Wednesday, October 13, 2004

Carlyle Group, Iraq Reparations and Conflicts of Interests

Naomi Klein has an article in The Nation describing how James Baker, the man placed in charge of convincing the world to forgive Iraq's debts by the Bush administration, is also part of the Carlyle group which has basically made a deal with Kuwait to make sure that Iraq pays its debts.

When President Bush appointed former Secretary of State James Baker III as his envoy on Iraq's debt on December 5, 2003, he called Baker's job "a noble mission." At the time, there was widespread concern about whether Baker's extensive business dealings in the Middle East would compromise that mission, which is to meet with heads of state and persuade them to forgive the debts owed to them by Iraq. Of particular concern was his relationship with merchant bank and defense contractor the Carlyle Group, where Baker is senior counselor and an equity partner with an estimated $180 million stake.

Until now, there has been no concrete evidence that Baker's loyalties are split, or that his power as Special Presidential Envoy--an unpaid position--has been used to benefit any of his corporate clients or employers. But according to documents obtained by The Nation, that is precisely what has happened. Carlyle has sought to secure an extraordinary $1 billion investment from the Kuwaiti government, with Baker's influence as debt envoy being used as a crucial lever.

The full article is available by clicking on comments.

Posted by: Phil at 5 : 43 PM | Comments? (31) | LINK

Tuesday, October 05, 2004

How the White House Embraced Disputed Arms Intelligence

The NYTimes ran a long story describing the Administration's handling of the intelligence regarding Aluminium Tubes in Iraq. Condoleeza Rice said on CNN: "We do know that there have been shipments...into Iraq, for instance, of aluminum tubes that really are only suited...for nuclear weapons programs." There, in fact, were differing assessments of what the Tubes were for, and this article catalogs them:

Far from "group think," American nuclear and intelligence experts argued bitterly over the tubes. A "holy war" is how one Congressional investigator described it. But if the opinions of the nuclear experts were seemingly disregarded at every turn, an overwhelming momentum gathered behind the C.I.A. assessment. It was a momentum built on a pattern of haste, secrecy, ambiguity, bureaucratic maneuver and a persistent failure in the Bush administration and among both Republicans and Democrats in Congress to ask hard questions.

Precisely how knowledge of the intelligence dispute traveled through the upper reaches of the administration is unclear. Ms. Rice knew about the debate before her Sept. 2002 CNN appearance, but only learned of the alternative rocket theory of the tubes soon afterward, according to two senior administration officials. President Bush learned of the debate at roughly the same time, a senior administration official said...

The tubes episode is a case study of the intersection between the politics of pre-emption and the inherent ambiguity of intelligence. The tubes represented a scientific puzzle and rival camps of experts clashed over the tiniest technical details in secure rooms in Washington, London and Vienna. The stakes were high, and they knew it.

The complete text of the article is available here for the time being, and is also copied in the extended entry of this post, which can be accessed by clicking on comments. Definitely worth the (rather long) read.

Posted by: Phil at 2 : 30 AM | Comments? (31) | LINK

Wednesday, September 29, 2004

Baghdad Year Zero

Naomi Klein has a good article in the September Harper's discussing the "reconstruction" efforts and ideology in Iraq.

Iraq was going to change all that. In one place on Earth, the theory would finally be put into practice in its most perfect and uncompromised form. A country of 25 million would not be rebuilt as it was before the war; it would be erased, disappeared. In its place would spring forth a gleaming showroom for laissez-faire economics, a utopia such as the world had never seen. Every policy that liberates multinational corporations to pursue their quest for profit would be put into place: a shrunken state, a flexible workforce, open borders, minimal taxes, no tariffs, no ownership restrictions. The people of Iraq would, of course, have to endure some short-term pain: assets, previously owned by the state, would have to be given up to create new opportunities for growth and investment. Jobs would have to be lost and, as foreign products flooded across the border, local businesses and family farms would, unfortunately, be unable to compete. But to the authors of this plan, these would be small prices to pay for the economic boom that would surely explode once the proper conditions were in place, a boom so powerful the country would practically rebuild itself.

The fact that the boom never came and Iraq continues to tremble under explosions of a very different sort should never be blamed on the absence of a plan. Rather, the blame rests with the plan itself, and the extraordinarily violent ideology upon which it is based.

The full article is also included in the extended section if you click on comments.

Posted by: Phil at 2 : 01 PM | Comments? (19) | LINK

Monday, July 26, 2004

Scott Ritter Article

Scott Ritter, the former UN weapons inspector was one of the few people who pretty much got the situation in Iraq correct before the war. He had long explained how he believed that Saddam no longer had significant WMD stockpiles. He now has an article linked on zmag with his outlook on the present situation:

Regardless of the number of troops the United States puts on the ground or how long they stay there, Allawi's government is doomed to fail. The more it fails, the more it will have to rely on the United States to prop it up. The more the United States props up Allawi, the more discredited he will become in the eyes of the Iraqi people - all of which creates yet more opportunities for the Iraqi resistance to exploit.

We will suffer a decade-long nightmare that will lead to the deaths of thousands more Americans and tens of thousands of Iraqis. We will witness the creation of a viable and dangerous anti-American movement in Iraq that will one day watch as American troops unilaterally withdraw from Iraq every bit as ignominiously as Israel did from Lebanon.

The calculus is quite simple: the sooner we bring our forces home, the weaker this movement will be. And, of course, the obverse is true: the longer we stay, the stronger and more enduring this byproduct of Bush's elective war on Iraq will be.

There is no elegant solution to our Iraqi debacle. It is no longer a question of winning but rather of mitigating defeat.

Given his prescience before this whole thing started, his current views probably deserve some attention.

Posted by: Phil at 12 : 50 AM | Comments? (57) | LINK

Monday, July 19, 2004

Allawi shot inmates in cold blood, say witnesses

Some alleged bio info on the US's pick to head Iraq:

Iyad Allawi, the new Prime Minister of Iraq, pulled a pistol and executed as many as six suspected insurgents at a Baghdad police station, just days before Washington handed control of the country to his interim government, according to two people who allege they witnessed the killings.

They say the prisoners - handcuffed and blindfolded - were lined up against a wall in a courtyard adjacent to the maximum-security cell block in which they were held at the Al-Amariyah security centre, in the city's south-western suburbs.

They say Dr Allawi told onlookers the victims had each killed as many as 50 Iraqis and they "deserved worse than death".The Prime Minister's office has denied the entirety of the witness accounts in a written statement to the Herald, saying Dr Allawi had never visited the centre and he did not carry a gun.

But the informants told the Herald that Dr Allawi shot each young man in the head as about a dozen Iraqi policemen and four Americans from the Prime Minister's personal security team watched in stunned silence.

The complete article from the Sidney Morning Herald is archived here on Z-Net.

Posted by: Phil at 2 : 44 PM | Comments? (670) | LINK

Saturday, July 17, 2004

Academics Targeted in Iraq

Robert Fisk has an article on zmag.org describing how numerous academics have been targeted in Iraq.

Since the Anglo-American invasion, they have murdered at least 13 academics at the University of Baghdad alone and countless others across Iraq. History professors, deans of college and Arabic tutors have all fallen victim to the war on learning. Only six weeks ago - virtually unreported, of course - the female dean of the college of law in Mosul was beheaded in her bed, along with her husband.

It makes the chaos hit home even more.

Posted by: Phil at 10 : 21 PM | Comments? (75) | LINK

Monday, July 12, 2004

2 Scapegoats for the Price of One?

This just in: The Senate's Abu Ghraib truth commission claims pervert private acted alone, in Al Qaeda(tm) plot to discredit private contractors!!

Woman in Iraq Abuse Case Appears in Court
Judge Orders Aug. 3 Hearing to Decide if Woman in Iraq Abuse Case Will Face Court-Martial

The Associated Press

FORT BRAGG, N.C. July 12, 2004 � Pfc. Lynndie England, the Army reservist at the center of the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse case, was read her rights in military court Monday and given a date of Aug. 3 for a hearing on whether she is to face a court-martial.
England appeared in court for the five-minute hearing, held before Col. Denise Arn, who is the judge or "investigating officer," in military parlance presiding over her case.

Dressed in a jungle-green camouflage Army uniform and visibly pregnant, England answered "Yes, ma'am" when Arn asked if she understood her rights and "No, ma'am" when she was asked if she had any questions.

more: http://abcnews.go.com/wire/US/ap20040712_1015.html

Posted by: Gustavo at 9 : 56 PM | Comments? (139) | LINK

Saturday, July 03, 2004

What the Handover Means

from www.democracynow.org on June 28, 2004:

U.S. Conducts Surprise "Handover" of Power in Iraq
In a surprise move the U.S. held a secret ceremony in Baghdad earlier today to mark the so-called handover of power to the new unelected government of Iraq. The handover was scheduled to take place on Wednesday June 30 but the US moved up the date with hopes that it would pre-empt further attacks by members of the Iraq resistance to coincide with the handover. The ceremony was attended by a handful of Iraqi and coalition officials including the head of the Coalition Provision Authority Paul Bremer and Iyad Allawi who was selected to be Iraq's prime minister. Allawi is a former Baathist who has ties to the CIA and Saudi intelligence. Iraq's newly selected president Ghazi Yawer was also present. Over the past week, scores of Iraqis have died in attacks that were apparently staged to disrupt the handover of power. President Bush was in Turkey at the NATO summit while Bremer presided over the ceremony. Bremer left the country on a US Air Force C-130 at about 12:30 p.m. Baghdad time shortly after the ceremony ended.

Questions Remain Over How Much Power Was Handed Over
Technically the handover of power ends the 14-month occupation of Iraq, but many questions remain as to how much power the US has actually handed over. The U.S. will keep 130,000 troops on the ground. US Ambassador John Negroponte will head up the largest embassy in the world. The new government will be barred from amending the interim constitution that was drawn up by the US and the US-appointed Iraqi Governing Council.

Before Leaving Bremer Puts Into Place Numerous Edicts
The US has put in place numerous laws to protect US forces and contractors. On Saturday Bremer signed an edict that gave US soldiers and military contractors immunity from Iraqi laws even after the handover of power.

The Washington Post reports Bremer has also issued a series of other edicts that could affect how Iraq will be governed for years. He has appointed at least two dozen Iraqis to government jobs with five-year terms including Iraq's new national security advisor and national intelligence chief. This means the US will have high-placed allies in government regardless of who wins the upcoming Iraqi elections.

Bremer has also formed a seven-member election commission that will have the power to disqualify political parties and candidates -- barring them from participating in any upcoming elections.

Allawi Hints Martial Law May Soon Be In Order
It has been widely reported Allawi is considering imposing martial law or issuing special emergency laws. Allawi said during the ceremony, "The security situation of our country now lies in our hands. We are going to announce the new measures today and tomorrow." Over the weekend Allawi also announced the U.S. would soon handover Saddam Hussein to the new Iraqi government.

Posted by: Amee at 4 : 00 PM | Comments? (0) | LINK

Monday, June 21, 2004

Lawyer for Abu Ghraib Accused Claims "Israeli Methods" Used Under Pressure from Commanders and CIA

Judge Declares Abu Ghraib a Crime Scene

By FISNIK ABRASHI and JIM KRANE
The Associated Press
Monday, June 21, 2004; 5:11 AM

BAGHDAD, Iraq - A military judge on Monday declared the notorious Abu Ghraib prison a crime scene that cannot be demolished as President Bush had offered. He also refused to move the trial of a soldier accused of abusing inmates.

...

Bergrin told reporters during a recess that he thought the hearing had gone well. He said lower-echelon troops at the prison had worked under intense pressure from their commanders and the CIA and had used nudity and other "Israeli methods" considered effective against Arab prisoners.

Posted by: Gustavo at 6 : 46 AM | Comments? (166) | LINK

Saturday, June 12, 2004

Interrogators hired for Iraq despite ban

http://www.salon.com/news/wire/2004/06/12/interrogators_iraqi/index.html

Interrogators hired for Iraq despite ban

- - - - - - - - - - - -
By Matt Kelley

June 12, 2004 | The Army hired private interrogators to work in Iraq and Afghanistan despite the service's policy of barring contractors from military intelligence jobs such as interrogating prisoners.

A policy memo from December 2000 says letting private workers gather military intelligence would jeopardize national security.

Posted by: Gustavo at 3 : 52 PM | Comments? (154) | LINK

Wednesday, June 09, 2004

Birdcage Liner: CIA Officials Suffer Memory Loss

FORMER CIA OFFICIALS CAN'T QUITE REMEMBER WHETHER THEY CONDUCTED A TERRORIST CAMPAIGN IN SADDAM'S IRAQ, BIN LADEN "DOES NOT RECALL" PLANNING 9-11.

Posted by: Gustavo at 1 : 08 AM | Comments? (203) | LINK

Wednesday, June 09, 2004

Shaken, Stirred, and On the Rocks - Soldiers Fall Ill, Commit Suicide After Downing Military's Drug Cocktail

...Pogany believes that his behavior may have been affected by the drug cocktail that the military gives its soldiers, especially the antimalarial drug Lariam (also known by its generic name, mefloquine hydrochloride, which is what Pogany took). Lariam or its generic equivalent has been associated with the suicides of, or murders committed by, several Ft. Bragg soldiers; and several advocacy groups, as well as Congress, are investigating claims that adverse drug reactions are much more common than the military has acknowledged. "They give soldiers a little anthrax, a little yellow fever, Larium, smallpox, Ambien to help you sleep, antidepressants, whatever," Pogany says. "Any normal person would say, 'Hold on there, Hoss.'" ...

(click on the word 'drug' in the heading for full article)

Posted by: Gustavo at 12 : 17 AM | Comments? (260) | LINK

Tuesday, June 08, 2004

CHALABI MAKES OFF WITH SADDAM'S SCANDALOUS FILES

So, some of this is finally starting to make sense.

Chalabi got his hands on Saddam's old files, which included, among other proof of the corruption of western politicians and corporations and wait a second--this is pretty powerful smelling stuff we're talking about.... think of it--we've seen the grainy quicktime video of Rumsfeld's meeting with pal Saddam back in the 80's, right? I wonder how that conversation went? I bet Saddam had a tape--in fact I'll bet Saddam had Rummy bugged 24/7!

So that's just one example. Saddam did a brisk business in the UN Oil-for-Food trade for a while too. All sorts of people would be implicated by that stash. When Kofi Annan is giving his speech at Harvard's commencement, I wonder if he wouldn't mind touching on the subject?

So let's get back to the real issue--who has the blackmail on our leaders? This information, still secret (though we can piece together a lot of it), could be on the open market, in the hands of a foreign government, or in a vault in Crawford! What kind of monumental whatever this is IS this??

So anyway, do click on comments for the real article on this bone-chilling development...

Posted by: Gustavo at 1 : 10 AM | Comments? (221) | LINK

Thursday, June 03, 2004

Judith Miller: Gross Incompetent or Co-conspirator?

Sorry, but since this woman has a Pulitzer under her belt, I can only conclude that she is guilty of conspiring with a felonious exile leader to overthrow a foreign government. The Times' editor at the time, Howell Raines, was forced to resign over the actions of a petty plagiarist, right? Uh huh. I guess "Some lying black kid got him canned" sounds better than "He helped some fanatics pull off the scam of the millenium."

The following is an excerpt from this article.

"By late summer of 2002, then, Miller had developed a circle of sources who claimed to have firsthand knowledge of Saddam's continued push for prohibited weapons. And as she and Gordon made the rounds of administration officials, they picked up a dramatic bit of information about Iraq's nuclear program. During the previous fourteen months, they were told, Iraq had tried to import thousands of high-strength aluminum tubes. The tubes had been intercepted, and specialists sent to examine them had concluded from their diameter, thickness, and other technical properties that they had only one possible use�as casings for rotors in centrifuges to enrich uranium, a key step in producing an atomic bomb.

This was dramatic news. If true, it would represent a rare piece of concrete evidence for Saddam's nuclear aspirations. And, on Sunday, September 8, 2002, the Times (then under the editorship of Howell Raines) led with the story, written by Miller and Gordon. "US Says Hussein Intensifies Quest for A-Bomb Parts," the headline said. The lead was emphatic:

More than a decade after Saddam Hussein agreed to give up weapons of mass destruction, Iraq has stepped up its quest for nuclear weapons and has embarked on a worldwide hunt for materials to make an atomic bomb, Bush administration officials said today.
Gordon and Miller went on to cite the officials' claims about the aluminum tubes and their intended use in centrifuges to enrich uranium.

The article contained several caveats, noting, for instance, that Iraq "is not on the verge of fielding a nuclear weapon." Overall, though, the language was stark:

Mr. Hussein's dogged insistence on pursuing his nuclear ambitions, along with what defectors described in interviews as Iraq's push to improve and expand Baghdad's chemical and biological arsenals, have brought Iraq and the United States to the brink of war.
Administration "hard-liners," Gordon and Miller added, worried that "the first sign of a 'smoking gun'... may be a mushroom cloud." The piece concluded with a section on Iraq's chemical and biological weapons, relying heavily on the information supplied by Ahmed al-Shemri. "All of Iraq is one large storage facility," he was quoted as saying.

Gordon and Miller argue that the information about the aluminum tubes was not a leak. "The administration wasn't really ready to make its case publicly at the time," Gordon told me. "Somebody mentioned to me this tubes thing. It took a lot to check it out." Perhaps so, but administration officials were clearly delighted with the story. On that morning's talk shows, Dick Cheney, Colin Powell, Donald Rumsfeld, and Condoleezza Rice all referred to the information in the Times story. "It's now public," Cheney said on Meet the Press, that Saddam Hussein "has been seeking to acquire" the "kind of tubes" needed to build a centrifuge to produce highly enriched uranium, "which is what you have to have in order to build a bomb." On CNN's Late Edition, Rice said the tubes "are only really suited for nuclear weapons programs, centrifuge programs." She added: "We don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud"�a phrase lifted directly from the Times.

In the days that followed, the story of the tubes received wide publicity. And, on September 12, 2002, President Bush himself, in a speech to the UN General Assembly, said that "Iraq has made several attempts to buy high-strength aluminum tubes used to enrich uranium for a nuclear weapon"� evidence, he added, of its "continued appetite" for such a weapon. In the following months, the tubes would become a key prop in the administration's case for war, and the Times played a critical part in legitimizing it.

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/16922

Posted by: Gustavo at 10 : 53 PM | Comments? (117) | LINK

Tuesday, June 01, 2004

Judith Miller and the New York Times

Is it me or has following the New York Times of late been a lot like watching the stock market bubble burst? Maybe it's more like the fall of Enron. In any case, here is what the NYT ombudsman (appointed after the Jayson Blair scandal broke) had to say about the NYT serving as master propagandist for the war hawks.

Of course he makes sure to say that this all shouldn't be pinned on Judith Miller, citing "institutional failures" (i.e. everyone take a little blame and no one gets blamed...) What a joke! Whether the Times is guilty of failing institutionally or, dare we say it, RACKETEERING, the point is not who exactly was responsible (there are probably several people to blame,) but what it has cost in lost lives and the immeasurable suffering of tens of thousands of people. Conspiracy? Maybe, maybe not, but the story of this war is a tangled web indeed.

Here is some worthwhile reading on Judith Miller

So, isn't there a law against publishing lies to push your country into a criminal war? Or are there still those who are willing to accept ignorance as an excuse for anything and everything under the sun? If so, I propose we enact legislation to stiffen the penalties for being deceived, maybe then people won't be so gullible.

And more on contractors (i.e. people in a war zone who are above any law)--this time they were involved in the Chalabi "raid".

Posted by: Gustavo at 8 : 32 PM | Comments? (148) | LINK

Friday, May 21, 2004

The Coup in Iraq - Act I - Scene i - Baghdad

Curtain opens on the mess of Chalabi's raided apartment.

Enter Ahmad Chalabi

Chalabi: Curses! The Americans have turned on me!

[collective gasp from audience]

Goon A: Whaddaya gonna do now Boss?

Chalabi: [gazing up at a great light emanating from a hole in his ceiling, or from God] I must rally my people against the Americans so as to gain legitimacy from my apparent indepent action! This will brand me as an "Iraq for the Iraqis" kind of guy in time for the elections, which the Americans will be very cross to see me win!!

Goon B: Boss, now that the Americans don't like you, I don't think you should sell them all of our national industries.

Chalabi: [smacking Goon A with one hand and poking Goon B in the eyes with the other] Since when did I pay you two to think?? All this scamming has made me tired. Goon A, please read me something by that Tom Friedman fellow.

Goon A: You bet boss. How about the one about the golden straitjacket?

Chalabi: That would be lovely, thank you.

Chalabi snuggles up with his Don Rumsfeld stuffed action fighter as Goon A begins to read, interrupted every few minutes by the sounds of exploding children and the like.

Goon A: ...Maria and Carlos were very hungry indeed, but they had no money, so they went to the free market, where everything was free...

Chalabi:it's...magical... [gurgles sweetly]

Posted by: Gustavo at 12 : 42 AM | Comments? (50) | LINK

Thursday, May 20, 2004

Shakir Tawfiq Talk

Prof. Shakir Tawfiq from Iraq(I think Baghdad University) spoke at the Physics department today. He is a professor of Electrical Engineering.

Its an interesting perspective. The perspective of the highest echelons of the elite in Iraq. He was educated at 'Baghdad College' did his PhD in Sussex. Under Saddam, he was a very senior scientist in Iraq, high up in the nuclear programme for example. He knows all the weapons inspectors by name ... every time they came to Iraq, they would visit him. He said that his house was in the most upscale locality in Baghdad and right next to the Iraqi intelligence services.

This programme to get Iraqi scientists was started by Richard Wilson-- of the Physics department -- months ago and most of them didnt get visas. Dr. Tawfiq waited for a month in Amman, till he finally got his visa and was able to come here. He said that he was very happy to be here, that coming to Harvard was a dream.

I had a long conversation with him in the afternoon attended his talk and then spoke to him later over 'refreshments'. He is working with the occupation is head of several committes and even described a conversation he had with Bremer.

He said little new in the talk. To summarize it, I would say that he 'played to the gallery' .. perhaps he believed that Americans here wanted to hear positive things about the occupation and he said everything good that could be said about it.

However, when I asked him in person and pressed him on the issue he said: "If anybody has 1% of patriotism he will not accept the occupation. Its an occupation whatever you call it". His public talk did not quite gel in with this statement.

1)He pointed out that Iraq had *no* weapons of mass-destruction. As he says, if they wanted to start a programme, they would need me ... so I know.

2)Nevertheless, he believes that war was positive and moreover is optimistic about the occupation. He made several puzzling statements in the talk. eg.

a)After speaking of the delterious effect the sanctions had on the Iraqi economy and calling them murderous, he said: "but they worked. If you wanted to impose sanctions, this is the way it should have been done. It stopped all WMD production".

b)He said the Americans made initial mistakes in Fallujah because they dont understand Iraqi culture but their 'negotiated solution' to the problem is the way he thinks they should deal with all problems in Iraq. [Editors Note: especially puzzling. Bomb with AC130's, shoot ambulances,
turn the football field into a mass grave, then turn over command to a Saddam general, then have the Pentagon rescind that decision and turn over command to another Saddam general??]

c)While speaking of the history of Saddam, he *never* mentioned sustained American support for him.

d)He believes many practical mistakes were made ... eg the Iraqi army was disbanded. Nevertheless he remains 'very optimistic'.

e)He said people in America should cooperate with the occupation and can help -- for example -- by helping revise curricula in Iraq.

Perhaps this is an overly negative picture of what he said. He is quite a pleasant person ... not a republican or a hawk or anything.

I'm afraid I cant quite convey the tone of the talk accurately. In many ways, he is nationalistic but in the US, he is extremely restrained with criticism of the US. I suppose, this is similar to the way I behaved when I first came here. As I said before, he 'played to the gallery'.

Posted by: Suvrat at 10 : 22 PM | Comments? (117) | LINK

Thursday, May 13, 2004

Contracted Interrogators Linked to Israel?

From Counterpunch.org:

May 10, 2004
The Israeli Torture Template
Rape, Feces and Urine-Dipped Cloth Sacks

By WAYNE MADSEN

...

In fact, the Taguba report does reference the presence of non-U.S. and non-Iraqi interrogators at Abu Ghraib. The report states, "In general, US civilian contract personnel (Titan Corporation, CACI, etc), third country nationals, and local contractors do not appear to be properly supervised within the detention facility at Abu Ghraib."

The Pentagon is clearly concerned about the outing of the Taguba report and its references to CACI, Titan, and third country nationals, which could permanently damage U.S. relations with Arab and Islamic nations. The Pentagon's angst may explain why the Taguba report is classified Secret No Foreign Dissemination.

...

During his testimony before the Senate Armed Service Committee, Rumsfeld was pressed upon by Senator John McCain about the role of the private contractors in the interrogations and abuse. McCain asked Rumsfeld four pertinent questions, ". . . who was in charge? What agency or private contractor was in charge of the interrogations? Did they have authority over the guards? And what were the instructions that they gave to the guards?"

When Rumsfeld had problems answering McCain's question, Lt. Gen. Lance Smith, the Deputy Commander of the U.S. Central Command, said there were 37 contract interrogators used in Abu Ghraib. The two named contractors, CACI and Titan, have close ties to the Israeli military and technology communities. Last January 14, after Provost Marshal General of the Army, Major General Donald Ryder, had already uncovered abuse at Abu Ghraib, CACI's President and CEO, Dr. J.P. (Jack) London was receiving the Jerusalem Fund of Aish HaTorah's Albert Einstein Technology award at the Jerusalem City Hall, with right-wing Likud politician Israeli Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz and ultra-Orthodox United Torah Judaism party Jerusalem Mayor Uri Lupolianski in attendance. Oddly, CACI waited until February 2 to publicly announce the award in a press release. CACI has also received grants from U.S.-Israeli bi-national foundations.

Posted by: Gustavo at 7 : 55 AM | Comments? (259) | LINK

Wednesday, May 12, 2004

Interview With CIA Vet Re: Torture

From Salon.com:

"The place is broken"

CIA veteran Bob Baer says torture was forbidden when he worked for the agency. "Now contractors are sent out to torture people to death and then hide it."

By Mary Jacoby

...

What about the contractors who are allegedly involved in the abuse and at least one of the deaths. Does that surprise you? Did the CIA ever use contractors to conduct interrogations while you were at the agency?

No. The only contractors we had were people who fixed your computers and stuff. You never used a contractor to run agents or sources, interrogate, or anything like that. And there were all sorts of reasons for that. How can you trust somebody you haven't vetted? I mean, an outside company -- who knows who these people are that they're hiring? [emphasis added. -G]

Posted by: Gustavo at 7 : 24 AM | Comments? (120) | LINK

Tuesday, May 11, 2004

Iraq Interrogator's Blog Disappears From Internet

A bizarre story from the Washington Post adds to intrigue surrounding "Abuse Scandal".

Media's Most Wanted Today Is Blogger From Iraqi Prison

By Ellen McCarthy
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, May 5, 2004; Page E01

For three months, Joe Ryan kept an online diary detailing his sometime dangerous, sometimes tiresome work at Abu Ghraib, the prison outside of Baghdad.

The dispatches, titled "Joe Ryan Iraq Diary" and hosted on the Web site of KSTP-AM, a St. Paul, Minn., radio station, caused little stir -- until reports of prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib. The radio station says Ryan works for CACI International Inc., a U.S. military contractor based in Arlington.

By yesterday, journalists and other Internet readers clamoring for a glimpse inside the world of contract interrogators at Abu Ghraib were trying to find the Web log, also known as a blog, only to learn that it was gone -- with only the last month of entries saved, or "cached," by an Internet search engine.

"I'll not be sending my diary out any more because of the allegations being spread through the media. I will keep my diary and maybe someday the truth of what is and has gone on here will surface," Ryan wrote in an e-mail, according to Ethan McIntosh, a producer at KSTP.

[Click here for entire article. You might be asked to register with washingtonpost.com.]

Posted by: Gustavo at 6 : 52 PM | Comments? (123) | LINK

Tuesday, May 11, 2004

News roundup

From www.democracynow.org:

Red Cross: Iraq Jail Abuse Not Isolated
A report by the International Committee for the Red Cross from February largely contradicts the Pentagon's charge that the recently revealed incidents of prison abuse in Iraq were isolated events. The 24-page Red Cross report said military intelligence officers "confirmed that it was part of the military intelligence process... to use inhumane and degrading treatment, including physical and psychological coercion." This included "beatings with hard objects including pistols and rifles" and prisoners being "paraded naked outside cells... sometimes hooded or with women's underwear over their heads."

Report: Up to 90% Iraqi Detainees Innocent
The Red Cross also reported that military intelligence officers estimated that 70 to 90 percent of the 43,000 Iraqis detained over the past year were innocent. The Red Cross study also concluded that the U.S. prison practices were prohibited under International Humanitarian Law.

Iraq Lawyers Criticize Judicial System
In addition to the prison conditions, Iraqi attorneys have criticized the entire judicial process the U.S. has set up in Iraq. Malik Dohan, the president of the Iraqi Bar Association told the Washington Post, "The system is not fair at all. Aside from the question of torture, people are being held for long periods of time without having their cases reviewed by a court."

Amnesty: UK Soldiers Killed 37 Iraqi Civilians
In Britain, Amnesty International issued a report Monday listing 37 cases where British troops killed Iraqi civilians under disputed circumstances.

Bush: Rumsfeld Doing "A Superb Job"
President Bush on Monday again praised Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld saying, "You are doing a superb job. You are a strong secretary of defense. And our nation owes you a debt of gratitude." Bush made the comments at the Pentagon while surrounded by much of his national security team, Rumsfeld, Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of State Gen. Colin Powell and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chair Gen. Richard Myers. Meanwhile 275,000 people have now signed an online petition calling on Rumsfeld to resign.

Sadrists Take Control of East Baghdad
In Iraq, the U.S. has lost control of portions of East Baghdad known as Sadr City where followers of the Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr have seized control and set up checkpoints to help keep out the U.S. This comes as Sadr is calling on his supporters to increase their resistance to the US occupation. A chief aide of Sadr told Reuters, "We have now entered a second phase of resistance. Our policy now is to extend the state of resistance and to move it to all of Iraq because of the occupiers' military escalation and crossing of all red lines in the holy cities of Kerbala and Najaf." The US has killed dozens of Shiites over the past few days in East Baghdad, Kut and Kufa. On Monday, the U.S. used tanks, Bradley Fighting Vehicles and two Apache attack helicopters to destroy Sadr's office in Baghdad. Meanwhile Sadr faces resistance from within the Shiite community. The Los Angeles Times reports another senior Shiite leader, Sadruddin Qubanchi, allied with the powerful Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq, has called for a mass demonstration Friday in Najaf to expel Sadr's private army from the holy city.

Spain: U.S. Actions Pushed Them Out of Iraq
Spain's new Minister of Defense, Jose Bono, has revealed that in early April the U.S. ordered Spanish troops to take Sadr "Dead or alive." At the time Spanish troops were responsible for patrolling the holy city of Najaf. Spain refused the order saying it went beyond their mission as peacekeeping troops. Spanish officials also said the U.S. did not consult them before they arrested a top aide of Sadr's sparking the Shiite uprising and attacks on Spanish troops. These two events led Spain to quickly pull out of Iraq.

UN: 1,000 Palestinians Left Homeless Over Past Week
The United Nations is estimating 1,100 Palestians have been left homeless this month after Israel has carried out one of its most intense periods of home demolitions since the start of the intifada in 2000. The UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees reports 131 homes have been destroyed during the first 10 days of May. The UN estimates 17,000 Palestinians have lost their homes since September 2000.

Bush Prepares to Levy Sanctions Against Syria
Haaretz is reporting that President Bush will announce as early as today the implementation of stiff new sanctions against Syria. The paper, citing unnamed sources, says Bush will ban all U.S. exports to Syria other than food and medicine; Syrian planes will be barred from flying over or landing in the United States and U.S. oil companies will be prohibited from making new investments ins Syria. Syrian's Foreign Minister said Monday that there is a "unanimous Arab decision" to condemn the sanctions.

Nader Fails To Get on Texas Ballot
In campaign news, independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader has failed to qualify for the November ballot in Texas, the country's second largest state. Nader is now suing the state challenging its ballot petition requirements.

Posted by: Amee at 5 : 49 PM | Comments? (156) | LINK

Monday, May 10, 2004

Abuse was Intentional. But WHY?

Joe Conason, from Salon.com:

"...How did the "permissive environment" that encouraged rampant criminality and cruelty arise at Abu Ghraib? According to the JAG senior officers who spoke with Horton, Pentagon civilian officials removed safeguards that were designed to prevent such abuses. At a detention facility like Abu Ghraib, those safeguards would include the routine observation of interrogations from behind a two-way mirror by a JAG officer, who would be empowered to stop any misconduct.

The JAG officers told Horton that those protective policies were discontinued in Iraq and Afghanistan. They said that interrogations were routinely conducted without JAG oversight -- and, worse, that private contractors were being allowed unprecedented participation in the interrogation process. Moreover, the contractors who participated in the interrogation of Iraqi prisoners were operating in a legal twilight zone, says Horton.

"The Uniform Code of Military Justice, which governs the conduct of officers and soldiers, does not apply to civilian contractors," he adds. "They were free to do whatever they wanted to do, with impunity, including homicide."

If that seems hard to believe, it is apparently true that the contractors are exempt from prosecution by Iraqi and U.S. courts and not answerable to those within the military chain of command. Kenneth Roth, the director of Human Rights Watch, has suggested, however, that under the Geneva Conventions, the U.S. government "nonetheless remains responsible for the actions of those running the detention facilities, be they regular soldiers, reservists or private contractors."

click here for entire article

Posted by: Gustavo at 7 : 12 AM | Comments? (71) | LINK

Sunday, May 09, 2004

The Taguba Report and Intelligence Cover-up

The Taguba report is required reading for anyone who wants to understand what the "Prisoner Abuse Scandal" is all about. The basic storyline seems to go something like this:

The prison was manned by the 800th Military Police Brigade, under reservist Brig. Gen. Janis Karpinski, a business consultant in real life. At some point the 205th Military Intelligence Brigade was assigned, apparently without Karpinski's knowledge, to oversee interrogations, and thus take command of all MP's (including Karpinski's) working in the wing where hard prisoners were. There, the MI folks, including "civilian interrogators" contracted through CACI International, Inc., instructed the hapless MPs of the 372nd (in which smiling Lynndie England served) to "soften up" prisoners for interrogation, which resulted in the documented sexual and physical abuse. While the attention of the press seems to be focused on the breakdown in the chain of command which allowed illegal activities to take place, distributing the blame evenly down from Bush to Rumsfeld to Myers to Karpinski to the leaders of the individual MP units involved, attention should instead be on the masterminds behind the deliberate violation of the Geneva convention, namely military intelligence and their hired goons.

Question #1: Why were pictures taken? If these activities were intended to soften up prisoners for interrogation, why take, or allow to be taken, incriminating photographs of the methods used? How stupid is military intelligence? Are we to believe that these rogue MPs were collecting souvenirs for fun and that MI simply looked the other way, knowing the danger the pictures posed if they became public?

Question #2: Why have the civilian contractors involved not received more scrutiny? Outsourcing of defense work is a big issue these days, and if it involves intelligence gathering and results in illegal abuse of prisoners, throwing the entire war (and peace) effort into disarray, then it should be fully investigated.

Click on "Comments" below to see the whole report.

Posted by: Gustavo at 12 : 38 PM | Comments? (102) | LINK

Saturday, May 08, 2004

The Media and Abu Ghraib

The American media has gone into overdrive to try and explain and justify the happenings at Abu Ghraib.
"It just makes me laugh, because that's not Lynn," said Destiny Goin, 21, a friend. "She wouldn't pull a dog by its neck, let alone drag a human across a floor." [1] .

In the same report, The Washington Post also characterized the happenings as "chaos and unpressionalism". Here, we are told that "the prison was chaotically run, that there were no apparent rules governing interrogations and that Harman's military police unit was ill trained for the job it was asked to perform." . Enlightening. This was 'unprofessionalism'? I cant think of a better characterization.

A ridiculous amount of focus has been directed to the question of whether the interrogators were given the 'Geneva Convention'???? These soldiers need the Geneva Convention to be understand that what they did was not correct?

In any case, the individual soldiers have been humanized quite comprehensively. This is matched only by the corresponding disregard for the real victims. Not a single major newspaper has expressed any interest in seeking out the prisoners who were abused. They are not be humanized, not to be given a voice. Anyway, a report can be found here
Will any of this restore my honour to me? My dignity has been crushed under foot,'' he told The Associated Press. ``Bush says they (the guards) will be punished, but who knows? In all seriousness, do you really think they will?'' ... He said a car that was giving him a ride was stopped by U.S. troops because it was of a make often used in anti-U.S. attacks.

The second point to be made has to do with the surprise with which people here -- including anti-war activists -- seem to react. Somehow they assume that the American army is civilized. Of course the Syrian army, the Pakistani army and other brown/black armies are capable of this barbarism, but white Americans? God no. The American army may be strong and tough and rugged and sometimes institutional factors may lead it into brutal actions, but the soldiers are not capable of 'this'.
Thats incredibly racist. John Pilger has an article here that describes what these civilized people did in Vietnam.

"Nor did it explain the children burned to a bubbling pulp by something called napalm, or farmers hunted in helicopter "turkey shoots", or a "suspect" tortured to death with a rope around his neck, dragged behind a jeep filled with doped and laughing American soldiers.
Nor did it explain why so many soldiers kept human parts in their wallets and special forces officers who kept human skulls in their huts, inscribed with the words: "One down, a million to go."

Indeed, if sections of the anti-war movement persist with this antiseptic view of 'white Americans', that will be disastrous. It must mean that these people are unable to recognize the brutality and callousness and violence that characterizes the American empire even as they discuss it and document its actions.

The third point has to do with the fact that the pictures were released at all. This is quite in accordance with our general view of the media. The American media is, of course, not a totalitarian system. It works under strong institutional constraints and the Army and the White House have effective means of getting their viewpoint in. Moreover, and this is something not accounted for in the propaganda model, it functions in a broader intellectual climate of social liberalism, insularity, patriotism and contempt for the inferior races.
All this is on display in this incident. CBS withheld the stories for 2 weeks under a request from the Pentagon. It released them only when its hand was forced ... the photographs appeared on the Internet. This opened up space. Remember we have had evidence of sadistic behaviour by the 'brave men and women in uniform' for a long time. But the space that the CBS report opened up was essential for the New Yorker and the Washignton Post to follow suit. Most of the muck is still undisturbed and will probably remain so. In the meantime, contradictory forces in the media are rushing into a damage control operation. These incidents must be explained as 'aberrations'. We must not remind people that 'our' culture is the most violent in the world. That "we" have been responsible for killing millions of people, exploiting the rest of the world and that "our" prosperity is crucially dependent on imperialism. That would shatter too many illusions.

Addendum:

Let me add two news reports to this. First, lets grant the conservatives their due. Ruthless defenders of the status-quo that they are, they are unafraid about extending their ideas of individual responsibility here.[Of course, I suspect that their commitment to individual responsibility would break down if the interests of the American elite were threatened. As long as its soldiers hailing from rural America, or brown people, its fine]. Note what the weekly standard says:
"The prison guards were badly trained, we hear; they thought they were doing what the interrogators/contractors/CIA wanted them to do; they were cogs in a corrupt military machine. We might say something like that if we were being paid to defend these lowlifes. And, yes, there do seem to have been lamentable weaknesses in training and command. But "sodomizing a detainee with a chemical light" is evidence of a lack of humanity, not a lack of training"

Now, lets turn to the New York Times.
"But a more worrisome category of prisoners emerged from the widening insurgency in Iraq, as played out in the shootings, bombings and other attacks against American soldiers. More and more of those prisoners were filling the makeshift jails"

You see, all these bad guys were filling the prisons and stressing out the innocent soldiers.

So, where do I stand on this? As of now, I believe ... without firm evidence .. that behaviour is largely social. That it would be difficult to really define something called 'innate human nature'. So I disagree with people who say that war brings out the 'real' human nature ... I dont believe that exists. War puts people in a certain social surroundings that -- together with deeper cultural and historical-social influences -- leads them to behave in a certain way. From this viewpoint, I agree with Robert Fisk. I dont think these soldiers were 'evil'. Rather, I believe that American/British culture is extremely racist and condescending towards the inferior races -- that army training systematically dehumanizes and brutalizes people. Moreover, given this racist culture that refuses to acknowledge Iraqis as equals and virtually unlimited power over their victims -- this is exactly how you would expect British/American soldiers to behave.
So, in a sense I agree with the New York Times idea that this behaviour was the result of systemic causes, though I would look deeper into the system and not superficially at 'chaos' or 'ill-preparedness' or whatever other apologetic nonsense they turn out.

P.S: And its extremely interesting that I cant find a single black/hispanic/native american soldier involved in the abuse despite the fact that almost half of the American army is non-white. See here for statistics.

Posted by: Suvrat at 12 : 14 PM | Comments? (165) | LINK

Wednesday, May 05, 2004

Army General Apologizes to Iraqis for His Group's Perverted Behavior

"And in the first of many such statements by American officials today, General Miller said he was sorry to the Iraqi people for the abuses that were allowed to go on inside the prison."

[ed. note: I think it's high time Osama apologized for 9-11. After all, it's a real drag when your country is invaded, buildings bombed, and thousands of fellow citizens killed.

And while he's at it, maybe he can explain the pictures of our young Christian men being forced to simulate blasphemous acts in the presence of mocking young Qaeda recruits.

Remember, fellow Americans--WE are the victims. THEY started it. WE'RE going to heaven. God bless the united states of america.

... cont.

Posted by: Gustavo at 11 : 09 PM | Comments? (154) | LINK

Friday, April 30, 2004

Is America Commiting War Crimes?

Viet-what? Who? Eye-opening piece in Ha'aretz claims U.S. has committed war crimes in Falluja, Iraq. Yes, Virginia, there IS a new Vietnam, and sadistic humiliation and physical abuse of prisoners is just the beginning.

Posted by: Gustavo at 7 : 30 AM | Comments? (157) | LINK

Friday, April 23, 2004

June 30 Hallelujah!

The Bush administration is slowly unfolding its actual intentions for the mysterious handover of power on June 30. The Bush gang recently revealed its severe modifications to Brahimi's already questionable plan for Iraqi sovereignty. From the New York Times:

"The Bush administration's plans for a new caretaker government in Iraq would place severe limits on its sovereignty, including only partial command over its armed forces and no authority to enact new laws, administration officials said Thursday."

Posted by: Eric at 10 : 02 AM | Comments? (222) | LINK

Friday, March 05, 2004

In Karbala and Baghdad, they mourned the dead. Throughout Iraq, they blamed the US

"The fear everyone is talking about is that the massacre could set off
Shia revenge attacks against Iraqi Sunni that could spiral into a civil
war. But yesterday the anger of the mourners seemed far more directed at
the Americans."

'No, no America! No, no terrorism!' they chanted."

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/story.jsp?story=497631

Click here for the full text of the article.

Posted by: Phil at 10 : 28 AM | Comments? (128) | LINK

Friday, January 30, 2004

Fraud & Waste in US "reconstruction" of Iraq

Good article which also documents corporate complicity in perpetuating the military occupation:

"To date, Halliburton has made over $2.2 billion from the war in Iraq but, unlike Bechtel, most of this money is not for fixing Iraq's destroyed and crumbling infrastructure. Some 42% is spent on combating oil fires and fixing oil pipelines, 48% is for supporting the needs of the occupying army (such as housing and transportation for troops), leaving just 10% for meeting community needs in Iraq.

"Breaking down the numbers reveals some startling details: Halliburton has spent $40 million to support the unsuccessful search for weapons of mass destruction - enough to support 6,600 families in Iraq for a year (at $500 a month, the number cited by many Iraqis as necessary for a decent standard of living).

"Other numbers are just as startling - Halliburton's net profit for the second quarter of 2003 was $26 million, which contrasts markedly with the company's net loss of $498 million in the same quarter of 2002. Most of its new income is from the contracts in Iraq. "Iraq was a very nice boost" for the company, an analyst told The Wall Street Journal.

"Easily the most controversial contract that the company has won in Iraq is for fuel transportation ... The United States has been paying Halliburton an average of $2.64 a gallon to import gasoline to Iraq from Kuwait, more than twice what others are paying to truck in Kuwaiti fuel, government documents show. In some cases Halliburton has even charged the government as much as $3.09 a gallon ...

"Meanwhile, Iraq's state oil company, SOMO, pays 96 cents a gallon to bring in gasoline. Both SOMO and Halliburton's subcontractor deliver gasoline to the same depots in Iraq and often use the same military escorts. ...

"... the money for Halliburton's gas contract has come principally from the United Nations oil-for-food program (now called the Iraq Development Fund), money that should rightfully be spent on food and basic necessities for the Iraqi people rather than paid to Halliburton for expensive oil imports, though some of the costs have been borne by American taxpayers."

Posted by: Amee at 8 : 45 PM | Comments? (129) | LINK

Friday, January 30, 2004

Possibility for elections?!

I read this very interesting analysis posted by "Hurria" on another blog site from Jan. 17:

"The other day there was an article in the San Francisco Chronicle which very nicely debunked Bremers' lame excuse that "There is no electoral infrastructure in this country to ... institute direct elections immediately...". It seems that Iraqi and UN experts say that credible elections could indeed be held within months using the food ration database to create a list of eligible voters. Given that the UN has a good deal of experience in setting up and monitoring the process of
democratization and supervising elections, it's going to be difficult for Bremer, who has no such experience (and no real applicable expertise), to effectively discount this.

"The director of the U.N. World Food Program's Iraqi mission said "The database is reliable and includes all the population in the (Kurdish) north". He added that "There were no exclusions because of political reasons." Ahmad Al-Mukhtar, director of the ration system, said "The database is 99 percent accurate, and is extremely detailed, with full information about the ages of all Iraqis, and it has been repeatedly and exhaustively cleaned up of all irregularities and duplications". He further stated "If you gave me one month and enough paper, I could open registration to anyone who was exiled, allow them to register, and then I would give you a complete electoral roll."

"So, according to experts in such things, direct elections before the end of June are quite doable, and there are Iraqis and U.N. personnel who are willing to do what it takes to make it happen. However, the Bush regime and their henchman Bremer and their "Governing Council" will do everything they can to prevent it because there is simply no way it will turn out the way they need it to ...

"Bush desperately needs to have something that he can sell as a "success" in Iraq before the Presidential election this year. He cannot afford elections in Iraq because that would certainly not result in a government that will do America's bidding, and it is likely to result in Iraq becoming The Shi'ite Islamic Republic of Iraq, which even Bush would have a hard time calling a success. However, some awfully powerful Iraqis are becoming rather testy about the whole thing and if they continue to block elections the consequences could be even worse."

Some other articles and recent news about elections:

- "Annan says UN to help with Iraq elections" (1/28/04)
- "Washington's plan to transfer power without a direct vote is a fraud" (1/19/04), from The Guardian

And the spin by the Nytimes: "U.S. Tries to Give Moderates an Edge in Iraqi Elections"

I found many of these articles from www.occupationwatch.org, which is a great resource.

Posted by: Amee at 8 : 37 PM | Comments? (146) | LINK

Saturday, January 17, 2004

Who's afraid of elections in Iraq? Protests against power transfer plans and legal restrictions on women

Mass protests against the US plans for transfering power in Iraq, and calling instead for direct elections, have been reported in the recent news. I was trying to look up exactly what the US plans entailed and why they are objectionable, since they have been billed as "partial elections" based on local "caucuses" in the Nytimes, whatever that means.

Below's from www.occupationwatch.org (originally published in the Guardian):

"The CPA wants to constitute an interim national assembly by selecting delegates from Iraq's 18 provinces, and it has empowered the governing council to form committees to select members to local electoral caucuses. The November agreement calls for these members to elect delegates to the interim Iraqi national assembly. The assembly would be the recipient of Iraq's sovereign power before electing an interim government by June 30."

From what I can tell, this seems like a top-down appointment system.� The article's analysis:

"Council members, appointed by Paul Bremer as advisors, quickly became partners in post-Saddam Iraq with authority over Iraq's ministries, laws, intelligence and security. It is most unlikely that the governing council would vote itself out of power now. The agreement has empowered it to design the transition and veto delegates to provincial caucuses."

Meanwhile, the following info came by email rather than news coverage. This particular summary problematically conflates a certain brand of Sharia with all of Sharia or Islamic law, but describes important happenings:

"GOVERNING COUNCIL IN IRAQ MOVES TO INSTITUTE ISLAMIC SHARIA
OVER 80 WOMEN'S GROUPS SPONTANEOUSLY REVOLT IN PROTEST

"The US puppet "Governing Council of Iraq" (IGC) has declared the replacement of Iraqi Civil Status law in family matters with religious law: Islamic Sharia.� In so doing, they are attempting to eliminate all of Iraqi women's hard-earned rights in one fell swoop.� This news was met by waves of women's spontaneous protest and revolt in the streets.� Nadia Mahmood, of Organization of Women's Freedom in Iraq, reports that "women representing over 80 0rganizations spontaneously gathered in the streets of Baghdad to protest the declaration.� Protesters carried placards reading "No to discrimination! No to differentiating women and men in our new Iraq!"� The Baghdad/London daily az-Zaman, reported that "storms of street protests" occurred again on Thursday.� Yet, this news is barely being covered by the western press.

"While Saddam Hussein's Baath regime had already made concessions to the Islamists by changing several articles of the civil code to accommodate misogynist religious practices, this move by the US imposed IGC goes far beyond Saddam's concessions, to entirely eliminate a secular civil code in place since 1958, won by the militant women's movement of the time!

"The effects of this decision will be catastrophic for Iraqi women.� Under the Iraqi civil code, women had rights regarding marriage, divorce, inheritance, child custody, and alimony.� Under Islamic Sharia all this will change.� [The proposed] Islamic law would give men the right of unilateral divorce over their wives, give men the right to take second, third and fourth wives, eliminate women's right to alimony and give girls half the inheritance of boys.

"The interim "Governing Council" is an illegitimate authority in Iraq. Its members were hand-picked by the US government and were chosen from among the same religious and tribal leaders that supported the US plans to attack the country in the first place.� They have no rightful claim to represent the Iraqi people.� In stark contrast to the US governments rhetoric about fighting Islamic fundamentalists and bringing "freedom to Iraqi women," they are now using the IGC to impose theocratic and misogynist rule onto Iraqi women!� We must now allow this kind of audacious hypocrisy to go unchallenged."

Posted by: Amee at 3 : 40 PM | Comments? (139) | LINK

Tuesday, December 30, 2003

Our Troops and Theirs: Vietnam Memorial

In response to this article, I received a number of emails disagreeing with me on the Vietnam memorial. I've copied a reply I sent to a friend of mine here. I guess, this also extends the argument in the article.

Click here to see the entire entry

Posted by: Suvrat at 10 : 16 AM | Comments? (177) | LINK

Sunday, December 21, 2003

Support the Troops?

Robert Fisk reports on the continuing slaughter in Iraq. After the capture of Saddam, popular resentment has exploded and the American army is putting this down with incredible brutality ... shooting people at random. See this article for example. (there are two other articles on the subject, both paid at the moment)

Of course, we need to stop saying 'support the troops'. How can we support the troops as they go around, drunk in their power with their fingers light on the trigger, killing innocent people?

At this point, I am open to the charge that I am adopting 'ultra-left' tactics, because it is obviously organizationally easy to say 'support the troops' and appeal to people in the US who have family in Iraq. Moreover, I understand the cruel economic system that forces people into the military. and I am allied with the troops who oppose the occupation.

Despite all that, I am never going to shout 'support the troops' at another rally.

So, from this ultra-left utopian perspective, I support the resistance.

I need to think about what that translates to in practical terms, and what I can do(if anything), within the bounds of legality(in the US), to help the resistance defeat 'the troops'.

Posted by: Suvrat at 12 : 19 PM | Comments? (156) | LINK

Thursday, December 18, 2003

Liberating Iraq in 1917

Does this seem familiar to anyone? This is taken from Harper's magazine:

The following proclamation was issued to the inhabitants of Baghdad on March 19, 1917, by Lieut. General Sir Stanley Maude, shortly after the occupation of the city by British forces.

In the name of my King, and in the name of the peoples over whom he rules, I address you as follow:-

Our military operations have as their object the defeat of the enemy, and the driving of him from these territories. In order to complete this task, I am charged with absolute and supreme control of all regions in which British troops operate; but our armies do not come into your cities and lands as conquerors or enemies, but as liberators. Since the days of Halaka your city and your lands have been subject to the tyranny of strangers, your palaces have fallen into ruins, your gardens have sunk in desolation, and your forefathers and yourselves have groaned in bondage. Your sons have been carried off to wars not of your seeking, your wealth has been stripped from you by unjust men and squandered in distant places.

Since the days of Midhat, the Turks have talked of reforms, yet do not the ruins and wastes of today testify the vanity of those promises?

It is the wish not only of my King and his peoples, but it is also the wish of the great nations with whom he is in alliance, that you should prosper even as in the past, when your lands were fertile, when your ancestors gave to the world literature, science, and art, and when Baghdad city was one of the wonders of the world.

Between your people and the dominions of my King there has been a close bond of interest. For 200 years have the merchants of Baghdad and Great Britain traded together in mutual profit and friendship. On the other hand, the Germans and the Turks, who have despoiled you and yours, have for 20 years made Baghdad a centre of power from which to assail the power of the British and the Allies of the British in Persia and Arabia. Therefore the British Government cannot remain indifferent as to what takes place in your country now or in the future, for in duty to the interests of the British people and their Allies, the British Government cannot risk that being done in Baghdad again which has been done by the Turks and Germans during the war.

But you people of Baghdad, whose commercial prosperity and whose safety from oppression and invasion must ever be a matter of the closest concern to the British Government, are not to understand that it is the wish of the British Government to impose upon you alien institutions. It is the hope of the British Government that the aspirations of your philosophers and writers shall be realised and that once again the people of Baghdad shall flourish, enjoying their wealth and substance under institutions which are in consonance with their sacred laws and their racial ideals. In Hedjaz the Arabs have expelled the Turks and Germans who oppressed them and proclaimed the Sherif Hussein as their King, and his Lordship rules in independence and freedom, and is the ally of the nations who are fighting against the power of Turkey and Germany; so indeed are the noble Arabs, the Lords of Koweyt, Nejd, and Asir.

Many noble Arabs have perished in the cause of Arab freedom, at the hands of those alien rulers, the Turks, who oppressed them. It is the determination of the Government of Great Britain and the great Powers allied to Great Britain that these noble Arabs shall not have suffered in vain. It is the hope and desire of the British people and the nations in alliance with them that the Arab race may rise once more to greatness and renown among the peoples of the earth, and that it shall bind itself together to this end in unity and concord.

O people of Baghdad remember that for 26 generations you have suffered under strange tyrants who have ever endeavoured to set on Arab house against another in order that they might profit by your dissensions. This policy is abhorrent to Great Britain and her Allies, for there can be neither peace nor prosperity where there is enmity and misgovernment. Therefore I am commanded to invite you, through your nobles and elders and representatives, to participate in the management of your civil affairs in collaboration with the political representatives of Great Britain who accompany the British Army, so that you may be united with your kinsmen in North, East, South, and West in realising the aspirations of your race.

Posted by: Phil at 9 : 13 PM | Comments? (85) | LINK

Sunday, December 14, 2003

The Capture of Saddam

Saddam Hussein was finally captured, today. Here are some quick reactions. Please add comments. And we should all come back to this in a few weeks and see whether our predictions were accurate:

1)Well, goes without saying, this is good news. The dictator goes behind bars.

2)Good news for the Iraqi resistance also. Bush, Bremer, Wolfowitz, Chirac, Schroeder, Blair and other leaders of neo-colonizer countries believe that now that the headman has been captured, the natives will be quiet and settle down. Completely incorrect.

The resistance did not comprise remnants of the regime. It is quite clearly a grassroots movement against the American occupation. In fact, a large number of people, who did not join because they were afraid Saddam would come back will now enlist. Second, the resistance is now going to gain moral high-ground and no one will be able to call the freedom fighters, the 'fedayeen saddam'. I predict that the resistance is going to pick up momentum.

3)Finally, what happens to Saddam. They can put him on trial, and his trial will be a massive embarrassment like Milosevic. Well, more so. There is very good evidence of Saddam's crimes and his worst crimes were committed when he was allied with the neo-colonizers. So, if we bring charges against him, surely charges of collaboration will be extended to Rumsfeld? Or not?

4)For domestic US politics, this is a boost for Bush's re-election campaign. There are two streams in the anti-war movement. One that says that the 'war on terror' is fundamentally immoral and misguided and a cloak for imperialism, like HIPJ. Another that says that Mr. Bush has not dealt with the 'terrorists ' properly, has failed to capture Osama and has made America unsafe. People like Howard Dean belong to the second stream. They are going to be embarrassed. Good -- they should be.

Posted by: Suvrat at 10 : 39 AM | Comments? (214) | LINK

Thursday, December 11, 2003

Fake Turkey?

Michael Moore writes that the turkey served in Baghdad, by Bush, was fake!

The Washington Post has an article. Now, listen to this:

Officials said they did not know ... that Bush would pick it up. They said the bird was not placed there in anticipation of Bush's stealthy visit, and military sources said a trophy turkey is a standar feature of chow lines.

Ha, ha! I believe 'the officials'!

Posted by: Suvrat at 3 : 23 PM | Comments? (214) | LINK

Thursday, December 11, 2003

Vultures?

See this story . The White House is asking France, Germany and Russia to write off Iraq's debt. FGR, on the other hand are incensed that the US has the gall to ask them for this favour after excluding them from reconstruction conttracts.

Does this disgusting conflict remind you of vultures? Of a bunch of robbers fighting on how to divide the loot?

I think it is appropriate to quote Fidel Castro's description of European powers:
A group of old colonial powers historically responsible for slave trafficking, looting and even the extermination of entire peoples

So, these old colonial powers, smarting from the humiliation of having been usurped by a new imperial power, assume they have a right to the plunder in Iraq. The new headman of the robbers, the US, is going to punish them for not being loyal. How low can people sink?

Posted by: Suvrat at 10 : 22 AM | Comments? (176) | LINK

Wednesday, December 10, 2003

Halliburton reaps high payments for fuel in Iraq

Corporate profiteering in Iraq - guess what, guess who. This article in the Nytimes today:

"The United States government is paying the Halliburton Company an average of $2.64 a gallon to import gasoline and other fuel to Iraq from Kuwait, more than twice what others are paying to truck in Kuwaiti fuel, government documents show."

Guess who pays?

Posted by: Amee at 5 : 49 PM | Comments? (196) | LINK

Wednesday, October 13, 2004 Carlyle Group, Iraq Reparations and Conflicts of Interests

Tuesday, October 05, 2004 How the White House Embraced Disputed Arms Intelligence

Wednesday, September 29, 2004 Baghdad Year Zero

Monday, July 26, 2004 Scott Ritter Article

Monday, July 19, 2004 Allawi shot inmates in cold blood, say witnesses

Saturday, July 17, 2004 Academics Targeted in Iraq

Monday, July 12, 2004 2 Scapegoats for the Price of One?

Saturday, July 03, 2004 What the Handover Means

Monday, June 21, 2004 Lawyer for Abu Ghraib Accused Claims "Israeli Methods" Used Under Pressure from Commanders and CIA

Saturday, June 12, 2004 Interrogators hired for Iraq despite ban

Wednesday, June 09, 2004 Birdcage Liner: CIA Officials Suffer Memory Loss

Wednesday, June 09, 2004 Shaken, Stirred, and On the Rocks - Soldiers Fall Ill, Commit Suicide After Downing Military's Drug Cocktail

Tuesday, June 08, 2004 CHALABI MAKES OFF WITH SADDAM'S SCANDALOUS FILES

Thursday, June 03, 2004 Judith Miller: Gross Incompetent or Co-conspirator?

Tuesday, June 01, 2004 Judith Miller and the New York Times

Friday, May 21, 2004 The Coup in Iraq - Act I - Scene i - Baghdad

Thursday, May 20, 2004 Shakir Tawfiq Talk

Thursday, May 13, 2004 Contracted Interrogators Linked to Israel?

Wednesday, May 12, 2004 Interview With CIA Vet Re: Torture

Tuesday, May 11, 2004 Iraq Interrogator's Blog Disappears From Internet

Tuesday, May 11, 2004 News roundup

Monday, May 10, 2004 Abuse was Intentional. But WHY?

Sunday, May 09, 2004 The Taguba Report and Intelligence Cover-up

Saturday, May 08, 2004 The Media and Abu Ghraib

Wednesday, May 05, 2004 Army General Apologizes to Iraqis for His Group's Perverted Behavior

Friday, April 30, 2004 Is America Commiting War Crimes?

Friday, April 23, 2004 June 30 Hallelujah!

Friday, March 05, 2004 In Karbala and Baghdad, they mourned the dead. Throughout Iraq, they blamed the US

Friday, January 30, 2004 Fraud & Waste in US "reconstruction" of Iraq

Friday, January 30, 2004 Possibility for elections?!

Saturday, January 17, 2004 Who's afraid of elections in Iraq? Protests against power transfer plans and legal restrictions on women

Tuesday, December 30, 2003 Our Troops and Theirs: Vietnam Memorial

Sunday, December 21, 2003 Support the Troops?

Thursday, December 18, 2003 Liberating Iraq in 1917

Sunday, December 14, 2003 The Capture of Saddam

Thursday, December 11, 2003 Fake Turkey?

Thursday, December 11, 2003 Vultures?

Wednesday, December 10, 2003 Halliburton reaps high payments for fuel in Iraq