Archived news and commentary: October 25 - 31, 2004

2004/11/01 - 2004/11/07
2004/10/25 - 2004/10/31
2004/10/18 - 2004/10/24
2004/10/11 - 2004/10/17
2004/10/04 - 2004/10/10
2004/09/27 - 2004/10/03

Sunday, October 31, 2004

News and commentary:

"BBC reporter weeps over Arafat's fate" (Backspin, 2004/10/31)
"BBC correspondent Barbara Plett describes Yassir Arafat's departure from Ramallah:

But where were the people, I wondered, the mass demonstrations of solidarity, the frantic expressions of concern? Was this another story we Western journalists were getting wrong, bombarding the world with news of what we think is an historic event, while the locals get on with their lives?
Yet when the helicopter carrying the frail old man rose above his ruined compound, I started to cry... without warning. ...

So now, Palestinians are apathetic (at most) about Arafat, after all the damage he's caused them, but the foreign reporters — like Plett — are all choked up! Says Plett: 'Mr Arafat's life has been one of sheer dedication and resilience.'" (UPDATE 2004/11/01: Tim Blair and Melanie Phillips have more on this. See also: "Yasser Arafat's unrelenting journey" (Barbara Plett, BBC News, 2004/10/30))

"New Friends, New Times... New Election" (Roger L. Simon, rogerlsimon.com, 2004/10/31)
Bush-hatred II: "Last night I was at a dinner party... yes, it was in Hollywood where I live, but it wasn't particularly glamorous, just normal big city folks getting together. Not all the people worked in the Industry and those that did were more on the workaday side. The people had come together through our children - we were all parents from the same school - and the kids played in the next room while we ate, drank and talked. Naturally, the subject of the election came up and I decided - maybe it was the vodka - to let it rip and say I was voting for Bush. One woman shrieked at the top of her lungs. The others just looked at me in incredulity."

"A reflection on the election" (Larry E. Ribstein, Ideoblog, 2004/10/31)
A brilliant post on Bush-hatred: "Yes, as the lefties age, folks who used to pride themselves on tolerance now turn to virulent and destructive hatred. They justify their attitude by speaking of the intolerance of those they hate — of gays, of the poor, of African-Americans, etc. They also claim being disturbed by Bush's inflexibility and insularity. But hatred distorts their vision. They ignore, for example, the irony that these supposed lovers of all the world's people should scorn Bush's idealism, denigrate the Iraqis' impulse for freedom, and despair about the economic rise of third world countries at the expense of our own jobs. And in any event such hatred cannot be justified by the supposed errors of its target. ...
Bush-hatred does not spring from the left's revulsion over the war in Iraq. At most, that provided convenient fuel. ... Consider the following excerpts from an email Michael Moore broadcast on 9/12/2001. It's worth reading now, a couple of days before the election (and a couple of days after OBL has officially taken credit for 9/11). ...

In just 8 months, Bush gets the whole world back to hating us again. He withdraws from the Kyoto agreement, walks us out of the Durban conference on racism, insists on restarting the arms race -- you name it, and Baby Bush has blown it all. . . . .
Many families have been devastated tonight. This just is not right. They did not deserve to die. If someone did this to get back at Bush, then they did so by killing thousands of people who DID NOT VOTE for him! ...

Reflect on what this initial reaction to 9/11 says about the attitudes of Moore, and of those in his wide and enthusiastic audience." (Hat tip: Ann Althouse. Ribstein also quotes Leon Wieselter's must-read review of Nicholson Baker's "Checkpoint": "The Extremities of Nicholson Baker" (Leon Wieselter, The New York Times, 2004/08/08))

"Hell To Pay" (Rod Nordland et al., Newsweek, from the 2004/11/08 issue)
"For months the American people have heard, from one side, promises to "stay the course" in Iraq (George W. Bush); and from the other side, equally vague plans for gradual withdrawal (John Kerry). Both plans depend heavily on building significant Iraqi forces to take over security. But the truth is, neither party is fully reckoning with the reality of Iraq—which is that the insurgents, by most accounts, are winning. Even Secretary of State Colin Powell, a former general who stays in touch with the Joint Chiefs, has acknowledged this privately to friends in recent weeks, NEWSWEEK has learned. The insurgents have effectively created a reign of terror throughout the country, killing thousands, driving Iraqi elites and technocrats into exile and scaring foreigners out. "Things are getting really bad," a senior Iraqi official in interim Prime Minister Ayad Allawi's government told NEWSWEEK last week. 'The initiative is in [the insurgents'] hands right now. This approach of being lenient and accommodating has really backfired. They see this as weakness.'"

"Osama The Impotent" (Amir Taheri, New York Post, 2004/10/31)
"Third, Bin Laden appears to have abandoned his messianic pretensions. He no longer wants to save humanity from kufr (unbelief) and plant the banner of the Only True Faith on top of every capital in all continents. He is, in fact, reading an op-ed piece written in the style of Michael Moore. ...
Finally, and here is the most surprising theme of the message, bin Laden is offering the Americans a deal. To cast himself as an honest deal-maker, he takes up some of Michael Moore's themes, especially about President Bush not reacting to the 9/11 attacks fast enough.
The deal is simple, and bin Laden hammers it in more specifically: "Do not play with our security, and spontaneously you will secure yourself."
What does this mean? Translated into practical terms, it means that bin Laden would call off his hounds, if he has any left, provided the United States and its allies stop hunting him down.
Compare this with bin Laden's previous statements, and you will be struck by the change of tone and substance." (See also: "Osama bin Laden's Speech on the Eve of the 2004 US Elections" (MEMRI, 2004/10/29))

"U.N. Hostages Plead for Release in Video" (Stephen Graham, AP/Yahoo! News, 2004/10/31)
"In the tape, the hostages — Annetta Flanigan of Northern Ireland, Filipino diplomat Angelito Nayan and Shqipe Habibi of Kosovo — are shown sitting hunched together against the bare wall of a room in an undisclosed location. ...
Habibi explains that she is from Kosovo — the mainly Muslim autonomous region of Serbia — but her abductor seems unsure where that is.
"It is a Muslim country," she says. "I thought I could help a Muslim country, and I just want to go home and see my brother."
All three hostages appear frightened. Their interviewer at several points seems to try to reassure them, saying to Flanigan: "Don't cry. Why you cry?"
But he repeatedly — sometimes sharply — asks them what they are doing in Afghanistan, and does not seem to understand their answers.
Toward the end of the 15 minute video, obtained by APTN in neighboring Pakistan, the interviewer appears to ask Flanigan to cry for the camera, to which she replies: 'I have cried and cried and I can't cry anymore.'"

"Afghan militants vow to 'chop up' Irish hostage" (David Smith, The Observer, 2004/10/31)
"Islamic militants yesterday threatened to kill an Irish woman and two fellow hostages in Afghanistan, warning: 'We will not only behead them, but chop them up, as is being done in Iraq.'
A Taliban breakaway faction known as the Jaish-e-Muslimeen (Army of Muslims) said it had snatched 35-year-old Annetta Flanigan, a UN official, and two colleagues last week and will kill them unless US and coalition troops withdraw from the country.
Ishaq Manzoor, a spokesman for the group, said: 'If these countries don't agree to our demands, we will do the same thing as the mujahideen are doing in Iraq.'"

"Body Identified as Missing Japanese Man" (AP/Los Angeles Times, 2004/10/31)
"A Japanese man kidnapped by Islamic militants was decapitated, wrapped in an American flag and left in a Baghdad field where he was found Saturday, officials said.
Japanese Foreign Minister Nobutaka Machimura in Tokyo confirmed that the body was that of Shosei Koda, 24.
A group led by Jordanian militant Abu Musab Zarqawi had shown Koda, a backpacker, in a video posted online Tuesday.
It demanded that Japan withdraw its noncombat troops from Iraq to prevent Koda's beheading.
Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi quickly rejected that demand, saying he would not give in to terrorists."

Note: Sorry for the downtime, which was caused by excess of the bandwidth limit. Guess my kind host Winds of Change is too good and thus are attracting too many readers.

Saturday, October 30, 2004

News and commentary:

"Lebanese senior reporter Najwa Qasim..."
(Akram Saleh, Reuters, 2004/10/30)
"Lebanese senior reporter Najwa Qasim looks at the scene after a bomb exploded in the parking lot of the Arab satellite television news station Al Arabiya's bureau in Baghdad October 30, 2004."

"Car Bomb Kills 8 Marines Outside Fallujah" (Rawya Rageh, AP/Yahoo! News, 2004/10/30)
"A car bomb killed eight U.S. Marines outside Fallujah on Saturday, the deadliest attack against the U.S. military in nearly six months. Marines pounded guerrilla positions out the outskirts of Fallujah, where American forces are gearing up for a major assault on the insurgent stronghold.
In Baghdad, another car bomb exploded outside an Arabic television network's offices, killing seven people and injuring 19 in the biggest attack against a news organization since the occupation began last year. ...
Employees "were trapped between fire and the shattering shards of glass," he said. That "led to the high number of casualties. We were all there." ...
A militant group calling itself the "1920 Brigades" claimed responsibility for the attack, blasting Al-Arabiya as "Americanized spies speaking in Arabic tongue" in a statement posted on the Web. The station is owned by Saudi investors."

"Stop Terror Sheikhs, Muslim Academics Demand" (Arab News, 2004/10/30)
Via Daniel Pipes ("Are the moderate, anti-Islamist voices in the Muslim world beginning to organize? If so, I cannot think of more cheering news."):
"Over 2,500 Muslim intellectuals from 23 countries have signed a petition to the United Nations calling for an international treaty to ban the use of religion for incitement to violence.
It also calls on the Security Council to set up a tribunal to try “the theologians of terror.” The petition is addressed to Secretary-General Kofi Annan, and to all members of the Security Council and its current chairman.
“There are individuals in the Muslim world who pose as clerics and issue death sentences against those they disagree with,” says Shakir Al-Nablusi, a Jordanian academic and one of the signatories. “These individuals give Islam a bad name and foster hatred among civilizations.”
Nablusi said hundreds of Arab writers and academics were collecting more signatures and hope to have “tens of thousands” by next month. ...
The signatories describe those who use religion for inciting violence as “the sheikhs of death”. Among those mentioned by name is Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, an Egyptian preacher working in Qatar. The signatories accuse him of 'providing a religious cover for terrorism.'"

"Rove/Osama Link Revealed" (Tim Blair, timblair.spleenville.com, 2004/10/31)
Blair also has sensational e-mail correspondence between the two conspirators:
"Walter Cronkite identifies the evil genius responsible for the latest Osama bin Laden video:

So now the question is basically right now, how will this affect the election? And I have a feeling that it could tilt the election a bit. In fact, I'm a little inclined to think that Karl Rove, the political manager at the White House, who is a very clever man, he probably set up bin Laden to this thing."

(See also: "Larry King Live: Bin Laden Releases New Videotape" (CNN.com, 2004/10/29). Also: "Karl Rove: America's Mullah" (Neal Gabler, Los Angeles Times, 2004/10/24) and "The President's brain" (Mark Steyn, The Sunday Telegraph, 2004/10/24))

"A.S.S. Cole" (Tony, Across the Bay, 2004/10/30)
More on the Lancet's claim that about 100,000 Iraqi civilians have died as a result of the war:
"Speaking of nitwits, Juan Cole, Mr. "Informed Comment," Prof. "I convey very complex social and intellectual realities" (and hot air), has jumped on this story with his usual abandon and over-the-top rhetoric. Here's a slice:
"The troubling thing about these results is that they suggest that the US may soon catch up with Saddam Hussein in the number of civilians killed."
But wait, Cole is not convinced of Saddam's murder toll (just like Said wasn't sold on Saddam's gassing of the Kurds). After all, this is "Informed Comment." We take our academic integrity very seriously around here folks! Hence the following comment:
"How many deaths to blame on Saddam is controverial. He did after all start both the Iran-Iraq War and the Gulf War. But he also started suing for peace in the Iran-Iraq war after only a couple of years, and it was Khomeini who dragged the war out until 1988. But if we exclude deaths of soldiers, it is often alleged that Saddam killed 300,000 civilians. This allegation seems increasingly suspect."
I see, so the number of Saddam's victims is suspect (over the course of three decades, two wars, a genocide, and specialized death troops and death chambers), but the Lancet report is 'very tight.'" (See also: "US Has Killed 100,000 in Iraq: The Lancet" (Juan Cole, Informed Comment, 2004/10/29), "100,000 Dead — or 8,000" (Fred Kaplan, Slate, 2004/10/29) and "100,000 Iraqi civilians dead, says study" (Sarah Boseley, The Guardian, 2004/10/29))

"Spiegel Online Scratches the Bottom of the Barrel" (Davids Medienkritik, 2004/10/30)
"In this sensationally miserable article

DEMOCRACY IN CRISIS – The Shrouded Statue of Liberty

Paul Lersh presents, and agrees with, theses posited by the Italian “philosopher,” Giorgio Agamben.
These extracts emphatically prove the magnitude of the damage done to the minds of leftist German journalists by George W. Bush:

Is the USA a rouge nation? Is George Bush a warlord? The Italian philosopher sees America’s “war on evil” as a symbol of a frightening development – crisis becomes the norm. Democracy is morphing into a civilian dictatorship.
Since then (9/11) a warlord rules in Washington who has declared that “old rules” are no longer applicable in the “war on evil” and therefore ignores them. All obligations under law and justice are subject to being overruled by national security considerations. He mounts the stage as commander in chief of the armed forces that can, by “military order” obviate international law and the human right to freedom, and create military commissions to replace courts. …
According to Agamben, Bush’s “military order” has transformed the prisoners at Guantánamo into judicial non-persons. They, just as the Jews in concentration camps, “have lost their juridical identity.”
The naked detainee on the leash (in Abu Ghraib) reminds one of the horrible pictures of concentration camp inmates. (emphasis added)

Spiegel Online undertakes only weak attempts to soften the unbelievable tactless comparison between Abu Ghraib and Auschwitz. Nevertheless, even printing Agamben’s idiotic theses is an unforgivable affront to America (and to historical truth)." (See also: "Demokartie im ausnahmezustand: Die verhüllte Freiheitsstatue" (Paul Lersch, Spiegel Online, 2004/10/27))

"Afghanistan Reborn" (Charles H. Fairbanks Jr., The Weekly Standard, from the 2004/11/01 issue)
"But this election more than anything else is about the conquest of two foreign lands, and the humbling of enemy potentates, a project still messy in many ways, but nevertheless an American success, so far, a victory — even in Iraq. Yet it is detested by George W. Bush's opponents to the bottom of their souls. So violent are our animosities at this moment that Bush's staggering achievement in Afghanistan is never debated as we approach the vote. It is reminiscent of the postwar debate over "Who lost China?" The passionate partisans who raised this cry in frenzied accusation never reflected: We were debating who lost China only because we had gained Japan, South Korea, Germany, Italy, France, and so forth. There seems to be some flaw in our national character, some self-hatred whereby we respond to the complexity of the real world by trying to exorcise the devil within ourselves. And the devil within ourselves we locate soon enough in our neighbor, in the other faction.
Rather than rending our national fabric with self-reproach, Election Day is a moment to take mature satisfaction in our country's real triumphs. In Afghanistan, four short years ago, murders were plotted for the World Trade Center and the Pentagon under the protection of the Afghan government. This year, the plotters and those who protected them have been driven from the country or into remote fastnesses, while vast hordes of Afghans turned out to pay homage to our ideals in a free election. As you part the curtains of your voting booth, remember them."

"Bush Voters in Baghdad" (Lawrence F. Kaplan, The Wall Street Journal, 2004/10/30)
"As far as Iraqi elites are concerned, President Bush brought democracy to a land that knew only dictatorship. From Sen. Kerry, however, they hear no commitment to build a liberal state or, for that matter, any state. What they hear instead is a presidential aspirant who complains about "opening firehouses in Baghdad and closing them down in the United States of America," even as his campaign aides dismiss Iraq's prime minister as an American "puppet."
Not surprisingly, surveys by the Iraqi Center for Research and Strategic Studies find that, whereas Mr. Bush garners the most support in the Kurdish north and from Iraq's well-educated urban elites, Mr. Kerry draws his strongest support from what the Center's Sadoun al-Dulame calls Iraq's "hottest places" — hotbeds of resistance to the U.S. A poll taken earlier this month in Baghdad, for example, finds that while President Bush would win a higher tally in New Baghdad's Christian precincts, Sen. Kerry carries Sadr City hands down.
Leaving aside that speechifying about a U.S. withdrawal culminates in what Mr. Rubaie describes as "a huge moral boost to the terrorists": How does Sen. Kerry intend to work alongside the pro-U.S. Iraqis he denigrates at every turn? This is a practical as well as a moral question. By advancing the fiction that there's no such thing as bringing the troops home too soon and nothing to justify an adequate level of expenditure in Iraq, he's already signaled his willingness to forfeit America's obligation to rebuild the country it turned inside out. And he offers this as heightened moral awareness."

"The Osama Litmus Test" (David Brooks, The New York Times, 2004/10/30)
"Here was this monster who killed 3,000 of our fellows showing up on our TV screens, trying to insert himself into our election, trying to lecture us on who is lying and who is telling the truth. Here was this villain traipsing through his own propaganda spiel with copycat Michael Moore rhetoric about George Bush in the schoolroom, and Jeb Bush and the 2000 Florida election.
Here was this deranged killer spreading absurd theories about the American monarchy and threatening to murder more of us unless we do what he says. ...
Bush's response yesterday to the video was exactly right. He said we would not be intimidated. He tried to take the video out of the realm of crass politics by mentioning Kerry by name and assuring the country that he was sure Kerry agreed with him.
Kerry did say that we are all united in the fight against bin Laden, but he just couldn't help himself. His first instinct was to get political. ...
Even in this shocking moment, this echo of Sept. 11, Kerry saw his political opportunities and he took 'em. There's such a thing as being so nakedly ambitious that you offend the people you hope to impress."

"Candidates Give Tough Response to a Qaeda Tape" (Richard W. Stevenson and Jodi Wilgoren, The New York Times, 2004/10/30)
"But the senator also criticized Mr. Bush for allowing Mr. bin Laden to remain at large. "I regret that when George Bush had the opportunity in Afghanistan and Tora Bora, he didn't choose to use American forces to hunt down and kill Osama bin Laden," Mr. Kerry said in an interview with an ABC affiliate in Milwaukee shortly after learning about the tape. "He outsourced the job to Afghan warlords. I would have never have done that. I think it was an enormous mistake, and we are paying the price for it today."
Mr. Bush swiftly responded in his final campaign event of the day, suggesting that Mr. Kerry was not only wrong, but was politicizing national security. "It's the worst kind of Monday morning quarterbacking,'' he said. 'It is especially shameful in the light of a new tape from America's enemy.'"

Friday, October 29, 2004

News and commentary:

"Osama bin Laden speaks..."
(Al-Jazeera, 2004/10/29)
"Osama bin Laden speaks in this image made from an undated video broadcast on Friday, Oct. 29, 2004 by Arab television station Al-Jazeera."

"Osama bin Laden's Speech on the Eve of the 2004 US Elections" (MEMRI, 2004/10/29)
Video clip and transcript of bin Laden's speech: "As I was looking at those destroyed towers in Lebanon, I was struck by the idea of punishing the oppressor in the same manner and destroying towers in the US, to give it a taste of what we have tasted and to deter it from killing our children and women.
We had no difficulty dealing with Bush and his administration, because it resembles the regimes in our (Arab) countries, half of which are ruled by the military, and the other half are ruled by the sons of kings and presidents with whom we have had a lot of experience. Among both types, there are many who are known or their conceit, arrogance, greed, and for taking money unrightfully."

"Bin Laden Says He Ordered 9/11 Attacks" (Maggie Michael, AP/Yahoo! News, 2004/10/29)
"Osama bin Laden, addressing the American public four days ahead of presidential elections, said in a video aired Friday that the United States can avoid another Sept. 11 attack if it stops threatening the security of Muslims. ...
Bin Laden said he wanted to explain why he ordered the suicide airline hijackings that hit the World Trade Center and the Pentagon so Americans would know how to avoid "another disaster." ...
He said he was first inspired to attack the United States by the 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon in which towers and buildings in Beirut were destroyed in the siege of the capital.
"While I was looking at these destroyed towers in Lebanon, it sparked in my mind that the tyrant should be punished with the same and that we should destroy towers in America, so that it tastes what we taste and would be deterred from killing our children and women," he said. ...
"It never occurred to us that the commander-in-chief of the American armed forces would leave 50,000 of his citizens in the two towers to face these horrors alone," he said, referring to the number of people who worked at the World Trade Center.
"It appeared to him (Bush) that a little girl's talk about her goat and its butting was more important than the planes and their butting of the skyscrapers. That gave us three times the required time to carry out the operations, thank God," he said."

"Another Question" (David Frum, National Review, 2004/10/29)
"Speaking of media bias, here’s a question you won’t hear in our big papers or on network TV: Does Yasser Arafat have AIDS?
We know he has a blood disease that is depressing his immune system. We know that he has suddenly dropped considerable weight – possibly as much as 1/3 of all his body weight. We know that he is suffering intermittent mental dysfunction. What does this sound like?
Former Romanian intelligence chief Ion Pacepa tells in his very interesting memoirs that the Ceaucescu regime taped Arafat’s orgies with his body guards. If true, Arafat would a great deal to conceal from his people and his murderously anti-homosexual supporters in the Islamic world."

"Bin Laden bedazzled Saddam with jewel" (Aaron Klein, WorldNetDaily, 2004/10/29)
"Osama bin Laden tried to purchase the world's largest pearl, the Pearl of Allah, as a gift to Saddam Hussein "to unite the Arab cultures," and Hussein was prepared to accept, according to the pearl's owner.
Victor Barbish, who owns 66 percent of the pearl on behalf of his daughter, told WorldNetDaily he received an offer in 1999 from individuals who said they were "from bin Laden's group" to purchase the pearl for $60 million to give to Hussein as an overture of unity between al-Qaida and the Iraqi government."

"U.S. Team Took 250 Tons of Iraqi Munitions" (FOX News, 2004/10/29)
Explosives XVII: "U.S. Army officer came forward Friday to say a team from his 3rd Infantry Division took about 250 tons of munitions and other material from the Al-Qaqaa arms-storage facility soon after Saddam Hussein's regime fell in April 2003.
Explosives were part of the load taken by the team, but Major Austin Pearson was unable to say what percentage they accounted for. The material was then destroyed, he said.
The Pentagon believes the disclosure helps explain what happened to 377 tons of high explosives that the International Atomic Energy Agency said disappeared after the U.S.-led invasion."

"U.S. left ammo site unguarded" (Mike Francis, The Oregonian, 2004/10/29)
Explosives XVI: "Six months after the fall of Baghdad, a vast Iraqi weapons depot with tens of thousands of artillery rounds and other explosives remained unguarded, according to two U.S. aid workers who say they reported looting of the site to U.S. military officials.
The aid workers say they informed Lt. Gen. Ricardo S. Sanchez, the highest ranking Army officer in Iraq in October 2003 but were told that the United States did not have enough troops to seal off the facility, which included more than 60 bunkers packed with munitions.
"We were outraged," said Wes Hare, city manager of La Grande, who was working in Iraq as part of a rebuilding program. A colleague who also visited the depot, Jerry Kuhaida, said it appeared that the explosives at the Ukhaider Ammunition Storage Area had found their way to insurgents targeting U.S. forces.
"There's no question in my mind that the stuff in Ukhaider was used by terrorists," said Kuhaida."

"100,000 Dead — or 8,000" (Fred Kaplan, Slate, 2004/10/29)
Kaplan rips The Lancet's claim to shreds:
"The authors of a peer-reviewed study, conducted by a survey team from Johns Hopkins University, claim that about 100,000 Iraqi civilians have died as a result of the war. ... But read the passage that cites the calculation more fully:

We estimate there were 98,000 extra deaths (95% CI 8000-194 000) during the post-war period.

Readers who are accustomed to perusing statistical documents know what the set of numbers in the parentheses means. For the other 99.9 percent of you, I'll spell it out in plain English — which, disturbingly, the study never does. It means that the authors are 95 percent confident that the war-caused deaths totaled some number between 8,000 and 194,000. (The number cited in plain language — 98,000 — is roughly at the halfway point in this absurdly vast range.)
This isn't an estimate. It's a dart board." (See also: "100,000 Iraqi civilians dead, says study" (Sarah Boseley, The Guardian, 2004/10/29))

"Arafat's Swiss Bank Account" (Issam Abu Issa, The Middle East Quarterly, from the Fall 2004 issue)
Issam Abu Issa is a former chairman of the Palestine International Bank:
"On November 28, 1999, I became a victim of Arafat's abuse of power and flagrant disregard for the law. That's when, in direct breach of the law, Arafat issued a decree dissolving the Palestine International Bank's board of directors. The state-controlled Palestine Monetary Authority took over the bank, and with Arafat's blessing and written approval, formed a new supervisory board of directors, including at least one convicted and Interpol-wanted felon. The unlawful takeover was a confiscation of my own, my shareholders', and my clients' private assets for Arafat's personal use. At the date of seizure, PIB total assets amounted to $105 million. Since the takeover, they have neither called for a shareholders' meeting nor disclosed the bank's balance sheet. ...
As they seized the bank, Arafat's security services harassed me. I fled to the Qatari mission in Gaza. Arafat's staff confiscated my private belongings, including my car, which Arafat took for himself. My brother Issa accompanied a Qatari Foreign Ministry delegation to Gaza in order to resolve the stalemate. But, upon his arrival, Palestinian police acting on orders from Arafat arrested him. The PA said they would trade his freedom for mine. Only after the State of Qatar threatened Arafat with financial sanctions and severing of diplomatic ties did the PA give us free passage to leave Gaza for Qatar."

"Get Them Rewrite: A sad tale of literary figures pronouncing on presidential politics" (Sam Schulman, The Wall Street Journal, 2004/10/29)
"American literary figures are speaking out against President Bush's re-election with unusual fervor and unanimity. From our best writers we might expect a high standard of vituperation. We are often disappointed. Listen to what Walt Whitman might have called the hum of multi-valved voices. ...
Russell Banks: "I'll vote for John Kerry. His election won't reverse our nation's rush to establish a fascist plutocracy, it's too late for that."
Yes, a fascist plutocracy. Norman Mailer senses this fascist tendency, too. Writing in the New York Review of Books, he notes: "The sorriest thing to be said about the US, as we sidle up to fascism (which can become our fate if we plunge into a major depression, or suffer a set of dirty-bomb catastrophes), is that we expect disasters. We await them. We have become a guilty nation." ...
Nicole Krauss, a novelist of less fame but equally strong opinions, was moved to write elsewhere: 'I really think it's not alarmist to say that if Bush is reelected to another four years, it may be the end of life as we know it.'" (See also: "New York Review of Lefties" (John Derbyshire, The Corner, 2004/10/17) and "'Roll Call': Who are novelists voting for?" (Slate, 2004/10/11))

"Inside Duke's Hate-Fest" (Lee Kaplan, FrontPageMagazine, 2004/10/29)
Kaplan reports on his undercover work at the Palestine Solidarity’s conference held at Duke University on October 15-17:
"Qumsiyeh declared that "Zionism is a disease," which would preclude those labeled Zionists from having any rights. Qumsiyeh denounced the Jewish state's existence and cited texts that he claimed proved "Nazi-Zionist collaboration" during the Holocaust. His intention was to undermine any justification for the creation of a Jewish state. ...
Another closed panel I attended was called "The One-State Solution and Bi-nationalist Politics' Impact on Activist Discourse." It featured Fadi Kiblawi, who has publicly expressed his wish to become a suicide bomber. Kiblawi advocates killing Jews in all countries to hasten the creation of a Palestinian state. He spoke to a full, eager audience; the room was so crowded I had to sit on the floor behind the panelists.
At one point a husky young man from the audience raised his hand and to propose a topic shift. "One thing we need to discuss," he said, "is Jewish control of the media. The Jews are everywhere. Look at the governor of New Jersey. He even has a homosexual Jew, an Israeli, for his lover." Kiblawi agreed. 'Yeah, isn't it disgusting?'" (See also: "Duke University's Weekend Hate Fest" (Lee Kaplan, FrontPageMagazine, 2004/10/15))

"Kerry's Afghan Amnesia" (Charles Krauthammer, The Washington Post, 2004/10/29)
"In the 1990s, Afghanistan was allowed to fall to the Taliban and become the global center for the training, indoctrination and seeding of jihadists around the world — including the mass murderers of Sept. 11, 2001. This week, just three years after a two-month war that destroyed the Taliban, Afghanistan completed its first free election, choosing as president a pro-American democrat enjoying legitimacy and wide popular support.
This represents the single most astonishing geopolitical transformation of the past four years. (Deposing Saddam Hussein ranks second. The global jihad against America was no transformation at all: It existed long before the Bush administration. We'd simply ignored al Qaeda's declaration of war.) But perhaps even more astonishing is how this singular American victory has disappeared from public consciousness."

"This reconaissance picture..."
(AP, 2004/10/28)
"This reconaissance picture, released yesterday, shows two trucks parked outside one of the 56 bunkers of the Al Qa Qaa Explosive Storage Complex on March 17, 2003, prior to the U.S. invasion of Iraq."

"Photos point to removal of weapons" (Bill Gertz, The Washington Times, 2004/10/29)
Explosives XV: "U.S. intelligence agencies have obtained satellite photographs of truck convoys that were at several weapons sites in Iraq in the weeks before U.S. military operations were launched, defense officials said yesterday.
The photographs indicate that Iraq was moving arms and equipment from its known weapons sites, said officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
According to one official, the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, known as NGA, "documented the movement of long convoys of trucks from various areas around Baghdad to the Syrian border." ...
The arms that were taken out of the country included missile parts, nuclear-related equipment, tank and aircraft parts, and chemicals used in making poison gas weapons, the official said.
Regarding the satellite photographs, defense officials said the photographs bolster the information obtained from the European intelligence services on the Russian arms-removal program.
The Russian special forces troops were housed at a computer center near the Russian Embassy in Baghdad and left the country shortly before the U.S. invasion was launched March 20, 2003." (See also: "Russia tied to Iraq's missing arms" (Bill Gertz, The Washington Times, 2004/10/28))

"Munitions Issue Dwarfs the Big Picture" (Bradley Graham and Thomas E. Ricks, The Washington Post, 2004/10/29)
Explosives XIV: "The 377 tons of Iraqi explosives whose reported disappearance has dominated the past few days of presidential campaigning represent only a tiny fraction of the vast quantities of other munitions unaccounted for since the fall of Saddam Hussein's government 18 months ago.
U.S. military commanders estimated last fall that Iraqi military sites contained 650,000 to 1 million tons of explosives, artillery shells, aviation bombs and other ammunition. The Bush administration cited official figures this week showing about 400,000 tons destroyed or in the process of being eliminated. That leaves the whereabouts of more than 250,000 tons unknown."

"The outside of an arms bunker at Al Qaqaa..."
(KSTP, 2004/10/29)
"The outside of an arms bunker at Al Qaqaa with a seal that experts say was placed by U.N. inspectors."

"Video Shows G.I.'s at Weapon Cache" (William J. Briad and David E. Sanger, The New York Times, 2004/10/29)
Explosives XIII. More on KSTP's video: "Weapons experts familiar with the work of the international inspectors in Iraq say the videotape appears identical to photographs that the inspectors took of the explosives, which were put under seal before the war. One frame shows what the experts say is a seal, with narrow wires that would have to be broken if anyone entered through the main door of the bunker. ...
"The photographs are consistent with what I know of Al Qaqaa," said David A. Kay, a former American official who led the recent hunt in Iraq for unconventional weapons and visited the vast site. "The damning thing is the seals. The Iraqis didn't use seals on anything. So I'm absolutely sure that's an I.A.E.A. seal."
One weapons expert said the videotape and some of the agency's photographs of the HMX stockpiles "were such good matches it looked like they were taken by the same camera on the same day." (See also: "5 Eyewitness News video may be linked to missing explosives in Iraq" (Gerard Baker, KSTP, 2004/10/28))

"100,000 Iraqi civilians dead, says study" (Sarah Boseley, The Guardian, 2004/10/29)
"About 100,000 Iraqi civilians - half of them women and children - have died in Iraq since the invasion, mostly as a result of airstrikes by coalition forces, according to the first reliable study of the death toll from Iraqi and US public health experts. ...
They found an increase in infant mortality from 29 to 57 deaths per 1,000 live births, which is consistent with the pattern in wars, where women are unable or unwilling to get to hospital to deliver babies, they say. The other increase was in violent death, which was reported in 15 of the 33 clusters studied and which was mostly attributed to airstrikes." (See also: "Mortality before and after the 2003 invasion of Iraq: cluster sample survey" (Les Roberts et al., The Lancet, 2004/10/29))

Thursday, October 28, 2004

News and commentary:

"Alleged American Al Qaeda Warns of U.S. Attacks" (Brian Ross, ABC News, 2004/10/28)
"A man describing himself as an American member of al Qaeda says a new wave of terror attacks against the United States could come "at any moment," according to a videotape obtained by ABC News. ...
The man on the tape is identified only as "Azzam the American." U.S. officials say they had not previously known of the nom de guerre. His face is never fully visible and he makes no reference to where in the United States he might have lived.
"No, my fellow countrymen you are guilty, guilty, guilty, guilty. You are as guilty as Bush and Cheney. You're as guilty as Rumsfeld and Ashcroft and Powell," he says in what he calls his message to America. "After decades of American tyranny and oppression, now it's your turn to die. Allah willing, the streets of America will run red with blood matching drop for drop the blood of America's victims." ...
"People of America, I remind you of the weighty words of our leaders, Osama bin Laden and Dr. Ayman al-Zawahri, that what took place on Sept. 11 was but the opening salvo of the global war on America," said Azzam. 'And that Allah willing, the magnitude and ferocity of what is coming your way will make you forget all about Sept. 11.'" (Note: FOX News has the video. See also: "ABC News holds terror warning tape" (Drudge Report, 2004/10/27))

"France always on Arafat's side: FM" (Xinhuanet, 2004/10/28)
"France will be always on the side of the Palestinian Authority leader Yasser Arafat, French Foreign Minister Michel Barnier declared Thursday.
"France, as I told you (Arafat) in Ramallah on June 30, will be always on your side to back your effort in favor of a just and negotiated peace," Barnier said. ...
French presidency announced on Thursday evening the leader's imminent move to Paris for treatment at the request of Palestinian Authority. He was expected to arrive in Paris on Friday."

"Ailing Arafat to Fly to Paris Hospital" (Lara Sukthian, AP/Yahoo! News, 2004/10/28)
"Palestinian officials prepared to fly the ailing Yasser Arafat to Paris for treatment after blood tests found he had a low count of platelets, which help clotting. Associates said Arafat was too weak to stand Thursday, appeared confused at times and spent most of the day sleeping.
The doctors told reporters there could be a variety of causes for the low count, including blood cancer, and more tests were needed to determine the reason.
The 75-year-old Arafat will be taken Friday morning to Amman, Jordan, where he will be flown by plane to Paris, said Munib al-Masri, an Arafat aide." (See also "The Noonday Train" (wretchard, Belmont Club, 2004/10/28): "Twenty years of European and UN Middle Eastern policy may be lying on the deathbed with Arafat. That they had to fly in doctors to treat him in a makeshift clinic underscores how, after 50 years of UN relief and billions in European investment, there are no Palestinian institutions. Not even decent hospitals for its supreme leader.")

"Video Suggests Explosives Disappeared After U.S. Took Control" (ABC News, 2004/10/28)
Explosives XII: "Experts who have studied the images say the barrels on the tape contain the high explosive HMX, and the universal markings on the barrels are clear that these are highly dangerous explosives.
"I talked to a former inspector who's a colleague of mine, and he confirmed that, indeed, these pictures look just like what he remembers seeing inside those bunkers," said David Albright, president of the Institute for Science and International Security in Washington.
The barrels were found inside sealed bunkers, which American soldiers are seen on the videotape cutting through. Inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency sealed the bunkers where the explosives were kept just before the war began.
"The seal's critical," Albright said. "The fact that there's a photo of what looks like an IAEA seal means that what's behind those doors is HMX. They only sealed bunkers that had HMX in them."
After the bunkers were opened, the 101st was not ordered to secure the facility. A senior officer told ABC News the division would not have had nearly enough soldiers to do so."

"5 Eyewitness News video may be linked to missing explosives in Iraq" (Gerard Baker, KSTP, 2004/10/28)
Explosives XI: "The news crew was based just south of Al Qaqaa, and drove two or three miles north of there with soldiers on April 18, 2003.
During that trip, members of the 101st Airborne Division showed the 5 EYEWITNESS NEWS news crew bunker after bunker of material labelled "explosives." Usually it took just the snap of a bolt cutter to get into the bunkers and see the material identified by the 101st as detonation cords. ...
There were what appeared to be fuses for bombs. They also found bags of material men from the 101st couldn't identify, but box after box was clearly marked "explosive."
In one bunker, there were boxes marked with the name "Al Qaqaa", the munitions plant where tons of explosives allegedly went missing.
Once the doors to the bunkers were opened, they weren't secured. They were left open when the 5 EYEWITNESS NEWS crew and the military went back to their base.
"We weren't quite sure what were looking at, but we saw so much of it and it didn't appear that this was being secured in any way," said photojournalist Joe Caffrey. 'It was several miles away from where military people were staying in their tents.'"

"Group Claims to Kill Kidnapped Iraq Troops" (Rawya Rageh, AP/Yahoo! News, 2004/10/28)
"A grisly video released Thursday showed militants killing 11 Iraqi troops held hostage for days, beheading one, then shooting the others execution-style. Another group released a video of a kidnapped Polish woman, demanding Warsaw pull its troops from Iraq.
The latest kidnapping dramas came as the deadline wound down for a Japanese hostage who was shown in a video aired Tuesday. His captors — said to be the al-Qaida-linked militant group of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi — threatened to behead him in 48 hours unless Japan withdraws its troops — a demand rejected by Tokyo. ...
The unidentified Pole was the latest foreign woman to be abducted in Iraq. Hassan, the head of CARE International in Iraq, was snatched from her car last week and in a video aired Wednesday night was seen pleading for the withdrawal of British troops and the release of Iraq women prisoners.
The video Thursday of the Polish hostage, aired on Al-Jazeera television, showed a middle-aged woman with gray hair and dressed in a polka-dotted blouse sitting in front of two masked gunmen, one of whom was pointing a pistol at her head."

"George Soros Now Doubts a Kerry Victory" (Dave Eberhart, NewsMax.com, 2004/10/29)
Soros says he will go into "some kind of monastery" if Bush is re-elected:
"Billionaire investor, donor to radical causes and political activist George Soros, speaking at the last hurrah event of his whirlwind anti-Bush tour, told a luncheon audience at the National Press Club: “Now that I am at the end of my tour, I am not reassured... The race is too close for comfort.”
“I embarked on the tour because I was worried that the dramatic deterioration in Iraq did not produce the decisive lead for John Kerry I had confidently expected,” Soros conceded.
Asked what he will do if George W. Bush wins another term, Soros lamented, 'I shall go into some kind of monastery. If we endorse him [Bush], my next question will be 'what’s wrong with us?''"

"If Bush goes, I go" (Mark Steyn, The Spectator, from the 2004/10/30 issue)
Steyn says he will resign if Bush is not re-elected:
"Were America to elect John Kerry president, it would be seen around the world as a repudiation not just of Bush and of Iraq but of the broader war. It would be a declaration by the people of American unexceptionalism — that they are a slightly butcher Belgium; they would be signing on to the wisdom of conventional transnationalism. Having failed to read correctly the mood of my own backyard, I could hardly continue to pass myself off as a plausible interpreter of the great geopolitical forces at play. ...
But I don’t think it will come to that. This is the 9/11 election, a choice between pushing on or retreating to the polite fictions of September 10. I bet on reality."

"Fukuyama’s moment: a neocon schism opens" (Danny Postel, openDemocracy, 2004/10/28)
"But the latest salvo against the war and its neocon architects has stung its targets like none other has done. That’s because the critique Francis Fukuyama has advanced is an inside job: not only is its author among the most celebrated members of the neo–conservative intelligentsia, but his dissection of the conceptual problems at the core of the Iraq undertaking appeared on the neocons’ home ground. “The Neoconservative Moment,” his twelve–page intervention into the Iraq debate, was published in the Summer 2004 issue of The National Interest, a flagship conservative foreign–policy journal.
This, in short, is different. Fukuyama is — to use a phrase patented by Margaret Thatcher — one of us. He’s part of the club. Indeed, he’s played as prominent a role as any of his co–thinkers in fostering the life of the neo-conservative mind since helping define the post–cold war moment fifteen years ago with his famous “end of history” thesis.
That’s why the neocon world is abuzz about Fukuyama’s jab, and about his decision not to support Bush for re–election. “I just think that if you’re responsible for this kind of a big policy failure,” he tells openDemocracy, 'you ought to be held accountable for it.'" (See also: "Neoconservatism and Foreign Policy" (Charles Krauthammer, The National Interest, from the Fall 2004 issue), "The Neoconservative Moment" (Francis Fukuyama, The National Interest/AIB, 2004/06/01) and "Democratic Realism: An American Foreign Policy for a Unipolar World" (Charles Krauthammer, AEI, 2004/02/12))

"Us and Them" (Martin Peretz, The New Republic, 2004/10/28)
"The European elites are indifferent to — if not downright disdainful of — the American personnel who risk their lives, bravely and delicately, in places like Hatra, to return the bodies of Saddam's victims so they might be properly mourned and buried. These are the governments whose moral approval Kerry seems to believe America needs. Yes, we have made mistakes in Iraq. Yes, Americans were surprised when large numbers of Iraqis, who had just been freed from decades of ferocious Baathist rule, could not see their opportunity for real freedom and reverted instead to the barbarous habits so ingrained in Iraq's history. I, who am skeptical of those who see much kindness on the Arab political street, did not envision this relentless fealty to the indiscriminate pitilessness that now characterizes the Iraqi opposition. Bush didn't see it, and Kerry didn't either. But Bush is doing something about it. And the uncivilized behavior of some Iraqis is another good reason for us to stay in the country. Otherwise, the barbarians will have won the day, and the future."

"Look at Bush's enemies: they are the reason why he deserves re-election" (Gerard Baker, The Times, 2004/10/28)
"The list of those whose world could be truly rocked on Tuesday is just too long and too rich to be ignored. If you think for a moment about those who would really be upset by a second Bush term, it becomes a lot easier to stomach.
The hordes of the bien-pensant Left in the universities and the media, the sort of liberals who tolerate everything except those who disagree with them. Secularist elites who disdain religiosity except when it comes from Muslim fanatics. Europhile Brits who drip contempt for everything their country has ever done and long for its disappearance into a Greater Europe. Absurd, isolationist conservatives in America and Britain who think the struggles for freedom are always someone else’s fight. Hollywood sybarites and narcissists, self-appointed arbiters of a nation’s morals. ...
Above all, of course, Middle Eastern militants. If your bitterest enemies are the sort of people who hack the heads off unarmed, innocent civilians, then I would say you are probably doing something right.
This may sound petty. It is not. This constellation of individuals, parties and institutions has very little in common other than the fact that it has contrived to be wrong on just about every important issue of my adult lifetime.
And so, perhaps for the wrong reasons, perhaps less because he has been right and more because those who hate him so much have been so wrong, I want this President re-elected.
Go on America. Make Their Day."

"A new frontline for Islamic anger . . . . Thailand" (Andrew Drummond, The Times, 2004/10/28)
"A Muslim separatist group in the south of the country vowed to take revenge on Bangkok with “fire and oil” after Thaksin Shinawatra, the Thai Prime Minister, promised an inquiry but failed to apologise for the excruciatingly painful way in which anti-government demonstrators died at the hands of Thai authorities. ...
Pictures of the victims were shown on the website of al-Jazeera, the Arabic satellite television station, and threatened to inflame Islamic sentiment around the world. Al-Jazeera quoted a spokesman for Thailand’s southern separatist Pattani United Liberation Organisation promising vengeance. 'We pledge before Allah that from now on the infidel will suffer sleepless nights. Their capital will be burned down. The property they have robbed from us will be totally destroyed and their lives will face the consequences of the sins they have committed.'" (See also: "80 Thai Muslims suffocate after arrest at protest" (Sebastien Berger , The Daily Telegraph, 2004/10/27))

"Russia tied to Iraq's missing arms" (Bill Gertz, The Washington Times, 2004/10/28)
Explosives X: "Russian special forces troops moved many of Saddam Hussein's weapons and related goods out of Iraq and into Syria in the weeks before the March 2003 U.S. military operation, The Washington Times has learned.
John A. Shaw, the deputy undersecretary of defense for international technology security, said in an interview that he believes the Russian troops, working with Iraqi intelligence, "almost certainly" removed the high-explosive material that went missing from the Al-Qaqaa facility, south of Baghdad. ...
Mr. Shaw, who was in charge of cataloging the tons of conventional arms provided to Iraq by foreign suppliers, said he recently obtained reliable information on the arms-dispersal program from two European intelligence services that have detailed knowledge of the Russian-Iraqi weapons collaboration.
Most of Saddam's most powerful arms were systematically separated from other arms like mortars, bombs and rockets, and sent to Syria and Lebanon, and possibly to Iran, he said.
The Russian involvement in helping disperse Saddam's weapons, including some 380 tons of RDX and HMX, is still being investigated, Mr. Shaw said."

Wednesday, October 27, 2004

News and commentary:

"Sources: Serious deterioration in Arafat's health" (Khaled Abu Toameh, The Jerusalem Post, 2004/10/27)
"Palestinian sources in Ramallah said Wednesday night that there has been a serious deterioration in Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat's health.
The sources said a number of Palestinian officials were summoned urgently to Arafat's Mukata compound in Ramallah following reports that Arafat has lost consciousness. ...
PA officials who visited Arafat made every effort to play down the severity of his illness, saying he had been diagnosed with a large gallstone and was on his way to full recovery. The officials dismissed as "lies" reports that Arafat was suffering from stomach cancer."

"Snivel Discourse" (James Taranto, Best of the Web Today, 2004/10/27)
Two years ago, Hitchens left the Nation because it was "becoming the voice and the echo chamber of those who truly believe that John Ashcroft is a greater menace than Osama bin Laden." What was the realm of moonbats then is the liberal mainstream now:
"Bill Clinton was campaigning in Philadelphia the other day, and he had this to say: "If one candidate is trying to scare you and the other is trying to get you to think, if one candidate is appealing to your fears and the other one is appealing to your hopes, you better vote for the one who wants you to think and hope."
It's hard to argue with that. So, who is the candidate of hope, and who is the candidate of fear? For an answer, we turn to Slate, the online magazine, which asked each of its staff and contributors to make the case for Kerry (an intern provides the pro-Bush counterpoint). Reading their endorsements, a clear theme emerges:

• Paul Berman: "The prospect of tumbling down the stairs for four more years has got me scared out of my wits. Better Kerry, then."
• Kris Fritz: "If Bush gets re-elected, I might have to change citizenship and move to another country."
• Mickey Kaus: "I think Bush is prosecuting the fight against terrorism in a way that will make us dramatically less safe. . . . Let the world calm down so that fewer people hate us." ...
• Josh Levin: "If Kerry gets elected, the world will be just a bit less dangerous, and I'm all for baby steps away from mutual assured destruction." ...
• Seth Stevenson: "The Bush administration frigging TERRIFIES me. . . . They literally make me fear for the fate of the world."
• Louisa Herron Thomas: "I wish I didn't fear for the safety and health of myself, my country, and my planet. Under Bush, I do." ...

It seems clear, then, that when Clinton urged Americans to vote for the candidate of hope not fear, he was endorsing President Bush." (See also: "At this magazine, it's Kerry by a landslide!" (Slate, 2004/10/26) and "Taking Sides" (Christopher Hitchens, The Nation, 2002/09/26))

"Saddam’s Surrogates" (Michael Isikoffand Mark Hosenball, Newsweek, 2004/10/27)
Explosives IX: "But while the dispute has grabbed the headlines, United Nations officials tell NEWSWEEK that the Al Qaqaa case may only be the tip of the iceberg. As many as 10,000 other conventional-arms dumps dotted around Iraq are believed to have been looted after the U.S. invasion, the officials say. In addition, as many as 30 out of 90 of Saddam's known nuclear research facilities were also stripped down — some to the ground — by looters.
While much of the material taken from the nuclear sites is believed to have been "dual use" manufacturing equipment largely useless to terrorists, the looting of conventional-arms depots means that Zarqawi and the ex-Baathists are not unlikely to run out of weapons any time soon — and that the insurgency may have a long way to go before it runs out of steam."

"Discrepancy Found in Explosives Amounts" (ABC News, 2004/10/27)
Explosives VIII: "Iraqi officials may be overstating the amount of explosives reported to have disappeared from a weapons depot, documents obtained by ABC News show.
The Iraqi interim government has told the United States and international weapons inspectors that 377 tons of conventional explosives are missing from the Al-Qaqaa installation, which was supposed to be under U.S. military control. ...
The information on which the Iraqi Science Ministry based an Oct. 10 memo in which it reported that 377 tons of RDX explosives were missing — presumably stolen due to a lack of security — was based on "declaration" from July 15, 2002. At that time, the Iraqis said there were 141 tons of RDX explosives at the facility.
But the confidential IAEA documents obtained by ABC News show that on Jan. 14, 2003, the agency's inspectors recorded that just over 3 tons of RDX was stored at the facility — a considerable discrepancy from what the Iraqis reported.
The IAEA documents could mean that 138 tons of explosives were removed from the facility long before the start of the United States launched "Operation Iraqi Freedom" in March 2003."

"ABC News holds terror warning tape" (Drudge Report, 2004/10/27)
"In the last week before the election, ABCNEWS is holding a videotaped message from a purported al Qaeda terrorist warning of a new attack on America, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned.
The terrorist claims on tape the next attack will dwarf 9/11. "The streets will run with blood," and "America will mourn in silence" because they will be unable to count the number of the dead. Further claims: America has brought this on itself for electing George Bush who has made war on Islam by destroying the Taliban and making war on Al Qaeda. ...
ABCNEWS obtained the tape from a source in Waziristan, Pakistan over the weekend, sources tells DRUDGE. ...
The terrorist's face is concealed by a headdress, and he speaks in an American accent, making it difficult to identify the individual.
US intelligence officials believe the man on tape may be Adam Gadhan — aka Adam Pearlman, a California native who was highlighted by the FBI in May as an individual most likely to be involved in or have knowledge of the next al Qaeda attacks." (Note: Michelle Malkin has a round-up of background links on Adam Gadahn.)

"Real divide is only in elitist minds" (Victor Davis Hanson, San Fransisco Chronicle, 2004/10/27)
"Yet the true nature of our loud divisiveness is rarely remarked upon. In the last three decades, there has been a steady evolution from liberal to moderately conservative politics among a majority of the voters, whether gauged by the recent spate of Republican presidents or Bill Clinton's calculated shift to the center. Now the House, Senate, presidency and the majority of state governorships and legislatures are in Republican hands. A Bush win will ensure a conservative Supreme Court for a generation.
In contrast, the universities, the arts, the major influential media and Hollywood are predominately liberal — and furious. They bring an enormous amount of capital, talent, education and cultural influence into the political fray — but continue to lose real political power. The talented elite plays the same role to the rest of America as the Europeans do to the United States — venting and seething because the supposedly less sophisticated, but far more powerful, average Joes don't embrace their visions of utopia. ...
It is apparently a terrible thing to be sensitive, glib, smart, educated or chic — and not be listened to, as we have seen from this noisy and often hysterical campaign among elites. That is the real divide in this country, and it is only going to get worse."

"Terror takes a stand" (Ralph Peters, New York Post, 2004/10/27)
"The struggle isn't just about the fate of one country, but about the future of the entire Middle East. If freedom and the rule of law get even a 51 percent victory in Iraq, it's the beginning of the end for the terrorists and the vicious regimes that bred them.
Al Qaeda and its affiliates are rapidly using up the human capital they've accumulated over decades. The casualties in Iraq are overwhelmingly on the terrorist side. Extremist leaders have paid a particularly heavy price. But they won't stop fighting because they can't. The terrorists have to win in Iraq. They have to defeat America.
The astonishing thing is that so many of our fellow Americans don't get it. The terrorists aren't committing their shrinking reserves because the outcome's a trivial matter. They recognize the magnitude of what we're helping the Iraqi people achieve.
This is the big one. The fate of a civilization hangs in the balance. And all we hear from one presidential contender is that it's the "wrong war, at the wrong time."
It is. For the terrorists."

"The sun set, the moon rose..." (James Lileks, The Bleat, 2004/10/27)
Lileks is, uhm, somewhat critical of Sullivan's reasons for endorsing Kerry:
"'But in wartime, a president bears the greater responsibility for keeping the country united. And this president has fundamentally failed in this respect.' ...
Keeping the country united? Good luck. Imagine FDR running a war with a press composed of cynical snickerers who derided the president as a rich old cripple who thought the best way to defeat Tojo was a war in North Africa and preached defeat every day through the hard slog of the Pacific theater. Imagine running a war with an entertainment industry that declined to make a single movie about the conflict — why, imagine a "Casablanca" where Rick and Sam argue about whether America started it all because they didn’t support the League of Nations. Imagine a popular radio drama running through the early 40s about a smart, charismatic, oh-so-intellectual Republican president whose bourbon baritone mocked FDR’s patrician whine, a leader who took no guff from Stalin OR Hitler! Lux Soap brings you, The West Wing of the White House! Imagine Thomas Dewey’s wife in 1944 callling the WW2 a war for oil; imagine former vice presidents insisting that FDR had played on our fears after Pearl Harbor. Imagine all that." (See also: "Risk Management" (Andrew Sullivan, The New Republic, 2004/10/26))

"Iraq says 'impossible' explosives taken before regime fall" (AFP/TurkishPress.com, 2004/10/27)
Explosives VI: "A top Iraqi science official said Wednesday it was impossible that 350 tonnes of high explosives could have been smuggled out of a military site south of Baghdad before the regime fell last year.
He warned that explosives from nearby sites could have also been looted. ...
Mohammed al-Sharaa, who heads the science ministry's site monitoring department and worked with UN weapons inspectors under Saddam, said "it is impossible that these materials could have been taken from this site before the regime's fall."
He said he and other officials had been ordered a month earlier to insure that "not even a shred of paper left the sites."
"The officials that were inside this facility (Al-Qaqaa) beforehand confirm that not even a shred of paper left it before the fall and I spoke to them about it and they even issued certified statements to this effect which the US-led coalition was aware of."
He said officials at Al-Qaqaa, including its general director, whom he refused to name, made contact with US troops before the fall in an effort to get them to provide security for the site."

"Eyewitness to a failure in Iraq" (Peter W. Galbraith, The Boston Globe, 2004/10/27)
Explosives V: "In 2003 I went to tell Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz what I had seen in Baghdad in the days following Saddam Hussein's overthrow. ... On April 16, 2003, a mob attacked and looted the Iraqi equivalent of the Centers for Disease Control, taking live HIV and black fever virus among other potentially lethal materials. US troops were stationed across the street but did not intervene because they didn't know the building was important.
When he found out, the young American lieutenant was devastated. He shook his head and said, "I hope I am not responsible for Armageddon." About the same time, looters entered the warehouses at Iraq's sprawling nuclear facilities at Tuwaitha on Baghdad's outskirts. They took barrels of yellowcake (raw uranium), apparently dumping the uranium and using the barrels to hold water. US troops were at Tuwaitha but did not interfere. ...
The looting that I observed was spontaneous. Quite likely the looters had no idea they were stealing deadly biological agents or radioactive materials or that they were putting themselves in danger. As I pointed out to Wolfowitz, as long as these sites remained unprotected, their deadly materials could end up not with ill-educated slum dwellers but with those who knew exactly what they were doing.
This is apparently what happened."

"Time to Tell Hussein's Story" (Anne Applebaum, The Washington Post, 2004/10/27)
"With bombs exploding in the Green Zone, the fate of Saddam Hussein seems to many a secondary priority. But what if this logic is backward? Leave aside abstract ideals of justice and human rights and consider the practical reasons to get this tribunal underway: What if the insurgency, the bombs and the massacres are happening precisely because there has been no national discussion of the past?
If that sounds peculiar, don't listen to me. Listen instead to Kanan Makiya, the former Iraqi dissident who has now dedicated himself to consolidating, scanning and investigating the archives of the former regime. Makiya thinks that what matters is not whether the Iraqis remember Hussein's reign but how they remember it. Was the Baathist state a totalitarian regime under which the entire nation suffered? Or was it a conspiracy of the Sunni minority against the Shiite majority? If Iraqis come to believe the former, argues Makiya, it might still be possible for them to unify behind a new national government. If Iraqis come to believe the latter, the result could be ethnic civil war."

"What the Terrorists Have in Mind" (Daniel Benjamin and Gabriel Weimann, The New York Times, 2004/10/27)
"Some things, however, are clear: There has been a drastic shift in mood in the last two years. Radicals who were downcast and perplexed in 2002 about the rapid defeat of the Taliban in Afghanistan now feel exuberant about the global situation and, above all, the events in Iraq.
For example, an article in the most recent issue of Al Qaeda's Voice of Jihad - an online magazine that comes out every two weeks - makes the case that the United States has a greater strategic mess on its hands in Afghanistan and Iraq than the Soviet Union did in Afghanistan in the 1980's. ...
Meanwhile, radicals in dozens of countries are increasingly seizing on events in Iraq. Some Web sites have moved beyond describing the action there to depicting it in the most grisly way: images of Western hostages begging for their lives and being beheaded. These sites have become enormously popular throughout the Muslim world, thrilling those who sympathize with the Iraqi insurgents as they see jihad in action. Fired up by such cyber-spectacles, militants everywhere are more and more seeing Iraq as the first glorious stage in a long campaign against the West and the "apostate" rulers of the Muslim world."

"Terrorists hope to defeat Bush through Iraq violence" (Borzou Daragahi, The Washington Times, 2004/10/27)
"Leaders and supporters of the anti-U.S. insurgency say their attacks in recent weeks have a clear objective: The greater the violence, the greater the chances that President Bush will be defeated on Tuesday and the Americans will go home.
"If the U.S. Army suffered numerous humiliating losses, [Democratic presidential nominee Sen. John] Kerry would emerge as the superman of the American people," said Mohammad Amin Bashar, a leader of the Muslim Scholars Association, a hard-line clerical group that vocally supports the resistance.
Resistance leader Abu Jalal boasted that the mounting violence had already hurt Mr. Bush's chances.
'American elections and Iraq are linked tightly together," he told a Fallujah-based Iraqi reporter. 'We've got to work to change the election, and we've done so. With our strikes, we've dragged Bush into the mud.'"

"80 Thai Muslims suffocate after arrest at protest" (Sebastien Berger , The Daily Telegraph, 2004/10/27)
"Almost 80 Muslim demonstrators arrested in southern Thailand suffocated after being crammed into army lorries, the Thai authorities admitted yesterday.
Only six people were previously believed to have died when security forces opened fire to quell rioting on Monday in the Muslim-majority region adjoining the border with Malaysia.
The huge new toll, and the manner of the deaths, are bound to add to tensions and highlight methods to quell a 10-month rebellion that has claimed 400 lives.
In a comment likely to inflame Muslims, Thaksin Shinawatra, the prime minister, blamed the Ramadan fast for weakening those who died. A Muslim leader predicted that "hell will break out".
The men died after protesters in Tak Bai demanded the release of six village defence volunteers, arrested on suspicion of giving their weapons to militants.
Protesters allegedly threatened to storm a police station, and police and soldiers broke up the demonstration, killing six and arresting 1,300. ...
Mr Thaksin said: 'This is typical. It's about bodies made weak from fasting. It is not about someone attacking them.'"

Tuesday, October 26, 2004

News and commentary:

"Country at a Crossroads" (Victor Davis Hanson, National Review/Private Papers, 2004/10/26)
Hanson backs Bush: "By any historical standard, the Bush doctrine is working. In just over three years, the Taliban and Saddam Hussein have been eradicated. Consensual societies are starting to emerge in their place. Syria and Iran are jittery, fearing new global scrutiny over their longstanding, but heretofore excused, terrorist sympathies. Libya and Pakistan have flipped, renouncing much of their past villainy. Saudi Arabia and the other autocracies of the Gulf region feel the new pressure of American idealism. For all their vocal resentment, strategically critical sheikdoms are inching toward political reform and terrorist-hunting. ...
A Kerry presidency would not be a setback for our present winning strategy; it would be an unmitigated disaster. Why such a pessimistic appraisal? ... In sum, a Kerry presidency will lack either the vision or the resolve to finish the war, resulting in a defeat for the United States in Iraq — with calamitous consequences for the brave reformers there, an end to liberal momentum in the Middle East, a reversal in the conduct of Libya, Pakistan, and the Gulf, and assurance to Syria, Lebanon, and Iran that the United States is conducting not war but a criminal investigation akin to efforts against gambling or prostitution. Chamberlain-like, we will return to the complacency of the pre-9/11 days, regarding the telltale signs of the destruction to come as mere "nuisances." All the hysterical invective of John Kerry's surrogates — like George Soros, Michael Moore, Terry McAuliffe, and Teresa Heinz Kerry — cannot change that bleak and depressing fact."

"Risk Management" (Andrew Sullivan, The New Republic, 2004/10/26)
Sullivan backs Kerry: "Bush has had some notable achievements. He was right to cut taxes as the economy headed toward recession; he was right to push for strong federal standards for education; he was right to respond to September 11 by deposing the Taliban; he was right to alert the world to the unknown dangers, in the age of Al Qaeda, of Saddam Hussein's Iraq. He is still right that democratization is the only ultimate security in an age of Jihadist terror. ...
Equally, his presidency can and should be judged on its most fateful decision: to go to war against Iraq without final U.N. approval on the basis of Saddam's stockpiles of weapons and his violation of countless U.N. resolutions. I still believe that his decision was the right one. ...
At the same time, the collapse of the casus belli and the incompetent conduct of the war since the liberation point in an opposite direction. ...
The lack of stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq remains one of the biggest blows to America's international credibility in a generation. The failure to anticipate an insurgency against the coalition remains one of the biggest military miscalculations since Vietnam. And the refusal to send more troops both at the beginning and throughout the occupation remains one of the most pig-headed acts of hubris since the McNamara era." (Also this evaluation (which I agree with completely): "They are both second-tier politicians, thrust into the spotlight at a time when we desperately need those in the first circle of talent and vision.")

"At this magazine, it's Kerry by a landslide!" (Christopher Hitchens, Slate, 2004/10/26)
Hitchens backs Kerry: "I am assuming for now that this is a single-issue election. There is one's subjective vote, one's objective vote, and one's ironic vote. Subjectively, Bush (and Blair) deserve to be re-elected because they called the enemy by its right name and were determined to confront it. Objectively, Bush deserves to be sacked for his flabbergasting failure to prepare for such an essential confrontation. Subjectively, Kerry should be put in the pillory for his inability to hold up on principle under any kind of pressure. Objectively, his election would compel mainstream and liberal Democrats to get real about Iraq." (But see also: "Why I'm (Slightly) for Bush" (Christopher Hitchens, The Nation, 2004/10/21))

"We Don’t Need No Stinkin’ Impartiality!" (Norton Tierra, Stambord, 2004/10/26)
Swedish media and Bush II: "Tuning into public service radio P1’s morning drive time news program I was delighted to hear that libertarian think tank Timbro’s well-coiffed contrarian Johan Norberg was going toe to toe with left-leaning radio personality Cecilia Uddén. ... ...Uddén — who every week is allotted 120 minutes (240 including reruns) of public service airtime to vent her grievances against, among others, George W. Bush.
Uddén had this to say about the role of journalistic impartiality and objectivity at Sweden’s public service media organization: "As far as I’m concerned Swedish media outlets don’t have any obligation whatsoever to be impartial when it comes to covering the U.S. presidential election. Unlike the Swedish election cycle, we have no reason to be impartial and provide equal time for both [the Democratic and Republican parties]. This is our policy for reporting on international affairs, as well. We wouldn’t be impartial when covering elections in Tunisia or [Iraq] or anywhere [other than in Sweden]."
Yikes. Uddén sounds like Rupert Murdoch at a congressional hearing on media bias. Yet, elections aside, Sweden’s public service radio does in fact strive for impartiality when reporting on Islamic terrorist leaders." (Note: Cecilia Uddén is now forced to recant and is banned from reporting on the US election after her celebration of partiality. See also: "Bevakning av valet i USA" (Sveriges Radio, 2004/10/26))

"(Blue and) Yellow Journalism" (Paul O'Mahony, Stambord, 2004/10/26)
Swedish media and Bush I: "Stefan Jonsson at DN Culture flirted with the idea of assassinating George W. Bush long before the Johnny-come-latelys at al-Grauniad. In fact, the Swedish media is top of the class when it comes to unbalanced reporting on the US election. This shouldn’t really knock any Stambord readers off their stools but Johan Norberg, writing in Monday’s Expressen, does some solid forensic work on the wreckage. ...
Journalists recycle every story portraying Bush as brainless and mean — difficult qualities to reconcile in reality. But while these tepid tales get the full media treatment, anything outside of this limited orbit receives no more than fleeting consideration.

This explains why the average Swede has no idea that CBS tried to get at Bush with forged documents; that John Kerry lied about being in Cambodia during the Vietnam War; that no other senator over the last 15 years has received more money from lobbyists than Kerry; that the UN’s “Oil-for-Food” programme was deeply corrupt; that it was France, Russia and China that armed Saddam. And so on.
Don’t these journalists have any professional pride? What they do is anti-intellectual, and it breaks the fundamental rule of journalism: Don’t follow the flock — search in places that others ignore!
Swedish journalists who scoff at the American Fox News Channel should take a look in the mirror. Yes, Fox is painfully propagandist. But everybody knows it is, and it contributes to diversity in a USA where most other TV channels are clearly on Kerry’s side. Swedish media are even more lacking in balance. And they are not a counterweight but a monopoly.
I don’t believe that they consciously distort and propagandize; they are doubtless convinced that they convey the only conceivable truth. Such is sectarianism."

(See also: "Är svenska medier en del av Kerrys kampanj?" (Johan Norberg, Expressen/JohanNorberg.net, 2004/10/25): "The Bush-hatred has gone so far that Stefan Jonsson at DN Culture even discusses if it is right to murder him — 'the power is in the hands of a tyrant — is it then justified to kill the tyrant?'" (19/8))

"Knesset votes to back Gaza plan" (BBC News, 2004/10/26)
"Israeli legislators have voted in favour of the controversial plan to withdraw Jewish settlers from Gaza.
The Knesset voted 67-45 to back Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's proposal, with seven abstentions.
Mr Sharon had to rely on the support of the main opposition party, while four government ministers threatened to resign unless there was a referendum.
Thousands of protesters, including many settlers, demonstrated outside to show their opposition to the policy. ...
Under the proposal, Israel will withdraw all its settlers — and the troops protecting them — but it will maintain control of Gaza's borders, coastline and airspace."

"Allawi Accuses Foreign Troops Of Negligence In Massacre" (Jackie Spinner, The Washington Post, 2004/10/26)
"Iraq's interim prime minister, Ayad Allawi, on Tuesday accused foreign troops in the country of "gross negligence" in the massacre of 49 Iraqi National Guard recruits over the weekend, an unusually critical remark by the U.S.-backed leader.
Allawi, in a weekly address to the Iraqi National Assembly, said his government had launched an investigation into the deaths of the U.S.-trained recruits, most of whom were lined up and executed shortly after sunset Saturday near the National Guard's main training base in Kirkush, about 60 miles northeast of the capital.
"A terrible crime was committed in which a large number of the ING were martyred," Allawi said. 'We think this shows, in addition to gross negligence on the side of some of the multinational forces, it shows the kind of insistence to hurt Iraq and its people.'"

"What's so funny about decapitation?" (Mark Steyn, The Daily Telegraph, 2004/10/26)
Steyn on Brooker's assassination "joke" ["John Wilkes Booth, Lee Harvey Oswald, John Hinckley Jr - where are you now that we need you?"]:
"Well, wherever they are, they're probably saying: "Why bring us into it? When ol' Lee Harvey decided it was time for JFK to get assassinated, he didn't sit around whining, 'John Wilkes Booth, where are you now that I need you?' Get off your butt and do it yourself, you big Euro-pussy."
But, with the armchair insurgents of the Euro-Left, it's always got to be someone else who