Jordan Search Results

Home The Book Dr Articles Products Message Boards Journal Articles Search Our Surveys Surgery ESWT Dr Messages Find Good Drs video


Search on portion of word, single word, or exact phrase.


Message Boards and Database
Journal Articles & Abstracts
Scott's heelspurs.com book

Begin Message Board Search

Searching file 26

Message Number 264740
Re: Who owns Jerusalem View Thread
Posted by Dr. Ed on 4/19/10 at 13:38

Marie:

Do you not own your car? If not, then anyone can drive it.
Do you not own your house? If not, then anyone can live in it.
Lets not get into semantics concerning leasing, renting, the 'bank owning it' and so forth. There is a reason you have a legal title to your home and auto. We can discuss Eastern philosophy all day but the reality is that countries have borders, possession of land and people have legal possession of property. Nations have been fighting over land for milleniums and there need be a fair and legal means for nations to stake claims. Feel free to research Gauthier's educational background, but he has a JD degree and practices international law. A lay person could have engaged in similar research.

Currently, Israel exists on less than 30% of the territory of Palestine. It is no fault of the Israelis that all of the Palestinian Mandate east of the Jordan River is not controlled by 'Palestinian' nationals but by a Hashemite minority monarchy related to the Saudi royal family. Why is no one calling on the Jordanian government to turn authority over to the 'Palestinians?' Remember that the Jordanian government had possession of the West Bank until 1967 and Egypt had possession of the Gaza Strip before 1967. There was no demand for a Palestinian State then. There were no demands placed on Egypt or Jordan then for such a state. The issue is the demand to carve up the tiny sliver of land left to Israel while ignoring the fact that 99.7% of the land in the Middle East is under Arab control.

Ed

Result number: 1

Message Number 264449

Re: Medicare Reimbursement Payments to Doctors View Thread
Posted by Dr. Ed on 4/02/10 at 08:45

John:
The concept of land for peace is not only a flawed one but is diversionary as it has little to do with the real issues. Modern day Israel has less than one third of land mass of the British Mandate of Palestine. The Kingdom of Jordan was carved out of the portion of Palestine east of the Jordan River by the Brits to be ruled by the minority Hashemites who are related to the Saudi royal family. Why do none of the Arab countries insist that that land be given back to the Palestinians? In fact, the Jordan owned the entire West Bank prior to 1967 and no one was asking for a Palestinian state there. Egypt owned the Gaza Strip before 1967 and no one asked for a Palestinian state there. Yassir Arafat was an Egyptian. Obama is demanding that Israel accept a terrorist state within its own boundaries -- that is insanity.
Ed

Result number: 2

Message Number 264250

Re: High-top Pronation Protection.... Does it exist? View Thread
Posted by Highlander on 3/23/10 at 22:33

Thank you very much for your reply! That makes sense. However, whether a shoe has Michael Jordan or Kobe Bryant's name on it is the least of my concerns. The arch support and motion control is much more important to me than the ankle support, but I would like to find something with both, whether it's suitable for basketball or not.

I've been reading a lot about the New Balance 888. In all of my searches, it keeps popping up, so I'm going to check it out. If I eliminate the desire for high-tops, what are the better over-pronator shoes to look at?

Thank you for your time...

Raven

Result number: 3
Searching file 25

Message Number 258866

Some Like Thomas Sowell and Some Do Not View Thread
Posted by john h on 7/15/09 at 11:42


Sometimes, when I hear about 'disparities' and 'inequities,' I think of a disparity that applied directly to me-- the disparity in basketball ability between myself and Michael Jordan.

When I was in school, I was so awful in basketball that the class coach wouldn't even let me try out for softball, at which I was actually pretty good.

I was more than forty years old before I ever got the ball through the basket. It wasn't during a game. The basket was in my brother's backyard and I was just shooting-- unopposed-- from practically right under the basket. The only pressure on me was that my little nephew was watching.

After making that one basket, I never took a basketball in my hands again. I retired at my peak.

Think about it: Michael Jordan made millions of dollars because of having a talent that was totally denied to me. Through no fault of my own, I had to spend years studying economics, in order to make a living.

Economics is not nearly as much fun as basketball and doesn't pay nearly as much money either. We are talking inequity big time.

Most discussions of 'disparities' and 'inequities' are a prelude to coming up with some 'solution' that the government can impose, winning politicians some votes in the process. How could the disparity between Michael Jordan and me be solved?

We could change the rules of basketball, in order to try to equalize the outcomes. Michael Jordan could be required to make all his two-point shots from beyond the three-point line, with five players opposing him and no one on his side. A three-point shot could require him to stand under the basket on the opposite side of the court and shoot from there.

Meanwhile, I could make two-point shots from a spot half the distance from the foul line to the basket, and of course without any other players on the court to distract me. Any shots I might make from back at the foul line would count as three-pointers.

Even under these conditions, you would be better off betting your money on Michael Jordan. But, conceivably at least, we might change the rules some more to make the results come out less lopsided, in order to create 'social justice.'

The problem with trying to equalize is that you can usually only equalize downward. If the government were to spend some of its stimulus money trying to raise my basketball ability level to that of Michael Jordan, it would be an even bigger waste of money than most of the other things that Washington does.

So the only way to try to equalize that has any chance at all would be to try to bring Michael Jordan down to my level, whether by drastic rule changes or by making him play with one hand tied behind his back, or whatever.

The problem with this approach, as with many other attempts at equalization, is that it undermines the very activity involved. Basketball would be a much less interesting game if it was played under rules designed to produce equality of outcomes.

Attendance would fall off to the point where neither Michael Jordan nor anyone else could make a living playing the game.

The same principle applies elsewhere. If you are going to try to equalize the chances of women getting jobs as firefighters, for example, then you are going to have to lower the physical requirements of height, weight and upper body strength.

That means that you are going to have more firefighters who are not capable of carrying an unconscious person out of a burning building.

If you are going to have these lower physical requirements be the same for both women and men, that means that you are not only going to have women who are not capable of carrying someone out of a burning building, you are also going to have men who are likewise incapable of carrying someone to safety.

Most activities do not exist for the sake of equality. They exist to serve their own purposes-- and those purposes are undermined, sometimes fatally, when equality becomes the goal.

Nor would a politician encouraging me to feel resentful toward Michael Jordan do any good. If I had such resentments, they would do me more harm than they would do Michael Jordan. They would make me feel bad-- and could make me miss seeing some great basketball.

Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institute and author of The Housing Boom and Bust.

Result number: 4

Message Number 258631

Re: Netanyahu Agrees to Palestinian State View Thread
Posted by Dr. Ed on 7/05/09 at 08:18

Marie:

Keep in mind that there are already Arabs living in Israel as voting Israeli citizens. Israel is the only place in the Middle East, outside of perhaps, Iraq where Arabs have a right to vote.

What is mean by a 'Palestinian state' is a separate county with distinct borders inside Israel. That is very different than Arab citizens living in peace and harmony inside Israel. Where is the land for a Palestinian state supposed to come from? From the country with the least land in the Middle East, Israel? Why is there no call for the Arab countries with huge amounts of land to provide territory. Why not territory from the portion of the Palestinian Mandate which is now called Jordan? How does Israel maintain defensible borders in such a situation. Sure, it would be nice if everyone just got along and defense was not a major consideration but that is not the case, has never been the case and is unlikely to be the case anywhere in the world.

Again, the real issue has little to do with a separate nation for the Palestinian people. The Arab countries could have granted that at any time since 1948 and could still do so. The issue is about dismembering Israel, making it unviable and indefensible. If one choses to go along with the propaganda suggesting otherwise while ignoring the reality of the situation then perhaps their position is based on unstated opinions about the right of Israel to survive.

Ed

Result number: 5

Message Number 258269

Re: Netanyahu Agrees to Palestinian State View Thread
Posted by Dr. Ed on 6/20/09 at 15:04

Marie:
You state that you support a two state option. That set of circumstances already exists. The British Mandate of Palestine was split into a Jewish homeland on the West side of the Jordan River and the Palestinian Arabs given the part of Palestine east of the Jordan River which then became known as Transjordan and then Jordan. The issue is that the Brits handed over the reigns of power in Jordan, not to the Palestinian majority but to the minority Hashemites who are royalists and an offshoot of the Saudi royal family. Jordan is the Palestinian State but not ruled by Palestinians. Why are no Arab states protesting that? Why must a state run by Palestinians be inside Israel? Keep in mind that the so-called 'occupied territories' were under Arab control before 1967, the West Bank under the control of Jordan and Gaza under the control of Egypt. Yasser Arafat was an Egyptian. Why did no Arab state refer to the West Bank or Gaza as an 'occupied territory' before 1967. Why were Arabs living in Gaza called Egyptians prior to 1967?

There never was a nation nor a nationality of people know as Palestinians, nor Jordanians, nor Iraqis for that matter. The nations with such names were carved out of the Middle East by the European colonial powers, France and England after WW1 once the Ottoman Empire was defeated. It was those same power that laid down the artificial borders based on their political considerations. Syria had, on several occasions threatened Jordan militarily because Syria considered the people living in Jordan as Syrian Arabs, not Palestinan Arabs. Culturally and historically, Syria is probably correct although one could not want the Baathist thugs that run Syria to have any more power. You may also recall that after WW2 and into the 1950s there was a call to Arab unity and Syria and Egypt were to unite into one country, the United Arab Republic as they felt that they were one people.

The Arab refugees who left Israel in 1948 did so under the threat of seven Arab armies driving the Jew into the sea and those in the way being in jeopardy. Those refugees have been used as pawns by leaders of the Arab governments as a pretext to destroy Israel. Each of those refugees could probably have been given a nice condo by the beach when one adds up all the money poured into war making over the last 6 decades. To do so, though, would take away the ability of the Arab leaders to attempt to persuade the world that an Arab state need be established inside Israel. Israel has a miniscule amount of land in the Middle East; approximately 0.3%. The Arabs have 99.7% of the land. As such demands that Israel give up land or not use the land they have are not only absurd but an attempt to hurt Israel.

Ed

Result number: 6

Message Number 253684

Re: John H point of view Gaza View Thread
Posted by Dr. Wedemeyer on 1/03/09 at 16:07

The real War on Terror lies right at the feet of Israel. That small country is surrounded by enemies and states that support terrorism. Hamas' military is listed as a terrorist organization by the U.S., Canada, Israel, Jordan, Japan, the UK and Australia. Need any more be said?

The question of who is entitled to the land that is now Israel is an intriguing one. A little history:

The Northern Kingdom of Israel was destroyed around 720 BCE by the Assyrians. Judah and Jerusalem fell to the Babylonians in 586 BCe and the Israelite/s were expelled from their land, many being forced to settle in Babylonia. Keep in mind that the first temple named after Solomon was destroyed.

In 538 BCE the Jews were allowed to return to what is now Israel and began building the second temple on the site where the first was destroyed. Nowhere during this time is there any mention of a feud between Israel and what is now termed Palestine or the Palestinian people (whose ethnic origin remains unclear and debated to this day)over this land.

In 70 CE the Romans conquered Isreal and again destroyed their sacred temple. Christians were subjugated by Roman rule at this time and repressed as well. There is a vast and repeated history of invasion and foreign rule for centuries following these events in what was once the original Jewish state and eventually was termed 'Palestinia' under Arab rule but the fact remains that Israel and its people were the initial inhabitants of the land that they exist in today.

During WWI an agreement was reached by the British and Israel that would reestablish the Israeli state for Israeli financial support of the war once the Ottoman's were removed from Palestine. Remember the Ottoman's were in cahoots with German and Axis powers and France and Britain felt control of the region was important to the outcome of the war. It should be noted here that the force that expelled the Ottoman's was Egyptian and led by the Brits.

In WWII the Brits lost their control of the region and were blamed for not allowing the Jews to reach safer port in Palestine and instead being sent to Cyprus and Germany where they were interned and many destroyed by the abomination that we know as the Holocaust.

In 1947 control of the region was passed to the UN and they set out a new plan for the region including two separate states under International control, one for Israel and one for Arabs. The Arabs of course rejected this plan. The Jews being the survivors hat they are implemented the Jewish State of Israel on May 14, 1948, just one day prior to the termination of this agreement and this resulted in the 1948 Arab-Israeli War. We know the outcome of this battle.

Following the war the Arab nations divided the rest of land not taken by Israel among Egypt, Jordan and Syria. The refused to acknowledge Palestine or set up a Palestinian state. The Palestinians are a Bedouin tribe who have never had any claim to Israel and never will.

Sorry Palestinians, but the winners of WWI and WWII ultimately decided the fate of that land in succeeding years and not Israel (and Jewish scientists ultimately created the means to end that war and the destruction of the their people). Moreover your Arab brothers didn't cut you in on the pie and refused to acknowledge your heritage and your right to that land and rightfully so.

Israel merely acted on the opportunity to reclaim what was rightfully theirs in the first place in my opinion.

This is not the history of that land that you will hear from the mobs of angry, frothing Palestinians who support Hamas and terrorism when it suits them and denounce them when Israel send them a black eye. They then plead and beg for restraint and mercy when force and bombs become the reality of their involvement and bastardy support of Hamas and their terrorist objectives. Hamas hides among their homes, women and children and then decries Israel for defending themselves, pointing ut the collateral damages. Hypocrites.

The Palestinians are a welfare nation and blame Israel for their own internal strife and lack of adequate self-governance and the predicament that they find themselves in. They were given land to live peacefully and co-exist alongside Israel and continue to test and destroy the benevolence of the Israeli Nation and peace and expect Arab and world opinion to support them? Sure the militant and terrorist states in the Middle East may support Hamas and the Palestinians but their surrounding neighbors who continue to clean their wounds and give them aid shelter when Israel has had enough and defends themselves are more pragmatic about the reality of the Israeli State; it exists and you do not.

I have a suggestion for Palestine. You are a minute fish in a large and well armed sea of enemies who are tiring of your terrorism and perpetual sobbing. Expel Hamas and live peacefully alongside Israel and their generous offer of your own land or you will never have peace and possibly perish. Follow Israel's example of producing a functioning society, science and industry and gain respect through education and self-governance and the will to create a state for your people and get over the past.

Otherwise, we supply and support Israel and you cannot beat them. Hanas cannot beat them. They kicked the collective (_(_)'s of an allied force of greater numbers several times and are the toughest and smartest people on this earth.

Israel is moving into Gaza today as I write this and rightfully so. We should support every effort on Israel's part to protect their land and people. They are our ally and deserve our support. They are only defending THEIR land and livelihood.

The notion of a Palestinian State is a joke that has been told too many times. They are thus far undeserving of our consideration and sympathy and support terrorism. I loathe war but sometimes it is the only solution and I see no way Israel can allow what is happening to them today without action.

Result number: 7

Message Number 250441

Biden's list is impressive! View Thread
Posted by marie:) on 9/23/08 at 19:50

This is a partial list of leaders............it's not complete.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/09/23/meetings_with_foreign_leaders.html
Senator Biden/Meetings with World Leaders

Iraq
Prime Minister Iyad Allawi (May 2004 - April 2005)
Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari (April 2005 - May 2006)
Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki (April 2006 - Present)
President Jalal Talabani (June 2005 - Present)
Kurdistan Region President Massoud Barzani (June 2005 - Present)
Kurdistan Region Prime Minister Nechirvan Barzani (March 2006 - Present)

Israel
Prime Minister Golda Meir (March 1969 - June 1974)
Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin (July 1992 - November 1995)
Prime Minister Shimon Peres (November 1995 - June 1996)
Prime Minister Menachem Begin (June 1977 - October 1983)
Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir (October 1986 - July 1992)
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (June 1996 - July 1999)
Prime Minister Ehud Barak (June 1996 - July 1999)
Prime Minister Ariel Sharon (March 2001 - April 2006)
Prime Minister Ehud Olmert (April 2006 - Present)
Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni (January 2006 - present)

Palestinian Territories
Chairman Yasser Arafat (September 1993 - November 2004)
Chairman Mahmoud Abbas (November 2004 - Present)
Prime Minister Dr. Salam Fayyad (June 2007 - Present)
Prime Minister Ahmed Qurei (October 2003 - March 2006)

Jordan
King Hussein (August 1952 - February 1999)
King Abdullah (August 2005-Present)

Egypt
President Hosni Mubarak (October 1981 - Present)
President Anwar Sadat (October1970 - October 1981)

Libya
Prime Minister Col. Muammar Qaddafi (March 1977 - March 1979)

Lebanon
Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri (October 1992 - December 1998)
Prime Minister Najib Mikati (April 2005 - July 2005)

Bahrain
Crown Prince Shaikh Salman bin Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa (March 1999 - Present)

Syria
President Bashar al-Assad (July 2000 - Present)

Turkey
Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan (March 2003 - Present)
President Ahmet Sezer (May 2000 - August 2007)
Prime Minister/President* Abdullah Gul (November 2002 - March 2003, Current President)
Prime Minister Bulent Ecevit (January 1999 - May 1999)
Prime Minister Demirel (November 1991 - June 1993)

Greece
President Kostis Stephanopoulos (March 1995 - March 2005)
Prime Minister Kostas Karamanlis (March 2004 - Present)
Prime Minister Kostantinos Mitsotakis (April 1990 - October 1993)
Prime Minister Andreas Papandreou (October 1981 - July 1989)
(October 1993 - January 1996)

Cyprus
President George Vassiliou (February 1988 - February 1993)
President Glafcos Clerides (February 1993 - February 2003)

Afghanistan
President Hamid Karzai (December 2001 - Present)

Pakistan
President Asif Ali Zardari (September 2008 - Present)*
Prime Minister Syed Yousaf Raza Gillani (March 2008 - Present)
President Pervez Musharraf (June 2001 - August 2008)
Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto (December 1988 - August 1990, October 1993 - November 1996)
Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif (November 1990 - July 1993, February 1997 - October 1999)

India
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh (May 2004 - Present)
Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee (May 1996 - June 1996)
(March 1998 - May 2004)

Sri Lanka
Prime Minister Ranil Wickremasinghe (May 1993 - August 1994)
(December 2001 - April 2004)

Russia
President Vladimir Putin (May 2000 - May 2008; current Prime Minister)
President Boris Yeltsin (July 1991 - December 1999)
Soviet Union President Mikhail Gorbachev (March 1990 - December 1991)
Soviet Union President Andrei Gromyko (July 1985 - October 1988)
Premier of the Soviet Union Alexey Kosygin (October 1964 - October 1980)
Premier of the Soviet Union Leonid Brezhnev (May 1960 - July 1964)

France
President Jacques Chirac (May 1995 - May 2007)
Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin (May 2005 - May 2007)
President Francois Mitterrand (May 1981 - May 1995)

U.K.
Queen Elizabeth (February 1952 - Present)
Prime Minister Tony Blair (May 1997 - June 2007)
Prime Minister John Major (November 1990 - May 1997)
Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher (May 1979 - November 1990)

Ireland
Prime Minister Bertie Ahern (June 1997 - Present)
Prime Minister John Bruton (December 1994 - June 1997)
Prime Minister Albert Reynolds (February 1992 - December 1994)
Prime Minister Charles Haughey (December 1979 - June 1981)
(March 1982 - December 1982)
(March 1987 - February 1992)

Germany
Chancellor Angela Merkel (November 2005 - Present)
Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder (October 1998 - November 2005)
Chancellor Helmut Kohl (October 1982 - October 1998)
Chancellor Helmut Schmidt (May 1974 - October 1982)

Italy
Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi (June 2001 - May 2006)
(May 2008 - Present)
Prime Minister Romano Prodi (May 2006 - May 2008)
Prime Minister Cossiga (July 1989 - April 1992)

Serbia
President of Serbia Boris Tadic (July 2004 - Present)
Prime Minister of Serbia Vojislav Kostunica (March 2004 - Present)
Prime Minister of Serbia Zoran Djindjic (January 2001 - March 2003)
President of Serbia Slobodan Milosevic (May 1989 - July 1997)

Yugoslavia
Premier of Yugoslavia Josip Broz Tito (January 1953 - May 1980)

Croatia
President of Croatia Franjo Tudjman (May 1990 - December 1999)

Slovenia
Prime Minister of Slovenia Janez Drnovsek (December 2002 - Present)
President of Kosovo Ibrahim Rugova (March 2002 - January 2006)
President of Slovenia Milan Kucan (October 1991 - December 2002)

Bosnia and Herzegovina
President of Bosnia Haris Silajdzic (November 2006 - Present)
President of Bosnia Sulejman Tihić (October 2002 - November 2006)
President of Bosnia Alija Izetbegovic (March 1992 - October 2000)

Kosovo (as an independent nation)
President Fatmir Sejdiu (January 2008 - Present)
Prime Minister Hashim Thaci (January 2008 - Present)

Poland
President Lech Walesa (December 1990 - December 1995)
Prime Minister Wlodzimierz Cimoszewicz (October 1993 - March 1995)

Czech Republic
President Vaclav Havel (February 1993 - February 2003)

Hungary
Prime Minister Gyula Horn (July 1994 - July 1998)
President Arpad Goncz (August 1990 - August 2000)
Prime Minister Viktor Orban (July 1998 - May 2002)

Finland
Prime Minister Paavo Lipponen (April 1995 - April 2003)

Romania
President Ion Iliescu (December 1989 - November 1996)

Georgia
President Mikheil Saakashvili (January 2004 - Present)
President Eduard Shevardnadze (October 1995 - November 2003)

Kazakhstan
President Nursultan Nazarbayev (December 1991 - Present)

Ukraine
President Viktor Yushchenko (January 2005 - Present)

Canada
Prime Minister Paul Martin (December 2003 - February 2006)
Prime Minister Brian Mulroney (September 1984 - June 1993)

NATO
Secretary General Lord George Robertson (October 1999 - January 2004)
Secretary General Javier Solana (December 1995 - October 1999)
Secretary General Manfred Woerner (July 1988 - August 1994)
Secretary General Lord Peter Carrington (June 1984 - July 1988)

China
President Jiang Zemin (March 1993 - March 2003)
Premier Zhu Rongji (March 1998 - March 2003)

Hong Kong
Chief Executive Tung Chee Hwa (July 1997 - March 2005)

Taiwan
President Chen Shui-Bian (May 2000 - Present)

Korea
President Kim Dae Jung (February 1998 - February 2003)

Singapore
Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew (June 1959 - November 1990)
Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong (November 1990 - August 2004)
Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong (August 2004 - Present)

Indonesia
President Megawati Sukarnoputri (July 2001 - October 2004)
President Bambang Yudhoyono (October 2004 - Present)

Australia
Prime Minister John Howard (March 1996 - December 2007)
Prime Minister Paul Keating (December 1991 - March 1996)

Philippines
President Gloria Arroyo (January 2001 - Present)
President Fidel Ramos (June 1992 - June 1998)

Vietnam
Prime Minister Phan Van Kai (September 1997 - June 2006)

East Timor
President Ramos Horta (May 2007 - Present)

Tibet
The Dalai Lama Tenzin Gyatso (1950 - Present)

Colombia
President Alvaro Uribe (August 2002 - Present)
President Andres Pastrana (August 1998 - August 2002)
President Cesar Gaviria (August 1990 - August 1994)

Mexico
President Vincente Fox (December 2000 - December 2006)
President Ernesto Zedillo (December 1994 - November 2000)

Bolivia
President Jaime Paz Zamora (August 1989 - August 1993)

South Africa
President Thabo Mbeki (June 1999 - September 2008)
President Nelson Mandela (April 1994 - June 1999)

Liberia
President Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf (January 2006 - Present)

Lesotho
Prime Minister Leabua Jonathan (July 1965 - January 1986)

United Nations
Secretary General Ban Ki-moon (January 2007 - Present)
Secretary General Kofi Annan (January 1997 - January 2007)
Secretary General Boutros Boutros Ghali (January 1992 - January 1997)

Vatican City
Pope John Paul II (October 1978 - April 2005)

Slovakia
President Rudolf Schuster (June 1999 - June 2004)

Result number: 8
Searching file 24

Message Number 248270

Trial finds radial ESWT outdoes sham therapy for heel pain relief View Thread
Posted by UHM..... on 7/06/08 at 18:19

Investigators appear again to be split over the relative benefits of low-energy extracorporeal shockwave therapy, with positive outcomes presented at the APMA meeting offset by a published study from Germany that failed to reach statistically significant results.

The presented findings, part of a larger multicenter trial, indicated that patients treated with radial ESWT using the Swiss Dolorclast device (Electro Medical Systems, Nyon, Switzerland) for heel pain unresponsive to at least six months of standard treatment experienced a significantly greater reduction in pain at three and 12 months than those treated with a sham device.

Of the 252 patients randomized, 114 in the treatment group and 111 in the sham group completed the study. Each received three sessions of office-based treatment during a four-week period, with the therapy targeted to the site of most intense pain, as identified using palpation.

At three months, 61% of treated patients reported at least a 60% decrease in overall pain as measured using a visual analog scale, compared with 42% of sham patients. At 12 months, the same outcome measure was reported in 63% of treated patients and 44% of sham patients.

The median decrease in the ESWT group was 72% at three months and 85% at 12 months. Statistically significant between-group differences were also observed for pain when taking first steps in the morning and pain during activities of daily living.

'The results are comparable to those obtained with high-energy ESWT, but no sedation or anesthetic is required,' said Lowell S. Weil, Sr., DPM, of the Weil Foot & Ankle Institute in Des Plaines, IL, who presented the findings.

Researchers from the Technical University of Munich, however, did not find a statistically significant treatment effect of low-energy ESWT in a smaller study of a similar design published in the September-October issue of the Journal of Foot & Ankle Surgery. Of 40 patients randomized, those who received ESWT reported a 73.2% reduction in overall heel pain at 12 weeks whereas those who received a sham therapy reported 32.7% less pain. This difference was clinically relevant in terms of Mann-Whitney effect size (0.6737), but was not statistically significant.

Jordana Bieze Foster is a freelance writer based in Massachusetts and the former editor of BioMechanics magazine.

Result number: 9

Message Number 247601

Fight the Smears View Thread
Posted by marie:) on 6/12/08 at 21:07

The Republican Party has little control over their supporters who continue to bring their party down. Senator Obama has opened a website to correct the lies that Republicans make online and elsewhere. Wow. What a shame that there are Americans cannot tell the truth. A real shame.

http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/fightthesmearshome/

How does it make us look to the rest of the world?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080613/ap_on_el_pr/us_global_poll;_ylt=AvVXo8GB2A.28EMvtn7qkU.yFz4D
Substantial numbers in most countries said they are closely following the U.S. presidential election, including 83 percent in Japan — about the same proportion who said so in the U.S. Of those following the campaign, optimism that the new president will reshape American foreign policy for the better is substantial, with the largest segment of people in 14 countries — including the U.S. — saying so.

Among those tracking the American election, greater numbers in 20 countries expressed more confidence in Obama, the likely Democratic nominee, than John McCain, the Republican candidate, to handle world affairs properly. The two contenders were tied in the U.S., Jordan and Pakistan. Obama's edge was largest in Western Europe, Australia, Japan, Tanzania and Indonesia, where he lived for a time as a child.

http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/Chart-shows-global-views-economics-and-US-presidential-race-two/photo//080613/480/nyol58806130154//s:/ap/20080613/ap_on_el_pr/us_global_poll;_ylt=As8k4V.gee6oeWav3ceDr9ph24cA
The majority of people in 12 of the 23 countries polled say they have more confidence in Obama then McCain.

Result number: 10

Message Number 245703

Re: Executive Pay View Thread
Posted by cwk on 4/11/08 at 10:37

Shareholders are owners. It is a non-sequitur to posit that strengthening the voice of the shareholder (owner) in determining management compensation could lead to Congress setting limits on the earning power of athletes. (or artists, rock stars or plumbers for that matter). Corporate ownership and governance is not analogous to Congress. Congress does not own the Yankees, the PGA or any of the entities that pay Tiger Woods and Michael Jordan to endorse products.

Your statement that Obama favors a law that will allow shareholders to set the management salary is incorrect. Senator Obama favors legislation that would, 'require corporations to offer a nonbinding shareholder vote on executive compensation'. (Nick Timiraos WSJ, April 11, 2008). The key word here is non-binding.

The Shareholder Vote on Executive Compensation Act would allow shareholders to 'signal their displeasure' (Timiraos, WSJ) but does not give them veto power over elected corporate boards. The legislation would NOT give shareholders the right to set salaries.

John McCain has recently decried executive pay. '
“It’s outrageous that someone who is the head of Bear Stearns cashes in millions and millions of dollars in stocks,” McCain said last weekend. “And I think it’s unconscionable when the guy who apparently is the head of Countrywide and his co-conspirators make huge amounts of money while Americans are facing the threat of losing their own homes.” (WSJ, April 11, 2008) but does not favor the proposed legislation. 'Investor advocates, union pension funds and shareholder groups have supported the legislation. ' (CNN.money.com, April 11, 2008)

Corporate governance, the evolution of corporate capital, the nature of investment bankers and venture capitalists who use OPM (Other's People's Money) to reward themselves lavishly regardless of the quality of their performance are all related to the current precarious imbalance in our economic system. Certainly a long discussion is required to authentically examine these issues but in short capitalism can work quite well but it can also be dangerous. Of course capitalism relies on self interest but unbridled self interest (greed) can destroy the foundation of our society.

Result number: 11

Message Number 245700

Executive Pay View Thread
Posted by john h on 4/11/08 at 08:23

Last year the CEO of Merrill Lynch received a total compensation package of over $83 million dollars. Surprisingly only one oil company CEO was in the top 10. I think the CEO of Proctor & Gamble was at 23 mil and several were well over 20 mil. This, of course, includes stock options, bonuses, perks, etc.

This does seem obscene but it is part of what makes America what it is. Each person can go as far as they can and make as much as they can. Arod of the New York Yankees makes a straight salary of around $27 mil for 7 or so months of work and probably makes that much in endorsements. Tiger Woods probably makes $100 mil a year. Michael Jordan probably exceeds over $100 million a year.

At the moment Obama wants to create a law whereby the stockholders set the pay for executives. Once you start this where does it stop? Does Congress say Arod can only make 10 mil a year. This flys in the face of our constitution and our economic system.

I do not like the CEO of Merrill Lynch, who I deal with, making $83 mil a year, as I lost money last year but it comes with our free economic system so I accept it. If I were him I would give at least half of it back and another chunk to charity. Maybe he does? They did not show what these guys give away. I know Bill Gates gives away Billions not Millions.

Anyway it beats being a Socialist or Communist IMHO.

Result number: 12

Message Number 244325

Re: From OHIO: GOP voters crossing over in large numbers View Thread
Posted by marie:) on 3/09/08 at 17:36

Christian Century responds.........thought it may be of interest. :) Sometimes politics is what it is.............

http://www.christiancentury.org/article.lasso?id=3392
One hatchet-job report in Investor's Business Daily, pointing to the Black Value System (a statement written not by Wright but by church members in the early 1980s), concluded that there is 'little room for white Christians at Obama's church.' Black conservative pundit Erik Rush said the church has embraced 'things African above things American,' and he claimed that this should be as alarming as a Republican presidential candidate 'belonging to the Aryan Brethren Church of Christ.' Tucker Carlson of MSNBC described Trinity as having a 'racially exclusive theology' that 'contradicts the basic tenets of Christianity.' Sean Hannity of Fox News confronted Wright on TV and asked how a black value system is any more acceptable than a white value system. Hannity also suggested that Trinity's emphasis on black values contradicts Martin Luther King's famous hope that people would be judged 'not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.'

Such charges are really aimed at Obama, rather than Wright or Trinity. By trying to link Obama to black radicals, they attack one of Obama's political assets: his seeming ability—shared by Colin Powell, Oprah Winfrey and Michael Jordan—to 'transcend' race. Because Obama is able to do this, he invites the white support that Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson lack (which perhaps explains the decided coolness of some black leaders toward Obama's candidacy).

Result number: 13

Message Number 244324

Re: From OHIO: GOP voters crossing over in large numbers View Thread
Posted by marie:) on 3/09/08 at 17:36

Christian Century responds.........thought it may be of interest. :) Sometimes politics is what it is.............

http://www.christiancentury.org/article.lasso?id=3392
One hatchet-job report in Investor's Business Daily, pointing to the Black Value System (a statement written not by Wright but by church members in the early 1980s), concluded that there is 'little room for white Christians at Obama's church.' Black conservative pundit Erik Rush said the church has embraced 'things African above things American,' and he claimed that this should be as alarming as a Republican presidential candidate 'belonging to the Aryan Brethren Church of Christ.' Tucker Carlson of MSNBC described Trinity as having a 'racially exclusive theology' that 'contradicts the basic tenets of Christianity.' Sean Hannity of Fox News confronted Wright on TV and asked how a black value system is any more acceptable than a white value system. Hannity also suggested that Trinity's emphasis on black values contradicts Martin Luther King's famous hope that people would be judged 'not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.'

Such charges are really aimed at Obama, rather than Wright or Trinity. By trying to link Obama to black radicals, they attack one of Obama's political assets: his seeming ability—shared by Colin Powell, Oprah Winfrey and Michael Jordan—to 'transcend' race. Because Obama is able to do this, he invites the white support that Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson lack (which perhaps explains the decided coolness of some black leaders toward Obama's candidacy).

Result number: 14
Searching file 23

Message Number 239881

Re: back question (yes i know, wrong forum) View Thread
Posted by james e on 11/27/07 at 08:18

lol, ur one of them die hards

to you, im am a traitor to my city :( i am guilty of treason i admit it :(

i used to like baseball as a very young kid. this was when carlton fisk was on the white sox. had to be around 10. then i saw jordan playing and i fell in love with basketball (if i had only known that one day basketball would curse me, i would've stayed a baseball fan ROFL)i even played coach pitch baseball when i was like 6, and this leads to an embarrasing story i will share, hell my wife loves it. i was an outfielder for some time. but i was always scared to catch a pop fly. so i'd just stick my hand in the air, and close my eyes. can u guess what happened? BOOM right in the eye socket. many a time i laid in the outfield knocked out with the coach running up with the smelling salt LOL. this happened at least 3 or 4 times, and i usually had a black eye all season long. maybe it bamaged my drain? er uh damaged my brain. i did finally get over the fear, but its still a funny story to tell.

with that said, i'd still like to go to wrigley field once in my life. take my too when he gets a little older. i dont hate the sport, im just in to mma right now. and no, its not the brutatility of it or human __fighting. you want to know what mma is? look up a man named randy couture, nuff said

Result number: 15

Message Number 239715

Re: back question (yes i know, wrong forum) View Thread
Posted by james e on 11/21/07 at 07:54

HEY, THATS NOT NICE ABOUT FOOTBALL rofl

u know somethin though, being near chicago for half me life, ever since jordan left the bulls, i have NO sports team to have pride in. and now that u mentioned sports you're drudging up many painful memories about mj and the bulls :( cubs=suck sox=suck bears=mega suck lol

to this day, when i think of jordans final game, final shot to win the championship, i get a lump in my throat lol. on the day it happened, im man enough to admit, that i shed a tear. cause i knew that was it for jordan in a bulls uniform. DANG YOU

and the bears? well, since they've been the suck ever since i can remember, i have not been a football fan. they have let us down so many times that i just cant bear to watch (PUN INTENDED!)

my sport of choice is ufc, i've watched since 13 years old. and i dont like it for the brutality, its the sport of it. two men train there arses off, and step into that cage and put it all on the line. that opens up the whole randy couture issue (couture and mj, i wish they were my dads, not gay though lol) scientists should take dna from jordan and couture and make a superhuman and send a few hundred to iraq and that'd clear up that mess lol. ya, im a nutso

i am wondering, do you think i could qualify for ssi? i cant get disability cause i dont have enough paid in, but ssi is different. i can do basic things around the house like get dressed, take showers etc... i cant really bounce my son on my shoulders anymore, it hurts the ankle too much. and driving for more than 10 minutes is out of the question. im not going to risk an accident. and its too weird using the left foot to drive, it doesnt feel right.

i am going to talk with my new doc, and kelikian about getting on ssi and see what they say. my wife has bugged me for years, but i've been embarrased of the idea of it.

i still wonder to this day, if this was the worst ankle injury in the history of basketball. lol i tore my foot off. only thing connected was some skin, and the achilles. every doctor i've seen says 'wow, u did that playing basketball? you sure someone didnt just try to rip your foot off?' lol

when i see the doc about bp, i will ask him for a good psych' or counselor that deals with chronic pain, i guess it cant hurt to check one out, and who knows, it could help. got alot of pent up anger and embarrasment to get out lol. i know i should quit cigarettes, and i NEVER smoke around my son. i think parents that smoke around their kids should be fined. its already proven to cause ear infections and sinus problems with kids, and i remember as a kid getting massive ear infections (parents smoked like chimney's around me) my son has been lucky to only have a cold once or twice in his 2 years 6 months since being born.

my family are VERY proud that i've been clean of marijuana since october 8th. i really thought that would make my blood pressure lower, but it hasnt. i guess cigarettes are the next thing to go. i dont even know why i started smoking them. i used to be so anti cigarettes. i smoked marijuana for about a year before i even touched a cigarette (that is backwards to everyone i know, everyone started cigarettes first that i've met)

sorry to make another huge post lol. glad ur better from your shopping spree, and i appreciate all the talking you and doctor wedemeyer have done with me these past months. it has for sure helped me maintain some sanity. i wish you the best of luck with your spinal treatment, and after my back pains, i cant imagine what serious back problems feel like. i will pray that things turn out well for you. you stay positive and think happy thoughts as well michelle :)

will post again when i learn more about my situation, tks again guys

Result number: 16

Message Number 238181

Re: Turkey View Thread
Posted by john h on 10/21/07 at 19:52

Ed: From what I read the Kurdish rebels (PDK) who are venturing into Turkey are Communist by nature and have killed a number of Turks. It would seem only natural for the Turks to retaliate. The U.S. for it's part wants to dissuade the Turks for venturing into the Kurdish territories but the Kurds may have their own agenda and could be backed by outside forces. Strange that we hear nothing about Polosi's resolution suddenly?? As Marie said it is not her resolution but she has the power to bring it to a vote or not. President Clinton had the same problem when he was in office but talked Speaker Dennis Hassert into not bringing it to a vote. The entire problem is obviously political in nature in an attempt to get a large block of Armenian votes in northern California. I wonder what the motive for the Armenians is to get this vote on the table at a time like this. After all it is nearly 100 years ago. There is probably a lot more to this than most of us know.

In the early 1960's I was flying a group of Turkish high ranking officers from the Army War College in the U.S. back to Turkey. As we approached the Turkish border I received an urgent recall to bring them back to Germany. There had been some sort of revolution or overthrow of the government and the Turkish Officers were likely to be shot had we landed. The air base in Turkey we use has been there for many many years and we have large forces there. The air traffic is like JFK due the the supplies moving in and out. I under stand some of our contengency plans now included air bases in Jordan? and some of the smaller Muslim nations that are friendly. That, however, does not solve the problem of the use of Turkish air space or the large quantity of oil they supply us for use in Iraq and Afganistan. The Turks are fierce fighters. The Kurds who attacked the turks this past week killing 12 Turks are known as the PDK and are listed as a Terriorist Organization. They seek autonomy/separate nation status for the Kurds in Northern Iraq. There are good arguments for this on both sides of the issue. The PDK however represents a small portion of the Kurdish popultion.

Turkey was the first nation with a Muslim majority to recognize Israel as a state (1949). Since them Israel has become a major supplier of arms to Turkey and they have diplomatic, strategic, and diplomatic cooperation with concerns over regional stability in that area of the world. Each allow the other to fly military training exercises over each others air space.
There is a plan in place to build a gigantic pipline from Turkey to Israel to supply water, gas, and oil. They hold joint military exercises together. Jews have lived in Turkey for over 2400 years.

Result number: 17

Message Number 232500

Re: Al Queda in Iraq View Thread
Posted by larrym on 7/04/07 at 14:00

----------------------------------In February
1993, a group led by Ramzi Yousef
tried to bring down the World Trade Center with a
truck bomb. They killed six and wounded a
thousand. Plans by Omar Abdel Rahman and others to
blow up the Holland and Lincoln tunnels and other
New York City landmarks were frustrated when the
plotters were arrested. In October 1993, Somali
tribesmen shot down U.S. helicopters, killing 18
and wounding 73 in an incident that came to be
known as 'Black Hawk down.' Years later
it would be learned that those Somali tribesmen
had received help from al Qaeda.

In early 1995, police in Manila uncovered a plot
by Ramzi Yousef to blow up a dozen U.S. airliners
while they were flying over the Pacific. In
November 1995, a car bomb exploded outside the
office of the U.S. program manager for the Saudi
National Guard in Riyadh, killing five Americans
and two others. In June 1996, a truck bomb
demolished the Khobar Towers apartment complex in
Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, killing 19 U.S. servicemen
and wounding hundreds. The attack was carried out
primarily by Saudi Hezbollah, an organization that
had received help from the government of Iran.

Until 1997, the U.S. intelligence community viewed
Bin Ladin as a financier of terrorism, not as a
terrorist leader. In February 1998, Usama Bin
Ladin and four others issued a self-styled fatwa,
publicly declaring that it was God's decree that
every Muslim should try his utmost to kill any
American, military or civilian, anywhere in the
world, because of American 'occupation'
of Islam's holy places and aggression against
Muslims.

In August 1998, Bin Ladin's group, al Qaeda,
carried out near-simultaneous truck bomb attacks
on the U.S. embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar
es Salaam, Tanzania. The attacks killed 224
people, including 12 Americans, and wounded
thousands more.

In December 1999, Jordanian police foiled a plot
to bomb hotels and other sites frequented by
American tourists, and a U.S. Customs agent
arrested Ahmed Ressam at the U.S. Canadian border
as he was smuggling in explosives intended for an
attack on Los Angeles International Airport.

In October 2000, an al Qaeda team in Aden, Yemen,
used a motorboat filled with explosives to blow a
hole in the side of a destroyer, the USS Cole,
almost sinking the vessel and killing 17 American
sailors.

The 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the
Pentagon were far more elaborate, precise, and
destructive than any of these earlier assaults.
But by September 2001, the executive branch of the
U.S. government, the Congress, the news media, and
the American public had received clear warning
that Islamist terrorists meant to kill Americans
in high numbers.
Posted 18 hours ago by

Result number: 18

Message Number 231734

Re: Holy cow, that was an amazing, powerful presentation View Thread
Posted by Dr. Ed on 6/17/07 at 19:10

David:

I would be happy just to see anyone review this. How many people realize that there never was a nation called Palestine? How many realize that the country now called Jordan composes over 2/3 of the land of the former British Mandate of Palestine and that the 'Palestinians' living there are not demanding a separate country nor are other Arab nations demanding such? How many realize that current boundaries or borders we see in the region were simply carved out by the British and French after defeating the Ottoman empire in WW1? The situation in Iraq is directly related to it being carved out and constituted by European colonial powers after WW1...the only way that nation was held together was via a series of dictatorships. Now the Euros want no responsibility for the mess they created. The Brits take no responsibility for the mess they created in their former territories which they carved up and promised to various parties. The Euros also fail to take responsibility for refusing to accept Jewish immigrants from Germany when the situation was becoming critical before WW2. The Jews of Europe felt unwelcome and unsafe in Europe which was a major impetus for relocation to Israel. This is the same Europe that is siding with the Arabs against Israel now.

I really hope that we are not 'preaching to the choir' here as I see no comments from our posters on the left.

Ed

Result number: 19
Searching file 22

Message Number 226052

Re: For Jeremy: running shoes for sprained ankle View Thread
Posted by larrym on 3/27/07 at 08:05

Also, do yourself a favor and dont buy Nike Shox to play hoops in. They are very unstable and if you are prone to or recovering from inversion sprain they are not good. New Balance makes some nice stable basketball shoes. they are not as popular since NB doesnt pay a ton of athletes a ton of money to wear them. Try to twist and bend the shoe, it should be stiff and bend under the ball. Take your thumb and press on the lateral sole, a Nike Shox will compress a great deal, NB wont. Considering when you land from a rebound you hit with several times your body weight, how much will that shoes heel compress which could allow your ankle to roll.

Another very stable shoe is the Adidas that Chauncey Billups wears, I dont know the exact name but it is his model and it is very stable and firm but the heel and midfoot fit is a bit narrow like most Adidas. If you are a Nike guy try an old Air Force. It is very simple high top with velcro strap but the sole is just plain rubber/eva with no silly bubbles, springs or gizmos. It is closer to a 1984 Air Jordan than anything new. it is stable and solid.

Result number: 20

Message Number 224136

Re: Obviously, you watched it through your Ann Coulter tinted glasses. View Thread
Posted by jim on 3/04/07 at 20:56

I wish that liberals understood that they are the first target of Radical Muslims. Liberal beliefs in "Anything Goes" with sex and 'If it feels good do it! attitude makes them the bullseye for Muhamed. When we drop a bomb, we pay $15,000 so it hits where we want it to(bad guys). They spend $50.00 strap it on a man or women and send them to a pizza parlor and kill women and children. Our prisoners live in buildings on a Carribean Island. I lived in a tent for a year in a desert. When I pulled a trigger, I had to account for every bullet and had to get clearance before I could shoot these scum bags. When they got injured, we took them to the hospital and fixed them. If they caught us, we kept one bullet in our pocket, so we could ensure we were not captured alive, because we knew what would happen to us. If we pull out of Iraq, make sure you buy stock in oil(Canadian Oil Trusts pay a great dividend), because we will have $200.00 a ballel oil. Iran will support Shitte, Saudi Arabia will support Sunni as well as Jordan, and Egypt. the Kurds and Turks will start at each other and the oil will stop.

Go San Fransico!

Jim

Result number: 21

Message Number 222423

Re: James Watson (DNA dude) speaks out View Thread
Posted by larrym on 2/13/07 at 23:00

I think it may also be values or willingness to sacrifice since they are very competitive with each other. i have a friend in auto that travels there often. he said there is an intense desire to look busier and more productive than your associates. They will even stay longer at work and not really have to just to look good being the last to leave. I think lots of it has to do with what a society values. Austria is a small country but they produce a huge number of world cup skiers. In Austria being a skier os like being Michael Jordan here. They have mountains and skiing is like riding a bike to them.

Traditionally inners city blacks have excelled at basketball for years. Partially due to the fact it is a cheap sport to do and if you do it often you become better which rises the bar for others. In the last few years the NBA has started looking to more European or non American players as they tend to focus more on fundementals. look at MVP last year and maybe this year is Steve Nash who is a short white guy from an island in Cananda and his Dad was a soccer player

Result number: 22
Searching file 21

Message Number 218248

Re: Both points of view are always needed View Thread
Posted by Dr. Ed on 12/29/06 at 09:10

Marie:

The answer to your question is yes and no. That is part of the problem. I fault Israel for not having annexed the West Bank in 1967. This notion that it is an "occupied territory" has gone on far too long. Occupied from whom? Presumably occupied Jordanian territory. The press makes it sound like it is occupied Palestinian territory. If so, was the Kingdom of Jordan the occupier before 1967? The answer to that, in a historical sense is probably "yes" because the Kingdom of Jordan was an artificial entity created by the British after WW1 as a gift to the Hashemites which are related to the Saudi royal family. Jordan was the portion of the British Mandate of Palestine east of the Jordan River or trans-Jordan. Jordan, is a Palestinian state but with minority royal control.

Result number: 23

Message Number 218193

Re: Both points of view are always needed View Thread
Posted by marie on 12/28/06 at 18:39

"They need to - grow up!! My heart is with Israel and the Jews there, but I do not want my heart to be dragged along while Israel treats the Palestinians the way the Jews have been treated throughout history. I think Jordan and Syria need to be heavily leaned on by the UN and the US to provide homes for the Palestinians but that's not going to happen anytime soon, if ever - and in the meantime.... what? Israel has to deal with it and the world needs to help them get to "detente."

Interesting point Dorothy.

I feel that people have the right and the will to live freely in a Democracy. I think a Democracy should provide the basic funds for an education so that those in poverty may elevate their status have the means to do so. I have always wondered why does Hamas pays for 100% of all Palestinian schools. I thought Israel was a democracy like us....but they don't spend a penny on basic education of it's Palestinian citizens. If we, in America chose not to pay for education of all our citizens because of their ethnicity or religous beliefs we would be called racist. Yet Israel chooses not to contribute a nickel towards the education of their Palestinian citizens....but if I criticize Israel for this practice I am an anti-zionist. How does this kind of sentiment endear anyone to Israel? Luckily for Israel I don't judge them based on Dr. Ed. LOL. Allowing a terrorist group to educate their lawful citizens is wrong. All this does is give terrorist groups a platform to indoctrinate young minds. I disagree with this. Why do they treat their own subjects in this manner? I would like to know why Israel provides an education to some and not others? Can someone please explain this to me?

Result number: 24

Message Number 218168

Re: Both points of view are always needed View Thread
Posted by Dr. Ed on 12/28/06 at 16:29

Dorothy:

Are you and Marie taking turns going on the attack?

There are a lot of good points in your post and I agree with many of them. Nevertheless, you had to take a few potshots at me so I will respond.

Please explain, " I think what we all need to do more of is to consider that Israel and its Jewish citizens have a somewhat diminished claim on the singularity of that existential plight than they did in the past" There are a lot of peoples throughout the world in dire straights but I do not think that the condition of one group of people in any way diminishes the needs of another.

"The Israeli Jews should know, above all people, that oppression and marginalization and deprivation do not lead to anything good."

They do know that. Israel is a democratic and free nation with a free press. There is a massive amount of soul searching and debate that goes on in Israel. You can find a diversity of opinions within Israel. I prefer the Likud Party but that is just my opinion.

I agree with you that Germany got off a bit too easy. Part of the reason for that was the concept that the sanctions against Germany after WW1 were too severe and led to the rise of the Nazis. Nevertheless, to place responsibility for support of Palestinians on Germany still misses the major point. There would be no Palestinian refugee problem if the British did not give a large portion fo the British Mandate of Palestine to the Hashemite royal family to create its own little fiefdom called the Kingdom of Jordan. Furthermore, it was the neighbors of Israel who used the Palestinian Arabs as pawns to keep the conflict going. That is something you already understand. The so-called occupied territories are a real red herring considering that those territories were part of Egypt, syrai and Jordan before 1967. So, the question arises: Was there a so called "occupation" existing before 1967? Did Palestinian Arabs living in the west bank portion of Jordan and the Egyptian Gaza Strip want their own country there? Funny, but there was no mention of it before 1967! Yasser Arafat made it an issue but he was an Egyptian, not a Palestinian Arab.

"Finally I have to say your arrogance and smugness is stunning."

Quite frankly, I have to say that your stupidity and narrow mindedness is amazing.

I am not the only one to accuse your hero, Carter, the worst President in American history, of being an anti-Semite. The press and acacdemia has numerous writers, far more erudite than I making the same observation. Considering the fact that Carter fails to recognize the rights of the Jews in Israel to survive is akin to sentencing them to death and since you agree with him, I would have to place you in the same category despite your claims otherwise.

How can I dispute Carter's use of the term "apartheid?" It is innapropriate because of its definition being accepted by common usage which has been a racially based separation of peoples that occurred in South Africa. It implies that there is a perpetrator of such policies in the area and Carter's finger is pointed at Israel despite his recent attempts to qualify the title.

Here is where your true colors show by the absurd statement:
"Israel cannot prevent an entire "nation" within a nation from making a livelihood, from buying and selling, from moving about - it is called a ghetto, Ed!!" The Jews were forced into the ghettos of Europe for centuries due to prejudice. Making such a comparison is a reprehensible act. You shuld be ashamed of yourself. Israel has NEVER prevented the Palestinian Arabs from mking a living. In fact, Israel acted to engage the Arabs living in the West Bank in commerce and provided significant amonts of monetary aid, money that was not available for Jewish refugees from the Soviet Union arriving penniless. This all occurred while the Saudis and other Arab oil countries were raking in billions in oil money. Saddam offered the Palestinian Arabs a check for $25,000 for every family member died as a suicide bomber, one of the many reasons that Saddam had to be eliminated -- something that people like yourself who choose to have blinders on cannot and will not understand.

I would like to think that your statement about your heart being "with Israel and the Jews is true" but that statement need be better reflected in your posts and the people who you choose to admire.

" I think Jordan and Syria need to be heavily leaned on by the UN and the US to provide homes for the Palestinians but that's not going to happen anytime soon, if ever - and in the meantime.... what? Israel has to deal with it and the world needs to help them get to "detente."

That is a very unclear statement to me. Yes, Jordan and Syria need to be leaned on heavily. But that is not going to happen. It needed to happen for 48 years. So how do you propose that Israel "deal with it" in a way that does not meet the wrath of Carter? Do you really expect the "world" to help Israel and the Arabs get to detente? Again, it has not happened in 48 years. Much of the world needs oil and what is speaking here is oil money. That is why Europe has largely taken the Arab side. Oil money fro mthe Arabs is what helped bail out Jimmy Carter's peanut farm and finance Carter's philanthropic actitivities for the last 16 years. China needs oil even more than Europe so they are selling thier latest missile technology to Iran which ahs transferred such weapons to terrorists.

Result number: 25

Message Number 218159

Re: Both points of view are always needed View Thread
Posted by Dorothy on 12/28/06 at 15:10

ed - I am not going to take up "for" the Palestinians and "against" Israel. It goes without saying that Israel and Jews have had to endure tremendous assaults on their very existence. I think what we all need to do more of is to consider that Israel and its Jewish citizens have a somewhat diminished claim on the singularity of that existential plight than they did in the past; now we have to also consider Rwanda, Sudan, and other geopolitical locations that don't come immediately to mind. I actually agree with you about the Palestinians vis a vis Jordan, Egypt and Syria, in particular, and that the international pressure on Israel alone to solve the "Palestinian problem" within Israeli borders is absurd and wrong.
That said, Israel - probably out of weariness, frustration, and many other pressures - has not dealt with the Palestinian reality, the reality of their existence within those same borders, in a way that will lead to "detente". The Israeli Jews should know, above all people, that oppression and marginalization and deprivation do not lead to anything good. Israel and the U.S. should be actively working in the U.N. to pressure those neighbors of Israel to do more for the Palestinians - more than pressure and threaten Israel - but, in the meantime, Israel needs to do what it has been doing for the past week or so - for its own survival, as well as for humane treatment of a people living within its borders. It should also be said that of all nations on this earth, the one nation that should be housing and employing Palestinians is GERMANY!! Germany's foul history fomented all of these horrors that the world still deals with today..... and Germany has prospered and moved on!

Finally, I have to say that your arrogance and smugness is stunning. For you to say that Carter "does not understand" the issues and dynamics of the Middle East and for you to accuse him of anti-Semitism is the last refuge of the ignorant. Who on this earth (besides you, perhaps) DOES understand the issues and dynamics of the Middle East?? We all, each and every one of us, may have what we think is understanding - but I submit to you, it is Roshomon all over again. No one understands it all. And understanding is irrelevant at some point. At some point, people have to say: we must stop this madness. The cease-fire that was implemented a year or two ago - and that then fell apart - was doomed to fall apart. Yes, hostilities stopped for a while, but Israel cannot prevent an entire "nation" within a nation from making a livelihood, from buying and selling, from moving about - it is called a ghetto, Ed!!
Carter calls it apartheid. If you study the definition of that word, how can you dispute his use of it? I have not read his book. I am sick unto death of the Israel-Palestinian "problem"! This world has lots of problems that need our attention. That part of the world is beyond sanity - commanding and demanding everything from everyone - and I am tired of them. They need to - grow up!! My heart is with Israel and the Jews there, but I do not want my heart to be dragged along while Israel treats the Palestinians the way the Jews have been treated throughout history. I think Jordan and Syria need to be heavily leaned on by the UN and the US to provide homes for the Palestinians but that's not going to happen anytime soon, if ever - and in the meantime.... what? Israel has to deal with it and the world needs to help them get to "detente."

Result number: 26

Message Number 218147

Re: Both points of view are always needed View Thread
Posted by Dr. Ed on 12/28/06 at 14:04

Marie:

I think that my view of Carter's means to achieve Middle East peace is obvious. Carter's proposals are fractionated, biased and ill conceived. He fails to bring the "big picture" into account -- the status of Palestinians in Jordan, Egypt, Syria; the role of Iran, etc.
He still states that negotiation need proceed with Abbas when the authority of Abbas to negotiate is minimal. Beyond Carter's bias and antisemitism, I really doubt that he truly understands the geopolitics of the area.

Israel can best protect itself with defensible borders and by advocating that Iran not be permitted to foment terrorism and threaten the region with nuclear annihilation.

I believe that Israel should do its best to follow the Geneva Convention. One big dilemma for many countries is that that set of rules was formulated in a day and age when we were dealing with nations fighting nations. It is unclear as to how it applies to terrorists, terrorists acting as proxies for nations. We have the same dilemma in Guantanamo.

Result number: 27

Message Number 218127

I guess we are back to cutting and pasting instead of links View Thread
Posted by Dr. Ed on 12/28/06 at 13:00

A long cut and paste. It was just a short time ago when Scott or the moderator deleted a shorter cut and paste and did and demanded that I provide a link instead... oh well

Okay, lets look closely at this letter:

A letter to Jewish citizens of America

"During my recent book tour...a documentary about me and the work of The Carter Center. Demme reported that there was an equally large group of Jewish citizens demonstrating in support of the book and its call for a path to peace."

This represents one group of people at one venue. It is really irrelevant if the number of Jewish citizens demonstrating in support was equal to the number opposed at that particular place and time. What were the absolute numbers involved. If both groups were small as I suspect, it was an inacccurate sample size to guage opinion by scientific method.

"We first discussed the peace treaty I negotiated between Israel and Egypt in 1979, and the Holocaust Commission I announced on Israel's 30th birthday. Five of them had read my book completely and one partially, and I answered their questions about the text and title of PALESTINE PEACE NOT APARTHEID. I emphasized, as I had throughout the tour, that the book was about conditions and events in the Palestinian territories and not in Israel, where a democracy exists with all the freedoms we enjoy in our country and Israeli Jews and Arabs are legally guaranteed the same rights as citizens."

I am glad that he recognizes the conditions and Democracy in Israel. A major dilemna is that he conveniently forgets that the majority of Palestine is encompassed by Jordan. Remember the Black September issue in which Palestinian Arabs fought for control and autonomy in the territory controlled by the Hashemite minoirty government in Jordan. Why is this fact so conveniently ignored? Additonally he fails to state that the government of Israel only has limited control over what occurs in the territories where Palestinian Arabs live. The Palestinian Authority was provided a large measure of control by Israel at the demand of the US and Europe. It was the Palestinian people who rejected that control and voted in the radical Hamas instead which has continued to foment instability. The PA, in response to the polularity of Hamas, felt it necessary to prove to the Palestinian Arabs, that it too could carry on terrorism against Israel.

"We discussed the word "apartheid," which I defined as the forced segregation of two peoples living in the same land, with one of them dominating and persecuting the other."

Who is persecuting who? The so-called occupied territories were territories control by Egypt and Jordan before the 1967 War. The West Bank includes historical Judea and Samaria. I was surprised that Israel bowed to international pressure and did not annex those areas into Israel proper. That is a mjoar criticism that I have of the Israeli government. Did the Palestinian Arabs living in Gaza and the West Bank have more rights when Jordan and Egypt ran the areas. The answer is "no." Many Israelis moved to the West Bank and established settlements as they viewed that land as their home in the Holy Land both for historical and religious regions and because they had lost family members fighting the wars. The Jews living in the West Bank in no maneer practiced any form of policy of separation from the Arabs living there, It was their expectation that the Arabs living in the West Bank would have a stautus similar to that in the rest of Israel. It was the Arab leadershiop under Arafat that practiced spearation or "apartheid" if you will. There is no inherent prejudice of Arabs among Jews. There was and has been massive prejudice, blood libel and hatred preached against he jews by the Arab rulers including the PLO. Textbooks used in the Palestinian Arab classrooms, paid for by the US and the Europeans depict Israel as non-existant on the map and Jews as sub-humans.
" I made clear in the book's text and in my response to the rabbis that the system of apartheid in Palestine is not based on racism but the desire of a minority of Israelis for Palestinian land and the resulting suppression of protests that involve violence."

What? What is wrong with the supression of violent protests and how does that lead to apartheid? What does he mean by a "desire of a minority of Israeli's for Palestinian land?" Exactly how does Carter decide waht land belongs to the Israelis and what land to the Palestinian Arabs? '"Bishop Tutu, Nelson Mandela, and prominent Israelis, including former attorney general Ben Yair, who served under both Labor and Likud prime ministers, have used and explained the appellation in harsher terms than I, pointing out that this cruel oppression is contrary to the tenets of the Jewish faith and the basic principles of the nation of Israel."

Bishop Tutu and Mandela can chose to be racists if they wish. I will not condone it but Carter can. Which prominent Israelis does he speak of? One can always find a group of people that support one's views. Cruel oppression? Exactly what or which cruel oppression is Carter speaking of?

"I made it clear that I have never claimed that American Jews control the news media..."

Gee thanks.
, " factor, especially in the political arena, is the powerful influence of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, which is exercising its legitimate goal of explaining the current policies of Israel's government and arousing maximum support in our country. There are no significant countervailing voices."

Okay. So Carter is concerned about the influence of the AIPAC. Why is he not concerned about the influence and why does he not mention the numerous Arab lobbying groups which have MUCH more money derived from Saudi oil money to influence American politics and media? Why does Carter conveniently fail to mention the millions of dollars that he, associates and the Carter Center have recieved from Arab interests?

"When asked my proposals for peace in the Middle East, I summarized by calling for Hamas members and all other Palestinians to renounce violence and adopt the same commitment made by the Arab nations in 2002: the full recognition of Israel's right to exist in peace within its legally recognized 1967 borders (to be modified by mutual agreement by land swaps)."

What? Hamas is a terrorist group organized for the purpose of committing terror. It charter calls for the annihilation of the State of Israel. Hamas is unlikely to renounce violence even if Jimmy Carter asks. When was a "committment made by the Arab states?" Mr. Carter needs to share this with the rest of us.

" An immediate step would be the resumption of peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians, now absent for six years. President Mahmoud Abbas is the official spokesman for the Palestinians, as head of the Palestinian National Authority and the Palestine Liberation Organization, and has repeatedly called for peace talks. I asked the rabbis to join in an effort to induce the Israeli government to comply with this proposal."

One small problem. Carter calls Mahmoud Abbas the official spokesman for the Palestinians BUT the Palestinian Arabs do not regard him as such. Hamas won the election so Abbas is out. Yesterday, Prince Hassan of Jordan refused to meet with Abbas in deference to Hamas. Hmas will NOT negotiate with Israel.

"In addition, I pointed out that the Palestinian people were being deprived of the necessities of life by economic restrictions imposed on them by Israel and the United States because 42% had voted for Hamas candidates in the most recent election. Teachers, nurses, policemen, firemen, and other employees are not being paid, and the U.N. has reported that food supplies in Gaza are equivalent to those among the poorest families in sub-Sahara Africa with half the families surviving on one meal a day. My other request was that American Jewish citizens help to alleviate their plight."

It is not clear to me that it is up to Israel to foot the bill for hte Palestinians. Why do not the oil rich Arab nations send money? I thought that the other Arab countries were so concerned about the plight of the Palestinian people. Why do the oil rich Arabs provide money for Palestinian arms while refusing to pay for non-bleeigerant needs? Why does not Carter care about this fact and fail to mention this fact?????????????

"The chairman of the group, Rabbi Andrew Straus, then suggested that I make clear to all American Jews that my use of "apartheid" does not apply to circumstances within Israel, that I acknowledge the deep concern of Israelis about the threat of terrorism and other acts of violence from some Palestinians, and that the majority of Israelis sincerely want a peaceful existence with their neighbors. The purpose of this letter is to reiterate these points."

Some backtracking by Carter?

"We then held hands in a circle while one of the rabbis prayed, I autographed copies of my book as requested, and Chaplain (Colonel) Rabbi Bonnie Koppell gave me a prayer book."

Did they sing "Kumbaya?"

"I have spent a great deal of my adult life trying to bring peace to Israel, and my own prayer is that all of us who want to see Israelis enjoy permanent peace with their neighbors join in this common effort."

Right and because of your bias and hatred, many innocent Jews in Israel will not live to have an adult life: http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Terrorism-%20Obstacle%20to%20Peace/Memorial/2001/Shalhevet%20Tehiya%20Pass

Result number: 28

Message Number 218117

Re: 2 sides Where are the facts? Religious slurs from Marie View Thread
Posted by Dr. Ed on 12/28/06 at 11:59

"Jimmy Carter is no anti-Semite. He belongs to a prominent group of American presidents who made more important contributions toward the advancement of the Zionist project than the Zionists themselves"

Marie -- you must have been reading 1984 by George Orwell, not Carter's book if you truly believe anything in the above paragraph. I have been a member of the Sierra Club. One could argue that the Sierra Club has done more for the environment than any other group of environmentalists. My membership by no means establishes my credentials as a champion of environmental issues.

"The enforced segregation, abject humiliation and spiraling Israeli violence against Palestinians have been detailed in the Israeli and European press and, with remarkable consistency, by all the major human rights organizations"

This is an innaccurate and opinionated statement. What spiraling Israeli violence against Palestinians? It simply is a falsehood. Israel trained and armed the Palestine Authority to keep order in the territories where Palestinian Arabs live. Israel has had the need to defend itself from terrorist attacks by Palestinian Arabs. That HAS been a one way street. How many Israeli suicide bombers have attacked Arabs? Zero. How many unprovoked attacks by Israelis on Palestinian Arab civilians have occurred? Again zero. Yes, in the process of retaliation against terrorists there have been innocent civilians injured and killed. There is no such thing as a "sterile" military operation. Furthermore, the Arab terrorists have made it a policy to hide out among civilians and use them as a shield.

"Almost 100 students, faculty, and alumni of Brandeis University have signed a petition calling for campus officials to bring President Jimmy Carter to Waltham to discuss his controversial new book about Israel without requiring him to debate"

Wow, a hundred in a university that size. Why should Carter not debate? Why can he not defend his assertions? If he is unable to do so, why can he not ask others who supprt his position to assist him?

"Jimmy Carter has a bull's-eye on his back. Critics are taking shots. But that's OK, the former president said, because the rising volleys aimed at him are boosting sales of his latest book, Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid."

A man spreading lies and defaming an entire nation should have a target on his back. The very title of the book amounts to defamation. Consider his use of the term "apartheid" which was a very disagreeable policy of the former Republic of South Africa based on racial lines. That simply does not exist in Israel. Israel is the ONLY country in the Middle East where Arabs have the right to vote. Israeli Arabs live among Jews without any restriction. The Arabs who live apart do so because they have chosen to. For years, the PLO and now Hamas call for the destruction of the State of Israel and the murder of the Jews in Israel. The people who have "forced" segregation have been the Arab organizations and leadership. The second fallacy is that only Israel is being blamed for the segregation of Palestinian Arabs. Carter and his cabal of Jew haters conveniently fail to mention that Palestinian Arabs living in the land that constitutes the majority of Palestinian territory, aka trans-Jordan or Jordan remain segregated. Is Israel responsible for that? Palestinian Arabs who left Israel in and around the 1948 War of Independence were huddled in refugee camps in Lebanon, Syrian and Egypt and not afforded the opportunity to become integrated into the societies and economies of those nations. They were used as pawns for aggression against Israel for over 50 years! Is Israel responsible for that?

"All this for a former president whose Nobel Peace Prize was won forging the historic peace agreement between Israel and Egypt in 1979. Carter said he expected the response because the United States is one of the few nations in the world where debate over Israel's role in the Palestinian dispute is stifled."

I have never heard anything so ridiculous and incorrect. The media and universities ocntain much discussion of Israel's percieved role in the Palestinian dispute. What we DO NOT hear is the role of Egypt, Syria and Jordan in the Palestinian dispute. They are the entities that had the ability to bring the dispute to conclusion over 50 year ago. They did not want to do so because it would have removed their leverage for demanding territorial concessions from Israel and, not to mention, a major diversion of their populace from the miserable leadership of those countries.

"moral bankruptcy of institutions that claim to speak for American Jews and the Jewish state."

Okay, this is nothing but a slur if you cannot back up such a statement. Do you think anyone would sit back quietly if a poster came here to talk about the moral bankruptcy of the Vatican let alone the leadership of any major religion? Perhaps you feel that this board is a free for all but it should not be a forum for you to spew hatred against any religious institution.

Result number: 29

Message Number 218050

Re: Ed who? View Thread
Posted by Dr. Ed on 12/27/06 at 23:13



"Like I said your own bias is fueling your posts. More proof now then ever."

Do you really think that by continually repeating the same accusation that you will garner credibility. A falsehood is a falsehood no matter how often you chose to repeat it. Hitler used the principle of the "big lie" assuming that if you keep repeating a whopper, people will start to believe." "Israel was born out of the suffering of Jews during WWII but it is a nation irregardless of the dominate faith of Israel."

I hate to break the news to you but Israel was born over two thousand years ago. The Zionist movement started in the 19th Century. The end of WW2 provided a large influx of Jewish refugees from Europe which made the re-establishment of an official State of Israel possible.

"It must abide by all the same UN rules as the rest of us do." Are you serious? Explain to me exactly which UN rules the rest of us are abiding by.

"They are not an acception because of their history or faith. I don't buy into the hogwash if you criticize Israel you're anti-zionist." It depends on the nature of the criticism. When you criticize the needs which are the basis for national survival of the Jews in Israel, you indeed are taking an anti-Semitic point of view. "It is this kind of behavior that has so many angry at Israel and why Carter's book is selling like crazy." Mein Kampf sold like crazy too.

"Make a post criticizing Israel for one of their mistakes and then and only then will you convince me that your not being fueled to attack Carter based on your personal bias." Why should I? Israel has made many mistakes such as the failure to annex Judea and Samaria into Israel proper. I will criticize them for that. I will criticize Israel for not utilizing adequate force in Lebanon last summer for fear of loss of US aid. Nevertheless, whether I chose to come to this site to levy such criticisms has no bearing on my ability and motives in criticizing the lies of Carter. Carter has written a book containing falsehoods and misrepresentations of facts and does so with the authority of an ex-US President. It is a shameful act.
"Unless you telling me that your faith is directing you to attack Carter?" I am not telling you that. My faith helps determine my sense of moral justice.
"If so come clean instead of hiding behind a smokescreen of words. I can handle honesty. It's sneaky underhandedness that i do not care for."
Are the words of the late Martin Luther King a smokescreen? I think his quote does a good job exposing bigots such as yourself. You can handle honesty? How come you cannot practice honesty? One day you are on the left, the next day a moderate, then on the left and then a centrist.

"I believe you said this correct? http://heel.server327.com/bbs/bbv.cgi?n=216245
"Once the area is stabilized, we can withdraw our troops via Iran after taking out their nuclear facilities. ""

"Do you honestly believe there will be peace in the Middle East by the time your children are old enough to join the military?"

It is not likely that there will be.

"As long as people continue to view this as a black and white topic there will not be peace."

I do not view this a black and white. There are a multitude of parties involved with a multitiutde of interests. I have discussed issues concerning the various ethnic groups in Iran and Iraq, SAudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan and Syria on numerous posts and you appear unable to engage in such discussions. " As long as people scream "anti-zionist" for daring to have an open discussion on the Middle East there will not be peace."

I do not know anyone who screams "anti-Zionist" for daring to have an open discussion on the Middle East. I have not seen many attempts at an open discussion on this board. Certainly, Carter's book in no way approaches an open discussion as it is highly opinionated, one sided, innaccurate and incomplete. " As long as people deny their mistakes on BOTH sides there will not be peace. BOTH SIDES not one but BOTH SIDES."
I do not think that the conflict revolves around the denying of mistakes. If you think so you are very naive.

"I'm Catholic and my faith has not declared the Iraq War as JUST. By your standards because you support the war in Iraq you ARE ANTI-CATHOLIC." That is a total lapse in logic. It is hard to beleive that you are charged with the responsiblity of teaching children in a publi school. Luckily, my children go to a Catholic school and they do not think I am anti-Catholic and neither does my wife who is Catholic and supports our war effort in Iraq. "To criticize anyone who opposes the war in Iraq is ANTI-CATHOLIC." Please don't tell my wife that because she has plenty of criticisms for those who oppose the war and is by no means an anti-Catholic.

" Your standards not mine. " Thank G-d for that.

Result number: 30

Message Number 217964

John -- Marie answered your question View Thread
Posted by Dr Ed on 12/26/06 at 22:42

John:

You wanted to know where Marie stands. It has been a bit difficult to figure out -- has it not? Well, I think her last post told us a lot:

"I think Ed's initiative for Israel is his motiviation here. His desire to invade Iran is his own loyality for Israel and not in the best interest of our country. Sorry, but America first."

Here we see Marie stating that my opinion is based on the best interest of Israel, not the US. This is the oldest accusation in the book-- the loyalty of Jews is for their religion first and the country they live in second. Sorry Marie but you can deny this all you want but I and my ancestors have heard this loud and clear too many times. I think that democracies share values and goals. To the radical Islamists, Israel is the "little Satan" and the US, the "big Satan." Israel is just a closer and smaller target. They view Western values as a threat to their way of life and, given the chance, they would like to see the US go away. The interests of the US and other nations with similar values has drawn the US into war many at time with WW2 being one of the best examples. I really don't think that we were accusing citizens who wanted to defend Europe from Hitler of dual loyalty or the desire of wanting to place the interests of Europe over the US as a reason for the US to enter WW2. Keep in mind that Hitler never threatened the US directly (except for the declaration of war by treaty after Perhal Harbor). The Islamists supported by Iran have threatened us and our way of life.

"Israel is all grown up now. They do not need us to conquer the middle east for them. They have the bomb.....ahemmmm."
An incredible statement. Israel never has expressed the desire to conquer the Middle East let alone be at war with any of its neighbors. In fact, unless you get your revisionist history from Jimmy Carter, Israel has never started any war with an Arab country.
Israel should not have to base their defense on having the "bomb." Needing to use the bomb basically results in the end of the "cradle of humanity." Ahmadinejad states that he desires to accelerate the coming of the Islamic equivalent of the messiah so he appears to show little restraint with regards to armageddon. Will the world allow him to achieve such goals? I for one beleive that such a madman need be stopped. Stopping the destruction of the Middle East idoes not constitute a desire to place the interest of Israel above any nation.

"Israel has made their fair share of mistakes along the way. Our lack of acknowledgement of their mistakes has gotten us in a pickle."

BE SPECIFIC. What mistakes has Israel made that got the US into a "pickle?"
"Israel is our ally and I hope they remain so."

Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan are also US allies and recieve billions of dollars of US arms; Egypt with massive US economic aid. Yet those countries rarely support our interest in the Middle East, are not democracies and violate the civil rights of women and minority groups. Christianity has been almost completely stamped out by most of our Arab allies in the Middle East. Talk to a Coptic Christian from Egypt. Who supported the Christians in Lebanon during the last war? -- it was not the US. How come you are not concerned with their actions? How come you see no problem with our relations with those countries?

"But we must put our foot down with them when they are wrong."

Please be specific. Site examples of when Israel was wrong and we did not "put our foot down." Should Israel put it's foot down when the US is wrong? Should the US put its foot down when its Arab "allies" in the Middle East such as Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia are wrong? In fact, the silence is deafening concerning the human rights abuses of Egypt and Saudi Arabia. Why? Christians are routinely persecuted by our Pakistani allies. The longstanding Christian community of Iraq, the Chaldeans, who have biblical historical roots have been decimated by the radical Shiites supported by Iran.

" We will be there if they need us for support.......but not to fight their wars for them."

Israel has NEVER asked the US to fight a war for it. Sure, if Iran threatens Israel with nukes, Israel can retaliate in kind. The nations of the world should be acting to prevent that scenario.
"America first?" That was the motto of the right wing isolationsits who wanted the US to stay out of WW2, now adapted by leftist Marie!

"As far as the peace talks with Clinton.....Arafat totally screwed that one up. That one lies on the Palestinian shoulders."

"In short there is no ez answer to the Middle East crisis.....but attacking Carter won't help either. He's just a target of their frustration."

Carter is a target of "their" frustration? Who may that be. Carter wrote a book full of misinformation and disinformation attacking Israel. Why should anyone sit back and ignore such an act? Carter, as an ex-President has a responsibility to approach the world stage with wisdom and discretion. Yes we must comment on the misdeeds of Carter whether the left likes it or not.

Result number: 31

Message Number 217572

Re: Carter stated.that the US Revolutionary War was "unecessary." View Thread
Posted by Dr. Ed on 12/20/06 at 16:59

Dorothy:

The fact that your refuse to read the links in my posts says a lot about your persective. First of all, ScottR insists that we use links and not cut and paste. Second, if you don't want to read the information in the links, you are not engaging in conversation but a one sided diatribe or monologue. I DO read your posts and any links you wish to provide. Why will you not do the same?

I believe that few people will agree with you that Nixon was a worse President than Carter. Nixon's primary black mark was the Watergate scandal, which when placed in historical perspective was relatively minor. Of course, we would all prefer that our leaders be beyond reproach. Nixon opened dialogue with the government of mainland China. He was highly engaged in foreign policy during the height of the Cold War and did so in a competent fashion. Nixon governed from the center. Carter's legacy was one of gross incompetence. Interest rates at 21% rivaled that of the mafia during the Carter Administration. His biggest foreign policy blunder involved pulling support from the Shah, allowing the Ayatollah Khomenei and his radicals to take over. We are still paying the price for that today and will probably be paying a yet higher price for a generation to come. The radicals that took over Iran are gung ho to aquire nuclear weapons and have announced the willingness to use them. The Soviet Union at the height of the Cold War, did not show a propensity to want to see a nuclear holocaust. You blame Bush for the failure in Iraq but totally ignore the fact that if not for the Iranian and Syrian aid to the Iraqi "insurgents" the Iraq War would likely be concluded.

The Carter Administration provided nuclear technology to the North Korean government in exchange for peace. Look at the situation now! That was the epitomy of stupidity.

Carter, in his recent statements and recent book on the Middle East conflict is either delusional or a liar. He states that the issues really surround Palestine, not Israel. Does he even know what Palestine is? The British mandate of Palestine included the land that is now Jordan, the West Bank, Gaza and Israel. First of all, can Carter really beleive that if the people livng in the West Bank and Gaza were given more autonomy that that would solve the problem? That ignores the fact that the majority of "Palestinians" live in the portion of the British mandate of Palestine east of the Jordan River which was given by the Brits to a minority Hashemite ruler related to the Saudi royal family.

Result number: 32

Message Number 216245

Re: NBC Saids Iraq In The Midst of "Civil War" View Thread
Posted by Dr. Ed on 11/27/06 at 21:21

The Iraq situation can become like Vietnam if we conduct the war like Vietnam. The usage of the Vietnam analogy is basically one for "no win" wars. The Vietnam War became a no-win situation because our military leaders were unreasonably constrained by civilian leadership who did not permit the necessary military action to bring the Vietnam War to a conclusion. Our military trains to win wars and they can do it well. The military is poorly suited for police actions.

Durbin's comments are somewhat unrealistic. The issue is not that Iraqi's won't disband the militias and that Iraqi's don't want to govern responsibly. The act of making such statements is meaningless. Iraq is a conglomerate of various religious sects and ethnicities carved out of the region to be formed into a country based on the dictates of the European powers that defeated the Ottoman Empire after WW1. A more enlightened "carving up" of the Ottoman Empire by the Euros would have taken the rights of the various ethnic groups into account and have involved the creation of separate Sunni, Shiite and Kurd nations. The Brits gave about two thirds of the land of the British Mandate of Palestine to a minority Hashemite king (related to the Saudi royal family) and the new country became known as "Trans-Jordan." Interestingly, few Arabs seem to complain about the rights of the Palestinian Arabs that make up two thirds of the population of trans-Jordan. The French got what is now Lebanon as well as influence in Syria. Unfortunately, the Euros who were responsible for creating the mess refuse to take part in dealing with the consequences of their actions. I doubt that the Iraqi government can vanquish the Shiite militias, especially when those militias have Iranian support and the Euroweenies are supporting Iran. Saddam used the iron fist to keep Iraq in one piece. It is not clear that the amount of forced needed to keep Iraq as one country is a reasonable option. We do not have to keep worrying about offending the Turks over an independent or semi-autonomous Kurdistan as the Turks refuse to help us with the Iraq War. The Kurds deserve their own country or, at least, a reasonable measure of autonomy in their own lands. Kurdistan has made a remarkable recovery since the beginning of the Iraq War: see http://www.theotheriraq.com/ We need to see what it will take to satisfy the Sunnis and Shiites in terms of giving them a reasonable amount of autonomy while doubling up efforts to curb Iranian and Syrian subversion. Once the area is stabilized, we can withdraw our troops via Iran after taking out their nuclear facilities.

Result number: 33

Message Number 216131

Re: cryosurgery Surgery for Morton's Neuroma View Thread
Posted by BJordan on 11/25/06 at 19:24

Hi Carol,

Hope you are feeling well. What type of surgery did you have and how was your post-op?

Result number: 34

Message Number 216077

Re: EDIN Surgery for Morton's Neuroma View Thread
Posted by BJordan on 11/24/06 at 16:31

Doctors Wander and Goldstein:

Thank you for your responses - much appreciated.

Dr. Goldstein can you recommend a doctor in Connecticut who performs this procedure. Also, what is the cost of the procedure, in case the doc is out of network or my insurance carrier does not cover the procedure. (The only CT doctor (Dr. Patel), which I found on this site's listing, website states the below and does not mention cryosurgery:

"Neuromas are enlarged benign growths of nerves, most commonly between the third and fourth toes. They are caused by tissue rubbing against and irritating the nerves. Pressure from poorly-fitting shoes or abnormal bone structure can create the condition as well. Treatments include special shoes or inserts and/or cortisone injections, but surgical removal of the growth is sometimes necessary."


Thanks in advance.

Result number: 35

Message Number 216057

Re: EDIN Surgery for Morton's Neuroma View Thread
Posted by BJordan on 11/24/06 at 05:52

Hi, Dr. Wander,

Thank you so much for responding. I have some questions I hope you don't mind answering:

1. You wrote "surgery for a neuroma is never absolutely necessary" - what do you actually mean by this? Will my condition rectify itself without surgery? Will it get worse?

2. What is cryosurgery?

3. If I decided to do this procedure and it either doesn't work (according to my doc 10 percent of the time it doesn't) or scar tissue builds would I still be a candidate for cryosurgery?

Thanks.

Brenda

Result number: 36

Message Number 216037

EDIN Surgery for Morton's Neuroma View Thread
Posted by BJordan on 11/23/06 at 10:09

Hi,

Last year I had bunion surgery and this year my doc is recommending EDIN for a neuroma. (the neuroma is on the same foot that had bunion surgery). I had an MRI that showed a seven mil nodule 1/2 inch in diameter.

Is surgery really necessary? In the last three months I have had one cortisone shot, orthopedic inserts, and seven alcohol injections. The only shoe I can currently wear with minimal discomfort is my running shoes.

Thanks in advance.

Result number: 37

Message Number 210212

US denies closely linking Saddam to Zarqawi? View Thread
Posted by marie on 9/13/06 at 16:41

Did I say WMD's was the ONLY reason we attacked Iraq? I don't think so. The Bush administration made a case for the war based on the fact that we were under an IMMEDIATE threat from Iraq. In the justification and evidence of the threat was based on WMD's, Links with al-Qaida, and Hussein's past record of violence towards his neighbors.

The problem is that we now know there was not an emminent threat. Saddam was contained. NOW we do face a very serious situation in Iraq. Bush's trigger happy cowboy attitude got us in an awful mess. Meantime China made away with the most important part of our smart bomb......the magnets, Iran is havin' their cake and eatin' it too, and who knows what nutso is up to in North Korea.

Some of the things you guys are discussing is supported in the links I provided. I don't just cherry pick info. It's all there.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060912/pl_afp/usiraqqaedabush
The White House denied ever linking
Saddam Hussein and Jordanian-born extremist Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi in "direct, operational" ties before the March 2003 US-led invasion of
Iraq.

"They were in the country, and I think you understand that the Iraqis knew they were there. That's the relationship," said the spokesman.

Now a few words from our president. Documented and REAL. No conspiracy or spin. Just his words.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/10/20021007-8.html
"We know that Iraq and the al Qaeda terrorist network share a common enemy -- the United States of America. We know that Iraq and al Qaeda have had high-level contacts that go back a decade. Some al Qaeda leaders who fled Afghanistan went to Iraq. These include one very senior al Qaeda leader who received medical treatment in Baghdad this year, and who has been associated with planning for chemical and biological attacks. We've learned that Iraq has trained al Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases. And we know that after September the 11th, Saddam Hussein's regime gleefully celebrated the terrorist attacks on America."

And here is the Department of Defense's STATEMENT from November 2003:
DoD Statement on News Reports of Al Qaeda and Iraq Connections
http://www.defenselink.mil/releases/2003/nr20031115-0642.html

Also here is the Congressional Record of Bush on Iraq and links to 9/11 and a variety of misleading statements made by the president and his staff. Prove them wrong. Please. I'd like to see that. Seriously. It's only 35 pages. An ez read.
http://www.house.gov/reform/min/pdfs_108_2/pdfs_inves/pdf_admin_iraq_on_the_record_rep.pdf

Result number: 38
Searching file 20

Message Number 209592

correction View Thread
Posted by Dr. Ed on 9/07/06 at 21:11

The above should read: "The British Mandate of Palestine was split into a portion WEST of the Jordan River and a portion EAST of the Jordan River, called Trans-Jordan, now just Jordan."

Result number: 39

Message Number 209591

Re: Why hate the US? View Thread
Posted by Dr. Ed on 9/07/06 at 21:06

True, but other factors are at play too.
1)Syria and Iran have a significant interest in undermining our success in Iraq. A stable Democratic Iraq would be a problem for most regimes in the Middle East since most are dictatorships and kingdoms. Keep in mind that, besides, Iraq, the only other country where Arabs are free to vote is Israel.
2)Iraq is a conglomerate of different people: Kurds, Sunnis, Shiites. Iraq was a territory carved out of the Ottoman Empire by the European colonial powers after WW1. The Euros, in fact, caused much of the strife in the Middle East today by their colonial actions following the first world war. Lebanon was carved out of Syria by the French. The British Mandate of Palestine was split into a portion east of the Jordan River and a portion west of the Jordan River, called Trans-Jordan, now just Jordan. The population of Jordan is about two-thirds Palestinian Arab but control of Trans-Jordan was given to a Hashemite minority, the rulers of which were related to the Saudi royal family. Is ist not amazing that no one ever calls out for a homeland for the Palestinians in the largest part of the British Mandate of Palestine, ie. Trans-Jordan or Jordan. There never existed a country named "Jordan." It is an artificial creation of the Brits.

Result number: 40

Message Number 207421

Democrat Party's long history of racism View Thread
Posted by Dr. Ed on 8/16/06 at 01:39

Great to see the political discussion board back.

The Democrat Party's Long and Shameful History of Bigotry and Racism

A common attack upon conservatives and republicans by the ultra left is to engage in what has come to be known as "playing the race card" but is more accurately described as racial McCarthyism. Hardly a day goes by without a member of the far left wing falsely accusing conservatives of racism, bigotry, and a wide array of similar nasty things. They are not only dishonest, but they often border on the absurd, as in NAACP leader and hyper bigot Julian Bond's recent implication to his organization that Bush administration officials supported confederate slavery. Amazingly, Bond's statements went without condemnation from the radical Democrat party or others in his organization.


Not surprisingly, in all the lies and accusations of racism by the radical left wing, the truth becomes distorted not only about the Republicans but also the Democrats who make these accusations themselves. For instance, you may or may not have heard Democrat Senator Robert Byrd's outburst of racist bigoted slurs, more specifically the "n-word," on national television in March of 2001. Amazingly, this incident of blatant racism on national television drew barely a peep from the NAACP, Jesse Jackson, Julian Bond, Mary Frances Berry, or any of the other ambulance chasers who purport themselves to be the leaders of the civil rights movement. In contrast, the main source of well deserved criticism for Byrd's racist outburst came not from any of the so called leaders of the civil rights movement but from from Republican Majority Leader Dick Armey (source). The race hustlers Jackson, Mfume et al turned a blind eye towards this act of racism by one of their own party, at most issuing an unpublicized slap on the wrist, or, as was more often the case, making not a peep. But where the race hustlers turn a blind eye and spew their lies, it is up to conservatives to set the record straight with the truth.

In response to the growing practice of racial McCarthyism by prominent left wing Democrats, it is necessary to expose the truth about the Democrat Party's record on Civil Rights:


I. Acts of Bigotry by Prominent Democrats and Leftists:
Franklin Delano Roosevelt: Franklin Roosevelt, the long time hero and standard bearer of the Democrat Party, headed up and implemented one of the most horrible racist policies of the 20th Century – the Japanese Internment Camps during World War II. Roosevelt unilaterally and knowingly enacted Japanese Internment through the use of presidential Executive Orders 9066 and 9102 during the early years of the war. These orders single-handedly led to the imprisonment of an estimated 120,000 law abiding Americans of Japanese ancestry, the overwhelming majority of them natural born second and third
generation American citizens. Countless innocents lost their property, fortunes, and, in the case of an unfortunate few, even their lives as a result of Roosevelt's internment camps, camps that have been accurately described as America's concentration camps. Perhaps most telling about the racist nature of Roosevelt's order was his clearly expressed intention to apply it almost entirely to Japanese Americans, even though America was also at war with Germany and Italy. In 1943, Roosevelt wrote regarding concerns of German and Italian Americans that they t0o would share in the fate of the interned Japanese Americans, noting that "no collective evacuation of German and Italian aliens is contemplated at this time." Despite this assertion, Roosevelt did exhibit his personal fears about Italian and German Americans, and in his typical racist form he used an ethnic stereotype to make his point. Expressing about his position on German and Italian Americans during World War II, Roosevelt stated “I don’t care so much about the Italians, they are a lot of opera singers, but the Germans are different. They may be dangerous.”

Roosevelt also appointed two notorious segregationists to the United States Supreme Court. Roosevelt appointed South Carolina segregationist Democrat Jimmy Byrnes to the court. Roosevelt later made Byrnes a top advisor, where the segregationist earned the nickname “assistant president.” Byrnes was Roosevelt’s second choice behind Harry Truman for the VP nod in his 1944 reelection bid. Roosevelt also appointed segregationist Democrat Senator Hugo Black of Alabama to the court. Black was a former member of the Ku Klux Klan with a notorious record of racism himself.

Hugo Black: A former Democrat Senator from Alabama and liberal U.S. Supreme Court Justice appointed by FDR, Hugo Black had a lengthy history of hate group activism. Black was a member of the Ku Klux Klan in the 1920's and gained his legal fame defending Klansmen under prosecution for racial murders. In one prominent case, Black provided legal representation to Klansman Edwin Stephenson for the hate-induced murder of a Catholic priest in Birmingham. A jury composed of several Klan members acquited Stephenson of the murder, reportedly after Black expressed Klan gestures to the jury during the trial. In 1926 Black sought and won election as a Democrat to the United States Senate after campaigning heavily to Klan membership. He is said to have told one Klan audience "I desire to impress upon you as representatives of the real Anglo-Saxon sentiment that must and will control the destinies of the stars and stripes, that I want your counsel." In the Senate Black became a stauch supporter of the liberal New Deal initiatives of FDR and a solid opponent of civil rights legislation, including a filibuster of an anti-lynching measure. Black led the push for several New Deal programs and was a key participant in FDR's court packing scandal. Roosevelt appointed Black, a loyal ally, to the U.S. Supreme Court. During the Senate confirmation of Black's nomination, the issue of his strong Klan affiliations caused a public controversy over his appointment. Following the confirmation Roosevelt claimed ignorance of Black's Klan past, though this claim was dubious at best. Black's first Senate election, which occurred with Klan support, had been covered nationally a decade earlier in 1926. Black's Klan affiliations were a well known part of his political background and recieved heavy coverage in the newspapers at the time of his appointment. On the court, Black became a liberal stalwart. He also continued his career of supporting racism by authoring the opinion in favor of FDR's Japanese internment program in the infamous Korematsu ruling.

Senator Robert Byrd, D-WV: Byrd is a former member of the Ku Klux Klan and is currently the only national elected official with a history in the Klan, a well known hate group. Byrd was extremely active in the Klan and rose to the rank of “Kleagle,” an official Klan membership recruiter. Byrd once stated that he joined the Klan because it was effective in "promoting traditional American values" (Source). Byrd's choice of words speak volumes about his bigotry considering the fact that the Klan is a notorious hate group, and the racist "values" it promotes are anything but American. One of the earliest criticisms of Byrd's Klan ties came in 1952 when he was running for Congress. Byrd responded by claiming that he had left the Klan in 1943 while noting that "(d)uring the nine years that have followed, I have never been interested in the Klan." Byrd was lying, however, as he engaged in correspondence with a Klan Imperial Wizard long after he claims to have ended his ties with the hate group.

In a letter to the Klan leadership (Source) dated 3 years after he purported to have ended his ties with them, Byrd wrote "I am a former kleagle of the Ku Klux Klan in Raleigh County and the adjoining counties of the state. The Klan is needed today as never before and I am anxious to see its rebirth here in West Virginia." Byrd continued his racist diatribe "It is necessary that the order be promoted immediately and in every state of the Union" and followed with a request for assistance from the hate group's leadership in "rebuilding the Klan in the realm" of West Virginia.

Byrd's racism extends far beyond his Klan membership. In a letter he wrote on the subject of desegregating the armed forces, Byrd escalated his racist rhetoric to an appalling level. In the letter, Byrd vowed that he would never fight in an integrated armed services noting "(r)ather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds" (Source).

Byrd's racist opinions have shown their ugly face in his behavior in the Senate. Byrd led the filibuster of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and, according to the United States Senate's own website, filibustered the legislation to the bitter end appearing as one of the last opponents to the act before a coalition of civil rights proponents led by Republican Minority Leader Everett Dirksen invoked cloture so that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 could pass. At the time, Byrd was in the the midst of a 14 hour and 13 minute filibuster diatribe against the key civil rights measure (Source). Throughout the 1960's, Byrd was was one of the staunchest opponents to civil rights in the U.S. Senate. Byrd’s racist history drew attention recently when he went on national television and repeatedly used the n-word, one of the most vicious racial slurs in existence, in an appearance on national television. Byrd uttered the slur on Fox News Sunday with Tony Snow on March 5, 2001. Despite the appalling nature of the remark, it went largely ignored by the mainstream media and the self appointed "civil rights" leadership. Whereas a similar remark by anyone other than a leading Democrat Senator would assuredly prompt the likes of Jesse Jackson to assemble protest rallies demanding resignations, the Jackson crowd was eerily quiet following Byrd's remarks, issuing only low key suggestions that Byrd should avoid making such bigoted remarks.

In a sickening recognition of Byrd's appalling political career, the national Democrat party has done nothing but embrace the West Virginia senator with leadership roles and practically every honor imaginable. To this very day the Democrats call former Klansman turned U.S. Senator Robert Byrd the "conscience of the Senate." They have embraced him as their party's central pillar in all ways possible. Byrd has been reelected more times than any other Democrat senator, has served as a Democrat in Congress, a Democrat State Senator in West Virginia, and a Democrat State Delegate in West Virginia. Democrats have made repeatedly elected Byrd into their national party leadership and into the U.S. Senate leadership. He became secretary of the Senate Democrat Caucus in 1967, and Senate Democrat Whip in 1971. The Democrats elected former Klansman Byrd as their Senate Majority Leader from 1977-1980 and as their Senate Minority Leader from 1981-1986. Byrd was again elected Democrat Majority Leader from 1987-1988. Democrats made Byrd the chairman of the powerful Appropriations Committee and President Pro Tempore of the Senate from 1989 until the Republicans won control of the Senate in November 1994. Following the defection of Jim Jeffords in June 2001, the Democrats again made Byrd the chairman of the Appropriations Committee and elected him to the highest ranking office in the Senate: the President Pro Tempore, a position which also put this former Klansman 4th in line for the presidency. Byrd lost his position when Republicans retook the Senate in late 2002, but continues to serve as one of the highest ranking members of the Democrat Senate leadership today.

Senator Ernest Hollings, D-SC: Hollings is liberal Democrat Senator from South Carolina who is also notorious for his use of racial slurs. He rose out of the Democrat Party's segregationist wing in the 1960's as governor of South Carolina. While in office as governor, Hollings personally led the opposition to lunch counter integration in his state. The New York Times reported on March 17, 1960 that then-governor Hollings "warned today that South Carolina would not permit 'explosive' manifestations in connection with Negro demands for lunch-counter services." According to the article, Hollings gave a speech in which he "challenged President Eisenhower's contention that minorities had the right to engage in certain types of demonstrations" against segregation. In the speech Hollings described the Republican president as "confused" and asserted that Eisenhower had done "great damage to peace and good order" by supporting the rights of minorities to protest segregation at the lunch counters.

Governor Hollings' support for segregation continued throughout his term and included his attendance at a July 23, 1961 meeting of segregationist Democrats to organize their opposition to the civil rights movement. Hollings was one of four governors in attendence, all of them Democrats. The others included rabid segregationists Orval Faubus of Arkansas and Ross Barnett of Mississippi. The New York Times reported on the meeting, noting that among the strategies discussed were using the segregationist White Citizens Council organization to mobilize political opposition to desegregation.

In more recent years Hollings, a senior Democrat senator, has made disparaging racial remarks and slurs against minorities. Senator Hollings, who was a contender for his party's presidential nomination in 1984, blamed his defeat in the primaries by using a racial slur against Hispanics. After losing the Iowa Straw Poll, Hollings stated "You had wetbacks from California that came in here for Cranston," referring to one of his opponents, Alan Cranston. A few years later Hollings reportedly used the slur "darkies" to derogatorily refer to blacks. He also once disparagingly referred to the Rainbow PUSH Coalition as the "Blackbow Coalition," and called former Senator Howard Metzenbaum, who is Jewish, "the Senator from B'nai B'rith." Hollings gained international criticism for his remarks about the African Delegation to the 1993 Geneva GATT conference, where he crudely remarked "you'd find these potentates from down in Africa, you know, rather than eating each other, they'd just come up and get a good square meal in Geneva." Hollings was also the Governor of South Carolina who raised the confederate flag over the state capitol in the early 1960's in what was considered at the time to be an act of defiance to civil rights. The press ignored Hollings and his role in the flag issue at the same time the political correctness police were smearing George W. Bush during his campaign after Bush correctly remarked that the flag was a state issue to be decided upon by South Carolina and not the national government.

Jesse Jackson: Jackson was the featured prime time speaker at the 2000 Democrat Convention. Jackson has a history of using anti-Semitic slurs and derogatorily calling New York City “Hymietown.” Jackson, a prominent self proclaimed "civil rights leader," is himself guilty of the same bigotry he dishonestly purports to oppose.

Dan Rather: Rather, the well known television anchor for CBS, is also a liberal Democrat who has spoken at fundraisers for the Democrat party in the past. The notoriously left wing reporter appeared on the Don Imus radio show on July 19, 2001 where he was interviewed about his long term refusal to cover the Gary Condit (D-CA) scandal involving an affair with a missing intern despite the scandal's national prominence. Rather noted on the air that CBS had basically forced him to cover the story that was on every other network and on the front page of all the major newspapers, all this after Rather avoided it for months. Rather stated on the air, refering to CBS, that "they got the Buckwheats" and made him cover the Condit scandal. The term "Buckwheat" is considered an offensive racial stereotype that stems from an easily frightened black character named "Buckwheat" on the Little Rascals comedies. It is widely regarded as a racial epithet and has long been condemned as an offensive stereotype by several civil rights organizations. In several past incidents (see here and here) the use of the epithet "Buckwheat" has recieved condemnation by the NAACP, Al Sharpton and other left wing organizations. These left wing organizations and personalities have demanded that other media personalities be fired over using the epithet, and even staged a protest at a school over the mere allegation that the racist stereotype had been used by a teacher. Yet these same liberal groups have, to date, remained completely silent now that one of their own, Dan Rather, is guilty of using the same offensive racial stereotype they have condemned elsewhere on a national radio show. It's just more proof of how the left wingers who cry the loudest with accusations of racism against others turn a blind eye when somebody of their own left wing ideology is the undeniable culprit of a blatantly racist act or statement!

Cragg Hines: Hines is one of the most rabidly partisan DC based Democrat editorial columnists to work for a major newspaper, and he makes no attempts to hide it. To Hines, pro-lifers are "neanderthals," as is often the case with those who differ in opinion with him. Ironically, Hines, a columnist who regularly touts himself as an enlightened progressive, is also known for racial remarks and religious intolerance. He attacked Senator Jesse Helms in an August 26, 2001 editorial with not only the usual liberal name calling, but also with a racial epithet. Hines used the racial slur "cracker" to attack Helms. He used the epithet not only within the article's text, but he even included it in the piece's title. In a sense of heavy irony, Hines' article accused Helms of bigotry for, among other things, opposing liberal policies like affirmative action. He didn't seem to object to himself for his own bigotted language in the same article. Hines has also drawn heavy criticism from Catholics including a letter to the editor from the former President of the U.S. Catholic Bishop's Conference for his seemingly agenda-driven criticisms of Catholicism and its religious leaders, often based on little or no historical evidence, which he has expressed in numerous editorial columns.

Al Sharpton: Sharpton, a perrenial Democrat candidate and one of the rumored candidates for the Democrat's 2004 presidential nomination, has a notorious racist past. Sharpton was a central figure who fanned the 1991 Crown Heights race riot, where a mob shouting anti-semetic slurs murdered an innocent Jewish man. Sharpton also incited a 1995 protest of a Jewish owned store in Harlem where protesters used several anti-semetic slurs. During the protests, a Sharpton lieutenant called the store's owner a "bloodsucker" and declared an intent to "loot the Jews." A member of the protest mob later set fire to the store, resulting in the death of seven (source).

Representative Dick Gephardt, D-MO: Gephardt, the former Democrat Minority Leader in the U.S. House of Representatives, gave several speeches to a St. Louis area hate group during his early years as a representative. According to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Gephardt spoke before the Metro South Citizens Council, a now defunct white supremacist organization, during his early years as a congressman. Newsmax.com further reported that Gephardt had openly asked the group for an endorsement of his candidacy during one of his many visits with the organization. Gephardt has long avoided questions about his past affiliation with this group.

Andrew Cuomo: Cuomo, Bill Clinton's former Housing Secretary and a prominent Democrat political player in New York, was tape recorded using racially inflamatory rhetoric to build opposition to a potential Democrat primary opponent while speaking to a Democrat group. Cuomo stated that voting for his rival for the New York Democrat gubernatorial nomination Carl McCall, who is black, would create a "racial contract" between Black and Hispanic Democrats "and that can't happen." Upon initial reports, Cuomo denied the statement but later a tape recording surfaced. Cuomo later dropped out of the race for governor (source).

Lee P. Brown: Brown, Bill Clinton's former drug czar and Democrat mayor of Houston, engaged in racist campaigning designed to suppress Hispanic voter turnout during his 2001 reelection bid. Brown faced challenger Orlando Sanchez, a Hispanic Republican who drew heavy support from the Hispanic community during the general election. Two weeks prior to the runoff, Brown's campaign printed racist signs designed to intimidate Hispanic voters. The signs featured a photograph of Sanchez and the words "Anti-Hispanic." The signs drew harsh criticism from Hispanic leaders as their message was designed to intimidate and confuse Hispanic voters. Around the same time the signs were being used, Brown supporter and city councilman Carol Alvarado made a series of racially charged attacks on Sanchez, implying a desire to see the supression of Hispanic voter turnout in the runoff. Brown staffers also went on record claiming that Sanchez was not a true Hispanic. The racist anti-Hispanic undertones of Brown's reelection bid were so great that liberal Democrat city councilman John Castillo, himself Hispanic, retracted his endorsement of Brown in disgust and became a Sanchez supporter in the final week of the campaign. Following the harsh condemnation of the racist signs and tactics, Brown purported that his campaign was removing them even though many still lingered around Houston up until the election. When election day came along, Brown placed more of the racist signs at polling places, despite his claim to have stopped using them. The large campaign billboard style election day signs featured, in Spanish, the word "Danger!" on them followed by Sanchez's name with a large red circle and slash through it. The signs identified the Brown campaign as their owner on the bottom. Brown's racially charged reelection effort barely squeeked by Sanchez on election day, winning 51% to 49% following a series of racially motivated advertisements in which the Brown campaign appealed to the fear of black voters by invoking images of the gruesome lynching death of James Byrd, Jr. and by attempting to pit them against Hispanics. While Brown had the audacity to declare himself a mayor for all people and all ethnicities at his victory party, many in Houston fear the racial wounds inflicted by his campaign will take years to heal.

Mary Frances Berry: Berry is the Democrat chair of the US Commission on Civil Rights (USCCR). She purports herself to be an "independent" in her political affiliation in order to hold her job on the civil rights commission where partisan membership may not exceed 4 for either party, but is in fact a dedicated liberal Democrat who openly supported Al Gore for president and has given a total of $20,000 in personal contributions to the Democrat Party, Al Gore for President, and other Democrat candidates over the last decade. Berry is an open racist who is affiliated with the far-left Pacifica radio network, a group with ties to black nationalist causes. Berry once stated "Civil rights laws were not passed to protect the rights of white men and do not apply to them," indicating that she believes the USCCR should only look out for civil rights violations against persons of certain select skin colors.

Billy McKinney: Former Democrat State Representative Billy McKinney of Georgia, who is also the father of former Democrat congresswoman Cynthia McKinney of the same state. During his daughter's failed 2002 reelection bid, McKinney appeared on television where he blamed his daughter's difficulties on a Jewish conspiracy. McKinney unleashed a string of anti-semitic sentiments, stating "This is all about the Jews" and spelling out "J-E-W-S." McKinney lost his own seat in a runoff a few weeks later.

The Democrat Party and the Ku Klux Klan: Aside from the multiple Klan members who have served in elected capacity within the high ranks of the Democrat Party, the political party itself has a lengthy but often overlooked history of involvement with the Ku Klux Klan. Though it has been all but forgotten by the media, the Democrat National Convention of 1924 was host to one of the largest Klan gatherings in American history. Dubbed the "Klanbake convention" at the time, the 1924 Democrat National Convention in New York was dominated by a platform dispute surrounding the Ku Klux Klan. A minority of the delegates to the convention attempted to condemn the hate group in the party's platform, but found their proposal shot down by Klan supporters within the party. As delegates inside the convention voted in the Klan's favor, the Klan itself mobilized a celebratory rally outside. On July 4, 1924 one of the largest Klan gatherings ever occurred outside the convention on a field in nearby New Jersey. The event was marked by speakers spewing racial hatred, celebrations of their platform victory in the Democrat Convention, and ended in a cross burning.




II. Democrat opposition to the Civil Rights Movement:
A little known fact of history involves the heavy opposition to the civil rights movement by several prominent Democrats. Similar historical neglect is given to the important role Republicans played in supporting the civil rights movement. A calculation of 26 major civil rights votes from 1933 through the 1960's civil rights era shows that Republicans favored civil rights in approximately 96% of the votes, whereas the Democrats opposed them in 80% of the votes! These facts are often intentionally overlooked by the left wing Democrats for obvious reasons. In some cases, the Democrats have told flat out lies about their shameful record during the civil rights movement.

Democrat Senators organized the record Senate filibuster of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Included among the organizers were several prominent and well known liberal Democrat standard bearers including:
- Robert Byrd, current senator from West Virginia
- J. William Fulbright, Arkansas senator and political mentor of Bill Clinton
- Albert Gore Sr., Tennessee senator, father and political mentor of Al Gore. Gore Jr. has been known to lie about his father's opposition to the Civil Rights Act.
- Sam Ervin, North Carolina senator of Watergate hearings fame
- Richard Russell, famed Georgia senator and later President Pro Tempore

The complete list of the 21 Democrats who opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 includes Senators:

- Hill and Sparkman of Alabama
- Fulbright and McClellan of Arkansas
- Holland and Smathers of Florida
- Russell and Talmadge of Georgia
- Ellender and Long of Louisiana
- Eastland and Stennis of Mississippi
- Ervin and Jordan of North Carolina
- Johnston and Thurmond of South Carolina
- Gore Sr. and Walters of Tennessee
- H. Byrd and Robertson of Virginia
- R. Byrd of West Virginia

Democrat opposition to the Civil Rights Act was substantial enough to literally split the party in two. A whopping 40% of the House Democrats VOTED AGAINST the Civil Rights Act, while 80% of Republicans SUPPORTED it. Republican support in the Senate was even higher. Similar trends occurred with the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which was supported by 82% of House Republicans and 94% of Senate Republicans. The same Democrat standard bearers took their normal racists stances, this time with Senator Fulbright leading the opposition effort.

It took the hard work of Republican Senate Minority Leader Everett Dirksen and Republican Whip Thomas Kuchel to pass the Civil Rights Act (Dirksen was presented a civil rights accomplishment award for the year by the head of the NAACP in recognition of his efforts). Upon breaking the Democrat filibuster of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, Republican Dirksen took to the Senate floor and exclaimed "The time has come for equality of opportunity in sharing in government, in education, and in employment. It will not be stayed or denied. It is here!" (Full text of speech). Sadly, Democrats and revisionist historians have all but forgotten (and intentionally so) that it was Republican Dirksen, not the divided Democrats, who made the Civil Rights Act a reality. Dirksen also broke the Democrat filibuster of the 1957 Civil Rights Act that was signed by Republican President Eisenhower.

Outside of Congress, the three most notorious opponents of school integration were all Democrats:
- Orval Faubus, Democrat Governor of Arkansas and one of Bill Clinton's political heroes
- George Wallace, Democrat Governor of Alabama
- Lester Maddox, Democrat Governor of Georgia

The most famous of the school desegregation standoffs involved Governor Faubus. Democrat Faubus used police and state forces to block the integration of a high school in Little Rock, Arkansas. The standoff was settled and the school was integrated only after the intervention of Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower.

Even the Democrat Party organization resisted integration and refused to allow minority participation for decades. Exclusion of minorities was the general rule of the Democrat Party of many states for decades, especially in Texas. This racist policy reached its peak under the New Deal in the southern and western states, often known as the New Deal Coalition region of FDR. The Supreme Court in Nixon v. Herndon declared the practice of "white primaries" unconstitutional in 1927 after states had passed laws barring Blacks from participating in Democrat primaries. But the Democrat Parties did not yield to the Court’s order. After Nixon v. Herndon, Democrats simply made rules within the party's individual executive committees to bar minorities from participating, which were struck down in Nixon v. Condon in 1932. The Democrats, in typical racist fashion, responded by using state parties to pass rules barring blacks from participation. This decision was upheld in Grovey v. Townsend, which was not overturned until 1944 by Smith v. Allwright. The Texas Democrats responded with their usual ploys and turned to what was known as the "Jaybird system" which used private Democrat clubs to hold white-only votes on a slate of candidates, which were then transferred to the Democrat party itself and put on their primary ballot as the only choices. Terry v. Adams overturned the Jaybird system, prompting the Democrats to institute blocks of unit rule voting procedures as well as the infamous literacy tests and other Jim Crow regulations to specifically block minorities from participating in their primaries. In the end, it took 4 direct Supreme Court orders to end the Democrat's "white primary" system, and after that it took countless additional orders, several acts of Congress, and a constitutional amendment to tear down the Jim Crow codes that preserved the Democrat's white primary for decades beyond the final Supreme Court order ruling it officially unconstitutional.

Hispanics in South Texas were treated especially poorly by the Democrat Party, which relied heavily on a system of political bosses to coerce and intimidate Hispanics into voting for Democrat primary candidates of choice. Though coercion is illegal, this system, known as the Patron system, is still in use to this day by local Democrat parties in some heavy Hispanic communities of the southwest.


The next time Democrats take to the national airwaves to dishonestly accuse Republicans of racial hatred, remember who the historical record up until this very day points to as the real bigots: The Democrat Party. In all possible ways, the Democrat Party is built around the pillars of ultra leftists, many of whom are known participants in racism and/or affiliates of racist hate groups. Consider the Democrat Party of today's heroes and leaders:
- Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Democrat icon and orchestrator of Japanese Internment
- Ex-House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt, former affiliate of a St. Louis area racist group
- Ex-Senate President Pro Tempore Robert Byrd, former Ku Klux Klansman known for making bigoted slurs on national television
- Rev. Jesse Jackson, Democrat keynote speaker and race hustler known for making anti-Semitic slurs
- Rev. Al Sharpten, Democrat activist and perennial candidate and race hustler known inciting anti-Semitic violence in New York City
- Sen. Ernest Hollings, leading Democrat Senator known for use of racial slurs against several minority groups
- Lee P. Brown, former Clinton cabinet official and Democrat mayor of Houston who won reelection using racial intimidation against Hispanic voters
- Andrew Cuomo, former Clinton cabinet official and Democrat candidate for NY Governor who made racist statements about a black opponent.
- Dan Rather, Democrat CBS news anchor and editorialist known for using anti-black racial epithets on a national radio broadcast
- Donna Brazile, former Gore campaign manager known for making anti-white racial attacks. Brazile has also worked for Jackson, Gephardt, and Michael Dukakis

The simple truth is that the Democrat Party's history during this century is one closely aligned to bigotry in a record stemming largely out of the liberal New Deal era up until the modern day. Bigots are at the center of the Democrat party's current leadership and role models. And in a striking display of hypocrisy, many of the same Democrats who dishonestly shout accusations of "bigotry" at conservatives are practicing bigots of the most disgusting and disreputable kind themselves.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2001, The Capitalist Conservative Republican Homepage. All Rights Reserved.

Result number: 41

Message Number 205048

Re: Is anyone as scared as I am? View Thread
Posted by Dorothy on 7/22/06 at 14:04

Kathy G

I've been in the state of mind you describe off and on throughout this most recent outbreak in the middle east, too. And like you, I've been overly distressed by some of the news coverage so that I have "tuned out" except for just enough to stay on top of events. (I check the news each morning - radio and online - to see what has happened; I well remember casually checking the news on the morning of September 11, 2001 only to be stunned by the news and seeing the unbelievable happening....)

It can, and does, feel as if (as you said)"we, the world, are in big, big trouble" - but you might find some comfort in some of what john h so often reminds us of here. (I am paraphrasing freely as I can't quote him exactly) He tells us that the world has been in very, very dire circumstances many times before and that we come through them and pick up and carry on.....

What I have been astounded by, and very worried about, lately is the open/blatant resurgence of anti-Jewish (hard to say "anti-Semitic" because Semites are Jews and Arabs, actually) statements and actions very recently and over the past few years in Europe. This is just beyond belief. The Europeon president du jour last week said that the EU will NOT identify Hezbollah as a terrorist organization. The Spanish premier/prime minister? put on a Palestinian scarf and was photographed with Palestinian supporters and he has been making ugly public anti-Jewish and anti-Israel statements for some time. And for several years there have been desecrations of cemeteries and synogogues, mostly in France, but not only. Does all of this reflect the fact that many Europeon countries are increasingly MUSLIM countries or does it reflect the ancient, latent Europeon hatred for Jews or it is purely crass materialism and the greed for easy oil...... Whatever it is, it is dark and ominous and worrisome.....and hard to believe that it can be happening.

Jordan, Egypt, Syria need to make a home for the Palestinians. Israel should not be expected - by the "world community" - whatever that is! - to make a home for people sworn to destroy it and committed to hatred of its very existence. Israel and the U.S. are allies and as such need to stand by each other. The U.S. has allied itself with some odd bedfellows: the Saudis, being a prime example of that..... Somebody explain to me the single-minded hard-line against Cuba by U.S. administration after adminstration, while administration after administration kisses and hugs Saudi "princes" (Kings of Decadence!)and just this week has said to U.S. labor union and other organizations wanting to implement greater monitoring of labor situations in China: no, we don't think that's a good idea to do that..... Somebody please tell me: exactly what DOES the U.S. stand for??

Sorry, Kathy G - I got into a bit of a rant here; not my intention at first. I agree with what you described actually.... sorry. I guess I am much more affected by the news than I like to admit. Maybe my spirits need some light therapy!

Result number: 42

Message Number 204410

Re: Mumbai bombings and Israel/Lebanon View Thread
Posted by Dorothy on 7/17/06 at 10:57

John H -

I am always struck by the absence of any suggestion that the Palestinians be given territory in Jordan or Syria or Iran or Eqypt for a "homeland"..... The Palestinians were more linked to what is now Jordan historically than to what is now Israel. And if those countries have so much feeling for the Palestinians, then give them a home! When we consider the Palestinians and how the British handled the whole process in the 1940s, we know that the Palestinians were evicted from what had been their homes and their lands. That does not make a people happy. But what gets left out of those discussions is the repeated and persistent loss of homes, belongings, family members for Jews, in the Middle East,in Europe, in Russia. What would be justice, I think, is for Germany to have been required to take in the Palestinians or for Germans to have been evicted from Germany for repatriation of Jews! THAT would have been justice! However, that is not consistent with historical ties to Israel for Zionists....not to mention all of the other forces that would have squashed such an idea. Israel needs an occupying force, something like the U.S. forces along the border in Korea, all around its borders. Palestinians need to be resettled in, say, Jordan, and Germany should be required to build them homes and give them financial support until the resettlement takes hold. Why Germany? Because through the two still unfinished wars they started, WWI and WWII, these unsettled issues continue to kill and destroy. The U.N. should install an occupying force around the Jordanian or Syrian or Lebanese-Palestinian "homeland" to enforce "peace". The world should intervene to put a stop to the warring in that part of the world. We are all sick of it! - And tell me, other than OIL, why do the wars in that part of the world get so much world attention when the other tribal wars, those in Africa, go almost ignored?!
We watched the 1959 movie "On the Beach" recently - annihilation of humans due to nuclear war and radioactive fallout - and once again, you are reminded of how utterly and persistently stupid humans are. And then always so regretful.....in hindsight!

Result number: 43

Message Number 204408

Re: Mumbai bombings and Israel/Lebanon View Thread
Posted by Dorothy on 7/17/06 at 10:52

John H -

I am always struck by the absence of any suggestion that the Palestinians be given territory in Jordan or Syria or Iran or Eqypt for a "homeland"..... The Palestinians were more linked to what is now Jordan historically than to what is now Israel. And if those countries have so much feeling for the Palestinians, then give them a home! When we consider the Palestinians and how the British handled the whole process in the 1940s, we know that the Palestinians were evicted from what had been their homes and their lands. That does not make a people happy. But what gets left out of those discussions is the repeated and persistent loss of homes, belongings, family members for Jews, in the Middle East,in Europe, in Russia. What would be justice, I think, is for Germany to have been required to take in the Palestinians or for Germans to have been evicted from Germany for repatriation of Jews! THAT would have been justice! However, that is not consistent with historical ties to Israel for Zionists....not to mention all of the other forces that would have squashed such an idea. Israel needs an occupying force, something like the U.S. forces along the border in Korea, all around its borders. Palestinians need to be resettled in, say, Jordan, and Germany should be required to build them homes and give them financial support until the resettlement takes hold. Why Germany? Because through the two still unfinished wars they started, WWI and WWII, these unsettled issues continue to kill and destroy. The U.N. should install an occupying force around the Jordanian or Syrian or Lebanese-Palestinian "homeland" to enforce "peace". The world should intervene to put a stop to the warring in that part of the world. We are all sick of it! - And tell me, other than OIL, why do the wars in that part of the world get so much world attention when the other tribal wars, those in Africa, go almost ignored?!
We watched the 1959 movie "On the Beach" recently - annihilation of humans due to nuclear war and radioactive fallout - and once again, you are reminded of how utterly and persistently stupid humans are. And then always so regretful.....in hindsight!

Result number: 44

Message Number 203266

Terrorism, a non issue nothin to worry about View Thread
Posted by larry m on 7/07/06 at 11:21

Bomb tunnel, flood city

One man is busted in Beirut, others hunted across
globe and terrorists are seen linked to Zarqawi



BY ALLISON GENDAR in New York
and JAMES GORDON MEEK in Washington
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITERS


New Jersey-bound traffic speeds through Holland Tunnel beneath more than 40 feet of earth and concrete - and the Hudson. Experts say that terrorists would need huge amount of explosives, and even more expertise to have a chance to rupture the tunnel.

The FBI has uncovered what officials consider a serious plot by jihadists to bomb the Holland Tunnel in hopes of causing a torrent of water to deluge lower Manhattan, the Daily News has learned.
The terrorists sought to drown the Financial District as New Orleans was by Hurricane Katrina, sources said. They also wanted to attack subways and other tunnels.

Counterterrorism officials are alarmed by the "lone wolf" terror plot because they allegedly got a pledge of financial and tactical support from Jordanian associates of top terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi before he was killed in Iraq, a counterterrorism source told The News.

It's not clear, however, if any cash or assistance was delivered.

The News has learned that at the request of U.S. officials, authorities in Beirut arrested one of the alleged conspirators, identified as Amir Andalousli, in recent months. Agents were scrambling yesterday to try to nab other suspects, sources said.

They didn't indicate how many people were the target of the international dragnet but said they were scattered all over the world.

"This is an ongoing operation," one source said.

U.S. agents were allowed to take part in the interrogation of Andalousli, a source said.

FBI and New York City Police Department officials would not comment yesterday about the investigation, which has been kept under wraps for months.

The plotters wanted to detonate a massive amount of explosives inside the Holland Tunnel to blast a hole that would destroy the tunnel, everyone in it, and send a devastating flood shooting through the streets of lower Manhattan.

It is assumed by officials the thugs would try to use vehicles packed with explosives.

Sources said that New York City officials believed the plan could conceivably work with enough explosives placed in the middle of the tunnel, which runs underneath the river bed, a source said.

But others doubted the plot was feasible.

"You are talking major, major explosives and knowledge of blast effect to make this happen," said another senior counterterrorism source.

Besides bedrock, the tunnel is protected by concrete and cast-iron steel.

Experts also said that even if the tunnel cracked, the Financial District would not be flooded because it is above the level of the river.

The FBI discovered the plot by monitoring Internet chat rooms, where the aspiring

Result number: 45
Searching file 19
Searching file 18

Message Number 184140

Re: Naming babies View Thread
Posted by Suzanne D. on 10/05/05 at 09:29

In my graduating class of just a little over 100, we had 6 girls named Kathy! We also had at least two Lindas and one or two Judys. There were no other Suzannes but a Susan or two, and my name was consistently spelled wrong by my classmates, usually with an S instead of the Z.

Through the years, I have taught a few Susans but no Kathys or Lindas! I guess too many mothers had those names and didn't pass them along to their daughters.

For several years, the "J" names seemed to dominate my classes: Jessica, Jordan, Jason, Justin, with a few Johns that I can remember. (By the way, John H., my great-grandfather, grandfather, and an uncle are all named John!) My college-age daughter says that there seem to be an inordinate number of her friends named either Heather or John.

Lately, the most predominant name I've noticed has been Katelyn (Kaytlin, Caitlynne, Caitlyn). Would you believe that a few years ago I had four little girls with all those spellings of the same name in one year?! Talk about keeping me on my toes!

I notice at school that the name Emily seems to be making a comeback as well as Grace and Ethan. And I know four people who have a dog named Maggie although I don't know any little girls with that name! So perhaps older names will now be more prominant. Who knows, perhaps in a few years all the Jessicas, Heathers, and Katelyns will name their daughters Kathy and Linda and Susan! :-)

Suzanne :)

Result number: 46
Searching file 17

Message Number 178274

Re: Complete list of ESWT research- the rest View Thread
Posted by Ed Davis, DPM on 7/12/05 at 20:45

List of publications from ismst.com website, July, 2005
Author Title Year Publisher
Ackaert KS, Schröder FH Effects of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) on renal tissue. 1989 Urological Research, 17: 3-7
Alvarez R. Preliminary results on the safety and efficacy of the OssaTron for treatment of plantar fasciitis. 2002 Foot Ankle Int 2002;23:197-203
Amelio E, Cugola L Acute and chronic tendon pathology in athlete 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:81
Amini A, Hafez M, Zhou S, Garcia E, Coombs R Shockwave Treatment for Chronic Non-union 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 159-164
Ammendolia A, Perticone L, Milano C Chronic shoulder articular pain: treatment by extracorporeal shockwaves 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:19
Ape A, Bosco V, Buselli P, Coco V, Gerardi A, Saggini R A retrospective, multi-centre experience report of shock wave therapy on epicondylitis 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:35-36
Apfel RE Acoustic cavitation. 1981 Methods of experimental physics, vol. 19, P. Edmonds ed., Academic Press New York: 355-411
Arbeitsgruppe "Orthopädische Stosswellenbehandlungen" Standortbestimmung 1995 Chaussy C, Eisenberger F, Jocham D, Wilbert D (Hrsg), Die Stosswelle - Forschung und Klinik, Attempto Verlag, Tübingen: 137-142
Arbeitsgruppe "Technische Entwicklungen" Standortbestimmung 1995 Chaussy C, Eisenberger F, Jocham D, Wilbert D (Hrsg), Die Stosswelle - Forschung und Klinik, Attempto Verlag, Tübingen: 15-20
Assenza, Buselli P, Chiacchio C, Pozzolini M, Scrocca M, Saggini R A retrospective, multi-centre experience report of shock wave therapy on rotator cuff tendonitis with calcific deposit 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:25
Auersperg V, Labek G, Böhler N Correlations Between Length of History and Outcome 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 37-42
Augat P, Claes L, Suger G In vivo effects of shock waves on the healing of fractured bone. 1995 Clin. Biomechan., 10: 374-378
Baloglu I, Aydinok H, Lök V Our results of the ossatherapy for treatment of pseudoathrosis 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:56
Baloglu I, Lök V Shockwave Therapy for Plantar Fasciitis 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 51-52
Bao S, Thrall BD, Miller DL Transfection of a reporter plasmid into cultured cells by sonoporation in vitro. 1997 Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology, 23: 953-959
Baumann J, Baumann J Treatment of neuromuscular dysfunction in children with spastic cerebral palsy by extracorporeal unfocused shock waves. 1997 Siebert W, Buch M (Hrsg), Extracorporal shock waves in orthopaedics, Springer Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg New York: 231-239
Beg M, Melikyan E, Yang X, Bainbridge L Shockwave Treatment for Intractable Tennis Elbow 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 81-90
Begg C, Cho M, Eastwood S Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials: the CONSORT statement. 1996 JAMA 1996; 276:637-639
Benson K, Hartz AJ A comparison of observational studies and randomized, controlled trials. 2000 N Engl J Med 2000; 342: 1878-1886
Betz U, Heine J, Riedel C, Rompe J D, Schöllner C The value of Cervical Spinal Manipulative Therapy Combined with Low Energy Shockwaves for Chronic Tennis Elbow 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 123-130
Boxberg W, Perlick L, Giebel G Stosswellenbehandlung bei therapieresistenten Weichteilschmerzen. 1996 Chirurg, 67: 1174-1178
Boyer MI, Hastings H Lateral tennis elbow: Is there any science out there? 1999 J Shoulder Elbow Surg 1999; 8:481-491
Braun W, Claes L, Rüter A, Paschke D Untersuchung zur Wirksamkeit von Stosswellen auf die Festigkeit des Verbundes von Knochen und Polymethylmetacrylat. 1991 Experimentelle Orthopädie, 130: 236
Braun W, Claes L, Rüter A, Paschke D Effects of extracorporeal shock waves on the stability of the interface between bone and polymethylmethacrylate: an in vitro study on human femoral segments. 1992 Clin. Biomechan., 7: 47-54
Braun W, Rüter A Frakturheilung: Morphologische und physiologische Gesichtspunkte. 1996 Unfallchirurg, 99: 59-67
Brendel W, Delius M, Goetz A Effect of shock waves on the microvasculature. 1987 Prog. Appl. Microcirculation, 12: 41-50
Brocai DRC, Lukoschek M, Hartmann M, Loew M Biometrische Planung klinisch-orthopadischer Studien. Der optimale Stichprobenumfang. 1998 Orthopäde 1998; 27:301-304
Brunner W, Thüringer R, Ascher G, Maluche C, Kellner F, Neuking A, Solleder A, Schmidt-Hoensdorf F, Vetter K High energy shock waves for pain management in orthopedics - a two year foolow-up in 899 cases 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:75
Brunner W, Thüringer R, Ascher G, Neuking A, Flesch A, Solleder A, Schmidt-Höhnsdorff F, Bärtel B Die extrakorporelle Stosswellentherapie in der Orthopädie - Drei-Monats-Ergebnisse in 443 Fällen. 1997 Orthopädische Praxis, 7: 461-464
Brümmer F, Brenner J, Bräuner T, Hülser D Effect of shock waves on suspended and immobilized L1210 cells. 1989 Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology, 15: 229-239
Brümmer F, Bräuner T, Hülser D Biological effects of shock waves. 1990 World Journal of Urology, 8: 224-232
Brümmer F, Suhr D, Hülser D Sensitivity of normal and malignant cells to shock waves. 1992 Stone Disease, 4: 243-248
Bräuner T, Brümmer F, Hülser DF Histopathology of shock wave treated tumor cells suspensions and multicell tumor spheroids. 1989 Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology, 15: 451-460
Buch M Shock wave therapy of heel spur. 1997 Orthopaedic Product News, July/Aug./Sep.: 28-30
Buch M Prospektiver Vergleich der hochenergetischen Stoßwellentherapie sowie des Needling bei der Tendinosis calcarea der Schulter 2001 Siebert W, Buch M (Hrsg), Extrakorporale Stoßwellentherapie in der Orthopädie - Grundlagen und Anwendung, Ecomed Verlagsgesellschaft, Germany: 127-136
Buch M, Fleming L, Theodore G, Amendola A, Bachmann C, Zingas C. Resultate einer prospektiven placebokontrollierten randomisierten doppelblinden Multicenterstudie zur Evaluation der Effektivität und Sicherheit der Stoßwellentherapie bei plantarer Fasciitis. 2001 Vortrag, Symposium Muskuloskeletale Stoßwellentherapie, Mainz
Buch M, Knorr U, Fleming L, Theodore G, Amendola A, Bachmann C et al Extracorporeal shock wave therapy in plantar fasciitis: a review. 2002 Orthopaede 2002;31:637-644
Buch M, Knorr U, Siebert W E Chronic plantar fasciitis treated by ESWT 2000 Minimally Invasive Therapy & Allied Technologies, Isis Medical Media, Volume 9, Number 3/4 August 2000: 310 (Abstract 7)
Buch M, Schlangmann B, Träger D, Siebert W Prospektiver Vergleich der niedrig- und hochenergetischen Stosswellentherapie und Needling bei der Behandlung der Tendinosis calcarea der Schulter. 1997 45. Jahrestagung der Vereinigung Süddeutscher Orthopäden, Abstractband: 101-102
Buch M, Siebert W Shockwave Treatment for Heel Pain Syndrome - a Prospective Investigation 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 73-77
Burger C, Tsironis K, Helling HJ, Prokop A, Rehm KE Die extrakorporale Stosswellentherapie bei Ansatztendopathien der Schulter, des Ellenbogens und der Ferse - vorläufige Ergebnisse einer prospektiven Kölner Studie. 1996 45. Jahrestagung der Deutschen Orthopädenvereinigung e.V. User Meeting Ossatron, Wiesbaden
Buselli P, Saggini R ESWT in ossificans myositis 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:83
Bürger R, Witzsch U, Haist J, Grebe P, Hohenfellner R Die extrakorporale Stosswellentherapie (ESWT) - eine neue Möglichkeit der Behandlung von Pseudarthrosen. 1993 Chaussy C, Eisenberger F, Jocham D, Wilbert D (Hrsg), Stosswellenlithotripsie - Aspekte und Prognosen, Attempto Verlag, Tübingen: 127-130
Bürger R, Witzsch U, Haist J, Karnofsky V Extrakorporale Stosswellenbehandlung bei Pseudarthrose und aseptischer Knochennekrose. 1991 Urologe A, 30: 48
Bürger R, Witzsch U, Haist J, Karnofsky V, Hohenfellner R Extracorporeal shock wave therapy of pseudo-arthrosis and aseptic osteonecrosis. 1991 Endourology, 5, Suppl. 1: 48
Bürger R, Witzsch U, Haist J, Karnovsky V, Ahlers J, Hohenfellner R Extracorporeal shock wave therapy of pseudo-arthrosis. 1992 Urology, 147: 48 ff
Bödekker I, Haake M Die extrakorporale Stosswellentherapie zur Behandlung der Epicondylitis humeri radialis. Ein aktueller Überblick. 2000 Orthopäde 2000; 29:463-469
Bödekker R, Schafer H, Haake M Extracorporeal shock wave therapy in the treatment of plantar fasciitis – a biometrical review. 2001 Clin Rheumatol 2001; 20:324-330
Chaussy C, Eisenberger F, Wanner K, Forssmann F, Hepp W, Schmiedt E, Brendel W The use of shock waves for the destruction of renal calculi without direct contact. 1976 Urol Res 1976; 4:181-188
Chen H, Chen L, Huang T Treatment of painfull heel syndrome with shock waves 2001 Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 387: 41-46
Chen H, Chen L, Huang T Treatment of painful heel syndrome with shock waves 2001 Clin Orthop 2001; 387: 41-46
Child SZ, Hartman C, Schery LA, Carstensen EL Lung damage from exposure to pulsed ultrasound. 1990 Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology, 16: 817-825
Church C A theoretical study of cavitation generated by an extracorporeal shock wave lithotripter. 1989 Acoustic Society of America, 86: 215-227
Coleman AJ, Saunders JE A review of the physical properties and biological effects of the high amplitude acoustic fields usedr in extracorporeal lithotripsy. 1993 Ultrasonics, 31: 75-89
Coleman AJ, Saunders JE A survey of the acoustic output of commercial extracorporeal shock wave lithotripters. 1989 Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology, 15: 213-227
Coleman AJ, Saunders JE, Crum LA, Dyson M Acoustic cavitation generated by an extracorporeal shock wave lithotripter. 1987 Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology, 13: 69 ff
Concato J, Shah N, Jorwitz RI Randomized, controlled trials, observational studies, and the hierarchy of research. 2000 N Engl J Med 2000; 342: 1887-189
Corrado B, Russo S, Gigliotti S, De Durante C, Canero R Shockwave Treatment for Non-unions of the Carpal Scaphoid 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 187-194
Cosentino R, de Stefano R, Frati E, Manca S, Tofi C, Falsetti P, Linari S, Morfini M, Rossi-Ferrini P, Marcolongo R Safety and efficacy of extracorporeal shock wave therapy in the treatment of painful non articular rheumatism of patients with hemophilia 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:86
Cozzolino F, Corrado B, Izzo M, Borrelli M, Russo S, Gigliotti S, de Durante C Axial external fixation plus high energy shock waves in the treatment of unstable leg non union 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:61
Crawford F, Atkins D, Edward J Interventions for treating plantar heel pain (Cochrane Review) 2000 Cochrane Library, Issue 3. Oxford: Update Software, 2000
Crowther M. A prospective randomised study comparing shockwave therapy and steroid injection in the treatment of 'tennis elbow' 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:34
Crum L Tensile strength of water. 1979 Nature, 278: 148-149
Crum L Acoustic cavitation. 1982 Proceedings of the 1982 IEEE ultrasonics Symposium, IEEE, New York: 1-11
Cugola L, Amelio E Long bone non-union: treatment by extracorporeal shock wave (ESW) 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:59Dahm K Stosswellentherapie bei schmerzhaftem Fersensporn: Nachuntersuchungen bei 362 Patienten. 1997 2. Radevormwalder ESWT-Symosium, Radevormwald: 8-9
Dahmen GP, Franke R, Gonchars V, Poppe K, Lentrodt S, Lichtenberger S, Jost S, Montigel J, Nam VC, Dahmen G Die Behandlung knochennaher Weichteilschmerzen mit extrakorporaler Stosswellentherapie (ESWT) - Indikation, Technik und bisherige Ergebnisse. 1995 Chaussy C, Eisenberger F, Jocham D, Wilbert D (Hrsg), Die Stosswelle - Forschung und Klinik, Attempto Verlag, Tübingen: 175-186
Dahmen GP, Meiss L, Nam VC, Skruodies B Extrakorporale Stoßwellentherapie (ESWT) im knochennahen Weichteilbereich an der Schulter 1992 Extracta Orthopaedica 1992; 15:25-28
Dahmen GP, Nam VC, Meiss L Extrakorporale Stosswellentherapie zur Behandlung von knochennahen Weichteilschmerzen: Indikation, Technik und vorläufige Ergebnisse. 1993 Chaussy C, Eisenberger F, Jocham D, Wilbert D (Hrsg), Stosswellenlithotripsie - Aspekte und Prognosen, Attempto Verlag, Tübingen: 143-148
Davis PF, Severud E, Baxter DE Painful heel syndrome: results of nonoperative treatment. 1994 Foot Ankle Int 1994;15:531-5
de Durante C, Russo S, Gigliotti S, Corrado B The Treatment of Shoulder Periarticular Calcification 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 143-144
de Durante C, Russo S, Gigliotti S, Pecoraro C The treatment of shoulder periarticular calcifications by shock waves 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:23
de Maio M, Paine R, Mangine RE, Drez D Plantar fasciitis. 1993 Orthopedics 1993;16: 1153-63
de Oya R, Sanchez Benitez Soto J, Garcia Munilla M Extracorporeal shock waves in the treatment of tendinitis of shoulder 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:13
de Pretto M, Dalla Valle I, Ferrari G, Pacetti A Follow-up and evaluation of heterotopic ossifications treated with shockwave therapy 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:85
de Pretto M, Guerra L, Pozzolini M, Zucchetti R, Saggini R A retrospective multi-centre experience report of shock wave therapy on achilles tendonitis 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:45-46
Delius M Minimal static excess pressure minimizes the effect of extracorporeal shock waves on cells and reduces it on gallstones. 1997 Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology, 23: 611-617
Delius M Experimentelle Stosswellenlithotripsie - aktuelle Entwicklungen. 1995 Chaussy C, Eisenberger F, Jocham D, Wilbert D (Hrsg), Die Stosswelle - Forschung und Klinik, Attempto Verlag, Tübingen: 3-9
Delius M Biologische Wirkung von Stosswellen - mehr als "nur" Steinzertrümmerung? 1995 Zentralblatt Chirurgie, 120: 259-273
Delius M Medical applications and bioeffects of extracorporal shock waves. 1994 Shock waves, 4: 55-72
Delius M Bioeffects of shock waves: in vivo and in vitro actions 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:9
Delius M, Denk R, Berding C, Liebich H, Jordan M, Brendel W Biological effects of shock waves: cavitation by shock waves in piglet liver. 1990 Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology, 16: 467-472
Delius M, Draenert K Einfluß hochenergetischer Stosswellen auf Knochen, Wirkung von Stosswellen auf Knochen. 1997 Siebert W, Buch M (Hrsg), Stosswellenanwendung am Knochen - Klinische und experimentelle Erfahrungen, Dr. Kovac, Hamburg: 10-11
Delius M, Draenert K, Al Diek Y, Draenert Y Biological effect of shock waves: in vivo effect of high energy pulses on rabbit bone. 1995 Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology, 21: 1219-1225
Delius M, Draenert K, Draenert Y, Börner M Effects of extracorporeal shock waves on bone: a review of shock wave expiriments and the mechanism of shock wave action. 1997 Siebert W, Buch M (Hrsg), Extracorporeal shock waves in orthopaedics, Springer Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg New York: 91-107
Delius M, Enders G, Heine G, Stark J, Remberger K, Brendel W Biological effects of shock waves: lung hemorrhage by shock waves in dogs - pressure dependence. 1987 Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology, 13: 61-67
Delius M, Enders G, Xuan Z, Liebich H, Brendel B Biological effects of shock waves: kidney damage by shock waves in dogs - dose dependence. 1988 Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology, 14: 117-122
Delius M, Hoffmann E, Steinbeck G, Conzen P Biological effects of shock waves: induction of arrhythmia in piglet hearts. 1994 Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology, 20: 279-285
Delius M, Jordan M, Eizenhoefer H, Marlinghaus E, Heine G, Liebich H, Brendel W Biological effects of shock waves: kidney hemorrhage by shock waves in dogs - administration rate dependence. 1988 Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology, 14: 689-694
Delius M, Jordan M, Liebich H, Brendel W Biological effects of shock waves: effect of shock waves on the liver and gallbladder wall of dogs - administration rate dependence. 1990 Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology, 16: 459-466
Delius M, Weiss N, Gambihler S, Goetz A, Brendel W Tumor therapy with shock waves requires modified lithotripter shock waves 1989 Naturwissenschaften, 76: 573-574
Delius M, Überle F, Eisenmenger W Extracorporeal shock waves act by shock wave gas bubble interaction. 1998 Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology, 24: 1055-1059
Dellian M, Walenta S, Gamarra F, Kuhnle G, Mueller-Klieser W, Goetz A Ischemia and loss of ATP in tumors following treatment with focused high energy shock waves. 1993 British Journal of Cancer, 68: 26-31
di Silverio F, Galluci M, Gambardella P, Alp G, Benedetti R, La Mancusa R, Pulcinelli FM, Romiti R, Gazzangia PP Blood cellolar and biochemical changes after extracorporeal shock wave in lithotripsy. 1990 Urological Research, 18: 49 ff
Dieppe P, Chard J, Tallon D, Egger M Funding clinical research. 1999 Lancet 1999; 353:1626-1629
Diesch R, Haupt G Anwendung der hochenergetischen extrakorporalen Stosswellentherapie bei Pseudarthrosen. 1997 Siebert W, Buch M (Hrsg), Stosswellenanwendung am Knochen - Klinische und experimentelle Erfahrungen, Dr. Kovac, Hamburg: 63-64
Diesch R, Haupt G Use of extracorporeal shock waves in the treatment of pseudarthrosis. 1991 Chaussy C, Eisenberger F, Jocham D, Wilbert D (Hrsg), High energey shock waves in medicine, Thieme Verlag, Stuttgart: 136-139
Diesch R, Haupt G Extracorporeal shock wave treatment of pseudarthrosis, tendinosis calcarea of the shoulder and calcaneal spur. 1997 Siebert W, Buch M (Hrsg), Extracorporeal shock waves in orthopaedics, Springer Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg New York: 131-135
Diesch R, Straub T, Penninger E, Frolich T, Scholl J Conventional Versus Ballistic Shockwave Treatment for Calcaneal Spur 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 71-72
Duarte LR The stimulation of bone growth by ultrasound. 1983 Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, 101: 153 ff
Dyson M, Brookes M Stimulation of bone repair by ultrasound. 1983 Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology, Suppl 2: 61 ff
Eichenblat M Experience with two different types of shockwave therapy for chronic calcifying tendinitis of the shoulder and chronic heel syndrome 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:71
Eisenmenger W Experimentelle Bestimmung der Stossfrontdicke aus dem akustischen Frequenzspektrum elektromagnetisch erzeugter Stosswellen in Flüssigkeiten bei einem Stossdruckbereich von 10 atm bis 10 atm. 1964 Acustica, 14: 188-204
Ekkernkamp A Extrakorporale Stosswellen. 1998 Deutsches Ärzteblatt, 95: B-1403
Ekkernkamp A Die Wirkung extrakorporaler Stosswellen auf die Frakturheilung. 1992 Habilitationsschrift, Ruhr-Universität, Bochum
Ekkernkamp A, Bosse A, Haupt G, Pommer A Der Einfluß der extrakorporalen Stosswellen auf die standardisierte Tibiafraktur am Schaf. 1992 Ittel TH, Sieberth HG, Matthiaß HH (Hrsg), Aktuelle Aspekte der Osteologie, Springer Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg New York: 307-310
Ekkernkamp A, Haupt G, Knopf HJ, Püllenberg P, Muhr, Senge T Effects of extracorporeal shock waves on standardized fractures in sheeps. 1991 Urology, 145: 257 ff
Feigl T, Schneider T, Riedlinger R, Löhr M, Hahn EG, Ell C Beschallung von humanen Pankreaskarzinomzellen mit hochenergetischem gepulsten Ultraschall. 1992 Med. Tech., 3: 139-143
Ferrari G, lo Prete F, de Pretto M, Pacetti A Use of imaging for heterotopic ossifications evaluation 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:84
Folberth W, Krause H, Reuner T Stosswellenmesstechnik in der Lithotripsie: Historie und Ausblick. 1995 Chaussy C, Eisenberger F, Jocham D, Wilbert D (Hrsg), Die Stosswelle - Forschung und Klinik, Attempto Verlag, Tübingen: 45-50
Forriol F, Solchaga L, Moreno JL, Canadell J The effects os shock waves on mature and healing cortical bone. 1994 International Orthopaedics, 18: 325-329
Fritze J Extrakorporale Stoßwellentherapie in orthopädischer Indikation: Eine ausgewählte Übersicht. 1998 Versicherungsmedizin 1998; 50: 180-183
Fukada E, Yasuda I On the piezoelectric effect of bone. 1957 Phys. Soc. Japan, 12: 1158-1162
Fuson RL, Sherman M, Van Fleet J, Wendt, T The conduct of orthopaedic clinical trials. 1997 J Bone Joint Surg 1997; 79-A: 1089-1098



Feigl T, Schneider T, Riedlinger R, Löhr M, Hahn EG, Ell C Beschallung von humanen Pankreaskarzinomzellen mit hochenergetischem gepulsten Ultraschall. 1992 Med. Tech., 3: 139-143
Ferrari G, lo Prete F, de Pretto M, Pacetti A Use of imaging for heterotopic ossifications evaluation 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:84
Folberth W, Krause H, Reuner T Stosswellenmesstechnik in der Lithotripsie: Historie und Ausblick. 1995 Chaussy C, Eisenberger F, Jocham D, Wilbert D (Hrsg), Die Stosswelle - Forschung und Klinik, Attempto Verlag, Tübingen: 45-50
Forriol F, Solchaga L, Moreno JL, Canadell J The effects os shock waves on mature and healing cortical bone. 1994 International Orthopaedics, 18: 325-329
Fritze J Extrakorporale Stoßwellentherapie in orthopädischer Indikation: Eine ausgewählte Übersicht. 1998 Versicherungsmedizin 1998; 50: 180-183
Fukada E, Yasuda I On the piezoelectric effect of bone. 1957 Phys. Soc. Japan, 12: 1158-1162
Fuson RL, Sherman M, Van Fleet J, Wendt, T The conduct of orthopaedic clinical trials. 1997 J Bone Joint Surg 1997; 79-A: 1089-1098


Search:
Author Title Publisher

1-9 A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
To sort a column, just click on any of the column heading. Sites: 1 2 3

Author Title Year Publisher
Galasso O, de Durante C, Russo S, Gigliotti S, Corrado B Chronic achilloynia. Treatment with extracorporeal shock waves 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:43
Gambihler S, Delius M In vitro interaction of lithotripter shock waves and cytotoxic drugs. 1992 British Journal of Cancer, 66: 69-73
Gambihler S, Delius M, Ellwart JW Permeabilization of the plasma membrane of L1210 mouse leukemia cells using lithotripter shock waves. 1994 Membr. Biol., 141: 267-275
Gambihler S, Delius M, Ellwart JW Transient increase in membrane permeability of L1210 cells upon exposure to lithotripter shock waves in vitro. 1992 Naturwissenschaften, 79: 328-329
Gebhart C, Widhalm R The Biological Effects of Shockwave Treatment 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 11-12
Gerdesmeyer L ESWT bei Tendinosis calcarea – Ergebnisse der prospektiven placebokontrollierten Multicenterstudie der DGOOC. 2001 Vortrag, Arbeitskreis Stoßwellentherapie, Berlin, 2001
Gerdesmeyer L, Bachfischer K, Hauschild M Overview of Calcifying Tendonitis of the Shoulder Treated with Shockwave Treatment 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 151-156
Gerdesmeyer L, Hasse A, Engel A, Bachfischer K, Rechl H Der Einfluß extrakorporaler Stoßwellen auf die Osteoinduktion nach Radiatio 2001 Siebert W, Buch M (Hrsg), Extrakorporale Stoßwellentherapie in der Orthopädie - Grundlagen und Anwendung, Ecomed Verlagsgesellschaft, Germany: 13-22
Gerdesmeyer L, Hauschild M, Bachfischer K The change of clinical outcome of tendinitis calcarea after ESWT in course of time 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:28
Gerdesmeyer L, Russlies M, Peters P, Gradinger R Die hochenergetische ESWT zur Behandlung der Tendinosis calcarea. 1997 46. Jahrestagung Norddeutsche Orthopädenvereinigung, Kurzreferate: 14
Galasso O, de Durante C, Russo S, Gigliotti S, Corrado B Chronic achilloynia. Treatment with extracorporeal shock waves 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:43
Gambihler S, Delius M In vitro interaction of lithotripter shock waves and cytotoxic drugs. 1992 British Journal of Cancer, 66: 69-73
Gambihler S, Delius M, Ellwart JW Permeabilization of the plasma membrane of L1210 mouse leukemia cells using lithotripter shock waves. 1994 Membr. Biol., 141: 267-275
Gambihler S, Delius M, Ellwart JW Transient increase in membrane permeability of L1210 cells upon exposure to lithotripter shock waves in vitro. 1992 Naturwissenschaften, 79: 328-329
Gebhart C, Widhalm R The Biological Effects of Shockwave Treatment 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 11-12
Gerdesmeyer L ESWT bei Tendinosis calcarea – Ergebnisse der prospektiven placebokontrollierten Multicenterstudie der DGOOC. 2001 Vortrag, Arbeitskreis Stoßwellentherapie, Berlin, 2001
Gerdesmeyer L, Bachfischer K, Hauschild M Overview of Calcifying Tendonitis of the Shoulder Treated with Shockwave Treatment 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 151-156
Gerdesmeyer L, Hasse A, Engel A, Bachfischer K, Rechl H Der Einfluß extrakorporaler Stoßwellen auf die Osteoinduktion nach Radiatio 2001 Siebert W, Buch M (Hrsg), Extrakorporale Stoßwellentherapie in der Orthopädie - Grundlagen und Anwendung, Ecomed Verlagsgesellschaft, Germany: 13-22
Gerdesmeyer L, Hauschild M, Bachfischer K The change of clinical outcome of tendinitis calcarea after ESWT in course of time 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:28
Gerdesmeyer L, Russlies M, Peters P, Gradinger R Die hochenergetische ESWT zur Behandlung der Tendinosis calcarea. 1997 46. Jahrestagung Norddeutsche Orthopädenvereinigung, Kurzreferate: 14
(PIPE) next

Haake M, Böddeker IR, Decker T, Buch M, Vogel M, Labek G, Maier M, Loew M, Maier-Boerries O, Fischer J, Betthäuser A, Rehack HC, Kanovsky W, Müller I, Gerdesmeyer L, Rompe JD Efficacy of Extracorporal Shockwave Therapy (ESWT) in patients with lateral epicondylitis - A placebo controlled multicenter trial. 2001 4th International Congress of the ISMST, Berlin, 2001
Haake M, Böddeker IR, Decker T, Buch M, Vogel M, Labek G, Maier M, Loew M, Maier-Boerries OM, Fischer J, Betthäuser A, Rehack HC, Kanovsky W, Müller I, Gerdesmeyer L, Rompe JD Side effects of Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy (ESWT) in the treatment of tennis elbow. 2002 Arch Orthop Traum Surg 2002
Haake M, Deike B, Thon A, Schmitt J Exact focusing of extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy for calcifying tendinopathy. 2002 Clin Orthop 2002
Haake M, Deike B, Thon A, Schmitt J. Importance of accurately focussing of extracorporeal shock waves (ESWT) in the treatment of calcifying tendinitis - A prospective randomised study. 2001 Biomed Tech 2001; 45: 69-74
Haake M, Jensen K, Prinz H, Willenberg T Design einer Multizenterstudie zum Wirksamkeitsnachweis der Extrakorporalen Stosswellentherapie (ESTW) bei Epicondylitis humeri radialis. 2000 Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb 2000; 138:99-103
Haake M, Rautmann M, Griss P Therapieergebnisse und Kostenanalyse der Extrakorporalen Stoßwellentherapie bei Tendinitis calcarea und Supraspinatussehnensyndrom. 1998 Orthop Praxis 1998;34: 110-113
Haake M, Rautmann M, Wirth T Assessment of treatment costs of Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy (ESWT) - Comparison of ESWT and surgical treatment in shoulder diseases 2001 Int J Tech Ass Health Care 2001; 17: 612-617
Haake M, Rautmann M, Wirth T Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy versus surgical treatment in calcifying ttttrendinitis and non calcifying tendinitis of the supraspinatus muscle. 2001 Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 2001; 11: 21-24
Haake M, Sattler A, Gross MW, Schmitt J, Hildebrandt R, Müller HH Vergleich der Extrakorporalen Stoßwellentherapie mit der Röntgenreizbestrahlung beim Supraspinatussehnensyndrom – ein prospektiver randomisierter einfachblinder Parallelgruppenvergleich 2001 Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb 2001; 139: 397-402
Haist J Die Osteorestauration via Stosswellen-Anwendung. Eine neue Möglichkeit zur Therapie der gestörten knöchernen Konsolidierung. 1995 Chaussy C, Eisenberger F, Jocham D, Wilbert D (Hrsg), Die Stosswelle - Forschung und Klinik, Attempto Verlag, Tübingen: 157-161 Haist J Osteorestoration via shock wave application. A new possibility of treating disturbed bone union. 1997 Siebert W, Buch M (Hrsg), Extracorporeal shock waves in orthopaedics, Springer Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg New York: 119-129
Haist J Einsatzmöglichkeiten der analgetisch wirksamen extrakorporalen Stosswellentherapie an der Schulter. 1995 Orthopädische Praxis, 9: 591-593
Haist J Shockwave Treatment for Radial and Ulnar Epicondylitis 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 115-113
Haist J Shockwave Therapy for Pseudarthroses 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 195-196
Haist J Shockwave Treatment of Dupuytren's Contracture and Ledderhose's Contraction 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 253-254
Haist J, Reichel W, Bürger R, Witzsch U Einsatz der extrakorporalen Stosswelle bei der osteosynthetisch versorgten Pseudarthrose - eine experimentelle Studie. 1993 Orthopädische Praxis, 5: 345-346
Haist J, Reichel W, Witzsch U, Bürger R Die extrakorporale Stosswellenbehandlung der gestörten Frakturheilung - eine Alternative zu operativen Verfahren ? 1993 Orthopädische Praxis, 29: 842-844
Haist J, Steeger von Keitz D Die Stosswellentherapie (ESWT) der Epicondylopathia radialis et ulnaris. Ein neues Behandlungskonzept knochennaher Weichteilschmerzen. 1994 Orthopädie Mitteilungen, 173
Haist J, Steeger von Keitz D Stosswellentherapie knochennaher Weichteilschmerzen - ein neues Behandlungskonzept. 1995 Chaussy C, Eisenberger F, Jocham D, Wilbert D (Hrsg), Die Stosswelle - Forschung und Klinik, Attempto Verlag, Tübingen: 162-165
Haist J, Steeger von Keitz D, Mohr G, Schulze G, Weber F The orthopaedic shock wave therapy in the treatment of chronic insertion tendopathy and tendinosis calcarea. 1997 Siebert W, Buch M (Hrsg), Extracorporeal shock waves in orthopaedics, Springer Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg New York: 159-163
Haist J, Steeger von Keitz D, Witzsch U, Bürger R, Haist U The extracorporeal shockwave therapy in the treatment of disturbed bone union. 1992 7th International Conference on Biomedical Engineering, December 2.- 4.1992, Singapore: 222-224
Haist J, Steeger von Keitzr D Shock wave therapy in the treatment of near to bone soft tissue pain in sportsmen. 1996 International Journal of Sports Medicine, 17: 79-81
Hammer DS, Rupp S, Ensslin S, Kohn D, Seil R Extracorporal shock wave therapy in patients with tennis elbow and painful heel. 2000 Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2000; 120:304-7
Hammer DS, Rupp S, Kreutz A, Pape D, Kohn D, Seil R Extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) in patients with chronic proximal plantar fasciitis. 2002 Foot Ankle Int 2002;23:309-13
Hasegawa S, Kato K, Takashi M, Zhu Y, Obata K, Miyake K S100a0 protein as a marker for tissue damage related to extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. 1993 Eur. Urology, 24: 393-396
Haupt G Stosswellen in der Orthopädie. 1997 Urologe A, 36, Nr.3: 233-238
Haupt G Use of extracorporeal shock waves in the treatment of pseudarthrosis, tendopathy and other orthopaedic diseases. 1997 Urology, 158: 4-11
Haupt G, Diesch R, Straub T, Penninger E, Fröhlich T, Scholl J, Löhrer H, Senge T Ballistic Shockwave Treatment 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 271-272
Haupt G, Ekkernkamp A, Püllenberg A, Senge T Einfluß extrakorporal erzeugter Stosswellen auf standardisierte Tibiafrakturen im Schafmodell. 1992 Urologe A, 31: A 43ff
Haupt G, Haupt A, Ekkernkamp A, Gerety B, Chvapil M Influence of shock waves on fracture healing. 1992 Urology, 39: 529-532
Haist J, Steeger von Keitz D, Witzsch U, Bürger R, Haist U The extracorporeal shockwave therapy in the treatment of disturbed bone union. 1992 7th International Conference on Biomedical Engineering, December 2.- 4.1992, Singapore: 222-224
Haist J, Steeger von Keitzr D Shock wave therapy in the treatment of near to bone soft tissue pain in sportsmen. 1996 International Journal of Sports Medicine, 17: 79-81
Hammer DS, Rupp S, Ensslin S, Kohn D, Seil R Extracorporal shock wave therapy in patients with tennis elbow and painful heel. 2000 Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2000; 120:304-7
Hammer DS, Rupp S, Kreutz A, Pape D, Kohn D, Seil R Extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) in patients with chronic proximal plantar fasciitis. 2002 Foot Ankle Int 2002;23:309-13
Hasegawa S, Kato K, Takashi M, Zhu Y, Obata K, Miyake K S100a0 protein as a marker for tissue damage related to extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. 1993 Eur. Urology, 24: 393-396
Haupt G Stosswellen in der Orthopädie. 1997 Urologe A, 36, Nr.3: 233-238
Haupt G Use of extracorporeal shock waves in the treatment of pseudarthrosis, tendopathy and other orthopaedic diseases. 1997 Urology, 158: 4-11
Haupt G, Diesch R, Straub T, Penninger E, Fröhlich T, Scholl J, Löhrer H, Senge T Ballistic Shockwave Treatment 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 271-272
Haupt G, Ekkernkamp A, Püllenberg A, Senge T Einfluß extrakorporal erzeugter Stosswellen auf standardisierte Tibiafrakturen im Schafmodell. 1992 Urologe A, 31: A 43ff
Haupt G, Haupt A, Ekkernkamp A, Gerety B, Chvapil M Influence of shock waves on fracture healing. 1992 Urology, 39: 529-532
Haupt G, Haupt A, Gerety B, Chvapil M Enhancement of fracture healing with extracorporeal shock waves. 1990 AUA Annual Meeting, New Orleans 1990
Haupt G, Haupt A, Senge T Die Behandlung von Knochen mit extrakorporalen Stosswellen - Entwicklung einer neuen Therapie. 1993 Chaussy C, Eisenberger F, Jocham D, Wilbert D (Hrsg), Stosswellenlithotripsie - Aspekte und Prognosen, Attempto Verlag, Tübingen: 120-126
Haupt G, Katzmeier P Anwendung der hochenergetischen Stosswellen-therapie bei Pseudarthrosen, Tendinosis calcarea der Schulter und Ansatztendinosen (Fersensporn, Epiconylitis). 1995 Chaussy C, Eisenberger F, Jocham D, Wilbert D (Hrsg), Die Stosswelle - Forschung und Klinik, Attempto Verlag, Tübingen: 143-146
Hearnden A, Flannary MC A prospective, blinded randomised control trial assessing the use of different energy extracorporeal shock wave therapy for calcifying tendonitis 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:16
Heckman JD, Ryaby JP, McCabe J, Frey JJ, Kilcoyne RF Accleration of tibial fracture-healing by non-invasive low-intensity pulsed ultrasound. 1994 Bone Joint Surgery (Am), 76: 26-34
Heidersdorf S, Lauber S, Lauber H, Hötzinger H, Ludwig J, Dreisliker U Rädel R Osteochondritis Dissecans 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 255-264
Heinrichs W, Witzsch U, Bürger R Extrakorporale Stosswellentherapie (ESWT) von Pseudarthrosen. 1993 Anaesthesist, 42: 361-364
Helbig K, Herbert C, Schostok T, Brown M, Thiele R Correlations between the duration of pain and the success of shock wave therapy 2001 Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 387: 68-71
Helbig K, Schostok T, Brown M, Herbert C, Thiele R Correlations Between Duration of Pain and Success 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 43-48
Heller KD, Niethard FU Der Einsatz der extrakorporalen Stoßwellentherapie in der Orthopädie – eine Metaanalyse 1998 Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb 1998; 136:390-401
Herbert C, Thiele R, Hartmann T, Helbig K Musculoskeletal shock wave therapy for the treatment of tendinosis calcarea, follow-up of 1483 patients between 1995 and 1998 (4 years) 2000 Minimally Invasive Therapy & Allied Technologies, Isis Medical Media, Volume 9, Number 3/4 August 2000: 322 (Abstract 28)
Herbert C, Thiele R, Helbig K, Hartmann T, Mälzer H Pseudarthrosentherapie mit der Stosswelle in der Praxis. 1997 Siebert W, Buch M (Hrsg), Stosswellenanwendung am Knochen - Klinische und experimentelle Erfahrungen, Dr. Kovac, Hamburg:
Herken K, Bernhardt F, Lenz G Die extracorporale Stosswellenbehandlung bei der chronischen, therapieresistenten Tendinosis calcarea der Schulter. 1996 45. Jahrestagung Norddeutsche Orthopädenvereinigung e.V.: 124-125
Holmes RP, Yeaman LD, Taylor RG, McCullough DL Altered neutrophil permeability following shock wave exposure in vitro. 1992 Urology, 147: 733-737
Hötzinger H, Rädel R, Lauber S, Lauber H, Platzek P, Ludwig J MRI-Guided Shockwaves for Multiple Stress Fractures of the Tibia 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 165-168
Jakobeit C, Welp L, Winiarski B, Schuhmacher R, Osenberg T, Splittgerber T, Spelsberg G, Buntrock W, Missulis U, Kroll U, Schmeiser A, Beer M, Watzlawik A, Olschner G, Winarski B Ultrasound-guided extracorporeal shock wave therapy of tendinosis calcarea of the shoulder, of symptomatic plantar calcaneal spur (heel spur) and of epicondylopathia radialis and ulnaris. 1997 Siebert W, Buch M (Hrsg), Extracorporeal shock waves in orthopaedics, Springer Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg New York: 165-180
Johannes EJ, Sukul Kaulesar DMKS, Mature E, Schutte HE High energy shock waves for the treatment of nonunions - experiments in dog. 1994 Surg. Research, 57: 246-252
Jurgowski W, Loew M, Cotta H, Staehler G Extracorporeal shock wave treatment of calcareous tendinitis of the shoulder. 1993 Endourology, 7, Suppl. 1: 193
Karlsen JS, Smevik B, Hovig T Acute morphological changes in canine kidneys following exposure to extracorporeal shock waves. 1991 Urological Research, 19: 105-115
Karpman R, Magee F, Gruen T, Mobley M The Lithotriptor and its potential use in the revision of total hip arthroplasty 2001 Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 387: 4-7
Kawahara K, Koba M The effect of extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) for carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) in chronic hemodialysis patients 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:93
Ko J, Chen H, Chen L Treatment of lateral epicondylitis of the elbow with shock waves 2001 Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 387: 60-67
Koeweiden E, Chin A Paw E Promising results of ESWT for tennis elbow 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:33
Kolsky H Stress waves in solids. 1963 Dover, New York: 186
Krause H Physik und Technik medizinischer Stosswellensysteme. 1997 Rompe JD (Hrsg), Extrakorporale Stosswellentherapie - Grundlagen, Indikation, Anwendung, Chapman & Hall GmbH, London Glasgow Weinheim New York Tokio Melbourne Madras
Krischek O, Hopf C, Nafe B, Rompe JD Shock-wave therapy for tennis and golfer`s elbow. 1999 Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 1999; 119: 62-66
Krischek O, Rompe JD, Herbsthofer B, Nafe B Symptomatische niedrig-energetische Stosswellentherapie bei Fersenschmerzen und radiologisch nachweisbarem plantarem Fersensporn. 1998 Orthopädie, 136: 169-174
Krischek O, Rompe JD, Hopf C, Stratmann M, Vogel J, Nafe B Ist die extrakorporelle Stosswellentherapie bei Epicondylitis humeri ulnaris indiziert? Kurzfristige Ergebnisse einer vergleichenden, prospektiven Studie. 1997 Orthopädische Praxis, 7: 465-469
Krischek O, Rompe JD, Zöllner J Extrakorporale Stoßwellentherapie bei der Tendinosis calcarea der Schulter – eine kritische Bestandsaufnahme nach einem Jahr. 1997 Phys Rehab Kur Med 1997; 7:272-277
Kuderna H, Schaden W, Sailler A, Fischer A, Kölpl C, Hagmüller V Comparison of 30 tibial non-unions: costs of surgical treatment versus costs of extracorporeal shockwave therapy 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:65-66
Kuhns JC Changes in elastic adipose tissue. 1949 Bone Joint Surg Am 1949;31:541-8
Kuner EH, Berwarth H, Lücke SV Behandlungsprinzipien bei aseptischen Pseudarthrosen. 1996 Orthopäde, 25: 394-404
Kusnierczak D, Brocai DRC, Vettel U, Loew M The influence of extrycorporeal shock wave application (ESWA) on the biological behaviour of bone cells in vitro 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:100
Kusnierczak D, Loew M Einfluß von Stosswellen auf das Wachstums- und Expressionsverhalten von Knochenzellkulturen - eine Pilotstudie. 1997 Siebert W, Buch M (Hrsg), Stosswellenanwendung am Knochen - Klinische und experimentelle Erfahrungen, Dr. Kovac, Hamburg: 12-13
Kusnierczak D, Loew M, Nitschmann C Studie ESWA (extrakorporale Stosswellen-anwendung) bei schmerzhaftem Fersensporn. 1997 46. Jahrestagung Norddeutsche Orthopädenvereinigung, Kurzreferate: 156
Kuwahara M, Ioritani N, Kambe K, Shirai S, Taguchi K, Saitoh T, Orikasa S, Takayama K, Aida S, Iwama N Hyperechoic region induced by focused shock waves in vitro and in vivo: possibility of acoustic cavitation bubbles. 1989 Lithotripsy Stone Disease, 1: 282-288
la Bruna SC, Tedeschi C, Camurri GB Shock waves therapy for a rehablitation program 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:74
Labelle H, Guibert R, Joncas J, Newman N, Fallaha M, Rivard CH Lack of scientific evidence for the treatment of lateral epicondylitis of the elbow: an attempted metaanalysis 1992 J Bone Joint Surg 1992 ; 74-B:646-651
Larini P, Marcato C, Ugolotti U, Meneghetti S, Paroli C, Mazzucchi A, Cavatorta S Extracorporeal shock wave therapy in paraosteoarthropathy (POA). Preliminary results 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:76
Lauber S, Lauber HJ, Ludwig J, Hötzinger H, Rädel R, Dreisilker U MRI controlled results of extracorporeal shockwave therapy in adult osteonecrosis of the femoral head 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:91
Lauber S, Ludwig J, Hötzinger H, Dreisilker U, Rädel R, Platzek P MRI after Shockwave Treatment for Osteonecrosis of the Femoral Head 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 241-247
Lauber S, Ludwig J, Lauber H, Hötzinger B, Dreisilker U, Rädel R Die ESWT-Behandlung der Hüftkopfnekrose und der Osteochondrosis dissecans 2001 Siebert W, Buch M (Hrsg), Extrakorporale Stoßwellentherapie in der Orthopädie - Grundlagen und Anwendung, Ecomed Verlagsgesellschaft, Germany: 161-192
Lauer U, Bürgelt E, Squire Z, Messmer K, Hofschneider PH, Gregor M, Delius M Shock wave permeabilization as new gene transfer method. 1997 Gene Therapy, 4: 710-715
Lehmkühler K, Köhnke W, Wrede A Focus Positioning 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 33-34
Levitt R, Alvarez R, Ogden JA The FDA Studies of Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy for Lateral Epicondylitis and Heel Pain Syndrome 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 107-110
Levitt R, Ogden JA, Selesnick H FDA study for chronic lateral epicondylitis 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:39
Loew M Stosswellenbehandlung bei Erkrankungen an Schulter und Ellenbogen - Mythen und Wirklichkeit. 1997 Mitteilungsblatt DVSE Juni 1997: 5-7
Loew M Die Wirkung extrakorporal erzeugter hoch-energetischer Stosswellen auf den klinischen, röntgenologischen und histologischen Verlauf der Tendinosis calcarea der Schulter - eine klinische und experimentelle Studie. 1994 Habilitationsschrift, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg
Loew M, Daecke W, Kusnierczak D, Rahmanzadeh M, Ewerbeck V Extracorporal shock wave application – an effective treatment for patients with chronic and therapy-resistant calcifying tendinitis? 1999 Bone Joint Surg 1999 ; 81-B:863-867
Loew M, Jurgowski W Erste Erfahrungen mit der extrakorporalen Stosswellen-Lithotripsie in der Behandlung der Tendinosis calcarea der Schulter. 1993 Orthopädie, 131: 470-473
Loew M, Jurgowski W Erste Erfahrungen mit der Extrakorporalen Stosswellen-Lithotripsie (ESWL) in der Behandlung der Tendinosis calcarea der Schulter. 1993 Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb 1993; 131:470-473
Loew M, Jurgowski W, Mau HC, Perlick L, Kuszniercak D Die Wirkung extrakorporal erzeugter hochenergetischer Stosswellen auf den klinischen, röntgenologischen und histologischen Verlauf der Tendinosis calcarea der Schulter - eine prospektive Studie. 1995 Chaussy C, Eisenberger F, Jocham D, Wilbert D (Hrsg), Die Stosswelle - Forschung und Klinik, Attempto Verlag, Tübingen: 153-156
Loew M, Jurgowski W, Mau HC, Thomsen M Treatment of calcifying tendinitis of rotator cuff by extracorporeal shock waves: a preliminary report. 1995 Shoulder Elbow Surg 1995; 4:101-106
Loew M, Jurgowski W, Thomsen M Die Wirkung extrakorporaler Stosswellen auf die Tendinosis calcarea der Schulter. 1995 Urologe A, 34: 49-53
Loew M, Jurgowski W, Thomsen M, Cotta H Extracorporale Stosswellenbehandlung bei chronischer Tendinitis calcarea der Schulter 1994 Orthopädie Mitteilungen
Loew M, Nitschmann R Shock wave application in heel spur syndrome. 1995 3. Münchener Symposium für Fußchirurgie, München


Loew M, Rompe JD Stosswellenbehandlung bei orthopädischen Erkrankungen. 1998 Grifka J (Hrsg), Bücherei des Orthopäden, Band 71, Enke, Stuttgart
Lohse-Busch H, Kraemer M, Reime U The use of extracorporeal shock wave fronts for treatment of muscle dysfunction of various etiologies: an overview of first results. 1997 Siebert W, Buch M (Hrsg), Extracorporeal shock waves in orthopaedics, Springer Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg New York: 215-230
Lohse-Busch H, Kraemer M, Reime U Pilotuntersuchung zur Wirkung von niederenergetischen, extrakorporalen Stosswellen auf Muskelfunktionsstörungen bei spastischen Bewegungsstörungen von Kindern. 1997 Schmerz, 11, Nr. 2: 108-112
Ludwig J, Hötzinger H, Lauber S, Trenkel I Pre- and post shockwave therapy (SWT) MRI evaluation of artificial calcifications of the supraspinate tendon in pig shoulders 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:94
Ludwig J, Lauber S, Lauber H, Dreisilker U, Rädel R, Hötzinger H High-energy shock wave treatment of femoral head necrosis in adults 2001 Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 387: 119-126
Lüssenhop S, Hahn M, Seemann S, Meiss L Einfluß der Stosswelle auf Epiphysenfugen. 1997 Siebert W, Buch M (Hrsg), Stosswellenanwendung am Knochen - Klinische und experimentelle Erfahrungen, Dr. Kovac, Hamburg: 12-13
Lüssenhop S, Seemann D, Hahn M, Meiss L The influence of shock waves on epiphysal growth plates: first results of an in-vivo study with rabbits. 1997 Siebert W, Buch M (Hrsg), Extracorporeal shock waves in orthopaedics, Springer Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg New York: 109-118
Lök V, Baloglu I, Aydinok H Experience of Shockwaves for Non-unions in Izmir 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 185-186


Maier M Gibt es magnetresonanztomographische Veränderungen nach Stosswellenbehandlung bei Tendinitis calcarea ? 1997 Orthopädie, 2: 20-21
Maier M, Dürr HR, Kohler S, Staupendahl D, Pfahler M, Refior HJ, Meier M Analgetische Wirkung niederenergetischer extrakorporaler Stosswellen bei Tendinosis calcarea, Epikondylitis humeri radialis und Plantarfasziitis. 2000 Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb 2000; 138:34-8
Maier M, Dürr HR, Staupendahl D, Refior HJ Einfluß des Koppelmediums auf den Applikationsschmerz bei der ESWT des Stütz- und Bewegungsapparates 2001 Siebert W, Buch M (Hrsg), Extrakorporale Stoßwellentherapie in der Orthopädie - Grundlagen und Anwendung, Ecomed Verlagsgesellschaft, Germany: 227-234
Maier M, Schnarkowski P, Pfahler M, Refior H Kernspintomographische Veränderungen der Schulterregion nach Stosswellentherapie bei Tendinosis calcarea. 1997 45. Jahrestagung der Vereinigung Süddeutscher Orthopäden, Abstractband: 101
Maier M, Stabler A, Lienemann A, Kohler S, Feitenhansl A, Dürr HR, Pfahler M, Refior HJ Shockwave application in calcifying tendinitis of the shoulder - prediction of outcome by imaging. 2000 Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2000; 120:493-8
Maier M, Steinborn M, Staebler A, Koehler S, Pfahler M, Dürr HR, Refior HJ Extracorporeal shock wave application for chronic plantar fasciitis – prediction of outcome by imaging? 2000 Rheumatol 2000; 27:2455-246
Marchetti I, Carnevali R, Russo N Our experience with ESW: first review of the cases 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:73
May TC, Krause WR, Preslar AJ, Smith MJV, Beaudoin AJ Use of high energy shock waves for bone cement removal. 1990 Arthroplasty, 01: 19-27
McCullough DL, Yeaman LD, Bo WJ, Assimos DG, Kroovant RL, Griffin AS, Furr EG Effects of shock waves on the rat ovary. 1989 Urology, 141: 666-669
Melegati G, Tornese D, Bandi M, Cappadonia C L'utilizzo della terapia con onde d'urto extracorporee nella sindrome da conflitto acromion-omerale: studio prospettico controllato 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:17-18
Neuland HG The treatment of complaints caused py playing golf using ESWT 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:78
Niethard FU Wissenschaftlichkeit und Wirtschaftlichkeit in Orthopädie und Physiotherapie - Editorial. 1997 Orthopädie, 135:1-2
Niethard FU Qualitätssicherung - Editorial 1997 Orthopädie, 135: 93-94
Nigrisoli M, Bosco V Non-unions-treatment and results 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:57
Nigrisoli M, Bosco V, Sisca G Shockwave Treatment for Knee and Achilles Tendinopathies 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 249-251
O'Brien WD, Zachary JF Rabbit and pig lung damage comparison from exposure to continuous wave 30 kHz ultrasound. 1996 Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology, 22: 345-354
Ogden JA, Alvarez R, Levitt R, Cross GL Chronic heel pain: results of FDA shockwave study 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:51
Ogden JA, Alvarez R, Levitt R, Cross GL, Marlow M Shock wave therapy for chronic proximal plantar fasciitis 2001 Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 387: 47-59
Ogden JA, Alvarez R, Levitt R, Marlow M Shock Wave Therapy (Orthotripsy®) in Musculoskeletal Disorders 2001 Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 387: 22-40
Ogden JA, Tóth-Kischkat A, Schultheiss R Principles of Shock Wave Therapy 2001 Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 387: 8-17
Oosterhof G, Cornel EB, Smits GA, Debruyne F, Schalken J The influence of high energy shock waves on the development of metastases. 1996 Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology, 22: 339-344
Oosterhof G, Smits G, de Ruyter A, Schalken J, Debruyne F Effects of high energy shock waves combined with biological response modifiers in different human kidney cancer xenografts. 1991 Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology, 17: 391-399


Peers K, Onkelinx L, Brys P, Lysens R ESWT for calcific tendinopathy of the rotator cuff: one year foolow-up and outcome comparison with surgery 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:15
Peers K, van den Eeede E, Brys P, Bellemans J, Lysens R Cross sectional functional outcome comparison of ESWT versus surgery for chronic patellar tendinopathy 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:42
Perlick L, Boxberg W, Giebel G Hochenergetische Stosswellenbehandlung des schmerzhaften Fersensporns. 1998 Unfallchirurg 1998; 101:914-918
Perlick L, Gassel F, Zander D, Schmitt O, Wallny T. Vergleich der Ergebnisse der mittelenergetischen ESWT und der operativen Therapie in der Technik nach Mittelmeier bei der therapieresistenten Epicondylitis humeri radialis 1999 Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb 1999; 137: 316-321
Perlick L, Wallny T Die ESWT der Tendinosis calcarea. Untersuchungen zur Desintegrationswirkung von Stoßwellen auf ein standardisiertes Kalkdepot im Tiermodell 2001 Siebert W, Buch M (Hrsg), Extrakorporale Stoßwellentherapie in der Orthopädie - Grundlagen und Anwendung, Ecomed Verlagsgesellschaft, Germany: 149-160
Perren SM Aktivierung der Knochenbildung durch Stosswellentherapie in der Frakturbehandlung. 1993 AO Forschungsinstitut, Davos
Philipp A, Delius M, Scheffzyk C, Vogel A, Lauterborn W Interaction of lithotripter-generated shock waves with air bubbles. 1993 Acoustic Society of America, 93: 2496-2509
Pigozzi F, Giombini A, Parisis A, Casciello G, Di Salvo V, Santori N, Mariani PP The application of shock wave therapy in the treatment of resistant chronic painful shoulder. 2000 Sports Med Phys Fitness 2000; 40:356-361
Polak HJ Ergebnis der Literaturrecherche der MDK-Gemeinschaft zur ESWT mit orthopädischen Indikationen. 1997 Siebert W, Buch M (Hrsg), Stosswellenanwendung am Knochen - Klinische und experimentelle Erfahrungen, Dr. Kovac, Hamburg: 66-68
Prat F, Sibille A, Luccioni C, Pansu D, Chapelon J, Beaumatin J, Ponchon T, Cathignol D Increased chemocytotoxicity to colon cancer cells by shock wave induced cavitation. 1994 Gastroenterology, 106: 937-944


Randazzo RF, Chaussy C, Fuchs GJ, Lovrekovich H, de Kernion JB The in vitro and in vivo effects of extracorporeal shock waves on malignant cells. 1988 Urological Research, 16: 419-426
Richter D, Ekkernkamp A Klinischer Einsatz der Stosswellentherapie in der Unfallchirurgie. 1997 Siebert W, Buch M (Hrsg), Stosswellenanwendung am Knochen - Klinische und experimentelle Erfahrungen, Dr. Kovac, Hamburg: 12-13
Richter D, Ekkernkamp A, Muhr G Die extrakorporale Stosswellentherapie - ein alternatives Konzept zur Behandlung der Epicondylitis humeri radialis ? 1995 Orthopäde, 24: 303-306
Rodríguez de Oya R, Sánchez Benitez de Soto J, Garcia Munilla M Shockwave Treatment for Chronic Non-unions 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 169-172
Roles NC, Maudsley RH Radial tunnel syndrome: resistant tennis elbow as a nerve entrapment. 1972 Bone Joint Surg [Br] 1972;54:499-508
Rompe JD Tierexperimentelle und klinische Ergebnisse der Stosswellentherapie am Knochen. 1997 Siebert W, Buch M (Hrsg), Stosswellenanwendung am Knochen - Klinische und experimentelle Erfahrungen, Dr. Kovac, Hamburg: 38-39
Rompe JD Extrakorporale Stosswellentherapie - Grundlagen, Indikation, Anwendung. 1997 Chapman & Hall GmbH, London Glasgow Weinheim New York Tokio Melbourne Madras
Rompe JD Stosswellentherapie: therapeutische Wirkung bei spekulativem Mechanismus. 1996 Orthopädie, 134: 13-19
Rompe JD Die Auswirkung extrakorporaler Stosswellen unterschiedlicher Energiedichten auf knochennahes Sehnengewebe - tierexperimentelle und klinische Studien. 1996 Habilitationsschrift, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz
Rompe JD Overview of Tennis Elbow Treated with Shockwaves 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 131-135


Rompe JD, Bohl J, Riehle HM, Schwitalle M, Krischek O Überprüfung der Läsionsgefahr des Nervus ischiadicus des Kaninchens durch die Applikation niedrig- und mittelenergetischer extrakorporaler Stosswellen. 1998 Zeitschrift für Orthopädie, 136: 407-411
Rompe JD, Burger R, Hopf C, Eysel P. Shoulder function after extracorporeal shock wave therapy for calcific tendinitis. 1998 Shoulder Elbow Surg 1998; 7: 505-509
Rompe JD, Decking J, Schoellner C, Nafe B Shock wave application for chronic plantar fasciitis in running athletes – a prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. 2001 Persönliche Mitteilung, 2001
Rompe JD, Eysel P, Hopf C, Vogel J, Küllmer K Extrakorporale Stosswellenapplikation bei gestörter Knochenheilung - eine kritische Bestandsaufnahme. 1997 Unfallchirurg, 100: 845-849
Rompe JD, Eysel P, Küllmer K, Vogel J, Kirkpatrick CJ, Bürger R, Nafe B, Heine J Extrakorporale Stosswellentherapie in der Orthopädie - aktueller Stand. 1996 Orthopädische Praxis, 8: 558-561
Rompe JD, Hopf C, Eysel P, Heine J, Witzsch U, Nafe B Extrakorporale Stosswellentherapie des therapieresistenten Tennisellenbogens - erste Ergebnisse von 150 Patienten. 1995 Chaussy C, Eisenberger F, Jocham D, Wilbert D (Hrsg), Die Stosswelle - Forschung und Klinik, Attempto Verlag, Tübingen: 147-152
Rompe JD, Hopf C, Küllmer K, Heine J, Bürger R Analgesic effect of extracorporeal shock-wave therapy on chronic tennis elbow. 1996 Bone Joint Surgery, 78 B: 233-237
Rompe JD, Hopf C, Küllmer K, Heine J, Bürger R, Nafe B Low-energy extracorporeal shock wave therapy for persistent tennis elbow. 1996 International Orthopaedics, 20: 23-27
Rompe JD, Hopf C, Küllmer K, Witzsch U, Nafe B Extrakorporale Stosswellentherapie der Epicondylopathia humeri radialis - ein alternatives Behandlungskonzept. 1996 Orthopädie, 134: 63-66
Rompe JD, Hopf C, Nafe B, Bürger R Low-energy extracorporeal shock wave therapy for painfull heel: a prospektiv controled single-blind study. 1996 Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, 115: 75-79


Rompe JD, Hopf C, Rumler F 2 Jahre extrakorporelle Stosswellentherapie (ESWT) in der Orthopädie - Indikationen und Resultate ? 1994 Orthopädie Mitteilungen, 173
Rompe JD, Kirkpatrick CJ, Küllmer K, Schwitalle M, Krischek O Dose-related effects of shock waves on rabbit tendo Achillis. 1998 Bone Joint Surgery 80 B: 546-552
Rompe JD, Küllmer K, Eysel P, Riehle HM, Bürger R, Nafe B Niedrigenergetische extrakorporale Stosswellentherapie beim plantaren Fersensporn. 1996 Orthopädische Praxis, 4: 271-275
Rompe JD, Küllmer K, Riehle HM, Herbsthofer B, Eckardt A, Bürger R, Nafe B, Eysel P Effektiveness of low-energy extracorporeal shock waves for chronic plantar fasciitis. 1996 Foot Ankle Surgery, 2 : 215-221
Rompe JD, Küllmer K, Vogel J, Eckardt A, Wahlmann U, Eysel P, Hopf C, Kirkpatrick CJ, Bürger R, Nafe B Extrakorporale Stosswellentherapie - experimentelle Grundlagen, klinischer Einsatz. 1997 Orthopäde, 26: 215-228
Rompe JD, Riedel C, Betz U, Fink C Chronic lateral epicondylitis of the elbow (tennis elbow) – Prospective comparison of low-energy shock wave therapy with low-energy shock wave therapy plus manual therapy of the cervical spine. 2001 Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2001; 82: 578-582
Rompe JD, Rosendahl T, Schöllner C, Theis C High-energy extracorporeal shock wave treatment of nonunions 2001 Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 387: 102-111
Rompe JD, Rumler F, Hopf C, Eysler P Shoulder function after extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) for calcifying tendinitis. 1997 Shoulder and Elbow Surgery
Rompe JD, Rumler F, Hopf C, Nafe B, Heine J Extracorporeal shock wave therapy for calcifying tendinitis of the shoulder. 1995 Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 321: 196-201
Rompe JD, Schoellner C, Nafe B Evaluation of low-energy extracorporeal shock-wave application for treatment of chronic plantar fasciitis 2002 Bone Joint Surg [Am] 2002;84:335-41

Result number: 47

Message Number 178137

we sell nike shoes(www.nikeshoesbusiness.com) View Thread
Posted by mary on 7/10/05 at 14:13


(www.nikeshoesbusiness.com) (Mary-home@hotmail.com Brandshoessupplier@hotmail.com
Shoes-online@hotmail.com) nike shoes seller/nike shoes wholesaler/buy nike shoes here/ sports shoes/china shoes supplier/ nike shoes supply/nike shoes seller/nike shoes store/nike shoes in stock/nike shoes online/ china shoes export/ nike shoes website/ buy nike shoes lowest price/ nike shoes Jordan series/ Nike shoes buyer/ sport shoes/ brand shoes/nike shoes manufacturer/find nike shoes online/ Nike air force 1(offer nike shoes Nike shoes supplier. We Sell Stock Nike Shoes, Dunk, Jordan, Jordans, Air Force 1, Shox, shocks, TL, NZ, Aix Max, Aixmax, 85, 97, 2003, TN, running, Sport - Shop, Store, Stock, Buy, Sell, Nike, Shoes, Dunk, Jordan, Jordans, Air Force 1, Shox, shocks, TL, NZ, Aix Max, Aixmax, 85, 97, 2003, TN, running, Sport, Basketball, Football, Boots, men's, women's, Timberland, Adidas, Puma, Prada )
,air jordans1-20,air max 2003/95/97/2004/2005 nike shox tl3 tl2 tl turbo r4 bmw monster / We sell nike air max 95/nike air max 97/ nike air max 2003/ nike air max 2004/ nike air max 2005/nike air max plus TN ( we sell nike air max 95 97 2003 2004 2005 plus TN) We sell air force one ( air force 1) imberland-low,timberland-mid We sell nike air Jordan I (1) / nike air jordan II (2) / nike air jordan III(3)/ nike air jordan IV(4) / nike air jordan V (5)/nike air jordan VI(6)/ nike air jordan VII(7)/ nike air jordan VIII(8) / nike air jordan IX(9) / nike air jordan X (10) / nike air jordan XI(11) / nike air jordan XII (12) / nike air jordan XIII(13)/nike air jordan XIV (14) / nike air jordan XV (15) / nike air jordan XVI(16)/nike air jordan XVII(17)/nike air jordan XVIII(18) /nike air jordan XIX (19) /nike air jordan XX(20)
http://www.nikeshoesbusiness.com/index.asp
http://www.nikeshoesbusiness.com/nike-air-force1-1.htm
http://www.nikeshoesbusiness.com/nike-air-jordans/nike-air-jordan-13-1.htm
http://www.nikeshoesbusiness.com/nike-new-product-1.htm
http://www.nikeshoesbusiness.com/air-max/nike-air-max95.htm
http://www.nikeshoesbusiness.com/air-max/nike-air-max97.htm
http://www.nikeshoesbusiness.com/air-max/nike-air-max2003.htm
http://www.nikeshoesbusiness.com/nike-shox/nike-shox-bmw.htm
http://www.nikeshoesbusiness.com/nike-shox/nike-shox-tl3.htm
http://www.nikeshoesbusiness.com/nike-shox/nike-shox-monster-1.htm
http://www.nikeshoesbusiness.com/nike-shox/nike-shox-R4-1.htm
http://www.nikeshoesbusiness.com/nike-shox/nike-shox-oz-1.htm
http://www.nikeshoesbusiness.com/nike-shox/nike-shox-nz-1.htm
http://www.nikeshoesbusiness.com/air-max/nike-air-max-tn.htm
http://www.nikeshoesbusiness.com/air-max/nike-air-max2005.htm
http://www.nikeshoesbusiness.com/nike-shox/nike-shox-Ride-1.htm
http://www.nikeshoesbusiness.com/nike-shox/nike-shox-de-1.htm
http://www.nikeshoesbusiness.com/nike-shox/nike-shox-tl2.htm
http://www.nikeshoesbusiness.com/nike-dunk-1.htm
http://www.nikeshoesbusiness.com/air-max/nike-air-max2003.htm
http://www.nikeshoesbusiness.com/nike-new-product-1.htm
http://www.nikeshoesbusiness.com/in-stock/nike-air-jordans-instock.htm
http://www.nikeshoesbusiness.com/contactus.htm
http://www.nikeshoesbusiness.com/rules.htm
http://www.nikeshoesbusiness.com/aboutus.htm

Result number: 48

Message Number 177900

Re: ESWT View Thread
Posted by Ed Davis, DPM on 7/06/05 at 01:01

Here is a partial list of research -- the www.asmst.org site is still under construction (by the way United may be hiring techs and sales reps).
ps. I have only gotten up to "k" on the researchers list:


Author Title Year Publisher
Ackaert KS, Schröder FH Effects of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) on renal tissue. 1989 Urological Research, 17: 3-7
Alvarez R. Preliminary results on the safety and efficacy of the OssaTron for treatment of plantar fasciitis. 2002 Foot Ankle Int 2002;23:197-203
Amelio E, Cugola L Acute and chronic tendon pathology in athlete 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:81
Amini A, Hafez M, Zhou S, Garcia E, Coombs R Shockwave Treatment for Chronic Non-union 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 159-164
Ammendolia A, Perticone L, Milano C Chronic shoulder articular pain: treatment by extracorporeal shockwaves 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:19
Ape A, Bosco V, Buselli P, Coco V, Gerardi A, Saggini R A retrospective, multi-centre experience report of shock wave therapy on epicondylitis 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:35-36
Apfel RE Acoustic cavitation. 1981 Methods of experimental physics, vol. 19, P. Edmonds ed., Academic Press New York: 355-411
Arbeitsgruppe "Orthopädische Stosswellenbehandlungen" Standortbestimmung 1995 Chaussy C, Eisenberger F, Jocham D, Wilbert D (Hrsg), Die Stosswelle - Forschung und Klinik, Attempto Verlag, Tübingen: 137-142
Arbeitsgruppe "Technische Entwicklungen" Standortbestimmung 1995 Chaussy C, Eisenberger F, Jocham D, Wilbert D (Hrsg), Die Stosswelle - Forschung und Klinik, Attempto Verlag, Tübingen: 15-20
Assenza, Buselli P, Chiacchio C, Pozzolini M, Scrocca M, Saggini R A retrospective, multi-centre experience report of shock wave therapy on rotator cuff tendonitis with calcific deposit 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:25
Auersperg V, Labek G, Böhler N Correlations Between Length of History and Outcome 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 37-42
Augat P, Claes L, Suger G In vivo effects of shock waves on the healing of fractured bone. 1995 Clin. Biomechan., 10: 374-378
Baloglu I, Aydinok H, Lök V Our results of the ossatherapy for treatment of pseudoathrosis 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:56
Baloglu I, Lök V Shockwave Therapy for Plantar Fasciitis 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 51-52
Bao S, Thrall BD, Miller DL Transfection of a reporter plasmid into cultured cells by sonoporation in vitro. 1997 Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology, 23: 953-959
Baumann J, Baumann J Treatment of neuromuscular dysfunction in children with spastic cerebral palsy by extracorporeal unfocused shock waves. 1997 Siebert W, Buch M (Hrsg), Extracorporal shock waves in orthopaedics, Springer Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg New York: 231-239
Beg M, Melikyan E, Yang X, Bainbridge L Shockwave Treatment for Intractable Tennis Elbow 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 81-90
Begg C, Cho M, Eastwood S Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials: the CONSORT statement. 1996 JAMA 1996; 276:637-639
Benson K, Hartz AJ A comparison of observational studies and randomized, controlled trials. 2000 N Engl J Med 2000; 342: 1878-1886
Betz U, Heine J, Riedel C, Rompe J D, Schöllner C The value of Cervical Spinal Manipulative Therapy Combined with Low Energy Shockwaves for Chronic Tennis Elbow 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 123-130
Boxberg W, Perlick L, Giebel G Stosswellenbehandlung bei therapieresistenten Weichteilschmerzen. 1996 Chirurg, 67: 1174-1178
Boyer MI, Hastings H Lateral tennis elbow: Is there any science out there? 1999 J Shoulder Elbow Surg 1999; 8:481-491
Braun W, Claes L, Rüter A, Paschke D Untersuchung zur Wirksamkeit von Stosswellen auf die Festigkeit des Verbundes von Knochen und Polymethylmetacrylat. 1991 Experimentelle Orthopädie, 130: 236
Braun W, Claes L, Rüter A, Paschke D Effects of extracorporeal shock waves on the stability of the interface between bone and polymethylmethacrylate: an in vitro study on human femoral segments. 1992 Clin. Biomechan., 7: 47-54
Braun W, Rüter A Frakturheilung: Morphologische und physiologische Gesichtspunkte. 1996 Unfallchirurg, 99: 59-67
Brendel W, Delius M, Goetz A Effect of shock waves on the microvasculature. 1987 Prog. Appl. Microcirculation, 12: 41-50
Brocai DRC, Lukoschek M, Hartmann M, Loew M Biometrische Planung klinisch-orthopadischer Studien. Der optimale Stichprobenumfang. 1998 Orthopäde 1998; 27:301-304
Brunner W, Thüringer R, Ascher G, Maluche C, Kellner F, Neuking A, Solleder A, Schmidt-Hoensdorf F, Vetter K High energy shock waves for pain management in orthopedics - a two year foolow-up in 899 cases 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:75
Brunner W, Thüringer R, Ascher G, Neuking A, Flesch A, Solleder A, Schmidt-Höhnsdorff F, Bärtel B Die extrakorporelle Stosswellentherapie in der Orthopädie - Drei-Monats-Ergebnisse in 443 Fällen. 1997 Orthopädische Praxis, 7: 461-464
Brümmer F, Brenner J, Bräuner T, Hülser D Effect of shock waves on suspended and immobilized L1210 cells. 1989 Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology, 15: 229-239
Brümmer F, Bräuner T, Hülser D Biological effects of shock waves. 1990 World Journal of Urology, 8: 224-232
Brümmer F, Suhr D, Hülser D Sensitivity of normal and malignant cells to shock waves. 1992 Stone Disease, 4: 243-248
Bräuner T, Brümmer F, Hülser DF Histopathology of shock wave treated tumor cells suspensions and multicell tumor spheroids. 1989 Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology, 15: 451-460
Buch M Shock wave therapy of heel spur. 1997 Orthopaedic Product News, July/Aug./Sep.: 28-30
Buch M Prospektiver Vergleich der hochenergetischen Stoßwellentherapie sowie des Needling bei der Tendinosis calcarea der Schulter 2001 Siebert W, Buch M (Hrsg), Extrakorporale Stoßwellentherapie in der Orthopädie - Grundlagen und Anwendung, Ecomed Verlagsgesellschaft, Germany: 127-136
Buch M, Fleming L, Theodore G, Amendola A, Bachmann C, Zingas C. Resultate einer prospektiven placebokontrollierten randomisierten doppelblinden Multicenterstudie zur Evaluation der Effektivität und Sicherheit der Stoßwellentherapie bei plantarer Fasciitis. 2001 Vortrag, Symposium Muskuloskeletale Stoßwellentherapie, Mainz
Buch M, Knorr U, Fleming L, Theodore G, Amendola A, Bachmann C et al Extracorporeal shock wave therapy in plantar fasciitis: a review. 2002 Orthopaede 2002;31:637-644
Buch M, Knorr U, Siebert W E Chronic plantar fasciitis treated by ESWT 2000 Minimally Invasive Therapy & Allied Technologies, Isis Medical Media, Volume 9, Number 3/4 August 2000: 310 (Abstract 7)
Buch M, Schlangmann B, Träger D, Siebert W Prospektiver Vergleich der niedrig- und hochenergetischen Stosswellentherapie und Needling bei der Behandlung der Tendinosis calcarea der Schulter. 1997 45. Jahrestagung der Vereinigung Süddeutscher Orthopäden, Abstractband: 101-102
Buch M, Siebert W Shockwave Treatment for Heel Pain Syndrome - a Prospective Investigation 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 73-77
Burger C, Tsironis K, Helling HJ, Prokop A, Rehm KE Die extrakorporale Stosswellentherapie bei Ansatztendopathien der Schulter, des Ellenbogens und der Ferse - vorläufige Ergebnisse einer prospektiven Kölner Studie. 1996 45. Jahrestagung der Deutschen Orthopädenvereinigung e.V. User Meeting Ossatron, Wiesbaden
Buselli P, Saggini R ESWT in ossificans myositis 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:83
Bürger R, Witzsch U, Haist J, Grebe P, Hohenfellner R Die extrakorporale Stosswellentherapie (ESWT) - eine neue Möglichkeit der Behandlung von Pseudarthrosen. 1993 Chaussy C, Eisenberger F, Jocham D, Wilbert D (Hrsg), Stosswellenlithotripsie - Aspekte und Prognosen, Attempto Verlag, Tübingen: 127-130
Bürger R, Witzsch U, Haist J, Karnofsky V Extrakorporale Stosswellenbehandlung bei Pseudarthrose und aseptischer Knochennekrose. 1991 Urologe A, 30: 48
Bürger R, Witzsch U, Haist J, Karnofsky V, Hohenfellner R Extracorporeal shock wave therapy of pseudo-arthrosis and aseptic osteonecrosis. 1991 Endourology, 5, Suppl. 1: 48
Bürger R, Witzsch U, Haist J, Karnovsky V, Ahlers J, Hohenfellner R Extracorporeal shock wave therapy of pseudo-arthrosis. 1992 Urology, 147: 48 ff
Bödekker I, Haake M Die extrakorporale Stosswellentherapie zur Behandlung der Epicondylitis humeri radialis. Ein aktueller Überblick. 2000 Orthopäde 2000; 29:463-469
Bödekker R, Schafer H, Haake M Extracorporeal shock wave therapy in the treatment of plantar fasciitis – a biometrical review. 2001 Clin Rheumatol 2001; 20:324-330
Chaussy C, Eisenberger F, Wanner K, Forssmann F, Hepp W, Schmiedt E, Brendel W The use of shock waves for the destruction of renal calculi without direct contact. 1976 Urol Res 1976; 4:181-188
Chen H, Chen L, Huang T Treatment of painfull heel syndrome with shock waves 2001 Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 387: 41-46
Chen H, Chen L, Huang T Treatment of painful heel syndrome with shock waves 2001 Clin Orthop 2001; 387: 41-46
Child SZ, Hartman C, Schery LA, Carstensen EL Lung damage from exposure to pulsed ultrasound. 1990 Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology, 16: 817-825
Church C A theoretical study of cavitation generated by an extracorporeal shock wave lithotripter. 1989 Acoustic Society of America, 86: 215-227
Coleman AJ, Saunders JE A review of the physical properties and biological effects of the high amplitude acoustic fields usedr in extracorporeal lithotripsy. 1993 Ultrasonics, 31: 75-89
Coleman AJ, Saunders JE A survey of the acoustic output of commercial extracorporeal shock wave lithotripters. 1989 Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology, 15: 213-227
Coleman AJ, Saunders JE, Crum LA, Dyson M Acoustic cavitation generated by an extracorporeal shock wave lithotripter. 1987 Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology, 13: 69 ff
Concato J, Shah N, Jorwitz RI Randomized, controlled trials, observational studies, and the hierarchy of research. 2000 N Engl J Med 2000; 342: 1887-189
Corrado B, Russo S, Gigliotti S, De Durante C, Canero R Shockwave Treatment for Non-unions of the Carpal Scaphoid 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 187-194
Cosentino R, de Stefano R, Frati E, Manca S, Tofi C, Falsetti P, Linari S, Morfini M, Rossi-Ferrini P, Marcolongo R Safety and efficacy of extracorporeal shock wave therapy in the treatment of painful non articular rheumatism of patients with hemophilia 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:86
Cozzolino F, Corrado B, Izzo M, Borrelli M, Russo S, Gigliotti S, de Durante C Axial external fixation plus high energy shock waves in the treatment of unstable leg non union 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:61
Crawford F, Atkins D, Edward J Interventions for treating plantar heel pain (Cochrane Review) 2000 Cochrane Library, Issue 3. Oxford: Update Software, 2000
Crowther M. A prospective randomised study comparing shockwave therapy and steroid injection in the treatment of 'tennis elbow' 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:34
Crum L Tensile strength of water. 1979 Nature, 278: 148-149
Crum L Acoustic cavitation. 1982 Proceedings of the 1982 IEEE ultrasonics Symposium, IEEE, New York: 1-11
Cugola L, Amelio E Long bone non-union: treatment by extracorporeal shock wave (ESW) 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:59Dahm K Stosswellentherapie bei schmerzhaftem Fersensporn: Nachuntersuchungen bei 362 Patienten. 1997 2. Radevormwalder ESWT-Symosium, Radevormwald: 8-9
Dahmen GP, Franke R, Gonchars V, Poppe K, Lentrodt S, Lichtenberger S, Jost S, Montigel J, Nam VC, Dahmen G Die Behandlung knochennaher Weichteilschmerzen mit extrakorporaler Stosswellentherapie (ESWT) - Indikation, Technik und bisherige Ergebnisse. 1995 Chaussy C, Eisenberger F, Jocham D, Wilbert D (Hrsg), Die Stosswelle - Forschung und Klinik, Attempto Verlag, Tübingen: 175-186
Dahmen GP, Meiss L, Nam VC, Skruodies B Extrakorporale Stoßwellentherapie (ESWT) im knochennahen Weichteilbereich an der Schulter 1992 Extracta Orthopaedica 1992; 15:25-28
Dahmen GP, Nam VC, Meiss L Extrakorporale Stosswellentherapie zur Behandlung von knochennahen Weichteilschmerzen: Indikation, Technik und vorläufige Ergebnisse. 1993 Chaussy C, Eisenberger F, Jocham D, Wilbert D (Hrsg), Stosswellenlithotripsie - Aspekte und Prognosen, Attempto Verlag, Tübingen: 143-148
Davis PF, Severud E, Baxter DE Painful heel syndrome: results of nonoperative treatment. 1994 Foot Ankle Int 1994;15:531-5
de Durante C, Russo S, Gigliotti S, Corrado B The Treatment of Shoulder Periarticular Calcification 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 143-144
de Durante C, Russo S, Gigliotti S, Pecoraro C The treatment of shoulder periarticular calcifications by shock waves 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:23
de Maio M, Paine R, Mangine RE, Drez D Plantar fasciitis. 1993 Orthopedics 1993;16: 1153-63
de Oya R, Sanchez Benitez Soto J, Garcia Munilla M Extracorporeal shock waves in the treatment of tendinitis of shoulder 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:13
de Pretto M, Dalla Valle I, Ferrari G, Pacetti A Follow-up and evaluation of heterotopic ossifications treated with shockwave therapy 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:85
de Pretto M, Guerra L, Pozzolini M, Zucchetti R, Saggini R A retrospective multi-centre experience report of shock wave therapy on achilles tendonitis 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:45-46
Delius M Minimal static excess pressure minimizes the effect of extracorporeal shock waves on cells and reduces it on gallstones. 1997 Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology, 23: 611-617
Delius M Experimentelle Stosswellenlithotripsie - aktuelle Entwicklungen. 1995 Chaussy C, Eisenberger F, Jocham D, Wilbert D (Hrsg), Die Stosswelle - Forschung und Klinik, Attempto Verlag, Tübingen: 3-9
Delius M Biologische Wirkung von Stosswellen - mehr als "nur" Steinzertrümmerung? 1995 Zentralblatt Chirurgie, 120: 259-273
Delius M Medical applications and bioeffects of extracorporal shock waves. 1994 Shock waves, 4: 55-72
Delius M Bioeffects of shock waves: in vivo and in vitro actions 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:9
Delius M, Denk R, Berding C, Liebich H, Jordan M, Brendel W Biological effects of shock waves: cavitation by shock waves in piglet liver. 1990 Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology, 16: 467-472
Delius M, Draenert K Einfluß hochenergetischer Stosswellen auf Knochen, Wirkung von Stosswellen auf Knochen. 1997 Siebert W, Buch M (Hrsg), Stosswellenanwendung am Knochen - Klinische und experimentelle Erfahrungen, Dr. Kovac, Hamburg: 10-11
Delius M, Draenert K, Al Diek Y, Draenert Y Biological effect of shock waves: in vivo effect of high energy pulses on rabbit bone. 1995 Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology, 21: 1219-1225
Delius M, Draenert K, Draenert Y, Börner M Effects of extracorporeal shock waves on bone: a review of shock wave expiriments and the mechanism of shock wave action. 1997 Siebert W, Buch M (Hrsg), Extracorporeal shock waves in orthopaedics, Springer Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg New York: 91-107
Delius M, Enders G, Heine G, Stark J, Remberger K, Brendel W Biological effects of shock waves: lung hemorrhage by shock waves in dogs - pressure dependence. 1987 Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology, 13: 61-67
Delius M, Enders G, Xuan Z, Liebich H, Brendel B Biological effects of shock waves: kidney damage by shock waves in dogs - dose dependence. 1988 Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology, 14: 117-122
Delius M, Hoffmann E, Steinbeck G, Conzen P Biological effects of shock waves: induction of arrhythmia in piglet hearts. 1994 Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology, 20: 279-285
Delius M, Jordan M, Eizenhoefer H, Marlinghaus E, Heine G, Liebich H, Brendel W Biological effects of shock waves: kidney hemorrhage by shock waves in dogs - administration rate dependence. 1988 Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology, 14: 689-694
Delius M, Jordan M, Liebich H, Brendel W Biological effects of shock waves: effect of shock waves on the liver and gallbladder wall of dogs - administration rate dependence. 1990 Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology, 16: 459-466
Delius M, Weiss N, Gambihler S, Goetz A, Brendel W Tumor therapy with shock waves requires modified lithotripter shock waves 1989 Naturwissenschaften, 76: 573-574
Delius M, Überle F, Eisenmenger W Extracorporeal shock waves act by shock wave gas bubble interaction. 1998 Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology, 24: 1055-1059
Dellian M, Walenta S, Gamarra F, Kuhnle G, Mueller-Klieser W, Goetz A Ischemia and loss of ATP in tumors following treatment with focused high energy shock waves. 1993 British Journal of Cancer, 68: 26-31
di Silverio F, Galluci M, Gambardella P, Alp G, Benedetti R, La Mancusa R, Pulcinelli FM, Romiti R, Gazzangia PP Blood cellolar and biochemical changes after extracorporeal shock wave in lithotripsy. 1990 Urological Research, 18: 49 ff
Dieppe P, Chard J, Tallon D, Egger M Funding clinical research. 1999 Lancet 1999; 353:1626-1629
Diesch R, Haupt G Anwendung der hochenergetischen extrakorporalen Stosswellentherapie bei Pseudarthrosen. 1997 Siebert W, Buch M (Hrsg), Stosswellenanwendung am Knochen - Klinische und experimentelle Erfahrungen, Dr. Kovac, Hamburg: 63-64
Diesch R, Haupt G Use of extracorporeal shock waves in the treatment of pseudarthrosis. 1991 Chaussy C, Eisenberger F, Jocham D, Wilbert D (Hrsg), High energey shock waves in medicine, Thieme Verlag, Stuttgart: 136-139
Diesch R, Haupt G Extracorporeal shock wave treatment of pseudarthrosis, tendinosis calcarea of the shoulder and calcaneal spur. 1997 Siebert W, Buch M (Hrsg), Extracorporeal shock waves in orthopaedics, Springer Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg New York: 131-135
Diesch R, Straub T, Penninger E, Frolich T, Scholl J Conventional Versus Ballistic Shockwave Treatment for Calcaneal Spur 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 71-72
Duarte LR The stimulation of bone growth by ultrasound. 1983 Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, 101: 153 ff
Dyson M, Brookes M Stimulation of bone repair by ultrasound. 1983 Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology, Suppl 2: 61 ff
Eichenblat M Experience with two different types of shockwave therapy for chronic calcifying tendinitis of the shoulder and chronic heel syndrome 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:71
Eisenmenger W Experimentelle Bestimmung der Stossfrontdicke aus dem akustischen Frequenzspektrum elektromagnetisch erzeugter Stosswellen in Flüssigkeiten bei einem Stossdruckbereich von 10 atm bis 10 atm. 1964 Acustica, 14: 188-204
Ekkernkamp A Extrakorporale Stosswellen. 1998 Deutsches Ärzteblatt, 95: B-1403
Ekkernkamp A Die Wirkung extrakorporaler Stosswellen auf die Frakturheilung. 1992 Habilitationsschrift, Ruhr-Universität, Bochum
Ekkernkamp A, Bosse A, Haupt G, Pommer A Der Einfluß der extrakorporalen Stosswellen auf die standardisierte Tibiafraktur am Schaf. 1992 Ittel TH, Sieberth HG, Matthiaß HH (Hrsg), Aktuelle Aspekte der Osteologie, Springer Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg New York: 307-310
Ekkernkamp A, Haupt G, Knopf HJ, Püllenberg P, Muhr, Senge T Effects of extracorporeal shock waves on standardized fractures in sheeps. 1991 Urology, 145: 257 ff
Feigl T, Schneider T, Riedlinger R, Löhr M, Hahn EG, Ell C Beschallung von humanen Pankreaskarzinomzellen mit hochenergetischem gepulsten Ultraschall. 1992 Med. Tech., 3: 139-143
Ferrari G, lo Prete F, de Pretto M, Pacetti A Use of imaging for heterotopic ossifications evaluation 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:84
Folberth W, Krause H, Reuner T Stosswellenmesstechnik in der Lithotripsie: Historie und Ausblick. 1995 Chaussy C, Eisenberger F, Jocham D, Wilbert D (Hrsg), Die Stosswelle - Forschung und Klinik, Attempto Verlag, Tübingen: 45-50
Forriol F, Solchaga L, Moreno JL, Canadell J The effects os shock waves on mature and healing cortical bone. 1994 International Orthopaedics, 18: 325-329
Fritze J Extrakorporale Stoßwellentherapie in orthopädischer Indikation: Eine ausgewählte Übersicht. 1998 Versicherungsmedizin 1998; 50: 180-183
Fukada E, Yasuda I On the piezoelectric effect of bone. 1957 Phys. Soc. Japan, 12: 1158-1162
Fuson RL, Sherman M, Van Fleet J, Wendt, T The conduct of orthopaedic clinical trials. 1997 J Bone Joint Surg 1997; 79-A: 1089-1098



To sort a column, just click on any of the column heading. Sites: 1

Author Title Year Publisher
Feigl T, Schneider T, Riedlinger R, Löhr M, Hahn EG, Ell C Beschallung von humanen Pankreaskarzinomzellen mit hochenergetischem gepulsten Ultraschall. 1992 Med. Tech., 3: 139-143
Ferrari G, lo Prete F, de Pretto M, Pacetti A Use of imaging for heterotopic ossifications evaluation 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:84
Folberth W, Krause H, Reuner T Stosswellenmesstechnik in der Lithotripsie: Historie und Ausblick. 1995 Chaussy C, Eisenberger F, Jocham D, Wilbert D (Hrsg), Die Stosswelle - Forschung und Klinik, Attempto Verlag, Tübingen: 45-50
Forriol F, Solchaga L, Moreno JL, Canadell J The effects os shock waves on mature and healing cortical bone. 1994 International Orthopaedics, 18: 325-329
Fritze J Extrakorporale Stoßwellentherapie in orthopädischer Indikation: Eine ausgewählte Übersicht. 1998 Versicherungsmedizin 1998; 50: 180-183
Fukada E, Yasuda I On the piezoelectric effect of bone. 1957 Phys. Soc. Japan, 12: 1158-1162
Fuson RL, Sherman M, Van Fleet J, Wendt, T The conduct of orthopaedic clinical trials. 1997 J Bone Joint Surg 1997; 79-A: 1089-1098



Search:
Author Title Publisher

1-9 A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
To sort a column, just click on any of the column heading. Sites: 1 2 3

Author Title Year Publisher
Galasso O, de Durante C, Russo S, Gigliotti S, Corrado B Chronic achilloynia. Treatment with extracorporeal shock waves 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:43
Gambihler S, Delius M In vitro interaction of lithotripter shock waves and cytotoxic drugs. 1992 British Journal of Cancer, 66: 69-73
Gambihler S, Delius M, Ellwart JW Permeabilization of the plasma membrane of L1210 mouse leukemia cells using lithotripter shock waves. 1994 Membr. Biol., 141: 267-275
Gambihler S, Delius M, Ellwart JW Transient increase in membrane permeability of L1210 cells upon exposure to lithotripter shock waves in vitro. 1992 Naturwissenschaften, 79: 328-329
Gebhart C, Widhalm R The Biological Effects of Shockwave Treatment 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 11-12
Gerdesmeyer L ESWT bei Tendinosis calcarea – Ergebnisse der prospektiven placebokontrollierten Multicenterstudie der DGOOC. 2001 Vortrag, Arbeitskreis Stoßwellentherapie, Berlin, 2001
Gerdesmeyer L, Bachfischer K, Hauschild M Overview of Calcifying Tendonitis of the Shoulder Treated with Shockwave Treatment 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 151-156
Gerdesmeyer L, Hasse A, Engel A, Bachfischer K, Rechl H Der Einfluß extrakorporaler Stoßwellen auf die Osteoinduktion nach Radiatio 2001 Siebert W, Buch M (Hrsg), Extrakorporale Stoßwellentherapie in der Orthopädie - Grundlagen und Anwendung, Ecomed Verlagsgesellschaft, Germany: 13-22
Gerdesmeyer L, Hauschild M, Bachfischer K The change of clinical outcome of tendinitis calcarea after ESWT in course of time 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:28
Gerdesmeyer L, Russlies M, Peters P, Gradinger R Die hochenergetische ESWT zur Behandlung der Tendinosis calcarea. 1997 46. Jahrestagung Norddeutsche Orthopädenvereinigung, Kurzreferate: 14
(PIPE) next

Author Title Publisher

1-9 A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
To sort a column, just click on any of the column heading. Sites: 1 2 3

Author Title Year Publisher
Galasso O, de Durante C, Russo S, Gigliotti S, Corrado B Chronic achilloynia. Treatment with extracorporeal shock waves 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:43
Gambihler S, Delius M In vitro interaction of lithotripter shock waves and cytotoxic drugs. 1992 British Journal of Cancer, 66: 69-73
Gambihler S, Delius M, Ellwart JW Permeabilization of the plasma membrane of L1210 mouse leukemia cells using lithotripter shock waves. 1994 Membr. Biol., 141: 267-275
Gambihler S, Delius M, Ellwart JW Transient increase in membrane permeability of L1210 cells upon exposure to lithotripter shock waves in vitro. 1992 Naturwissenschaften, 79: 328-329
Gebhart C, Widhalm R The Biological Effects of Shockwave Treatment 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 11-12
Gerdesmeyer L ESWT bei Tendinosis calcarea – Ergebnisse der prospektiven placebokontrollierten Multicenterstudie der DGOOC. 2001 Vortrag, Arbeitskreis Stoßwellentherapie, Berlin, 2001
Gerdesmeyer L, Bachfischer K, Hauschild M Overview of Calcifying Tendonitis of the Shoulder Treated with Shockwave Treatment 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 151-156
Gerdesmeyer L, Hasse A, Engel A, Bachfischer K, Rechl H Der Einfluß extrakorporaler Stoßwellen auf die Osteoinduktion nach Radiatio 2001 Siebert W, Buch M (Hrsg), Extrakorporale Stoßwellentherapie in der Orthopädie - Grundlagen und Anwendung, Ecomed Verlagsgesellschaft, Germany: 13-22
Gerdesmeyer L, Hauschild M, Bachfischer K The change of clinical outcome of tendinitis calcarea after ESWT in course of time 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:28
Gerdesmeyer L, Russlies M, Peters P, Gradinger R Die hochenergetische ESWT zur Behandlung der Tendinosis calcarea. 1997 46. Jahrestagung Norddeutsche Orthopädenvereinigung, Kurzreferate: 14
(PIPE) next



To sort a column, just click on any of the column heading. Sites: 1 2 3 4 5

Author Title Year Publisher
Haake M, Böddeker IR, Decker T, Buch M, Vogel M, Labek G, Maier M, Loew M, Maier-Boerries O, Fischer J, Betthäuser A, Rehack HC, Kanovsky W, Müller I, Gerdesmeyer L, Rompe JD Efficacy of Extracorporal Shockwave Therapy (ESWT) in patients with lateral epicondylitis - A placebo controlled multicenter trial. 2001 4th International Congress of the ISMST, Berlin, 2001
Haake M, Böddeker IR, Decker T, Buch M, Vogel M, Labek G, Maier M, Loew M, Maier-Boerries OM, Fischer J, Betthäuser A, Rehack HC, Kanovsky W, Müller I, Gerdesmeyer L, Rompe JD Side effects of Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy (ESWT) in the treatment of tennis elbow. 2002 Arch Orthop Traum Surg 2002
Haake M, Deike B, Thon A, Schmitt J Exact focusing of extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy for calcifying tendinopathy. 2002 Clin Orthop 2002
Haake M, Deike B, Thon A, Schmitt J. Importance of accurately focussing of extracorporeal shock waves (ESWT) in the treatment of calcifying tendinitis - A prospective randomised study. 2001 Biomed Tech 2001; 45: 69-74
Haake M, Jensen K, Prinz H, Willenberg T Design einer Multizenterstudie zum Wirksamkeitsnachweis der Extrakorporalen Stosswellentherapie (ESTW) bei Epicondylitis humeri radialis. 2000 Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb 2000; 138:99-103
Haake M, Rautmann M, Griss P Therapieergebnisse und Kostenanalyse der Extrakorporalen Stoßwellentherapie bei Tendinitis calcarea und Supraspinatussehnensyndrom. 1998 Orthop Praxis 1998;34: 110-113
Haake M, Rautmann M, Wirth T Assessment of treatment costs of Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy (ESWT) - Comparison of ESWT and surgical treatment in shoulder diseases 2001 Int J Tech Ass Health Care 2001; 17: 612-617
Haake M, Rautmann M, Wirth T Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy versus surgical treatment in calcifying ttttrendinitis and non calcifying tendinitis of the supraspinatus muscle. 2001 Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 2001; 11: 21-24
Haake M, Sattler A, Gross MW, Schmitt J, Hildebrandt R, Müller HH Vergleich der Extrakorporalen Stoßwellentherapie mit der Röntgenreizbestrahlung beim Supraspinatussehnensyndrom – ein prospektiver randomisierter einfachblinder Parallelgruppenvergleich 2001 Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb 2001; 139: 397-402
Haist J Die Osteorestauration via Stosswellen-Anwendung. Eine neue Möglichkeit zur Therapie der gestörten knöchernen Konsolidierung. 1995 Chaussy C, Eisenberger F, Jocham D, Wilbert D (Hrsg), Die Stosswelle - Forschung und Klinik, Attempto Verlag, Tübingen: 157-161 Haist J Osteorestoration via shock wave application. A new possibility of treating disturbed bone union. 1997 Siebert W, Buch M (Hrsg), Extracorporeal shock waves in orthopaedics, Springer Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg New York: 119-129
Haist J Einsatzmöglichkeiten der analgetisch wirksamen extrakorporalen Stosswellentherapie an der Schulter. 1995 Orthopädische Praxis, 9: 591-593
Haist J Shockwave Treatment for Radial and Ulnar Epicondylitis 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 115-113
Haist J Shockwave Therapy for Pseudarthroses 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 195-196
Haist J Shockwave Treatment of Dupuytren's Contracture and Ledderhose's Contraction 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 253-254
Haist J, Reichel W, Bürger R, Witzsch U Einsatz der extrakorporalen Stosswelle bei der osteosynthetisch versorgten Pseudarthrose - eine experimentelle Studie. 1993 Orthopädische Praxis, 5: 345-346
Haist J, Reichel W, Witzsch U, Bürger R Die extrakorporale Stosswellenbehandlung der gestörten Frakturheilung - eine Alternative zu operativen Verfahren ? 1993 Orthopädische Praxis, 29: 842-844
Haist J, Steeger von Keitz D Die Stosswellentherapie (ESWT) der Epicondylopathia radialis et ulnaris. Ein neues Behandlungskonzept knochennaher Weichteilschmerzen. 1994 Orthopädie Mitteilungen, 173
Haist J, Steeger von Keitz D Stosswellentherapie knochennaher Weichteilschmerzen - ein neues Behandlungskonzept. 1995 Chaussy C, Eisenberger F, Jocham D, Wilbert D (Hrsg), Die Stosswelle - Forschung und Klinik, Attempto Verlag, Tübingen: 162-165
Haist J, Steeger von Keitz D, Mohr G, Schulze G, Weber F The orthopaedic shock wave therapy in the treatment of chronic insertion tendopathy and tendinosis calcarea. 1997 Siebert W, Buch M (Hrsg), Extracorporeal shock waves in orthopaedics, Springer Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg New York: 159-163
Haist J, Steeger von Keitz D, Witzsch U, Bürger R, Haist U The extracorporeal shockwave therapy in the treatment of disturbed bone union. 1992 7th International Conference on Biomedical Engineering, December 2.- 4.1992, Singapore: 222-224
Haist J, Steeger von Keitzr D Shock wave therapy in the treatment of near to bone soft tissue pain in sportsmen. 1996 International Journal of Sports Medicine, 17: 79-81
Hammer DS, Rupp S, Ensslin S, Kohn D, Seil R Extracorporal shock wave therapy in patients with tennis elbow and painful heel. 2000 Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2000; 120:304-7
Hammer DS, Rupp S, Kreutz A, Pape D, Kohn D, Seil R Extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) in patients with chronic proximal plantar fasciitis. 2002 Foot Ankle Int 2002;23:309-13
Hasegawa S, Kato K, Takashi M, Zhu Y, Obata K, Miyake K S100a0 protein as a marker for tissue damage related to extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. 1993 Eur. Urology, 24: 393-396
Haupt G Stosswellen in der Orthopädie. 1997 Urologe A, 36, Nr.3: 233-238
Haupt G Use of extracorporeal shock waves in the treatment of pseudarthrosis, tendopathy and other orthopaedic diseases. 1997 Urology, 158: 4-11
Haupt G, Diesch R, Straub T, Penninger E, Fröhlich T, Scholl J, Löhrer H, Senge T Ballistic Shockwave Treatment 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 271-272
Haupt G, Ekkernkamp A, Püllenberg A, Senge T Einfluß extrakorporal erzeugter Stosswellen auf standardisierte Tibiafrakturen im Schafmodell. 1992 Urologe A, 31: A 43ff
Haupt G, Haupt A, Ekkernkamp A, Gerety B, Chvapil M Influence of shock waves on fracture healing. 1992 Urology, 39: 529-532
Haist J, Steeger von Keitz D, Witzsch U, Bürger R, Haist U The extracorporeal shockwave therapy in the treatment of disturbed bone union. 1992 7th International Conference on Biomedical Engineering, December 2.- 4.1992, Singapore: 222-224
Haist J, Steeger von Keitzr D Shock wave therapy in the treatment of near to bone soft tissue pain in sportsmen. 1996 International Journal of Sports Medicine, 17: 79-81
Hammer DS, Rupp S, Ensslin S, Kohn D, Seil R Extracorporal shock wave therapy in patients with tennis elbow and painful heel. 2000 Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2000; 120:304-7
Hammer DS, Rupp S, Kreutz A, Pape D, Kohn D, Seil R Extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) in patients with chronic proximal plantar fasciitis. 2002 Foot Ankle Int 2002;23:309-13
Hasegawa S, Kato K, Takashi M, Zhu Y, Obata K, Miyake K S100a0 protein as a marker for tissue damage related to extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. 1993 Eur. Urology, 24: 393-396
Haupt G Stosswellen in der Orthopädie. 1997 Urologe A, 36, Nr.3: 233-238
Haupt G Use of extracorporeal shock waves in the treatment of pseudarthrosis, tendopathy and other orthopaedic diseases. 1997 Urology, 158: 4-11
Haupt G, Diesch R, Straub T, Penninger E, Fröhlich T, Scholl J, Löhrer H, Senge T Ballistic Shockwave Treatment 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 271-272
Haupt G, Ekkernkamp A, Püllenberg A, Senge T Einfluß extrakorporal erzeugter Stosswellen auf standardisierte Tibiafrakturen im Schafmodell. 1992 Urologe A, 31: A 43ff
Haupt G, Haupt A, Ekkernkamp A, Gerety B, Chvapil M Influence of shock waves on fracture healing. 1992 Urology, 39: 529-532
Haupt G, Haupt A, Gerety B, Chvapil M Enhancement of fracture healing with extracorporeal shock waves. 1990 AUA Annual Meeting, New Orleans 1990
Haupt G, Haupt A, Senge T Die Behandlung von Knochen mit extrakorporalen Stosswellen - Entwicklung einer neuen Therapie. 1993 Chaussy C, Eisenberger F, Jocham D, Wilbert D (Hrsg), Stosswellenlithotripsie - Aspekte und Prognosen, Attempto Verlag, Tübingen: 120-126
Haupt G, Katzmeier P Anwendung der hochenergetischen Stosswellen-therapie bei Pseudarthrosen, Tendinosis calcarea der Schulter und Ansatztendinosen (Fersensporn, Epiconylitis). 1995 Chaussy C, Eisenberger F, Jocham D, Wilbert D (Hrsg), Die Stosswelle - Forschung und Klinik, Attempto Verlag, Tübingen: 143-146
Hearnden A, Flannary MC A prospective, blinded randomised control trial assessing the use of different energy extracorporeal shock wave therapy for calcifying tendonitis 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:16
Heckman JD, Ryaby JP, McCabe J, Frey JJ, Kilcoyne RF Accleration of tibial fracture-healing by non-invasive low-intensity pulsed ultrasound. 1994 Bone Joint Surgery (Am), 76: 26-34
Heidersdorf S, Lauber S, Lauber H, Hötzinger H, Ludwig J, Dreisliker U Rädel R Osteochondritis Dissecans 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 255-264
Heinrichs W, Witzsch U, Bürger R Extrakorporale Stosswellentherapie (ESWT) von Pseudarthrosen. 1993 Anaesthesist, 42: 361-364
Helbig K, Herbert C, Schostok T, Brown M, Thiele R Correlations between the duration of pain and the success of shock wave therapy 2001 Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 387: 68-71
Helbig K, Schostok T, Brown M, Herbert C, Thiele R Correlations Between Duration of Pain and Success 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 43-48
Heller KD, Niethard FU Der Einsatz der extrakorporalen Stoßwellentherapie in der Orthopädie – eine Metaanalyse 1998 Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb 1998; 136:390-401
Herbert C, Thiele R, Hartmann T, Helbig K Musculoskeletal shock wave therapy for the treatment of tendinosis calcarea, follow-up of 1483 patients between 1995 and 1998 (4 years) 2000 Minimally Invasive Therapy & Allied Technologies, Isis Medical Media, Volume 9, Number 3/4 August 2000: 322 (Abstract 28)
Herbert C, Thiele R, Helbig K, Hartmann T, Mälzer H Pseudarthrosentherapie mit der Stosswelle in der Praxis. 1997 Siebert W, Buch M (Hrsg), Stosswellenanwendung am Knochen - Klinische und experimentelle Erfahrungen, Dr. Kovac, Hamburg:
Herken K, Bernhardt F, Lenz G Die extracorporale Stosswellenbehandlung bei der chronischen, therapieresistenten Tendinosis calcarea der Schulter. 1996 45. Jahrestagung Norddeutsche Orthopädenvereinigung e.V.: 124-125
Holmes RP, Yeaman LD, Taylor RG, McCullough DL Altered neutrophil permeability following shock wave exposure in vitro. 1992 Urology, 147: 733-737
Hötzinger H, Rädel R, Lauber S, Lauber H, Platzek P, Ludwig J MRI-Guided Shockwaves for Multiple Stress Fractures of the Tibia 2000 Coombs R, Schaden W, Zhou S (eds), Musculoskeletal Shockwave Therapy, Greenwich Medical Media Ltd, London: 165-168
Jakobeit C, Welp L, Winiarski B, Schuhmacher R, Osenberg T, Splittgerber T, Spelsberg G, Buntrock W, Missulis U, Kroll U, Schmeiser A, Beer M, Watzlawik A, Olschner G, Winarski B Ultrasound-guided extracorporeal shock wave therapy of tendinosis calcarea of the shoulder, of symptomatic plantar calcaneal spur (heel spur) and of epicondylopathia radialis and ulnaris. 1997 Siebert W, Buch M (Hrsg), Extracorporeal shock waves in orthopaedics, Springer Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg New York: 165-180
Johannes EJ, Sukul Kaulesar DMKS, Mature E, Schutte HE High energy shock waves for the treatment of nonunions - experiments in dog. 1994 Surg. Research, 57: 246-252
Jurgowski W, Loew M, Cotta H, Staehler G Extracorporeal shock wave treatment of calcareous tendinitis of the shoulder. 1993 Endourology, 7, Suppl. 1: 193
Karlsen JS, Smevik B, Hovig T Acute morphological changes in canine kidneys following exposure to extracorporeal shock waves. 1991 Urological Research, 19: 105-115
Karpman R, Magee F, Gruen T, Mobley M The Lithotriptor and its potential use in the revision of total hip arthroplasty 2001 Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 387: 4-7
Kawahara K, Koba M The effect of extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) for carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) in chronic hemodialysis patients 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:93
Ko J, Chen H, Chen L Treatment of lateral epicondylitis of the elbow with shock waves 2001 Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 387: 60-67
Koeweiden E, Chin A Paw E Promising results of ESWT for tennis elbow 2000 3rd Congress of the ISMST - Naples, Abstracts:33
Kolsky H Stress waves in solids. 1963 Dover, New York: 186
Krause H Physik und Technik medizinischer Stosswellensysteme. 1997 Rompe JD (Hrsg), Extrakorporale Stosswellentherapie - Grundlagen, Indikation, Anwendung, Chapman & Hall GmbH, London Glasgow Weinheim New York Tokio Melbourne Madras
Krischek O, Hopf C, Nafe B, Rompe JD Shock-wave therapy for tennis and golfer`s elbow. 1999 Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 1999; 119: 62-66
Krischek O, Rompe JD, Herbsthofer B, Nafe B Symptomatische niedrig-energetische Stosswellentherapie bei Fersenschmerzen und radiologisch nachweisbarem plantarem Fersensporn. 1998 Orthopädie, 136: 169-174
Krischek O, Rompe JD, Hopf C, Stratmann M, Vogel J, Nafe B Ist die extrakorporelle Stosswellentherapie bei Epicondylitis humeri ulnaris indiziert? Kurzfristige Ergebnisse einer vergleichenden, prospektiven Studie. 1997 Orthopädische Praxis, 7: 465-469

Result number: 49

Message Number 177370

ESWT on the rise View Thread
Posted by Ed Davis, DPM on 6/27/05 at 14:24

biomech
June 2005Positive plantar fasciitis findings help ESWT regain its momentumBy: Jordana Bieze Foster
The tide seems to have turned for advocates of extracorporeal shock wave therapy, less than three years after a provocative study set the trend back on its proverbial heels. In the March-April issue of the Journal of Foot and Ankle Surgery, researchers from Columbus, OH, reported significant improvements in plantar fasciitis pain about four months after a single high-energy ESWT treatment given to 37 patients. Also in March, researchers from Atlanta reported

in Foot & Ankle International that 312 patients with a history of cortisone injection were no more or less likely to benefit from high-energy ESWT than 243 patients who had never received cortisone.

These were only the most recent of six studies on ESWT for plantar fasciitis published since the much-discussed September 2002 study in the Journal of the American Medical Association that found no difference in pain relief between patients treated with ESWT and those treated with a sham therapy (see "ESWT manufacturers respond to shock of negative JAMA study," December 2002, page 62).

Three also involved sham therapy control groups. One, published in the September 2003 issue of the Journal of Orthopedic Research, found no treatment effect for low-energy ESWT, but-like the JAMA study-has been criticized for using protocols that diverged from the manufacturer's recommendations. Another, published in Foot & Ankle International in May 2004, reported more success at three months in patients treated with high-energy ESWT than in controls. The third, published in the March-April 2003 issue of the American Journal of Sports Medicine, detailed positive effects in runners first reported earlier that year at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons (see "Runners in study return to form after ESWT for plantar fasciitis," April 2003, page 11).



Copyright: 2005 CMP Media, LLC

Result number: 50

Message Number 177325

momentum View Thread
Posted by Ed Davis, dPM on 6/26/05 at 01:20



biomech
June 2005
Positive plantar fasciitis findings help ESWT regain its momentum
By: Jordana Bieze Foster


The tide seems to have turned for advocates of extracorporeal shock wave therapy, less than three years after a provocative study set the trend back on its proverbial heels.
In the March-April issue of the Journal of Foot and Ankle Surgery, researchers from Columbus, OH, reported significant improvements in plantar fasciitis pain about four months after a single high-energy ESWT treatment given to 37 patients. Also in March, researchers from Atlanta reported

in Foot & Ankle International that 312 patients with a history of cortisone injection were no more or less likely to benefit from high-energy ESWT than 243 patients who had never received cortisone.

These were only the most recent of six studies on ESWT for plantar fasciitis published since the much-discussed September 2002 study in the Journal of the American Medical Association that found no difference in pain relief between patients treated with ESWT and those treated with a sham therapy (see "ESWT manufacturers respond to shock of negative JAMA study," December 2002, page 62).

Three also involved sham therapy control groups. One, published in the September 2003 issue of the Journal of Orthopedic Research, found no treatment effect for low-energy ESWT, but-like the JAMA study-has been criticized for using protocols that diverged from the manufacturer's recommendations. Another, published in Foot & Ankle International in May 2004, reported more success at three months in patients treated with high-energy ESWT than in controls. The third, published in the March-April 2003 issue of the American Journal of Sports Medicine, detailed positive effects in runners first reported earlier that year at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons (see "Runners in study return to form after ESWT for plantar fasciitis," April 2003, page 11).




Copyright: 2005 CMP Media, LLC

Result number: 51
Searching file 16

Message Number 168905

Re: What do you think of men dying their hair? View Thread
Posted by Dorothy on 2/11/05 at 14:50

John H -
One response to your question: it depends on the head and the man.
Michael Jordan had a beautiful head and was marvelous to watch on the court, like sculpture in motion. Likewise Kareem Abdul Jabar - Likewise Andre Braugher (wonderful actor - was on a TV program that was good, from Barry Levinson, "Homicide:Life on the Streets" /Baltimore police- he played the detective Frank Pembleton, shaved head, great persona)
It just depends....the lead singer for Smashing Pumpkins (yes, I do keep up - although they're a little passe now)- I don't know; looked a little like a PUMPKIN, or a moon.
Personally, I like a bald head just fine. I think it has a lot of appeal even for a woman. I like simplicity and ease in life and what could be better than just shaving it all off. No more judging of each other related to hair (gray? real? sick? too thin? age?) and no more big investment in hair products! Anyway, I think that most women go to beauty shops so that they can have their hair brushed and combed and touched. I have never known any woman who did not love to have her hair and head "messed with".... So I think beauty shops are excuses to have that done. Just as I think golf is an excuse for grown-ups to go outside and play. What I would really like to see is the demise of the shampoo/hair product advertisements, finally, that show the plasticized hair being swung back and forth. It does not look real and I have never seen anyone in life with hair like that and those hair products are major chemicals. Hair, after all, is dead skin cells. Let it go. Same with fingernails that look like claws. And those fake fingernails....Ohhhhhh, they give me the creeps. I was scarred for life by a National Geographic magazine of my youth showing the man deemed to have the world's longest finger/toe nails. I have never gotten over it. Shiver. I think he was bald.

Result number: 52
Searching file 15

Message Number 153046

Re: George The Cat View Thread
Posted by Kathy G on 6/15/04 at 10:04


John,

I liked seeing pictures of George and I'm glad he's getting along well. I also liked seeing the pictures of your lovely home. We don't have many homes that aren't made out of wood in NE and it always surprises me when I get further south that there are so many that aren't wooden.

I lost my interest in basketball when Larry Bird, the Chief (Robert Parish), Tiny Archabauld, Michael Jordan, and Magic Johnson and their contemporaries stopped playing. My father used to say that was because I liked a game of finesse not brute strength and size, just as you say.

There was a time when I wouldn't have thought of missing a Boston Celtics game but those days are gone.

My son, however, with whom you would share a passion for sports, follows basketball and every other sport faithfully.

Result number: 53
Searching file 14
Searching file 13

Message Number 130102

Re: HANDLE ARAFAT View Thread
Posted by Phil on 9/15/03 at 16:40

Reality Bites; Middle East fictions fade

By Clifford D. May
Scripps Howard News Service
September 11, 2003


The resignation of Mahmoud Abbas was sudden but not surprising. For a few months, everyone called him Mr. Prime Minister, but everyone knew that was a fiction.

Abbas never enjoyed any real power within the Palestinian Authority. And he attempted to exercise only the power of persuasion over Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the other terrorist organizations that that have been permitted to plot acts of mass murder from bases under the PA's control.

Could Abbas have taken charge if he'd had the will and the courage? Perhaps, though it's hard to see how. Yasser Arafat remained the …well, the 800-pound guerrilla whose presence America and Israel tried to ignore. The rulers of the surrounding Arab states did not follow suit. They, and too many Europeans, continued to treat Arafat with a respect he does not deserve.

Much of the media – e.g. the Washington Post last weekend -- describe Arafat as “the elected leader” of the Palestinian Authority. That, too, is a fiction. It suggests that Arafat was the winner of a free and fair election within a democratic system. If that's so, there must be an opposition party in the Palestinian territories, as well as an opposition leader. Can anyone name them?

Abbas was hardly Israel's friend. He was not even willing to recognize Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state which, realistically, must precede any serious negotiations that could lead toward an enduring peace.

He did oppose terrorism – not because he sees terrorism as a crime, but rather because he sees it as a blunder. Terrorism, he believes, will not further the Palestinian cause, if the Palestinian cause is defined as having an independent Palestinian state on the West Bank and Gaza in the near term, while leaving more ambitious goals for the long term.

Arafat, by contrast, hasn't the patience to settle for half a loaf in the present, while praying for Israel's extermination in the future. At Camp David in 2000, prodded by President Clinton, then-Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak offered Arafat an independent Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza. Arafat brusquely refused the offer. The explanation is not that Arafat “never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity.” Rather, like Hamas and Islamic Jihad, Arafat's goal always has been to wipe Israel off the map completely. In fact, the maps Arafat displays on his uniforms, on his official documents and in his offices show not a shrunken Israel, but no Israel whatsoever; a final answer to the Jewish question of the Middle East.

Like Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden, Arafat fancies himself a latter-day Saladin, a reference to the 12th century Muslim warrior who defeated the infidels and drove them from the Holy Land.

Remember that Arafat founded Fatah (Arabic for “conquest”) before Israel took possession of the West Bank and Gaza. Israel took those territories from Jordan and Egypt because it was from those territories that Egypt and Jordan launched the 1967 war to destroy Israel. Israel never formally annexed the West Bank and Gaza (AKA Judea and Samaria) because Israeli leaders thought it better to use them as bargaining chips.

But to bargain again with Arafat would be a fool's errand. Can anyone seriously imagine Arafat spending his golden years as the emir of a West Bank/Gaza mini-state, collecting taxes, filling pot holes and entertaining foreign investors? That goes beyond fiction to fantasy.

Abbas' resignation is a blow, perhaps fatal, for the Road Map. But the inspiration for the Road Map, President's Bush's June 24, 2002 description of a new, post-9/11 approach to settling the Arab-Israeli conflict, remains the best hope for peace. Bush said to the Palestinians, in effect: “You can have a state. We'll help. Or you can have terrorism. But you can't have both, because the US will not support the creation of another terrorist state – and that is what a state born out of terrorism inevitably would be.”

If a majority of Palestinians wanted to take President Bush up on his offer, how would they express themselves? By standing up on soap boxes in Ramallah? By voting against Arafat, and for an anti-terrorism “peace candidate”? Pace the Washington Post, those options do not now exist. Those options can exist only when and if there is real freedom and democracy within the Palestinian Authority.

But it's worse than that. Much as we'd like to believe that most Palestinians are ready to make peace with Israel that, too, may be fiction. For more than a generation, the Palestinians have been told they can and will have it all – that Arab Muslims will rule from the Mediterranean Sea to the Persian Gulf. Arab leaders could tell the Palestinians that that dream is a fiction. They could tell them to cut a deal with the Jews and give their children a chance to lead normal lives. Arab leaders would do that if they sincerely wanted to see an end to the conflict. Sadly, that, too, is a fiction.

Clifford D. May, a former New York Times foreign correspondent, is president of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, a policy institute focusing on terrorism.



View Related Information by Topic


Arab-Israeli Conflict








© Copyright 2003 The Foundation for the Defense of Democracies
an iapps site

Result number: 54
Searching file 12

Message Number 129856

Re: Many joyful questions View Thread
Posted by Ed Davis, DPM on 9/13/03 at 11:40

Sharon:
There are still more "Palestinians" in what is now Jordan than in the West Bank. Keep in mind that Israel could have, after 1967, annexed the West Bank. They did not. The West Bank is part of Eretz Israel, ie, historical/biblical Israel. Important things like the tomb of Joseph are there -- it was recently desecrated by the Arabs -- what a tragedy. It contains towns such as Jericho and Bethlehem. The more religious sects in Israel would have liked to have seen the area annexed to Israel and the Arabs relocated east of the Jordan River.

Practical politics kept the Israeli government from annexing the West Bank. Many could envision an autonomous region there linked to Jordan with some international supervision of religious sites. That will not be allowed to happen with the current radical leadership of the Palestinian Arabs.

For years, it has been necessary to remove that radical leadership. For years, pressure from the Euro-weenies has prevented that from happening.
Ed

Result number: 55

Message Number 129844

Re: Many joyful questions View Thread
Posted by Sharon W on 9/13/03 at 10:24

Dr. Ed,

That was a brilliant summation of a very complex topic! I wonder, however, if what I was told is untrue (since you left it out): that the Palestinian West Bank was actually settled, for the most part, by JORDANDIANS after the Arabs seized that territory from the newly-created country of Israel in 1947. So, depending on how you look at it (aye, there's the rub!) the Jordanian Arabs did, then, exactly the same thing that Israel is so universally criticized for trying to do after "taking back" the West Bank: they put settlers into the area to solidify their claim and to help fight for the land if need be. Many of these settlers continued to carry Jordanian passports until quite recently; they gave their holders certain advantages.

(Correct me if I'm wrong here.) The decendants of those early settlers who moved into the West Bank from JORDAN compose much, probably MOST, of the "Palestinian" population of the area now.

Just a comment.

Sharon
.

Result number: 56

Message Number 129799

Re: Many joyful questions View Thread
Posted by Ed Davis, DPM on 9/12/03 at 21:38

marie:
Going back a little further in history is important. The first thing to realize was that there was never a country called "Palestine." There was a territory that the British won from the Ottoman Empire known as the British Mandate of Palestine which included the land which is know Israel and Jordan. That part of the land east of the Jordan river, known as trans-Jordan was given to a minority Arab group known as the Hashemites by the Brits. The Hashemites are related to the Saudi royal family. Jordan is composed of 2/3 "Palestinian" arabs and, as such, is a Palestinian state. The Brits had promised the land west of the jordan River to the Jews but instead that land was partioned yet again into an Arab area and Jewish state in 1947. The Israelis recognized the partition but the Arabs did not and invaded. The Israelis won much of the land but not the west bank which stood with Jordan.

The Arabs asked the UN to leave so they could attack Israel and "drive the Jews into the sea" in 1967 and the UN readily stepped aside. The Israelis launched a pre-emptive strike winning an impressive victory and re-capturing the west bank as well as taking the Gaza Strip and the Sinai peninsula. Interestingly, while the west bank was in Jordanian hands and Gaza in Egyptian hands, there was never a call for a "Palestinian' state by the Arabs in those territories.
Ed

Result number: 57

Message Number 129753

Re: To Rick View Thread
Posted by Dorothy on 9/12/03 at 16:46

And how do you reconcile your last statement with the long-standing, entrenched, pervasive, embraced and oft-stated view of the "Palestinians" and many others in the Middle East that Israel has NO right to any of those, must be destroyed, eliminated, its citizens all eradicated....
Tell us, please. How would YOU react if your own personal neighbor held those publicly stated attitudes about YOU? Smile, invite them for tea, and then offer them a permanent guest room in your home?
I don't agree with everything that Israel has done, but the attitudes toward Israel throughout the Middle East should not be glossed over.
As things stand now, it seems to be an intractable situation. I think that the world should bring heavy-duty pressure on Jordan, Syria, Saudi Arabia,Egypt etc. to make a welcome home for the Palestinians - build them houses, give them jobs, the whole thing - in one or all of those countries. End the fight over Israel. Put all the holy sites under U.N. control. Force an end to it. It dominates too much of everyone's attention and resources. There are other dangers and other horrors on the planet.

Result number: 58

Message Number 129708

Re: To Dr Davis View Thread
Posted by Ed Davis, DPM on 9/12/03 at 10:55

David:

I don't know if you read the second piece carefully but what the author was doing was parotting the stated goals of the Palestinian Islamists; he was not looking for a tit for tat, nor a "total war." Use of nuclear weapons leaves the entire region unusable for ALL parties and nobody has advocated their use. Israel's nuclear arsenal is it's "Samson option" to be used under a cataclysmic destruction by the Arabs.

When you say there are "two" sides, I would like to hear your version of the "other" side. The territories currently termed "occupied" by Israel were part of Arab states, Egypt, Jordan and Syria before 1967 and those states had no intention of forming a "Palestinian" state there. Why should more be expected from Israel in this area, especially when the destruction of Israel has been the stated goal of the PLO. If the PLO and its various factions were to go away, there would be some hope of negotiating a settlement. Even when offered almost everything in Oslo, the PLO rejected peace.

I am even more sorry than you that a Jewish person such as yourself cannot recognize the needs of survival for several million Israelis.
Ed

Result number: 59

Message Number 129448

Re: Iraqi children View Thread
Posted by marie on 9/10/03 at 13:00

I thought this covered the problem in great detail I hope you like to read because it's a long report. I thought it intereting because it offered solutions and explained the situation very well.

marie


http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/sanction/iraq1/2002/paper.htm

Iraq Sanctions:
Humanitarian Implications and Options for the Future
Anglican Observer Office at the UN
Arab Commission for Human Rights
Center for Development of International Law
Center for Economic and Social Rights
Fellowship of Reconciliation • Global Policy Forum
New Internationalism Project, Institute for Policy Studies
Mennonite Central Committee
Middle East and Europe Office of Global Ministries of the United
Church of Christ and the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ)
Quaker UN Office-New York • United Church of Christ UN Office
World Economy, Ecology and Development Association (WEED)

in association with
Save the Children UK

August 6, 2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Contents

Executive Summary

Chapter 1 – Introduction

Chapter 2 – Comprehensive Economic Sanctions:
A Badly-Flawed Policy

Chapter 3 – Sanctions and the Civilian Population
3.1. Early Warnings
3.2 Steady Flow of Critical Reports


Chapter 4 – Causes of Human Suffering
4.1. Iran-Iraq War and Gulf War Campaign
4.2. Civil War, Regime Change, No-Fly Zones and Military Attacks
4.3. Responsibility of the Government of Iraq and the Politics of Vilification
4.4 Commercial Interests and Oil Politics


Chapter 5 – Oil-for-Food
5.1. Short Term Policy
5.2 Deductions and Delays
5.3 Blocked Contracts, Dual-Use and Holds
5.4 War Reparations Fund: Oil-for-Compensation
5.5 North vs. Center-South
5.6 Nutrition and Health
5.7 Deaths


Chapter 6 – “Smart” Sanctions, Price Disputes and Military Threats
6.1 Background
6.2 Smart Sanctions vs. Targeted Sanctions
6.3 Oil Pricing Dispute & Falling Humanitarian Revenue
6.4 US Military Threats and Appraisals of Iraq’s Rearmament


Chapter 7 – Security Council Obligations Under International Human Rights and Humanitarian Law
7.1. Legal Framework for the Security Council
7.2. Human Rights Law
7.3. Humanitarian Law


Chapter 8 – Conclusion & Policy Recommendations

Appendix I – Chronology

Appendix II – UK Select Committee Report

Footnotes



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Iraq Sanctions: Humanitarian Implications and Options for the Future
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1. Introduction The United Nations Security Council has maintained compre-hensive economic sanctions on Iraq since August 6, 1990. The international community increasingly views the sanctions as illegitimate and punitive, because of well-documented humanitarian suffering in Iraq and widespread doubts about the sanctions’ effectiveness and their legal basis under international humanitarian and human rights law.

2. A Flawed Policy In the early 1990s, many policy makers saw comprehensive economic sanctions, imposed under Resolution 687, as an ethical and non-violent policy tool. Though Iraq sanctions produced some significant disarmament results, they failed to achieve all their policy goals and they have deeply harmed powerless and vulnerable Iraqi citizens. The Security Council implicitly accepts such a negative assessment, since it no longer uses comprehensive economic sanctions in other security crises.

3. Warnings of Civilian Harm Civilian suffering in Iraq is not an unexpected collateral effect, but a predictable result of the sanctions policy. Security Council members have received warnings of the humanitarian emergency in Iraq and the damage done by sanctions since shortly after the Gulf War. Warnings have come from three Secretary Generals, many UN officials and agencies including UNICEF, WHO and WFP, and two Humanitarian Coordinators who have resigned in protest. A Select Committee of the UK House of Commons offered a very negative judgment as well.

4. Causes of Suffering Sanctions are not the sole cause of human suffering in Iraq. The government of Iraq bears a heavy burden of responsibility due to the wars it has started, its lack of cooperation with the Security Council, its domestic repression, and its failure to use limited resources fairly. However, the UN Security Council shares responsibility for the humanitarian crisis. The United States and the United Kingdom, who use their veto power to prolong the sanctions, bear special responsibility for the UN action. No-fly zones, periodic military attacks, and threats of regime-change block peaceful outcomes, as do vilification of Saddam Hussein, pro-sanctions propaganda, and other politicization of the crisis. Though real concerns about Iraq’s security threat undoubtedly are legitimate, commercial interests, especially control over Iraq’s oil resources, appear to be a driving force behind much of the policy making.

5. Oil-for-Food Sanctions advocates proposed Oil-for-Food under Resolution 986 as a temporary solution to the humanitarian crisis. Oil-for-Food materially improved conditions in Iraq in contrast to the early days of the sanctions. But Oil-for-Food failed to resolve the humanitarian crisis, much less provide a long-term solution for Iraq. Punitive deductions for war reparations weaken the program as do unacceptable delays in delivery (less than 60%f of all items ordered from oil sales since December 1996 have actually arrived in Iraq). Politically motivated blocks and “holds,” imposed almost entirely by the United States, have plagued the program as well. Consequently, there has been little repair and renewal of Iraq’s badly-deteriorated infrastructure, including water treatment, electricity, and public health. Oil-for-Food has failed to improve sufficiently the nutrition and health of Iraqi citizens, who continue to suffer from conditions drastically worse than the pre-sanctions period. Less than $200 per year per capita has arrived in Iraq under the program. Studies have amply documented a substantial rise in mortality of children, five years of age and under and credible estimates suggest that at least 400,000 of these young children have died due to the sanctions. Various reforms, including Resolution 1284 have proven ineffective in addressing these problems.

6. Smart Sanctions? The United States and the United Kingdom recently proposed “smart sanctions” as an answer to critics. This reform, embodied in Security Council Resolution 1409, offers small improvements, but it has little in common with the “targeted sanctions” that experts have proposed in recent years. Targeted sanctions would directly impact Iraq’s leaders, by freezing their assets and preventing their international travel, without damage to ordinary Iraqis. Resolution 1409 is grossly inadequate as a solution to the Iraq crisis. The enormous Goods Review List of items with possible military use suggests further blockage of goods and delays, as well as disappointingly little substantial advance. Meanwhile, a dispute over pricing methods has greatly reduced Iraq’s oil sales, drastically depleting the funds of the humanitarian program, while the United States threatens to attack Iraq and impose a change of regime.

7. International Law The Security Council has clear obligations under international human rights and humanitarian law, which provide means to assess its sanctions record. A number of policy papers by UN agencies and bodies, as well as studies by legal scholars, have determined that the Council is in serious violation of its responsibilities in the case of Iraq. The Council has committed both procedural and substantive violations, by failing to conduct regular assessments of the humanitarian impact of the sanctions and by directly violating a number of important rights including the rights of children to protection and the right to life itself.

8. Conclusion & Policy Recommendations A solution to the crisis in Iraq must be based on a comprehensive agreement between the United Nations and the Government of Iraq in which many important and interrelated issues would be addressed. The United Nations must begin with five steps:

Comprehensive economic sanctions must be lifted,
The UN “escrow account” must be eliminated,
Free trade (excepting military goods) must be re-established,
Foreign investments in Iraq must be permitted, and
Foreign assets of Iraq must be unfrozen so as to normalize its external economic relations
Such change will not be free of risk. The government of Iraq cannot be counted on to make benign and peaceful policy choices, or to promote automatically the well-being of its people. In this context

Robust weapons monitoring must be reintroduced, to insure disarmament and eliminate production programs for mass destruction weapons,
Disarmament in Iraq must be complemented by regional approaches to disarmament, especially elimination of mass destruction weapons and weapons programs in other regional states
The Government of Iraq must give firm assurances to the international community, as a part of reciprocal undertakings, that

It will renounce all plans to buy, build or use weapons of mass destruction and related delivery systems
It will cooperate fully with ongoing UN arms inspection arrangements
It will establish friendly and cooperative relations with neighboring countries
It will take all necessary steps to address the humanitarian emergency as soon as funds become available to do so
It will honor minority rights, including offering special status to the Kurdish areas, and it will take steps to honor its human rights obligations.
If the government of Iraq fails at any time to provide adequate means for inspection and arms control, then:

Narrowly-targeted sanctions, including financial and travel penalties, should be directed at Iraq’s leaders,
Time limits must be part of such a new sanctions regime,
Clear criteria for lifting and modification must also be part of the new sanctions regime,
Regular humanitarian assessments must also be part of the new sanctions as well, so that the Council will be aware of any possible impact on the broader Iraqi population.
If Iraq is to return to normalcy, and if it is to be persuaded to agree to international accords, it must be freed from constant military pressure, threats and intimidation. The Security Council’s decisions, not unilateral action by one or two powerful states, must prevail. In this framework

“No-Fly zones” must be eliminated and aerial threats and attacks halted,

Unilateral military attacks must be ruled out as completely unacceptable and illegal, and
Other efforts directed towards “regime change,” including force build-ups, military aid to opposition forces, and covert destabilization and assassination campaigns must cease.
Further elements in the design for post-sanctions Iraq are also required, in order to address immediate humanitarian concerns, long-term development needs and safeguards for minorities. In such a framework:

Emergency relief, to bring a speedy end to the human suffering, must be put in place with the help of the international community,
Large-scale physical reconstruction, to build a new infrastructure for Iraq, must be set in motion, including foreign investments, and
Safeguards for minorities such as the Kurds must be introduced, including federative structures and possibly a UN presence to monitor and promote human rights in the post-sanctions era.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Chapter 1 - Introduction
The United Nations Security Council has maintained comprehensive economic sanctions on Iraq since August 6, 1990. (1) The international community increasingly views the sanctions as illegitimate and punitive, because of well-documented humanitarian suffering in Iraq and widespread doubts about the sanctions’ effectiveness and their legal basis under international humanitarian and human rights law. This paper examines key legal and humanitarian issues of the current sanctions arrangements and it argues for urgent, fundamental changes.

When first imposed, four days after Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait, under Resolution 661, the comprehensive sanctions appeared legitimate, as a short-term means to press Iraq to withdraw. When redefined on April 3, 1991, under Resolution 687, after the US-led military coalition had forced Iraq’s withdrawal, the sanctions likewise commanded broad support, as a means to compel Iraq’s compliance with Security Council resolutions and in particular to end Iraqi possession of weapons of mass destruction. (2) Iraq eventually met (however reluctantly) many of the UN requirements and the United Nations supervised substantial Iraqi disarmament, including extensive dismantlement of Iraq’s mass-destruction weapons, weapons programs and delivery systems. (3)

Questions still remain about the extent of Iraq’s compliance, but many experts believe that Iraq has been substantially disarmed and has little capacity left in the four banned weapons types. (4) Residual concerns and conjectures must be weighed against the sanctions’ present ineffectiveness, their great harm to innocent civilians, the clear option of targeted sanctions, and the discredit that the status quo brings to the United Nations, the Security Council and international law more generally. Though the overwhelming opinion of the international community favors change, comprehensive economic sanctions remain firmly in place and criteria for their lifting remain imprecise, fluid and subjective. (5)

A large majority of Security Council members now oppose the comprehensive sanctions or have serious reservations about them, but they cannot lift them, because vetoes of two Permanent Members, the United States and the United Kingdom, block action for comprehensive reform. Indeed, most discussions of Iraq sanctions have taken place in secret, among the Council’s five Permanent Members, side-stepping the ten Elected Members and keeping the international community in the dark. Ambassador Peter van Walsum of the Netherlands, Chairman of the Iraq Sanctions Committee in 1999-2000, spoke in an open meeting of the Council in November 1999 about the intense frustrations of elected Council members at this lack of information, transparency and accountability. (6)

Such secret diplomacy by the major powers shows disregard for the international community and for the lives and well-being of the people of Iraq. Recent adjustments by the Council in Resolution 1409 (May 14, 2002) fall far short of the needed fundamental change. Just two Council members negotiated in secret the Goods Review List, at the heart of the new resolution. Instead of such gestures, the international community should insist on the lifting of comprehensive economic sanctions. There must also be program to help re-build and restore the country’s civilian economy and to promote the democratic rights and human development of the Iraqi people.

All parties agree that the Iraqi people’s basic needs are unmet. Governments, UN agencies, the press, and international NGOs all acknowledge that the Iraqi population is living through a long humanitarian crisis. Those who defend the sanctions policy insist on blaming the government of Iraq and its leader, Saddam Hussein, for all the suffering, insisting that the humanitarian situation can only improve if the leader satisfies the demands of the US and the UK or, better still, relinquishes power. Such an approach holds Iraq’s humanitarian suffering hostage to international power politics, the hidden play of commercial interests, and the goal of “regime change.”

Sanctions do not cause all distress in Iraq. The government of Iraq must bear a large share of responsibility, because of its failure to comply with Council requirements and because of its failure to use all resources at its disposal to meet the humanitarian crisis. But as long as the United Nations maintains control over economic life in Iraq, the Security Council bears a joint responsibility with the Iraq government for the health and wellbeing of the population. The Council has the means to alleviate the economic crisis, but it has failed to discharge its responsibility to act in accord with universal human rights and humanitarian standards, as we shall see in more detail below.

The sanctions put economic pressure on the population and supposedly use civilian suffering as a tool in arms control negotiations with Iraq’s government. In theory, the deprived and angry populace will press their rulers to change policy. If policy does not change, the people are expected to reject the rulers and rise against them. This has proved to be a simplistic and false model. Politics in Iraq have not worked this way. To the contrary, the sanctions appear to have strengthened the government, by increasing its economic role and its symbolic appeal.

The suffering of Iraq’s civilian population must command primary attention and legal priority. The Security Council should not continue to pursue arms control goals with a mechanism that exacts such a high human cost. Rather, the Council should move towards alternatives that the overwhelming majority of international opinion has long favored:

lift comprehensive economic sanctions

abolish the UN “escrow” account

establish free trade in non-military goods

restore foreign investments

unfreeze Iraq’s foreign assets

establish robust UN weapons monitoring

require agreement by Iraq for disarmament, cooperation with arms inspection and friendly relations with its neighbors, in a framework of regional disarmament

impose, if needed, sanctions narrowly targeted at Iraqi government leaders, subject to time limits, clear criteria for lifting and regular humanitarian assessments

eliminate “no fly” zones, "regime change" programs and military threats directed at Iraq

provide international humanitarian assistance to help Iraq overcome its humanitarian crisis as swiftly as possible

organize programs to promote large-scale reconstruction of Iraq

establish safeguards for Iraq’s minorities, including special arrangements for the Kurdish areas in the North and possibly a UN presence to monitor and promote human rights
In the chapters that follow, this report will consider the flaws in comprehensive economic sanctions, the question of responsibility and the shortcomings of the oil-for-food program. The report will then consider the current “smart sanctions” in contrast to longstanding proposals for “targeted sanctions” aiming at political leaders. Finally, the report will look at the Security Council’s responsibilities under international humanitarian and human rights law and it will conclude with a discussion of recommended alternatives.

Chapter 2 - Comprehensive Economic Sanctions: A Badly-Flawed Policy
When the Security Council first imposed sanctions on Iraq in 1990, many diplomats, scholars and citizens believed that comprehensive economic sanctions were innovative, benign and non-violent. Some believed that sanctions offered an ethical foreign policy tool to combat threats to peace and security without causing unintended suffering. (7)

It is now clear that comprehensive economic sanctions in Iraq have hurt large numbers of innocent civilians not only by limiting the availability of food and medicines, but also by disrupting the whole economy, impoverishing Iraqi citizens and depriving them of essential income, and reducing the national capacity of water treatment, electrical systems and other infrastructure critical for health and life. People in Iraq have died in large numbers. The extent of death, suffering and hardship may have been greater than during the armed hostilities, especially for civilians, as we shall see in more detail below. (8) Comprehensive sanctions in Iraq, then, are not benign, non-violent or ethical.

The 1977 Protocols to the Geneva Conventions on the laws of war include a prohibition of economic sieges against civilians as a method of warfare. Ironically, legal consensus does not yet define economic sanctions as subject to these laws, which apply in warfare and which legally require belligerents to target military rather than civilian objectives. Sanctions operate in a hazy legal status between war and peace. (9) Unlike the dramatic, visible toll of military action, sanctions take their effect gradually, indirectly and with low visibility.

UN Secretary General Boutros Boutros-Ghali recognised the growing doubt about the legal and moral status of comprehensive sanctions when he wrote in 1995 that they

raise the ethical question of whether suffering inflicted on vulnerable groups in the target country is a legitimate means of exerting pressure on political leaders whose behaviour is unlikely to be affected by the plight of their subjects (10)
The Security Council has implicitly accepted this judgement. In recent years, it has always imposed either narrowly-targeted sanctions that seek to pressure rulers and elites directly, or embargos of arms sales to belligerents, or embargos of strategic resources fueling conflicts like diamonds. The Council has not imposed comprehensive economic sanctions since 1994 and no one expects that it will adopt this policy again. (11)
Iraq sanctions do not effectively target or affect political or military elites. Rather, they hit the weakest and most vulnerable members of Iraqi society, those with the least ability to influence decisions and who are least able to compete for scarce resources. The primary victims of the sanctions – children, the elderly, the sick, the poor -- are also those least responsible for government policy and least able to change policy. Even so, advocates in Washington have insisted that sanctions on Iraq are necessary and justified, as a means to pressure an evil dictator and keep him “in a box.” Such imperatives have found declining acceptance in the rest of the world, where people increasingly see comprehensive economic sanctions as a blunt and cruel weapon. As UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan stated in 2000:

just as we recognize the importance of sanctions as a way of compelling compliance with the will of the international community, we also recognize that sanctions remain a blunt instrument, which hurt large numbers of people who are not their primary targets. (12)
The sanctions on Iraq have left the country impoverished, isolated and socially disrupted, they resulted in widespread illness and death of innocent civilians, and they have tightened the grip of a repressive political regime.

Chapter 3 - Sanctions and the Civilian Population
3.1. Early Warnings

Iraq sanctions have not caused suffering as an unexpected collateral effect or a lesser evil that passed unnoticed. The suffering was not only foreseeable (and foreseen) in advance, but dozens of studies have documented it in great detail for more than a decade.

From the early days of the sanctions, well-informed UN officials and envoys warned about dire humanitarian consequences. In March 1991, Under Secretary General Martti Ahtisaari reported that, directly after the massive bombing of the Gulf War, the situation was especially troubling:

most means of modern life support have been destroyed or rendered tenuous. Iraq has, for some time to come, been relegated to a pre-industrial age, but with all the disabilities of post-industrial dependency on an intensive use of energy and technology. (13)
Ahtisaari pointed out that Iraq needed more than just emergency relief of food and medicine. The power grid and the communications system had been badly damaged, he said, and needed repair.
The far-reaching implications of this energy and communications vacuum as regards urgent humanitarian support are of crucial significance for the nature and effectiveness of the international response. (14)
In July of the same year, the Secretary General's Executive Delegate, Sadruddin Aga Khan, submitted a comprehensive report based on a country-wide assessment of conditions. The Executive Delegate’s report spoke of immediate needs for reconstruction as well as humanitarian assistance, setting the cost of restoring pre-war conditions at $22 billion. Calculating only the most urgently-needed initial reconstruction costs, he estimated that Iraq would require $6.8 billion in the first year, for which substantial quantities of Iraqi oil would have to be sold. (15) Many well-known international experts and eminent persons, as well as more than a dozen agencies, were involved in producing the report, which said:
Our aim has been to be sober, measured and accurate. We are neither crying wolf nor playing politics. But it is evident that for large numbers of the people of Iraq, every passing month brings them closer to the brink of calamity. As usual, it is the poor, the children, the widowed and the elderly, the most vulnerable amongst the population, who are the first to suffer. (16)
The report concluded, issuing a clear call:
It remains a cardinal humanitarian principle that innocent civilians – and above all the most vulnerable – should not be held hostage to events beyond their control. Those already afflicted by war's devastation cannot continue to pay the price of a bitter peace. It is a peace that will also prove to be tenuous if unmet needs breed growing desperation. (17)
Instead of making such humanitarian provision to avert the impending catastrophe, the Security Council passed Resolutions 706 and 712 (August 15 and September 19, 1991) which put a low cap on Iraq’s allowed oil sales and deducted about a third of the oil revenues to pay for war reparations, weapons inspectors and UN administrative expenses. The oil sales ceiling would have yielded (after deductions) about $1.1 billion every six months for Iraq’s humanitarian needs, (18) a small fraction of Sadruddin Aga Khan’s estimate for essential spending. The stage was set for rejection by Baghdad and years of fruitless manoeuvring. Neither side gave priority to the growing humanitarian crisis.
Nearly five years later, on May 20, 1996, the Council and the government of Iraq finally agreed to an Oil-for-Food program, under Resolution 986. The agreement allowed for the sale of oil to pay for humanitarian and other vital imports. (19) This step, while significant in some respects, was to prove woefully inadequate as a solution to the humanitarian emergency. (20)

3.2 A Steady Flow of Critical Reports

Throughout the 1990s, regular surveys by the Food and Agriculture Organisation/World Food Programme documented the lack of food in Iraq and its effect on vulnerable groups. In 1996 the World Health Organisation reported on health, morbidity and mortality data for 1989-1994 and commented:

Comparing levels of the infant mortality rate (IMR) and the mortality of children under 5 years old during the pre war period (1988-1989) with that during the period of the sanctions (since 1990), it is clear that the IMR has doubled and the mortality rate for children under 5 years old has increased six times. (21)
Various agencies, including UNICEF, presented reports to the Council, cataloguing the suffering, but the US and the UK used their diplomatic weight and threatened use of the veto to block remedial action beyond the Oil-for-Food program. (22) These two countries also used their considerable influence with the news media to downplay the seriousness of the humanitarian situation in Iraq, accusing humanitarian agencies of bad science or even complicity with the Iraqi government. (23) The two partners portrayed themselves as well-meaning, innocent victims of Saddam’s finely-tuned propaganda machine.
Legal and interpretive reports also appeared that raised the broader issue of sanctions policy within international law and policy. In 1996, the Graca Michel report to the General Assembly on the Impact of Armed Conflict on Children concluded that sanctions’

humanitarian exemptions tend to be ambiguous and are interpreted arbitrarily and inconsistently.... Delays, confusion and the denial of requests to import essential humanitarian goods cause resource shortages .... [Their effects] inevitably fall most heavily on the poor. (24)
The following year, the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, headed by the distinguished Australian jurist Philip Alston, issued a report expressing concern that the Security Council, in establishing and maintaining sanctions, did not adequately take into account its responsibilities under economic, social and cultural rights law. The report stated that sanctions
often cause significant disruption in the distribution of food, pharmaceuticals and sanitation supplies, jeopardize the quality of food and the availability of clean drinking water, severely interfere with the functioning of basic health and education systems, and undermine the right to work. (25)
As such, the report continued, sanctions “have a major additional impact on the enjoyment of economic, social and cultural rights.” (26)
The Council’s Oil-for-Food program eased the worst of the food shortages as supplies began to arrive in mid-1997, but reports from the field suggested that the situation remained very serious. (27)

Responding to the many troubling reports and to the waning political support for sanctions, the chairman of the Security Council’s Iraq Sanctions Committee, Ambassador António Monteiro of Portugal, convened a series of meetings with Council colleagues during 1998. He brought together the chairmen of the Council’s sanctions committees, all elected members, to discuss the Council’s humanitarian responsibilities and the steps that it should take to improve sanctions more generally. On October 30, the group circulated a paper to the whole Council, setting forth its concerns with a series of reform proposals. The reformers noted that sanctions

often produce undesired side effects for the civilian population, including children. The decisions of the Security Council to impose sanctions imply the Council's obligation to ensure that proper implementation of sanctions does not result in violations of human rights and international humanitarian law, and its responsibility to do all within its power for the respect of the basic economic, social and cultural rights, and other human rights of the affected population. (28)
The paper insisted on the Council’s responsibility to monitor the impact of its sanctions, the need for clear criteria for lifting of sanctions, and the need to move towards “targeted” sanctions that would impact on top leaders, not the general population of the offending state.
Towards the end of 1998, the legitimacy of the sanctions/disarmament regime was enormously compromised by evidence that the United States had used the UN weapons inspection teams of UNSCOM to carry out espionage and covert action. (29) UNSCOM issued an alarmist report about the state of Iraq’s disarmament, said to have been strongly influenced by US pressure. In December, the US and the UK threatened to attack Iraq, to force compliance with the inspections. With military action imminent, the Chairman of UNSCOM, Richard Butler, ordered the weapons inspectors withdrawn. US-UK aerial attacks, beginning on December 16, continued for four days. (30) Discredited UNSCOM was never to return.

Though Council membership changed at the turn of the year, momentum for sanctions reform continued. The reformers succeeded in getting a watered-down version of the October proposals embodied in a statement by the President of the Council on January 29, 1999, giving some of the ideas official status. (31) Also in the October spirit, elected members persuaded the Council to establish three assessment “panels” on Iraq under the chairmanship of Ambassador Celso Amorim of Brazil. One panel considered arms control issues, a second looked at prisoners of war and other issues, while a third focused on the humanitarian situation. In its report of March 1999, the humanitarian panel set forth the alarming decline in living standards in Iraq, including health, food, infrastructure and education

In marked contrast to the prevailing situation prior to the events of 1990-91, the infant mortality rates in Iraq today are among the highest in the world, low infant birth weight affects at least 23% of all births, chronic malnutrition affects every fourth child under five years of age, only 41% of the population has regular access to clean water, 83% of all schools need substantial repairs. (32)
The report concluded with an implicit call for re-development and normalization of the Iraqi economy:
In presenting the above recommendations to the Security Council, the panel reiterates its understanding that the humanitarian situation in Iraq will continue to be a dire one in the absence of a sustained revival of the Iraqi economy, which in turn cannot be achieved solely through remedial humanitarian efforts. (33)
The report provides a measure of how far the sanctions had lost support within the Council’s membership.
In Baghdad, UN Humanitarian Coordinator, Hans von Sponeck, was raising alarms. His predecessor, Dennis Halliday, had resigned in the summer of 1999, in protest against the sanctions. Now von Sponeck himself was shocked by what he saw and was beginning to speak out strongly to visiting UN officials and others. A visiting delegation reported on this conversation:

The oil for food program provides him with $177 per person per year – 50 cents a day – for all of the needs of each Iraqi citizen. He said, “Now I ask you, $180 per year? That’s not a per capita income figure. This is a figure out of which everything has to be financed, from electrical service to water and sewage, to food, to health – the lot . . . that is obviously a totally, totally inadequate figure. (34)
Meanwhile, UNICEF’s 1999 survey of child mortality in Iraq provided some chilling facts. In a summary of the study, prepared for the distinguished British medical journal Lancet, researchers Mohamed Ali and Iqbal Shah presented the following findings:
Infant mortality rose from 47 per 1000 live births during 1984–89 to 108 per 1000 in 1994–99, and under-5 mortality rose from 56 to 131 per 1000 live births. (35)
On June 21, the UN Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights published a working paper by Marc Bossuyt, its expert representative from Belgium, which called sanctions on Iraq “unequivocally illegal” and said they had caused a humanitarian disaster “comparable to the worst catastrophes of the past decades.” (36) Later, the outraged US ambassador, charged that the report was “incorrect, biased and inflammatory.” (37)
In addition to death, disease and general impoverishment, some reports showed that the sustained sanctions in Iraq were having numerous other negative effects. Emigration was sapping away many of the best and brightest. Workers’ skills were disappearing after years of mass unemployment. Women had lost jobs disproportionately in the shrunken workforce. Stress and psychiatric illnesses had ravaged families. Social cohesion had steadily unravelled. (38) The Security Council became increasingly aware of these broader issues. Its humanitarian panel spoke of such effects in 1999, noting that observers often report alarming signs such as:

Increase in juvenile delinquency, begging and prostitution, anxiety about the future and lack of motivation, a rising sense of isolation bred by absence of contact with the outside world, the development of a parallel economy replete with profiteering and criminality, cultural and scientific impoverishment, disruption of family life. WHO points out that the number of mental health patients attending health facilities rose by 157% from 1990 to 1998. (39)
Many Council members hoped that the panel reports would lead to remedial action and that the Council would eventually lift the comprehensive sanctions, moving towards sanctions targeted at Saddam Hussein and his inner circle. Many also hoped for regular monitoring of sanctions’ humanitarian impact, as agreed in the January presidential statement. Negotiations began towards a comprehensive new resolution, but Washington held firm against substantive change and the UK, unable to persuade its partner to adopt a more reform-oriented policy, chose to maintain a status quo posture as well.
Because of deep differences, the Council did not adopt a new resolution until the end of 1999. A divided Council finally adopted Resolution 1284 on December 17 with abstentions by three Permanent Members: Russia, China and France. It fell far below the earlier hopes of sanction reformers such as Argentina, Brazil, Canada, and Slovenia, though it did incorporate a few of the moderate panel suggestions. It lifted the cap on oil sales completely (40) and it marginally relaxed the system of goods review. It also set forth rules for an improved system of weapons inspection. But it proposed neither targeting, nor humanitarian monitoring procedures, the two most important reform proposals. Further, it left more vague than ever the conditions under which the Council would consider lifting or “suspending” the sanctions. (41)

Even in the UK parliament, scepticism about Iraq sanctions abounded. On January 27, 2000, after ten months of hearings, the House of Commons Select Committee on International Development issued a report that proved a sharp rebuke to the government’s sanctions policies. (42) The Executive Summary stated that:

There is a clear consensus that the humanitarian and developmental situation in Iraq has deteriorated seriously since the imposition of comprehensive economic sanctions whilst, at the same time, sanctions have clearly failed to hurt those responsible for past violations of international law as Saddam Hussein and his ruling elite continue to enjoy a privileged existence. (43)
In February, UN Humanitarian Coordinator von Sponeck announced his resignation and on 29 March, as he prepared to leave Baghdad, he explained that “I can no longer be associated with a program that prolongs suffering of the people and which has no chance to meet even basic needs of the civilian population.” (44) Later, he would declare that “lawlessness of one kind does not justify lawlessness of another kind,” and ask “how long must the civilian population be exposed to such punishment for something that they’ve never done?” (45) A few weeks later, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan expressed doubts of his own. At a meeting organized by the International Peace Academy and in the presence of most Council ambassadors he concluded that:
The record of the “Sanctions Decade” has raised serious doubts not only about the effectiveness of sanctions, but also about their scope and severity when innocent civilians often become victims not only of their own government, but of the actions of the international community as well.
When robust and comprehensive economic sanctions are directed against authoritarian regimes, a different problem is encountered. Then, tragically, it is usually the people who suffer, not the political elites whose behaviour triggered the sanctions in the first place.

...sanctions remain a blunt instrument, which hurt large numbers of people who are not their primary targets. (46)

On the same day, Canadian Foreign Minister Lloyd Axworthy spoke to the Council during a special session on sanctions and insisted that “sanctions must reflect the will of the international community – not just the interests of its more powerful members.” (47) Three months later, French Foreign Minister Hubert Védrine stated that his country considered Iraq sanctions “cruel, ineffective and dangerous.” (48)
In spite of these many warnings, pressures, legal opinions and expressions of humanitarian concern, the US-UK gave few concessions to the critics, insisting always on Iraqi perfidy. According to insiders, the US stepped up pressure on Council members for silence and conformity. The most reform-oriented ambassadors, including Amorim himself, were recalled by their governments or assigned to other postings. Activist junior diplomats likewise moved on. The reform vision faded, though deep opposition continued within the Council’s chambers.


Chapter 4 - Causes of Human Suffering
4.1. Iran-Iraq War and the Gulf War

Two wars, both started by Saddam Hussein, laid a basis for the harsh impact of comprehensive economic sanctions on Iraq. The Iran-Iraq War of 1980-88 greatly damaged Iraq and reduced it from prosperity to economic difficulty. The United States and the UK (as well as France and the Soviet Union) supported Iraq in that conflict, the longest conventional war of the twentieth century. The support included weapons sales, military advisors and intelligence sharing. The United States provided, among other things, economic assistance, political support, arms, satellite intelligence and the assistance of a US naval battle group. (49) Iran proved a resilient foe, however, and the war dragged out at great cost in life and material infrastructure.

In addition to great damage on the Iranian side, the Iran-Iraq War destroyed several Iraqi cities and much of Iraq’s oil production and refinery system. It caused several hundred thousand Iraqi casualties. It also caused environmental damage, stripped the government of cash, halted infrastructure building and government welfare programs, and caused large human displacement. (50) Saddam Hussein’s dictatorship and internal repression grew still more oppressive during wartime conditions, including a harsh campaign against the Kurds in the North, though both the United States and the UK governments deflected attention from the widespread human rights violations and the regular use of chemical weapons by their ally. (51)

In the Gulf crisis and War of 1990-91, Saddam Hussein again attacked a neighboring country – the oil rich emirate of Kuwait – and sought to annex it. This time, the United States and the UK opposed Hussein, along with many other countries. US President George Bush Sr. declared: “Our jobs, our way of life, our own freedom ... would all suffer if control of the world’s great oil reserves fell into the hands of Saddam Hussein.” (52) A series of United Nations Security Council resolutions called on Iraq to withdraw, imposed sanctions and authorized the use of force by member states. The United States took the lead in a coalition that eventually launched an air war against Iraq, followed by a brief ground campaign that drove Iraq from Kuwait and decisively defeated Iraqi forces. (53)

This second war resulted in many Iraqi casualties as well as grave damage to Iraq’s infrastructure with losses estimated at $170 billion. (54) Much of the damage was due to one of history’s heaviest aerial bombardments, a 43-day long campaign conducted largely by units of the US air force. (55) US President George Bush Sr. claimed publicly that

we do not seek the destruction of Iraq, nor do we seek to punish the Iraqi people for the decisions and policies of their leaders, (56)
yet US war planners created conditions for civilian suffering in the course of the intense bombing campaign. As a Washington Post article reported a few months afterwards:
Planners now say their intent was to destroy or damage valuable facilities that Baghdad could not repair without foreign assistance. The worst civilian suffering, senior officers say, has resulted not from bombs that went astray but from precision-guided weapons that hit exactly where they were aimed – at electrical plants, oil refineries and transportation networks... ‘What we were doing with the attacks on infrastructure was to accelerate the effect of the sanctions’… If there are political objectives that the U.N. coalition has, it can say, 'Saddam, when you agree to do these things, we will allow people to come in and fix your electricity.' It gives us long-term leverage’… Said another Air Force planner: ‘We're not going to tolerate Saddam Hussein or his regime. Fix that, and we'll fix your electricity.” (57)
United States war planners did not intend to march on Baghdad and install a new government. Instead, the coalition ground forces halted their offensive in southern Iraq and signed a cease-fire with Baghdad. US policy planners expected that the war had weakened Iraq militarily and economically, and that post war unrest and economic sanctions would succeed in toppling the Saddam regime soon afterwards.
4.2 Civil War, Regime-Change, No-Fly Zones and Military Attacks

After the Gulf War, United States radio broadcasts urged Iraqis to rise up against the Hussein regime. In March, the Shi’a populations in the South and the Kurds in the North staged an insurrection and a brief civil war followed. The uprising failed to topple the government, however, and Baghdad soon brutally repressed it in the South, while US unilateral military intervention under Operation Provide Comfort in the North eventually provided some protection for the Kurdish populations. (58) The United States continued to insist on “regime change” to sweep the dictator from power.

The Security Council never agreed, however, to “regime change” as a purpose of its sanctions against Iraq. Resolution 687 referred to disarmament and other issues, but it said nothing about a new government. Nevertheless, the United States openly pursued this other goal. On February 15, 1991, at the end of the Gulf War, President Bush had made the point quite bluntly: “(T)here’s another way for the bloodshed to stop, and that is for the Iraqi military and the Iraqi people to take matters into their own hands and force Saddam Hussein, the dictator, to step aside and then comply with the United Nations’ resolution." (59) To a greater or lesser extent, regime change has continued to be a goal of US policy ever since.

In April 1991, the US, the UK and France established a “no-fly zone” in the North, originally to protect coalition military operations in the area. This policy banned Iraqi aircraft from flying over the national territory above 36 degrees north latitude. To this the three allies added in August 1992 a “no-fly zone” in the South, excluding Iraqi overflight of territory below 32 degrees. The US and its partners claimed that Security Council Resolution 688 authorized these actions, though the resolution was not adopted (as would be required) under Chapter VII of the UN Charter and said nothing about military measures or Iraq’s aircraft or airspace. The protagonists said their no-fly enforcement overflights were undertaken to protect vulnerable populations of Shi’a in the South and Kurds in the North from further blows by Baghdad, but Turkey was not restrained from striking blows at Kurds in this zone or from repressing its own Kurdish population across the border. (60) Further, the no-fly zone did not even include several major Kurdish cities in the North. Nor did the southern no-fly offer any clear protection to populations there. France withdrew from northern “no-fly” enforcement at the end of 1996 and southern no-fly at the end of 1998. Thousands of overflights each year, mainly by US-UK military aircraft, enforced these zones on a daily basis.

In addition to no-fly, the powers launched military operations against Iraq, by aircraft and cruise missiles. France participated in the attack of January 13, 1993 involving 80 strike aircraft, but thereafter the French withdrew from this type of action. United States forces, operating from a variety of ground bases and naval ships, carried out most of these operations, sometimes with UK participation. The main events took place on January 17 (42 cruise missiles) and June 26 (23 cruise missiles), 1993, September 3-4, 1996 (Operation Desert Strike)(44 cruise missiles), and especially December 16-19, 1998 (Operation Desert Fox)(hundreds of strike aircraft and cruise missiles). (61) There were also a variety of military deployment operations intended to threaten Iraq, including US operations titled Phoenix Scorpion I, II, III and IV and phases of Operation Desert Thunder, together lasting from November 1997 to December 1998. (62)

Some of these attacks targeted sites in Baghdad or other populated areas and resulted in civilian casualties. Operation Desert Fox, in December 1998, an intense aerial attack, destroyed a Basra oil refinery and hit a number of targets in Baghdad and other cities, including civilian housing. (63) More US-UK air strikes followed Desert Fox as part of no-fly enforcement, under “enlarged rules of engagement” (64) and an enlarged no-fly zone (to the 33 degree parallel, near the southern suburbs of Baghdad). These more robust and provocative patrols led to hundreds of clashes with Iraqi forces, including attacks on radar and anti-aircraft missile sites, command and control centers, intelligence installations and more, including sites outside the no-fly areas. They resulted in regular civilian casualties. (65)

When the UN Humanitarian Coordinator, Hans von Sponeck, documented these strikes (as well as the destruction and death they caused, and the danger to UN staff), the US and the UK reacted with outrage and demanded his resignation. (66)

Such unilateral military attacks deepened confusion as to the economic sanctions policy and what steps the Iraqi government could be expected to take to cooperate with UN inspectors and to comply with requirements that might lead to the lifting of sanctions. The Russian ambassador at the UN, Sergey Lavrov, remarked in the Council that “it was not possible to ask the [Iraqis] to cooperate and, at the same time, bomb their territory.” (67)

4.3 Responsibility of the Government of Iraq and the Politics of Vilification

The government of Iraq under Saddam Hussein bears responsibility for the wars and the weapons programs that brought suffering to Iraq’s people and its neighbors. The government of Iraq has also been a notorious human rights abuser. The United States and the UK often point to these crimes as rationale and justification for the sanctions. But sanctions cannot legally, under the UN Charter or under any standard of international law, serve as punishment for past acts, heinous as they are. Nor, of course, should the punishment fall on the people of Iraq and not the responsible leaders themselves.

As the international community grew increasingly aware of the human costs of the sanctions, the US and UK worked tirelessly to shift responsibility away from themselves and onto Saddam Hussein. By charging Saddam with non-compliance, they sought to prove that the Iraqi leader was himself solely answerable and deserved full moral opprobrium. In fact, considerable compliance occurred up to 1998, in spite of the Iraq government’s obstruction and lack of full cooperation.

The US and the UK also accused the Iraqi leader of various kinds of malfeasance that deepened his people’s economic and social crisis. The accusations charged that Saddam built presidential palaces, a stadium and a lavish safari park, while his people were suffering, and that he built an artificial lake during a drought. (68) Many of the charges appear to be true and reflect the Iraqi government’s lax humanitarian priorities. However, these projects appear to have cost only a small portion of the country’s vast needs for humanitarian supplies and capital re-building. While outrageous, they fall far short of providing by themselves an explanation for Iraq’s humanitarian emergency. (69)

Other charges directly address the Oil-for-Food program. In 1998 and 1999, the Western press accused the Iraqi government of not ordering adequate baby foods, of failing to order pulses – a main ingredient in Iraqis’ diets — and even of exporting foods. (70) In many cases, these allegations have proved unfounded, as we shall see. (71) Where true, they confirm the government’s unacceptable priorities, but again do not explain more than a fraction of the humanitarian emergency.

UK Minister of Defence George Robertson accused Iraq’s government of preventing medical supplies in Iraqi warehouses from reaching the population. (72) This accusation was a serious misrepresentation, based on selective use of the UN Secretary General’s report issued in February 1999, where a number of reasons for holding stocks and slow delivery were clearly listed. (73) The same charge is repeated on the US State Department “Myths and Facts About Iraq” web site where it is said, falsely, that “Saddam has been criticised by the UN for intentionally hoarding medicines in warehouses.” In fact, the World Health Organization had urged the Iraqi government to increase its buffer stocks because of uneven and unpredictable supply chains, while computerization of records (likewise recommended by the UN) had temporarily slowed deliveries. Lack of transportation equipment, due to the sanctions, also slowed delivery of medicines at this time.

The US and the UK have also blamed Saddam Hussein not halting the sale on the black market of items such as medicine, food, and food rations that entered Iraq through the Oil-for-Food program. However, as the UN Humanitarian Coordinator Tun Myat has pointed out, desperately poor citizens sometimes sell a portion of their rations to raise cash for their household. (74) UN reports have repeatedly stated that Iraq has acceptably carried out the Oil-for-Food distribution plan (which must be previously approved by the Security Council).

The UN Office of the Iraq Programme has referred to the shortcomings of the government of Iraq in regular information provided to the Council, including Iraq’s failure to act on all approved contracts, its slow implementation of letters of credit and other financial transactions, and its other management failures. (75) The OIP has reported that the government of Iraq delayed issuance of visas to experts who were needed for electricity and other technical projects and that it has failed to cooperate fully with the UN programs. At the same time, OIP admits that serious delays are often due to UN procedures and to cumbersome arrangements mandated by the Security Council, such as UN contract checking procedures at Iraqi ports of entry that can greatly delay shipments. (76)

No one can condone the Iraqi government’s failings and its lack of proper concern for the well-being of its people. To blame the government of Iraq alone for the human crisis, though, is to ignore the responsibility of the Security Council and two of its leading members.

The politics of blame, instigated by the supporters of comprehensive economic sanctions, seeks to focus public discussion on the behaviour of a vilified Saddam Hussein, as the personification of evil and to absolve the Security Council (and the US-UK) from all responsibility. This line of argument reduces the Iraqi people’s plight to a single cause: the machinations of a demented dictator. It is quite possible to remain a vigorous critic of Saddam Hussein and to reject this distorting project of vilification as an excuse for the sanctions. The lead reforming delegations on the Council such as Canada and Slovenia clearly had no sympathy for the Iraqi leader and loathed his human rights record. Indeed, they proposed targeting him and his circle directly in a new sanctions approach. Paradoxically, those who proposed vilification insisted on sanctions that were least damaging to Hussein and worked most clearly to his advantage!

European inter-war history of 1919-38 shows that national humiliation and ruinous economic pressure by the victors breeds resentment on which dictatorships thrive. (77) The founders of the United Nations knew this lesson well. Some of their successors have tragically chosen to forget.

4.4 Commercial Interests and Oil Politics

Enormous commercial interests shape policies on Iraq sanctions, taking their toll in human consequences. Oil resources have greatly influenced Iraq’s own domestic politics, of course. Oil revenues created a welfare state with considerable benefits prior to 1990, but they also fuelled Iraq’s oppressive government, its army, its intelligence services and its weapons programs, laying some of the basis for the current conflict. Iraq manipulates its oil sales, trade contracts and future oil production agreements to gain external political backing. But the commercial dimension of Iraq sanctions do not end with Iraq’s own “oil rent” dictatorship and the regime’s manoeuvres for survival.

Neighboring states such as Jordan, Syria, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates and Turkey have clear interests in a lucrative export trade with Iraq, which greatly influences their policy towards this powerful neighbor. (78) They get oil-for-food contracts and they are involved in the smuggling trade as well. (79) Egypt saw its exports to Iraq soar from $105 million in 1997 to almost $1 billion in 2000. UAE exports to Iraq rose from $24 million to over $500 million in the same period. Syria and Turkey benefit from transiting Iraq’s oil exports, for they are bordering states through which Iraq’s oil flows, both legally and illegally. Additionally, Jordan has a special deal for Iraqi oil at reduced prices for its domestic use. France, Russia and China (permanent members of the Security Council) also have very substantial interests in commercial relations with Iraq, selling hundreds of millions of dollars in goods every year to Baghdad. Of the first $18.29 billion of oil-for-food contracts approved by the Security Council, $5.48 billion went to just these three countries. Further, Russia and France are owed billions of dollars by Iraq from arms sales prior to the Gulf War, loans they hope will be repaid through enlarged trade, oil deals, and growing Iraqi prosperity. Finally, Russian, Chinese and French companies are buyers of Iraq’s oil. Russian traders, in particular, have won a very large share of recent Iraqi oil-sale contracts. Iraq offers these commercial deals to curry favour and support. Commercial interests incline these states to support Iraq and to favor a more lenient approach to sanctions policies, though continued sanctions may offer some of them rich rewards in smuggling and “political” contracts that they could not win on an open market.

The most important commercial interest in Iraq is not trade but oil (and gas) production. Iraq possesses the world’s second largest proven oil reserves, currently estimated at 112.5 billion barrels, about 11% of the world total and its gas fields are immense as well. Many experts believe that Iraq has additional undiscovered oil reserves, which might double the total when serious prospecting resumes, putting Iraq nearly on a par with Saudi Arabia. Iraq’s oil is of high quality and it is very inexpensive to produce, making it one of the world’s most profitable oil sources. Oil companies hope to gain production rights over these rich fields of Iraqi oil, worth hundreds of billions of dollars. In the view of an industry source it is “a boom waiting to happen.” (80) As rising world demand depletes reserves in most world regions over the next 10-15 years, Iraq’s oil will gain increasing importance in global energy supplies. According to the industry expert: “There is not an oil company in the world that doesn’t have its eye on Iraq.”(81) Geopolitical rivalry among major nations throughout the past century has often turned on control of such key oil resources. (82)

Five companies dominate the world oil industry, two US-based, two primarily UK-based, and one primarily based in France. (83) US-based Exxon Mobil looms largest among the world’s oil companies and by some yardsticks measures as the world’s biggest company. The United States consequently ranks first in the corporate oil sector, with the UK second and France trailing as a distant third. Considering that the US and the UK act almost alone as sanctions advocates and enforcers, and that they are the headquarters of the world’s four largest oil companies, we cannot ignore the possible relationship of sanctions policy with this powerful corporate interest.

US and UK companies long held a three-quarter share in Iraq’s oil production, but they lost their position with the 1972 nationalization of the Iraq Petroleum Company. (84) The nationalization, following ten years of increasingly rancorous relations between the companies and the government, rocked the international oil industry, as Iraq sought to gain greater control of its oil resources. After the nationalization, Iraq turned to French companies and the Russian (Soviet) government for funds and partnerships. (85) Today, the US and UK companies are very keen to regain their former position, which they see as critical to their future leading role in the world oil industry. The US and the UK governments also see control over Iraqi and Gulf oil as essential to their broader military, geo-strategic and economic interests. At the same time, though, other states and oil companies hope to gain a large or even dominant position in Iraq. As de-nationalization sweeps through the oil sector, international companies see Iraq as an extremely attractive potential field of expansion. France and Russia, the longstanding insiders, pose the biggest challenge to future Anglo-American domination, but serious competitors from China, Germany and Japan also play in the Iraq sweepstakes.(86)

During the 1990s, Russia’s Lukoil, China National Petroleum Corporation and France’s TotalElfFina held contract talks with the government of Iraq over plans to develop Iraqi fields as soon as sanctions are lifted. Lukoil reached an agreement in 1997 to develop Iraq’s West Qurna field, while China National signed an agreement for the North Rumailah field in the same year (China’s oil import needs from the Persian Gulf will grow from 0.5 million barrels per day in 1997 to 5.5 million barrels per day in 2020, making China one of the region’s most important customers). (87) France’s Total at the same time held talks for future development of the fabulous Majnun field.

US and UK companies have been very concerned that their rivals might gain a major long-term advantage in the global oil business. “Iraq possesses huge reserves of oil and gas – reserves I’d love Chevron to have access to,” enthused Chevron CEO Kenneth T. Derr in a 1998 speech at the Commonwealth Club of San Franciso, in which he pronounced his strong support for sanctions. (88) Sanctions have kept the rivals at bay, a clear advantage. US-UK companies hope that the regime will eventually collapse, giving them a strong edge over their competitors with a post-Saddam government. As the embargo weakens and Saddam Hussein holds on to power, however, stakes in the rivalry rise, for US-UK companies might eventually be shouldered aside. Direct military intervention by the US-UK offers a tempting but dangerous gamble that might put Exxon, Shell, BP and Chevron in immediate control of the Iraqi oil boom, but at the risk of backlash from a regional political explosion.

In testimony to Congress in 1999, General Anthony C. Zinni, commander in chief of the US Central Command, testified that the Gulf Region, with its huge oil reserves, is a “vital interest” of “long standing” for the United States and that the US “must have free access to the region’s resources.” (89) “Free access,” it seems, means both military and economic control of these resources. This has been a major goal of US strategic doctrine ever since the end of World War II. Prior to 1971, Britain (the former colonial power) policed the region and its oil riches. Since then, the United States has deployed ever-larger military forces to assure “free access” through overwhelming armed might. (90)

To appraise the humanitarian and human rights impact of Iraq sanctions, we must take into account these commercial and oil interests and their substantial policy impact. Such factors do not alone determine the course of Iraq sanctions, but they appear to be an enormously powerful policy influence. Members of UN Security Council delegations are well-aware of this, and they privately refer to it often. Indeed, they cannot avoid a cynical posture towards their responsibilities under international law, as they become aware that oil politics and geo-strategic rivalry greatly overshadows humanitarian considerations that could protect and guarantee the rights of innocent Iraqis.


Chapter 5. Oil-for-Food
In the mid-1990s, as political support for Iraq sanctions declined, the Security Council decided to revise its earlier plan on humanitarian trade, proposing that Iraq export oil on a controlled basis and use the revenues, under UN supervision, to buy humanitarian supplies. The Council passed Resolution 986 as a “temporary” measure on April 12, 1995, with a restrictive cap on oil sales. The government of Iraq, facing an increasingly serious economic crisis, agreed to the Council’s conditions a year later. Though Oil-for-Food brought undoubted short term benefits to a desperate population, it never eliminated the humanitarian crisis.

5.1. A Short Term Policy

When the Security Council and the government of Iraq finally agreed in May 1996 to allow the sale of oil for the purchase of food and other necessities, no one supposed that six years later the UN would be still be operating on the same basis, running a program to provide the Iraqi population with an inadequate supply of even the most basic necessities. (91)

In November 2000 the UN Secretariat reported to the Security Council that

the humanitarian programme was never intended to meet all the humanitarian needs of the Iraqi population or to be a substitute for normal economic activity. Also the programme is not geared to address the longer term deterioration of living standards or to remedy declining health standards and infrastructure. (92)
The Secretary-General repeated this concern in his report of March 2, 2001, reminding the Council that Oil for Food "was never meant to meet all the needs of the Iraqi people and cannot be a substitute for normal economic activity in Iraq."
The US and the UK have consistently ignored the implications of such warnings. As year after year of this “short term” program passes, it results in further deterioration of the country’s dilapidated infrastructure, more human suffering, and deeper damage to Iraqi society. Officials in the United Nations with direct experience in administering Oil-for-Food, like Denis Halliday and Hans von Sponeck, concluded that the system was unworkable and should not continue.

5.2 Deductions and Delays

Under Resolution 986, the Council initially allowed Iraq to sell $2.0 billion worth of oil every six months. The resolution called for deductions of 30% from all Iraqi oil sales to finance the Compensation Fund. The resolution allowed additional deductions of about 4% for UN agencies including the Office of the Iraq Programme (OIP), the arms inspection units (the UN Special Commission - UNSCOM - and the International Atomic Energy Authority – IAEA), and for fees for the use of the Turkish pipeline for Iraq’s oil exports. Of the remaining 66%, the resolution earmarked 13% for the three autonomous Kurdish northern governorates of Dahuk, Arbil and Suleymaniyah, where a UN inter-agency group would run the humanitarian program, and the remaining 53% for the balance of the country where the government would be in charge of distribution. The government of Iraq accepted the resolution in May 1996, and oil started flowing in December 1996. Because of procurement and shipping lags, the UN humanitarian supplies did not arrive in Iraq until April 1997.

This arrangement contained a strange allocation of the deductions, taking them all from the portion allocated to the Baghdad-controlled population. Thus the 13% of the population in the Kurdish areas of the North got 13% of the total oil sales, while 87% of the population in the Baghdad-controlled areas in the Center and South got just 53% of oil sales – 61% of the rate available in the North. (93)

Contrary to common perception, the Oil-for-Food program is not “humanitarian aid.” No foreign government or NGO donates food, medicines or other necessities to Iraq under the program. The government of Iraq sells oil and then pays in hard currency (from a UN-controlled “escrow account”) for imports which the Security Council Sanctions Committee must approve. Thereafter, the UN distributes the imports in the North and UN staff oversee Iraqi government distribution in the Center and South.

From December 10, 1996 until July 19, 2002, a period of over five and a half years, the government of Iraq sold a total of $55.4 billion in oil through UN-controlled sales. This amount looks impressive. However, far less in value of goods has arrived in Iraq. After 33% deductions for a combination of war reparations, UN operations and other items, the Council and the UN Secretariat approved $35.8 billion in contracts. (94) As of July 19, 2002, only $23.5 billion worth of goods had actually arrived in Iraq. (95) A combination of factors explain this $10.2 disparity, including cumbersome procedures imposed by Security Council rules, poor or obstructionist Iraqi management, “holds” mostly imposed by the United States, and other factors.

Over a period of about five years, serving an Iraqi population of 23 million, the program has delivered roughly $200 worth of goods per capita per year, including oil spare parts and other goods not directly consumed by the population. Allowing for domestic production outside the Oil-for-Food program and for smuggling, the result still appears to leave Iraqi citizens an exceedingly low per capita income which may be at or below the $1 per day World Bank threshold of absolute poverty.

Responding to criticisms of slow delivery, the Security Council has streamlined procedures for contract approval since the early days of the program. By 2002, the UN Office of the Iraq Programme (OIP) had introduced procedural reforms including electronic submission of contract technical details, electronic signatures from border inspection personnel, several fast-track lists for items with no dual-use concern, a pre-vetting of contracts by OIP experts, and improved means for financial transactions. But OIP has been under-staffed and faced with a huge and growing task of contract management and oversight.

For the country as a whole, less than two-thirds of the ordered items have arrived during the whole program. Sanctions proponents argue that this discrepancy is largely due to deliberate Iraqi obstruction. The evidence, rather, is that the contract approval system put in place by the Security Council bears a substantial responsibility for these delays and delivery blockages. In spite of improvements and reforms and in spite of the good will of many UN officials who do their best to speed the process along, oil-for-food still suffers from heavy bureaucratic centralization and red tape, as well as political manipulation, for which the Iraqi people pay a heavy price.

5.3 Blocked Contracts, Holds and “Dual-Use”

In the period before Oil-for-Food, the Iraq Sanctions Committee reviewed proposed import contracts to determine whether they should be exempted from the import ban under Resolution 687. Foods and medicines considered strictly humanitarian most readily won approval, but even in this humanitarian area the Committee blocked contracts when a single delegation objected. The United States tended to block foods that might be inputs to Iraqi food processing industries as well as a range of medicines that were alleged to have potential military use. Additionally, the United States, blocked a large number of contracts for other goods, including wrist watches, paper, textiles, shoe soles and other ordinary items that had no possible military use. The US blocked shoe soles as inputs to Iraqi industry but allowed complete shoes to be imported, it blocked textiles but allowed ready-to-wear clothes to be imported. The Committee never developed any criteria, addressing each contract on an ad hoc basis. The United States and the UK were not the only delegations to propose blockage of contracts, but they were responsible for the great majority of blockages. Their actions appeared to many observers to be arbitrary, capricious and punitive. (96)

After the passage of Resolution 986, the ground rules changed, but barriers to contracts remained a major issue of contention. The United States and the UK insisted that Iraq be prevented from importing not only weapons but also items that appear to be for civilian use but which might in some way contribute to the government’s military capacity or be turned into weapons through re-manufacturing. Such items are known as “dual-use.” A Council member could place such items, or any other that they chose, on “hold” – blocking them as an agreed import. Of fifteen Council members, only two made regular use of holds: the United States and the UK. The United States imposed the overwhelming majority. As of July 19, 2002, no less than $5.4 billion in contracts were on hold, (97) up from $3.7 billion on May 14, 2001.

Holds have blocked vital goods. They have affected water purification systems, sewage pipes, medicines, hospital equipment, fertilizers, electricity and communications infrastructure, oil field equipment, and much else. Sometimes just a small part of these contracts is alleged to have dual use. Other Council members do not agree that these items represent a credible dual-use threat, and they have often noted that holds are imposed inconsistently – an item may be placed on hold on one occasion and let through on another, even on contract with the same firm. Because the Sanctions Committee works by consensus, a single member can block any contract, even if all other members are ready to approve. As a result of these holds, contracts for many critical infrastructure projects failed to gain approval, generating much international criticism of the holds process and contributing to the broad loss of credibility of the Iraq sanctions regime.

On December 18, 2001, the OIP weekly update noted that

The total value of contracts placed on hold by the 661 Committee continued to rise . . . The “holds” covered 1,610 contracts for the purchase of various humanitarian supplies and equipment, including 1,072 contracts, worth $3.85 billion, for humanitarian supplies and 538 contracts, worth $527 million, for oil industry equipment. During the week, the Committee released from hold 14 contracts, worth $19.8 million. However, it placed on hold 57 new contracts, worth $140.6 million. (98)
These numbers dwarfed the 161 contracts on the same date, worth $253 million, that were on “inactive hold,” that is, for which the problem was the result of some administrative irregularity. (99)
Many present and past members of the Council and other expert observers believe that the United States often has used the system of “holds” for political purposes and not because of real concerns over the dual-use potential in contracts. Even the UK, which has imposed a very small minority of holds, has quietly expressed concern that US holds are excessive and impossible to defend. The UK government took a diplomatic initiative in 2000 to persuade Washington to ease up on the holds and let more goods through. The United States, however, did not agree. Since the UK démarche, the value of contracts on hold has more than doubled, from $2.25 billion in October 2000 to $5.4 billion in mid-July 2002. As of February 2001, the most recent date for which we have a complete breakdown, the US was solely responsible for over 93% of all holds, the US and the UK together for 5%, and the UK alone for 1%, while 1% was attributable to all other Council delegations, past and present. Approximately the same breakdown has continued to July, 2002, according to knowledgeable delegates.

Though the holds add up to a very large figure, the numbers alone do not tell the full story. The United States delegation may have insisted on putting a “hold” on just one item in a large contract, with the result that the whole contract was blocked. In the worst case, one contract put on hold can endanger an entire investment project. As OIP Director Benon Sevan noted in 1999,

The absence of a single spare part or item of equipment, as small as it may be, could be sufficient to prevent the completion of an entire water injection project or well completion programme. (100)
Sevan notes that the oil sector is the source of all the humanitarian revenue. Yet this sector was at first prevented entirely from importing equipment and spare parts (101) and it continues to suffer severe dilapidation because of a large number of holds that result in permanent damage to oil wells, serious safety risks, dangers of environmental damage, and risk to the country’s future production capacity. (102) Sevan has noted that such vital items as pumping controls, exploration equipment, well-drilling, degassing, hydrostatic testing and much more have been placed on hold. (103) Such goods are vital for rehabilitation and modernization of the oil sector, a precondition for Iraq to produce more oil to pay for its immediate needs and long-term reconstruction.
Holds placed on pesticides and animal vaccines have resulted in serious loss of domestic food production. Even essential health care equipment has not escaped the dubious charge of “dual-use.” There have been holds on heart-lung machines, blood gas analyzers, and other equipment. In some cases, the US has argued that it has put holds on such orders because of associated computers or data processing capacity. Sevan expressed his scepticism of this approach in comments in February 2002:

Many of the items such as computers placed on hold are readily available in the markets and shops of Baghdad . . . what is being placed on hold is the utilization of funds from the escrow account. (104)
In one case, an ambulance contract suffered because it contained communication equipment. In the end, though, the vehicles got through, but only because they were delivered without radios, which had to be removed from the contracts as a condition of lifting the holds. (105)
The UN can track the end-use of imports and determine that they were used for stated, purely civilian purposes. This is known as the “end-use/user verification” process and some 300 UN staff are currently available in Iraq for this purpose. UN officials, including the Secretary General, have regularly criticised the “holds” and argued that the UN has a much-enhanced capacity for on-site inspections and end-use verification. (106) But the United States insists that it has little faith in such options, preferring to impose holds instead. While perfect verification is probably impossible, the US approach imposes a very high cost for a very slight benefit. Its holds prevent many critical goods from reaching Iraq, blocking essential humanitarian supplies and urgently needed equipment and infrastructure. The import of modern ambulances without communications radio suggests the unacceptably compromised humanitarian system that Iraq must endure under the UN flag.

Resolution 1409 of May 14, 2002 theoretically eliminates holds, but it will probably not eliminate blocked goods. The massive Goods Review List, with suspect items totalling more than 300 pages,(107) provides a substantial barrier to future importation of goods into Iraq. Further, the Iraq Sanctions Committee will continue to exercise oversight and we can expect, based on past practice, that the US will find ways to block large numbers of contracts and insist that the Goods Review List be administered in a restrictive way.

Some knowledgeable observers believe that the new arrangements under Resolution 1409, including the administration of the Goods Review List, may prove equally onerous than the system that preceded it. No one expects that shipments for vital infrastructure like water, sanitation, communications, and electricity will suddenly rise to acceptable levels. Nor is it expected that the oil industry, which provides the essential funding of the humanitarian program, will be able to obtain sufficient badly needed parts and equipment, much less new investment.

Looking at the accumulated records of holds, the biggest disparity between orders and deliveries exists in the Telecommunications-Transport sector, where the US has placed so many holds that the value of contracts on hold recently exceeded the value of all contracts delivered throughout the program. (108) The Electricity, Oil Spares and Water-Sanitation sectors likewise suffer from large numbers of “holds” on contracts that are vital to Iraq’s infrastructure. UN officials implementing the program have insisted repeatedly that such holds gravely damage the program. Sevan has spoken about holds’ “direct negative effect on the program,” about the “interminable quagmire,” and the “appalling disrepair” of Iraqi infrastructure” but to no avail. (109) Resolution 1409 may at least partially relieve this nightmare, but progress initially appears very slow. In the first week of implementation, just $7.6 million in holds were released, (110) a rate that if sustained would require more than 13 years to work down the entire backlog.

5.4 War Reparations Fund: Oil-for-Compensation

As we have seen, the United Nations deducts a substantial proportion of Iraq’s oil sales for payment into a fund to compensate for war damages. The Council set up the Compensation Commission with Resolution 692 and in Resolution 705 it set the deductions from the Oil-for-Food account at the very high level of 30%, against the advice of the Secretary General.

The Compensation Commission has considered a very large number of claims, including claims on behalf of many individuals. According to the Commission’s web site, the Commission received approximately 1,356,500 small individual claims and settled them all with payments of approximately $16 billion. Many of the claimants had been migrant workers from Egypt and other countries, working in Iraq and Kuwait at the time the war broke out. A strong case can be made for compensating these individuals. The Commission wisely gave priority to their claims. (111)

Corporations and governments have made most of the remaining claims, which come to an additional sum of about $290 billion. This includes claims by various Kuwait government ministries and by the Kuwait Oil Company concerning wartime losses. Considering the wealth of Kuwait and the absence of humanitarian problems there, the deduction of a large share of Iraq’s oil sales for war reparations to such claimants appears punitive and not attuned to Iraq’s urgent humanitarian and reconstruction needs. (112)

These are probably the most severe war reparations since the Treaty of Versailles, at the end of World War I. Taking a lesson from the interwar crisis, the victors of World War II did not impose war reparations on Germany and Japan, in spite of terrible damage they inflicted on other countries and personal hardship imposed on millions of people.

The Council has given the Compensation Commission unusual authority and power. The Commission operates secretively and allows Iraq only to comment on a summary of each case. The operations of the Commission alone absorb more than $50 million per year, also deducted from the Iraq’s oil export funds. (113)

The reparations process appears even more troubling when its results are compared with the results of the humanitarian goods going to Iraq. While the compensation fund received an allocation of about 29% on average, it actually awarded a total of $38 billion in compensation as of April 2002 compared to just $47 billion in humanitarian supplies ordered by Iraq as of the same date, putting the compensation fund awards at 45% vs. humanitarian orders placed at 55%. As of the same date, the compensation fund had paid out $16 billion to settle claims, while the humanitarian program had received only $21 billion in goods, putting the compensation fund at 43%, while the actual humanitarian outlays came to just 57%.

The reparations fund appears punitive and contrary to basic humanitarian principles due to its exceptionally large claim on total resources. Many Council members have taken this view, but they have been unable to persuade the sanctions protagonists that humanitarian needs should have priority over compensation claimants, especially wealthy claimants such as the Government of Kuwait, Kuwait’s state oil company, and other governments and large corporations.

Responding to growing criticism and a sharp controversy within the Council following a Compensation Commission award of $15.9 billion to the Kuwait Petroleum Corporatioin, the US and the UK agreed to reduce reparations deductions from 30% to 25% in Resolution 1330 of December 5, 2000, after the small claimants had been paid. Though very welcome, especially since the funds were allocated to the Center and South, this step fell far short of humanitarian standards. The reparations deduction should instead be eliminated completely until humanitarian needs in Iraq are completely met. Further, a limit should be placed on the corporate and government compensation level, so as not to hobble the Iraqi economy for decades to come and stoke future resentment.

5.5 North vs. Center-South

Sanctions advocates make much of differences in humanitarian conditions between the three Kurdish governates in the North of Iraq, where the UN directly administers Oil-for-Food and the 15 governates in the Center and South, where the Governmant of Iraq administers the program. Better conditions in the North are alleged to prove that Saddam Hussein’s misrule is the sole explanation of the difference. On March 24, 2000, Peter Hain, Minister of State at the Foreign Office told the UK House of Commons:

exactly the same sanctions regime applies [in the north] . . . The difference is that Saddam’s writ does not run there. Why do sanctions critics prefer to ignore that inconvenient but crucial fact. (114)
But Hain was seriously misstating the case. Other important variables enter the equation, some an integral part of the Security Council sanctions’ architecture, of which the UK was a principal author and defender.
First, as we have already seen, the system of deductions results in per capita spending in the Center-South that was only 61% of the rate in the North until December 5, 2000 (69% thereafter), a very substantial difference. Second, the sanctions allow contracts going to the North to contain a “commercial clause” that enforces the quality of goods received, whereas the Center-South cannot include such a clause and must accept shoddy and even unusable merchandise with no legal recourse. Third, the sanctions allow the North to derive cash from 10% of its oil sales allocation, while absolutely no cash is available in the Center-South. Cash is needed to pay for services in the local economy, including staff for health clinics and food distribution programs. Fourth, while many important contracts in the South are blocked by holds, the United States puts relatively few holds on goods for the North, resulting in real infrastructure improvement in such sectors as electricity and public health. The US and the UK designed these four differences into the sanctions regime, but their propaganda pretends that the differences do not exist.

Several other regional differences explain part of the humanitarian variation. There is very active clandestine cross-border trade (smuggling) in the North, invigorating the economy there and putting money in the pockets of local people. Also, the climate in the North is more favorable, with cooler weather and more rainfall, resulting in better water supplies, more local food crops, and better overall health conditions. The North, with just 9% of the land area of the country, has nearly 50% of the productive, arable land.

The Government of Iraq is the seventh variable. Its administration is clearly less concerned with human welfare than the UN efforts in the North. It has not used imported goods as well, and it has failed to effectively implement targeted programs. But a fair appraisal of the North/Center-South differences must conclude that the Security Council bears considerable responsibility by imposing exceptionally harsh sanction conditions on the Center-South region, where 87% of the Iraqi population lives.

Conditions in the North may be better than the Center-South, but they are by no means acceptable. According to a study published in January 2002 by Save the Children, 60% of the population in the North live in deep poverty – with 40% living on incomes of under $300 per household per year and a further 20% living on less than $150 per household per year. The report concludes that the sanctions and ration system has “destroyed normal economic life for the vast majority,” who subsist largely through “unprecedented levels of dependency.” Up to 85% of the population are “at risk” in case of any reduction of their food access through the ration system. (115)

5.6 Nutrition and Health

Survey information by the World Food Programme/Food and Agriculture Organisa-tion in 2000 indicated 800,000 Iraqi children “chronically malnourished.” (116) The UNICEF 1999 study, also based on extensive field surveys, had shown 21% of children under five underweight, 20% stunted (chronic malnutrition) and 9% wasted (acute malnutrition). Several recent reports have noted that the UN has created initiatives to help the most vulnerable in the Center and South through targeted nutrition programs. These have had some positive results, but it is clear that the government of Iraq has not adequately implemented them.

The FAO 2000 report pointed out that at 2,000 kilocalories, the universal ration provided under the UN program was insufficient in total yield, absent substantial local food additions. The same report insisted also that the composition of the food basket remained nutritionally inadequate:

Of great concern is the lack of a number of important vitamins and minerals such as vitamin A, C, riboflavin, folate and iron in the diet. Although the planned ration is reasonably adequate in energy and total protein, it is lacking in vegetables, fruit, and animal products and is therefore deficient in micronutrients." (117)
Despite the Oil-for-Food program and the $11 billion worth of food that has entered the country, infant mortality remains very high. Today, most child deaths are not directly due to malnutrition, though. Rather, they are water-related, from such conditions as diarrhoea. Poor water quality and lack of sanitation, combined with existing malnourishment, have taken over from poor nutrition as the prime killer of children in Iraq. UNICEF reported in July 2001 that “Diarrhoea leading to death from dehydration and acute respiratory infections (ARI), together account for 70 per cent of child deaths.” (118)
Deliberate bombing of water treatment facilities during the Gulf War originally degraded the water quality. Since that time, sanctions-based “holds” have blocked the rebuilding of much of Iraq’s water treatment infrastructure. Additionally, sanctions have blocked the rebuilding of the electricity sector which powers pumps and other vital water treatment equipment.

Health problems in Iraq arise from multiple factors, many of which can be attributed to the sanctions. Electricity shortages, in addition to shutting down water-treatment, seriously disrupt hospital care and disrupt the storage of certain types of medicines. Sanctions also result in shortages of medical equipment and spare parts, blockages of certain important medicines, shortage of skilled medical staff, and more.

There can be no doubt, based on health and mortality surveys, that Iraqis are suffering from a major public health crisis. The sanctions both deepen that crisis as a cause and also block measures that could mitigate it through public health measures and curative medical procedures. The health status of the Iraqi people has been a key indicator of the humanitarian consequences of the Iraq sanctions regime.

5.7 Deaths

None deny that Iraq sanctions have caused many deaths, but a debate has raged over how many. The larger the number, the greater the burden on sanction advocates to justify their actions. Unfortunately, wrangling over numbers obscures the unavoidable reality: a tragically large humanitarian disaster.

The measurement of deaths rests on the concept of “excess” mortality – those deaths that exceed the mortality rate in the previous, pre-sanctions period or that exceed a projection of the earlier trend towards further gains. The previous mortality rate is well-established, but two arguments arise – first, what is the present mortality rate (which, some argue, may be distorted by false Iraq government statistics) and second, what is the cause of such mortality increase. Neither of these questions has a simple answer. Not surprisingly, the government of Iraq claims a very large increase and blames most of its child mortality on sanctions. UNICEF, in a widely-publicised study carried out jointly with the Iraq Ministry of Health, determined that 500,000 children under five years old had died in “excess” numbers in Iraq between 1991 and 1998, though UNICEF insisted that this number could not all be ascribed directly to sanctions. (119) UNICEF used surveys of its own as part of the basic research and involved respected outside experts in designing the study and evaluating the data. UNICEF remains confident in the accuracy of its numbers and points out that they have never been subject to a scientific challenge.

Prof. Richard Garfield of Columbia University carried out a separate and well-regarded study of excess mortality in Iraq. Garfield considered the same age group and the same time period as the UNICEF study. (120) He minimized reliance on official Iraqi statistics by using many different statistical sources, including independent surveys in Iraq and inferences from comparative public health data from other countries. Garfield concluded that there had been a minimum of 100,000 excess deaths and that the more likely number was 227,000. He compared this estimate to a maximum estimate of 66,663 civilian and military deaths during the Gulf War. Garfield now thinks the most probable number of deaths of under-five children from August 1991 to June 2002 would be about 400,000. (121)

There are no reliable estimates of the total number of excess deaths in Iraq beyond the under-five population. Even with conservative assumptions, though, the total of all excess deaths must be far above 400,000.

All of these excess deaths should not be ascribed to sanctions. Some may be due to a variety of other causes. But all major studies make it clear that sanctions have been the primary cause, because of the sanctions’ impact on food, medical care, water, and other health-related factors. Though oil-for-food has changed the situation studied by UNICEF and Garfield, resulting in less malnutrition, recent field reports suggest that infant mortality remains high, due to water-borne disease. (122) The mortality rate for under-five children has probably not continued to rise since the 1999 studies, but the rate apparently remains very much higher than that reported in Iraq before 1990.

In the face of such powerful evidence, the US and UK governments have sometimes practiced bold denial. Brian Wilson, Minister of State at the UK Foreign Office told a BBC interviewer on February 26, 2001 “There is no evidence that sanctions are hurting the Iraqi people.” When denial has proved impossible, officials have occasionally fallen back on astonishingly callous affirmations. In a famous interview with Madeleine Albright, then US representative at the United Nations, Leslie Stahl of the television show 60 Minutes said: “We have heard that half a million children have died . . . is the price worth it? Albright replied, “I think this is a very hard choice, but the price – we think the price is worth it.” (123)

Six years after Albright’s statement and twelve years after Security Council Resolution 661, comprehensive economic sanctions continue to impose on Iraq a very high number of deaths of young children, as measured by careful and well-regarded estimates. Combined with the deaths of older children and adults, this adds up to a great and unjustifiable humanitarian tragedy.


Chapter 6 “Smart” Sanctions, Price Disputes and Military Threats
6.1. Background

Sanctions results in the 1990s suggest that comprehensive economic sanctions are ineffective and do not reliably persuade the leadership of an offending country to make required policy changes. (124) Secretary Generals Boutros Boutros-Ghali and Kofi Annan have made this point repeatedly in public statements. The Security Council itself no longer uses such broad sanctions in other international security crises and seeks instead to develop more “targeted” sanctions.

UN officials, academic experts and national policy makers have recently held a number of conferences to consider how sanctions could be better targeted on the arms trade and on the personal finances and travel of responsible leaders and elites. The most important such efforts are known as the Interlaken Process (sponsored by the Swiss government) which began in March 1998, the Bonn-Berlin Processes (sponsored by the German government) which began in November 1999, and the Stockholm Process (sponsored by the Swedish government) which began in February, 2002. (125)

The Security Council briefly imposed targeted sanctions on the Iraqi leadership through Resolution 1137 of November 12, 1997, prohibiting international travel of listed leaders until full compliance with UNSCOM inspectors had been restored. That resolution brought swift Iraqi compliance, and seemed a great success, but curiously the Council did not further use this effective and well-targeted measure.

As international and domestic opposition to Iraq sanctions mounted in the late 1990’s, and as pressure rose for targeted sanctions against the Iraqi leadership, United States and UK policy makers sought means to deflect criticisms while holding the comprehensive sanctions system in place. During the US presidential election campaign in 2000, candidate George W. Bush often spoke of the need for a new approach to Iraq sanctions. Secretary of State Powell, in his congressional confirmation hearings in early 2001, repeatedly stressed the need to shore up public opinion against Iraq through what he referred to as “smart” sanctions:

So this wasn't an effort to ease the sanctions; this was an effort to rescue the sanctions policy that was collapsing. We discovered that we were in an airplane that was heading to a crash, and what we have done and what we are trying to do is to pull it out of that dive and put it on an altitude that's sustainable, bring the coalition back together.” (126)
Early in 2001, after a tour of the region by Secretary Powell, the UK government (with US support) proposed to modify Iraq sanctions. The UK did not propose targeting the Iraqi leadership, however, ignoring several years of discussions about more effective sanctions. Rather, the UK proposed a further streamlining of imports, combined with more rigorous controls at Iraq’s borders to prevent smuggling. Eventually, after much discussion, this proposal bogged down in the summer of 2001 in the face of doubts by many Council members and a threatened Russian veto.
The events of September 11, 2001 changed the political equation on the Council and created greater unity among the permanent members through shared concern about terrorism and related issues. As a result, opposition by Russia, China and France to Iraq sanctions softened, opening the way for a modified version of the original UK resolution centering on a Goods Review List (GRL) to streamline imports. Resolution 1382 (November 2001) provided for a GRL to be adopted by the Council by May 29, 2002. The GRL theoretically offered a means to speed contract approval by compiling in advance a list of potentially dual-use items, with all remaining items exempted from automatic Sanctions Committee review. Committee members would retain the option, though, to block future contracts.

The United States and Russia negotiated the GRL list over the course of several months, with the Russians favoring a short list and the US favoring a long one. The United States lifted holds on $200 million in Russian contracts and it promised to lift holds on $550 more as a means to secure Russian agreement. (127) France and China allegedly asked for holds on their contracts to be lifted also, as a condition of their agreement. (128) Since the policies of the US and the UK are widely believed to be driven by commercial interests in the oil sector, this bargaining fed the perception that the Security Council sanctions are dominated by commercial dealing among the permanent members, not by concerns about “peace and security” or arms control.(129) The elected members of the Council were kept, as usual, entirely in the dark until the resolution was finally submitted to the Council on a take-it-or-leave-it basis.

6.2. Smart Sanctions vs. Targeted Sanctions

Reconstruction and economic revival, not the relief-based approach of the Oil-for-Food program and its “smart” variant, are essential to human development and the human rights of Iraq’s people.

US-inspired smart sanctions, mainly in the form of a Goods Review List, completely fail to address the major problems of the current sanctions against Iraq. Four pillars of the present sanctions effectively prevent the rebuilding of Iraq’s economy:

Targeting the entire population, not just leaders

Controlling Iraq’s oil export income through a cumbersome UN-administered “escrow account”

Controlling Iraqi imports in ways that limit access to key goods, especially items for Iraq’s infrastructure and for its oil sector, and that drastically slow the delivery of most contracts

Prohibiting foreign investment and freezing all foreign assets
The four pillars have remained the basic operating method of the (new) sanctions. No government could restore a healthy domestic economy within the confines of such sanctions. As the Security Council itself concluded in 1999, Oil-for-Food cannot provide a framework for rebuilding Iraq and restoring its vital infrastructure. (130)
The “smart” sanctions initially envisaged by the Security Council in Resolution 1382 and finally adopted in Resolution 1409 are not smart. They do not follow the recommendations of the Interlaken or Bonn-Berlin process. (131) They do not reflect a focus on the culprit regime or a better targeting of military equipment. While theoretically speeding up delivery of certain goods, these proposals also allow the blocking of vital imports. Iraq needs foreign investment projects and contact with the outside world to train a new generation of Iraqi managers, scientists and technicians. An open Iraq would almost certainly lead to positive political changes. Instead, “smart” sanctions shore up the old, failed system.

Judging by the experience of “fast-track” lists drawn up in 2000, the new “smart” sanctions could increase the volume of humanitarian goods arriving in Iraq, but this is by no means sure. Some well-informed observers think that the new system will be no better than the old and possibly worse, depending on how UNMOVIC, IAEA and OIP are able to handle the new process of contract compliance scrutiny. Even if the new arrangements result in some marginal improvement, they offer far too little to address the pressing humanitarian crisis. So much effort for such small gain suggests that the US and the UK are more interested in “public relations” (New York Times) or “cosmetic surgery” (The Economist) than in speeding up goods shipments to Iraq. (132)

6.3 Oil Pricing Disputes & Shrinking Humanitarian Revenue

A new crisis quickly overshadowed Resolution 1409. A clash over oil pricing methods resulted in rapidly falling Iraq oil sales and a severe shortfall of funds for the humanitarian program.

The crisis had its origins in late 2000 when oil traders buying Iraqi oil started to sell the oil at marked-up prices and kicked-back to Baghdad a portion of the premium they received. This scheme gave the Government of Iraq the cash it eagerly sought. Russian traders acted as the major intermediaries and profited handsomely. The kickback varied, but in early 2002 stood at 25-30 cents per barrel, or over 1% of the oil price, with price premiums running at 30-45 cents. (133) Had it continued, this scheme might theoretically have provided the government of Iraq with about $100 million in cash revenue annually, based on recent prices and export levels. Such a sum is relatively small in comparison to Iraq’s estimated smuggling revenues of at least $1.5 billion.

The US and UK demanded that the Security Council take steps to prevent these kickbacks. Some delegations objected, but ultimately the US-UK prevailed. In October 2001, the Iraq Sanctions Committee introduced a new system known as “retroactive pricing,” which reduced premiums to 10-15 cents per barrel by July 2002 and nearly eliminated all kick-backs. But the Council’s new pricing system left oil buyers uncertain of final prices at the time of purchase. Increased uncertainty for buyers and reduced profit margins for oil traders reduced demand for Iraqi oil by a third or more. (134)

The shrinking market took a heavy toll on the humanitarian program. In mid-February OIP Executive Director Benon Sevan spoke to the Council of the program’s “financial crisis.” (135) Iraq’s refusal to sell oil for a month (April 8-May 8, 2002), announced as a show of support for Palestinians, further worsened the situation, as did weakening oil prices. As the demand crisis wore on, the pricing method had an increasingly negative effect on the humanitarian program. By July 26, a funds shortfall left the UN unable to act on 1,001 approved contracts worth $2.1 billion. (136)

Many in the Council came to believe that the US-UK pricing system was punitive and unacceptable. (137) The French circulated proposals in June to escape the impasse and restore acceptable prices, an initiative that attracted broad support. But the US-UK refused, insisting that the Council must dutifully block cash to the Iraqi government and blaming Iraq entirely for negative humanitarian consequences. Though many in the Council pressed for a speedy resolution, negotiations dragged on, while revenue shortfalls grew. Once again, the people of Iraq were forced to pay a heavy price.

6.4 Regime Change, Military Threats and Appraisals of Iraq’s Rearmament

The United States government has consistently pursued a policy favoring a change of regime in Iraq. This policy has included clandestine support for Iraqi opposition groups and efforts to promote a military coup against Saddam Hussein. On October 31, 1998, shortly before Operation Desert Fox, President Bill Clinton signed the Iraq Liberation Act, which clearly identified regime-change as US policy and authorized spending and policy action in this direction.(138)

Since the fall of 2001, Washington has increased its commitment to regime-change. In President Bush’s State of the Union address in January 2002, he branded Iraq as a “terrorist state,” part of an “axis of evil” (139) and many reports have since circulated about plans for a military strike against Iraq. This dogmatic “good vs. evil” approach, endangers peace and ignores humanitarian considerations as well as opportunities for peaceful solutions. It does, however, provide a rationale for US military and political control of Iraq’s oil fields.

The US now alleges that Iraq possesses (or that it will soon acquire) weapons of mass destruction. This concern cannot be categorically rejected as implausible, in view of such weapons programs by Iraq in the recent past. But considerable doubt exists, among well-informed experts, like former weapons inspector Scott Ritter. (140) CIA reports recently concluded that there is no hard evidence for such claims. (141) And Senator Bob Graham, Chairman of the Intelligence Committee of the US Senate was reported on May 14, 2002 by USA Today to have said that “Based on the intelligence briefings he has received… Iraqi president Saddam Hussein is not on the verge of developing weapons of mass destruction.” (142)

It should be recalled that other countries have actually developed and deployed weapons of mass destruction without US-led military threats. Israel, South Africa under apartheid, India and Pakistan are cases in point. Such programs are extremely dangerous to world peace wherever they emerge, but Washington has applied drastically different standards in appraising them and claimed “global responsibilities” to act (or not) against each as its sees fit. Regional and international disarmament agreements would be far better guarantee of peace than unilateral decisions of a single superpower.

In the present political climate, the “hawks” in Washington are ready to disregard the weak evidence concerning Iraqi rearmament. Instead, they insist that Iraq poses such a grave and immediate danger that humanitarian considerations do not count and that a military strike is urgently necessary. (143) In such a heated atmosphere, the opportunity for lifting Security Council sanctions against Iraq may have temporarily diminished. Many Council delegations, though critical of the sanctions, are concerned primarily about averting a full-scale invasion of Iraq by the United States.

Such a dismal prospect need not prevail for long, however. The United States may draw back from the dangerous war option and members of the Security Council may again raise their voices for sound policy and for conformity with international law. The temporary unity of the Permanent Members is likely to weaken, making room for elected members of the Council to advance such proposals successfully, with broad backing from the international community. Public opinion, acting directly and through governments, is likely to pressure the Council in a more critical direction. A new dynamic can promote the values that gained ground in the late 1990s, a dynamic of far-reaching reform inspired by humanitarian concerns and legal mandates, not cynical commercial interests or expansionist geopolitical strategies.


Chapter 7 – The Council’s Obligations under Human Rights and Humanitarian Law
7.1. Legal Framework for the Security Council

The UN Charter gives the Security Council broad authority to maintain international peace and security, including the use of sanctions and international military action. The Charter also obliges member states to abide by Security Council resolutions even when such resolutions conflict with other treaties.

However, Article 24 of the Charter directs the Council “to act in accordance with the Purposes and Principles of the United Nations” when acting to maintain peace and security. The promotion of human rights is one of these fundamental “Purposes and Principles.” (144) Human rights have been elaborated in the Universal Declaration, the two International Covenants, and a variety of other international instruments including the Convention on the Rights of the Child, creating a legal framework for member states of the UN. While the Security Council may not be bound by human rights requirements in the same manner as a state, it must nevertheless act in conformity with these principles in fulfilling its duties under the Charter. The contrary view, that the Council is not bound by international law, defies not only the Charter but also common sense.

When responding to a threat to peace and security, it may not be clear whether the Security Council should abide by the war-time legal regime of humanitarian law or the peace-time regime of human rights. While both are grounded in humanitarian norms, they offer different levels of protection to the individual. Humanitarian law, the laws of war, permit belligerents to inflict collateral civilian casualties when attacking legitimate military targets, provided that the harm to civilians is not disproportionate to the value of the military target, that it was unavoidable and that all efforts have been made to minimise it. The human rights regime, on the other hand, provides stricter protection to civilian life, health and property. The Council is therefore under an obligation to respect both humanitarian law and human rights norms and to apply them in the framework of its actions on sanctions. But, some members believe that the Council enjoys a specially privileged position and is subject to no legal authority other than its own political judgements.(145)

The Security Council’s failure to address the human rights and humanitarian impact of sanctions has prompted regular expressions of concern from UN agencies, commissions, panels and other bodies – the Machel Report to the General Assembly (1996), the Comment by the Committee on Social, Economic and Cultural Rights (1997), the Statement by the Inter-Agency Standing Committee (1997), UNICEF’s Hoskins Report (1998), the Bossuyt Report of the Commission on Human Rights (2000) (tellingly entitled The Adverse Consequences of Economic Sanctions on the Enjoyment of Human Rights), (146) the Report of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights entitled The Human Rights Impact of Economic Sanctions on Iraq,(147) as well as reports of the International Committee for the Red Cross and many more. Human rights NGOs including Human Rights Watch and the Center for Economic and Social Rights have likewise raised serious questions about Iraq sanctions. A variety of international conferences have also raised these concerns, including Interlaken, Bonn-Berlin, Stockholm, the Symposia of the International Peace Academy, and the Colloquium on “United Nations Sanctions and International Law” of the Graduate Institute of International Affairs (1999). (148) There has not yet been a direct legal challenge to the Council on this issue, but there could and should be, possibly through the International Court of Justice.

7.2 Human Rights Law

The Security Council is bound to respect the full range of human rights standards in the major international legal instruments as an extension of its underlying obligations under the UN Charter. (149) It must ensure that its actions comply with these standards. Thus, the Security Council may not violate human rights, even when acting to maintain peace and security. The Council has two basic human rights duties:

procedural duties to recognize its human rights obligations and take concrete measures to monitor its actions to comply with these obligations; and

substantive duties not to undertake any actions that violate human rights, especially the rights of vulnerable groups with special legal protections, and to undertake immediate corrective measures in the case of violations.

The two sets of duties are closely linked. Procedural duties provide an essential safeguard against human rights violations by allowing the Security Council to monitor its activities for early warning signs of adverse human rights impacts. Since no outside body has yet successfully reviewed the legality of Security Council decisions, the Council must judge its own actions and hold itself accountable to human rights standards. Given its recently-expanded role in international affairs, the Security Council has an increased obligation to monitor and check its own actions.

Procedural Human Rights Violations

The Security Council has clearly violated its procedural human rights obligations throughout the course of its sanctions against Iraq. Given the extent of civilian suffering and the clear knowledge available, the Council has taken only token steps to measure the human rights impact of its sanctions or to modify its actions in accordance with human rights principles. At the very beginning of the sanctions, UN Secretary-General Javier Perez de Cuellar called for “close monitoring” as an essential tool for avoiding a humanitarian crisis:

The maintenance of food supply and consumption as well as the close monitoring of the nutritional and health status of the Iraqi population over the next few months are absolutely necessary to prevent full-scale famine and major human disasters developing in the country. (150)
Apart from the 1999 panels, however, the Council has never authorized an ongoing assessment of the sanctions’ humanitarian impact, due to vigorous opposition by the United States and the UK. Given the importance of the sanctions, such an assessment should be functioning on a permanent basis and offering regular reports to the Council. But the pro-sanction members vigorously resist such a step. As Hans von Sponeck said,
every attempt that I made with the United Nations in New York to get an agreement to prepare an assessment of the humanitarian condition in Iraq was blocked. (151)
In Resolution 1302 of June 8, 2000, the Council spoke of a “comprehensive report” to be prepared by a group of experts, but the US-UK insisted on language that other Council members understood as effectively ruling out Iraqi cooperation, (152) demanding that the mandate of the study exclude any mention of human rights or of the impact of sanctions. The US also rejected a proposal by other Council members that a report should be prepared based on information available outside Iraq.
The Council has ordered impact assessment studies of sanctions in the case of Liberia and Afghanistan. (153) The absence of such assessment in the case of Iraq appears as a gross procedural lapse with extremely serious consequences.

Substantive Human Rights Violations

The Council has a clear share of responsibility for the death and suffering of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians under sanctions. These deaths carry the clearest implication of a substantive violation, since the UN Human Rights Committee considers the right to life to be “the supreme right from which no derogation is permitted even in time of public emergency.” (154) Sanctions have also contributed to violations of the rights to health, education, and an adequate standard of living. The Council clearly cannot act in pursuit of international peace and security without causing some degree of inadvertent harm, but very large casualties, caused in such a routine way, cannot be accepted. The Council would thus appear to be in violation of rights guaranteed by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and other solemn international agreements.

Iraqi children have suffered disproportionately under sanctions. Human rights law considers children uniquely vulnerable to abuse and therefore grants them special protections in the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Among other provisions, the Convention specifically recognises that “every child has the inherent right to life” and calls on all states “to ensure to the maximum extent possible the survival and development of the child” and “to take appropriate measures to diminish infant and child mortality.” (155) It is hard to think of a graver breach of child rights in modern history than the death of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children.

The Iraq government’s own human rights violations in no way excuse the Security Council for its violations. The Council remains always obligated by the UN Charter to “promote and encourage respect for human rights.” The human rights of individual Iraqis are not forfeited because of their government’s misconduct, particularly when these citizens have no voice in the decisions of the government. Iraq’s failure to comply completely with Security Council resolutions therefore does not give the Council license to disavow its independent obligations to respect the human rights of Iraqi civilians.

7.3 Humanitarian law

Even under the more permissive framework of humanitarian law, Security Council sanctions on Iraq violate well-established legal norms. The basic principles of the laws of war are those of distinction and proportionality. Under the principle of distinction, belligerents are required to distinguish between civilians and combatants at all times and to direct attacks only against military targets.(156) This is the fundamental principle of the laws of war. The corollary principle of proportionality is designed to ensure that attacks against military targets do not cause excessive civilian damage. The Geneva Conventions define the principle of proportionality as prohibiting any “attack which may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects (...) which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated.” (157) Sanctions are tantamount to acts of war and so should be subject to this restriction.

Indiscriminate weapons, which cannot be directed solely against military targets, by their very nature violate the principle of distinction. Comprehensive economic sanctions can also be considered as such an indiscriminate weapon, which two Secretary Generals have for good reason called a “blunt instrument.” (158) Such sanctions fail to target the real offenders and instead harm the weakest and most vulnerable members of society. Sanctions in Iraq thus clearly violate the principle of distinction under humanitarian law.

Sanctions also violate the principle of proportionality. (159) The Security Council originally re-imposed economic sanctions after the Gulf War with high expectations of successfully eliminating mass destruction weapons in Iraq. Initially the sanctions were proportional to the aim. But after substantial disarmament was achieved and the humanitarian crisis deepened, the judgement on proportionality must be revised. Many innocent lives continue to be claimed by the sanctions with scarcely any potential benefit.

Proportionality is a malleable and subjective standard, prone to manipulation by belligerents to justify civilian casualties. Nevertheless, the authoritative ICRC legal commentary on the laws of war sets out guidelines for interpretation:

A remote [military] advantage to be gained at some unknown time in the future would not be a proper consideration to weigh against civilian loss. (...) The advantage concerned should be substantial and relatively close. (...) There can be no question of creating conditions conducive to surrender by means of attacks which incidentally harm the civilian population.” (160)
The Iraq case illustrates why, contrary to conventional wisdom, comprehensive economic sanctions are not a humane alternative to war. Public opinion could never have tolerated a military campaign against Iraq that killed so many innocent children, especially not a war carried out in the name of the world’s people under the authority of an organization dedicated to defend human rights.
The case of Iraq underscores the need to clearly define legal constraints on the Security Council. The Council’s significant power to act in international affairs must be bounded by accepted principles of international law. For twelve years, the Security Council has maintained comprehensive sanctions without referring to its legal obligation to act in accordance with human rights and humanitarian principles.


Chapter 8 – Conclusion & Policy Recommendations
The international community must press the Security Council to honor its legal obligations in Iraq sanctions policy. World public opinion now recognizes comprehensive economic sanctions as a seriously flawed policy tool, a “blunt instrument” almost certain to do massive harm to innocent civilians. The Council itself no longer uses such sanctions, choosing to use exclusively targeted sanctions instead. But two Permanent Members have prevented the Council from reforming Iraq sanctions so as to meet the widely-agreed new standards.

When the Council first imposed sanctions on Iraq, its members may have reasonably believed that the sanctions would be effective and that the goal of disarmament was worth a few months of civilian suffering. Now, twelve years later, with clear evidence of negative consequences and with no further positive outcome to be expected, the Council can no longer excuse its inaction. The Council’s failure to lift the comprehensive economic sanctions is a breach of its humanitarian responsibilities and an abject failure to use the principles of proportionality.

In recent years, Council members have received many learned and thoughtful reports, setting forth the humanitarian crisis in Iraq, the flaws in the sanctions regime, and the international legal principles that should be applied. The Council cannot say that it is uninformed about the conditions on the ground or that it is unaware of the legal aspects of its responsibilities. Oil-for-Food sought to accommodate the strongest objections, by allowing Iraq to sell oil for the purchase of some humanitarian resources. But it was designed as a short term policy, and is subject to bureaucratic bottlenecks, manipulated by the pro-sanction powers, and throttled by US-imposed blocking and holds. The Goods Review List and associated new procedures under Resolution 1409 are far from sufficient as an improvement.

A number of UN agencies and organs have called on the Security Council to lift or deeply modify the sanctions. Several Secretary Generals have raised questions that pointed in this direction. Two respected UN humanitarian coordinators have resigned in protest, urging an end to the punitive sanctions. Scholars, journalists, religious leaders, NGOs, diplomats, health authorities, human rights organizations, parliamentarians and citizens have joined in a compelling call for change. A majority of Council members have long concluded that Iraq sanctions are a repugnant failure and world opinion has clearly mapped out the road towards legality and accountability:

Comprehensive economic sanctions must be lifted,

The UN “escrow account” must be eliminated,

Free trade (excepting military goods) must be re-established,

Foreign investments in Iraq must be permitted, and

Foreign assets of Iraq must be unfrozen so as to normalize its external economic relations
Clearly, though, such change will not be free of risk. The government of Iraq cannot be counted on to make benign and peaceful policy choices, or to automatically promote the well-being of its people. In this context
Robust weapons monitoring must be reintroduced, to insure full disarmament and to guarantee no future production programs for mass destruction weapons, and
Disarmament in Iraq must be complemented by regional approaches to disarmament, especially elimination of mass destruction weapons and weapons programs in other regional states.
The Government of Iraq must give firm assurances to the international community, as a part of reciprocal undertakings, that
It will renounce all plans to buy, build or use weapons of mass destruction and related delivery systems
It will cooperate fully with ongoing UN arms inspection arrangements
It will establish friendly and cooperative relations with neighboring countries
It will take all necessary steps to address the humanitarian emergency as soon as funds become available to do so
It will honor minority rights, including offering special status to the Kurdish areas, and it will take steps to honor its human rights obligations
If the government of Iraq fails to provide adequate means for inspection and arms control, in future, then:
Narrowly-targeted sanctions, including financial and travel penalties, should be directed at Iraq’s leaders,
Time limits must be part of the new sanctions regime,
Clear criteria for lifting must also be part of the new sanctions regime,
Regular humanitarian assessments must also be part of the new sanctions as well, so that the Council will be aware of their possible impact on the broader Iraqi population.
If Iraq is to return to normalcy, and if it is to be persuaded to agree to international accords, it must be free of constant military pressure, threats and intimidation. The Security Council’s decisions, not unilateral action by one or two powerful states, must prevail. In this framework:
“No-Fly zones” " must be eliminated and aerial threats and attacks halted, and
Unilateral military attacks, as a means towards “regime change,” must be ruled out as unacceptable and illegal.
Other efforts directed towards "regime change," including force build-ups, military aid to opposition forces, and covert destabilization and assassination campaigns must cease.
Security Council members must find the courage and the wisdom to move forward, to reflect at long last the Council’s compelling responsibilities and its accountability to the overwhelming majority of world opinion. For this reason, the Security Council should seek a wide-ranging agreement with the government of Iraq that ends comprehensive sanctions and threats of violence on the one hand while introducing on the other hand a program for securing Iraq’s physical and political renewal and its peaceful re-integration into the world community. In such a framework:
Emergency relief, to bring a speedy end to the human suffering, must be put in place, with the help of the international community,
Large-scale physical reconstruction, to build a new infrastructure for Iraq, must be set in motion, including foreign investments, and
Safeguards for minorities such as the Kurds must be introduced, including federative structures and possibly a UN presence to monitor and promote human rights in the post-sanctions era.
The Council has recently made great and impressive progress in East Timor, Sierra Leone, Ethiopia-Eritrea and Angola, each a very difficult and challenging task. A peaceful and constructive solution to the Iraq crisis is surely not beyond its grasp.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Appendix I
Chronology of main events
1990
Aug 2 After months of tension, the Iraqi army invades Kuwait. The United Nations Security Council passes Resolution 660 condemning the Invasion and demanding Iraq's immediate and unconditional withdrawal.
Aug 3 Arab League calls for Iraq's withdrawal from Kuwait.
Aug 6 Council passes Resolution 661, imposing comprehensive sanctions on Iraq and establishes a committee (the 661 or Sanctions Committee) to monitor the sanctions.
Aug 12-15 Iraq offers two peace plans which are rejected by the US.
Aug 28 Jordan proposes a peace plan which is accepted by Iraq but rejected by the US.
Sep 19 Morocco proposes a peace plan which is rejected by the US.
Sep 24 France proposes a peace plan which is accepted by Iraq but rejected by the US.
Nov 22 Most expert witnesses to US Senate Armed Services Committee reject military option towards Iraq.
Nov 29
Security Council Resolution 678 authorizes use of force against Iraq if it has not withdrawn from Kuwait by 15 January 1991.
Nov 30 US proposes talks; Iraq accepts.
Dec 5 CIA director, William Webster tells US Congress that ``economic sanctions and the embargo against Iraq ... have dealt a serious blow to the Iraq economy. ... In late November, Baghdad cut civilian rations for the second time since the rationing program began ... In addition, services ranging from medical care to sanitation have been curtailed." Although sanctions are hurting Iraq's civilian economy, they are affecting the Iraqi military only at the margins.
1991
Jan 9 US-Iraq talks fail.
Jan 13 UN Secretary-General's talks with Iraq fail.
Jan 16 Air war begins, destroying much of Iraq's civilian infrastructure.
Jan 21 Iran protests scale of bombing.
Jan 29 French defence minister Chevènement resigns in protest against scale of bombing.
Feb 3 Pope John Paul II rejects the claim that the war against Iraq is a "just war."
Feb.28 War ends.
Mar 20 Ahtisaari Report to Security Council on humanitarian crisis in Iraq and Kuwait. "…Most means of modern life support have been destroyed or rendered tenuous." "Sanctions in respect of food supplies should immediately be removed." No remedy to humanitarian need, "without dealing with the underlying need for energy."
Apr 3 Resolution 687 begins cease-fire, establishes UN Special Commission on weapons, extends sanctions by tying them to Iraq's weapons. UK ambassador Sir David Hannay states in the Council that "it will in fact prove impossible for Iraq to rejoin the community of civilized nations while Saddam Hussein remains in power."
Apr 5. Resolution 688 condemns "the repression of the Iraqi civilian population" in the ensuing civil war.
Mid-Apr US, UK and France organize a "no-fly" zone in northern Iraq, while Operation Provide Comfort carves out an autonomous zone in a large part of the Kurdish areas.
Jul 17 UN mission to Iraq led by Sadruddin Aga Khan concludes that Iraq needs $22 billion that year to provide civilian services at pre-war levels.
Aug 15 Resolution 706 acknowledges the Sadruddin Aga Khan Report and calls for oil sales not to exceed $1.6 billion over 6 months to be placed in escrow account, deducting 30% for a Compensation Commission, plus UNSCOM and other international obligations, leaving less than 1/3 of the Report's recommended amount for humanitarian aid.
Sep 19 Resolution 712 proposes that Iraq be allowed $1.6 billion oil sales over six months, of which $900 million would be available for civilian needs, disregarding the Secretary General's request that the cap be raised.
1992
Feb 1 Iraq rejects 706 and 712.
Feb 5 Council declares that Iraq "therefore bears full responsibility for their humanitarian problems."
August US, UK and France establish no-fly zone in southern Iraq
1993
Jan 13 US, UK and France attack Iraq with aircraft and cruise missiles. US and UK continue air strikes on January 17 and June 26.
1995
Jan UN Secretary General Boutros Ghali issues a report calling sanctions a "blunt instrument"
Apr 14 Resolution 986 allows Iraqi government $2 billion in oil sales every six months. 13% of total available funds set aside for UN use in the northern governorates. Sanctions Committee must review and approve all supplies purchased through escrow account.
1996
May 12 US Ambassador to the UN Madeleine Albright, in response to claims of half a million child deaths in sanctioned Iraq, replies: "I think this is a very hard choice, but the price - we think the price is worth it."
May 20 Iraq is no longer able to provide survival sustenance for its civilian population. Iraqi government and UN reach agreement on implementing Resolution 986.
Sep 3-4 In Operation Desert Strike, US fires cruise missiles at Iraqi targets
Dec 10 First oil sales start, beginning the Oil-for-Food program. It has since been renewed mostly in six month phases.
1998
Feb 20 Oil-for-Food oil sales cap increased to $5.256 billion per six month phase.
Dec UNSCOM's credibility is undermined by evidence that staff members seconded to the agency by the United States have compromised the independence of the agency and engaged in espionage and covert action to overthrow the Iraq government.
Dec 15 UN weapons inspectors withdraw from Iraq due to impending aerial attacks by the United States and the UK.
Dec 16-19 Operation Desert Fox air campaign by US and UK
1999
Mar 30 Security Council panel report finds that Iraq had ``experienced a shift from relative affluence to massive poverty'' and predicted that ``the humanitarian situation in Iraq will continue to be a dire one in the absence of a sustained revival of the Iraqi economy, which in turn cannot be achieved solely through remedial humanitarian efforts.''
Aug 12 UNICEF estimates that an additional half million children under five who would be alive under normal circumstances had died in Iraq between 1991 and 1998.
Dec 17 Resolution 1284 offers improvements in Oil-for-Food, although less than those recommended by the Security Council panel, and expresses its intention to suspend sanctions with the ``fundamental objective of improving the humanitarian situation'' in Iraq. The oil sales cap is removed and some items are allowed into Iraq with automatic Security Council approval.
2000
Jun 8 Resolution 1302 establishes a team of "independent experts to prepare by November 26, 2000 a comprehensive report and analysis of the humanitarian situation". Iraqi government does not allow the team to enter its territory. Security Council rejects the alternative of a report based on UN agency information and other reliable external sources.
Dec 5 Resolution 1330 further expands lists of humanitarian items. Compensation fund reduced to 25% from 30% of oil revenues with the additional resources targeted to vulnerable groups.
2001
May-Jun UK, French, and Russian draft resolutions propose various new approaches. The UK proposes a Goods Review List of potential dual-use items and land-based border monitoring of Iraq trade. Objections by Russia and by Iraq, as well as differences among Permanent Members blocks Council action.
Jun 6 One month extension of Oil-for-Food under previous conditions.
Jul 4 Lacking agreement with Iraq, five month extension of existing Oil-for- Food.
Nov 29 Oil-for-Food program extended by six months in Resolution 1382. Resolution proposes a Goods Review List to be adopted in May.
2002
Jan 29 US President George W. Bush declares Iraq to be part of an "axis of evil" in his State of the Union message to Congress. Thereafter, reports abound of plans for a large-scale US military attack on Iraq.
Feb 26 OIP Director Benon Sevan warns the Security Council of a "financial crisis" in the humanitarian program due to the dispute over oil pricing.
May 14 Resolution 1409 adopts Goods Review List.
Aug 1 Iraq Foreign Minister Naji Sabri writes to UN Secretary General Kofi Annan suggesting that Iraq may be ready to allow arms inspectors back into Iraq, but scepticism remains that inspections will resume




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


APPENDIX II
“The Future of Sanctions”A Report of The Select Committee on International Development, of the UK House of Commons, 27 January 2000. Excerpt…Comprehensive Economic Sanctions — Iraq (paras 17-42)

There is a clear consensus that the humanitarian and developmental situation in Iraq has deteriorated seriously since the imposition of comprehensive economic sanctions whilst, at the same time, sanctions have clearly failed to hurt those responsible for past violations of international law as Saddam Hussein and his ruling elite continue to enjoy a privileged existence.

Not all this humanitarian distress is the direct result of the sanctions regime. It appears that Saddam Hussein is quite prepared to manipulate the sanctions regime and the exemptions scheme to his own ends, even if that involves hurting ordinary Iraqi people. This does not, however, entirely excuse the international community from a part in the suffering of Iraqis. A sanctions regime which relies on the good faith of Saddam Hussein is fundamentally flawed.

Whatever the wisdom of the original imposition of sanctions, careful thought must now be given as to how to move from the current impasse without giving succour to Saddam Hussein and his friends. Any move away from comprehensive sanctions should go hand in hand with measures designed to target the real culprits, not the poor of Iraq but their leadership. Possibil-ities include a concerted attempt to target and either freeze or sequester the assets of Saddam Hussein and those connected to him, and the indictment of Saddam Hussein and his close associates as war criminals.

We find it difficult to believe that there will be a case in the future where the UN would be justified in imposing comprehensive economic sanctions on a country. In an increasingly interdependent world such sanctions cause significant suffering. However carefully exemptions are planned, the fact is that comprehensive economic sanctions only further concentrate power in the hands of the ruling elite. The UN will lose credibility if it advocates the rights of the poor whilst at the same time causing, if only indirectly, their further impoverishment.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Footnotes
(1) The sanctions, imposed under Resolution 661, barred imports and exports, except medical and humanitarian supplies and they also forbade foreign investments. Foreign assets of Iraq were also largely frozen. Resolution 986 (1995) allowed for exceptions to the sanctions for the export of oil and the import of approved humanitarian supplies, eventually implemented in 1996.
(2) The sanctions, as redefined under Resolution 687, seek to eliminate Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction and delivery systems; they also seek return of prisoners of war and property taken during the Gulf War, they establish the principle of compensation for war damage, they insist that Iraq’s international debts be honored and they demand that Iraq refrain from terrorism.

(3) This issue is discussed further below, in chapter 6, with a number of opinions cited.

(4) The four banned categories are: nuclear weapons, chemical weapons, biological weapons, and missile delivery systems. For an assessment by the Council itself, see the reports of 1999 in S/1999/356. In August 2000, US Undersecretary of State Thomas Pickering told journalists that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein “has not, at least in so far as we can tell, reconstituted his weapons of mass destruction.” (transcript of digital video conference, August 3, 2000, source US Department of State). For a discussion of this issue see chap. 6.4 below.

(5) Security Council Resolution 1284 (1999) added additional criteria to those specified in Resolution 687 (1991) and all criteria remained vague. Many at the UN have spoken of “moving the goalposts,” but the metaphor of precise goalposts is itself misleading, since criteria have never been clear.

(6) See verbatim transcript of the Council meeting of November 19, 1999. Van Walsum said his frustrated delegation was beginning to refer to the Council’s permanent members as the “Hereditary Five.”

(7) For a discussion of the early optimism about sanctions, see Thomas G. Weiss, David Cortright, George A. Lopez and Larry Minear, Political Gain and Civilian Pain (Oxford, 1997).

(8) See especially section 5.2.

(9) A case an be made that Iraq sanctions, first imposed response to armed aggression, should be subject to the Geneva Conventions.

(10) United Nations document A/50/60, Supplement to an Agenda for Peace, January 1995.

(11) After Iraq, the Council imposed two further comprehensive economic sanctions – on the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Resolution 757of May 30, 1992)(suspended November, 1995); and on Haiti (Resolution 917 of May 6, 1994)(lifted September 1994). For well over six years, the Iraq sanctions have been the only sanctions of this type in force. The Council may be moving towards (renewable) time-limited sanctions. Such limits reduce the likelihood of sanctions lasting for a very long period.

(12) Press Release, “Secretary-General Reviews Lessons Learned During ‘Sanctions Decade’ In Remarks To International Peace Academy Seminar,” April 17, 2000, SG/SM/7360.

(13) UN document S/22366, 20/3/91, paragraph 8.

(14) Report to the Secretary-General on humanitarian needs in Kuwait and Iraq in the immediate post-crisis environment by a mission to the area led by Martti Ahtisaari, Under-Secretary-General for Administration and Management, March 20, 1991, paragraph 9, available online. http://www.un.org/Depts/oip/reports/S22366.html

(15) UN document S/22799, July 17, 1991, paragraph 29.

(16) Report to the Secretary-General dated July 15, 1991 on humanitarian needs in Iraq prepared by a mission led by the Executive Delegate of the Secretary- General for humanitarian assistance in Iraq, S/22799, July 17, 1991, available online at http://www.cam.ac.uk/societies/casi/info/undocs/s22799.html .

(17) Ibid.

(18) UN Security Council Resolution 706 specified a ceiling of $1.6 billion worth of oil sales every six months. From that amount, deductions for the Compensation Commission and UN expenses had to be made, equalling about one third. For an analysis of this period, see Ian Johnstone, Aftermath of the Gulf War: An Assessment of UN Action. Occasional Paper of the International Peace Academy (Boulder, 1994).

(19) On this date, a Memorandum of Understanding was signed between the UN Secretariat and the Government of Iraq.

(20) For a detailed discussion of the Oil-for-Food Program and its deficiencies, see Chapter 5 below. Initially, Iraq was severely restricted in its oil sales, but, as we will show below, the program had more fundamental flaws.

(21) WHO, March 1996, The Health conditions of the population in Iraq since the Gulf Crisis: Section 4, Impact on Child malnutrition.

(22) See: UNICEF, “The Status of Children and Women in Iraq: A Situation Report,” September 1995; WFP, News Release: "Time running out for Iraqi children," September 26, 1995; CESR, “Unsanctioned Suffering,” May 1996, available online at http://www.cesr.org/text%20files/sanct.PDF; UNHCR, “Humanitarian situation in Iraq: Sub-Commission decision 1997/119,” UN Document E/CN.4/SUB.2/DEC/1997/119, August 28, 1997; FAO Press Release, “FAO Warns of Danger to Near East if Outbreak of Animal Diseases in Iraq is not Contained - Situation Could Threaten Near East Food Security,” February 10, 1999.

(23) See for example the State Department’s web site on Iraq sanctions and spokesman James Rubin’s comments on the television program “Paying the Price: Killing the Children of Iraq” by John Pilger, first broadcast on ITV in the UK on March 6, 2000.

(24) Graca Michel, Impact of Armed Conflict on Children A/51/306, annex, par 128.

(25) “The Relationship Between Sanctions and Respect for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights,” UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, E/C.12/1997/8.

(26) Ibid.

(27) For details on Oil-for-Food, see Chapter 5 below.

(28) This text, known as a “non-paper,” was never issued as a publication of the Security Council. For the full text see http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/sanction/committee-chairs/1998/1030papr.htm.

(29) See Barton Gellman, “U.S. Spied on Iraq Via U.N.,” Washington Post, March 2, 1999.

(30) Republican members of Congress charged US President Bill Clinton with having launched these attacks to draw attention away from his impeachment hearings. Such charges demonstrate how very political and subjective the Iraq issue had become.

(31) S/1999/92.

(32) Report of the second panel established pursuant to the note by the president of the Security Council S/1999/100 concerning the current humanitarian situation in Iraq, UN document S/1999/356, 15, para 43.

(33) Ibid., para 58.

(34) From a report on a meeting with a delegation from Physicians for Social Responsibility on April 5, 1999, available at www.scn.org/ccpi/UN andUSreports.html.

(35) Mohamed M Ali and Iqbal H Shah, “Sanctions and childhood mortality in Iraq”, The Lancet 2000; 355: 1851–57. See Section 4.3 for a discussion of the debate about sanctions and mortality. The “autonomous region” refers to the North, where a separate and better-funded program was in place.

(36) The Adverse Consequences of Economic Sanctions for the Enjoyment of Human Rights, E/CN.4/Sub.2/2000/33).

(37) The US ambassador, George Moose, made his comment when the report was being considered by a UN body in August 2000. See http://www.us-mission.ch/press2000/0817moose.htm.

(38) “Special Topics on Social Conditions In Iraq, An Overview Submitted By The UN System To The Security Council Panel On Humanitarian Issues,” Baghdad, March 24, 1999.

(39) UN document S/1999/356, Annex II, “Report of the second panel established pursuant to the note by the president of the Security Council of January 30, 1999 (S/1999/100), concerning the current humanitarian situation in Iraq”, March 30, 1999, paragraph 25.

(40) Though the Council lifted the cap, it was clear that Iraq could not produce or sell much more oil, because the ban on investments and the holds on oil equipment contracts left Iraqi oil facilities in bad disrepair.

(41) For another interpretive overview of Iraq sanctions, see David Cortright and George Lopez, Sanctions and the Search for Security, (New York, 2002), ch. 2, “The Iraq Quagmire.”

(42) Select committees are all-party committees, not subject to party discipline. It would appear that the UK government has not commanded a majority in the Commons on this issue for some time and maintains the policy only by imposing party discipline on its recalcitrant backbenchers in regular parliamentary votes.

(43) United Kingdom, House of Commons, Select Committee on International Development, Second Report, Executive Summary, para 17 (For a more extensive quotation from this report, see Appendix II).

(44) Reuters, “Top UN Official Leaves Iraq, says programme failed,” 29 March 2000.

(45) Open Letter to Mr. Peter Hain, The Guardian, January 3, 2001.

(46) Press Release, “Secretary-General Reviews Lessons Learned During ‘Sanctions Decade’ In Remarks To International Peace Academy Seminar,” April 17, 2000, SG/SM/7360 The conference was largely sponsored by the Canadian government.

(47) Speech by Lloyd Axworthy to the UN Security Council, April 17, 2000, text as posted on the Canadian Mission web site at www.un.int/canada/html/s-17apr2000axworthy.htm.

(48) Interview with al-Hayat daily, August 1, 2000, text from the web site of the French embassy in Washington at www.info-france-usa.org/news/statmnts/2000/iraq0108.asp.

(49) See Dilip Hiro, “Outside Powers,” in The Longest War (New York, 1991). Though France, Germany and the Soviet Union were the main arms suppliers, the United States and Britain also quietly provided arms and related military assistance. See Mark Phythian, Arming Iraq: How the U.S. and Britain Secretly Built Saddam’s War Machine (Boston, 1997).

(50) For an account of the war, see especially Hiro, op. cit. and also Efraim Karsh, The Iran-Iraq War (Houndmills, 1987), and Charles Tripp, Iran and Iraq at War (Boulder, 1991). Iraq received a large amount of war financing from the oil rich states of the Gulf and as a result purchased a lot of very expensive military hardware.

(51) For policy in Washington, see for example Samantha Power, “A Problem From Hell “ (New York, 2002), 171-245. Iraqi forces used chemical weapons in battle approximately 195 times between 1983 and 1988, and also against Iraqi Kurdish civilians, including the notorious case of Halabja, but US military and economic support continued. See also Human Rights Watch, Human Rights in Iraq (New Haven, 1990), 113ff.

(52) New York Times, August 16, 1990.

(53) For an account of this war, see John Bulloch and Harvey Morris: Saddam’s War (London, 1991) and Dilip Hiro: From Desert Storm to Desert Shield (New York, 1992).

(54) Peter Sluglett and Marion Farouq Sluglett, “Iraq,” in Joel Krieger (ed.), Oxford Companion to Politics of the World, p. 435.

(55) The bombing campaign dropped over 88,000 tons of explosives through the course of six weeks – more explosives than were dropped by the US in the Vietnam war. This comparison was made by Parker Payson, “Figure it Out” in the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs in 1991, drawing on Pentagon and Department of Defense figures. http://www.washington-report.org/backissues/0491/9104055.htm . See also the Federation of American Scientists information: www.fas.org/man/dod-101/ops/desert_storm.htm .

(56) Transcript of President Bush Press Conference, quoted in Washington Post, February 6, 1991, A21.

(57) Quoted in Barton Gellman, “Allied Air War Struck Broadly in Iraq; Officials Acknowledge Strategy Went Beyond Purely Military Targets,” Washington Post, June 23, 1991. See also Thomas J. Nagy, “The Secret Behind the Sanctions: how the U.S. intentionally destroyed Iraq’s water supply,” The Progressive (September, 2001).

(58) For an excellent discussion of weak and contradictory justifications of the no-fly policy, see Sarah Graham-Brown, Sanctioning Saddam: the politics of intervention in Iraq (London, 1999), 107-121.

(59) George Bush, Voice of the Gulf, February 15, 1991, quoted in CNN special: www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/gulf.war/unfinished/war/index2.htm

(60) Turkish aircraft attacking Kurds in the northern zone operated from the same Incirlik Air Base that the US aircraft operated from in their allegedly protective mission. On several occasions, Turkish ground forces crossed the border to attack Kurds, including a force of 10,000 in December 2000. For a good overview of no-fly, see Sarah Graham-Brown, “No-Fly Zones: rhetoric and real intentions,” MERIP Press Information Note No. 49 (February 20, 2001).

(61) The Federation of American Scientists web site provides considerable information on these and subsequent military operations in Iraq.

(62) The United States has also built up permanent basis in the Gulf region and it has pre-positioned large amount of supplies and military equipment, mostly directed at Iraq. See Greg Jaffe, “Desert Maneuvers: Pentagon boosts U.S. military presence in the Gulf,” Wall Street Journal, June 24, 2002.

(63) William Arkin, “Desert Fox Delivery, Precision Undermined its Purpose,” Washington Post, January 17, 1999.

(64) Enlarged rules of engagement meant that US-UK warplanes operated under fewer restrictions and could “engage” Iraqi planes and targets in a much wider set of circumstances. As journalists reported, pilots understood this to mean that they could taunt Iraqi forces and provoke confrontations.

(65) For a revealing account of US operations in the northern no-fly zone, see Thomas E. Ricks, “Containing Iraq: A Forgotten War,” Washington Post, October 25, 2000. Ricks reports that in 16,000 sorties since the beginning of 1997 [to October, 2000], air force pilots have launched more than 1,000 bombs and missiles aginst 250 targets in northern Iraq. The pilots he quotes are very sceptical about the enterprise. No-fly enforcement also has proved very costly.

(66) “Impact of air strikes on UN operations in Iraq, January 1, 1999 – September 15, 1999”, prepared by the Humanitarian Coordinator for Iraq, Baghdad, September 26, 1999. Von Sponeck acted on the grounds that the air strikes had humanitarian consequences that fell within his mandate. He resigned less than a year later, under enormous pressure from the US and the UK.

(67) United Nations Press Release, SC/6833 http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2000/20000324.sc6833.doc.html .

(68) U.S. Department of State, “Saddam Hussein's Iraq”, September 13, 1999 (updated 3/24/00) http://usinfo.state.gov/regional/nea/iraq/iraq99.htm .

(69) The State Department speaks of “multi-billion” dollar projects but this is not supported by reliable evidence.

(70) Patrick Clawson, “A Look at Sanctioning Iraq: The Numbers Don’t Lie, Saddam Does,” The Washington Post, February 27, 2000.

(71) Associated Press, August 17, 2000.

(72) Robertson first made the charge in a House of Commons debate on January 25, 1999 and repeated it in “Bombing Iraq, Letter,” The Times (London), March 6, 1999.

(73) Report of the Secretary-General Pursuant to Paragraph 6 of Security Council Resolution 1210 (1998), S/1998/187, February 22, 1999, available online at: http://www.un.org/Depts/oip/reports/90day5.htm .

(74) Tun Myat, “Press Briefing by UN Coordinator in Iraq,” October 19, 2000, http://www.un.org/News/briefings/docs/2000/20001019.myatbriefing.doc.html .

(75) Security Council Committee established by resolution 661 (1990), Statement by Benon V. Sevan, Executive Director of the Iraq Programme, At the 221st meeting of the Committee, held on Thursday, July 12, 2001, http://www.un.org/Depts/oip/latest/BVS120701.htm . See also his statement on the number of ‘holds’, criticising: “the very large number of applications placed on hold, in particular those concerning electricity, water and sanitation, transport and telecommunications, which impact all sectors. The same applies also for the very large number of holds placed on applications for spare parts and equipment in the oil sector which is the only source of revenues for the programme.” United Nations Office of the Iraq Programme, Oil-for-Food, Briefing by Benon V. Sevan, Executive Director of the Iraq Programme, on Thursday, April 20, 2000, http://www.un.org/Depts/oip/latest/benonsc20apr00.htm .

(76) Sevan raises this point in a number of his briefings.

(77) John Maynard Keynes’ famous book The Economic Consequences of the Peace (London, 1919), written immediately after participating in the conference at Versailles, provides a cautionary tale.

(78) The information in this paragraph draws heavily from Raad Alkadiri, “The Iraqi Klondike: oil and regional trade,” Middle East Report, No. 220 (Fall, 2001), 30-33.

(79) Current estimates of smuggling range from $1.5 to $3 billion per year. The government of Iraq would participate in only part of the smuggling. Though far less than the Oil-for-Food program, it is a lucrative market.

(80) Conversation with the authors, June 5, 2002.

(81) Ibid.

(82) See, for example, Daniel Yergin, The Prize: the epic quest for oil, money and power (New York, 1991).

(83) In order of size these firms are: Exxon Mobil, Royal Dutch-Shell, British Petroleum-Amoco, Chevron-Texaco, and Total Fina Elf. Royal Dutch Shell is often described as a British-Dutch company, while Total Fina Elf is sometimes described as a French-Italian company.

(84) Major shareholders in IPC were: Shell, BP, Esso (later Exxon), Mobil, and CFP, the French national company.

(85) For an account of this period, see Joe Stork, Middle East Oil and the Energy Crisis(New York, 1975), 188-194. Since 1918, France had considered Iraq to be its main source of international oil reserves and its main means to gain parity with the Anglo-American companies (see Yergin, op. cit., 188-191).

(86) See Michael Tanzer, “Oil and Military Power in the Middle East and the Crimean Sea Region, The Black World Today (web site), two parts, February 28 and Mar 6, 2002.

(87) From US Department of Energy, International Energy Outlook, Table 13.

(88) Text as posted at www.chevrontexaco.com/news/archive/chevron_speech/1998/98-11-05.asp At the time, Condoleeza Rice, currently US National Security Advisor, was a board member of Chevron and one of the company’s supertankers was named after her. Though it is tempting to insist on the many oil and energy industry connections of the Bush administration, including the President and Vice President Cheney, oil issues have consistently had a heavy influence on US foreign policy, regardless of party or personalities.

(89) Testimony to the Senate Armed Services Committee, April 13, 1999.

(90) See Michael T. Klare, Resource Wars: the new landscape of global conflict (New York, 2001), esp. ch. 3, “Oil Conflict in the Persian Gulf.”

(91) “Informal consultations of the Security Council held on Monday, November 26, 2001, Introductory Statement by Benon V. Sevan, Executive Director of the Office of the Iraq Programme.

(92) UN report S/2000/1132, page 2 point 5.

(93) The Center-South per capita percentage rose to 69% with Resolution 1330 of December 5, 2000, which reduced the deduction for the Compensation Fund from 30% to 25%.

(94) These and subsequent data on sanctions trade are from the Office of the Iraq Programme web site (www.un.org/Depts/oip). See “Weekly Update,” 13-19 July, 2002.

(95) OIP site.

(96) See Paul Conlon, United Nations Sanctions Management: A Case Study of the Iraq Sanctions Committee, 1990-1994 Procedural Aspects of International Law Monograph Series, Vol. 24 (Ardsley, NY, 1995).

(97) See Office of the Iraq Programme, weekly update, www.un.org/Depts/oip/latest/wu020521.

(98) Office of the Iraq Programme, Oil-for-Food, December 18, 2001, Weekly Update, December 8-14, 2001, http://www.un.org/Depts/oip/background/latest/wu011218.html .

(99) Ibid.

(100) Briefing by Benon V. Sevan to the Security Council, July 22, 1999.

(101) Oil spares gained Council approval only on June 19, 1998 with Resolution 1175 that allowed $300 million in spares imports per six-month phase. The Council doubled this sum to $600 million with Resolution 1293 of March 31, 2000. But US holds continued to block most important oilfield imports.

(102) The UN and many independent experts have pointed out that the Iraqi oil industry is very seriously dilapidated and that production under such unfavourable condition depressurizes the reservoirs and may make future production impossible in these fields. See, for example, Middle East Institute [Washington, DC], “Iraqi Oil After Sanctions,” February 29, 2000 http://www.mideasti.org/html/020900b.html .

(103) Ibid.

(104) Briefing by Benon V. Sevan to the Security Council, February 26, 2002.

(105) Secretary General's report to the Security Council, S/2001/505, para 67.

(106) See several sectoral briefings of UN agencies working in Iraq to the Security Council, in the fall of 2001.

(107) The GRL circulated to delegations at the time of the adoption of Resolution 1409 was 302 pages in length, but the GRL that we have accessed on the OIP web site and dated May 16, 2002 is 486 pages in length. Since each page lists many categories of items, tens or even hundreds of thousands of items could be covered by the list.

(108) As of December 31, 2001, data from OIP.

(109) Statement by Benon V. Sevan, Executive Director of the Office of the Iraq Programme to the 661 Committee of the Security Council, April 20, 2000.

(110) “Weekly Update,” 20-26 July,l 2002, Office of the Iraq Programme.

(111) The Commission posts extensive information about its work at www.uncc.ch.

(112) No current estimates for the reconstruction needs of Iraq are available. The report on the state of the oil industry calls for $1.3 billion annual operating expenditure only, not counting capital expenditure. Other damaged sectors in Iraq are equally capital-intensive. See http://www.un.org/Depts/oip/reports/oilexpertsreport.pdf (p.35).

(113) See Alain Gresh “L’Iraq paiera: enquête sure une commission occulte,” Le Monde Diplomatique, October, 2000, pp. 1, 16-77.

(114) House of Commons, Hansard, March 24, 2000, column 1291. Hain made this false point on a number of other occasions, including a speech to the Royal Institute of International Affairs on November 7, 2000.

(115) Alastair Kirk and Gary Sawdon, “Understanding Kurdish Livelihoods in Northern Iraq: Final Report,” Save the Children (London, 2002). The study was based on a household economy study carried out by Save the Children during 2001.

(116) FAO ibid, p. 17.

(117) FAO ibid, page 10.

(118) “Urgent Need for Health and Immunisation Interventions”, UNICEF Humanitarian Action, Iraq, Donor Update, July 11, 2001, http://www.unicef.org/emerg/Iraq11Jul01.PDF .

(119) UNICEF and Ministry of Health of Iraq, Child and Maternal Mortality Survey 1999 Preliminary Report (July, 1999) and UNICEF, Questions and Answers (August 16, 1999).

(120) Richard Garfield, “Morbidity and Mortality among Iraqi Children from 1990 to 1998, Assessing the Impact of Economic Sanctions.” Occasional Paper of the Joan B. Kroc Institute of International Peace Studies, University of Notre Dame (1999).

(121) Communication with the authors, April 8, 2002.

(122) FAO report, op. cit.

(123) CBS Television, May 12, 1996. With thanks to Eric Herring and his outstanding paper “Between Iraq and a Hard Place, Review of International Studies (January, 2002), vol. 28, no. 1

(124) Robert A. Pape, “Why Economic Sanctions Do Not Work,” International Security, Vol. 22, No. 2 (Fall, 1997).

(125) The Interlaken Process focused on financial sanctions while the Bonn-Berlin Process focused on arms embargoes, while the Stockholm Process seeks an integrative approach.

(126) US Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Hearing, “The Fiscal Year 2002 Foreign Operations Budget,” March 8, 2001.

(127) See “Cosmetic Surgery,” The Economist, May 16, 2002; “US unfreezes Russian contracts in oil for food program with Iraq,” Alexander’s Gas & Oil Connections, News & Trends: Middle East, April 4, 2002.

(128) According to the Washington Post (July 6, 2001), the US had lifted blocks on $80 million of Chinese contracts in June 2001, at an earlier stage of the negotiations.

(129) The GRL negotiations took place only between the US and Russia, with even the UK reportedly excluded. The United States apparently rejected a special deal of lifted holds for France and China.

(130) Security Council Humanitarian Panel Report, March 1999 http://www.un.org/Depts/oip/panelrep.html .

(131) These proposals set out model Security Council resolutions, recommend a UN sanctions unit, etc. The entire exercise has aimed at targeting leaders, their personal finances, travel and arms supplies. The reports are posted on the web.

(132) New York Times, May 15, 2002. The Economist, “Cosmetic Surgery” May 16, 2002.

(133) UN Oil Overseers Report, March 14, 2002 notes the premium level. Estimates of the kickback have appeared in the Financial Times (June 7), Middle East Economic Survey (July 1 and 8), and Reuters (July 16).

(134) UN Oil Overseers Report, March 14, 2002. For some comment on the pricing issue see David Cortright, Alistair Millar and George A. Lopez, Sanctions, Inspections and Containment (Goshen, Indiana, 2002)

(135) Statement by Benon V. Sevan, Executive Director of the Iraq Programme at the Informal Consultations of the Security Council, February 26, 2002 (as posted on the OIP web site).

(136) “Weekly Update,” 20-26 July, 2002, Office of the Iraq Programme web site.

(137) Not surprisingly, the Russians took the most vocal position. See, for instance, “In Connection with problems in implementing UN humanitarian program for Iraq,” Press release of the Government of the Russian Federation, June 17, 2002. Many other, more disinterested delegations, opposed firmly but quietly the US-UK stance.

(138) The New York Times quoted a US National Security spokesman as dating the regime-change policy to the mid-1990s: “Our policy remains the same. It has been the same since 1995 and that is ‘regime change’.” (August 3, 2002). But evidence suggests that regime-change has been official policy since 1991.

(139) State of the Union Address, January 29, 2002.

(140) Scott Ritter, a member of the UN disarmament team in Iraq, has argued that while every single item was not accounted for by the UNSCOM monitors, Iraq was found to be “qualitatively” disarmed, that is, “the elimination of a meaningful, viable capability to produce or employ” nuclear or chemical-biological weapons. See “Redefining Iraq’s Obligation: The Case for Qualitative Disarmament of Iraq,” Arms Control Today (June, 2000).

(141) Unclassified Report to Congress on the Acquisition of Technology Relating to Weapons of Mass Destruction and Advanced Conventional Munitions, January 1 through June 30 2001.

(142) On July 5, the New York Times reported that European governments believe that the evidence for Iraq’s possession of mass destruction weapons remains “murky” (European intelligence sources have in fact been saying that no clear evidence for such programs currently exists.) A month later the Times concluded from Congressional hearings that “the United States simply does not know” how advanced Iraq’s weapons programs may be.” (August 3, 2002).

(143) Recent attacks on the arms control record of UNMOVIC head Hans Blix (as first reported in the Washington Post) suggests that Paul Wolfowitz and others in the Bush administration fear UN inspections that would determine Iraq to be free of weapons of mass destruction.

(144) ‘The Purposes of the United Nations are (...) to achieve international cooperation in (...) promoting and encouraging respect for human rights (...)’ (article 1(3)). ‘The United Nations shall promote universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and fundamental freedoms for all ...’ (Article 55(c)).

(145) See Mohammed Bedjaoui, The New World Order and the Security Council (Dordrecht, 1994) for an extensive review of the arguments from a legal scholar who believes that the Council is not above the law and even that its decisions should be reviewable by the World Court. A well-known World Court opinion by Justice Lauterpacht (1993 L.C.J. 325, p. 440) argues that the Council’s work is obviously subject to the limits imposed by international humanitarian law.

(146) IASC Statement S/1998/147; Eric Hoskins, The Impact of Sanctions: a study of UNICEF’s perspective (New York, 1998); Bossyut Report: The Adverse Consequences of Economic Sanctions on the Enjoyment of Human Rights, E/CN.4/Sub.2/2000/33.

(147) Background Paper prepared by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights for the meeting of the Executive Committee on Humanitarian Affairs, September 5, 2000.

(148) For the GIIS event, see Vera Gowlland-Debbas, United Nations Sanctions and International Law (The Hague, 2001).

(149) Every major human rights treaty derives from and grounds itself in the principles of the United Nations, as made explicit in its Preamble or Statement of Principles.

(150) Report of the Secretary General, September 4, 1991, S/23006, 15.

(151) Open letter to Mr. Peter Hain, published in the Guardian, January 3, 2001.

(152) See paragraph 18 of Resolution 1302 (8 June 2000).

(153) For Liberia: UN Document S/2001/939. For Afghanistan: UN Document S/2001/1215.

(154) UN Human Rights Committee, General Comment 6/16 (July 27, 1982).

(155) Articles 6 and 24, ‘States Parties recognize the right of the child to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health (...)’ and they ‘shall pursue full implementation of this right and, in particular, shall take appropriate measures (...) to diminish infant and child mortality’ (Ibid.)

(156) Additional Protocol to the Geneva Convention of August 12, 1949, Relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol 1) of June 8, 1977, article 51 (5) (b).

(157) Article 51 (5)(b), Protocol 1, Additional to the Geneva Convention, June 8, 1977.

(158) See e.g. Boutros Boutros-Ghali in Supplement To An Agenda For Peace: ibid, para 70.

(159) For a much more extensive argument, see Thérèse O’Donnell, Iraq and the Proportionality of UN Sanctions After Ten Years A report compiled for Save the Children (London, 2000) (unpublished).

(160) Ibid.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We publish this report on the twelfth anniversary of the date on which the Security Council first imposed comprehensive economic sanctions on Iraq

Principal contributors to this report are: Richard Morran, Roger Normand, James Paul, John Rempel and Christoph Wilcke.

With thanks for extensive and helpful comments from: Gerard McHugh, Colin Rowat, Hans von Sponeck and Joe Stork.

Note: Though this report has been produced in association with Save the Children UK, the views and recommendations expressed do not necessarily reflect the position of Save the Children UK



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


More Information on Sanctions Against Iraq
More Information on the Iraq Crisis

Result number: 60

Message Number 129045

Article from our paper this morning View Thread
Posted by wendyn on 9/07/03 at 17:59

Special for BG and Ed.

A non-American perspective. Just to balance things out a bit. And to prove that I too, can copy and paste.






September 7, 2003

Lessons from Sept. 11

"Cost of Empire": the high price of U.S. policies

By ERIC MARGOLIS -- Contributing Foreign Editor
Two years after the Sept. 11 suicide attacks on the United States, this earthshaking event remains clouded by mystery and misunderstanding.

Was al-Qaida behind the operation? Most likely, but not for certain. Secretary of State Colin Powell promised a white paper proving al-Qaida's guilt. It never came.

A tape that surfaced in late 2001 purporting to show Osama bin Laden gleefully chortling over the attacks, was seen by many in the Arab and Muslim world as a crude fake.

The 9/11 attacks were planned in Germany and Spain, not Afghanistan, by young men, mostly Saudis, who were educated and westernized.

Afghanistan's Taliban regime, until four months before 9/11 a recipient of U.S. aid, had nothing to do with the attacks, but did provide a base for al-Qaida, which numbered only 300 members. Most of the "terrorists" in Afghanistan cited by the U.S. were actually independence fighters from neighbouring Central Asia. Taliban refused to hand bin Laden, a national hero of the 1980s anti-Soviet war, to the U.S. without proof of his guilt in 9/11, which the U.S. declined to provide.

This allowed far right neo-conservatives to seize control of U.S. national security policy. They immediately launched the invasion of Afghanistan and began preparing war against Iraq. There's now evidence both invasions, intended to seize major oil regions, were being planned long before 9/11.

President George Bush was widely regarded pre-9/11 as a hapless, rather comical figure enmeshed in the Enron scandal. The savage assaults transformed him into a saviour on a white horse, bathed in praise by the fawning U.S. media.

The Bush administration created a firestorm of jingoism, war fever, and national hysteria that quickly obscured its failure to protect the nation from an attack that Mideast observers, including this column, had predicted was coming.

Disparate bands of extremists

Bush declared a war on terrorism and dispatched U.S. armed forces to attack Muslim mischief-makers around the globe. This, however, was not a real war, but rather a police action against disparate bands of violent anti-American extremists determined to drive U.S. political and economic influence from their lands, and aid the struggle in Palestine.

Declaring "war on terrorism" made no more sense than declaring war on evil.

Few Americans understand their nation became a modern imperial power after World War II, or that it had recreated in the Mideast a modern version of the British Empire - the American Raj. Most were simply unaware, or uncaring, that their governments had been overthrowing regimes, assassinating foreign leaders, promoting dictatorships and waging undeclared wars on foreign nations since the late 1940s.

Fewer understood the U.S. was de facto ruler of Morocco, Tunisia, Egypt, Jordan, the Gulf states, and overlord of Saudi Arabia and Turkey. Washington kept highly repressive feudal or military dictatorships in power in all these nations that advanced Washington's strategic interests and brutally crushed all opponents. Most Americans were unaware that Israel was fighting Palestinians with U.S.-supplied arms, financed by U.S. taxpayers, or that in the eyes of most Mideasterners, and all extremists, Israel and the United States had become indistinguishable.

Osama bin Laden kept tirelessly repeating this theme, calling for revolution against the American Mideast Raj and its Arab vassal rulers. That, far more than truck bombs, was bin Laden's real threat to U.S. interests. Interestingly, bin Laden recently predicted he will shortly die a martyr.

The ghastly 9/11 attacks were what Imperial Britain called the "cost of empire." Angry, fanatical natives would strike back, using any means to punish the high-tech empire seeking to rule them.

Britain had Maxim guns; America, terrifying B-52s.

Bush's knee-jerk military response to essentially political problems, an historic blunder, has left the U.S. mired in deepening guerrilla wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, costing over $7 billion US monthly and growing numbers of American casualties.

Heavy bombing of Afghanistan prior to 9/11, what ever-wrongheaded neo-cons say should have been done, would not have prevented 9/11. Having alert security guards at Boston airport would have. The attacks of 9/11 might have been averted by proper coordination between FBI and CIA, and if Bush's astoundingly inept national security staff had done its job.

Instead, Attorney General John Ashcroft, today the self-appointed scourge of Muslim malefactors, actually cut anti-terrorism spending just before 9/11.

Nothing can excuse the sickening barbarity of the 9/11 attacks. But nothing should excuse America's pre-attack delusions of Olympian immunity from the ills of the outside world, some caused by U.S. policies.

Nor America's casual indifference to the death of 500,000 Iraqi children caused by a cruel U.S.-imposed embargo. Nor the bulldozing of Palestinian shanty towns, without realizing that at some point enraged recipients of U.S. geo-strategic discipline would bite back. Nor the risk of aircraft attacks.

This writer was aboard a hijacked Lufthansa A310 in 1993 when the air pirate warned the FBI he would crash the jumbo jet into New York's Wall Street.

All the flag-waving and heart-rending survivor interviews that will mark this week's 9/11 anniversary should not - but, of course, will - obscure the painful truth: the faux-macho Bush administration was asleep while on guard; it refuses to accept responsibility for its dereliction of duty; and continues to mislead Americans about the real causes of 9/11.

Result number: 61

Message Number 127878

Re: moderation? View Thread
Posted by Dorothy on 8/25/03 at 00:55

I don't understand that hatred either. All of these hatreds are irrational. They are insane. All of this violence is insane.

I think there should be a much heavier leaning on surrounding countries - Jordan and Saudi Arabia and Egypt, most particularly - to make a home for the Israeli Arabs, the "Palestinians", and that international aid should increase to settle them and that international aid should cease if they all continue to foment violence and obstruct resettlement.

I read a recent issue of the Christian Science Monitor with an excellent article on the building of the wall/fence in Israel. In the article, there was reference to Jordan's objecting to the efforts to form a new government in Iraq in the form of the Council that was put together by the U.S. essentially. Jordan's king said that Jordan wants to see free and open elections for representative government in Iraq. I repeat: Jordan's KING said he can't support the new Council because he wants to see free elections in Iraq!The KING said that. Not an ELECTED king, you know. And, by the way, the American born Queen Noor, widow of King Hussein of Jordan and mother to this current King, she being of either Lebanese or Palestinian parentage? while in the U.S. touring to sell her book made repeated statements that sounded pretty anti-Israel and anti-Jewish. So is Jordan simply trying to survive or is Jordan doing something more insidious.

There is no pure answer to any of this because it has gotten so muddled and messed over the years, so the international 'forces' either exert force by resettlement and rehabilitation or we will all continue to see these periodic waves of violence.

In the meantime, our own country has daily waves of violence - 44 people murdered every single day in the U.S. - and every element of our society needs a lot of improvement. I want that persistent violence to end for the sake of the people who live in that part of the world, but also for our own country. We need to bring our attention and efforts to the very, very, very serious problems in this country as well. I mean no disrespect to ANYONE but an almost 230 year old democracy is a kind of holy land itself and needs to be revered and protected and preserved.

Result number: 62

Message Number 127621

A Lecture from Dorothy Before Sleep - to Kristie View Thread
Posted by Dorothy on 8/22/03 at 02:43

Kristi ~ Dr. Davis’ advice is sound advice. One of the biggest contributors to depression is a feeling of helplessness but taking action is one of the best ways to fight depression. His advice to you to read – (or read again) – the heelspurs book is a good place to start.
In addition to the people here who are speaking to you out of loving kindness and personal experience, I would also urge you to get your hands on books and any other material you can that will tell you the stories of other people who have faced terrible things in their lives that, while they were in the middle of them, looked and felt like they could never go on. Maybe they overcame them or maybe they didn't overcome them but they learned how to live in new ways. Have you read Lance Armstrong's book? It is not fiction - it is true and it was painful and it was dire and not only did it seem like an absolute sure thing that he would never do the things that he loves and lives for, riding his bike, having children, but it looked like a certainty that he would not be alive. He is very much alive! Have you ever read about Helen Keller? How about that young man recently who was hiking out west and had a gigantic boulder fall on him. He was in the wilderness, all alone, with a gigantic boulder on him. He could have said, "Well, that's it. This hurts a lot. I give up." But he didn't. He freed his arm in the most unbelievable way, but even then, he couldn't say, "Ok, well, I've done all I can do. That's it." No, he then had to hike and rappel and struggle and fight to get out. He lost an arm and he has pain, but he's still living on and smiling and keeping on - he's alive. Someone very dear to me has had terrible seizures all of her adult life, and you know what, she also recently learned that she has cancer, too. She’s facing all of it, face forward, chin up. She gets down sometimes; of course, she does, but she keeps on going with whatever the new day brings, and she's had plenty of new days where the surprises weren't very pleasant. She doesn’t assume that somehow she got a waiver from having anything bad happen to her. Or that, because she has had a helluva time of life with epilepsy, she would never have another bad thing happen to her. No, she’s had a whole lot of bad things happen to her – and she keeps on plugging away. Being a human being includes having bad things happen and includes having pain - sometimes it is occasional, intermittent pain; sometimes it is temporary such as with childbirth; sometimes it is always present. It is part of being a human being. Are you familiar with the boy who writes poetry and essays (I am blocking on his name at the moment, and I regret that very much; when it comes to me, I will print it here – I think it is Manny Stepanovich, but I may be wrong – I’ll look it up later – Ok, I looked it up: Manny Stepanek) but his entire life has been full of pain and trauma - yet he lives in the fullest and most joyful way that a person can - even with the pain. His mother also lives with pain, physical and emotional, because she has the same disease that her boy has and she has already lost several children to the disease and she will lose this boy, as well. They keep living fully and keep trying to help others in pain. Another person dear to me developed rheumatoid arthritis as a relatively young woman. The very name of her daily existence was excruciating pain. Her body was twisted and distorted and she lived in physical agony, for years, over her ENTIRE body - but that was not her attitude. She was so very brave. We don't come into life with guarantees that we will be exempt from pain or from disability or from physical changes. When you think about it, it is pretty arrogant to assume that others may suffer horribly, but we should somehow be exempt from any suffering. I can't even IMAGINE living as Helen Keller did, but she didn't ever give up. And you know, it is entirely possible that not only could she not see, not hear, and not be able to speak - but she may have had very painful feet in her life, or back pain, or migraines, too. There are no pain quotas and there are no guarantees. These are the times that you get to find your courage and your strength - Life's easy, when it's easy. I don't know where these people get that kind of 'guts', but I love it and I want it myself because I admire it so profoundly. Read the stories of the people on this message board and know that what they are telling you is the truth and that they are giving you an important piece of themselves by reaching out to you and telling you they understand and telling you what they have been through and that it gets better or they are still working on it getting better. Read Dr. Ed's so sensible words about treatment and Sharon's and Aly's and John's and Brian's and Judy's and others really remarkable words - they know what they're talking about. I can't add one single thing of importance to what they have already said except to say that you can learn from others and you can really learn about yourself when things are hard and painful. There is nothing unique about being a human being in pain. What is unique is how you face it. Think about this Buddhist statement: Give thanks. In all circumstances, give thanks.
I have often been fascinated and curious about men in battle. It is hard for me to imagine the kind of grit, courage, spirit that it must take to keep going - when someone is shooting at you day and night, when there are no "breaks", no vacations from it, it is relentless and there is no end in sight to it, day after day - and it might be easier and tempting to just give in, give up - yet men keep going and keep trying and they were hurting and exhausted and filthy and hot or cold and missing their families but they kept going - they do what needs to be done. Think about John McCain, a POW for YEARS, with no reason to think that his captivity would ever end.Do you know his story? Think about people who survived concentration camps in WWII - what more "rational" time to just give up. They didn't. I love to read stories about people in these situations because I want to know what that "thing" is, where it comes from, why some people have it and others don't - can we learn to have it.... things like that.
Here’s a more trivial example, but I always thought about it when it happened: you knew who was a champion and who was not when you would be watching a basketball game and it was down to the last few seconds and it looked like all was lost for your team – it was the champion who kept on driving and shooting until the buzzer. Not governed by a defeated attitude, but only by the buzzer. It was always evident in Michael Jordan because he always played full-tilt until the buzzer, even when it looked like the game was lost. He won a lot of games in the last seconds. It’s all in the attitude. Find your attitude of drive and effort and will. If you are paying attention to your darkest thoughts, don't. Pay attention to people who have also had dark thoughts, but they looked for courage and 'grit' in themselves and outside of themselves and turned away from dark thoughts. Marie told a story here recently about a student who thought about joining the Marines, encountered a negative attitude in a school counselor and had second thoughts about herself - Marie's advice was that she needed to toughen up if she was going to be a Marine – did you read that story? Well, you need to toughen up to be a human being because whoever led you to believe that there would be no pain and no hard times was lying to you, but, my dear, you have it in you to deal with what comes your way. You can’t know what you’re made of when everything is easy and painless; it’s only when living gets so dang hard that you have the opportunity to become a champion. You don’t have to stay down. You are discouraged and that is understandable because you have tried a number of avenues for getting better, but you haven’t hit on the one or two or combination that work for you - yet. Read the book here, read what the experienced voices tell you, calm yourself – and then think about what you can do today to help yourself. Maybe start with the yoga stretches that so many people use on this site – right now while you are sitting there. I know everybody is different in the way they deal with things and we all know that what works for one may not work for another - but here is something I learned when I was having severe back pain and problems. At some point, rather than being angry and fighting the pain, I began to think of my back as I might think of a friend in great pain and I would think of my back that way and even have (silent) conversations with it that were kind and gentle. Like the feet, my back has been a faithful friend all my life, doing yeoman work without notice and suddenly it was in great distress - it was one of several turning points in attitude for me. I stopped fighting what was hurting and tried to think of it differently. It might be useful for feet that are hurting. It's not something that is being "done TO you" - they are your faithful, hard-working friends and they're having a bit of trouble right now.
Maybe think of them with love as you would a loved one who was suddenly very sick. One last thing – I have no idea where you are with regard to any kind of faith, but many people find great help and comfort and strength in prayer. Best wishes to you ~

Result number: 63

Message Number 127519

Re: Description of what happens when a homicide bomber pushes the button View Thread
Posted by Ed Davis, DPM on 8/21/03 at 11:52

Peter:

While your point is well taken it does not lead to a long term solution to the problem. England, France, the UN, Saudi Arabia and all those who have perpetuated the conflict need to pay the bill for a major population relocation so that those Arabs who do not wish to be part of Israel move to decent accomodations in Jordan (which is the British mandate of Palestine) and to provide Israel with secure and defensible borders. The Euro-weenies need to stop funding Arab schools that are little more than terrorist training grounds and breeding grounds of hatred. They need to demand accountability for what is being taught with the funds they contribute.

Israel needs real borders that it can defend against attack. Jerusalem was only a third tier "holy" city to Islam but only became an issue in recent decades as leverage against Israel. Israel once allowed to exist in peace, once good intentions have been demonstrated by the Arabs, once they are no longer acting in a bellicose fashion would be allowed access by Israel to all holy sites in the same manner that Christians have access to Bethlehem and other sites. Obviously, such access is in Israel's best interest politically as well as economically because such access brings toruist revenue to the country.
Ed

Result number: 64

Message Number 127504

Re: How many "Palestinian" states are needed? View Thread
Posted by Dorothy on 8/21/03 at 00:26

It has always amazed me that in the international discussions, only Israel is expected to give up land to the Palestinians. Why not Jordan,Egypt,Lebanon, Syria, Saudi Arabia, etc etc.? The way that the British 'created' Israel, and in response to terrorism really, has contributed greatly to the ongoing conflicts there. Generations carry the sting of injustice forward. Maybe the entire region needs to be placed in the hands of an international redistricting committee and the whole region gets remapped, similar to what the British did in 1947 in Israel. Israel is experiencing increasingly serious social problems, beyond the "usual" ones they have of war and terrorism. Then there is the question of water...
Frankly, I think that Germany has gotten off much too easily for all the hell that has been wrought as the result of her aggression and destruction for much of the twentieth century. The world still reels on a daily basis today as a result of Germany's warring. It is unconscienable that Germany has prospered and flourished while her many victims - nations and individuals - continue to suffer. I think that Germany should have an ongoing, and huge, requirement to fund Israel, for example. Israel should have no national expenses because all are paid by Germany, in perpetuity. Germany and Japan owe the world, but it is the U.S. that pays the bills, literally and metaphorically. It has always been galling to read of the lovely social benefits that Germans have enjoyed (until just very recently with a deteriorating economy) while U.S. veterans, including WWI and WWII veterans over the years, have had to struggle and grovel for decent benefits from our government.

Result number: 65

Message Number 127496

How many "Palestinian" states are needed? View Thread
Posted by Ed Davis, DPM on 8/20/03 at 21:14

marie:
Palestinian "statehood" is unlikely to solve the problem in the area. The area now discussed for Palestinian autonomy, the West Bank was part of Jordan until 1967. Two thirds of Jordan is comprised of Palestinian Arabs and Jordan is essentially a Palestinian state. The Gaza Strip was part of Egypt until 1967 and Yasser Arafat is an Egyptian. The trading of land for peace is a dubious concept at best.
Ed

Result number: 66

Message Number 127490

Re: Description of what happens when a homicide bomber pushes the button View Thread
Posted by marie on 8/20/03 at 20:43

Do we send aid, other than military, to Saudi Arabia? Jordan? Egypt? I am asking because I don't know what aid we send were in the Arab countries and what it is designated for.

Result number: 67

Message Number 120180

Email View Thread
Posted by D.Thomas on 5/28/03 at 14:47

Once again, I feel like I have written a voluminous book. However, if you are willing to read these emails, I am more than willing to share the stories with whoever will listen (read). It seems impossible to capture everyone’s story but so many are amazing. I haven’t even started with the Arab kickboxer who left Iraq to work and practice his sport in Sudan but came home to Iraq when he saw his family’s house on T.V. He won a middle east tournament and plans on competing internationally. There was also the Jordanian teenager who supposedly came to Iraq to donate his kidney to his cousin. After some probing I found that his other three friends who came to Iraq had already “donated” their kidneys already and had large scars to prove it -- I suspected they were selling organs for the cash. No doubt, I will have so many stories to tell when I get home and finally decompress.

Despite the fact that I feel like I am “doing some good in the world”, it is very difficult not to feel homesick. I am fortunate to have so many friends and loved ones who have kept my spirits up with emails or snail mail. Thank You! I have been trying to respond to all of the emails I receive and occasionally I get around to returning snail mail. If I haven’t gotten back to you yet, please do not feel unappreciated. Every letter is precious to me. By the way, if you send a letter, you only need to cover postage from your mailbox to New York. Military mail is free from there so don’t worry about covering airmail or extra postage for overseas delivery. I am currently receiving letters that were sent 9-12 days ago. It isn’t swift, but I am at least receiving mail. I will be sending some photos in future emails.

I had some doubts about this war when I first left. Despite all the rhetoric and accusations about “war for oil” or “the threat of weapons of mass destruction”, I know in my heart that in this case the ends have justified the means. I have seen the gratitude in the faces of the people this war has most affected. I have always said, “Please support the troops even if you don’t support the war”. It is a lot easier to be involved in this war now that I have seen firsthand the good that has come from it.

It will take a while for the Iraqis to trust us given they have lived for 30 years in fear. However, I am proud of the great strides in international relations that our soldiers and DOD civilians are making one person at a time. As we enter the Memorial Day weekend, please remember that it is about more than the Indianapolis 500 and backyard barbeques. I hope everyone remembers a soldier, whether alive or dead, and the sacrifices they were willing to make for not just our country but others around the world. While Iraq is much calmer now, threats still exist. The depleted Ba’ath party still struggles to regain power and terrorist operatives continue to threaten U.S. interest and bases across the region. Even from the perimeter of Camp Bucca, I could hear automatic gunfire in the distance as I prepared for my convoy back. Just a reminder that the war is not over even if the media coverage is.

I have already promised too many people that I will be safe and come back alive so do not worry about me. I work and sleep as often as possible hoping the days will go by quicker. Even though I have only been gone for a couple of months it already feels like 6 months. I find laughter wherever and whenever I can and just try to count down the days. I have heard rumors that there will be a USO tour coming soon. I will let you know if I meet anyone famous. Please keep me in your thoughts and prayers, as you will be in mine. Enjoy your holiday weekend… I wish I could be there.

XXX X. XXXX
CPT, JA, U.S. Army

Teaching Democracy

The tribunals were just as fascinating as the screenings. A few of the detainees came to Iraq to protest the war and provide humanitarian aid. Having watched the news on Syrian television, they were convinced that the Americans were killing innocent women and children. They expected to find bodies littering the streets and they were told that we were ripping the arms and legs off from babies. When they arrived in Baghdad they found the streets were clear and the American soldiers were passing out milk and candy to the children. The buildings were still standing and the American bombs did not level the Mosques and schools like they had been told. Amazed and miffed, they boarded a bus back to Syria knowing their media had deceived them. They were stopped at a Kurdish checkpoint near the Syrian board and detained because of their foreign nationality even though they had no weapons.

I also saw a sixteen-year-old boy who trembled when he first appeared before the tribunal. I had seen him over the past two days in the holding tent and had used him in one of my democracy demonstrations. I had also given him some rice from my MRE (I certainly wasn’t going to eat it!). I reminded him that he had seen me before and he knew I would treat him fairly, he just needed to answer my questions. Once he calmed down, he explained that he ran from his uncle when they came to Iraq to “smuggle” sheep from Syria. I asked what he meant be “smuggle” and he explained that they could buy sheep cheaper in Iraq and sell them from their farm in Syria for more money but because of the embargo, goods (including sheep) were not allowed to be transported across the boarder. He said that he ran from his family because his father is too strict. He would receive beatings for smoking cigarettes, for dropping out of school or not working on the family’s farm (Apparently Syrian teenagers are like American teenagers). Point blank, I asked him if cigarettes were more important to him than his family. He started to cry and told us how much his missed his family. After the tribunal, I asked him about his expectations for his own future son. Since he expected his own son to go to school, stay healthy and work for a living, I showed him that he and his father were the same. When I asked, “why do you want to make your father’s job so difficult?” he responded, “I don’t know… I hate myself”. I then knew that I needed to build back his self-esteem. I told him that this experience was Allah’s way of teaching him a lesson that he needed to learn and that he should not hate himself because Allah thought enough of him to help him learn this valuable lesson. He seemed relieved. The message to a Christian child would have been the same except I would have used Jesus instead of Allah-- we are really the same!

Not all of the people we see are worthy of a Hallmark documentary. We still catch some men in unbelievable stories that cannot explain why they came to Iraq in a time of war unless they were planning on joining the fight against the coalition. Those people are held for further Military Intelligence or CID interviews. Still, the majorities are released to the “happy bus” where they will be reunited with their families. I showed one guy who was coming up on his first wedding anniversary a picture of Wendy that I carry around. I told him that I was just married in October and I couldn’t wait to get home to her either. Jokingly, he waved his hands and said, “just go”. Unfortunately, it is not that easy.

I have tried to make the best out of this situation and have found some joy in working with the detainees. I have refined my class on democracies and they are eager to learn with looks of anticipation. This trip, I found a package of Lorna Doone cookies in an MRE. In the holding tent, I raised the cookies in the air and at least three raised their hand hoping for a handout. I selected three and had them stand before the group. Again I explained through my interpreter how they would be voting for which “leader” would receive the cookies. However, I counseled, they should pick a leader who will serve the people and not a leader who requires the people to serve him. Therefore, they should vote for the one who they think will give the cookies to the people rather than keep the cookies for himself. They were amazed by this concept. One asked, “How do we know who will do this, we do not know these people”? This question took me back for a moment-- My solution to let them give speeches. I explained that in America, I have never met any of the Presidents but I decided on who to vote for by listening to their speeches and deciding whom I thought would be most honest. My three contestants looked as nervous as students answering professors questions on the first day of law school. Forced to say “something”, the first candidate said, “I do not want the cookies, they are for children”. The next want said “I do not want the cookies, I will give them away.” The third one said, “I do not want the cookies either”. So much for campaign promises, eh? The group selected the third candidate so I handed the cookies to him and drummed up a round of applause. When the applause died down I explained that this was the hard part. Since they elected their leader, they were responsible for holding him accountable for his promise (a concept even foreign to Washington DC). He had a difficult job because he only had six small cookies with 40-50 people to share with. Undaunted, he began to break the cookie into small pieces. After conducting another tribunal I came back to the holding tent and asked if they were satisfied with their leader. Several gave me the thumbs up sign and muttered the English word, “good”. Therefore, I rewarded the “leader” with a cold Coke from the MP cooler. It was just a taste of democracy for them but as I mentioned before they are most eager to learn.

Short of my democracy class or MAJ Rallis’ singing of the U.S. national anthem while the Iraqis provide the sound effects on cue, they sit in a tent most of the day waiting for their number to be called. On one of my last days, a 19-year old MP made the mistake of telling COL Sabitino that she had never heard of the 80’s band, “Frankie goes to Hollywood”. Within minutes this middle aged Full-bird Colonel was dancing and singing to the dance club one hit wonder “Relax” in front of the detainees. They smiled, laughed and applauded. For me, that song will never be the same! COL Sabitino is an interesting character who is a great professional to work with. This Robert Deniro-like Italian from New York can start the day belting out Broadway show tunes, then shift gears to a hard-nose, mission focused, Army Colonel who will finish the day by humming a Frank Sinatra tune as he tallies up the final numbers. He also played some other songs for the detainees including “In the Navy” and “YMCA” by the Village People but nothing was a bigger hit than Sting’s “Desert Rose”. They were amazed that we had music which contained both Arabic and English lyrics. For them, it was one more example of how our worlds were not so far apart… for COL Sabitino, it was just another opportunity to dance and sing.

Even for the detainees who were held after the Article 5 tribunals, they still seemed grateful that they had a fair trial with an opportunity to tell their story without any threat or coercion. I cannot imagine how a typical American would react if ripped from their families for two months during a time of war and imprisoned without a trial. We take so many of our liberties and rights for granted.

Torture

During the Article 5 tribunals I served as a tribunal member (judge) on one day and as the recorder (responsible for presenting the Government’s evidence) on two days. On the days I didn’t serve doing the tribunals I conducted more detainee screenings. Three of those screenings are particularly interesting and worth sharing.

One of the first guys I talked to told me that he had been imprisonment since January 16th, 2003 until one day before his capture (April 2nd, 2003). Obviously, this sent up red flags. He explained that he was approached by the Ba’ath Party to join the Iraqi military. He blatantly refused and without a trial, he was imprisoned and tortured. (Apparently running to Canada was not an option!) I probed deeper into the treatment he received during his incarceration. He provided a detailed account of how he was tortured in the morning every other day. The officials would place electrodes on his hands, feet, and genitals and give him jolts of electricity. Then they would whip him with electrical cables across the back while he remained tied up. In disbelief, I ordered him to remove his shirt so I could see any evidence of these “alleged” beatings. Sure enough, I was shocked (no pun intended) to see about 20-30 marks on each side of his back which moved diagonally from his shoulder blades to the center of his back.

While I am no expert, it was clear that this man had been brutally whipped. Even after a month and a half of “healing” in our Camp, the scabbed over marks were well-defined. I decided to believe him on the electrical shocks and declined to look at his genitals. He told me that he was released only because the Americans were approaching and Saddam ordered the prisons to be released to increase the size of his Army. Although I did not ask, I am certain that he was not thrilled about the U.N.’s delay to enter Iraq. After waiting the night out in a farmhouse, he surrendered to American forces the next day. He was certainly pleased with the way he was treated with respect and well fed by the Americans. Having no other information to support his detainment, I recommended his release pending a review by CID to make sure there wasn’t another reason for his imprisonment. Having been raised in America, it is impossible to truly imagine the torture these people suffered at the hands of Saddam Hussein.

My next interview highlighted this point. He was a Shi’ite Muslim from Southern Iraq. His father and uncles supported the uprising that occurred in the South after Desert Storm in 1991 when the Iraqis thought George Bush Sr. would rid them of Saddam Hussein. You may recall that George Sr. gave in to “experts” who demanded peace rather than pushing into Baghdad twelve years earlier. This grown man demonstratively sobbed as he explained how Saddam crushed their resistance. His mother and sisters were brutally raped. His father and uncles were tortured until they died. His mixed emotions were written all over his face. He was happy we were finally here but angry that we didn’t come sooner. He is looking forward to living in a new “free Iraq”. As we now uncover the mass graves of Saddam’s atrocities I cannot help but think how many Kurdish and Shi’ite lives we would have saved by pushing to Baghdad in 1991.

I also interviewed an older man with an interesting story. He was 52 (its OK dad… that is why I said “older” and not “old”) but his face and body looked 70-80. He had served in the Iraqi army during the 80s when Iraq was involved in the Iraq-Iran wars. He was kicked out of the Army and given a death sentence when he threw a bottle at a television set while Saddam gave a speech. That sentence was later reduced to a life sentence. After a year and a half of incarceration, his sentence was later commuted again to “time served”. At the time of the war, he lived in Al-Basrah on a farm with his two sons. When Coalition forces advanced, Fedayeen (Saddam’s henchmen) took over his house and fired RPG rockets at Coalition tanks from his property. The next day he was able to sneak off to the city while the Fedayeen left his home for additional supplies. He told British forces that Fedayeen was using his home and they had left a cache of weapons. The Brits took him into custody reportedly for “his own safety” and conducted an ambush at his home for the unsuspecting Fedayeen when they returned. He was interviewed by the BBC but never released.

Almost two months later he finds himself in the custody of the Americans. He did not know what happened to his sons, his farm, or his wealth. Having no news of the Iraqi attitude in Basra, he worried that the locals would kill him because the BBC televised his deception of the Fedayeen. Unfortunately, I was pulled away to a Tribunal before I had an opportunity to calm some of his concerns. So later, I went back and found this man again while he sat in the “happy bus” line to go home. He was still frustrated and exclaimed that he would be better off to be dead. I reminded him of his faith in Allah and that he cannot reject the gift of each new day that his God had given him. He could not help to agree with me when I told him how he was better off to be poor in a free Iraq than the wealthiest man under Saddam’s tyranny. We spoke for about 15 minutes and I told him how the people of Iraq are supporting the coalition forces in rebuilding their country. Even if he wasn’t recognized as a “hero” for his sacrifices by his countrymen, I doubted that he would be ostracized either. He was certainly a hero to us. As the interpreter translated my words, I could see the smile grow across his aging face. He told me that “although I am Christian and his is Muslim, we are the same”.

I couldn’t help but reflect later that those were the wisest words I have heard since I have been here. A democracy will only work if the people first learn religious tolerance. He smiled and shook my hand just satisfied that someone recognized him as an equal. When he saw me again a few minutes later he told me that he wasn’t sure what he would have when he got home but he wanted to give me a gift. He asked for my address on the back of a piece of cardboard…I politely declined and explained that for military security reasons I could not provide that to him. Embarrassed by his own request, the man apologized and affirmed that he understood. Little did he know his religious insight was the only gift I needed. I am convinced that there cannot be world peace until we all recognize that we are all different but yet the same.

What am I doing here?

The purpose of my latest visit was to begin conducting “Article 5 tribunals”. Pursuant to “Article 5” of the Geneva Conventions, detainees are entitled to appear before a competent tribunal to determine their legal status if it has not been already determined. If they were obviously in the military, they are entitled to “Enemy Prisoner of War” (EPW) status. If they were civilians rounded up in the course of the war, they were released as an “innocent civilian”. However, if they were an illegal combatant, in that they violated a war crime or they were foreign mercenaries, they were to be held as civilian internees. The Geneva conventions do not apply to illegal combatants. This is the category used to keep the Al-Queda at Camp X-ray in Cuba. This hearing is merely for fact finding purposes and is not adversarial. The detainees do not have a “right to counsel” although they may choose someone to represent them on their behalf if that person is “reasonably available”. Almost all evidence is permitted; even hearsay. Detainees are permitted to be present at all open sessions and typically only the deliberations are closed. Detainees are allowed to present witnesses if they are “reasonably available”.

Since most detainees have been “pre-screened”, we were able to determine whether they were soldiers (therefore EPWs entitled to the Geneva convention protections) or innocent civilians (Iraqis who we had no information on and couldn’t get them to confess that they were in the military). The ones left to “tribunalize” (I think we made that word up) are primarily men of the ripe military age who came to Iraq from a third country such as Syria, Jordan, or Libya. As you may recall from the beginning of the war, Saddam Hussein actively recruited other Arabs to join his fight by coming to Iraq. Many of these third party nationals were able to enter Iraq through Syria on bus trips arranged at the Iraqi embassy. Unfortunately, the capturing unit on these detainees has given us nothing to work with. We are currently working with the CIA, FBI, and CID to find out more information about our guests. We have also received a lot of older men who are suspected of being in the Ba’ath party. Last week the military conducted several raids around Baghdad; those who are not released will be sent to Bucca.

You may have also seen articles in the news about the MEK fighters. They are Iranians who have come to Iraq to conduct terrorist operations against Iran. This has created the philosophical dilemma: Is the enemy of our enemy (Iran) our friend? (OR) Is the friend of our enemy (Saddam Hussein) our enemy? Regardless, they have now surrendered so they will soon be our guests at Camp Bucca. Prior to the capture of the MEK fighters, we had secretly hoped to be home for Thanksgiving. I don’t know how this latest development will change my departure date. According to my orders I have 297 days left (unless sooner released or extended)…. But who is counting???

Camp Bucca

Dear Friends and Family,

I have returned from my second trip into Iraq. Just like before, I have an abundance of stories to share. I doubt it will ruin any of the suspense to tell you that much has changed in the past 10 days.

The night before my trip to Camp Bucca, our base at Arifjan was hit by a sand storm. The best way to imagine a sand storm if you haven’t experienced one is to picture a strong spring rain but replace the water with sand. The strong winds pushed in the sides of the tent and were forceful enough to rattle my cot. The sand pelted the top and sides of the tent making it sound like we were in the middle of a hellacious thunderstorm. I now know why the media never has a problem finding someone to describe a storm as “it sounded like a freight-train!” As nature would have it, between the moving cot and “water-like” noises, I had an urge to use the latrine. I found my goggles and made a mad-dash wearing a brown T-shirt and gray PT shorts (my sleeping attire) with flip-flops and goggles – I am sure I was quite the sight. Due to the low visibility I think I made my trip and back in the cover of the sand without anyone seeing me. However, I am still scanning those “alien sighting” website photos just to make sure no one snapped a picture.

Despite having very little sleep that night, I was ready to drive to Camp Bucca the next morning. One thing that has changed is that the Army no longer allows us to pass food and/or water to the locals as we drive through. As you know from my last letter, this was one of the highlights of the trip. The locals have become too aggressive in seeking food and water. They have formed human chains to try to stop the vehicles and have thrown rocks at soldiers who didn’t pass out food. The Army is rightfully concerned about children who run into the road to gather up food and the possibility that they could be hit by the next unsuspecting vehicle in the convoy. It is an unfortunate reality that it was in the best interest of the Iraqi people for us to stop throwing food from vehicles. They still loyally sit by the road (even at 6:00 am)—some have learned to display the “peace sign”, other have learned to give “thumbs up”, still others proudly display both with thumbs up on one hand with peace on the other. Even in such a primitive way, they were able to “sign” their gratitude for their liberation. They touch their fingers to their lips to request food and water. They have learned the English words “water”, “please”, and “mister” (pronounced “mee-stir”).

While it saddens my heart to see the children who still line the streets begging for food or water, I am grateful that the Army has increased Humanitarian aid in the area. At least the locals can find food and water from some source even if the roadside handouts cease. Based on the number of people who still stand at the roads, I am not certain if they have received the word. Not everyone has taken kindly to the Army’s new mandate. On the trip back, a young girl (approximately 12-13) came out into the middle of the road to approach our vehicle. My driver, SGT Santos wisely slowed down and moved closer to the opposite shoulder. She yelled “water” and when we didn’t comply I saw her arm come forward in a throwing motion. A rock struck the side of SGT Santos’ helmet. Up ahead, the MPs were already lecturing other locals with the aid of an interpreter. Hopefully, they will all get the word soon and the only ones who will line the roads are the ones who wave and smile.

Many things have also changed at Camp Bucca. Since my last stay, they finished the dining facility. It looks like three “double wide” trailers all pushed together. The food is much better as we now receive a cooked meal for breakfast and dinner. Instead of T-rations, they serve “real eggs”. We still have MREs (Meals-Ready to Eat; affectionately also know as Meals Refused by Ethiopians or Meals Resisting Escape) for lunch. Due to the heat (and the quality of the food), I usually skip lunch and just eat the M & Ms or cookies contained in the MRE pack.

The best change at Camp Bucca is that we now have portable toilets (a.k.a. Porta-potties) instead of the wooden stall latrines. Iraqis hired by the U.S. Army come by daily to suck out the contents with a large hose and replace the toilet paper. This appears to be much healthier for the inhabitants of Bucca who previously dealt with the daily burning of feces barrels. The new latrines have also cut down on the number of flies at the camp. I didn’t become ill after this last trip, either due to the increase sanitary standards or because my body built up some immunity to the Iraqi diseases. Either way, it feels good to be healthy again!

The tents now have wooden floors. I sleep much better knowing the “scorpion threat” has been reduced. When my toes first dug into the sand each morning on my prior trip, I was always worried about what I might unearth. Camp Bucca is still weeks away from receiving “air-conditioned” tents, but the improvements made my stay more enjoyable. I even took full use of the shower that consists of a “lister bag” or 5-gallon jug that you pull over top while standing in a wooden stall. It was chilly but felt good in the desert heat. One day the temperature in the sun was 137 degrees. It was a mere 120 in the shade of the tent. Even here at Arifjan, the temperatures have hit 124. I did see my first Arabian scorpion this trip but I have yet to see any camel spiders. For those of you who are unfamiliar with camel spiders, you can search the term on Google.com and see pictures. They are not pretty creatures!

Result number: 68
Searching file 11

Message Number 118755

Saudi bombings View Thread
Posted by Ed Davis, DPM on 5/14/03 at 15:55

Riyadh: Car Bombings Signal New Phase in Saudi War
May 13, 2003

Summary

The May 12 car bombings in Riyadh will escalate a war between Saudi authorities and al Qaeda. But the government's ability to wage a successful counterterrorism campaign will be hampered by political constraints and doubts as to the loyalties of elements of the security forces.

Analysis

A series of coordinated car bombings in Saudi Arabia on May 12 killed nearly 100 people and wounded scores more. Radicals attacked the headquarters of a joint U.S.-Saudi business as well as three compounds housing American and other expatriate workers. Latest counts put the death toll at 90 -- including 12 Americans, seven Saudis, two Jordanians, two Filipinos, one Lebanese and one Swiss citizen, according to U.S. and Saudi officials.

The attacks mark a new phase in the ongoing war between the Saudi government and Islamist militants. Al Qaeda and its local branches likely are behind the most recent attacks: A Saudi weekly published an indirect claim of responsibility by an alleged al Qaeda spokesman the day of the bombings, and there are striking similarities between the Riyadh explosions and the coordinated bombings of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998. For instance, in both cases, gunmen with weapons blazing rammed the gates of the compounds before detonating their explosives-packed vehicles.

Stratfor previously has stated that internal conflict in Saudi Arabia would ratchet up. Now, the attacks on the Westerners' housing compounds will force Riyadh, which previously has focused its efforts on arresting the militants themselves, to target their sources of support instead.

The May 12 bombings likely were intended to convey several messages. First, the militants wanted to demonstrate their continued ability to operate within the kingdom, despite recent government efforts to dismantle their operations. Second, the timing of the attacks and the targets chosen indicate the assaults were intended as a direct insult to the kingdom's leadership, in particular de facto ruler Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz and Defense Minister Prince Sultan bin Abdul Aziz, and as a warning to the Saudi security forces.

One of the targets was a compound housing American employees of Vinnell Corp., the U.S. company training the Saudi National Guard. Another of the targets was a compound housing Westerners involved in training the Saudi air force, according to Stratfor sources. The division of labor within the house of Saud gives Abdullah responsibility for the Saudi National Guard and Sultan control over the military.

The bombings also came just hours before the arrival of U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell, who was set to meet with Abdullah on May 13.

Ultimately, the attacks may cause Riyadh to change its tactics -- switching from a focus on the ground-level operatives, their safehouses and arms caches to their support systems instead. Those supporters include wealthy Saudi financiers, religious leaders and possibly factions within the government and security personnel.

Until recently, officials in Riyadh refused to admit that radicals linked to al Qaeda were even present in the kingdom. However, a steady stream of shootings and bomb attacks against Westerners and government officials, as well as intense political pressure from Washington, has forced the Saudi government to launch at least halfhearted crackdown against the suspected al Qaeda network.

That crackdown has focused primarily on the militants themselves. Most recently, Saudi authorities announced a manhunt for 19 militants, including 17 Saudis, following a shootout at a Riyadh home where authorities discovered an arms cache that included 800 pounds of explosives as well as ammunition, guns, disguises and large amounts of cash. The announcement came a week after an April 30 U.S. State Department warning about attacks being planned in the kingdom.

Riyadh's ability to break up the militant network now operating in Saudi territory is questionable.

The government still faces the same obstacles that have slowed its efforts so far: Widespread anti-American sentiment has emboldened militants -- nearly all of the violence in the kingdom over the last year has been directed at either Westerners or government officials. Moreover, the alliance between the ruling House of Saud and the kingdom's religious leadership has undermined the government's legitimacy -- and this, in turn, may limit its ability to root out the militants. Several of the country's top imams repeatedly have called for attacks against the "infidels" and have denounced Riyadh's strategic relationship with Washington.

Finally, it is unclear where the Saudi security forces stand. Several of the Saudi nationals involved in the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks were former members of the Saudi security services -- either military or police. And there have been unconfirmed reports that a gunman involved in the May 1 shooting of an American in Jubail wore the uniform of a Saudi military officer.

Riyadh now will find it necessary to move against the decision makers and facilitators of al Qaeda's local activities. This will mean purging suspect members of the government and security forces and rolling up financial networks in Saudi and neighboring Gulf states. But these moves could trigger political and security crises in Saudi Arabia -- once again leaving Western expatriates, including the 30,000 Americans and 30,000 Britons now living there -- caught in the middle of what could become a bloody and brutal fight over the next year.


Related Headlines
Al Qaeda's Move
Apr 12, 2003
Saudi Arabia's Internal War and the External Consequences
Feb 04, 2003
U.S. Travel Warning Heralds Trouble in Saudi Arabia
Above was from stratfor.com
Ed

Result number: 69

Message Number 118582

Re: "Selective Intelligence" - excerpts View Thread
Posted by Ed Davis, DPM on 5/13/03 at 16:19

Mason:
One of Marie's "rules" of web etiquet included not having readers chase donw links and information. Hwere is some reading for you. please provide some of the relevent references you have discussed.
Regards,
Ed

Powell Confronts, Assad Prevaricates

From DEBKA-Net-Weekly 107

May 4, 2003, 12:21 AM (GMT+02:00)





Syria is reported by DEBKA-Net-Weekly’s intelligence sources as having secretly disposed of Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction by moving them into eastern Lebanon for burial in the Beqaa Valley. Iraq’s biological weapons may be there too. They were interred deep under the heroin poppy and cotton fields in two of the most fertile regions of Lebanon: the valley stretching between Jabal Akroum, the town of al Qbayyat and the Syrian border, and the land lying between the towns of Al Hirmil and al Labwah between the Orontes River and the Syrian frontier.

On February 14, about a month before the start of the war in Iraq, DEBKA-Net-Weekly Issue 97 ran an article captioned “Is Iraq’s WMD cache in Lebanon available to Al Qaeda?” To subscribe to DNW click HERE

Now, our intelligence sources can disclose exclusively that the relocation of Iraq’s WMD systems took place between January 10 and March 10 and was completed just 10 days before the US-led offensive was launched against Iraq. The banned arsenal, hauled in giant tankers from Iraq to Syria and from there to the Bekaa Valley under Syrian special forces and military intelligence escort, was discharged into pits 6-8 meters across and 25-35 meters deep dug by Syrian army engineers. They were sealed and planted over with new seedlings. Nonetheless, their location is known and detectable with the right instruments. Our sources have learned that Syria was paid about $35 million to make Saddam Hussein’s forbidden weapons disappear.

Before US secretary of state Colin Powell arrived in Damascus on Saturday, May 3, the Syrians made the placatory gesture to Washington of speeding and upgrading the handover of Iraqi fugitives from the Saddam regime sheltering in Syria

DEBKA-Net-Weekly has learned from its most exclusive sources that on Monday, April 28, Dr. RihabTaha, a microbiologist known as Dr. Germ, was turned over to the Americans in Iraq. She had directed Iraq’s biological weapons program. Also turned over was Huda Salih Mahdi Ammash, who headed Iraq’s anthrax project. No announcement was made of their capture. However, the surrender 24 hours later of Taha’s husband, General Amir Muhammed Rasheed, director of Iraq’s missile development program and best known by his nickname “The Missile Man”, was announced.

The United States is therefore fully apprised of the whereabouts of Saddam Hussein’s arsenal of unconventional weapons and has taken custody of the scientists who developed them.

But DEBKA-Net-Weekly’s sources say Washington was nevertheless far from placated and Powell’s meeting with the Syrian president Saturday was a confrontation. The secretary of state laid down the following demands:

1. A map with the coordinates of the pits holding Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction.

2. Surrender of Saddam’s most senior insiders who fled to Aleppo and Latakiya. After DEBKAfile blew the whistle on April 3, the group staying at the Cote D’Azur De Cham Resort in Latakia was whisked away leaving their families comfortably ensconced there.

3. Handover of the two senior Al Qaeda members now in Damascus. DEBKA-Net-Weekly’s military and intelligence sources say their names and whereabouts were uncovered by US intelligence units in Iraq.

4. An explanation of Syrian motives in allowing two British terrorists, Assif Hanif, who blew himself up in Tel Aviv on April 30, and Omar Khan Sharif, who ran away, to transit Damascus en route to Israel. (One of the duo spent four months of preparation in the Syrian capital with the Hamas operations officer and associate of Hizballah Imad al-Alami, as reported exclusively by DEBKAfile.)

5. An immediate stop to the military-terrorist activities of the Lebanese Hizballah and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad and Hamas in Syria and Lebanon. Failure to do so, Powell explained, will result in a painful tightening of economic pressure on Syria, after the loss of $1b in oil revenues from Baghdad.

Powell suggested that Assad invite Abu Mazen, the new Palestinian prime minister, to Damascus. This step would further underline Yasser Arafat’s state of isolation in view of his never having been received in Damascus. It could lead to an invitation from the Bush administration to invite the leaders of Syria, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Iraq’s new regime and the Palestinians to a regional conference that would set the stage for Syrian and Palestinian peace negotiations with Israel.

Powell told Assad bluntly to choose between confrontation and negotiations.

At the same time, DEBKA-Net-Weekly’s Middle East experts stress that Powell’s stance was tough yet exploratory. The Bush administration is still in option-weighing mode, pondering how best to proceed in the post Iraq war era to achieve its two main objectives: One is to advance America’s long-range strategic goals in the Middle East. The second is to get Bush re-elected as President in November 2004.



Back Next To Print Send to Friend Go to top


Related articles:

Tel Aviv Bombers Missed Passover Date

Result number: 70

Message Number 114382

What anti-war demonstrators found..... View Thread
Posted by Ed Davis, DPM on 3/24/03 at 22:06

Group shows Iraqis welcoming U.S.
By Arnaud de Borchgrave
THE WASHINGTON TIMES


AMMAN, Jordan — A group of American anti-war demonstrators, part of a Japanese human-shield delegation, returned from Iraq yesterday with 14 hours of uncensored video, all shot without Iraqi government minders present, with Iraqis eager to tell of their welcome for American troops. Top Stories
• 12 U.S. soldiers killed or captured
• U.S. calls footage of POWs 'disgusting'
• Female captive first since Pentagon altered rule
• 7,000 rally to show support for troops
• British jet downed by 'friendly fire'
• Saddam likely still alive


The Rev. Kenneth Joseph, a young American pastor of the Assyrian Church of the East, said the trip to Iraq "had shocked me back to reality."
Some of the Iraqis he interviewed on camera, he said, "told me they would commit suicide if American bombing didn't start. They were willing to see their homes demolished to gain their freedom from Saddam [Hussein]'s bloody tyranny."
Mr. Joseph said the Iraqis convinced him that Saddam is "a monster the likes of which the world had not seen since Stalin and Hitler. He and his sons are sick sadists.
"Their tales of slow torture and killing made me ill, such as people put in a huge shredder for plastic products, feet first so the [torture masters] could hear their screams as bodies got chewed up from foot to head."
The pastor and others making it across the border into Jordan tell harrowing stories about their journey. The only gasoline station between Baghdad and the border, a distance of 400 miles, was blown up by U.S. fighter-bombers. The station, in the one-camel village of Ramadi, had the only telephone booth on the road across the desert and a Jordanian, who had stopped to call his parents in Amman to let them know he was on his way home, was killed in the explosion.
The few taxi drivers in Baghdad willing to drive to the Jordanian border are charging $1,500 per passenger. Very few Iraqis can afford the fare, and only about 300 "third-country nationals," mostly Sudanese and Egyptians, have reached the border post since the "shock and awe" campaign began. Travelers have to struggle with their luggage across the last two miles on foot to Al Karama, the first Jordanian outpost. From there, they are taken by bus to a tent city at the Ruwaished refugee camp, 36 miles inside Jordan.
The Baghdad-Jordan highway was busy with commercial traffic before the beginning of the war, with some 700 tanker-trucks shuttling daily with part of the 12,000 tons of oil consumed by Jordan every day. All of it comes from Iraq at discounted prices under the U.N. oil-for-food program. Some 2,600 Jordanian and 1,500 Iraqi tankers have been involved in the overland oil traffic. Movement was down to 140 tankers the day before the bombing started. It stopped abruptly two days ago.
Jordan had made plans for a quick switch to tankers anchored off Aqaba. Qatar had pledged to replace whatever shortfall Jordan experienced.
Jordanians see one favorable omen. Every day, almost a thousand white storks arrive at a supermarket parking lot on one of Amman's seven hills, a pit stop on their way from Africa to their East European breeding grounds. About 100,000 storks are expected to stop here over the next month, numbers not seen in 10 years. Jordanians take this as a sign of ample rain and a good harvest ahead.
The difference between official and private views of some ranking Jordanian officials may be an omen, too. Officially, they condemn the war and say they are "deeply troubled" by the prospect of repercussions of the war on the region, and describe the situation as "critical."
Privately, they say, the war is developing a new opportunity for peace in the Middle East. Says one former prime minister: "If the U.S. can get a new Iraq to recognize Israel as a quid pro quo for a final Palestinian settlement, others will fall into place — Syria, Saudi Arabia, and the other Gulf states. Iran would then have to pull back its military support for Hezbollah."
•Arnaud de Borchgrave is editor at large of The Washington Times and of United Press International. This dispatch was distributed by UPI.


Back to World

Result number: 71

Message Number 113776

The French Connection View Thread
Posted by Ed Davis, DPM on 3/21/03 at 15:11

French Connection II
By WILLIAM SAFIRE


ASHINGTON — What will the world discover, after the war is over, about which countries secretly helped Saddam obtain components for terror weapons?

Last week, I wrote that French brokerage was involved in the illicit transfer of the chemical HTBP, a rubbery base for a rocket propellant, from a Chinese company through Syria to Iraq.

When Christiane Amanpour asked President Jacques Chirac about it on CBS's "60 Minutes," he replied: "Because The New York Times is a serious newspaper, as soon as I read this I ordered an inquiry. I can now confirm officially, after an inquiry by the French foreign ministry, France and French companies have never endorsed or even provided such material to Iraq. So I am clearly denying this allegation."

Mr. Chirac knows more than I do about trade with Iraq: in the late 1970's, he facilitated France's multibillion-dollar sale of the Osirak nuclear reactor to the rising Saddam. (After Iraq officially stated that the reactor's purpose was not to incinerate Tehran but "to eliminate Zionism," Israel destroyed it.)

Let me supply Mr. Chirac with some documentation that the Inspector Clouseau in his foreign ministry cannot find.

On Aug. 25, 2002, e-mail went from the director general of CIS Paris to Qilu Chemicals in China regarding a preliminary order: "We are about to have one of our affiliates open a L/C [Letter of Credit] for an initial order of 20,000 kg. of sealant type HTBP-III. . . . The drums should have a label mentioning the nature of the goods, same as your sample: `modified polybatadiene [sic] sealant type III,' it is not necessary that the label shows the name of your company."

Ten days later, on Sept. 4, this response came from Qilu: "Thank you for your order to our HTPB-III! We just have sent a 40-foot container to Tartous (Syria) last month. I am not sure whether the container is in your warehouse now." A month later, Qilu sought a "formal order."

A Times colleague in Paris visited CIS early last week. The director, Jean-Pierre Pertriaux, acknowledged the documents but said someone else had filled the order. I duly reported his denial.

Mr. Pertriaux has since written to me to denounce my column as "mostly imagination and slander." He argues, in a rambling fashion, "About HTPB, one of the uses of this chemical is as a binder for rocket propellant, one of the possible rocket style is long-range missile, which I personally know for sure the Iraqis do not have (the CIA know it still better): so the supply of HTPB is legal, it is not forbidden by the UN except for a use which does not exist, though it is unpleasant if you plan to invade Iraq and do not want to face field rockets or anti-tank weapons."

But what about those e-mail notes? "My company never supplied HTPB to Iraq (but it considered this eventuality) we know the Chinese QiLu company, they boasted to have shipped HTPB to promote their business but never actually did."

Then, "leaving you a chance to show that you distorted the truth, but did not organize a lie," the French broker pointed elsewhere: "Three shipments (totaling 115.8 tons) have actually been made from USA via Jordanian traders."

He didn't name the supposed suppliers, but I was able to check his assertion that "the supply of HTPB is legal" with an assistant secretary of state, John Wolf. "All military-related sales to Iraq are banned by several U.N. resolutions," countered Mr. Wolf, the man in charge of our nonproliferation bureau. "This is rocket fuel you're talking about. The fact that Iraq was permitted to have missiles in the sub-150-kilometer range does not therefore allow the import of such fuel. Any sale to Iraq, except for humanitarian goods, requires the approval of the U.N. sanctions committee." The U.S. is on that committee and never approved such a sale.

Is this component of fuel propelling "unpleasant" weapons in Iraq now, to be used against our troops? I have no proof of that. But the name of the Iraqi arms merchant who handled the shipment when it arrived in Syria is no mystery. After the war, he'll sing, same as Saddam's runners of Al Qaeda agents.

Then President Chirac, all injured innocence, may castigate the foreign minister who too quickly assured him that a column about a French connection was "devoid of all foundation."







Forum: Join a Discussion on William Safire's Columns

Result number: 72

Message Number 113710

take it or leave it..just interesting View Thread
Posted by marie on 3/21/03 at 07:06

The Arrogant Empire
America’s unprecedented power scares the world, and the Bush administration has only made it worse. How we got here—and what we can do about it now

By Fareed Zakaria
NEWSWEEK


March 24 issue — PART I: The United States will soon be at war with Iraq. It would seem, on the face of it, a justifiable use of military force. Saddam Hussein runs one of the most tyrannical regimes in modern history.






• eDiets Diet Center
• Shop at B&N.com
• Loan Center
• Yellow Pages
• Newsletters
• MSN Broadband













FOR MORE THAN 25 years he has sought to acquire chemical, biological and nuclear weapons, and has, in several documented cases, succeeded. He gassed 60,000 of his own people in 1986 in Halabja. He has launched two catastrophic wars, sacrificing nearly a million Iraqis and killing or wounding more than a million Iranians. He has flouted 16 United Nations resolutions over 12 years that have warned him to disarm or else, including one, four months ago, giving him a “final opportunity” to do so “fully and immediately” or face “serious consequences.” But in its campaign against Iraq, America is virtually alone. Never will it have waged a war in such isolation. Never have so many of its allies been so firmly opposed to its policies. Never has it provoked so much public opposition, resentment and mistrust. And all this before the first shot has been fired.
Watching the tumult around the world, it’s evident that what is happening goes well beyond this particular crisis. Many people, both abroad and in America, fear that we are at some kind of turning point, where well-established mainstays of the global order—the Western Alliance, European unity, the United Nations—seem to be cracking under stress. These strains go well beyond the matter of Iraq, which is not vital enough to wreak such damage. In fact, the debate is not about Saddam anymore. It is about America and its role in the new world. To understand the present crisis, we must first grasp how the rest of the world now perceives American power.
It is true that the United States has some allies in its efforts to topple Saddam. It is also true that some of the governments opposing action in Iraq do so not for love of peace and international harmony but for more cynical reasons. France and Russia have a long history of trying to weaken the containment of Iraq to ensure that they can have good trading relations with it. France, after all, helped Saddam Hussein build a nuclear reactor that was obviously a launching pad for a weapons program. (Why would the world’s second largest oil producer need a nuclear power plant?) And France’s Gaullist tendencies are, of course, simply its own version of unilateralism.



Do you believe that using military force is the only way to disarm Iraq?

Yes, military action is the only way
No, diplomacy can be successful
I don't know


Vote to see results




Do you believe that using military force is the only way to disarm Iraq?
* 119587 responses
Yes, military action is the only way
61%
No, diplomacy can be successful
33%
I don't know
6%

Survey results tallied every 60 seconds. Live Votes reflect respondents' views and are not scientifically valid surveys.


But how to explain that the vast majority of the world, with little to gain from it, is in the Franco-Russian camp? The administration claims that many countries support the United States but do so quietly. That signals an even deeper problem. Countries are furtive in their support for the administration not because they fear Saddam Hussein but because they fear their own people. To support America today in much of the world is politically dangerous. Over the past year the United States became a campaign issue in elections in Germany, South Korea and Pakistan. Being anti-American was a vote-getter in all three places.
Look at the few countries that do publicly support us. Tony Blair bravely has forged ahead even though the vast majority of the British people disagree with him and deride him as “America’s poodle.” The leaders of Spain and Italy face equally strong public opposition to their stands. Donald Rumsfeld has proclaimed, with his characteristic tactlessness, that while “old Europe”—France and Germany—might oppose U.S. policy, “new Europe” embraces them. This is not exactly right. The governments of Central Europe support Washington, but the people oppose it in almost the same numbers as in old Europe. Between 70 and 80 percent of Hungarians, Czechs and Poles are against an American war in Iraq, with or without U.N. sanction. (The Poles are more supportive in some surveys.) The administration has made much of the support of Vaclav Havel, the departing Czech president. But the incoming president, Vaclav Klaus—a pro-American, Thatcherite free-marketer—said last week that on Iraq his position is aligned with that of his people.



March 24, 2003 Cover Package:


• The Arrogant Empire
• Great Britain: Blair Sweats It Out
• Washington: Powell in the Bunker
• The Unmighty Dollar






Some make the argument that Europeans are now pacifists, living in a “postmodern paradise,” shielded from threats and unable to imagine the need for military action. But then how to explain the sentiment in Turkey, a country that sits on the Iraqi border? A longtime ally, Turkey has fought with America in conflicts as distant as the Korean War, and supported every American military action since then. But opposition to the war now runs more than 90 percent there. Despite Washington’s offers of billions of dollars in new assistance, the government cannot get parliamentary support to allow American troops to move into Iraq from Turkish bases. Or consider Australia, another crucial ally, and another country where a majority now opposes American policy. Or Ireland. Or India. In fact, while the United States has the backing of a dozen or so governments, it has the support of a majority of the people in only one country in the world, Israel. If that is not isolation, then the word has no meaning.
It is also too easy to dismiss the current crisis as one more in a series of transatlantic family squabbles that stretch back over the decades. Some in Washington have pointed out that whenever the United States has taken strong military action—for example, the deployment of Pershing nuclear missiles in Europe in the early 1980s—there was popular opposition in Europe. True, but this time it’s different. The street demonstrations and public protests of the early 1980s made for good television images. But the reality was that in most polls, 30 to 40 percent of Europeans supported American policies. In Germany, where pacifist feelings ran sky high, 53 percent of Germans supported the Pershing deployments, according to a 1981 poll in Der Spiegel. In France, a majority supported American policy through much of Ronald Reagan’s two terms, even prefer-ring him to the Democratic candidate, Walter Mondale, in 1984.







Josef Joffe, one of Germany’s leading commentators, observes that during the cold war anti-Americanism was a left-wing phenomenon. “In contrast to it, there was always a center-right that was anti-communist and thus pro-American,” he explains. “The numbers waxed and waned, but you always had a solid base of support for the United States.” The cold war kept Europe pro-American. For example, 1968 was a time of mass protests against American policies in Vietnam, but it was also the year of the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia. Europeans (and Asians) could oppose America, but their views were balanced by wariness of the Soviet threat and communist behavior. Again, the polls bear this out. European opposition even to the Vietnam War never approached the level of the current opposition to Iraq. This was true outside Europe as well. In Australia, for example, a majority of the public supported that country’s participation in the Vietnam War through 1971, when it withdrew its forces.
But today no such common threat exists, and support for America is far more fluid. Center-right parties might still support Washington, but many do so almost out of inertia and without much popular support for their stand. During the recent German election, Gerhard Schroder campaigned openly against America’s Iraq policy. Less noted was that his conservative opponent, Edmund Stoiber, did so as well, at one point (briefly) outflanking Schroder by saying he would not even allow American bases in Germany to participate in the war.
In one respect, I believe that the Bush administration is right: this war will look better when it is over. The military campaign will probably be less difficult than many of Washington’s opponents think. Most important, it will reveal the nature of Saddam’s barbarous regime. Prisoners and political dissidents will tell stories of atrocities. Horrific documents will come to light. Weapons of mass destruction will be found. If done right, years from now people will remember above all that America helped rid Iraq of a totalitarian dictator.
But the administration is wrong if it believes that a successful war will make the world snap out of a deep and widening mistrust and resentment of American foreign policy. A war with Iraq, even if successful, might solve the Iraq problem. It doesn’t solve the America problem. What worries people around the world above all else is living in a world shaped and dominated by one country—the United States. And they have come to be deeply suspicious and fearful of us.

PART II: THE AGE OF GENEROSITY
Most Americans have never felt more vulnerable. September 11 was not only the first attack on the American mainland in 150 years, but it was also sudden and unexpected. Three thousand civilians were brutally killed without any warning. In the months that followed, Americans worried about anthrax attacks, biological terror, dirty bombs and new suicide squads. Even now, the day-to-day rhythms of American life are frequently interrupted by terror alerts and warnings. The average American feels a threat to his physical security unknown since the early years of the republic.
Yet after 9-11, the rest of the world saw something quite different. They saw a country that was hit by terrorism, as some of them had been, but that was able to respond on a scale that was almost unimaginable. Suddenly terrorism was the world’s chief priority, and every country had to reorient its foreign policy accordingly. Pakistan had actively supported the Taliban for years; within months it became that regime’s sworn enemy. Washington announced that it would increase its defense budget by almost $50 billion, a sum greater than the total annual defense budget of Britain or Germany. A few months later it toppled a regime 6,000 miles away—almost entirely from the air—in Afghanistan, a country where the British and Soviet empires were bogged down at the peak of their power. It is now clear that the current era can really have only one name, the unipolar world—an age with only one global power. America’s position today is unprecedented. A hundred years ago, Britain was a superpower, ruling a quarter of the globe’s population. But it was still only the second or third richest country in the world and one among many strong military powers. The crucial measure of military might in the early 20th century was naval power, and Britain ruled the waves with a fleet as large as the next two navies put together. By contrast, the United States will spend as much next year on defense as the rest of the world put together (yes, all 191 countries). And it will do so devoting 4 percent of its GDP, a low level by postwar standards.





Washington and the World: Arrogant Empire?
• Audio: Fareed Zakaria, Editor, Newsweek International Editions, Author of "The Future of Freedom"
• Audio: Listen to the complete weekly On Air show






American dominance is not simply military. The U.S. economy is as large as the next three—Japan, Germany and Britain—put together. With 5 percent of the world’s population, this one country accounts for 43 percent of the world’s economic production, 40 percent of its high-technology production and 50 percent of its research and development. If you look at the indicators of future growth, all are favorable for America. It is more dynamic economically, more youthful demographically and more flexible culturally than any other part of the world. It is conceivable that America’s lead, especially over an aging and sclerotic Europe, will actually increase over the next two decades.
Given this situation, perhaps what is most surprising is that the world has not ganged up on America already. Since the beginnings of the state system in the 16th century, international politics has seen one clear pattern—the formation of balances of power against the strong. Countries with immense military and economic might arouse fear and suspicion, and soon others coalesce against them. It happened to the Hapsburg Empire in the 17th century, France in the late 18th and early 19th century, Germany twice in the early 20th century, and the Soviet Union in the latter half of the 20th century. At this point, most Americans will surely protest: “But we’re different!” Americans—this writer included—think of themselves as a nation that has never sought to occupy others, and that through the years has been a progressive and liberating force. But historians tell us that all dominant powers thought they were special. Their very success confirmed for them that they were blessed. But as they became ever more powerful, the world saw them differently. The English satirist John Dryden described this phenomenon in a poem set during the Biblical King David’s reign. “When the chosen people grew too strong,” he wrote, “The rightful cause at length became the wrong.”
Has American power made its rightful cause turn into wrong? Will America simply have to learn to live in splendid isolation from the resentments of the world? This is certainly how some Americans see things. And it’s true that some of the opposition to the United States is thinly veiled envy. “Scratch an anti-American in Europe, and very often all he wants is a guest professorship at Harvard or to have an article published in The New York Times,” says Denis MacShane, Britain’s minister for Europe.
But there lies a deep historical fallacy in the view that “they hate us because we are strong.” After all, U.S. supremacy is hardly a recent phenomenon. America has been the leading world power for almost a century now. By 1900 the United States was the richest country in the world. By 1919 it had decisively intervened to help win the largest war in history. By 1945 it had led the Allies to victory in World War II. For 10 years thereafter America accounted for 50 percent of world GDP, a much larger share than it holds today.
Yet for five decades after World War II, there was no general rush to gang up against the United States. Instead countries joined with Washington to confront the Soviet Union, a much poorer country (at best comprising 12 percent of world GDP, or a quarter the size of the American economy). What explains this? How—until now—did America buck the biggest trend in international history?
To answer this question, go back to 1945. When America had the world at its feet, Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Harry Truman chose not to create an American imperium, but to build a world of alliances and multilateral institutions. They formed the United Nations, the Bretton Woods system of economic cooperation and dozens of other international organizations. America helped get the rest of the world back on its feet by pumping out vast amounts of aid and private investment. The centerpiece of this effort, the Marshall Plan, amounted to $120 billion in today’s dollars.
Not least of these efforts was the special attention given to diplomacy. Consider what it must have meant for Franklin Roosevelt—at the pinnacle of power—to go halfway across the world to Tehran and Yalta to meet with Churchill and Stalin in 1943 and 1945. Roosevelt was a sick man, paralyzed from the waist down, hauling 10 pounds of steel braces on his legs. Traveling for 40 hours by sea and air took the life out of him. He did not have to go. He had plenty of deputies—Marshall, Eisenhower—who could have done the job. And he certainly could have summoned the others closer to him. But FDR understood that American power had to be coupled with a generosity of spirit. He insisted that British commanders like Montgomery be given their fair share of glory in the war. He brought China into the United Nations Security Council, even though it was a poor peasant society, because he believed that it was important to have the largest Asian country properly represented within a world body.
The standard set by Roosevelt and his generation endured. When George Marshall devised the Marshall Plan, he insisted that America should not dictate how its money be spent, but rather that the initiatives and control should lie with Europeans. For decades thereafter, the United States has provided aid, technical know-how and assistance across the world. It has built dams, funded magazines and sent scholars and students abroad so that people got to know America and Americans. It has paid great deference to its allies who were in no sense equals. It has conducted joint military exercises, even when they added little to U.S. readiness. For half a century, American presidents and secretaries of State have circled the globe and hosted their counterparts in a never-ending cycle of diplomacy.
Of course, all these exertions served our interests, too. They produced a pro-American world that was rich and secure. They laid the foundations for a booming global economy in which America thrives. But it was an enlightened self-interest that took into account the interests of others. Above all, it reassured countries—through word and deed, style and substance—that America’s mammoth power need not be feared.

PART III: WHERE BUSH WENT WRONG
George W. Bush came into office with few developed ideas about foreign policy. He didn’t seem much interested in the world. During the years that his father was envoy to China, ambassador to the United Nations, director of the CIA and vice president, Bush traveled two or three times outside the country. Candidate Bush’s vision amounted mostly to carving out positions different from his predecessor. Many conservatives thought the Clinton administration was over-involved in the world, especially in nation-building, and hectoring in its diplomacy. So Bush argued that America should be “a humble nation,” scale back its commitments abroad and not involve itself in rebuilding other countries.

Odd man out? George W. Bush

Yet other conservatives, a number of whom became powerful within the administration, had a more sweeping agenda. Since the early ’90s, they had argued that the global landscape was marked by two realities. One was American power. The post-cold-war world was overwhelmingly unipolar. The other was the spread of new international treaties and laws. The end of the cold war had given a boost to efforts to create a global consensus on topics like war crimes, land mines and biological weapons. Both observations were accurate. From them, however, these Bush officials drew the strange conclusion that America had little freedom to move in this new world. “The picture it painted in its early months was of a behemoth thrashing about against constraints that only it could see,” notes the neoconservative writer Robert Kagan. For much of the world, it was mystifying to hear the most powerful country in the history of the world speak as though it were a besieged nation, boxed in on all sides.
In its first year the administration withdrew from five international treaties—and did so as brusquely as it could. It reneged on virtually every diplomatic effort that the Clinton administration had engaged in, from North Korea to the Middle East, often overturning public statements from Colin Powell supporting these efforts. It developed a language and diplomatic style that seemed calculated to offend the world. (President Bush has placed a portrait of Theodore Roosevelt in the White House. TR’s most famous words of advice are worth recalling: “Speak softly and carry a big stick.”) Key figures in the administration rarely traveled, foreign visitors were treated to perfunctory office visits, and state dinners were unheard of. On an annual basis, George W. Bush has visited fewer foreign countries than any president in 40 years. Still, he does better than Dick Cheney, who has been abroad only once since becoming vice president.
September 11 only added a new layer of assertiveness to Bush’s foreign policy. Understandably shocked and searching for responses, the administration decided that it needed total freedom of action. When NATO, for the first time in its history, invoked the self-defense clause and offered America carte-blanche assistance, the administration essentially ignored it. It similarly marginalized NATO in the Afghan war. NATO has its limitations, which were powerfully revealed during the Kosovo campaign, but the signal this sent to our closest allies was that America didn’t need them. Thus as seen by the rest of the world, 9-11 had a distressingly paradoxical effect. It produced a mobilization of American power and yet a narrowing of American interests. Suddenly, Washington was more powerful and determined to act. But it would act only for its own core security and even pre-emptively when it needed to. Bush later announced an expansive, vague Wilsonian vision—which has merit—but his style and methods overshadowed its potential promise.
The Bush administration could reasonably point out that it doesn’t get enough credit for reaching out to the rest of the world. President Bush has, after all, worked with the United Nations on Iraq, increased foreign aid by 50 percent, announced a $15 billion AIDS program and formally endorsed a Palestinian state. Yet none of these actions seems to earn him any good will. The reason for this is plain. In almost every case, the administration comes to multilateralism grudgingly, reluctantly, and with a transparent lack of sincerity. For a year now, President Bush has dismissed the notion that he should make any effort toward a Middle East peace process, even though it would have defused some of the anti-Americanism in the region as he sought to confront Iraq. Suddenly last week, to gain allies on Iraq and at the insistence of Tony Blair, Bush made a belated gesture toward the peace process. Is it surprising that people are not hailing this last-minute conversion?


fact file
Deeply divided

How the Security Council feels about Iraq
Permanent members
• United States
• Russia
• China
• Britain
• France
Elected members
• Angola
• Bulgaria
• Cameroon
• Chile
• Guinea

• Germany
• Mexico
• Pakistan
• Syria
• Spain


The United States: Iraq is developing weapons of mass destruction, is failing to cooperate with weapons inspectors and is violating its obligations under U.N resolutions. President Bush said March 6 that the United States will seek a vote on its draft resolution that would pave the way for military action, although he warned, "We really don't need anybody's permission.”

Russia: Iraq is cooperating with inspectors and there is no evidence it is rearming. Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov joined his French and German counterparts on March 5 in threatening to block a U.S.-backed war resolution.

China: Supports continued inspections and wants the crisis resolved peacefully. On March 7, Foreign Minister Tang Jiaxuan told the Security Council that the goal of disarming Iraq can be achieved "as long as we stick to the road of political settlement."
Britain: Prefers a second Security Council resolution authorizing any military action, but is expected to join U.S.-led action without one. Britain has suggested a two-phase approach to the draft resolution, under which Saddam Hussein would be given 10 days to prove disarmament by meeting certain conditions followed by the second phase of verification of the same.
France: Open to dialogue but still won’t support any U.N. resolution that would authorize war on Iraq. France also has rejected giving Saddam Hussein an ultimatum to disarm, as set in the amended resolution proposed by the United States and its allies, and hinted it will veto the proposal. Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin described the deadline as a "pretext for war."
Angola: The government says the March 17 deadline is too short for Iraq to demonstrate that it is disarming and along with the other five undecided nations proposed a longer deadline for Saddam to comply with the United Nations.
Bulgaria: Indicated it would support U.S.-led military intervention without a Security Council authorization.
Cameroon: U.S. officials believe Cameroon will ultimately side with Washington. But to date, the government says the current disarmament deadline is too short and is pressing, along with the other five undecided nations, to give more time for Saddam to comply with the United Nations.
Chile: Believes the March 17 deadline is too short for Iraq. On March 14, the government proposed a compromise plan that would give Saddam up to a month to meet certain benchmarks on disarmament or face military action.
Guinea: The current holder of the Security Council presidency, Guinea has joined the other five undecided nations in proposing a longer deadline for Saddam to comply with the United Nations. State radio reported on March 12 that the government would abstain if forced to vote on the current resolution.
Germany: Insists Iraq must be disarmed peacefully and has said it will not participate in any military intervention, even if the Security Council authorizes such action. Germany joined with France and Russia on March 5 to say the three nations would block the U.S.-backed war resolution.
Mexico: Under fierce pressure from its northern neighbor, Mexico has joined the other five 'swing' nations to propose a longer deadline for Saddam to comply with the United Nations.

Pakistan: The beneficiary of a multi-million dollar aid package since it helped Washington in the war in Afghanistan, Pakistan has said it won’t support the resolution in its current form.
Syria: Damascus says Iraq is cooperating with its obligations under U.N. resolutions and has called for U.N. sanctions to be lifted. It will not support any new resolution.
Spain: Supports the Bush administration’s stance on Iraq and has co-sponsored, along with the United States and Britain, a draft resolution that would pave the way for military action.



Source: MSNBC research
Printable version

Nowhere has this appearance of diplomatic hypocrisy been more striking than on Iraq. The president got high marks for his superb speech at the Security Council last September, urging the United Nations to get serious about enforcing its resolutions on Iraq and to try inspections one last time. Unfortunately, that appeal had been preceded by speeches by Cheney and comments by Rumsfeld calling inspections a sham—statements that actually contradicted American policy—and making clear that the administration had decided to go to war. The only debate was whether to have the United Nations rubber-stamp this policy. To make matters worse, weeks after the new U.S.-sponsored U.N. resolution calling for fresh inspections, the administration began large-scale deployments on Iraq’s border. Diplomatically, it had promised a good-faith effort to watch how the inspections were going; militarily, it was gearing up for war with troops that could not stay ready in the desert forever. Is it any wonder that other countries, even those that would be willing to endorse a war with Iraq, have felt that the diplomacy was a charade, pursued simply to allow time for military preparations?
President Bush’s favorite verb is “expect.” He announces peremptorily that he “expects” the Palestinians to dump Yasir Arafat, “expects” countries to be with him or against him, “expects” Turkey to cooperate. It is all part of the administration’s basic approach toward foreign policy, which is best described by the phrase used for its war plan—”shock and awe.” The notion is that the United States needs to intimidate countries with its power and assertiveness, always threatening, always denouncing, never showing weakness. Donald Rumsfeld often quotes a line from Al Capone: “You will get more with a kind word and a gun than with a kind word alone.”
But should the guiding philosophy of the world’s leading democracy really be the tough talk of a Chicago mobster? In terms of effectiveness, this strategy has been a disaster. It has alienated friends and delighted enemies. Having traveled around the world and met with senior government officials in dozens of countries over the past year, I can report that with the exception of Britain and Israel, every country the administration has dealt with feels humiliated by it. “Most officials in Latin American countries today are not anti-American types,” says Jorge Castaneda, the reformist foreign minister of Mexico, who resigned two months ago. “We have studied in the United States or worked there. We like and understand America. But we find it extremely irritating to be treated with utter contempt.” Last fall, a senior ambassador to the United Nations, in a speech supporting America’s position on Iraq, added an innocuous phrase that could have been seen as deviating from that support. The Bush administration called up his foreign minister and demanded that he be formally reprimanded within an hour. The ambassador now seethes when he talks about U.S. arrogance. Does this really help America’s cause in the world? There are dozens of stories like this from every part of the world.
In diplomacy, style is often substance. Consider this fact: the Clinton administration used force on three important occasions—Bosnia, Haiti and Kosovo. In none of them did it take the matter to the United Nations Security Council, and there was little discussion that it needed to do so. Indeed, Kofi Annan later made statements that seemed to justify the action in Kosovo, explaining that state sovereignty should not be used as a cover for humanitarian abuses. Today Annan has (wrongly) announced that American action in Iraq outside the United Nations will be “illegal.” While the Clinton administration—or the first Bush administration—was assertive in many ways, people did not seek assurances about its intentions. The Bush administration does not bear all the blame for this dramatic change in attitudes. Because of 9-11, it has had to act forcefully on the world stage and assert American power. But that should have been all the more reason to adopt a posture of consultation and cooperation while doing what needed to be done. The point is to scare our enemies, not terrify the rest of the world.

PART IV: THE WAY TO BUCK HISTORY
In 1992, Paul Wolfowitz, then a senior official in the first Bush administration, authored a Pentagon document that argued that in an era of overwhelming American dominance, U.S. foreign policy should be geared toward maintaining our advantage and discouraging the rise of other great powers. The premise behind this strategy is perfectly sensible. The United States should attempt to lengthen its era of supremacy for as long as it can. Any country would try to do the same (though a wise one would not be foolish enough to announce it). For that reason, the elder Bush ordered the Pentagon to water down the document so that it was not quite so arrogant.





• Deployments




In principle, American power is not simply good for America; it is good for the world. Most of the problems the world faces today—from terrorism to AIDS to nuclear proliferation—will be solved not with less U.S. engagement but with more. The lesson of the 1990s—of Bosnia, Kosovo, East Timor, Rwanda—is surely that American action, with all its flaws, is better than inaction. Other countries are simply not ready or able, at this point, to take on the challenges and burdens of leadership. Around the world, people understand this. In a global survey taken last year, the most intriguing—and unreported—finding was that large majorities of people in most countries thought that the world would be a more dangerous place if there were a rival to the American superpower. Sixty-four percent of the French, 70 percent of Mexicans, 63 percent of Jordanians felt this way. (Ironically, old Europe was more pro-American on this issue than new Europe. Only 27 percent of Bulgarians agreed.)
The real question is how America should wield its power. For the past half century it has done so through alliances and global institutions and in a consensual manner. Now it faces new challenges—and not simply because of what the Bush administration has done. The old order is changing. The alliances forged during the cold war are weakening. Institutions built to reflect the realities of 1945—such as the U.N. Security Council—risk becoming anachronistic. But if the administration wishes to further weak—en and indeed destroy these institutions and traditions—by dismissing or neglecting them—it must ask itself: What will take their place? By what means will America maintain its hegemony?
For some in the administration, the answer is obvious: America will act as it chooses, using what allies it can find in any given situation. As a statement of fact this is sometimes the only approach Washington will be able to employ. But it is not a durable long-term strategy. It would require America to build new alliances and arrangements every time it faced a crisis. More important, operating in a conspicuously unconstrained way, in service of a strategy to maintain primacy, will paradoxically produce the very competition it hopes to avoid. The last two years are surely instructive. The Bush administration’s swagger has generated international opposition and active measures to thwart its will. Though countries like France and Russia cannot become great-power competitors simply because they want to—they need economic and military strength—they can use what influence they have to disrupt American policy, as they are doing over Iraq. In fact, the less responsibility we give them, the more freedom smaller powers have to make American goals difficult to achieve.
In many cases the United States simply can’t “go it alone.” The current crises over North Korea, Iran’s nuclear program and the leakage of fissile materials from Russia are all good examples. And while the United States can act largely by itself in certain special circumstances, such as Iraq, the fewer allies, bases and air rights it has, the higher the costs will be in American lives and treasure. And those costs will become unbearable if the United States has to both wage war and pay for postwar reconstruction on its own.
The war on terror has given the United States a core security interest in the stability of societies. Failed states can become terrorist havens. That means we must focus attention and expenditures on nation-building. For all its flaws, the United Nations is doing on-the-ground work to create stable societies in Afghanistan, Kosovo, Cambodia and Mozambique—and for the most part, it’s succeeding. The European Union and Japan pay most of these bills. Were Washington to move to an entirely ad hoc approach, why would the rest of the world agree to clean up its messes?
Fighting terror also requires constant cooperation with countries across the globe. America could not have captured Qaeda strategist Khalid Shaikh Mohammed without the active partnership of Pakistan. And yet if you ask Pakistanis what they have gotten for this, they will point out that American tariffs continue to strangle their textile industry and U.S. aid remains meager. Having asked for help in de-Islamizing their education system—a matter of crucial concern to America—they have received little. Meanwhile the overall tone of Bush administration foreign policy has made General Musharraf embarrassed to be pro-American.
The last point is perhaps the most crucial one. Being pro-American should not be a political liability for our allies. The diplomatic fiasco over Turkey is an excellent example. For well over a year now it has been obvious to anyone watching that the Turkish people were deeply opposed to a war in Iraq. Yet the administration assumed that it could bully or bribe Turkey into giving it basing rights. But Turkey over the last year has become more democratic. The military is less willing to overrule politicians. The new ruling party, AK, is more open to internal debate than Turkey’s other parties. It allowed its members to vote freely on the motion to allow America basing rights, only to have it defeated. Since more than 90 percent of the Turks oppose giving America basing rights, this should not have been surprising. The administration wants democracy in the Middle East. Well, it got it.
As usual, diplomatic style played a role. “The way the U.S. has been conducting the negotiations has been, in general, humiliating,” says a retired senior diplomat, Ozdem Sanberk.
The costs of this mishap are real. If Turkey allowed America to open a second front, we could end the war more quickly and with fewer casualties, and the thorny issues relating to Turkish-Kurdish relations could be more easily handled. But the larger lesson is surely that in an increasingly democratic world American power must be seen as legitimate not only by other governments but by their people. Does America really want a world in which it gets its way in the face of constant public anger only by twisting arms, offering bribes and allying with dictators?
There are many specific ways for the United States to rebuild its relations with the world. It can match its military buildup with diplomatic efforts that demonstrate its interest and engagement in the world’s problems. It can stop oversubsidizing American steelworkers, farmers and textile-mill owners, and open its borders to goods from poorer countries. But above all, it must make the world comfortable with its power by leading through consensus. America’s special role in the world—its ability to buck history—is based not simply on its great strength, but on a global faith that this power is legitimate. If America squanders that, the loss will outweigh any gains in domestic security. And this next American century could prove to be lonely, brutish and short.

Result number: 73

Message Number 113333

Going at it alone View Thread
Posted by Ed Davis, DPM on 3/18/03 at 13:27

Search The WebDirectoryNewsPhotos For



Quick FindAutosCareersCasinoCelebritiesCommunityComputersDatingeBay®EmailEntertainmentFashionFood & DrinkGamesGreetingsHealthHoroscopesInvestingLifestyleLotteryMoviesMusicNewsPrize MachineReal EstateShoppingSite MapSmall BusinessSportsTodayTravelTVWeatherWhite PagesYellow Pages
Excite (PIPE) Lite (PIPE) Email (PIPE) Help











Home Top World Intl Natl Op Politics Govt Business Tech Sci Entertain Sports Health Odd Sources

Mid East • Europe • Asia • Africa • Latin Amer & Caribbean


Powell: 30 Nations in Anti-Iraq Coalition


Email this Story

Mar 18, 1:02 PM (ET)

By BARRY SCHWEID

(AP) US soldiers from the 3rd Brigade of the 101st Airborne Division walk past a Blackhawk helicopter at...
Full Image


WASHINGTON (AP) - Thirty nations have declared their support for the United States in any war with Iraq and 15 other nations have given their backing privately, Secretary of State Colin Powell said Tuesday.

"We now have a coalition of the willing that includes some 30 nations who publicly said they could be included in such a listing," Powell said, "and there are 15 other nations, for one reason or another, who do not wish to be publicly named but will be supporting the coalition."

Powell told reporters he had received assurances of open support in telephone conversations Tuesday from the foreign ministers of Denmark and the Netherlands, which were listed, but that Russian President Vladimir Putin had reaffirmed his opposition to war with Iraq in a telephone conversation with President Bush.

But Powell said a mutual concern over terrorism and a planned reduction in nuclear weapons arsenals "pull us together, and I think we will have this disagreement and move on."


At the same time, Powell said Iraqi President Saddam Hussein so far had rejected Bush's demand that he leave Iraq, but that a number of countries were still trying to persuade the Iraqi president to go into exile.

"He has essentially dismissed the message," Powell said.

Asked when the United States may go to war against Iraq, the former Army general said he had "learned long ago not to make predictions."

The State Department released the list of 30 countries, one of which, Japan, was identified as only a post-conflict member of the coalition.

Turkey was included, and Powell said even as the Turkish parliament debates a U.S. proposal to use Turkish territory for an invasion of northern Iraq he was confident of Turkish cooperation in one form or another.

Powell also hinted that if the parliament accepts the U.S. proposal the Bush administration might revive its offer of $6 billion in special economic assistance.

Powell said war plans have been drawn up designed to minimize Iraqi civilian casualties and to warn Iraqi commanders about their actions. He said the U.S. aim was "to make it as quick as possible."

Powell also said he would not attend a U.N. Security Council meeting on Wednesday at which the chief U.N. weapons inspector, Hans Blix, is due to make a report.

France and Russia, which opposed war and sought to extend inspections, have indicated they would be represented by their foreign ministers.

But Powell said he saw no point in going, and that U.S. Ambassador John Negroponte would represent the United States.







Articles From AP


• Iraqi Kurds Prepare for Looming War photo
• U.S. Tells Iraqis, Surrender or Die photo
• Oil Exports From Iraq May Be Disrupted photo
• Spain Rules Out Sending Troops to Iraq photo
• Bush Fails to Win China, Russia Support photo
• Arafat Signs Legislation for PM Position photo
• Russia Wants U.N. at Head of Iraq Crisis photo
• Iran and Iraq Exchange Prisoners of War
• Arab League Chief Cancels Trip to Iraq
• Powell: 30 Nations in Anti-Iraq Coalition photo
• Explosion in Saudi Arabian House Kills 1
• Saddam Defies U.S. Demand to Leave Iraq photo
• Saddam Mocks Ultimatum to Give Up Power photo
• France May Help if Iraq Uses Bio Weapons photo
• Nations Joining Anti-Iraq Coalition
• Yemeni Man Fatally Shoots 3 Oil Workers photo
• Qatari Emir Pardons Jordanian Journalist
• Blair Pleads for Party Backing on Iraq photo
• Germany: Iraq Threat Doesn't Justify War photo
• U.S. General Studies Iraq Battle Plans photo

Copyright 2003 Associated Press. All right reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Result number: 74

Message Number 112616

Re: barbara View Thread
Posted by Perry K. on 3/11/03 at 22:07

barbara,

when did the tightness start? i am 5 days post op and i feel tightness, it takes a few seconds when i stand up for it to go away. do you always have it? is it similar to mine?

Also, why did you go to an orthopedic doctor fro the surgery? you should have had it done by a foot specialist. Ortho's rarely do these surgeries and have no practice at it. Even Michael Jordan would not hit his free throws if he rarely ever got to shoot one.

Result number: 75

Message Number 112212

Re: Iraq and 9-11 View Thread
Posted by Ed Davis, DPM on 3/07/03 at 21:57

A good overview of the situation:
Random Gleanings

Pollack’s Case for Invasion
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Article date: 02/28/03

Eric Miller
Senior Contributor, bankstocks.com
emiller@bankstocks.com

More by this Author...




Many are exhausted by the issue of Iraq—and understandably so, as the topic has gone on for a long time, and has come to dominate people’s thinking both on Wall Street and Main Street. But even as a final countdown approaches, a clear resolution to the crisis may prove elusive, even with the best possible military outcome. World and domestic opinions have polarized and emotion levels are running high, with rational discussion frequently absent. A major contribution to mature discussion is The Threatening Storm (Council on Foreign Relations), published last year by Kenneth Pollack. Hailed by Bill Keller of The New York Times as the most influential book on foreign policy in years, it was also characterized by The Economist (12/14), as the book to be read before listening to anyone else on the subject.

What are the author’s credentials? Pollack spent seven years in the Central Intelligence Agency as a Persian Gulf analyst, and was one of the few to predict the invasion of Kuwait. He was also the primary author of the CIA’s history of that invasion. A graduate of Yale and the holder of a doctorate from MIT, Pollack was the Olin Senior Fellow of National Security Studies for the Council on Foreign Relations at the time that he authored the book. He is now serving as the Director of Research for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution. He previously served on the National Security Council under President Clinton from 1995 to 1996 and again from 1999 to 2000.

Reluctant Warrior
The book’s subtitle is “The Case for Invading Iraq,” yet Pollack came to his current conclusion reluctantly. While many of his arguments seem to mirror the rhetoric of the Bush administration, Pollack offers a number of criticisms of U.S. policy over the last 15 years. He is far more critical of the policies and perfidy of the French, Russians, and Chinese for their roles over the last decade in undermining the resolve of the United Nations. Pollack’s book painstakingly details the history of Iraq, the mindset of Saddam Hussein, and the pros and cons of five key policy options: containment, deterrence, covert action, the Afghan approach, and invasion.

Pollack calls this our last chance to stop Iraq, and says that a war today would be much less costly and risky than an inevitable conflict with Hussein down the road. Pollack strongly fears that Hussein will not be deterred, and that it is reckless to assume he can be. Other policy options pose a greater risk than war.

A Brief History
Hussein came to power in Iraq in the early 1970s and assumed the presidency in 1979. Following the model of his idol, Joseph Stalin, he cruelly and relentlessly purged his opposition early on and continues to do so right up to this day. In his first purge, he forced a confession from an opponent at a party meeting, then read the names of 54 others sitting in the room, alleging their conspiracy against him. Hussein had each dragged out by guards to confront a kangaroo court. They were then dispatched by a firing squad consisting of the other high officials whose names hadn’t been called.

As Saddam eliminated his internal opposition, external checks on him weakened. The British had withdrawn from east of Suez, and the U.S. relied on its proxy in the region, the Shah of Iran. Hussein invaded Iran in 1980, after the Shah’s overthrow, in the hope of winning what was then 20% of the world’s oil reserves. The U.S. tilted toward Iraq in the war as the lesser of two evils, and didn’t interfere when Iraq used chemical weapons against the Iranians in 1983, and against its own Kurds in 1988.

Bankrupted By War
The eight-year war cost Iraq the equivalent of 18 million Americans killed or wounded, and distorted and virtually bankrupted its economy. The U.S. tried to turn Saddam into a regional ally from 1988 to 1990, but he distrusted our intentions, and Israel’s. It was at this point that Saddam attempted to build a uranium enrichment facility.

The first Bush administration decided on a hands-off policy, and Hussein invaded Kuwait in August of 1990 with the purpose of snaring its huge treasure chest. After a lightning victory, he moved his troops to the border of Saudi Arabia. Pollack asserts that, contrary to conventional wisdom, Hussein expected an American military response to his invasion of Kuwait, but thought that he could thwart the light military effort that he expected the U.S. to mount, and that we would soon back down. According to Pollack, Hussein did not contemplate the coalition building and massive use of air and ground power that followed.

Hussein made what Pollack enumerated as four wrong assumptions about the Gulf War. But then, we made some miscalculations of our own in 1991. Following our quick military victory, we didn’t thrust into Baghdad, and expected Hussein’s government collapse, instead. The U.S. wanted to leave a strong, cohesive Iraq to serve as a counter to Iran. Neither did we wish to exceed the UN mandate, or agitate world opinion with further slaughter of helpless Iraqi troops. The next miscalculation was to underestimate the remaining strength of Iraq’s military capability; we stood by as they used air power and the Republican Guards to eliminate revolts by the Kurds in the north and the south.

When Containment Failed
With Hussein still in power, the U.S. and the UN stitched together a containment policy--which the “doves,” both here and abroad, thought would work. Hussein was determined to resist inspections from the outset. He formed a Concealment Operations Committee in June 1991, and had no intention of giving up his weapons of mass destruction. Hussein credited the chemical weapons with salvaging a victory over the Iranians, quashing the Kurds in northern Iraq, and deterring the U.S. with attacking Baghdad. The Iraqis withheld documentation, key equipment, and key people from the inspection teams from the beginning. For a while, the containment program seemed to be working and had broad international support.

In 1993, an attempted assassination of the former President Bush was foiled in Kuwait, and in 1994 Iraq issued warnings that unless the UN sanctions, which he claimed were starving his people, were lifted, he would take action. There were even indications that he was going to reinvade Kuwait, until the U.S. responded with a military threat. While Hussein tried to enlist world pity for the impact of the sanctions on his people, he continued to build what amounted to fifty new palaces, and proceeded with the production of banned weapons.

Meanwhile, defectors indicated that the inspectors were being hoodwinked, but France pushed to ease the sanctions. The Iraqis were sufficiently emboldened in 1995 to announce that they would cease all cooperation with the inspectors. Should the U.S. respond militarily, the Iraqis threatened tie the inspectors to the machinery likely to be attacked.

U.S. Distracted
The inspectors made concessions to the Iraqis in 1996, and Iraqi efforts to circumvent the sanctions by smuggling had increasing success. Support for any retaliatory efforts on our part came increasingly in question as Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Turkey began to waver. U.S. governmental policy fluctuated somewhat as the doves in the foreign policy establishment, Anthony Lake, Strobe Talbott, and Warren Christopher, were replaced, and we were distracted by the problems in Somalia and Haiti.

The CIA had been given the green light in 1997 to pursue coup attempts, but at least six attempts didn’t come close to succeeding. Clinton didn’t want Iraq to be the centerpiece of his foreign policy, but his efforts at ameliorating the Israeli-Palestinian issue, however promising for a time, couldn’t maintain momentum. Americans tend to forget that during those years, when the Clinton administration attempted a more even-handed Mideast policy, a series of major terrorist attacks occurred, including the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center. The attacks, while not positively linked to Hussein, may have been financially and morally supported by his regime.

Matters came to head in 1997 when Iraq blocked the inspectors from entering the country. At that time, Richard Butler, a much tougher leader than Hans Blix, led them. They had two close calls: One occurred when an Iraqi tried to seize control of a UNSCOM helicopter—almost crashing it. In the second, a rocket-propelled grenade was fired into UNSCOM headquarters. That fall, the Iraqis blocked an inspection, but when the Security Council threatened to impose travel restrictions on Iraqi officials, there were five abstentions in the vote, including France, China, and Russia. When the U.S. and Britain massed forces in the area, Arab and European governments distanced themselves from any support. When matters reached the boiling point once again in 1998 regarding the inspections process, Clinton again began rebuilding U.S. forces in the region, but found little support, with only the Kuwaitis willing to allow us the use of their bases. The UN showed little determination and, one more time, Saddam proved that few nations would support the use of force.

Obstruction Continues
When the inspections team found VX nerve gas on missile warheads, the Iraqis destroyed them, and the Security Council offered only a muted reaction. In August 1998, al Qaeda detonated car bombs outside our embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, and in October, Saddam expelled 10 Americans from the inspections team and renounced any cooperation with UNSCOM. In November, along with the British, we had attack planes in the air—but the operation was aborted when Iraq announced on CNN that the inspectors would be allowed back in the country. That situation lasted only a short while, because Richard Butler informed the Security Council that Iraq was still impeding the inspectors, and he withdrew his staff.

A few days later, on December 19th, President Clinton announced that it was henceforth the policy of the U.S. government to replace the Hussein regime, but that it would be very difficult to accomplish without an invasion. That possibility was derailed the following year when the U.S. got involved in the war in Kosovo. International resolution was further damaged when the French went back on their word, according to Pollack, and abstained on voting for Resolution 1284 to preserve the military embargo and the United Nations’ control over Iraq’s finances, thereby defeating U.S. efforts for a consensus. The presumed reason was that Iraq trade had grown to $17 billion and other countries were trying to get a share of that. When Russia abstained, so did France, fearing that otherwise they would lose contracts to the Russians.

In the meantime, smuggling mushroomed to the benefit of some of the Gulf countries, Syria, and Turkey. Arab-Israeli violence inflamed the Arab street. Saddam urged this on, knowing that it was to his advantage. In its last year in office, the Clinton administration was just playing defense in regard to Iraq. When the Bush camp came in, there was no clear priority set initially, because, as earlier, the foreign policy establishment was split between doves, moderate hawks, and extreme hawks. The new administration, like its predecessors, initially chose the “least bad” solution, adopting the dovish version, which remained in place until 9/11 changed everything.

Saddam Hussein
So what about this man, who some name in the polls as “less dangerous” than George Bush? The atrocities attributed to him are mind-boggling. An estimated 200,000 have disappeared into the prison system and the number tortured vastly exceeds that. He employs 500,000 people in his internal intelligence security and police, exclusive of the army. One of his sons is said by defectors to have athletes beaten and tortured if their teams lose in international matches. While Pollack doesn’t think that Hussein is irrational or suicidal, he’s sure that he’s totally out of touch with reality, and surrounded only by sycophants. Saddam’s views of the world are amazingly narrow and distorted.

Saddam shares some of Hitler’s most dangerous traits, Pollack says. His history of foreign policy decisions is littered with bizarre judgments and catastrophic miscalculations, such as his invasion of Iran, his expectation of repulsing the U.S. in Kuwait, and his continued dismissal of our will and capabilities. He sees himself as a great man in history, the new Saladin. His goal is to head a new pan-Arab union with Iraq as a superpower in total control of the Persian Gulf.

Once Saddam has a nuclear weapon, he expects to deter the U.S. and Israel under all circumstances. His weapons of mass destruction program have been so important to him that he’s been willing to give up $130 to $180 billion in oil revenue in order to hang on to them, sacrificing his people, the Iraqi economy, and conventional military power. Pollack believes, as many other experts do, that Saddam may achieve that nuclear capability within one to four years, and could become emboldened by its possession. He is far more of a gambler than were the Soviets.

The Inspections Trap
Pollack has long been a disbeliever in the effectiveness of weapons inspection, doubting that we could ever get and be able to retain the quality of inspection regime required. In the past, the UN has periodically weakened inspections’ effectiveness, and the French, Russians, and Chinese have consistently attempted to shift the burden of proof from Iraq to the inspectors. At times, they’ve colluded with the Iraqis. Even as strong as UNSCOM was, it couldn’t eradicate WMD. Iraq has played the inspection game the last several weeks exactly as Pollack had predicted in his book, completed months earlier.

Other Options
The author dismisses the alternatives to invasion as useless and riskier than invasion itself. Some politicians have advocated an attempted coup, but we’re tried that a number of times, never successfully. Pollack isn’t impressed with the quality of leadership among the opposition groups. Hussein’s security wall seems almost impenetrable, especially after he eliminated any potential adversary. George Tenet, the CIA director, has said that the chances of success of covert action are no better than 20%. Some observers have championed the adoption of the “Afghan Approach” in lieu of war. This would consist of using overt military forces at arms length, supported by Special Forces units and air power such as we did with the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan. Pollack doesn’t think the Iraqi opposition forces are of the caliber of the Northern Alliance, and is cautious on any expectations of a mass uprising or even widespread surrenders.

The Iraqi army is not of uniformly high quality and isn’t as well equipped as in 1990-91, but the Republican Guard fought hard in that brief conflict, although not effectively. The use of air power in Iraq would be hampered in urban conflict, unlike in Kuwait. Our tactical air campaigns have not always been wildly successful as, for example, against the Serbian group forces in Kosovo where we inflicted little damage. What was effective in the Gulf War was the psychological pounding from five weeks of bombing by B-52s, but in this campaign, care would be taken regarding population centers.

Many Europeans and members of the Gulf States favor the option of deterrence, relying on American military action short of invasion. But that’s what has been practiced in part since 1991 without great success. It could not be maintained once Hussein has the bomb. He’s the risk taker that the Soviets were not. As we’ve seen, support for U.S. military action has flickered off and on, with several Gulf States showing increasing reluctance to let the U.S. use their bases.

Pollack feels that containment is the least bad of the alternatives to invasion. Sanctions have been the greatest impediment to Iraqi military rebuilding, but the sanctions policy has been eroding due to the increase in smuggling and the Iraqi leveling of surcharges on oil going through the UN system. It’s estimated that Iraq has earned $2 billion per year through the breakdowns in the system. Other breaches in discipline have been uncovered as well. In 2000, it was discovered that China was constructing a nationwide fiber optic system for the Iraqi government that would have military and internal security capabilities. There just hasn’t been the will to punish violators of the sanctions program. The Chinese and Russians have even sold arms to the Iraqis. Another example of a breakdown is the disintegration of the ban on air travel to Iraq.

Having written about this subject three weeks in a row, we should get off it, but we find ourselves troubled and even sickened by so much of what we hear in our cynical and often ignorant world. A reading of this book should refamiliarize many with what a grotesque brute Hussein has always been, and always will be—and how few major countries have shown a consistent will other than Britain and the U.S. The UN has wavered, and France, Russia, and China have obstructed. The inspections process has been ineffective. One may disagree on the wisdom of a war alternative, but the hawks’ motives shouldn’t be subject to the ridicule they have been. Even if our government should be drawing the wrong conclusion, the intentions of the administration and Tony Blair are purer than many in the opposite camp, abroad. And anyway, we may already have passed the point of no return. We can’t keep our forces in the Gulf doing nothing for six months, and soon the weather will become an obstacle. The risks of our backing down at this stage would be formidable. Better to brace yourselves, take a deep breath, and hope.




What do you think? Let me know!

/ETM/


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


The author is a contributor to bankstocks.com, a public web site operated by a hedge fund. The fund often buys and sells securities that are the subject of his articles, both before and after the articles are posted. Under no circumstances does this article represent a recommendation to buy or sell stocks. This article is intended to provide insight into the financial services industry and is not a solicitation of any kind. Neither the author nor bankstocks.com can provide investment advice or respond to individual requests for recommendations. However, we encourage your feedback and welcome your comments on any of the articles on this site. Neither the author nor bankstocks.com has undertaken any responsibility to update any portion of this article in response to events which may transpire subsequent to its original publication date.





Copyright © 2002 by bankstocks.com. Email info@bankstocks.com. View our Privacy Policy.

Result number: 76
Searching file 10

Message Number 105786

Re: Copy and Paste Queen View Thread
Posted by Marty on 1/18/03 at 09:54

Wow its strange how so different our cases can be. The same is true for as well. Sitting much better the standing and I can walk fairly fare. But standing and within in one minute the pain is horrible.

Could you tell me the test you have had and what they were looking for in the test? I think the Neurologist is going to be putting me thru the ringer next month.


Judge Memorial, I went to Jordan High. Things have changed a bit since then. The new ski resorts are huge. One is the biggest in the United States. Of corse that one is in Park City.

Anyway I wish us both good luck, ……… well ok, got to out on a limb here even though I shouldn’t but because I live in Utah you have probably guessed my religion and may I say I wish us both good luck and I pray our prayers will be answered soon.

Marty

Result number: 77
Searching file 9

Message Number 98878

Re: Lets have some fun . Who is Bill ? View Thread
Posted by rob a on 11/01/02 at 06:49

If Bill is a real name and he is so concerned only with the Sonocur then I'm still guessing that it might be Dr. Bill Jordan, CEO and founder of Sonorex. I hope it isn't the person you are hinting it might be, Of course, I have no way of knowing for sure. As for hundreds of indications taking many years Dr. Z; I believe that when they made the temp CPT codes for PF and the other for all other indications, that was a way to speed up the approval for all other indications that was in anticipation to come. The first approval is normally the hardest. Once you can prove that another similar indication works as well then they are more open to sign off approval for other similar indications. As long as the devices will be use for tendiopathys, there should not be any major issues.

Result number: 78

Message Number 98708

Re: Bill is Right vs. Bill of Rights View Thread
Posted by rob a on 10/30/02 at 19:30

I wonder if Bill is Bill Jordan; founder and CEO of Sonorex? Just remember people, the FDA regulates OEMs not physicians. If a physician uses a device off labeled, that is their medical decision. It happens very often and I don't know where it is written that they can't do this. As for Bill stating that physicians need to do an IRB study under FDA guidelines; that is incorrect. OEMs, or those companies seeking marketing approval, need to follow FDA guides for an IRB, not Physicians. AS for the liability that they take, well, if they have proof of many clinical studies that state that the device treats PF effectively, then they can say, in their medical judgement, that it is ethical to treat that indication with that device. If you want to look at a classic example of treating off labeled on a routine basis, look at urologists and the treatment of ureteral stones with kidney lithotripters. Most of those devices are labeled only to treat stones in the kidney but they are routinely used to treat stones in the ureter. You would be hard pressed to find an expert in urology to say that this is unethical and should not be done.

Result number: 79

Message Number 94973

Re: "Good Feet" Store and Arch Supports View Thread
Posted by BGCPed on 9/10/02 at 22:52

I am glad to hear that you didnt get scammed by them. The margin they make on an injection molded prefab device that costs about $3 a pair and sells at $217 they can afford to give money back refunds. To put it in perspective: The top of the line Air Jordan Nike retails for about $140, they are made over seas and the cost is about $7.50, somebody smarter than me do the math. I know Tiger Woods and MJ dont come cheap but I guess infomercials are VERY expensive.

I guess Goodfeet is the Carlton Sheets of foot products

Result number: 80

Message Number 93570

Re: Working out what to do? View Thread
Posted by R C on 8/26/02 at 13:39



Sure, 10% body fat is not unusual for guys like Michael Jordan, heh heh!

Anyway, let me take this moment to say that humor is good medicine, and I've appreciated John h's contributions in that department.

Result number: 81

Message Number 92018

Re: '90 percent of people are wearing the wrong size shoes' View Thread
Posted by Lara T on 8/08/02 at 18:11

Shaquille isn't just a basketball player with large feet. He is practically a giant. He dwarfs some of the professional basketball players. He's over 7 feet tall and over 300 pounds. For comparison, Michael Jordan (probably the best professional basketball player ever, unless Shaquille surpasses him before he retires) is 6'6" and 198 pounds. Magic Johnson was 6'9" and 250 pounds.

Result number: 82
Searching file 8

Message Number 83167

sneaker for sell nike View Thread
Posted by fat on 5/09/02 at 03:09

dunk low pro sb whilte blue us 11.5
304292 141
1350hkd 170usd
dunk low pro red white 3m us 12
624044 611
800hkd 100usd
air max 95 black red us 12
604116 063
1200hkd 150usd
air jordan i black blue us 12
136066 041
850hkd 110usd
air jordan iii blue white us 12
136064 141
1000hkd 125usd
air jordan xi low snake us 12.5
136071 102
1200hkd 150usd
air jordan xii red white us 12
130690 161
1200hkd 150usd
air jordan viii black us 12 used over all 85% new
130182 001
1500hkd 190usd
dynamic flight us 12 worn once over all 95% new
130163 011
1400hkd 175usd

fatnessbear@sinaman.com
international shipping 25-35usd

Result number: 83
Searching file 7

Message Number 75209

Re: Carmen, Discovery Network replied & MJ down View Thread
Posted by Carmen H on 2/27/02 at 18:22

What's her address? If you give itto me I will write to her and get the Network publication addresses....
Thanks Brian!!

Yeah...you know...Michael Jordan probably does have heel problems from his BAD KNEES.
;o)

Result number: 84

Message Number 75198

Carmen, Discovery Network replied & MJ down View Thread
Posted by BrianG on 2/27/02 at 16:31

Hi Carmen,

Amber, from the Discovery Network answered my e-mail today. It did not sound as positive as yours. She told me that their programs were produced by liscensed production companies. If I wanted, I could write to one of them, but of course she didn't include that information.

This morning I heard that Michael Jordan was out for the season, knee surgery. Oh lord, why couldn't he have been cursed him with heel problems!! Talk about a perfect spokesperson :*)

BrianG

Result number: 85
Searching file 6

Message Number 68650

What kind of shoes are they? View Thread
Posted by Valerie S on 1/04/02 at 07:04

Hi JoAnn,

When did your PF start again? Forgive me, if you've already told us.

Can the shoes be repaired or re-soled? If they are athletic shoes, probably not... but just wondered because I am an experienced cobbler (although I don't do it anymore). Depending on what type of sole they have, you may be able to have a nonslip rubber sole protector put on the botttom to extend the life of the soles. Unfortunately, athletic shoes are disposable and can't really be revamped properly (that's why Michael Jordan needs a new pair after every game). They, like cars, are made to wear out... and if you wear them on your feet all day every day... well.

Have you looked at the Birkenstocks at all? Of course, they're not right for everyone, but These shoes can go through a resoling before you need to replace the cork footbed (also replaceable, through the manufacturer... the shoe store you buy them from can send them back for you). I have found them to be well worth the money. You can get them with nonslip soles, or you can even have rubber sole protectors put on the bottoms of these (the sole is a soft crepe material and does wear quickly, especially if you scuff at all). Also, if you get lots of wear in a certain spot like the heels, you can get heel protectors put on.

You might take the shoes to a shoe repair and see what they say. Sometimes it can cost, but if the shoes are comfortable, it's usually worth it. I am wondering... have the shoes helped your PF... you say they are really good, but you might want to consider the possibility that the shoes are hurting you... just a thought.

I really hope you can pamper those feet and find some real relief soon. I really know what it's like to have PF and work a standup job. I thought it wasn't so bad and that it would just go away. You say it's not too bad, but make sure you listen to your body. This change for the worse could be related to the cold weather, but make sure you do what you can to take care of it! Don't be like me (I had to leave my job after months of physical and mental turmoil). I don't want to scare you or dramatize... it's just that this can get serious.

Sorry if I am saying too much. It's just that when someone talks about waitressing or a job that keeps them on their feet, I really take notice. You work hard and you need the job, but don't let it be your demise. I say all of these things out of care and concern for a fellow customer service person. Are you working with a doctor to treat this PF?

I wish you the best and very quick relief.

Your friend, Val.

Result number: 86

Message Number 62572

BEST IVE EVER SEEN View Thread
Posted by WoW!!!!!! on 10/09/01 at 19:14

If you like sneakers .ive seen the best pair of Jordan sneakers on Ebay check this link out.Tell me if anyone seen this before I bid on them these are hot http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1648390514

Result number: 87

Message Number 60304

Re: sorry but... View Thread
Posted by Ed Davis, DPM on 9/14/01 at 10:50

Anon:

"Murder" is the deliberate taking of one's life. The US has not deliberately taken the lives of Iraqi children. Iraqi children may have died of malnutrition as a consequence of the embargo. The government of Iraq has made a concious decision to allow the starvation--where are the billlions of dollars of oil money being used? We probably made an error in the Gulf War in not "finishing the job" by going all the way to Baghdad and eliminating Sadam but we did so to appease our "allies" in the Middle East.

Bill Gates, amy indeed, contribute money to the victims in New York.

How are the people in NY "directly responsible" for the Palestinians being "forcibly exiled" from Palestine? Keep in mind that, in terms of territory, the majority of the land of the British Mandate of Palestine, that is, all of the mandate east of the Jordan River was given to the Hashemite Arabs (King Hussein) but the population of Jordan has a majority of Palestinians. Also, in 1948, the remainder of the mandate, the portion west of the Jordan River was partitioned between the Israelis and the Palestinians. It was the Arab neighbors, Egypt and Syria that refused to accept the partition, waged war and created the refugee problem.
Ed

Result number: 88

Message Number 60206

Re: another dissident View Thread
Posted by Ed Davis, DPM on 9/13/01 at 19:05

Scott:

You really need to do some historical research. The United States did not take Palestine from the Palestinians. There never was a country called Palestine. There was a colony of Britain known as the British "mandate" of Palestine which included the land which is now Jordan, Israel and the West Bank. The portion of the British mandate of Palestine east of the Jordan river was given to rule, after the Brits withdrew from the area, to the Hashemite Arabs (of which King Hussein was a member). That area became known as Trans-Jordan and eventually just Jordan. The Hashemite population of Jordan are actually a minority in that country with the majority being Palestinian Arabs. After WWII, that portion of the mandate west of the Jordan River was partitioned into a Jewish state, Israel and an Arab state.
The neighboring Arab countries, Syria and Egypt, refused to accept the existence of Israel, vowed to "drive the Jews into the sea," told the Arab population in the area to leave so they would not be harmed in the upcoming massacre they had planned. Egypt and Syria lost the war in 1948 causing the Arab population they had displaced to become refugees. Those unfortunate refugees became pawns of Egypt, Syria and Jordan and excuses to wage 3 additional wars against Israel. The Israelis have been living under the spectre of terrorism on a daily basis. Albeit on a smaller scale, what happened to us on Tuesday is a regular occurrence in Israel. There are so many terrorist actions perpetrated against Israeli citizens that the American media had stopped reporting the incidents as news virtually a decade ago. Only the really big terrorist actions make the news.
Ed

Result number: 89
Searching file 5

Message Number 53474

Re: Custom orthodics . . .what next? View Thread
Posted by Sally J on 7/17/01 at hrmin

Thank you for your response. I will get the cortizone injection this afternoon. I sure hope it helps.

Result number: 90

Message Number 53258

Custom orthodics . . .what next? View Thread
Posted by Sally J on 7/15/01 at hrmin

I have PF/HS and I have been wearing custom orthodics for over three weeks now with some relief but I'm still in quite a bit of pain most of the time.
The pain is still very bad after any inactivity. Should the orthodics be giving me more relief after three weeks or am I expecting too much? My doctor has finally agreed to try cortizone shots but I have some questions, such as side effects: I have heard cortizone can compromise the immune system. If this true? Where do I go from here. My feet are ruling my life!
Thanks, Sally

Result number: 91

Message Number 50584

Heel pain and Aspertame View Thread
Posted by Doug on 6/13/01 at hrmin

I am a diet Pepsi junkie. My heel pain is apparently caused by nothing that can be discovered by modern medicine. I have heard horror stories about aspertame but I tend not to be an alarmist so I ignored them. For the past while, I have stopped drinking diet colas and I think my pain is beginning to ease off. Is this possible as a result of an elimination of aspertame or is it more likely just the passage of time (I have been in pain about 10 months)?

Result number: 92
Searching file 4

Message Number 47772

Re: TTS - Does it ever go away? View Thread
Posted by Doug J on 5/15/01 at hrmin

Wendyn:

Thank you for your reply.

I developed the condition about 8 months ago (I think - hard to remember the onset). I had been a runner for about 20 years and I had to take a year off. At the end of the year, I ran again, hard, usually on a hill. I began to notice my heels hurting. The only relief I felt was when I lay face down in bed. Fortunately, my sleep was not disturbed. Any touch to my feet caused pain, then tingling, then burning. I had x rays, bone scan, blood tests and then I found this website and found out there were other people who were suffering the same pains. I took a description to my doctor and, while he seemed a little abrupt at a patient suggesting a cause, he did say it sounds like TTS and performed the "tapping" test to make sure. NOw he wants to do a diagnostic injection of cortisone.

Treatment I have had includes podiatrist (who was baffled), physio, acupunture, stretching, anti inflammatories, etc.

Originally, the tingling was fairly constant but it is abating and I don't think the symptoms are as bad now as they were 6 weeks ago when I thought I wouldn't be able to work (I teach and therefore spend much time standing which hurts the most). I still have the occasional painful flareup and I am aware all of the time that my feet are still not right, but I am hoping I am on the road to recovery. Unfortunately, what I read here seems to say that recovery is unlikely. Is that true?

Doug

Result number: 93

Message Number 47737

TTS - Does it ever go away? View Thread
Posted by Doug J on 5/14/01 at hrmin

My doctor thinks I may have TTS. He is doing a diagnostic injection of cortisone this week.

While I have significant pain, and have had for about 8 months, it's not as bad as it was 6 weeks ago. Does TTS ever get better on its own or am I eventually doomed to surgery?

Result number: 94

Message Number 47573

Re: Inspiration View Thread
Posted by Cynthia d on 5/12/01 at 09:25

Julie, I attended an intimate concert by him here in Jordan Hall. He had his entire family there and I believe it was his daughter played a peice on piano with him. At the end he spoke about his family and how much they all mean to him, and how they inspire him. It was very touching.

Result number: 95

Message Number 46182

Re: possible tibial neuralgia View Thread
Posted by Doug on 4/29/01 at hrmin

I have problems with both feet that sound very much like yours. I experience pain, burning and tingling, but no swelling or hot spots. I havetried physio, acupuncture, chiro, stretching. No luck. It's been about 6-8 months now.

Have you found any relief?

My doctors sound like yours. Nobody has mentioned neuralgia. Is this a difficult diagnosis?

Any response would be appreciated.

Result number: 96

Message Number 42175

Re: So much pain I can't walk View Thread
Posted by Bendan A. Jordan on 3/22/01 at hrmin

I have just had an xray for my pain and discovered I have a calcaneal spur What medical advice do you give. Is sugery a success or are there alterantives

Result number: 97
Searching file 2

Message Number 23889

Is all arch pain PF ? View Thread
Posted by Bruce J on 7/25/00 at 11:12

Hello, I believe I have atypical pf since I don't have the usual symptoms. After at least six years , many Drs., orthotics and shoes, I'm still left with arch pain while standing. I guess I would like to know how others have dealt with this or am I alone. Initally I had a bout of PF with typical symptoms but in the past five years it has been mostly arch pain. Some days are almost pain free, just returned from a family euopean trip that gave me little grief and I can bicylce for hours but then out of the blue the discomfort makes it almost impossible to be on my feet. I have yet to see any pattern . I would appreciate hearing from anyone with similar problems.
Thank you, Bruce JordanResult number: 98

Message Number 23190
You know you have PF when... View Thread
Posted by john a on 7/12/00 at 08:42

You notice that one of the "contestants" on the Big Brother TV show was wearing Birks - she was the exotic dancer, Jordan, I think, was her name, and she was wearing a silver Gizeh style (if I know my Birks!). It looked like she had almost no room to spare at the toes or heel :-)Result number: 99
Searching file 1
Searching file 0

Message Number 1903
Re: acupuncture View Thread
Posted by Barbara on 9/18/98 at 17:23

Hi Debbie: I go once a week. I have been to a few Chinese acupuncturists (for different things in the past)and am now going to a woman who has her OMD (Dr. of Oriental Medicine) and is a licensed acupuncturist. She has been in the same location for 13 years and practices using the Japanese method. I beleive both methods work equally well the only difference being that with the Japanese method there is actually no pain with needle insertion. I don't know yet if it is working or how well but I actually am able to bear the pain better. I find that my heels feel worse directly after the treatment for maybe 24-36 hours and then feel quite a bit better after that. This is probably not a cure and if my insurance did not pay for it I would probably give it up. But I understand that it does take, as a general rule of thumb for acupuncture, 10 treatments for each year of the problem. So I will give it up to another 10 treatments and see what happens. I am going to start the icing, continue the stretching and start the taping. I would be interested in seeing how you do with acupuncture. Please let me know at barbara.jordan@barra.com. Thanks.

Result number: 100

Message Number 1592

Re: Does a walking cast help PF? View Thread
Posted by Barbara Jordan on 9/03/98 at 12:28

I was in a soft cast (boot) for four weeks and while it was indeed better and less painful to walk while wearing it, after four weeks I could not see any difference. I wore this boot 24 hours a day except in the shower. Maybe six weeks would have helped, I don't know. I hate to sound the negative note and truly hope that this will work for you. I recently read an article by a podiatrist that claimed that no matter what we do, the injury takes about a year to heal in most cases. But, on reading this site about those who have been suffering 3 and 4 years I am convinced I need to try everything possible and go with those things that at least seem to be helping.

Result number: 101

Message Number 1591

Acupuncture, homeopathic remedies and footwear View Thread
Posted by Barbara Jordan on 9/03/98 at 11:46

I am going to try the trauma oil compound you suggested, Edain. Thanks for the encouragement and right back at cha! The main change I have found so far from acupuncture is that my left foot (which has the most pain and is the one I have been having "pinned") is now less stiff than the right foot. In other words, when I do the foot exercises, it works better. So, now I am having both feet "pinned". I really cannot say that the pain is less but as I said before, it seems more bearable and perhaps this is because acupuncture (I am told) brings other things into balance, both emotionally and physically. I am sticking with it because I have had success in the past with soft tissue injuries. However, my acupuncturist tells me that it could be a long process. I plan to give her 5 or 6 months to see if it works. I would be very interested in staying in touch with acupuncture patients to compare notes. Has anyone had treatments for as long at 5 or 6 months? Also, as for shoes, I have a wide front foot with squared off toes and narrow heel so really need a roomy toe box. I have been wearing Easy Spirit walking shoes which accommodate orthotics well. (I like to put my orthotics under the inner sole for more comfort.) My orthotics do not fit in sandals or clogs, or any kind of dress shoe. And even though the European footwear is wider than most American shoes, the length sizing is wrong for my feet. Yesterday I bought a pair of SAS walking shoes which seem pretty supportive and comfortable. I find that I cannot wear flat shoes without support or lift. If I could find an athletic or walking shoe with slightly more lift in the heel that would be terrific but I don't think they exist. When I need to dress up, the round-toed Naturalizer with one inch heel works well for me even without the orthotics. (These are the ones with the elastic sides that sort of curl up the shoes when they are not being worn.) Thank goodness I don't have to dress up for work
! Well, anyway, it's great to be able to get all this out...and also realize that I'm not alone.

Result number: 102

Message Number 1574

Pain relief with homeopathic ointment View Thread
Posted by Barbara Jordan on 9/02/98 at 12:46

I have had PF for almost a year now and like most you have tried lots of remedies. I have customized orthotics, a soft cast I wore for 4 weeks, tried a cortizone shot--none of which seems to have made any difference. I now find that the stretching exercises are crucial to feeling better. I have been going to an acupuncturist (my insurance does cover this at 70%)for about 6 weeks and find that it has not made a big difference other than to perhaps make the pain a little more bearable. The acupuncturist gave me a homeopathic natural anti-inflammatory and analgesic cream called Traumeel and this has worked well for me--especially when the pain is bad. I think it works better than taking the motrin/anaprox types of anti-inflammatories. I have also started Weight Watchers and am enjoying losing the 30 pounds I put on when I quit smoking. After reading the messages posted here I am off to the shoe store again. I find it really difficult to find wide shoes that accommodate orthotics. Anyway, I am still hopeful and determined and love this web-site
! Thank you all for sharing.

Result number: 103

Begin Guestbook searches

Searching file all
Searching file all2
Searching file runners
Searching file guestsold2
Searching file oldguestbook

End of Search

heelspurs.com
Copyright ©, Financial Disclosure, Terms of Use, Privacy
Powerstep Night Splints Ibuprofen Cream ProStretch LED Light Therapy