A pact between UN and weapons industry

The UN has a pact with the weapons industry: ‘We give you a mandate to destroy Libya by using bombs of Depleted Uranium if you are funding us and give us extra money to clean up the Depleted Uranium.’

Photo: victim of Depleted Uranium


Libya was 5.000 times bombed with an UN-mandate. Bombs with Depleted Uranium.

Depleted Uranium (DU) can cause kidney damage, cancers of the lung and bone, skin disorders, neurocognitive disorders, chromosome damage, immune deficiency syndromes and rare kidney and bowel diseases. Pregnant women exposed to DU may give birth to infants with genetic defects. Once the dust has vaporized, don’t expect the problem to go away soon. As an alpha particle emitter, DU has a half life of 4.5 billion years.

A University of Michigan peer-reviewed study of births in Fallujah (Iraq) published in December 2010 found that of 547 births in Fallujah General Hospital in May of 2010, six years after the all-out US assault on that city of 300,000, in which DU weapons were reportedly used widely, 15% of babies had birth defects–a rate more than five times higher than the global average of 2-3%.

We sent this information to: embassy.afghanistan, embassy.irak, embassy.liban, embassy.rwanda, acrimeagainsthumanity, embassy.burundi, embassy.togo, angola.embassy, embassy.madagascar, Redazione Alta italia TV, embassy.Liechtenstein, zhou.zhichengChineseGovern​ment, chinese.embassy, russian.embassy,

Save our world !

Tags: , , , , ,

5 Reacties to “A pact between UN and weapons industry”

  1. kruitvat Says:

    Arms industry
    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    The arms industry is a global industry and business which manufactures and sells weapons and military technology and equipment. It comprises government and commercial industry involved in research, development, production, and service of military material, equipment and facilities. Arms producing companies, also referred to as defence companies or military industry, produce arms mainly for the armed forces of states. Departments of government also operate in the arms industry, buying and selling weapons, munitions and other military items. Products include guns, ammunition, missiles, military aircraft, military vehicles, ships, electronic systems, and more. The arms industry also conducts significant research and development.
    It is estimated that yearly, over 1.5 trillion dollars are spent on military expenditures worldwide (2.7% of World GDP). Part of this goes to the procurement of military hardware and services from the military industry. The combined arms sales of the top 100 largest arms producing companies amounted to an estimated $315 billion in 2006. In 2004 over $30 billion were spent in the international arms trade (a figure that excludes domestic sales of arms). The arms trade has also been one of the sectors impacted by the credit crunch, with total deal value in the market halving from US$32.9bn to US$14.3bn in 2008. Many industrialized countries have a domestic arms industry to supply their own military forces. Some countries also have a substantial legal or illegal domestic trade in weapons for use by its citizens. An illegal trade in small arms is prevalent in many countries and regions affected by political instability.
    Contracts to supply a given country’s military are awarded by the government, making arms contracts of substantial political importance. The link between politics and the arms trade can result in the development of what US President Dwight D. Eisenhower described as a military-industrial-congressional complex, where the armed forces, commerce, and politics become closely linked. The European defence procurement is more or less analogous to the U.S. military-industrial complex. Various corporations, some publicly held, others private, bid for these contracts, which are often worth many billions of dollars. Sometimes, such as the contract for the new Joint Strike Fighter, a competitive tendering process takes place, where the decision is made on the merits of the design submitted by the companies involved. Other times, no bidding or competition takes place.
    In the Cold War Era, arms exports were used by both the Soviet Union and the United States to influence their standings in other countries, particularly Third World Countries. Since the fall of the Soviet Union, global arms exports initially fell slightly, but have since 2003 grown again, and now come close to Cold War levels.

    World’s largest defense budgets

    This is a list of the ten countries with the highest defence budgets for the year 2010, which is $1.22 trillion or 76% of total world expenditures. The information is from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. Total world spending amounted to $1.63 trillion USD in 2010.
    Rank Country Spending ($ b.) World Share (%) % of GDP, 2010
    — World Total 1630 100 —
    1 United States 698.0 42.8 4.8
    2 China 119.0a 7.3a 2.1
    3 United Kingdom 59.6 3.7 2.7
    4 France 59.3 3.6 2.3
    5 Russia 58.7a 3.6a 4.0
    6 Japan 54.5 3.3 1.0
    7 Germany 45.2 2.8 1.3
    8 Saudi Arabia 45.2 2.8 10.4
    9 India 41.3 2.5 2.7
    10 Italy 37.0 1.8 2.7

  2. kruitvat Says:

    Arms industry
    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (2)

    World’s largest arms exporters

    The unit in this table are so-called trend indicator values expressed in millions of US dollars at 1990s prices. These values do not represent real financial flows but are a crude instrument to estimate volumes of arms transfers, regardless of the contracted prices, which can be as low as zero in the case of military aid. Ordered by descending 2000-2009 values. The information is from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute.
    2001-10 Rank Supplier 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
    1 United States 5908 5229 5698 6866 6700 7453 8003 6288 6658 8641
    2 Russia 5896 5705 5236 6178 5134 5095 5426 5953 5575 6039
    3 Germany 850 916 1713 1105 2080 2567 3194 2500 2432 2340
    4 France 1297 1368 1345 2219 1724 1643 2432 1994 1865 834
    5 United Kingdom 1368 1068 741 1316 1039 855 1018 982 1022 1054
    6 China 499 509 665 292 303 597 430 586 1000 1423
    7 Netherlands 203 239 342 209 583 1187 1326 530 545 503
    8 Sweden 880 191 526 314 538 432 366 454 383 806
    9 Italy 216 426 341 212 774 502 684 417 514 627
    10 Israel 407 436 368 628 368 299 438 281 807 472
    11 Ukraine 700 311 442 200 290 553 728 330 320 201
    12 Spain 7 120 150 56 108 843 590 610 998 513
    13 Switzerland 193 157 181 243 246 285 301 482 255 137
    14 Canada 129 170 263 265 226 226 334 227 169 258
    15 South Korea 165 N/A 100 29 48 94 220 80 163 95

    World’s largest arms importers

    The unit in this table are so-called trend indicator values expressed in millions of US dollars. These values do not represent real financial flows but are a crude instrument to estimate volumes of arms transfers, regardless of the contracted prices, which can be as low as zero in the case of military aid.
    Current Rank Importer 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
    1 India 911 1242 1872 2802 2227 1036 1257 2179 1810 2116 3337
    2 Singapore 622 220 235 88 384 543 52 368 1123 1729 1078
    3 Malaysia 30 26 131 135 48 51 410 546 541 1494 411
    4 Greece 710 725 491 2241 1528 389 598 1796 563 1269 703
    5 South Korea 1262 623 461 680 986 686 1650 1758 1821 1172 1131
    6 Pakistan 158 397 533 592 385 332 262 613 939 1146 493
    7 Algeria 418 553 237 197 272 156 308 471 1518 942 791
    8 United States 301 449 453 533 512 501 581 731 808 831 893
    9 Australia 364 1191 647 798 505 470 682 629 380 757 1677
    10 Turkey 1170 553 1009 438 187 1005 422 585 578 675 468
    11 Saudi Arabia 80 59 555 159 1161 148 185 64 115 626 787
    12 United Arab Emirates 243 186 213 695 1246 2198 2026 938 748 604 493
    13 People’s Republic of China 2015 3366 2819 2207 3080 3511 3831 1474 1481 595 559
    14 Norway 263 148 92 4 6 14 469 494 536 576 205
    15 Indonesia 171 27 63 398 82 31 58 577 241 452 198

  3. kruitvat Says:

    In 100 days, Libya was 5.000 times bombed with bombs of Depleted Uranium. The UN gave a mandate for these bombings…



    November 24th, 2009 • A parliamentary majority today voted to support a proposal from the SP for a temporary ban on the use of weapons containing depleted uranium and heavy metals. SP Member of Parliament Harry Van Bommel explains: “The SP has long argued for a ban on these weapons, which have caused enormous suffering amongst ordinary civilians, including children, in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere. In view of Parliament’s vote, the government must now take active steps to persuade the Americans and the British to accept a moratorium on these weapons. The SP believes that such a move would lead eventually to a total ban.”

    A picture from a 2003 edition of the SP’s monthly magazine, Tribune. Depleted uranium continues to create thousands of victims. Photo: Geert van Kesteren/HH

    Depleted uranium (DU) is used by US and British troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. Weapons containing it are radioactive, and though the radioactivity level is relatively low, the material continues to give off radiation for many years. Munitions are equipped with DU to, for example, enable them to penetrate armoured cars and tanks. Researchers confirm that they are responsible for massive and widespread health problems amongst civilians, including children contaminated while playing on burnt-out tanks. Harry van Bommel’s SP colleague in Parliament, Krista van Velzen has fought for many years against the use of these weapons. As long ago as 2004 she attempted to persuade the AFMP, the soldiers’ union, to get rid of all munitions enriched with uranium and has since organised numerous expert meetings, including a conference in Parliament itself. Describing the parliamentary vote as “an enormous step forwards,” Van Velzen said: “The government has fought tooth and nail to avoid having to speak out to the Americans, British and others on this. Parliament has now pronounced. to the effect that the Dutch government must make efforts on the international stage to bring about a moratorium. I’ll be holding them to it.”

    In addition to a halt on the use of DU weapons, Parliament also backed a demand for a similar moratorium on armaments containing heavy metals. The UN Goldstone Commission’s recent report on the war on Gaza report noted that this sort of weapon, in this case containing the heavy metal tungsten, had been used by Israel. In common with DU, these weapons carry disproportionate consequences for the civilian population.


  4. kruitvat Says:

    In 100 days, Libya was 5.000 times bombed with bombs of Depleted Uranium. The UN gave a mandate for these bombings…



    March 31st, 2011 • SP Member of Parliament Harry van Bommel today spoke out against the Dutch military contribution into the enforcement of the no fly zone over Libya. ‘We are in favour of a ‘no fly zone’, he said, ‘but this has already been achieved. The first goal of the UN resolution which led to all of this was a cease-fire, but this is moving more and more towards participation in a war, with a military victory the sole target. Our intention is to see a return to the main point of the resolution, which was a cease-fire.’

    Last week the government decided to contribute militarily to the enforcement of the no fly zone and the arms embargo on Libya declared by the UN. Van Bommel was already describing this double decision as a step on the way to an armed intervention, “My suspicions were confirmed,” he says, “and within a week the mission had already been broadened. There was open discussion of the possibility of providing the insurgents with weapons. This isn’t how you enforce a no fly zone, or how you protect Libyan civilians, but participation in a civil war.”

    The SP foreign affairs spokesman also expressed his concerns over the disappearance of the original goal of UN resolution 1973, which was an immediate cease-fire. “By so clearly taking sides, the chance of dialogue between the parties is reduced. Nor do massive air attacks help in this. The rebels expect shortly to be armed by the coalition and a number of countries, including the United States, have stated that they are prepared to do this. The international action is thus encouraging the insurgents and steering them in fact towards a hopeless war.”

    In today’s speech Van Bommel also argued for a return to the original aim of the cease-fire. “The no fly zone has been enforced and if Gaddafi again moves towards Benghazi or any other town with a view to attacking it, the means are on hand to protect the people from this dangerous dictator. For this reason the SP, as things stand, advocates restraint. “It may seem a long way off,” Van Bommel continued, “but the only way to avoid a long-lasting, hopeless war, is to get the parties to the conflict around the table. That’s why to promote a cease-fire is the only way forward.”


  5. kruitvat Says:


    June 23rd, 2011 • SP Member of Parliament Harry van Bommel is urging that the bombing of Libya be stopped. ‘An immediate cease-fire in order to enable humanitarian aid to be offered must be the overture to a solution to this war,’ he says. The Dutch government wants to offer three months support to the NATO countries which are bombing Libya. ‘In the last three months hundreds of cruise missiles have been fired and some 4,400 targets have been bombed from the air,’ Says Van Bommel. ‘That goes much further than UN Security Council Resolution 1973 permits.’ Meanwhile, in Strasbourg, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe is also calling for a cease-fire.

    Van Bommel stresses that back in March the SP welcomed the UN Resolution. A Dutch contribution to the enforcement of the arms embargo and no-fly zone was rejected because it quickly became clear that the countries who were carrying out the Resolution by violent means were failing to do so in a proportionate fashion. “Our judgment in March was that this operation was out of all proportion and that it would not be effective to carry out the Resolution in such a manner, a judgement which has since been shown to be sound.”

    The fervently hoped for Arab contribution to this war was as it turned out offered by only a very few countries. The mission in Libya was intended to give support to the Arab spring, but only the UAE, Jordan and Qatar are taking part in the war in Libya. As Van Bommel points out, “these are countries where political reforms are also needed and must be forced through, countries of which democratisation has also been demanded and where it has not occurred.”

    The Dutch government has this year only a limited budget for operations abroad. With the €15 million that this operation will have cost by September, that budget will be exhausted. What this means, Van Bommel says, is that “no follow up in the form of a genuine peacekeeping operation can be paid for out of this budget, which shows that taking part in the bombing raids was clearly a choice, and a bad one.”

    Because the Gadhafi regime met the uprising of the Libyan people with such so violence, UN Resolution 1973 was adopted on 17th March, its primary aim being an immediate cease-fire and a complete end to all attacks against civilians. Yet the demand for a cease-fire has been forgotten and the war could turn out to be lengthy, with all that implies. “Italy,” says Van Bommel, “the country from which many of the bombing raids have been conducted, now finds that a cease-fire is needed. This offers a real chance for a political solution to this war.”
    The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE), which is currently meeting to discuss the situation in the North Africa-Middle East region, has also come out in favour of a cease-fire, and has asked the Arab League to declare its support.

    SP Senate leader Tiny Kox, who is also chair of the United Left political group in PACE – an assembly in which every parliament in Europe is represented – says that ‘the warring parties in Libya must now stack their weapons and NATO should suspend its bombing campaign. International observers should supervise the enforcement of a cease-fire. Most political groups are in agreement that the violence must stop and a peaceful solution be given a chance. Continuing the violence would be a dead-end, for everyone. The NATO bombing was originally seen as part of the solution, a way of keeping Gadhafi’s air force on the ground. But the raids have now become a part of the problem, targeting everything and anything and causing ever more civilian casualties.

    In Syria too the violent attacks by President Assad’s forces against the population, which have been going on for months, must end. “More than a thousand dead, ten thousand imprisoned, and thousands forced to flee, and millions of Syrian citizens who want peace, security and democracy,” says Kox. “In Syria there’s no question of military intervention, yet there is a great need for international solidarity with the organisations which are trying to coordinate resistance. In contact with these groups, it has been impressed on me how important such solidarity is to them at this time.”

    Kox and his colleagues in the United Left group are urging that observers, journalists and international aid workers be given access to Syria and Libya, and that European countries offer assistance to Tunisia, Egypt and Turkey in coping with the flow of refugees. “These countries should be complimented for offering shelter to people fleeing violence in their own countries, and in this they deserve our support,” he says.


Geef een reactie

Vul je gegevens in of klik op een icoon om in te loggen.

WordPress.com logo

Je reageert onder je WordPress.com account. Log uit /  Bijwerken )

Google photo

Je reageert onder je Google account. Log uit /  Bijwerken )


Je reageert onder je Twitter account. Log uit /  Bijwerken )

Facebook foto

Je reageert onder je Facebook account. Log uit /  Bijwerken )

Verbinden met %s

%d bloggers liken dit: