Back to NVUSA Global

Head U.N. weapons inspectors refute
Bush-Blair charges against Iraq
by Garland Favorito
author of Our Nation Betrayed
via email, March 10, 2003

On March 7, 2003 the U.N. weapons inspectors gave what may be their last report to the U.N. Security Council prior to a planned U.S. and British led invasion of Iraq. Our national news media has glossed over the details of their verbal reports by having talking heads interpret the presentations instead of showing sizeable excerpts and letting the audience draw their own conclusions. During his verbal report, Mohammed Elbaradei, the chief U.N. nuclear weapons inspector dramatically refuted all Bush and Blair administration assertions against Iraq regarding its nuclear program. Hans Blix, the chief weapons inspector for chemical and biological weapons also stated they have found no evidence the Bush Blair claims. Here are some of their actual comments that were suppressed by most national news media outlets other than C-Span.

a.. "The nuclear weapons program is defunct";
b.. "There is no indication of resumed nuclear activities or prohibited activities";
c.. "There is no indication that Iraq is attempting to import enriched uranium";
d.. "There is no indication that Iraq is attempting to import tubes for uranium enrichment".
e.. "No evidence so far has been found for mobile biological weapons units";
f.. "No underground facilities were found for chemical and biological weapons (so far)".

Contrary to reports from our national news media, the head Elbaradei told the U.N. Security Council that: "Iraq has been forthcoming", "inspections are moving forward" and they have made "important progress". Blix told the council that chemical and biological weapons inspections had "few difficulties".

Secretary of State Colin Powell made an excellent speech about Iraqi deceptions in its weapons declarations but then offered the illogical Bush administration position: "We must not allow Iraq to shift the burden of proof onto the inspectors". His position was echoed by Ana Palacio of Spain, which joined the U.S. and British in support of the planned invasion. She stated: "It is not the Security Council that is responsible" for the loss of life that will ensue. She also complained about the inspections in that Iraq should not "reverse the burden of proof onto our shoulders". It is unclear as to what they believed were the purpose of inspections.

The foreign ministers of Germany, France, Russia, China, Syria and even Pakistan spoke adamantly against the planned U.S. and British invasion. Here are some of their comments:

a.. Dominique De Villipin of France - "We are completely eliminating programs of weapons of mass destruction". "Why should we wish to proceed by force when we can succeeed peacefully?"
b.. Igor Ivanov, Russia - Iraq has given "immediate, unimpeded, unrestricted access to sites" for inspections. "The process of real disamament is underway". "Is it now reasonable to halt the inspections?"
c.. Joscha Fischer, Germany - "Iraq cooperation improved", "Why should we abandon inspections?" and "There is no need for a second resolution"
d.. Tang Jiaxuan, China - "Much progress has been made in the weapons inspection process" and results have been achieved". "It is highly necessary to continue the inspections".
e.. Farouk Al-Shara, Syria - "Iraq has cooperated actively and positively".
f.. Munir Akram, Pakistan - "We believe that there is no imminent threat to our security".

Despite news media hype that these countries may eventually change their mind, all of them made it clear that they would oppose another U.S. and British resolution.

The foreign ministers of Mexico, Chile, Bulgaria, Cameroon, Angola and Guinea gave relatively neutral pleas for peace and unity while Jack Straw of the United Kingdom resorted to provable lies such as: "Iraq falsely declared the missile range of the Al Samoud 2 missile was 150 kilometers". (The missile range of the Al Samoud 2 missile actually is 150 kilometers when tested under normal battlefield conditions with payloads and guidance systems). Straw also stated that "200,000 are willing to put their lives on the line for the sake of this body". Apparently he had never heard of Michael New and other reluctant Americans who were forced to fight for the United Nations or face prosecution by Clinton and Bush administrations operating in direct violation of the Constitution of the United States.

Iraq foreign minister, Mohammed Aldouri, who was allowed 7 minutes to refute details of the near one hour presentation made by Colin Powell on 2/5/3, was allowed another 7 minutes for comments at this meeting. He began: "It seems that the possibility of a war of aggression being launched against Iraq has become imminent regardless of what the security council decides and regardless of international position both official and public." He went on to detail several specific summits in which hundreds of countries have condemned military aggression against Iraq.

Aldouri contended that "all biological material was destroyed in 1991" and that "Iraq never weaponized VX gas". He claimed that "Iraq will not waiver in its continuing, proactive and rapid cooperation with Unmovic and IAEA" and that: "U.S. and United Kingdom officials have been unable to provide any evidence of weapons of mass destruction".

Aldouri continued: "On behalf of the people of Iraq I would like to express our appreciation to all of the peoples of the world, in particular those of the United States, Britain and Spain who took to the streets in the millions in demonstrations to express their attachment to peace and rejection of war". He contended that: "U.S. and U.K. officials have not been able to mask their private agenda:" That being "the takeover of Iraqi oil" and "the domination of the entire Middle Eastern region, politically and economically".

Aldouri closed with the "We call on the security council to shoulder its responsibility and thwart aggression against Iraq and especially let the security council not allow a new crime to be committed in its name, which in is impact will far surpass the crimes in the past century."

Whether you agree or not with the Iraqi foreign minister or any other foreign minister comments, I think you will agree that the national news media reporting perspective is a far cry from the direct quotes of the ministers. Seven minutes of actual comments from a true opposite perspective is worth more than 7 months of talking heads telling you what the opposition believes.

Garland Favorito


Back to NVUSA Global