IOC investigation of age cheating by Chinese gymmasts

[StillGreen]

<p>Author: Andreas Zumach
Original in German at [taz.de</a> - Archiv](<a href=“http://www.taz.de/pt/2002/12/18/a0049.nf/text]taz.de”>USA zensieren Irak-Bericht - taz.de)
Translator: Anu de Monterice</p>

<p>USA CENSORS IRAQ REPORT </p>

<p>Germany and the other non-permanent members of the UN Security Council received only a truncated version of the weapons dossier. Data concerning foreign suppliers of Iraq are missing. </p>

<p>Geneva: The 10 non-permanent members of the UN Security Council–to which Germany will belong starting in January–have been withheld substantial parts of the Iraqi arms report. All information about the supplies from–and the support of–foreign companies, research labs and governments from the mid-1970’s on, related to Iraqi arms programs, have been deleted. The 5 permanent Council members, the USA, Russia, China, France and Great Britain, are aware of this censorship. According to the German Press Agency DPA, it has reduced the 12,00 page report to only 3000 pages. </p>

<p>From information gathered from UN diplomats of 2 of these 5 countries taz learned that the censorship was agreed on primarily upon the urging of the United States. Among the 5 constant members of the Security Council it was the USA that stood out by giving the strongest support to Saddam Hussain’s regime by arming it with the means of mass destruction. </p>

<p>The report gives us a complete overview of these supplies for the first time. In particular it names the 24 US companies and when and to whom in Iraq the supplies were delivered. And it makes clear how strongly the Reagan and the first Bush administrations supported the arming of Iraq, from 1980 up to the Gulf conflict of 1990/91. Substantial construction units for the Iraqi nuclear weapon and rocket programs were supplied with permission of the government in Washington. The poison Anthrax for the arming of Iraq with biological weapons stemmed from US laboratories. Iraqi military and armament experts were trained in the US and there received know-how having to do with their domestic arms programs. </p>

<p>According to the estimation of Susan Wright, a US arms-control expert from the University of Michigan, publication of this information would be “especially embarassing for the USA.” It would “remind people in the USA of a very dark chapter, which the Bush administration would prefer to forget about.” Whether the US had already struck out this information before it made copies for the other 4 permanent Council members continues to be unclear. </p>

<p>The full list of arms suppliers to Iraq, as published by the taz on 12/19/02, can be found at [taz.de</a> - Archiv](<a href=“http://www.taz.de/pt/2002/12/19/a0080.nf/textdruck]taz.de”>USA - taz.de) </p>

<p>Legend used in this list: </p>

<p>A = nuclear program,
B = bioweapons program,
C = chemical weapons program,
R = rocket program,
K = conventional weapons, military logistics, supplies at the Iraqi Defense Ministry and the building of military plants. </p>

<p>US CORPORATIONS </p>

<p>1 Honeywell (R, K)
2 Spectra Physics (K)
3 Semetex (R)
4 TI Coating (A, K)
5 Unisys (A, K)
6 Sperry Corp. (R, K)
7 Tektronix (R, A)
8 Rockwell (K)
9 Leybold Vacuum Systems (A)
10 Finnigan-MAT-US (A)
11 Hewlett-Packard (A, R, K)
12 Dupont (A)
13 Eastman Kodak (R)
14 American Type Culture Collection (B)
15 Alcolac International (C)
16 Consarc (A)
17 Carl Zeiss - U.S (K)
18 Cerberus (LTD) (A)
19 Electronic Associates (R)
20 International Computer Systems (A, R, K)
21 Bechtel (K)
22 EZ Logic Data Systems, Inc. (R)
23 Canberra Industries Inc. (A)
24 Axel Electronics Inc. (A) </p>

<p>In addition to these 24 companies home-based in the USA are 50 subsidiaries of foreign enterprises which conducted their arms business with Iraq from within the US. Also designated as suppliers for Iraq’s arms programs (A, B, C & R) are the US Ministries of Defense, Energy, Trade and Agriculture as well as the Lawrence Livermore, Los Alamos and Sandia National Laboratories. </p>

<p>CHINA </p>

<p>1 China Wanbao Engineering Company (A, C, K)
2 Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd (K)
3 China State Missile Company (R) </p>

<p>FRANCE </p>

<p>1 Commissariat a lEnergie Atomique (A)
2 Sciaky (A)
3 Thomson CSF (A, K)
4 Aerospatiale and Matra Espace (R)
5 Cerbag (A)
6 Protec SA (C)
7 Thales Group (A)
8 Societ</p>

[coolweather]

<p>

All information about the supplies from–and the support of–foreign companies, research labs and governments from the mid-1970’s on, related to Iraqi arms programs, have been deleted.

</p>

<p>

And it makes clear how strongly the Reagan and the first Bush administrations supported the arming of Iraq, from 1980 up to the Gulf conflict of 1990/91.

</p>

<p>You mixed up the two wars. The Gulf war and the second Iraq war are different. The articles you mentioned are out of context. Everyone knows that the US supported Iraq to fight against Iran before the Gulf war in 1990. And the US was not the only country that supported Iraq before that war. The Soviet Union, France, Egypt, and China also supported Iraq. After the Gulf war, Iraq agreed with the UN to live in peace with the world. Unfortunately, China continued to sell weapons to Iraq. This is the WMD program that led to the Iraq war in 2003 that people talk about here. I am not sure what you are trying to say here.</p>

[StillGreen]

<p>“You mixed up the two wars.”</p>

<p>I didn’t, but W. Bush et al did it on purpose. They were desperate to find anything in support of the WMD accusations. The older stockpiles may have done the trick.</p>

<p>“I am not sure what you are trying to say here.”</p>

<p>Among other things, the US government censors as much info as it has wanted to and the War on Iraq isn’t about some WMD which were never found.</p>

[F.O.LTS]

<p>Detour sorry.</p>

<p>Energy security is driving a frantic China to make all kinds of radical moves in foreign countries.</p>

<p>The US just finished construction on it’s 104 acre Baghdad Embassy–serving it’s eight permanent military bases in Iraq. Protecting US energy security is a priority, obviously. The real questions is: Why can’t the administration explain this to the US public? Why feed us so much pablum about “WMD” and “withdrawal”?</p>

<p>[Think</a> Progress PHOTOS: The $592 Million U.S. Embassy In Iraq](<a href=“http://thinkprogress.org/2007/05/29/photos-embassy-iraq/]Think”>http://thinkprogress.org/2007/05/29/photos-embassy-iraq/)</p>

[coolweather]

<p>StillGreen - The US did not need to find WMD to go to the Gulf war. The US only went to the Gulf war with a coalition of 34 countries in 1990 after Iraq invaded Kuwait. The coalition was authorized by the UN.
The WMD issue with Saddam Hussein supported by China in the Iraq war in 2003 was not ignored by the US Congress. Read here <a href=“http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2006_rpt/srpt109-331.pdf[/url]”>http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2006_rpt/srpt109-331.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

[coolweather]

<p>F.O.LTS - We need a government that can effectively deal with China.</p>

[StillGreen]

<p>coolweather, it seems that you are mixing up the 2 wars. My post #283 only addressed War on Iraq, the second Gulf War. And W. Bush didn’t need the WMD excuse to invade Iraq afterall. The US is the largest arms dealer of the entire planet followed by Russia. We actually need a government to effectively deal with our own military enterprises. China is mild in comparison.</p>

[StillGreen]

<p>F.O.LTS, it is far easier to sell “good” versus “bad”. Obviously, some of us still believe in the WMD lie. And nobody including the US wanted to start WWIII, well not yet, not even Russia in Georgia.</p>

[coolweather]

<h1>287

My post #283 only addressed War on Iraq, the second Gulf War.

</h1>

<p>I am baffled. I don’t understand how post #281 talking about the 1990 Gulf War was trangressed to post #283 talking about the 2003 Iraq war.</p>

<p>

We actually need a government to effectively deal with our own military enterprises. China is mild in comparison.

</p>

<p>Wow! Did the US supply weapons to Sudanese government to kill people in Darfur now?</p>

<p>[BBC</a> NEWS | Africa | China ‘is fuelling war in Darfur’](<a href=“http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7503428.stm]BBC”>BBC NEWS | Africa | China 'is fuelling war in Darfur')</p>

<p>

The BBC has found the first evidence that China is currently helping Sudan’s government militarily in Darfur. </p>

<p>The Panorama TV programme tracked down Chinese army lorries in the Sudanese province that came from a batch exported from China to Sudan in 2005. </p>

<p>The BBC was also told that China was training fighter pilots who fly Chinese A5 Fantan fighter jets in Darfur. </p>

<p>China’s government has declined to comment on the BBC’s findings, which contravene a UN arms embargo on Darfur. </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>[Oil</a> for China, Guns for Darfur](<a href=“Bloomberg - Are you a robot?”>Bloomberg - Are you a robot?)

China’s thirst for oil is causing bloodshed. So says New York-based nongovernmental organization Human Rights First, which on Mar. 13 released a report linking China’s rising imports of Sudanese oil with sales of Chinese small weapons to Khartoum, used to further the deadly conflict in the western region of Darfur. The report is part of a broader campaign called Made in China: Stop Arms Sales to Sudan, timed to coincide with the runup to the Beijing Olympics in August. “China’s huge appetite for oil from Sudan filled Khartoum’s coffers, enabling Sudan to buy Chinese arms,” says Betsy Apple, a Human Rights First program director and author of the report. “It’s a toxic oil-for-arms relationship.” Apple says the group is calling for China to halt arms sales to Sudan immediately.

</p>

[coolweather]

<h1>288

Obviously, some of us still believe in the WMD lie.

</h1>

<p>If I were in charge I would not send our troops to Iraq regardless whether Iraq had WMD or not. I would spend my effort to stop China from manipulating the world. China is the force behind North Korea, Iraq, Iran, and Darfur.</p>

[owlice]

<p>I’m waiting for the link between the Gulf Wars, Russia, and Darfur to the topic this thread is about… who wants to go first?</p>

[coolweather]

<p>owlice - Here we go</p>

<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/parent-cafe/560379-china-russia-us-presidential-candidates-darfur-georgia.html#post1060935570[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/parent-cafe/560379-china-russia-us-presidential-candidates-darfur-georgia.html#post1060935570&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

[StillGreen]

<p>“I am baffled. I don’t understand how post #281 talking about the 1990 Gulf War was trangressed to post #283 talking about the 2003 Iraq war.”</p>

<p>The reason that W. Bush et al were so confident to start the second Gulf War even before finding the so-called “smoking gun”, was the older stockpile of WMD already supplied to Iraq by the US and other countries. WMD used to refer to nuclear weapons and it was conveniently extended to biological and chemical weapons here so that they can use the WMD excuse.</p>

<p>“Wow! Did the US supply weapons to Sudanese government to kill people in Darfur now?”</p>

<p>So it was okay for the US to supply WMD, when Iraq was a hitman for the US in the war against Iran and it suddenly became a crime when Iraq was no longer “obedient”? Give me a break. Let’s see how some US weapons excel in killing civilians and even jeapardizing our own soldiers.</p>

<p>“DU is implicated in respiratory and kidney problems, rashes and, longer-term, bone cancer, as well as damaged reproductive and neurological systems. Iraqi civilians – many more than the 100,000 who died in the conflict or as a result of the war – also suffer from a range of similar health problems. Families of soldiers should be very worried. A huge amount of ordnance has already been unleashed in Iraq, and there is no way of knowing how many thousands of tons of depleted uranium will find “permanent storage” in the rubble of Iraq, its soil and the bodies of its people and U.S. occupying forces.” [Uranium Warheads May Leave Both Sides a Legacy of Death for Decades By Susanna Hecht - March 30, 2003]
[Uranium</a> Warheads May Leave Both Sides a Legacy of Death for Decades - Los Angeles Times](<a href=“http://www.latimes.com/la-oe-hecht30mar30,0,6100057.story]Uranium”>Uranium Warheads May Leave Both Sides a Legacy of Death for Decades)</p>

<p>“The Persian Gulf war was the first major use of DU in combat… Although warnings were issued to refrain from DU use the U.S. Marines fired DU munitions on three separate occasions during 1995 and 1996 while conducting operations in Okinawa and then did not tell the Japanese Government for some time. During 1995 the U.S. military also fired approximately 10000 rounds of DU munitions during battle in Serbia. Recently U.S. forces fired over 31000 rounds of 30 mm DU munitions during 100 missions into Kosovo or inner Serbia. DU munitions have been fired on ranges in Indiana, Nevada, New Mexico, Florida, Maryland, and this past year on Vieques in Puerto Rico. The incident in Puerto Rico involved the deliberate use of DU in preparation for combat in Kosovo. Although DU use is prohibited except during combat, the Navy fired at least 258 rounds in Vieques. Navy personnel have reported that the Navy has been firing DU into Vieques for years but this was the first time they were caught.” [Depleted Uranium: Uses and Hazards By Doug Rokke - January 21, 2001]
[Depleted</a> Uranium: Uses and Hazards, by Doug Rokke, 2001](<a href=“http://www.ratical.org/radiation/DUuse+hazard.html]Depleted”>Depleted Uranium: Uses and Hazards, by Doug Rokke, 2001)</p>

<p>“2003 Iraq ----- The US and UK used nearly 13,000 cluster munitions containing an estimated 1.8 to 2 million submunitions in the three weeks of major combat. 2001- 2002 Afghanistan ----- The US dropped 1,228 cluster bombs containing 248,056 submunitions. 1999 Yugoslavia (including Serbia, Montenegro, and Kosovo) ----- The US, UK, and Netherlands dropped 1,765 cluster bombs containing 295,000 submunitions…” [Timeline of Cluster Munition Use By Human Rights Watch - May 2008]
<a href=“http://www.hrw.org/pub/2008/arms/Timeline_Cluster_Use_05.08.pdf[/url]”>http://www.hrw.org/pub/2008/arms/Timeline_Cluster_Use_05.08.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>“Cluster bombs have killed and injured thousands of civilians during the last 40 years and continue to do so today. They cause widespread harm on impact and yet remain dangerous, killing and injuring civilians long after a conflict has ended. One third of all recorded cluster munitions casualties are children. 60% of cluster bomb casualties are injured while undertaking their normal activities… Air-dropped or ground-launched, they cause two major humanitarian problems and risks to civilians. First, their widespread dispersal means they cannot distinguish between military targets and civilians so the humanitarian impact can be extreme, especially when the weapon is used in or near populated areas. Many submunitions fail to detonate on impact and become de facto antipersonnel mines killing and maiming people long after the conflict has ended. These duds are more lethal than antipersonnel mines; incidents involving submunition duds are much more likely to cause death than injury…” [Cluster Munition Coalition]
[Cluster</a> Munition Coalition - The Problem](<a href=“404 | CMC”>404 | CMC)</p>

<p>“If I were in charge I would not send our troops to Iraq regardless whether Iraq had WMD or not. I would spend my effort to stop China from manipulating the world. China is the force behind North Korea, Iraq, Iran, and Darfur.”</p>

<p>If you were in charge, I hope you would spend the effort to clean up the mess our own country left behind, before pointing your fingers at others. :-)</p>

[Canuckguy]

<p>

I knew many high rank officers in the Bush admin disagreed and left via US TVs, newspapers. The dissidents published a lot of books too. They would have been in jail if they were in China. And I criticize the administration and they do nothing to me. US Republicans freely criticized Bill Clinton. Obama, Clinton and the US democrats freely criticize the Bush administration. Can you criticize the China Communist Party in Beijing or Hong Kong?

</p>

<p>I repeat. It is never wise to openly oppose government policy, especially one that is obviously vindictive. If the military MP is not sufficient warning, the case of Ambassador Joe Wilson should. The reason they did not come after you is because you have no credibility in the eyes of other Americans. They may already have started a dossier on you that we don’t know about.</p>

<p>Some years ago I heard the story, or urban legend, of this Yale Law student, who seemed to have something to say about everything. One day when the class discussion came to abortion, he was totally silent. When ask about it after class, his reply was that he did not want to say anything that will jeopardize his future someday.</p>

<p>Here is a kid that is mature beyond his years.</p>

<p>

I’m waiting for the link between the Gulf Wars, Russia, and Darfur to the topic this thread is about… who wants to go first?

</p>

<p>You are naughty.</p>

[BunsenBurner]

<p>KING5 TV reported that China was stripped of its team Olympic medal .</p>

[missypie]

<p>That is exciting, but I sure wish it had been the 2008 team!!!</p>

<p>

The bronze medal salvages what had been a disappointing Olympics for the U.S. women. The squad - Amy Chow, Jamie Dantzscher, Dominique Dawes, Kristin Maloney, Elise Ray and Tasha Schwikert - left Sydney empty-handed, the only time since 1976 the American women had failed to win a single Olympic medal.

</p>

<p>How cool would that be - I bet some of these ladies have kids by now who will think it is great for mom to get an Olympic medal!</p>

[Bromfield]

<p>[::</a> USA Gymnastics :: Women’s Artistic Gymnastics](<a href=“http://www.usa-gymnastics.org/post.php?PostID=5280&prog=w]::”>http://www.usa-gymnastics.org/post.php?PostID=5280&prog=w)</p>

[LakeWashington]

<p>Cheaters never win [do they?].</p>

[missypie]

<p>I think they did win in 2008…by then the government had learned to alter the passport records and birth certificates.</p>