America's shameful use of cancer causing weapons in Iraq.....cancer on the rise there
Options
kingblaze84
Members Posts: 14,288 ✭✭✭✭✭
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/toxic-legacy-of-us-assault-on-fallujah-worse-than-hiroshima-2034065.html
Toxic legacy of US assault on Fallujah 'worse than Hiroshima'
The shocking rates of infant mortality and cancer in Iraqi city raise new questions about battle
By Patrick Cockburn
July 24, 2010
Children in Fallujah who suffer from birth defects which are thought to be linked to weapons used in attacks on the city by US Marines
Dramatic increases in infant mortality, cancer and leukaemia in the Iraqi city of Fallujah, which was bombarded by US Marines in 2004, exceed those reported by survivors of the atomic bombs that were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945, according to a new study.
Iraqi doctors in Fallujah have complained since 2005 of being overwhelmed by the number of babies with serious birth defects, ranging from a girl born with two heads to paralysis of the lower limbs. They said they were also seeing far more cancers than they did before the battle for Fallujah between US troops and insurgents.
Their claims have been supported by a survey showing a four-fold increase in all cancers and a 12-fold increase in childhood cancer in under-14s. Infant mortality in the city is more than four times higher than in neighbouring Jordan and eight times higher than in Kuwait.
Dr Chris Busby, a visiting professor at the University of Ulster and one of the authors of the survey of 4,800 individuals in Fallujah, said it is difficult to pin down the exact cause of the cancers and birth defects. He added that "to produce an effect like this, some very major mutagenic exposure must have occurred in 2004 when the attacks happened".
US Marines first besieged and bombarded Fallujah, 30 miles west of Baghdad, in April 2004 after four employees of the American security company Blackwater were killed and their bodies burned. After an eight-month stand-off, the Marines stormed the city in November using artillery and aerial bombing against rebel positions. US forces later admitted that they had employed white phosphorus as well as other munitions.
In the assault US commanders largely treated Fallujah as a free-fire zone to try to reduce casualties among their own troops. British officers were appalled by the lack of concern for civilian casualties. "During preparatory operations in the November 2004 Fallujah clearance operation, on one night over 40 155mm artillery rounds were fired into a small sector of the city," recalled Brigadier Nigel Aylwin-Foster, a British commander serving with the American forces in Baghdad.
He added that the US commander who ordered this devastating use of firepower did not consider it significant enough to mention it in his daily report to the US general in command. Dr Busby says that while he cannot identify the type of armaments used by the Marines, the extent of genetic damage suffered by inhabitants suggests the use of uranium in some form. He said: "My guess is that they used a new weapon against buildings to break through walls and ? those inside."
The survey was carried out by a team of 11 researchers in January and February this year who visited 711 houses in Fallujah. A questionnaire was filled in by householders giving details of cancers, birth outcomes and infant mortality. Hitherto the Iraqi government has been loath to respond to complaints from civilians about damage to their health during military operations.
Researchers were initially regarded with some suspicion by locals, particularly after a Baghdad television station broadcast a report saying a survey was being carried out by terrorists and anybody conducting it or answering questions would be arrested. Those organising the survey subsequently arranged to be accompanied by a person of standing in the community to allay suspicions.
The study, entitled "Cancer, Infant Mortality and Birth Sex-Ratio in Fallujah, Iraq 2005-2009", is by Dr Busby, Malak Hamdan and Entesar Ariabi, and concludes that anecdotal evidence of a sharp rise in cancer and congenital birth defects is correct. Infant mortality was found to be 80 per 1,000 births compared to 19 in Egypt, 17 in Jordan and 9.7 in Kuwait. The report says that the types of cancer are "similar to that in the Hiroshima survivors who were exposed to ionising radiation from the bomb and uranium in the fallout".
Researchers found a 38-fold increase in leukaemia, a ten-fold increase in female breast cancer and significant increases in lymphoma and brain tumours in adults. At Hiroshima survivors showed a 17-fold increase in leukaemia, but in Fallujah Dr Busby says what is striking is not only the greater prevalence of cancer but the speed with which it was affecting people.
Of particular significance was the finding that the sex ratio between newborn boys and girls had changed. In a normal population this is 1,050 boys born to 1,000 girls, but for those born from 2005 there was an 18 per cent drop in male births, so the ratio was 850 males to 1,000 females. The sex-ratio is an indicator of genetic damage that affects boys more than girls. A similar change in the sex-ratio was discovered after Hiroshima.
The US cut back on its use of firepower in Iraq from 2007 because of the anger it provoked among civilians. But at the same time there has been a decline in healthcare and sanitary conditions in Iraq since 2003. The impact of war on civilians was more severe in Fallujah than anywhere else in Iraq because the city continued to be blockaded and cut off from the rest of the country long after 2004. War damage was only slowly repaired and people from the city were frightened to go to hospitals in Baghdad because of military checkpoints on the road into the capital.
Toxic legacy of US assault on Fallujah 'worse than Hiroshima'
The shocking rates of infant mortality and cancer in Iraqi city raise new questions about battle
By Patrick Cockburn
July 24, 2010
Children in Fallujah who suffer from birth defects which are thought to be linked to weapons used in attacks on the city by US Marines
Dramatic increases in infant mortality, cancer and leukaemia in the Iraqi city of Fallujah, which was bombarded by US Marines in 2004, exceed those reported by survivors of the atomic bombs that were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945, according to a new study.
Iraqi doctors in Fallujah have complained since 2005 of being overwhelmed by the number of babies with serious birth defects, ranging from a girl born with two heads to paralysis of the lower limbs. They said they were also seeing far more cancers than they did before the battle for Fallujah between US troops and insurgents.
Their claims have been supported by a survey showing a four-fold increase in all cancers and a 12-fold increase in childhood cancer in under-14s. Infant mortality in the city is more than four times higher than in neighbouring Jordan and eight times higher than in Kuwait.
Dr Chris Busby, a visiting professor at the University of Ulster and one of the authors of the survey of 4,800 individuals in Fallujah, said it is difficult to pin down the exact cause of the cancers and birth defects. He added that "to produce an effect like this, some very major mutagenic exposure must have occurred in 2004 when the attacks happened".
US Marines first besieged and bombarded Fallujah, 30 miles west of Baghdad, in April 2004 after four employees of the American security company Blackwater were killed and their bodies burned. After an eight-month stand-off, the Marines stormed the city in November using artillery and aerial bombing against rebel positions. US forces later admitted that they had employed white phosphorus as well as other munitions.
In the assault US commanders largely treated Fallujah as a free-fire zone to try to reduce casualties among their own troops. British officers were appalled by the lack of concern for civilian casualties. "During preparatory operations in the November 2004 Fallujah clearance operation, on one night over 40 155mm artillery rounds were fired into a small sector of the city," recalled Brigadier Nigel Aylwin-Foster, a British commander serving with the American forces in Baghdad.
He added that the US commander who ordered this devastating use of firepower did not consider it significant enough to mention it in his daily report to the US general in command. Dr Busby says that while he cannot identify the type of armaments used by the Marines, the extent of genetic damage suffered by inhabitants suggests the use of uranium in some form. He said: "My guess is that they used a new weapon against buildings to break through walls and ? those inside."
The survey was carried out by a team of 11 researchers in January and February this year who visited 711 houses in Fallujah. A questionnaire was filled in by householders giving details of cancers, birth outcomes and infant mortality. Hitherto the Iraqi government has been loath to respond to complaints from civilians about damage to their health during military operations.
Researchers were initially regarded with some suspicion by locals, particularly after a Baghdad television station broadcast a report saying a survey was being carried out by terrorists and anybody conducting it or answering questions would be arrested. Those organising the survey subsequently arranged to be accompanied by a person of standing in the community to allay suspicions.
The study, entitled "Cancer, Infant Mortality and Birth Sex-Ratio in Fallujah, Iraq 2005-2009", is by Dr Busby, Malak Hamdan and Entesar Ariabi, and concludes that anecdotal evidence of a sharp rise in cancer and congenital birth defects is correct. Infant mortality was found to be 80 per 1,000 births compared to 19 in Egypt, 17 in Jordan and 9.7 in Kuwait. The report says that the types of cancer are "similar to that in the Hiroshima survivors who were exposed to ionising radiation from the bomb and uranium in the fallout".
Researchers found a 38-fold increase in leukaemia, a ten-fold increase in female breast cancer and significant increases in lymphoma and brain tumours in adults. At Hiroshima survivors showed a 17-fold increase in leukaemia, but in Fallujah Dr Busby says what is striking is not only the greater prevalence of cancer but the speed with which it was affecting people.
Of particular significance was the finding that the sex ratio between newborn boys and girls had changed. In a normal population this is 1,050 boys born to 1,000 girls, but for those born from 2005 there was an 18 per cent drop in male births, so the ratio was 850 males to 1,000 females. The sex-ratio is an indicator of genetic damage that affects boys more than girls. A similar change in the sex-ratio was discovered after Hiroshima.
The US cut back on its use of firepower in Iraq from 2007 because of the anger it provoked among civilians. But at the same time there has been a decline in healthcare and sanitary conditions in Iraq since 2003. The impact of war on civilians was more severe in Fallujah than anywhere else in Iraq because the city continued to be blockaded and cut off from the rest of the country long after 2004. War damage was only slowly repaired and people from the city were frightened to go to hospitals in Baghdad because of military checkpoints on the road into the capital.
Comments
-
Damn......and we wonder why people in the Middle East hate us so much.....and we're still fighting in Afghanistan.....haha......good luck pacifying people there Mr. President.
-
I'm going to assume for arguments sake everything in this article is true.
1) People in the Middle East "already hated us." They didn't need and added incentive to "hate," us.
2) IT'S A ? WAR ZONE!!!! GET OUT OF THE WAY!!!!
3) Wasn't a Fallujah that hostile city that hosting a radical (al Sader, I think his name is,) that was encouraging violence against coalition forces and had U.S. citizens bodies hanging from bridges?
One thing this article is biased because there's no conclusive proof that it's our weapons that causing the cancer rates to go up. The article said thought, so it's possible something else could be the cause of cancer rates going up. If people with us, they wouldn't be getting bombed into oblivion. -
Maximus Rex wrote: »I'm going to assume for arguments sake everything in this article is true.
1) People in the Middle East "already hated us." They didn't need and added incentive to "hate," us.
2) IT'S A ? WAR ZONE!!!! GET OUT OF THE WAY!!!!
3) Wasn't a Fallujah that hostile city that hosting a radical (al Sader, I think his name is,) that was encouraging violence against coalition forces and had U.S. citizens bodies hanging from bridges?
One thing this article is biased because there's no conclusive proof that it's our weapons that causing the cancer rates to go up. The article said thought, so it's possible something else could be the cause of cancer rates going up. If people with us, they wouldn't be getting bombed into oblivion.
It's a warzone get out the way? How the ? do you get out the way when your city is being bombed at night in shock n awe campaigns and if you try fleeing your gunned down because you "look like a terrorist"?
And its obvious any war in this age would cause a rise in cancer. A lot of the bombs leave radiation, some of the enemy weapons that are destroyed in the bombings led to radiation. -
ThaChozenWun wrote: »It's a warzone get out the way? How the ? do you get out the way when your city is being bombed at night in shock n awe campaigns and if you try fleeing your gunned down because you "look like a terrorist"?
And its obvious any war in this age would cause a rise in cancer. A lot of the bombs leave radiation, some of the enemy weapons that are destroyed in the bombings led to radiation.
Depleted uranium is used in some bombs. -
northside7 wrote: »Depleted uranium is used in some bombs.
It's also used in all armored vehicles so every tank and humvee that gets blown to ? also leaves off a good bit of radiation, and yea H-Bombs and Fission Bombs are major factors -
Thank you Chozenwun for the rational thought you brought to this thread......
The point of this thread is that people in the Middle East have more and more reasons to hate us now. If there is another 911 style terrorist attack on American soil, don't be surprised!!!!! Our foreign policy is creating terrorists by the MINUTE. Our non stop wars of aggression in the Middle East, along with our support of the racist and apartheid state of Israel, is only going to create one million more Osama Bin Ladens.
I don't wish for anything like that, but we're not on the winning side of history right now. Iraq is a hail storm of anger and blood right now.Afghanistan is a complete and utter failure. 9 years and no success, lol......hilarious. What a shame the Pentagon, not the White House, truly runs this nation. We are an empire with more blood on our hands than the Roman Empire......what a shame. -
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/ML-Iraq/2010/08/01/id/366285
High Iraq Deaths Cast Doubt On US Stability Talk
Sunday, 01 Aug 2010 06:35 PM Article Font Size
While concern is rising in the U.S. about the war in Afghanistan, the Americans are anxious to show evidence of progress in their other conflict — Iraq.
New Iraqi government figures tell a different story, however, showing civilian casualties hitting their highest level in more than two years — figures the U.S. rushed on Sunday to dispute.
The rejection of the figures, compiled by the Iraqi ministries of defense, interior and health, comes at a delicate time. The American military has pronounced Iraq's security as stabilizing and is going ahead with plans to send home all but 50,000 troops by the end of the month, leaving Iraq's nascent security forces in control. The last American soldier is due to leave by the end of 2011.
Things were not much better in July for the Americans in Afghanistan — where U.S. losses were the highest for any month of the war. The monthly death toll — 66 — surpassed the previous record of 60 deaths in June. U.S. commanders have warned of more bloodshed as fighting escalates in longtime Taliban strongholds.
Moreover, at least 270 Afghan civilians were killed in the July fighting and nearly 600 wounded — a 29 percent increase over the previous month, according to Interior Ministry spokesman Zemeri Bashary.
In Iraq, the July death toll — 532 — was the highest since May 2008 when 563 died, heightening concerns over the country's precarious security even as a political deadlock persists nearly five months after a parliamentary election produced no clear winner.
The new figures suggested that a resilient insurgency is successfully taking advantage of the political deadlock and shows the difficulties of achieving a political solution in a polarized society like Iraq's, where ethnic and religious groups compete for power regardless of where national interests lie.
More than seven years after Saddam Hussein's ouster, Iraqi politicians from these rival groups have failed to resolve key issues like sharing wealth, the extent of provincial autonomy and identity.
The U.S. military countered that its own data showed only 222 Iraqis had been killed in July. "We do our very best to be vigilant to ensure the numbers we report are as accurate as can be," spokesman Lt. Col. Bob Owen said in defense of the military's own numbers.
An Associated Press tally indicated that at least 350 Iraqis were killed in July, but this figure is considered a minimum, based on AP reporting. The actual number is likely higher, as many killings go unreported or uncounted.
The three Iraqi ministries release casualty figures each month, but rarely if ever have they been so strongly disputed by the U.S. military as it worries about creating an image of withdrawing too soon.
The troubled transition to full Iraqi control serves as a warning for the U.S. and NATO as they pursue the same broad strategy in Afghanistan. In both countries, the war plan calls for weakening the insurgents on the battlefield while building up local forces capable of handling security while politicians pursue a political settlement.
Recent bloodshed in Iraq, where the transition is farther along, raises questions about how it will work in Afghanistan, where the challenges are far greater.
Unlike Iraq, Afghanistan has no tradition of strong central government. The country is made up of numerous ethnic groups speaking different languages with no ethnic community in the majority. Smaller groups — Tajiks, Uzbeks and Hazaras — harbor deep grudges against the Taliban, whose support comes from the Pashtuns.
That raises the possibility that if the coalition leaves too soon, the country would descend into civil war as it did following the Soviet pullout in 1989.
In Iraq, the country's political impasse deepened this weekend, when a Shiite bloc nominally allied with Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's coalition announced its rejection of his candidacy for a second term.
Late Sunday, Iraq state television released excerpts of an interview with al-Maliki, during which he said he would not insist on remaining prime minister as long as a partnership between his bloc and another Shiite coalition continues.
Al-Maliki's comments came as the Iraqi National Alliance said it was suspending contacts with al-Maliki's State of Law bloc until it put forward another candidate for the prime minister's job. The merger between the two blocs, which leaves them just a few seats shy of a majority in parliament, however, remained intact, it said.
"I will be happy and will walk behind them so that they do not mislead people into thinking that al-Maliki is the problem," al-Maliki said in the interview, to be fully aired Monday.
Bombings, assassinations and gunfights remain daily occurrences in Iraq, particularly in the capital, although the overall level of violence has dramatically declined since 2008. The concerted attacks on Shiite civilians are thought to be designed to re-ignite the sectarian strife that pushed the country to the brink of all-out civil war in 2006 and 2007.
Civilians also accounted for the overwhelming majority of the wounded in July — 680 of the 1,043. There were also 165 soldiers and 198 policemen among the wounded, according to the three ministries.
With U.S. forces out of Iraqi cities since June last year, insurgents seem to be focusing their attacks on Iraqi security forces and Shiite civilians. Of those killed in July, 89 were policemen and 50 soldiers.
U.S. soldiers have largely been left alone and their casualties have mostly been in the single digits recently, a fact that points to their diminishing role on the ground.
When all but 50,000 American troops are left in Iraq by the end of this month, the U.S. military will shift its mission from warfare to training Iraqi security forces. The U.S. military said late last month that troop levels in Iraq had dropped to below 65,000.
---Damn, when is the last time America has won a war? -
kingblaze84 wrote: »Thank you Chozenwun for the rational thought you brought to this thread......
The point of this thread is that people in the Middle East have more and more reasons to hate us now. If there is another 911 style terrorist attack on American soil, don't be surprised!!!!! Our foreign policy is creating terrorists by the MINUTE. Our non stop wars of aggression in the Middle East, along with our support of the racist and apartheid state of Israel, is only going to create one million more Osama Bin Ladens.
I don't wish for anything like that, but we're not on the winning side of history right now. Iraq is a hail storm of anger and blood right now.Afghanistan is a complete and utter failure. 9 years and no success, lol......hilarious. What a shame the Pentagon, not the White House, truly runs this nation. We are an empire with more blood on our hands than the Roman Empire......what a shame.
Imagine a 50,000 acre forest fire burning out of control. Now image if you threw a tree branch on that forest on that fire. That's how I gauged "Middle Eastern," hatred towards us. Those muthafuckas hated us before 9/11 and they're going to continue to hate. At least unlike this country decides it wants to conduct warfare properly.
Israel isn't an apartheid state Israeli Arabs have the same rights as everybody else and have the highest standard of living of Arabs in that part of the world. Arabs are in the Kesset too. -
in fairness, creating Usama also requires having him be a spoiled rich kid who needs attentionkingblaze84 wrote: »... is only going to create one million more Osama Bin Ladens. -
This is crazy....
oh there is the WMD.... smh talking about them when we used them. ? is said.. its funny how people push that ? off as they dont like our way of life.. in a small part that maybe true..but it is our arrogance and back handedness/ snake like actions.. I mean living in the western world a fight on our soil is so foreign to us..... Aside from the guerilla attacks in Oklahoma/ Ny 93 and 9/11.. small potatoes when it comes to the scale of death destruction and despair that goes on around the globe daily. but no one cares.. or wants to care.. then get mad when a measley few thousand americans die and get gun ? .. People need to start waking up we are hurtin ourselves.. and have been for years with our military/ corporate"gangsta" practices abroad
What would be the response if we were hit with those type of munitions.. now thinnk about it.... acts of terrorism are in the eye of the beholder.. if that is not a ringing definition i otn k now what is...
Basically what its been is war not on our terms is terrorism in our eyes.. Propoganda.. Alot of these ? dont want better realtions around the world.. they just want to test weapons and make money.. cowboys..... -
in fairness, creating Usama also requires having him be a spoiled rich kid who needs attention
Come on, you know what he means. When ? like this happens many people will turn to a maniac like Osama and his influences. -
Uncle Sam always gets his man... again, who are the terrorist??
The Middle East.. is a result of choosing sides with the wrong people than ? them over at the same time.. Why would the Middle East love America? At least they fight for whats rightfully theirs.. Unlike a South America where America been ? them since the beginning..
If the weapons are affecting the people how about the patriotic soldiers??? I see 'em 10-15 years from now complaining about America's negligence of their health, imagine Vietnam x10 worse. -
well, i know he's meaning that it'll make people dislike America more. but creating more Usamas is a slightly different concept, i think.major pain wrote: »Come on, you know what he means. When ? like this happens many people will turn to a maniac like Osama and his influences. -
Maximus Rex wrote: »Imagine a 50,000 acre forest fire burning out of control. Now image if you threw a tree branch on that forest on that fire. That's how I gauged "Middle Eastern," hatred towards us. Those muthafuckas hated us before 9/11 and they're going to continue to hate. At least unlike this country decides it wants to conduct warfare properly.
Israel isn't an apartheid state Israeli Arabs have the same rights as everybody else and have the highest standard of living of Arabs in that part of the world. Arabs are in the Kesset too.
hey dumb muthafucka, Iraq had nothing to do with 911....them ? was only concerned about they country, they didnt have the power to invade or attack anyone
we thought we'd go in there and bully them iraqis and look at us now? getting our troops killed by roadside bombs on the daily...what is the point of the iraq war? you could argue for afghanistan war because thats connected to 911 and the taliban, but what was the point of the iraq war?
many countries hate america, but that doesnt mean we go and blow them up...
all we did with the iraq war is create more new enemies... -
Maximus Rex wrote: »Israel isn't an apartheid state Israeli Arabs have the same rights as everybody else and have the highest standard of living of Arabs in that part of the world. Arabs are in the Kesset too.
NOT FOR LONG LOL
tenten -
thesynthesis wrote: »hey dumb muthafucka, Iraq had nothing to do with 911....them ? was only concerned about they country, they didnt have the power to invade or attack anyone
we thought we'd go in there and bully them iraqis and look at us now? getting our troops killed by roadside bombs on the daily...what is the point of the iraq war? you could argue for afghanistan war because thats connected to 911 and the taliban, but what was the point of the iraq war?
many countries hate america, but that doesnt mean we go and blow them up...
all we did with the iraq war is create more new enemies...
Proof?............. -
playmaker88 wrote: »This is crazy....
oh there is the WMD.... smh talking about them when we used them. ? is said.. its funny how people push that ? off as they dont like our way of life.. in a small part that maybe true..but it is our arrogance and back handedness/ snake like actions.. I mean living in the western world a fight on our soil is so foreign to us..... Aside from the guerilla attacks in Oklahoma/ Ny 93 and 9/11.. small potatoes when it comes to the scale of death destruction and despair that goes on around the globe daily. but no one cares.. or wants to care.. then get mad when a measley few thousand americans die and get gun ? .. People need to start waking up we are hurtin ourselves.. and have been for years with our military/ corporate"gangsta" practices abroad
What would be the response if we were hit with those type of munitions.. now thinnk about it.... acts of terrorism are in the eye of the beholder.. if that is not a ringing definition i otn k now what is...
Basically what its been is war not on our terms is terrorism in our eyes.. Propoganda.. Alot of these ? dont want better realtions around the world.. they just want to test weapons and make money.. cowboys.....
America has never lost its cowboy, bloodthirsty ways. Our frequent wars prove that fact.......sad but true post you made. -
Maximus Rex wrote: »Imagine a 50,000 acre forest fire burning out of control. Now image if you threw a tree branch on that forest on that fire. That's how I gauged "Middle Eastern," hatred towards us. Those muthafuckas hated us before 9/11 and they're going to continue to hate. At least unlike this country decides it wants to conduct warfare properly.
Israel isn't an apartheid state Israeli Arabs have the same rights as everybody else and have the highest standard of living of Arabs in that part of the world. Arabs are in the Kesset too.
Ask Arabs in Israel how they are still treated as second class citizens in Israel. Israel is stealing water from its Arab neighbors all the time, and Palestinians are treated like trash on a daily basis. Homes are being bulldozed all the time in Palestinian lands, with little safety net. Infrastructure that Israel destroyed during its many ? wars against the Palestinians cannot be built because Israel bars most building materials from reaching Palestinian hands.
Israel is indeed an apartheid state, and is committing ethnic cleansing on a daily basis. Don't make me bring up links..... just do your research and you will see why so many Arabs around the world want to destroy the USA and Israel. Blowing people up in Afghanistan and Iraq is NOT going to solve the terror problem. Ending Israel's corrupt and evil power in the Middle East will.......and that should start with massive boycotts against Israel.
Too bad Arabs are not respected much in the international community. Israel will get away with its ? and evil crimes for a long time. It doesn't change the fact people all over the world are disgusted by Israel though. -
well, i know he's meaning that it'll make people dislike America more. but creating more Usamas is a slightly different concept, i think.
There are plenty of rich people in the Middle East who despise America and Israel, with excellent reasons.....even if Osama was to be killed tomorrow, there are plenty of other rich Arabs who WILL take his place. I don't have to think about that. -
Well they are starting to bring all that industrial ? out there to get that oil and those minerals...cancer is just a by product of industrialization
-
but they're not all going to be spoiled brats who try and portray themselves as war heroes to boost their self-esteemkingblaze84 wrote: »There are plenty of rich people in the Middle East who despise America and Israel, with excellent reasons.....even if Osama was to be killed tomorrow, there are plenty of other rich Arabs who WILL take his place. I don't have to think about that. -
but they're not all going to be spoiled brats who try and portray themselves as war heroes to boost their self-esteem
The evil war in Iraq and our shameful support of Israel has made TONS of Arabs and Muslims worldwide feel the leaders of Al Qaeda are war heroes.
Whether we agree with that notion are not, people all over the Middle East are giving aid and their lives to support Al Qaeda.....ask General Petraus. -
It should also be noted that Al Qaeda's membership has grown since the war in Iraq......and some idiots actually want to bomb Iran soon. Heaven help us if a ? like Newt Gingrich or Giuliani ever becomes president.
-
Maximus Rex wrote: »Israel isn't an apartheid state Israeli Arabs have the same rights as everybody else and have the highest standard of living of Arabs in that part of the world. Arabs are in the Kesset too.
Israel systematically discriminates against its non-Jewish citizens, in a system that can only be described as Apartheid. This is true not only for the Israeli regime in the Occupied Territories but also for the State of Israel itself. Unequal land laws, selective distribution of funds, social services, state emblems, and the political system all attest to the marginalization of the Palestinian Arab community in the State of Israel and the imposition of an exclusive Jewish identity on the State. In the Territories, the situation is worse than Apartheid in many ways, as many eminent scholars have pointed out, including Israeli journalist Tanya Reinhart, with forcible expulsions, land expropriations, and “pogroms” (in the words of former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert) against Palestinians being commonplace. Rather than the use of Apartheid being seen as insulting to the plight of Black South Africans, many South African anti-Apartheid activists, such as Ronnie Kasrils and Archbishop Desmond Tutu, have actively campaigned against the State of Israel and explained that the situation in Palestine strongly resembles the Apartheid regime that existed in their own country.
Although those living within Israel's legal borders can vote, there numerous diverse mechanism in place which systematically discriminate against this minority. Furthermore, in the Occupied West Bank, apartheid can clearly be seen in the physical divisions between the privileged class of Jewish settlers and the oppressed, indigenous Palestinian population; this separation/apartheid/haFrada is embodied in the existence of a massive concrete barrier between the illegal Jewish settlements and the Palestinian communities. Not only is this a division based on racial lines, the illegally occupied West Bank that has been transformed into a collection of bantustans, surrounded by Israeli soldiers, hostile and violent Jewish settlers, checkpoints, and concrete walls.
Israel excludes Palestinians and non-Jews from state land and land belonging to the Jewish National Fund, it does not exclude Jews from the very limited and minimal land remaining under Palestinian (“Arab”) ownership. This has been compared to Apartheid South Africa where only 13% of the land could be owned by the native African population, but the difference lies in the fact that South African law guaranteed that 13% as African land, while Israeli law makes no such provisions for what it terms “Arab land”
The Central Bureau of Israeli Statistics indicates that 85% of Palestinians in Israel are in the bottom five deciles of income distribution while 50% of Jews in Israel are in the upper five deciles. Palestinian familes earn, on average, less than 65% of the average income of Jewish
families. IDF service a requirement for employment in many jobs; the vast majority of Palestinians do not serve in the IDF, and thus are excluded from these jobs
There is not a single Arabic-language university in Israel, despite Palestinians making up some 20-30% of the population. Systematic discrimination exists in the Israeli education system with separate schools for Palestinian and Jewish schoolchildren. Selective allocation of funds means Arab schools are usually overcrowded, underequipped, underperforming, and having less reources relative to Jewish schools. Jewish curriculum is all-round with history, politics, sciences being taught while the curriculum in Arab schools is very heavily censored, with history, politics, and any national material being edited out.
Recognize that what Israel is doing within its own borders and against Palestinians in the Occupied Territories IS Apartheid. -
america dont give a ? japan is still feeling the affect of the attomic bomb, its all about money
