Get Columbia Out of the War blog

This is what Bush calls a movement toward democracy:

The Power Beyond Their Grasp
By Vivienne Walt
Washington Post
Sunday, August 17, 2003; Page B01

BAGHDAD

Ali Hassan shook his head in dismay at the current state of his life. "Twenty-three years I worked in the Ministry of Justice," he said. "I was an accountant in the ministry's auditing department. Now where am I?

"Two weeks ago I sold our refrigerator and television just to get some money. I have four children at home," said the small, gray-haired man, standing among 300 or so demonstrators outside Baghdad's new Union of Unemployed Iraqis. "I'm happy Saddam is gone -- but I need a job."

And to whom did he and the other demonstrators turn? Chanting their demands for work, they marched toward Saddam Hussein's old Republican Palace, headquarters of the Coalition Provisional Authority -- the almost all-American body, headed by L. Paul Bremer III, that runs Iraq. When I asked one of the organizers why they didn't go to their own leaders in the Iraqi Governing Council, he looked blank. "We don't know where they are," he said.

That's no surprise. One month after the council's 25 members were handpicked by Bremer's office, its members work in a largely empty office building, surrounded by American military cordons and coils of barbed wire. They carry American-issued MCI cell phones, with an American area code (914).

Almost all have spent the past few decades in exile, returning home only after Baghdad fell to coalition forces in April; to many of the people who stayed here through 23 years of Hussein's stranglehold, they might as well have landed from another planet. They are generally inaccessible, with no control over their own budget; more hands-on are the new council-appointed Iraqi cabinet ministers.

The United States has vowed to install a working democracy in Iraq, yet one of the defining values of any democracy is the extent to which it can furnish its citizens with what they need to survive. In Iraq today, these things are working utilities, jobs and safety. So far, the Governing Council can deliver none of these. That powerlessness, if it endures, could present serious obstacles to creating a viable Iraqi government that its citizens will respect.

-At least the Iraqis are organizing. I'd hate to see what Iraq would look like if they were
too cowed by years of Saddam and the sanctions to do anything.

I decided to pass on my usual article clippings and add some original thoughts.
Things could not be going worse for Bush or better for those of us who were
opposed to the war in the first place. Three months after the "end" of the war,
not a single Weapon of Mass Destruction has been found. Every scientist we
capture says there weren't any. Every terrorist we capture says that Iraq had
no links with Al Qaeda because Bin Ladin hated Saddam and wouldn't work
with him. Bush himself has been forced to admit that he at least overstated
the case for war, and Blair has been held to the flames on this one.

We were right, but it doesn't feel very good. If you've been checking out
the casualty lists, you can see that this occupation is swiftly becoming a
losing proposition. We've now lost more troops than in the last Gulf War
and we're losing anywhere from one to three soldiers a day and that's
not getting any better. Life in Iraq must be hell for these kids, and I only
wish they weren't there in the first place.

Thinking ahead: the anti-war movement has been keeping a hand in
over the uranium allegations, but I think we should become more
visible in the future. In the coming presidential race, we have four
candidates opposed to the war, at least one of whom is viable.
In addition to supporting pro-war candidates, I think we could buttress
the presidential elections with "bring our troops home" marches.
Bush is going to be in New York City for his convention - that's
going to be the nightly news that week. But if 400,000 people
held a rally in Central Park calling for Bush to withdraw from our
city and if an anti-war presidential nominee were to headline it,
that would be a very different image. Instead of a wealthy, politically
savvy president working his mojo, you'd see a damaged and
unpopular president hiding from the real New York.

Just a thought.

Enemy Combatant Vanishes Into a 'Legal Black Hole'
By Paula Span
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, July 30, 2003; Page A01


Second of two articles

NEW YORK -- It was the luck of the draw.

Some other spring morning, Donna Newman would have encountered a different client in a prison jumpsuit, someone accused of fraud or drug trafficking. Instead, arriving at the federal courthouse in downtown Manhattan in May 2002, she met Jose Padilla.

Newman serves on a panel of private practice attorneys who occasionally take on indigent clients facing federal charges. She accepts new cases two days a year. "I believe in defending indigents," she said. "You gotta give back." At the time, though, she had no inkling how much she was about to give.

Padilla, arrested by the FBI at Chicago's O'Hare International Airport on May 8, had been flown east to appear before a grand jury as a material witness. The subject he supposedly had knowledge of -- an al Qaeda plan to detonate a "dirty bomb" in the United States -- sounded scarier than most. Another alarming sign was that every time Newman set her pen down on the courtroom table during that first appearance, federal marshals handed it back to her, evidently so that Padilla couldn't seize it as a weapon.

Still, for Newman, the procedures seemed largely routine -- until June 9, when President Bush declared her client an enemy combatant and Padilla was hauled off to a brig in South Carolina. At that point, the Padilla case detonated, largely consuming Newman's practice, her leisure, her life for the coming year and plunging her into an extraordinary constitutional debate.

The pivotal question: Can an American citizen, arrested on U.S. soil, be held incommunicado in a military prison indefinitely -- without being charged with a crime, without access to a lawyer?

The issue has ignited a fierce debate over civil liberties. It has been argued on the Senate floor and on op-ed pages, and Amnesty International has condemned Padilla's treatment as "an unprecedented suspension of fundamental rights of U.S. citizens in U.S. custody."

Prosecuting Terror
No Choice but Guilty
Lackawanna Case Highlights Legal Tilt

By Michael Powell
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, July 29, 2003; Page A01


First of two articles

LACKAWANNA, N.Y. -- Even now, after the arrests and the anger and the world media spotlight, the mystery for neighbors in this old steel town remains this: Why would six of their young men so readily agree to plead guilty to terror charges, accepting long prison terms far from home?

"These knuckleheads betrayed our trust, and we're disgusted with their attendance at the camps in Afghanistan," Mohammed Albanna, 52, a leader in the Yemeni community here, said of the six men who have admitted to attending an al Qaeda training camp two years ago. "But the punishment doesn't fit the crime, or the government's rhetoric. It's ridiculous."

But defense attorneys say the answer is straightforward: The federal government implicitly threatened to toss the defendants into a secret military prison without trial, where they could languish indefinitely without access to courts or lawyers.

That prospect terrified the men. They accepted prison terms of 61/2 to 9 years.

"We had to worry about the defendants being whisked out of the courtroom and declared enemy combatants if the case started going well for us," said attorney Patrick J. Brown, who defended one of the accused. "So we just ran up the white flag and folded. Most of us wish we'd never been associated with this case."

Clipping news reports of casualties in Iraq is depresssing
and hard to keep up with, but I found a site that does it
for me.

Here you go.

http://lunaville.org/warcasualties/Summary.aspx

CBS News Poll. July 8-9, 2003. N=753 adults nationwide. MoE ± 4 (total sample).
.

"Do you approve or disapprove of the way George W. Bush is handling the situation with Iraq?"

Approve Disap-
prove Don't
Know
% % %
7/03 58 32 10
5/03 72 20 8
3/26-27/03 69 27 4
3/24/03 71 24 5
3/23/03 75 22 3
3/22/03 72 23 5
3/20-21/03 69 25 6
3/15-16/03 55 41 4
3/7-9/03 51 42 7
3/4-5/03 54 39 7
2/24-25/03 52 44 4
2/10-12/03 53 42 5
.

"Do you think removing Saddam Hussein from power was worth the loss of American life and other costs of attacking Iraq, or not?" Form A (N=341)

Worth
It Not
Worth It Don't
Know
% % %
7/03 54 37 9
6/03 62 31 7
.

"Do you think the end result of the war with Iraq was worth the loss of American life and other costs of attacking Iraq, or not?" Form B (N=412)

Worth
It Not
Worth It Don't
Know
% % %
7/03 45 45 10
.

"Which comes closer to your opinion: Iraq was a threat to the United States that required immediate military action, or Iraq was a threat that could have been contained, or Iraq was not a threat to the United States at all?" Form C (N=384)

Required
Immediate
Action Could
Have
Been
Contained Was Not
a Threat Don't
Know
% % % %
7/03 43 43 9 5
6/03 53 35 10 2
.

"Looking back, do you think that Iraq's Saddam Hussein represented a major threat to the U.S., a minor threat, or was Saddam Hussein not a threat to the U.S.?" Form D (N=369)

Major
Threat Minor
Threat Not a
Threat Don't
Know
% % % %
7/03 56 28 12 4
.

"How would you say things are going for the U.S. in its efforts to bring stability and order to Iraq? Would you say things are going very well, somewhat well, somewhat badly, or very badly?"

Very
Well Somewhat
Well Somewhat
Badly Very
Badly Don't
Know
% % % % %
7/03 6 54 25 11 4
5/03 11 61 19 5 4
.

"Which do you think the Iraqi people are feeling right now: grateful to the United States for getting rid of Saddam Hussein, or resentful of the United States for being in Iraq right now?"

Grateful Resentful Both
(vol.) Don't
Know
% % % %
7/03 34 37 20 9
5/03 46 31 20 3
.

"From what you have seen or heard, is the United States in control of events taking place in Iraq, or are the events in Iraq out of U.S. control?"

In
Control Out of
Control Don't
Know
% % %
7/03 45 41 14
4/03 71 20 9
.

"How long do you think the United States troops will have to remain in Iraq: for less than a year, one to two years, two to five years, or will U.S. troops have to stay in Iraq for longer than five years?"

Less Than
1 Year 1 to 2
Years 2 to 5
Years More Than
5 Years Don't
Know
% % % % %
7/03 13 31 31 18 7
.

"If the United States and its allies never find any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, then do you think the war against Iraq will have been worth the loss of American life and other costs of attacking Iraq, or not??"

Worth
It Not
Worth It Don't
Know
% % %
7/03 46 46 8
5/03 56 38 6
.

"Thinking back now to the weeks before the war with Iraq, do you think the Bush Administration overestimated the number of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, underestimated the number of weapons of mass destruction, or accurately estimated the number of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq?"

Over-
estimated Under-
estimated Accurately
estimated Don't
Know
% % % %
7/03 56 11 19 14
6/03 44 14 28 14
.

"When presenting what they knew about the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq before the war, do you think the members of the Bush Administration were telling everything they knew, most of what they knew, hiding important elements of what they knew, or mostly lying?"

Telling
Everything Telling
Most Hiding
Important
Elements Mostly
Lying Don't
Know
% % % % %
7/03 4 32 45 11 8

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Majority in US believes Bush 'stretched truth' about Iraq: poll
Wed Jul 2, 4:04 AM ET Add Mideast - AFP to My Yahoo!
WASHINGTON (AFP) - For the first time since the beginning of the war in Iraq (news - web sites), a solid majority of Americans believe the Bush administration either "stretched the truth" about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction or told outright lies, according to a new opinion survey.

The poll by the University of Maryland found that 52 percent of respondents said they believed President George W. Bush (news - web sites) and his aides were "stretching the truth, but not making false statements" about Iraqi president Saddam Hussein (news - web sites)'s chemical, biological and nuclear programs.


Another 10 percent said US officials were presenting Congress, the American public and the international community "evidence they knew was false," indicated the survey which was made public Tuesday.


Only 32 percent said they thought the government was being "fully truthful" about the Iraqi arsenal.


The weapons of mass destruction -- as well as the Iraqi government's alleged ties to the al-Qaeda terrorist group -- which the administration claimed represented an immediate threat to the Unites States, served as the chief rationale for launching the March 20 invasion of the country.


But more than three months since the start of the war, US troops have yet to find any of the suspected weapons.


Similarly, 56 percent of those polled believed the US government stretched the truth or made outright false statements about Hussein's ties to al-Qaeda.


The nationwide survey of 1,051 people was conducted from June 18 to 25 and had a margin of error of 3.5 percent.

Occupation Forces Halt Elections Throughout Iraq
By William Booth and Rajiv Chandrasekaran
Washington Post Staff Writers
Saturday, June 28, 2003; Page A20


SAMARRA, Iraq -- U.S. military commanders have ordered a halt to local elections and self-rule in provincial cities and towns across Iraq, choosing instead to install their own handpicked mayors and administrators, many of whom are former Iraqi military leaders.

The decision to deny Iraqis a direct role in selecting municipal governments is creating anger and resentment among aspiring leaders and ordinary citizens, who say the U.S.-led occupation forces are not making good on their promise to bring greater freedom and democracy to a country dominated for three decades by Saddam Hussein.

The go-slow approach to representative government in at least a dozen provincial cities is especially frustrating to younger, middle-class professionals who say they want to help their communities emerge from postwar chaos and to let, as one put it, "Iraqis make decisions for Iraq."

Once Hailed, Soldiers in Iraq Now Feel Blame at Each Step
By EDMUND L. ANDREWS


AGHDAD, Iraq, June 28 — After riding into Iraq on a wave of popular euphoria, American and British forces are unexpectedly finding themselves the brunt of criticism for everything that goes wrong these days.

"We are furious about people pointing guns at us," said Hamid Hussein, 33, pushing his broken-down Volkswagen bus to the front door of his house this morning. A United States Army Humvee was parked in the middle of his street, and a soldier in the turret ordered Mr. Hussein in English to stop where he was.

If the complaint is not about security, then it is about the lack of electricity this week in Baghdad.

"Don't talk to me about Saddam Hussein," snapped Ibrahim Aullaiwi, a 46-year-old shop owner in the poor neighborhood of New Baghdad. "The Americans are in charge of everything here. They could have brought generators in here within 24 hours."

Like Mr. Aullaiwi, many residents of Baghdad seem to ignore the fact that the electricity disruption was caused at least in part by sabotage and looting. Seething in 110-degree heat without air-conditioners, fans or refrigerators, many residents were already furious about chronic power failures over the past two months.

Whether battling saboteurs or snipers, American and British occupation leaders find that the public mood has turned critical, even though countless Iraqis remain pleased that Saddam Hussein is gone and still place considerable hope in the Americans and British to improve things.

Once Hailed, Soldiers in Iraq Now Feel Blame at Each Step
By EDMUND L. ANDREWS


AGHDAD, Iraq, June 28 — After riding into Iraq on a wave of popular euphoria, American and British forces are unexpectedly finding themselves the brunt of criticism for everything that goes wrong these days.

"We are furious about people pointing guns at us," said Hamid Hussein, 33, pushing his broken-down Volkswagen bus to the front door of his house this morning. A United States Army Humvee was parked in the middle of his street, and a soldier in the turret ordered Mr. Hussein in English to stop where he was.

If the complaint is not about security, then it is about the lack of electricity this week in Baghdad.

"Don't talk to me about Saddam Hussein," snapped Ibrahim Aullaiwi, a 46-year-old shop owner in the poor neighborhood of New Baghdad. "The Americans are in charge of everything here. They could have brought generators in here within 24 hours."

Like Mr. Aullaiwi, many residents of Baghdad seem to ignore the fact that the electricity disruption was caused at least in part by sabotage and looting. Seething in 110-degree heat without air-conditioners, fans or refrigerators, many residents were already furious about chronic power failures over the past two months.

Whether battling saboteurs or snipers, American and British occupation leaders find that the public mood has turned critical, even though countless Iraqis remain pleased that Saddam Hussein is gone and still place considerable hope in the Americans and British to improve things.

Explosion rocks Baghdad near U.S. guard post
Witnesses say two men threw grenades toward U.S. tank
Saturday, June 28, 2003 Posted: 6:09 PM EDT (2209 GMT)

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Two explosions were heard in Baghdad's Al Salihiya district Saturday night, according to Iraqis and U.S. soldiers near the site of the explosion.

U.S. soldiers guarding the Iraqi National Museum said the explosions came as a vehicle approached their position and sped away.

Several Iraqi witnesses near the museum said two men driving in a red Volkswagen threw grenades in an attempt to hit a U.S. Paladin Howitzer tank that was adjacent to a small office building. The men missed and instead struck the front of the building that housed a travel agency and a restaurant.

There were no reports of causalities. Neither of the stores were occupied at the time of the explosions which occurred at about 9:30 p.m. local time (1:30 p.m. EDT).

Earlier Saturday, the U.S. Central Command announced the remains of two U.S. soldiers who disappeared Wednesday north of Baghdad have been found.

The violence in Iraq seems to be on the rise
in the past few days. Previously, we would lose
an average of 1 soldier every day or every other
day - horrible but not startling. Yesterday, the British
lost 6 MP's and had 8 wounded. Today, we've lost
3 soldiers, had about 6 wounded, and 2 abducted.
This is not a sustainable situation:

U.S. Special Ops member killed in Iraq, 8 wounded
UK: The 6 British personnel killed were Royal Military Police
Thursday, June 26, 2003 Posted: 2:28 PM EDT (1828 GMT)

(CNN) -- Several incidents of hostile action were reported Thursday by U.S. military officials, the latest in a string of attacks on American forces since the end of major military action there was declared.

• A Special Operations forces member was killed and eight were injured Thursday in a "hostile fire" incident in southwest Baghdad on Thursday morning, according to U.S. Central Command. No details of that incident have been released, and names of the service members are being withheld pending notification of next of kin.

• Pentagon officials confirmed that two U.S. soldiers were missing and that an extensive search was being made for them in the Baghdad area. The soldiers were traveling in a military Humvee near a checkpoint in the vicinity of Baghdad when their commanders lost contact with them late Wednesday, officials said.

U.S. officials said a search party went to the vehicle's last known location and encountered an Iraqi man acting strangely. He was being questioned. Nearby Iraqi citizens told U.S. military personnel they had seen another vehicle in the area depart along with the Humvee. Although details were sketchy, officials said they tracked the second vehicle to a building which they searched. A blood trail and civilian clothes were found but it was not clear whether they were related to the disappearance of the soldiers.

It was not clear whether the two had been traveling alone, but recent attacks on U.S. forces has led military officials to urge soldiers increase their security by traveling together in larger groups. A senior Pentagon official said there is no reason to believe the soldiers have fallen into opposition hands but there is concern about their fate.

• A U.S. military official said a coalition vehicle carrying a group including the director for rehabilitation of electricity in Iraq was struck in a rocket-propelled grenade attack Thursday, killing the driver and wounding at least two others. The attack took place on a road between Baghdad and the airport.

Capt. Sean McWilliams said two vehicles were damaged in the attack, although only an SUV was at the scene when reporters arrived. "This was an attack by a small group, designed to derail the process of moving to a democratic Iraq," he said. "But they will not succeed in this."

• A U.S. tractor-trailer was hit on the southern outskirts of Baghdad in another rocket-propelled grenade attack, a military spokesman said. Two soldiers were wounded.

• In a separate attack, a U.S. Marine died and two others were injured when their quick-reaction force assisted three Marines who were ambushed Wednesday in the central Iraqi town of Hillah, U.S. Central Command said. Hillah is about 70 miles south of Baghdad.

This is the nail in the coffin of the WMD story:

Expert Said to Tell Legislators He Was Pressed to Distort Some Evidence
By JAMES RISEN and DOUGLAS JEHL


ASHINGTON, June 24 — A top State Department expert on chemical and biological weapons told Congressional committees in closed-door hearings last week that he had been pressed to tailor his analysis on Iraq and other matters to conform with the Bush administration's views, several Congressional officials said today.

The officials described what they said was a dramatic moment at a House Intelligence Committee hearing last week when the weapons expert came forward to tell Congress he had felt such pressure.

By speaking out, they said, the senior intelligence expert, identified by several officials as Christian Westermann, became the first member of the intelligence community on active service to make this sort of admission to members of Congress.

-To paraphrase Doonesbury, Bush is guilty, guilty, guilty!

It seems as if the attacks on US-UK forces are getting
more sophisticated and more powerful. How many attacks
prior could successfully attack reinforcements in addition
to isolated units?

Six British Troops Killed in String of Iraq Attacks
Tue June 24, 2003 12:34 PM ET
By Nadim Ladki
BAGHDAD, Iraq (Reuters) - Six British troops were killed and several were wounded in Iraq Tuesday in the biggest daily death toll sustained by U.S. and British forces since March 23, three days after the start of the war to topple Saddam Hussein.

British and U.S. forces came under a string of attacks on the toughest day of their battle to eliminate resistance by what they have branded as die-hard Saddam loyalists since the Iraqi leader fell on April 9.

British Prime Minister Tony Blair's office said British forces suffered the casualties in two separate clashes near the city of Amarah, around 120 miles north of Iraq's British-controlled second city, Basra.

"We very much regret to confirm that in one incident six British personnel have been killed," a spokesman told reporters. He could give no further details.

In a second clash, he said, British troops on patrol came under fire. One was wounded and two vehicles were destroyed.

A rapid reaction force was sent by helicopter to the scene but also came under attack on landing. Seven people were wounded, three of them seriously.

More press clips:
Blix Downgrades Prewar Assessment of Iraqi Weapons
By Colum Lynch
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, June 22, 2003; Page A20
UNITED NATIONS -- As he nears the end of his three-year hunt for Iraq's biological and chemical weapons, Hans Blix, the United Nations' chief weapons inspector, says he suspects that Baghdad possessed little more than "debris" from a former, secret weapons program when the United States invaded the country in March.

Report Cast Doubt on Iraq-Al Qaeda Connection
By Walter Pincus
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, June 22, 2003; Page A01
In a nationally televised address last October in which he sought to rally congressional support for a resolution authorizing war against Iraq, President Bush declared that the government of Saddam Hussein posed an immediate threat to the United States by outlining what he said was evidence pointing to its ongoing ties with al Qaeda.

A still-classified national intelligence report circulating within the Bush administration at the time, however, portrayed a far less clear picture about the link between Iraq and al Qaeda than the one presented by the president, according to U.S. intelligence analysts and congressional sources who have read the report.

Pipeline Explodes West of Baghdad; Oil Exports Resume
By Sameer N. Yacoub
The Associated Press
Sunday, June 22, 2003; 11:00 AM
HIT, Iraq (AP) - A fuel pipeline exploded and caught fire west of Baghdad, sending flames high into the sky, as Iraq returned to world oil markets Sunday with its first crude oil exports since the U.S.-led invasion.

Meanwhile, a grenade attack Sunday killed an American soldier and wounded another just outside the capital, the latest violence to plague U.S. forces, who have launched a large crackdown aimed at putting down persistent resistance.


Attacks In Iraq Traced to Network
Resistance to U.S. Is Loosely Organized
By Daniel Williams
Washington Post Foreign Service
Sunday, June 22, 2003; Page A01


FALLUJAH, Iraq, June 21 -- Groups of armed fighters from the Baath Party and security agencies of ousted president Saddam Hussein have organized a loose network called the Return with the aim of driving U.S. forces out of the country, according to U.S. and Iraqi officials. The officials said the group is partially responsible for the string of fatal attacks on American soldiers in recent weeks.

The intensified resistance has been reinforced by the participation of foreign fighters coming into Iraq, L. Paul Bremer, the civilian administrator of Iraq, told reporters at a conference in Jordan today. "We do see signs of outside involvement in a number of ways," he said. Bremer said that "we so far don't see signs of command and control in these attacks," adding that it appears largely to be small groups of five to 10 people.

It looks as if our soldiers have a better
grasp on what's going on in Iraq then
their leaders:

By Daniel Williams and Rajiv Chandrasekaran
Washington Post Foreign Service
Friday, June 20, 2003; Page A01


BAGHDAD, June 19 -- Facing daily assaults from a well-armed resistance, U.S. troops in volatile central Iraq say they are growing frustrated and disillusioned with their role as postwar peacekeepers.

In conversations in a half-dozen towns across central Iraq, soldiers complained that they have been insufficiently equipped for peacekeeping and too thinly deployed in areas where they are under attack from fighters evidently loyal to deposed president Saddam Hussein. Others questioned whether the armed opposition to the U.S. presence in Iraq may be deeper and more organized than military commanders have acknowledged.

"What are we getting into here?" asked a sergeant with the U.S. Army's 4th Infantry Division who is stationed near Baqubah, a city 30 miles northeast of Baghdad. "The war is supposed to be over, but every day we hear of another soldier getting killed. Is it worth it? Saddam isn't in power anymore. The locals want us to leave. Why are we still here?"

I thought I'd share this with you, because I think it's
important to see how another president who lived
in a time of crisis viewed how we should deal with
the world:

University of Washington Speech 11/16/1961

"We cannot, as a free nation, compete with our adversaries in tactics of terror,
assassination, false promises, counterfeit mobs and crises.

We cannot, under the scrutiny of a free press and public, tell different stories to
different audiences, foreign and domestic, friendly and hostile.

We cannot abandon the slow processes of consulting with our allies to match
the swift expediencies of those who merely dictate to their satellites.

We can neither abandon nor control the international organization in which we
now cast less than one percent of the vote in the General Assembly...

In short, we must face problems which do not lend themselves to easy or quick o
r permanant solutions. And we must face the fact that the United States is neither
omnipotent nor omniscient-that we are only six percent of the world's population-
that we cannot impose our will upon the other ninety-four percent of mankind-
that we cannot right every wrong or reverse each adversity-
and that therefore there cannot be an American solution to every problem."

This might be a bit repetative, but here's a new memo:
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/usinfo/press/intell.htm


snip:

The newly-disclosed DIA report, classified "secret,'' is entitled, "Iraq's Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Weapon and Missile Program: Progress, Prospects, and Potential Vulnerabilities.'' Its existence raises more questions about the quality of U.S. intelligence before the March invasion. In one section about Iraq's chemical weapons capabilities, the report says: "No reliable information indicates whether Iraq is producing and stockpiling chemical weapons or where the country has or will establish its chemical agent production facility." The report cites suspicious weapons transfers and improvements on Iraq's "dual-use" chemical infrastructure. Nonetheless, says a DIA spokesman, "there was no single piece of irrefutable data that said definitely has it."

In recent days, President Bush has tempered his rhetoric about Iraq's terror weapons capabilities. "I am absolutely convinced, with time, we'll find out that they did have a weapons program," he told reporters this week. This departs from language used by his senior advisors before the war. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld perhaps was the most expansive: "There's no debate in the world as to whether they have those weapons. There's no debate in the world as to whether they're continuing to develop and acquire them. There's no debate in the world as to whether or not he's used them. There's no debate in the world as to whether or not he's consistently threatening his neighbors with them. We all know that. A trained ape knows that."

Winning hearts and minds everywhere, eh?:

LONDON (Reuters)
A majority of people around the world view President Bush unfavorably and think the United States was wrong to invade Iraq, according to a BBC poll published on Monday.

The poll, which surveyed more than 11,000 people in 11 countries, showed 57 percent of those asked had "a very unfavorable or fairly unfavorable attitude toward the American president," the British broadcaster said in a statement.

Some 56 percent felt the United States was wrong to attack Iraq, including 81 percent of Russian respondents and 63 percent of those polled in France. ---

And in eight of the 11, respondents said the United States was more dangerous than Syria, a country which Washington accuses of sponsoring terrorism.

I swear to god, when it comes to WMD's,
Bush and company become the inbred
hicks they really are:

Iraqi trailers were not mobile WMD labs: report

LONDON (AFP) Jun 15, 2003
A British inquiry into two trailers found in northern Iraq has found they are not mobile germ warfare labs, but were for the production of hydrogen to fill artillery balloons, the Observer reported Sunday.
The London-based weekly newspaper said the conclusion by biological weapons experts was an embarrassment for Prime Minister Tony Blair, who has claimed the discovery of the labs proved that Iraq retained weapons of mass destruction and justified the case for going to war against Saddam Hussein.

More news on the casualties of the war:
War may have killed 10,000 civilians, researchers say
Simon Jeffery
Friday June 13, 2003
The Guardian

At least 5,000 civilians may have been killed during the invasion of Iraq, an independent research group has claimed. As more evidence is collated, it says, the figure could reach 10,000.

Iraq Body Count (IBC), a volunteer group of British and US academics and researchers, compiled statistics on civilian casualties from media reports and estimated that between 5,000 and 7,000 civilians died in the conflict.

Its latest report compares those figures with 14 other counts, most of them taken in Iraq, which, it says, bear out its findings.

Researchers from several groups have visited hospitals and mortuaries in Iraq and interviewed relatives of the dead; some are conducting surveys in the main cities.

Three completed studies suggest that between 1,700 and 2,356 civilians died in the battle for Baghdad alone.

White House Silenced Experts
who Questioned Iraq Intel Info Six Months before War
by Jason Leopold

Six months before the United States was dead-set on invading Iraq to rid the country of its alleged weapons of mass destruction, experts in the field of nuclear science warned officials in the Bush administration that intelligence reports showing Iraq was stockpiling chemical and biological weapons was unreliable and that the country did not pose an imminent threat to its neighbors in the Middle East or the U.S.

But the dissenters were told to keep quiet by high-level administration officials in the White House because the Bush administration had already decided that military force would be used to overthrow the regime of Iraq’s President Saddam Hussein, interviews and documents have revealed.

The most vocal opponent to intelligence information supplied by the CIA to the hawks in the Bush administration about the so-called Iraqi threat to national security was David Albright, a former United Nations weapons inspector and the president and founder of the Institute for Science and International Security, a Washington, D.C. based group that gathers information for the public and the White House on nuclear weapons programs.

-That's not an intelligence failure, that's lying to the American people,
and defrauding the United States Congress on a resolution of war
powers is an impeachable offense.

Weird, but good news on public opinion on Iraq:
National Public Radio Poll conducted by Public Opinion Strategies (R) and Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research (D). May 27-29, 2003. N=723 likely voters nationwide. MoE ± 3.6.

.
"I would like to read you a few statements about the war in Iraq. Please tell me which comes closest to your opinion: The war in Iraq was a success and WAS worth the cost in U.S. lives and dollars. The war in Iraq was a success but was NOT worth the cost in U.S. lives and dollars. The war in Iraq was NOT a success." Options were rotated
A success, worth cost 48
A success, not worth cost 33
Not a success 15
None of these (vol.) 2
Don't know 2

The Bush administration's WMD story is completely falling apart;
soldiers are dying every day; and the U.S envoy is banning political
expression in dissention to the occupation:

By Dana Priest and Walter Pincus
Washington Post Staff Writers
Saturday, June 7, 2003; Page A01


During the weeks last fall before critical votes in Congress and the United Nations on going to war in Iraq, senior administration officials, including President Bush, expressed certainty in public that Iraq possessed chemical and biological weapons, even though U.S. intelligence agencies were reporting they had no direct evidence that such weapons existed.

In an example of the tenor of the administration's statements at the time, the president said in the Rose Garden on Sept. 26 that "the Iraqi regime possesses biological and chemical weapons. The Iraqi regime is building the facilities necessary to make more biological and chemical weapons."

But a Defense Intelligence Agency report on chemical weapons, widely distributed to administration policymakers around the time of the president's speech, stated there was "no reliable information on whether Iraq is producing or stockpiling chemical weapons or whether Iraq has or will establish its chemical agent production facilities."

By SLOBODAN LEKIC
The Associated Press
Saturday, June 7, 2003; 9:15 AM


BAGHDAD, Iraq - An American soldier was killed and four companions wounded Saturday in an attack near Saddam Hussein's hometown of Tikrit north of the capital, a military statement said.

It was at least the seventh U.S. soldier killed in attacks in Iraq over the past two weeks.

Gunmen opened fire on the troops using small arms and a rocket-propelled grenade, said the brief statement released by U.S. Central Command.

(This makes the 213th coalition to die; almost as many after declaration of victory)
http://www.islam-online.net/English/News/2003-06/05/article11.shtml
Additional reporting by Ayman Qenawi, IOL Staff

BAGHDAD, June 5 (IslamOnline.net & News Agencies) - In a move that is likely to trigger an outcry from Iraqi parties, politicians and scholars as well as international human rights advocates, the U.S.-led occupation administration said Thursday, June 5, it would outlaw any "incitement" against the Anglo-American forces in Iraq even inside mosque.

The new measure, which is to "go out fairly shortly", would prohibit "incitement" to "armed insurrection", including attacks on the U.S. and British troops, an administration spokesman said.

He said the ban would be applicable even to mosques if preachers encourage attacks against the Anglo-American forces in their sermonsæ reported Agence France-Presse (AFP).

Lies, lies and more lies:
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0606-01.htm


A U.S. Defense Department report in September 2002 found ``no reliable information'' proving that Iraq had chemical weapons, even as Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld was saying the country had amassed stockpiles of the banned arms.

``There is no reliable information on whether Iraq is producing and stockpiling chemical weapons, or whether Iraq has -- or will -- establish its chemical warfare agent production facilities,'' a report by the Defense Intelligence Agency said in a summary page obtained by Bloomberg News.

The unreleased report said Iraq ``probably'' had stockpiles of banned chemicals, a more tentative conclusion than Rumsfeld was presenting in public remarks. Iraq has ``amassed large, clandestine stockpiles of chemical weapons, including VX, sarin and mustard gas,'' he told Congress on Sept. 19.

The summary from the report suggests ``substantially more uncertainty than was stated by senior administration officials,'' said Kenneth Katzman, a specialist on Iraq's military for the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service, who was told of the contents by Bloomberg.

-Ok, they knew they knew sh*t. They knew Chalabi was unreliable,
they knew that 90% of the weapons were gone already, and they
told the world that they knew Hussein had weapons, that he was
on the verge on making more, and that he posed an immanent threat.
This is verging on the Nixonian.

posted by Steven  # Friday, June 06, 2003

A truly depressing story in the post:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A51283-2003May28.html?nav=hptop_tb

I urge you to read it because it's the best thing
I've read that reveals what the war on terror has
meant to immigrants in the U.S

Many war-related things in the news, none of them good:
Peter Ford | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

BAGHDAD – Evidence is mounting to suggest that between 5,000 and 10,000 Iraqi civilians
may have died during the recent war, according to researchers involved in independent surveys
of the country. None of the local and foreign researchers were willing to speak for the record,
however, until their tallies are complete.

Such a range would make the Iraq war the deadliest campaign for noncombatants that US forces
have fought since Vietnam.

Though it is still too early for anything like a definitive estimate, the surveyors warn, preliminary
reports from hospitals, morgues, mosques, and homes point to a level of civilian casualties far
exceeding the Gulf War, when 3,500 civilians are thought to have died.

"Thousands are dead, thousands are missing, thousands are captured," says Haidar Taie,
head of the tracing department for the Iraqi Red Crescent in Baghdad. "It is a big disaster."

By one measure of violence against noncombatants, as compared with resistance faced by
soldiers, the war in Iraq was particularly brutal. In Operation Just Cause, the 1989 US invasion
of Panama, 13 Panamanian civilians died for every US military fatality. If 5,000 Iraqi civilians died
in the latest war, that proportion would be 33 to 1.

-So much for a bloodless war of liberation.

duelling pieces on Iraq suggest a coming difficulty between Iraqis and the American occupation:

Boston Globe:
By Charles A. Radin, Globe Staff, 5/21/2003
BAGHDAD -- The Iraqi National Congress sharply criticized the United States yesterday for delays in
forming a transitional government to run the country. Entifadh Qanbar, the chief spokesman for the group,
said at a news conference that the congress would try to establish an interim government within a few weeks,
regardless of whether the United States supported such an effort. The congress is one of several groups that
attempted to orchestrate opposition to Saddam Hussein from outside Iraq before he was overthrown. 'It is not
up to the Americans to delay this government,'' Qanbar said. ''This is a sovereign issue of Iraqis. We are allies
of the United States. We do not take orders from the United States. . . . We are going forward in our plans'' for a
meeting of representatives of all major Iraqi parties by the end of this month to form a government.

Washington Post
The War Isn't Over
By Jim Hoagland
Thursday, May 22, 2003; Page A35

Saddam Hussein is alive and well and inside Iraq in the minds of his most dedicated followers.

In the dictator's name, they have launched guerrilla attacks on U.S. forces and aid shipments.
They have reorganized into secret cells. They draw strength from the reluctance of the Bush
administration to run a full-scale military occupation to deal with the jarring reality that the
Second Gulf War is not yet over.

The swift U.S. battlefield victory over an Iraqi army that melted away is now being described by
administration insiders as a "catastrophic success." As the phrase suggests, the speed of the
Iraqi collapse helped create an appalling aftermath, in which a capable and compact U.S. war-fighting
force has not been able to establish a credible pacification program.

Washington Post
Thursday, May 22, 2003; Page A01
BAGHDAD, May 21 -- L. Paul Bremer III, the chief U.S. civilian in Iraq, said today selection of an interim Iraqi government is at least seven weeks away, prompting aspiring leaders from Kurdish and returned exile groups to warn that Iraqis are tiring of the six-week-old U.S. occupation and want swift movement toward self-rule.

The new timeline laid down by Bremer would call for an Iraqi national convention in mid-July to pick an interim government that would have limited functions under U.S. tutelage until elections could be organized. That is weeks later than U.S. officials had once predicted. Moreover, the interim government's responsibilities are still the subject of disagreement between U.S. officials and their increasingly dissatisfied Iraqi allies.

The delay appeared to be the result of enduring security problems in parts of Iraq, most notably here in the capital of 5 million people, and a lingering sense among U.S. officials that the process to choose even a temporary and circumscribed postwar government had not been sufficiently inclusive.

-so much for a free, self-governing, and stable Iraq.

Interesting development:
I have been appointed to a position as student representative on the Committee for Socially
Responsible Investment. Starting in the fall,
I will be able to fight for GCOW's demands on
divestment from military corporations. I also
intend to push for a number of progressive
causes, so anyone who has suggestions should
post them here.

Group Searching for WMD Comes Up Empty-Handed
By Barton Gellman
(c) 2003, The Washington Post

BAGHDAD, Iraq — The group directing all known U.S. search efforts for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq is winding down operations without finding proof that President Saddam Hussein kept clandestine stocks of outlawed arms, according to participants.

The 75th Exploitation Task Force, as the group is formally known, has been described from the start as the principal arm of the U.S. plan to discover and display forbidden Iraqi weapons. The group's departure, expected next month, marks a milestone in frustration for a major declared objective of the war.

Leaders of Task Force 75's diverse staff — biologists, chemists, arms treaty enforcers, nuclear operators, computer and document experts, and special forces troops — arrived with high hopes of early success. They said they expected to find what Secretary of State Colin. Powell described at the U.N. Security Council on Feb. 5 — hundreds of tons of biological and chemical agents, missiles and rockets to fire them, and evidence of an ongoing program to build a nuclear bomb.

Scores of fruitless missions broke that confidence, many task force members said in interviews.

- With the clear knowledge that Tony Blair told me I'll be sorry, I'll go ahead and say it: TOLDYA SO. Since the Bush Administration decided to go after Iraq, the anti-war movement has been saying that Hussein had no weapons of mass destruction, that he posed no threat whatsoever to America either through terrorists or himself. And now, despite the lies and fabrications forced upon the U.N and the world, the truth has finally came out.

Nice to know that 139 Anglo-American soldiers and god only knows how many Iraqis died so that George Bush could win re-election in 2004. Nice to know that the American people bought it. I don't know about you, but I'm voting for a Democrat next year.

Another scary news update:
Senate Panel Votes to Lift Ban on Small Nuclear Arms
By JAMES C. DAO

WASHINGTON, May 9 — A sharply divided Senate Armed Services Committee voted today to repeal a 10-year-old ban on the development of small nuclear weapons, asserting that the United States must begin looking at new ways of deterring terrorist groups and so-called rogue nuclear powers like North Korea.

-I'm a fairly tolerant person, and I'm willing to acknowledge that people might have honest disagreements on defence policy, but I though that even the most hawkish of hawks would agree with me that making it easier for people to use nuclear weapons is insane.

The Bush administration's disturbing focus on building bigger and better weapons of mass destruction is terrifying, but even more so when you consider that the so-called "low-yield" bomb is in fact a 5 megaton warhead, one third the size of the Hiroshima bomb. One of these bombs could wipe out most small cities and take out almost half of even the largest of cities, while spreading radioactive material throughout the atmosphere and causing radiation poisoning, cancer, and birth defects.

How in the name of all that's sane is this supposed to reduce the threat of nuclear proliferation? If regimes unpopular with the U.S were scrambling to get nukes after the invasion of Iraq, this proposal is only going to encourage them to consider using them on their nieghbors or possibly on the United States, if they feel that they themselves will be the target of a nuclear attack.

Please contact your senators and tell them to fillibuster this proposal.

I've been lucky enough this semester to get a few things published in the Spec on issues relevant to the war, but unfortunately they've printed their last normal issue of the year. I wanted to share an editorial I wrote which will be too dated come the fall, but I thought you'd enjoy it:

Democracy In Iraq: Freedom of Speech Amid the Rubble
By Steven Attewell

Consider these two faces of Baghdad: dozens of Iraqis pulling down giant statues of Saddam Hussein and waving American flags, and tens of thousands of Iraqis marching through the rubble of their homeland, calling for the American invader to leave their streets. Which of these is the true face of Iraq and which is the false?

Over the past week, the Bush administration and their cronies at Fox News have chortled themselves sick at the liberation of Iraq, barely pausing at the news of the destruction of the National Museum and the burning of the National Archives. Freedom is messy, Rumsfeld shrugged at a recent news conference, as gangs of young men with Kalishnikovs roamed through the hospitals of Baghdad stealing desperately needed medical supplies.

But bit by bit, the story of Iraq’s newfound voice and their desire to speak out against the U.S military occupation has seeped into the media, in spite of the soldiers who penned back CNN camera men in the hope that everyone would stop watching. U.S troops shot 12 Kurdish civilians in the city of Mosul when a mob demanding that the soldiers vacate the town hall and remove their flag from its staff surrounded the building and threw rocks. Outside of the Palestine Hotel in Baghdad, 20,000 Iraqis, Shiites and Sunnis marching together chanted “We are Sunni and Shiite brothers, we will not sell this nation” while inside a secret council of Iraqi “leaders” met with “Viceroy” Garner to decide the future of Iraq.

It would seem that the United States has done the impossible: it freed the Iraqis by sparking an independence movement against their liberators and it ended religious devision by fuelling a dislike of “secular government” common to both sects.

This situation provides a breath of fresh air for an anti-war movement that has been rocked back on its heels by the sheer force of American triumphalism. Ever since debate over the invasion of Iraq began, the mightiest weapon in the pro-war arsenal was the argument that American liberals were hypocritically denying the Iraqi people the right to democratic government and civil rights. Indeed, many of the nation’s supposed liberal leaders jumped on board the war wagon. But now that the fighting war is over and the occupation has begun, the tables have turned. Now the anti-war movement can stand by the freedom of Iraqis without endorsing the bombs that slaughter them, now the students, union members, veterans, preachers, and pacifists that stood in the cold and the rain amidst a hail of jingoistic slanders can begin to fight back in the name of human rights here and abroad.

Self-determination of peoples was American liberalism’s answer to imperialism, the thundering condemnation of all militaristic adventures from the Philippines to Grenada. It is time that we, as a nation and a generation, shook off the blind terror of 9/11 and told our silent Congress that pre-emption is not an American value, that the PATRIOT act does not protect democracy. The neoconservative vision of a new American Empire should be hauled out of the White house and exposed for the fraud it really is.

Thankfully for the Iraqi people, next year is an election year. It is within our power as the sovereign power of the republic to stand up against this national nightmare where dissent is choked off and innocent people are bound up in the silence of illegal confinement. There are anti-war candidates running for president, and there are many more who would be willing to stand against the evils unleashed by the Bush administration and free Iraq and America both, if we would lend our support. When we go to the voting booth this November, every one of us should remember that the Iraqi people have no ballot box to go to.

Broad Domestic Role Asked for C.I.A. and the Pentagon
By ERIC LICHTBLAU and JAMES RISEN

WASHINGTON, May 1 — The Bush administration and leading Senate Republicans sought today to give the Central Intelligence Agency and the Pentagon far-reaching new powers to demand personal and financial records on people in the United States as part of foreign intelligence and terrorism operations, officials said.
Advertisement

The proposal, which was beaten back, would have given the C.I.A. and the military the authority to issue administrative subpoenas — known as "national security letters" — requiring Internet providers, credit card companies, libraries and a range of other organizations to produce materials like phone records, bank transactions and e-mail logs. That authority now rests largely with the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the subpoenas do not require court approval.


- At some point, parallels with McCarthyism and J. Edgar Hoover start to become less rhetorical and more factual.
I find myself quite puzzled by the fact that the same people in the Bush administration who push for these incredibly sweeping government powers are normally quasi-libertarian conservatives who don't believe in "Big Government." Do you think they're hypocrites or just schizophrenics?

Iraqi Scientist Says U.S. Unlikely to Find Biological Weapons
From CNN.com

Iraq's biological weapons program was shut down by economic sanctions in the 1990s and U.S. search teams are unlikely to find evidence of those efforts now, a leading program scientist said Monday.

The scientist, Nassir Hindawi, left Iraq's bio-weapons program in 1989, and one of his students -- Rihab Taha -- eventually became notorious as Iraq's leading biological weapons expert.

But Hindawi told CNN that Taha -- who was nicknamed "Dr. Germ" in the West -- didn't have the practical capability to advance the program.

Hindawi said economic sanctions imposed after the first Persian Gulf War effectively halted the program, and it probably could not have been reconstituted with whatever materials that remained from the previous years.

-Weapons of Mass Destruction? What WMD? Every day, it becomes more obvious that Iraq had no WMD, that Bush knew that and lied to Congress, the nation, the U.N and the entire world. (http://abcnews.go.com/sections/nightline/US/globalshow_030425.html)
The amazing thing is that no one in the U.S knows about this because the press couldn't care less. When Bush shows up in NYC to start his victory parade, I suggest that New Yorkers show up in the hundreds of thousands to denounce his lies. Let the press not cover that!

The arms depot explosion in Baghdad today emphasized the dangers of a U.S occupation: immediate responsibility for the deaths of Iraqis in post-Saddam Iraq, deep hostility from Sunni and Shiite faithful against what they see as the attempted imposition of a "secular state," and even more unrelenting hostility towards the U.S military presence from the people at large. It's exactly these kind of factors, combined with lousy attempts at nation-building through elitism, that created the Lebanon crisis.

Check it out:
http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/04/26/sprj.irq.blast/index.html

U.S. Warns Iraqis Against Claiming Authority in Void
By MICHAEL R. GORDON and JOHN KIFNER

BAGHDAD, Iraq, April 23 — The American military moved today to strip Baghdad's self-appointed administrator of his authority and warned Iraqi factions not to take advantage of the confusion and the political void in the country by trying to grab power.

Lt. Gen. David McKiernan, the commander of ground forces in Iraq, issued a proclamation putting Iraq's politicians on notice, saying, "The coalition alone retains absolute authority within Iraq." He warned that anyone challenging the American-led authority would be subject to arrest.

- Interesting. How exactly is "the coalition alone retains absolute authority within Iraq" compatible with the U.S respecting Iraqi self-determination? It seems to me that the U.S is facing an increasingly difficult occupation, where the conservative secular rulers they seek to install simply don't have the constituency to run the country, but the clerics do. Will Iraq become a Shiite theocracy like Iran? Too early to tell, I think, but things don't seem to be heading in any other direction.

Posted on Thu, Apr. 17, 2003
Chairman: PATRIOT powers eternalized `over my dead body'
BY CRAIG GILBERT
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel

WASHINGTON - (KRT) - House Judiciary Chairman Jim Sensenbrenner said Thursday he would fight any effort now to make permanent many of the expanded police powers enacted after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks as part of the USA PATRIOT Act.

"That will be done over my dead body," said Sensenbrenner in an interview.

-Congressional Republicans usually don't come down on the same side with anti-war activists, so it's encouraging when they do. It's good to see that even right-wingers are leery of Bushco with unlimited police power.

More good polling news:

"How do you feel about the possibility that the United States will get bogged down in a long and costly peacekeeping mission in Iraq? Would you say you're very concerned about that, somewhat concerned, not too concerned or not concerned at all?"
Very Some-what Not Too Not At All No Opinion 4/16/03
31 42 19 7 1

"For each item I name, please tell me who you think should be in charge of that: the United States or the United Nations. . . . "

"Maintaining civil order in Iraq until a new government is established" 4/16/03
United States United Nations Both Neither No Opinion
45 49 4 1 1

"Awarding contracts to companies for rebuilding the infrastructure in Iraq" 4/16/03
United States United Nations Both Neither No Opinion
41 51 3 3 2

"Helping establish a new government in Iraq" 4/16/03
United States United Nations Both Neither No Opinion
39 55 4 1 1

Looks to me as if an anti-occupation movement would start out with a majority of the population on our side.
Imagine what we could do with numbers on
our side again.

Think the PATRIOT act scares the living bejeezus out of you?
Read this article, and I guarantee you'll be filling out forms for alternate passports.

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2003/04/18/patriot_act/index.html

Despite the military's attempts to keep this out of the papers, there are thousands of Iraqis protesting in the
streets of Baghdad against the occupation.
http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/04/18/sprj.irq.war.main/index.html

I feel that the next march should be a sympathy march
for the people of Iraq whose banners read "Invaders should
be out of our country. Let us make our government by
ourselves." It's heartening to see a people who lived under a dictatorship only a week ago have found the courage to defy their new rulers, no matter how many times they emerge from their planning councils to announce that they have the best interests of the Iraqi people in mind. Supporting the people of Baghdad and Mosul in their non-violent struggle for independence against an occupation that uses violence to supress dissent should be our first priority.

• Buried laboratories: The buried labs U.S. troops found last week were not the mobile chemical and biological weapons labs one U.S. Army general suspected, CNN Correspondent Ryan Chilcote reported Tuesday. The 11 cargo containers were filled with new laboratory equipment apparently intended to make conventional weapons, said Chief Warrant Officer Monte Gonzalez, the head of the team brought in to examine them.

-BWAHAHAHAHA! Those whacky WMD, always slipping out from our fingers...I swear, someone should do a sitcom on a U.S inspections team.

ANNOUNCEMENT:
TUESDAY, MARCH 15th,
CSCC ELECTIONS ON LOW STEPS!

SU4A has put a pro-ROTC student referendum
on the ballot. Show up and cast your vote against
Columbia University training military officers!

For those of us who are opposed to the war, it is quite frightening how the Bush Administration's Ministry of Truth
has smoothly rolled on to turn Syria into Public Enemy #1.
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/14/international/worldspecial/14CND-CAPI.html

Every day, we slip one step closer to Orwell's dystopia,
and no one seems to notice. On the other hand, there is at least a silver lining to the Pavlovian Public Polls, courtesy of PollingReport.com:

"Does success in the Iraq war make you feel the United States should be more willing to use military force in the future to help solve international problems, or not?"
Yes No Don't Know 4/10-11/03
28 62 10
"Please tell me if you would support the United States using military force against any of the following countries that, like Iraq, have been linked to terrorism or have weapons programs considered a threat to other countries. Would you support using military force against [see below], or not?"
Yes No Don't Know
North Korea 53 35 12
Iran 45 41 14
Syria 42 40 18

"Do you think any interim government in Iraq set up by the United States after the war ends should be subject to the approval of the United Nations Security Council, or not?"
Subject to UN approval 57
Not subject to UN approval 35
Don't know 8

"Do you think the United States should invite countries that refused to support military action -- such as France, Germany, and Russia -- to play a role in rebuilding Iraq after the fighting stops, or not?"
Should Should Not Don't Know 4/10-11/03
45 50 5

The good news in all of this is that a majority or a large plurality of Americans are against any further war, so that indicates a possible upsurge in mobilization. A majority or large plurality also want international involvement in the rebuilding of Iraq - indicating a lack of desire for formal empire. The bad news is that about 57% of the people in this poll had no problems with an occupation lasting from 1 to more than 5 years, and for some bizarre reason a majority want to go to war with North Korea, even though that would be a much, much more difficult war.

It's not the worst damage that's been done to the Iraqi people in the war so far, but to me as a student of history
who appreciates how ancient Iraqi culture is, the destruction
of the National Museum of Iraq in Baghdad stands as an cultural war crime, equal in scope to the Taliban's destruction of the stone Buddhas.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/12/international/worldspecial/12CND-BAGH.html?pagewanted=1

ANNOUNCEMENT-----------------------------------------
**How can we build a united and effective antiwar movement at Columbia?**
**What kind of message should we put forward at this time?**
**What can we do to make our antiwar voices heard?**

Come to a unity meeting for all antiwar groups and individuals to discuss the next steps for the antiwar movement!

Sunday April 13, 2003
8:00 PM
Shapiro Hall
1st Floor Lounge
on 115th Street b/t Broadway and Riverside
(across from the Kraft Center)

With the US beginning to declare victory in Iraq, it is more important then ever that our antiwar movement come together. It will be easy for us feel isolated and demoralized in the upcoming weeks with the barrage of media showing "liberated Iraqis", and we need to be able to reorient ourselves in order to come out of this with a sense of focus, purpose, and clarity.

It is important that we collaborate right now because as people have seen, the US is already lining up Syria and a number of other countries into their crosshairs. They want a war without end, and our movement needs to figure out what our next steps should be in order to stop them. What we do right now and how we do it really does matter.

Despite our differences in organizing styles, political perspectives, localities, and experience, let's come together to discuss the basis on which we can unite in order to build a stronger and more rooted antiwar presence on campus! It's really urgent.

GCOW's website:
http://www.cuoutofwar.org/

Welcome to GCOW blog. Feel free to discuss the War in Iraq, the War on Terror, and Columbia University's participation in these enterprises. This blog is a free speech zone, and any and all are welcome to speak their minds. However, we ask that you refrain from ad hominem attacks, gratuitous swearing, and trolling in general.

Enjoy!