[Seattle-editorial] FEATURE PROPOSAL: Iraq

[jonathan lawson]

yeah, removed that link--couldn't find a resource. if you do, please insert!

At 02:22 PM 8/14/2002 -0700, you wrote:
>Yes. Was there an intended link about the inspectors' gag order WRT the
>origin of the weapons?  Even without this, this is a great article.
>
>Thumbs up!
>--j
>
>------------------------
>Veeble a rebel you shun!
>On Wed, 14 Aug 2002, jonathan lawson wrote:
>
> > subtitle: PROPAGANDA AND THE MEMORY HOLE
> > title: Media's Willing DistortionsPave Way for War
> >
> > An August 8 <i>USA Today</i> article that described how Saddam Hussein is
> > "complicating U.S. plans to topple his regime" repeated a common myth about
> > the history of U.S./Iraq relations. Reporter John Diamond wrote that "Iraq
> > expelled U.N. weapons inspectors four years ago and accused them of being
> > spies." Diamond gives no evidence for this claim, which simply repeats
> > commonly known facts about the relevant history. But the statement simply
> > isn't true, by a longshot--as noted in this<a
> > href="http://seattle.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=16911">action
> > alert</a> by <a href="http://www.fair.org">Fairness and Accuracy in
> > Reporting</a>.
> >
> > <p>Firstly, Iraq didn't expel the weapons inspectors-the U.S. leader of the
> > inspections team made a unilateral decision to withdraw. Secondly, Iraq's
> > accusation against the weapons inspection teams--that they were spying for
> > the US--later <a href="http://www.fair.org/extra/9903/unscom.html">turned
> > out to be true</a>. Corporate media like USA Today are happy to consign
> > these actual facts to the memory hole, in favor of misstatements which make
> > a fine accompaniment to the Bush administration's war drums, but don't do
> > much for the health of our democracy.
> >
> > <p>The Bush administration can be expected to soon launch a PR campaign to
> > "sell" the idea of attacks on Iraq to the American public. You can bet that
> > these facts will be omitted:
> > <br>
> > <font size=-2 color="white" face="verdana">
> > <ul>
> > <li>US corporations were Iraq's major source--perhaps only source--of <a
> > href="http://www.twf.org/News/Y1998/IraqHypocrisy.html">biological weapons
> > materials</a> just prior to the Gulf War.
> > <li>International weapons inspectors were instructed <a href="">not to
> > report</a> the nation of origin of any such weapons they found stockpiled
> > in Iraq.
> > <li>Weapons inspectors in the late 1990s were satisfied that Iraq's
> > capabaility to sustain a biological weapons program had been <a
> > href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/Print/0,3858,4280517,00.html">effectively
> > ended</a>.
> > <li>Iraqi weapons inspections were halted by the US government, not by 
> Iraq.
> > <li>The Bush administration does not want Iraqi weapons inspections to
> > resume; in fact they arranged <a
> > href="http://www.inthesetimes.com/issue/26/14/feature1.shtml">the ouster of
> > Jose Bustani</a> (former head of the treaty-established Organization for
> > the Prevention Chemical Weapons) in the midst of his promising negotiations
> > to reopen Iraq to inspections.
> > <li>Iraq apparently poses <a
> > href="http://www.mirror.co.uk/printable_version.cfm?objectid=11697201">no
> > significant military threat</a> to the US or to its regional neighbors.
> > <li>The US government has produced <a
> > href="http://www.converge.org.nz/pma/cra0439.htm">no evidence</a> linking
> > Iraq or the Saddam Hussein regime to 9/11 terrorist attacks (and not for
> > lack of trying).
> > <li>A US military attack on Iraq, as an act of <a
> > href="http://www.crimesofwar.org/thebook/aggression.html">aggression</a>,
> > would be explicitly illegal under every relevant US and international law
> > (See UN Charter sections <a
> > href="http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/chapter6.htm">VI and <a
> > href="http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/chapter7.htm">VII).
> > </ul>
> > </font>
> > <p>A government preparing for an unnecessary, immoral and illegal war can
> > be expected to tell horrible lies to the public. We should require better
> > from the nation's journalists.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Seattle-editorial mailing list
> > Seattle-editorial at lists.indymedia.org
> > http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/seattle-editorial
> >