Text 24606, 85 rader
Skriven 2008-12-06 10:35:26 av Roy Witt (1:397/22)
  Kommentar till text 24580 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
Ärende: Loyalties
=================
06 Dec 08 11:00, Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Roy Witt:

 MvdV>>> You forgot to mention that van Anraath in turn obtained the
 MvdV>>> thiodiglycol from Alcolac Inc in Baltimore. A US company.

 RW>> I didn't forget, it wasn't mentioned in the article I read.

 MvdV> So your informationm is incomplete.

No, the information I needed was in one article. If I were to need the
information you're talking about, it was in another article which followed
up on the trial.

 MvdV> Anyway, Lee is right, some of the stuff came from the US.

That wasn't Lee, it was Bob. But the intent of his information was to
belittle the US (a traitorous act in itself) to make the US the scapegoat
and not the real perpetrator.

 RW>>>> This case was also notable because it established that the
 RW>>>> chemical bombings in North Iraq constituted genocide according
 RW>>>> to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime
 RW>>>> of Genocide.

 MvdV>>> Wrong. It proves nothing of the kind. Note: the charge of
 MvdV>>> complicity to genocide was dismissed.

 RW>> Wrong. Because they couldn't prove he was complicit with the Kurd
 RW>> genocide, doesn't mean that the act of genocide didn't occur.

 MvdV> It does not mean that it *did* occur either.

It is documented fact that genocide did occur in the Kurdish part of Iraq.

 MvdV> You forward van Anraath's case as proof Saddam used poison gas.

No, I used Anraath's case to prove that Saddam had the materials
(supplied by Anraath) and the where-with-all to make and use poison gas.

 MvdV> It is not proof of that.

See above. Then look at the court records and deny that the court didn't
think so too.

 RW>>  You need to bone up on your Geneva Conventions.

 MvdV> You need to bone up on your logic.

Yours is flawed and I should take your's as an example?

 MvdV>>> Also does it not prove that the chemicals he delivered were
 MvdV>>> actually used to make the poison gas used against the Kurds.

 RW>> The paper trail proved that he provided the chemicals that were used
 RW>> against the Kurds, yes.

 MvdV> No, it does not.

Duhhhh.

 MvdV> It just proved he delivered them to Iraq. Which was a violation of
 MvdV> the trade sanctions.

Duhhhh.

 MvdV>>> All that the court considered proven was that Frans van Anraath
 MvdV>>> was guilty of comlicity to war crimes.

 RW>> For which he's doing 17 years.

 MvdV> Right. But it is NOT proof that Saddam gassed the Kurds.

That Saddam gassed the Kurds is not in question. He most definately did.

 MvdV>  He may have or he may not, the van Anraath case is not proof
 MvdV> either way.

I think it is.

                R\%/itt



--- Twit(t) Filter v2.1 (C) 2000
 * Origin: SATX Alamo Area Net * South * Texas, USA * (1:397/22)