Tuesday, November 27, 2007

WMDs in Iraq - Finally There's Proof


A growing number of credible scientists are reporting on the presence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. They exist and they've been used, widely it seems. The WMDs they refer to weren't built by Saddam. They were American and British.

The WMDs are in the form of radiation contamination caused by the widespread use of depleted uranium shells.

So much ammunition containing depleted uranium(DU) has been fired, asserts nuclear authority Leuren Moret, "The genetic future of the Iraqi people for the most part, is destroyed."

"More than ten times the amount of radiation released during atmospheric testing (of nuclear bombs) has been released from depleted uranium weaponry since 1991," Moret writes, including radioactive ammunition fired by Israeli troops in Palestine.

Moret is an independent U.S. scientist formerly employed for five years at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and also at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, both of California.

Adds Arthur Bernklau, of Veterans For Constitutional Law, "The long- term effect of DU is a virtual death sentence. Iraq is a toxic wasteland. Anyone who is there stands a good chance of coming down with cancer and leukemia. In Iraq, the birth rate of mutations is totally out of control."

Moret, a Berkeley, Calif., Environmental Commissioner and past president of the Association for Women Geoscientists, says, "For every genetic defect that we can see now, in future generations there are thousands more that will be expressed."

She adds, "the (Iraq) environment now is completely radioactive."


I hope these experts are wrong, flat out wrong. I hope they're just making this stuff up to advance some scurrilous hidden agenda. I hope this is all some vast, loonie left conspiracy. But, if it is, it's a conspiracy involving a lot of prominent scientists:

Dr. Helen Caldicott, the prominent anti-nuclear crusader, has written: "Much of the DU is in cities such as Baghdad, where half the population of 5 million people are children who played in the burned- out tanks and on the sandy, dusty ground."

"Children are 10 to 20 times more susceptible to the carcinogenic effects of radiation than adults," Caldicott wrote. "My pediatric colleagues in Basra, where this ordnance was used in 1991, report a sevenfold increase in childhood cancer and a sevenfold increase in gross congenital abnormalities."


Because of the extremely long half-life of uranium 238, one of the radioactive elements in the shells fired, "the food, the air, and the water in the cradle of civilization have been forever contaminated," Caldicott explained.

Chalmers Johnson, president of the Japan Policy Research Institute, writes in his "The Sorrows of Empire"(Henry Holt and Co.) that, given the abnormal clusters of childhood cancers and deformities in Iraq as well as Kosovo, the evidence points "toward a significant role for DU."

By insisting on its use, Johnson adds, "the military is deliberately flouting a 1996 United Nations resolution that classifies DU ammunition as an illegal weapon of mass destruction."
Moret calls DU "the Trojan Horse of nuclear war." She describes it as "the weapon that keeps killing." Indeed, the half-life of Uranium-238 is 4.5-billion years, and as it decays it spawns other deadly radioactive by-products.

Radioactive fallout from DU apparently blew far and wide. Following the initial U.S. bombardment of Iraq in 2003, DU particles traveled 2,400 miles to Great Britain in about a week, where atmospheric radiation quadrupled.

5 comments:

Manuel said...

Guess it's time to bust out the chlorine...this gene pool is like a Canadian swimming pool after a elementary school was in it.

The Mound of Sound said...

Gee, Manuel, glad you had nothing cogent to contribute.

Alan said...

With rare exception, objective and reliable scientific conclusions cannot coexist with emotional agenda-driven activism.

http://tinyurl.com/29blsj

http://tinyurl.com/25m4ps

The Mound of Sound said...

As I wrote in this post, Alan, I hope these people are making this stuff up. The trouble is that you can find abundant, credible experts on both sides of this debate. Surely, by now, those who are right ought to be able to convincingly dismantle the other side? Neither side has.

Alan said...

"The trouble is that you can find abundant, credible experts on both sides of this debate."

No, not really. Everyone you've quoted is an activist, and none are adequately qualified to understand radiation health issues.

That's my point. You've put forth the agenda-driven activist viewpoint, and I'm saying that you're not going to get reliable science from it.

Lots of emotion and ulterior motives, but no accurate scientific determinations.