Hank Roth
THOSE ILLUSIVE weapons of mass destruction..
Tue Apr 8 17:11:41 2003
208.152.73.192

WHERE ARE THEY?
-----THOSE ILLUSIVE weapons of mass destruction..

If none can be found any other way, then there is always the claim that
the chemical industry is CAPABLE if not actually participating in the
manufacture of WMD. It requires and Orwellian reasoning which would not be
new to this administration. It is the "could be" method of reasoning.

"CIA director George Tenet told Congress in February (2003), `Baghdad is
expanding its civilian chemical industry in ways that _could be_ diverted
quickly to chemical weapons production.' [Milan Rai - "War Plan Iraq" -
2002]

Anything can be justified. What is not important to these extremists on
the right is what is, but what could be. The paranoia grows and is
expanded to include everyone and everything that is happening in the world
which _could be_ unfavorable to capitalist exploitation and expansion; to
Globalization of capital.

Time Mag had an article which said: "Procedurally, there is not much
difference between making pesticides and making chemcical weapons." (Time
- May 13, 2002)

Scott Ritter, former UNSCOM weapons inspector in Iraq, WHO has been the
object also of repeated attacks from the pro-war forces (incidentally
Scott Ritter is a republican who admits to having voted for George W.
Bush). Scott Ritter in an article for ARMS CONTROL TODAY (June 2000)
wrote:

"Manufacturing CW (chemical weapons) would require the assembling of
production equipment into a single, integrated facility, creating an
infrastructure readily detectable by the strategic intelligence
capabilities of the United States."

Using modern, state of the art technology, no chemical weapons facilities
have been detected in Iraq. And even Hans Blix, who is the head of
UNMOVIC, which was just ordered out of Iraq so the U.S. and Britain could
attack the people of Iraq (a repeat of the first weapons inspectors who
were also removed so an attack on the people of Iraq could begin.

Blix has said that he DOES NOT accept the U.S. assertion that there are
weapons of mass destruction. He stated when leaving Iraq that none have
been found and the inspectors were again not given enough time to do their
job. Blix stated in Financial Times (March 2001) he:

"does not accept as fact the US and UK's repeated assertions that
Baghdad has used the time to rebuild its weapons of mass destruction..."

Many in the U.S. are afraid of another attack on their soil similar to the
attack on the Twin Towers. They are told by this administration that there
is a connection between Saddam Hussein and that attack whereas there is
none. No connections have been proven. All have been refuted, yet there is
sufficient effort by Donald "Goebels" Rumsfeld to complete confuse and
brainwash Americans which has been sucessful in a country where most of
it's citizens do not read higher than a fifth grade level and many do not
read at all. Most only get their news in sound bites from highly
managed news releases disseminated by the Pentagon.

"A USA Today poll published Friday shows 76 percent of the American
people support President Bush's decision to attack Iraq even though
the United Nations Security Council refused to support the use of
force." [Marc Morano, "Anti-War Leader Compares President Bush to
Hitler" -- 03/22/2003 - CNSNews.com]

Patriotism is the expectation. Supporting the armies of capitalism is
expected to be unflinching and unquestioning. It is patriotic to protest
this war. It is also humane and moral to protest this immoral war in Iraq.

George Bush has made this personal. The objective has been to kill Saddam
Hussein or remove him. The first attack was an attack intended to kill the
president of Iraq. Assassinations were considered illegal in the U.S. but
George Bush has changed all that. This administration uses whatever means
is available at his disposal in contravention of what is illegal under
U.S. and international law. AND the war is IMMORAL.

"THE bombs are falling on Baghdad. Our boys are in action. The awesome
destruction of modern high-tech warfare is being visited upon Iraq."
[Paul Routledge, "THIS WAR IS STILL IMMORAL" - Mar 21 2003 - UK Mirror]

"And now comes the big pressure here at home. Overnight, it is deemed
unpatriotic - or worse - not to support this illegal and immoral war."
[ibid]

"Just because Tony Blair has sold himself into unpaid political and
military slavery to President George Bush, everyone must shut up."
[ibid]

"The debate is over. Whipped, bullied and bribed, MPs have approved the
invasion, though half of Labour's backbenchers don't support it."
[ibid]

"The deployment of British troops under the direct orders of George
Bush does not alter the basic moral fundamentals of the situation. The
war is wrong, and we should not be fighting it. It is wrong like the
Suez action in 1956 was wrong." [ibid]

At the start of every war we are told to `line up behind our president.'

"Either you are with us or you are with the terrorist" [George W. Bush]
Am I supposed to believe that objecting to this war in someone's
convoluted thinking makes me a supporter of terrorism? Am I supposed to
believe that by not supporting this war against innocent civilians makes
me an enemy of the state? This is the bull shit of power...


Hank Roth
http://pnews.org/
================================================

.moves into its third week
What You’re Missing on TV
The images seen and news reported on television matters. Those who control the flow of information control the minds of the public. This has become acutely apparent as the war in Iraq
CLICK:

See: "Veterans as Pawns of the Ruling Elite" at
http://pnews.org/art/9art/ILLEGAL.shtml

(Illegal and Immoral war in Iraq (links and articles) http://pnews.org/

• Law Groups Say US Invasion Illegal

  — APFN, Tue Apr 8 17:26
• the war we are told about! — mick from new mexico, Wed Apr 9 19:10
• Bush + Blair = Iraq — APFN, Tue Apr 8 19:03