Times Online - World: "November 27, 2004 | 6,635 bodies in Baghdad mortuary: counting cost of crime and chaos | From Anthony Loyd in Baghdad
...
Figures compiled at the central mortuary, on file and indisputable, shine a light through the murk of estimate and rumour surrounding casualty rates in Iraq. Of the 6,635 suspicious deaths in Baghdad recorded this year at the city’s Medical-Legal Institute, the complex incorporating the central mortuary, more than 75 per cent were killed by a bullet. Stabbing is the next most common cause of death.
October’s figures include 726 suspicious deaths, of which 494 were caused by gunfire. The vast majority did not die for reasons directly related to the insurgency but as the result of the crimewave scourging the capital’s streets.
The institute’s deputy director, Abdul Razzaq al-Ubaidi, said: “Vengeance killings, kidnap victims, gang war, robberies — we don’t deal with bodies whose cause of death is already known by the police, for example those killed in bombings.”
The mortuary staff cannot agree whether the present situation could be described as better or worse than that which existed under Saddam Hussein. In August 2002, ten suspicious deaths led to post-mortem examinations. In August 2003, post-Saddam, 518 murders were recorded in the city in a similar four-week period. But the staff also remember when hundreds of victims of mass execution were dumped by the Baathist authorities at the mortuary and relatives were too frightened to collect them.
Saturday, November 27, 2004
Thursday, November 25, 2004
20,802 US Soldiers Heavily Wounded went through German hospital: offical total in 8458 ... ["we don't do bodycounts" ... accurately?]
20,802 US Soldiers Heavily Wounded (mparent7777.blog-city.com): "Raed in the Middle | November 24, 2004
believe it or not... Can anyone believe how dirty and dishonorable the US administration is? The official number of
US soldiers wounded in Iraq that was announced by the US DOD (department of defense) is 8458 in Iraq (http://icasualties.org/oif/ ) and 423 in Afghanistan (http://www.unknownnews.net/casualties.html#methodology ).
Can anyone believe that the US military hospital at Germany (alone), the Landstuhl Regional Medical Center, announced that 20,802 troops have been treated at Landstuhl from injuries received in "Operations Iraqi Freedom" (occupying Iraq) and "Enduring Freedom" (occupying Afghanistan).
The interesting part of the news that I didn't find these numbers on AlJazeera (the No.1 enemy of Rumy and other little bush supporters). These Numbers were published by the well-known, Department of Defense-authorized daily newspaper distributed overseas for the U.S. military community, "Stars and Stripes": http://www.stripes.com/about/aboutstripes.html
More than 17,200 from these soldiers were injured in Iraq, and more than 3,000 were injured in Afghanistan as I read in a local newspaper: http://www.assabeel.net/
These numbers are just for the US soldiers that were moved to Germany. There are other thousands that were injured inside Iraq and Afghanistan and treated in small local military clinics and hospitals, or moved to other US military hospitals.
believe it or not... Can anyone believe how dirty and dishonorable the US administration is? The official number of
US soldiers wounded in Iraq that was announced by the US DOD (department of defense) is 8458 in Iraq (http://icasualties.org/oif/ ) and 423 in Afghanistan (http://www.unknownnews.net/casualties.html#methodology ).
Can anyone believe that the US military hospital at Germany (alone), the Landstuhl Regional Medical Center, announced that 20,802 troops have been treated at Landstuhl from injuries received in "Operations Iraqi Freedom" (occupying Iraq) and "Enduring Freedom" (occupying Afghanistan).
The interesting part of the news that I didn't find these numbers on AlJazeera (the No.1 enemy of Rumy and other little bush supporters). These Numbers were published by the well-known, Department of Defense-authorized daily newspaper distributed overseas for the U.S. military community, "Stars and Stripes": http://www.stripes.com/about/aboutstripes.html
More than 17,200 from these soldiers were injured in Iraq, and more than 3,000 were injured in Afghanistan as I read in a local newspaper: http://www.assabeel.net/
These numbers are just for the US soldiers that were moved to Germany. There are other thousands that were injured inside Iraq and Afghanistan and treated in small local military clinics and hospitals, or moved to other US military hospitals.
Wednesday, November 24, 2004
'Something was not right': Kevin Sites talks about the killing of the Iraqi on camera
Guardian Unlimited | Special reports | 'Something was not right': Cameraman tells Falluja marines why he broadcast controversial shooting | Tuesday November 23, 2004 |
The Guardian
The broadcast last week of footage showing a US marine shooting an injured Iraqi fighter in Falluja caused an international outcry. Yesterday the cameraman, Kevin Sites, published on his website [www.kevinsites.net] this open letter to the marines with whom he had been embedded."
...
As you know, I'm not some war zone tourist with a camera who doesn't understand that ugly things happen in combat. I've spent most of the last five years covering global conflict. But I have never in my career been a "gotcha" reporter - hoping for people to commit wrongdoings so I can catch them at it.
This week I've been shocked to see myself painted as some kind of anti-war activist. Anyone who has seen my reporting on television or has read my dispatches on the web is fully aware of the lengths I've gone to to play it straight down the middle - not to become a tool of propaganda for the left or the right. But I find myself a lightning rod for controversy in reporting what I saw occur in front of me, camera rolling.
...
'Something was not right'
Cameraman tells Falluja marines why he broadcast controversial shooting
Tuesday November 23, 2004
The Guardian
The broadcast last week of footage showing a US marine shooting an injured Iraqi fighter in Falluja caused an international outcry. Yesterday the cameraman, Kevin Sites, published on his website this open letter to the marines with whom he had been embedded.
Since the shooting in the mosque, I've been haunted that I have not been able to tell you directly what I saw or explain the process by which the world came to see it as well.
As you know, I'm not some war zone tourist with a camera who doesn't understand that ugly things happen in combat. I've spent most of the last five years covering global conflict. But I have never in my career been a "gotcha" reporter - hoping for people to commit wrongdoings so I can catch them at it.
This week I've been shocked to see myself painted as some kind of anti-war activist. Anyone who has seen my reporting on television or has read my dispatches on the web is fully aware of the lengths I've gone to to play it straight down the middle - not to become a tool of propaganda for the left or the right. But I find myself a lightning rod for controversy in reporting what I saw occur in front of me, camera rolling.
It's time for you to have the facts, in my own words, about what I saw, without imposing on that marine guilt or innocence or anything in between. I want you to read my account and make up your own minds. Here it goes.
It's Saturday morning and we're still at our strong point from the night before, a clearing between a set of buildings on the southern edge of the city. The advance has been swift, but pockets of resistance still exist. In fact, we're taking sniper fire from both the front and the rear.
Advertiser links
Ski.com Vacation Packages
Ski.com provides holiday and skiing vacation travel packages...
ski.com
Skiing Equipment Shipped Free
Back Country Outlet carries a wide range of outdoor and...
backcountryoutlet.com
Free Shipping on All Skiing Equipment
Backcountry.com has the skis, boots and clothing from great...
backcountry.com
Weapons Company uses its 81's (mortars) where they spot muzzle flashes. The tanks do some blasting of their own. By mid-morning, we're told we're moving north again. We'll be back clearing some of the area we passed yesterday. There are also reports that the mosque, where 10 insurgents were killed and five wounded on Friday, may have been re-occupied overnight.
I decide to leave you guys and pick up with one of the infantry squads as they move house-to-house back toward the mosque. Many of the structures are empty of people - but full of weapons. Outside one residence, a member of the squad lobs a frag grenade over the wall. Everyone piles in, including me.
While the marines go into the house, I follow the flames caused by the grenade into the courtyard. When the smoke clears, I can see through my viewfinder that the fire is burning beside a large pile of anti-aircraft rounds.
I yell to the lieutenant that we need to move. Almost immediately after clearing out of the house, small explosions begin as the rounds cook off in the fire.
At that point, we hear the tanks firing their 240-machine guns into the mosque. There's radio chatter that insurgents inside could be shooting back. The tanks cease fire and we file through a breach in the outer wall.
We hear gunshots that seem to becoming from inside the mosque. A marine from my squad yells, "Are there marines in here?"
When we arrive at the front entrance, we see that another squad has already entered before us.
The lieutenant asks them, "Are there people inside?"
One of the marines raises his hand signaling five.
"Did you shoot them," the lieutenant asks?
"Roger that, sir, " the same marine responds.
"Were they armed?" The marine just shrugs and we all move inside.
Immediately after going in, I see the same black plastic body bags spread around the mosque. The dead from the day before. But more surprising, I see the same five men that were wounded from Friday as well. It appears that one of them is now dead and three are bleeding to death from new gunshot wounds.
The fifth is partially covered by a blanket and is in the same place and condition he was in on Friday, near a column. He has not been shot again. I look closely at both the dead and the wounded. There don't appear to be any weapons anywhere.
"These were the same wounded from yesterday," I say to the lieutenant. He takes a look around and goes outside the mosque with his radio operator to call in the situation to Battalion Forward HQ.
I see an old man in a red kaffiyeh lying against the back wall. Another is face down next to him, his hand on the old man's lap - as if he were trying to take cover. I squat beside them, inches away and begin to videotape them. Then I notice that the blood coming from the old man's nose is bubbling. A sign he is still breathing. So is the man next to him.
While I continue to tape, a marine walks up to the other two bodies about 15 feet away, but also lying against the same back wall.
Then I hear him say this about one of the men:
"He's fucking faking he's dead - he's faking he's fucking dead."
Through my viewfinder I can see him raise the muzzle of his rifle in the direction of the wounded Iraqi. There are no sudden movements, no reaching or lunging.
However, the marine could legitimately believe the man poses some kind of danger. Maybe he's going to cover him while another marine searches for weapons.
Instead, he pulls the trigger. There is a small splatter against the back wall and the man's leg slumps down.
"Well he's dead now," says another marine in the background.
I am still rolling. I feel the deep pit of my stomach. The marine then abruptly turns away and strides away, right past the fifth wounded insurgent lying next to a column. He is very much alive and peering from his blanket.
He is moving, even trying to talk. But for some reason, it seems he did not pose the same apparent "danger" as the other man - though he may have been more capable of hiding a weapon or explosive beneath his blanket.
But then two other marines in the room raise their weapons as the man tries to talk.
For a moment, I'm paralysed still taping with the old man in the foreground. I get up after a beat and tell the marines again, what I had told the lieutenant - that this man - all of these wounded men - were the same ones from yesterday. That they had been disarmed treated and left here.
At that point the marine who fired the shot became aware that I was in the room. He came up to me and said, "I didn't know sir - I didn't know." The anger that seemed present just moments before turned to fear and dread.
The wounded man then tries again to talk to me in Arabic.
He says, "Yesterday I was shot ... please ... yesterday I was shot over there - and talked to all of you on camera - I am one of the guys from this whole group. I gave you information. Do you speak Arabic? I want to give you information."
...
So here, ultimately, is how it all plays out: when the Iraqi man in the mosque posed a threat, he was your enemy; when he was subdued he was your responsibility; when he was killed in front of my eyes and my camera - the story of his death became my responsibility.
The burdens of war, as you so well know, are unforgiving for all of us.
The Guardian
The broadcast last week of footage showing a US marine shooting an injured Iraqi fighter in Falluja caused an international outcry. Yesterday the cameraman, Kevin Sites, published on his website [www.kevinsites.net] this open letter to the marines with whom he had been embedded."
...
As you know, I'm not some war zone tourist with a camera who doesn't understand that ugly things happen in combat. I've spent most of the last five years covering global conflict. But I have never in my career been a "gotcha" reporter - hoping for people to commit wrongdoings so I can catch them at it.
This week I've been shocked to see myself painted as some kind of anti-war activist. Anyone who has seen my reporting on television or has read my dispatches on the web is fully aware of the lengths I've gone to to play it straight down the middle - not to become a tool of propaganda for the left or the right. But I find myself a lightning rod for controversy in reporting what I saw occur in front of me, camera rolling.
...
'Something was not right'
Cameraman tells Falluja marines why he broadcast controversial shooting
Tuesday November 23, 2004
The Guardian
The broadcast last week of footage showing a US marine shooting an injured Iraqi fighter in Falluja caused an international outcry. Yesterday the cameraman, Kevin Sites, published on his website this open letter to the marines with whom he had been embedded.
Since the shooting in the mosque, I've been haunted that I have not been able to tell you directly what I saw or explain the process by which the world came to see it as well.
As you know, I'm not some war zone tourist with a camera who doesn't understand that ugly things happen in combat. I've spent most of the last five years covering global conflict. But I have never in my career been a "gotcha" reporter - hoping for people to commit wrongdoings so I can catch them at it.
This week I've been shocked to see myself painted as some kind of anti-war activist. Anyone who has seen my reporting on television or has read my dispatches on the web is fully aware of the lengths I've gone to to play it straight down the middle - not to become a tool of propaganda for the left or the right. But I find myself a lightning rod for controversy in reporting what I saw occur in front of me, camera rolling.
It's time for you to have the facts, in my own words, about what I saw, without imposing on that marine guilt or innocence or anything in between. I want you to read my account and make up your own minds. Here it goes.
It's Saturday morning and we're still at our strong point from the night before, a clearing between a set of buildings on the southern edge of the city. The advance has been swift, but pockets of resistance still exist. In fact, we're taking sniper fire from both the front and the rear.
Advertiser links
Ski.com Vacation Packages
Ski.com provides holiday and skiing vacation travel packages...
ski.com
Skiing Equipment Shipped Free
Back Country Outlet carries a wide range of outdoor and...
backcountryoutlet.com
Free Shipping on All Skiing Equipment
Backcountry.com has the skis, boots and clothing from great...
backcountry.com
Weapons Company uses its 81's (mortars) where they spot muzzle flashes. The tanks do some blasting of their own. By mid-morning, we're told we're moving north again. We'll be back clearing some of the area we passed yesterday. There are also reports that the mosque, where 10 insurgents were killed and five wounded on Friday, may have been re-occupied overnight.
I decide to leave you guys and pick up with one of the infantry squads as they move house-to-house back toward the mosque. Many of the structures are empty of people - but full of weapons. Outside one residence, a member of the squad lobs a frag grenade over the wall. Everyone piles in, including me.
While the marines go into the house, I follow the flames caused by the grenade into the courtyard. When the smoke clears, I can see through my viewfinder that the fire is burning beside a large pile of anti-aircraft rounds.
I yell to the lieutenant that we need to move. Almost immediately after clearing out of the house, small explosions begin as the rounds cook off in the fire.
At that point, we hear the tanks firing their 240-machine guns into the mosque. There's radio chatter that insurgents inside could be shooting back. The tanks cease fire and we file through a breach in the outer wall.
We hear gunshots that seem to becoming from inside the mosque. A marine from my squad yells, "Are there marines in here?"
When we arrive at the front entrance, we see that another squad has already entered before us.
The lieutenant asks them, "Are there people inside?"
One of the marines raises his hand signaling five.
"Did you shoot them," the lieutenant asks?
"Roger that, sir, " the same marine responds.
"Were they armed?" The marine just shrugs and we all move inside.
Immediately after going in, I see the same black plastic body bags spread around the mosque. The dead from the day before. But more surprising, I see the same five men that were wounded from Friday as well. It appears that one of them is now dead and three are bleeding to death from new gunshot wounds.
The fifth is partially covered by a blanket and is in the same place and condition he was in on Friday, near a column. He has not been shot again. I look closely at both the dead and the wounded. There don't appear to be any weapons anywhere.
"These were the same wounded from yesterday," I say to the lieutenant. He takes a look around and goes outside the mosque with his radio operator to call in the situation to Battalion Forward HQ.
I see an old man in a red kaffiyeh lying against the back wall. Another is face down next to him, his hand on the old man's lap - as if he were trying to take cover. I squat beside them, inches away and begin to videotape them. Then I notice that the blood coming from the old man's nose is bubbling. A sign he is still breathing. So is the man next to him.
While I continue to tape, a marine walks up to the other two bodies about 15 feet away, but also lying against the same back wall.
Then I hear him say this about one of the men:
"He's fucking faking he's dead - he's faking he's fucking dead."
Through my viewfinder I can see him raise the muzzle of his rifle in the direction of the wounded Iraqi. There are no sudden movements, no reaching or lunging.
However, the marine could legitimately believe the man poses some kind of danger. Maybe he's going to cover him while another marine searches for weapons.
Instead, he pulls the trigger. There is a small splatter against the back wall and the man's leg slumps down.
"Well he's dead now," says another marine in the background.
I am still rolling. I feel the deep pit of my stomach. The marine then abruptly turns away and strides away, right past the fifth wounded insurgent lying next to a column. He is very much alive and peering from his blanket.
He is moving, even trying to talk. But for some reason, it seems he did not pose the same apparent "danger" as the other man - though he may have been more capable of hiding a weapon or explosive beneath his blanket.
But then two other marines in the room raise their weapons as the man tries to talk.
For a moment, I'm paralysed still taping with the old man in the foreground. I get up after a beat and tell the marines again, what I had told the lieutenant - that this man - all of these wounded men - were the same ones from yesterday. That they had been disarmed treated and left here.
At that point the marine who fired the shot became aware that I was in the room. He came up to me and said, "I didn't know sir - I didn't know." The anger that seemed present just moments before turned to fear and dread.
The wounded man then tries again to talk to me in Arabic.
He says, "Yesterday I was shot ... please ... yesterday I was shot over there - and talked to all of you on camera - I am one of the guys from this whole group. I gave you information. Do you speak Arabic? I want to give you information."
...
So here, ultimately, is how it all plays out: when the Iraqi man in the mosque posed a threat, he was your enemy; when he was subdued he was your responsibility; when he was killed in front of my eyes and my camera - the story of his death became my responsibility.
The burdens of war, as you so well know, are unforgiving for all of us.
Monday, November 22, 2004
How many injured and ill soldiers left off Pantagon's casualty count --- Would you believe 15,000?
CBS News | Iraq: The Uncounted | November 22, 2004�04:17:53: "Iraq: The Uncounted | Nov. 21, 2004
...
How many injured and ill soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines - like Chris Schneider - are left off the Pentagon’s casualty count?
Would you believe 15,000? 60 Minutes asked the Department of Defense to grant us an interview. They declined. Instead, they sent a letter, which contains a figure not included in published casualty reports: "More than 15,000 troops with so-called 'non-battle' injuries and diseases have been evacuated from Iraq."
Many of those evacuated are brought to Landstuhl in Germany. Most cases are not life-threatening. In fact, some are not serious at all. But only 20 percent return to their units in Iraq. Among the 80 percent who don’t return are GIs who suffered crushing bone fractures; scores of spinal injuries; heart problems by the hundreds; and a slew of psychiatric cases. None of these are included in the casualty count, leaving the true human cost of the war something of a mystery.
...
"You have to say that the total number of casualties due to wounds, injury, disease would have to be somewhere in the ballpark of over 20, maybe 30,000," says Pike.
...
The Department of Defense did not include non-battle injuries in its casualty reports in other recent wars, either.
...
Traditionally, that count has not included combat stress. It was long thought, in the military’s macho culture, that psychological trauma is best suffered in silence.
...
How many injured and ill soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines - like Chris Schneider - are left off the Pentagon’s casualty count?
Would you believe 15,000? 60 Minutes asked the Department of Defense to grant us an interview. They declined. Instead, they sent a letter, which contains a figure not included in published casualty reports: "More than 15,000 troops with so-called 'non-battle' injuries and diseases have been evacuated from Iraq."
Many of those evacuated are brought to Landstuhl in Germany. Most cases are not life-threatening. In fact, some are not serious at all. But only 20 percent return to their units in Iraq. Among the 80 percent who don’t return are GIs who suffered crushing bone fractures; scores of spinal injuries; heart problems by the hundreds; and a slew of psychiatric cases. None of these are included in the casualty count, leaving the true human cost of the war something of a mystery.
...
"You have to say that the total number of casualties due to wounds, injury, disease would have to be somewhere in the ballpark of over 20, maybe 30,000," says Pike.
...
The Department of Defense did not include non-battle injuries in its casualty reports in other recent wars, either.
...
Traditionally, that count has not included combat stress. It was long thought, in the military’s macho culture, that psychological trauma is best suffered in silence.
Sunday, November 21, 2004
"That's what Americans do, isn't that so?" Taha said. "They do this all the time in Iraq."
Excite News: "Iraqis, GIs Share Uneasy Relationship | Nov 20, 5:20 AM (ET) | By HAMZA HENDAWI
BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) - When a hail of bullets hit the car in which Jinan Adnan and her family were riding, she followed her maternal instincts - and paid with her life.
Adnan, 37, used her body to shield her three children in the back seat. Her husband and the children survived. She was mortally wounded.
Because American soldiers had been in a firefight nearby around the time, it remains unclear if a U.S. bullet killed her, though her husband, Aref Taha, says he saw four American soldiers firing in the car's direction.
"That's what Americans do, isn't that so?" Taha said. "They do this all the time in Iraq."
...
"They are criminals," Zaid, Adnan's 15-year-old son, said of the Americans on Friday. His father said he cannot find words to describe his rage at the loss of his wife of 16 years.
BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) - When a hail of bullets hit the car in which Jinan Adnan and her family were riding, she followed her maternal instincts - and paid with her life.
Adnan, 37, used her body to shield her three children in the back seat. Her husband and the children survived. She was mortally wounded.
Because American soldiers had been in a firefight nearby around the time, it remains unclear if a U.S. bullet killed her, though her husband, Aref Taha, says he saw four American soldiers firing in the car's direction.
"That's what Americans do, isn't that so?" Taha said. "They do this all the time in Iraq."
...
"They are criminals," Zaid, Adnan's 15-year-old son, said of the Americans on Friday. His father said he cannot find words to describe his rage at the loss of his wife of 16 years.
Saturday, November 20, 2004
Democracy Now! | Red Cross Estimates 800 Iraqi Civilians Killed in Fallujah
Democracy Now! | Red Cross Estimates 800 Iraqi Civilians Killed in Fallujah: Wednesday, November 17th, 2004
Red Cross officials in Iraq are now estimating 800 Iraqi civilians have been killed during the siege on Fallujah. We go to Baghdad to speak with independent journalist Dahr Jamail who broke the story. [includes rush transcript] "
Independent journalist Dahr Jamail is reporting that Red Cross officials in Iraq are now estimating 800 Iraqi civilians have been killed during the siege on Fallujah. Jamail quotes an unnamed Red Cross official who insisted on remaining anonymous out of fear of US military reprisal. The US military has claimed that no civilians have been killed in the city even though the city of 300,000 has recently witnessed some of the most intense fighting of the Iraq war. The military has estimated 1200 fighters have been killed.
Red Cross officials in Iraq are now estimating 800 Iraqi civilians have been killed during the siege on Fallujah. We go to Baghdad to speak with independent journalist Dahr Jamail who broke the story. [includes rush transcript] "
Independent journalist Dahr Jamail is reporting that Red Cross officials in Iraq are now estimating 800 Iraqi civilians have been killed during the siege on Fallujah. Jamail quotes an unnamed Red Cross official who insisted on remaining anonymous out of fear of US military reprisal. The US military has claimed that no civilians have been killed in the city even though the city of 300,000 has recently witnessed some of the most intense fighting of the Iraq war. The military has estimated 1200 fighters have been killed.
Violence Breaks Out All Over Baghdad
Excite News: "Violence Breaks Out All Over Baghdad | Nov 20, 11:36 AM (ET) | By KATARINA KRATOVAC
BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) - Baghdad exploded in violence Saturday, as insurgents attacked a U.S. patrol and a police station, assassinated four government employees and detonated several bombs. One American soldier was killed and nine were wounded during clashes that also left three Iraqi troops and a police officer dead.
Some of the heaviest violence came in Azamiyah, a largely Sunni Arab district of Baghdad where a day earlier U.S. troops raided the capital's main Sunni mosque. Shops were in flames, and a U.S. Humvee burned, with the body of what appeared to be its driver inside.
BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) - Baghdad exploded in violence Saturday, as insurgents attacked a U.S. patrol and a police station, assassinated four government employees and detonated several bombs. One American soldier was killed and nine were wounded during clashes that also left three Iraqi troops and a police officer dead.
Some of the heaviest violence came in Azamiyah, a largely Sunni Arab district of Baghdad where a day earlier U.S. troops raided the capital's main Sunni mosque. Shops were in flames, and a U.S. Humvee burned, with the body of what appeared to be its driver inside.
ICRC Slams 'Utter Contempt' for Humanity Amid Fierce Fighting in Iraq: no access for humanitarian relief, no official count of civilian casualties
ICRC Slams 'Utter Contempt' for Humanity Amid Fierce Fighting in Iraq: "Published on Friday, November 19, 2004 by the Agence France Presse
GENEVA - The International Committee of the Red Cross sharply criticized the 'utter contempt' for humanity shown by all sides in Iraq amid fierce fighting between US forces and insurgents for control of the city of Fallujah.
...
"For the parties to this conflict, complying with international humanitarian law is an obligation, not an option," Kraehenbuehl said in an unusually tough statement by the relief agency.
...
As aid agencies were prevented from entering Fallujah, Kraehenbuehl appealed "for everything possible to be done to allow such organizations to come to the aid of the thousands of Iraqis who are suffering."
...
The ICRC had no information from US forces on when they would allow aid teams into Fallujah, she added.
As the US offensive continued, the ICRC was providing aid including tents, blankets, water and food to displaced just outside the city, Notari said, but aid was limited because of insecurity along the road from Baghdad.
...
There has been no official count of civilian casualties. US forces said about 1,200 insurgents had been killed while 51 US soldiers and eight Iraqi soldiers had died during the fighting for Fallujah.
GENEVA - The International Committee of the Red Cross sharply criticized the 'utter contempt' for humanity shown by all sides in Iraq amid fierce fighting between US forces and insurgents for control of the city of Fallujah.
...
"For the parties to this conflict, complying with international humanitarian law is an obligation, not an option," Kraehenbuehl said in an unusually tough statement by the relief agency.
...
As aid agencies were prevented from entering Fallujah, Kraehenbuehl appealed "for everything possible to be done to allow such organizations to come to the aid of the thousands of Iraqis who are suffering."
...
The ICRC had no information from US forces on when they would allow aid teams into Fallujah, she added.
As the US offensive continued, the ICRC was providing aid including tents, blankets, water and food to displaced just outside the city, Notari said, but aid was limited because of insecurity along the road from Baghdad.
...
There has been no official count of civilian casualties. US forces said about 1,200 insurgents had been killed while 51 US soldiers and eight Iraqi soldiers had died during the fighting for Fallujah.
Wednesday, November 17, 2004
The Bush Revolution: crushing resistance at State, the CIA ... shaft his Christian-right or pursue revolutionary changes on the right?
The New York Times > Opinion > Op-Ed Columnist: The Bush Revolution: "By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF | Published: November 17, 2004
Having crushed the resistance in Falluja, President Bush is now trying to do the same at the State Department and the C.I.A.
Colin Powell may have "resigned," but don't kid yourself - the White House didn't want him. Mr. Powell's own statement said that he and Mr. Bush "came to the mutual agreement that it would be appropriate for me to leave at this time."
The real winner in this foreign policy wrestling match is Dick Cheney. One of his former aides, Stephen Hadley, will now be the national security adviser, and Condoleezza Rice was run over so many times by Mr. Cheney in the first term that she'll be docile at State.
In a conversation with the British foreign secretary, Jack Straw, Mr. Powell once referred in frustration to Mr. Cheney, Don Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz as "[expletive] crazies," according to a recent British biography of Tony Blair. Mr. Powell had a point, but they're getting the last laugh.
The central question of President Bush's second term is this: Will he shaft his Christian-right supporters, since he doesn't need them any more, and try to secure his legacy with moderate policies that might unite the country? Or, with no re-election to worry about, will he pursue revolutionary changes on the right? To me, it looks increasingly like the latter.
...
... That will be much less likely now that heads are rolling down the corridors of the C.I.A.'s directorate of operations.
It's fair to replace Mr. Powell, a political appointee, but the spies being pushed out at Langley are career professionals. The intelligence community's best assets aren't those spying for us in foreign capitals, but the thousands of Americans at the C.I.A., the D.I.A., the N.S.A. and the rest of the alphabet soup of spookdom. Their morale - already bad - will suffer a further dive, along with their effectiveness.
Having crushed the resistance in Falluja, President Bush is now trying to do the same at the State Department and the C.I.A.
Colin Powell may have "resigned," but don't kid yourself - the White House didn't want him. Mr. Powell's own statement said that he and Mr. Bush "came to the mutual agreement that it would be appropriate for me to leave at this time."
The real winner in this foreign policy wrestling match is Dick Cheney. One of his former aides, Stephen Hadley, will now be the national security adviser, and Condoleezza Rice was run over so many times by Mr. Cheney in the first term that she'll be docile at State.
In a conversation with the British foreign secretary, Jack Straw, Mr. Powell once referred in frustration to Mr. Cheney, Don Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz as "[expletive] crazies," according to a recent British biography of Tony Blair. Mr. Powell had a point, but they're getting the last laugh.
The central question of President Bush's second term is this: Will he shaft his Christian-right supporters, since he doesn't need them any more, and try to secure his legacy with moderate policies that might unite the country? Or, with no re-election to worry about, will he pursue revolutionary changes on the right? To me, it looks increasingly like the latter.
...
... That will be much less likely now that heads are rolling down the corridors of the C.I.A.'s directorate of operations.
It's fair to replace Mr. Powell, a political appointee, but the spies being pushed out at Langley are career professionals. The intelligence community's best assets aren't those spying for us in foreign capitals, but the thousands of Americans at the C.I.A., the D.I.A., the N.S.A. and the rest of the alphabet soup of spookdom. Their morale - already bad - will suffer a further dive, along with their effectiveness.
Tuesday, November 16, 2004
Moves Cement Hard-Line Stance On Foreign Policy: For the rest of the world, there will be "teeth-gnashing
Moves Cement Hard-Line Stance On Foreign Policy (washingtonpost.com): "Moves Cement Hard-Line Stance On Foreign Policy | By Glenn Kessler | Washington Post Staff Writer | Tuesday, November 16, 2004; Page A01
By accepting Secretary of State Colin L. Powell's resignation, President Bush appears to have taken a decisive turn in his approach to foreign policy.
Powell's departure -- and Bush's intention to name his confidante, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice, as Powell's replacement -- would mark the triumph of a hard-edged approach to diplomacy espoused by Vice President Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld. Powell's brand of moderate realism was often overridden in the administration's councils of power, but Powell's presence ensured that the president heard divergent views on how to proceed on key foreign policy issues.
...
... Powell has pressed for working with the Europeans on ending Iran's nuclear program, pursuing diplomatic talks with North Korea over its nuclear ambitions and taking a tougher approach with Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. Now, the policy toward Iran and North Korea may turn decidedly sharper, with a bigger push for sanctions rather than diplomacy. On Middle East peace, the burden for progress will remain largely with the Palestinians.
...
For the rest of the world, Powell was considered a sympathetic ear in an administration that often appeared tone-deaf to other nations' concerns. There will be "teeth-gnashing" over Powell's departure by many foreign officials, said Samuel R. "Sandy" Berger, national security adviser in President Bill Clinton's second term. ...
By accepting Secretary of State Colin L. Powell's resignation, President Bush appears to have taken a decisive turn in his approach to foreign policy.
Powell's departure -- and Bush's intention to name his confidante, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice, as Powell's replacement -- would mark the triumph of a hard-edged approach to diplomacy espoused by Vice President Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld. Powell's brand of moderate realism was often overridden in the administration's councils of power, but Powell's presence ensured that the president heard divergent views on how to proceed on key foreign policy issues.
...
... Powell has pressed for working with the Europeans on ending Iran's nuclear program, pursuing diplomatic talks with North Korea over its nuclear ambitions and taking a tougher approach with Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. Now, the policy toward Iran and North Korea may turn decidedly sharper, with a bigger push for sanctions rather than diplomacy. On Middle East peace, the burden for progress will remain largely with the Palestinians.
...
For the rest of the world, Powell was considered a sympathetic ear in an administration that often appeared tone-deaf to other nations' concerns. There will be "teeth-gnashing" over Powell's departure by many foreign officials, said Samuel R. "Sandy" Berger, national security adviser in President Bill Clinton's second term. ...
Monday, November 15, 2004
MSNBC - Iraq fighting spreads far beyond Fallujah
MSNBC - Iraq fighting spreads far beyond Fallujah: "Spate of attacks, clashes throughout Sunni triangle; Mosul �tense�" | MSNBC News Services | Updated: 7:45 p.m. ET Nov. 15, 2004
BAGHDAD, Iraq - U.S. soldiers battled insurgents northeast of Baghdad on Monday in clashes that killed more than 50 people. Some guerrillas were said to be “fighting to the death” inside Fallujah, where American forces struggled to clear pockets of resistance.
At least five suicide car bombers targeted American troops elsewhere in volatile Sunni Muslim areas north and west of the capital, wounding at least nine Americans. Three of those bombings occurred nearly simultaneously in locations between Fallujah and the insurgent stronghold of Ramadi, the U.S. command said.
The apparent coordination of those attacks against U.S. or Iraqi forces suggested a level of military sophistication and planning not seen in the early months of the insurgency last year.
BAGHDAD, Iraq - U.S. soldiers battled insurgents northeast of Baghdad on Monday in clashes that killed more than 50 people. Some guerrillas were said to be “fighting to the death” inside Fallujah, where American forces struggled to clear pockets of resistance.
At least five suicide car bombers targeted American troops elsewhere in volatile Sunni Muslim areas north and west of the capital, wounding at least nine Americans. Three of those bombings occurred nearly simultaneously in locations between Fallujah and the insurgent stronghold of Ramadi, the U.S. command said.
The apparent coordination of those attacks against U.S. or Iraqi forces suggested a level of military sophistication and planning not seen in the early months of the insurgency last year.
AP Photographer Flees Fallujah; Witnesses US Helicopter Kill Fleeing Family of 5
AP Photographer Flees Fallujah; Witnesses US Helicopter Kill Fleeing Family of 5: "Monday, November 15, 2004 by the Associated Press | AP Photographer Flees Fallujah | Witnesses US Helicopter Kill Fleeing Family of 5 | by Katarina Kratovac
...
"I decided to swim ... but I changed my mind after seeing U.S. helicopters firing on and killing people who tried to cross the river."
He watched horrified as a family of five was shot dead as they tried to cross. Then, he "helped bury a man by the river bank, with my own hands."
...
"I decided to swim ... but I changed my mind after seeing U.S. helicopters firing on and killing people who tried to cross the river."
He watched horrified as a family of five was shot dead as they tried to cross. Then, he "helped bury a man by the river bank, with my own hands."
A City Lies in Ruins, Along with the Lives of the Wretched Survivors
A City Lies in Ruins, Along with the Lives of the Wretched Survivors: "Monday, November 15, 2004 by the lndependent/UK | by Michael Georgy in Fallujah and Kim Sengupta
After six days of intense combat against the Fallujah insurgents, US warplanes, tanks and mortars have left a shattered landscape of gutted buildings, crushed cars and charred bodies.
A drive through the city revealed a picture of utter destruction, with concrete houses flattened, mosques in ruins, telegraph poles down, power and phone lines hanging slack and rubble and human remains littering the empty streets. The north-west Jolan district, once an insurgent stronghold, looked like a ghost town, the only sound the rumbling of tank tracks.
After six days of intense combat against the Fallujah insurgents, US warplanes, tanks and mortars have left a shattered landscape of gutted buildings, crushed cars and charred bodies.
A drive through the city revealed a picture of utter destruction, with concrete houses flattened, mosques in ruins, telegraph poles down, power and phone lines hanging slack and rubble and human remains littering the empty streets. The north-west Jolan district, once an insurgent stronghold, looked like a ghost town, the only sound the rumbling of tank tracks.
A City Lies in Ruins, Along with the Lives of the Wretched Survivors
A City Lies in Ruins, Along with the Lives of the Wretched Survivors: "Monday, November 15, 2004 by the lndependent/UK | by Michael Georgy in Fallujah and Kim Sengupta
After six days of intense combat against the Fallujah insurgents, US warplanes, tanks and mortars have left a shattered landscape of gutted buildings, crushed cars and charred bodies.
A drive through the city revealed a picture of utter destruction, with concrete houses flattened, mosques in ruins, telegraph poles down, power and phone lines hanging slack and rubble and human remains littering the empty streets. The north-west Jolan district, once an insurgent stronghold, looked like a ghost town, the only sound the rumbling of tank tracks.
After six days of intense combat against the Fallujah insurgents, US warplanes, tanks and mortars have left a shattered landscape of gutted buildings, crushed cars and charred bodies.
A drive through the city revealed a picture of utter destruction, with concrete houses flattened, mosques in ruins, telegraph poles down, power and phone lines hanging slack and rubble and human remains littering the empty streets. The north-west Jolan district, once an insurgent stronghold, looked like a ghost town, the only sound the rumbling of tank tracks.
61 US Soldiers Killed This Week - by Michael Ewens
61 US Soldiers Killed This Week - by Michael Ewens: "November 15, 2004 | At least 40 killed in Fallujah alone | by Michael Ewens
In a flurry of weekend press releases, the Department of Defense named another 26 U.S. soldiers killed in Iraq. These deaths bring the total killed since Nov. 8 to 61. Such facts may conflict with 'official numbers' released to the unquestioning media. However, in an apparent response to this article, the DoD is now reporting that 38 US troops have died in Fallujah. The discrepancy in numbers may stem from unreported deaths. We will only know after the troops' names are officially released.
The 50-plus killed this week is indicative of a growing insurgency likely to spread to previously peaceful cities. Over twenty of the deaths occurred in Baghdad, Mosul, Abu Gharb, and Babli province (just south of Baghdad). This indicates that the violence is only spreading."
In a flurry of weekend press releases, the Department of Defense named another 26 U.S. soldiers killed in Iraq. These deaths bring the total killed since Nov. 8 to 61. Such facts may conflict with 'official numbers' released to the unquestioning media. However, in an apparent response to this article, the DoD is now reporting that 38 US troops have died in Fallujah. The discrepancy in numbers may stem from unreported deaths. We will only know after the troops' names are officially released.
The 50-plus killed this week is indicative of a growing insurgency likely to spread to previously peaceful cities. Over twenty of the deaths occurred in Baghdad, Mosul, Abu Gharb, and Babli province (just south of Baghdad). This indicates that the violence is only spreading."
Saturday, November 13, 2004
Behind the Camp David Myth: Palestinian positions ... were compatible with the existence of a Jewish state
Los Angeles Times: Behind the Camp David Myth: "Behind the Camp David Myth
Arafat didn't blindly spurn a generous offer.
By Robert Malley
Robert Malley was President Clinton's special assistant for Arab-Israeli affairs. He now directs the Middle East and North Africa program at the International Crisis Group.
November 12, 2004
It took Yasser Arafat many years to persuade his fellow Palestinians of the wisdom of the two-state solution, and it took longer still to convince Americans and Israelis of the genuineness of his views. Yet it took only two weeks at Camp David in the summer of 2000 to wreck all the progress that had been made and for Arafat to regain the pariah status he once held.
Those talks failed, and in the aftermath a myth was born that has had a lasting and devastating effect: that Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak made the most generous offer possible, but that Arafat summarily turned it down. He did so, the story goes, because he never really believed in the Jewish state's right to exist in the first place and because he had never really hoped to reach a just, comprehensive and lasting peace with Israel. Since 2000, it is this narrative � Camp David as a metaphor for Palestinian rejectionism � that has ravaged the Israeli peace camp, distorted both U.S. and Israeli policy and badly undermined confidence in a peaceful settlement of the conflict.
...
Second, although Camp David undoubtedly was a breakthrough, and although Israel was prepared to concede far more than in the past, the deal nevertheless didn't meet the minimum requirements of any Palestinian leader. ...
A third oft-neglected point about Camp David is that the Palestinian positions, though clearly inconsistent with Israel's, nonetheless were compatible with the existence of a Jewish state: a Palestinian state based on the lines of June 4, 1967; Israeli annexation of limited West Bank territory to accommodate settlement blocs in exchange for the transfer of an equivalent amount of land from Israel proper; Palestinian sovereignty over Arab neighborhoods of East Jerusalem and over its holy sites; and implementation of the refugees' right of return in a manner designed to protect Israel's demographic interests. Those stances probably went beyond what the Israeli people could accept. ...
The more difficult question is not why Arafat rebuffed the Camp David ideas but why he failed to embrace the Clinton parameters five months later in December 2000, which came far closer to meeting the Palestinian principles.
By then, however, everything had changed. The intifada was raging, Palestinians were seething and mourning their dead, and many of Arafat's advisors were counseling against the deal. ...
Arafat didn't blindly spurn a generous offer.
By Robert Malley
Robert Malley was President Clinton's special assistant for Arab-Israeli affairs. He now directs the Middle East and North Africa program at the International Crisis Group.
November 12, 2004
It took Yasser Arafat many years to persuade his fellow Palestinians of the wisdom of the two-state solution, and it took longer still to convince Americans and Israelis of the genuineness of his views. Yet it took only two weeks at Camp David in the summer of 2000 to wreck all the progress that had been made and for Arafat to regain the pariah status he once held.
Those talks failed, and in the aftermath a myth was born that has had a lasting and devastating effect: that Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak made the most generous offer possible, but that Arafat summarily turned it down. He did so, the story goes, because he never really believed in the Jewish state's right to exist in the first place and because he had never really hoped to reach a just, comprehensive and lasting peace with Israel. Since 2000, it is this narrative � Camp David as a metaphor for Palestinian rejectionism � that has ravaged the Israeli peace camp, distorted both U.S. and Israeli policy and badly undermined confidence in a peaceful settlement of the conflict.
...
Second, although Camp David undoubtedly was a breakthrough, and although Israel was prepared to concede far more than in the past, the deal nevertheless didn't meet the minimum requirements of any Palestinian leader. ...
A third oft-neglected point about Camp David is that the Palestinian positions, though clearly inconsistent with Israel's, nonetheless were compatible with the existence of a Jewish state: a Palestinian state based on the lines of June 4, 1967; Israeli annexation of limited West Bank territory to accommodate settlement blocs in exchange for the transfer of an equivalent amount of land from Israel proper; Palestinian sovereignty over Arab neighborhoods of East Jerusalem and over its holy sites; and implementation of the refugees' right of return in a manner designed to protect Israel's demographic interests. Those stances probably went beyond what the Israeli people could accept. ...
The more difficult question is not why Arafat rebuffed the Camp David ideas but why he failed to embrace the Clinton parameters five months later in December 2000, which came far closer to meeting the Palestinian principles.
By then, however, everything had changed. The intifada was raging, Palestinians were seething and mourning their dead, and many of Arafat's advisors were counseling against the deal. ...
The "completely false conception that Arafat was offered a good deal ": the 97% myth
Arafat and Vanunu: Two Prisoners of War- by Justin Raimondo: "November 12, 2004 | Israel's move against Mordechai Vanunu, the man who exposed their nuclear secrets, couldn't have been timed better | by Justin Raimondo
...
Central to the hateful festivities surrounding Arafat's death is the myth of the missed opportunity, the completely false conception that Arafat was offered a good deal by former Prime Minister Ehud Barak, and Bill Clinton, and, because of a psychological inability to make the transition from revolutionary leader to "statesman," failed to take it while the taking was good. This is utter balderdash, as a simple glance at a map of what the Palestinians were offered – here and here – graphically reveals. Alexander Cockburn put it well:
"Bill Clinton has always been one for the phony reconciliation, the win-win solution, the photo-op deal. The defining moment of his diplomacy was the 'handshake' between Rabin and Arafat, offered to the world as the insignia of a decent settlement brokered by America."
But it was nothing of the sort, as Cockburn notes. The Palestinian "nation" was to be a series of disconnected bantustans, surrounded entirely by Israeli military posts and "settlements" populated by ultra-Zionist fanatics. All water, roads, communications, and other vital command posts of this "independent" entity would be controlled by the Israelis. Some independence!
As Michael C. Desch wrote in The American Conservative:
"In the Palestinians' view, they had surrendered 78 percent of historic Palestine to Israel when they recognized Israel as a sovereign state at Oslo in 1993; in return, they expected that they would get the remaining 22 percent (the West Bank and Gaza) as part of the final agreement. Yet the Israeli occupation of Palestinian lands continued to deepen and expand after Oslo and the Israeli government began to interfere ever more intrusively in the lives of ordinary Palestinians.
If Palestinians were black, instead of a rich nut-brown, the UN would have imposed strict sanctions long ago, and in the U.S. the Israeli government would be as reviled as the white South African or Rhodesian regimes that lorded it over their native African majorities. As it is, Israeli propaganda seeks to depict any and all Arabs, and practically all Muslims, as terrorists, a definition that suits Osama bin Laden just fine. The Israelis have been particularly eager to smash all manifestations of secular Arab militance, in a perfect complement to bin Laden working the other side of the street.
Arafat was no saint, but then the only saints in that part of the world are already buried in their graves. It's a rough neighborhood, and by local standards the PLO leader was no better or worse than most of his Israeli counterparts, whose crimes fall in the category of state terrorism as opposed to the more freelance variety practiced by the other side. After all, the Israeli state was founded by groups that employed terrorism as a tactic, who bombed hotels full of innocent civilians, massacred Arab villagers, and drove the remaining Palestinians off the land. These are the very same people, by the way, who claim that they are a bulwark against terrorism – even as they carry out a brutal policy of state terrorism in the sight of the whole world.
...
...
Central to the hateful festivities surrounding Arafat's death is the myth of the missed opportunity, the completely false conception that Arafat was offered a good deal by former Prime Minister Ehud Barak, and Bill Clinton, and, because of a psychological inability to make the transition from revolutionary leader to "statesman," failed to take it while the taking was good. This is utter balderdash, as a simple glance at a map of what the Palestinians were offered – here and here – graphically reveals. Alexander Cockburn put it well:
"Bill Clinton has always been one for the phony reconciliation, the win-win solution, the photo-op deal. The defining moment of his diplomacy was the 'handshake' between Rabin and Arafat, offered to the world as the insignia of a decent settlement brokered by America."
But it was nothing of the sort, as Cockburn notes. The Palestinian "nation" was to be a series of disconnected bantustans, surrounded entirely by Israeli military posts and "settlements" populated by ultra-Zionist fanatics. All water, roads, communications, and other vital command posts of this "independent" entity would be controlled by the Israelis. Some independence!
As Michael C. Desch wrote in The American Conservative:
"In the Palestinians' view, they had surrendered 78 percent of historic Palestine to Israel when they recognized Israel as a sovereign state at Oslo in 1993; in return, they expected that they would get the remaining 22 percent (the West Bank and Gaza) as part of the final agreement. Yet the Israeli occupation of Palestinian lands continued to deepen and expand after Oslo and the Israeli government began to interfere ever more intrusively in the lives of ordinary Palestinians.
If Palestinians were black, instead of a rich nut-brown, the UN would have imposed strict sanctions long ago, and in the U.S. the Israeli government would be as reviled as the white South African or Rhodesian regimes that lorded it over their native African majorities. As it is, Israeli propaganda seeks to depict any and all Arabs, and practically all Muslims, as terrorists, a definition that suits Osama bin Laden just fine. The Israelis have been particularly eager to smash all manifestations of secular Arab militance, in a perfect complement to bin Laden working the other side of the street.
Arafat was no saint, but then the only saints in that part of the world are already buried in their graves. It's a rough neighborhood, and by local standards the PLO leader was no better or worse than most of his Israeli counterparts, whose crimes fall in the category of state terrorism as opposed to the more freelance variety practiced by the other side. After all, the Israeli state was founded by groups that employed terrorism as a tactic, who bombed hotels full of innocent civilians, massacred Arab villagers, and drove the remaining Palestinians off the land. These are the very same people, by the way, who claim that they are a bulwark against terrorism – even as they carry out a brutal policy of state terrorism in the sight of the whole world.
...
Friday, November 12, 2004
U.N. Report Slams Use of Torture to Beat Terror
U.N. Report Slams Use of Torture to Beat Terror: "November 12, 2004 by the Inter Press Service | by Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS - No country can justify torture, the humiliation of prisoners or violation of international conventions in the guise of fighting terrorism, says a U.N. report released here.
The 19-page study, which is likely to go before the current session of the U.N. General Assembly in December, does not identify the United States by name but catalogues the widely publicized torture and humiliation of prisoners and detainees in Iraq and Afghanistan by U.S. troops waging the so-called ”war on terrorism.”
...
On Wednesday, U.S. President George W Bush named White House legal counsel Alberto Gonzales as attorney general to succeed John Ashcroft, who announced his resignation last week.
In a now-infamous memo to the White House in January 2002, Gonzales argued that captured members of the former ruling Taliban regime in Afghanistan were not protected under the Geneva Conventions, which stipulate the treatment of prisoners of war (POWs). The United States has signed the Geneva Conventions.
...
Gonzales has also described international conventions governing prisoners of war, including the Geneva Conventions, as ''obsolete.''
According to the author of the 19-page U.N. report, 'Torture, and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment', ''The condoning of torture is, per se, a violation of the prohibition of torture.”
UNITED NATIONS - No country can justify torture, the humiliation of prisoners or violation of international conventions in the guise of fighting terrorism, says a U.N. report released here.
The 19-page study, which is likely to go before the current session of the U.N. General Assembly in December, does not identify the United States by name but catalogues the widely publicized torture and humiliation of prisoners and detainees in Iraq and Afghanistan by U.S. troops waging the so-called ”war on terrorism.”
...
On Wednesday, U.S. President George W Bush named White House legal counsel Alberto Gonzales as attorney general to succeed John Ashcroft, who announced his resignation last week.
In a now-infamous memo to the White House in January 2002, Gonzales argued that captured members of the former ruling Taliban regime in Afghanistan were not protected under the Geneva Conventions, which stipulate the treatment of prisoners of war (POWs). The United States has signed the Geneva Conventions.
...
Gonzales has also described international conventions governing prisoners of war, including the Geneva Conventions, as ''obsolete.''
According to the author of the 19-page U.N. report, 'Torture, and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment', ''The condoning of torture is, per se, a violation of the prohibition of torture.”
Tests for Mideast and World: the road to Baghdad passes through Jerusalem
The New York Times > International > Middle East > News Analysis: After Death, Tests for Mideast and World: "By STEVEN ERLANGER | Published: November 12, 2004
RAMALLAH, West Bank, Nov. 11 - Yasir Arafat was both the symbol of the Palestinians' hope for a viable, independent state and the prime obstacle to its realization.
His death early Thursday morning presents an enormous set of challenges to his own people, to the Israelis, to a re-elected American president and to the world at large.
It is a test, first of all, for the Palestinians themselves, to move from a revolutionary ethos of victimhood and military confrontation with Israel to a more responsible and legitimate government, able to care for its people and to negotiate for them.
It is a test for Israel and its prime minister, Ariel Sharon, to move beyond the dismissive response that there is 'no negotiating partner' and to work to help the emerging Palestinian leadership consolidate and maintain authority and control.
And it is a test for President Bush, already being pressed in public by his best ally, Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain, to push Mr. Sharon hard for revived negotiations with the Palestinians.
As Mr. Blair, the Europeans and Arab states like Egypt constantly point out, the Israeli-Palestinian stalemate feeds Muslim anger and despair, giving a larger rationale to terrorist groups like Al Qaeda and to the insurgency in Iraq.
Before the Iraq war, Mr. Bush had been told that "the road to Jerusalem passed through Baghdad," but with Iraq today a magnet for anti-Western fervor, it is increasingly believed in the region that the formula is the other way around. ...
RAMALLAH, West Bank, Nov. 11 - Yasir Arafat was both the symbol of the Palestinians' hope for a viable, independent state and the prime obstacle to its realization.
His death early Thursday morning presents an enormous set of challenges to his own people, to the Israelis, to a re-elected American president and to the world at large.
It is a test, first of all, for the Palestinians themselves, to move from a revolutionary ethos of victimhood and military confrontation with Israel to a more responsible and legitimate government, able to care for its people and to negotiate for them.
It is a test for Israel and its prime minister, Ariel Sharon, to move beyond the dismissive response that there is 'no negotiating partner' and to work to help the emerging Palestinian leadership consolidate and maintain authority and control.
And it is a test for President Bush, already being pressed in public by his best ally, Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain, to push Mr. Sharon hard for revived negotiations with the Palestinians.
As Mr. Blair, the Europeans and Arab states like Egypt constantly point out, the Israeli-Palestinian stalemate feeds Muslim anger and despair, giving a larger rationale to terrorist groups like Al Qaeda and to the insurgency in Iraq.
Before the Iraq war, Mr. Bush had been told that "the road to Jerusalem passed through Baghdad," but with Iraq today a magnet for anti-Western fervor, it is increasingly believed in the region that the formula is the other way around. ...
Bush and Blair See 'New Opportunity' for Mideast Peace
The New York Times > AP > National > Bush and Blair See 'New Opportunity' for Mideast Peace: "By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS | Published: November 12, 2004
WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Bush said Friday the death of Yasser Arafat provides ``a great chance to establish a Palestinian state'' and a broader Middle East peace.
At a joint White House news conference, Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair pledged their support for a fresh stab at Israeli-Palestinians peace negotiations.
``We'll hold their feet to the fire to make sure that democracy prevails,'' Bush said.
``We're going to work flat out to deliver this,'' Blair said.
...
While the president coupled his call for a Palestinian state with his unwavering support of Israeli security, Blair stressed the need to bolster Palestinians.
``If we want a viable Palestinian state, we want to make sure the political, the economic and the security infrastructure of that state is shaped and comes into being,'' the British prime minister said.
``We've got the chance over the next few months, with the election of a new Palestinian president, to put the first marker down,'' Blair said.
Bush didn't commit to a Mideast conference or sending a U.S. envoy to the region -- two items sought by Europeans. But he did talk more optimistically than usual about the prospects for a Palestinian state.
``I intend to use the next four years to spend the capital of the United States on such a state,'' Bush said. ``I believe it is in the interests of the world that such a truly free state develop. I know it is in the interest of the Palestinian people.''
WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Bush said Friday the death of Yasser Arafat provides ``a great chance to establish a Palestinian state'' and a broader Middle East peace.
At a joint White House news conference, Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair pledged their support for a fresh stab at Israeli-Palestinians peace negotiations.
``We'll hold their feet to the fire to make sure that democracy prevails,'' Bush said.
``We're going to work flat out to deliver this,'' Blair said.
...
While the president coupled his call for a Palestinian state with his unwavering support of Israeli security, Blair stressed the need to bolster Palestinians.
``If we want a viable Palestinian state, we want to make sure the political, the economic and the security infrastructure of that state is shaped and comes into being,'' the British prime minister said.
``We've got the chance over the next few months, with the election of a new Palestinian president, to put the first marker down,'' Blair said.
Bush didn't commit to a Mideast conference or sending a U.S. envoy to the region -- two items sought by Europeans. But he did talk more optimistically than usual about the prospects for a Palestinian state.
``I intend to use the next four years to spend the capital of the United States on such a state,'' Bush said. ``I believe it is in the interests of the world that such a truly free state develop. I know it is in the interest of the Palestinian people.''
A Middle East Opening (washingtonpost.com)
A Middle East Opening (washingtonpost.com): "By Brent Scowcroft | Friday, November 12, 2004; Page A25
...
Iraq, Israel-Palestine, Iran and terrorism are parts of a whole and can only be satisfactorily engaged as such. To cut through this Gordian knot will require not only a new approach but the deep, sustained commitment of the United States and a significant investment of the president's attention.
...
This essential step in Iraq needs to be accompanied by a U.S. undertaking to revitalize the peace process between Israel and the Palestinians. Yasser Arafat has passed from the scene. His death represents a sea change in the Palestinian situation and, as the president has remarked, "an opening for peace." Both the United States and Israel have refused to deal with Arafat. The United States must seize this unique opportunity to make a decisive move.
The president should add substance to his commitment to an independent Palestinian state. It must include steps to provide security to Israel and to give the Palestinians the ability and means to construct a viable political entity free from the crushing presence of Israeli troops. The United States should insist that Israel stop construction of its wall on the West Bank and mirror its withdrawal from Gaza with the evacuation of the West Bank. In return, the wall and Israeli troops would be replaced by an international force, principally European or perhaps NATO troops.
The Palestinians should be pressed to take urgent measures to replace Arafat with political leadership that is both willing and able to undertake responsible negotiations and deliver on its commitments. Arab friends, notably Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Morocco, should provide vital guidance, encouragement and support.
The "road map" plan of the United States, the European Union, Russia and the United Nations should be revived and fortified by the actions I've described and vigorously pushed by its sponsors to final settlement. The outlines of such a settlement have, by the otherwise unfortunate stagnation of the process, become much less contested. A unified Jerusalem would serve as capital to both peoples. While the "right of return" could be left as a principle, the reality is that most Palestinian refugees will remain outside Israel, just as most Jewish settlers will return to Israel. A donor pool may need to be organized to provide compensation for both groups. [1/10th of what that spent on Iraq shold do nicely!.ed.] Border rectifications would be necessary to compensate for the settlement solution and would complete the package.
Substantial, visible progress on the Palestinian issue would significantly improve the atmosphere in Iraq and the rest of the Middle East, ....
...
Iraq, Israel-Palestine, Iran and terrorism are parts of a whole and can only be satisfactorily engaged as such. To cut through this Gordian knot will require not only a new approach but the deep, sustained commitment of the United States and a significant investment of the president's attention.
...
This essential step in Iraq needs to be accompanied by a U.S. undertaking to revitalize the peace process between Israel and the Palestinians. Yasser Arafat has passed from the scene. His death represents a sea change in the Palestinian situation and, as the president has remarked, "an opening for peace." Both the United States and Israel have refused to deal with Arafat. The United States must seize this unique opportunity to make a decisive move.
The president should add substance to his commitment to an independent Palestinian state. It must include steps to provide security to Israel and to give the Palestinians the ability and means to construct a viable political entity free from the crushing presence of Israeli troops. The United States should insist that Israel stop construction of its wall on the West Bank and mirror its withdrawal from Gaza with the evacuation of the West Bank. In return, the wall and Israeli troops would be replaced by an international force, principally European or perhaps NATO troops.
The Palestinians should be pressed to take urgent measures to replace Arafat with political leadership that is both willing and able to undertake responsible negotiations and deliver on its commitments. Arab friends, notably Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Morocco, should provide vital guidance, encouragement and support.
The "road map" plan of the United States, the European Union, Russia and the United Nations should be revived and fortified by the actions I've described and vigorously pushed by its sponsors to final settlement. The outlines of such a settlement have, by the otherwise unfortunate stagnation of the process, become much less contested. A unified Jerusalem would serve as capital to both peoples. While the "right of return" could be left as a principle, the reality is that most Palestinian refugees will remain outside Israel, just as most Jewish settlers will return to Israel. A donor pool may need to be organized to provide compensation for both groups. [1/10th of what that spent on Iraq shold do nicely!.ed.] Border rectifications would be necessary to compensate for the settlement solution and would complete the package.
Substantial, visible progress on the Palestinian issue would significantly improve the atmosphere in Iraq and the rest of the Middle East, ....
Falluja a 'Big Disaster,' Aid Needed - Red Crescent
Excite News: "Falluja a 'Big Disaster,' Aid Needed - Red Crescent | Nov 12, 7:37 AM (ET) | By Omar Anwar
BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Aid agencies called on U.S. forces and the Iraqi government to allow them to deliver food, medicine and water to Falluja on Friday and said four days of intense fighting had turned the city into a 'big disaster.'
The Iraqi Red Crescent Society, which receives support from foreign agencies including the Red Cross and UNICEF, said it had asked U.S. forces and Iraq's interim government to let them deliver relief goods to Falluja and establish medics there.
But it said it had received no reply."
BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Aid agencies called on U.S. forces and the Iraqi government to allow them to deliver food, medicine and water to Falluja on Friday and said four days of intense fighting had turned the city into a 'big disaster.'
The Iraqi Red Crescent Society, which receives support from foreign agencies including the Red Cross and UNICEF, said it had asked U.S. forces and Iraq's interim government to let them deliver relief goods to Falluja and establish medics there.
But it said it had received no reply."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)