They Bombed Libya on March 19, the Anniversary of the War on IRAQ

March 20, 2011 at 4:13 pm | Posted in Turkmens | Leave a comment
Tags: ,

They Bombed Libya on March 19, the Anniversary of the War on IRAQ

The USA-UK’s Thirst for Blood Does Not Seem to End!

 On March 19, the 8th Anniversary of the War on IRAQ, the USA and British submarines launches 112 Tomahawk cruise missiles on Libyan air defenses. All for the sake of democracy!

A call for a serious boycott of the USA-UK-France-Israel block is IMPERATIVE. An immediate action must be taken NOW!

To commemorate the 8th anniversary of the war on IRAQ, I publish the forgotten account of the Baghdad airport battle on April 7 – 9, 2003

Written by Jeff Archer

From his book, “The Mother of All Battles: The Endless U.S.-Iraq War

The U.S. preoccupation with the impending threat of Iraqi nuclear weapons was just another form of misinformation to rattle the American public. A few months after Desert Storm, the U.N. sent a secret team of nuclear inspectors to Iraq to try to discover how close Iraq was to producing its first nuclear weapon prior to the conflict. The experts were nuclear designers from the U.S., Russia, Britain and France.

Iraq’s nuclear program had already been scrutinized by U.N. inspectors, but this group was more advanced in its knowledge of nuclear weapons because it was comprised of design experts. The designers’ assessment was the most accurate that had been reported: “Iraq was at least five years away from developing its first crude nuclear weapon, if it desired to do so.” This message was opposite of that of George Bush, who created worldwide hysteria by saying Iraq was within months, or even weeks, of having a nuke ready to go

Like father, like son again was the rule of the day a dozen years later as Bush II spoke in detailed terms of Iraq’s impending nuclear threat and a “mushroom cloud over New York City.” Few journalists mentioned the 1991 report, or that Iraq’s nuclear weapons capability was totally destroyed in the bombing of Desert Storm.

Continue Reading They Bombed Libya on March 19, the Anniversary of the War on IRAQ…

Iraq: the Invisible War, Kamil Mahdi

November 10, 2010 at 12:04 am | Posted in Turkmens | Leave a comment
Tags: , ,


Iraq: the Invisible War

Last Updated on Friday, 05 November 2010

Written by Kamil Mahdi

The US continues to paint a rosy picture of progress in Iraq but the reality is one of poverty, violence, torture and political corruption in a country still suffering from sanctions, the invasion and the continuing imperial plunder of its resources.


Image from front cover of Invisible War: The United States and the Iraq Sanctions by Joy Gordon

War and Sanctions continue to be used to manipulate and control Iraq. Joy Gordon’s recent book on the sanctions and US policy shows them being used by the US and Britain, not as an alternative to war as many in the international community may have intended, but as a means of softening in preparation for war.

As it turned out, that was done not once, but twice in 1991 and 2003. This Invisible War, in Joy Gordon’s own terms, has been part of a twenty year long US war against Iraq which successive British governments have enthusiastically and dishonourably supported. We see and learn of more gruesome evidence of the human cost of this war with every day that passes, but western governments try to abdicate their responsibility for the cumulative damage of a war that has lasted a whole generation and which they continue to wage.

Even now, after seven years of invasion and occupation, the Invisible War is not finished. Under Security Council Resolutions, Iraq is still considered by the big powers who dominate and abuse the UN as a threat to international peace, and it is thus subject to punishments and enforceable measure under Chapter vii of the UN Charter.

The war on Iraq continues not just through the presence and activities of US occupation forces and foreign mercenaries, but also through a series of punitive tools that are used against Iraq in order to ensure compliance with US wishes.

As a residue of the sanctions imposed in 1990, Iraq’s oil revenues are deposited into a fund in the US that is overseen externally and which is subject to restrictions that give the US great leverage. All Iraq’s foreign reserves are also held in the US and have been explicitly threatened with legal action in US courts. This leverage was used by the US to obtain concessions in negotiations with the Iraqi Government over the Status of Forces and Strategic Framework Agreements in 2008. In September this year, Maliki’s government agreed to pay $400m in settlement of some bizarre claims against Iraq by US citizens in US courts; claims which the US government and court system can simply impose by impounding Iraqi financial assets. This mockery of law and civilised international relations is reminiscent of the pillage of Iraqi assets in the first year of the occupation, and it shows that claims of Iraq having recovered its sovereignty are vacuous.

So, the sanctions are still used to coerce and damage Iraq.

Iraq today is the injured party, as it has been for the past 19 years. Yet, it is Iraq that is paying compensation to Kuwait and to others imposed under a UN compensation scheme imposed in 1991. Claims under the scheme were highly and sometimes ludicrously exaggerated and judgements were imposed in an unjust manner. No matter the extent and evidence of US and British abuse in Iraq, and no matter the gruesome suffering of the Iraqi people, the rich and powerful continue to demand their “compensation” from a nation that has been traumatised and abused by the great powers. Iraq will have to continue paying compensation for decades to come unless it gets a government that has the courage to mount a challenge to this iniquity.

While the UN imposes this punishment, the IMF with its customary criminal recklessness has been trying to abolish Iraq’s food ration system which is essential for the daily sustenance of a large proportion of the Iraqi population. In the province of Diyala, where the system has not been operating effectively due to conflict, a recent official survey found that 51% of the population suffers from “food deprivation”, i.e. their dietary energy consumption is below the minimum energy requirement. In simple terms, half the population of what used to be Iraq’s fruit garden, continuously don’t get enough to eat. In Basra which British forces left last year, they left behind them 20% of a population that is food deprived, even with the ration system operating.

Almost 30% of the population of the country as a whole cannot find any or enough employment, despite a massive expansion in state and security jobs. This is not counting the millions who have sought refuge in neighbouring countries, nor women who are discouraged by extreme conditions from seeking employment. Inflation is rising rapidly again, public services, electricity, clean water provisions and housing remain in acute crisis. The economy is still at a standstill, and yet, Iraq is forced to pay unjust reparations by those who claim to have liberated it.

The sanctions forced the Iraqi government to accept border changes that were designed to subject Iraq’s main maritime channel to Kuwaiti sovereignty, making Iraq almost landlocked. In border changes imposed by the UN, Iraq lost areas that had never even been claimed by Kuwait. This policy championed by the US and British governments is thereby effectively creating a security threat.

So despite the British land withdrawal last year, British Navy units are in and around Iraq ostensibly protecting Iraq’s main oil export terminals and its maritime access routes. This is protection like having a knife at the jugular.

Of course there are security dangers to Iraq’s vital installations, but one of the main such dangers emanates from Britain’s and the US gung-ho attitude towards Iran and their continuing destabilisation of the region. What is needed is a regional security arrangement that sees foreign forces out altogether.

The British record in Iraq is abominable. We know about the torture and murder committed by troops that the Ministry of Defence has tried to cover up, and we know of the failure to provide security in Basra and the south. Yet, the British Ministry of Defence claims that “British Armed Forces have been helping the Iraqis to secure and rebuild their country after years of neglect and conflict.”

This disingenuous claim by those who had earlier enforced the blockade against Iraq, is also belied by reality on the ground. Last week, Basra city Council warned that dykes near the Iranian border and close to the city are liable to collapse. Such a collapse would cause an area of soil full of landmines to slide into the city itself. This is an example of the security and rebuilding the British forces have left behind. What security and rebuilding, I ask, if the military would not deal with the dangers of landmines creeping in on a city in their clutches?

The Department for International Development (DFID), for its part, pronounces that it provided £14m in aid to Iraq in 2009 and almost £19m the previous year. This of course is a pittance when compared with the tens of billions spent by Britain on the war. Nevertheless, a quick look at so-called UK aid to Iraq shows that of £32.8 disbursed in 2008/2009, only 5% (amounting to barely £1.5m) was spent on water, sanitation and other social issues, while a third was spent on “Governance” and close to a half on a category described as “other” which seems to include contributions to humanitarian emergency efforts. Almost nothing is spent on economic development projects as in actual reconstruction of physical infrastructure.

According to the Iraqi Minister of Water Resources, last year (2009) in southern Iraq alone, 300,000 Iraqis became ecological refugees as they had to move because the quality of water available to their villages had deteriorated because of drought. In Basra today, and more so in Fallujah, there is a serious, even catastrophic increase in cancers and congenital diseases.

The main purpose of DFID’s aid programme is not to accept responsibility for damaged caused by Britain’s illegal war, but to build political influence and to promote foreign investment. Perhaps this is the partly why the Coalition Government says it is not cutting it back.

We keep hearing that Iraq is rich in oil, but this oil has now been auctioned off in the dead of night by a cleptocracy and a government that is totally incompetent and that is advised by an army of international consultants. Multi-national companies have been given twenty year contracts that offer them rewards and no risks while the companies control of most of Iraqi oil, field by field.

Many people in Iraq are already talking of the next oil nationalisation struggle. No wonder, the contracts did not all go to the major American and British oil companies alone. Had they done so, the battle lines would have been more clearly drawn and abrogation of the contracts would be easier, but it is a struggle that will come anyway.

Iraq’s industrial assets are also being auctioned and investors are hankering after prime state land. The country’s water resources are being siphoned off by neighbouring states upstream, and the country is once again beginning to sink into debt that threatens to go out of control under the guise of federalism and decentralisation. So, the promised new oil revenues are being skimmed away straight off the top.

The occupiers have come, destroyed, abused and created chaos. They have encouraged corruption, and they now give loud advice on economic policy, equitable distribution of resources, and good governance. The US occupiers still retain 50,000 troops and tens of thousands of mercenaries in the country and they keep a hold on Iraq’s lifeline and bank accounts. Terrorist atrocities are a daily occurrence, and the people of Iraq are victims of a defeat the US refuses to acknowledge. A failing political process has Iraq’s future hostage to the schemes of corrupt US political protégés and dark reactionary forces and regimes fomenting sectarianism and prejudice in Iraq and across the region.

The US continues to paint a rosy picture of progress which it measures largely by the march of its project for a corporate takeover of the country. Widespread corruption and chaotic conditions mean that this project cannot yet be trusted to the local political allies of the US, so I take the promised full US military withdrawal by December 2011 with more than a pinch of salt.

A last word on the recent Wikileaks revelations of abuse by US forces and by Iraqi security forces. A lot has been revealed about the killing, the torture, and the failure to protect civilians. The leaks must be utilised to expose occupation policy and crimes against the Iraqi people and to identify victims and perpetrators.

However, whatever else one may say and do, the focus on getting all US forces and mercenaries out of Iraq must not be lost. Abusive Iraqi security forces will not be reformed by abusive US forces, and certainly not by mercenaries.

Based on Kamil Mahdi’s speech to the Stop the War Coalition conference

Hans von Sponeck’s Open letter to Tony Blair

September 25, 2010 at 10:31 am | Posted in Turkmens | 1 Comment
Tags: ,


 After the journey — a UN man’s open letter to Tony Blair


An open letter of Hans von Sponeck to Tony Blair appeared in the London weekly The NewStatesman. It is a response to Blair’s book “A Journey” which includes three chapters on Iraq. All three are full of deceptive and incorrect contentions. Hans von Sponeck could not keep his mouth shut.

Hans von Sponeck

Hans von Sponeck is a former UN assistant secretary general and was UN humanitarian co-ordinator for Iraq from 1998 until he resigned in protest in March 2000.

Published 23 September 2010   The NewStatesman

Hans von Sponeck, UN humanitarian co-ordinator from 1998-2000, demands answers from the former prime minister to a simple question: Why is Iraq in such a mess?


Dear Mr Blair,

You do not know me. Why should you? Or maybe you should have known me and the many other UN officials who struggled in Iraq when you prepared your Iraq policy. Reading the Iraq details of your “journey”, as told in your memoir, has confirmed my fears. You tell a story of a leader, but not of a statesman. You could have, at least belatedly, set the record straight. Instead you repeat all the arguments we have heard before, such as why sanctions had to be the way they were; why the fear of Saddam Hussein outweighed the fear of crossing the line between concern for people and power politics; why Iraq ended up as a human garbage can. You preferred to latch on to Bill Clinton’s 1998 Iraq Liberation Act and George W Bush’s determination to implement it.

You present yourself as the man who tried to use the UN road. I am not sure. Is it really wrong to say that, if you had this intention, it was for purely tactical reasons and not because you wanted to protect the role of the UN to decide when military action was justified? The list of those who disagreed with you and your government’s handling of 13 years of sanctions and the invasion and occupation of Iraq is long, very long. It includes Unicef and other UN agencies, Care, Caritas, International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, the then UN secretary general, Kofi Annan, and Nelson Mandela. Do not forget, either, the hundreds of thousands of people who marched in protest in Britain and across the world, among them Cambridge Against Sanctions on Iraq (CASI) and the UK Stop the War Coalition.

You suggest that you and your supporters – the “people of good will”, as you call them – are the owners of the facts. Your disparaging observations about Clare Short, a woman with courage who resigned as international development secretary in 2003, make it clear you have her on a different list. You appeal to those who do not agree to pause and reflect. I ask you to do the same. Those of us who lived in Iraq experienced the grief and misery that your policies caused. UN officials on the ground were not “taken in” by a dictator’s regime. We were “taken in” by the challenge to tackle human suffering created by the gravely faulty policies of two governments – yours and that of the United States – and by the gutlessness of those in the Middle East, Europe and elsewhere who could have made a difference but chose otherwise. The facts are on our side, not on yours.

Here are some of those facts. Had Hans Blix, the then UN chief weapons inspector, been given the additional three months he requested, your plans could have been thwarted. You and George W Bush feared this. If you had respected international law, you would not, following Operation Desert Fox in December 1998, have allowed your forces to launch attacks from two no-fly zones. Allegedly carried out to protect Iraqi Kurds in the north and Iraqi Shias in the south, these air strikes killed civilians and destroyed non-military installations.

I know that the reports we prepared in Baghdad to show the damage wreaked by these air strikes caused much anger in Whitehall. A conversation I had on the sidelines of the Labour party conference in 2004 with your former foreign secretary Robin Cook confirmed that, even in your cabinet, there had been grave doubts about your approach. UN Resolution 688 was passed in 1991 to authorise the UN secretary general – no one else – to safeguard the rights of people and to help in meeting their humanitarian needs. It did not authorise the no-fly zones. In fact, the British government, in voting for Resolution 688, accepted the obligation to respect Iraq’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.

I was a daily witness to what you and two US administrations had concocted for Iraq: a harsh and uncompromising sanctions regime punishing the wrong people. Your officials must have told you that your policies translated into a meagre 51 US cents to finance a person’s daily existence in Iraq. You acknowledge that 60 per cent of Iraqis were totally dependent on the goods that were allowed into their country under sanctions, but you make no reference in your book to how the UK and US governments blocked and delayed huge amounts of supplies that were needed for survival. In mid-2002, more than $5bn worth of supplies was blocked from entering the country. No other country on the Iraq sanctions committee of the UN Security Council supported you in this. The UN files are full of such evidence. I saw the education system, once a pride of Iraq, totally collapse. And conditions in the health sector were equally desperate. In 1999, the entire country had only one fully functioning X-ray machine. Diseases that had been all but forgotten in the country re-emerged.

You refuse to acknowledge that you and your policies had anything to do with this humanitarian crisis. You even argue that the death rate of children under five in Iraq, then among the highest in the world, was entirely due to the Iraqi government. I beg you to read Unicef’s reports on this subject and what Carol Bellamy, Unicef’s American executive director at the time, had to say to the Security Council. None of the UN officials involved in dealing with the crisis will subscribe to your view that Iraq “was free to buy as much food and medicines” as the government would allow. I wish that had been the case. During the Chilcot inquiry in July this year, a respected diplomat who represented the UK on the Security Council sanctions committee while I was in Baghdad observed: “UK officials and ministers were well aware of the negative effects of sanctions, but preferred to blame them on the Saddam regime’s failure to implement the oil-for-food programme.”

No one in his right mind would defend the human rights record of Saddam Hussein. Your critical words in this respect are justified. But you offer only that part of this gruesome story. You quote damning statements about Saddam Hussein made by Max van der Stoel, the former Dutch foreign minister who was UN special rapporteur on human rights in Iraq during the time I served in Baghdad. You conveniently omitted three pertinent facts: van der Stoel had not been in Iraq since 1991 and had to rely on second-hand information; his UN mandate was limited to assessing the human rights record of the Iraqi government and therefore excluded violations due to other reasons such as economic sanctions; and his successor, Andreas Mavrommatis, formerly foreign secretary in Cyprus, quickly recognised the biased UN mandate and broadened the scope of his review to include sanctions as a major human rights issue. This was a very important correction.

Brazil’s foreign minister, Celso Amorim, who in the years of sanctions on Iraq was his country’s permanent representative to the UN, is not mentioned in your book. Is that because he was one of the diplomats who climbed over the wall of disinformation and sought the truth about the deplorable human conditions in Iraq in the late 1990s? Amorim used the opportunity of his presidency of the UN Security Council to call for a review of the humanitarian situation. His conclusion was unambiguous. “Even if not all the suffering in Iraq can be imputed to external factors, especially sanctions, the Iraqi people would not be undergoing such deprivations in the absence of the prolonged measures imposed by the Security Council and the effects of war.”

Malaysia’s ambassador to the UN, Hasmy Agam, starkly remarked: “How ironic it is that the same policy that is supposed to disarm Iraq of its weapons of mass destruction has itself become a weapon of mass destruction.” The secretary general, too, made very critical observations on the humanitarian situation in Iraq. When I raised my own concerns in a newspaper article, your minister Peter Hain repeated what the world had become accustomed to hearing from London and Washington: it is all of Saddam’s making. Hain was a loyal ally of yours. He and others in your administration wrote me off as subjective, straying off my mandate, not up to the task, or, in the words of the US state department’s spokesman at the time, James Rubin: “This man in Baghdad is paid to work, not to speak!”

My predecessor in Baghdad, Denis Halliday, and I were repeatedly barred from testifying to the Security Council. On one occasion, the US and UK governments, in a joint letter to the secretary general, insisted that we did not have enough experience with sanctions and therefore could not contribute much to the debate. You were scared of the facts.

We live in serious times, which you helped bring about. The international security architecture is severely weakened, the UN Security Council fails to solve crises peacefully, and there are immense double standards in the debate on the direction our world is travelling in. A former British prime minister – “a big player, a world leader and not just a national leader”, as you describe yourself in your book – should find little time to promote his “journey” on a US talk show. You decided differently. I watched this show, and a show it was. You clearly felt uncomfortable. Everything you and your brother-in-arms, Bush, had planned for Iraq has fallen apart, the sole exception being the removal of Saddam Hussein. You chose to point to Iran as the new danger.

Whether you like it or not, the legacy of your Iraq journey, made with your self-made GPS, includes your sacrifice of the UN and negotiations on the altar of a self-serving alliance with the Bush administration. You admit in your book that “a few mistakes were made here and there”. One line reads: “The intelligence was wrong and we should have, and I have, apologised for it.” A major pillar of your case for invading Iraq is treated almost like a footnote. Your refusal to face the facts fully is the reason why “people of good will” remain so distressed and continue to demand accountability.

Hans von Sponeck is a former UN assistant secretary general and was UN humanitarian co-ordinator for Iraq from 1998 until he resigned in protest in March 2000.

Did the US drop tactical nuclear weapons on Iraq/Afghanistan – You bet!

July 5, 2010 at 4:57 pm | Posted in Turkmens | Leave a comment
Tags: , , , ,

Did the US drop tactical nuclear weapons on Iraq/Afghanistan – You bet!

Peter Eyre – Middle East Consultant – 4th July 2010

UK, July 4 (Pal Telegraph, by Peter Eyre)  – You may find this story hard to believe and at the same time challenge as to why anyone would use such weapons having no regard for other humans that live on this planet. We hear almost weekly about the push by President Obama to fulfill the Non Proliferation Treaty (NPT) by reducing weapons of mass destruction (WMD) but is there any truth behind this PR exercise or is it a case of business as usual?

I am sure you all believe that the last use of nuclear weapons was in Japan during WW2 but I have to tell you that this is far from the truth. In actual fact the US, UK, NATO and Israel have been using WMD’s on an almost daily basis since the conflict in the Balkans in the 1990’s. In actual fact it started well before this when the Israelis went to war with Egypt……this was the first time WMD’s had been used on mass with weapons purchased from the US and with US technicians acting in an advisory role.

We have discussed the use of depleted uranium weapons many times before but maybe no one has truly grasped how serious these actions have been and the greater implications on the rest of the world and our environment.

As an example when we look at Iraq you may find it hard to believe that just one small group of US Naval Vessels dropped on Iraq the equivalent of many thousands of Nagasaki bombs……..add to this the fact that the nanoparticles from these weapons have since crossed international borders and contaminated millions of people unrelated to this conflict. Under the terms of the Geneva Convention that makes these weapons totally indiscriminate and therefore constitutes being a war crime of gigantic proportions (mass genocide). The consequences of all these actions will soon be revealed in the publication of an extensive War Crimes Complaint (a formal legal document) that has already been lodged in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia towards the end of last year.

This document is now being re written in order to show the world what damage these thoughtless actions have and are doing to planet earth and its inhabitants. It is backed up with extremely convincing evidence and I can assure you that no War Crimes Document has ever been written covering such a broad range of topics and never in the history of mother Earth have we witnessed such mass genocide of gigantic proportions. I am sure that few newspapers will print the findings, which is proof in itself that the media is totally controlled. However, the story will be available care of the Palestine Telegraph and other Middle Eastern Outlets in the coming weeks.

Readers will find it deeply disturbing but Leuren Moren and myself feel it is our duty of care to this planet to make this report public and hope at the same time that the world will react and stop these satanic minded people from continuing there master plan which is to depopulate the world in an extremely dramatic and painful way. It will make the Holocaust appear almost miniscule by comparison and at the same time prove that Israel has in actual fact also nuked its own entire population by using these weapons in both Lebanon and Gaza.

So now we will leave the topic of depleted uranium and discuss the fact that the US have and will continue to use Tactical Nuclear Weapons in the battlefields of Kuwait, Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere as required to fulfill their economic greed.

Continue Reading Did the US drop tactical nuclear weapons on Iraq/Afghanistan – You bet!…

Keith Olbermann: Mr. President, the war isn’t about you

December 25, 2009 at 4:29 pm | Posted in Turkmens | Leave a comment
Tags: , , , ,


By Keith Olbermann

Anchor, ‘Countdown’


May 14, 2008

 Olbermann: Mr. President, the war isn’t about you

 To watch the video please click on:

 To read the article in full, click on:


The question (to Bush) was phrased as follows: “If we were to pull out of Iraq next year, what’s the worst that could happen, what’s the doomsday scenario?”

The president replied: “Doomsday scenario of course is that extremists throughout the Middle East would be emboldened, which would eventually lead to another attack on the United States. The biggest issue we face is, it’s bigger than Iraq, it’s this ideological struggle against cold-blooded killers who will kill people to achieve their political objectives.”

Mr. Bush, at long last, has it not dawned on you that the America you have now created, includes “cold-blooded killers who will kill people to achieve their political objectives?” They are those in — or formerly in — your employ, who may yet be charged some day with war crimes.

Through your haze of self-congratulation and self-pity, do you still have no earthly clue that this nation has laid waste to Iraq to achieve your political objectives? “This ideological struggle,” Mr. Bush, is taking place within this country.

It is a struggle between Americans who cherish freedom, ours and everybody else’s, and Americans like you, sir, to whom freedom is just a brand name, just like “Patriot Act” is a brand name or “Protect America” is a brand name.

But wait, there’s more: You also said “Iraq is the place where al-Qaida and other extremists have made their stand and they will be defeated.” They made no “stand” in Iraq, sir, you allowed them to assemble there!

As certainly as if that were the plan, the borders were left wide open by your government’s farcical post-invasion strategy of “they’ll greet us as liberators.” And as certainly as if that were the plan, the inspiration for another generation of terrorists in another country was provided by your government’s farcical post-invasion strategy of letting the societal infra-structure of Iraq dissolve, to be replaced by an American viceroy, enforced by merciless mercenaries who shoot unarmed Iraqis and then evade prosecution in any country by hiding behind your skirts, sir.

Terrorism inside Iraq is your creation, Mr. Bush!

Continue Reading Keith Olbermann: Mr. President, the war isn’t about you…

الاحتلال السنة 7 ما هو مستقبل العراق؟

March 28, 2009 at 3:16 pm | Posted in Turkmens | 1 Comment
Tags: , , , , ,

بيان صحفي
20 مارس 2009
eu-parl-18-03-09-iraq-with-a-future-and-belgian-parl-19-03-09-017الاحتلال السنة 7
ما هو مستقبل العراق؟

محكمة بروكسل في
البرلمان الأوروبي والبرلمان البلجيكي

في 18 آذار / مارس و 19 مارس 2009 ، بعد ست سنوات من الغزو وألاحتلال  ألغير القانوني الذي  قادته الولايات المتحدة ،  دخلت محكمة بروكسل وشركائها  البرلمان الأوروبي والبرلمان البلجيكي لتعيد الكارثة المنسية في العراق الى الصدارة.تتالف محكمة  بروكسل من مفكرين وفنانين وناشطين  يشجبون منطق الحرب الدائمة الذى تروج له الحكومة الاميركية وحلفائها ، ويتمسكون بصلابة بأن كل ما ينبع من غزو واحتلال العراق الذي قادته الولايات المتحدة وحلفائها يظل غير قانوني وغير مشروع ، ولا يمكن أن يكتسب الشرعية.
وقام فريق من خبراء عراقيين بارزين بكشف  واقع العراق في ظل الاحتلال ، بتناقض مع الدعايات المغرضة ألرائجة.
في البرلمان الأوروبي ،استضافت نائبة الرئيس لويزا مركانتيني محكمة بروكسل في جلسة اعلامية. وفي البرلمان البلجيكي ،استضاف نائب رئيس البرلمان ديرك فان دير مايلين مناقشات غير رسمية حضرها اعضاء اخرين من البرلمان .



تكون فريق المتحدثين من: عبد الاله ألبياتى ، المحلل الجيوبوليتيكي والخبير في الحركات القومية العربية والدكتور عمر الكبيسي   الأخصائى الاكثر شهرة في أمراض ألقلب والخبير فى موضوع انهيار الصحة العامة في العراق في ظل الاحتلال ، والدكتور فالح الخياط ، المدير العام السابق لوزارة النفط العراقية قبل الغزو الامريكي والخبير في قضايا الصناعة النفطية في العراق ؛ الدكتور حسن آيدنلى ، ممثل التركمان فى الاتحاد الاوروبي  و الخبير في مصير الأقليات الطائفية في ظل الحكومات الطائفيةألتى نصبتهاالاحتلال الامريكي وشانون ميهان ،مديرة الدعم  في لجنة الإنقاذ الدولية والخبيرة في مجال حماية اللاجئين.  وقد قامت هناء ألبياتى ، منسقة المبادرة العراقية الدولية بشأن اللاجئين والعضوة في محكمة بروكسل  بأدارة الجلسات.
النقاط الرئيسية التي طرحت وجرى التاكيد عليها :

ان استقرار العراق بسبب موقعه الجيوبوليتيكي وموارده الغنية فان استقرار العراق يلبي ليس فقط مصلحة شعبه ، ولكن أيضا في مصلحة جيرانه والعالم.
ان مشروع الولايات المتحدة لتقسيم العراق  قد فشل. ان شعب العراق باغلبية ساحقة عددا وثقافة يرفض الاحتلال الامريكي. لقد خلق الاحتلال باشاعة الرعب أكبر أزمة لاجئين في العالم اليوم ، مشردا خمس السكان.
ان الاحتلال بعمليته السياسية الطائفية قد خلق الفوضى ودولة فاشلة تجسدت في انهيار كامل لجميع الخدمات العامة وانتهاكات منتظمة لحقوق الانسان في جميع جوانبها ، بما في ذلك الحق في الحياة. ان هذه العملية السياسية لا يمكن إصلاحها.

ان المأساة الإنسانية التي خلقها الاحتلال طالت النساء والأطفال بشكل خاص فهم يتعرضون لكافة أشكال العنف والاستغلال.
ان الاحتلال ،عمدا، أجبر طبقة المثقفين والمهنيين العراقية على الهجرة القسرية  ، مما أدى إلى عدم قدرته على  بناء دولة تعمل كدولة ،كما ادى الى زعزعة الاستقرار في المنطقة.
ان المهجرين العراقيين فرديا لهم الحق في العودة ، ولكن ما دام الاستقرار والأمن غائب ، فالظروف الملائمة للعودة غائبة.
ان الاحتلال وأجهزته هم الذين اشاعوا العنف. ان الأمن في العراق لا يمكن أن يتحقق إلا عن طريق الانسحاب غير المشروط لجميع قوات الاحتلال الأجنبية من العراق.


بعد انسحاب جميع القوات الاجنبية، فقط دولة مواطنين متساوين  يمكن أن تضمن السلام والاستقرار والديمقراطية للعراق وشعبه.
ان العراق ذات السيادة لن يرفض فقط تسليم المصدر الرئيسي للثروة النفط ¬ — الى الشركات الأجنبية ، وانما كذلك يحق له ايضا المطالبة بتعويضات عن كل الخسائر التي يعاني منها منذ عام 2003.
ان المقاومة العراقية  بجميع أشكالها هي القوة الوحيدة القادرة  موضوعيا و شرعيا ، على   تأمين الطريق نحو السلام والاستقرار والرفاه والديمقراطية في العراق.
ان محكمة بروكسل وفي عشية الاحتلال ألسنة 7 ، رأت أن من الضروري التأكيد على هذه الحقائق في المحافل الرسمية. ان رفض الاحتلال الاميركي ،و كلما يستمد  منه يجب أن يصبح موقفا رسميا.بعد هذه الجلسات في المؤسسات الرسمية  عقدت محكمة بروكسيل  جلسات علنية في المؤسسات الثقافية الرئيسية في بروكسل:



ان احتلال العراق لا يمكن تحمله. ومع دخول الاحتلال عامه السابع ، فان الوقت الآن للعمل ضده في مجالات جديدة.
محكمة بروكسل


لبرنامج للأحداث :

للمقابلات الصحفية الاتصال :
هناء ألبياتى hanaalbayaty@gmail.comHYPERLINK “”   (0) 488871408 HYPERLINK “”   (0) 488871408 +32يمكن أن تجري المقابلات الصحفية حول هذا الحدث مع المتحدثين باللغتين العربية والانكليزية. عبد الاله ألبياتى وحسن آيدنلى يتحدثان الفرنسية ايضا.

Let the numbers speak, by Dr. Souad Al-Azzawi

March 26, 2009 at 9:27 am | Posted in Turkmens | 6 Comments
Tags: , , , , , ,


Let the Numbers Speak


Dr. Souad N. Al-Azzawi, Associate Professor, Baghdad, Iraq, member of the BRussells Tribunal Advisory Committee (26 March 2009)

Dear Friends,

I pride myself in being a scientist and a researcher. I built my academic career on theories and numbers. As a teacher, I teach my students that everything is based in science – everything has reason. For this reason, I am always frustrated with myself when I find I am overwhelmed with feelings on specific topics.

One such topic is the occupation of my country, Iraq. On this subject I find that I cannot always be dispassionate. I cannot be the researcher and observer and discuss it without feeling or emotion as I am sometimes expected to do. I find myself doing research on the damages caused by the war and occupation, and my head buzzes with anger, my eyes burn with tears of desperation at the state of my country.  

Six years after the attack and the pain is as fresh and cutting as it was in March 2003. This year, I decided, I would view it as a scientist. I would not attack the subject with emotion. I would let the numbers speak for themselves. This year I will sit back and play the part of the analyst- the researcher- on this topic that is closest to my heart.

Six years into the occupation… 

– 72 months of destruction

– $607 Billions spent on the war

– 2 Million Barrels of oil being sold per day

– 2 Million Displaced Iraqis inside of Iraq

– 3 Million Iraqis forced to leave the country

– 2615 professors, scientists, and doctors killed in cold blood

– 338 dead journalists

– $13 Billion misplaced by the current Iraqi government

– $400 Billion required to rebuild the Iraqi infrastructure

– 3 hours average of electricity daily

– 24 car bombs per month

– 7 major mafias running the country

– 4260 Americans dead

– 10,000 cases of cholera per year

– 50 of my friends dead

– 22 of my relatives dead

– 15 abductions of close relatives and people I know and love

– At least 1.3 million Iraqis dead since 2003.  


Six years into the occupation and somehow, the numbers are not looking better. Year after dismal year, the numbers of dead and displaced grow as we continue to reap the rewards of an American occupation on our country.  

So the numbers speak for themselves. Six. Six months is what it took for most Iraqis to realize no good could come of this war and occupation. Six years is what it has taken the rest of the world. Six years, six million Iraqis displaced inside and outside of Iraq- well over a million Iraqis dead or dying inside of the country.   

As a scientist, as a researcher- it is a disaster that will never be sufficiently documented with numbers or words. As a researcher, the numbers are so astounding that we go back and recalculate to make sure they are real. As an Iraqi, it is enraging. The numbers and statistics fill me with a rage and shame that make my heart throb and my blood boil. It’s a rage towards all who are silent and uncaring, and a shame at the little we all are doing.

Souad N. Al-Azzawi

Associate Professor,

Baghdad, Iraq


Dr. Souad Naji Al-Azzawi is a former Vice-President of Mamoun University of Scientific Affaires; former professor of environmental engineering at Baghdad Univ., recipient of the 2003 Nuclear-Free Future Award for her work on environmental contamination after the Gulf War in Iraq. She published 50 Papers in hazardous Waste management and Radiological Pollution from the use of Depleted Uranium Weapons in Iraq. 


Dr. Souad Al-Azzawi‘s essential studies and articles, published by the BRussells Tribunal:

* Depleted Uranium Radioactive Contamination In Iraq [PDF]Dr. Souad N. Al-Azzawi –  Aug 2006


* Deterioration of Iraqi Women’s Rights and Living Conditions Under Occupation [PDF] – Dr. Souad N. Al-Azzawi – 19 Dec 2007


* Crimes of the Century: Occupation & Contaminating Iraq with Depleted Uranium [PDF] Dr. Souad N. Al-Azzawi -15 June 2008



Iraqi Holocaust: 2.3 Million Iraqi Excess Deaths

March 22, 2009 at 12:25 am | Posted in Turkmens | Leave a comment
Tags: , , , , , , ,


Iraq Invasion 6th Anniversary

Iraqi Holocaust : 2.3 Million Iraqi Excess Deaths

By Gideon Polya

21 March, 2009

March 20, 2009 marks the 6th anniversary of the illegal, utterly unjustified, war criminal invasion of Iraq by US, UK and Australian forces. Post-invasion violent and non-violent excess deaths total 2.3 million and refugees total 6 million in a continuing Iraqi Holocaust and Genocide.

After the defeat of Nazi Germany in the 1939-1945 World War 2 conflict (that commenced with the Nazi German invasion of Poland in September 1939), the defeated Germans adopted a post-war and post-Holocaust protocol that can be summarized by the acronym CAAAA (C4A), specifically Cessation of the killing, Acknowledgment of the crimes, Apology, Amends and Assertion “never again to anyone”.

Unfortunately, unlike the Nazi Germans, the pro-Zionist, anti-Arab anti-Semitic, Islamophobic, imperialist war criminals of the US Alliance are comprehensively violating the 5-point CAAAA (C4A) protocol by continuing the war in Occupied Iraq; refusing to acknowledge the horrendous carnage; declining to apologize; refusing to make amends; and making it clear that they will continue and indeed expand war in Occupied Afghanistan and the North West Provinces of Pakistan.

On the occasion of this 6th Anniversary of the war criminal US Alliance invasion of Iraq, decent people ask: what has been the human cost of this unjustified and illegal war?

Continue Reading Iraqi Holocaust: 2.3 Million Iraqi Excess Deaths…

Damning new evidence that dossier to invade Iraq was sexed up

March 13, 2009 at 2:36 pm | Posted in Turkmens | Leave a comment
Tags: , , ,


Tony Blair and Alastair Campbell during the run-up to war


Secret emails show Iraq dossier was ‘sexed up’
Intelligence chiefs criticised ‘iffy drafting’ of key document

By Nigel Morris, Deputy Political Editor


March 12, 2009

Secret Whitehall emails released yesterday provide damning new evidence that the notorious dossier making the case for invading Iraq was “sexed up”.

They disclose that the intelligence services were sceptical over the “iffy drafting” of government claims that Saddam Hussein could mount a missile strike on his neighbours within 45 minutes of ordering an attack.

Officials privately mocked assertions that the Iraqi president was covertly trying to develop a nuclear capability and wisecracked that perhaps he had recruited “Dr Frankenstein” to his supposed crack team of nuclear scientists.

The release of a series of confidential memos and emails, following a protracted Freedom of Information battle, reignited the controversy over accusations that Tony Blair’s government “spun” Britain into war.

Continue Reading Damning new evidence that dossier to invade Iraq was sexed up…

ANSWER Coalition responds to President Obama’s Iraq Speech

February 28, 2009 at 2:57 pm | Posted in Turkmens | Leave a comment
Tags: , , , ,


ANSWER Coalition Responds
to President Obama’s Iraq Speech
of Friday, February 27


All Out for the Mass March on the Pentagon
on Saturday March 21, 2009!


With his speech today, President Obama has essentially agreed to continue the criminal occupation of Iraq indefinitely. He announced that there will be an occupation force of 50,000 U.S. troops in Iraq for at least three more years. President Obama used carefully chosen words to avoid a firm commitment to remove the 50,000 occupation troops, even after 2011.

The war in Iraq was illegal. It was aggression. It was based on lies and false rationales. President Obama’s speech today made Bush’s invasion sound like a liberating act and congratulated the troops for “getting the job done.” More than a million Iraqis died and a cruel civil war was set into motion because of the foreign invasion. President Obama did not once criticize the invasion itself.

Continue Reading ANSWER Coalition responds to President Obama’s Iraq Speech…

Next Page »

Blog at
Entries and comments feeds.