"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." -
George Orwell
"As democracy is perfected, the office of president
represents, more and more closely, the inner soul
of the people. On some great and glorious day the
plain folks of the land will reach their heart's
desire at last and the White House will be adorned
by a downright moron." --- H.L. Mencken (1880 - 1956)
Published
on Friday, September 6, 2002 in the Times/UK
Gates
of Hell Will Open If US Attacks Iraq, Say Arab States
THE United States was told last night that a war to oust President Saddam
Hussein would "open the gates of Hell" in the Middle East.
PHOTO: U.S. soldiers detain a protester as local residents rally against the U.S. military presence in Kamaliyah neighborhood in Baghdad, Iraq, Wednesday, May 2, 2007. Hundreds attended the rally, some throwing stones on an passing American convoy. (AP Photo/Adil al-Khazali)
Sameer Hussein, a 22-year-old Sunni college student in Baghdad, said he wanted the U.S. forces to withdraw but didn't think they ever would.
"Even if they will withdraw they will leave permanent military bases in Iraq and that is something Iraqi people will reject," he said.
VideoVets: Bring Our Troops Home contains some of the most compelling stories about this war that you've ever heard. These brave men and women want to put us on a course to start bringing our troops home.
VideoVets: John Bruhns
VideoVets: Kevin Denton
VideoVets: Garret Reppenhagen
VideoVets: Brendan Duffy
Huge turnout for anti-US rally
BBC News reported that up to 1 million Shias were expected to take to the streets in Najaf.
Monday April 9, 2007
Guardian Unlimited
Hundreds of thousands of supporters of the radical Shia cleric Moqtada al-Sadr took to the streets of two Shia holy cities in Iraq today and protested against "US occupiers".
The rally was called by Mr Sadr, who said in a statement yesterday that his militia followers should redouble efforts to drive US forces out of Iraq, describing them as "your arch-enemy".
Today, clad in Iraqi flags, demonstrators marched from the city of Kufa to neighbouring Najaf, which is 100 miles south of Baghdad, shouting "we obey your call" and other slogans against the US "occupiers".
Mr Sadr commands an enormous following among Iraq's majority Shia population and has close allies in the Shia-dominated government.
As he marched, politician Nassar al-Rubaie, head of Mr Sadr's bloc in parliament, said: "The enemy that is occupying our country is now targeting the dignity of the Iraqi people ... After four years of occupation, we have hundreds of thousands of people dead and wounded."
Mr Sadr's statement yesterday called for Iraq's army and police to join him in defeating the US.
Today some Iraqi soldiers in uniform joined the crowd, which was led by at least a dozen turbaned clerics - including one Sunni.
PHOTO: Demonstrators hold Iraqi flags as they march during an anti-U.S. protest called by fiery cleric Moqtada al-Sadr in Najaf, marking the fourth anniversary of the fall of Baghdad April 9, 2007. Baghdad was under curfew on Monday on the fourth anniversary of the fall of the capital to U.S. forces. (Ali Abu Shish/Reuters)
Iraqis call for U.S. forces to leave
By Khaled Farhan
NAJAF, Iraq (Reuters) - Hundreds of thousands of people waving Iraqi flags staged a peaceful rally in the southern city of Najaf on Monday to demand the withdrawal of U.S. forces, four years to the day since Baghdad fell to invading American troops.
The protesters in Najaf were responding to a call by powerful anti-American cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, who blames the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in March 2003 for the country's woes and wants a timetable set for a U.S. troop withdrawal.
Waving dozens of red, white and back Iraqi flags, marchers choked the seven km-long road between Najaf and neighboring Kufa and clogged the streets leading to Sadrayn Square, the main rallying point in Najaf.
Many had come by bus and car from Baghdad and Shi'ite towns and cities in the south.
Speaking against the backdrop of an Iraqi flag, a leading member of Sadr's movement, Abdelhadi al-Mohammadawi, called on U.S. forces to leave. His speech was interrupted by the periodic chorus of "Leave, leave occupier!" and "No, no, to the occupation."
"We demand the exit of the occupier and withdrawal of the last American soldier and we also reject the existence of any kind of military bases," he said.
PHOTO: Iraqi supporters of Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr burn a US flag during an anti-US rally in the holy city of Najaf on 09 April 2007. Thousands of Iraqi Shiites burned and trampled on US flags on the fourth anniversary of the fall of Saddam Hussein.(AFP/Qassem Zein)
Iraqi Shiites burn US flags, chant "May America fall" and "Bush is a dog"
in huge anti-US protest
by Hassan Abdul Zahra, April 9, 2007
NAJAF, Iraq (AFP) - Hundreds of thousands of Iraqi Shiites burned and trampled on US flags in the holy city of Najaf on Monday at an anti-American rally called by firebrand cleric Moqtada al-Sadr on the fourth anniversary of the fall of Saddam Hussein.
Large crowds of men, women and children holding Iraqi flags and anti-US banners massed in Najaf and the nearby city of Kufa to protest against what they said was an American occupation of
Iraq.
At many places Iraqi and US flags were painted on the ground and being trampled by the Shiite crowd, the reporter said, adding that some Sunni religious groups were also seen participating in the rally.
The rally is seen as a show of strength for the cleric who has not been seen for more than two months, since the launch of a security crackdown in Baghdad aimed largely at reining in his militiamen accused of killing Sunni Arabs.
"No, no, to the occupation, no, no to America," hundreds of thousands of marching
Iraqis, mainly men and young boys waving Iraqi flags, chanted as they
marched through the southern Shi'ite holy city.
Protesters in Najaf burnt the American flag and spray painted the slogans
"May America fall" and "Bush is a dog" on the ground. Thousands were
marching from nearby Kufa, while others clogged roads as they came by car
and bus from Baghdad and Shi'ite cities in the south.
PHOTO: Supporters of anti-US cleric Muqtada al-Sadr arrive to the holy city of Kufa, Iraq, 160 kilometers (100 miles) south of Baghdad, Sunday, April 8, 2007. al-Sadr called on his supporters to come to the holy cities of Kufa and Najaf to mark the fourth year of the US-led invasion on Monday. (AP Photo/Hadi Mizban)
Iraqis flock to Najaf for anti-U.S. protest
By Khaled Farhan
NAJAF, Iraq (Reuters) - Thousands of Iraqis flocked to the holy city of Najaf on Sunday for a big demonstration called by radical Shi'ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr against the U.S. presence in Iraq.
Sadr has urged Iraqis to protest in Najaf on Monday, the fourth anniversary of the day on which U.S. forces swept into central Baghdad in 2003. It is remembered around the world as the day a large statue of
Saddam Hussein was toppled in the Iraqi capital.
The Baghdad-Najaf road was packed on Sunday with hundreds of vehicles crammed with passengers waving Iraqi flags and chanting religious and anti-U.S. slogans.
"No, no, no to America ... Moqtada, yes, yes, yes," they chanted as they converged towards Najaf.
Protesters in the southern town of Samawa clashed with Iraqi police on Sunday after they were stopped from getting to Najaf. One protester stabbed a policeman and police retaliated by firing shots in the air to disperse the crowd, witnesses said.
Monday's protest is expected to attract tens of thousands of Iraqis angry at the violence that grips their country, four years after U.S. forces ousted Saddam. Demonstrations will begin at a mosque in nearby Kufa, then move to Najaf.
"Our feeling is like the feeling of any Iraqi who calls for sovereignty and freedom," said 27-year-old Baghdad resident Abbas Kadhem, an electricity store owner who arrived in Najaf.
"We are answering the call of Sayyed Moqtada al-Sadr to spread freedom and to demand that the occupation forces leave."
al Sadr calls for attacks on U.S. troops
By SAAD ABDUL KADIR, Associated Press Writer
BAGHDAD - The Iraqi cleric Muqtada al-Sadr urged Iraqi forces to stop cooperating with the United States and told his guerrilla fighters to concentrate their attacks on American troops rather than Iraqis, according to a statement issued Sunday.
The statement, stamped with al-Sadr's official seal, was distributed in the Shiite holy city of Najaf on Sunday � a day before a large demonstration there, called for by al-Sadr, to mark the fourth anniversary of the fall of Baghdad.
"You, the Iraqi army and police forces, don't walk alongside the occupiers, because they are your archenemy," the statement said. Its authenticity could not be verified.
In the statement, al-Sadr � who commands an enormous following among
Iraq's majority Shiites and has close allies in the Shiite-dominated government � also encouraged his followers to attack only American forces, not fellow Iraqis.
"God has ordered you to be patient in front of your enemy, and unify your efforts against them � not against the sons of Iraq," the statement said, in an apparent reference to clashes between al-Sadr's Mahdi Army fighters and Iraqi troops in Diwaniyah, south of Baghdad. "You have to protect and build Iraq."
The U.S. military on Sunday announced the deaths of four American soldiers, killed a day earlier in an explosion near their vehicle in Diyala province northeast of Baghdad. The province has seen a spike in attacks on U.S. and Iraqi forces since the start of a plan two months ago to pacify the capital. Officials believe militants have streamed out of Baghdad to invigorate the insurgency in areas just outside the city.
PHOTO: Iraqis hold a British soldier's helmet and pieces of a British military
Warrior fighting vehicle as they cheer after a road side bomb on British
patrol in Basra, Iraq, 550 kilometers (340 miles) southeast of Baghdad,
Thursday, April 5, 2007.
Ten British, US troops killed in Iraq by Jennie Matthew
BAGHDAD (AFP) - Six American and four British soldiers were killed in
separate attacks in
Iraq, coalition forces announced on Thursday, as Britain prepared to
transfer security of another province to local troops.
Amid one of the bloodiest recent 24-hour periods for foreign troops in Iraq,
the US military was also investigating reports that a Black Hawk helicopter
was shot down south of Baghdad in a notorious Sunni insurgent stronghold.
The four British soldiers, together with a civilian translator travelling in
the same vehicle, were killed outside the southern city of Basra in a
complex roadside bomb, small-arms fire and rocket-propelled grenade attack.
U.S. soldier complaining that he can't shoot Iraqi children.
U.S. Tank crushes Iraqi civilian's car
Israeli girls write messages on shells ready to be fired towards Lebanon.
Photo: Agence France-Presse
Top US general says Rumsfeld is inspired by God
Thursday Oct 19, 2006
MIAMI (AFP) - The top US general defended the leadership of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, saying it is inspired by God.
"He leads in a way that the good Lord tells him is best for our country," said Marine General Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Iraqi Shiites chant 'Death to Israel', "Death to America"
By MURTADA FARAJ, Associated Press Writer
August 4, 2006
BAGHDAD, Iraq - Hundreds of thousands of Shiites chanting "Death to
Israel" and "Death to America" marched through the streets of Baghdad's
biggest Shiite district Friday in a massive show of support for Hezbollah in
its battle against Israel.
The demonstration was the biggest in the Middle East in support of Hezbollah
since Israel launched its attacks against the guerrillas in Lebanon on July
12. The protest was organized by radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr,
whose political movement built around the Mahdi Army militia has been
modeled after Hezbollah.
Al-Sadr summoned followers from throughout the Shiite heartland of southern
Iraq to converge on Baghdad for the rally but he himself did not attend.
Demonstrators, wearing white shrouds symbolizing willingness to die for
Hezbollah, waved the guerrillas' yellow banner and chanted slogans in
support of their leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah, which has attained a cult
status in the Arab world for its defiance of Israeli military power.
"Allah, Allah, give victory to Hassan Nasrallah," the crowd chanted.
"Mahdi Army and Hezbollah are one, let them confront us if they dare," the
predominantly male crowd shouted, waving the flags of Hezbollah, Lebanon and
Iraq. Many walked with umbrellas in the searing afternoon sun. Volunteers
sprayed them with water.
"I am wearing the shroud and I am ready to meet martyrdom," said Mohammed
Khalaf, 35, owner of a clothes shop in the southern city of Amarah.
Al-Sadr followers painted U.S. and Israeli flags on the main road leading to
the rally site, and demonstrators stepped on them - a gesture of contempt in
Iraq. Alongside the painted flags was written: "These are the terrorists."
Protesters set fire to American and Israeli flags, as well as effigies of
President George W. Bush and Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, showing the
men with Dracula teeth. "Saddam and Bush, Two Faces of One Coin" was
scrawled on Bush's effigy.
Crowds stand around and watch as others throw stones and Molotov cocktails on a british tank as it arrived on the scene where a British military helicopter crashed in Basra, Iraq Saturday May 6, 2006 in this image from TV. (AP Photo/TEL)
British Copter Shot Down in Basra; 4 Killed May 6, 2006
By BUSHRA JUHI, Associated Press Writer
BAGHDAD, Iraq - A British military helicopter crashed in Basra on Saturday, and Iraqis hurled stones at British troops and set fire to at least one armored vehicle that rushed to the scene. Clashes broke out between British troops and Shiite militias, police and witnesses said.
Police Capt. Mushtaq Khazim said the helicopter was apparently shot down in a residential district the city. He said the four-member crew was killed, but British officials would say only that there were "casualties."
British forces backed by armored vehicles rushed to the area but were met by a hail of stones from the crowd of at least 250 people, who jumped for joy and raised their fists as a plume of thick smoke rose into the air from the crash site.
The crowd also set at least one British armored vehicle on fire, apparently with a rocket-propelled grenade.
Shooting broke out between the British and armed militiamen, and at least two people, including a child, were killed, Khazim said.
Crowds chanted "we are all soldiers of al-Sayed," a reference to radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, an ardent foe of the presence of foreign troops in
Iraq.
The chaotic scene was widely shown on Iraqi state television and on the Al-Jazeera satellite station.
Three British military vehicles set on fire by angry Iraqis May 6, 2006
BASRA, Iraq (AFP) - Two British military tanks and a Land Rover have been set on fire by angry Iraqis as troops came to recover the crew of a British helicopter that crashed in the southern city of Basra, an AFP correspondent reported.
Gunfire broke out between armed Iraqi civilians and British troops and a mob fired rockets at the military vehicles, he said Saturday.
Three vehicles were hit, one soldier was wounded by a shrapnel and an AFP photographer at the site was also hit in the leg by a rubber-coated bullet, he said.
A British military spokesman confirmed the clashes.
The Arab League warning has come true.
US "News" media propagandists have been proven wrong:
"Tommy Franks and the coalition forces have demonstrated the old axiom
that boldness on the battlefield produces swift and relatively
bloodless victory. The three-week swing through Iraq has utterly
shattered skeptics' complaints." (Fox News Channel's Tony Snow,
4/27/03) - UPDATE: Tony Snow is now White House press secretary, do you think he can be trusted to tell the truth??
"The only people who think this wasn't a victory are Upper Westside
liberals, and a few people here in Washington." (Charles Krauthammer,
Inside Washington, WUSA-TV, 4/19/03)
"We're all neo-cons now." (MSNBC's Chris Matthews, 4/9/03)
"I will bet you the best dinner in the gaslight district of San Diego
that military action will not last more than a week. Are you willing to
take that wager?" (Fox News Channel's Bill O'Reilly, 1/29/03)
"The majority of the American media who were in a position to comment
upon the progress of the war in the early going, and even after that,
got it wrong," Hume complained in the April 2003 speech (Richmond Times
Dispatch, 4/25/04). "They didn't get it just a little wrong. They got
it completely wrong."
"The war was the hard part. The hard part was putting together a
coalition, getting 300,000 troops over there and all their equipment
and winning. And it gets easier. I mean, setting up a democracy is
hard, but it is not as hard as winning a war."
(Fox News Channel's Fred Barnes, 4/10/03)
"He looked like an alternatively commander in chief, rock star, movie
star, and one of the guys."
(CNN's Lou Dobbs, on Bush's 'Mission Accomplished' speech, 5/1/03)
"What's he going to talk about a year from now, the fact that the war
went too well and it's over? I mean, don't these things sort of lose
their--Isn't there a fresh date on some of these debate points?"
(MSNBC's Chris Matthews, speaking about Howard Dean--4/9/03)
"It is amazing how thorough the victory in Iraq really was in the
broadest context..... And the silence, I think, is that it's clear that
nobody can do anything about it. There isn't anybody who can stop him.
The Democrats can't oppose--cannot oppose him politically."
(Washington Post reporter Jeff Birnbaum-- Fox News Channel, 5/2/03)
"Now that the war in Iraq is all but over, should the people in
Hollywood who opposed the president admit they were wrong?"
(Fox News Channel's Alan Colmes, 4/25/03)
"I doubt that the journalists at the New York Times and NPR or at ABC
or at CNN are going to ever admit just how wrong their negative
pronouncements were over the past four weeks."
(MSNBC's Joe Scarborough, 4/9/03)
"I'm waiting to hear the words 'I was wrong' from some of the world's
most elite journalists, politicians and Hollywood types.... I just
wonder, who's going to be the first elitist to show the character to
say: 'Hey, America, guess what? I was wrong'? Maybe the White House
will get an apology, first, from the New York Times' Maureen Dowd. Now,
Ms. Dowd mocked the morality of this war....
"Do you all remember Scott Ritter, you know, the former chief U.N.
weapons inspector who played chief stooge for Saddam Hussein? Well, Mr.
Ritter actually told a French radio network that -- quote, "The United
States is going to leave Baghdad with its tail between its legs,
defeated." Sorry, Scott. I think you've been chasing the wrong tail,
again "Maybe disgraced commentators and politicians alike, like Daschle,
Jimmy Carter, Dennis Kucinich, and all those others, will step forward
tonight and show the content of their character by simply admitting
what we know already: that their wartime predictions were arrogant,
they were misguided and they were dead wrong. Maybe, just maybe, these
self-anointed critics will learn from their mistakes. But I doubt it.
After all, we don't call them 'elitists' for nothing."
(MSNBC's Joe Scarborough, 4/10/03)
"Over the next couple of weeks when we find the chemical weapons this
guy was amassing, the fact that this war was attacked by the left and
so the right was so vindicated, I think, really means that the left is
going to have to hang its head for three or four more years."
(Fox News Channel's Dick Morris, 4/9/03)
"This has been a tough war for commentators on the American left. To
hope for defeat meant cheering for Saddam Hussein. To hope for victory
meant cheering for President Bush. The toppling of Mr. Hussein, or at
least a statue of him, has made their arguments even harder to defend.
Liberal writers for ideologically driven magazines like The Nation and
for less overtly political ones like The New Yorker did not predict a
defeat, but the terrible consequences many warned of have not happened.
Now liberal commentators must address the victory at hand and confront
an ascendant conservative juggernaut that asserts United States might
can set the world right."
(New York Times reporter David Carr, 4/16/03)
"Well, the hot story of the week is victory.... The Tommy Franks-Don
Rumsfeld battle plan, war plan, worked brilliantly, a three-week war
with mercifully few American deaths or Iraqi civilian deaths.... There
is a lot of work yet to do, but all the naysayers have been humiliated
so far.... The final word on this is, hooray."
(Fox News Channel's Morton Kondracke, 4/12/03)
"Shouldn't the [Canadian] prime minister and all of us who thought the
war was hasty and dangerous and wrongheaded admit that we were wrong? I
mean, with the pictures of those Iraqis dancing in the streets, hauling
down statues of Saddam Hussein and gushing their thanks to the
Americans, isn't it clear that President Bush and Britain's Tony Blair
were right all along? If we believe it's a good thing that Hussein's
regime has been dismantled, aren't we hypocritical not to acknowledge
Bush's superior judgment?... Why can't those of us who thought the war
was a bad idea (or, at any rate, a premature one) let it go now and
just join in celebrating the victory wrought by our magnificent
military forces?"
(Washington Post's William Raspberry, 4/14/03)
"Some journalists, in my judgment, just can't stand success, especially
a few liberal columnists and newspapers and a few Arab reporters."
(CNN's Lou Dobbs, 4/14/03)
"Sean Penn is at it again. The Hollywood star takes out a full-page ad
out in the New York Times bashing George Bush. Apparently he still
hasn't figured out we won the war."
(MSNBC's Joe Scarborough, 5/30/03)
"This will be no war -- there will be a fairly brief and ruthless
military intervention.... The president will give an order. [The
attack] will be rapid, accurate and dazzling.... It will be greeted by
the majority of the Iraqi people as an emancipation. And I say, bring
it on."
(Christopher Hitchens, in a 1/28/03 debate-- cited in the Observer,
3/30/03)
"I will bet you the best dinner in the gaslight district of San Diego
that military action will not last more than a week. Are you willing to
take that wager?"
(Fox News Channel's Bill O'Reilly, 1/29/03)
"There's no way. There's absolutely no way. They may bomb for a matter
of weeks, try to soften them up as they did in Afghanistan. But once
the United States and Britain unleash, it's maybe hours. They're going
to fold like that."
(Fox News Channel's Bill O'Reilly, 2/10/03)
"He [Saddam Hussein] actually thought that he could stop us and win the
debate worldwide. But he didn't--he didn't bargain on a two- or three
week war. I actually thought it would be less than two weeks."
(NBC reporter Fred Francis, Chris Matthews Show, 4/13/03)
"Speaking to the U.N. Security Council last week, Secretary of State
Colin Powell made so strong a case that Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein
is in material breach of U.N. resolutions that only the duped, the dumb
and the desperate could ignore it."
(Cal Thomas, syndicated column, 2/12/03)
"Chris, more than anything else, real vindication for the
administration. One, credible evidence of weapons of mass destruction.
Two, you know what? There were a lot of terrorists here, really bad
guys. I saw them."
(MSNBC reporter Bob Arnot, 4/9/03)
"Even in the flush of triumph, doubts will be raised. Where are the
supplies of germs and poison gas and plans for nukes to justify
pre-emption? (Freed scientists will lead us to caches no inspectors
could find.) What about remaining danger from Baathist torturers and
war criminals forming pockets of resistance and plotting vengeance?
(Their death wish is our command.)"
(New York Times' William Safire, 4/10/03)
Coming home ? disillusioned
By Christopher H. Sheppard Special to The Seattle Times
April 12, 2006
Three years ago, I was a Marine Corps captain on the Iraqi/Kuwaiti border, participating in the invasion of Iraq. Awestruck, I heard our howitzers thunder and watched artillery rockets rise into the night sky and streak toward Iraq ? their light bathing the desert moonscape like giant arc welders.
As I watched the Iraq war begin, I completely trusted the Bush administration. I thought we were going to prove all of the left-wing antiwar protesters and dissenters wrong. I thought we were going to make America safer. Regrettably, I acknowledge that it was I who was wrong.
I believed the Bush administration when it said Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. I believed its assertion that Iraq was trying to buy yellowcake uranium from Africa and refine it into weapons-grade uranium for a nuclear bomb. I believed its claim Iraq had vast quantities of biological and chemical agents. After years of thorough inspections, all of these claims have been disproved.
I believed the administration when it claimed there was overwhelming evidence Iraq was in cahoots with al-Qaida. In January 2004, then-Secretary of State Colin Powell admitted that there was no concrete evidence linking Saddam Hussein and al-Qaida.
I believed the administration when it grandly proclaimed we were going to bring a stable, Western-style liberal democracy to Iraq, complete with religious tolerance and the rule of law. We never had enough troops in Iraq to restore civil order and the rule of law. The Iraqi elections have produced a ruling majority of Shiite fundamentalists and marginalized the seething Sunni minority. Iraq dangerously teeters on the brink of civil war. We have emboldened Iran and destabilized the entire Middle East.
I believed the administration when it claimed the war could be done quickly and cheaply. It said the war would cost only between $50 billion and $60 billion. It said that Iraqi oil revenue would fund the country's reconstruction. I believed President Bush when he landed on the USS Lincoln and said "major combat operations have ended."
The war has cost the American taxpayers $250 billion and counting. The vast majority ? 94 percent ? of the more than 2,300 United States service members killed in Iraq have occurred since Bush's "Top Gun" proclamation. The cost in men and materiel has been far beyond what we were led to believe.
I volunteered to go back to Iraq for the fall and winter of 2004-2005. I went back out of frustration and guilt; frustration from watching Iraq unravel on the news and guilt that I wasn't there trying to stop it. Many fine Marines from my reserve battalion felt the same and volunteered to go back. I buried my mounting suspicions and mustered enough trust and faith in my civilian leadership to go back.
I returned disillusioned by what I saw. I participated in the second battle of Fallujah in November 2004. We crushed the insurgents in the city, but we only ended up scattering them throughout the province. The dumb ones stayed and died. The smart ones left town before the battle, to garner more recruits and fight another day. We were simply the little Dutch boy with our finger in the dike. In retrospect, we never had enough troops to firmly control the region; we had just enough to maintain a tenuous equilibrium.
I now know I wrongfully placed my faith and trust in a presidential administration hopelessly mired in incompetence, hubris and a lack of accountability. It planned a war based on false intelligence and unrealistic assumptions. It has strategically surrendered the condition of victory in Iraq to people who do not share our vision, values or interests. The Bush administration has proven successful at only one thing in Iraq ? painting us into a corner with no feasible exit.
I will never trust any of them again.
Christopher H. Sheppard is a former Marine captain who served two tours of duty in Iraq as a combat engineer. He currently is finishing his master's degree in mass communication and lives in Marysville.
Iraqi men hold up a helmet of the type worn by worn by coalition forces after a roadside explosion targetting a US Patrol Sunday April 2, 2006 in Ramadi, Iraq, 115 kilometers (70 miles) west of Baghdad. Roadside bombs targeted U.S. convoys Sunday in Ramadi west of Baghdad and the northern city of Mosul as as Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw made a surprise visit to press Iraqi politicians to speed up the formation of the government.(AP Photo/Bilal Hussein)
Chopper lost in Iraq, pilots feared dead April 2, 2006
BAGHDAD (Reuters) - A U.S. military helicopter lost south of Baghdad on Saturday is believed to have been shot down and its two pilots are feared dead, the U.S. military said on Sunday.
In an Internet posting, a group calling itself the Rashedeen Army said
it had shot down a U.S. helicopter near the town of Yusufiya, an area
that sees considerable Sunni insurgent activity just southwest of the
capital.
Delta Force founder: Bush may have started World War III
A founding member of the elite counter-terrorist unit, Delta Force, suggested that President Bush's invasion of Iraq may have started World War III, according to an interview set for Saturday's Los Angeles Daily News, RAW STORY has learned.
Retired Command Sergeant Major Eric Haney's book "Inside Delta Force" became the basis for the CBS drama "The Unit," where he now assumes technical adviser and executive producer duties.
Excerpts from the forthcoming article written by David Kronke:
Q: What's your assessment of the war in Iraq?
A: Utter debacle. But it had to be from the very first. The reasons were wrong. The reasons of this administration for taking this nation to war were not what they stated. (Army Gen.) Tommy Franks was brow-beaten and ... pursued warfare that he knew strategically was wrong in the long term. That's why he retired immediately afterward. His own staff could tell him what was going to happen afterward.
We have fomented civil war in Iraq. We have probably fomented internecine war in the Muslim world between the Shias and the Sunnis, and I think Bush may well have started the third world war, all for their own personal policies.
Q: What do you make of the torture debate? Cheney ...
A: (Interrupting) That's Cheney's pursuit. The only reason anyone tortures is because they like to do it. It's about vengeance, it's about revenge, or it's about cover-up. You don't gain intelligence that way. Everyone in the world knows that.
British soldier quits army, accuses US troops of illegal tactics in Iraq
Sun Mar 12,2006
LONDON (AFP) - An elite British soldier reveals that he quit the army after refusing to fight in
Iraq anymore on moral grounds because of the "illegal" tactics used by US troops on the ground.
Ben Griffin, a member of the Special Air Service (SAS) described in an interview with The Sunday Telegraph the experiences that led him to end his impressive army career after just three months in Baghdad.
"I saw a lot of things in Baghdad that were illegal or just wrong," Griffin told the weekly newspaper in his first interview since leaving the SAS.
"I knew, so others must have known, that this was not the way to conduct operations if you wanted to win the hearts and minds of the local population.
"And if you can't win the hearts and minds of the people, you can't win the war."
"We would radio back to our headquarters that we were not going to detain certain people because, as far as we were concerned, they were not a threat because they were old men or obviously farmers, but the Americans would say: 'No, bring them back'," Griffin said.
"The Americans had this catch-all approach to lifting suspects. The tactics were draconian and completely ineffective."
The SAS soldier spoke of another operation which netted a group of innocent civilians who were clearly nothing to do with the insurgency.
"I couldn't understand why we had done this, so I said to my troop commander: 'Would we have behaved in the same way in the Balkans or Northern Ireland?' He shrugged his shoulders and said: 'This is Iraq', and I thought: 'And that makes it all right?'"
Griffin said he believed US soldiers had no respect for Iraqis, whom they regarded as "sub-human".
Dave Zweifel: Another Iraq story gets debunked
By Dave Zweifel
In November 2001, just two months after the terrorist attacks on New York and
Washington, two high-profile U.S. journalists Chris Hedges of the New York Times
and Christopher Buchanan of PBS' "Frontline" were ushered to a meeting in a
Beirut hotel with a man identified as Jamal al-Ghurairy, an Iraqi lieutenant
general who had fled Saddam Hussein.
The high-ranking Iraqi military officer claimed he had witnessed terrorist
training camps in Iraq where Islamic militants learned how to hijack airplanes.
About 40 foreign nationals were based there at any given time, he said.
"We were training these people to attack installations important to the
United States," he told the journalists at the meeting arranged by the Iraqi
National Congress.
Reporter Hedges and producer Buchanan found Ghurairy to be very convincing,
worried for his life and very insistent that his face couldn't be shown on
camera. He was accompanied by a well-organized entourage.
A story appeared a couple of days later on the front page of the Times and
then "Frontline" followed with a report on public television. The stories
generated numerous editorials and op-ed pieces and, of course, became the topic
of the week on cable talk shows.
Now, the liberal investigative magazine Mother Jones has exposed the
"general" as a fake.
"The story of Saddam training foreign fighters to hijack airplanes was
instrumental in building the case to invade Iraq," a detailed report in the
March-April issue says. "But it turns out that the Iraqi general who told the
story to the New York Times and 'Frontline' was a complete fake a low-ranking
former soldier whom Ahmed Chalabi's aides had coached to deceive the media."
The Mother Jones investigator, Jack Fairweather, was even able to track down
a Lt. Gen. Ghurairy in Iraq. He interviewed him in Fallujah and this Ghurairy
said he had never left Iraq, nor had he ever spoken to the U.S. journalists.
According to the magazine, the Ghurairy tale was one of 108 stories the Iraqi
National Congress and Chalabi, who was exiled from Iraq, planted in the American
and British media between October 2001 and May 2002. Chalabi is the figure on
whom the Bush administration relied for much of the Iraqi intelligence about
weapons of mass destruction and Saddam's supposed connection with the 9/11
terrorists.
After the war started, the Bush neocons had a falling out with Chalabi,
discovering that much of the information he had provided was fabricated. They
also accused him of spying on the U.S. for neighboring Iran. He has had a
resurgence in Iraq, though, and is now the deputy prime minister in the new
U.S.-sponsored government and apparently back in favor with the Bush people.
He obviously had a major role in helping sell the war to the American people.
Thanks to the deceptions, which a compliant American press didn't uncover, some
69 percent of the American public believed that Saddam had a role in the 9/11
attacks.
Just how hookwinked Americans were is underscored
by this Mother Jones expose.
Dave Zweifel is editor of The Capital Times.
Iraq pushes Bush support to all time low
Julian Borger in Washington and Michael Howard in Irbil
Wednesday March 1, 2006
The Guardian
Profound pessimism about the Iraq war has pushed George Bush's
popularity to an all-time low of 34%, as polls yesterday showed
American civilians and soldiers at odds with the White House over US
objectives and strategy.
Public opinion is sceptical that this is the right policy. A poll
published by CBS News yesterday, found only 36% of Americans said the
war is going well, and 30% thought Mr Bush was doing a good job of
handling the conflict. Even fewer believed the results of the war were
worth the cost. Those concerns have dragged Mr Bush's overall approval
ratings down to levels comparable with Richard Nixon's at a similar
point in his second term. Now, only 34% of the country approves of the
way Mr Bush is handling his job and only 29% has a favourable view of
him as a person.
It is clear that if it were up to the troops, the US would be out of
Iraq by the end of the year. In a poll of troops in Iraqi bases,
conducted by Zogby International, 72% said the US should withdraw in
2006; more than a third of those said the troops should leave
immediately. Just over one in five agreed with the president that they
should stay in Iraq "as long as needed".
Another striking element of the poll was the opinion of US soldiers
over why they were there.
Only a quarter thought their role was establishing a democracy "that
can be a model for the Arab world".
Nearly 86% said it was "to retaliate for Saddam's role in the 9/11
attacks", a role proved to have been non-existent.
Study: Flood of Iraq Vets Seeks Mental-Health Care by Joseph Shapiro
All Things Considered, February 28, 2006 ? A new study shows that 35
percent of troops returning from Iraq are seeking help for
mental-health issues. Most of the problems are easily treatable, but
more than one in 10 soldiers are diagnosed with a serious mental
illness such as post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety or depression.
When President Bush held a public meeting with troops by satellite
last fall, they were miraculously upbeat. And all along, unrepentant
hawks (most of whom have never been to Iraq) have insisted that
journalists are misreporting Iraq and that most soldiers are gung-ho
about their mission.
Hogwash! A new poll to be released today shows that U.S. Soldiers
overwhelmingly want out of Iraq ? and soon.
The poll is the first of U.S. Troops currently serving in Iraq,
according to John Zogby, the pollster. Conducted by Zogby
International and LeMoyne College, it asked 944 service members, "How
long should U.S. Troops stay in Iraq?"
Only 23 percent backed Mr. Bush's position that they should stay as
long as necessary. In contrast, 72 percent said that U.S. Troops
should be pulled out within one year. Of those, 29 percent said they
should withdraw "immediately."
That's one more bit of evidence that our grim stay-the-course policy
in Iraq has failed. Even the American troops on the ground don't buy
into it ? and having administration officials pontificate from the
safety of Washington about the need for ordinary soldiers to stay the
course further erodes military morale.
While the White House emphasizes the threat from non-Iraqi terrorists,
only 26 percent of the U.S. Troops say that the insurgency would end
if those foreign fighters could be kept out. A plurality believes that
the insurgency is made up overwhelmingly of discontented Iraqi Sunnis.
So what would it take to win in Iraq? Maybe that was the single most
depressing finding in this poll.
By a two-to-one ratio, the troops said that "to control the insurgency
we need to double the level of ground troops and bombing missions."
And since there is zero chance of that happening, a majority of troops
seemed to be saying that they believe this war to be unwinnable.
"I can tell you the main reason behind all our woes ? it is America." The New York Times reporter is quoting the complaint of a clothing merchant in a Sunni stronghold in Iraq. "Everything that is going on between Sunni and Shiites, the troublemaker in the middle is America."
One can't doubt that the American objective in Iraq has failed. The same edition of the paper quotes a fellow of the American Enterprise Institute. Mr. Reuel Marc Gerecht backed the American intervention. He now speaks of the bombing of the especially sacred Shiite mosque in Samara and what that has precipitated in the way of revenge. He concludes that ?The bombing has completely demolished? what was being attempted ? to bring Sunnis into the defense and interior ministries.
Our mission has failed because Iraqi animosities have proved uncontainable by an invading army of 130,000 Americans. The great human reserves that call for civil life haven't proved strong enough. No doubt they are latently there, but they have not been able to contend against the ice men who move about in the shadows with bombs and grenades and pistols.
The Iraqis we hear about are first indignant, and then infuriated, that Americans aren't on the scene to protect them and to punish the aggressors. And so they join the clothing merchant who says that everything is the fault of the Americans.
The Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, elucidates on the complaint against Americans. It is not only that the invaders are American, it is that they are "Zionists." It would not be surprising to learn from an anonymously cited American soldier that he can understand why Saddam Hussein was needed to keep the Sunnis and the Shiites from each others' throats.
A problem for American policymakers ? for President Bush, ultimately ? is to cope with the postulates and decide how to proceed.
One of these postulates, from the beginning, was that the Iraqi people, whatever their tribal differences, would suspend internal divisions in order to get on with life in a political structure that guaranteed them religious freedom.
The accompanying postulate was that the invading American army would succeed in training Iraqi soldiers and policymkers to cope with insurgents bent on violence.
This last did not happen. And the administration has, now, to cope with failure. It can defend itself historically, standing by the inherent reasonableness of the postulates. After all, they govern our policies in Latin America, in Africa, and in much of Asia. The failure in Iraq does not force us to generalize that violence and antidemocratic movements always prevail. It does call on us to adjust to the question, What do we do when we see that the postulates do not prevail ? in the absence of interventionist measures (we used these against Hirohito and Hitler) which we simply are not prepared to take? It is healthier for the disillusioned American to concede that in one theater in the Mideast, the postulates didn't work. The alternative would be to abandon the postulates. To do that would be to register a kind of philosophical despair. The killer insurgents are not entitled to blow up the shrine of American idealism.
Mr. Bush has a very difficult internal problem here because to make the kind of concession that is strategically appropriate requires a mitigation of policies he has several times affirmed in high-flown pronouncements. His challenge is to persuade himself that he can submit to a historical reality without forswearing basic commitments in foreign policy.
He will certainly face the current development as military leaders are expected to do: They are called upon to acknowledge a tactical setback, but to insist on the survival of strategic policies.
Yes, but within their own counsels, different plans have to be made. And the kernel here is the acknowledgment of defeat.
(c) 2006 Universal Press Syndicate
Iraqi Province Cuts Off U.S. Forces Feb. 20, 2006
KARBALA, Iraq - The governing council of Karbala province said Monday
it was suspending contact with U.S. forces over the behavior of
soldiers during a visit to the governor's office two days ago.
The decision followed similar moves by leaders of Maysan and Basra
provinces, which have frozen ties with British forces in southern
Iraq.
Karbala provincial spokesman Abdel Amir Hanoun complained that U.S.
soldiers brought dogs inside the building when their commander visited
provincial Gov. Aqeel al-Khazraji, considered an insult by the
council.
They also blocked roads leading to the governor's office, preventing
council members and the governor from parking cars outside the
building, Hanoun said. The governor instructed the council to suspend
contacts until U.S. forces apologize, he said.
The Karbala council is controlled by the Supreme Council of Islamic
Revolution in Iraq, the country's largest Shiite party, and Dawa, the
party of Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari.
On Sunday, Maysan province decided to suspend ties with British
authorities pending an investigation into a recently released
videotape of British soldiers beating Iraqi youths during a January
2004 riot there.
.
The Maysan council also called for the release of all the province's
detainees held by coalition authorities.
The governing council for Basra province, headquarters of Britain's
more than 8,000-member military contingent in Iraq, also cut ties with
the British military and civilian operations over the video.
Mon, Jan. 30, 2006
Nearly half of Iraqis support attacks on U.S. troops, poll finds
BY DREW BROWN
Knight Ridder Newspapers
WASHINGTON - A new poll found that nearly half of Iraqis approve of attacks on U.S.-led forces, and most favor setting a timetable for American troops to leave.
The poll also found that 80 percent of Iraqis think the United States plans to maintain permanent bases in the country even if the newly elected Iraqi government asks American forces to leave. Researchers found a link between support for attacks and the belief among Iraqis that the United States intends to keep a permanent military presence in the country.
At the same time, the poll found that many Iraqis think that some outside military forces are required to keep Iraq stable until the new government can field adequate security forces on its own. Only 39 percent of Iraqis surveyed thought that Iraqi police and army forces were strong enough to deal with the security challenges on their own, while 59 percent thought Iraq still needed the help of military forces from other countries.
Seventy percent of Iraqis favor setting a timetable for U.S. forces to withdraw, with half of those favoring a withdrawal within six months and the other half favoring a withdrawal over two years.
"Iraqis are demanding a timetable for U.S. withdrawal, and most believe that the U.S. has no plans to leave even if the new government asks them to," said Steven Kull, the director of the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland, which conducted the poll. "This appears to be leading some to even support attacks on U.S.-led troops, even though many feel they also continue to need the presence of U.S. troops awhile longer."
"If you put it all together, it's clear there is a center of gravity, not towards immediate withdrawal, but for the U.S. to be there in a way that affirms their intent to withdraw eventually," he said. "There is real consensus on that point."
The poll was to be published Tuesday by WorldPublicOpinion.org, a Web site that reports on public opinion from around the globe. The survey was conducted Jan. 2-5, with a nationwide sample of 1,150 Iraqis from country's main religious and ethnic sects.
According to the poll's findings, 47 percent of Iraqis approve of attacks on American forces, but there were large differences among ethnic and religious groups. Among Sunni Muslims, 88 percent said they approved of the attacks. That approval was found among 41 percent of Shiite Muslims and 16 percent of Kurds.
Ninety-three percent of Iraqis oppose violence against Iraqi security forces, and 99 percent oppose attacks on Iraqi civilians.
"They're pretty much the same results that have been going on since 2003, so it's consistent with a lot of the attitudes that exist," said Anthony H. Cordesman, a former Pentagon official and a longtime Iraq watcher at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a center for national-security studies in Washington. "We're not seen as liberators by the Sunnis, but what else is new?"
Previous samples from Shiites who supported attacks on coalition troops have been much lower in the past, Cordesman said, but support for U.S.-led forces even among Shiites - who were oppressed under Saddam Hussein, a Sunni - has been mixed from the beginning.
"It was clear after the invasion that about a third or more of Shiites did not see us as liberators, and did not see the war as justified, and somewhere around 15 percent supported attacks on coalition forces then," he said. "We're also seen as creating all kinds of internal problems without creating any kind of internal solutions."
U.S. officials have acknowledged in the past that the mere presence of American troops in Iraq has helped fuel the insurgency, which is dominated by Iraq's Sunni minority. U.S. officials have sent mixed signals about long-term American intentions.
During a visit with U.S. troops in Fallujah on Christmas Day, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said "at the moment there are no plans for permanent bases" in Iraq. "It is a subject that has not even been discussed with the Iraqi government," he said.
According to the poll, 80 percent of Iraqis overall assume that the United States intends to keep bases in Iraq. The breakdown of people who have that belief is 92 percent of Sunnis, 79 percent of Shiites and 67 percent of Kurds.
More than 80 percent of Sunnis favor a six-month withdrawal period; 49 percent of Shiites favor a longer withdrawal. Just 29 percent of all Iraqis surveyed say U.S. forces should be reduced only as the security situation improves, though more than half of the Kurds surveyed favor that option.
Iraq's Sadr says US spreading strife among Arabs
Feb. 6, 2006
DAMASCUS (Reuters) - Iraqi Shi'ite Muslim leader Moqtada al-Sadr met
Syrian leaders on Monday and said the United States and
Israel were trying to spread strife among Arab countries.
Sadr, who led two anti-U.S. uprisings in Iraq, expressed support for
Syria, which is facing western pressure over its alleged support for
rebels in Iraq and the killing of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik
al-Hariri.
"Both Iraq and Syria are under U.S. pressure. We have good relations
but our common enemies, Israel, the United States and Britain, are
trying to spread strife among us. The people will not fall for this,"
he told reporters.
"I will help Syria in every way. We are witnessing Islamic
solidarity," said Sadr, who met President Bashar al-Assad and Foreign
Minister Farouq al-Shara.
Al-Sadr vows to defend Iran
Jan. 26, 2006
Muqtada al-Sadr, the Iraqi cleric, has said his al-Mahdi Army will
help to defend Iran if it is attacked.
Speaking on Sunday on the sidelines of a meeting with Ali Larijani,
the senior Iranian nuclear negotiator, he said his militia was formed
to defend Islam.
"The forces of Mahdi Army defend the interests of Iraq and Islamic
countries," al-Sadr said. "If neighbouring Islamic countries,
including Iran, become the target of attacks, we will support them.
"The Mahdi Army is beyond the Iraqi army. It was established to defend
Islam."
Al-Sadr's comments could be seen as a message that Tehran has allies
who could make things difficult for US forces in the region if Iran's
nuclear facilities are attacked.
Al-Sadr's backing of Iran, a Shia-majority nation, comes after a hint
from Israel's defence minister that the Jewish state was preparing for
military action to stop Iran's nuclear programme.
US used white phosphorus on Iraqi civilians - report
By Phil Stewart
November 8, 2005
ROME (Reuters) - U.S. forces in Iraq have used incendiary white phosphorus against civilians and a firebomb similar to napalm against military targets, Italian state-run broadcaster RAI reported on Tuesday.
A RAI documentary showed images of bodies recovered after a November 2004 offensive by U.S. troops on the town of Falluja, which it said proved the use of white phosphorus against men, women and children who were burned to the bone.
"I do know that white phosphorus was used," said Jeff Englehart in the RAI documentary, which identified him as a former soldier in the U.S. 1st Infantry Division in Iraq.
An incendiary device, white phosphorus is used by the military to conceal troop movements with smoke, mark targets or light up combat areas. The use of incendiary weapons against civilians has been banned by the Geneva Convention since 1980.
The United States did not sign the relevant protocol to the convention, a U.N. official in New York said.
Some Western newspapers reported at the time that white phosporus had been used during the offensive.
In the documentary called "Falluja: The Hidden Massacre," RAI also said U.S. forces used the Mark 77 firebomb, a weapon similar to napalm, on military targets in Iraq in 2003.
It cited a letter it said came from British Armed Forces Minister Adam Ingram, claiming 30 MK 77 weapons were used on military targets in Iraq between March 31 and April 2, 2003.
UK Ministry of Defence poll: Iraqis support attacks on
British troops By Sean Rayment, Defence
Correspondent (Filed: 23/10/2005)
Millions of Iraqis believe that suicide attacks
against British troops are justified, a secret military poll commissioned by
senior officers has revealed.
The poll, undertaken for the Ministry of Defence and seen by The
Sunday Telegraph, shows that up to 65 per cent of Iraqi citizens support attacks
and fewer than one per cent think Allied military involvement is helping to
improve security in their country.
It demonstrates for the first time the true strength
of anti-Western feeling in Iraq after more than two and a half years of
bloody occupation.
The nationwide survey also suggests that the coalition has lost
the battle to win the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people, which Tony Blair and
George W Bush believed was fundamental to creating a safe and secure
country.
These are the major findings from the secret MoD poll as published in The
Daily Telegraph:
? Forty-five per cent of Iraqis believe attacks against British and American
troops are justified - rising to 65 per cent in the British-controlled Maysan
province;
? 82 per cent are "strongly opposed" to the presence of coalition troops;
? less than one per cent of the population believes coalition forces are
responsible for any improvement in security;
? 67 per cent of Iraqis feel less secure because of the occupation;
? 43 per cent of Iraqis believe conditions for peace and stability have
worsened;
? 72 per cent do not have confidence in the multi-national forces.
Iraqis shout anti-British and anti-American slogans while holding pictures of Shiite cleric Muqtada al Sadr after Friday prayers in Basra, Iraq, Friday Sept. 23 2005. Rioting broke out in Basra on Monday after British armored vehicles and troops encircled a jail where two British soldiers were taken after their arrest by Iraqi police. Basra authorities accused the British of violating Iraqi sovereignty, and the provincial governor ordered all Iraqis to stop cooperating with the British. (AP Photo/Nabil al-Jurani)
Judge Renews Warrant for British Soldiers By ABBAS FAYADH, Associated Press Writer
Spet. 24, 2005
BASRA, Iraq - An Iraqi judge said on Saturday he had renewed arrest warrants for two British soldiers who were rescued from jail early this week by troops using armor to crash through the prison walls.
The violence infuriated local Iraqi police and government officials, and tensions remained high in Basra on Saturday. Rockets were fired at two buildings housing British officials, police said.
Judge Raghib al-Mudhafar, chief of the Basra Anti-Terrorism Court, said Saturday that he reissued homicide arrest warrants for the two soldiers on Thursday.
But the British government said its troops are not legally bound by the warrants.
In Basra early Saturday morning, several rockets were fired at the British and American consulates in the city, but both fell in a nearby field, hurting no one, said police Capt. Mushtaq Khazim. Also, three rockets were fired at the Shat al-Arab hotel, the headquarters of the British army in Basra, he said. One rocket hit the building, without causing casualties.
EXCLUSIVE : A decorated Army officer reveals new allegations of
detainee mistreatment in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Did the military ignore his charges ?
The US Army has launched a criminal investigation into new
allegations of serious prisoner abuse in Iraq and Afghanistan made by a
decorated former Captain in the Army's 82nd Airborne Division, an Army spokesman
has confirmed to TIME.
The claims of the Captain, who has not been named, are in part
corroborated by statements of two sergeants who served with him in the 82nd
Airborne; the allegations form the basis of a report from Human Rights Watch
obtained by TIME and due to be released in the next few days (Since this story
first went online, the organization has decided to put out its report; it can be found
here :
Senate sources tell TIME that the Captain has also reported
his charges to three senior Republican senators: Majority Leader Bill Frist,
Armed Services Committee chairman John Warner and John McCain, a former torture
victim in Vietnam. A Senate Republican staffer familiar with both the Captain
and his allegations told TIME he appeared "extremely credible."
The new allegations center around systematic abuse of Iraqi detainees by men
of the 82nd Airborne at Camp Mercury, a forward operating base located near
Fallujah, the scene of a major uprising against the US occupation in April 2004,
according to sources familiar with the report and accounts given by the Captain,
who is in his mid-20s, to Senate staff. Much of the abuse allegedly occurred in
2003 and 2004, before and during the period the Army was conducting an internal
investigation into the Abu Ghraib prison scandal, but prior to when the abuses
at Abu Ghraib became public. Other alleged abuses described in the Human Rights
report occurred at Camp Tiger, near Iraq's border with Syria, and previously in
Afghanistan. In addition, the report details what the Captain says was his
unsuccessful effort over 17 months to get the attention of military superiors.
Ultimately he approached the Republican senators.
The Human Rights Watch report?as well as accounts given to Senate
staff?describe officers as aware of the abuse but routinely ignoring or covering
it up, amid chronic confusion over US military detention policies and whether or
not the Geneva Convention applied. The Captain is quoted in the report
describing how military intelligence personnel at Camp Mercury directed enlisted
men to conduct daily beatings of prisoners prior to questioning; to subject
detainees to strenuous forced exercises to the point of unconsciousness; and to
expose them to extremes of heat and cold?all methods designed to produce greater
cooperation with interrogators. Non-uniformed personnel?apparently working for
the Central Intelligence Agency, according to the soldiers?also interrogated
prisoners. The interrogators were out of view but not out of earshot of the
soldiers, who overheard what they came to believe was abuse.
Specific instances of abuse described in the Human Rights Watch report
include severe beatings, including one incident when a soldier allegedly broke a
detainee's leg with a metal bat. Others include prisoners being stacked in human
pyramids (unlike the human pyramids at Abu Ghraib, the prisoners at Camp Mercury
were clothed); soldiers administering blows to the face, chest and extremities
of prisoners; and detainees having their faces and eyes exposed to burning
chemicals, being forced into stress positions for long periods leading to
unconsciousness and having their water and food withheld.
Prisoners were designated as PUCs (pronounced "pucks")?or "persons under
control." A regular pastime at Camp Mercury, the report says, involved off-duty
soldiers gathering at PUC tents, where prisoners were held, and working off
their frustrations in activities known as "F____a PUC" (beating the prisoner)
and "Smoke a PUC" (forced physical exertion, sometimes to the point of
collapse). Broken limbs and similar painful injuries would be treated with
analgesics, the soldiers claim, as medical staff would fill out paperwork
stating the injuries occurred during capture. Support for some of the
allegations of abuse come from a sergeant of the 82nd Airborne who served in
both Iraq and Afghanistan. Human Rights Watch quotes him as saying that, "To
'F____ a PUC' means to beat him up. We would give them blows to the head, chest,
legs, and stomach, pull them down, kick dirt on them. This happened every day.
To 'smoke' someone is to put them in stress positions until they get muscle
fatigue and pass out. That happened every day. Some days we would just get bored
so we would have everyone sit in a corner and then make them get in a pyramid.
This was before Abu Ghraib but just like it. We did that for amusement."
"On their day off people would show up all the time," the sergeant continues
in the HRW report. "Everyone in camp knew if you wanted to work out your
frustration you show up at the PUC tent. In a way it was sport. The cooks were
all US soldiers. One day a sergeant shows up and tells a PUC to grab a pole. He
told him to bend over and broke the guy's leg with a mini Louisville Slugger
that was a metal bat. He was the cook."
AP - Fri May 20, 2005 Iraqis walk over U.S. and Israeli flags, in the Sadr City area of Baghdad Friday, May 20, 2005. Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr called on people to paint Israeli and American flags on the ground in front of mosques so people step on them in protest of raids against holy places and an allegation, that has since been retracted, of the desecration of a Quran in Guantanamo Bay. Writing in English on left reads ' No No No USA'. (AP Photo/Karim Kadim)
Clashes Break Out Over U.S. Occupation By ABDUL HUSSEIN AL-OBEIDI, Associated Press Writer
NAJAF, Iraq - Thousands of Shiites, many waving Islam's holy book over
their heads, protested the U.S.-led occupation in Iraq on Friday,
setting off clashes in at least one southern city as they answered a
call by a radical cleric to paint Israeli and American flags on the
ground and stomp on them.
Sunni Muslim clerics also delivered fiery sermons in Baghdad and in
cities like Ramadi, capital of the volatile Sunni Triangle in western
Iraq, where more than 3,000 people protested.
In a separate action, Sunni Muslims began shutting down their mosques
to complain about their alleged mistreatment at the hands of the
country's majority Shiites ? who they have blamed for kidnapping and
killing several of their clerics.
The U.S. military also launched what it said would be an aggressive
investigation to discover how pictures of an underwear clad Saddam
Hussein wound up on the front page of a British tabloid.
The pictures, the military said, violated military guidelines and
possibly the Geneva convention on the humane treatment of prisoners.
They are expected to further fuel anti-American sentiment among Iraqi
supporters of the former dictator.
PHOTO: Shiite demonstrators burn U.S. flags as they heed a call by Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr to protest raids against holy places and the previously alleged desecration of a Quran in Guantanamo Bay, in Najaf, 160 kilometers (100 miles) south of Baghdad, Iraq Friday, May 20, 2005. (AP Photo/Mohammed Hato)
The protests in Najaf, Nasiriyah and Kufa, came as Iraq's Shiite prime
minister, Ibrahim al-Jaafari, announced that he will visit Syria,
which has been blamed for harboring insurgents bent on starting a
civil war in Iraq.
In Baghdad, clashes also broke out in two northern neighborhoods
across the Tigris River. In Kazimiyah, a suicide bombing targeting the
house of Iraqi national security adviser, Mouwafak al-Rubaie, killed
two civilians and wounded three, police said.
After the explosion, unknown gunmen in Azamiyah opened fire at a U.S.
base in Kazimiyah on the western side of the river, witnesses said.
The gunmen later fled, they added. Witnesses reported seeing U.S.
Apache attack helicopters firing rockets into the neighborhood.
A U.S. soldier was killed early Friday by a
roadside bomb attack near Taji, 12 miles north of Baghdad, the
military said. The soldier's identity was withheld pending
notification of next of kin.
A roadside bomb also destroyed a U.S. military truck and wounded an
unspecified number of American soldiers on a highway in southeastern
Baghdad, said a military spokeswoman and police Lt. Mazin Saeed.
Bush's
Baghdad: It's just pure hell. (Newsweek) "The Pentagon secretly keeps
track of many grim statistics in Iraq. The numbers are not encouraging... An
accidentally declassified Pentagon report about a killing on the road to Baghdad
airport at the beginning of March shows quite clearly how much worse the overall
situation is than the Bush administration would like us, or even its allies in
the Coalition forces, to believe... 'From July 2004 to late March
2005,' says the document, 'there were 15,527 attacks against Coalition Forces
throughout Iraq.' Then comes one of several paragraphs marked S//NF (secret,
not for distribution to foreign nationals): 'From 1 November 2004 to 12
March 2005 there were 3306 attacks in the Baghdad area. Of these, 2400 were
directed against Coalition Forces.' In a span of four and a half months,
which included the election turning point, that?s not only a hell of a lot
of hits in the capital city, it's just pure hell."
Anti-U.S. Protests Spread in Afghanistan and Pakistan
--Anti-American violence spread across Afghanistan and into Pakistan today in the third
day of demonstrations and clashes with the police. A provincial office of CARE
International was ransacked and four protesters were killed in a
continuation of the most widespread protests against the American presence since
the fall of the Taliban regime more than three years ago.
Iraqis burn an American flag during a demonstration in Baghdad, Iraq
Saturday, April 9, 2005. Tens of thousands called Saturday for
American forces to withdraw from Iraq. The demonstration overflowed
Firdos Square, where U.S Marines pulled down a towering statue of
Saddam Hussein two years ago to the day.(AP Photo/Karim Kadim)
Men paraded with cardboard cut outs of Saddam, US President George W.
Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair with bloodied fangs and the
writing 'international terrorist'.
"In our unity, you have cut off the tongues of all the people who are
saying if the occupation left there would be civil war," Sadr said in
his speech, delivered to the crowd by his representative Sheikh Nasir
al-Saaidi.
"There will be no peace and no security until the occupation leaves."
Sunni clerics from the Committee of Muslim Scholars, which organized a
boycott of historic January elections, also urged followers to join
the protest.
"All of Iraq is united against the occupation," said Adnan Hamoud, 45,
from the restive Sunni city of Samarra north of Baghdad.
Some Christians paraded around the square with banners reading: "We
support Sayed Moqtada's call for national unity."
Iraqis urge US exit
April 9, 2005
BAGHDAD (AFP) - Tens of thousands of protestors poured into Baghdad's
Firdos square to demand US troops leave the country, as 15 Iraqi
soldiers were killed in a roadside bombing.
Chanting "No, no, USA," protesters converged Saturday on the square, a
symbol of the ouster of former president Saddam Hussein, two years to
the day since Baghdad fell to US forces.
The rally is believed to be the largest demonstration since US troops
entered the country.
"Oh God, cut off their necks, the way they are cutting off our necks
and terrorising us," said Sadr representative Sheikh Nasir al-Saaidi,
reading a speech from his boss. "There will be no peace, no security,
until the occupation leaves."
Iraqi flags fluttered in the sea of demonstrators, many of whom were
dressed in black, the uniform of Sadr's Mehdi Army militia. Many wore
green and black Islamic headbands.
Some waved the notorious picture of a hooded naked Iraqi detainee,
with wires attached to his body. It was released during the Abu Ghraib
prison scandal last year that blemished the US record in Iraq.
Demonstrators also carried signs saying "No to the occupation," "No to
the devil" as they descended on the square from north, east and west.
"The war has been finished for two years. What did we get? Nothing.
Our country has become the centre of terrorism," said Ali Hussein, 30,
from Sadr City, who was dressed all in black. "There is no
electricity, no services, no nothing."
A shopkeeper from Sadr City, Baqr Mussa, vented frustration at the
continuing US presence and the failure by the Americans to execute
Saddam. He was dressed in white religious robes, symbolic of
martyrdom.
"We are very angry. We don't believe we've just lived two years since
the war. All the buildings are still burnt and destroyed," Mussa said.
Most violent incidents in Iraq go unreported By Patrick Cockburn in Mosul
18 April 2005
Belfast Telegraph -
Ironically, one reason why Washington can persuade the outside world that its venture in Iraq is finally coming right is that it is too dangerous for reporters to travel outside Baghdad or stray far from their hotels in the capital. The threat to all foreigners was underlined last week when an American contractor was snatched by kidnappers.
When I was travelling in the northern city of Mosul this week, my guards ? Kurdish members of the Iraqi National Guard ? said it was too dangerous for them to travel with me in uniform in official vehicles. They donned Arab gowns, hid their weapons and drove through the city in a civilian car.
Most violent incidents in Iraq go unreported. We saw one suicide bomb explosion, clouds of smoke and dust erupting into the air, and heard another in the space of an hour. Neither was mentioned in official reports. Last year US soldiers told the IoS that they do not tell their superiors about attacks on them unless they suffer casualties. This avoids bureaucratic hassle and "our generals want to hear about the number of attacks going down not up". This makes the official Pentagon claim that the number of insurgent attacks is down from 140 a day in January to 40 a day this month dubious.
US casualties have fallen to about one dead a day in March compared with four a day in January and five a day in November. But this is the result of a switch in American strategy rather than a sign of a collapse in the insurgency. US military spokesmen make plain that America's military priority has changed from offensive operations to training Iraqi troops and police. More than 2,000 US military advisers are working with Iraqi forces.
With US networks largely confined to their hotels in Baghdad by fear of kidnapping, it is possible to sell the American public the idea that no news is good news. General George Casey, the top US commander in Iraq, said recently that if all goes well "we shall make fairly substantial reductions in the size of our forces". Other senior US officers say this will be of the order of four brigades, from 17 to 13, or a fall in the number of US troops in Iraq from 142,000 to 105,000 by next year.
The real change leading to the US troop reduction is probably more in the US than in Iraq. The White House finds its military commitment in Iraq politically damaging at home. The easiest way to bring the troops home is, as in Vietnam, to declare a victory and full confidence in US-trained Iraqi forces to win the war. These soldiers and police supposedly number 152,000, but it is not clear who is being counted.
The figure may include the 14,000 blue-uniformed Iraqi police in Nineveh province, the capital of which is Mosul, with a population of 2.7 million. But Khasro Goran, the deputy governor and Kurdistan Democratic Party leader in Mosul, told the IoS that the police had helped insurgents assassinate the previous governor.
Mr Goran said that when guerrillas captured almost all of Mosul on 11 November last year, the police had collaborated, abandoning 30 police stations without a fight. "They didn't fire on terrorists because they were terrorists themselves," he said. Some $40m-worth of arms and equipment was captured by the insurgents. It is a measure of how far the reality of the war in Iraq now differs from the rosy picture presented by the media that the fall of Mosul to the insurgents went almost unreported abroad because most journalists were covering the assault by the US marines on Fallujah.
Despite the elections on 30 January, the US problem in Iraq remains unchanged. It has not been defeated by the Sunni Arab guerrillas but it has not defeated them either. The US army and Iraqi armed forces control islands of territory while much of Iraq is a dangerous no-man's land.
Don't be fooled by the spin on
Iraq
The US is
failing - and hatred of the occupation greater than ever
Jonathan Steele Wednesday April 13,
2005 The Guardian
Saddam Hussein's effigy
was pulled down again in Baghdad's Firdos Square at the weekend. But unlike the
made-for-TV event when US troops first entered the Iraqi capital, the toppling
of Saddam on the occupation's second anniversary was different.
Instead of being done by US marines with a few dozen Iraqi bystanders,
300,000 Iraqis were on hand. They threw down effigies of Bush and Blair as well
as the old dictator, at a rally that did not celebrate liberation but called for
the immediate departure of foreign troops.
For most Iraqis, with the exception of the
Kurds, Washington's "liberation" never was. Wounded national pride was greater
than relief at Saddam's departure. Iraqis were soon angered by the failure to
get power and water supplies repaired, the brutality of US army tactics, and the
disappearance of their country's precious oil revenues into inadequately
supervised accounts, or handed to foreigners under contracts that produced no
benefits for Iraqis.
From last autumn's disastrous attack on Falluja to the huge increase in
detention without trial, the casualties go on rising. After an amnesty last
summer, the numbers of "security detainees" have gone up again and reached a
record 17,000.
The weekend's vast protest shows that opposition is still growing, in spite
of US and British government claims to have Iraqis' best interests at heart. It
was the biggest demonstration since foreign troops invaded.
Equally significantly, the marchers were mainly Shias, who poured in from the
impoverished eastern suburb known as Sadr City. The Bush-Blair spin likes to
suggest that protest is confined to Sunnis, with the nod and wink that these
people are disgruntled former Saddam supporters or fundamentalists linked to
al-Qaida, who therefore need not be treated as legitimate. The fact that the
march was largely Shia and against Saddam as much as Bush and Blair gives the
lie to that.
Some Sunnis attended the march, urged to go there by the Association of
Muslim Scholars, which has contacts with the armed resistance. This too was an
important sign. Occupation officials consistently talk up the danger of civil
war, usually as an argument for keeping troops in Iraq. It is a risk that
radicals in both communities take seriously.
Moqtada al-Sadr, the Shia cleric who organised the latest march, recently
joined forces with the National Foundation Congress, a group of Sunni and Shia
nationalists, to affirm "the legitimate right of the Iraqi resistance to defend
their country and its destiny" while "rejecting terrorism aimed at innocent
Iraqis, institutions, public buildings and places of worship".
The key issue, now as it has been since 2003, is for the occupation to end
quickly. Only this will reduce the resistance and give Iraqis a chance to live
normally. In a new line of spin - which some commentators have taken to mean
that the US is preparing for a pullout - US commanders claim the rate of
insurgent attacks is down.
The figures are not independently monitored. Even if true, they may be
temporary. Thirdly, they fly in the face of evidence that suggests the US is
failing. Most of western Iraq is out of US control. The city of Mosul could
explode at any moment. Ramadi is practically a no-go area.
In any case, the US is only talking of a possible reduction of a third of its
troops next year. This will still leave 100,000. The US argues that a complete
withdrawal has to be "conditions-related, not calendar-related" or, as Blair
puts it, there can be no "artificial timetable". By that, they mean Iraq's
security forces have to be strong enough to replace the Americans and British, a
totally elastic marker.
That is surely the message that Donald Rumsfeld, the US defence secretary, is
giving this week on his ninth trip to Baghdad since April 2003. Whenever there
is an alleged transfer of power to Iraqis, this time to a "government" elected
in a flawed poll, Rumsfeld comes with instructions.
His public warning is for Iraq's leaders not to make any changes in the army
and interior ministries, or postpone the writing of a constitution. Behind the
scenes, he is probably telling them not to ask for a withdrawal timetable, and
sounding them out on the opposite. The US has indicated that it wants permanent
bases in Iraq, just as it does in Afghanistan - which is why the joint
Sadr-National Foundation Congress statement says the government "will have no
right to ratify any agreement or treaty that might affect Iraq's sovereignty,
the unity of its territory and the preservation of its resources".
Poland has just announced it is pulling out of Iraq at the end of the year,
just as Spain did last year. Italy is wavering on the verge of a similar
decision. If Blair wants to regain the trust he lost before the Iraq war, his
best approach would be to announce the same by May 5. He would help Iraqis as
well as himself.
How The U.S. Murdered a
City
Fallujah: The Truth at
Last
Doctor Salam Ismael took aid to Fallujah last
month. This is a report of his visit.
02/17/05 - - IT WAS the
smell that first hit me, a smell that is difficult to describe, and one that
will never leave me. It was the smell of death. Hundreds of corpses were
decomposing in the houses, gardens and streets of Fallujah. Bodies were rotting
where they had fallen-bodies of men, women and children, many half-eaten by wild
dogs.
A wave of hate had wiped out two-thirds of the town,
destroying houses and mosques, schools and clinics. This was the terrible and
frightening power of the US military assault.
The accounts I heard
over the next few days will live with me forever. You may think you know what
happened in Fallujah. But the truth is worse than you could possibly have
imagined.
In Saqlawiya, one of the makeshift refugee camps that
surround Fallujah, we found a 17 year old woman. "I am Hudda Fawzi Salam Issawi
from the Jolan district of Fallujah," she told me. "Five of us, including a 55
year old neighbour, were trapped together in our house in Fallujah when the
siege began.
"On 9 November American marines came to our house. My
father and the neighbour went to the door to meet them. We were not fighters. We
thought we had nothing to fear. I ran into the kitchen to put on my veil, since
men were going to enter our house and it would be wrong for them to see me with
my hair uncovered. "This saved my life. As my father and neighbour approached
the door, the Americans opened fire on them. They died
instantly.
"Me and my 13 year old brother hid in the kitchen behind
the fridge. The soldiers came into the house and caught my older sister. They
beat her. Then they shot her. But they did not see me. Soon they left, but not
before they had destroyed our furniture and stolen the money from my father's
pocket."
Hudda told me how she comforted her dying sister by
reading verses from the Koran. After four hours her sister died. For three days
Hudda and her brother stayed with their murdered relatives. But they were
thirsty and had only a few dates to eat. They feared the troops would return and
decided to try to flee the city. But they were spotted by a US
sniper.
Hudda was shot in the leg, her brother ran but was shot in
the back and died instantly. "I prepared myself to die," she told me. "But I was
found by an American woman soldier, and she took me to hospital." She was
eventually reunited with the surviving members of her family.
I
also found survivors of another family from the Jolan district. They told me
that at the end of the second week of the siege the US troops swept through the
Jolan. The Iraqi National Guard used loudspeakers to call on people to get out
of the houses carrying white flags, bringing all their belongings with them.
They were ordered to gather outside near the Jamah al-Furkan mosque in the
centre of town.
On 12 November Eyad Naji Latif and eight members of
his family-one of them a six month old child-gathered their belongings and
walked in single file, as instructed, to the mosque.
When they
reached the main road outside the mosque they heard a shout, but they could not
understand what was being shouted. Eyad told me it could have been "now" in
English. Then the firing began. US soldiers appeared on the roofs of surrounding
houses and opened fire. Eyad's father was shot in the heart and his mother in
the chest.
They died instantly. Two of Eyad's brothers were also
hit, one in the chest and one in the neck. Two of the women were hit, one in the
hand and one in the leg. Then the snipers killed the wife of one of Eyad's
brothers. When she fell her five year old son ran to her and stood over her
body. They shot him dead too. Survivors made desperate appeals to the troops to
stop firing.
But Eyad told me that whenever one of them tried to
raise a white flag they were shot. After several hours he tried to raise his arm
with the flag. But they shot him in the arm. Finally he tried to raise his hand.
So they shot him in the hand.
The five survivors, including the six
month old child, lay in the street for seven hours. Then four of them crawled to
the nearest home to find shelter. The next morning the brother who was shot in
the neck also managed to crawl to safety. They all stayed in the house for eight
days, surviving on roots and one cup of water, which they saved for the baby. On
the eighth day they were discovered by some members of the Iraqi National Guard
and taken to hospital in Fallujah. They heard the Americans were arresting any
young men, so the family fled the hospital and finally obtained treatment in a
nearby town.
They do not know in detail what happened to the other
families who had gone to the mosque as instructed. But they told me the street
was awash with blood. I had come to Fallujah in January as part of a
humanitarian aid convoy funded by donations from Britain.
Our small
convoy of trucks and vans brought 15 tons of flour, eight tons of rice, medical
aid and 900 pieces of clothing for the orphans. We knew that thousands of
refugees were camped in terrible conditions in four camps on the outskirts of
town.
There we heard the accounts of families killed in their
houses, of wounded people dragged into the streets and run over by tanks, of a
container with the bodies of 481 civilians inside, of premeditated murder,
looting and acts of savagery and cruelty that beggar
belief.
Through the ruins That is why we decided to go into
Fallujah and investigate. When we entered the town I almost did not recognise
the place where I had worked as a doctor in April 2004, during the first
siege.
We found people wandering like ghosts through the ruins.
Some were looking for the bodies of relatives. Others were trying to recover
some of their possessions from destroyed homes.
Here and there,
small knots of people were queuing for fuel or food. In one queue some of the
survivors were fighting over a blanket.
I remember being approached
by an elderly woman, her eyes raw with tears. She grabbed my arm and told me how
her house had been hit by a US bomb during an air raid. The ceiling collapsed on
her 19 year old son, cutting off both his legs.
She could not get
help. She could not go into the streets because the Americans had posted snipers
on the roofs and were killing anyone who ventured out, even at
night.
She tried her best to stop the bleeding, but it was to no
avail. She stayed with him, her only son, until he died. He took four hours to
die.
Fallujah's main hospital was seized by the US troops in the
first days of the siege. The only other clinic, the Hey Nazzal, was hit twice by
US missiles. Its medicines and medical equipment were all destroyed. There were
no ambulances-the two ambulances that came to help the wounded were shot up and
destroyed by US troops.
We visited houses in the Jolan district, a
poor working class area in the north western part of the city that had been the
centre of resistance during the April siege.
This quarter seemed to
have been singled out for punishment during the second siege. We moved from
house to house, discovering families dead in their beds, or cut down in living
rooms or in the kitchen. House after house had furniture smashed and possessions
scattered.
In some places we found bodies of fighters, dressed in
black and with ammunition belts.
But in most of the houses, the
bodies were of civilians. Many were dressed in housecoats, many of the women
were not veiled-meaning there were no men other than family members in the
house. There were no weapons, no spent cartridges.
It became clear
to us that we were witnessing the aftermath of a massacre, the cold-blooded
butchery of helpless and defenceless civilians.
Nobody knows how
many died. The occupation forces are now bulldozing the neighbourhoods to cover
up their crime. What happened in Fallujah was an act of barbarity. The whole
world must be told the truth.
Dr Salam Ismael, now 28 years old, was head of junior doctors
in Baghdad before the invasion of Iraq. He was in Fallujah in April 2004 where
he treated casualties of the assault on the city.
At the end of 2004 he
came to Britain to collect funds for an aid convoy to Fallujah. Now the British
government does not want Dr Salam Ismael?s testimony to be
heard.
He was due to come here last week to speak at trade union
and anti-war meetings. But he was refused entry. The reason given was that he
received expenses, covering the basic costs of his trip, when he came to Britain
last year and this constitutes "illegal working".
Dr Salam Ismael merely
wishes to speak the truth. Yet it seems the freedom that Bush and Blair claim to
champion in Iraq does not extend to allowing its citizens to travel
freely.
Legal challenges, supported by the Stop the War Coalition,
were launched this week in an effort to allow Dr Salam Ismael to come to
Britain.
Copyright ? Information Clearing House.
All rights reserved. You may republish under the following conditions: An active
link to the original publication must be provided. You must not alter, edit or
remove any text within the article, including this copyright notice.
(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107,
this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior
interest in receiving the included information for research and educational
purposes. Information Clearing House has no affiliation whatsoever with the
originator of this article nor is Information Clearing House endorsed or
sponsored by the originator.)
Thursday, February 17, 2005
News about Iraq goes through filters
By DAHR JAMAIL GUEST COLUMNIST
How is it that more than 40 percent of Americans still believe Iraq has
weapons of mass destruction even though President Bush personally has admitted
there are none?
How is it possible that millions of Americans believe the recent election in
Iraq showed that Iraqis are in favor of the ongoing occupation of their country?
In reality, the determination displayed by the roughly 59 percent of registered
voters who participated in the election did so because they felt it would bring
about an end to the U.S. occupation.
How do so many Americans wonder why more Iraqis each day are supporting both
violent and non-violent movements of resistance to the occupation when after the
U.S. government promised to help rebuild Iraq, a mere 2 percent of
reconstruction contracts were awarded to Iraqi concerns and the infrastructure
lies in shambles?
It's because overall, mainstream media reportage in the United States about
the occupation in Iraq is being censured, distorted, threatened by the military
and controlled by corporations that own the outlets.
Recently at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, Eason Jordan, a
CNN executive, told a panel that the U.S. military deliberately targeted
journalists in Iraq. He said he "knew of about 12 journalists who had not only
been killed by American troops, but had been targeted as a matter of policy,"
said Rep. Barney Frank, a Democrat from Massachusetts who was on the panel with
Jordan.
When we hear this statement with the knowledge that 63 journalists have been
killed in Iraq, in addition to the fact that in a 14-month-period, more
journalists were killed in Iraq than during the entire Vietnam War, one begins
to get the feeling that the military clampdown on the media is more than a myth
or a conspiracy theory.
(Editor's note: Jordan has since resigned from CNN, telling fellow CNN
staffers: "I never meant to imply U.S. forces acted with ill intent when U.S.
forces accidentally killed journalists, and I apologize to anyone who thought I
said or believed otherwise.")
I've personally witnessed photographers in Baghdad who have had their cameras
either confiscated or smashed by soldiers, who were, of course, acting on orders
from their superiors. And no, the journalists weren't trying to photograph
something that would jeopardize the security of the soldiers.
Even Christiane Amanpour, CNN's top war correspondent, announced on national
television that her own network was censuring her journalism.
Most Americans don't know that on any given day, an average of three U.S.
soldiers die in Iraq as a result of 75 attacks every single day on U.S. forces
or that Iraqi civilian deaths average 10 times that amount.
Most Americans also don't know there are four permanent U.S. military bases
in Iraq, with the Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg Brown and Root diligently
constructing 10 others.
Most Americans don't know overall troop morale in Iraq resembles that of the
Vietnam War, with tours being extended and stop-loss orders imposed.
Nor do most folks know where billions of their tax dollars have been spent
that were supposed to be used in the reconstruction of Iraq.
But who can blame Americans when the military and mainstream media continue,
day in and day out, to distort, deny and destroy the truth before it reaches the
audience back home? An international peoples' initiative called the World
Tribunal on Iraq met in Rome to focus on media complicity in the crimes
committed against the people of Iraq as well as U.S. citizens who are paying
with their blood and tax dollars to maintain the occupation. The tribunal found
Western mainstream media outlets guilty of incitement to violence and the
deliberate misleading of people into the war and ongoing occupation of Iraq.
Makes you wonder what else Americans aren't being told about Iraq. After
spending eight of the past 14 months reporting from Iraq, I can tell you the
points made here are just the tip of the iceberg.
Dahr Jamail, an independent reporter covering the Iraq war,
has several current speaking engagements in Western Washington. For more info,
go to www.dahrjamailiraq.com.
U.S. 'in for a shock' Shiite
cleric's alliance trouncing Washington's favorite
Borzou Daragahi,
Chronicle Foreign Service
Friday, February 4,
2005
Baghdad -- Partial results from Sunday's election suggest
that U.S.-backed Prime Minister Ayad Allawi's coalition is being roundly
defeated by a list with the backing of Iraq's senior Shiite cleric, Grand
Ayatollah Ali al- Sistani, diminishing Allawi's chances of retaining his post in
the next government.
Sharif Ali bin Hussein, head of the Constitutional Monarchy Party, likened
the vote outcome to a "Sistani tsunami" that would shake the nation.
"Americans are in for a shock," he said, adding that one day they would
realize, "We've got 150,000 troops here protecting a country that's extremely
friendly to Iran, and training their troops."
The partial totals so far show the Iraqi List headed by Allawi, a secular
Shiite and onetime CIA protege, trailed far behind with only 18 percent of the
votes, despite an aggressive television ad campaign waged with U.S. aid. A
lopsided majority of votes, 72 percent, went to the United Iraqi Alliance list,
topped by a Shiite cleric who lived in Iran for many years and whose Sciri party
has close ties to Iran's clerical regime. More than a third of the alliance's
vote came from Baghdad, the cosmopolitan capital where Allawi had been expected
to fare well.
The election commission also released final vote tallies from overseas voters in eight countries, the United States, Britain, France, Iran, Syria, Jordan, the United Arab Emirates and Australia. The alliance won of 44 percent of the 170,000 votes cast in those countries, the Kurds 18 percent and Allawi's list 12 percent. In U.S. voting, Allawi garnered just 5 percent of the vote, less than the Communist Party total.
It's like Vietnam all over again:
U.S. ENCOURAGED BY VIETNAM VOTE;
Officials Cite 83% Turnout Despite Vietcong Terror
WASHINGTON, Sept. 3 United States officials were surprised and heartened today at the size of turnout in South Vietnam's presidential election despite a Vietcong terrorist campaign to disrupt the voting.
According to reports from Saigon, 83 per cent of the 5.85 million
registered voters cast their ballots yesterday. Many of them risked
reprisals threatened by the Vietcong.
The size of the popular vote and the inability of the Vietcong to
destroy the election machinery were the two salient facts in a
preliminary assessment of the nation election based on the incomplete
returns reaching here.
WASHINGTON (AP) - A decorated Marine Corps general said, ``It's fun to
shoot some people'' and poked fun at the manhood of Afghans as he
described the wars U.S. troops are fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Lt. Gen. James Mattis, a career infantry officer who is now in charge
of developing better ways to train and equip Marines, made the
comments Tuesday while speaking to a forum in San Diego.
According to an audio recording, he said, ``Actually, it's a lot of
fun to fight. You know, it's a hell of a hoot. ... It's fun to shoot
some people. I'll be right up front with you, I like brawling.''
He added, ``You go into Afghanistan, you got guys who slap women
around for five years because they didn't wear a veil. You know, guys
like that ain't got no manhood left anyway. So it's a hell of a lot of
fun to shoot them.''
His comments were met with laughter and applause from the audience.
Mattis was speaking during a panel discussion hosted by the Armed
Forces Communications and Electronics Association, a spokeswoman for
the general said.
US soldiers in Iraq approach a car after opening fire when it failed to stop as requested.
Inside the car were an Iraqi family of seven. The mother and father were killed but their five children in the backseat survived, one with a non-life threatening wound.
Chris Hondros a photographer with Getty News was on hand to record these pictures.
As the children get out of the car one of them screams, her hands covered in blood...
More photos
Military Personnel Wounded
in Iraq & Afghanistan: A Photo
Gallery warning: 2
of the photos are graphic updated 20 Dec
2004
IRAQ: Some Just Voted for
Food
Dahr Jamail
BAGHDAD, Jan 31 (IPS) - Voting in Baghdad was
linked with receipt of food rations, several voters said after the Sunday poll.
Many Iraqis said Monday that their names were marked on a list
provided by the government agency that provides monthly food rations before they
were allowed to vote.
?I went to the voting centre and gave my name and
district where I lived to a man,? said Wassif Hamsa, a 32-year-old journalist
who lives in the predominantly Shia area Janila in Baghdad. ?This man then sent
me to the person who distributed my monthly food ration.?
Mohammed
Ra'ad, an engineering student who lives in the Baya'a district of the capital
city reported a similar experience.
Ra'ad, 23, said he saw the man who
distributed monthly food rations in his district at his polling station. ?The
food dealer, who I know personally of course, took my name and those of my
family who were voting,? he said. ?Only then did I get my ballot and was allowed
to vote.?
?Two of the food dealers I know told me personally that our
food rations would be withheld if we did not vote,? said Saeed Jodhet, a
21-year-old engineering student who voted in the Hay al-Jihad district of
Baghdad.
There has been no official indication that Iraqis who did not
vote would not receive their monthly food rations.
Many Iraqis had
expressed fears before the election that their monthly food rations would be cut
if they did not vote. They said they had to sign voter registration forms in
order to pick up their food supplies.
Their experiences on the day of
polling have underscored many of their concerns about questionable methods used
by the U.S.-backed Iraqi interim government to increase voter turnout.
Just days before the election, 52 year-old Amin Hajar who owns an auto
garage in central Baghdad had said: ?I'll vote because I can't afford to have my
food ration cut...if that happened, me and my family would starve to death.?
Hajar told IPS that when he picked up his monthly food ration recently,
he was forced to sign a form stating that he had picked up his voter
registration. He had feared that the government would use this information to
track those who did not vote.
Calls to the Independent Electoral
Commission for Iraq (IECI) and to the Ministry of Trade, which is responsible
for the distribution of the monthly food ration, were not returned.
Other questions have arisen over methods to persuade people to vote.
U.S. troops tried to coax voters in Ramadi, capital city of the al-Anbar
province west of Baghdad to come out to vote, AP reported.
IECI
officials have meanwhile 'downgraded' their earlier estimate of voter turnout.
IECI spokesman Farid Ayar had declared a 72 percent turnout earlier, a
figure given also by the Bush Administration.
But at a press conference
Ayar backtracked on his earlier figure, saying the turnout would be nearer 60
percent of registered voters.
The earlier figure of 72 percent, he said,
was ?only guessing? and ?just an estimate? that had been based on ?very rough,
word of mouth estimates gathered informally from the field.? He added that it
will be some time before the IECI can issue accurate figures on the turnout.
?Percentages and numbers come only after counting and will be announced
when it's over,? he said. ?It is too soon to say that those were the official
numbers.?
Where there was a large turnout, the motivation behind the
voting and the processes both appeared questionable. The Kurds up north were
voting for autonomy, if not independence. In the south and elsewhere Shias were
competing with Kurds for a bigger say in the 275-member national assembly.
In some places like Mosul the turnout was heavier than expected. But
many of the voters came from outside, and identity checks on voters appeared
lax. Others spoke of vote-buying bids.
The Bush Administration has
lauded the success of the Iraq election, but doubtful voting practices and
claims about voter turnout are both mired in controversy.
Election
violence too was being seen differently across the political spectrum.
More than 30 Iraqis, a U.S. soldier, and at least 10 British troops died
Sunday. Hundreds of Iraqis were also wounded in attacks across Baghdad, in
Baquba 50km northeast of the capital as well as in the northern cities Mosul and
Kirkuk.
The British troops were on board a C-130 transport plane that
crashed near Balad city just northwest of Baghdad. The British military has yet
to reveal the cause of the crash.
Despite unprecedented security
measures in which 300,000 U.S. and Iraqi security forces were brought in to curb
the violence, nine suicide bombers and frequent mortar attacks took a heavy toll
in the capital city, while strings of attacks were reported around the rest of
the country.
As U..S. President George W. Bush saw it, ?some Iraqis were
killed while exercising their rights as citizens.?
Report: U.S. can't win Iraq war
Baghdad, Iraq, Jan. 22 (UPI) -- An analysis of a U.S. newspaper group
concludes the United States is headed toward defeat in the Iraqi war.
The Knight Ridder Newspapers analysis of U.S. government statistics shows the
Sunni Muslim insurgency in Iraq steadily gaining on the U.S. military, the
Detroit Free Press, owned by Knight Ridder, reported Saturday.
Among factors cited:
-- U.S. military fatalities from hostile acts rose from an average of about
17 per month in May 2003 to a current average of 82 per month;
-- The average number of U.S. soldiers wounded by hostile acts per month has
spiraled from 142 to 808 during the same period;
-- Attacks on the U.S.-led coalition since November 2003 rose from 735 a
month to 2,400 in October;
-- The average number of mass-casualty bombings has grown from zero in the
first few months of the U.S.-led occupation to an average of 13 per month;
and
-- Electricity production has been below prewar levels since October.
"All the trend lines we can identify are all in the wrong direction," said
Michael O'Hanlon of the Brookings Institution, a Washington policy research
organization.
BBC News, Jan. 5, 2005 While the world's attention has been on the disaster in Asia, the situation in Iraq has deteriorated so much that the insurgency has developed into near-open warfare.
The level of attacks is now so intense and sophisticated that it is
not surprising that the former British representative to the former
Coalition Authority, Sir Jeremy Greenstock, said recently that the
insurgency was "irremediable" and "ineradicable" by US and other
foreign troops alone.
"We have lost the primary control," he said.
More than 200,000 insurgents: intelligence chief
AFP: 1/3/2005
Asked if the insurgents were winning, Shahwani answered: "I would say they
aren't losing."
BAGHDAD, Jan 3 (AFP) - Iraq's insurgency counts more than 200,000 active
fighters and sympathisers, the country's national intelligence chief told AFP,
in the bleakest assessment to date of the armed revolt waged by Sunni Muslims.
"I think the resistance is bigger than the US military in Iraq. I think the
resistance is more than 200,000 people," Iraqi intelligence service director
General Mohamed Abdullah Shahwani said in an interview ahead of the January 30
elections.
Shahwani said the number includes at least 40,000 hardcore fighters but rises
to more than 200,000 members counting part-time fighters and volunteers who
provide rebels everything from intelligence and logistics to shelter.
The numbers far exceed any figure presented by the US military in Iraq, which
has struggled to get a handle on the size of the resistance since toppling
Saddam Hussein's regime in April 2003.
A senior US military officer declined to endorse or dismiss the spy chief's
numbers.
"As for the size of the insurgency, we don't have good resolution on the
size," the officer said on condition of anonymity.
Past US military assessments on the insurgency's size have been revised
upwards from 5,000 to 20,000 full and part-time members, in the last half year,
most recently in October.
Defense experts said it was impossible to divine the insurgency's total
number, but called Shahwani's estimate a valid guess, with as much credence, if
not more, than any US numbers.
"I believe General Shahwani's estimation, given that he is referring
predominantly to active sympathizers and supporters and to part-time as well as
full-time active insurgents, may not be completely out of the ballpark," said
defense analyst Bruce Hoffman who served as an advisor to the US occupation in
Iraq and now works for US-based think-tank RAND Corporation.
Compared to the coalition's figure, he said: "General Shahwani's -- however
possibly high it may be, might well give a more accurate picture of the
situation."
Anthony Cordesman, an Iraq analyst with the Washington-based Center for
Strategic and International Studies, put Shahwani's estimates on an equal
footing with the American's.
"The Iraqi figures do... recognize the reality that the insurgency in Iraq
has broad support in Sunni areas while the US figures down play this to the
point of denial."
Shahwani said the resistance enjoys wide backing in the provinces of Baghdad,
Babel, Salahuddin, Diyala, Nineveh and Tamim, homes to Sunni Arabs who fear they
will lose influence after the elections.
Insurgents have gained strength through Iraq's tight-knit tribal bonds and
links to the old 400,000-strong Iraqi army, dissolved by the US occupation in
May 2003 two months after the US-led invasion, he said.
"People are fed up after two years, without improvement. People are fed up
with no security, no electricity, people feel they have to do something. The
army was hundreds of thousands. You'd expect some veterans would join with their
relatives, each one has sons and brothers."
The rebels have turned city neighborhoods and small towns around central Iraq
into virtual no-go zones despite successful US military efforts to reclaim
former enclaves like Samarra and Fallujah, he said.
"What are you going to call the situation here (in Baghdad) when 20 to 30 men
can move around with weapons and no one can get them in Adhamiyah, Dura and
Ghazaliya," he said, naming neighborhoods in the capital.
The spy chief also questioned the success of the November campaign to retake
Fallujah, which US forces have hailed as a major victory against the resistance.
"What we have now is an empty city almost destroyed... and most of the
insurgents are free. They have gone either to Mosul or to Baghdad or other
areas."
Shahwani pointed to a resurgent Baath party as the key to the insurgency's
might. The Baath has split into three factions, with the deadliest being the
branch still paying allegiance to jailed dictator Saddam Hussein, he said.
Shahwani said the core Baath fighting strength was more than 20,000.
Operating out of Syria, Saddam's half-brother Sabawi Ibrahim al-Hassan and
former aide Mohamed Yunis al-Ahmed are providing funding and tapping their
connections to old army divisions, particularily in Mosul, Samarra, Baquba,
Kirkuk and Tikrit.
Saddam's henchman, Izzat Ibrahim al-Duri, still on the lam in Iraq, is also
involved, he said.
Another two factions, which have broken from Saddam, are also around, but
have yet to mount any attacks. The Baath are complemented by Islamist factions
ranging from Abu Musab al-Zarqawi's al-Qaeda affiliate to Ansar al-Sunna and
Ansar al-Islam.
Asked if the insurgents were winning, Shahwani answered: "I would say they
aren't losing."
01/03/2005 13:03 GMT - AFP
Photos of Fallujah's dead show civilians shot in bed, surrendering
By Dahr Jamail
Two weeks ago an Iraqi man was allowed into Fallujah by the U.S.
military to help bury bodies. He was allowed to take photographs of
75 bodies, in order to show pictures to relatives so that they might be
identified before they were buried.
These pictures are from a book of photos. They are being circulated
publicly around small villages near Fallujah where many refugees are
staying.
The man who took them was only allowed to take photos and bury
bodies in one small area of Fallujah. He was not allowed to visit
anywhere else. Keep in mind there are at least 1,925 other bodies
that were not allowed to be seen.
Information with some of the photos is from those identified by family
members already.
One of the family members who was looking for dead relatives,
shared these photos which were taken from that book.
Speaking on condition of anonymity, he told of what he saw in his
village during the last few weeks.
"The Americans shot every boat on the river because people were
trying to escape Fallujah by the river. They shot all the sheep, any
animal people owned was shot. Helicopters shot all the animals and
anything that moved in all the villages surrounding Fallujah during the
fighting."
He said that none of the roads into Fallujah, or around Fallujah were
passable because anyone on them was shot. "I know one family that
were all killed. There are no signs on these roads that tell people not
to use them-so people don't know they aren't supposed to use them.
No signs in English or Ara
