. In the book he mentions a woman he meets, but the name is different. He seems to have had a bit of a crush on the woman in the book.

Dan said...

Moron99 said: "Dan...I think your definition of democracy is based upon the assumption of male dominance and the erosion of family."

Seeing that "my" definition of democracy comes from a military officer training manual: U.S. Government Training manual No. 2000-25, which was published only eight years after women were given the right to vote in the United States, yes, it may hint of "male dominance."

Then again, so do "The Federalist Papers" on which the same military training manual is based.

---Dan

Dan said...

Today on Yahoo (July 28, 2005 CE)there are pictures from Mosul at: http://search.news.yahoo.com/search/news/?c=news_photos&p=mosul.

Dan said...

The Federalist #10, paragraphs 11-13:

"From this view of the subject it may be concluded that a pure democracy, by which I mean a society consisting of a small number of citizens, who assemble and administer the government in person, can admit of no cure for the mischiefs of faction. A common passion or interest will, in almost every case, be felt by a majority of the whole; a communication and concert result from the form of government itself; and there is nothing to check the inducements to sacrifice the weaker party or an obnoxious individual. Hence it is that such democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths. Theoretic politicians, who have patronized this species of government, have erroneously supposed that by reducing mankind to a perfect equality in their political rights, they would, at the same time, be perfectly equalized and assimilated in their possessions, their opinions, and their passions.

A republic, by which I mean a government in which the scheme of representation takes place, opens a different prospect, and promises the cure for which we are seeking. Let us examine the points in which it varies from pure democracy, and we shall comprehend both the nature of the cure and the efficacy which it must derive from the Union.

The two great points of difference between a democracy and a republic are: first, the delegation of the government, in the latter, to a small number of citizens elected by the rest; secondly, the greater number of citizens, and greater sphere of country, over which the latter may be extended"

---Dan

Moron99 said...

ahhh, but true democracies are controlled by the bell curve. Inevitably the middle of the bell curve asserts its desire for stability and security. At which point they implement some variation of the town council. If the town council is chosen by popular consent, is subject to preiodic reviews, and the citizens retain their right to replace council members then it is still a democracy. It is just a democracy with a built in buffer against the spurious instabilities of mob mentality. True, pure, instantaneous democracy is really nothing more than a theoretical abstract. IMO, any structure of governance may be considered true democracy if every individual with the power to affect laws is chosen by majority consent from open ballots with regularly scheduled elections. We like to think that democracy inherently means freedom of press, freedom of speech, women's rights, minority rights, etc, etc. But it doesn't. Those things come about only because the majority believes that it enhances the stability and prosperity of their community.

All of which relates to Iraq how? As long as the middle of the bell curve retains its ongoing right to select leaders from a completely open ballot then no mistake is insurmountable. The majority will inherently seek whatever brings them and their children a better life. The key, you see, is not in the structure of governance but rather in the ongoing selection and control of government officials.

Dan said...

UGGH!!!

Mororn99, I certainly hope you can back up this "Bell Curve" stuff. First, please give me the mathematical formula for a Bell Curve so I can follow along in my Differential Equation , Fractal, and Chaos book.

Any "Bell Curve," by which you obviously mean some statistical collective magic, is the best chance you have on this one.

Try appying logic (premises, statements, conjuncts, disjuncts, implications) and your argument completely breaks down.

Check your premises. What are they?

---Dan

PS
I will be gone overnight so please think it through and let me have it with both barrels when I am back tomorrow.

---D.

Moron99 said...

If you count the number of people having an opinion on an issue it will follow the same pattern over and over again. There will be very few people holding the extremist points of view and a big clump of people in the middle. The middle is also called moderate. As you go away from the moderate towards either extreme an equal number of people will lean right as left. The further away from the middle you go, the fewer people there are. It is known as a "bell curve" because if you draw it on graph paper it looks like a bell.

The "magic" is that something like 67% of the people will be very close to the middle almost every time. A good politician (like Reagan) gives clear voice to the 67% and wins the elections every time. A dumb politician (like Kerry) tries to polarize opinion and then work his way towards the middle ground. It rarely works.

As an example I offer the last election. Bush is just about the dumbest prez. we have had since Carter. The only reason he won was because the democrats picked a polarizing candidate and then treid to scramble for middle ground. IMO, if they had started with the 67% and worked their way out, Bush would have lost in a landslide. I was firmly onboard the "anybody but Bush" bandwagon right up until the point that the dems picked a divisionist candidate. Then I voted for Bush.

I like to say that of 250 million people 249,999,999 of them could have beaten Bush. So my party picked the only one who couldn't.

Moron99 said...

As another, purely speculative example.

Let us take the role of religion in Iraqi governance. I have absolutely no idea where opinion polls place this issue. But .... bell curve "magic" strikes again. Let me pull some numbers out of my ass. I bet they will be fairly accurate due to the "magic" of bell curves.

Probably somewhere around 15% favor religion running government and 15% oppose any religous influence upon governemnt. The remaining 70% will favor seeking a balance. A good politician will find a way to unite the 70%.

Bruno said...

Moron99 --

To recap :

(1) The imposed US reconstruction is an failure which has sapped what was left of the Iraqi funds to almost zero. The assertion that the US is hardly doing Iraqis a favour by continuing these operations thus holds. Thank you very much for saving us much time and yourself embarrassment by not contesting these facts.

(2) You did not respond to my assertion that the US is helping Islamic fundamentalism. I assume that either you are embarrassed by this turn of events or that you support this. Either way, the facts are there: on the Shia side of Islam, the US has managed to set the stage for the most organised and more importantly, * radical * Shias like SCIRI and Dawa to take power. Remember the US support for Iraq in its war with Iran? That was to stop exactly this result. Congratulations. On the Sunni side of Islam, you have managed to aggravate them worldwide, and to radicalise those that might never have had a problem with you before. Al Qaeda recruitment is UP. I’m neither Arab nor Muslim, and I’m incensed by US actions in Iraq. I can only imagine how devout Arab Muslims must feel. Congratulations.

(3) I see you have not contested the fact that the US is employing numerous Ba’athi with blood on their hands to crush dissent. This tells me that either you were ignorant of this fact, or knew about it and hoped you wouldn’t be caught out. Well, you have been. The same for the rest of your assertions on that matter.

Alright, in your comments to JohnNZ I see you are resorting to the old statistical Jedi mind trick. Really, I thought that by now you had more sense. The problem is, you are dealing with people that are INFORMED and who have the ACTUAL DOCUMENTS from which you suck your figures. But of course, counting from June 2004 is somewhat fallacious, isn’t it? Because the war in fact started in 2003.

To whit:

IBC – A Dossier of Civilian Casualties 2003 – 2005
Page 10, Killers By Category:

Killed by US-led Forces alone : 37,3 %
Anti-Occupation Forces alone : 9,5%
Predominantly Criminal Killings: 35,9%
Unknown Agents : 11,0%

THOSE, ladies and gentlemen, are the REAL percentages.

Of course, if I wanted to present figures a la Moron99, it would also be accurate to say that US forces, other criminals and unknown agents killed 84,2 % of all civilians. Accurate but not exactly truthful, right?

Really, Moron99, aren’t you ashamed of being caught out time and time again? What would your dear mother say if she knew you spent your time lying, distorting information and misleading people?


In your post to me you resort to religion and flawed logic in order to defend your position. Sorta scraping the bottom of the barrel now, aren’t we? Let’s take a surgical approach to the argument you have made, why don’t we?

The first fish in the barrel is this : [m99] “The right of self-determination is a thing. The right to choose their own government is a thing.”

You give the impression that the US is in Iraq to defend these concepts.

But in truth, the first thing that the US did in Iraq was arm Chalabi and turn him loose. Then it appointed Bremer as King and he re-wrote all the Iraqi laws by diktat. Instead of holding democratic elections, the US cancelled the results of municipal elections when the results were not to its liking. Instead of free elections, it organised ‘caucuses’ of handpicked puppet Iraqis. When Sistani pressed for elections, the US hummed and hawed and stalled all it could, until mass action forced the issue.

Reality check : the US is in Iraq to protect its own interests. If democracy happens to coincide with these, fine. If not, well, another form of government will be imposed. This scenario has happened time and time again. Even in democracies, the US continues to influence the course of events with methods deemed unacceptable for other countries to do to the States itself.

The second fish in the barrel is this: [m99] “In his final speech the prophet said that anything taken from a muslim without his willing consent is illegitimate. The right of self-determination is a thing.”

Indigenous government is a thing. Torture is also a thing. Communism is a thing. The lives of Iraqis lost in the invasions are things.

You are playing with words here, and twisting them to suit your own meaning. Let’s see who has taken what from whom: Who has profited from the invasion? Ah, American, non-Muslim, non- Iraqi companies. Well, I agree with the Prophet here. The imposed contracts are illegitimate.

This is linked to :

[m99] “The rights of free speech and protection from unlawful arrest is a thing.”

Of course when we read excerpts like these, your claims become somewhat hollow and hypocritical:

Kate Adie – Pentagon threatens to target journalists in Iraq. (RealAudio, 49 minutes into the broadcast.) Radio One interview

"Kate Adie: I was told by a senior officer in the Pentagon, that if uplinks — that is the television signals out of Baghdad, for example — were detected by any planes electronic media ... mediums, of the military above Baghdad ... they'd be fired down on. Even if they were journalists."
Tom McGurk: "Kate, sorry to interrupt you. Just to explain for our listeners. Uplinks is where you have your own satellite telephone method of distributing information."
Kate Adie: "The telephones and the television signals."
Tom McGurk: "And they would be fired on?"
Kate Adie: "Yes. They would be 'targeted down,' said the officer."
Tom McGurk: "Extraordinary!"
Kate Adie: "Shameless! He said, 'Well ... they know this ... they've been warned.'”

And excerpts like these:

“You asked for my evidence, Mr Ambassador. Here it is:”
In Iraq, the US does eliminate those who dare to count the dead
Naomi Klein - Saturday December 4, 2004 - The Guardian
“ […] The New York Times reported that "the hospital was selected as an early target because the American military believed that it was the source of rumours about heavy casual ties", noting that "this time around, the American military intends to fight its own information war, countering or squelching what has been one of the insurgents' most potent weapons". The Los Angeles Times quoted a doctor as saying that the soldiers "stole the mobile phones" at the hospital - preventing doctors from communicating with the outside world.
But this was not the worst of the attacks on health workers. Two days earlier, a crucial emergency health clinic was bombed to rubble, as well as a medical supplies dispensary next door. Dr Sami al-Jumaili, who was working in the clinic, says the bombs took the lives of 15 medics, four nurses and 35 patients. The Los Angeles Times reported that the manager of Falluja general hospital "had told a US general the location of the downtown makeshift medical centre" before it was hit. […]” //end excerpt
And FACTS like these,

How innocent Iraqis came to be abused as terrorists
USATODAY.com – June 2004

“So the chain of events seems to have worked like this: Rules violating the Geneva Conventions were invented for dealing with proven terrorists in specific places or circumstances. But they gradually came to be applied to hundreds of suspects, many of them innocent. Military officials said 70% to 90% of the Iraqis swept up for interrogation were arrested by mistake, the International Committee of the Red Cross reported.”


Hmmmm.

So, it does seem that US forces are GUILTY of what you say they are there to defend. Is this merely another case of destroying the village in order to save it? Or are American atrocities and violations excused simply because they are committed by Americans?

You drop another red herring when you divide, arbitrarily, the Iraqi Resistance into ‘legitimate’ and ‘illegitimate’ sections, and handily give us quantities for each. Your clumsy attempts to frame the terms of discussion are duly noted. Your lack of facts on the real numbers involved is also duly noted.

I suppose that the mixed Sunni / Shia protest against the US occupation in Firdous Square, numbering around 250 000 Iraqis, also managed to escape your notice. The Sadrists have in no way abandoned their resistance against the Occupation, they have merely changed the form of resistance from a violent to a non violent one. Both are legitimate.

OF COURSE the ultimate goal of the Iraqi resistance is power and money.

OF COURSE Iraqis would like to have power over their own country and their own oil revenues.

ANY IDIOT can see that this is the case. Lack of those two things means that you have neither a country nor control of your own destiny. You will forever be somebody’s slave.

The difference between Iraqis and the Americans is: the land and what is under it is actually the birthright of these people, whereas the Americans have NO, repeat, NO claim whatsoever to Iraq or its oil. The Neoconservative fantasies of oil pipelines to Israel (Clean Break document) and US bases in Iraq, whether Saddam was in power or not (PNAC – Rebuilding America’s Defences) are direct claims of ownership on foreign assets. They are direct claims of ownership on the lives, culture and land that belongs TO IRAQIS.

The US invaded with the idea of taking Iraqi power and money, and its actions have been directed toward that goal. Finding itself outmatched, it has tried to divide the country on ethnic lines and exploit that division. Now that things are slipping out of control (Central Iraq still in flames, the Kurds antagonising Turkey, the Shia allying with Iran) you are, for lack of a better word, in the shit.

Given that the US is essentially neither rebuilding anything, nor protecting the fruits of democracy, nor even killing Ba’athists, as has been claimed, but is rather having the opposite effect – given this, the real question is: why are you still there?

Moron99 said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Moron99 said...

Bruno, the most basic concepts elude you. Iraq has a horrid past and a chance for a bright future. Your so-called resistance seeks to resurrect the past. I put forth that when the prophet gave his final speech he was in possession of all that Allah had revealed to him. There was no other sermon or speech in which he possessed a greater understanding. According to that speech, the goals of the insurgency are illegitimate. They are indefensible. Your continued desire to avoid discussing their goals and to demonize the US bears testament to their illegitimacy. You are the Satan that Mohammed warned us against. You seek to decieve us with the little things because you can not lead us astray with the big things.

O People, lend me an attentive ear, for I know not whether after this year I shall ever be amongst you again. Therefore listen to what I am saying very carefully and take these words to those who could not be present here today.

O People, just as you regard this month, this day, this city as Sacred, so regard the life and property of every Muslim as a sacred trust. Return the goods entrusted to you to their rightful owners. Hurt no one so that no one may hurt you. Remember that you will indeed meet your Lord, and that he will indeed reckon your deeds. Allah has forbidden you to take usury (interest), therefore all interest obligations shall henceforth be waived. Your capital is yours to keep. You will neither inflict nor suffer any inequity. Allah has judged that there shall be no interest and that all the interest due to Abbas ibn 'Abd'al Muttalib [the Prophet's uncle] be waived.

Every right arising out of homicide in pre-islamic days is henceforth waived and the first such right that i waive is that arising from the murder of Rabiah ibn al Harithibn.

O People, the unbelievers indulge in tampering with the calender in order to make permissible that which Allah forbade, and to forbid that which Allah has made permissible. With Allah the months are twelve in number. Four of them are holy, three of these are successive and one occurs singly between the months of Jumada and Shaban.

Beware of Satan, for the safety of your religion. He has lost all hope of that he will be able to lead you astray in big things, so beware of following him in small things.

O People, it is true that you have certain rights with regard to your women but they also have rights over you. Remember that you have taken them as your wives only under Allah's trust and with His permission. If they abide by your right, then to them belongs the right to be fed and clothed in kindness. Do treat your women well and be kind to them for they are your partners and committed helpers. And it is your right that they do not make friends with anyone of whom you do not approve, as well as never to be unchaste. O People, listen to me in earnest, worship Allah, say your five daily prayers, fast during the month of Ramadhan, and give your wealth in Zakat. Perform Hajj if you can afford to.

All mankind is from Adam and Eve, an Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab nor a non-Arab has any superiority over an Arab; also a white has no superiority over a black nor a black has any superiority over a white - except by piety and good action. Learn that every Muslim is a brother to every Muslim and that the Muslims constitute one brotherhood. Nothing shall be legitimate to a Muslim which belogs to a fellow Muslim unless it was given freely and willingly. Do not therefore do injustice to yourselves. Remember one day you will meet Allah and answer your deeds. So beware: do not stray from the path of righteousness after I am gone.

Dan said...

Moron99:

Here is where I zero my weapon:

What kind of kook are you to call the Federalist Papers sexist? ...Especially one of the most famous Federalist papers: #10?

---Dan

Moron99 said...

Dan , Huh?

I think the excerpt you quoted is self-explanatory. In the very first sentence they state that the required sample size must be small. I am not talking about small groups, I am talking about population masses.

Mariam said...

Very intresting read! Thanks for the sharing

Dan said...

Moron99 said:

"It is the nature of females to wish stability and safety for the raising of offspring, a period that lasts 15-30 years for humans."

Here is a link to a woman wishing for stability in Iaq:

http://www.publiuspundit.com/?p=1409

Please note the unorthodox manner of dress.

---Dan

Dan said...

Moron99:

Before I continue, I would like to say that I count you as an ally in the Internet war against global tyranny. However, sometimes I do not understand or agree with your reasoning. So, having said that, when I challenge you or contrast a point that you make, I am NOT trying to engage in mindless rhetoric or trying to just get “one up” on someone. It is because I am genuinely concerned. Also, I make errors of reasoning sometimes and other times I just get in too much of a hurry to say what I really mean or what I should say.

There are other times that my ego just gets too big and explodes all over the place…

Now, considering the situation in Iraq (to ALL):

I am well aware, as everyone should be, that a new Iraqi Constitution is in the final stages of being drafted and will soon be offered up to the Iraqi public for a vote of acceptance or refusal. It is with this in mind that I desire to direct everyone’s attention to The Federalist Papers. They are available online via a Google search and may be found at: [http://www.law.ou.edu/hist/federalist/] which is the first link (and is also from the University of Oklahoma website about 30 miles to my south).

I suggest that it would behoove anyone considering a new constitution to read, at least, one or two entries. Also, for anyone who is unfamiliar with the literacy of the average colonial American, and especially for those to which English is a second language, I recommend that you read the “Introduction” to get a feel for the articles.

A “leaked” version of the proposed Iraqi Bill of Rights may be found online by following the link on the banner at the top of “Publius Pundit” via the link in my last comment.

Moron99 (again):

A distinction is made, in Federalist #10, between “a democracy” and “a republic.” This distinction is very vague by today’s understanding and may be missed altogether without the following clarification:

“Democracy,” as used in “The Federalist Papers,” refers to a form of government in which ALL people meet to make whatever laws they so decide. The two features that distinguish it are:

1. There are NO ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES.
2. There is NO BILL OF RIGHTS.

“Republic,” as used in “The Federalist Papers,” refers to a form of government in which ONLY elected representatives meet to discuss laws and they are restrained by a Bill of Rights.

In “The Federalist Papers,” there is NO discussion of:

1. A form of government where everyone meets to discuss new laws with a Bill of Rights.
2. A form of government where elected representatives meet to discuss new laws without a Bill of Rights.

Please make note of this!

Now, to confuse things even further, and to help people to see why our (United States) politicians refer to the US as “a democracy,” I refer you all to the following PDF file:

http://famguardian.org/PublishedAuthors/Media/Antishyster/V12N1-ContrFormsOfGovernment.pdf

The man who wrote this is a friend of mine and I suggest downloading ALL of the affiliated articles while they are still available online from:

http://famguardian.org/PublishedAuthors/Media/Antishyster/Antishyster.htm

Thank you. Enjoy!

---Dan

Dan said...

e I just "tested" the University of Oklahoma link for The Federalist Papers and it did not work. Try this one [http://thomas.loc.gov/home/histdox/fedpapers.html] via thThe Library of Congress.

...Damned Okies. Can't they do anything besides play football?

___dan

Moron99 said...

Nice reads Dan. But still ... IMO, the key to good governance is the same today as it was 5,000 years ago. Subvert the desire for power into becoming a desire to please the greatest number of citizens.

Power will always attract evil men and it will always have a corrupting influence upon those who hold it. So don't fight to change human nature. It is a losing battle. Instead change the system to subvert human nature into the service of the citizens. The most effective method found to date is the modern "democracy". Power is granted by the people, the people retain the right to deny power at future dates, and those individuals wishing to acquire or keep power must compete in open ballots. From there, all else flows (eventually). The reason is simple. Every leader wishes to retain his chair.

johninnz said...

Truthteller must be very puzzled about how his post about Abu Graib has been transformed into some kind of infantile discussion about "democracy" and "republicanism."
Dan, Moron, a lot of us out here in the English-speaking world have Westminister-type governments that we regard as considerably more "democratic" than the rather primitive and ossified US version. Certainly we in NZ and Australia don’t need any lessons in it: NZ leads the world in exploring refinements of our democracy to make it as representative as possible, Aussie is I believe still the only country where voting is compulsory. (The fact that the fiercely independent and authority-resistant Aussies accept this speaks volumes about the value they place on it.)
Returning to the actual subject of the Blog, I see that the US Defence Department is strongly resisting the release of the Abu Ghraib photos because of fear that they will ignite "unrest," to put it kindly, in the Muslim world. Seems a bit silly to me because they will leak out eventually.
Do it now and get it over with? Or stall as long as possible and hope for a distraction?
I’d vote for "bite the bullet." Seems the manly thing to do.

Moron99 said...

johninnz,

There is a third option. Let the administrative branch (president) and the legislative branch (senate) finish working out a deal that revises military policies. At that time, repeats of the AbuGhraib phase will be impossible. Then release all the court evidence and military documents to the press. Don't really know what americans in general think about it, but I suspect that the majority realize that this is what's happenning now. Which is why they don't seem to be that worked up over the issue. I'd vote for allowing the system to go through its normal cycles of self-examination, debate, and revision. Seems the prudent thing to do.

johninnz said...

I thought Congress was the Legislative branch? Still, what do I know?
Well, yeah, except that it's kind of a live issue, and under the flawed and inefficient US version of "democracy," the "normal cycles" can tend to take forever.
"Prudence" can sometimes be a synonym for "cowardice."
I still say let it all hang out, get it over and done with.
If you want to retain the respect of us out here in the free world.

Moron99 said...

Johninnz, there are two houses. Senate and congress. Senate is based upon number of states - two senators for every state. Congress is based on population - one congressman per xxx number of citizens.

Nothing is perfect. It is difficult to quickly ascertain concensus and approval amoung 300 million people. Your "perfect" democracy in NZ would probably collapse if it tried to scale up to handle such a large number of people with such cultural diversity across such a large geographic range whilst also trying to manage the worlds largest economy. Each nation should use the system that suits them best. Ours is based upon the pro-versus-con model with extended public debate. Every law has unintentional consequences and the nature of extended debate allows more of the unintentional consequences to be explored and discussed.

Your respect is valued and appreciated. However, don't expect others to shoot themselves attempting to earn it.

It is always prudent to be prudent.

Dan said...

OK
I have done my best to direct people to American documents describing and outlining the original American Constitutional considerations. I have done a very good job of trying to give you an "out” and you have neither acknowledged it nor taken your leave on the matter.

Instead, you have charged me again.

Now, it is going to get EPISTEMOLOGICAL!
NOW, it is, obviously a battle of ego.
Go for it man!

"I'll be back..."

---Dan

Dan said...

Truth Teller:

Here is an article that speaks to some of your stated dissatisfaction:

http://strengthandhonor.typepad.com/captaink/2005/07/bad_apples.html

---Dan

Dan said...

Johninnz:

They should have released ALL of the photographs after the original incident. Now, they only serve to shame myself and others for bothering to defend them in the first place.

I want to see them just to see how " poorly trained" the American soldiers were. That this even happened and that the American leadership did not display the depth of the error speaks to American leadership's inability to handle humiliation.

I, for one, am disgusted, feel deceived, and am tired of dealing with it.

Still...this was NOTHING compared to Saddam Hussein's tactics.

---Dan

Truth teller said...

dan

"I have done a very good job of trying to give you an "out” and you have neither acknowledged it nor taken your leave on the matter."

You really did a very good job, I acknowledged your effort and thank you for that.
But:

"Still...this was NOTHING compared to Saddam Hussein's tactics."

Saddam is finished, there is no place to compare his tyranny to the US war crimes. Each is a different entity.
We don't want to change one dictator with many dictators.

Dan said...

Truth Teller:

Thank you! Let us all work together to bring freedom and peace to this planet.

---Dan

strykeraunt said...

Dan, I may have missed some by not wading through all of the posts above, but tell me, what part of the process made you feel deceived. The military acknowledged the problem long before the original photos appeared on the TV screens. They were dealing with it when the photos were released. No one that I know of has defended the actions of those soldiers...so what is your point here. I disagree with the idea that the photos need to be released because the only purpose it would serve is to incite more anger over an event that has already been dealt with...and I believe we have enough of that going on in the world already. Ask any soldier (except those directly involved in the Abu Graib abuse) and they will tell you that no military training they received or did not receive would have led them to believe that anything these soldiers were accused of doing is okay.

Lisa, New York said...

I have skimmed these comments and, so far, have not seen even one word of regret or contrition or horror from the Americans

That's because you're about a year late on this story, Rachel. Remember the Spring of 2004? When this story broke in the U.S. media? And hearings were held in the U.S. Congress and broadcast to the entire world? And the President, military and ordinary Americans expressed horror and apologized repeatedly? And trials were held and people sent to jail?

Just rewind the tape and you can see and hear it all again if you like.

madtom said...

The Federalist

This is a link to the Federalist Papers.

Hurria said...

Dan writes:

"Let us all work together to bring freedom and peace to this planet."

Dan, as long as your main contribution to peace on the planet is your death dealing machine, your bombs, your tanks, and your lust to dominate, there will certainly never be anything resembling peace on the planet.

Dan said...

Strykeraunt:

I agree that the photos should NOT be released for the same reason you do. It is just that I was led to believe that the extent of the abuses was already revealed in the photos that were released. Apparently, this is not so.

Dan said...

Hurriah:

You are just mad because your baathist bullies are NOT the biggest kid on the block.

---Dan

strykerdad said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Truth teller said...

Dan "Muslims in general and Arabs in particular are never held to the same standards of behavior as white Americans."

This a typical American racial discrimination. What's about the black Americans? or chinese American?

I suggest you read "I found my self"

"It appears that war instigated by the United States is worse than mass murder, mass starvation, mass torture, mass rape, and genocide,"

The illegitimate war instigated by the US against a free country, involved all the bad things you mentioned and even more.

"Now, I suspect I will be censored by the "Truth Teller" for "insulting his religion." Yet it is the truth. "

You are right, Your post deserve to censored. and I will do that soon (not now), Just to let the other know why I did that.

"And if someone wants to call their self "Truth Teller" and then censor people, then I see no value in continuing to post on or read this blog."

That is your own choice.
Good bye then.

Dan said...

Truth Teller:

This was just a test that I was conducting to make sure that I understand your personality and its underlying epistemology.

Those are NOT my words that you censored. I copied and pasted them from: . You may also find this blog entry by Googling Javed Akbar. You are unable to delete the entry here.

In the meantime, I offer my apologies for offending you. Also, I thank you for directing my attention to Khalid's entry about his "arrest." I have been waiting for it.

---Dan

Dan said...

Oops. How DO YOU get these links to work? "Arabian Dissent" is the blog name.

---Dan

Lynnette in Minnesota said...

Ahhh, I see I'm not the only one who has problems with those things.

On some blogs the command works fine, on others no. Weird, huh?


"It appears that war instigated by the United States is worse than mass murder, mass starvation, mass torture, mass rape, and genocide, as long as its Muslims doing those things to other Muslims."

Tell me, Truth Teller, what is your opinion on Darfur?

Truth teller said...

dan

Your apologies are accepted. But I have to censore those posts which insult the Islam or the Muslim.
Nothing personal.

Truth teller said...

lynnette in minnesota

I am not a politician, but I know the situation in Darfor is not between Muslim and Muslim. It is a tribal problem which happened and still happening in other part of Africa.

Lynnette in Minnesota said...

"The Janjaweed (variously spelled Janjawid, Jingaweit, Jinjaweed, Janjawiid, Janjiwid, etc.) is an armed militia group in Darfur, western Sudan, comprising fighters of Muslim Arab background (mainly from the Baggara people). Since 2003 it has been one of the principal actors in the increasingly bloody Darfur conflict, which has pitted Arabs against the black African population (also Muslim) of the region. Its name translates as "a man with a horse and a gun," although it is more usefully translated as "armed men on horseback."

The Janjaweed is the successor to an earlier Arab tribal militia, the Murahilin (literally "nomads"), which had existed for many years beforehand"


Regardless of why they are fighting, the conflict in Sudan does pit Muslim against Muslim.

To only condemn the actions or perceived actions of the United States and not the actions of fellow Muslims is a little hypocritial isn't it? To think that because they are Muslim they can do no wrong is a dangerous form of denial.

strykerdad said...

Hypocrisy? Among Arab Muslims (but certainly not limited to the Arab version)? I am shocked and dismayed! Here we have a man who was a member of the Iraqi elite who took his salary from the Saddam regime and asks us to 'do what your moralistic principles ask of you' because we have revealed abuses among a handful of our soldiers but chose not to release graphic pictures to incite their kind to kill each other and us in their 'demonstrations' once again. Acts committed by their governments every day make those soldiers seem like angels in comparison. I asked TT what his own 'moralistic principles' asks of him when he sees his 'honorable resistance' murdering his fellow Iraqis, beheading Western workers, dancing around the burned and dismembered bodies--what did his principles ask of him when villages were decimated just up the road from his home, when the political opponents were shredded, when women and children were gassed. Did he feel any twinges of conscience when depositing his paycheck? He didn't answer. Muslims committing wholesale murder among themselves and Christians and animists in Africa? Yawn---at least they aren't Jews fighting back against Palestinians. But do not accuse THEM of racism! Any dissension and discord among them is due to the interference of America--they have no responsibility. They don't know what it means. But there are many bloggers, mostly Iranian students, that give reason for some hope, and it is for those like them who desire true political, economic, and social freedoms through democracy that I continue to support our efforts, flawed as they may be in their implementation.

Dan said...

For What It Is Worth:

I live in Oklahoma. A soldier from Oklahoma was killed yesterday. I heard about it on the television news.

I did not know him. He was a young father of two and was said to be well respected in his community.

The news article said that he was killed by an (Islamic) fundamentalist suicide bomber.

I wonder what the family of the "suicide bomber" was like. What kind of man was he?

I suppose it is to his credit that he did NOT target little children, innocent civillians, or Iraqi policemen or soldiers.

They are both dead now.

---Dan

Lynnette in Minnesota said...

Steven Vincent has been killed in Basrah.

Nour, his translator and the woman he mentions in his book, was wounded. They had been kidnapped by gunman driving an Iraqi police car. Initial suspicion is falling on followers of al-Sadr.

He was a good man who actually cared about Iraq.

strykerdad said...

Mr Vincet was indeed a good man and I had the honor of corresponding with him briefly on the subject of finding shipping providers to Mosul who could deal with the medicines needing refrigeration. As I shared with Walschrat on the previous blog entry here, he thought it hopeless at this point to try such a thing, but was hopeful things would improve. All should read Mr Vincet's last few blog entries in particular as they shed a lot of light on the business climate in Iraq and the state of reconstruction. It probably is what got him killed. The Arab world is run by crime families disguised as tribes and religious sects with a few hapless honest folks just trying to stay alive. I'm beginning to think they are not worthy of the effort we are expending to bring them into the last century. We need to pick a ruthless but capable leader, sell him some good weapons and get the hell out of there. Just like the good old days, lets go with what works for them. Brutality and corruption is what they understand. I bought into the belief that people in that part of the world are like us and desire religious, economic and political freedom, but I am increasingly disgusted by the selfishness and lack of character demonstrated by far too many of the residents there. Not sure why that is, but it seems to be a common thread among predominantly Islamic nations, from Africa to SE Asia.

Lynnette in Minnesota said...

"I'm beginning to think they are not worthy of the effort we are expending to bring them into the last century."

I hear you, Strykerdad. Those people who killed Mr. Vincent are not. They are simply a waste of space.

It is only when I think of people like Nour, Omar, Mohammed, Ali, Alaa, Zeyad, Nabil and so many others, that I think there is hope.

Truth teller said...

Another letter from the Citizens for Fair Legislation about the TREATMENT AND ILLEGAL DETENTION OF CHILD PRISONERS.

Citizens for Fair Legislation For Immediate Release August 3, 2005
********************************
CFL ALERT: TELL YOUR REPRESENTATIVES TO SPEAK OUT AGAINST THE TREATMENT AND ILLEGAL DETENTION OF CHILD PRISONERS IN PALESTINE AND IRAQ.

TALKING POINTS:
*Please take a moment to write to your representatives and ask them to speak out against the illegal detention of children in Iraq and Palestine. Reports on the abuse at Abu Ghraib indicate that the Pentagon has proof (photographs and video) that detained Iraqi children are being sodomized and raped by American soldiers. In Israel, Palestinian children are also being held indiscriminately and illegally in violation of international law and human rights law.
Reports by Israeli human rights organizations indicate that like Iraqi children, Palestinian child detainees are regularly tortured and not allowed visits by either the Red Cross or their parents.

* In a report written last year called, 'Stolen Youth: The Politics of Israel's Detention of Palestinian Children' the authors interviewed a teenager who gave the following description of his treatment by the Israeli military: "Three more people in masks came into the room. They blindfolded me, put a hood over my head... they kicked and
slapped me. They beat me with a plastic pipe and whatever they could get their hands on. I couldn't see anything because I was blindfolded. I just felt the blows. That lasted ten to fifteen minutes... Later they stood me on a chair and told me to grab a pipe that was fixed to the wall. They removed the chair from under me and left me hanging in the air, with my handcuffed hands holding onto the pipe and the weight of my body, hanging in the air, drawing my hands downwards. They left the room." - Ismail Sabatin, 17 years old. Palestinian children being held by the Israeli military range between the ages of 9-17 years old, many of these children are being held without charges, others have
been held for months for merely throwing stones at Israeli tanks. Tell your representatives that because we give $12 billion dollars in American welfare to Israel a year that we have a moral obligation to demand that the Israelis end this despicable treatment of Palestinian children.

*Treatment of Iraqi children under the U.S. occupation forces is no better. Last week the Pentagon blocked the release of pictures of Iraqi children being raped and sodomized by American soldiers as publication of those pictures would have been a public relations disaster of the U.S. In an expose done by the Sunday Herald late last year a child witness of the abuse at Abu Ghraib gave a statement to investigators saying that he witnessed the rape of a boy who was 15 years old: "The kid was hurting very bad and they covered all the doors with sheets. Then, when I heard the screaming I climbed the door … and I saw [the soldier's name is deleted] who was wearing a military uniform." The witness then described in graphic details how he witnessed that soldier rape "the little kid".

*The abuse of children by the United States and by the U.S.'s staunchest ally in the Middle East is unacceptable; it's time that we held our government accountable for the blatant violations of human rights occurring in Iraq and Palestine. Tell your representatives that you feel that the illegal detention of Palestinian and Iraqi children is deplorable and that as your elected officials you expect them to speak out against the cruel treatment of children. Remind your elected officials that none of these actions in Iraq or Palestine could occur without the tacit approval of the U.S. government.

EMAIL AND OR CALL THE WHITE HOUSE
WHITE HOUSE COMMENTS LINE: 202-456-1111
WHITE HOUSE SWITCHBOARD: 202-456-1414
WHITE HOUSE FAX: 202-456-2461
===============================
Citizens for Fair Legislation is a grassroots organization committed to encouraging a fair domestic and foreign policy with an emphasis on the US/Arab world.
http://www.cflweb.org

Hurria said...

"I'm beginning to think they are not worthy of the effort we are expending to bring them into the last century."

You are absolutely right, so why don't you just give up this worthless effort with such worthless people and go home. Take your mega-embassy, your "rebuilding programs" and your puppets with you.

Lynnette in Minnesota said...

But, Hurria, if we left who would you use as a scapegoat for everything that is wrong in Itaq?

Lynnette in Minnesota said...

Oops, that Itaq should be Iraq!

madtom said...

"who would you use as a scapegoat for everything that is wrong in Iraq?"

That won't be a problem, as soon as we leave, and if the baath or some other similar minded group takes over. Baghdad Bob would have his old job back, and
you would never hear any problems from Iraq. All would be well and dandy.

Skippy said...

As a member of the hated right wing crazies in the US I was ashamed of the treatment of the prisoners at Abu Graib. It was deplorable and heinous and should be punished to the maximum possible. It is my belief that it is in the past and is being prosecuted. I would offer as evidence that it is not still occuring the statement by Truthteller in another post that the Iraqiis would prefer to be arrested by Americans than their own countrymen because of the abuses the Iraqi soldiers were known to committ.

I will not now or ever defend what happened in Abu Graib. I am also in favor of Sen McCain's and Sen Graham's efforts to codify our conduct in relation to individuals that are arrested or detained by US soldiers. I have written both my Senators and The Whitehouse to that effect.

I personally have no desire to see the photos or tapes of the abuse that these people suffered, just as I have no desire to see the beheadings of individuals kidnapped by al Qaida. I don't see a benefit in releasing them, as there is no dispute that the abuses occured. If there is new evidence of ongoing abuse that would be relevant, but to revisit the previous abuses already acknowleged seems less than useful and potentially dangerous.

To Mr. NZ...as terrible as the abuse of the Abu Graib prisoners was it was not a sanctioned activity of the US Military. It is concievable that it was a wider policy than admiitted but more likely was a result of inadequate training and control and command of the units involved. It is also possible it is the actions of just plain bad people that happened to be in the US Military.

The terrorists by comparison have as a stated and repeated policy of sawing the head off of any individual they have detained whether they are combatants or not. I submit that we are better than the terrorists, even at our worst.

I would love for us to get out of Iraq. Which of our options is better? Stay and eventually see a government by the people that is alligned with Iran and more repressive that one we would desire, or the degeneration into civil war that will certainly follow with Iran alligned with the Shia, Syria alligned with the Sunni, and the Kurds on thier own. Do you believe that any of those groups are going to treat the people better than the US?

I am pessimistic that any of it will work, because I don't see any evidence from any of the sides that they desire to live in peace with each other. All they want to do is kill each other. It is a dream that they could learn to live in harmony, but an illusive one. If anybody living there believes they will be better off with the US gone, I believe they are sadly mistaken. When we leave it will be like Russia leaving Bosnia and Croatia.

If you believe life was better under Saddam then you must be a Baathist, because the others certainly didn't have security then.

慢慢來 said...

晚情徵信協會全國網
大愛徵信社
三立徵信社
離婚|離婚證人有限公司
離婚|離婚證人-高雄徵信同業工會
離婚|婚姻挽回專區
一品蒐證尋人器材網
全國女子徵信社
晚晴徵信
八大徵信社
離婚│華納徵信社
徵信社品質保障關懷協會
晚晴徵信協會全國網
溫馨法律諮詢
劈腿大剖析
全國優良婚姻挽回
法律諮詢|免費諮詢華陀
亞洲徵信總部
感情挽回全國徵信
鴻海徵信尋人免費諮詢法律諮詢
大陸抓姦二奶-法律諮詢社
三立徵信有限公司
大愛徵信社
離婚|離婚證人非凡有限公司
女人國際徵信社
中區嚴選聯合徵信網
女人國際徵信
大愛徵信有限公司-台中
婦幼徵信有限公司
女子偵探徵信團隊
離婚|外遇觀測站
法律諮詢|免費諮詢網
外遇抓猴徵信偵探社
離婚-感情挽回Q&A諮詢網
新浪私家偵探社
離婚|女人徵信社
離婚|女人私家偵探社
婚姻挽回│國際聯盟社
法律諮詢所
外遇抓姦|女人國際徵信
女子徵信社
外遇|抓姦-女子偵探全國入口網
全國優良女人徵信社