Napalm in Fallujah

Remember in August of 2003 when the U.S. military admitted that they were using Napalm? Well, Randi Rhodes just said that they're using it again in Fallujah reports the Sunday Mirror.

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?'"

Napalm was banned in 1980 by a United Nations convention, but the U.S. did not sign the pact. Over a decade later, in 2001, the U.S. told the world that it destroyed the last of its Napalm arsenal. But it looks like they only got rid of Napalm-B.

What the military is now using is what they call: Mark-77 firebombs. According to this [Google cache here] Sydney Morning Herald article from August 8, 2003, the soldiers refer to the Mark-77 as Napalm because they are basically the same thing

Colonel Daily said that US stocks of Vietnam-era napalm had been phased out, but that the fuel-gel mixture in the Mark-77s had "similar destructive characteristics."

"Many folks (out of habit) refer to the Mark-77 as 'napalm' because its effect upon the target is remarkably similar," he said.

That's sort of like calling a tissue a Kleenex or a cotton swab a Q-Tip. They do the same thing.

I think we all know what Napalm does and I'd rather not post that image of the young Vietnamese girl running from her village as a result of a Napalm attack to reinforce how horrible this thing is. We are being forcefed lie after lie after lie.

Comments

[Ann Coffey]

The US use of napalm is reprehensible and illegal. Isn't it somewhat two-faced for the US to ostensibly attack a country that posed absolutely no threat to its own because it had WMD, only to go ahead and use them yourself?

I guess for the US the end justifies the means and the end is to control oil in the Middle East and protect Israel. The world outside the US seems to be largely awake. How come the Americans have allowed themselves to be so asleep and to have become so brainwashed that they believe the lies of the war criminals in the Bush administration?

[chase]

http://usinfo.state.gov/media/Archive_Index/Illegal_Weapons_in_Fallujah.html

Did the U.S. Use "Illegal" Weapons in Fallujah?
Media allegations claim the U.S. used outlawed weapons during combat in Iraq

The fighting in Fallujah, Iraq has led to a number of widespread myths including false charges that the United States is using chemical weapons such napalm and poison gas. None of these allegations are true.

Qatar-based Internet site Islam Online was one of the first to spread the false chemical weapons claim. On November 10, 2004, it reported that U.S. troops were allegedly using "chemical weapons and poisonous gas" in Fallujah. ("US Troops Reportedly Gassing Fallujah") It sourced this claim to Al-Quds Press, which cited only anonymous sources for its allegation.

The inaccurate Islam Online story has been posted on hundreds of Web sites.

On November 12, 2004, the U.S. Department of Defense issued a denial of the chemical weapons charge, stating:

"The United States categorically denies the use of chemical weapons at anytime in Iraq, which includes the ongoing Fallujah operation. Furthermore, the United States does not under any circumstance support or condone the development, production, acquisition, transfer or use of chemical weapons by any country. All chemical weapons currently possessed by the United States have been declared to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) and are being destroyed in the United States in accordance with our obligations under the Chemical Weapons Convention."

To its credit, Islam Online ran a Nov. 25, 2004, story carrying the U.S. denial.

In both stories, Islam Online noted that U.S. forces had used napalm-like incendiary weapons during the march to Baghdad in the spring of 2003. Although all napalm in the U.S. arsenal had been destroyed by 2001, Mark-77 firebombs, which have a similar effect to napalm, were used against enemy positions in 2003.

The repetition of this story on Islam Online’s led to further misinformation. Some readers did not distinguish between what had happened in the spring of 2003, during the march to Baghdad, and in Fallujah in November 2004. They mistakenly thought napalm-like weapons had been used in Fallujah, which is not true. No Mark-77 firebombs have been used in operations in Fallujah.

On Nov. 11, 2004, the Nov. 10 Islam Online story was reposted by the New York Transfer News Web site, with the inaccurate headline "Resistance Says US Using Napalm, Gas in Fallujah."

The headline was wrong in two ways. First, as explained above, Islam Online was incorrect in claiming that U.S. forces were using poison gas in Fallujah. Second, the New York Transfer News misread the Islam Online story to mean that U.S. forces were currently using napalm-like weapons in Fallujah. But Islam Online had never claimed this; it had only talked about napalm use in 2003.

The false napalm allegation then took on a life of its own. Further postings on the Internet repeated or recreated the error that the New York Transfer News had made, which eventually appeared in print media. For example, on Nov. 28, 2004, the UK’s Sunday Mirror inaccurately claimed U.S. forces were "secretly using outlawed napalm gas" in Fallujah.

The Sunday Mirror story was wrong in two ways.

First, napalm or napalm-like incendiary weapons are not outlawed. International law permits their use against military forces, which is how they were used in 2003.

Second, as noted above, no Mark-77 firebombs were used in Fallujah.

The Sunday Mirror’s phrasing "napalm gas" is also revealing. Napalm is a gel, not a gas. Why did the Sunday Mirror describe it as a gas?

It may be that, somewhere along the line, a sloppy reader read the inaccurate New York Transfer News headline, "Resistance Says US Using Napalm, Gas in Fallujah," and omitted the comma between napalm and gas, yielding the nonsensical "napalm gas."

Next, the Sunday Mirror’s misinformation about “napalm gas” was reported in identical articles on Nov. 28 by aljazeera.com and islamonline.com. These two Web sites, which are owned by the same company – Al Jazeera Publishing – are deceptive look-alike Web sites that masquerade as the English-language sites of the popular Qatar-based Arabic-language satellite television station al Jazeera and the popular Islam Online Web site, which is islamonline.net.

Finally, some news accounts have claimed that U.S. forces have used "outlawed" phosphorus shells in Fallujah. Phosphorus shells are not outlawed. U.S. forces have used them very sparingly in Fallujah, for illumination purposes. They were fired into the air to illuminate enemy positions at night, not at enemy fighters.

There is a great deal of misinformation feeding on itself about U.S. forces allegedly using "outlawed" weapons in Fallujah. The facts are that U.S. forces are not using any illegal weapons in Fallujah or anywhere else in Iraq.

[Andrew Clitheroe]

#Finally, some news accounts have claimed that U.S. forces have used "outlawed" phosphorus shells in Fallujah. Phosphorus shells are not outlawed. U.S. forces have used them very sparingly in Fallujah, for illumination purposes.#

I have on my computer documentary footage of the US deploying their 'illuminating' white phosphorous onto Fallujah. Note 'onto', not 'above'. Four consecutive aerial detonations raining a firestorm down onto unprotected civilians. There is also footage of the aftermath, showing grotesquely burned and disfigured bodies contorted in agony, their clothing miraculously untouched - the trademark effects of WP.

I'm curious: at what point does such behaviour become unacceptable? America has already killed far more innocent Iraqis than died in the WTC collapse, not to mention that Iraq had nothing to do with that horrific attack on your country - but that's OK, everyone knows one Arab is much the same as another, and isn't worth a whole American anyway. But when does it stop? When does the slaughter of innocents around the world cease to be justified by your paranoia? How many children have to drown in their own blood, flesh curling from their bones, before you say 'Ok, I think that's probably enough; we should try something different.'?

Your country has lost its way, my friend.

[albert]

some more info on white phosphorous via BooMan Tribune