> Robert Seeberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<most snipped> 
 
> http://www.prwatch.org/books/tsigfy10.html
> 
> In fact, the most emotionally moving testimony on
> October 10 came from
> a 15-year-old Kuwaiti girl....Sobbing, she described

>what she had seen with her own eyes in
> a hospital in Kuwait City...."I saw the
> Iraqi soldiers come into the hospital with guns, and
> go into the room
> where . . . babies were in incubators. They took the
> babies out of the
> incubators, took the incubators, and left the babies
> on the cold floor to die..."

> http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0906/p01s02-wosc.html
> ...Later, it was learned that Nayirah was in fact
the
> daughter of the
> Kuwaiti ambassador to Washington and had no
> connection to the Kuwait hospital.
> 
> She had been coached - along with the handful of
> others who would
> "corroborate" the story - by senior executives of
> Hill and Knowlton in
> Washington, the biggest global PR firm at the time,
> which had a
> contract worth more than $10 million with the
> Kuwaitis to make the case for war...

"He raped her [a Handmaid] -- and she was
*pregnant*!!"
- IIRC, a line from the movie The Handmaid's Tale: a
lie justifying the murder of a dissenter who had done
no such thing.

Now Saddam is a ravening dog who ought to be shot -
but at least in the field of biological agents useful
for terrorism, the US govt. gave his regime some teeth
in the 80's [2 summers ago I posted links to the
Library of Congress site detailing the bacterial
pathogens, phage vectors and CDC training for at least
one Iraqi scientist].  I suppose it's more palatable
to believe that somebody's a monster all by
themselves, not that your government helped create
that horror.

I had posted some time [2 years?] back that
assassination, repugnant though it is, was preferable
to full-out war, and was told that it had been tried
and wasn't feasible.  I recently was informed that a
sniper/special forces team *had him in their
crosshairs* and was ordered not to shoot -- it is not
clear to me if this was during or after GWI. 
Aside: this is less reliable data than my
previously-cited military technical advisor's
assessment of Iraq pre-GWII; since I don't know the
security-type system of rating information, I'll put
it in medical research terms: the tech advisor's info
I'd rate as a placebo-controlled trial, whereas this
'crosshairs' statement I'd class as a retrospective
study. 

My hopes that this mess would be turned around, faint
to begin with, are daily less, with the continued
violence in Iraq, and now weather becoming a serious
factor in the Kurdish north (apparently it was a
concern for the Kurdish leaders before the election
time was decided upon, but their observations were
overruled).

Debbi
Pottery Barn Rules Maru   }:/


                
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
All your favorites on one personal page � Try My Yahoo!
http://my.yahoo.com 
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Reply via email to