US Indymedia Global Indymedia Publish About us
Printed from Boston IMC :
IVAW Winter Soldier

Winter Soldier
Brad Presente

Other Local News

Spare Change News
Open Media Boston
Somerville Voices
Cradle of Liberty
The Sword and Shield

Local Radio Shows

WMBR 88.1 FM
What's Left
WEDS at 8:00 pm
Local Edition
FRI (alt) at 5:30 pm

WMFO 91.5 FM
Socialist Alternative
SUN 11:00 am

WZBC 90.3 FM
Sounds of Dissent
SAT at 11:00 am
Truth and Justice Radio
SUN at 6:00 am

Create account Log in
Comment on this article | View comments | Email this article | Printer-friendly version
News ::
Iraq War:Cobbling together "evidence" (english)
09 Sep 2002
Modified: 10 Sep 2002
what a coincidence, that this evidence should promise to pop up now, just as it becomes clear public opinion is against a war. It all looks as desperate as a couple coming back from holiday and incompetently trying to carry out an insurance fiddle.
The Independent
Article Here

Don't look now: Saddam is drowning

The warmongers failed to win public opinion,
so they're suddenly cobbling together

By Mark Steel

05 September 2002

So, they've got the evidence, about the
weapons of mass destruction, but we
can't see it just yet. Is it still at the
printers? Is it being held up by a row
about how you spell "aflatoxin"? Perhaps
there's a problem with the plot, and the
scriptwriters are refusing to let it go
because the character of Tariq Aziz is left
in the air and the relationship between
Saddam and the scud missiles left
hopelessly unresolved.

If they know the evidence, why can't they
tell us the main points until we have the
dossier? Or at least make a trailer: "This
is a story of a man for whom mass
destruction was simply a hobby – 'Soon
all my chemical weapons will be in place'
-– and two men determined to stop him –
'My God, there's enough uranium in there
to murder every living thing in every
country affiliated to Nato. And look at this
delivery notice, it says he's getting his last
crucial warhead in exactly three months' –
Together they have 90 days to stop the
axis of evil."

Or when it comes they might announce:
"We don't have any photos of his
weapons of mass destruction just yet –
but we have got drawings. In felt pen."

And what a coincidence, that this
evidence should promise to pop up now,
just as it becomes clear public opinion is
against a war. It all looks as desperate
as a couple coming back from holiday
and incompetently trying to carry out an
insurance fiddle. Blair and Bush are almost kicking each other under
the table as they mutter: "They've definitely got plutonium. Uranium. No,
plutonium. Hang on a minute – I thought we agreed uranium."

In a couple of weeks Blair will hold another press conference and
announce he's left the evidence on the Tube. But he has finished it,
honest. Then that night he'll ring Bush and say: "Can I copy yours?"

So for the time being we're left with statements such as the one by
White House spokesman Ari Fleischer, who said the war must go
ahead because "Saddam has not lived up to his promise to allow
inspectors into the country". He was then asked if the war would still go
ahead if Saddam did allow them into the country, and Fleischer
answered: "The policy of the US is regime change, with or without
inspectors." So if Saddam does admit inspectors, they'll be doing the
most pointless inspecting in the world. You couldn't blame them if they
sat in the shade for a fortnight and sent back a note saying: "He's got a
machine that can turn us all into tadpoles.".

Which would be at the level of one paper's cut-out guide to "Iraq's evil
arsenal", pride of place going to "Scud missiles". It admits the accuracy
of these things is less than a mile, so can we really go to war with
someone for possessing a large firework? They might as well include
"The Dead Leg. Evil thigh-tingling weapon that could numb several
people in one day". The Scud, we are told, has a "range of 200 miles,
making Israel, Cyprus, Turkey, Iran and Kuwait possible targets". So
either the demand is that Saddam gets rid of his Scuds, or that he
moves Iraq to somewhere more than 200 miles from the nearest

But the tabloid also mentions nuclear weapons. For, "if Saddam
acquires enriched uranium, he could be just months from building a
warhead". If the Women's Institute acquired enriched uranium, they
could be just months from building a warhead. There is, however, a fair
amount of evidence that Saddam doesn't have the military power that
Blair and Bush claim. Scott Ritter, who led the UN inspections team,
has stated repeatedly that any nuclear potential was destroyed. And the
last bunch of inspectors eventually left because they admitted they were
acting as spies.

The other argument for war, that Saddam's evil is proved by his war
against Iran and his treatment of Kurds, is poetic in its hypocrisy. It's
true he did both those things but we were backing him at the time. The
Americans shot down a civilian Iranian plane, vetoed a United Nations
resolution condemning the attacks on the Kurds and dismissed anyone
who pointed out this barbarism. It's as if Alex Ferguson decided to
bomb Roy Keane, screaming "But this is a man prepared to hack down
his own colleagues" at anyone who suggested he shouldn't.

So it could be that because the warmongers are failing to win public
opinion, they're suddenly cobbling together "evidence". And there will be
piles of it. Just like the stories of Germans raping nuns in 1914 and
Iraqis throwing babies out of incubators in 1990, admitted as lies once
those wars were over. There will be grainy film of Saddam chucking
kittens in canals and crackly tape of him threatening to ruin David
Beckham's hair. But the football manager the Americans will try to copy
once the war starts will be Ars่ne Wenger. Every time hundreds of
civilians are slaughtered by wayward bombs, the US spokesman will
look blank and say: "Well I didn't see that incident so I really can't
comment. But aren't we doing well?"

Add a quick comment
Your name Your email


Text Format
Anti-spam Enter the following number into the box:
To add more detailed comments, or to upload files, see the full comment form.


another war to end all wars (english)
10 Sep 2002
The serious problem we have here at home is that if we People with brains to think and analyze logically do not rah rah siss boom bah to those powerful forces that want this war (despite any common sense retorts to their shouting about Iraq's nuclear weapons that will blow us to smithereens, Iraq's potential to blow us to smithereens, that the Iraq has a monsterous dictator, Iraq gassed their own people, Iraq invaded their neighbor Kuwait killing babies with bayonets, or that Iraq is not feeding their people or providing medicine to the sick) the very real possibility exists that we will soon witness another terrorist attack in America to spur up enthusiasm.