Just Foreign Policy Iraqi Death Estimator    

Sunday, November 20, 2005

PM’s credibility at stake following abuse allegations


By Fatih Abdulsalam
Azzaman, November 17, 2005

Prime Ministry Ibrahim al-Jaafari is now facing the most critical decision in his entire life that will either make or break his political career.

Before him are two options in the aftermath of the reported atrocities against Iraqi inmates in a secret prison in Baghdad.

To win back his credibility, in the eyes of many Iraqis at least, he should insist on revealing the whole truth and punish the perpetrators no matter their political affiliations or rank.

This move will need a lot of courage as it will place him in direct confrontation against his own Shiite coalition which helped him ascend to power.

Or he could simply put his coalition’s interests before those of the country by simply condoning the atrocities in return for the covetous premiership that will be decided in the light of January elections.

So far, Jaafari has indicated he will pursue the first path, insisting that he will only be satisfied when the full truth is revealed and the violators are brought to justice.

And that is exactly what Iraqis need: full transparency. This requires that the prime minister make public the outcome of the investigation he has ordered and lay bare the full scale of the secret detention centers the ministry of interior has been running.

Jaafari claims he had no knowledge of the existence of these notorious jails which remind many Iraqis of their dark days under their former tormentor Saddam Hussein.

Now that he knows his interior ministry violates basic human rights of prisoners by starving and torturing them, it is indeed time for him to act.

Some might say it is too late. But better late than never. We believe Jafaari should have acted decisively when human rights groups pointed to these atrocities in their reports.

The prisoners and U.S. troops who found them on Sunday have corroborated these reports.

Both speak of beatings with cables, hanging from wrists, the use of electric shocks to sensitive parts of the body and burning with cigarette studs.

These atrocities and many others attributed to U.S. troops have confirmed Iraqis worst fears that there are no noticeable differences between their reign of terror under Saddam Hussein and the one they are passing through now.

Iraqis now wonder: where is the democracy the U.S. vowed to create in Iraq when its tanks rumbled through Baghdad.

The U.S. itself says more than 21,000 Iraqis now languish in its prisons in Iraq without trial, access to lawyers or visits by relatives.

The surge in prisoner population in Iraq has forced the U.S. to build more and more jails across the country.

The U.S. invasion has brought us nothing but these jails, lack of freedom, and lack of transparency and usurpation of basic rights.

Link Here

Women and children suffer as U.S. pursues offensive


By Fatih Abdulsalam

Azzaman, November 9, 2005

As U.S. troops pursue their new major border offensive for the seventh consecutive day, reports from the battlefields say innocent Iraqis are once again bearing the brunt.

It is wrong to blame ordinary Iraqis, wherever they live, for the surge in violence and attacks by anti-U.S. and government groups.

If the U.S., as the mightiest military power the world has ever known, cannot stop infiltration by foreign fighters, it is beyond the power of the hapless Iraqis living in border villages to do so.

If these fighters and their supporters can fiercely resist massive and disproportionate U.S. firepower, no one on earth should expect Iraqi women and children to take up arms and flush them out.

U.S. military officials only speak of the damage they inflict on insurgents and broadly deny Iraqi reports of civilian casualties.

In the absence of independent reporting it is hard to assess damage and casualties in the areas covered by this major offensive.

But Iraqi medics and Red Crescent officials available on the ground dispute U.S. claims and speak of scores of civilians killed and thousands of families fleeing these areas.

Killing and displacing civilians for the presence of rebels with the ability to fiercely resist U.S. military machine is tantamount to a crime against humanity.

Iraqi civilians should not be punished because of U.S. troops’ failure to crush the resistance.

There is no justification for the atrocities Iraqi civilians suffer at the hands of U.S. and Iraqi troops during these operations.Not every man in these areas is a rebel or insurgent and even if he is found to be connected to the insurgency, his wife, children and parents should not suffer as a result.

But unfortunately that is exactly what is happening, fuelling more anger and fury against the occupiers and their supporters.

Link Here

New Orleans Today: It's Worse Than You Think






New Orleans’ Katrina

Aftermath…







Sunday, Nov. 20, 2005

STILL NO EXIT STRATEGY GEORGIE?

Violent awakening in battle of pen versus the sword



Nothing can prepare you for that moment when a suicide bomb is suddenly aimed at you, writes Catherine Philip in Baghdad
November 21, 2005

THE blast ripped through the room at 8.20am, spraying fragments of glass and plaster across the bed, throwing me out on to the floor on the other side just as the wooden door jamb flew past and landed by my feet.

Lying on the ground, awake for only seconds, I knew exactly what had happened. A suicide bomb, yes, like so many mornings in Baghdad. But this time, it was the one we had long feared and expected, aimed at our hotel full of foreign journalists.

My ears still half-deafened by the blast, I lay on the floor next to the bed, knowing too well what could happen next. First came the volleys of automatic fire, the shouts of guards, then the sound of screaming. Then, seconds later, even louder than the first, another blast that sent the whole building shaking all over again.

Pulling the bedsheets around me, I crawled next door to the bathroom, the only room in our suite with no windows. I needn't have bothered. Not a single shard of glass remained in the windows to fly out and injure me.

No matter how many times you run through the scenario, how well you know the drills, nothing can really prepare you for that moment when a suicide bombing of the sort that occurs daily in Baghdad is suddenly aimed at you. That realisation comes long after the roar that knocks you off your feet and the robotic work mode that you suddenly slip into as the shock ebbs away.

I pulled on the first clothes I could find, picked up a bag with personal documents, and ran for the door. On the way down I met the security guards for NBC. "It's building two," they said, referring to the adjacent tower of the hotel. "It's taken the worst."

I ran down the remaining nine flights of stairs to the ground floor. Shattered glass and smears of blood covered the reception floor.

Dazed staff wandered around searching for one another. Outside, the courtyard was strewn with charred gobbets of flesh, the unmistakable sign of a suicide bombing that I had seen on Baghdad's streets so many times before. At the end of the road, a woman in a black abaya was screaming, searching for her missing husband.

Two men rushed out of a neighbouring apartment block, the side of which had been ripped off. They were carrying a child still dressed in her pink pyjamas, bloodied and weeping. It was the little girl who used to wave at me from her balcony. Her family lived half in, half out, of the blast wall that surrounded our hotel complex and was supposed to protect us from such an attack.

Now the concrete blocks lay toppled like dominoes, peppered with shrapnel. Later, we learned how the wall had been blasted open by a first suicide truck packed with explosives in order to clear the way for a second aimed at the hotel -- the same tactic used a month earlier against the Palestine Hotel.

It was the sheer scale of the insurgents' ambition that saved our lives. The crater and pile of debris created by the first explosion was so huge that the second lorry could not get through. It detonated where it was, killing at least eight of those living in the surrounding flats. Miraculously, not a single journalist was killed. As so often happens, innocent Iraqis were the victims.

Of all the media hotels in Baghdad, al-Hamra, where The Times has its office, is the most legendary, an iconic war correspondents' hotel.

The seedy, unloved Palestine Hotel, while host to several large agencies and television stations, is also home to scores of security contractors and is guarded by the US military. When it was bombed last month, it was speculated that it was the journalists they were after. Or maybe, others surmised, the bombers just wanted to get their spectacular explosion captured on live television. "Blow up a bomb around the media and you'll write about it," Lieutenant-Colonel Robert Roth said, confirming that we had been the target of the bomb. "Or else they just have something against the media."

I was less sure that they wanted us to write about it. They would not have tried to kill us if they did.

Liz, a friend from the Chicago Tribune, led me through her destroyed office suite, showing me where the ceiling tiles had fallen on her sleeping translator and driver. Kim Sengupta, from The Independent, showed me where a 20cm spear of glass had landed inches from his head.

I walked back to the hotel reception courtyard, where a crowd of guards stood around looking at the severed foot of one of the bombers lying by a tree. A hand and a penis lay metres away.

I sat down on a concrete bolster for a moment and thought about my friend Marla, killed in a suicide bombing on the airport road in April along with her beloved colleague Fais.

I thought about Nadia, the bereaved bride from the Amman hotel bombings who had cried on my shoulder only a week before.

I walked back inside the hotel and into the courtyard between the two towers where the swimming pool is, where Marla used to pound up and down every day, where, after the war, bacchanalian evenings unfolded among the press corps, with bottles of wine downed and colleagues thrown into the pool fully dressed. "One day someone'll toss a grenade in here," someone quipped.

That was in the old days though, just after the war, before the first suicide bombing came and changed it all.

At the poolside, the pool boy fished around in the water for shrapnel thrown there by the blast. He pulled up the net to find a piece of a bomber's skull, with the matted hair still intact.

I went back inside to my room, where the shattered window, held together by a plastic blast shield, had caved in on the computer, and tried to drag it off.

Then I sat down and started to write. Because whatever those people who blew themselves up trying to kill us believe, that is what we are here to do.

The Times

Link here

Their time's up, but these soldiers are stuck in Iraq

Sunday, November 20, 2005
By Hart Seely
Staff writer

Baghdad, Iraq - They don't talk about it much. They push the subject from their minds. It serves no purpose. But now and then, the thought does surface. After all, they did their time. They served their country. They planned to move on.

They weren't supposed to be here.

But the U.S. Army needed them, and it invoked the once rare policy it calls "stop loss," though others call it a "backdoor draft."

So here they are: In Iraq.

"There's no sense in dwelling on these things," said Staff Sergeant Paul B. Zundel, 33, of Baton Rouge, La., who in more peaceful times would have ended his five-year Army career in September. "All you can do is do your job and take it one day at a time."

(more)

CNN: Powell aide (Wilkerson): Torture 'guidance' from VP Cheney


Powell aide: Torture 'guidance' from VP
Former staff chief says Cheney's 'flexibility' helped lead to abuse
Sunday, November 20, 2005

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A former top State Department official said Sunday that Vice President Dick Cheney provided the "philosophical guidance" and "flexibility" that led to the torture of detainees in U.S. facilities.

Retired U.S. Army Col. Larry Wilkerson, who served as former Secretary of State Colin Powell's chief of staff, told CNN that the practice of torture may be continuing in U.S.-run facilities.

"There's no question in my mind that we did. There's no question in my mind that we may be still doing it," Wilkerson said on CNN's "Late Edition."

"There's no question in my mind where the philosophical guidance and the flexibility in order to do so originated -- in the vice president of the United States' office," he said. "His implementer in this case was Donald Rumsfeld and the Defense Department."

At another point in the interview, Wilkerson said "the vice president had to cover this in order for it to happen and in order for Secretary Rumsfeld to feel as though he had freedom of action."...

Rumsfeld says he did not 'advocate' invading Iraq


20/11/2005 16h48WASHINGTON (AFP) - Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has asserted that he did not press for the US-led invasion of Iraq, as public disaffection for the US military operation there reaches new highs. "I didn't advocate invasion," Rumsfeld told ABC television Sunday, when asked if he would have advocated an invasion of Iraq if he had known that no weapons of mass destruction would be found there. The US Defense chief added: "I wasn't asked," when asked whether he supported the March 2003 invasion.

Asked on ABC television's "This Week" program if he was trying to distance himself after the fact from the controversial US decision to invade Iraq, Rumsfeld replied: "Of course not. Of course not. I completely agreed with the decision to go to war and said that a hundred times. Don't even suggest that.

"But Rumsfeld's insistence that he had not advocated an invasion of Iraq appears to contradict several media reports, and at least one book by a former White House couter-terrorism chief. CBS News has reported, citing notes by Pentagon officials, that Rumsfeld told his aides to come up with plans for striking Iraq hours after the September 11, 2001 attacks on Washington and New York. The notes, cited by CBS, quote Rumsfeld as saying he wanted "best info fast. Judge whether good enough to hit S.H. (Saddam Hussein)".

Former White House terrorism czar, Richard Clarke, said in his book "Against all Enemies" that days after the September 11 attacks, Rumsfeld was pushing for retaliatory strikes on Iraq, despite questions over Iraq's links to Al-Qaeda. Clarke suggests the idea took him so aback, he initally thought Rumsfeld was joking. "Rumsfeld was saying that we needed to bomb Iraq," Clarke has said in describing White House deliberations after the September 11 attacks.

Tough Week for The Post and a Star

Bush Tones Down Attack on Iraq War Critics

Proverbs 6 16 19
16These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him:

17A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,

18An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief,

19A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.

By TERENCE HUNT, AP White House Correspondent
59 minutes ago

BEIJING - After fiercely defending his Iraq policy across Asia, President Bush abruptly toned down his attack on war critics Sunday and said there was nothing unpatriotic about opposing his strategy.

"People should feel comfortable about expressing their opinions about Iraq," Bush said, three days after agreeing with Vice President Dick Cheney that the critics were "reprehensible."
>>>cont

Link Here

Why Iraq war support fell so fast


Now I wonder why we did not hear this a lot earlier? incredible

WASHINGTON – The three most significant US wars since 1945 - Korea, Vietnam, and now Iraq - share an important trait: As casualties mounted, American public support declined.
In the two Asian wars, that decline proved irreversible. With Iraq, the additional bad news for President Bush is that support for the war in Iraq has eroded more quickly than it did in those two conflicts.

For Mr. Bush, low support for his handling of the war - now at 35 percent, according to the latest Gallup poll - has depleted any reserves of "political capital" he had from his reelection and threatens his entire agenda. Last week's bombshell political developments, both the bipartisan Senate resolution calling for more progress reports on Iraq and the stunning call for withdrawal by a Democratic hawk, Rep. John Murtha of Pennsylvania, have not helped.

But the seeds of Bush's woes were planted early on. Just seven months into the Iraq war, Gallup found that the percentage of Americans who viewed the sending of troops as a mistake had jumped substantially - from 25 percent in March 2003 to 40 percent in October 2003.

Link Here

Wounded Sergeant Fights for a 'Best Friend'



By Donna St. George
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, November 20, 2005; Page A01

They had trained together for three years in the military and were deployed overseas side by side. In June, they arrived in Iraq, where they worked as a team scouring houses and villages for hidden explosives. Then, one afternoon, riding back from a mission, a roadside bomb went off under their Humvee.

Air Force Tech. Sgt. Jamie Dana was critically injured -- bleeding internally, her lungs collapsed, her spine fractured, her pelvis broken. In her last moment of consciousness, she asked in desperation about her comrade. "Where's Rex?" she pleaded. When no one answered, she grabbed a medic's arm. "Where's my dog? Is he dead?"

The medic told her that he was. "I felt like my heart broke," she recalled. "It's the last thing I remember."

Weeks passed before Dana would understand that the medic was mistaken and that Rex was alive. The German shepherd was burned slightly on his nose while Dana teetered at life's edge, doctors unable to assure her family that she would survive.

Not long after she started to rally from her injuries, Dana asked Air Force leaders if she could adopt Rex. The answer was no; it was against the rules, and Rex was still valuable to the military. Now, the Air Force has changed its view -- but federal law stands in the way.

Under Title 10, U.S. Code 2583, the Air Force says it cannot allow the wounded airman to take her combat dog home until the animal is too old to be useful. Rex, 80 pounds and brown and black with gold markings, is just 5 years old, not nearly the retirement age of 10 to 14.

It will take an act of Congress to pave the way for Rex to stay with Dana, 26. For the time being, he is with her on leave and will return with her this week to Peterson Air Force Base in Colorado, where Dana is stationed. Walking with a cane because of nerve damage in her legs and feet, Dana expects to take a desk job while military medical boards consider whether she should retire.

"He's my best friend," she said. "I thought he was dead, and I was almost dead, and that made the feeling to be with him a lot stronger."

In Congress, several lawmakers have taken up her cause, including Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.), who is working to attach to a Defense appropriations bill a provision that would allow Rex's adoption. The measure is expected to emerge from a conference committee by the middle of next month and must face votes in both houses.

"This young lady came as close to death as you can come and still be alive," said Rep. John E. Peterson (R-Pa.), who lobbied on her behalf. "She was extremely seriously wounded . . . and I think a person who came that close to death deserves to have the dog who went through it with them. . . . I think that's the least we can do for her."

Air Force officials said support for granting Dana's request has grown in recent weeks. "You add things up, and this is the right thing to do," said Brig. Gen. Robert Holmes, Air Force director of security forces and force protection.

Dana said the Air Force had turned her down twice. Adopting Rex, officials said in an Oct. 21 letter to Peterson, would not be "a legal or advisable use of Air Force assets, in spite of the sentimental value and potential healing effects it might produce."

CONTINUED 1 2 Next

Link Here

Louisiana asks '60 Minutes to hold tonight's report on sinking N.Orleans


11/20/2005, 3:19 p.m. CT
The Associated Press

BATON ROUGE, La. (AP) — State officials have asked the CBS television show "60 Minutes" to postpone Sunday's scheduled segment highlighting a scientist's allegations that New Orleans is sinking and that residents should be induced to leave the city.

Tim Kusky, a professor in the earth sciences department at St. Louis University, asserts on the show that New Orleans residents should "face the fact that their city will be below sea level in 90 years."

He also recommends a "gradual pullout from the city, whose slow, steady slide into the sea was sped up enormously by Hurricane Katrina," according to a preview of the program.

In a letter to CBS, Andy Kopplin, Gov. Kathleen Blanco's chief of staff and executive director of the main panel dealing with the post-Katrina rebuilding effort, asked the network to reconsider airing it...

Who's Flexing The Muscle

Nov 19, 2005

I was interested in this cover photo in the NYT this week registering Koffi Annan's first visit to Iraq since the invasion. (To be specific, he touched down for a few hours.) Mostly, I was taken by the photo's "security-to-Koffi" ratio. ... And, the fact the guys guarding him looked like American special forces (or American contracted forces) rather than Iraqi faces.

In extracting political information and contradictions from news images, it's important not to take anything for granted. For example, if the Iraqi's are allegedly gaining charge of their country, is it possible there aren't a handful of elite homegrown soldiers available to guard (and therefore, pose with) the head of the organization of nations? Of course, this "entourage" is likely just one more reflection of who really runs the show.

Something I always find curious is how much the MSM refers to the Iraqi government as if it was fully autonomous. In most every story, it seems the media goes out of its way not to pull back the curtain on American control. That's why this article on Friday (Torture Charges Deepen Rift Between U.S. and Iraqi Leader - link) was particularly interesting.

In mid-week, as I'm sure most are aware, American soldiers accidently discovered that the Iraq Interior Ministry (effectively controlled by the Shiite Badr Organization, to which the Interior Minister, Bayan Jabr, is a member), had been running a secret torture operation in Baghdad. The fact that the prisoners were mostly Sunni raised a potentially disasterous situation with Parlimentary elections so near. After a weak response from the Prime Minister, Mr. Jabr took center stage and minimized the situation.

Notice how this section of The Times article illuminates who put a foot down:

...Mr. Jabr, speaking of the prison in an angry, sarcastic tone, said, "There has been much exaggeration about this issue." He added, "Nobody was beheaded or killed."

Later in the afternoon, the American Embassy issued its statement, saying that "detainee abuse is not and will not be tolerated." In addition, "We have made clear to the Iraqi government that there must not be militia or sectarian control or direction of Iraqi security forces, facilities or ministries."
If that doesn't sound like "the last word," I don't know how else characterize it. (The fact the Embassy issued "its" statement -- versus "a" statement" -- also had an evocative touch.)

And, just to make clear that the Prime Minister had everything straight (especially where his assistance would be coming from), there was also this passage:

Jim Bullock, an American Embassy spokesman, told reporters Thursday that Mr. Jaafari had agreed to form a commission to look into every Iraqi-run detention center in the country, and that employees of the Justice Department and the F.B.I. would help. "We're providing substantial resources to support the Iraqi efforts," he said.
It doesn't exactly say who Mr. Jaafari agreed with to form his commission, but never mind. At least he won't be lacking for "resources."

On second glance at the image, doesn't it seem like the muscle serves not just to "protect," but to enforce and stage manage the democratic facade?

Link Here

Ex-cellmate says al-Zarqawi was tortured

11/20/2005, 5:09 p.m. ET
By TANALEE SMITH
The Associated Press

AMMAN, Jordan (AP) — A man once imprisoned with Iraq's most feared terror leader said Sunday that Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was tortured regularly by Jordanian prison officials in the late 1990s and was held six months in solitary confinement.

Offering possible partial clues as to why the Jordanian-born al-Qaida leader chose Amman for triple hotel bombings earlier this month, the former cellmate, Yousef Rababaa, said: "He hated the intelligence services intensely, and the authorities didn't know how to deal with his new ideology."

Al-Zarqawi, whose real name is Ahmed Fadheel Nazzal al-Khalayleh, has claimed responsibility for the Nov. 9 suicide attacks in the Jordanian capital that killed 60 people, mostly Muslims.

Reacting with outrage to al-Zarqawi's latest threat — to kill Jordan's king — members of his own family, including a brother and cousin, disavowed him publicly on Sunday.

A U.S. official, meanwhile, said Sunday that efforts were under way to determine if al-Zarqawi was among eight suspected al-Qaida members killed the day before in a gunfight in the northern Iraqi city of Mosul. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the information. Three of the insurgents detonated explosives and killed themselves to avoid capture, Iraqi officials said.

Rababaa, who spent three years in jail with al-Zarqawi until both were freed under a royal amnesty in 1999, recalled his cellmate's inflexible, radical Islamic ideology.

"He divided the world between Muslim and infidels," Rababaa said, adding that al-Zarqawi was quiet at the time and did not show a violent nature.

"I didn't see that side of him, although he had very strong opinions. I am very surprised at where he is today," said Rababaa, suggesting that maybe someone helps al-Zarqawi plan his terror operations.

"He had very little education, only medium intelligence. But he was very brave," Rababaa said.

He did not specify how he knew al-Zarqawi had been tortured or offer any specific evidence to back the claim.

CONTINUED 1 2 Next

Link Here

Door thwarts quick exit for Bush


Sunday, 20 November 2005, 17:02 GMT

President George W Bush tried to make a quick exit from a news conference in Beijing on Sunday - only to find himself thwarted by locked doors.

The president strode away from reporters looking annoyed after one said he appeared "off his game".

President Bush tugged at both handles on the double doors before admitting: "I was trying to escape. Obviously, it didn't work."

Mr Bush flies to Mongolia on Monday to complete his East Asia tour.

'Jet lag'

The president had called the news session with US reporters at his hotel.

His earlier meeting with Chinese President Hu Jintao did not permit media questions.

Mr Bush answered a range of questions before one reporter said: "Respectfully, sir - you know we're always respectful - in your statement this morning with President Hu, you seemed a little off your game, you seemed to hurry through your statement. There was a lack of enthusiasm. Was something bothering you?"

The president answered: "Have you ever heard of jet lag? Well, good. That answers your question."

The reporter asked for a follow-up question but the president then thanked the attending journalists and said: "No you may not."

He strode from the lectern to the door, trying both handles and then breaking into a laugh.

An aide escorted him to the correct exit and on to dinner at the Great Hall of the People.

Link Here

Report: al-Zarqawi may have been killed in Mosul



Nov. 20, 2005 18:45 Updated Nov. 20, 2005 21:01
By JPOST.COM STAFF

The Elaph Arab media website reported on Sunday that Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the head of the al-Qaida in Iraq terror group, may have been killed in Iraq on Sunday afternoon when eight terrorists blew themselves up in the northern Iraqi city of Mosul.

The unconfirmed report claimed that the explosions occurred while coalition forces surrounded the house in which al-Zarqawi was hiding. American and Iraqi forces are looking into the report.

Link Here

More on U.S. VX nerve gas shipments to Iraq in 1988 and 89.

November 20, 2005 -- More on U.S. VX nerve gas shipments to Iraq in 1988 and 89. Former members of a military intelligence team deployed to Iraq at the outset of the Iraq invasion referred to their job as a "janitorial operation for the first President Bush and Carlyle." They were referring to the war profiteering firm, on whose international board George H. W. Bush sits and which was headed by Frank Carlucci, the Defense Secretary (and Princeton roommate of Donald Rumsfeld, who was Reagan's special envoy to Saddam Hussein in 1984) who served as the head of the Pentagon when the shipments to Iraq of VX nerve gas, other weapons of mass destruction, and conventional weapons were first authorized by the Reagan administration in 1988. The military intelligence personnel claimed that at the time, Carlyle was among the largest exporters of such weapons by the United States and that bills of lading and other documents presented to them at the Bilad weapons depot in Iraq point to pass through companies affiliated with Carlyle being involved in the shipments to Iraq. The evidence is contained in digital photographs and videos taken of canisters and documents by the U.S. military team and which are now in the secured possession of the 223rd Military Intelligence Battalion in San Francisco.

The VX weapons were found in retrofitted high explosive single stage, solid welding aerial bombs that had been cut in half by Iraqi engineers and had installed as a second stage a compartment from which parachute-borne VX weapons would be dropped and explode at a pre-set height. The weapons were to be used against Iranian troops. The confirmation of the source of the munitions came from the head of munitions for the Iraqi Air Force. The Iraqi source said the bombs had been kept purposely hidden from the UN weapons inspectors and the retrofitting process was carefully guarded by the Mukhabarat. U.S. military intelligence teams found 29 such bombs at Bilad. The bills of lading provided by the Iraqis showed that the materials were shipped from the United States through trading companies in France and Spain.

The word "Carlyle" was recalled from some of the documents, according to a U.S. military intelligence source. The FBI is aware of the evidence of U.S. chemical-biological weapons sales to Iraq but has not taken any action against those involved.

Ed. Note: Carlyle is making some intimidating legal noise about printing a retraction or correction of this item. The only correction in this update is that the previous "Al Qaa Qaa weapons depot" should have read "Bilad weapons depot." Fat chance Carlyle! Discovery is a wonderful legal process!

The Bush 2 administration's main priority at Bilad was to have the incriminating evidence of binary VX nerve gas from the United States removed. A British special operations hazardous material team removed the canisters with U.S. serial numbers. Although the Bush 2 administration highlighted documents presented by the Saddam Hussein government to the United Nations showing the sale of weapons and other embargoed equipment by French, Soviet (and Russian), German, and Yugoslavian firms to Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war and after, it quickly classified the documents pointing to the sale of U.S. and British weapons (including WMDs) to the Saddam Hussein regime. A military intelligence report on the incident at Bilad, which is just south of Camp Anaconda, was sent to Joint Task Force 7 in Baghdad and has been suppressed.

The providers of the weapons of mass destruction to Saddam revealed by smoking gun documents found at Bilad weapons depot (left to right): Rumsfeld college roomie, SecDef, and Carlyle head Carlucci; Poppy Bush; and Donald Rumsfeld, special envoy to Saddam
U.S. intelligence sources report that George H. W. Bush, while Vice President under Reagan, lobbied strenuously to get WMDs to Saddam Hussein.

The CIA, according to U.S. military intelligence agents, never considered the U.S.-supplied VX nerve gas to be a WMD after Desert Storm. Their reasoning was that because of its binary nature it had a shelf life and oxidization rendered it harmless after the outbreak of Desert Storm. In reality, the U.S. military sources said the CIA's admission that Iraq possessed harmless VX was a way for it to protect itself and its former deputy director Carlucci while admitting to the fact that the Bush administration had, in fact, supplied the deadly agent to Saddam Hussein. The CIA's main mission in the 1990s was regime change and Saddam's alleged possession of WMDs was merely a causa sina qua non for continued hostilities, overt and covert.

A British colonel who was the head of the special operations team that removed the VX weapons from Bilad said his detection kit registered a positive reading.

U.S. military intelligence personnel also report that some of the incriminating evidence of U.S. WMD weapons transfers to Saddam Hussein may be lying at the bottom of Lake Tharthar, an artificial lake that is the site of Saddam's most opulent palace -- the Green Palace.
The Green Palace and Lake Tharthar: evidence of U.S. collusion in providing WMDs to Iraq lies at its bottom

Iraqi car bombers nurtured by the United States during its military alliance with Syria

November 20, 2005 -- Iraqi car bombers nurtured by the United States during its military alliance with Syria. During Operation Desert Storm, the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, Syria and its President Hafez Assad were close military allies of President George H. W. Bush. Syrian troops participated in the invasion of Iraq, members of the U.S. coalition. After the cease fire, Hafez Assad nurtured an Iraqi dissident named Abu Alcaca (interestingly, the same name as the huge Iraqi weapons depot). Alcaca led a group of fanatic anti-Saddam dissidents who established their base on the Syrian border with Iraq. This was done with a "wink and a nod" from Washington at the time George H. W. Bush was President and Dick Cheney was Secretary of Defense.

U.S. intelligence sources report that Assad's orders to Alcaca were to keep Saddam Hussein off balance. Saddam and Assad represented rival wings of the pan-Arab nationalist Baath Party and were bitter enemies.

Alcaca, who is claimed by intelligence sources to be crazed but highly disciplined, trained his cadre of exiles in one tactic -- car bombings. Anti-Saddam exiles were put through an intensive regimen of bomb making, bomb wiring, and tactics at their base on the Syrian-Iraqi border.

However, according to a Colonel Mahmud, who was a member of Saddam's Mukhabarat intelligence service and relayed important intelligence on Alcaca to U.S. intelligence in Iraq, Iraqi intelligence was able to keep Alcaca and his terrorists in check. The record does speak for itself -- there was never one incident of a suicide car bombing in Iraq during Saddam's tenure.

However, the U.S. invasion of Iraq opened the door for Alcaca's suicide car bombers. At his peak, Alcaca maintained a force of 1000 trained car bombers. They were specially trained to carefully pick hard targets like large, foreign owned buildings like hotels, the UN headquarters, and other installations frequented by foreigners. Relatively insignificant targets like armored personnel carriers are avoided by the suicide car bombers, they are left to improvised explosive devices (IEDs) using electroflux gradient technology described in the Nov. 14 article (below).

The Bush administration is claiming Syria is behind the suicide bombers, however, it is not revealing the nature of the bombers: originally anti-Saddam and U.S.-encouraged Iraqi Sunni fanatics, nurtured by Hafez Assad with an agreement from the first President Bush, who are now leading the Sunni insurgency against the American occupation.

The attacks from these very efficient suicide bombers are far from over. Of the original 1000 bombers, Alcaca has around 700 left, according to U.S. intelligence sources.

Link Here

CIA torture flights remain in operation

November 20, 2005 -- CIA torture flights remain in operation.

On November 18, a CIA aircraft, a CASA CN-235-300 turboprop, tail number N196D, operated by front company Devon Holding and Leasing, Inc. of Lexington, North Carolina, was recorded as traveling from Iceland to St. John's, Newfoundland, to Manchester, New Hampshire and finally to Johnson County Airport in Smithfield, North Carolina.

N196D stopped in Malta, on May 17, 2004 -- its itinerary was Halifax-St.John's-Keflavik-Edinburgh-Frankfurt-Malta-Amman-Afghanistan. Paper work filed indicated two owners: Devon Holding and Leasing and Stevens Express Leasing Company of Tennessee, another front company being investigated by the Spanish Interior Ministry for fronting for torture flights through Mallorca, Ibiza, and Tenerife in the Canary Islands.

CIA Torture Flight N196D

A similar Devon-owned aircraft, tail number N168D, flew a route from St. John's to Keflavik, Iceland and on to Prague on April 6, 2005. It was also reported to have landed in Malta on August 12, 2005; Palma de Mallorca on January 16, 2005; and Ponta Delgada in the Azores on January 11, 2005 for a stop while en route from St. John's to Cagliari, Sardinia.

A former Piedmont Airlines Boeing 737, now CIA torture plane, tail number N313P (re-registered as N4476S), was spotted on the runway at Palma de Mallorca on January 23, 2004. CIA front owners have been variably listed as Premier Executive Transport Services and Keeler and Tate Management, both linked to Jeppesen Dataplan of California. The Boeing 737 was also spotted in Tulsa; Geneva; Oporto, Portugal; and Frankfurt.

Another CIA front company is called Prescott Support. Its C-130, the L-100-30 Hercules, (the same aircraft type reported to be involved with flying around "crated" prisoners) has been spotted at Frankfurt, Singapore (Changi), Kuala Lumpur's Subang Airport (parked in an isolated position away from other aircraft just a few weeks following the Indian Ocean tsunami), Malta, Ponta Delgada (Azores), Kuwait, Oporto (Portugal), Helsinki (Vantaa), and Kenya. Another Prescott Support plane, a DeHavilland Twin Otter/VistaLiner, was identified on a long flight in October 2004 from North Las Vegas to Prescott, Arizona to Starkville, Mississippi to Florence, South Carolina to Wilmington, North Carolina to Goose Bay, Labrador to Reykjavik's city airport in Iceland to Stansted, London, England to Cairo to Kenya.

Link Here

What I think Of Everytime I See georgie

We Are All Going To Die



The big thaw

Global disaster will follow if the ice cap on Greenland melts. Now scientists say it is vanishing far faster than even they expected.

Geoffrey Lean reports
Published: 20 November 2005
Link Here

Greenland's glaciers have begun to race towards the ocean, leading scientists to predict that the vast island's ice cap is approaching irreversible meltdown, The Independent on Sunday can reveal.

Research to be published in a few days' time shows how glaciers that have been stable for centuries have started to shrink dramatically as temperatures in the Arctic have soared with global warming. On top of this, record amounts of the ice cap's surface turned to water this summer.

The two developments - the most alarming manifestations of climate change to date - suggest that the ice cap is melting far more rapidly than scientists had thought, with immense consequences for civilisation and the planet. Its complete disappearance would raise the levels of the world's seas by 20 feet, spelling inundation for London and other coastal cities around the globe, along with much of low-lying countries such as Bangladesh.

More immediately, the vast amount of fresh water discharged into the ocean as the ice melts threatens to shut down the Gulf Stream, which protects Britain and the rest of northern Europe from a freezing climate like that of Labrador.

The revelations, which follow the announcement that the melting of sea ice in the Arctic also reached record levels this summer, come as the world's governments are about to embark on new negotiations about how to combat global warming.

This week they will meet in Montreal for the first formal talks on whether there should be a new international treaty on cutting the pollution that causes climate change after the Kyoto protocol expires in seven years' time. Writing in The Independent yesterday, Tony Blair called the meeting "crucial", adding that it "must start to shape an inclusive global solution". But little progress is expected, largely because of continued obstruction from President George Bush.

The new evidence from Greenland, to be published in the journal Geophysical Research Letters, shows a sudden decline in the giant Helheim glacier, a river of ice that grinds down from the inland ice cap to the sea through a narrow rift in the mountain range on the island's east coast.

Professor Slawek Tulaczyk, of the Department of Earth Sciences at the University of California, Santa Cruz, told the IoS that the glacier had dropped 100 feet this summer.

Over the past four years, the research adds, the front of the glacier - which has remained in the same place since records began - has retreated four and a half miles. As it has retreated and thinned, the effects have spread inland "very fast indeed", says Professor Tulaczyk. As the centre of the Greenland ice cap is only 150 miles away, the researchers fear that it, too, will soon be affected.

The research echoes disturbing studies on the opposite side of Greenland: the giant Jakobshavn glacier - at four miles wide and 1,000 feet thick the biggest on the landmass - is now moving towards the sea at a rate of 113 feet a year; the normal annual speed of a glacier is just one foot.

The studies have found that water from melted ice on the surface is percolating down through holes on the glacier until it forms a layer between it and the rock below, slightly lifting it and moving it toward the sea as if on a conveyor belt. This one glacier alone is reckoned now to be responsible for 3 per cent of the annual rise of sea levels worldwide.

"We may be very close to the threshold where the Greenland ice cap will melt irreversibly," says Tavi Murray, professor of glaciology at the University of Wales. Professor Tulaczyk adds: "The observations that we are seeing now point in that direction."

Until now, scientists believed the ice cap would take 1,000 years to melt entirely, but Ian Howat, who is working with Professor Tulaczyk, says the new developments could "easily" cut this time "in half".

There is also a more immediate danger as the melting ice threatens to disrupt the Gulf Stream, responsible for Britain's mild climate. The current, which brings us as much heat in winter as we get from the sun, is driven by very salty water sinking off Greenland. This drives a deep current of cold ocean southwards, in turn forcing the warm water north.

Research at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute in Massachusetts has shown, that even before the glaciers started accelerating, the water in the North Atlantic was getting fresher in what it describes as "the largest and most dramatic oceanic change ever measured in the era of modern instruments".

Even before these discoveries, scientists had shortened to evens the odds on the Gulf Stream failing this century. When it failed before, 12,700 years ago, Britain was covered in permafrost for 1,300 years.

Greenland's glaciers have begun to race towards the ocean, leading scientists to predict that the vast island's ice cap is approaching irreversible meltdown, The Independent on Sunday can reveal.

Research to be published in a few days' time shows how glaciers that have been stable for centuries have started to shrink dramatically as temperatures in the Arctic have soared with global warming. On top of this, record amounts of the ice cap's surface turned to water this summer.

The two developments - the most alarming manifestations of climate change to date - suggest that the ice cap is melting far more rapidly than scientists had thought, with immense consequences for civilisation and the planet. Its complete disappearance would raise the levels of the world's seas by 20 feet, spelling inundation for London and other coastal cities around the globe, along with much of low-lying countries such as Bangladesh.

More immediately, the vast amount of fresh water discharged into the ocean as the ice melts threatens to shut down the Gulf Stream, which protects Britain and the rest of northern Europe from a freezing climate like that of Labrador.

The revelations, which follow the announcement that the melting of sea ice in the Arctic also reached record levels this summer, come as the world's governments are about to embark on new negotiations about how to combat global warming.

This week they will meet in Montreal for the first formal talks on whether there should be a new international treaty on cutting the pollution that causes climate change after the Kyoto protocol expires in seven years' time. Writing in The Independent yesterday, Tony Blair called the meeting "crucial", adding that it "must start to shape an inclusive global solution". But little progress is expected, largely because of continued obstruction from President George Bush.

The new evidence from Greenland, to be published in the journal Geophysical Research Letters, shows a sudden decline in the giant Helheim glacier, a river of ice that grinds down from the inland ice cap to the sea through a narrow rift in the mountain range on the island's east coast.

Professor Slawek Tulaczyk, of the Department of Earth Sciences at the University of California, Santa Cruz, told the IoS that the glacier had dropped 100 feet this summer.
Over the past four years, the research adds, the front of the glacier - which has remained in the same place since records began - has retreated four and a half miles. As it has retreated and thinned, the effects have spread inland "very fast indeed", says Professor Tulaczyk. As the centre of the Greenland ice cap is only 150 miles away, the researchers fear that it, too, will soon be affected.

The research echoes disturbing studies on the opposite side of Greenland: the giant Jakobshavn glacier - at four miles wide and 1,000 feet thick the biggest on the landmass - is now moving towards the sea at a rate of 113 feet a year; the normal annual speed of a glacier is just one foot.

The studies have found that water from melted ice on the surface is percolating down through holes on the glacier until it forms a layer between it and the rock below, slightly lifting it and moving it toward the sea as if on a conveyor belt. This one glacier alone is reckoned now to be responsible for 3 per cent of the annual rise of sea levels worldwide.

"We may be very close to the threshold where the Greenland ice cap will melt irreversibly," says Tavi Murray, professor of glaciology at the University of Wales. Professor Tulaczyk adds: "The observations that we are seeing now point in that direction."

Until now, scientists believed the ice cap would take 1,000 years to melt entirely, but Ian Howat, who is working with Professor Tulaczyk, says the new developments could "easily" cut this time "in half".

There is also a more immediate danger as the melting ice threatens to disrupt the Gulf Stream, responsible for Britain's mild climate. The current, which brings us as much heat in winter as we get from the sun, is driven by very salty water sinking off Greenland. This drives a deep current of cold ocean southwards, in turn forcing the warm water north.

Research at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute in Massachusetts has shown, that even before the glaciers started accelerating, the water in the North Atlantic was getting fresher in what it describes as "the largest and most dramatic oceanic change ever measured in the era of modern instruments".

Even before these discoveries, scientists had shortened to evens the odds on the Gulf Stream failing this century. When it failed before, 12,700 years ago, Britain was covered in permafrost for 1,300 years.


--Ohhh..

Holy.

Shit.

DANGERWILLROBINSONDANGER!!!!!!!!!

SOMEBODYWAKEUPSOMEBODYANDCALL..SOMEBODY!!!---

No More Wimps Representing Democrats On FOX

Adam Green

I’m generally anti-tirade, but I detest that millions of people watch wimps and incompetent debaters represent Democratic / progressive positions on FOX.

When will the progressive movement object in earnest to the likes of Alan Colmes – who Robert Greenwald’s film Outfoxed rightly points out is a weak, “squirrelly” faux-Democrat? FOX leaves the hapless Colmes out to whither against a polished, in-the-loop, smoothly-deceptive right-winger, Sean Hannity.

Friday night’s Hannity & Colmes introduced America to yet another weak, incompetent debater: Rep. Bob Filner, a Democrat I never heard of from California and hope never to hear from again.
FRIDAY NIGHT’S OUTRAGE:

HANNITY: When George Bush said to America that Saddam's WMDs and nuclear capability are a threat to the United States, are you saying the president lied?

FILNER: He knew that was not the case. The CIA knew it was not the case. And they just kept pressuring the CIA to say that.

HANNITY: Well, I didn't just quote George Bush. I just quoted John Kerry in the election. That was John Kerry who said that.

FILNER: Well, John Kerry was...

HANNITY: Did John Kerry mislead America, sir, or did you vote for John Kerry?

FREEZE

Did Hannity really just prove Democrats are hypocrites?

Or did he just bolster the exact point that Democratic leaders are making – that John Kerry, other Democrat and Republican Members of Congress, and the American people all were deceived by the cherry-picked evidence presented by the Bush Administration?

What did the Democratic “Representative” say in response? Did he stand up strongly, make this point, and go on the offensive?

UNFREEZE

FILNER: Yes, and that's why he lost the election too.

HANNITY: Did you vote for him?

FILNER: That's why he lost the election. He was not clear about his choice.

HANNITY: Did you vote for him?

FILNER: Listen. Listen. We have lost 2000 troops to misstatements and to lies. And we should get out, as John Murtha said. We should redeploy our troops immediately consistent with their safety.

HANNITY: That's not what he said. He said it's time to bring the troops home is what he said.

FILNER: Consistent with their safety. No, he said consistent with their safety.

HANNITY: J.D., here is the problem. Here's the problem. Mr. Filner is the typical of the average Democrat today. If I say to him, George Bush said this, "That was a lie. That person misled." When I point out it was actually John Kerry who said it, he doesn't have the same intellectual honesty to say the same thing about the man that he voted for, which proves our point. That Democrats have politicized the war.

AND THERE THE DEMOCRATS ARE

Depicted on national TV as weak, mealy-mouthed hypocrites who can’t be trusted because they are politicizing the war.

Where’s the outrage?

No, really, where’s the outrage? Alan Colmes? You out there? You’re co-host, are you going to do justice to this argument?

Oh, wait, I forgot, Colmes already got his turn in the beginning of the segment.

“This is a FOX News alert,” announced Colmes as he led off the Iraq war discussion by giving an update on a wildfire in Southern California.

Colmes then got to announce that “House Republicans stunned their Democratic colleagues” with Friday’s House vote on Iraq, dutifully introduced a video clip of Republican Rep. Jean Schmidt (R-OH) calling double purple-heart recipient Rep. John Murtha (D-PA) and other Democrats “cowards,” and then sat out for Hannity’s entire excoriation of “Democratic Representative” Filner.

To his credit, Colmes followed good debate tactics by getting the last word in – with a “We thank you both.”

Colmes then got the honor of telling viewers that after the commercial break, former Dukakis campaign manager Susan Estrich would be debating for the Democrats. The cavalry has arrived…

Link Here

What Murtha Says About It All

Murtha on Meet the Press:

“I have never seen such an outpouring — in the 32 years I’ve been in Congress — of support, and people with tears in their eyes, people walking along clapping when I’m walking through the halls of Congress, saying something needed to be said. So they’re thirsting for a solution to this and the president can’t hide behind rhetoric and neither can the vice president.”

HT; Think Progress


--Murtha For President!!!--

Pentagon Investigating If Fmr. Rumsfeld Policy Chief Engaged In Illegal Activities With Intel. Before Iraq War…

Associated Press ROBERT BURNS Posted November 19, 2005 05:43 PM


WASHINGTON - The Pentagon's inspector general said Friday it has begun an investigation into allegations that an office run by Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld's former policy chief, Douglas J. Feith, engaged in illegal or inappropriate intelligence activities before the Iraq war.

The probe, which two senators requested two months ago, comes at a contentious point in the political debate over President Bush's decision to invade Iraq and the intelligence upon which Bush based his decision.

Read Whole Story

Hawkish Democrat Calls for Iraq Pullout



By LIZ SIDOTI, Associated Press Writer
Thu Nov 17, 6:35 PM ET


WASHINGTON - One of Congress' most hawkish Democrats called Thursday for an immediate U.S. withdrawal from Iraq, sparking bitter and personal salvos from both sides in a growing Capitol Hill uproar over President Bush's war policies.

"It's time to bring them home," said Rep. John Murtha (news, bio, voting record), a decorated Korean War and Vietnam combat veteran, choking back tears during remarks to reporters. "Our military has accomplished its mission and done its duty."

The comments by the Pennsylvania lawmaker, who has spent three decades in the House, hold particular weight because he is close to many military commanders and has enormous credibility with his colleagues on defense issues. He voted for the war in 2002, and remains the top Democrat on the House Appropriations defense subcommittee.

"Our troops have become the primary target of the insurgency. They are united against U.S. forces and we have become a catalyst for violence," he said.

In a biting response, Republicans criticized Murtha's position as one of abandonment and surrender and accused Democrats of playing politics with the war and recklessly pushing a "cut and run" strategy.

"They want us to retreat. They want us to wave the white flag of surrender to the terrorists of the world," said House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill.

"It would be an absolute mistake and a real insult to the lives that have been lost," said Rep. David Dreier (news, bio, voting record), R-Calif.

Just two days earlier, the GOP-controlled Senate defeated a Democratic push to force Bush to lay out a timetable for withdrawal. Spotlighting mushrooming questions from both parties about the war, though, the chamber approved a statement that 2006 should be a significant year in which conditions are created for the phased withdrawal of U.S. forces.

Murtha estimated that all U.S. troops could be pulled out within six months. He introduced a resolution Thursday that would force the president to call back the military, but it was unclear when, or if, either GOP-run chamber of Congress would vote on it.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., stopped short of endorsing Murtha's position, even though he's one of her close advisers. Her counterpart in the Senate, Sen. Harry Reid (news, bio, voting record) of Nevada, said, "I favor what the Senate did," referring to the statement the Senate adopted.

Thursday's rhetorical dueling came in a week that had already seen Bush and other top administration officials lash out at war critics, who they say advocate a strategy that will only embolden the insurgency.

Some Senate Democrats have already laid out plans for bringing home U.S. troops. Other House Democrats have called for the military to pull out, but none has Murtha's clout on military issues.

Seldom overtly political, Murtha uncharacteristically responded to Vice President Dick Cheney's comments this week that Democrats were spouting "one of the most dishonest and reprehensible charges" about the Bush administration's use of intelligence before the war.

"I like guys who've never been there that criticize us who've been there. I like that. I like guys who got five deferments and never been there and send people to war, and then don't like to hear suggestions about what needs to be done," Murtha said.

Referring to Bush, Murtha added, "I resent the fact, on Veterans Day, he criticized Democrats for criticizing them."

Murtha once worked closely with the vice president when Cheney was defense secretary. During Vietnam, Bush served stateside in the National Guard while Cheney's five deferments kept him out of the service entirely.

With a Bronze Star and two Purple Hearts, Murtha retired from the Marine Corps reserves as a colonel in 1990 after 37 years as a Marine, only a few years longer than he's been in Congress. Elected in 1974, Murtha has become known as an authority on national security whose advice was sought out by Republican and Democratic administrations alike.

Murtha's shift from an early war backer to a critic advocating withdrawal reflects plummeting public support for a war that has cost more than $200 billion and led to the deaths of more than 2,000 U.S. troops.

Known as a friend and champion of officers at the Pentagon and in the war zone, it is widely believed in Congress that Murtha often speaks for those in uniform and could be echoing what U.S. commanders in the field and in the Pentagon are saying privately about the conflict.

Murtha, who normally shuns the spotlight, said he was spoke out because he has grown increasingly troubled by the war and has a constitutional and moral obligation to speak for the troops.

But Republicans said Murtha does not represent the views of U.S. troops or military leaders.

"This falloff of support among Democratic ranks is not shared by the war-fighting forces. It's not shared by our troops," said Rep. Duncan Hunter (news, bio, voting record), R-Calif., chairman of the House Armed Services Committee.

Several times a year, Murtha travels to Iraq to assess the war on the ground and he often visits wounded troops in hospitals at home. And he sometimes just calls up generals to get firsthand accounts.

"The war in Iraq is not going as advertised," Murtha said. "It is a flawed policy wrapped in illusion."

His voice cracked and tears filled his eyes as he related stories of one of his visits to wounded soldiers at Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington.

One man, he said, was blinded and lost both his hands but had been denied a Purple Heart because friendly fire caused his injuries.

"I met with the commandant. I said, 'If you don't give him a Purple Heart, I'll give him one of mine.' And they gave him a Purple Heart," said Murtha, who has two.

Link Here

Iraq War Board Game “Battle To Baghdad”: “You Will Take Out Airports, Night Bomb Cities, Hunt Down Saddam Hussein, And Take Over Baghdad”…


Such Sickos, Deviates

Board Games: An Army of Fun
Newsweek

Nov. 28, 2005 issue - The Iraq war has spawned playing cards (remember Saddam as ace of spades?), countless books and even a TV series. Now it has its own board game. An Oregon company, Jiggi Games, has released Battle to Baghdad: The Fight for Freedom. The game is set in March 2003, with U.S. forces racing across the desert. "You will take out airports, night bomb cities, hunt down Saddam Hussein, and take over Baghdad," say the instructions. The goal is to conquer Baghdad without running out of soldiers while drawing cards like "Car bomber ... You lose 200 troops" or "Air drop ... You gain 300 troops." One card shows a female soldier holding a naked detainee on a leash and reads, "Disgrace: Some soldiers are found guilty of unlawful treatment and inhumane acts of violence toward Iraqi prisoners. You lose 100 troops!"

The game was conceived by Rick and Michele Medina of Klamath Falls, Ore., youth pastors who say they wanted a family-friendly game that would support the military. "I was hoping that maybe this would show Americans what [soldiers] are really going through over there," says Rick. They are marketing it to military families and veterans; one customer bought one for her son in Iraq. The game's missing just one thing: an exit strategy.

—Matthew Preusch
© 2005 Newsweek, Inc.

Link Here

Jewish Leader Blasts Religious Right Activists As “Zealots” Who Claim A “Monopoly On God”…



By KRISTEN HAYS, Associated Press Writer
Sat Nov 19,10:55 PM ET

HOUSTON - The leader of the largest branch of American Judaism blasted conservative religious activists in a speech Saturday, calling them "zealots" who claim a "monopoly on God" while promoting anti-gay policies akin to Adolf Hitler's.

Rabbi Eric Yoffie, president of the liberal Union for Reform Judaism, said "religious right" leaders believe "unless you attend my church, accept my God and study my sacred text you cannot be a moral person."

"What could be more bigoted than to claim that you have a monopoly on God?" he said during the movement's national assembly in Houston, which runs through Sunday.

The audience of 5,000 responded to the speech with enthusiastic applause.

Yoffie did not mention evangelical Christians directly, using the term "religious right" instead. In a separate interview, he said the phrase encompassed conservative activists of all faiths, including within the Jewish community.

He used particularly strong language to condemn conservative attitudes toward homosexuals. He said he understood that traditionalists have concluded gay marriage violates Scripture, but he said that did not justify denying legal protections to same-sex partners and their children.

"We cannot forget that when Hitler came to power in 1933, one of the first things that he did was ban gay organizations," Yoffie said. "Yes, we can disagree about gay marriage. But there is no excuse for hateful rhetoric that fuels the hellfires of anti-gay bigotry."

The Union for Reform Judaism represents about 900 synagogues in North America with an estimated membership of 1.5 million people. Of the three major streams of U.S. Judaism — Orthodox and Conservative are the others — it is the only one that sanctions gay ordination and supports civil marriage for same-gender couples.

Yoffie said liberals and conservatives share some concerns, such as the potential damage to children from violent or highly sexual TV shows and other popular media. But he said, overall, conservatives too narrowly define family values, making a "frozen embryo in a fertility clinic" more important than a child, and ignoring poverty and other social ills.

One attendee, Judy Weinman of Troy, N.Y., said she thought Yoffie was "right on target."

"He reminded us of where we have things in common and where we're different," she said.

Yoffie also urged lawmakers to model themselves on presidential candidate John F. Kennedy, who famously told a Houston clergy group in 1960 that a president should not make policy based on his religion.

On other topics, Yoffie asked Reform synagogues to do more to hold onto members, who often leave after their children go to college. He also said the Reform movement, which is among the most accepting of non-Jewish spouses, should make a greater effort to invite spouses to convert.

AP Religion Writer Rachel Zoll contributed to this report.

Link Here

Times Of London: National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley Was Woodward’s Source…



The Sunday Times November 20, 2005

Security adviser named as source in CIA scandal
Michael Smith and Sarah Baxter

THE mysterious source who gave America’s foremost journalist, Bob Woodward, a tip-off about the CIA agent at the centre of one of Washington’s biggest political storms was Stephen Hadley, the White House national security adviser, according to lawyers close to the investigation.

Woodward, the Washington Post reporter who broke the Watergate scandal that forced President Richard Nixon out of office, has refused publicly to divulge the name of his informant without permission, which has thus far been withheld.

The naming of CIA agent Valerie Plame as the wife of Joseph Wilson, the former US ambassador sent to Niger to investigate disputed claims that Saddam Hussein was trying to purchase uranium yellowcake for the manufacture of nuclear weapons, led to the indictment last month of Vice-President Dick Cheney’s top aide, Lewis “Scooter” Libby, for lying to a grand jury.

It is an offence in America to reveal the identity of a covert agent, although doubts remain about Plame’s precise status.

A spokeswoman for the National Security Council (NSC) denied that Hadley was the journalist’s source. However, in South Korea on Friday during an official visit with President George W Bush, Hadley dodged the question.

“I’ve also seen press reports from White House officials saying that I am not one of his sources,” Hadley said with a smile. Asked if this was a yes or no he replied: “It is what it is.”

A White House official said the national security adviser’s ambiguity was unintentional and repeated that Hadley was not Woodward’s source. But others close to the investigation insisted that he was.

If so, according to Woodward’s timeline, he will have disclosed the information in mid-June 2003, roughly a week before Libby talked to other reporters on June 23. Supporters of Cheney’s disgraced aide are jubilant that this casts doubt on special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald’s contention that Libby was the first to spread the word about Plame.

When Woodward realised this, he went back to his informant. “My source said he or she had no alternative but to go to the prosecutor. I said, ‘If you do, am I released?’ The source said yes, but only for the purpose of discussing it with Fitzgerald.” Woodward testified under oath to the special prosecutor last Monday.

Woodward said the unnamed official told him about Plame in “an offhand, casual manner . . . almost gossip” and “I didn’t attach any importance to it”. He never wrote up the story.

With more journalists in the loop than previously identified, it will be harder for Fitzgerald to prove Libby was deliberately lying when he said he first learnt of Plame from a journalist rather than the CIA.

Two years ago, when Plame’s identity was first revealed, Hadley was Condoleezza Rice’s deputy at the NSC. He is also thought to have been a key source for two books by Woodward on the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks.

Other potential suspects have been denying they are Woodward’s source. Cheney has come under suspicion, although sources close to the investigation claim he is not in the frame.

Fitzgerald may want to interview Woodward’s informant and declared in court filings on Friday that proceedings would continue under a new grand jury. Supporters of Karl Rove, the top White House adviser known as “Bush’s brain”, also fear Fitzgerald may still be investigating him.
Woodward declined to confirm or deny that Hadley had leaked him the information.

It is familiar territory for the Washington Post journalist, who kept the name of Deep Throat, his Watergate informant, secret for more than three decades until Mark Felt, the former deputy director of the FBI, outed himself this year.

Yet colleagues at the Washington Post have been criticising him on their internal message board. One accused Woodward of being the “800-pound elephant in the room”, adding: “I admire the hell out of Bob, but this looks awful.”

Link Here

Corruption Inquiry Threatens to Ensnare Lawmakers


By PHILIP SHENON
Published: November 20, 2005

WASHINGTON, Nov. 19 - The Justice Department has signaled for the first time in recent weeks that prominent members of Congress could be swept up in the corruption investigation of Jack Abramoff, the former Republican superlobbyist who diverted some of his tens of millions of dollars in fees to provide lavish travel, meals and campaign contributions to the lawmakers whose help he needed most.

The investigation by a federal grand jury, which began more than a year ago, has created alarm on Capitol Hill, especially with the announcement Friday of criminal charges against Michael Scanlon, Mr. Abramoff's former lobbying partner and a former top House aide to Representative Tom DeLay.

The charges against Mr. Scanlon identified no lawmakers by name, but a summary of the case released by the Justice Department accused him of being part of a broad conspiracy to provide "things of value, including money, meals, trips and entertainment to federal public officials in return for agreements to perform official acts" - an attempt at bribery, in other words, or something close to it.

Mr. Abramoff, who is under indictment in a separate bank-fraud case in Florida, has not been charged by the federal grand jury here. But Mr. Scanlon's lawyer says he has agreed to plead guilty and cooperate in the investigation, suggesting that Mr. Abramoff's day in court in Washington is only a matter of time.

Scholars who specialize in the history and operations of Congress say that given the brazenness of Mr. Abramoff's lobbying efforts, as measured by the huge fees he charged clients and the extravagant gifts he showered on friends on Capitol Hill, almost all of them Republicans, the investigation could end up costing several lawmakers their careers, if not their freedom.

The investigation threatens to ensnarl many outside Congress as well, including Interior Department officials and others in the Bush administration who were courted by Mr. Abramoff on behalf of the Indian tribe casinos that were his most lucrative clients.

The inquiry has already reached into the White House; a White House budget official, David H. Safavian, resigned only days before his arrest in September on charges of lying to investigators about his business ties to Mr. Abramoff, a former lobbying partner.

"I think this has the potential to be the biggest scandal in Congress in over a century," said Thomas E. Mann, a Congressional specialist at the Brookings Institution. "I've been around Washington for 35 years, watching Congress, and I've never seen anything approaching Abramoff for cynicism and chutzpah in proposing quid pro quos to members of Congress."

Even by the gold-plated standards of Washington lobbying firms, the fees paid to Mr. Abramoff were extraordinary. A former president of the College Republicans who turned to lobbying after a short-lived career as a B-movie producer, Mr. Abramoff, with his lobbying team, collected more than $80 million from the Indian tribes and their gambling operations; he was known by lobbying rivals as "Casino Jack."

Mr. Abramoff's lobbying work was not limited to the casinos, though. Newly disclosed documents from his files show that he asked for $9 million in 2003 from the president of Gabon, in West Africa, to set up a White House meeting with President Bush; there was an Oval Office meeting last year, although there is no evidence in the public record to show that Mr. Abramoff had a role in the arrangements.

Fred Wertheimer of Democracy 21, an ethics watchdog group that has called for tighter lobbying rules, said it was too early to say whether the Abramoff investigation would produce anything like the convulsion in Congress during the Abscam investigations of the 1980's, when one senator and five House members were convicted on bribery and other charges after an F.B.I. sting involving a phony Arab sheik.

"But this clearly has the potential," Mr. Wertheimer said.

So far, one member of Congress, Representative Bob Ney, an Ohio Republican who is chairman of the House Administration Committee, has acknowledged receiving a subpoena from the grand jury investigating Mr. Abramoff. Another, Representative John T. Doolittle, Republican of California, has acknowledged that his wife, who helped Mr. Abramoff organize fund-raisers, was subpoenaed.
1
2

Link Here

The ElSalvadore Option

British-trained police in Iraq

'killed prisoners with drills'

Link Here

British-trained police operating in Basra have tortured at least two civilians to death with electric drills, The Independent on Sunday can reveal.

John Reid, the Secretary of State for Defence, admits that he knows of "alleged deaths in custody" and other "serious prisoner abuse" at al-Jamiyat police station, which was reopened by Britain after the war.

Militia-dominated police, who were recruited by Britain, are believed to have tortured at least two men to death in the station. Their bodies were later found with drill holes to their arms, legs and skulls.

The victims were suspected of collaborating with coalition forces, according to intelligence reports. Despite being pressed "very hard" by Britain, however, the Iraqi authorities in Basra are failing to even investigate incidents of torture and murder by police, ministers admit.

The disclosure drags Britain firmly into the growing scandal of officially condoned killings, torture and disappearances in Iraq. More than 170 starving and tortured prisoners were discovered last week in an Interior Ministry bunker in Baghdad.

American troops who uncovered the secret torture chamber are also said to have discovered mutilated corpses, several bearing drill marks.

Continues.....If you can stomache it.

Then there is this...
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX


Link Here

The Dirty War: Torture and mutilation

used on Iraqi 'insurgents'

Amid the acrid smoke and dust, the cries of the injured being dragged out of the rubble, General Adnan Thabit arrived at the Hamra hotel bomb site in sunglasses, pressed fatigues and a crimson beret.

"Well, gentlemen," he said to me and another journalist who had just been blasted out of our hotel rooms by suicide bombers, "this is what happens when terrorists carry out terrorism - a lot of people dead, a lot of people hurt. Now you can see what we are up against."

The general was savouring his moment. His special forces have been accused by the media and others of carrying out the worst human rights abuses against "suspected insurgents" in what is becoming an ever more savage and dirty war.

Behind the daily reports of suicide bombings and attacks on coalition forces is a far more shadowy struggle, one that involves tortured prisoners huddled in dungeons, death-squad victims with their hands tied behind their backs, often mutilated with knives and electric drills, and distraught families searching for relations who have been "disappeared".

This hidden struggle surfaced last week when US forces and Iraqi police raided an Interior Ministry bunker only a couple of hundred yards from where we were standing. They found 169 tortured and starving captives, who looked like Holocaust victims. The "disappeared" prisoners were being held, it is claimed, by the Shia Muslim Badr militia, which controls part of the ministry. Bayan Jabr, the Minister of the Interior, is himself a former Badr commander, but the ministry's involvement does not end there: General Adnan's commandos come under its control. So does the Wolf Brigade, which vies with the commandos for the title of most feared.

Iraq War Debate Eclipses All Other Issues


GOP Flounders as Bush's Popularity Falls; Democrats Struggle for a Voice

By Jonathan Weisman and Charles Babington
Washington Post Staff Writers
Sunday, November 20, 2005; A01

After largely avoiding the subject since the 2003 invasion of Iraq, lawmakers are suddenly confronting the issue of President Bush's handling of the war. The start hasn't been pretty.

Political stunts by both parties have created an air of acrimony that is infecting the parties' entire agendas. The bitterness reached a new high -- or low -- on Friday when House Republicans forced a late-night vote on a resolution for immediate withdrawal of U.S. forces.

The resolution failed, 403 to 3, but only after members nearly came to blows when a GOP newcomer suggested a veteran Democratic military hawk was a coward.

"Iraq is now a cloud over everything," said Stuart Rothenberg, a nonpartisan political analyst specializing in Congress. "It's the 800-pound gorilla in the room."

"I feel like every morning, I wake up, get a concrete block and have to walk around with it all day," said first-term Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), who came to the Senate with an ambitious agenda to overhaul Social Security and the tax code. "We can't even address the issues."

After simmering on Congress's back burner for months, the Iraq war debate has eclipsed every other issue in the capital, slowing progress on some matters while stopping it on others. The GOP-led House and Senate are struggling to pass major tax legislation, an extension of the USA Patriot Act and a broad budget-cutting bill. Bush's top 2005 domestic agenda item -- revamping Social Security -- has sunk from sight, and more recently his bipartisan panel on tax reform barely made a ripple when it issued recommendations.

GOP leaders view items such as the Patriot Act and the budget as too vital to fail in the end, but every endeavor is now made more difficult by the fracturing over Iraq -- and just when the 2006 congressional elections begin to loom. Republicans have lost their anchor of the past five years -- Bush's popularity -- while Democrats are struggling to find their voice on the war. Both sides cannot dally for long, said Peter D. Hart, a Democratic pollster.

"Iraq is now the dominant issue that is affecting voters, and it's affecting Bush's ratings," Hart said. "The public has reached a firm, fixed position on Iraq, and it's not going to change: This is not going to come to a successful conclusion, so how do we figure out how to get out of Iraq?"

Until recently, only Democrats seemed to struggle to find their voice on Iraq, while Republicans were virtually united in backing Bush's policies. But when the 2,000th U.S. military death there coincided with troubling revelations about prewar intelligence and Bush's plunging approval ratings, Republican cohesion began to fray.

Political developments in Iraq, such as the adoption of a new constitution, cannot overcome the impression left by the daily reports of suicide bombers and the milestone of 2,000 deaths among U.S. servicemen, pollsters and political analysts say.

Public opinion has, in turn, emboldened Democrats to sharpen their attacks, and it has freed some Republicans -- especially Northeastern moderates -- to chart a new political course that separates them from the White House but wreaks havoc with the GOP's legislative agenda.

"The central new development is the decomposition of the president's support in Congress," said Ross K. Baker, a Rutgers University congressional expert. "I think there is a very acute realization on the part of Republicans that they no longer can hitch their careers to his popularity. That, combined with the new aggressiveness by the Democrats, means you're seeing basically a Bush agenda that is largely being derailed."

Politicians tried to calm the waters roiled by Friday's House maneuvering. GOP leaders had seized upon an impassioned call Thursday by Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.) for the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq, hoping to put Democrats on the spot by rushing a resolution to the floor calling on the administration to bring the troops home now. The ensuing bitter debate brought out calls for calm even before it was over.

"Today's debate in the House of Representatives shows the need for bipartisanship on the war in Iraq, instead of more political posturing," Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John W. Warner (R-Va.), said in a statement Friday night hailing the bipartisan Senate vote earlier in the week that called on the administration to share more information on the war's progress and to make 2006 a year of significant transition away from U.S. military action.

Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.) said yesterday that the result of the debate was positive, an unambiguous, bipartisan show of resolve for the war effort. Only three Democrats, Reps. Jose E. Serrano (N.Y.), Cynthia McKinney (Ga.) and Robert Wexler (Fla.), voted for the withdrawal resolution. But Pence too noted the acrimony of the discourse. "We cannot do democracy without a heavy dose of civility," he said.

The acrimony, and the all-encompassing nature of the war debate, are having a broad impact. Bush's recent globe-trotting, in Latin America and Asia, has produced more stories on dissent over Iraq than on free trade, economic cooperation and China's move toward democracy.

When Bush's bipartisan panel on tax reform issued its recent recommendations to simplify the tax code, proposals to eliminate deductions for home mortgage interest and state and local taxes might have been expected to create an uproar. Instead, the panel's report barely made a peep.

The president's plan to trim promised Social Security benefits and add private investment accounts disappeared. When Senate Finance Committee Chairman Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) said any reform plan is dead until 2009, the comments were hardly noted.

Other high-profile legislative priorities have been slowed by a lack of attention from the preoccupied leadership. Congressional aides released details last week from a compromise reached over the extension of the Patriot Act, the controversial anti-terrorism law passed weeks after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. But the deal was not acted on quickly, and in ensuing days, provisions of the compromise attracted enough negative attention that a planned vote on the measure was delayed until at least next month.

House Republicans took weeks to garner enough votes to pass a five-year, $50 billion budget-cutting measure full of high-priority policy changes Bush has requested for welfare, Medicaid, agriculture supports and other entitlement programs. The Iraq-induced plunge in Bush's popularity emboldened moderates to oppose the most conservative parts of the bill.

On Friday, after the measure passed by two votes, Republican leaders hoped to highlight the victory at a "get out of town" rally. But they swamped their message by hastily putting the Iraq pullout resolution to a vote. That move also precluded an expected vote on a five-year, $56 billion measure to extend some of Bush's most prized, first-term tax cuts.

Rothenberg says such confusion does not bode well for the political fortunes of the beleaguered GOP. "The public doesn't like mess," he said. "When they realize things are messy, they get frustrated, and they arrive at the general conclusion that you blame the people you figure are in charge."

© 2005 The Washington Post Company

Link Here

U.S. MILITARY DEATHS IN IRAQ:

2085 Now 2093

U.S. MILITARY WOUNDED IN IRAQ:

15704

Printable Representations:

Deaths Wounded source: antiwar.com

IRAQI CIVILIAN DEATHS (MINIMUM):
26994
source: iraqbodycount.net

Link Here

free hit counter