Muslim in Suffer

Bismi-lLahi-rRahmani-rRahiem. Assalamu\’alaikum Warohmatullahi Wabarokatuh!

Archive for October 18th, 2006

Criticism of the veil is not about liberating women

Posted by musliminsuffer on October 18, 2006


bismi-lLahi-rRahmani-rRahiem
In the Name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful

=== News Update ===

Criticism of the veil is not about liberating women

by Lindsey German- 21 October 2006 | Socialist Worker Online

One of the more distasteful features of the wave of attacks on Muslims has been the sight of feminists lining up to support Jack Straw’s comments against the veil.

Women who claim they believe in liberation should know better. The women’s movement of the 1960s was anti-racist, coming out of the civil rights and anti-war movements in the US.

Those who espouse their ideas today are attacking some of the most oppressed women in the name of liberating them. Their assumption is that any Muslim woman who wears the veil or the hijab does so because of pressure.

This is false – some women may fit into this category, but many Muslim women choose to wear the niqab or the hijab for their identity, or for political or other reasons. They are making a statement which they have every right to make.

You would think from the attacks that it was only among Muslims that women’s oppression still exists. In fact, women in the West do not have even the most basic equality, despite nominal lip service to the term.

Women suffer worse wages, have to do most housework and childcare and are subject to sexual double standards.

Feminists often say superior ideas on women’s liberation in the West go back 200 years, which makes the West more advanced than the Middle East or South Asia. But women’s liberation has long been a minority view.

It took until well into the 20th century before women won the vote after a long struggle. It took another struggle to put issues like abortion, equal pay and gay liberation on the agenda in the 1960s and 1970s.

These struggles are still to be won. Only a small minority of women have benefited from changes in society – they pay other, often immigrant, women, to do domestic work.

They have turned their backs on any struggle to change the world and supported a series of bloody wars aimed at countries with Muslim populations.

They now presume to tell Muslim women they can’t be liberated unless they dress and behave like them.

source:
http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/article.php?article_id=9965

Note: This article should be read after: Warmongers play race card
http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/article.php?article_id=9963

===

-muslim voice-
______________________________________
BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

Under Bush’s law, guilty until confirmed guilty

Posted by musliminsuffer on October 18, 2006


bismi-lLahi-rRahmani-rRahiem
In the Name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful

=== News Update ===

Under Bush’s law, guilty until confirmed guilty

The New York Times

Published: October 16, 2006

When President George W. Bush rammed the bill on military commissions through Congress, the Republicans crowed about creating a process that would be tough on terrorists but preserve essential principles of justice. “America can be proud,” said Senator Lindsey Graham, one of the bill’s architects.

Unfortunately, Graham was wrong. One of the many problems with the new law is that it will only make it harder than it already is to separate the real terrorists from the far larger group of inmates at the American military detention center at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, who were bit players in the Taliban or innocent bystanders.

Graham and other supporters of this dreadful legislation seem to have forgotten that American justice does not merely deliver swift punishment to the guilty. It also protects the innocent.

Bush ignored that fact after the Sept. 11 attacks, when he tried to put the prisoners of the war on terror beyond the reach of American law and the Geneva Conventions. For starters, he dispensed with one of the vital provisions of the conventions: that prisoners must be screened by a “competent tribunal” if there is any doubt about who they are and what role they played in hostilities.

As a result, hundreds of men captured in Afghanistan and other countries were sent to Guantánamo Bay and other prisons, including the network of illegal CIA detention camps, without any attempt to determine whether they were any sort of combatant, legal or illegal.

The Bush administration showed not the slightest interest in fixing this problem until the Supreme Court said in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld that the president cannot simply lock up anyone – even a foreign citizen – without giving him a real chance to challenge his detention before a “neutral decision maker.”

In response, Bush created Combatant Status Review Tribunals, which gave the most cursory possible reviews of the Guantánamo detainees. These reviews took place years after the prisoners were captured. They permitted the use of hearsay evidence, evidence obtained through coercion and even torture, and evidence that was kept secret from the prisoner. The normal burden of proof was reversed: The tribunals presumed prisoners were justifiably detained and the prisoners had the burden of disproving government evidence – presuming they knew what it was in the first place.

The new law makes this mockery of justice stronger. The Military Commissions Act of 2006 makes it virtually impossible to contest a status tribunal’s decision. It prohibits claims of habeas corpus – the ancient right of prisoners in just societies to have their detentions reviewed – or any case based directly or indirectly on the Geneva Conventions. Even if an appeal got to the single appeals court now authorized to hear it, the administration would be very likely to argue that it cannot be heard without jeopardizing secrets, as it has done repeatedly.

The new law dangerously expands the definition of illegal enemy combatant and allows Bush – and the secretary of defense – to give to anyone they choose the authority to designate a prisoner as an illegal combatant. It also allows Bush to go on squirreling prisoners away at secret CIA camps where none of the rules apply.

Bush wants Americans to trust him to apply these powers only to truly dangerous men. Even if the American system were based on that sort of personal power and not the rule of law, it would be hard to trust the judgment of a president and an administration whose records are so bad. The United States has yet to acknowledge that it kidnapped an innocent Canadian citizen and sent him to be abused in a Syrian prison. In another case, a German citizen has accused the United States of grabbing him off the streets of Macedonia, drugging him and sending him to Afghanistan, where he was brutally treated. Then there is the Ethiopian living in London who said he was grabbed by American agents and brutalized by Moroccan torturers until he confessed to plotting with Jose Padilla to set off a “dirty bomb.” Padilla was never charged with the crime. The Ethiopian remains at Guantánamo Bay.

Republicans who support the new law like to point out that it only covers foreigners. But Americans have never believed that human rights are just for Americans.

The United States is outraged when an authoritarian government jails an American, or one of its own citizens, on trumped-up charges and brings him or her before a phony court. Surely that is not the model that Americans want to follow in their own prisons.

When President George W. Bush rammed the bill on military commissions through Congress, the Republicans crowed about creating a process that would be tough on terrorists but preserve essential principles of justice. “America can be proud,” said Senator Lindsey Graham, one of the bill’s architects.

Unfortunately, Graham was wrong. One of the many problems with the new law is that it will only make it harder than it already is to separate the real terrorists from the far larger group of inmates at the American military detention center at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, who were bit players in the Taliban or innocent bystanders.

Graham and other supporters of this dreadful legislation seem to have forgotten that American justice does not merely deliver swift punishment to the guilty. It also protects the innocent.

Bush ignored that fact after the Sept. 11 attacks, when he tried to put the prisoners of the war on terror beyond the reach of American law and the Geneva Conventions. For starters, he dispensed with one of the vital provisions of the conventions: that prisoners must be screened by a “competent tribunal” if there is any doubt about who they are and what role they played in hostilities.

As a result, hundreds of men captured in Afghanistan and other countries were sent to Guantánamo Bay and other prisons, including the network of illegal CIA detention camps, without any attempt to determine whether they were any sort of combatant, legal or illegal.

The Bush administration showed not the slightest interest in fixing this problem until the Supreme Court said in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld that the president cannot simply lock up anyone – even a foreign citizen – without giving him a real chance to challenge his detention before a “neutral decision maker.”

In response, Bush created Combatant Status Review Tribunals, which gave the most cursory possible reviews of the Guantánamo detainees. These reviews took place years after the prisoners were captured. They permitted the use of hearsay evidence, evidence obtained through coercion and even torture, and evidence that was kept secret from the prisoner. The normal burden of proof was reversed: The tribunals presumed prisoners were justifiably detained and the prisoners had the burden of disproving government evidence – presuming they knew what it was in the first place.

The new law makes this mockery of justice stronger. The Military Commissions Act of 2006 makes it virtually impossible to contest a status tribunal’s decision. It prohibits claims of habeas corpus – the ancient right of prisoners in just societies to have their detentions reviewed – or any case based directly or indirectly on the Geneva Conventions. Even if an appeal got to the single appeals court now authorized to hear it, the administration would be very likely to argue that it cannot be heard without jeopardizing secrets, as it has done repeatedly.

The new law dangerously expands the definition of illegal enemy combatant and allows Bush – and the secretary of defense – to give to anyone they choose the authority to designate a prisoner as an illegal combatant. It also allows Bush to go on squirreling prisoners away at secret CIA camps where none of the rules apply.

Bush wants Americans to trust him to apply these powers only to truly dangerous men. Even if the American system were based on that sort of personal power and not the rule of law, it would be hard to trust the judgment of a president and an administration whose records are so bad. The United States has yet to acknowledge that it kidnapped an innocent Canadian citizen and sent him to be abused in a Syrian prison. In another case, a German citizen has accused the United States of grabbing him off the streets of Macedonia, drugging him and sending him to Afghanistan, where he was brutally treated. Then there is the Ethiopian living in London who said he was grabbed by American agents and brutalized by Moroccan torturers until he confessed to plotting with Jose Padilla to set off a “dirty bomb.” Padilla was never charged with the crime. The Ethiopian remains at Guantánamo Bay.

Republicans who support the new law like to point out that it only covers foreigners. But Americans have never believed that human rights are just for Americans.

The United States is outraged when an authoritarian government jails an American, or one of its own citizens, on trumped-up charges and brings him or her before a phony court. Surely that is not the model that Americans want to follow in their own prisons.

source:
http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/10/16/opinion/edcourts.php

===

-muslim voice-
______________________________________
BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

Bush signs law authorizing harsh interrogation

Posted by musliminsuffer on October 18, 2006


bismi-lLahi-rRahmani-rRahiem
In the Name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful

=== News Update ===

Bush signs law authorizing harsh interrogation

Tue Oct 17, 2006 10:53am ET145

By Steve Holland

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – President George W. Bush signed a law on Tuesday authorizing tough interrogation and prosecution of terrorism suspects and took an indirect, election-year swipe at Democrats who opposed the legislation.

Bush, trying to help Republicans maintain control of the U.S. Congress by emphasizing national security, called the Military Commissions Act of 2006 “one of the most important pieces of legislation in the war on terror.”

Human rights groups charge that the measure would allow harsh techniques bordering on torture, such as sleep deprivation and induced hypothermia.

In a White House East Room ceremony, Bush praised members of Congress who approved the law over the opposition of the Democratic leadership in both the Senate and House of Representatives.

“Every member of the Congress who voted for this bill has helped our nation rise to the task that history has given us. Some voted to support this bill even when a majority of their party voted the other way,” Bush said.

Much of the new law, which critics say still does not protect detainees’ rights and predict will face legal challenge, was negotiated in September after senior Republicans rebelled against Bush’s plan.

The new law means Bush can continue a secret CIA program for interrogating terrorism suspects whom he believes have vital information that could thwart a plot against America.

Bush said the law will allow intelligence professionals to question suspects without fear of being sued by them later.

“This bill spells out specific recognizable offenses that would be considered crimes in the handling of detainees so that our men and women who question captured terrorists can perform their duties to the fullest extent of the law,” he said.

The White House has refused to describe what techniques will be allowed or banned.

CHALLENGES SEEN

Critics and legal experts have predicted the new law will draw vigorous court challenges and could be struck down for violating rights guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution.

They cited provisions that strip foreign suspects of the right to challenge their detentions in U.S. courts and what they described as unfair rules for military trials.

Bush insisted the law complies with the spirit and letter of international agreements. “As I’ve said before, the United States does not torture. It’s against our laws and it’s against our values,” he said.

The law also establishes military tribunals for terrorism suspects, most of whom are held at the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

The law was prompted by a Supreme Court ruling in June that said Bush lacked legislative authority in setting up his first system of military commissions. Future legal battles will likely also end up in the high court.

Shortly after Bush signed the law, the Republican National Committee issued a press releasing headlined, “Democrats would let terrorists free” and listed the names of many House and Senate Democrats who opposed it.

The American Civil Liberties Union expressed outrage, calling the new law “one of the worst civil liberties measures ever enacted in American history.”

“Nothing separates America more from our enemies than our commitment to fairness and the rule of law, but the bill signed today is an historic break because it turns Guantanamo Bay and other U.S. facilities into legal no-man’s-lands,” said ACLU Executive Director Anthony Romero.

source:
http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=politicsNews&storyID=2006-10-17T145346Z_01_N17413926_RTRUKOC_0_US-SECURITY-BUSH.xml&WTmodLoc=PolNewsHome_C1_%5BFeed%5D-2

===

-muslim voice-
______________________________________
BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

9/11 – ALL THE PROOF YOU NEED!

Posted by musliminsuffer on October 18, 2006


bismi-lLahi-rRahmani-rRahiem
In the Name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful

=== News Update ===

9/11 – ALL THE PROOF YOU NEED!

A 9/11 CHECKMATE
BY TvNews LIES .ORG – April – 2005

Some things are so disturbing that they are almost impossible to believe. That is why, in the 9/11 enigma, less is more.

Until these questions are answered there is no need to establish more doubt. What we have here is solid undisputed evidence that we were never told the truth.

Before you read this article, conduct this test. Try to purchase some stock, or some futures, a mutual fund or some put options, without providing your identity. Go ahead and try it! See if you get anywhere. Find out what happens when you tell the investment firm that you want to make a huge investment anonymously. It can’t be done.

Then ask yourself this question: How could someone have placed anonymous put options on American Airlines and United Airlines just prior to the attacks of 9/11? Then ask yourself why no one has investigated this suspicious deal. Ask yourself why there has been no attempt by the US government to identify the person who anticipated huge profits from a disaster that was yet to occur. Is it because the trail possibly leads to the CIA?

Then wonder about the collapse of Building 7 on the day of the attacks. Ask yourself why the owner of the building allowed the building to be pulled down (intentionally demolished) hours after the Twin Towers fell. Pulling down a building takes weeks of planning and preparation so that explosives can be safely positioned and wired. Not so in this case. Wonder why.

If you have any doubts at all about the official 9/11 story, then the answers to these questions are all the proof you need that something is very, very wrong!

Independent 9/11 researchers have worked nonstop since the events to examine the events of 9/11 and they have uncovered enough information to seriously challenge the official versions of what happened on that fateful day. But maybe, just maybe, the very fact that massive amounts of information are available is a problem in itself. There may be far too much evidence for most Americans to face.

The challenges to the official stories may be too devastating to be processed by the average American who has spent a lifetime believing in the system. Many people can deal with the minor violations that are part of the political scene, but cannot possibly fathom a government that might be complicit in an attack on its own people. They are not unlike the parents who eventually come to terms with a child’s shoplifting spree. The same parents would do anything to deny far more serious accusations. Imagine the response of parents whose son turns out to be a Timothy McVeigh.

Some things are so disturbing that they are almost impossible to believe. That is why, in the 9/11 enigma, less is more. There is a real danger of frightening everyone off by offering too much information. Therefore, if we think of the problem as a chess game, two strategic moves can lead to checkmate.

There are two pieces of the 9/11 puzzle that on their own expose the lies of the administration.

Two questions must be raised so that even the most diehard Bush supporters realize they have been deceived. These are issues that no one can debate or dismiss. These are not conspiracy theories. They are fact-based questions that can lead to exposing the deceptions in the official reports. The apologists have no way to explain these away or justify them. Basically, they offer clear evidence that the official explanations of 9/11 are meaningless.

TWO MOVES TO CHECKMATE

1. THE COVER UP

Someone had foreknowledge of the attacks. In the weeks leading up to 9/11 someone made a series of investments that would have paid off in huge profits because of the attacks. This is well documented and undisputed. This person specifically invested in the two airliners used in the attacks, anticipating windfall profits from any drop in the stock prices of these companies. This is solid evidence that at least one person in the United States had detailed information that something bad was going to happen to the specific airlines that were to be used in the attack.

We have been told that the person who made these investments never claimed the profits. We are expected to believe that this explains why his or her identity is unavailable. This is absolutely untrue. This is not an instance in which someone was waiting to pick up a package at an airport locker. This is a case of a financial institution processing an investment transaction for an individual. This CAN NOT BE PERFORMED ANONYMOUSLY! The identity of this person who had foreknowledge of the attack is know and this person’s identity is being protected by our government and this is a fact! Period, end of story.

WHO MADE THE INVESTMENT? Identify this person and you have someone who very probably had detailed foreknowledge of the events. The fact that the profits were never collected is even more suspicious and incriminating. The fact that the identity of this person remains unknown is even more suspicious. The only possible conclusion is that this person is known to the government and that his or her identity is being protected.

There has been a clear and concerted cover up regarding the person who tried to profit from events he or she knew were coming. The people who could easily clear this up, but who chose to close any further investigation into the matter are not underlings. They are officials who answer directly to the President of the United States. Check.

2. BUILDING 7

On September 11th, Towers One and Two collapsed after suffering direct hits by airliners. Building 7 was neither hit by an airliner nor damaged severely by flying debris, but at 5:20 p.m. it collapsed in the exact same accordion style of the other two towers. The official explanation by FEMA investigators claimed that WTC 7 fell as a result of burning for 7 hours.

Several weeks after the events of 9/11, Larry Silverstein, the new owner of the WTC was interviewed on TV. At this time he openly acknowledged the decision to pull Building 7. This was a public statement in which the owner of the WTC agreed to the destruction of the building.

This decision was never explained and was never questioned by the Kean Commission. The conflicting report of the FEMA investigators was also never explained. Pulling a building requires weeks, if not months of preparation. Explosives have to be carefully and strategically placed and wired. How was it possible to pull a building without first preparing for its demolition?

Larry Silverstein invested $386 million in WTC 7. On 9/11, by his own admission, Larry Silverstein ordered the demolition of his building . In February of 2002, his company won a settlement of $861 million from Industrial Risk Insurers. Do the math. No one investigated. This is a confession to the demolition of Building 7. Let me repeat that, THIS IS A CONFESSION! Checkmate.

Until these questions are answered there is no need to establish more doubt. What we have here is solid undisputed evidence that we were never told the truth. We have solid evidence that the official investigation stopped short of delving into questions that could have supplied answers. We have solid proof that something is very, very wrong.

There is a mountain of unanswered questions concerning the events surrounding the 9/11 attacks. Anyone willing to listen or look at the inconsistencies would have to draw an obvious conclusion: the official explanation of the events of 9/11 is nothing more than a desperate attempt to distract the American people from investigating the truth. There can be no denying that there are a number of strange and puzzling occurrences that have never been, and seemingly cannot be explained.

Perhaps the abundance of startling and damning information is too incredible to be accepted easily by the millions of Americans who have bought into the corporate media’s version of the events. So many people in this country can not deal with, or accept any real challenge to the official explanation that allows for no foreknowledge or cover up by their government. Even if most Americans were to be presented with clearly corroborated facts or cold evidence, they would probably refuse to even consider the involvement of their elected leaders in a tragedy of such huge proportions.

The official story, however, collapses after an examination of the two questions just raised. Very simply put, case closed. We do not need to pull an OJ here and bury the obvious under more evidence than the jury can handle. Show the Bronco chase and the blood evidence, and rest the prosecution. Otherwise we risk badly confusing a jury of the uninformed.

It is vital that the evidence based community encourage the American public to question the events for themselves. Two questions of this magnitude are enough to raise reasonable doubt. Two such questions that have gone uninvestigated and unexplained are enough to arouse curiosity,

We’re in a very dangerous game, here, and all of us are players. Much of what happened on September 11th remains at best unclear, and at worst terribly suspicious. The reality that the President of the United States spent more than 18 months resisting an official investigation into the most devastating tragedy in our history is in itself an outrage. But the reality that there is no official body still seeking answers to vital questions is an even greater outrage.

And if that remains the case, we all will have been checkmated, en masse.

Editor’s NOTE: People might comment on this article by calling it a conspiracy theory. This is their usual way of dismissing the facts. I ask you, where exactly is there ‘theory’ on this page? What elements of this article are in dispute? This is not a theory, this article poses questions that have not been answered and the people who call the results of the independent 9/11 research community ‘conspiracy theories’ have yet to qualify their assertion. You can not simply call something a ‘theory’ just because you have not looked closely enough to see the facts that have been presented. If you call this a theory you are in denial. Very simply put, you can not debate this issue. Many people will dismiss this, as they do all evidence that goes against what they want to believe, yet when asked what their criteria is for discerning between theory and fact, they will not have a logical answer. This is not theory and neither are the facts that have been brought to light by the many people involved in the legitimate independent 9/11 research community.

SOURCE: 911 Review
http://911review.org/brad.com/sept11_truth/9_11_-_all_the_proof_you_need.html

===

-muslim voice-
______________________________________
BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

Genocide in Iraq

Posted by musliminsuffer on October 18, 2006


bismi-lLahi-rRahmani-rRahiem
In the Name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful

=== News Update ===

Genocide in Iraq

The Numbers Tell the Horrific Story of a Lying Government and Complicit Corporate Media

by Kim Petersen
www.dissidentvoice.org
October 16, 2006

As reported by BBC News [1], a forthcoming study in the academic peer review journal Lancet estimates the extra number of people killed because of the aggression-occupation of Iraq at 655,000 — up from a previous Lancet study that estimated 100,000 deaths since the US-UK attacked Iraq. [2] All the killing has its origin in US-UK government lies. Weapons of mass destruction were just a pretext as acknowledged by Ziocon Paul Wolfowitz in a Vanity Fair interview, and the invasion was a foregone matter as revealed by the Downing Street Memos. [3]

There is an ongoing genocide in Iraq. What else can over 600,000 killings be deemed but genocide? A price “worth it”? [4] George W. Bush, who some consider the elected president of the United States, labeled the killings in Darfur as genocide over a year ago. [5] But, in totality and proportionally, the number of deaths in Sudan pale in comparison to the number of deaths in Iraq. Sudan with a population of 41,236,378 (July 2006, CIA Factbook estimate) is purported by some sources to have incurred 200,000 deaths from “fighting, famine and disease.” [6] Using the figure cited in the latest Lancet to-be-published study, Iraq with a population of 26,783,383 (July 2006, CIA Factbook estimate) has a far greater extraordinary fatality rate covering approximately the same period of time.

The genocide in Iraq is perpetrated by US imperialist interests. Despite the large number of body bags returning to the US (at best a lowball figure, as who can really trust the number of US troop fatalities reported given the mendacity and secrecy of the Bush administration — not to forget the complicity of the Democratic Party?), the corporate media continues to pump out the outrageous disinformation and propaganda supporting societal destruction and murder. The media is an ensanguined partner in imperialism.

Why the media pumps out the disinformation is understandable: it is effective in swaying much of the public to the “national interest” — i.e., the interests of corporate “elites.”

The duped support imperialism

A 10 October e-mailing from Project Censored exemplifies the effectiveness of disinformation through a unique methodology for gathering and analyzing polling data. The data collected and analyzed by the firm Retro Poll reveals a connection between people’s ignorance and the opinions they hold. Not surprisingly, misinformation or disinformation appears to affect public perceptions.

Retro Poll’s methodology asks both factual and opinion questions and compares the opinion responses on accurate and inaccurate understanding.

In a recent Retro Poll phone survey, 151 Americans in 40 states were contacted. Among the results were that only 53 (35%) knew that none of the 19 al Qaeda members alleged to be directly involved in the 9-11 attack were Iraqis; about the purported connection between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden, 23% said there were no ties while 28% didn’t know; only 44% knew the International Red Cross has charged the US with systematic torture at Guantanamo; only 40% knew of the “extraordinary rendition” of prisoners by the US to countries that torture.

Furthermore,

86% of people who think Saddam and Al Qaeda worked together agreed that prisoners held at Guantanamo without trials must all be guilty simply for being picked up, while two thirds (67%) of those who knew the truth about Saddam and Al Qaeda reject blanket assumptions about prisoners’ guilt. Three quarters (75%) of those who have not heard about the “renditions” in which prisoners have been secretly transferred between nations say they think that all the prisoners at Guantanamo are guilty, compared to just 39% of those who did answer the rendition question accurately. Statistically such differences were highly unlikely to occur by chance (far less than 1%).

“But the important point,” stressed Dr. Marc Sapir, executive director of Retro Poll, “is how strongly these opinion differences are linked to bad information in our surveys.” Most of the bad information came from TV sources; about half of the TV viewers cited Fox or CNN as their source.

Safir warned, “What people think they know — if it is consistently wrong — can endanger our nation in a world environment of war, crisis and US dominance.”

Giving credit where it is due

The BBC News noted that the Lancet findings are “vigorously disputed by supporters of the war in Iraq, including US President George W Bush.” Bush described the methodology of the discredited researchers as “pretty well discredited.” One cannot help wondering about how thoroughly discredited a warring president must be who justified an invasion based on phantom WMD, leading to the untimely killing of so many people, who described the mission as accomplished but whose troops remains mired in the death and mayhem that engulfs Iraq.

With his credibility in tatters, Bush still uttered: “Six-hundred thousand or whatever they guessed at is just … it’s not credible.”

The BBC News mentioned that the 655,000 figure has a built-in “survivor bias.” A bias toward underreporting deaths is reasoned to exist for slain resistance fighter, infant mortality, and the fact of completely annihilated families.

The corporate media abysmally covered the Iraqi civilian fatalities first study published in the Lancet. It is expected that the corporate media will once again focus on the inexpert politicians’ opinions as to what constitutes proper methodology. The effectiveness of such corporate media reporting will depend on the public continuing to trust a media steeped in a genocidal project.

There is, after all, another media that is not beholden to profit nor the spilling of blood to obtain greater profit.

Kim Petersen, Co-Editor of Dissident Voice, lives on the outskirts of Seoul in southern Korea. He can be reached at: kim@dissidentvoice.org.

ENDNOTES

[1] “‘Huge rise’ in Iraqi death tolls,” BBC News, 11 October 2006.

[2] Les Roberts, Riyadh Lafta, Richard Garfield, Jamal Khudhairi, Gilbert Burnham, “Mortality before and after the 2003 invasion of Iraq: cluster sample survey, Lancet, 29 October 2004.

[3] Downing Street Memos. “But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy.”

[4] In 1996, then US ambassador to the United Nations, Madeleine Albright, gave the infamous necrophilic reply that the murder of a half-million Iraqi children was a price “worth it” in a 60 Minutes interview.

[5] Jim VandeHei, “In Break With U.N., Bush Calls Sudan Killings Genocide,” Washington Post, 2 June 2005.

[6] “Sudan: Obasanjo Warns of ‘Near-Genocide’ in Darfur,” allAfrica.com, 11 October 2006. About genocide in Darfur, Nigeria’s president Olusegun Obasanjo finds Bush to be hasty.

source:
http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Oct06/Petersen16.htm

===

-muslim voice-
______________________________________
BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

US Terrorize The World – 25 Ramadhan 1427 H (18.10.06)

Posted by musliminsuffer on October 18, 2006


bismi-lLahi-rRahmani-rRahiem
In the Name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful

=== News Update ===

Criticism of the veil is not about liberating women

One of the more distasteful features of the wave of attacks on Muslims has been the sight of feminists lining up to support Jack Straw’s comments against the veil. Women who claim they believe in liberation should know better. The women’s movement of the 1960s was anti-racist, coming out of the civil rights and anti-war movements in the US.

Those who espouse their ideas today are attacking some of the most oppressed women in the name of liberating them. Their assumption is that any Muslim woman who wears the veil or the hijab does so because of pressure. This is false – some women may fit into this category, but many Muslim women choose to wear the niqab or the hijab for their identity, or for political or other reasons. They are making a statement which they have every right to make.

You would think from the attacks that it was only among Muslims that women’s oppression still exists. In fact, women in the West do not have even the most basic equality, despite nominal lip service to the term.
http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/article.php?article_id=9965

Note: This article should be read after: Warmongers play race card
http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/article.php?article_id=9963

===

Number Of Iraqi Civilians Slaughtered In America’s War? As Many As 655,000

http://informationclearinghouse.info/article15266.htm

Number of U.S. Military Personnel Sacrificed (Officially acknowledged) In Bush’s War 2771
http://icasualties.org/oif/

Cost of America’s War in Iraq $334,899,987,539 – See the cost in your community
http://nationalpriorities.org/index.php?option=com_wrapper&Itemid=182

===

Genocide in Iraq

The Numbers Tell the Horrific Story of a Lying Government and Complicit Corporate Media
http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Oct06/Petersen16.htm

===

Why Bush Smiles: Victory is at Hand in Iraq

Yes, victory. You wonder why Bush and his minions maintain the seemingly irrational belief that “things are going well” in Iraq, that “we’re making progress,” etc.? That’s because things are going well in the war they are fighting: the war for money and power.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article15328.htm

===

The worst in Iraq is still to come

In the US, Iraq is now primarily an electoral rather than a nation-building, humanitarian or counter-terrorism issue. With the Republicans fighting to retain control of Congress in next month’s midterm polls, George Bush’s Middle East freedom mission has become a hard-nosed numbers game.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article15323.htm

===

Iraq: Leave Or Be Forced Out

The United States is not militarily capable of preventing the worse war yet to come, and trying to do so would only start a new war between the United States and the Shiites who want the U.S. to leave. Since we cannot prevent sectarian violence, the only question is whether we leave before the inevitable confrontation with Shiites­a battle U.S. troops would certainly lose.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article15331.htm

===

The Ground Truth : The Human Cost Of War

Sometimes the greatest act of courage is to tell the truth, Must Watch Video
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article15319.htm

===

Stewart in Leg-irons; the latest victory in the war on terror

So far, Bush’s only triumph in his muddled war on terror has been locking up the two Stewart Sisters, Lynne and Martha. (They’re not really sisters) Neither posed any threat to national security, but that’s beside the point. Their arrest sends a chilling message to “home-decoration mavens” and 67 year old cancer patients that they’d better “watch their step” or they’ll find themselves in prison-pinstripes.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article15330.htm

===

The propaganda of our times

J.B. Priestly in the Root Is Fear wrote: “Almost all propaganda is designed to create fear. Heads of governments and their officials know that a frightened people are easier to govern, will forfeit rights it would otherwise defend, are less likely to demand a better life, and will agree to millions and millions being spent on ‘defense’.” Between now and Election Day we’ll see Karl Rove’s minions flaunt the Islamic Fascist line repeatedly and unabashedly to garner votes.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article15329.htm

===

Islamic Army in Iraq Issues Video of Ammunition Facility Bombing in Baghdad, Commenting on the Operation at the Falcon Base

http://www.siteinstitute.org/bin/articles.cgi?ID=publications219606&Category=publications&Subcategory=0

===

Video of the Iraqi resistance operations

http://alrashedeen.net/download.php?actionfiltered=view&id=86

===

US Army AMMO DUMP ATTACK with secondarys

Note how they are asking if the burning ammo dump had chemical weapons.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1410660598904719984&pr=goog-sl

===

The courts are starting to accept that the war against Iraq is a crime

In Britain and Ireland, protesters who have deliberately damaged military equipment are walking from the dock
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,1924178,00.html

===

Iraqi Judge Sentences U.S. Citizen To Death After U.S. Military “Demanded” the Man Be Executed

An Iraqi-born US citizen is in a battle to save his life as he tries to avoid execution in Baghdad. But he’s not up against insurgents groups ­ he’s up against the Iraqi and US governments.
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/10/17/1439239

===

The End of Press Freedom in Iraq?

http://www.albasrah.net/pages/www.juancole.com/2006/10/end-of-press-freedom-in-iraq-al-zaman.html#comments

===

Saddam: Kurds dividing Iraq for Israeli benefit

“This will only serve the separation,” Saddam said, referring to the deepening division among Iraqis as shown by the rising death toll in the insurgency and sectarian fighting.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/1,7340,L-3316173,00.html

===

Blame the Iraqi’s: Dennis Ross: A plan for Iraq

Staying the course is a prescription for avoiding reality. But simply setting a deadline and withdrawing might also constitute a form of denial — denial of what will happen in the region after a precipitous pullout.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article15321.htm

===

Iraqis Ask Why U.S. Forces Didn’t Intervene in Balad

…In the aftermath of the reprisals, some residents of Balad asked why American troops had not intervened when the killings began in earnest on Saturday. One of the largest American military bases in Iraq, Camp Anaconda, which includes a sprawling air base that serves as the logistical hub of the war, is nearby. “People are bewildered because of the weak response by the Americans,” said one Balad resident who asked not to be identified for fear of reprisals. “They used to patrol the city every day, but when the violence started, we didn’t see any sign of them.”….
http://www.uruknet.biz/?p=m27545&hd=0&size=1&l=e

===

Iraq: At least 73 killed as U.S occupation rages on

65 bodies were found in different districts of Baghdad since Sunday night, an Interior Ministry source said.
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/IBO731144.htm

===

Open letter to Danish MP Villy Soevndal: Impunity for the Danish responsible for 655.000 dead Iraqis?

http://fritirak.blogspot.com/2006/10/open-letter-to-danish-mp-villy.html

===

2 U.S. army copters crash in Baghdad

Two U.S. Army helicopters crashed in south-west Baghdad, killing two soldiers and injuring two others, the U.S. military said. The 1st Cavalry Division said the cause of the crashes, which occurred about 8:30 p.m. yesterday, had not been determined. The aircraft went down in south-west Baghdad. Names of the dead and injured were withheld pending notification of relatives, but U.S. officials said they were assigned to Task Force Baghdad…
http://www.uruknet.biz/?p=m27548&hd=0&size=1&l=e

===

US Death Toll in Iraq Hits 57

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20061016/wl_mideast_afp/iraqusunresttoll_061016152611

===

US Military Deaths in Iraq Hit 2,774

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061017/ap_on_re_us/iraq_us_deaths

===

Iraqi Resistance Report for events of Monday, 16 October 2006.

  • Four Resistance bombs rip through US column in Hit, leaving six Americans reported dead.
  • US warplane wipes out family of five near al-Qa’im at dawn Monday.
  • Resistance sharpshooter kills US sniper atop building in al-Qa’im on Sunday.
  • US soldier reported killed in Resistance bomb attack in al-Ba‘aj midday Monday.
  • Resistance battles US troops for two hours in ar-Ramadi on Sunday.
  • the fourth straight day US troops accompanied by their Iraqi puppet army allies have kept the Iraqi town of ‘Anah
  • Resistance bomb blasts Iraqi puppet army troops in Abu Ghurayb noon Monday.
  • Resistance car bomber wounds puppet policemen in Baghdad al-Jadidah.
  • Resistance bomb blasts puppet police patrol in eastern Baghdad Monday morning.
  • Tuz Khurmatu, Resistance bomb blasts puppet “Iraqi National Guard” column Sunday.
  • Yathrib, Resistance blasts US-occupied base with Katyusha rockets.
  • Resistance fighters assault puppet police checkpoint a midday Monday.
  • Resistance bomb damages US armored vehicle in al-Mawsil on Sunday.
  • Member of collaborationist “Islamic Party” assassinated in al-Mawsil on Sunday.
  • Rocket blasts British official’s car in al-Basrah.
  • Armed men attack home of spokesman for puppet Provincial Assembly of al-Basrah on Sunday.

http://www.albasrah.net/pages/mod.php?mod=art&lapage=../en_articles_2006/1006/iraqiresistancereport_161006.htm

===

The War in Afghanistan: Drugs, Money Laundering and the Banking System

It must also be recognized that the insurgency is also partially and genuinely a resistance movement in many parts of Afghanistan. The media “erroneously” calls this movement the “Taliban.” On the ground in Afghanistan, however, NATO troops term the Afghan insurgents as Anti-Coalition Militias (ACMs).
http://tinyurl.com/yghxxu

===

Four Palestinians killed by Israeli Occupation Forces in West Bank

Border Policemen fired at Palestinian stonethrowers in Qabatiya, killing one and moderately injuring another, according to the IDF.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/objects/pages/PrintArticleEn.jhtml?itemNo=775854

===

Gaza doctors say patients suffering mystery injuries after Israeli attacks

Doctors in occupied Gaza have reported previously unseen injuries from Israeli weapons that cause severe burning and deep internal wounds often resulting in amputations or death.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,,1924524,00.html

===

Abbas lacks majority in Fatah to oust Hamas government

Most Fatah leaders are opposed to Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas’ initiative to dismiss the Hamas government. Consequently, the Fatah Central Committee has postponed a meeting scheduled to discuss the Abbas proposal.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/775934.html

===

9/11 – ALL THE PROOF YOU NEED!

Some things are so disturbing that they are almost impossible to believe. That is why, in the 9/11 enigma, less is more.

Until these questions are answered there is no need to establish more doubt. What we have here is solid undisputed evidence that we were never told the truth.
http://justanotherblowback.blogspot.com/2006/10/911-all-proof-you-need.html

===

Government Targets American Bloggers As Enemy Propagandists

Military, Homeland Security, Bush White House strategy sharpen knives against anyone critical of the “war on terror”

Recent scientific polls that show around 84% don’t believe the government’s explanation behind 9/11 and others confirming the fact that support for the war in Iraq is at an all time low have led the Bush administration to sharpen their knives against the new breed of perceived “enemy propagandists,” bloggers, journalists and online activists who dissent against the “war on terror.”
http://www.uruknet.biz/?p=m27541&hd=0&size=1&l=e

===

Bush signs law authorizing “harsh” interrogation

Bush signed a law on Tuesday authorizing tough “interrogation” and prosecution of terrorism suspects and took an indirect, election-year swipe at Democrats who opposed the legislation.
http://tinyurl.com/y8s9sm

===

Under Bush’s law, guilty until confirmed guilty

Graham and other supporters of this dreadful legislation seem to have forgotten that American justice does not merely deliver swift punishment to the guilty. It also protects the innocent
http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/10/16/opinion/edcourts.php

===

Bush’s S.S. Grills 14 Year-Old

Two super-sized adult male U.S. Secret Service (“S.S.”) agents banged on the front door at 14 year-old Julia Wilson’s home last Thursday during school hours, but Julia wasn’t home. Predictably (except to the S.S. agents), the straight-A student was in her microbiology class at school.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article15325.htm

===

Web could be terror training camp in U.S., politician says

Disaffected people living in the United States may develop radical ideologies and potentially violent skills over the Internet and that could
present the next major U.S. security threat, U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said on Monday.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061016/ts_nm/security_chertoff_dc

===

Former FDA Chief Lester Crawford to Plead Guilty in Fraud Case

Former FDA chief Lester Crawford will plead guilty for failing to disclose a financial interest in companies his agency regulated, his lawyer said.
http://www.fox28.com/News/index.php?ID=6438

===

Lone Wolf Takes on the Pharma Pack: The Whistleblower

Confessions of a Healthcare Hitman , Rost compares corporate culture to running with a wolf pack. “Everyone helps out and is friendly as long as it benefits the group,” he writes, “but each wolf cares only about himself and will do anything to survive.”
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article15327.htm

===

-muslim voice-
______________________________________
BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »