US says not using DU in Libya

[outsider]

Air Force Spokeswoman claims that A-10s were not loaded with DU ammunition, but does not rule out future use in the conflict.
4 April 2011
A US Airforce Spokeswoman has told a Scottish journalist that, as of 2nd April, A-10s fighting in Libya have not been firing DU ammunition. However, she refused to give any assurances about the future use of DU, stating that she didn't want "to speculate on what may or may not be used in the future".



ICBUW calls for the US to give a categorical assurance, similar to that given by UK Prime Minister David Cameron, that weapons containing DU have no place in this conflict. A clear statement, covering both A-10 and AV-8B aircraft should be issued at the earliest opportunity.


If the US has taken a strategic decision not to equip US planes with DU ammunition in this conflict, that is a progressive step. However, in the absence of a public declaration that such a decision has been taken, concerns will remain that the door has been left open for the future use of DU in Libya.


ICBUW calls for the US to take steps in a clear and transparent manner to assure the world that no US aircraft will go into the air equipped with DU ammunition, and that pilots will not be cleared to fire it. Any DU ammunition currently in theatre should be separated and left unused.

As ICBUW has long maintained, DU has no place in conventional munitions. The current position of the US affirms that position: if US planes have been able to use alternatives, there is no reason why alternatives should not be found for all ammunition containing DU. We call for all current user states to remove these weapons from their arsenals.

An urgent step to protect civilians in areas where DU weapons have already been used, is for user states to share targeting data with the authorities in affected states - a move endorsed by 148 states in the UN General Assembly last December, and opposed by only four, including the US, France and UK.
More: http://www.bandepleteduranium.org/en/a/402.html

Whilst interesting in itself, this email I got from ICBUW states it was 'opposed by only four, including the US, France and the UK'.
There website page, however, gives the other state, Israel.
Now it could be argued that the three mentioned are the only 3 of the 4 officially involved in the attacks, but I suspect it has a lot to do with protecting Israel's 'public opinion profile' in the West.
Here is the full page from ICBUW's site:

http://www.bandepleteduranium.org/en/a/364.html

I checked this out, because I suspected Israel was the '4th country', and was right.

Also, I would take with a pinch of salt any denial DU has been used by the invading powers.
And the following part of ICBUW's webpage is also of interest:

'abstentions were still registered by Australia, Canada, Denmark and Sweden amongst others. The Russian Federation also abstained, while China declined to vote.'

What's going on? Russia and China seem to be in cahoots with the NWO.
And Sweden & Denmark have gone down the same pan, it would appear.

NWO's on a mega-roll!!!

'The dogs (9/11 Truthers etc) may howl, but the caravan rolls on'.

[Disco_Destroyer]

Lies! I bet

My advise Follow the Money ! Didn't someone post Libyan rebels have set up a new Central Bank?

The future is bright, the future is debt slavery!

[outsider]

ICH article: Gaddafi in his own words:

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article27856.htm