Police Response More Frightening Than the Killing

LONDON, Jul 26 (IPS) - That an innocent Brazilian was shot dead on the London Underground is tragic; but the near justification of that killing by the police is frightening.

The police have now openly declared a shoot-to-kill policy, and declared that they can shoot to kill just on suspicion. And that suspicion arising not from reliable intelligence or anything like that, but from just how someone may behave somewhere.

Until the other day everyone thought that a Brit licensed to kill was a character in a James Bond film. Now that is official British policy.

London's police commissioner Sir Ian Blair expressed ''regret'' -- and no more -- over the death of Brazilian electrician Jean Charles de Menezes. That ''regret'' was accompanied by the remark that there could be more such killing of innocent people.

Ian Blair said the police had a shoot-to-kill policy to stop suspected suicide bombers. "This is not a Metropolitan (police) policy, this is a national policy and I think we are quite comfortable that the policy is right, but of course these are fantastically difficult times...there are still officers having to make those calls as we speak. Somebody else could be shot."(...)"

more

Board to Death

By Andrew Fleming
Friday, 22 July 2005



The myth of the mainstream media’s “liberal bias” has recently taken yet another hit after researchers at California’s Sonoma State University took a close look at the resumes of the 118 people who sit on the boards of directors of America’s ten largest media organizations. The research team is part of the Project Censored, which for nearly three decades has been exposing journalistic self-censorship — “the news that didn’t make the News.” They determined that the group of 118 board members in turn sit on the boards of 288 other major corporations. They also discovered that eight out of the ten media behemoths share common memberships in each other’s boardrooms.

Given that the job of the press is to help us to run the state, and not the other way around, the following makes for an alarming list of bedfellows:

1-New York Times: Carlyle Group, Eli Lilly, Ford, Johnson and Johnson, Hallmark, Lehman Brothers, Staples, Pepsi.

2-Washington Post: Lockheed Martin, Coca-Cola, Dun & Bradstreet, Gillette, G.E. Investments, J.P. Morgan, Moody's.

3-Knight-Ridder: Adobe Systems, Echelon, H&R Block, Kimberly-Clark, Starwood Hotels.

4-The Tribune (Chicago & LA Times): 3M, Allstate, Caterpillar, Conoco Phillips, Kraft, McDonalds, Pepsi, Quaker Oats, Shering Plough, Wells Fargo.

5-News Corp (Fox): British Airways, Rothschild Investments.

6-GE (NBC): Anheuser-Busch, Avon, Bechtel, Chevron/Texaco, Coca-Cola, Dell, GM, Home Depot, Kellogg, J.P. Morgan, Microsoft, Motorola, Procter & Gamble.

7-Disney (ABC): Boeing, Northwest Airlines, Clorox, Estee Lauder, FedEx, Gillette, Halliburton, Kmart, McKesson, Staples, Yahoo.

8-Viacom (CBS): American Express, Consolidated Edison, Oracle, Lafarge North America.

9-Gannett: AP, Lockheed-Martin, Continental Airlines, Goldman Sachs, Prudential, Target, Pepsi.

10-AOL-Time Warner (CNN): Citigroup, Estee Lauder, Colgate-Palmolive, Hilton.

Can we reasonably imagine Peter Jennings’ handlers at ABC giving him the green light to investigate why Halliburton was awarded sole-source contracts in Iraq when their own wallets are fattening because of it? How about expecting the grand poobahs of the New York Times to report on the financial ties between the Bush and Bin Laden families through their mutual membership in the Carlyle Group when they’re feasting from the same trough?

source

Letter from a London Mother: Does anyone have the answers?

"I have never left comments on (or even read) News Forums before but I have so many unanswered questions on the London bombings. I have read all the newspapers and watched countless news-bulletins but they all seem to carry the same story, and unquestioningly at that. Can anyone tell me the answers to the following:

I have been unable to find out the times that the trains left Kings Cross and the time that they were at each station. I have checked every web-site I can think of from the police to the BBC to TFL. If the police want witnesses to come forward, wouldn't this information be crucial and easily attainable? Then show these guys getting on the tube trains from the CCTV on each platform to help jolt people's memories.

CCTV not working on the bus?

CCTV not working on the tube trains?

Radios not working on the tube trains, (so the power surge story remains for an hour), surely the drivers weren't killed so they would radio to a control centre. Wouldn't radio contact be essential, don't we have it?

No interviews with train or bus drivers?

Head of tube is ex-CIA man?

Lots of detail on Met Police website and poster re: bus. Including times that the bus was at each stop. Why are they only concerned with finding witnesses to his whereabouts and not the other 3?

Why would someone sit at the back and on the top deck of a bus instead of the lower deck if he wanted to create carnage?

Is it true that ONLY this bus was diverted away from Kings Cross?

An eye-witness account on the BBC News website is quoted as saying she saw the bus explode and the police were on the scene immediately, cordoning off the area? How comes, surely not a lot of spare police around at that time?

The police are still unable to identify many of the poor victims of this (state-terrorist?) attack. Yet they can identify 4 men (with personal id?) within 48 hours? Each of which would have been in a far worse physical state than anyone else.

How did the police trace the station they got on at and therefore the car at Luton? Did the return tickets they brought remain intact as well? Why buy return tickets? Why put a pay and display ticket on your car?

I am a just a 50 year old Londoner, whose son uses the tube every day, and spent hours trying to contact him that morning whilst only getting a system busy signal. Thankfully he was fine (although he freaked out when he witnessed the following morning a young man in the street making a call on his mobile getting shoved to the ground by four rifle-toting police, who screamed "drop the phone" as they held the rifles to his head whilst he screamed "I was only calling my dad").

Other mothers weren't as fortunate as me and my heart goes out to them.

Yet I am totally unconvinced by the police/media coverage (or cover-up). When I have gone onto news web-sites I have noticed that anyone who questions the official line is branded a conspiracy theorist, yet they feel very comfortable saying that facts that don't add-up are just coincidences.
(For instance the drill that took place, same time, same place.)

I too thought that the attacks were going to happen at some point (I also marched against the war in Iraq), but now I'm nowhere near believing what we are being told.

What would happen if the truth was that this was state-terrorism, and we have a government that would willingly sacrifice some of its own (as well as the lives of countless Afghani and Iraqis), would our media have the courage to ask the questions and find the real answers.

How would we as a people respond if this was the truth? Instead of diverting our attention towards a misunderstood and marginalised section of our society (shades of Nazi Germany and the jews here), and all the talk of an evil idealogy, let us know the true facts so we can make up our own minds about the reasons behind these appalling attacks."

source

What's Behind the London Attacks?

The bombing of the London Underground was a false-flag operation designed to keep the West mired in war. Don't believe otherwise.

By Matt Hutaff Jul 7, 2005

Only one word sprang to mind when I heard about the bombings that claimed the lives of dozens of Londoners today – convenient.

Is there anything convenient in death, or in thousands of lives destroyed from catastrophe? No – and words cannot express the sorrow I feel for the men and women changed by today's events. But governments with skeletons in their closets have a great deal to gain from a national tragedy bolstered by "terrorism."

As I sit in my office today, I hear the whispers of co-workers now utterly convinced our war on terror must continue. Despite American and British involvement in the Middle East birthing wave after wave of rebel forces, the Bush doctrine is now justified in the minds of millions. Petty grievances such as the Downing Street Minutes, the President's flagging support and Karl Rove's treasonous outing of CIA agent Valerie Plame are unimportant. A shadowy conglomeration is out to kill us.

Sound familiar? It should – the same emotional ploy was used to great effect on Americans in the wake of September 11th. Question nothing, particularly your cries for vengeance or that nagging feeling in the back of your head. Justice delayed is justice denied.

Unlike four years ago, however, I refuse to accept that the attack on London was anything less than a false-flag operation designed to enrage Western "civilization" against the Middle East. Why? Because there is no reason for "terrorist" groups to attack England. As recently as this week, the Ministry of Defense announced that plans were being drafted that would pull British armed forces from the quagmires in Iraq and Afghanistan. With the British effectively admitting they're throwing in the towel, the only motivation to stay could come from an attack that compels the forces to stay and fight "global terrorism."

Think about it. The attack only benefits empires desperate to maintain a foothold in the Middle East without further eroding public opinion. Will Parliament shrug their shoulders and push their soldiers into longer tours of duty because of this? Obviously it's too early to tell, but if that happens, insurgents and rebels will have lost more than they could have ever possibly gained in destroying part of the Underground.

Brian Kilmeade of Fox News agrees, claiming the sabotage "works to ... [the] Western world's advantage, for people to experience something like this together." It doesn't just make "terrorism" an American problem. It makes it a worldwide problem. The Number One problem.

No longer do we need to concern ourselves with two world leaders (who have spawned more worldwide terrorism than any fanatical religious organization) going unquestioned in their lies that started a war. We can cast off our sluggish economies, lack of freedoms and pitiful descent into draconian law. Terror is on the rise.

I feel like I'm sitting in my apartment watching the World Trade Center collapse all over again.

Everything is the same, right down to the previously unheard of Islamic group (The Secret Organization of al-Qaida in Europe? Are you kidding me?) taking credit – even though the translation falls apart under scrutiny and the Q'uran is improperly cited. Considering the only Al Qaeda cell to ever be uncovered was a front for the Mossad, you'd think the perpetrators could at least come up with a clever new booga-booga name to grab headlines. Their arrogance is startling.

As is the ever-present Israeli connection, a staple among false flag operations. Before today's attack, the Israeli Embassy in London was notified an attack was forthcoming. As a result, former Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu remained in his hotel room rather than head towards a nearby hotel where he was to address an economic summit.

The embassy denies it had any prior knowledge, of course, but the story has changed dramatically in the process. If, as they say, Netanyahu was not warned, how did he know to stay in his room? How did he know the danger was so severe that he dare not venture out of the hotel?

Oops! The story's changed again – here Netanyahu says that British police had warned the Israelis (but not the rest of the city?) of a pending attack. Scotland Yard denies this; Israel's reply was to say Netanyahu received his warning after the first blast. How? It was initially reported as a power surge for hours. What is being hidden here? And why isn't there an investigation into these obvious discrepancies?

It's enough to make your head spin and your eyes cross with rage.

Regardless, I am making an appeal to Britons who are understandably wracked with grief at the moment – don't buy into the hatred the way we Americans did. Don't ignore the obvious evidence that this whole affair was orchestrated by your own government. Most importantly, don't let the deaths of the few, however tragic, plunge your nation into another fit of war and civic clampdowns.

Toying with your emotions is expected. Don't fall prey to ignorance. See the attack on your home for what it really is – a distraction that will keep your money, resources and troops mired in ceaseless battle for an ideology that betrays your democratic and civilized tenets.

Honor your dead with tears, not a cry for war or praise for a disgraced leader.

source

Haiti's UN Occupation Forces Carry Out Massacre of Poor in Port-au-Prince

"On Wednesday morning, July 6th, at approximately 3:00 AM, UN occupation forces in Haiti carried out a major military operation in the working-class neighborhood of Cite Soleil, one of the poorest in Port-au-Prince and also a stronghold of support for Haiti's majority political party Lavalas and President Jean-Bertrand Aristide. Presumably, the purpose of the operation was to crack down on illegal "gang activity", in particular on "gang" leader Dread Wilme. In actuality, a US trade union and human rights delegation in Port-au-Prince discovered evidence of a massacre conducted by the UN forces, targeting the larger community itself.

According to accounts from many different members of the community, many of whom chose to remain anonymous, as well as from journalists who were on the scene during the operation, UN forces surrounded two neighborhoods within Cite Soleil, Boisneuf and Project Drouillard, sealing off the alleys with tanks and troops.

Two helicopters flew overhead. At 4:30 AM, UN forces launched the offensive, shooting into houses, shacks, a church, and a school with machine guns, tank fire, and tear gas. Eyewitnesses reported that when people fled to escape the tear gas, UN troops gunned them down from the back.(...)"

more

report

Africa's new best friends

"(...)Few would deny that one of the things Africa needs is investment. But investment by many of our multinationals has not enriched its people but impoverished them. The history of corporate involvement in Africa is one of forced labour, evictions, murder, wars, the under-costing of resources, tax evasion and collusion with dictators. Nothing in either the Investment Climate Facility or the Growth and Opportunity Act imposes mandatory constraints on corporations. While their power and profits in Africa will be enhanced with the help of our foreign-aid budgets, they will be bound only by voluntary commitments: of the kind that have been in place since 1973 and have proved useless. (...)"

more

Nearly 9,000 U.S. troops dead? A NATIONWIDE CALL FOR INFO FROM SURVIVORS.

Has the Bush administration drastically understated the U.S. military death count by redefining "death"? The following article suggests that it has, and it calls for a nationwide campaign to honor deceased service members by naming and counting them.

According to the article: "...DoD lists currently being very quietly circulated indicate almost 9,000 [U.S. military] dead"; this far exceeds the "official" death count of 1,831. How can this be? It's largely because "U.S. Military Personnel who died in German hospitals or en route to German hospitals have not previously been counted."



In other words, "death" has been redefined.



WHAT YOU CAN DO RIGHT NOW:




1. If you know (or know of) service members who've died in Bush()'s wars, look for their names on the full, alphabetized "official" Pentagon death list, at www.tbrnews.org/Archives/list.htm. IF THEIR NAMES ARE NOT INCLUDED, PLEASE SEND A REPORT TO: tbrnews (at) hotmail.com. You're also encouraged to notify your Congress members, your local newspaper, and other interested parties.



( Note that the alphabetized list is updated regularly at tbrnews.org. It currently includes deaths reported up through early June. )



2. FORWARD THIS WEB PAGE TO ANYONE YOU KNOW WHO MAY KNOW SERVICE MEMBERS WHO'VE DIED.



3. Forward this web page to veterans' groups, other organizations, responsible journalists and respectable elected officials.




///////////////////////////



"The Bush Butcher’s Bill: Officially, 80 US Military Deaths in Iraq() from 1 through 21 May, 2005 – Official Total of 1,831 US Dead to date (and rising)"



( THE FOLLOWING TEXT IS FROM www.tbrnews.org/Archives/a1682.htm )




U.S. Military Personnel who died in German hospitals or en route to German hospitals have not previously been counted. They total about 6,210 as of 1 January, 2005. The ongoing, underreporting of the dead in Iraq, is not accurate. The DoD is deliberately reducing the figures. A review of many foreign news sites show that actual deaths are far higher than the newly reduced ones. Iraqi civilian casualties are never reported but International Red Cross, Red Crescent and UN figures indicate that as of 1 January 2005, the numbers are just under 100,000.



by Brian Harring, Domestic Intelligence Reporter



Note: There is excellent reason to believe that the Department of Defense is deliberately not reporting a significant number of the dead in Iraq. We have received copies of manifests from the MATS that show far more bodies shipped into Dover AFP than are reported officially. The educated rumor is that the actual death toll is in excess of 7,000. Given the officially acknowledged number of over 15,000 seriously wounded, this elevated death toll is far more realistic than the current 1,400+ now being officially published. When our research is complete, and watertight, we will publish the results along with the sources In addition to the evident falsification of the death rolls, at least 5,500 American military personnel have deserted, most in Ireland but more have escaped to Canada and other European countries, none of whom are inclined to cooperate with vengeful American authorities. (See TBR News of 18 February for full coverage on the mass desertions) This means that of the 158,000 U.S. military shipped to Iraq, 26,000 either deserted, were killed or seriously wounded. The DoD lists currently being very quietly circulated indicate almost 9,000 dead, over 16,000 seriously wounded* (See note below. This figure is now over 24,000 Ed) and a large number of suicides, forced hospitalization for ongoing drug usage and sales, murder of Iraqi civilians and fellow soldiers , rapes, courts martial and so on –



I have a copy of the official DoD casualty list. I am alphabetizing it with the reported date of death following. TBR will post this list in sections and when this is circulated widely by veteran groups and other concerned sites, if people who do not see their loved one’s names, are requested to inform their Congressman, their local paper, us and other concerned people as soon as possible.



The government gets away with these huge lies because they claim, falsely, that only soldiers actually killed on the ground in Iraq are reported. The dying and critically wounded are listed as en route to military hospitals outside of the country and not reported on the daily postings. Anyone who dies just as the transport takes off from the Baghdad airport is not listed and neither are those who die in the US military hospitals. Their families are certainly notified that their son, husband, brother or lover was dead and the bodies, or what is left of them (refrigeration is very bad in Iraq what with constant power outages) are shipped home, to Dover AFB. You ought to realize that President Bush personally ordered that no pictures be taken of the coffined and flag-draped dead under any circumstances. He claims that this is to comfort the bereaved relatives but is designed to keep the huge number of arriving bodies secret. Any civilian, or military personnel, taking pictures will be jailed at once and prosecuted.




...This listing program is finished so act accordingly. If there is an actual variance of, say, 10 names, that is acceptable. 50 would indicate sloppiness and anything over 100 a positive sign of lying. As of June 16, TBR has received 32 new, unlisted names



*The latest on the wounded: “Landstuhl Regional Medical Center in Germany, is a 150-bed hospital that's already seen over 24,000 wounded military patients from Iraq and Afghanistan since the commencement of hostilities “. Knight Ridder Newspapers June 6, 2005 (Note: The Pentagon refuses to publish accurate lists of any wounded. Ed)



LINK TO FULL, "OFFICIAL" ALPHABETICAL LIST: www.tbrnews.org/Archives/list.htm

(The list is updated regularly.)

source

Live 8 Philly performers get freebies

Associated Press

PHILADELPHIA - The performers at the Live 8 show in Philadelphia are getting thousands of dollars in gifts. The Philadelphia Inquirer reports that celebrities at the event will be given designer suits, satellite radio subscriptions, Gibson guitars, $125 ties, $330 sweat suits and watches worth between $1,500 and $6,000. Total worth: $12,000.

The products were donated by manufacturers. Giving celebrities gift bags is common for award shows like the Grammys or the Oscars. Loyola Marymount University business and ethics professor Thomas White says it's not unethical, but it is a gray zone.

The celebrities will also eat gourmet food catered by one of Philadelphia's top restaurant owners, who is donating his services. The menu includes char-grilled dry aged beef, tea-smoked spare ribs and chicken and ginger dumplings.

source

Barbarism Inc.

NEW YORK, JULY 1, 2005— The trajectory of the global capitalist economy at the beginning of the twentyfirst century is on a collision course with nature. Some of us used to joke that if corporations could bottle and sell the air that we breathe they would do it. Well, now nobody is laughing.

The summit of these eight richest countries in the world - Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia and the United States - will meet in July 2005 in Scotland. The G8 have consistently imposed a neo-liberal economic model that benefits the rich and powerful at the expense of the most destitute people in the world. This type of economics is characterized by privatization, deregulation and trade liberalization.

Take the case of trade liberalization. An increase in international trade for the world's poorest countries has not led to any real reduction in poverty in these countries. The United Nations Conference on Trade and Development reported that the majority of people in countries that opened up their markets for free trade are still surviving on less than US$1 a day. In other words, the people who gain most from relaxing import and export controls in the developing world are the multinationals.

The G8 continue to demand that poor countries open up their borders so that transnational corporations can swoop down and bleed public services dry. Like vultures, the corporations circle over the developing world, waiting to feed off the profits.

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank insist that to qualify for debt relief or loans poor countries must privatize public utilities including water, gas, electricity, transport, hospitals and schools. Privatization has increased the costs of these essential services, which means that poor people can no longer afford them. Privatization of public services has clearly exacerbated the effects of poverty in many developing countries.

Neo-liberal economists from the pulpits of the World Bank and IMF also lay down strict budgetary constraints on public spending as a condition of receiving aid and loans. In doing so, they prevent countries in the developing world from hiring doctors, nurses and health workers and purchasing much needed medicines to fight diseases such as HIV/AIDS.

The G8 expound the gospel of globalization. Like a phalanx they march across the globe, pushing into the gutter anyone or anything that stands in their way.

The term 'globalization' has a specific meaning. It is the accelerated integration of capital, production of goods and services, and markets on a global scale. Globalization is a process that is driven by the logic of corporations competing with one another for natural and human labour resources, and for markets in which to sell goods and services. This logic extends to rivalries between nation states, which is why globalization is also characterized by war.

There are three interconnected international bodies that are forcing through globalization: The IMF, the World Bank, and the World Trade Organization (WTO). Between them they aim to establish 'global governance' based on the principles of unchecked financial flows and speculation on the stock markets, free trade and privatization.

The purpose of the IMF is to make sure that financial speculation, gambling on currencies and the buying and selling of corporate shares, can go on unchecked. It wants this free-for-all to take place irrespective of the consequences. For example, when the world's gamblers started a run on the baht, the Thai currency, it precipitated the Asian financial crisis of 1997. In a matter of weeks over a million people in Thailand and 21 million people in Indonesia were pushed below the poverty line.

Like grand schoolmasters, the IMF and World Bank tell governments in the developing world what they should do with their economies. The developing countries are being taught to abide by 'structural adjustment programmes', which are now disingenuously called 'poverty reduction strategies'. If governments refuse to do as they are told, detention for the pupil is severe. The IMF and World Bank have refused to provide aid and loans to these countries. In the past, debt relief was denied to seven heavily indebted countries because they had not abided by IMF and World Bank neo-liberal economic programs. It is not from lack of money that members of the G8 refuse to cancel Third World debt, it is because debt can be used as a way of coercing developing countries to adopt neo-liberal economic practices.

The purpose of the WTO is to establish free trade so that corporations can do what they want and go where they want without anything or anyone standing in their way. There will be no barbed wire fences or border police blocking the path of transnational corporations. It is the WTO that is imposing Trade-Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS). This is the intellectual equivalent of armed robbery. Our human genes and basic foodstuffs are being patented. Patenting has meant, for example, that the production of cheaper, generic drugs that would keep people with HIV/AIDS alive is being blocked. In other words, pharmaceutical profits are protected and the poor and sick are paying the price.

The 'Battle of Seattle' in 1999 outside the WTO is seen as the beginning of a wave of global protest against the neo-liberal project, although a wave of protest in the developing world had preceded it, from 1994 onwards. It was not only the anti-capitalists who were compelled to protest in Seattle. Governments from developing countries were also outraged by the hypocrisy of the eight richest nations in the world. For example, while they were expected to open up their country's borders to corporations from abroad, and remove support given to key sectors of the economy, the United States was busy propping up its own agricultural and steel industries through massive subsidies. The United States took a position of 'Don't do what I do, but do as I say.' In other words, it was all right for the United States to flout the free trade rules but not for others.

The crisis of legitimacy of the neo-liberal project was exposed again in Genoa at the G8 summit in 2001. As hundreds of thousands of demonstrators took to the streets to declare that another world is possible, the most powerful leaders of the world met behind huge wire fences, protected by armed personnel. Genoa was a reminder of the power and strength of this social movement. Since Genoa, the G8 has kept away from meeting in major urban conurbations.

The storm clouds gathering over the corporate-driven globalization agenda on the streets of Seattle and Genoa have been joined by a hurricane - the anti-war movement.

On 15 February 2003 millions took to the streets against the then impending war on Iraq. The relationship between neo-liberalism and war has never been starker than in the war against Iraq. This war, which was led by the United States with Britain obediently following, has compounded the crisis of legitimacy of global capitalism in at least three ways. The war and occupation of Iraq showed what the 'Project for a New American Century' actually means in practice. It means control of oil supplies and it means profits for US corporations. Nowhere has this been more blatant than in awarding the main business contracts for the so-called 'rebuilding' of Iraq to US corporations linked to the Bush gang, such as Bechtel and Halliburton. UK corporations were left to peck the crumbs off the table after the hawks had had their fill.

Given the failed history of the G8 it is no surprise that people have protested when they meet. The leaders of the eight richest countries in the world may take their photo opportunities, but there are millions of us ready to point out their hypocrisy and reveal the G8 for what they really are: a rich cabal trying to disguise themselves as pious philanthropists. We will not be fooled.

source

Telling Lies and False Statements

" Why don’t they tell in honest way the miserable status of US occupation solders? Brave Iraqi resistance fighters are hunting occupation solders and their machinery on daily bases while the occupation administration is only showing misleading pictures to cover up their political scandals. Occupation solders can only move in groups in fear of resistance attacks.
Yet no one has admitted or announced the true fate of the dead American solders.

Lately, reports from all over the homeland tell about US planes that throw black and white bags over rivers and deserts. In the meantime, continuous daily resistance attacks on an area in the west of Iraq have forced the US occupation troops to flee that area which contains several mass graves
for American dead solders. The occupiers have used heavy machines to make mass graves where dead solders were quickly buried. The mass graves area has attracted stray animals and they ate some of the bodies, which were partly buried. Hence, body parts and bones are spread all over the desert.

Anyway, many of these bodies were collected from different areas in Iraq. The majority of the dead bodies were of white skin and tall solders. Those solders were killed in Iraq and were not in anyway involved in making the decision to come to Iraq and be killed there. In addition the dead
bodies were put in bags that are only used by the US army.The bodies will be delivered to the Iraqi Red Crescent or the Red Cross or any organization that respects its mission.These mass graves are an honest proof of the occupiers’ lies to hide the number of dead solders and where they’re about. These pictures are just of some of the unknown number of dead American solders. Now we are challenging the criminals of war and the occupiers to explain to the families who lost their sons for the occupation of Iraq whether their sons will be returned home, be buried in Iraq, or be thrown to the dogs to eat them."

source