Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom 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
Comments
(Hide Comments)
It is more than ironic--absolute hypocrisy is more appropos--that the USA rogue regime invaded Iraq illegally(without UN approval and against more than 12 MILLION ant-war demostrators worldwide prior to the Invasion), on the fabricated lies that Saddam had WMDs and was about to use them on his neighbors! Now solid evidence has turned up the conclusive fact that it was the Bushwhacked USA's NeoCon cabal that ordered the massive use of WMDs on Iraqi civilians, from the 1,000-lb 'bunker buster' bombs, DU munitions, and even banned chemical weapons like White Phosphorous and napalm.
These days, only the most recalcitrant & ignoramous war supporters(unfortunately, some 37% of the U.S. public apparently belongs to this "flat-Earth" contingent) could still justify continued U.S. Occupation and support for the Clueless Chickenhawk Coward from Crawford. Sadly, the vast majority of the U.S. Congress still gravitates toward this rightwing side of the political spectrum.
Will the 60% plus of the Public continue to tolerate this Tyranny of the Minority? And for how long?
These days, only the most recalcitrant & ignoramous war supporters(unfortunately, some 37% of the U.S. public apparently belongs to this "flat-Earth" contingent) could still justify continued U.S. Occupation and support for the Clueless Chickenhawk Coward from Crawford. Sadly, the vast majority of the U.S. Congress still gravitates toward this rightwing side of the political spectrum.
Will the 60% plus of the Public continue to tolerate this Tyranny of the Minority? And for how long?
The assertion that the U.S. military used chemical weapons is absurd. In fact, the assertion that U.S. troops used phosphorous is preposterous; any first year chemistry major can tell you that phosphorous is not a chemcial weapon. But, hey, if it rallies the "insurgents" and gets a few of our boys killed, then make sure it spreads to every network on the globe! Allah Akbar!
LT. COL. BARRY VENABLE: White phosphorus is a conventional munition. It's not a chemical weapon. They are not outlawed or illegal. We use them primarily as obscurants, for smoke screens or for target marking in some cases. However, it is an incendiary weapon and may be used against enemy combatants.
BBC REPORTER: Can you confirm, then, that it was used as an offensive weapon against enemy troops during the siege of Fallujah?
LT. COL. BARRY VENABLE: Yes. It was used as an incendiary weapon against enemy combatants.
BBC REPORTER: There are suggestions here that if used in that way, an incendiary weapon such as white phosphorus would be against the various conventions governing the use of weapons during war. You disagree?
LT. COL. BARRY VENABLE: Cite the conventions.
BBC REPORTER: The Chemical Weapons Convention.
LT. COL. BARRY VENABLE: Okay. Does it list white phosphorus as a chemical?
BBC REPORTER: No, it doesn't. But it says a chemical weapon can be any chemical which, through its chemical action, on life processes can cause death, temporary incapacitation or permanent harm.
BBC REPORTER: Can you confirm, then, that it was used as an offensive weapon against enemy troops during the siege of Fallujah?
LT. COL. BARRY VENABLE: Yes. It was used as an incendiary weapon against enemy combatants.
BBC REPORTER: There are suggestions here that if used in that way, an incendiary weapon such as white phosphorus would be against the various conventions governing the use of weapons during war. You disagree?
LT. COL. BARRY VENABLE: Cite the conventions.
BBC REPORTER: The Chemical Weapons Convention.
LT. COL. BARRY VENABLE: Okay. Does it list white phosphorus as a chemical?
BBC REPORTER: No, it doesn't. But it says a chemical weapon can be any chemical which, through its chemical action, on life processes can cause death, temporary incapacitation or permanent harm.
For more information:
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid...
ARTICLE II
DEFINITIONS AND CRITERIA
For the purposes of this Convention:
1. "Chemical Weapons" means the following, together or separately:
(a) Toxic chemicals and their precursors, except where intended for purposes not prohibited under this Convention, as long as the types and quantities are consistent with such purposes;
(b) Munitions and devices, specifically designed to cause death or other harm through the toxic properties of those toxic chemicals specified in subparagraph (a), which would be released as a result of the employment of such munitions and devices;
(c) Any equipment specifically designed for use directly in connection with the employment of munitions and devices specified in subparagraph
More
http://www.cwc.gov/treaty/articles/art-02_html
DEFINITIONS AND CRITERIA
For the purposes of this Convention:
1. "Chemical Weapons" means the following, together or separately:
(a) Toxic chemicals and their precursors, except where intended for purposes not prohibited under this Convention, as long as the types and quantities are consistent with such purposes;
(b) Munitions and devices, specifically designed to cause death or other harm through the toxic properties of those toxic chemicals specified in subparagraph (a), which would be released as a result of the employment of such munitions and devices;
(c) Any equipment specifically designed for use directly in connection with the employment of munitions and devices specified in subparagraph
More
http://www.cwc.gov/treaty/articles/art-02_html
what is it, Mr. HitandRun?
it's not a munition, it's not nuclear or radialogical
it's not biological
what is it?
funny, too, that you assert that it is not our USE of the weapon which harms us globally, but the NEWS of it. dontcha think those people who survived Fallujah already knew? some just went to Jordan and bombed some hotels. it's not not like prisoners at Abu Ghraib had to wait for the photos to be exposed to know what was going on. and you think they didn't tell anyone?? so naive
it's not a munition, it's not nuclear or radialogical
it's not biological
what is it?
funny, too, that you assert that it is not our USE of the weapon which harms us globally, but the NEWS of it. dontcha think those people who survived Fallujah already knew? some just went to Jordan and bombed some hotels. it's not not like prisoners at Abu Ghraib had to wait for the photos to be exposed to know what was going on. and you think they didn't tell anyone?? so naive
[funny, too, that you assert that it is not our USE of the weapon which harms us globally, but the NEWS of it. dontcha think those people who survived Fallujah already knew? some just went to Jordan and bombed some hotels. it's not not like prisoners at Abu Ghraib had to wait for the photos to be exposed to know what was going on. and you think they didn't tell anyone?? so naive]
. . . . EXACTLY, we are always the LAST TO KNOW
every time I bring this up in response to some right wing guy who claims that publicizing torture, white phosphorus and checkpoint shootings undermines the war effort, they never really have a response
--Richard
. . . . EXACTLY, we are always the LAST TO KNOW
every time I bring this up in response to some right wing guy who claims that publicizing torture, white phosphorus and checkpoint shootings undermines the war effort, they never really have a response
--Richard
<<<<EXACTLY, we are always the LAST TO KNOW>>>>
dahr jamail of ips news service, a lebanese 2nd generation american citizen born in texas, reported the use of phosphorous gas, fleshettes and napalm shortly after the 2nd invasion of falluja. he was an un-embedded eye-witness to the atrocities aftermath. go to his website and see for yourself. the dead bodies with the flesh on the iraqis' legs completely eaten off by ravenous dogs......
i attended a meeting several months ago put on by KPFA, AND MECA at the first congregational church in Oakland, with jamail and dennis bernstein the main contributors. he spoke quite frankly to the crowd and had slides to show.
this news is so old it is paleolithic. but, hey, if its not reported by the right person at the right time, then it just doesn't count.
dahr jamail of ips news service, a lebanese 2nd generation american citizen born in texas, reported the use of phosphorous gas, fleshettes and napalm shortly after the 2nd invasion of falluja. he was an un-embedded eye-witness to the atrocities aftermath. go to his website and see for yourself. the dead bodies with the flesh on the iraqis' legs completely eaten off by ravenous dogs......
i attended a meeting several months ago put on by KPFA, AND MECA at the first congregational church in Oakland, with jamail and dennis bernstein the main contributors. he spoke quite frankly to the crowd and had slides to show.
this news is so old it is paleolithic. but, hey, if its not reported by the right person at the right time, then it just doesn't count.
WP is not a chemical weapon according to the military. That term is used for nerve gas, blister agents, blood agents and riot control(vomiting, coughing, tearing).
WP does cause horrible burns and death, and the burning is a chemical reaction. WP is used for mainly smoke or to destroy fixed positions. WP also comes in hand grenades.
Armored vehicles have batteries of WP or RP grenades/mortars attached to them. These are to make an instant smoke screen for them to hide in. You can see these on M1 Abrams, the Bradley, Humvees, etc.
You feign outrage over a weapon that's been in use since the early 1900s. Killing sucks, dying sucks. You find a more humane way to kill people, tell me about it.
WP does cause horrible burns and death, and the burning is a chemical reaction. WP is used for mainly smoke or to destroy fixed positions. WP also comes in hand grenades.
Armored vehicles have batteries of WP or RP grenades/mortars attached to them. These are to make an instant smoke screen for them to hide in. You can see these on M1 Abrams, the Bradley, Humvees, etc.
You feign outrage over a weapon that's been in use since the early 1900s. Killing sucks, dying sucks. You find a more humane way to kill people, tell me about it.
The bodies were burned but the clothing intact? That is not WP. If it can burn, it will burn right through it. My friend Gary caught fragments of it in his left leg and burned his hand trying to get it out. As long as the air can reach the phosphorous, it burns.
While I appreciate the technical argument that WP is an incendiary agent and not a chemical one per se, I don't think this niggling point of yours makes a particle of difference when this shit gets used directly on people, which you're luvvly mahvlous guvmint has now admitted to. In terms of their experience of dying from that exposure, WP is tantamount to one of the most horrific chemical weapons ever conceived. Why can't you figure this the fuck out on your own, Joel? Did you take a head shot last week? Then you'd have an excuse, at least
Oh, and get this Joel: it was used against CIVILIANS, because there were lots of those in Fallujah. Just because they were running around with guns fighting to hold their HOMETOWN doesn't mean they weren't civilians. Lots of the Kurds Saddam gassed were also running around with guns fighting against HIM, so if he doesn't have this "combatant" excuse then neither the fuck do you, get it undead-boy? Oh, and get this: Saddam's army, unlike yours, actually had a sovereign right to be there. Yours doesn't even have the flimsiest shred of an excuse, not anymore
THAT SHIT JUST DONE DROPPEDED DEAD
YOU KILLED IT!!
Good work, Mr. Hero
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!!!!!!!
Hey Joel, I got a song for ya
It's one of the most beautiful statements of truth I've ever seen:
The Universal Soldier
written by Buffy Saint-Marie in 1963
He's five feet two and he's six feet four
He fights with missiles and with spears
He's all of 31 and he's only 17
He's been a soldier for a thousand years
He's a Catholic, a Hindu, an athiest, a Jain,
a Buddhist and a Baptist and a Jew
and he knows he shouldn't kill
and he knows he always will
kill you for me my friend and me for you
And he's fighting for Canada,
he's fighting for France,
he's fighting for the USA,
and he's fighting for the Russians
and he's fighting for Japan,
and he thinks we'll put an end to war this way
And he's fighting for Democracy
and fighting for the Reds
He says it's for the peace of all
He's the one who must decide
who's to live and who's to die
and he never sees the writing on the walls
But without him how would Hitler have
condemned him at Dachau
Without him Caesar would have stood alone
He's the one who gives his body
as a weapon to a war
and without him all this killing can't go on
He's the universal soldier and he
really is to blame
His orders come from far away no more
They come from him, and you, and me
and brothers can't you see
this is not the way we put an end to war.
"He's the universal soldier and HE REALLY IS TO BLAME"
Beautiful, beautiful stuff, brings tears to my eyes, especially when I listen to Buffy sing it. I can't recommend it too highly
Oh, and get this Joel: it was used against CIVILIANS, because there were lots of those in Fallujah. Just because they were running around with guns fighting to hold their HOMETOWN doesn't mean they weren't civilians. Lots of the Kurds Saddam gassed were also running around with guns fighting against HIM, so if he doesn't have this "combatant" excuse then neither the fuck do you, get it undead-boy? Oh, and get this: Saddam's army, unlike yours, actually had a sovereign right to be there. Yours doesn't even have the flimsiest shred of an excuse, not anymore
THAT SHIT JUST DONE DROPPEDED DEAD
YOU KILLED IT!!
Good work, Mr. Hero
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!!!!!!!
Hey Joel, I got a song for ya
It's one of the most beautiful statements of truth I've ever seen:
The Universal Soldier
written by Buffy Saint-Marie in 1963
He's five feet two and he's six feet four
He fights with missiles and with spears
He's all of 31 and he's only 17
He's been a soldier for a thousand years
He's a Catholic, a Hindu, an athiest, a Jain,
a Buddhist and a Baptist and a Jew
and he knows he shouldn't kill
and he knows he always will
kill you for me my friend and me for you
And he's fighting for Canada,
he's fighting for France,
he's fighting for the USA,
and he's fighting for the Russians
and he's fighting for Japan,
and he thinks we'll put an end to war this way
And he's fighting for Democracy
and fighting for the Reds
He says it's for the peace of all
He's the one who must decide
who's to live and who's to die
and he never sees the writing on the walls
But without him how would Hitler have
condemned him at Dachau
Without him Caesar would have stood alone
He's the one who gives his body
as a weapon to a war
and without him all this killing can't go on
He's the universal soldier and he
really is to blame
His orders come from far away no more
They come from him, and you, and me
and brothers can't you see
this is not the way we put an end to war.
"He's the universal soldier and HE REALLY IS TO BLAME"
Beautiful, beautiful stuff, brings tears to my eyes, especially when I listen to Buffy sing it. I can't recommend it too highly
My point is, it's a weapon that kills. Some sweet persons went and made a treaty to cut back on the nast ways to kill, but left lots in there that still does the job. WP is one.
Niggling? Cool word. You say civilian with guns, I say enemy. The whole point that these articles are trying to say"some horrible secret weapon has been unleashed'. It's horrible, but it ain't a secret. Dying from that, an IED that shreds you, what's the diff?
As for justification to be here? The host government asked me to.
Niggling? Cool word. You say civilian with guns, I say enemy. The whole point that these articles are trying to say"some horrible secret weapon has been unleashed'. It's horrible, but it ain't a secret. Dying from that, an IED that shreds you, what's the diff?
As for justification to be here? The host government asked me to.
Poignant reporting on the devastating effects of white phosphorous bombs can be found in Robert Fisk's description of their unconscionable use on Beirut's civilian population during Israel's 1982 invasion of Lebanon. The impression the reader takes away from the relevant passages in Fisk's Pity the Nation (Andre Deutsch: London, 1990, pp. 282-285) is of a weapon intended to slowly and relentlessly torture its victims to death.
Here is Fisk, on 29 July 1982, quoting Dr Amal Shamaa of the Barbir hospital, after Israeli phosphorus shells had been fired into West Beirut:
"I had to take the babies and put them in buckets of water to put out the flames. When I took them out half an hour later, they were still burning.
Even in the mortuary, they smouldered for hours."
Here is Fisk, on 29 July 1982, quoting Dr Amal Shamaa of the Barbir hospital, after Israeli phosphorus shells had been fired into West Beirut:
"I had to take the babies and put them in buckets of water to put out the flames. When I took them out half an hour later, they were still burning.
Even in the mortuary, they smouldered for hours."
"As for justification to be here? The host government asked me to."
Would that be the ludicrous line-up of frontmen with those strange fissures on either side of their chins who all have Uncle Sam's arm thrusted up their assholes. Yeah, I thought so
Would that be the ludicrous line-up of frontmen with those strange fissures on either side of their chins who all have Uncle Sam's arm thrusted up their assholes. Yeah, I thought so
You say puppets, but it's the closest thing to a true free election these parts have seen in decades, maybe lifetime, maybe ever. Who do you want to run the country? Could be the people that actually live there don't feel the same.
You don't like what I say, but you have to admit I'm closer to the truth than you, I just refuse to get bent out of shape over the absurdity and brutality of it all. The people of iraq and Afghanistan obviously are not reading the same script our govt. is. The happily ever after ending was written out by some malcontents. I not a single posting have I ever lauded Bush or Rumsfeld, but I refuse to rabidly make attack against the Americans in either operation. This site, on the other hand is chock full of haters. I can't believe that anyone of you really gives a damn about any soldier there. You accuse them of countless crimes, but what's a crime during war? Is Zarqawi a criminal? Al Sadr? Or just Pvt. Rock?
You don't like what I say, but you have to admit I'm closer to the truth than you, I just refuse to get bent out of shape over the absurdity and brutality of it all. The people of iraq and Afghanistan obviously are not reading the same script our govt. is. The happily ever after ending was written out by some malcontents. I not a single posting have I ever lauded Bush or Rumsfeld, but I refuse to rabidly make attack against the Americans in either operation. This site, on the other hand is chock full of haters. I can't believe that anyone of you really gives a damn about any soldier there. You accuse them of countless crimes, but what's a crime during war? Is Zarqawi a criminal? Al Sadr? Or just Pvt. Rock?
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$260.00 donated
in the past month
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