Checens hold hundreds of Russians hostage today

[kg_veteran]

Originally posted by: Mavdog
IMHO Russia is reaping what it sowed.

This really is a disgusting statement.

[Mavdog]

Originally posted by: Drbio

Still with the lame ass retorts? Come on man....even a dumbass liberal like you shold be able to come up wiht a better put down.

oh, so showing your inability to understand words is a "lame ass retort"? It's a lot better than the mindless drivel of yours. Then you go and do it again...

But don't avoid the fact that you sympathized wiht terrorists. We aren't letting your true colors go away because you want to perform a Kerry backtrack flipflop.

LMAO! from the Karl Rove school of fabrication comes DrCleo, Show the "sympathy wiht terrorists". Show the "backtrack and flipflop". They don't exist, just like your being accurate, intelligent or articulate.

[Drbio]

Another avoidance of the facts eh mavdoogie?

Your statement was that Russia reaped what it sowed. Ther eis no wiggle room for a disgusting, terrorist sympathizing, dumbass statement like that. No matter how much you try to smoke and mirror dodge the issues wiht your backtracking nonsense, you have been shown to be what you clearly are. A terrorist sympathizing ass.

[knowitall]

And not every Russian civilian who lost a child has committed a vengeful act of retaliation. All it takes is two groups of people who refuse to let the other decide on how they should live their lives. Then, mutual extermination becomes the bond they all share.

[Mavdog]

Originally posted by: Drbio
Another avoidance of the facts eh mavdoogie?

Your statement was that Russia reaped what it sowed. Ther eis no wiggle room for a disgusting, terrorist sympathizing, dumbass statement like that. No matter how much you try to smoke and mirror dodge the issues wiht your backtracking nonsense, you have been shown to be what you clearly are. A terrorist sympathizing ass.

yes, reading comprehension is not a trait of DrCleo. neither is thinking.

"reaped what you sow" means that the russians have blame as well as the terrorists.

That's as well as, not instead of. Hard for you to understand I know.

No "sympathy" for the terrorists.

No "backtracking".

No accuracy from DrCleo.

But what else is new?

[kg_veteran]

Originally posted by: Mavdog
"reaped what you sow" means that the russians have blame as well as the terrorists.

Explain how the Russians have blame for Russian children being held hostage by terrorists.

[Drbio]

What isn't new is that you got called out by several forum members and backtracked like the little bitch you are. It's ok...we expect it from liberal terrorist sympathizing little pukes. To thineself be true mavdoogie....to thineself be true.


pathetic.

[LRB]

Originally posted by: Mavdog


"reaped what you sow" means that the russians have blame as well as the terrorists.

So Mavdog says that the terrorists were 100% justified in taking the children hostage, however neither were the terrorist 100% unjustified. So the terrorists were partially justified in taking the children hostages. Pray tell what percent are the terrorists justified Mavdog. Is it partially justified in doing this to Russian children or would any group of children be partially justified.

[knowitall]

Many of you are missing the point. You've trampeled on his words to serve your own purpose. But this is of no suprise. It fulfills your desire to conquer.

[madape]

This tranferrence of guilt is terrorism's greatest lie: that the ultimate responsibility for a hostage's death lies in the failure of his loved ones to capitulate fully to their monstrous demands. It is a lie which the Left never tires of repeating but it is false all the same. Albert Camus once wryly wrote in the Rebel that "on the day when crime dons the apparel of innocence -- through a curious transposition peculiar to our times -- it is innocence that is called upon to justify itself." He was referring to Stalin, but alas, the evil the Left worshipped never died.

.. from the Belmont Club

Placing the blame of terrorist acts upon the victims of terror rather than the perpetrators of terror is absolutely reprehensible. I don't know whether mavdog is stupid, disingenuous, heartless, or evil. In any case, he makes me want to puke.

[Mavdog]

Originally posted by: kg_veteran

Explain how the Russians have blame for Russian children being held hostage by terrorists.

The Russian government has led not one but two brutal wars in Chechnya, the second still ongoing. Putin has taken a stand that he will not relent, and was reelected partly on his position that Russia should be even more agressive with the Chechnyn seperatists. They have uprooted families, destroyed cities, it has been a very bloody campaign. The goal? To not let Chechnya leave the Russian Federation. They have continued to raise the stakes in the conflict and acheive their goals by the use of bombs and bullets. The dialectic of conflict has played out with these unfortunate innocent civilians caught in the mess and in danger.

[Mavdog]

Originally posted by: madape

.. from the Belmont Club

Placing the blame of terrorist acts upon the victims of terror rather than the perpetrators of terror is absolutely reprehensible. I don't know whether mavdog is stupid, disingenuous, heartless, or evil. In any case, he makes me want to puke.

NOBODY has "placed the blame of terrorist acts upon the victims of terror". The government of Russia, and especially the generals and Putin, share in the blame for the never ending escalation of violence.

Your attempts to shift the point are either "stupid, disingenuous or evil". You choose after you finish spewing on yourself.

[kg_veteran]

So, in response to the actions of Putin and his government, these Chechens are justified in taking children hostage and threatening to blow them up?

[LRB]

The goal? To not let Chechnya leave the Russian Federation.

You mean that Putin is not caving into viloent attempts to circumvent the Russian rule of law. But even if Russia does a wrong, that doesn't mean that she shares blame in a wrong committed by other individuals. That is faulty thinking.

[LRB]

Originally posted by: kg_veteran
So, in response to the actions of Putin and his government, these Chechens are justified in taking children hostage and threatening to blow them up?

Or the terrorist would now be to blame if Putin took a bunch of Checen school children hostage in return.[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-disgusted.gif[/img]

[Mavdog]

Originally posted by: kg_veteran
So, in response to the actions of Putin and his government, these Chechens are justified in taking children hostage and threatening to blow them up?

no. they are criminals and as I said yesterday may justice be swift.

[knowitall]

I don't recall the Russians ever taking Chechen children as hostages. It's much simpler just to kill them, and refer to it as collateral damage.

[LRB]

Originally posted by: knowitall
I don't recall the Russians ever taking Chechen children as hostages. It's much simpler just to kill them, and refer to it as collateral damage.

When have the Russians intentionally targeted children and civilians in the Checen conflict?

[Mavdog]

Originally posted by: LRB

When have the Russians intentionally targeted children and civilians in the Checen conflict?

from the BBC link I posted earlier.

"But the aerial bombardment failed to have the desired effect. Rather than capitulating to the clearly superior air power of Moscow, the Chechens dug in with tens of thousands of civilians taking to shelters.

Russian journalists also contradicted official reports of "precision bombing", reporting that the civilian population was being hit as often as military targets."

[LRB]

Mavdog this is hardly example of targeting civilians. Missing what you are aiming at is not targeting.

[kg_veteran]

Originally posted by: Mavdog

no. they are criminals and as I said yesterday may justice be swift.

Then you shouldn't say that Russia is reaping what it sowed. To essentially suggest that a nation deserves to be attacked by terrorists is just disgusting.

[Mavdog]

Originally posted by: LRB
Mavdog this is hardly example of targeting civilians. Missing what you are aiming at is not targeting.

yeah, right, they didn't know there were all those civilians right below them in Grozny as they dropped their bombs...[img]i/expressions/anim_roller.gif[/img]

[Epitome22]

Originally posted by: LRB

When have the Russians intentionally targeted children and civilians in the Checen conflict?

You're kidding right?

"http://hrw.org/english/docs/2004/04/12/russia8424.htm"

Here's a story about the bodies of 9 chechen civilians found after they were seized and 'disappeared by Russian forces.

http://www.hrw.org/english/docs/2004...russia8415.htm

Here's another article detailing some of the abuses directed towards chechens by Russian Federal troops and pro-russian chechen militias. Including rape, tortures and execution.

http://www.hrw.org/reports/2002/russchech/chech0202.htm

Here's an article detailing some of the russian federal troops 'sweeps' into chechen territory in which numerous civilians were killed, tortured and 'dissappeared'

http://www.hrw.org/press/2000/01/chech0120.htm

Here's an article detailing the lovely conduct of Russian federal troops against Chechen women (Rape, Murder)


To be fair, the Chechen opposition forces are guilty of their own share of civilian abuses in this conflict (including the one going on) and they are also dually condemned for their criminal actions. Human Rights Watch themselves raised the question of whether Chechen rebels were provoking attacks by Russian troops on Civilian areas. But the fact remains that Russians are equally liable in this conflict, began this conflict themselves. As for the question, not only have russian troops targeted civilians, but they have primarily targeted civilians throughout this case. This is not merely rogues or russian backed chechen militias but Federal Russian Troops, implicated in these civlian abuses of rape, torture and murder.

[LRB]

Originally posted by: Mavdog

yeah, right, they didn't know there were all those civilians right below them in Grozny as they dropped their bombs...[img]i/expressions/anim_roller.gif[/img]

That they knew that there were civilians there still doesn't mean that they were targeting them. If a man in a crowd shoots at me and I defend myself and shoot back at him an miss and hit an innocent in the crowd, it doesn't mean that I was targeting the civilian. It just means that I'm not a very good shot, and it could possibly be construed that I have poor judgement. But poor judgement doesn't make it targeting the innocent.

[LRB]

Originally posted by: Epitome22

You're kidding right?

"http://hrw.org/english/docs/2004/04/12/russia8424.htm"

Here's a story about the bodies of 9 chechen civilians found after they were seized and 'disappeared by Russian forces.

http://www.hrw.org/english/docs/2004...russia8415.htm

Here's another article detailing some of the abuses directed towards chechens by Russian Federal troops and pro-russian chechen militias. Including rape, tortures and execution.

http://www.hrw.org/reports/2002/russchech/chech0202.htm

Here's an article detailing some of the russian federal troops 'sweeps' into chechen territory in which numerous civilians were killed, tortured and 'dissappeared'

http://www.hrw.org/press/2000/01/chech0120.htm

Here's an article detailing the lovely conduct of Russian federal troops against Chechen women (Rape, Murder)


To be fair, the Chechen opposition forces are guilty of their own share of civilian abuses in this conflict (including the one going on) and they are also dually condemned for their criminal actions. Human Rights Watch themselves raised the question of whether Chechen rebels were provoking attacks by Russian troops on Civilian areas. But the fact remains that Russians are equally liable in this conflict, began this conflict themselves. As for the question, not only have russian troops targeted civilians, but they have primarily targeted civilians throughout this case. This is not merely rogues or russian backed chechen militias but Federal Russian Troops, implicated in these civlian abuses of rape, torture and murder.

So it appears possible that Russians may be committing abuses against civilians including rape, torture, and murder. They may even be doing it as policy set down by the Russian government. If so that is atrocious and should be stopped. However that doesn't justify kidnapping and threatening to murder innocent Russian school children even if all allogations against the Russians are true. 2 wrongs don't make a right.

[knowitall]

I didn't say intentionally target children. Is it now time to trample on my words? The term reap what you sow. What makes people commit acts of unthinkable violence?

Please, let me share one of many violent acts I witnessed as a small child.

One early evening, while I was outside playing with friends, I saw a man running down the road just past me. The way he was running made me very curious because he was desperately attempting to cover his identity. I looked back down the road from where he came thinking maybe he was being chased. So I kept looking into the shadows from where he appeared and saw movement. As my eyes adjusted to the darkness, I could just see the silhouette's of several military helmets. The man running, as we later discovered, had just left a meeting with these helmeted gentlemen.
Then,what seemed like forever but was really only moments, a large group of heavily armed British "terrorist" blasted there way into a dwelling. Why they entered in this fashion still puzzles me to this day. You see, had they simply knocked the occupants would have gladly allowed their entrance. There was nothing to fear from the people of this home. No weapons, no IRA, nothing at all to fear. Well, back to the events that followed.
After blasting their way in, what followed was 125 to 150 rounds of gunfire. I'm not sure of how much because I was crying and trembling so hard. After a few more minutes, all the British "terrorist" emerged from the home patting each other on the back, remarking about what a good mission they had just accomplished. I remember that part clearly because I had just finished vomiting. The people left inside the home did not follow them out.
Outside on the street many people had come out to see what was happening. They all stood there, silently in shock, hugging each other, not believing the carnage they had just witnessed. The Brits then began to round up many of these people. Mere onlookers were interogated and some beaten. Absolutely silent simple onlookers. I ran to my special place where I knew I could still see and be safe.
After some time, the victims in the home were removed. Two women, seven children, the oldest child was twelve, and a very close friend of mine. No men were inside. I hadn't seen a man in that home for weeks. My friend and I would always share our dreams, our feelings and our fears. Now, one of our shared fears had come true.

When one group of people forces their will on another group of people, it changes the way a person thinks.

The man running down the road was later killed. This might serve as a definition for "reap what you sow".

[LRB]

So what are you saying? That you personally reaped what you sow???

[knowitall]

I should have known you wouldn't understand.

[kg_veteran]

Originally posted by: knowitall
I should have known you wouldn't understand.

I don't understand either. While it's horrible that you had to witness what you did, I don't see how you're making a coherent point relevant to this thread.

[Chiwas]

When one group of people forces their will on another group of people, it changes the way a person thinks.

This is the conclusion. In the story she is explaning how the "sowing" is made and how the "reaping" (hatred) has to arise necessarily.

In my country this happens very often.

[mavsman55]

Originally posted by: knowitall
I didn't say intentionally target children. Is it now time to trample on my words? The term reap what you sow. What makes people commit acts of unthinkable violence?

Please, let me share one of many violent acts I witnessed as a small child.

One early evening, while I was outside playing with friends, I saw a man running down the road just past me. The way he was running made me very curious because he was desperately attempting to cover his identity. I looked back down the road from where he came thinking maybe he was being chased. So I kept looking into the shadows from where he appeared and saw movement. As my eyes adjusted to the darkness, I could just see the silhouette's of several military helmets. The man running, as we later discovered, had just left a meeting with these helmeted gentlemen.
Then,what seemed like forever but was really only moments, a large group of heavily armed British "terrorist" blasted there way into a dwelling. Why they entered in this fashion still puzzles me to this day. You see, had they simply knocked the occupants would have gladly allowed their entrance. There was nothing to fear from the people of this home. No weapons, no IRA, nothing at all to fear. Well, back to the events that followed.
After blasting their way in, what followed was 125 to 150 rounds of gunfire. I'm not sure of how much because I was crying and trembling so hard. After a few more minutes, all the British "terrorist" emerged from the home patting each other on the back, remarking about what a good mission they had just accomplished. I remember that part clearly because I had just finished vomiting. The people left inside the home did not follow them out.
Outside on the street many people had come out to see what was happening. They all stood there, silently in shock, hugging each other, not believing the carnage they had just witnessed. The Brits then began to round up many of these people. Mere onlookers were interogated and some beaten. Absolutely silent simple onlookers. I ran to my special place where I knew I could still see and be safe.
After some time, the victims in the home were removed. Two women, seven children, the oldest child was twelve, and a very close friend of mine. No men were inside. I hadn't seen a man in that home for weeks. My friend and I would always share our dreams, our feelings and our fears. Now, one of our shared fears had come true.

When one group of people forces their will on another group of people, it changes the way a person thinks.

The man running down the road was later killed. This might serve as a definition for "reap what you sow".

Knowitall, my sympathies are with you for having to witness this. Nobody should ever have to see something like that, <u>especially</u> a child. But I just don't get why since this happened, hundreds of other innocent children deserve to be kidnapped and potentially killed?

[knowitall]

Of course they don't deserve it. No one here has said that they do. Oppression will play games with your mind.

[LRB]

A good friend of mine grew up in an abusive home. Her father would verbally and emotionally abuse her. She was lucky because her mother and siblings often got physically abused. Her father would basically tell them that they were reaping what they sowed because of some action they did. For example my friend can be very stubborn at times and would talk back as a child. That may have justified punishing her, it did not justify what she recieved. Nothing a child does would deserve a beating, but that's what her father did to her siblings.

This is faulty logic that you reap what you sow. More than that it's BS. This is just an excuse for people to use violence against innocents to try and get their way or make themselves feel better.

Knowitall the soldiers in your story sound like they may have committed a serious injustice. If so those responsible should be punished for that injustice. However that injustice does not make it all right for others in you neighborhood to go kill a bunch of English school children. If you neighbors did this, they and they alone should be held accountable for what they did. Those soldiers may have been responding to some people that killed innocent English citizens. However if the English soldiers were responding against innocent civilians, then the English soldiers and the people who ordered their attack bear the blame and them alone.

[knowitall]

I was trying to explain why people do the horrible things that they do. I have witnessed many an act of the one I just shared. What someone nowhere near this kind of violence should understand is the Law, Right and Wrong, ceases to exist. It is replaced with brutal and savage behavior from both sides.

[LRB]

Originally posted by: knowitall
I was trying to explain why people do the horrible things that they do. I have witnessed many an act of the one I just shared. What someone nowhere near this kind of violence should understand is the Law, Right and Wrong, ceases to exist. It is replaced with brutal and savage behavior from both sides.

Not all people resort to brutal and savage behavior. And those that do should be held responsible for their actions and their actions alone. Just because you were abused as a child doesn't give you the right to abuse your children.

[knowitall]

Just because you were abused as a child doesn't give you the right to abuse your own children?

What the hell does that mean?

LRB, in this one case you are completely clueless.

[MavKikiNYC]

At Least 120 Hostages Dead After Hours of Pitched Battles
By C.J. CHIVERS and STEVEN LEE MYERS

Published: September 3, 2004


ESLAN, Russia, Sept. 3 — The siege of a school here in southern Russia ended today in panic, violence and death 52 hours after it began. At least 120 hostages — students, teachers and parents — died, according to initial reports and witnesses, after two large explosions set off pitched battles between heavily armed captors and Russian troops that continued for hours.

Ambulances, police cars and any other vehicle that was free rushed more than 650 hostages to hospitals in frenzied convoys that careered through the streets of this small, leafy city in North Ossetia.

Scores survived, staggering from the school even as intense gunfire sputtered and grenades exploded around them. Many were barely dressed, their faces strained with fear and exhaustion, their bodies bloodied by shrapnel and gunshots.

Many others never got out. Their bodies lay in the charred wreckage of Middle School No. 1's gymnasium, the roof of which had collapsed and burned, a police officer here said. Many people here feared the toll would surely rise.

The violence, which Russian officials said erupted unexpectedly for reasons that were not immediately clear, ended the siege that began when more than two dozen masked and camouflaged fighters stormed the school on Wednesday as children and parents gathered for a festive first day of school.

It did not end the crisis, though. By tonight at least three fighters remained hunkered inside a building nearby, reportedly holding an unknown number of hostages. Gunfire and explosions erupted sporadically in and around the school.

President Vladimir V. Putin, confronted with perhaps the worst crisis of his five years in office, did not immediately address what unfolded here. Other officials, in Moscow and in North Ossetia, said that Russian forces had not instigated the firefights but were forced to return fire, then storm the school following the first explosions, which occurred at 1 p.m.

"Taking advantage of the panic, hostages began to escape," a spokesman for North Ossetia's president, Lev Dzugayev, said in an interview, referring to the initial blasts. "The bandits began shooting them in the back. The special forces on our side had to cover the fleeing hostages. This is unfortunately how it happened."

The number of dead and wounded far surpassed the number of hostages that were even reported being held, prompting accusations here that the authorities deliberately underplayed the severity of the crisis. Today, a presidential adviser said for the first time that as many as 1,200 hostages might have in fact been held.

The dead included several Russian soldiers and security officials, one reported killed tonight as he rescued two more children. The dead also included at least 20 of an estimated 30 or more guerrillas.

Maj. Gen. Valery A. Andreyev, the director of North Ossetia's branch of the Federal Security Service, said that half of the dead fighters were foreigners, apparently from Arabic countries. If verified, that would comport with the Kremlin's assertions that Chechnya's rebels were receiving aid and manpower from abroad.

Today's violence shattered the fretful vigil by the relatives of those held since Wednesday in conditions described as horrid. For many families the vigil ended joyously, but for others grievously. Two girls who escaped, tattered and wan but apparently unhurt, emerged from a car not far from the school and raced to their family's courtyard, where they met and hugged their mother. She swung them in circles.

The morgue at the city's main hospital, though, overflowed. More than 10 bodies lay on stretchers on grass outside. Men and women filed through, lifting the sheets that covered the dead, which included children and Russian soldiers or security officers. Recognition brought wrenching, piercing wails. A mother in a red and white blouse knelt on the ground, weeping as she kissed her dead daughter's face.

There were conflicting accounts of the source and the reason for the initial explosions

Some witnesses and officials cited by news agencies said the attackers had mishandled a bomb; some said two of the female fighters had detonated explosive belts wrapped around their bodies. The spokesman for Russia's Federal Security Service, Sergei N. Ignatchenko, said the explosions might have been staged by the attackers in an attempt to sow confusion.

Some of the attackers, he said in an interview in Moscow, had changed into civilian clothes and blended into the panicked crowd fleeing the building. He and others said that some of the guerrillas, including a sniper on the roof or from a second-story window, fired on those who fled.

"When they opened fire, we were compelled to give the order for the special forces to attack in order to save people," he said.

The carnage began even as negotiators continued to hold intermittent talks with the fighters, the morning after they had allowed 26 women and babies to leave the school on Thursday.

This morning, North Ossetia's president, Aleksandr S. Dzasokhov, told hundreds of relatives gathered in the city's House of Culture that the use of force was not being considered but that the behavior of the fighters, who rebuffed offers of safe passage and who refused to allow food or water into the school, was trying everyone's patience.

"Forcible action is absolutely unacceptable," Mr. Dzasokhov told the crowd, seeking to reassure relatives who have grown increasingly weary, anxious and fearful as the siege grinds on. "But I must tell you that if the bandits, God forbid, behave like real beasts, not only the special services, but others will lose patience."

He said that the authorities had turned to Chechnya's separatist leaders to help negotiate a peaceful end to a crisis that has stunned a country that has already endured a wave of terrorist attacks and other violence stemming from the war in Chechnya.

Mr. Dzasokhov also said he had received instructions to open a channel to Alsan Maskhadov, the separatist leader who served as Chechnya's president until fleeing invading Russian forces in 1999. Mr. Dzasokhov and Ruslan Aushev, the regional political leader who negotiated the release of 26 hostages on Thursday, both called Mr. Maskhadov's chief representative abroad, Akhmed Zakayev on Thursday evening and again this morning.

That appeared to reverse the Kremlin's policy never to negotiate with men that Mr. Putin denounces as terrorists. After the assault, a Kremlin spokesman, Aleksandr Smirnov, distanced Mr. Putin from the contacts, saying they were "the personal initiative" of Mr. Aushev.

Mr. Zakayev, who lives in exile in London and is wanted by the Russians on a series of criminal charges that he calls politically motivated, said in a telephone interview that he and Mr. Maskhadov were prepared to assist.

"I assured them that President Maskhadov was as distraught as they were," Mr. Zakayev said only minutes before chaos fell on this city. "He is ready without any conditions to make all efforts to save these children and resolve this crisis."

The contacts with Mr. Zakayev — the first since a fleeting meeting between Mr. Zakayev and a Russian negotiator at a Moscow airport in Nov. 2001 — underscored the evident desperation facing the Russians.

The nascent entreaties, obviously, came too late.

After the first explosions, separated by less than a minute, sent a large, dusty white cloud rose over the school and were followed by an ferocious period of gunfire, chaos radiated in all directions. Some residents joined the Russian police and army forces in firing at the building; others rushed the school, under fire, to escort or carry out the fleeing hostages and put them in vehicles headed to the hospital.

In one there was a teenage girl, her black hair matted to her bloody face, her mouth open, apparently gravely wounded. "Where is the hospital?" the driver of a Mercedes screamed as he sped along the edges of the battle. Inside were two adults with children on their laps.

Teimuraz Kanukov said he had shuttled six times between the school and the hospital ferrying hostages, three wounded, three dead. His shirt was soaked with blood. "These were children," he said, "shot in the head." Eight of his own relatives were among the hostages, he said, then headed back toward the school.

By 2 p.m. officials announced that commandos had entered the school, but the fighting continued as at least some of the hostage takers sought to escape into Beslan's neighborhoods. As helicopters circled overhead, a small group of fleeing fighters occupied a nearby house, where a firefight raged for hours.

Fierce fighting broke out by a railroad crossing hundreds of feet from school, apparently as a separate group of fighters fled southward. Half an hour later two tanks cranked their engines and headed toward the school, almost immediately firing heavy shells.

Evidence suggesting that Russian forces had not planned a storming of the building could be seen around the two tanks, whose soldiers milled about, evidently in confusion after the initial blast, before rallying and heading into the fight. Only after the battle began did three helicopters appear overhead.

There were reports that angry Ossetians had attacked captured fighters.

A man believed to be one of the fighters made his way to an alley near the school and hid under an army truck before being captured by Russian soldiers. A crowd then set upon the man, who was in his 30's, with a large black beard. The crowd beat him, tearing at his clothes, while the soldiers tried to shuffle him away.

"Everybody tried to beat him," said Khariton Valiyev, 58, who was in the crowd. "People wanted to tear him to pieces. I myself would have pulled his eyes from his head with my fingers."

That fighter's fate was not known.

[MavKikiNYC]

Maj. Gen. Valery A. Andreyev, the director of North Ossetia's branch of the Federal Security Service, said that half of the dead fighters were foreigners, apparently from Arabic countries. If verified, that would comport with the Kremlin's assertions that Chechnya's rebels were receiving aid and manpower from abroad.


How long will the rest of Europe stand idly by?

[MavKikiNYC]

At least 9 of the figthers are confirmed as Arabs.

[mavsman]

There's no way to rationalize what those bastards did to these kids, but when it comes to "reap what you sow":

When 30 guys attack you in some backstreet (should be in the neighborhood of how much the Chechnyans have been outnumbered by the Russian army) you are going to go for cheap shots before you go down.
Regarding the Arabs:
Maybe because when you've been bullied around for years by a gang that outnumbers you 30:1, you tend to seek a little outside help?
Maybe they are terrorists, but for sure they feel that they've been terrorized by the Russians all the way, so in their pov, it's a fair game. It's just not that black and white as some of you want it to be. It's not always just when a large army does what it does, only because it's sanctioned by its government, just like what you may call terrorist actions are sometimes the only means a small nation has to defend itself, in their own point of view.