Theos-Talk Archives (July 2004 Message tt00038)

If, as HPB pointed out several times, a Theosophist is one who seeks 
after truth, then perhaps it is among our theosophical duties to try as 
best as we can to separate political rhetoric, designed to manipulate 
people instead of informing them, from the facts of the matter.

Several years ago, before the US invasion of Iraq, Frontline aired a 
political documentary on the rise of Saddam that included three 
extraordinary statements that I felt warranted further investigation:

1. That the CIA assisted in deposing Kassim and bringing Hussain to power. 
2. That April Glaspie, US Ambassador to Baghdad, in a meeting with 
Saddam Hussain, in effect, indicated that the US would be neutral 
concerning the pending Iraqi-Kuwait war. 
3. That it is very questionable whether Saddam had gassed a Kurd village 
in 1988. 
The internet has become a cornucopia for archived news stories and 
documents from which we can learn quite a bit, providing we approach the 
information critically. In checking out the above statements, I found 
the following.


1. Saddam alleged gassing of Iraqi Kurds: The event in question, often 
mentioned by Bush and Blair, occurred in the Kurd town of Halabja in 
March 1988, near the end of the Iraqi-Iranian war. On Jan. 31, 2003, 
Stephen C. Pelletiere, then CIA Senior Political Analyst, writing to the 
New York Times, cited a then classified document asserting that "it was 
Iranian gas that killed the Kurds, not Iraqi gas." While both sides 
used gas against the other, the gas that killed the Kurds was a cyanide 
based gas, which Iran is known to use, and the Iraqis did not have. 
Rather, they were using mustard gas at the time. Pellitiere's entire 
essay is archived at
http://www.quixote-quest.org/resources/national_international/IraqGasKurds_OilH2O_013103.html

2. April Glaspie's meeting with Saddam: Glaspie's meeting with Saddam 
took place on July 25, 1990. At the time, Saddam had "deployed massive 
troops in the South," ready to invade Kuwait. It is pretty clear that 
Saddam's reason for his interview with Glaspie was to get assurance that 
the US would not interfere with his planned assault upon Kuwait. 
Glaspie informed Saddam that "We [i.e. the US] have no opinion on the 
Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border disagreement with Kuwait." 
Clearly, Saddam would have taken her answer as a green light. The 
invasion took place on August 2nd. Glaspie herself was interviewed on 
the Frontline show, so there was no question in my mind concerning the 
veracity of her statements. Fortunately, the interview was recorded and 
a transcription of it is archived at 
http://chss.montclair.edu/english/furr/glaspie.html and clearly verifies 
Glaspie's account.

3. CIA involvement with regime changes in Iraq: This is most troubling, 
and if true, completely damming. I have found dozens of web sites 
chronicling CIA assassinations of political leaders, communists and left 
leaning intellectuals. Many of them repeat each other word for word, 
but source documentation always seems to be lacking. Is there someone 
who has put some time into researching this, who might be able to 
produce some real documentation, or at least a paper trail to the source 
of these allegations? 
--jhe




Raghu K wrote:

> Steve
>
> I don't think there was any atrocity committed by Saddam, as projected by
> the US & Britain. Tony Blair says hundreds of thousands of Kurds were killed
> by Saddam ( Look @ the number). The magnitude of the adjective only asserts
> the sort of desperation that Tony Blair is under.
>
> No.2, Don Rumsfeld & co are confident of wmd being in Iraq, simply because
> they were supplied by his Highness Rumsfeld himself in the 1980s to fuel the
> Iran - Iraq crisis.
>
> Anyway, what is the motive behind all these ? I feel oil is one and number
> two is religion (Christianity ) propagation.
>
> Any comments ??
>
> Raghu
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: stevestubbs [mailto:stevestubbs@yahoo.com]
> Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2004 3:31 PM
> To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Theos-World The Trial
>
>
> Saddam Hussein may not be the only jerkoff in the courtroom when he
> us put on trial. His defense attorneys want to call George Bush I,
> Bush 2, and "Rummy" Rumnsfeld, without whom Saddam's atrocities would
> not have been possible, as well. The problem is, nobody can tell
> them apart. What if Saddam takes advantage of the confusuion to
> leave the courtroom and move into the white house snd Bush 2 finally
> faces justice? Will any of Bush's brain damaged admirers be able to
> tell their boy is missing?
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links