MSNBC Lying about White Phosphorus
MSNBC: U.S. denies using phosphorus against civilians
CBC Canada: U.S. official admits phosphorus used as weapon in Iraq
MSNBC’s story was at 7:18 am, CBC at about 10:00am, so perhaps MSNBC still hadn’t heard the news…? but now it’s at least 7 hours after many international news organizations have reported the exact opposite of MSNBC’s headline and they still haven’t changed it… This is a joint-effort between two billion dollar corporations and that’s the best they can do? Absolutely, because their purpose is not to inform, but to cover for the Military-Industrial Complex.
If we can get the MSM to cover this admitted use of Chemical Weapons, then we can ask all Pro-war Americans where they draw the line. Can they really look in the mirror and convince themselves that we’re still the good guys in Iraq?
* * *
November 16th, 2005 at 3:07 pm
The UN Convention bans the use of incendiary weapons against civilans, not against humans. See for yourself:
http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/FULL/515?OpenDocument
Of course any deliberate engagement or targeting of civilians is
already a war crime. so that the US has not signed this one is not of especial import except to say that we aren’t bound by it expressly.
White Phosphorus is not banned.
It also isn’t a chemical weapon. We are signtory to the Chemical Weapons Convention which defines chemical weapons. See here:
http://www.opcw.org/html/db/cwc/eng/cwc_frameset.html
So it isn’t a chemical weapon and it isn’t banned.
Indiscriminate use is. The stories circulating do not support that
contention. See here:
http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2004/04/11/military/iraq/19_30_504_10…
Cpl. Bogert received the coordinates for the targets and recorded them on a map. This is proper procedure. He’s receiving coordinates from a Forward Observer, indirect fire weapons never see their targets, the FOs do. The coordinates are plotted so that it is known what was ordered where. There is also a verification that takes place in the call for indirect fire to avoid problems with numerical transposition or other mistakes.
November 16th, 2005 at 3:49 pm
re: Damage Control comment #1:
So what you’re saying is that White Phosphorus, which burns skin to the bone is not a chemical weapon, and the US did not do anything wrong.
Just like torture and pre-emptive attack, we’re the Good Guys, we never do anything wrong. Do you really believe that?
November 16th, 2005 at 5:10 pm
White phosphorous ignites spontaneously upon contact with oxygen. If it comes into contact with a persons skin it will continue to burn as long as oxygen is available, going as far down as the bone. As we have seen time and again the United States has had to backtrack and restate what is happening in regards to Iraq. Each revision of the “truth” results in a lowering of the world’s opinion of the war. How refreshing it would be to have one story told, and it be the correct one the first time around!
All of this is very disturbing. In light of the topic you have a good site. Keep up the good work.
http://www.illmethinks.com
g
November 17th, 2005 at 2:45 am
This post is sad on two counts.
First it repeats a complete and utter falsehood about white phosphorus and about American use of WP. It is actually pathetic that in a situation like Iraq one has to invent stuff to make it bad.
Read the MSNBC headline - it accurately reports what was said by the US military official. WP was NOT used against civilians.
Now read the CBC headline. It too is accurate: WP was used as a weapon in Iraq - but against the insurgents, the combattants, the people setting off car bombs.
AT NO POINT does anyone accuse, claim or prove the ludicrous story that is circulating on the internet and recently foisted on the world again by the appalling piece of Italian propaganda, namely that the US is targetting Iraqi civilians with “chemical” weapons.
ThItalian job and the Internet stuff is, for the most part, complete fiction. It would be generous to liken it to Goebbels big lie. Ironic, isn’t it?
Second, and more importantly, the kinds of misrepresentations about WP we have seen repeatedly in so many places weakens any efforts to bring peace to a place like Iraq. After all, this claim and insane accusation actually destroys the credibility of the people making the claim - they are wrong, factually, completely wrong.
November 17th, 2005 at 2:56 pm
In response to “Now read the CBC headline. It too is accurate: WP was used as a weapon in Iraq - but against the insurgents, the combattants, the people setting off car bombs.”
I have yet to see any reports of us using this against British SAS agents. If you have anything on us getting the car bombers please post it.
Now as to the targeting, if a soldier is in thew middle of a crowd of cicvilians, it is not permissible to kill the civilians in order to get a clearer shot at the soldier. Burning them up isnt either.