Saturday, 21 February 2015

Has ABC News Radio Become a War Facilitating Propaganda Service? A Letter.

The following letter was sent to ABC News Radio (Australia) in response to the words of one of their guests - a supposed expert on US foreign policy:


Has ABC News Radio become a war facilitating propaganda service? I was listening to Joe Siracusa, professor of Human Security and International Diplomacy at RMIT, spout nonsense about the Middle East saying the US has been at war there for 25 years in efforts to 'fix a long running problem.' He implied that we had faced the same in-country issue, centred on Iraq, the entire time.

Such a misleading and grossly generalised appraisal of the wars whitewashes the particular circumstances that led to conflict and handily absolved the US of its criminal responsibilities throughout this entire 25 year period.

The problems we see in Iraq today were largely due to US intervention. Unbeknownst to many (certain academics excepted), the original Iraqi attack on Kuwait in 1990 was invited by US Ambassador April Glaspie:


Transcript of Meeting Between Iraqi President, Saddam Hussein and U.S. Ambassador to Iraq, April Glaspie. - July 25, 1990 (Eight days before the August 2, 1990 Iraqi Invasion of Kuwait)

July 25, 1990 - Presidential Palace - Baghdad

U.S. Ambassador Glaspie - I have direct instructions from President Bush to improve our relations with Iraq. We have considerable sympathy for your quest for higher oil prices, the immediate cause of your confrontation with Kuwait. (pause) As you know, I lived here for years and admire your extraordinary efforts to rebuild your country. We know you need funds. We understand that, and our opinion is that you should have the opportunity to rebuild your country. (pause) We can see that you have deployed massive numbers of troops in the south. Normally that would be none of our business, but when this happens in the context of your threat s against Kuwait, then it would be reasonable for us to be concerned. For this reason, I have received an instruction to ask you, in the spirit of friendship - not confrontation - regarding your intentions: Why are your troops massed so very close to Kuwait's borders?

Saddam Hussein - As you know, for years now I have made every effort to reach a settlement on our dispute with Kuwait. There is to be a meeting in two days; I am prepared to give negotiations only this one more brief chance. (pause) When we (the Iraqis) meet (with the Kuwaitis) and we see there is hope, then nothing will happen. But if we are unable to find a solution, then it will be natural that Iraq will not accept death.

U.S. Ambassador Glaspie - What solutions would be acceptab le?

Saddam Hussein - If we could keep the whole of the Shatt al Arab - our strategic goal in our war with Iran - we will make concessions (to the Kuwaitis). But, if we are forced to choose between keeping half of the Shatt and the whole of Iraq (i.e., in Saddam s view, including Kuwait ) then we will give up all of the Shatt to defend our claims on Kuwait to keep the whole of Iraq in the shape we wish it to be. (pause) What is the United States' opinion on this?

U.S. Ambassador Glaspie - We have no opinion on your Arab - Arab conflicts, such as your dispute with Kuwait. Secretary (of State James) Baker has directed me to emphasize the instruction, first given to Iraq in the 1960's, that the Kuwait issue is not associated with America. (Saddam smiles)

On August 2, 1990, Saddam's massed troops invade and occupy Kuwait. _____

Baghdad, September 2, 1990, U.S. Embassy

One month later, British journalists obtain the the above tape and transcript of the Saddam - Glaspie meeting of July 29, 1990. Astounded, they confront Ms. Glaspie as she leaves the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad.

Journalist 1 - Are the transcripts (holding them up) correct, Madam Ambassador?(Ambassador Glaspie does not respond)

Journalist 2 - You knew Saddam was going to invade (Kuwait ) but you didn't warn him not to. You didn't tell him America would defend Kuwait. You told him the opposite - that America was not associated with Kuwait.

Journalist 1 - You encouraged this aggression - his invasi on. What were you thinking?

U.S. Ambassador Glaspie - Obviously, I didn't think, and nobody else did, that the Iraqis were going to take all of Kuwait.

Journalist 1 - You thought he was just going to take some of it? But, how could you? Saddam told you that, if negotiations failed , he would give up his Iran (Shatt al Arab waterway) goal for the Whole of Iraq, in the shape we wish it to be. You know that includes Kuwait, which the Iraqis have always viewed as an historic part of their country!

Journalist 1 - American green-lighted the invasion. At a minimum, you admit signaling Saddam that some aggression was okay - that the U.S. would not oppose a grab of the al-Rumeilah oil field, the disputed border strip and the Gulf Islands (including Bubiyan) - the territories claimed by Iraq?

(Ambassador Glaspie says nothing as a limousine door closed behind her and the car drives off.)


Later, the international support for attacking Iraq in 1991 was rallied by the 'babies taken out of the incubators' lie, famously aired by 'nurse Nayirah' who was actually a Kuwaiti Ambassador's daughter.

What actually occurred in the early 90s was a US orchestrated 'set-up' that led to a short lived war with huge consequences for the future. None of this was accidental. This was not simply an intrinsically Iraqi centred problem that needed to be fixed, as Professor Siracusa might like to believe.

Overlooking the subsequent sanctions on Iraq that lasted into the early 2000s we next arrive at the US concocted WMD lies, that were a combination of total fabrications (Uranium from Niger, the meeting with Al Qaeda in Prague), and distortions of intelligence that were strongly suspected to be false (mobile weapons labs, the Curve Ball nuclear program testimony, the aluminium 'centrifuge' tubes). Nevertheless, the 2003 war was pushed relentlessly by neoconservative politicians, along with a compliant post-911 intelligence community and media, with the support of the British establishment (world wide protests be damned!).

In the end the corporate media, except in isolated instances, failed to challenge the faux narrative that was heaped upon the public and we ended up with a full scale invasion and occupation of Iraq. Again what we experienced was a completely unnecessary and entirely avoidable war that lead to the subsequent destabilisation of the Middle East.

The occupation policy, of disbanding the Army and forming Shia death squads one year later (Google it), in order to 'counter the Sunni insurgency' - again a policy directed by the neoconservatives - directly led to the sectarian violence that ravaged the country post Saddam's rule. This was not a problem the US was simply trying 'fix'.

Joe Siracusa also falsely said that President Obama has been an anti-war president. How can this be true when he expanded the drone war into multiple countries not at war with the USA, attacked Libya using false humanitarian cover (which we now know was contradicted by contemporary intelligence reports), participated in a proxy war against Syria, and backed the coup in Ukraine that ultimately led to the current war? 

The current President is not anti-war, he's simply pro-covert war, using humanitarian cover and anti-Russian propaganda to sell various US interventions to the public.

Professor Siracusa should know better than to misinform the public on your radio program. Furthermore, you people at News Radio should know better than to invite such guests to repeat heinous whitewashing propaganda (unchallenged) to your audience.

You should ask yourselves the question; does our Mainstream Media Facilitate Mass Murder through varying levels of propaganda and/or misinformation, and are you part of this process?

Please forward this message to your news director and or researchers. Thank you.

Some additional comments about the 2003 Iraq War:

The war was certainly no 'accident' - it was a premeditated attack. The neoconservatives entrenched in the Bush Administration were the same ones actively pushing for a war on Iraq during the 90s. We even have their policy paper - the Project for a New American Century (PNAC) - that specifically singles out Iraq as a target. Furthermore, in a 60 Minutes interview, former Treasury Secretary, Paul O'Neill, recalled a meeting in 2000, before the attacks of 911, where the topic of discussion was planning for a US invasion of Iraq.

[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, February 21st, 2015.]

No comments: