You have commented 338 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Iraq
Volunteer ’human shields’ flock to Iraq
2003-02-17
Convoys of foreign peace activists are arriving in Iraq to act as "human shields", hoping to deter a US-led bombardment of the country. About 75 multinational activists, led by former US marine and Gulf War veteran Ken Nichols O'Keefe, arrived in Baghdad on Sunday after a marathon land and sea journey from London. Dozens more are on their way, planning to spread themselves in strategic positions across the country.
Some might be finding themselves spread a little bit further than they wished for when it kicks off...
"We're talking about making it politically impossible for them to bomb," Torben Franck, a spokesman for the group, told BBC News Online.
Wouldn't bet you life on that...
The US has already declared that the deployment of human shields is a crime, warning there is no guarantee that they will not be bombed. Those activists who arrived on Sunday were delayed when their convoy's lead vehicle - a double-decker bus - broke down in Italy earlier this month. Members of the group - which goes under the unwieldy name of Truth Justice Peace Human Shields Action Iraq - spent Monday viewing civilian sites bombed during the 1991 Gulf War.
"We're they boys from TJPHSAI! Don't worry, you're safe now!"
They will soon be joined by more than 100 volunteers, some of whom are due to fly from London's Heathrow airport to the Jordanian capital Amman on Monday, before making their way to Baghdad.
Hope the lads with the SAMs aren't planning any fireworks on Monday - that would be embarassing.
Those on board have paid their own fares and are said to include students, a mother of three and a businessman who has given up his job. They signed up to the cause despite the clear risks. The Human Shields website warns those considering taking part in this action: "There are significant risks for all of us taking part... But if you're like many of us, you recognise a greater danger lies in our acquiescence in the face of injustice."
Now there's logic for you - we're safer in Baghdad than Birmingham
A further flight of volunteers is scheduled to leave London on Friday. Mr Franck said the volunteers were being welcomed by the people of Iraq, but added that they had had their mobile and satellite phones confiscated by the Iraqi authorities.
Wonder why they'd do that?
He said the aim was to have up to 20,000 Western "human shields" in place.
Now why didn't some of those marches last weekend terminate here, I wonder...
He also denied that the presence of these activists was a propaganda coup for Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein's regime. "The people there are not there to support Saddam," he said. "They are there to show support and solidarity with the people of Iraq - and share their fate."
Coincidence. Just coincidence...
Other peace organisations - including the US-based Iraq Peace Team, Italian-based Bridges to Baghdad and a Japanese pacifist group - are also sending volunteers to Iraq.
We're sure they'll be very happy there. Briefly.
The term "human shields" became common currency ahead of the last Gulf War, when Saddam Hussein threatened to place Westerners detained in Iraq at sites deemed likely to be attacked by the US-led coalition. He did not carry out this threat, and most of the detainees were released before hostilities began.
Posted by:Bulldog

#7  There was quite the stink raised when the Kuwaitis dealt with their domestic (read Paleostinian) collaborators last time around. The wringing of hands and the rending of garments was pathetic to behold.

I don't think I'd like to be a Sammy supporter in Iraq when Sammy is gone. I'd like being an imported supporter even less. If the bombs don't get them, the populace might. They had a good chance of being toast, unless they scoot at the last moment.
Posted by: Fred   2003-02-17 17:46:19  

#6  Gosh, me thinks in the post-Saddam world, a human shield might be synonymous with COLLABORATOR.

If I were them, I'd be a lot more worried about an angry mob of Iraqis than a JDAM.
Posted by: Dreadnought   2003-02-17 16:37:56  

#5  Darwinism at work.
So we invade and these people, who survive, are standing around. How are they going to get home? Won't be able to fly. Don't think any of the liberated Iraqis are going to offer them a lift. They may actually be treated like collaboraters were in WWII. Which border do they walk to?
And while on the thought, any American found/captured on the battlefield faces the very real possibility of the charge of Treason. This action is not protected free speech.
Posted by: Don   2003-02-17 16:21:17  

#4  One might be tempted to delay the invasion of Iraq unitl as many of these Saddam supporters are in place. However, delaying also gives Saddam more days to torture, rape and murder.
Posted by: mhw   2003-02-17 15:25:47  

#3  It raises an interesting question. Who decides what needs to be shielded. Do they get to choose? If so they will most likely pick the obvious spots, like mosques, hospitals, that sort of thing; places where even their dull intellects know we will not attack without extreme provocation.

Will Saddam pick the locations? Well if he does then they have a pretty good chance of getting bombed. Maybe. I mean, on studying on it would you place these people at places you do not want bombed? It seems counter productive from his perspective.

It appears to me that that people are idiots.

Saddam will just have to come up with innocous places to park these people and hope they get bombed by accident.

Oh the problems of a Leader.
Posted by: Michael   2003-02-17 14:34:13  

#2  Martin Sheen, Alec Baldwin, Mike Farrell, Rob Reiner, Barbra Streisand, Sean Penn. Now those would be good human shields.
Posted by: Denny   2003-02-17 14:28:15  

#1  Can I nominate Robert Fisk?
Posted by: Anonymous   2003-02-17 14:16:56  

00:00