Re: IRAQ
Fillimisht postuar nga Darien:
[qb]
Fillimisht postuar nga kastriot:
[qb] Me sill te lutem nje artikull te vetem gazete, nga gazetat amerikane, pa bere fjale ketu per nje reagim te qeverise se atehershme amerikane ose kongresit amerikan, qe DENONCONTE perdorimin e helmit luftarak kunder popullsise kurde me 1988 dhe pastej flasim me gjate.[/qb]
Sa e lezetshme kjo punë. Kaluam nga "E kanë fajin amerikanët që i dhanë teknologjinë" tek "E kanë fajin amerikanët që nuk e dënuan aktin publikisht".
Edhe sikur qeveria amerikane ta kishte urdhëruar vetë përdorimin e armëve kimike nga Iraku (p.sh. në luftën kundër Iranit), shumica e gazetave amerikane do shkruanin kundër atij veprimi. S'po pres kot ta kuptosh këtë gjë, sepse mënyra si flet ti për shtypin amerikan tregon që nuk e ke kupton (ose s'të do qefi ta kuptosh) idenë e shtypit të lirë.
Arkivat e gazetave nuk janë të gjitha në Internet. Po e pate aq merak, shko në ndonjë bibliotekë të madhe në Amerikë që ka sistemin e kërkimit të arkivave të shtypit. Me këtë sistem mund të kërkosh përmbledhjen e artikujve dhe të jep numrin e mikrofishës që ka tekstin dhe fotot e asaj gazete apo reviste. Sistemin për kërkim e kanë pothuajse të gjitha bibliotekat e kolegjeve në Amerikë dhe një numër i madh i bibliotekave në Europën perëndimore. Sa më e madhe biblioteka, aq më shumë shans do kesh t'i gjesh mikrofishat.
Edhe një herë, politikën neo-koloniale shaje sa të duash, është e drejta jote. Nuk është e drejta jote të shtrembërosh faktet.
Për vitin 1991, unë vetë u vë faj politikanëve amerikanë që e lanë luftën përgjysëm. Nënshkruan zjarr-pushimin me Sadamin kur duhet të kishin vazhduar deri në Bagdad. Populli u ngrit kundër Sadamit, dhe amerikanët prapë nuk vepruan shpejt. Për pesë ditë ai i masakroi kundërshtarët. Ky faj është pasiv, jo aktiv siç po përpiqesh ta bësh ti. [/qb]
Qe amerikanet nuk kane ngurruar kurre te perkrahin diktatura te ndryshme sa here qe keta te fundit i "hapnin dyert" Firmave amerikane kete nuk mund ta mohosh as ti dhe as ndonje tjeter. Per kete jane shembuj te tille qe fillojne nga perkrahja e diktatures Frankiste ne Spanje(1958) deri tek rrezimi i Salvator Alendes ne Kili dhe instalimi i diktatures se Pinocetit ne ate vend per te mbaruar pastaj tek Drogazhiu Noriega qe kur i ngriti cmimet e droges qe ja shiste CIA-s u rrezua nga posti i presidentit.
Kush e njeh sadopak historine e Irakut ne 100 vjecarin e fundit e din mire se puci i partise Bath dhe ardhja ne fuqi e Saddamit u perkrahen nga CIA dhe administratat e atehershme amerikane.Po keshtu i pakundershtueshem eshte fakti se regjimi i Saddamit u perkrah jo vetem politikisht nga amerikanet por edhe ushtarakisht me armatime qe perfshijne edhe teknollogjine per prodhimin e helmeve luftarake.
Si aleat i amerikaneve Saddami nuk u kritikua as nga shtypi dhe as nga administrata amerikane kur kunder kurdeve u perdor gazi helmues. KY ESHTE NJE FAKT I PAKUNDERSHTUESHEM. kush kerkon te vertetoje te kunderten LE TE SJELLI EDHE NJE ARTIKULL TE VETEM GAZETE NGA SHTYPI AMERIKAN dhe jo TE NA KALLZOJE SE KU MUNDET NJERIU TE KERKOJE NEPER ARSHIVA BIBLOTEKASH SEPSE NE KETE DREJTIM NUK I KERKOJ NJERI NDIHME.
Published on Friday, August 2, 2002 by CommonDreams.org
The Saddam in Rumsfeld’s Closet
by Jeremy Scahill
“Man and the turtle are very much alike. Neither makes any progress without sticking his neck out.”
—Donald Rumsfeld
..................Most glaring is that Donald Rumsfeld was in Iraq as the 1984 UN report was issued and said nothing about the allegations of chemical weapons use, despite State Department “evidence.” On the contrary, The New York Times reported from Baghdad on March 29, 1984, “American diplomats pronounce themselves satisfied with relations between Iraq and the United States and suggest that normal diplomatic ties have been restored in all but name.”
A month and a half later, in May 1984, Donald Rumsfeld resigned. In November of that year, full diplomatic relations between Iraq and the US were fully restored. Two years later, in an article about Rumsfeld’s aspirations to run for the 1988 Republican Presidential nomination, the Chicago Tribune Magazine listed among Rumsfeld’s achievements helping to “reopen U.S. relations with Iraq.” The Tribune failed to mention that this help came at a time when, according to the US State Department, Iraq was actively using chemical weapons.
Throughout the period that Rumsfeld was Reagan’s Middle East envoy, Iraq was frantically purchasing hardware from American firms, empowered by the White House to sell. The buying frenzy began immediately after Iraq was removed from the list of alleged sponsors of terrorism in 1982. According to a February 13, 1991 Los Angeles Times article:
“First on Hussein's shopping list was helicopters -- he bought 60 Hughes helicopters and trainers with little notice. However, a second order of 10 twin-engine Bell "Huey" helicopters, like those used to carry combat troops in Vietnam, prompted congressional opposition in August, 1983... Nonetheless, the sale was approved.”
In 1984, according to The LA Times, the State Department—in the name of “increased American penetration of the extremely competitive civilian aircraft market”—pushed through the sale of 45 Bell 214ST helicopters to Iraq. The helicopters, worth some $200 million, were originally designed for military purposes. The New York Times later reported that Saddam “transferred many, if not all [of these helicopters] to his military.”
In 1988, Saddam’s forces attacked Kurdish civilians with poisonous gas from Iraqi helicopters and planes. U.S. intelligence sources told The LA Times in 1991, they “believe that the American-built helicopters were among those dropping the deadly bombs.”
In response to the gassing, sweeping sanctions were unanimously passed by the US Senate that would have denied Iraq access to most US technology. The measure was killed by the White House.
Senior officials later told reporters they did not press for punishment of Iraq at the time because they wanted to shore up Iraq's ability to pursue the war with Iran. Extensive research uncovered no public statements by Donald Rumsfeld publicly expressing even remote concern about Iraq’s use or possession of chemical weapons until the week Iraq invaded Kuwait in August 1990, when he appeared on an ABC news special.
Eight years later, Donald Rumsfeld signed on to an “open letter” to President Clinton, calling on him to eliminate “the threat posed by Saddam.” It urged Clinton to “provide the leadership necessary to save ourselves and the world from the scourge of Saddam and the weapons of mass destruction that he refuses to relinquish.”
In 1984, Donald Rumsfeld was in a position to draw the world’s attention to Saddam’s chemical threat. He was in Baghdad as the UN concluded that chemical weapons had been used against Iran. He was armed with a fresh communication from the State Department that it had “available evidence” Iraq was using chemical weapons. But Rumsfeld said nothing.
Washington now speaks of Saddam’s threat and the consequences of a failure to act. Despite the fact that the administration has failed to provide even a shred of concrete proof that Iraq has links to Al Qaeda or has resumed production of chemical or biological agents, Rumsfeld insists that “the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.”
But there is evidence of the absence of Donald Rumsfeld’s voice at the very moment when Iraq’s alleged threat to international security first emerged. And in this case, the evidence of absence is indeed evidence.
Jeremy Scahill is an independent journalist. He reports frequently for Free Speech Radio News and Democracy Now! In May and June 2002, he reported from Iraq. He can be reached at
jeremybgd@yahoo.com.<br />
Kastriot