Archived news and commentary: August 8 - 14, 2005

2005/08/08 - 2005/08/14
2005/08/01 - 2005/08/07
2005/07/25 - 2005/07/31
2005/07/18 - 2005/07/24
2005/07/11 - 2005/07/17
2005/07/04 - 2005/07/10

› From 2001/09/11 -

Sunday, August 14, 2005

News and commentary:

"Inside Iran's Secret War for Iraq" (Michael Ware, TIME, 2005/08/14)
Iran IV: "The U.S. Military's new nemesis in Iraq is named Abu Mustafa al-Sheibani, and he is not a Baathist or a member of al-Qaeda. He is working for Iran. According to a U.S. military-intelligence document obtained by TIME, al-Sheibani heads a network of insurgents created by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps with the express purpose of committing violence against U.S. and coalition forces in Iraq. Over the past eight months, his group has introduced a new breed of roadside bomb more lethal than any seen before; based on a design from the Iranian-backed Lebanese militia Hizballah, the weapon employs "shaped" explosive charges that can punch through a battle tank's armor like a fist through the wall. According to the document, the U.S. believes al-Sheibani's team consists of 280 members, divided into 17 bombmaking teams and death squads. The U.S. believes they train in Lebanon, in Baghdad's predominantly Shi'ite Sadr City district and "in another country" and have detonated at least 37 bombs against U.S. forces this year in Baghdad alone."

"Iran's new defense minister tied to U.S. Marine bombing" (WorldNetDaily, 2005/08/14)
Iran III: "The new minister of defense of Iran has direct ties to the suicide bombing in Beirut that killed 241 Marines in 1983.
Mostafa Mohammad-Najjar, a veteran commander of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, was named today to the top military post by the new government.
On Oct. 23, 1983, he was a senior commander in the Revolutionary Guards in charge of the expeditionary force in Lebanon. At 6:22 a.m. that morning, a suicide bomber drove a large water delivery truck to the Beirut International Airport where the U.S. Marine barracks were located. ... The huge explosion crumbled the four-story building, crushing the soldiers to death while they were sleeping. ...
The U.S. court order described the blast as "the largest non-nuclear explosion that had ever been detonated on the face of the Earth." It was equal in force to between 15,000 and 21,000 pounds of TNT.
Eighteen of the 21 new members of the new Iranian cabinet have backgrounds in the Revolutionary Guards or secret police."

"Man catalogues North Korea's over-the-top rhetoric" (Paul Eckert, Reuters/Yahoo! News, 2005/08/14)
"Few can denounce the "imperialist ogre" or "kingpin of evil" as well as the writers at North Korea's official news agency, and a California graphic artist is now cataloguing their rhetorical masterpieces on a Web site.
Pyongyang's official Korean Central News Agency, or KCNA, is the only regular source of the views of the secretive government of Kim Jong-il available to diplomats, journalists and scholars.
But there was no way for them to search the archives of KCNA until Geoff Davis, fighting boredom during a rainy San Francisco spring, decided to hone his Web design skills on a topic he had followed in news reports on the North Korean nuclear crisis.
"Their propaganda is often unintentionally hilarious and I couldn't find an existing searchable database of the KCNA on the Web. Thus, NK News was born," Davis told Reuters.
Launched in May, www.nk-news.net boasts of having nearly every KCNA article since December 1996 -- "over 50 megabytes of hard-core Stalinist propaganda ... each article written in the unique and indelible style of the KCNA."
Readers can get a taste of that KCNA style from recommended key word searches, such as "burning hatred," which turns up 18 articles. The targets of that hot wrath include Japan, Yankees, "U.S. imperialist ogres" and "class enemies."
"Human scum" yields 25 KCNA reports applying that epithet to U.S. President George W. Bush, U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and diplomat John Bolton. Rumsfeld also keeps company with Japanese officials in the "political dwarf" category. ...
"Inveterate" is another popular KCNA word and a search for it returns an entry describing "U.S. imperialists" as 'a pack of beasts in human skin and the inveterate enemy with whom the Korean nation cannot live under the same sky.'" (See also: NK News - Database of North Korean Propaganda.)

"Iran's revolution is in its infancy - but it may have just found its Stalin" (Niall Ferguson, The Sunday Telegraph, 2005/08/14)
Iran II: "We in the English-speaking world never give up hoping that the revolutionaries will suddenly see the advantages of peace, the rule of law and representative government. That may be because we think our own revolutions - the English revolution of the 1640s and the American revolution of the 1770s - followed that pattern.
Yet there was no more bellicose British government than Cromwell's. And the United States was scarcely a peaceful power as it expanded from sea to shining sea in the century after independence.
So it was pure pie in the sky to imagine that the Islamic Republic of Iran, founded in 1979, was just about to morph into a touchy-feely democracy. Yet people did. Only last year I had dinner in Washington with the son of the deposed shah. His country, he assured the assembled company, would soon make the transition to democracy. People were fed up with the ayatollahs and the mullahs.
The same kind of argument used to be made by neo-conservatives such as Richard Perle, the former chairman of the US Defence Policy Board, and Michael Ledeen of the American Enterprise Institute.
"In Iran," President Bush himself declared in a speech back in November 2003, "the demand for democracy is strong and broad." Dream on. Far from being on the brink of democracy, Iran is now on the brink of becoming the single biggest threat to democracy in the world. ...
To repeat: the Iranian revolution is still at an early stage. It has not yet produced its Bonaparte, its Stalin, its Mao. Or has it? A full-scale war with the "Great Satan" may be all Mr Ahmadinejad needs to don that bloody mantle."

"Iran tips the nuclear balance" (Ian Mather, Scotland on Sunday, 2005/08/14)
Iran I: "Within days of being installed as Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the conservative son of a blacksmith, has won the first round in the biggest confrontation with the West since the seizure of the US embassy a quarter of a century ago.
He has called the bluff of the UN's nuclear watchdog and restarted Iran's nuclear fuel enrichment programme, receiving in return a mere slap on the wrist.
Ahmadinejad is hailed by the poor as an Iranian Robin Hood because of the promises to distribute Iran's oil wealth that won him a landslide victory. But he combines this with appeals to the traditional Iranian Shi'ite obsession with martyrdom, which is deeply embedded in the Iranian psyche.
In a TV speech to the nation he asked: "Is there art that is more beautiful, more divine and more eternal than the art of martyrdom? A nation with martyrdom knows no captivity." ...
Ahmadinejad's spiritual adviser, Ayatollah Mohammad Yazdi, advises Iranians on how to volunteer for an Iranian regime-sponsored martyrdom squad, including an Iranian women's group that is dedicated to carrying out martyrdom operations against US, British and Israeli forces, the London Arabic-language daily Al-Sharq Al-Awsat reports.
An announcement in his name reads: "Acts of martyrdom are the great pinnacle of the Iranian people and the height of its courage." ...
The sudden arrival on the scene of an Iranian leader who combines a driving ambition to turn Iran into a nuclear state with extolling the virtues of suicide bombing has alarmed Western governments."

"A Nation in Blood and Ink" (Dexter Filkins, The New York Times, 2005/08/14)
Iraq III: "In 28 months of war and occupation here, Iraq has always contained two parallel worlds: the world of the Green Zone and the constitution and the rule of law; and the anarchical, unpredictable world outside.
Never have the two worlds seemed so far apart.
From the beginning, the hope here has been that the Iraq outside the Green Zone would grow to resemble the safe and tidy world inside it; that the success of democracy would begin to drain away the anger that pushes the insurgency forward. This may have been what Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was referring to when, in an interview published in Time magazine this month, she said that the insurgency was "losing steam" and that "rather quiet political progress" was transforming the country.
But in this third summer of war, the American project in Iraq has never seemed so wilted and sapped of life. It's not just the guerrillas, who are churning away at their relentless pace, attacking American forces about 65 times a day. It is most everything else, too.
Baghdad seems a city transported from the Middle Ages: a scattering of high-walled fortresses, each protected by a group of armed men. The area between the forts is a lawless no man's land, menaced by bandits and brigands."

"U.S. Lowers Sights On What Can Be Achieved in Iraq" (Robin Wright and Ellen Knickmeyer, The Washington Post, 2005/08/14)
Iraq II: "The Bush administration is significantly lowering expectations of what can be achieved in Iraq, recognizing that the United States will have to settle for far less progress than originally envisioned during the transition due to end in four months, according to U.S. officials in Washington and Baghdad.
The United States no longer expects to see a model new democracy, a self-supporting oil industry or a society in which the majority of people are free from serious security or economic challenges, U.S. officials say.
"What we expected to achieve was never realistic given the timetable or what unfolded on the ground," said a senior official involved in policy since the 2003 invasion. "We are in a process of absorbing the factors of the situation we're in and shedding the unreality that dominated at the beginning." ...
"We set out to establish a democracy, but we're slowly realizing we will have some form of Islamic republic," said another U.S. official familiar with policymaking from the beginning, who like some others interviewed would speak candidly only on the condition of anonymity. 'That process is being repeated all over.'"

"Iraqi Sunnis Battle To Defend Shiites" (Ellen Knickmeyer and Jonathan Finer, The Washington Post, 2005/08/14)
Iraq I: "Rising up against insurgent leader Abu Musab Zarqawi, Iraqi Sunni Muslims in Ramadi fought with grenade launchers and automatic weapons Saturday to defend their Shiite neighbors against a bid to drive them from the western city, Sunni leaders and Shiite residents said. The fighting came as the U.S. military announced the deaths of six American soldiers.
Dozens of Sunni members of the Dulaimi tribe established cordons around Shiite homes, and Sunni men battled followers of Zarqawi, a Jordanian, for an hour Saturday morning. The clashes killed five of Zarqawi's guerrillas and two tribal fighters, residents and hospital workers said. Zarqawi loyalists pulled out of two contested neighborhoods in pickup trucks stripped of license plates, witnesses said.
The leaders of four of Iraq's Sunni tribes had rallied their fighters in response to warnings posted in mosques by followers of Zarqawi. The postings ordered Ramadi's roughly 3,000 Shiites to leave the city of more than 200,000 in the area called the Sunni Triangle. The order to leave within 48 hours came in retaliation for alleged expulsions by Shiite militias of Sunnis living in predominantly Shiite southern Iraq.
"We have had enough of his nonsense," said Sheik Ahmad Khanjar, leader of the Albu Ali clan, referring to Zarqawi. 'We don't accept that a non-Iraqi should try to enforce his control over Iraqis, regardless of their sect -- whether Sunnis, Shiites, Arabs or Kurds.'"

"Muslim leaders in feud with the BBC" (Martin Bright, The Observer, 2005/08/14)
The Muslim Council of Britain II: "Britain's most powerful Islamic organisation was accused last night of failing mainstream Muslim Britain after it complained of a 'pro-Israel agenda' at the BBC in a Panorama programme on the faith to be aired next week. ...
The BBC programme is thought to be highly critical of some MCB affiliates for their links to extremist Islamic ideology. Panorama, reporter John Ware is thought to challenge Sacranie over his boycott of this year's Holocaust Memorial Day, his attendance at a memorial service for Hamas leader Sheikh Yassin and his equivocal stance on Palestinian suicide bombers.
The letter from Bunglawala, sent last Thursday, repeatedly refers to the 'pro-Israel lobby' at the BBC, which is said to be behind the programme, although it does not specify who it means. Bunglawala says: 'It appears the Panorama team is more interested in furthering a pro-Israeli agenda than assessing the work of Muslim organisations in the UK.
He regrets that 'the Panorama team seem intent on creating mistrust by serving the interests of the pro-Israeli lobby and undermining community relations'.
The letter goes on: 'The BBC should not allow itself to be used by the highly placed supporters of Israel in the British media to make capital out of the 7 July atrocities in London.'
A senior BBC source said: 'It's plain wrong - insulting - to suggest we have an agenda and frankly preposterous.'"

"Radical links of UK's 'moderate' Muslim group" (Martin Bright, The Observer, 2005/08/14)
The Muslim Council of Britain I: "The Muslim Council of Britain is officially the moderate face of Islam. Its pronouncements condemning the London bombings have been welcomed by the government as a model response for mainstream Muslims. The MCB's secretary general, Iqbal Sacranie, has recently been knighted and senior figures within the organisation have the ear of ministers.
But an Observer investigation can reveal that, far from being moderate, the Muslim Council of Britain has its origins in the extreme orthodox politics in Pakistan. And as its influence increases through Whitehall, many within the Muslim community are growing concerned that this self-appointed organisation is crowding out other, genuinely moderate, voices of Muslim Britain.
Far from representing the more progressive or spiritual traditions within Islam, the leadership of the Muslim Council of Britain and some of its affiliates sympathise with and have links to conservative Islamist movements in the Muslim world and in particular Pakistan's Jamaat-i-Islami, a radical party committed to the establishment of an Islamic state in Pakistan ruled by sharia law.
One of the MCB's affiliate organisations, Leicester's Islamic Foundation, was founded by Khurshid Ahmad, a senior figure in Jamaat-i-Islami.
Another is Birmingham-based Jamiat Ahl-e-Hadith, an extremist sect whose website says: 'The disbelievers are misguided and their ways based on sick or deviant views concerning their societies, their universe and their very existence.' It urges its adherents not to wear Western hats, walk dogs, watch sport or soap operas and forbids 'mingling and shaking hands between men and women.'"

"Saudi exile runs urban warfare website in UK" (Dipesh Gadher and Hala Jaber, The Sunday Times, 2005/08/14)
"A prominent London-based Saudi dissident, Muhammed al-Massari, is running a website that features a guide to urban warfare for potential terrorists.
In a series of video and audio clips, the Beginner’s Guide for Mujahed gives detailed advice on physical training, the surveillance of enemy targets and operational tactics.
It features footage of an Arab instructor who recommends would-be holy warriors to invest in a knife for self-defence, saying: “Of course, this knife is mainly for stabbing and is not suitable or good for beheadings.”
Referring to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, Al-Qaeda’s leader in Iraq whose followers murdered the British hostage Ken Bigley by slitting his throat, the instructor adds: “As far as beheadings are concerned, we ask our brothers to seek Abu Musab’s advice on this issue as he has more experience in this.” ...
Massari’s website, www.tajdeed.net, also hosts a Hollywood-style film presenting a gory “top 10” of attacks by insurgents on westerners in Iraq and provides helpful tips for fighters trying to gain entry to the country."

"US warns of new attacks on London" (David Leppard, The Sunday Times, 2005/08/14)
"American intelligence chiefs have warned that Al-Qaeda terrorists are plotting to drive hijacked fuel tankers into petrol stations in an effort to cause mass casualties in London and US cities in the next few weeks.
The leaked warning, contained in a bulletin issued by the US Department for Homeland Security last week, says the attacks aim to create catastrophic damage at about the time of the fourth anniversary of the September 11 attacks on New York and Washington.
The warning came as it emerged that the British Department for Transport had for the first time issued guidelines ordering a tightening of security around the UK road tanker fleet.
The US warning has been circulated among law enforcement agencies and fuel transport agencies. Although a preamble states that “no other intelligence exists to corroborate this specific threat”, the intelligence report is highly specific.
It says: 'Al-Qaeda leaders plan to employ various types of fuel trucks as vehicle-borne improvised explosive devices (VBIED) in an effort to cause mass casualties in the US (and London), prior to September 19. Attacks are planned specifically for New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles. It is unclear whether the attacks will occur simultaneously or be spread over a period of time. The stated goal is the collapse of the US economy.'"

Note: Joe Katzman is leaving Winds of Change as he is moving from Canada to America. I just want to wish him good luck in his new endevours and thank him for all his support during these years. It was thanks to him that Watch was saved back in 2003 as he generously offered me a new home under the wings of Winds of Change.NET.
See also: "Good News Saturdays: The Last Waltz" (Joe Katzman, Winds of Change, 2005/08/13))

Added in archive:
"The struggle for Islam's soul" (Ziauddin Sardar, New Statesman, 2005/07/18)

Saturday, August 13, 2005

News and commentary:

"Ex-Iranian leader warns IAEA resolution will 'cost' West" (Hiedeh Farmani, Middle East Times, 2005/08/13)
Iran II: "TEHRAN -- Top Iranian figure Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani said Iran's decision to resume sensitive nuclear work was "irreversible" and warned that Western opposition to Iran's program will "cost them dearly".
During a Friday sermon, the prominent ayatollah said: "You could drag things on but Iran's decision is irreversible," drawing chants of "Death to America" and "Death to Israel" from the faithful.
Rafsanjani's remarks came a day after the International Atomic Energy Agency's 35-nation board of governors adopted a resolution expressing "serious concern" at Tehran's decision to resume uranium conversion activities.
The influential former president warned worshippers not to "take lightly what happened at the IAEA. It is very important and will create new conditions for our country and the region. It will turn a new leaf in the history of our revolution.
"It will cost them dearly," he vowed, signaling the possibility of a hardened stance by a country that plays an important role in Iraq, Afghanistan and the Gulf as well as being a major oil producer."

"Germany attacks US on Iran threat" (BBC News, 2005/08/13)
Iran I: "German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder has warned the US to back away from the possibility of military action against Iran over its nuclear programme.
His comments come a day after President Bush reiterated that force remained an option but only as a last resort.
Iran has resumed what it says is a civilian nuclear research programme but which the West fears could be used to develop nuclear arms.
Germany, France and the UK have led efforts to end the crisis peacefully.
Mr Schroeder's rejection of force came at the official launch of his party's election campaign.
The BBC's Ray Furlong - reporting from Hanover - says there was an echo of his last election campaign three years ago, when his steadfast opposition to the use of force against Iraq helped get him re-elected.
Mr Schroeder directly challenged Mr Bush's comment that "all options are on the table" over the Iran crisis.
"Let's take the military option off the table. We have seen it doesn't work," Mr Schroeder told Social Democrats at the rally in Hanover, to rapturous applause from the crowd." (See also: "Bush refuses to rule out force against Iran" (AFP/Yahoo! News, 2005/08/12))

"Iraq president says charter may be ready Sunday" (Michael Georgy, Reuters, 2005/08/13)
The Iraqi Constitution III: "A draft of Iraq's new constitution should be ready by Sunday, a day ahead of schedule, President Jalal Talabani said on Saturday, but some involved with drafting the document doubted the deadline could be met.
"If God is willing, tomorrow it will be ready," Talabani told a news conference in Baghdad, although he said two major issues remained under negotiation.
"There are no obstacles but discussions on federalism in the south and the relation between religion and state."
Talabani, a former Kurdish guerrilla who fought Saddam Hussein, has gathered Iraqi leaders from across sectarian and ethnic divides to try and hammer out an agreement on the charter before a self-imposed August 15 deadline.
Some drafters have suggested postponing discussion of the most contentious issues in order to make the deadline to present it to parliament, but Talabani said that would not happen."

"Al Qaeda threatens to kill pro-charter Iraq imams: website" (AFP/Khaleej Times, 2005/08/13)
The Iraqi Constitution II: "The group of Al Qaeda frontman in Iraq Abu Musab Al Zarqawi has threatened to kill any Muslim imam who speaks out in favour of Iraq’s constitution, according to an Internet statement published on Saturday.
“O imams of the mosques and preachers, know that you are assuming the responsibility of every word that you say” on the constitution, said the Organisation of Al Qaeda in the Land of Two Rivers in a statement posted on an Islamist website.
“We proclaim that we are going to apply the punishment (according to Islamic law) on every apostate who calls for the constitution to be drawn up,” said the statement, whose authenticity could not be verified.
“Do you know that this plot is aimed at saving America from the impasse that it is stuck in? So what side are you on? That of Bush or that of the soldiers of Allah or the Koran?”
The statement comes with just two days to go before the deadline for the constitution to be presented to parliament, with negotiators claiming success in solving four contentious issues but federalism remains a dispute.
On Thursday the group issued a statement saying it would kill anyone taking part in drafting the constitution or in the ensuing referendum to approve the document." (See also: "Qaeda vows to kill Iraqis drafting constitution" (Reuters/Daily News, 2005/08/12))

"Iraq's political compact" (Paul R. Williams and William Spencer, The Boston Globe, 2005/08/13)
The Iraqi Constitution I: "Most of the news and commentary addressing the leaked drafts of the Iraqi constitution focus criticism on the role of religion, Iraq's designation as an Arab nation, the protection of women's rights, and Kurdish autonomy. While these are key issues that must be resolved, the constitution under development is first and foremost a political compact. ...
The purpose of the political compact is to weld all the factions to the idea of a united Iraq committed to the principles of pluralism and democracy. If successful, this compact hopefully will split and weaken the insurgency, allow Iraq to fend off interference from neighboring states, provide an opportunity to resurrect and restructure the oil industry, and provide a blueprint for the operation of governing structures. ...
A number of the groups have articulated extreme positions. This is to be expected in a constitutional negotiation, in order to test their bargaining positions and clarify opposing views. The agreement of the drafting committee to operate on the principle of consensus will sufficiently moderate these positions.
What is important, and impressive, is that the committee has not reached for political expedient, yet practically devastating mechanisms such as rotating presidencies, set-aside seats in parliament and the judiciary for specific ethnic groups, sectarian distribution of executive offices, or direct international participation in the governance of the state.
August 15, the day the Iraqi National Assembly will adopt the constitution, will not be the finish line. It will not be the day the United States and its coalition partners can begin political and military disengagement. Rather, it will be the day the race for political sustainability begins."

"Able Danger disabled" (Jack Kelly, Toldeo Blade, 2005/08/13)
Able Danger II: "Able Danger was a military intelligence unit set up by Special Operations Command in 1999. A year before the 9/11 attacks, Able Danger identified hijack leader Mohammed Atta and the other members of his cell. But Clinton administration officials stopped them - three times - from sharing this information with the FBI.
The problem was the order Clinton Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick made forbidding intelligence operatives from sharing information with criminal investigators.
"They were stopped because the lawyers at that time in 2000 told them Mohammed Atta had a green card" - he didn't - "and they could not go after someone with a green card," said Rep. Curt Weldon, the Pennsylvania Republican who brought the existence of Able Danger to light.
The military spooks knew only that Atta and his confederates had links to al-Qaeda. They hadn't unearthed their mission. But if the FBI had kept tabs on them (a big if, given the nature of the FBI at the time), 9/11 almost certainly could have been prevented.
What may be a bigger scandal is that the staff of the 9/11 Commission knew of Able Danger and what it had found, but made no mention of it in its report. This is as if the commission that investigated the attack on Pearl Harbor had written its final report without mentioning the Japanese." (See also: "Four in 9/11 Plot Are Called Tied to Qaeda in '00" (Douglas Jehl, The New York Times, 2005/08/09))

"New facts back tale of brush with Atta" (David Nason, The Australian, 2005/08/13)
Able Danger I: "New intelligence reports suggesting that 9/11 ringleader Mohammed Atta arrived in the US in late 1999 or early 2000 - six months earlier than previously thought - are likely to spark a reassessment of public servant Johnelle Bryant's incredible story of a face-to-face meeting with the terrorist.
In an extraordinary 2002 interview later branded a hoax by some media -- including the ABC's Media Watch -- Ms Bryant claimed to have met Atta in late April or early May of 2000 when she worked as a loan officer with the US Department of Agriculture's farm services agency in Florida.
Ms Bryant, who was medically retired from the department last year, said Atta had tried to apply for a $US650,000 US government loan to buy a six-seat, twin-engine aircraft that he wanted to convert to a crop duster.
In her interview with the US's ABC network, Ms Bryant told how Atta became angry when told he was ineligible for the loan and how he became fixated with an aerial photo of Washington DC hanging on her office wall.
When told the picture was not for sale, Ms Bryant said Atta became "very bitter".
"I believe he said: 'How would America like it if another country destroyed that city and some of the monuments in it'." ...
Her claims were ignored in last year's 9/11 commission report on the events leading up to the terrorist attacks. The commission accepted the advice of US immigration authorities that Atta did not arrive until June 2000.
But revelations that a military intelligence unit known as Able Danger believed Atta had actually arrived in the US in late 1999, or at the latest very early in 2000, have lent new credibility to Ms Bryant's claims, while at the same time raising questions about the exchange of intelligence between US security agencies." (Hat tip: Tim Blair. See also: "Face to Face With a Terrorist" (Brian Ross, ABC News, 2002/06/06) and "Four in 9/11 Plot Are Called Tied to Qaeda in '00" (Douglas Jehl, The New York Times, 2005/08/09))

"'Preacher of hate' is banned from Britain" (Richard Ford and Daniel McGrory, The Times, 2005/08/13)
"The extremist cleric Omar Bakri Mohammed was banned from Britain yesterday amid Home Office fears that he was about to return to test the Government’s tough policy towards the “preachers of hate”.
Charles Clarke excluded Sheikh Bakri Mohammed from returning from Lebanon and stripped him of his leave to stay in Britain hours after ordering the deportation of ten other Islamic extremists, including Abu Qatada, another cleric.
Sheikh Bakri Mohammed could still try to confront the ban and fly to London if he fears that Syria intends to extradite him while he is in Beirut visiting his mother.
The threat of an extended stay in a Damascus prison answering terror allegations came as he was freed yesterday after 24 hours’ detention in Lebanon. Ministers were alarmed that the cleric might fly back to Britain before next weekend when new rules will make it easier for the Government to deport extremists.
Mr Clarke’s decision to move against Sheikh Bakri Mohammed is seen as a U-turn, coming only four days after John Prescott, the Deputy Prime Minister, said that the Government was powerless to stop the cleric from coming back."

Added in archive:
"In a Ruined Country: How Yasir Arafat destroyed Palestine" (David Samuels, The Atlantic, from the September 2005 issue)

Friday, August 12, 2005

News and commentary:

"Cindy Sheehan sits on the side of the road..."
(LM Otero, AP, 2005/08/12)
"Cindy Sheehan sits on the side of the road near Crawford, Texas, Friday, Aug. 12, 2005. Sheehan is seeking a meeting with President Bush to discuss the death of her son Casey Sheehan that was killed in Iraq"

"The Sad Story of Cindy Sheehan" (James Taranto, Best of the Web Today, 2005/08/12)
"Cindy Sheehan suffered a grievous loss for a noble cause: Her 24-year-old son, Army Spc. Casey Sheehan, died in combat in Iraq. Because of this, it seems churlish to criticize her. But enough is enough. ...
What are we to make of Mrs. Sheehan's demand for a second meeting with President Bush? She claims she wants an explanation of why her son died, but she acknowledges that her mind is already made up. This is an excerpt of a speech she gave Monday, as transcribed on the Web site of an outfit called Veterans for Peace, describing how she conceived of her protest (quoting verbatim):

I'm gonna tell them, "You get that evil maniac [the president] out here, cuz a Gold Star Mother, somebody who's blood is on his hands, has some questions for him." ...
And I'm gonna say, "And you tell me, what the noble cause is that my son died for." And if he even starts to say freedom and democracy' I'm gonna say, bullshit.
You tell me the truth. You tell me that my son died for oil. You tell me that my son died to make your friends rich. You tell me my son died to spread the cancer of Pax Americana, imperialism in the Middle East. You tell me that, you don't tell me my son died for freedom and democracy.
Cuz, we're not freer. You're taking away our freedoms. The Iraqi people aren't freer, they're much worse off than before you meddled in their country.
You get America out of Iraq, you get Israel out of Palestine
(massive round of applause)
And if you think I won't say bullshit to the President, I say move on, cuz I'll say what's on my mind.

According to New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd, "the moral authority of parents who bury children killed in Iraq is absolute." So we now have it on absolute moral authority that America is a cancer, that Iraqis were better off under Saddam Hussein, and that Israel must be destroyed?" (See also: "Cindy Sheehan Address Veterans For Peace Convention, August 8, 2005" (Veterans For Peace, 2005/08/08))

"Palestinians Cheer Upcoming Gaza Pullout" (AP/Yahoo! News, 2005/08/12)
"Tens of thousands of Palestinians crowded Gaza City's small harbor Friday to celebrate the impending Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, waving flags and hearing promises from their leader that the West Bank and Jerusalem will be next.
The government-organized rally under the theme "Setting Sail for Freedom" was Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas' most high-profile attempt to seek credit for the pullout, and defuse claims by Hamas that its attacks had driven Israel out.
Abbas, surrounded by security guards, told the crowd: "From here, from this place, our nation and our masses are walking toward the establishment of an independent Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital." ...
Hamas, meanwhile, invited TV cameramen for the first time to film about 1,000 militants training ahead of the pullout. The release of the pictures of militants rappelling from high-rise walls and jumping through hoops of fire was seen as a challenge to the Palestinian Authority.
But it was unclear whether the training — which included the infiltration and attack of a Jewish settlement — meant the group would fire on withdrawing Israeli troops and settlers, despite demands by the Palestinian leadership that they allow Israel to evacuate the area quietly."

"Bush refuses to rule out force against Iran" (AFP/Yahoo! News, 2005/08/12)
"US President George W. Bush refused to rule out the use of force against Iran over the Islamic Republic's resumption of nuclear activities, in an interview aired on Israeli television.
When asked if the use of force was an alternative to faltering diplomatic efforts, Bush said: "All options are on the table."
"The use of force is the last option for any president. You know we have used force in the recent past to secure our country," he said in a clear reference to Iraq, which the United States invaded in March 2003.
"I have been willing to do so as a last resort in order to secure the country and provide the opportunity for people to live in free societies," he added. ...
The International Atomic Energy Agency on Thursday in Vienna passed a EU resolution expressing "serious concern" at Iran's resumption of uranium conversion activities, and set a September 3 date for an IAEA report on Iran's compliance.
"In all these instances we want diplomacy to work and so we are working feverishly on the diplomatic route and, you know, we will see if we are successful or not. As you know I'm skeptical," he said."

"Qaeda vows to kill Iraqis drafting constitution" (Reuters/Daily News, 2005/08/12)
"Iraq’s al Qaeda group vowed to kill anyone involved in drafting a constitution which Washington hopes can help quell a Sunni Muslim insurgency.
“The judicial court of the Organisation of al Qaeda in Iraq has ruled that it is a duty to uphold God’s law and kill those who have declared themselves God’s partners in drafting this void constitution,” the group said in an Internet statement.
“We have decided to combat all those who write and who support this constitution ... as they are apostates.”
The statement was posted on a Web site often used by al Qaeda. The group led by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi said in an earlier statement that Islamic sharia law should be the only legislation to govern Iraq."

"Boy ready for martyrdom" (Matthew B. Stannard, San Fransisco Chronicle, 2005/08/12)
"Fifteen-year-old Abdel Kareem Mohammed Abu Habel sits in an Israeli prison after he tried and failed to martyr himself last year. Would he do it again? Without a doubt, he says.
Abdel Kareem Mohammed Abu Habel agrees with Israeli critics who say that next week's disengagement from the Gaza Strip and parts of the West Bank will do nothing to stop Palestinian terrorist attacks against Israel.
Sitting in his jail cell in the Sharon Detention Center in central Israel, he also said he would never accept peace with the Jewish state, even if Israel eventually pulled back to its pre-1967 borders, behind the so-called Green Line. He doesn't even know what the Green Line is.
The only peace he wants "is to get back all our lands," meaning the entire state of Israel.
"We don't want the Jews on this world," he said.
Abdel is 15. He has a baby face that sharply contrasts with the cigarette sticking out of his broken teeth. He sits in a cell, approximately 10 feet by 10 feet, the light from a bright blue sky filtering through an iron grate ceiling in the courtyard outside.
He is in prison for strapping a bomb to his belly in the spring of 2004 and trying to kill Israelis by killing himself.
If he were released today, he said, it would not be long before he tried again.
"One month," he estimated. 'I would want to see my family first.'"

"What al-Qaida Really Wants" (Yassin Musharbash, Der Spiegel, 2005/08/12)
"If there is anyone who might possibly have an inkling as to what al-Qaida are up to, it is the Jordanian journalist Fouad Hussein. He has not only spent time in prison with al-Zarqawi, but has also managed make contact with many of the network's leaders. Based on correspondence with these sources, he has now brought out a book ["al-Zarqawi - al-Qaida's Second Generation"] detailing the organization's master plan.":
"In the introduction, the Jordanian journalist writes, "I interviewed a whole range of al-Qaida members with different ideologies to get an idea of how the war between the terrorists and Washington would develop in the future." What he then describes between pages 202 and 213 is a scenario, proof both of the terrorists' blindness as well as their brutal single-mindedness.
In seven phases the terror network hopes to establish an Islamic caliphate which the West will then be too weak to fight.

• The First Phase Known as "the awakening" -- this has already been carried out and was supposed to have lasted from 2000 to 2003, or more precisely from the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 in New York and Washington to the fall of Baghdad in 2003. The aim of the attacks of 9/11 was to provoke the US into declaring war on the Islamic world and thereby "awakening" Muslims. "The first phase was judged by the strategists and masterminds behind al-Qaida as very successful," writes Hussein.

• The Second Phase "Opening Eyes" is, according to Hussein's definition, the period we are now in and should last until 2006. Hussein says the terrorists hope to make the western conspiracy aware of the "Islamic community." Hussein believes this is a phase in which al-Qaida wants an organization to develop into a movement. The network is banking on recruiting young men during this period. Iraq should become the center for all global operations, with an "army" set up there and bases established in other Arabic states. ...

• The Fifth Phase This will be the point at which an Islamic state, or caliphate, can be declared. The plan is that by this time, between 2013 and 2016, Western influence in the Islamic world will be so reduced and Israel weakened so much, that resistance will not be feared. Al-Qaida hopes that by then the Islamic state will be able to bring about a new world order. ...

• The Seventh Phase This final stage is described as "definitive victory." Hussein writes that in the terrorists' eyes, because the rest of the world will be so beaten down by the "one-and-a-half million Muslims," the caliphate will undoubtedly succeed. This phase should be completed by 2020, although the war shouldn't last longer than two years. ...

What is interesting is that major attacks against the West are not even mentioned by Fouad Hussein. Terrorism here cannot be ignored -- but it seems these attacks simply supplement the larger aim of setting up an Islamic caliphate. Attacks such as those in New York, Madrid and London would in this case not be ends in themselves, but rather means to a achieve a larger purpose -- steps in a process of increasing insecurity in the West."

"Get out now" (Dan Savage, andrewsullivan.com, 2005/08/12)
Come back Andy, all is forgiven. Does Savage honestly think that the best thing to do is to give the jihadists their greatest victory ever? Apparently. This from a guy who has argued that America "would have to invade the Middle East, depose absolutely everybody -- the Taliban in Afghanistan, Saddam Hussein in Iraq, Bashar al-Assad in Syria, Saudi royals in Saudi Arabia -- and start all over again." Talk about a fair-weather hawk:
"Look, I was for this thing [the Iraqi war]. I went out on limb and backed it. I wanted it to succeed. I still do.
But it’s time to declare victory and get the fuck out. ...
It seems that the more corners we’re told we’ve turned, the more walls we run into. And it just keeps coming back to manpower — “just enough troops to lose,” as Andrew says. ...
Liberal hawks wanted to win this more desperately than anyone else. But it’s time to bring down the curtain — why? Not because war [sic] I hate Bush so much that I want to see my country lose this war — I love my country — and not because I don’t care about the Iraqi people. I’m one of those liberals who backed the war for humanitarian reasons.
No, we should get out because, with the Bushies running the show for the next three years, we’re simply not going to win. It’s just go to drag on and on. This war, as I see it now, is either going to be nasty, brutal and short or nasty, brutal and long. I prefer nastry, brutal and short, if only because it will mean fewer Americans will die. And fewer Iraqis too, I suspect."

"Recorded details of Sept 11 NY attacks made public" (Ellen Wulfhorst, Reuters, 2005/08/12)
"'I'm trapped. I can't breathe much longer. Save me. I don't have much air. Please help me. I can barely breathe.'
Those panicked words of a civilian on a New York Fire Department radio dispatch tape from the September 11, 2001, attacks were part of dramatic unreleased details of the attacks on New York made public on Friday.
The release followed a court order that overruled city efforts to keep some records of the World Trade Center attack private.
The audio tapes, transcripts of emergency workers' radio dispatches and oral histories provided by rescuers after the attacks recount the harrowing and grim moments when thousands of people were trapped and died in the flames and debris of the twin towers.
Firefighter Maureen McArdle-Schulman described a "constant" stream of bodies falling from the towers.
"I felt like I was intruding on a sacrament," she said. "They were choosing to die, and I was watching them and shouldn't have been, so me and another guy turned away and looked at the wall and we could still hear them hit." ...
Firefighter Robert Dorritie described a woman who, leaping to her death from a tower, landed on a firefighter. "A lady in a blue dress came down," he said. 'She went through the skylight and she hit this guy ... and she crushed him.'" (See also: "New York City Fire Department Dispatches From Sept. 11" (The New York Times, 2005/08/12) and "Oral Histories From Sept. 11 Compiled by the New York Fire Department" The New York Times, 2005/08/12))

"Lessons for an Exit Strategy" (Henry A. Kissinger, The Washington Post, 2005/08/12)
"Today the Iraqi forces are in their majority composed of Shiites, and the insurrection is mostly in traditional Sunni areas. It thus foreshadows a return to the traditional Sunni-Shiite conflict, only with reversed capabilities. These forces may cooperate in quelling the Sunni insurrection. But will they, even when adequately trained, be willing to quell Shiite militias in the name of the nation? Do they obey the ayatollahs, especially Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, or the national government in Baghdad?
And if these two entities are functionally the same, can the national army make its writ run in non-Shiite areas except as an instrument of repression? And is it then still possible to maintain a democratic state?
The ultimate test of progress will therefore be the extent to which the Iraqi armed forces reflect -- at least to some degree -- the ethnic diversity of the country and are accepted by the population at large as an expression of the nation. Drawing Sunni leaders into the political process is an important part of an anti-insurgent strategy. Failing that, the process of building security forces may become the prelude to a civil war.
Can a genuine nation emerge in Iraq through constitutional means?
The answer to that question will determine whether Iraq becomes a signpost for a reformed Middle East or the pit of an ever-spreading conflict."

"Setting Limits on Tolerance" (Charles Krauthammer, The Washington Post, 2005/08/12)
"In 1977, when a bunch of neo-Nazis decided to march through Skokie, a suburb of Chicago heavily populated with Holocaust survivors, there was controversy as to whether they should be allowed. I thought they should. Why? Because neo-Nazis are utterly powerless.
Had they not been -- had they been a party on the rise, as in late-1920s Germany -- I would have been for not only banning the march but also for practically every measure of harassment and persecution from deportation to imprisonment. A tolerant society has an obligation to be tolerant. Except to those so intolerant that they themselves would abolish tolerance.
Call it situational libertarianism: Liberties should be as unlimited as possible -- unless and until there arises a real threat to the open society. Neo-Nazis are pathetic losers. Why curtail civil liberties to stop them? But when a real threat -- such as jihadism -- arises, a liberal democratic society must deploy every resource, including the repressive powers of the state, to deter and defeat those who would abolish liberal democracy."

"Arabian Shame" (The Washington Post, 2005/08/12)
"So far this year the United States has given $468 million in foreign assistance to Sudan, mostly for humanitarian relief in the western region of Darfur. The U.S. contribution comes to 53 percent of all outside donations -- a proportion about twice the size of the nation's weight in the global economy.
A few other countries have been even more generous relative to the size of their economies, notably Norway, the Netherlands, Sweden, Denmark and Britain. But the contribution from many others has been embarrassing. ...
But perhaps the most striking absentees are the oil-rich Arab countries, which have more money than ideas on how to spend it, thanks to oil prices above $60 a barrel. Saudi Arabia has contributed a grand total of $3 million, according to the U.N. data; the United Arab Emirates and Qatar have given less than $1 million between them. No other Arab country even makes the list.
This Arab indifference is shameful. The victims of Sudan's worst crisis, in Darfur, are Muslim, and aid to non-Muslim southern Sudan is essential to shoring up the fragile north-south peace deal that would help Muslims as well. Sudan borders Libya and Egypt; only the narrow Red Sea separates it from Saudi Arabia. Arabs have every reason to care about Sudan, and yet they have done far less than remote non-Muslim countries such as Norway, which has an economy roughly the same size as Saudi Arabia's." (See also: "Arab Genocide, Arab Silence" (Joseph Britt, The Washington Post, 2005/07/13))

"Israeli hawks circle Iran's N-plants" (Tim Butcher, The Daily Telegraph, 2005/08/12)
"Ever since its 1979 Islamic revolution the only fate Iran has had in mind for Israel has been simple: its destruction. Now that Teheran seems to be moving towards acquiring its own nuclear arsenal, its plans for its great enemy threaten to be both fiery and radioactive.
Sometimes Iran's stated policy towards Israel is couched in inflammatory rhetoric, like that on a 40ft banner that used to hang outside the entrance of the foreign ministry in Teheran bearing the message: "Israel Must Burn".
Sometimes the language is tamer, such as the "Down With Israel" chants of students who march after Friday prayers in Teheran week in, week out.
But whatever the tone, the message remains the same. The Jewish state has survived wars, internal upheaval, intifadas and bloody entanglements in the internal affairs of its neighbours. But now a major enemy, one committed to its annihilation, appears close to deploying the most destructive force known to Man."

Thursday, August 11, 2005

News and commentary:

"Al Qaeda and the Guardian" (David T, Harry's Place, 2005/08/11)
David T on an article by Sa’ad al-Faqih in today's The Guardian:
"What concerns me is this.
Sa’ad al-Faqih [is] described in the footnote to the article as “a leading exiled Saudi dissident and director of the Movement for Islamic Reform in Arabia”.
In fact Sa’ad al-Faqih is a little bit more than that.
Al-Faiqih seems to have bought the satellite phone which was used by one of the Al Qaeda suicide bombers who blew up the US embassy in Nairobi.
Sa'ad al-Faqih, was "designated" by the United States Treasury on December 21, 2004 and on 23 Dec 2004 was named on the United Nations 1267 Committee consolidated list of individuals belonging to or associated with the Al-Qaida organisation.
On 14 July 2005, the US Treasury "designated" al-Faiqih's "Movement for Islamic Reform in Arabia" (MIRA), a U.K.-based Saudi oppositionist organization, for providing material support to al Qaida:

Under [al-Faqih's] ideological and operational control, MIRA is the main vehicle al-Faqih uses to propagate support for the al Qaida network. MIRA's 1995 founding statement explicitly states that the organization is not limited to peaceful means in the pursuit of its objectives. According to information available to the U.S. Government, while head of MIRA, al-Faqih assumed the role of the al Qaida spokesperson in London following the arrest of senior Egyptian Islamic Jihad terrorist Yassir al-Sirri in 2001.
Information shows that statements on the MIRA website, including messages from Usama bin Laden and Abu Mus'ab al Zarqawi, are intended to provide ideological and operational support to al Qaida affiliated networks and potential recruits. According to recent information available to the U.S. Government, a senior al Qaida operative in Saudi Arabia sent articles to al-Faqih who then posted them to the MIRA website under the al Qaida operative's pennames. ...

Did the Guardian know any of this?
Again, why didn't they flag it up to their readership?" (See also: "Give up your freedoms - or change tack" (Saad al-Fagih, The Guardian, 2005/08/11)
UPDATE: "Did the Guardian know any of this?" As reader Angus Cook points out, they just had to check their own archives. For example: "UK backs sanctions against Saudi dissident" (Brian Whitaker, The Guardian, 2004/12/23) and "UK-based dissident denies link to website that carried al-Qaida claim" (David Pallister, The Guardian, 2005/07/09): "Mr Faqih, who is based in Willesden, north-west London, and runs the Movement for Islamic Reform in Arabia (Mira), was designated by the US
treasury last December as a supporter of al-Qaida. The UK Treasury
followed suit by freezing Mr Faqih's assets.")

"Allow Bakri Mohammed to spew out his rubbish" (Rod Liddle, The Spectator, from the 2005/08/13 issue)
"The problem lies with the government and those Left-liberal multiculturalist commentators who continue to delude themselves that Islam as a whole is easily compatible with the Western notions of freedom of conscience, freedom of speech, democracy and equality. As a result, we now have a false dichotomy — between something called moderate Islam and this rogue creature, extremist Islam. Oh, 95 per cent of Muslims are moderate, we tell ourselves — and we are then rendered speechless with shock when the Iranians vote en masse for a fundamentalist headbanger as President and, worse, it is revealed that those London bombers come not from some dusty backward desert redoubt, but from England. And all the while, clinging to the comforts of this false dichotomy, we betray our commitment to universal human rights by imprisoning or otherwise persecuting both those who would attack Islam as a religion — I can no longer say, without impunity, that Islam is wicked or stupid, no matter how much evidence I marshal to support this reasonable thesis — and those who espouse its literal truths."

"For Muslims, a role in the war on terror" (Mamoun Fandy, USA Today, 2005/08/11)
"The time has come to issue a fatwa to excommunicate Osama bin Laden and his followers from the world of Islam. In fact, as terrorism rages, we need a stream of solid counter-fatwas - legal pronouncements in Islam — from the Muslim community.
Thus far we have heard fatwas, such as the one issued last month by the Fiqh Council of North America, telling us that Islam does not condone violence or that Islam condemns these actions. These types of words are not enough. We need to move beyond abstract condemnations and actually exclude those who give Islam a bad name.
In the same spirit that bin Laden and his group label moderate Muslims as Western lackeys, it is time Muslim leaders pronounce bin Laden by name as non-Muslim. That's right, excommunicate him. ...
I have talked with many Muslims, especially in the West, who in public condemn violent acts but in private conversations say, "The West deserves this." In public, they will say it is a revenge for Palestine and Iraq, but in private I hear blind hatred, a virus that is taking over too many Muslim minds.
Only two things can stop terrorism: serious counter-fatwas from all Muslims to excommunicate bin Laden and his supporters, and a more skeptical eye in the West for Islamists who say one thing while advocating another.
There are no moderate Islamists that I have seen. There are ordinary Muslims who are living decent lives, and there are terrorists or would-be terrorists."

"Britain Detains Palestinian Cleric" (Michael McDonough, AP/Yahoo! News, 2005/08/11)
"Britain detained a Palestinian cleric considered Osama bin Laden's spiritual ambassador in Europe and nine other foreigners on Thursday, saying they were a threat to national security and would be deported.
The detentions came a day after Britain signed an extradition agreement with Jordan, where the Palestinian cleric Omar Mahmoud Abu Omar, who is better known as Abu Qatada, has been sentenced in absentia to life imprisonment on terror charges.
The Home Office didn't identify the detainees, but a British government official confirmed that Abu Qatada was in custody. ...
The Home Office said Home Secretary Charles Clarke had issued the 10 foreigners with a "notice of intention to deport" and that they had been detained. They have five working days to appeal the decision.
Meanwhile, radical cleric Omar Bakri was arrested in the Lebanon by security officials. Bakri left Britain, where he has lived for 20 years, last weekend amid speculation he could face treason charges, and flew to Lebanon to see his mother."

"On condemning terrorism" (Jeff Jacoby, The Boston Globe, 2005/08/11)
"When Muslim extremists murder innocents in cold blood, there is often a politically correct reluctance to call the killers terrorists, or to denounce them unequivocally. But there was no such reluctance last week when an Israeli Jew, Eden Natan Zada, opened fire inside the bus he was riding through the Arab town of Shfaram in northern Israel. Zada, 19, was active in the outlawed extremist Kach movement, and had deserted his army unit to protest Israel's withdrawal from the Gaza Strip. His rampage left four Arabs dead -- Michel Bahus, 56; Nader Hayak, 55; Hazar Turki, 23, and her sister Dina, 21 -- and another 12 wounded. ...
Indeed, so horrified were Israelis by Zada's bloody crime that, as the newspaper Ha'aretz reported on Sunday, ''No cemetery will accept Jewish terrorist's body." (Zada was lynched by Shfaram residents in the wake of his attack.) The defense minister banned an interment in any military cemetery, saying Zada was ''not worthy of being buried next to fallen soldiers." Neither his hometown of Rishon Letzion nor Tapuah, the settlement to which he had recently moved, wanted his grave to be within their borders. ...
Without being prompted, without making excuses, Jewish communities instinctively reacted to Zada's monstrous deed with disgust and outrage, all the more angrily because the perpetrator was a fellow Jew. When that is the way every community responds to terrorism, terrorism will come to an end." (See also: "Jewish Extremist Opens Fire Inside Bus" (Kristen Stevens, AP/Yahoo! News, 2005/08/04))

"Scratching the Surface" (Claudia Rosett, The Wall Street Journal, 2005/08/11)
"Mr. Volcker's latest report, released Monday, documents bribes Mr. Sevan took from Saddam, via an Oil for Food contractor who happens to be a cousin of former Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali, as well as what appears to be more garden-variety graft collected by a Russian staffer in the U.N. procurement department, Alexander Yakovlev, who among other matters was involved in the U.N. Secretariat's hiring of Oil for Food inspectors. These tales, dramatic though they are, only begin to dabble in the river of graft that flowed through U.N.-administered deals under Oil for Food. ...
Mr. Volcker's latest report, after more than a year of investigation, is the first from his team to document actual bribes. It covers a grand total of $1.1 million in graft and runs to 130 pages, annexes included. If that ratio holds for the billions grafted, skimmed and smuggled out of Iraq relief funds under the U.N. cover of Oil for Food, we can expect that the final two reports, promised in September and October, will run to well over 1.5 million pages combined. No one is seriously expecting anything that massive, but it does give some idea of the scale of corruption with which the U.N. under Oil for Food became complicit. And it perhaps gives a hint of the scope of reform that will truly be required to clean up the U.N." (See also: "Oil-For-Food Chief Accused of Kickbacks" (Nick Wadhams and Edith M. Lederer, AP/Yahoo! News, 2005/08/08))

"US reporter killed 'because he was to marry a Muslim'" (Fraser Nelson, The Scotsman, 2005/08/11)
Steven Vincent IX: "An American journalist who was shot dead in Basra last week was executed by Shiite extremists who knew he was intending to marry his Muslim interpreter, it has emerged.
Steven Vincent was shot a week before the planned wedding to Nouriya Itais and had already delivered a $2,500 dowry to her family.
The disclosure casts new light on the grip of Islamic religious sects in the British-run south- east of Iraq - raising concern that they will take control once troops start to withdraw. Mr Vincent was abducted from his hotel three days after writing a piece in the New York Times accusing British officials of allowing religious parties to infiltrate the Basra police.
In America, his death was taken as retribution for his article. But in London yesterday, British officials pointed out that the police in Basra believed it was retribution for his affair.
"We warned him to look after his security in a more professional manner than he was doing," said the official." (See also: "Death of an idealist" (Tony Allen-Mills, The Sunday Times, 2005/08/07))

"Bakri to have heart op on NHS" (Brendan Carlin, The Daily Telegraph, 2005/08/11)
"The Government was under intense pressure last night to carry out Tony Blair's threats to expel extremist Muslim clerics after news that one of them was expected to return for a heart operation on the health service. ...
Bakri left Britain for the first time in 20 years at the weekend after gaining a Lebanese passport, apparently without the knowledge of the Home Office, to fly to Beirut where his mother lives.
He receives £331.28 a month in incapacity benefit and £183.30 a month in disability living allowance because of a leg injury he suffered in his teens.
Both payments will continue for at least six months while he is abroad, as long as he plans to return, as will the housing benefit on his home in Edmonton, north London, and his council tax benefit.
His wife, who remains in Britain with their seven children, can also continue to claim a benefits package thought to be worth at least £1,300 a month. Bakri drives a Toyota people carrier worth £30,000, paid for under a scheme called Motability.
The preacher is expected to return for an angioplasty procedure. That involves inserting and inflating a balloon in the coronary artery to improve blood flow.
He has been receiving treatment at North Middlesex Hospital, near his home, as well as at St Thomas's."

Wednesday, August 10, 2005

News and commentary:

"Iran Resumes Full Conversion Operations" (Ali Akbar Dareini, AP/Yahoo! News, 2005/08/10)
"ISFAHAN, Iran - A defiant Iran resumed full operations at its uranium conversion plant Wednesday, as Europe and the United States struggled to find a way to stop the Islamic republic from pushing ahead with a nuclear program they fear will lead to weapons of mass destruction.
With United Nations inspectors watching, Iranian officials removed U.N. seals that had been placed voluntarily on equipment at the facility eight months ago when Tehran agreed to freeze most of its nuclear program.
Technicians then immediately resumed work on the process that turns raw uranium into gas for enrichment. ...
Iran has rejected European proposals to limit its program in return for economic incentives and shrugged off threats of U.N. sanctions. Any attempt to impose sanctions could face a veto in the U.N. Security Council from Russia and China, which have close ties with Iran."

"Time to face the ugly facts" (Andrew Bolt, Herald Sun, 2005/08/10)
"How much longer can we pretend our Muslim clerics are mainly moderates who are allies in our war against Islamist terror?
When eight out of 10 imams surveyed by this paper refuse even to blame Osama bin Laden for the September 11 attacks we know we have a bigger problem than it's been polite to admit.
What hope now of Islamic clerics here issuing a fatwa against the terror chief implicated so far in the deaths of some 100 Australians, from Bali to Washington?
To make it worse, the Islamic Council of Victoria has again showed it is no sound ally in this battle either. Asked to explain today's findings, spokesman Waleed Aly said the imams merely had "a furious mistrust of mainstream media".
Gee, our fault again." (Hat tip: Tim Blair.)

"Islamic leaders won't condemn bin Laden" (Liam Houliha, Herald Sun, 2005/08/10)
"Eight Islamic spiritual leaders who preach to hundreds of Muslims in Victoria each day refuse to accept that Osama bin Laden was responsible for the September 11 attacks.
Responding to a survey, the imams from suburban and regional mosques ignored bin Laden's own confession.
Asked if bin Laden were responsible for the attacks that killed almost 3000 people, Carlton mosque imam Rexhep Idrizi said: "We don't know."
Acting Werribee mosque imam Riyad Ahmad said: "I have it only from one side. I'm not sure really."
Fitzroy mosque acting imam Bilgim Alpay said: "I don't know. It's very hard to answer. There are a lot of political games."
Only two of the 10 imams said bin Laden was to blame." (Hat tip: Tim Blair.)

"Interview on Saudi Government TV With Prominet Egyptian Professor: Muslims Had Nothing to Do with 9/11; Dirty Zionist Hands Behind It" (MEMRI, Special Dispatch Series - No. 954, 2005/08/10)
"The following are excerpts from an interview with Egyptian professor Abd Al-Sabour Shahin, which aired on Saudi Channel 1 on August 8, 2005. Dr. Shahin is head of the Shari'a faculty at Al-Ahzar University, the most prestigious seat of learning in Sunni Islam, and is also a lecturer at Cairo University. ...
'Our enemies weave many lies about us, which we are not necessarily aware of. For example: One day, we awoke to the crime of 9/11, which hit the tallest buildings in New York, the Empire State Building [sic]. There is no doubt that not a single Arab or Muslim had anything to do with these events. The incident was fabricated as a pretext to attack Islam and Muslims. The plan was to take over the world's energy sources, and to achieve this control by force and not by agreement or negotiations, by interests, free trade, or anything like that. This is what they wanted. ...
These were lies from beginning to end, and we were not used to lying - not in policy, not in our discourse, and not in the media. Imagine what crisis the Arab and Islam nation finds itself in, in the midst of these peculiar events, which we cannot explain or believe.
All of a sudden, we were framed for an international crime, on the basis of lies.
I believe a dirty Zionist hand carried out this act. Zionism has taken the opportunity to escalate the war in Palestine, killing hundreds of thousands so far, while we watch from the sidelines in astonishment and ask: What's going on?'"

"British detectives question bomb suspect held in Rome" (Barbara McMahon and Rosie Cowan, The Guardian, 2005/08/10)
The Friendly Suicide Bomber IV: "British detectives were finally allowed to question Hussein Osman in Rome yesterday, 12 days after he was arrested in connection with the botched London bombings on July 21.
According to his lawyer, the 27-year-old Ethiopian-born suspect, who police believe tried to detonate a device on board a tube train at Shepherd's Bush, told police his rucksack contained a few nails and explosives, but "not aimed at harming anyone ... just to make a noise". ...
"He was calm, he was fully cooperative, he answered all the questions without a break," said Ms Sonnessa. "He continues to reiterate that this was a demonstrative act. As far as he knew the contents of the bag were not aimed at harming anyone, including himself," she added. 'There were a few nails, as well as the explosives, but the contents were meant just to make a noise.'" (See also: "'Actions were a peaceful protest over the Iraq war'" (Richard Owen and Martin Penner, The Times, 2005/08/01))

"No way back for extremist cleric as wife packs her (Tesco) bags" (Daniel McGrory et al., The Times, 2005/08/10)
"Immigration rules will be changed within days to ensure that the extremist Muslim cleric Sheikh Omar Bakri Mohammed will never be allowed back into Britain.
The new “exclusion order” will allow Charles Clarke, the Home Secretary, to prevent any attempt by the leader of the al-Muhajiroun group to re-enter Britain after he fled to Lebanon at the weekend.
John Prescott, the Deputy Prime Minister, admitted yesterday that he had no power to deal with the cleric, who reportedly described the July 7 bombers as “the fantastic four”. Mr Prescott said: “At the moment he has the right to come in and out. That is the circumstances at present and we have to change situations in this country by law. It’s a democracy, not a dictatorship, for God’s sake.”
He made clear his dislike of Sheikh Bakri Mohammed, who claims to have gone to Beirut on a family visit, saying: 'I just say, enjoy your holiday — make it a long one.'"

"Baghdad Mayor Is Ousted by a Shiite Group and Replaced" (James Glanz, The New York Times, 2005/08/10)
"Armed men entered Baghdad's municipal building during a blinding dust storm on Monday, deposed the city's mayor and installed a member of Iraq's most powerful Shiite militia.
The deposed mayor, Alaa al-Tamimi, who was not in his offices at the time, recounted the events in a telephone interview on Tuesday and called the move a municipal coup d'état. He added that he had gone into hiding for fear of his life.
"This is the new Iraq," said Mr. Tamimi, a secular engineer with no party affiliation. "They use force to achieve their goal."
The group that ousted him insisted that it had the authority to assume control of Iraq's capital city and that Mr. Tamimi was in no danger. The man the group installed, Hussein al-Tahaan, is a member of the Badr Organization, the armed militia of the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq, known as Sciri."

Tuesday, August 9, 2005

News and commentary:

"Why Tolerate the Hate?" (Irshad Manji, The New York Times, 2005/08/09)
"As Westerners bow down before multiculturalism, we anesthetize ourselves into believing that anything goes. We see our readiness to accommodate as a strength - even a form of cultural superiority (though few will admit that). Radical Muslims, on the other hand, see our inclusive instincts as a form of corruption that makes us soft and rudderless. They believe the weak deserve to be vanquished.
Paradoxically, then, the more we accommodate to placate, the more their contempt for our "weakness" grows. And ultimate paradox may be that in order to defend our diversity, we'll need to be less tolerant. Or, at the very least, more vigilant. And this vigilance demands more than new antiterror laws. It requires asking: What guiding values can most of us live with? Given the panoply of ideologies and faiths out there, what filter will distill almost everybody's right to free expression?
Neither the watery word "tolerance" nor the slippery phrase "mutual respect" will cut it as a guiding value. Why tolerate violent bigotry? Where's the "mutual" in that version of mutual respect? Amin Maalouf, a French-Arab novelist, nailed this point when he wrote that 'traditions deserve respect only insofar as they are respectable - that is, exactly insofar as they themselves respect the fundamental rights of men and women.'"

"'Today Gaza, Tomorrow Jerusalem'" (Daniel Pipes, New York Sun/danielpipes.org, 2005/08/09)
"Are Israel's critics correct? Does the "occupation" of the West Bank and Gaza cause the Palestinians' antisemitism, their suicide factories, and their terrorism? And is it true these horrors will end only when Israeli civilians and troops leave the territories?
The answer is coming soon. Starting on Aug. 15, the Israeli government will evict some 8,000 Israelis from Gaza and turn their land over to the Palestinian Authority. In addition to being a unique event in modern history (no other democracy has forcibly uprooted thousands of its own citizens of one religion from their lawful homes), it also offers a rare, live, social-science experiment.
We stand at an interpretive divide. If Israel's critics are right, the Gaza withdrawal will improve Palestinian attitudes toward Israel, leading to an end of incitement and a steep drop in attempted violence, followed by a renewal of negotiations and a full settlement. Logic requires, after all, that if "occupation" is the problem, ending it, even partially, will lead to a solution.
But I forecast a very different outcome. Given that some 80 percent of Palestinians continue to reject Israel's very existence, signs of Israeli weakness, such as the forthcoming Gaza withdrawal, will instead inspire heightened Palestinian irredentism. Absorbing their new gift without gratitude, Palestinians will focus on those territories Israelis have not evacuated. (This is what happened after Israeli forces fled Lebanon.) The retreat will inspire not comity but a new rejectionist exhilaration, a greater frenzy of anti-Zionist anger, and a surge in anti-Israel violence. ...
Events, I predict, will prove Israel's critics totally wrong but they will learn no lessons. Untroubled by facts, they will demand further Israeli withdrawals. Israel's one-car crash is dismally preparing the way for more disasters."

"Trust politicians to do nothing useful" (Mark Steyn, The Daily Telegraph, 2005/08/09)
"Responding to Islamist terrorism in Britain and elsewhere, Germany is considering introducing a Muslim public holiday. As Mathias Dopfner, chief executive of Axel Springer, put it: "A substantial fraction of Germany's government - and, if polls are to be believed, the German people - believe that creating an official state Muslim holiday will somehow spare us from the wrath of fanatical Islamists."
Great. At least the 1930s' appeasers did it on their own time. But, in recasting appeasement as yet another paid day off, the new proposal cunningly manages to combine the worst instincts of the old Europe and the new. ...
Not all the member states of what we loosely call "the West" will survive this existential struggle: on the Continent, the combination of terrorism, demographics, immigration and welfare would require a genius to steer through it, and there aren't many in sight, and little sign that the natives would be receptive to them. They will prefer the combination of appeasement of enemies and ongoing welfare for themselves so nicely summed up in that "Muslim Bank Holiday" concept. By the time they're ready for their burning-plane-on-the-runway heroics, it will be too late.
Before he was knighted and raised up as the ne plus ultra of "moderate Muslims", Iqbal Sacranie considered the fatwa against Salman Rushdie and mused: "Death is perhaps too easy." I don't know about that, but slow societal suicide is certainly too easy. As we've seen these past few weeks, every issue - immigration, welfare - is now a national security issue. The question is whether the politicians really have the will to do anything about it and, if they don't, how long the people will put up with them."

"The Web as Weapon" (Susan B. Glasser and Steve Coll, The Washington Post, 2005/08/09)
"The jihadist bulletin boards were buzzing. Soon, promised the spokesman for al Qaeda in the Land of the Two Rivers, a new video would be posted with the latest in mayhem from Iraq's best-known insurgent group.
On June 29, the new release hit the Internet. "All Religion Will Be for Allah" is 46 minutes of live-action war in Iraq, a slickly produced video with professional-quality graphics and the feel of a blood-and-guts annual report. In one chilling scene, the video cuts to a brigade of smiling young men. They are the only fighters shown unmasked, and the video explains why: They are a corps of suicide bombers-in-training.
As notable as the video was the way Abu Musab Zarqawi's "information wing" distributed it to the world: a specially designed Web page, with dozens of links to the video, so users could choose which version to download. There were large-file editions that consumed 150 megabytes for viewers with high-speed Internet and a scaled-down four-megabyte version for those limited to dial-up access. Viewers could choose Windows Media or RealPlayer. They could even download "All Religion Will Be for Allah" to play on a cell phone." (See also: "Briton Used Internet As His Bully Pulpit" (Craig Whitlock, The Washington Post, 2005/08/08) and "Terrorists Turn to the Web as Base of Operations" (Steve Coll and Susan B. Glasser, The Washington Post, 2005/08/07))

"Oil-Food Official Pleads Guilty" (Colum Lynch, The Washington Post, 2005/08/09)
"A federal prosecutor investigating corruption in the $64 billion oil-for-food program issued the case's first criminal charges against a U.N. official, accusing a former Russian procurement officer of receiving hundreds of thousands of dollars in bribes from companies doing business with the United Nations.
Alexander Yakovlev, 52, pleaded guilty to three counts of wire fraud, conspiracy to commit wire fraud and money laundering, said David N. Kelley, the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York. If convicted, Yakovlev could face up to 60 years in prison.
The case against Yakovlev grew out of the United Nations' own investigation of its marred oil-for-food program, and it came on a day when a U.N.-appointed panel accused Benon V. Sevan, the program's former director, of receiving nearly $150,000 in kickbacks from a company run by relatives of former U.N. secretary general Boutros Boutros-Ghali."

"Four in 9/11 Plot Are Called Tied to Qaeda in '00" (Douglas Jehl, The New York Times, 2005/08/09)
"More than a year before the Sept. 11 attacks, a small, highly classified military intelligence unit identified Mohammed Atta and three other future hijackers as likely members of a cell of Al Qaeda operating in the United States, according to a former defense intelligence official and a Republican member of Congress.
In the summer of 2000, the military team, known as Able Danger, prepared a chart that included visa photographs of the four men and recommended to the military's Special Operations Command that the information be shared with the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the congressman, Representative Curt Weldon of Pennsylvania, and the former intelligence official said Monday.
The recommendation was rejected and the information was not shared, they said, apparently at least in part because Mr. Atta, and the others were in the United States on valid entry visas."

Added in archive:
"The Irascible Prophet: V. S. Naipaul at Home" (Rachel Donadio, The New York Times, 2005/08/07)

Monday, August 8, 2005

News and commentary:

"Treason threat cleric 'flees UK'" (BBC News, 2005/08/08)
"A controversial Islamic cleric has left the UK for the Middle East, his spokesman has said, amid speculation he would be investigated for treason.
Sheikh Omar Bakri Mohammed - former head of radical group Al Muhajiroun - left on Saturday for Lebanon, his colleague Anjem Choudary told the BBC.
Tony Blair had warned Mr Mohammed's organisation faced a potential ban under new anti-terrorism measures.
Mr Choudary said the cleric believed "Britain had declared war on Muslims".
The news came as it was revealed police and lawyers were to consider whether some outspoken Islamist radicals could face treason charges. ...
Speaking to the BBC News Website, Mr Choudary - the former right hand man of Bakri Mohammed - said the cleric no longer believed Britain was a safe country for Muslims. ...
"He believes that war has been declared against Muslims in the country. He has decided to go elsewhere." ...
Mr Choudary said that Mr Mohammed's family had remained behind in Britain and that he had not disposed of his assets in the country - but he was "sure" that the radical preacher would not be returning because he did not hold a British passport."

"Oil-For-Food Chief Accused of Kickbacks" (Nick Wadhams and Edith M. Lederer, AP/Yahoo! News, 2005/08/08)
"Investigators probing claims of wrongdoing in the Iraq oil-for-food program accused its former chief, Benon Sevan, of corruption for taking illegal kickbacks and recommended his immunity be lifted for prosecution.
The investigators said a former U.N. procurement officer sought a bribe and should have his immunity lifted as well. Alexander Yakovlev also was accused of collecting nearly $1 million in kickbacks outside the oil-for-food program. ...
The report touched briefly on U.N. Secretary-General
Kofi Annan and his son, Kojo. It said new e-mails suggesting Annan knew more than he said about his son's involvement in the program raised questions that would be answered in the committee's final report, expected in September. ...
On Thursday, Sevan's lawyer Eric Lewis revealed that the committee would find conclude that Sevan got kickbacks for steering contracts under oil-for-food to a small trading company called African Middle East Petroleum Co. Ltd. Inc.
The report largely confirmed that, but went further. It described how Sevan and his wife repeatedly had overdrawn their bank accounts before Sevan first sought to steer oil allocations to AMEP.
It also found that two men helped Sevan: Fred Nadler, an AMEP director and brother-in-law of former U.N. Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali; and Fakhry Abdelnour, the president of AMEP." (See also the report [PDF]: "Third Interim Report" (Independent Inquiry Committee, 2005/08/08))

"Iran Resumes Uranium Conversion Efforts" (Ali Akbar Darein, AP/Yahoo! News, 2005/08/08)
"Iran resumed uranium conversion activities at its Isfahan nuclear facility Monday, a step that Europeans and the United States have warned would prompt them to seek U.N. sanctions against the Tehran regime.
Work restarted at the conversion facility in central Iran quickly after inspectors from the U.N. nuclear watchdog finished installing surveillance equipment.
The move came a day before the International Atomic Energy Agency's 35-nation board of governors is to hold an emergency session to discuss Iran's nuclear program that was expected to produce a sharply worded warning to Iran. The agency could then refer the issue to the
U.N. Security Council, which has the power to impose economic sanctions.
European negotiators and the United States have said they would likely recommend that the IAEA act against Iran if work at Isfahan resumed."

"Losing the Iraq War: Can the left really want us to?" (Christopher Hitchens, Slate, 2005/08/08)
"How can so many people watch this as if they were spectators, handicapping and rating the successes and failures from some imagined position of neutrality? Do they suppose that a defeat in Iraq would be a defeat only for the Bush administration? The United States is awash in human rights groups, feminist organizations, ecological foundations, and committees for the rights of minorities. How come there is not a huge voluntary effort to help and to publicize the efforts to find the hundreds of thousands of "missing" Iraqis, to support Iraqi women's battle against fundamentalists, to assist in the recuperation of the marsh Arab wetlands, and to underwrite the struggle of the Kurds, the largest stateless people in the Middle East? Is Abu Ghraib really the only subject that interests our humanitarians? ...
Isn't there a single drop of solidarity and compassion left over for the people of Iraq, after three decades of tyranny, war, and sanctions and now an assault from the vilest movement on the face of the planet? Unless someone gives me a persuasive reason to think otherwise, my provisional conclusion is that the human rights and charitable "communities" have taken a pass on Iraq for political reasons that are not very creditable. And so we watch with detached curiosity, from dry land, to see whether the Iraqis will sink or swim. For shame."

"Stay the course, Mr. President" (Frederick W. Kagan, Los Angeles Times, 2005/08/08)
"Despite what you may have read, the military situation in Iraq today is positive — far better than it ever was when we were fighting guerrillas in Vietnam, or when the Soviets were fighting the Afghan mujahedin, or in almost any other major insurgency of the 20th century. ...
Perhaps the best news from the region these days is that the Iraqi army is finally producing units able to fight on their own.
According to Lt. Gen. David Petraeus, there are now more than 170,000 "trained and equipped" Iraqi police and military personnel, and more than 105 police and army battalions are "in the fight." Over the next few months, tens of thousands more Iraqi troops will be able to take the field in the struggle against the insurgency. They should number around 250,000 by next summer. ...
If the U.S. were to keep its troop levels constant over the next 18 months, the manpower available to perform all of these critical tasks would increase dramatically as Iraqi forces became available to handle basic security functions. ...
If the U.S. begins pulling troops out prematurely, it runs the risk of allowing the insurgency to grow, perhaps becoming what it now is not — a real military threat to the government.
If, on the other hand, Bush stays the course and pays the price for success, the prospects for winning will get better every day."

"God, Man and the Common Weal" (Reuel Marc Gerecht, The Wall Street Journal, 2005/08/08)
Gerecht on the new Iraqi constitution: "Sharia or Islamic family law, probably the most resilient aspect of the Holy Law since it culturally underpins the highly stable Muslim home, may make some comeback in Iraqi law and in the new constitution. In all probability, this process will not be a Trojan horse, allowing for the subversion of democracy itself. As long as women have the right to vote and the Iraqi Parliament remains the supreme chamber for political debate -- and neither is seriously in question -- then the inclusion of some aspects of Islamic family law into Iraq's civil code may well reinforce democracy's chances. ...
The secularization of religious discussions in Iraq is already very far advanced -- just compare the Iraqi clerical discussion of constitutional