Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.

Underground > Switchboard >

Lies of Yesterday: Revelations

We're The Great Old Ones Now

10:27 / 05.08.03

"It's not about oil".

Wolfowitz reasserts the US position: The notion that the Iraq war was about oil "is a complete piece of nonsense," says Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz.

And indeed, the US was very clear about this at the time: "Some commentators in the media have suggested that the U.S.' true objective in the recent crisis over Iraq is to seize control of that country's oil resources. As in any free society, they are entitled to their opinions, even if they are inaccurate."

Cut to today - or rather, to May this year - and to the exciting Executive Order 13303. It's getting great press...

"This order reveals the true motivation for the present occupation: absolute power for U.S. corporate interests over Iraqi oil," said [Insitute for Policy Studies] Senior Researcher Jim Vallette. "This is the smoking gun that proves the Bush administration always intended to free corporate investments, not the Iraqi people."

"In terms of legal liability, the Executive Order cancels the concept of corporate accountability and abandons the rule of law," charged Tom Devine, legal director of the Government Accountability Project. "It is a blank check for corporate anarchy, potentially robbing Iraqis of both their rights and their resources." link

"Under this Order, an oil company complicit in human rights violations, or one that causes environmental damage, would be immune from lawsuits." link

"In addition to an exemption for ecological accidents, the UN order had restricted immunity to the point of initial sale. Bush grants Iraqi oil a lifetime exemption provided US companies are involved in the oil's production, transport, or distribution." link

gotham island fae

03:54 / 06.08.03

Exactly why I was not surprised when our dynastic administrator's group of 'thugs' quickly targeted Saudi Arabia, after the 'speedy success' in Iraq.

18:19 / 06.08.03

"We didn't use napalm."

Strictly speaking, this is true. The Pentagon destroyed all their gasoline-benzene firebombs a couple years ago. They kept the other, fresher firebombs, though. And then used them in Iraq.

We napalmed both those (bridge) approaches," said Col. James Alles in a recent interview. He commanded Marine Air Group 11, based at Miramar Marine Corps Air Station, during the war. "Unfortunately, there were people there because you could see them in the (cockpit) video.

"They were Iraqi soldiers there. It's no great way to die," he added. How many Iraqis died, the military couldn't say. No accurate count has been made of Iraqi war casualties.

Thing is, Pentagon officials denied using napalm in a press conference.

Apparently the spokesmen were drawing a distinction between the terms "firebomb" and "napalm." If reporters had asked about firebombs, officials said yesterday they would have confirmed their use.

What the Marines dropped, the spokesmen said yesterday, were "Mark 77 firebombs." They acknowledged those are incendiary devices with a function "remarkably similar" to napalm weapons.

Rather than using gasoline and benzene as the fuel, the firebombs use kerosene-based jet fuel, which has a smaller concentration of benzene.

Hundreds of partially loaded Mark 77 firebombs were stored on pre-positioned ammunition ships overseas, Marine Corps officials said. Those ships were unloaded in Kuwait during the weeks preceding the war.

"You can call it something other than napalm, but it's napalm," said John Pike, defense analyst with GlobalSecurity.com, a nonpartisan research group in Alexandria, Va.

The Pentagon doesn't call it napalm. But the Marines call it napalm.

During a recent interview about the bombing campaign in Iraq, Marine Corps Maj. Gen. Jim Amos confirmed aircraft dropped what he and other Marines continue to call napalm on Iraqi troops on several occasions. He commanded Marine jet and helicopter units involved in the Iraq war and leads the Miramar-based 3rd Marine Air Wing.

And whatever you call it, it *sticks* when it burns....

02:06 / 08.08.03

From the magic of Dick Cheney's Internally Combusting Head:
"Events leading to the fall of Saddam Hussein are fresh in memory, and do not need recounting at length. Every measure was taken to avoid a war. But it was Saddam Hussein himself who made war unavoidable. He had a lengthy history of reckless and sudden aggression. He bore a deep and bitter hatred for the United States. He cultivated ties to terrorist groups. He built, possessed, and used weapons of mass destruction. He refused all international demands to account for those weapons. " (italics mine, cause some of it is true)

gotham island fae

04:26 / 08.08.03

solid_state's link-statement

So, does the fact that the White House doesn't feel like showing me, a USA citizen, the link to what I can only assume is some form of evidence or report that what is posted above is true, a sign that maybe knowing how they gained any of that evidence would cast dispersion or difficulty on any further investigations of sovereign nations who threaten world peace?

I, of course, mean other than Our Own?

gotham island fae

12:28 / 08.08.03

Oh, that's right. If Saddam's a bad man then those who align against him could only have altruistic intentions.

Sheesh, wotta world. Bring on Ragnarok, I want a NU one.

We're The Great Old Ones Now

15:32 / 11.09.03

It was said at the time, and it is still (rather half-heartedly) being maintained that the invasion of Iraq made the world a safer place. However, though Tony Blair seemed happy enough to take the most tentative inteliigence assessments of Iraq's weapons capabilities as truth, he was and remains unwilling to do the same with intelligence analysis which questioned the benefit of war.

From the Guardian:

The powerful intelligence and security committee (ISC) said the intelligence agencies advised that the collapse of Saddam Hussein's regime would increase the risk of terrorist groups obtaining chemical or biological weapons.

An assessment prepared by the joint intelligence committee (JIC) on February 10, entitled International Terrorism: War with Iraq, concluded that there was no intelligence that Iraq had provided CB materials to al-Qaida.

Nor was there any suggestion of any intention by Saddam Hussein's regime to carry out chemical or biological terror attacks using Iraqi intelligence officials or their agents.

However the JIC did judge that in the event of the regime's collapse, there would be an increased risk that terrorist groups would be able to get their hands on CB materials.

link

jentacular dreams

09:44 / 13.12.08

Radio 4 broadcast "What I heard about Iraq" last night. Very well worth listening to.

Available here for one week.

The style and execution is so excellent (possibly apart from some dodgy accent approximations) I was almost tempted to post it in R&M or FTV, but the content left me colder than I've felt in a long time.