From the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
The US In Iraq: Chemical hypocrisy
A US serviceman speaks out to confirm non-embedded reports from Falluja that the US military used banned chemical weapons against Iraqis, writes Nermeen Al-Mufti from Baghdad
Before US troops began their offensive on Falluja in November-December 2004, the occupation authorities asked news networks to provide their correspondents with masks and special outfits to protect them from chemical weapons. By then and to date no Iraqi weapons of mass destruction were found. The request was considered "classified" information and it sent a message that the occupation forces may use non- conventional weapons against the city.
While this was happening, Falluja fighters posted Internet messages to journalists, saying they would be protected if they arrived to cover news in the city. Occupation forces reacted by stating that they cannot guarantee the safety of any journalist talking to "insurgents". As a result, the world saw the offensive from the eyes of those journalists embedded with US troops. Those journalists may have attempted to convey the truth, but their version of truth remained far from complete. No one, including the Iraqis, knew what happened to the hundreds of families who stayed in Falluja.
I went to Falluja with a Red Cross convoy after the fighting receded, hearing firsthand horrendous accounts from families who managed to survive by taking refuge in the only safe haven in town -- a home run by the Iraqi Red Crescent. I wrote my story and it was published in Al-Ahram Weekly, though what I wrote remained vulnerable to scepticism simply because I am Iraqi.
The few foreign journalists who managed to get into Falluja in 2004 said that US forces used chemical weapons there. Hundreds of photographs coming out showing bodies burned in a manner consistent with the use of chemical agents raised questions about US denials. Then a US trooper who participated in the attack spoke out. Marine serviceman Jeff Englehart told the Italian network RAI TV that US forces used lethal white phosphorus in Falluja. He said he saw the charred bodies of women and children, adding that white phosphorus burns flesh clean to the bones.
A year on, Falluja is calm, or nearly so. The city's entire population said "no" to the constitution in last month's referendum. Entry to the city is forbidden except to inhabitants. IDs are checked to ensure that non-inhabitants are kept away, although some international officials are allowed to get in. I had to speak by telephone to get reaction from those who were in Falluja during the onslaught. Mohamed Tarek Al-Daraji, who in 2004 founded a human rights centre in Falluja, said, "the firing was intense, and some of the shells exploded in bright colours upon detonation. We began to discover bodies with strange burn marks. We found bodies that were burned completely, but the clothes on the bodies remained intact."
Um Mustafa, who lost her boy in the attack, said that, "on the road to the Red Crescent home, we'd seen many charred bodies." Speaking on condition of anonymity, one of the Iraqis who was working in an international organisation and travelled to Falluja after the offensive, said, "it was clear that a non- conventional weapon was used. The bodies were buried without examination or autopsy, so the US use of chemical weapons remained unconfirmed. US troops are known to use lethal white phosphorus but they claim it's just for lighting."
Read More
http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2005/769/re10.htm
While this was happening, Falluja fighters posted Internet messages to journalists, saying they would be protected if they arrived to cover news in the city. Occupation forces reacted by stating that they cannot guarantee the safety of any journalist talking to "insurgents". As a result, the world saw the offensive from the eyes of those journalists embedded with US troops. Those journalists may have attempted to convey the truth, but their version of truth remained far from complete. No one, including the Iraqis, knew what happened to the hundreds of families who stayed in Falluja.
I went to Falluja with a Red Cross convoy after the fighting receded, hearing firsthand horrendous accounts from families who managed to survive by taking refuge in the only safe haven in town -- a home run by the Iraqi Red Crescent. I wrote my story and it was published in Al-Ahram Weekly, though what I wrote remained vulnerable to scepticism simply because I am Iraqi.
The few foreign journalists who managed to get into Falluja in 2004 said that US forces used chemical weapons there. Hundreds of photographs coming out showing bodies burned in a manner consistent with the use of chemical agents raised questions about US denials. Then a US trooper who participated in the attack spoke out. Marine serviceman Jeff Englehart told the Italian network RAI TV that US forces used lethal white phosphorus in Falluja. He said he saw the charred bodies of women and children, adding that white phosphorus burns flesh clean to the bones.
A year on, Falluja is calm, or nearly so. The city's entire population said "no" to the constitution in last month's referendum. Entry to the city is forbidden except to inhabitants. IDs are checked to ensure that non-inhabitants are kept away, although some international officials are allowed to get in. I had to speak by telephone to get reaction from those who were in Falluja during the onslaught. Mohamed Tarek Al-Daraji, who in 2004 founded a human rights centre in Falluja, said, "the firing was intense, and some of the shells exploded in bright colours upon detonation. We began to discover bodies with strange burn marks. We found bodies that were burned completely, but the clothes on the bodies remained intact."
Um Mustafa, who lost her boy in the attack, said that, "on the road to the Red Crescent home, we'd seen many charred bodies." Speaking on condition of anonymity, one of the Iraqis who was working in an international organisation and travelled to Falluja after the offensive, said, "it was clear that a non- conventional weapon was used. The bodies were buried without examination or autopsy, so the US use of chemical weapons remained unconfirmed. US troops are known to use lethal white phosphorus but they claim it's just for lighting."
Read More
http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2005/769/re10.htm
Add Your Comments
Latest Comments
Listed below are the latest comments about this post.
These comments are submitted anonymously by website visitors.
TITLE
AUTHOR
DATE
Difference of opinion
Sun, Nov 20, 2005 5:54AM
More lame brainwashed bullshit from Joel
Sat, Nov 19, 2005 11:19PM
yep
Sat, Nov 19, 2005 11:19AM
My oops
Sat, Nov 19, 2005 11:06AM
Jeol's definitional word games
Sat, Nov 19, 2005 7:00AM
One more thing
Sat, Nov 19, 2005 3:30AM
word games
Sat, Nov 19, 2005 2:53AM
why is this
Thu, Nov 17, 2005 7:43PM
I always laugh at this . . . .
Thu, Nov 17, 2005 7:04PM
"phosphorous is not a chemcial weapon"
Thu, Nov 17, 2005 6:07PM
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network