who gave Iraq its weapons?
- Thread starter I. Cold
- Start date
MADE IN THE USA
UNCLE SAM GAVE SADDAM HUSSEIN THE BIO-WEAPONS BUSH SO FEARS
BY KURT NIMMO
While George Bush junior declares he "will not allow a nation such as Iraq to threaten our very future by developing weapons of mass destruction," his father's and Ronald Reagan's administrations apparently didn't have the future in mind at all. Especially in the 80s, when they allowed the export of biological and chemical weapons and massive amounts of conventional military hardware, to Iraq.They were only interested in making sure Saddam gassed as many Iranians as possible, to pay back the Ayatollah Khomeini for evicting the Shah and initiating an anti-U.S. revolution.
The U.S. Department of Commerce licensed 70 biological exports to Iraq between 1985 and 1989, including at least 21 batches of lethal strains of anthrax. Researchers at the Rockville, Maryland, lab of the American Type Culture Collection confirmed sending anthrax samples via mail order to Iraq.
After the Gulf War, Iraq made several declarations to UN weapons inspectors about how they had weaponized the anthrax sent to them by the American corporation. In 1985, the U.S. Center for Disease Control sent samples of an Israeli strain of West Nile virus to a microbiologist at Iraq's Basra University. In addition, Iraq received "various toxins and bacteria," including botulins and E. coli.
Corporations that have sold dual-use chemicals and biological samples to Iraq for its weapons program include: Phillips Petroleum, Unilever, Alcolac, Allied Signal, the American Type Culture Collection and Teledyne. Teledyne pleaded guilty to charges of criminal conspiracy, false statements and violations of the Export Administration Act and the Arms Export Control Act for indirectly exporting 130 tons of zirconium, intended for use in cluster bombs, to Iraq through Chilean arms manufacturer Carlos Cardoen. In defence, Teledyne argued at trial that the CIA had authorized the shipments.
The Baltimore company Alcolac was convicted of illegally selling thiodiglycol -- a chemical used in the production of mustard gas -- for use in Iraq's chemical warfare program.
When Murray Waas and Craig Unger published an article in the New Yorker about the Reagan admin and Bush's involvement with Saddam Hussein, they were roundly condemned and mocked by the corporate media.
This was a full three years before Howard Teicher's revelatory 1995 affidavit. Teicher had been a national security council staffer under Reagan, and he testified in the Teledyne case that he and Donald Rumsfeld travelled to Iraq to make sure the Iraqi dictator received what he needed to win the Iran-Iraq war. Teicher claims the U.S. actively supported the Iraqi war effort by supplying them with billions of dollars of credits, plus U.S. military intelligence and advice. In 1982, Reagan legalized direct military assistance. This resulted in more than a billion dollars in military-related exports.
When Teicher presented his affidavit, the Clinton Justice Department went on the offensive, accused Teicher of lying and then promptly classified the document as a state secret. On January 15, 1995, Attorney General Janet Reno and deputy John Hogan released a Final Report whitewashing the entire affair. It was hoped the whole thing would simply fade away.
As Dubya Junior prepares to make war on a Frankenstein that Bush Senior -- at least in part -- created, these investigations need to be revisited within the full context of public debate.
From Alternet
http://www.nowtoronto.com/issues/2002-10-03/news_story2.php
UNCLE SAM GAVE SADDAM HUSSEIN THE BIO-WEAPONS BUSH SO FEARS
BY KURT NIMMO
While George Bush junior declares he "will not allow a nation such as Iraq to threaten our very future by developing weapons of mass destruction," his father's and Ronald Reagan's administrations apparently didn't have the future in mind at all. Especially in the 80s, when they allowed the export of biological and chemical weapons and massive amounts of conventional military hardware, to Iraq.They were only interested in making sure Saddam gassed as many Iranians as possible, to pay back the Ayatollah Khomeini for evicting the Shah and initiating an anti-U.S. revolution.
The U.S. Department of Commerce licensed 70 biological exports to Iraq between 1985 and 1989, including at least 21 batches of lethal strains of anthrax. Researchers at the Rockville, Maryland, lab of the American Type Culture Collection confirmed sending anthrax samples via mail order to Iraq.
After the Gulf War, Iraq made several declarations to UN weapons inspectors about how they had weaponized the anthrax sent to them by the American corporation. In 1985, the U.S. Center for Disease Control sent samples of an Israeli strain of West Nile virus to a microbiologist at Iraq's Basra University. In addition, Iraq received "various toxins and bacteria," including botulins and E. coli.
Corporations that have sold dual-use chemicals and biological samples to Iraq for its weapons program include: Phillips Petroleum, Unilever, Alcolac, Allied Signal, the American Type Culture Collection and Teledyne. Teledyne pleaded guilty to charges of criminal conspiracy, false statements and violations of the Export Administration Act and the Arms Export Control Act for indirectly exporting 130 tons of zirconium, intended for use in cluster bombs, to Iraq through Chilean arms manufacturer Carlos Cardoen. In defence, Teledyne argued at trial that the CIA had authorized the shipments.
The Baltimore company Alcolac was convicted of illegally selling thiodiglycol -- a chemical used in the production of mustard gas -- for use in Iraq's chemical warfare program.
When Murray Waas and Craig Unger published an article in the New Yorker about the Reagan admin and Bush's involvement with Saddam Hussein, they were roundly condemned and mocked by the corporate media.
This was a full three years before Howard Teicher's revelatory 1995 affidavit. Teicher had been a national security council staffer under Reagan, and he testified in the Teledyne case that he and Donald Rumsfeld travelled to Iraq to make sure the Iraqi dictator received what he needed to win the Iran-Iraq war. Teicher claims the U.S. actively supported the Iraqi war effort by supplying them with billions of dollars of credits, plus U.S. military intelligence and advice. In 1982, Reagan legalized direct military assistance. This resulted in more than a billion dollars in military-related exports.
When Teicher presented his affidavit, the Clinton Justice Department went on the offensive, accused Teicher of lying and then promptly classified the document as a state secret. On January 15, 1995, Attorney General Janet Reno and deputy John Hogan released a Final Report whitewashing the entire affair. It was hoped the whole thing would simply fade away.
As Dubya Junior prepares to make war on a Frankenstein that Bush Senior -- at least in part -- created, these investigations need to be revisited within the full context of public debate.
From Alternet
http://www.nowtoronto.com/issues/2002-10-03/news_story2.php
American Type Culture Collection, which holds a huge repository of diverse microorganisms, cell lines, and molecular biology materials is one of the corporations that sold dual-use chemicals and biological samples to Iraq for its weapons program was charge with 58 violations for exporting U.S. origin microorganisms... Scroll down to page 4 and check out some of the commodities they are in violation for selling. http://efoia.bxa.doc.gov/ExportControlViolations/e638.pdf
ACCORDING TO SADDAM AND WEAPONS INSPECTORS HE DOES NOT HAVE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION. NO FINDINGS HAVE BEEN REPORTED TO THE UN THAT SUPPORT THIS THEORY. ACCORDING TO SADDAM ALL THE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION (WHICH HE RECEIVED FROM AMERICA) HAVE BEEN DESTROYED.
WHAT *YOU* ARE ASKING IS THE SAME THING I HAVE ASKED THOSE WHO SAID HE DID HAVE WMD (YOU AND MCLEANHATCH).
NOW KEEP IN MIND THAT IF HE ***DOES*** HAVE WMD THE UNITED STATES IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ***EVERY*** DEATH IN IRAQ. TO BE MORE SPECIFIC EVERY DEATH FROM THE IRAN IRAQ WAR ,UN SANCTIONS,GULF WAR AND THE CURRENT WAR......
IF HE DOES NOT HAVE WMD THIS WAR IS TOTALLY UNJUSTIFIED.....
YOUR CALL.....
:h:
WHAT *YOU* ARE ASKING IS THE SAME THING I HAVE ASKED THOSE WHO SAID HE DID HAVE WMD (YOU AND MCLEANHATCH).
NOW KEEP IN MIND THAT IF HE ***DOES*** HAVE WMD THE UNITED STATES IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ***EVERY*** DEATH IN IRAQ. TO BE MORE SPECIFIC EVERY DEATH FROM THE IRAN IRAQ WAR ,UN SANCTIONS,GULF WAR AND THE CURRENT WAR......
IF HE DOES NOT HAVE WMD THIS WAR IS TOTALLY UNJUSTIFIED.....
YOUR CALL.....
:h:
heresy, youre smarter than to think "serious consequences" does not mean getting dunked. but to answer the question, resolution 1441 does just that. it continues on from two older resolutions that were agreed to at the end of the gulf war. saddams position is actually being argued for the simple fact that this took so long to complete. if this were 1993 there would be no qualms. but 12 years is a long time to build black market relations with countries who would love to get a leg up on the u.s. france (which is an anti american country by over a 2 to 1 margin based on polls) is one of them and russia (which has and will always be known to be run by the russian mob) is the other. i think germany is still in decent standing with us.
I DID ANSWER IT. IM NOT LIKE YOU. ACCORDING TO WEAPONS INSPECTORS SADDAM DOES NOT HAVE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION. ACCORDING TO SADDAM HE DOES NOT HAVE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION. HE HAS OPENLY STATED THAT HE HAS DESTROYED THEM.
SINCE YOU STATED HE HAD WMD WHY DONT YOU ANSWER THE FOLLOWING?
1.WHERE WERE THESE WMD FOUND?
2.WHO LOCATED THEM?
3.WHO REPORTED THIS FINDING TO THE UN?
4.WHAT WERE THE WEAPONS MADE FROM?
WHEN A PERSON IS ACCUSED OF A CRIME ISNT THE PROSECUTER,LAW ENFORCEMENT AND D.A. RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVING THE CASE?
AS FAR AS RESO 1441? NOPE. 678 AND 687? MAYBE. 1441 DOES ***NOT*** AUTHORIZE THE USE OF **FORCE**. WHAT IT ***DOES*** STATE IS THAT THE SECURITY COUNCIL WILL RECONVENE AND GO BACK TO THE TABLE IF IRAQ CONTINUES TO BREACH. SINCE YOU TWO DONT KNOW WHAT THE HELL YOUR TALKING ABOUT LET ME GIVE YOU INSIGHT.
1."it will face serious consequences as a result of its continued violations of its obligations." DOES NOT MEAN WAR.
2.PLEASE SHOW ME EXCERPTS OF 1441 THAT STATE "USE OF FORCE WILL HAPPEN" "USE OF FORCE WILL BE USE" ETC ETC ETC....YOU CANT AND YOU WONT.
3.1441 DOES *NOT* AUTHORIZE REGIME CHANGE NOR DOES IT IMPLY IT. SO WHY IS AMERICA TRYING TO REMOVE SADDAM?
4.ARTICLE 51. LOOK INTO IT.(SELF DEFENSE) IT DOES NOT JUSTIFY A PRE-EMPTIVE STRIKE. EVEN IF IT DID THE ATTACK (COMMITED BY THE ATTACKER) MUST BE IMMINENT.
5.ARTICLE 42 LOOK INTO IT (U.N. AUTORIZES WAR). PEOPLE ARGUE THAT 1441 GIVES THE RIGHT TO ATTACK BECAUSE IT STATES "it will face serious consequences".
THE WORDS/STATEMENT "ALL NECESSARY MEANS" IS WHAT THE *U.N* USES TO ***AUTHORIZE WAR***. IT DID SO IN ACTIONS IN IRAQ,SOMALIA,BOSNIA,RWANDA AND HAITI.
6.687 PASSED IN APRIL 1991.IT DOES NOT AUTHORIZE FORCE. THE ONLY RESOLUTION THAT DOES IS 678 WHICH WAS PASSED IN 1990.
7.687 CALLS FOR IRAQ TO DESTROY WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION BUT UNDER ARTICLE 42 ITS UP FOR THE SECURITY COUNCIL TO DECIDE HOW IT SHOULD BE ENFORCED.
8.THE *ONLY* ACTION THAT 678 AUTHORIZED WAS ACTION TAKEN TO ***RESTORE KUWAIT***.
MCLEANHATCH YOU'RE WRONG (AS ALWAYS) PHIL YOUR WRONG (ONCE AGAIN).....
HAVE A NICE DAY GENTLEMEN AND CONTINUE TO SUPPORT A MURDERER.
:dead: :dead: :dead:
:h:
SINCE YOU STATED HE HAD WMD WHY DONT YOU ANSWER THE FOLLOWING?
1.WHERE WERE THESE WMD FOUND?
2.WHO LOCATED THEM?
3.WHO REPORTED THIS FINDING TO THE UN?
4.WHAT WERE THE WEAPONS MADE FROM?
WHEN A PERSON IS ACCUSED OF A CRIME ISNT THE PROSECUTER,LAW ENFORCEMENT AND D.A. RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVING THE CASE?
AS FAR AS RESO 1441? NOPE. 678 AND 687? MAYBE. 1441 DOES ***NOT*** AUTHORIZE THE USE OF **FORCE**. WHAT IT ***DOES*** STATE IS THAT THE SECURITY COUNCIL WILL RECONVENE AND GO BACK TO THE TABLE IF IRAQ CONTINUES TO BREACH. SINCE YOU TWO DONT KNOW WHAT THE HELL YOUR TALKING ABOUT LET ME GIVE YOU INSIGHT.
1."it will face serious consequences as a result of its continued violations of its obligations." DOES NOT MEAN WAR.
2.PLEASE SHOW ME EXCERPTS OF 1441 THAT STATE "USE OF FORCE WILL HAPPEN" "USE OF FORCE WILL BE USE" ETC ETC ETC....YOU CANT AND YOU WONT.
3.1441 DOES *NOT* AUTHORIZE REGIME CHANGE NOR DOES IT IMPLY IT. SO WHY IS AMERICA TRYING TO REMOVE SADDAM?
4.ARTICLE 51. LOOK INTO IT.(SELF DEFENSE) IT DOES NOT JUSTIFY A PRE-EMPTIVE STRIKE. EVEN IF IT DID THE ATTACK (COMMITED BY THE ATTACKER) MUST BE IMMINENT.
5.ARTICLE 42 LOOK INTO IT (U.N. AUTORIZES WAR). PEOPLE ARGUE THAT 1441 GIVES THE RIGHT TO ATTACK BECAUSE IT STATES "it will face serious consequences".
THE WORDS/STATEMENT "ALL NECESSARY MEANS" IS WHAT THE *U.N* USES TO ***AUTHORIZE WAR***. IT DID SO IN ACTIONS IN IRAQ,SOMALIA,BOSNIA,RWANDA AND HAITI.
6.687 PASSED IN APRIL 1991.IT DOES NOT AUTHORIZE FORCE. THE ONLY RESOLUTION THAT DOES IS 678 WHICH WAS PASSED IN 1990.
7.687 CALLS FOR IRAQ TO DESTROY WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION BUT UNDER ARTICLE 42 ITS UP FOR THE SECURITY COUNCIL TO DECIDE HOW IT SHOULD BE ENFORCED.
8.THE *ONLY* ACTION THAT 678 AUTHORIZED WAS ACTION TAKEN TO ***RESTORE KUWAIT***.
MCLEANHATCH YOU'RE WRONG (AS ALWAYS) PHIL YOUR WRONG (ONCE AGAIN).....
HAVE A NICE DAY GENTLEMEN AND CONTINUE TO SUPPORT A MURDERER.
:dead: :dead: :dead:
:h:
