Thread: Iraq News

^ I like that:

"We support our troops when they shoot officers."

I agree.

Originally Posted by Milkman

^ I like that:

"We support our troops when they shoot officers."

I agree.

Jeeeze...it's a bloody shame when even the Mods on here are Trolls...

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Jeeeze...it's a bloody shame when even the Mods on here are Trolls..

...but it gives you something to respond to, doesn't it?

Originally Posted by Wallace

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Jeeeze...it's a bloody shame when even the Mods on here are Trolls..

...but it gives you something to respond to, doesn't it?

Yep, I not complaining.

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Jeeeze...it's a bloody shame when even the Mods on here are Trolls...

I am not a troll.

And I am not trolling.


This is my opinion. I have had this opinion for almost 4 years.


I have a right to express it, because I have not broken any of the Issues Guidelines.

And you sir, have said the same.

Iraqis: life is getting better

Most Iraquis believe life is better for tham than it was under Saddam according to a British opinion poll published yesterday.

Yep...British poll - how 'bout them apples boys?

Links edited Wallace.
Article reproduced in full, as it appears to be the same survey Boonie referred to yet paints a very different picture.

The Mujahdeen got 9 of the Jews proxies in one strike! Good on 'em

Here's some interesting items you don't see posted 'round here, eh boys?


According to a recent USA Today/Gallup poll, 61% of Americans oppose “denying the funding needed to send any additional U.S. troops to Iraq,” and opposition is up from 58% in February. (3/23-25, 2007).

• A Bloomberg poll reveals 61% of Americans believe withholding funding for the war is a bad idea, while only 28% believe it is a good idea (3/3-11, 2007).

• A recent Public Opinion Strategies (POS) poll found that 56% of registered voters favor fully funding the war in Iraq, with more voters strongly favoring funding (40%) than totally opposing it (38%); (3/25-27, 2007).

• POS found also that a majority of voters (54%) oppose the Democrats imposing a reduction in troops below the level military commanders requested (3/25-27, 2007).

• A separate POS poll finds 57% of voters support staying in Iraq until the job is finished and “the Iraqi government can maintain control and provide security for its people.” And 59% of voters say pulling out of Iraq immediately would do more to harm America’s reputation in the world than staying until order is restored (35%); (2/5-7, 2007).

• A Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll show 69% of American voters trust military commanders more than members of Congress (18%) to decide when United States troops should leave Iraq. This includes 52% of Democrats, 69% of Independents and 88% of Republicans (3/27-28, 2007).

• According to a recent Pew Research survey, only 17% of Americans want an immediate withdrawal of troops (4/18-22, 2007). That same poll found a plurality of adults (45%) believe a terrorist attack against the United States is more likely if we withdraw our troops from Iraq while the “country remains unstable”

• Should a date for withdrawal be set, 70% of American believe it is likely that “insurgents will increase their attacks in Iraq” starting on that day. This is supported by 85% of Republicans, 71% of Independents and 60% of Democrats. (FOX News/Opinion Dynamics, 4/17-18, 2007).

An LA Times/Bloomberg polls reveals that 50% of Americans say setting a timetable for withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq “hurts” the troops, while only 27% believe it “helps” the troops (4/5-9, 2007)

Rice Approaches Syria and Iran

Thursday brought the first high-level contact between the United States and Syria in two years. Condoleezza Rice and her Syrian counterpart discussed the Iraq crisis and exchanged frank words as Baghdad discussed debt relief, ties with neighboring states and solutions to its imploding security situation.
...
Although Washington's relations with Syria and Iran are frozen, the bipartisan Baker Commission recently urged US President George W. Bush to pull the two countries into the international community's talks to bring peace and stability to Iraq.
...

More here: Breaking the Ice at the Iraq Conference: Rice Approaches Syria and Iran - International - SPIEGEL ONLINE - News

^
Yeah, but the 'envoy' dissed her at dinner 'cause his sensitivities were offended by a 'scantilly clad' musician.

Welcome back to the Dark Ages...

Why would they send such an intolerant diplomat? "Intolerant diplomat" is a bit of a contradiction.

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Here's some interesting items you don't see posted 'round here, eh boys? According to a recent USA Today/Gallup poll, 61% of Americans oppose “denying the funding needed to send any additional U.S. troops to Iraq,” and opposition is up from 58% in February. (3/23-25, 2007). A Bloomberg poll reveals 61% of Americans believe withholding funding for the war is a bad idea, while only 28% believe it is a good idea (3/3-11, 2007). A recent Public Opinion Strategies (POS) poll found that 56% of registered voters favor fully funding the war in Iraq, with more voters strongly favoring funding (40%) than totally opposing it (38%); (3/25-27, 2007). POS found also that a majority of voters (54%) oppose the Democrats imposing a reduction in troops below the level military commanders requested (3/25-27, 2007). A separate POS poll finds 57% of voters support staying in Iraq until the job is finished and “the Iraqi government can maintain control and provide security for its people.” And 59% of voters say pulling out of Iraq immediately would do more to harm America’s reputation in the world than staying until order is restored (35%); (2/5-7, 2007). A Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll show 69% of American voters trust military commanders more than members of Congress (18%) to decide when United States troops should leave Iraq. This includes 52% of Democrats, 69% of Independents and 88% of Republicans (3/27-28, 2007). According to a recent Pew Research survey, only 17% of Americans want an immediate withdrawal of troops (4/18-22, 2007). That same poll found a plurality of adults (45%) believe a terrorist attack against the United States is more likely if we withdraw our troops from Iraq while the “country remains unstable” Should a date for withdrawal be set, 70% of American believe it is likely that “insurgents will increase their attacks in Iraq” starting on that day. This is supported by 85% of Republicans, 71% of Independents and 60% of Democrats. (FOX News/Opinion Dynamics, 4/17-18, 2007). An LA Times/Bloomberg polls reveals that 50% of Americans say setting a timetable for withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq “hurts” the troops, while only 27% believe it “helps” the troops (4/5-9, 2007)

MAY THE 4TH BE WITH YOU.

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Here's some interesting items you don't see posted 'round here, eh boys?

And the text which follows is copied from "free republic", or where did you get it from?
Indicate when you quote and from where or have the posts deleted in future.

Originally Posted by stroller

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Here's some interesting items you don't see posted 'round here, eh boys?

And the text which follows is copied from "free republic", or where did you get it from?
Indicate when you quote and from where or have the posts deleted in future.

From here:

The Corner on National Review Online

^^

the majority of the polling data in boner's post comes from the highly suspect POS--it is frequently cited by drudge, and then taken down because it's numbers don't add up).
"POS"....no, not piece of shit, but 'public opinion strategies...

Public Opinion Strategies (POS) describes itself as a "Republican polling firm". [1]

In 2001, it was charged with violating Virginia's polling disclosure laws, and it has also been accused of using push polls to influence elections." [2]

Public Opinion Strategies - SourceWatch

Watch this video. It shows the 9/11 plot with testimonies of experts and pictures of the terrorists. How they looked like Westerners (watch their original clothes) and worked with Iraq to do 9/11. Check out how they were trained in Salman Pak, Iraq...


So much for the lies/spin etc that Saddam was not involved with Al Quaeda before 9/11...

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

So much for the lies/spin etc that Saddam was not involved with Al Quaeda before 9/11

boonie, boonie, boonie......there was no evidence of any operational contact between saddam and AQ. none. zero. zip.

in fact, it defies logic that saddam would have anything to with AQ.....but then why should that suddenly get in the way?

fell free to provide any info you have to the contrary.....but spare us the same tired littlegreenfootballs blogs.

more interesting news from Baghdad

Originally Posted by WSJ

U.S. Investigates Firm Building Embassy in Iraq

Former Employees Allege Abusive Labor Practices;
Company Denies Claims
By YOCHI J. DREAZEN
June 7, 2007; Page A1

WASHINGTON -- Federal prosecutors are investigating the Kuwaiti company building the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad, probing allegations that foreign employees were brought to work on the massive project against their will and prevented from leaving the country.

The Department of Justice launched the probe of First Kuwaiti General Trading & Contracting Co. after former employees alleged that workers at the company were told they were being sent to Dubai, only to wind up in Iraq instead, people familiar with the matter said. According to the allegations, First Kuwaiti confiscated the workers' passports, so they were unable to depart Baghdad, these people said.


The new U.S. Embassy, under construction in Baghdad
A statement by First Kuwaiti said, "We are not aware of any DOJ investigation involving First Kuwaiti. The DOS [State Department] has already fully investigated these ludicrous allegations and has found them to be without merit. First Kuwaiti is proud of its accomplishments and of its efforts to build the U.S. embassy in Baghdad on time, within budget, and in compliance with the law."

The $592 million project involves a heavily fortified compound of 21 buildings on 104 acres in Baghdad's Green Zone, and is set to be completed by September. First Kuwaiti won the project in a competitive-bidding process, besting several better-known firms.

Though Iraq is wracked by high unemployment, the company was barred from hiring Iraqis because of concerns they might pass information to insurgents or try to smuggle explosives into the compound. Instead, it hired nationals from poor countries such as Bangladesh, Egypt and Pakistan, for whom the wages -- about $1,000 per month -- were far higher than they could earn at home.

The Bush administration has made combating human trafficking world-wide a high-profile priority. In addition, U.S. officials have expressed growing concern about human trafficking by companies working on American-funded projects in Iraq. Last year, the Defense Department said it conducted an investigation into such problems, following media reports about labor trafficking in Iraq. The Pentagon said its probe "identified a number of abuses, some of them considered widespread," committed by Pentagon contractors and subcontractors, including U.S. companies.

Violations included confiscation of passports and deceptive hiring practices, allegations similar to those Justice is pursuing in the First Kuwaiti matter.

The Defense Department responded with a number of measures to closely monitor the hiring and employment of foreign laborers. In April 2006, Gen. George W. Casey, then the top U.S. commander in Iraq, issued specific guidelines to all Defense contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan. Chief among them was a mandate that they cease holding or withholding employee passports.

People familiar with the First Kuwaiti situation said an American who formerly worked for the company in Baghdad, John Owens, told prosecutors that dozens of Pakistani and West African employees on a First Kuwaiti charter flight from Kuwait to Baghdad received boarding passes that wrongly indicated the flight was going to Dubai. He also told prosecutors he had personally seen a safe at the construction site in Baghdad containing hundreds of passports belonging to some of the 1,500 foreign workers at the site, the people said.

Justice spokeswoman Cynthia Magnuson said she couldn't confirm or deny whether an investigation is in progress, and declined to comment further. State Department spokesman Tom Casey said the department is unaware of such an investigation.

Mr. Owens and Rory Mayberry, a second American who had worked for -- and, unlike Mr. Owens, was fired by -- First Kuwaiti, submitted written accounts of alleged labor trafficking and mistreatment of First Kuwaiti's foreign work force to U.S. officials late last year. They also have had frequent email and telephone conversations with the officials in recent months, according to the people familiar with the case.

Mr. Owens has filed a separate False Claims Act lawsuit against First Kuwaiti, alleging that the company overcharged the U.S. government and failed to properly install many of the embassy's security fortifications, according to a copy of the sealed complaint reviewed by The Wall Street Journal. The False Claims Act allows private citizens to file suit alleging the government was defrauded, and to receive a portion of any penalties levied against a defendant.

The contours of the probe were detailed by government officials with direct knowledge of it, as well as by Mr. Owens and others who have been contacted by prosecutors. Several government officials said the inquiry had accelerated in recent weeks, but they said it is unclear when, or if, prosecutors would bring criminal or civil charges.

The embassy compound is one of the only major U.S.-funded construction projects in Iraq that appears likely to be finished on schedule and within budget. The first State Department personnel are slated to begin moving into the new compound in September, with the remainder settling in by year's end.

First Kuwaiti's work on the site has been dogged by accusations of various labor abuses. In September, State Department Inspector General Howard Krongard visited the embassy locale after receiving allegations that workers had been deceived about where they would be working and had their passports confiscated upon arrival, he said in a report released by his office earlier this year.

Mr. Krongard later reported he found no evidence of wrongdoing. Workers he interviewed told him they knew they were going to Iraq and had handed over their passports voluntarily for safekeeping, he reported. In an interview, Mr. Krongard said he stands by the report and was unaware of the Justice probe.

The U.S. military also investigated First Kuwaiti over similar allegations. In a report released in March, the inspector general for the U.S.-led coalition in Iraq said workers from Nepal, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka complained of "fraudulent hiring practices" by recruitment firms in their home countries. The employees said they had been promised more time off and higher pay than First Kuwaiti was giving them.

The report cleared First Kuwaiti of wrongdoing, noting that investigators had found "no evidence of Trafficking in Persons violations." It said workers at the site "were being paid and had the ability to quit at any time...and return to their home country."

While Justice may ultimately clear the company of the present allegations, its involvement suggests they are serious enough to merit investigation. The U.S. maintains jurisdiction on American-funded projects anywhere in the world and, unlike the State and Defense departments, Justice has the power to issue subpoenas and bring charges on its own.

The new probe could be perilous for First Kuwaiti. If Justice found prosecution warranted, and convictions were obtained, the company and its executives could face steep civil and criminal penalties, including possibly being forced to return the nearly $600 million it has been paid by the U.S. government. Any executives proved to have taken part in alleged human-trafficking, meanwhile, might face lengthy prison sentences.

According to the company's Web site, First Kuwaiti is a privately owned company founded in 1996, with annual revenue topping $1 billion.

In interviews, two ex-employees who triggered the probe said that while still with the company, they reached out to the government after witnessing numerous instances of workers being deceived or mistreated.

Mr. Owens, who had supervised construction of the embassy building, said he was waiting for a First Kuwaiti charter flight to Iraq in March 2006 when he noticed that the Pakistani and West African workers held boarding passes for Dubai. He asked a First Kuwaiti official about the discrepancy, and said he was told it was a way to get the workers past Kuwaiti customs. Mr. Owens, who lives in the U.S., assumed the workers knew they were going to Iraq, he said.

Mr. Mayberry, the second former employee, said he himself had been given a boarding pass marked for Dubai on a First Kuwaiti charter flight that he knew was bound for Baghdad. "It was the first sign that something was a bit off with the company," he says.

A former Army medical technician who was hired to run the site's infirmary, Mr. Mayberry later wrote to U.S. military and civilian officials alleging that First Kuwaiti ran a dirty, dilapidated medical facility that lacked running water and needed supplies.

Mr. Owens, meanwhile, said he began to hear dozens of workers complain that they had been told they would be sent to Dubai and Kuwait, not Iraq. Later, he said he saw a large safe that contained the passports of hundreds of workers. He alleged the company began confiscating passports after 70 Filipinos fled in search of other work in Iraq.

Mr. Owens resigned, according to his statements in the sealed False Claims Act complaint, "because he could no longer countenance this misconduct" by First Kuwaiti.

Mr. Mayberry, who now is in Oregon, was fired by the company less than a week after he arrived in Iraq after the company criticized his medical skills. He questions the timing of the dismissal, though, since he says it came almost immediately after he began complaining about the infirmary conditions.

"I felt bad for those folks every day that I was in Iraq, and the feelings just built and built," Mr. Owens said in an interview. "They were basically being treated like slaves."

Write to Yochi J. Dreazen at yochi.dreazen@wsj.com

Even more interesting .

"Iran caught red-handed shipping arms to Taliban." By NATO officials.

This will make it a bit harder for the Lefties to ignore.

What makes you think "Lefties" would want to ignore crucial information which isn't fabricated by right-wing blogs like the speculations you previously tried to pass as 'fact'.