 21 Jan 2003 @ 09:47, by spiritseek
1) "Flawed Report; Iraqi Warheads Found" William Rivers Pitt
William Rivers Pitt, Author "War on Iraq"
to: Staff / Aaron Brown CNN
Subject: Flawed Report; Iraqi Warheads Found
Thursday 16 January 2003
My name is William Rivers Pitt. I am the author of the book 'War on
Iraq,'
which has appeared on the New York Times bestseller list, and has cracked
the top ten bestseller lists of the Washington Post, L.A. Times, San
Francisco Chronicle and others. I am also a writer for the publication
truthout.org.
I apologize for flouting my resume at you, but I wanted to make sure that
you do not dismiss this email as coming from someone not very well versed
in this Iraq situation. A correspondent ........ at CNN gave me your
address, so that I might pass a note through you to Mr. Aaron Brown. I am
hoping he is prepared to hear what I am saying.
First things first: The warheads.
Let's be clear. These were not 'chemical warheads.' In the Iraqi arsenal,
a
warhead is a warhead - an empty ordnance space strapped to a missile.
What
matters is the payload, be it explosive or chemical or nuclear. The item
placed in the warhead denotes the designation. These warheads were
stone-cold empty, so by definition they are not 'chemical warheads.' They
are, in fact, nothing, because they were loaded with no payload.
Furthermore, the word 'warhead' is in itself misleading, as these were
artillery munitions.
Second. Iraq is allowed by UN resolutions to have a variety of weapons,
including the Al Samoud missile. We did not want to pull Iraq's fangs
completely after the Gulf War, considering the neighborhood they live in.
We allowed them to keep missiles that fly only a certain distance (150km
most often). Many people will not know this, and will think the presence
of
these munitions will represent a breach of the UN resolution. This is not
the case.
Third. Scott Ritter informed me today that these munitions were part of
Iraq's declaration last December. I await further confirmation of this,
and
so should the journalism world.
Fourth. This is absolutely a vindication of the inspections regime. They
found the stuff, and it will be destroyed, and no American soldiers or
Iraqi civilians died in the process. Inspections work.
Fifth. Recall how the UNSCOM inspections were undermined by meddling from
the American intelligence community. Understand that this warhead story
did
not come from Blix, or through the normal channels, but through a
Japanese
(read: close ally) inspector who contacted the news media and let rip
before the facts were in hand. Why?
Finally, I want to address a comment you made earlier this week. You said
on your show that it was unconscionable that viewers were writing in
claiming that CNN wants war because war is good for the media business. I
understand that this idea offends the core of your professionalism, but I
wonder if you have been watching CNN today.
Your station has referred, over and over again, to these discovered
warheads as 'chemical warheads.' The debate has not been centered on what
the facts are behind these items - when they were made, whether they were
loaded with anything, how long they have been there, whether they were
declared - and instead has focused on whether the White House can use
this
as a pretext for war. Calling these things 'chemical warheads' is a gross
exaggeration, which I have heard on CNN no less than seven times during
the
period I have been writing this message. Mull that.
Please, take the data I have given you and air it, for the sake of a
reasoned and complete debate. I remind you that CNN's viewership
increased
by 500% after 9/11 and that your network made its bones on the first Gulf
War. I beg you to get this data out to the American people, who
desperately
need facts and not overheated innuendo.
With great appreciation,
William Rivers Pitt
|
|
