|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Bulsajo
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
 Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2006 1:14 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
It's certainly an interesting allegation.
What does Georges Sada get out of this?
Besides more book sales?
Isn't he courting a hit squad for lying/spilling the beans (take your pick)?
Or do we take this at face value:
| The sun wrote: |
Short of discovering the weapons in Syria, those seeking to validate Mr. Sada's claim independently will face difficulty. His book contains a foreword by a retired U.S. Air Force colonel, David Eberly, who was a prisoner of war in Iraq during the first Gulf War and who vouches for Mr. Sada, who once held him captive, as "an honest and honorable man."
In his visit to the Sun yesterday, Mr. Sada was accompanied by Terry Law, the president of a Tulsa, Oklahoma based Christian humanitarian organization called World Compassion. Mr. Law said he has known Mr. Sada since 2002, lived in his house in Iraq and had Mr. Sada as a guest in his home in America. "Do I believe this man? Yes," Mr. Law said. "It's been solid down the line and everything checked out."
Said Mr. Law, "This is not a publicity hound. This is a man who wants peace putting his family on the line."
...
Mr. Sada is an unusual figure for an Iraqi general as he is a Christian and was not a member of the Baath Party. He now directs the Iraq operations of the Christian humanitarian organization, World Compassion. |
One way or another, this story is going to hinge on the credibility of this man for some time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
supernick
Joined: 24 Jan 2003
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2006 4:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Gopher wrote:
| Quote: |
| The problem was that the W. Bush Administration linked Saddam to 9/11 and bin Laden, and then painted him as an immeninent threat to the U.S. in 2002-2003, alleging that Saddam and bin Laden were conspiring to produce "mushroom clouds" over the U.S., etc., which was not accurate. |
Blame what you want on the Bush Administration, but I see the problem as much bigger than that. You really have to look closely at the 67% of the population that took it all in, and who still believed it even after there were no creditable links. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2006 4:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| supernick wrote: |
| ...there were no creditable links. |
Yeah, they clearly made the entire allegation up out of whole cloth...
So again, for those who are slow, and with additional data:
| Quote: |
| The [Iran-Iraq War] saw the use of chemical weapons, especially tabun, by Iraq. International antipathy to the Tehran regime meant Iraq suffered few repercussions despite these attacks. The UN eventually condemned Iraq for using chemical weapons against Iran, after the war. Chemicals weapons had not been used in any major war since World War I. |
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran-Iraq_War
| Quote: |
| Saddam Hussein is the first world leader in modern times to have brutally used chemical weapons against his own people. His goals were to systematically terrorize and exterminate the Kurdish population in northern Iraq, to silence his critics, and to test the effectiveness of his chemical and biological weapons. Hussein launched chemical attacks against 40 Kurdish villages and thousands of innocent civilians in 1987-88, using them as testing grounds. The worst of these attacks devastated the city of Halabja on March 16, 1988. |
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/rls/18714.htm[/quote]
| Quote: |
Iraq and Saudi Arabia fund families of suicide bombers
18 July 2002
In past speeches on the situation in the Middle East, U.S. President George Bush made clear that the Palestinian Authority and the Arab world must stop supporting terror. In his speech on 4 April 2002, Bush said: �All in the Middle East also must choose and must move decisively in word and deed against terrorist acts. The chairman of the PA has not consistently opposed or confronted terrorists�I call on the PA and all governments in the region to do everything in their power to stop terrorist activities, to disrupt terrorist financing, and to stop inciting violence by glorifying terror in state-owned media or telling suicide bombers they are martyrs. They're not martyrs. They're murderers. And they undermine the cause of the Palestinian people. Those governments, like Iraq, that reward parents for the sacrifice of their children are guilty of soliciting murder of the worst kind.�
Generous financial rewards to families of suicide bombers increase motivation to undertake suicide operations, as bombers can rest assure that their families will be taken care of. Thus Iraq and Saudi Arabia directly promote terrorism.
Iraq and Saudi Arabia have been transferring significant funds to the families of suicide bombers in the West Bank and Gaza. Iraq�s Saddam Hussein has said that the Palestinians need weapons and money instead of peace proposals and has provided payments throughout the 22 months of the Palestinian uprising. According to Mahmoud Safi of the Arab Liberation Front, a pro-Iraqi Palestinian group, �I saw on Iraqi TV President Saddam saying he will continue supporting the (uprising) even if it means selling his own clothes�. (Associated Press, April 3, 2002).
U.S. Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfield said Saddam�s payments inspire a �culture of political murder�Here is an individual who is the head of a country, Iraq, who has proudly, publicly made a decision to go out and actively promote and finance human sacrifice for families that will have their youngsters kill innocent men, women and children.� (Associated Press, April 3, 2002).
According to the Israeli newspaper Maariv (January 24, 2002), Arafat personally turned to Saddam Hussein to ask for Iraqi assistance in the struggle against Israel. The Iraqi News Agency reported that an unnamed Palestinian Authority minister brought Arafat�s request to Baghdad.
Saddam Hussein increased his financial pledge to Palestinian families of suicide bombers from $10,000 to $25,000 after reaching a decision on March 12, 2002 during an Arab conference in Baghdad (Associated Press, April 3, 2002).
According to Sky News (July 18, 2002) �Saddam Hussein has given millions of dollars to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers�The Iraqi president has channelled $20m to militant groups in les than two years.� The transfer of the funds takes place at ceremonies, organised by the Arab Liberation Front (a local pro-Iraqi organisation), in Gaza to relatives of suicide bombers.
On August. 13, 2002 it was reported twelve Palestinian families from Hebron who �lost� their sons in the uprising received $10,000 each as a personal gift from Iraqi President Saddam Hussein on Monday. The money was given to the families at a ceremony under the auspices of the pro-Iraqi Arab Liberation Front. Most of the dead men belonged to the armed wings of Fatah and Hamas. According to Palestinian sources (the Jerusalem Post, August 15, 2002) Saddam Hussein ordered his government to accelerate payments to Palestinian families in an attempt to muster the utmost support ahead of a possible US strike. The sources explained that he hopes widespread sympathy of the Arab masses for him will force Arab governments to oppose an American military campaign.
The Jerusalem Post also revealed that Saddam has started providing financial assistance to Arab families in Jerusalem in an effort to gain the support of Palestinians.
Iraq is not the only Arab country funding the Palestinian terrorists. Charities from Saudi Arabia, a U.S. ally � provide funds to families of Palestinian suicide bombers.
The mother of Jamal Nasser, a 23-year old architecture student who died while attempting to ram an explosives-laden car into an Israeli bus, said she received a cheque for $10,000 from Iraq and another for $5,000 from Saudi Arabia. (Associated Press, April 3, 2002).
During Israel�s Operation �Defensive Shield�, documents linking the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to financial backing of terrorist attacks against Israel were uncovered in Palestinian offices in Tulkarem. Among them was a table itemizing payments to the �Martyrs of the Al-Aqsa Intifada�. The table details how $545,000 was allocated to 102 families. The letterhead reads �Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the Saudi Committee for Aid to the Al-Quds Intifada.� (JCPA, May 6, 2002) This committee was established by the Saudi Minister of Interior, Prince Nayef bin Abd al-Aziz, in the fall of 2000.
In April 2002, the Saudi state TV held a telethon for the families of �Palestinian martyrs� � raising over $100 million.
Beyond the financial assistance to Palestinian terrorists, further moral support for suicide bombings is evident in a poem written by the Saudi Arabian ambassador to the UK. Ambassador Dr Ghazi Algosaibi, a well-known poet in the Arab world, wrote that suicide bombers "died to honour God's word" in a short verse published in the London-based Arabic newspaper al-Hayat. The poem, entitled The Martyrs, praised Ayat Akhras, an 18-year-old Palestinian who blew herself up in a Jerusalem supermarket on 29 March, killing two Israelis and wounding 25 (The Observer, April 14, 2002).
On March 28, leaders of the Arab League met for a summit in Beirut and pledged $330 million over six months to support the Palestinian Authority, plus an additional $150 million to support the Palestinian �uprising.� (The Washington Post, March 29, 2002)
For any progress to be made toward peace in the Middle East, it is crucial that all nations stop the flow of money to terrorist groups and cease supporting suicide bombers. Iraq and Saudi Arabia are an obstacle to peace and undermine any international effort to reach a diplomatic solution to the conflict. |
http://www.bicom.org.uk/publications/middle_east_and_north_africa/?content_id=691 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
supernick
Joined: 24 Jan 2003
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2006 4:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Maybe Saddam took lessons from the British.
Gopher quoted:
| Quote: |
| Saddam Hussein is the first world leader in modern times to have brutally used chemical weapons against his own people. His goals were to systematically terrorize and exterminate the Kurdish population in northern Iraq, to silence his critics, and to test the effectiveness of his chemical and biological weapons. Hussein launched chemical attacks against 40 Kurdish villages and thousands of innocent civilians in 1987-88, using them as testing grounds. The worst of these attacks devastated the city of Halabja on March 16, 1988. |
http://www.internationalist.org/chemwarhoax0503a.html
II. Britain Used Chemical Arms on 1920 Iraq Revolt In March 1917, British commander Lt.-General Stanley Maude, issued a proclamation upon entering Baghdad (above) declaring that ��Our armies do not come into your cities and lands as conquerors or enemies, but as liberators.�� British ��liberators�� proceeded to use poison gas against Iraqi rebels. (Photo: New York Times) It all goes back to the seizure of the Near East by the Western powers during and after World War I. As Marxists declared at the time, that was not a war to ��make the world safe for democracy,�� as U.S. president Woodrow Wilson sanctimoniously claimed. Rather, it was over the division of the world by the imperialists and the redistribution of their respective colonies. WWI saw the break-up of the Ottoman Empire in the Near East, whose capital Constantinople became Istanbul, the metropolis of modern Turkey. Out of the remnants of that decrepit empire, a series of artificial states were created which arbitrarily divided up and threw together various peoples of the Arab East under puppet monarchs imposed by the colonialists (see ��Mr. Sykes and Monsieur Picot Carve Up the Near East��). Under League of Nations ��mandates,�� France got Syria and Lebanon, while Britain got Palestine, Jordan and Iraq. Naturally, the imperialist ��democracies�� didn��t bother to consult the populations of the countries involved. The birth of Iraq was presided over by Winston Churchill, an arrogant, brutal colonialist and imperialist who to this day is honored as a ��statesman�� in bourgeois histories. At the time Churchill was British secretary of state for the colonies. He had earlier promised Arabian ruler Sharif Hussein to install his son, Feisal, as ruler of Syria. When the French grabbed Damascus in the diplomatic horse-trading, Churchill gave Feisal the lands formerly known as Mesopotamia, lying between the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers, as a consolation prize. Repeatedly from 1919 on, the population of what is now Iraq rose up against the Hashemite ruler and his British patrons. In June 1920, a full-scale rebellion broke out. British garrisons were taken by surprise as the revolt spread throughout the lower Euphrates valley. In August, the insurgents declared a provisional Arab government. But by February 1921, the revolt had been crushed, with between 8,000 and 9,000 rebels killed. This was accomplished mainly through the use of air power, by the Royal Air Force (RAF), which mercilessly bombed the insurgents using incendiary weapons and poison gas. Before the outbreak of the rebellion, the RAF asked Churchill in 1919 for permission to use chemical weapons ��against recalcitrant Arabs as an experiment.�� Churchill (then secretary of state for war) in turn asked experts if it would be possible to use ��some kind of asphyxiating bombs calculated to cause disablement of some kind but not death��for use in preliminary operations against turbulent tribes.�� He added: ��I do not understand this squeamishness about the use of gas. I am strongly in favour of using poison gas against uncivilised tribes�� which ��spread a lively terror.�� General Sir Aylmer Haldane wrote that poison gas was more useful against the hilly Kurdish redoubts, while ��in the hot plains��the gas is more volatile�� (quoted in Geoff Simmons, Iraq: From Sumer to Saddam [MacMillan Press, 1994]). In fact, the weapons used by the RAF in its ��civilizing mission�� against the ��turbulent tribes�� were quite lethal. The British cabinet was squeamish, but Churchill argued that use of gas should not be prevented ��by the prejudices of those who do not think clearly.�� Eventually, poison gas was used on Iraqi rebels, with what the illustrious ��statesman�� described as ��excellent moral effect�� (quoted in David Omissi, Air Power and Colonial Control. The Royal Air Force, 1919-1939 [Manchester University Press, 1990]).The RAF was also used to bomb and strafe Kurds and Iraqis before, during and after the revolt. A series on the ��Secret History�� TV program of Britain��s Channel 4 on ��The RAF and the British Empire�� (6 July 1992) interviewed a squadron leader, who said that if the tribespeople ��were doing something they ought not to be doing then you shot them.�� A commander remarked: ��If the Kurds hadn��t learned by our example to behave themselves in a civilised way then we had to spank their bottoms. This was done by bombs and guns.�� A colonel with the Royal Artillery noted in his diary that the burning of Arab villages made ��a wonderful sight at night.�� Earlier, Wing Commander Arthur Harris emphasized, ��The Arab and Kurd now know what real bombing means in casualties and damage. Within forty-five minutes a full-size village can be practically wiped out and a third of its inhabitants killed or injured.�� The bloodthirsty Harris was later known as ��Bomber Harris�� (or, more to the point, Butcher Harris) during World War II, when he designed the infamous firebombing of Dresden, Germany in February 1945 (see ��U.S./British Massacre at Dresden��).As the Pentagon is doing today, Britain used the suppression of the Iraqi revolt in order to test out new weapons. Devices developed for use against tribal villages included forerunners of napalm, air-to-ground missiles and fragmentation bombs. An Air Ministry list included: ��Phosphorous bombs, war rockets, metal crowsfeet [to maim livestock], man-killing shrapnel, liquid fire, and delay-action bombs. Many of these weapons were first used in Kurdistan.�� Gertrude Bell, the Oriental Secretary in the Colonial Office, described a demonstration of the new technology: ��They had made an imaginary village��and the first two bombs dropped from 3000 feet, went straight into the middle of it and set it alight��. Then they dropped bombs all round it, as if to catch the fugitives and finally fire bombs which even in the brightest sunlight made flares of bright flame in the desert. They burn through metal and water won��t extinguish them. At the end the armoured cars went out to round up the fugitives with machine guns�� (quoted in Simons, Iraq: From Sumer to Saddam, which brings together reports of Britain��s use of poison gas and terror bombing of the civilian Iraqi population). Today the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office, successor to the Colonial Office, professes horror at the suffering of the Kurds under Hussein��s rule, which has ��included the use of chemical weapons�� (Saddam Hussein: Crimes and Human Rights Abuses [November 2002]). Yet this is the bloody history of the British imperialists who claim to be friends of the Kurds! In March 1917, the commander of the Anglo-Indian Army of the Tigris, Lt.-General Stanley Maude, issued a proclamation upon entering Baghdad declaring that ��Our armies do not come into your cities and lands as conquerors or enemies, but as liberators�� (Robert Fisk, ��The West Has Been Liberating the Middle East for Centuries,�� Independent [London], 7 March). This is the fiery hell the imperialist ��liberators�� visited on the Iraqi people then, as they are doing again today. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
supernick
Joined: 24 Jan 2003
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2006 5:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Wangja wrote:
| Quote: |
| What is being said is that in the months running up to the invasion, Hans Blix's team reported (twice at least) that there were none. That there were none reported and that this fact was disregarded and did not prevent the invasion is the issue. |
Let's also remember that there were UN weapon inspectors in Iraq doing their job just before the invasion. Clearly, the war was never over whether or not Iraq had such weapons, that was just part of the fear Bush and the boys were selling. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2006 5:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Wangja wrote: |
Nobody's saying he didn't have 'em at one point and hadn't used 'em earlier.
What is being said is that in the months running up to the invasion, Hans Blix's team reported (twice at least) that there were none.. |
Didn't they report that they COULDN'T FIND ANY? To search an entire country the size of Iraq, particularly when they were restricted from going certain places, would have taken them a lot longer. In fact people on this very board have complained about the Bush Adminstration not letting the weapon inspectors finish their job.
Reporting not being able to find any and reporting that there are none are two very different things.
What was the actual language used in the report? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 28, 2006 12:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| Iraq had no links to AQ? |
I don't doubt that there were contacts or possible links. But I don't think that Saddam was financing or giving training, intel, or weapons to AQ, or was in any way involved in 9/11, no.
I think that the W. Bush Administration alleged or strongly implied this as part of its justification for the Iraqi War, and on this point, the President is on very problematic ground.
See, for ex., this kind of analysis...
http://foxnews.com/story/0,2933,103163,00.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wangja
Joined: 17 May 2004
Location: Seoul, Yongsan
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 28, 2006 3:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Many have to tried to kill US presidents, but their country was not invaded as a result.
They did have troops massed at the border - but had almost no aircraft left to support any such invasion, so that should be dismissed as posturing. In any event, massing troops within their own country is not justification for an invasion by anotehr country.
He did, too, shoot at US (and UK) planes in the "no-fly" zones in airspace above Iraq, but that too is not reason sufficient to justify invasion.
And the cost to US (and UK and others) was far far less than invasion and occupation. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 28, 2006 3:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Put it this way if Saddam had given up his war and his revolutionary agenda then there would have been no gulf war II. If Saddam didn't want to be invaded then he should have given up his war.
Every time Saddam acted up the US had to respond to him. This could have gone on for a very long time. Remember his sons were coming up next.
The US was at war with Iraq before 9-11. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gypsyfish
Joined: 17 Jan 2003
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 28, 2006 4:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Wangja wrote: |
Nobody's saying he didn't have 'em at one point and hadn't used 'em earlier.
What is being said is that in the months running up to the invasion, Hans Blix's team reported (twice at least) that there were none. That there were none reported and that this fact was disregarded and did not prevent the invasion is the issue. |
On 27 January 2003, Blix actually reported to the UN Security Council that he could neither confirm nor exclude WMD in Iraq. He did report that his inspectors couldn't account for 6,500 missing chemical weapons and couldn't prove that Iraq had destroyed the anthrax that it admitted it had produced.
As late as 5 June 2003(after the war had begun), in his last letter to the security council, Bilx reported, 'While we are all aware of the large amounts of proscribed items, which still remain unaccounted for, we should perhaps take note of the fact that for many years neither UNSCOM nor UNMOVIC made significant finds of weapons. The lack of finds could be because the items were unilaterally destroyed by the Iraqi authorities or else because they were effectively concealed by them. I trust that in the new environment in Iraq, in which there is full access and cooperation, and in which knowledgeable witnesses should no longer be inhibited to reveal what they know, it should be possible to establish the truth we all want to know.'
http://www.unmovic.org/
That said, I doubt that Saddam, who was abrogating the UN sanctions, was a threat to the USA. And now Iraq is a breeding ground for terrorism. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2006 7:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
My point is simply that it is not unreasonable at all to have assumed that Saddam had some kind of WMD program, based on his demonstrated history with the things.
I never believed that he was an immediate threat to the U.S., however, or that he was linked in any way to bin Laden, and I continue to believe that the Iraqi War was an unjust war for that reason.
There could be all kinds of explanations why we never found the WMD or WMD facilities, though, and the one Joo offers here is not implausible at all. I'd just like to see some direct evidence before buying it. |
Sadly, I agree with goph. (Sad because it is much more fun when we have a little tiff.  ) I basically figured there was a fair chance they were moved rather than destroyed. Wouldn't surprise me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bulsajo
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2006 10:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
This couldn't have been done by one person, and George Sada says he didn't particpate but heard about it from friends.
Now that he has let the cat out of the bag, let's see who (if anyone) is willing/able to corroborate (you know it won't be anyone from Syria...) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2006 11:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| If you were Syria and you were smart, you would have destroyed the things immediately. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2006 1:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| syria and smart seem to be polar opposites the past couple years. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
