http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7272353.stm
'Pilgrims targeted
The two attacks in Baghdad, which took place on 1 February, were the deadliest for months in the capital and were initially blamed on two mentally disabled women.
Iraqi security forces were ordered to detain beggars and mentally disabled people found on Baghdad's streets after fears that al-Qaeda in Iraq were attempting to recruit them.
A US military official later said that the two women who had carried out the bombings had undergone psychiatric treatment for depression and schizophrenia.'
Sometimes, stuff you read is so wrong you just don't know where to start. '...initially blamed on two mentally disabled women'???? Who did that? Who said that? Are you seriously suggesting that the US or Iraqi government accused a couple of mad women of blowing people on their own volition? And does initially blamed mean that now they've been exonerated? Eye-witnesses positively id'd the women, and their names and mental state corroborated from many sources. AQiI definitely conned/coerced/tricked these women into helping them. So what is this shit about 'initially blamed'? Just as now the BBC always put in provisos and disclaimers when they report NATO press releases from Afghanistan, to prove how 'objective' and 'even-handed' they are, while reporting Taliban claims of civilian casualties without any; the BBC also seems determined to find conspiracies and lies in Coalition information from Iraq. So what is all this 'initially blamed' shit?
Presumably, the BBC trusts the words of the people who send out mentally-ill women as human bombs and drive trucks full of terrible chemicals into villages that will no longer support them over the men and women of THEIR OWN ARMED FORCES. Its time to sweep the BBC vipers nest clean. The moonbats and the Britain-haters have taken over. I want my BBC back.
No comments:
Post a Comment