<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<Facts xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance">
  <supertopics>
   <Supertopic name="Home">
    <topics>
     <Topic name="Home">
      <subtopics>
        <Subtopic name="Site Overview" nocomment="true">
          <facts>
            <Fact>
              <text>
                This site contains information which should be kept in mind
                when looking at the current direction the US is taking in its foreign policy. Everything
                is backed up with links to articles/sources from around the web, to allow for quick
                verification.
              </text>
             </Fact>
             <Fact>
             	 <date>A few highlights of recent US Foreign Policy ...</date>
             	 <text>
                <p>
                <ul>
                <li>CIA's overthrow of democratic governments in |guatemala Guatemala|, |brazil Brazil|, 
                       |chile Chile|, |guyana Guyana|, |iranian Iran|, |indonesia Indonesia| and |congo Congo|.
                <li>CIA's |iraq_overthrow_63 overthrow of Iraq's government in 60's| and installation of Saddam.
		            <li>US |us_terror terrorism| in |nicaragua Nicaragua| leading to condemnation by the World Court.
		            <li>CIA training and support of death squads and repressive secret police in |iranian Iran|, 
		              |indonesia Indonesia|, |el El Salvador|, |chile Chile|, |guatemala Guatemala| and |vietnam Vietnam|.
                </ul></p>
                
                <p>Comments, suggestions, criticism please direct at <a href="mailto:godblesstheusa@bevin.de">
                godblesstheusa@bevin.de</a> or enter in the <a href="/phorum/">forum</a>. 
                Any additional backed-up facts regarding the topics contained in this site or related 
                topics would be greatly appreciated.
              </text>
            </Fact>
          </facts>
        </Subtopic>

        <Subtopic name="News" nocomment="true">
          <facts>

            <Fact>
            	<date>1 November 2003</date>
              <text>
              	A few small changes and updates and a new section on the |british_dossiers British dossiers|. 
              	Have mostly however been helping with work on the 
              	<a href="http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/">Co-operative Research</a> site to add a system
              	for user input - the aim being to allow for users to help do the research for sites such as these.
              </text>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
            	<date>1 August 2003</date>
              <text>
              	Added a discussion system, whereby anyone can add personal comments to any of the topics presented
              	on the site. The comments will be automatically shown on the site directly beneath the corresponding 
              	topics.
              	<br><br>
              	Added a |israel new section| on Israel. Given the unusually large amount of misinformation
              	regarding the events in and around Israel, and the complexity of the situation, I thought it 
              	neccessary to devote an entire topic to it. Still very much a work-in-progress however.
              	<br><br>
              	Also added a bit on |israeli_connection the Israeli Connection| to the |sept11 September 11th|
              	section.
              	<br><br>
              	Updated the |libya Libya| section with more information relating to the Lockerbie bombing.
              	<br><br>
              	Added a |missing_link new section| on the Bush Administration's attempts to link Saddam with
              	Al Qaeda (most of the information was simply extracted from the more |selling general section|
              	regarding the selling of the war).
              </text>
             </Fact>


            <Fact>
            	<date>22 July 2003</date>
              <text>
              	Re-organized the whole website into new sections - the amount of information the site contains
              	was getting too much for the old 'two-tier' system of navigation, so I've now created a 
              	'three-tier' one. Still working on it, so let me know how you like it.
              	<br><br>
              	Added a new section under Iraq on |uranium_claim the uranium claim|.
              	<br><br>
              	Added a new section on |libya Libya|.
              	<br><br>
              	Added a new section under General Issues on |diego Diego Garcia|, in particular the 
              	expulsion of the island's native inhabitants in preparation for the US naval base there.
              </text>
             </Fact>

            <Fact>
            	<date>7 July 2003</date>
              <text>
              	Added a |democracy_rhetoric new section| documenting the changing rhetoric given
              	by the Bush Administration regarding their promises to install democracy in Iraq. Also
                added some new developments regarding the |selling propaganda on Iraq| and |post_iraq post-war
                Iraq|.
              </text>
             </Fact>

            <Fact>
            	<date>3 July 2003</date>
              <text>
                Updated the |wtc_bombing WTC Bombing| section, and added a new |did_war_achieve_goals analysis|
                of whether the Iraq war achieved its goals.
              </text>
             </Fact>
          </facts>
        </Subtopic>

        <Subtopic name="Vice Guide to American Foreign Policy" shortName="US Foreign Policy" forcebg="true" nocomment="true">
          <facts>
            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
								This guide is taken from <a href="http://www.guerrillanews.com/human_rights/doc358.html">this article</a> which
								was originally published in the <a href="http://www.viceland.com">Vice magazine</a>. The topic headings
								link to the corresponding sections in this website, where the claims presented here are backed up with the facts.
							</text>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>Philippines</date>
							<text>
								The 1899 Filipino-American War is one of those nasty little conflicts that you won't find a lot about in your high school history textbook. Call it the first Vietnam. During the 1898 Spanish-American War, the U.S. help the Filipinos gain independence from Spain. Then they declare the country an American colony. A brutal war follows. Many of the scorched-earth tactics used in Vietnam are first used here. More than 100,000 Filipinos die. A large anti-imperialism movement starts in the U.S. 'We do not intend to free, but subjugate the people of the Philippines. We have gone there to conquer, not to redeem,' wrote early celebrity activist Mark Twain. In 1945, the Americans come back to the Philippines. Even though they have a common enemy - Japan - America fights leftist forces known as Huks. The U.S. defeat the Huks, and install a series of puppet presidents, culminating in the absurdly corrupt Ferdinand Marcos. He and his high-heel-obsessed wife bilk the poverty-ridden country dry for three decades, until retiring comfortably in Hawaii.
							</text>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>|iranian Iran|</date>
							<text>
								1953 - The CIA's first big takedown. The democratically elected Prime Minister Mossadegh had to go. He was talking crazy talk, like nationalizing Iran's oil. A CIA-sponsored coup restores the Shah to absolute power that begins 25 years of repression and torture. Iran's oil is returned to its rightful owners, the Americans and British. This, of course, sets the stage for a radical Islamic revolution in 1979, when the Ayatollah Khomeini takes over, holds Americans hostage, burns many American flags, and pisses off rednecks across America.
							</text>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>|guatemala Guatemala|</date>
							<text>
								1953 - Jacobo Arbenz also had to go. The progressive democratically elected president is also talking that crazy talk - you know, land reform, civil liberties, nationalizing the Washington-connected United Fruit Company. The CIA organizes a massive disinformation campaign and coup. Next up: 40 years of bad, bad things you don't even want to think about - American-trained death squads, torture, disappearances, mass executions. Victims: 100,000.
							</text>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>|middle Middle East|</date>
							<text>
								In the 50s, the Eisenhower Doctrine stated the United States 'is prepared to use armed forces to assist' any Middle East country 'requesting assistance against armed aggression from any country controlled by international communism.' In other words, no one is allowed to fuck around in the Middle East or its oil fields except the United States. The U.S. tries to overthrow the Syrian government (twice), lands 14,000 troops in Lebanon, and conspires to overthrow and assassinate Arab nationalist Nasser in Egypt. U.S. supports Israel with billions of dollars of aid, despite its harsh treatment of Palestinians and massacres in Lebanon.
							</text>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>|indonesia Indonesia|</date>
							<text>
								1957 - President Sukarno is another troublemaker. He takes back Indonesian companies from their former colonial master, the Dutch. He takes a trip to Moscow. He refuses to crack down on communists. The CIA launches a disinformation campaign, tries to blackmail him with a fake sex film, plots his assassination, and hooks up with dissident military officers to start a full-scale war against the government. Sukarno, unlike many on the Agency's hit list, somehow survives. 1965 - Sukarno is finally overthrown by General Suharto. The U.S. helps him track down anyone suspected of being communist. The New York Times calls what follows 'one of the most savage mass slayings of modern political history.' Up to one million die.
							</text>
						</Fact>


						<Fact>
							<date>|vietnam Vietnam|</date>
							<text>
								After watching the French get their asses kicked halfway to Montparnasse, the U.S. gets embroiled in a civil war pitting communist nationalist forces against a corrupt, pro-west government. In 1961, the first young American men start arriving home in body bags. Before it's over, more than one million Vietnamese and 50,000 Americans will die, Jimi Hendrix will play Woodstock, the Beatles will form and break up, and the American psyche will be radically transformed. In 1975, the U.S. finally admits defeat, forever dooming it to need to overcome the 'Vietnam Syndrome' (see <i>Rambo</i>).
							</text>
						</Fact>


						<Fact>
							<date>|cambodia Cambodia|</date>
							<text>
								1969 - Nixon and Kissinger begin their secret 'carpet bombings' of Cambodia. They say it is to kill Viet Cong hiding out in the Cambodian jungle. Hundreds of thousands of Cambodian civilians die. 1970 - Washington finally helps overthrow troublesome Prince Sihanouk in a coup. The U.S. enlists the genocidal maniac Pol Pot and his Khmer Rouge to help fight the Viet Cong. Five years later, Pol Pot takes over, declares 'Year Zero,' kills anyone with an education, or even wearing glasses, and sends everyone to the countryside to work in agricultural labor camps. More than two million die in his 'killing fields' (see <i>The Killing Fields</i>).
							</text>
						</Fact>


						<Fact>
							<date>|congo The Congo/Zaire|</date>
							<text>
								1960 - Patrice Lumumba becomes the Congo's first prime minister after independence from Belgium. But the Belgians don't quite leave. They keep their hands on the vast mineral wealth in the Katanga province, where the Americans also have a piece of the action. Lumumba is defiant, calling for the Congo's economic and political liberation. In other words, he is doomed. In January 1961, he is assassinated with help from the CIA, under orders from Eisenhower himself. His body is chopped up into little pieces and burned in acid. Mobutu Sese Seko takes over, changes the name to Zaire, and begins one of the most corrupt and bloody dictatorships in modern times. Even his CIA handlers are amazed at his cruelty. Thirty years later, despite its rich natural resources, the people of the Congo are still dirt-poor, Mobutu is a multibillionaire, and the country is in chaos. In 1997, Mobutu is overthrown, and retires to the Cote d'Azur. The country slides into a civil war that has killed more than one million.
							</text>
						</Fact>


						<Fact>
							<date>|cuba Cuba|</date>
							<text>
								1959 - When Fidel Castro rolls into Havana New Years Day he isn't a commie - he is a nationalist and an opportunist. But he did take over Cuba's national industries. And that, as we've learned, is something the U.S. doesn't look kindly on. The Americans begin a comically disastrous campaign to oust Castro. They help launch a full-scale invasion at the Bay of Pigs and are crushed. They launch gunboat attacks, bombings, biological warfare. New evidence has just come out that the CIA even considered committing terrorist acts and then blaming them on Cuba as a pretext to invade again. They try to send Castro exploding cigars. Spray poison on his beard. The U.S. issues sanctions and a trade embargo that, more than anything, ensures Castro remains in power.
							</text>
						</Fact>


						<Fact>
							<date>|chile Chile|</date>
							<text>
								1973 - Salvador Allende was a 'dangerous' man. He was popular, democratically elected, and a leftist. Against the objections of many inside the US State Department, the CIA, pushed by Kissinger, helps the military overthrow the government. Allende is killed. General Pinochet closes off the country to the outside world. Tanks roll in, soldiers round up students, stadiums turn into execution fields, the country is gripped by fear. For two decades, Pinochet rules with a brutal hand, and thousands of students, union organizers and other bad apples are 'disappeared' (see the movie <i>Missing</i>).
							</text>
						</Fact>


						<Fact>
							<date>|indonesia East Timor|</date>
							<text>
								December 1975 - Indonesia invades the small island of East Timor, which had proclaimed its independence after Portugal left. The day before, U.S. President Ford and Secretary of State Kissinger were in Indonesia meeting with Indonesian President Suharto. Amnesty International estimates that by 1989, Indonesian troops had killed 200,000 people out of a population of between 600,000 and 700,000. The U.S. supplies Indonesia with aid, guns, and training throughout.
							</text>
						</Fact>


						<Fact>
							<date>|nicaragua Nicaragua|</date>
							<text>
								1978 - the leftist Sandinistas overthrow the U.S.-backed Somoza dictatorship. Reagan becomes obsessed with taking out the Cuba-and-Soviet-friendly government, enlisting an army of mercenaries, drug dealers and ex-Somoza National Guardsmen. The Contras attack schools and medical clinics, raping, torturing, mining harbors, and bombing. When Congress cuts off funds, Reagan's 'freedom fighters' are financed by CIA drug-dealing and secret arms sales to Iran in what comes to be known as the Iran-Contra Affair.
							</text>
						</Fact>


						<Fact>
							<date>|el El Salvador|</date>
							<text>
								During El Salvador's bloody civil war (1980-92), the U.S. funds, trains, and secretly fights alongside a military that operates less like a traditional army than a loose confederation of homicidal fraternities. By the end of the war, 75,000 Salvadorans are dead.
							</text>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>Panama</date>
							<text>
								During the 80s, Manny Noriega was George Bush's boy. On the CIA payroll, he helped the U.S. run drugs, launder money and ship arms to its operations in Nicaragua and El Salvador. But ol' Pineapple Face became a problem. Turned out he was helping Castro, laundering money for Pablo Escobar, and talking smack about U.S. imperialism. Plus he knew way too much about the whole Iran-Contra scandal. Dude had to go. In December 1989, Bush sends in the Green Berets to arrest him for drug dealing. A whole Panama City barrio is leveled. The official body count is 500-something, others say 3,000. Noriega sits in a Florida jail feeling confused.
							</text>
						</Fact>


						<Fact>
							<date>|iraqi Iraq|</date>
							<text>
								In the 80s, Saddam Hussein is America's ally. The U.S. sends him weapons and money as he fights a seemingly endless war against Iran, murders his political opponents, and gasses the Kurds. In 1991, Saddam is pissed off at neighboring Kuwait (a country invented by Britain) for undercutting the price of oil. He invades. The U.S. forms an international coalition to 'liberate' Kuwait. Saddam sends an army of barefoot conscripts. For more than 40 days and nights, 177 million pounds of bombs fall on Iraq - the most concentrated aerial onslaught in the history of the world. The U.S. uses cancer-causing depleted uranium weapons; they bury soldiers alive; they bomb retreating troops and civilians. At the war's end, the U.S. turns its back on the Kurds and other anti-Saddam forces (see Three Kings). While Saddam remains in power, U.S. sanctions and continued bombing keep food, medicine, and clean water from everyday Iraqis. According to the UN, over one million Iraqis have died, half of them children.
							</text>
						</Fact>


						<Fact>
							<date>|afghanistan_pipeline Afghanistan|</date>
							<text>
								Beginning in the 1970s, the U.S. pours billions of dollars into overthrowing a pro-Soviet government. The CIA funds, trains, and arms a guerrilla army of Islamic extremists known as the Mujahideen. The Soviets are driven out, in their version of Vietnam. More than a million Afghan are dead, three million disabled, and five million made refugees. The country slides into civil war in which an even more radical group of Pakistan-educated students and uneducated hillbillies known as the Taliban take over. The country becomes a haven for anti-American terrorists groups and women-haters. Lies flourish. While outwardly criticizing the Taliban, behind the scenes the CIA and American oil companies jockey for leverage to build a pipeline across the country.
							</text>
						</Fact>


						<Fact>
							<date>Yugoslavia</date>
							<text>
								1999 - After the Serbs start 'ethnic cleansing' Albanians in the Yugoslavian province of Kosovo, the U.S. and NATO launch 70 days of air strikes against Serbia. Thousands of Serbs are killed. The ethnic Albanian KLA guerrilla army, a drug-dealing group of thugs who were first accused of ethnic cleansing Serbs by The New York Times back in 1982, start an open season on Serbs living in Kosovo. The bombs stop, and Serb demagogue Slobodan Milosevic is driven from power by a popular movement.
							</text>
						</Fact>


						<Fact>
							<date>Colombia</date>
							<text>
								2001 - Colombia's three-decade-old civil war is still going strong, despite, or one might say, as a result of $1.4 billion of U.S. military aid. The country is a chaotic death trap. Marxist rebels hold large portions of the country; American mercenaries and defense department front companies like DynCorp are covertly helping the inept Colombian military; right-wing paramilitaries are massacring civilians; and everyone has their hands in the super-lucrative drug trade. Most people don't know that American forces have been around for while. In the early 90s, a secret group code-named Centra Spike launch a covert operation to take out Pablo Escobar, a major cocaine lord who made the fatal mistake of giving money to the poor and talking shit about American imperialism. The Colombian government and the secret American unit go into business with Escobar's rival the Cali Cartel. Escobar is finally killed. The Cali Cartel's power is solidified and the flow of cocaine into the U.S. only increases.
							</text>
						</Fact>


						<Fact>
							<date>Sources/ Suggested reading:</date>
							<text>
								"The Trial of Henry Kissinger" - Christopher Hitchens, Verso, 2001. Panama Deception -documentary film. Winner 1992 Academy Award for Best Documentary. Director: Barbara Trent.
								<br><br>
								Blowback: The Costs and Consequences of American Empire -Chalmers Johnson, Henry Holt, 2000
								<br><br>
								Weakness and Deceit: U.S. policy and El Salvador -Raymond Bonner, Times Books, New York, 1984
								<br><br>
								The War Conspiracy: The Secret Road to the Second Indochina War -Peter Dale Scott, Bobbs Merrill, New York and Indianapolis, 1972.
								<br><br>
								Cocaine Politics: Drugs, Armies and the CIA in Central America -Peter Dale Scott and Jonathan Marshall. University of California Press, 1991.
								<br><br>
								Coming to Jakarta: A Poem About Terror -Peter Dale Scott, New Directions, New York, 1989.
								<br><br>
								East Timor: Genocide in Paradise -Matthew Jardine, Common Courage Press, 1999.
								<br><br>
								Killing Pablo: The Hunt for the World's Greatest Outlaw -Mark Bowden, Atlantic Monthly Press, 2001.
								<br><br>
								Between Despair and Hope: Windows on My Middle East Journey 1967-1992 Margarita Skinner, UNICEF Health Coordinator in Baghdad from 1991-1992, The Radcliffe Press, London and New York, 1998.
								<br><br>
								<a href="http://www.unicef.org/newsline/99pr29.htm">UNICEF Report</a> August 1999: Iraq surveys show 'humanitarian emergency'. 
							</text>
						</Fact>
					</facts>
				</Subtopic>

        <Subtopic name="Contribution" nocomment="true">
          <facts>
            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
								I am always looking for people willing to do research to extend the information presented on this 
								website. The information is all stored in a very simple xml file. This file, and the program which generates 
								the website from it, are contained in <a href="backup.rar">this approx. 140kb downloadable file</a>. 
								Please <a href="mailto:helpout@bevin.de">contact me</a> if you are interested in helping out.<br><br>
								Also, if you like this website, then please link to it so that its information gets spread. 
								Especially if you reproduce any of the information presented in this website on the internet, then 
								please give this site credit by linking to it.
              </text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <notes>
              </notes>
            </Fact>
          </facts>
        </Subtopic>

        <Subtopic name="Humour" nocomment="true">
          <facts>
             <Fact>
             	 <date></date>
             	 <text>
								 Heres a few cartoons relating to |bush Bush|, |selling Iraq| etc I've gathered 
								 from around the web. They are taken largely from the following cartoonists :-
								 <ul>
								 	 <li><a href="http://www.claybennett.com">Clay Bennett</a> - cartoonist for <a href="http://www.csmonitor.com/">The Christian Science Monitor</a>
								 	 <li><a href="http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/horsey/bio.asp">David Horsey</a> - pulitzer prize winning cartoonist for the Post-Intelligencer.
								 </ul>
              </text>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
            	<text>
                <table><tr><td width=680 height=500 align=center valign="top">
                <img name="humour_pic" src="dot.gif" align="center" valign="top">
                </td></tr></table>

								<SCRIPT LANGUAGE="JavaScript"> 
									var timeDelay = 16600; 
									
									var Pix             = new Array ("iraq_checklist.jpg", "iraq_priceless.gif", "bushes_iraqoil.jpg", "frodo_has_failed.jpg", "saddam_ballot.jpg", "humorink_saddamshowoff.jpg", "iraq_inthe80s.jpg", "bush_bombiraq.jpg", "bush_precious.jpg", "spot_the_mistake.jpg", "empty-warheads.gif", "war-games.gif", "foreign_policy.jpg", "sword_in_stone.jpg", "time.jpg", "tree.jpg", "cartoon1.gif", "cartoon2.gif", "cartoon3.gif", "cartoon4.gif", "cartoon5.gif", "cartoon6.gif", "cartoon7.gif", "cartoon8.gif", "cartoon9.gif", "liberation.jpg", "exaggeration.jpg" ); 
									var howMany         = Pix.length; 
									var PicCurrentNum   = Math.floor(Math.random()*howMany); 
									var PicTotalChanges = 0;
									var PicCurrent      = new Image(); 
									
									function slideshow() { 
										//if(!(location.href.indexOf('#') != -1 && location.href.indexOf('#site') == -1)) {
											PicCurrentNum++; 
											PicTotalChanges++;
											if(60 > PicTotalChanges) {
												if(PicCurrentNum == howMany) { PicCurrentNum = 0; } 
												PicCurrent.src = Pix[PicCurrentNum]; 
												document.humour_pic.src = PicCurrent.src; 
											}
										//}
									}
									slideshow();
									setInterval("slideshow()", timeDelay); 
								</script>                
              </text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>
          </facts>
        </Subtopic>

      </subtopics>

     </Topic>
    </topics>
   </Supertopic>
    
   <Supertopic name="Iraq" image="iraq-cards.jpg" imagewidth="158" imageheight="128">
 		<topics>
		 <Topic name="Introduction">
		   <subtopics>
		     <Subtopic name="Iraq Section Overview" forcebg="true" nocomment="true">
		       <facts>
		     		<Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	<table>
              		<tr>
              			<td valign=top> 
			              	<span class=date>War Propaganda</span><br><br>
			              	Timelining the unprecedented propaganda campaign which led to the 
			              	huge |misperception public misperception| leading up to the Iraq war.
			              	<ul>
			              		<li>|first_gulf_war The first Gulf War|
			              		<li>|selling The second Gulf War|        
			              		<li>|uranium_claim The 'sought uranium from Africa' claim|
			              		<li>|missing_link The missing Saddam - Al-Qaeda link|
			              		<li>|british_dossiers The British dossiers|
			              	</ul>
			              	<br>
			              </td>
              			<td valign=top>
			              	<span class=date>Changing Rhetoric</span><br><br>
			              	Timelines of quotes from the |profiles Bush Administration| highlighting 
			              	their contradictory backpedalling from their pre-war claims following the war.
			              	<ul>
			              		<li>|wmd_rhetoric WMD Rhetoric|
			              		<li>|democracy_rhetoric Democracy Rhetoric|
			              	</ul>
			              	<br>
			              </td>
			            </tr>
			            <tr>
              			<td colspan=2>
			              	<span class=date>Other Issues</span>
			              	<ul>
			              		<li>|post_iraq Post-war Aftermath| - follow how |bush Bush's|
			              			|democracy_rhetoric promises| for a better post-war Iraq hold up.
			              		<li>|effect Effect of sanctions on Iraq| - the impact of the sanctions, who was really behind 
			              			them and why.
			              		<li>|pre-emptive Pre-emptive War| - a short aside on what the |bush Bush| doctrine of 'pre-emptive'
			              		  war means.
			              		<li>|reasons Reasons behind the war with Iraq| - not the ones you see on FOX news.
			              		<li>|misperception Public Misperception| - the deception which led to war.
			              		<li>|1441 Resolution 1441| - think the UN Resolution 1441 justified the US's attack on Iraq? Think
			              		  again.
			              	</ul>
			              	<br>
			              </td>
			            </tr>
			            <tr>
              			<td colspan=2>
			              	<span class=date>Analysis</span><br><br>
			              	Deviating a bit from the general format of this site - two opinion pieces 
			              	regarding the war on Iraq.
			              	<ul>
			              		<li>|did_war_achieve_goals Did the War achieve its Goals?|
			              		<li>|short_anti_war_arg A short anti-war argument| (written before the war).
			              	</ul>
			              </td>
			            </tr>
			          </table>
              </text>
            </Fact>
		       </facts>
		     </Subtopic>
		   </subtopics>
		 </Topic>
     <Topic name="War Propaganda">
      <subtopics>
        
				<Subtopic name="The first Gulf War" link="first_gulf_war">
					<facts>
            <Fact>
              <date>August 1990</date>
              <link>backing_kuwait</link>
              <text>
              	Iraq invades Kuwait after the U.S. Ambassador to Baghdad April Glaspie tells Hussein that 
              	Washington has '<i>no opinion on Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border disagreement with 
              	Kuwait</i>'.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.independent.org/tii/news/030105Marshall.html</url>
              <urlText>LA Times article</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>September 1990</date>
              <text>The Pentagon leaks reports estimating that up to 250,000 Iraqi troops and 1,500 tanks stand 
                on the border to Saudi Arabia in preparation for an invasion of the world's major oil fields.
                Soviet satellite photos however show no such build-up, Iraq denies it, and the US government 
                has refused to release its alleged evidence for such a build-up.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0906/p01s02-wosc.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.independent.org/tii/news/030105Marshall.html
              	http://deoxy.org/wc/wc-consp.htm#one
              	http://www.guerrillanews.com/intelligence/doc1785.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1991</date>
              <text>The US goes to war with Iraq. One of the main selling points of the war was the story of
	              '<i>312 premature babies at Kuwait City's maternity hospital who died after Iraqi soldiers stole 
	              their incubators and left the infants on the floor,</i>' and of '<i>babies pulled from incubators 
	              and scattered like firewood across the floor.</i>' (these are the words of Bush, who referred to the
	              incident six times in one month in order to justify the bombing). This story was in fact a 
	              fabrication by the PR firm Hill and Knowlton, who were paid between $12-$16 million by Kuwait's 
	              emirocracy to promote its interests in the US. In actual fact the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait was 
	              virtually bloodless.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.groundscore.org/jan03/pg07.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0906-01.htm</altUrls>
            </Fact>
					</facts>
				</Subtopic>

        <Subtopic name="The second Gulf War" link="selling">
          <facts>

            <Fact>
              <text>
              	The propaganda campaign leading up to the attack on Iraq reached such epic proportions that
              	I have split off some aspects of it into separate sections - the |uranium_claim uranium claim|,
              	the attempts to establish a |missing_link Saddam - Al Qaeda link|, and the |british_dossiers 'dodgy'
              	British dossiers|. Also see |misperception
              	this section| regarding the effects - in public misperception - of the campaign.
              </text>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Jan 2000</date>
              <link>no_threat</link>
              <text>
              	Outgoing Secretary of Defence William Cohen conveys to incoming |bush President Bush| that 
              	'<i>Iraq no longer poses a military threat to its neighbours.</i>' 
              </text>
              <url>http://www.viwuk.freeserve.co.uk/library/hans.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://indy.pabn.org/archives/204bushs.shtml
              	http://www.transnational.org/features/2002/Lilburn_IraqPeaceEconomy.html
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Sept 11, 2001</date>
              <link></link>
              <text>
              	Immediately following the Sept 11 attacks, Rumsfeld urges aides to start thinking about
              	attacking Iraq, asking for the '<i>best info fast</i>' to '<i>judge whether good enough 
              	to hit SH [Saddam] at the same time, not only UBL [bin Laden].</i>' and demanding that 
              	the administration's response '<i>go massive ... sweep it all up, things related and 
              	not.</i>'<br><br>
              	General Wesley Clark receives a call on 9/11, saying '<i>You got to say this is connected. 
              	This is state-sponsored terrorism. This has to be connected to Saddam Hussein.</i>' He 
              	responds '<i>But--I'm willing to say it, but what's your evidence?</i>', and never 
              	receives any evidence.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.fair.org/press-releases/clark-iraq.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/09/04/september11/main520830.shtml
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <date>Sept 2002</date>
              <text>The White House is forced to issue a retraction of the erroneous conclusions |bush Bush| 
              	drew from both some satellite photos and a UN report regarding Iraq's supposed nuclear
	              rearmament, after he erroneously claimed that the report claims Iraq is six months away
	              from developing nuclear weapons, and that the satellite photos show evidence of construction 
	              on nuclear sites.
              </text>
              <url>http://truthout.com/docs_02/09.10B.msnbc.iraq.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.sourcedreporting.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=7&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0</altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Sept 2002</date>
              <link>tubes</link>
              <text>The |profiles Bush administration| leaks information to the media in September about Iraq's 
              attempt to import aluminum tubes, which administration officials and Tony Blair claim can be used 
              to enrich uranium and are headed for Iraq's nuclear program, even though US Government experts think 
              otherwise. The International Atomic Energy Agency denies outright the possibility of such use.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/12/06/60minutes/main532107.shtml</url>
              <urlText>CBS News Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
                http://pilger.carlton.com/print/129139
                http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A36348-2002Sep18&notFound=true
                http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/10/international/middleeast/10ALUM.html?ex=1042866000&en=cd51b367fd2e4b32&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE
              	http://www.sourcedreporting.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=7&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0
              </altUrls>
              <otherUrls>
                http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A18841-2002Sep14?language=printerwashingtonpost.com (about oil)	
              </otherUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Sept 2002</date>
              <link>already_disarmed</link>
              <text>
                Former UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter claims Iraq is not a threat, citing the fact
                that '<i>Iraq, during nearly seven years of continuous inspection activity by the 
                United Nations, had been certified as being disarmed to a 90 [percent] to 95 
                percent level ...</i>'.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/meast/09/08/ritter.iraq/</url>
              <urlText>CNN article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/09/08/iraq.debate/</altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
                Ritter also notes that, contrary to the Bush administration's repeated claims that weapons
                inspectors were <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1853860.stm">'kicked out'</a>, 
                the inspectors were in fact ordered out by the United States
                after it was <a href="http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/scomspy1.htm">discovered 
                that some of the inspectors were US spies</a>, and in preparation for a
                round of US bombing.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/meast/09/08/ritter.iraq/</url>
              <urlText>CNN article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/scomspy1.htm
              	http://www.accuracy.org/press_releases/PR111802.htm
              	http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/inatl/daily/march99/unscom2.htm
              	http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/WO0210/S00203.htm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
                This claim is also supported by Hans Blix, who concedes that the previous inspection team 
                '<i>lost its legitimacy by being too closely associated with intelligence and with 
                Western states</i>'.
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2544691.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Sept 2002</date>
              <text>
                The International Atomic Energy Agency says that a report cited by |bush President Bush| as
                evidence that Iraq in 1998 was "six months away" from developing a nuclear weapon does not 
                exist.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.washtimes.com/national/20020927-500715.htm</url>
              <urlText>Washington Times article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.sourcedreporting.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=7&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0</altUrls>
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
            	<link>tenet_advice</link>
              <date>October 2002</date>
              <text>
              	 The CIA Director George Tenet claims it is far from clear that we will be safer 
              	 by attacking Iraq. He writes '<i>Baghdad for now appears to be drawing a line 
              	 short of conducting terrorist attacks with conventional or chemical and biological 
              	 warfare against the United States.</i>', saying that only if attacked would Iraq use 
              	 whatever weapons of mass destruction it has.
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/2315967.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://truthout.org/docs_02/021103A.htm
              	http://www.fcnl.org/issues/int/sup/iraq_kennedy203-03.htm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <date>Dec 2002</date>
              <link>edit_declaration</link>
              <text>
                Iraq releases its weapons declaration. Before releasing it to the public however, the US 
                Government confiscates all 12,000 pages, saying they contained 'sensitive information' which 
                needed 'a little editing'. Sensitive indeed. The original Iraqi documents listed 150 American, 
                British and other foreign companies that supplied Iraq with its nuclear, chemical and 
                missile technology, many of them in illegal transactions. In 2000 Peter Hain, then a 
                Foreign Office Minister, blocked a parliamentary request to publish the full list of 
                lawbreaking British companies. He has never explained why.
              </text>
              <url>http://pilger.carlton.com/print/129139</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://baltimorechronicle.com/media_ommisions_jan03.shtml
              	http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/16/national/16BIO.html
              	http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A52241-2002Dec29&notFound=true
              	http://cns.miis.edu/research/wmdme/flow/iraq/seed.htm
              	http://www.thememoryhole.org/corp/iraq-suppliers.htm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <date>Jan 2003</date>
              <text>Bush signs an executive order formally creating the Office of Global 
                Communications, which has been working informally for the previous six months 
                trying to spread the U.S. message in sceptical parts of the world.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/01/20030121-3.html</url>
              <urlText>Govt Release</urlText>
              <altUrls>
                http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1042491018351&p=1012571727291
                http://www.prwatch.org/prwissues/2002Q4/war.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Feb 2003</date>
              <text>
                Public opposition for the war continues to grow. With only Australia, US and Britain going
                to war, the Australian Prime Minister receives a 
                <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/2727551.stm">vote of 
                no-confidence</a> (the first ever to be made an Australian leader) for sending 
                troops to Iraq without reference to parliament and
                with the majority of Australians against such an action, and even the British public doesn't
                support the war, with over 90% polled as being against going to war without a new UN 
                resolution. 
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/2751471.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/SYD4678</altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Feb 2003</date>
              <link>terrorism_increase</link>
              <text>
                Intelligence and law enforcement officials, and also 
                <a href="http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=20030209-020607-8252r">CIA veterans</a>, 
                warn that a war on Iraq will lead to an increase in terrorism directed at the US.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/23/national/23TERR.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,5932244%5E2703,00.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact hide="true">
              <date>Feb 5, 2003</date>
              <link></link>
              <text>
                Powell gives his speech at the UN after raising doubts about the intelligence being provided.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,967548,00.html</url>
              <urlText>Guardian article</urlText> 
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>
            

            <Fact>
              <date>Feb 9, 2003</date>
              <link>gassed_own_people</link>
              <text>
                The claim that Saddam gassed his own people, one of the most cited proofs of 
                Saddam's evilness by the Bush Administration (for example, Bush cited it in his 
                <a href="http://asia.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/01/28/sotu.transcript/">second 
                State of the Union address</a>) is put into question in a New York Times article.<br><br>The 
                article notes that an investigation by the U.S. Defence Intelligence Agency concluded 
                it was gas released by Iran - not Iraq - that killed the Kurdish civilians.
                This appears to lead to one of either two conclusions - either Saddam is in fact 
                not responsible, or the US government was trying to cover up the tragedy at the time.
              </text>
              <url>
              	http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1035777592117&call_page=TS_Columnists&call_pageid=970599109774&call_pagepath=Columnists
              </url>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/ops/war/docs/3203/
              	http://truthout.org/docs_02/020303C.htm
              	http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0301-06.htm
              	http://www.amin.org/eng/uncat/2003/feb/feb062.html
              	http://globalresearch.ca/articles/TRI205A.html
              </altUrls>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <notes>Bush said 'The dictator who is assembling the world's most dangerous weapons has 
              already used them on whole villages, leaving thousands of his own citizens dead, blind or 
              disfigured.'</notes>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Feb 15, 2003</date>
              <text>
                |powell Colin Powell's| <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/02/05/sprj.irq.powell.transcript/">
                long dossier</a> of Iraq's alleged non-compliance comes under 
                withering attack from the chief UN weapons inspectors, saying they found several elements of 
                his evidence either false or unconvincing. 
              </text>
              <url>http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,896137,00.html</url>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/01/18/iraq/main537096.shtml
              </altUrls>
              <urlText>Guardian article</urlText>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
                Note that Powell's <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/02/05/sprj.irq.powell.transcript/">dossier
                </a> also repeats the long descredited story of |tubes aluminium tubes supposedly headed for 
                Iraq's supposed nuclear program|, and repeats claims of |no_link links between Saddam and al Qaeda|. 
                Powell also refers to, as 'a fine paper', a British report discredited in Britain 
                after it was discovered to be largely plagiarized from a graduate student paper 
                (grabbed off the Internet from an Israeli publication) that relied on 12-year-old data.
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/2735031.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
                http://www.workingforchange.com/article.cfm?itemid=14486  
                http://www.channel4.com/news/home/z/stories/20030206/dossier.html
                http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A42276-2003Feb7?language=printer
                http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/story.jsp?story=375403
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <date>Mar 2, 2003</date>
              <text>
              	Observer reveals US spying on the UN delegates from all of the 'swing' countries
              	(Angola, Cameroon, Guinea, Bulgaria, Chile and Pakistan) and possibly others, looking 
              	for any information regarding which way the members might vote, or that could help the 
              	US put pressure on these countries to vote for a resolution authorising a war against Iraq.
              	The UN launches an <a href="http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/archives/2003/03/10/197437">
              	investigation</a> into the spying.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.observer.co.uk/iraq/story/0,12239,905936,00.html</url>
              <urlText>Observer article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.observer.co.uk/iraq/story/0,12239,910756,00.html
								http://www.observer.co.uk/iraq/story/0,12239,910360,00.html
								http://www.observer.co.uk/iraq/story/0,12239,910381,00.html
								http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/news/5307509.htm
								http://www.theage.com.au/text/articles/2003/03/03/1046540131913.htm
								http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/29547.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Mar 25, 2003</date>
              <text>
								Rumsfeld, Bush and Blair make the claim that Iraqi footage of British prisoners of war
								violates the Geneva Convention, and in doing so largely prevent it being showed on US TV.
								They seem to forget that they themselves have been showing similar images - the <a href=
								"http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1048313101760">Red 
								Cross confirms</a> that Iraq is violation of the Geneva Convention in showing the prisoners, 
								but no more than the US is also, and notes that these rules should have also been applied 
								to images of PoWs at the US base of <a href="http://web.amnesty.org/ai.nsf/Index/AMR511642002?Open&of=COUNTRIES%5CUSA">
								Guantanamo Bay</a> in Cuba.
              </text>
              <url>
              	http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2881187.stm
              </url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,920710,00.html
              	http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_766423.html?menu=
              	http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_764628.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Mar 25, 2003</date>
              <text>
              	 The Arab League ministers meeting in Cairo pass a resolution declaring the war on Iraq a 
              	 "violation of the United Nations Charter" and a "threat to world peace", and demanding 
              	 unconditional withdrawal of US and British forces from Iraq. The resolution is 
              	 adopted unanimously by the 22-member League except for key US ally Kuwait, making the
              	 Bush Administration's <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/sections/world/Primetime/iraq_bushspeech_transcript030317.html">
              	 claims</a> that Iraq poses a threat to its neighbours sound somewhat hollow.
              </text>
              <url>
              	http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2882851.stm
              </url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/01/31/sprj.irq.carter/
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>May 2003</date>
              <text>
              	 With the war over and no WMD found, officials within the |profiles Bush Administration| 
              	 admit that Saddam Hussein probably had no weapons of mass destruction.
              </text>
              <url>
              	http://www.sundayherald.com/33628
              </url>
              <urlText>Sunday Herald article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40212-2003May10.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>June 6, 2003</date>
              <text>
              	A September 2002 Pentagon intelligence report - which concludes that there was
             	  'no reliable information' that Iraq had biological or chemical weapons - is leaked.
              </text>
              <url>
              	http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2970064.stm
              </url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/abs_news_body.asp?section=Opinion&oid=25504
              	http://www2.kbcitv.com/x5154.xml?ParentPageID=x5157&ContentID=x42913&Layout=KBCI.xsl&AdGroupID=x5154
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>June 8, 2003</date>
              <text>
								|rice Condoleezza Rice| admits that |bush President Bush| had used a forged document in 
								his State of the Union speech to prove Iraq represented a nuclear threat (see |uranium_claim this
								section| for the whole sordid account of this affair). The same week, she 
								<a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/06/20030613-5.html">speaks out</a>
								about the threat |iranian Iran's| nuclear programme poses.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.msnbc.com/news/925382.asp?0si=-</url>
              <urlText>MSNBC article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/abs_news_body.asp?section=Opinion&oid=25504
              	http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/a/2003/06/09/national1050EDT0538.DTL
              	http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-2769175,00.html
              	http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/ap20030609_591.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>June 11, 2003</date>
              <text>
								The US Government blocks calls for a public investigation into pre-war US intelligence and 
								allegations that the White House exaggerated the threat (following the failure of US combat forces
								to find evidence of any WMDs since conquering Iraq).
              </text>
              <url>http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/126240_iraq12.html</url>
              <urlText>Seattle Pi article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/world/chi-0306120280jun12,0,2343217.story?coll=ny-worldnews-headlines
              	http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2003/06/11/national1755EDT0730.DTL
              	http://www.nynewsday.com/news/sns-ap-us-iraq,0,5097744.story?coll=nyc-topnews-short-navigation
              	http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A46651-2003Jun11.html?nav=hptop_ts
              	http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20030604-043824-2833r.htm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact hide="true">
              <date></date>
              <text>
								http://www.guardian.co.uk/antiwar/story/0,12809,907104,00.html
								Last week a full page ad in the New York Times quoted former Nato supreme commander Wesley Clark 
								saying that invading Iraq would "supercharge recruiting for al-Qaida". It was signed by around 
								50 musicians, including Lou Reed, Sheryl Crow, Massive Attack, and REM.
              </text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact hide="true">
              <date></date>
              <text>
								General Wesley Clark, former NATO Supreme Allied Commander of Europe, says: "Attacking 
								Iraq will detract from our primary mission against al-Qaeda, supercharge anti-American 
								sentiment in the Arab street and boost al-Qaeda's recruiting."
              </text>
            </Fact>

            <Fact hide="true">
              <date></date>
              <text>
								history of us plans to control world resources, focus on iraq today
								http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2003/10/ma_273_01.html
								
								great (pilger) article on us hypocrisy, lies, scare tactics
								http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/page.cfm?objectid=12422214&method=full&siteid=50143
              </text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>

            </Fact>

          </facts>
        </Subtopic>

        <Subtopic name="The 'sought uranium from Africa' claim" shortName="The Uranium Claim" link="uranium_claim">
					<facts>
            <Fact>
              <link></link>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	This issue really belongs to the |selling second Gulf War| section but was separated because
              	it is worth looking into in more depth - not only for the fact that the war was launched 
              	partly on the basis of this false claim, but also that the |profiles Bush Administration| 
              	appears to have known it was false, yet denies this, spinning an intricate web of deceit 
              	in the process which needs a bit of work to untangle.
              </text>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
            	<link>cia_report</link>
              <date>Late 2001</date>
              <text>
              	The Italian government receives evidence suggesting that Iraq is trying to purchase uranium 
              	from Niger. The evidence is shared with Britain and the US, where it catches the eye of
              	|cheney Dick Cheney|.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.time.com/time/covers/1101030721/story2.html</url>
              <urlText>Time article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
            	</altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
            	<link>cia_report</link>
              <date>February 2002</date>
              <text>
              	A US diplomat travels to Africa under order's from |cheney Cheney's| office to determine 
              	the truth of the claims, and reports back to the Bush Administration, concluding 
              	that the government had not contracted to sell uranium to Iraq, and that the |no_nukes 
              	documents| |state_of_union_nuke later presented| as evidence of Iraq's nuclear program are 
              	forgeries.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/07/06/sprj.irq.uranium/index.html</url>
              <urlText>CNN article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.nypost.com/news/worldnews/2489.htm
              	http://politics.guardian.co.uk/media/story/0,12123,993017,00.html
              	http://www.islam-online.net/English/News/2003-07/06/article07.shtml
              	http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/07/08/sprj.irq.uranium/index.html
              	http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/08/international/worldspecial/08PREX.html?ex=1058639631&ei=1&en=bf0be88201173af1
              	http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?030331fa_fact1
              	http://www.boston.com/dailynews/192/wash/U_S_intelligence_doubted_repor:.shtml
              	http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EG11Ak02.html
              	http://www.hillnews.com/marshall/062503.aspx
              	http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/195/nation/Democrats_dismiss_Tenet_statement+.shtml
              	http://www.madison.com/captimes/opinion/column/nichols/52530.php
            	</altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>March 2002</date>
              <text>
              	A memo is sent from the State Department's intelligence arm directly to |powell Colin Powell| 
              	disputing the uranium story.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.time.com/time/covers/1101030721/story2.html</url>
              <urlText>Time article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
            	</altUrls>
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <link>tells_britain</link>
              <date>September 2002</date>
              <text>
              	The CIA tries unsuccessfully to persuade the British government to drop from an official 
              	intelligence paper a reference to Iraqi attempts to buy uranium in Africa. Bush's
              	|state_of_union_nuke State of the Union address| would later reference this very paper!
              </text>
              <url>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40684-2003Jul10.html</url>
              <urlText>Washington Post article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://truthout.org/docs_03/071203B.shtml
              	http://www.time.com/time/covers/1101030721/story2.html
              	http://www.abcnews.go.com/sections/world/US/uranium030714_timeline.html
              	http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/3109993.stm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>October 2002</date>
              <text>
								The National Intelligence Estimate is produced. It mentions the uranium allegations, but 
								calls them '<i>highly dubious</i>'.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.abcnews.go.com/sections/world/US/uranium030714_timeline.html</url>
              <urlText>ABC News article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>October 2002</date>
              <text>
              	The CIA has a reference to Iraq seeking uranium from Niger removed from a presidential speech
              	due to doubts about its accuracy.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A48847-2003Jul12.html?nav=hptop_tb</url>
              <urlText>Washington Post article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.abcnews.go.com/sections/world/US/uranium030714_timeline.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>January 2003</date>
              <text>
              	According to one official, the claim is not included in drafts of Bush's 
              	|state_of_union_nuke State of the Union address| due to similar doubts about its accuracy.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A48847-2003Jul12.html?nav=hptop_tb</url>
              <urlText>Washington Post article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40684-2003Jul10.html
              	http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/07/10/sprj.irq.wmd/
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	Other sources say that the claim was included in early drafts, and attributed to American 
              	intelligence, but when intelligence officials urged the removal of the information due to 
              	doubts about it, the speechwriters, attributing it to the British report instead.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/07/10/sprj.irq.wmd/</url>
              <urlText>CNN article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40684-2003Jul10.html
              	http://www.suntimes.com/output/brown/cst-nws-brown14.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	Still other sources say that the claim was originally included, then removed after intervention
              	from |scapegoat George Tenet|, only to be later reappear in the speech. This story would appear to 
              	reconcile the above two stories.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,997712,00.html</url>
              <urlText>Guardian article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	In any case, despite being considered 'hardly believable' by the intelligence community at the 
              	time, the claim appears to have been only included due to pressure from |cheney Cheney|, 
              	|rumsfeld Rumsfeld|, and Robert G. Joseph.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/6076178.htm</url>
              <urlText>Knight Ridder article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
								http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/6076139.htm
								http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/story.jsp?story=424011
								http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,997712,00.html
								http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/12/international/worldspecial/12INTE.html?pagewanted=3&ei=5062&en=b947fdd8447b4360&ex=1058587200&partner=GOOGLE
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <link>state_of_union_nuke</link>
              <date>Jan 28, 2003</date>
              <text>
              	In Bush's State of the Union address he makes the claim '<i>The British government has 
              	learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from 
              	Africa.</i>'.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/01/20030128-19.html</url>
              <urlText>US Govt transcript</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://edition.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/01/28/sotu.transcript/
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
            	<link>no_nukes</link>
              <date>Mar 7, 2003</date>
              <text>
              	The head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) shoots down allegations Iraq tried 
              	to revive its nuclear arms program and says fake documents backed US claims Baghdad had tried 
              	to buy uranium to make bombs. He also reiterates that '<i>After three months of intrusive 
              	inspections, we have to date found no evidence or plausible indication of the revival of a 
              	nuclear weapons program in Iraq.</i>'
              </text>
              <url>
              	http://www.torontostar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1047121276400&call_pageid=968332188492&col=968705899037
              </url>
              <urlText>Toronto Star article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.sourcedreporting.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=7&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0
              	http://stacks.msnbc.com/news/882311.asp?cp1=1
              	http://asia.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=worldNews&storyID=2346382
              	http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0308-06.htm
              	http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=578&ncid=578&e=17&u=/nm/20030325/ts_nm/iraq_nuclear_un_dc
              	http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?030331fa_fact1
              	http://www.motherjones.com/news/dailymojo/2003/28/we_477_04.html#one
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	The IAEA also reports the fake documents are so badly forged that, in the words of one 
              	official, his 'jaw dropped'. This makes it hard to believe that the US government was the 
              	honest victim of the forgery in making their claims regarding Iraq's nuclear program. The 
              	IAEA also ask the US and Britain if they had any other evidence backing their claims that 
              	Iraq tried to buy uranium. The answer given is no.
              </text>
              <url>
              	http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=578&ncid=578&e=17&u=/nm/20030325/ts_nm/iraq_nuclear_un_dc
              </url>
              <urlText>Yahoo article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
								http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A59403-2003Mar7&notFound=true
								http://www.sourcedreporting.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=7&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>March 16, 2003</date>
              <text>
              	|cheney Dick Cheney| responds (to the IAEA saying Saddam has no nuclear program) on NBC's Meet 
              	the Press, saying '<i>... we believe he [Saddam] has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons. 
              	I think Mr. ElBaradei, frankly, is wrong.</i>'
              </text>
              <url>
              	http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=16398
              </url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.abcnews.go.com/sections/world/US/uranium030714_timeline.html
              	http://www.armscontrol.org/pressroom/2003/adminstmtsiraq_july03.asp
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>


						<Fact>
							<date>June 8, 2003</date>
							<text>
								|rice Colondeeza Rice| concedes that the documents were fraudulent but argues that the White 
								House hadn't known this before Bush's State of the Union speech.
							</text>
							<url>http://www.hillnews.com/marshall/062503.aspx</url>
							<urlText>Article</urlText>
						</Fact>


						<Fact>
							<date>July 7, 2003</date>
							<text>
								A British parliamentary commission reports it was unclear why the British government 
								asserted as a 'bald claim' (in a |british_dossiers dossier| published four months prior to Bush's speech) 
								that there was intelligence that Iraq had sought to buy significant amounts of uranium 
								in Africa. It notes that the CIA had already debunked this intelligence at the time.
							</text>
							<url>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A23777-2003Jul7.html?nav=hptop_tb</url>
							<urlText>Washington Post article</urlText>
							<altUrls>http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1057615812189&call_pageid=1045739058633&col=1045739057805</altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>July 7, 2003</date>
							<text>
								The |profiles Bush Administration| acknowledges for the first time that President Bush should not 
								have claimed that Iraq had sought to buy uranium in his |state_of_union_nuke State of the Union| 
								address in January.
							</text>
							<url>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A23777-2003Jul7.html?nav=hptop_tb</url>
							<urlText>Washington Post article</urlText>
							<altUrls>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A35606-2003Jul9.html?nav=hptop_ts</altUrls>
						</Fact>
						
            <Fact hide="true">
              <date>July 2003</date>
              <text>
              	Blair continues to stand by the Niger claim.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/07/09/nblur09.xml</url>
              <urlText>Telegraph article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>July 10, 2003</date>
              <text>
              	|rumsfeld Rumsfeld| testifies that he only found out 'within recent days' that 
              	the information was discredited. 
							</text>
              <url>http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20030710.urums0710/BNStory/International/</url>
              <urlText>Globe and Mail article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=33574
              	http://www.madison.com/captimes/opinion/column/nichols/52530.php
              	http://www.abcnews.go.com/sections/world/US/uranium030714_timeline.html
              	http://www.iht.com/articles/102701.html
              	http://slate.msn.com/id/2085434/
              	http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/wxxi/news.newsmain?action=article&ARTICLE_ID=520586
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	|rumsfeld Rumsfeld| has to later correct his claim, first revising it to 'weeks',
              	then finally to 'months'.
              </text>
              <url>http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=33574</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.iht.com/articles/102701.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>July 10, 2003</date>
              <text>
              	At the same time, |rumsfeld Rumsfeld| also changes the official reason for the war - 
              	not fresh evidence of banned weapons, rather a changed perspective following |sept11 Sept 11|. 
              	This of course flies in the face of all of their claims of fresh evidence (such as the 
              	uranium claim under discussion) which were used to prove the urgency of attacking Iraq
              	when they did, as well as Rumsfeld's |sept_excuse own reaction| to September 11th.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20030710.urums0710/BNStory/International/</url>
              <urlText>Globe and Mail article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,91513,00.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
            	<link>scapegoat</link>
              <date>July 11, 2003</date>
              <text>
              	CIA director George Tenet becomes the scapegoat, taking all of the blame for the
              	inclusion of the claim in Bush's |state_of_union_nuke speech| despite doubts about the 
              	quality of the intelligence behind it.<br><br>
              	Despite admitting that the CIA should have had the claim removed, he holds to the argument 
              	that it was 'factually correct' in that it referenced a British report (despite the CIA having 
              	|tells_britain told the British Government| before the speech that this report was inaccurate!).
              </text>
              <url>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A44949-2003Jul11.html</url>
              <urlText>Washington Post article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/07/11/tenet.statement/
              	http://www.suntimes.com/output/brown/cst-nws-brown14.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

        	</facts>
        
         </Subtopic>

				<Subtopic name="The Missing Link - the Saddam / Al-Qaeda connection" shortName = "The Missing Link" link="missing_link">
					<facts>
            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
                Given the implausibility of the idea that Iraq in any way threatened the US militarily, even 
                if it were to have WMD, the only way |bush Bush| could justify his |pre-emptive pre-emptive war|,
                while at the same time turning the public's fear+anger over |sept11 September 11| onto Iraq,
                was to link Saddam with Al-Qaeda, the idea being that Saddam could potentially supply terrorists
                with |us_uk_wmd WMD| with which they could then attack America. This section examines just how well 
                he succeeded in putting forward this fancy.
              </text>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1998</date>
              <text>
                An comprehensive review by America's National Security Council - which advises Bush - concludes
                that there is no evidence of a noteworthy relationship between Iraq and al-Qaeda.
              </text>
              <url>http://epic-usa.org/resources/rpt.php?n=03</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2002/11/01/bushiraq021101
              	http://pilger.carlton.com/print/130585
              	http://www.scar.utoronto.ca/~msa/issues/Iraq/more_myths.htm
              	http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/wot/iraq/allegedtiestoalqaeda.html
              	http://www.brown.edu/Students/INDY/issues/110702/opinions/3.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
            	<link>atta_meeting</link>
              <date>October 2001</date>
              <text>
	              US officials claim that Mohammed Atta (one of the suspected |sept11 Sept 11| suicide 
	              hijackers) had two meetings with Iraqi intelligence officers in Prague in April. 
              </text>
              <url>http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/10/11/inv.atta.meetings/</url>
              <urlText>CNN Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
                http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/12/18/wirq18.xml
                http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/2315967.stm
                http://www.prwatch.org/prwissues/2002Q4/war.html
                http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0314/p02s01-woiq.htm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>December 2001</date>
              <text>
	              Czech police say they have no evidence of any such meeting ever occurring.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/12/18/wirq18.xml</url>
              <urlText>Telegraph article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/12/18/wirq18.xml
               http://www.sourcedreporting.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=17&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>December 2001</date>
              <text>
	              CBS, after interviewing a CIA agent who debunked the report of the meeting, reports that '<i>Despite 
	              a lack of evidence that the meeting took place, the item was cited by administration officials as 
	              high as Vice President Dick Cheney and ended up being reported so widely that 
	              |misperception two-thirds of Americans polled| by the Council on Foreign Relations believe Iraq was 
	              behind the terrorist attacks of 9/11.</i>'.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.prwatch.org/prwissues/2002Q4/war.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
								http://www.sourcedreporting.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=17&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0              
							</altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>May 2002</date>
              <text>
	              The <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1961668.stm">BBC also concludes</a> that 
	              the meeting never took place, and that Atta was in Florida at the time of the alleged meeting.
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1961668.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
                http://www.sourcedreporting.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=15&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0&POSTNUKESID=4b55a0cdfbff09410d42ce9bfaa990f9
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>May 2002</date>
              <text>
              	|rumsfeld Rumsfeld| claims '<i>There are al-Qaeda in a number of locations in Iraq</i>' 
              	receiving shelter from Saddam's regime, suggesting that the Administration is merely
              	waiting to reveal ironclad evidence of the link between Saddam and the al-Qaeda.
              </text>
              <url>http://europe.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/08/26/time.iraq/</url>
              <urlText>CNN Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
                http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/12/18/wirq18.xml
                http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/2315967.stm
                http://www.prwatch.org/prwissues/2002Q4/war.html
                http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0314/p02s01-woiq.htm
                http://www.sourcedreporting.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=15&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0&POSTNUKESID=4b55a0cdfbff09410d42ce9bfaa990f9
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Sept 2002</date>
              <text>
              	|cheney Cheney| and |rumsfeld Rumsfeld| both claim to still 'accept reports from Czech diplomats' 
              	that the |atta_meeting meeting| took place.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2002-09-16-intell_x.htm</url>
              <urlText>USA Today article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <date>Feb 1, 2003</date>
              <link>no_link</link>
              <text>
                CIA complains that senior administration officials have exaggerated the significance of some 
                intelligence reports about Iraq, particularly about its possible links to terrorism, in order 
                to strengthen their political argument for war. FBI investigators are also baffled by the Bush 
                administration's insistence on a solid link between Iraq and Osama bin Laden's network. 
                '<i>We've been looking at this hard for more than a year and you know what, we just don't 
                think it's there</i>' a government official said.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/02/international/middleeast/02INTE.html?ex=1044853200&en=b0a7399a9308374c&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE</url>
              <urlText>NY Times article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.prospect.org/print/V13/22/dreyfuss-r.html
              	http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2002/09/10/1031608245289.html
              	http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2002-09-16-intell_x.htm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>
            
            <Fact>
              <date>Feb 5, 2003</date>
              <link>bbc_leak</link>
              <text>
                BBC obtains a top-level report from British intelligence that states flatly 
                that there are no current ties between Iraq and Al Qaeda. Blair 
                <a href="http://news.findlaw.com/news/s/20030205/iraqbritainstrawdc.html">denies</a>
                having seen the report and continues to insist there are links.
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2727471.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
                http://news.independent.co.uk/world/politics/story.jsp?story=376732
                http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,967548,00.html
                http://www.workingforchange.com/article.cfm?itemid=14486
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Feb 9, 2003</date>
              <text>
                A 'terrorist chemicals and poisons factory' in Iraq, 
                <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/02/05/sprj.irq.powell.transcript/">presented</a> by Powell 
                as evidence of a link between Saddam and Al Qaeda, is found to be nothing of the sort. It 
                also lies outside the area controlled by Hussein, lying in the northern Kurdish region which 
                is protected by US and British warplanes. It is run by the Islamic fundamentalist group Ansar 
                al-Islam, which has a history of opposing the secular Hussein.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0209-09.htm</url>
              <urlText>Guardian article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0211-03.htm</altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Feb 13, 2003</date>
              <link>laden_tape</link>
              <text>
                Apparently getting desparate to invent the link, Colin Powell claims that a 
                <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2751019.stm">tape</a> of Bin Laden, in 
                which Bin Laden calls Saddam Hussein and his regime as infidels, is proof of a link between 
                the al-Qaeda network and the Iraqi government, simply because Bin Laden calls for support 
                of Iraq.
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2751765.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>July 23, 2003</date>
              <link></link>
              <text>
                The <a href="http://www.gpoaccess.gov/serialset/creports/911.html">report</a> of the joint 
                congressional inquiry into the suicide hijackings on Sept. 11, 2001, reveals US intelligence 
                had no evidence that the Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein was involved in the attacks, or that 
                it had supported al-Qaeda.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=20030723-064812-9491r</url>
              <urlText>UPI article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://feeds.bignewsnetwork.com/?sid=6aa9e973ce69679a
              	http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2002_rpt/911rept.pdf
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>September 2003</date>
              <link></link>
              <text>
              	Cheney still continues to bring up the long discredited Atta - Iraq link while
              	suggesting links between Iraq and the Sept. 11 attacks. 
              </text>
              <url>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A14901-2003Sep28.html</url>
              <urlText>Washington Post article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <link></link>
              <text>
              	Just three days following Cheney's most recent insinuations of a connection between 
              	Saddam and 9/11, Bush admits that Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with 9/11, contrary 
              	to |misperception popular belief|. The White House denies ever having claimed
              	any Iraq-Sept. 11 links.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.mediainfo.com/editorandpublisher/headlines/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1991322</url>
              <urlText>E&P article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.twincities.com/mld/pioneerpress/6797311.htm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

					</facts>
				</Subtopic>
				
				<Subtopic name="The British dossiers" link="british_dossiers">
					<facts>
						<Fact>
							<date>September 7, 2002</date>
							<text>
								While at Camp David, Tony Blair says to |bush President Bush| (referring to Iraq)
								'<i>We haven't the faintest idea what has been going on in the last four years
								... other than what we know is an attempt to carry on rebuilding weapons.</i>'.
							</text>
							<url>http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/page.cfm?objectid=12183299&method=full&siteid=50143</url>
							<urlText>Mirror article</urlText>
							<altUrls>
								http://www.spiked-online.com/articles/00000006DA63.htm
								http://www.spiked-online.com/Printable/00000006DA63.htm
							</altUrls>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>September 24, 2002</date>
							<text>
								The British government releases its first dossier - '<i>Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction - 
								The assessment of the British Government</i>'.
								<a href="http://www.spiked-online.com/articles/00000006DA63.htm">According a suddenly much more
								confident Blair</a>, '<i>The assessed intelligence has established beyond doubt that Saddam has continued 
								to produce chemical and biological weapons, that he continues in his efforts to develop nuclear weapons, 
								and that he has been able to extend the range of his ballistic missile programme</i>'.
							</text>
							<url>http://www.number-10.gov.uk/files/pdf/iraqdossier.pdf</url>
							<urlText>Full dossier</urlText>
							<altUrls>http://www.number-10.gov.uk/output/Page271.asp</altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>Oct 2002</date>
							<text>
								The dossier is used by Bush in convincing congress 
								into giving him a blank check to launch the war with Iraq.
							</text>
							<url>http://www.thenation.com/thebeat/index.mhtml?bid =1&pid=895</url>
							<urlText>The Nation article</urlText>
						</Fact>
						
						<Fact>
							<date>Jan 2003</date>
							<text>
								The British government releases its second dossier, depicted as an up-to-date and highly unsettling 
								assessment by the British intelligence services of Iraq's security apparatus and its efforts
								to hide its activities from weapons inspectors and to resist international
								efforts to force it to disarm. It is <a href="http://www.channel4.com/news/2003/02/week_1/07_dossier.html">paraded</a>
								by Tony Blair and |powell Colin Powell| as quality research and a searing indictment of Saddam's regime. 
							</text>
							<url>http://www.number-10.gov.uk/files/pdf/Iraq.pdf</url>
							<urlText>Second dossier</urlText>
							<altUrls>
								http://www.number-10.gov.uk/output/page1470.asp
								http://www.casi.org.uk/discuss/2003/msg00616.html
							</altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date></date>
							<link>sept_dossier</link>
							<text>
								This second dossier is soon found to be largely based on a 12-year-old
								<a href="http://meria.idc.ac.il/journal/2002/issue3/jv6n3a1.html">PhD thesis</a> posted on 
								the internet, with only minor propagandistic modifications, such as 'monitoring foreign embassies in Iraq' 
								having become 'spying on foreign embassies in Iraq', and 'aiding opposition groups in hostile regimes' 
								turned into 'supporting terrorist organisations in hostile regimes'.
							</text>
							<url>http://www.channel4.com/news/2003/02/week_1/06_dossier.html</url>
							<urlText>Channel4 article</urlText>
							<altUrls>
								http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodgy_Dossier	
								http://www.casi.org.uk/discuss/2003/msg00616.html
								http://www.channel4.com/news/2003/02/week_1/07_dossier.html
								http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/9/15/101721.shtml
							</altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact hide="true">
							<date></date>
							<text>Blair defends the second 'dodgy' dossier by pointing to the first. (like a few more of Blairs twisted lies ...)</text>
							<url></url>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date></date>
							<text>
								Jack Straw would finally in June admit the dossier was an 'embarrassment' and apologise to
								the student whose thesis was plagiarised.
							</text>
							<url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3015272.stm</url>
							<urlText>BBC article</urlText>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>June 2003</date>
							<text>
								A row erupts between the British government and the BBC over a BBC report that the government
								'sexed up' the September dossier in reporting that Saddam could deploy WMDs within 45 minutes
								of an order. The BBC refuses to back down from the claim or to name the source.
							</text>
							<url>http://media.guardian.co.uk/iraqandthemedia/story/0,12823,985654,00.html</url>
							<urlText>Guardian article</urlText>
							<altUrls>
								http://media.guardian.co.uk/iraqandthemedia/story/0,12823,985446,00.html
								http://media.guardian.co.uk/iraqandthemedia/story/0,12823,985529,00.html
								http://media.guardian.co.uk/iraqandthemedia/story/0,12823,984994,00.html
								http://media.guardian.co.uk/iraqandthemedia/story/0,12823,984942,00.html
								http://media.guardian.co.uk/iraqandthemedia/story/0,12823,970421,00.html
							</altUrls>
						</Fact>
						
						<Fact>
							<date>July 7, 2003</date>
							<text>
								The House of Commons Foreign Affairs committee rules that the first dossier had undermined 
								the government's case for war because it contained material plagiarised from a 12-year-old graduate 
								thesis found on the Internet.
								The September dossier, the committee says, gave undue prominence to an uncorroborated claim that 
								Saddam's troops could deploy chemical and biological weapons at 45 minutes notice. It also contained 
								an |uranium_claim incorrect claim| that Iraq had recently sought significant quantities of uranium in 
								the African nation of Niger.
							</text>
							<url>http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-files/Politics/documents/2003/07/07/WMD_report.pdf</url>
							<urlText>Report in full</urlText>
							<altUrls>
								http://www.namibian.com.na/2003/june/world/03E10973F4.html
								http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3051224.stm
								http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,993740,00.html
								http://politics.guardian.co.uk/iraq/story/0,12956,993169,00.html
								http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A23777-2003Jul7.html?nav=hptop_tb
								http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1057615812189&call_pageid=1045739058633&col=1045739057805
							</altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>July 18, 2003</date>
							<text>
								David Kelly, the source for the BBC's claims that the Government 'sexed up' the September dossier,
								is found dead, following in his words 'intolerable pressure' put on him by politicians during the row
								between the BBC and the government.
							</text>
							<url>http://media.guardian.co.uk/bbc/story/0,7521,1001003,00.html</url>
							<urlText>Guardian article</urlText>
							<altUrls>
								http://media.guardian.co.uk/bbc/story/0,7521,1000906,00.html
								http://media.guardian.co.uk/bbc/story/0,7521,1000935,00.html
								http://media.guardian.co.uk/bbc/story/0,7521,1001367,00.html
								http://media.guardian.co.uk/bbc/story/0,7521,1001303,00.html
							</altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date></date>
							<text>
								Tony Blair promises a public inquiry.
							</text>
							<url>http://media.guardian.co.uk/bbc/story/0,7521,1001028,00.html</url>
							<urlText>Guardian article</urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>August 1, 2003</date>
							<text>
								The Hutton inquiry into David Kelly's death begins.
							</text>
							<url>http://media.guardian.co.uk/iraqdossieraffair/0,13754,1002851,00.html</url>
							<urlText>Guardian article</urlText>
							<altUrls>
								http://media.guardian.co.uk/iraqdossieraffair/story/0,13754,1010634,00.html
								http://media.guardian.co.uk/iraqdossieraffair/story/0,13754,1010693,00.html
							</altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>August 26, 2003</date>
							<text>
								John Scarlett, chairman of the joint intelligence committee (JIC), the body responsible
								for drawing up the dossier, admits during the Hutton inquiry that the 45 minute claim only 
								referred to battlefield munitions, rather than strategic weapons (i.e. missiles) as it was 
								at the time taken to mean (and appears to mean given the context - the |sept_dossier document| 
								talks about the Iraq's ballistic missile program '<i>capable of reaching Cyprus, Eastern Turkey, 
								Tehran and Israel</i>' just two paragraphs above the 45 minute claim, and it was this connection 
								that the headlines made the next day). 
								<br><br>
								When John Scarlett is asked why they failed to correct the headlines which reported the
								misinterpretation, he answers '<i> it is not my immediate responsibility to correct headlines 
								and if I did that, I certainly would not have time to do my job.</i>'. 
							</text>
							<url>http://www.the-hutton-inquiry.org.uk/content/transcripts/hearing-trans42.htm</url>
							<urlText>Transcripts</urlText>
							<altUrls>
								http://www.the-hutton-inquiry.org.uk/content/transcripts/hearing-trans19.htm
								http://media.guardian.co.uk/iraqdossieraffair/story/0,13754,1010634,00.html
								http://media.guardian.co.uk/iraqdossieraffair/story/0,13754,1010693,00.html
							</altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date></date>
							<text>
								It appears that David Kelly was like everyone else confused by this claim, also taking it to
								refer to missiles.
							</text>
							<url>http://politics.guardian.co.uk/kelly/story/0,13747,1029712,00.html</url>
							<urlText>Guardian article</urlText>
							<altUrls>http://www.the-hutton-inquiry.org.uk/content/transcripts/hearing-trans19.htm</altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date></date>
							<text>
								The final conclusions for the inquiry have not been yet reached. However, in addition to the above, it 
								has already revealed a lot of dirt in the government's scapegoating of David Kelly, lead to spin-doctor 
								Alister Campbell's resignation, and caused 
								<a href="http://www.uktop100.reuters.com/latest/Civil_Service/top10/20030829-IRAQ-BRITAIN-SCIENTIST-UPDATE-1.ASP">public 
								trust</a> in the British Government to plunge (only 24% trusting Blair down from 74% at the start
								of his term). Follow this Guardian report for the latest information.
							</text>
							<url>http://media.guardian.co.uk/huttoninquiry/0,13812,1018643,00.html</url>
							<urlText>Guardian special report</urlText>
							<altUrls>
								http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2003/s931703.
								http://www.townhall.com/news/politics/200308/FOR20030825c.shtml
								http://aljazeerah.info/News%20archives/2003%20News%20archives/August/30%20n/Blair%20Loses%20Voters'%20Trust%20Over%20Kelly%20Affair,%20Poll.htm
								http://www.socialistparty.org.uk/2003/311/index.html?id=pp2.htm
							</altUrls>
						</Fact>
							
						<Fact>
							<date>Further Reading</date>
							<text>
								<ul>
								<li><a href="http://media.guardian.co.uk/iraqdossieraffair/0,13754,1002851,00.html">Guardian summary</a>
								</ul>
							</text>
							<url></url>
							<urlText></urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
						</Fact>
						<Fact hide="true">
							<date></date>
							<text></text>
							<url></url>
							<urlText></urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
						</Fact>
						<Fact hide="true">
							<date></date>
							<text></text>
							<url></url>
							<urlText></urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
						</Fact>
					</facts>		
				</Subtopic>

        </subtopics>
			 </Topic>

			 <Topic name="Changing Rhetoric">
        <subtopics>
        <Subtopic name="Changing Rhetoric on WMD" shortName="WMD Rhetoric" link="wmd_rhetoric">
        	<facts>
            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	It is interesting to look at how the Bush Administration has backpedalled in their WMD rhetoric 
              	after no WMDs were found following the Iraq war. This timeline of quotes is taken largely from
              	<a href="http://billmon.org.v.sabren.com/archives/000172.html">this page</a>.
              	<br><br>
              	See also
              	<a href="http://www.armscontrol.org/pressroom/2003/adminstmtsiraq_july03.asp">this</a> or
              	<a href="http://www.ceip.org/files/projects/npp/resources/iraqintell/adminquoteshtml.htm">this</a>
              	selection or <a href="http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig/steinreich8.html">this</a> great article 
              	summarizing Fox News'	lies and contradictions regarding the Iraq war and the WMD hunt.
              </text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>August 26, 2002, |cheney Dick Cheney|</date>
              <text>Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction.</text>
              <url>http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/08/20020826.html</url>
              <urlText>Speech to VFW National Convention</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date>December 6, 2002, White House spokesman Ari Fleischer</date>
              <text>
                The president of the United States and the secretary of defense would not assert as plainly and 
                bluntly as they have that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction if it was not true, and if they 
                did not have a solid basis for saying it.
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2548437.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>September 12, 2002, |bush George W. Bush|</date>
              <text>
              	Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of 
              	biological weapons.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/09/20020912-1.html</url>
              <urlText>Speech to UN General Assembly</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date>September 24, 2002, Tony Blair</date>
              <text>
              	The assessed intelligence has established beyond doubt that Saddam has continued to produce chemical and 
              	biological weapons, that he continues in his efforts to develop nuclear weapons, and that he has been 
              	able to extend the range of his ballistic missile programme.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.spiked-online.com/articles/00000006DA63.htm</url>
              <urlText>Comments on September Dossier</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>January 9, 2003, Ari Fleischer</date>
              <text>We know for a fact that there are weapons there.</text>
              <url>http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/01/20030109-8.html</url>
              <urlText>Press Briefing</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date>January 28, 2003, |bush George W. Bush|</date>
              <text>
              	Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 
              	500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/01/20030128-19.html</url>
              <urlText>State of the Union Address</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date>February 5, 2003, |powell Colin Powell|</date>
              <text>We know that Saddam Hussein is determined to keep his weapons of mass destruction, is determined to make more.</text>
              <url>http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2003/17300.htm</url>
              <urlText>Remarks to UN Security Council</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date>February 8, 2003, |bush George W. Bush|</date>
              <text>We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons -- the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have.</text>
              <url>http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/02/20030208.html</url>
              <urlText>Radio Address</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date>February 28, 2003, |powell Colin Powell|</date>
              <text>If Iraq had disarmed itself, gotten rid of its weapons of mass destruction over the past 12 years, or over the last several months since (UN Resolution) 1441 was enacted, we would not be facing the crisis that we now have before us . . . But the suggestion that we are doing this because we want to go to every country in the Middle East and rearrange all of its pieces is not correct.</text>
              <url>http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2003/18094.htm</url>
              <urlText>Interview with Radio France International</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date>March 7, 2003, |powell Colin Powell|</date>
              <text>So has the strategic decision been made to disarm Iraq of its weapons of mass destruction by the leadership in Baghdad? . . . I think our judgment has to be clearly not.</text>
              <url>http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2003/18458.htm</url>
              <urlText>Remarks to UN Security Council</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date>March 16, 2003, |cheney Dick Cheney|</date>
              <text>
              	We know he [Saddam] has been absolutely devoted to trying to acquire nuclear weapons. And we 
              	believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons. 
              </text>
              <url>http://www.armscontrol.org/pressroom/2003/adminstmtsiraq_july03.asp</url>
              <urlText>Interview on NBC's 'Meet the Press'</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.abcnews.go.com/sections/world/US/uranium030714_timeline.html</altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>March 17, 2003, |bush George W. Bush|</date>
              <text>Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised.</text>
              <url>http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/03/20030317-7.html</url>
              <urlText>Address to the Nation</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date>March 21, 2003, Ari Fleisher</date>
              <text>Well, there is no question that we have evidence and information that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, biological and chemical particularly . . . all this will be made clear in the course of the operation, for whatever duration it takes.</text>
              <url>http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/03/20030321-9.html</url>
              <urlText>Press Briefing</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date>March 22, 2003, Gen. Tommy Franks</date>
              <text>There is no doubt that the regime of Saddam Hussein possesses weapons of mass destruction. And . . . as this operation continues, those weapons will be identified, found, along with the people who have produced them and who guard them.</text>
              <url>http://usinfo.state.gov/topical/pol/terror/03032203.htm</url>
              <urlText>Press Conference</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date>March 23, 2003, Defense Policy Board member Kenneth Adelman</date>
              <text>I have no doubt we're going to find big stores of weapons of mass destruction.</text>
              <url>http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A12217-2003Mar22&notFound=true</url>
              <urlText>Washington Post</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date>March 22, 2003, Pentagon Spokeswoman Victoria Clark</date>
              <text>One of our top objectives is to find and destroy the WMD. There are a number of sites.</text>
              <url>http://www.dod.gov/news/Mar2003/t03222003_t0322osdpa.html</url>
              <urlText>Press Briefing</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
            	<link>know_where</link>
              <date>March 30, 2003, |rumsfeld Donald Rumsfeld|</date>
              <text>We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat.</text>
              <url>http://www.dod.gov/news/Mar2003/t03302003_t0330sdabcsteph.html</url>
              <urlText>ABC Interview</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A43615-2003Jun11.html</altUrls>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date>April 9, 2003, Neocon scholar Robert Kagan</date>
              <text>Obviously the administration intends to publicize all the weapons of mass destruction U.S. forces find -- and there will be plenty.</text>
              <url>http://www.ceip.org/files/Publications/2003-04-08-kaganpost.asp?p=11&from=pubdate</url>
              <urlText>Washington Post op-ed</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date>April 10, 2003, Ari Fleischer</date>
              <text>But make no mistake -- as I said earlier -- we have high confidence that they have weapons of mass destruction. That is what this war was about and it is about. And we have high confidence it will be found.</text>
              <url>http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/04/20030410-6.html</url>
              <urlText>Press Briefing</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date>April 24, 2003, |bush George W. Bush|</date>
              <text>We are learning more as we interrogate or have discussions with Iraqi scientists and people within the Iraqi structure, that perhaps he destroyed some, perhaps he dispersed some. And so we will find them.</text>
              <url>http://www.talkingproud.us/EditorChoice042603.html</url>
              <urlText>NBC Interview</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>
            <Fact hide="true">
              <date></date>
              <text></text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date>April 25, 2003, |rumsfeld Donald Rumsfeld|</date>
              <text>There are people who in large measure have information that we need . . . so that we can track down the weapons of mass destruction in that country.</text>
              <url>http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/2003/tr20030425-secdef0126.html</url>
              <urlText>Press Briefing</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date>May 3, 2003, |bush George W. Bush|</date>
              <text>We'll find them. It'll be a matter of time to do so.</text>
              <url>http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/05/20030503-1.html</url>
              <urlText>Remarks to Reporters</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date>May 4, 2003, |powell Colin Powell|</date>
              <text>I'm absolutely sure that there are weapons of mass destruction there and the evidence will be forthcoming. We're just getting it just now.</text>
              <url>http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2003/20166.htm</url>
              <urlText>Remarks to Reporters</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date>May 4, 2003, |rumsfeld Donald Rumsfeld|</date>
              <text>We never believed that we'd just tumble over weapons of mass destruction in that country.</text>
              <url>http://www.dod.gov/transcripts/2003/tr20030504-secdef0153.html</url>
              <urlText>Fox News Interview</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date>May 6, 2003, |bush George W. Bush|</date>
              <text>I'm not surprised if we begin to uncover the weapons program of Saddam Hussein -- because he had a weapons program.</text>
              <url>http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/05/20030506-3.html</url>
              <urlText>Remarks to Reporters</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date>May 12, 2003, |rice Condoleeza Rice|</date>
              <text>U.S. officials never expected that "we were going to open garages and find" weapons of mass destruction.</text>
              <url>http://asia.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=politicsNews&storyID=2741627</url>
              <urlText>Reuters Interview</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date>May 13, 2003, Maj. Gen. David Petraeus, Commander 101st Airborne</date>
              <text>I just don't know whether it was all destroyed years ago -- I mean, there's no question that there were chemical weapons years ago -- whether they were destroyed right before the war, (or) whether they're still hidden.</text>
              <url>http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/2003/tr20030513-0181.html</url>
              <urlText>Press Briefing</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date>May 26, 2003, Gen. Richard Myers, Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff</date>
              <text>Given time, given the number of prisoners now that we're interrogating, I'm confident that we're going to find weapons of mass destruction.</text>
              <url>http://www.msnbc.com/local/wilx/generalcothe.asp</url>
              <urlText>NBC Today Show interview</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date>May 27, 2003, |rumsfeld Donald Rumsfeld|</date>
              <text>They may have had time to destroy them, and I don't know the answer.</text>
              <url>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A51355-2003May28.html?nav=hptop_ts</url>
              <urlText>Remarks to the Council on Foreign Relations</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date>May 28, 2003, Paul Wolfowitz</date>
              <text>For bureaucratic reasons, we settled on one issue, weapons of mass destruction (as justification for invading Iraq) because it was the one reason everyone could agree on.</text>
              <url>http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/2003/tr20030528-depsecdef0222.html</url>
              <urlText>Vanity Fair interview</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date>June 8, 2003, |rice Condoleezza Rice|</date>
              <text>No one ever said that we knew precisely where all of these agents were, where they were stored.</text>
              <note><br><br>[contradicting |know_where this|]</note>
              <url>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A43615-2003Jun11.html</url>
              <urlText>NBC's 'Meet the Press'</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/ap20030609_591.html
              	http://www.prospect.org/webfeatures/2003/06/tomasky-m-06-11.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

          </facts>  
        
         </Subtopic>

         <Subtopic name="Changing Rhetoric on Democracy" shortName="Democracy Rhetoric" link="democracy_rhetoric">
        	<facts>
            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	Along the same lines as the |wmd_rhetoric WMD rhetoric| above, we can also observe
              	how the Bush Administration has backpedalled from assurances that there would be |no_occupation no 
              	occupation| of Iraq, to admissions that they are |occupying_admission occupying| a country
              	in which they are fighting to |impose_will impose their will| on the people.
              	The quotes are taken largely from <a href="http://lunaville.org/WMD/democracy.aspx">this site</a>.
              </text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>10 July, 2002, |bush George W. Bush|</date>
							<text>Some worry that a change of leadership in Iraq could create instability and make the situation worse. The situation could hardly get worse, for world security and for the people of Iraq.</text>
							<url>http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/10/20021007-8.html</url>
							<urlText>Cincinnati, Ohio Speech</urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
						</Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>November 17, 2002, Paul Wolfowitz</date>
              <text>If you're looking for a historical analogy, it's probably closer to post-liberation France [after World War II].</text>
              <url>http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/news/columnists/trudy_rubin/4535946.htm</url>
              <urlText>Interview with Trudy Rubin of the Philidelphia Inquirer</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>
						<Fact>
							<link>no_occupation</link>
							<date>February 23, 2003, Paul Wolfowitz</date>
							<text>First-and this is really the overarching principle-the United States seeks to liberate Iraq, not occupy Iraq . . If the President should decide to use force, let me assure you again that the United States would be committed to liberating the people of Iraq, not becoming an occupation force.</text>
							<url>http://www.pentagon.gov/speeches/2003/sp20030223-depsecdef0042.html</url>
							<urlText>Speech to Iraqi-American Community</urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>March 26, 2003, |powell Colin Powell|</date>
							<text>But as soon as possible, we want to have working alongside the commander an interim Iraqi authority, people representing the people of Iraq. And, as that authority grows and gets greater credibility from the people of Iraq, we want to turn over more and more responsibilities to them.</text>
							<url>http://usinfo.state.gov/topical/pol/terror/0326powell4.htm</url>
							<urlText>Press Conference</urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>March 26, 2003, |bush George W. Bush|</date>
							<text>We will help the Iraqi people to find the benefits and assume the duties of self-government. The form of those institutions will arise from Iraq's own culture and its own choices.</text>
							<url>http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/03/20030326-4.html</url>
							<urlText>Speech at MacDill AFB</urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>April 1, 2003, Paul Wolfowitz</date>
							<text>The goal is an Iraq that stands on its own feet and that governs itself in freedom and in unity and with respect for the rights of all its citizens. We'd like to get to that goal as quickly as possible.</text>
							<url>http://www.dod.gov/news/Apr2003/t04032003_t0401dsd60min.html</url>
							<urlText>Interview with 60 Minutes</urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>April 2, 2003, |powell Colin Powell|</date>
							<text>I can assure you that we all want to end this as soon as possible, so we can get on with the task of allowing the Iraqi people to form a new government.</text>
							<url>http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2003/19296.htm</url>
							<urlText>Press Conference in Belgrade</urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>April 4, 2003, |rice Condoleeza Rice|</date>
							<text>We will leave Iraq completely in the hands of Iraqis as quickly as possible.</text>
							<url>http://usinfo.state.gov/topical/pol/terror/texts/03040412.htm</url>
							<urlText>Press Briefing</urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>April 6, 2003, Paul Wolfowitz</date>
							<text>We come as an army of liberation, and we want to see the Iraqis running their own affairs as soon as they can.</text>
							<url>http://defenselink.mil/news/Apr2003/t04062003_tdod0406mtp.html</url>
							<urlText>Meet the Press</urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
						</Fact>
						
						<Fact>
							<date>April 10, 2003, Paul Wolfowitz</date>
							<text>We want to see a situation where power and responsibility is transferred as quickly as possible to the Iraqis themselves, with as much international assistance as possible ... We have no desire to occupy Iraq ...</text>
							<url>http://www.dod.gov/speeches/2003/sp20030410-depsecdef0142.html</url>
							<urlText>Testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee</urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>April 13, 2003, Ahmed Chalabi, Chairman of the Iraqi National Congress</date>
							<text>After (Gen. Jay Garner) finishes his job of restoring basic services, the interim Iraqi authority will be established. And that interim authority will be an authority of Iraqis, chosen by Iraqis. And it will be able to function as an authority in the country immediately after Gen. Garner's job is finished, which should be only a few weeks.</text>
							<url>http://www.centcom.mil/CENTCOMNews/transcripts/20030413.htm</url>
							<urlText>Meet the Press</urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>April 13, 2003, |rumsfeld Donald Rumsfeld|</date>
							<text>The task is to create an environment that is sufficiently permissive that the Iraqi people can fashion a new government. And what they will do is come together in one way or another and select an interim authority of some kind. Then that group will propose a constitution and a more permanent authority of some kind. And over some period of months, the Iraqis will have their government selected by Iraqi people.</text>
							<url>http://www.centcom.mil/CENTCOMNews/transcripts/20030413.htm</url>
							<urlText>Meet the Press</urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>April 13, 2003, Gen. Tommy Franks</date>
							<text>I think what we are so proud of is governments which permit their populace to be involved in a process that provides them freedom, provides them liberty. And I think what we will see in the months and years ahead in Iraq will provide a bit of a model for how that can be done . . . . because, Tony, it will be the Iraqi people who decide how to do that, and they will do it on their terms.</text>
							<url>http://www.centcom.mil/CENTCOMNews/transcripts/20030413.htm</url>
							<urlText>Fox News Interview  </urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>April 16, 2003, Marc Grossman, Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs</date>
							<text>Soon Iraqis will be able to give us guidance about how to move forward and create an Iraqi interim authority. And that authority will begin to allow Iraqis to have sovereignty over their country and in a way that Iraqis will choose; they will create an Iraqi Government.</text>
							<url>http://164.109.48.86/regional/nea/iraq/text2003/0416grossman.htm</url>
							<urlText>Interview with Free Iraqi Television</urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>April 17, 2003,  Zalmay Khalilzad, Special U.S. Envoy to Iraq</date>
							<text>The coalition supports the formation, as soon as possible, of the Iraqi Interim Authority -- a transitional administration, run by Iraqis, until a government is established by the people of Iraq through elections. The Interim Authority should be broad-based and fully representative.</text>
							<url>http://usembassy.state.gov/tokyo/wwwh20030418a4.html</url>
							<urlText>Wall Street Journal op-ed</urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>April 21, 2003,  Gen. Jay Garner</date>
							<text>The new ruler of Iraq is going to be an Iraqi. I don't rule anything.</text>
							<url>http://www.dod.mil/news/Apr2003/n04242003_200304242.html</url>
							<urlText>Press Interview</urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>April 24, 2003, |rumsfeld Donald Rumsfeld|</date>
							<text>If you're suggesting, how would we feel about an Iranian-type government with a few clerics running everything in the country, the answer is: That isn't going to happen.</text>
							<url>http://www.cmonitor.com/stories/front2003/iraqrdp_2003.shtml</url>
							<urlText>Interview with Associated Press</urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>April 24, 2003, Gen. Jay Garner</date>
							<text>I think you'll begin to see the governmental process start next week, by the end of next week. It will have Iraqi faces on it. It will be governed by the Iraqis.</text>
							<url>http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A31918-2003Apr24&notFound=true</url>
							<urlText>Press Conference in Baghdad</urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>April 28, 2003, |bush George W. Bush|</date>
							<text>As freedom takes hold in Iraq, the Iraqi people will choose their own leaders and their own government. America has no intention of imposing our form of government or our culture. Yet, we will ensure that all Iraqis have a voice in the new government ...</text>
							<url>http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/04/20030428-3.html</url>
							<urlText>Speech in Dearborne, Michigan</urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>May 5, 2003,  Gen. Jay Garner</date>
							<text>By the middle of (this) month, you'll really see a beginning of a nucleus of an Iraqi government with an Iraqi face on it that is dealing with the coalition.</text>
							<url>http://usinfo.state.gov/regional/nea/iraq/text2003/0505interim.htm</url>
							<urlText>Press Conference</urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>May 9, 2003, |bush George W. Bush|</date>
							<text>Soon, Iraqis from every ethnic group will choose members of an interim authority. The people of Iraq are building a free society from the ground up, and they are able to do so because the dictator and his regime are no more.</text>
							<url>http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/05/20030509-11.html</url>
							<urlText>Address at the University of South Carolina</urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>May 18, 2003, L. Paul Bremer, Special Envoy to Iraq</date>
							<text>I've read a report in the American press about a delay (in the transitional authority). I don't know where these stories are coming from because we haven't delayed anything.</text>
							<url>http://reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=2764271</url>
							<urlText>Remarks to Press in Mosul</urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>May 21, 2003, L. Paul Bremer</date>
							<text>I would think we are talking about more like sometime in July to get a national conference put together.</text>
							<url>http://www.rferl.org/nca/features/2003/05/21052003162611.asp</url>
							<urlText>Remarks to Reporters in Baghdad</urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
						</Fact>
						
						<Fact>
							<date>May 27, 2003, |rumsfeld Donald Rumsfeld|</date>
							<text>As Thomas Jefferson put it, "we are not to expect to be translated from despotism to liberty in a featherbed." It took time and patience, but eventually our Founders got it right--and we hope so will the people of Iraq--over time.</text>
							<url>http://164.109.48.86/regional/nea/iraq/text2003/0527rams.htm</url>
							<urlText>Wall Street Journal op-ed</urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>May 27, 2003, |rumsfeld Donald Rumsfeld|</date>
							<text>While our goal is to put functional and political authority in the hands of Iraqis as soon as possible, the Coalition Provisional Authority has the responsibility to fill the vacuum of power . . . by asserting temporary authority over the country. The coalition will do so. It will not tolerate self-appointed "leaders."</text>
							<url>http://www.dod.gov/speeches/2003/sp20030527-secdef0245.html</url>
							<urlText>Speech to the Council on Foreign Relations</urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>May 29, 2003, Ahmed Chalabi</date>
							<text>They told us, "Liberation now," and then they made it occupation. Bush said he was a liberator, not an occupier, and we supported the United States on this basis.</text>
							<url>http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/news/special_packages/iraq/5966949.htm</url>
							<urlText>Interview with Trudy Rubin, Philadelphia Inquirer columnist</urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>May 29, 2003, |rumsfeld Donald Rumsfeld|</date>
							<text>Question: When do you think there might be a government in place, even a provisional government in place in Iraq? Rumsfeld: I don't know.</text>
							<url>http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/2003/tr20030529-secdef0230.html</url>
							<urlText>Infinity Radio Town Hall</urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>June 7, 2003, Hamid Bayati, Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq</date>
							<text>If (Bremer) is going to appoint an administration, we can't be part of that. We will only be part of an administration selected by the Iraqi people. There are certain lines which we cannot cross.</text>
							<url>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A29427-2003Jun7.html?nav=hptop_tb</url>
							<urlText>Washington Post Interview </urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>June 7, 2003,  Isam Khafaji, DoD's Iraq Reconstruction and Development Council</date>
							<text>Our role is very limited. We're not allowed to make any decisions.</text>
							<url>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A29427-2003Jun7.html?nav=hptop_tb</url>
							<urlText>Washington Post Interview</urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>June 17, 2003, Abu Adel, Tribal Leader in Ramadi, Iraq</date>
							<text>We are a proud people and we will not accept this humiliation. The Americans should beware the wrath of the Iraqi people.</text>
							<url>http://www.tallahassee.com/mld/democrat/6111427.htm</url>
							<urlText>AP Interview</urlText>
							<altUrls>http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=540&e=2&u=/ap/20030618/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq</altUrls>
						</Fact>
						
						<Fact>
							<link>occupying_admission</link>
							<date>June 18, 2003, L. Paul Bremer</date>
							<text>As long as we're here, we are the occupying power. It's a very ugly word, but it's true.</text>
							<url>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A7147-2003Jun17.html?nav=hptop_tb</url>
							<urlText>Washington Post Interview</urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>June 28, 2003, L. Paul Bremer</date>
							<text>I'm not opposed to [self-rule], but I want to do it a way that takes care of |reasons our concerns| ... In a postwar situation like this, if you start holding elections, the people who are rejectionists tend to win ... It's often the best-organized who win, and the best-organized right now are the former Baathists and to some extent the Islamists.</text>
							<url>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A42905-2003Jun27.html</url>
							<urlText>Interview Reported In Washington Post</urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<link>impose_will</link>
							<date>June 30, 2003,  L. Paul Bremer</date>
							<text>We are going to fight them and impose our will on them and we will capture or, if necessary, kill them until we have imposed law and order upon this country.</text>
							<url>http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,987833,00.html</url>
							<urlText>BBC Interview</urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
						</Fact>
						<Fact hide="true">
							<date></date>
							<text></text>
							<url></url>
							<urlText></urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
						</Fact>
          </facts>  
         </Subtopic>
         </subtopics>
        </Topic>

			 
			 <Topic name="Other Issues">
        <subtopics>
				<Subtopic name="Post-war Aftermath" link="post_iraq">
          <facts>
            <Fact>
              <date>April 2003</date>
              <text>
              	Kurdish leaders raise concerns that the US is abandoning plans to introduce 
              	democracy in Iraq after the war.
              </text>
              <url>http://news.independent.co.uk/world/politics/story.jsp?story=379060</url>
              <urlText>Independent article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.sourcedreporting.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=12&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0
              	http://yellowtimes.org/article.php?sid=1213&mode=thread&order=0
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
            	<link>looting</link>
              <date>April 2003</date>
              <text>
                The occupying US forces fail to prevent the looting of the Iraqi national museum, as
                well as numerous schools, universities, hospitals, Baghdad's communications centre,
                <a href="http://www.charlotte.com/mld/observer/news/6068775.htm">nuclear materials</a> etc. 
                The only ministry building saved from looting and plundering by the US forces is the 
                ministry of oil.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.dailytelegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/05/18/wirq118.xml&sSheet=/news/2003/05/18/ixnewstop.html</url>
              <urlText>Daily Telegraph article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
                http://www.counterpunch.org/sommerfeld05172003.html
                http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/05/15/1052885337044.html
                http://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/08/international/worldspecial/08IRAQ.html?ex=1057464000&en=f1d8dd76c5e2d095&ei=5070
                http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/story.jsp?story=412943
                http://www.almuajaha.com/feature/display/441/index.php
                http://www.charlotte.com/mld/observer/news/6068775.htm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact hide="true">
              <date>April 2003</date>
              <text>
                Bush announces the end of the war, however carefully crafts his words to avoid 
                actually calling the war ended, as if the war were to be officially ended, the US 
                troops would be required by international law to to admit the war to be ended would 
                to fulfil certain obligations.
              </text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>June 2003</date>
              <text>
                The World Health Organisation (WHO) and UNICEF are fighting a growing number of 
                cases of water-borne diseases as a result of continuing lack of clean drinking 
                water and adequate sewage facilities in Iraq.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.theolympian.com/home/news/20030629/frontpage/39442.shtml</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2973564.stm
              	http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,965942,00.html
              	http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/05/15/1052885337044.html
              	http://www.reliefweb.int/w/rwb.nsf/480fa8736b88bbc3c12564f6004c8ad5/1be6515ecead3ae285256d4a00572f02?OpenDocument
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>June 2003</date>
              <text>
              	Occupation forces move to halt elections throughout Iraq (preferring to install 
              	their own handpicked mayors and administrators).
              </text>
              <url>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A42905-2003Jun27.html</url>
              <urlText>Washington Post article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1056838210022&call_pageid=968332188492&col=968793972154
              	http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/06/29/1056825280190.html
              	http://www.islam-online.net/English/News/2003-06/29/article08.shtml
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>September 21, 2003</date>
              <text>
              	The US institutes wide-ranging free-market reforms in Iraq which allow full foreign 
              	ownership in every sector except oil (the oil remaining under US control).
              </text>
              <url>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A44003-2003Sep21.html</url>
              <urlText>Washington Post article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
								http://wireservice.wired.com/wired/story.asp?section=Breaking&storyId=783786
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>October 2003</date>
              <text>
              	The US seeks help from the UN in Iraq, however refuses to make the main concessions
              	demanded by other countries - ceding control in Iraq, and moving quicker towards
              	handing power in Iraq over to the Iraqis.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2003-09-22-Bush-UN-Address_x.htm</url>
              <urlText>USA Today article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
								http://ipsnews.net/interna.asp?idnews=20567
								http://ww1.mid-day.com/news/world/2003/october/66001.htm
              	http://www.abc.net.au/news/justin/weekly/newsnat-11oct2003-18.htm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact hide="true">
              <date>September 24, 2003</date>
              <text>
              	The Governing Council, in consultation with the U.S. occupation authority, places temporary 
              	bans on the popular al-Jazeera and al-Arabiya 
              	news networks in Iraq, accusing the stations of violating vague "media-conduct rules" 
              	outlined for the first time in an edict released simultaneously with the ban.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A55271-2003Sep23&notFound=true</url>
              <urlText>Washington Post article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Oct 2003</date>
              <text>
              	 The occupation authority makes preparations to dismantle the food distribution system 
              	 which under Saddam gave free rations of flour, rice, cooking oil and other staples to 
              	 every Iraqi.<br><br>
              	 Described by the UN as the world's most efficient food network, the system still keeps 
              	 Iraqis from going hungry. But the US civilian administrator of Iraq, Paul Bremer, 
              	 views it as a dangerous socialist anachronism. The coalition provisional authority 
              	 (CPA) is planning to abolish it in January, despite warnings from its own technical 
              	 experts that this could lead to hunger and riots.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1058867,00.html</url>
              <urlText>Guardian article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EJ18Ak04.html
              	http://www.motherjones.com/news/dailymojo/2003/42/we_591_01a.html
              	http://billmon.org/archives/000755.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Oct 2003</date>
              <text>
              	Christian Aid reports that $4 billion of a total of $5 billion in oil revenues and other funds 
              	from Iraq have 'disappeared' in bank accounts in the hands of the US-led occupation 
              	authority.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.christianaid.org.uk/indepth/310iraqoil/iraqoil.pdf</url>
              <urlText>Christian Aid report</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.christianaid.org.uk/indepth/310iraqoil/index.htm
              	http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1074267,00.html
              	http://www.news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=2085696
              	http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/fromthefield/106690354068.htm
              	http://www.timesofoman.com/newsdetails.asp?newsid=43919
              	http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1066918167114&call_pageid=968332188774&col=968705899037
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>


						<Fact>
							<link>web_blog</link>
              <date>Today</date>
              <text>
								This web-blog provides a good up-to-date account of events as they are 
								unfolding in the occupation of Iraq.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.xymphora.blogspot.com/</url>
              <urlText>Web-Blog</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2003/new.iraq/index.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact hide="true">
              <date></date>
              <text>
              (post_iraq iraq use of oil) - http://www.forbes.com/home/2003/03/06/cx_ah_0305oil.html
              
              </text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

          </facts>
				</Subtopic>

       
        <Subtopic name="Effect of sanctions on Iraq" shortName="UN sanctions">
          <facts>

            <Fact>
              <date>1990</date>
              <link>before_sanctions</link>
              <text>
                Under the leadership of Saddam, Iraq had achieved one of the most modern infrastructures and 
                highest standards of living in the Middle East, and this despite the effects of the war on Iran.
              </text>
              <url>http://canesi.org/Engl/impact.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>April 1991</date>
              <link></link>
              <text>
                The original post-Gulf War U.N. Security Council resolution 687, makes a lots of demands on Iraq,
                but specifies that once Iraq complies with the weapons inspection regime, the economic sanctions 
                '<i>shall have no further force or effect.</i>'.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.caabu.org/press/documents/unscr-resolution-687.html</url>
              <urlText>UN Resolution</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.counterpunch.org/husseini03082003.html</altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>May 1991</date>
              <link></link>
              <text>
              	Daddy Bush states states '<i>At this juncture, my view is we don't want to lift these 
              	sanctions as long as Saddam Hussein is in power</i>'. The same day, then-Secretary of 
              	State James Baker sends the same message - '<i>We are not interested in seeing a 
              	relaxation of sanctions as long as Saddam Hussein is in power</i>'. Clinton continues
              	with this	same policy during his time as President.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.counterpunch.org/husseini03082003.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://hnn.us/articles/1326.html
              	http://www.accuracy.org/press_releases/PR031803.htm
              	http://www.accuracy.org/press_releases/PR031103.htm
              </altUrls>
              <notes>the hnn.us article is worth another look</notes>
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
            	<link>sanctions_unicef_est</link>
              <date></date>
              <text>UNICEF estimates the sanctions have caused 500,000 Iraqi children under 5 to die in the
                eight year period from 1991 to 1998.</text>
              <url>http://www.unicef.org.uk/index_s.asp?sct=news&filen=../news/iraq1.htm</url>
              <urlText>UNICEF report</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.unicef.org/reseval/pdfs/irqu5est.pdf
              	http://www.unicef.org/newsline/99pr29.htm
              	http://www.casi.org.uk/briefing/000707versailles.pdf
              	http://www.unicef.org/noteworthy/iraq/situation.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
							<link>sanctions_un_est</link>
	            <date></date>
              <text>
              	The UN estimates 1 million Iraqis, mostly children, had died under the sanctions in this period. 
              	The Iraqi	health ministry claims 1.5 million people.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/meast/9908/06/iraq.sanctions/</url>
              <urlText>CNN article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.muslimedia.com/archives/oaw98/sanction.htm
              	http://www.cbc.ca/news/features/iraq/iraq_sanctions.html
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1996</date>
              <link></link>
              <text>
                 At the International Court On Crimes Against Humanity, US, British and 
                 UN officials are charged with '<i>causing the deaths of more than 1,500,000 people including 750,000 
                 children under five, and injury to the entire population of Iraq by genocidal sanctions.</i>',
                 and having committed '<i>genocide as defined in the Convention against Genocide against the 
                 population of Iraq including genocide by starvation and sickness through use of sanctions as 
                 a weapon of mass destruction and violation of Article 54, Protection of Objects Indispensable 
                 to the Civilian Population, of Protocol I Additional to the Geneva Convention 1977.</i>'.
                 The US is charged further with extortion, obstruction of justice, co-ercion, corruption of 
                 UN functions and the restriction of press and media coverage on the issue.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.twf.org/News/Y1997/Ramsey.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.iacenter.org/warcrime/charges.htm
              	http://www.mediamonitors.net/mosaddeq1.html
              	http://www.infordeus.com/portico3/E_1_97/clark_irak.html
              	http://www.iacenter.org/reportun.htm
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1997</date>
              <text>Madeleine Albright, in her first major foreign policy address as Secretary of State, 
              proclaims '<i>We do not agree with the nations who argue that if Iraq complies with its 
              obligations concerning weapons of mass destruction, sanctions should be lifted</i>'.</text>
              <url>http://www.counterpunch.org/husseini03082003.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.accuracy.org/press_releases/PR031103.htm
              	http://www.accuracy.org/articles/twisted-policy.html
              	http://www.fair.org/extra/0301/blitzer.html
              	http://www.antiwar.com/rep/utley2.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1998</date>
              <text>When asked on 60 minutes whether the price (500,000 children) was worth it, Madeline Albright 
              replies - '<i>I think this is a very hard choice, but the price - we think the price is worth 
              it.</i>' The 500,000 deaths are supposedly 'justified' by the fact that the sanctions have 
              stopped Iraq from building weapons of mass destruction. Yet now |bush Bush| is taking us to war 
              because, he alleges, Iraq does in fact still have these weapons, indicating that the sanctions 
              served no purpose except to kill an estimated 4,000 children a month.</text>
              <url>http://www.cnn.com/2000/WORLD/meast/07/26/iraq7_25.a.tm/</url>
              <urlText>CNN article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
                http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4274013,00.html
                http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/meast/9907/12/iraq.sanctions/
                http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/meast/9908/12/iraq.unicef/
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>2000</date>
              <text>
                Iraq drops to 126th on the UNDP Human Development Index, despite having ranked 50th in 1990.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.casi.org.uk/info/unicef/sit0202/context.html</url>
              <urlText>UNICEF report</urlText>
              <altUrls>
                http://www.careusa.org/newsroom/specialreports/victimsofwar/iraq-war.asp?gir
                http://www.unicef.ie/unicef.php?content=iraq_2.php
                http://www.dawn.com/2000/03/09/int15.htm
                http://pilger.carlton.com/iraq/myths
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Nov 2001</date>
              <link>oil_for_food</link>
              <text>
                Halliday (who started the oil-for-food programme in Iraq), and Von Sponeck (his successor)
                - both of whom resigned their long UN careers after calling the embargo "genocide" - write: 
                "<i>The most recent report of the UN secretary general, in October 2001, says that the US 
                and UK governments' blocking of $4bn of humanitarian supplies is by far the greatest 
                constraint on the implementation of the oil-for-food programme. The report says that, in 
                contrast, the Iraqi government's distribution of humanitarian supplies is fully satisfactory
                ... The death of some 5-6,000 children a month is mostly due to contaminated water, lack of 
                medicines and malnutrition. The US and UK governments' delayed clearance of equipment and 
                materials is responsible for this tragedy, not Baghdad.</i>"
              </text>
              <url>http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4309594,00.html</url>
              <urlText>Guardian article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.salon.com/people/feature/2002/03/20/halliday/index2.html
              	http://pilger.carlton.com/print/100275
              	http://www.planetpapers.com/Assets/3800.php
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <link></link>
              <text>
                When the UN Secretary General refers to the US and UK governments' 'blocking', he is
                referring partly to US+British efforts to prevent 'kickbacks' from the program reaching 
                the Iraqi leadership. It is estimated their efforts prevented $30-50 million reaching 
                the Iraqi leadership, at a cost however of $2-3 billion to the humanitarian program - 
                a dubious tradeoff.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.merip.org/mero/mero030403.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/sanction/iraq1/priceindex.htm
              	http://pilger.carlton.com/print/132938
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <link></link>
              <text>
								Other blocking included the prevention such 'dual-use' items as medicines, heart and lung machines, 
								water pumps and other agricultural supplies, safety and fire fighting equipment, wheel barrows, 
								detergent, ambulances etc from being provided to Iraq.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.planetpapers.com/Assets/3800.php</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.socialistworker.org/2001/370/370_06_NoIraqSanctions.shtml
              	http://www.zmag.org/sustainers/content/2002-05/21arnove.cfm
              	http://www.washtimes.com/world/20020515-550690.htm
              	http://www.geocities.com/iraqinfo/index.html?page=/iraqinfo/sanctions/sanctions.html
              	http://pilger.carlton.com/print/132938
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

          </facts>
        </Subtopic>

				
        <Subtopic name="Pre-emptive War">
        	<facts>
            <Fact>
              <date>1848</date>
              <link>lincoln</link>
              <text>Abraham Lincoln writes '<i>Allow the President to invade a neighboring nation, whenever 
                <i>he</i> shall deem it necessary to repel an invasion ... and you allow him to make war at 
                pleasure.</i>'.
              </text>
              <url>http://kinkade.ws/cwt_alt/resources/e-texts/lincoln/02.htm</url>
              <urlText>E-Text</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.msnbc.com/news/806286.asp?cp1=1</altUrls>
              <urlMouseOvers> ... add this some time ... </urlMouseOvers>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Today</date>
              <text>The Bush Doctrine being used to justify war on Iraq - '<i>To 
              	forestall or prevent such hostile acts by our adversaries, the United States will, if 
                necessary, act preemptively.</i>'
              </text>
              <url>http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/wh/15425.htm"</url>
              <urlText>US National Security Strategy</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.msnbc.com/news/806286.asp?cp1=1</altUrls>
            </Fact>
        	</facts>
				</Subtopic>
				

        <Subtopic name="Reasons behind the war with Iraq" shortName="Grounds for war" link="reasons">
          <facts>

            <Fact>
              <date>1982</date>
              <text>
                US FBI chief William Webster meets with the Emir of Kuwait and plots the seizure of Iraqi 
                oil fields and the slant-drilling with which Kuwait and western oil companies would steal $14 
                billion worth of Iraqi oil, and which provided one of the main incentives for Iraq's invasion
                of Kuwait.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.rmbowman.com/isss/iraqsp.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
                http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Iraq/SlowMotionHolocaust_Iraq.html
                http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/CIA%20Hits/Iraq_CIAHits.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>
						
						
            <Fact>
              <date>1983</date>
              <text>
                It was recently revealed that a purpose of |rumsfeld_83 Rumsfeld's meeting with Saddam in '83|
                was to negotiate a deal for an oil pipeline to be built by the company Bechtel (now in line for 
                post-war construction contracts) through Iraq. Despite much work and dirty-dealing by US 
                officials, the plan would later by rejected by Saddam in '85.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.guerrillanews.com/war_on_terrorism/doc1510.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.ips-dc.org/crudevision/crude_vision.pdf
              	http://www.citizenworks.org/corp/bechtel.php
              	http://www.seen.org/pages/reports/crude.shtml
              	http://english.aljazeera.net/topics/article.asp?cu_no=1&item_no=1611&version=1&template_id=273&parent_id=258
              	http://www.rediff.com/money/2003/apr/29paran.htm
              	http://www.guardian.co.uk/editor/story/0,12900,939505,00.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>May 1990</date>
              <text>
                The Soviet Union has collapsed, and the American people are clamoring for a peace dividend. 
                A new bad guy is needed  fast. In May 1990 (three months before the first Gulf War), 
                a National Security Council white paper states that Iraq and Saddam Hussein are '<i>the 
                optimum contenders to replace the Warsaw pact as the rationale for major military 
                expenditures.</i>'
              </text>
              <url>http://www.123student.com/politics/3411.shtml</url>
              <urlText>Essay</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.rmbowman.com/isss/iraqsp.htm
              	http://www.firethistime.org/contempchrono.htm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1997</date>
              <text>
              	<a href="http://www.newamericancentury.org/">PNAC</a> formed, its 
              	<a href="http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm">members</a> including
              	|cheney Cheney|, |rumsfeld Rumsfeld|, Wolfowitz and Bush's brother Jeb among others. 
              	The group lobbies the government to go to war with Iraq and	remove Saddam, writing in 1998 in
              	<a href="http://www.fas.org/news/iraq/1998/05/980526-pnac.htm">this letter</a> that
              	'<i>"We should establish and maintain a strong US military presence 
              	in the region, and be prepared to use that force to protect our vital interests in the Gulf - 
              	and, if necessary, to help remove Saddam from power</i>' and in 
              	<a href="http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonletter.htm">this letter</a>
              	that the government	'<i>strategy should aim, above all, at the removal of Saddam 
              	Husseins regime from power</i>'.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.philly.com/mld/dailynews/2003/01/27/news/local/5025024.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.onlinejournal.com/Special_Reports/022003Leopold/022003leopold.html
              	http://www.brown.edu/Administration/News_Bureau/2002-03/02-053.html
              	http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonletter.htm
              	http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqletter1998.htm
              	http://www.observer.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,901066,00.html
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1998</date>
              <text>
              	The International Energy Annual reveals the oil reserves/production ratios for a number of countries,
              	revealing that at current rates, the US, Canada 
              	(<a href="http://www.afa.org/magazine/June2002/0602chart.pdf">the US's main supplier of oil</a>) 
              	and Britain's proven oil reserves will be exhausted within
              	5-7 years. In contrast, |selling Iraq's| will last the longest, 142 years, at current production rates, 
              	and |post-war Kuwait's| second longest.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.ott.doe.gov/facts/archives/fotw125.shtml</url>
              <urlText>Graph</urlText>
              
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>2000</date>
              <text>
              	The PNAC Report of 2000 talks about using Saddam as an excuse for extending the US role in the gulf -
              	'<i>the United States has for decades sought to play a more permanent role in Gulf regional security. 
              	While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for a substantial 
              	American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein.</i>'
              </text>
              <url>http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf</url>
              <urlText>PNAC Report</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://observer.guardian.co.uk/iraq/story/0,12239,905990,00.html</altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>May 2001</date>
              <text>
              	The US energy department frighten politicians with a study known as the 
              	<a href="http://www.eei.org/issues/news/releases/010517.htm">Cheney
              	report</a> (after the former head of Halliburton oil services group, now |cheney US vice-president|, 
              	who wrote it). He predicts that imported oil would need to rise from 10.4 million barrels a 
              	day at present to 16.7 million barrels a day by 2020.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,880443,00.html</url>
              <urlText>Guardian article</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
            	<link>strategic_energy_policy_challenges</link>
              <date>April 2001</date>
              <text>
              	A report entitled <a href="http://www.rice.edu/projects/baker/Pubs/workingpapers/cfrbipp_energy/energytf.htm">
              	'Strategic Energy Policy Challenges For The 21st Century'</a> is submitted to
              	Vice President |cheney Dick Cheney|, advocating a policy of using military force against an 
              	enemy such as Iraq to secure US access to, and control of, Middle Eastern oil fields. 
              	<br><br>
              	'<i>'Iraq remains a destabilising influence to ... the flow of oil to international markets 
              	from the Middle East. Saddam Hussein has also demonstrated a willingness to threaten to use the 
              	oil weapon and to use his own export programme to manipulate oil markets.</i>'.
              	The document also points out that '<i>the United States remains a prisoner of its energy dilemma</i>', 
              	and that one of the 'consequences' of this is a '<i>need for military intervention</i>'. It 
              	says the 'central dilemma' for the US administration is that '<i>the American people continue to 
              	demand plentiful and cheap energy without sacrifice or inconvenience</i>'.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.sundayherald.com/28224</url>
              <urlText>Sunday Herald article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.sundayherald.com/28285</altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact hide="true">
            	<link>sept_excuse</link>
              <date>Sept 12, 2001</date>
              <text>
								The day after the Sept 11 attacks, while the rest of America is still shell-shocked, 
								Rumsfeld is trying to	determine whether he can use the attacks as an excuse to attack 
								Iraq, writing that he wants the '&lt;i>best info fast. Judge whether good enough [to] 
								hit S.H. at the same time. Not only UBL&lt;/i>'.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.philly.com/mld/dailynews/2003/01/27/news/local/5025024.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Aug 2002</date>
              <text>
								Cheney launches the new initiative against Iraq, arguing that the danger Iraq would pose if 
								it obtained |no_nukes nuclear weapons| would be that it could '<i>manipulate the world's 
								energy supplies because Iraq holds 10 percent of the world's oil reserves</i>'.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/08/26/cheney.iraq/</url>
              <urlText>CNN article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.guerrillanews.com/war_on_terrorism/doc1510.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
            	<link>oil_lobby</link>
              <date>Oct 2002</date>
              <text>
								Energy companies start to position themselves for a role in the revival of Iraq's oil industry.
								<a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,822230,00.html">British companies are 
								concerned</a> they may not get their share of the pie.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/archives/2002/10/28/0000177429</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Oct 2002</date>
              <text>
              	 US Govt report shows Iraq has signed several multi-billion dollar deals with foreign 
              	 oil companies mainly from China, France, and Russia. Deutsche Bank estimates $38 billion total 
              	 on new fields ... having reportedly signed a flurry of deals in recent weeks and months with 
              	 companies from Italy (Eni), Spain (Repsol YPF), Russia (Tatneft), France (TotalFinaElf), China, 
              	 India, Turkey, and others. Spot who's missing :).
              </text>
              <url>http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/iraqfull.html</url>
              <urlText>US Gov report</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Jan 2003</date>
              <text>
                Guardian reports on international oil companies jostling for rights to post-war oil, 
                and also provides a nice summary of the close ties between the |profiles Bush administration| and
                oil companies
              </text>
              <url>http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,880443,00.html</url>
              <urlText>Guardian article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
                Among these companies is Halliburton, to which |cheney US vice-president Dick Cheney| 
                has deep ties.
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/2837477.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
            	<link>halliburton_contracts</link>
              <date>Mar 25, 2003</date>
              <text>
                |cheney Halliburton| is one of two companies to receive the first contracts for rebuilding Iraq.
              </text>
              <url>http://money.cnn.com/2003/03/25/news/companies/war_contracts/index.htm</url>
              <urlText>CNN article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A14472-2003Mar23.html
              	http://www.guerrillanews.com/corporate_crime/doc1247.html
              	http://www.corpwatch.org/issues/PID.jsp?articleid=6008
              	http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/business/1834500
              	http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_25-3-2003_pg4_16
              	http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/25/international/worldspecial/25HALI.html?ex=1049259600&en=3e4aa5df432ba2b5&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE
              	http://www.opensecrets.org/news/rebuilding_iraq/index.asp
              	http://money.cnn.com/2003/04/11/news/companies/war_halliburton/index.htm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>May 2003</date>
              <text>
                US and Britain present a resolution to the UN which gives the US and 
                Britain control over how the profits from Iraqi oil sales should be spent, and
                gives the US and UK an open-ended mandate to stay in Iraq and run the 
                country 'until an internationally recognized, representative government is 
                established by the people of Iraq'. A 
                <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2003-05-22-un-iraq-text_x.htm">modified
                draft</a> is eventually accepted by the UN.
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3032693.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
                http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3034891.stm
                http://www.dailytelegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/05/18/wirq118.xml&sSheet=/news/2003/05/18/ixnewstop.html
                http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2003/05/21/un_security030521
                http://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/08/weekinreview/08OBRI.html?ex=1055649600&en=abe9cb25f85f46b6&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE
                http://www.voanews.com/article.cfm?objectID=2F51B839-87E7-47A4-B1F66214B1F6D317
                http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A20958-2003May21&notFound=true
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Today</date>
              <text>
              	|cheney Halliburton| is reaping billions of dollars in contracts in Iraq.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.ajc.com/news/content/news/0803/28irhalliburton.html?urac=n&urvf=10639950422380.6407404785349302</url>
              <urlText>AJC article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
								http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/news/politics/6896614.htm
								http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/apbiz_story.asp?category=1310&slug=Halliburton%20Iraq
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	 Total petroleum demand in the US is projected to grow at an average annual rate of 1.7% 
              	 each year through to 2025, with Petroleum imports required to meet this demand 
              	 expected to almost double in that time from 23.29 to 41.23 (quadrillion Btu).
              </text>
              <url>http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/</url>
              <urlText>US Govt report</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/tbl1.html
              	http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/ieo/
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	Another factor that shouldn't be forgotten is the defense industry's influence on the 
              	US government. Conservative estimates are that defense contractors have been the source 
              	of $72.5 million in contributions to federal candidates and parties from 1989 to present.
              	32 major appointees of the Bush Administration - including the deputy secretaries of defense 
              	and state, and the secretaries of the Navy and Air Force - are former executives, consultants 
              	or major shareholders of top military contractors. Further, 95 out of the 100 members of the 
              	US Senate received contributions from the defense sector.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.guerrillanews.com/corporate_crime/doc1543.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

          </facts>
        </Subtopic>

        <Subtopic name="Public Misperception" link="misperception">
        	<facts>
            <Fact>
              <date>August 2002</date>
              <text>
	              A USA Today poll shows 86% of the American public as thinking Baghdad is giving support 
	              to terrorist groups planning to strike America, with more than half believing Saddam had 
	              a hand in 9/11.
              </text>
              <url>http://europe.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/08/26/time.iraq/</url>
              <urlText>CNN Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>
            	
            <Fact>
            	<link>american_misperception</link>
              <date>Jan 2003</date>
              <text>
              	Leading up to the war, polls indicate widespread misperception regarding Iraq - a meagre 
              	17% of Americans realise that none of the Sept. 11 hijackers were Iraqi, and 41% believe 
              	Iraq already has nuclear weapons (again a claim which not even the	Bush Administration 
              	has made).
              </text>
              <url>
              	http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/4920860.htm
              </url>
              <urlText>Knight Ridder poll</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://bernie.house.gov/documents/articles/20030328175457.asp
              	http://www.editorandpublisher.com/editorandpublisher/headlines/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1848576
								http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/editorialsopinion/134620660_sigars24.html
								http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/front/6085261.htm
	              http://www.guerrillanews.com/cgi-bin/wwwthreads/showflat.pl?Cat=&Board=quote&Number=140082&page=2&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=0&part=
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
            	<date></date>
            	<text>
            		Another poll taken around the same time finds a full 81% of Americans believing Iraq poses a 
            		threat to the US.
            	</text>
            	<url>http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=127&ncid=742&e=13&u=/030630/7/4jscz.html</url>
            	<urlText>Yahoo article</urlText>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Mar 18, 2003</date>
              <text>
              	A CNN poll taken just two days before the war shows just how successfull the US
              	propaganda machine has been in getting the American public to back the war - a full 51% of
              	Americans are polled as believing that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein was responsible for 
              	|sept11 September 11|. Although the Bush Administration has tried hard (|no_link and failed|) 
              	to establish links	between Saddam and Al Qaeda, not even he has ever gone so far as to accuse 
              	Saddam of direct involvement in 9-11.
              </text>
              <url>
              	http://www.editorandpublisher.com/editorandpublisher/headlines/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1848576
              </url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/03/11/Iraq.Qaeda.link/
              	http://bernie.house.gov/documents/articles/20030328175457.asp
              	http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/front/6085261.htm
								http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/editorialsopinion/134620660_sigars24.html
								http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0314/p02s01-woiq.htm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
            	<date>June 2003</date>
            	<text>
            	  A third of the American public is polled as believing US forces to have found WMD in Iraq, with
            	  22% actually believing Iraq to have used chemical or biological weapons in the war, despite no WMD
            	  having being either found or used.
            	</text>
            	<url>http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/front/6085261.htm</url>
            	<urlText>Philadelphia Inquirer article</urlText>
            	<altUrls>
            		http://www.khilafah.com/home/category.php?DocumentID=7527&TagID=2
            		http://www.bayarea.com/mld/cctimes/news/6093501.htm
            		http://www.charleston.net/stories/061503/ter_15poll.shtml
            	</altUrls>
            </Fact>
            
            <Fact>
              <date>June 2003</date>
              <text>
              	Another poll gives some insight as to why, as shown above, half of America believe
              	Saddam Hussein to be responsible for the attacks - 7 in 10 Americans 
              	polled say the Bush administration implied that Iraq and its leader, Saddam Hussein, were 
              	involved in the Sept. 11 attacks.
              </text>
              <url>
              	http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/4920860.htm
              </url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>August 2003</date>
              <text>
              	Polls show the American public believing the coalition fatalities in Iraq to be no higher 
              	than 50, at a time when the actual official figure lies at 295.
              </text>
              <url>
              	http://www.iraqwar.ru./iraq-read_article.php?articleId=14364
              </url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>September 2003</date>
              <text>
              	New polls repeat the picture shown back in June - 7 in 10 Americans continue to believe
              	it to be 'likely or very likely Saddam Hussein was involved in Sept. 11'.
              </text>
              <url>
              	http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A32862-2003Sep5.html
              </url>
              <urlText>Washington Post article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A3549-2003Sep12.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>


            
          </facts>
        </Subtopic>

        <Subtopic name="Resolution 1441" link="1441">
          <facts>

            <Fact>
              <date>Aug 1990</date>
              <text>
                UN Resolution 660 passed, calling on Iraq to '<i>withdraw immediately and unconditionally 
                all its forces to the positions in which they were located on 1 August 1990</i>'.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.caabu.org/press/documents/unscr-resolution-660.html</url>
              <urlText>UN Resolution</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Nov 1990</date>
              <text>
                UN Resolution 678 passed, which '<i>Authorizes Member States co-operating with the Government 
                of Kuwait, unless Iraq on or before 15 January 1991 fully implements, as set forth in 
                paragraph 1 above, the foregoing resolutions, to use all necessary means to uphold and 
                implement resolution 660 (1990) and all subsequent relevant resolutions and to restore 
                international peace and security in the area.</i>'.<br><br>
                In other words, this authorizes the use of force to remove Iraq from Kuwait.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.caabu.org/press/documents/unscr-resolution-678.html</url>
              <urlText>UN Resolution</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Nov 2002</date>
              <text>
                John Negroponte, U.S. Ambassador to the UN, urges support for 
                <a href="http://www.journalnow.com/wsj/specialreports/war/1441.html">Resolution 1441</a>, arguing 
                '<i>There's no 'automaticity' and this is a two-stage process, and in that regard we have 
                met the principal concerns that have been expressed for the resolution ... Whatever violation 
                there is, or is judged to exist, will be dealt with in the [Security] Council, and the Council 
                will have an opportunity to consider the matter before any other action is taken.</i>'
              </text>
              <url>http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-fg-uniraq8nov08.story</url>
              <urlText>LA Times article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
                http://hnn.us/articles/1326.html
                http://www.wagingpeace.org/articles/03.03/0324krieger_shock.htm
                http://philpotonpolitics.com/archive/2003/mar0303.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Nov 2002</date>
              <text>
                Resolution 1441 passed. It 'Recalls ... that the Council has repeatedly warned Iraq that 
                it will face serious consequences as a result of its continued violations of its obligations'
                and also recalls 'that its resolution 678 (1990) authorized Member States to use all 
                necessary means to uphold and implement its resolution 660 (1990) of 2 August 1990 and all 
                relevant resolutions subsequent to Resolution 660 (1990) and to restore international peace 
                and security in the area'.<br><br>
                In other words, it repeats a previously given warning and recalls some previous resolutions 
                which authorized force <i>to remove Iraq from Kuwait</i>.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.journalnow.com/wsj/specialreports/war/1441.html</url>
              <urlText>UN Resolution</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://ods-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/PRO/N02/680/99/PDF/N0268099.pdf?OpenElement
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <date>Mar&nbsp;18, 2003</date>
              <text>
                After it becomes obvious that the UN will not pass a resolution authorizing a war in Iraq, 
                the US and Britain violate international law by launching the war anyway, justifying their 
                actions with Resolution 1441.
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2858965.stm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.khilafah.com/home/category.php?DocumentID=6673&TagID=2
              	http://www.number-10.gov.uk/output/Page3319.asp
              	http://usinfo.state.gov/cgi-bin/washfile/display.pl?p=/products/washfile/latest&f=03033101.nlt&t=/products/washfile/newsitem.shtml
              	http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/2856223.stm
              	http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2859485.stm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
                Under the UN charter, military force is legally permitted only if it is sanctioned by the 
                Security Council or in self-defense.
              </text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText>|treaties More on UN Charter|</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2847929.stm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>


            <Fact hide="true">
              <date>Mar&nbsp;20, 2003</date>
              <text>
                Hans Blix reports that Iraq has complied with Resolution 1441.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.sunnt.com/news/world/world.asp?id=9633</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

          </facts>
        </Subtopic>
       </subtopics>
			 </Topic>
	
        <Topic name="Analysis">
         <subtopics>
         <Subtopic name="Did the War achieve its Goals?" shortName="Analysis" forcebg="true" link="did_war_achieve_goals">
          <facts>
            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
								With Iraq now in |web_blog virtual chaos| under US occupation, a <a href="http://lunaville.org/warcasualties/Summary.aspx">few hundred</a>
								American soldiers dead and who knows <a href="http://www.iraqbodycount.net/">how many Iraqis</a>, it 
								is worth asking whether the war achieved its stated goals. Note that this analysis doesn't 
								attempt to address any |reasons hidden goals| the war may have had, rather gives the US 
								Government the benefit of the doubt in assuming that their |wmd_rhetoric rhetoric| represents 
								their real motives.
							</text>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>Removing the WMD threat</date>
							<text>
								The danger posed by Iraq's WMD was the reason and justification put forward to the UN for 
								the war. Although the UN itself |1441 did not feel| that the war was justified at the time on this
								basis, this is the sole basis upon which Powell argued for the war to the UN.<br><br>
								With no WMD yet found, it is getting more and more difficult to argue that the war succeeded
								in the aim of removing their danger - if they never existed then there was never any danger
								in the first place. The US government is now trying to promote finds allegedly proving the 
								existance of a <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3051916.stm">program</a> for 
								the potential production of WMD, yet even if some of these finds turn out to be true (and 
								many supposed finds have already proven not to be), this is a far cry from the imminent 
								threat allegedly posed by existing WMDs.<br><br>
								Making the argument even weaker is the fact that the war lead to |looting looting| in which nuclear
								materials were removed from the Tuwaitha facility in Iraq. While all of the 'evidence' put forward
								regarding Iraq's nuclear weapons program by the US government turned out to be |selling bogus|, these
								nuclear materials were very real (and were under <a href="http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/story.jsp?story=412943">IAEA 
								surveillance</a>), and the looting of these materials (due to the US troops' failure to protect them) 
								is exactly the kind of thing the war was supposed to prevent.
							</text>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>Fighting Terrorism</date>
							<text>
								It is difficult to judge at this stage whether the war has 'succeeded' in fighting terror. It 
								mostly comes down to what you consider the most effective means to fighting terror - eliminating 
								the causes/reasons or eliminating the terrorists. The problem with the latter method is that 
								|guide history tends to teach us| that violent attempts to eliminate the terrorists tend to result in 
								more terrorists springing up.<br><br>
								Iraq unfortunately seems to fit this model perfectly. The guerrilla attacks around Iraq which
								are causing US deaths on an almost daily basis appear not to be an organised resistance by
								Baathists still loyal to Saddam, but rather Iraqi's not feeling so happy with their 
								'liberators' and essentially fighting for their freedom from the |occupying_admission occupying army|. Under the
								US Government's usage of the word 'terrorist', this would make them terrorists, and they have obviously
								only become terrorists as a result of this war.<br><br>
								I should note here however that under a <a href="http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/42/a42r159.htm">UN 
								Resolution</a> passed in 1987, the definition of terrorism does not apply to people struggling 
								against racist and colonialist regimes or foreign military occupation.<br><br>
								Thus the Iraqis currently killing US troops do not really qualify as terrorists (and are also 
								probably well within their rights under international law - if such a thing still exists in 
								face of US efforts to |no_icc undermine| it). The other obvious group this definition exempts 
								are the Palestinians - in fact, the UN Resolution mentioned above which defines terrorism in this 
								way was voted against only by the US and Israel for exactly this reason.<br><br>
								Given the very real terrorism the war has caused, the very speculative grounds on which
								the war was supposed to help the fight on terror (i.e. Iraq's unproven |selling links| to al 
								Qaeda), and the fact that this war by nature can only exacerbate the well-known |why reasons| 
								behind terrorism directed at the US, it is very hard to see how the war has succeeded in 
								this goal. 
							</text>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>Removing Saddam Hussein</date>
							<text>
								<p>
									Although Saddam has not yet been caught, and in fact looks like turning into another 
									ghost-like figure ala |why bin Laden|, with the <a href="http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2003/new.iraq/transition/index.html">occasional 
									recording</a> inciting followers to
									new acts of violence against America etc, it is an obvious fact that Saddam has been removed 
									from power in Iraq. Thus this goal has clearly been achieved. However, the goal only has any 
									merit if he is replaced with something better, which given the current situation in Iraq
									is far from clear.
								</p>
							</text>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>Liberating the Iraqi people</date>
							<text>
								This goal was only really pushed once the war began, as more of a justification made for the 
								American public than a real goal or reason behind the war. This is clear in the lack of 
								planning made by the US for post-'liberation' Iraq - if the war was really about liberating the
								Iraqi people, one would expect the US to have done a better job of working out how they were
								going to look after these people, and in particular how they were going to give these people
								actual freedom (i.e. democracy, self-rule etc) rather than simply end up as hated occupiers.
								<br><br>
								As the WMD justification unravels, the Bush Administration is becoming desperate for other 
								justifications for the war, and this is one of the few available. Ironically however, it is
								almost becoming more and more apparent that many of the Iraqi people do not feel liberated,
								and that the US has little intention of giving the Iraqi people true liberation in the form
								of the self-determination which they all want.<br><br>
								It should in any case be apparent to anyone with a good grasp of |iraqi Iraqi history| that 
								liberation is a very unlikely motive for a British-US led attack, given that the British 
								|iraqi stole the promised freedom| from the Iraqi people after WWI, and after the Iraqi's finally
								shook off their colonial yoke and got their own leader, the CIA |iraq_overthrow_63 helped the Baathists| remove
								him, bringing Saddam to power. Not exactly a history of help from these two world powers with
								respect to liberation, which if we ask <a href="http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=liberate">www.dictionary.com</a> 
								means '<i>set free, as from oppression, confinement, or foreign control</i>'. The Americans may 
								have set the Iraqis free from the oppression they |iraq_overthrow_63 put there in the first place|, 
								but it appears they won't be offering much help to the Iraqis in making the final step in their
								liberation - setting themselves free from foreign control.
							</text>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>Conclusion - was it worth it?</date>
							<text>
								With the WMD reason for the war looking |wmd_rhetoric thinner than ever|, the Iraqi people |iraqi again| 
								fighting for their liberation from the Americans and British, and with new Iraqi terrorists 
								springing up all round the country to |web_blog kill US soldiers daily|, the only success the 
								US can conclusively claim is in removing the guy they |iraq_overthrow_63 put there in the first 
								place| - Saddam. It remains to be seen whether Iraq turns out to be a better place without 
								Saddam, and whether this improvement can justify the <a href="http://www.costofwar.com/">huge 
								cost</a> of the war, but it should be noted that if war on this basis is to be taken as a 
								precendent for the future - the precedent being that war is justified against any country ruled 
								by an oppressive dictator - then this world has a very worrying future ahead of it. 
							</text>
						</Fact>
          </facts>
        </Subtopic>


        <Subtopic name="A short anti-war argument" shortName="Argument" forcebg="true" link="short_anti_war_arg">
          <facts>
            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
								<p>With the war on Iraq impending, I wrote up a small argument against a war. Of course, the
								war is now been and gone, however I think it still important to consider, if only because Iraq
								doesn't appear to be the last on the US's list of countries in need of 'liberation'. Note that
								this write-up makes claims which the reader may not initially agree with, but all of which are 
								backed up within this site.</p>
								<p>              
								A few important reasons why I don't support a non-UN-backed war on Iraq:
								</p>
							</text>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>1. Such a war can only lead to an |terrorism_increase increase in terrorism|</date>
							<text>
								One only has to look into
								the |why reasons for Osama bin Laden's hate| of the US to appreciate this obvious fact.
								The Iraqis, arabs and muslims around the 
								world will see such a war not only as a war on Islam, but also for what it largely is about ...
							</text>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>2. This war is (to whatever degree) an imperialistic grab for oil</date>
							<text>
								<p>Anyone doubting this need only consider Iraq's history. The CIA played a hand in 
								|iraq_overthrow_63 overthrowing the government in Iraq in 1963| which brought Saddam to
								power. The reason was that the government had moved to |iraq_nationalise_oil nationalise oil| 
								(exactly the same thing also happened |iranian in Iran|). Going back further also gives a long history of the 
								colonial power |iraqi Britain treating Iraq atrociously in order to control their oil|.
								</p><p>
								Consider further the |profiles Bush Administration's 
								deep ties with the oil industry|, read about the English and US oil companies |oil_lobby already lobbying| over 
								who gets to drill the Iraqi oil (Iraq has the <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,880443,00.html">
								second largest oil reserves in the world</a>), read |strategic_energy_policy_challenges the report| submitted 
								to Dick Cheney suggesting the use of military force in Iraq because the US |reasons needs the oil|, or consider that a 
								result of the war in Afghanistan was the US finally getting to |afghanistan_pipeline build a pipeline through 
								the country|, or that high oil prices are currently threatening the US economy and could be reliably kept 
								significantly lower if the US were to control Iraq's oil.</p><p>
							</text>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>3. There are no proven links between Saddam and the Al-Qaeda.</date>
							<text>The best intelligence agencies (those of 
								the US and Britain) in the world have been working flat out to try and find one, yet both reported |no_link no 
								link| (despite this fact, both |bush Bush| and Blair |bbc_leak repeatedly cite information discredited by their own 
								intelligence agencies as evidence of a link| - if they are so convinced of the case for war they shouldn't 
								need to lie in presenting it). |bbc_leak British intelligence reports| that even the possibility of a substantial link is 
								unlikely, given that Osama is in ideological conflict with Saddam (in a |laden_tape recent tape| Osama termed 
								Saddam and his regime 'infidels').
							</text>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>4. Before the UN sanctions Saddam had created a country with the |before_sanctions one of the highest 
								standards of living in the Middle East|.</date>
							<text><p>At least for his own people he had thus done a better job than most
								other Middle Eastern leaders, and now we're supposed to be saving his people from him? I'm not saying Saddam is 
								all good, far from it, but can anyone honestly claim that we are acting in the interests of the Iraqi people here?
								</p><p>
								Consider this - over the past 12 years under the UN sanctions, an estimated |oil_for_food 5000-6000 
								children| in Iraq have died due to starvation and lack of water and medication in Iraq every 
								week. The blame for this lies not with Saddam or even the UN, rather the fact 
								that the US and UK have always fought against any relaxation of the sanctions, including
								|oil_for_food blocking the efforts of the oil-for-food program|. The two 
								successive UN leaders of the oil-for-food program resigned due to this, saying that Saddam 
								had done his best to provide his people with food, however calling the US and UK actions 
								'genocide'. If the US and UK have pursued a genocidal policy at the cost of 1.5 million Iraqi 
								lives over the past 10 years, can we believe their claim to now be taking war to the people of 
								Iraq for their own good?
								</p><p>
							</text>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>5. The |no_threat threat that Iraq poses to the US is tiny|.</date>
							<text><p>Iraq probably still has some |us_uk_wmd 'weapons of mass 
								destruction'| of course, but an |already_disarmed insignificant amount| which pales in comparison to that 
								of many other countries (including of course the |us_uk_wmd US and Britain|, but also less stable places such 
								as Syria and the nuclear states of North Korea, Pakistan, India and |us_uk_wmd Israel|). 
								</p><p>
								Saddam has never been a threat to or threatened the US. This brings into question not only the motives for the 
								war but also whether there is any right by |un_charter international law| or even under Bush's pre-emptive
								doctrine to initiate one. Saddam's army was 
								pathetic in the Gulf War and is much weaker now. Even CIA Director |tenet_advice George Tenet believes| that 
								the probability of Saddam Hussein initiating an attack on the United States is low, however 'should Saddam 
								Hussein conclude that a US-led attack could no longer be deterred, he probably would become much less 
								constrained in adopting terrorist actions'.
								</p><p>
								Saddam gives no evidence to being the irrational madman that Bush paints him to be (except perhaps when pushed 
								into a corner as mentioned above and as evidenced by him firing missiles at Israel during the first Gulf War). 
								His war on Iran was |rumsfeld_83 backed by the US|, as was |backing_kuwait initially his invasion of Kuwait|. If we are truly 
								concerned about chemical and biological weapons, we might ask why the US has recently undermined the Chemical 
								Weapons Convention by |cwc restricting inspections in the US|, killed the |bwc Biological Weapons Convention| 
								and |germ refused to sign an International Treaty banning germ warfare|. We might also ask why the US had 
								to |edit_declaration edit Iraq's weapons declaration before releasing it to the public|, removing 150 
								American, British and other foreign companies from it who illegally supplied Iraq's WMD in the first place.
								</p><p>
							</text>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>6. The US has a deplorable record of foreign intervention over the past 50 years.</date>
							<text>One need only look 
								at all the well documented cases of democratic governments that have been overthrown by CIA covert action 
								and replaced with dictators (i.e. |guatemala Guatemala|, |chile Chile|, |brazil Brazil|, |iranian Iran|, 
								|indonesia Indonesia|), or the US's blatant ignoring of the World Court (i.e. in the case of the |nicaragua World 
								Court's ruling of $17 billion in damages to Nicaragua| for damages incurred in the US's illegal war on it) and 
								other |treaties world organisations' rulings or treaties|. Such a country has no right to be playing global cop, 
								and when it does we all end up worse off.
							</text>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>7. Bush's pre-emptive doctrine sets a dangerous precedent.</date>
							<text><p>It is this same doctrine which
								started World War I, and we can only hope that neither the US nor any other countries continue 
								with this doctrine - the most worrying aspect about this war in Iraq is that it appears to be just
								the beginning, with |iranian Iran| and Syria looking likely contenders for being the next 'threats'
								to the US in need of liberation.</p><p>
								Not only does this war set 
								a dangerous precent, and in |lincoln the words of Abe Lincoln|
								'allow (the US) to make war at pleasure', but it may also encourage other countries to seek
								WMD to combat the US threat - the threat of US force/co-ercion is in fact 
								<a href="http://traprockpeace.org/usefulquotesoniraq.html">one of the main 
								reasons</a> countries seek to obtain WMD.
								</p>
							</text>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>8. The war is illegal.</date>
							<text>The |un_charter UN Charter| was set up for a good reason. Any war 
								which goes against International Law should be at least put into question (|1441 Resolution
								1441| does not provide authorization for war).
              </text>
            </Fact>
          </facts>
        </Subtopic>
      </subtopics>
     </Topic>
    </topics>
   </Supertopic>

   <Supertopic name="Regional Interventions" image="world_ms.gif" imagewidth="200" imageheight="104">
    <topics>

		 <Topic name="Introduction">
		   <subtopics>
		     <Subtopic name="Regional Interventions Section Overview" forcebg="true" nocomment="true">
		       <facts>
		     		<Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	<table width=510>
              		<tr>
              			<td colspan=2>
			              	This section is divided into regions and countries. For each country a timeline is provided,
			              	documenting the effects that US foreign policy has had on the given country.<br><br>
			              </td>
			            </tr>

              		<tr>
              			<td colspan=2>
			              	<span class=date>Middle East</span>
			              	<ul>
			              		<li>|afghanistan_pipeline The pipeline through Afghanistan and the war|
			              		<li>|iraqi Iraqi History up to the first Gulf War| (for the rest see the |iraq Iraq section|)
			              		<li>|iranian Iran|
			              		<li>|libya Libya|
			              		<li>|post-war Post-war Aftermath in Afghanistan and Kuwait|
			              		<li>|israel Israel|
			              	</ul>
			              	<br>
			              </td>
			             </tr>
			             <tr>
			             	<td valign=top>
			              	<span class=date>Latin America</span>
			              	<ul>
			              		<li>|nicaragua Nicaragua|
			              		<li>|guatemala Guatemala|
			              		<li>|el El Salvador|
			              		<li>|chile Chile|
			              		<li>|venezuela Venezuela|
			              		<li>|brazil Brazil|
			              		<li>|bolivia Bolivia|
			              	</ul>
			              	<br>
              			</td>
              			<td valign=top>
			              	<span class=date>Carribean</span>
			              	<ul>
			              		<li>|cuba Cuba|
			              		<li>|guyana Guyana|
			              		<li>|dominican Dominican Republic|
			              	</ul>
			              	<br>
										</td>              			
              		</tr>
              		<tr>
										<td valign=top>
			              	<span class=date>South-East Asia</span>
			              	<ul>
			              		<li>|indonesia Indonesia and East Timor|
			              		<li>|vietnam Vietnam|
			              		<li>|laos Laos|
			              		<li>|cambodia Cambodia|
			              	</ul>
										</td>              		
										<td valign=top>
			              	<span class=date>Africa</span>
			              	<ul>
			              		<li>|ghana Ghana|
			              		<li>|congo Congo|
			              		<li>|diego Diego Garcia|
			              	</ul>
										</td>              		
              		</tr>
              </text>
            </Fact>

		       </facts>
		     </Subtopic>
		   </subtopics>
		 </Topic>

    <Topic name="Middle East">
      <subtopics>
				<Subtopic name="Middle East Overview" shortName="Overview" nocomment="true">
					<facts>
						<Fact>
							<text>
								<table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="6" align="right" valign="top" border="0"><tr><td valign=top align=center><img src="handshake300.jpg" width=205 border="0"><br>|rumsfeld_83 Rumsfeld +
									Saddam shake hands|</td></tr></table>

									George Bush I - <a href="http://www.ecoscorporation.com/think/climate/hot_topic.htm">
									'<i>The American lifestyle is not negotiable.</i>'</a><br><br>
									|strategic_energy_policy_challenges Govt Report 2001| - The US's 'central 
									dilemma' today is that '<i>the American 
									people continue to demand plentiful and cheap energy without sacrifice 
									or inconvenience</i>'.<br><br>
									
									The 20th century history of the Middle East shows the US+Britain prepared to |iranian overthrow
									governments|, |iraqi install rulers|, invent countries, |both_sides sponsor war|, |iraqi break promises| and 
									generally do whatever it takes to guarantee a ready supply of / control over that essential 
									commodity - |reasons oil|. This has understandably created a large amount of resentment 
									throughout the Middle East, which the war with |selling Iraq| has only intensied. <br><br>
									It is essential to understand this history before backing yet another conflict in the Middle 
									East, if only to understand why the US+Britain are not seen as liberators, or why some 
									Arabs might feel inclined to fly a jetplane into the |sept11 WTC|.
							</text>
						</Fact>
					</facts>
				</Subtopic>

        <Subtopic name="The pipeline through Afghanistan and the war" link="afghanistan_pipeline" shortName="Afghanistan war">
          <facts>
            <Fact>
              <date>1995</date>
              <text>US energy company Unocal signs deal with Turkmenistan over development of a 
                gas pipeline from Turkmenistan through Afghanistan.</text>
              <url>http://www.unocal.com/uclnews/96htm/081396.htm</url>
              <urlText>Unocal report</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date>1995</date>
              <text>Unocal begins negotiations with Taliban over a pipeline deal
                through Afghanistan to Pakistan.</text>
              <url>http://www.rense.com/general33/symp.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>October 1997</date>
              <text>Unocal and other oil companies form Central Asia Gas Pipeline, Ltd. (CentGas) in 
                preparation for building the trans-Afghanistan pipeline.</text>
              <url>http://www.unocal.com/uclnews/97news/102797a.htm</url>
              <urlText>Unocal report</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1998</date>
              <text>Pipeline project delayed due to Afghanistan's continuing civil war, and Unocal 
              <a href = "http://www.unocal.com/uclnews/98news/centgas.htm">withdraws</a> from the project
              in December.</text>
              <url>http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/afghan.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <date>May 2000</date>
              <text>CIA begins operating in Afghanistan</text>
              <url>http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A47201-2001Nov17</url>
              <urlText>Washington Post article</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>February 2001</date>
              <text>
              	Upon taking office, the Bush administration immediately begins negotiations with the Taliban 
                over the pipeline.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.rense.com/general17/before.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>July 2001</date>
              <text>Washington tells India that US troops will be in Afghanistan "before the snow
		        	      falls" - this deadline is then met thanks to the Sept. 11 attacks two months later.</text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/1550366.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2002/08/05/walq05.xml</altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date>August 2001</date>
              <text>The last secret meeting between US officials and the Taliban is held, in a 
								last ditch attempt to secure a pipeline deal. Talks break off, with the US allegedy 
								delivering a final	ultimatum of '<i>accept our carpet of gold (oil pipeline), or 
								you will receive a carpet of bombs</i>'. While some question whether this was in fact
								said (see article), the point is that talks which had been talking place for months over 
								a pipeline deal in Afghanistan finally broke down.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.globalpolicy.org/wtc/analysis/2002/0816salon.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <notes />
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>October 2001</date>
              <text>September 11th attacks give US excuse to declare war on Afghanistan. Mainstream media
                attempts to quash any theories that the war might be related to desires for a pipeline in
                Afghanistan.
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/1626889.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC Article</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>January 2002</date>
              <text>
                Former Unocal consultant 
                Zalmay Khalilzad appointed as new US special envoy to Afghanistan.</text>
              <url>http://news.independent.co.uk/world/asia_china/story.jsp?story=113662</url>
              <urlText>Independent article</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date>May 2002</date>
              <text> The leaders of Afghanistan, Pakistan and Turkmenistan agree to the construction of a 
                $2bn pipeline to bring gas from Central Asia to the sub-continent. 
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/2017044.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC Article</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date>December 2002</date>
              <text>White House announces 10 new bases in Afghanistan '<i>in hopes of boosting reconstruction 
                efforts and regional security</i>', whose locations
		        	  coincide with the route proposed by Unocal in 1998 for a gas pipeline
		        	  from Turkmenistan through Afghanistan to Pakistan.</text>
              <url>http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/354/nation/US_plans_to_install_bases_in_Afghanistan+.shtml</url>
              <urlText>Boston Globe article</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date>December 2002</date>
              <text>Deal signed to build gas pipeline across Afghanisatan.</text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/2608713.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

          </facts>
        </Subtopic>
        

        <Subtopic name="Iraqi History" shortName="Iraqi History">
          <facts>

            <Fact>
              <text>
                The following gives a summary of Iraq's history from WWI up to the |first_gulf_war first Gulf War|, 
                focusing on how US and British actions have shaped this history. This historical context is 
                important to understand when looking at what is happening in Iraq today (see the in-depth section
                on the |iraq Iraq War|).
              </text>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1914-1918</date>
              <text>
                During World War I, the Arab nations fight against the Turkish forces (aligned with Germany),
                contributing substantially to the Allied victory. In return they are promised aid
                and independence.
              </text>
              <url>http://zog.to/3/palestine/part1.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://islamicity.com/mosque/ihame/Sec14.htm
              	http://www.geocities.com/hlindner1/Writings/middleeast.htm
              	http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/cib/2000-01/01cib06.htm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1919</date>
              <text>
                The war has made everyone realise the strategic importance of oil, so even before the peace 
                conference begins in Paris in 1919 some underhand oil trading takes place. France, for example, 
                gives Britain the oil-rich area around Mosul in Iraq, in exchange for a share of the oil and 
                "a free hand" in Syria. Unfortunately, Britain had already promised Syria to the Syrians. It 
                becomes obvious to the Arabs that the guarantees of freedom and independence made during the 
                war by Britain and France would now mean nothing.
                <br><br>
                This is confirmed at the peace conference when the oil companies press their 
                governments to renounce all wartime promises to the Arabs - oil concessions and royalties 
                would be easier to negotiate with a series of rival Arab states, lacking any sense of unity, 
                than with a powerful independent Arab state in the Middle East.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.independent.co.uk/story.jsp?story=321252</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://islamicity.com/mosque/ihame/Sec14.htm
              	http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/cib/2000-01/01cib06.htm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>  
                At the Paris Peace Conference, Lawrence of Arabia warns England and the world that 
                unless the Arab world are granted their promised freedom and independence, his 
                great-grandchildren might one day have to fight a war in Iraq wearing gas masks.
              </text>
              <url>http://darringtonoutback.com/L.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=19091
              	http://www.lawrenceofarabia.info/life/telchron/year/1919.htm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>
                

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
                A commission set up by President Wilson warns that independence for states such as 
                Palestine, Syria and Iraq, should be granted as soon as possible. Further, the idea 
                of making Palestine into a Jewish commonwealth should be dropped.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.palestinecenter.org/cpap/documents/recommendations.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/cib/2000-01/01cib06.htm
              	http://www.independent.co.uk/story.jsp?story=321252
              	http://www.al-bushra.org/israel/king.htm
              	http://www.ralphmag.org/BI/king-crane-2.html
              	http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/History/crane.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
             	<text>
                The report is ignored, and rather than grant the Arab nations their promised independence,
                the whole Arab rectangle lying between the Mediterranean and the Persian frontier, including 
                Palestine, is placed under mandates to suit the foreign policies of Britain and France. 
                The Arabs have simply exchanged one imperial ruler, Turkey, for another, the West.
              </text>
              <url>http://islamicity.com/mosque/ihame/Sec14.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.independent.co.uk/story.jsp?story=321252
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1920</date>
              <text>
                Britain, France, and the U.S. seize the rights to 95% of the oil in Iraq. 
              </text>
              <url>http://www.rmbowman.com/isss/iraqsp.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
                Revolution begins almost immediately. The Iraqis try to kick out the British by raiding British 
                establishments and killing British troops. The British army retaliates with collective 
                punishment, burning to the ground every village from which any such attack was mounted. 
                Lawrence of Arabia writes to The Times suggesting, with heavy irony, that burning villages 
                was not very efficient. "By gas attacks, the whole population of offending districts could 
                be wiped out neatly, and as a method of government, it would be no more immoral than the 
                present system."<br><br>
                The grim truth was that something along these lines was being considered. Churchill, then 
                Secretary of State for Air and War, suggested that the RAF should take on the job of 
                subduing Iraq: '&lt;i>It would ... entail the provision of some kind of asphyxiating bombs 
                calculated to cause disablement of some kind but not death ... for use in preliminary 
                operations against turbulent tribes.&lt;/i>' In the end the RAF stuck to conventional 
                high-explosive bombs, a method we are still using today.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=19091</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.independent.co.uk/story.jsp?story=321252</altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1921</date>
              <text>
              	England installs Feisal as king of Iraq, kidnapping his popular opponent Sayid Taleb - who 
              	had gained popular support by threatening a nationwide revolt 
                if the Iraqis were not allowed to choose their own leader - and dispatching him to Ceylon
                (what is now Sri Lanka).
              </text>
              <url>http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=19091</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.independent.co.uk/story.jsp?story=321252
              	http://www.newint.org/issue316/history.htm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>
               
            <Fact>
              <date>1921-1958</date>
              <text>
                Feisal wins the election to become kind by one of those suspiciously high majorities  96.8%, 
                and he and his descendants hold power (interrupted by a few coups) for 30-odd years.
                Meanwhile, Britain installs Feisal's brother Abdullah as king of Jordan, and provides him with 
                money and troops in return for his promise to suppress anti-Zionist activity.
              </text>
              <url> http://www.independent.co.uk/story.jsp?story=321252</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=19091
              	http://www.newint.org/issue316/history.htm
              	http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/iraq/overview.htm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1958</date>
              <text>
                The US and UK back a coup against King Faisal II (who had himself been installed by the British),
                following a pattern whereby British intelligence had murdered almost every Iraqi leader and 
                king since the first world war, usually because they all called for the return of Kuwait.
                He is killed and replaced with Abdel Karim Qassim.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.rmbowman.com/isss/iraqsp.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.newint.org/issue316/history.htm</altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1959</date>
              <text>
                CIA employs Saddam Hussein in a botched attempted assassination of Kassim. The CIA then
                helps Saddam escape through Tikrit into Syria, where the CIA pays for his apartment 
                and puts him through a brief training course.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=20030410-070214-6557r</url>
              <urlText>UPI article</urlText>
              <notes>find more articles as they appear - news.google.com 'CIA Saddam 1959'</notes>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1960</date>
              <text>
                CIA attempts to kill Kassim using a poisoned handkerchief, following orders from CIA chief
                Allen Dulles.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/14/opinion/14MORR.html?pagewanted=print&position=top</url>
              <urlText>NY Times article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.theatlantic.com/unbound/flashbks/cia/powers.htm</altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1961</date>
              <link>iraq_nationalise_oil</link>
              <text>
                Current president (Abdul Karim Kassim) nationalises part of the concession of the 
                British-controlled Iraq Petroleum. He further annoys the US by restoring diplomatic 
                relations with the Soviet Union, lifting a ban on the Communist Party in Iraq, and 
                calling for the return of Kuwait.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.muslimedia.com/archives/features98/saddam.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/14/opinion/14MORR.html?pagewanted=print&position=top</altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Feb 1963</date>
              <link>iraq_overthrow_63</link>
              <text>
                CIA aids Saddam Hussein and his Ba'ath party in a bloody military coup (in which around 
                5,000 are estimated killed) which overthrows president Kassim and puts the Ba'ath party 
                into power. 
              </text>
              <url>http://www.bbc.co.uk/education/walden/sad_about2.shtml</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/14/opinion/14MORR.html?pagewanted=print&position=top
                http://www.muslimedia.com/archives/features98/saddam.htm
                http://www.disinfo.com/pages/article/id1751/pg1/
                http://www.tmtmetropolis.ru/stories/2003/03/21/120.html
                http://www.socialconscience.com/articles/2002/iraqgate/
                http://www.oceanbooks.com.au/iraq/articles2/294.html
                http://www.onlinejournal.com/Special_Reports/Chin103102/chin103102.html
                http://pilger.carlton.com/print/129139
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1963</date>
              <text>
                Following the coup, the Ba'ath party slaughters at least 800 communists using a 
                list provided by the CIA.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.socialistalternative.org/justice32/11.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
                http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=20030410-070214-6557r
                http://www.tmtmetropolis.ru/stories/2003/03/21/120.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1963</date>
              <text>
                The new Ba'athist regime has little popular support, and is  
                replaced by rival army officers after only 9 months in power.
              </text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <date>1968</date>
              <text>
                A second successful coup by the Ba'ath party, again with CIA cooperation. Following
                the coup, the party comes to be dominated by Saddam Hussein.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.mafhoum.com/press2/cia276_files/home_files/azpolitics_03.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
                http://www.newsbatch.com/iraq.htm
                http://www.socialconscience.com/articles/2002/iraqgate/
                http://www.tmtmetropolis.ru/stories/2003/03/21/120.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

						<Fact hide="true">
							<date>An 'iran started the war' view of the war</date>
							<text>
								The long-term historical cause of the war was the progressive
								breakdown, after Khomeini took power, of the 1975 Algiers
								accord. Usually viewed as a treaty settling key border disputes
								between Iran and Iraq, the accord was more importantly an
								agreement between Iran and Iraq not to interfere in each other's
								internal affairs. The Shah invoked this provision of the accord
								in 1978 when he called on Hussein to expel Khomeini from Iraq.
								When Iraq signed the accord, it hoped to settle three issues:
								the disputed border territories of Zain al-Qaws and Saif Saad,
								both strategic heights overlooking the Iraqi plains and occupied
								by Iran; the question of sovereignty over the Shatt al Arab
								waterway; and most important, the Kurdish revolt in the north,
								heavily and covertly supported by the shah in concert with
								Israel and the United States.
								
								Iraq agreed to give up sovereignty over half of the Shatt al
								Arab by moving its southeastern border away from the far shore
								of the waterway to the thalweg, the deepest part of the Shatt.
								Iraq's border with Iran had already been moved back twice in
								this century: once in 1913 by the Constantinople Protocol
								negotiated between the Persian and Ottoman empires and again in
								1937 by a League of Nations settlement. The rationale for this
								third border adjustment was that a thalweg is the line of
								demarcation normally used between countries when the border is
								along a waterway.
								
								In exchange for one-half of the Shatt al Arab, the Shah agreed
								to stop inciting the Kurds to rebellion and to return the
								occupied territories of Zain al-Qaws and Saif Saad, which make
								up 210 square miles along the middle section of the border.
								Four years later, when Khomeini returned to Qom, the religious
								center of Iran, Iran had still not returned Iraq's two
								territories, although Iran had taken official possession
								immediately of half of the Shatt al Arab.
								
								Iraq made a serious effort to establish good relations with the
								new Iranian regime, but the Algiers acord soon began to break
								down on two counts: Khomeini commenced a well-financed campaign
								to turn the Shiites in Iraq, who make up more than one-half of
								the population, against the Sunni-controlled government, and he
								stepped up violations of airspace and border clashes, which had
								largely ceased in 1975. By the summer preceding the Iraq's
								invasion, they were taking place almost daily.
								
								By the fall of 1979, a year before the war broke out, border
								hostilities were escalating and demonstrations were being staged
								in front of the Iraqi embassy and consulates in Iran. Armed
								attacks took place along the border, and an assault on the Iraqi
								embassy in Tehran in injured Iraqi diplomats.
								
								By spring 1980, top Iranian officials were proclaiming openly
								their intention to liberate Iraq from their Sunni oppressors. A
								prominent Iranian military official stated that Iraq was an
								integral part of Iran.
								
								Meanwhile, inside Iraq there were Iranian-sponsored
								assassination attempts on Hussein and members of his cabinet.
								Bombs exploded in several ministries and at the Mustansiriyah
								University, killing and wounding hundreds.
								
								In summer 1980 Iran began to mass its army along the border in
								larger numbers and fired several times on Iraqi oil
								installations. On September 4 Iran shelled the Iraqi towns of
								Khanaqin, Mandali, Naft Kanch, and Zarbatiyah. In the minds of
								Iraqi leaders, the war began with that shelling.
								
								Iraq called on the Iranian government to review the terms of the
								Algiers accord, giving Iran a last chance to avoid war and still
								save face, and informed Iran that it was going to remove, by
								force if necessary, the occupying troops if they did not leave
								voluntarily.
								
								Again, Iran opened fire. It struck oil installations, attacked
								Mandali from the air, fired on Iraqi ships in the Shatt al Arab,
								and shelled Basra, Iraq's primary port.
								
								On September 22, 1980, Hussein launched an invasion of Iran,
								within 6 days occupying a substantial belt along the border. He
								then called for a cease-fire and negotiations, both of which
								Khomeni unequivocally turned down.
							</text>
						</Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1980</date>
              <text>
                US National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski allegedly meets with Saddam two months before
                the war, assuring Saddam that the US would not oppose intervention in Iran. 
              </text>
              <url>http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=40&ItemID=2292</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.rmbowman.com/isss/iraqsp.htm	
              	http://rwor.org/A/V24/1161-1170/1165/us-iraq.htm
              	http://www.finalcall.com/perspectives/iraq_us10-01-2002.htm
              	http://indyhawaii.org/news/2003/03/1212.php
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
                US Secretary of State Alexander Haig would confirm in 
                <a href="http://www.consortiumnews.com/2003/haig-docs.html">these declassified documents</a> 
                the following year that '<i>President Carter gave the Iraqis a green light to launch the 
                war against Iran</i>'.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.consortiumnews.com/2003/haig-docs.html</url>
              <urlText>Declassified documents</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.consortiumnews.com/2003/022703a.html
              	http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=40&ItemID=2292
              	http://www.finalcall.com/perspectives/iraq_us10-01-2002.htm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
            	<link>both_sides</link>
              <date>1980-1988</date>
              <text>
              	Iraq fights a war with Iran. During this war, Saddam commits the atrocities which the Bush
              	Administration now condemns him for - the use of chemical weapons against the Iranians. Despite
              	these atrocities being well known to the US, the US sold many chemical/biological agents to Iraq
              	during this time, including many strains of anthrax, and also provided cluster bombs and 
              	intelligence. 
              </text>
              <url>
              	http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A52241-2002Dec29&notFound=true
              </url>
              <urlText>Washington Post article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,866942,00.html
              	http://stacks.msnbc.com/news/795649.asp?cp1=1
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
            	<link></link>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	Throughout the war the US also provided strategic operational advice to the Iraqis, such as
              	a secret message from Reagan to Saddam in 1986 telling him that Iraq should step up its 
              	air war and bombing of Iran, and intelligence assistance to Iraq during the war in the 
              	form of satellite photography to help the Iraqis understand how Iranian forces were deployed.
              </text>
              <url>
              	http://stacks.msnbc.com/news/795649.asp?cp1=1
              </url>
              <urlText>MSNBC article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
            	<link>rumsfeld_83</link>
              <date>1983</date>
              <text>
              	Shortly after the secretary of state, George Shultz, is passed intelligence reports of "almost 
              	daily use of CW [chemical weapons]" by Iraq, Ronald Reagan signs a secret order instructing the 
              	administration to do "whatever was necessary and legal" to prevent Iraq losing the war.             	
              	Donald Rumsfeld meets Saddam Hussein the following month in Baghdad and passes on 
              	the US willingness to help his regime and restore full diplomatic relations.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,866942,00.html</url>
              <urlText>Guardian article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A52241-2002Dec29&notFound=true
              	http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0802-01.htm
              	http://stacks.msnbc.com/news/795649.asp?cp1=1
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1984</date>
              <text>
              	US releases following statement '<i>The United States finds the present Iranian 
              	regime's intransigent refusal to deviate from its avowed objective of eliminating 
              	the legitimate government of neighboring Iraq to be inconsistent with the accepted 
              	norms of behavior among nations and the moral and religious basis which it claims.</i>'
              	Or were they referring to Bush's policy today?
              </text>
              <url>http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/press.htm</url>
              <urlText>Declassified documents</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1985-1986</date>
              <text>
              	Despite backing Iraq in the war, the US secretly sells weapons to Iran to fund the
              	|nicaragua Nicaraguan contras| in what later becomes the Iran-Contra scandal.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/reagan.years/whitehouse/iran.html</url>
              <urlText>CNN article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <date>1987</date>
              <text>
              	US destroys three Iranian offshore oil platforms as part of the Iraq-Iran war.
              	Iran is currently sueing the US for compensation through the International Court of Justice.
              	Iran is <a href="http://www.buzzflash.com/alerts/03/02/18_Spiegel.html">further sueing the 
              	US for supplying Iraq with dangerous chemicals and deadly viruses </a>	during the war.
              	US newspapers <a href="http://www.guerrillanews.com/media/doc1129.html">fail to pickup the story</a>
              	as the US prepares for war against Iraq over these very WMD the US supplied in the first place.
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2771993.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030217/ap_wo_en_ge/eu_gen_world_court_iran_us_2
              	http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/0,1518,236508,00.html
              	http://www.icj-cij.org/icjwww/idocket/iop/iopframe.htm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
                Right up to the time of Saddam's invasion of Kuwait, US Department of Defense training 
                manuals sang the praises of Saddam Hussein, noting how he had vastly improved education, 
                medical care, and the standard of living of his people. His regime was called one of the 
                most enlightened, progressive governments in the region. This was in an official DoD 
                document used in the education of high-ranking officers of all the military services.              
              </text>
              <url>http://www.rmbowman.com/isss/iraqsp.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>
         </facts>
        </Subtopic>


        <Subtopic name="Lebanon" hide="true">
					
				</Subtopic>


        <Subtopic name="Iran" link="iranian">
          <facts>

            <Fact>
              <date>1951</date>
              <text>
              	Iran's Parliament votes to nationalize the oil industry, and legislators backing the 
              	law elect its leading advocate, Dr. Mossadegh, as prime minister. Britain, not happy with
              	the 
              	<a href="http://www.lobster-magazine.co.uk/articles/l30iran.htm">compensation offered</a> 
              	for the oil nationalization, responds with threats and sanctions.
							</text>
              <url>
              	http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/mideast/041600iran-cia-chapter1.html
              </url>
              <urlText>NY Times In-depth</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.iranchamber.com/history/mmosaddeq/mohammad_mosaddeq.php
              	http://www.iranchamber.com/history/oil_nationalization/oil_nationalization.php
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1953</date>
              <text>A CIA covert operation succeeds in overthrowing Iran's democratic government and 
                installing the Shah as dictator.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/mideast/041600iran-cia-index.html</url>
              <urlText>NY Times In-depth</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.iranchamber.com/history/coup53/coup53p1.php
              	http://www.bowlingforcolumbine.com/library/wonderful/iran.php
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1953-1979</date>
              <text>The CIA, through SAVAK - the Iranian secret police - launchs a reign of terror on 
                the civilian population. In 1976, Amnesty International said SAVAK had the worst human 
                rights record on the planet, their CIA-textbook torture techniques were 'beyond belief.' 
							</text>
              <url>http://www.neravt.com/left/cia.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.cia-on-campus.org/usc.edu/mccone.html</altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	After the 1979 revolution, the Iranians find a CIA film made for SAVAK on how 
              	to torture women.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.workingforchange.com/article.cfm?ItemId=12216</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.intellnet.org/resources/american_terrorism/US-Torture.html
              	http://www.commoncouragepress.com/course/course_archive_2_31.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1954</date>
              <text>Iran announces an oil deal with British, French and American oil companies
							</text>
              <url>http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/mideast/080654iran-statements.html</url>
              <urlText>NY Times article</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>
            
            <Fact>
              <date>1979</date>
              <text>Growing opposition to the dictatorship
                of the Shah causes him to flee, and he is replaced by the leader of 
                the Shah's opponents, Ayatollah Khomeini, who returns from exile to be greeted by 
                adoring millions. The Ayatollah's fiery brand of nationalism and Islamic 
                fundamentalism leads to the efficient establishment of a clergy-dominated Islamic 
                Republic, where the USA is styled as the 'Great Satan' and Israel fares not much 
                better.
	        </text>
              <url>http://www.lonelyplanet.com/destinations/middle_east/iran/history.htm</url>
              <urlText>Lonely Planet Guide</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.iranchamber.com/history/white_revolution/white_revolution.php
              	http://www.iranchamber.com/history/islamic_revolution/islamic_revolution.php
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>
   

           <Fact>
              <date>2002</date>
              <text>In Bush's first State of the Union speech, he includes Iran in what he terms the
                'Axis of Evil'. His <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/09/20/gen.bush.transcript/">answer</a>
                to why they hate us is that they hate what we stand for - freedom and democracy. Right on Bush.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/01/30/ret.axis.facts/</url>
              <urlText>CNN Fact Sheet</urlText>
              <altUrls>
             </altUrls>
            </Fact>
             
           <Fact>
              <date>2003</date>
              <text>In Bush's State of the Union speech this year  he claims '<i>Iranians, like all people, 
                have 
                a right to choose their own government, and determine their own destiny, and the United States 
                supports their aspirations to live in freedom.</i>'. I just hope hes not lining up
                Iran to give it a second dose of help in this area.
							</text>
              <url>http://asia.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/01/28/sotu.transcript/</url>
              <urlText>CNN Transcript</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=20030128-083443-9087r
             </altUrls>
            </Fact>             
          </facts>
        </Subtopic>

				
        <Subtopic name="Libya">
        	<notes>
        		http://www.fpp.co.uk/BoD/Mossad/
        		
        		Lebanon - Mr. Ostrovsky says the Israelis had advance notice of the suicide attack that killed 241 Marines in Beirut in October 1983 but WITHHELD the information from the United States, allowing the Marines to be killed, in the hope that the attack would poison American Arab relations.
       		</notes>

          <facts>
            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	A look at how Libya, a member of Bush's extended 'axis of evil' was prodded into its current rogue 
              	status in part through |israel_libyan_airliner terrorism| and |mossad_libya misinformation| by 
              	Israel, and also the hyprocisy of the US stance in imposing sanctions in response to the Lockerbie 
              	bombing despite very shaky evidence, and after having performed a |us_libya_bombing similar act| 
              	against Libya only two years prior to the bombing. 
              </text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1969</date>
              <text>
              	Colonel Qaddafi leads a successful military coup against the pro-Western monarchy and takes power.
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/country_profiles/819291.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC country profile</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.washington-report.org/backissues/1099/9910022.html</altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	Qaddafi pursues a pan-Arab agenda by attempting to form mergers with several Arab countries, and 
              	introduces state socialism by nationalising most economic activity, including the oil industry.
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/country_profiles/1398437.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC timeline</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
            	<link>israel_libyan_airliner</link>
              <date>Feb 1973</date>
              <text>
              	111 passengers and crewmembers are killed in the crash of a Libyan commercial airliner 
              	downed by Israeli guns as it descends, slightly off course during a dust storm, over 
              	Israeli-occupied Egyptian Sinai for a routine landing at Cairo International Airport.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.washington-report.org/backissues/1099/9910022.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact hide="true">
              <date>Jan 1986</date>
              <text>
								The US begins sanctions against Libya, freezing Libyan assets after becoming convinced 
								that the country is sponsoring international terrorism.
							</text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/1148057.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
            	<link>mossad_libya</link>
              <date>Feb 1986</date>
              <text>
              	According to an ex-Mossad agent, the Mossad (the Israeli secret service) Israel plants a 
              	communications device called 'the Trojan' in the top floor of an apartment house in Tripoli, 
              	Libya. The device can receive messages broadcast by Mossad, Israel's foreign intelligence service, 
              	on one frequency and automatically relay them on a different frequency used by the Libyan government.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.wrmea.com/archives/december01/0112017.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://abbc.com/islam/english/terror/ostrov3.htm</altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
								The Trojan broadcasts a series of fraudulent terrorist orders to various Libyan embassies. 
								Spanish and French intelligence pick up the broadcasts and conclude they are fake. The United 
								States, encouraged by its 'ally' Israel - which knows the broadcasts are Mossad 
								disinformation - concludes that they are genuine.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.wrmea.com/archives/december01/0112017.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.washington-report.org/backissues/0495/9504058.htm</altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
            	<link>us_libya_bombing</link>
              <date>April 1986</date>
              <text>
								Only a few weeks after the Trojan broadcasts began, the La Belle Discotheque in West Berlin 
								is bombed, killing two American soldiers and a Turkish woman. Assuming (based on the Trojan
								broadcasts) that Libya had bombed La Belle, a club frequented by US soldiers, President 
								Ronald Reagan sends planes from England and from US aircraft carriers in the Mediterranean 
								to bomb the Libyan cities of Tripoli and Benghazi. More than 100 Libyans are killed, including 
								Qaddafi's adopted young daughter.								
							</text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/country_profiles/1398437.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC timeline</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.wrmea.com/archives/december01/0112017.html
              	http://www.washington-report.org/backissues/0495/9504058.htm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
								France and Germany later conclude that the bomb in La Belle had been the work of local
								Iranian militants.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.guardian.co.uk/Lockerbie/Story/0,2763,740115,00.html</url>
              <urlText>Guardian article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>July 1988</date>
              <text>
              	The US frigate Vincennes shoots down an Iran Air airliner on a routine flight to Saudi 
              	Arabia, killing everyone on board. After hesitating to even apologize for the mistake, the 
              	US eventually pays compensation for the loss of life, albeit at the minimum rates required 
              	by international law, and gives the Vincennes' captian two decorations.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.guardian.co.uk/Lockerbie/Story/0,2763,740115,00.html</url>
              <urlText>Guardian article</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <date>Dec 21, 1988</date>
              <text>
              	38 minutes after takeoff, Pan Am Airways Flight 103 explodes over Lockerbie, Scotland, killing all 
              	269 passengers, most of them Americans, and 11 people on the ground.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.americanradioworks.org/features/lockerbie/story/aviv_frameset.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.wrmea.com/archives/december01/0112017.html</altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Dec 22, 1988</date>
              <text>
              	The US intercepts a radio message from Tripoli (where the trojan was installed) to a Libyan 
              	government office in Berlin, saying in effect, 'mission accomplished', heightening US suspicians
              	that Libya is responsible and drawing attention away from the 
              	<a href="http://www.americanradioworks.org/features/lockerbie/story/chap_nav5.html">initial 
              	suspect</a> - |iranian Iran|.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.guardian.co.uk/Lockerbie/Story/0,2763,740115,00.html</url>
              <urlText>Guardian article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.americanradioworks.org/features/lockerbie/resources/pdf/me_report.pdf
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1989</date>
              <text>
              	Pan Am's insurers, anticipating lawsuits from victims' families, carry out their own 
              	investigation, concluding that the bomb was placed in Frankfurt (from where the plane 
              	took off, and not in Valletta as the official story goes), and was done by a Palestinian 
              	resistance movement targeting the US Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA).
							</text>
              <url>http://www.guardian.co.uk/Lockerbie/Story/0,2763,740115,00.html</url>
              <urlText>Guardian article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.radio4all.org/pfp/panam103.html
              	http://www.gordonthomas.ie/Articles/lockerbie.htm
              	http://www.americanradioworks.org/features/lockerbie/resources/story_aviv.html
              	http://www.welfarestate.com/panam103/unproven.txt
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
            	<link>interfor_report</link>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	The actual report is available here. It is written by a former Mossad agent, and tells a 
              	much more interesting tale than the official story. It notes a number of warnings given 
              	prior to the bombing, i.e. '<i>About three weeks prior to the disaster, a Mossad agent ... 
              	tipped his HQ that a major terrorist attack would take place at Frankfurt airport against a 
              	US airline. Mossad HQ warned CIA HQ and BKA (German Federal Police Agency) HQ</i>', '<i>two days 
              	before the disaster a BKA undercover agent reported to his superiors a plan to bomb a PanAm 
              	flight in the next few days. BKA passed the intelligence to the CIA</i>', and '<i>An 
              	undercover Mossad agent tipped BKA within 24 hours before takeoff as to the plan to place a 
              	bomb on that very PanAm flight</i>'.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.americanradioworks.org/features/lockerbie/resources/pdf/interfor_report.pdf</url>
              <urlText>Interfor report</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.americanradioworks.org/features/lockerbie/resources/documents.html
              	http://www.guardian.co.uk/Lockerbie/3_Col_Story/0,2763,206620,00.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	A warning posted at the US embassy in Moscow a week prior to the attack is also available online.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.americanradioworks.org/features/lockerbie/resources/pdf/warning_2.pdf</url>
              <urlText>Memo</urlText>
              <altUrls>
								http://www.americanradioworks.org/features/lockerbie/resources/pdf/warning_1.pdf
              	http://www.americanradioworks.org/features/lockerbie/resources/documents.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	Also exposed in the report is a drug-smuggling operation which appears to have had something 
              	to do with the bombing. A number of US intelligence operatives were killed in the bombing. The 
              	report suggests they were planning to expose the drug-smuggling operation and thus were killed (i.e. 
              	<a href="http://www.radio4all.org/pfp/panam103.html">Time reported</a> that Charles McKee (an 
              	Army Major <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/493242.stm">aboard the aircraft</a>) had discovered that a rogue CIA team in Frankfurt, called COREA, 
              	was protecting the drug route). The report claims the DEA (Drug Enforcement Agency), CIA, and BKA
              	were all involved in the smuggling. 
							</text>
              <url>http://www.americanradioworks.org/features/lockerbie/story/story_frame13.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
								http://www.radio4all.org/pfp/panam103.html
              	http://www.americanradioworks.org/features/lockerbie/resources/documents.html
              	http://www.bk2k.com/bushbodycount/iran-contra/bodies2.shtml
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
								A NBC News report confirms this idea, reporting that Pan Am flights out of Frankfurt had been 
								used by the DEA to fly informants and heroin into Detroit as part of a sting operation, and that 
								it was investigating whether the terrorists might have discovered what the DEA was doing and 
								switched one of their (drug) bags with one containing the bomb. This is in fact exactly
								what the |interfor_report Interfor report| claims did happen - '<i>a BKA surveillance
								agent watching that PanAm flight's loading noticed that the "drug" suitcase substituted
								was different in make, shape, material and colour from that used for all previous drug
								shipments</i>'.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.radio4all.org/pfp/panam103.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
								http://www.americanradioworks.org/features/lockerbie/story/story_frame13.html
              	http://www.americanradioworks.org/features/lockerbie/resources/documents.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
								Other sources confirm the drug-smuggling aspect, including a senior source responsible 
								for overseeing the Lockerbie investigation for the German government, and 
								<a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/Lockerbie/3_Col_Story/0,2763,206620,00.html">a farmer</a>
								who found a suitcase full of cellophane packets containing white powder among the debris in 
								his fields.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.americanradioworks.org/features/lockerbie/story/story_frame13.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
								The London Times quotes an ex-DIA agent, Mr Coleman, as saying that the DEA, together with the 
								narcotics squad of the Cypriot national police, the German BKA police and British customs, ran 
								a 'drugs sting operation' through Cyprus and airports in Europe including Frankfurt.
								He was told that BKA had 'serious concerns' that a US drugs sting operation out of Cyprus had 
								been used by terrorists to place the bomb on flight 103, by switching bags.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.welfarestate.com/panam103/times.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/074751562X/socialconscience/002-5855569-1460018
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	Since the publication of the |interfor_report Interfor report|, the US Government has 
              	gone to great lengths in failed attempts to discredit the writer. The DEA has also denied
              	the existance of any drug-smuggling route involving the Pan Am flight.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.americanradioworks.org/features/lockerbie/resources/story_aviv.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.americanradioworks.org/features/lockerbie/resources/pdf/atty_letter.pdf
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <date>1992</date>
              <text>
              	The UN imposes sanctions on Libya in an effort to force it to hand over for trial in the UK 
              	or the US two of its citizens who are suspected of involvement in the Pan-Am bombing.
							</text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/country_profiles/1398437.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC timeline</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/1148057.stm</altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	Libya was prepared to hand the suspects over for trial in Malta (where the alleged crime took
              	place), but not Scotland or the UK.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.guardian.co.uk/Lockerbie/Story/0,2763,740115,00.html</url>
              <urlText>Guardian article</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <date>1999</date>
              <text>
              	The suspects are finally handed over for trial and the UN lifts some of the sanctions, however the
              	US retains its own unilateral sanctions, pending compensation for the Lockerbie victims' 
              	relatives.
							</text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/1148057.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/country_profiles/1398437.stm
              	http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/1155521.stm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Jan 31, 2001</date>
              <text>
              	A Scottish tribunal at Camp Zeist, an old American military base near Amsterdam, the Netherlands,
              	sentences Abdel Basset Ali Mohammad Megrahi, a Libyan, to life imprisonment for destroying Pan Am 
              	Flight 103.
							</text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/1868394.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.wrmea.com/archives/december01/0112017.html</altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	 Robert Black, the Scottish law professor who devised the format of the Netherlands-based trial,
              	 is '<i>absolutely astounded</i>' at the guilty verdict, and believes the prosecution had '<i>a 
              	 very, very weak circumstantial case</i>'. He is reluctant to believe that Scottish judges would 
              	 '<i>convict anyone, even a Libyan</i>' on such evidence.
							</text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/1154649.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/1152550.stm
              	http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/1820113.stm
              	http://www.americanradioworks.org/features/lockerbie/story/story_frame11.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	 A United Nations observer at the trial notes that the decision appeared to be politically
              	 motivated, with pressure from the US and UK. He notes '<i>The present judgment is logically 
              	 inconsistent ... You cannot come out with a verdict of guilty for one and innocent for the 
              	 other when they were both being tried with the same evidence ... In my opinion, there seemed 
              	 to be considerable political influence on the judges and the verdict.</i>'
							</text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/scotland/2002/lockerbie_appeal/1773868.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.americanradioworks.org/features/lockerbie/story/story_frame12.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <date>August 2001</date>
              <text>
              	|bush Bush| imposes a five-year extension to sanctions against Libya and Iran, accusing them of
              	involvement in international terrorism, and demanding Libya accept responsibility for the 
              	Lockerbie bombing and pay compensation to relatives.
							</text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1473176.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>May 2002</date>
              <text>
              	Libya, along with Cuba and Syria, is added to Bush's 'axis of evil'.
							</text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1975588.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>May 2002</date>
              <text>
              	Libya, while still denying responsibility for the Pan-Am bombing, offers $2.7 billion 
              	in compensation to the victims' families if the UN and US sanctions against it are lifted.
              	However, for the UN and US this is not enough - an admission is required.
							</text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/2013816.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/2179479.stm
              	http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/2845661.stm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Sept 12, 2003</date>
              <text>
              	The UN finally lifts sanctions against Libya after Libya accepts responsbility for the 
              	Lockerbie bombing and offers to pay compensation for the downing of a 1989 UTA flight above 
              	Niger which claimed 170 lives, something for which it has never accepted responsibility.
							</text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/3102342.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/3104744.stm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Oct 20, 2003</date>
              <text>
              	Talks on the UTA case between Libya and France stall, with Libya wanting Paris to honour a deal 
              	to compensate for Libyan deaths as a result of French involvement in Chad, and France wanting Libya 
              	to pay the same amount of money it is giving relatives of the Lockerbie air bombing victims. Libya
              	also continues to insist that six Libyans convicted by France in absentia for the attack were innocent.
							</text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/3208860.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/3189130.stm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>


          </facts>
        </Subtopic>



				<Subtopic name="Greece" hide="true">
					<facts>
						<Fact>
							<text>
								A lot of work to do on this topic. 
							</text>
						</Fact>
						
						<Fact>
							<date>1947</date>
              <text>
                Following the end of the war, Britain has imposed the rule of royalist elements and
                former Nazi collaborators, suppressing the anti-Nazi resistance. Britain is however unable 
                to cope with the resistance, so the US takes over the task of destroying the Communist-led 
                peasant and worker-based nationalist movement which had fought the Nazis, while maintaining 
                in power its own favourites.
							</text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<text>
                Worth noting is that the Soviet Union refused to provide assistance to the Greek communists and 
                refrained from interfering in the struggle.
							</text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>


						<Fact>
							<text>
                The counterinsurgency effort leads the country into civil war, resulting in 160,000 Greeks being 
                killed and 800,000 refugees.
                80,000/700,000 - http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/m1373/10_49/56459146/p1/article.jhtml
							</text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>


						<Fact>
							<date>Feb 1948</date>
              <text>
                A CIA study warns that in the event of a rebel victory, the US would face 
                '<i>the possible loss of the petroleum resources of the Middle East (comprising
                40% of world reserves)</i>'.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.zmag.org/chomsky/dd/dd-c01-s17.html</url>
              <urlText>Chomsky book extract</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<text>
							  The US shamelessly manipulates the electoral process to ensure the right men win.
               </text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<text>
								One of the costs of the US's victory against freedom and democracy in Greece was that the
								intervention effectively marked the start of the cold war.
							</text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
              <date>1959-1963</date>
							<text>
                Almost a third of the Greek labor force emigrates in search of satisfactory employment.
							</text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>1960s</date>
							<text>
							 The US supports a military police state that brutalizes much of the Greek citizenry.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.peacehost.net/mdpc/specialreport.html</url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<text>
							</text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<text>
							</text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>
					</facts>
				</Subtopic>

        <Subtopic name="Post-war Aftermath in Afghanistan and Kuwait" shortName="Post-war aftermath">
          <facts>

            <Fact>
              <date>Feb 2001</date>
              <text>
              	10 years following Bush's liberation of Kuwait in the name of democracy, a CNN Correspondant 
              	notes that Kuwait is still as undemocratic as it always was.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/meast/02/25/amanpour.debrief/</url>
              <urlText>CNN article</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	The CIA World Factbook describes the government type as a 'nominal constitutional monarchy'
              	under which only 10% of the population (no females) are allowed to vote.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/ku.html</url>
              <urlText>CIA World Factbook</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/02/27/1046064163865.html
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Feb 2003</date>
              <text>
              	Bush's new budget fails to request any money for humanitarian and reconstruction funds 
              	for Afghanistan, despite Bush's repeated claims the US will not walk away from the 
              	Afghan people. Congress steps in to find nearly $300m - this pales however in comparison to
              	the $10 billion the World Bank and UN estimate is required for reconstruction alone.
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/2759789.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/2823557.stm
              	http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/2857017.stm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Mar 2003</date>
              <text>
								The UN-funded anti-narcotics agency <a href="http://www.incb.org/e/ar/2002/incb_report_2002_3.pdf">
								report</a> says Afghanistan has again become the world's largest producer of opium with a 
								significant upsurge in 2002 (3,400 tonnes up from 185 tonnes the previous year). Poppy cultivation 
								in Afghanistan had significantly dropped until a US-led military coalition removed the hardline 
								Islamic Taleban regime from power in its war on terrorism. The Taleban had imposed extremely harsh 
								punishments on poppy growers - which accounted for the decline in opium. 
              </text>
              <url>http://www.poppies.org/news/104626735864579.shtml</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/2814861.stm
              	http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/2798603.stm
                http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/2202148.stm
              	http://www.incb.org/e/ar/2002/incb_report_2002_3.pdf
              	http://www.rferl.org/nca/features/2002/02/27022002094302.asp
              	http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/1834118.stm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
								Afhganistan looks set to repeat its bumper crop again this year.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.msnbc.com/news/936986.asp</url>
              <urlText>MSNBC article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A35639-2003Jul9.html
              	http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/03194/201663.stm
              	http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2003-07-07-afghanistan-usat_x.htm
              	http://www.greenleft.org.au/current/544p14.htm
              	http://www.canoe.ca/CNEWS/WarOnTerrorism/2003/06/17/113421-ap.html
              	http://www.msnbc.com/news/930618.asp?0cv=NB10
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
								Looking at things historically, Afghanistan opium production only gained international significance 
								when, beginning in 1979, the CIA began financing the Mujahedden. Under CIA protection, the 
								Mujaheddin made Afghanistan the world's largest supplier of heroin by 1981. The CIA's involvement 
								in the drug trade ended with the civil war's end in '92, however the drugs continued, even after 
								the Taliban overthrew the government in '96. It finally ended when the Taliban, under international 
								pressure, banned the cultivation in 2000. This brought about a significant drop in the opium 
								production, the only exception being the areas controlled by the Northern Alliance, whom the US 
								then backed in overthrowing the Taliban.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.greenleft.org.au/current/544p14.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.greenleft.org.au/back/2001/465/465p15.htm
              	http://www.cedro-uva.org/lib/boekhout.drug.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>


						<Fact hide="true">
              <date>Afghanistan and broken promises</date>
              <text>
								http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/EE27Ag01.html
								http://www.observer.co.uk/review/story/0,6903,962905,00.html
              </text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

						<Fact>
              <date>October 2003</date>
              <text>
								Amnesty International <a href="http://www.web.amnesty.org/library/index/engasa110232003">reports</a>
								(and Human Rights Watch <a href="http://www.hrw.org/reports/2003/afghanistan0703/12.htm#_Toc46287032">confirms</a>)
								that little has improved for the women of Afghanistan
								since the fall of the Taliban - women are not protected by the criminal justice system,
								and forced marriages, rapes and domestic violence still occurring frequently.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.billingsgazette.com/index.php?id=1&display=rednews/2003/10/06/build/world/40-afghan-women.inc</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.web.amnesty.org/library/index/engasa110232003
              	http://www.hrw.org/reports/2003/afghanistan0703/12.htm#_Toc46287032
              	http://www.guardian.co.uk/afghanistan/story/0,1284,1056388,00.html
              	http://www.aljazeerah.info/Opinion%20editorials/2003%20Opinion%20Editorials/October/9%20o/No%20solution%20on%20the%20horizon%20for%20Afghan%20women's%20predicament%20Farhan%20Bokhari.htm
              	http://paktribune.com/news/index.php?id=40571
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>


          </facts>
        </Subtopic>

			</subtopics>
		</Topic>

    <Topic name="Latin America">
      <subtopics>
        
       <Subtopic name="Latin America Overview" shortName="Overview" forcebg="true" nocomment="true">
          <facts>

            <Fact>
              <date>
              
              </date>
              <text>
								<table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="6" align="right" valign="top" border="0"><tr><td valign=top><img src="che-guevara.jpg" border="0"></td></tr></table>
								The US has a long history of involvement with Latin America. I am focusing here on the past
                50 or so years, revealing a disturbing pattern whereby whenever a Latin American government tries 
                to alleviate the plight of its poor (the vast majority of Latin American's today still
                live in poverty), the US does its best to remove the government
                (typically through a military coup). The countries are then invariably ruled by some form of 
                repressive dictatorship more acceptable to US interests.<br><br>
                The standard excuse for the US's actions in Latin America throughout the 50s - 80s
                was Cold War concerns, and some would claim that as this reason/excuse no longer exists today,
                this history is not relevant, as the CIA would not do such things today.
                However, the recent case of |venezuela Venezuela| gives cause for concern that this doesn't 
                hold true.<br><br>
                A further concern is that, even if the political climate today is sufficiently improved
                such that the US is unable to so blatantly further its business interests at the expense of
                the Latin Americans as it has in the past, the fact remains that the US's actions over the past 
                30 years have left Latin America in a poor state, where many of the countries' peoples work 
                as effective slaves to us in the West, often forced by the |imf IMF / World Bank| to do so in order 
                to repay ridiculous debts, and not only do we do little to help, but we do our best to ensure 
                they stay in this state and we make little effort to right the wrongs caused by our past actions 
                which put these countries in the mess in the first place (the clearest case of this being 
                |nicaragua Nicaragua|, as can be see directly below).
              </text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
            </Fact>

          </facts>
        </Subtopic>
       
        <Subtopic name="Nicaragua">
          <facts>
            <Fact>
              <date>1979</date>
              <text>Ruthless, repressive, pro-US and US-backed dictatorship of Somoza overthrown. 
                New government 'Sandinistas' formed. The Sandinistas make dramatic improvements 
                in nutrition, health care (reducing infant mortality to a third of the rate previously)
                and literacy (<a href="http://www.mediamonitors.net/mosaddeq13.html">increasing 
                literacy from 25% to 80%</a>).
              </text>
              <url>http://www.lonelyplanet.com/destinations/central_america/nicaragua/history.htm</url>
              <urlText>Lonely Planet guide</urlText>
              <notes>
                Add how Somoza got there in the first place (after a CIA-coup??) - http://www.ppu.org.uk/war/countries/america/nicaragua.html
                Add Phillipines ...  
              </notes>
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>An Oxfam report entitled 'The Threat of a Good Example' (which sums up precisely
                the threat posed to the US by Nicaragua) on the Sandinistas concludes '<i>
                in Oxfam's experience of working in seventy-six developing countries, Nicaragua was to 
                prove exceptional in the strength of that government commitment [to meeting the basic 
                needs of the poor majority]</i>'. This should be contrasted with Nicaragua's neighbours
                at the time (|guatemala Guatemala| and |el El Salvador|) who, as this article reports, had 
                '<i>military dictatorships responsible for the sheer institutionalisation of state terror, 
                installed and propped up by the US. Tens of thousands of civilians were regularly 
                slaughtered by government death squads trained and armed by the CIA. The vast majority 
                of the populations were impoverished</i>'.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.mediamonitors.net/mosaddeq13.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.understandingpower.com/Chapter2.htm</altUrls>
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <date>1983</date>
              <text>The CIA responds, under Reagan, by creating a paramilitary force to 'stop the flow
				        of military supplies from Nicaragua to |el El Salvador|' (despite <a href="http://www.mediamonitors.net/mosaddeq13.html">
				        little evidence</a> of this actually occuring). The force grows to around 50,000 
				        in the late 80s, and throughout the 80s mounts raids on Nicaragua, attacking schools 
				        and medical clinics, raping, kidnapping, torturing, massacres, mining harbours etc etc.
				      </text>
              <url>http://www.cpa.org.au/garchve2/1010wars.html</url>
              <urlText>Guardian article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://eightiesclub.tripod.com/id263.htm
              	http://www.wakeupmag.co.uk/articles/cia5.htm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>
            
            <Fact>
              <date>1984</date>
              <text>Reagan publicly claims to stop aid to 'contras', however continues aid despite
	              a congress ban, leading to Iran-contra scandal.
	            </text>
              <url>http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/reagan.years/whitehouse/iran.html</url>
              <urlText>CNN article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.cpa.org.au/garchve2/1010wars.html</altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1984</date>
              <text>Elections are held in Nicaragua and Sandinistas win with 67% of the vote. International
              observer teams comment that they are the fairest elections to have been held in Latin 
              America in many years.
	            </text>
              <url>http://www.lonelyplanet.com/destinations/central_america/nicaragua/history.htm</url>
              <urlText>Lonely Planet guide</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.mediamonitors.net/mosaddeq13.html
              	http://www.nicaraguasc.org.uk/overview/
              	http://www.globalexchange.org/tours/profile/nicaragua/history.html
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1984</date>
              <text>
              	Associated Press discloses a 90 page CIA-produced training manual called "Psychological 
              	Operations in Guerrilla Warfare" giving advice for the contras on political assassinations, 
              	blackmailing, mob violence, kidnappings and blowing up public buildings, and calling for 
              	'implicit |us_terror terror|'.
	            </text>
              <url>http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/cold.war/episodes/18/documents/cia.ops/</url>
              <urlText>CNN article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.wakeupmag.co.uk/articles/cia5.htm
              	http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/cold.war/episodes/18/documents/cia.contra/index.html
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

						<Fact hide="true">
              <date>1986</date>
              <text>
              	In order to provide justification for the war, the CIA launches an operation whereby a
              	pilot named Barry Seal flies a plane to Columbia, picks up some cocaine, flies this to
              	Nicaragua where he makes an 'emergency landing' at a commercial airfield, and then 
              	(using hidden cameras on the plane) photographs a Nicaraguan helping him offload and 
              	reload the boxes of cocaine. The photos are then shown by Reagan on national TV to prove
              	the Sandinistas are criminals intent on addicting America's youth.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.guerrillanews.com/intelligence/doc1785.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.fair.org/extra/8807/nicaragua-drug.html
              	http://www.sfbg.com/nessie/44.html
              </altUrls>
              <notes>
              	http://www.darkconspiracy.com/conspiracies/bigbrother/inpriv/c123.txt
              	
              	looks a bit more complicated and messier - also look for barry seal - clinton/bush connections
              </notes>
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
            	<link>nicaragua_world_court</link>
              <date>1986</date>
              <text>Nicaragua takes the case to the World Court in The Hague, who rule in their favour,
								ordering America to put a stop to its crime in Nicaragua and to pay massive reparations. 
								America ignores the World Court's ruling, not paying a cent and escalating the war.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.icj-cij.org/icjwww/idecisions/isummaries/inussummary860627.htm</url>
              <urlText>ICJ case summary</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1987</date>
              <text>ICJ decides on the amount owed by the US to Nicaragua - $17 billion. US continues 
              to ignore ruling.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.tiscali.co.uk/reference/encyclopaedia/countryfacts/nicaragua.html</url>
              <urlText>Timeline</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.counterpunch.org/jones0913.html</altUrls>
            </Fact>
            
            <Fact>
              <date>1987</date>
              <text>UN General Assembly calls on US to comply with ICJ's judgement. US continues
                to ignore ruling. Call <a href="http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/42/a42r018.htm">repeated</a> 
                in 1988.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/43/a43r011.htm</url>
              <urlText>UN resolution</urlText>
              <notes></notes>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1988</date>
              <text>Reagan announces that he will no longer seek military aid for the Contras.
	            </text>
              <url>http://www.tiscali.co.uk/reference/encyclopaedia/hutchinson/m0019831.html</url>
              <urlText>Timeline</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1990</date>
              <text>Elections are held in Nicaragua, and the Sadistinas lose to the US-backed
                Violeta Barrios de Chamorro, after the US spends $9 million on her election campaign
                (including <a href="http://www.wakeupmag.co.uk/articles/cia5.htm">bribing the 
                voters</a> to vote for her).
	            </text>
              <url>http://www.tiscali.co.uk/reference/encyclopaedia/hutchinson/m0019831.html</url>
              <urlText>Timeline</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>
            
            <Fact>
            <date>Today</date>
              <text>Nicaragua is crippled by highest per capita debt in the world. If the US were 
                simply to honour the World Court ruling, the debt would be paid off three-fold.
	            </text>
	            <url>http://www.oxfam.org.uk/policy/papers/nicdebt/nicdebt2.htm</url>
              <urlText>Oxfam article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
                http://www.chesterwdf.org.uk/jubnic1.htm
                http://www.caa.org.au/oxfam/advocacy/debt/nicaragua/debt.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>


          </facts>
        </Subtopic>
        
        
        <Subtopic name="Guatemala">
          <facts>
            <Fact>
              <date>1901-1944</date>
              <text>
              	Guatemala suffers under a succession of dictators all effectively belonging to the United 
              	Fruit Company, which is exempt from taxes and controls pretty much everything in the 
              	country.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.killerplants.com/whats-in-a-name/20011130.asp</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.mayaparadise.com/ufc1e.htm</altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1944-1954</date>
              <text>The dictator Ubico is overthrown and Guatemala enjoys the 'Ten Years of Spring' with 
              two popularly elected and reformist Presidents. President Arbenz permits free expression, 
              legalized unions and diverse political parties, and initiates basic socio-economic reforms. 
              One key program is a moderate land reform effort aimed at alleviating the suffering of the 
              rural poor, by which only plantations of very high acreage are affected, and 
              only in cases where a certain percentage of such acreage is in fact lying unused. In these 
              extreme cases, the unused portions of the land are not expropriated, but simply purchased 
              by the Guatemalan government <i>at the same value declared on the owner's tax forms</i>.
              The property is then resold at low rates to peasant cooperatives. To set an example, 
              President Arbenz starts with his own lands.</text>
              <url>http://www.globalexchange.org/campaigns/guatemala/history.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <notes>Jacobo Arbenz elected president. Makes the big mistake of attempting to 
              improve conditions for the poor in a country where 2% of the population own 70%
              of the land and over 50% are illiterate.</notes>
            </Fact>
            
            <Fact>
              <date>1953</date>
              <text>The land redistribution collides with the interests of the United Fruit Company, for 
              whom 85% of the 550,000 acres they own are uncultivated. The US government demands extra
              compensation for the United Fruit Company over what was already given.</text>
              <url>http://www.unitedfruit.org/arbenz.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <notes>Arbenz commits the unforgiveable sin of attempting to 
              improve conditions for the poor in a country where 2% of the population own 70%
              of the land and over 50% are illiterate. His policies for the redistribution of
              uncultivated land collide with the interests of the United Fruit Company, for whom
              85% of 500,000 acres they owned was uncultivated, leading to his inevitable downfall.
              http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/cold.war/episodes/18/recap/</notes>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1953</date>
              <text>
                Charles R. Burrows of the Bureau of Inter-American Affairs writes '<i>Guatemala has 
                become an increasing threat to the stability of Honduras and El Salvador. Its agrarian 
                reform is a powerful propaganda weapon; its broad social program of aiding the workers 
                and peasants in a victorious struggle against the upper classes and large foreign 
                enterprises has a strong appeal to the populations of Central American neighbors where 
                similar conditions prevail.</i>'
              </text>
              <url>http://www.info.sophia.ac.jp/amecana/Journal/11-1.htm#_edn53</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
                http://www.brazzil.com/p141feb03.htm
                http://members.madasafish.com/~tropicalmonkey/blatt/chomsky.htm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1954</date>
              <text>CIA covert <a href="http://www.gwu.edu/%7Ensarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB4/cia-guatemala5_a.html">Operation 
              PB Success</a> successfully removes Arbenz from power.</text>
              <url>http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/cold.war/episodes/18/interviews/hunt/</url>
              <urlText>CNN article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB4/index.html
              	http://www.bowlingforcolumbine.com/library/wonderful/gmala.php
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	Note that the CIA director at the time, Allen Dulles, had previously been United Fruit's 
              	president, and the previous CIA director and Under-secretary of State (General Walter 
              	Bedell Smith) was on the company's board of directors and became president following the 
              	overthrow.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.ied.info/books/ed/freedom.html</url>
              <urlText>Book extract</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Blum/Guatemala_KH.html
              	http://vi.uh.edu/pages/buzzmat/lafeber.htm
              	http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/jbfranklins/Cuba.htm
              	http://www.killerplants.com/whats-in-a-name/20011130.asp
              	http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Global_Economy/Silent_Takeover_Part2.html
              	http://www.mayaparadise.com/ufc1e.htm
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	Allen Dulles' brother, John Dulles, who was Secretary of State at the time, also worked as a 
              	lawyer defending the United Fruit Company.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/cold.war/episodes/18/script.html</url>
              <urlText>CNN transcript</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/coldwar/interviews/episode-13/ginsberg1.html
              	http://history.acusd.edu/gen/20th/guatemala.html
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <date>1954</date>
              <text>Following the CIA coup, Guatemala plunges into a civil war and 40 years of 
                American-trained death squads, torture, disappearances, mass executions, with an 
                estimated toll of 100,000 victims.
	            </text>
              <url>http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/americas/12/29/guatemala.presidential.ap/index.html</url>
              <urlText>CNN article</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1963</date>
              <text>
                Concerned about an upcoming election in which former president Juan Jose Arevalo 
                would be allowed to run and thus possibily elected, Kennedy supports another military 
                coup. This ends any hopes for a democratic Guatemala.
	            </text>
              <url>http://www.tau.ac.il/eial/XI_1/tzeitlin.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1983-1995</date>
              <text>Guatemala seeks to reduce infant mortality by regulating the marketing of 
                infant formula by multinationals, in conformity with WHO guidelines and 
                according to international codes. Infant mortality rates drop significantly.<br>
                However, one company, the Gerber Corp., refuses to comply. Guatemala spends five years
                trying to get it to comply, but then the company in 1993 threatens a WTO complaint and 
                US sanctions.<br>
                Guatemala backs down in 1995 and Gerber Corp. is exempted from the regulation.
				      </text>
              <url>http://www.globalexchange.org/wto/CaseStudies.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>February 1999</date>
              <text>A <a href="http://shr.aaas.org/guatemala/ceh/report/english/toc.html">Historical 
              	Clarification Commission report</a> concludes that US-backed security forces committed the 
              	vast majority of human rights abuses during the war, including torture, kidnapping and 
	              the murder of thousands of rural Mayans, contradicting years of official denial. 
	              The commission estimates over 200,000 Guatemalans were killed in the civil war, 
	              the most brutal armed conflict in Latin America history.
	            </text>
              <url>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/inatl/daily/march99/clinton11.htm</url>
              <urlText>Washington Post article</urlText>
              <notes></notes>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.dyncorp-sucks.com/guatemala.htm
                http://www.icomm.ca/carecen/page36.html
                http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/inatl/daily/march99/guatemala11.htm
							</altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>March 1999</date>
              <text>Clinton apologises to Guatemalans for decades of US policy in support of 
	              a murderous military that 'engaged in violent and widespread repression', 
	              costing the lives of some 100,000 civilians. That policy 'was wrong', the 
	              president declares, 'and the United States must not repeat that mistake'.
	            </text>
              <url>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/inatl/daily/march99/clinton11.htm</url>
              <urlText>Washington Post article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/americas/9903/10/clinton.latam.02/index.html
              	http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/low/americas/294590.stm
              	http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB11/docs/
              </altUrls>
              <notes></notes>
            </Fact>
            
            <Fact hide="true">
              <date>1999</date>
              <text>(DUPLICATE - see above!) '<i>A U.N. sponsored truth commission report has concluded that the United States gave 
	              money and training to a Guatemalan military that committed "acts of genocide" against the 
	              Mayan people during the most brutal armed conflict in Latin America history - Guatemala's 
	              36-year civil war [1960-1996]. The report of the independent Historical Clarification 
	              Commission ... contradicts years of official denial about the torture, kidnapping and 
	              execution of thousands of civilians in a war that the commission estimates killed more 
	              than 200,000 Guatemalans.</i>' reports the New York Times.
				      </text>
              <url>http://shr.aaas.org/guatemala/ceh/report/english/toc.html</url>
              <urlText>Historical Clarification Report</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.dyncorp-sucks.com/guatemala.htm
                http://www.icomm.ca/carecen/page36.html
                http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/inatl/daily/march99/guatemala11.htm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Today</date>
              <text>
								Guatemala sits at 120th of the <a href="http://www.undp.org/hdr2002/chapterone.pdf">UN Human 
								Development Index.</a> out of 173 ranked countries.
				      </text>
              <url>http://www.undp.org/hdr2002/chapterone.pdf</url>
              <urlText>2002 HDR</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>
            
          </facts>
        </Subtopic>
        
        

        <Subtopic name="El Salvador">
          <facts>
            <Fact>
              <date>1980-1992</date>
              <text>El Salvador is ravaged by a bitter civil war leaving around 70,000 dead. The US
                provides military funding during this period to the tune of $6 billion.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.alertnet.org/thefacts/countryprofiles/215623</url>
              <urlText>Country profile</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/country_profiles/1220684.stm
              	http://www.lonelyplanet.com/destinations/central_america/el_salvador/history.htm	
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1993</date>
              <text>UN names the army officers who had committed the worst atrocities of the
					       civil war. Two-thirds of them had been trained at the 'School of the
					       Americas' in Georgia, the same school that trained soldiers to commit similar 
					       atrocities in |nicaragua Nicaragua|, Peru, Honduras, |chile Chile|, Argentina, 
					       Panama, Ecuador and Mexico. The school still operates today under a different name.
					    </text>
              <url>http://www.guardian.co.uk/waronterror/story/0,1361,583254,00.html</url>
              <urlText>Guardian article</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>2002</date>
              <text>US involvement in El Salvador is being put forward by some in Washington 
                as a model for a possible solution for Colombia's 30-year civil war. 
                Look out Columbia!
					    </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1891145.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>


          </facts>
        </Subtopic>



        <Subtopic name="Chile">
          <facts>

            <Fact>
              <date>1964</date>
              <text>
              	CIA spends three million dollars to influence the elections in order to 
              	prevent Allende being elected as president.
							</text>
              <url>
              	http://foia.state.gov/Reports/ChurchReport.asp
              </url>
              <urlText>Church report</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/church/reports/vol7/html/ChurchV7_0076b.htm
              	http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Blum/Chile_KH.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1970</date>
              <text>Socialist Allende elected as president, despite extensive CIA efforts (mainly through propaganda)
                to prevent him winning. He pursues a leftist program, establishing diplomatic relations with 
                Cuba and moving Chile closer to communist countries such as China, North Korea and North 
                Vietnam, and nationalizing various industries, several of which have significant U.S. business 
                interests. The US responds by continuing support of the opposition and working systematically to 
                weaken Chile's economy.
							</text>
              <url>
              	http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/cold.war/kbank/profiles/allende/
              </url>
              <urlText>CNN Profile</urlText>
              <altUrls>
                http://www.fas.org/irp/world/chile/allende.htm
								http://foia.state.gov/Reports/ChurchReport.asp
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>
						
            <Fact>
              <date>Sept 11, 1973</date>
              <text>CIA covert policies (at an expense of $8 million from 1970-73) lead to a coup d'etat in which 
                Allende is killed and Pinochet brought to power.
							</text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/americas/1022347.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/church/reports/vol7/html/ChurchV7_0076b.htm
              	http://asia.cnn.com/SPECIALS/cold.war/episodes/18/documents/cia.chile/
              	http://asia.cnn.com/SPECIALS/cold.war/episodes/18/1st.draft/
              	http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB8/nsaebb8.htm
                http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB8/nsaebb8i.htm
                http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,550375,00.html
								http://foia.state.gov/Reports/ChurchReport.asp
              </altUrls>
              <note>
                After the coup, President Nixon was ecstatic. He considered it the finest military 
                coup in history, and he watched with glee the video of Hawker Hunter jets dropping 
                their bombs and firing their rockets at the Chilean presidential palace, blowing it 
                apart in broad daylight. Bush, |cheney Cheney|, |rumsfeld Rumsfeld|, and Powell were 
                very aware of how pleased Nixon was with the operation.
              </note>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1973-1990</date>
              <text>Pinochet leads country in brutal dictatorship, during which over 3,000 political 
                opponents are killed or disappear.
							</text>
              <url>http://europe.cnn.com/2000/WORLD/americas/12/19/pinochet.chile.02.reut/</url>
              <urlText>CNN Article</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>
            
           <Fact>
              <date>1997</date>
              <text>The US ends its 20 year moratorium on sales of advanced military equipment to Latin America
              (despite which it had remained the largest supplier of military equipment to the region) by offering
              to sell jet fighters to the Chilean military, the chief of whom is former dictator Pinochet.
 							</text>
              <url>http://www.fpif.org/briefs/vol2/v2n53arm.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>

            
           <Fact>
              <date>Sept 2000</date>
              <text><a href="http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20000919/01-01.htm">CIA report</a> released 
                admitting that the CIA knowingly supported the Pinochet regime's brutalities, 
                and revealing that the head of Pinochet's dreaded secret police (responsible 
                for the assination of an American in Washington DC) was a paid CIA asset.
 							</text>
              <url>http://www.cnn.com/2000/WORLD/americas/09/19/us.cia.chile.ap/</url>
              <urlText>CNN Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20000919/</altUrls>
            </Fact>


           <Fact>
              <date>Nov 2000</date>
              <text>Non-violent demonstration held for the closing of the 'School of the Americas', a 
                US Army-run school which has trained more than
                60,000 Latin American military officers over the past 50 years, and which trained many 
                of the officers involved in Pinochet's human rights abuses, and which still operates 
                today under a different name. Most of the protestors
                are thrown in jail, including an 88-year old nun.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.s-j-c.net/SOA.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.cnn.com/2000/US/04/03/school.protest/
              	http://www.cin.org/archives/cinjust/199802/0015.html
              	http://www.soaw.org/new/pressrelease.php?id=8
              	http://www.geocities.com/~virtualtruth/soa_atro.htm
              	http://www.derechos.org/soa/chile-not.html
              	http://www.newhumanist.com/soa.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>
             
          </facts>
        </Subtopic>

        <Subtopic name="Venezuela" shortName="Venezuela">
          <facts>

            <Fact>
              <date>1998</date>
              <text>Chavez elected president. Promises to try to raise Venezuela's minimum wage, which 
                stands at $175 a month, despite Venezuela's substantial oil wealth (the largest outside the 
                middle east, being the US's <a href="http://www.afa.org/magazine/June2002/0602chart.pdf">
                second largest supplier of oil</a>).
              </text>
              <url>http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/americas/9812/07/venezuela.02/</url>
              <urlText>CNN article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.fpif.org/commentary/2002/0204venezuela2.html</altUrls>
            </Fact>

           <Fact>
              <date>1998-2002</date>
              <text>Chavez makes major inroads into the resource base of the entrenched oligarchs. 
                He tries to improve the 60-year old royalty agreement that pays as little as 1% to 
                Venezuela while creating cash cows for Philips Petroleum and ExxonMobil, confirms the 
                nationalization of the oil sector, and introduces significant <a href="http://www.workers.org/ww/2001/chavez1025.php">
                land reforms</a> which would see a change to the current situation where two percent of 
                the population controls sixty percent of the land, and 
                where <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1932132.stm">80% of the population 
                live in poverty</a>.<br>
              </text>
              <url>http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/public/imc-houston/2002-December/004966.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.fpif.org/commentary/2002/0204venezuela2.html
              	http://www.networkideas.org/news/feb03/news08_Chavez_Offensive.htm
              	http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,876362,00.html
              	http://www.skog.de/envenezu.htm
              	http://www.medialens.org/articles_2002/jp_venezuela.html
              	http://www.evilsite.org/good/Chavez,%20Hugo/
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

           <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
                He also puts in place a free and progressive Constitution. 
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/529003.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
            </Fact>

           <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
                And succeeds in lowering infant mortality rates. 
              </text>
              <url>http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0412-08.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.change-links.org/venezuelan203.htm
              	http://www.fpif.org/commentary/2002/0204venezuela2.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

           <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
                And passes 49 laws which not only bring forward land reform but also improve both the fairness 
                and efficiency of the tax system, guarantee women's and indigenous people's rights, and 
                introduce free healthcare and education up to university level.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.medialens.org/articles_2002/jp_ranting_demagogues.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
            </Fact>


           <Fact>
              <date>Dec 28, 2001</date>
              <text>
              	San Francisco Examiner publishes an article speculating that the US may be planning a coup
              	in Venezuela. The article also notes that Chavez has reduced inflation from 40 percent to 
              	12 percent, generated economic growth of 4 percent, and increased primary school enrollment 
              	by 1 million students.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.examiner.com/opinion/default.jsp?story=OPhallinan1228w</url>
              <urlText>Examiner article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.fpif.org/commentary/2002/0204venezuela2.html</altUrls>
            </Fact>

           <Fact>
              <date>Apr 11, 2002</date>
              <text>Chavez overthrown in a military coup reminiscent of previous CIA-coups in |guatemala 
                Guatemala|, |chile Chile|, |brazil Brazil| etc. US welcomes the coup and congratulates the 
                military, while denying involvement. The coup collapses after two days however, and Chavez 
                returns to power. BBC also notes that '<i>Since his election, President Chavez has been a thorn 
                in the side of the United States - which gets much of its oil from Venezuela. In particular, US officials were 
                angered because Mr Chavez was selling cheap oil to Fidel Castro in Cuba. Mr Chavez also 
                condemned US bombing of civilians in Afghanistan.</i>'
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1929498.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://jaks_venezuela.blogspot.com/</altUrls>
            </Fact>

           <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>Otto J. Reich, the US's assistant secretary for Western Hemisphere affairs, is in contact 
                with Mr. Chavez's successor on the very day he takes over. Bush administration claims Reich
                was pleading with him not to dissolve the National Assembly.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/17/international/americas/17DIPL.html</url>
              <urlText>NY Times article</urlText>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
                As background on Reich, he served in the 1980s as the head of the State Departments 
                Office of Public Diplomacy, an outfit set up by Lt. Col. Oliver North to further the illegal 
                US funding and arming of the contra mercenary army in |nicaragua Nicaragua|. An investigation 
                concluded that Reich's office had 'engaged in prohibited, covert propaganda activities', using 
                CIA and military resources to spread disinformation, vilify the Nicaraguan government and build 
                support for the contras. The Pentagon also admits that Rogelio Pardo-Maurer, the Defense Department 
                official responsible for Latin America, discussed the proposed coup in Washington with Gen. 
                Lucas Romero Rincon, chief of the Venezuelan military command. Maurer spent the 1980s working 
                in Washington as the chief spokesman for the Nicaraguan contras.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.wsws.org/articles/2002/apr2002/vene-a18.shtml</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://yellowtimes.org/article.php?sid=253</altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
                It is revealed that senior Bush administration aides, including Assistant 
                Secretary of State Otto Reich and White House advisor Elliott Abrams (both key players in the 
                Reagan administrations covert network for supporting the contra terrorist war on Nicaragua 
                in the 1980s), had met repeatedly in Washington with the coup's organizers.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.wsws.org/articles/2002/dec2002/vene-d11.shtml</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
                Elliott Abrams is also known for his role in the |chile 1973 coup in Chile|, as well as his 
                sponsorship of death squads in Argentina, |el El Salvador|, Honduras and |guatemala Guatemala|.
              </text>
              <url>http://yellowtimes.org/article.php?sid=253</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
                Washington Post writes '<i>Members of the country's 
                diverse opposition had been visiting the U.S. Embassy here in recent weeks, hoping to 
                enlist U.S. help in toppling Chavez. The visitors included active and retired members 
                of the military, media leaders and opposition politicians.</i>'. Administration 
                spokesmen insist however that these officials repeatedly urged the coup plotters not to 
                take extra-constitutional action. <br><br>
                
                The article speculates - That a group of military officers (several of them graduates of 
                the Pentagon's School of the Americas in Fort Benning, Georgia) and wealthy businessmen would 
                ignore Washingtons 'advice' and go ahead with a coup detat opposed by the US government 
                defies all logic. Even if taken at face value, this absurd scenario would make the Bush 
                administration an accomplice in the abortive attempt to overthrow an elected Latin American 
                government. Though repeatedly notified that a coup was planned, it did nothing, by its own 
                admission, to warn the Chavez government.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.wsws.org/articles/2002/apr2002/vene-a18.shtml</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
                A Defense Department official claims the administration's message was less categorical.
                "<i>We were not discouraging people,</i>" the official said. "<i>We were sending informal, subtle 
                signals that we don't like this guy. We didn't say, 'No, don't you dare,' and we weren't 
                advocates saying, 'Here's some arms; we'll help you overthrow this guy.' We were not doing 
                that.</i>"</text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1933526.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.fpif.org/papers/venezuela.html</altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Apr 16, 2002</date>
              <text>
                Chavez alleges a plane with US registration numbers was at an army airstrip on Venezuela's 
                Orchila Island, one of five places he was held in captivity during his brief removal from 
                power.
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1933526.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Apr 18, 2002</date>
              <text>
                Bush warns Chavez to learn from the turmoil that erupted in his country following his brief 
                ousting and commit himself to democracy. So the US, encouraging if not involved in the miltary
                coup to replace the elected president with what looked like becoming a typical dictatorship, 
                and with a record of many such coups to install dictatorships in the past (|guatemala Guatemala|, 
                |chile Chile|, |iranian Iran|, |brazil Brazil| etc), is trying to tell Chavez 
                to commit himself to democracy?                
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1937598.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Apr 21, 2002</date>
              <text>
                 An official investigation by the Venezuelan government reveals that two high-ranking US 
                 officers joined the Venezuelan military commanders who backed the coup at Fort Tiuna, the 
                 largest military base in Caracas, where President Hugo Chavez was forcibly taken after 
                 being captured by soldiers supporting the overthrow of his government.          
              </text>
              <url>http://www.theage.com.au/breaking/2002/04/21/FFXI5U3340D.html</url>
              <urlText>The Age article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
                http://www.rense.com/general24/ushad.htm
                http://www.guardian.co.uk/venezuela/story/0,12716,858072,00.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>May 14, 2002</date>
              <text>
                Chavez claims he has proof of US military involvement in the events in April, claiming he 
                has radar images showing a foreign military vessel, a plane and a helicopter violating the 
                country's waters and air space during the failed coup.              
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1988213.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.fpif.org/papers/venezuela.html</altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Oct 6, 2002</date>
              <text>Chavez claims to have foiled another plan to remove him from office through a coup.</text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2303199.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Oct 20, 2002</date>
              <text>
                Chavez claims to have escaped an assassination attempt against while 
                returning from a trip to Europe.
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2344973.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Dec 2002</date>
              <text>
                A 'strike' (in reality more like an employers lockout) organised by Venezuelas 
                employers begins.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.wsws.org/articles/2002/dec2002/vene-d11.shtml</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Dec-Jan 2003</date>
              <text>
                For the two month duration of the strikes, the only commercials on Venezuelan TV were 
                the opposition's relentless barrage of powerful and often witty anti-Chavez spots.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.adage.com/news.cms?newsId=37098</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Feb 3, 2003</date>
              <text>
                The strike ends after 63 days. Although some oil workers continue striking, oil 
                output slowly returns to what is currently around half of pre-strike levels).
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2719335.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
            </Fact>
             
          </facts>
        </Subtopic>

        <Subtopic name="Brazil" shortName="Brazil">
          <facts>

            <Fact>
              <date>1961</date>
              <text>Quadros elected president by a record margin. He mysteriously resigns, reportedly
                under military pressure. Goulart (previously vice-president) succeeds Quadros as 
                president and aims to continue Quadros' independent foreign policy</text>
              <url>http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Blum/Brazil_KH.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
            </Fact>

           <Fact>
              <date>1962</date>
              <text>
                Like Quadros, Goulart is no communist - he is a millionaire land-owner and 
                a Catholic who wears a medal of the Virgin around his neck. He recives a 
                ticker-tape parade in New York City in April, and toasts the US Ambassador, 
                "To the Yankee Victory!", after the "Cuban Missile Crisis" in October.
              </text>
              <url>http://www-personal.umich.edu/~lormand/poli/soa/brazil.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
            </Fact>

           <Fact>
              <date>1962</date>
              <text>
              	Elections, Goulart wins despite the CIA spending close to $20 million in 
              	rigging them against him.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.namebase.org/brazil.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
            </Fact>

           <Fact>
              <date>1962-1964</date>
              <text>
                The CIA carries out a consistent propaganda campaign against Goulart which dates from 
                at least the 1962 election operation and which includes the financing of mass 
                urban demonstrations.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Blum/Brazil_KH.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
            </Fact>

           <Fact>
              <date>Early 1964</date>
              <text>
                Goulart nationalises oil, expropriates unused land, and passes a law limiting 
                the amount of profits multinationals could transmit out of the country.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.namebase.org/brazil.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
            </Fact>

           <Fact>
              <date>March 1964</date>
              <text>A CIA-backed military coup overthrows the government of Joao Goulart.</text>
              <url>http://www.namebase.org/brazil.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
            </Fact>

           <Fact>
              <date>1964</date>
              <text>Readers Digest reports on the coup - '<i>Seldom has a major nation come closer to the 
                brink of disaster and yet recovered than did Brazil in its recent triumph over Red 
                subversion. The communist drive for domination-marked by propaganda, infiltration, 
                terror-was moving in high gear. Total surrender seemed imminent - and then the people said 
                No!</i>'
              </text>
              <url>http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Blum/Brazil_KH.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
            </Fact>

           <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	The Washington Post reports a rather different story - 
                '<i>In 1964, with US Ambassador Lincoln Gordon's promises of immediate recognition 
                and petroleum support, and with a US Navy task force - an aircraft carrier, 
                destroyers, guided missiles - in Brazilian coastal waters, US-armed elements in 
                the military advance upon Rio with troops and tanks. Not wanting to be responsible 
                for bloodshed among Brazilians, Goulart refuses to call on loyalist forces and 
                flees to Uruguay.</i>'</text>
              <url>http://www-personal.umich.edu/~lormand/poli/soa/brazil.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
            </Fact>

           <Fact>
              <date>1964-1985</date>
              <text>
                All the features of military dictatorship which Latin America has come to know 
                are instituted. According to the US House Committee on Foreign Affairs, '<i>[General Castelo 
                Branco] shuts down Congress, virtually extinguishes political opposition, suspends habeas 
                corpus for "political crimes", forbids by law criticism of the dictator, takes over labor 
                unions, institutes police and military firing into protesting crowds, burns down peasant 
                homes, brutalizes priests, ...</i>'.
              </text>
              <url>http://www-personal.umich.edu/~lormand/poli/soa/brazil.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
            </Fact>

           <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
                Amnesty International reports on the regime in Brazil - '<i>Tortures range from 
                simple but brutal blows from a truncheon to electric shocks. Often the torture 
                is more refined: the end of a reed is placed in the anus of a naked man hanging 
                suspended downwards on the pau de arara [parrot's perch] and a piece of cotton 
                soaked in petrol is lit at the other end of the reed. Pregnant women have been 
                forced to watch their husbands being tortured. Other wives have been hung naked 
                beside their husbands and given electric shocks on the sexual parts of their body, 
                while subjected to the worst kind of obscenities. Children have been tortured before their 
                parents and vice versa. At least one child, the three month old baby of Virgilio Gomes da 
                Silva was reported to have died under police torture. The length of sessions depends upon the 
                resistance capacity of the victims and have sometimes continued for days at a time.</i>'</text>
              <url>http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Blum/Brazil_KH.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
            </Fact>

           <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
                The official Washington line was ... yes, it's unfortunate that democracy 
                has been overthrown in Brazil ... but, still, the country has been saved 
                from communism.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.cpa.org.au/garchve2/1009wars.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
            </Fact>

           <Fact>
              <date>2003</date>
              <text>
                |bush Bush|'s brother Jeb recently made a big contribution to the Cancun World Trade talks,
                defending the US's tariff on orange juice which protects Florida's citrus industry. Back in
                the year 1985, the US imported half a billion gallons of orange juice from Brazil, and 20 million
                gallons from the rest of the world. These figures now stand at 150 million gallons and 100 million 
                gallons respectively as a result of the tariffs.<br><br>
                A further family member, brother Marvin Bush, may be able to explain Jeb's interest in these subsidies 
                - he holds 30,000 shares in a business which is directly dependent on continued Brazilian tariffs to 
                keep its business.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.guerrillanews.com/globalization/doc3160.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/28/business/worldbusiness/28ftaa.html?ex=1068008400&en=8a51b52e30ac049e&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE
              	http://www.njpa.com/2002-midyear/Spreen.pdf
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>
             
          </facts>
        </Subtopic>


        <Subtopic name="Bolivia">
          <facts>

            <Fact>
              <date>1951</date>
              <text>
              	The populist Movimiento Nacionalista Revolucionario (MNR), under the leadership of 
              	Victor Paz Estenssoro, prevails in the general elections but is stymied by a last-minute coup. 
              </text>
              <url>http://www.lonelyplanet.com/destinations/south_america/bolivia/history.htm</url>
              <urlText>Lonely Planet guide</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1952</date>
              <text>
              	The coup provokes a popular armed revolt which becomes known as the April Revolution of 1952. The 
              	military is subsequently defeated and Paz Estenssoro returned to power.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.lonelyplanet.com/destinations/south_america/bolivia/history.htm</url>
              <urlText>Lonely Planet guide</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	 The MNR introduces universal adult suffrage, carries out a sweeping land reform, promotes rural 
              	 education, and nationalizes the country's largest tin mines.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/1958.htm</url>
              <urlText>US govt report</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1957</date>
              <text>
              	Notorious ex-gestapo captain Klaus Barbie, convicted with the death penalty for his war crimes, 
              	escapes to Bolivia <a href="http://www.cia.gov/csi/studies/97unclass/naziwar.html">with 
              	assistance</a> from the American Counter-Intelligence Corps (CIC). Here he 
              	works as a US agent, assisting a succession of military regimes during the 70s and 80s, 
              	teaching soldiers torture techniques and helping protect the flourishing cocaine trade before 
              	finally being deported to France to face his crimes in 1983.
              </text>
              <url>http://members.aol.com/voyl/barbie/4chapter.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.cia.gov/csi/studies/97unclass/naziwar.html
              	http://www.boliviaweb.com/outsiders/barbie.htm
              	http://www.angelfire.com/ca3/jphuck/Book14Ch.3.html
              	http://www.commondreams.org/views01/0508-05.htm
              	http://members.aol.com/voyl/barbie/barbie.htm
              	http://www.pavelicpapers.com/documents/cia/cia0012.html
              </altUrls>
              <notes>FBI files should be at http://foia.fbi.gov/history.htm but have been removed!!!?</notes>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1964</date>
              <text>
              	A military junta headed by General Ren Barrientos overthrows the MNR. Military regimes subsequently 
              	come and go with monotonous regularity until the election of the leftist civilian Movimiento de la 
              	Izquierda Revolucionaria (MIR) under Dr Hernn Siles Zuazo in 1982.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.lonelyplanet.com/destinations/south_america/bolivia/history.htm</url>
              <urlText>Lonely Planet guide</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/1958.htm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1967</date>
              <text>
              	Che Guevara, having gone to Bolivia in the hopes of starting a revolution to overthrow the military
              	government, is captured and executed by Bolivian soldiers trained, equipped and guided by US Green 
              	Beret and CIA operatives.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB5/</url>
              <urlText>Declassified docs + chronology</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1985</date>
              <text>
              	Zuazo is defeated in elections by Paz Estenssoro, who immediately seeks to curb the 
              	stratospheric inflation levels (at one point reaching 35,000% annually) and implements austerity 
              	measures under pressure from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in exchange for partial relief 
              	of Bolivia's crushing foreign debt.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.greenleft.org.au/back/2002/501/501p16.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/1958.htm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1998</date>
              <text>
              	California-based conglomerate Bechtel privatizes water in parts of Bolivia (helped by 
              	<a href="http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/bolivia/timeline.html">IMF	pressure</a> on the 
              	government to allow the privatization), even going so far as to force the Bolivian government to 
              	forbid Bolivians to draw water from their own local wells. This results in skyrocketing water prices 
              	in a country that is already desperately poor.<br><br>
              	The people revolt against Bechtel, and so the Bolivian government shoots hundreds of protesters in 
              	the streets to protect itself and its corporate benefactor. Bechtel eventually withdraws from Bolivia, 
              	but now is suing the nation for $25 million in lost potential profits. 
              </text>
              <url>http://www.theemailactivist.org/carpetbaggers.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/bolivia/timeline.html
              	http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/South_America/ColombiaPlan_Chomsky.html
              	http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=14525
              	http://www.globalexchange.org/wbimf/Shultz.html
								http://www.nadir.org/nadir/initiativ/agp/free/ftaa/noticias_nl/water.htm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>


          </facts>
        </Subtopic>

        <Subtopic name="example" hide="true">
          <facts>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              </text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              </text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              </text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>


          </facts>
        </Subtopic>


      </subtopics>
    </Topic>


    <Topic name="South-East Asia">
      <subtopics>

        <Subtopic name="Indonesia and East Timor" shortName="Indonesia + E.T.">
          <facts>

            <Fact>
              <date>1965</date>
              <text>
                US supports the Suharto regime's grab for power under the auspices of a Communist plot 
                during Indonesia's independence movement, and assists in the following murder of up to 
                1 million civilians. The CIA helps by <a href="http://www.namebase.org/kadane.html">compiling 
                death lists</a> of communists for Suharto to execute.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.wsws.org/articles/1999/jul1999/indo1-j19_prn.shtml</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.isp.nwu.edu/~fprefect/politics/timeline.html
              	http://www.namebase.org/scott.html
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1975</date>
              <text>
                The day before Indonesia's invasion of East Timor, Kissinger meets with Suharto and
                approves of the invasion (this fact was denied by the US government until documents
                confirming it were declassified in 2001). 
              </text>
              <url>http://www.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/asiapcf/southeast/12/06/indonesia.timor.us/</url>
              <urlText>CNN article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/1697248.stm</altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1975-1979</date>
              <text>
                Following the annexation of East Timor, an estimated 200,000 are killed in the violence 
                and the famine that follow.
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/903657.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC timeline</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour/documentaries/features/feature_kissinger.shtml
                http://www.isp.nwu.edu/~fprefect/politics/timeline.html
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1975-1998</date>
              <text>
                During the occupation, the UN passes a number of resolutions condemning the invasion and
                occupation. However, it is unable to enforce them without the support of the US, British, 
                Australian and Portuguese governments, who continually abstain on the resolutions at the 
                United Nations, whilst continuing to sell arms to Indonesia. 
              </text>
              <url>http://pilger.carlton.com/timor/complicity</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <date>Nov 1991</date>
              <text>
              	Several hundred Timorese are mown down as they attend a funeral in the Santa Cruz cemetery 
              	in Dili. While nothing exceptional for East Timor, the shootings are by chance filmed and 
              	broadcast on world television, and international attention is thus focused on East Timor.
              </text>
              <url>http://pilger.carlton.com/timor/santacruz</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <date>Aug 1999</date>
              <text>
              	Under UN supervision, and despite intense intimidation from Indonesian troops to discourage voting,
              	East Timor votes overwhelmingly for independence. As a result, the Indonesian military-backed militia 
              	goes on a terror campaign. Much of East Timor is destroyed and approximately 200,000 to 300,000 
              	refugees are created. The UN evacuates, leaving the East Timorese to the mercy of the Indonesian 
              	forces.
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/1504243.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC timeline</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://pilger.carlton.com/timor/today</altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Oct 1999</date>
              <text>
              	The US, UK and others finally stop aid to Indonesia. The Indonesian legislature then 
              	ratifies the East Timorese vote on 20 October, allowing East Timor to officially 
              	become an independent nation.
              </text>
              <url>http://pilger.carlton.com/timor/today</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>May 2002</date>
              <text>
              	East Timor finally gains independence.
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/1504243.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC timeline</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>
            
          </facts>
        </Subtopic>

        <Subtopic name="Vietnam">
          <facts>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
                John Pilger writes in 1985 'The constant American government line was that the war was 
                essentially a conflict of Vietnamese against Vietnamese, in which Americans became 
                'involved', mistakenly and honourably .... The longest war this century was a war waged 
                by America against Vietnam, North and South. It was an attack on the people of Vietnam, 
                communist and non-communist, by American forces. It was an invasion of their homeland 
                and their lives, just as the current presence in Afghanistan of Soviet forces is an 
                invasion. Neither began as a mistake. ... The accredited version of events has not 
                changed. It is that non-communist South Vietnam was invaded by communist North Vietnam and 
                that the United States came to the aid of the 'democratic' regime in the South. 
                This of course is untrue' ... That Ho Chi Minh waited so long before sending a 
                regular force to assist (against) the American attacks seems, in retrospect, 
                extraordinary'.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.globalissues.org/HumanRights/Media/Propaganda/Vietnam.asp</url>
              <urlText>Pilger book summary</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <date>1947</date>
              <text>
                Ho Chi Minh is leading the Vietminh (a popular movement of Catholics, Buddhists, small 
                businessmen, communists and farmers) in their fight for Vietnam's independence from 
                the French. He appeals for American help, insisting he is not a communist in the
                American sense. The US refuses to offer help, instead helping the French (even offering
                France two atomic bombs, which Paris mercifully declined), and he is eventually forced 
                (in 1950) to look for help elsewhere (the USSR and China).
              </text>
              <url>http://www.globalissues.org/HumanRights/Media/Propaganda/Vietnam.asp</url>
              <urlText>Pilger book summary</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <date>May 1954</date>
              <text>
                The French army is defeated May 1954 at Dien Bien Phu.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.ben-heidler.de/texte/vietnam.htm</url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1954</date>
              <text>
                The Geneva Accords temporarily divide Vietnam in half at the 17th parallel, with Ho Chi Minh's 
                Communists ceded the North, while Bao Dai's regime is granted the South. The accords 
                also provide for elections to be held in all of Vietnam within two years to reunify the 
                country. The US opposes the unifying elections, fearing a likely victory by Ho Chi Minh,
                and refuse to sign the Geneva accords, <a href="http://www.mediamonitors.net/mosaddeq13.html#3">
                noting</a> '<i>if the scheduled national elections are held in July 1956, and if the 
                Viet Minh does not prejudice its political prospects, the Viet Minh will almost certainly win.</i>'.
              </text>
              <url>http://vietnam.vassar.edu/doc2.html</url>
              <urlText>Geneva Accords</urlText>
              <altUrls>
                http://www.historyplace.com/unitedstates/vietnam/index-1945.html
                http://www.globalissues.org/HumanRights/Media/Propaganda/Vietnam.asp
                http://www.mediamonitors.net/mosaddeq13.html#3
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
                Eisenhower admitted that '<i>I have never talked or corresponded with a person knowledgeable 
                in Indochinese affairs who did not agree that had elections been held as of the time of the 
                fighting, a possible 80 per cent of the population would have voted for the communist Ho Chi 
                Minh as their leader</i>'.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.mediamonitors.net/mosaddeq13.html#3</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
                Pilger writes 'Ho Chi Minh was the antithesis of other emerging communist leaders in one 
                respect: he wanted his people to open themselves out to other societies, communist, 
                capitalist and non-aligned .... Indeed, so anxious was Ho for American support for his 
                fledgling republic that he addressed twelve separate appeals to President Roosevelt, to his 
                Secretary of State, Cordell Hull, and to the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee.' pleading
                'for understanding, for moral support, for a voice in the forum of western democracies. 
                But the United States would not read his mail'. It is only after being ignored by the US
                that he finally turns to the other superpower of the time, the USSR, for support.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.globalissues.org/HumanRights/Media/Propaganda/Vietnam.asp</url>
              <urlText>Pilger book summary</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

                
            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
                The CIA installs the fascistic Ngo Dinh Diem into power in the south. At the same time 
                the CIA provides mass propaganda of the horrors that Ho Chi Minh would supposedly impose 
                on the people of the North, urging them to flee to the South. It is hoped this will provide 
                enough justification to raise the good conscious of the American people to demand something 
                be done.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.globalissues.org/HumanRights/Media/Propaganda/Vietnam.asp</url>
              <urlText>Pilger book summary</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
                A curious feature regarding the election of the US chosen Diem was that more 
                votes were cast than the actual amount of voters.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.gfsnet.org/msweb/sixties/ngodinhdiemnov63.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
								The CIA's Phoenix Operation, that was responsible for escalation of the Vietnam war,
								also begins in 1954, using the same methods as in |iranian Iran| - creating South Vietnam's 
								secret police who dish out live burnings, garroting, rape, torture, sabotage (it is the 
								Vietnamese people defending themselves against these atrocities which the US comes to Vietnam 
								to fight). 
              </text>
              <url>http://www.neravt.com/left/cia.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
                An estimated 50,000 South Vietnamese were systematically murdered by assassins 
                working for the CIA's 'Phoenix Programme'. The most decorated American soldier of the war, 
                Lieutenant Colonel Anthony Herbert, wrote in his book, Soldier, 'They wanted me to take 
                charge of execution teams that wiped out entire families and tried to make it look as 
                though the VC themselves had done the killing.' Like Agent Orange, the Phoenix Programme 
                was not a 'story' until the war was ending. Or like Operation Speedy Express [an atrocity where 
                the US Ninth Infantry Division had killed 11,000 people, 5,000 of whom were 'non-combatants'], 
                the massacre of between 90 and 130 men, women and children at the village of My Lai on 
                March 16, 1968, was not a story until long after it had happened. 
              </text>
              <url>http://www.globalissues.org/HumanRights/Media/Propaganda/Vietnam.asp</url>
              <urlText>Pilger book summary</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <date>1956</date>
              <text>
                The date for the unifying elections set by the Geneva Conference passes. Diem, 
                backed by the US, had refused to participate (the people would have chosen 
                Ho Chi Minh and the US cannot accept the possibility what they see as a 'communist' 
                Vietnam, even if that would be the result of democracy and would unify the country).
              </text>
              <url>http://www.historyplace.com/unitedstates/vietnam/index-1945.html</url>
              <urlText>Timeline</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1957</date>
              <text>
                 The Soviet Union proposes permanent division of Vietnam into North and South, with 
                 the two nations admitted separately to the United Nations. The US rejects the 
                 proposal, unwilling to recognize Communist North Vietnam.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.historyplace.com/unitedstates/vietnam/index-1945.html</url>
              <urlText>Timeline</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <date>1963</date>
              <text>
                Buddhist clerics begin setting themselves afire, creating a sensation around the world,
                to protest against prosecution under the Diem regime. 
              </text>
              <url>http://www.cnn.com/interactive/specials/0004/vietnam.profiles/diem.html</url>
              <urlText>CNN profile</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://hubcap.clemson.edu/~eemoise/viet6.html
              	http://www.mediamonitors.net/mosaddeq13.html#3
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1963</date>
              <text>
                The excesses of Diem (who the CIA installed in the first place) prove too much, 
                and in November 1963 Diem is overthrown by a triumvirate of his generals, 
                organised by the CIA. At the time of his shooting, he 
                <a href="http://www.time.com/time/asia/magazine/2000/0424/history.vietnam.html">had 
                in his hand a briefcase containing 1 million U.S. currency in the highest 
                denominations</a>. A series of military regimes follow Diem which are marked by 
                coups and counter-coups. 
              </text>
              <url>http://www.mediamonitors.net/mosaddeq13.html#3</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.globalissues.org/HumanRights/Media/Propaganda/Vietnam.asp	
              	http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/church/reports/ir/html/ChurchIR_0116a.htm
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	CIA documents declassified in '99 reveal that Kennedy initiated the process
              	to overthrow Diem, contrary to the what the government had previously claimed.
              </text>
              <url>http://freedom.orlingrabbe.com/lfetimes/vietnam10.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1964</date>
              <text>
                The 'Gulf of Tonkin' incident provides the justification for use of military force -
                an alleged attack on US spyship USS Maddox which was engineered by the US and that 
                became the pretext for war in Vietnam. This was later known as the 'Gulf of Tonkin 
                Incident' and 'as a direct result, a resolution was sent by the White House to 
                Congress seeking authority for the United States to invade Vietnam. Seven years were 
                to pass before the |pentagon_papers Pentagon Papers|, the official 'secret history' 
                of the war would reveal that administration officials had drafted the 
                <a href="http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/cold.war/episodes/11/documents/tonkin/">'Gulf 
                of Tonkin Resolution'</a> two months before the alleged attack on the Maddox'
              </text>
              <url>http://www.globalissues.org/HumanRights/Media/Propaganda/Vietnam.asp</url>
              <urlText>Pilger book summary</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <date>1954-1975</date>
              <text>
                According to the DRV some 1 million Vietnamese combatants and 2-4 million
                Vietnamese civillians are killed in the war (estimated anywhere between 10-20% 
                of the population), with over half the casualties inflicted in South Vietnam whom 
                the US is supposedly there to protect.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.isp.nwu.edu/~fprefect/politics/timeline.html</url>
              <urlText>Timeline</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat2.htm#Vietnam
              	http://www.ausvets.powerup.com.au/vietnam/vietstat.htm
              	http://users.bigpond.net.au/jbuckley/history/
              	http://www.war-stories.com/body-count.htm	
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <link>pentagon_papers</link>
              <date>1971</date>
              <text>
                The New York Times <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/books/97/04/13/reviews/papers-overview.html">releases</a>
                excerpts from the 'Pentagon Papers', a secret government study of decision-making about the 
                Vietnam War, starting an extraordinary federal court battle pitting the US government against 
                the press, with the Supreme Court eventually ruling that that the government could not block 
                publication of the Pentagon Papers.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.vva.org/pentagon/history/history.html</url>
              <urlText>Summary</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB48/
              	http://usinfo.state.gov/journals/itdhr/0297/ijde/goodsb1.htm
              	http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB48/supreme.html
              	http://www.hedricksmith.com/topics/vietnamAndThePentagonPapers.shtml
								http://www.salon.com/opinion/freedom/2003/07/01/pentagon_papers/index_np.html
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>
						
						<Fact>
							<text>
								The Pentagon papers <a href="http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/history/A0838198.html">revealed</a> a 
								considerable degree of miscalculation, bureaucratic arrogance, and deception on the part of US 
								policymakers. Some quotes:
                <ul>
                	<li>'In 1956, almost any type of election that could conceivably be held in Vietnam would, on the basis of present trends, give the Communists a very significant if not decisive victory.'
                	<li>'In 1965, the President of South Vietnam, President Thieu, according to George Ball, believed that "the communists could still win any election held in South Vietnam".'
                	<li>'South Vietnam (unlike other countries in Southeast Asia) was essentially the creation of the United States.'
								</ul>
							</text>
							<url>http://www.colorado.edu/AmStudies/lewis/2010/vietnam.htm#The%20Pentagon%20Papers</url>
							<urlText>Quotes from Pentagon Papers</urlText>							
							<altUrls>
								http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/history/A0838198.html
								http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB48/
							</altUrls>
						</Fact>
						
            <Fact>
              <date>Today</date>
              <text>
                Vietnamese continue to suffer from Agent Orange, the toxic defoliant used by US forces during the
                Vietnam war, which has been blamed for huge numbers of birth defects.
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/1023133.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
                http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/1734289.stm
                http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/1024627.stm
                http://www.mediamonitors.net/mosaddeq13.html#3
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
                The US, despite being engaged in a supposed war on terrorism, harbours a terrorist group
                which has waged a low-level three-year war against the communist government of Vietnam, 
                and are suspected in half a dozen attacks on Vietnamese targets in Europe and Asia.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.time.com/time/asia/news/magazine/0,9754,180563,00.html</url>
              <urlText>Time article</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Further Reading</date>
              <text>
                <ul>
                	<li><a href="http://www.historyplace.com/unitedstates/vietnam/index-1945.html">History Place Vietnam Timeline</a>
                	<li><a href="http://www.salon.com/opinion/freedom/2003/07/ 01/pentagon_papers/index.html">Pentagon Papers</a>
                </ul>
              </text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>
            
          </facts>
        </Subtopic>



        <Subtopic name="Laos">
          <facts>

            <Fact>
              <date>1958-1960</date>
              <text>
                 CIA sponsors coups at least once in 1958, 1959, 1960 and probably other years as well.
                 "By merely withholding the monthly payment to the troops," wrote Roger Hilsman 
                 (whose career encompassed both agencies, perhaps covertly simultaneously), "the United 
                 States could create the conditions for toppling any Lao government whose policies it 
                 opposed. As it turned out, in fact, the United States used this weapon twice-to bring 
                 down the government of one Lao leader and to break the will of another." The aim 
                 was generally to prevent the Pathe Lao from holding power, as they were the only sizable 
                 group in the country serious about social change, a characteristic which of course tends 
                 to induce Washington officials to apply the communist label. However, the Pathe Lao did
                 not consider themselves communists.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Blum/Laos_KH.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.isp.nwu.edu/~fprefect/politics/timeline.html</altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1964</date>
              <text>
              	The coalition government, such as it was, was overthrown by the right wing, 
              	with the CIA's man Phoumi Nosavan emerging as part of a rightist government headed 
              	by the perennial survivor Souvanna Phouma to give it a neutralist fig leaf. The Pathet 
              	Lao were once again left out in the cold. For them it was the very last straw. The 
              	fighting greatly intensified, the skirmishes were now war, and the Pathet Lao offensive 
              	soon scored significant advances. Then the American bombing began.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Blum/Laos_KH.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1964-1973</date>
              <text>
                Laos is subject to extensive aerial bombardment by the United States in an attempt to destroy 
                North Vietnamese sanctuaries and to rupture the supply lines known as the Ho Chi Minh trail. 
                It's estimated that more bombs were dropped on Laos than were used during the whole of 
                World War II.
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/1154670.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC timeline</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
                The CIA also dropped millions of dollars in forged Pathet Lao currency in an attempt to 
                wreck the economy.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Blum/Laos_KH.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
                Although US officials deny it vehemently, ample evidence exists to confirm charges 
                that the Meo villages that do try to find their own way out of the war, even if it 
                is simply by staying neutral and refusing to send their 13-year-olds to fight in 
                the CIA army, are immediately denied American rice and transport, and ultimately 
                bombed by the US Air Force.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Blum/Laos_KH.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
                This all occurred despite the war in Laos not officially existing, and despite Laos being 
                officially neutral.
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/346961.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Today</date>
              <text>
                The removal of unexploded ordinances is continuing from such places as the Plain of Jars (which 
                has the unenviable distinction of being the most heavily-bombed place on earth)                
                and is expected to take another 50-100 years.
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/1100842.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	An estimated 300 Laotians continue to die every year from these bombs, and 1 in 384 people
              	in Laos are amputees. From the end of the war to 1998, 38,248 people were killed and 
              	64,064 injured.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.ausaid.gov.au/publications/focus/focuspdfs/1002/focus1002_16.pdf</url>
              <urlText>UNICEF article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=12165</altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>
            
          </facts>
        </Subtopic>


        <Subtopic name="Cambodia">
          <facts>

            <Fact>
              <date>1960s</date>
              <text>
	               Cambodia is a peaceful kingdom led by Prince Sihanouk, who naively presumes that his 
	               country can remain neutral while the US wages war next door in Vietnam.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.robertscheer.com/1_natcolumn/97_columns/070897.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1969-1973</date>
              <text>
	               US bombs Cambodia -       
	               '<i>The fact is that the United States dropped three times the quantity of explosives on 
	               Cambodia between 1970 and 1973 than it had dropped on Japan for the duration of World 
	               War II. Between 1969 and 1973, 539,129 tons of high explosives rained down on Cambodia; 
	               that is more than one billion pounds. This is equivalent to some 15,400 pounds of 
	               explosives for every square mile of Cambodian territory. Considering that probably less 
	               than 25 percent of the total area of Cambodia was bombed at one time or another, the actual 
	               explosive force per area would be at least four times this level.</i>'
	               - The Rise and Demise of Democractic Kampuchea, Craig Etcheson 
              </text>
              <url>http://www.isp.nwu.edu/~fprefect/politics/timeline.html</url>
              <urlText>Timeline</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1970</date>
              <text>
              	 The military under Lon Nol, and backed by the United States, overthrows Sihanouk.
              	 As hatred of the US and the Lon Nol government grows, peasants flood to join the 
              	 Khmer Rouge army. 
              </text>
              <url>http://www.plp.org/cd_sup/khmerrouge.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.media-criticism.com/Washington_Post_Pol_Pot_1998.html
                http://www.robertscheer.com/1_natcolumn/97_columns/070897.htm
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1970</date>
              <text>
                US and South Vietnamese troops enter Cambodia to attack Communist bases and supply lines. 
                US ground forces are withdrawn by June 30, but South Vietnamese troops remain, occupying 
                heavily populated areas. The actions of the South Vietnamese troops in Cambodia and the resumption 
                of heavy US air bombings in their support, with the inevitable destruction of villages and 
                killing of civilians, alienates many Cambodians and creates considerable sympathy for the 
                'communists'. The Khmer Rouge increases in number from about 3,000 in Mar 1970, to over 30,000 
                within a few years. Most of the North Vietnamese and Viet Cong troops are able to withdraw, 
                leaving in progress a raging civil war fought by Cambodians but financed by the US, North 
                Vietnam, and Communist China.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.encyclopedia.com/html/section/cambodia_history.asp</url>
              <urlText>Encyclopedia.com</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <date>1975</date>
              <text>
                Phnom Penh falls to the Khmer Rouge. 
              </text>
              <url>http://www.lonelyplanet.com/destinations/south_east_asia/cambodia/history.htm</url>
              <urlText>Lonely Planet History</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1975-1978</date>
              <text>
                The Khmer Rouge, under Pol Pot's leadership, systematically kills hundreds of thousands of
                Cambodians (targeting the educated in particular) in a brutal bid to turn Cambodia into a 
                Maoist, peasant-dominated agrarian cooperative. Estimates vary to the number of killings, 
                some say 300,000 is an upper limit while the US media typically claims 2 or 3 million (in
                contrast, estimates for the number of casualties of the US bombing range between 600,000 
                and over a million).
                Currency is abolished, postal services is halted, the population became a work force of slave 
                labourers and the country is almost entirely cut off from the outside world.              
              </text>
              <url>http://www.plp.org/cd_sup/khmerrouge.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.lonelyplanet.com/destinations/south_east_asia/cambodia/history.htm
              	http://www.robertscheer.com/1_natcolumn/97_columns/070897.htm
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>
                

            <Fact>
              <date>1978</date>
              <text>
                Responding to recurring armed incursions into their border provinces, Vietnam invades Cambodia,
                forcing the Khmer Rouge to flee to the relative sanctuary of the jungles along the Thai border. 
                From there, they conduct a guerilla war against the Vietnamese-backed government throughout the 
                late 1970s and 1980s.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.lonelyplanet.com/destinations/south_east_asia/cambodia/history.htm</url>
              <urlText>Lonely Planet History</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1980-1986</date>
              <text>
                Instead of applauding the Vietnamese for ending Pol Pot's genocide,
                the US and China also insist that Pol Pot, responsible for killing an estimated one in every five
                Cambodians, has the right to name Cambodia's legitimate representative at the UN.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.robertscheer.com/1_natcolumn/97_columns/070897.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
              <notes>mention how many pol pot killed</notes>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
                The US also supports Pol Pot throughout this period, funding the Khmer Rouge to the tune of 
                $85 million. The National Security Advisor of the time, Zbiginiew Brzezinski, admits 
                '<i>I encouraged the Chinese to support Pol Pot</i>', and adds that the US 'winked 
                publicly' as China sent arms to the Khmer Rouge through Thailand.
              </text>
              <url>http://chss.montclair.edu/english/furr/pol/pilgerpolpotnus.pdf</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.media-criticism.com/Washington_Post_Pol_Pot_1998.html
              	http://www.robertscheer.com/1_natcolumn/97_columns/070897.htm
              </altUrls>
              <notes>mention how many pol pot killed</notes>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1993</date>
              <text>
                UN-administered elections lead to a new constitution and the reinstatement of Norodom 
                Sihanouk as king. 
              </text>
              <url>http://www.zmag.org/forums/chomcambodforum.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

          </facts>
        </Subtopic>
      </subtopics>
    </Topic>


    <Topic name="Carribean">
      <subtopics>

        <Subtopic name="Cuba">
          <facts>
            <Fact>
              <date>1959</date>
              <text>Popular Cuban Revolution led by Castro overthrows Batista, a dictatorship
              which had been supported by the US to the tune of $16 million US in military aid per year.</text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1203355.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC timeline</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date>1960</date>
              <text>US begins trade embargo on Cuba which has continued till today. The UN has condemned 
                these unilateral sanctions against Cuba every year for the past 10 years, sanctions which 
                have included both food and medicine.</text>
              <url>http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,608397,00.html</url>
              <urlText>Guardian Article</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>
            <Fact reference="cuba_terrorism"></Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date>1961</date>
              <text>US fails in an attempt to invade Cuba using 1500 exiled Cubans in what becomes known 
              as the Bay of Pigs.</text>
              <url>http://www.cia.gov/csi/studies/winter98-99/art08.html</url>
              <urlText>CIA Internal Probe</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <link>northwood</link>
              <date>2001</date>
              <text><a href="http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/doc1.pdf">Operation Northwood</a> 
              declassified - detailing CIAs plans to commit terrorist attacks 
              in the US and blame them on Cuba, in order to create public support for a war against Cuba.
              These plans included the sinking of boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas, hijacking 
              planes, blowing up a U.S. ship, and even orchestrating violent terrorism in US cities.
              Thinking is summarised by the following quote:
              '<i>casualty lists in US newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation</i>'.</text>
              <url>http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/jointchiefs_010501.html</url>
              <urlText>ABC News Article</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact hide="true">
              <date>1988</date>
              <text>
              	WHO presents Fidel Castro with its 'Health for All' award in recognition of Cuba reaching all the 
              	WHO health goals set for developing countries to achieve by 2000.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.ratb.org.uk/frfi/158_healthcare.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Today</date>
              <text>
              	Amazingly, despite the sanctions and terrorism inflicted by the US, Cuba has managed to 
              	survive. The WHO's representative in Cuba in 1980 stated that '<i>there is 
                no question that Cuba has the best health statistics in Latin America</i>', and in 1990
                a UNICEF report on the 'State of the World's Children' stated (with regards to infant
                mortality rates) that '<i>Cuba is the only (Latin American) country on a par with 
                developed nations</i>'. 
              </text>
              <url>http://www.zmag.org/chomsky/year/year-c06-s05.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://cyberspacei.com/jesusi/authors/chomsky/year/y501_006.htm</altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
								Cuba's great health care system is not limited to its own borders - in 1991, Cuba had more 
								doctors working abroad in oppressed countries than did the WHO.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.ratb.org.uk/frfi/158_healthcare.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.globalexchange.org/campaigns/cuba/US-Cuba/dallasmorning051401.html
              	http://members.attcanada.ca/~dchris/CubaFAQ405.html
              	http://www.speakeasy.org/wfp/30/Cuba.html
              	http://www.unesco.org/courier/1999_09/uk/dici/txt1.htm
              	http://www.radford.edu/~junnever/law/cuba.htm
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>
           
          </facts>
        </Subtopic>
   
   
        <Subtopic name="Guyana">
          <facts>

            <Fact>
              <date>1953</date>
              <text>
              	Guyana elects its first native-born Prime Minister, Cheddi Jagan, an admirer 
              	of the works of Karl Marx.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.nytimes.com/library/national/103094real-cia.html</url>
              <urlText>NY Times article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1211428.stm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1953</date>
              <text>
              	Four months later, Churchill sends in troops, suspends British Guyana's Constitution and orders 
              	its Government dissolved (being too leftist for Churchill's tastes).
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1211428.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC timeline</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.nytimes.com/library/national/103094real-cia.html
              	http://www.worldrover.com/history/guyana_history.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1957</date>
              <text>
								Dr. Jagan and his wife are freed from jail after the British restore 
								constitutional government, and Jagan is re-elected in 1957 and 1961.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.nytimes.com/library/national/103094real-cia.html</url>
              <urlText>NY Times article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1211428.stm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Oct 1961</date>
              <text>
								Jagan travels to the White House, seeking financial aid and offering assurances
								that Guyana would not become a Soviet base.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.nytimes.com/library/national/103094real-cia.html</url>
              <urlText>NY Times article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
								Following Jagan's departure, Kennedy meets in secret with his top national 
								security officers. Still-classified documents depict in unusual detail a 
								direct order from the President to unseat Dr. Jagan, say Government officials 
								familiar with the secret papers. Though many Presidents have ordered the CIA 
								to undermine foreign leaders, they say, the Jagan papers are a rare smoking 
								gun: a clear written record, without veiled words or plausible denials, of 
								a President's command to depose a Prime Minister. 
              </text>
              <url>http://www.nytimes.com/library/national/103094real-cia.html</url>
              <urlText>NY Times article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.jagan.org/articles2i.htm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1962-1963</date>
              <text>
								Agitation from the CIA grows - riots, propaganda, union action, a fire in 
								the center of town, shipping and airline blockades.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.nytimes.com/library/national/103094real-cia.html</url>
              <urlText>NY Times article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/~remoore/jonestown/articles/mcgehee.html
              	http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/43/034.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Oct 1963</date>
              <text>
								The British, at the suggestion of the Kennedy Administration, delay their 
								colony's scheduled independence and change its electoral system. The 
								electorate now have to vote for parties instead of people, and a still popular 
								but politically weakened Dr. Jagan falls from power. The British then grant 
								independence to the new republic of Guyana.              
							</text>
              <url>http://www.nytimes.com/library/national/103094real-cia.html</url>
              <urlText>NY Times article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.jagan.org/articles2i.htm
              	http://www.worldrover.com/history/guyana_history.html
              	http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/43/034.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
								Declassified documents show the correspondence between the US and Britain, in
								order to avoid the re-election of Jagan. <br><br>
								In a August 1961 Telegram From the Department of State to the Embassy in the UK:
								'<i>... we do believe that Jagan and his American wife are very far to the left indeed and 
								that his accession to power in British Guiana would be a most troublesome setback in this 
								Hemisphere. Would you be willing to have this looked into urgently to see whether there is 
								anything which you or we can do to forestall such an eventuality?</i>'<br><br>
								
								In reply: '<i>now the choice before us in situations like this is either to allow the 
								normal process of democracy and progress towards self-government to go ahead and do our 
								best to win the confidence of the elected leaders, and to wean them away from any dangerous 
								tendencies, or else to revert to what we call "Crown Colony rule." It is practical politics 
								to take the latter course only when it is quite clear that a territory is heading for disaster. 
								We have done this once already in British Guiana-in 1953. But since the restoration of the 
								democratic process in 1957, the elected government has behaved reasonably well and we have had 
								no grounds which would justify a second attempt to put the clock back.</i>' (Jagan is re-elected
								shortly thereafter).<br><br>
								By February 1962 however, the US Dept of State writes: '<i>I must tell you now that I have 
								reached the conclusion that it is not possible for us to put up with an independent British Guiana 
								under Jagan .... These considerations, I believe, make it mandatory that we concert on remedial 
								steps.</i>'<br><br>
								Interestingly, in February 1962, the President's Special Assistant (Schlesinger) writes: '<i>
								Jagan is not a Communist ... Jagan is infinitely preferable to Burnham.</i>', however other
								officials differ on just how 'communist' he is.<br><br>
								The correspondence then proceeds to address the fundamental question - '<i>Can we topple Jagan 
								while maintaining at least a facade of democratic institutions.</i>' and '<i>Can the PPP be 
								defeated in new elections without obvious interference?</i>' with concerns that '<i>
								it is unproven that CIA knows how to manipulate an election in British Guiana without a 
								backfire</i>'.<br><br>
								In 1963 the conclusion is reached: '<i>The President (Kennedy) said he agreed with the analysis 
								of all the difficulties, but that these still paled in comparison with the prospect of the 
								establishment of a Communist regime in Latin America. Mr. Sandys said he thought the best solution 
								was that of a Burnham-D'Aguiar government to which the UK would grant independence.</i>'
							</text>
              <url>http://www.guyanaundersiege.com/Historical/Declassified%20Documents1.htm</url>
              <urlText>Declassified documents</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
								For the following 20 years the country is governed by Forbes Burnham 
								- "as the British described him, an opportunist, racist and demagogue 
								intent only on personal power," to quote from "A Thousand Days." He 
								holds power through force and fraud until his death in 1985, running
								up a foreign debt of over $2 billion during this time (over 5x Guyana's
								GDP).							
							</text>
              <url>http://www.nytimes.com/library/national/103094real-cia.html</url>
              <urlText>NY Times article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.jagan.org/articles2i.htm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
								During Burnham's rule, elections are viewed in Guyana and abroad as fraudulent. 
								Human rights and civil liberties are suppressed, and two major political assassinations 
								occur: The Jesuit priest and journalist Bernard Darke in July 1979, and the 
								distinguished historian and Working People's Alliance (WPA) party leader Walter Rodney 
								in June 1980. Agents of President Burnham are widely believed to have been responsible 
								for both deaths.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.worldrover.com/history/guyana_history.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1992</date>
              <text>
								The first completely free parliamentary elections since independence (in 1966) 
								result in Cheddi Jagan becoming re-elected.
							</text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1211428.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC timeline</urlText>
              <altUrls>
								http://www.worldrover.com/history/guyana_history.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>


            <Fact hide="true">
              <date>Today</date>
              <text>
              	The interest on the foreign debt of more than $2 billion, ran up by Forbes 
              	Burnham (a sum more than five times Guyana's gross domestic product) now 
              	consumes 80 percent of the country's revenue and more than half of its 
              	foreign earnings.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.nytimes.com/library/national/103094real-cia.html</url>
              <urlText>NY Times article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>


          </facts>
        </Subtopic>


        <Subtopic name="Dominican Republic">
          <facts>

            <Fact>
              <date>1930-1961</date>
              <text>
              	Trujillo rules the country in a brutal dictatorship, featuring the massacre in 1937 of 
              	19,000-20,000 Haitians living in areas of the Dominican Republic adjacent to Haiti, until 
              	he is finally	assassinated in 1961.
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/country_profiles/1217771.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC timeline</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Blum/DominicanRepublic_KH.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1962</date>
              <text>
              	Juan Bosch, a leftist reformer, is elected president in the first democratic elections 
              	for nearly four decades, defeating Joaquin Balaguer (Trujillo's heir).
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/country_profiles/1217771.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC timeline</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.encyclopedia.com/html/b/bosch-j1u.asp
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
								While no radical, Bosch is true to his beliefs. He calls for land reform, nationalisation 
								of some businesses and an ambitious public works project. As a principled liberal, he is 
								also serious about civil liberties. Communists in the Dominican Republic are not to be 
								prosecuted unless they break the law.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.columbia.edu/~lnp3/mydocs/fascism_and_war/william_blum.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <notes>also talks about pre-election US actions</notes>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date>1963</date>
              <text>
              	Bosch is deposed in a military coup and replaced by a three-man junta. The US does nothing to 
              	stop the coup and if anything encourages it.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Blum/DominicanRepublic_KH.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.progressive.org/mplvjl00.htm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1964</date>
              <text>
              	Over 20,000 US troops invade the Dominican Republic to crush a popular revolt aimed
              	at returning Bosch to power. Thousands of Dominicans are killed (as the NY Times admits
              	at the time) 'fighting and dying for social justice and constitutionalism.'
              </text>
              <url>http://www.iso.org.nz/sr/9/washingtons_war_crimes.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://studentservicesdr.freeservers.com/Dominican%20Overview%20&%20Historical%20Summary.htm
              	http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/country_profiles/1217771.stm	
              	http://www.columbia.edu/~lnp3/mydocs/fascism_and_war/william_blum.htm
              	http://free.freespeech.org/americanstateterrorism/ChronologyofTerror2.html
              	http://www.fsmitha.com/h2/ch24v.html
              </altUrls>
              <notes>
              	http://studentservicesdr.freeservers.com/Dominican%20Overview%20&%20Historical%20Summary.htm
              	- mentions how US held elections following this with Bosch under house arrest.
              	http://www.fsmitha.com/h2/ch24v.html
              	- mentions how 300 of Bosch's supporters were killed leading up to elections
              </notes>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1966</date>
              <text>
              	The troops only leave after supervising elections in which they ensure Trujillo's 
              	vice-president Balaguer wins.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.fsmitha.com/h2/ch24v.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Blum/DominicanRepublic_KH.html
              	http://studentservicesdr.freeservers.com/Dominican%20Overview%20&%20Historical%20Summary.htm
              </altUrls>
              <notes>
              </notes>
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	Since then, the Dominican Republic has sailed on choppy seas of fraudulent 
              	elections, corruption, and economic uncertainty.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/deaths/news/1493983</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.progressive.org/mplvjl00.htm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact hide="true">
              <date>1990</date>
              <text>
              	The two contestants whose election precipitated the 1962 incursion from the US, and who 
              	now are octogenarians, return as contestants in the presidential election. US interference 
              	has made its usual full cycle, a cycle in which the Dominicans greatly suffered.
              </text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact hide="true">
              <date></date>
              <text>
              </text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

          </facts>
        </Subtopic>
			</subtopics>
		</Topic>

    <Topic name="Africa">
      <subtopics>

        <Subtopic name="Africa's 'world war'" hide="true">
          <facts>
            
						<Fact>
              <date>1990</date>
              <text>
								Paul Kagame, a Rwandan refugee living in Uganda,attends a 
								course in tactics given by the US Army Command and General Staff College at Fort 
								Leavenworth, Kansas.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.comebackalive.com/df/dplaces/rwanda/player4.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
							<altUrls>
								http://www.policyalternatives.ca/publications/articles/article303.html
								http://www.womenwagingpeace.net/content/whatwedo/newsevents/3kagame.asp
							</altUrls>
            </Fact>

						<Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
								Kagame drops out of the school to assume commant of the Rwandan 
								Patriotic Army (RPA), a movement struggling for the liberation of Rwanda, and launchs
								an full-scale invasion of Rwanda which is only repelled with help from the French.
								US military advisers are notably present in Uganda at the time of the invasion.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.progressive.org/wm0900.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
							<altUrls>http://www.comebackalive.com/df/dplaces/rwanda/player4.htm</altUrls>
            </Fact>

						<Fact>
              <date>April 1994</date>
              <text>
								The Hutu (Rwanda?) government unleashes a genocide that kills 800,000 Tutsis and 50,000 
								Hutus in 89 days. 
              </text>
              <url>http://www.policyalternatives.ca/publications/articles/article303.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>

						<Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
								Following this, Kagame's Tutsi rebel force, the Rwanda Patriotic Army (RPA), invades Rwanda from 
								Uganda and takes power. A million Hutus flee to eastern Zaire (Kagame considered the Hutu refugee 
								camps a "dangerous threat to his regime" because Hutu militia who had carried out the 
								genocide were among the refugees).
              </text>
              <url>http://www.policyalternatives.ca/publications/articles/article303.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1994-1996</date>
              <text>
								US Special Forces train the Rwandan army in counterinsurgency, combat and psychological 
								operations. This training includes instructions about fighting in Zaire.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.policyalternatives.ca/publications/articles/article303.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date>July-August 1996</date>
              <text>
								Rwandan soldiers train at Fort Bragg, North Carolina.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.policyalternatives.ca/publications/articles/article303.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date>August 1996</date>
              <text>
								Kagame, who had previously trained at the US Army Command and General Staff College at 
								Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, visits Washington to discuss his concerns about Hutu refugee 
								camps in eastern Zaire with US officials.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.policyalternatives.ca/publications/articles/article303.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date>October 1996</date>
              <text>
							  The Rwandan army, lead by Kagame, along with Ugandan troops, invades Zaire. By May 1997 
								they have taken over the country and forced Mobutu to flee. They install
								Laurent Kabila, an exiled Congolese Marxist opponent of Mobutu's, as a figurehead leader.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.policyalternatives.ca/publications/articles/article303.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>
						
            <Fact>
              <date>July 1998</date>
              <text>
								Kabila expels Rwandan and Ugandan forces from the Congo. He cites as his reasons a failed 
								assassination attempt against him, and the Rwandan army's killings of Hutu refugees.
              </text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>August 2, 1998</date>
              <text>
								Rwanda and Uganda invade the Congo and occupy its eastern half (where they remain today),
								setting up surrogate "rebel" armies called the Congolese Rally for Democracy (RCD-Goma, 
								created by Rwanda) and the Movement for the Liberation of the Congo (MLC, created by Uganda). 
								Angola, Zimbabwe and Namibia send their armies to support Kabila, and Burundi joins the 
								Rwandans and Ugandans. Thus begins "Africa's First World War" involving seven armies.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.policyalternatives.ca/publications/articles/article303.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact hide="true">
              <date></date>
              <text>
								US forces are seen among Rwandan forces? (at hutu refugee camps)
              </text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>

								Oxfam calls this war "the world's biggest humanitarian disaster."
              </text>
              <url>http://www.policyalternatives.ca/publications/articles/article303.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
								It has to date claimed over 3 million lives.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.etaiwannews.com/World/2003/04/09/1049851718.htm</url>
              <urlText>AP article</urlText>
							<altUrls>http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/04/09/1049567737776.html</altUrls>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              </text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              </text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>

					</facts>				
				</Subtopic>


        <Subtopic name="Ghana">
          <facts>
            <Fact>
              <date>1952</date>
              <text>
								Dr Kwame Nkrumah is elected as the country's first prime minister.
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/special_report/africa_at_40/14157.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC report</urlText>
							<altUrls>http://www.daintycrew.com/kwamenkrumah.htm</altUrls>
            </Fact>
            
						<Fact>
              <date>1957</date>
              <text>
								Ghana becomes the first black African country to shake off the chains of colonial
								rule. In leading the country to independence, Dr Nkrumah becomes an international 
								symbol of freedom, spearheading the struggle for independence in much of 
								sub-Saharan Africa.
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/special_report/africa_at_40/14157.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC report</urlText>
							<altUrls>
								http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/1048638.stm
								http://www.daintycrew.com/kwamenkrumah.htm
							</altUrls> 
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1961</date>
              <text>
								In his book 'I Speak of Freedom', Nkrumah writes of the need to unite Africa -
								'<i>Divided we are weak; united, Africa could become one of the greatest forces 
								for good in the world</i>'.
								He calls for an anti-imperialist, pan-African organization and non-alignment 
								in the Cold War.
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/special_report/africa_at_40/14157.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC report</urlText>
							<altUrls>
								http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1961nkrumah.html
								http://www.minesandcommunities.org/Country/africa1.htm
							</altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1964</date>
              <text>
								Nkrumah declares himself himself president for life and bans opposition parties.
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/special_report/africa_at_40/14157.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC report</urlText>
							<altUrls>http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/refpages/RefArticle.aspx?refid=761554880</altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Oct 1965</date>
              <text>
								Nkrumah publishes his famous work - "Neo-Colonialism - The Last	Stage of Imperialism" - 
								in which he predicts, quite accurately as events soon prove, that Africa will suffer 
								persistent meddling by the intelligence agencies of foreign governments, particularly the 
								CIA and the KGB. The book introduces the term 'neo-colonialism', whereby a 
								state is theoretically independent,	but in reality, has its economic system and political 
								policies directed from outside.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.bidstrup.com/agony.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
							<altUrls>
								http://www.minesandcommunities.org/Country/africa1.htm
								http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/special_report/africa_at_40/14157.stm
								http://hometown.aol.com/capzpsyche/pan-african2.htm
							</altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
								The US government reacts by sending Nkrumah a note of protest	and cancelling $35 million 
								in aid to Ghana.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.minesandcommunities.org/Country/africa1.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
							<altUrls>
								http://liberiaorbit.org/lonewsnkrumahtwo.htm
							</altUrls>
            </Fact>
						
            <Fact>
              <date>1966</date>
              <text>
								A CIA-backed military coup overthrows Nkrumah. 
              </text>
              <url>http://www.seeingblack.com/x060702/nkrumah.shtml</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
							<altUrls>
								http://www.state.gov/www/about_state/history/vol_xxiv/s.html
								http://www.minesandcommunities.org/Country/africa1.htm
							</altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
								Documents declassified only in 1999 finally provide definitive proof of the US role in 
								the coup.
								In memorandum 253	Robert Komer writes '<i>FYI, we may have a pro-Western coup in Ghana 
								soon. Certain key military and police figures have been planning one for some time, and 
								Ghana's deteriorating economic condition may provide the spark. The plotters are keeping 
								us briefed, and State thinks we're more on the inside than the British.</i>'.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.state.gov/www/about_state/history/vol_xxiv/y.html</url>
              <urlText>US Govt archive</urlText>
							<altUrls>
								http://www.state.gov/www/about_state/history/vol_xxiv/x.html
								http://www.state.gov/www/about_state/history/vol_xxiv/t.html
								http://www.state.gov/www/about_state/history/vol_xxiv/z.html
								http://www.seeingblack.com/x060702/nkrumah.shtml
							</altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
								Following the coup, conditions in Ghana worsen rapidly.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.minesandcommunities.org/Country/africa1.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
								IMF involvement in Ghana follows, and Structural Adjustment Programs (SAPs) 
								are activated in 1983. Seen as a "star pupil" by the World Bank and the IMF, Ghana privatizes 
								more than 130 state enterprises including the mining sector (its main source of revenue), 
								removes tariff barriers and exchange regulations and ends subsidies for health and education.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.minesandcommunities.org/Country/africa1.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
							<altUrls>
								http://gbgm-umc.org/country_profiles/country_history.cfm?Id=33
								http://mason.gmu.edu/~kreinert/wwepdf/chap22.pdf
								http://www.nesl.edu/intljournal/VOL4/IMF.PDF
							</altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1999</date>
              <text>
								BBC listeners in Africa vote Kwame Nkrumah their "Man of the Millennium".
							</text>
              <url>http://chat.carleton.ca/~losman/</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Today</date>
              <text>
								Ghana today provides an example of the end results of IMF's policies.
								20% of Ghanaians are unemployed and the cost of food and services has gone beyond the 
								reach of the poor. GDP per capita was lower in 1998 ($390) than it was in 1975 ($411); 
								78.4% of Ghanaians live on $1 a day and 40% live below the poverty line; 75% have no access 
								to health services and 68% none to sanitation. User fees in education have raised the primary 
								school dropout rate to 40%.
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/1634514.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
							<altUrls>
								http://www.minesandcommunities.org/Country/africa1.htm								
								http://www.twnside.org.sg/title/twe276h.htm
								http://www.jubilee2000uk.org/databank/profiles/ghana.htm
								http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/correspondent/1634502.stm
								http://www.jubilee2000uk.org/worldnews/africa/Ghana_prisoner_imf.htm
								http://mason.gmu.edu/~kreinert/wwepdf/chap22.pdf
							</altUrls>
            </Fact>
						
            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
								These conditions prevail despite Ghana being the second largest gold producer in Africa.
								SAPs have compelled Ghana to sell the gold mining sector to Western multinational corporations 
								which now own up to 85% of the large-scale mining industry. More than half of the 200 active 
								gold concessions belong at least in part to Canadian companies.
								The corporations can repatriate up to 95% of their profits into foreign accounts and pay no
								income tax or duties. This means that Western companies virtually monopolize Ghana's gold which
								contributes little to its economy.
							</text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/correspondent/1634502.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
							<altUrls>
								http://www.minesandcommunities.org/Country/africa1.htm
								http://www.wrm.org.uy/bulletin/54/Ghana.html
								http://www.researchafrica.org/facts.htm
							</altUrls>
            </Fact>
						
            <Fact>
              <link>imf</link>
              <date></date>
              <text>
								The Structural Adjustment Programs (SAPs) imposed on 36 African countries since 1980 have devastated the continent, decimating national economies and health and education systems. SAPs offer loans on condition that governments drastically reduce public spending (especially on health, education and food subsidies) in favor of repayment of debt owed to Western banks, increase exports of raw materials to the West, encourage foreign investment and privatize state enterprises; the last two steps mean selling whatever national assets a poor country may have to Western multinational corporations. Under SAPs, Sub-Saharan Africa's external debt has actually increased by more than 500% since 1980, to $300 billion today. In 1997, the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) stated that in the absence of debt payments, severely indebted African countries could have saved the lives of 21 million people and given 90 million girls and women access to basic education by the year 2000. The All-African Conference of Churches has called the debt "a new form of slavery, as vicious as the slave trade."
								<br><br>
								After twenty years of SAPs, 313 million Africans lived in absolute poverty in 2001 (out of a total population of 682 million), a 63% increase over the 200 million figure for 1994. Life expectancy has dropped by 15% since 1980 and today is 47 years, the lowest in the world. 40% of Africans suffer from malnutrition and more than half are without safe drinking water. Health care spending in the 42 poorest African countries fell by 50% during the 1980s. As a result, health care systems have collapsed across the continent creating near catastrophic conditions. More than 200 million Africans have no access to health services as hundreds of clinics, hospitals and medical facilities have been closed. This has left diseases to rage unchecked, leading most alarmingly to an AIDS pandemic. More than 17 million Africans have died of HIV/AIDS which has created 12 million orphans.
								<br><br>
								Between 1986 and 1996, per capita education spending in Africa fell by 0.7% a year on average. Forty per cent of African children are out of school and the adult literacy rate in Sub- Saharan Africa is 60%, well below the developing country average of 73%. More than 140 million young Africans are illiterate. Given the annihilating social impact of SAPs all over Africa, it is not surprising that Emily Sikazwe, director of the Zambian anti-poverty group "Women for Change," asked: "What would they [the World Bank and the IMF] say if we took them to the World Court in The Hague and accused them of genocide?" 							</text>
              <url>http://www.minesandcommunities.org/Country/africa1.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>

					</facts>				
				</Subtopic>
				
        <Subtopic name="Congo">

          <facts>
            <Fact>
              <date>1959</date>
              <text>
              	Popular revolts and demands for independence from Belgium force the Belgian government 
              	to negotiate with the rebellious parties.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.alternativeinsight.com/Foreign_Policy_Failures.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>
            
            <Fact>
              <date>June 1960</date>
              <text>
              	Lumumba, already recognized as one of Africa's most vociferous leaders of 
              	anti-colonial liberation movements, is elected prime minister of the Congo Republic 
              	immediately before the country's independence.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.alternativeinsight.com/Foreign_Policy_Failures.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Aug 1960</date>
              <text>
              	The US is concerned that Lumumba will be the new Castro. Eisenhower tells CIA 
              	chief Allen Dulles to 'eliminate' Lumumba at a National Security Council meeting.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/DG03Aa01.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.wsws.org/articles/2001/jan2001/lum-j10.shtml</altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	The Church committee hearings of 1975-1976 would later confirm that
              	Eisenhower gave the order to assassinate Lumumba, as well as revealing several
              	CIA plots to assassinate Lumumba.
              </text>
              <url>http://history-matters.com/archive/church/reports/ir/html/ChurchIR_0014a.htm</url>
              <urlText>Church report</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/church/reports/ir/html/ChurchIR_0014a.htm
              	http://www.afrol.com/News2002/drc005_lumumba_us.htm
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <date>Aug 1960</date>
              <text>
              	The CIA establishes Project Wizard, a CIA covert action program aimed at removing
              	Lumumba. Not to be outdone, the Belgians also initiate 
              	<a href="http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/DG03Aa01.html">their own plot</a> to 
              	kill Lumumba later in October, entitled 'Operation Barracuda'.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A35560-2002Jul20&notFound=true</url>
              <urlText>Washington Post article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.wsws.org/articles/2001/jan2001/lum-j10.shtml</altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	Over the next few months, the CIA works with and makes payments to eight top Congolese, 
              	including Kasavubu (who would replace Lumumba) and Mobutu (then army chief of staff). 
              	All eight	play roles in Lumumba's downfall.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A35560-2002Jul20&notFound=true</url>
              <urlText>Washington Post article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/church/reports/ir/html/ChurchIR_0014a.htm</altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

           
            <Fact>
              <date>Sept 5, 1960</date>
              <text>
              	Lumumba is ousted and placed in captivity. 
              </text>
              <url>http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A35560-2002Jul20?language=printer</url>
              <urlText>Washington Post article</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Sept 19, 1960</date>
              <text>
              	The British foreign minister meets with Kissinger, pressing him to kill Lumumba.
              	During the meeting, Kissinger	expresses his wish that 'Lumumba would fall into a 
              	river full of crocodiles'.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/08/09/wcong109.xml</url>
              <urlText>Telegraph article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4211887,00.html</altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Oct 1960</date>
              <text>
              	The CIA provides Mobutu with $250,000 to win parliamentary support for a Mobutu government. 
              	However, when legislators balk at approving any prime minister other than Lumumba, the CIA
              	prevents the parliament from reopening. The following month the CIA is authorized to provide arms, 
              	ammunition, sabotage materials and training to Mobutu's military in the event it has 
              	to resist pro-Lumumba forces.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A35560-2002Jul20&notFound=true</url>
              <urlText>Washington Post article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://history-matters.com/archive/church/reports/ir/html/ChurchIR_0016a.htm</altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Jan 1961</date>
              <text>
              	Lumumba and two of his comrades are killed, allegedy while attempting to escape
              	confinement. It is recently revealed that he was actually executed by a firing 
              	squad commanded by a Belgian.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.un.org/ecosocdev/geninfo/afrec/subjindx/154gov2.htm</url>
              <urlText>UN report</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.usnews.com/usnews/doubleissue/mysteries/patrice.htm
              	http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4211887,00.html
              	http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/1802929.stm
              	http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/1660615.stm
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Jan 1961</date>
              <text>
              	Barely three weeks after his death, the US authorises new funds to be given to 
              	the people who arranged Lumumba's murder.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A35560-2002Jul20&notFound=true</url>
              <urlText>Washington Post article</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

           
            <Fact>
              <date>1965-1997</date>
              <text>
              	Mobutu seizes full power and reigns as a despot for 35 years with US support. In 
              	1980 he bans all political parties except his own. He personally controls 70% of the 
              	country's wealth, valued at $5 billion. At his death in 1997, he is personally 
              	responsible for 80% of his country's debts. 
              </text>
              <url>http://www.alternativeinsight.com/Foreign_Policy_Failures.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
							<altUrls>http://www.wsws.org/articles/1999/may1999/cong-m14.shtml</altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	During this period (up till 1991 when the US cuts aid), Mobutu receives over $1.5
              	billion in economic and military aid from the US while US companies increase
              	their share of Congo's fabulous mineral wealth.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.covertaction.org/full_text_69_01.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Blum/Zaire_KH.html</altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact hide="true">
              <date>1996</date>
              <text>
              	Operation Guardian Assistance http://cicg.free.fr/diremp/depl7597.htm
              	
              	troops/marines doing ? at Rwandan Hutu Refugee camps, in area 
              	where revolution begins.
              </text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            
            <Fact>
              <date>1997</date>
              <text>
              	Laurent-Denise Kabila forces a dissipated Mobutu from power. He inherits a country in 
              	ruins which soon finds itself in a brutal civil war in which to date an estimated 3 million
              	people have been killed. The resource rich Congo, once the most 
              	promising of the liberated central African countries, after 35 years of US involvement 
              	in its affairs, is an economically, politically and socially bankrupt nation.
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/country_profiles/1076399.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20030528-054732-3949r.htm
              	http://www.sfbayview.com/052803/coporate052803.shtml
              	http://www.alternativeinsight.com/Foreign_Policy_Failures.html
              	http://www.forward.com/issues/2003/03.05.30/news8.html
              	http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1052251800613&call_pageid=968332188492&col=968793972154
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>
					</facts>
				</Subtopic>

				<Subtopic name="Diego Garcia">
					<facts>
            <Fact>
              <date>1965</date>
              <text>
              	The US wants a base in the Indian Ocean, however one without a 'population problem' which
              	might upset the base's operation. Diego Garcia is chosen, however there is a slight problem
              	- the islands are home to some 1800 people.<br><br>
              	To deal with this problem, British politicians, diplomats and civil servants begin a campaign 
              	- in their own words - '<i>to maintain the pretence there were no permanent inhabitants</i>' 
              	on the islands. One official writes '<i>There will be no indigenous population except 
              	seagulls</i>'.
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/1005064.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1966</date>
              <text>
              	Britain leases the Chagos islands (the largest atoll of which is Diego Garcia) to 
              	the US for 50 years. 
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/country_profiles/2988827.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC timeline</urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date>1966</date>
              <text>
              	Britain begins a program to drive out the residents of the Chagos islands (who had 
              	been living there for 
              	<a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/06/12/60minutes/main558378.shtml">200 
              	years</a>). Most are sent to Mauritius. 
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/country_profiles/2988827.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC timeline</urlText>
							<altUrls>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/2380013.stm</altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1970</date>
              <text>
              	The Americans arrive on the island, and the remaining natives on Diego Garcia are 
              	called together and told they will have to leave.
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/835963.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
							<altUrls>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/1005064.stm</altUrls>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	They are not allowed to take anything with them except a suitcase of their clothes.
              	Without possessions or any professional skills, the islanders receive no help resettling
              	or recompensation, becoming squatters in a foreign land.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0306/18/i_ins.01.html</url>
              <urlText>CNN transcript</urlText>
							<altUrls>http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/06/12/60minutes/main558378.shtml</altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	The evacuation is kept a secret from the world for the next 30 years, with the official
              	story being that Diego Garcia had no native people. 
              </text>
              <url>http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/06/12/60minutes/main558378.shtml</url>
              <urlText>CBC article</urlText>
							<altUrls>
								http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0306/18/i_ins.01.html
								http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/not_in_website/syndication/monitoring/2076937.stm
								http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/835963.stm
								http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/1005064.stm
							</altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1971</date>
              <text>
              	Construction begins on a US naval base on Diego Garcia
              </text>
              <url>http://www.dg.navy.mil/history/frameset.htm</url>
              <urlText>US Navy site</urlText>
							<altUrls>http://www.cbc.ca/news/iraq/maps/buildup_diegogarcia.jsp</altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1999</date>
              <text>Recently declassified documents are discovered, revealing that the colonial 
              	officials thought no one would notice if they deported the islanders. 
              	One document reveals that '<i>evicting the people and leaving the island to the seagulls</i>' 
              	was done at the request of the US. It reads: '<i>The United States Government will require 
              	the removal of the entire population of the atoll by July.</i>', a requirement the British 
              	were only too happy to oblige. 
              </text>
              <url>http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/06/12/60minutes/main558378.shtml</url>
              <urlText>CBC article</urlText>
							<altUrls>http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0306/18/i_ins.01.html</altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Sept 2000</date>
              <text>
              	With the islanders fighting in high court in London for the right to return to home,
              	the US exerts pressure on the British Government to prevent the return home of the islanders.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4057649,00.html</url>
              <urlText>Guardian article</urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Nov 2000</date>
              <text>
              	A court in London rules that the deportation was illegal. The islanders win the right 
              	to return 'home' to two islands on the archipelago, however not to their original home - 
              	Diego Garcia, as the US refuses to allow this. The court also fails to provide any 
              	compensation to the islanders.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,392685,00.html</url>
              <urlText>Guardian article</urlText>
							<altUrls>
								http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/2380013.stm
								http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/06/12/60minutes/main558378.shtml
								http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,410578,00.html
							</altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Nov 2002</date>
              <text>
              	The US makes a formal request to launch 'offensive actions' from Diego Garcia 
              	as America continues its build-up for the |selling campaign| against Saddam Hussein.
              	Although the US already has a military base on the island, it can be used only 
              	for defensive and training purposes, unless Britain permits attack operations.
              </text>
              <url>http://observer.guardian.co.uk/iraq/story/0,12239,846560,00.html</url>
              <urlText>Guardian article</urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>
            
            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	The US base on Diego Garcia is the 
              	<a href="http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cm199899/cmhansrd/vo990317/debtext/90317-23.htm">largest</a> 
              	outside the continental United States, and has been used by the US to launch B-2 and 
              	B-52 bombers in the recent |afghanistan_pipeline Afghanistan| and |selling Iraq| wars.
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/2380013.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
							<altUrls>
								http://observer.guardian.co.uk/iraq/story/0,12239,846560,00.html
								http://www.cbc.ca/news/iraq/maps/buildup_diegogarcia.jsp
								http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2002/iraq/bases/diego.garcia.html
								http://www.dg.navy.mil/history/frameset.htm
							</altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Dec 2002</date>
              <text>
              	A report is released revealing that torture has been used by the CIA on al-Qaeda suspects
              	being held by the US on secret overseas detention centres including Diego Garcia.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.guardian.co.uk/Print/0,3858,4573343,00.html</url>
              <urlText>Guardian article</urlText>
							<altUrls>
								http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,881841,00.html
								http://www.cpa.org.au/garchve03/1131cruelty.html
								http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A37943-2002Dec25
								http://pilger.carlton.com/print/132978
							</altUrls>
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <date>Today</date>
              <text>
              	The islanders have never fully integrated into their adopted communities and say 
              	the expulsion condemned them to a lifetime of poverty.
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/not_in_website/syndication/monitoring/2076937.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
							<altUrls>
								http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/1005130.stm
								http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/835963.stm
							</altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	They are currently suing both the US and the British governments for compensation 
              	and the right to return to their home.
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/2380013.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
							<altUrls>http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,823613,00.html</altUrls>
            </Fact>

					</facts>				
				</Subtopic>

				<Subtopic name="" hide="true">
					<facts>
            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              </text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              </text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
							<altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>
					</facts>				
				</Subtopic>

			</subtopics>
		</Topic>


		<Topic name="Israel">
			<subtopics>
				<Subtopic name="Israel Overview" nocomment="true">
					<facts>
						<Fact>
							<text>
								<table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="6" align="right" valign="top" border="0"><tr><td valign=top><img src="arafat.jpg" width="148" height="200" border="0"></td></tr></table>
									Israel is the world's |largest_benefactor largest benefactor| of US military aid. With Israel
									being the world's fourth strongest military power, with additionally many nuclear and other 
									chemical and biological weapons, why is this aid neccessary. In particular, I would like to 
									pose the following two questions:
									<br><br><span class=date>1. What does the US gain through helping Israel?</span><br><br>
									Is it really in US interests to help Israel. Israel, in deceiving America into some of 
									its foreign policy failures (i.e. in |libya Libya| and in |bombing_marines the bombing| of the marine 
									barracks in Lebanon) hardly presents a grateful customer.
									<br><br><span class=date>2. Does the US support of Israel help solve the situation?</span><br><br>
									Is the vetoing of some 50-odd UN resolutions the best way to peace? Or the increasing of military aid
									to Israel <a href="http://www.palestinechronicle.com/article.php?story=2002060115392650">following</a>
									such acts as its illegal invasion of Lebanon? Does the US approach represent the best way towards 
									a peaceful solution, or is the US simply aiding in Israel's repressive occupation of Palestine?
							</text>
							<notes>
								further reading:
									http://www.1upinfo.com/country-guide-study/israel/
									http://www2.uiuc.edu/ro/observer/archive/vol11/issue6/mideast.html
									http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in_depth/world/2001/israel_and_palestinians/timeline/
							</notes>
						</Fact>
						<Fact hide="true">
							<date>1. What does the US gain through helping Israel?</date>
							<text>
								Is it really in the US's interests to help Israel. Israel, in deceiving 
								America (in two cases in |libya Libya| as well as the bombing of the marine barracks 
								in Lebanon) into some of its foreign policy failures is hardly a grateful customer.
							</text>
							<date>2. Does the US support of Israel help solve the situation?</date>
							<text>
								Is the vetoing of some 50-odd UN resolutions the best way to peace? Or the increasing of military aid
								to Israel following its illegal invasion of Lebanon? Does the US support and mediation represent the
								best way towards a peaceful solution, or is the US simply supporting Israel's repressive occupation
								of Palestine?
							</text>
						</Fact>
					</facts>
				</Subtopic>
				<Subtopic name="Seeds of Conflict">
					<facts>
						<Fact hide="true">
							<text>
								A LOT of research to go into this before it gets added to the site, however	I believe
								it is a very important addition to the overall picture - nowhere is the control of the US
								media more apparent than in this case, thus the need for correcting the historical record
								here is the greatest.
								<br><br>
								Most of the outline I have based on Chomsky's book 'The Hidden Triangle'.
							</text>
						</Fact>
						
						
						<Fact>
							<date>1917</date>
							<text>
								Lord Balfour writes the Balfour declaration, committing Britain to 'facilitate' the
								'establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people' on the condition
								that 'nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of the
								existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine ...'.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/cib/2000-01/01cib06.htm</url>
              <urlText>Background Brief</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>1919</date>
							<text>
								President Wilson's King-Crane Commission reports that '<i>the Zionists looked forward to a
								practically complete dispossession of the present non-Jewish inhabitants of Palestine</i>' and
								estimated that the latter - '<i>nearly nine-tenths of the whole</i>' - are '<i>emphatically against
								the entire Zionist programme</i>'.<br><br>
								The Commission warns that the Zionist programme 'would be a gross violation of the principle
								[of self-determination], and of the people's rights, though it kept within the forms of law'.
								The Commission, while expressing '<i>a deep sense of sympathy for the Jewish cause</i>', recommends
								limitation of Jewish immigration and abandonment of the goal of a Jewish state.<br><br>
								It also warns that '<i>No British officer, consulted by the Commissioners, believed that the 
								Zionist Program could be carried out except by force of arms ... That of itself is evidence 
								of a strong sense of the injustice of the Zionist program ... The initial claim, often submitted by 
								Zionist representatives, that they have a 'right' to Palestine based on occupation of two 
								thousand years ago, can barely be seriously considered.</i>' Its conclusions
								are ignored.
							</text>
              <url>http://domino.un.org/UNISPAL.nsf/0/16e17fc18fab11d785256ced0075086e?OpenDocument</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.palestinecenter.org/cpap/documents/recommendations.html
              	http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/cib/2000-01/01cib06.htm
              	http://www.hri.org/docs/king-crane/syria-recomm.html
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>1919</date>
							<text>
								Lord Balfour writes '<i>The contradiction between the letter of the Covenant and the policy 
								of the Allies is even more flagrant in the case of the independent nation of Palestine than
								in that of the independent nation of Syria. For in Palestine we do not propose even to go 
								through the forum of consulting the wishes of the present inhabitants of the country, though
								the American [King-Crane] Commission has been going through the form of asking what they are.
								The four great powers are committed to |zionism Zionism| and Zionism, be it right or wrong, good or
								bad, is rooted in age-long tradition, in present needs, in future hopes, of far profounder
								import than the desires and prejudices of the 700,000 Arabs who now inhabit that ancient land.</i>'.
							</text>
              <url>http://membres.lycos.fr/israelonline/mr_balfour.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.alinaam.org.za/library/oisrael2.html
              	http://www.ralphmag.org/BI/king-crane-2.html
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<text>
								The Palestinians resist as expected, often resorting to terrorist violence against Jews, the
								worse case being in August 1929 when 133 Jews area killed by Palestinians and 110 Palestinians die
								at the hands of the British police.
							</text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in_depth/world/2001/israel_and_palestinians/timeline/1936.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC in-depth</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>1938</date>
							<text>
								Mahatma Ghandi comments on the Palestine conflict - 'Palestine belongs to the Arabs in the same 
								sense that England belongs to the English or France to the French ... What is going on in Palestine 
								today cannot be justified by any moral code of conduct ... If they [the Jews] must look to the 
								Palestine of geography as their national home, it is wrong to enter it under the shadow of the 
								British gun. A religious act cannot be performed with the aid of the bayonet or the bomb. They 
								can settle in Palestine only by the goodwill of the Arabs ... As it is, they are co-sharers with 
								the British in despoiling a people who have done no wrong to them. I am not defending the Arab 
								excesses. I wish they had chosen the way of non-violence in resisting what they rightly regard as 
								an unacceptable encroachment upon their country. But according to the accepted canons of right 
								and wrong, nothing can be said against the Arab resistance in the face of overwhelming odds.'
							</text>
              <url>http://www.alinaam.org.za/library/oisrael2.html</url>
              <urlText>Collection of Quotes</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>1940</date>
							<text>
								The noted Zionist Yossef Weitz, Director of the Jewish National Fund affiliated to the 
								World Zionist Organization, writes that '<i>It should be clear for us that there is not room 
								for two peoples in this country. If the Arabs leave it, there will be enough for us ... There is 
								nothing else to do but to remove them all; we mustn't leave a single village, a single tribe ... 
								We must explain to Roosevelt and all the heads of friendly states that the land of Israel isn't 
								too small if all the Arabs leave and if the borders are pushed back a little to the north, as 
								far as the Litani, and to the east, on the Golan Heights.</i>'
							</text>
              <url>http://www.mediamonitors.net/mosaddeq24.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

					</facts>
				</Subtopic>

				<Subtopic name="Lebanon Invasion in 1978" shortName="Lebanon Invasion '78" link="lebanon_invasion_78">
					<facts>
						<Fact>
							<date>1954</date>
							<notes>1958 marines</notes>
							<text>
								Ben-Gurion proposes that Israel support the establishment in part of Lebanon 
								of a Maronite-dominated Christian ministate that would ally itself with Israel. 
							</text>
              <url>http://countrystudies.us/israel/33.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>1970</date>
							<text>
								 The PLO is expelled from Jordan, and sets up its major base of operations in southern 
								 Lebanon, from which it attacks northern Israel. 
							</text>
              <url>http://countrystudies.us/israel/33.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www2.uiuc.edu/ro/observer/archive/vol11/issue6/mideast.html
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>1975</date>
							<text>
								Civil war breaks out between a predominantly Muslim leftist coalition and Christian right-wing 
								militias.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.lonelyplanet.com/destinations/middle_east/lebanon/history.htm</url>
              <urlText>Lonely Planet guide</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>



						<Fact>
							<date></date>
							<text>
								During the two years of civil war, Israel reportedly invests US$150 million in equipping and 
								training the Maronite Phalange Party's militia.
							</text>
              <url>http://countrystudies.us/israel/33.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>April 1976</date>
							<text>
								Syria intervenes at the request of the Lebanese president to force an uneasy peace, however
								the cease-fire proves unstable and hostilities resume full scale in '77.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.encyclopedia.com/html/section/lebanon_history.asp</url>
              <urlText>Encyclopedia.com</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.lonelyplanet.com/destinations/middle_east/lebanon/history.htm
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>


						<Fact>
							<date>1978</date>
							<text>
 								Israel launches a full-scale invasion of Lebanon with 20,000 troops, supposedly in response 
 								to Palestinian guerilla activity, however later studies show the invasion (Operation Litani) 
 								had been planned two years prior to this. 								
							</text>
              <url>http://www.jewwatch.com/jew-atrocities-lebanon.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>
					</facts>
				</Subtopic>

				<Subtopic name="Ariel Sharon" hide="true">
					<facts>
						<Fact>
							<date>1983</date>
							<text>
								The West Bank and Gaza '<i>will not be, not now and not in the future, a Palestinian state</i>'.
							</text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in_depth/world/2001/israel_and_palestinians/timeline/1982.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC timeline</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date></date>
							<text>
							</text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date></date>
							<text>
							</text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>
					</facts>
				</Subtopic>
				
				<Subtopic name="Lebanon Invasion in 1982" shortName="Lebanon Invasion '82" link="lebanon_invasion_82">
					<facts>
						<Fact>
							<date>July 1981</date>
							<text>
								Israel attacks civilian targets in Lebanon. Palestinian retaliation then elicits heavy Israeli 
								bombing. Some 450 Arabs - nearly all Lebanese civilians - are reported killed, along with six Jews.
								Following this, the US mediates a new ceasefire.
							</text>
              <url>http://almashriq.hiof.no/lebanon/300/350/355/april-war/Limited-War-in-Lebanon.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.jewwatch.com/jew-atrocities-lebanon.html
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date></date>
							<text>
								The PLO observes the ceasefire except in two retalatory cases, only one of which results 
								in any damage. In contrast, Israel violates the terms daily.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.zmag.org/chomsky/ni/ni-c10-s05.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://almashriq.hiof.no/lebanon/300/350/355/april-war/Limited-War-in-Lebanon.html
              	http://www.mediamonitors.net/mosaddeq24.html#3
              	http://www.washington-report.org/Washington-Report_org/www/backissues/050382/820503006.htm
              	http://www.washington-report.org/Washington-Report_org/www/backissues/051782/820517006.htm
              	http://www.washington-report.org/Washington-Report_org/www/backissues/062882/820628007.htm
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact hide="true">
							<date>1968-1981</date>
							<text>
								Between 1968-1981 Israeli attacks in Lebanon killed n Lebanese and Palestinians. In contrast,
								PLO operations mounted out of Lebanon against Israeli citizens killed n Israeli citizens.
							</text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>


						<Fact hide="true">
							<date></date>
							<text>
								Israel plans the invasion of Lebanon, including the taking of Beruit - all that is needed is
								an excuse.
							</text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>February 1982</date>
							<text>
								Israel's Major General Yehoshua Saguym, Chief of Israel's Intelligence, meets with Pentagon 
								officials and Secretary of Defense Haig to outline Israel's plans for a major invasion of 
								Lebanon. Following this meeting Israel takes delivery of $217,695,000 worth of military equipment 
								from the U.S							
							</text>
              <url>http://www.jewwatch.com/jew-atrocities-lebanon.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.mediamonitors.net/mosaddeq24.html
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>April 1982</date>
							<text>
								The US and Soviet Ambassadors to Lebanon meet separately with Lebanon's President Elias Sarkis, 
								who asks both for help from their countries in staving off a feared Israeli invasion of southern 
								Lebanon. Israeli Prime Minister Begin assures them '<i>that the Israeli cabinet has taken no 
								decision to go into Lebanon in any way, shape or form.</i>'
							</text>
              <url>http://www.washington-report.org/Washington-Report_org/www/backissues/041982/820419006.htm</url>
              <urlText>Timeline</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>


						<Fact>
							<date>June 5, 1982</date>
							<text>
								An attempt is made to assassinate Shlomo Argov, Israeli ambassador to the United Kingdom. 
								Although the attempt was not made by the PLO, rather s group opposed to the PLO allegedly 
								hoping to provoke an Israeli assault, Israel finds in this a sufficient excuse to execute 
								their plans made months earlier.
							</text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/country_profiles/819200.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC timeline</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,2763,902422,00.html
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date></date>
							<text>
								Although the attempt was not made by the PLO, rather a group opposed to the PLO (allegedly hoping 
								to provoke an Israeli assault on the PLO), Israel finds in this a sufficient excuse to execute 
								their planned invasion.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,2763,902422,00.html</url>
              <urlText>Guardian article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>June 5, 1982</date>
							<text>
								Mr Ghassan Tueni, a Christian, and the official representative of the Government of Lebanon at 
								the UN, informs the UN of Israeli aggression and requests that the Security Council act '<i>to
								stop the aggression against Lebanon</i>'.
							</text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>June 5, 1982</date>
							<text>
								In response to Lebanon's pleas, the Security Council unanimously passes a Resolution calling 
								for a cease-fire.
							</text>
              <url>http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=S/RES/508%20(1982)&Lang=E&Area=RESOLUTION</url>
              <urlText>UN Resolution 508</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>June 6, 1982</date>
							<text>
								Israel responds by invading Lebanon. Initially the declared aim of the invasion is to create 
								a 40km wide PLO-free zone north of Israel, however the invasion quickly proceeds in accordance 
								with the earlier made plans - the Israeli forces head straight to Beirut.
							</text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.washington-report.org/Washington-Report_org/www/backissues/062882/820628007.htm
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>
					</facts>
				</Subtopic>
				
				<Subtopic name="Reactions to Israel's '82 'liberation' of Lebanon" shortName=" - Reactions" link="lebanon_invasion_reaction">
					<facts>

						<Fact>
							<date></date>
							<text>
								Israel's invasion of Lebanon is often reported in the American Press as a humanitarian 
								<a href="http://www.mideastfacts.com/pp_ni-c10.html">'liberation'</a>. To consider whether the 
								Lebanese really felt liberated, we need only consider the expressed reactions of the three populations 
								in Lebanon - the Christians, the Shi'ite Muslims, and the Palestinians. I also examine here the worldwide 
								(i.e. UN) reaction, to highlight the uniqueness and also importance of the US support of Israel in the 
								invasion.
							</text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>June 6, 1982</date>
							<text>
								The UN passes a further resolution, which '<i>Demands that Israel withdraw its military forces
								forthwith and unconditionally to the internationally recognized borders of Lebanon</i>'.
							</text>
              <url>http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=S/RES/509%20(1982)&Lang=E&Area=RESOLUTION</url>
              <urlText>UN Resolution 509</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>June 8, 1982</date>
							<text>
								The US gives its official blessing to the invasion, vetoing a Secutiy Council resolution that 
								'<i>Condemns the non-compliance</i>' of Israel with the earlier resolution, calling for 
								immediate cessation of hostilities and withdarwal of Israeli forces.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/UN/usvetoes.html</url>
              <urlText>US Vetoes timeline</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>June 22</date>
							<text>
								Mr Ghassan Tueni, a Christian Lebanese, and the official representative of the Government of 
								Lebanon at the UN, calls for the '<i>immediate and unconditional withdrawal of Israeli forces from 
								Lebanon</i>' citing UN Resolution 509, deploring the fact that the UN peacekeeping forces were 
								unable '<i>to defend [Lebanon] against aggression</i>'.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0896086011/qid=1059398904/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_1/103-9042595-4660600?v=glance&s=books&n=507846</url>
              <urlText>Naom Chomsky - Fateful Triangle</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://zena.secureforum.com/Znet/chomsky/ni/ni-c06-s13.html
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date></date>
							<text>
								He also later comments on the name given to the Israeli invasion: 'Peace for Galilee' - '<i>To
								occupy almost half of a country, destory its capital, disrupt its economy, ferciously kill its
								civilian population by the thousands - for the sake of 'Peace for Galilee' - is indeed a very 
								strange notion of peace!</i>'
							</text>
              <url>http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0896086011/qid=1059398904/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_1/103-9042595-4660600?v=glance&s=books&n=507846</url>
              <urlText>Naom Chomsky - Fateful Triangle</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date></date>
							<text>
								The Prime Minister of Lebanon, Shafik Wazzan, a Muslim, also condemned the invasion. At one 
								point, referring to the unremitting Israeli attacks on Beruit, he complains '<i>Every time we 
								reach some kind of understanding, we run into a new escalation as if designed to pressure us. 
								You can quote me: this is an international conspiracy against Lebanon and the Lebanese. You want 
								me to remain silent while Philip Habib watches the bombardment of residential areas? As if we 
								were rats in this country! Shafik Wazzan cannot accept this</i>'.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0896086011/qid=1059398904/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_1/103-9042595-4660600?v=glance&s=books&n=507846</url>
              <urlText>Naom Chomsky - Fateful Triangle</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date></date>
							<text>
								The former Prime Minister of Lebanon, <a href="http://www.arabicnews.com/ansub/Daily/Day/000122/2000012203.html">Saeb 
								Salam</a>, also a Muslim, condemned the merciless attacks on the civilian population, and demanded that Israel pay 
								reparations, blaming the US for 'backing Israel blindly'.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0896086011/qid=1059398904/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_1/103-9042595-4660600?v=glance&s=books&n=507846</url>
              <urlText>Naom Chomsky - Fateful Triangle</urlText>
              <notes>
              	Saeb Salam brokered an agreement between US envoy Philip Habib and Palestine Liberation Organisation leader Yasser Arafat that ended the Palestinian military presence in Lebanon three months after the Israeli invasion.
              	http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2000/466/re3.htm
              </notes>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>


						<Fact hide="true">
							<date></date>
							<text>
								The justification in terms of it being a 'humanitarian' invasion is also contradicted by the Israeli
								approach ...
							</text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact hide="true">
							<date></date>
							<text>
								The fact that their actions also failed to end the civil war (it is regarded as having ended in 1990)
								also makes this justification hard to accept.
							</text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/country_profiles/819200.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC timeline</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>
					</facts>
				</Subtopic>
				<Subtopic name="The Aftermath of the '82 invasion of Lebanon" shortName=" - The Aftermath" link="lebanon_invasion_aftermath">
					<facts>

						<Fact>
							<date></date>
							<text>
								An estimated 18,000 Lebanese and Palestinians were killed, 30,000 injured and 500,000-800,000 made
								homeless in the invasion.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.worldsocialist-cwi.org/index2.html?/eng/2003/05/27history.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.wsws.org/articles/1999/jun1999/isra-j29_prn.shtml
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<note>need better article</note>
							<date>August 1982</date>
							<text>
								A US-mediated ceasefire is brokered, by which the PLO guerillas will leave Beirut and US troops
								will oversee the evacuation and protect the now defenceless citizens of Beirut.
							</text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in_depth/world/2001/israel_and_palestinians/timeline/1982.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.washington-report.org/Washington-Report_org/www/backissues/082382/820823006.htm
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>August 23, 1982</date>
							<text>
								After a heavily rigged election Christian Phalange leader Bashir Gemayel becomes president 
								of Lebanon.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.worldsocialist-cwi.org/index2.html?/eng/2003/05/27history.html</url>
              <urlText>Timeline</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>September 10, 1982</date>
							<text>
								Having overseen the evacuation of the PLO guerillas, the US troops also leave, breaking the terms 
								of the agreement and leaving the citizens defenseless.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.rand.org/publications/CF/CF129/CF-129.chapter6.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.washington-report.org/Washington-Report_org/www/backissues/082382/820823006.htm
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>September 14, 1982</date>
							<text>
								Following the assassination of President-elect, Bashir al-Jumayyil, Israel breaks
								the cease-fire and ignoring UN and US protest occupies West Beirut, encircling the Sabra and 
								Shatila refugee camps.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.worldsocialist-cwi.org/index2.html?/eng/2003/05/27history.html</url>
              <urlText>Timeline</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.rand.org/publications/CF/CF129/CF-129.chapter6.html
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>Sept 1982</date>
							<text>
								Israeli forces send Lebanese Christian militiamen, known for their history of atrocities and 
								hatred of the Palestinians, into the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps, and watch as they 
								massacre an estimated 2000 unarmed civilians.
							</text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/2978970.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date></date>
							<text>
								Israel's original justification for the breaking of the cease-fire was to prevent the 
								Lebanese Christian militiamen from undertaking such an atrocity. This justification was 
								later retracted, however it indicates foreknowledge that such a massacre was likely if 
								they were to let such militiamen into an undefended refugee camp.
							</text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date></date>
							<text>
								A later justification was that the camp was full of 'terrorists'. However, in massacring 2000 
								men, women and children, only two Lebanese were killed, hardly indicitave of armed terrorist 
								resistance. The PLO had of course already withdrawn, as part of the ceasefire agreement which 
								Israel broke.
							</text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>Feb 1983</date>
							<text>
								An Israeli government inquiry absolves itself of any blame except '<i>indirect responsibility 
								for the massacre since the I.D.F. held the area</i>'. It recommends Ariel Sharon (now prime 
								minister) resign from his post as defense minister for failing to act to prevent the massacre.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/History/kahan.html</url>
              <urlText>Kahan Commission report</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1394377.stm
              	http://www.redress.btinternet.co.uk/sharon.htm
              	http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/History/Sabra_&_Shatila.html
              	http://www.dawn.com/2001/11/30/int20.htm
              	http://www.palestinemonitor.org/israelipoli/sabra_shatilla_links.htm
            	</altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>April 1983</date>
							<text>
								The US embassy in Beruit is partially destroyed by a bomb, killing 50 people.
							</text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/september/20/newsid_2525000/2525197.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<link>bombing_marines</link>
							<date>October 1983</date>
							<text>
              	241 US Marines are killed by a truck bomb in Beruit. 
							</text>
              <url>http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/1999/century/episodes/09/currents/</url>
              <urlText>CNN article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2951938.stm
              	http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/05/30/iran.barracks.bombing/
              	http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/october/23/newsid_2489000/2489117.stm
              	http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/war/sept_11/build_up_01.shtml
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>October 1983</date>
							<text>
								Ex-Mossad agent Victor Ostrovsky, in his book 'By Way of Deception, writes that the Mossad knew 
								of the bombing in advance, however only gave the US the usual general notice that they had 
								reason to believe someone might be planning an operation against them. He says the Mossad 
								hoped the attacks would poison American-Arab relations, with the general attitude about the 
								Americans being: 'Hey, they wanted to stick their noses into this Lebanon thing, let them 
								pay the price.'
							</text>
              <url>http://www.codoh.com/zionweb/zionsob241die.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://feralnews.com/issues/israeli_espionage/bwod_322-5.html
              	http://sonsofliberty.org/america-sos/terrorism_2.php
              	http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/5260/guardian17499.html
              	http://zog.to/3/aipac/90-09-13.htm
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>
								
								
						<Fact hide="true">
							<date>October 1983</date>
							<text>
								'93(?) invasion ...
							</text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>2001</date>
							<text>
								A year following Israel's withdrawl from Lebanon, the Lebanese government considers
								suing Israel for compensation over its 22-year occupation, estimating the damage from 
								the Israeli occupation at about $1bn.
							</text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1408746.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>Today</date>
							<text>
								A Belgian court rules that a case for crimes against humanity by survivors of the 1982 Sabra 
								and Shatila massacres brought against an Israeli general by can go ahead. A trial
								against Sharon however will <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2754877.stm">have 
								to wait</a> as he is currently Prime Minister of Israel.
							</text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/2978970.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/2662635.stm
              	http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article1568.shtml
              	http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1394377.stm
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date></date>
							<text>
								To date, not a single individual has been brought to justice for the massacre.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.hrw.org/press/2001/06/isr0622.htm</url>
              <urlText>HRW article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

					</facts>
				</Subtopic>


				<Subtopic name="UN Resolutions against Israel" shortName="UN Resolutions" hide="true">
					<facts>

						<Fact>
							<date>1955</date>
							<text>
								 ... 'condemns' Israel for Gaza raid
							</text>
              <url>http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=S/RES/106%20(1955)&Lang=E&Area=RESOLUTION</url>
              <urlText>Resolution 106</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>1956</date>
							<text>
								... 'condemns' Israel for raid on Syria that killed fifty-six people
							</text>
              <url>http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=S/RES/111%20(1956)&Lang=E&Area=RESOLUTION</url>
              <urlText>Resolution 111</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>1958</date>
							<text>
								'recommends' Israel suspend its 'no-man's zone' in Jerusalem
							</text>
              <url>http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=S/RES/127%20(1958)&Lang=E&Area=RESOLUTION</url>
              <urlText>Resolution 127</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>1961</date>
							<text>
								... 'urges' Israel to comply with UN decisions
							</text>
              <url>http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=S/RES/162%20(1961)&Lang=E&Area=RESOLUTION</url>
              <urlText>Resolution 162</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>1962</date>
							<text>
								... determines flagrant violations' by Israel in its attack on Syria
							</text>
              <url>http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=S/RES/171%20(1962)&Lang=E&Area=RESOLUTION</url>
              <urlText>Resolution 171</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>1966</date>
							<text>
								... 'censures' Israel for its attack on Samu in the West Bank, then under Jordanian control
							</text>
              <url>http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=S/RES/228%20(1966)&Lang=E&Area=RESOLUTION</url>
              <urlText>Resolution 228</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>1967</date>
							<text>
								... 'urges' Israel to allow return of new 1967 Palestinian refugees
							</text>
              <url>http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=S/RES/237%20(1967)&Lang=E&Area=RESOLUTION</url>
              <urlText>Resolution 237</urlText>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>1968</date>
							<text>
								... 'condemns' Israel for its massive attack on Karameh in Jordan
							</text>
              <url>http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=S/RES/248%20(1968)&Lang=E&Area=RESOLUTION</url>
              <urlText>Resolution 248</urlText>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>1968</date>
							<text>
								'calls' on Israel to refrain from holding military parade in Jerusalem
							</text>
              <url>http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=S/RES/250%20(1968)&Lang=E&Area=RESOLUTION</url>
              <urlText>Resolution 250</urlText>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>1968</date>
							<text>
								... 'deeply deplores' Israeli military parade in Jerusalem in defiance of Resolution 250
							</text>
              <url>http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=S/RES/251%20(1968)&Lang=E&Area=RESOLUTION</url>
              <urlText>Resolution 251</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>1968</date>
							<text>
								... 'declares invalid' Israel's acts to unify Jerusalem as Jewish capital
							</text>
              <url>http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=S/RES/252%20(1968)&Lang=E&Area=RESOLUTION</url>
              <urlText>Resolution 252</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>1968</date>
							<text>
								 ... 'condemns' Israeli raids on Jordan as 'flagrant violation'
							</text>
              <url>http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=S/RES/256%20(1968)&Lang=E&Area=RESOLUTION</url>
              <urlText>Resolution 256</urlText>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>1968</date>
							<text>
								... 'deplores' Israel's refusal to accept UN mission to probe occupation
							</text>
              <url>http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=S/RES/259%20(1968)&Lang=E&Area=RESOLUTION</url>
              <urlText>Resolution 259</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>1968</date>
							<text>
								... 'condemns' Israel for attack on Beirut airport
							</text>
              <url>http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=S/RES/262%20(1968)&Lang=E&Area=RESOLUTION</url>
              <urlText>Resolution 262</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>1969</date>
							<text>
								... 'condemns' Israel for air attacks for Salt in Jordan
							</text>
              <url>http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=S/RES/265%20(1969)&Lang=E&Area=RESOLUTION</url>
              <urlText>Resolution 265</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>1969</date>
							<text>
								... 'censures' Israel for administrative acts to change the status of Jerusalem
							</text>
              <url>http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=S/RES/267%20(1969)&Lang=E&Area=RESOLUTION</url>
              <urlText>Resolution 267</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>1969</date>
							<text>
								... 'condemns' Israel for air attacks on villages in southern Lebanon
							</text>
              <url>http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=S/RES/270%20(1969)&Lang=E&Area=RESOLUTION</url>
              <urlText>Resolution 270</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>1969</date>
							<text>
								... 'condemns' Israel's failure to obey UN resolutions on Jerusalem
							</text>
              <url>http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=S/RES/271%20(1969)&Lang=E&Area=RESOLUTION</url>
              <urlText>Resolution 271</urlText>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>1970</date>
							<text>
								... 'demands' withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon
							</text>
              <url>http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=S/RES/279%20(1970)&Lang=E&Area=RESOLUTION</url>
              <urlText>Resolution 279</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>1970</date>
							<text>
								... 'condemns' Israeli's attacks against Lebanon
							</text>
              <url>http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=S/RES/280%20(1970)&Lang=E&Area=RESOLUTION</url>
              <urlText>Resolution 280</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>1970</date>
							<text>
								... 'demands' immediate Israeli withdrawal form Lebanon
							</text>
              <url>http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=S/RES/285%20(1970)&Lang=E&Area=RESOLUTION</url>
              <urlText>Resolution 285</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>1971</date>
							<text>
								... 'deplores' Israel's changing of the status of Jerusalem
							</text>
              <url>http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=S/RES/298%20(1971)&Lang=E&Area=RESOLUTION</url>
              <urlText>Resolution 298</urlText>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>1972</date>
							<text>
								... 'demands' that Israel stop attacks against Lebanon
							</text>
              <url>http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=S/RES/313%20(1972)&Lang=E&Area=RESOLUTION</url>
              <urlText>Resolution 313</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>1972</date>
							<text>
								... 'condemns' Israel for repeated attacks on Lebanon
							</text>
              <url>http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=S/RES/316%20(1972)&Lang=E&Area=RESOLUTION</url>
              <urlText>Resolution 316</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>1972</date>
							<text>
								... 'deplores' Israel's refusal to release Arabs abducted in Lebanon
							</text>
              <url>http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=S/RES/316%20(1972)&Lang=E&Area=RESOLUTION</url>
              <urlText>Resolution 317</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>1973</date>
							<text>
								... 'condemns' Israel's repeated attacks against Lebanon
							</text>
              <url>http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=S/RES/332%20(1973)&Lang=E&Area=RESOLUTION</url>
              <urlText>Resolution 332</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>Resolution </date>
							<text>
							</text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>Resolution </date>
							<text>
							</text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>Resolution </date>
							<text>
							</text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>
						<Fact>
							<date>Resolution </date>
							<text>
							</text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>Resolution </date>
							<text>
							</text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>Resolution </date>
							<text>
							</text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>Resolution </date>
							<text>
							</text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>Resolution </date>
							<text>
							</text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>Resolution </date>
							<text>
							</text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

					</facts>
				</Subtopic>

				<Subtopic name="Zionism" hide="true">
					<facts>

						<Fact>
							<date></date>
							<text>
								Its stated goals and execution of these ...
							</text>
              <url>http://www.wrmea.com/html/focus.htm</url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date></date>
							<text>
								Its definition of the term 'anti-semetic'. 
								
								Use of this to quash any criticism.
								
								Consequent demeaning of the word.
							</text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>1975</date>
							<text>
								The UN passes a resolution defining Zionism as racist, and compares
								'<i>the racist regime in occupied Palestine and the racist regime in Zimbabwe and South Africa</i>'
								which '<i>have a comon imperialist origin, forming a whole and having the same racist 
								structure and being organically linked in their policy aimed at repression of the dignity 
								and integrity of the human being</i>'.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/UN/unga3379.html</url>
              <urlText>UN Resolution</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date></date>
							<text>
								Zionists argued that the resolution was part of the Soviet-Arab Cold War anti-Israel campaign,
								and that it was 'anti-semetic'.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/Zionism/Zionism_Is_Not_Racism.html</url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>1991</date>
							<text>
								The UN repeals its resolution which defined Zionism as racist.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/UN/unga46_86.html</url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>


						<Fact>
							<date></date>
							<text>
							</text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date></date>
							<text>
							</text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

					</facts>
				</Subtopic>

				<Subtopic name="Israeli Censorship of Western Media" hide="true">
					<facts>
						<Fact>
							<date></date>
							<text>
							</text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date></date>
							<text>
							</text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

					</facts>
				</Subtopic>


				<Subtopic name="Democracy and Discrimination in Israel" hide="true">
					<facts>

						<Fact>
							<date></date>
							<text>
								Israel calls itself the only democracy in the Middle East, a description readily
								accepted in the west.
							</text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date></date>
							<text>
								Right to vote ...
							</text>
              <url>http://www.washington-report.org/backissues/0590/9005014.htm</url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date></date>
							<text>
								Right to have a political party which advocates equality.
								http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=247006&contrassID=1&subContrassID=0&sbSubContrassID=0
								http://www.iht.com/cgi-bin/generic.cgi?template=articleprint.tmplh&ArticleId=75124
								http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=247157&contrassID=2&subContrassID=4&sbSubContrassID=0&listSrc=Y
							</text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date></date>
							<text>
								Other discrimination
								- Israel limits the citizenship rights of its citizens depending on whether they could 
								  be required to serve in the IDF 
								  - note this has nothing to do with whether the citizens ACTUALLY serve, but rather simply 
								    functions as discrimination against Arabs (including Jewish Arabs), who are not required 
								    to serve.
								- http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article1651.shtml - discriminatory laws on marriage ala apartheid

							</text>
              <url>http://www.ittijah.org/inside/discrimination.html</url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.arabhra.org/article26/factsheet1.htm
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date></date>
							<text>
								"Israeli Discrimination Against Non-Jews is Carefully Codified in the State of Israel's Laws"
							</text>
              <url>http://www.ittijah.org/inside/discrimination.html</url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>

					</facts>
				</Subtopic>
			
				<Subtopic name="Lavon affair" hide="true">
					<facts>
						<Fact>
							<date></date>
							<text>
								In 1954, Israeli agents working in Egypt planted bombs in several buildings, including a United States diplomatic facility, and left evidence behind implicating Arabs as the culprits. The ruse would have worked, had not one of the bombs detonated prematurely, allowing the Egyptians to capture and identify one of the bombers, which in turn led to the round up of an Israeli spy ring. Some of the spies were from Israel, while others were recruited fro the local Jewish population. Israel responded to the scandal with claims in the media that there was no spy ring, that it was all a hoax perpetrated by "anti-Semites". But as the public trial progressed, it was evidence that Israel had indeed been behind the bombing. Eventually, Israeli's Defense Minister Pinhas Lavon was brought down by the scandal, although it appears that he was himself the victim of a frame-up by the real authors of the bombing project, code named "Operation Susannah."
							</text>
              <url>http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/anthraxsuspect.html</url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senate/7891/lavon_hirst.html
              </altUrls>
						</Fact>
					</facts>
				</Subtopic>
			</subtopics>
		</Topic>


	 </topics>
	</Supertopic>
  <Supertopic name="General Issues" image="wtc1.jpg" imagewidth="185" imageheight="133">
	 <topics>

    <Topic name="September 11">
      <subtopics>

        <Subtopic name="Why does Osama bin Laden hate the US?" shortName="Why?">
          <facts>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
								<table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="6" align="right" valign="top" border="0"><tr><td valign=top><img src="bin-laden2.jpg" border="0" width="150"></td></tr></table>
             			No one denies that Osama bin Laden is a crazy fanatic, the type of person this world would
             			be much better off without.<br><br>
            			However, it is important to understand the reasons he and other terrorists have for hating the 
            			US and perpretating their terrorism. Obviously Osama's fanatic interpretation of Islam is a major 
            			factor, but there are many others which cause him to focus this hate on the US. While we cannot 
            			change the fact that the world will always have fanatics, there are some things we should be able 
            			to change which would help prevent them focusing their zeal on the US.<br><br>
            			Of course, in explaining the causes of his hate against the US I am not attempting to justify 
            			Osama bin Laden's actions in any way, rather to provide insight into why he picks the US as 
            			the target of his religious fervor. In my opinion the best way to avoid a repeat of the 
            			tragedy is to eliminate the causes, rather than exacerbate them through war.
              </text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>US military bases in Saudi Arabia.</date>
              <url>http://www.infoplease.com/spot/osamabinladen.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.nationalreview.com/york/york100801.shtml
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	It incenses Osama bin Laden that non-believers are stationed in the 
              	birthplace of Islam.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.infoplease.com/spot/osamabinladen.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	The troops were put there in the first Gulf War, due to Saudi Arabian
              	fears that Iraq would attack. These fears were based on reports leaked by the
              	Pentagon estimating that up to 250,000 Iraqi troops and 1,500 tanks stood 
                on the border to Saudi Arabia in preparation for an invasion.
                Soviet satellite photos however show no such build-up, Iraq denies it, and the 
                US government has refused to release its alleged evidence for such a build-up.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0906/p01s02-wosc.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.independent.org/tii/news/030105Marshall.html
              	http://deoxy.org/wc/wc-consp.htm#one
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Israel's occupation of Palestine</date>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/monitoring/media_reports/1636782.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC transcript</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.nationalreview.com/york/york100801.shtml
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	Osama connects Israel to the US due to the US's extensive support of Israel. Part of this is the 
              	US's vetoing of 30 UN resolutions passed against Israel's occupation of Palestine.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.musalman.com/news/musalman-UN%20resolutions%20against%20Israel.htm</url>
              <urlText>Summary</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
                In addition to the UN resolutions vetoed by the US, Israel stands in violation
                of around 50 UN resolutions over a period of 30 years (the link references 65 resolutions). 
              </text>
              <url>http://www.mediamonitors.net/michaelsladah&suleimaniajlouni1.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
								http://www.musalman.com/news/musalman-UN%20resolutions%20against%20Israel.htm
								http://www.middleeastnews.com/unresolutionslist.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
            	<link>largest_benefactor</link>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	Israel is also the world's largest benefactor of US military aid, to the tune of $2-3 billion per year.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.washtimes.com/world/20030103-83943580.htm</url>
              <urlText>Washington Post article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.wrmea.com/html/us_aid_to_israel.htm
              	http://www.peace-action.org/home/israel.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	The US has also provided Israel with what Bush would term 'Weapons of Mass Destruction' - 
              	Israel has <a href="http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/israel/nuke/">hundreds of nukes</a> (these
              	it has obtained mainly through assistance from France) and has also created biological and chemical 
              	weapons with US help, which it has been |israel_nerve_gas accused of using| on Palestinian civilians.
              </text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText>|us_uk_wmd WMD in-depth|</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://infomanage.com/nonproliferation/najournal/israelinucs.html
              	http://www.nationalpost.com/search/site/story.asp?id=A253489A-34FF-4EAD-A630-D4707446A42E
              	http://www.mideastfacts.com/pp_ni-c10.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <date>The millions who have died and continue to die due to the Iraqi sanctions</date>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/monitoring/media_reports/1636782.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC transcript</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.nationalreview.com/york/york100801.shtml
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact reference="sanctions_unicef_est"></Fact>

            <Fact reference="sanctions_un_est"></Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
                Halliday (who started the oil-for-food programme in Iraq), and Von Sponeck (his successor)
                - both of whom resigned their long UN careers after calling the embargo "genocide" - write: 
                "<i>The most recent report of the UN secretary general, in October 2001, says that the US 
                and UK governments' blocking of $4bn of humanitarian supplies is by far the greatest 
                constraint on the implementation of the oil-for-food programme. The report says that, in 
                contrast, the Iraqi government's distribution of humanitarian supplies is fully satisfactory
                ... The death of some 5-6,000 children a month is mostly due to contaminated water, lack of 
                medicines and malnutrition. The US and UK governments' delayed clearance of equipment and 
                materials is responsible for this tragedy, not Baghdad.</i>"
              </text>
              <url>http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4309594,00.html</url>
              <urlText>Guardian article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.salon.com/people/feature/2002/03/20/halliday/index2.html
              	http://pilger.carlton.com/print/100275
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
                i.e. the US+UK are responsible for a tragedy greater than Sept 11 occurring <i>every 
                week</i> in Iraq.
              </text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>He sees Bush as a modern 'crusader' fighting against Muslims</date>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/monitoring/media_reports/1636782.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	Bush has termed the war on terrorism as a 'crusade'. 
              </text>
              <url>http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2001/09/mil-010916-usia4.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.csmonitor.com/2001/0919/p12s2-woeu.html
              	http://www.rosbaltnews.com/2002/10/01/50212.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
								Bush's terming of Iran, Iraq and North Korea as an 'axis of evil', and his current war against 
								Iraq, only further serve to confirm the idea that this is a clash between Islam and Christianity.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.csmonitor.com/2001/0919/p12s2-woeu.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.rosbaltnews.com/2002/10/01/50212.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	Although Bush is a little more diplomatic, Bush's spiritual advisor terms Islam an 'evil' religion.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.csmonitor.com/2001/0919/p12s2-woeu.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://english.aljazeera.net/topics/article.asp?cu_no=1&item_no=2710&version=1&template_id=263&parent_id=258
              	http://www.counterpunch.org/wazwaz1010.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	Recent comments by a general charged with finding Osama also don´t help. The general said the 
              	US has been battling Satan during the war with Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein, that
              	he had nothing to fear from Muslims because their god was an idol, and that the main reason
              	terrorists attack the US is '<i>because we're a Christian nation</i>'.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A38457-2003Oct16.html</url>
              <urlText>Washington Post article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.orion-online.net/vnews/display.v/ART/2003/10/22/3f95c469462ed
              	http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/144852_erbe22.html
              	http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/news/nation/7036459.htm
              	http://www.sltrib.com/2003/Oct/10222003/commenta/commenta.asp	
              	http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/ny-uspent173498203oct17,0,2933140.story?coll=ny-nationalnews-headlines
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <date>UN separation of East Timor from Indonesia</date>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/monitoring/media_reports/1636782.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	This point is really an illustration of what an insane fanatic Osama bin Laden is.
              	The fault of the UN and the world's superpowers (US, France, Britain etc) was not
              	in finally granting East Timor independence in 1999, but their support of Indonesia's 
              	occupation of and genocide in East Timor for the previous 24 years.
              </text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText>|indonesia Indonesia in-depth|</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

          </facts>
        </Subtopic>

				<Subtopic name="The '93 WTC Bombing precedent" shortName="WTC Bombing" link="wtc_bombing">
					<facts>

            <Fact>
            	<note>congressional hearings - http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/1998_hr/s980224c.htm</note>
              <date>1980s</date>
              <text>
	              Sheik Omar Abdul-Rahman (later convicted to life imprisonment for his central role in 
	              the bombing) is enlisted by the CIA as a "valuable asset" in covert operations involving 
	              the Afghan mujahideen, during which time he befriends Osama bin Laden.
              </text>
              <url>http://abcnews.go.com/sections/2020/DailyNews/wtc_yearTHECELL020816.html</url>
              <urlText>ABC News article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/96may/blowback.htm
              	http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/main/timelinebefore2001.html
              	http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/08/23/1030052970208.html
              </altUrls>
              <notes></notes>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
	              Ramzi Yousef, the eventual mastermind of the bombing, is thought to have gained his 
	              explosives expertise on the Afghanistan-Pakistan border in al Qaeda training camps during 
	              this period, and is also known to have close ties to Osama bin Laden.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.rotten.com/library/bio/crime/terrorists/ramzi-yousef/</url>
              <urlText>Profile</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.terrorismcentral.com/Library/Biographies/Bios/Yousef/BioYousef.html
              	http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/analysis/30928.stm
              	http://www.terrorismfiles.org/individuals/ramzi_yousef.html
              	http://abcnews.go.com/sections/2020/DailyNews/wtc_yearTHECELL020816.html
              	http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/main/timelinebefore2001.html
              	http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1555534074/002-1296172-0765604?vi=glance
              	http://www.sabcnews.co.za/world/the_middle_east/0,1009,56425,00.html
              </altUrls>
              <notes></notes>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1987</date>
              <text>
	              Emad Salem, another former Mujaheddin fighter, enters the US.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.drewhendricks.freeservers.com/emada.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/wot/sept11/undersurveillance.html</altUrls>
              <notes></notes>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>May 1990</date>
              <text>
	              Sheik Omar Abdul-Rahman is granted a one-year visa from a CIA 
	              agent posing as an official at the US Consulate in Khartoum, Sudan. He arrives in 
	              New York in July 1990 despite being on the US State Department's "watch list" of 
	              non-Americans believed to be involved in terrorism since 1987.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/1990s/atlanticmonthly0596.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://bestoftulsa.com/bestoftulsacgi/ikonboard/topic.cgi?forum=10&topic=5</altUrls>
              <notes></notes>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Nov 1990</date>
              <text>
	              Sheik Omar's visa is revoked, and the State Department advises the Immigration and 
	              Naturalization Service to be on the lookout for him. So attentive is the INS to this 
	              advisory that it grants Sheik Omar a green card just five months later. 
              </text>
              <url>http://bestoftulsa.com/bestoftulsacgi/ikonboard/topic.cgi?forum=10&topic=5</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <notes></notes>
            </Fact>

            <Fact hide="true">
              <date>1991-1993</date>
              <text>
	              Emad Salem pulls together some Muslims for the attack. They are snuck into the country 
	              by the CIA, despite a State Department ban on their entry.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.intellex.com/~rigs/page1/wtc/bulow.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://thenewamerican.com/tna/1997/vo13no05/vo13no05_assets.htm</altUrls>
              <notes></notes>
            </Fact>

						<Fact>
              <date>1991</date>
              <text>
	              The FBI recruits Emad Salem as an informant. Through him, the FBI learns of the
	              bombing plot.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur46.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://csmail.law.pace.edu/lawlib/legal/us-legal/judiciary/second-circuit/test3/96-1044.opn.html
              	http://www.thenewamerican.com/tna/2001/11-05-2001/vo17no23_prevented_print.htm
              	http://www.wsws.org/articles/2002/jan2002/sept-j22_prn.shtml
              </altUrls>
              <notes></notes>
            </Fact>

						<Fact>
              <date>1992</date>
              <text>
	              A rift develops between Salem and the FBI, and it is agreed that Salem's undercover 
	              investigation should be terminated.
              </text>
              <url>http://csmail.law.pace.edu/lawlib/legal/us-legal/judiciary/second-circuit/test3/96-1044.opn.html</url>
              <urlText>Appeals Court Case</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://209.157.64.200/focus/news/696886/posts
              	http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur46.htm
              </altUrls>
              <notes></notes>
            </Fact>


            <Fact hide="true">
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	The CIA also provides financial aid and training to the terrorists.
              </text>
              <url>http://bestoftulsa.com/bestoftulsacgi/ikonboard/topic.cgi?forum=10&topic=5</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <notes></notes>
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <date>Feb 1993</date>
              <text>
              	A bomb is set off in the World Trade Center, killing six people, wounding over a 
              	thousand and inflicting $500 million in damage.
              </text>
              <url>http://edition.cnn.com/2003/US/Northeast/02/26/wtc.bombing/</url>
              <urlText>CNN article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://bestoftulsa.com/bestoftulsacgi/ikonboard/topic.cgi?forum=10&topic=5</altUrls>
              <notes></notes>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
                Within 48 hours of the bombing, the FBI requests Salem to help them solve the case, who
                quickly points the finger at the defendants. 
              </text>
              <url>http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur46.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <notes></notes>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
								The FBI puts Emad Salem back on the payroll, paying him 
								<a href="http://www.drewhendricks.freeservers.com/world.htm">over $1 million</a> to 
                continue as an informant. 
              </text>
              <url>http://www.cnn.com/US/9510/terror_trial/</url>
              <urlText>CNN article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://csmail.law.pace.edu/lawlib/legal/us-legal/judiciary/second-circuit/test3/96-1044.opn.html</altUrls>
              <notes></notes>
            </Fact>
            
            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
								Emad Salem then recruits another bunch of Muslims for another bombing, and then turns them all
								in in a classic case of entrapment (prosecutors would concede that none of the defendants 
								had the technical knowledge required and that the chemicals they were allegedly mixing 
								would never have exploded).	
              </text>
              <url>http://www.wsws.org/public_html/prioriss/iwb10-9/simpson.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
              <notes></notes>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
								The relevance of this is that it is alleged that the entire conspiracy (in the WTC bombing) 
								was also the product of Salem, who needed to bust something big to earn his $1 million 
								reward from the FBI.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur46.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
              <notes></notes>
            </Fact>

            <Fact hide="true">
              <date></date>
              <text>
                The official story of the crime is of course quickly found: The criminals were evil Muslims. 
              </text>
              <url>http://www.intellex.com/~rigs/page1/wtc/bulow.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <notes></notes>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Oct 1993</date>
              <text>
								The New York Times reports that the FBI knew in advance that terrorists were plotting 
								to build a bomb and 'blow up the World Trade Center' and 'planned to thwart the plotters
								by secretly substituting harmless powder for the explosives...'.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/OK/wtcbomb.html</url>
              <urlText>NY Times article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://209.157.64.200/focus/news/696886/posts
              	http://www.intellex.com/~rigs/page1/wtc/bulow.htm
              	http://bestoftulsa.com/bestoftulsacgi/ikonboard/topic.cgi?forum=10&topic=13
              	http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur46.htm
              	http://www.thenewamerican.com/tna/2001/11-05-2001/vo17no23_prevented_print.htm
              	http://www.thenewliberator.com/wethepeople.htm
              </altUrls>
              <notes></notes>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
								Also revealed is how Salem secretly recorded his conversations with 
								FBI agents and, as the transcripts show, tried to complain to FBI Headquarters in
								Washington about the bureau's failure to stop the bombing but was dissuaded by an agent 
								identified as John Anticev. Defense attorney, William Kunstler, had seen some of the 
								transcripts and described them as "filled with all sorts of Government misconduct." 
              </text>
              <url>http://209.157.64.200/focus/news/696886/posts</url>
              <urlText>NY Times articles</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://209.157.64.200/focus/news/696886/posts
              	http://www.intellex.com/~rigs/page1/wtc/bulow.htm
              	http://bestoftulsa.com/bestoftulsacgi/ikonboard/topic.cgi?forum=10&topic=13
              	http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur46.htm
              	http://www.thenewamerican.com/tna/2001/11-05-2001/vo17no23_prevented_print.htm
              	http://www.thenewliberator.com/wethepeople.htm
							</altUrls>
              <notes></notes>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Sept 11 Connection</date>
              <text>
								Aside from the above-mentioned <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2800297.stm">links</a>
								of many of the conspirators to Osama bin Laden, a message left by one of the attackers found following
								the attacks stated '<i>Next time, it will be very precise.</i>' (the terrorists had aimed to
								<a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2800297.stm">topple the towers</a>, 
								and could have succeeded if the bomb had not been placed in the wrong place).
              </text>
              <url>http://multimedia.belointeractive.com/attack/perspective/0930learning.html</url>
              <urlText>AP article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.thenewliberator.com/wethepeople.htm
              	http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/main/timelinebefore2001.html
							</altUrls>
              <notes></notes>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
								 The overall mastermind of the 9/11 attacks, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, is a close relative of 
								 Ramzi Yousef, thought to be his uncle.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.latimes.com/news/specials/911/la-na-plot-1sep01.story</url>
              <urlText>LA Times article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2800297.stm
              	http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/main/timelinebefore2001.html
							</altUrls>
              <notes></notes>
            </Fact>

					</facts>
				</Subtopic>

        <Subtopic name="A few slightly speculative facts related to the tragedy" shortName="Speculation" link="sept11">
          <facts>
            <Fact>
            	<notes>
								history of cia in afghanistan
								http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1054416441044

            		Warren Buffett, who  among with several other World Trade Center executives  went to Offutt AFB before the attacks on the morning of September 11. This is where Bush went after the attacks began.
            	</notes>
            	
              <date>1979-1980</date>
              <text>Contact begins between Osama Bin Laden and the CIA, as Osama goes to Afghanistan 
              to fight the Soviets, with support from Pakistan's intelligence service (ISI), with the 
              ISI's operation being funded by the CIA.
              </text>
              <url>http://rwor.org/a/v23/1120-29/1120/afghanistan.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.observer.co.uk/waronterrorism/story/0,1373,582274,00.html</altUrls>
            </Fact>
            
            <Fact>
              <date>Shortly before Sept 11, 2001</date>
              <text>General Mahmoud Ahmad, chief of the US trained Pakistan intelligence service, arranges 
	              for $100,000 to be given to Mohammed Atta (alleged hijacker on 11 Sept).
              </text>
              <url>http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/10/05/inv.terror.investigation/</url>
              <urlText>CNN article</urlText>
              <notes></notes>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Around Sept 11, 2001</date>
              <text>General Mahmoud Ahmad arrives in the USA on 4 September and, over the days that follow, 
                has regular consultations with his counterparts at the CIA and Pentagon. He spends the 
                <a href="http://www.nowtoronto.com/issues/2002-09-12/news_story.php">morning of 
                September 11th</a> in Washington, having breakfast with the chairs of the US Senate 
                and House intelligence committees. 
              </text>
              <url>http://www.heise.de/tp/deutsch/inhalt/co/11036/1.html</url>
              <urlText>Heise article</urlText>
							<altUrls>
								http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO206A.html
								http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/2001/nyt091301.html
							</altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>
            
            <Fact>
              <date>July 2001</date>
              <text>According to the French media, Osama Bin Laden was treated at this time for a kidney 
                problem at the American Hospital in Dubai, and while in hospital, he allegedly received a 
                visit from a CIA official. The CIA denies the meeting took place.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.infowars.com/saved%20pages/Report%20bin%20Laden%20treated%20at%20US%20hospital%20--%20The%20Washington%20Times.htm</url>
              <urlText>Washington Times article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0111/S00018.htm
              	http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/10/31/163622.shtml
              	http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_437828.html?menu=
              	http://www.islamonline.net/english/news/2001-11/02/article10.shtml
              	http://www.bigmagic.com/pages/blackj/column67m11.html
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>
            
            

            <Fact>
              <date>Days before attacks</date>
              <text>
              	German central bank research shows that '<i>activities on international financial 
              	markets must have been planned and executed with the necessary knowledge</i>', noting
              	that trading in so-called put options, which rise in value when stock prices fall, surged 
              	as much as 285 times the previous average volume in American Airlines and United Airlines
              	during the days before Sept. 11.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.newsday.com/ny-bzbund232380730sep23,0,2864727.story</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/2001/09/24/FFX325EQXRC.html
              	http://cjonline.com/stories/091901/ter_tradingacts.shtml
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	To '<i>the embarrassment of investigators, it has also emerged that the firm used to buy 
                many of the put options ... on United Airlines stock was headed until 1998 by 'Buzzy' Krongard, 
                now executive director of the CIA.</i>'
              </text>
              <url>http://news.independent.co.uk/business/news/story.jsp?story=99402</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.dooyoo.co.uk/speakers_corner/discussion/attacks_on_america/_review/351591/</altUrls>
              <notes>
              	sudan's offers to hand over bin laden / files on him
              	taliban's offers to hand over bin laden
            	</notes>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	Further suspicious trading prior to Sept 11 is reported in Morgan Stanley, one of the biggest 
              	occupants of the World Trade Centre 
              </text>
              <url>http://news.independent.co.uk/business/news/story.jsp?story=99402</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.themodernreligion.com/terror/wtc-unusualtrading.html
              	http://www.suntimes.com/terror/stories/cst-fin-opt19.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Sept 11</date>
              <text>
              	George Bush doesn't arrive back to Washington until some 10 hours after the terrorist attacks. 
              	After receiving much criticism for his lack of leadership, the White House explains that they 
              	had received a call relaying credible information that Air Force one was a target. Less than two 
              	weeks later the excuse is retracted by the administration. CBS Evening News reports on September 
              	25 that the call 'simply never happened.'<br><br>The subject was then deemed of little 
              	importance by the media and thus there was no subsequent discussion about the incident. However, 
              	it would appear that either the first story was a lie made in an attempt to protect the 
              	president's image, or the retraction of the story was a lie  perhaps to avoid explaining where 
              	the information came from.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A32319-2001Sep26</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>A week after Sept 11</date>
              <text>
              	Mohammed Atta's passport is conveniently found (in perfect shape) near the wreckage of the WTC, 
              	despite the	four black boxes (designed to survive such impacts) from the planes being 
              	allegedly destroyed.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.fpp.co.uk/online/01/10/WTC_BlackBox.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1581063.stm
              	http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/09/16/gen.america.under.attack/
              	http://www.guardian.co.uk/september11/story/0,11209,669961,00.html
              	http://www.context.co.nz:8080/discuss/msgReader$1356
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Sept 21</date>
              <text>
								FBI Director Robert Mueller <a href="">acknowledges</a> 
								that the identity of several of the suicide hijackers is in doubt.
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1559151.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Sept 23</date>
              <text>
              	Of the <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1567815.stm">FBI's list</a> of 19 hijackers -
              	<ul>
              	  <li><a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1559151.stm">Waleed Alshehri<a>
              	    confirms he is alive and well, yet is indeed the same Waleed Al Shehri to whom the FBI has 
              	    been referring (he attended flight training school at Dayton Beach in the US).
              	  
              	  <li><a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1559151.stm">Abdul aziz Al Omari<a> 
              	    is also alive and well, but had his passport stolen in 1995.
              	  
              	  <li><a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1559151.stm">Saeed Alghamdi<a> 
              	    (with <a href="http://www.portal.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/09/23/widen23.xml">matching 
              	    name, place, date of birth and occupation</a> to the alleged hijacker) is also found to be still alive.
              	  
              	  <li><a href="http://www.portal.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/09/23/widen23.xml">
              	    Salem Al-Hazmi<a> is also still alive, but had his 
              	    <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/september11/story/0,11209,601550,00.html">passport stolen</a> 
              	    three years before the attacks. The photo published by the FBI is of the living Salem Al-Hazmi.
              	  
              	  <li><a href="http://www.portal.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/09/23/widen23.xml">
              	    Ahmed Al-Nami<a> is also still alive and has never lost his passport.
								</ul>
              </text>
              <url>http://www.fbi.gov/pressrel/pressrel01/092701hjpic.htm</url>
              <urlText>FBI's list</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-092101probe.story
              	http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/09/14/archive/main311329.shtml
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Nov 2, 2001</date>
              <text>
              	The FBI claims to have resolved questions about the identities of the 19 hijackers involved in 
              	the Sept. 11 attacks, and to know for certain the 19 who are responsible. However to this day 
              	no revised list of the hijackers identities has been made public.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/11/02/attack/main316806.shtml</url>
              <urlText>CBS News article</urlText>
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <date>Jan 2002</date>
              <text>
              	|bush Bush| and |cheney Cheney| do their best to block an inquiry into Sept 11 from going ahead.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/01/29/inv.terror.probe/</url>
              <urlText>CNN article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/05/15/attack/main509096.shtml
              	http://www.newsfrombabylon.com/article.php?sid=1680
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Dec 2002</date>
              <text>
              	|bush Bush| names Thomas Kean as the new chairman of the 9/11 Commission. Kean has business ties 
              	to Osama's brother-in-law, who is suspected to have funnelled millions of dollars to the Al 
              	Qaeda network and is named as a defendant in a lawsuit filed by families of Sept 11 victims.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.fortune.com/fortune/articles/0,15114,410237,00.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0212/S00150.htm</altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	The Commission also has other problems - including receiving only $3 million in funding
              	(compare this with the <a href="http://www.s-t.com/daily/04-99/04-01-99/a05wn028.htm">
              	millions spent</a> on the Lewinsky scandal, or the shuttle tragedy 
              	inquiry, which is estimated to cost $40 million).
              </text>
              <url>http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/31/opinion/31MON2.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,437267,00.html</altUrls>
            </Fact>


          </facts>
        </Subtopic>

        <Subtopic name="The Israeli Connection" link="israeli_connection">
          <facts>
            <Fact>
              <date>Sept 11, 2001</date>
              <text>
              	Two hours before the attacks, employees of the instant-messaging firm Odigo in Israel
              	receive text messages warning of an attack on the World Trade Centre.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.fpp.co.uk/online/01/09/WTC_Odigo.html</url>
              <urlText>Washington Post article</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>

						<Fact>
							<date>Sept 11, 1002</date>
							<text>
								Shortly following the attacks, the media repeatedly shows pictures of Palestinians apparently 
								celebrating the attacks, switching repeatedly between these pictures and the pictures of the 
								Twin Towers. Only later is it revealed that the Palestinian celebrations were staged by Israeli
								defence forces, with the celebrations having nothing to do with the Twin Towers attacks.
							</text>
							<url>http://www.iap.org/israelstages.htm</url>
							<urlText>Jerusalem Times quote</urlText>
							<altUrls>
								http://www.mlpd.de/rf0139/rfartv2.htm
								http://www.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=66140&group=webcast
								http://www.palestinecampaign.org/archives.asp?xid=302
							</altUrls>
						</Fact>
						
	          <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	Some people however did appear to actually have celebrated the fall of the Twin Towers ...<br><br> 
              	Following the attacks, police detain five men in a van, who claim to be Israeli tourists, 
              	found carrying maps linking them to the blasts. They are stopped due to an FBI alert to be
              	on the lookout for their vehicle. It reads '<i>Three individuals with van were seen 
              	celebrating after initial impact and subsequent explosion. FBI Newark Field Office 
              	requests that, if the van is located, hold for prints and detain individuals.</i>'
              	Sources also say that bomb-sniffing dogs reacted as if they had detected explosives, 
              	although officers were unable to find anything.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.fpp.co.uk/online/01/12/WTC_Mysteries3.html</url>
              <urlText>North Jersey News article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/fiveisraelis.html
              	http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=75266&sw=mockery
              	http://www.thornwalker.com/ditch/towers_4.htm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Sept 22, 2001</date>
              <text>
              	The New York Times reports that, contrary to earlier reports, 
              	'<i>There were, in fact, only three Israelis who had been confirmed as dead: two on the 
              	planes and another who had been visiting the towers on business and who was identified 
              	and buried.</i>' Given the around 4,500 death toll, this is surely a statistical 
              	impossibility excluding foreknowledge of the attacks by Israelis. 
              </text>
              <url>http://www.fpp.co.uk/online/01/11/WTC_DeathRoll2.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <date>Dec 12, 2001</date>
              <text>
              	FOX News reports on the bust of a huge Israeli spying operation in the US, in which
              	'<i>even prior to September 11, as many as 140 other Israelis had been detained or arrested
              	in a secretive and sprawling investigation into suspected espionage by Israelis in the United States.</i>'
              </text>
              <url>http://www.fpp.co.uk/online/01/12/Israelis/spies1.html</url>
              <urlText>FOX News article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.washington-report.org/backissues/062000/0006006.html
              	http://www.washington-report.org/backissues/072000/0007043.html
              	http://cryptome.org/fox-il-spy.htm
              	http://www.govsux.com/spy_file.htm
              	http://www.rense.com/Datapages/Israeldata.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	While that would be a huge story in itself, the connections to September 11th are the most shocking.
              	It mentions that the Mossad sent representatives to the US to warn, just before 9/11, that a major 
              	terrorist attack was imminent. However, the warning was nonspecific and general, and investigators 
              	believe that it may have had something to do with the desire to protect what are called sources and 
              	methods in the intelligence community. The suspicion being, perhaps those sources and methods were 
              	taking place right here in the United States.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.fpp.co.uk/online/01/12/WTC_Mysteries2.html</url>
              <urlText>FOX News article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
								http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1024.htm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	In one worrying quote, an investigator said '<i>"evidence linking these Israelis to 9-11 is 
              	classified. I cannot tell you about evidence that has been gathered. It's classified 
              	information.</i>'
              </text>
              <url>http://www.fpp.co.uk/online/01/12/WTC_Mysteries3.html</url>
              <urlText>FOX News article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
								http://www.thornwalker.com/ditch/towers_5.htm              
								http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1024.htm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	The FOX News article disappears within days from the web without a trace, and is not picked 
              	up by any other news outlets. The <a href="http://www.fpp.co.uk/online/01/12/Israelis/spies8.html">Jewish 
              	reaction</a> may have had something to do with this.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.rense.com/general18/spypull.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>March 2002</date>
              <text>
              	A DEA report is leaked, revealing more information regarding the Israeli spying operation, most 
              	notably that some of the Israeli operatives were only a few blocks and a few hundred feet from
              	where the Sept. 11 hijacking leader, Mohammad Atta, was staying at the time.
              </text>
              <url>http://cryptome.org/dea-il-spy.htm</url>
              <urlText>DEA report</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.atlanta.creativeloafing.com/2002-03-20/fishwrapper.html
              	http://www.antiwar.com/orig/dea1.html
              	http://www.antiwar.com/justin/j032202.html
              	http://www.thornwalker.com/ditch/towers_5.htm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <date>Further Reading</date>
              <text>
              	<ul>
              		<li><a href="http://www.fpp.co.uk/BoD/Mossad/">Real History and Mossad, the Israeli Secret Service</a>
              		<li><a href="http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/main/AAisrael.html">Israeli "art student" spy ring, Israeli foreknowledge evidence</a>
              		<li><a href="http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/wot/sept11/911mossad.html">Possible Israeli Foreknowledge of 9/11 attacks</a>
              		<li><a href="http://www.thornwalker.com/ditch/towers_toc.htm">September 11 and the origins of the "War on Terrorism": A revisionist account</a>
              	</ul>
              </text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls></altUrls>
            </Fact>
          
          </facts>
        </Subtopic>

      </subtopics>
    </Topic>
		<Topic name="WMD">
			<subtopics>
				<Subtopic name="WMD Overview" nocomment="true">
					<facts>
            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
 								<table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="6" align="right" valign="top" border="0"><tr><td valign=top align=center><img src="napalm.jpg" width=250 height=193 border="0"></td></tr></table>
                With the US having recently fought the war on Iraq allegedly in order to control WMD proliferation, 
                and with a few more such wars probably on the way, it is worth considering just what kind of an example 
                the US, with the world's largest stores of WMD, is setting the rest of the world. 
              </text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>
					</facts>
				</Subtopic>

				<Subtopic name="Nuclear">
					<facts>
            <Fact>
              <date>Oct 1999</date>
              <text>
                The US Senate decides not to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (designed to prevent 
                testing of nuclear weapons and hence reduce the chance of an arms race), drawing widespread
                criticism.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.globalissues.org/Geopolitics/ArmsControl/CTBTUSA.asp</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date>Dec 2001</date>
              <text>
                The Nuclear Posture Review is submitted to Congress, a comprehensive review laying out the 
                direction for American nuclear forces over the next five to ten years. It looks at making 
                America's atomic arsenal more 'usable' (rather than just as weapons of deterrence), talking
                about the development of new nuclear bunker-busting bombs and speculating that adhering to 
                the Comprehensive Test Ban 'may not be possible for the indefinite future'. It also puts 
                into question recent steps made by US and Russia towards reducing their nuclear arsenals.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/policy/dod/npr.htm</url>
              <urlText>Nuclear Posture review</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.clw.org/control/nukereview02.html
              	http://www.wslfweb.org/nukes/npr.htm
              	http://www.disarmament.org/realreduct.pdf
              	http://www.ceip.org/files/projects/npp/resources/newnukespage.htm
              	http://www.ucsusa.org/global_security/nuclear_weapons/page.cfm?pageID=623
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Feb 19, 2003</date>
              <text>
                Documents leaked revealing that the Bush administration is planning a secret meeting in August 
                to discuss the construction of a new generation of nuclear weapons, including "mini-nukes", 
                "bunker-busters" and neutron bombs designed to destroy chemical or biological agents, according 
                to a leaked Pentagon document. The meeting would also decide whether to restart nuclear testing 
                and how to convince the American public that the new weapons are necessary.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,898550,00.html</url>
              <urlText>Guardian article</urlText>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Mar 7, 2003</date>
              <text>
                The Pentagon asks the US Congress to lift a 10-year ban on developing small nuclear warheads, 
                or "mini-nukes".
              </text>
              <url>http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,909205,00.html</url>
              <urlText>Guardian article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2003-07-06-nuclear-usat_x.htm</altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Apr 24, 2003</date>
              <text>
                The US regains the capability to make nuclear weapons for the first time in 14 years 
                and resumes production of plutonium parts for bombs.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-bomb23apr23,0,6939044.story?coll=la-headlines-nation</url>
              <urlText>LA Times article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.themoscowtimes.com/stories/2003/04/24/001.html
              	http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/04/23/1050777304686.html
              	http://www.etaiwannews.com/Asia/2003/04/24/1051149017.htm
              	http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,58592,00.html
              	http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2003-07-06-nuclear-usat_x.htm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>
				
					</facts>
				</Subtopic>

				<Subtopic name="Biological + Chemical" link="us_uk_wmd">
					<facts>
            <Fact>
              <date>1987</date>
              <text>
                 The Foundation for Economic Trends forces the Department of Defense to divulge its 
                 operation of 127 chemical and biological warfare research sites in the US. This
                 despite a treaty at the time banning research and development of biological agents.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.netowne.com/conspiracy/konformist/manmadeaids.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://csf.colorado.edu/mail/psn/jan98/0027.html
              	http://www.healthnewsnet.com/humanexperiments.html
              	http://www.wakeupmag.co.uk/articles/biochem.htm
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>
				
            <Fact reference="cwc"></Fact>
            
            <Fact>
              <date>July 1998</date>
              <text>
                CNN and Time magazine report on the use of nerve gas by US special forces in Laos.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.aim.org/publications/special_reports/TIME06-15.html</url>
              <urlText>Time article</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <date>July 1998</date>
              <text>
                CNN and Time magazine are forced to retract their reports under pressure from the 
                US military, the CIA and figures such as Kissinger, Helms and Colin Powell. The two 
                reporters who brought us the story stand by it and are fired.<br><br>
                An independent review by CNN however acknowledges that the reporters conscientiously and 
                honestly amassed a considerable basis of evidence to support their conclusions, 
                and that the confidential sources interviewed by the reporters were reputable.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.wsws.org/news/1998/july1998/cnn-j16.shtml</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
                http://www.wsws.org/news/1998/july1998/cnn-j24.shtml
                http://www.wsws.org/news/1998/july1998/cnn2-j24.shtml
                http://www.flonnet.com/fl1526/15260640.htm
                http://www.geocities.com/~virtualtruth/tailwin2.htm
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date>Oct 1998</date>
              <text>
                Dutch media claim that an Israeli plane which crashed in Holland was carrying a chemical 
                used for  nerve gas from a US factory to the Institute for Biological Research 
                in Ness Ziona near Tel Aviv. The Dutch health ministry believes that up to 300 residents 
                could be suffering from effects caused by the accident.
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/185199.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://communication.ucsd.edu/911/massdestruction.html
              	http://www.sit.wisc.edu/~time/articles/nurveIsreal.htm
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
            	<link>israel_nerve_gas</link>
              <date>Feb-Mar 2001</date>
              <text>
                Israel (the world's top recipient of US military aid) uses poison gas on Palestinian 
                civilians. Symptoms are typical of nerve gas poisoning.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.onlinejournal.com/Special_Reports/022003Brooks/022003brooks.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.palestinemonitor.org/factsheet/US_Aid_to_Israel.htm
              	http://www.peace-action.org/home/israel.html
              	http://www.antiwar.com/orig/brooks3.html
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact reference="bwc"></Fact>

            <Fact reference="germ"></Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Dec 2001</date>
              <text>
                Some of the anthrax spores used in the recent anthrax attacks in the US are found to be
                biologically identical to bacteria secretly manufactured at a US germ warfare facility 
                at the Dugway Proving Ground (about 80 miles southwest of Salt Lake City, Utah)
                during the last decade. The lab has a long history of secret research (including |dengue
                dengue fever| and a 
                controversy in the 60s when thousands of sheep and other animals died downwind of the 
                facility, showing symptoms of having been exposed to nerve gas), and the revelation that 
                it has been secretly producing Anthrax only adds to concerns.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A40896-2001Dec13&notFound=true</url>
              <urlText>Washington Post article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.wsws.org/articles/2001/dec2001/anth-d28.shtml
              	http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/disc_anth.html
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>April 2002</date>
              <text>
                For the second time in the month, an anthrax leak is found at an Army 
                biodefense research building in Frederick.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A37548-2002Apr23&notFound=true</url>
              <urlText>Washington Post article</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>May 2002</date>
              <text>
                The Pentagon acknowledges using two kinds of nerve gas and a biological toxin in 
                tests on over 1000 US sailors in the 1960s.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/05/24/national/main510079.shtml</url>
              <urlText>CBS News article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.newsfrombabylon.com/article.php?sid=1410
              	http://deploymentlink.osd.mil/current_issues/shad/shad_intro.shtml
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Oct 2002</date>
              <text>
              	Pentagon documents reveal that the US held open-air biological and chemical weapons tests in 
              	at least three states - Alaska, Hawaii and Utah - during the 1960s 'to try to develop defenses 
              	against such weapons', using the nerve agents sarin, soman, tabun and VX . According to the 
              	Defense Dept, an unknown number of civilians were exposed at the time to 'simulants', or what 
              	were then thought to be harmless agents meant to stand in for deadlier ones, however some of 
              	which were later discovered to be dangerous. 
              </text>
              <url>http://www.newsfrombabylon.com/article.php?sid=2402</url>
              <urlText>Reuters article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.usmedicine.com/dailyNews.cfm?dailyID=114
              	http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/10/08/national/main524873.shtml
              	http://www.sltrib.com/2002/oct/10092002/nation_w/5457.htm
              	http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A63555-2002Oct9&notFound=true
              	http://www.nytimes.com/2002/10/09/politics/09NERV.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Oct 2002</date>
              <text>
                Respected scientists on both sides of the Atlantic warn that the US is developing a new 
                generation of weapons that undermine and possibly violate international treaties on biological 
                and chemical warfare, including research into the possibility of genetically engineering a new 
                strain of antibiotic-resistant anthrax, a programme to produce dried and weaponised anthrax 
                spores, and 'non-lethal' weapons similar to the gas Russian forces used to break the Moscow 
                theatre siege.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,821306,00.html</url>
              <urlText>Guardian article</urlText>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Dec 2002</date>
              <text>
                A Sunday Herald investigation reveals that Britain is supplying chemical warfare technology 
                to 26 countries including Libya, Syria, Sudan, Israel and |iranian Iran| (which was labelled part of the 
                'axis of evil' by Bush). The lethal chemicals being exported are illegal under international law 
                and controlled under the chemical weapons convention because they can be used in weapons of mass 
                destruction.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.sundayherald.com/25366</url>
              <urlText>Sunday Herald article</urlText>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Dec 2002</date>
              <text>
                Iraq releases weapons declaration. Before releasing to the public, the US Government
                confiscates all 12,000 pages, saying they contained "sensitive information" which needed 
                "a little editing". Sensitive indeed. The original Iraqi documents listed 150 American, 
                British and other foreign companies that supplied Iraq with its nuclear, chemical and 
                missile technology, many of them in illegal transactions. In 2000 Peter Hain, then a 
                Foreign Office Minister, blocked a parliamentary request to publish the full list of 
                lawbreaking British companies. He has never explained why.
              </text>
              <url>http://pilger.carlton.com/print/129139</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://baltimorechronicle.com/media_ommisions_jan03.shtml</altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Jan 6, 2003</date>
              <text>
                Artillery shell found to be leaking mustard gas (a poisonous chemical compound used in World War I)
                at the US Blue Grass Army Depot which stores about 55,000 rockets, land mines and other artillery with 
                about 523 tons of chemical weapons.
              </text>
              <url>http://rwor.org/a/v23/1120-29/1120/afghanistan.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.newsfrombabylon.com/article.php?sid=2698</altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Feb 5, 2003</date>
              <text>
                |rumsfeld Donald Rumsfeld| reveals that military planners are preparing for the US to 
                use incapacitating biochemical weapons in an invasion of Iraq, including use of gas or aerosols 
                <i>on unarmed Iraqi civilians</i>, in caves, and on prisoners (thus violating the same 
                treaties it purports to defend). 
              </text>
              <url>http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?story=378740</url>
              <urlText>Independent article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
                http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,912354,00.html
                http://www.guerrillanews.com/war_on_terrorism/doc1060.html
                http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0214/p02s01-usmi.htm
                http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/2/5/192247.shtml
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	US army scientists genetically reconstruct the 'Spanish Flu' influenza virus 
              	that killed 20-40 million people in 1918.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.sunshine-project.org/publications/pr/pr091003.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.sunshine-project.org/publications/others/gmoflu.html
              	http://www.greenleft.org.au/current/558p23b.htm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Oct 2003</date>
              <text>
              	The US develops an extremely deadly form of mousepox, a relative of the smallpox virus, 
              	through genetic engineering. The cowpox virus, which infects a range of animals including 
              	humans, is also genetically altered in a similar way.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994318</url>
              <urlText>New Scientist article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/business/7146895.htm
              	http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20031029-070930-7116r.htm
              	http://ww1.theherald.co.uk/news/3596.html
              	http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/cms.dll/html/uncomp/articleshow?msid=260140
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact hide="true">
              <date></date>
              <text>
              </text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Today</date>
              <text>
                Vietnamese continue to suffer from Agent Orange, the toxic defoliant used by US forces during the
                Vietnam war, which has been blamed for huge numbers of birth defects.
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/1023133.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
                http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/1734289.stm
                http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/1024627.stm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

					</facts>
				</Subtopic>

				<Subtopic name="Napalm">
					<facts>
            <Fact>
              <date>1963-1971</date>
              <text>
                During the Vietnam war, it is estimated the US used a total of 338,237 tons of napalm.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.danshistory.com/varms.shtml</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date>1980</date>
              <text>
                Protocol III of the Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Incendiary Weapons in 
                Geneva bans the use of napalm due to it being 'deemed to be excessively injurious or to have indiscriminate
                effects'. The US however is <a href="http://www.icrc.org/Web/Eng/siteeng0.nsf/d268e7e7eea08ab74125675b00364294/31cb28dd880a3601c1256b6600594ccf?OpenDocument">not</a>
                a party to this protocol.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.icrc.org/IHL.nsf/52d68d14de6160e0c12563da005fdb1b/3a507447d94ad829c125641f002d2729?OpenDocument</url>
              <urlText>Protocol</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date>March 22, 2003</date>
              <text>
                The Sydney Morning Herald and <a href="http://edition.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/03/21/otsc.irq.savidge/">CNN</a> 
                report on the US' use of Napalm in Iraq.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/03/21/1047749944836.html</url>
              <urlText>Sydney Morning Herald article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://edition.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/03/21/otsc.irq.savidge/
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date>August 2003</date>
              <text>
                The US air force website makes a point of emphatically denying its use, posting a
                'disinformation alert' demanding the article's withdrawl and noting that the US's 
                stock of napalm bombs was destroyed in 2001.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.af.mil/news/opscenter/OIF_talker.shtml</url>
              <urlText>Disinformation Alert</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date>August 2003</date>
              <text>
                Soon after, however, officials admit that the US did in fact use a compound which has the
                same effect as Napalm, but with a different name ('MK-77 firebombs'), and a slightly 
                different composition. 
              </text>
              <url>http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/08/08/1060145827920.html</url>
              <urlText>Sydney Morning Herald article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www1.iraqwar.ru/iraq-read_article.php?articleId=15089&lang=en
              	http://www1.iraqwar.ru/iraq-read_article.php?articleId=15084&lang=en
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	The technicality seems a bit irrelevant however when the soldiers involved referred to
              	the bombs as napalm, and that technically napalm only refers to a combination of naphthalene 
              	and palmitate which was only used in the very earliest versions of such bombs anyway
              	(the napalm used in Vietnam for example used a different mixture, and was termed 'Napalm-B'). 
              	It appears in fact that the MK-77 firebombs represent simply a further improvement, having 
              	been made harder to extinguish than 'Napalm-B', thus perhaps 'Napalm-C' might be a more apt 
              	name and would certainly create less confusion.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/08/08/1060145828249.html</url>
              <urlText>Sydney Morning Herald article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2003/02/mil-030211-usmc02.htm
              	http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?story=432201
              	http://smh.com.au/articles/2003/08/08/1060145870882.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
                With the above in mind, one can correctly understand Tommy Franks' comments following
                Al Jazeera's reports on the use of napalm in Afghanistan - 'Right. We're not using - 
                we're not using the <i>old</i> napalm in Tora Bora'.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.centcom.mil/CENTCOMNews/transcripts/franksdec14.htm</url>
              <urlText>DoD Operational Briefing</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Today</date>
              <text>
                Rock Island Arsenal in Illinois is continuing to make napalm, producing a further
                500 MK-77 firebombs for the marines.
              </text>
              <url>http://smh.com.au/articles/2003/08/08/1060145870882.html</url>
              <urlText>Sydney Morning Herald article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>
          </facts>
				</Subtopic>
			</subtopics>
		
		</Topic>

		<Topic name="Terrorism">
			<subtopics>
        <Subtopic name="Terrorism - Made in the USA" shortName="Terrorism" link="us_terror">
          <facts>

            <Fact>
              <link>cuba_terrorism</link>
              <date>1959-Today</date>
              <text>
              	US carries out 40 years of terrorism against Cuba, including |killing_castro hundreds of assassination 
              	attempts| on Fidel Castro, the introduction of swine fever in '71, the |dengue dengue fever| 
              	in '81, and the bombing of tourist hotels in '97.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.newhumanist.com/cubaterror.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Latin_America/LaDemanda.html</altUrls>

              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
            	<link>killing_castro</link>
              <date>1960-1965</date>
              <text>CIA forms no less than 8 plans to assassinate Castro, including attempts to
              send Castro exploding or drugged cigars and spray poison on his beard.</text>
              <url>http://www.historyhouse.com/in_history/castro/</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/church/reports/ir/html/ChurchIR_0043a.htm
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
            	<link>cuba_bombing</link>
              <date>1976</date>
              <text>
              	Flight 455, headed to Cuba, is bombed. 73 passengers and all crew members die, including
              	Cuban government officials and many Cuban and other civilians. 
              </text>
              <url>http://www.greenleft.org.au/back/1992/58/58p15.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	Orlando Bosch, responsible for the bombing, now lives in the US, violating his parole
              	and aiding further terrorist activities against Cuba. His freedom is largely thanks to Bush,
              	who overruled his own Justice Department to let Bosch stay in the US under house arrest, 
              	despite a clear history of terrorist activities. The US has refused Cuba's demands for him to
              	be extradited and for an investigation to be made into the tragedy.
              </text>
              <url>http://vander.hashish.com/articles/911/ghostofterrorpast.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.giraldilla.com/Terror_Docs/UN-CubaAmb-10-01-01.htm
              	http://www.newhumanist.com/cubaterror.html
              	http://www.greenleft.org.au/back/1992/58/58p15.htm
              	http://pd.cpim.org/2001/sept30/2001_sept30_simmon%20wallers.htm
              	http://www.historyofcuba.com/faqcuba/cfaq10.htm
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
            	<link>dengue</link>
              <date>1981</date>
              <text>
              	The CIA releases the dengue fever in Cuba, resulting in 340,000 people being infected and 
              	116,000 hospitalized - this in a country which had never before experienced a single case of 
              	the disease. 158 people, including 101 children, die (that the total was this low is only thanks 
              	to Cuba's remarkable public	health center).
              </text>
              <url>http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Latin_America/LaDemanda.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	 In a 1984 federal criminal trial in New York, the head of the anti-Cuba terrorist organization 
              	 Omega 7 testified under oath that, shortly before the outbreak of the epidemic, the CIA had 
              	 given members of his group "some germs" to be taken to Cuba.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Latin_America/LaDemanda.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/43b/070.html
              	http://www.cuba.cu/politica/webpcc/demanda%20gobcubaeeuu.html
              	http://www.historyofcuba.com/faqcuba/cfaq10.htm
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	 Declassified documents have also revealed that the US Army loosed swarms of specially bred 
              	 mosquitoes in Georgia and Florida to see whether disease-bearing insects could be weapons in 
              	 biological war. The mosquitoes were of the Aedes Aegypti type, the precise carrier of dengue fever.
              	 It has also been revealed that the US government center Fort Detrick was researching dengue fever
              	 for the purposes of biological warfare in 1967.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.whale.to/v/keske8.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.cuba.cu/politica/webpcc/demanda%20gobcubaeeuu.html</altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1982-1988</date>
              <text>US sponsors contras in terrorism campaign against Nicaraguan government.
					    </text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText>|nicaragua Nicaragua in-depth|</urlText>
              <notes>chomsky - in doing so
              becoming the only country ever to be condemned by the World Court for international 
              terrorism (for "the unlawful use of force" for political ends, as the World Court put it).</notes>
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <date>1993</date>
              <text>UN names the army officers who had committed the worst atrocities of the
					       civil war in |el El Salvador|. Two-thirds of them had been trained at the 'School 
					       of the Americas' in Georgia, the same school that trained soldiers to commit similar 
					       atrocities in |nicaragua Nicaragua|, Peru, Honduras, |chile Chile|, Argentina, Panama, 
					       Ecuador and Mexico. The school still operates today under a different name.
					    </text>
              <url>http://www.guardian.co.uk/waronterror/story/0,1361,583254,00.html</url>
              <urlText>Guardian article</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1996</date>
              <text>Amnesty International, in its annual report on US military aid and human rights, states that
              '<i>throughout the world, on any given day, a man, woman or child is likely 
              to be displaced, tortured, killed or "disappeared" at the hands of governments or armed political 
              groups. More often than not, the United States shares the blame.'
					    </text>
              <url>http://www.uwire.com/content/topops021401001.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://teresi.us/html/writing/us_wars.html
              	http://www.robert-fisk.com/robert_elias_25sept2001.htm
              	http://www.zmag.org/chomsky/articles/9708-UD-relativity.html
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>


           <Fact>
              <date>Nov 2000</date>
              <text>Non-violent demonstration held for the closing of the 'School of the Americas', a 
                US Army-run school which has trained more than 60,000 Latin American military officers 
                over the past 50 years. Most of the protestors are thrown in jail, including an 88-year 
                old nun.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.s-j-c.net/SOA.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.cnn.com/2000/US/04/03/school.protest/
              	http://www.cin.org/archives/cinjust/199802/0015.html
              	http://www.soaw.org/new/pressrelease.php?id=8
              	http://www.geocities.com/~virtualtruth/soa_atro.htm
              	http://www.derechos.org/soa/chile-not.html
              	http://www.newhumanist.com/soa.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

						<Fact reference="northwood"></Fact>

            <Fact hide="true">
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	ira
              	bush and terror - http://www.democrats.com/display.cfm?id=299
              </text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Today</date>
              <text>
              	Vietnam's most wanted terrorist, suspected in half a dozen attacks on 
              	Vietnamese targets in Europe and Asia, who even brags of having planned several 
              	past incidents and claims to be planning future attacks, happily lives in and operates 
              	from California, from where Cambodian 'Freedom Fighters' also continue to operate 
              	unhindered by US authorities.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.time.com/time/asia/news/magazine/0,9754,180563,00.html</url>
              <urlText>Time article</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            
          </facts>
        </Subtopic>
			</subtopics>
		</Topic>

		
    <Topic name="Diplomacy">
      <subtopics>
        <Subtopic name="The US and International bodies and treaties" shortName="Treaties + UN" link="treaties">

          <facts>
            <Fact>
              <date>1942</date>
              <link>un_charter</link>
              <text>
                The UN is formed. The UN charter states that a country has the '<i>right of individual 
                or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United 
                Nations</i>', but otherwise prohibits the use of force in international affairs.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/chapter7.htm</url>
              <urlText>UN Charter</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1965</date>
              <text>
                This is further emphasized in UN Resolution 2131, the <i>Declaration on the 
                Inadmissibility of Intervention in the Domestic Affairs of States and the Protection 
                of Their Independence and Sovereignty</i>, which argues not only that '<i> armed 
                intervention is synonymous with aggression and, as such, is contrary to the basic 
                principles on which peaceful international cooperation between States should be built</i>' 
                but also further that '<i>direct intervention, subversion and all forms of indirect 
                intervention are contrary to these principles and, consequently, constitute a violation 
                of the Charter of the United Nations</i>'.
              </text>
              <url>http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/2131.htm</url>
              <urlText>UN Resolution</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://ods-dds-ny.un.org/doc/RESOLUTION/GEN/NR0/218/94/IMG/NR021894.pdf?OpenElement</altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
                Since the creation of the UN, the US has forcefully intervened in |vietnam Vietnam|, 
                |laos Laos|, |cambodia Cambodia|, |nicaragua Nicaragua|, Panama, Grenada, 
                |el El Salvador| among others - without UN authorization, without aggression 
                from any of the given countries, and without any of the given countries even posing a 
                credible threat to the US. 
                Additionally it has covertly intervened in the affairs countries too numerous to list, but
                including |guatemala Guatemala|, |chile Chile|, |brazil Brazil|, |guyana Guyana|, |ghana Ghana|, 
                |congo Congo|, |iraqi Iraq| and |iranian Iran|. 
                Again, none of which posed any credible threat, let alone showed any aggression. All of 
                these actions are thus violations of international law. Much of this site is devoted to 
                the detailing of these actions and the disastrous effects they had on the countries involved.
              </text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <date>1966-Today</date>
              <text>
                Since 1966, the US has vetoed far more Security Council resolutions than any other country.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/data/vetotab.htm</url>
              <urlText>Table</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
              <date>1973-Today</date>
              <text>
                The US has vetoed to date 24 Security Council resolutions regarding Palestine, while 
                providing Israel with approximately $100 billion in aid to help it maintain its 
                34-year occupation of land in defiance of international law.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.miftah.org/Display.cfm?DocId=1579&CategoryId=4</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.miftah.org/PrinterF.cfm?DocId=1579
              	http://www.una-uk.org/veto.html
                http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/UN/usvetoes.html
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1986</date>
              <text>
              	The World Court orders America to put a stop to its crime in Nicaragua and to pay massive 
                reparations, estimated at $17 billion. America ignores the World Court's ruling, not 
                paying a cent and continuing their war.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.icj-cij.org/icjwww/idecisions/isummaries/inussummary860627.htm</url>
              <urlText>ICJ case summary</urlText>
              <altUrls>http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/43/a43r011.htm</altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1997</date>
              <text>
              	US is the only G7 country to refuse to sign the 1997 Mine Ban Treaty, forbidding the 
                use of landmines.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.icbl.org/treaty/nonsign.php3</url>
              <urlText>List of non-signatories</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1998</date>
              <text>
              	US is the only G7 country to vote against the creation of the International Criminal Court.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.hrw.org/campaigns/icc/us.htm</url>
              <urlText>Human Rights Watch article</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>May 1998</date>
              <link>cwc</link>
              <text>
                The US Senate approves legislation that restricts international inspections of 
                chemical sites in the United States, effectively killing the Chemical Weapons
                Convention.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.bullatomsci.org/research/collections/armscntrlcwc.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>March 2001</date>
              <text>US, the worlds largest polluter, unilaterally withdraws from the Kyoto treaty on global warming.</text>
              <url>http://www.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/europe/italy/03/29/environment.kyoto/</url>
              <urlText>CNN article</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>July 2001</date>
              <text>US, the worlds largest exporter of arms, prevents the United Nations from curbing 
                the gun trade at an international arms conference.</text>
              <url>http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/07/09/small.arms.conference/</url>
              <urlText>CNN article</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>July 2001</date>
              <link>bwc</link>
              <text>
              	US renounces efforts to negotiate a verification process for the Biological Weapons 
                Convention and brings an international conference on the matter to a halt.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.nti.org/e_research/e3_2a.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
                http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1663376.stm
                http://www.guardian.co.uk/bush/story/0,7369,494257,00.html
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>August 2001</date>
              <link>germ</link>
              <text>
                US refuses to sign an international treaty banning germ warfare, saying it 
                would put national security and confidential business information at risk.
              </text>
              <url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1493128.stm</url>
              <urlText>BBC article</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>May 2003</date>
              <text>The Bush administration effectively withdraws the US signature on the International 
                Criminal Court (ICC) treaty. It also requests states around the world to approve bilateral 
	              agreements requiring them not to surrender American nationals to the ICC. The goal of these 
	              agreements ("impunity agreements" or so-called "Article 98 agreements") is to exempt U.S. 
	              nationals from ICC jurisdiction</i>'.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.hrw.org/campaigns/icc/us.htm</url>
              <urlText>Human Rights Watch article</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

						<Fact>
							<link>no_icc</link>
							<date>June 2003</date>
							<text>
								The US is ups the pressure on contries to exempt Americans from war crimes, threatening 
								cutting military aid to countries that fail to sign an agreement exempting American military 
								and other personnel from prosecution in the ICC, and then on July 1 does so for the 35 countries 
								(the complete list available <a href="http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20030702.wcour0702/BNStory/International/">here</a>)
								which refused.
							</text>
							<url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3035296.stm</url>
							<urlText>BBC article</urlText>
							<altUrls>
								http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/07/01/us.icc.aid/index.html 
								http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/02/international/02COUR.html?ex=1057723200&en=516fb9bd08329f99&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE 
								http://washingtontimes.com/world/20030701-115712-8350r.htm 
								http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/129066_court02.html 
								http://asia.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=politicsNews&storyID=3021721 
								http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?click_id=6&art_id=vn20030702044421419C243131&set_id=1 
								http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/06/30/icc.military.aid/index.html 
							</altUrls>
						</Fact>
						
            <Fact>
              <date>Today</date>
              <text>US stands with Somalia (which currently has no recognised government) as the only two 
                countries in the world to refuse to ratify the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child
                (<a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/450457.stm">ratification means</a> the convention 
                has to be incorporated into national law).
              </text>
              <url>http://www.unicef.org/crc/convention.htm</url>
              <urlText>UNICEF Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/1678895.stm
              	http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/509373.stm
              	http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/450457.stm
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

          </facts>
        </Subtopic>

        <Subtopic name="The US, the WTO, and 'free trade'" shortName="Free trade" link="wto_free_trade">
          <facts>
            <Fact>
              <date>1996</date>
              <text>The US successfully challenges an EU rule protecting the banana exports of their 
                former colonies in the Caribbean, on behalf of Chiquita Brands International. The EU, 
                with 74% of its citizens willing to pay more for 'fair trade' bananas, stands firm. 
                The US responds with punitive tariffs against the EU, forcing the EU to rescind the 
                tariffs. Caribbean farmers are the losers.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.globalexchange.org/wto/CaseStudies.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>Worth noting in the above is the fact that Clinton filed the complaint at the WTO 
              within a day of the US Democratic Party receiving a $500,000 'donation' from Chiquita.
							</text>
              <url>http://pilger.carlton.com/globalisation/globalimpact/farmers</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>1998</date>
				       <text>'An attempt to confer to WHO a role in monitoring international trade agreements was
				         strongly opposed at the 1998 World Health Assembly: US State Department representatives 
				         threatened to withdraw WHO funding when faced with aggressive WHO support for improved 
				         access to patented medicines in less-developed countries.' WHO was later granted a more
				         limited role in monitoring the public-health consequences of International trade 
				         agreements in 1999.
	            </text>
							<url>http://www.transnationale.org/anglais/sources/sante/influence_profits__lancet_thailand.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Jan 2000</date>
              <text>Debate in Montreal over Genetic Engineering of crops.
								Chief negotiator for EU argues '<i>governments 
								  must be able to have the freedom and sovereign right to take precautionary action
								  (with regards to genetically altered microbes, animals or crops that they fear might be harmful), 
								  as risks that may arise may be long term and irreversible</i>'. 
								However the Miami Group (US, Canada, Australia, Argentina, Chile and Uruguay) insist 
								on WTO rules - 
								that something can only be banned on the basis of scientific evidence (i.e. removing the right 
								of countries to refuse to be experimental subjects).<br><br>
								Ignoring the scientific arguments, the main issue is that forcing GMOs into 
								countries dependent on agriculture could harm their economies (seeds imported for food are often 
								planted by farmers, and the addition of GMOs to a country's ecosystem could destroy its export 
								market, as many buyers do not accept GM food).
							</text>
              <url>http://web.greens.org/s-r/22/22-22.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://home.intekom.com/tm_info/rw00208.htm
             	</altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>
            
            <Fact>
              <date>Jan 2000</date>
              <text>The UN has condemned the US's unilateral sanctions against Cuba every year for the
                past 10 years, sanctions which have been in place since 1961 and have included both food
                and medicine.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,608397,00.html</url>
              <urlText>Guardian article</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date>Today</date>
              <text>The US currently enforces co-ercive unilateral (unsupported by, and condemned by, 
                the UN) sanctions on 50% of the worlds population.
							</text>
              <url>http://www.twnside.org.sg/title/half-cn.htm</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/sanction/unilat.htm
              	http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/1154649.stm
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>The US is resisting a European effort at the World Health Organization to exempt 
                tobacco from trade rules. Under the mantra of 'free trade', it has already used the 
                threat of sanctions to force open cigarette markets in East Asia, and recently 
                (in 2001) defeated a South 
                Korean attempt to impose stiff tariffs on imported cigarettes. Markets in
                China, Japan, Taiwan and Thailand have all been opened, with the US further demanding 
                tobacco companies be allowed to advertise, hold giveaway 
                promotions and sponsor concerts and sports events in these countries. An estimated 3-4
                million people worldwide die every year due to smoking-related illnesses.
 							</text>
              <url>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/tobacco/stories/asia.htm</url>
              <urlText>Washington Post article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A40950-2002Jan13&notFound=true
                http://www.fctc.org/news184.shtml
                http://www.twnside.org.sg/title/pushup.htm
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>
          </facts>
        </Subtopic>
			</subtopics>
		</Topic>
		<Topic name="Bush Administration">
			<subtopics>
        <Subtopic name="Bush Administration" link="profiles">
          <facts>

            <Fact>
            	<link>bush</link>
              <date>President</date>
              <text>
								<table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="6" align="right" valign="top" border="0"><tr><td valign=top><img src="bush.jpg" width="100" border="0"></td></tr></table>
                George Bush is a Texas oilman, although not a very successful one. His company, 
                Arbusto, merged with Spectrum 7 in 1984 as it was on the verge of bankruptcy. 
                Spectrum was bought out by Harken Energy in 1986, giving Bush a seat on Harkens 
                board, some stock options and a $120,000 consulting contract. The energy 
                industry <a href="http://greenyes.grrn.org/2001/02/msg00097.html">pumped 
                $2.8 million into Bush's 2000 campaign</a>.
                <br><br>
                Bush's father, the former president and ex-CIA director, is part of the 
                <a href="http://www.observer.co.uk/iraq/story/0,12239,919897,00.html">Carlyle 
                Group</a>, a $12 billion international equity firm. Carlyle's portfolio is heavy in 
                defense and telecommunications holdings. In addition, The Wall Street Journal 
                reported on September 31 that Bush One and Osama bin Laden's family, which is also 
                is part of the Carlyle Group, have business dealings with each other.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.opensecrets.org/bush/cabinet.asp</url>
              <urlText>Profile</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.onlinejournal.com/Special_Reports/Lynn082202/lynn082202.html
              	http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1138009.stm
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	Bush only won the 2000 election after his brother removed 94,000 Florida voters from the 
              	electoral	role on the basis that they were criminals. 90% (91,000) were in fact innocent
              	of any crime. As these voters were predominantly black and thus overwhelmingly democrats, 
              	it can be said with a fair degree of certainty that they would have swung the vote away 
              	from Bush by more than the 537 vote difference had they been granted their right to vote.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.theindependentjournal.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2003/02/08/3e45aacc276f6</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/events/newsnight/1174115.stm
              	http://www.buzzflash.com/interviews/2002/03/Greg_Palast_031102.html
              	http://www.network54.com/Realm/genslab/lawsuot.html
              	http://archive.salon.com/politics/feature/2002/11/01/lists/index_np.html
              	http://www.consortiumnews.com/2001/071201a.html
              	http://www.consortiumnews.com/2001/051201a.html
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
            	<link>cheney</link>
              <date>Vice President</date>
              <text>
              	<table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="6" align="right" valign="top" border="0"><tr><td valign=top><img src="cheney.jpg" width="100" border="0"></td></tr></table>
                Dick Cheney was, from 1995 to 2000, the CEO of Halliburton, the worlds 
                largest oil field services company. Halliburton, through its European subsidiaries, sold 
                spare parts to Iraq's oil industry, despite U.N. sanctions, and had contracts to rebuild 
                oil infrastructures destroyed in Bush One's Gulf War (during which Cheney was secretary 
                of defense). He sold $59m of his shares as Chief Executive of Halliburton, after accounting 
                changes allegedly inflated the share price by $445m. The shares later collapsed, and 
                Cheney and Halliburton are <a href="http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/news/nation/3638040.htm">now 
                under investigation </a>by the Securities and Exchange Commission.
                <br><br>
                Cheney was also a member of the Kazakhstan Oil Advisory Board. U.S. oil companies now hold 
                a nearly three-fourths stake in the Tengiz oil fields in Kazakhstan.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.guardian.co.uk/bush/story/0,7369,752722,00.html</url>
              <urlText>Guardian article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
								http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1554217.stm
								http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1138009.stm
								http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/2310943.stm
              	http://www.opensecrets.org/bush/cabinet.asp
              	http://www.moles.org/ProjectUnderground/pr_archive/cheney000725b.html
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
            	<link></link>
              <date></date>
              <text>
                As a house rep from Wyoming from 1978 to 1989, he cosponsored a measure to open up the 
                Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska to oil drilling and voted against the Clean 
                Water Act which required industries to release publicly their records on toxic emissions. 
                The Sierra Club, quoting from 1997 EPA data, point out that Halliburton's facility in 
                Duncan, Oklahoma, was in the top 20 percent of the dirtiest in the United States.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.moles.org/ProjectUnderground/pr_archive/cheney000725b.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
            	<link></link>
              <date></date>
              <text>
                Cheney has consistently opposed increased gun control and environmental laws. He has also voted
                to fund the |nicaragua Nicaraguan contras| and against imposing sanctions on the apartheid 
                regime in South Africa.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2000/democracy/bush/stories/cheney/</url>
              <urlText>CNN profile</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
            	<link></link>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	Cheney still receives annual payments from Halliburton, which has recently been awarded the 
              	Pentagon's <a href="http://www.fortune.com/fortune/washington/0,15704,437274,00.html">
              	contract to put out potential oil-field fires</a> in Iraq and |halliburton_contracts other 
              	postwar construction contracts|. Halliburton was also awarded contracts worth nearly $33m to 
              	build the detention camp at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba for al-Qaida suspects.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,912515,00.html</url>
              <urlText>Guardian article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://money.cnn.com/2003/09/25/news/companies/cheney/
              	http://www.salon.com/news/wire/2003/09/26/haliburton/
              	http://stacks.msnbc.com/news/972131.asp?cp1=1
              	http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A2233-2003Sep25.html
              	http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/09/26/politics/main575356.shtml
              	http://www.tompaine.com/feature2.cfm/ID/9120
              </altUrls>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
            	<link>rice</link>
              <date><b>National Security Affairs Advisor</b><!-- <br><br><br><img src="rice2.jpg" width="100">--></date>
              <text>
                Condoleezza Rice sat on Chevron's Board of Directors from 1991 to 2001, and Chevron 
                named a 129,000-ton oil tanker after her. Rice used her expertise as a Soviet foreign 
                relations specialist on the National Security Council during Bush One to advise Chevron 
                on its investments in the Caspian Sea during her board tenure.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.topica.com/lists/politicaldiary/read/message.html?mid=804022459&sort=d&start=0</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1138009.stm
              	http://www.opensecrets.org/bush/cabinet/cabinet.rice.asp
              	http://aztlan.net/oiltanker.htm
              </altUrls>
              <notes>
              	Previously included this picture (<img src="oiltank.jpg" width="440" align="center">),
                however then realised it is an obvious fake.
              </notes>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
            	<link>rumsfeld</link>
              <date><b>Secretary of Defense<b> <!-- <br><br><img src="rumsfeld.jpg" width=100>--></date>
              <text>
              	Donald Rumsfeld was on the board of technology giant ABB when it won a deal to supply 
              	North Korea with two nuclear power plants, netting a $200 million contract.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.msnbc.com/news/870477.asp</url>
              <urlText>MSNBC article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.nzzamsonntag.ch/2003/02/22/english/page-synd1648385.html
              	http://truthout.org/docs_02/022303B.htm	
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	In 1983, a month after the US received intelligence reports of "almost daily use of CW 
              	[chemical weapons]" by Iraq, Donald Rumsfeld met Saddam Hussein in Baghdad and passed on 
              	the US willingness to help his regime and restore full diplomatic relations.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,866942,00.html</url>
              <urlText>Guardian article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://stacks.msnbc.com/news/795649.asp?cp1=1
              	http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A52241-2002Dec29&notFound=true
              	http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0802-01.htm
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	In 1998 he and Deputy Secretary Paul Wolfowitz undertook a full-fledged lobbying 
              	campaign to get former President Bill Clinton to start a war with Iraq and topple 
              	Saddam Hussein's regime, claiming that the country posed a threat to the United States.
              	This included <a href="http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonletter.htm">this</a>,
              	and <a href="http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqletter1998.htm">this</a> letter.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.onlinejournal.com/Special_Reports/022003Leopold/022003leopold.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.observer.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,901066,00.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
            	<link>powell</link>
              <date><b>Secretary of State<b> <!-- <br><br><img src="powell.jpg" width=100>--></date>
              <text>
                In the Vietnam war, Colin Powell attempted to cover-up the 
                <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/64344.stm">My Lai massacre</a>.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.consortiumnews.com/2000/121700b.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
                http://www.usvetdsp.com/story13.htm
                http://www.tnr.com/politics/cnote/lane041795.html
                http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour/documentaries/profile/colin-powell.shtml
                http://abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/DailyNews/profile_powell.html
                http://www.onlinejournal.com/Commentary/Wingo021303/wingo021303.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
                In 1986, he supervised the transfer of 4,508 TOW missiles to the CIA, and 
                then sought to hide the transaction from Congress and the public (for the reason that 
                these missiles were part of the 
                <a href="http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/reagan.years/whitehouse/iran.html">Iran-Contra
                </a> scandal's arms-for-hostages deal). He later worked diligently on behalf of the 
                contra guerrillas who were killing civilians in |nicaragua Nicaragua| (for which the 
                US was later |nicaragua_world_court condemned by the World Court|).
              </text>
              <url>http://www.workingforchange.com/article.cfm?itemid=14478</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
                http://www.consortiumnews.com/2000/121900a.html
              	http://www.tnr.com/politics/cnote/lane041795.html
                http://abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/DailyNews/profile_powell.html
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
                Collin Powell met with General Mahmoud Ahmad on Sept 12+13, 2001. Ahmad was the
                'money-man' behind the |sept11 Sept 11| hijackers.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO206A.html</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
                http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/2001/nyt091301.html
                http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/10/05/inv.terror.investigation/
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>


            <Fact>
              <date><b>Commerce Secretary<b> <!-- <br><br><img src="donevans.jpg" width=100>--></date>
              <text>
                Don Evans spent 25 years at Tom Brown Inc., a Denver-based oil and gas company. He 
                was chairman and CEO of the $1.2 billion company and also sat on the board of TMBR/Sharp 
                Drilling, an oil and gas drilling operation.              
              </text>
              <url>http://www.opensecrets.org/bush/cabinet/cabinet.evans.asp</url>
              <urlText>Profile</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date><b>Energy Secretary<b> <!--  <br><br><img src="abraham.jpg" width=100>--></date>
              <text>
                Spencer Abraham was the No. 1 recipient of campaign contributions from the automotive 
                industry, receiving more than $700,000 for his failed Senate run in 2000 from contributors 
                like General Motors, Ford and Lear Corp. One of his top contributors, DaimlerChrysler, is 
                introducing an extra large SUV to the U.S. market this year. Daimlers SUV, considered a 
                "military spin-off," is a foot longer than the SUVs currently on the road and will only get 
                about 10 miles per gallon. 
              </text>
              <url>http://www.opensecrets.org/bush/cabinet/cabinet.abraham.asp</url>
              <urlText>Profile</urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date><b>Transportation Secretary<b> <!-- <br><br><img src="minetarrrr.jpg" width=100>--></date>
              <text>
                In yet another conflict of interests, Norman Mineta has corporate ties with Lockheed 
                Martin, Northwest Airlines, Greyhound, United Airlines, Union Pacific and Boeing.
              </text>
              <url>http://www.opensecrets.org/bush/cabinet/cabinet.evans.asp</url>
              <urlText>Profile</urlText>
              <notes>
                 1961  CIA-backed coup overthrows elected Pres. J. M. Velasco Ibarra of Ecuador, who has been too friendly with Cuba.  
                 http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Blum/Ecuador_uned_WBlum.html
                 http://members.aol.com/bblum6/ecuador.htm
              </notes>
            </Fact>
            
          </facts>
        </Subtopic>

      </subtopics>
    </Topic>


    <Topic name="Media Censorship" hide="true">
      <subtopics>
        <Subtopic name="Media Censorship in the US">
          <facts>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	The mainstream US media is owned by large corporations - Fox News by Rupert Murdoch 
              	(who owns a lot of media all over the world), MSNBC by General Electric and Microsoft, 
              	ABC by Walt Disney, CBS+MTV by Viacom (another huge conglomerate). To make the situation
              	even worse, the government is looking at removing some monopoly controls which would 
              	only make the situation worse.
              </text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	http://www.guerrillanews.com/media/doc1139.html
              	http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=14873
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
								CNN censors journalists in afghanistan
              </text>
              <url>http://www.wsws.org/articles/2001/nov2001/cnn-n06.shtml</url>
              <urlText>Article</urlText>
              <altUrls>
              	iraq coming up - http://argument.independent.co.uk/commentators/story.jsp?story=381438
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	CNN forced to remove 'nam story
              </text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	dodgy stuff on bush lies story - http://www.takebackthemedia.com/cbscia.html
              	
              	FOX removes Israeli spy ring story
              	more censorship -
              	  http://news.mywebpal.com/partners/701/public/news438465.html
              	
              	misreported shooting of civilians in iraq war -  
              	  http://www.guerrillanews.com/human_rights/doc1548.html
              	  
              	censorship re. congo
              	  http://www.wsws.org/articles/2002/mar2002/carl-m15.shtml
              	  
								shooting of journalists
								  http://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/28/international/worldspecial/28HOTE.html?ex=1054699200&en=f617424fd6bd0e41&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE
              		http://www.boston.com/dailynews/148/region/Report_counters_Pentagon_s_acc:.shtml  
									http://media.guardian.co.uk/broadcast/story/0,7493,965490,00.html	
									
              	The Daily Mirror, a UK tabloid newspaper which opposes the war, says it has hired veteran reporter 
              	Peter Arnett - a few hours after he was sacked by the American NBC TV network for saying the initial 
              	war plan had failed.
              	
              	
              	jefferson - http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/RRiraqWar.html
								"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, it expects what never was and never will be ... 
								The People cannot be safe without information. When the press is free, and every man is able to 
								read, all is safe."
								
								FOX lies on Iraq (great)
								http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig/steinreich8.html
								
              </text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <altUrls>
              </altUrls>
            </Fact>


          </facts>
        </Subtopic>
      </subtopics>
    </Topic>

 	 </topics>
 	</Supertopic>
	
 	<Supertopic name="Articles" image="bush_foreign_policy.jpg" imagewidth="194" imageheight="145">
 	 <topics>
		<Topic name="Fighting Terrorism">
			<subtopics>		
        <Subtopic name="Guide to Fighting Terrorism" shortName="Fighting Terrorism"  forcebg="true" nocomment="true">
          <facts>
            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
								<p>              
								To prevent terrorism by dropping bombs on Iraq is such an obvious idea that I can't think why no one has thought of it before. It's so simple. If only the UK had done something similar in Northern Ireland, we wouldn't be in the mess we are in today.
								</p><p>              
								The moment the IRA blew up the Horseguards' bandstand, the Government should have declared its own War on Terrorism. It should have immediately demanded that the Irish government hand over Gerry Adams. If they refused to do so - or quibbled about needing proof of his guilt - we could have told them that this was no time for prevarication and that they must hand over not only Adams but all IRA terrorists in the Republic. If they tried to stall by claiming that it was hard to tell who were IRA terrorists and who weren't, because they don't go around wearing identity badges, we would have been free to send in the bombers.
								</p><p>              
								It is well known that the best way of picking out terrorists is to fly 30,000ft above the capital city of any state that harbours them and drop bombs - preferably cluster bombs. It is conceivable that the bombing of Dublin might have provoked some sort of protest, even if just from James Joyce fans, and there is at least some likelihood of increased anti-British sentiment in what remained of the city and thus a rise in the numbers of potential terrorists. But this, in itself, would have justified the tactic of bombing them in the first place. We would have nipped them in the bud, so to speak. I hope you follow the argument.
								</p><p>              
								Having bombed Dublin and, perhaps, a few IRA training bogs in Tipperary, we could not have afforded to be complacent. 
								We would have had to turn our attention to those states which had supported and funded the IRA terrorists through all 
								these years. The <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/1490663.stm">main provider of funds</a> was, of course, the USA, and this would have posed us with a bit of a problem. Where to bomb in America? It's a big place and it's by no means certain that a small country like the UK could afford enough bombs to do the whole job.
								</p><p>              
								It's going to cost the US billions to bomb Iraq and a lot of that is empty countryside. America, on the other hand, provides a bewildering number of targets.
								</p><p>              
								Should we have bombed Washington, where the policies were formed? Or should we have concentrated on places where Irishmen are known to lurk, like New York, Boston and Philadelphia? We could have bombed any police station and fire station in most major urban centres, secure in the knowledge that we would be taking out significant numbers of IRA sympathisers. On St Patrick's Day, we could have bombed Fifth Avenue and scored a bull's-eye.
								</p><p>              
								In those American cities we couldn't afford to bomb, we could have rounded up American citizens with Irish names, put bags over their heads and flown them in chains to Guernsey or Rockall, where we could have given them food packets marked 'My Kind of Meal' and exposed them to the elements with a clear conscience.
								</p><p>              
								The same goes for Australia. There are thousands of people in Sydney and Melbourne alone who have actively supported Irish republicanism by sending money and good wishes back to people in the Republic, many of whom are known to be IRA members and sympathisers. A well-placed bomb or two Down Under could have taken out the ringleaders and left the world a safer place. Of course, it goes without saying that we would also have had to bomb various parts of London such as Camden Town, Lewisham and bits of Hammersmith and we should certainly have had to obliterate, if not the whole of Liverpool, at least the Scotland Road area.
								</p><p>              
								And that would be it really, as far as exterminating the IRA and its supporters. Easy. The War on Terrorism provides a solution so uncomplicated, so straightforward and so gloriously simple that it baffles me why it has taken a man with the brains of George W. Bush to think of it.
								</p><p>              
								So, sock it to Iraq, George. Let's make the world a safer place.
								</p>
								&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;-- From <a href="http://www.counterpunch.org/jones1207.html">Terry Jones (Monty Python)</a>
              </text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <notes />
            </Fact>
          </facts>
        </Subtopic>
      </subtopics>
		</Topic>
		
    <Topic name="Failures of US Foreign Policy">
      <subtopics>
        <Subtopic name="Introduction" nocomment="true">
          <facts>
            <Fact>
            	<text>
            	<i>This article originally appeared entitled 'Failures of US Foreign Policy' on the <a href="http://www.alternativeinsight.com/Foreign_Policy_Failures.html">Alternative Insight</a> website and has been reproduced here with permission.</i>
            	<br><br>
            	Since World War II, U.S. foreign policy often failed to realize its objectives and proved t be counterproductive. Although anti-communism posed as the principal guide to foreign policy, the same policies continued after the Cold War. Counter-insurgency rarely encountered insurgents and at times promoted insurgency. In almost all cases, force replaced diplomacy and military policy dictated foreign policy.
							<br><br>
							Although it might seem logical to examine the policies chronologically, a regional approach exposes a similarity of failures. A comprehensive review of American foreign policy towards countries in different regions in different eras shows that foreign policy exhibited the same elements--ineffective diplomacy degenerating into military excursions, and a lack of statesmanship. If the presentation appears one-sided, it is only because the policies have been one-sided, exhibiting common patterns that continue their trajectory to international catastrophes.
							</text>
            </Fact>
          </facts>
        </Subtopic>
        <Subtopic name="The European Scene" link="european" shortName="Europe" nocomment="true">
          <facts>
            <Fact>
            	<date></date>
            	<text>
								During the Cold war, opposing forces faced one another across a thin line. Nevertheless, no military confrontations occurred. The U.S. succeeded in stabilizing Western Europe and preventing the Soviet Union from encroaching upon West European territory. The communist state maintained its sphere of influence in East Europe and the U.S. reluctantly permitted it. After the demise of the Soviet Union from internal policies, the U.S.appeared to have achieved its objectives without firing a bullet on European soil. The length of the Cold War, and its social and economic strains on the United States during the 1960's and 1970's, signaled the policy was not a complete success. Without the military demands of the Cold War, it is entirely possible that internal struggles in the Soviet Union might have provoked the Soviet state into a different and more acceptable path than it has achieved in the post-communist era. Other U.S. foreign policies, which also highlighted internal interference and military confrontation, have rarely resolved situations and usually caused havoc.            	
							</text>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
            	<date>Greece - 1946</date>
      	     	<text>
        	    	The Truman Doctrine, the first major post-war military policy decision, allowed active military support to the anti-communists in the Greek 1946 civil war. U.S. participation occurred although the Soviet Union refused to provide assistance to the Greek communists and refrained from interfering in the struggle. The U.S. succeeded in preventing a communist government in Greece. The successful interference added to the initial frictions between the East and the West and started the Cold War.
            	</text>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
            	<date>Berlin - 1948</date>
            	<text>
    	        	Rather than a simple case of harassment, the USSR tested U.S. intentions in Berlin. Viewing the allied sectors in Berlin as espionage bases and of no importance to the allies, the Soviets probed Western decisiveness on a vital issue. The USSR leaders theorized that if the allies desired satisfactory relations with the USSR, they would compromise and evacuate Berlin. The Berlin airlift convinced the Soviet leaders that the West would struggle for each advantage, leading them to conclude they could not easily find a rapport with the West . The U.S. successful response to the Soviet's efforts became the critical event that moved the Cold War to the preparatory stage of confrontation and initiated the drastic arms race.
            	</text>
            </Fact>

            <Fact>
            	<date>Marshall Plan - 1948 to 1960</date>
            	<text>
  	          	The Marshall plan, provided the economic resources for West Europe to recover from the war. It is undoubtedly the finest U.S. foreign policy achievement. Proposed and guided by General George C. Marshall, the plan assured markets for U.S. exports and smoothed the transition from a war economy to a peace economy. It is an example of using U.S. policy in a "win-win" situation, benefiting the American people and providing sustenance to others.
            	</text>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
            	<date>NATO - 1948 to Present</date>
            	<text>
	            	NATO grew in size and strength and sat silently all through the Cold War. Despite opportunities to provide assistance to Czechoslovakia in 1948, Hungary in 1956, the Czechs again in the Prague spring of 1968 and the Poles in the 70's, NATO refrained from modifying its doctrine of only attacking after being attacked. In the post Cold War era, after the Soviet Union had been humbled and could not retaliate, NATO changed its position. As a component of U.S. foreign policy NATO's existence succeeded in preventing any military action against Western Europe. The same component aggressively promoted U.S. policies in the Balkans.
            	</text>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
            	<date>Balkan Wars</date>
            	<text>
								The words Balkan wars creates images of armies with long muskets and early 20th century colorful uniforms. Despite two World Wars, the creation of two international peace organizations, and several resolutions that resolved the Balkan borders, the area's problems continually revive and persist. The ferocity of the antagonisms, killings, dislocations, and brutalities committed in the Balkans, and the military involvement of the U.S. and NATO, indicate that a capitalist/communist hostility, the most accepted reason for previous disputes, and one that had never resulted in military strife in Europe, may have disguised other reasons
								<ul>
								    <li> the assurance of trade and markets,
								    <li> the control of a major portion of world resources,
								    <li> the need to have all nations conform to a unified economic plan,
								    <li> world domination by one party, and
								    <li> rendering powerless those nations that threatened an emerging New World Order or did not conform it. 
								</ul>
								Although the return of the Kosovar refugees to their towns and villages seemed to prove that the ends justified the means, all the results of the war should be considered--testing of weapons in all types of conditions that caused victims and destruction, strong nations now able to attack weaker nations with the pretext of unfair treatment of their minorities, revival of the cold war, renewal of an arms race, the loss of sovereignty, and the uncomfortable feeling that no matter where you are in the world, if you don't agree with a specified policy you may become a target of a guided missile.
								<br><br>
								Considering the extent of the strife and mayhem, can U.S. policy in the Balkans be considered a success? The diplomacy did not prevent the violence, the "ethnic cleansing," and the military confrontations. The policy resulted in deaths of many persons and in the destruction of the Yugoslavian nation. The policy has not resolved the issues and has left the Balkans with an uncertain future. The aggravation of the problems, the manner of their resolution, and the resulting partition of the Balkan nations, indicates that the past Cold War policies were only a prelude and not an end to carelessly formed European foreign policies. Today's Europe contains a united and powerful Germany, a disintegrated Soviet Union, a divided Czechoslovakia, a fragmented Balkans. Europe is buffeted by the tendencies of one nation (non-European) that possesses a military and cultural dominance that controls the activities of the other European nations, although it does not have a geographical presence on the Western continent. It almost seems that the West has accepted a Nazi vision of Europe, including separation of peoples by ethnic identity.
            	</text>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
            	<date>European Strife - 1946 to Present</date>
            	<text>
								Throughout the post - WWII years, the U.S. had no severe conflicts with the Western European countries, even with those which had socialist orientation. Yet, the U.S. applied pressure and force to Third World countries that were either antagonistic to U.S. policies or had socialist oriented governments.
								<br><br>
								The U.S. tried to destroy the leftist government of the former Portuguese colony of Angola, and did not confront Angola's former parent country, Portugal when it was governed by the leftist leader, Caravalho.
								<br><br>
								Leftist regimes in Greece and Spain replaced former rightist regimes that had championed U.S. policies. The communists were always Italy's major political party and they had several opportunities to achieve power. In France, Mitterand's Socialist government had characteristics that normally alarmed the U.S. State Department. DeGaulle's leadership pursued independent policies that conflicted with U.S. policies. The reason for U.S. acceptance of adversarial European regimes - Americans would not support attacks on Europeans, nor would other Europeans remain silent if any European country became a victim of an attack. A touch of cowardice and bully is also apparent - The U.S. has only attacked small and less industrialized Third World nations. Racism guides U.S. foreign policy.            	
            	</text>
            </Fact>
          </facts>
        </Subtopic>
        <Subtopic name="The Asian Scene" link="asian" shortName="Asia" nocomment="true">
          <facts>
            <Fact>
            	<date></date>
            	<text>
	            	U.S. foreign policy and military adventures in Asia have been disasters.Without resolving controversies in its favor, the U.S. temporarily destroyed the Indo-Chinese countries, allowed repressive regimes to flourish in other countries and did prevent an event it fought against-- China's rapid development.
            	</text>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
            	<date>Korean War 1948-1952</date>
            	<text>
								U.S. policies had forged no alternative to military intervention in the Korean Civil War in order to prevent the Korean peninsula from becoming totally controlled by the Northern communists. Although the two Koreas had been threatening one another, and it had become obvious that the stronger North Korea showed itself ready to settle the conflict by military force, in 1948, the U.S. still had not prepared a constructive Korean policy.
								<br><br>
								Shortly after the war started, with U.S. troops trapped in a small part of the peninsula, MacArthur launched a counterthrust by landing troops at Inchon. Deemed a suicide venture by military experts, and ignored as an impossibility by the North Korean command, the surprise maneuver doomed the North Korean army and cleared the South of all but enemy guerrilla forces. At this point, instead of calling a truce, U.S. foreign policy drifted into its first great post-war error--a chilling prelude to a future of military catastrophes--U.S. troops continued into North Korea. This excursion generated a military confrontation with China, an additional 30 to 40 thousand American deaths, many more wounded, and hundreds of thousands of Korean casualties.
								<br><br>
								After the truce, Korea remained divided as it had been in 1948. Uncertainty and war has threatened the Korean peninsula for decades. The military move across the 37th parallel escalated the Cold War, and gave the Soviet Union closer support from China. A strategic foothold on the Asian mainland and the progress of South Korea were successful ingredients of the Korean policy. The losses in American and Korean lives, the human tragedies due to the lack of reunification, and the escalation of East-West tensions offset the successes.
            	</text>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
            	<date>Vietnamese War 1961-1975</date>
            	<url></url>
            	<urlText>|vietnam Read More|</urlText>
            	<text>
            		The greatest foreign policy blunder in U.S. history brought America 47,382 military dead, 10,811 non-combatant deaths, 153,382 wounded, and 10,173 captured. The American military devastated both North and South Vietnam, inflicted 1 million casualties upon their peoples and brought environmental catastrophes to large areas. Washington claimed counter-insurgency as the U.S role in the war. The war escalated because the United States, defender of free elections, acted to prevent the Vietnamese people from voting on the unification of Vietnam. Those guiding U.S. foreign policy used facetious exaggerations, such as the dubious Tonkin Bay attack on U.S. warships by small North Vietnamese speed boats, to justify intervention, and then cited doubtful SEATO treaties and an amateurishly created "domino effect" to give it legitimacy. After years of turmoil and violence in Vietnam and at home, the U.S. gained its policy of "no elections" in Vietnam. The North took control of all of Vietnam without any election.
            	</text>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
            	<date>Cambodia 1968-1978</date>
            	<url></url>
            	<urlText>|cambodia Read More|</urlText>
            	<text>
            	The destruction in Cambodia started before the end of the Vietnam campaign. Not willing to have the North Vietnamese military use a neutral territory to bring troops and material to the South, the U.S. carried the war into Cambodia with extensive bombings and military excursions. This "secret" war signified the first time after WWII that the U.S. attacked a sovereign country in an undeclared war, and set a precedent for future attacks. After realizing that they could not convince Prince Sihanouk, Cambodia's ruler, to take action against the North Vietnamese, the CIA engineered Sihanouk's overthrow. The years following this action are one of the saddest of any country's history. Sihanouk, who brought a measure of stability and prosperity to his country during a wartime crisis, did not want to antagonize the U.S. He simply wanted to remain neutral. His disposal, exile and replacement by Lon Nol brought violence and civil war to the country. The Khmer Rouge captured the leadership and brought the country to civil and economic ruin. The new Socialist Republic of Vietnam invaded the country, ostensibly to create order. The war, and further civil wars, increased the death and destruction that had started with the U.S. policy of replacing Sihanouk.
            	</text>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
            	<date>China 1948 to Present</date>
            	<text>
            	Containment guides United States' China policy. The policy is designed to prevent China from developing into a world economic and military power that may challenge U.S. hegemony. The world's countries recognize that superior nations react aggressively to a challenge to their invincibility, and tacitly accept the policy if it does not cause a world catastrophe. Since 1948, U.S. policy towards China has grown from intense hostility without violent intent to a "constructive engagement," that cajoles it, insults it, accuses it, and tries everything to get it to do...what? Nobody is sure and so, regardless of what we state or imply, China has done what it wants--wars with Vietnam and India, incorporating Tibet, controlling its people in a manner in which it feels they should be controlled. Meanwhile China grows economically and militarily more powerful each day. And each day the U.S. perceives China as an increasing threat. Since our containment of China has not succeeded and has had only one direction, we can expect the U.S. attitude towards China to become more severe. The trajectory of the U.S. policy towards China is leading to a world catastrophe, and to an eventual conflict that will undoubtedly use the mightiest weapons to achieve victory.
            	</text>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
            	<date>Other Asia</date>
            	<text>
            	 Economic interests have dictated U.S. policy towards other Asiatic countries. In Japan and Taiwan, the U.S. has assisted in creating economic powerhouses in order to have stable, friendly governments that allow the U.S. to maintain military bases. Other countries have not been as fortunate. Indonesia and the Philippines maintained totalitarian and corrupt governments for decades. The U.S. policies have generated insurrections, retaliations and violent confrontations. After years of prosperity turned into economic collapse, these countries have started to evolve more stable institutions.
            	</text>
            </Fact>
          </facts>
        </Subtopic>
        <Subtopic name="The Mid-East Scene" link="mid_east" shortName="Middle East" nocomment="true">
          <facts>
            <Fact>
            	<date></date>
            	<text>
            		The immediate post-war Middle East policy liberated the Arab countries from foreign domination. It also enabled their governments to exercise greater control of their oil resources and develop them in partnership with Western interests. The United States had superior resources for assisting the oil producers, and initially became the favored partner. As energy became the most significant resource to the fast growing Western world, U.S. policy in the Middle East retreated to one sentence--Keep the oil at any cost. Nevertheless, several powerful oil producers remain antagonistic to the United States and the U.S. policy towards the Arab world has been one cause of terrorism. The hypocritical policy has created havoc for some of the areas people. Lacking any apparent change, it portends a dangerous future.
            	</text>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
            	<date>Iran 1946 to Present</date>
            	<url></url>
            	<urlText>|iranian Read More|</urlText>
            	<text>
								In 1946, after the Soviet Union had occupied Northern Iran for contradictory reasons, Truman demanded and succeeded in removing the Russian troops. This overlooked event signified a basis existed for cooperating with the Soviet Union. The U.S. government ignored the signal and headed into the Cold War. The next major Iranian event occurred in 1954 when Mossadegh threatened to nationalize the oil industry. By evening he had been forced from office and the U.S. had its colleague, the anti-communist and anti-nationalist Shah Pahlevi, firmly in power. The State Department failed to realize that the Shah considered Iran his personal fiefdom and that the uneven economic progress he brought to Iran did not have the support of the masses, especially those inclined to a more rigid Islam.  This failure proved fatal.
								<br><br>
								In 1979, the Iranians deposed the Shah and an Islamic movement, led by the Ayatollah Khomeini, gained control. Instead of using diplomacy with the new government and demonstrating restraint, U.S. policy reflected its bias against a regime that did not follow its dictates. Despite Iran's protests, the government allowed the Shah to enter the U.S. for medical treatment. This event precipitated extreme groups in Iran to seize the American embassy and hold U.S. citizens as prisoners.Within a short time, the Shah returned to Panama and eventually died in Egypt. Relations with Iran rapidly declined to a total separation. The U.S. quickly lost any economic and strategic advantages it had established in Iran.
								<br><br>
								U.S. policy planners could not admit mistakes and their policy towards Iran continued on a destructive path. In Iraq's war against Iran, the U.S. provided arms and support to Saddam Hussein. U.S. moved warships into the Straits of Tiran to protect the straits and Kuwait against possible Iranian aggression. Yet, the only aggression in the Straits was the bombing of a U.S. warship by the Iraqi air force, which at that time, was considered a U.S. friend. Later, the U.S. became forced to defend Kuwait against an aggressive Iraq, the country that the U.S. had supported against the "supposed aggressor." The Iran/Iraq war, encouraged by U.S. military support to Iraq, caused massive destruction to both countries and, as a side effect, to the Kurdish peoples of both countries. The hostilities in the Straits of Tiran damaged Iranian shipping and brought death and losses to their flimsy navy. In a coda to the macabre concerto, a U.S. warship shot down an Iranian civilian airliner in their territorial waters, killing all on board. After all this, the U.S. has tried to establish friendly relations with Iran and can't imagine why the Iranians are obstinate.
            	</text>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
            	<date>Iraq 1980 to Present</date>
            	<url></url>
            	<urlText>|iraqi Read More|</urlText>
            	<text>
								U.S. policy towards Iraq has been the reverse of its policy towards Iran. The U.S. made Iran its enemy and later tried to become more friendly. The U.S. started with supportive relations of Iraq, and later reverted, almost over-night, to become an enemy of Iraq. For almost twenty years the U.S. treated Saddam Hussein's Iraq favorably until the invasion of Kuwait changed everything. Like Jekyll becoming Hyde, the U.S. suddenly turned all its power against Iraq and within one month destroyed the country's infrastructure, brought death to thousand of its citizens, including those who felt safe in hardened bomb shelters, and created a road of death in which U.S. war planes bombed and strafed fleeing and defenseless Iraqi soldiers. Those left dying remained unattended, and, according to reliable reports, were bulldozed alive into permanent graves. Estimates are that 250,000 Iraqis and only 160 allied contingent soldiers died in the war. Did all of this have to happen? By being cordial to Saddam Hussein for many years, the United States reinforced his power. State department dispatches indicate that Ambassador Glaspie gave Iraq a "green" light to invade Kuwait, or at least did not apply sufficient pressure to prevent the invasion.
								<br><br>
								Iraq could make a good case of legitimate complaints against Kuwait: Kuwait had siphoned oil from the shifting sands of Iraqi territory: Kuwait owed a prostate Iraq some remuneration for having defended Kuwait against a possible Iran incursion:. Kuwait walked out of discussions on the complaints and totally rebuffed Iraq. These were not difficult complaints to resolve. They could have been easily arbitrated or forced into compliance by the United States. The U.S. policy makers had options. They chose to be complacent and indirectly paved the path to a punishing war. The post-war policy has continued the pattern of established ferocity. Iraq was bombed, almost on a daily basis. The U.S. destroyed more "command and control" facilities than existed in any country. U.S. and British air power destroyed more "radar bases" than Iraq can possibly have. This senseless and vicious policy has transformed Iraq from an emerging country with a moderate prosperity into an impoverished country with a starving population. Estimates are that one million Iraqis have had their lives shortened by the punishing embargoes and bombings, and that future generations will inherit the suffering. What were the purposes of this unstated policy?
								<br><br>
								Is the U.S. assuring that Iraq does not have any weapons of "mass destruction?" The final UN inspections indicated that Iraq no longer possesses these weapons and the constant bombings cannot prevent their future developments. Most countries of the world possess some type of gas and germ warfare, some of which can be manufactured in a garage. No matter how long the U.S. bombed Iraq, an eventual Iraqi government would develop the weapons they want. They can't be policed forever. The U.S. continually attempted to overthrow Saddam Hussein and continually failed. The U.S. encourages rebellions by the Shiites and Kurds and reinforced Saddam's internal support. While the U.S. claimed to be protecting the rebellious Kurd and Shiite minorities, America still allowed Turkey to decimate the Kurds and the Oman government to terrorize its Shiite minority.
								<br><br>
								The reasons for the U.S. policy towards Iraqi have been ambiguous. If the results follow policy, then the results indicate our unstated policy is the opposite to what is believed. The U.S. does not want a new Iraqi government. It wants a continually unstable, embattled, embargoed and disrupted Iraq that maintains the country weak. Why? To maintain weak, a potentially strong Middle East country that could contend U.S. policy and arouse others in the region to challenge U.S. major partners in the Middle East, which are Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Israel. And the number of Iraqis that may suffer from this policy--it doesn't matter.            	
            	</text>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
            	<date>Israel/Palestine - 1948 to Present</date>
            	<text>
	            	The Middle East policy is driven mostly by the Israel-Palestinian conflict. The U.S. has been intimately involved in the conflict since its inception in 1948. Although the U.S. had the military and economic power and many opportunities to force an acceptable solution to the strife and bring it to an end, its wandering and contradictory policies have kept the violence going. The contradictions include being the only country, besides Israel, to vote against a dozens of UN resolutions that criticized Israel and which, if implemented, may have forced a solution to the conflict. After 50 years of conflict and debate, the conflict and debate continue. The parties in conflict showed their distrust in U.S. effectiveness by not allowing the U.S. to participate in or be informed of the Oslo meetings that resulted in the Oslo accords from which a solution was attempted. Since Israel's strength is many times that of the Palestinians, the U.S. could serve to equalize the strengths. Yet, the U.S. insists the two parties compromise their differences. Everyone knows that a dominant Israel will not make make concessions to a weak, almost fragile Palestine. The U.S. policy has accomplished nothing. And the future is ominous. The conflict affects and involves many countries. It could lead to a nuclear war.
            	</text>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
            	<date>Lebanon - 1956 to Present</date>
            	<text>
  	          	Once, the most prosperous, most beautiful and most hospitable of all of the Middle East countries, Lebanon has been destroyed by its indirect involvement in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. U.S. involvement in Lebanon's affairs has never had positive results. In the Eisenhower administration, during a short period of political uncertainty, U.S. marines landed on the Lebanese beaches. They stayed and they left. It was never clear why they had arrived. During the latter stages of the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in the 1980's, the U.S. together with other European countries, dispatched warships and marines to Lebanon. Although the U.S. claimed it had entered a sovereign country to assist it, U.S. warships responded to spurious attacks on U.S. marines by shelling the Lebanese mountains and killing scores of people. A Lebanese group retaliated by blowing up the marine barracks and killing more than 200 marines. U.S. policy in Lebanon left many killed on both sides. It helped save Arafat's PLO and have him and his organization removed to Tunisia.
            	</text>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
            	<date>Afghanistan 1980 to Present</date>
            	<url></url>
            	<urlText>|afghanistan_pipeline Read More|</urlText>
            	<text>
								A feature of U.S. foreign policy is that the United States has often armed its eventual enemies to combat perceived antagonists. One example is our assistance to the Mujaheedin in Afghanistan.
								<br><br>
								The Soviet Unions's intervention in the internal conflicts of Afghanistan may have been improper, but it did not contain elements of economic exploitation or seizing of territory. Efforts to contain the internal political frictions, prevent a Civil War from creating anarchy that could undo the economic progress of previous governments, and a desire to maintain the status quo in East-West spheres of influence, impelled the Soviet Union to supply troops from 1980-1986 to assist Babrak Kamal's Afghan regime. The Soviet Union may have been doing the U.S. a favor. The Afghan internal politics, the Civil War, and the Soviet Union intervention did not directly affect U.S. world hegemony. The Mujaheedin, whom the U.S. supported, consisted of a radical Islam that had already shown itself to hostile to the American interests. Success of the Soviet objectives would have certainly created a more acceptable Afghan government than those that followed.
								<br><br>
								During the struggle, the United States, through Pakistan, provided arms, material and finances to the Mujaheedin that eventually assured their temporary victory. Published estimates show that 15,000 Soviets and 350,000 Afghans died in the Civil War. After the Soviets left Afghanistan in Feb. 1989, the United States had an opportunity to let the war play out among Afghans. Continued U.S. arms shipments through Pakistan to the Mujaheedin forced the Najibullah government, that tried to carry out some democratic reforms and create a coalition government of reconciliation, to fall in 1992. After a continuing civil war caused more than 50,000 additional deaths, the Taliban, a reactionary Islamic religious group by U.S standards, gained control of Afghanistan. The Mujaheedin, characterized as freedom fighters and brought to fighting capability by U.S. arms, destroyed Afghanistan, caused an immense number of deaths, could not compromise among themselves to form a government, and became responsible for the Taliban emergence and its control of Afghanistan. They Taliban also trained major terrorist groups that have brought death to Americans and destruction to U.S. facilities. The only remaining vestige of U.S. intervention in the Afghanistan Civil War is Ibn Bin Laden.
            	</text>
            </Fact>
          </facts>
        </Subtopic>
        <Subtopic name="African Scene" shortName="Africa" forcebg="true" nocomment="true">
          <facts>
            <Fact>
            	<date></date>
            	<text>
								Knowing that the African countries don't possess economic and military muscle, the U.S. has generally treated central African countries with benign neglect. In some countries, notably Egypt, South Africa and Zimbabwe, U.S. policy has been mildly constructive.
								<br><br>
								Egypt has received financial and military assistance without compromising its national integrity. The assistance occurred after the U.S. refused to support the construction of the Aswan dam, an economic benefit to Egypt that the Soviet Union supported.
								<br><br>
								The South African policy, that included embargo of many goods, assisted in the termination of Apartheid and a government of reconciliation. In Zimbabwe, the United States has not fought the evolution of the former white led Rhodesia to a majority black led Zimbabwe. The political frameworks of the latter countries, where Nelson Mandela, an ardent communist became the president of South Africa, and where a leftist government gained power in Zimbabwe, demonstrate that the U.S. could cooperate with leftist governments and these government would not imperil U.S. interests. In most other parts of Africa, policy has been formed by reacting to sudden events. U.S. policies towards the African countries have not assisted them in alleviating their continual poverty, internal wars and economic catastrophes.
            	</text>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
            	<date>Republic of Congo - 1960 to Present</date>
            	<text>
								The Republic of Congo, formerly Zaire, and previously the Republic of Congo is an example of the complete cycle of a U.S. policy which ends in desolation. In 1959, popular revolts and demands for independence from Belgium, forced the Belgian government to negotiate with the rebellious parties. During elections in 1960, the Congolese National Movement (MNC), directed by Patrice Lumumba, became the country's strongest party. Lumumba, already recognized as one of Africa's most vociferous leaders of anti-colonial liberation movements, became prime minister of the Congo Republic immediately before the country's independence on June 30, 1960. He had a difficult task and could not control the many factions desiring the Congo's resources and riches. His socialist leanings and avowed non-alignment policies prevented him from acquiring the U.S. as an ally. Within one month, Katanga, the Congo's richest province, with the assistance of the major powers, seceded. On September 14, Colonel Mobutu Sese Seko effectively neutralized the Congo's institutions and its leaders. The military placed Lumumba under house arrest and protection of the United Nations. After several transfers of his confinement, Patrice Lumumba, and two his comrades were killed on January 17, 1961. The official reason for his death--accidentally shot while attempting to escape.
								<br><br>
								The complicity of the United States and the CIA in this unfortunate episode have not been definitely proved. Many informed persons take it for granted that the CIA played a leading role in Lumumba's demise. Nevertheless, the United States motivated the anti-Lumumba activities by demonstrating its disapproval of Lumumba and by not giving him adequate protection. U.S. total support for Mobutu, who seized power of the Congo in 1965 and reigned for 32 years, indicates the U.S. has been involved in determining Congo's government. After changing the country name to Zaire, Mobutu ruled as a despot. In 1980, he banned all political parties, except his own. Although he created unity among the country's 200 ethnic groups and nationalized the mining industries, he personally controlled 70% of the country's wealth, valued at 5 billion dollars. At his death in 1997, he was personally responsible for 80% of his country's debts.
								<br><br>
								The now deceased Laurent-Denise Kabila, completed the cycle. Originally an avowed communist and with a vision similar to Lumumba, he forced a dissipated Mobutu from power in 1997. Kabila, weakened by the years, inherited a country in ruins that soon found itself in a brutal civil war. The resource rich Congo, the most promising of the liberated central African countries, after 35 years of U.S. involvement in its affairs, returned to be an economically, political and socially bankrupt nation.            	
            	</text>
            	<url></url>
            	<urlText>|congo Read More|</urlText>

            </Fact>
            <Fact>
            	<date>Angola 1970 to Present</date>
            	<text>
								Angola became a victim of the Cold War immediately after it achieved independence from Portugal. In Angola all insurgent groups, with the anachronisms MPLA, FLNA and UNITA had alliances with anti-American left wing international organizations. The MPLA had close ties to Moscow and received military training from Cuban forces. UNITA leader, Jonas Savimba, a late entry to the insurgency, considered himself a Maoist and was prepared to organize the country in accord with Mao's principles. Roberto Holden, an avowed Marxist, commanded the FLNA. After a group of disillusioned military officers. led by General Antonio de Spinola, overthrew the Lisbon government and granted independence to Angola on July 14, 1974, the three groups managed to form a short lived coalition. As their alliance broke down, the MPLA emerged as the most powerful group and obtained the government positions of the departing Portuguese. With Neto as head of state, the MPLA extended political control over much of the country. The FLNA and UNITA joined forces to combat the MPLA. The U.S. role in the Angolan civil war became obvious--spoil MPLA's nation building plan.
								<br><br>
								Initially, the U.S. supported the Marxist FLNA. As the MPLA became stronger, the U.S. also funded the Maoist UNITA. The State department initiated these policies although MPLA's Neto obtained business alliances with U.S. oil companies, tried to secure friendly relations with many Western countries and invited foreign investment. Rather than encourage investment and improved relations, the State department pressured the oil companies to cease operations in Cabinda, Angola's oil producing region. Neto died in 1979 and Jose Eduardo Santos, who became prime minister, preferred a mixed economy with an important role for the private sector. The United States still made no attempt to improve relations and blocked Angola's admission to the United Nations. After years, in which the CIA had continually funded the rival groups, and had promoted a covert program to solicit European and American mercenaries to fight with the FLNA, the U.S., in 1988, offered to normalize relations with Angola. The offer had one condition-a mutual settlement with UNITA. The MPLA agreed, and in that year the MPLA and UNITA negotiated a regional peace agreement. Although UNITA members served in the new Angola government of Unity and Reconciliation, Savimbi rejected a UN monitored election and retreated back to the provinces. The war resumed after the failure of peace accords the parties had signed in November 1994.
								<br><br>
								The U.S. had only a negative policy in Angola--remove the Cuban supported group from power. The only replacement, Jonas Savimbi, had a more radical philosophy than the MPLA and yet the U.S. supported him for a long time. Primarily due to that support, Angola is a ruined country and the people have suffered greatly. If Maoist Savimbi had gained power, what would the U.S. have done?            	
            	</text>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
            	<date>Somalia 1970-1995</date>
            	<text>
								Somalia is another country that became caught in the East-West struggle. Muhammad Syad Barre, who became the Somalia leader after a bloodless coup in 1969, initially aligned his country with the Soviet Union. Problems with Ethiopia, a close ally of the Soviet Union, moved Syad Barre away from the East bloc and more towards an alignment with the Arab states. After the Ethiopians prevented the ethnic Somali that lived in the Ogaden region of Ethiopia from seizing the region, the U.S. agreed to provide humanitarian and military assistance to Somalia. In return, Somalia granted to the U.S. the naval base at Berbera that had previously been a Soviet naval base. As in other Third World countries, the United States found itself financing a leader whose regime slowly became repressive, corrupt and unpopular. Armed opposition to Barre started in 1988. On June 27, 1991, Siyad Barre, after ruling Somalia for 22 years, fled the country. The fighting that ensued between rival groups caused a societal breakdown that led to periodic famines in Somalia. U.S. financial and military support had achieved nothing for Somalia.
								<br><br>
								In December 1992, the UN responded to Somalia's anarchy and famines by dispatching a "peace-keeping" force that included 2000 U.S. marines. U.S. and UN policies in Somalia became intertwined. Nevertheless, U.S. actions in Somalia must be evaluated separately. And what were these actions? First, it appears that the U.S. humanitarian troops had arrived after the famine had subsided. News reports stated that the U.S. found no famine in the capital, Mogadishu. They expected to find it inland in Baidoa. No famine in Baidoa. The famine had retreated to the villages. Reports from the villages did not disclose famines. The UN and U.S. marines did not go home.
								<br><br>
								Instead, marines began house to house searches for weapons, and caused several casualties in the searches. On June 5, 1993, UN troops attempted to close the radio station commanded by Mohammed Farah Aideed, one of the contenders for Somali leadership. Aideed had credentials. He had been a Somali ambassador and had been elected chairman of the United Somali Congress by a 2/3 vote. He declared his faction to be the legitimate Somalia government. In repelling the attack, Somali militiamen killed 24 Pakistani troops. This action propelled the U.S. forces into a five month manhunt for Aideed. In the process, the marines engaged in several "shoot outs" with Somali, including the killing of two children who had climbed into marine vehicles and reached for their sunglasses. After 18 U.S. soldiers were killed and Somalis dragged some of their corpses through the Mogadishu streets, the U.S. military left Somalia.
								<br><br>
								According to the NY Times, December 8, 1993, UN/U.S. forces inflicted 6,000 to 10,000 casualties on the Somali. UN Marine Corps General Anthony Zinni estimated that 2/3 of the casualties were women and children.The Los Angeles Times, November 28, 1993, estimated that only a small fraction of the UN relief efforts benefited Somali. Foreign business people profited from fast food sales to the UN soldiers, a $9 million sewer system in the UN/U.S. headquarters and helicopter flights for Western officials. Twenty years of U.S. policy in Somalia- anarchy, wasted money, many Somali and American dead.            	
            	</text>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
            	<date>Libya 1970 to Present</date>
            	<text>
								U.S. policy towards Libya can be regarded as a policy of a country directed against one person-- Muhammar Qadhafi. In the two decades after the Libyan 1968 military revolution, Qadhafi assumed power in Libya as chief of the armed forces and a sometime Head of State (he relinquished his duties as general secretary of the General people's Congress in March 1979). Today, Qadhafi does not hold any public office, only the title of Revolutionary Leader. Nevertheless, his detractors claim he is still the "unofficial" Head of State. Officially Libya has a complete legislative branch with an elected head of government, a cabinet and a Supreme Court. Qadhafi has significant power in Libya, but by framing a policy that considers only his power, the U.S. is disregarding too many other Libyan power blocs.
								<br><br>
								The U.S. accepted a revolutionary Libya that expelled all foreign forces and closed their bases. It could not accept:            	
								<ul>
								<li> Libya's perceived attempts to unite the Arab world against U.S. diplomatic and military presence in the Middle East,
								<li> its initiatives against Israel,
								<li> its nationalization of an economy that displaced foreign interests, and
								<li> its weakening of foreign control of Libya's oil resources.
								</ul>
								Actually, few of these policies followed U.S. perceptions. Libya could not unite the Arab world against the U.S. Except for the oil price rises during the 1970's; neither Libya or the Arab world harmed Western economic interests; Libyan policies have had little effect on Israel's development; and the U.S.oil companies are reasonably satisfied with their business relationship in bringing low sulfur Libyan oil to market. Nevertheless, the U.S. adopted aggressive policies towards Libya that escalated the confrontation over the years. The policies--Replace Qadhafi and stop Libya's contribution to terrorism. It is obvious that the first has been a total failure. The bombings of U.S. embassies in Africa and previous terrorist attacks in the U.S. indicate that Libya's contribution to terrorism must have been small. The aggressive policy also exposed the error of a supposed belief that U.S. polices are dictated by the East--West conflict. Since 1972, Libya's relations with the Soviet Union have been cool.
								<br><br>
								On May 30, 1973, U.S. aircraft, during maneuvers close to Libya's shores, violated the sovereign Libyan air space. Rather than intimidating Libya, the provocation increased the activities that most alarmed the U.S., the suspicion and accusations that Libya financed international terrorism and political subversion. Libya did not deny they had training grounds for recruits representing a variety of national liberation movements and that they provided financial support for Palestinian liberation organizations. Nevertheless, the Libyan role was a small counterbalance to the huge U.S. financial and military support of those who repressed liberation movements and, by their authoritarian actions, caused international terrorism. Another significant point: Libya gained no economic or material benefit from its small support of any movement. They declared in 1981 that, to them, it was a matter of principle. For the U.S., intervention has been mostly a matter of safeguarding interests and gaining economic benefits.
								<br><br>
								Having defined a policy towards Libya by the invasion of its airspace, the U.S. continually reacted to Libyan actions with an aggressive policy. Libyans protested U.S. policy in Iran by burning the U.S. embassy in Tripoli in December 1979. On August 19,1981, U.S. jets downed two Libyan air force planes during U.S. maneuvers in the Libyan Gulf of Sidra. On March 25, 1986, U.S. navy planes bombarded civilian targets in Libya's Gulf. They also attacked a Libyan Coast Guard boat in which all 10 sailors were reported killed. Another attack on a ship resulted in the crew leaving the ship. The Libyans claimed that all 42 men, while swimming to shore, were machine gunned to death. On April 14, 1986, the U.S. mounted air attacks on the Libyan mainland. In these attacks, a bombing of Qadhafi's house killed the leader's adopted child. President Ronald Reagan claimed self-defense as the reason for the attacks. The U.S. had countered a terrorist attack on a U.S. military club in Berlin, Germany that U.S. intelligence agency attributed to Libya. The attacks on Libya signaled U.S. determination to defend against other terrorist attacks on its citizens. No evidence has been presented that involved Libya or its agents in the Berlin club bombing. And the U.S. has not prevented terrorism. It managed to bring to trial two Libyans, accused of masterminding the explosion of the December 21, 1988, Pan Am flight over Lockerbie, Scotland.
								<br><br>
								Two other incidents must be mentioned. On February 21, 1973, Israeli fighters shot down a Libyan civilian airliner over the Sinai and 106 Libyans died in the attack. On December 22, 1992, A Libyan air plane exploded over Tripoli and 158 Libyans died. Libya accused Western intelligence agencies of being responsible for the explosion. The Libyan toll in their struggle with the West has been brutal. Adding to the human toll has been an economic toll. In April 1992, the U.N. banned arm sales and flights to Libya after Libya refused to turn over two suspects of the Lockerbies explosion. This ban has been recently rescinded. In 1996, the U.S. tried to organize Trade Laws that could have amounted to an embargo against Libya. Other countries did not agree.
								<br><br>
								U.S. policy towards Libya has been guided by fear, miscalculation, mistrust and an unnecessary aggressiveness. It has not achieved diplomatic victories or accomplished any objectives. It has caused death and misery. It has exposed the fact that aggressive policies are not only a result of East-West relations.
            	</text>
            </Fact>
          </facts>
        </Subtopic>

        <Subtopic name="Central American Scene" shortName="Central America" nocomment="true">
          <facts>
            <Fact>
            	<date></date>
            	<text>
								The Monroe Doctrine warned countries outside the Western Hemisphere not to interfere in Latin America affairs. The Western Hemisphere protectorate policy that the United States established in 1821 did not exclude the U.S. from interfering in Latin American affairs. The cold war reinforced the interferences. Unlike Africa, where the United States has neglected most of the Third World countries, the United States has actively intervened in the operations and functions of almost all Latin American countries. For the entire 19th century and almost the entire 20th century, the Latin American countries stagnated in poverty, illiteracy, corruption and disease. The active intervention in their affairs could not have been beneficial to them.            	
            	</text>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
            	<date>Cuba 1960 to Present</date>
            	<url></url>
            	<urlText>|cuba Read More|</urlText>
            	<text>
								What could be more damaging to the United States in the 1960's than to have the Soviet Union gain a foothold close to U.S.shores and create missile bases within firing range of U.S. territory? U.S. foreign policy planners succeeded in accomplishing that. Not understanding diplomacy and compromise, Washington responded to the Castro government's agrarian reform and expropriation of U.S. properties by imposing a trade embargo. The embargo motivated Cuba to seek economic assistance from the world's Socialist countries. This further angered the U.S. Washington severed diplomatic relations with Cuba on January, 1961. The U.S. followed the diplomatic break with a U.S. trained invasion force that landed at the ill-fated Bay of Pigs on April 17, 1961. The poorly conceived invasion didn't bring the fall of the Castro government. Ninety invaders from the Cuban exile community died and 1200 were captured. And the legacy of the invasion? Castro, fearful of further attacks, succeeded in convincing the Soviet Union to provide a missile umbrella to counter further attacks. U.S. diplomacy brought nuclear missiles close to its shores and the world close to nuclear war.
								<br><br>
								After settling the debacle by removing U.S. missile bases from Turkey, and promising never to attack Cuba, the U.S., either from spite or more likely from not wanting an independent and socialist government to succeed in the Western hemisphere, continued a policy of isolating Cuba from the Latin American community and imposed additional sanctions. The "ups" and "downs" of US/Cuba relations couldn't contain Cuba. The Caribbean country drew closer to the USSR and became a member of COMECON. Cuba provided combat forces for the government of Angola, for the Ethiopian regime in its war in the Ogaden, and for Socialist forces in Yemen. After the fall of the Soviet Union, the Cuba economy collapsed. The U.S. has taken advantage of this collapse with additional embargoes and attempts at isolation. The perilous condition of the Cuban people, at one time approaching starvation, did not deter America from its aggressive policy.
								<br><br>
								The Cuban policy almost brought the U.S. into a nuclear war. It had other damaging consequences. An influx of Cuban refugees into Florida displaced black workers and created racial problems. Mixed with refugees, Cuba forwarded many hardened criminals who committed crimes in the United States. American companies have seen foreign interests gain advantages in reconstructing Cuba.             	
            	</text>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
            	<date>Guatemala</date>
            	<url></url>
            	<urlText>|guatemala Read More|</urlText>
							<text>
								In 1951, Guatemala elected Jacobo Arbenz Guzman, a reformer who considered the grievances of the lower and middle classes. By mentioning the words "land reform" and "organizing labor," Arbenz and his intended policies infuriated the banana companies and U.S. politicians. In 1954, a group of Guatemala exiles, armed and trained by the CIA, and commanded by Colonel Carlos Castillos Armas invaded Guatemala and forced out the legitimately elected president. After that time, Guatemala was ruled by military dictatorships.With U.S. military and economic assistance, these governments suppressed political activity and stimulated the forces willing to peacefully seek political and social change into pursuing the changes by violent confrontations. After a brutal suppression of guerrilla activity, civilian leaders in 1985 returned to govern with the military watching in the wings. Finally, in 1996, the Guatemalan government signed a peace accord with guerrilla forces, ending a conflict that had caused more than 100,00 Guatemalan deaths.
								<br><br>
								After the accords, a trail of evidence and admissions by the Guatemalan military began to confirm what many had suspected: The U.S. government had linked itself to a suppression that some claim caused 110,000 Mayan Indian lives, and razed thousands of villages in an effort to destroy a guerrilla force estimated at 2,000 armed rebels. U.S. and Guatemala officials acknowledged that the CIA transferred millions of dollars to the Guatemala military and provided intelligence to their army. Another example of a U.S. policy that went full cycle and during the cycle brought a nation to self-destruction.            	
            	</text>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
            	<date>El Salvador</date>
            	<url></url>
            	<urlText>|el Read More|</urlText>
            	<text>
								In 1972, a coalition led by Jose Napoleon Duarte, head of the Christian Democratic Party (PDC), appeared to win the El Salvador presidential election. Instead of taking office he found himself arrested and exiled by the military. During the following years, a repressive military government maintained power and provoked left-wing guerrilla groups to overthrow an illegitimate government. Partly due to the urgings of the U.S. government, the military junta in January 1980 offered concessions to moderate and leftist groups. Duarte returned from exile to become the country's leader. Despite social and economic reforms, the military still seemed to rule the nation.
								<br><br>
								The Farabundo Marti National Liberation Front (FMLN), a coalition of rebel forces, armed itself with a variety of military equipment, including leftover weapons shipped from the battle fields of Vietnam through Nicaragua and to the FMLN. The equipped FMLN declared war on the government. The war had two characteristics--an overt war between military forces and a war against civilian populations. It has been estimated that the latter war claimed the most lives. Right wing death squads terrorized the local villages and assassinated political opponents. In 1980, they killed Archbishop Oscar Arnulfo Romero, a Catholic "liberation" theologian. El Salvador troops violated and massacred four nuns. The wars escalated until the FMLN almost captured the entire country.The government repulsed the offensive and, although a "no-win" situation emerged, the violence continued.
								<br><br>
								The Reagan administration used counter-insurgency as the reason for interfering in El Salvador affairs. Economic and military aid to El Salvador from 1981-1992 amounted to $1 million/day in a country of 5.2 million people, and became contingent on political and social reforms. El Salvador, struggling for a democratic face, managed to have elections during that period. Military aid peaked at $197 million in 1984 and economic aid peaked at $462 million in 1987. The U.S. policy of countering insurgency and demanding reforms contradicted actuality. The U.S. did not demand the resolution of the murders of Romero, nuns and political opponents, and did not condemn the burning of villages and many other obvious human rights violations. U.S. troops advised the El Salvador military and "secretly" engaged in military operations. Amnesty International concluded that the paramilitary death squads received covert financial support and military training from the United States.
								<br><br>
								The El Salvador military realized that the collapse of the USSR meant the end of massive U.S. support. After years of war ravaged the nation, the competing groups finally agreed in 1990 to peace talks. Under the agreement, the FMLN and the El Salvador government disbanded their respective forces and formed a new civilian police force that included National police and FMLN members. In a 1994 election, ARENA, the already established government, retained their power and the FMLN established itself as a legitimate opposition party, able to operate without government suppression.
								<br><br>
								From the U.S. perspective, preventing the fall of an El Salvador government that might have led to government control by a leftist FMLN allied with the Soviet Union, vindicated Washington's policy. U.S. policy did not prove effective until the country had destroyed itself. El Salvador will not easily recover from its civil war. If the U.S. had been able to mediate the differences, and stop the destructive war much earlier, it could claim a successful policy.            	
            	</text>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
            	<date>Dominican Republic</date>
            	<url></url>
            	<urlText>|dominican Read More|</urlText>
            	<text>
								U.S. intervention in Dominican Republic affairs have occurred often in the century. In 1962, the heir to Trujillo's reign, Joaquin Balaguer, was defeated in an election by Dr. Juan Bosch, a leftist reformer. President Johnson already occupied with preventing the communist North Vietnam from expanding to all of Vietnam, and still troubled by the Castro government in the Caribbean, decided he could not afford another Castro type government close to America's shores. U.S. troops entered the Dominican Republic and assisted a military coup against the Bosch government. After that incursion, the Dominican Republic sailed on choppy seas of fraudulent elections, corruption, and economic uncertainty. Finally, in 1990, the two contestants whose election precipitated the 1962 incursion from the U.S., and who now were octogenarians, returned as contestants in the presidential election. U.S. interference had made its usual full cycle. In the cycle, the Dominicans greatly suffered.            	
            	</text>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
            	<date>Panama</date>
            	<text>
								U.S. relations with Panama's Manuel Antonia Noriega were similar to U.S. relations Iraq's Saddam Hussein. For years the U.S. governments tolerated Noriega's authoritarian attitude. President Bush even praised him. When the United States declared drugs as a major threat to American society, and a Florida court indicted Noriega for drug trafficking and money laundering, the U.S. found a reason to remove Noriega from power. Having received mixed signals from the U.S. government over the years and believing that he had could reveal information that exposed the CIA and U.S. involvement in covert activities, Noriega felt immune from attack. His arrogant attitude further provoked President Bush. In the absence of cold-war considerations, the United States proceeded with full-scale military intervention against Panama and removed an insignificant leader from power. The invasion exhibited unnecessary brutality. The U.S. military demolished impoverished Panamanian neighborhoods, where Noriega had major support. Many civilians were killed. The American military captured Noriega and the American judicial system convicted him and sentenced him to prison. The legality of all the operations is questionable.
								<br><br>
								The severity of the invasion of Panama and its aftermath decry a meaningful policy. Previous events indicated that Noriega, rather than assisting the drug trade, had impeded it. By using known narcotics dealers as informants against him at his trial, the prosecution did not make a compelling case. Besides, it is well known that in other countries, principally Mexico, the governments have been in collusion with leading narcotics dealers and the U.S. has not interfered with those governments. Panama's involvement in drugs could never approach the large scale involvement of Mexico, nor has the imprisonment of Noriega diminished the drug supply. Noriega may have used his military role in a despotic manner, but he was fair to the poor people of Panama and he was not a threat to the U.S. and the Central American area. Since his demise, Panama has been mis-governed and the country remains in an economic crisis. U.S. policy towards a small country failed to use diplomacy and degenerated into a brutal military adventure. The reasons for the U.S. military adventure in Panama are not clear. One reason may be a stumbling policy that stumbled into a war that was used to prevent President Bush States from being humiliated by an insignificant dictator.            	
            	</text>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
            	<date>Grenada</date>
            	<text>
								Little Grenada threatened the U.S. mainland as much as City Island threatened New York. The Reagan administration did not favor having the hard-line Marxist, Bernard Coard replace, in a coup, a moderate Marxist, Maurice Bishop. Citing anarchy, a state of martial law, the construction of an airport by Cuban construction workers that could be used for military flights, and a threat to United States students at a Grenada medical school, as sufficient reasons for intervention, the U.S. Marines invaded the island on October 25, 1983. President Reagan also told reporters that the Organization of East Caribbean States had requested the intervention. The facts did not entirely support the statements:
								<ul>
								    <li> Coups and revolutions have been daily affairs in Latin America.
								    <li> The martial law quieted an extreme situation.
								    <li> The airport had European financing and was being constructed for tourist purposes.
								    <li> The students did not seem disturbed until the Americans invaded. (some students did express fear).
								    <li> The Organization of American States (OAS) "deeply deplored" the invasion.
								    <li> The UN Security Council voted 11 to 1 against the attack. 
								</ul>
								Two dozen Cubans,18 U.S. military and 45 Grenadians died. When the caskets containing the Cuban dead arrived in Havana, U.S. reporters noted that most of the dead were men in their late fifties and sixties and were obviously not military personnel. Most of the Grenadians died in the U.S. military destruction of a mental hospital. Some felt that the invasion timing, two days after a bomb in Beirut had killed 241 Marines, an intended to offset the U.S. weakness in Lebanon, by displaying military prowess close to home.
								<br><br>
								The U.S. assisted in completing the tourist airport. Nevertheless, little has been done for the Grenada economy and the nation remains extremely poor. Grenada expressed its attitude to the U.S. invasion by inviting Fidel Castro to the island 15 years after the invasion. The Cuban leader unveiled a bronze plaque at Port Salines airport terminal that honored the dead Cuban construction workers who had assisted in the airport construction. The plaque hangs besides a plaque that honors the U.S. Agency for International Development, which helped complete the airport the U.S. did not want built.            	
            	</text>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
            	<date>Nicaragua</date>
            	<url></url>
            	<urlText>|nicaragua Read More|</urlText>
            	<text>
								Nicaraguan dictator Anastasio Somoza Debayle, former proprietor of most of Nicaragua's industry and resources, mishandled the country's 1972 earthquake crisis and the international relief funds sent to alleviate the suffering. In an act of sympathy with the plight of the Nicaraguan people, the U.S. suspended military aid to Somoza and paved the way for Commandante Zero and his Sandinista compatriots, known as the FSLN, to seize power in 1979. At first, Washington with Jimmy Carter as president, provided aid to the new administration. Within a year, the policy changed. Fearful that the Sandinistas were allied with Moscow, could spread their influence throughout Central America, and were aiding the Salvador rebels, Washington suspended aid and became belligerent against an administration it had indirectly assisted in achieving power. Despite the U.S. House of representatives passage of the Boland Act, that prohibited the U.S. from supplying arms to those opposed to the Sandinista regime (Contras), the Reagan administration "covertly" armed the Contras. In an effort to destroy the Nicaragua economy, the CIA mined Nicaragua's harbors. In June 1986 the World Court sided with a Nicaragua law suit and |nicaragua_world_court found the U.S. guilty| of violating international law.
								<br><br>
								The confrontation with Nicaragua escalated during the Reagan and Bush administrations. The Contras, illegally armed with U.S. funds from several sources, including those diverted in the Iran-Contra affair, ventured from bases in Honduras into parts of Nicaragua. They attacked and destroyed, but never held territory or could convince the Nicaraguan people to revolt. The actions had their toll and the Sandinista government wanted to end the bloodshed. The Sandinista government accepted the Arias Plan, devised by the Costa Rican president, and which had the support of Central American countries. Despite U.S. rejections of the plan, the plan was implemented. In 1990, Violeta Barios Chamorro, representing an opposition party, defeated Daniel Ortega, the FSLN candidate, in internationally supervised elections. The Nicaragua government and the Contras signed a permanent cease fire and the Contras demobilized. The Arias Plan brought the democracy and peace to Nicaragua that Washington had claimed as its objectives. Yet, Washington rejected the Arias Plan. It is possible that Sandinista Daniel Ortega might one day return to power in a Nicaragua that remains impoverished after the disposal of the previous Sandinista government.            	
            	</text>
            </Fact>

          </facts>
        </Subtopic>

        <Subtopic name="Conclusions" nocomment="true">
          <facts>
            <Fact>
            	<date></date>
            	<text>
								Viewed totally and over many years, U.S. foreign policy has not exhibited diplomacy. The policies almost always degenerated into military ventures that did not resolve the policy issues. It seems incredible, but it can be shown that since the end of World War II, U.S. indirect, and often direct, intervention in all areas of the world, resulted in the deaths of more than two million persons, wounded and maimed many more, caused dislocations and uprooting of masses of persons, and destroyed infrastructures and economies.  The American people have sent their children to die in several fruitless interventions that have served no beneficial purposes.
								<br><br>
								The Cold War served as an excuse for many illegitimate policies. Most of these interventions did not resolve Cold War issues and usually resulted in attacks on powerless countries. Similar provocations occurred after the end of the Cold War. It's unfortunate that the American people have been unable to fulfill their responsibility and prevent the disasters their governments have caused. U.S. foreign policies have had a habit of going full circle--the adversary conditions they intended to change have often come back again. The trajectories of the explosive weapons used to quell the adversary may someday follow a similar pattern--returning to explode at the original place of manufacture.            	
            	</text>
            </Fact>
          </facts>
        </Subtopic>

      </subtopics>
    </Topic>


    <Topic name="Politics of Starvation">
      <subtopics>
        <Subtopic name="Introduction" nocomment="true">
          <facts>
            <Fact>
            	<text>
            	<i>This article originally appeared entitled 'The Politics of Starvation' on the <a href="http://www.alternativeinsight.com/The_Politics_of_Starvation.html">Alternative Insight</a> website.</i>
							</text>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
            	<date>The powerful can't always use military might to suppress adversaries</date>
            	<text>
            		Their own citizens and world opinion may react unfavorably and undermine a military adventure. Logistics may not favor it. Beside, they have other means. One of these means is economic warfare; a method that can silently crush an adversary without firing a shot. Gone to its extreme, economic warfare has the force of a neutron bomb: It debilitates the population and disables the infrastructure.
							</text>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
            	<date>Economic warfare requires preparation before implementation</date>
            	<text>
            		First, the grieved country accuses its adversary of great crimes. The adversary is powerless to defend itself and becomes marked with the adjective, "rogue state." Since the "rogue state" cannot ameliorate the crimes of which it is accused, being that they may not exist, and since these states are usually proud and will not compromise with their national integrity (one reason for their fate) further action must be taken against them. 
            		<br><br>
            		The next step is isolation. This has several stages. In stage #1, the grieved country forbids all its citizens, except the CIA, to travel to the "rogue state." Although forbidden by law in democratic countries and contradicting the criticism made by the democratic countries against the policy of the former Soviet Union which imposed travel restrictions on its citizens, the democratic country bans all travel to the "rogue state." It bypasses the constitutional laws by enforcement procedures. These include democratic actions such as heavy fines, harassment, embarrassing airport searches, letting the neighbors know, and calls from the internal revenue department. The reasons mentioned for this "undemocratic" action are: to protect travelers from being contaminated with "rogue" germs, shield them from vicious propaganda and prevent them from being kidnapped for ransom and from accusations of spying. These are valid reasons, The unmentioned reasons are: to assure the "rogue" country doesn't acquire tourist dollars that may enable it to survive, make certain that the travelers don't learn that all they have read and heard from their government may be propaganda, terrorize citizens against terrorists and prevent rogueidization in which a happy citizen suddenly sympathizes with the rogue and acquires rogue traits. 
            		<br><br>
            		In the next stage, the "rogue state" is isolated from international agencies, relief efforts, finances and communications. After it is forced into an isolation it doesn't desire, it may receive the adjective, "hermit kingdom." That prepares it for the great strike, economic warfare. The economic warfare punch has many shapes. Sanctions that are are not normally used against favored countries that have succeeded in arousing the wrath of the world community, (reason given that they really don't work) are used with impunity against the disfavored countries. If the preferred sanctions cannot be implemented then an illegal embargo is enforced by warships that arrive close to ithe country's beaches and dwarf the rowboats of the rogue country. Sometimes explosive mines are dropped in the rogue's harbors to complete the embargo. 
            		<br><br>
            		If the embargo proves insufficient for the cleansing task, then the grieved country may arm surrogate warriors inside or close to the rogue country and have them add human catastrophes to the natural catastrophes that inflict the rogue country. The laws of the grieved country usually prohibit this action. Nevertheless, these laws are conviently circumvented. If the grieved country keeps its hands clean and doesn't get its citizens punctured with bullet holes, the judicial system may not bother to enforce the laws. Rogues that have special qualifications earn the title of terrorists. This title sticks to their names like velcro. It appears in all articles, headlines, dispatches, reports and news, as if the word terrorist followed by the country name is one word. The rogue country earns this title by committing an evil deed that is usually in response to the tens of evil deeds committed against it. No matter! 
            		<br><br>
            		Economic warfare leads to the final step in whipping a "rogue" country back into shape--starvation. If the food supply dwindles then certainly the poor unfortunate citizens of the "rogue" country will act as those who proclaimed "Liberte", "Egalitie" and "Fraternitie" in the French revolution. They will storm the gates of their oppressors, take away their cake and demand bread. The United States has implemented political policies that have caused starvation in several countries. Their leaders still eat cake while the populations have suffered greatly from economic deprivation and, in some cases, starvation.
							</text>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
            	<date>Since WWII, the United States implemented sanctions against approximately 30 countries</date>
            	<text>
            		The proof that sanctions have become a major part of foreign policy and that they affect the business climate, is shown by the number of companies, such as James Orr Associates, that provide information services on unilateral and economic trade sanctions. Intentional interferences and disruptions to a nation's economy and business operations occur often from many sources, and are part of the "white collar" crime that affects the world. Economic warfare, of which sanctions is one part, is more serious than "white collar" crime and people suffer greatly from the warfare. Intentional starvation of people due to interference by a foreign source is more serious than economic warfare. It is a major crime and a form of terrorism. It has been attempted by the United States in several situations.
							</text>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
            	<date>The most punishing U.S. policies have been against |cuba Cuba|, Angola, |nicaragua Nicaragua|, and |iraqi Iraq|</date>
            	<text>
            		Although Washington and its allies have often stated that civilians should not be made to deliberately suffer from a nation's transgressions or from war and strife, Washington's policies have guaranteed that civilians suffer by economic warfare. Economic warfare against the above mentioned countries demonstrates the damages to their populations.
							</text>
            </Fact>
          </facts>
	      </Subtopic>
        <Subtopic name="Cuba" nocomment="true">
          <facts>
            <Fact>
            	<date>The United States imposed an embargo against |cuba Cuba| almost immediately after its revolution</date>
            	<text>
            		Cuban expropriation of American property and land reform policies motivated the United States into decreasing Cuba's sugar subsidy and implementing an embargo that intended to starve Cuba of spare parts for the U.S. machinery that powered their economy. The Soviet Union aided Cuba in these unfortunate years by purchasing sugar at inflated market prices and forwarding strategic materials to the island. Cuba's alliance with the Soviet Union strengthened Uncle Sam's determination to cripple Cuba by embargo. 
            		<br><br>
            		Although the reasons for the embargo faded with the years and became totally unnecessary after the fall of the Soviet Union, the United States, still wanting to overthrow the Castro government and catering to the Cuban exile community, tightened the embargo. In 1992, congress passed The Cuba Democracy Act, 1992. This act forbade United States subsidiaries to trade with Cuba, and deprived the island of $700 million in trade, 70% of which had been in food and medicine. The Act also prohibited U.S. citizens to spend money in Cuba. It allowed private groups to deliver food and medicine. Although the United Nations general assembly on November 2, 1995, voted 117 to 3 to recommend an end to the U.S. embargo against Cuba, President Clinton on March 12, 1996 signed into law The Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity Act, otherwise known as The Helms-Burton Act. This Act imposed penalties on foreign companies doing business in Cuba, permitted U.S. citizens to sue foreign investors who make use of American-owned property seized by the Cuban government, and denied entry into the U.S. of the investors in Cuba. 
            		<br><br>
            		The tightened embargo reinforced Cuba's suffering after Russia withdrew subsidies.  The pre-90's Cuba had been credited with eliminating hunger and malnutrition, wiping out infectious diseases and received applause from the World Health Organization for its public health system. Cuba of the mid-90's portrayed another image. The American Association for World Health and the American Public Health Association determined that the embargo caused significant deterioration in Cuba's food production and health care:
            		<ul>
            			<li>Cuba is banned from purchasing nearly 1/2 of new drugs on the market.
            			<li>Physicians have access to only 890 medications, down from 1,300 in 1989.
            			<li>Deterioration of water supply has increased water borne diseases.
            			<li>Daily caloric intake dropped by 33% between 1989 and 1993.
            		</ul>
            		New Jersey Congressman Torricelli predicted that his Cuban Democracy Act would bring Castro's downfall within one year. That has not happened. 
            		Humanitarians, such as Congressman Torricelli, have been eager to take advantage of the sufferings of the Cuban people and intensify them for political purposes rather than affording the people a means to recover from the tragedy. 
            		This procedure is equivalent to hitting a person you don't know as they are falling down. 
            		Cuba claims that forty years of trade embargo has cost the Caribbean island $60 billion. 
            		In 1998,they estimated their losses at $800 million. Due to the European nations refusal to abide by the embargo, and increased tourist revenues, the economic war against Cuba is slowly being lost.
							</text>
            </Fact>
					</facts>
				</Subtopic>
        <Subtopic name="Angola" nocomment="true">
          <facts>
            <Fact>
            	<date>Angola is an example of  destroying the economic fabric of a nation by creating turmoil</date>
            	<text>
            		Independence from Portugal brought civil war to a country that had the resources to become the wealthiest in Africa. The contending rivals had extreme leftist leanings and none could be considered friends of the United States. After the Soviet Union and Cuba gave financial and military support to protect the established MPLA government from the rebel group UNITA, the United States quickly supported the rebel groups. Due to military assistance from South Africa, Jona Savimbi's UNITA evolved from a small army of poorly armed followers in 1976 to a credible fighting force during the '80's. After 1985, the United States' aid to the avowed Maoist leader allowed UNITA to extend its destructive campaign throughout Angola. By the time the factions agreed to a mutual settlement in 1989, Angola had been ravaged. Library of Congress documents describe the human toll:
            		<ul>
            			<li> Estimates are that between 60,000 and 90,000 have died.
                  <li> More than 20,000 persons have become amputees, the largest of any country.
                  <li> Almost 700,000 people have become displaced.
                  <li> About 400,000 Angolans became refugees in neighboring states.
                  <li> About 600,00 Angolans required nutritional assistance. 
                </ul>
                Added to the human toll are the economic losses:
                <ul>
                	<li> Agriculturally rich Angola became forced to import 80% of its food supplies.
             			<li> Iron production virtually ceased. Diamond mining and lumber were curtailed.
             			<li> UNITA damaged and destroyed hundreds of facilities and made development impossible.
             			<li> Due to civil war, the defense budget doubled between 1980 and 1986. Economic development was halved.
             			<li> The insurgency disrupted all areas of productivity. Inflation went as high as 1,650% in 1996. 
             		</ul>
             		The havoc committed upon Angola did not stop with the 1988 accords between the warring parties. Although the Angolan government permitted Jonas Savimba's UNITA to enter the government, and many have remained, Jonas Savimba returned to the battle. His troops have seized the diamond mining area and now function as a government within a government. Angola's infrastructure remains in shambles. The story has an ironic twist. The United Nations, with United States voting approval, imposed sanctions against UNITA, the organization that the US armed for several years and supported until the mid '90's. Under U.N. Security Council Resolution 1173, member states must freeze all UNITA assets and those of its leadership. The resolution prohibits the importation of illegal diamonds from Angola, and also prohibits the exportation to UNITA of any mining equipment, vehicles and spare parts. The Washington Post, July 25, 1999  (that's '99 and not '79), gave a clue to the US legacy of economic war against Angola:
             		<br><br><i>Luanda, Angola--The staff of the main public hospital here grapples with one epidemic after another. It was cholera a year ago, followed by an outbreak of polio this year. The malaria season is beginning...With thousands of refugees fleeing the the fighting in their villages and settling in vast squatter camps, with uncollected garbage, open sewage and contaminated water, Angolan cities can be incubators for diseases such as polio and malaria.  Angola has higher rates of leprosy than almost any other country.</i>
							</text>
            </Fact>
					</facts>
				</Subtopic>
        <Subtopic name="Nicaragua" nocomment="true">
          <facts>
            <Fact>
            	<date>Economic warfare by the United States against |nicaragua Nicaragua| consisted of all forms of disruption</date>
            	<text>
            		Revolutionary Nicaragua's friendly relations with Cuba and the Soviet Union aggravated Washington. After accusing the Sandinistas of human rights violations and aiding the El Salvador rebels, the United States, which had indirectly assisted the Sandinistas to achieve power by denying Somoza military assistance, started an economic war against the Nicaragua people. In 1981, Carter terminated aid to Nicaragua. In 1984, US Seals mined Nicaragua's harbors in a known "covert" action. In 1986, the |nicaragua_world_court World Court awarded damages| to Nicaragua (that the US never paid) and confirmed this obvious violation of international law. Although the US House of Representative, in 1982, passed the Boland Amendment that prohibited the US from supplying the Contra rebels in their struggle against the Nicaraguan government, Reagan declared the Contras to be "freedom fighters," and "covertly" provided arms to them. With these "freedom fighters," the US had Nicaragua's borders isolated from land and sea. Since Nicaragua had previously been a "quasi" colony of its Northern neighbor, its trade occurred principally with the US, and its infrastructure depended on US materials.
            		<br><br>
            		Due to the loss of aid and the embargo, Nicaragua's imports dropped from $242.1 millions in 1980 to $122.6 million in 1984. During the same period, exports dropped from 160.2 million to $62.5 million. Meanwhile, the Contra "freedom fighters" sallied from protected bases in Honduras and raided Nicaraguan farms, burnt crops, killed livestock and created havoc. They never held territory or incited the Nicaraguan people to revolt. Finally, a desperate Nicaragua agreed in 1988 to seek an end to the havoc. The Central American countries, with Nicaragua's and Contra approval, adopted the Arias Plan, named after the Costa Rican president. The Arias Plan resulted in a permanent cease-fire, demobilization of the Contras and free elections in Nicaragua. Violetta Chamorro, a previous Sandinista supporter defeated the previous government's president, Daniel Ortega. The United States never approved the Arias Plan that settled the dispute to the U.S. desires. Evidently, the Nicaraguan people had not sufficiently suffered.
							</text>
            </Fact>
					</facts>
				</Subtopic>
        <Subtopic name="Iraq" nocomment="true">
          <facts>
            <Fact>
            	<date>If |iraqi Iraq| were Pompeii, then the US would be Mt. Vesuvius</date>
            	<text>
            		The US, after destroying much of Iraq in a declared war, has continued to destroy it further in an undeclared war. This war contains every imaginable form of warfare: direct military, economic, incitement to revolt, aid to insurgency, blockade, spying, propaganda. Analyzing the reasons for these attacks, that continue today, is fruitless and only deflects us from the obvious fact that the Iraq population has greatly suffered.
            		<br><br>
            		This suffering has been outlined in a UN Report on the Current Humanitarian Situation in Iraq, submitted to the Security Council, March 1999.
                Due to the length of the report, only the significant features are mentioned.
							</text>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
            	<date>Before the Gulf War</date>
            	<text>
								<ul>
								<li> Iraq's social and economic indicators were generally above the regional and developing country averages. Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in 1989 stood at 75.5 billion for a population of 18.3 million. By 1988 GDP per capita totaled 3.510 US dollars.
          			<li> Up to 1990, domestic food production represented only one third of total consumption for essential food items. As highlighted by Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO), at that time Iraq had one of the highest per capita food availability indicators in the region. Dietary energy supply averaged 3.120 kilo calories per capita/per day. Due to its relative prosperity Iraq had capacity to import large quantities of food.
          			<li> According to the World Health Organization (WHO), prior to 1991, health care reached approximately 97% of the urban population and 78% of rural residents. The health care system was based on an extensive expanding network of health facilities linked up by reliable communications and a large fleet of service vehicles and ambulances. Health care emphasized curative aspects, but a set of active public health programmes complemented it through immunization and control of insect borne diseases. A major reduction of young child mortality took place from 1960 to 1990, with the infant mortality rate at 65 per 1.000 live births in 1989 (1991 Human Development Report average for developing countries was 76 per- 1.000 live births). UNICEF indicates that a national welfare system was in place to assist orphans and children with disabilities and support the poorest families.
          			<li> Before 1991 the South and Center of Iraq had a well developed water and sanitation system comprising over two hundred water treatment plants ("wtp's") for urban areas and 1200 compact wtp's to serve rural areas, as well as an extensive distribution network. WHO estimates that 90% of the population had access to an abundant quantity of safe drinking water. 
          			</ul>
          		</text>
          	</Fact>
          	<Fact>
          		<date>After the Gulf War</date>
          		<text>
          		  <ul>
          		  <li> The United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) estimated the maternal mortality rate increased from 50/100,000 live births in 1989 to 117/100,000 in 1997. The under-five child mortality rate increased from 30.2/1000 live births to 97.2/1000 during the same period. The United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA) calculates that the infant mortality rate rose from 64/1000 births in 1990 to 129/1000 in 1995 (the latest Human Development Report sets the average infant mortality rate for Least Developed Countries at 109/1000). Low birth weight babies (less than 2.5 kg) rose from 4% in 1990 to around a quarter of registered births in 1997, due mainly to maternal malnutrition.
          		  <li> The dietary energy supply had fallen from 3120 to 1093 calories per capita/per day by 1994-95. The prevalence of malnutrition in Iraqi children under five almost doubled from 1991 to 1996 (from 12% to 23%). Acute malnutrition in Center/South rose from 3% to 11% for the same age bracket.
          		  <li> The World Food Program (WFP) estimates that access to potable water is currently 50% of the 1990 level in urban areas and only 33% in rural areas.
          		  <li> Since 1991, hospitals and health centers have remained without repair and maintenance. The functional capacity of the health care system has been degraded by shortages of water and power supply, lack of transportation and the collapse of the telecommunications system. Communicable diseases, such as water borne diseases and malaria, which had been under control, came back as an epidemic in 1993 and have now become part of the endemic pattern of the precarious health situation, according to WHO.
          		  <li> School enrollment for all ages (6-23) has declined to 53%. According to a field survey conducted in 1993, as quoted by UNESCO, in Central and Southern governorates 83% of school buildings needed rehabilitation, with 8613 out of 10,334 schools having suffered serious damages. The same source indicated that some schools with a planned capacity of 700 pupils actually have 4500 enrolled in them. Substantive progress in reducing adult and female illiteracy has ceased and regressed to mid-1980 levels, according to UNICEF. The rising number of street children and children who work can be explained, in part, as a result of increasing rates of school drop-outs and repetition, as more families are forced to rely on children to secure household incomes. Figures provided by UNESCO indicate that drop-outs in elementary schools increased from 95,692 in 1990 to 131,658 in 1999. 
          		  </ul>
							</text>
            </Fact>
          	<Fact>
          		<date>Observations and recommendations</date>
          		<text>
          		  <ul>
          		  <li> Data provided to the panel point to a continuing degradation of the Iraqi economy with an acute deterioration in the living conditions of the Iraqi population and severe strains on its social fabric. As summarized by the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) field office, ""the country has experienced a shift from relative affluence to massive poverty". In marked contrast to the prevailing situation prior to the events of 1990-91, the infant mortality rates in Iraq today are among the highest in the world, low infant birth weight affects at least 23% of all births, chronic malnutrition affects every fourth child under five years of age, only 41% of the population have regular access to clean water, 83% of all schools need substantial repairs. The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) states that the Iraqi health-care system is in a decrepit state.
                <li> ....it is the panel's view that, under current conditions the humanitarian outlook will remain bleak and become more serious with time. Even if not all suffering in Iraq can be imputed to external factors, especially |effect 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. 
          		  </ul>
          		  The International Study Team noted, "Most of the babies who lost their lives during the war period must have died from diseases related to poor nutrition, lack of clean water, and related deprivations."
							</text>
            </Fact>
					</facts>
				</Subtopic>
        <Subtopic name="Conclusion" nocomment="true">
          <facts>
            <Fact>
            	<date>Sovereign countries that suffered from US economic warfare in undeclared wars had similar traits:</date>
            	<text>
            		<ul>
            			<li> Independent foreign policies that didn't support the US policies.
            			<li> The most advanced social polices of comparable countries in their area, such as the highest literacy rate, life expectancy, number of doctors/population, and the lowest infant mortality rate. This had been true of Cuba and Iraq. Angola and Nicaragua never had the opportunity to develop these characteristics.
            			<li> Strong authoritarian leaders and lack of US concepts of democracy and freedom. This had been true of Cuba and Iraq. It was not entirely true of Angola and Nicaragua.
            			<li> Principally dependent on the export of one essential crop or resource for survival. 
            		</ul>
							</text>
            </Fact>
            <Fact>
            	<date>The economic warfare policies had similar results:</date>
            	<text>
            		<ul>
            			<li> Almost complete devastation to the country's infrastructure.
            			<li> Enormous suffering to the population, bordering on starvation.
            			<li> The country's military remaining relatively intact.
            			<li> Except for Nicaragua, no modification to the country's leadership or political structure. 
            		</ul>
            		We visualize warfare in terms of dead soldiers, battlefield blood, eerie noises and bombed-out structures. We can't easily comprehend that warfare can be silent and still be deadly. Economic warfare has equivalents to military war. The country that takes the offense becomes the aggressor, as in any war, and the destruction to the defending state is equally brutal. In most cases, the economic war has worse results: In a one sided manner, the civilian population of the defending nation suffers greatly and the military force receives lesser pain. The aggressor country suffers few losses. The war rarely achieves the results that the offending party desired and no peace treaty is signed. The economic war remains an open issue.
								<br><br>
								A limited form of economic warfare may, at times, have a legitimate purpose. A complete economic war, that invades all aspects of a country's life and continues until it debiltates the population, cannot be accepted. In a military campaign, atrocities and human rights violations are often committed. Although no shots are fired and battefields are not identifiable, economic warfare cannot camouflage its atrocities and disguise its severe human rights violations.
							</text>
            </Fact>
					</facts>
				</Subtopic>
				
			</subtopics>
		</Topic>

		<Topic name="Further reading">
      <subtopics>
        <Subtopic name="Further reading" forcebg="true" nocomment="true">
          <facts>
            <Fact>
              <date></date>
              <text>
              	For those people wanting to read more, and preferring more in-depth analysis over 
              	the selected facts provided here, take a look at the following resources.
              	<ul>
              		<li><a href="http://www.zmag.org/chomsky/dd/dd-contents.html">Deterring Democracy</a> - 
              			this comprehensive attack on US Foreign Policy by Noam Chomsky is provided here in full.
              			 Noam Chomsky is one of America's most prominent political dissidents, having authored over 
              			 30 political books to date.
              		<li><a href="http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Blum/KillingHope_page.html">Killing Hope</a> - 
              			a book by William Blum detailing US interventions country by country, considered one of the
              			most comprehensive sources on the matter available.
              		<li><a href="http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/church/reports/ir/contents.htm">Alleged Assassination Plots Involving Foreign Leaders</a> - 
              			In 1975-1976, the Church Committee investigated CIA plots to assassinate foreign leaders. 
              			This Interim Report, published in 1975, discusses alleged plots to kill 
              			|congo Patrice Lumumba|, |cuba Fidel Castro|, |dominican Rafael Trujillo|, |vietnam Ngo Dinh Diem| and 
              			|chile Rene Schneider|.
              		<li><a href="http://www.fsmitha.com/h2/">The 20th Century</a> - an online book going into
              		  depth regarding world history for the past century.
              	</ul>
              	A few news sites which I also recommend are the following.
              	<ul>
              		<li><a href="http://www.consortiumnews.com/">Consortium News</a> - a great independent news source. See especially their <a href="http://www.consortiumnews.com/archive/lost.html">Lost History archive</a>.
              		<li><a href="http://www.guerrillanews.com/">Guerrilla News</a> - another great alternative news source.
              		<li><a href="http://www.fair.org/">Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting</a> - offers documented criticism of media bias and censorship since 1986.
              		<li><a href="http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/">Center for Cooperative Research</a> - pretty similar to this site in its approach, with a larger focus on more recent events (Sept 11th + Iraq).
              		<li><a href="http://www.takebackthemedia.com/">Take Back the Media</a> - getting to the source of the disinformation.
              		<li><a href="http://www.thenation.com/">The Nation Magazine</a> - unconventional wisdom since 1865.
              		<li><a href="http://www.americanradioworks.org/">American Radio works</a> - contains great documentaries 
              		  on everything from the <a href="http://www.americanradioworks.org/features/lockerbie/">Lockerbie 
              		  bombing</a> to <a href="http://www.americanradioworks.org/features/vietnam/">Vietnam</a>.
              		<li><a href="http://truthout.org/index.htm">Truthout</a> - critical news and commentry.
              		<li><a href="http://sourcedreporting.com/">Sourced Reporting</a> - this site is dedicated to providing 
              		  uninterpreted factual information of select global events from verified media sources.
              	</ul>
              </text>
              <url></url>
              <urlText></urlText>
              <notes>
              	other potential news sites -
              		http://www.thornwalker.com/ditch/index.html
              		<li><a href="http://english.aljazeera.net/topics/index.asp?cu_no=1&lng=0&template_id=1&temp_type=44">
              		  Al Jazeera's English website</a> - see the world the way the Arabs see it.
              	
              </notes>
            </Fact>
          </facts>
        </Subtopic>
      </subtopics>
		</Topic>

   </topics>
  </Supertopic>

	<Supertopic name="Forum">
		<topics>
	    <Topic name="Forum">
	      <subtopics>
      	</subtopics>
    	</Topic>
    </topics>
  </Supertopic>


 </supertopics>
</Facts> 