portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article commentary global

imperialism & war

The hypocritical prosecution of Saddam for crimes against humanity

The last people on earth who should be prosecuting Saddam and the Americans and the Brits...

The hypocritical prosecution of Saddam for crimes against humanity


During happier times, when Saddam's 'war crimes' and 'crimes against humanity' just were not considered all that important, Rumsfeld had his picture taken shaking the hands of the 'war criminal'. This took place after Saddam had gassed the Kurds, a 'crime against humanity' that Rumsfeld will no doubt be looking to prosecute Saddam for today, although it wasn't a problem before.

The propaganda line is that America invaded Iraq to 'bring democracy and freedom' by throwing out a 'vicious tyrant.' That never bothered them before. The administration continues to lie about their lack of interest in oil, even though their own oil policy document which was on the desk of Dick Cheney in April 2001, months before 9-11, "Strategic Energy Policy Challenges For The 21st Century" states that America is facing an energy crisis of massive scale. The document identifies Saddam as a threat to the United States due to the fact that he controls Iraq's oil fields and recommends an invasion of Iraq as a strategy to be employed in dealing with the American energy supply crisis. The document reads, "Iraq remains a destabilizing influence to ... the flow of oil to international markets from the Middle East. Saddam Hussein has also demonstrated a willingness to threaten to use the oil weapon and to use his own export program to manipulate oil markets," and then goes on to state that "the American people continue to demand plentiful and cheap energy without sacrifice or inconvenience" and therefore this requires military intervention in Iraq.

The 'war crimes' of the Taliban and Al Queda never bothered the American government during the Reagan administration when Bin Laden and Al Queda were getting billions of dollars. Reagan issued Proclamation 4908 on March 10, 1982 which declared 'Afghanistan Day' in honor of the Taliban, Bin Laden and Al Queda. According to the decree, Reagan signed it into law to

'commemorate the valor of the Afghan people and to condemn the continuing Soviet invasion of their country. Afghanistan Day will serve to recall not only these events, but also the principles involved when a people struggles for the freedom to determine its own future, the right to be free of foreign interference and the right to practice religion according to the dictates of conscience. Now, Therefore, I, Ronald Reagan, President of the United States of America, do hereby designate March 21, 1982, as Afghanistan Day.'

The Reagan administration started Al Queda, armed Bin Laden, and Reagan called the Taliban 'the fathers of the nation' and compared the leader of the Taliban to George Washington and the rest of the Taliban leadership he called 'the founding fathers.' They were 'freedom fighters', not 'terrorists' who deserved the support of all Americans because of their wonderful courage in the cause of freedom.


The British also have a few 'war crimes' of their own that need to be prosecuted, among them supplying Saddam with the poison gas facilities needed to do such things as gassing the Kurds, a 'war crime' for which Saddam will now be prosecuted by some of those same Brits.

The Guardian in Britain has revealed that one of the main Iraqi chemical warfare facilities used to manufacture poison gas used against Iranian soldiers was built by a British company, and that the United Kingdom, under the Thatcher government also helped to arm Saddam with the ingredients to create nerve gas. The plant (Falluja 2) was used by Colin Powell in his address to the security council as one of the reasons that war needed to be launched against Iraq. During the same security council meeting, Powell also gave high praise to what was purported to be the magnificent work of the British intelligence service in documenting Saddam's efforts to develop 'weapons of mass destruction' while evading weapons inspectors. The report turned out to be a fraud, and was concocted by pasting together documents on the internet, including a grad student's paper, all of which discussed the first Gulf War at the beginning of the nineties, and had nothing to do with the present time (although the cooked up British fraud was presented as the most recent results of the efforts of 'British Intelligence').

The humiliations being suffered by the British propagandists for war only increased, when it was revealed by U.N. nuclear inspectors that so called 'evidence' by British Intelligence that Saddam was trying to import the ingredients for a nuclear bomb were also faked. In fact the inspectors called the evidence 'deliberately fabricated'. with the chief nuclear inspector for Iraq, Mohammed El Baradei, referring to the so called as evidence as "not authentic". According to the IAEA the fakery was 'transparently obvious' and this led them to believe that either British Intelligence was duped, although because the fraudulent nature of the documents was so obvious it seemed more likely that the British intelligence services were willing dupes in the attempted act of deceit (the fraud was cooked up in Africa, probably Niger, and then passed onto the intelligence services).

It was also revealed, that in addition to building Iraq's chemical weapons factory, the British government was also involved in shipping to Iraq the precursor ingredients required to manufacture the nerve gas Sarin. The British government was also involved secretly in the building of another plant which they knew to be of the kind used to manufacture mustard gas, which was also used on Iranian soldiers. What is worse, the British government also provided financial backing for Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program, and the British tax payers winded up coughing up three hundred thousand pounds by the end of it all. Hypocritically, at the same time as this was going on, Britain was taking the 'lead role' at meetings of the Geneva convention on the subject of banning chemical weapons in warfare, but the government decided to hide the matter from both the British public and the American government on the grounds that British businesses would regard any interference in the deal as 'an unreasonable commercial restraint'.

The Americans were also up to their nostrils in shady deals with Iraq, and also involved in arming Iraq with both the ingredients for chemical and biological weapons, but also providing the equipment required in the manufacturing facilities for these toxic agents. When Iraq's report was released to the United Nations, the American government immediately seized the copies and expunged a huge part of the report, citing concerns about 'National Security' and the 'danger of proliferation'. Someone leaked an unedited copy, and it turned out that all Washington wanted to hide was the extremely long list of American Multinational Corporations that were complicit in arming Saddam Hussein with both the manufacturing capability and the ingredients required to manufacture chemical and biological weapons during its war with Iran. The state department also allowed Iraq to import biological agents such as Anthrax and Botulism, as well as facilities to work with such biological weapons.

Since it was the same bunch in power now who were in power during the Nixon, Reagan and now both Bush presidencies it seems just that since they were the ones who gave Saddam weapons of mass destruction, they should now be held accountable for dealing with that problem they caused.

The strange case of Falluja 2

Britain's dirty secret

Dismay at chemical plant link to Britain

How deal got the green light despite nerve gas warning

UK nuclear evidence a fake

What the Americans tried to hide by gutting Iraq's weapons declaration last December...

Western companies alleged to have developed Iraq's weapons of mass destruction

U.S. Corporations, Gov't Agencies and Nuclear Labs Helped Illegally Arm Iraq

As well, if you haven't seen them before, here are links to two parodies of Colin Powell's United Nations presentation...

Finally, the satellite proof the world needed against Iraq

Colin Powell's Facts about Iraq And speaking of fakery...

BREAKING NEWS!!!! bin Laden reveals Iraq/al Queda links!

Is this how a corporate take over works. 15.Dec.2003 14:11

Bird Dog

Is this also why washington is run by corporates.
Gee! This is like playing connect the dots.
And we can learn and use our minds to think at the same time.
Much more fun than being a puppet troll.

A puppet troll gets up in the morning and it's the same old line.
What do you mean think for my self!

Not to defend Rumsfeld... 15.Dec.2003 15:16


...But that photo was taken five years before the gassing of the Kurds. (The handshake was in 1983, the gassing in 1988). Though I agree with your sentiments.

urban legend 15.Dec.2003 23:40


you know that bit about the hand shake coming after the gassing of the Kurds could be an urban legend
you really have to watch out for the internet, its really bad for urban legends and I got stung a few times this way
for example I picked up some phony quotes from the American 'founding fathers' off the internet and they keep showing up on Indymedia sites I have noticed...you really have to watch your sources when you are reading material on the internet...this is a new age for the urban legend and the internet is one of the driving forces behind this new pheonomena where an urban legend can get started and then rocket around the globe in a couple of days...

according to this page
Iraq began gassing Iranian troops around the time that Rumsfeld was cozing up to Saddam (the Iran Iraq war lasted from 1980 to 1988) so it is possible that this net page got the Kurds mixed up with iranians...

thanks for the tip 15.Dec.2003 23:44


i updated my website
don't want to be spreading any urban legends myself
thanx for the tip

"collateral damage" 22.Dec.2003 17:07

just one person critter186@peoplepc.com

History is totally based on perspective. What is true today, is based on the past. As time passes, the truth, whatever that may be, changes. Decisions are based on what is true today. Not using the past to justify or demean what is now true. You can say the US is wrong about the war in Iraq. But it is likely that those same people that claim the US is wrong, wanted crimes against humanity stopped somewhere in the world last week, or month, or year. Those same people feel we are wrong for claiming the lives of citizens of those countries like Iraq. However, look at what has occurred. The World Trade Center did not contain military personnel. There direction was to kill American citizens. Those that did not even pose a threat to Iraq, Afghanistan, Al-Quaida, or anyone else. How is that justified??? By a religious faction that aims to kill anyone that does believe the way they do?? And that is acceptable to those who criticize what has occurred since? And the familes of 40 of those killed in the Trade Center do not want their stamp of approval on this? That is not only is a minority, but absurd. Will these people, or others that are against the conflicts in Iran, support terrorism against the American citizens "because we should not be in Iraq" or that Iraq is a bad war? Will they say we desirved it because we should not be in Iraq? The path of logic says they will. That same path does not allow those same people to be bothered by whatever terrorists may do on American soil. Our actions in Iraq created it.

By the way, has anyone noticed that since the gov and immigration tightened up after 9/11, i.e. took the illegal employees out of airports, off the flight line, and increased security there has been NO commercial flight crashes. No more Alaska Airlines crashing in the Pacific, no more Flight 800's in the Atlantic? So maybe these were the work of individuals going to their everlasting glory in heaven for kiling Americans. Think about that. Could it be true?