Red Crossed

The Red Cross has officially joined with Amnesty International, the United Nations, Michael Moore and Linda Ronstadt to equate the Coalition of the Willing with the terrorists in Iraq.

From the BBC:

The International Committee of the Red Cross has condemned what it calls the “utter contempt for humanity” shown by all sides in the fighting in Iraq.


Is there anyone out there who can explain to me how beheadings of innocent aid workers, stockpiling weapons in mosques, car bombing school children, etc. is equal to firing on moving targets in self defence (who were firing at you from a mosque)? Has the world gone mad? And, since when did the Red Cross become so outspoken?

The article continues:

All parties in the conflict must provide adequate medical care for the injured, whether friend or foe, and must do everything possible to help civilians with food, water and health care, he added.

Hmmm, so are they saying that the terrorists ought to give hostages (care workers) bread and water before or after they remove their head from the rest of their body? I’m confused… When did liberals gain control over the world’s aid organizations? Why else would they be demanding health care? When was Jimmy Carter put in charge of the Red Cross?

Earlier in the Iraqi War a member of the Red Cross interviewed one person who knew someone, who had talked to someone, who used to go out with someone, who said that the US was mistreating the Iraqi prisoners of war. This (of course) was front page news at the time. Now, we get to hear that our soldiers and terrorists are equals! I am not sure what is more outrageous, that the Red Cross thinks that terrorists ought to treat you humanely before they inhumanely execute you, or that the BBC makes this story one of their headlines.

You Might Like