Interview with Hamas-Leader Khaled Meshaal

Hamas ready for peaceful coexistence with Israel within the borders of 1967.

By Rainer Rupp

12/18/06 "Information Clearing House" -- - Khaled Meshaal is the political leader of the Palestinian Hamas movement, which earlier this year came to power with a large majority in the free and democratic election in Palestine. In summer 2006 the Israeli Minister of Justice Haim Ramon publicly confirmed his government’s order to kill Khaled Meshaal. In 1997 in the Jordanian capital Amman Meshaal survived a assassination attempt by Israel’s secret service Mossad by a narrow margin. Currently the leading Hamas politician lives in Syrian asylum in Damascus under strong security. Khaled who is a physicist is married and has three daughters and four sons. He was interviewed by Rainer Rupp (RR), a German journalist for the daily “junge Welt”, published in Berlin with nation wide distribution.

R.R.
Mr. Khaled Meshaal, as a leading politician of Hamas you are on the assassination list of the Israeli intelligence service. How did you become a member of the Islamic resistance movement against Israeli occupation?

K.M.
Actually, I am one of the founders of the Hamas movement. Inside Hamas the most prominent figure was the late Sheik Ahmed Yassim. When the Hamas movement was established in the year 1987 I was 31 years old. I was among the people who had built up branches inside and outside Palestine. But the very idea of Hamas started already at the end of the seventies. The internal dialogue and deliberation lasted for more than ten years in order to establish a movement against Israeli occupation. But the very project of the movement had already been in my heart and in my mind when I was still at Kuwait-University. At the age of 21 I represented the Islamic movement in the students General Union at university.

R.R.
For many years there has been the suggestion in the Western media that Israeli intelligence was instrumental in the creation of Hamas. I suppose you know about this story?

K.M.
Unfortunately this tale is told by some Arabs, Palestinian Arabs. It is an attempt to distort the image of our movement. We consider this charge as something so ridiculous, that we don’t even bother to deny it. It is so illogical. How come, that Israel should establish an organisation that will combat Israel, how is that possible?

R.R.
The argument is, the Israelis helped to create Hamas in order to divide the Palestinian resistance and weaken the Fatah movement.

K.M.
Indeed, during the seventies the main Palestinian force that was combating Israel was the Fatah-movement. Consequently Israel concentrated its fighting against Fatah und the other, smaller groups of Palestinian resistance, which existed in this period. At that time, however, Hamas was not yet properly established. We were only starting to build our social base in Palestinian society, by focussing entirely on social affairs, organizing help, building hospitals and schools, looking after the sick and deprived. In that era we were only involved in peaceful actions. This is why Israel did not do anything against us.
Because they did not know at the time, what was going on in our minds. But, while we were focussing outwardly only on social and educational work, at the same time we were secretly already training and preparing for our future resistance projects. Because the Israelis did not see this danger they concentrated their actions against other brigades, not against us. And it is this Israeli inaction against us, which some Palestinian Arab elements unfriendly towards Hamas present as “proof”, that Israel was supporting the creation of Hamas.

R.R.
Recently Hamas’ relations with the Fatah movement have been very strained. Is there still a chance for a national unity government?

K.M.
There is a positive atmosphere between the movements of Hamas und Fatah to create a unity government. Since one month we have agreed in principle on the creation of such a unity government. Recently, however, some obstacles have started to appear. The first obstacle was that there were efforts to bring us back to a “government of technocrats”, not forward to the national unity government. This is how they want to remove Hamas from the government. And the second obstacle is that the guarantees for lifting the blockade are still not sufficient.

R.R.
Guarantees? Guarantees from the West?

K.M.
Yes, from America.

We made an agreement, that once we have formed a government of national unity, the siege shall be lifted. Hamas is very serious about this. We are keen to end the suffering of the Palestinian people. But as our movement got the majority of votes and has most seats in parliament we also have the right to have the major influence in this government. The main dilemma now is that there are forces, which deny us this right.

R.R.
One of the key issues is the so-called recognition of “Israel’s right to exist”. Is Hamas prepared to change its position on this matter? Especially as the West has made this issue a condition sine-qua-non for the lifting of the blockade against a Hamas-led Palestinian government.

K.M.
I think the Western world has understood by now that Hamas will never recognise Israel. How can I recognise the one who occupies my land? It is illogical that it is demanded of Hamas to recognise Israel. I am the victim. I am the man who is not free. I am the man living in the Diaspora away from my land. Israel has got a kind of a nation that was imposed as a “fait accompli” by the United Nations. We don’t have a nation. More than half of the Palestinian people are living in the Diaspora, mostly in camps and they can’t go home. Because of Israel they can’t go home and we should recognise Israel? Who is actually in the wrong, us or Israel?

R.R.
But the 2-state theory which the Americans are promoting – envisages a Palestinian state next to an Israeli state. Is this also absolutely unacceptable for Hamas?

K.M.
No. No. Let me say that the Hamas movement will only establish a Palestinian state within the borders of 1967 that includes the West of Jerusalem and the Westbank. Up till now Israel does not recognise this right for us. All the Palestinians are demanding is this right. But Israel keeps violating Palestinian rights and the West is unwilling to force Israel to recognise the Palestinian rights.
Even when President Bush talked about a Palestinian state, it was not clear cut. And Ariel Sharon and recently Ehud Olmert have made a lot of reservations about Bush’s proposal. They are rejecting the idea of an Israeli state within its 1967 borders. They want an Israeli state, which includes parts of the Westbank. Actually President Bush had even agreed to Sharon’s proposal for Israel to keep all of Jerusalem. And he agreed with Sharon to choose the right Palestinian leader who would accept all this.

R.R.
Have I understood you correctly that you would be prepared to negotiate with Israel and accept it within its borders of 1967, before it started its wars of aggression, stealing Palestinian land?

K.M.
Good, that has been made clear.

R.R.
In the West Hamas is generally depicted as being absolutely against talks with Israel and that Hamas only wants to drive the Israeli jews into the sea.

K.M.
This is not correct. Killing Jews is not our aim. For centuries we have lived in Palestine peacefully with Jews and Christians of all kind. We are fighting Israel because it occupies our land and oppresses our people. We are fighting Israel to finish this occupation. We want to live freely on our land just as other nations. We want to have our own country just like other people. But the Zionist movement came from all over the world to occupy our land. And the real owner of the land has been kicked out. This is the root of the problem.

Because of many factors, we now accept to build a Palestinian state within the borders of 1967. But that doesn’t mean that we recognise Israel. But we are prepared to make a long term truce with Israel. Accepting the status of Israel without recognising it.

R.R.
But, no recognition? Doesn’t that mean continued tensions and war?

K.M.
No. There are plenty of examples where no recognition does not mean war. China and Taiwan for example have not recognized each other but they trade and cooperate with each other. – By withholding a formal recognition we just don’t want to give Israel the legitimacy for having taken our land in the first place.

R.R.
It is no secret, that for many years under the Fatah-government the Palestine security services have been trained and equipped by the Americans, namely the CIA. Is it therefore not reasonable to assume, that a whole lot of people in the movement of the Palestinian president Mahmud Abbas are secretly working for the Americans and Israelis, some possibly in top positions? How far could you trust Fatah if you were to build a national unity government together?

K.L.
This problem is well known for us and for the rest of the Palestinians. But not all of the people of Fatah are of this kind. There is a huge motivation within Fatah which is “nationality”. They are our partners in the resistance. But there are others, the people you spoke about. That is a fact. We know the problem quite well and we are dealing with it. Moreover, the relationship is not, by necessity, always based upon trust.

R.R.
Do you think that this problem is also at the root of the difficulties you are having right now with Fatah in creating a unity government?

K.M.
Yes, that’s right. This is one of the problems. Unfortunately, there are these factors and pressures which are following foreign agendas that influence negatively the Palestinian arena. But the patriotic forces are the ones that are going to win. The Palestinian people have confirmed this in the latest democratic elections.

R.R.
Is Hamas the movement of religious fanatics, as it is portrayed in the West? A movement with which one cannot deal? Yet, Hamas has been accepted and invited to Moscow by the Russian government and here (in Syria) you are guests of a secular state. Is this all a disguise? Which is the true Hamas.

M.K.
Well, let me give you an example. We have for instance good relations with Christians

R.R.
Are you actually working together with the Christians in Palestine?

K.M.
Yes, with some of them.

This image of religious fanaticism has been fabricated by Israel and the American administration. It is an image that does not reflect the facts. You know that the American administration gives itself the right to classify people just the way they like. But how can respectable states in Europe, like Britain, Germany or France, be influenced by this propaganda. Should they not search for the truth themselves? Should they not form their views on the basis of reason instead of rumours and hearsay.

But how should the West discover the truth about Palestine and Hamas? First the Western journalists should come here to meet the people and see the facts with their own eyes. Go to Palestine and see how the people live. Listen to what the people have to say. Listen to leaders of Hamas and other Palestinian movements. You should learn the truth through direct contacts and not through others. And if you want to know about Hamas then go and meet the people from Hamas. We are ready for dialogue.

If you are looking for reasons, why Hamas won the election, then it is because the Palestinian people trust us and because Hamas reflects the feelings and the aspirations of the Palestinian people. And if you scrutinize Hamas closely then you will not find any corruption whatsoever. But you will find that Hamas is very close to the people, that it is really serving the needs of the people. And if the people of Palestine elected Hamas, then the will of the people should be respected, also by the West.

R.R.
But what about the reproach of religious fanaticism?

M.K.
That is easy to refute. If Hamas was a movement of religious fanatics, it wouldn’t have been elected by the Palestinian people, because in Palestine there are many groups. And there are also Christians, who work together with us. For instance one of the Members of Parliament in Gaza who was elected on the Hamas list is a Christian doctor. And the majority of Muslims and Christians gave him their vote. The fact is, that the ideas of Hamas are moderate. We practice tolerance with everybody. And we deal with Muslims and Christians at the same level. And on this level we deal with everybody, either religious, liberal or secular, either inside or outside of Palestine. And we have relations within the Middle East but also in Europe and Africa. Hamas is an open movement. We do not combat Israel because they are Jews but because they are occupying our land.

R.R.
The West is reproaching you, that in this fight against Israel you are committing acts of terrorism.

M.K.
No. There is a major difference between terrorism and resistance. We are against terrorism. Resistance is not terrorism. What Israel is doing is terrorism. What we are doing is resistance. Because it is a reaction against the Israeli aggression and a reaction against the Israeli occupation of our land. The resistance is the legal right to defend ourselves.
END.

This interview with Khaled Meshaal was conducted in English at the end of November 2006 in Damascus by Rainer Rupp, German Journalist and Economist. The interview was first published on Saturday, Dec. 16th in the German daily newspaper “junge Welt” with nation wide distribution. See: http://www.jungewelt.de/2006/12-16/001.php

0

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Vees has showed us the truth, once again.

Vees,
This proves it. Syria harbors terrorists. Duplicitous ones at that.
Thank you for presenting the proof.

the concept of "terrorism" and its uses

No doubt here, Hamas and its leaders are terrorists. Not on par with Olmert or Peretz, but definitely terrorists. This should come as no big surprize to anyone who knows anything about this conflit. The point is not whether party XYZ are terrorists or not, but whether they are terrorists with whom the other side might be willing to negotiate. For example, the Likud has a long track record of negotiating with the opposing side, as does Labor by the way, so the Israeli side will negotiate when it finds it to its advantage. Meshaal's interview clearly shows that Hamas will negotiate also. The fact that at any such negotiating table both sides will be represented by thugs with plenty of innocent blood on their hands is utterly irrelevant. I remind you that the Nobel Peace Prize winner Rabin, when he was Israeli Army chief of staff, actually gave orders to break the bones of the Palestinians arrested during the first Indifada and I do not think that even you would be unaware that Nobel Peace Prize winner Arafat had a long and distinguised carrer in all kind of terrorism including bombing Jewish nurseries in Belgium. So the stupid, if factual, accusation of "harboring terrorism" is just a smokesreen used to demonize the "bad" party (even when it is, indeed, quite demonic already) and justify the refusal to negotiate.

Lastly, I remind you that since Dubya's appointment by the Supreme Court (he never was elected) the USA is the clear Uberterrorist of the planet, outdone only by Israel. Dubya's invasion of Iraq has now resulted in a mass-killing of Iraqi civilians on the same magnitude as the Rwandan genocide (about 650'000 for the former to about 850'000 in the latter. this estimate does NOT include over a million of Iraqis killed by US imposed sanctions against Iraq before the invasion). And the USA is still harboring plenty of terrorists, including the ones who bombed a Cuban airliner (use google for details).

So please climb down from your tower of self-righteous indignation over Hamas and Meshall, stop getting not only your info but, worse, also your opinions from TV, and try to use some rational thinking beginning by applying the same criteria to all the parties to the conflict.

Motto: chown -R linux:GNU world
Distros: Debian, Kanotix, Frenzy, Damn Small Linux

Are the Syrians good enough

Vees,
You are quoting death figures in Iraq that no one can prove.

You can't possibly believe that we are terrorists and raise your children amongsts us. If so, shame on you for exposing them to the U.S. population.

Lastly, do you believe that the information that the Syrians are providing from the people we outsourced to them is true and hasn't been manipulated? Can we trust terrorists to do our torture? Are the Syrians good enough for us to take these chances?

P.S. Reading The Cardinal of the Kremlin so I will quickly catch up on the Afghan problem.

Are the Syrians good enough

Not that this would convience a person who rejects any polls or figures (except the 6 million Jews killed during WWII I suppose), but the figures I provided are from the journal The Lancet, calculated by researchers from Johns Hopkins who used a methodology used by the US government in other conflicts.

I do not believe that Americans are terrorists. Terrorism is a tactic, not a condition. In any rate, it is the regime in Washington which is terroristic, not the American people. I strongly beleive that if the American people really knew what is done in their name by their government, "their troops" (which they presumably "support" with bumper stickers) and their intelligence agencies they would stop the GWOT immediately.

I would never trust ANY info obtained by torture. Sure, the Syrians are "good" at torturing, but that makes them very bad partners for the US intelligence community. Simply put - torture does not work, whether in Damascus or in Gitmo. It is also repugnant to the civilized conscience.

If you read Clancy you will never understand anything about the real world. Stay away from his primitive, flag-waving books. Instead, ask yourself why he is the quasi-official mounthpiece for the propaganda of the US military. Instead, read Noam Chomsky, Arundhati Roy or Robert Fisk.

Or even better - listen daily to Amy Goodman on democracynow.org where you will learn much more in one week than in a year of political science in college!

Motto: chown -R linux:GNU world
Distros: Debian, Kanotix, Frenzy, Damn Small Linux

Thou shalt not kill.

Vees,
"used a methodology"
The only way to know for sure is to count the graves.
If you can't count graves, you can count news reports and interview the people that maintain the graveyards. I'm surprised you take these figures at face value when there is no absolute proof of their validity.

"It is also repugnant to the civilized conscience."
It is a tradition handed down through the ages. Torture is reported to not work by pacifists that find it reprehensible. They are also against war.
Can you trust someone that doesn't want to kill a person different from himself? Don't let a belief in G_d get in the way of torturing or killing his children.

Do you ever wonder what's going on in this war against terrorism when we contract to the Syrians and they accept their own to torture?

Noam Chomsky, Arundhati Roy and Robert Fisk make a living attacking me and mine. They are not trustworthy.
Tom Clancy is entertainment.
These well paid writers aren't writing the truth. They are publishing propaganda.

I trust your personal opinions because I see a thread of truth running through them.

Hamas are not terrorists

"No doubt here, Hamas and its leaders are terrorists." - Vees.

Surprised to read that line from you Vees.
In the same way that you quite rightly defend Hezbollah against accusations of terrorism, I think the same applies to Hamas. In essence there is very little difference between the two groups. Both heavily rely on 100% (rhetoric at least) opposition to Israel and US/UK imperialism. Both have organised social and educational programmes for the poor (like the Black Panthers did in the northern ghettoes of the 'free' sic USA - remember they were also labelled 'terrorists' by those in power at the time, just like now accepted politicians such as Nelson Mandela, Gerry Adams, Aaron Sharon). Hamas easily won the election mainly due to its uncompromising stance over Israel - Fatah had been seen by many Palestinians as not only corrupt, but capitulating to Israel and the US, more so after the death of Arafat. We both know that if there were elections in Lebanon tomorrow Hezbollah would win by a landslide.
The difference lies in the circumstances that they find themselves in and the options of resistance available. The Palestinians have in reality no state, just a tiny strip of land that cannot survive and is totally surrounded by hostile nations, not only the obvious one of the state of Israel, but also hostile Arab neighbours such as those still in power in Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt (despite Mubarak's claim to support the Palestinian cause). So the struggle to acheive freedom is bound to take on a form that in other circumstances can be avoided.
Their resistance is not terrorism, maybe you could say it is desperation, but in no way is it terrorism.

anticapitalista

"Philosophers have interpreted the world in many ways; the point is to change it."

November 17

anticapitalista,
Do you consider November 17 a left-wing terrorist group?

Hamas are not terrorists

Greetings my good friend!

I did not say that Hamas was not democratically elected or otherwise illegitimate. They are the only legitimate representatives of the Palestinian people and when Abbas and his Fatah thugs want to call for new (read: better doctored) elections they are showing their disregard for their own people. However, even if legitimate, I consider Hamas "terrorist" simply because of its choice of civilian targets to further their objectives. I believe that they want to show the Israelis that the price to pay for their terror is getting terror back at their own population. I do not believe that this is morally right, nor do I believe that Hezbollah targets civilians. Also - I beleive that Hamas' ideology allows for such policies, whereas Sheikh Fadlallah's does not. Hence I believe that, totally unlike Hezbollah, Hamas not only practices terror, but that they justify it too.

I am sorry for this super-short answer - I need to run, but I will gladly discuss this further if you want.

Kind regards,

VS

Motto: chown -R linux:GNU world
Distros: Debian, Kanotix, Frenzy, Damn Small Linux

Paradise Now

The easy part, and in this case I'll be polite:

jaclon asks:

anticapitalista,
Do you consider November 17 a left-wing terrorist group?

anticapitalista answers:
yes.

Right that's the end of that.

Vees,

Greetings from a cold, wet and miserable Greece. It is also late so I can't pick up on your points, but would like to discuss this in more detail.

A quick point. I think Hezbollah did, in the past, target civilians, mainly the Christian falange/fascist 'strongholds' in Northern Lebanon in the '80's. Since then they certainly have moved away from this tactic (I use this without quotes) as circumstances changed and they were able to rely much more on a well trained and armed guerilla army fighting and succeeding in kicking out US troops and Israel, with mass support from the population, Muslim and non.
In Palestine, things are much tougher for the Palestinians and it is no surprise that resistance takes on, lets say, 'unsavourary' forms. The blame for this, and I know you will agree, is the systematic and brutal terrorism of the oppressors.
Personally, I would not choose the route of attacks on civilians, but I can write this safely in my home in Greece, with a movement that has a long history of fighting oppression without having/neeeding to resort to such tactics. If I was brought up in Gaza, maybe I would think differently. I hope not.

BTW There is a great film about Palestinian suicide bombers. It is called : Paradise Now.

anticapitalista

"Philosophers have interpreted the world in many ways; the point is to change it."

Thanks anticapitalista

anticapitalista,
Thank you for your response. I now have a better idea of your thoughts on terrorists. I now see your posts in a different light.

Paradise Now

Dear friend,

I am back with a some more short comments. While they deny that, I also believe that Hezbollah did commit terrorist acts in the past, however I do not think that it is constructive to keep sticking that in their noses after 30 years now. I for sure do emphatically not believe that Hezbollah had anything to do with the bombings in Argentina. I personally know Argentina very well and I know how easy it is to have anyone accused of anything there. Just as I know that there are plenty of local candidates to blow up Jewish centers. So here is what I would say: to the best of my knowledge Hezbollah as refrained from any terrorist tactics for at least a decade. Hamas though, as well as the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades and the Islamic Jihad did very deliberately target not only Israeli "civilians" (and I realize that this is a rather artificial construct) but even Israeli children. Why must Hamas explode suicide bombs and kill civilians when there are military personnel all over Palestine? I have been to Israel and I assure you that approaching a military position is a no brainer for anyone willing to do so. To get a group of soldiers or, better, the infrastructure is also possible. No, Hamas *chooses* civilian targets to make the average Israeli pay for his/her actions at the poll (electing such murderous thugs as Olmert or Lieberman). While I understand the logic here, I totally reject it. Simply put - I think that using terror is not only immoral, it is also counterproductive: they are 'cornering' the Israelis into fearing for their lives and fear is what racist fascists of the Olmert type need to conduct their genocidal policies.

While it is easy for me to write this sitting safely in the USA, the fact of my safety does not remove from me the moral obligation to reject the tactics of Hamas even when such tactics are decided upon under the terror of the racist Israeli occupation. Two wrongs do not make a right.

My best advice to all the Palestinians is to follow Hezbollah's example and to refrain from *any* forms of terrorism. Sure, the US State Department will list them as terrorist as long as they do not comply with US/Israeli policies, but at least these accusations will be baseless. Alas, in the case of Hamas, they have a factual basis which only makes the plight of the Palestinian people worse.

These are 'my two cents' as the expression goes (I think).

Kind regards,

VS

Motto: chown -R linux:GNU world
Distros: Debian, Kanotix, Frenzy, Damn Small Linux

Death figures in Iraq

Quote:
You are quoting death figures in Iraq that no one can prove.

I strongly disagree. We can scientifically prove the amount of deaths in Iraq.

That's what the scientists have done. They used normal, time-tested, scientific methods to determine death rates in Iraq. Comparing those deaths to pre-war (peacetime) deaths and working out the differences they came to a range of deaths that were caused by the illegal US invasion. That range was 400,000-900,000, with the scientists agreeing that ~650,000 was the most likely number.

That Johns-Hopkins study was then vetted and peer-reviewed by other scientists selected by The Lancet, arguably one of the world's top journals of medical/scientific research. The peer-reviewers agreed with the study's soundness and validity.

It's worth noting that in the past the US and UN have completely agreed with studies using the exact same techniques to determine death rates in other conflicts.

So where is the controversy?

The controversy is that a US administration and military that has been nailed cold in countless lies refuses to accept the study's conclusion. Is that really surprising?!

Another less controversial point is that the study does not and can not point to specific murderers -- what percentage of the 650,000 dead Iraqis were killed by US forces or by resistance fighters, for example. The study was not designed to do that.

But we can certainly say, that if the US/UK/Aus(etc.) had not launched their illegal invasion to steal Iraq's oil, that between 400,000 and 900,000 Iraqis would be alive today.

the predictable answer will be:

You can probably guess what Jaclon & Co. will answer to all that: All these "academics" are little more than enemies of the USA who make a living artificially creating unprovable statistics to try to aid and abet those who "hates us for our freedom". Futhermore, Iraqis are killing each other and that cannot be penned on "our troops" who, composed of red-blooded American patriots, go to great lenghts to avoid civilian casualties. For all we know, the authors of this report might be ex-KGB and/or ex-Iraqi Mukhabarat moles now working for the Iranian and/or Cuba and/or the DPRK, etc. etc. etc.

So the bottom line I am coming to is basically: why confuse them with facts - they already have their opinion...

For example, there is simply *no way* these "patriots" will accept the fact that "their troops" (which they "support" by means of bumper stickers and the like) have played a key-role in a mass-murder on a scale similar to the Rwandan genocide.
If they were to truly comprehend this, their entire psychological universe who simply collapse on them, they would either:

1) force themselves to approve such actions, and "justify them away" by referring to some "the world is a bad place" or "screw the ragheads and make their countries into a parking lot"

or

2) drop on the floor, roll-up into a fetal position, sob and start calling for their moms.

So they are really much better up draping themselves into a flag and ignoring the rest of the world :-)

Cheers,

VS

Motto: chown -R linux:GNU world
Distros: Debian, Kanotix, Frenzy, Damn Small Linux

400,000 and 900,000 = Exact numbers

"400,000 and 900,000 Iraqis would be alive today."
Scientific proof brings us to this.

You can't prove your statement so you question our intelligence. You are both anti-semitic and anti-redneck.
Does this make you a Christian bigot or a Bolshevik in your intellectual stance?
Where is Jesus when you make such statements? I know for a fact he is not crossing the Rio Grande. We have cameras on the river.

A compliment from jaclo(w)n!?

What's wrong with being anti-redneck? Or was that a compliment jaclo(w)n?

Once again though you have proven your own stupidity.
Why don't you just stop and think before engaging the mouth, or in this case the keyboard.

BTW: I just love how racist bigots throw in accusations of anti-semitism to those who oppose the state of Israel.

anticapitalista

"Philosophers have interpreted the world in many ways; the point is to change it."

Where you from?

anticapitalista,
I was taught in school that Greeks are intelligent people. Did you immigrate from the middle east?

Where you from?

there we go! anticapitalista is also some somber secret mole for some (yet unnamed) anti-American country of the Middle-East. LOL.

(Looks like ad-hominems, no matter how idiotic or lame, are pretty much the ONE AND ONLY "argument" flag-wavers can come up with)

Jaclon - I know everything about anticapitalista. He is a secret agent from Mars, preparing for the invasion of the USA by little green men. Hurry, and go and fetch your tinfoil hat!!

Motto: chown -R linux:GNU world
Distros: Debian, Kanotix, Frenzy, Damn Small Linux

Aris not Mars.

Vees,
Please, no, not from Mars, but from Aris/Ares/Areus. The Greeks chose the name first, but then come to think of it didn't they get the knowledge from the Babylonians -Nergal. (Bloody Iraqi's)

anticapitalista

"Philosophers have interpreted the world in many ways; the point is to change it."

Aris not Mars.

Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa (souds of "contrite chest thumping" and sobs are heard)...

But at least you have admitted to a nefarious "Babylonian" connection. I just *knew* you had to be somebody's agent!

Wasalaam!

Motto: chown -R linux:GNU world
Distros: Debian, Kanotix, Frenzy, Damn Small Linux

Wasalaam

Damn, cover blown.

Wasalaam!

anticapitalista

"Philosophers have interpreted the world in many ways; the point is to change it."

Greeks are intelligent.

"I was taught in school that Greeks are intelligent people. Did you immigrate from the middle east?"
Vees,
I wasn't accusing anticapitalista of being a mole or an agent or even a Greek.

I would like to thank you for your old tin foil hat. I have a hard time working with tin foil. Is the new prescription of haloperidol working for you?

"Paranoia is heightened awareness"
Anonymous

Death certificates

In an interview on CSPAN, the John's Hopkins researchers mentioned that a large percentage of the death estimates were backed up by actual death certificates possessed by the family.

To put the death rate in perspective, 650,000/30,000,000/4 years = 5 Iraqi deaths per 1000 people per year. Compare that with one of the most violent cities in the US, Baltimore, at 300/650,000/year = 4 murders per 10,000 people per year.

per-capita impact

Very good point. Another good point was made by Dennis Kucinich during the hearings he organized on this issue recently. What would be a comparable impact on the US society? Here is what he said:

*****
We are rapidly approaching the grave number of 3,000 dead US service members. But as painful as that is -- and it's very painful -- the estimated 650,000 deaths attributed to hostilities in Iraq is an overwhelming number to comprehend. While it is natural and appropriate for Americans to first focus upon the deaths of American service members in Iraq, it's astounding to consider that for every service member killed, 200 Iraqi civilians have been killed.
According to the United Nations, the population of Iraq was 25 million in 2003, and we have now learned that since then an estimated 650,000 have perished to violence. Now, if such a rate of violence were to be inflicted against the US, we would have lost about 7.8 million Americans. Such level of violence is unimaginable, but this is the level of violence that the civilians in Iraq are subjected to.
Consider the massive psychological impact the 9/11 attacks and resulting deaths have had on our nation. Imagine the impact we'd feel as a nation if, over a period of three years, 7.8 million of our citizens died in ongoing, uncontrollable violence. Consider the political impact of violence at that scale. Are we closer to a stable transition in Iraq, or are we closer to collapse? How would we react if this was happening here?
With the help of Congressman Paul, I've assembled a panel of experts to help us grasp the civilian situation in Iraq and its impact on Iraq's society. I hope to explore many vexing questions by leading a discussion with the experts who are here with us today. What confidence do we have in the US administration responses on the number of Iraqi fatalities? Who is getting killed by whom, and why? What does this violence do to the prospects of peace in Iraq? What are the short-term and long-term implications of this massive number of deaths to Iraqi civil society? Will the millions of Iraqi children who have lost a parent ever forgive our country for igniting this violence? How do we make peace with the generations of Iraqis severely harmed by this unnecessary war of choice?
We have to ask these questions. We have to understand what the Iraqi citizenry thinks and feels to understand why this violence has escalated far beyond our control.
Now, I have no doubt that the best course of action for our nation is to extract ourselves from Iraq as fast as possible, while enabling the United Nations to establish a peacekeeping force. Such action would remove our troops from harm's way, remove the largest impetus for the violence and begin the healing process, which will take decades to complete.
Our president does not seem to understand the necessity to get out of Iraq. Thus, it is imperative that Congress do the one thing the Constitution of the United States provides for: Congress must cut off future war funds and demand that the President use the current funds in the pipeline from the October 1st $70 billion appropriation to bring the troops home.

Syndicate content