Re: AUT: Dennis Halliday: Death For Oil. US Genocide in Iraq

[Sean Fenley <satellitecrash@xxxxxxxxx>]

forget about that last message. i hadn't yet finished
the article...
-Sean

--- "Harry M. Cleaver" <hmcleave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2000 17:11:35 -0400
> From: Jim Jaszewski <grok@xxxxxxxxx>
> Reply-To: Forum on Labor in the Global Economy
> <LABOR-L@xxxxxxxx>
> To: LABOR-L@xxxxxxxx
> Subject: Fwd: Dennis Halliday: Death For Oil.
> Clinton Guilty Of Crimes
>         Against Humanity
>
> From: Rick Rozoff <r_rozoff@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: r_rozoff@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Dennis Halliday: Death For Oil. Clinton
> Guilty Of Crimes Against
> Humanity
> Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 23:48:11 -0700 (PDT)
>
> http://www.ahram.org.eg/weekly/2000/490/intrvw.htm
>
> "So you think President Bill Clinton should be
> tried?"
> "Absolutely. He is the commander-in-chief and he
> approved the bombing of Iraq, for example, in
> December
> 1998. There was no justification for this, no UN
> resolution. It is a breach of international law. It
> is
> outrageous and, of course, a crime against
> humanity."
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Al-Ahram Weekly (Egypt)
> 13 - 19 July 2000
>
> Death for oil
> Dennis Halliday is probably the most high-profile
> critic of continuing sanctions against Iraq the
> world
> over. He should know. As UN assistant
> secretary-general heading the international
> organisation's humanitarian mission in Iraq he was
> first hand witness to the havoc the sanctions were
> wreaking on the country and its people. In 1998 he
> resigned in disgust. While in Cairo last week,
> Halliday found time to talk to Amira Howeidy about
> the
> 10-year long genocidal war still being launched
> against Iraq and the medieval tactics used in a
> dangerous game masterminded by Washington
>
> On 9 June, the UN Security Council adopted
> Resolution
> 1302, which extends the Oil-for-Food programme for
> another 180 days. How do you evaluate this
> resolution
> and should we expect improvement in the plight of
> the
> Iraqi people?
>
> Resolution 1302 is a continuation of the
> Oil-for-Food
> programme, which was not designed to resolve the
> crisis in Iraq. When it was assembled in 1996, it
> was
> designed to stop further deterioration. But the fact
> is that Oil-for-Food has sustained the humanitarian
> crisis. Mortality rates of children under five years
> of age still remain at 5,000 per month, plus an
> additional 2,000-3,000 people per month among
> adults,
> other children and teenagers. These people are dying
> because of bad water, inadequate diets, broken down
> hospital care and collapsed systems.
>
> We have massive malnutrition in Iraq, despite the
> Oil-for-Food programme. There is a huge social
> collapse, families falling apart with children out
> of
> school taking to the streets. The electric power is
> 35
> per cent of what it was in 1990. So the Oil-for-Food
> programme has totally failed to bring about the well
> being of the Iraqi people. Having said that, it has,
> however, provided something like 20 million tonnes
> of
> basic food. It does make a huge difference in
> keeping
> the Iraqi people alive -- but only barely alive.
>
> The conditions in Iraq today under the UN economic
> sanctions and the Oil-for-Food programme constitute
> famine conditions. The average birth weight of a
> child
> in Iraq today is less than five pounds. That is an
> indicator of famine. The Oil-for-Food programme is
> something that the UN should be ashamed of. It is a
> continuation of the genocide that the economic
> embargo
> has placed on Iraq.
>
> I say genocide because it is an intentional
> programme
> to destroy a culture, a people, a country --
> economic
> sanctions are known to do that. [Secretary of State
> Madeleine] Albright herself acknowledged half a
> million dead children back in 1996. Yet the member
> states -- the United States and the United Kingdom
> in
> particular -- have continued the economic embargo
> despite their knowledge of the death rate of Iraqi
> children. That is genocide.
>
> Oil-for Food is better than nothing, but it is not
> the
> solution. The solution is to rebuild the economy.
> There is no other way to address the problems of the
> Iraqi people but to give 100 per cent of the oil
> revenues back to Iraq and allow Iraq to invest that
> money in agriculture, health care and education, to
> rebuild the infrastructure, water systems, sewage
> systems, electric power and rebuild its capacity to
> produce oil and so on. That is the only solution to
> this crisis.
>
> After ten years of disarmament and sanctions,
> outrageous mortality rates and evidence of famine,
> why
> has the UN Security Council failed to agree on
> lifting
> the embargo? Do you believe that the continuation of
> this genocide is deliberate?
>
> I think the UN Security Council today reflects the
> wishes of the US. The US, supported by the UK, has
> corrupted the UN. They deliberately sustain this
> policy. This is not about Kuwait, it is about
> something much bigger. It is a new form of
> neo-colonialism [applied by] the US to dominate the
> Arab world in order to control the supply of oil and
> destroy and suppress perhaps the strongest country
> within the Arab world which in 1990 who dared to
> challenge the West. A country which dared to stand
> up
> and plan to create some regional leadership.
>
> The US found that unacceptable. They were afraid of
> the power that Saddam Hussein represented after the
> Iraq-Iran war. Although the economy was damaged and
> he
> was short of money, he had capacity. When they
> realised this capacity, and when he foolishly
> invaded
> Kuwait -- a grave mistake -- it was a gift to
> President George Bush. They prayed for something
> like
> that and they got it. They destroyed Iraq and they
> were very happy to do that. They were very
> frightened
> that he would withdraw from Kuwait before [General
> Norman] Schwarzkopf and Bush were ready to crush the
> Iraqi people.
>
> But when they did that, they broke the international
> law and the Geneva convention. They deliberately
> targeted the civilian infrastructure. And this was
> the
> US -- under the umbrella of the UN -- committing
> crimes against humanity during the Gulf War.
>
> So Iraq has been controlled and destroyed. Why,
> then,
> are the sanctions still in force?
>
> What is happening now is that they are frustrated.
> They are punishing the Iraqi people by killing them
> because they cannot find a way to punish Saddam
> Hussein and deal with the government in Baghdad.
>
> This is a substitute for dealing with the real
> problem
> as they see it, which is the government in Baghdad.
>
> But this sounds rather medieval.
>
> Yes. It is like raiding the city and killing all the
> women and children or killing all the men and then
> taking the women. It is absolutely medieval, you're
> quite right.
>
> When they launched Operation Desert Fox against Iraq
> in 1998, was it actually possible for the US and the
> UK to get rid of Hussein?
>
> I think they deliberately decided to keep the
> government in Baghdad in power to sustain the
>
=== message truncated ===


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get Yahoo! Mail ? Free email you can access from anywhere!
http://mail.yahoo.com/


     --- from list aut-op-sy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---