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]
--- Darin Zeilweger <email@example.com> wrote: > Look Folks, > > I came across this site by sheer accident and I > could not believe what I > saw. I hate to be the one to tell you this but > Saddam Hussein has > suckered you people. And from what I can tell, for > quite a long time. > > What I don't get is how you folks could so easily > believe the sanctions > propaganda spewed by Saddam's Baath Party. No - we believe that facts 'spewed' out by the Iraqi people. > > There have been been plenty of clues: > > 1. Saddam Hussein and the Baath Party's reputation, > track record, and > credibility itself. We get our information from other sources - this is irrelevent. > > 2. The debunked FAO report of 1995. > > 3. The debunked WHO report of 1996. > > 4. The 1999 UNICEF Report. Did you ever bother > reading the footnotes > to that study? Saddams Baath Party was heavily > involved in every aspect > of that study... which was the main reason the 1995 > and 1996 reports > were 'debunked'. Why was everybody so eager to put > so much weight on, > and unquestionably rely on, a UNICEF report? > Because it is politically > incorrect to challenge the, what some think as > noble, but actually > corrupt and beaurocratic U.N.? Here is a link to > the footnotes of the > 1999 UNICEF report, straight from the horses mouth: > > http://www.unicef.org/reseval/pdfs/irqscvak.pdf Because it relfects what many here have seen with their own eyes. We didn't need to read the report - any of us could have written it. No matter how much you insist the Iraqi government was too involved in the reports, the fact remains that many of us oppose the sanctions because we have seen the effect of the sanctions for ourselves. Yes - the Iraqi government was involved. That doesn't mean that UNICEF would give them the chance to manipulate the figures (and the Iraqi government didn't need to). It doesn't stop the fact that the US/UK governments sanctioned basic medical supplies, anti-biotics and anti-cancer drugs. It doesn't stop the fact that the US/UK governments sanctioned chemicals for water treatment. The effect was inevitable (Tom Nagy can also show that the US/UK governments knew this and didn't care - or their objective was to kill Iraqi children) > > I'll quote a couple of critical sections from the > above link: > No need - we've all read it. The point is that SH is not responsible for EVERYTHING, as the US/UK govts keep saying. I think you need to look up what exactly wasn't avaliable in Iraq at the time. I can't do this subject justice but I'm sure Ghazwan can. > 5. Reports coming out of the 'baby parades' being a > big farce. > > In June of 2002, > http://observer.guardian.co.uk/Print/0,3858,4446693,00.html > > In May of 2003, > http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/05/23/1053585696870.html > > 6. Where the hell are the mass baby > graves?????????? They were burried by their families, as you would expect. > > > 7. Now if this doesn't open your eyes then I don't > what will. I refer > now to an article titled: > > "Confessions of an Anti-Sanctions Activist" by by > Charles M. Brown > at: http://www.meforum.org/article/548 > > I will paste the whole article for you to read: Why? Do you really think anybody here hasn't already read and debunked it? Alun Harford __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ 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 firstname.lastname@example.org All postings are archived on CASI's website: http://www.casi.org.uk