IRAQ sheltered terrorists

[Guest HairyDomBraz27]

For those of you who claim that there is no link between Iraq and Arab terrorists, what was Abul Abbas -- who was just arrested by U.S. forces in Baghdad -- doing in Iraq?

 

Abul Abbas was the terrorist who oversaw the hijacking of the Italian cruise ship Achille Lauro -- and threatened to kill the passengers and crew unless 50 imprisoned Palestinians were released by Israel.

 

The terrorists doused American and British women with gasoline and taunted them with matches. They forced passengers to hold live grenades. When their demands were not met, the terrorists shot a wheelchair-bound American, Leon Klinghoffer, and forced other passengers at gunpoint to throw him overboard in his wheelchair into the Mediterranean Sea.

 

He was living peacefully and with the protection of the Iraqi government in a lovely home in a quiet residential section of Baghdad.

 

So, too, was Abu Nidal - probably the most destructive and murderous Arab terrorist of the 1980s. He was also given shelter by Saddam Hussein in Iraq until he recently died.

 

Two of the most vile, murderous anti-American extremist terrorists were given shelter and protection by Saddam Hussein's government.

 

But there is no link between Iraq and terrorism.

[FrancoDiSantisxxx]

No link

 

If the United States were to go after every government who knowingly may be harboring or otherwise aiding terrorists, there would be no country in the region that would not be subject to a "pre-emptive" invasion in the middle east.

 

This administration has convinced the American public, in order to obtain support for this "pre-emptive" undeclared war that Iraq was involved in the September 11th attacks, that they were harboring and aiding Al-Qaeda and were allied with Osma bin Laden. In fact, recent polls have indicated that contrary to the truth (that nearly all the hijackers were Saudis), the majority polled believe most involved were from Iraq. No such connection has yet been shown (although, as the trials progress, particularly when the recently captured strategic and operations officer is fully interrogated and tried, who knows what will actually come out).

 

It would have been possible to obtain extradiction of the two individuals you named without wide spread distruction in Iraq and the loss of lives by American, Australian and British soldiars, as well as civilians in Afghanistan, Syria, Kuwait and other countries who have suffered casualities in this "pre-emptive" involvement beyond those civilians and solidiars from Iraq who have also died.

 

There are international systems of justices and law used to find, transfer and prosecute anyone suspected or convicted of any crime. They exist to insure due process to all. That is why they should be used and followed.

[dick_nyc]

RE: No link

 

How would you obtain extradition of those individuals. We can't even get extradition from France and France is supposedly our friend. Whyever would Iraq who was not our friend be extraditing these individuals. That is pure hogwash and wishful thinking.

[Guest HairyDomBraz27]

RE: No link

 

>If the United States were to go after every government who

>knowingly may be harboring or otherwise aiding terrorists,

>there would be no country in the region that would not

>be subject to a "pre-emptive" invasion in the middle east.

 

So you admit that there IS a link between Iraq and terrorists - but your defense of Iraq is that "everyone in that region does it"?

 

Maybe what you say was true a year ago - i.e., that every country there harbors terrorists -- but I believe that after seeing what happens to governments that harbor terrorists (such as the ex-Government of Afghanistan and the ex-Gavernment of Iraq used to do), there won't be many governments in the Middle East engaging in such behavior for much longer. If there are, I have no dobut that they will meet a similar fate.

 

That is the WHOLE POINT of these military activities -- to signal to countries that, in the aftermath of 9/11, we will no longer tolerate countries harboring terrorists who attack our citizens and interests.

 

Do you think we should allow countries to do so?

 

>This administration has convinced the American public, in

>order to obtain support for this "pre-emptive" undeclared war

>that Iraq was involved in the September 11th attacks, . . . .

 

I have never heard any official of the U.S. Government claim that Iraq was involved in the planning of the September 11th attacks. On what are you basing this statement?

 

>It would have been possible to obtain extradiction of the two

>individuals you named without wide spread distruction in Iraq

>and the loss of lives. . . .

 

On what basis could you possibly believe that Iraq - which has wilfully ignored virtually every UN directive aimed at it - would have complied with a lofty little "extradition order" backed up by no force?

 

Even if it had extradited these 2 individuals, the Government that GAVE THEM SHELTER would have remained, and would have continued to do so. What good would that have served?

 

Also, what do you have to say to the 23 million Iraqis who would still be living under the most brutal, repressive dictatorship if you had your way?

 

>There are international systems of justices and law used to

>find, transfer and prosecute anyone suspected or convicted of

>any crime. They exist to insure due process to all. That is

>why they should be used and followed.

 

"International systems of justices and law" LOLOLOL!!!!!!!! Can you agree that Saddam Hussein has demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt that he was completely unwilling to abide by "international systems of justice and law"?

 

Even the French admit that Iraq repeatedly and deliberately violated 17 different UN resolutions over the last 12 years without any sign of adherence.

 

Your belief in the "international systems of justices and law" is cute, really. But there are bad people in the world who don't abide by such systems. There are also bad people who allow them to get away with it. That is why war is sometimes necessary - becasue it is the only way to stop the bad people from doing bad things.

 

Did you have some alternative to stop the tryanny and oppression and terrorist-sheltering of Saddam Hussein other than war? DID YOU????

[axebahia]

More nonsense from you! Under the Oslo treaties, PLO and Israelis terrorists are given amnesty for their prior violent acts. (Do you really want to re-open this, Mr. Sharon, Mr. Peres et al.?) Mr. Abbas lived openly in Iraq, repudiated violence and regretted the Italian affair. So much so that Israel permitted him to travel several times to Gaza. So that's what this war has come to? WMD found in the a.m., then denied in the p.m. Terrorists training camps found in the north controlled by our Kurdish "allies". And now terrorists found who lived openly and cooperated with the Israelis. I think W's getting pretty fucking desperate. None of his pretexts for this illegal/immoral war have born fruit, and pretty soon even imbeciles like you are going to wake up and realize that you have been hoodwinked at the cost of lives of your compatriots, innocent Iraqis and the common heritage of mankind.

[Guest HairyDomBraz27]

>Under the Oslo treaties, PLO and

>Israelis terrorists are given amnesty for their prior violent

>acts.

 

He committed the murder and hijacking crimes on an Italian cruise ship. Italy was not a party to any agreement giving amnesty to this terrorist, which is why it is seeking to have him extradited.

 

>Mr. Abbas lived openly in Iraq, repudiated

>violence and regretted the Italian affair.

 

Oh - he terrorized hundreds of innocent passengers on a cruise ship, shot a wheelchair-bound American in front of his wife, and then forced the other passengers to dump the body into the sea.

 

But he said he was sorry and wishes he hadn't done it - so what's all the fuss about?

 

He chose Iraq as the country he wanted to live in because he knew he would receive the protection of the government. That's why Abu Nidal chose to live there, too. There is no longer any room - at least in reality - for the claim that there is no connection between anti-U.S. Arab terrorists and ex-Iraqi regime

 

>None of his

>pretexts for this illegal/immoral war have born fruit, and

>pretty soon even imbeciles like you are going to wake up and

>realize that you have been hoodwinked at the cost of lives of

>your compatriots, innocent Iraqis and the common heritage of

>mankind.

 

Why do you pretend to care about the lives of "innocent Iraqis" when - if you had your way - the dictator who slaughtered and terrorizeed innocent Iraqis for the last 25 years would still be doing so if had your way?

[axebahia]

Oh yes, and before I forget, how about this little quote from the AP from the super-hawk former prosecutor responsible for the file in the 1980s:

 

"A criminal complaint filed shortly after the hijacking was withdrawn because of lack of evidence against Abbas, said Victoria Toensing, who was the Justice Department's top counterterrorism prosecutor in the mid-1980s.

 

Toensing, now in private practice, said that unless prosecutors have better evidence than existed in the 1980s it would be unwise to go forward."

 

Apparently, the Justice Department dropped a U.S. arrest warrant for Abbas in the 1980s after the State Department concluded the evidence against him would probably not be admissible in U.S. courts.

[axebahia]

>He committed the murder and hijacking crimes on an Italian

>cruise ship. Italy was not a party to any agreement giving

>amnesty to this terrorist, which is why it is seeking to have

>him extradited.

 

At least, you seem to agree that the U.S. has no basis to put him on trial. It would make for a nice case as the government tried to deny a grant of immunity signed by an American president. But hey after this illegal war, the Guantamo POW fiasco, the Massaoui show trial and the denial ofa U.S. citizen the right to counsel, I suppose this was only a natural next step.

 

As for the extradition, it will be very interesting to see on what legal basis that proceeds. If he is under a valid grant of immunity here, it is arguable that the U.S. has no authority to extradite him. And if the U.S., does not "hold" him legally, it may be that extradition would be a matter for the government of "occupied" Iraq. The bottom line, I guess, is that Mr. Sharon won't be travelling very much any more!

[Guest HairyDomBraz27]

>"A criminal complaint filed shortly after the hijacking was

>withdrawn because of lack of evidence against Abbas, said

>Victoria Toensing, who was the Justice Department's top

>counterterrorism prosecutor in the mid-1980s.

 

Gee - you said earlier that he regretted that unfortunate little incident where he hijacked that cruise ship and demanded the release of Arab criminals from jail; then shot that passenger in the head in front of his wife, and then dumped his body into the sea.

 

That sounds like a confession to me. It's sort of hard to regret having committed a hijacking and a murder that you didn't commit, isn't it?

[axebahia]

>Gee - you said earlier that he regretted that unfortunate

>little incident where he hijacked that cruise ship and

>demanded the release of Arab criminals from jail; then shot

>that passenger in the head in front of his wife, and then

>dumped his body into the sea.

 

One can regret something without participating in it. Do you have evidence that he shot and pushed the old fart overboard? The U.S. prosecutor said she did not have any such evidence usable in an American court, but I forgot that our on-line Zionists here are vested with so much more insider information!

[Guest HairyDomBraz27]

>One can regret something without participating in it.

 

You said before he regretted it in order to argue that he shouldn't be held accountable for what he did. You also said he "renounced" terrorism - which means that he must have embraced it previously. Do you believe the committed this sick murder?

 

>Do you

>have evidence that he shot and pushed the old fart overboard?

 

He was convicted by the criminal court in Italy of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment for his involvement in this murder.

 

And it's funny how one minute you are oh-so-piously pretending to care about the deaths of innocent people (as long as they are Arab and the deaths are caused by the U.S.), but then the next minute, you are belittling the murder of an innocent human being (referring to the murder as the "Italian affair" and saying it's no big deal because the murderer said he "regretted" it) and mocking the murder victim as an "old fart" (because he's a jew slaughtered by an Arab).

 

Do you think that the murder of Leon Klinghoffer on the Achille Lauro was a despicable act and that the individuals who committed this act should be punished?

 

Why do I have the strong feeling that you won't answer that question?

[BewareofNick]

I suppose we'll find Eric Robert Rudolph in Iraq as well.

 

Oh and let's not forget the Oklahoma City terrorists Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols. They're Arab too, aren't they?

[axebahia]

>Do you think that the murder of Leon Klinghoffer on the

>Achille Lauro was a despicable act and that the individuals

>who committed this act should be punished?

 

I don't think it was any more dispicable than the occupation of Palestine and the enslavement of 4 million people, and the dennial of their basic human rights to say nothing of the millions more expelled and whose land have been expropriated. Whether in Ireland, South Africa or elsewhere, I think that the way to resolving these issues is not by one-sided selective prosecutions of "terror". So no, unless we punish Sharon, I would not favor punishing whoever fed "Sir Leon" to the fishes. I worry about those who cry crocodile tears for folks like him while ignoring the oppression of millions. I won't join you in that moral relativism, and I don't see anything that makes the life of a Jew intrinsically more valuable than that of anyone else. It is time to end with that infantalizing hypocrisy.

[axebahia]

>He was convicted by the criminal court in Italy of murder

 

in absentia (you forgot to add).

[axebahia]

>You said before he regretted it in order to argue that he

>shouldn't be held accountable for what he did. You also said

>he "renounced" terrorism - which means that he must have

>embraced it previously.

 

He might have embraced acts of liberation that some Zionist occupiers and their symapthyzers might characterize as "terrorism" just as the "military" and para-military acts of the Zionist entity in Palestine might be characterized as "terrorism" in some circles. But thatr does not mean, and nor does it matter, whether he committed the particular Italian surprise. The point is that if you want to settle the Israel/Palestine dispute, as elsewhere, there is going to have to be a turning of the page on bad acts. In this case, his renunciation of violence as a liberation strategy has been accepted by Israel as part of the Oslo accords, and in fact they gave him safe passage to Gaza. Are you more hawkish than your co-religionists?

[FrancoDiSantisxxx]

Wishfull Thinking

 

>How would you obtain extradition of those individuals. We

>can't even get extradition from France and France is

>supposedly our friend. Whyever would Iraq who was not our

>friend be extraditing these individuals. That is pure hogwash

>and wishful thinking.

 

France (like nearly all other industralized states) does not believe in capital punishment. France (as well as other industralized states) have complied with extradition treaties in place between our governments when the United States Department of Justice (or the pertinent local authority) has agreed not to pursue the death penalty. Under such circumstances, not only have individuals been prosecuted in this country (except they only face life imprisonment) but evidence and other cooperation has been provided by the French, just as it has been provided by Yeman (which has also "harbored" terrorists), Eqypt, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qaatar, Libya (ditto), etc.

[FrancoDiSantisxxx]

Do Your Homework

 

>>This administration has convinced the American public, in

>>order to obtain support for this "pre-emptive" undeclared

>war

>>that Iraq was involved in the September 11th attacks, . . . .

>

>

>I have never heard any official of the U.S. Government claim

>that Iraq was involved in the planning of the September 11th

>attacks. On what are you basing this statement?

 

I am not going to do your research for you.

 

Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Peres and several others, including "unidentified" DOD or State or White House "sources" have all stated this on the cable news channels, in speeches, on Sunday morning talk programs and otherwise. A simple Google seach for "Iraq" and "9/11" will pull up the references for you and then you can narrow the search with either of the named administration officials or departments.

[Guest HairyDomBraz27]

Franco is a LIAR

 

>>I have never heard any official of the U.S. Government claim

>>that Iraq was involved in the planning of the September 11th

>>attacks. On what are you basing this statement?

>

>I am not going to do your research for you.

>

>Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Peres and several others, including

>"unidentified" DOD or State or White House "sources" have all

>stated this on the cable news channels, in speeches, on Sunday

>morning talk programs and otherwise.

 

You are an absolute liar. None of the individuals in the Bush Administration whom you identified have EVER claimed that Iraq participated in the 9/11 attacks. The reason you refuse to identify any basis for your statement is because none exists.

 

The ONLY claim that any link existed was from members of the Czech intelligence service, which claimed that a mid-level Iraqi intelligent agent met Mohammed Atta in Prague.

 

Neither Bush, Cheney nor Rumsfeld has ever claimed that Iraq participated in the planning or execution of the 9/11 attacks, and it is really repugnant of you to simply fabricate lies to suit your little agenda -- and then try to cover up your lies by refusing to identify a basis for your statements.

[woodlawn]

>He might have embraced acts of liberation that some Zionist

>occupiers and their symapthyzers might characterize as

>"terrorism" just as the "military" and para-military acts of

>the Zionist entity in Palestine might be characterized as

>"terrorism" in some circles. But thatr does not mean, and nor

>does it matter, whether he committed the particular Italian

>surprise.

 

 

There you have it, folks. Our official spokesman for the Palestinian cause tells us that the murder of an elderly American cruise ship passenger was an "act of liberation" and "doesn't matter." Well, that settles it, right?

 

 

>Are you more hawkish than

>your co-religionists?

 

I don't know about Hairy, but I am and always will be far too hawkish to give amnesty to any terrorist who deliberately targets American civilians. If Abbas were in my custody I would, to use an expression that is quite appropriate considering the season, "hang him as high as Haman."

 

Both Israel and America offer plenty of purely military targets for any state or organization that wants to wage war on either country. Those who ignore military targets and deliberately target innocent and defenseless civilians for slaughter are nothing but murderers.

[Guest HairyDomBraz27]

>I don't know about Hairy, but I am and always will be far too

>hawkish to give amnesty to any terrorist who deliberately

>targets American civilians.

 

As shocking and controversial as it is, I, too, would actually oppose giving amnesty or shelter to terrorists who deliberately slaughter U.S. civilians. As should be clear, Iraq did not have such reservations.

 

>Those who ignore military targets and

>deliberately target innocent and defenseless civilians for

>slaughter are nothing but murderers.

 

Don't you find it extraordinary that you actually have to point this out?

[taylorky]

as well as the abortion clinc bombers,and murderers of abortion providers;i guess iraq is responsible for them also.........damn and i thought they were part of the right wing ideologues.or it could be as long as your a right wing nut your terrorism is okay............taylorsanebleedingheartliberal@16:27-04/18/03

[DallasTony]

Time is a strange thing. At the time of the Achille Lauro incident 1985, Saddam and Iraq were Allies of the USA.

[dick_nyc]

At the time Abu Abbas was not living in Baghdad. Neither was Abu Nidal.

[axebahia]

You can oppose the amnesty as much as you want, but the fact is that it was signed by an American President precisely so that we would not have to litigate historical "should haves and would haves and mihght have beens or might have dones". I would hope that you can see the problems for foreign policy if commitments of prior Presidents are not honored. I bet that when the fuss is over, he is either extradited to Italy or the case falls away. As a matter of law, this is not going to be an easy trial on the merits or on extradition. BTW, asserting the amnesty goes to jurisdiction, it does not require or mean that he in any way admits the conduct of which he is accused.

 

As for the military targets in Israel, there again the logic of asymetric power implies unconventional responses. Haven't we learned that yet? If not, I suppose we will have ample opportunity to do so in due course.

[woodlawn]

>You can oppose the amnesty as much as you want, but the fact

>is that it was signed by an American President precisely so

>that we would not have to litigate historical "should haves

>and would haves and mihght have beens or might have dones".

 

Is what the president signed a treaty and was it ratified as such by the Senate, as our constitution requires? If not, it has no legal effect here.

 

The "amnesty" you refer to is nothing but a sham, since the principal Palestinian terrorist groups have said again and again they will not honor it. It didn't stop them from assassinating an Israeli cabinet minister some months ago. If they had an opportunity to kill Sharon no doubt they would take it. If the Palestinians are not going to honor it I see no reason why Israel or America should do so.

 

 

>BTW, asserting

>the amnesty goes to jurisdiction, it does not require or mean

>that he in any way admits the conduct of which he is accused.

 

He has already been convicted of that conduct in a court of law. He was tried in Italy in absentia -- because he refused to show up for his court appearance after being released by the Italians.

 

 

>As for the military targets in Israel, there again the logic

>of asymetric power implies unconventional responses.

 

And this is from the same person who is constantly yelling and screaming about violations of international law by the U.S. If our enemies can't be expected to abide by the laws of war then I see no reason why we should. Let's simply put Abbas in front of a firing squad in Baghdad.