• Changing RCF's index page, please click on "Forums" to access the forums.

The ISIS offensive in Iraq

Do Not Sell My Personal Information
We already have boots on the ground fighting. ODA ain't advising shit; they are killing Daesh everywhere they can find them.

Also, we already have, like, 10,000 troops in Iraq.
 
Great call by Obama. Special forces will be needed to carry out rescue missions and intelligence. It's common sense.

Meanwhile, in ISIS land...

The Islamic State Is Burying Children Alive and Crucifying Them, Says UN
the-islamic-state-is-burying-children-alive-crucifying-them-says-un-1423157298.jpg



UNITED NATIONS

The Islamic State Is Burying Children Alive and Crucifying Them, Says UN
By Liz Fields

February 5, 2015 | 2:40 pm
Islamic State militants are systematically mass-executing and abusing children, including by crucifying them, burying them alive, and using mentally disabled youth as suicide bombers and shields in battle, according to a United Nations review of atrocities committed against children in Iraq.

The UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) reviewed Iraq for the first time since 1998 and found "severe violations of children's rights" as a result of ongoing sectarian warfare in that country, exacerbated by the rise of the Islamic State terror group (also known as ISIS/ISIL), which has routinely murdered and enslaved children in areas under its control.

"We are really deeply concerned at torture and murder of those children," Renate Winter, an independent expert on the CRC panel, told reporters after the committee's findings were released on Wednesday. "The scope of the problem is huge."

The committee determined that children belonging to religious and ethnic minorities are especially at risk of being killed or sexually enslaved by the Sunni Muslim group, which has sought to establish a caliphate and impose a strict brand of Islamic law across the areas it controls in Syria and Iraq.

The Islamic State. Watch the full-length VICE News documentary here.

"The CRC observations constitute the most thorough review of the child rights situation in the country," Laurent Chapuis, UNICEF's Middle East and North Africa advisor on child protection told VICE News, adding that the report was "long overdue."

Chapuis said that children have been used to perform support functions since the start of the conflict — working as guards, messengers, spies and to man checkpoints — and are now increasingly being used in armed combat roles.

"This includes not only fighting in battles, but also working on the front lines to treat and evacuate wounded combatants, and to film and photograph battles," he said.

The CRC report also formally validated reports that the militant group had established slave markets where women and children are bought and sold.

VICE News previously reported on video that purportedly showed Islamic State fighters, including a young boy, discussing the selling of Yazidi slave girls at such bazaars, mentioning that age and eye color might have an effect on the price of the girls at market. The Yazidis, an ethnic and religious minority group in Iraq, have been subjected to some of the most extreme violence and persecution at the hands of the insurgents, including summary executions, rapes, torture, and forced conversions.

The recent findings were consistent with a Human Rights Watch report from last October that detailed the personal accounts of women and girls, some as young as 12, who had been sold, beaten, raped, forced to marry militants, or killed. The CRC also addressed the "sexual enslavement of children detained in makeshift prisons," including the former Badoush prison near Mosul.

The committee's report said that many of the children "are severely traumatized from witnessing the murder of their parents and are subjected to physical and sexual assault."

Inside Japan's new war with the Islamic State. Read more here.

The CRC, which based its findings on information it received from the Iraqi government, non-governmental organizations, and talks it had with Iraq's UN delegation, said that it had received reports that the group had also used mentally disabled children as suicide bombers — "most probably without them even understanding," Winter told Reuters.

The report did not just focus on atrocities committed by the extremist organization, but also mentioned the "very large number of children killed and severely injured, as a result of the current fighting, including by air strikes, shelling and military operations by the Iraqi Security Forces, and as a result of land mines and explosive war remnants."

"This includes deaths from dehydration, starvation and heat in conflict affected areas," the report added.

Erin Evers, an Iraq researcher for Human Rights Watch, told VICE News that while the report does a good job of condemning honor killings of women and girls both by militants and armed groups, it does not focus enough on the perpetration of other child abuses on the part of Shia militias working under the Iraqi government, which are at the forefront of the fight against the Islamic State.

"The main shortcomings of this report is that it didn't treat the abuse of children by Shia militias," Evers said. "We have seen evidence that they are recruiting children, but there's been very little reporting on it. ISIS advertises its training and abuse of children, whereas it's harder to research on what the militias are doing."

Evers said that there is no comparison to the "aberrant and horrific" acts committed by the Islamic State, but called for an examination of the maltreatment of children at the hands of government-linked forces, "particularly in the detention of minors being held on terrorism charges."

Women abducted by the Islamic State feared trapped in sexual slavery. Read more here.

Chapuis said that while the "recruitment and use of children by all parties has become a common feature of the conflict… there are a number of unique features with regards to ISIL's recruitment and use of children."

"ISIL openly promotes the recruitment and indoctrination of children, and more so than other groups, has instrumentalized children for propaganda purposes," he said.

To do this, militants have exposed children to extreme violence as a means to desensitize them, as well as encouraged them to attend and participate in public executions. "The appropriation of schools and introduction of a revised radical education curriculum in areas under Islamic State control has also been a key mechanism to indoctrinate and influence children to join their cause," Chapuis said.

Because Iraq's government is ultimately responsible for the protections of its people, the CRC has urged it to take measures to "stop the use of excessive and lethal force against civilians and prevent further violence against children." The committee believes the government should rescue children who are forced into these conditions, and prosecute those who commit abuses.

Despite the recommendations, widespread corruption, a lack of accountability, and certain ingrained cultural and social factors continue to have a detrimental impact on children's rights in Iraq at a time of national crisis.

https://news.vice.com/article/the-i...ng-children-alive-and-crucifying-them-says-un
 
Awesome. Need to annihilate ISIS. Any movement that hurts/ kills kids has no future on earth. It's why I was so shocked that nothing was done to Israel when the UN reported that Israel was bombing safe havens in Gaza. Wish this outrage expanded to places that opposed our best interests.

Speaking of which, 3 Muslim students murdered in Chapel Hill and a see nary a condemning statement from Obama or our leadership. Headlines focusing on parking disputes. It just happened yesterday and it's already out of the news, essentially. Just more evidence, as if we needed any, that Muslim lives just aren't as important.

Mentioned the story at work yesterday and the first question was "What type of Islam were they?" Disturbing.
 
Speaking of which, 3 Muslim students murdered in Chapel Hill and a see nary a condemning statement from Obama or our leadership. Headlines focusing on parking disputes. It just happened yesterday and it's already out of the news, essentially. Just more evidence, as if we needed any, that Muslim lives just aren't as important.

There are over 15,000 homicides each year, with most of the victims being Christians, and they obviously don't all garner national headlines. Does that mean that Christian lives don't matter? And, these murders still got more national attention than most else you'd never have heard of them.

In this instance, the guy who did the killing was not some Christian "avenger", but actually an atheist who apparently didn't like anyone, always arguing with and confronting his neighbors in general. And the apparent motive at this point was arguments over parking spaces and noise coming from property, not a misguided attempt to kill Muslims on principle.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Latest...d-Chapel-Hill-shooting-of-three-Muslims-video

If it was a clear case of this guy murdering them precisely because he didn't like Muslims -- and stories like that do get more attention -- then I'd agree it should be a bigger story.
 
There are over 15,000 homicides each year, with most of the victims being Christians, and they obviously don't all garner national headlines. Does that mean that Christian lives don't matter? And, these murders still got more national attention than most else you'd never have heard of them.

In this instance, the guy who did the killing was not some Christian "avenger", but actually an atheist who apparently didn't like anyone, always arguing with and confronting his neighbors in general. And the apparent motive at this point was arguments over parking spaces and noise coming from property, not a misguided attempt to kill Muslims on principle.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Latest...d-Chapel-Hill-shooting-of-three-Muslims-video

If it was a clear case of this guy murdering them precisely because he didn't like Muslims -- and stories like that do get more attention -- then I'd agree it should be a bigger story.

See, that's the type of stuff I'm talking about. If the killer was a Muslim we'd be waist deep in information regarding who his third cousins were, what he studied in school, and where his loyalties are... to understand how "religious" he is. Because he's not, we're discussing parking spots and interviewing his wife to further understand why he was "crazy". Didn't say he was Christian... but his FB includes anti-religious rants, he's threatened them before, flashing his holster around, and just last week family says the daughter spoke of how he "was hateful/didn't like who they were".

Yet here we are convinced it was parking and noise... as if 3 people just get executed over that type of stuff all the time. You throw the 15k number around as if any of those resemble what happened in Chapel Hill. Bottom line, benefit of the doubt stays with the status quo and the burden of "prove it wasn't parking" falls to the rest in the population. Great job media. It's part of why questions like "what type of Islam" are first and foremost when three innocent kids get executed.
 
See, that's the type of stuff I'm talking about. If the killer was a Muslim we'd be waist deep in information regarding who his third cousins were, what he studied in school, and where his loyalties are... to understand how "religious" he is....

I suspect that a fair number of those 15,000 homicides each year are committed by guys who happen to be Muslim. Armed robberies, drug deals gone bad, etc.. I don't see the fact that a Muslim may have been the perpetrator in those ordinary crimes getting much attention. What garners attention is when there is a killing when there doesn't seem to otherwise be an explanation. That's when the background digs go on to see if it was terrorism.

I've seen lots of stories where the perpetrator is Muslim, and there is then a search for a motive. To pretend that only happens when the victims are Muslim is inaccurate.

Because he's not, we're discussing parking spots and interviewing his wife to further understand why he was "crazy". Didn't say he was Christian... but his FB includes anti-religious rants, he's threatened them before, flashing his holster around, and just last week family says the daughter spoke of how he "was hateful/didn't like who they were".

No, we're discussing parking sports and interviewing his wife because that stuff was apparent as a possible motive early on. The guy was a known dickhead with dickhead facebook posts. He's threatened non-Muslims as well.

Yet here we are convinced it was parking and noise... as if 3 people just get executed over that type of stuff all the time.

Have you even read those articles?? Nobody is "convinced" of anything. They're simply discussing possible explanations of motive, including the possibility that it was a hate crime.

Chapel Hill murders: Hate crime or parking dispute?

A Chapel Hill, North Carolina, man known as an outspoken atheist on social media has been taken into custody by police for allegedly murdering three Muslim students.

Craig Stephen Hicks, 46, was being charged with three counts of first-degree murder. He has been held at Durham County Jail since turning himself in to local police Tuesday night.

The Town of Chapel Hill released a statement that said its “preliminary investigation indicates that the crime was motivated by an ongoing neighbor dispute over parking.” Hicks, the statement said, is “cooperating with investigators.”

It is not yet clear whether prosecutors will pursue hate-crime charges. Chapel Hill Police Chief Chris Blue said that he "understands concerns about the possibility that this was hate-motivated and we will exhaust every lead to determine if that is the case.”


Meanwhile, on Wednesday morning, the hashtag #MuslimLivesMatter was trending on Twitter as social media users assumed that the slayings must have been motivated by hatred of Muslims.


Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/02/chapel-hill-muslim-deaths-north-carolina-115110.html#ixzz3RYHDxAD6


What is your basis for saying that what the preliminary investigation showed is wrong?
 
I suspect that a fair number of those 15,000 homicides each year are committed by guys who happen to be Muslim. Armed robberies, drug deals gone bad, etc.. I don't see the fact that a Muslim may have been the perpetrator in those ordinary crimes getting much attention. What garners attention is when there is a killing when there doesn't seem to otherwise be an explanation. That's when the background digs go on to see if it was terrorism.

I've seen lots of stories where the perpetrator is Muslim, and there is then a search for a motive. To pretend that only happens when the victims are Muslim is inaccurate.



No, we're discussing parking sports and interviewing his wife because that stuff was apparent as a possible motive early on. The guy was a known dickhead with dickhead facebook posts. He's threatened non-Muslims as well.



Have you even read those articles?? Nobody is "convinced" of anything. They're simply discussing possible explanations of motive, including the possibility that it was a hate crime.

Chapel Hill murders: Hate crime or parking dispute?

A Chapel Hill, North Carolina, man known as an outspoken atheist on social media has been taken into custody by police for allegedly murdering three Muslim students.

Craig Stephen Hicks, 46, was being charged with three counts of first-degree murder. He has been held at Durham County Jail since turning himself in to local police Tuesday night.

The Town of Chapel Hill released a statement that said its “preliminary investigation indicates that the crime was motivated by an ongoing neighbor dispute over parking.” Hicks, the statement said, is “cooperating with investigators.”

It is not yet clear whether prosecutors will pursue hate-crime charges. Chapel Hill Police Chief Chris Blue said that he "understands concerns about the possibility that this was hate-motivated and we will exhaust every lead to determine if that is the case.”


Meanwhile, on Wednesday morning, the hashtag #MuslimLivesMatter was trending on Twitter as social media users assumed that the slayings must have been motivated by hatred of Muslims.


Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/02/chapel-hill-muslim-deaths-north-carolina-115110.html#ixzz3RYHDxAD6


What is your basis for saying that what the preliminary investigation showed is wrong?

A Muslim that writes hateful diatribes about all other religions, doesn't get along with anybody, murders 3 Hasidic Jewish students that he's been intimidating already, living in his building. He and his wife claim that he shot these kids in the head because they were being argumentative and threw snowballs at his window... To you, this is a homicide thrown in with the other 15k and isn't acknowledged by Obama? It's not regarded as religiously motivated? We move on after a day or two and blame it on a crazy guy and snowballs? No effing way.

I'm not even making these statements based on the investigation (that isn't complete), rather the media portrayal of this event. I'm a Communication major and I understand the nuance, or lack thereof, of headlines. Every word has a purpose. They've spoken to the victims' families and have heard the stories/history with Hicks. Utter hypocrisy and completely disingenuous. How many incidents like these with minorities have to happen before people comprehend a person's reasons for feeling marginalized?
 
A Muslim that writes hateful diatribes about all other religions, doesn't get along with anybody, murders 3 Hasidic Jewish students that he's been intimidating already, living in his building. He and his wife claim that he shot these kids in the head because they were being argumentative and threw snowballs at his window...

Yeah, that would likely get reported as "crazy guy" rather than "jihadi", because jihadis normally admit what they do.

To you, this is a homicide thrown in with the other 15k and isn't acknowledged by Obama? It's not regarded as religiously motivated?

What is the evidence that he did this because they were Muslim? If a guy is fanatical enough to kill 3 Muslims just because they're Muslims, why would he admit to the crime but deny the motive? Aren't guys like that trying to make some ideological statement or point? Isn't that "higher" purpose destroyed if you claim it has nothing to do with religion?

How common is it for actual Muslim terrorists (or those retaliating against them) to come out after an attack and said "Uh, this really had nothing to do with killing infidels or striking a blow for Allah. I just didn't like their shoes"?

I'm not even making these statements based on the investigation (that isn't complete), rather the media portrayal of this event. I'm a Communication major and I understand the nuance, or lack thereof, of headlines. Every word has a purpose. They've spoken to the victims' families and have heard the stories/history with Hicks. Utter hypocrisy and completely disingenuous.

Yeah...don't see it. This is a situation where the crime happened and the guy turned himself in and blabbed about his motive almost immediately. That's why it was reported that way. Had the guy not done that, then the speculation about motives would be a lot more open. . And I'll just bet that if this same guy had killed 3 Christians -- and Christians kill each other all the time in this country -- , you wouldn't be up in arms and claiming that there was a religious motive that the media is trying to conceal.

It's an even stranger argument given that there is plenty of reporting on this that expressly keeps open the possibility that it was religious bias.

Here's the media reporting that the FBI is looking into it to see if there was a religious motivation.

http://www.wncn.com/story/28097396/police-continue-to-investigate-motive-behind-chapel-hill-shooting

Here's another media one casting casting doubt that religion wasn't the motive:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/12/chapel-hill-muslims-dont-_n_6669118.html

Go ahead and google "Chapel Hill Muslim Murders" and you can find as many media reports as you'd like. Your claim that this is being swept under the rug in some media conspiracy is ridiculous.

Your real complaint is that they're reporting this alternative motive at all. You're pissed that it's not being presumed he did this because they were Muslim, and because people aren't all seeing this as equivalent to a terrorist attack.

How many incidents like these with minorities have to happen before people comprehend a person's reasons for feeling marginalized?

Just because someone feels a certain way does not make it true. And unless I missed it -- and I don't believe I have -- there doesn't seem to be a long line of people defending or excusing this shooter. Condemnation of these killings -- whatever the motive -- appears pretty universal. Yet, the "Muslim lives don't matter" meme is already up and running even though nobody is saying this guy shouldn't be punished.

So, to the extent someone "feels" marginalized even though reality shows no hint that this guy is being exonerated, too fucking bad. Feelings based on a skewed reality don't impress me.
 
Last edited:
Speaking of killing Muslims.

In fact, as the Guardian reported today, “Mr. Jahmi’s age” was 13 on the day the American drone ended his life. Just months earlier, the Yemeni teenager told that paper that “he lived in constant fear of the ‘death machines’ in the sky that had already killed his father and brother.” It was 2011 when “an unmanned combat drone killed his father and teenage brother as they were out herding the family’s camels.” In the strike two weeks ago, Mohammed was killed along with his brother-in-law and a third man.

Mohammed’s older brother Maqded said he “saw all the bodies completely burned, like charcoal” – undoubtedly quite similar to the way the Jordanian combat pilot looked after he was burned alive last month by ISIS. That’s not an accident: the weapons the U.S. military uses are deliberately designed to incinerate people to death. The missiles shot by their drones are named “Hellfire.” Of his younger, now-deceased 13-year-old brother, Maqded told the Guardian: “He wasn’t a member of al-Qaida. He was a kid.”

...

When the Guardian interviewed Mohammed last September, he spoke of his anger towards the US government for killing his father. “They tell us that these drones come from bases in Saudi Arabia and also from bases in the Yemeni seas and America sends them to kill terrorists, but they always kill innocent people. But we don’t know why they are killing us.


In their eyes, we don’t deserve to live like people in the rest of the world and we don’t have feelings or emotions or cry or feel pain like all the other humans around the world.”

https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/02/10/u-s-media-13-year-old-yemeni-boy-killed-u-s-drone/

The kid who had nightmares about drones killing him was burned to death by one. How sad is it that he thought the U.S. government would consider him to be human being like everyone else.
 
Sorry, but absent something new, I'm still voting "channeling Michael Douglas" rather than "Islamophobe".

This guy apparently confronted multiple neighbors about this parking space issue while carrying a gun. There were neighborhood meetings at which he was discussed because "he was making everyone feel nervous and unsafe", and even the towing company eventually refused to come when he called. He apparently was hateful towards everyone except the two truck drivers, but they got sick of responding.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/report-alleged-chapel-hill-shooter-banned-by-tow-company/

Dude's ex-wife says he was fascinated by "Falling Down" watched it incessantly, and it creeped her out.

http://www.wral.com/chapel-hill-murder-suspect-was-banned-from-calling-towing-company/14443091/

Neither motive is any better (or worse) in my view anyway.
 
Last edited:
Sorry, but absent something new, I'm still voting "channeling Michael Douglas" rather than "Islamophobe".

This guy apparently confronted multiple neighbors about this parking space issue while carrying a gun. There were neighborhood meetings at which he was discussed because "he was making everyone feel nervous and unsafe", and even the towing company eventually refused to come when he called. He apparently was hateful towards everyone except the two truck drivers, but they got sick of responding.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/report-alleged-chapel-hill-shooter-banned-by-tow-company/

Dude's ex-wife says he was fascinated by "Falling Down" watched it incessantly, and it creeped her out.

http://www.wral.com/chapel-hill-murder-suspect-was-banned-from-calling-towing-company/14443091/

I'm not really familiar with what happened because I haven't had time, but just reading your back and forth with kosis I'm a bit confused.

If a guy was a neo-Nazi, and hated basically everyone, but he killed 3 Black people. Is it not a hate crime because he called the arresting officer a "dirty Jew?" Or does hate need to be exclusively targeted towards those who were killed?

Trying to understand your logic here.
 
I'm not really familiar with what happened because I haven't had time, but just reading your back and forth with kosis I'm a bit confused.

If a guy was a neo-Nazi, and hated basically everyone, but he killed 3 Black people. Is it not a hate crime because he called the arresting officer a "dirty Jew?"

Well, no. It must be a hate crime towards the victim.

And just to be up front about it, I'm not a fan of the whole "hate crime" thing anyway. Killing your neighbor because he's a jew isn't any worse than killing him because you wanted to steal his money. Both a completely unjustified murders, and I think this guy should receive the same punishment regardless of his motive. And that's coming from a supporter of the death penalty. If he's guilty, fry him.

Or does hate need to be exclusively targeted towards those who were killed?

Yes, but it's really a question of motive. You could use comments he made to the arresting officer as part of the proof of his motive towards the victims, for example.

My overall point is that anti-Muslim bias is being reported and investigated as a possible motive, but the preliminary investigation, which includes his confession and reports from other neighbors, includes a different motive and some corroborating facts. I think the objection is by those who want the bias to be presumed, and I don't think that fits these facts.
 
Last edited:
Well, no. It must be a hate crime towards the victim.

Agreed.

And just to be up front about it, I'm not a fan of the whole "hate crime" thing anyway.

Ahhh....

Killing your neighbor because he's a jew isn't any worse than killing him because you wanted to steal his money.

Hate crime laws don't address which is ethically worse. The laws are meant as a deterrent to groupthink (discriminatory and prejudiced beliefs) potentially leading to violence and murder.

Both a completely unjustified murders, and I think this guy should receive the same punishment regardless of his motive.

That's fine. But just because you think that doesn't mean this isn't a hate crime; you might not want it to be, but it sure sounds like one.

And that's coming from a supporter of the death penalty. If he's guilty, fry him.

Lol.. of course you are...

Yes, but it's really a question of motive. You could use comments he made to the arresting officer as part of the proof of his motive towards the victims, for example.

I get what you're saying, but that's not how hate crimes work.
 
Sidenote:

I supported the death penalty until I realized that it costs more to do it than life, that many prisoners would rather die than spend life in prison and that when you go for death you very rarely get it anyways and you pay out the nose to try.

I want people that cause suffering to suffer themselves. With nearly zero exceptions, prisoners say that prison is fucking awful. What I'd really like to think is that these guys get killed in prison, but it's far more rare than I'd like.
 
Last edited:
I supported the death penalty until I realized how many innocent people the government kills every day, so whether or not you are really guilty is immaterial to them.
 

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Video

Episode 3-15: "Cavs Survive and Advance"

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Spotify

Episode 3:15: Cavs Survive and Advance
Top