Re: Fwd: CRISIS [12-10] Urgent -- House Bill on Bombing Iraq,

>>Hello, all. The Bush administration was unable to show any hard link 
>>between Iraq and the attacks of Sept. 11, so it has declared that the 
>>simple possession of weapons of mass destruction by a "rogue state" is 
>>terrorism. Now, the House International Relations Committee is considering 
>>a resolution that will declare Iraq's refusal to allow weapons inspectors 
>>in an act of "aggression" against the United States (weapons inspectors 
>>were removed by the United States shortly before the December 1998 "Desert 
>>Fox" bombing campaign, and Iraq has not allowed any back in). This is a 
>>clear move to authorize large-scale bombing of Iraq. For those of you 
>>living in the United States, the following action alert has information on 
>>what to do. For everyone else, please do take note. It's not too early to 
>>start thinking about demonstrations.
>>
>>For more information about Iraq, see http://www.casi.org.uk, 
>>http://www.endthewar.org, or http://www.fair.org/international/iraq.html
>>
>>In Solidarity,
>>
>>Crisis Update
>>PLEASE FORWARD WIDELY
>>International Affairs Committee Drafting Resolution to Authorize Bombing 
>>of Iraq
>>Rep. Ron Paul Circulating Congressional Letter in Opposition
>>
>>Friends - As many of you know, there has been immense pressure building 
>>recently within the Bush Administration, and the media, to make Iraq the 
>>next target in our unending war against terrorism. Now a number of members 
>>of Congress have written a letter urging President Bush to do just that, 
>>and this coming Tuesday the House International Relations Committee will 
>>be drafting a resolution to authorize attacks on Iraq. (Much greater 
>>attacks than what we have been doing already, aimed at overthrowing Saddam 
>>Hussein.) It will, among other things, stipulate that any refusal of Iraq 
>>to grant access to UN inspectors to any site in Iraq will be considered an 
>>"act of aggression against the United States."
>>

from F.A.I.R. (Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting), an American media watchdog
group:

http://www.fair.org/activism/post-expulsions.html

March 6, 2000 
Since January 1999, the Washington Post has spun a tall tale about the 1998
collapse of U.N. weapons inspections in Iraq and the U.S.-British airstrikes
that followed. Not only has the Post rewritten Iraqi history, but the paper's
new version of events contradicts its own coverage from the time of the
airstrikes. Despite running several letters to the editor pointing out the
mistake, the paper has repeated the error again and again. How many times can
one newspaper get the same fact wrong? 
The story centers on the Iraq crisis that broke out on December 16, 1998.
Richard Butler, head of the United Nations weapons inspection team in Iraq, had
just released a report accusing the Iraqi regime of obstructing U.N. weapons
checks. On the basis of that report, President Clinton announced he would
launch airstrikes against Iraqi targets. Out of concern for their safety,
Butler withdrew his inspectors from Iraq, and the U.S.-British bombing
proceeded. 
The Washington Post reported all these facts correctly at the time: A December
18 article by national security correspondent Barton Gellman reported that
"Butler ordered his inspectors to evacuate Baghdad, in anticipation of a
military attack, on Tuesday night." 
But in the 14 months since then, the Washington Post has again and again tried
to rewrite history--claiming that Saddam Hussein expelled the U.N. inspectors
from Iraq. Despite repeated attempts by its readers to set the record straight
in letters to the editor, the Post has persisted in reporting this fiction. 
Not only did Saddam Hussein not order the inspectors' retreat, but Butler's
decision to withdraw them was--to say the least--highly controversial. The
Washington Post (12/17/98) reported that as Butler was drafting his report on
Iraqi cooperation, U.S. officials were secretly consulting with him about how
to frame his conclusions. 
According to the Post, a New York diplomat "generally sympathetic to
Washington"
argued--along with French, Russian, Chinese, and U.N. officials--that Butler,
working in collusion with the U.S., "deliberately wrote a justification for
war." "Based on the same facts," the diplomat said, "he [Butler] could have
just said, 'There were something like 300 inspections and we encountered
difficulties in five.'" 
What follows is a chronology of the Washington Post's 14-month reign of error.
On at least five separate occasions, the Post falsely reported that Saddam
Hussein expelled the U.N. weapons inspectors in December 1998. In three of
these instances, the gaffe was made by foreign affairs columnist Fred Hiatt or
by the Post editorial page, which Hiatt now edits. 
Of course, the Post is not alone. The New York Times made the same mistake
seven
times (1/8/99, 4/16/99, 8/20/99, 10/28/99, 11/18/99, 12/17/99, 2/1/00) before
finally printing a correction on February 2, 2000. The Chicago Tribune
(12/18/99), Boston Globe (10/21/99), Washington Times (11/5/99), AP (12/2/99),
NewsweekM (8/30/99), USA Today (12/9/99) and NBC News (12/19/99) have all made
the same error. 

EXAMPLES OF THE LIES:

JANUARY 10, 1999 
"The Many Policies on Iraq" (Op-Ed) 
By Fred Hiatt 
"It was because Saddam Hussein kicked out United Nations weapons inspectors
that Clinton finally authorized a three-day bombing campaign last month." 
JANUARY 16, 1999 
"A Pretext for Bombing" (Letter to the Editor) 
Jenifer Dixon, Washington, D.C. 
"Contrary to Fred Hiatt's assertion [op-ed, Jan. 10] that 'it was because
Saddam Hussein kicked out United Nations weapons inspectors that Clinton
finally authorized a three-day bombing campaign last month,' Iraq did not 'kick
out' the inspectors -- nor was it even accused of doing so." 
JULY 25, 1999 
"Out of Sight, Out of Control" (Op-Ed) 
By Fred Hiatt 
"It's been nearly a year since United Nations disarmament inspectors could do
their jobs in Iraq, and eight months since they were kicked out altogether. The
Clinton administration professes little concern, saying it sees no sign that
Saddam Hussein is rebuilding his nuclear or poison weapons." 
AUGUST 30, 1999 
"U.S. Air Raids on Iraq Become an Almost Daily Ritual; As Fighters Retaliate
for Threats, Mission Faces Allies' Questions" (News article) 
By Roberto Suro 
"More than a year has passed since Iraq shut down the U.N. weapons inspection
program that President Clinton so often proclaimed essential to keeping the
peace, and the administration faces an uphill diplomatic effort to impose a new
inspection regime." 
SEPTEMBER 16, 1999 
"The Impeachment Bombings" (Letter to the Editor) 
Sam Husseini, Washington, D.C. 
"In 'U.S. Air Raids on Iraq Become an Almost Daily Ritual' [news story, Aug.
30], it is asserted that 'more than a year has passed since Iraq shut down the
U.N. weapons inspection program that President Clinton so often proclaimed as
essential to keeping the peace.' This is inaccurate. The weapons inspection
program was shut down when its head, Richard Butler, withdrew the inspectors in
December 1998 following the release of a self-contradictory report." 
NOVEMBER 16, 1999 
"U.N. Nears Pact on Iraq Inspections; Security Council May Ease Sanctions"
(News article) 
By John Lancaster and Colum Lynch 
"Nearly a year after Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein ejected international arms
inspectors from his country, members of the U.N. Security Council are nearing
agreement on a resolution that could lead to the resumption of inspections
aimed at preventing Baghdad from acquiring illegal weapons, U.S. and allied
officials said yesterday." 
NOVEMBER 25, 1999 
"Leaving Iraq" (Letter to the Editor) 
Hussein Ibish, Washington, D.C. 
"The Post is mistaken in its claim that 'Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein ejected
international arms inspectors from his country' ['U.N. Nears Pact on Iraq
Inspections,' front page, Nov. 16]. In December 1998 Richard Butler, head of
the weapons inspection program, withdrew his team from Iraq after issuing a
report to the United Nations." 
FEBRUARY 22, 2000 
"Sanctions Sanctimony" (Editorial) 
"The sanctions would disappear if Saddam accounted for all his weapons of mass
destruction, as promised. Instead, he refuses to permit even a weaker U.N.
weapons inspection team to replace the one he earlier kicked out." 
ACTION: Please contact Washington Post ombudsman E.R. Shipp and ask her why the
Washington Post has misreported the U.N. weapons inspections story, even after
being repeatedly corrected by readers. 
CONTACT: 
E.R. Shipp, Ombudsman 
Washington Post 
ombudsman@washpost.com 


http://www.fair.org/activism/post-expulsions.html