Annual Fundraising Appeal
Over the course of 21 years, we’ve published many unflattering stories about Henry Kissinger. We’ve recounted his involvement in the Chilean coup and the illegal bombings of Cambodia and Laos; his hidden role in the Kent State massacre and the genocide in East Timor; his noxious influence peddling in DC and craven work for dictators and repressive regimes around the world. We’ve questioned his ethics, his morals and his intelligence. We’ve called for him to be arrested and tried for war crimes. But nothing we’ve ever published pissed off HK quite like this sequence of photos taken at a conference in Brazil, which appeared in one of the early print editions of CounterPunch.
100716HenryKissingerNosePicking
The publication of those photos, and the story that went with them, 20 years ago earned CounterPunch a global audience in the pre-web days and helped make our reputation as a fearless journal willing to take the fight to the forces of darkness without flinching. Now our future is entirely in your hands. Please donate.

Day12Fixed

Yes, these are dire political times. Many who optimistically hoped for real change have spent nearly five years under the cold downpour of political reality. Here at CounterPunch we’ve always aimed to tell it like it is, without illusions or despair. That’s why so many of you have found a refuge at CounterPunch and made us your homepage. You tell us that you love CounterPunch because the quality of the writing you find here in the original articles we offer every day and because we never flinch under fire. We appreciate the support and are prepared for the fierce battles to come.

Unlike other outfits, we don’t hit you up for money every month … or even every quarter. We ask only once a year. But when we ask, we mean it.

CounterPunch’s website is supported almost entirely by subscribers to the print edition of our magazine. We aren’t on the receiving end of six-figure grants from big foundations. George Soros doesn’t have us on retainer. We don’t sell tickets on cruise liners. We don’t clog our site with deceptive corporate ads.

The continued existence of CounterPunch depends solely on the support and dedication of our readers. We know there are a lot of you. We get thousands of emails from you every day. Our website receives millions of hits and nearly 100,000 readers each day. And we don’t charge you a dime.

Please, use our brand new secure shopping cart to make a tax-deductible donation to CounterPunch today or purchase a subscription our monthly magazine and a gift sub for someone or one of our explosive  books, including the ground-breaking Killing Trayvons. Show a little affection for subversion: consider an automated monthly donation. (We accept checks, credit cards, PayPal and cold-hard cash….)
cp-store

or use
pp1

To contribute by phone you can call Becky or Deva toll free at: 1-800-840-3683

Thank you for your support,

Jeffrey, Joshua, Becky, Deva, and Nathaniel

CounterPunch
 PO Box 228, Petrolia, CA 95558

When a Chemical Weapon is Not a Chemical Weapon

US War Crimes List Keeps Growing

by DAVE LINDORFF

Whether white phosphorus bombs–what American troops call "Willie Pete"–is a chemical weapon or an incendiary weapon, may not seem like a very important distinction to a casual observer. After all, what it does–burn flesh on contact and eat right down to the bone causing severe pain and, depending on what it eats through, death–is as cruel and vicious as any poison gas.

But it does matter to the Pentagon, and to the mainstream media that is covering the growing scandal of US military use of phosphorus bombs in the assault on Fallujah (and probably elsewhere in the Iraq War/Occupation).

Pentagon, State Department and White House officials, after first denying that phosphorus was used at all in Fallujah, when caught in their lie, finally admitted using the weapon, but insisted that it was only used against troops, not civilians (a lie), and that it is not a chemical weapon. The New York Times, which finally reported on the scandal on Monday, three separate times noted that phosphorus is an incindiary weapon, not a chemical weapon.

Why the fuss? Well, recall that the Bush/Cheney adminstration made use ad nauseum of how Saddam Hussein "used chemical weapons against his own people."

So how would it look if the bombs we are using against Iraqis were also chemical weapons?

It turns out, though, that what the Pentagon calls "chemical" arms depends on who’s using them.

An organization called Think Progress has uncovered a Pentagon document, formerly classified, from 1995 that calls phosphorus bombs "chemical weapons."

Titled "Possible Use of Phosphorous Chemical," the document says:

IRAQ HAS POSSIBLY EMPLOYED PHOSPHOROUS CHEMICAL WEAPONS AGAINST THE KURDISH POPULATION IN AREAS ALONG THE IRAQI-TURKISH-IRANIAN BORDERS. [...]

IN LATE FEBRUARY 1991, FOLLOWING THE COALITION FORCES’ OVERWHELMING VICTORY OVER IRAQ, KURDISH REBELS STEPPED UP THEIR STRUGGLE AGAINST IRAQI FORCES IN NORTHERN IRAQ. DURING THE BRUTAL CRACKDOWN THAT FOLLOWED THE KURDISH UPRISING, IRAQI FORCES LOYAL TO PRESIDENT SADDAM ((HUSSEIN)) MAY HAVE POSSIBLY USED WHITE PHOSPHOROUS (WP) CHEMICAL WEAPONS AGAINST KURDISH REBELS AND THE POPULACE IN ERBIL (GEOCOORD:3412N/04401E) (VICINITY OF IRANIAN BORDER) AND DOHUK (GEOCOORD:3652N/04301E) (VICINITY OF IRAQI BORDER) PROVINCES, IRAQ.

So let’s go with chemical arms as we continue to look at this latest war crime by the U.S. against the people of Iraq.

Yet another impeachable crime–this time a crime against humanity–by the dynamic duo occupying the White House.

And whiile we’re on the matter of Pentagon lies regarding phosphorus bomb use, let’s look at another Pentagon claim: that there’s nothing illegal about the weapon.

In fact, an instruction manual used by the U.S. Army Command and General Staff School (CGSC) at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, tells senior officers it is against the "laws of war" to fire the incendiary weapon at human targets. This document, first disclosed by the UK Independent, reports that the Army manual "makes clear that white phosphorus can be used to produce a smoke screen, but that ‘It is against the law of land warfare to employ WP [white phosphorous] against personnel targets.’"

So besides being a war crime, this is also a US crime.

In all of this, it needs to be recalled that the US fall-back claim that it "only" used phosphorus bombs against insurgents has to be held up against the reality that the US military, in Iraq in general and in the Fallujah assault in particular, considers all Iraqi males of "combat age" (read that 12 or 14 and up) to be the enemy under Pentagon "rules of engagement." In Fallujah, it was widely reported that the US, after encircling the city in preparation for its assault, refused to allow such Iraqi males to leave the doomed city and left them to their fate as the assault began (a war crime, since under the rules of war anyone, inclulding combatants, must be allowed to surrender and leave the field of battle)–an assault that included the use of phosphorus bombs.

Even so, Iraqi government sources say 5-6000 civilians were killed in the US attack on Fallujah a year ago. That’s a terrible toll, but in fact, the real figure is surely higher and will never be known. Hospitals were deliberately bombed at the outset (yet another war crime), and others were occupied by US troops. Bodies of the dead were bulldozed away after the battle ended as well, and many were in any event so thoroughly destroyed–and left to roaming dogs–as to never be recoverable or identifiable.

Such is this "noble effort" of our commander-in-chief.

DAVE LINDORFF is the author of Killing Time: an Investigation into the Death Row Case of Mumia Abu-Jamal. His new book of CounterPunch columns titled "This Can’t be Happening!" is published by Common Courage Press. Information about both books and other work by Lindorff can be found at www.thiscantbehappening.net.

He can be reached at: dlindorff@yahoo.com