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]

[casi] Unfree stuff happens to free Iraqis!




"Stuff happens!", said Rummy, thumping his chest,
when Iraq's museums, libraries, hospitals, banks,
ministries, and private properties got looted.

Art treasures that survived the invasion of the
mongols, did not to survive the invasion and
occupation of this lot.

Still, Iraqis were free at last - free to loot:

"... freedom's untidy. And free people are free to
make mistakes and commit crimes and do bad things.
They're also free to live their lives and do
wonderful things. And that's what's going to happen
here", said Rummy reassuringly.

What wonderful things?

Are free Iraqis free to bid on subcontracts for the
reconstruction of their own country - on the crumbs,
so to speak?

Nope, free Iraqis are free enough to loot their
own country but not free enough to work in it.
Iraqi firms are barred from working as subcontractors
for USAID "because they are not designated as countries
of the free world", a USAID official said on April 29.
So are countries from Iran, Syria, Cuba and North Korea.

And what have these countries in common? All belong
to Bush' 'axis of evil', I believe.

But this is outrageous! Free Iraqis can't work in
their own country? Free Iraqis that have been liberated
in 'Operation Iraqi Freedom' by the freest invaders
in world history. Are occupied by these same super-free
invaders.

Yet they can't work in their own country because it
hasn't been designated a 'country of the free world'!
A country occupied and controlled by the freest
super power on earth, is not a a free country?

Why is this?

"'We're struggling on how to deal with Iraqi firms,'
said an official at a USAID conference for
companies interested in working on Iraqi reconstruction."
The U.S. Treasury Department has granted waivers for
humanitarian work in the country, which includes
reconstruction efforts, but would not cover hiring
local firms.

The U.S. Treasury says it "enforces the U.N.
sanctions."

But how can the Treasury "enforce" the sanctions
on labour while starting reconstruction work?
There can be no reconstruction work until the
sanctions are lifted. Million-dollar contracts
are not "humanitarian work". Or are they?

And the sanctions can only be lifted when Iraq is
_disarmed_. These are the stipulations of the
resolutions. The certification for that can only
come from the UN Security Council. Even George Bush
realizes that there are "catches" to lifting the
sanctions.

But first the alleged WMD's have to be found. If none
are found, despite US insistence that they must be
there, then the sanctions have been illegal all along.
Just as the war was illegal - with or without WMDS.

And what have the sanctions got to do with the
designation 'country of the free world'? Iraqi firms
are barred from bidding because they don't belong
to the 'free world', according to USAID. Iran and
Syria are barred too, and they don't even have sanctions.

Perhaps this is just "untidy" reporting by the
right-wing, Mooney-owned Washington Times? Comparing
apples to oranges?

"Iraqi firms excluded from reconstruction", April 30.
http://www.washtimes.com/business/20030430-11854056.htm

So why does unfree stuff happen to free Iraqis?
Why are they being discriminated against by their
liberators?

--Elga




_______________________________________________
Sent via the discussion list of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.
To unsubscribe, visit http://lists.casi.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/casi-discuss
To contact the list manager, email casi-discuss-admin@lists.casi.org.uk
All postings are archived on CASI's website: http://www.casi.org.uk


[Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]