A War Crime or an Act of War?

SADDAM HUSSEIN DID NOT GAS THE KURDS. . . Nor did Iraqi soldiers pull babies out of incubators in Kuwait, as the Zionist-controlled media proclaimed in order to promote the first Gulf War. That was later exposed and admitted to be a story cooked up by the ad agency hired to arouse American's support for a war thousands of miles from our borders with a country which leader never made a threat against America. They just wanted U.S. soldiers to "go get that evil mad-man" and if a few hundred thousand innocent Iraqi's die in the process. . . so what?

The book Saddam Hussein gives more information on the media lies about Hussein "gassing his own people", whatever the hell that means.  The people in Iraq aren't 'his', anymore than Americans are the U.S. Government's people.  Not me, anyway. How about you?

Here's what Nita Renfrew, the author of Saddam Hussein (.pdf format) tells us:

"In March 1988, the Iranians managed to take the Iraqi Kurdish town of Halabja, near the border.  Some of the fiercest fighting of the war ensued in Iraq's effort to retake it, and Halabja became the site of one of the greatest tragedies of the war.  After the fighting stopped, with Iran still in possession of the town, the international press was invited in.  Hundreds of people lay dead in the streets, many of them Kurdish women clutching their dead babies, their dark blue lips indicating that they were victims of cyanide gas.

The Iranians condemned Saddam for gassing his own people, and the Kurdish rebels quickly joined in the condemnation, but Saddam denied the charges.

The Pentagon later issued a report that said that although both sides used chemical weapons at Halabja, each apparently believing they were targeting enemy positions, there was no evidence that it was the Iraqis who gassed the Kurds.  In fact, Iraq was not believed to have cyanide gas, whereas, it was known that Iran did.

The mayor of Halabja also said he believed it was the Iranians who gassed the Kurds. Although the Pentagon's findings on the Halabja massacre were reported by the Washington Post, they went largely unnoticed by most Americans. Instead, most U.S. media used the Halabja incident as definite proof that Saddam was a mass murderer.

Later, there was another incident in which the Kurds claimed that Saddam had used chemical weapons. A UN inspection team, however, found bad burns but no evidence of gas."

We're inundated about the terrible 'human rights' violations committed by Saddam Hussein, and people repeat the accusations like good little parrots. Until I read the book, Saddam Hussein, I was not aware that the Kurds rejected an opportunity to form their own government. Here's an excerpt on that:

"In 1970, Saddam proposed a plan for Kurdish autonomy, meant to take effect as law in March 1974.  The plan included provisions for the administration of Kurdish territory to pass into Kurdish hands and for a Kurdish parliament to be elected.  

Also, Iraq would have a mandatory Kurdish vice-president.  Unlike Turkey and Iran, where the Kurds have not been allowed to speak their own language, Iraq ensured that Kurdish would be the first language in the local kurdish government, schools, and universities.  

However, at the instigation of the shah of Iran, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA, the U.S. government agency that conducts most international covert activities), and Israel, the Kurds rejected the terms and unleashed a bloody civil war.  Within a year there were 60,000 casualties, among them 16,000 Iraqi soldiers."

Now, you'll want to read what a CIA's senior political analyst on Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war, and a professor at the Army War College from 1988 to 2000, has to say about the media lies that "Saddam gassed his own people". I'm tired of the lies. Aren't you?

-- Jackie --

March 23rd, 2003


New York Times

January 31, 2003, Friday


A War Crime Or an Act of War?

By Stephen C. Pelletiere ( Op-Ed ) 1128 words

MECHANICSBURG, Pa. -- It was no surprise that President Bush, lacking smoking-gun evidence of Iraq's weapons programs, used his State of the Union address to re-emphasize the moral case for an invasion: ''The dictator who is assembling the world's most dangerous weapons has already used them on whole villages, leaving thousands of his own citizens dead, blind or disfigured.''

The accusation that Iraq has used chemical weapons against its citizens is a familiar part of the debate. The piece of hard evidence most frequently brought up concerns the gassing of Iraqi Kurds at the town of Halabja in March 1988, near the end of the eight-year Iran-Iraq war. President Bush himself has cited Iraq's ''gassing its own people,'' specifically at Halabja, as a reason to topple Saddam Hussein.

But the truth is, all we know for certain is that Kurds were bombarded with poison gas that day at Halabja. We cannot say with any certainty that Iraqi chemical weapons killed the Kurds. This is not the only distortion in the Halabja story.

I am in a position to know because, as the Central Intelligence Agency's senior political analyst on Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war, and as a professor at the Army War College from 1988 to 2000, I was privy to much of the classified material that flowed through Washington having to do with the Persian Gulf. In addition, I headed a 1991 Army investigation into how the Iraqis would fight a war against the United States; the classified version of the report went into great detail on the Halabja affair.

This much about the gassing at Halabja we undoubtedly know: it came about in the course of a battle between Iraqis and Iranians. Iraq used chemical weapons to try to kill Iranians who had seized the town, which is in northern Iraq not far from the Iranian border. The Kurdish civilians who died had the misfortune to be caught up in that exchange. But they were not Iraq's main target.

And the story gets murkier: immediately after the battle the United States Defense Intelligence Agency investigated and produced a classified report, which it circulated within the intelligence community on a need-to-know basis. That study asserted that it was Iranian gas that killed the Kurds, not Iraqi gas.

The agency did find that each side used gas against the other in the battle around Halabja. The condition of the dead Kurds' bodies, however, indicated they had been killed with a blood agent -- that is, a cyanide-based gas -- which Iran was known to use. The Iraqis, who are thought to have used mustard gas in the battle, are not known to have possessed blood agents at the time.

These facts have long been in the public domain but, extraordinarily, as often as the Halabja affair is cited, they are rarely mentioned. A much-discussed article in The New Yorker last March did not make reference to the Defense Intelligence Agency report or consider that Iranian gas might have killed the Kurds. On the rare occasions the report is brought up, there is usually speculation, with no proof, that it was skewed out of American political favoritism toward Iraq in its war against Iran.

I am not trying to rehabilitate the character of Saddam Hussein. He has much to answer for in the area of human rights abuses. But accusing him of gassing his own people at Halabja as an act of genocide is not correct, because as far as the information we have goes, all of the cases where gas was used involved battles. These were tragedies of war. There may be justifications for invading Iraq, but Halabja is not one of them.

In fact, those who really feel that the disaster at Halabja has bearing on today might want to consider a different question: Why was Iran so keen on taking the town? A closer look may shed light on America's impetus to invade Iraq.

We are constantly reminded that Iraq has perhaps the world's largest reserves of oil. But in a regional and perhaps even geopolitical sense, it may be more important that Iraq has the most extensive river system in the Middle East. In addition to the Tigris and Euphrates, there are the Greater Zab and Lesser Zab rivers in the north of the country. Iraq was covered with irrigation works by the sixth century A.D., and was a granary for the region.

Before the Persian Gulf war, Iraq had built an impressive system of dams and river control projects, the largest being the Darbandikhan dam in the Kurdish area. And it was this dam the Iranians were aiming to take control of when they seized Halabja. In the 1990's there was much discussion over the construction of a so-called Peace Pipeline that would bring the waters of the Tigris and Euphrates south to the parched Gulf states and, by extension, Israel. No progress has been made on this, largely because of Iraqi intransigence. With Iraq in American hands, of course, all that could change.

Thus America could alter the destiny of the Middle East in a way that probably could not be challenged for decades -- not solely by controlling Iraq's oil, but by controlling its water. Even if America didn't occupy the country, once Mr. Hussein's Baath Party is driven from power, many lucrative opportunities would open up for American companies.

All that is needed to get us into war is one clear reason for acting, one that would be generally persuasive. But efforts to link the Iraqis directly to Osama bin Laden have proved inconclusive. Assertions that Iraq threatens its neighbors have also failed to create much resolve; in its present debilitated condition -- thanks to United Nations sanctions -- Iraq's conventional forces threaten no one.

Perhaps the strongest argument left for taking us to war quickly is that Saddam Hussein has committed human rights atrocities against his people. And the most dramatic case are the accusations about Halabja.

Before we go to war over Halabja, the administration owes the American people the full facts. And if it has other examples of Saddam Hussein gassing Kurds, it must show that they were not pro-Iranian Kurdish guerrillas who died fighting alongside Iranian Revolutionary Guards. Until Washington gives us proof of Saddam Hussein's supposed atrocities, why are we picking on Iraq on human rights grounds, particularly when there are so many other repressive regimes Washington supports?


Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company

War with Iraq - Again?
Introduction and Overview. Reading this first will put the other items in this section into perspective. —Jackie

Hussein Did NOT Gas the Kurds!
New York Times: "The United States Defense Intelligence Agency investigated and produced a classified report, which it circulated within the intelligence community on a need-to-know basis. That study asserted that it was Iranian gas that killed the Kurds, not Iraqi gas."

Zionist Campaign for War with Iraq
In Revisionist Perspective by Paul Grubach
"Why should the U.S. go to war to serve Israeli-Zionist interests? Why should mostly non-Jewish White, Black, and Hispanic Americans — who make up the vast majority of the U.S. armed forces — have to risk their lives for the Jewish state of Israel?"

America's Ultra-Secret Weapon - "dial-a-hurt"
HPMs are man-made lightning bolts crammed into cruise missiles. The Directed Energy Directorate at Kirtland has been studying how to deliver varying but predictable electrical pulses to inflict increasing levels of harm: to deny, degrade, damage or destroy, to use the Pentagon's parlance. HPM engineers call it "dial-a-hurt."

The Mother of All Wars - SHOCK and AWE
"Ullman is ready to use every kind of weapon to create shock and awe. He once said it might be a good idea to use electromagnetic waves that attack peoples' neurological systems, "to control the will and perception of adversaries, by applying a regime of shock and awe. It is about effecting behavior."

Pentagon Eyes Mass Graves (for U.S. Soldiers)
Denver Post: "The bodies of U.S. soldiers killed by chemical or biological weapons in Iraq or future wars may be bulldozed into mass graves and burned to save the lives of surviving troops, under an option being considered by the Pentagon."

View from Baghdad
This following article is the reality that 99% of the world sees about the Iraq situation and the U.S. role. This war is not over oil. It's about ownership and control of Earth's resources. . . this proven technology could provide an ABUNDANCE of cheap, clean energy worldwide, virtually overnight, if it was not ruthlessly suppressed with inventors bankrupted if not murdered.

War - No Matter What!
Dr Richard Perle stunned MPs by insisting a "clean bill of health" from UN chief weapons inspector Hans Blix would not halt America's war machine. Evidence from ONE witness on Saddam Hussein's weapons programme will be enough to trigger a fresh military onslaught, he told an all-party meeting on global security.

Saddam's Bodyguard Warns of Secret Weapons
A source close to Mr. Sharon said, "Sharon intends to shatter the growing anti-war movement. He plans to call all those European leaders who are wavering . . ." Is this the ONE witness Richard Perle needed to trigger a fresh military onslaught?

Seeds of Destruction
What keeps Bush from planting evidence of WMD in Iraq?
Think about it. Bush is willing to lie, cheat and steal in order to forward his agenda to destroy Iraq. To his disappointment, inspectors have found NOTHING thus far except some crated-up, 20 year-old warheads. Hardly evidence of an active program for WMD.

U.S. Demands Iraq Show Cooperation by This Weekend
What can we make of this convoluted and contradictory piece?
The headline says 'this weekend' (2-15/16). In the body of the article we read: "Mr. Bush did not mention Friday as a turning point. Ms. Rice said he had set no deadline for action by the Security Council." Much of what we read in the controlled media is designed to 'shape public opinion' and generate fear and anxiety. Stay close with God in peace and love. —Jackie

U.S. Documents show embrace of Saddam Hussein in early 1980's
From the National Security Archive
"The declassified documents posted today include the briefing materials and diplomatic reporting on two Rumsfeld trips to Baghdad, reports on Iraqi chemical weapons use concurrent with the Reagan administration's decision to support Iraq. . . "

Book: Saddam Hussein
Click here to download Adobe Acrobat ReaderBook about Saddam Hussein, which tells a side of the story that you will not get from the major media.
Note: This link requires Acrobat Reader from Adobe.

Turkish Parliament Refuses to Accept G.I.'s in Blow to Bush
ANKARA, Turkey, March 1 - The Turkish Parliament today dealt a major setback to the Bush administration's plans for a northern front against Iraq, narrowly rejecting a measure that would have allowed thousands of American combat troops to use the country as a base for an attack.

Bush and 2 Allies Seem Set for War to Depose Hussein
N.Y.Times - 3-17-03
BUSH: "Saddam Hussein can leave the country if he's interested in peace. You see, the decision is his to make, and it's been his to make all along on whether or not there's the use of military."

Bush Planned Iraq Regime Change Before Becoming President
Sunday Herald, United Kingdom, September 15, 2002
"A secret blueprint for US global domination reveals that President Bush and his cabinet were planning a premeditated attack on Iraq to secure 'regime change' even before he took power in January 2001...'This is a blueprint for US world domination -- a new world order of their making. These are the thought processes of fantasist Americans who want to control the world. I am appalled that a British Labour Prime Minister should have got into bed with a crew which has this moral standing.'"

Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategy, Forces, and Resources for a New Century
Click here to download Adobe Acrobat ReaderWritten in September 2000, before George W. Bush was President, and prior to September 11th, this document is the report the Sunday Herald (U.K.) called, "A blueprint for US global domination." Among other things, the report establishes missions for U.S. military forces to:

  • "defend the American homeland

  • "fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous theatre wars

  • "perform the 'constabulary' duties associated with shaping the security environment in critical regions

  • "transform U.S. forces to exploit the 'revolution in military affairs'"

U.S. Awards Deals for Post-War Iraq
"A USAid spokeswoman said that the companies were chosen because of their proven ability, and that it was a policy to use US companies for projects funded by the American taxpayer." U.S. soldiers will bomb the Iraqis to hell, then the "American taxpayer" will pay, and pay, and pay to rebuild what they destroyed. Except, you can't rebuild or re-animate dead babies and men and women, not even one, nor the half-million Iraqis expected to be murdered. Oh, yes. . . the sanitized war-term for murder now is "collateral damage."

Just Another Staged Baghdad Rally?
They told us that the Iraqis were dancing in the streets, celebrating at the thought of being "liberated." Could it be they lied to us again?

Sham Saddam Scam
An analysis of the allegation that Saddam Hussein was captured.

Saddam Was NOT Captured
"The Pentagon spin machine is trying to dupe us all by telling us that this photo was taken in December. It shows two American soldiers lifting the lid off that elaborate 'spider hole', where they claim they have found Saddam Hussein."

Who Writes Letter(s) to Editors for Soldiers?
Many Soldiers, Same Letter
Newspapers around U.S. get identical missives from Iraq. ". . . appear to be part of a campaign to present a positive picture of the U.S. occupation."

Army to Recall Former Military Members
CNN News 6.29.04
"The Army is preparing to notify about 5,600 retired and discharged soldiers who are not members of the National Guard or Reserve that they will be involuntarily recalled to active duty for possible service in Iraq or Afghanistan. . . "

Pick Your Price: Your Blood or Your Soul
By John Kaminski
Demonic demagogues like Joseph Farah, Michael Savage and Rush Limbaugh all have recently recommended killing large numbers of innocent Iraqis "to teach them a lesson." . . . it's not cool to mess with Uncle Sam and mutilate his hired killers, the highly paid mercenaries he hired to assassinate Iraqi intellectuals. . . "

Thousands of US troops evacuated from Iraq for unexplained medical reasons
September 2003
"At no point in the last six months have the American people been told that for every soldier who has been killed in Iraq, at least another 15 have fallen so ill that they had to be flown back to the United States."

Back to Iraq main page | America's New War or War on Americans? | Issues Index | CDR Home