Who first wrongly linked anthrax to Iraq -- and why?
Friday August 1, 2008
In the wake of the apparent suicide of an alleged suspect in the 2001 anthrax attacks, fresh questions are being raised about the extent to which those attacks were used by the Bush administration as part of the push for both draconian anti-terror legislation and eventual war with Iraq.
Blogger Glenn Greenwald has suggested, "By design, those attacks put the American population into a state of intense fear of Islamic terrorism, far more than the 9/11 attacks alone could have accomplished."
Greenwald has also raised questions about the source of claims being pushed by ABC News in late October 2001 that government tests had shown the anthrax contained bentonite, an additive used only by Iraq. These claims, which were later found to be completely false, played an important role in spreading the idea of an Iraq-anthrax link.
However, the idea of such a link was already in circulation a week earlier when, according to Think Progress, John McCain was using the anthrax attacks to argue for war with Iraq. McCain told David Letterman on October 18, "The second phase is Iraq. There is some indication, and I don’t have the conclusions, but some of this anthrax may — and I emphasize may — have come from Iraq."
RAW STORY has found that, although there had been active online speculation about an Iraqi source for the anthrax by the first week of October, the first suggestion that official investigations were focusing on that nation appears to have come in an article published in the Guardian on October 14.
Under the headline, "Iraq 'behind US anthrax outbreaks' - Pentagon hardliners press for strikes on Saddam," David Rose and Ed Vulliamy wrote, "American investigators probing anthrax outbreaks in Florida and New York believe they have all the hallmarks of a terrorist attack - and have named Iraq as prime suspect as the source of the deadly spores. Their inquiries are adding to what US hawks say is a growing mass of evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved, possibly indirectly, with the 11 September hijackers." >>>cont
LinkHere
Kucinich seeks to bar US oil firms from Iraq
Nick JulianoPublished:
Friday August 1, 2008
Rep. Dennis Kucinich has introduced a measure that would bar US oil companies from receiving contracts in Iraq.
The Ohio Democrat, who believes exploiting Iraq's massive oil reserves was the primary reason we invaded, introduced a measure he says aims to keep Iraq's oil wealth within the country.
“Iraq needs oil revenue now more than ever as they try to rebuild their country,” Kucinich said Thursday, unveiling the Oil for Iraq Liberation Act.
Kucinich noted Congress recently required Iraq to match US investments in the country's reconstruction, and he implied that Iraq's ability to contribute to its reconstruction was damaged because of its reliance on oil revenues.
"The invasion of Iraq was about oil, but it didn’t result in more oil or cheaper gas," Kucinich said on the House Floor. "It resulted in war profiteering by oil companies who benefited by keeping Iraqi oil off the market."
Recent reports have indicated that big oil companies like Exxon, Chevron, BP, Total and Shell are set to receive lucrative no-bid contracts to explore in Iraq.
It's unclear what effect, if any, Kucinich's proposal would have on companies like the former British Petroleum, which is headquartered in London; Total, based in Paris; or Royal Dutch Shell, headquartered in The Hague. Of the companies reportedly in line to receive contracts, only ExxonMobil and Chevron are based in the US, but both operate around the globe. >>>cont
Big Oil's Record Quarter: $51.5B In Combined Profit
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home