Iraqis killed for wearing shorts


Kreskin
#1
Quote:

BAGHDAD (AP) - An Iraqi tennis coach and two of his players were shot dead this week in Baghdad because they were wearing shorts, authorities said Saturday, reporting the latest in a series of recent attacks attributed to Islamic extremists.

A U.S. marine helicopter, meanwhile, crashed Saturday and its two crew members were missing in Anbar province, a volatile area west of the Iraqi capital where insurgents are active. Hostile fire was not suspected as the cause of the crash, the U.S. military said.

In the Baghdad incident, gunmen stopped a car carrying the Sunni Muslim coach and two Shiite players, asked them to step out and then shot them, said Manham Kubba secretary general of the Iraqi Tennis Union.

Extremists had distributed leaflets warning people in the mostly Sunni neighbourhoods Saidiyah and Ghazaliyah not to wear shorts, police said.

"Wearing shorts by youth are prohibited because it violates the principals of Islamic religion when showing forbidden parts of the body. Also, women should wear the veil," the leaflets said.

Entire article at http://www.cbc.ca/cp/world/060527/w052774.html

Will Iraq become a culture of Islamic extremism?
 
dekhqonbacha
#2
did this kind of incidents happen before?
 
#juan
No Party Affiliation
#3
There is no other explanation

These people are all frigging crazy. If you think about it....if you can stand thinking about it, how is it wrong to wear shorts, and not wrong to shoot people? "Forbidden" body parts? Years of Saddam and wars and sanctions have turned the place into an asylum.

"Excuse me sir, you are wearing the wrong clothes and you must be shot. "Alla be with you"......BANG. The March Hare should be by any second.
 
Finder
#4
Well thanks to the Americans Iraq is a hot bed for Terrorism and extremism. Thanks America for increasing terrorism.
 
Zan
Green
#5
Finder,

You know I'm not well versed in international politics to comment on whether your opinion has merit or not. Regardless, it's yours, and I will respect that.

However, no matter who is doing a wrong, it never falls upon anyone else's shoulders to own the wrong doing. If someone pokes me in the eye, I don't have the right to go poke a bunch of other people in the eye.

Simple analogy, but it's how I see it.

Shooting citizens in the street for any reason is just wrong.... using their apparel as a rational to do so takes it beyond wrong and into something I have no word for. Insanity maybe?
 
unclepercy
#6
Well, as an American, I don't have to respect Finder's opinion, and I most certainly do not.

I am not taking the blame for something I did to do or for beliefs that are not mine. If you are so smart and know it all, I am sure the Iraqis would welcome you into their bosom - go forth, Finder, and solve this problem for the world.

Uncle
 
Finder
#7
Why would I go to Iraq and solve their problems? Why would I want to anyways. My point is Iraq was largely seculer before the war. The after math of the war has lead to wide spread poverity and violance. What could any of us do to stop this?

Iraq is currently caught up in a catch 22 with the USA.

So well while the USA is there it increases hatred against the Americans in the region as we can easyly see every day in the news papers. Terrorism in Iraq post war is so much higher then pre-war, I think this is commonly known as well. The current Iraqi government foesn't appear to be able to control the situation which appears to be getting out of control, even with American help.

Now the catch 22 is that if the USA leaves Iraq this won't solve the problem. I don't think any leftist or rightist can't see the current government would be able to keep Iraq peaceful and whole. The Kurds will seperate and fight if anyone doesn't let them and the Suni's and Shia's will break into sectarian violance and perhaps civil war.

No I really do think there is no solution and yes I think the USA has a fair share of the blame with the current increase of Terrorism in the middle east by invading this nation with false pretences and lack of international support.
 
Johnny Utah
#8
Quote: Originally Posted by dekhqonbacha

did this kind of incidents happen before?

The Horrors of Saddam's 'Sadist' Son
Sunday, December 22
ESPN.com
Excerpt:
In the history of the world, an expanse that covers Genghis Khan and Adolf Hitler and other despots both past and present, there is no shortage of absolute rulers whose human rights records compare with that of today's designated pariah, Saddam Hussein.

There may never have been a sports official, though, as brutal as his son, Uday.

As president of the Iraqi National Olympic Committee, Uday allegedly tortures athletes for losing games. He sticks them in prison for days or months at a time. Has them beaten with iron bars. Caned on the soles of their feet. Chained to walls and left to stay in contorted positions for days. Dragged on pavement until their backs are bloody, then dunked in sewage to ensure the wounds become infected. If Uday stops by a player's jail cell, he might urinate on his bowed, shaven head. Just to humiliate him.

http://espn.go.com/oly/s/2002/1220/1480103.html


Under Uday Hussein Iraqi Athletes were tortured for losing..
 
Kreskin
#9
Quote: Originally Posted by Johnny Utah

Quote: Originally Posted by dekhqonbacha

did this kind of incidents happen before?

The Horrors of Saddam's 'Sadist' Son
Sunday, December 22
ESPN.com
Excerpt:
In the history of the world, an expanse that covers Genghis Khan and Adolf Hitler and other despots both past and present, there is no shortage of absolute rulers whose human rights records compare with that of today's designated pariah, Saddam Hussein.

There may never have been a sports official, though, as brutal as his son, Uday.

As president of the Iraqi National Olympic Committee, Uday allegedly tortures athletes for losing games. He sticks them in prison for days or months at a time. Has them beaten with iron bars. Caned on the soles of their feet. Chained to walls and left to stay in contorted positions for days. Dragged on pavement until their backs are bloody, then dunked in sewage to ensure the wounds become infected. If Uday stops by a player's jail cell, he might urinate on his bowed, shaven head. Just to humiliate him.

http://espn.go.com/oly/s/2002/1220/1480103.html


Under Uday Hussein Iraqi Athletes were tortured for losing..

You bought that laughable war propoganda?
 
Finder
#10
Johnny Utah there was also a really indepth artical on this by maxium on Udays otrocities. Nobody is saying the Saddams regeme was fuzzy bunny. Hell it was down right fascist. They murdered and tortured many of there own people. But the country was more or less stable and what terror there was from the government was contained.

Before the invasion orginizations like Al Qaeda were small in Iraq and illegal. Now post war these orginizations are much bigger and enjoy support from many people in Iraq. Not only that but the sectarien violance and extremism is much worse.
 
Johnny Utah
#11
Quote: Originally Posted by Kreskin

Quote: Originally Posted by Johnny Utah

Quote: Originally Posted by dekhqonbacha

did this kind of incidents happen before?

The Horrors of Saddam's 'Sadist' Son
Sunday, December 22
ESPN.com
Excerpt:
In the history of the world, an expanse that covers Genghis Khan and Adolf Hitler and other despots both past and present, there is no shortage of absolute rulers whose human rights records compare with that of today's designated pariah, Saddam Hussein.

There may never have been a sports official, though, as brutal as his son, Uday.

As president of the Iraqi National Olympic Committee, Uday allegedly tortures athletes for losing games. He sticks them in prison for days or months at a time. Has them beaten with iron bars. Caned on the soles of their feet. Chained to walls and left to stay in contorted positions for days. Dragged on pavement until their backs are bloody, then dunked in sewage to ensure the wounds become infected. If Uday stops by a player's jail cell, he might urinate on his bowed, shaven head. Just to humiliate him.

http://espn.go.com/oly/s/2002/1220/1480103.html


Under Uday Hussein Iraqi Athletes were tortured for losing..

You bought that laughable war propoganda?

It's only Laughable War propganda to someone like you who would debunk these true stories of torture by Uday Hussein because it doesn't support you're views..
 
Johnny Utah
#12
Quote: Originally Posted by Finder

Johnny Utah there was also a really indepth artical on this by maxium on Udays otrocities. Nobody is saying the Saddams regeme was fuzzy bunny. Hell it was down right fascist. They murdered and tortured many of there own people. But the country was more or less stable and what terror there was from the government was contained.

Before the invasion orginizations like Al Qaeda were small in Iraq and illegal. Now post war these orginizations are much bigger and enjoy support from many people in Iraq. Not only that but the sectarien violance and extremism is much worse.

I know, I was giving an example how Uday Hussein tortured Iraqi Athletes for simply losing..
 
Finder
#13
ok... Yeah Uday was insane man. It was crazy some of the things he did. did you read the one about him rapeing a sister of one of the players. The father came into the building to ask questions about what happend and Uday had the father shoot. This is pretty tame to many of the things he did.
 
Johnny Utah
#14
Quote: Originally Posted by Finder

ok... Yeah Uday was insane man. It was crazy some of the things he did. did you read the one about him rapeing a sister of one of the players. The father came into the building to ask questions about what happend and Uday had the father shoot. This is pretty tame to many of the things he did.

There's stories of Uday going to Iraqi night clubs picking up women regardless if they were with someone or not, taking them back to his place raping them, the same goes for Tourists who were raped in their hotel room by Uday, real sick stories like that..

If Saddam wasn't removed Uday was going to take over oneday and Iraq would have been even more dangerous. Then there's Qusay who was just as insane as Uday..
 
Nuggler
#15
So, anyway, when I head to Iraq for Christmas holidays, I shouldn't wear shorts

Dang
 
Finder
#16
There was a pretty good movie made during Clintons time about a Jewish President of the USA being forced to us Nukes on Iraq to end Udays terror when he invades Kuwait. Was a really good movie. I can't remember it's name however. But you are right at least Uday will never rule Iraq. That would have been scary. If we though Saddam was bad! Uday would have been much, much worse.
 
Kreskin
#17
The Iraqi 2004 Olympic Soccer team basically told Bush to drop dead when Bush used their soccer team for propoganda. No sad tales of Iron Maidens from them.
 
Johnny Utah
#18
Quote: Originally Posted by Kreskin

The Iraqi 2004 Olympic Soccer team basically told Bush to drop dead when Bush used their soccer team for propoganda. No sad tales of Iron Maidens from them.

Says who you? Where's the proof to back up this claim..
Start Googling or Yahooing..
 
Kreskin
#19
Quote: Originally Posted by Kreskin

The Iraqi 2004 Olympic Soccer team basically told Bush to drop dead when Bush used their soccer team for propoganda. No sad tales of Iron Maidens from them.

Quote: Originally Posted by Johnny Utah

[ Says who you? Where's the proof to back up this claim..
Start Googling or Yahooing..

Were you not on planet Earth in 2004?

Quote:

Iraqi Olympic Soccer Players Kick the Stuffing Out of Bush's Fantasy
Robert Scheer

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20040830/scheer0824

With just seventy days until Election Day, the race for the presidency has gone from bitter to outright poisonous: John Kerry is faulted in television ads by President Bush's moneyed allies for winning combat medals in a war that Bush avoided, then slammed by the same hypocrites for having the courage to criticize that war after his return as a wounded vet.

Meanwhile, Bush pretends to be above the fray, all the while parading as a war commander and boasting, bizarrely, about his mythical achievements in the invasion of Iraq. That war, like Vietnam, has been a costly disaster since its inception. In an eerie echo of previous Presidents who knowingly lied us into the Vietnam horror, always affirming that victory was "just around the corner," Bush's latest campaign ads prematurely declare Afghanistan and Iraq as the world's newest democracies. According to the implicit logic of one ad, the proof can be found in the fact that they both sent teams to the Olympics.

Never mind that both countries are racked by insurgencies and warlordism and dependent on US troops for what passes for security. Forget that both countries are under martial law and their leaders are unelected US appointees. Cover your eyes to the fact that both countries are squalid economic basket cases, with the vast majority of the populace unemployed--or, in the case of Afghanistan, cultivating opium poppies. Ignore the facts. They're democracies because George W. Bush says so.

But members of the very successful Iraqi Olympic soccer team beg to differ, blasting Bush's attempt to use their participation in the Games as justification for the US occupation of their country. "My problems are not with the American people," Iraq's soccer coach, Adnan Hamad Majeed, told the Associated Press. "They are with what America has done in Iraq: destroy everything. The American Army has killed so many people in Iraq." His star midfielder, Salih Sadir, agreed: "Iraq as a team doesn't want Mr. Bush to use us [in an ad] for the presidential campaign.... We don't wish for the presence of the Americans in our country. We want them to go away." These are not anonymous bomb throwers sending notes to the media. These are Iraq's favorite sons, stars of the national sport. Yet they all seem to be saying the same thing: America's military is not wanted on our land. Another team member, Ahmed Manajid, demanded to know: "How will [Bush] meet his God having slaughtered so many men and women? He has committed so many crimes." The athlete added that were he not playing for his country he would "for sure" be fighting in the Iraqi resistance. "I want to defend my home. If a stranger invades America and the people resist, does that mean they are terrorists?" Manajid asked.


That is a legitimate question that no one in the Bush Administration and few in Congress want to grapple with. And yet we wonder why, fifteen months after the United States "liberated" Iraq, are there so many people there who hate us?

The honest answer would be similar to the one once offered by Vietnam vet and now-Secretary of State Colin L. Powell to explain the failure of the US occupation of South Vietnam: "We had been sent to pursue a policy that had become bankrupt," Powell wrote in his autobiography. "Our political leaders had led us into a war for the one-size-fits-all rationale of anti-communism, which was only a partial fit in Vietnam, where the war had its own historical roots in nationalism, anti-colonialism and civil strife beyond the East-West conflict."

The only essential difference between Powell's remarks and the 1971 remarks by Kerry that Bush supporters cite in their ugly smear campaign is that Powell's dissent came twenty years too late to stop the carnage. Those who attack Kerry for speaking out in 1971 against the Vietnam War don't understand that it was an enormous public service for returning American veterans to expose the cynicism of their leaders, as Kerry did in testifying before the US Senate.

The young Kerry was speaking truth to power, facing a reality that presidents Richard Nixon and Lyndon B. Johnson had admitted in private, as records made public later revealed. In private White House tapes, Johnson made it clear he could never justify the death of a single US soldier in Vietnam.

His successor, knowing the war was unwinnable, nevertheless carpet-bombed the region in order to fend off an inevitable defeat until after his re-election campaign.

In the end, who better than veterans to speak out when our commander in chief has betrayed the trust of US troops, sending them to kill and be killed in an unnecessary war?

Doesn't sound like a ticker tape parade from Iraqi Olympians.
 
Johnny Utah
#20
Quote: Originally Posted by Kreskin

Quote: Originally Posted by Kreskin

The Iraqi 2004 Olympic Soccer team basically told Bush to drop dead when Bush used their soccer team for propoganda. No sad tales of Iron Maidens from them.

Quote: Originally Posted by Johnny Utah

[ Says who you? Where's the proof to back up this claim..
Start Googling or Yahooing..

Were you not on planet Earth in 2004?

Quote:

Iraqi Olympic Soccer Players Kick the Stuffing Out of Bush's Fantasy
Robert Scheer

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20040830/scheer0824

With just seventy days until Election Day, the race for the presidency has gone from bitter to outright poisonous: John Kerry is faulted in television ads by President Bush's moneyed allies for winning combat medals in a war that Bush avoided, then slammed by the same hypocrites for having the courage to criticize that war after his return as a wounded vet.

Meanwhile, Bush pretends to be above the fray, all the while parading as a war commander and boasting, bizarrely, about his mythical achievements in the invasion of Iraq. That war, like Vietnam, has been a costly disaster since its inception. In an eerie echo of previous Presidents who knowingly lied us into the Vietnam horror, always affirming that victory was "just around the corner," Bush's latest campaign ads prematurely declare Afghanistan and Iraq as the world's newest democracies. According to the implicit logic of one ad, the proof can be found in the fact that they both sent teams to the Olympics.

Never mind that both countries are racked by insurgencies and warlordism and dependent on US troops for what passes for security. Forget that both countries are under martial law and their leaders are unelected US appointees. Cover your eyes to the fact that both countries are squalid economic basket cases, with the vast majority of the populace unemployed--or, in the case of Afghanistan, cultivating opium poppies. Ignore the facts. They're democracies because George W. Bush says so.

But members of the very successful Iraqi Olympic soccer team beg to differ, blasting Bush's attempt to use their participation in the Games as justification for the US occupation of their country. "My problems are not with the American people," Iraq's soccer coach, Adnan Hamad Majeed, told the Associated Press. "They are with what America has done in Iraq: destroy everything. The American Army has killed so many people in Iraq." His star midfielder, Salih Sadir, agreed: "Iraq as a team doesn't want Mr. Bush to use us [in an ad] for the presidential campaign.... We don't wish for the presence of the Americans in our country. We want them to go away." These are not anonymous bomb throwers sending notes to the media. These are Iraq's favorite sons, stars of the national sport. Yet they all seem to be saying the same thing: America's military is not wanted on our land. Another team member, Ahmed Manajid, demanded to know: "How will [Bush] meet his God having slaughtered so many men and women? He has committed so many crimes." The athlete added that were he not playing for his country he would "for sure" be fighting in the Iraqi resistance. "I want to defend my home. If a stranger invades America and the people resist, does that mean they are terrorists?" Manajid asked.


That is a legitimate question that no one in the Bush Administration and few in Congress want to grapple with. And yet we wonder why, fifteen months after the United States "liberated" Iraq, are there so many people there who hate us?

The honest answer would be similar to the one once offered by Vietnam vet and now-Secretary of State Colin L. Powell to explain the failure of the US occupation of South Vietnam: "We had been sent to pursue a policy that had become bankrupt," Powell wrote in his autobiography. "Our political leaders had led us into a war for the one-size-fits-all rationale of anti-communism, which was only a partial fit in Vietnam, where the war had its own historical roots in nationalism, anti-colonialism and civil strife beyond the East-West conflict."

The only essential difference between Powell's remarks and the 1971 remarks by Kerry that Bush supporters cite in their ugly smear campaign is that Powell's dissent came twenty years too late to stop the carnage. Those who attack Kerry for speaking out in 1971 against the Vietnam War don't understand that it was an enormous public service for returning American veterans to expose the cynicism of their leaders, as Kerry did in testifying before the US Senate.

The young Kerry was speaking truth to power, facing a reality that presidents Richard Nixon and Lyndon B. Johnson had admitted in private, as records made public later revealed. In private White House tapes, Johnson made it clear he could never justify the death of a single US soldier in Vietnam.

His successor, knowing the war was unwinnable, nevertheless carpet-bombed the region in order to fend off an inevitable defeat until after his re-election campaign.

In the end, who better than veterans to speak out when our commander in chief has betrayed the trust of US troops, sending them to kill and be killed in an unnecessary war?

Doesn't sound like a ticker tape parade from Iraqi Olympians.

You're Link is a Leftwing Rag, try again..
 
Kreskin
#21
Quote: Originally Posted by Johnny Utah

Quote: Originally Posted by Kreskin

Quote: Originally Posted by Kreskin

The Iraqi 2004 Olympic Soccer team basically told Bush to drop dead when Bush used their soccer team for propoganda. No sad tales of Iron Maidens from them.

Quote: Originally Posted by Johnny Utah

[ Says who you? Where's the proof to back up this claim..
Start Googling or Yahooing..

Were you not on planet Earth in 2004?

Quote:

Iraqi Olympic Soccer Players Kick the Stuffing Out of Bush's Fantasy
Robert Scheer

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20040830/scheer0824

With just seventy days until Election Day, the race for the presidency has gone from bitter to outright poisonous: John Kerry is faulted in television ads by President Bush's moneyed allies for winning combat medals in a war that Bush avoided, then slammed by the same hypocrites for having the courage to criticize that war after his return as a wounded vet.

Meanwhile, Bush pretends to be above the fray, all the while parading as a war commander and boasting, bizarrely, about his mythical achievements in the invasion of Iraq. That war, like Vietnam, has been a costly disaster since its inception. In an eerie echo of previous Presidents who knowingly lied us into the Vietnam horror, always affirming that victory was "just around the corner," Bush's latest campaign ads prematurely declare Afghanistan and Iraq as the world's newest democracies. According to the implicit logic of one ad, the proof can be found in the fact that they both sent teams to the Olympics.

Never mind that both countries are racked by insurgencies and warlordism and dependent on US troops for what passes for security. Forget that both countries are under martial law and their leaders are unelected US appointees. Cover your eyes to the fact that both countries are squalid economic basket cases, with the vast majority of the populace unemployed--or, in the case of Afghanistan, cultivating opium poppies. Ignore the facts. They're democracies because George W. Bush says so.

But members of the very successful Iraqi Olympic soccer team beg to differ, blasting Bush's attempt to use their participation in the Games as justification for the US occupation of their country. "My problems are not with the American people," Iraq's soccer coach, Adnan Hamad Majeed, told the Associated Press. "They are with what America has done in Iraq: destroy everything. The American Army has killed so many people in Iraq." His star midfielder, Salih Sadir, agreed: "Iraq as a team doesn't want Mr. Bush to use us [in an ad] for the presidential campaign.... We don't wish for the presence of the Americans in our country. We want them to go away." These are not anonymous bomb throwers sending notes to the media. These are Iraq's favorite sons, stars of the national sport. Yet they all seem to be saying the same thing: America's military is not wanted on our land. Another team member, Ahmed Manajid, demanded to know: "How will [Bush] meet his God having slaughtered so many men and women? He has committed so many crimes." The athlete added that were he not playing for his country he would "for sure" be fighting in the Iraqi resistance. "I want to defend my home. If a stranger invades America and the people resist, does that mean they are terrorists?" Manajid asked.


That is a legitimate question that no one in the Bush Administration and few in Congress want to grapple with. And yet we wonder why, fifteen months after the United States "liberated" Iraq, are there so many people there who hate us?

The honest answer would be similar to the one once offered by Vietnam vet and now-Secretary of State Colin L. Powell to explain the failure of the US occupation of South Vietnam: "We had been sent to pursue a policy that had become bankrupt," Powell wrote in his autobiography. "Our political leaders had led us into a war for the one-size-fits-all rationale of anti-communism, which was only a partial fit in Vietnam, where the war had its own historical roots in nationalism, anti-colonialism and civil strife beyond the East-West conflict."

The only essential difference between Powell's remarks and the 1971 remarks by Kerry that Bush supporters cite in their ugly smear campaign is that Powell's dissent came twenty years too late to stop the carnage. Those who attack Kerry for speaking out in 1971 against the Vietnam War don't understand that it was an enormous public service for returning American veterans to expose the cynicism of their leaders, as Kerry did in testifying before the US Senate.

The young Kerry was speaking truth to power, facing a reality that presidents Richard Nixon and Lyndon B. Johnson had admitted in private, as records made public later revealed. In private White House tapes, Johnson made it clear he could never justify the death of a single US soldier in Vietnam.

His successor, knowing the war was unwinnable, nevertheless carpet-bombed the region in order to fend off an inevitable defeat until after his re-election campaign.

In the end, who better than veterans to speak out when our commander in chief has betrayed the trust of US troops, sending them to kill and be killed in an unnecessary war?

Doesn't sound like a ticker tape parade from Iraqi Olympians.

You're Link is a Leftwing Rag, try again..

Google it yourself, since you managed to miss the reality when it occurred. I'm not your librarian.

There are 541000 Google results to " 2004 Iraq Olympic Soccer+Bush " that you can mull over, as you were apparently away from the planet at that time.
 

Similar Threads

42
Killed for wearing a headscarf
by hadhoud | Jul 9th, 2009
36
Wearing Helmets
by JLM | Mar 25th, 2009
45
what are you wearing right now
by peapod | Jul 26th, 2005
2
Bmw Shorts..
by cookies | Jun 8th, 2004