COME CLEAN
WMD Awareness Programme
Nuclear Weapons : The United Nations
The United Nations was formed in October 1945 and the preamble to the UN Charter reads as follows:We the peoples of the United Nations determined
to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind, and
to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small, and
to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, and
to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom …
The full article can be read at:
To the United Nations’ credit, it did not attack Iraq. Mr. Bush did. And after Mr. Bush conquered Iraq he started to search for the reason he conquered Iraq – yellowcake. Saddam Hussein did not, to the Bush team’s satisfaction, reveal everything. So, the Bush team removed him from power and searched and did its independent search. The Bush team, as conquering “heros” invited the IAEA into Iraq to find the the reason (yellowcake) the Bush team conquered Iraq.
The IAEA did not find the “yellowcake” reason why the Bush team conquered Iraq.
The Bush team never explained to America why it could not prove its stated reason for going to war with Iraq. That task, of “TELLING AMERICA” fell to a lower ranking group.
James Bovard, in his “The forgeries” topic of his “Bush’s WMD Flimflams” explained it this way:
A tardy admission
After months of the story of the false Niger claims festering in the media, a senior Bush administration official – unnamed, of course – formally announced on July 7, 2003,
Knowing all that we know now, the reference to Iraq’s attempt to acquire uranium from Africa should not have been included in the state of the Union speech.
This greatly belated admission by an unnamed official was taken by senior Republicans as the proper close of the entire episode. Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, the No. 3 Republican in the Senate, declared,
Obviously, when you use foreign intelligence, you – we don’t have necessarily as much confidence or as much reliability as you do your own. It has since turned out to be, at least according to the reports that have been just released, not true. The president stepped forward and said so. I think that’s all you can expect.
But it is ludicrous to assert that “the president stepped forward and said so.” Bush never conceded his statements were false; instead, he busied himself in late June denouncing “historical revisionists” who were examining the administration’s record on Iraq. The Bush administration did not even have the gumption to permit the “senior administration official” to be named – and yet Santorum believes Bush deserves a “that’s all you can expect” response.
House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) derided concerns over the administration’s confession that it had used false statements on the path to war:
It’s very easy to pick one little flaw here or one little flaw there. The overall reason we went into Iraq was sound and morally sound. And it’s not just because somebody forged or a made a mistake on whether Saddam Hussein was looking for nuclear material from Niger or whatever.
Whatever. Hundreds of American soldiers are dead and thousands of Iraqi civilians have been killed. It is not a question of “one little flaw here or one little flaw there.” Instead, it is a question of plank after plank of the Bush administration’s justification for going to war being rotten to the core. And leaders like DeLay respond by rushing to attempt to close the subject and to portray any further curiosity as pettifogging – or worse.
Bush White House aides sought to defend the president by blaming the CIA for failing to warn them that the Niger story was as bogus as a three-dollar bill. However, on July 22, Bush’s Deputy National Security Adviser Stephen J. Hadley and his chief speechwriter, Michael Gerson, conceded that the CIA had sent two warnings to the White House in early October 2002 casting grave doubts on the Iraq-Niger uranium claims.
Read James Bovard’s entire post here:
You can’t MAKE a neocon talk about Iraq and the elusive yellowcake. The secret of the Niger-Iraq yellowcake link has been kept for over five years. The neocons “lips are sealed” and nobody’s book is likely to make the neocons “COME CLEAN“. When neocons use the words “COME CLEAN”, they do not apply them to SELF. Those words apply to others – like, for example, IRAN.
When the Bush team’s neocons points the “inhumanitarian” finger at a country, it won’t be its Middle East’s sidekick. The Hamas “CONCENTRATION CAMP”, while in LOCK-DOWN punished everyone in the camp. The United Nations called the Middle East sidekick’s behavior – COLLECTIVE PUNISHMENT. The Bush team’s neocons “looked the other way“. What are friends for?
And speaking of “looking the other way”, how did the United Nations manage to allow the Bush teams Middle East sidekick to amass as many as 150 nuclear weapons on the United Nations’ watch? Surely 150 “fully formed” nuclear weapons have a greater earthly “presence” than a few tons of yellowcake. How could the Bush team be frantic about yellowcake and totally in bliss about 150 “fully formed UNREGISTERED” nuclear weapons safely tucked away in the Middle East?
What are friends for?
Ex-President Nixon, spioke apprehensively, of the Middle East nuclear weapon situation. He was concerned about a nuclear mishap in that part of the world. Compare that Republican to Mr. bush who has spoken of WWIII as a possible solution to the local problems of the Middle East.
William Buckley, an ICON among American conservatives, called the Iraq war a mistake. He also called the neocons’ effort to wrap their arms around the democrats during the height of the neocons ethics meltdown – PITIFUL. The neocons, were up to their necks in MUCK. They wanted the democrats to wade in and help them show the American electorate – BIPARTISANSHIP.
All the while, the Bush team’s “TELL AMERICA” press was working feverishly trying to “sanitize” the MUCK. There were scandals everywhere. One columnist asked readers, “When is a Scandal Really a Scandal”? At that time, America was up to its neck in Republican scandals and this columnist was searching for a definition of scandal?.
The Democrats declined to wade into the MUCK to join the neocons in a show of BIPARTISANSHIP.
The neocons are not deciples of William Buckley. They are not deciples of Barry Goldwater. They are not deciples of Everett Dirksen. They are neoConservatives. And they have made their mark on the world. They work on their own behalf. But due to a miserable performance record, they now “low profile” their neocon name.
The author of the article: “Nuclear Weapons: The United Nations“, believes the United Nations is in need of reformatting. There is a good case for that. How does the United Nations know when it is doing a good job? Should it tell the world, at least yearly, how well it met its humanitarian objectives? Is it now doing that? The world already has the experience of the demise of one organization that attempted to work on behalf of humanity. The League of Nations failed due to no enforcement power. The United Nations was formed with enforcement power. Will the United Nations die and a fhird world organization formed that is relatively free of the overpowering influence of STRONG MINDED RULERS? .
It makes sense to have the United Nations as the WORLD’S POLICEMAN. It pains the (1) intellect, (2) world stability, (3) American economic stability and numerous other world and American interests to have Mr. Bush as world policeman.
Tags: barry goldwater, Bush, human rights, international law, James Bovard, neocons, Saddam Hussein, treaties, United Nations, william buckley, Yellowcake
