Iraq doctor brings evidence of US napalm at Fallujah

[NNN0LHI]

http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/iraq-doctor-brings-evidence-of-us-napalm-at-fallujah/2006/05/22/1148150185038.html

EVIDENCE to support controversial claims that napalm has been used by US forces in Iraq has been brought to Australia by an Iraqi doctor.

Dr Salam Ismael, of the Baghdad-based group Doctors for Iraq, said the evidence pointed to the use of napalm on civilians during the second siege of Fallujah in November 2004.

It is contained in film and photographs that doctors took of bodies they collected when they were finally allowed to enter the city after being barred for three days of the military operation.

"We said that napalm had been used, because napalm is a bomb which is a fuel bomb that burns only on the exposed part of the body, so that the clothes will not be affected," Dr Ismael said from Perth at the start of a speaking tour.



Yes, napalm would seem like a fine weapon to use while liberating people. I sure hope no one ever comes and liberates me by dropping fire on me.

[tuvor]

1. "FALLUJAH NAPALMED" (Sunday Mirror, Nov 28, 2004)

FALLUJAH NAPALMED
www.sundaymirror.co.uk
Nov 28 2004

US uses banned weapon ..but was Tony Blair told?

By Paul Gilfeather Political Editor

US troops are secretly using outlawed napalm gas to wipe out remaining insurgents in and around Fallujah.

News that President George W. Bush has sanctioned the use of napalm, a deadly cocktail of polystyrene and jet fuel banned by the United Nations in 1980, will stun governments around the world.

And last night Tony Blair was dragged into the row as furious Labour MPs demanded he face the Commons over it. Reports claim that innocent civilians have died in napalm attacks, which turn victims into human fireballs as the gel bonds flames to flesh.

Outraged critics have also demanded that Mr Blair threatens to withdraw British troops from Iraq unless the US abandons one of the world's most reviled weapons. Halifax Labour MP Alice Mahon said: "I am calling on Mr Blair to make an emergency statement to the Commons to explain why this is happening. It begs the question: 'Did we know about this hideous weapon's use in Iraq?'"

Since the American assault on Fallujah there have been reports of "melted" corpses, which appeared to have napalm injuries.

Last August the US was forced to admit using the gas in Iraq.

A 1980 UN convention banned the use of napalm against civilians - after pictures of a naked girl victim fleeing in Vietnam shocked the world.

America, which didn't ratify the treaty, is the only country in the world still using the weapon.

http://www.sundaymirror.co.uk/news/news/tm_objectid=14920109%26method=full%26siteid=106694-name_page.html

(Seems the link no longer works, but that's the whole article.)

[chat_noir]

22. US ADMITS USING 'SON OF NAPALM' ON IRAQIS (2003)

AMERICAN jets killed Iraqi troops with a controversial napalm-type weapon during the war in Iraq, the Pentagon has admitted.

Mark 77 firebombs were dropped on Iraq on at least two occasions during the recent conflict.

A senior Pentagon colonel confirmed the bombs have "similar destructive characteristics" to napalm - the use of which sparked world outrage in the Vietnam war. The photograph of nine-year-old Kim Phuc, screaming in pain from napalm burns, turned public opinion in America against the war. In 1980 napalm was banned by the United Nations, but the US did not sign the agreement.

Three months ago, after Gulf War II, the Pentagon denied using napalm against Iraqi troops. However, it has now admitted using "Mark 77 firebombs", which are produced using a similar fuel-gel mixture.


http://www.sundaymirror.co.uk/news/news/tm_objectid=13274923%26method=full%26siteid=62484-name_page.html

[CoffeeCat]

2. How in the hell did they get away with that?

God, I feel like I spend so much time screaming inside of my head.

Can I be any more outraged, than I am right now?

Where is the MSM on this? Do they care? Do they care that we're torturing people
and using chemical weapons on innocent civilians--people that we're supposed to be liberating?

It just makes me so sick. It's so evil.

No wonder so many soldiers return home with PTSD. They've been sold a bill of goods that
is a complete lie, "Yes son! Sign up and you can be a liberator! A hero to the Iraqi people!"

Then, we get these brave, unsuspecting soldiers over there, and we give orders to fire bomb
innocent women and children.

How could we do something like this and where is the outrage?

[Up2Late]

27. Simple, just change the name. The NEW name is "firebomb" not...

...napalm, even though, that's exactly what they are:

<http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/dumb/mk77.htm>

And this:

<http://www.guardian.co.uk/Columnists/Column/0,5673,1642831,00.html>

Comment

The US used chemical weapons in Iraq - and then lied about it

Now we know napalm and phosphorus bombs have been dropped on Iraqis, why have the hawks failed to speak out?

George Monbiot
Tuesday November 15, 2005
The Guardian

Did US troops use chemical weapons in Falluja? The answer is yes. The proof is not to be found in the documentary broadcast on Italian TV last week, which has generated gigabytes of hype on the internet. It's a turkey, whose evidence that white phosphorus was fired at Iraqi troops is flimsy and circumstantial. But the bloggers debating it found the smoking gun.

The first account they unearthed in a magazine published by the US army. In the March 2005 edition of Field Artillery, officers from the 2nd Infantry's fire support element boast about their role in the attack on Falluja in November last year: "White Phosphorous. WP proved to be an effective and versatile munition. We used it for screening missions at two breeches and, later in the fight, as a potent psychological weapon against the insurgents in trench lines and spider holes when we could not get effects on them with HE . We fired 'shake and bake' missions at the insurgents, using WP to flush them out and HE to take them out."

The second, in California's North County Times, was by a reporter embedded with the marines in the April 2004 siege of Falluja. "'Gun up!' Millikin yelled ... grabbing a white phosphorus round from a nearby ammo can and holding it over the tube. 'Fire!' Bogert yelled, as Millikin dropped it. The boom kicked dust around the pit as they ran through the drill again and again, sending a mixture of burning white phosphorus and high explosives they call 'shake'n'bake' into... buildings where insurgents have been spotted all week."

White phosphorus is not listed in the schedules of the Chemical Weapons Convention. It can be legally used as a flare to illuminate the battlefield, or to produce smoke to hide troop movements from the enemy. Like other unlisted substances, it may be deployed for "Military purposes... not dependent on the use of the toxic properties of chemicals as a method of warfare". But it becomes a chemical weapon as soon as it is used directly against people. A chemical weapon can be "any chemical which through its chemical action on life processes can cause death, temporary incapacitation or permanent harm".

(more at link)

<http://www.guardian.co.uk/Columnists/Column/0,5673,1642831,00.html>

[paparush]

3. Must be part of the Bush** "Clear Plan for Victory"

If there is a god, I will not be suprised when she says enough is enough and blinks us all out of existence.

[Asgaya Dihi]

4. Maybe WP

Sounds more like WP than napalm, napalm burns everything doesn't it? White Phosphorus will act like that though. More or less the next generation of the same type of weapon, but not quite the same from what I've read.

[Greyskye]

23. That was the consensus at the time...

White Phosphorus. I was amazed that there wasn't a lot more outrage. :banghead:

[Up2Late]

29. The Napalm, sorry, "firebombs" were used early on, the WP was used...

...later in the war at Falluja: <http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0805-01.htm>

Published on Tuesday, August 5, 2003 by the San Diego Union-Tribune

Officials Confirm Dropping Firebombs on Iraqi Troops

Results are 'remarkably similar' to using napalm
by James W. Crawley

American jets killed Iraqi troops with firebombs – similar to the controversial napalm used in the Vietnam War – in March and April as Marines battled toward Baghdad.

Marine Corps fighter pilots and commanders who have returned from the war zone have confirmed dropping dozens of incendiary bombs near bridges over the Saddam Canal and the Tigris River. The explosions created massive fireballs.

"We napalmed both those (bridge) approaches," said Col. James Alles in a recent interview. He commanded Marine Air Group 11, based at Miramar Marine Corps Air Station, during the war. "Unfortunately, there were people there because you could see them in the (cockpit) video.

"They were Iraqi soldiers there. It's no great way to die," he added. How many Iraqis died, the military couldn't say. No accurate count has been made of Iraqi war casualties. The bombing campaign helped clear the path for the Marines' race to Baghdad.

(more at link)

<http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0805-01.htm>

Article about WP use (same as the one I posted above): <http://www.guardian.co.uk/Columnists/Column/0,5673,1642831,00.html>

[Just Me]

5. Saddam used "chemical weapons". Bush uses "chemical weapons".

Remember, the neocons' SOLD these weapons to Saddam to control his population.

Evil, people. Evil, evil people,...all around. They bargained with Saddam, they prove worse than Saddam in destruction, in evil.

Amazingly, Iraq WAS the secular, multi-cultural, multi-religious center in the region.

WAS. WAS. WAS.

Now, that the necons have destroyed that melting pot, they've IMHO INTENTIONALLY brewed the rest of the Muslim world because,...

Well, nevermind. My opinion doesn't mean shit.

[AndyTiedye]

6. That Was the Warped Residents Celebrating their Man Date

These people SOOOOO need to be sent to the Hague!

[Just Me]

7. Personally, I'd prefer ALL their money be paid over for their crimes.

,...to UNICEF and small business Iraqis,...EVERY DAMNED PENNY, PROPERTY, CORPORATE INVESTMENT, STOCK, PENSION, TRUST,....ALL OF IT. Let them live with NOTHING.

[TomInTib]

8. Wrong. Not 'napalm'. Napalm has been outlawed. So we...

re-formulated it to contribute to the firestorm of the City of Angels (Panama).

100,000 - that is how many Panamanians died in that GHWB outrage.

[Asgaya Dihi]

9. I thought this sounded familiar

I saw a video about this last year, Italian Satellite TV did a story complete with video about it. Link here to a copy. Sounds to me like the doctor has confused napalm with WP, the article says that the US admits to use of WP and napalm doesn't act like the doc says it does. It burns everything, WP doesn't.

I'm not sure there's anything new here.

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2005/11/07.html#a5753

[Clarkie1]

10. Is there any other evidence for this besides this one link?

If not, the story is dubious.

The use of napalm would serve no useful purpose. It was an horrific method of warfare used in Vietnam to clear vegetation, but the desert is bereft of such vegetation. It makes no sense. Also, if it was used the evidence would be obvious from many sources on the ground. It is hard to believe such evidence would not become available for 2 years.

I hope this is not true, and seriously doubt that it is true.

Edit: I wish there was a choice for NOT recommended on the OP (nothing personal against the individual who started the thread, but I would advise all not to trust everything they read or see, especially on the internet).

[Scoody Boo]

11. Napalm is pretty much gelled gasoline

it will burn anything. It will burn flesh, exposed or not. Willie Pete would burn just exposed areas, but not napalm.

[Solo_in_MD]

15. Concur

I am also not sure when naplam was indeed banned. Any one have a link or pointer?

[Asgaya Dihi]

20. Sure

Did a quick web search, turned up the following. Seems to be in at least two parts depending on what aspect we're talking about, the old stuff or newer.

First was the CCW or Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons signed in 1980 though they took effect over a few following years. That's sourced here and took out napalm as we knew it. http://www.morh.hr/hvs/SPORAZUMI/ostale-ENG.htm

The second was for a new formula called MK77, that was taken out by a UN treaty in 1997 according to an article both the CSM and the Daily Kos, so one on both sides of the isle there for that part.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/1108/dailyUpdate.html
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/11/7/11819/9522

[tuvor]

12. Check the first reply.

[Asgaya Dihi]

13. I read it

The line that strikes me is this. "Reports claim that innocent civilians have died in napalm attacks, which turn victims into human fireballs as the gel bonds flames to flesh".

The thing is that WP is pretty damned nasty, it hits you and sticks burning straight through to the bone, uses the oxygen in your blood. You can't really put it out, jump in a river and you just burn under water. I'm not saying that napalm wasn't used, but so far I haven't seen anything that couldn't have been someone confusing one for the other and just using the wrong term.

[Monk06]

16. Click on the CAL link on #9 and watch the video.....

Or click here

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2005/11/07.html#a5753

All the napalm footage from Viet Nam and the WP after
effects footage from Iraq is either from US military
sources or embedded sources.

BTW neither Agent Orange or Napalm was used to clear
vegetation. The VN napalm footage is old film I remember
seeing when I was in my twenties and the targets were
villages. The effects were filmed from the aircraft as
they passed over and dropped the ordinance.That defoliation
story was a crock 35 years ago and nobody believed it then.

The claim is also made that WP is used to illuminate
targets which is ludicrous given that even ground
troops have IR optics.

[me b zola]

19. I saw what I thought to be evidence of napalm on CNN

After the assault on Falluja, cnn took a camera crew through to show the US "victory". In one of the buildings was an Iraqi gunner, frozen in postition & time and burned to a crisp--he was burned mummified. I'll never forget that image.

[Recursion]

14. Probably not napalm

1. Napalm isn't terribly useful in most urban environments. We used an early form of it on Dresden and Tokyo in WWII but that worked because we used so much that we turned both cities into flaming infernos. Using less than that much on a city doesn't have much of an operational effect. It's main uses are clearing vegetation and disrupting mass movements.

2. Napalm doesn't just burn exposed skin. It's essentially gasoline stabilized with styrofoam; it sticks like jelly and burns like gas. So anything: clothes, metal, flesh, stone, wood, etc. that gets napalm on it burns.

3. White phosophorous, on the other hand, does behave more like that, though if any fell directly on clothing the clothing would burn really fast.

4. As a side note, WP often gets talked up as a chemical munition that we used against Iraqis, but it is not a chemical weapon by normal definitions of that term -- and if we *do* say that WP or napalm are chemical weapons, then we are saying that Saddam had chemical weapons too, because his army like all modern armies had both WP and napalm. So we need to tread carefully there.

[magellan]

17. See this BBC article: US General Defends Phosphorus Use

US general defends phosphorus use - Wednesday, 30 November 2005

The United States' most senior general has defended the use of weapons containing white phosphorus in Iraq.

General Peter Pace said that such munitions were a "legitimate tool of the military", used to illuminate targets and create smokescreens.

Two weeks ago, the US admitted using it to flush out insurgents in Falluja last year - raising concerns that it might have hit civilians.

Initially, the military denied using it against either insurgents or civilians.

SNIP...

"It is not a chemical weapon. It is an incendiary. And it is well within the law of war to use those weapons as they're being used, for marking and for screening," he said.

If it comes into contact with human skin, white phosphorus can ignite and burn down to the bone if it is not exhausted or extinguished.

An Italian TV channel has reported that the US used white phosphorus against civilians in Falluja, and showed pictures of burned bodies.

The US has denied this.

Tiny bit more....

At the side of the article is this info box; note the second-to-last and last entry:

WHITE PHOSPHORUS

1. Spontaneously flammable chemical used for battlefield illumination
   
2. Contact with particles causes burning of skin and flesh
   
3. Use of incendiary weapons prohibited for attacking civilians (Protocol III of Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons)
   
4. Protocol III not signed by US
   

BushCo are playing another "it depends on what the meaning of 'is' is" game here. White phosphorus has the same effect on flesh as napalm. It's sticky and will burn down to bone. Technically it isn't a weapon...it's an incendiary device, an illuminant. But you'd have to be thick not to realize that it can be used directly against people to cause significant harm and even death, just like napalm.

It is WELL within the realm of probability that our forces used white phosphorus against civilians in Iraq. Be that maliciously or in error doesn't really change the outcome or the responsibility for having done it.

But as noted above, BushCo didn't sign on to Protocol III....Gee, I wonder why?

[ConsAreLiars]

18. Not "Napalm," but, according to Salam, Napalm combined with WP

(White Phosphorous). The newspaper article over-simplifies his statements, not unusual, and thus misrepresents his claims. His own statements regarding the atrocities in Fallujah, including the use of cluster bombs, can be found here: http://www.brusselstribunal.org/DrSalam.htm

"I’m convinced that the testimony of eyewitnesses, scientific facts and an international investigation will provide the evidence. Napalm is an inflammable, sticky gel that burns at 300-350°C (572-662°F), causing fourth degree burnings. The American troops used napalm combined with white phosphorous, which makes the temperature increase up to 3000°C (5432°F). The chemicals react with the water in human cells. Clothes stay intact, but the affected skin burns to the bone. Since these chemicals react with water, the effect worsens when you pour water on it."

[Catrina]

21. This site is pretty comprehensive and includes the Italian video

I don't think the US is even denying they used WP anymore ~ this site is very disturbing but it links to some credible sources ~

Fallujah: The Flame of Atrocity

Using filmed and photographic evidence, eyewitness accounts, and the direct testimony of American soldiers who took part in the attacks, the documentary – "Fallujah: The Hidden Massacre" – catalogues the American use of white phosphorous shells and a new, "improved" form of napalm that turned human beings into "caramelized" fossils, with their skin dissolved and turned to leather on their bones.

The film was produced by RAI, the Italian state network run by a government that backed the war.

Vivid images show civilians, including women and children, who had been burned alive in their homes, even in their beds. This use of chemical weapons – at the order of the Bushist brass – and the killing of civilians are confirmed by former American soldiers interviewed on camera. "I heard the order to pay attention because they were going to use white phosphorous on Fallujah," said one soldier, quoted in the Independent. "In military jargon, it's known as Willy Pete. Phosphorous burns bodies; in fact it melts the flesh all the way down to the bone. I saw the burned bodies of women and children. Phosphorus explodes and forms a cloud. Anyone within a radius of 150 meters is done for."


The broadcast is an important event: shameful, damning, convincing. But it shouldn't be news. Earlier this year, as reported here on March 18, a medical team sent to Fallujah by the Bush-backed Iraqi interim government issued its findings at a press conference in Baghdad. The briefing, by Health Ministry investigator Dr. Khalid ash-Shaykhli, was attended by more than 20 major American and international news outlets. Not a single one of these bastions of a free and vigorous press reported on the event. Only a few small venues – such as the International Labor Communications Association – brought word of the extraordinary revelations to English-speaking audiences.


Yet this highly credible, pro-American official of a pro-occupation government confirmed, through medical examinations and the eyewitness testimony of survivors – including many civilians who had opposed the heavy-handed insurgent presence in the town – that "burning chemicals" had been used by U.S. forces in the attack, in direct violation of international and American law. "All forms of nature were wiped out" by the substances unleashed in the assault, including animals that had been killed by gas or chemical fire, said Dr ash-Shaykhli

http://www.chris-floyd.com/fallujah/

Is that the same Doctor who went to Australia, I wonder? Will check.

I'd like to give credit to the DUer who posted this link in another thread ~ but don't remember his/her name ~

[undergroundpanther]

24. Duh'oh i got stuff from 1999

Here are more articles saying the US used Napalm in the Gulf war.. and in Afganistan..Check the dates...!!And one about bioterror made in the US being blamed on Saddam in 1999!! wow.


JOHN pilger - journalism and the Persian Gulf War
New Statesman, June 26, 2000

As the ceasefire was being negotiated with Iraq, columns of retreating Iraqis and foreign guest workers who had been trapped in Kuwait were attacked by American carrier-based aircraft. They used cluster bombs and napalm B, the type that sticks to the skin while continuing to burn. Returning pilots bragged about a "turkey shoot". Others likened it to "shooting fish in a barrel". Among the fleeing military trucks were old Toyotas, Volkswagens, motorbikes. Defenceless people were strafed as they ran for cover.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0FQP/is_4492 ...

http://www.uruknet.info/?p=m10781



Daisy Cutters signal switch to crude tactics
Evening Standard (London), April, 2003 by HUGH DOUGHERTY

While other allied bombs are dropped from strike aircraft or American bombers, Daisy Cutters are the size of a small family car - so large that they have to be dropped from the back of a specially adapted Hercules transport plane.

They contain 15,000lb of fuel-air explosives, a variation on the deadly napalm which the US deployed with huge destructive effect - and to massive public outrage - in Vietnam.
The plane carrying the device has to fly above 6,000 feet to escape being destroyed by the blast.

The bomb works by detonating only three feet above the ground, spraying tiny droplets of fuel-based explosive into the air where they create a massive "air burst", a huge explosion, marked by a mushroom cloud visible for miles around.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4153/is_200 ...


Fighting the postwar battles: the end of the gulf war has not brought peace to the Kurds, the Shiites, the Arabs or Israel
US News & World Report, April 22, 1991 by Louise Lief

On the Turkish and Iranian borders, almost 2 million Kurdish refugees are freezing and starving in icy, ankle-deep mud. French doctors who traveled through the Kurdish areas report seeing many victims of napalm and phosphorous bombs dropped by Hussein's Air Force that left their faces blistered with black and white scabs and doctors sponging off hemorrhages with dirty rags. "We need a massive mobilization," says Dr. Francis Charhon of Doctors Without Borders, a French relief group that has sent almost 40 doctors and nurses into Turkey and Iran to help the refugees. "The Kurds are dying."


Why Napalm....???


From an article by Scott Shuger in Slate, who favors the use of napalm flamethrowers in Afghanistan:

"Although in Vietnam napalm was used irresponsibly on civilians, it is not inherently dangerous to them." Shuger adds, "Flamethrowers might even save some terrorists' lives because they would rather give up than be burned alive."



American terrorist: forget Hutton. He will not reveal what the US and UK authorities really don't want you to know: that radiation illnesses caused by uranium weapons are now common in Iraq
New Statesman, Jan 12, 2004 by John Pilger

According to a November 2003 study by the Uranium Medical Research Centre, witnesses living next to Baghdad airport reported a huge death toll following one morning's attack from aerial bursts of thermobaric and fuel air bombs. Since then, a vast area has been "landscaped" by US earth movers, and fenced.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0FQP/is_4670 ...


Did the US start germ warfare? - United States
New Statesman, Oct 25, 1999 by Peter Pringle

I refer to Britain's and America's shameful past with "bio-weapons". All the charges about "rogue" states making these nasty poisons tends to steer us away from past deeds. No one mentions that, in 1944, Churchill wanted to finish off the Germans with anthrax bombs but was dissuaded by his generals; or that the Americans secretly gave immunity to Japanese second world war criminals who experimented with biological agents on Chinese prisoners - and used the results for developing US germ weapons. And the half-century-old charges by the Chinese that the United States actually used biological agents in the Korean war are repeatedly glossed over.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0FQP/is_4459...

I don't know if any of these links still work but the articles exist...

[sweetheart]

25. The general sherman offence

It did have a romantic charm, that path of destruction across georgia...
"Sherman therefore applied the principles of scorched earth,
ordering his troops to burn crops, kill livestock, consume supplies,
and destroy civilian infrastructure along their path.
This policy is often also referred to as total war."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherman's_March_to_the_Sea

[mom cat]

26. There should be a war crimes tribunal!

[upi402]

28. There will be, if we get a real opposition party in power.

I'm glad this is bumping up here in GD because it was posted a little late in LBN.