An allegation that Iraqi police raped a Sunni woman while enforcing a new security plan in Baghdad has opened sectarian splits within the government.
The second word of the heading is "claim" plus the second word of the first sentence is "allegation", so you are already being conditioned to think this story is "false".
So a rape "allegation" is opening sectarian splits not the daily massacres.
The woman said she was assaulted at a police garrison on Sunday where she was falsely held for supporting insurgents. Falsely held, what does that mean? Well it means the "claim" or "allegation" the woman was supporting the resistance was "false".
Prime Minister Nouri Maliki, who is Shia, dismissed the claims, but senior Sunni officials insist it is true. Observers say the row could undermine the security plan, in which mainly-Shia police are deployed in Sunni areas. Massacring innocent civilians won't undermine the security plan but THIS rape will. ok. Security for who BTW, not for the civilians.
Mr Maliki accused "known groups" - taken to mean Sunni political parties - of fabricating the story, to discredit the security forces. I doubt this very much. Think about it, why would they need to fabricate stories when there are so many atrocities being committed on a daily basis? The "security forces" have discredited themselves through their own actions.
A series of insurgency attacks in and around the capital have already shown the difficulties of trying to stem the tide of violence. They create the violence and "claim" they want to stem the tide of violence.
- A chemicals tanker was blown up in Taji, killing six and causing 148 people to inhale noxious fumes
- Two car bombs killed at least eight people and wounded 30 in south-west and south Baghdad
- A suicide bomber attacked a funeral in Baghdad, killing seven mourners
- How did the writer of this story know the bomb was set off by a suicide bomber?
- Five US soldiers died in attacks on Monday, the military said.
'False arrest' The woman, whose identity has not been confirmed, made the rape allegation in an emotional interview with Arabic TV network al-Jazeera. Here we start with the word "false", then move onto her identity and question the validity of that as well, trying to insinuate that basically everything about this woman's story is "false". Notice the word "allegation" again.
She was arrested in her Baghdad neighbourhood of Amil for helping insurgents and taken to a police facility where she claims she was assaulted by three officers. Now the writer starts getting really dirty, originally we were told the woman was falsely arrested, thereby the heading "false arrest" but now we are told she is guilty of those charges as there is no "claim" "allegation" or anything similar preceding "helping insurgents".
Mr Maliki ordered an investigation into the case on Monday night, but cleared the three men hours later. Inspector peirot look out, maliki is after your job.
"Medical examinations showed the woman had not been subjected to any sexual attack," a government statement said. "The prime minister has ordered that the honourable officers accused be rewarded," it added without elaborating. This has to the ultimate kick in the teeth for the poor woman.
But an aide of Vice President Tariq Hashimi, a Sunni, said the prime minister's office had acted in haste, and doctors had in fact confirmed rape had taken place. The woman was named Sabrine Janabi by al-Jazeera, but Sunni politicians said this was not her real name. The US military, whose medical staff oversaw the woman's examination, said it was aware of the various reports, but could not confirm anything. If they oversaw the examination, why are they not revealing the truth? What is preventing them from stating yes or no?
Sunni politicians have accused the police of a series of human rights abuses perpetrated on their community and of turning a blind eye to attacks on them by Shia militants. Link to original story.
| 
