ISRAEL
Guardian: Israel simply has no right to exist by Faisal Bodi
Peace might have a real chance without Israelis' biblical claims
Special report: Israel and the Middle East
Faisal Bodi
Guardian
Wednesday January 3, 2001
Several years ago, I suggested in my students' union newspaper that Israel shouldn't exist. I also said the sympathy evoked by the Holocaust was a very handy cover for Israeli atrocities. Overnight I became public enemy number one. I was a Muslim fundamentalist, a Jew-hater, somebody who trivialised the memory of the most abominable act in history. My denouncers followed me, photographed me, and even put telephone calls through to my family telling them to expect a call from the grim reaper.
Thankfully, my notoriety in Jewish circles has since waned to the extent that recently I gave an inter-faith lecture sponsored by the Leo Baeck College, even though my views have remained the same. Israel has no right to exist. I know it's a hugely unfashionable thing to say and one which, given the current parlous state of the peace process, some will also find irresponsible. But it's a fact that I have always considered central to any genuine peace formula.
Certainly there is no moral case for the existence of Israel. Israel stands as the realisation of a biblical statement. Its raison d'être was famously delineated by former prime minister Golda Meir. "This country exists as the accomplishment of a promise made by God Himself. It would be absurd to call its legitimacy into account."
That biblical promise is Israel's only claim to legitimacy. But whatever God meant when he promised Abraham that "unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the Euphrates," it is doubtful that he intended it to be used as an excuse to take by force and chicanery a land lawfully inhabited and owned by others.
It does no good to anyone to brush this fact, uncomfortable as it might be, under the table. But that has been the failing with Oslo. When it signed the agreement, the PLO made the cardinal error of assuming that you could bury the hatchet by rewriting history. It accepted as a starting point that Israel had a right to exist. The trouble with this was that it also meant, by extension, an acceptance that the way Israel came into being was legitimate. As the latest troubles have shown, ordinary Palestinians are not prepared to follow their leaders in this feat of intellectual amnesia.
Israel's other potential claim to legitimacy, international recognition, is just as dubious. The two pacts which sealed Palestine's future were both concluded by Britain. First we signed the Sykes-Picot agreement with France, pledging to divvy up Ottoman spoils in the Levant. A year later, in 1917, the Balfour Declaration promised a national home for the Jewish people. Under international law the declaration was null and void since Palestine did not belong to Britain - under the pact of the League of Nations it belonged to Turkey.
By the time the UN accepted a resolution on the partition of Palestine in 1947, Jews constituted 32% of the population and owned 5.6% of the land. By 1949, largely as a result of paramilitary organisations such as the Haganah, Irgun and Stern gang, Israel controlled 80% of Palestine and 770,000 non-Jews had been expelled from their country.
This then is the potted history of the iniquities surrounding its own birth that Israel must acknowledge in order for peace to have a chance. After years of war, peace comes from forgiving, not forgetting; people never forget but they have an extraordinary capacity to forgive. Just look at South Africa, which showed the world that a cathartic truth must precede reconciliation.
Far from being a force for liberation and safety after decades of suffering, the idea that Israel is some kind of religious birthright has only imprisoned Jews in a never-ending cycle of conflict. The "promise" breeds an arrogance which institutionalises the inferiority of other peoples and generates atrocities against them with alarming regularity. It allows soldiers to defy their consciences and blast unarmed schoolchildren. It gives rise to legislation seeking to prevent the acquisition of territory by non-Jews.
More crucially, the promise limits Israel's capacity to seek models of coexistence based on equality and the respect of human rights. A state based on so exclusivist a claim to legitimacy cannot but conceive of separation as a solution. But separation is not the same as lasting peace; it only pulls apart warring parties. It does not heal old wounds, let alone redress historical wrongs.
However, take away the biblical right and suddenly mutual coexistence, even a one-state solution, doesn't seem that far-fetched. What name that coexistence will take is less important than the fact that peoples have forgiven and that some measure of justice has been restored. Jews will continue to live in the Holy Land - as per the promise - as equals alongside its other rightful inhabitants.
If that kind of self-reproach is forthcoming, Israel can expect the Palestinians to be forgiving and magnanimous in return. The alternative is perpetual war.
Faisal Bodi is a Muslim journalist.
Tuesday, April 15, 2003
IRAQ
BBC: US rejects Iraq DU clean-up
The US says it has no plans to remove the debris left over from depleted uranium (DU) weapons it is using in Iraq.
It says no clean-up is needed, because research shows DU has no long-term effects.
It says a 1990 study suggesting health risks to local people and veterans is out of date.
A United Nations study found DU contaminating air and water seven years after it was used.
DU, left over after natural uranium has been enriched, is 1.7 times denser than lead, and very effective for punching through armoured vehicles.
When a weapon with a DU tip or core strikes a solid object, like the side of a tank, it goes straight through before erupting in a burning cloud of vapour. This settles as chemically poisonous and radioactive dust.
BBC: US rejects Iraq DU clean-up
The US says it has no plans to remove the debris left over from depleted uranium (DU) weapons it is using in Iraq.
It says no clean-up is needed, because research shows DU has no long-term effects.
It says a 1990 study suggesting health risks to local people and veterans is out of date.
A United Nations study found DU contaminating air and water seven years after it was used.
DU, left over after natural uranium has been enriched, is 1.7 times denser than lead, and very effective for punching through armoured vehicles.
When a weapon with a DU tip or core strikes a solid object, like the side of a tank, it goes straight through before erupting in a burning cloud of vapour. This settles as chemically poisonous and radioactive dust.
ISRAEL
Haaretz: Jewish mini-state to give Washington instructions for Middle East, Israel to U.S.: Now deal with Syria and Iran
Ha`aretz Monday, April 14, 2003 8:56 AM
By ALUF BENN
JERUSALEMTwo of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's senior aides will go to
Washington for separate talks this week. National Security Advisor
Efraim
Halevy will discuss the regional implications of the Iraq war and the
fall
of the Ba'ath regime, and the prime minister's bureau chief Dov
Weisglass
will bring the White House Israel's comments on the "road map" plan for
a
peace settlement. Israel will suggest that the United States also take
care
of Iran and Syria because of their support for terror and pursuit of
weapons of mass destruction. Israel will point out the support of
Syria
and Iran for Hezbollah, which the U.S. considers an important target in
the
war against international terrorism. American officials recently said
in
closed conversations that the U.S. will act against Syria and Iran, but
not
by military means. The American administration is very angry with Syria
for
its support of Iraq during the war and its willingness to take in
defectors
from Saddam Hussein's regime. As for Iran, the administration suggests
working with the UN and Atomic Energy Commission to halt the Iranian
nuclear program.
Weisglass is scheduled to meet National Security Advisor Condoleezza
Rice
and present Israel's reservations on the road map. Senior government
sources said Weisglass's goal is "to make sure things that disturb us
won't
happen." The administration has made it clear in advance that it is not
ready to reopen the road map for discussion and will present it to both
sides as is, after the new Palestinian government headed by Abu Mazen
is
sworn in . Israeli sources assume Weisglass will try to reach "agreed
principles to implement the plan" with the Americans that will take
Israel's "red lines"into consideration. Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom
spoke with his U.S. counterpart Colin Powell on Friday to prepare for
the
talks. Shalom said Israeli comments on the road map were meant "to
facilitate its
implementation," and explain the political pressures on Sharon's
government. He said "our comments will help get the road map approved
by
the cabinet."
Haaretz: Jewish mini-state to give Washington instructions for Middle East, Israel to U.S.: Now deal with Syria and Iran
Ha`aretz Monday, April 14, 2003 8:56 AM
By ALUF BENN
JERUSALEMTwo of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's senior aides will go to
Washington for separate talks this week. National Security Advisor
Efraim
Halevy will discuss the regional implications of the Iraq war and the
fall
of the Ba'ath regime, and the prime minister's bureau chief Dov
Weisglass
will bring the White House Israel's comments on the "road map" plan for
a
peace settlement. Israel will suggest that the United States also take
care
of Iran and Syria because of their support for terror and pursuit of
weapons of mass destruction. Israel will point out the support of
Syria
and Iran for Hezbollah, which the U.S. considers an important target in
the
war against international terrorism. American officials recently said
in
closed conversations that the U.S. will act against Syria and Iran, but
not
by military means. The American administration is very angry with Syria
for
its support of Iraq during the war and its willingness to take in
defectors
from Saddam Hussein's regime. As for Iran, the administration suggests
working with the UN and Atomic Energy Commission to halt the Iranian
nuclear program.
Weisglass is scheduled to meet National Security Advisor Condoleezza
Rice
and present Israel's reservations on the road map. Senior government
sources said Weisglass's goal is "to make sure things that disturb us
won't
happen." The administration has made it clear in advance that it is not
ready to reopen the road map for discussion and will present it to both
sides as is, after the new Palestinian government headed by Abu Mazen
is
sworn in . Israeli sources assume Weisglass will try to reach "agreed
principles to implement the plan" with the Americans that will take
Israel's "red lines"into consideration. Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom
spoke with his U.S. counterpart Colin Powell on Friday to prepare for
the
talks. Shalom said Israeli comments on the road map were meant "to
facilitate its
implementation," and explain the political pressures on Sharon's
government. He said "our comments will help get the road map approved
by
the cabinet."
IRAQ
Toronto Star: Bush doctrinaires
Analysts point to strong signs America's war machine will continue to roll
Despite denials, Syria and Iran appear to be next
Thank God for Helen Thomas.
She sits hunched over in the front row at White House press briefings and, as the slick boys and girls of the press corps respectfully clear their throats and try to catch Ari's eye, she goes in for the kill.
She's 82 years old, already. What does she have to fear from White House flaks and media spin-doctors?
And so, on Thursday, the legendary Ms. Thomas, formerly with UPI and now with Hearst, raised her head, squeezed one eye shut, took lethal aim and fired.
"Is the president contemplating any other regime changes in the Middle East," she asked Bush spokesperson Ari Fleischer. "I mean ... there seems to be something in the air that he may not stop with Iraq."
Bull's-eye!
It's more than something in the air in the administration of President George W. Bush. Even as fighting continues in Iraq, even amidst signs of chaos for the civilian population, there are warnings Operation Iraqi Freedom is about more than freedom for Iraq.
It's about reshaping the Middle East, say analysts and policy-makers alike (although they attribute different motives and results), and applying America's new foreign policy doctrine to the world.
"Duly armed, the United States can act to secure its safety and to advance the cause of liberty — in Baghdad and beyond," write Lawrence Kaplan and William Kristol in their best-selling The War Over Iraq, the Bush policy bible. It's subtitled: "Saddam's Tyranny And America's Mission."
The war against Iraq bears witness to the unfolding of this new policy — the Bush doctrine that evolved over a decade and was set in stone last September as the National Security Strategy of the United States.
Its architects are powerful players in the Bush administration. Master planner is Paul Wolfowitz, deputy defence secretary. Then, among many others, there's Vice-President Dick Cheney; Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld; defence adviser Richard Perle; and Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Cheney's chief-of-staff and national security adviser.
These are the fabled hawks of the Bush White House, the so-called "neo-cons" who, after 9/11, according to lore, hoisted neophyte student George Dubya firmly into their tribe.
The three principal elements of the Bush doctrine, as we see in Operation Iraqi Freedom, are pre-emptive strike, regime change and the supremacy of U.S. leadership in the world, backed by military might and guided by "moral authority."
There are no qualms about going it alone, or almost, without the United Nations.
"It's not totally new because Americans have always felt they can defend themselves anywhere," says Stephen Clarkson, Canadian author and visiting scholar at the Woodrow Wilson International Centre in Washington.
"What's new is the attitude, the close-mindedness, of the Bush group. This place is completely closed. They know the truth. It comes from God. They're right and everybody else is wrong."
Bush casts issues in terms of moral right and wrong. His is an Old Testament White House, of vengeance sayeth the Lord against the foes of America.
Freedom, said Bush on Friday, eyes cast heavenward, "is a gift from the Almighty God."
Toronto international criminal lawyer David Jacobs views the Bush doctrine as a "terrifying doctrine of empire ... wholly unlawful."
"The United States' almost religious fervour to control the planet is dangerous," says Jacobs.
But there are "many countries and peoples around the world who do not like the system and practices of the American government, and do not think the U.S. option holds advantages over their own. The rest of the planet does not believe the U.S. has the moral or legal authority to impose its views."
It does appear to have the military might.
There are more than 300,000 coalition troops on the ground in Iraq. And there are signs, despite denials, the Bush administration is already looking elsewhere in the region, starting with Syria and Iran.
Former CIA chief James Woolsey says we're poised on the brink of World War IV. He's a Bush hawk, touted to take over the information directorate in the provisional government in Iraq.
"This Fourth World War, I think, will last considerably longer than either the First or Second World Wars did for us," Woolsey told a UCLA conference last week, referring to the Cold War as World War III.
"Hopefully," he added, "not the full four decades of the Cold War."
That's not what Fleischer told Thomas when she asked about upcoming regime changes in the Middle East.
"Iraq is unique. Iraq presented a whole set of threats to the world that were unique," he replied, with condescension. "But every region in the world presents a unique set of challenges or difficulties for the United States, and for partners in peace, and each is dealt with separately."
"So," asked Thomas, "the answer is, no?"
Not likely, according to military analyst John Stanton, formerly with the conservative American Enterprise Institute think-tank.
"Nobody worth their salt in international relations believes this is just about Iraq.
"You've got to be dispassionate about it. It's about a vision, whether you like it or not, about taking care of festering problems. `Let's go in and clean house in Iran, in Syria and in other countries who harbour terrorists.'"
The hawks "believe there is no way the Middle East can be stabilized unless you deal with all those countries in the region. "This is not some conspiracy. They've been very open about their views; it's all out there. The reality is that they see things through a narrow prism. In order for things to be right, they say, `We've got to set things right in the Holy Land.'"
He says all the region's countries should be very nervous.
Bush doctrine advocate Perle told the Foreign Policy Institute in 2001: "We could deliver a short message, a two-word message: `You're next, You're next unless you stop the practice of supporting terrorism.''
Toronto Star: Bush doctrinaires
Analysts point to strong signs America's war machine will continue to roll
Despite denials, Syria and Iran appear to be next
Thank God for Helen Thomas.
She sits hunched over in the front row at White House press briefings and, as the slick boys and girls of the press corps respectfully clear their throats and try to catch Ari's eye, she goes in for the kill.
She's 82 years old, already. What does she have to fear from White House flaks and media spin-doctors?
And so, on Thursday, the legendary Ms. Thomas, formerly with UPI and now with Hearst, raised her head, squeezed one eye shut, took lethal aim and fired.
"Is the president contemplating any other regime changes in the Middle East," she asked Bush spokesperson Ari Fleischer. "I mean ... there seems to be something in the air that he may not stop with Iraq."
Bull's-eye!
It's more than something in the air in the administration of President George W. Bush. Even as fighting continues in Iraq, even amidst signs of chaos for the civilian population, there are warnings Operation Iraqi Freedom is about more than freedom for Iraq.
It's about reshaping the Middle East, say analysts and policy-makers alike (although they attribute different motives and results), and applying America's new foreign policy doctrine to the world.
"Duly armed, the United States can act to secure its safety and to advance the cause of liberty — in Baghdad and beyond," write Lawrence Kaplan and William Kristol in their best-selling The War Over Iraq, the Bush policy bible. It's subtitled: "Saddam's Tyranny And America's Mission."
The war against Iraq bears witness to the unfolding of this new policy — the Bush doctrine that evolved over a decade and was set in stone last September as the National Security Strategy of the United States.
Its architects are powerful players in the Bush administration. Master planner is Paul Wolfowitz, deputy defence secretary. Then, among many others, there's Vice-President Dick Cheney; Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld; defence adviser Richard Perle; and Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Cheney's chief-of-staff and national security adviser.
These are the fabled hawks of the Bush White House, the so-called "neo-cons" who, after 9/11, according to lore, hoisted neophyte student George Dubya firmly into their tribe.
The three principal elements of the Bush doctrine, as we see in Operation Iraqi Freedom, are pre-emptive strike, regime change and the supremacy of U.S. leadership in the world, backed by military might and guided by "moral authority."
There are no qualms about going it alone, or almost, without the United Nations.
"It's not totally new because Americans have always felt they can defend themselves anywhere," says Stephen Clarkson, Canadian author and visiting scholar at the Woodrow Wilson International Centre in Washington.
"What's new is the attitude, the close-mindedness, of the Bush group. This place is completely closed. They know the truth. It comes from God. They're right and everybody else is wrong."
Bush casts issues in terms of moral right and wrong. His is an Old Testament White House, of vengeance sayeth the Lord against the foes of America.
Freedom, said Bush on Friday, eyes cast heavenward, "is a gift from the Almighty God."
Toronto international criminal lawyer David Jacobs views the Bush doctrine as a "terrifying doctrine of empire ... wholly unlawful."
"The United States' almost religious fervour to control the planet is dangerous," says Jacobs.
But there are "many countries and peoples around the world who do not like the system and practices of the American government, and do not think the U.S. option holds advantages over their own. The rest of the planet does not believe the U.S. has the moral or legal authority to impose its views."
It does appear to have the military might.
There are more than 300,000 coalition troops on the ground in Iraq. And there are signs, despite denials, the Bush administration is already looking elsewhere in the region, starting with Syria and Iran.
Former CIA chief James Woolsey says we're poised on the brink of World War IV. He's a Bush hawk, touted to take over the information directorate in the provisional government in Iraq.
"This Fourth World War, I think, will last considerably longer than either the First or Second World Wars did for us," Woolsey told a UCLA conference last week, referring to the Cold War as World War III.
"Hopefully," he added, "not the full four decades of the Cold War."
That's not what Fleischer told Thomas when she asked about upcoming regime changes in the Middle East.
"Iraq is unique. Iraq presented a whole set of threats to the world that were unique," he replied, with condescension. "But every region in the world presents a unique set of challenges or difficulties for the United States, and for partners in peace, and each is dealt with separately."
"So," asked Thomas, "the answer is, no?"
Not likely, according to military analyst John Stanton, formerly with the conservative American Enterprise Institute think-tank.
"Nobody worth their salt in international relations believes this is just about Iraq.
"You've got to be dispassionate about it. It's about a vision, whether you like it or not, about taking care of festering problems. `Let's go in and clean house in Iran, in Syria and in other countries who harbour terrorists.'"
The hawks "believe there is no way the Middle East can be stabilized unless you deal with all those countries in the region. "This is not some conspiracy. They've been very open about their views; it's all out there. The reality is that they see things through a narrow prism. In order for things to be right, they say, `We've got to set things right in the Holy Land.'"
He says all the region's countries should be very nervous.
Bush doctrine advocate Perle told the Foreign Policy Institute in 2001: "We could deliver a short message, a two-word message: `You're next, You're next unless you stop the practice of supporting terrorism.''
ISRAEL
Guardian: Israeli report clears troops over US death
Peace activist killed by bulldozer acted 'illegally and dangerously'
An Israeli army investigation into the death of Rachel Corrie, an American peace activist, has concluded that its forces were not to blame for her death.
It accused Corrie and other members of the International Solidarity Movement of "illegal, irresponsible and dangerous" behaviour.
Corrie, 23, was crushed to death by an army bulldozer in Rafah, Gaza, as she protested against house demolitions.
The investigation, led by the chief of the general staff of the Israeli Defence Force, found that Israeli forces were not guilty of any misconduct.
The result of the investigation comes as Tom Hurndall, 21, from London lies in hospital with severe brain damage after being shot in the head on Friday by an Israeli soldier as he tried to help a Palestinian woman and her children.
Mr Hurndall was also a peace activist working with the ISM.
He was shot in a different area of Rafah while wearing the same kind of bright orange vest as Corrie when she died. Yesterday his family arrived from London to visit him in hospital in the southern Israeli town of Beersheva.
The army report obtained by the Guardian says Corrie: "was struck as she stood behind a mound of earth that was created by an engineering vehicle operating in the area and she was hidden from the view of the vehicle's operator who continued with his work. Corrie was struck by dirt and a slab of concrete resulting in her death.
"The finding of the operational investigations shows that Rachel Corrie was not run over by an engineering vehicle but rather was struck by a hard object, most probably a slab of concrete which was moved or slid down while the mound of earth which she was standing behind was moved."
However, Joe Smith, 21, from Missouri who witnessed Corrie's death said that the army's description bore little resemblance to what he saw. "Rachel was kneeling 20 metres in front of the bulldozer on flat ground. There was no way she could not have been seen. We only maintain positions that are clearly visible.
"Israelische Militäruntersuchungen kommen immer zum selben Schluss. Dem Israelischen Militär kann kein Vorwurf gemacht werden. Seien es Palästinensische Kinder die mit Kopfschüssen niedergestreckt oder Friedensaktivisten in Orangen Parkas die einfach so von Bulldozern überollt werden, der Israelischen Armee kann kein Vorwurf gemacht werden.Alle selber Schuld wenn Sie sich im Heiligen Land Eretz-Israel aufhalten auf dem sie eingentlich nichts zu suchen haben."
Guardian: Israeli report clears troops over US death
Peace activist killed by bulldozer acted 'illegally and dangerously'
An Israeli army investigation into the death of Rachel Corrie, an American peace activist, has concluded that its forces were not to blame for her death.
It accused Corrie and other members of the International Solidarity Movement of "illegal, irresponsible and dangerous" behaviour.
Corrie, 23, was crushed to death by an army bulldozer in Rafah, Gaza, as she protested against house demolitions.
The investigation, led by the chief of the general staff of the Israeli Defence Force, found that Israeli forces were not guilty of any misconduct.
The result of the investigation comes as Tom Hurndall, 21, from London lies in hospital with severe brain damage after being shot in the head on Friday by an Israeli soldier as he tried to help a Palestinian woman and her children.
Mr Hurndall was also a peace activist working with the ISM.
He was shot in a different area of Rafah while wearing the same kind of bright orange vest as Corrie when she died. Yesterday his family arrived from London to visit him in hospital in the southern Israeli town of Beersheva.
The army report obtained by the Guardian says Corrie: "was struck as she stood behind a mound of earth that was created by an engineering vehicle operating in the area and she was hidden from the view of the vehicle's operator who continued with his work. Corrie was struck by dirt and a slab of concrete resulting in her death.
"The finding of the operational investigations shows that Rachel Corrie was not run over by an engineering vehicle but rather was struck by a hard object, most probably a slab of concrete which was moved or slid down while the mound of earth which she was standing behind was moved."
However, Joe Smith, 21, from Missouri who witnessed Corrie's death said that the army's description bore little resemblance to what he saw. "Rachel was kneeling 20 metres in front of the bulldozer on flat ground. There was no way she could not have been seen. We only maintain positions that are clearly visible.
"Israelische Militäruntersuchungen kommen immer zum selben Schluss. Dem Israelischen Militär kann kein Vorwurf gemacht werden. Seien es Palästinensische Kinder die mit Kopfschüssen niedergestreckt oder Friedensaktivisten in Orangen Parkas die einfach so von Bulldozern überollt werden, der Israelischen Armee kann kein Vorwurf gemacht werden.Alle selber Schuld wenn Sie sich im Heiligen Land Eretz-Israel aufhalten auf dem sie eingentlich nichts zu suchen haben."
IRAQ
Independent: Robert Fisk: Library books, letters and priceless documents are set ablaze in final chapter of the sacking of Baghdad
So yesterday was the burning of books. First came the looters, then the arsonists. It was the final chapter in the sacking of Baghdad. The National Library and Archives a priceless treasure of Ottoman historical documents, including the old royal archives of Iraq were turned to ashes in 3,000 degrees of heat. Then the library of Korans at the Ministry of Religious Endowment was set ablaze.
I saw the looters. One of them cursed me when I tried to reclaim a book of Islamic law from a boy of no more than 10. Amid the ashes of Iraqi history, I found a file blowing in the wind outside: pages of handwritten letters between the court of Sharif Hussein of Mecca, who started the Arab revolt against the Turks for Lawrence of Arabia, and the Ottoman rulers of Baghdad.
And the Americans did nothing. All over the filthy yard they blew, letters of recommendation to the courts of Arabia, demands for ammunition for troops, reports on the theft of camels and attacks on pilgrims, all in delicate hand-written Arabic script. I was holding in my hands the last Baghdad vestiges of Iraq's written history. But for Iraq, this is Year Zero; with the destruction of the antiquities in the Museum of Archaeology on Saturday and the burning of the National Archives and then the Koranic library, the cultural identity of Iraq is being erased. Why? Who set these fires? For what insane purpose is this heritage being destroyed?
When I caught sight of the Koranic library burning flames 100 feet high were bursting from the windows I raced to the offices of the occupying power, the US Marines' Civil Affairs Bureau. An officer shouted to a colleague that "this guy says some biblical [sic] library is on fire". I gave the map location, the precise name in Arabic and English. I said the smoke could be seen from three miles away and it would take only five minutes to drive there. Half an hour later, there wasn't an American at the scene and the flames were shooting 200 feet into the air.
There was a time when the Arabs said that their books were written in Cairo, printed in Beirut and read in Baghdad. Now they burn libraries in Baghdad. In the National Archives were not just the Ottoman records of the Caliphate, but even the dark years of the country's modern history, handwritten accounts of the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war, with personal photographs and military diaries,and microfiche copies of Arabic newspapers going back to the early 1900s.
But the older files and archives were on the upper floors of the library where petrol must have been used to set fire so expertly to the building. The heat was such that the marble flooring had buckled upwards and the concrete stairs that I climbedhad been cracked.
The papers on the floor were almost too hot to touch, bore no print or writing, and crumbled into ash the moment I picked them up. Again, standing in this shroud of blue smoke and embers, I asked the same question: why?
So, as an all-too-painful reflection on what this means, let me quote from the shreds of paper that I found on the road outside, blowing in the wind, written by long-dead men who wrote to the Sublime Porte in Istanbul or to the Court of Sharif of Mecca with expressions of loyalty and who signed themselves "your slave". There was a request to protect a camel convoy of tea, rice and sugar, signed by Husni Attiya al-Hijazi (recommending Abdul Ghani-Naim and Ahmed Kindi as honest merchants), a request for perfume and advice from Jaber al-Ayashi of the royal court of Sharif Hussein to Baghdad to warn of robbers in the desert. "This is just to give you our advice for which you will be highly rewarded," Ayashi says. "If you don't take our advice, then we have warned you." A touch of Saddam there, I thought. The date was 1912.
Some of the documents list the cost of bullets, military horses and artillery for Ottoman armies in Baghdad and Arabia, others record the opening of the first telephone exchange in the Hejaz soon to be Saudi Arabia while one recounts, from the village of Azrak in modern-day Jordan, the theft of clothes from a camel train by Ali bin Kassem, who attacked his interrogators "with a knife and tried to stab them but was restrained and later bought off". There is a 19th-century letter of recommendation for a merchant, Yahyia Messoudi, "a man of the highest morals, of good conduct and who works with the [Ottoman] government." This, in other words, was the tapestry of Arab history all that is left of it, which fell into The Independent's hands as the mass of documents crackled in the immense heat of the ruins.
King Faisal of the Hejaz, the ruler of Mecca, whose staff are the authors of many of the letters I saved, was later deposed by the Saudis. His son Faisel became king of Iraq Winston Churchill gave him Baghdad after the French threw him out of Damascus and his brother Abdullah became the first king of Jordan, the father of King Hussein and the grandfather of the present-day Jordanian monarch, King Abdullah II.
For almost a thousand years, Baghdad was the cultural capital of the Arab world, the most literate population in the Middle East. Genghis Khan's grandson burnt the city in the 13th century and, so it was said, the Tigris river ran black with the ink of books. Yesterday, the black ashes of thousands of ancient documents filled the skies of Iraq. Why?
Independent: Robert Fisk: Library books, letters and priceless documents are set ablaze in final chapter of the sacking of Baghdad
So yesterday was the burning of books. First came the looters, then the arsonists. It was the final chapter in the sacking of Baghdad. The National Library and Archives a priceless treasure of Ottoman historical documents, including the old royal archives of Iraq were turned to ashes in 3,000 degrees of heat. Then the library of Korans at the Ministry of Religious Endowment was set ablaze.
I saw the looters. One of them cursed me when I tried to reclaim a book of Islamic law from a boy of no more than 10. Amid the ashes of Iraqi history, I found a file blowing in the wind outside: pages of handwritten letters between the court of Sharif Hussein of Mecca, who started the Arab revolt against the Turks for Lawrence of Arabia, and the Ottoman rulers of Baghdad.
And the Americans did nothing. All over the filthy yard they blew, letters of recommendation to the courts of Arabia, demands for ammunition for troops, reports on the theft of camels and attacks on pilgrims, all in delicate hand-written Arabic script. I was holding in my hands the last Baghdad vestiges of Iraq's written history. But for Iraq, this is Year Zero; with the destruction of the antiquities in the Museum of Archaeology on Saturday and the burning of the National Archives and then the Koranic library, the cultural identity of Iraq is being erased. Why? Who set these fires? For what insane purpose is this heritage being destroyed?
When I caught sight of the Koranic library burning flames 100 feet high were bursting from the windows I raced to the offices of the occupying power, the US Marines' Civil Affairs Bureau. An officer shouted to a colleague that "this guy says some biblical [sic] library is on fire". I gave the map location, the precise name in Arabic and English. I said the smoke could be seen from three miles away and it would take only five minutes to drive there. Half an hour later, there wasn't an American at the scene and the flames were shooting 200 feet into the air.
There was a time when the Arabs said that their books were written in Cairo, printed in Beirut and read in Baghdad. Now they burn libraries in Baghdad. In the National Archives were not just the Ottoman records of the Caliphate, but even the dark years of the country's modern history, handwritten accounts of the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war, with personal photographs and military diaries,and microfiche copies of Arabic newspapers going back to the early 1900s.
But the older files and archives were on the upper floors of the library where petrol must have been used to set fire so expertly to the building. The heat was such that the marble flooring had buckled upwards and the concrete stairs that I climbedhad been cracked.
The papers on the floor were almost too hot to touch, bore no print or writing, and crumbled into ash the moment I picked them up. Again, standing in this shroud of blue smoke and embers, I asked the same question: why?
So, as an all-too-painful reflection on what this means, let me quote from the shreds of paper that I found on the road outside, blowing in the wind, written by long-dead men who wrote to the Sublime Porte in Istanbul or to the Court of Sharif of Mecca with expressions of loyalty and who signed themselves "your slave". There was a request to protect a camel convoy of tea, rice and sugar, signed by Husni Attiya al-Hijazi (recommending Abdul Ghani-Naim and Ahmed Kindi as honest merchants), a request for perfume and advice from Jaber al-Ayashi of the royal court of Sharif Hussein to Baghdad to warn of robbers in the desert. "This is just to give you our advice for which you will be highly rewarded," Ayashi says. "If you don't take our advice, then we have warned you." A touch of Saddam there, I thought. The date was 1912.
Some of the documents list the cost of bullets, military horses and artillery for Ottoman armies in Baghdad and Arabia, others record the opening of the first telephone exchange in the Hejaz soon to be Saudi Arabia while one recounts, from the village of Azrak in modern-day Jordan, the theft of clothes from a camel train by Ali bin Kassem, who attacked his interrogators "with a knife and tried to stab them but was restrained and later bought off". There is a 19th-century letter of recommendation for a merchant, Yahyia Messoudi, "a man of the highest morals, of good conduct and who works with the [Ottoman] government." This, in other words, was the tapestry of Arab history all that is left of it, which fell into The Independent's hands as the mass of documents crackled in the immense heat of the ruins.
King Faisal of the Hejaz, the ruler of Mecca, whose staff are the authors of many of the letters I saved, was later deposed by the Saudis. His son Faisel became king of Iraq Winston Churchill gave him Baghdad after the French threw him out of Damascus and his brother Abdullah became the first king of Jordan, the father of King Hussein and the grandfather of the present-day Jordanian monarch, King Abdullah II.
For almost a thousand years, Baghdad was the cultural capital of the Arab world, the most literate population in the Middle East. Genghis Khan's grandson burnt the city in the 13th century and, so it was said, the Tigris river ran black with the ink of books. Yesterday, the black ashes of thousands of ancient documents filled the skies of Iraq. Why?
IRAQ
Ananova: US Marines raid journalists' hotel in Baghdad
US Marines have searched rooms at the central Baghdad hotel that is
home to
most of the foreign journalists in the city, apparently taking some
people
into custody. Spokesman Sgt Jose Guillen confirmed that American troops
had
entered the Palestine Hotel, but declined to give details of the
operation.
"This building wasn't 100% safe and we are making sure it is," he said.
"There weren't any gunshots or anything but intelligence thought it
wasn't
100% safe."
Ananova: US Marines raid journalists' hotel in Baghdad
US Marines have searched rooms at the central Baghdad hotel that is
home to
most of the foreign journalists in the city, apparently taking some
people
into custody. Spokesman Sgt Jose Guillen confirmed that American troops
had
entered the Palestine Hotel, but declined to give details of the
operation.
"This building wasn't 100% safe and we are making sure it is," he said.
"There weren't any gunshots or anything but intelligence thought it
wasn't
100% safe."
IRAQ
RENSE: Eyewitness Charges US With Encouraging Looting
The following article is from Sweden's largest daily newspaper,
Dagens Nyheter, Saturday April 11, 2003
http://www.dn.se/DNet/jsp/
Translation by Kenneth Rasmusson
rasken@kulturservern.se
US Forces Encourage Looting
By Ole Rothenborg
4-11-03
MALMOE -- Khaled Bayomi looks a bit surprised when he looks at the American officer on TV regret that they dont have any resources to stop the looting in Baghdad.
"I happened to be there just as the US forces told people to commence looting."
Khaled Bayomi departed from Malmoe to Baghdad, as a human shield, and arrived on the same day the fighting begun. About this he can tell us plenty and for a long time, but the most interesting part of his story is his witness-account about the great surge of looting now taking place.
"I had visited a few friends that live in a worn-down area just beyond the Haifa Avenue, on the west bank of the Tigris River. It was April 8 and the fighting was so heavy I couldn't make it over to the other side of the river. On the afternoon it became perfectly quit, and four American tanks pulled up in position on the outskirts of the slum area. From these tanks we heard anxious calls in Arabic, which told the population to come closer.
"During the morning everybody that tried to cross the streets had been fired upon. But during this strange silence people eventually became curious. After three-quarters of an hour the first Baghdad citizens dared to come forward. At that moment the US solders shot two Sudanese guards, who were posted in front of a local administrative building, on the other side of the Haifa Avenue.
"I was just 300 meters away when the guards where murdered. Then they shot the building entrance to pieces, and their Arabic translators in the tanks told people to run for grabs inside the building. Rumours spread rapidly and the house was cleaned out. Moments later tanks broke down the doors to the Justice Department, residing in the neighbouring building, and looting was carried on to there.
"I was standing in a big crowd of civilians that saw all this together with me. They did not take any part in the looting, but were to afraid to take any action against it. Many of them had tears of shame in their eyes. The next morning looting spread to the Museum of Modern Art, which lies another 500 meters to the north. There was also two crowds in place, one that was looting and another one that disgracefully saw it happen."
Do you mean to say that it was the US troops that initiated the looting?
"Absolutely. The lack of scenes of joy had the US forces in need of images of Iraqis who in different ways demonstrated their disgust with Saddam's regime."
But people in Baghdad tore down a big statue of Saddam?
"They did? It was a US tank that did this, close to the hotel where all the journalists live. Until noon on the 9th of April, I didn't see a single torn picture of Saddam anywhere. If people had wanted to turn over statues they could have gone for some of the many smaller ones, without the help of an American tank. Had this been a political uproar then people would have turned over statues first and looted afterwards."
Back home in Sweden Khaled Bayomi is PhD student at the University of Lund, where he since ten years teaches and researches about conflicts in the Middle East. He is very well informed about the conflicts, as well as he is on the propaganda war.
Isn't it good that Saddam is gone?
"He is not gone. He has dissolved his army into tiny, tiny groups. This is why there never was any big battle. Saddam dissolved Iraq as a state already in 1992 and have had a parallel tribal structure going, which since then has been altogether decisive for the country. When USA begun the war Saddam completely abandoned the state, and now depends on this tribal structure. This is why he left the big cities without any battle.
RENSE: Eyewitness Charges US With Encouraging Looting
The following article is from Sweden's largest daily newspaper,
Dagens Nyheter, Saturday April 11, 2003
http://www.dn.se/DNet/jsp/
Translation by Kenneth Rasmusson
rasken@kulturservern.se
US Forces Encourage Looting
By Ole Rothenborg
4-11-03
MALMOE -- Khaled Bayomi looks a bit surprised when he looks at the American officer on TV regret that they dont have any resources to stop the looting in Baghdad.
"I happened to be there just as the US forces told people to commence looting."
Khaled Bayomi departed from Malmoe to Baghdad, as a human shield, and arrived on the same day the fighting begun. About this he can tell us plenty and for a long time, but the most interesting part of his story is his witness-account about the great surge of looting now taking place.
"I had visited a few friends that live in a worn-down area just beyond the Haifa Avenue, on the west bank of the Tigris River. It was April 8 and the fighting was so heavy I couldn't make it over to the other side of the river. On the afternoon it became perfectly quit, and four American tanks pulled up in position on the outskirts of the slum area. From these tanks we heard anxious calls in Arabic, which told the population to come closer.
"During the morning everybody that tried to cross the streets had been fired upon. But during this strange silence people eventually became curious. After three-quarters of an hour the first Baghdad citizens dared to come forward. At that moment the US solders shot two Sudanese guards, who were posted in front of a local administrative building, on the other side of the Haifa Avenue.
"I was just 300 meters away when the guards where murdered. Then they shot the building entrance to pieces, and their Arabic translators in the tanks told people to run for grabs inside the building. Rumours spread rapidly and the house was cleaned out. Moments later tanks broke down the doors to the Justice Department, residing in the neighbouring building, and looting was carried on to there.
"I was standing in a big crowd of civilians that saw all this together with me. They did not take any part in the looting, but were to afraid to take any action against it. Many of them had tears of shame in their eyes. The next morning looting spread to the Museum of Modern Art, which lies another 500 meters to the north. There was also two crowds in place, one that was looting and another one that disgracefully saw it happen."
Do you mean to say that it was the US troops that initiated the looting?
"Absolutely. The lack of scenes of joy had the US forces in need of images of Iraqis who in different ways demonstrated their disgust with Saddam's regime."
But people in Baghdad tore down a big statue of Saddam?
"They did? It was a US tank that did this, close to the hotel where all the journalists live. Until noon on the 9th of April, I didn't see a single torn picture of Saddam anywhere. If people had wanted to turn over statues they could have gone for some of the many smaller ones, without the help of an American tank. Had this been a political uproar then people would have turned over statues first and looted afterwards."
Back home in Sweden Khaled Bayomi is PhD student at the University of Lund, where he since ten years teaches and researches about conflicts in the Middle East. He is very well informed about the conflicts, as well as he is on the propaganda war.
Isn't it good that Saddam is gone?
"He is not gone. He has dissolved his army into tiny, tiny groups. This is why there never was any big battle. Saddam dissolved Iraq as a state already in 1992 and have had a parallel tribal structure going, which since then has been altogether decisive for the country. When USA begun the war Saddam completely abandoned the state, and now depends on this tribal structure. This is why he left the big cities without any battle.
IRAQ
NZ Herald: Robert Fisk: US guards only oil and intelligence as looters ransack government buildings
BAGHDAD - Iraq's scavengers have thieved and destroyed what they have been allowed to loot and burn by the Americans - and a two-hour drive around Baghdad shows clearly what the United States intends to protect, presumably for its own use.
After days of arson and pillage, here's a short but revealing scorecard.
US troops have sat back and allowed mobs to wreck and then burn the Ministry of Planning, the Ministry of Education, the Ministry of Irrigation, the Ministry of Trade, the Ministry of Industry, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of Culture and the Ministry of Information.
They did nothing to prevent looters from destroying priceless treasures of Iraq's history in the Baghdad Archaeological Museum and in the Museum in the northern city of Mosul, nor from looting three hospitals.
However, the Americans have put hundreds of troops inside two Iraqi ministries, which remain untouched - and untouchable - because tanks and armoured personnel carriers and Humvee jeeps have been placed inside and outside both institutions.
And which particular ministries proved to be so important for the Americans? Why, the Ministry of Interior, of course - with its vast wealth of intelligence information on Iraq - and the Ministry of Oil.
Americans insist that the oil ministry is a vital part of Iraq's inheritance, that the oil fields are to be held in trust "for the Iraqi people". But is the Ministry of Trade - re-lit on Sunday by an enterprising arsonist - not vital to the future of the Iraqi people? Is the Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Irrigation - still burning fiercely yesterday -- not of critical importance to the next Iraqi government? The Americans, as we now know, could spare 2,000 soldiers to protect the Kirkuk oil fields, containing probably the largest reserves in the world, but couldn't even invest 200 soldiers to protect the Mosul museum from attack.
CHECK IT
NZ Herald: Robert Fisk: US guards only oil and intelligence as looters ransack government buildings
BAGHDAD - Iraq's scavengers have thieved and destroyed what they have been allowed to loot and burn by the Americans - and a two-hour drive around Baghdad shows clearly what the United States intends to protect, presumably for its own use.
After days of arson and pillage, here's a short but revealing scorecard.
US troops have sat back and allowed mobs to wreck and then burn the Ministry of Planning, the Ministry of Education, the Ministry of Irrigation, the Ministry of Trade, the Ministry of Industry, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of Culture and the Ministry of Information.
They did nothing to prevent looters from destroying priceless treasures of Iraq's history in the Baghdad Archaeological Museum and in the Museum in the northern city of Mosul, nor from looting three hospitals.
However, the Americans have put hundreds of troops inside two Iraqi ministries, which remain untouched - and untouchable - because tanks and armoured personnel carriers and Humvee jeeps have been placed inside and outside both institutions.
And which particular ministries proved to be so important for the Americans? Why, the Ministry of Interior, of course - with its vast wealth of intelligence information on Iraq - and the Ministry of Oil.
Americans insist that the oil ministry is a vital part of Iraq's inheritance, that the oil fields are to be held in trust "for the Iraqi people". But is the Ministry of Trade - re-lit on Sunday by an enterprising arsonist - not vital to the future of the Iraqi people? Is the Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Irrigation - still burning fiercely yesterday -- not of critical importance to the next Iraqi government? The Americans, as we now know, could spare 2,000 soldiers to protect the Kirkuk oil fields, containing probably the largest reserves in the world, but couldn't even invest 200 soldiers to protect the Mosul museum from attack.
CHECK IT
IRAQ
Truthout: How America Lost the War
Monday 14 April 2003
Television news stations, along with newspapers from coast to coast, have been showing scenes of celebration in Baghdad. The dictator, Saddam Hussein, has been removed from power. News anchors have likened this event to the fall of the Berlin Wall and the liberation of Paris by Allied forces during World War II. Never mind that the joyful crowds who tore down the statue of Saddam Hussein in Baghdad last week numbered perhaps one hundred people, or that the entire event was a staged media scam. A wide angle shot of the square where this 'celebration' took place showed a deserted, ruined city with that one small clot of people. The true feelings of the Iraqi people in the aftermath of the invasion were best summed up by a woman who screamed at a reporter for the UK Independent: "Go back to your country. Get out of here. You are not wanted here. We hated Saddam and now we are hating Bush because he is destroying our city."
The war against Iraq was proffered and pursued by the Bush administration with two clear goals on the table. 1) We were, first and foremost, there to capture and destroy any and all weapons of mass destruction; 2) We were there to 'liberate' the Iraqi people and plant a seedcorn of democracy. Enveloping this entire scenario was the Bush administration's premise that what we were doing was just and moral.
We need, first of all, to get our terms straight so as to achieve a sense of clarity regarding the issue of America's moral standing on the matter. Saddam Hussein was not defeated. He was not overthrown, bested, beaten or destroyed. Saddam Hussein was fired, relieved of his position by a nation that hired him for a dirty job way back in 1979.
When the Shah of Iran, another employee of the United States, was overthrown by fundamentalist revolutionaries controlled by the Ayatollah Khomeini in 1979, America lost a staunch ally against the rise of Soviet influence in the Middle East. That same year saw Saddam Hussein take control of Iraq, and America immediately leaped into his corner so as to maintain the bulwark against the USSR. In short, he was hired. On September 22, 1980, Hussein attacked Iran ostensibly to gain strategically important territory along with the rich oil fields around Khuzestan. At bottom, however, Hussein was acting as an instrument of American policy and attempting to overthrow Khomeini, so as to dissolve a dangerous Iranian/Soviet alliance.
The relationship between Iraq and America bloomed throughout the Reagan administration in the 1980s. We provided intelligence data to Iraqi forces that described, in detail, the order of battle of Iranian forces. American government and private industry interests provided Iraq with the means to create all of the terrible weapons Hussein was so covetous of. We knew Iraq was using chemical weapons during their fight with Iran, and continued to give them this intelligence data. In fact, Iran in 1984 brought a draft resolution before the United Nations Security Council condemning Iraq's use of chemical weapons on the battlefield. Iraq petitioned the United States several times to make sure the international response to their chemical attacks was muted, and that no specific country was named regarding Iran's petition. The Iraqi/American version of the resolution carried the day.
That same year saw a public American condemnation of the use of these weapons. However, that same condemnation carried within it the following language: "The United States finds the present Iranian regime's intransigent refusal to deviate from its avowed objective of eliminating the legitimate government of neighboring Iraq to be inconsistent with the accepted norms of behavior among nations and the moral and religious basis which it claims." (Emphasis added)
Truthout: How America Lost the War
Monday 14 April 2003
Television news stations, along with newspapers from coast to coast, have been showing scenes of celebration in Baghdad. The dictator, Saddam Hussein, has been removed from power. News anchors have likened this event to the fall of the Berlin Wall and the liberation of Paris by Allied forces during World War II. Never mind that the joyful crowds who tore down the statue of Saddam Hussein in Baghdad last week numbered perhaps one hundred people, or that the entire event was a staged media scam. A wide angle shot of the square where this 'celebration' took place showed a deserted, ruined city with that one small clot of people. The true feelings of the Iraqi people in the aftermath of the invasion were best summed up by a woman who screamed at a reporter for the UK Independent: "Go back to your country. Get out of here. You are not wanted here. We hated Saddam and now we are hating Bush because he is destroying our city."
The war against Iraq was proffered and pursued by the Bush administration with two clear goals on the table. 1) We were, first and foremost, there to capture and destroy any and all weapons of mass destruction; 2) We were there to 'liberate' the Iraqi people and plant a seedcorn of democracy. Enveloping this entire scenario was the Bush administration's premise that what we were doing was just and moral.
We need, first of all, to get our terms straight so as to achieve a sense of clarity regarding the issue of America's moral standing on the matter. Saddam Hussein was not defeated. He was not overthrown, bested, beaten or destroyed. Saddam Hussein was fired, relieved of his position by a nation that hired him for a dirty job way back in 1979.
When the Shah of Iran, another employee of the United States, was overthrown by fundamentalist revolutionaries controlled by the Ayatollah Khomeini in 1979, America lost a staunch ally against the rise of Soviet influence in the Middle East. That same year saw Saddam Hussein take control of Iraq, and America immediately leaped into his corner so as to maintain the bulwark against the USSR. In short, he was hired. On September 22, 1980, Hussein attacked Iran ostensibly to gain strategically important territory along with the rich oil fields around Khuzestan. At bottom, however, Hussein was acting as an instrument of American policy and attempting to overthrow Khomeini, so as to dissolve a dangerous Iranian/Soviet alliance.
The relationship between Iraq and America bloomed throughout the Reagan administration in the 1980s. We provided intelligence data to Iraqi forces that described, in detail, the order of battle of Iranian forces. American government and private industry interests provided Iraq with the means to create all of the terrible weapons Hussein was so covetous of. We knew Iraq was using chemical weapons during their fight with Iran, and continued to give them this intelligence data. In fact, Iran in 1984 brought a draft resolution before the United Nations Security Council condemning Iraq's use of chemical weapons on the battlefield. Iraq petitioned the United States several times to make sure the international response to their chemical attacks was muted, and that no specific country was named regarding Iran's petition. The Iraqi/American version of the resolution carried the day.
That same year saw a public American condemnation of the use of these weapons. However, that same condemnation carried within it the following language: "The United States finds the present Iranian regime's intransigent refusal to deviate from its avowed objective of eliminating the legitimate government of neighboring Iraq to be inconsistent with the accepted norms of behavior among nations and the moral and religious basis which it claims." (Emphasis added)
IRAQ
IP: U.S. Govt Accused of War Crimes against Journalists
International journalists' organisations are accusing the U.S. government of committing war crimes in Iraq by intentionally firing at war correspondents.
PARIS, Apr 10 (IPS) - International journalists' organisations are accusing the U.S. government of committing war crimes in Iraq by intentionally firing at war correspondents.
The Paris-based journalists' organisation 'Reporters without Borders' (RSF, after its French name), called on the International Humanitarian Fact-Finding Commission to investigate whether by attacking journalists in Iraq the U.S.-British coalition forces were not violating international humanitarian law.
"A media outlet cannot be a military target under international law and its equipment and installations are civilian property protected as such under the Geneva Conventions," said Reporters without Border secretary-general Robert Ménard.
"Only an objective and impartial enquiry can determine whether or not the Conventions have been violated," Ménard claimed.
It is the first time since its existence that the International Humanitarian Fact-Finding Commission is being petitioned. Set up in 1991 under the First Additional Protocol of the Geneva Conventions, the Commission's task is investigating any alleged serious violation of international humanitarian law.
Similarly, the Brussels-based International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) called for an independent inquiry on the U.S. attacks against the Palestine Hotel and the bureaus of Al-Jazeera and Abu Dhabi television channels.
Ménard, RSF's secretary-general, said that all independent evidence on the U.S. attacks against the hotel shows that the firing was deliberate.
"Film shot by the French television station France 3, and descriptions by journalists, prove that the neighbourhood around the hotel was very quiet at the hour of the attack, and that the U.S. tank crew took their time, waiting for a couple of minutes and adjusting its gun before opening fire," Ménard said.
"This evidence does not match the U.S. version of an attack in self-defence and we can only conclude that the U.S Army deliberately and without warning targeted journalists," Ménard added.
Caroline Sines, a French television correspondent covering the war in Baghdad, confirmed Ménard's accusations against the U.S. troops.
"I was at the Palestine Hotel at the moment of the attack, around one pm, Baghdad time, and my crew filmed everything," Sines said. "Our films shows that the U.S. tank took its time at targeting the 14th floor of the hotel, where many journalists are hosted, at a moment of complete calm," Sines said.
Menard urged the "U.S. forces to prove that the incident was not a deliberate attack to dissuade or prevent journalists from continuing to report on what is happening in Baghdad."
IP: U.S. Govt Accused of War Crimes against Journalists
International journalists' organisations are accusing the U.S. government of committing war crimes in Iraq by intentionally firing at war correspondents.
PARIS, Apr 10 (IPS) - International journalists' organisations are accusing the U.S. government of committing war crimes in Iraq by intentionally firing at war correspondents.
The Paris-based journalists' organisation 'Reporters without Borders' (RSF, after its French name), called on the International Humanitarian Fact-Finding Commission to investigate whether by attacking journalists in Iraq the U.S.-British coalition forces were not violating international humanitarian law.
"A media outlet cannot be a military target under international law and its equipment and installations are civilian property protected as such under the Geneva Conventions," said Reporters without Border secretary-general Robert Ménard.
"Only an objective and impartial enquiry can determine whether or not the Conventions have been violated," Ménard claimed.
It is the first time since its existence that the International Humanitarian Fact-Finding Commission is being petitioned. Set up in 1991 under the First Additional Protocol of the Geneva Conventions, the Commission's task is investigating any alleged serious violation of international humanitarian law.
Similarly, the Brussels-based International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) called for an independent inquiry on the U.S. attacks against the Palestine Hotel and the bureaus of Al-Jazeera and Abu Dhabi television channels.
Ménard, RSF's secretary-general, said that all independent evidence on the U.S. attacks against the hotel shows that the firing was deliberate.
"Film shot by the French television station France 3, and descriptions by journalists, prove that the neighbourhood around the hotel was very quiet at the hour of the attack, and that the U.S. tank crew took their time, waiting for a couple of minutes and adjusting its gun before opening fire," Ménard said.
"This evidence does not match the U.S. version of an attack in self-defence and we can only conclude that the U.S Army deliberately and without warning targeted journalists," Ménard added.
Caroline Sines, a French television correspondent covering the war in Baghdad, confirmed Ménard's accusations against the U.S. troops.
"I was at the Palestine Hotel at the moment of the attack, around one pm, Baghdad time, and my crew filmed everything," Sines said. "Our films shows that the U.S. tank took its time at targeting the 14th floor of the hotel, where many journalists are hosted, at a moment of complete calm," Sines said.
Menard urged the "U.S. forces to prove that the incident was not a deliberate attack to dissuade or prevent journalists from continuing to report on what is happening in Baghdad."
IRAQ: MEDIA WATCH
The Nation: The US vs. the UK
ere in Belgrade, along just about every street, satellite dishes sprout. Many residents are watching and comparing American and British coverage of the Iraq war, as are untold millions around the world. And so am I. From my position, embedded in the Third Couch Division, I see news organizations placing themselves on a spectrum of objectivity, from a great deal to absolutely none at all.
Click. BBC: "Shells are falling within two kilometers of a port where ships arrived with humanitarian aid...the port was believed secure."... "[Citizens of Basra] are not really welcoming them. They're more weary than anything. [Coalition troops] are still men with guns in a foreign country." Click. Fox News: "What should people be thinking about as we head into the weekend?" the anchor asks a Fox military consultant, who replies: "That, aside from what the media says, the American people--people in the heartland--support our troops--except for a few nuts." Anchor (laughing in agreement): "Thanks. Always a pleasure to talk to you."
In general, for the Brits, war coverage offers an opportunity to corral facts and to ask tough questions about hugely consequential events. For the Americans, it is a chance to present an "exciting" story within narrow limits. Compared with the BBC's studied neutrality, Fox (broadcasting globally its original stateside programming, complete with Brit Hume, Mort Kondracke et al.) comes across as a kind of Gong Show of propaganda. The result is a myopic vision of war that proves alternatively nerve-racking, boring or uplifting, but in the aggregate effectively sanitizes events and numbs the audience. Watching Fox, Serbs see a striking similarity to something in their own recent past: "Why, it's just like TV here under Milosevic!"
The Nation: The US vs. the UK
ere in Belgrade, along just about every street, satellite dishes sprout. Many residents are watching and comparing American and British coverage of the Iraq war, as are untold millions around the world. And so am I. From my position, embedded in the Third Couch Division, I see news organizations placing themselves on a spectrum of objectivity, from a great deal to absolutely none at all.
Click. BBC: "Shells are falling within two kilometers of a port where ships arrived with humanitarian aid...the port was believed secure."... "[Citizens of Basra] are not really welcoming them. They're more weary than anything. [Coalition troops] are still men with guns in a foreign country." Click. Fox News: "What should people be thinking about as we head into the weekend?" the anchor asks a Fox military consultant, who replies: "That, aside from what the media says, the American people--people in the heartland--support our troops--except for a few nuts." Anchor (laughing in agreement): "Thanks. Always a pleasure to talk to you."
In general, for the Brits, war coverage offers an opportunity to corral facts and to ask tough questions about hugely consequential events. For the Americans, it is a chance to present an "exciting" story within narrow limits. Compared with the BBC's studied neutrality, Fox (broadcasting globally its original stateside programming, complete with Brit Hume, Mort Kondracke et al.) comes across as a kind of Gong Show of propaganda. The result is a myopic vision of war that proves alternatively nerve-racking, boring or uplifting, but in the aggregate effectively sanitizes events and numbs the audience. Watching Fox, Serbs see a striking similarity to something in their own recent past: "Why, it's just like TV here under Milosevic!"
IRAQ
Sunday Herald: US accused of plans to loot Iraqi antiques
FEARS that Iraq's heritage will face widespread looting at the end of the Gulf war have been heightened after a group of wealthy art dealers secured a high-level meeting with the US administration.
It has emerged that a coalition of antiquities collectors and arts lawyers, calling itself the American Council for Cultural Policy (ACCP), met with US defence and state department officials prior to the start of military action to offer its assistance in preserving the country's invaluable archaeological collections.
The group is known to consist of a number of influential dealers who favour a relaxation of Iraq's tight restrictions on the ownership and export of antiquities. Its treasurer, William Pearlstein, has described Iraq's laws as 'retentionist' and has said he would support a post-war government that would make it easier to have antiquities dispersed to the US.
Before the Gulf war, a main strand of the ACCP's campaigning has been to persuade its government to revise the Cultural Property Implementation Act in order to minimise efforts by foreign nations to block the import into the US of objects, particularly antiques.
News of the group's meeting with the government has alarmed scientists and archaeologists who fear the ACCP is working to a hidden agenda that will see the US authorities ease restrictions on the movement of Iraqi artefacts after a coalition victory in Iraq.
Sunday Herald: US accused of plans to loot Iraqi antiques
FEARS that Iraq's heritage will face widespread looting at the end of the Gulf war have been heightened after a group of wealthy art dealers secured a high-level meeting with the US administration.
It has emerged that a coalition of antiquities collectors and arts lawyers, calling itself the American Council for Cultural Policy (ACCP), met with US defence and state department officials prior to the start of military action to offer its assistance in preserving the country's invaluable archaeological collections.
The group is known to consist of a number of influential dealers who favour a relaxation of Iraq's tight restrictions on the ownership and export of antiquities. Its treasurer, William Pearlstein, has described Iraq's laws as 'retentionist' and has said he would support a post-war government that would make it easier to have antiquities dispersed to the US.
Before the Gulf war, a main strand of the ACCP's campaigning has been to persuade its government to revise the Cultural Property Implementation Act in order to minimise efforts by foreign nations to block the import into the US of objects, particularly antiques.
News of the group's meeting with the government has alarmed scientists and archaeologists who fear the ACCP is working to a hidden agenda that will see the US authorities ease restrictions on the movement of Iraqi artefacts after a coalition victory in Iraq.
IRAQ
Guardian: Bomb before you buy by Naomi Klein
What is being planned in Iraq is not reconstruction but robbery
On April 6, deputy defence secretary Paul Wolfowitz spelled it out: there will be no role for the UN in setting up an interim government in Iraq. The US-run regime will last at least six months, "probably longer than that". And by the time the Iraqi people have a say in choosing a government, the key economic decisions about their country's future will have been made by their occupiers. "There has to be an effective administration from day one," Wolfowitz said. "People need water and food and medicine, and the sewers have to work, the electricity has to work. And that's coalition responsibility."
The process of how they will get all this infrastructure to work is usually called "reconstruction". But American plans for Iraq's future economy go well beyond that. Rather than rebuilding, the country is being treated as a blank slate on which the most ideological Washington neo-liberals can design their dream economy: fully privatised, foreign-owned and open for business
Guardian: Bomb before you buy by Naomi Klein
What is being planned in Iraq is not reconstruction but robbery
On April 6, deputy defence secretary Paul Wolfowitz spelled it out: there will be no role for the UN in setting up an interim government in Iraq. The US-run regime will last at least six months, "probably longer than that". And by the time the Iraqi people have a say in choosing a government, the key economic decisions about their country's future will have been made by their occupiers. "There has to be an effective administration from day one," Wolfowitz said. "People need water and food and medicine, and the sewers have to work, the electricity has to work. And that's coalition responsibility."
The process of how they will get all this infrastructure to work is usually called "reconstruction". But American plans for Iraq's future economy go well beyond that. Rather than rebuilding, the country is being treated as a blank slate on which the most ideological Washington neo-liberals can design their dream economy: fully privatised, foreign-owned and open for business
IRAQ
AP: Baghdad Seeths With Anger Toward U.S.
BAGHDAD, Iraq - At first they cheered, smiled, offered hearty thumbs-ups to the U.S. soldiers newly in their midst. But across Iraq (news - web sites)'s lawless capital, that sentiment is evaporating as quickly as Saddam Hussein (news - web sites)'s government melted away.
Baghdad was bursting with anti-American feeling Saturday as residents saw their city being stripped by its own citizens while U.S. forces stood by, rarely intervening and in some cases even motioning treasure-laden men through checkpoints.
AP: Baghdad Seeths With Anger Toward U.S.
BAGHDAD, Iraq - At first they cheered, smiled, offered hearty thumbs-ups to the U.S. soldiers newly in their midst. But across Iraq (news - web sites)'s lawless capital, that sentiment is evaporating as quickly as Saddam Hussein (news - web sites)'s government melted away.
Baghdad was bursting with anti-American feeling Saturday as residents saw their city being stripped by its own citizens while U.S. forces stood by, rarely intervening and in some cases even motioning treasure-laden men through checkpoints.
Saturday, April 12, 2003
IRAQ
Counterpunch: The Night After By URI AVNERY
The Easier the Victory, the Harder the Peace
It is now fashionable to talk about "the day after". Let's talk about the night after.
After the end of hostilities in Iraq, the world will be faced with two decisive facts:
First, the immense superiority of American arms can beat any people in the world, valiant as it may be.
Second, the small group that initiated this war--an alliance of Christian fundamentalists and Jewish neo-conservatives--has won big, and from now on it will control Washington almost without limits.
Who are the winners?
They are the so-called neo-cons, or neo-conservatives. A compact group, almost all of whose members are Jewish. They hold the key positions in the Bush administration, as well as in the think-tanks that play an important role in formulating American policy and the ed-op pages of the influential newspapers
The combination of these two facts constitutes a danger to the world, and especially to the Middle East, the Arab peoples and the future of Israel. Because this alliance is the enemy of peaceful solutions, the enemy of the Arab governments, the enemy of the Palestinian people and especially the enemy of the Israeli peace camp.
It does not dream only about an American empire, in the style of the Roman one, but also of an Israeli mini-empire, under the control of the extreme right and the settlers. It wants to change the regimes in all Arab countries. It will cause permanent chaos in the region, the consequences of which it is impossible to foresee.
Its mental world consists of a mixture of ideological fervor and crass material interests, an exaggerated American patriotism and right-wing Zionism.
That is a dangerous mixture. There is in it something of the spirit of Ariel Sharon, a man who has always had grandiose plans for changing the region, consisting of a mixture of creative imagination, unbridled chauvinism and a primitive faith in brute force.
Counterpunch: The Night After By URI AVNERY
The Easier the Victory, the Harder the Peace
It is now fashionable to talk about "the day after". Let's talk about the night after.
After the end of hostilities in Iraq, the world will be faced with two decisive facts:
First, the immense superiority of American arms can beat any people in the world, valiant as it may be.
Second, the small group that initiated this war--an alliance of Christian fundamentalists and Jewish neo-conservatives--has won big, and from now on it will control Washington almost without limits.
Who are the winners?
They are the so-called neo-cons, or neo-conservatives. A compact group, almost all of whose members are Jewish. They hold the key positions in the Bush administration, as well as in the think-tanks that play an important role in formulating American policy and the ed-op pages of the influential newspapers
The combination of these two facts constitutes a danger to the world, and especially to the Middle East, the Arab peoples and the future of Israel. Because this alliance is the enemy of peaceful solutions, the enemy of the Arab governments, the enemy of the Palestinian people and especially the enemy of the Israeli peace camp.
It does not dream only about an American empire, in the style of the Roman one, but also of an Israeli mini-empire, under the control of the extreme right and the settlers. It wants to change the regimes in all Arab countries. It will cause permanent chaos in the region, the consequences of which it is impossible to foresee.
Its mental world consists of a mixture of ideological fervor and crass material interests, an exaggerated American patriotism and right-wing Zionism.
That is a dangerous mixture. There is in it something of the spirit of Ariel Sharon, a man who has always had grandiose plans for changing the region, consisting of a mixture of creative imagination, unbridled chauvinism and a primitive faith in brute force.
IRAQ
Zmag: Whose Standards? by Michael Albert
When a New York Times correspondent indicated on its front page of February 16th 2003, that there were now only two super powers in the world -- the U.S. and public opinion - dissidents everywhere trumpeted the article as recognizing activism's stature and importance. But did we understand the broader implications?
The Times observation indicates what we all should already have known -- that there is a war in the world. It is between an agenda that aggrandizes the rich and powerful at the expense of the poor and weak - and a contrary agenda that diminishes differences in income, wealth, and power on the road to equity and self-management. Moreover, it isn't the policies of the disparate heads of state of France and Germany, Italy and Spain, Turkey and India, South Africa and Egypt, Chile and Bolivia, that ultimately matter most to people's daily life prospects. Nor is it the machinations of the separate corporate leaders of competing businesses around the world. What ultimately matters most to people's prospects now and into the future, is the struggle between the world's masters and its aroused citizens.
The conflict between these super powers rages in neighborboods, communities, counties, countries, and regions, and across the whole planet. Advocates of justice are getting stronger, but we cannot yet reverse the rising tides of repression, violence, and impoverishment. We cannot yet win big victories for peace, redistribution, and justice. And so if we go to bed each night measuring our day's labors by whether we have won major victories against the behemoth, then each night we will go to bed weeping over our inadequacy and moaning at the power of the world's centers of power and their ability to ignore our demands. Worse, our weeping and moaning will diminish our energies and make us unattractive to those we seek to reach. We will go to bed dumb as well, because we will be ratifying standards of measurement which stunt and curb our efforts, and which entirely lack reason.
This is the best of times. We have seen, in recent weeks, not only the largest simultaneous peaceful legal demonstrations worldwide in history, but massive civil disobedience, coordinated resistance, citywide, regional, and national teach-ins, protests, and marches, and what is ultimately most important, local outreach in towns, on streets, in schools, and everywhere.
More, the tone and tenor of this upsurge is diversifying. People are seeing the necessity to not only oppose this war, but to oppose all imperial war. People are seeing the need to not only seek peace now, but to seek pervasive and lasting peace, and not just peace but also justice. People are seeing the need to not only reject the barbaric, the colonial, and the domineering, but to propose and advocate positive alternatives to capitalism, patriarchy, and racism.
But this is also the worst of times. We have seen, in recent weeks, despite our activism, not only a gigantic assault on a defenseless country but a celebration of that assault as if it were a major human achievement. On top of missiles, bombers, helicopters, and tanks we have suffered a media that reports war like it was soccer, that obscures context and substance to highlight dismissive details, and that lies and denies and even fabricates news so that it is fit to print in the eyes of the masters.
Mainstream media presents what suits the masters. It obscures what doesn't. Media mystification so swamps the air waves, the sound waves, and the byways, that any person not directly plugged into alternative avenues of thought and not sustained by a community that ratifies true information and analysis, cannot help but to some degree succumb to the fear and loathing and triumphalism screaming forth from every orifice of society, It is no wonder that at least temporarily imperial thoughts occupy many people's minds, not only despite people having a social conscience, but even, amazingly, in pursuit of manifesting such a conscience.
"REVOLUTION NOW"
Zmag: Whose Standards? by Michael Albert
When a New York Times correspondent indicated on its front page of February 16th 2003, that there were now only two super powers in the world -- the U.S. and public opinion - dissidents everywhere trumpeted the article as recognizing activism's stature and importance. But did we understand the broader implications?
The Times observation indicates what we all should already have known -- that there is a war in the world. It is between an agenda that aggrandizes the rich and powerful at the expense of the poor and weak - and a contrary agenda that diminishes differences in income, wealth, and power on the road to equity and self-management. Moreover, it isn't the policies of the disparate heads of state of France and Germany, Italy and Spain, Turkey and India, South Africa and Egypt, Chile and Bolivia, that ultimately matter most to people's daily life prospects. Nor is it the machinations of the separate corporate leaders of competing businesses around the world. What ultimately matters most to people's prospects now and into the future, is the struggle between the world's masters and its aroused citizens.
The conflict between these super powers rages in neighborboods, communities, counties, countries, and regions, and across the whole planet. Advocates of justice are getting stronger, but we cannot yet reverse the rising tides of repression, violence, and impoverishment. We cannot yet win big victories for peace, redistribution, and justice. And so if we go to bed each night measuring our day's labors by whether we have won major victories against the behemoth, then each night we will go to bed weeping over our inadequacy and moaning at the power of the world's centers of power and their ability to ignore our demands. Worse, our weeping and moaning will diminish our energies and make us unattractive to those we seek to reach. We will go to bed dumb as well, because we will be ratifying standards of measurement which stunt and curb our efforts, and which entirely lack reason.
This is the best of times. We have seen, in recent weeks, not only the largest simultaneous peaceful legal demonstrations worldwide in history, but massive civil disobedience, coordinated resistance, citywide, regional, and national teach-ins, protests, and marches, and what is ultimately most important, local outreach in towns, on streets, in schools, and everywhere.
More, the tone and tenor of this upsurge is diversifying. People are seeing the necessity to not only oppose this war, but to oppose all imperial war. People are seeing the need to not only seek peace now, but to seek pervasive and lasting peace, and not just peace but also justice. People are seeing the need to not only reject the barbaric, the colonial, and the domineering, but to propose and advocate positive alternatives to capitalism, patriarchy, and racism.
But this is also the worst of times. We have seen, in recent weeks, despite our activism, not only a gigantic assault on a defenseless country but a celebration of that assault as if it were a major human achievement. On top of missiles, bombers, helicopters, and tanks we have suffered a media that reports war like it was soccer, that obscures context and substance to highlight dismissive details, and that lies and denies and even fabricates news so that it is fit to print in the eyes of the masters.
Mainstream media presents what suits the masters. It obscures what doesn't. Media mystification so swamps the air waves, the sound waves, and the byways, that any person not directly plugged into alternative avenues of thought and not sustained by a community that ratifies true information and analysis, cannot help but to some degree succumb to the fear and loathing and triumphalism screaming forth from every orifice of society, It is no wonder that at least temporarily imperial thoughts occupy many people's minds, not only despite people having a social conscience, but even, amazingly, in pursuit of manifesting such a conscience.
"REVOLUTION NOW"
IRAQ
United Press International: Exclusive: Saddam key in early CIA plot
U.S. forces in Baghdad might now be searching high and low for Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, but in the past Saddam was seen by U.S. intelligence services as a bulwark of anti-communism and they used him as their instrument for more than 40 years, according to former U.S. intelligence diplomats and intelligence officials.
United Press International has interviewed almost a dozen former U.S. diplomats, British scholars and former U.S. intelligence officials to piece together the following account. The CIA declined to comment on the report.
While many have thought that Saddam first became involved with U.S. intelligence agencies at the start of the September 1980 Iran-Iraq war, his first contacts with U.S. officials date back to 1959, when he was part of a CIA-authorized six-man squad tasked with assassinating then Iraqi Prime Minister Gen. Abd al-Karim Qasim.
United Press International: Exclusive: Saddam key in early CIA plot
U.S. forces in Baghdad might now be searching high and low for Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, but in the past Saddam was seen by U.S. intelligence services as a bulwark of anti-communism and they used him as their instrument for more than 40 years, according to former U.S. intelligence diplomats and intelligence officials.
United Press International has interviewed almost a dozen former U.S. diplomats, British scholars and former U.S. intelligence officials to piece together the following account. The CIA declined to comment on the report.
While many have thought that Saddam first became involved with U.S. intelligence agencies at the start of the September 1980 Iran-Iraq war, his first contacts with U.S. officials date back to 1959, when he was part of a CIA-authorized six-man squad tasked with assassinating then Iraqi Prime Minister Gen. Abd al-Karim Qasim.
IRAQ
WorkingforChange: We said it would be a nightmare, And yes, that's exactly what it is
Baghdad's hospitals admit a hundred casualties an hour and have run out
of
anesthetics. Surgeons try to numb up mangled children with short-term
pain-killers, but even these are in dwindling supply. Iraqi families
who
fled into the desert face 100-degree temperatures and no water. U.S.
tanks
inflict mayhem and slaughter in Baghdad's streets. From Umm Qasr and
the
Faw peninsula, through Basra to Baghdad, it's a scene of devastation,
with
every bridge and guard post adorned with civilian cars riddled with
bullets
by jumpy U.S. soldiers. There's no "fog of war" where the disaster of
daily
life in Iraq (what's now swaddled in that virtuous bureaucratic phrase
"humanitarian crisis") is concerned. Reports confirm what all sane
forecasts predicted of a U.S. attack: It is a catastrophe for the Iraqi
people, particularly the poor.
A few days ago, the BBC featured a vivid interview with Patrick
Nicholson
of the British charity Catholic Agency For Overseas Development
(CAFOD).
He's just returned from Umm Qasr, where he found the humanitarian
effort in
the British-occupied area to be a "shambles." "From the TV pictures of
Umm
Qasr, I had been led to believe it was a town under control, where the
needs of the people were being met. The town is not under control. It's
like the Wild West. And even the most major humanitarian concern,
water, is
not being adequately administered.
WorkingforChange: We said it would be a nightmare, And yes, that's exactly what it is
Baghdad's hospitals admit a hundred casualties an hour and have run out
of
anesthetics. Surgeons try to numb up mangled children with short-term
pain-killers, but even these are in dwindling supply. Iraqi families
who
fled into the desert face 100-degree temperatures and no water. U.S.
tanks
inflict mayhem and slaughter in Baghdad's streets. From Umm Qasr and
the
Faw peninsula, through Basra to Baghdad, it's a scene of devastation,
with
every bridge and guard post adorned with civilian cars riddled with
bullets
by jumpy U.S. soldiers. There's no "fog of war" where the disaster of
daily
life in Iraq (what's now swaddled in that virtuous bureaucratic phrase
"humanitarian crisis") is concerned. Reports confirm what all sane
forecasts predicted of a U.S. attack: It is a catastrophe for the Iraqi
people, particularly the poor.
A few days ago, the BBC featured a vivid interview with Patrick
Nicholson
of the British charity Catholic Agency For Overseas Development
(CAFOD).
He's just returned from Umm Qasr, where he found the humanitarian
effort in
the British-occupied area to be a "shambles." "From the TV pictures of
Umm
Qasr, I had been led to believe it was a town under control, where the
needs of the people were being met. The town is not under control. It's
like the Wild West. And even the most major humanitarian concern,
water, is
not being adequately administered.
IRAQ-TURKEY-KURDISTAN
Guardian: 'Turks must swallow a bitter pill'
Ankara presses US to remove Kurds from oil-rich Kirkuk
Saturday April 12, 2003
The Guardian
KurdishMedia.com Editorial, April 10
"The US secretary of state, Colin Powell, said he had reached an accord with Turkey to have Kurdish forces pull back from Kirkuk, the oil-rich city in northern Iraq. It appears that Kurds were only wanted for the 'dirty job'. After Kurds liberated Kirkuk, then their services are not required. The question for the US is this: why should Turkey, the one country that refused to help the US in the war against Iraq, have any say in the future of Iraq?
"This is the first reward that Kurds get for sacrificing their lives in the liberation of Iraq. Perhaps the US and Britain have more surprises for Kurds. By retreating from Kirkuk, Kurds will lose more than the most important city of Kurdistan; they lose their national pride and dignity."
Kamal Mirawdeli Kurdistan Observer, April 11
"Whatever happens, however [many] sacrifices we make for keeping Kirkuk, it is worth it. Thousands of Kurds in exile are prepared to go back to live or die in Kirkuk. The Kurdish people everywhere will oppose [Kurdish leaders] and dishonour them if they surrender to a simple threat by Turkish fascists.
"Stay in Kirkuk. Occupy and fortify all strategic positions. Ask tens of thousands of Kurds to join Kurdish people in Kirkuk. I sincerely hope and appeal to Kurdish leaders not to surrender to the Turkish threat and sell their dignity, honour and all their past history and struggle. This is the most defining moment in our history."
Taha Akyol Milliyet, Turkey, April 11
"Of course the US will give something in return to the Kurds, because they fought against President Saddam, but they will not be given Kirkuk or the oil. For Kirkuk to change hands would turn the region to hell. What will those who rejected the second motion [to allow US troops to be stationed in Turkey] be thinking now? If they had accepted the request, the US would not have been dependent on the [Kurdish] peshmergas, and Turkish and American soldiers would have entered northern Iraq together, preventing any ethnic chaos."
Mehmet Ali Birand Posta, Turkey, April 11
"Everything at this stage is in the hands of the Americans. If Washington gives the green light, then the Kurds can take Kirkuk and do as they please. Any Turkish soldiers entering northern Iraq would come face to face with the US army. Trying to remove the Kurds from Kirkuk would probably mean clashing with the US, and put [Turkey] at great risk.
"But if Washington wants to maintain its long-term relations with Turkey it must exercise maximum caution to Ankara's sensitivities. Generally speaking, winning a military victory is easy. More difficult is dressing the wounds, winning the hearts and establishing a new order that is acceptable to everybody. That is the biggest task the coalition countries face."
Tehran Times Editorial, April 10
"[Kurds and Shia Muslims] still remember the failed Shia and Kurdish uprising of 1991. The US had initially expressed support for the uprising, but then US troops inexplicably stood by and watched as Iraqi forces loyal to President Saddam killed approximately 250,000 Shia and 250,000 Kurds.
"Naturally, the Iraqi Kurds and Shia still bear a grudge against the US over the betrayal and are suspicious of US intentions in Iraq. This is one reason why US officials do not want to see a coalition of legitimate Iraqi opposition groups take control of Iraq. It seems that the US is still opposed to the will of the Iraqi people and the establishment of real democracy in Iraq."
Stavros Lygeros Kathimerini, Greece, April 11
"Nothing is settled, but the most likely scenario is that the Kurds will benefit, their quasi-state in northern Iraq made stronger and larger. The Americans will support them because they realise that the Kurds see them as liberators. Kurdistan will not only be a more friendly environment but a lever for exerting pressure on surrounding countries. Washington is trying to reassure the Turkish leadership. But everything points to the fact that the Turks will have to swallow a bitter pill. The only other option is outright recklessness."
Wall Street Journal Editorial, April 11
"One has to wonder about the wisdom in giving the green light to the Turkish military. It's not hard to imagine how a single incident involving a Turkish soldier and a Kurdish fighter could explode. Had Turkey allowed 60,000 US soldiers to be based in south-eastern Turkey for a move into northern Iraq those troops would now be keeping order in the region and Turkey would have a lot less to complain about."
Times Editorial, April 11
"Sensitive, but firm, policing by coalition troops will be needed. Turks and Kurds alike must find the resolve to keep the promises of restraint they made on the eve of war, and not to jeopardise the complex endgame now playing out. There is no plan for a new Kurdistan, and there must be no war within a war in northern Iraq. Wise words came [on Thursday] from the US president, when he pledged that 'the goals of our coalition are clear and limited' - an intention that should steady the nerves of Turks and Kurds alike."
Guardian: 'Turks must swallow a bitter pill'
Ankara presses US to remove Kurds from oil-rich Kirkuk
Saturday April 12, 2003
The Guardian
KurdishMedia.com Editorial, April 10
"The US secretary of state, Colin Powell, said he had reached an accord with Turkey to have Kurdish forces pull back from Kirkuk, the oil-rich city in northern Iraq. It appears that Kurds were only wanted for the 'dirty job'. After Kurds liberated Kirkuk, then their services are not required. The question for the US is this: why should Turkey, the one country that refused to help the US in the war against Iraq, have any say in the future of Iraq?
"This is the first reward that Kurds get for sacrificing their lives in the liberation of Iraq. Perhaps the US and Britain have more surprises for Kurds. By retreating from Kirkuk, Kurds will lose more than the most important city of Kurdistan; they lose their national pride and dignity."
Kamal Mirawdeli Kurdistan Observer, April 11
"Whatever happens, however [many] sacrifices we make for keeping Kirkuk, it is worth it. Thousands of Kurds in exile are prepared to go back to live or die in Kirkuk. The Kurdish people everywhere will oppose [Kurdish leaders] and dishonour them if they surrender to a simple threat by Turkish fascists.
"Stay in Kirkuk. Occupy and fortify all strategic positions. Ask tens of thousands of Kurds to join Kurdish people in Kirkuk. I sincerely hope and appeal to Kurdish leaders not to surrender to the Turkish threat and sell their dignity, honour and all their past history and struggle. This is the most defining moment in our history."
Taha Akyol Milliyet, Turkey, April 11
"Of course the US will give something in return to the Kurds, because they fought against President Saddam, but they will not be given Kirkuk or the oil. For Kirkuk to change hands would turn the region to hell. What will those who rejected the second motion [to allow US troops to be stationed in Turkey] be thinking now? If they had accepted the request, the US would not have been dependent on the [Kurdish] peshmergas, and Turkish and American soldiers would have entered northern Iraq together, preventing any ethnic chaos."
Mehmet Ali Birand Posta, Turkey, April 11
"Everything at this stage is in the hands of the Americans. If Washington gives the green light, then the Kurds can take Kirkuk and do as they please. Any Turkish soldiers entering northern Iraq would come face to face with the US army. Trying to remove the Kurds from Kirkuk would probably mean clashing with the US, and put [Turkey] at great risk.
"But if Washington wants to maintain its long-term relations with Turkey it must exercise maximum caution to Ankara's sensitivities. Generally speaking, winning a military victory is easy. More difficult is dressing the wounds, winning the hearts and establishing a new order that is acceptable to everybody. That is the biggest task the coalition countries face."
Tehran Times Editorial, April 10
"[Kurds and Shia Muslims] still remember the failed Shia and Kurdish uprising of 1991. The US had initially expressed support for the uprising, but then US troops inexplicably stood by and watched as Iraqi forces loyal to President Saddam killed approximately 250,000 Shia and 250,000 Kurds.
"Naturally, the Iraqi Kurds and Shia still bear a grudge against the US over the betrayal and are suspicious of US intentions in Iraq. This is one reason why US officials do not want to see a coalition of legitimate Iraqi opposition groups take control of Iraq. It seems that the US is still opposed to the will of the Iraqi people and the establishment of real democracy in Iraq."
Stavros Lygeros Kathimerini, Greece, April 11
"Nothing is settled, but the most likely scenario is that the Kurds will benefit, their quasi-state in northern Iraq made stronger and larger. The Americans will support them because they realise that the Kurds see them as liberators. Kurdistan will not only be a more friendly environment but a lever for exerting pressure on surrounding countries. Washington is trying to reassure the Turkish leadership. But everything points to the fact that the Turks will have to swallow a bitter pill. The only other option is outright recklessness."
Wall Street Journal Editorial, April 11
"One has to wonder about the wisdom in giving the green light to the Turkish military. It's not hard to imagine how a single incident involving a Turkish soldier and a Kurdish fighter could explode. Had Turkey allowed 60,000 US soldiers to be based in south-eastern Turkey for a move into northern Iraq those troops would now be keeping order in the region and Turkey would have a lot less to complain about."
Times Editorial, April 11
"Sensitive, but firm, policing by coalition troops will be needed. Turks and Kurds alike must find the resolve to keep the promises of restraint they made on the eve of war, and not to jeopardise the complex endgame now playing out. There is no plan for a new Kurdistan, and there must be no war within a war in northern Iraq. Wise words came [on Thursday] from the US president, when he pledged that 'the goals of our coalition are clear and limited' - an intention that should steady the nerves of Turks and Kurds alike."
WORLD WIDE PROTESTS
Guardian: Anti-war protesters march in London
Anti-war protesters have taken to the streets of London this afternoon, as organisers of the demonstration come up against criticism that they are "hijacking" public feeling for their own agenda.
Stop The War Coalition chairman Andrew Murray said it was important to continue protesting against the government's policy and to press for the US and UK "occupation" to end.
"Unless there is a peaceful and democratic end to the conflict the war might spread to other parts of the Middle East and we may be drawn into an endless conflict," warned Mr Murray.
However, Labour MP David Winnick, a strong supporter of the government's stance on Iraq, singled out Mr Murray for criticism, accusing him of leading an organisation whose agenda was very different from those actually demonstrating.
"I don't doubt the sincerity of most of the peace marchers who marched before and those who, for some reason, march today," said Mr Winnick. "They have a perfect right to do so but the fact remains that there are a number of the leading organisers whose commitment to parliamentary democracy is very remote indeed."
"Zuerst werden Kritiker ignoriert, dann werden sie dikreditiert und wenn das auch nichts nützt wird die Repressionmaschine angeworfen"
Guardian: Anti-war protesters march in London
Anti-war protesters have taken to the streets of London this afternoon, as organisers of the demonstration come up against criticism that they are "hijacking" public feeling for their own agenda.
Stop The War Coalition chairman Andrew Murray said it was important to continue protesting against the government's policy and to press for the US and UK "occupation" to end.
"Unless there is a peaceful and democratic end to the conflict the war might spread to other parts of the Middle East and we may be drawn into an endless conflict," warned Mr Murray.
However, Labour MP David Winnick, a strong supporter of the government's stance on Iraq, singled out Mr Murray for criticism, accusing him of leading an organisation whose agenda was very different from those actually demonstrating.
"I don't doubt the sincerity of most of the peace marchers who marched before and those who, for some reason, march today," said Mr Winnick. "They have a perfect right to do so but the fact remains that there are a number of the leading organisers whose commitment to parliamentary democracy is very remote indeed."
"Zuerst werden Kritiker ignoriert, dann werden sie dikreditiert und wenn das auch nichts nützt wird die Repressionmaschine angeworfen"
ISRAEL
Independent: Israeli army sniper leaves British peace activist brain-dead
A British peace activist was pronounced brain-dead yesterday after being shot in the head by an Israeli army sniper.
Tom Hurndall, 21, from London, was shot while trying to rescue Palestinian children from a street where they were pinned down by Israeli gunfire.
He is the third peace activist to be killed or seriously injured in the occupied territories in the past month.
His fellow activists were beginning to wonder aloud last night if they are a target of the Israeli army. Mr Hurndall was declared brain-dead on arrival at a Palestinian hospital in Rafah but there were some reports last night that his condition might be improving.
Independent: Israeli army sniper leaves British peace activist brain-dead
A British peace activist was pronounced brain-dead yesterday after being shot in the head by an Israeli army sniper.
Tom Hurndall, 21, from London, was shot while trying to rescue Palestinian children from a street where they were pinned down by Israeli gunfire.
He is the third peace activist to be killed or seriously injured in the occupied territories in the past month.
His fellow activists were beginning to wonder aloud last night if they are a target of the Israeli army. Mr Hurndall was declared brain-dead on arrival at a Palestinian hospital in Rafah but there were some reports last night that his condition might be improving.
IRAQ
Independent: A city in flames. A nation in chaos
Baghdad: Regime buildings are set ablaze; fears mount as looters run amok
Mosul: City captured by Kurdish forces; banks and shops ransacked by mob
Kirkuk: Marines take control of oilfields; anarchy as Kurdish troops begin pull-out
Basra: Looters shot dead by British forces
Chaos threatened to engulf Iraq yesterday, with American-led forces apparently unwilling or unable to deal with a storm of arson, looting, car-jacking, drunkenness and factional fighting that swept Baghdad, Mosul and other big cities.
The Red Cross, aid charities and Iraqi citizens pleaded with the US to honour its obligations under the Geneva Convention and protect the civilian population. But a senior commander said: "At no time do we really see [ourselves] becoming a police force."
After the capitulation of the northern city of Mosul – scene of some of the most frantic looting and destruction yesterday – a reported 2,000 US troops were deployed to secure the northern oilfields, bringing all of Iraq's oil reserves, the second largest in the world, under American and British protection. But US commanders in the field said they did not have the manpower, or the orders from above, to control the scenes on the streets of Baghdad and other cities
"Wenn Mr. Rumsfeld die Genfer Kovention ganz gelesen hätte wüsste er das eine Besatzungsmacht für den Schutz Zivilbevölkerung und die Aufrechterhaltung der Ordnung verantwortlich ist und nicht nur für den Schutz von Ölfeldern"
Independent: A city in flames. A nation in chaos
Baghdad: Regime buildings are set ablaze; fears mount as looters run amok
Mosul: City captured by Kurdish forces; banks and shops ransacked by mob
Kirkuk: Marines take control of oilfields; anarchy as Kurdish troops begin pull-out
Basra: Looters shot dead by British forces
Chaos threatened to engulf Iraq yesterday, with American-led forces apparently unwilling or unable to deal with a storm of arson, looting, car-jacking, drunkenness and factional fighting that swept Baghdad, Mosul and other big cities.
The Red Cross, aid charities and Iraqi citizens pleaded with the US to honour its obligations under the Geneva Convention and protect the civilian population. But a senior commander said: "At no time do we really see [ourselves] becoming a police force."
After the capitulation of the northern city of Mosul – scene of some of the most frantic looting and destruction yesterday – a reported 2,000 US troops were deployed to secure the northern oilfields, bringing all of Iraq's oil reserves, the second largest in the world, under American and British protection. But US commanders in the field said they did not have the manpower, or the orders from above, to control the scenes on the streets of Baghdad and other cities
"Wenn Mr. Rumsfeld die Genfer Kovention ganz gelesen hätte wüsste er das eine Besatzungsmacht für den Schutz Zivilbevölkerung und die Aufrechterhaltung der Ordnung verantwortlich ist und nicht nur für den Schutz von Ölfeldern"
IRAQ
Independent: Robert Fisk: Flames engulf the symbols of power
Baghdad is burning. You could count 16 columns of smoke rising over the city yesterday afternoon. At the beginning, there was the Ministry of Trade. I watched the looters throw petrol through the smashed windows of the ground floor and the fire burst from them within two seconds.
Then there was a clutch of offices at the bottom of the Jumhuriyah Bridge, which emitted clouds of black, sulphurous smoke. By mid- afternoon, I was standing outside the Central Bank of Iraq as each window flamed like a candle, a mile-long curtain of ash and burning papers drifting over the Tigris.
As the pickings got smaller, the looters grew tired and – the history of Baghdad insists that anarchy takes this form – the symbols of government power were cremated. The Americans talked of a "new posture" but did nothing. They pushed armoured patrols through the east of the city, Abrams tanks and Humvees and Bradley fighting vehicles, but their soldiers did no more than wave at the arsonists. I found a woman weeping beside her husband in the old Arab market. "We are destroying what we now have for ourselves," she said to him. "We are destroying our own future."
After the West German and Slovak embassies and the Unicef offices, it was the turn of the French cultural centre to be looted.
I briefly mentioned the extent of the anarchy to a US Marine officer who promised to tell his colonel about it. When I saw him later, he said he'd seen the colonel – but hadn't had time to mention the looting and burning.
Just a week ago, it was the Iraqi army's oil fires that covered the city in darkness. Now it is the newly "liberated" Iraqi people who are cloaking their city in ash.
Independent: Robert Fisk: Flames engulf the symbols of power
Baghdad is burning. You could count 16 columns of smoke rising over the city yesterday afternoon. At the beginning, there was the Ministry of Trade. I watched the looters throw petrol through the smashed windows of the ground floor and the fire burst from them within two seconds.
Then there was a clutch of offices at the bottom of the Jumhuriyah Bridge, which emitted clouds of black, sulphurous smoke. By mid- afternoon, I was standing outside the Central Bank of Iraq as each window flamed like a candle, a mile-long curtain of ash and burning papers drifting over the Tigris.
As the pickings got smaller, the looters grew tired and – the history of Baghdad insists that anarchy takes this form – the symbols of government power were cremated. The Americans talked of a "new posture" but did nothing. They pushed armoured patrols through the east of the city, Abrams tanks and Humvees and Bradley fighting vehicles, but their soldiers did no more than wave at the arsonists. I found a woman weeping beside her husband in the old Arab market. "We are destroying what we now have for ourselves," she said to him. "We are destroying our own future."
After the West German and Slovak embassies and the Unicef offices, it was the turn of the French cultural centre to be looted.
I briefly mentioned the extent of the anarchy to a US Marine officer who promised to tell his colonel about it. When I saw him later, he said he'd seen the colonel – but hadn't had time to mention the looting and burning.
Just a week ago, it was the Iraqi army's oil fires that covered the city in darkness. Now it is the newly "liberated" Iraqi people who are cloaking their city in ash.
IRAQ
Ny Times: Sniper Fire Greets G.I.'s in Big City in North
MOSUL, Iraq, April 11 — American Special Forces troops entered northern Iraq's largest city today, finding it engulfed by anarchy. Gunfire from Iraqi irregulars greeted the force of several dozen Americans, and the shots prompted them to pull back after spending only 30 minutes in the streets here.
The American incursion here came after the organized Iraqi resistance had fled and was the result of 24 hours of negotiations with tribal and Baath Party leaders intended to bring about the peaceful surrender of Iraq's third-largest city.
The brief fight here this afternoon reflected the enduring difficulties of the military situation in Iraq. An important center of resistance has formed in Tikrit, Saddam Hussein's hometown, 110 miles north of Baghdad. The road south of Kirkuk, the other major northern city, has become a no man's land frequented by Iraqi irregulars, or fedayeen.
Ny Times: Sniper Fire Greets G.I.'s in Big City in North
MOSUL, Iraq, April 11 — American Special Forces troops entered northern Iraq's largest city today, finding it engulfed by anarchy. Gunfire from Iraqi irregulars greeted the force of several dozen Americans, and the shots prompted them to pull back after spending only 30 minutes in the streets here.
The American incursion here came after the organized Iraqi resistance had fled and was the result of 24 hours of negotiations with tribal and Baath Party leaders intended to bring about the peaceful surrender of Iraq's third-largest city.
The brief fight here this afternoon reflected the enduring difficulties of the military situation in Iraq. An important center of resistance has formed in Tikrit, Saddam Hussein's hometown, 110 miles north of Baghdad. The road south of Kirkuk, the other major northern city, has become a no man's land frequented by Iraqi irregulars, or fedayeen.
Friday, April 11, 2003
IRAQ: CHAOS
Spiegel: ANARCHIE IN BAGDAD
Anarchie und Chaos im Irak nehmen grausame Züge an. Plünderer machen selbst vor Krankenhäusern nicht halt. Ärzte und Schwestern trauen sich nicht mehr an ihre Arbeitsplätze, Kranke und Verletzte bleiben unversorgt. Das Internationale Rote Kreuz appelliert an Amerikaner und Briten, endlich einzuschreiten.
Spiegel: ANARCHIE IN BAGDAD
Anarchie und Chaos im Irak nehmen grausame Züge an. Plünderer machen selbst vor Krankenhäusern nicht halt. Ärzte und Schwestern trauen sich nicht mehr an ihre Arbeitsplätze, Kranke und Verletzte bleiben unversorgt. Das Internationale Rote Kreuz appelliert an Amerikaner und Briten, endlich einzuschreiten.
US MEDIA CENSORED
Rense/tbrnews: In-House Memos On Television News Presentations
Part 1
It has long been the strong belief of many Americans that their print and television media is subject to certain government oversight and, finally, control.
Recently, a mid-level executive of one of the three major American television networks sent on over 1500 pages of memos from the corporate offices of his network in New York to the head of their television news division.
These memos contain a multitude of instructions concerning the presentation of national and international news for the network's viewers. Corporate is obviously subject to the opinions of various pressure groups, to include those of official Washington and the Jewish community.
It would be impossible to show all of these revealing documents but selections are certainly possible. What is not possible, obviously, is to reveal either the name of the conscience-stricken media executive nor the company that employs him. These comments, therefore, can be accepted or rejected by the reader as they see fit.
If the shoe fits, however, wear it.
(March 22) ...it is not conducive to maintaining an overall neutrality in the Palestine uprisings to show any pictures of the American peacenik that was run over by the Israeli army bulldozer. This is only to be mentioned as a ãtragic accidentä for which the IDF ãis truly saddened.ä
(Feb 10) ...It is not permitted at this point to use or refer to any film clips, stills or articles emanating from any French source whatsoever.
(Feb 26) It is expected that coverage of the forthcoming Iraqi campaign will be identical with the coverage used during Desert Storm. Shots of GIs must show a mixed racial combination...any interviews must reflect the youthful and idealistic, not the cynical point of view...the liberation of happy, enthusiastic Iraqis can be best shown by filming crowds of cheering citizens waving American flags. Also indicated would be pictures of photogenic GIs fraternizing with Iraqi children and handing them food or other non-controversial presents...of course, pictures of dead US military personnel are not to be shown and pictures of dead Iraqi soldiers should not show examples of violent death...also indicated would be brief interviews with English-speaking Iraqi citizens praising American liberation efforts...all such interviews must be vetted by either the White House or Pentagon before public airing.
(March 12) At this point in time, reference to North Korean military threats must be played down entirely. The Iraqi Freedom campaign has to be concluded in the public mind before proceeding with the next assault on the Evil Axis.
(March 26) US alliances with the Turkish/Iraqi Kurdish tribes should be played down. This is considered a very sensitive issue with the Turks and American arming and support of the Kurds could create a severe backlash in Ankara...Kurds should be depicted as 'Iraqi Freedom Fighters' and not identified as Kurds.
(March 2) ...further references to the religious views of the President are to be deleted...
"Ich hoffe mal das ist nicht wirklich wahr wobei ich mir nur zu gut vorstellen kann das es wirklich so gehandhabt wird"
Rense/tbrnews: In-House Memos On Television News Presentations
Part 1
It has long been the strong belief of many Americans that their print and television media is subject to certain government oversight and, finally, control.
Recently, a mid-level executive of one of the three major American television networks sent on over 1500 pages of memos from the corporate offices of his network in New York to the head of their television news division.
These memos contain a multitude of instructions concerning the presentation of national and international news for the network's viewers. Corporate is obviously subject to the opinions of various pressure groups, to include those of official Washington and the Jewish community.
It would be impossible to show all of these revealing documents but selections are certainly possible. What is not possible, obviously, is to reveal either the name of the conscience-stricken media executive nor the company that employs him. These comments, therefore, can be accepted or rejected by the reader as they see fit.
If the shoe fits, however, wear it.
(March 22) ...it is not conducive to maintaining an overall neutrality in the Palestine uprisings to show any pictures of the American peacenik that was run over by the Israeli army bulldozer. This is only to be mentioned as a ãtragic accidentä for which the IDF ãis truly saddened.ä
(Feb 10) ...It is not permitted at this point to use or refer to any film clips, stills or articles emanating from any French source whatsoever.
(Feb 26) It is expected that coverage of the forthcoming Iraqi campaign will be identical with the coverage used during Desert Storm. Shots of GIs must show a mixed racial combination...any interviews must reflect the youthful and idealistic, not the cynical point of view...the liberation of happy, enthusiastic Iraqis can be best shown by filming crowds of cheering citizens waving American flags. Also indicated would be pictures of photogenic GIs fraternizing with Iraqi children and handing them food or other non-controversial presents...of course, pictures of dead US military personnel are not to be shown and pictures of dead Iraqi soldiers should not show examples of violent death...also indicated would be brief interviews with English-speaking Iraqi citizens praising American liberation efforts...all such interviews must be vetted by either the White House or Pentagon before public airing.
(March 12) At this point in time, reference to North Korean military threats must be played down entirely. The Iraqi Freedom campaign has to be concluded in the public mind before proceeding with the next assault on the Evil Axis.
(March 26) US alliances with the Turkish/Iraqi Kurdish tribes should be played down. This is considered a very sensitive issue with the Turks and American arming and support of the Kurds could create a severe backlash in Ankara...Kurds should be depicted as 'Iraqi Freedom Fighters' and not identified as Kurds.
(March 2) ...further references to the religious views of the President are to be deleted...
"Ich hoffe mal das ist nicht wirklich wahr wobei ich mir nur zu gut vorstellen kann das es wirklich so gehandhabt wird"
IRAQ: PROPAGANDA
Informationclearinghouse: The photographs tell the story...
Is This Media manipulation on a grand scale?
April 6th: Iraqi National Congress founder, Ahmed Chalabi is flown into the southern Iraqi city of Nasiriyah by the Pentagon. Chalabi, along with 700 fighters of his "Free Iraqi Forces" are airlifted aboard four massive C17 military transport planes. Chalabi and the INC are Washington favorites to head the new Iraqi government. A photograph is taken of Chalabi and members of his Free Iraqi Forces militia as they arrive in Nasiriyah.
April 9th: One of the "most memorable images of the war" is created when U.S. troops pull down the statue of Saddam Hussein in Fardus Square. Oddly enough... a photograph is taken of a man who bears an uncanny resemblance to one of Chalabi's militia members... he is near Fardus Square to greet the Marines. How many members of the pro-American Free Iraqi Forces were in and around Fardus Square as the statue of Saddam came tumbling down?
The up close action video of the statue being destroyed is broadcast around the world as proof of a massive uprising. Still photos grabbed off of Reuters show a long-shot view of Fardus Square... it's empty save for the U.S. Marines, the International Press, and a small handful of Iraqis. There are no more than 200 people in the square at best. The Marines have the square sealed off and guarded by tanks. A U.S. mechanized vehicle is used to pull the statue of Saddam from it's base. The entire event is being hailed as an equivalent of the Berlin Wall falling... but even a quick glance of the long-shot photo shows something more akin to a carefully constructed media event tailored for the television cameras.
CHECK IT
Informationclearinghouse: The photographs tell the story...
Is This Media manipulation on a grand scale?
April 6th: Iraqi National Congress founder, Ahmed Chalabi is flown into the southern Iraqi city of Nasiriyah by the Pentagon. Chalabi, along with 700 fighters of his "Free Iraqi Forces" are airlifted aboard four massive C17 military transport planes. Chalabi and the INC are Washington favorites to head the new Iraqi government. A photograph is taken of Chalabi and members of his Free Iraqi Forces militia as they arrive in Nasiriyah.
April 9th: One of the "most memorable images of the war" is created when U.S. troops pull down the statue of Saddam Hussein in Fardus Square. Oddly enough... a photograph is taken of a man who bears an uncanny resemblance to one of Chalabi's militia members... he is near Fardus Square to greet the Marines. How many members of the pro-American Free Iraqi Forces were in and around Fardus Square as the statue of Saddam came tumbling down?
The up close action video of the statue being destroyed is broadcast around the world as proof of a massive uprising. Still photos grabbed off of Reuters show a long-shot view of Fardus Square... it's empty save for the U.S. Marines, the International Press, and a small handful of Iraqis. There are no more than 200 people in the square at best. The Marines have the square sealed off and guarded by tanks. A U.S. mechanized vehicle is used to pull the statue of Saddam from it's base. The entire event is being hailed as an equivalent of the Berlin Wall falling... but even a quick glance of the long-shot photo shows something more akin to a carefully constructed media event tailored for the television cameras.
CHECK IT
WAR ON IRAK ANALYSIS
Aeronautics.ru: Final Letter
April 8, 2003, 1846hrs MSK (GMT +4 DST), Moscow - Events of the last 2 days have made further work of Ramzaj group in its current format impossible.
With the embassy personnel and journalists having left Iraq and most of Iraqi information services evacuated from Baghdad, analysis of the situation in Baghdad and Iraq as a whole becomes ineffective.
The quickly changing course of street fights leaves any informational updates far behind. Direct TV broadcasts are far more evident than any analytics. At the same time, we do not have the right to reveal classified, “top secret” information.
Apart from that, our actions meet increasing opposition from the official quarts and in fact are turning into confrontation the outcome of which is not difficult to forecast.
Therefore we have to discontinue our work and thank everybody for taking part in the project.
In conclusion we would like to say:
All the “updates” came out from a compact group formed a few years ago in the framework of a special service. The group used to work for the government for a long time but all its members have left the service and now act as an independent analytical group that has kept some capabilities. This gives an answer to the most common question – about the sources of our information.
We participated in the ongoing events on a “non-profit” basis and had no object other than to stand the US-British informational blockade of the war in Iraq.
Our updates were not genuine materials from any of Russian or other special services, but rather an “intellectual product” of the group itself, product of its operative, informational and analytical abilities. But compiling the updates we used materials available from our friends from special information structures. The very form “operativnaya informatsiya” never claimed to be “military information updates” but served as additional data for self-dependent analysis.
The main goal of the project was to present intelligible military analytics on the war in Iraq, which is currently missing, to the informational space. We had both success and obvious fails along the way.
We are grateful to the iraqwar.ru and forum.vif2.ru administration that took the risk and burden of working with us and we understand how many problems they have to endure because of that.
With all responsibility we state that no messages, letters, appeals and other materials, apart from the daily “updates” on iraqwar.ru and forum.vif2.ru were made by Ramzaj group and any other statement in our name is nothing but mystification.
The author with the nickname “Kondor” is the only authorized source of information about the group and its “official contact person”. In cases of uncertainty or “nickname cloning” authentication is possible using his personal photo that supplements one of images published on iraqwar.ru and comes as its logical continuation.
With unfailing respect to all of you,
Ramzaj
Download all War on Irak Reports here: ZIP FILE
Aeronautics.ru: Final Letter
April 8, 2003, 1846hrs MSK (GMT +4 DST), Moscow - Events of the last 2 days have made further work of Ramzaj group in its current format impossible.
With the embassy personnel and journalists having left Iraq and most of Iraqi information services evacuated from Baghdad, analysis of the situation in Baghdad and Iraq as a whole becomes ineffective.
The quickly changing course of street fights leaves any informational updates far behind. Direct TV broadcasts are far more evident than any analytics. At the same time, we do not have the right to reveal classified, “top secret” information.
Apart from that, our actions meet increasing opposition from the official quarts and in fact are turning into confrontation the outcome of which is not difficult to forecast.
Therefore we have to discontinue our work and thank everybody for taking part in the project.
In conclusion we would like to say:
All the “updates” came out from a compact group formed a few years ago in the framework of a special service. The group used to work for the government for a long time but all its members have left the service and now act as an independent analytical group that has kept some capabilities. This gives an answer to the most common question – about the sources of our information.
We participated in the ongoing events on a “non-profit” basis and had no object other than to stand the US-British informational blockade of the war in Iraq.
Our updates were not genuine materials from any of Russian or other special services, but rather an “intellectual product” of the group itself, product of its operative, informational and analytical abilities. But compiling the updates we used materials available from our friends from special information structures. The very form “operativnaya informatsiya” never claimed to be “military information updates” but served as additional data for self-dependent analysis.
The main goal of the project was to present intelligible military analytics on the war in Iraq, which is currently missing, to the informational space. We had both success and obvious fails along the way.
We are grateful to the iraqwar.ru and forum.vif2.ru administration that took the risk and burden of working with us and we understand how many problems they have to endure because of that.
With all responsibility we state that no messages, letters, appeals and other materials, apart from the daily “updates” on iraqwar.ru and forum.vif2.ru were made by Ramzaj group and any other statement in our name is nothing but mystification.
The author with the nickname “Kondor” is the only authorized source of information about the group and its “official contact person”. In cases of uncertainty or “nickname cloning” authentication is possible using his personal photo that supplements one of images published on iraqwar.ru and comes as its logical continuation.
With unfailing respect to all of you,
Ramzaj
Download all War on Irak Reports here: ZIP FILE
IRAK
Independent: Murdered in a mosque: the cleric who went home to act as a peacemaker
The 12 years of exile in Kilburn, in north-west London could not have prepared him for this. Abdul Majid al-Khoei had lived quietly there, running a charitable religious foundation.
He took part in polite interfaith dialogues. He was one of a number of Muslim leaders who met Tony Blair to offer advice on Islamic sensitivities to foster good race relations, at home and abroad.
Nothing in that could have hinted of what would happen yesterday – that he would be hacked to death by a crowd at one of Islam's holiest shrines.
It was, by terrible irony, the shrine holding the silver-covered tomb of Ali, the son-in-law of the Prophet Mohammed, who is honoured by Muslims as the first Islamic martyr. And now martyrdom came to Mr Khoei, who had returned to Iraq from exile in Britain only two weeks ago to act as a peace broker for Allied forces and help rebuild his country.
Mr Khoei, whose father was the pre-eminent spiritual leader of the Shia Muslim community in Iraq, was slain inside the Ali Mosque in Najaf, the third most sacred site for the world's 120 million Shias.
Witnesses said Mr Khoei, who had four children, was dragged outside the building and set upon by attackers armed with knives and swords. He tried to defend himself by firing his gun.
As bullets and insults flew, it took just moments for simmering tensions within Najaf's Shia community to explode into a killing.
The reasons for the killing remained unclear last night. Some said that Mr Khoei was the target of a political assassination by Saddam Hussein loyalists. Others said he had been caught up in a revenge attack on a cleric, reviled for his connections to the Iraqi regime, who was also killed.
The murders took place shortly after 10am as Iraq's leading Shia mullahs gathered for a meeting to decide control of the shrine, which had been occupied by Iraqi gunmen during fighting for Najaf.
Mr Khoei had arrived for the gathering with Haider al-Kadar, the imam who had been in charge of the mosque and was widely disliked as a member of President Saddam's Ministry of Religion. Their joint arrival was a gesture of reconciliation, according to Mr Khoei's supporters.
Ali Assayid Haider, a mullah who had travelled from the southern city of Basra for the meeting, said: "People attacked and killed both of them inside the mosque."
There were fears that the incident could trigger in-fighting among Iraq's Shias, who make up 60 per cent of the population.
Independent: Murdered in a mosque: the cleric who went home to act as a peacemaker
The 12 years of exile in Kilburn, in north-west London could not have prepared him for this. Abdul Majid al-Khoei had lived quietly there, running a charitable religious foundation.
He took part in polite interfaith dialogues. He was one of a number of Muslim leaders who met Tony Blair to offer advice on Islamic sensitivities to foster good race relations, at home and abroad.
Nothing in that could have hinted of what would happen yesterday – that he would be hacked to death by a crowd at one of Islam's holiest shrines.
It was, by terrible irony, the shrine holding the silver-covered tomb of Ali, the son-in-law of the Prophet Mohammed, who is honoured by Muslims as the first Islamic martyr. And now martyrdom came to Mr Khoei, who had returned to Iraq from exile in Britain only two weeks ago to act as a peace broker for Allied forces and help rebuild his country.
Mr Khoei, whose father was the pre-eminent spiritual leader of the Shia Muslim community in Iraq, was slain inside the Ali Mosque in Najaf, the third most sacred site for the world's 120 million Shias.
Witnesses said Mr Khoei, who had four children, was dragged outside the building and set upon by attackers armed with knives and swords. He tried to defend himself by firing his gun.
As bullets and insults flew, it took just moments for simmering tensions within Najaf's Shia community to explode into a killing.
The reasons for the killing remained unclear last night. Some said that Mr Khoei was the target of a political assassination by Saddam Hussein loyalists. Others said he had been caught up in a revenge attack on a cleric, reviled for his connections to the Iraqi regime, who was also killed.
The murders took place shortly after 10am as Iraq's leading Shia mullahs gathered for a meeting to decide control of the shrine, which had been occupied by Iraqi gunmen during fighting for Najaf.
Mr Khoei had arrived for the gathering with Haider al-Kadar, the imam who had been in charge of the mosque and was widely disliked as a member of President Saddam's Ministry of Religion. Their joint arrival was a gesture of reconciliation, according to Mr Khoei's supporters.
Ali Assayid Haider, a mullah who had travelled from the southern city of Basra for the meeting, said: "People attacked and killed both of them inside the mosque."
There were fears that the incident could trigger in-fighting among Iraq's Shias, who make up 60 per cent of the population.
IRAK
Independent: Robert Fisk: Baghdad: the day after
Arson, anarchy, fear, hatred, hysteria, looting, revenge, savagery, suspicion and a suicide bombing
11 April 2003
It was the day of the looter. They trashed the German embassy and hurled the ambassador's desk into the yard. I rescued the European Union flag – flung into a puddle of water outside the visa section – as a mob of middle-aged men, women in chadors and screaming children rifled through the consul's office and hurled Mozart records and German history books from an upper window. The Slovakian embassy was broken into a few hours later.
At the headquarters of Unicef, which has been trying to save and improve the lives of millions of Iraqi children since the 1980s, an army of thieves stormed the building, throwing brand new photocopiers on top of each other and sending cascades of UN files on child diseases, pregnancy death rates and nutrition across the floors.
The Americans may think they have "liberated" Baghdad but the tens of thousands of thieves – they came in families and cruised the city in trucks and cars searching for booty – seem to have a different idea what liberation means.
American control of the city is, at best, tenuous – a fact underlined after several marines were killed last night by a suicide bomber close to the square where a statue of Saddam Hussein was pulled down on Wednesday, in the most staged photo-opportunity since Iwo Jima.
Independent: Robert Fisk: Baghdad: the day after
Arson, anarchy, fear, hatred, hysteria, looting, revenge, savagery, suspicion and a suicide bombing
11 April 2003
It was the day of the looter. They trashed the German embassy and hurled the ambassador's desk into the yard. I rescued the European Union flag – flung into a puddle of water outside the visa section – as a mob of middle-aged men, women in chadors and screaming children rifled through the consul's office and hurled Mozart records and German history books from an upper window. The Slovakian embassy was broken into a few hours later.
At the headquarters of Unicef, which has been trying to save and improve the lives of millions of Iraqi children since the 1980s, an army of thieves stormed the building, throwing brand new photocopiers on top of each other and sending cascades of UN files on child diseases, pregnancy death rates and nutrition across the floors.
The Americans may think they have "liberated" Baghdad but the tens of thousands of thieves – they came in families and cruised the city in trucks and cars searching for booty – seem to have a different idea what liberation means.
American control of the city is, at best, tenuous – a fact underlined after several marines were killed last night by a suicide bomber close to the square where a statue of Saddam Hussein was pulled down on Wednesday, in the most staged photo-opportunity since Iwo Jima.
Thursday, April 10, 2003
IRAQ
Spiegel: Selbstmordanschlag vor dem "Palestine"
Einen Tag nach der Einnahme Bagdads durch US-Truppen gab es offenbar das erste Selbstmordattentat gegen die Amerikaner. An einem Checkpoint vor dem Journalistenhotel "Palestine" soll sich ein Attentäter in die Luft gesprengt haben. Mehrere US-Soldaten sollen getötet worden sein.
Spiegel: Selbstmordanschlag vor dem "Palestine"
Einen Tag nach der Einnahme Bagdads durch US-Truppen gab es offenbar das erste Selbstmordattentat gegen die Amerikaner. An einem Checkpoint vor dem Journalistenhotel "Palestine" soll sich ein Attentäter in die Luft gesprengt haben. Mehrere US-Soldaten sollen getötet worden sein.
INDIA-PAKISTAN
Times of India: India's pre-emptive strike remark taken seriously: US
ISLAMABAD: The US has said it has taken "seriously" India's assertion that it reserved the right to launch a pre-emptive strike against Pakistan and advised the two countries to ensure that the situation does not "get out of hand".
A senior unnamed US State Department official, quoted by Dawn newspaper, also said the infiltration of militants into Jammu and Kashmir "has not stopped as yet and it is something we have said needs to stop."
About External Affairs Minister Yashwant Sinha's remarks that India reserved the right to launch a pre-emptive attack against Pakistan just as the US did against Iraq, the official said Washington is "in pretty regular touch with both governments to ensure that the situation does not get out of hand. Threats of war are always something taken seriously
Times of India: India's pre-emptive strike remark taken seriously: US
ISLAMABAD: The US has said it has taken "seriously" India's assertion that it reserved the right to launch a pre-emptive strike against Pakistan and advised the two countries to ensure that the situation does not "get out of hand".
A senior unnamed US State Department official, quoted by Dawn newspaper, also said the infiltration of militants into Jammu and Kashmir "has not stopped as yet and it is something we have said needs to stop."
About External Affairs Minister Yashwant Sinha's remarks that India reserved the right to launch a pre-emptive attack against Pakistan just as the US did against Iraq, the official said Washington is "in pretty regular touch with both governments to ensure that the situation does not get out of hand. Threats of war are always something taken seriously
IRAQ
Independent: Surgeons using headache pills instead of anaesthetic
At Al-Kindi hospital in Baghdad yesterday, stocks of painkillers had run so low that surgeons were operating on patients anaesthetised with headache pills.
At the Medical City hospital complex, which has 650 beds, overflowing wards were without electricity or water. Of the 27 operating theatres in the four hospitals in Medical City, just six were functioning, with the help of a back-up generator that has worked non-stop for 72 hours and could fail at any time.
Aid agencies said Baghdad's casualty units were being run by a skeleton staff of doctors and nurses who had struggled to work through the fighting. Most had worked solidly for three days, snatching a few minutes' rest between emergencies.
And all the while a steady stream of civilian casualties flowed into the city's 12 main hospitals in the back of pick-ups or carried by their families.
Independent: Surgeons using headache pills instead of anaesthetic
At Al-Kindi hospital in Baghdad yesterday, stocks of painkillers had run so low that surgeons were operating on patients anaesthetised with headache pills.
At the Medical City hospital complex, which has 650 beds, overflowing wards were without electricity or water. Of the 27 operating theatres in the four hospitals in Medical City, just six were functioning, with the help of a back-up generator that has worked non-stop for 72 hours and could fail at any time.
Aid agencies said Baghdad's casualty units were being run by a skeleton staff of doctors and nurses who had struggled to work through the fighting. Most had worked solidly for three days, snatching a few minutes' rest between emergencies.
And all the while a steady stream of civilian casualties flowed into the city's 12 main hospitals in the back of pick-ups or carried by their families.
USA
Newswithviews: S.A.R.S.: SIMPLY ANOTHER RIDICULOUS SCAM
Mary Starrett
April 8, 2003
NewsWithViews.com
Those photos of Asians wearing masks have been effective, haven't they? By now you probably wring your hands every time someone near you sneezes.
Maybe you've canceled a plane trip or decided to stay away from large groups of people…just to be safe.
Good thinking. Just stay in, watch the war on TV (Operation Iraqi Freedom Ta Da!) and nurse that fear and anxiety you've been feeling. Unless of course, like me, your THERE'S MORE TO THIS THAN WE'RE BEING TOLD radar went off the very first time you heard about this "mysterious" disease called S.A.R.S. - short for severe acute respiratory syndrome. Relax, the mega public health "experts" are working feverishly to try and figure out just what this coughing, sneezing, shortness of breath "disease" is.
In the meantime you can be comforted by the Executive Order President Bush signed Friday afternoon saying "health authorities" can hold you against your will if they even think you have this "virus". The E.O. Specifically made provisions for "apprehension, detention or conditional release" (.i.e. "be a good little citizen and take your vaccine/ medicine and we'll let you go")... "of individuals who refuse hospitalization and isolation".
Oh, you missed the announcement of that executive order? That's understandable. See, it's standard operating procedure for any risky political move ; you sign it, pass it, cram it down our collective throats right before a holiday or on a Friday, after everyone's gone home for the weekend to worry about stuff like whether to order in or go out for pizza.
And exactly how much media attention did this executive order to QUARANTINE Americans receive? A tiny blurb at the bottom of a page is where I found it. S.A.R.S is really at this point just a collection of vague symptoms that anybody can have a number of times a year. This "disease" is the first to be added to the quarantine list in over 20 years The last large-scale quarantine in this country was in 1918 during the Spanish flu pandemic.
Some preliminary research into the symptoms and likely cause of this pneumonia-like virus (of which there are over 50 strains, by the by) shows a number of reasons why this has all the earmarks of an effort to control the masses and none of the markers for a bona fide pandemic......
Newswithviews: S.A.R.S.: SIMPLY ANOTHER RIDICULOUS SCAM
Mary Starrett
April 8, 2003
NewsWithViews.com
Those photos of Asians wearing masks have been effective, haven't they? By now you probably wring your hands every time someone near you sneezes.
Maybe you've canceled a plane trip or decided to stay away from large groups of people…just to be safe.
Good thinking. Just stay in, watch the war on TV (Operation Iraqi Freedom Ta Da!) and nurse that fear and anxiety you've been feeling. Unless of course, like me, your THERE'S MORE TO THIS THAN WE'RE BEING TOLD radar went off the very first time you heard about this "mysterious" disease called S.A.R.S. - short for severe acute respiratory syndrome. Relax, the mega public health "experts" are working feverishly to try and figure out just what this coughing, sneezing, shortness of breath "disease" is.
In the meantime you can be comforted by the Executive Order President Bush signed Friday afternoon saying "health authorities" can hold you against your will if they even think you have this "virus". The E.O. Specifically made provisions for "apprehension, detention or conditional release" (.i.e. "be a good little citizen and take your vaccine/ medicine and we'll let you go")... "of individuals who refuse hospitalization and isolation".
Oh, you missed the announcement of that executive order? That's understandable. See, it's standard operating procedure for any risky political move ; you sign it, pass it, cram it down our collective throats right before a holiday or on a Friday, after everyone's gone home for the weekend to worry about stuff like whether to order in or go out for pizza.
And exactly how much media attention did this executive order to QUARANTINE Americans receive? A tiny blurb at the bottom of a page is where I found it. S.A.R.S is really at this point just a collection of vague symptoms that anybody can have a number of times a year. This "disease" is the first to be added to the quarantine list in over 20 years The last large-scale quarantine in this country was in 1918 during the Spanish flu pandemic.
Some preliminary research into the symptoms and likely cause of this pneumonia-like virus (of which there are over 50 strains, by the by) shows a number of reasons why this has all the earmarks of an effort to control the masses and none of the markers for a bona fide pandemic......
IRAQ
ALternet: The New Christian Crusaders
After 9/11, pundits quickly relegated "irony" to history's dust bin. There was nothing left to laugh about. Several months later, there were no hosannas or fanfare when irony slithered back into our lives. These days, irony is alive and well, thank you, as recently embodied by several post-war proselytizing-in-Iraq proposals announced by fundamentalist Christian organizations.
With each passing day the U.S. rains down more death and destruction on the people of Iraq. Outrage within the Muslim world is rapidly growing. When the war against Iraq is over and occupation begins, the Bush Administration plans to establish an American-led government – with ample benefits reaped by the president's long-time political supporters and oil industry cronies. Closely behind these grim reapers there will follow a host of fundamentalist Christian leaders, plowing the sand for new recruits.
Over the past 10 days, several fundamentalist Christian organizations announced plans to prop further open the window of opportunity by participating in the rebuilding of Iraq. Before the war, none seemed particularly interested in working to avoid the situation the Bush Administration has caused in the country, and now, none seems interested in whether or not they're invited or even desired by the people of Iraq.
ALternet: The New Christian Crusaders
After 9/11, pundits quickly relegated "irony" to history's dust bin. There was nothing left to laugh about. Several months later, there were no hosannas or fanfare when irony slithered back into our lives. These days, irony is alive and well, thank you, as recently embodied by several post-war proselytizing-in-Iraq proposals announced by fundamentalist Christian organizations.
With each passing day the U.S. rains down more death and destruction on the people of Iraq. Outrage within the Muslim world is rapidly growing. When the war against Iraq is over and occupation begins, the Bush Administration plans to establish an American-led government – with ample benefits reaped by the president's long-time political supporters and oil industry cronies. Closely behind these grim reapers there will follow a host of fundamentalist Christian leaders, plowing the sand for new recruits.
Over the past 10 days, several fundamentalist Christian organizations announced plans to prop further open the window of opportunity by participating in the rebuilding of Iraq. Before the war, none seemed particularly interested in working to avoid the situation the Bush Administration has caused in the country, and now, none seems interested in whether or not they're invited or even desired by the people of Iraq.
IRAQ/ISRAEL
BBC: Israel eyes Iraqi oil
An Israeli minister says he wants to reopen a pipeline which has been closed for more than fifty years to bring Iraqi oil through Jordan to Israel's Mediterranean coast.
A spokesman for the infrastructure minister, Joseph Paritzky, said the move would cut fuel costs in Israel and help regenerate the port city of Haifa.
There has been no official comment yet from Jordan, but any suggestion that Israel might benefit from the fall of Saddam Hussein is likely to enrage many people in Arab countries.
The pipeline was built after Britain took control of Iraq, Jordan and what was then British mandate Palestine after the First World War.
The section from Iraq to Jordan is still functioning, but the route from Jordan to the port of Haifa, which is now in Israel, was cut in 1948 when the British pulled out.
BBC: Israel eyes Iraqi oil
An Israeli minister says he wants to reopen a pipeline which has been closed for more than fifty years to bring Iraqi oil through Jordan to Israel's Mediterranean coast.
A spokesman for the infrastructure minister, Joseph Paritzky, said the move would cut fuel costs in Israel and help regenerate the port city of Haifa.
There has been no official comment yet from Jordan, but any suggestion that Israel might benefit from the fall of Saddam Hussein is likely to enrage many people in Arab countries.
The pipeline was built after Britain took control of Iraq, Jordan and what was then British mandate Palestine after the First World War.
The section from Iraq to Jordan is still functioning, but the route from Jordan to the port of Haifa, which is now in Israel, was cut in 1948 when the British pulled out.
IRAQ/AFGHANISTAN
Guardian: Iraqis have paid the blood price for a fraudulent war
The crudely colonial nature of this enterprise can no longer be disguised
On the streets of Baghdad yesterday, it was Kabul, November 2001, all over again. Then, enthusiasts for the war on terror were in triumphalist mood, as the Taliban regime was overthrown. The critics had been confounded, they insisted, kites were flying, music was playing again and women were throwing off their burkas. In parliament, Jack Straw mocked Labour MPs who predicted US and British forces would still be fighting in the country in six months' time.
Seventeen months later, such confidence looks grimly ironic. For most Afghans, "liberation" has meant the return of rival warlords, harsh repression, rampant lawlessness, widespread torture and Taliban-style policing of women. Meanwhile, guerrilla attacks are mounting on US troops - special forces soldiers have been killed in recent weeks, while 11 civilians died yesterday in an American air raid - and the likelihood of credible elections next year appears to be close to zero.
In Baghdad and Basra, perhaps the cheering crowds have been a bit thinner on the ground than Tony Blair and George Bush might have hoped - and the looters and lynchers more numerous. But it would be extraordinary if many Iraqis didn't feel relief or euphoria at the prospect of an end to a brutal government, 12 years of murderous sanctions and a merciless bombardment by the most powerful military machine in the world. Afghanistan is not of course Iraq, though it is a salutary lesson to those who believe the overthrow of recalcitrant regimes is the way to defeat anti-western terrorism. It would nevertheless be a mistake to confuse the current mood in Iraqi cities with enthusiasm for the foreign occupation now being imposed. Even Israel's invading troops were feted by south Lebanese Shi'ites in 1982 - only to be driven out by the Shi'ite Hizbullah resistance 18 years later.
Guardian: Iraqis have paid the blood price for a fraudulent war
The crudely colonial nature of this enterprise can no longer be disguised
On the streets of Baghdad yesterday, it was Kabul, November 2001, all over again. Then, enthusiasts for the war on terror were in triumphalist mood, as the Taliban regime was overthrown. The critics had been confounded, they insisted, kites were flying, music was playing again and women were throwing off their burkas. In parliament, Jack Straw mocked Labour MPs who predicted US and British forces would still be fighting in the country in six months' time.
Seventeen months later, such confidence looks grimly ironic. For most Afghans, "liberation" has meant the return of rival warlords, harsh repression, rampant lawlessness, widespread torture and Taliban-style policing of women. Meanwhile, guerrilla attacks are mounting on US troops - special forces soldiers have been killed in recent weeks, while 11 civilians died yesterday in an American air raid - and the likelihood of credible elections next year appears to be close to zero.
In Baghdad and Basra, perhaps the cheering crowds have been a bit thinner on the ground than Tony Blair and George Bush might have hoped - and the looters and lynchers more numerous. But it would be extraordinary if many Iraqis didn't feel relief or euphoria at the prospect of an end to a brutal government, 12 years of murderous sanctions and a merciless bombardment by the most powerful military machine in the world. Afghanistan is not of course Iraq, though it is a salutary lesson to those who believe the overthrow of recalcitrant regimes is the way to defeat anti-western terrorism. It would nevertheless be a mistake to confuse the current mood in Iraqi cities with enthusiasm for the foreign occupation now being imposed. Even Israel's invading troops were feted by south Lebanese Shi'ites in 1982 - only to be driven out by the Shi'ite Hizbullah resistance 18 years later.
WAR ON IRAK
Teheran Times: Dictators' Collusion
Almost 10 days ago, there was a halt in U.S.-British operations in Iraq. However, U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and the chief of the U.S. Central Command, General Tommy Franks, in their interviews with the media never elaborated on the issue, but instead tried to mislead world public opinion in order to hide a greater secret decision from them.
Suspicions rose on the same day when U.S. troops, that had been stopped at the Euphrates, immediately were able to advance toward the heart of Baghdad without any significant resistance by Iraqi forces. Nobody asked why Tikrit, that was once called the ideological heart of Saddam's government and the last possible trench of the Iraqi army, was never targeted by U.S. and British bombs and missiles. Or why when the elite Iraqi forces arrived in eastern Iraq from Tikrit, the pace of the invaders advancing toward central Baghdad immediately increased. Also, it has been reported that over the past 24 hours, a plane was authorized to leave Iraq bound for Russia. Who was aboard this plane?
All these ambiguities, the contradictory reports about Saddam's situation, and the fact that the highest-ranking Iraqi officials were all represented by a single individual -- Iraqi Information Minister Mohammed al-Sahhaf -- and the easy fall of Baghdad shows that the center of collusion had been Tikrit, where Saddam, his aides, and lieutenants from the Baath Party had been waiting for al-Sahhaf to join them so that they could receive the required guarantees to leave the country in a secret compromise with coalition forces.
Teheran Times: Dictators' Collusion
Almost 10 days ago, there was a halt in U.S.-British operations in Iraq. However, U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and the chief of the U.S. Central Command, General Tommy Franks, in their interviews with the media never elaborated on the issue, but instead tried to mislead world public opinion in order to hide a greater secret decision from them.
Suspicions rose on the same day when U.S. troops, that had been stopped at the Euphrates, immediately were able to advance toward the heart of Baghdad without any significant resistance by Iraqi forces. Nobody asked why Tikrit, that was once called the ideological heart of Saddam's government and the last possible trench of the Iraqi army, was never targeted by U.S. and British bombs and missiles. Or why when the elite Iraqi forces arrived in eastern Iraq from Tikrit, the pace of the invaders advancing toward central Baghdad immediately increased. Also, it has been reported that over the past 24 hours, a plane was authorized to leave Iraq bound for Russia. Who was aboard this plane?
All these ambiguities, the contradictory reports about Saddam's situation, and the fact that the highest-ranking Iraqi officials were all represented by a single individual -- Iraqi Information Minister Mohammed al-Sahhaf -- and the easy fall of Baghdad shows that the center of collusion had been Tikrit, where Saddam, his aides, and lieutenants from the Baath Party had been waiting for al-Sahhaf to join them so that they could receive the required guarantees to leave the country in a secret compromise with coalition forces.
AFRICA
Independent: 40 million starving 'as world watches Iraq'
UN agency accuses west of pledging to feed victims of Gulf war while concern for plight of hungry Africans fades
Rory Carroll in Kanywambizi, Zimbabwe
Wednesday April 9, 2003
The Guardian
Forty million Africans are at risk of starving but are not getting enough aid because the world is distracted by Iraq, the World Food Programme has warned.
In an impassioned appeal to the United Nations security council, James Morris, the UN agency's executive director, accused the west of double standards.
"How is it we routinely accept a level of suffering and hopelessness in Africa we would never accept in any other part of the world? We simply cannot let this stand."
Independent: 40 million starving 'as world watches Iraq'
UN agency accuses west of pledging to feed victims of Gulf war while concern for plight of hungry Africans fades
Rory Carroll in Kanywambizi, Zimbabwe
Wednesday April 9, 2003
The Guardian
Forty million Africans are at risk of starving but are not getting enough aid because the world is distracted by Iraq, the World Food Programme has warned.
In an impassioned appeal to the United Nations security council, James Morris, the UN agency's executive director, accused the west of double standards.
"How is it we routinely accept a level of suffering and hopelessness in Africa we would never accept in any other part of the world? We simply cannot let this stand."
WAAR ON IRAK
Radio Netherland: Where are the weapons?
With the battle for Baghdad fizzling out without the use of chemical weapons by Iraqi troops, Washington's critics are demanding to know what has happened to Saddam Hussein's purported weapons of mass destruction. Former chief UN weapons inspector in Iraq Scott Ritter is one of those who has heaped scorn upon President George Bush's administration for going to war. In this interview with RN's Saskia van Reenan, Mr Ritter, a former US marine officer, explains why he sees US justifications for waging war as dishonest excuses for empire-building.
"The threat that Iraq poses from weapons of mass destruction I think has been clearly exposed as a lie. We were told to expect chemical weapons to rain down on troops as soon as they crossed over the border from Kuwait into Iraq, but that didn't happen. We were then told that as we closed in on the so-called ‘red line' around Baghdad – the 50-mile circle – that as soon as we breached that, chemical weapons would be used. That didn't happen. Then we said chemical weapons would be used as a last-gasp defence of Baghdad but that didn't happen. What chemical weapons? We were told that the presidential palaces were brimming over with weapons of mass destruction, but we now occupy many of the presidential palaces and we've found nothing."
Radio Netherland: Where are the weapons?
With the battle for Baghdad fizzling out without the use of chemical weapons by Iraqi troops, Washington's critics are demanding to know what has happened to Saddam Hussein's purported weapons of mass destruction. Former chief UN weapons inspector in Iraq Scott Ritter is one of those who has heaped scorn upon President George Bush's administration for going to war. In this interview with RN's Saskia van Reenan, Mr Ritter, a former US marine officer, explains why he sees US justifications for waging war as dishonest excuses for empire-building.
"The threat that Iraq poses from weapons of mass destruction I think has been clearly exposed as a lie. We were told to expect chemical weapons to rain down on troops as soon as they crossed over the border from Kuwait into Iraq, but that didn't happen. We were then told that as we closed in on the so-called ‘red line' around Baghdad – the 50-mile circle – that as soon as we breached that, chemical weapons would be used. That didn't happen. Then we said chemical weapons would be used as a last-gasp defence of Baghdad but that didn't happen. What chemical weapons? We were told that the presidential palaces were brimming over with weapons of mass destruction, but we now occupy many of the presidential palaces and we've found nothing."
WAR ON IRAK
Independent: Robert Fisk: A day that began with shellfire ended with a once-oppressed people walking like giants
The Americans "liberated" Baghdad yesterday, destroyed the centre of Saddam Hussein's quarter-century of brutal dictatorial power but brought behind them an army of looters who unleashed upon the ancient city a reign of pillage and anarchy. It was a day that began with shellfire and air strikes and blood-bloated hospitals and ended with the ritual destruction of the dictator's statues. The mobs shrieked their delight. Men who, for 25 years, had grovellingly obeyed Saddam's most humble secret policeman turned into giants, bellowing their hatred of the Iraqi leader as his vast and monstrous statues thundered to the ground.
"It is the beginning of our new freedom," an Iraqi shopkeeper shouted at me. Then he paused, and asked: "What do the Americans want from us now?' The great Lebanese poet Kalil Gibran once wrote that he pitied the nation that welcomed its tyrants with trumpetings and dismissed them with hootings of derision. And the people of Baghdad performed this same deadly ritual yesterday, forgetting that they – or their parents – had behaved in identical fashion when the Arab Socialist Baath Party destroyed the previous dictatorship of Iraq's generals and princes. Forgetting, too, that the "liberators" were a new and alien and all-powerful occupying force with neither culture nor language nor race nor religion to unite them with Iraq.
You'll see the celebrations and we will be happy Saddam has gone," one of them said to me. "But we will then want to rid ourselves of the Americans and we will want to keep our oil and there will be resistance and then they will call us "terrorists". Nor did the Americans look happy "liberators". They pointed their rifles at the pavements and screamed at motorists to stop – one who did not, an old man in an old car, was shot in the head in front of two French journalists.
Independent: Robert Fisk: A day that began with shellfire ended with a once-oppressed people walking like giants
The Americans "liberated" Baghdad yesterday, destroyed the centre of Saddam Hussein's quarter-century of brutal dictatorial power but brought behind them an army of looters who unleashed upon the ancient city a reign of pillage and anarchy. It was a day that began with shellfire and air strikes and blood-bloated hospitals and ended with the ritual destruction of the dictator's statues. The mobs shrieked their delight. Men who, for 25 years, had grovellingly obeyed Saddam's most humble secret policeman turned into giants, bellowing their hatred of the Iraqi leader as his vast and monstrous statues thundered to the ground.
"It is the beginning of our new freedom," an Iraqi shopkeeper shouted at me. Then he paused, and asked: "What do the Americans want from us now?' The great Lebanese poet Kalil Gibran once wrote that he pitied the nation that welcomed its tyrants with trumpetings and dismissed them with hootings of derision. And the people of Baghdad performed this same deadly ritual yesterday, forgetting that they – or their parents – had behaved in identical fashion when the Arab Socialist Baath Party destroyed the previous dictatorship of Iraq's generals and princes. Forgetting, too, that the "liberators" were a new and alien and all-powerful occupying force with neither culture nor language nor race nor religion to unite them with Iraq.
You'll see the celebrations and we will be happy Saddam has gone," one of them said to me. "But we will then want to rid ourselves of the Americans and we will want to keep our oil and there will be resistance and then they will call us "terrorists". Nor did the Americans look happy "liberators". They pointed their rifles at the pavements and screamed at motorists to stop – one who did not, an old man in an old car, was shot in the head in front of two French journalists.
WAR ON IRAK
Independent: Arab world dismayed at 'new colonialism'
The West may have watched the pictures of jubilant crowds in Baghdad with joy, but in the Arab world most people watched with dismay. Many turned their televisions off, unable to watch any more.
Many Arabs who opposed Saddam Hussein's regime saw in the television pictures not the toppling of a ruthless tyrant, but the conquest of Iraq by a foreign occupying army. The most telling moment came when American soldiers briefly draped a statue of President Saddam with a US flag. "This is a new colonialism," was one Palestinian's reaction.
Independent: Arab world dismayed at 'new colonialism'
The West may have watched the pictures of jubilant crowds in Baghdad with joy, but in the Arab world most people watched with dismay. Many turned their televisions off, unable to watch any more.
Many Arabs who opposed Saddam Hussein's regime saw in the television pictures not the toppling of a ruthless tyrant, but the conquest of Iraq by a foreign occupying army. The most telling moment came when American soldiers briefly draped a statue of President Saddam with a US flag. "This is a new colonialism," was one Palestinian's reaction.
Monday, April 07, 2003
WAR ON IRAK
Independent: The Twisted Language Of War Used To Justify The Unjustifiable
Why do we aid and abet the lies and propaganda of this filthy war? How come, for example, it's now BBC "style" to describe the Anglo-American invaders as the "coalition". This is a lie. The "coalition" that we're obviously supposed to remember is the one forged to drive Iraqi occupation troops from Kuwait in 1991, an alliance involving dozens of countries ö almost all of whom now condemn President Bush Junior's adventure in Iraq. There are a few Australian special forces swanning about in the desert, courtesy of the country's eccentric Prime Minister, John Howard, but that's it.
So, who at the BBC decreed this dishonest word "coalition"? True, there's a "coalition of the willing", to use Mr Bush's weird phrase, but this is a reference to those nations that have given overflying rights to the United States or have given political but not military support. So the phrase "coalition forces" remains a lie.
Then there's the historical slippage to justify the unjustifiable. When Jonathan Charles, an "embedded" journalist, reported in the early days of the invasion that the British army outside Basra was keeping a watchful eye on the Iranian border because the Iranians had "stirred up" an insurrection in the city in 1991, his dispatch was based on a falsehood. The Iranians never stirred up an insurrection in Basra. President Bush Senior did that by calling for just such a rebellion ö and then betraying the Shia Muslims who followed his appeal. The Iranians did everything they could to avoid involvement in the uprising.
Independent: The Twisted Language Of War Used To Justify The Unjustifiable
Why do we aid and abet the lies and propaganda of this filthy war? How come, for example, it's now BBC "style" to describe the Anglo-American invaders as the "coalition". This is a lie. The "coalition" that we're obviously supposed to remember is the one forged to drive Iraqi occupation troops from Kuwait in 1991, an alliance involving dozens of countries ö almost all of whom now condemn President Bush Junior's adventure in Iraq. There are a few Australian special forces swanning about in the desert, courtesy of the country's eccentric Prime Minister, John Howard, but that's it.
So, who at the BBC decreed this dishonest word "coalition"? True, there's a "coalition of the willing", to use Mr Bush's weird phrase, but this is a reference to those nations that have given overflying rights to the United States or have given political but not military support. So the phrase "coalition forces" remains a lie.
Then there's the historical slippage to justify the unjustifiable. When Jonathan Charles, an "embedded" journalist, reported in the early days of the invasion that the British army outside Basra was keeping a watchful eye on the Iranian border because the Iranians had "stirred up" an insurrection in the city in 1991, his dispatch was based on a falsehood. The Iranians never stirred up an insurrection in Basra. President Bush Senior did that by calling for just such a rebellion ö and then betraying the Shia Muslims who followed his appeal. The Iranians did everything they could to avoid involvement in the uprising.
SCIENCE
Times Online: Oil industry suppressed plans for 200-mpg car
THE original blueprints for a device that could have revolutionised the motor car have been discovered in the secret compartment of a tool box.
A carburettor that would allow a car to travel 200 miles on a gallon of fuel caused oil stocks to crash when it was announced by its Canadian inventor Charles Nelson Pogue in the 1930s.
But the carburettor was never produced and, mysteriously, Pogue went overnight from impoverished inventor to the manager of a successful factory making oil filters for the motor industry. Ever since, suspicion has lingered that oil companies and car manufacturers colluded to bury Pogue’s invention.
Now a retired Cornish mechanic has enlisted the help of the University of Plymouth to rebuild Pogue’s revolutionary carburettor, known as the Winnipeg, from blueprints he found hidden beneath a sheet of plywood in the box.
The controversial plans once caused panic among oil companies and rocked the Toronto Stock Exchange when tests carried out on the carburettor in the 1930s proved that it worked.
Patrick Davies, 72, from St Austell, had owned the tool box for 40 years but only recently decided to clean it out. As well as drawings of the carburettor, the envelope contained two pages of plans, three test reports and six pages of notes written by Pogue.
They included a report of a test that Pogue had done on his lawnmower, which showed that he had managed to make the engine run for seven days on a quart (just under a litre) of petrol.
The documents also described how the machine worked by turning petrol into a vapour before it entered the cylinder chamber, reducing the amount of fuel needed for combustion.
Mr Davies has had the patent number on the plans authenticated, proving that they are genuine documents.
"SKANDAL"
Times Online: Oil industry suppressed plans for 200-mpg car
THE original blueprints for a device that could have revolutionised the motor car have been discovered in the secret compartment of a tool box.
A carburettor that would allow a car to travel 200 miles on a gallon of fuel caused oil stocks to crash when it was announced by its Canadian inventor Charles Nelson Pogue in the 1930s.
But the carburettor was never produced and, mysteriously, Pogue went overnight from impoverished inventor to the manager of a successful factory making oil filters for the motor industry. Ever since, suspicion has lingered that oil companies and car manufacturers colluded to bury Pogue’s invention.
Now a retired Cornish mechanic has enlisted the help of the University of Plymouth to rebuild Pogue’s revolutionary carburettor, known as the Winnipeg, from blueprints he found hidden beneath a sheet of plywood in the box.
The controversial plans once caused panic among oil companies and rocked the Toronto Stock Exchange when tests carried out on the carburettor in the 1930s proved that it worked.
Patrick Davies, 72, from St Austell, had owned the tool box for 40 years but only recently decided to clean it out. As well as drawings of the carburettor, the envelope contained two pages of plans, three test reports and six pages of notes written by Pogue.
They included a report of a test that Pogue had done on his lawnmower, which showed that he had managed to make the engine run for seven days on a quart (just under a litre) of petrol.
The documents also described how the machine worked by turning petrol into a vapour before it entered the cylinder chamber, reducing the amount of fuel needed for combustion.
Mr Davies has had the patent number on the plans authenticated, proving that they are genuine documents.
"SKANDAL"
WAR ON IRAK
Rense: Arabs Fight US Troops Near Baghdad
Egyptians, Jordanians and Syrians are fighting alongside Iraqi troops against US forces moving on Baghdad, using tactics including suicide bombings which left two Marines dead, US officers said yesterday.
One officer with the 1st Marine Division told AFP US troops fought a 10-hour battle with hundreds of such fighters southeast of Baghdad on Friday.
"We were ambushed twice, and there were four suicide car bombings against tanks," the officer said.
"There were nine casualties, including two Marines killed."
The officer said contact was initially with some 150 black-clad fighters, but by the end of the battle around midnight 300 to 400 had been killed. "They kept bringing them in by the busload," he said. "It's a whole conglomerate of freedom fighters."
Rense: Arabs Fight US Troops Near Baghdad
Egyptians, Jordanians and Syrians are fighting alongside Iraqi troops against US forces moving on Baghdad, using tactics including suicide bombings which left two Marines dead, US officers said yesterday.
One officer with the 1st Marine Division told AFP US troops fought a 10-hour battle with hundreds of such fighters southeast of Baghdad on Friday.
"We were ambushed twice, and there were four suicide car bombings against tanks," the officer said.
"There were nine casualties, including two Marines killed."
The officer said contact was initially with some 150 black-clad fighters, but by the end of the battle around midnight 300 to 400 had been killed. "They kept bringing them in by the busload," he said. "It's a whole conglomerate of freedom fighters."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)