IAWM Press Releases on capture of Saddam Hussein

by Colm Stephens - Irish Anti-War Movement Mon Dec 15, 2003 14:38 info at irishantiwar dot org PO Bos 9260, Dubli9n 1

Yesterday's Press Release is more detailed than today's .

IAWM statement on Saddam arrest
by Harry Browne - Irish Anti-War Movement Sunday, Dec 14 2003, 5:20pm
mailto:harrybrowne@eircom.net

issued to media today
Irish Anti-War Movement Press Statement, Sunday 14 December 2003

‘Criminals catching a criminal,’ peace campaigners say

SADDAM Hussein should be tried by Iraqis, the main victims of his tyranny, the Irish Anti-War Movement (IAWM) said today.

Any assessment of Saddam’s career as a despot should put the United States on trial – for supporting him through the worst of his war crimes, and for its own vicious attacks on the Iraqi people, an IAWM statement said.

“Saddam’s ‘arrest’ is a case of criminals catching a criminal,” IAWM chairman Richard Boyd Barrett said. “The US, which itself refuses to recognise the International Criminal Court, has no genuine legitimacy as a legal authority in Iraq.”

One dictator has been captured alive. Thousands of innocent civilians have died in the meantime. And it’s as true today as yesterday that the US and Britain lied about their intentions, and lied about the dangers of Iraqi WMD, in order to launch the invasion of Iraq. The US supported Saddam and continues to support vicious dictators who co-operate with US economic and military interests.

“Today’s events do nothing to redeem US behaviour in Iraq and Afghanistan, and Ireland’s complicity in it,” Mr Boyd Barrett said.

Appalling crimes against civilians continue: the nine children killed in Afghanistan earlier this month were slaughtered by an American A-10 attack aircraft – a type of craft that has been photographed on the ground in Shannon Airport. More than 14,000 US troops passed through Shannon last month alone, on their way to wage war on Iraqis, or on their way home with shattering injuries.

These grim facts put Bertie Ahern’s claims to be a longstanding peace activist in some perspective.

“The real agenda for the Iraq occupation has nothing to do with justice, no more than it does democracy for Iraqis,” Mr Boyd Barrett said. The occupation provides more than just a Middle East outpost for the US military: it offers massive profits for the US oil companies, construction firms and mercenary ‘security’ forces that are stripping Iraqi assets – and rolling in US taxpayers’ money. Some $30 billion of the $87 billion approved by the US Congress for Iraq is actually going directly to such private-sector profiteers.

Even the CIA admits that Iraqi resistance to the occupation has been growing and is not dependent on Saddam or any other individual. However, while US claims of ‘victory’ have proven premature, the danger after today’s side-show of an emboldened and ‘vindicated’ US is clear: its latest aggressive noises directed at Syria suggest that the Americans have not finished their march through the Middle East.

US actions in Iraq – with attacks on civilians, repressive curfews, collective punishment etc – increasingly resemble those of its client state, Israel, continually stepping up its own violence against Palestinians.

Opposition to the Iraq occupation, among Iraqis determined to end foreign occupation and among concerned citizens of the world, continues. American anti-war activists have called for a global day of action against the occupations of Iraq, Afghanistan and Palestine, with massive demonstrations around the globe planned for next March 20th.

“On March 20th the Irish Anti-War Movement will play its part in a global movement, as we did last February 15th, when millions around the world marched against war,” Mr Boyd Barrett said.

Ends

For further info contact Richard Boyd Barrett, 087 632 9511 or
Harry Browne, 087 764 8065

by Democrat Mon Dec 15, 2003 14:43

When did you replace Aoifr as Secretary? Why was she removed? How were you elected? Was any advance warning of the election given, were nominations invited?

Who are you and how come no one ever heard of you before you assumed the mantle of Secretary of the IAWM? Did you spring fully born from the brow of Jupiter?

by Paul Kinsella - CPSU Mon Dec 15, 2003 14:50 paulkinsella53 at yahoo dot com 53 Lorcan Grove, Santry, Dublin 9 085-1478100

I wonder is this the Fianna Failure dirty tricks department up to their old tricks again?

by pc Mon Dec 15, 2003 14:57

very catchy i like it,

it funny when you see them saying he will get a fair trial and treated like a pow under the geneva treaty what about those in camp xray and whats that british place called?

by Colm Stephens - Irish Anti-War Movement Mon Dec 15, 2003 15:06 info at irishantiwar dot org

A new steering committee was elected at the AGM in September and I was nominated and elected to it.

At the first meeting of that steering committee I was elected Secretary. Aoife did not wish to continue as Secretary.

by David Mon Dec 15, 2003 15:38

Madam, - Dr Colm Stephens of The Irish Anti-War Movement (Dec. 10th) claims that protesters at Shannon Airport have adopted principles of non-violent protest and pose no threat to the safety of aircraft at the airport.

I find it ironic, then, that in the same letter he should remind us that earlier this year protesters not only breached security at the airport but have also inflicted damage to aircraft there.

This type of "peaceful" protest not only puts the protesters themselves at risk, but also members of the public travelling through the airport.

From the point of view of airport staff members, whose cars were spat at, kicked, stoned and climbed on as they arrived for work on December 6th, this protest was nothing short of violent and out of control.

Dr. Stephens also asks why it is that members of An Garda Síochána confiscate weapons from protesters while they themselves carry weapons.

The fact is, Dr Stephens, that the gardaí are not there for a fair fight, but to protect the public and maintain increased security levels at Shannon Airport.

Can Dr Stephens account for the violent behaviour of members of the Irish Anti-War Movement towards airport staff and members of the gardaí? - Yours, etc.,

PAUL CAMPBELL, Beresford Avenue, Dublin 9.

Madam, - Dr Colm Stephens (Dec 10th) accuses me of living in a "topsy-turvy world of neo-cons" and questions what qualifications I might have to suggest that the US Federal Aviation Authority will stop US airlines from using Shannon. As the holder of a multi-engine pilot licence issued by the FAA, I suspect I know far more about their attitude to such things than anyone in the "Irish Anti-War" movement.

The FAA's job is the promotion of civil and general aviation, which implicitly involves safety. One of their top priorities at the moment is cutting down on what the trade refers to as "Runway Incursions".

I know this because the FAA sent all their pilots two separate letters on this very subject.

Their idea of a serious problem is a pedestrian crossing an unused taxiway without permission. The thought of axe-wielding peace protesters wandering among parked US-registered aircraft looking for military equipment to sabotage must be keeping them awake at night.

The motives of the trespassers are irrelevant - their mere presence is enough to raise serious concerns about Shannon. If the so-called "Anti-War" movement can gain access, then who else can? Why not make the whole problem go away by telling the airlines Shannon is no longer safe?

According to Dr Stephens, all the acts of sabotage up to now have been carried out by responsible individuals who made sure their work would be noticed and waited to be arrested. Can he personally guarantee that this will continue in future?

Is he in a position to vouch for the bona fides of everyone who shows up at his demonstrations? Since he can't give positive answers to either of these questions, isn't he the one living in a topsy-turvy world in which he gives assurances on a situation that he has created but does not control?

By encouraging trespass, distracting the gardaí and creating chaos, his movement is creating an ideal environment for a professional terrorist who has infiltrated the ranks of the protesters to enter the airfield and do whatever they want without being detected.

This is what I had in mind when I suggested that the results of one of these protests might not be discovered until the aircraft in question was literally and figuratively beyond the point of no return. The fact that the Anti-War movement is not prepared to confront this scenario shows what a profoundly irresponsible and unaccountable group they are. - Yours, etc.,

DAVID ROLFE, Leinster Road, Rathmines, Dublin 6

These were in response to this letter published by Colm Stephens on December 10th.

Madam, - David Rolfe (December 4th), who thinks that it is appropriate to jail a peaceful protester, seems to inhabit the topsy-turvy world of the neo-cons. Through his looking glass Mr Rolfe sees peaceful protest as a possible threat to the safety of aircraft using Shannon. What rubbish! As the hundreds of protesters that blockaded the main dual-carriageway leading to the airport on Saturday showed, they are wedded to principles of non-violence.

The Irish Anti-War Movement distributed these principles by leaflet to all taking part and to the gardaí before the blockade got under way. Unfortunately, the gardaí had already decided on their tactics of using overwhelming force and intimidation. The intimidation came in the form of searching the buses arriving from Dublin, Cork and Galway and removing all placards, flag poles and even 1,000 posters. These were deemed to be "weapons". Naturally, no receipt was produced. It was, of course, nothing to do with security - but an attempt to paint the protesters as the ones who threaten violence.

The jackboot is, of course, firmly on the other foot. At this latest and all other protests at Shannon, the only ones carrying arms have been the gardaí. They have previously commandeered the airport's fire engines to have at the ready as water cannon and I have seen plain-clothes officers with the bulge of their sub-machine guns plainly showing under the "Garda" bibs.

Mr Rolfe's further assertion - he tries to give the impression that he knows these things - that the US Federal Aviation Authority might declare Shannon unsafe flies in the face of logic. The US military is obviously more than satisfied about the level of security at Shannon, as it has increased its usage of the airport since the protests have begun. Indeed, your paper reported only last Saturday that the number of US troops passing through Shannon has peaked in the last month. The Pentagon brass is not worried - why should the FAA be?

Finally, Mr Rolfe raises the spectre of a plane taking off from Shannon after being sabotaged.

This too is, of course, utter nonsense. Anti-war saboteurs have on three occasions in the past breached security at Shannon and damaged or disabled military planes. On each occasion they have actually gone out of their way to make the sabotage noticeable and, indeed, to be apprehended. No threat to any person could possibly have ensued.

Only in the world inhabited by Mr Rolfe and the neo-cons do anti-war protesters present a threat of violence, does overwhelming force create peace and can democracy be built at the point of a gun.

The majority sees the world in a very different way. - Yours, etc.,

Dr COLM STEPHENS, Secretary, Irish Anti-War Movement, PO Box 9260, Dublin 1

And i thought i'd stick in a letter from fintan lane (just for good measure)

Madam, - Dominic Carroll (Dec 3rd) highlighted my continued imprisonment because of my refusal to pay a €750 fine imposed in April for my part in a peaceful anti-war mass trespass at Shannon airport on October 12th, 2002.

I am also banned from entering Co Clare for a period of two years.

My action was an act of conscience taken to protest against the integration of an Irish civilian airport into the US war machine. On the day, more than 100 anti-war activists staged a peaceful sit-down protest inside the perimeter fence at Shannon airport. Peace songs were sung, anti-war slogans chanted, and ten of us were arrested.

That demonstration was only one of a series across Ireland against American plans to invade Iraq and against Irish complicity. The largest, in Dublin on February 15th, attracted 100,000 participants. Still, Fianna Fáil and the PDs continued to facilitate the US war machine and almost 100,000 US troops passed through Shannon airport in 2003. In September alone US military flights ferried 10,000 soldiers and many weapons and equipment through this civilian airport. This is an outrage.

It seems that I will spend Christmas and the New Year in prison because of my opposition to what is happening at Shannon. I am not looking forward to this, but I will not pay this fine. Peaceful civil disobedience is a legitimate tactic when human lives are at stake. - Yours, etc.,

Dr FINTAN LANE, E Wing, Limerick Prison, Mulgrave Street, Limerick.

by Eoin Dubsky Mon Dec 15, 2003 18:11

Quite a number of people now have found the courage to continue their witness against war -- passing through Shannon Airport in particular -- all the way to prison. Ciaron O'Reilly has commented elsewhere on this site that if we can overcome our fears of the state's sanctions, we can achieve so much more as a peace movement. And I agree... I mean, I think that we need to *quite deliberately* organize in ways that allow us confront our fears and support everyone as we go through this together.

by pc Mon Dec 15, 2003 18:20

whgere di the misinformation about workers cars getting stoned or kicked come from?

by lone gunman Mon Dec 15, 2003 18:49

Going by the posts of the Shannon demo,the Gaurds confiscated a half dozen knives.[ No cheating now Indymedia by conviently deleting those nasty posts]. Ostensibly to" cut bread and sandwiches" or possibly a Garda throat.??You must be REALLY DUMB to carry an potential offensive weapon on a demo. Poster paint and sticks were also confiscated by the own admission of some of the anti american posters here.Riggghht it said poster paint on the tin.What could be inside it?acid?petrol?
So by your own words you have hung yourselves .Some of you came kitted up for aggro,and you got off bloody lightly. The gaurds gave you back your paint and sanie knives.Anywhere else you would be joining Fintan Lane in the nick.For a longer stretch of course.Germany the balaclavad one would have been arrested on sight.it is illegal to disguise yourselves on a German demo.

Neither side has really got the hang of these demos yet ,have we?

by Laurence - IAWM Mon Dec 15, 2003 23:17

Please before the conspiracy theorys kick in the site went down because of a network disaster in the hosting company which brought down loads of sites !!! not just ours

by Joe Tue Dec 16, 2003 11:43

Too much wishful thinking there LG. The Gardai actuallly confiscated a few of the feeble sticks the SWP attach placards to, a few plastic poles they attach flags to, a couple of banner poles, 1,000 A3 pieces of paper bearing the message 'Release Fintan Lane' and some PLASTIC BOTTLES of poster paint.

You could pretend some of these were weapons if you wanted to give us a laugh but I'd LOVE to hear you turn the 1,000 A3 pieces of paper into a weapon. Go on, amuse us!

There were no cars stoned. One car did drive into a group of people with some minor injuries as a result. It would not be all that surprising if that car got a kick or two. If he did the same in Iraq he'd have been shot and you'd have been cheering.

by Interested iawm member - IAWM MEMBER Tue Dec 16, 2003 20:17

Why does every single press release quote Mr Richard Boyd Barratt of the SWP
Why do they never mention any other person.
The SWP are using the IAWM as a publicity vehicle. Why is the Socialist party person never mentioned. ? I am sick and tired of their manipulating the IAWM like this and it should stop.

by cabhog Tue Dec 16, 2003 21:17

R B-B said Saddam’s ‘arrest’ is a case of criminals catching a criminal,” IAWM chairman Richard Boyd Barrett said. “The US, which itself refuses to recognise the International Criminal Court, has no genuine legitimacy as a legal authority in Iraq.”

Since IAWM spent the run up to the war telling us that the war was illegal under international law, you'd assume that they knew what they were talking about. However, Richard Boyd clearly doesn't, as if he did he'd know that the invading force is responsible for law and order in the ocupied country, therefore the US coalition does is the legitimate legal force in Iraq.

Also, on a serperate point, since the UN is the only body that can make a war legal, surely the failure of the UN to declare the invasion of Iraq illegal means it ain't?

by Slarti Tue Dec 16, 2003 23:42

"...since the UN is the only body that can make a war legal..."

And they didn't. So, according to your rather simplistic analysis of international law, it wasn't.

Actually it wasn't for several other reasons as well, but we won't strain you too much at this point.

by David C Wed Dec 17, 2003 02:14

The US will now look very hypocritical when they condemn illegal invasions by other countries.

I had hoped Saddam could have evaded capture for years so that the US would have had to face a humiliating withdrawl. As it is, he must be treated as the Head of State in Iraq and set free immediately, since the war was illegal. Then the US must negotiate with Saddam to withdraw unconditionally, and bring Halliburton with them.

by Ariel - none Wed Dec 17, 2003 12:20 none

I've been visiting this site for a few weeks now. I thought it was about representing fair and balanced comment as opposed to the traditional media. What a nonsense! The whole SP, SWP, ISN, Anarchy prats, Anti-Waste Charge nonsense etc, etc, is enough to make the head reel. Pathetic, self indulgent, self absorbed nonsense. Have any of you guys evere seen a payslip, done a day's work or travelled ? RBB from BRIGADOON in leafy suburbia wetting himself over the capture of Saddam. Sinn Fein'ers, who wet themselves with excitement whenever a convicted childkiller bomber from PIRA visits an ArdComhairle, holding forth on peace and democracy. Ferris, McGuinness, Kelly, Adams et al who drip with the blood of the innocent lecturing on peace. Joe Higgins who quietlely paid his water charges when he moved house exhorting the unemployed to resist " double taxation " and marching them to the High court and onward to Mountjoy! SP and SWP activists ridiculing elected politicians but who themselves will be knocking on doors in upcoming election campaigns touting for votes. What a sad load of basket cases!

by imc user Wed Dec 17, 2003 13:36

"!horatio stepped unto the burning bridge...,!"
I am still in litigation with several companies that went into liquidation after employing me, as I am the kiss of corporative death.
And I used to work double shifts.
and i will wait another two years before i get paid for over five months work.
and Ariel truly doesn't give a shit about that.
"in the time of Tarquin, Horatio stood upon the burning bridge!".
I reckon Ariel just wants to slag us off.
so be it.
If you were authoritarian enough with it, Ariel, we could offer your _a great future role_.
how authoritarian are you?

by 2e Thu Dec 18, 2003 13:46

This photo is a subject of controversy in the Arab media. Several journalists said that there are no dates on palm trees now, in the middle of December, like the yellow fruits behind these two US soldiers, who are showing where the Iraqi President Saddam Hussain was hiding in Ad Dawr, in Tikrit. They argue that the photo was taken about two months ago. Al-Riyadh newspaper argues that there is a kind of dates called Al-Hilaliya, that may ripen in winter .
JEDDAH, 18 December 2003 — The picture of a palm tree with ripe dates near the mud hole where Saddam Hussein was hiding has given rise to speculation that the arrest may have taken place two months ago.

“The yellowish dates in the picture behind two American soldiers show that Saddam was not present there at this time of the year,” Okaz Arabic daily reported. “The picture shows that the capture of Saddam would have taken place two months ago,” the paper said.

Many Arabs have been spreading this theory through the Internet. A person, who identified himself as Sunaid Quraish, asked “Does the presence of a palm tree with ripe dates in the place where Saddam was arrested have any special significance? Was he captured months ago? Is there some scandalous story behind the capture?”

Adel wrote in his e-mail message, “The Americans forgot about the dates when they staged the drama but the date season ended months ago.” Many Arabs, however, refused to get involved in this particular theory. Abu Mishaal pointed out that the uniforms, which the soldiers were wearing, indicated that the capture took place in winter. Al-Watan Arabic newspaper said, quoting its Baghdad reporter, that the Iraqis had paid no attention to the date theory.

Hatem Al-Natour, an agriculture engineer at the Arabian Company for Agricultural Systems in Riyadh, said ripe dates could be seen on date palms in summer. “Summer is the season when dates ripen under the sun,” he pointed out. Muhammad Al-Dossary, however, who has been engaged in date cultivation in the Aflaj region for several years, pointed out that there is a special kind of date, “hilali”, which yields its fruits at this time of the year.

Iraq is the native place of hilali dates which are now found in Saudi Arabia and other countries, Dossary told Al-Eqtisadiah, a sister publication of Arab News. “Even yesterday I ate hilali dates taken from the tree,” he told the newspaper. The season for dates is usually between June and July but in some countries, the date ripening period may be extended.

http://www.aljazeerah.info/18%20n/Dates%20Clash%20With%20Saddam's%20Day%20of%20Destiny.htm

by Jimbo Thu Dec 18, 2003 13:55

Saddam was allegedly captured at night yet within hours it was stated that DNA swabs had been tested and confirmed his identity.

How did these samples get to a laboratory equipped for DNA testing so quickly? As far as I know it's a specialist job and very few labs are equipped for it. Look at any serious criminal case in Ireland. The DNA samples often go to the UK for testing.

Not only did Saddam's DNA have to be tested. It had to be matched against a sample from one of his children. Perhaps such a sample was taken in advance, but presumably that was in a lab in Baghdad or possibly Washington, how did the two samples get into one place for testing so quickly?

Also there was the initial story of Saddam wearing a false beard. This was plainly untrue and could have been ascertained by any soldier on the scene. Just give a tug guys!


There's something altogether too convenient in the Saddam capture story. I'm not saying that it wasn't him, or that it was impossible for this to happen this way, but it does raise some doubts.

by Gaillimhed Thu Dec 18, 2003 16:51

yeah sure its hard to believe anything coming out of the Empires mouthpieces in these strange days, but just to add more mud to the waters...you may find it interesting to note that a special tribunal board of the kind required to try a high calibre prisoner like saddam (or high level Ba'ath party members etc) in Iraq was hurriedly assembled just six days before his 'capture'. I'd say the Americans will try to have him hanged in Iraq rather than going down the international war crimes road, that way no-one else gets to have access to him and we dont get to hear him spill the beans on his dealings with his former partners in crime. I mean can you imagine Bush and the boys handing over their Ace of spades to The Hague. I just cant see it.

by Cyril Bennett Thu Dec 18, 2003 21:33

However there is no but.
There is no downside to this story, however much we'd like to think there is.
The standard knee-jerk response has been:

"but don't forget that the US put him there".

By some tortuous chain of logic, some would see this as justification for not liberating Iraq from this monstrous tyrant. Even if it was true, it would still be a grossly immoral position to hold.

Let's look at some facts:

In the period 1980-1990 Iraq spent $28.9bn on weapons.

France supplied 19% of these. The USSR, East Germany and Czechoslovakia accounted for a further 57%, with China supplying 8%.

The list of other suppliers accounting for more than 2% did not include the US.

Not only did Chirac supply weapons, he also provided nuclear power stations, fissile materials and training for 600 Iraqi nuclear scientists.

by Drbinoche Thu Dec 18, 2003 23:12

I firmly believe that it is up to the people of Iraq what fate is bestowed to Saddam. You see the UN and the world would have one problem trying Saddam, the Iraqi people would not feel that they have been given justice, which is a very important factor here. If they decide to hand him over to the UN, then great, let him be tried in the Hague. If they decide to hang him, then so be it. Its up to them and not the Americans or anyone else.

I don't think he should be executed. I think he should be shown for the fool he is. Prove to the people who follow him that he is nothing more than a Hypocrite and a murderous thug. Much like Bush.

Its mentioned above that alot of people equate Anti-War people with being Pro-Saddam, well the same can be said for Anti-War people. Alot of Anti-War people equate being Pro-war or in anyway in favour of solving this militarily as being Pro-Bush/Blair. I am pro-war to an extent. I still believe that the US should have waited for UN backing and a mulit-national force should have been sent in. I also believe that the Sanctions placed against Saddam while horrible and truely devastating to the Iraqi people were really the only thing that could be done at the time. I don't see anyone giving out very many alternatives to it. However, I do not like Bush and Blair, I think they are a whole heap of trouble. I desperately believe that Bush should lose the next election. I wouldn't mind if the fucker was assassinated, but having said that, I still believe that what he did in intervening in Afghanistan and Iraq was the lesser of two evils.

Yes Innocent people got killed in Both conflicts and continue to die today, but that happens in war and it is something that everyone has to accept. There is never gonna be a stop to war, or at least not for a considerable amount of time. Its ingrained into the current human mentality.

Speaking of people killed. I watched a news story earlier in which the US soldier interviewed stated that he thought that any Iraqi firing into the air as a celebrating was just asking for trouble. I agree with him. If there are armed people near you and you don't wanna get shot, you put your weapons on the ground. You don't start shooting upwards and screaming, it leads to further confusion and it leads to people getting their heads blown off.

by Barney Fri Dec 19, 2003 03:03

I think invading Iraq was the only right and moral thing to do, the UN did enough harm to that country.

Since when are arms inspectors supposed to be arms detectives??? Of course, the UN wanted to back down several times, drop the sanctions without the proper conditions being met. That was impossible of course, as the UN would lose any authourity it had.

Clinton should have invaded in 1994. Instead it took a president with the courage of his convictions to do what was necessary, so I can gladly say: Bush-Cheney: another four years.

Dubya's going to storm home this time, the Democrats have got nobody of his calibre.