reply to post by oozyism
Here is some info for you to research - This will shed some light on why we say he report is biased and innacurate.
From the Teran News article you linked:News Source
1. An Afghan investigative research scholar, Dr. Mohammad Daud Miraki conducted a field research in the southern provinces of the country. He
accumulated enough empirical evidence regarding the use of poisonous weapons in the area.
1st - He is referred to as Dr. However, he is not one in the manner he is being portrayed in (IE Scientific with specialization in a Scientific field
for researh, study, expermenting).
Daud was admitted at the University of Illinois, Chicago, where he started to study biology. However, he changed his major to
Political Science because of his desires to contribute to the betterment of Afghanistan. In 1992, he graduated with a BA in political science.
Daud Miraki received two Master’s degree. His first Master’s degree was in Political Science, specialization in International Relations, which
he completed in 1993. His second Master’s degree was in Middle Eastern Studies, specialization in Conflict Resolution, which he received in 1996. In
2000, he completed his PhD in Public Policy Analysis
If he is not a doctor, or scientist, I would say the method to collect his "empirical evidence" is going to be flawed since proper collection
techniques, seperation of samples, isolation of samples from one area so as not to cross contaminate samples from another area, or if the evidence was
Ok.. We will give the good man the benefiet of the doubt and move on to the second part of the Teran News Article.
Uranium Radiation Levels in Afghanistan Report
2. In 2002, a research team of Canadian Medical Research Center visited southern provinces of Afghanistan and found that the magnitude of uranium
isotopes in the inhabitants was soaring between 300 and 2000 nanograms while the accepted limit is 10 nanograms.
What Uranium is tested? - U234, U235 and U238 - All of which are used in munitions as well as naturally occuring in nature.
First the article states the research found uranium isotopes in the inhabitants ranging from 300 to 2000. The problem is this is no where in the
Canadiens report. I went back to the website of the Candien report to see if I missed it but could not find this number in any reports. The reason
this number is important is its used to quantify the damge levels to the inhabitants who tested for it, according to the article..
Uranium Medical Research Centre
Implied in the Article -
Governments in Canada, the US, the UK, and the World Health Organisation have carried out DU testing on individuals exposed to inhalational
The Problem with that thought and why it causes issues with the articles conclusions?
Although tests have been conducted, they did not employ the proper methodology and equipment to quantify inhalational exposure to DU. They tested
individuals for total uranium.
DU is always mixed with a natural uranium background so you have to measure the DU in the presence of natural uranium. That requires an isotopic
analysis of U235, U238 at least and preferably also of U236 which does not exist in natural uranium. The U238/U235 ratio of 137.9 indicates natural
uranium; ratios above 140 provide unequivocal evidence of the presence of depleted uranium. It is essential to determine whether the uranium is
depleted, enriched, or natural uranium in order to determine how long it has been in the body. If DU or enriched uranium is found in the body, we can
postulate that it has been internally irradiating the victims since their exposure.
The total uranium measurement by itself is not important, most people have uranium which they take in and eliminate on a daily basis though water or
food. The US DU testing program tested shrapnel victims; they have not tested for inhalational exposures.
The WHO study did not test human samples. The Canadian and Belgian studies used equipment that could not measure U235.
So with the above information, the first article used is misrepresented in the article, and the claim the article made itself is based off of
something that is non existant on humans.
3. Iran’s Arabic language channel al-Alam TV website has posted a video report about newly-born infants suffering from deformities and abnormal
body parts caused by the usage of biological weapons. See http:www.alalam.ir/node/307570.
The US did not employ Biological weapons in Afghanistan, or in any other country for that manner. The only confirmed use of Biological weapoins was
during the Iraq-Iran war, and has been confirmed as Yellow Rain" (T-2 tricothecene mycotoxins). Iranian and Iraqi soldiers who were sent to Europe for
treatment test positive for this in addition to mustard gas.
The video linked talks about deformities in children, but does not give any credible proof of where the video came from, where the children came from,
the areas they were from that is contaminated", or medical history of the parents. There is no way to verify any authenticiy / information in the
video to conclusivly link it to the article.
The other problem is the article is accusing the US of using Chemical weapons, not Biological. The video specifically covers deformities in relation
to Biological weapons.
The last section, section 4, I will break down into segment to make this easier to read and understand.
4. A Senior official of the Kabul Regime’s Ministry of Health told media some times ago that they had obtained evidences, indicating that the
Americans had used depleted uranium munitions and phosphorus bombs in Tora bora in east Afghanistan in 2001.
I am not able to locate any information regarding the evidence obtained. Before I buy into this hook liune and sinker I would like to see the obtained
evidence. Giving the benefiet of the doubt, if DU munitions were used, it would be isolated to the Tora Bora region, as the article claims. However
even the testing done on the people from those areas were not caused by DU, but NDU, per the supporting reports you provided.
The Candian report you are using specifically states the radiation talked about was not DU, but NDU. You will need to notice this part specifically
because it is important at the end. The section below is from part 8 of the Canadian report:
2nd block of part 4
UMRC’s Afghan civilian findings have been criticised by a leading anti-DU activist. Responding to this criticism may shed light on questions of
those who are understandably confused by the discovery of Non-depleted Uranium and its possible use by Operation Enduring Freedom. Below is the reply
(objections are indented and in quote marks):
“UMRC’s findings of Non-depleted Uranium (as opposed to Depleted Uranium) confuses the public’s understanding of the issues”:
Deformed infants have been born in the area or some have deformed body parts or suffering from weightlessness or mental retardation. Diseases like
leukemia (blood white cells disease) is widespread in the area. Sperms “infertility” malfunction in males have been noticed. Many persons have
died without an open wound.
* - Children suffering from weightlessness (Giving the benefiet of the doubt its possible the article meant weightloss) and mental retardation,
Lukemia, sperms infertility.
These symptoms are accurate, but the article decided to move them into the Uranium exposure category. The symptoms described above are attributed to
Atomic Radiation exposure in acute form, instead of the months to years uranium exposure needs to cause the cancers.
Specifically these, which the article ignored to attribute it to uranium:
**These 4 only cause the above symptoms only from a nuclear detonation, and all 4 of these cause immidiate burns**
Addressing the lower dose exposure implied in the article, runs into this problem:
However, at much lower doses, such as those experienced in uranium mining, atomic radiation cannot be detected by any of our human senses. Special
instruments are needed. Alpha radiation, the kind associated with radon gas and most of the other uranium decay products, is difficult to detect even
The article cites Congenital Deformities
a condition existing at birth and often before birth, or that develops during the first month of life (neonatal disease), regardless of causation.
Of these diseases, those characterized by structural deformities are termed "congenital anomalies"; that is a different concept (MeSH) which involves
defects in or damage to a developing fetus.
A congenital disorder may be the result of genetic abnormalities, the intrauterine (uterus) environment, errors of morphogenesis, infection, or a
chromosomal abnormality. The outcome of the disorder will depend on complex interactions between the pre-natal deficit and the post-natal
environment. Animal studies indicate that the mother's (and possibly the father's) diet, vitamin intake, and glucose levels prior to ovulation and
conception have long-term effects on fetal growth and adolescent and adult disease. Congenital disorders vary widely in causation and
abnormalities. Any substance that causes birth defects is known as a teratogen.
The older term congenital disorder does not necessarily refer to a genetic disorder despite the similarity of the words. Some disorders can be
detected before birth through prenatal diagnosis (screening).
Simply invoking the term Congenital Defects and showing pictures of deformed babies does not support the claim. Congenital is hereditary and is a
result from a bunch of factors, and without complete information released from the researcher, the information is circumstantial at best. The same
holds for Lukemia, with no information to support other than it being written down.
All Americans military and civilian rulers are held responsible for these anti-human crimes. Ironically, still, the crimes have been continuing in
Afghanistan at the hands of the invading Americans and their coalition forces, in a time that many human rights organizations including those of the
United Nations and the Human Rights Watch have presence in the country.
I will address this section as an opinion, since DU use is not illegal, nor is it banned by the United Nations. Secondly, the reports above, the ones
linked, and the 2 follow up articles you provided Oozzzy all have the same conclusion, which is:
Afghan civilians exposed to OEF bombing contaminated with Non-depleted Uranium – not, Depleted Uranium
However, we did not use any NDU weapons in Afghanistan, and as such, the exposure to NDU, as the medical report states, is coming from a source other
than military weapons in theatre. They also have not ruled out abnormal background radiation, geological issues, etc. This is NOT saying the OEF
bombing used NDU. It IS saying the civilians who were exposed to allied bombs were contaiminated in a different way than the bombs.
To fulfill its responsibility, the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan calls on all human rights organizations and other relevant entities,
organizations and independent personalities to take steps, as a part of their responsibility, to impede those who are involved in human rights
violations and bring them to human rights crimes tribunals. Moreover, speed up efforts aimed at disseminating awareness and unearthing more cases of
crimes against humanity. Spokesman of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan (Taliban website).
While I 100 percent agree we should all put pressure on groups who violate Human Rights, whether it be in the US, or the Islamic Emirate of
Afghanistan. I will point out the last section came from the Taliban Spokesman.
OK, we have all 4 sections, including the reports used to compile all of this information. Evidence has been provided to refute the evidence, again,
and the article is even more biased as well as misleading, using skewed information to paint a picture of something that takes the plight of their
people and uses it as propoganda to blame someone else for the problem.
If you remeber near the mid part of this response I posted some information and told you to remeber it because it would become important at the end of
this post. Here it is with a quick recap:
** The Report found the cause to be NDU
*** Leading, anti-DU activist challenges UMRC’s Afghan findings
Why is that important, that the leading activist disagreed with the Canadian report?
Because of this:
Mohammed Daud Miraki, who is the "Doctor" who put this "report" together, who is being portrayed as an independant, non biased, impartial researcher
** The founder and head of a non-for-profit organization, Afghan DU & Recovery Fund.
** Specializing in - to raise awareness and funds to initiate some DU clean up projects, relocate villagers from bombed villages, and provide clean
water and other basic sustenance for the poor people of Afghanistan.
** He is also the Leading, anti-DU activist challenges UMRC’s Afghan findings.
What does this mean? It means Mr. Miraki is pushing an Agenda designed to lay the blame directly at the doorstep of the United States of America, in
conjunction with Iran and the Taliban, who conviently published the story and refered to Mr. Miraki as a Doctor to lend credibility to his opinions,
and the Taliban, who were presented in the artcile calling on all nations and groups to challenge the Human Rights abuses being comiited by the United
States in Afghanistan.
As we have told you before, present information and back it up. The info you have provided, from your origional post, to all of the reports you gave,
are inconsistent with the findings. The information you are using is being cherry picked and purposely manipulated in a way as to lend credence and
legitimacy to a biased report that is a work of scince fiction.
If you want to try again using different reports, maybe from Russian or Indians instead of the Canadians and the Russians, post it and I will debunk
it for you.
A word of advice - An investigation is a quest for the truth, using all available information, conducted in such a manner where the investigator is
not attached or invested into the outcome. Instead they are seeking the truth, the whole truth, regardless of how information supports, or even
destroys their case.
When reports like the one you posted are used and portrayed as Fact, it becomes problematic for the exact same arguments youhave given when it comes
to American reports. The Canadiens who did this research, and even using the German Report you cited, backs up the claims I have made. There is no
conclusive evidence present to link the use of Depleted Uranium to the illnesses and deformities that they are being associated with, and you know
How do I know you know this, because you said so in your post. The German report states DU ammunition was used in Afghanistan, which is something the
US denies. Giveing the Germans the beneefiet of the doubt, the other reports you are citing have all stated that DU is NOT
cause of the problems, citing NDU as the source.
The US has never used Chemical or Biological weapons in our conflicts in the Middle East or Afghanistan. However, Iraq and Iran did engage in Chemical
AND Biological warfare during there war, and their is a possibility according to the reports you cited could be a cause to due exposure to the human
body, food chain, water chain with the damages being passed from generation to generation.
I don't know how to get through to you that we are not the enemy. If you find information that is verifiable, and where the sources are not hidden
because they are behind the claims, you will have no problems finding Americans to symphathize and take up the cause over here.
One of the stumbling blocks though, as you tell us, you are going to need to stop posting stories and accepting everything present in them as absolute
fact. We have had a few of these debates now, and in every single one we have shown the sources are in conflict with the story, rendering them as
biased, with manipulation of facts and omission of words to twist the facts to fit the story.
How can you say this article is absolutely true and fair, when the "Doctor" who started the investigation is not even a real Doctor. The paper that
printed the story continued calling him a doctor, furthering the untruthfulness and misleading direction of the article. When the information provided
by the "Doctor" was not collected in a scientific manner so as to preserve samples, to avoid cross contamination or any other step that go wrong,
invalidating samples, there is an immidiate flaw in the outcome of results/
When the article invokes the use of Chemical and Biological weapons, and in the same sentence implies that the US used them in theater, again with no
supporting documentation or independant, verifiable information.
You want to know what gives us the right to question the article and the methods used, and the conclusions there of?
Its called living in a free society where its not taboo to challenge people, where we can see all of the evidence collected, the manner it was
collected, stored, transported, stored. Where we have access to the full report, and not a version of it the Government is wanting to sell.
The article is geared towards the US and our actions - So my question to you is why do we NOT have a right to challenge it and question the
reliability o sources and methods? Only in Middle Eatern countries would someone want to know where another person gets a right to challenge and
question something the Government puts out.
This site is www.Abovetopsecret.com and is based on the premis of Deny Ignorance.
The manner in which that is done is to have a full and open discussion about topcs that concern us all. Sometimes this means posting information you
want to beleive is real, only to find out its not. Somtimes its reading someone else post, only to find you know the answer and burst the bubble of
The moment we dont question an article, or a researcher, or the methods used, the manner the report was done, the people the report was done on, the
type of participation, locations, background information, supporting documentation etc, we are no longer seeking the truth and we are in fact,
As I said, you make some excellent posts, and in some cases PressTV has actually gotten it right. The problem, and I have said this before, is your
zeal to take whatever you can, and to blame the United States for it, regardless of how you come to that conclusion.
I honestly do not think you fully grasp the concept of a free society, freedom of press, freedom of expression, or the pursuit of your
life, liberty and happiness. When someone provides information to refute your argument, dont get pissed. Dont dismiss their post because you dont
agree with it. Take the information they provided and look into it.
You never know, sometimes the info a debunker provides very well might be the smoking gun in your response when you find a flaw in their argument.
Simply stating you have not contributed anything to this thread is a weak cop out. How do I know this? Look at your first post, and scrool down and
look at my first post, and count the starts above the each.
When you tell me I have nott contributed anything to this thread, you look like a an adle minded kid who is trowing a temper tantrum, packs up his
marbles and goes home because no one will play with you.
I end it with this thought - Not everything you read from the West is true, and not everything we read from the middle East is true. Its up to each
one of us to read the info and research it to find our own answers.
Firendly Advice that you have given to me on occasion:
Try this on your next post, find a story you like and want to bring to others attention. Rsearch the article before posting it here. Check the names
of the people listed to see if they are who they are, check any reports they cite to see if the quoted information is accurate, check the media outlet
reporting the info and check who they are owned by. One of the disconnects I see from you, and you from us, is trust of the media. You lay the exact
same level of trust in western media as we do in media coming from Iran.
2 wrongs do not make a right, but it does give you, and us, common ground to work from. As an example the case where PressTV covered the Israeli
actors boycotting an event to protest jewish settlement expansion. The most recent where Palkestinian firefighters worked side by side with Israeli
firefighters to help put on the forest fire. 2 very differnet groups on opposite ends of the spectrum, coming together to stop a larger injustice.
You would be surprised how many friends can be made that way. All it took was a common goal and a few people who could care less about politics,
concentrating instead on whats right.
When we, and you, stop looking, stop excersizing independant thought, stop challenging the Government, then we are nothing, and we have lost
edit on 6-12-2010 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)
edit on 6-12-2010 by Xcathdra because: (no reason
edit on 6-12-2010 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)