Tomaa,

Superb that you forwarded this one. The International Action Center (www.iacenter.org) is planning a massive anti-war demonstration in D.C for October 26. My fear is that it would have been already to late to stop the war.

Sidibeh
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Momodou Camara" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, September 23, 2002 6:45 PM
Subject: FWD:iac: Ramsey Clark Letter to UN: Do Not Support Attack on Iraq


> The following letter by former U.S. Attorney General  Ramsey Clark has
> been sent to all members of the UN  Security Council, with copies to
> the UN General Assembly.  Please circulate.
> 
> September 20, 2002
> 
> Secretary General Kofi Annan  United Nations New York, NY
> 
> Dear Secretary General Annan,
> 
> George Bush will invade Iraq unless restrained by the  United Nations.
> Other international organizations--  including the European Union, the
> African Union, the OAS,  the Arab League, stalwart nations courageous
> enough to  speak out against superpower aggression, international
>  peace movements, political leadership, and public opinion  within the
> United States--must do their part for peace. If  the United Nations,
> above all, fails to oppose a U.S.  invasion of Iraq, it will forfeit
> its honor, integrity and  raison d?etre.
> 
> A military attack on Iraq is obviously criminal;  completely
> inconsistent with urgent needs of the Peoples  of the United Nations;
> unjustifiable on any legal or moral  ground; irrational in light of the
> known facts; out of  proportion to other existing threats of war and
> violence;  and a dangerous adventure risking continuing conflict
>  throughout the region and far beyond for years to come.  The most
> careful analysis must be made as to why the world  is subjected to such
> threats of violence by its only  superpower, which could so safely and
> importantly lead us  on the road to peace, and how the UN can avoid the
> human  tragedy of yet another major assault on Iraq and the  powerful
> stimulus for retaliatory terrorism it would  create.
> 
> 1. President George Bush Came to Office Determined to  Attack Iraq and
> Change its Government.
> 
> George Bush is moving apace to make his war unstoppable  and soon.
> Having stated last Friday that he did not  believe Iraq would accept UN
> inspectors, he responded to  Iraq?s prompt, unconditional acceptance by
> calling any  reliance on it a ?false hope? and promising to attack Iraq
>  alone if the UN does not act. He is obsessed with the  desire to wage
> war against Iraq and install his surrogates  to govern Iraq by force.
> Days after the most bellicose  address ever made before the United
> Nations--an  unprecedented assault on the Charter of the United
>  Nations, the rule of law and the quest for peace--the U.S.  announced
> it was changing its stated targets in Iraq over  the past eleven years,
> from retaliation for threats and  attacks on U.S. aircraft which were
> illegally invading  Iraq?s airspace on a daily basis. How serious could
> those  threats and attacks have been if no U.S. aircraft was ever  hit?
> Yet hundreds of people were killed in Iraq by U.S.  rockets and bombs,
> and not just in the so called ?no fly  zone,? but in Baghdad itself.
> Now the U.S. proclaims its  intentions to destroy major military
> facilities in Iraq in  preparation for its invasion, a clear promise of
>  aggression now. Every day there are threats and more  propaganda is
> unleashed to overcome resistance to George  Bush?s rush to war. The
> acceleration will continue until  the tanks roll, unless nonviolent
> persuasion prevails.
> 
> 2. George Bush Is Leading the United States and Taking the  UN and All
> Nations Toward a Lawless World of Endless Wars.
> 
> George Bush in his ?War on Terrorism? has asserted his  right to attack
> any country, organization, or people  first, without warning in his
> sole discretion. He and  members of his administration have proclaimed
> the old  restraints that law sought to impose on aggression by
>  governments and repression of their people, no longer  consistent with
> national security. Terrorism is such a  danger, they say, that
> necessity compels the U.S. to  strike first to destroy the potential
> for terrorist acts  from abroad and to make arbitrary arrests,
> detentions,  interrogations, controls and treatment of people abroad
>  and within the U.S. Law has become the enemy of public  safety.
> ?Necessity is the argument of tyrants.? ?Necessity  never makes a good
> bargain.?
> 
> Heinrich Himmler, who instructed the Nazi Gestapo ?Shoot  first, ask
> questions later, and I will protect you,? is  vindicated by George
> Bush. Like the Germany described by  Jorge Luis Borges in Deutsches
> Requiem, George Bush has  now ?proffered (the world) violence and faith
> in the  sword,? as Nazi Germany did. And as Borges wrote, it did  not
> matter to faith in the sword that Germany was  defeated. ?What matters
> is that violence ... now rules.?  Two generations of Germans have
> rejected that faith. Their  perseverance in the pursuit of peace will
> earn the respect  of succeeding generations everywhere.
> 
> The Peoples of the United Nations are threatened with the  end of
> international law and protection for human rights  by George Bush?s war
> on terrorism and determination to  invade Iraq.
> 
> Since George Bush proclaimed his ?war on terrorism,? other  countries
> have claimed the right to strike first. India  and Pakistan brought the
> earth and their own people closer  to nuclear conflict than at any time
> since October 1962 as  a direct consequence of claims by the U.S. of
> the  unrestricted right to pursue and kill terrorists, or  attack
> nations protecting them, based on a unilateral  decision without
> consulting the United Nations, a trial,  or revealing any clear factual
> basis for claiming its  targets are terrorists and confined to them.
> 
> There is already a near epidemic of nations proclaiming  the right to
> attack other nations or intensify violations  of human rights of their
> own people on the basis of George  Bush?s assertions of power in the
> war against terrorism.  Mary Robinson, in her quietly courageous
> statements as her  term as UN High Commissioner for Human Rights ended,
> has  spoken of the ?ripple effect? U.S. claims of right to  strike
> first and suspend fundamental human rights  protection is having.
> 
> On September 11, 2002, Colombia, whose new administration  is strongly
> supported by the U.S., ?claimed new authority  to arrest suspects
> without warrants and declare zones  under military control,? including
> ?[N]ew powers, which  also make it easier to wiretap phones and limit
>  foreigners? access to conflict zones... allow security  agents to
> enter your house or office without a warrant at  any time of day
> because they think you?re suspicious.?  These additional threats to
> human rights follow  Post-September 11 ?emergency? plans to set up a
> network of  a million informants in a nation of forty million. See,
>  New York Times, September 12, 2002, p. A7.
> 
>   3. The United States, Not Iraq, Is the Greatest Single  Threat to the
> Independence and Purpose of the United  Nations.
> 
>   President Bush?s claim that Iraq is a threat justifying  war is
> false. Eighty percent of Iraq?s military capacity  was destroyed in
> 1991 according to the Pentagon. Ninety  percent of materials and
> equipment required to manufacture  weapons of mass destruction was
> destroyed by UN inspectors  during more than eight years of
> inspections. Iraq was  powerful, compared to most of its neighbors, in
> 1990.  Today it is weak. One infant out of four born live in Iraq
>  weighs less than 2 kilos, promising short lives, illness  and impaired
> development. In 1989, fewer than one in  twenty infants born live
> weighed less than two kilos. Any  threat to peace Iraq might become is
> remote, far less than  that of many other nations and groups and cannot
> justify a  violent assault. An attack on Iraq will make attacks in
>  retaliation against the U.S. and governments which support  its
> actions far more probable for years to come.
> 
> George Bush proclaims Iraq a threat to the authority of  the United
> Nations while U.S.-coerced UN sanctions  continue to cause the death
> rate of the Iraqi people to  increase. Deaths caused by sanctions have
> been at  genocidal levels for twelve years. Iraq can only plead
>  helplessly for an end to this crime against its people.  The UN role
> in the sanctions against Iraq compromise and  stain the UN?s integrity
> and honor. This makes it all the  more important for the UN now to
> resist this war.
> 
> Inspections were used as an excuse to continue sanctions  for eight
> years while thousands of Iraqi children and  elderly died each month.
> Iraq is the victim of criminal  sanctions that should have been lifted
> in 1991. For every  person killed by terrorist acts in the U.S. on
> 9/11, five  hundred people have died in Iraq from sanctions.
> 
> It is the U.S. that threatens not merely the authority of  the United
> Nations, but its independence, integrity and  hope for effectiveness.
> The U.S. pays UN dues if, when and  in the amount it chooses. It
> coerces votes of members. It  coerces choices of personnel on the
> Secretariat. It  rejoined UNESCO to gain temporary favor after 18 years
> of  opposition to its very purposes. It places spies in UN  inspection
> teams.
> 
> The U.S. has renounced treaties controlling nuclear  weapons and their
> proliferation, voted against the  protocol enabling enforcement of the
> Biological Weapons  Convention, rejected the treaty banning land mines,
>  endeavored to prevent its creation and since to cripple  the
> International Criminal Court, and frustrated the  Convention on the
> Child and the prohibition against using  children in war. The U.S. has
> opposed virtually every  other international effort to control and
> limit war,  protect the environment, reduce poverty and protect
>  health.
> 
> George Bush cites two invasions of other countries by Iraq  during the
> last 22 years. He ignores the many scores of  U.S. invasions and
> assaults on other countries in Africa,  Asia, and the Americas during
> the last 220 years, and the  permanent seizure of lands from Native
> Americans and other  nations--lands like Florida, Texas, Arizona, New
> Mexico,  California, and Puerto Rico, among others, seized by force
>  and threat.
> 
> In the same last 22 years the U.S. has invaded, or  assaulted Grenada,
> Nicaragua, Libya, Panama, Haiti,  Somalia, Sudan, Iraq, Yugoslavia,
> Afghanistan and others  directly, while supporting assaults and
> invasions  elsewhere in Europe, Asia, Africa, and the Americas.
> 
> It is healthy to remember that the U.S. invaded and  occupied little
> Grenada in 1983 after a year of threats,  killing hundreds of civilians
> and destroying its small  mental hospital, where many patients died. In
> a surprise  attack on the sleeping and defenseless cities of Tripoli
>  and Benghazi in April 1986, the U.S. killed hundreds of  civilians and
> damaged four foreign embassies. It launched  21 Tomahawk cruise
> missiles against the El Shifa  pharmaceutical plant in Khartoum in
> August 1998,  destroying the source of half the medicines available to
>  the people of Sudan. For years it has armed forces in  Uganda and
> southern Sudan fighting the government of  Sudan. The U.S. has bombed
> Iraq on hundreds of occasions  since the Gulf War, including this week,
> killing hundreds  of people without a casualty or damage to an
> attacking  plane.
> 
> 4. Why Has George Bush Decided The U.S. Must Attack Iraq  Now?
> 
>   There is no rational basis to believe Iraq is a threat  to the United
> States, or any other country. The reason to  attack Iraq must be found
> elsewhere.
> 
> As governor of Texas, George Bush presided over scores of  executions,
> more than any governor in the United States  since the death penalty
> was reinstated in 1976 (after a  hiatus from 1967). He revealed the
> same zeal he has shown  for ?regime change? for Iraq when he oversaw
> the  executions of minors, women, retarded persons and aliens  whose
> rights under the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic  Relations of
> notification of their arrest to a foreign  mission of their nationality
> were violated. The Supreme  Court of the U.S. held that executions of a
> mentally  retarded person constitute cruel and unusual punishment in
>  violation of the U.S. Constitution. George Bush addresses  the United
> Nations with these same values and willfulness.
> 
> His motives may include to save a failing Presidency which  has
> converted a healthy economy and treasury surplus into  multi-trillion
> dollar losses; to fulfill the dream, which  will become a nightmare, of
> a new world order to serve  special interests in the U.S.; to settle a
> family grudge  against Iraq; to weaken the Arab nation, one people at a
>  time; to strike a Muslim nation to weaken Islam; to  protect Israel,
> or make its position more dominant in the  region; to secure control of
> Iraq?s oil to enrich U.S.  interests, further dominate oil in the
> region and control  oil prices. Aggression against Iraq for any of
> these  purposes is criminal and a violation of a great many
>  international conventions and laws including the General  Assembly
> Resolution on the Definition of Aggression of  December 14, 1974.
> 
> Prior regime changes by the U.S. brought to power among a  long list of
> tyrants, such leaders as the Shah of Iran,  Mobutu in the Congo,
> Pinochet in Chile, all replacing  democratically elected heads of
> government.  5. A Rational  Policy Intended to Reduce the Threat of
> Weapons of Mass  Destruction in The Middle East Must Include Israel.
> 
>   A UN or U.S. policy of selecting enemies of the U.S. for  attack is
> criminal and can only heighten hatred, division,  terrorism and lead to
> war.             The U.S. gives  Israel far more aid per capita than
> the total per capita  income of sub Sahara Africans from all sources.
>  U.S.-coerced sanctions have reduced per capita income for  the people
> of Iraq by 75% since 1989. Per capita income in  Israel over the past
> decade has been approximately 12  times the per capita income of
> Palestinians.
> 
> Israel increased its decades-long attacks on the  Palestinian people,
> using George Bush?s proclamation of  war on terrorism as an excuse, to
> indiscriminately destroy  cities and towns in the West Bank and Gaza
> and seize more  land in violation of international law and repeated
>  Security Council and General Assembly resolutions.
> 
> Israel has a stockpile of hundreds of nuclear warheads  derived from
> the United States, sophisticated rockets  capable of accurate delivery
> at distances of several  thousand kilometers, and contracts with the
> U.S. for joint  development of more sophisticated rocketry and other
> arms  with the U.S.
> 
> Possession of weapons of mass destruction by a single  nation in a
> region with a history of hostility promotes a  race for proliferation
> and war. The UN must act to reduce  and eliminate all weapons of mass
> destruction, not submit  to demands to punish areas of evil and enemies
> of the  superpower that possesses the majority of all such weapons  and
> capacity for their delivery.
> 
> Israel has violated and ignored more UN Resolutions for  forty years
> than any other nation. It has done so with  impunity.
> 
> The violation of Security Council resolutions cannot be  the basis for
> a UN-approved assault on any nation, or  people, in a time of peace, or
> the absence of a threat of  imminent attack, but comparable efforts to
> enforce  Security Council resolutions must be made against all  nations
> who violate them.
> 
>   6. The Choice Is War Or Peace.
> 
> The UN and the U.S. must seek peace, not war. An attack on  Iraq may
> open a Pandora?s box that will condemn the world  to decades of
> spreading violence. Peace is not only  possible; it is essential,
> considering the heights to  which science and technology have raised
> the human art of  planetary and self-destruction.
> 
> If George Bush is permitted to attack Iraq with or without  the
> approval of the UN, he will become Public Enemy Number  One--and the UN
> itself worse than useless, an accomplice  in the wars it was created to
> end. The Peoples of the  World then will have to find some way to begin
> again if  they hope to end the scourge of war.
> 
> This is a defining moment for the United Nations. Will it  stand
> strong, independent and true to its Charter,  international law and the
> reasons for its being, or will  it submit to the coercion of a
> superpower leading us  toward a lawless world and condone war against
> the cradle  of civilization?
> 
> Do not let this happen.
> 
> Sincerely,
> Ramsey Clark
> 
> Share this page with a friend
> 
> International Action Center  39 West 14th Street, Room 206
> New York, NY 10011 email: [log in to unmask]
> En Espanol: [log in to unmask]
> web: http://www.iacenter.org
> CHECK OUT SITE    http://www.mumia2000.org
> phone: 212 633-6646
> fax:   212 633-2889
> To make a tax-deductible donation,
> go to   http://www.peoplesrightsfund.org
> 
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> 
> To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface
> at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
> To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
> [log in to unmask]
> 
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface
at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
[log in to unmask]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~