us helped iraq develop biological and chemical arms-report (from reuters 06:22 pm et 02/12/98)
london (reuters) - the united states helped iraq develop its chemical and biological weapons programs in the 1980s while britain sold baghdad the antidote to nerve gas as late as march 1992, britain's channel four television news said thursday.
the program said it had found u.s. intelligence documents which showed 14 consignments of biological materials were exported from the united states to iraq between 1985 and 1989. these included 19 batches of anthrax bacteria and 15 batches of botulinum, the organism that causes botulism.
they would save themselves so many headaches.
Right on the money...how do you put a spin on everything the government is doing? Even mainstream news media are not so dumb as to take everything handed down from the White house and disseminate it as doctrine.
crazy people walk among us.. they may drive cars, own houses, raise kids and hold jobs.. i have personally known psychotic people who appeared to be normal in every respect.
- except when you talked to them at length.
they had 25 kids (actually none),.
Larc,
People often look at a loony person and conjecture that the loon must have done something terrible to become a loon. Do you know what I am talking about?... 'I'm glad I haven't lost my sanity! Pity that poor fool!' Do most people really think the mentally ill exist through some fault of their own?
So what responsibility do people have to avoid mental illness? Besides the obvious, avoiding drugs?
cellmould
sorry, i don't have time to search the site right now.
this bloody french isp is rubbish, and i keep getting dropped when i try anything that takes more than 10 seconds.
has the society ever come up with any intelligent reasoning to counter the ages that carbon dating/science has given to various artifacts, i.e.
Rem,
thanks for following up...I thought for some reason no one had replied to this thread.
The easiest 'flood' argument to unravel is the 'water canopy' argument. To sustain a significant amount more of water vapor, our atmosphere would need to have been under considerable pressure. This can also be demonstrated by calculating the potential energy (or weight) of a thick cloud of water vapor, of the height estimated by flood proponents.
Evidence is non-existent that the atmospheric pressure on earth was several times higher in the past. Neither does it make any sense. By the way, water vapor is quite dense. It likes to occupy the lower atmosphere. Clouds are caused because as water vapor rises and cools, it condenses. Even under increased pressure (which still doesn't make any sense), other gases would be lighter and thus occupy the upper atmosphere.
And as for my C14 argument...I didn't mean to say that animals 'produced' C14. Neither, of course, do they 'produce' C12. At least, not in that they add it to the atmosphere. That was a mistake on my part. Wrong terminology...but I think the point is still quite valid.
Animals and vegetation (as well as other organisms) are responsible for absorbing whatever carbon is in the atmosphere and distributing it throughout over the earth's surface...it later becomes sediment. Without life, precious little C14 is deposited.
cellmould
Edited by - cellomould on 30 September 2002 14:2:48
us helped iraq develop biological and chemical arms-report (from reuters 06:22 pm et 02/12/98)
london (reuters) - the united states helped iraq develop its chemical and biological weapons programs in the 1980s while britain sold baghdad the antidote to nerve gas as late as march 1992, britain's channel four television news said thursday.
the program said it had found u.s. intelligence documents which showed 14 consignments of biological materials were exported from the united states to iraq between 1985 and 1989. these included 19 batches of anthrax bacteria and 15 batches of botulinum, the organism that causes botulism.
Undecided,
I wouldn't call that paranoia...more like wisdom.
Plmkrzy,
You are always running away from me (i.e. Alpine Village)!
us helped iraq develop biological and chemical arms-report (from reuters 06:22 pm et 02/12/98)
london (reuters) - the united states helped iraq develop its chemical and biological weapons programs in the 1980s while britain sold baghdad the antidote to nerve gas as late as march 1992, britain's channel four television news said thursday.
the program said it had found u.s. intelligence documents which showed 14 consignments of biological materials were exported from the united states to iraq between 1985 and 1989. these included 19 batches of anthrax bacteria and 15 batches of botulinum, the organism that causes botulism.
Comf,
I think we are on the same page when it comes to the safety of U.S. citizens. That has been an priority in each adminstration, ostensibly. We should definitely clamour for more domestic safety. Intelligent foreign policy amounts to domestic safety, of course.
But look at what the government has done. (And keep in mind the above information is from 4 years ago) How does it feel to know that the government is trying to cover its own ass? Isn't it the people they should be protecting?
I hope everyone sees why there is good reason to complain. U.S. scholars are perplexed over what the government is trying to do. If the the best and brightest see that we are striking out on an errant path, why do we not listen to them?
cellmould
Attack on Iraq would be mark of failure
By Ghassan Salame
Special to The Washington Post
The Daily Yomiuri February 16,1998
@
PARIS - The more one thinks about the U.S. government's stated rationale for bombing Iraq, the less convincing it seems. Even someone like me, a critic of the Iraqi regime's human-rights record for 20 years and a public opponent of Iraq's occupation of Kuwait, finds it difficult to accept the various U.S. explanations for pursuing a shortsighted policy that will bring further death and destruction to an already traumatized society.
Is the objective to defeat a dangerous dictatorship? But how does launching smart bombs from afar bring about a democracy? Why would bombing Baghdad miraculously produce a government that respects human rights or a society that obeys the rule of law? And how many sorties will be necessary to find and kill Saddam Hussein (as some bellicose commentators have openly called for) and rouse the population against the Iraqi regime (as some senators have suggested)? I see a different outcome of a sustained bombing campaign: a weakened Iraq even more vulnerable to interference from its neighbors, either those frightened by the prospect of lawlessness in Iraq or those who take advantage of the chaos to extend their influence.
Or is it a matter of enforcing UN resolutions? Other countries have failed to implement UN resolutions. But it appears that only Iraq must implement them all. Furthermore, what incentive does Iraq have to comply? In a now-famous speech delivered in March 1997, U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright ruled out normalization of relations with the present regime, even if it were to satisfy the requirements of all relevant international resolutions. Is the United States' purpose to make Saddam Hussein understand that whatever he does (even full compliance), he will remain a pariah?
us helped iraq develop biological and chemical arms-report (from reuters 06:22 pm et 02/12/98)
london (reuters) - the united states helped iraq develop its chemical and biological weapons programs in the 1980s while britain sold baghdad the antidote to nerve gas as late as march 1992, britain's channel four television news said thursday.
the program said it had found u.s. intelligence documents which showed 14 consignments of biological materials were exported from the united states to iraq between 1985 and 1989. these included 19 batches of anthrax bacteria and 15 batches of botulinum, the organism that causes botulism.
Weapons of mass destruction? The world is full of them. At least six Middle Eastern countries have built chemical and/or biological weapons. Israel went nuclear years ago, and has adamantly refused to sign the nuclear nonproliferation treaties. And while most - if not all - of Iraq's Scud missiles have been destroyed in the past few years, seven Middle Eastern nations have been improving their ballistic missiles.
also from the above link I posted above...
George W is so smart, he's playing the same hand Clinton played 4 years ago. I almost wish I still believed in the bible, so I could quote Solomon's 'nothing new' line.
cellmould
us helped iraq develop biological and chemical arms-report (from reuters 06:22 pm et 02/12/98)
london (reuters) - the united states helped iraq develop its chemical and biological weapons programs in the 1980s while britain sold baghdad the antidote to nerve gas as late as march 1992, britain's channel four television news said thursday.
the program said it had found u.s. intelligence documents which showed 14 consignments of biological materials were exported from the united states to iraq between 1985 and 1989. these included 19 batches of anthrax bacteria and 15 batches of botulinum, the organism that causes botulism.
http://www.billtotten.com/english/ow2/00148.htmlUS helped Iraq develop biological and chemical arms-report
(from REUTERS 06:22 PM ET 02/12/98)
LONDON (Reuters) - The United States helped Iraq develop its chemical and biological weapons programs in the 1980s while Britain sold Baghdad the antidote to nerve gas as late as March 1992, Britain's Channel Four television news said Thursday.
The program said it had found U.S. intelligence documents which showed 14 consignments of biological materials were exported from the United States to Iraq between 1985 and 1989. These included 19 batches of anthrax bacteria and 15 batches of botulinum, the organism that causes botulism. The exports, backed by the State Department, were licensed by the Department of Commerce, it said.
The program said Iraq had bought other toxins from the United States while the atomic energy commission in Baghdad acquired human genetic material and E. coli bacteria for use as a culture medium. No less than 29 batches of material were sent after Iraq had used gas in an attack on the Kurdish town of Halabja in 1988, killing 5,000 people, it said. Stephen Bryen, a former senior Pentagon official in the 1980s, said he and a few colleagues had tried hard to stop the exports of sensitive materials. "They just were stupid, utterly stupid, and the people who did it I don't think had even a slight grasp of what they were doing", he told Channel Four. He said he had managed to stop a 1988 order from Iraq for 1.5 million doses of atropine, which is used to protect troops from nerve gas.
Channel Four news quoted from a classified U.S. Department of Defense document which it said showed Iraq had bought pralidoxine -- an antidote to nerve gas -- from Britain in March 1992, after the Gulf War. "This (sale) took place, as I understand it, long before we came into government", British Defense Secretary George Robertson told the program. "We'll investigate it, but I understand it probably was exported on the grounds that it was medication and medications are allowable exports to Iraq today".
Channel Four also said it had uncovered U.S. intelligence documents which showed London and Washington knew as long ago as August 1990 of the existence of Agent 15, a deadly nerve gas. Robertson, releasing what he said was new information about Iraq's 1991 weapon stocks, on Monday said Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein may have possessed large quantities of Agent 15. "There may well have been some knowledge of the range of things Saddam might have had at that time but the concrete information has only gradually come forward (in) recent times". Robertson told Channel Four.
Edited by - cellomould on 30 September 2002 4:57:0
full copies of the evidence for the case against iraq only published today for the first time are available from number 10 downing street http://www.pm.gov.uk.
http://www.fco.gov.uk.
the ministry of defence http://www.mod.uk.
It's funny just how old this issue is...read up...this date's back to Clinton's Administration, when he wanted to invade Iraq:
http://www.billtotten.com/english/ow2/00148.html
By the way, did you ever hear the United States government spoke out about the genocidal abuses perpetrated by the Indonesian government? The U.S. continues to support Indonesia.
cellmould
friends,.
i want to thank all of you for your kind words and your support.
jan is home.
Larc,
Jan must be a fan of Dr. Strangelove ...
best wishes again,
cellmould
george bush took advantage of your fears of 'big government' to get into office.... ...so are the democrats proponents of 'big government'?
do they love in-your-face politics?
do they want to give all of your hard-earned money away to good-for-nothing slobs?.
from http://www.historychannel.com/
DEMOCRATIC PARTY
The Democratic party began to assume its modern form during the intense political conflict that divided Americans after the War of 1812. Over the next decade, as the party's organization developed, Democrats argued that they were combating Federalist efforts to impose an aristocratic, centralized government on the American people. The conflict between centralizers and egalitarians, Democrats declared, went back to the Hamiltonian efforts in the 1790s to erect a powerful national authority, threatening to individual liberties...
The core of the Democratic party's support lay in southern slave plantations, farms of all sizes in every part of the nation, and immigrants in the urban centers of the eastern seaboard...
At the same time, the unwillingness of many Democratic leaders to take a stand against slavery was increasingly seen as a prosouthern position that unfairly permitted slaveholders to prevail in more and more of the nation's territories and to dominate national policy when Democrats were in power.
I highlight some of the pros and cons in the early history of the Democratic party. It is quite interesting that in many regards the modern Republican party resembles the historical Democratic party.
cellmould
