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] RE: DU - Panos



>Thank you, Felicity, for writing this...for being so
brave to go there and do what others have not done...
...to meet "our"  children...words fail me..
...yours, philippa
(i'm thanking F on the list because she often doesn't get
individual emails due to technical difficulties)
===== Original Message From farbuthnot <asceptic@freenetname.co.uk> =====
>· September 2001
>· July 20
>Search Features
> FAR001IRA |  30/05/2003 | 1044 words
>Depleted uranium: weapon of (long-term) mass destruction
>By Felicity Arbuthnot 
>BAGHDAD (PANOS) ­ The small city of Diwania in southern Iraq is home to
>10-year- old Mustafa Ali who has acute myeloid leukaemia. Wan and wide-eyed,
>the cancer has affected a nerve in his right eye. His embarrassment at
>losing his hair ­ because of chemotherapy ­ is evident. His father, engineer
>Ali Ismael Tamader Ghalib, gives up work a week every month to bring his son
>to Baghdad for treatment.
>
>³If there is another war, more children will suffer,² he said weeks before
>the latest war. ³We must stop this slaughter of innocents; what have these
>children done to deserve this?² Tears streamed down his wife¹s face,
>dripping on to her immaculate black abaya.
>
>The Al Mansour Teaching and Paediatric Hospital in Baghdad is Iraq¹s
>foremost medical teaching centre. When the twice-weekly cancer clinics are
>held, it is near impossible to squeeze through the crowds that spread into
>the grounds; parents holding, carrying, clutching their children for
>diagnosis and treatment.
>
>After the 1991 Gulf War, Al Mansour filled with a disproportionately high
>number of patients from heavily bombed cities in the south of Iraq. Between
>1978 and 1992 there were 270 cancer and leukaemia cases recorded there. But
>between November 1992 and October 2002, the hospital recorded 1,714 cases
>a six-fold increase. Those patients included 10-year-old Mustafa and scores
>of other children from Diwania and other heavily bombed areas.
>
>With the latest war in Iraq and the post-war looting, treatment at Al
>Mansour will have ceased, effectively condemning Mustafa, other children of
>Diwania and all the first Gulf war¹s cancer victims to death. This war has
>confirmed Ali Ismael¹s worst fears.
>
>Just 10 months after the 1991 Gulf war, Iraqi doctors were already
>bewildered at the rise in rare cancers and birth deformities. They were
>comparing them to those they had seen in textbooks relating to nuclear
>testing in the Pacific in the 1950s. That depleted uranium (DU) weapons had
>been used in Iraq was then unknown.
>Basra, southern Iraq, was in the eye of the original Desert Storm. In 1997,
>senior paediatrician at the Basra Maternity and Paediatric Hospital Dr Jenan
>Hussein completed a thesis comparing the effects there with Hiroshima.
>Cancers, leukaemias and malignancies believed linked to DU, she found, had
>risen up to 70% since 1991.
>
>³There is every relation between the congenital malformations, cancer and
>depleted uranium. Before 1991, we saw nothing like this. Most of these
>children have no family history of cancer,² she said.
>
>DU, or Uranium 238, is a waste product of the uranium enrichment process. It
>has little commercial value, but when conventional bullets and shells are
>coated with DU, it makes them armour-piercing. Radioactive particles from
>spent DU shells do not disappear after explosion. The Pentagon says there
>are some 320 tonnes of DU left over from the 1991 war. Three weeks into the
>latest war, independent Britain-based DU researcher Dai Williams said 2,000
>tonnes of residual DU dust is a conservative estimate.
>
>In April 1991 the UK Atomic Energy Authority sent a report to the Ministry
>of Defence warning of a health and environmental catastrophe in Iraq.
>It estimated that a residue of 50 tonnes of DU dust could now lead to half a
>million ³potential deaths² from cancer ³in the region² within 10 years. With
>estimates of 2,000 tonnes of DU residue, the ³potential deaths² could be
>astronomical.
>
>The evidence on the destructive nature of DU is clear: sick Gulf war and
>Balkans veterans, tested in 2000 at the World Depleted Uranium Centre in
>Berlin, were found to have three times more radioactive contamination than
>the residents of Chernobyl, Ukraine ­ site of the world¹s worst nuclear
>accident. A 1996 survey that studied the families of 267 US Gulf veterans
>showed that 67% of children conceived after their fathers had returned from
>the Gulf, had rare birth deformities.
>
>DU has thrice been condemned as a weapon of mass destruction by UN
>Sub-Committees. Even the US Army Environmental Policy Institute agrees: DU,
>it said in 1995, is ³radioactive waste and, as such, should be deposited in
>a licensed repository².
>
>But in spite of all the evidence ­ or perhaps because of it ­ DU continues
>to remain an integral part of the NATO arsenal. And now, attempts are being
>made to cover up its devastating effects.
>
>When, in 1999, Finland¹s Minister of Environment, Dr Pekka Haavisto was
>appointed chairman of the UN Environment Programme unit investigating the
>use of DU in Kosovo, doors slammed in the face of this highly respected
>expert. In Washington, de-classified documents relating to DU use were
>suddenly re-classified ­ a pattern followed in all the NATO countries he
>doggedly visited, Haavisto told a UN conference in 2001.
>
>When his team arrived in Kosovo, their movements were restricted by the
>military, but they still managed to produce a 72-page report outlining deep
>concerns. However, by the time it underwent the tortuous UN Œeditorial¹
>process, it was reduced to two pages.
>
>In an internal memo from the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico
>(the laboratory that brought the world the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs)
>headed The Effectiveness of Depleted Uranium Penetrators, the reason for the
>apparent cover-up becomes clearer. Dated 1st March 1991, the day after the
>Gulf ceasefire, a Lt Col Larson wrote to a Maj. Ziehman: ³There has been and
>continues to be a concern regarding the impact of DU on the environment.
>Therefore if no one makes the case for the effectiveness of DU on the
>battlefield, DU rounds may become politically unacceptable and therefore be
>deleted from the arsenal.²
>
>The memo ends: ³I believe we should keep this sensitive issue at mind, when,
>after action, reports are written.²
>
>With hospital records in Iraq being destroyed while US troops stand by and
>do nothing, it is now unlikely we will ever know the true extent of the
>health effects caused by the last war. As for the latest war, based on the
>amount of DU used, the health effects can only be exponentially worse.
>
>Uranium 238 has a half-life of some 4.5 billion years, meaning the DU dust
>will outlive the sun. Kuwait and Iraq may have been relieved of Saddam
>Hussein, but the cancer patients, the Œliberators¹, the new born and the
>unborn will pay the price until the end of time.
>
>Felicity Arbuthnot is an award-winning investigative reporter from Britain
>
>This feature is published by Panos Features and can be reproduced free of
>charge. Please credit the author and Panos Features and send a copy to MAC,
>Panos Institute, 9 White Lion St, London N1 9PD, UK. Email:
>media@panoslondon.org.uk
>     



_______________________________________________
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]