ASHCRAFT

The long rumored story about Ashcraft changing to chartered planes v. commercial aircraft during the few month prior to 9/11 has been put to rest, fairly well.

The nature of the Att'y Gen.'s position should require him to use government aircraft rather than commercial. Ashcraft stated that for his personal and family flights, commercial aircraft were used, including a flight to Washington in early September.

I tend to believe that the rumor was a CT (Conspiracy Theory) that didn't work out.

SALVOS: (from CMAR)

“First of all the coalition IS responsible for the chaos which is reigning in Iraq right now.”

We didn’t tell the Fallujians to call in the Syrians, Hamas, Hezbollah. We didn’t encourage Al Sadr to come back from his trip to Iran (with millions to pay off his band of scum.) We didn’t create Ansar Al-Islam, or Abu Abbas, we didn’t coddle the terrorists and welcome them to Iraq. We don’t want them there; it would be easier without them. Syrians, Hamas, Hezbollah, Iranians, Al Qaeda made the choice.

If the opposition did not fire another shot (IED, car bomb, RPG) there would be quiet. The opposition wants chaos, continues chaos, killing and kidnapping is part of it. They are killing civilians, intentionally. Terrorists like chaos. They are responsible for the chaos, we are responsible for some of the cure.



“Secundo: the US/UK and their "allies" who waged 2 ILLEGAL wars on Iraq should be made to pay for the reconstruction of the country's civil/industrial infrastructure which they so happily destroyed”

Nope. In 1991, Gulf I was legal, sanctioned by UNSC, supported by many countries in the ME (with funding.) The war was discontinued through the Cease-Fire Agreement in 1991—which Saddam violated 16+ times. Operation Iraqi Freedom can be considered as *ceasing* the Cease-fire, a continuation of Gulf War I. As Saddam said, “The Mother of All Battles Continues. . .” and it did. Consider no second war; therefore, no *illegal* second war.



Tertio: The Iraqi victims of war crimes committed by the US and the UK should seek compensation. (If Lybia was made to pay millions of Dollars for the Lockerbie victims(for which Lybians were probably not responsible) then the US and the UK should pay an equal amount for EVERY IRAQI who lost their lives during the US/UK aggressions and for every child who died during the criminal embargo.

Your first part is valid. If you can prove that the Coalition purposely killed a group of Iraqis (who are confirmed civilians), there probably will be compensation. There may be compensation for unintended deaths. There will be no compensation for the sanctions which Saddam caused, Saddam thwarted; no compensation for the starvation of children while billions were being bilked from the Iraqi people. They may be able to sue Saddam’s estate in the Iraqi Court system. Check your facts on the sanctions. Check your facts on Saddam’s wealth, during the time the Iraqis suffered.



“Quarto: Iraq's oil revenues are sufficient to give ALL Iraqis a very decent living (provided the US has not forced the puppet governing council to sign contracts which are against the interest of Iraq before the handover”

You really want to consider this, while not considering Saddam’s theft for decades? Okay, what is the Iraqi GNP? What was the Iraqi budget under Saddam? If we hadn’t done this, how would the Iraqis survive under the severe national debts and compensation for the wars Saddam conducted? How many billions for that? Any contract signed will result in funds for the Iraqis. Any changes may be negotiated by the elected government. But, you might find the contracts are good ones; the elected government might not want to change them. Plus, Iraqis will keep much more money under their elected government than with Saddam skimming from the top, the bottom, and the middle.

Cinco: Is an enormous truckload of camel dung. Hardly earns a response, except: while you are busy saying the US is splitting, you strike at the Kurds.

Sexto: A good idea. The UN and other organizations which routinely help to supervise elections would be very helpful to the Iraqis.

KIMMITT and SENOR (Fox) not quoted

Kimmitt: In Falluja, approximately 30 shooters were behind mosque wall. Troops sent 2 (500lb.) munitions at the wall, damaged wall but not mosque.

Kimmitt: Good plan to respond to Mahdi army, and will execute it.

Senor: Zarqawi wants to split country apart. Once turned over to Iraqis, makes it more difficult for Zarqawi.

Kimmitt: Some marriage of convenience between some of the groups.
May be working together in some small cases, not going to succeed.

Senor: Sistani a supporter. Sadr represents mob violence.

AL KUT (Senor/Kimmitt Interview)

Fox: questioned that troops backed off Al Kut.

Senior: Did not respond directly to the question.

Possibly, troops relocated to another area for strategic reasons; but, the question was not sufficiently answered.

SH

Saddam Hussein aided, supported, sheltered, protected. . .terrorists.
and:

Saddam Hussein is a Terrorist

Check out the link.

YOU HEAR THIS ALL THE TIME (poster at AM)

Not only does the Bush administration face enemies everywhere else but also within the United States as well. Millions, including people who voted for GW in 2000, virulently oppose this regime. As people, Iraqis and occupiers, die on a daily basis Americans are finally starting to see the reality of this horror, despite those who constantly tell us that the media only focuses on the negative and that Iraqis generally view the Americans as "liberators". A good portion of Americans believed that Saddam had something to do with 9/11 and this falsehood was encouraged by Bush and his people. Now, as the 9/11 investigation gets more and more uncomfortable for Bush, those Americans are beginning to understand that the administration had an agenda, from the beginning, to invade Iraq no matter what.
I suppose anyone who reads this already knows about the 9/11 investigation, Condoleeza Rice's reluctance to testify,etc. This is only one of the thorns in the side of the Bush administration, but most of the problems revolve around Iraq...the daily body count, the money spent abroad while we in the states strruggle for decent health care, quality schools and just about every public service.
Why am I sharing American woes with you who should not, by all rights, give a damn? Because I am assuming that you want the Bush regime to fall as badly as I do, as badly as millions of Americans do and I hope you will count us among your friends and allies. Things are bad for George Bush here because people are slowly wising up, after all of the hideous decisions he has made here and abroad, and it is here in the United States that I believe he will be defeated, if only by a margin. I wish peace and love to you all,

RESPONSE TO POSTERS (like the one above)

No one has declared this war over. America faces enemies without and within. The enemy does not want the election of a President willing to fight against them. Osama Bin Laden *would like* anyone else to be elected; Saddam Hussein *would have liked* anyone else who was elected. Al Qaeda reaped the benefits of the Spanish election. The bad want a liberal view, so they can continue with fewer obstacles.

It does not seem wise to give them what they want.

A “good portion of Americans” believe Saddam Hussein was a disgusting piece of garbage. In the early days after 9/11, the administration did suspect Saddam Hussein, and then stated clearly that they were backing off this contention, that they were no longer stating that Saddam Hussein had anything to do with it—-they had no concrete proof. It could not be legally proven; therefore, it was no longer stated. They said it several ways, several times. Did you listen; did you take the time to get it right?

As more evidence is revealed, the direction is toward Saddam and his connections with terrorism, Saddam and his connections with influence peddling, and Saddam and his underlings’ meetings with AQ underlings and OBL. There is testimony of a terrorist training camp which included foreigners and a plane—-at Salman Pak. Saddam was harboring terrorists—-not one, but several. Did you take the time to read? And there is more evidence now than there was at the start of the war.

The Executive Branch of government has no legal obligation to require the NSA to testify. Doing it would comprise the ability to freely discuss situations and solutions and would leave a President (any President) without the ability to openly discuss all opinions. Yet, Condoleeza Rice will be testifying before the Committee; and will be under oath, because the administration is willing to contribute to the information concerning the 9/11 with the proviso that this will not set a precedent. The President and Vice-President will be before the Committee, also. They have agreed to it under similar terms in an effort to provide as much information as possible. It’s important, and should be helpful, unless those on the Committee and watching choose to make political fodder out of it—and they will try.

The Constitution of the United States supports the separation of the three branches of government. Do you wish to subvert the Constitution in favor of political views? The choice belongs to the Executive Branch, not the political opposition.

You, for your own purposes, seek to undermine America. For Politics? For Peace? Because you are feeling seditious? We are at war, and you are not supporting the purpose of fighting Al Qaeda or the War in Iraq. It is war; it is fact; you do not support either.

There are people who realize that a President, less than 8 months in office, became the receiver of a mountain of problems. If a President could not head if off during 8 years, are you saying a President of 8 months could?

Why are you sharing American woes? Because you hope to influence against a sitting President; Because you wish to undermine what America is doing; Because you wish to moan and groan about the situation at home—when the situation in Iraq was devastating to the people. You compare smaller problems (which we can handle) to a people who were murdered systematically, tortured, shredded, and the attempt was made to rip their souls out. Do you wish their fate to be your fate? No, you just wish them to side with you for your own gain.

You wish “peace and love to”. ..”all.” Did you love Iraqis while they were oppressed, suppressed, murdered, and tortured? You loved yourself more (you seem to be saying.) Did you wave your sign “No Blood for Oil” giving Saddam a good phrase to use, a group to point to--an assist with his propaganda? Did you see that your country went to war to change a selfish, murderous regime and chant “Regime change in America?”

Did you wish the Spanish train-ravelers “peace?” The people of Halabja? Those of An Najaf, Al Hillah, and Basrah? Those in the mass graves? Many of those people now have the peace you offer. You can have ***selfish love***, and ***expensive peace.***

Bad will overpower good, because bad has no restrictions—-and all it takes is for good people to stand silently. The bad have no decision to make; they take the easy road, fall in with the brutes because it’s easier not to fight it. The good have many decisions and a huge fight.

I voted for GORE in 2000. I apologize for the error. I realize my mistake. I have “WISED-UP!”

YES, RAED,

WAR IS EXPENSIVE. Are you worth it? YES, you are.

You're scared by 100,000. Well, $1,000 means much to me. I don't talk in millions, billions are unimaginable, and tril...tril... Well, I can hardly talk about it.

Many of us are nickel-squeezing, penny-pinchers. This war was very important. Bush(41) didn't tell me, Clinton(42) didn't tell me, Bush(43) tried, but didn't get the message across very well (for whatever reason.)

Watching this develop told me; activities in the UN told me; 9/11 yelled it; terrorists bomb it into our brains. The next two decades are going to be very important to civilization--yours, mine, ours!

HELLO PAX

Hello Pax is the name of the blog. There are many days when it seems more like HELL (we aren't going to get) PAX.

KAY--

GRESHAM's Law: the BAD DRIVES OUT the GOOD.

It seems a variation of--all that's necessary for evil to prevail is that good men do nothing.

Why? Because the bad will stop at nothing, while the good will try to decide what to do based on moral and legal issues. The bad have few, to no, restrictions.

DR. DAVID KAY (C-SPAN)

This is paraphrasing as quickly as possible to get the general idea of the talk:

DK: Behavior remains same. Rationale changes. Domestic political control was a concern. Saddam was deathly afraid of his own citizens. He was concerned that Kurds and Shi’ia, would rise up and destroy his family. He feared the guys with guns, even if own guys. If he opened doors and unmasked society, it would be saying he was weak--giving in.

Interview military officers: all know we have them, but hadn’t seen them. Behavior appeared the same; rationale changed. Underlying intentions are the secrets to be discovered.

KAY ON C-SPAN

Finally, a replay of Dr. David Kay's lecture plus Q&A is on again. I hope C-SPAN provides a transcript.

Kay is very informative and easy listening. He's even funny. Even better, he has ideas for improvement.

PERSUASSION OR WAR

Make your choice. Sometimes, the only choice we have is between two options--neither of which we like.

We tried diplomacy with Iraq. We tried persuading Iraq. We listened to those who escaped Iraq. We tried U.N. sanctions on Iraq. We tried inspections in Iraq. We tried covert operations. We tried threatening Iraq.

Advocating the repeated failures would not produce success. It didn?t work for more than a decade. Inspections did not work. ISG is 3 to 4 times the size of U.N. inspection force and we still don?t know exactly what was going on while the light was off.

The longer it continued, the more dangerous it appeared to be. We don't know exactly how dangerous it was.....yet. We will know more; we may know enough (eventually) to make a decision about what had happened. We don't know whether or not we were really in time--even after one year.

If you don't believe the government was concerned about WMD, you must have missed the troops in chem gear--in the scorching sun, in the heat. If you don't believe we believed it, we have 1,000 Iraq Survey team members still trying to piece it together.

If nothing else, the world knows that Saddam can't control any WMD. . .now! The regime has been disarmed and dispersed. We would not have found out much in Saddam's Iraq; and while Saddam was in charge, the threat was there. We must have as many of the answers as possible.

9/11 INV

This is hogwash. Political trappings are becoming obvious--each trying to trap the other. Wake up!

Where are the representatives of America who care about America more than they care about their own political party or personal gain? I'm looking for you and I don't see you. I'm hoping you are there; but, I'm losing hope.

You, the representatives of the people, have failed US (we the people and America.) No excuses are necessary, or will be enough. Clarke said it and you know it, but many don't say it. If you were a member of the administration, Congress, or in a position of responsibility for any of this, you didn't do enough. This includes the years from 1990 through 2004. You didn't do enough because it was NOT PREVENTED. This means each one--no excuses and no blame will erase it.

We always have to assign blame. Get on with it! Stop wasting your time and get to the meat of the issues. No one did enough, what do we do now?

IT DOESN"T MATTER?? (cmar-b)

The other countries might have thought Iraq maybe had some WMD, but they didn't invade Iraq. We might have thought they had some and we did invade. But all that doesn't matter. You don't really believe we invaded Iraq because of WMD, do you? And I hope you don't believe we invaded them to help out the Iraqi people... it's clear helping out oppressed peoples is not on the administrations to-do list (i.e. Uzbekistan, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Haiti...).

Your hope is unrealistic; it is hopeless. Many did believe this. Did you watch the U.N. sessions? Almost all indicated they believed Iraq had WMD. The question was what action. Inspections were favored, first. At the time of UNSCR 1441, the decision was inspections, with severe consequences upon failure. Did anyone doubt what the consequences were? France didn’t; they were in favor of inspections; and, indicated a willingness to disarm Iraq. The problem came to full view as the muttering began about REGIME REMOVAL. Now, we know why.

Is it clear we don’t help oppressed peoples? Kosovo—troops still there? Liberia—we went there when we were in the MIDDLE OF A WAR because the U.N. requested? WWII—we declared war on Germany when we went to war with Japan?

We had many reasons to do this. Most of those reasons were stated UP FRONT. At the moment, the only thing which can be proven is that there are not huge stockpiles of WMD. The very important questions are. . .what happened, where did they go, and what was the overall plan?

From 1999 to 2002, Saddam was operating in the dark. Read the happenings throughout the first half of 1990, and tell me that Saddam was honorable, trustworthy, and open while he conducted his activities. Tell me that you would trust him.

JUST OR UNJUST

“I don't think a war designed to strengthen American Empire is just.” (cmar-ben)

What do you think of a war designed to disarm Iraq (it did), to strengthen democracy in the ME (it can), and to work toward *real* peace and fight against terrorism in the ME (it’s tough, but possible), and designed to change attitudes in the ME (it may happen) ??

POLITICS

It's everywhere, into everything. Office politics, local politics, political views at home, national politics, foreign politics; it permeates what you see, what you hear, how you live. It's the crap of life--both fertilizer and stench. It's an unpleasant fact of life.

War is politics, and the failure of diplomacy. But, if diplomacy is appeasement (rather than compromise) it will fail and there will eventually be war. We needed a viable ledge between the failure of diplomacy and war. The UN was designed to provide that ledge; it failed, too. The UN is also polluted with politics.

Not only polluted with politics, it appears the UN is in a QUAGMIRE, stuck in its own graft and corruption. Requesting transparency from the US, the United Nation will not reveal accounts, transactions, activities, and will investigate itself.

We are stuck with politics. Well, how about truth in politics. You lie during a campaign, your point score goes down. Could we find an independent, unbiased, (unable to be bribed) group of people who could keep score? HA, it's unlikely.

All we can do is try to find the lies, try to find the truth, try to battle the propaganda with the truth, and hope for the best.

Politics, for me, is the choice for the "lesser of two evils."

PRO-AMERICAN

I feel lucky to enjoy the fruits of so many generations of Americans who fought to provide and to continue an idea, which even Benjamin Franklin was not convinced would last.

Our domestic policies do not always please me. Our previous foreign policies did not always please me. But. . .the idea and ideals of America please me. We must do better each day, each month, each year. We help to steer the huge boat and have to struggle to keep that boat moving forward, not backward. It's not easy; it is . . .worth it.

We will wobble, we will twist and turn on our path, we will work hard to make progress. . .we will try to be the best that we can be. It will not be easy; but, we will only lose when we cease to try.

THOUGHT BIAS:

I am biased, and believe most people are, too. I'm PRO-AMERICAN, and do believe that much of the time our intentions are more good than bad.

There are people who would attempt to proof that ALL intentions the US ever had are BAD. Few people are ALL BAD. Few countries are ALL BAD. The world is not ALL BAD. OUR INTENTIONS WERE NOT ALL BAD and ARE NOT ALL BAD.

NEWSPAPERS: (comment post on CMAR)

Closing down newspapers advocating or inciting violence, against the Coalition and/or the Council, is a routine practice under the circumstances. This was not done early and for good reason. There was an opportunity for the newspaper to do better, to be less violent, to be more truthful. There was also time for the newspaper to put the rope around its neck and hang itself. It was not closed down permanently, but temporarily.

How many papers (of the 200) were closed down permanently?

RIVERBEND (CMAR comment post)

Canaria,
Riverbend’s blog is not an ordinary diary, thoughts to oneself—it is a propaganda vehicle, thousands read it, soon they may believe it as total truth. There is not contradictory comment, (or any alternative provided) there is constant drip, drip; and, it is that way for a reason. It looks very purposeful. The choices are Riverbend’s and what we say about it (and where we say) it is our choice.

There is a note of steady persuasion throughout; a phrase of anti-coalition peppered in; and the whole song is sung in Ba’athist Lefty. The song includes a chorus of poor me, life was better. You sing that song often enough, to people who wish to know what is happening there, and they will begin to like the tune—and repeat the tune. The left sings a similar song, some people don’t inspect the words, they just like the melody

ANOTHER MOAB (verbal):

washingtonpost.com

ML: "The administrations of Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush authorized the sale to Iraq of numerous items that had both military and civilian applications, including poisonous chemicals and deadly biological viruses, such as anthrax and bubonic plague."

In the same Washington Post Article is this:
Although U.S. arms manufacturers were not as deeply involved as German or British companies in selling weaponry to Iraq, the Reagan administration effectively turned a blind eye to the export of "dual use" items such as chemical precursors and steel tubes that can have military and civilian applications. According to several former officials, the State and Commerce departments promoted trade in such items as a way to boost U.S. exports and acquire political leverage over Hussein.

**I don’t believe that the Washington Post or any other media outlet CAN PROVE this. There are several reasons for the belief. Saying that an administration *authorized* the sale requires documentary proof. It’s hard to get proof for something like this—so, it appears to be speculation with a bias. Records were sealed.

First, the article says “authorized the sale of”. . .”items”. . .”both military and civilian applications” (which are called “dual use”); then, it says in another paragraph . . . “effectively turned a blind eye to the export of ‘dual use’ items.”
“Authorized” sounds a lot like Ronnie and H.W. saying, “Hey Joe! Ship those canisters of mustard gas over to Iraq.” (Highly unlikely that ever happened.) No politician wants that “HOT POTATO!” So, I doubt any chemical warfare items were shipped to Iraq by US.

“Blind eye”; do they mean purposely didn’t notice; or, knew and didn’t care? Well, if you can prove that all administrations know everything, and the right hand ALWAYS knows what the left hand is doing, it isn’t very likely. Some administrations are better than others, some know more than others. Turning a “blind eye” is a biased statement, leading you to a conclusion the journalist and reporter would have great difficulty proving.

“Dual Use” is a red-herring—a useful tool for many sides. Items on this imaginary list could be extensive—almost anything you can imagine. It could include everything except milk, bread, and eggs—even eggs could contain bio-material.

NEXT IS:
WP-- "In a September interview with CNN, Rumsfeld said he "cautioned" Hussein about the use of chemical weapons"

THE WHOLE PARAGRAPH IS:
In a September interview with CNN, Rumsfeld said he "cautioned" Hussein about the use of chemical weapons, a claim at odds with declassified State Department notes of his 90-minute meeting with the Iraqi leader. A Pentagon spokesman, Brian Whitman, now says that Rumsfeld raised the issue not with Hussein, but with Iraqi foreign minister Tariq Aziz. The State Department notes show that he mentioned it largely in passing as one of several matters that "inhibited" U.S. efforts to assist Iraq.

**WP didn’t include the whole sentence, let alone the whole paragraph. The only quote in the paragraph was “cautioned.” Did the quotes mean that was the only word they quoted from Rumsfeld? It seems so; the rest of the paragraph is the author(s) opinion of the circumstances.



We were concerned that Iraq should not lose the war with Iran, because that would have threatened Saudi Arabia and the Gulf. Our long-term hope was that Hussein's government would become less repressive and more responsible.

If you remember the climate of the times, few thought Saddam was going to be the “Iraqi Idol”, many thought about “guilt by association.” Few liked Saddam, and the public was not happy. There were frequent statements about the “balance of power” in the ME. The theory seemed to be: if one side has a pea-shooter, give the other side a pea-shooter to make it more even. They can beat on each other, and will eventually quit.

You see the world outrage at trying to change anything in the ME. It was as bad, or worse, then. Half the world yells “don’t touch it” you’ll make it worse; the other half yells, “do something!” Iraq’s losing the war would have shaped the ME in a much worse direction. Yes, “status-quo” was frequently used, it became a sentence. Anyone could yell “status quo” and most would know exactly what was meant.

MOTHER OF ALL (VERBAL) BATTLES CONTINUES AT AM:

Al Muajaha post (exchange between Max and ML (Media Lies)

“Media Lies”. . .Yes, I agree. But, the question of the moment is, does *Media Lies* tell the truth.

ML says: “Max has a view of the world where the worlds only superpower is a benevolent peace loving state, this is at odds with the darker reality of the situation.”

**ML, while you are “suicide-bombing” through my brain, in order to blow apart my thoughts, you might try harder to get it right. Unless you are Jan, in disguise, I doubt you have read every word I’ve written, know who I am, live where I live, and (in your enthusiasm to jump into my brain and start bombing) you stepped into the middle of a Max/Jan argument (holding a target sign) attempting to hit from behind. Okay, it’s your right. It might be like jumping into a huge vat of ABC (Already Been Chewed) bubble gum, but no one will stop you. Just a “heads up.”

**You may only be interested in telling me what my view is; but, here it is. The U.S. is the world’s only superpower. We got it by default. We feel the responsibility and have the means and resources to attempt to make some parts of the world a better place. Sometimes, we are benevolent; sometimes, we are peace-loving; and sometimes, we engage in a battle against the darker reality that the world can be a very nasty place. The world wants us to abide by every last law and resolution and comment and view; while the enemy does heinous acts, kills innocents gleefully, is unhampered by convention, law, morals or humanity. We can be cold, and calculatedly, clearly determined; and, there is a sleeping wrath of justice which was awakened on 9/11. The terrorists chose to take the step that awoke the Giant. They wanted to be noticed; they are now noticed, and ON NOTICE.

ML says: “Max believes this beacuse the reality of the situation is uncomfortable for him- The reality that his comfort, and fantastically high standard of living is dependent on the suffering of the third world/ global south, and his countries determination to make sure that the south do not get a fair price for their goods.”

**Well, ML, you are talking about reality. The reality is that WE ARE AT WAR, and WILL BE AT WAR FOR THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE. That’s really UNCOMFORTABLE. You might excuse me from discussing the “price of tea in China” during a war. But, if you really wanted current reality: the fair price of the goods in Iraq is going up; the fair wage for people in Iraq is going up.

ML: “Max- all of us in the first world are dependent on the exploitation of the third world. The UK empire destroyed cultures and stole resouces- we Transported the slave labour that made America great.”

ML: “The cheap food that you buy in the supermarket is cheap beacuse the producers do not get a fair wage. The cheap clothes you buy are cheap because the people who made them exist in conditions of semi slavery in tax free export processing zones”.

**This sounds like JAN MUD. He’s always busy trying to divert the issue to something else, too. You seem to be saying that the US must cure all the ills of the world before doing anything to cure the ills of the world—while you say it’s none of our business.

ML: “The cheap fuel you put in your car is cheap because The US is prepared to invade another state (whose dictator it trained and armed with chemical weapons) and take the Oil by force”

**The average price of gas was around $2.45 a gallon. And for this privilege, we only paid billions and didn’t get any oil—or, our gas prices would be really cheap. Where’s your proof that we “trained and armed with chemical weapons?” Documented facts, not left-sin wizardry.

ML: “These are uncomfortable facts, I do not like the fact that my wealth is dependent on screwing someone else, but I accept it as a fact.”

**Then donate it to the Iraqis, donate it to the poor workers. Keep a family off the street, hire a worker at good wages. You accept “screwing someone else” too easily

COMPASSION THROUGH A STRAW--single focus compassion
(response to poster whose only focus is on innocent Iraqis killed by the Coalition)

Your compassion is for the innocent Iraqis killed by Coalition forces. You say so.

No compassion for the U.N. workers (trying to help) killed in the headquarters bombing? No compassion for the two Americans shot dead for helping people? No thought of the innocent victims of the suicide bombings in Baghdad (and throughout Iraq)? No compassion for the IP who hope to control the criminals and hope to obtain & maintain the peace. No compassion for the Anfel victims, promised amnesty, taken is buses to the “peace” under the ground? No compassion for those whose tongues were cut out; those who were shredded (FEET FIRST, so they would live longer, die more slowly); those who were killed and buried—with hands tied behind their backs and bullet in their heads—by the thousands. No compassion concerning these MASS GRAVES of individual victims when the body count is close to 400,000 and may grow closer ONE MILLION people before the count is finished. No compassion for those who would have and could have continued to give their lives for a palace, or a bribe, or an Uday PLEASURE? No compassion for the brave humanitarian workers who risk their lives to help Iraqis even under this danger? Apparently, you are (compassion-deficient) compassion limited..

The poster WROTE “. . .makes me want to get blind forever.”

Well, be happy. It looks like you already have your wish.

FALLUJA:

Many Iraqis are under liberation; much of Iraq is under organization; Falluja should be under OCCUPATION. Full OCCUPATION: Martial Law, Strict Curfew, concertina wire, the works. Possibly, after re-commencing major combat.

At a time of the Coalition's choosing the Military appears, and OCCUPATION BEGINS.

Call it Occupational Therapy!

Among other things, those who are yelling "occupation" will finally be speaking the truth about the only occupation in Iraq--Falluja.

SHADES OF SOMALIA?????

The news is reporting that the contractors' burned bodies were dragged through the streets, hit and dismembered, then hung from a bridge.

It isn't the 1990s, you pieces of human garbage! I could guess what will happen now; but I won't say how--there are several ways.

Keep in mind, THE GARBAGE IS USUALLY TAKEN OUT SOONER OR LATER!

It reaffirms the resolve: no matter how long it takes, whatever it takes!

LATEX GLOVES (or a BANDAGE?)

If (in the flury of activity) those were latex gloves, who would have access to those? Are latex gloves an item widely available?

Strange that someone passing by would happen to have those gloves. Very strange that he would put them on (in the excitment) when he just happened to be there, passing by.

Looks like a leader may have been spotted. Someone who may have been inciting, while protecting himself against. . . .identifying him by his fingerprints.

That's my observation and my guess.

PostScript: After watching several times, it might be a bandage? Either way, they should be able to find that man.

STATE DEPT. SOURCES:

Fox is reporting that 3 of the 4 contractors are American.

SPOTTED

During the first view (Fox tape) of murdered contractors' vehicle, there was a man whose arm came into foreground range of the camera. DID THAT MAN HAVE ON LATEX GLOVES?

I've seen the tape 2 or 3 times and it still looks like he has LATEX GLOVES on his hands. Why? Maybe he didn't wish to get his hands dirty; or, maybe HE DIDN'T WANT SOMEONE TO GET HIS FINGERPRINTS!!!!

MUQTY

Muqtada Al Sadr has spoken praising 9/11, condemning the killing of Yassin.

He's on the side of the TERRORIST by praising 9/11. He is inciting to violence against the US. He may be in big trouble; and, not for the first time.

TERRORISM

The Twenty-first Century Plague is TERRORISM. The disease is spread by HATE; the purpose is to KILL. TERRORISM: THE INTENT TO KILL INNOCENT PEOPLE (USUALLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF KILLING AS MANY AS POSSIBLE,) FOR ANY REASON, ANYWHERE, ANYTIME.

HOW DID THIS PLAGUE BECOME ACCEPTED--BY ANYONE, ANYWHERE, ANYTIME. . .EVER?

Insidiously, it became the weapon of a cause. It was accepted by that cause. Sucess depended on the acceptance of the weapon. It was accepted, if it wasn't directed at you. It was ignored, because it wasn't here (wherever here is.) Now, it can be here, there, and everywhere. No one is immune; no one is protected.

If this were smallpox, of epic proportions, the whole world would realise the possibilities and acknowledge the danger. TERRORISM IS SEVERE, DEADLY, AND WORLDWIDE. IT WILL NOT GET BETTER FOR A LONG TIME.

If you do not condemn terrorism; you condemn yourself, and your children, and their children. You condemn your neighbors, your friends, their friends. You condemn people in another land, and those on another continent.

Unless we ALL CONDEMN TERRORISM, we will sentence ourselves to live under the threat of that same terrorism. When we remain silent, they grow stronger. Tacit consent allows them to continue.

THE WORLD'S FUTURE IS IN YOUR VOICE; DO NOT LEAVE YOUR FUTURE IN THE HANDS OF THE TERRORIST. CONDEMN IT! SHOUT, LOUD AND STRONG AND LONG. . .AND SHOUT IT NOW.

NO MORE TERROR, FOR ANY REASON. . .EVER!!!!!!!!!!!!

(This should apply in State Law, National Law, International Law, and Space Law.)

[note: Yes, Virginia, there are Space Laws!]

FOX TICKER

The Iraq Survey Group has evidence that scientists tested long range missle(s) and UAVs with longer range than proscribed vehicles.

PREZ, RICE, VEEP WILL TALK TO COMMITTEE

Clues are (sometimes) revealed during testimonies. Security is (sometimes) compromised.

It may be politics to you; but, it could be dangerous for all of US.

THE LOVE/Hate TICKER RELATIONSHIP

DEADLY CLEANSER. . . (go to commercial) WHAT ????

Nothing further when the network returned from commercial break.

(sarcastic) Ajax Acidosis; Comet Corrosion; Mr. Clean kills, Janitor in the Drum Escapes? Sorry, I can't tell you, either.

RICE TO TESTIFY

Condoleeza Rice is to testify, before the Committee, in public, under oath!!
. . . . . . with the proviso that it WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED PRECEDENT-SETTING!
(according to FOX NEWS)

Well, never let it be said that they listen to me.

POLITICS and PATRIOTISM

I see the Democrats working hard to defeat the Republicans. In the process, the Democrats are doing serious damage to the United States of America. They don't seem to see this. The Anti-War Movement is doing serious damage to the United State of America--they don't seem to care. The extreme left-wing liberals appear to feel that their opinion is the only thing that counts.

This time; for this election; I will put aside my own needs. I have voted for many Democrats, and some Republicans. This time I will vote MY CONSCIENCE, FOR THE SAKE OF OUR COUNTRY, and WITHOUT REGARD FOR PERSONAL NEED (and I am needy), and CAST MY VOTE AGAINST THE TERRORISTS!!!!!

IF the Democrats continue to undermine America to get the vote, they won't get my vote.

RICE and TESTIMONY

I would like to see Condoleeza Rice testify; BUT, I wouldn't want AQ to see it. AND, it wouldn't be good if the Democrats saw it, because they might attempt to twist it or make it political meat for the campaign. I'd like to see her testify; BUT it compromises the Executive Branch, and sets a precedent. Some of those who say it wouldn't set a precedent are those who cite a previous precedent--which shouldn't have happened because it SET A PRECEDENT.

NO, Rice should not testify, in public, under oath. We need the information she can provide behind closed doors, with selected sections released under agreement.

INTERESTING: 60 MISSILES TO AQ

(Berger:) We sent General Ralston to go have dinner, as I recall, with General Karamat, the head of the Pakistani military. And as those missiles were heading into Pakistani airspace, General Ralston said, by the way, General Karamat, at this moment missiles are coming over your airspace, so that the Pakistanis would not read those as incoming missiles from India with nuclear warheads and we'd start a nuclear war

. . .
BEN-VENISTE: Do you have any reason to understand now whether or not bin Laden might have been warned back in '98 by Pakistani intelligence?

BERGER: There has been speculation to that effect, Mr. Ben- Veniste, that he was tipped off. I tend to doubt it for the simple reason that we also killed apparently a number of Pakistani intelligence officials who were at the camps at the same time. So one would think that had there been a tip, they would have gotten their own people out. So I have no reason to believe that's true

**"killed apparently a number of Pakistani intelligence officials"**

QUESTIONS: Ramzi Yousef and Terry Nichols

Was there any connection established between Terry Nichols and Ramzi Yousef?

Some have tried. Both were (apparently) in the Philippines at (approximately) the same time. The OKC bombing law suit brought by a few Oklahoma citizens offered information of a connection as part of the suit. Whether or not the information is reliable, we don't know.

Since Terry Nichols is currently on trial in Oklahoma, we may find more information, or we may find nothing or no connection.

(note: Not every event is terrorism, and some may be terrorism. I may not "have the wisdom to know the difference; but, I'm going to look at events, turn them over to analyze them, and decide (preliminarily) what I think about it.

You can't find what is not there; but if you don't look you'll find nothing and know nothing. You can have a bias, but you have to be sure to look at as many facts as possible, to try to connect the dots factually and without that bias.)

BUT BERGER SAYS:

When the CIA came back and said, "Sir, we believe this is Al Qaida," I believe I would have been in favor of acting. I don't think we were at that point and I'd seen enough situations in my eight years where preliminary judgments were wrong. The Egypt Air plane that went down was terrorism. Oklahoma City, sir, was foreign terrorism for quite some time until we found out that it wasn't foreign terrorism.

In short, Berger says that Egypt Air was terrorism; OKC was NOT TERRORISM.

I accept that (for the time being) but will continue to watch for more information and look for someone (knowledgeable) who will refute the Yousef/Nichols info--including the rumor that Yousef had been known to be in the employ of Iraq. Looking forward to more data.

9/11 INV--LEHMAN - BERGER Q&A

LEHMAN: Let's talk about 93 World Trade Center investigation.

We now know that three of the key planners and players were Al Qaida. And indeed, one of them was able to escape and was given safe haven in Baghdad right up until, as far as we know, the present day.

We have received many criticisms of the handling of that crisis at the time, in that it was handled as a criminal problem, and that the information gathered in the investigation that would have turned the light bulb on in the policy community as to the extent of the Al Qaida participation was never shared within the intelligence community until after the trial.

BERGER: Mr. Lehman, I think this is a -- I'm not attributing this to you, but I think this is a good example of reading history backwards.

In 1993, we had no notion of the linkage of Ramzi Yousef to Khalid Sheik Mohammed and others who ultimately were tied to bin Laden.

BERGER: These were things that were learned in '97 and '98.

You know, when you turn the book upside down, and when you start with the last chapter and you read backwards, it's a hell of a lot easier...

1993 WTC bombing-
***"We now know that three of the key planners and players were Al Qaida. And indeed, one of them was able to escape and was given safe haven in Baghdad right up until, as far as we know, the present day."*** (3/24/04)

***"In 1993, we had no notion of the linkage of Ramzi Yousef to Khalid Sheik Mohammed and others who ultimately were tied to bin Laden."***

If true, Saddam Hussein was harboring AQ, who was the third key planner? The blind sheik, probably.

PRE-9/11 CLIMATE:

Before 9/11 the public, and the climate in the world, would not have supported some actions against terror. Europe does not agree with the US actions now; how could they have agreed prior to 9/11? Well, much of Europe would not, could not, and still does not, and might not ever. . .agree about how VERY IMPORTANT the WoT is.

I believe Iraq was and is a part of it. So much of the world disagrees with me. To be blunt, I hope I'm NOT CORRECT.

I (also) hope that I heard Sandy Berger incorrectly. (flight 800)

AT WAR after early August, 1998.

We were at war after August 1998, the people didn't realize it or know it. When Bin Laden declared war against us, Congress should have been notified and war declared officially.

There were many possible errors which led to 9/11; but, this might have been a big one. There are various reasons why this was not done:

US Economy; acknowledgement of terror activities in general; declaring war on an organizationed group--rather than a country; acknowledging specific terror activities and being pushed into a hasty response; panic.

SANDY BERGER--(IT WAS AN ERROR--INCORRECT--RETRACTED & EXPLAINED)

Sandy Berger was the National Security Adviser to Clinton Administration, 1997-2001.

During Wednesday's testimony, Berger was discussing Flight 800. I have been waiting for years to hear more.

Did Berger just say what I think he said? I had missed his testimony on Wednesday-- the coverage was not carried except in replays during the next few days. I missed the first part in the replays. Now I have to watch the whole thing again because there may have been something very important earlier (that Berger said.)

Did Berger say that preliminary indications on the cause of the Flight 800 disaster were not Al Qaeda. That later preliminary judgements were that it was AQ, that too many witnesses sighted missiles from earth into the air.

I heard pieces of this in the background until it caught my attention. Now I don't know if that is what I heard; it is what I thought I heard. If this was not the case, why mention it; an air accident has nothing to do with 9/11. Wonder if there is a transcript somewhere. I heard all of Rumsfeld; some of Powell; Berger; Clarke.

THE ABOVE IS IN ERROR, BELOW IS FROM ACTUAL BERGER TRANSCRIPT:

BERGER: We thought TWA 800 was terrorism. *It was not terrorism.* People actually -- dozens of people saw the missile strike TWA 800 as it went up over Long Island.

(Here is where I was rolling back "mental tape"--What? Flight 800? People saw the missile strike. . .) (Then, I heard: . . .)

LEHMAN: Yes, but you just told us...

BERGER: Preliminary judgments, I have come to learn, are not the same as judgments. And when the CIA was ready -- they were certainly not sitting on their hands, and when they were ready to come back and say, "It's our best judgment that this is Al Qaida," we should have acted. That did not happen on our watch, sir

Well, it was a challenging day. I'm still watching; but, probably, there will be little more on this one.

I did learn something new!

RIVERBEND

As one of very few bloggers from Iraq, Riverbend became well-known and many people read her opinions. If you don't expect anyone to read your blog, you might not have a comments section; but, this did not seem to be the case. She came on the net with the encouragement of Salam. He had a huge following which shot him into prominence. It's reasonable to believe that she would have a large readership.

Her views coincide with opposition views within Iraq, and her efforts are directed toward anti-Coalition positions. She has no obligation to speak the truth, does not seem to search for it, perpetuates rumors; and it is a well-written drumbeat marching steadily toward pure propaganda.

Salam seemed to gravitate more to the left, after becoming “famous.” Riverbend appears to be firm in her opinions, was encouraged to blog (with expectation of wide-readership.) I doubt her views were unknown to Salam. Raed blogs within Salam’s “Where’s Raed” and might be considered to have views more similar to Riverbend. Raed’s mother blogs. (Faiza), his sibling blogs (Khalid) and another sibling Majid edits almuajaha.com (which is supposedly a Baghdad newspaper and net access website on indymedia.com but could be just the netsite.) They know each other and it seems they know a left-wing journalist fairly well.

Are we looking at the natural spread of blog-a-maniacs; or, a slowly organizing group of blog-a-gandists? Almost everyone has a bias, but many are willing to listen to another view. I’m American; but, I can listen.

Is Riverbend. . .Hamza?

AL ZAWAHIRI

The recent attempt to catch Zawahiri appears to be a failure. Al Jazeera aired a tape (supposedly) calling for the toppling of the Pakistan government and the assassination of Musharraf. It doesn't seem to be working. There are demonstrations.

Are the people of the world recognizing that to support ANY TERRORIST, is supporting all terrorist? There is hope that this is happening. Otherwise, we (the people of the world) are making a supremely, serious, stupid mistake--which is very likely to kill us.

STAYING FOCUSED

Much as I try to stay focused on Iraq and on Propaganda (correcting,) there is so much happening that I drift into other topics.

9/11 INV

I can't depend on the news media to tell more than the bare sensationalism. I depend on C-SPAN to give more. Well, they did; but, they did it on C-SPAN 3. It didn't do me any good because we don't have it and may not be able to get it.

COHEN

CNN, Cohen said that there was question whether or not OBL was in the tent compound. It may not have been OBL. In which case it would have been irresponsible and might have killed a UAE Prince for no reason.

RUMSFELD

It WILL BE ATTEMPTED AGAIN.

C-SPAN NOW AIRING:

C-SPAN is back on with Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, and Myers. A relief! No commercials. They have been given the oath.

TOO SLOW; TOO KIND; TOO CAREFUL?

It seems to be coming out that we had been very careful not to act in haste, not to kill numbers of innocents (collateral damage) on vague intelligence; and couldn't get to UBL fast enough to get him. We were not at the right place, at the right time, with the right equipment.

If I heard correctly: There was an opportunity missed. OBL and UAE meeting, UAE in large compound, OBL in tent compound, they focused on the large compound. Should have hit the small tent compound, at night when OBL returned. Waiting to hear more about this.

IDIOT TALKING HEADS:

William Cohen was speaking about his concerns in 1997. Then he began saying that people comment about no attacks since 9/11. That we need to understand that they are coming again, they're already here, we aren't safe. . .(talking head rattles on and on right through the rest of Cohen's remaining paragraph or two.)

Okay! I have a controller. It's even called a "remote control." It just doesn't control the important things. Someone else decides which part of this I can hear, and which part is really important. All the news networks do this (to varying degrees) except C-SPAN which would rather show today's House of Regurgitation.

C-SPAN, you have really let me down, today! It's important, it should be live, and you should be showing it NOW. I was counting on you; YOU LET ME DOWN.

MEDIA CRACKPOTS with control

Okay, who decides what is on the news ticker? The guys in charge should be fired. Can you count the times you catch something important-looking on the news ticker and suddenly it's gone, never to appear again--at least not while I'm watching.

Commercial Time superscedes ALL! IMAGINE noticing part of the ticker news. . .
". . .HUGE EXPLOSION, BODY PARTS EVERYWHERE, in the little town of. . ." Later you find out that there was a boiler explosion at a sheep rendering plant in Pocatella, ID which tossed mutton for a mile. Well, you don't find that out for hours, or days, because they don't start the ticker at the cut for commercial, or they don't repeat the item for hours, or they don't repeat it at all.

Since they know when they are having a commerical (to the second), why don't they cut off the ticker before the last item and start it (upon return) with the next complete item. (Of course, they could always skip the commercial--snicker.)

9/11 INV--

C-SPAN is replaying a morning interview; FOX didn't go back to the hearings; CNN was covering the hearings and left, I don't get C-SPAN III. I may have to resort to the old fashioned radio. Frustrating!

The "not-as-important" people may "let-slip" the more important information. But, it doesn't look like it will be seen live. Even C-SPAN may wait to cover testimony by the big guys. Nuts!!!

The committee is back in session and C-Span is watching the posterior of the Sgt.-at-Arms in the House. Finally, FOX is carrying the remainder of Powell.

9/11 INV--General

Is there any possibility that this committee could be bi-partisan? No way! It won't happen in an election year, and the contest of appearing bi-partisan, while shooting poop-bombs, continues.

While this is happening, the average American will be acquiring information which we wouldn't get elsewhere. What? Yes, these people are under oath and may not wish to lose credibility, in public, millions watching. In short, they are less likely to like and more likely to fudge the issue, but tell the truth--if you can find it.

We will have to keep in mind that the committee is not under oath, but those who give testimony are under oath. Some facts will come out in the muck. And, there will be replays. Watching this, cuts some of the crap and middle men out of the equation. It will not be Albright said that. . .(followed by interpretation), we will hear Albright say, "This is. . ." The words will be hers, spoken through her mouth, recorded and replayed for proof and examination. This goes for Powell, too; and any others who testify.

MISSED PART--9/11 INV.

I missed part of this mornings's start of the 9/11 Investigation committe hearings. Saw some of Maleleine Albrights's testimony (under oath.) Got company. Missed much of Colin Powell's testimony, but was able to hear some. Then the committee adjourned for lunch, to come back at 1:30. C-SPAN mentioned that they would change to the House, might not come back to the Hearings. WHAT?

Frequently, C-SPAN shows important events; BUT, to change from important hearings to a bunch of babbling speech makers doesn't not seem a wise choice. The hearings are far more important. . .and even tho' it could be on C-SPAN III, I don't get that.

Fortunately, CNN and FOX seem to be carrying it--just have to suffer through the commercials and wonder what was said during the break.

SSZ

Did SLIMY, SLIPPERY, Zawahiri squeeze through the trap? Looks that way; but he may not have been there in the first place.

Was there a benefit? It looks as tho' there were hundreds of terrorists captured.
So, it wasn't a waste of effort.

MADAM AMBASSADOR

Rend Al-Rahim will be the first Ambassador from Iraq to the United States after the transfer of power is completed.

C-SPAN replayed Al-Rahim's speech to CAIS, at Johns Hopkins University. It was fairly impressive. The information imparted with clear, concise, to the point; and, probably answered many of the questions the audience would ask, prior to the asking.

I didn't take notes (maybe should have) because it may be replayed again and I preferred to get an overall impression. The impression was very good.

ZAWAHIRI REPORTS

Out of London, news reports that a body was obtained. DNA testing is being conducted, reporting to establish whether or not the body is ZAWAHIRI.

At the same time, the news ticket says that US Intel claims the reports are not true.

Just more of the usual messy confusion.

PAKISTAN

Nothing much new. They don't seem to know who is there.

$25M REWARD

IF. . . .this is Al-Zawahiri and he's captured/killed, would Pakistan receive the reward? I would be in favor of distributing the reward to the participating soldiers of the Pakistani Army.

RICE ON TODAY'S EVENTS

Condoleeza Rice said that getting one will not mean that it's over.

True, but many people would like to see this as a GOOD DAY.

PETER BERGEN (CNN):

The fact that there is fierce resistance does not mean that there is a high-value target. There have been times of fierce resistance and no high-value target, and time when there was fierce resistance. Another "expert" saying that we don't know.

ASSURANCES:

There are no assurances that this is Al-Zawahiri. We have been through this again and again. However, there is no reason to refrain from hope at the possibility. If Al-Zawahiri is captured or killed, this could be a effective lobotomy to Al Q'iller.

CNN: PAKISTANI INTEL. SOURCES SAY TARGET IS AL-ZAWAHIRI

Pakistani Intelligence Sources are saying that Al-Zawahiri is within these fighters and is fighting with them. Heavy duty army has gone into the area.

REUTERS: PAKISTANI OFFICIAL SAYS HIGH-VALUE TARGET NOT BIN LADEN

STEVE BRIDGES IMPERSONATING GW:

He resembles Bush(43) and his movements and mannerisms are really good. He's got the eyebrows and neck/head motions down pretty well. When he was questioned about Saddam trying to kill his dad and responded that his mother tried to kill his dad and we haven't heard from her. . .makes me LAUGH! Barbara Bush (apparently) asked for an introductory tape (Steve Bridges pretending to be GW introducing her.) And, she showed it to her son. Bridges and group were invited to the White House, where Steve impersonated George to George. . .and the President laughed.

The thought that Steve Bridges can go around the country and say outrageous things (many of which GW might like to say, too) gives rise to inner laughter at all the possibilities. Picture GW (Steve) meets Saddam!

At some time in the future, look forward to Iraqis producing a movie or a play about the years of Saddam. Sure, there was little laughter; but, there might be much more laughter in the years to come. Iraqis may not be able to do that yet. They will. In the past, a joke against Saddam could mean torture or death; in the future, Saddam will be the "butt" of decades of jokes.

BAGHDAD

Reports are that the Al Hyaat Hotel has been hit with an RPG; but, damage not said to be extensive. No casualties reported at this time. We can hope that it's a scar in the building with no human damage.

BAGHDAD

Explosions heard. Sirens (briefly) in the Green Zone. Channel-switching doesn't do a thing--commercials abound.

Location--South Waziristan

Ayman Al-Zawahiri is considered a more important "catch" as he is the one suspected of being in charge of operations. Highly intelligent, he may be the "brains" of AQ. No one knows who or what is being defended. The location is so remote that there are no reporters in the area.

Al-Zawahiri has been involved in AQ for a long time. If we got Bin Laden, the operations would continue. If Al-Zawahiri is captured or killed, it is more likely that operations would slow down, as soon as they ran out of the current plans.

Watching the news on this type of thing is usually exciting and hopeful. It also can(usually) turn out to be nothing. A very senior Pakistan official is saying that a very senior AQ is surrounded. The hope continues!

MSNBC--Fighting going on between Pakistani forces against local tribesmen, Talaban/AQ who may be defending someone (suspected of being the "high-value" target. Might be some coordination between Special Forces and Pakistan Forces for intelligence purposed. They are talking Al-Zawahiri, who son was captured a few weeks ago. Ayman Al Zawahiri is suspected to be the one who moves around.

PAKISTAN--FIERCE FIGHTING

In the past two days, there has been fierce fighting going on in Pakistan. Speculation is rampant. The assessment is that the fighters are defending a "high value" target. What? Who? Well, we don't know yet, as usual.

Because the fighting has been increasingly fierce, media pundants are going wild. CNN: "Pakistani Pres.: "High-value Al Qaeda Target Possibly Surrounded.

AP: (Apparently saying) They suspect it's the second in command.

APPEASEMENT DIDN'T WORK IN WWII, either

The appeasement which so amuses the French may not be so funny when played by the Spaniards. For Spain, in concert with America and France, shared the watch of North Africa. And since that is where many Al Qaeda have moved, as the Madrid train bombing carried out by North Africans proves, Europe will find their relative danger increased far more greatly than the Americans, who can comfortably lose the Spanish contingent in Iraq. The loss of a solid Spain, while an annoyance to America is a catastrophe for Europe. Iraq is far from America but Spain is close to France.
(belmontclub.blogspot.com)

SOCIALISTS WIN

Well, it looks like the Socialists won in Spain. That is sad. Thanks for the help, we did appreciate it. Sorry it turned out this way. I cannot help but feel that the score is Aznar's Party 0; Socialists 0; Terrorists 1.

Wish you hadn't caved. (Guess it's too much to hope for a Dewey/Truman result, isn't it?)

BLIX

Hans Blix has another scheduled appearance. This time it's on CNN (Monday, 8pm.) Will there be mis-direction, accusations? SURE!! Seems Dr. Hans Blix is able to be diplomatic with rogue nations, but not so diplomatic with US. Should be fun; much more fun than when he was with the UN.

NEWT

Newt Gingrich is on the TV warpath concerning the UN Oil-for-food Program. Apparently, there are billions unaccounted for and Newt is promoting an investigation to find out what happened. Some 50 Billion Dollars is the question; where is it is another question. No answers, yet.

There should be more information somewhere on the WEB. I need to see what the full story is, according to Newt.

SPAIN--TRAIN BOMBING

Our warm thoughts go out to the families and friends of the people killed and injured in the Madrid Train Bombing. There are no words to soothe the pain. Our thoughts are with you.

PYRAMID

"I somewhere read that the truth is like a pyramid. Some chose to believe that the only truth is the side that is in front of them when in fact the truth is the whole pyramid." (Nadia)

The pyramid idea is interesting; and, I agree, too. The problem seems to be that there are so many factors/people/countries/organizations putting obstacles in the way of a person making the trip around all sides of the pyramid. It’s a very difficult trip.

While we are trying to decide the truth, Hans Blix will be telling his side on CNN (Monday at 8pm.)

Newt Gingrich is telling his version of UN activities.

The Spaniards will be deciding their future in today's elections.

Europe is tightening security.

One thing is clear. This is world-wide; and, the world needs all of the great silent majorities (the vast numbers of regular people) to speak against the targeted killing of innocents; to fight against the attempted eradication of us-- the humanity of the earth, the fathers, mothers, sisters, brothers, sons and daughters.

WE'VE BEEN BLIXED

Nadia says: "Blix book will tell the world what sort of liars Bush and Blair are. And some will go to any length to discredit the messenger (Blix) instead of turning the focus to Bush and Blair." (Al Muajaha.com)


Blix's book may just tell more than Blix wants known. His quotes are wonderful. There is a saying that sometimes it's best to "smile and let the world believe you are intelligent; rather than open your mouth to confirm your ignorance." In the Hans Blix case, it may be more than ignorance.

Earlier this year, Blix admitted to a British newspaper: *****"It's correct to say that the IAEA was fooled by the Iraqis."*****

No, Hans Blix (who said they were clean again, and again) was fooled. It's very possible that no one will bother to discredit Hans Blix, we'll just wait for him to do it himself.

BLIX AGAIN

More quotes and miscellanous:
Blix said Iraq was unable to account for its cache of VX poison gas or its stockpile of anthrax. The VX gas, Blix told the panel, appeared to have been "weaponized." In addition there were concerned about the fate of VX precursor chemicals, which Iraq told inspectors were lost in the Gulf War bombing or destroyed by Iraq.

[note: It doesn’t exist, and now it “appeared to have been ‘weaponized.”]

Iraq declared that it had destroyed its store of 8,500 liters of anthrax in 1991, but Blix said no "convincing evidence" existed of its destruction.

"There are strong indications that Iraq produced more anthrax than it declared and that at least some of this was retained after the declared destruction date. It might still exist," Blix said

Those questions include what Iraq has done with its stockpiles of
the nerve agent VX. There are indications that Iraq has weaponized this deadly chemical, Blix said. Moreover, "There are strong indications that Iraq produced more anthrax than it declared."

"Any further sign of the concealed documents would be serious," Blix said. "There can be no sanctuaries for proscribed items, activities, or documents. A denial of prompt access to any site would be very serious matter."

"Iraq appears not to have come to a genuine acceptance, not
even today, of the disarmament which was demanded of it," Blix said.

HANS BLIX

According to a new article on Al Muajaha.com, Blix has a book out. I just had to respond with as much as I could collect.

Butler said he had ''no doubt'' that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, but was unsure whether they would be found.

***''Do they exist? No question. I knew that, (current U.N. chief weapons inspector) Hans Blix knew that, the U.N. Security Council knows that, the permanent members of the Security Council knew that because some of them kept the receipts,'' Butler said***. [Sydney, April 15, Kyodo—comment by Richard Butler, former Chief UN Weapons Inspector]

Per Ahlmark, who had been Blix’s boss in 1960 and had followed his career since then, said in an article published on Nov. 1, 2002 that Blix was chosen after "Friends of Iraq in Paris and Moscow consulted Baghdad to see whom Saddam would prefer." He added, "France and Russia then suggested Mr. Blix."

Ahlmark’s article was appropriately titled, "Sending in a Dupe to Disarm Saddam." He described Blix as amiable but "politically weak and easily fooled." He said, "I can think of few European officials less suitable for a showdown with Saddam."

He pointed out that Blix, as head of the IAEA, had assured the world before the Gulf War that nothing alarming was happening in Iraq. He gave Saddam the report he had hoped for when he began hiding his nuclear ambitions and facilities.

. . .He contrasts him with David Kay, whom he described as a highly skilled inspector who discovered evidence that Iraq was only 12 to 18 months away from producing a nuclear device. He says that Kay’s distrust of Saddam’s henchmen led Blix to chide him for not accepting "official information."

"I think it is wiser," he said, "to interview the Iraqis inside Iraq and in the presence of a representative of the Iraqi government." (Blix)

[This might make some Iraqis laugh. . .now. It could have been more blatant, Blix could have suggested that the scientists be interview in the presence of Iraqi Intelligence—but, maybe they were present in some form.]




DURING THE BLIX WATCH:

IAEA: Iraq developed WMD; India and Pakistan acquired nuclear, North Korea began developing nuclear was inspected—but still has it. Iran has a nuclear program, possibly begun during Blix’s watch. (IAEA needs improvement.)

UNMOVIC: Libya has WMD (including nuclear material and missiles) stockpiles of chemicals—tons of it. Syria has WMD. Iraq had existing programs. Is Syria’s WMD Iraq’s WMD? We don’t know yet. (UNMOVIC needs improvement--more than just Blix’s retirement.)

Looking into Blix's background, Podhoretz learned that
Hans Blix was director general of the International Atomic
Energy Agency. In that job he was to determine whether
certain nations - including Iraq - were developing nuclear
weapons.

Blix, Podhoretz writes, insisted that Iraq was clean. Not
once, but again and again. After the Gulf War, however,
documents seized by America and its allies established
that Saddam was within months of acquiring a nuclear bomb

Earlier this year, Blix admitted to a British newspaper:

"It's correct to say that the IAEA was fooled by the Iraqis."



"There is a fair amount of skepticism about armed action," Blix said at a U.N. press
briefing on Tuesday. "That skepticism would turn immediately around, if they used
chemical weapons or biological weapons," he said. "My guess is they would not."

http://www.newsmax.com/archive/print.shtml?a=2003/3/19/00030

[note: Apparently, Mr. Blix appears to believe they have the weapons in March 2003, just that they would not use them.]





Chief U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix earlier told the U.N. Security Council that Iraq "does not appear to have come to a general acceptance" of the disarmament demanded of it. He said Iraq has been playing "hide and seek."

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/1/27/161214.shtml

[note: “Hide and seek” with what? How could you believe someone is hiding what you don’t believe they have.]



(OPINION)
“And Taheri warns that it appears that Blix believes that his job is not to uncover Saddam's hidden weapons of mass destruction but to come up with ‘a diplomatic fig leaf’ that could preclude a war to enforce U.N. resolutions and U.S. demands that Iraq disarm.”

[note: Blix (apparently) believed his title was not Chief Weapons Inspector, but Chief Fig Leaf Finder--Diplomat. And so, he did not find the more recent missile program--the missle is a violation of UNSC Resolutions.”]

UPDATE:

No apparent injuries reported at Baghdad Hospitals. No US injuries reported.

Useless Knowledge

[i]As Blix himself said:
“Little of the detail in these declarations, such as production quantities, dates of events and unilateral destruction activities, can be confirmed. Such information is critical to an assessment of the status of disarmament. Furthermore, in some instances, UNMOVIC has information that conflicts with the information in the declaration. (page 139)”


Now that we've removed Saddam from power, we've finally been able to begin conducting serious inspections (still hampered, however, by terrorist activity). Dr. David Kay was able to uncover a secret network of biological labs, testing labs in prisons, ongoing work on possible bioweapons like Brucella and Congo Crimean Hemorrhagic Fever, unmanned aerial vehicles, and live botulinum that could have been used to quickly produce biological weapons. He also stated, "The ISG nuclear team has found indications that there was interest, beginning in 2002, in reconstituting a centrifuge enrichment program."

In January 2004, Kay said that he had not found large stockpiles of actual weapons, and the news media seized on that statement, ignoring what he actually did find. Now, despite the twelve years of UN insistence that Saddam had not accounted for all his WMDs, and the things that were found after the liberation of Iraq that Saddam never would have turned over to the UN voluntarily, is the United Nations seriously trying to say that they believe that Iraq had no illegal weapons since 1994? Does the UN really think we will forget their own reports to the contrary?[/i]

David Kay

David Kay (2003)

[i] Let me just give you a few examples of these concealment efforts, some of which I will elaborate on later:

• A clandestine network of laboratories and safehouses within the Iraqi Intelligence Service that contained equipment subject to UN monitoring and suitable for continuing CBW research.

• A prison laboratory complex, possibly used in human testing of BW agents, that Iraqi officials working to prepare for UN inspections were explicitly ordered not to declare to the UN.

• Reference strains of biological organisms concealed in a scientist's home, one of which can be used to produce biological weapons.

• New research on BW-applicable agents, Brucella and Congo Crimean Hemorrhagic Fever (CCHF), and continuing work on ricin and aflatoxin were not declared to the UN.

• Documents and equipment, hidden in scientists' homes, that would have been useful in resuming uranium enrichment by centrifuge and electromagnetic isotope separation (EMIS).

• A line of UAVs not fully declared at an undeclared production facility and an admission that they had tested one of their declared UAVs out to a range of 500 km, 350 km beyond the permissible limit.

• Continuing covert capability to manufacture fuel propellant useful only for prohibited SCUD variant missiles, a capability that was maintained at least until the end of 2001 and that cooperating Iraqi scientists have said they were told to conceal from the UN.

• Plans and advanced design work for new long-range missiles with ranges up to at least 1000 km - well beyond the 150 km range limit imposed by the UN. Missiles of a 1000 km range would have allowed Iraq to threaten targets through out the Middle East, including Ankara, Cairo, and Abu Dhabi.

• Clandestine attempts between late-1999 and 2002 to obtain from North Korea technology related to 1,300 km range ballistic missiles --probably the No Dong -- 300 km range anti-ship cruise missiles, and other prohibited military equipment.
In addition to the discovery of extensive concealment efforts, we have been faced with a systematic sanitization of documentary and computer evidence in a wide range of offices, laboratories, and companies suspected of WMD work. The pattern of these efforts to erase evidence - hard drives destroyed, specific files burned, equipment cleaned of all traces of use - are ones of deliberate, rather than random, acts. For example,

• On 10 July 2003 an ISG team exploited the Revolutionary Command Council (RCC) Headquarters in Baghdad. The basement of the main building contained an archive of documents situated on well-organized rows of metal shelving. The basement suffered no fire damage despite the total destruction of the upper floors from coalition air strikes. Upon arrival the exploitation team encountered small piles of ash where individual documents or binders of documents were intentionally destroyed. Computer hard drives had been deliberately destroyed. Computers would have had financial value to a random looter; their destruction, rather than removal for resale or reuse, indicates a targeted effort to prevent Coalition forces from gaining access to their contents.

• All IIS laboratories visited by IIS exploitation teams have been clearly sanitized, including removal of much equipment, shredding and burning of documents, and even the removal of nameplates from office doors.

• Although much of the deliberate destruction and sanitization of documents and records probably occurred during the height of OIF combat operations, indications of significant continuing destruction efforts have been found after the end of major combat operations, including entry in May 2003 of the locked gated vaults of the Ba'ath party intelligence building in Baghdad and highly selective destruction of computer hard drives and data storage equipment along with the burning of a small number of specific binders that appear to have contained financial and intelligence records, and in July 2003 a site exploitation team at the Abu Ghurayb Prison found one pile of the smoldering ashes from documents that was still warm to the touch.[/i]

UPDATE

CNN is reporting rockets had been fired new the Al Rashid Hotel and that an
SUV had been ablaze. The SUV, supposedly, contained 2 unfired rockets.

CNN is also reporting that an SUV fired rockets at the Al Rashid.

REUTERS: reporting no US casualties. Hoping no Iraqi casualties.

AP

AP is reporting that 10 RPGs were fired into the Green Zone. Reports say that one building is on fire, housing, and possibly a Mess Hall were hit.

FOX: Not hearing any more explosions, or gunfire. Often "hit and run" attacks. FOX was explaining that it might be a light on the screen, not a fire; but, it seems to be flickering.

MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS AND HOUSING

Reports coming in are stating that the Ministry, as well as nearby housing, was hit. Newscasters are concerned that an attack might have been conducted on troop housing or housing of administration.

First reports are usually very speculative. Listing the incoming reports gives an indication of accuracy of these speculations--guesses. Sometimes, the guesses have been excited blurtings of those who need to continuously talk, no matter what they say. Other guess are, sometimes, well-educated speculations which are surprisingly accurate.

Off-topic: I have to reconstruct the links. They were very useful and were (accidentally) wiped out while trying to add the comments section. It's an OOOOPS!

EXPLOSION(S) IN BAGHDAD

The news is reporting explosion or explosions in Baghdad near the Green Zone. Sirens are screaming. No information about what is happening, but the speculation is that possibly a series of attacks are in progress.

Early reports are that the explosions (now said to be plural) downtown near the Green Zone. Possibly rockets or motars are being shot into the area. Thick smoke is coming out of a building in the Baghdad Green Zone, according to Fox News. The explosions were followed by gunfire.

A FAMILY IN BAGHDAD

Faiza is willing to try to teach us Arabic. This is a kind and generous effort on her part. Thank you, Faiza. I've checked out the first lesson. It is clear, concise, and leaves my mind the moment I leave the site. I will have to read it again and again to impress it on my brain. It's a challenge and a good thing to try this.



Faiza Teaches You Arabic

INTERIM CONSTITUTION

A Senior Coalition spokesperson said that all the Council Members are there, working on a difficulty. It sounds as though they are working on a refinement of language. He stressed that this is similar to the happenings when we were drafting our Constitution.

Something, apparently, came to the attention of the Council Members which needs a fix before the final signing. Since they are all there, it seems that all are willing to work diligently on whatever issue has presented itself. Some basic human rights should be irrevocable--Equality, Life, Liberty, Persuit of Happiness means FREEDOM.

They are working on it. It's approximately 8 in the evening (Baghdad.) They may have to continue tomorrow.

TURMOIL

There is turmoil in most lives--everyday. When you consider the whole, the turmoil of each man is not usually a high degree. When you consider the individual, the turmoil is high relative to his own life and thoughts; but it is highly subjective and internal. The Iraqi Turmoil is subjective, internal, as well as, objective and external.

The turmoil is delivered through fear and terror. There is fear that this great effort will not be the dream. There is terror that this great effort might be the nightmare. Through it all, some of the Iraqi Bloggers infuse us with their determination. This is what will win the day. . .DETERMINATION.

DETERMINATION is the need to do whatever it takes. The US has it; many of the Iraqis have it. TOGETHER, we will work to make this work, because we MUST. IRAQ IS THE KEY to unlock the door to freedom for the Middle East. IRAQ IS THE CROSSROAD, THE CENTER. Iraq is THE HUB around which the wheel can turn.

There are others with DETERMINATION. There are those who wish to keep their people poor and dependent. There are those who pedal propaganda to keep their populations enraged against others; thereby directing rage away from themselves. And there are the media propaganda puppets who feed on distortion and lies. Like leeches, they feed on the blood of the people. And, the people become weakened. They look for a snake as they grow weaker, when all the time it's the leech which is killing them slowly.

The media in the Middle East has almost sucked the people dry. They live off the hatred that they promote and they have been living well. The window of truth was opened (briefly) when the Arab Street was surprised by the defeat of Saddam. The typical people did not know. Why didn't they know? They didn't know because the leeches didn't tell them. As an example, this should be clear to all. The leeches weakened the people (again) and the people were surprise by their lack of awareness. Lack of knowledge (awareness) and hatred can be deadly. And, the leeches continue.

TRUTH IS A SHIELD FOR THE PEOPLE.

SARMAD

Sarmad's command of the written word is becoming very good. At first, it was difficult to read. To be able to express your thoughts concisely in a second language is amazing. Those fluent in a second language must (eventually) think in that language. Sarmad, keep up the great work.

But, not only the above, Sarmad's latest blog was an epistle. He gave us information that we could not have had otherwise. He gave insight into Falluja, where even a peek is more than we can expect. Sarmad has hope, he has expectations, he has belief about humanity. Sarmad allows us to "tip toe" through his brain and heart. It seems like a very good heart, to me.

SIGNING OF CONSTITUTION DELAYED

The signing of Iraq's interim constitution has been delayed (indefinitely) with no explanation (yet) for the delay. Information (at this time) is that it has nothing to do with previous conflicting discussions.

ARISTIDE

Now Aristide claims that he was forced to sign a letter resigning. The news said that he claimed he was kidnapped. The tough approach on this one is that the minute Aristide said he was kidnapped, they should have taken him back. No fanfare, no comments. Just take him back. Countries aren't lining up to shelter him, anyway.

News: Canada, US, France and more, are putting together a peacekeeping force.

OUTSOURCING...RUN AMUCK!

During a hearing today, Rep. Zack Wamp (R, TN) revealed information he had concerning the outsourcing of "bio-shield" to a German company. The company, apparently, has questionable connections.

This reminds me of the outsourcing of crystals to a Swiss company which decided that it didn't wish to give us the crystals because they objected to what we were doing in Iraq. (Well, it ranks close to selling our enemies weapons so they can shoot us--think Ollie North.) This was the cause of the "Buy American" Pentagon Push.

Back to the problem, why would we EVER contract with another country to provide equipment for our NATIONAL SAFETY. More than paranoia, we couldn't afford to be surprised at failure of equipment, or refusal of delivery. It's common sense; but, not all of us have that.

If we do not currently have a company which can produce the product, then we need to have one. First, you outsource the jobs, then you outsource the safety of our lives. Oh, we have a lot of work to do to make US better.

Could we make a law? Outsourcing more than 10% of the jobs results in no sales in the US marketplace. You want to go offshore, then go; but, don't sell any of your products here--not in your major business, nor a subsidiary, nor a shell corporation. Nada, Nyet, nothing!

After this fiasco, I wouldn't be surprised if someone wanted to move the CDC to the northeastern border of Afghanistan ( with Pakistan--home of Bin L.) Next, they'll want to let the prison inmates (cheap labor) make the bullets for the police guns. Please don't tell me that's happening!

WHAT IDIOT HAD A BRAIN BURP? (that was phrased very gently, wasn't it?)

KURDO

The Kurds have had a higher degree of autonomy (freedom) than many others in Iraq. Kurdo mentioned autonomy from 1970. This was autonomy? True, those murdered during Anfel chose to give themselves up for amnesty; but, they are dead and gone. How can you compare that which you have (now) and will have to the "Anfel Autonomy" of the past? You need to sit in a quiet spot, with tea, and think this over more thoroughly. We do not achieve freedom by declaration, but by cooperation.

Cooperation is the metal (fabric) which holds it all together. A group of Kurds can declare their freedom until a stronger group of Turks, or Iranians refutes it by action. The cooperation is not easy and strains brain and emotions. Human greed needs to be tempered with the "give and take" of negotiations--while observing the opposition's human greed. Human greed is want, and need, and desire, sometimes mixed with jealousy and envy. And, it is not all on one side but on each side. There has to be as much open-minded negotiation as possible. Negotiate, re-negotiate, and then do it again.

If you consider Iraq is a building under construction (with several levels existing) and remove more than one-fourth of the foundation, the building is likely to topple. If you consider Iraq as a suspension bridge and you remove one-fourth of the bridge, no one goes anywhere.

Worse than not going anywhere, the Kurds could walk willingly into their own demise. The world can be a nasty place, as you well know. Together much is possible; alone less is possible. A scenario: My brother and I (with our families) have a farm which is attacked by murderers. My brother decides to take his family to the safety of the woods. There are an equal number of adults (murderers and us); but, if we split our forces, we lose (first one family, then another.) Our strength is in cooperation, defending against the murderers together.

The focus is on Iraq. If you become independent, the focus will still be on Iraq, and (likely) much less on you. It could be dangerous. It took more than a decade for you to become truly free. Prior to April (2003) Saddam could have invaded you with all his resources and, by the time anyone came to your aid, there would have been no Kurds. We could not prevent it (alone,) you could not prevent it (alone,) but together we did prevent it.

We need you; Iraq and Iraqis need you; and, you need us. All of us must cooperate, for mutual strength and safety. We don't want to see the another Rwanda. Once is once more than anyone needs or wants.

THE MURDERS CONTINUE

What can anyone say about this horrendous type of act? It is more than sad; and, it is difficult to form the words of understanding, sympathy, and comfort for those directly targeted--the dead, the injured, their families, their friends, their fellow Iraqis.

Oh, "THE HUMANITY!" (said as The Hindenburg burned.) It constricts the heart, and scorches the soul. It inflames to rage; and, as the rage cools, it becomes the clear, cold resolve to irradicate the soulless. Humanity needs the hearts and resolve of everyone unwilling to be silent while their family, friend, and fellow partner in the world is blown into pieces.

"WE WILL NOT GO SILENTLY. . ."

ZEYDUN

I have heard little further information on the incident. There was mention that the soldiers moved away from the scene while the two men were still near the bridge. There was information about soldiers mis-treating detainees at a detention center. No connection was mentioned. The "bones" of it are that we no little more than we knew shortly after the incident.

Thanks for the rare (for this site) comment. (Mike H.)

ezboard (Iraqi Discussions)

I posted this to the board under Riverbend (Baghdad Burning):

Is there a possibility that River might be having a slight attitude change? She may be considering that the "invaders" and "occupiers" might not be as horrific as the "repisstors."

Note: I have discontinued the word "resistor." The phrase "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter" does NOT apply. These fighters are not for freedom; they are not for life. They are for death and destruction. The only thing these terrorists resist is permitting others the right to live and be free.

ZEYAD REPORTED

Zeyad (healingIraq.blogspot.com) reported that the body of Zeydun was found 12 days later, approximately 1/2 mile downstream from the bridge area. At his site, he links to an article which describes the alledged events of that night.

There is anger in the postings. Zeyad feels that some commentators would be enraged if the incident had resulted in the death of soldiers by the Fedayeen. That may be true; however, I don't classify the Fedayeen in the same category (as the troops.) The objective of the Fedayeen is to kill to attain power; the objective of the troops is to prevent the disruptions, to calm the waters (if possible) and to avoid killing innocent Iraqis.

Zeyad, in some cases, may be hasty in his conclusions. Neither the cousins, nor the soldiers, should be concluded guilty until the investigtion is completed. Many acknowledged that it is possible the soldiers may have done this. Many acknowledged that the full truth has not been revealed--there are still many unanswered questions. Many are waiting for the CID decision, at the end of the investigation.

Regardless, this is the reason we need to keep in contact--that Zeyad should struggle to continue the blog. It is not easy for either side and most people feel strongly about some aspect of the happenings in Iraq. For Zeyad, this incident was so very close to home. For others, it is not our purpose (in Iraq) to kill passers-by and innocents. We know it happens, but we do not expect a purposeful incident which does not involve a serious reason for the actions.

There is more to this story and we can hope to get to the truth, eventually. In the meantime, there will be speculations. This is what we do. We examine the information and try to figure out what happened. In doing so, we must consider that any suspicions we have may be wrong and we must be prepared to be wrong. (As Zeyad may, also, have to prepare to be wrong.) This does not mean that he is wrong, but it means he cannot be right at this point, and neither can I be right at this point.

So far, we have a picture of a truck; we have quotes from Marwan; and, we (apparently) have the body of Zeydun, now. Sad, I was hoping that he was taken into custody and would reappear in a few weeks. It was not to be. The death of a young man of nineteen years is something which will sit in the minds of his parents for the rest of their days. . .