The following is an archived copy of a message sent to a Discussion List run by the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.

Views expressed in this archived message are those of the author, not of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.

[Main archive index/search] [List information] [Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Guardian article on bombing

Just thought you might like to know that The Guardian printed the
following corrections today to their article on 8th June (see my message
to this list on that date). Thanks to those who wrote in.,3604,330942,00.html
Corrections and clarifications 

Monday June 12, 2000 

A report headed Bombing strikes stepped up in 'secret war' against Iraq,
page 2, June 8, mistakenly stated that two no-fly zones, policed by
British and US planes, were agreed by the UN after the 1991 Gulf war. The
Foreign Office says the no-fly zones were set up "in support of" UN
security council resolution 688 (1991) which demands that the government
of Iraq cease oppression of its civilian population, particularly in the
northern Kurdish area. The British and US governments justify the no-fly
zones on grounds of "overwhelming humanitarian necessity" - the reasons
given for Nato's bombing of Serbia. There is no basis for such
intervention in international law. In the same piece we spoke of the Shia
minority in Iraq. In fact more than 60% of the population is Shia. 

This is a discussion list run by the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq
For removal from list, email
Full details of CASI's various lists can be found on the CASI website:

[Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]