WoMD ... so where are they?

by Simon 865 Replies latest social current

Satanus

Yiz
What about the fact that Saddam murdered over 200,000 Kurdish Villagers as well as his own people in Iraq by killing anyone who opposed him or thinks they are a threat to his power base?
Seems that people are avoiding that issue.
That was why the us invaded? Gee, all along they were saying it was because he had al queda connections, he was training suicide pilots, he was a threat to the usa, he might become a threat to the usa, he was a threat to israel, he had womd.
All the heads of murderous govts in the world must be shaking in their boots, knowing that they could be next. Countries like indonesia, cambodia, zimbabwe, uganda, china, cuba.
SS
William Penwell

Dubla,
It is not my statement but an investigative report from PBS Frontline. You ask for proof of the US suppling weopons to Iraq and I gave you one source. If you read further down it said " And here in Washington, the government consistently followed a policy which allowed and perhaps encouraged the extraordinary growth of Saddam Hussein's arsenal and his power."
A few more articles:
Washingtonpost.com. December 30, 2002
"November 1983. A National Security Directive states that the U.S would do "whatever was necessary and legal" to prevent Iraq from losing its war with Iran."
Columbia Journalism Review. March/April 1993. Iraqgate.
"November 1983. Banca Nazionale del Lavoro of Italy and its Branch in Atlanta begin to funnel $5 billion in unreported loans to Iraq. Iraq, with the blessing and official approval of the U.S. government, purchased computer controlled machine tools, computers, scientific instruments, special alloy steel and aluminum, chemicals, and other industrial goods for Iraq's missile, chemical, biological and nuclear weapons programs."
"August 1988. Four major battles were fought from April to August 1988, in which the Iraqis massively and effectively used chemical weapons to defeat the Iranians. Nerve gas and blister agents such as mustard gas are used. By this time the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency is heavily involved with Saddam Hussein in battle plan assistance, intelligence gathering and post battle debriefing. In the last major battle with of the war, 65,000 Iranians are killed, many with poison gas. Use of chemical weapons in war is in violation of the Geneva accords of 1925."

"June 1992. Ted Koppel of ABC Nightline reports: "It is becoming increasingly clear that George Bush, Sr., operating largely behind the scenes throughout the 1980s, initiated and supported much of the financing, intelligence, and military help that built Saddam's Iraq into [an aggressive power]." "
"July 1992. "The Bush administration deliberately, not inadvertently, helped to arm Iraq by allowing U.S. technology to be shipped to Iraqi military and to Iraqi defense factories... Throughout the course of the Bush administration, U.S. and foreign firms were granted export licenses to ship U.S. technology directly to Iraqi weapons facilities despite ample evidence showing that these factories were producing weapons." Representative Henry Gonzalez, Texas, testimony before the House." Congressional Record. July 27, 1992. Representative Henry B. Gonzalez
More information:
http://www.unobserver.com/index.php?pagina=layout5.php&id=815&blz=1
patio34

Thanks for those references WmPenwell. That's really helpful.
It's my understanding that the US put up and supported Hussein until he disobeyed the US and invaded Kuwait. Then after the attack by the US Desert Storm, the sanctions the US/UN put on Iraq further served to empower Hussein by crippling the people but doing nothing to him. This severely hurt any resistance and potential overthrow of Hussein. If the US hadn't been interfering for so long, maybe he would have been overthrown by the Iraqis themselves.
Pat
Satanus

Patio
It's my understanding that the US put up and supported Hussein until he disobeyed the US and invaded Kuwait.
Actually, hussein asked for permission first ...
APRIL GLASPIE TRANSCRIPT

Saddam-Glaspie meeting
Transcript of Meeting Between Iraqi President, Saddam Hussein and U.S. Ambassador to Iraq, April Glaspie. - July 25, 1990 (Eight days before the August 2, 1990 Iraqi Invasion of Kuwait)
July 25, 1990 - Presidential Palace - Baghdad
U.S. Ambassador Glaspie - I have direct instructions from President Bush to improve our relations with Iraq. We have considerable sympathy for your quest for higher oil prices, the immediate cause of your confrontation with Kuwait. (pause) As you know, I lived here for years and admire your extraordinary efforts to rebuild your country. We know you need funds. We understand that, and our opinion is that you should have the opportunity to rebuild your country. (pause) We can see that you have deployed massive numbers of troops in the south. Normally that would be none of our business, but when this happens in the context of your threat s against Kuwait, then it would be reasonable for us to be concerned. For this reason, I have received an instruction to ask you, in the spirit of friendship - not confrontation - regarding your intentions: Why are your troops massed so very close to Kuwait's borders?
Saddam Hussein - As you know, for years now I have made every effort to reach a settlement on our dispute with Kuwait. There is to be a meeting in two days; I am prepared to give negotiations only this one more brief chance. (pause) When we (the Iraqis) meet (with the Kuwaitis) and we see there is hope, then nothing will happen. But if we are unable to find a solution, then it will be natural that Iraq will not accept death.
U.S. Ambassador Glaspie - What solutions would be acceptable?
Saddam Hussein - If we could keep the whole of the Shatt al Arab - our strategic goal in our war with Iran - we will make concessions (to the Kuwaitis). But, if we are forced to choose between keeping half of the Shatt and the whole of Iraq (i.e., in Saddam’s view, including Kuwait ) then we will give up all of the Shatt to defend our claims on Kuwait to keep the whole of Iraq in the shape we wish it to be. (pause) What is the United States' opinion on this?
U.S. Ambassador Glaspie - We have no opinion on your Arab - Arab conflicts, such as your dispute with Kuwait. Secretary (of State James) Baker has directed me to emphasize the instruction, first given to Iraq in the 1960's, that the Kuwait issue is not associated with America. (Saddam smiles)
On August 2, 1990 four days later, Saddam's massed troops invade and occupy Kuwait. _____
Baghdad, September 2, 1990, U.S. Embassy
One month later, British journalists obtain the the above tape and transcript of the Saddam - Glaspie meeting of July 29, 1990. Astounded, they confront Ms. Glaspie as she leaves the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad.
Journalist 1 - Are the transcripts (holding them up) correct, Madam Ambassador?(Ambassador Glaspie does not respond)
Journalist 2 - You knew Saddam was going to invade (Kuwait ) but you didn't warn him not to. You didn't tell him America would defend Kuwait. You told him the opposite - that America was not associated with Kuwait.
Journalist 1 - You encouraged this aggression - his invasion. What were you thinking?
U.S. Ambassador Glaspie - Obviously, I didn't think, and nobody else did, that the Iraqis were going to take all of Kuwait.
Journalist 1 - You thought he was just going to take some of it? But, how could you? Saddam told you that, if negotiations failed , he would give up his Iran (Shatt al Arab waterway) goal for the Whole of Iraq, in the shape we wish it to be. You know that includes Kuwait, which the Iraqis have always viewed as an historic part of their country!
Journalist 1 - American green-lighted the invasion. At a minimum, you admit signaling Saddam that some aggression was okay - that the U.S. would not oppose a grab of the al-Rumeilah oil field, the disputed border strip and the Gulf Islands (including Bubiyan) - the territories claimed by Iraq?
(Ambassador Glaspie says nothing as a limousine door closed behind her and the car drives off.)
Former US Ambassador to Iraq April Glaspie, meeting with Saddam Hussein, July 25th 1990. US State Department transcripts have been published in James Ridgeway's ‘The March to War’ Four Walls and Eight Windows, New York 1991 (page 28). Also in Pierre Salinger and Eric Laurent's ‘Secret Dossier - The Hidden Agenda Behind the Gulf War’ Penguin, Harmondworth 1991, and ‘The Gulf War Reader’, Times Books, Random House, New York 1991, editors Michael Sifry and Christopher Cert.
On 20th September 1990, seven weeks after the invasion of Kuwait, Glaspie was interviewed by the New York Times, during which she remarked:
"I didn't think, and nobody else did, that the Iraqis were going to take ALL of Kuwait."
-----------
Further, at first bush I was not planning on any reaction. Here is the transcript from national public radio, of news analist daniel schorr explaining the change:
DANIEL SCHORR:

At dinner last Saturday at that Aspen ranch of Henry Catto, former ambassador to Britain, he recalled the daylong meeting of President Bush Sr. and British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher in his house on August 3rd, 1990, the day after the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait.

JACKI LYDEN, host:

NPR News analyst Daniel Schorr.

SCHORR: The president had said before leaving Washington that, `We're not discussing intervention. I am not contemplating such action.' Thatcher told him, `George, this is no time to go wobbly.' At the ensuing joint press conference, Bush, his spine stiffened, said he was considering steps to end the naked aggression, and thus he started down the road to war.

Today, Bush Jr. agonizes about how not to be perceived as going wobbly if he does not soon make good on his many suggestions, a forceful action to bring down the regime of Saddam Hussein. Bush has so far not presented convincing evidence of an imminent threat nor proof of Iraqi support for the al-Qaeda terrorists. That makes it difficult to assemble decisive congressional, public and international support without which military action is somewhere between difficult and unfeasible.

So now with Secretary of State Colin Powell for the first time openly acknowledging a split in the official family, the president seems to be embarked on an effort to back off his limb of pre-emption. He is soliciting the advice of Congress, the American people and the international community. After his meeting this morning with congressional leaders, he stressed a wish for open dialogue about our future and how to deal with it. He said that in his speech to the United Nations on September 12th, he will talk about ways of making sure that Saddam Hussein, who has been stiffing the world, can be made to fulfill his obligations. No mention of armed action or even regime change, which, in any event, would not survive a veto in the Security Council.

His retreat, if that's what it is, will have to be carefully orchestrated if it is not to cause him political damage. He could embrace the Powell idea of revived weapons inspection as a first step without giving up the idea of military action as an eventual recourse. The question is how to carry this off without being labeled by the hawks as `wobbly.' This is Daniel Schorr.

Copyright ©2002 National Public Radio®. All rights reserved. No quotes from the materials contained herein may be used in any media without attribution to National Public Radio. This transcript may not be reproduced in whole or in part without prior written permission. For further information, please contact NPR's Permissions Coordinator at (202) 513-2000.

This transcript was created by a contractor for NPR, and NPR has not verified its accuracy. For all NPR programs, the broadcast audio should be considered the authoritative version. To purchase an audiotape of this piece, please order online or call 1-877-NPR-TEXT. http://www.npr.org/programs/atc/transcripts/2002/sep/020904.schorr.html
------
SS
Satanus

Britain Secretly Built Iraqi Chemcial Warfare Plant
By David Leigh and John Hooper
The Guardian - UK 3-6-3
A chemical plant which the US says is a key component in Iraq's chemical warfare arsenal was secretly built by Britain in 1985 behind the backs of the Americans, the Guardian can disclose.
Documents show British ministers knew at the time that the £14m plant, called Falluja 2, was likely to be used for mustard and nerve gas production.
Senior officials recorded in writing that Saddam Hussein was actively gassing his opponents and that there was a "strong possibility" that the chlorine plant was intended by the Iraqis to make mustard gas. At the time, Saddam was known to be gassing Iranian troops in their thousands in the Iran-Iraq war.
But ministers in the then Thatcher government none the less secretly gave financial backing to the British company involved, Uhde Ltd, through insurance guarantees.
Paul Channon, then trade minister, concealed the existence of the chlorine plant contract from the US administration, which was pressing for controls on such exports.
He also instructed the export credit guarantee department (ECGD) to keep details of the deal secret from the public.
The papers show that Mr Channon rejected a strong plea from a Foreign Office minister, Richard Luce, that the deal would ruin Britain's image in the world if news got out: "I consider it essential everything possible be done to oppose the proposed sale and to deny the company concerned ECGD cover".
The Ministry of Defence also weighed in, warning that it could be used to make chemical weapons.
But Mr Channon, in line with Mrs Thatcher's policy of propping up the dictator, said: "A ban would do our other trade prospects in Iraq no good".
The British taxpayer was even forced to write a compensation cheque for £300,000 to the German-owned company after final checks on the plant, completed in May 1990, were interrupted by the outbreak of the Gulf war.
The Falluja 2 chlorine plant, 50 miles outside Baghdad, near the Habbaniya airbase, has been pinpointed by the US as an example of a factory rebuilt by Saddam to regain his chemical warfare capability.
Last month it featured in Colin Powell's dossier of reasons why the world should go to war against Iraq, which was presented to the UN security council.
Spy satellite pictures of Falluja 2 identifying it as a chemical weapons site were earlier published by the CIA, and a report by Britain's joint intelligence committee, published with Tony Blair's imprimatur last September, also focused on Falluja 2 as a rebuilt plant "formerly associated with the chemical warfare programme".
UN weapons inspectors toured the Falluja 2 plant last December and Hans Blix, the chief inspector, reported to the security council that the chemical equipment there might have to be destroyed.
But until now, the secret of Britain's knowing role in Falluja's construction has remained hidden.
Last night, Uhde Ltd's parent company in Dortmund, Germany, issued a statement confirming that their then UK subsidiary had built Falluja 2 for Iraq's chemical weapons procurement agency, the State Enterprise for Pesticide Production.
A company spokesman said: "This was a normal plant for the production of chlorine and caustic soda. It could not produce other products".
The British government's intelligence at the time, as shown in the documents, was that Iraq, which was having increasing difficulty in obtaining precursor chemicals on the legitimate market, intended to use the chlorine as a feedstock to manufacture such chemicals as epichlorohydrin and phosphorous trichloride. These in turn were used to make mustard gas and nerve agents.
Paul Channon, since ennobled as Lord Kelvedon, was last night holidaying on the Caribbean island of Mustique. He issued a statement through his secretary, who said: "He can't object to the story. So he's got no comment." Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2003
dubla

william-
You ask for proof of the US suppling weopons to Iraq
actually, thats not at all what i asked for.........the only proof i asked for was proof that the u.s. government supplied mustard gas to saddam (a statement you and simon both made). you can dance around and create a smokescreen by showing that the u.s. aided iraq during the iraq-iran war, but it doesnt prove we provided the mustard gas that was used on the kurds (which we didnt). that tidbit is simply a blatant fabrication.......which is why i havent heard back from simon on it yet, id presume.
im not one to yell "anti-american" every time someone is critical of the u.s. government (theres nothing wrong with disagreeing about political policies)......but when you have to go out of your way, as you and simon have, to twist facts and fabricate things like "the u.s. supplied the gas", it definitely shows a very strong anti-american sentiment.....it shows your true colors.
aa
dubla

for simon and william (bold/italic mine).............
NEW YORK (CNN) -- Twelve years after the Persian Gulf War began, some American veterans of that conflict are finding new ammunition in their fight to find out who supplied Iraq chemicals that might have made them sick.
More than 5,000 veterans are plaintiffs in a lawsuit that accuses companies of helping Iraqi President Saddam Hussein build his chemical warfare arsenal. The plaintiffs are among the tens of thousands who came down with "Gulf War Illness," a debilitating series of ailments that can include chronic fatigue, skin rashes, muscle joint pain, memory loss, and brain damage.
Now, plaintiffs' attorneys have acquired, for the first time, what they believe is strong evidence of which companies supplied Iraq the chemicals that might have been used to produce mustard gas, sarin nerve gas and VX.
The Iraqi list names 56 suppliers of chemicals and equipment to process them. A majority are based in Europe.
Germany is home to the most major suppliers listed in Iraq's 1998 U.N. declaration. The Netherlands and Switzerland each are home to three companies on the list. France, Austria and the United States each are home to two. The declaration says Singapore was the largest exporter of chemical weapons precursors. Other countries home to alleged chemical exporters to Iraq include India, Egypt, Spain and Luxembourg, with one each.
Neither American company listed -- Alcolac International, based in Baltimore, Maryland; and Al-Haddad Trading, based in Nashville, Tennessee -- are still in business.
No one from Al-Haddad could be reached.
Alcolac paid a fine in 1989 under U.S. law for one charge of exporting thiodiglycol, a chemical that could be used to make mustard gas, but that shipment was destined for another country.
http://edition.cnn.com/2003/LAW/01/18/iraq.chemical.suit/
this hardly supports the statement that the u.s. governement supplied mustard gas to saddam, does it boys? the above allegations (nothing has been proven) dont even back up your fabrications. according to these allegations, the vast majority of the chemical precursors saddam used came from everywhere but the united states, and a grand total of zero of the components came from our government.....and again, the fact that u.s. companies (all TWO of them) were even a part of this has yet to be proven. you got called on a lie, now id appreciate it if both of you would come clean and admit you were twisting the facts.
aa
William Penwell

Dubla,
I already posted the link to this information and I didn't want to quote it all word for word. You want more specifics here they are. If you have a problem with the sources take it up with them. I have not twisted the facts but quoting what has already been documented. We can split hairs and say the US didn't actually supply the "mustard gas" but they did approve of the shipment of cemicals used in the manufacturing of mustard gas.
I don't believe this is being anti American when facts are facts. If they made a mistake than admit it. If we don't make our governments accountable for its actions, no matter how bad it may make them look, then we have a dictatorship.
July 1984. CIA begins giving Iraq intelligence necessary to calibrate its mustard gas attacks on Iranian troops. Bob Woodward. CIA Aiding Iraq in Gulf War. Washington Post.15 December, 1986
April 1988. US Department of Commerce approves shipment of chemicals used in manufacture of mustard gas. Riegle Report: Dual Use Exports. Senate Committee on Banking. May 25, 1994
August 1988. Four major battles were fought from April to August 1988, in which the Iraqis massively and effectively used chemical weapons to defeat the Iranians. Nerve gas and blister agents such as mustard gas are used. By this time the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency is heavily involved with Saddam Hussein in battle plan assistance, intelligence gathering and post battle debriefing. In the last major battle with of the war, 65,000 Iranians are killed, many with poison gas. Use of chemical weapons in war is in violation of the Geneva accords of 1925. Counter Punch, October 10, 2002, Iran-Iraq War, 1980-1988. Iranchamber.com
dubla

will-
We can split hairs and say the US didn't actually supply the "mustard gas" but they did approve of the shipment of cemicals used in the manufacturing of mustard gas.
well, that certainly goes directly against this quote from cnn (that i already provided):
Alcolac paid a fine in 1989 under U.S. law for one charge of exporting thiodiglycol, a chemical that could be used to make mustard gas
if the u.s. approved of these shipments, then why would they fine the companies? i think youre confusing anti-american propaganda with facts.
I don't believe this is being anti American when facts are facts
first of all, as i have shown with a current article from cnn, it hasnt even been proven as a fact that any american companies even shipped these chemicals to iraq. did you even read the article? secondly, if its not being antiamerican, then what exactly was the purpose of singling out the u.s. when you talk of "suppliers" to iraq? if it is true that these two companies shipped precursors to iraq, then it seems that all the companies listed (in the article) would also be guilty. so, when you and simon scream about who supplied iraq with mustard gas, why not also include germany, the netherlands, switzerland, france, austria, singapore, india, egypt, spain, and luxembourg in your complaints (especially considering the vast majority of the chemicals came from non-u.s. companies according to the allegations)?? singling out the u.s. from this list, and painting this "america supplied saddam with mustard gas" picture shows your true agenda, whether or not you will admit it.
April 1988. US Department of Commerce approves shipment of chemicals used in manufacture of mustard gas. Riegle Report: Dual Use Exports. Senate Committee on Banking. May 25, 1994
i couldnt find this in your link, could you provide a direct link to that page? id love to do some research on that particular statement. if this had been proven as fact, it wouldve gotten quite a bit of negative press coverage, im guessing......sounds like unsubstantiated propaganda, especially considering the article i posted, but ill definitely take the time to confirm it.
furthermore, is it your position that when you first declared that "the u.s. supplied saddam with mustard gas" what you really meant was, "a couple of u.s. companies sold chemical precursors to iraq that could be used in the production of mustard gas (but also have harmless uses), and according to some accusations, the government approved these shipments"? becuase if thats what you really meant (and maybe simon did too, who knows), then you sure painted a different picture. i think you simply didnt expect to get called on it, and now youre in a bit of a backpedal.....but thats just an observation.
aa
Simon

Dubla. You really are clutching at straws now. The US backed Saddam 100% for many years and didn't care one jot about all the human rights abuses while it suited them. I think that rather than trying to defend the indefesible you should be ashamed of your countries conduct and accept that they are not some infallible, 'all good' bastion of truth, justice and righteousness, however many hollywood films tell you otherwise.
U.S. Had Key Role in Iraq Buildup
Trade in Chemical Arms Allowed Despite Their Use on Iranians, Kurds
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A52241-2002Dec29¬Found=true
Report: U.S. supplied the kinds of germs Iraq later used for biological weapons
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2002-09-30-iraq-ushelp_x.htm
USA SOLD IRAQ WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION
http://theinsider.org/mailing/article.asp?id=241
USA Supplied Iraq with Biological Agents?
http://english.pravda.ru/main/2002/10/23/38542.html
COVER STORY: How he US armed Saddam Hussein with chemical weapons
http://www.greenleft.org.au/back/2002/506/506p12.htm
The Corporations That Supplied Iraq's Weapons Program
http://www.thememoryhole.org/corp/iraq-suppliers.htm

WoMD ... so where are they?

APRIL GLASPIE TRANSCRIPT

Share this