Sign Up | Log In
REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS
The Battle for Iraq - Ethnic Cleansing
Monday, November 15, 2004 6:52 AM
GHOULMAN
Monday, November 15, 2004 7:51 AM
GEEZER
Keep the Shiny side up
Quote:(from the Weekly Standard) In a piece dated June 1, the Saudi website alsaha.com, which propounds the extremist views of the kingdom's official Wahhabi sect of Islam, proudly reported the combat deaths in Fallujah of two Saudi subjects, Faisal Sultan al-Rougi al-Otabi and Tahir ash-Shoumani. The writer, Nassim al-Islam (doubtless a pseudonym--it means "wind of Islam"), adopts a tone of adulation: "Congratulations, Faisal, the color is that of blood and the scent that of musk. I wish I were with you to win great honor as a martyr."
Monday, November 15, 2004 8:06 AM
SIGNYM
I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.
Monday, November 15, 2004 8:20 AM
Monday, November 15, 2004 8:51 AM
Monday, November 15, 2004 10:23 AM
Quote:Originally posted by Ghoulman: Over 100000 dead Iraqi women and children. Trust me.
Monday, November 15, 2004 10:39 AM
Monday, November 15, 2004 10:42 AM
Quote:Originally posted by Geezer: Quote:Originally posted by Ghoulman: Over 100000 dead Iraqi women and children. Trust me. 'Fraid I can't. Your research is so sloppy. I need proof.
Monday, November 15, 2004 10:45 AM
MANIACNUMBERONE
Monday, November 15, 2004 10:51 AM
Monday, November 15, 2004 1:00 PM
Quote:Originally posted by SignyM: This very much reminds me of Gulf War I. When we bragging about dropping thousands of bombs per day, Saddam was admitting to eight civilian casualties and we were admitting to none. And everyone (except the Iraq victims of course) was happy with that little fantasy. But Geezer, with his vast intellect and great skepticism, can't see past that. You see Geezer need PROOF. Photos! Body counts! Certs of death! Notes from Bush to Rumie detailing how many Iraqis need to be killed today! He needs these irrefutable facts brought to him because if he had to engage the truth then he might have to admit moral culpability. And that might make him uncomfortable. It's just so much easier to rationalize it all away.... Geezer, I'm going to stop responding to your posts for a while. I'm not sure even a note from God would satisfy you.
Monday, November 15, 2004 1:20 PM
Monday, November 15, 2004 5:42 PM
DITHER
Monday, November 15, 2004 5:52 PM
Quote:Originally posted by SignyM: Why should I go thru the donkey-work of finding out something that you should be looking into on your own, if you had any interest in the truth? You never contribute anything positive to these discussions anyway. So- you tell me- how many people do YOU think we killed in Iraq? I propose that YOU go find the facts and let ME reject them! Over and out.
Monday, November 15, 2004 6:36 PM
Monday, November 15, 2004 6:38 PM
Tuesday, November 16, 2004 3:25 AM
DEBIJI
Quote:Originally posted by Ghoulman: Is the "Battle for Iraq" really just ethnic cleansing? The "insurgents" are not terrorrists from neighboring countries. It's not like there is a bus tour from Syria. The insurgents are the people of Iraq. They are the people of Fallujah. They are the people defending thier homes. Defending them from an American attack.
Quote: Fallujah is a Sunni town. That is, they are not Saddam supporters or even supporters of terrorists. Never were. They have only ever wanted two things... Saddam dead. And an Islamic State.
Quote: The first is a no brainer. The second is the undeclared enemy of the Bush/Cheney war machine. This is the real reason to attack the people of Iraq - because 80% of Iraq desires an Islamic State Government. Everyone but those old pals of the USA, the Bathists in Bagdadh. This is the unspoken political objective of the White House.
Quote: ... If that's the case then why are the Americans attacking and killing an entire city with it's massive military might?
Tuesday, November 16, 2004 3:41 AM
Tuesday, November 16, 2004 5:46 AM
Tuesday, November 16, 2004 6:36 AM
Quote:Originally posted by debiji: Quote:Originally posted by Ghoulman: Is the "Battle for Iraq" really just ethnic cleansing? The "insurgents" are not terrorrists from neighboring countries. It's not like there is a bus tour from Syria. The insurgents are the people of Iraq. They are the people of Fallujah. They are the people defending thier homes. Defending them from an American attack. As has been mentioned, many of the captured insurgents appear to have recently immigrated to Iraq. One of the hostages who had been held in Fallujah indicated that his captors were Syrian. Quote: Fallujah is a Sunni town. That is, they are not Saddam supporters or even supporters of terrorists. Never were. They have only ever wanted two things... Saddam dead. And an Islamic State. Saddam is a Sunni Muslim. Fallujah is in the Sunni Triangle ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunni_triangle) where most of top level Ba'ath party officials came from. Saddam is known to have favored Sunnis and oppressed Shiites, who make up most of the victims in the mass graves that have been discovered. Quote: The first is a no brainer. The second is the undeclared enemy of the Bush/Cheney war machine. This is the real reason to attack the people of Iraq - because 80% of Iraq desires an Islamic State Government. Everyone but those old pals of the USA, the Bathists in Bagdadh. This is the unspoken political objective of the White House. Bush has publicly stated ( http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3755850.stm) that an Islamic government in Iraq is acceptable. Quote: ... If that's the case then why are the Americans attacking and killing an entire city with it's massive military might? Is this hyperbole? I think you are saying that the Americans are killing everyone in the city of Fallujah. Do you mean this? Clearly, there are better ways to do such a thing, ways that prevent 38 Americans from dying and 275 from being wounded. IMO, hyperbole contributes little to meaningful discussion. It may be cathartic, but it isn't constructive. It is being reported that some Iraqis support the actions of the US and Iraqi military in Falluja, and some do not: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4002233.stm
Tuesday, November 16, 2004 7:12 AM
Quote:Originally posted by SignyM: Geezer- "This is a test". Have you actually looked at the IBC sources? What do they all have in common?
Quote: Our sources include public domain newsgathering agencies with web access. A list of some core sources is given below. Further sources will be added provided they meet acceptable project standards.ABC - ABC News (USA) AFP - Agence France-Presse AP - Associated Press AWST - Aviation Week and Space Technology Al Jaz - Al Jazeera network BBC - British Broadcasting Corporation BG - Boston Globe Balt. Sun - The Baltimore Sun CT - Chicago Tribune CO - Commondreams.org CSM - Christian Science Monitor DPA - Deutsche Presse-Agentur FOX - Fox News GUA - The Guardian (London) HRW - Human Rights Watch HT - Hindustan Times ICRC - International Committ of the Red Cross IND - The Independent (London) IO - Intellnet.org JT - Jordan Times LAT - Los Angeles Times MEN - Middle East Newsline MEO - Middle East Online MER - Middle East Report MH - Miami Herald NT - Nando Times NYT - New York Times Reuters - (includes Reuters Alertnet) SABC - South African Broadcasting Corporation SMH - Sydney Morning Herald Sg.News - The Singapore News Tel- The Telegraph (London) Times - The Times (London) TOI - Times of India TS - Toronto Star UPI - United Press International WNN - World News Network WP - Washington Post For a source to be considered acceptable to this project it must comply with the following standards: (1) site updated at least daily; (2) all stories separately archived on the site, with a unique url (see Note 1 below); (3) source widely cited or referenced by other sources; (4) English Language site; (5) fully public (preferably free) web-access. The project relies on the professional rigour of the approved reporting agencies. It is assumed that any agency that has attained a respected international status operates its own rigorous checks before publishing items (including, where possible, eye-witness and confidential sources). By requiring that two independent agencies publish a report before we are willing to add it to the count, we are premising our own count on the self-correcting nature of the increasingly inter-connected international media network.
Quote:Originally posted by SignyM: BTW- I never said that we killed 100,000 women and children mostly by bombing. Comb through my posts. You are wrong on that point, so I'm calling bullshit on THAT point!
Quote:Originally posted by SignyM: Did you read the article? The vast majority of dead are women and children, and they were bombed (deliberately targeted using "smart bomb" technology). If you're willing to accept "collateral damage" of this magnitude, what makes you better than a terrorist? (Other than the fact that we're the "good guys".)
Tuesday, November 16, 2004 7:45 AM
Tuesday, November 16, 2004 8:25 AM
Tuesday, November 16, 2004 11:19 AM
Quote:Few Foreigners Among Insurgents Of the more than 1,000 men between the ages of 15 and 55 who were captured in intense fighting in the center of the insurgency over the last week, just 15 are confirmed foreign fighters, Gen. George W. Casey, the top U.S. ground commander in Iraq, said Monday.
Wednesday, November 17, 2004 1:21 AM
Wednesday, November 17, 2004 8:17 AM
HERO
Quote:Originally posted by SignyM: The point that the White House apologists are missing is that there are facts, there are statistics, and then there is the truth. And I'm not talking about facts and statistic vresus the truth, I'm not talking about a "higher" truth, or a moral truth, I'm talking about the REAL truth
Quote: Since they planned Falujah far enough in advance to take the hospital first, it tells me that they were expecting to kill many more.
Quote: It also tells me that they don't mind Iraq holding elections under the point of a gun, because by January that's what Falujah, Mosul etc are going to be like.
Wednesday, November 17, 2004 8:57 AM
Quote:So facts and statistics should be ignored because you have already decided what the TRUTH is. Thats prejudice. I say that because you have pre-judged the events.
Quote:Maybe. Another possibility, and I'm just throwing this wacky idea out here...maybe they took the hospitals first to SAVE AS MANY LIVES AS THEY COULD. Naw, you hate Bush, so that can't be true.
Quote:Thats what all of Iraq was like during the last election. Vote or Die in Iraq meant vote for Saddam or Die.
Wednesday, November 17, 2004 9:36 AM
Quote:In terms of the information war, the hospital was indeed the most strategic of targets. During the first siege of Fallujah in April, doctors told independent media the real story about the suffering of civilian victims. So this time the Pentagon took no chances: no gory, disturbing photos of the elderly, women and children - the thousands unable to leave Fallujah in advance of this week's offensive, the civilian victims of the relentless bombing. But this did not prevent the world from seeing doctors and patients at the hospital handcuffed to the floor - as if they were terrorists. Hospital director Dr Salih al-Issawi told Agence France-Presse that the Americans blocked him and other doctors from going to the center of Fallujah to help another clinic in distress; he also said an ambulance that tried to leave the hospital was shot at by the Americans - just like in April, when all ambulances were targeted. The Geneva Convention is explicit: in a war situation, hospitals and ambulances are neutral.
Wednesday, November 17, 2004 10:19 AM
Quote:Originally posted by SignyM: The Geneva Convention is explicit: in a war situation, hospitals and ambulances are neutral www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/FK11Ak03.html
Wednesday, November 17, 2004 11:18 AM
Quote:Originally posted by Geezer: Quote:Originally posted by SignyM: The Geneva Convention is explicit: in a war situation, hospitals and ambulances are neutral www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/FK11Ak03.html True. Unfortunately, the anti-coalition forces have a history of turning hospitals, mosques, schools and the like into either strongpoints or boobytraps. This requires the coalition forces to be more careful around these buildings. For example, handcuffing people until they can identify them, rather than taking the chance that they'll pop up later with cached weapons or to set off bombs. The anti-coalition forces have also used ambulances as carbombs. If coalition troops can't tell the real ambulances from the carbombs, they can either shoot to stop them all, or risk getting blown up. Safer for everyone just to keep them off the streets when major fighting is going on.
Wednesday, November 17, 2004 11:25 AM
Wednesday, November 17, 2004 12:22 PM
BARNSTORMER
Quote:Originally posted by SignyM: So you agree that taking the hospital was not a life-saving action?
Wednesday, November 17, 2004 1:11 PM
Wednesday, November 17, 2004 1:36 PM
Quote:Originally posted by SignyM: I'm just trying to lay one proposal to rest, and that was the opinion that we took the hospital to save Iraqi lives. Is that deader'n a doornail then? I don't want to have to revisit that opinion.
Wednesday, November 17, 2004 1:46 PM
Wednesday, November 17, 2004 7:39 PM
Quote:If taking the hospital early in the action prevented anti-coalition forces from occupying it and fighting from it later, then I'd say it did save Iraqi lives, those of the patients and staff of the hospital. Given the anti-coalition force's past track record, this wouldn't be an unexpected situation.
Wednesday, November 17, 2004 9:08 PM
INEVITABLEBETRAYAL
Quote:Originally posted by Ghoulman: Ayman al-Zawahri is not a member of al Qaeda.
Quote:Originally posted by Ghoulman: The "insurgents" are not terrorrists from neighboring countries.
Quote:Originally posted by Ghoulman: Fallujah is a Sunni town. That is, they are not Saddam supporters or even supporters of terrorists.
Quote:Originally posted by Ghoulman: If the USA is just attacking cities because of thier ethnicity then this is ethnic cleansing.
Thursday, November 18, 2004 12:57 AM
Quote:Well, they may not be primarily foreign fighters, but they are there.
Quote:Of the more than 1,000 men between the ages of 15 and 55 who were captured in intense fighting in the center of the insurgency over the last week, just 15 are confirmed foreign fighters, Gen. George W. Casey, the top U.S. ground commander in Iraq, said Monday.... But despite an intense focus on the network of Jordanian-born militant Abu Musab Zarqawi by U.S. and Iraqi officials, who have insisted that most Iraqis support the country's interim government, American commanders said their best estimates of the proportion of foreigners among their enemies is about 5%.
Quote:U.S. officials have for months publicly promoted the notion that foreign fighters and terrorists are playing a major role in the anti-American insurgency in Fallujah and the rest of Iraq. By blaming foreigners, U.S. authorities hope to quash the idea that Iraqis are rising up against military occupation and frame the conflict as part of the wider war on terror. However, foreigners play a tiny role in Iraq's insurgency, many military experts say. In Fallujah, U.S. military leaders say around 90 percent of the 1,000 or more fighters battling the Marines are Iraqis. To date, there have been no confirmed U.S. captures of foreign fighters in Fallujah... Elsewhere, U.S. military commanders say foreigners have an even smaller role in the insurgency. In Baghdad, Maj. Gen. Martin Dempsey has said foreigners account for just 1 percent or so of guerrillas. Of 8,000 guerrilla suspects jailed across Iraq, only 127 hold foreign passports, the U.S. military said. In the south, no one has suggested that foreigners pack the ranks of radical cleric Muqtada al-Sadr's al-Mahdi Army. The group, which has fought U.S. and allied troops across southern Iraq, is made up of Shiite Muslim radicals, many of whom hail from the slums of Baghdad. In March, Dempsey called the idea that foreign fighters were flooding Iraq "a misconception."
Quote:Also, lest you should think that there are no terrorists or supporters of terrorists or even any bad locals, think twice about the news of torture chambers there.
Quote:Can you come up with even a scrap of evidence to support that (the USA is just attacking cities because of their ethnicity)?
Quote:Consequently, a lot of Sunnis are pretty peeved that they don't have the influence they used to.
Quote:We were there to remove Hussein in an effort to make the world a safer place.
Thursday, November 18, 2004 3:00 AM
Quote:Originally posted by SignyM: What is the point of this statement? I could just as easily say "lest you should think that there are no terrorists or supporters of terrorists or even any bad USA soldiers, think twice about the news of torture chambers in Abu Ghraib" I'm sure you would say Abu Ghraib represented just a small fraction of US soldiers. I would say the same thing of Falujah.
Quote:To this end, the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons: (a) violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture; (b) taking of hostages; (c) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment; (d) the passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgement pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.
Quote: Originally posted by SignyM: When we casually shoot wounded point-blank in the head?
Thursday, November 18, 2004 3:16 AM
Thursday, November 18, 2004 4:48 AM
Quote:Originally posted by debiji: Ghoulman, You typed: "You refute my essay with meaningless, perhaps I should say contextless, fact. You wouldn't get far in debate class with crap like that so please, don't go around defining my essay as meaningless until you graduate. " Perhaps you believe that I was characterizing your entire post as hyperbole. If so, I regret the misunderstanding, but I stand by the assertion that the following is hyperbole: "If that's the case then why are the Americans attacking and killing an entire city with it's massive military might?" Specifically, the part about "...killing an entire city...". you typed: "Take how you redefine my point about Ethnic Cleansing and Saddam actually being Sunni just as the people of Fallujah are mostly Sunni. You have reframed my sentence into a conflict between particular sects. Well, that's not what I'm talking about at all. It is beside the point. And it isn't what's going on. But it made me seem wrong... which was all you cared about." I disagree. I haven't reframed the sentence. I did not agree with your statements, and I presented information that I thought justified my disagreement. You type that because Falluja is a Sunni town, they do not support Hussein. But, since Saddam is a Sunni (whether or not he is a "good" Sunni is not the point, since Sunni is also an ethnic group in Iraq) himself, IMO it doesn't follow that the people of Falluja would want him dead. On the contrary, Saddam's support was strongest in the Sunni regions of Iraq, where all his relatives and the highest officials of his party came from. If you disagree, you need only say so and state your facts and arguments. No need to be condescending ("your post is nothing but trit refutations of facts you fail to understand.") Also, you type that the Sunnis want "an Islamic State". My understanding is that the Shiites, led by Al Sistani, really want an Islamic State, and at first the CPA tried to shut Sistani out, but realized this was impossible, they needed him to control al-Sadr. you typed: "Do you really want me to believe the GWB White House will accept an Islamic Government? You really want me to believe Iraqies are happy to see the USA bomb 100000 people to death?" Well, he did say it, and he seems to like the ones in Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, Malaysia, and Turkey just fine. As to the second sentence, I never said "Iraqis are happy to see the USA bomb 100000 people to death" or anything like it. Perhaps you refer to the link to BBC forum that I posted. As I said, the opinions there are both for and against the action in Falluja. But they do not speak of 100000 anything, nor do they present opinions about the overall invasion, nor do they offer any way to infer how many Iraqis, percentage wise, hold these opinions. You typed: "...until you graduate." "shallow" "CNN whores" "What reality are you on???" "What are you concerned with? Tattered American honour perhaps?" "no one has the balls to" Sticks and stones, Sir. I fail to see how the 6 strings above contribute to the discourse in a constructive way. If you can, please enlighten me. Respectfully, debiji
Thursday, November 18, 2004 5:09 AM
Thursday, November 18, 2004 5:55 AM
Thursday, November 18, 2004 6:13 AM
Quote:.. video beheading hostage Nicholas Berg. Maybe al-Zarqawi should resign.
Quote:Nothing casual about it. A decision that had to be made in a split-second, given the knowledge that the insurgents had been boobytrapping their dead, ...
Thursday, November 18, 2004 6:42 AM
Quote:Originally posted by BarnStormer: Ethnic cleansing by the U.S. in Iraq is a ridiculous and irresponsible accusation!!! Given that, it is not suprising in the least who started this thread, and who is supporting the statement.
Quote:If you want to talk about Ethnic cleansing, look at Bosnia and Milosivic. The U.N. did nothing except look upon it with alarm, and say "Gee, what your doing is bad, we think you should stop the rape, murder, genocide. It was the U.S. that led the fight with NATO that stopped that atrocity. Where was the U.N.? Or, more current events make you look at the Sudan situation. Again, what is the U.N. doing? The U.N. is doing nothing except look upon it with alarm, and say "Gee, what your doing is bad, we think you should stop the rape, murder, genocide. How would you like some sanction put on you?" Give us all a break, and at least try to temper your blatant partisan rhetoric with even a tiny modicum of intelligent thought. By the way, where is you outrage for France invading the Ivory Coast, wiping out there military. Oh my goodness, they did'nt even have the support of the U.N. to do this. Are they Crazy? Are they NeoFacist Nazi scum? By your arguments they certianly are. Where is the outrage??????
Thursday, November 18, 2004 6:46 AM
Thursday, November 18, 2004 6:53 AM
Thursday, November 18, 2004 7:17 AM
Quote:Originally posted by InevitableBetrayal: Ghoulman, you are spewing verbal sewage again. Just a couple of points: Quote:Originally posted by Ghoulman: Ayman al-Zawahri is not a member of al Qaeda. Zawahiri is a member of Al Qaida. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayman_al-Zawahiri http://www.fbi.gov/mostwant/terrorists/teralzawahiri.htm You may have had a moment of stupidity (not uncommon for you) and confused him with Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi. He is also aligned with Bin Ladin. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6268680/ Quote:Originally posted by Ghoulman: The "insurgents" are not terrorrists from neighboring countries. Well, they may not be primarily foreign fighters, but they are there. Apparently the Marines have been treating injured foreign fighters. http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/news/world/10197113.htm?1c There may not be a bus tour to Fallujah, but Iraq is the jihad-du-jour, and jihadists from all over are converging there, just like they did in Afghanistan, Chechnya, Afghanistan before that, Kashmir, and other hot spots. Quote:Originally posted by Ghoulman: Fallujah is a Sunni town. That is, they are not Saddam supporters or even supporters of terrorists. Saddam is a Sunni muslim. That's the reason that the sunnis (the minority in Iraq) held positions of power. Consequently, a lot of Sunnis are pretty peeved that they don't have the influence they used to. http://www.nationsonline.org/oneworld/biography_saddam_hussein.htm Also, lest you should think that there are no terrorists or supporters of terrorists or even any bad locals, think twice about the news of torture chambers there. Nick Berg was beheaded there. I saw the video. Not pleasant. Margeret Hassan was shot there. I'm pretty sure that the Koran has some specific things to say about that. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,138524,00.html http://www.politicalgateway.com/news/read.html?id=1899 http://www9.sbs.com.au/theworldnews/region.php?id=98909®ion=6 Quote:Originally posted by Ghoulman: If the USA is just attacking cities because of thier ethnicity then this is ethnic cleansing. Of all the stupid things to say...Can you come up with even a scrap of evidence to support that? If that were the goal, why did the U.S. drop millions of leaflets warning civilians to get out? If they'd wanted to do some "ethnic cleansing" keeping the civilians there would have made more sense. I'm a veteran of the Iraq conflict. I was there. On the ground. Being shot at and returning fire. I can tell you that we are not there to conduct "ethnic cleansing". We were there to remove Hussein in an effort to make the world a safer place. You've obviously made up your mind to hate the U.S., the President, and the war, so I can't convince you otherwise. But I do know this: you don't know the first thing about Iraq. You don't know the situation there, or the U.S. strategy, or even basic facts like who the Sunnis support or who Ayman al-Zawahiri is. As an intelligence analyst who has spent the last 10 years studying Iraq, and who has done a combat tour there, allow me to invite you to shut your hole. Stop running off at the mouth concerning topics that you know nothing about. You're embarassing decent, well informed Canadians everywhere. Edit: I realize that you will no doubt lambast me for using some U.S. news sources, or cast aspersions on the U.S. intelligence community. I also realize that you are so committed to your position that facts have no bearing, experience can be dismissed, and anyone who doesn't agree with you is misinformed or part of the conspiracy. [
Thursday, November 18, 2004 8:15 AM
Quote:Originally posted by SignyM: YOU know Geezer, on the issue of morally suspect, it doesn't have to be either/or. It can also be both or neither.
Quote:I'll be interested in your findings on the number of civilians killed in Fallujah. Please let us know what you find.
Thursday, November 18, 2004 8:35 AM
Quote:Originally posted by SignyM: Oh please Geezer- the opinion was that the hospital would be used to treat Iraqi casualties- not that taking the hospital might save Iraqi lives in some indirect way. Is that opinion dead? Unless someone brings evidence by tomorrow that the hospital was equipped by, and used by the US military to treat Iraqi casulties I'm going to assume that contention is dead.
Quote: The military had allowed them to enter the general hospital on the western edge of the battle-scarred city on Saturday, but forbade the aid workers from going further for security reasons. The hospital also had no patients to treat as a bridge leading to it was littered with roadside bombs, making entry perilous, said a military spokeswoman. "The Red Crescent vehicles... were rerouted back to their origin because Fallujah General has no patients," she said. "All patients are being diverted to the Ramadi and Jordanian hospitals until the bridge leading to the Fallujah General is completely clear of improvised explosive devices and the security of the area can provide safe passage of ambulances with patients," she told AFP.
YOUR OPTIONS
NEW POSTS TODAY
OTHER TOPICS
FFF.NET SOCIAL