more evidence that this war is lost...

Death and Humiliation

“This is the freedom and democracy that America has brought us.”

Dahr Jamail

05/30/05 "Iraq Dispatches" The mayhem continues in Iraq, with today at least 40 people dead, including five US soldiers in Diyala province as the meltdown of the failed US-led occupation continues.

Two suicide bombers detonated themselves after walking into a crowd of police officers in Hilla, south of Baghdad. The policemen were demonstrating outside the mayor’s office to protest a government decision to disband their Special Forces unit.

In yet another horrible PR move (or attempt to raise sectarian tensions?) by the US military the head of Iraq’s largest Sunni political party, Mohsen Abdul Hamid was detained from his home early this morning in western Baghdad. Of course his head was promptly bagged and his hands tied before he was taken away to be interrogated. His three sons were also detained with him. Stun bombs and bullets were said to be used during the raid, according to his wife.

It just so happens that his party, the Islamic Party, opposes the new US-backed security operation now engulfing Baghdad because they believe the security forces will disregard the rights of innocent Iraqis.

Later today he was released and the military admitted it made a mistake.

The military statement concerning the matter said, “Coalition forces regret any inconvenience and acknowledge (Abdul-Hamid’s) cooperation in resolving this matter.”

Abdul Hamid refused their apology in the Arab media, and stated that he was humiliated when US soldiers held their boots on his head for 20 minutes. It was also stated that he accused American soldiers of removing items from his home, including a computer. This is standard operating procedure with home raids-I can’t tell you how many Iraqis I’ve interviewed after their homes were raided who complained of money, jewelry and other belongings being looted by American soldiers.

The Islamic Party released a statement after the release of Abdul Hamid which said, “The U.S. administration claims it is interested in drawing Sunnis into the political process but it seems that their way of doing so is by raids, arrests and violating human rights.”

At least 740 Iraqis have been killed since the new “government” took power in late April, and with the ongoing operations sparking more attacks each day, it doesn’t look like there is an end in sight. Keep in mind, the vast majority of the Iraqi security forces are either Shia or Kurdish battling against a primarily Sunni resistance (for now). It can easily be argued that we are witnessing a US-backed Iraqi government who is deliberating using its power to wage a civil war.

On that note, today Major General Ahmed al-Barazanchi, a Kurdish man who was the director of internal affairs of Kirkuk province died this morning after being shot yesterday.

My sources in Baghdad also said there have been fierce clashes today in the al-Amiriya district of Baghdad between resistance fighters and Iraqi and US soldiers. “Open gun battles in the streets,” as one friend told me, “And as soon as the Iraqi and US soldiers leave the area, the resistance takes it back over.”

Keep in mind that all of this is against the backdrop of well over 50% unemployment, horrendous traffic jams, and an infrastructure in shambles that continues to degrade with next to no reconstruction occurring in Baghdad.

“Electricity shut offs drive us crazy in this hot summer,” one of my friends wrote me recently, “Even we can’t read at night because of long hours of electricity cuts and because the outside generators can’t withstand running these long hours and we have to turn these generators off for some time to cool them!”

He continues, “Two years of occupation…for God sake where is the rebuilding, where the hell are these billions donated to Iraq? Even not 1% improvement in services and electricity! They say again and again the terrorists are to blame and I would accept this, but why they do not protect these facilities? Do the American camps have cuts of electricity? No, no, and nobody will allow this to happen...but poor Iraqis, nobody would be sorry for them if they burn with the hell of summer, small kids and old men they get dehydrated because no electricity, no cold water, etc. Have you heard about the tea that is mixed with iron particles? It is real in our life. People have to make sure their tea is not mixed with iron by use of magnets.”

He concluded his email with, “Things are getting worse day by day. Iraq has become a country not for its people, every day thoughts jump into the mind that sooner or later we have to leave this country, searching for another. And there is a saying, “your home is where you sleep safe,” but this is not true in Iraq anymore.”

He sent me that email three days ago.

Yesterday the Iraqi government announced that it may decrease subsidies for fuel and electricity, despite a severe shortage of both in the country, according to the electricity minister who warned Iraqis to prepare for more blackouts this summer.

Ongoing fuel, electricity and drinking water shortages persist, and only 37% of Iraqis have a working sewage system.

As so many of my Iraqi friends continue to say, “This is the freedom and democracy that America has brought us.”

Copyright: Dahr Jamail

if the downing street memo is the 'smoking gun' --is this story the spent shell casing in the smoking gun ?

Smoking Bullet in the Smoking Gun?
Congressman John Conyers, Daily Kos


Sun May 29th, 2005

Update [2005-5-29 14:8:35 by Armando]: From the diaries by Armando. We generally shy away from promoting the diaries, wonderful and welcome as they are, from our elected officials. I am breaking our general rule here because I think it is a particularly important diary. This diary from the esteemed Congressman is based upon the following story
( http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1632566,00.html
):

THE RAF and US aircraft doubled the rate at which they were dropping bombs on Iraq in 2002 in an attempt to provoke Saddam Hussein into giving the allies an excuse for war, new evidence has shown. The attacks were intensified from May, six months before the United Nations resolution that Tony Blair and Lord Goldsmith, the attorney-general, argued gave the coalition the legal basis for war. By the end of August the raids had become a full air offensive. The details follow the leak to The Sunday Times of minutes of a key meeting in July 2002 at which Blair and his war cabinet discussed how to make “regime change” in Iraq legal. Geoff Hoon, then defence secretary, told the meeting that “the US had already begun ‘spikes of activity’ to put pressure on the regime”. The new information, obtained by the Liberal Democrats, shows that the allies dropped twice as many bombs on Iraq in the second half of 2002 as they did during the whole of 2001, and that the RAF increased their attacks even more quickly than the Americans did. ... Tommy Franks, the allied commander, has since admitted this operation was designed to “degrade” Iraqi air defences in the same way as the air attacks that began the 1991 Gulf war. It was not until November 8 that the UN security council passed resolution 1441, which threatened Iraq with “serious consequences” for failing to co-operate with the weapons inspectors. The briefing paper prepared for the July meeting — the same document that revealed the prime minister’s agreement during a summit with President George W Bush in April 2002 to back military action to bring about regime change — laid out the American war plans. ... The systematic targeting of Iraqi air defences appears to contradict Foreign Office legal guidance appended to the leaked briefing paper which said that the allied aircraft were only “entitled to use force in self-defence where such a use of force is a necessary and proportionate response to actual or imminent attack from Iraqi ground systems”.


These are revelations of not only systematic efforts to bring a war against Iraq in most of 2002, it appears to be evidence that war was BEING CONDUCTED against Iraq in 2002. Representative Conyers provides us some new information on the question he has presented to Secretaryof Defense Rumsfled and an action item.

This morning I read the new revelations, again the London Times, that British and U.S. aircraft had substantially stepped up their bombing activity in the summer of 2002 in an effort to "goad Saddam into War." If true, we would seem to have the "smoking bullet" to the "smoking gun" of the Downing Street Memo.

I have prepared a letter to Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld detailing these new charges and asking for his response (see extended entry). Since the House is out of session next week, I plan to submit it by myself on Tuesday.

Of course, this new disclosure makes my letter asking 100,000 citizens to write to President Bush, located at www.johnconyers.com, all the more important As my back-office administrator is closed for the holiday, I do not expect to have specific numbers of signatures until Tuesday, however needless to say, the response has been overwhelming from everything I can gage thus far.




May 31, 2005

Hon. Donald Rumsfeld
Secretary of Defense
The Pentagon
Arlington, VA

Dear Secretary Rumsfeld:

I write with an urgent and important request that you respond to a report in the London Times on Sunday, May 29, indicating that British and U.S. aircraft increased their rates of bombing in 2002 in order to provoke an excuse for war in Iraq. Much of this information is provided by the British Ministry of Defense in response to questions posed by Liberal Democrat Sir Menzies Campbell.

As you may know, on May 6, I wrote to President Bush, along with 88 of my colleagues in the House of Representatives, asking him to respond to allegations first revealed in the London Times on May 1, that the U.S. and British government had a secret plan to invade Iraq by the summer of 2002, well before the Bush Administration requested authorization for military action, from the U.S. Congress. A response is still pending on that request.

The allegations and factual assertions made in the May 29 London Times are in many respects just as serious as those made in the earlier article. They include the following:

* "The RAF and U.S. aircraft doubled the rate at which they were dropping bombs in 2002 .... The attacks were intensified from May .... By the end of August the raids had become a full air offensive." Then British Defense Secretary Geoff Hoon reportedly told a British Cabinet Meeting in July, 2002, that by this time "the U.S. had already begun `spikes of activity' to put pressure on the regime." The newly released information also appears to show that "the allies dropped twice as many bombs on Iraq in the second half of 2002 as they did during the whole of 2001."

* According to the article, this increase at the rate of bombing was "an attempt to provoke Saddam Hussein into giving the allies an excuse for war." As I am sure you are aware, allied commander Tommy Franks has previously acknowledged the existence of increased military operations which he asserted were needed "to `degrade' Iraqi air defenses in the same way as the air attacks that began the 1991 Gulf War."

* The new information goes on to indicate that our military decided "on August 5, 2005 [sic], for a `hybrid plan" in which a continuous air offensive and special forces would begin while the main ground force built up in Kuwait for a full-scale invasion." According to the article, "despite the lack of an Iraqi reaction, the air war began anyway in September with a 100-plane raid."

The allegations and factual assertions made in the May 29 London Times are in many respects just as serious as those made in the earlier article. If true, these assertions indicate that not only had our nation secretly and perhaps illegally agreed to go to war by the summer of 2002, but that we had gone on to take specific and tangible military actions before asking Congress or the United Nations for authority.

Thus, while there is considerable doubt as to whether the U.S. had authority to invade Iraq, given, among other things, the failure of the U.N. to issue a follow-up resolution to the November 8, 2002 Resolution 1441, it would seem that the act of engaging in military action via stepped up bombing raids that were not in response to an actual or imminent threat before our government asked for military authority would be even more problematic from a legal as well as a moral perspective.

As a result of these new disclosures, I would ask that you respond as promptly as possible to the following questions:

1) Did the RAF and the United States military increase the rate that they were dropping bombs in Iraq in 2002? If so, what was the extent and timing of the increase?

2) What was the justification for any such increase in the rate of bombing in Iraq at this time? Was this justification reviewed by legal authorities in the U.S.?

3) To the best of your knowledge, was there any agreement with any representative of the British government to engage in military action in Iraq before authority was sought from the Congress or the U.N.? If so, what was the nature of the agreement?

In connection with all of the above questions, please provide me with any memorandum, notes, minutes, documents, phone and other records, e-mails, computer files (including back-up records) or other material of any kind or nature concerning or relating thereto in the possession or accessible by the Department of Defense.

I would encourage you to provide responses to these questions as promptly as possible, as they raise extremely grave and serious questions involving the credibility of our Administration and its constitutional responsibilities. In the interest of time, please feel free to forward me partial responses as they become available.

Sincerely,

John Conyers, Jr.
Ranking Member


:: Article nr. 12155 sent on 30-may-2005 03:59 ECT

: The incoming address of this article is :
www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/5/29/121914/591

"iraq dispatches" author dahr jamail  

iraq dispatches...by dahr jamail

May 15, 2005
A “Welcome Parade” of Blood and Seething Anger

As if to add insult to injury, with over 400 Iraqis killed in violence during the first two weeks of the newly sworn in Iraqi “government,” US Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice made a surprise one day visit to the newest US colony.

After visiting northern Iraq which has been spared the brunt of the ongoing violence, Rice traveled to the heavily entrenched “green zone” in central Baghdad where the U.S. “embassy” is located. She addressed a crowd in the former Republican Palace, the perfect setting for her symbolic visit to Iraq where more and more Iraqis are referring to the devastating occupation which has beset their country as their new “bloodocracy.”

“We are so grateful that there are Americans willing to sacrifice so the Middle East will be whole, and free and democratic and at peace,” she announced before she returned to northern Iraq in her huge contingent of military helicopters to the mountain stronghold of Kurdish Democratic Party leader Massoud Barzani before exiting the war ravaged nation.

Rather than a welcoming parade with ticker-tape and rose petals for the US Secretary of State who was one of the architects of the invasion, 34 corpses of men shot, beheaded or with their throats slit were discovered across Iraq today.

Other aspects of her warm welcome included drive-by shootings in Baghdad which claimed the lives of a senior Industry Ministry official, his driver and a prominent Shia cleric as well as a dual-bomb attack in Baquba which narrowly missed taking the life of the governor of Diyala province (but took the lives of four others in his convoy). A second bomb was delivered five minutes after the first by a man running on foot towards the convoy who then detonated an explosives belt.

When ambulances arrived medical workers found body parts strewn about in pools of blood and shattered glass as they attended to 37 wounded Iraqis.

Not only are the vast majority of Iraqis in Iraq vehemently opposed to the ongoing occupation, but in Amman those I met at the ‘Between the Two Rivers Trucking Company’ today were just as angry about the occupation.

Inside the large office of the general director of the company, drivers from Baghdad, Baquba, Sadr City, Fallujah, Ramadi and Basra, Sunni and Shia alike, crowd about glasses of hot tea to take turns venting their frustrations amidst my questions.

Prior to the invasion they used to make 4-5 trips between Amman and Baghdad per month. Now they make one trip per month, primarily due to the fact that prior to crossing the border into Jordan they are forced to wait in a line several kilometers long…for 18 days. This is due to, what they believe, unnecessary harassment by Jordanian border authorities.

They sleep in the cabs of their trucks as the line inches closer to the border, and when a driver from Basra tells me that if they leave their trucks at night they are shot at by American soldiers, I glace across the room to find all of the men nodding in agreement.

None of them are content with the situation.

“All of our problems are due to the Americans,” says Ahmed, a driver who has been trying to get supplies into Ramadi, “The soldiers have surrounded the city for so long, there is one entry way in and all of the people of the city are suffering. The Americans brought all of these problems with them.”

The subject of civil war is broached, and Mohammed, a Shia driver from Sadr City blurts out, “The occupiers are creating these problems between the Shia and Sunni, but they will not divide us! All occupations only mean destruction and suffering!”

Again I look around the room filled with seething Iraqis and find them nodding once again.

Ahmed raises his voice over the others and with eyes seething with anger asks, “My cousin is in al-Qaim, and he just told me the Americans have destroyed so many houses in that area and killed women and children!”

All of the attention in the room shifts to the large, mustached man wearing a brown dishdasha as he continues.

“They are entering our houses where women and children are, and this is totally against our traditions and culture. They must leave our country immediately!”

It isn’t only the Iraqis in Amman who are opposed to the brutal occupation of their country. Most Jordanians I’ve spoken with over the last week feel likewise. As an older Jordanian man from Palestine told me two days ago at my hotel, “The Iraqis must resist this occupation now, or they will end up like the Palestinians.”

In the office of the trucking company, the mood is that of searing anger, frustration and urgency.

Hamad, a Shia man from Basra enters the discussion and states, “I have seen them destroy three farms in Diyala! Why can’t they stay on their bases like the British do in the south? If they would just stay on their bases things would be so much better for us.”

“With my own eyes I’ve seen the Americans, when their patrol was hit by a roadside bomb open fire on all the civilian cars around them,” exclaims Mohammed.

At this everyone begins talking at once, the anger raising their voices.

Over the din Rathman, a driver from Fallujah demands, “If Bush is a real man, he should walk down the street alone!”

“Insh’Allah [God willing] Iraq will be the graveyard of the Americans,” adds Ahmed, “Qaim is three small villages and with all their planes and tanks they still fail to control it. If they were brave they should attack one or two villages without planes and helicopters and tanks and fight man to man!”

A Shia driver from Hilla, a small city south of Baghdad, sternly says that the US is “the mother company of terrorism.”

My interpreter Abu Talat, my friend Aisha and I decide it’s time to excuse ourselves. Several of the men follow us to the street as we wait for a taxi, continuing to make their statements as we wait. They are anxious to continue, seeing my pen as an outlet for their frustrations as I continue to take notes.

“Why is the media not talking more about al-Qaim,” asks Ahmed, as a taxi approaches and begins to pull over to collect us.

“We strongly advise the American people to pressure their government to leave Iraq,” says a man from al-Karma who asks to be called Ali.

As I begin to step into the car he asks, “We are now free of Saddam Hussein, so did the Americans come as liberators or acquirers?”

Posted by Dahr_Jamail at May 15, 2005 08:21 PM

©2004, 2005 Dahr Jamail.

winning hearts and minds in iraq...

sabrina harmon giving thumbs up over wounded iraqi civilian in body bag packed with ice--the caption actually said the guy was still alive--at THAT time--and the ice was used to make him more cooperative to interrogation  

discussion of downing st memo...at dar kush blog

*ok , in case our vast vast inumerable multitudes of curious readers were wondering what's been going on these past few days --well we've been sorta tied up involved in various non-internet projects , but we did have time to manage to have some fun jousting with a dourly humorous guy who calls himself "nobody" concerning the presence of ancient africans in western asia, southern and southeast asia and the pacific .

...and at writer steve barnes' Dar Kush blog , we got involved in a discussion of the "downing st. memo"-the document leaked in which the british government officials basically said the bush administration made a case for war with information "fixed" upon that outcome-war .

--the meaning of the word "fixed" seems important to some--but to this blogger--and perhaps to the vast immeasurable multitudes of our readers , it's like a "slam dunk" --to borrow a phrase from george tenent--that the bush administration led america to war in iraq on evidence they knew was pure bullchips...

steve made the mistake ...lol of asking for "any reasoned critique" ---sooo old longwinded "you know who" had to put his 2 cents in , especially since he's been writing about this war since summer of 2002--almost a year before the actual invasion... each poster's name is found at the end of their post and this blogger's long winded remarks appear in brown to make it easier to tell one comment from the other

Comment Successfully Posted

Steve, you might take a look at this analysis of the memo. I heard about this quite some time ago, and through the blessings of the internet was able to read the entire source document for myself. Thanks for posting the link so others can read it, too.
Jonna | Homepage | 05.23.05 - 5:14 pm | #

Just another note-the link is in the "homepage" spot--too long to stick in the message.
Jonna | Homepage | 05.23.05 - 5:16 pm | #

thanks, Jonna. Any reasoned critique from either side is welcome here.
Steve | 05.24.05 - 4:36 pm | #

briefly , from memory , a few random points:

1. bush admin from the start unsuccessfully tried to link saddam regime to 9-11--even though there was no connection

2. no nation in the region considered saddam a threat any longer --except the sharon gang in israel--basically because neutralizing iraq would be a blow to the palestinian cause and give israel a commercial , political and military foothold in northern iraq through alliances with the kurds--and hopefully also giving israel access to iraqi oil by rebuilding the old pipeline from northern iraq to the israeli city of haifa--which was a promise also made to the israelis by ahmed chalabi

3. cheney as vp made unusual visits to cia headquarters-- not so subtly pressuring intel analysts to revise initial assessments in order to make iraq seem a threat --when no threat existed--intel assessments to the contrary were rejected and sent back--cia has been gutted and emasculated ,in part for not showing enough enthusiasm for the bush-war effort --"cooked books" concept applies not just to enron

4. under clinton there were two assassination/coup attemps against saddam using intel gathered from UN american weapons inspectors working for cia --saddam finally put two and two together--figured out that americans were demanding weapons inspector access to all presidential palaces , residents and compounds in order to monitor the volume of electronic communications between saddam's bodyguards--the greatest volume of communications would give coup plotters/assassins a good chance at getting a fix on saddam's actual location and killing him--the guy moved around alot to avoid assassination --when he figured out americans in the UN weapons inspections teams were planting bugs , trying to help kill him , he demanded americans be removed from the Un inspection teams--of course the Us refused --saddam then had little choice left except to remove the inspection teams altogether--it was exactly what the Us hoped for --they had deliberately forced him into non-compliance with Un resolutions

5. the Us bombed iraq on average once a week for 12 years using no-fly zones as an excuse for flying over iraqi territory and denying iraq access to large portions of its own air space--Un did not order creation of the no-fly zones--Us and Uk created and enforced these zones

6. 1,500,000 iraqis died as a result of Un economic sanctions --mostly elderly and children--chlorine was considered a dual purpose item by Un sanctions, meaning it could be used in making weapons --serious shortages of materials needed to purify water resulted--preventable water-borne diseases like diahrrea from drinking dirty water killed tens of thousands
of iraqis . one of saddam's regimes propaganda victories before the 1st gulf war was spending large sums of money to deliver clean drinking water to most iraqis . during the first gulf war the allies violated geneva accords by deliberately bombing iraqi water treatment faci
d sekou | Homepage | 05.25.05 - 3:33 am | #

during the first gulf war the allies violated geneva accords by deliberately bombing iraqi water treatment facilities leaving people only contaminated river water to drink polluted by raw sewage .diseases from dirty drinking water became big killers of iraqi children and elderly

7. the mobile labs that saddam was supposed to be able to launch wmd in 45 minutes from turned out to be weather monitoring equipment --sold to iraq by the Uk

8. former marine and UN weapons inspector scott ritter said a year before the invasion that iraq hemmed and hawed stuttered and stalled but finally did comply and 95% of their wmd had been acounted for and verified as destroyed back in the 90s-the other 5% were destroyed in allied bombings during the gulf war--the serial numbers verified in the records of western nations and russia where they were originally produced and verified also by serial numbers in iraqi records as they were being destroyed in iraq, the country they were sold to .

9. the Us relied heavily upon intel and witness about wmd in iraq provided by ahmed chalabi --an escaped fugitive from justice convicted for massive swindling and bank fraud in jordan and sentenced to 20 years in prison.

chalabi wanted , and still wants to be president of iraq and basically told the americans whatever they wanted to hear in order to get the invasion going--he was also the source of the myth of american soldiers being greeted by grateful iraqis throwing rose petals and kisses--chalabi provided "witnesses" and "scientists" to the americans swearing that saddam had massive wmd chemical , biological , and nuclear--relying on chalabi -a convicted bank swindler with his own ambitious political agenda was total lunacy

10. the bushites knew the yellow cake/niger uranium claim was false --former Us ambassador joseph wilson went to niger to investigate the claim that saddam was trying to obtain uranium for a bomb and found it groundless and reported it in the media---his wife valerie plame's identity was then outed as a covert cia agent as retribution by the bush administration ---a major felony endangering her life and the lives of those associated with her overseas--outing her was an act bordering on treason --in times of war it is treason-- launching the jeff gannon/johnny gosche/jim guckert phoney reporter/gay hustler whitehouse leak scandal --the leak was rumored to have come directly from the whitehouse to phoney reporter gannon/guckert/gosche--the gay hustler with the internet escort service who visited the whitehouse 200 times --sometimes for many hours at a time and without signing out.

11. when sabers began rattling and ultimatums issued , saddam capitulated and allowed UN inspectors back in to verify that iraq had complied and no longer had wmd---the bush administration refused to allow them time to do their job --demanded they leave and then invaded---what was the big rush ?
d sekou | Homepage | 05.25.05 - 3:38 am | #

12. before the invasion saddam's regime released to the UN a 12,000 page report --the records and details of their wmd program ---how they financed it , who they bought from and what they purchased and when---the Us government grabbed it dismissed it as bull--because it probably would have shown that hundreds of major corporations were involved in arming iraq--going back and connected directly to scandals from the reagan and first bush administrations

13. the terrorist group "training camp" ansar "something or other"--i can't recall the exact name --the group bush and powell tried to connect to al-qaeda was operating in northern iraq in the area saddam had no longer had defacto authority in --controlled by america's kurdish allies and the pesh merga militias--militia financed and armed by the Us and trained by the israelis--
d sekou | Homepage | 05.25.05 - 3:39 am | #

no case for war and the bushites knew this and lied and misled the people with one excuse after another to justify this unnecessary war ---and even manipulated re-election
d sekou | Homepage | 05.25.05 - 3:59 am | #

Actually, there was, and is, indeed evidence for a connection between Iraq and Al Qaeda:http://www.adnki.com/index_2Level.php?cat=Terrorism&loid=8.0.169852178&par=0


but it has gotten less attention than one might have expected. If I were being cynical I'd say that some in our media aren't exactly happy about giving Bush even partial credit for having had at least a rational case for war.

Answering every other single objection to Bush's policy would be a loooooooooong series of posts, but I'll content myself with briefly noting: Niger =/= Africa, despite Joe Wilson having implied the reverse.
Erich Schwarz | 05.25.05 - 12:16 pm | #

former "prime minister" ayad allawi was little more than a leg breaker for saddam hussein who fell out of favor with the regime .while in europe he was believed by saddam's people to have become a double agent working for british and or us intel . saddam's people tried to kill him by hacking him to death with an axe, but he survived and turned completely . the guy is a murderer and a thug --always has been , probably always will be. he and chalabi made a career of feeding the cia and Us military the kind of info the neo-cons wanted to hear. the guy is a cia stooge and less bright than chalabi but probably more ruthless. when baghdad fell he and chalabi and their private militias were flown in to help run the country by the Us . unfortunately most iraqis distrust these guys and know they work for cia .

allawi and his boys grabbed up some of the headquarters of saddam's secret police and have been cranking out "official" document after "official" document trying to connect al qaeda with saddam's regime. people laugh at this stuff .

i've said it before , but you can check for yourselves , saddam and his sons lived the lives of western playboys--indulging themselves in vice and pleasures of the flesh ...bin laden is an islamic fundamentalist--the pleasures of the flesh are satanic temptations to him --bin laden types give up the pleasures of this world for the paradise of the next --saddam is the exact opposite --his paradise was enjoyed in this world.

the two are totally opposite and mortal enemies . if you put them in the same room they would probably try to kill each other . bin laden views saddam as someone who is as much or more an enemy than the Us because saddam was secular and iraq is a secular state.to bin laden types secular =western=everything immoral they are fighting against .

these two guys working together would be like hugh hefner and john the baptist forming an alliance...bin laden types hate everything saddam stands for and would consider it their duty to overthrow and behead him . saddam knows this and brutally suppressed the fundamentalists--as did hosni mubarak in egypt and assad and his son in syria. it was the fundamentalists who murdered anwar sadat in egypt .


and abu musad al zarqawi--if he really was in iraq was supposedly in the kurdish zone --the area not under saddams regime's control. ansar al islam's training camp --the terrorist camp mentioned by colin powell in his infamous UN power point presentation of half truths and lies was in the kurdish zone where the pesh merga and israeli mossad and elite commandos could have gotten them all but didn't . the Us had the location of the camp well before the invasion but did not bomb it until after the invasion began . if you knew where the camp was well before the invasion and had pesh merga on the ground , then why not go after it then --or at least bomb it --the Us and Uk had been bombing iraq on average of once a week for twelve years--w
d sekou | Homepage | 05.25.05 - 7:08 pm | #

--the Us and Uk had been bombing iraq on average of once a week for twelve years--what stopped them from taking out this big terrorist threat ? i guess they needed zarqawi and ansar al islam's "terrorist" camp as an excuse for the invasion.

ansar al islam and others have been saying that the person the Us calls zarqawi was killed in the bombings that hit the camp shortly after the invasion began. sources in afghanistan say zarqawi saw himself as a rival of bin laden and al qaeda and not an ally.
america will ultimately lose the "war on terror" because of gross incompetence on the part of the neo-cons . the neo-cons don't behave as if they understand the mentality of the islamic world and blunder again and again , over and over alienating more and more people in that part of the world .

ariel sharon must have the greatest difficulty in not laughing out loud at america when he does photo ops and speeches in the Us.

the american press for the most part have been lapdogs of the bush administration concerning this war in iraq --regurgitating without question the lies the bushies spin out and have abdicated their responsibility of presenting information honestly to the american people.
d sekou | Homepage | 05.25.05 - 7:13 pm | #

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/18034
d sekou | Homepage | 05.26.05 - 2:00 am | #

"http://www.washington%20post.com/wp...er=emailarticle">http://www.washingtonpost.com/ wp...er=emailarticle

not satisfied with the quagmire in iraq , neo-con richard perle calls for invasion of iran at AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee) annual convention...guest speaker --sec of state condie rice
d sekou | Homepage | 05.26.05 - 2:50 am | #

"Surge in US deaths in Iraq draws concern" http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldl...5028900,00.html


70 attacks a day ...at first it was a dozen attacks a day --then it doubled --then it was three dozen attacks a day--now that has doubled --despite the massive assault on fallujah--that was suposed to break the resistance , and the recent photos of a captured saddam in his undies --supposed to demoralize the resistance--the resistance has only grown more sophisticated in its abilities---the Us has bungled this war so badly that now it may be impossible to win it . bush should be impeached
d sekou | Homepage | 05.26.05 - 3:09 am | #

D Sekou,

Again, you're writing at vast length, far beyond anything I have time or space to comment on. Two points you make are particularly striking, though:

"former 'prime minister' ayad allawi was little more than a leg breaker for saddam hussein who fell out of favor with the regime."

"the Us has bungled this war so badly that now it may be impossible to win it"

Which leads me to ask a few Deep Questions of my own:

What the hell has this got to do with whether intelligence on Iraq was misrepresented?

Why exactly do you prefer keeping Saddam Hussein in power to having Allawi win a fair election carried out under conditions that would make most Americans soil their own undergarments in fear?

What are your objective, empirically testable criteria for falsification of the remarkable claim that we are losing in Iraq?

And, again, what does your remarkable hatred of seeing the U.S. actually overthrow a vicious dictator without French permission have to do with the original point Steve raised?
Anonymous | 05.26.05 - 12:07 pm | #

"What the hell has this got to do with whether intelligence on Iraq was misrepresented?"

both ayad allawi and ahmed chalabi were set up with millions of Us taxpayer dollars in order to create "iraqi exile" organizations-- each potentially vying to be the officially reognized iraqi government in exile by the Us and installed in power once saddam was assassinated or toppled by the americans .

when the assassination /coup attempts failed , invasion and regime change became the alternative means to install a new "leader" in iraq .


chalabi and allawi appeared to have an on-going "whoppers" contest telling the pentagon and neo-con idiots and the israelis whatever they wanted to hear in order to be the new leader.
the pentagon , the neo-cons and the izzies should have known better , but the fact that they relied on these two exiled iraqis shows their degree of disconnect from reality and capacity for self delusion . --it's "the noble lie" of the straussians --borrowed from the nazis concept


it was chalabi and allawi who told the pentagon that iraqis would greet them with flowers and kisses--note the newsweek cover of the iraqi man kissing an american soldier on the cheek--it was one of chalabi's guys flown in for the photo op --just as it was chalabi's guys flown in by the pentagon for the "breathtaking" photo of the saddam statue pulldown in firdos square in baghdad--photos taken from a nearby hotel show the square was actually deserted --except for chalabi's guys and Us marines --nothing at all like the tumultuous crowds scene of the "liberated" that american media puppydogs tried to convince the world were there--this staged scene alone shows the Us knew they were being fed lies and used those lies to convince a highly gullible american public to support the Us petro-war in iraq .

foreign journalists staying in a nearby hotel --the "palestine" or "lebanon" hotel--i think the name was-- were fired upon by Us troops for
puncturing the neo-con spin bubble and taking photos from the hi-rise hotel of firdos square showing it to be completely empty excepting for marines and a few dozen chalabi guys--at least one of those foreign reporters was killed if memory is correct --but most in the Us never saw the photos showing the firdos square "liberation " scene to be a staged fake .

it was alawi who helped sell the lie to the Us and the world that saddam was able to launch wmd at europe in less than 45 minutes..allawi was in on the "saddam smuggled yellow cake uranium from niger through libya" lie ...allawi "discovered" phoney documents saying saddam trained mohammad atta to hi-jack airliners and saddam was connected to al qaeda...it was also allawi who made up the lie that saddam had stashed $40 billion stolen dollars in banks around the world--allawi and chalabi both wanted to be the new iraqi leader--their private militias failed at coup and assassination--despite considerable Us technical and m
d sekou | Homepage | 05.27.05 - 11:34 pm | #

their private militias failed at coup and assassination--despite considerable Us technical and material assistance ---so they both told the neo-cons what the neo-cons wanted the american people to hear--saddam was an imminent threat and had to be invaded and toppled. the neo-cons ignored realistic intel they were receiving that said chalabi and allawi were full of it and instead chose to make a case for war on intel they knew was lies.
d sekou | Homepage | 05.27.05 - 11:37 pm | #

"Why exactly do you prefer keeping Saddam Hussein in power to having Allawi win a fair election carried out under conditions that would make most Americans soil their own undergarments in fear?"

i don't prefer keeping saddam in power and never did---he obviously sucks too.

the questions you should ask is how did saddam GET in power and WHO armed him and WHO encouraged him to go to war with iran and later kuwait and WHO gave him regular satellite intel showing him exactly where the iranian troops were concentrated and told him to shoot his chemical weapons to those coordinates for the greatest killing effect ? --but if you asked those questions then saddam and "chemical ali " wouldn't be the only two on trial for war crimes --would they ?

saddam began his career at age 22 as a hitman in a coup attempt against then iraqi leader colonel kassim-- a guy who was too soviet leaning for america's tastes and hinted at nationalizing iraq's oil .

saddam and three other guys ambushed kassim's car but saddam was too anxious and would not wait till the agreed upon moment --kassim was wounded and his driver killed . fugitive saddam escaped from the area by swimming i believe either the tigris or euphrates river --for years after when he finally became strong man in iraq --he would swim the same river to celebrate his escape.

young saddam ended up in jordan and was eventually hustled off by his american cia handlers to egypt where they paid for an apartment for him for about a year before kassim was finally killed or couped and saddam returned to iraq...

allawi could probably never win a fair election and had to be appointed interim prime minister because like chalabi and saddam before them both , he has the taint of american cia tool upon him ...and isn't trusted or liked but is feared by some iraqis--he had a reputation for brandishing a pistol to intimidate people even when he was a med school "student"--a legbreaker and thug is what he has always been...



the blog entry "from bad to worse" a long but useful read gives some interesting info about "dr." allawi--including this activity reported one week before assuming interim prime ministership :

"In mid-July, the Bagdad correspondent for the Sydney Morning Herald, Paul McGeogh, reported that two eye-witnesses stated that the week prior to the handover of power that Allawi had drawn a pistol and executed up to six people detained for suspected attacks on Iraqi and U.S forces."
d sekou | Homepage | 05.28.05 - 12:13 am | #

link's not working but the blog entry and article can be found under october 21, 2004 section and titled, "from bad to worse"
d sekou | Homepage | 05.28.05 - 12:17 am | #

Gravatar "What are your objective, empirically testable criteria for falsification of the remarkable claim that we are losing in Iraq?"

is that like that old question "do you still beat your wife?"

the insurgency has in only 2 years grown from an average of 12 attacks a day to 70 attacks a day.

the sophistication and coordination of the attacks continues to increase . despite the Us best efforts at "surgically" eliminating the resistance --as in the massive ,costly and militarily useless destruction in fallujah-civilians were the only big losers --the resistance left a few zealots seeking instant martrydom and some green recruits needing experience--the junior varsity--while the varsity team slipped away well in advance as usual and created havoc elsewhere .

the iraqis deeply resent that the bulk of the jobs reconstructing iraq have not gone to desperately unemployed iraqis and iraqi companies--but to american companies and the money stays in american pockets .

the Us is losing in iraq because it should not have been there in the first place .this war has turned the whole world against america.

the whole world including much of the populations of the "coalition of the willing" know it is a petro-war with nothing to do with wmd .

the whole world knows america is fighting a war of aggression against a nation that was no threat to it

.america has been estimated to have killed 100,000 people in this war--yet american generals appear on cnn and callously say they don't even keep iraqi death tolls and body counts --the message unwittingly sent is that iraqi lives don't matter to the Us --since the americans preciously , meticulously count each of their own killed , injured and wounded.

the iraqis hate the americans more and more each day with every death the americans cause , with every slight and insult the americans inflict with every custom the americans violate --like going into mosques wearing shoes-- the abuse of prisoners at abu ghraib, the secret agreements made without consulting the iraqi people allowing foreign investors to buy up interests in iraqs oil-- the destroyed electrical infrastructure -- the destroyed water treatment infrastructure -- the high gasoline prices and shortages -- the 50 % to 70% unemployment -- the dissolution of police and the army and the rampant crime -- the kicking down of doors -- disrespect shown to iraqi homes and iraqi women-- handcuffing, hooding and dragging off for questioning young men , old men and little boys --holding prisoners indefinitely without charges --the idiotic insult of referring to this "war on terror" as a "crusade"--the 4 million pounds of depleted uranium munitions dust gradually circulating into the air and water of iraq's land and cities and the memories of horribly deformed fetuses and cancers from du weapons used in the first gulf war-- i can go on and on--all of it shows the Us has failed to win over the population--the only way to defeat a deter
d sekou | Homepage | 05.28.05 - 9:17 am | #

--the only way to defeat a determined insurgency besides genocide against the civilians, is to win over the civilians--"hearts and minds" is the expression --the Us alienates more iraqis everyday--with every arrest and detention--every time they manhandle and humiliate people--with every burst of panic-stricken gunfire --with every unarmed civilian they shoot and the hardships on the iraqi families the Us creates.

-i first knew this war was lost when those 4 "contractors" were killed and burned and hung from the bridge in fallujah and the people there cheered.

i said to myself as i watched the news that day --the "contractors" were former special forces elite soldiers--experienced former elite soldiers --the best in the world and they were ambushed that easily? the resistance must have SERIOUS inside intel to catch these guys in an ambush...

as the ambush happened , the new iraqi police stood by , watched and did not lift a finger or radio it in for help--that's when i first knew this war was lost--the americans were clueless about the people of iraq and the iraqis they were paying to help them find a clue--didn't lift a finger to save them---vietnam all over again--and vietnam is the war of insurgency which the iraqi resistance have reportedly planned this war of insurgency after ...

earlier this week listening on the radio to a report given by bbc journalist phillip rees--he described the visit of a colonel in the new iraqi security forces to an elementary school --basically a pr --"hearts and minds" type thing--after pleasantries were exchanged between school officials and the military , the colonel then showed pictures of suspected insurgents and mentioned names and asked if any of the children recognized or knew any of these people. phillip rees reported that all the iraqi army received from these children was stoney silence--even the little kids know not to cooperate with the invaders--and other than massive brutality or genocide--the only way to win against a determined insurgency is gaining the trust and active cooperation of the locals---something the Us clearly does not have . so far this war has cost the Us taxpayers $300 billion in only 2 years --at this rate who can hold out longer--the american taxpayer or the iraqis?
...to win an insurgency type of war, all the insurgents need do is hold out longer than their opponent can afford to--then wait for him to leave and declare victory-- just as in vietnam
d sekou | Homepage | 05.28.05 - 9:22 am | #

"And, again, what does your remarkable hatred of seeing the U.S. actually overthrow a vicious dictator without French permission have to do with the original point Steve raised?"

hatred is a rather strong term --i feel no hatred for anyone , any nation or any thing.

saddam appears to me to have been duped by the west --as in used and then thrown away--yeah undoubtedly saddam was a vicious dictator and a murderer and deserves whatever punishment he gets ,but give even the devil his due--oil money was spent -at "considerable cost" to make available safe drinking water to most iraqis under his regime--the allies in the first gulf war deliberately targeted for destruction the iraqi water treatment plants--a clear violation of the geneva accords prohibiting destruction of infrastructure needed for civilian life.. . basic universal education was also put into effect under the saddam regime --iraqis and palestinians reportedly have the highest literacy rates among the arab world--saddam's regime provided universal health care to the iraqis--iraq had a better ratio of doctors per 100 people than the Us--of course everything the guy built he named after himself but he did filter some of the oil money down to improve the lives of the people and iraq was a modern--tho clearly not democratic nation by regional standards...

he used chemical weapons against the iranians --with Us help of course but there was a ny times article stating that the infamous gassing of the kurds was done by iranian chemical weapons --by a type of gas the iraqis didn't have .

yes saddam invaded kuwait but kuwait was at one time part of iraq--until the brits divided it off and installed its leaders . the kuwaitis were believed to be doing slant drilling across the kuwait/iraq border siphoning off iraqi oil. at the same time , the kuwaitis did have quiet assurances that the Us would back them in a confrontation with saddam--was this the old school yard trick clever kids use to get other kids to fight each other ? how come no one asks that question ?

the Us ambassador april glaspie when personally warned by saddam that if negotiations to stop the kuwaitis didn't work that he would resort to military action , did appear to give saddam a green light to invade when she told him america wasn't interested in getting involved in his iraq/kuwaiti border disputes--almost at the same time america was assuring kuwait that the Us had kuwait's back in aconfrontation with saddam... the daddy bush administration did lie and show the saudis and others faked satellite intel showing saddams troops massed on the saudi border when he clearly stopped well before it--so the claims that he was a hitler trying to take over saudi arabia too and control the world's oil supplies and thus bring the west to its knees--were more lies . . the story about iraqi soldiers throwing kuwati babies out of incubators and stealing the incubators was also fake--and the girl making the claim a li
d sekou | Homepage | 05.28.05 - 10:50 am | #

the story about iraqi soldiers throwing kuwati babies out of incubators and stealing the incubators was also fake--and the girl making the claim a liar and member of the kuwaiti elite families--seems the first gulf war was fought for as staged and phoney reasons as the second gulf war...bush and his daddy the culprits in office at the times...now should we ask if granddaddy prescot bush was ever involved in creating an international "boogeyman" that the Us then went after and destroyed in a costly war that also generated billions of dollars in revenues for big defense contractors ? (see the "bush book" on-line at www.tarpley.net -- the chapter titled "the hitler project")

like grandfather -like father-like son--all hogs at the trough--seems that with the bush family --the acorns don't fall far from the trees --

and the french--to their credit-- said show us the evidence and chirac promised to send troops to iraq --if the inspectors were first allowed to do their job--the Us refused --so why villify the french for being reasonable ?
d sekou | Homepage | 05.28.05 - 10:54 am | #

at the summit meeting world leaders discuss crucial issues...

"jeeze...that's a tough question , tony...of course briefs are spoze ta give a feller more support in the 'testosterphone' region , but condi says boxers just look better on me when i wear my sagging jeans "... 

boxer shorts , dude ...you need to wear boxers...

US tabloid runs frontpage photo of half-naked Saddam

NEW YORK (AFP)


US tabloid newspaper, the New York Post, ran a picture of a half-naked Saddam Hussein in his underwear on its front page, under the banner headline "Butcher of Sagdad."

The intimate photo of Saddam, along with three other pictures of the ousted Iraqi leader in his prison, were billed as an "exclusive" borrowed from sister British tabloid The Sun.

Both newspapers are owned by Australian-born media tycoon Rupert Murdoch.

"Saddam Hussein is living out every dictator's worst nightmare -- stripped of power and stripped to his underwear," the Post said in an accompanying story headlined "Saddam's Life is a Hard Cell."

The other pictures showed Saddam washing his own clothes by hand, walking in a prison yard and sleeping in his cell.

Saddam was captured by US troops in December 2003. The article did not reveal the location of the prison where he is being held.

The Sun said US military sources had handed over the photos in the hope of dealing a body blow to the resistance in Iraq.

The US military said it has ordered an investigation into the source of the photos, saying that they could be a breach of Defense Department regulations and Saddam's rights under the Geneva Coventions.

"An unknown reporter named Jeff Gannon/James Guckert was allowed into the White House Press Corp, and quickly became a star. Ari Fleischer, who was White House Press Secretary at the time, ok'ed it.

Gannon had no history, no journalistic credentials, and no training whatsoever. He immediately jumped to the 'Front of the line', guiding press conferences to focus on Bush's agendas."  

"John Roberts, the CBS star who will get Dan Rather's job, escorted Gannon around the White House press briefings."

 

ari fleischer white house press secretary initially ok'ed jeff gannon being allowed into the white house press corp 

scott mc clellan... "was the White House Press Secretary who allowed Jeff Gannon access, via daily press passes. Gannon's relationship was to help direct the press conferences towards Bush's agendas. When a hard topic came up, he often deflected and softened the issues."
 

was karl rove "jeff gannon's contact to president bush"? 

more food for cyncism?

from rense.com

"John Roberts, the CBS star who will get Dan Rather's job, escorted Gannon around the White House press briefings."

*gannon of course refers to fake journalist/gay male hustler jeff gannon who from whitehouse security records was given daily press passes by :

"Scott McClellan

is the White House Press Secretary who allowed Jeff Gannon access, via daily press passes. Gannon's relationship was to help direct the press conferences towards Bush's agendas. When a hard topic came up, he often deflected and softened the issues."



"Karl Rove who is Bush's Rasputin and a guiding light to Bush Jr.and Sr., was Gannon's contact to President Bush.One article states Gannon apparently got into the White House and stayed with or visited, upstairs, with the President."



* now back to john roberts ...

taken from a report by sherman skolnick :

The Gannon Cannon - Part 1
Bush Treason In Spy Whorehouse
By Sherman H. Skolnick
www.cloakanddagger.ca
www.skolnicksreport.com
www.rense.com/Datapages/skolnickdatapage.html


Then in February, 2005, there surfaced a fellow named Jeff Gannon. He was a major player in a District of Columbia Escort Service. Plain spoken folks would label it simply a male call service, or a male whorehouse. Gannon was a reputed reporter for a little-known news service owned by one of George W. Bush's pals in Texas; a news operation now defunct.

Gannon apparently got into the White House and stayed with or visited, upstairs, with the occupant and resident, namely George W. Bush. Some contend the U.S. Secret Service, contrary to what they are required, did NOT log in Gannon.

Gannon alias Gosch received reportedly directly from George W. Bush in the White House and/or right nearby, the secret American CIA records used to blow the cover of CIA operative Valerie Plame. The result was that some of the 70 CIA penetration agents, supervised by Plame, operating in countries very hostile to the U.S. were identified and murdered. Blowing the cover of Plame was a reprisal against her husband, a former U.S. Ambassador who criticized George W. Bush.

In so doing, George W. Bush committed treason and violated a federal criminal provision having a severe penalty for blowing the cover of a CIA operative.


...A member of the homosexual media and political underground, written about by us since December, 2002, reputedly is John Roberts. He heads up the CBS reporting team in the White House press corps and hopes to replace Dan Rather as CBS Network Evening News Anchor Face. Roberts ostensibly escorts Gannon to where he has to go, often apparently without legal formality.

Why would the Secret Service on purpose, fail to log in Jeff Gannon to the White House?

1. One reason is the Secret Service has become accustomed to George W. Bush's co-habiting reportedly with homosexuals, such as Victor Ashe, once longtime Mayor of Knoxville, Tennessee. When a member of Congress began following up on our stories, Bush shipped Ashe out of the country, as U.S. Ambassador to Poland.



...Some in the Secret Service have quietly resigned, fed up with covering up Bush's sordid doings as a member of the satanic cult, Skull & Bones, or as we call it, Skull & Bastards Society.

2. Another reason is that CBS's John Roberts has some reportedly rotten details about the Secret Service's involvement in political assassinations. And thus, Roberts ostensibly can escort certain persons upstairs in the White House to Bush without having the Secret Service log them in.

3. Jeff Gannon, in the company of John Roberts, attended a recent press conference by Bush. Gannon reportedly did not have to go through an extensive FBI/Secret Service background check. Further, apparently with Robert's connivance, Gannon, without Secret Service press credentials, was allowed to sit next to Roberts at a press conference and ask Bush a "soft ball" question, enabling Bush to mouth off about his agenda.





http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/02/25/eveningnews/main502029.shtml
roberts

...so john roberts , apparently a part of the "gannon-gate" whitehouse phoney reporter/gay hustler plant scandal --giving the bush administration loaded softball questions to easily hit out of the park--- gets dan rathers old job at cbs --after old dan resigns in "disgrace" when sources for a story he reported about bush's "lack" of service during his daddy-arranged vietnam dodging stint in the national guard ---suddenly fail to pan out---leaving old dan high and dry--and his career to twist slowly in the wind ! ...wow !

(CBS) John Roberts has been CBS News’ Chief White House Correspondent since August 1999. He became the anchor for the CBS Evening News Sunday edition in March 1995 and has served as a substitute anchor on Face The Nation.

Before that, Roberts was a New York-based correspondent, contributing reports on medical and health issues, as well as a wide variety of other subjects, primarily to the CBS Evening News With Dan Rather. He also served as anchor of the CBS Evening News Saturday edition from February 1999 until being assigned the White House post.

Roberts has anchored live CBS News coverage and reported on-site from many major breaking stories in the past several years. He was one of the Network’s embedded correspondents during the war with Iraq, reporting from the frontlines in one of CBS News’ specially equipped “mobile studios” which enabled Roberts to transmit live reports while the military unit with which he was embedded as it moved through the Iraq landscape. He has also covered the Atlanta Olympics bombing; the Oklahoma City bombing; the Northridge earthquake; the kidnap and murder of tourists in Uganda; Hurricanes Hugo, Andrew, Fran, Felix, Georges and others domestically, and Hurricane Mitch in Honduras; the U.S. intervention in Haiti; the Cuban refugee crisis in Miami and the fire at the Branch Davidian compound near Waco, Texas.

was it really because of "low ratings" ?

CBS Cancels Wednesday '60 Minutes'

By DAVID BAUDER, AP Television WriterWed May 18,10:00 AM ET

CBS said Wednesday it is cancelling the Wednesday edition of "60 Minutes," insisting the decision was made because of poor ratings and not last fall's ill-fated story about President Bush's military service.

Dan Rather, the newsmagazine's lead correspondent, will contribute stories to the Sunday edition of "60 Minutes," said CBS Chairman Leslie Moonves.

"This was a ratings call, not a content call," Moonves said Wednesday.

The newsmagazine spinoff was where Rather reported last September that Bush skirted some duty while in the Texas Air National Guard and a commander felt pressure to sugarcoat an evaluation of him. An independent panel later concluded that documents used in the story could not be verified.

Moonves said that story didn't figure in the decision to cancel it, "not even slightly."

"60 Minutes" Wednesday has been sinking in the ratings, a decline accelerated by the success of the ABC drama "Lost" in the same time slot. The show also has one of the oldest audiences in prime-time television, considered a turn-off to advertisers.

Moonves said CBS News President Andrew Heyward was telling his staff of the decision on Wednesday and it was too soon to tell if any layoffs will result.

CBS will likely run news specials during the year in prime-time, he said.

The show was Rather's home base since he stepped down as anchor of the "CBS Evening News" in March. While he will report for "60 Minutes," it's not clear whether he will become one of the correspondents pictured every week at the beginning of the show.

nothing unusual... just par for the course says iraqi blogger "riverbend"

"Riverbend - Baghdad Burning
... I'll meet you 'round the bend my friend,
where hearts can heal and souls can mend...
riverbendblog
5-18-5"




*the iraqi blogger riverbend
author of the popular blog "baghdad burning"

adds to the "controversy" over the desecration of the quran by american jailers of prisoners from the afghan/iraqi military campaigns




"We've been watching the protests about the Newsweek article with interest. I'm not surprised at the turnout at these protests- the thousands of Muslims angry at the desecration of the Quran. What did surprise me was the collective shock that seems to have struck the Islamic world like a slap in the face. How is this shocking? It's terrible and disturbing in the extreme- but how is it shocking? After what happened in Abu Ghraib and other Iraqi prisons how is this astonishing? American jailers in Afghanistan and Iraq have shown little respect for human life and dignity- why should they be expected to respect a holy book?

Juan Cole has some good links about the topic.

Now Newsweek have retracted the story- obviously under pressure from the White House. Is it true? Probably. We've seen enough blatant disregard and disrespect for Islam in Iraq the last two years to make this story sound very plausible. On a daily basis, mosques are raided, clerics are dragged away with bags over their heads. Several months ago the world witnessed the execution of an unarmed Iraqi prisoner inside a mosque. Is this latest so very surprising?

Detainees coming back after weeks or months in prison talk of being forced to eat pork, not being allowed to pray, being exposed to dogs, having Islam insulted and generally being treated like animals trapped in a small cage. At the end of the day, it's not about words or holy books or pork or dogs or any of that. It's about what these things symbolize on a personal level. It is infuriating to see objects that we hold sacred degraded and debased by foreigners who felt the need to travel thousands of kilometers to do this. That's not to say that all troops disrespect Islam- some of
them seem to genuinely want to understand our beliefs. It does seem like the people in charge have decided to make degradation and humiliation a policy.

By doing such things, this war is taken to another level- it is no longer a war against terror or terrorists- it is, quite simply, a war against Islam and even secular Muslims are being forced to take sides."

- posted by river @ 12:05 AM

outsourcing torture...and responsibility ?

was this guy an israeli in Us uniform --on loan to do prisoner interrogations ? 

no surprise that newsweek recanted the story--- but seems like it really did happen...

http://www.boomantribune.com/story/2005/5/17/7487/14941

"these are dark times --newsweek and the koran"

* seems that lawyers for prisoners at gitmo bay have been mentioning for some time complaints from their clients concerning the abuse of inmates as well as disrespect by jailers for the islamic faith in general ... but what do people really expect when the bush administration chose in its infamous "war on terror" to claim it does not have to follow either the geneva accords respecting the human rights of prisoners of war ,or the Us bill of rights concerning civil rights of americans it has charged along with foreigners with the dubious all-purpose labels of terrorists and "enemy combatants" .

using syrians , and uzbeks and most likely israeli interrogators disguised in Us uniforms, to carry out torture and psychological humiliation of prisoners , does not keep the hands of the bush administration clean in any way---the members of the bush administration are all guilty of lying to the world about this war on terror , and as the recent british documents show , guilty of lying to the world about the reasons for the war in iraq and guilty of lying about torture and abuse of prisoners they have taken during the course of these wars...

curiously , when it becomes time to take individual responsibility for these abuses ---the "people need to take individual responsibility for their actions " folks on the right seem to rely on blaming scapegoats like that "private lindy" dog collar chick seen in the abu ghraib photos ...guess this is another example of modern "outsourcing" --the outsourcing of individual responsibility for crimes and abuses committed under your administration's watch of "leadership"... how typical...



http://www.boomantribune.com/story/2005/5/17/7487/14941

By Martin Longman (BooMan) and SusanHu (SusanHu)
Reprinted at Daily Kos and MyDD

"...It’s not hard to find these accounts. A simple Google search will do.

But I took the extra step today of contacting an attorney that is representing over ten Guantánamo detainees. He works for a prominent, private, Washington, D.C. law firm, and has visited Guantánamo four times since late last year. All of his clients share the same nationality and, partly for this reason, all of his clients have been kept in complete isolation from each other.

Seeing his clients is not easy. First of all, it requires a week’s stay in barracks to meet with all his clients for a sufficient amount of time. The barracks are located on the other side of the base from the camps, and the two and half-hour transit time involves a bus and a ferry.

He must prepare, in advance, a list of which clients he wishes to see, and in what order. Once, he was told that the guards could not locate one of his clients.

He meets with his clients one-by-one, never in groups. The detainees have had no contact with each other, and no opportunity to collaborate on false allegations of abuse.

I asked him, “Have you heard any accounts of Qur’anic desecration?”

He replied, “Yes, two detainees told me completely independently that they had witnessed a Qur’an being thrown in the toilet. Another told me that he had witnessed a Qur’an being stomped on. And another told me he had witnessed a Qur’an being urinated on.”

He continued, “Most disturbances, like hunger strikes, have been over religious issues, like non-Muslims handling the Koran.” I asked how the guards were supposed to supply Qur’ans to the detainees without handling them? He told me that the Muslim chaplains could provide this service, but there were fewer and fewer chaplains available.

I am aware that anonymous sources are part of the controversy over the Newsweek article, so I called Tina Foster of the Counsel for the Center for Constitutional Rights' Guantánamo Global Justice Initiative. The GGJI is a new litigation and advocacy project, introduced on April 12, 2005, "dedicated to challenging rendition, arbitrary detention, and interrogation under torture committed as part of the United States’ global 'war on terror'".

Ms. Foster’s group is co-counsel for many of the Guantánamo detainees, and they have a ‘bird’s eye view’ of the allegations coming out of Gitmo. I asked her if she had heard of reports of Qur’anic desecration. She replied, “It’s one of a panoply of abuses that have occurred at Guantánamo, reported over and over again, both to counsel and by releasees.”

I asked her what she thought of the allegations made in the Newsweek article. She told me, “They have been repeatedly confirmed. We have heard allegations of ‘tossing’ based on religious beliefs, shaving of beards, prisoners being made to wear short pants, or having their pants taken away from them, not having the proper clothes given to them that are appropriate for prayer.”

Both sources took the same path in our conversations. First they confirmed that there were multiple independent allegations of Qur’anic desecration coming from Gitmo detainees; then they framed this outrage in the context of a more general program of religious humiliation.

My anonymous source told me that his clients were punished by the loss of showering privileges, the withholding of soap, and the removal of water basins used for ablution."

"i got a bunker buster this big---you all will learn to love the bomb"---rumsy --the donald of DoD 

madness by any other name ...would still be just as nuts...

"Earth-penetrating nuclear bombs would be capable of destroying military targets deep underground, but not without inflicting "massive casualties at ground level," according to a congressionally mandated study..."


"Rumsfeld replied that 70 countries are pursuing "activities underground" using technology that allows them to burrow into solid rock the length of a basketball court in a single day." --reporter ann scott tyson quoting rumsfeld --the donald of DoD

* umm...rumsy are any of these 70 nations "terrorist" sponsoring nations ?

are any of them friendly nations ?

are any of them allies of the Us ?

might even some of the "70" potentially new "axis of evil" be non-hostile , but just legitimately scared to death after the phoney excuses given for the iraq invasion that neo-con right wingnuts ---in a religious born-again frenzy to bring on "the rapture" ---might militarily target them next for umm... excess library overdue book fines ?

and does that list of 70 nations that are burrowing "into solid rock the length of a basketball ball court in a single day" include nations conducting legitimate scientific research --like maybe to see if they drill below 20,000 feet will they find oil being produced naturally by the earth's mantle in almost unlimited quantities and oozing upwards to collect in natural resevoirs nearer the surface-- that we have been calling "oil deposits" ?

ok , here's a stray thought ---could a few well placed bunker busters contaminate a bunch of deep drilling oil sites--sending a message to "geo-terrorists" foolish enough to tamper with oil-garchy record profits by threatening to drill deep enough to deliver unlimited quantities of oil to the planet and kill oil-garchy excuses to keep crude prices so artificially high ?

...i know that one's "out there" ---but just a curious thought...






'Bunker Buster' Casualty Risk Cited

By Ann Scott Tyson Washington Post Staff Writer

Thursday, April 28, 2005; Page A07

Earth-penetrating nuclear bombs would be capable of destroying military targets deep underground, but not without inflicting "massive casualties at ground level," according to a congressionally mandated study released yesterday.

The study's findings reflect a growing scientific consensus that even relatively small nuclear "bunker-buster" weapons — under study by the Bush administration but strongly opposed by some members of Congress and arms-control advocates — could not be used without a high cost in human life. Such a bomb could cause more than a million deaths, depending on the yield, the report said.

You can use a much smaller weapon if you use an earth penetrator, maybe 20 times smaller, but you will kill a lot of people, because it puts out a huge amount of radioactive debris," said John F. Ahearne, chairman of the Committee on the Effects of Nuclear Earth-Penetrator and Other Weapons of the National Research Council, which produced the report. The council, a branch of the National Academy of Sciences, advises the federal government on science and technology.

The study represents an authoritative finding amid a long-standing conflict over whether it is possible to design an earth-penetrating nuclear bomb that would destroy deeply buried targets without killing people aboveground.

The report found that casualties from an earth-penetrator weapon "would be equal to that from a surface burst of the same weapon yield," causing from thousands to more than a million deaths in an urban area, and hundreds to hundreds of thousands in lightly populated areas with unfavorable winds.

In its fiscal 2003 Defense Authorization Act, Congress directed the Pentagon to request the study to examine the health and environmental effects of the bombs.

The Bush administration this spring renewed its push for $8.5 million in funding to resume Pentagon and Energy Department studies of bunker-buster nuclear warheads. Congress killed funding for the study last year, and lawmakers indicated this year they will again question the request.

On Capitol Hill yesterday, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld faced incredulity from at least one senator on why the administration is pursuing the weapons.

"It is beyond me as to why you're proceeding with this program when the laws of physics won't allow a missile to be driven deeply enough to retain the fallout, which will spew in hundreds of millions of cubic feet if it's at 100 kilotons," Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said in a subcommittee hearing of the Appropriations Committee.

Rumsfeld replied that 70 countries are pursuing "activities underground" using technology that allows them to burrow into solid rock the length of a basketball court in a single day.

"At the present time, we don't have a capability of dealing with that. We can't go in there and get at things in solid rock underground," he said. "The only thing we have is very large, very dirty, big nuclear weapons. So . . . do we want to have nothing and only a large, dirty nuclear weapon, or would we rather have something in between?"

The Pentagon estimates there are 10,000 hardened targets — above and below ground — in the territory of potential adversaries. About 20 percent have a "major strategic function" such as housing command-and-control systems or weapons stockpiles, and of that 20 percent, half are near or in urban areas.

The study found that nuclear weapons, if aimed accurately, would be more effective than conventional bombs in destroying hard and deeply buried targets. Such nuclear weapons could work with a yield one-fifteenth to one-twenty-fifth as large if they are detonated a few yards below the earth's surface, causing a shock wave that could destroy bunkers hundreds of yards below.

arafat's doctor suspects poison...says arafat was hiv negative and no autopsy was done...

* we said here previously that we had suspected something was fishy from the start . arafat was an old man , but as the elected president of the palestinian authority-- the equivalent of a head of state-- and even though held prisoner by the israelis in his bombed out compound in ramallah, arafat's health was regularly checked by his physicians ...so when a head of state dies of mysterious and sudden illness and his primary enemies are his de facto jailers --- those same jailers who have mossad at their disposal, have tried to kill him in the past , have recently used helicopter gunships to wack a crippled cleric in a wheelchair and had not so subtly hinted that they would 'consider' again also doing old arafat in ...well...it doesn't take rocket science to figure it out...

STEALTH ASSASSINATION of
YASSER ARAFAT RESURFACES


"If someone dies of unknown causes, it is mandatory to have
an autopsy -- mandatory! They know the regulations. Here in
Jordan, bodies have been exhumed many times in criminal
cases... I suspect Arafat died of a 'killing poison'....
The death was due to this."
- Yasser Arafat's personal physician for 25 years



MER - Washington - 25 April: As has become the usual when it comes to matters relating to Israel and the Middle East nearly all the mass corporate media in the U.S. and Europe allow themselves to be manipulated by governments, lobby-groups, and on-the-take commentators and pundits in ways that severely distort or cover up major events. Such was the case with what MER termed even as it unfolded last November the 'Stealth Assassination' of Yasser Arafat.
At the time of Arafat's imprisonment in Ramallah, his unexplained illness, then the plot to wisk him off to a French military hospital followed by his still unexplained death and super quick burial without autopsy or serious investigation, MER made it clear from the start that many circumstances and facts lead to the conclusion that a historic 'stealth assassination' had been perpetrated and that the mass media was allowing itself to be complicitous in the cover up.
Today with the publication of this unusual interview with Yasser Arafat's personal physician for over 25 years, Dr. Ashraf Al Kurdi, a few more crucial details emerge into more public view.


Arafat's doctor demands answers

Dr. Ashraf Al Kurdi was former Palestinian Authority
president Yasser Arafat's physician for over 25 years.

Q: The U.S. press has insinuated that Yasser Arafat was a homosexual who died of AIDS. Are you aware of this?

A: I heard rumors he died of AIDS, but not rumors that he was a homosexual. I have done the HIV tests many times before on Arafat as a routine test. It was never positive.

Q: When was the last time you did a test?

A: About six months before he died. The Tunisian doctors told me they did this test in Ramallah and it was normal.

Q: Did Arafat have any longstanding health problems?

A: No, apart from the benign, nonessential tremor which manifests as a tremor in the lips and hands. He never had anything else.

Q: Did he have Parkinson's Disease?

A: Actually, this was investigated many times. No. It was the tremor only. He was tested many times for Parkinson’s.

Q: How long had you been Arafat's primary physician?

A: More than 25 years.

Q: You treated him after the plane crash in Libya?

A: Yes. We saved his life from bilateral subdural hematoma. This produced changes in his mental state and his physical appearance. He developed hemoplegia and when we caught it he was operated on in Amman.

Q: Could this cause any later medical condition?

A: No complications whatsoever. The operation went very smooth and was done by an ordinary neurosurgeon.

Q: Before you saw him the last time, had he had regular checkups?

A: Yes, of course.

Q: Arafat complained of stomach pain, could this indicate something?

A: No. He had abdominal pain from time to time, but not constant. A gastrointestinal gastroscopy showed a mild irritation.

Q: In the year prior to his death, how often had you seen him?

A: I was called on the sixteenth day after his illness, and when I went there I saw a group of Tunisian doctors sent by his wife to Ramallah without calling me. These people never had any idea about Arafat's health -- never saw Arafat before. I saw four Egyptian doctors and three Palestinian doctors. After I went to Ramallah with my group, I went straight to see him. There were signs of poisoning, manifested by a reddish patch on his face and a metallic, yellow color to his skin.

Q: Did any of these other doctors ask you about his medical history? Have you heard from them since?

A: No, they didn't consult me. Nobody talked to me and none of them knew his health before, except one of the Egyptians.

Q: Have you been contacted since for your opinion?

A: No. No, there were strict instructions not to contact me by his wife, according to Palestinian Authority leaders.

Q: How many checkups did he get in the year before his death?

A: Three times.

Q: Was he in good health?

A: Yes, he was perfectly healthy. But I must stress that I was called officially on the sixteenth day of his illness, not at the beginning, so we can't know exactly when it started. This is a very important point. I told Suha Arafat that by sending the Tunisian doctors, you delayed treatment on your husband. A gap of five or six days.

Q: Did you ask the PA leaders about this long delay?

A: There was no good answer -- no one dared to say anything. I was told that Suha refused me access. Why, I don't know. When I saw him, I decided he must go abroad because there were tests he needed that couldn't be done in Ramallah. There was contact with the French and their response was immediate. They sent a plane and the Jordanians sent two helicopters to take him to Amman. Nobody offered me to go with him to Paris, and whenever I asked after him, I never got a satisfactory reply. Again, because of one person, probably his wife.

Q: What was his appearance the last time you saw him alive?

A: He lost half of his body weight. He had this reddish spot covering his face, and his coloring was metallic yellow. He was conscious, talking and joking, even. His cognitive functions were perfect. After that I asked all the doctors to meet. We concluded he had platelet deficiency. Some of the causes for this were not clear, so I asked he be transferred to Paris as soon as possible. But even the French doctors didn't ask me for his previous history.

Q: Did Arafat know he was dying?

A: Yes. Yes, actually I heard from him in Ramallah, that he thought he'd been poisoned.

Q: Did he say who or why or how?

A: No.

Q: Last September 25th, 2003, there was an illness that some PA leaders in the Muqata said marked the start of his physical decline. What do you think?

A: I don't think so, because I went with a team to Ramallah from Jordan to investigate all known types of poisons. We took blood samples and there were no poisons, or HIV infection.

Q: According to Islamic law, when the cause of death is questionable, an autopsy is required?

A: That is absolutely true. I requested four things: a committee to investigate his health and the progression of his illness. I wanted all results of the Paris tests and to see the French doctors. I asked for cause of death and if it was not identified to perform an autopsy.

Q: Considering that Yasser Arafat was a major world figure for half a century, shouldn't an autopsy have been demanded? Why was it denied? Who denied it?

A: All of them. All the leadership, those with him in Paris and Chairman Mahmoud Abbas. He said there is no need, he is already buried. I said, "It’s not up to you."

Q: Did you feel Abbas made the decision alone or was it a committee decision?

A: I don't know.

Q: When you said publicly you thought he'd been poisoned, did you get threats?

A: No. The PA said I should communicate this to them, which I had done from the first.

Q: Some news accounts said the French government would be upset by an autopsy?

A: This is very stupid, I don't think this would upset them. If someone dies of unknown causes, it is mandatory to have an autopsy -- mandatory! They know the regulations. Here in Jordan, bodies have been exhumed many times in criminal cases.

Q: Is there a time limit to exhuming a body to trace forensic causes?
A: It depends on the agents used. I suspect Arafat died of a "killing poison", a catalyst. The death was due to this.

* Trish Schuh who conducted this interview is a freelance journalist who has worked for ABC News, Al Arabiya.net, Muslim's Weekly and The Indypendent. She studied Islam and Arabic at Bir Zeit University in Palestine. The interview was conducted in Amman Jordan on January 18, 2005 and published today in the Tehran Times.

The corruption watchdog Transparency International recently warned that Iraq could become “the biggest corruption scandal in history.”

As Congress approves $82 billion more
Wholesale corruption exposed in Iraqi contracts

By Jamie Chapman
5 May 2005


As the US Congress moves to pass “emergency” funding worth $82 billion for the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan, reports of rampant corruption involving private contractors receiving much of these funds continue to surface. Abuses include charges well beyond contract specifications, failure to deliver services charged for, and the most blatant forms of bribery and fraud, the costs of which have been accepted by the recently installed Iraqi government or its predecessors, the interim Iraqi government of Ayad Allawi, and the initial US occupation government, the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA).

The most prominent case involves Halliburton Corporation, the company formerly headed by Vice President Dick Cheney, who still receives approximately $195,000 in deferred compensation annually after stepping down as CEO to join Bush’s run for the presidency. Pentagon auditors have demanded reimbursement of $108 million in overcharges from the company’s Kellogg Brown and Root subsidiary for providing gasoline to the US Army obtained through a Kuwaiti supplier at many times the price locally available in oil-rich Iraq. This and several other fat no-bid contracts awarded to Halliburton and its subsidiaries in the aftermath of the US invasion of Iraq remain in force, while the company disputes the overcharges.

While the case of Halliburton has been the most prominent, it is only one among many cases of fraud and corruption. Among the most egregious involve a small company, Custer Battles, which was founded by an ex-Army Ranger and an ex-FBI man shortly before the Iraq war to solicit reconstruction work as soon as fighting subsided. Its initial contract was to provide armed guards and security screeners at Baghdad International Airport. The firm’s owners claimed they could accomplish the goal in only three weeks’ time, even though they had no demonstrated experience in this field and heretofore had never won a government contract of any kind. Experienced contractors warned that the job required more preparation, but the occupation authorities awarded the contract to Custer Battles, which enjoyed close ties to the Republican administration.

In a short period, the company won seven other contracts worth a $100 million combined. At its peak the company employed 700 people to handle its Iraq work.

Under a whistleblower protection statute, two former managers have filed a federal lawsuit against the company for war profiteering and defrauding the US government of at least $50 million. Among the charges are that Custer Battles took possession of Iraqi forklifts abandoned by Iraqi Airways at the Baghdad airport during the invasion. After repainting them to remove any markings, Custer Battles leased them back to the US government as their own equipment.

When one of the managers Robert Isakson refused to participate in the fraud and threatened to turn in the company to the CPA, he was allegedly forced to flee to Jordan by submachine-gun-toting contractors.

The lawsuit also outlines the unabashed lawlessness of company security men, who randomly opened fire on unarmed civilians—including an Iraqi teenager—and crushed a car filled with Iraqi children and adults in order to escape snarled traffic. The “Wild West” attitude prevailing among the US contractors hired to work in Iraq is evinced by another incident in which Custer Battles guards rained bullets on an Iraqi hotel, only to find out afterwards that they had been shooting at each other.

The company was engaged in 2003 to provide security for the distribution of $4 billion of new currency—weighing 2,400 tons—to replace the former regime’s worthless banknotes that carried the face of Saddam Hussein. Much of that money has never been properly accounted for.

A US Air Force investigation into this and other Custer Battles contracts heard testimony from Pete Baldwin, who oversaw this project and all other company work in Iraq. He, along with Isakson, filed the whistleblower lawsuit against the company. One of the company’s techniques to inflate profits was to run the accounting through shell companies domiciled in the Cayman Islands, Cyprus and Lebanon, but owned by Custer Battles. The shells billed the government huge markups without doing any independent work. The Air Force investigation uncovered that a single “cost-plus” contract that was supposed to have a maximum amount of 25 percent over cost turned a $3.7 million cost into a $9.8 million billing, or a markup of 162 percent.

This example is one of dozens of flagrant abuse of the open-ended contracts that companies seized on to profit off the war and misery visited on the Iraqi people. According to the Associated Press, Custer Battles is one of at least 60 private firms, collectively employing 20,000 people in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The corruption watchdog Transparency International recently warned that Iraq could become “the biggest corruption scandal in history.” In its Global Corruption Report 2005, it describes the US overthrew of Saddam Hussein as “the day that marked the beginning of a new era of intensified theft of state property, corruption and conflicts of interest.” Using the term adopted by the Iraqi people for those who looted buildings after the US takeover in Iraq, the Transparency International report continued, “When asked to give their views on the birth of the new Iraq, the probability is high that Iraqis will refer not only to the widespread looting by ‘Ali Babas’ but also to the looting by Iraq’s new democratic leaders.”

An Iraqi businessman interviewed last month by the Sydney Morning Herald talked about the inflation of tender bids worth billions in a common practice to rake off huge profits for both the contractor and government officials. Companies that refused to bribe the relevant minister found themselves shut out of the bidding, Mohammed Jawad said.

The United Nation’s much maligned Oil-for-Food program has been replaced under the occupation with the even more corrupt (and misnamed) Development Fund for Iraq. The former CPA’s inspector general issued a report on January 30, the day of the “democratic” elections in Iraq, conceding that occupation authorities failed to account properly for $8.8 billion of those funds. “The CPA did not implement adequate financial controls,” he reported. US officials argued that wartime conditions made such controls impossible.

The consequence, according to the businessman Jawad—a Shiite opposed to the former regime of Saddam Hussein—has been an increase in the percentage of corruption, according to his estimate, from 10 percent under Hussein to 95 percent today. “We used to have one Saddam, now we have 25 of them,” he said.

A report released April 29 by the Government Accountability Office (GAO), an arm of Congress, delves into yet another case of overcharging, possibly bordering on fraud, by an American contractor operating in Iraq. The report examines the performance of the Virginia-based CACI International Inc., which provided interrogators and translators to the infamous Abu Ghraib prison. The GAO report did not address the question of abuse of prisoners there, although CACI employees were implicated along with military personnel.

Officials of the US Defense and Interior Departments responsible for the contract failed to require CACI to monitor and verify the most basic information about hours of work. In addition, CACI increased their fees by upgrading the same employees from the title of “senior analyst” to that of “senior counterintelligence agent,” and from “senior functional analyst” to “interrogator.”

The whistleblower lawsuit filed by Isakson and Baldwin has, not surprisingly, failed to attract the support of the Bush administration’s Justice Department. Bush and Cheney cronies have gained the most from the government-sponsored fleecing operation in Iraq.

Justice Department lawyers maintained a deafening silence on the suit until Newsweek published an exposé on Custer Battles last month. A few days later, the Justice Department filed a brief supporting the right of the plaintiffs to seek recourse in US courts. Up until then, Bush administration lawyers were presumed to sympathize with Custer Battles’ contention that US courts did not have jurisdiction because the CPA was a “multinational” entity.

Such a legal argument, of course, was intended to preclude redress of any grievance in any court anywhere in the world, since the new Iraqi government would also be expected to reject jurisdiction over actions or agreements entered into by the now defunct CPA.

The Justice Department’s recent brief is the most limited response possible to political pressure on the Bush administration to address the corruption surrounding the billions of dollars in Iraq reconstruction contracts. Elements of the political elite, represented by those such as Senator Charles Grassley, Republican of Iowa, who pose as anti-corruption fighters, are concerned that the stench surrounding the awarding of contracts in Iraq threatens to jeopardize the entire imperialist project, undermining the already dwindling support for the war.

The Justice Department has yet, however, to take any position on the merits of the plaintiff’s basic charge of egregious company corruption and fraud, in spite of two specific invitations to do so by the judge handling the case, US District Judge T.S. Ellis in Virginia.

Government apologists and would-be reformers claim that Custer Battles is just one particularly bad apple, and that the corruption endemic to Iraq can be weeded out by stiffer legislation against abuse. One Democrat, Representative David Price of North Carolina, introduced legislation last week in response to the GAO report that would require more information on costs and contractors, claiming it would bring greater accountability to the government procurement process.