November 20, 2004

DOUBLE STANDARD NOTED

"What a glaring double standard," writes Jane Novak. "The Arab world is enraged over the shooting of a wounded, unarmed Iraqi insurgent by a uniformed US soldier. There is no similar outrage for Margaret Hassan":

Is it because she was an Anglo, a woman, or because she was killed by a Muslim?†The video of the soldier shooting is proof, we are told, of America's evil. And the kidnapping, torture and murder of Mrs. Hassan is then proof of what -- that America is evil!

Muslims wouldn't do that unless evil America forced their hand. Bombing children, defiling mosques, kidnapping civilians, executing poor workers and cleaning women point blank: these are not discussed, broadcast with frequency, or the source of much anger.

Videos where a masked man shakes a bloody head while the curtains flutter do not evoke such fury. Why? The identity of the victim or the perpetrator?

All tactics of the insurgents are excused. Hide among civilians. Justified. Wear civilian clothes. Justified. Shoot from the holy mosque. Justified. Feign death to draw soldiers in (the way one marine died the day before the incident). Justified. Wave a white flag as a ploy. Justified. Booby trap dead bodies. Justified. That's just Fallujah.

Moving outward -- Deliberately killing Iraqi civilians daily. Justified. Bombing churches. Justified. Bombing cafes. Justified. Using schools and mosques as arsenals. Justified. Attacking the police. Just fine. The rules of war don't apply to the insurgents, only the Americans.

And if one horrible act occurs at the hands of one American soldier, the world howls.

Hmmm. This wonít help matters any:

The French public broadcasting regulator authorized an Arabic-language television station close to the Lebanese Shiite Muslim Hezbollah group to transmit programs within the European Union.

Posted by Tim Blair at November 20, 2004 04:52 PM
Comments

Was Hassan killed by Iraqis at all? No-one has claimed reponsibility. The videos released of her in captivity are different from all the previous videos of hostages, with no mujahideen or Koranic verses. Also, Iraqi "insurgents" unanimously called for her release. I point no fingers, only question the automatic pointing by others.

Posted by: fatfingers at November 20, 2004 at 05:47 PM

Chirac has now come out and and called for modernization of an outdated United Nations, which he said needed serious reform if it was to be "representative of the world today."

He said that the UN is unrepresentative.

Thats what the US and others said too.

Posted by: rog at November 20, 2004 at 06:12 PM

What C***** is saying is "Give me a veto over everyone's national security policy, you can trust me, I'm F*****"

I like how he glosses over things, his "one or two differences" consists of the following:

F*****: We want money, and we don't care how many people Saddam slaughters to get it.

Britain: We want Saddam gone, its pretty bloody obvious why.

C***** proves what I've always said about F*****, Vichy is the norm, not the abberation.

Posted by: Sheriff at November 20, 2004 at 07:30 PM

"holy mosque" is an oxymoron.

Posted by: perfectsense at November 20, 2004 at 07:36 PM

Who are you implying killed her, fatfingers?

Aliens?

Posted by: Quentin George at November 20, 2004 at 07:37 PM

Shorter fatfingers: "It raises serious questions..."

Posted by: PW at November 20, 2004 at 07:39 PM

All we need is, "It really makes you think..."

Posted by: Quentin George at November 20, 2004 at 07:43 PM

In WWII a enclosed gun emplacement (usually of made of fortified concrete)was called a "pillbox." In the Middle East, these gun emplacements are called "mosques" or "schools."

Posted by: perfectsense at November 20, 2004 at 07:45 PM

Fatfingers, either make your accusation (i.e. the Americans killed her), or shut the fuck up. I point no fingers at your absolute cunt-ness, just passing along what others have alleged.

Posted by: David Crawford at November 20, 2004 at 08:11 PM

Fat Finger Head will probably blame both Karl Rove and the Jooooos! for her death.

Posted by: Mr. Blue at November 20, 2004 at 08:18 PM

Actually, Tony Windsor told me that John Anderson killed her.

Keep it under your hat.

Posted by: Quentin George at November 20, 2004 at 08:21 PM

As an Australian-Canadian, I have it on the very best authority that Carolyn Parrish killed her on the orders of her constituents - the Khadr family.

Or was it vice-versa

Posted by: jlchydro at November 20, 2004 at 08:29 PM

As an Australian-Canadian, I have it on the very best authority that Carolyn Parrish killed her on the orders of her constituents - the Khadr family.

Or was it vice-versa

Posted by: jlchydro at November 20, 2004 at 08:30 PM

Leave fatfingers alone, he does raise a valid point, the USA does have form in attacking defenseless NGO! Doesnít anyone remember the US Marine attack on the Green Peace Warrior in NZ, oh, wait, ummm.

Posted by: MadMike1 at November 20, 2004 at 08:45 PM

Seems that the Red Cross is angry with all warring parties in Iraq. Somehow I don't think the "insurgents" are too worried by their failure to meet their basic humanitarian obligations, though I imagine it must be quite encouraging to them to learn that other parties are held equally to blame.

I can understand the frustration felt by aid agencies at their inability to work unmolested in places like Falluja, but I note that, to date, there have been no reliable reports of US forces executing aid workers.


Posted by: rexie at November 20, 2004 at 08:52 PM


I suspect that the Red Crescent was pissed because they had a perfect means of enabling the brave insurgents to depart Fajullah under cover.

When they are finally allowed in, they are quite welcome to take the brave insurgents out under cover - under cover of body bags and full-length sheets, that is.

Posted by: Kaboom at November 20, 2004 at 09:09 PM

"holy mosque" is actually a tautology, FYI perfectsense ;)

Posted by: Steve at the pub at November 20, 2004 at 10:04 PM

in parts of the middle east today it is clearly neither 'oxymoron' or 'tautology', maybe an 'exception'

Posted by: ilibcc at November 20, 2004 at 10:48 PM

Actually FatFingers, I read that in the execution video that is believed to show Mrs Hassan being executed (though she had a hood on at the time) she was wearing one of those orange jumpsuits that these terrorists have dressed up their other captives in. There's one similarity for you.

Posted by: Richard at November 20, 2004 at 11:14 PM

Donít forget, it was not known with 100% certainty that the wounded Iraqi was unarmed until after he was shot in the head and examined. Had he been holding a grenade or a pistol that Marine and/or his buddies would be a mere statistic right now.

Posted by: Eddie Graziano at November 20, 2004 at 11:21 PM

Donít forget, it was not known with 100% certainty that the wounded Iraqi was unarmed until after he was shot in the head and examined. Had he been holding a grenade or a pistol that Marine and/or his buddies would be a mere statistic right now.

Posted by: Eddie Graziano at November 20, 2004 at 11:35 PM

I love these double standards of fatfingers the Arabs.

Posted by: The Real JeffS at November 21, 2004 at 12:06 AM

Arabs have cast filth upon Islam. They are cursed forever. They will be cast out of the holy places and others will be the guardians.

Posted by: Dar at November 21, 2004 at 12:12 AM

Happily, and surprisingly, the article was just published by the Arab News in Saudi Arabia. I can't seem to paste the article link here.

Thanks so much for your link, Tim.

Posted by: Jane at November 21, 2004 at 01:03 AM

Fatfingers:

as a an arab immigrant to the US, I have been observing the political and paramilitary dynamics of a variety of regions in teh arab and muslim worlds. They do not always assume responsibility, and do it only from a position of safety. Remember that bin Laden never directly admitted or denied the 9-11 attacks.

It seems to me that you understand virtually nothing about what's been going on in the near east for the past 30 years, and like so many people, simply projecting your domestic political objectives on it.

Look at the state of the hostage situation. The US policy of not exceeding or negociating is working. There are no releases, but no new kidnappings because it yields nothing.
Most importantly there isn't this unendable cycle which was characterized by those in Lebanon in the late 80's and in Europe in the late 70's.

Posted by: Joe N. at November 21, 2004 at 01:16 AM

Gee, fathead, there is the barest possibility that "No-one has claimed reponsibility" for the murder of Margaret Hassan because her murderers have been killed by coalition forces. You could in fact have figured this out by doing a brief web search but that would have meant actually doing your own work instead of sitting on your ass farting into someone's comments.

Posted by: Andrea Harris at November 21, 2004 at 02:57 AM

The lack of outrage in the West towards the methods used by the insurgency is most disturbing.
Is it somewhat racist? Do we expect(condone) such behavior from these monsters because they are different from us? The left should be embarrassed.Also, it seems as several peace loving nations such as Spain and other NATO countries refuse to even help train the Iraqi troops that they truly aren't interested in saving lives. They likely are only concerned with their "political skin",

Posted by: JAMSON64 at November 21, 2004 at 03:42 AM

I think the lack of outrage over the death of ms Hassan is
1. Unsurprising, as there is no evidence she is dead.
2. Inaccurate, as many people were shocked that her captors chose her as a target. Terrorist groups have so far exclusively targetted American collaborators - even Al-Zaqarwi requested they release her. As our governments do not negotiate, her capture is her death, and the reports of her death were mere confirmations.
3. Incomparable to a unarmed wounded soldier being executed by a westerner. We expect our own to live up to our standards. This is not a sign of anti-Americanism, as the outrage would be just as strong had the crime been committed by an Australian / British / French / German / Japanese soldier. Americans are only different in that they believe that they should not be held accountable for war crimes (a demand I would also have, if I had their record).

Posted by: phrenic at November 21, 2004 at 04:23 AM

"Americans are only different in that they believe that they should not be held accountable for war crimes (a demand I would also have, if I had their record)."

Fuck you, phrenic. You are hereby banned for being an asstard. Go piss on someone else's blog.

Posted by: Andrea Harris at November 21, 2004 at 04:42 AM

Our friend phrenic must think the US should be a signatory to ICK, the International Criminal Kangaroo court.

Posted by: A at November 21, 2004 at 04:55 AM

It seems that the MSM want to tie the hands of our soldiers/Marines much as they have ties the hands of police departments in certain areas of the left coast.

If I were walking through a next of insurgents (I hate that word) -- walking through a nest of the enemy and saw someone move, I'd sure as hell shoot him to secure the area and make sure it was safe for my unit. I would have made double sure every prone body was dead.

The LLL have NO F***ING clue who the enemy is. They would rather villanize a young Marine and call the terrist "an alright guy" as that Matt whatshisface did. That cowardly, simpering little wimpy journalist who hates his country, calling most of the people unthinking, uneducated, religious zealots and extermists while extolling the virtues of Pee-Wee farking Herman.

Sorry. Had to rant. I'm sick of France, sick of MSM, sick of the UN, sick of Muslims would who happily see most of the world dead by their own hands, sick of Hollywood (the people who should use their load voices to stregthen this country and not tear it apart.

Guess I wasn't done ranting.

Posted by: Catracks at November 21, 2004 at 05:09 AM

Quentin and others, re: fatfingers' comment:

If you follow the link to Jane Novak's site (in article above), scroll down to comment 15. This *may* be what fatfingers is alluding to.

(from comment 15)

"As anyone who follows events knows, Margaret was probably executed by US-CIA dirty tricksters."

Poster 15 includes a link to counterpunch's site for more info..

Most people here will be familiar with the name Robert Fisk. He has an article on counterpunch about Margaret's murder.

I assume, based on a quick perusal of Fisk's article, that fatfingers is hinting at Fisk's interpretation of things. Fisk has such a narrow view of the world that he can't conceive how Margaret could have been killed by anyone but his 'usual suspects'.

The old saying about a conservative being a liberal who has been mugged doesn't apply to Fisk. Getting roughed up as he did doesn't seem to have done anything to alter Fisk's world view, except perhaps make him hate the US even more than he did before.

I can't imagine hating the Islamofacsists with as much passion as Fisk seems to have for hating the US. He'd better be careful, he's heading for a heart attack with all that hate he has.

I do suggest a pop over to Jane's site so you can see comment 15. This poster not only believes Margaret was shot by the CIA, he/she also believes the US-UK sanctions caused 500,000 Iraqi infant deaths. Naturally, no mention is made about the UN's 'oil-for-everything-but-food' program. (Wouldn't want to let facts intrude upon good anti-US propaganda!!)

Posted by: Chris Josephson at November 21, 2004 at 05:12 AM

"unarmed wounded soldier"???

Poor, poor terrorist. Poor sweet potential suicide bomber. Poor agent of death who may or may not have cross the Iraqi border to support a jihad and undermine a new government. Gee, I really feel so bad that he's worm food.

Posted by: Catracks at November 21, 2004 at 05:20 AM

Americans should not be held accountable for so-called "war crimes", considering the record of the people doing the accusing.

When actual war crimes are committed by Americans --- a rarity, especially compared to the rest of the world --- they are summarily dealt with in a just and lawful manner. Name one Muslim country that does that.

Posted by: Rebecca at November 21, 2004 at 05:31 AM

From Fisk:
"So, incredibly, did Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the al-Qaeda man whom the Americans falsely claimed was leading the Iraqi insurrection, but who has definitely been involved in the kidnappings and beheadings. Other abducted women were freed when their captors recognised their innocence."

So who is "guilty?" Someone over there to build a bridge?

From the comment #15:
"How many people have the Iraqi Resistance killed compared to the US, since the US began its homocidal onslaught on the innocent Iraqi population back in 1991 ? Please give me a rough idea, I am eager to compare both sets of casualty figures, the US govt and its Allies versus the Terrorists. Just roughly."

Shall we included all the deaths caused by the Baathists (sp). I think Sadaams animal sons might have been able to match the figure. At least they did in measure of pure human terror.

This is not a fight against the Iraqi people anyway. We want to stabilize the area so Iraqi peopl can go to the market without being hit with an RPG. Correct me if I am wrong. but this is not an "Iraqi" resistence. People are pouring over the border because radical Islam does not want a democratic stronghold in an area where they want the power.

Why would the CIA off her. To get popular support for action against terrorism? BS.

I don't understand every nuance of this, but I try.

Posted by: Catracks at November 21, 2004 at 05:40 AM

It's alarming that Hezbollah now has such a free voice in the EU. Chirac must be in a suicidal mood.

I'm pretty sure if Fisk gets beheaded, he'll change his mind.

Posted by: ahem at November 21, 2004 at 05:52 AM

JAMSON64
you raise the interesting point that NOT condemning these Barbaric Acts by terrorists infact IS RACIST!
Why because every transgrassion by western forces is regarded as a "war crime" by the left.
But when far far worse is committed by the mud arabs it is understandable because they are not "on our moral level".
Such racist ideas were held by the KKK in respect to American Negros who were held to be much more likely to commit rape for the same reasons.

Posted by: davo at November 21, 2004 at 07:26 AM

Chirac would be keen on any distraction just now; if reports of French Bank BNP Paribas receiving hundreds of millions of dollars from the UN Oil-for-Food programme are proven the froggies could be stuck in the merde

Posted by: rog at November 21, 2004 at 07:30 AM

Poor ol Kofi is also copping it, someone found out that the official U.N. biography states that before becoming secretary-general, he "led the first United Nations team negotiating with Iraq on the sale of oil to fund purchases of humanitarian aid".

Plus more dirt, I'm deeply concerned.

Posted by: rog at November 21, 2004 at 07:52 AM

"How many people have the Iraqi Resistance killed compared to the US, since the US began its homocidal onslaught on the innocent Iraqi population back in 1991 ? Please give me a rough idea, I am eager to compare both sets of casualty figures, the US govt and its Allies versus the Terrorists. Just roughly."
One must at all times reiteraite the mantras of the academic left.
this is more reiteration of the John Pilger, Monbiot, george galloway garbage by Fisk.
On which they dined at saddam's expense for years.

Posted by: davo at November 21, 2004 at 07:55 AM

Davo

because every transgrassion by western forces is regarded as a "war crime" by the left.

The excercise of power at all, by western forces, is itself regarded as a war crime by the left.

This Marine killing someone, who the day before, was himself trying to kill Marines, is just this months Abu Graib.

That Marines life is worth thousands of times more than that terd on the floor, and I couldnt care less that it is dead.

Also

when far far worse is committed by the mud arabs it is understandable because they are not "on our moral level".

That is what the left believes, and it also applies to how Arabs are governed. A lefty friend of mine, in a moment of honest reflection, early on in the Iraq war, said to me "you know, some people (Arabs) are not capable of civilized democracy."

Its what they believe.

Posted by: Thomas at November 21, 2004 at 07:57 AM

ROBERT Fisk has done more than any other weaterner in the manufacturing of the middle east falsehoods that pervade the MSM press and their hordes of dhimmy folowers over the last 25 years.
Yes more than Pilger, Chomsky because his authentic credibilty is based on his "In situ" myth, this inside the action perception of westerners. Notice that he is so often seen in the uniform of fatigues to reinforce this image.
Whereas we know about this from the testimonies of maronite christians in lebanon, who talk of his Islamic paymasters and the PLO bodyguards who were embedded with him to allow him to carry on the good work for them. Seldom was he ever seen outside the areas of Beirut not controlled by the PLO thugs.
And of course read his digustinng piece on the slaughter of his "journalist colleague", Daniel Pearl - worth a week's blogging in itself

Posted by: davo at November 21, 2004 at 08:13 AM

It kills me when I hear things like: "the reason we are outraged by violence committed by Americans is because it's OUR country!!!" ....human nature tends to err on the side of forgiving your own shortcomings. You have to be pretty morally sophisticated to be hyper-critical of yourself (or your own country) and blithely excuse or ignore the blatant atrocities of others.

And you know, somehow I don't associate liberalism with moral sophistication...

Posted by: lexine at November 21, 2004 at 09:12 AM

And if one horrible act occurs at the hands of one American soldier, the world howls.

This was not a horrible act- it was a service to mankind and the Iraqis in particular-the injured man was not injured whilst smelling the roses or roasting chestnuts-he was attempting to kill Marines and Iraqi forces- who, but for these mongrels, would be better engaged building bridges,, water supplies and sewage treatment plants , Iraq would be buzzing with vigour and life instead of hell each day, As with Israel if these useless lumps of excrement ceased these activities there would not be one more bullet spent.

I for on would give that Marine a medal and a pay rise

Posted by: Rose at November 21, 2004 at 10:05 AM

And one more thing-9/11 wasn't a TV drama
those Marines are fighting and dying to save the Western World and our way of life-we OWE, OWE, OWE, BIG TIME, to these young men and our TOTAL 100000% SUPPORT-and if they get it wrong on some occasions(and this was NOT one of them)-so be it -this is WAR
GOD BLESS THEM AND ALL WHO SERVE

http://www.victorhanson.com/
Victoria Davis Hanson as always makes it so clear

Posted by: Rose at November 21, 2004 at 10:14 AM

On the whole, what Bill Mauldin in "Up Front" called "The Benevolent and Protective Order of Them What Has Been Shot At" seem to understand that the Marine understandably shot a potentially dangerous man, given that wounded rebels in Fallujah have killed US troops after asking for, and receiving, mercy. In that they resemble the Japanese of WWII. Marine grunts were reluctant to take the Japanese prisoner then, after the experience of the Goettage patrol at the start of the Guadalcanal Campaign, lured into an ambush by a false deserter.

Note that the Marines did not shoot the other Iraqi in the room, whose hands were plainly visible and who, therefore, did not appear to be a potential threat to them.

I gather the reaction of most Iraqis to the shooting was: good riddance. They know who is the real danger to them, and it's not the American troops.

Posted by: Michael Lonie at November 21, 2004 at 11:51 AM

If you are interested, there is an on line petition to the US Congress supporting the Marine who shot the insurgent.

Go to http://www.PetitionOnline.com/as123/.

Posted by: The Real JeffS at November 21, 2004 at 01:34 PM

Fat Fingers is a Wa***r.Next step is a seeing eye dog and cane.

Posted by: crash at November 21, 2004 at 01:43 PM

The Real JeffS:

Thanks for the info on that petition.

My brother-in-law was down at the local VFW and the vets are very concerned about what happens to that marine. Based on what was going on at the time, nobody seems to think the marine did anything wrong and they are very upset the marine is even being questioned.

They are afraid higher brass may be influenced by PC-types, due to the publicity, and the marine won't get a fair hearing.

Posted by: Chris Josephson at November 21, 2004 at 04:01 PM

Lexine makes a good point:
"It kills me when I hear things like: 'the reason we are outraged by violence committed by Americans is because it's OUR country!!!'

Interesting how nationalistic the left becomes when they have a chance to slam our country or soldiers.

Posted by: Jamson64 at November 22, 2004 at 07:16 AM

The Marineís shooting of a wounded unlawful combatant was not a war crime but instead an act intended to preclude a war crime by the wounded al Qaeda fighter: that is, perfidy (i.e., feigning to be incapacitated by wounds).

The Marine might have violated some order previously issued by his superiors when he killed the unlawful combatant but whatever happened it wasnít a war crime because only those who abide by the third Geneva Convention are protected by it. The unlawful combatant had long since forfeited any protection.

Here is a long analysis explaining why these statements are true. It covers the applicable Geneva Conventions and explains why unlawful combatants are unprotected and why the Marine can just blow the al Qaeda fighter's rag-head apart and not be committing a war crime.

Posted by: john - The Imperial Heavy Artillery at November 22, 2004 at 07:57 AM

Jane, thanks for writing and submitting your editorials to the Arab media.

Keep up the yeoman's work.

</brown smudged honkfest>

Posted by: monkey fan at November 22, 2004 at 09:30 AM

If anyone wants to stand up for our Marine in the places where it counts, here are some numbers:

Commandant, USMC:
703-614-8661

Marine PR Dept
703-614-1492

Defense Dept 703-428-0711

Posted by: richard mcenroe at November 22, 2004 at 01:56 PM