Would Sumate stand by and allow their fellow citizens to be contaminated?

by Mary MacElveen

US Senator Hillary Rodham-Clinton called the lack of body armor provided to our military personnel as being "unforgivable" this past week and wants an investigation into this matter. While our troops do need that body armor, it is like placing a band-aid on a gaping wound especially when it comes to the use of depleted uranium in Iraq. More on that later...

What I find unforgivable, especially after I wrote Blow Back! is where the CIA was used today in taking out the lives of innocent people in Pakistan according to an AP article: Pakistanis Condemn Purported CIA Attack

While I would say "allegedly used," due to our history of using this agency, I believe that the CIA attacked these people.

According to the AP article "Pakistani officials "on Saturday angrily condemned a purported CIA air strike meant to target al Qaeda’s No.2 man, saying he wasn’t there and "innocent civilians" were among at least 17 men, women and children killed in a village near the Afghan border."

I wonder if Senator Clinton and those screaming for more body armor would call the taking of innocent lives as being unforgivable?

As I have said in a previous article, that the Iraqi people suffer a 9/11 on a daily basis, these innocent women and children died due to terrorism. This was their 9/11, yet the world is not screaming out to avenge their deaths ... they are not seen as human beings with the right to live, but rather as collateral damage.

This is exactly the reason why President Chavez calls our United States government imperialist when we think we have the right to use the agency to bomb the life out of innocent women and children.

The sooner Americans realize this, the better...

Just suppose these women and children were killed like this in your neighborhood, you would want justice for them. Wouldn’t you? But, if these Pakistanis demand justice or exact revenge, they are known as ’enemy combatants.’ If these were American lives, their names would be mentioned on our evening news, where these Pakistani women and children’s names are not known to anyone, as if they did not exist. But they did exist and your tax dollars were used to kill them. I just felt this news article to be noteworthy.

Just the other day VHeadline.com ran an article: Will USA use DU weapons in fourth attempt to unseat President Hugo Chavez? and if you have not read it yet, I highly suggest that you do then pass it on to others.

The use of body armor is ineffective when it comes to the use of DU or even white phosphorus.

I wrote about our use of white phosphorus in past piece. US forces used it in Fallujah and an Italian news organization filmed it. If anyone thinks that body armor can protect soldiers and innocent civilians from that substance, they need to have their heads examined.

As I did my own research into the use of DU related to body armor, I came across the fact: "A standard anti-tank round, once fitted with a DU rod, can penetrate even the thickest armor, reducing the quantity of high explosive needed. Instead of merely glancing off the protective shield of the tank, DU will literally punch a hole through the thick armor, making it much easier to disable tanks and other heavy weaponry at longer ranges."

What good is body armor if it will not stop these munitions?

Here is another fact: "Six American vehicles struck with DU ’friendly fire’ in 1991 were deemed to be too contaminated to take home and were buried in Saudi Arabia. Of 16 more brought back to a purpose-built facility in South Carolina, six had to be buried in a low-level radioactive waste dump."

Yet we are still using these dangerous munitions today? Friendly fire?

"These same munitions nearly 11,000, were also used in Bosnia by US forces and have been said to be responsible for a range of cancers, leukemia, and mysterious ailments collectively known as "Balkans Syndrome."

So, no amount of body armor can protect our soldiers let alone innocent civilians from contracting these diseases.

Brent Scowcroft who was Bush Sr.’s NSA (National Security Agency) director said "Depleted uranium is more of a problem than we thought when it was developed. But it was developed according to standards and was thought through very carefully. It turned out, perhaps, to be wrong."

Yet another fact concerning DU: "Some DU munitions have been found to contain traces of Plutonium, which is the most toxic substance we know of. Its half-life is approximately 4.5 billion years, meaning that in that amount of time half of it will have broken down. DU is ingested when soldiers or civilians come into contact with it."

According to: Remains of toxic bullets: "Local children play "throughout the day" on a DU riddled tank. Where was their armor? As many American children go bowling, the malls, miniature golf fields and amusement parks, Iraqi children are playing on radioactive tanks.

As you eat your produce picked from your mega food store in America: "No one has warned the vendor in the faded, threadbare black gown to keep the toxic and radioactive dust off her produce." People are eating radioactive food over in Iraq and we did this yet no one is calling for any investigation into this matter.

If that does not blow you away, this will: "They gather around as a Geiger counter carried by a visiting reporter starts singing when it nears a DU bullet fragment no bigger than a pencil eraser. It registers nearly 1,000 times normal background radiation levels on the digital readout."

Just sit and think about that for a while...

Imagine if you will, you are walking around tending to your daily business and a reporter comes up to you with a Geiger counter and it reads this level of exposure. This is the daily life innocent Iraqis must deal with, yet no one is screaming to protect them with body armor, even though as I said, it is like putting a band-aid on a gaping wound.

According to Jan Olof Snihs, of Sweden’s Radiation Protection Authority in Stockholm ... "In most cases, dangers are low, unless children eat toxic and radioactive soil or get DU oxides on their hands."

Show me one child who does not have a tendency to put their hands in their mouth even if they are dirty ... just look at your own child as you take them to the sandbox at your local park ... would you want them eating radioactive soil?
Given this fact reported in the Monitor’s article: "Pentagon officials say that DU is relatively harmless and a necessary part of modern warfare."

Why aren’t Senators such as Hillary Rodham Clinton calling the use of these munitions "unforgivable"?

We are using munitions that give people cancers and birth defects and we call that a "necessary part of modern warfare"?

I highly suggest that you draw your own conclusions. While many scream here in the United States of irradiated food, we are irradiating a citizenry and an innocent one at that.

The only thing I find "unforgivable" is when Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton voted yes to this war.
It truly boggles my mind how people can think she is the United States deliverance come 2008. Some will say I am unfairly targeting her, but her vote speaks for itself. If you are truly against this war and the use of these munitions: How can you support any candidate who favors this war?

Heaven forbid our nation were to invade a pacifist nation such as Venezuela, would she be as vocal in our use of DU in that invasion?

Would the children of the barrios be playing in radioactive streets and eating radioactive food?

Would the Sumate condone this invasion and stand by and allow their fellow citizens to be contaminated?

Mary MacElveen
mary@vheadline.com

http://www,vheadline.com/MacElveen