ATENCIÓN NUEVO FORO

[Colorado del monte]

[Hutch]

Colorado.

So finally, after a pointless wait, you eventually show some information which was asked for. Thank you. Why you could not do this to begin with I don’t know. An interesting place to get your evidence form though – a random blog rather than an actual news source.

“…I do not believe that the incident in Basra is reason to feel pride…”

Who has said that the Basra ‘incident’ (whatever it was) was a reason to feel pride? Certainly not me. again you seem to be talking to yourself.

Who knows what they were doing there. I would expect special forces soldiers tom be heavily armed when necessary.

If the UK / USA wanted a civil war in Iraq they could easily create one. Instead their soldiers are being killed trying to stop one.

I may be wrong but I am not sure that Iraq has the power to detain Coalition forces in Iraq. As there is a high level of militant infiltration in the security services, perhaps it would not have been that safe to leave UK personnel with local forces.

“…"Operation Algeciras," as a terrorist…”

That may be considered a terrorist act.

“..in another of activists who diverted a plane to protest the colonial situation of the Malvinas and planting flags, as terrorists…”

Colorado do not be so foolish. They did not ‘divert’ a plane. They seized control of it like terrorist, like criminal scum.

“…but what of Basra is a heroic act hutch? ? ? ?”

Did I ever said it was ‘heroic’? No. The fact that you can only ‘win’ when you argue against yourself or things that I have not said is very interesting.

As for the article itself…

“The Iraqis, Arabs and Muslims in neighboring countries are well aware that in Iraq most of the terrorist attacks, especially those made with the car were perpetrated by the British, Americans and Israelis.”

Paranoid conspiracy theories again.

“They know equally well that the terrorist Abu Musab Al Zarqawi and his "Al-Qaeda in Iraq" are an invention of the coalition forces to justify their presence.”

Why would they have invented this? It is quite clear that the Coalition forces want to leave Iraq, not stay there.

“Overwhelming evidence confirms this fact.”

I would be very interested to see this ‘evidence’. That appear on a blog.

The fact that there were UK forces in an area is not proof of Coalition terrorism.

“…American terrorist activity in Iraq is aimed at inciting civil war…”

The USA could easily achieve this if it wanted to. But it would serve little purpose that I can think of and would make occupying Iraq and getting the oil flowing much, much harder.

“Many other British, American troops - both as independent reporters repeatedly commented that many soldiers, Latin American, African and British mercenaries are paid hundreds of times more than the rest to perpetrate terrorist attacks.”

I wonder if there is actually any evidence of this claim?

The BBC link does not work.

“They were disguised with wigs and clothes Arabs.”

That makes perfect 100% sense. It would be foolish to draw attention to yourself needlessly.
“…apparently ready to explode through the drive of a remote control in the populous market of Basra.”

Guesswork.

“SAS's presence in Iraq was discovered on January 30 this year…”

The SAS would obviously have been I Iraq for some time, probably before the invasion.

“It has also been reported that it was they who set fire to oil wells in Kuwait.”

I wonder if there is actual evidence of this.

“…but then infiltrated the IRA in which were involved in terrorist bombs.”

I wonder if there is actual evidence of this.

“The well-known bomb attack that killed 29 civilians in 1998 in Omagh, was executed by a double agent informed the Sunday Herald (http://www.sundayherald.com/17827).”

I wonder if there is actual evidence of this. The link does not show any evidence that it is true.

“The common denominator in these attacks is curiously being directed at Iraqi targets rather than the occupying forces.”

That is because it is easier to attack Iraqi targets than Coalition forces.

“It does not have the slightest sense that Al-Qaeda and Al-Zarqawi, allegedly came to Iraq to fight the Americans and instead attacked civilians and police.”

If the author had any knowledge of Islam, Iraq, Al Qaeda or Middle Eastern geopolitics they would understand the issue. But they do not.

“Doing the occupying forces find excuses to stay higher.”

Despite the fact that they would prefer to leave.

“Therefore it is imperative that the American and British troops remain in Iraq to fight terrorism and help the Iraqis defend themselves.”

Until they can fight this is true.

“There is consensus that these car were scattered by foreign armed forces…”

Consensus among who? Internet conspiracy theorists?
“The exiled Iraqi doctor Imad Khadduri, recounted that drivers Arabs have found bombs inside their cars after being arrested and questioned in some American checkpoint.”

I wonder if there is actual evidence of this.

“The blog Baghdad Burning reported in May 2005 that eyewitnesses saw American patrols throwing bombs in Ma'moun, an area located west of Baghdad.”

I wonder if there is actual evidence of this.

"We all know the agenda of the occupiers," said They are accomplices of the Mossad (the Israeli secret service) and their intention is to transform Iraq into a volatile battlefield to control its interests in Iraq.”

If Iraq is a ‘volatile battlefield’ then it will be impossible to control or acces the oil.

“El Sheik Hassan Al-Zarqani, spokesman for the armed militia Mahdi found weapons, explosives and remote control detonators in his car…”

As he is a militia leader is this supposed to be surprising?

"We believe these soldiers were planning an attack on a market or to any other civilian target."

So no evidence, just guesswork.

"I think the Americans are those who are doing this, trying to blame the Sunnis, so as to provoke a civil war and control our wealth"

If they wanted to control the wealth, a civil war is the wrong way to do it and obviously so. What is needed is stability.

There is already a lot of tension between the two Muslim groups in Iraq. This is well known.

“The civil war among Iraqis is the ultimate goal of the occupation…”

It would be utterly counter productive to have Iraq in civil war.

Yugoslavia collapsed due to internal tensions and very complex reasons.
_________________
Be pleased to inform Her Majesty that the White Ensign flies alongside the Union Jack in South Georgia. God save the Queen.

[JPL]

Lo que USA y UK están llevando a cabo en Irak es claramente un GENOCIDIO.

¿Qué es el genocidio?

Es cualquiera de una serie de actos cuya comisión tiene por objeto la destrucción total o parcial de ciertos grupos de personas. Es esta intención lo que distingue el genocidio de otros crímenes de lesa humanidad.

El articulo 6 del Estatuto de Roma de la Corte Penal Internacional confiere a ésta jurisdicción respecto del genocidio tal como se define en el artículo II de la Convención para la Prevención y Sanción del Delito de Genocidio, de 1948. Esta definición se considera parte del derecho internacional consuetudinario, por lo que es de obligado cumplimiento para todos los Estados, hayan ratificado o no la Convención. Los estatutos de los tribunales penales internacionales para la ex Yugoslavia y Ruanda utilizan la misma definición.

¿Qué actos de genocidio son de la competencia de la Corte Penal Internacional?

Si se cometen con intención de destruir total o parcialmente a un grupo nacional, étnico, racial o religioso, pueden constituir genocidio los cinco actos prohibidos siguientes:
- Matanza de miembros del grupo.
- Lesión grave a la integridad física o mental de los miembros del grupo.
- Sometimiento intencional del grupo a condiciones de existencia que hayan de acarrear su destrucción física, total o parcial.
-Medidas destinadas a impedir nacimientos en el seno del grupo.
-Traslado por la fuerza de niños del grupo a otro grupo.

¿Son culpables de genocidio quienes animan a otros a cometerlo?

De acuerdo con el artículo 25.3.b del Estatuto de Roma, todo el que ordene, proponga o induzca a alguien a cometer genocidio (consumado o en grado de tentativa) es culpable del crimen. También constituye un delito en virtud del artículo 25.3.e, el hecho de que una persona «haga una instigación directa y pública a que se cometa» genocidio.

¿Qué ocurre con quienes ayudan a otros a cometer o intentan cometer genocidio?

El artículo 25.3.c dispone que quien sea cómplice o encubridor o colabore de algún modo en la comisión o la tentativa de comisión de genocidio es culpable del crimen. El párrafo 3.f del mismo artículo estipula que quien intente cometer genocidio es culpable. Aunque, a diferencia de lo dispuesto en el artículo III de la Convención para la Prevención y Sanción del Delito de Genocidio, en el Estatuto de Roma no se define expresamente como delito la conspiración para cometer genocidio, el artículo 23.3.d considera como tal una conducta muy similar.

¿Quién puede ser considerado víctima de genocidio?

Todo miembro de un grupo nacional, étnico, racial o religioso pueder se víctima de genocidio. El término «étnico» denota grupo lingüístico y cultural.


El Estatuto de Roma no incluye los grupos sociales o políticos en la definición de víctimas potenciales. No obstante, muchos de los actos cometidos contra miembros de tales grupos serían de la competencia de la Corte en tanto que crímenes de lesa humanidad si se cometieran de manera generalizada o sistemática y de conformidad con la política de un Estado o una organización (véase el folleto número 4).

¿Es necesario destruir o intentar destruir a un grupo entero o a una parte considerable de él para que el acto constituya genocidio?

No. Basta con que el acusado haya intentado destruir a gran número de miembros del grupo en una comunidad particular, como una ciudad o pueblo, debido a la identidad del grupo.

¿Quién puede ser juzgado por genocidio?

Toda persona que haya cometido genocidio puede ser juzgada por ello, cualquiera que sea su cargo. Es decir, que se considera culpable no sólo al jefe de Estado o al ministro que haya planeado u ordenado el acto, sino también a quien lo haya cometido, sea un simple soldado o un ciudadano de a pie. El artículo 33.3 dispone expresamente que el hecho de haber actuado por orden de un superior no constituye una circunstancia eximente legítima del crimen de genocidio.

¿Que se necesita para probar el genocidio?

Puesto que la intención de destruir total o parcialmente a un grupo como tal constituye un elemento esencial del crimen, es fundamental y, al mismo tiempo, a menudo muy difícil, encontrar pruebas claras de los motivos e intenciones del autor del acto.

http://web.amnesty.org/library/index/eslIOR400042000?Open&of=esl-393

USA y UK ((((( NADA ))))) tienen que hacer en Irak. Sólo un idiota justificaría el genocidio que se está cometiendo en Irak con la excusa de la "guerra al terrorismo" o "evitar una guerra civil".

http://www.tu.tv/videos/genocidio-de-irak

Saludos, JPL.
_________________
No hay mayor señal de ignorancia que creer imposible lo inexplicable. - S. Bilard

[Colorado del monte]

[Hutch]

JPL

Do you honestly think that the UK and USA (and other Coalition nations there) are actually trying to exterminate Iraqis as a people? Think how the Germans tried genocide against the Jews and what happened in Rwanda and Yugoslavia. Then compare with Iraq.

“Is any of a series of acts whose commission considers object the total or partial destruction of certain groups of people.”

This is clearly not happening in Iraq.

A lot of people have been killed and there are a lot of deaths, which is a tragedy. But is there a clear policy of extermination being followed? Clearly no. are there crimes happening there and terrible, terrible things – yes, undoubtedly. Is it UK/USA led genocide? Clearly not.

“Only an idiot would justify the genocide that is being committed in Iraq with the excuse of the "war Al terrorism" or "to avoid a civil war". “

Actual genocide is not being committed in Iraq by the USA and UK.

The war on terror is not being used to justify the genocide which is not happening.

The possibility of civil war in Iraq is real and has to be avoided to stop worse inter community strife which could lead to ethic cleansing.

Colorado

Before you feel too dizzy on your pedestal remember that Argentina’s invasion of the FI in 1982 was also done with no authorisation from the UN and then occupied in defiance of the UN.

“Hutch because do not begin you same by respecting it, not a little bit one seems you hipocrita your claim?”

You still – like a small child – run away and hide. Whatever else happens where ever else in the world, Argentina still refuses to take her supposed legal case on the FI to any competent court. Her case is so legally strong that she can not tell anyone what it is or even attempt to prove it.

“These serian the points by which the government of the current one Bush, does not recognize to the International Penal Cut neither Al tried Rome.”

That is Bush not the UK and Argentina in relation to the FI. Different issues, different people. You still run away and hide.
_________________
Be pleased to inform Her Majesty that the White Ensign flies alongside the Union Jack in South Georgia. God save the Queen.

[Colorado del monte]

[Hutch]

Another worthless post Colorado. Well done you must be very proud.

See you on the otehr forum.
_________________
Be pleased to inform Her Majesty that the White Ensign flies alongside the Union Jack in South Georgia. God save the Queen.