MER - Washington - 6 March:
   If you want to find an excuse to do something, it's not that difficult to do so.  The U.S. military has much experience with manufacturing "excuses" -- going way back to massacres of the Indians to modern-day overthrowing of undesirable governments.
   The Vietnam War began with the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, based on a manufactured story only corrected decades later.
    The Gulf War began with a very narrow Senate vote, based on manufactured "evidence" that later was exposed as erroneous.
   The recent U.N. debate specifically ruled out allowing the Americans to decide if Iraq was in compliance with Security Council resolutions, specifically ruled out any "authorization" for automatic American attacks on Iraq.  Nation after nation, including 3 of the 5 with veto power, specifically stated they would only vote for the resolution if such an American interpretation did not apply.  And the U.N. Secretary- General has repeatedly stated, in his soft diplomatese, that the American interpretation is not correct and
"consultations" are required.
    Even so, the Americans continue with their unilateral inter-pretations, continue to prepare their forces to strike, and continueto manipulate public opinion to justify the near-genocide theyhave already brought upon Iraq as well as what they have planned.
 CLINTON'S CURRENT BIG LIE --THIS ONE WITH HISTORICAL RAMIFICATIONS 

 "Iraq must fulfill without obstruction or delay
 its commitment to open all of the nation to the
 international weapons inspectors anyplace, anytime
 without any condition, deadline or excuses.

 "All the members of the Security Council agree
 that failure to do so will result in 'severest
 consequences.'

 "The government of Iraq should be under no
 illusion.  The meaning of 'severest consequences'
 is clear.  It provides authority to act if Iraq
 does not turn the commitment it has now made into
 compliance."
                        President Bill Clinton
                        3/5/98

     CLINTON VOWS TO PUNISH IRAQ IF ACCORD NOT KEPT
                        By Robert Burns

WASHINGTON - President Clinton said yesterday that Iraq should be ''under no illusion'' it would escape severe punishment if it violated a pledge to permit unconditional UN weapons inspections. Aides said that
meant military action.

On a day in which the Pentagon announced it was speeding plans to give anthrax vaccinations to the 36,000 US troops in the Persian Gulf, Clinton praised a UN Security Council resolution endorsing Secretary General Kofi Annan's agreement with Iraq on weapons inspections. The resolution warned of ''severest consequences'' if Iraq failed to comply.

''The government of Iraq should be under no illusion,'' Clinton said. ''The meaning of `severest consequences' is clear.''

''It provides authority to act if Iraq does not turn the commitment it has now made into compliance,'' he added. Hinting strongly that he might feel compelled to use military force, Clinton said, ''No promise
of peace and no policy of patience can be without its limits.''

Other administration officials were more explicit on the question of a military option.

''This gives us the green light to approach our policy of diplomacy and force and it shows to the world once again that the onus of complying with this agreement is with Iraq,'' US Ambassador Bill
Richardson said.

Even before Annan reached the accord with Iraq last week, the Clinton administration maintained that previous UN Security Council resolutions gave it the authority to use force against Iraq to ensure compliance. Most other Security Council members dispute that view, and they still question the American interpretation of Monday's resolution.

Envoys from many countries, including longtime US allies, said yesterday that only the Security Council has the authority to determine whether Iraq has breached the weapons inspections deal, and what should be done in response. Almost alone, Britain shares the US view.

Before Monday's vote, China's UN ambassador, Qin Huasun, said Beijing had insisted ''that there must not be any automatic authorization of the use of force against in Iraq in this current resolution.''

Asked in an interview on NBC's ''Today'' show if the resolution gives the green light for a US attack, Richardson replied, ''The answer is yes. And we already had that green light.''

Clinton called on Iraq to demonstrate its commitment to the inspections agreement - a deal many Republicans have criticized as weak and unlikely to achieve US policy goals.

''Iraq must fulfill without obstruction or delay its commitment to open all of the nation to the international weapons inspectors - any place, any time, without any conditions, deadlines or excuses,'' he said.

At the State Department, spokesman James P. Rubin was asked by a reporter if the Clinton administration believes military action would be warranted if Iraq wavered on inspections.

''We'll make that judgment at the time and place of our choosing, but we are making clear the principle underlying our policy, which is that a violation of this agreement is one that will, in our view, justify
the use of military force,'' Rubin said.

A CBS News poll indicated most Americans approve of the UN agreement but doubt that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein will keep his promise to allow UN inspectors full access to suspected weapons sites.