fearlessly proclaiming the truth & the other truth! voice of the teknoshamanic institute
Even Worse...Real Life On Baghdad Street
Published on September 21, 2006 By kingbee In Politics

how horrible is this:  little physically and mentally abused two-year-old conjoined iraqi quadruplets forced by demonic mullahs to rip pelts off cute lil live bunnies every 2 seconds for 14 hours a day using only their teeth.

if that ain't bad enuff, if even just one american won't publicly praise every homosexual whenever passing them in the halls, a new law will permit howard dean to double taxes of the 1000 richest americans and use the money to forcefeed e coli-infected spinach to helpless brain-damaged victims suffering from persistent vegetative state.

just as i was stomping my feet and yelling 'bring it on' while forwarding all these outrages to everyone on my list,  i found something that would be MORE TERRIBLER even if it wasn't real.

but it is.

if you're lookin to read about something truly and abyssmally horrible, you're in the right place. what follows is what life in baghdad today looks like thru the eyes one iraqi--a seemingly normal and reasonable professional who isn't a muslim, much less an islamist. it appeared in the la times for wednesday 9/20/2006 without a byline. http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/front/la-fg-letter20sep20,1,4944252.story?coll=la-headlines-frontpage

i know how hard and time-consuming it is to visit links so i'll paste the entire thing here. 

No One Dares to Help
September 20, 2006

Because this account of daily life in Baghdad reveals where the writer lives, his name is not being used to protect his safety. He is a 54-year-old Iraqi reporter in The Times' Baghdad Bureau.

 BAGHDAD — On a recent Sunday, I was buying groceries in my beloved Amariya neighborhood in western Baghdad when I heard the sound of an AK-47 for about three seconds. It was close but not very close, so I continued shopping.

As I took a right turn on Munadhama Street, I saw a man lying on the ground in a small pool of blood. He wasn't dead.

The idea of stopping to help or to take him to a hospital crossed my mind, but I didn't dare. Cars passed without stopping. Pedestrians and shop owners kept doing what they were doing, pretending nothing had happened.

I was still looking at the wounded man and blaming myself for not stopping to help. Other shoppers peered at him from a distance, sorrowful and compassionate, but did nothing.

I went on to another grocery store, staying for about five minutes while shopping for tomatoes, onions and other vegetables. During that time, the man managed to sit up and wave to passing cars. No one stopped. Then, a white Volkswagen pulled up. A passenger stepped out with a gun, walked steadily to the wounded man and shot him three times. The car took off down a side road and vanished.

No one did anything. No one lifted a finger. The only reaction came from a woman in the grocery store. In a low voice, she said, "My God, bless his soul."

I went home and didn't dare tell my wife. I did not want to frighten her.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I've lived in my neighborhood for 25 years. My daughters went to kindergarten and elementary school here. I'm a Christian. My neighbors are mostly Sunni Arabs. We had always lived in harmony. Before the U.S.-led invasion, we would visit for tea and a chat. On summer afternoons, we would meet on the corner to joke and talk politics.

It used to be a nice upper-middle-class neighborhood, bustling with commerce and traffic. On the main street, ice cream parlors, hamburger stands and take-away restaurants competed for space. We would rent videos and buy household appliances.

Until 2005, we were mostly unaffected by violence. We would hear shootings and explosions now and again, but compared with other places in Baghdad, it was relatively peaceful.

Then, late in 2005, someone blew up three supermarkets in the area. Shops started closing. Most of the small number of Shiite Muslim families moved out. The commercial street became a ghost road.

On Christmas Day last year, we visited — as always — our local church, St. Thomas, in Mansour. It was half-empty. Some members of the congregation had left the country; others feared coming to church after a series of attacks against Christians.

American troops, who patrol the neighborhood in Humvees, have also become edgy. Get too close, and they'll shoot. A colleague — an interpreter and physician — was shot and killed by soldiers last year on his way home from a shopping trip. He hadn't noticed the Humvees parked on the street.

By early this year, living in my neighborhood had become a nightmare. In addition to anti-American graffiti, there were fliers telling women to wear conservative clothes and to cover their hair. Men were told not to wear shorts or jeans.

For me, as a Christian, it was unacceptable that someone would tell my wife and daughters what to wear. What's the use of freedom if someone is telling you what to wear, how to behave or what to do in your life?

But coming home one day, I saw my wife on the street. I didn't recognize her. She had covered up.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

After the attack on the Shiite shrine of the Golden Dome in Samarra in February, Shiite gunmen tried to raid Sunni mosques in my neighborhood. One night, against the backdrop of heavy shooting, we heard the cleric calling for help through the mosque's loudspeakers. We stayed up all night, listening as they battled for the mosque. It made me feel unsafe. If a Muslim would shoot another Muslim, what would they do to a Christian?

Fear dictates everything we do.

I see my neighbors less and less. When I go out, I say hello and that's it. I fear someone will ask questions about my job working for Americans, which could put me in danger. Even if he had no ill will toward me, he might talk and reveal an identifying detail. We're afraid of an enemy among us. Someone we don't know. It's a cancer.

In March, assassinations started in our neighborhood. Early one evening, I was sitting in my garden with my wife when we heard several gunshots. I rushed to the gate to see what was going on, despite my wife's pleas to stay inside. My neighbors told me that gunmen had dropped three men from a car and shot them in the street before driving off. No one dared approach the victims to find out who they were.

The bodies remained there until the next morning. The police or the American military probably picked them up, but I don't know. They simply disappeared.

The sounds of shootings and explosions are now commonplace. We don't know who is shooting whom, or who has been targeted. We don't know why, and we're afraid to ask or help. We too could get shot. Bringing someone to the hospital or to the police is out of the question. Nobody trusts the police, and nobody wants to answer questions.

I feel sad, bitter and frustrated — sad because a human life is now worth nothing in this country; bitter because people no longer help each other; and frustrated because I can't help either. If I'm targeted one day, I'm sure no one will help me.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I was very happy when my eldest daughter married an American. First, because there was love between them, but also because she would be able to leave Iraq, and I wouldn't have to worry about her safety day after day. She left last year.

If you had asked me a year ago whether I would consider leaving Iraq, I would have said maybe, but without enthusiasm. Now it's a definite yes. Things are going from bad to worse, and I can't see any light at the end of the tunnel.

Four weeks ago, I came home from work. As I reached my street, I saw a man lying in a pool of blood. Someone had covered him with bits of cardboard. This was the best they could do. No one dared move him.

I drove on.  

not much i can add to that.

feel free to return to your pursuit of escapist sensationalism.  

oh...hell i almost forgot. 

four members of the al-mahdi brigade of the sadr militia meet with the head of the local iraqi security police who informs them there are six sunnis enroute to mosul from falloujah at a rate of 85 kilometres per hour.  three of the militia men may be iraqi police officers.  one of the sunnis has over 1000 rounds of ammunition.  the sun has been in the sky for 394 minutes today.   how many corpses will be delivered to the morgue in najaf tomorrow?


Comments
on Sep 22, 2006
No One Dares to Help


Thats why they have the violence they do. They are not willing to stand up to the thugs and make a stand for what they think is right. This just goes to show you the Iraqi's don't want the violence to end bad enough yet. When they do they will step up and say enough is enough.

For me, as a Christian, it was unacceptable that someone would tell my wife and daughters what to wear. What's the use of freedom if someone is telling you what to wear, how to behave or what to do in your life?
But coming home one day, I saw my wife on the street. I didn't recognize her. She had covered up.


Guess he doen't belive in freedom all that much huh. Not enough to stand up for what he believes.

These postings are a prime example of why what is happening is happening. No one is willing to put their lives on the line and stand up to these thugs. In my neck of the woods, you did these things and a group of neighbors would be toting guns and begging you to come back again. The lack of courage to stand up for what one believes in and knows as right is what is lacking here. The people in his post including himself are part of the problem. The answer is fighting back, as a group, and being willing to die for what you beleive in.




on Sep 23, 2006

them shitz-n-sunnys aren't roasting puppies in the oven or bleeding horses on the sidewalks. There may be hope for 'em yet.

oh if it were true, it would be so wonderful i must say.  it couldn't be more humane ya know. but what if they're hiding the puppies and horses under human corpses?  now that would surely make me mental

on Sep 23, 2006

 

This just goes to show you the Iraqi's don't want the violence to end bad enough yet. When they do they will step up and say enough is enough.

i keep wanting to ask if you're joking...altho i'm sure you're not.   the very last response i expected from anyone reading this man's account of life in the hell known as baghdad during september 2006 is (if i'm understanding you correctly) 'the only way to reduce all this horrible violence is for even more people to engage in even more violence.' 

while there are situations when intentional excaberation may be the most effective option--fighting fire with fire comes to mind--this don't seem like one of those to me. 

a prime example of why what is happening is happening

i'm also atta loss trying to understand how or why the victims have now become the problem.  i see what you're saying:

No one is willing to put their lives on the line and stand up to these thugs

if what this guy reports is at all close to accurate, the lives of damn near everyone there are on the line 24/7--willing or not.  

In my neck of the woods, you did these things and a group of neighbors would be toting guns and begging you to come back again.

without meaning to dis your neighbors, there's only one way to test that theory.  it would be the very rare exception to the way things normally happen tho.  if ordinary folks regularly stood up to bad guys and won, we could get our fill of that kinda thing by watching the news instead of in theatres.  

beyond that, you're talking about civilians who've been repeatedly traumatized over a long period of time. in this specific case, the guy has somehow managed to beat daunting odds and survive for 54 years.  he's gotta wife, a daughter, a career and what might laffingly be called a life.  the benefit of whatever military training he may have received is very likely close to expiration (not that it would make much difference otherwise; thousands of much younger men in the police and military for whom 3 years of intensive training seems to be about 3 more years short of effective).   if he should lose his mind and take up arms against the militias or the insurgents, i'm thinkin he'll be boxed up within 36 hours.

 

he doen't belive in freedom all that much huh. Not enough to stand up for what he believes

i doubt he believes in much of anything anymore.  as for freedom, that's what drives the guys littering his block and life with bloody bodies.   their type of freedom is a galaxy of ballparks away from what you and i call freedom, but hey. if our type of freedom can't respect their or vice versa then i guess it really is just another word for nothin left to lose

on Sep 23, 2006
The only thing I got from all this was further proof that Radical and Fundamentalist Muslims are barbarians whose stated purpose in life is to come and kill most of us and oppress those who are left. This means that someone better start doing something to halt their advance.
Maybe the Iraqis who want to whine so much? Heres how:

1.)Pick up a discarded gun and aim it at them.

2.)Pull the trigger.

3.)Do it again until the enemy is vanquished.

That might help a little. It does a lot more than whining over how tough your life is. Do something to help change it.

And you know:

In every little tale here, the villain was a Muslim. And who was the hero? A Christian!
You frown on Christianity; I've seen you shoot it down time and again around here. Until, of course, you need a Christian and his beliefs to clarify whatever meaningless point you're trying to prove, then it's all a-okay. He's the wounded victim here. The poor oppressed urchin. Make up your mind.

'the only way to reduce all this horrible violence is for even more people to engage in even more violence.'
---kingbee

Well, yes. You'll never understand that, though. Rosie O'Donnell's adage, "Peace doesn't come from war" just isn't true. Ask every nation, especially aggressor nations, that ever lost a war. Peace followed, one way or another.
You can't sit idly by and let people commit acts of violence against innocents. I mean, isn't that, ideally, why we have police? To oppose violence and, when necessary, to use violence themselves in the act? Sometimes violence is a necessary thing. Like war, it's never a good thing, but sometimes necessary.

while there are situations when intentional excaberation may be the most effective option--fighting fire with fire comes to mind--this don't seem like one of those to me.


You’re wrong. When someone is single-mindedly determined to kill and destroy, nothing can be done but to stop them with violence of some kind. These people won’t be stopped with a frying pan to the head, though.

And for the peaceniks out there, who think that if we just keep talking and talking, and we all just get along and hug each other, it will all be better:

Sitting around a campfire, putting daisies in each other's hair and strumming a guitar while singing "Kum Bay Yah" isn't going to make the Islamist nutjobs go away. It'd just give them a better chance to kill more of you with fewer bullets or grenades. The only thing that will make them go away is to kill them. I hate that, but it's the truth.

The only way to cure a rabid dog is to shoot it. It's time people like you woke up and realized that.



i doubt he believes in much of anything anymore.


You can't say that. You don't really know him. He says he's a Christian, so I guess he believes in something.[/size]

as for freedom, that's what drives the guys littering his block and life with bloody bodies. their type of freedom is a galaxy of ballparks away from what you and i call freedom, but hey. if our type of freedom can't respect their or vice versa then i guess it really is just another word for nothin left to lose
---kingbee

[size="2"] No, freedom is freedom. The freedom to choose your own destiny, say and do pretty much what you will, to make your own choices, and to be happy, or not, in those choices. The problem comes in with the fact that these people have never really known freedom. We're trying to thrust on them something they've never had, and so can't understand it yet.That doesn't mean they never will understand it, as you seem to think.
It's like putting a ten-year-old behind the wheel of a car. He doesn't understand it, yet, but in time, he will.


on Sep 23, 2006
In every little tale here, the villain was a Muslim. And who was the hero? A Christian!


I think it's more likely that the twitchy American troops who killed his translator friend were atheist or christian rather than Muslim.

That's the problem I think. With the Americans there to kill all dissidents it's kind of hard to mount civil war. No one is going to recognise your side as the righteous one, particularly when a government allegedly devoted to peace has already been appointed. If that Christian were to start shooting the bad guys he'd be killed or arrested by the Americans or the government within a few weeks on terrorism charges. His life would be forfeit and his wife and children left to fend for themselves. Isn't it better that he protect them to the best of his ability than betray them by seeking death in pointless battle?

Sitting around a campfire, putting daisies in each other's hair and strumming a guitar while singing "Kum Bay Yah" isn't going to make the Islamist nutjobs go away. It'd just give them a better chance to kill more of you with fewer bullets or grenades. The only thing that will make them go away is to kill them. I hate that, but it's the truth.


The South Africans ended apartheid through civil disobedience. The Indians won independence through civil disobedience. Death and destruction do not guarantee a better future.

he freedom to choose your own destiny, say and do pretty much what you will, to make your own choices, and to be happy, or not, in those choices.


If you look at what he was saying freedom is not what he is lacking. It's rule of law. He's free to pick up a kalashnikov and start gunning anyone down and he may even get away with it. That's freedom. But it doesn't make for a peaceful society. That requires rule of law and that is something Baghdad lacks.

on Sep 23, 2006
The South Africans ended apartheid through civil disobedience. The Indians won independence through civil disobedience. Death and destruction do not guarantee a better future.


Tell that to Nazi Germany or Imperial Japan!
on Sep 23, 2006
Tell that to Nazi Germany or Imperial Japan!


Their plans, based on death and destruction, don't seem to have worked. I think they've already been told, don't you?
on Sep 23, 2006
I think it's more likely that the twitchy American troops who killed his translator friend were atheist or christian rather than Muslim.
---cacto

That's not what I'm saying....I was trying to indicate a little hipocrisy on Kingbee's part. You missed the point.
But that's okay; I mean, obviously, you're in Iraq right now, that you could make this statement, and with such authority!

The South Africans ended apartheid through civil disobedience. The Indians won independence through civil disobedience. Death and destruction do not guarantee a better future.
---cacto

It does when you have an enemy who's making a consolidated, concentrated effort to kill you. Civil disobedience only works when you have an opponent who is civilized enough, and is willing, to talk honestly and not simply murder you where you stand, whether you can see him/her or not. Think civil disobedience would have worked for the Jews in Europe?
"Oy vey! Such trouble there is here! Let's have us a sit-in! Let's us all sing! Ha-vah-Nagila-Ha-vah......" The Nazis would have found it that much easier to simply round them up and send them off to the Camps.

How about civil disobedience of the terrorists? Maybe if the good, reasonable people started taking a little action on their own part, opposing the psycho murderers, things would quiet down a little. Good men doing nothing and letting Evil win, and all that.
I do seem to recall an incident during the first election, I think; a group of terrorists came to a village and threatened to kill them if any of them voted. They voted; when the terrorists returned to carry out their threat, the villagers killed some and sent the rest back to their leaders, beaten and bloody, but sending a strong message. Good for them! If more Iraqis did that, things would improve dramatically. They took a stand, for better or worse.

If you look at what he was saying freedom is not what he is lacking. It's rule of law. He's free to pick up a kalashnikov and start gunning anyone down and he may even get away with it. That's freedom. But it doesn't make for a peaceful society. That requires rule of law and that is something Baghdad lacks.
---cacto

They don't have a peaceful society, and won't, if none of them are willing to do anything or take any responsiblity, for their own affairs. Maybe they would acheive that rule of law, if they were willing to act so as to earn it.
If the (supposedly) moderate and (ostensibly) civilized residents got together and started working, hand in glove, with the coalition forces on opposing the terrorists, I doubt their efforts would be met with much resistance on our part.

So now we're into the semantics of freedom? Is anything ever in black and white to you?

on Sep 24, 2006
But that's okay; I mean, obviously, you're in Iraq right now, that you could make this statement, and with such authority!


You're not there either so far as I'm aware. I just feel it's a reasonable conclusion to make that US soldiers are unlikely to be Muslims. If that mucks up your anti-Muslim conspiracy theory then so be it.

It does when you have an enemy who's making a consolidated, concentrated effort to kill you.


Only if you're in a position of strength. If you're in a position of relative weakness it's probably better to knuckle under and then wait out the long years of tyranny until you, your children or your grandchildren have built up the strength to overthrow them. The terrorists don't want apocalypse; they still want people to rule when the Americans are kicked out and the traitors dealt with.

Think civil disobedience would have worked for the Jews in Europe?


Probably not, and civil obedience didn't work either. But modern-day Iraq isn't pre-WWII Germany. The Iraq state has nowhere near the control at the current time to start rounding up minority Christians. It's probably in that guy's best interests to pursue his plan of leaving Iraq rather than fighting for something impossible in a war with so many sides there are no good guys.

If more Iraqis did that, things would improve dramatically. They took a stand, for better or worse.


I'm sure they do. But when the terrorists and the Americans are vastly stronger taking a stand will just end in your own death for no particular advantage. You might get a nice eulogy, but living is better than dying. Anyway, a Baghdad suburb is much, much harder to defend against either militia or potentially trigger-happy American troops than a village. You're an ex-soldier - I'm sure you know all about fields of fire and overwhelming force.

So now we're into the semantics of freedom? Is anything ever in black and white to you?


It's so easy to demand that other people be the hero and so difficult to take that role. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you've always been a tireless force for justice and a dynamo of personal defence for the oppressed, always one to lend a hand when others are suffering. But not everyone is capable of that courage. I think that difference in capacity is more than enough reason to consider everything political in colour rather than black and white.
on Sep 24, 2006



Only if you're in a position of strength. If you're in a position of relative weakness it's probably better to knuckle under and then wait out the long years of tyranny until you, your children or your grandchildren have built up the strength to overthrow them. The terrorists don't want apocalypse; they still want people to rule when the Americans are kicked out and the traitors dealt with.
---cacto

Tell that last line to Amedinejad. Or however you spell it.

So, people who are in a position of weakness shouldn't ever take up arms and defend themselves against murderous aggression and/or oppressive government? I'm glad you weren't in the American Colonies. Or the French Resistance. Or the Warsaw Ghetto. I wish you had been in the Southern Confederacy. Or better yet, the Viet Cong. History would be a whooooole lot different with your outlook.


Probably not, and civil obedience didn't work either. But modern-day Iraq isn't pre-WWII Germany. The Iraq state has nowhere near the control at the current time to start rounding up minority Christians. It's probably in that guy's best interests to pursue his plan of leaving Iraq rather than fighting for something impossible in a war with so many sides there are no good guys.
---cacto

Come on....you're smarter than that. You know perfectly well the point I was trying to make; you're being deliberately dunderheaded to avoid it.


I'm sure they do. But when the terrorists and the Americans are vastly stronger taking a stand will just end in your own death for no particular advantage. You might get a nice eulogy, but living is better than dying. Anyway, a Baghdad suburb is much, much harder to defend against either militia or potentially trigger-happy American troops than a village.
---cacto

"Give me liberty, or give me death."---Patrick Henry

"We hang together, or we hang separately."---Benjamin Franklin

"Better to die on your feet than to live on your knees."---Can't Remember Just Now

The people and troops defending Stalingrad held out. The city was levelled, but it never fell.


But not everyone is capable of that courage. I think that difference in capacity is more than enough reason to consider everything political in colour rather than black and white.
---cacto

You're wrong; everyone has the capacity to stand against evil when so moved, even to the point of death.
If the terrorists came to this man's house to kill his family, would he stand by and let it happen, or would he resist? I prefer to think he would resist, even if it meant his own death, rather than to simply give in and let it happen. But then, I seem to have a better and more optimistic opinion of people than you often do.











on Sep 24, 2006
So, people who are in a position of weakness shouldn't ever take up arms and defend themselves against murderous aggression and/or oppressive government?


Iraq doesn't have an oppressive government nor does it have a clear source of murderous aggression. If individual suburbs were to declare independence (ie form an anti-gov, anti-other militias militia) and the desire to fight to maintain that independence they would come under fire from the American/government forces and be crushed utterly. If they don't then they have a chance of avoiding death by militias but not a particularly good one, as the government sure as hell isn't going to protect them. So they have a choice between being killed for certain by the government or possibly being killed by accident/for political purposes by the militias or those who hunt them. Neither is particularly attractive but at least one offers a chance of survival.

You know perfectly well the point I was trying to make; you're being deliberately dunderheaded to avoid it.


Actually I have no idea what your point was. You said something bigoted and obviously wrong. If that was in service of some greater point I have no idea what it was.

The people and troops defending Stalingrad held out. The city was levelled, but it never fell.


This guy lives in a suburb of a city that's held by innumerable factions, both small and large. Stalingrad was contested by two, one of which had the manpower to pour millions of soldiers in to hold it. I don't see the relevance.

You're wrong; everyone has the capacity to stand against evil when so moved, even to the point of death.


Sure, but it's not always to their advantage. That's why tellers are trained not to be heroes in the event of a robbery. They could 'stand against evil' but it wouldn't be a particularly clever thing to do. Better to leave the criminals to the authorities.

Iraq has those authorities but they're more interested in fighting/avoiding the militias than protecting the citizenry. And that means the regular joe is either going to be harmless (in which case s/he might be spared), a victim or a target.

But then, I seem to have a better and more optimistic opinion of people than you often do.


I don't think I'm pessimistic. I just think it's unrealistic to assume that heroics are a) at all common or likely to save the day when not connected to some serious firepower and good intentions from junta to the lowliest follower. Historically it just doesn't happen, despite all the rhetoric to the contrary.
on Sep 24, 2006

Sure, but it's not always to their advantage. That's why tellers are trained not to be heroes in the event of a robbery. They could 'stand against evil' but it wouldn't be a particularly clever thing to do. Better to leave the criminals to the authorities.


cacto, this is a poor analogy. While robbing a bank is illegal no matter how you look at it, it is not particularly "evil". Now that does change if someone is shot or killed.
on Sep 25, 2006

And in my neck of the woods, as in many inner-city neighborhoods, the neighbors tend to react just like these folks in Baghdad. They look the other way, see nothing, pretend not to notice, and in many cases, won't even call the police. To do otherwise is to risk becoming the next victim yourself.

I can't imagine how much more prevalent this attitude would be if the police were as likely to be assassins themselves here as they are there.

i rarely go to my blog except to post new articles.  if it'a possible to acknowledge insightful comments in the newly reformatted forum pages, it's totally eluded me (overly camouflaged?  them old wives are right and you can go blind from doin it?).  

this comment is so deserving of the rating i hadda jump here from the forums to make it official.

(i'll return later today or tonite to respond to or rebut the rest of your comments)      

on Sep 25, 2006
As I read this I could not help thinking this must be hell on earth.

To live in a constant state of terror, at least with Saddam the terror was intermittent not constant. I have always believed we made a huge mistake going to Iraq for war. I still do.

But what do we do now that we are there?
on Sep 25, 2006
But what do we do now that we are there?


The painful crux, to which no-one has the answer . . .