Free Iraq

A commentator asked me about what I think of Iran's nuclear program.

Previously, I had stated the following:

"A military air strike on Iran's nuclear facilities would have a much lower success ratio than the Osirak attack had in 1981. In 1981, Iraq's nuclear research program was concentrated at the Tuwaitha Nuclear Center just outside of Baghdad. Baghdad's failure to disperse the different aspects of their nuclear program to multiple facilities made it an easy target for an air strike. Dr. Imad Khadduri, a former Iraqi nuclear scientist who was the head of the scientific experimentation group before the Israeli air strike, told the Power and Interest News Report, "Indeed, in 1981 all of our work was centered at the Tuwaitha site." In order to prevent such attacks from occurring in the future, Baghdad took prompt action after Israel's successful air strike. After the air strike, Khadduri explained, "we began to disperse our nuclear facilities to end up with eight or nine sites for production, processing, enrichment design and research."
''Can Iran's Pursuit of Nuclear Technology Be Thwarted By Air Strikes?'' October 20, 2003

Presently, I would say that the following article pretty much sums it up:

"Coordinating with Israel on the issue of Iran's nuclear program is crucial.”
Not Another Osiraq February 26, 2005

And this is rather illuminating and current:

"Bush made this claim:
"The reason we're having these discussions is because [the Iranians] were caught enriching uranium after they had signed a treaty saying they wouldn't enrich uranium. These discussions are occurring because they have breached a contract with the international community. They're the party that needs to be held to account, not any of us."
Bush manufactured all that. The EU-Iran agreement – which is being monitored by the IAEA – is not a treaty. In any case, the Iranians were not "caught" enriching uranium. As best the IAEA can determine, the Iranians have yet to enrich any uranium. The Iranians merely agreed to suspend for six months or so any attempt to do so. They did not – initially – agree to suspend the manufacture of gas centrifuges for enriching uranium. However, as a "confidence-building measure," they voluntarily agreed a few months ago to suspend those activities, too.
But if the Europeans don't live up to their end of the agreement – and Bush is determined to see that they won't or can't – the Iranians have announced that they intend to resume – probably in June – all the IAEA-safeguarded activities they have currently suspended. Maybe that's why the worst-kept secret in Washington is that we – in cahoots with our "ally" Israel – are planning to "take out" those safeguarded facilities in June."
Bye-Bye, NPT; Hello, Mushroom Cloud February 28, 2005

But then:

Below is a picture of Dimona's Plutonium producing reactor
(and Israel's nuclear bombs - around 200 of them) in Israel.

Israel has NOT allowed it to be inspected by the IAEA for the past 40 years, neither has it signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. However, al-Baradei (Head of IAEA) did pay a diplomtic (not inspection) visit to Israel last year during which he uttered and witnessed precious little.

Dimona has reached the end of its lifespan, and its rapid deterioration is becoming a threat to neighboring cities and countries.
Gov't okays anti-radiation pills for Dimona residents June 26, 2004

A presentation from informationclearinghouse.info:

"No Tyrant Can Stand Forever"

'Liberation' is an oxymoron ( اجتماع للفظين متناقضي المعنى‏ ) for 'Foreign Occupation'

"It was a striking -- some said chilling -- moment in the battle for Iraq, captured on videotape: a wounded, un-armed Iraqi, shot to death by a U.S. Marine.
CBS News has learned that military investigators conclude there is not enough evidence to formally charge that Marine.
As CBS News Correspondent Kimberly Dozier reports, it happened during the bloody fight for Fallujah last fall. The Marines were engaged in bitter house-to-house combat with dug-in enemy fighters. When Marines ran into a mosque seeking the source of insurgent fire, they found several Iraqis wrapped in blankets.
One Marine thought he saw one of them move. Marine: "He's fucking faking he's dead."
Second Marine: "And he's breathing."
Marine: "He's faking he's fucking dead!"
Navy investigators have concluded what happened next may have been justified in the heat of battle.
In a moment too graphic to show, one of the Americans fired. "He's dead now."
The insurgents, it turned out, were unarmed -- but investigators say the Iraqi the Marine thought he saw moving could have been going for a weapon.
(my note: the video shows an old man, slumped unconciuos and immobile against the wall with blood running from his nose and mouth with no sign of any weapon next or on him).
At the very least, Navy legal experts believe the situation is ambiguous enough that no prosecutor could get a conviction.
The original video added to popular anger over the Fallujah crackdown.
Many Iraqis felt Fallujah's unarmed civilians bore the brunt of the U.S. campaign. Hundreds of homes were destroyed in the battle, and months later, much of the city is still without power or water. Many Fallujans live in makeshift refugee camps far from their homes.
When news breaks that the Marine will not be prosecuted, it will not go over well here. (my italics)
It's now up to Marine commanders to decide what, if any internal action to take against the Marine. And investigators are still conducting ballistics tests to determine how the other insurgents in the mosque were killed. "
Justified Shooting? February 23, 2005

The situation is ambiguous? Do expect clarity.

"WITH elbows bandaged and knees padded for comfort, Abu Othman lay face down on a Ramadi rooftop and cradled his Russian-made sniper rifle as he waited for the tall American soldier to appear. The soldier’s habit of urinating into the street from the top of his Bradley armoured vehicle had angered Sunni Muslim inhabitants of the tree-lined suburb he patrolled. It was not the urinating as such that offended them; it was the way he exposed himself regardless of whether any women were around to see him. In the end an old man came forward to demand his death. He complained to insurgents that the soldier had strafed his street, destroying several cars and a trailer at a cost of thousands of dollars.
It was a long, hot wait that summer’s day on the rooftop. Abu Othman was glad of his headphones. He played his favourite verses from the Koran and their soothing flow cleared his mind, infusing him with a determination to see through the assignment, come what may. He prayed for God to deliver his target.
“Then the call came on my mobile phone, informing me that the soldier and his vehicle were finally heading my way,” he said. “The moment finally arrived. The Bradley stopped and the soldier stood on it ready to relieve himself. He was relaxed. He put his hand on his trousers. I took aim and fired one shot and saw him drop dead.”
... In the world of the Iraqi insurgent, Abu Othman — not his real name — is something of a celebrity. Known to all as The Sniper, he is acclaimed for the consistency with which he dispatches victims from ranges of 1,000 metres or more. The tale of how a humble calligrapher became a renowned marksman by teaching himself from websites, honing his skills with computer games and studying Hollywood films such as The Deer Hunter is the stuff of legend in the Sunni triangle of militant towns to the north and west of Baghdad.
==
... The weapon was a semi-automatic SVD Dragunov sniper rifle, with a range of more than 1,200 metres. Abu Othman described its technical specifications with affection, using drawings to help him explain various lethal attributes.
The insurgents soon called for him again, this time to “take out” an American sniper on the roof of a house on one of Falluja’s front lines. He was escorted to another house some distance away that gave him an uninterrupted view of the American’s position behind a small, rooftop wall with an opening through which the soldier was firing intermittently on a group of insurgents, pinning them down.
Abu Othman had brought with him a home-made dummy head — a painted face on a stick topped off with a chequered headdress. His companion used it to create a diversion while Abu Othman pinpointed the American’s position and made his calculations. “I put my trust in God,” he said. “My only feeling was that I must kill him. Everything was ready. I looked into my scope and saw movement from the hole in the wall. I fired and waited. “There was silence from his side. I wasn’t even sure whether I’d got him. Some other mujaheddin threw a few grenades at the house where he was positioned and when there was still no response they stormed the place. They found him dead on the rooftop with a bullet in his face.” The insurgents seized the American’s weapon, which was added to Abu Othman’s armoury.
The chilling toll of Allah's sniper February 20, 2005

"Capt Kirk Mayfield, commander of the Phantoms, called for fire from his task force's mortar team. But Sgt Anyett didn't want to wait. "Dude, give me the sniper rifle. I can take them out - I'm from Alabama."Two minutes tick by. "They're moving deep," shouted Sgt Anyett with disappointment. A dozen loud booms rattle the sky and smoke rose as mortars rained down on the co-ordinates the sergeant had given.
"Yeah," he yelled. "Battle Damage Assessment - nothing. Building's gone. I got my kills, I'm coming down. I just love my job"."
Iraq War as Video Game November 18, 2004

“The Sniper of Baghdad has shot and killed yet another American soldier at a petrol station South of Baghdad. After the shooting, US troops closed the fuel station and completely surrounded the area. They searched tall buildings in the area and found one empty bullet casing and retrieved his signatory hand-written piece of paper on which was written, "What has been taken by blood, cannot be regained except by blood. Baghdad sniper."
It is reported that the Sniper of Baghdad has claimed the lives of over 40 American soldiers around Baghdad over the past few months.”
Baghdad sniper kills US soldier February 7, 2005 (Actually, we heard of him since about a year ago)

"The Bradt Travel Guide to Iraq lists it among a tiny handful of tourist sites, describing it as ''a synthesis of Babylonian ziggurat and Islamic architecture." Now, it is a US Army sniper's nest.
Samarra's main landmark, a spiral minaret that looks like a slanted wedding cake, was built when the city was the capital of the Abbasid empire, the seat of power for the whole Islamic world. More than 1,100 years later, Samarra is a dusty provincial town caught between insurgents and the US troops and Iraqi security forces they are fighting.
The 172-foot minaret has been used by all of those groups to wage war.
Guerrillas used it to watch where their mortars fell, the better to aim them at US bases. Then, the Army's First Infantry Division pushed into the city in October. The perch is now occupied by American snipers on 24-hour shifts.
On Sunday, two New Englanders braved a night of freezing rain atop the tower, trying to spot anyone planting bombs to deter this Sunday's elections.Both men told their parents to search for Samarra on the Internet to find a picture of the tower. They are now among the few parents of servicemen who can picture exactly where their children are in Iraq."
Atop spiral minaret, Army sniper teams take aim January 28, 2005

Malwiya (the twisted) minaret - Samarra

"We lived through dark days under Saddam Hussein's dictatorship. When the regime fell, people wanted a new life: a life without shackles and terror; a life where we could rebuild our country and enjoy its natural wealth. Instead, our communities have been attacked with chemicals and cluster bombs, and our people tortured, raped and killed in our homes.
Saddam's secret police used to creep over the roofs into our homes at night; occupation troops now break down our doors in broad daylight. The media do not show even a fraction of the devastation that has engulfed Iraq. Journalists who dare to report the truth of what is happening have been kidnapped by terrorists. This serves the agenda of the occupation, which aims to eliminate witnesses to its crimes.
Workers in Iraq's southern oilfields began organising soon after British occupying forces invaded Basra. We founded our union, the Southern Oil Company Union, just 11 days after the fall of Baghdad in April 2003. When the occupation troops stood back and allowed Basra's hospitals, universities and public services to be burned and looted, while they defended only the oil ministry and oilfields, we knew we were dealing with a brutal force prepared to impose its will without regard for human suffering. From the beginning, we were left in no doubt that the US and its allies had come to take control of our oil resources.
The occupation authorities have maintained many of Saddam's repressive laws, including the 1987 order which robbed us of basic union rights, including the right to strike. Today, we still have no official recognition as a trade union, despite having 23,000 members in 10 oil and gas companies in Basra, Amara, Nassiriya, and up to Anbar province. However, we draw our legitimacy from the workers, not the government. We believe unions should operate regardless of the government's wishes, until the people are able finally to elect a genuinely accountable and independent Iraqi government, which represents our interests and not those of American imperialism.
Our union is independent of any political party.... Our union has already shown it is able to stand its ground against one of the most powerful US companies, Dick Cheney's KBR, which tried to take over our workplaces with the protection of occupation forces.
We forced them out and compelled their Kuwaiti subcontractor, Al Khourafi, to replace 1,000 of the 1,200 employees it brought with it with Iraqi workers, 70% of whom are unemployed today. We also fought US viceroy Paul Bremer's wage schedule, which dictated that Iraqi public sector workers must earn ID 69,000 ($35) per month, while paying up to $1,000 a day to thousands of foreign mercenaries. In August 2003 we took strike action and shut down all oil production for three days. As a result, the occupation authorities had to raise wages to a minimum of ID 150,000.
We see it as our duty to defend the country's resources. We reject and will oppose all moves to privatise our oil industry and national resources. We regard this privatisation as a form of neo-colonialism, an attempt to impose a permanent economic occupation to follow the military occupation.
The occupation has deliberately fomented a sectarian division of Sunni and Shia. We never knew this sort of division before. Our families intermarried, we lived and worked together. And today we are resisting this brutal occupation together, from Falluja to Najaf to Sadr City. The resistance to the occupation forces is a God-given right of Iraqis, and we, as a union, see ourselves as a necessary part of this resistance - although we will fight using our industrial power, our collective strength as a union, and as a part of civil society which needs to grow in order to defeat both still-powerful Saddamist elites and the foreign occupation of our country.
Bush and Blair should remember that those who voted in last month's elections in Iraq are as hostile to the occupation as those who boycotted them. Those who claim to represent the Iraqi working class while calling for the occupation to stay a bit longer, due to "fears of civil war", are in fact speaking only for themselves and the minority of Iraqis whose interests are dependent on the occupation.
We as a union call for the withdrawal of foreign occupation forces and their military bases. We don't want a timetable - this is a stalling tactic. We will solve our own problems. We are Iraqis, we know our country and we can take care of ourselves. We have the means, the skills and resources to rebuild and create our own democratic society.
· Hassan Juma'a Awad is general secretary of Iraq's Southern Oil Company Union and president of the Basra Oil Workers' Union hssnawad@yahoo.com

Leave our country now February 18, 2005

Your Oil or Else ............................ As I was saying

"The insurgency in Iraq continues to baffle (my italics) the U.S. military and intelligence communities, and the U.S. occupation has become a potent recruiting tool for al Qaeda and other terrorist groups, top U.S. national security officials told Congress yesterday.
"Our policies in the Middle East fuel Islamic resentment," Vice Adm. Lowell E. Jacoby, director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, told the Senate panel. "Overwhelming majorities in Morocco, Jordan and Saudi Arabia believe the U.S. has a negative policy toward the Arab world."
Jacoby said the Iraq insurgency has grown "in size and complexity over the past year" and is now mounting an average of 60 attacks per day, up from 25 last year. Attacks on Iraq's election day last month reached 300, he said, double the previous one-day high of 150, even though transportation was virtually locked down.
Air Force Gen. Richard B. Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told the House panel that the extremists associated with al Qaeda and Zarqawi represent "a fairly small percentage of the total number of insurgents." Sunni Arabs, dominated by former members of Saddam Hussein's Baath Party, "comprise the core of the insurgency" and continue to provide "funds and guidance across family, tribal, religious and peer-group lines," Jacoby said.
War Helps Recruit Terrorists February 17, 2005

The article also reports that "The Iraq conflict, while not a cause of extremism, has become a cause for extremists," Goss (CIA Director) said.
Wrong.
Iraq certainly was a 'cause of extremism' for the neo-conservatives and the Likudists, wasn't it? You are now reaping what was sown.

Want to know who/where your enemy is, in this case?

"Why Washington's insistence that elections should have gone ahead despite the appalling security situation?
America's true objectives are no longer as mysterious as they once were. Developments over the course of the last 20 months have provided clear indications that the US is working to secure specific strategic goals in Iraq should it be forced by the fierceness of the armed resistance to leave the country. (my italics)
One of the most important reasons for insisting on holding elections is to set up an Iraqi government that the US is able to describe as legitimate, which could then be presented to the international community as the product of free elections. It would then have the authority to take decisions and sign treaties that would be enforceable under international law. This is exactly what America needs to make happen in order to achieve two fundamental goals: a speedy withdrawal from Iraq to avoid further human and material losses at the hands of a fierce Iraqi armed resistance, and the signing of long-term strategic and economic agreements.
Among the military treaties planned is one that allows American military bases to be established in the country. There will be 14 main bases to secure American control over Iraq's oil-wells and to allow the American military easy access to other areas in the region. Under the economic treaties the Iraqi government will grant American companies long-term concessions to exploit Iraqi oil and will include, in all probability, the privatisation of the country's oil industry.
Another aspect of the problem is that emerging powers such as China and India will also need more and more oil, creating competition over oil stocks on the market, which falls short of demand.
By setting up American bases in Iraq and controlling its oil through internationally binding treaties the US will have achieved its two primary goals, both of which lay the foundation for the rise of an American empire and the removal of potential rivals.
The real value of such agreements only becomes clear when one remembers treaties such as that concluded between America and the pre-revolutionary Cuban government over Guantanamo Bay. Under the treaty, the area was rented to the Americans for 99 years. Following the revolution the Cubans demanded that America return the bay area, but relying on the treaty they had signed with the previous government the Americans vehemently refused. How much more dangerous, then, if an "elected" Iraqi government were to sign such treaties, bearing in mind that despite Soviet and international support Cuba was unable to secure the return of Guantanamo Bay in the face of American legal arguments."
Oil in the election February 10-16, 2005

"Decades from now, historians will likely calmly discuss the war currently raging in Iraq, and identify oil as one of the key factors that led to it.
They will point to the growing U.S. dependence on foreign oil, the importance of oil in the rising competition between the U.S. and China, and the huge untapped store of oil lying unprotected under the Iraqi sand. It will all probably seem fairly obvious.
Just don't expect to hear this sort of discussion now, however, when it might actually make a difference. In fact, a year-and-a-half into the U.S. occupation of Iraq, with the carnage over there spiralling ever more out of control, don't expect media discussions of Iraq to stray much beyond the issue of "fighting terrorism.""
History will show U.S. lusted after oil December 26, 2004

"Abdel Mahdi, currently the finance minister and a member of the SCIRI, remains a strong contender for prime minister, alongside Ibrahim al-Jafaari of Da'wa. On December 22, Mahdi - with US Under Secretary of State Alan Larson by his side - told the National Press Club in Washington in so many words, and to the delight of corporate US oil majors, that a new oil law would privatize Iraq's oil industry. The new law would allow investment in both downstream and "maybe even upstream" operations, meaning foreigners could become de facto owners of Iraqi oilfields. No wonder Mahdi has been touted by US corporate media as the next best candidate for prime minister after "the Americans' man", former Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) asset and current Prime Minister Iyad Allawi. Apart from an item by Inter Press Service at the time, Antonia Juhasz, a Foreign Policy in Focus scholar currently writing a book about the economic invasion of Iraq, has been the only one to sound alarm bells: Is it possible that Washington has made a deal - oil for power - with the SCIRI? This is the fine print that President George W Bush's freedom rhetoric does not cover.
Iraq may have a new "elected" National Assembly and a new Iraqi constitution may be written in the next few months. But the fact is that during 2005 the US remains in total control.
Follow the money: US$24 billion funded by American taxpayers toward the reconstruction, plus all the rules that have been passed by the US that control Iraq's economy, plus the military occupation. Both the billions of dollars and the maze of rules are controlled by auditors sitting in every Iraqi ministry for five years, all of them appointed (and controlled) by the Americans. The only thing that the Bush administration does not control in Iraq is unlimited, no-holds-barred access to oil - which anyone familiar with Vice President Dick Cheney's world view knows to be the key reason for the invasion and occupation of Iraq.
The whole point of an indefinite, muscular US military presence in Iraq (14 military bases, more than 100,000 troops, the massive embassy in Baghdad, the CIA-trained "Salvador option" death squads) would be to protect US corporate interests in the oil industry (my italics). But the possibility of a law privatizing Iraq's oil coming to pass under a UIA-dominated government is less than zero - for two main reasons. In terms of Iraqi nationalism, this would spell political suicide to either the SCIRI or the Da'wa Party: most Shi'ites who voted in the elections, following Sistani's dictum, thought they were voting for the US to leave, for good. And in geopolitical terms, all the Shi'ite religious parties have close connections with Iran, which, encircled by the US from the east (Afghanistan) and west (Iraq), would find innumerable creative ways to turn the Americans' lives into a living hell. "
The Shi'ites' Faustian pact February 11, 2005

The Iraqi Resistance is at the centre of a pivotal historical responsibility.
The Iraqi people will assert their mettle.

As for Iraqi oil, there have been 205 attacks on Iraqi oil pipelines in 20 months, since June 12, 2003, and expect more of the same.

Where is the Iraqi oil money? After Bremer squirmed out of Iraq, auditors have lost trail of 9 billion dollars (out of 20 billion dollars, that included oil sales, that belonged to Iraq). I have been asking this question for months now: where is the money from Iraqi oil sales going to, since Bremer's departure? Will some of it end up with those 'Iraqis' who came behind the American tanks when they will be scurrying out of Iraq in a hurry? I would appreciate it if somebody would inform me on the money's fate.

"Iraq's most wanted terrorist, the Jordanian militant Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, is hiding out in the northern Iraqi city of Kirkuk after fleeing from Mosul, according to police sources.
'He came to Kirkuk from Mosul,' a source in the Kirkuk police department told Reuters yesterday, speaking anonymously. 'There's a possibility that he might be captured at any moment.'
.... The claims came as British officials poured cold water on hopes (my italics) of substantial early withdrawal from Iraq, and suggested that Britain could be involved in Iraq for decades. It also followed an increasingly inevitable day of further violence across the country.
.... 'I think there is now a realisation that we underestimated issues such as the level of criminality (my italics) in Iraq and how that feeds into its instability and feeds its violence,' said one British official last week. 'There is an understanding now that this is a decades-long problem and we will be there for a long time.'
.... In the wake of last month's national elections, British and American policy-makers are hoping (my italics) that a new political process will begin to whittle away those who tolerate but do not actively support the insurgency to a point where the battle is perceived as a fight against a hard core rather than local populations. But they admit that attacks against foreign and Iraqi forces have been steadily increasing.
Allies move in on top terrorist February 13, 2005

Keep On Hoping (and hopping), for as long as the legitimate feelings of a people rising in Resistance against being occupied is not fully addressed, your feet will continue to be burnt.

How would they explain:"attacks against foreign and Iraqi forces have been steadily increasing."?
What will change these people's mind, having lost gaining their hearts?
(View this for a sample)

"Training of Iraq's security forces, crucial to any exit strategy for Britain and the US, is going so badly that the Pentagon has stopped giving figures for the number of combat-ready indigenous troops, The Independent on Sunday has learned.
Instead, only figures for troops "on hand" are issued. The small number of soldiers, national guardsmen and police capable of operating against the country's bloody insurgency is concealed in an overall total of Iraqis in uniform, which includes raw recruits and police who have gone on duty after as little as three weeks' training. In some cases they have no weapons, body armour or even documents to show they are in the police.
The resulting confusion over numbers has allowed the US administration to claim that it is half-way to meeting the target of training almost 270,000 Iraqi forces, including around 52,000 troops and 135,000 Iraqi policemen. The reality, according to experts, is that there may be as few as 5,000 troops who could be considered combat ready."
Pentagon covers up failure to train and recruit local security forces February 13, 2005

And in reality, those are these:

(Kindly note: The posting on Microwaving Iraqis has been temporarily removed for further verification)

"Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld flew into Iraq on Friday to inspect U.S.-trained Iraqi security forces and said they must accept responsibility for defeating the country's insurgents.
"Many should not be expected to behave and operate as if they were battle-hardened veterans. But one day soon, they will be. They'll have to be because it is the Iraqis that are going to have to, over time, defeat the insurgency," he said. (my italics)
Rumsfeld Visits Iraq, Says Iraqi Forces Improving February 11, 2005

And do the job for us, so we can concentrate on the oil.

"Some of the Iraqi forces Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld reviewed during a trip to Iraq on Friday:
Iraqi Intervention Force: Units that are comparable to police SWAT teams or military special operations forces.
Emergency Response Unit: An Iraqi Interior Ministry unit comparable in mission to the FBI's Hostage Rescue Team. The unit is trained in close-quarters combat and small arms.
Counter Terrorist Force: An elite military unit similar in mission to the Army's Delta Force. Highly trained special operators.
36th Commandos: A well-trained infantry unit similar to U.S. Army Rangers.
.....
A Glance at the Troops Rumsfeld Visited February 11, 2005

Now which one of the above did you say is the ‘The Salvador Option’?
"The Pentagon may put Special-Forces-led assassination or kidnapping teams in Iraq" January 14, 2005


"I'm more concerned about bringing down our casualties than bringing down our numbers," Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz said in an interview with PBS television's "The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer" program. "And it is worth saying that since June 1, there have been more Iraqi police and military killed in action than Americans." (my italics)
Wolfowitz says reducing US casualties in Iraq more important January 20, 2005

Now isn't that something for the 'Brave' American soldiers to be proud of?

We shall fight you even with these .. to your own fate

"These are the stories that will continue to emerge from the rubble of Fallujah for years. No, for generations...
Speaking on condition of anonymity, the doctor sits with me in a hotel room in Amman, where he is now a refugee. He'd spoken about what he saw in Fallujah in the UK, and now is under threat by the US military if he returns to Iraq... He is driven to tell what he's witnessed, and as a doctor working inside Fallujah, he has video and photographic proof of all that he tells me.
.. "I was in there since the beginning of December."
"One story is of a young girl who is 16 years old," he says of one of the testimonies he video taped recently, "She stayed for three days with the bodies of her family who were killed in their home. When the soldiers entered she was in her home with her father, mother, 12 year-old brother and two sisters. She watched the soldiers enter and shoot her mother and father directly, without saying anything."
The girl managed to hide behind the refrigerator with her brother and witnessed the war crimes first-hand.
"They beat her two sisters, then shot them in the head," he said. After this her brother was enraged and ran at the soldiers while shouting at them, so they shot him dead.
"She continued hiding after the soldiers left and stayed with her sisters because they were bleeding, but still alive. She was too afraid to call for help because she feared the soldiers would come back and kill her as well. She stayed for three days, with no water and no food. Eventually one of the American snipers saw her and took her to the hospital," he added before reminding me again that he had all of her testimony documented on film.
He briefly told me of another story he documented of a mother who was in her home during the siege. "On the fifth day of the siege her home was bombed, and the roof fell on her son, cutting his legs off," he says while using his hands to make cutting motions on his legs, "For hours she couldn't go outside because they announced that anyone going in the street would be shot. So all she could do was wrap his legs and watch him die before her eyes."
Stories from Fallujah February 8, 2005

"Iraqis line up in straggling columns, waiting to pass through barbed-wire checkpoints that ring this former insurgent stronghold left battered by intense fighting three months ago. They are returning to a virtually empty city (see below italics) where the 1st Marine Division's rumbling tanks and patrolling riflemen are out in force making sure the guerrillas don't come back.
American officers say only about a tenth of the 250,000 residents have returned.
Signs scrawled on some houses proclaim "Family leaves here'' or "Family in the home,'' their inexpert English alerting the Marines that families have moved back in.
Marines handed out military rations for weeks after the battle to help the few families in the city get by, but that stopped after the Jan. 30 national election.
"They have to get back on their own feet,'' (my itlaics, like how and with what?) said 1st Lt. Sven Jensen.
The heavily armed Marines do still hand out soccer balls and candy to children.
Jensen said the U.S. presence is paying off. After the battle, patrols often discovered big caches of weapons, he said. The haul last week: one automatic weapon found in the trunk of a car.
"Safest city in Iraq,'' said one of his Marines, Cpl. Daniel Ferrari.
3 months after U.S. offensive in Fallujah, tanks and checkpoints impose order on dusty streets February 8, 2005

"Safe", for the Americans, is relative. How long will you be staying around there?
For generations, the hate you have instilled will smolder in their hearts.

"Don't Live in Fear" the sign says in Arabic. It should be in English, no?


"Welcome back to Fallujah" (note the impaled doll's head in winning the hearts and minds of returning Fallujah children)

Despite all the carnage, destruction and insecurity that were unleashed by the illegal occupation of Iraq, we throb with life.

"Amid the sand barriers, the cement fronts and the barbed wire that surround the Iraqi capital Baghdad, a new spectrum of bright colors are springing.

In front of every government building or foreign news agency headquarters, four meters (12 feet) high cement barriers are erected in an attempt to protect the building from bomb attacks.

These gray cement surfaces have become the drawing boards for Iraqi artists.

Outside the French Embassy, wild horses, flying carpets and fancy castles next to an Iraqi farmer returning home to his family adorn the cement surfaces.

Flowers and the Iraqi flag adorn Reuters head office, next to an attempt at Picasso’s style.

The BBC’s cement painting mural deserves special mention. It is claimed that a teacher at the Iraqi Art Academy was asked, and spent, several weeks to paint that mural which exults Iraq’s ancient history.

These murals, a testimony to our indefectible spirit, are scattered around Baghdad."

Below are just three such murals.

To see the rest, kindly visit http://www.iraqpatrol.com/ (in Arabic) by clicking this link and scroll down past the above translation of the Arabic text:
http://www.iraqpatrol.com/php/index.php?showtopic=7698&hl=

This is a Comment posted at 9:05pm on "The Secret is Out" posting of yesterday, February 7, 2005:

"When you have deep thinkers who believe they have won a victory after the slaughter in Fallujah, you have to wonder how their minds work. It's easy to dismiss the defenders of Fallujah as fanatical Muslims and terrorist, but difficult to consider that they chose to die for their freedom as they understood it. I don't know whether Rumsfeld refuses to acknowledge the reality of the situation or whether he's oblivious to the reality. Iraqis will never know freedom while Americans occupy their soil. It's that simple.
My hope, as an American and a former combat veteran of Viet-Nam is that the freedom fighters in Iraq concentrate on killing Americans so that the suffering of Bush's senseless crusade is brought home to roost and Americans can taste the fruits their folly.Maybe then they'll wake up and demand accountability from our government to stop this lying insanity. It's sad to watch the Iraqis kill their own who have supported the American efforts only as a means of survival (my italics) and not as an honest ideology."

In a desperate attempt to counter the dilapidating large numbers of army desertions and resignations due to the increasing level of attacks against the 'new' Iraqi Army soldiers, it was announced yesterday that the Iraqi Ministry of Defense has doubled the salary of an enlisted soldier to be half a million Dinars monthly (in Arabic), one of the highest paid jobs in the government of Iraq. Have you tried blowing a balloon full of holes?

As for Fallujah: ... "Three months after the American offensive and capture of the Sunni bastion, barely 20% of the population has returned. Some residents survive in the ruins. The Red Crescent tries to help, while the Iraqi Army patrols and loots whatever remains. Three months after the American offensive against Falluja that began November 8, 2004, the rebel city fifty kilometers west of Baghdad is devastated, emptied, sepulchral. "Like after an earthquake, a fire and bomb tsunami that spared practically nothing, not even the mosques," relates Sheikh Taghlib Al-Alousi, President of the Chura, the assembly of religious dignitaries.
The city with a hundred mosques is now only a shadow of its former self. "It's a tragedy! I cried about it like a child," explains the official from the Hazrah Mohammedia mosque, who has returned to what was once a Sunni bastion three times in the period since the end of the main fighting in early December. Tears come to his eyes when he evokes the present condition of this city of 400,000 on the banks of the Euphrates. "Practically not a single house has been spared. 20% of them have burned and at least 10% are totally destroyed," asserts this engineer who denounces the massive American bombardments every time the Marines encountered any resistance. "
Falluja Residents Testify to the Destruction of Their City February 7, 2005

Concerning civilian casualties:
"Is it a perfect resistance? No. How could a resistance be pretty when the occupation is so brutal and ugly. The senseless violence inflicted upon the Iraqi people by the occupation results in a violent response. It was no different when the Algerians fought the French to a standstill in the early Sixties of the last century. When a leader of the Algerian resistance was asked why they often bombed cafes and killed [French] civilians, he replied: 'Give us planes and helicopters and then we will only target French troops.'"
"Democracy Promotion" and Resistance: Imperial Delusions Tariq Ali, February 7, 2005

Bush in Babylon ...........A clearer vision

"As reflected in CIA classified studies last month, U.S. military and intelligence officials are still trying to understand (my italics) the various Iraqi insurgency groups that they expect will continue to fight, even after last week's election.

The CIA studies included a detailed look at an at-large Iraqi fighter (my italics) who is motivated to fight because the United States is occupying his country, a senior intelligence official said.
"This person, with a tribal background, has a mix of motives including a family grievance, someone was hurt by coalition forces," said the official, who asked not to be identified because the reports are still classified. "There is also [in this Iraqi insurgent] religion and nationalism that results in a view he must fight on to get non-Muslims out of Muslim territory."

The CIA last month also updated its analysis of the breadth of the Iraqi insurgency, including Iraqis that are not only former Baathists, "dead enders," but also newly radicalized Sunni Iraqis, nationalists offended by the occupying force and others disenchanted by the economic turmoil and destruction caused by the fighting.

Foreign fighters associated with Abu Musab Zarqawi and his al Qaeda-affiliated insurgent group, who once were seen as the prime opponents along with tens of thousands of criminals freed by Saddam Hussein before the war began in 2003, are now described as lesser elements (my italics) but still a source of danger.
CIA Studies Provide Glimpse of Insurgents in Iraq February 6, 2005

So, how many billions of dollars did this intelligent "Intelligence" cost? and how much effort was required on the part of many experts on "anti-terrorism", such as Bremer, to reach this conclusion after twenty two months of occupation?

They certainly did not get this kind of inside information from Allawi, Chalabi, Khidir Hamza, Makkiya and Ajami, now did they?

And how is Rumsfeld going to deal with these now-called fighters in his typical forward planning, sharp analysis, political sophistication and lofty moral attitudes? ...... "Well, you know, that's Life."

"What you need to do is have the economic progress, the political progress which is going forward in such good style (sic). And that will determine the level of the insurgency," Rumsfeld said.
"And the level of the insurgency will determine the speed at which Iraqi security forces will be capable of managing that level of insurgency."
He acknowledged there were are lot of "ifs," but added, "That's life."
... "We don't have intelligence that good. I just don't know," Rumsfeld said."
Rumsfeld Says No Iraq Self-Security Date February 6, 2005

MR. RUSSERT: How many Iraqi security forces do we need fully trained and capable of fighting insurgents?

SEC'Y RUMSFELD: Well, the answer to that question is not complicated. We need as many as are needed. If you have an insurgency that's this level, you'll need X. If you have an insurgency that's that level, you'll need X-plus. And if you have an insurgency that's quite low, you'll need X-minus. And to think that you can sit here today and--I mean, no one predicted the level of the insurgency as it is today (my italics).
Meet the Press, Sunday February 6, 2005, transcript (Thanks to a comment by Evelyn)

Here is one humble soul who tried (without costing the CIA, or the Pentagon, a penny of US tax dollars).

But I guess with friends like the five mentioned above, who needs enemies, eh?

"Wanna know my answer to that?"

Early Sunday morning:
At several junctures over the past two years, I would receive emails from esteemed friends, some older and wiser than me, asking "where does one go from here?".

As the occupation stumbles from one cul-de-sac to another (one would not want to use the word dead-end lest we ungracefully remind Rumsfeld of the dead-enders that he coined a few months after the occupation), the above query arrives.

(For a list of the maze of American cul-de-sacs in Iraq during the past 15 years, this is a good reference: What I Heard about Iraq February 3, 2005).

The answer, all the time, to the above query is the end of the occupation.

The fury of the Iraqi Resistance is primarily directed against the occupying forces themselves, and those that support and shield them. It will abate with their departure.

Presently, and as expected, it appears that the United Alliance Party, the mainly Shiite coalition sponsored by Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, will dominate parliament.

The basic principles of the Platform of the United Iraqi Alliance states:
"The Iraq that we want:
1. A united Iraq - land and people - with full national sovereignty.
2. A timetable for the withdrawal of the multinational forces from Iraq.
.....
....."

If there is one person in Iraq now who can limit the bloodshed, it would be Sistani by interjecting himself, demand negotiations on the second point of the platform above and threaten revolt in case of procrastination or refusal to negotiate.

Barring that, we are heading to further cul-de-sacs.

Sunday mid-morning:
PS: The back-peddling on the above platform, which millions trusted and voted upon, has already started:
"Adel Abdel-Mehdi, the current finance minister and a powerful figure in the coalition expected to dominate Iraq's parliament, rejected a key demand of those groups -- a timetable for a withdrawal of the 150,000 U.S. troops in the country.
"If we start fixing timetables by now, we will be in a difficult situation if we reach that time and we are not prepared," Abdel-Mehdi said in the interview at his home. "You can't announce it, and then say okay, I'll delay it for two months."
Top Shiite Welcomes Overtures By Sunnis February 6, 2005

As I was mentioning on my posts of Have you counted the votes yet? of January 28, 2005 and "Oil-for-Food is now Oil-for-Grease" of December 27, 2004.

Let us see what, and if, Sistani speaks otherwise.

This short writing is more of an introspection rather than a political discourse.

People:

When I first “came out” in August 2002, six months before the invasion and occupation of Iraq, I claimed, in my first published article “Iraq’s nuclear non-capability”, the following conclusion: “President Bush and Prime Minister Blair are pulling their public by the nose, covering their hollow patriotic egging on with shoddy intelligence. But the two parading emperors have no clothes”. After the reports of David Kay and Charles Duelfer on the non-existence of WMD in Iraq after 1991, the CIA is now gingerly rectifying its ‘slam dunk’ assurances of their existence after propelling the occupation of Iraq and with a medal to its former director, George Tenet. The new CIA’s “report is not considered a high-level document for review by President Bush”.

During the three months before the invasion, I predicted on several radio and television interviews that ‘rivers of blood’ will flow in Iraq as a result of the occupation, to the consternation of a couple of American radio stations who curtailed the interview claiming that I was threatening the American listeners. Back in August of 2002 Vice President Dick Cheney cited the Middle East expert Professor Fouad Ajami (who is not Iraqi) predicting that after ‘liberation’, the streets in Basra and Baghdad are sure to erupt in joy in the same way the throngs in Kabul greeted the Americans. When an American soldier was shown on television raising the American flag, just a few days after the invasion, on a building in Um Qasr port south of Basra, I turned to my friends and mentioned that that gesture itself will cost hundreds of dead American soldiers.

Unlike Ajami and Cheney, I am more attuned with the dignity, and the indignities, of my people.

Immediately after the occupation of Baghdad, I was contacted by several radio stations challenging my prediction that ‘rivers of blood’ would flow as a result of the invasion. I related that the Iraqi people were going through a state of shock from the sudden disappearance of the Iraqi army and the Ba’athist militias as well as from the anarchy, looting and destruction that was taking place. I predicted that they will soon awaken to the tragedy of their being occupied, and to the predictable savagery of the American soldiers and the start of the Resistance. I asked the radio stations to call me back in two months time, in June of 2003. They did not call back. On April 28 and 30, 2003 American soldiers cold-bloodedly killed 20 unarmed civilians in Fallujah who were demonstrating against the confiscation of their school by the American soldiers. By mid-June, Falluja had become a major center of resistance to the U.S. occupation. The first oil pipeline was blown on June 12, 2003.

Sadly, painfully and tragically what I had predicted has flowed.

When it was becoming clear, by July-August 2003, that the Resistance was spreading, several radio stations again called to ask for an opinion on what course of action is best for the Americans. My response was that when wounded, the saliva applied by licking and cleaning the wound is the best medicine, meaning that the Iraqi people can best take care of their tragedy by themselves, if the American occupation is ended and they are left to tend to their affairs. The recent determination and dignity of the election turnout, whether participating in or boycotting it, is a vindication of that. My faith in the Iraqi people and their core capability to surmount our present predicament, according to our own traditions, culture and history, is deep and wide.

Resistance:

The Iraqi Resistance, and I here exclude the Salafis and the Phantom Al-Zarqawi, is born out the brutal and degrading occupation. Many of us, unlike Ajami, Chalabi, Allawi, Makiyya and such, predicted its emergence and veracity. How will the occupiers, aside from escalating the tempo of violence and the destruction of more Iraqi cities, quell down their mounting anger and determination, aside from leaving?

Perhaps I should outline here a letter calling for minimal demands that I recently signed, and was augmented by a friend:
(1) Setting a strict timetable for speedy withdrawal of all occupation forces,
(2) Ceasing all attacks, and confining all occupation forces to barracks until full withdrawal,
(3) Ending martial law and releasing all political prisoners,
(4) Establishing an independent election commission, led by Iraq's senior serving and retired judges, and including all Iraq's political forces. The commission can be assisted by anti-occupation figures, e.g. Nelson Mandela, and the UN General Assembly.
(5) Call on the Iraqi Resistance to shoulder the responsibilities of protecting civilian Iraqis against threats, kidnappings, and attacks by Occupation forces or criminal elements,
(6) Recognize that all Iraqis irrespective or sex, ethnic, sectarian, and age are equal before the law and that there shall be no law promulgated that infringes on the these equal rights in all spheres
(7) Clear and unequivocal rejection of human rights abuses, torture, and demeaning to human dignity in the work place, prison, streets, and political governing bodies.

Oil:

The neoconservative agenda of defending the security of Israel coincided comfortably with the lucrative control of Iraqi oil fields, through occupation, for the benefit of America’s 'global Pax Americana'. Bush had in mind Iraq’s ‘regime change’ even before becoming President, and nowhere were ‘freedom’ and ‘democracy’ stated then, and are now only flaunted for lack of any WMDs and alleged Al-Qaida connections. "Think of Iraq as a military base with a very large oil reserve underneath; you can't ask for better than that."

It is now known, after an audit, that more than 9 billion dollars are not accounted for under Bremer’s reign, which included income from Iraq’s oil sales. I would welcome any information on where has Iraq’s oil money being going to since Bremer’s stealth departure.

I repeat my strong reservations on Adil Abdul Mahdi’s generous offer during a speech to the National Press Club in that the current [Iraqi] leadership is looking at privatising the Iraqi National Oil Company and that the government, which is supposed to be replaced after elections scheduled for January, will also pass a new law that will further open Iraq's huge oil reserves to foreign companies. U.S. firms are expected to gain the lion's share of access in a process estimated to be worth billions of dollars. "So I think this is very promising to the American investors and to American enterprises, certainly to oil companies," Abdel Mahdi said.

Neither the outgoing ‘transition government’ nor do the next ‘transition government’, that is tasked with preparing Iraq’s constitution, have any legitimate right to make the above promises as they are not legitimate, except according to Bremer’s and Feldman dictums.

In the words of the oil expert Issam Al-Chalabi to MEES recently, Iraq must focus on domestic priorities, not exports.

US military bases:

Reports indicate that the US occupation is building 12 to 14 military bases all over Iraq.
In a recent article in the International Herald Tribune, it was proposed that military “planners might consider three factors that help explain why bases are welcomed (or at least tolerated) in some countries but not others…First is the economic impact…. Second is the question of whether the host country is part of a firm U.S. alliance with a shared purpose or simply being used to launch military operations elsewhere…. Third is the perceived impact on local prospects for democratization and political freedom.
It argued in the article that these three conditions do not hold in Iraq.
The article concluded that “considering all these factors, a continuing U.S. base presence in Iraq is unlikely to be politically tenable.”

There is one added unique reason in the case of Iraq. The behavior of the American military in Iraq over the past two years, including the torture, rape and humiliation at Abu Ghuraib prison, the destruction of Fallujah, the random shooting of civilians to count a few glaring follies among other atrocities, do not endear the presence of American forces in Iraq, not even behind fortified walls as the Iraqi Resistance will not accept their presence.

Finally, one slowly realizes a conviction: what is the use of words against blatantly aggressive actions while at the same time, the occupier dispenses with and refuses to adhere to the jurisdiction of International World Court, and interprets to his own liking the Geneva Conventions on the treatment of prisoners of war and the legality and limits of their occupation?

Israel occupies Palestine, builds an apartheid wall, kills civilians, uproots trees, and destroys homes and villages while at the same time they demand a ‘reasonable’ Palestinian leadership to negotiate with, while Sharon imposes armed violence with impunity and support from the US.

The US (with the UK tagging along) occupied Iraq illegally and under false pretences, destroyed its fragile infrastructure, drived the alien civil strife wedge deep into Iraqi society and yet demands to have ‘reasonable’ representatives of the Iraqi people (with the blessings of Negroponti and his 3000 embassy staff members) to negotiate with on its own (US) terms, laws and conditions that were illegally put in place by Bremer and Feldman, as it hugs the Iraqi oil and economy.

They will only listen to and recognize our demands when we are no longer under their thumb, after forcing it off. Otherwise, they will tell us what to do, with their gun forced down our throat, and we would have to accept only their crumbs.

By the way, I just recieved this excellent article touching upon what is postulated above:
What did the Palestinians and Iraqis Vote for? February 4, 2005

The last two sentences in my book are:

"The neoconservatives have indeed succeeded in manipulating the "American Way of Life" to devour my beloved Iraq.

We [the Iraqi people] shall, however, resurrect, to their detriment. "

… Thy kingdom (shall not) come, thy will be (un)done .

- a bout of flu, and
- a hard disk failure that totally wiped out my recent data and files,

I am slowly recuperating on both fronts.
I will respond to some comments that are worthy of the effort, and do regret any other inconvenience to visitors to this site.