Operation Iraqi Freedom
AFGP-2002-000100
Synopsis: This document contains a flyer addressed to all Arab immigrants. The flyer lists the Islamic Emirate officials' names that would assist the Arab immigrants in entering the Emirate.
CMPC-2003-001488
CMPC-2003-005934
Synopsis: The first page of this two-page file contains a list of a number pieces of equipment needed for detonation of explosive materials. It appears that they are giving time schedules for preparation of specific numbers of various devices.
Conclusion of report about the elections campain in France
ISGZ-2004-02780
Synopsis: Correspondence among various governmental offices regarding the French law for funding and financing election campaigns. The original French text of the law translated into Arabic, referring to the rules of the authority to regulate the financing
Original Arabic Text
Instructions from IIS to all sections of the MIC for procedures to follow in the event of UN visits
ISGZ-2004-028947
Synopsis: This 2 page document includes a memo from the Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS)(M6), to all general managers of the departments. It addresses the U.N. inspection team's intention of uncovering detailed information about departments' symbols
Original Arabic Text
Iraqi Intelligence Service (Mukhabarat)
CMPC-2003-006430
Synopsis: This file contains document relevant to the Mukhabarat or Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS), it explain the structure of the IIS
ISGZ-2004-019920
Synopsis: 2002 Iraqi Intelligence Correspondence concerning the presence of al-Qaida Members in Iraq. Correspondence between IRS members on a suspicion, later confirmed, of the presence of an Al-Qaeda terrorist group. Moreover, it includes photos and names.
Rumors of Iraqi and Saudi volunteers to fight against the US in AfghanistanISGQ-2003-00004500-0
Synopsis: Fedayeen Saddam received news of a rumor that 3,000 volunteers from Iraq and Saudi Arabia had traveled to Afghanistan to fight with the Mujahideen against the US. This letter is a request to investigate the rumor to determine whether it is true.
Original Arabic Text
Usage of Special Equipment
CMPC-2004-002219-0
Original Arabic Text
Audio File Transcripts:
DOCEX Saddam 030306
ISGC-2003-M0005595
ISGQ-2003-M0001714_TRANS
ISGQ-2003-M0003922
ISGQ-2003-M0003978
ISGQ-2003-M0003997
ISGQ-2003-M0004153_TRANS
ISGQ-2003-M0004244
ISGQ-2003-M0004244-1
ISGQ-2003-M0004286_3min_TRANS
ISGQ-2003-M0004286_TRANS
ISGQ-2003-M0004444_TRANS
ISGQ-2003-M0004528_TRANS
ISGQ-2003-M0004560_TRANS
ISGQ-2003-M0004660_TRANS
ISGQ-2003-M0004665_TRANS
ISGQ-2003-M0004666_TRANS
ISGQ-2003-M0004667
ISGQ-2003-M0004669_TRANS
ISGQ-2003-M0004694_TRANS
ISGQ-2003-M0004923
ISGQ-2003-M0004923_TRANS
ISGQ-2003-M0004925_TRANS
ISGQ-2003-M0004932_TRANS
ISGQ-2003-M0005494_TRANS
ISGQ-2003-M0005942_TRANS
ISGQ-2003-M0005943_TRANS
ISGQ-2003-M0005967_TRANS
ISGQ-2003-M0006893_TRANS
ISGQ-2003-M0007044_TRANS
ISGQ-2003-M0007133_TRANS
ISGQ-2003-M0007379
ISGQ-2003-M0007379_TRANS
ISGQ-2003-M0007740_TRANS
ISGQ-2003-M0007799_TRANS
ISGQ-2003-M0008110_TRANS
Friday, March 17, 2006
Major U.S.-Iraqi Military Strike Scores Big Against Terrorists
U.S. and Iraqi forces captured more than 30 suspected insurgents and found at least six major caches of weapons near the town of Samarra on Thursday, during the first day of what the U.S. military says is the largest air assault operation since the early weeks of the war. A military spokesman says more than half the troops were Iraqi, bringing the combat operations of the new Iraqi Army to a new level.
A spokesman for the U.S. 101st Airborne Division says troops found artillery shells, explosives and material for making the insurgency's deadliest weapons - roadside bombs. Major Tom Bryant says the troops also found instruction manuals for how to make the bombs, as well as medical supplies and military uniforms that insurgents could have used to gain access to restricted areas.
The major says the troops went into the area on U.S. helicopters with gunships in support, but no airborne weapons were fired. Major Bryant says the operation brought cooperation between U.S. and Iraqi forces to a new level.
"Conducting a combined air assault operation is a very complex, difficult thing to do, and they have performed extremely well," said Major Bryant. "The Iraqi Army soldiers were inside the same aircraft, side-by-side with our troops as they assaulted the objectives. Basically, we landed the aircraft right near a number of the objective areas, quickly exited the aircraft and secured the areas. So they performed the exact same role in the air assault as our troops did."
Major Bryant says about 800 of the 1,500 troops involved in the assault were Iraqi. He says the operation is expected to continue for several days.
A spokesman for the U.S. 101st Airborne Division says troops found artillery shells, explosives and material for making the insurgency's deadliest weapons - roadside bombs. Major Tom Bryant says the troops also found instruction manuals for how to make the bombs, as well as medical supplies and military uniforms that insurgents could have used to gain access to restricted areas.
The major says the troops went into the area on U.S. helicopters with gunships in support, but no airborne weapons were fired. Major Bryant says the operation brought cooperation between U.S. and Iraqi forces to a new level.
"Conducting a combined air assault operation is a very complex, difficult thing to do, and they have performed extremely well," said Major Bryant. "The Iraqi Army soldiers were inside the same aircraft, side-by-side with our troops as they assaulted the objectives. Basically, we landed the aircraft right near a number of the objective areas, quickly exited the aircraft and secured the areas. So they performed the exact same role in the air assault as our troops did."
Major Bryant says about 800 of the 1,500 troops involved in the assault were Iraqi. He says the operation is expected to continue for several days.
Rep.Curt Weldon: Bin Laden Is Dead !
Rep. Curt Weldon, who broke the Able Danger story last year revealing that military intelligence had identified lead hijacker Mohamed Atta as a terrorist threat before the 9/11 attacks, now says that Osama bin Laden has died.
Weldon made the stunning claim during an interview Wednesday with the Philadelphia Inquirer, which reported: "Weldon is making explosive new allegations. He says a high-level source has told him that terrorist leader Osama bin Laden has died in Iran, where he has been in hiding."
Weldon cited as his source an Iranian exile code-named Ali, telling the paper: "Ali's told me that Osama bin Laden is dead. He died in Iran."
Weldon said he last spoke to Ali three weeks ago. The Iranian exile was a prominent source for his 2005 book, "Countdown to Terror." The book also contained the first mention of the Able Danger data mining operation.
The Pennsylvania Republican has long alleged that bin Laden has been using Iran for sanctuary.
Weldon made the stunning claim during an interview Wednesday with the Philadelphia Inquirer, which reported: "Weldon is making explosive new allegations. He says a high-level source has told him that terrorist leader Osama bin Laden has died in Iran, where he has been in hiding."
Weldon cited as his source an Iranian exile code-named Ali, telling the paper: "Ali's told me that Osama bin Laden is dead. He died in Iran."
Weldon said he last spoke to Ali three weeks ago. The Iranian exile was a prominent source for his 2005 book, "Countdown to Terror." The book also contained the first mention of the Able Danger data mining operation.
The Pennsylvania Republican has long alleged that bin Laden has been using Iran for sanctuary.
Zarqawi a pre-war presence?
Mansfield pointed to another document showing that less than a year after the 9-11 attacks, Saddam's government had identified at least one active al-Qaida cell in his country.
The document, released only in Arabic, is described by the U.S. government as follows:
2002 Iraqi Intelligence Correspondence concerning the presence of al-Qaida Members in Iraq. Correspondence between IRS members on a suspicion, later confirmed, of the presence of an Al-Qaeda terrorist group. Moreover, it includes photos and names.
Mansfield said a translation of the document shows the al-Qaida terrorist Saddam's government had identified was Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who emerged as one of the leading terrorists in post-Saddam Hussein Iraq.
The document, dated Aug. 17, 2002, identifies the al-Qaida member as Ahmed Fadil Nizal Al Khalaylah, the real name of Zarqawi, and includes a series of photos.
A memo within the document shows that as early Aug. 8, 2002, Zarqawi was identified as a member of "Tanzeem al-Qaida," or the "Al-Qaida Organization�.
"This document provides startling documentation that at the very least that Saddam Hussein's government knew that al-Qaida was active and functioning in Iraq," Mansfield said.
She pointed out that although the document goes on to outline activities of the group, there is no indication the Iraqi government took any steps to stop al-Qaida from operating within Iraq, in clear defiance of international law.
Weekly Standard reporter Stephen Hayes, whose reporting has helped move members of Congress to call for release of the documents, nevertheless, has cautioned that they are published with a caveat. The Pentagon website says: "The U.S. Government has made no determination regarding the authenticity of the documents, validity or factual accuracy of the information contained therein, or the quality of any translations, when available."
Newly released document links Saddam to al-Qaida
Indicates regime was cooperating with bin Laden group to strike U.S.
Among the pre-war documents posted online yesterday by the Pentagon is a letter from a member of Saddam's intelligence apparatus indicating al-Qaida and the Taliban had a relationship with the regime prior to the 9-11 attacks.
The letter by the member of Saddam's Al Mukabarat to a superior, dated Sept. 15, 2001, reports a pre-9/11 conversation between an Iraqi intelligence source and a Taliban Afghani consul.
The documents were released yesterday at the direction of National Intelligence Director John Negroponte.
Among the first batch of the thousands expected to be declassified over the next several months, the Al Mukabarat document was translated from the original Arabic by a contributor to the online forum Free Republic.
Laura Mansfield, an independent Middle East analyst, examined the translation for WorldNetDaily and said it appears to be accurate.
The letter indicated Osama bin Laden and the Taliban in Afghanistan were in contact with Iraq � noting a specific visit to Baghdad � and said the U.S. had proof Saddam's regime and al-Qaida were cooperating to hit a target in the U.S.
The document said the U.S. was aware of such a relationship and could strike Iraq and Afghanistan if the attacks proved to be tied to bin Laden and the Taliban.
The translated text is as follows:.
In the Name of God the Merciful
Presidency of the Republic
Intelligence Apparatus
To the respectful Mr. M.A.M
Subject: Information
Our source in Afghanistan No 11002 (for information about him see attachment 1) provided us with information that that Afghani Consul Ahmad Dahestani (for information about him see attachment 2) told him the following:
1. That Osama bin Laden and the Taliban in Afghanistan are in contact with Iraq and it that previously a group from Taliban and Osama Bin Laden group visited Iraq.
2. That America has proof that the government of Iraq and Osama bin Laden group have shown cooperation to hit target within America.
3. That in case it is proven the involvement of Osama bin Laden group and the Taliban in these destructive operations it is possible that American will conduct strikes in Iraq and Afghanistan.
4. That the Afghani Consul heard about the subject of Iraq relation with Osama Bin Laden group during his stay in Iran.
5. In light of this we suggest to write to the Commission of the above information.
Please view� Yours� With regards
Signature:��, Initials : A.M.M, 15/9/2001
Foot note: Immediately send to the Chairman of Commission
Signature:����.
Among the pre-war documents posted online yesterday by the Pentagon is a letter from a member of Saddam's intelligence apparatus indicating al-Qaida and the Taliban had a relationship with the regime prior to the 9-11 attacks.
The letter by the member of Saddam's Al Mukabarat to a superior, dated Sept. 15, 2001, reports a pre-9/11 conversation between an Iraqi intelligence source and a Taliban Afghani consul.
The documents were released yesterday at the direction of National Intelligence Director John Negroponte.
Among the first batch of the thousands expected to be declassified over the next several months, the Al Mukabarat document was translated from the original Arabic by a contributor to the online forum Free Republic.
Laura Mansfield, an independent Middle East analyst, examined the translation for WorldNetDaily and said it appears to be accurate.
The letter indicated Osama bin Laden and the Taliban in Afghanistan were in contact with Iraq � noting a specific visit to Baghdad � and said the U.S. had proof Saddam's regime and al-Qaida were cooperating to hit a target in the U.S.
The document said the U.S. was aware of such a relationship and could strike Iraq and Afghanistan if the attacks proved to be tied to bin Laden and the Taliban.
The translated text is as follows:.
In the Name of God the Merciful
Presidency of the Republic
Intelligence Apparatus
To the respectful Mr. M.A.M
Subject: Information
Our source in Afghanistan No 11002 (for information about him see attachment 1) provided us with information that that Afghani Consul Ahmad Dahestani (for information about him see attachment 2) told him the following:
1. That Osama bin Laden and the Taliban in Afghanistan are in contact with Iraq and it that previously a group from Taliban and Osama Bin Laden group visited Iraq.
2. That America has proof that the government of Iraq and Osama bin Laden group have shown cooperation to hit target within America.
3. That in case it is proven the involvement of Osama bin Laden group and the Taliban in these destructive operations it is possible that American will conduct strikes in Iraq and Afghanistan.
4. That the Afghani Consul heard about the subject of Iraq relation with Osama Bin Laden group during his stay in Iran.
5. In light of this we suggest to write to the Commission of the above information.
Please view� Yours� With regards
Signature:��, Initials : A.M.M, 15/9/2001
Foot note: Immediately send to the Chairman of Commission
Signature:����.
Thursday, March 16, 2006
Media Ignore Saddam's WMD
by Pat Boone
I'm neither prophet nor genius on this stuff, and if I was catching on long before the current news cycles, so were lots of people. The driftwood is finally washing ashore, and soon everybody will be able to see... What happened? How could our side have believed so wrongly that Saddam's Iraq possessed WMD?
We do have enough evidence and detail coming in now to declare mystery solved. The new mystery is why the politicians and the news media have been taking scant notice.
If what's being learned (evident in NewsMax postings and even elsewhere increasingly over the past three full weeks!) isn't news, well, what is? Even rumors about this should have gotten more notice than these facts got.
For the mainstream media, has the definition of news become 'only the bits that fit the ideological agenda'? Are raw facts off the menu?
By now, of course, you've heard of the verified audio tapes revealing Saddam Hussein in his palace meetings discussing his WMD and ways to hide evidence and smuggle them over the Syrian border in the period before the U.S. military came calling in earnest.
What? No! Don't tell me you haven't heard!
Right now, if I needn't say this to you, there are lots of people who do need to hear it from you. The truth is, a poll by the respected TIPP organization just one week ago showed that no more than twenty percent of the public is even aware of the existence of these tapes showing that prewar intelligence about Saddam's WMD was correct all along!
Why haven't we been hearing playback with voice-over translation and maybe some artsy graphics as we did with certain past events in Iraq that had the major media frenzied? My hunch is that the reason relates to there being no kind of Abu Ghraib pornographic element to juice the story.
Then again, those old Nixon White House tapes, and these recent pre-Katrina tapes evidencing too-casual official preparedness, had none either. Yet they got plenty of broadcast repetition. So is this story beyond big media's appetite just because its bad guy Saddam doesn't happen to be anybody they're itching to bring down?
This is of pivotal historic importance (especially if you take seriously the idea that "Bush lied" as some of the media have all but engraved in stone), and what "everybody" knows someday (after enough exposes by the likes of The History Channel) won't help a citizenry who need to know right now. I'm sure I'm not the only one who sees something catastrophically wrong here, and we'd better make some loud noise and make it immediately.
Contacts with elected representatives, rage calls to corporate media switchboards, talk radio, letters to the editor ... all will count for something now.
Facts known are growing more numerous, and from reputable sources, but they now include:
That the United States has uncovered a lot of Saddam Hussein palace audiotapes � now authenticated by FBI methodology � with discussions by familiar voices like Tariq Aziz and others including Saddam himself about what to do with their WMD stockpiles and resources.
That Russian Spetsnaz (special forces) units evidently helped Saddam's military in secreting away�mostly into Syria �W MD that had first been purchased from Russia. Former Deputy Undersecretary of Defense John Shaw recently declared after lots of inquiry that their goal had been to erase any signs of Russian involvement in Saddam's WMD programs. On this point, Retired Air Force Lt. Gen. Thomas McInerney has been sticking by his belief that the Bush administration needs Russia's involvement now in halting Iran's rush toward nuclear armament and so must resist information damning to Russia.
That two different former high-ranking Iraqi military officers �General Georges Sada, the No. 2 ranking officer with the Iraqi Air Force, and Ali Ibrahim, another Iraqi commander � both assert that that Saddam possessed stockpiles of WMD, and transported them out of Iraq by converted 747 passenger jet and by land to be hidden inside Syria.
It's not my point here that I (along with countless others) was right in suspecting that Saddam slipped his WMD evidence across the border into Syria. No, the louder discussion now needs to be about the neglect of this new information in our public discourse. Both the mainstream political leaders and the main stream media are oddly muted or downright silent about the details we're learning.
Why? Who are they hoping to protect? By now, does anyone still imagine that ignoring inconvenient facts can make them go away?
For a long time now, the conventional wisdom has been settled around the idea that Saddam Hussein had no WMD, so President Bush now has only the good riddance of Saddam and the better life of Iraqis left as a way to justify the decision to make war back in 2003. "Bush lied, people died" has thus seemed just a tad less loony as a mantra for copyright by the left.
Amazingly, given what's now being revealed, nobody has yet laid a glove on the conventional wisdom!
It is the mainstream news media's duty to point unblinkingly to the fact of Saddam's WMD being smuggled into Syria. If they in their wisdom prefer�for whatever imaginable combination of reasons�to soft pedal the information, then we "small fry" are duty bound to bellow about it as I do here and now.
In the days ahead, the erroneous conventional wisdom about Saddam's WMD needs to be squarely in our cross hairs. Tell your friends and neighbors. "There were WMD in Iraq!"
I'm neither prophet nor genius on this stuff, and if I was catching on long before the current news cycles, so were lots of people. The driftwood is finally washing ashore, and soon everybody will be able to see... What happened? How could our side have believed so wrongly that Saddam's Iraq possessed WMD?
We do have enough evidence and detail coming in now to declare mystery solved. The new mystery is why the politicians and the news media have been taking scant notice.
If what's being learned (evident in NewsMax postings and even elsewhere increasingly over the past three full weeks!) isn't news, well, what is? Even rumors about this should have gotten more notice than these facts got.
For the mainstream media, has the definition of news become 'only the bits that fit the ideological agenda'? Are raw facts off the menu?
By now, of course, you've heard of the verified audio tapes revealing Saddam Hussein in his palace meetings discussing his WMD and ways to hide evidence and smuggle them over the Syrian border in the period before the U.S. military came calling in earnest.
What? No! Don't tell me you haven't heard!
Right now, if I needn't say this to you, there are lots of people who do need to hear it from you. The truth is, a poll by the respected TIPP organization just one week ago showed that no more than twenty percent of the public is even aware of the existence of these tapes showing that prewar intelligence about Saddam's WMD was correct all along!
Why haven't we been hearing playback with voice-over translation and maybe some artsy graphics as we did with certain past events in Iraq that had the major media frenzied? My hunch is that the reason relates to there being no kind of Abu Ghraib pornographic element to juice the story.
Then again, those old Nixon White House tapes, and these recent pre-Katrina tapes evidencing too-casual official preparedness, had none either. Yet they got plenty of broadcast repetition. So is this story beyond big media's appetite just because its bad guy Saddam doesn't happen to be anybody they're itching to bring down?
This is of pivotal historic importance (especially if you take seriously the idea that "Bush lied" as some of the media have all but engraved in stone), and what "everybody" knows someday (after enough exposes by the likes of The History Channel) won't help a citizenry who need to know right now. I'm sure I'm not the only one who sees something catastrophically wrong here, and we'd better make some loud noise and make it immediately.
Contacts with elected representatives, rage calls to corporate media switchboards, talk radio, letters to the editor ... all will count for something now.
Facts known are growing more numerous, and from reputable sources, but they now include:
That the United States has uncovered a lot of Saddam Hussein palace audiotapes � now authenticated by FBI methodology � with discussions by familiar voices like Tariq Aziz and others including Saddam himself about what to do with their WMD stockpiles and resources.
That Russian Spetsnaz (special forces) units evidently helped Saddam's military in secreting away�mostly into Syria �W MD that had first been purchased from Russia. Former Deputy Undersecretary of Defense John Shaw recently declared after lots of inquiry that their goal had been to erase any signs of Russian involvement in Saddam's WMD programs. On this point, Retired Air Force Lt. Gen. Thomas McInerney has been sticking by his belief that the Bush administration needs Russia's involvement now in halting Iran's rush toward nuclear armament and so must resist information damning to Russia.
That two different former high-ranking Iraqi military officers �General Georges Sada, the No. 2 ranking officer with the Iraqi Air Force, and Ali Ibrahim, another Iraqi commander � both assert that that Saddam possessed stockpiles of WMD, and transported them out of Iraq by converted 747 passenger jet and by land to be hidden inside Syria.
It's not my point here that I (along with countless others) was right in suspecting that Saddam slipped his WMD evidence across the border into Syria. No, the louder discussion now needs to be about the neglect of this new information in our public discourse. Both the mainstream political leaders and the main stream media are oddly muted or downright silent about the details we're learning.
Why? Who are they hoping to protect? By now, does anyone still imagine that ignoring inconvenient facts can make them go away?
For a long time now, the conventional wisdom has been settled around the idea that Saddam Hussein had no WMD, so President Bush now has only the good riddance of Saddam and the better life of Iraqis left as a way to justify the decision to make war back in 2003. "Bush lied, people died" has thus seemed just a tad less loony as a mantra for copyright by the left.
Amazingly, given what's now being revealed, nobody has yet laid a glove on the conventional wisdom!
It is the mainstream news media's duty to point unblinkingly to the fact of Saddam's WMD being smuggled into Syria. If they in their wisdom prefer�for whatever imaginable combination of reasons�to soft pedal the information, then we "small fry" are duty bound to bellow about it as I do here and now.
In the days ahead, the erroneous conventional wisdom about Saddam's WMD needs to be squarely in our cross hairs. Tell your friends and neighbors. "There were WMD in Iraq!"
Bush Reaffirms Pre-Emptive Use of Force
Undaunted by the difficult war in Iraq, President Bush reaffirmed his strike-first policy against terrorists and enemy nations on Thursday and said Iran may pose the biggest challenge for America.
In a 49-page national security report, the president said diplomacy is the U.S. preference in halting the spread of nuclear and other heinous weapons.
"The president believes that we must remember the clearest lesson of Sept. 11: that the United States of America must confront threats before they fully materialize," national security adviser Stephen Hadley said.
"The president's strategy affirms that the doctrine of preemption remains sound and must remain an integral part of our national security strategy," Hadley said. "If necessary, the strategy states, under longstanding principles of self defense, we do not rule out the use of force before attacks occur, even if uncertainty remains as to the time and place of the enemy's attack."
Titled "National Security Strategy," the report summarizes Bush's plan for protecting America and directing U.S. relations with other nations. It is an updated version of a report Bush issued in 2002.
"When the consequences of an attack with weapons of mass destruction are potentially so devastating, we cannot afford to stand idly by as grave dangers materialize. ... The place of pre-emption in our national security strategy remains the same," Bush wrote.
The report had harsh words for Iran. It accused the regime of supporting terrorists, threatening Israel and disrupting democratic reform in Iraq. Bush said diplomacy to halt Tehran's suspected nuclear weapons work must prevail to avert a conflict.
"This diplomatic effort must succeed if confrontation is to be avoided," Bush said.
In a 49-page national security report, the president said diplomacy is the U.S. preference in halting the spread of nuclear and other heinous weapons.
"The president believes that we must remember the clearest lesson of Sept. 11: that the United States of America must confront threats before they fully materialize," national security adviser Stephen Hadley said.
"The president's strategy affirms that the doctrine of preemption remains sound and must remain an integral part of our national security strategy," Hadley said. "If necessary, the strategy states, under longstanding principles of self defense, we do not rule out the use of force before attacks occur, even if uncertainty remains as to the time and place of the enemy's attack."
Titled "National Security Strategy," the report summarizes Bush's plan for protecting America and directing U.S. relations with other nations. It is an updated version of a report Bush issued in 2002.
"When the consequences of an attack with weapons of mass destruction are potentially so devastating, we cannot afford to stand idly by as grave dangers materialize. ... The place of pre-emption in our national security strategy remains the same," Bush wrote.
The report had harsh words for Iran. It accused the regime of supporting terrorists, threatening Israel and disrupting democratic reform in Iraq. Bush said diplomacy to halt Tehran's suspected nuclear weapons work must prevail to avert a conflict.
"This diplomatic effort must succeed if confrontation is to be avoided," Bush said.
'Hanoi Jane' Fonda Honor Withdrawn
The sponsor of an effort to honor Jane Fonda in the state Senate withdrew her resolution Thursday, after a rocky reception from some colleagues and a phone call from the actress' office.
Sen. Steen Miles, D-Decatur, said a representative for Fonda, who is out of the country, asked that she avoid the controversy the effort had stirred.
"This, ladies and gentlemen, should not be occupying our time," said Miles.
The resolution cites the Atlanta resident's work as founder of the Georgia Campaign for Adolescent Pregnancy Prevention, donations to Atlanta-area universities and charities and role as goodwill ambassador with the United Nations.
But the two-time Academy Award winner's political activities protesting the Vietnam War, including a trip to North Vietnam in 1972, have long made her a target of veterans of that war.
The measure, which Miles said is one of several she has pushed honoring Georgia women during Women's History Month, cruised through the Senate on Wednesday before some members realized it was part of a stack of mostly non-controversial resolutions approved because no one objected to them.
Sen. John Douglas, R-Social Circle, later asked that the vote be reconsidered.
"I can think of no living American who is less worthy of this honor," Douglas, chairman of the chamber's Veterans and Military Affairs committee, said Thursday. "She is as guilty of treason as Benedict Arnold and Tokyo Rose."
The Senate voted 48-1 to reconsider the measure - a necessary procedure before Miles could withdraw it. Sen. Michael Meyer von Bremen, D-Albany, cast the only vote against reconsideration.
Miles then withdrew the effort before senators considered the resolution itself.
Sen. Steen Miles, D-Decatur, said a representative for Fonda, who is out of the country, asked that she avoid the controversy the effort had stirred.
"This, ladies and gentlemen, should not be occupying our time," said Miles.
The resolution cites the Atlanta resident's work as founder of the Georgia Campaign for Adolescent Pregnancy Prevention, donations to Atlanta-area universities and charities and role as goodwill ambassador with the United Nations.
But the two-time Academy Award winner's political activities protesting the Vietnam War, including a trip to North Vietnam in 1972, have long made her a target of veterans of that war.
The measure, which Miles said is one of several she has pushed honoring Georgia women during Women's History Month, cruised through the Senate on Wednesday before some members realized it was part of a stack of mostly non-controversial resolutions approved because no one objected to them.
Sen. John Douglas, R-Social Circle, later asked that the vote be reconsidered.
"I can think of no living American who is less worthy of this honor," Douglas, chairman of the chamber's Veterans and Military Affairs committee, said Thursday. "She is as guilty of treason as Benedict Arnold and Tokyo Rose."
The Senate voted 48-1 to reconsider the measure - a necessary procedure before Miles could withdraw it. Sen. Michael Meyer von Bremen, D-Albany, cast the only vote against reconsideration.
Miles then withdrew the effort before senators considered the resolution itself.
Trial Witness Says Al-Qaida Official Lived in California
An FBI informant testified that a top al-Qaida official lived in California's Central Valley in the years before the 2001 terrorist attacks, but the statements were attacked immediately as unreliable.
The testimony came during an ongoing terrorism-related trial involving a father and son from Lodi, a small agricultural town south of Sacramento.
The Government informant, Naseem Khan, testified that he often saw Ayman al-Zawhri, Osama bin Laden's physician and top deputy, attending a mosque in Lodi in 1998 and 1999. Khan was living there at the time.
"Every time I would go to the mosque, (al-Zawahri) would be coming or going," Khan testified, according to a story posted yesterday on The Sacramento Bee newspaper's Web site. "He would quietly come to the mosque and leave."
Prosecutors offered the testimony to show why the FBI began investigating Lodi's Islamic community. The agency recruited Khan in December 2001, and he initially focused his undercover efforts on two Muslim clerics.
The testimony came during an ongoing terrorism-related trial involving a father and son from Lodi, a small agricultural town south of Sacramento.
The Government informant, Naseem Khan, testified that he often saw Ayman al-Zawhri, Osama bin Laden's physician and top deputy, attending a mosque in Lodi in 1998 and 1999. Khan was living there at the time.
"Every time I would go to the mosque, (al-Zawahri) would be coming or going," Khan testified, according to a story posted yesterday on The Sacramento Bee newspaper's Web site. "He would quietly come to the mosque and leave."
Prosecutors offered the testimony to show why the FBI began investigating Lodi's Islamic community. The agency recruited Khan in December 2001, and he initially focused his undercover efforts on two Muslim clerics.
Declassified Iraq Documents Released
The Bush administration Wednesday night released the first declassified documents collected by U.S. intelligence during the Iraq war, showing among other things that Saddam Hussein's regime was monitoring reports that Iraqis and Saudis were heading to Afghanistan after the Sept. 11 attacks to fight U.S. troops.
The documents, the first of thousands expected to be declassified over the next several months, were released via a Pentagon Web site at the direction of National Intelligence Director John Negroponte.
Many were in Arabic - with no English translation - including one the administration said showed that Iraqi intelligence officials suspected al-Qaida members were inside Iraq in 2002.
The Pentagon Web site described that document this way: "2002 Iraqi Intelligence Correspondence concerning the presence of al-Qaida members in Iraq. Correspondence between IRS members on a suspicion, later confirmed, of the presence of an al-Qaida terrorist group. Moreover, it includes photos and names."
The release of the documents, expected to continue for months, is designed to allow lawmakers and the public to investigate what documents from Saddam's regime claimed about such controversial issues as weapons of mass destruction and al-Qaida in the period before the United States invaded Iraq in March 2003.
The Web site cautioned that the U.S. government "has made no determination regarding the authenticity of the documents, validity or factual accuracy of the information contained therein, or the quality of any translations, when available."
A handful of prewar Iraq government documents released Wednesday had been translated into English.
They included one Iraqi intelligence document indicating Saddam's feared Fedayeen paramilitary forces were investigating rumors in the fall of 2001 that as many as 3,000 Iraqis and Saudis were going to fight in Afghanistan after the U.S. invasion.
"In the report on the status of rumors for November of 2001 regarding Fedayeen Saddam in al-Anbar, there is an entry that indicates that there is a group of Iraqi and Saudi Arabians numbering around 3,000 who have gone in an unofficial capacity to Afghanistan and have joined the mujahidin (mujahedeen, or holy warriors) to fight with and aid them in defeating the American Zionist Imperialist attack," the translated document stated.
"After presenting the matter to the Supervisor of Fedayeen Saddam, he ordered that the matter should be looked into for verification of the truth of the rumor," the translation said.
The documents, the first of thousands expected to be declassified over the next several months, were released via a Pentagon Web site at the direction of National Intelligence Director John Negroponte.
Many were in Arabic - with no English translation - including one the administration said showed that Iraqi intelligence officials suspected al-Qaida members were inside Iraq in 2002.
The Pentagon Web site described that document this way: "2002 Iraqi Intelligence Correspondence concerning the presence of al-Qaida members in Iraq. Correspondence between IRS members on a suspicion, later confirmed, of the presence of an al-Qaida terrorist group. Moreover, it includes photos and names."
The release of the documents, expected to continue for months, is designed to allow lawmakers and the public to investigate what documents from Saddam's regime claimed about such controversial issues as weapons of mass destruction and al-Qaida in the period before the United States invaded Iraq in March 2003.
The Web site cautioned that the U.S. government "has made no determination regarding the authenticity of the documents, validity or factual accuracy of the information contained therein, or the quality of any translations, when available."
A handful of prewar Iraq government documents released Wednesday had been translated into English.
They included one Iraqi intelligence document indicating Saddam's feared Fedayeen paramilitary forces were investigating rumors in the fall of 2001 that as many as 3,000 Iraqis and Saudis were going to fight in Afghanistan after the U.S. invasion.
"In the report on the status of rumors for November of 2001 regarding Fedayeen Saddam in al-Anbar, there is an entry that indicates that there is a group of Iraqi and Saudi Arabians numbering around 3,000 who have gone in an unofficial capacity to Afghanistan and have joined the mujahidin (mujahedeen, or holy warriors) to fight with and aid them in defeating the American Zionist Imperialist attack," the translated document stated.
"After presenting the matter to the Supervisor of Fedayeen Saddam, he ordered that the matter should be looked into for verification of the truth of the rumor," the translation said.
Insurgents claim al-Qaida backers purged from province
Insurgent groups in one of Iraq's most violent provinces claim they have purged the region of three-quarters of al Qaeda's supporters after forming an alliance to force out the foreign fighters.
If true, it would mark a significant victory in the fight against Abu Musab Zarqawi, the head of al Qaeda in Iraq, and could partly explain the considerable drop in suicide bombings in Iraq recently.
"We have killed a number of the Arabs including Saudis, Egyptians, Syrians, Kuwaitis and Jordanians," London Daily Telegraph quoted an insurgent representative in the western province of Anbar as saying.
Iraq's Sunni Muslim insurgents had originally welcomed al Qaeda into the country, seeing it as a powerful ally in its fight against the American occupation. But relations became strained when insurgents supported calls for Sunnis to vote in the Dec. 15 election, a move they saw as essential to break the Shi'ite hold on government, but which al Qaeda viewed as a form of collaboration.
It became an outright split when a wave of bombings killed scores of people in Anbar resulting in a spate of tit-for-tat killings.
In reaction, the Sunni tribal leaders formed their own anti-al Qaeda militia, the Anbar Revolutionaries. The group has a core membership of about 100 people, all of whom had relatives killed by al Qaeda. It is led by Ahmed Ftaikhan, a former Saddam-era military intelligence officer, the Telegraph reported.
The group claims to have killed 20 foreign fighters and 33 Iraqi sympathizers. The United States has confirmed that six of Zarqawi's deputies were killed in the city of Ramadi in the province.
The Associated Press reported yesterday that an Anbar-based group has claimed it killed five top members of al Qaeda and associated groups in Ramadi.
The claim was posted on an Islamist Web site and attributed to the Anbar Revenge Brigade, the AP reported.
It listed the names of four suspected al Qaeda leaders. The fifth man, it said, was from Ansar al-Sunnah, a terrorist group affiliated with al Qaeda.
If true, it would mark a significant victory in the fight against Abu Musab Zarqawi, the head of al Qaeda in Iraq, and could partly explain the considerable drop in suicide bombings in Iraq recently.
"We have killed a number of the Arabs including Saudis, Egyptians, Syrians, Kuwaitis and Jordanians," London Daily Telegraph quoted an insurgent representative in the western province of Anbar as saying.
Iraq's Sunni Muslim insurgents had originally welcomed al Qaeda into the country, seeing it as a powerful ally in its fight against the American occupation. But relations became strained when insurgents supported calls for Sunnis to vote in the Dec. 15 election, a move they saw as essential to break the Shi'ite hold on government, but which al Qaeda viewed as a form of collaboration.
It became an outright split when a wave of bombings killed scores of people in Anbar resulting in a spate of tit-for-tat killings.
In reaction, the Sunni tribal leaders formed their own anti-al Qaeda militia, the Anbar Revolutionaries. The group has a core membership of about 100 people, all of whom had relatives killed by al Qaeda. It is led by Ahmed Ftaikhan, a former Saddam-era military intelligence officer, the Telegraph reported.
The group claims to have killed 20 foreign fighters and 33 Iraqi sympathizers. The United States has confirmed that six of Zarqawi's deputies were killed in the city of Ramadi in the province.
The Associated Press reported yesterday that an Anbar-based group has claimed it killed five top members of al Qaeda and associated groups in Ramadi.
The claim was posted on an Islamist Web site and attributed to the Anbar Revenge Brigade, the AP reported.
It listed the names of four suspected al Qaeda leaders. The fifth man, it said, was from Ansar al-Sunnah, a terrorist group affiliated with al Qaeda.
Wednesday, March 15, 2006
Confusing 'Times' with Pre-Iraq War Probe
The Senate Intelligence Committee is close to completing its long investigation of the Bush administration�s prewar claims about the dangers posed by Iraq.
At least that�s what the Los Angeles Times is reporting.
Readers of The New York Times, on the other hand, are told that the committee is locked in a "partisan standoff.�
Three out of five sections of the committee�s report are nearly completed, Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan., the committee�s chairman, said Tuesday. They include a comparison of prewar and postwar assessments of Iraq�s weapons program and a probe of prewar intelligence assessments about postwar Iraq, the Los Angeles paper reports.
The first phase of the Iraq investigation was released in July 2004, but little progress has been reported since then.
The Democrats have accused Roberts of whitewashing the investigation, but he said the Democrats� charges were groundless and explained that progress now depended on how quickly committee members complete their reviews of the three drafts, due in early April.
"I welcome the chairman�s sense of urgency in finally completing Phase II,� said Sen. Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia, the committee�s top Democrat.
In The New York Times� report, however, Rockefeller is quoted as charging that the committee was "under the control of the White House through the chairman.�
Roberts, for his part, wrote in the congressional newspaper The Hill: "I don�t think it�s a stretch to say that many in the minority would prefer to serve on the 'committee against everything the Bush administration does.'�
At least that�s what the Los Angeles Times is reporting.
Readers of The New York Times, on the other hand, are told that the committee is locked in a "partisan standoff.�
Three out of five sections of the committee�s report are nearly completed, Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan., the committee�s chairman, said Tuesday. They include a comparison of prewar and postwar assessments of Iraq�s weapons program and a probe of prewar intelligence assessments about postwar Iraq, the Los Angeles paper reports.
The first phase of the Iraq investigation was released in July 2004, but little progress has been reported since then.
The Democrats have accused Roberts of whitewashing the investigation, but he said the Democrats� charges were groundless and explained that progress now depended on how quickly committee members complete their reviews of the three drafts, due in early April.
"I welcome the chairman�s sense of urgency in finally completing Phase II,� said Sen. Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia, the committee�s top Democrat.
In The New York Times� report, however, Rockefeller is quoted as charging that the committee was "under the control of the White House through the chairman.�
Roberts, for his part, wrote in the congressional newspaper The Hill: "I don�t think it�s a stretch to say that many in the minority would prefer to serve on the 'committee against everything the Bush administration does.'�
In Iran, Dissenting Voices Rise on ' Nuclear Strategy
Just weeks ago, the Iranian government's combative approach toward building a nuclear program produced rare public displays of unity here. Now, while the top leaders remain resolute in their course, cracks are opening both inside and outside the circles of power over the issue.
Some people in powerful positions have begun to insist that the confrontational tactics of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad have been backfiring, making it harder instead of easier for Iran to develop a nuclear program.
This week, the United Nations Security Council is meeting to take up the Iranian nuclear program. That referral and, perhaps more important, Iran's inability so far to win Russia's unequivocal support for its plans have empowered critics of Mr. Ahmadinejad, according to political analysts with close ties to the government.
One senior Iranian official, who asked to remain anonymous because of the delicate nature of the issue, said: "I tell you, if what they were doing was working, we would say, 'Good.' " But, he added: "For 27 years after the revolution, America wanted to get Iran to the Security Council and America failed. In less than six months, Ahmadinejad did that."
One month ago, the same official had said with a laugh that those who thought the hard-line approach was a bad choice were staying silent because it appeared to be succeeding.
As usual in Iran, there are mixed signals, and the government does not always speak with the same voice.
On Tuesday, both Mr. Ahmadinejad and the nation's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, insisted in public speeches that their country would never back down. At the same time, Iranian negotiators arrived in Moscow to resume talks � at Iran's request � just days after Iran had rejected a Russian proposal to resolve the standoff.
Average Iranians do not seem uniformly confident at the prospect of being hit with United Nations sanctions.
From the streets of Tehran to the ski slopes outside the city, some people have begun to joke about the catch phrase of the government � flippantly saying, "Nuclear energy is our irrefutable right."
Reformers, whose political clout as a movement vanished after the last election, have also begun to speak out. And people with close ties to the government said high-ranking clerics had begun to give criticism of Iran's position to Ayatollah Khamenei, which the political elite sees as a seismic jolt.
"There has been no sign that they will back down," said Ahmad Zeidabady, a political analyst and journalist. "At least Mr. Khamenei has said nothing that we can interpret that there will be change in the policies."
But, he said, "There is more criticism as it is becoming more clear that this policy is not working, especially by those who were in the previous negotiating team."
There are also signs that negotiators are starting to back away, however slightly, from a bare-knuckle strategy and that those who had initially opposed the president's style � but remained silent � are beginning to feel vindicated and are starting to speak up.
A former president, Mohammad Khatami, recently publicly criticized the aggressive approach and called a return to his government's strategy of confidence-building with the west.
"The previous team now feels they were vindicated," said Nasser Hadian, a political science professor at Tehran University who is close to many members of the government. "The new team feels they have to justify their actions."
Ayatollah Khamenei, who has the final say, issued a strong defense of Iran's position on Tuesday.
"The Islamic Republic of Iran considers retreat over the nuclear issue, which is the demand of the Iranian people, as breaking the country's independence that will impose huge costs on the Iranian nation," he said.
"Peaceful use of nuclear technology is a must and is necessary for scientific growth in all fields," Ayatollah Khamenei said. "Any kind of retreat will bring a series of pressures and retreats. So, this is an irreversible path and our foreign diplomacy should defend this right courageously."
In a speech in northern Iran, Mr. Ahmadinejad called on the people to "be angry" at the pressure being put on Iran.
"Listen well," the president said to a crowd chanting "die" as they punched the air with their fists. "A nuclear program is our irrefutable right."
When Mr. Ahmadinejad took office, he embraced a decision already made by the top leadership to move toward confrontation with the West about the nuclear program. From the sidelines, Mr. Ahmadinejad's opponents remained largely silent as his political capital grew.
Iran's ability to begin uranium enrichment, and to remove the seals in January at least three nuclear facilities without any immediate consequences, was initially seen as a validation of the get-tough approach.
But one political scientist who speaks regularly with members of the Foreign Ministry said that Iran had hinged much of its strategy on winning Russia's support. The political scientist asked not to be identified so as not to compromise his relationship with people in the government.
The political scientist said some negotiators believed that by being hostile to the West they would be able to entice Moscow into making Tehran its stronghold in the Middle East. "They thought the turn east was the way forward," the person said. "That was a belief and a vision."
The person added, "They thought, 99 percent, Russia would seize the opportunity and back the Iranian leaders."
The route forward remains unclear as Iran tries to regain a sense of momentum.
There is a consensus here that Iran has many cards to play � from its influence with the Shiites in Iraq to its closer ties to Hezbollah in Lebanon, to the prospect of using oil as a weapon. But the uncertainty of appearing before the Security Council, and the prospect of sanctions, has led some here to begin to rethink the wisdom of fighting the West head-on, analysts said.
Professor Hadian said he believed that for Iran to fundamentally change course the situation for Iran would have to first grow much worse.
"There are concerns to keep the situation calm," said Mr. Zeidabady, the journalist. "We have received orders not even to have headlines saying the case has been sent to the Security Council. Although the situation is very critical, they want to pretend that everything is normal. They do not want to show the country is coming under pressure and lose their supporters."
Some people in powerful positions have begun to insist that the confrontational tactics of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad have been backfiring, making it harder instead of easier for Iran to develop a nuclear program.
This week, the United Nations Security Council is meeting to take up the Iranian nuclear program. That referral and, perhaps more important, Iran's inability so far to win Russia's unequivocal support for its plans have empowered critics of Mr. Ahmadinejad, according to political analysts with close ties to the government.
One senior Iranian official, who asked to remain anonymous because of the delicate nature of the issue, said: "I tell you, if what they were doing was working, we would say, 'Good.' " But, he added: "For 27 years after the revolution, America wanted to get Iran to the Security Council and America failed. In less than six months, Ahmadinejad did that."
One month ago, the same official had said with a laugh that those who thought the hard-line approach was a bad choice were staying silent because it appeared to be succeeding.
As usual in Iran, there are mixed signals, and the government does not always speak with the same voice.
On Tuesday, both Mr. Ahmadinejad and the nation's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, insisted in public speeches that their country would never back down. At the same time, Iranian negotiators arrived in Moscow to resume talks � at Iran's request � just days after Iran had rejected a Russian proposal to resolve the standoff.
Average Iranians do not seem uniformly confident at the prospect of being hit with United Nations sanctions.
From the streets of Tehran to the ski slopes outside the city, some people have begun to joke about the catch phrase of the government � flippantly saying, "Nuclear energy is our irrefutable right."
Reformers, whose political clout as a movement vanished after the last election, have also begun to speak out. And people with close ties to the government said high-ranking clerics had begun to give criticism of Iran's position to Ayatollah Khamenei, which the political elite sees as a seismic jolt.
"There has been no sign that they will back down," said Ahmad Zeidabady, a political analyst and journalist. "At least Mr. Khamenei has said nothing that we can interpret that there will be change in the policies."
But, he said, "There is more criticism as it is becoming more clear that this policy is not working, especially by those who were in the previous negotiating team."
There are also signs that negotiators are starting to back away, however slightly, from a bare-knuckle strategy and that those who had initially opposed the president's style � but remained silent � are beginning to feel vindicated and are starting to speak up.
A former president, Mohammad Khatami, recently publicly criticized the aggressive approach and called a return to his government's strategy of confidence-building with the west.
"The previous team now feels they were vindicated," said Nasser Hadian, a political science professor at Tehran University who is close to many members of the government. "The new team feels they have to justify their actions."
Ayatollah Khamenei, who has the final say, issued a strong defense of Iran's position on Tuesday.
"The Islamic Republic of Iran considers retreat over the nuclear issue, which is the demand of the Iranian people, as breaking the country's independence that will impose huge costs on the Iranian nation," he said.
"Peaceful use of nuclear technology is a must and is necessary for scientific growth in all fields," Ayatollah Khamenei said. "Any kind of retreat will bring a series of pressures and retreats. So, this is an irreversible path and our foreign diplomacy should defend this right courageously."
In a speech in northern Iran, Mr. Ahmadinejad called on the people to "be angry" at the pressure being put on Iran.
"Listen well," the president said to a crowd chanting "die" as they punched the air with their fists. "A nuclear program is our irrefutable right."
When Mr. Ahmadinejad took office, he embraced a decision already made by the top leadership to move toward confrontation with the West about the nuclear program. From the sidelines, Mr. Ahmadinejad's opponents remained largely silent as his political capital grew.
Iran's ability to begin uranium enrichment, and to remove the seals in January at least three nuclear facilities without any immediate consequences, was initially seen as a validation of the get-tough approach.
But one political scientist who speaks regularly with members of the Foreign Ministry said that Iran had hinged much of its strategy on winning Russia's support. The political scientist asked not to be identified so as not to compromise his relationship with people in the government.
The political scientist said some negotiators believed that by being hostile to the West they would be able to entice Moscow into making Tehran its stronghold in the Middle East. "They thought the turn east was the way forward," the person said. "That was a belief and a vision."
The person added, "They thought, 99 percent, Russia would seize the opportunity and back the Iranian leaders."
The route forward remains unclear as Iran tries to regain a sense of momentum.
There is a consensus here that Iran has many cards to play � from its influence with the Shiites in Iraq to its closer ties to Hezbollah in Lebanon, to the prospect of using oil as a weapon. But the uncertainty of appearing before the Security Council, and the prospect of sanctions, has led some here to begin to rethink the wisdom of fighting the West head-on, analysts said.
Professor Hadian said he believed that for Iran to fundamentally change course the situation for Iran would have to first grow much worse.
"There are concerns to keep the situation calm," said Mr. Zeidabady, the journalist. "We have received orders not even to have headlines saying the case has been sent to the Security Council. Although the situation is very critical, they want to pretend that everything is normal. They do not want to show the country is coming under pressure and lose their supporters."
Rebellion across Iran
Protesters reportedly burn images of ayatollah, other clerical leaders
Iranian young people staged anti-government protests in Tehran and other cities across the country today, using the annual Persian "fire festival" celebration to burn effigies and pictures of the country's leaders and set cars ablaze belonging to the State Security Forces, according to the London-based independent news agency Iran Focus.
In the southwestern city of Ahwaz protestors set fire to an effigy of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Similar demonstrations were reported in Garmsar, southeast of Tehran, and in the southern city of Rafsanjan.
Youth in Tehran reportedly burned pictures of Khamenei and Islamic revolution founder Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, according to dissidents who reported to Iran Focus.
The independent news service said it received a photo from the protesters who set fire to pictures of leaders that had been placed on lampposts along Tehran's Mirdamad Street.
The demonstrations were part of the traditional "fire festival" celebration, or "Feast of Wednesday," on the last day of the Persian year, in which people jump over bonfires to "drive away evil."
Iran Focus said the demonstrations took place despite a massive crackdown by the country's paramilitary police to prevent people from turning tonight's festival into organized anti-government protests.
Iranian young people staged anti-government protests in Tehran and other cities across the country today, using the annual Persian "fire festival" celebration to burn effigies and pictures of the country's leaders and set cars ablaze belonging to the State Security Forces, according to the London-based independent news agency Iran Focus.
In the southwestern city of Ahwaz protestors set fire to an effigy of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Similar demonstrations were reported in Garmsar, southeast of Tehran, and in the southern city of Rafsanjan.
Youth in Tehran reportedly burned pictures of Khamenei and Islamic revolution founder Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, according to dissidents who reported to Iran Focus.
The independent news service said it received a photo from the protesters who set fire to pictures of leaders that had been placed on lampposts along Tehran's Mirdamad Street.
The demonstrations were part of the traditional "fire festival" celebration, or "Feast of Wednesday," on the last day of the Persian year, in which people jump over bonfires to "drive away evil."
Iran Focus said the demonstrations took place despite a massive crackdown by the country's paramilitary police to prevent people from turning tonight's festival into organized anti-government protests.
U.S., Iraqi Troops Score Successes
March 10, 2006 - Iraqi and U.S. soldiers found and destroy
26 roadside bombs and 17 weapons caches and killed and captured
suspected insurgents in several operations in Iraq in recent days.
- U.S. soldiers from 3rd Battalion, 67th Armor Regiment, 4th Brigade
Combat Team, 4th Infantry Division, captured three suspected terrorists
in New Baghdad, after soldiers found possible bomb-making materials
during a traffic stop and search early March 10.
- Responding to a tip, Iraqi soldiers from 1st Battalion, 2nd Brigade,
6th Iraqi Army Division, found a roadside bomb March 9 Baghdad's
Adhamiyah district. An Iraqi police explosive ordnance disposal team disarmed
the bomb.
- Soldiers from 2nd Battalion, 502nd Infantry Regiment, 2nd Brigade
Combat Team, 101st Airborne Division, responded to a
rocket-propelled-grenade attack south of Baghdad March 9. The soldiers detained three
suspected terrorists who had batteries, wire and detonation cord in their
possession.
- U.S. soldiers from Multinational Division Baghdad's 2nd Battalion,
502nd Infantry, 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 101st Airborne Division, Iraqi
troops from the 4th Brigade, 6th Iraqi Army Division, on a joint patrol
southwest of Baghdad found two weapons caches March 9. The first cache
consisted of 94 60 mm fused mortar rounds and 300 pounds of explosives.
The second cache contained seven 60 mm mortar rounds, one 120 mm mortar
round, and a 14-inch-long missile with tripod. An explosive ordnance
disposal team performed a controlled detonation to eliminate the threat.
- Members of 1st Battalion, 2nd Brigade, 6th Iraqi Army Division
defeated the enemy and captured two suspects after the unit was attacked by
small-arms fire at a checkpoint at about 10 p.m. March 8 in Baghdad's
Adhamiyah district.
In other news, soldiers from the 6th and 9th Iraqi Army Divisions,
supported by Multinational Division Baghdad soldiers, conducted one of the
largest operations of the past six months to gain control of a
terrorist stronghold in that area, officials said.
"Operation Glory Light" was designed to deny terrorists sanctuary and
preempt enemy attacks in the Baghdad area. The week-long operation was
launched March 2 with a joint air assault by U.S. and Iraqi troops into
the Sadr-Yusufiyah area by soldiers of 3rd Battalion, 1st Brigade, 6th
Iraqi Army Division, and 1st Battalion, 502nd Infantry Regiment, 2nd
Brigade Combat Team, 101st Airborne Division soldiers.
Following the air assault, the soldiers were attacked by indirect and
small arms fire. They also discovered a roadside bomb. Soldiers from the
6th and 9th Iraqi Army Divisions then moved into position to clear,
search and secure roads and houses in the town. March 5-6, the 9th
uncovered nine weapons caches, consisting of 131 mortar rounds, nine 50 mm
mortars, 17 rockets, two rocket-propelled-grenade launchers, six AK-47
rifles, two BKC machine guns, and a large amount of bomb-making materials.
In total, U.S. and Iraqi soldiers found 26 roadside bombs, two car
bombs and 15 weapons caches. The operation also involved seven firefights
with the enemy resulting in the detention of 16 suspected terrorists,
two terrorists killed and one wounded, officials said.
(Compiled from Multinational Force Iraq news releases.)
26 roadside bombs and 17 weapons caches and killed and captured
suspected insurgents in several operations in Iraq in recent days.
- U.S. soldiers from 3rd Battalion, 67th Armor Regiment, 4th Brigade
Combat Team, 4th Infantry Division, captured three suspected terrorists
in New Baghdad, after soldiers found possible bomb-making materials
during a traffic stop and search early March 10.
- Responding to a tip, Iraqi soldiers from 1st Battalion, 2nd Brigade,
6th Iraqi Army Division, found a roadside bomb March 9 Baghdad's
Adhamiyah district. An Iraqi police explosive ordnance disposal team disarmed
the bomb.
- Soldiers from 2nd Battalion, 502nd Infantry Regiment, 2nd Brigade
Combat Team, 101st Airborne Division, responded to a
rocket-propelled-grenade attack south of Baghdad March 9. The soldiers detained three
suspected terrorists who had batteries, wire and detonation cord in their
possession.
- U.S. soldiers from Multinational Division Baghdad's 2nd Battalion,
502nd Infantry, 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 101st Airborne Division, Iraqi
troops from the 4th Brigade, 6th Iraqi Army Division, on a joint patrol
southwest of Baghdad found two weapons caches March 9. The first cache
consisted of 94 60 mm fused mortar rounds and 300 pounds of explosives.
The second cache contained seven 60 mm mortar rounds, one 120 mm mortar
round, and a 14-inch-long missile with tripod. An explosive ordnance
disposal team performed a controlled detonation to eliminate the threat.
- Members of 1st Battalion, 2nd Brigade, 6th Iraqi Army Division
defeated the enemy and captured two suspects after the unit was attacked by
small-arms fire at a checkpoint at about 10 p.m. March 8 in Baghdad's
Adhamiyah district.
In other news, soldiers from the 6th and 9th Iraqi Army Divisions,
supported by Multinational Division Baghdad soldiers, conducted one of the
largest operations of the past six months to gain control of a
terrorist stronghold in that area, officials said.
"Operation Glory Light" was designed to deny terrorists sanctuary and
preempt enemy attacks in the Baghdad area. The week-long operation was
launched March 2 with a joint air assault by U.S. and Iraqi troops into
the Sadr-Yusufiyah area by soldiers of 3rd Battalion, 1st Brigade, 6th
Iraqi Army Division, and 1st Battalion, 502nd Infantry Regiment, 2nd
Brigade Combat Team, 101st Airborne Division soldiers.
Following the air assault, the soldiers were attacked by indirect and
small arms fire. They also discovered a roadside bomb. Soldiers from the
6th and 9th Iraqi Army Divisions then moved into position to clear,
search and secure roads and houses in the town. March 5-6, the 9th
uncovered nine weapons caches, consisting of 131 mortar rounds, nine 50 mm
mortars, 17 rockets, two rocket-propelled-grenade launchers, six AK-47
rifles, two BKC machine guns, and a large amount of bomb-making materials.
In total, U.S. and Iraqi soldiers found 26 roadside bombs, two car
bombs and 15 weapons caches. The operation also involved seven firefights
with the enemy resulting in the detention of 16 suspected terrorists,
two terrorists killed and one wounded, officials said.
(Compiled from Multinational Force Iraq news releases.)
Eight Suspects Detained in Iraq; Forces Find 30 Weapons Caches
March 11, 2006 - Iraqi and coalition forces detained eight
suspects today in a joint operation in Baghdad. The men are suspected
of kidnapping, manufacturing car bombs, and financing and supporting
terrorists, officials said.
Four men were detained at the Al Khayr Mosque Complex, identified as a
possible al Qaeda safe haven, and the others were detained from sites
raided during the operation. Iraqi forces led the joint operation and
discovered several rooftop fighting positions, AK-47s and Molotov
cocktails.
In other news, over an 11-day period, U.S. and Iraqi servicemembers
together have discovered 30 hidden weapons caches in Baqubah, Iraq,
officials said yesterday. The U.S. servicemembers are from the 3rd Heavy
Brigade Combat Team, 4th Infantry Division, Task Force Band of Brothers,
and the Iraqi soldiers are with the 1st Battalion, 2nd Brigade, 5th Iraqi
Army Division.
Each discovered cache prevents enemy forces from wounding or killing
civilians and military members, officials said.
Elsewhere, Iraqi army marksmen, supported by soldiers from
Multinational Division Baghdad, killed five terrorists planting roadside bombs
north of Taji, Iraq, March 9. Iraqi and coalition troops recovered two 130
mm artillery rounds and one AK-47 rifle from the terrorists, officials
said.
Additionally, a large car bomb near the Al Yarack hospital detonated
March 9, wounding four civilians and destroying three vehicles in central
Baghdad. Iraqi soldiers from the 2nd Battalion, 5th Brigade, 6th Iraqi
Army Division, along with Iraqi police, secured the area. The wounded
were treated and taken to a nearby medical facility for further
observation.
(Compiled from Multinational Force Iraq news releases.)
suspects today in a joint operation in Baghdad. The men are suspected
of kidnapping, manufacturing car bombs, and financing and supporting
terrorists, officials said.
Four men were detained at the Al Khayr Mosque Complex, identified as a
possible al Qaeda safe haven, and the others were detained from sites
raided during the operation. Iraqi forces led the joint operation and
discovered several rooftop fighting positions, AK-47s and Molotov
cocktails.
In other news, over an 11-day period, U.S. and Iraqi servicemembers
together have discovered 30 hidden weapons caches in Baqubah, Iraq,
officials said yesterday. The U.S. servicemembers are from the 3rd Heavy
Brigade Combat Team, 4th Infantry Division, Task Force Band of Brothers,
and the Iraqi soldiers are with the 1st Battalion, 2nd Brigade, 5th Iraqi
Army Division.
Each discovered cache prevents enemy forces from wounding or killing
civilians and military members, officials said.
Elsewhere, Iraqi army marksmen, supported by soldiers from
Multinational Division Baghdad, killed five terrorists planting roadside bombs
north of Taji, Iraq, March 9. Iraqi and coalition troops recovered two 130
mm artillery rounds and one AK-47 rifle from the terrorists, officials
said.
Additionally, a large car bomb near the Al Yarack hospital detonated
March 9, wounding four civilians and destroying three vehicles in central
Baghdad. Iraqi soldiers from the 2nd Battalion, 5th Brigade, 6th Iraqi
Army Division, along with Iraqi police, secured the area. The wounded
were treated and taken to a nearby medical facility for further
observation.
(Compiled from Multinational Force Iraq news releases.)
U.S. Troops Find Weapons Caches; Iraqi EOD Team Makes Road Safer
U.S. soldiers discovered four weapons
caches in a four-day period in areas outside of Baghdad, officials said.
Soldiers from 1st Battalion, 67th Armor Regiment, 2nd Brigade Combat
Team, 4th Infantry Division, discovered a weapons cache March 8 near the
Euphrates River, south of Baghdad.
Army Pfc. Jason Chambers, of B Company, was occupying an observation
post when he noticed something out of place in the distance. After
carefully inspecting the area, he and another soldier discovered the cache,
consisting of roadside bomb-making materials. Chambers and the soldier
moved away a safe distance, notified their chain of command, and
provided security until help arrived. Soldiers from B Company cordoned off the
area.
Communications equipment, enemy propaganda, pre-made bomb detonation
initiators, and various roadside bomb components were found. EOD
technicians estimated the seizure took 637 roadside bombs from terrorists'
hands.
Elsewhere, soldiers from Multinational Division Baghdad uncovered three
weapons caches in three separate events yesterday.
- Soldiers from 1st Squadron, 61st Cavalry Regiment, 4th Brigade Combat
Team, 101st Airborne Division, received a tip from a local resident
that led them to a terrorist safe house east of Baghdad. The soldiers
captured six suspected terrorists, five AK-47 rifles, 15 AK-47 magazines,
400 AK-47 rounds of ammunition, knives, grenades, 23 propaganda discs,
and various bomb-making equipment.
- Soldiers from 1st Battalion, 22nd Infantry Regiment, 1st Brigade
Combat Team, 4th Infantry Division, discovered a small cache in northern
Baghdad. The cache comprised two 122 mm rounds and four 130 mm artillery
rounds.
- West of Baghdad, soldiers from 2nd Battalion, 22nd Infantry Regiment,
1st Brigade Combat Team, 10th Mountain Division, located a cache
consisting of 35 pounds of C-4 explosives, two grenades, dynamite and
blasting caps.
In other news, an Iraqi explosive ordnance disposal team helped make a
route east of Baghdad safer yesterday by ridding it of a roadside bomb
found by Multinational Division Baghdad soldiers. Soldiers from 1st
Battalion, 61st Cavalry Regiment, 4th Brigade Combat Team, 101st Airborne
Division, found a hollowed-out tree trunk containing wires, a 152 mm
round, and a remote control base while they were on patrol. The disposal
team responded to the scene and secured the round.
(Compiled from Multinational Force Iraq news releases.)
caches in a four-day period in areas outside of Baghdad, officials said.
Soldiers from 1st Battalion, 67th Armor Regiment, 2nd Brigade Combat
Team, 4th Infantry Division, discovered a weapons cache March 8 near the
Euphrates River, south of Baghdad.
Army Pfc. Jason Chambers, of B Company, was occupying an observation
post when he noticed something out of place in the distance. After
carefully inspecting the area, he and another soldier discovered the cache,
consisting of roadside bomb-making materials. Chambers and the soldier
moved away a safe distance, notified their chain of command, and
provided security until help arrived. Soldiers from B Company cordoned off the
area.
Communications equipment, enemy propaganda, pre-made bomb detonation
initiators, and various roadside bomb components were found. EOD
technicians estimated the seizure took 637 roadside bombs from terrorists'
hands.
Elsewhere, soldiers from Multinational Division Baghdad uncovered three
weapons caches in three separate events yesterday.
- Soldiers from 1st Squadron, 61st Cavalry Regiment, 4th Brigade Combat
Team, 101st Airborne Division, received a tip from a local resident
that led them to a terrorist safe house east of Baghdad. The soldiers
captured six suspected terrorists, five AK-47 rifles, 15 AK-47 magazines,
400 AK-47 rounds of ammunition, knives, grenades, 23 propaganda discs,
and various bomb-making equipment.
- Soldiers from 1st Battalion, 22nd Infantry Regiment, 1st Brigade
Combat Team, 4th Infantry Division, discovered a small cache in northern
Baghdad. The cache comprised two 122 mm rounds and four 130 mm artillery
rounds.
- West of Baghdad, soldiers from 2nd Battalion, 22nd Infantry Regiment,
1st Brigade Combat Team, 10th Mountain Division, located a cache
consisting of 35 pounds of C-4 explosives, two grenades, dynamite and
blasting caps.
In other news, an Iraqi explosive ordnance disposal team helped make a
route east of Baghdad safer yesterday by ridding it of a roadside bomb
found by Multinational Division Baghdad soldiers. Soldiers from 1st
Battalion, 61st Cavalry Regiment, 4th Brigade Combat Team, 101st Airborne
Division, found a hollowed-out tree trunk containing wires, a 152 mm
round, and a remote control base while they were on patrol. The disposal
team responded to the scene and secured the round.
(Compiled from Multinational Force Iraq news releases.)
Saddam�s Delusions
�Saddam�s Delusions: The View From the Inside,� by Kevin Woods, James Lacey, and Williamson Murray�the key authors of the USJFCOM study�shows that even as coalition forces massed on Iraq�s borders in early 2003, Saddam remained convinced there would be no invasion�or that even if there were, he and his regime would survive. Saddam believed that the United States was a paper tiger and that France and Russia would protect him; his foremost concerns remained, as always, preventing a coup and keeping his police state in good working order. Ignorant of military history, logistics, and technology, Saddam lived in a bubble due to the atmosphere of fear he had had instilled throughout his civil and military bureaucracies. Because of the characteristics of the Iraqi regime, in short, once the war actually began its ultimate result was a foregone conclusion. Some of the topics the Foreign Affairs article addresses:
Did Iraq have WMD? No�but Saddam wanted others, particular in the region, to think he did, so he maintained a calculated ambiguity on the question. In the last months before the war he realized that it was too dangerous to continue playing this double game and finally decided to cooperate fully with international inspectors. But at that point his track record of repeatedly lying meant that no one believed him:
When it came to weapons of mass destruction (WMD), Saddam attempted to convince one audience that they were gone while simultaneously convincing another that Iraq still had them.� According to Chemical Ali [Ali Hassan al-Majid], Saddam was asked about the weapons during a meeting with members of the Revolutionary Command Council. He replied that Iraq did not have WMD but flatly rejected a suggestion that the regime remove all doubts to the contrary, going on to explain that such a declaration it might encourage the Israelis to attack.
By late 2002, Saddam finally tilted toward trying to persuade the international community that Iraq was cooperating with UN inspectors and that it no longer had WMD programs. As 2002 drew to a close, his regime worked hard to counter anything that might be seen as supporting the coalition�s assertion that WMD still remained in Iraq. Saddam was insistent that Iraq would give full access to UN inspectors �in order not to give President Bush any excuses to start a war.�But after years of purposeful obfuscation, it was difficult to convince anyone that Iraq was not once again being economical with the truth.
What made Saddam so complacent? His belief that the United States did not have the will to take casualties in a serious war and that if necessary France and Russia would keep him safe:
According to [Tariq] Aziz, Saddam�s confidence was firmly rooted in his belief in the nexus between the economic interests of France and Russia and his own strategic goals: �France and Russia each secured millions of dollars worth of trade and service contracts in Iraq, with the implied understanding that their political posture with regard to sanctions on Iraq would be pro-Iraqi. � Moreover, [the French] wanted to prove their importance in the world as members of the Security Council�that they could use their veto to show they still had power.�
What did Saddam care about? First and foremost, preventing a coup. His entire regime was set up to prevent the emergence of any alternate centers of power that could threaten his position. He created an astonishing array of different military and paramilitary forces to maintain domestic control, but made sure to stock them with lackeys and cronies, have them check and balance each other, and have everybody watched carefully at all times. This allowed him to stay in power, but it meant that his armed forces were almost completely ineffective at dealing with actual military operations against a competent foreign enemy:
Before the war, coalition planners generally assumed that the quality of Iraqi military officers improved as one moved up the military hierarchy from the militias to the regular army, to the Republican Guard, and then to the Special Republican Guard. It stood to reason that the commander of the Special Republican Guard�Iraq�s most elite fighting force�would be highly competent.� In fact, after the war [Major General Barzan Abdel Ghafur�s] peers and colleagues were all openly derisive of his abilities. Saddam had selected Barzan, one general noted, because Barzan had several qualities that Saddam held dear. �He was Saddam�s cousin, but he had two other important qualities which made him the best man for the job,� this general noted. �First, he was not intelligent enough to represent a threat to the regime, and second, he was not brave enough to participate in anyone else�s plots.��[Barzan], the man who was to command the last stand of Saddam�s most impressive military forces, spent most of the war hiding.
Every senior commander interviewed after the start of hostilities emphasized the psychological costs of being forced to constantly look over his shoulder. At any one time, each of these commanders had to contend with at least five major [internal] security organizations�. The Second Republican Guard Corps commander described the influence of the internal security environment on a typical corps-level staff meeting: �[all the appropriate military] participants would assemble at the corps headquarters. The corps commander had to ensure then that all the spies were in the room before the meeting began so that there would not be any suspicions in Baghdad as to my purpose�.I spent considerable time finding clever ways to invite even the spies I was not supposed to know about.�
Did Saddam plan the current insurgency? No. He thought the United States would never attack, and was confident that even if it did, the resulting war would follow essentially the same script as the first Gulf War in 1991, without a full-scale invasion all the way to Baghdad. He did preposition a lot of military materiel around the country before the war started, but only to disperse it and keep it safe, so that it would be available either in the later stages of a long and drawn-out campaign against the coalition, or to reestablish control at home afterwards (as he did in 1991, when the Kurds and Shia revolted):
As far as can be determined from the interviews and records reviewed so far, there were no national plans to embark on a guerrilla war in the event of military defeat. Nor did the regime appear to cobble together such plans as its world crumbled around it�. [T]he regime ordered the [prewar] distribution of ammunition [around the country] in order to preserve it for a prolonged war with coalition forces.
How did Saddam think the war was going? Swimmingly. Because everyone knew that Saddam severely punished anybody who told him unpleasant truths, the entire regime was built on lies. During wartime, this meant that junior officers told senior officers that everything was going well, they reported it up the chain of command, and Saddam himself remained a prisoner of his delusions:
As late as the end of March 2003, Saddam apparently still believed the war to be going the way he had expected. If Iraq was not actually winning it, neither was it losing�or at least so it seemed to the dictator. Americans may have listened with amusement to the seemingly obvious fabrications of [�Baghdad Bob�]. But the evidence now clearly shows that Saddam and those around him believed virtually every word issued by their own propaganda machine�. [On March 30] Saddam�s principal secretary directed the Iraqi foreign minister to tell the French and Russian governments that Baghdad would accept only an �unconditional withdrawal� of U.S. forces because �Iraq is now winning and � the United States has sunk in the mud of defeat.� At that moment, U.S. tanks were a hundred miles south of Baghdad, refueling and rearming for the final push.
Full text of �Saddam�s Delusions� is available at www.foreignaffairs.org
Did Iraq have WMD? No�but Saddam wanted others, particular in the region, to think he did, so he maintained a calculated ambiguity on the question. In the last months before the war he realized that it was too dangerous to continue playing this double game and finally decided to cooperate fully with international inspectors. But at that point his track record of repeatedly lying meant that no one believed him:
When it came to weapons of mass destruction (WMD), Saddam attempted to convince one audience that they were gone while simultaneously convincing another that Iraq still had them.� According to Chemical Ali [Ali Hassan al-Majid], Saddam was asked about the weapons during a meeting with members of the Revolutionary Command Council. He replied that Iraq did not have WMD but flatly rejected a suggestion that the regime remove all doubts to the contrary, going on to explain that such a declaration it might encourage the Israelis to attack.
By late 2002, Saddam finally tilted toward trying to persuade the international community that Iraq was cooperating with UN inspectors and that it no longer had WMD programs. As 2002 drew to a close, his regime worked hard to counter anything that might be seen as supporting the coalition�s assertion that WMD still remained in Iraq. Saddam was insistent that Iraq would give full access to UN inspectors �in order not to give President Bush any excuses to start a war.�But after years of purposeful obfuscation, it was difficult to convince anyone that Iraq was not once again being economical with the truth.
What made Saddam so complacent? His belief that the United States did not have the will to take casualties in a serious war and that if necessary France and Russia would keep him safe:
According to [Tariq] Aziz, Saddam�s confidence was firmly rooted in his belief in the nexus between the economic interests of France and Russia and his own strategic goals: �France and Russia each secured millions of dollars worth of trade and service contracts in Iraq, with the implied understanding that their political posture with regard to sanctions on Iraq would be pro-Iraqi. � Moreover, [the French] wanted to prove their importance in the world as members of the Security Council�that they could use their veto to show they still had power.�
What did Saddam care about? First and foremost, preventing a coup. His entire regime was set up to prevent the emergence of any alternate centers of power that could threaten his position. He created an astonishing array of different military and paramilitary forces to maintain domestic control, but made sure to stock them with lackeys and cronies, have them check and balance each other, and have everybody watched carefully at all times. This allowed him to stay in power, but it meant that his armed forces were almost completely ineffective at dealing with actual military operations against a competent foreign enemy:
Before the war, coalition planners generally assumed that the quality of Iraqi military officers improved as one moved up the military hierarchy from the militias to the regular army, to the Republican Guard, and then to the Special Republican Guard. It stood to reason that the commander of the Special Republican Guard�Iraq�s most elite fighting force�would be highly competent.� In fact, after the war [Major General Barzan Abdel Ghafur�s] peers and colleagues were all openly derisive of his abilities. Saddam had selected Barzan, one general noted, because Barzan had several qualities that Saddam held dear. �He was Saddam�s cousin, but he had two other important qualities which made him the best man for the job,� this general noted. �First, he was not intelligent enough to represent a threat to the regime, and second, he was not brave enough to participate in anyone else�s plots.��[Barzan], the man who was to command the last stand of Saddam�s most impressive military forces, spent most of the war hiding.
Every senior commander interviewed after the start of hostilities emphasized the psychological costs of being forced to constantly look over his shoulder. At any one time, each of these commanders had to contend with at least five major [internal] security organizations�. The Second Republican Guard Corps commander described the influence of the internal security environment on a typical corps-level staff meeting: �[all the appropriate military] participants would assemble at the corps headquarters. The corps commander had to ensure then that all the spies were in the room before the meeting began so that there would not be any suspicions in Baghdad as to my purpose�.I spent considerable time finding clever ways to invite even the spies I was not supposed to know about.�
Did Saddam plan the current insurgency? No. He thought the United States would never attack, and was confident that even if it did, the resulting war would follow essentially the same script as the first Gulf War in 1991, without a full-scale invasion all the way to Baghdad. He did preposition a lot of military materiel around the country before the war started, but only to disperse it and keep it safe, so that it would be available either in the later stages of a long and drawn-out campaign against the coalition, or to reestablish control at home afterwards (as he did in 1991, when the Kurds and Shia revolted):
As far as can be determined from the interviews and records reviewed so far, there were no national plans to embark on a guerrilla war in the event of military defeat. Nor did the regime appear to cobble together such plans as its world crumbled around it�. [T]he regime ordered the [prewar] distribution of ammunition [around the country] in order to preserve it for a prolonged war with coalition forces.
How did Saddam think the war was going? Swimmingly. Because everyone knew that Saddam severely punished anybody who told him unpleasant truths, the entire regime was built on lies. During wartime, this meant that junior officers told senior officers that everything was going well, they reported it up the chain of command, and Saddam himself remained a prisoner of his delusions:
As late as the end of March 2003, Saddam apparently still believed the war to be going the way he had expected. If Iraq was not actually winning it, neither was it losing�or at least so it seemed to the dictator. Americans may have listened with amusement to the seemingly obvious fabrications of [�Baghdad Bob�]. But the evidence now clearly shows that Saddam and those around him believed virtually every word issued by their own propaganda machine�. [On March 30] Saddam�s principal secretary directed the Iraqi foreign minister to tell the French and Russian governments that Baghdad would accept only an �unconditional withdrawal� of U.S. forces because �Iraq is now winning and � the United States has sunk in the mud of defeat.� At that moment, U.S. tanks were a hundred miles south of Baghdad, refueling and rearming for the final push.
Full text of �Saddam�s Delusions� is available at www.foreignaffairs.org
Port Security and the Liberal-Left's 5% Myth
by Jim Kouri, CPP
Many news media reports and political leaders such as Senator Chuck
Schumer (D-NY) and Democrat National Committee chairman Howard Dean
frequently state that the Department of Homeland Security inspects only about
5 percent of the over 10 million sea containers entering the country
each year. That 5 percent figure erroneously implies that 95 percent of
sea containers receive no attention or scrutiny at all from customs
agents.
While partisans are creating a frenzy over this issue, the media should
educate the American people about the difference between anti-terrorism
and counter-terrorism operations. Anti-terrorism operations are those
that are defensive in nature and visible security measures, while
counter-terrorism operations are offensive in nature and usually classified.
Counter-terrorism includes developing information, identifying targets
and taking out those targets in covert actions. Anyone who says they
can provide security that is 100% effective is either a liar or a fool.
Truth be told, it is impossible -- IMPOSSIBLE -- to check every
shipping container off-loaded at US seaports. If such an endeavor were
possible, the negative impact on the US -- even the world -- economy would be
staggering. The cost of such an endeavor to consumers would also create
adverse economic conditions in the US. Nevermind the billions of
dollars that would be spent on manpower and resources in order to check every
single container.
The truth -- which is being withheld from Americans -- is that US
Customs and Border Protection screens the data and information for all of
the millions of cargo containers arriving in the US each year; and
closely scrutinizes and examines all shipments identified as high risk. The
CBP has developed a multilayered process to target high-risk shipments
and provides a fast lane for legitimate cargo. In fact, according to the
CBP, examinations of sea containers are a small part of this process.
The CBP goal is not to search five percent, 10 percent, or even 50
percent of the cargo at our nation's borders and ports of entry. US Customs
and Border Protection thoroughly screens and examines 100% of the
shipments that pose a risk to our country and they are doing that today. The
goal is to screen these shipments before they depart for the United
States whenever possible. There are US CBP officers throughout the world
working with foreign governments in screening shipments leaving those
countries
CBP receives electronic bill of lading/manifest data for approximately
98 percent of the sea containers before they arrive at US seaports. CBP
uses this data to first identify the lowest risk cargo being shipped by
long-established and trusted importers.
In the year 2000, nearly half a million individuals and companies
imported products into the US. But 1,000 companies -- the top two-tenths of
one percent -- accounted for 62 percent of the value of all imports.
Some shipments for these companies are still randomly inspected, but the
vast majority is released without physical inspection.
Following 9/11, the CBP and major importers joined forces in the
Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism. C-TPAT is a cooperative effort
to heighten security of the supply chain. Under C-TPAT, the high volume
importers agree to take stringent security steps. In return they
receive far less scrutiny at the border.
CBP has also partnered with the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency
(CCRA) to prescreen sea containers under the Container Security Initiative.
Under this program US and Canada Customs have placed inspectors at one
another's major seaports. Cargo arriving in Halifax, Montreal and
Vancouver destined for the US is prescreened in Canada by targeting teams
consisting of both Canadian and US Customs inspectors.
Conversely, cargo arriving at the seaports of Seattle/Tacoma and Newark
and destined for Canada is prescreened at these US ports by Canadian
and US Customs inspectors. Similar agreements are under discussion with
major European and Asian seaports to ensure safe and secure flow of
commerce around the world.
CBP uses an Automated Targeting System (ATS) to automatically flag the
highest risk shipments. This powerful rules-based computer system sorts
through records stored in a massive database that contains detailed
information on every shipment that has entered the United States over the
past 10 years. ATS screens each ship's electronic manifest, comparing
and analyzing the information with this database.
US Customs and Border Protection has special targeting teams that
further analyze data before the ship arrives at a US port. US Customs
inspectors and analysts use their many years of training and experience to
help identify anomalies in shipping information.
US Customs and Border Protection inspectors use full-truck gamma ray
and x-ray machines to scan the contents of containers. These units can
scan the interior of a full-size 40-foot container in under a minute.
Specially trained dogs check for traces of narcotics and currency.
Inspectors use personal radiation detectors to scan for signs of radioactive
materials. Inspectors also use such special high-tech tools as
densitometers and fiber-optic scopes to peer inside suspicious containers.
Finally, if necessary, containers are opened and unloaded for a
lengthy, more thorough carton-by-carton inspection.
Many news media reports and political leaders such as Senator Chuck
Schumer (D-NY) and Democrat National Committee chairman Howard Dean
frequently state that the Department of Homeland Security inspects only about
5 percent of the over 10 million sea containers entering the country
each year. That 5 percent figure erroneously implies that 95 percent of
sea containers receive no attention or scrutiny at all from customs
agents.
While partisans are creating a frenzy over this issue, the media should
educate the American people about the difference between anti-terrorism
and counter-terrorism operations. Anti-terrorism operations are those
that are defensive in nature and visible security measures, while
counter-terrorism operations are offensive in nature and usually classified.
Counter-terrorism includes developing information, identifying targets
and taking out those targets in covert actions. Anyone who says they
can provide security that is 100% effective is either a liar or a fool.
Truth be told, it is impossible -- IMPOSSIBLE -- to check every
shipping container off-loaded at US seaports. If such an endeavor were
possible, the negative impact on the US -- even the world -- economy would be
staggering. The cost of such an endeavor to consumers would also create
adverse economic conditions in the US. Nevermind the billions of
dollars that would be spent on manpower and resources in order to check every
single container.
The truth -- which is being withheld from Americans -- is that US
Customs and Border Protection screens the data and information for all of
the millions of cargo containers arriving in the US each year; and
closely scrutinizes and examines all shipments identified as high risk. The
CBP has developed a multilayered process to target high-risk shipments
and provides a fast lane for legitimate cargo. In fact, according to the
CBP, examinations of sea containers are a small part of this process.
The CBP goal is not to search five percent, 10 percent, or even 50
percent of the cargo at our nation's borders and ports of entry. US Customs
and Border Protection thoroughly screens and examines 100% of the
shipments that pose a risk to our country and they are doing that today. The
goal is to screen these shipments before they depart for the United
States whenever possible. There are US CBP officers throughout the world
working with foreign governments in screening shipments leaving those
countries
CBP receives electronic bill of lading/manifest data for approximately
98 percent of the sea containers before they arrive at US seaports. CBP
uses this data to first identify the lowest risk cargo being shipped by
long-established and trusted importers.
In the year 2000, nearly half a million individuals and companies
imported products into the US. But 1,000 companies -- the top two-tenths of
one percent -- accounted for 62 percent of the value of all imports.
Some shipments for these companies are still randomly inspected, but the
vast majority is released without physical inspection.
Following 9/11, the CBP and major importers joined forces in the
Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism. C-TPAT is a cooperative effort
to heighten security of the supply chain. Under C-TPAT, the high volume
importers agree to take stringent security steps. In return they
receive far less scrutiny at the border.
CBP has also partnered with the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency
(CCRA) to prescreen sea containers under the Container Security Initiative.
Under this program US and Canada Customs have placed inspectors at one
another's major seaports. Cargo arriving in Halifax, Montreal and
Vancouver destined for the US is prescreened in Canada by targeting teams
consisting of both Canadian and US Customs inspectors.
Conversely, cargo arriving at the seaports of Seattle/Tacoma and Newark
and destined for Canada is prescreened at these US ports by Canadian
and US Customs inspectors. Similar agreements are under discussion with
major European and Asian seaports to ensure safe and secure flow of
commerce around the world.
CBP uses an Automated Targeting System (ATS) to automatically flag the
highest risk shipments. This powerful rules-based computer system sorts
through records stored in a massive database that contains detailed
information on every shipment that has entered the United States over the
past 10 years. ATS screens each ship's electronic manifest, comparing
and analyzing the information with this database.
US Customs and Border Protection has special targeting teams that
further analyze data before the ship arrives at a US port. US Customs
inspectors and analysts use their many years of training and experience to
help identify anomalies in shipping information.
US Customs and Border Protection inspectors use full-truck gamma ray
and x-ray machines to scan the contents of containers. These units can
scan the interior of a full-size 40-foot container in under a minute.
Specially trained dogs check for traces of narcotics and currency.
Inspectors use personal radiation detectors to scan for signs of radioactive
materials. Inspectors also use such special high-tech tools as
densitometers and fiber-optic scopes to peer inside suspicious containers.
Finally, if necessary, containers are opened and unloaded for a
lengthy, more thorough carton-by-carton inspection.
Tuesday, March 14, 2006
NY Times: Saddam's Generals Believed They Had WMD to Repel US
by Jim Kouri, CPP
The New York Times reports that just prior to the United States lead invasion, Iraq's dictator Saddam Hussein informed his top generals that
he had destroyed his stockpiles of chemical weapons three months before
their war plans meeting.
According to the Times report, the generals all believed Iraq had
weapons of mass destruction and were counting on the WMD to repel the
oncoming coalition invaders.
While reporting on this story, Fox News Channel's Bill O'Reilly said he
is not surprised that the CIA and other nations believed Saddam had WMD
since Hussein's own generals believed they had them. He said that this
proves President Bush did not lie and that he believed what Saddam's
own generals believed -- that Iraq possessed stockpiles of WMD.
O'Reilly also rhetorically asked when the Democrat Senators Reid,
Kennedy, Durbin and others would apologize for calling President Bush a liar
about WMD. He also asked when liberals such as Barbara Streisand,
Jessica Lange and other would apologize to Bush for calling him a liar.
According to the Times story, Saddam Hussein wanted the world to
believe he possessed WMD in order to create fear and thwart any war plans by
the US. The revelation that Saddam's generals believed they would use
WMD against American, British and other invading forces explains why the
US military found protective gear had been issued to Iraqi soldiers.
The top commanders wanted their troops protected from the WMD they
intended to use.
"The Iraqi dictator was so secretive and kept information so
compartmentalized that his top military leaders were stunned when he told them
three months before the war that he had no weapons of mass destruction,
and they were demoralized because they had counted on hidden stocks of
poison gas or germ weapons for the nation's defense, " stated the New
York Times on March 12.
The Times story supports the testimony of two former Iraqi generals who
said that prior to the war, Saddam was in possession of WMD.
Contact:jkouri@thenma.org
The New York Times reports that just prior to the United States lead invasion, Iraq's dictator Saddam Hussein informed his top generals that
he had destroyed his stockpiles of chemical weapons three months before
their war plans meeting.
According to the Times report, the generals all believed Iraq had
weapons of mass destruction and were counting on the WMD to repel the
oncoming coalition invaders.
While reporting on this story, Fox News Channel's Bill O'Reilly said he
is not surprised that the CIA and other nations believed Saddam had WMD
since Hussein's own generals believed they had them. He said that this
proves President Bush did not lie and that he believed what Saddam's
own generals believed -- that Iraq possessed stockpiles of WMD.
O'Reilly also rhetorically asked when the Democrat Senators Reid,
Kennedy, Durbin and others would apologize for calling President Bush a liar
about WMD. He also asked when liberals such as Barbara Streisand,
Jessica Lange and other would apologize to Bush for calling him a liar.
According to the Times story, Saddam Hussein wanted the world to
believe he possessed WMD in order to create fear and thwart any war plans by
the US. The revelation that Saddam's generals believed they would use
WMD against American, British and other invading forces explains why the
US military found protective gear had been issued to Iraqi soldiers.
The top commanders wanted their troops protected from the WMD they
intended to use.
"The Iraqi dictator was so secretive and kept information so
compartmentalized that his top military leaders were stunned when he told them
three months before the war that he had no weapons of mass destruction,
and they were demoralized because they had counted on hidden stocks of
poison gas or germ weapons for the nation's defense, " stated the New
York Times on March 12.
The Times story supports the testimony of two former Iraqi generals who
said that prior to the war, Saddam was in possession of WMD.
Contact:jkouri@thenma.org
President Bush Orders Saddam Tapes Release
President Bush has ordered that critical evidence confiscated by U.S. forces after they liberated Iraq be made public - including 3,000 hours of audiotapes of Saddam Hussein chairing his Revolutionary Command Council before the war and 48,000 boxes of records documenting his regime's military activities.
"This stuff ought to be out," Bush told National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley last month, according to the Weekly Standard's Stephen Hayes. "Put this stuff out," the president reiterated.
The president made similar statements during three separate meetings with congressional Republicans and several senior national security officials, the Standard said.
Bush's initial order came on Feb. 16, the day after ABC News broadcast snippets from 12 hours of Saddam audiotapes obtained by FBI translator and former U.N. weapons inspector Bill Tierney.
The recordings released so far strongly suggest that Saddam had hidden his weapons of mass destruction from weapons inspectors - and show the Iraqi dictator discussing previously unknown plans to enrich uranium as recently as 2000.
The Bush directive met with the enthusiastic approval of House Intelligence Committee Chairman Peter Hoekstra.
"This is a bold decision in favor of openness that will go a long way towards improving our understanding of prewar Iraq," Hoekstra told the Standard. "By placing these documents online and allowing the public the opportunity to review them, we can cut years off the time it will take to gain knowledge from this potential treasure trove of information."
Hoestra said that while National Intelligence Director John Negroponte had resisted the document release, his opposition softened in recent weeks.
The top Intelligence Committee Republican said Negroponte approached him during the Gridiron Dinner in Washington on Saturday to inform him that the new Saddam evidence would be made public.
"This stuff ought to be out," Bush told National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley last month, according to the Weekly Standard's Stephen Hayes. "Put this stuff out," the president reiterated.
The president made similar statements during three separate meetings with congressional Republicans and several senior national security officials, the Standard said.
Bush's initial order came on Feb. 16, the day after ABC News broadcast snippets from 12 hours of Saddam audiotapes obtained by FBI translator and former U.N. weapons inspector Bill Tierney.
The recordings released so far strongly suggest that Saddam had hidden his weapons of mass destruction from weapons inspectors - and show the Iraqi dictator discussing previously unknown plans to enrich uranium as recently as 2000.
The Bush directive met with the enthusiastic approval of House Intelligence Committee Chairman Peter Hoekstra.
"This is a bold decision in favor of openness that will go a long way towards improving our understanding of prewar Iraq," Hoekstra told the Standard. "By placing these documents online and allowing the public the opportunity to review them, we can cut years off the time it will take to gain knowledge from this potential treasure trove of information."
Hoestra said that while National Intelligence Director John Negroponte had resisted the document release, his opposition softened in recent weeks.
The top Intelligence Committee Republican said Negroponte approached him during the Gridiron Dinner in Washington on Saturday to inform him that the new Saddam evidence would be made public.
Bush sets target for transition in Iraq
President Bush vowed for the first time yesterday to turn over most of Iraq to newly trained Iraqi troops by the end of this year, setting a specific benchmark as he kicked off a fresh drive to reassure Americans alarmed by the recent burst of sectarian violence.
Bush, who until now has resisted concrete timelines as the Iraq war dragged on longer than he expected, outlined the target in the first of a series of speeches intended to lay out his strategy for victory. While acknowledging grim developments on the ground, Bush declared "real progress" in standing up Iraqi forces capable of defending their nation.
"As more capable Iraqi police and soldiers come on line, they will assume responsibility for more territory with the goal of having the Iraqis control more territory than the coalition by the end of 2006," he said in a speech to the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. "And as Iraqis take over more territory, this frees American and coalition forces to concentrate on training and on hunting down high-value targets like the terrorist [Abu Musab al-] Zarqawi and his associates."
The president made no commitments about withdrawing U.S. troops, but he repeated his general formula that Americans could come home as Iraqis eventually take over the fight. He also used the speech to urge Iraqis to form a unity government three months after parliamentary elections, and he accused Iran of providing explosives to Shiite militias attacking U.S. forces in Iraq.
Bush, who until now has resisted concrete timelines as the Iraq war dragged on longer than he expected, outlined the target in the first of a series of speeches intended to lay out his strategy for victory. While acknowledging grim developments on the ground, Bush declared "real progress" in standing up Iraqi forces capable of defending their nation.
"As more capable Iraqi police and soldiers come on line, they will assume responsibility for more territory with the goal of having the Iraqis control more territory than the coalition by the end of 2006," he said in a speech to the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. "And as Iraqis take over more territory, this frees American and coalition forces to concentrate on training and on hunting down high-value targets like the terrorist [Abu Musab al-] Zarqawi and his associates."
The president made no commitments about withdrawing U.S. troops, but he repeated his general formula that Americans could come home as Iraqis eventually take over the fight. He also used the speech to urge Iraqis to form a unity government three months after parliamentary elections, and he accused Iran of providing explosives to Shiite militias attacking U.S. forces in Iraq.
Dubai keeping Miami port operations
Despite its promise last week to turn over management of U.S. port operations to an American entity, Dubai Ports World has no immediate plans to sell its interests at Miami's seaport, according to a private e-mail reported by the Associated Press.
The e-mail today to business associates from Robert Scavone, a vice president for DP World's U.S. subsidiary, said even if the company were to sell its Miami operations amid fierce opposition in Congress, "that would probably take a while."
Last week, with Congress moving to overrule the White House, Dubai Ports World announced it would give up its management stake in a deal to operate some of the terminals at U.S. ports and transfer it to an American company.
"Because of the strong relationship between the United Arab Emirates and the United States and to preserve that relationship, DP World has decided to transfer fully the U.S. operation of P&O Operations North America to a United States entity," said DP World's chief operating officer, Edward H. Bilkey.
But the government-owned Dubai Ports World has declined to clarify its statement or specify the timing of any sale, prompting critics in Congress to threaten intervention, AP said.
In an interview, Scavone told AP he wrote the e-mail to reassure officials at the Port of Miami Terminal Operating Co. � which is half-owned by a DP World subsidiary � that uncertainty surrounding the deal would not affect its work there.
"As for the 'pending situation,' I myself am not aware of anything about it that would alter the ownership of POMTOC, so unless one or both of our esteemed partners have separately advised you that they plan to sell their interests, you should assume for your own purposes of managing the company that ownership of POMTOC is not going to change," Scavone wrote.
"And even if they do plan to sell, that would probably take a while," he wrote.
The e-mail today to business associates from Robert Scavone, a vice president for DP World's U.S. subsidiary, said even if the company were to sell its Miami operations amid fierce opposition in Congress, "that would probably take a while."
Last week, with Congress moving to overrule the White House, Dubai Ports World announced it would give up its management stake in a deal to operate some of the terminals at U.S. ports and transfer it to an American company.
"Because of the strong relationship between the United Arab Emirates and the United States and to preserve that relationship, DP World has decided to transfer fully the U.S. operation of P&O Operations North America to a United States entity," said DP World's chief operating officer, Edward H. Bilkey.
But the government-owned Dubai Ports World has declined to clarify its statement or specify the timing of any sale, prompting critics in Congress to threaten intervention, AP said.
In an interview, Scavone told AP he wrote the e-mail to reassure officials at the Port of Miami Terminal Operating Co. � which is half-owned by a DP World subsidiary � that uncertainty surrounding the deal would not affect its work there.
"As for the 'pending situation,' I myself am not aware of anything about it that would alter the ownership of POMTOC, so unless one or both of our esteemed partners have separately advised you that they plan to sell their interests, you should assume for your own purposes of managing the company that ownership of POMTOC is not going to change," Scavone wrote.
"And even if they do plan to sell, that would probably take a while," he wrote.
Al-Sadr Blames Al-Qaida for Baghdad Attack
Radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, whose directives can send thousands of heavily armed militiamen spilling into the streets, called for calm Monday and blamed al-Qaida in Iraq for the carnage in Baghdad's Sadr City slum that killed at least 48 people.
Speaking at a news conference in the Shiite holy city of Najaf, south of Baghdad, al-Sadr also sought to blunt rage against Iraq's minority Sunni Muslim community in a bid to prevent the country from slipping into full-blown civil war.
"We are not weak, but we don't want to be dragged to a civil war. So, I will keep calling for calm," the firebrand cleric said.
By blaming Jordanian-born Abu Musab al-Zarqawi's al-Qaida fighters for the attack, al-Sadr lifted the onus of blame from the mainstream Sunni community.
Speaking at a news conference in the Shiite holy city of Najaf, south of Baghdad, al-Sadr also sought to blunt rage against Iraq's minority Sunni Muslim community in a bid to prevent the country from slipping into full-blown civil war.
"We are not weak, but we don't want to be dragged to a civil war. So, I will keep calling for calm," the firebrand cleric said.
By blaming Jordanian-born Abu Musab al-Zarqawi's al-Qaida fighters for the attack, al-Sadr lifted the onus of blame from the mainstream Sunni community.
'Moment of Silence' Challenged in Texas
A couple has filed a complaint in federal court charging that the state's mandated moment of silence in public schools is unconstitutional.
David and Shannon Croft say a teacher told one of their children to keep quiet because the minute is a "time for prayer."
The complaint filed last week names Gov. Rick Perry and the Carrollton-Farmers Branch Independent School District in the Dallas suburbs.
David Croft, 37, said there is no secular reason for a moment of silence.
"This is just a ruse to get prayer in school without calling it prayer in school," he said.
The law, passed in 2003, allows children to "reflect, pray, meditate or engage in any other silent activities" for one minute after the American and Texas pledges at the beginning of each school day.
Perry spokeswoman Kathy Walt said children can use the minute as they wish.
"If the student wants to review mentally to get ready for a test or pray silently, they can," Walt said. "The law does not set it up specifically as a moment for prayer."
A school district spokeswoman declined comment because the district had not received a copy of the complaint.
David and Shannon Croft say a teacher told one of their children to keep quiet because the minute is a "time for prayer."
The complaint filed last week names Gov. Rick Perry and the Carrollton-Farmers Branch Independent School District in the Dallas suburbs.
David Croft, 37, said there is no secular reason for a moment of silence.
"This is just a ruse to get prayer in school without calling it prayer in school," he said.
The law, passed in 2003, allows children to "reflect, pray, meditate or engage in any other silent activities" for one minute after the American and Texas pledges at the beginning of each school day.
Perry spokeswoman Kathy Walt said children can use the minute as they wish.
"If the student wants to review mentally to get ready for a test or pray silently, they can," Walt said. "The law does not set it up specifically as a moment for prayer."
A school district spokeswoman declined comment because the district had not received a copy of the complaint.
Monday, March 13, 2006
Hecklers harass families of US soldiers killed in Iraq
Five women sang and danced as they held up signs saying "thank God for dead soldiers" at the funeral of an army sergeant who was killed by an Iraqi bomb.
For them, it was the perfect way to spread God's word: America was being punished for tolerating homosexuality.
For the hundreds of flag waving bikers who came to this small town in Michigan Saturday to shield the soldier's family, it was disgusting.
"That could be me in that church," said Jackie Sandler whose son Keith is currently serving his second tour of duty in Iraq.
The fringe group of fire and brimstone Baptists from Kansas has been courting controversy for more than 15 years, traveling the country with their hateful signs and slogans.
The Westboro Baptist Church first gained national notoriety when they picked the funeral of Matthew Shepard, a Wyoming student who was murdered in 1998 for being gay.
They have since picketed the funerals of Frank Sinatra and Bill Clinton's mother, celebrated the terrorist attacks of September 11 as an act of God's wrath, and have even targeted Santa Claus and the Ku Klux Klan.
But it was the callousness and cruelty of harassing the grieving families of soldiers at dozens of funerals across the country that has sparked a grassroots movement of bikers determined to drown out the jeers and taunts.
In Flushing, Michigan they turned their leather-clad backs to the five women and held flags and tarps up so that mourners walking past wouldn't see the signs saying "God hates fags," "fag vets" and "America is doomed."
Many found it hard to hide their anger when Margie Phelps, the daughter of Westboro's founder, called out "All this for little old us? Oh, you shouldn't have. I feel so special," before she started singing "the Pope, the Pope, the Pope is on fire. He don't get no water let the heretics burn" in front of a Catholic church.
The glee with which the women hurled insults made John Franklin, 64, sick to his stomach.
"This guy's family deserves a peaceful funeral. It's not right what they're doing," said Franklin, who fought in the Vietnam War. "The only reason they're able to walk around like that is because the veterans fought for their freedom."
While Westboro's congregation remains stable at around 100 people - most of whom are the extended family of founder Fred Phelps - the ranks of the Patriot Guard Riders has swelled to more than 16,000 in just a few months.
Four states have enacted legislation barring protests at funerals and a dozen more are in the process of introducing bans. But it is unlikely that the bans will stand up to legal challenge.
The group is careful to protest in public spaces and is well aware of its constitutional rights - 11 of Phelps' 13 children are lawyers.
For them, it was the perfect way to spread God's word: America was being punished for tolerating homosexuality.
For the hundreds of flag waving bikers who came to this small town in Michigan Saturday to shield the soldier's family, it was disgusting.
"That could be me in that church," said Jackie Sandler whose son Keith is currently serving his second tour of duty in Iraq.
The fringe group of fire and brimstone Baptists from Kansas has been courting controversy for more than 15 years, traveling the country with their hateful signs and slogans.
The Westboro Baptist Church first gained national notoriety when they picked the funeral of Matthew Shepard, a Wyoming student who was murdered in 1998 for being gay.
They have since picketed the funerals of Frank Sinatra and Bill Clinton's mother, celebrated the terrorist attacks of September 11 as an act of God's wrath, and have even targeted Santa Claus and the Ku Klux Klan.
But it was the callousness and cruelty of harassing the grieving families of soldiers at dozens of funerals across the country that has sparked a grassroots movement of bikers determined to drown out the jeers and taunts.
In Flushing, Michigan they turned their leather-clad backs to the five women and held flags and tarps up so that mourners walking past wouldn't see the signs saying "God hates fags," "fag vets" and "America is doomed."
Many found it hard to hide their anger when Margie Phelps, the daughter of Westboro's founder, called out "All this for little old us? Oh, you shouldn't have. I feel so special," before she started singing "the Pope, the Pope, the Pope is on fire. He don't get no water let the heretics burn" in front of a Catholic church.
The glee with which the women hurled insults made John Franklin, 64, sick to his stomach.
"This guy's family deserves a peaceful funeral. It's not right what they're doing," said Franklin, who fought in the Vietnam War. "The only reason they're able to walk around like that is because the veterans fought for their freedom."
While Westboro's congregation remains stable at around 100 people - most of whom are the extended family of founder Fred Phelps - the ranks of the Patriot Guard Riders has swelled to more than 16,000 in just a few months.
Four states have enacted legislation barring protests at funerals and a dozen more are in the process of introducing bans. But it is unlikely that the bans will stand up to legal challenge.
The group is careful to protest in public spaces and is well aware of its constitutional rights - 11 of Phelps' 13 children are lawyers.
New Al-Qaida Threat to Homeland, Arizona
A chilling new warning posted on Islamic Web sites threatens "devastating� terror operations in the U.S., and suggests the targets could be states "far away from Washington� � such as Arizona.
The message was posted by the Global Islamic Media Front (GIMF) on March 10 on behalf of "Rakan Ben Williams,� who calls himself an "Al-Qaida under cover soldier, USA [sic].�
According to memri.org, the Web site of the Washington, D.C.-based Middle East Media Research Institute, it is not clear who is behind the posting, and a previous statement from the GIMF on the Internet maintained that GIMF is not affiliated with Al-Qaida.
The new "last warning to the American People� appeared in Arabic and English.
According to a posting on memri.org, the English version declares that after the upcoming attacks, "top intellects, strategists, and analysts will be totally clueless as to how to explain what occurred.
"Let me also inform you that we are talking about two operations, not one. The scale of one of them is larger than the other but both are large and significant. However, we will start with the smaller, and temporarily put the larger on hold to see how serious the Americans are about their lives. Should you value your own life and security, accept Muslims� demands, but if you shall prefer death [over giving in to Muslims� demands].
"Then, we, by the grace of Allah, are the best in bringing it [death] to your door steps.
"Do not put your hopes on Bush and his clan, they are incapable of protecting you, and if they think they are, let them foil or stop the two upcoming operations, and punish those who are responsible for them. But if they could not identify and foil the devastating events coming your way, you must ask yourselves: How long will we continue allowing ourselves to be slaughtered with full advance knowledge of our fate?�
Here are other excerpts from the "Rakan Ben Williams� posting: "I will not give any more clues; this is enough as a wake up call. Perhaps the American people will start thinking about the magnitude of the danger that is coming their way.
"O� you helpless Americans, especially those living in States far away from Washington, D.C.! Your country is comprised of many States that should not have anything to do with Muslims. Take the State of Arizona for example; what does this State have to do with killing Muslims in Palestine, Afghanistan, and Iraq? What interest of theirs [is] serving, helping, and siding with the Jews and Israel? ...
"Why do you bring death and destruction to your homes and lives in an apparent sacrifice for a handful of dishonest men and women? ...
"The sad thing is that the pain will not stop at the loss of your loved ones in Iraq or Afghanistan, but the pain will even be greater when death and destruction comes once more to you in your own homes, by the grace of Allah.
"The operations are ready to go, we are just waiting for orders from the commander in chief, Osama Ben Laden ...
"You will be brought to your knees, but not until you lose more loved ones and experience significant destruction ...
"This is the last warning you will receive from us.
Consequently, if you ignore it, we regret to inform you that we will carry out devastating operations against the States of America and we will not show mercy whatsoever.�
The message was posted by the Global Islamic Media Front (GIMF) on March 10 on behalf of "Rakan Ben Williams,� who calls himself an "Al-Qaida under cover soldier, USA [sic].�
According to memri.org, the Web site of the Washington, D.C.-based Middle East Media Research Institute, it is not clear who is behind the posting, and a previous statement from the GIMF on the Internet maintained that GIMF is not affiliated with Al-Qaida.
The new "last warning to the American People� appeared in Arabic and English.
According to a posting on memri.org, the English version declares that after the upcoming attacks, "top intellects, strategists, and analysts will be totally clueless as to how to explain what occurred.
"Let me also inform you that we are talking about two operations, not one. The scale of one of them is larger than the other but both are large and significant. However, we will start with the smaller, and temporarily put the larger on hold to see how serious the Americans are about their lives. Should you value your own life and security, accept Muslims� demands, but if you shall prefer death [over giving in to Muslims� demands].
"Then, we, by the grace of Allah, are the best in bringing it [death] to your door steps.
"Do not put your hopes on Bush and his clan, they are incapable of protecting you, and if they think they are, let them foil or stop the two upcoming operations, and punish those who are responsible for them. But if they could not identify and foil the devastating events coming your way, you must ask yourselves: How long will we continue allowing ourselves to be slaughtered with full advance knowledge of our fate?�
Here are other excerpts from the "Rakan Ben Williams� posting: "I will not give any more clues; this is enough as a wake up call. Perhaps the American people will start thinking about the magnitude of the danger that is coming their way.
"O� you helpless Americans, especially those living in States far away from Washington, D.C.! Your country is comprised of many States that should not have anything to do with Muslims. Take the State of Arizona for example; what does this State have to do with killing Muslims in Palestine, Afghanistan, and Iraq? What interest of theirs [is] serving, helping, and siding with the Jews and Israel? ...
"Why do you bring death and destruction to your homes and lives in an apparent sacrifice for a handful of dishonest men and women? ...
"The sad thing is that the pain will not stop at the loss of your loved ones in Iraq or Afghanistan, but the pain will even be greater when death and destruction comes once more to you in your own homes, by the grace of Allah.
"The operations are ready to go, we are just waiting for orders from the commander in chief, Osama Ben Laden ...
"You will be brought to your knees, but not until you lose more loved ones and experience significant destruction ...
"This is the last warning you will receive from us.
Consequently, if you ignore it, we regret to inform you that we will carry out devastating operations against the States of America and we will not show mercy whatsoever.�
Iraqi Group Say They've Killed 5 al-Qaida Terrorists
An armed group created with government backing to drive al-Qaida fighters out of a restive Iraqi province claimed Monday that it had killed five top members of the terror group.
The claim came in a statement posted on an Islamic Web site and attributed to the Anbar Revenge Brigade, recently formed by tribal leaders of the western Anbar province.
"Your brothers, heroes of the Revenge Brigade, carried out the killing of five important elements of al-Qaida group, avenging the death of the sons of our Ramadi city," the statement said.
It listed the names of four alleged al-Qaida leaders. The fifth man, it said, was from Ansar al-Sunnah, a terrorist group affiliated with al-Qaida.
The claim was the first Internet posting by the Anbar Revenge Brigades and could not be independently verified.
The claim came in a statement posted on an Islamic Web site and attributed to the Anbar Revenge Brigade, recently formed by tribal leaders of the western Anbar province.
"Your brothers, heroes of the Revenge Brigade, carried out the killing of five important elements of al-Qaida group, avenging the death of the sons of our Ramadi city," the statement said.
It listed the names of four alleged al-Qaida leaders. The fifth man, it said, was from Ansar al-Sunnah, a terrorist group affiliated with al-Qaida.
The claim was the first Internet posting by the Anbar Revenge Brigades and could not be independently verified.
New Iraqi Documents Show Bush Didn't 'Lie'
Newly translated Iraqi documents from Saddam Hussein's regime show that President Bush was factually accurate when he told the nation in his 2003 State of the Union Address that Iraq had recently sought uranium from Africa.
Bush's 16-word statement had formed the basis for the claim adopted by administration critics that "Bush lied" about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs.
But according to the Washington Times today, an unnamed U.S. official reports that "newly translated Iraqi documents . . . tell of Saddam seeking uranium from Africa in the mid-1990s."
The documents also speak of burying prohibited missiles, a government official familiar with the declassification process told the paper.
In his January 2003 address, Bush told the nation:
"The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."
The statement prompted former ambassador to Iraq, Joseph Wilson to complain to the New York Times seven months later: "I have little choice but to conclude that some of the intelligence related to Iraq's nuclear weapons program was twisted to exaggerate the Iraqi threat."
The new documents strongly suggest, however, that Wilson was wrong - and that the "Bush lied" mantra adopted by most Democrats since Wilson first made his complaint has been based on bogus information.
Confirmation on African uranium claim offered by Iraqi documents may be just the tip of the iceberg.
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Peter Hoekstra told the Washington Times that about 500 hours of Saddam audiotape is still being translated and analyzed by the U.S.
And U.S. Central Command has 48,000 boxes of Iraqi documents, of which the military has delivered just 68 pages to his committee so far.
"I don't want to overstate what is in the documents," Hoekstra told the paper. "[But] I certainly want to get them out because I think people are going to find them very interesting."
Bush's 16-word statement had formed the basis for the claim adopted by administration critics that "Bush lied" about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs.
But according to the Washington Times today, an unnamed U.S. official reports that "newly translated Iraqi documents . . . tell of Saddam seeking uranium from Africa in the mid-1990s."
The documents also speak of burying prohibited missiles, a government official familiar with the declassification process told the paper.
In his January 2003 address, Bush told the nation:
"The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."
The statement prompted former ambassador to Iraq, Joseph Wilson to complain to the New York Times seven months later: "I have little choice but to conclude that some of the intelligence related to Iraq's nuclear weapons program was twisted to exaggerate the Iraqi threat."
The new documents strongly suggest, however, that Wilson was wrong - and that the "Bush lied" mantra adopted by most Democrats since Wilson first made his complaint has been based on bogus information.
Confirmation on African uranium claim offered by Iraqi documents may be just the tip of the iceberg.
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Peter Hoekstra told the Washington Times that about 500 hours of Saddam audiotape is still being translated and analyzed by the U.S.
And U.S. Central Command has 48,000 boxes of Iraqi documents, of which the military has delivered just 68 pages to his committee so far.
"I don't want to overstate what is in the documents," Hoekstra told the paper. "[But] I certainly want to get them out because I think people are going to find them very interesting."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)