TILTING

The exercise of responding to Faiza is over. . .there is not enough time to fully respond to everything she says while there are other important things to consider.

So, the exercise of “TILTING AT WINDMILLS” ends quietly.

"SINGLE MOST DAMAGING. . .IN A DECADE"

That's what Joe Biden (D-DE) thinks. Apparently, it wasn't damaging to find that Iraq was working on NUKE WEAPONS. . .we found this out in 1995. Much to the surprise of the IAEA and UNSCOM, Iraq still had WMD, they were still being found, they were still being destroyed. This was not only DAMAGING is was DEADLY!!; and it was a SURPRISE to inspectors!!

Now, THIS WAS SEVERELY DAMAGING to the US and the UN and the WORLD. But, Joe needs to focus on the naked prisoners who are still among the living. Less than a decade ago, the UN inspectors FAILED and the mushroom cloud of that failure has spread, and infiltrated the respect for the UN.

The inspectors could not find the "ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM" even when it stepped on their toes. THAT WAS THE SINGLE EVENT wHICH MADE THE SEVERE DAMAGE POSSIBLE.

That was the event, confirmed by the Oil-for-UN scandal made it possible for the world to dissolve in the mire of DISTRUST. Thanks, Joe; but, NO THANKS.

EQUAL TIME????

I suggest, as a cure for the wide promotion of this very ugly situation, that we promote and spread the pictures of those poor souls who were shoved into the shredder feet first to prolong their agony!

This will not happen. There was no "FREE PRESS" to show the horrors of Saddam. The "FREE PRESS" can only show and promote ugliness on our side; they play it and they replay it. Maiming, mutilating, shredding does not require nearly the attention the pictures of Iraqis, or terrorists, or foreign fighters (or whoever they are) are getting in the world-wide press. Those naked people are still living. And, they can testify against their guards; but, we can not request the same of the shredded, and those in the mass-graves.

Let’s Make Enemies: (NAOMI KLEIN)

ENEMIES


US occupation chief Paul Bremer hasn't started wearing a hijab yet, and is instead tackling the rise of anti-Americanism with his usual foresight. Baghdad is blanketed with inept psy-ops organs like Baghdad Now, filled with fawning articles about how Americans are teaching Iraqis about press freedom. "I never thought before that the Coalition could do a great thing for the Iraqi people," one trainee is quoted saying. "Now I can see it on my eyes what they are doing good things for my country and the accomplishment they made. I wish my people can see that, the way I see it."

**Of course, the quote must be targeted as “fawning” or some other label to convince the readers that the quote is unworthy of any reality. And Baghdad Now must be one of the inept psy-ops organs to nullify anything it prints. The mention of Paul Bremer wearing the Hijab is humorous and unrealistic. . . But, the anti-Americanism is a reality promoted by this author and many others. It is harmful, but no banned--which doesn't make it truth either.

**(read with SARCASM totally engaged:)Ah, but these people do not hate Americans….NEVER. They just want to destroy much of the hope, the work, and the fiber of America. Oh but, it has nothing to do with the people, ‘cause they love the people. The Western Journalists live under various forms of democracy; but NO, it’s not for the Iraqi people to be free because force is used. The Iraqi people have to be told what to believe and this author is there to tell you.

“Unfortunately, the Iraqi people recently saw another version of press freedom when Bremer ordered US troops to shut down a newspaper run by supporters of Muqtada al-Sadr. The militant Shiite cleric has been preaching that Americans are behind the attacks on Iraqi civilians and condemning the interim constitution as a "terrorist law." So far, al-Sadr has refrained from calling on his supporters to join the armed resistance, but many here are predicting that the closing down of the newspaper--a nonviolent means of resisting the occupation--was just the push he needed. But then, recruiting for the resistance has always been a specialty of the Presidential Envoy to Iraq: Bremer's first act after being tapped by Bush was to fire 400,000 Iraqi soldiers, refuse to give them their rightful pensions but allow them to hold on to their weapons--in case they needed them later.”

**Do you doubt the author’s feelings about Muqtada’s newspaper shut down? After all, Sadr is only”preaching that Americans are behind the attacks on civilians” and promoting the interim constitution as a “terrorist law.” Sadr has advocated violence against Americans, his people have attacked Americans, he hides in Najaf, and there is a warrant for his arrest in connection with the murder of another cleric. But NO, his paper should be able to continue organizing armed resistance against the “occupiers.” It has never been acceptable for US to incite violence, or the violent overthrow of the government. Why would it be accepted from Sadr and his group?

**There are almost 200 newspapers. Sadr’s newspaper was suspended for approximately 60-90 days. It was not closed down permanently—which could have been done as a consequence of the nature of the material printed. It was not closed down permanently—-but, Sadr might be closed down. If Sadr is supported, the Iraqi people may get their request. They may not like the results of their support.

**Bremer disbanded an army which had left the battlefield and disappeared, only to come back to seek a pension—-which was given. Where was the author? Did she miss the protests? Was she too busy looking for a hotel room? But, the Naomi Klein’s of the world just want you to see an alternative view, while they promote their articles, and seek their fame by distorting for profit.

**I, too, am offering an another view. It is not for fun—-this is not fun. It is not for profit; I seek no profit. It is not for fame; I do not seek fame or notoriety. I began writing while hoping to hear from Iraqis (whatever their view.) I continued writing to challenge the propaganda which does not seem to be the truth and sometimes is twisted beyond all reason; and, I am looking for TRUTH in this mess.

**When this is over, I hope to slide comfortably back into my unknown life of an average American, in middle America, of the moderate view—-the view of the voter who chooses with no loyalty to either Democrats or Republicans but great appreciation of living in America.

Mutiny is the only way? (by Naomi Klein) (almuajaha.com)

Above is a response to this article via another of Naomi Klein's articles.

MORE ON SALIH

THE GENERAL

Saleh is a veteran of Saddam's Republican Guard. He met with tribal leaders in a mosque on Friday morning, wearing his uniform from the former Iraqi military with his general's insignia.

"Fallujah residents have chosen Maj. Gen. Jassim Mohammed Saleh to form and lead a unit that will be in charge of protecting the city," said Iraqi Brig. Gen. Shakir al-Janabi, who expects to be part of the new force. "Our force will handle the security issue today in cooperation with Iraqi police."

ONE OF THE GENERALS?

Jasim Muhammad Salih is said to be the General who is assisting in Fallujah. It appears Salih will head a new emergency Iraqi force. He is said to have given a speech on Friday.

According to a relative, Salih was a former Chief of Staff.

Is Jasim Muhammad Salih one of THE GENERALS who waited so long to be freed? Is he one of WIGGLES' WARRIORS?

There was one General (in particular) who was spoken of in very good terms. He impressed his interrogators with his intelligence, and his genuine caring of his officers. The General (I have in mind) was A Man of HONOR among so many who do not know the meaning of honor.

AL JAZZ-UR-EAR-A

It looks like Al Jazeera has obtained (yet) another tape from their friends Al Qaeda. (Isn't it amazing how they are able to do this?)

Zarqawi denies that the Jordan attempt included chemical bombs.

The laugh is on Zarqawi because he is a victim of the propaganda machine, which is world-wide. The Liar Zarqawi is stung by his own operation and is turning to the representatives of the Liars to offer what he calls truth.

A LIAR TELLING LIARS the truth? That's one for Ripley's Believe It or Not!!!

YUP, MARC RICH

Clinton Crony

Marc Rich Tied to U.N. Oil-for-Food Scandal

Clinton-pardoned fugitive billionaire Marc Rich has turned up in the middle of the United Nations Oil-for-Food scandal, with his name on a roster of companies authorized to participate in the corruption-plagued arrangement.

"One of Marc Rich's companies was on the United Nations list that was approved to trade and transport Iraqi oil," Fox News Channel's Eric Shawn reported Tuesday.

"And it appears that Mr. Rich's firm, Marc Rich & Co. Investments AG, may well have been given that approval by the U.N. before the presidential pardon," Shawn added.

That means the U.N. was ready to do business with America's most-wanted white collar criminal, while other program participants were busily stuffing their pockets with Saddam Hussein's kickbacks.

TERROR DISEASE

The Terrorists are spreading the disease around. Spain, Morocco, Bali, and now Syria, Jordan are seeing it spread. Turkey, Iraq, Saudi Arabia have experienced the scourge; is Iran NEXT? HA, I doubt it. I would have to wonder if they would attack themselves!

In the recent activities in Syria, there is (apparently) more to this than anyone previously thought, and there may be more news about this today.

Meanwhile, a fugitive in the Madrid bombing is also indicted for planning 9/11.

INTERESTING HINT

Today's news had an interesting twist. It seems that from one of the names on the OFF program there is a connection to former President Bill Clinton. Hmmm.

Who could that be? I missed the name. Could it be Marc Rich? I'm hoping that the segment will be run again. If so, I'll put the name and take away my guess.

WELL, WELL, WELL!

It's Saddam's birthday, today. I think he should celebrate, maybe sing a little song. Why? Because this is as good as it gets; he's over the hill on the downward slide; it's not going to get better. It will be a WHOLE LOT WORSE.

Celebrate now, Saddam. You never know how many more birthdays you will get. The rest of us get one year older, it may not happen again for you.

OIL FOR TERROR

CLAUDIA ROSETT WRITES:
Beyond the billions in graft, smuggling, and lavish living for Saddam Hussein that were the hallmarks of the United Nations Oil-for-Food program in Iraq, there is one more penny yet to drop.

It's time to talk about Oil-for-Terror.

Especially with the U.N.'s own investigation into Oil-for-Food now taking shape, and more congressional hearings in the works, it is high time to focus on the likelihood that Saddam may have fiddled Oil-for-Food contracts not only to pad his own pockets, buy pals, and acquire clandestine arms — but also to fund terrorist groups, quite possibly including al Qaeda.

Oil For Terror

OFF WITH THEIR HEADS (Oil for Food--SCANDAL)

CLAUDIA ROSETT WRITES:
But at what cost? Are we supposed to conclude that, in order to deliver this amount of aid, the UN had to approve Saddam’s more than $100 billion worth of largely crooked business, had to look the other way while he skimmed money, bought influence, built palaces, and stashed away billions on the side, at least some of which may now be funding terror in Iraq or beyond?

No, something was at work here other than passive acquiescence. At precisely what moment during the years of Oil-for-Food did the UN Secretariat cross the line from "supervising" Saddam to collaborating with him? With precisely what deed did it enter into collusion? Even setting aside such obvious questions as whether individual UN officials took bribes, did the complicity begin in 1998, when Saddam flexed his muscles by throwing out the weapons inspectors and when Oil-for-Food, instead of leaving along with them, raised the cap on his oil sales? Did it come in 1999, when, even as Saddam’s theft was becoming apparent, the UN scrapped the oil-sales limits altogether? Or in 2000 and 2001, when Sevan dismissed complaints and reports about blatant kickbacks? Did it start in 2002, when Annan, empowered by Oil-for-Food Plus, signed his name to projects for furnishing Saddam with luxury cars, stadiums, and office equipment for his dictatorship? Or did the defining moment arrive in 2003, when Annan, ignoring the immense conflict posed by the fact that his own institution was officially on Saddam’s payroll, lobbied alongside two of Saddam’s other top clients, Russia and France, to preserve his regime? Certainly by the time Annan and Sevan, neck-deep in revelatory press reports and standing indignantly athwart their own secret records, continued to offer to the world their evasions and denials, the balance had definitively tipped

Oil for Food Scam

MAJID

This is a challenge to your freedom. It’s not only from the former regime members, but those who wish to own your view. The more you express their views, the more you strengthen them--helping them to own you. At that end of the road, you may make it possible for them to succeed in destroying your rights.

The efforts of your family seem directed toward using freedom of speech to undercut the Coalition which hopes to improve and solidify your freedoms. It’s worse than human shields because members of your family seem to be standing in their own way—yelling about the injustices of those who would support your difficulties and would condemn those who threaten to kill you. It undercuts those who might have helped you.

If the information is true, you could use help; but, Iraqis (and others) have attempted to cut the lines of rescue. If many in your family continue to use their free speech to erode the cause of those who offer freedom of speech, they will simply be continuing to cut off your choices. And, in doing so, will cut off their own choices.

You will make it possible to regress (from approximately 200 newspapers) back to a few newspapers run by the latest “Uday” It defies reason; and yet, it seems to be happening. Groups of Iraqis actively working to erode, undermine, thwart their own good future and trying vigorously to shove themselves back into a cave.

I can only hope that the work is as difficult as trying to shove 10 elephants into a thimble.

THE VIRGINS

Someone is promising the suicide bombers that he will get virgins when he blows himself up for the cause! Who is crazy enough to believe that? Who is crazy enough to think anyone else would believe that? Does this make sense?

Have you noticed how quirky life is? This is another quirk; worse, it's laughable. Jokes are made about it; and, no one seems to get the number of Virgins right. I've heard 17 and I've heard 72. But, let's take 72 as the final figure.

Would you want to be trapped in a room with 72 Virgin Teenagers? Without being supplied with earplugs. And, don't make them angry; they can be vicious.

How about, the door to Paradise opens and there they are. . .72 octogenarians! Every one of them are warty and ugly.

How about an error in the rumor? It's really 72 VIRGINians.

You might not be getting what you think you are. So, be careful what you wish, you might get it. Personally, I picture 72 VIRGINS, all are. . . . . CONCRETE.

Veteran Blog watcher and commenter STEVE emailed, "Concrete virgins would be worse than old and ugly so I give the bigger laugh to you."

Thanks, Steve.

AT KURDO'S SITE

That will be the biggest mistake that Kurds could do. Why should we fight Arabs in Iraq? That will only lead us to civil war. At this stage Kurds have to improve their friendship with the rest of Iraqi people. 182.000 Kurds were killed by Saddam’s regime. We have enough of war, no war anymore. We have to work hard for a better future for our children instead of fighting in Falluja. Let the American fight for the Iraqi oil, not the Kurds.
Rashaan 04.22.04 - 6:34 pm | #


First, I have to say what I have thought often and said frequently: We respect and admire the Kurds. You have accomplished so very much. There should have been bus tours of your area to show people how it is done, and what to do. You are amazing.

It isn’t just fighting Arabs in Iraq. It’s fighting against all those who would put you back; thereby, putting your children and grandchildren back into the cauldron and applying the flame. The good people can stand together or “hang separately.” Not pleasant, but it seems to be the way the world is these days.

Rashaan, if we are fighting for Iraqi oil, we are really, really stupid. We have paid Billions in attempting this. Did you see the ticker at Sarmad’s site: Sarmad down the left side near the bottom?

The Cost of War is ticking off about $1,000 a second. Estimates are a cost of one Billion a month, at least. We could buy a lot of oil for that, and we wouldn’t have dead soldiers. We can buy oil elsewhere; but, where do we buy back our dead soldiers?

This is the fight for your children, down several generations. Fallujah aside (we should be able to handle that,) you are needed for the unity of Iraq in the name of the good Iraqis—those who care about the future, and the children of the future.

Death threats to Almuajaha members

by Majid A.Jarrar

Situation just can't keep going down and down... the society still can't figure how and where to express its anger

After broadcasting the 2nd episode of "Bridges to Baghdad" program done by HBO TV soon after the end of the war and broadcasted on Channel two last Thursday, two members from the core of Al-Muajaha staff who participated in that episode received several death threats from an anonymous group.

It is believed that those death threats were made by followers of the formal regime, after listening to what the Iraqi part of the episode mentioned about how unjust the government of Saddam was.

The members who got threatened and didn’t wish to have their named published said that they were pursued by group of strangers several times. One of them was attacked once but hardly managed to get away.

Under this difficult situation, and with such circumstances, those members have no choice but to quit their jobs and try to disappear, or leave the country. This will certainly affect the work of almuajaha project, and will certainly inflame more of anger in the rest of the group.

STRANGE ACTIVITY

In highlighting Faiza's material for reference, there appears to be a quirk. When the post is tranferred into the blogger site, it changes the quotes, dashes, etc. into a question mark. This happened before at the almuajaha.com site. Just some added fun to make this more difficult than it would have been.

FAIZA'S FREEDOM 3. (deception and suspicion)

And I want to turn the American administration's attention to an important thing that was said some days ago. Iraqis aren't stupid. And they cannot be dealt with upon that basis. Because during all the years of Saddam Hussein, we learnt how to live to governments and deceive. We learnt all the means and methods, and we will accept no more that people will deceive us. . .

I?m not sure what was said "some days ago;" but, if the question were, "Do Americans believe Iraqis are stupid?". . .I would have to tell you that Americans have not been describing Iraqis as "stupid." However, please take into account that there are hundreds of millions of Americans; and, somewhere there may be some who feel that way; but, generally speaking, . . .no.

It appears to have taken great resilience, and deception, and manipulation, to have survived in Saddam Hussein's Iraq. Many people were able to come through those dark years in a sleep without hope; and now, they are energized, and filled with hope for the future. Others are still reeling from the experience. Still others are afraid to hope. If you had the means and methods, and learned how to deceive, you may not be able to trust at all. There will be suspicion attached to everything; and so, many others will wait and wait--in a state of suspended animation.


. . .Who respects us, we will respect and trust them, and we will be loyal and sincere to them. And who ever hurts us or disrespects us - we will turn their lives into hell. And the days that passed witnessed that.

If only it were that straight-forward. There is such hatred in the ME for much that is western. Where we may admire your culture, and some of your traditions, we might be met with absolute hatred of our culture and traditions. Respect and trust are earned and do not necessarily come automatically. Disrespect is a more active and possibly could be intended or could be accidental—because of differences between two cultures/traditions. When hatred is involved all actions could be interpreted as intended, when they were (actually) accidental. Hatred can shade everything.

FAIZA?S FREEDOM 2. (hope)

I hope these upcoming days come with peace for Iraq and Iraqis, and for everybody who loves them and wants to help them.

Is the quote "Hope springs eternal in the heart of man?" (I have a book which would tell me. It?s here somewhere?hiding among other books.) Well, close enough for the idea. Martin Luther King, Jr. had "A Dream." Robert F. Kennedy saw possibilities and asked, "Why not?" I have HOPE.

You have HOPE; so do I. HOPE that through the next decades, the world will be able to come to some new understanding, have better dreams and actions for the people. HOPE that the good people in this world will join together for one thing: to rid the world of terrorism and suicide bombs, which kill tens, to hundreds, to potentially thousands, of people who do not deserve these heinous acts to be performed on them. I have the HOPE that WE THE PEOPLE OF THE EARTH will not tolerate, will shout NO, NEVER AGAIN. I HOPE that the people of the earth will look into the face of the end of civilization with defiance, and will not go quietly back through time to the era of Genghis Kahn, Hitler, Stalin; and will not go forward into a future of domination by TERRORISM.

[Terrorism is the activity of murdering or maiming (with intent and malice) as many innocent human civilians as possible; and, the intent to threaten the remaining civilians with similar acts for the terrorist's own purpose--retaliation and/or heinous acts against civilians.]

FAIZA'S FREEDOM (explanation)

Is it possible to build a bridge with most of the construction from one side of the water? Answer: maybe.

Attempting to build a bridge presents the opportunity to construct a bridge. If no attempt is made, no bridge could be built. The project under construction is the attempt to build a one-sided bridge, most of the way, and see what happens. If, at any time, those on the other side of the water wish to pitch in and help it might be possible to build a bridge over the water which could be reinforced and eventually become solid, sturdy, and very useful for both sides.

The first attempt to build a bridge will be responses to the post of April 21. There may be long responses to some paragraphs, short or no response to other paragraphs. It is what it is; it is the attempt to build a one-sided bridge (as far as possible in the time I have.)

FIAZA’S FREEDOM 1:

The dialogue is open to return trust to the two sides. And there is a way to talk, and it must remain open, like lines of communications or bridges to bridge distances, to explain mysterious events. Because ignorance in the other causes enmity, and ignorant people are enemies, or or that’s how the saying goes.

In these difficult times, we need to struggle to come together as people who care. Regardless of political positions, the importance of working together for a better Iraq overcomes some of the political positions. Can enemies become friends? Can the ignorant gain knowledge? Much is possible except a clear knowledge of what the future holds; but, we can work very hard to shape the future toward good, away from bad. How we do this is as mysterious as the explanation of some of the mysterious events. We can only inspect it piece by piece, assess the event and try to come to some understand of the facts and the truth.

Bridge to Bridge: Can we do it? It is worth a try.

FIAZA: The dialogue is open to return trust to the two sides.

Trust is based on truth. If there is no truth, and no search for truth, there is little chance to develop trust—it can not be based upon lies, distortion, or twists. There are (at least) two sides to the issue of War in Iraq. For purposes of the discussion, it may be possible to compare Iraqi and American views, only. In a later discussion it could be possible to discuss other aspects of war—with a view toward additional group involved in the conflict and what they want.

FIAZA: like lines of communications or bridges to bridge distances

Could we build bridges, each from our own side, and arrive at a near spot in the middle? An interesting thought. There is no comments section in your blog, but possibly you might eventually consider adding one. It doesn’t seem likely, at the moment. Your view of the CMAR site as a poison site may prevent the addition of a comments section to your blog.

CMAR (in my view) was a site to provide the opportunity for others to respond to the blogs which have no comments section. Of course there will be nasty comments, and comments with which you would never agree; but, there were constructive comments, also. And, there is value in constructive comments. My view is: a blog is for the writer to express ideas and thoughts. If there was no expectation the blog would be viewed by others, there is an opportunity to check a blog which prevents the publication of the blog—it remains private. Not including a comments section leaves the reader with little possibility to respond and if the reader is in disagreement with a point (but not adamant) steam may build up with no vent to moderate the steam.

This steam is similar to the steam you may have felt while under the control of Saddam. Fears, worries, conclusions, constructive criticisms are stifled, prevented, contained—-causing steam to build. The freedom to express thoughts combined with the willingness of others to listen gives a mirror for your thoughts that you could not have without others who listen/read. Without feedback (responsive food for thought and idea exchanges) each person is lost in thought which may be narrower than it needs to be, which may lead to a perspective of truth which is not completely accurate. Actual truth may be a combination of truthful perspectives resulting in more than one truth.

So far, we agree on (at least) one thing: Iraq is for Iraqis; it is your country; you should rule it (hopefully with kindness, justice, wisdom, strength, and truth.) It is not Iran’s country; it is not Syria’s country; it is not Palestine’s country—it is IRAQI COUNTRY. It is for Iraqis to decide the destiny and participate in the Iraqi future.

Am I wrong? I believe this is what you believe. I believe that you do not feel this is what I believe.

A HITCHENS MISTAKE

When fools say that the occupation has "united" Sunni and Shiite, they flatter the alliance between the proxies of the Iranian mullahs and the Saudi princes. And they ignore the many pleas from disputed and distraught towns, from Iraqis who beg not to be abandoned to these sadistic and corrupt riffraff. One might have seen this coming with greater prescience. But it would have made it even more important not to leave Iraq to the post-Saddam plans of such factions. There was no way around our adoption of Iraq, as there still is not. It's only a pity that the decision to intervene was left until so many years had been consumed by the locust.

SLATE

ABDUL YASSIM (Miniter, WSJ Article Ref. below)


Or, better, "Against All Evidence." Mr. Clarke misstates a range of checkable facts. The 1993 U.S. death toll in Somalia was 18, not 17. He writes that Khalid Shaikh Mohammed became al Qaeda's "chief operational leader" in 1995; in fact, he took over in November 2001. He writes (correctly) that Abdul Yasim, one of the 1993 World Trade Center bombers, fled to Iraq but adds the whopper that "he was incarcerated by Saddam Hussein's regime." An ABC News crew found Mr. Yasim working a government job in Iraq in 1997, and documents captured in 2003 revealed that the bomber had been on Saddam's payroll for years.

TERRORISM, THREATS, CONNECTIONS


worldthreats


wallstreetjournal


nypost

GET THE SPIRIT


See SPIRIT OF AMERICA

IRAQ

Iraq. . .Iraq. . .Iraq. . . is the keystone. It is the hope for the ME future. Iraq, FIRST. Fix as many of the problems as we can; fight as many of the murderers as we can; hold the Coalition together as well as we are able; persist. . .continue. . .determinedly step-by-step with concrete resolve that we *must* accomplish the job.

Iraq is the focus; keep your eyes on it; and, your hearts with it. The killers realize that if Iraq goes into a good future it is a STAB at the heart of TERRORISM. The terrorists see it and are working vigorously to kill it in its infancy.

POV:

Iraq is the keystone, the center, the crossroads in the ME—geographically, and possibly economically in the future. It is a monumental task which, if it works, could jog the ME out of its pattern—out of its vicious cycle. The I/PC is a vicious cycle.

Nothing done over the last 56 years has changed the picture of the I/PC. If some progress is made, the other side will work hard to correct the situation; and, I don’t care which side you are on. It’s a stalemate; it’s been a stalemate; and it is STALE/STAGNANT.

Interesting turn of the phrase: “this is sticking a band aid onto a gaping wound.” It’s all in the perspective. I view this as an overwhelming effort (not a band aid) which is costing billions for the US. It is a huge military, economic, social campaign to change the picture for one country. All the resources available have been dedicated to this. It’s a monumental undertaking, seriously viewed as such, and worked on actively—everyday, all day, every week, all year. It is a medical operation, surgically removing a diseased tumor (Saddam & sons), cauterizing the wound to exterminate the germs (terrorists+), stitching it back together (IGC), applying more medication (to prevent the spread of Sadr), stapling the wound for extra strength (Interim Gov.), using nursing staff (NGOs/aid workers/construction workers) to care for and rehabilitate the patient. There are caring people who bring flowers and cards—well wishes.

All of the above, PLUS someone wants to kill the patient!

CHANGES ARE ACOMIN'

“The US, military and all, will still be there calling the shots on July 1st. What do you think a symbolic gesture of handing over sovereignity is going to change? If anything it will only emphasize the disconnect between what we say and what we do”. (Danya)

Yes, they will be there; No, they won’t call all the shots. The interim government will be making the day to day decisions of the government as a custodian (a temporary ruling body) to assist in a more orderly turn over of the government to the elected officials (in the early part of 2005.)

We are temporarily holding sovereignty but it was legally Iraq’s and now will (actually) be in the hands of Iraqis on July 1. Symbolic as it may seem, it is another step toward Iraqis (totally) in control of Iraqi affairs. There will be times when the Iraqi Interim Government say, “Don’t do that!” There will be times when the IIG says, “Do this!” There will be times when the US says, “No.” Between times, there will be some compromise but there will be more control in the hands of Iraqis—just where it will be in the future, and just as it should be.

”I don't want a crystal ball. I want to be pleasantly surprised if anything good comes of this. Otherwise I already know how it's going to go.” (Danya)

As rough as this has been for all, the one thing which seems to be true is that we (all) wish good for the Iraqi people. If you “already know how it’s going to go” and you don’t like that way, it seems reasonable to work harder to make the good happen. The politics should not stand in the way of making good happen for Iraqis. . .but, it will.

FAIZA's ORIGINAL PARAGRAPH from F’s Website

Bush led a war on Iraq in the name of God. He said that God sent him to undertake this war against Saddam and his oppression, and that he will give freedom to the Iraqis. Exactly like Saddam, when he announced a war on Kuwait, and placed God’s name on the Iraqi flag. God is innocent of what they do. And there are millions of ignorant, tricked idiots, running to clap and whistle. Doesn’t it appear to be a sight to make you laugh, and make you sad, at the same time? When will the ignorant wake up and not repeat mistakes already made by others?

COMMENTS ON FAIZA’S PARAGRAPH: F’s Website

F-“Bush led a war on Iraq in the name of God. He said that God sent him to undertake this war against Saddam and his oppression, and that he will give freedom to the Iraqis.”

The words “God is on my side” are spoken frequently, and by many. It’s unlikely that God whispered in either ear—Saddam’s or Bush’s. I can assure you that God did not whisper in my ear about giving freedom to Iraqis. It is an important gift, and is far better than imprisonment. However, if the imprisoned view themselves as happy the gift will be refused. The prisoner will go back in the cell and slam the cell door shut. So, the question would be: was it a prison or a happiness to be under the control of Saddam’s regime?

F-“ Exactly like Saddam, when he announced a war on Kuwait, and placed God’s name on the Iraqi flag. God is innocent of what they do.”

This seems to be a true statement, upon which we both agree.

F-“ And there are millions of ignorant, tricked idiots, running to clap and whistle. Doesn’t it appear to be a sight to make you laugh, and make you sad, at the same time?”

Yes, the problem is to recognize which are sad and laughing, and which are tricked idiots (ignorant clappers and whistlers.) There are 3 categories: the right, the wrong, and the vicious. Most people are in the right or the wrong, while thinking they are in the right category. The third category is for those who don’t care whether or not they are in the right, or in the wrong; but, care only for themselves, their greed or their viciousness.

Fortunately, there don’t seem to be many people in category 3. Saddam Hussein and his sons seem to fall directly into category 3. Most people might agree. Terrorists are clearly in category 3—most of the world agrees. Many people would like to toss George Bush into category 3; but, it may be a little more difficult to do that. (I’ll leave the discussion of that one for another time.)

Most of us like to believe that we are in category 1—the right category. Many of us are in category 2—the wrong category. We all want to be in category 1. I suspect that most of us are on a huge highway interchange (cloverleaf with exits), speeding back and forth between right and wrong—tricked idiots (whistled at, cheered and jeered by those who have traversed the interchange or who are about to get into it.) And, it all happens while we are going about in circles through the interchange.

Category 3 (the vicious) claps when the masses get off at Exit “WRONG.” Restaurants, hotels and shopping support the vicious. Anyone who stops there provides funding for the vicious.

F-“ When will the ignorant wake up and not repeat mistakes already made by others?”

Who are the ignorant, which are asleep? Could we agree on what the mistakes were? Are the actions repeated mistakes, or new approaches to the old problems?

Faiza’s paragraph is “food for thought.” Is it a snack or a banquet?

9 POINTS (CMAR)

there is no point from arguing with 'redblooded' americans here
as Raed says it should be called the snake's venom
now before you say anything you have to start with:

**Brief comments on 9 points:

1.condemmeing the 11/9.

1. Praising 9/11 usually starts an argument


2.denouncing islam & say its a retarded thing.

2. Denouncing radicalism is an issue; denouncing Islam is not


3.ignore the Israeili murdering of the palestinians &praise the israeili
democracy.

3. I/PC is not Iraq



4.criticise the palestinians for fighting for their freedom.

4. I/PC is not Iraq


5.dont mention the 4million palsetinians refugees cos they dont exist in the american media.

5. I/PC is not Iraq


6.condemm saddam's mass graves (which all of us were horrified to see them
before you say my dad lost his job because he was the manager of excution)

6. Praising Mass Graves usually starts an argument.



7.thank the americans for getting the hell out of iraq.

7. We haven’t left, yet



8.thank the americans for the new mass graves in falouja & other palces

8. There are few facts on Fallujah.



9.thank the american for 'liberation'

9. We made it possible for you to grab Freedom. Reach out for it, or not; this is your decision. Yes, it is important to us. It is far more important to you, and your children, and your children’s children—the future of Iraq.

SAUDI ARABIA

There is turmoil continuing in SA. Some say, it's like a running gun battle. Americans were warned to leave.

BREAKING THE WILL

I did not feel so different. I am rather ordinary, and of no significant notice.

But for me, for this time (this era), for this action, for this freedom and what it represents to the world who wants peace. . .

i. . . . ..WILL. . . . .CONTINUE. The "will" WILL NOT BE BROKEN!

WE CONTINUE

It is difficult, it is discouraging. And, we continue. There are surprises and there are challenges. . .we continue. There are those who will hurt, and those who will watch, and we continue. There are murders, and mutilations. . .we continue. There are threats and actions. . .WE CONTINUE.

We have one hand tied behind our backs by convention; we drag the weight of morality; we face the liars, we pull the inactive behind us; WE. . . . . . . CONTINUE!!!

ATTITUDE

I see the attitude. Sistani sends his people out to say one thing here, and another thing there. It clouds the water.

A few brave Iraqis dare to blog thoughts somewhat in sympathy with those who value freedom. A few brave Iraqis dare to make statements of support for what we are trying to accomplish.

A few not-so brave Iraqis dare to blog the repeated material of Al Jazeera, and the continuous support of the resistors. These are the people who were not so offended by the hatred toward ethnic groups or religious groups. After all, it wasn't these people who were as persecuted. It wasn't these people who were murdered by the thousands. But, it is people like these who wish to continue the horror, or go back to the horror. It's okay because it will not happen to them.

They want it back; they are working to have it back. The sneaky thing is that they may not get to perpetuate the old horror. There may be an entirely new horror. This time they may live under the thumb or such severe restrictions that they will wish to change. Too late.

It seems some people are fighting very hard to be oppressed. It seems others are not fighting but waiting.

Riverbend, in particular, seems to use her freedom of speech to perpetuate anything she can find which she thinks is damaging. . .and uses it. She's using freedom to fight freedom, and if she gets her wish she will never again be able to speak out against her fate--regardless of her plight. She will still have to puppet the words of her master.

She won't be able to go back; she will enter a new Riverbend era which she helped to craft. She has seen that her side requires the death of innocents, the multilation of bodies, the lies and the twisted truth, the threat, and oppression.

Riverbend is thirsty for yesterday, will drink the poison of today, and kill her future tomorrow. The pity is the she will help others to do the same. She will help to serve the poison.

FEAR FERTILIZER

Leaflets, messages, are floating around which threaten the people. They are warning the Iraqi people to stay in their homes. They are warning the people to stay away from the road to the airport, which is heavily traveled by Coalition forces. They are threatening any people who permit Coalition snipers the use of their homes.

If the enemy had sincere support, would they need to threaten? If they threaten, what do you do?

If you are courageous, you support the Coalition, you inform them and/or make your home available to them. Most would not be that courageous. If courage is weak, take your belongings and leave. Stay with family and friends. Tell no one and hope that your house is still standing; but, at least, you will be relatively safe.

The territory for the next firefight has been declared. You didn't declare it; those who want to control you and control/kill the Coalition declared it. See your future; see the past of your country. It's do as you are told or die.

In this situation, you have no control. Your home is in danger; your family is in danger. It doesn't matter if you back the Coalition, or the enemy; your house is in peril. Make your choice.

USELESS NEGOTIATIONS?

"negotiations and discussions.. Am I wrong???!

Ays, if negotiations and discussions included two honorable parties, then it might be more worthwhile. That is not the case. In these negotiations, there are uni-lateral non-offensive declarations (on the part of the US.) If we were dealing with honorable enemies, it would include a cease-fire, a halt of shooting.

If the enemies fire, we fire back. There is considerable fire. If they had stopped firing, there would be silence. If they had been interested in negiotations, we would see a different picture. You can't negotiate with those who have no interest in compromise

Iraqataglance Comments

AL JAZEERA

The photos of the dead children are circulating all over the net. It is unpleasant to view them, and it is difficult to think about the grief of the families.

Nevertheless, those pictures are propaganda. One of the children appears to be injured, not dead. Another baby it pictured several times, but switched from a blue cloth to a white cloth. Another baby appears to have been a stillborn, or a newborn, who had been dead much longer than the others.

One photo does not appear to be a child, or a woman; but, appears to be a young man. Since we have indication that there was an 11-year old with an AK47, who was guarding a clinic, it is possible that the young boy could have been carrying a weapon. It is likely that he was at the wrong place at the wrong time. But. . .Al Jazeera is not the most respected news outlet, and is the most suspected teller of twisted truth. Was the boy even dead? His color was good for a dead person.

Another boy appeared to have been dead; it (also) looked like he was in 2 photos. More assessment of the photos should be conducted and someone should come out with exactly what was in those photos. Al Jazeera claims approximately 200 deaths of women and children. There are photos of only several deaths of children and some of those duplicates, which are designed to give the impression that they are different children.

This is Al Jazeera in its typical mode.

IRANIAN DIPLOMAT

A first secretary of the Iranian Embassy was shot dead today in Baghdad.

Who might have done this? For what purpose?

NO GOOD NEWS???

Well, there is good news. Sometimes, there is no point in promoting good news. It just puts the enemies on notice of where to strike. Repair a pipeline and tell; they want to blow it up. Repair a water line, they want to blow it up. Repair the electricity, they want to destroy it.

Your enemies don't want you to have the oil, the water, the electricity, or the POWER. They want the POWER so you do without. They want to win; innocents must INTENTIONALLY DIE!!

They want to own you and will do anything to accomplish it.

The good news is. . . .VOTE!

MY TERRORIST?

"MY TERRORIST IS YOUR FREEDOM FIGHTER!"

NO, not unless your freedom fighter is really fighting for your freedom.

In Iraq, the resistors are resisting the freedom of the people of Iraq, they are resisting safety and hugging terror, resisting calm and embracing oppression. They yell "OCCUPATION", while ignoring ORGANIZATION.

They are kidnapping civilians, treatening aid workers, dismembering bodies, and they want the POWER. If they get the power; YOU GET THE OPPRESSION. VOTE against oppression; VOTE FOR FREEDOM!

If you YELL . . .YES TO AMERICA, they shoot you.

VOTE

My intention was for you, for the Iraqi people, for the huge SILENT MAJORITY. It wasn’t about me, or the US; it was about individuals who feel powerless when they can do something. The SILENT MAJORITY needs to VOTE. The people of Iraq need a voice to tell the world that this is IMPORTANT enough to VOTE.

Many blog comments are requesting the Iraqi People to please help. Suggestions have been made to tie ribbons around trees and various other means to let the world know you care about your freedom. VOTING FOR FREEDOM may be more than either or us suspects. It may be a new way to VOTE WITHOUT BULLETS, BOMBS, BLOOD.

Make it work for the good people of Iraq, make it work for the good people of the world. One man *can* make a difference; each of you already has made a big difference. Don’t stop short of the FREEDOM goal, VOTE, please! The only “thanks” necessary is for each Iraqi to begin a new and better life.

SWING AND SPLIT!

I NEVER vote for one party...exclusively. Split the vote is my motto. When you pull the "party lever" (to me) it means you drank it all in, sucked it all up. The politicians calculate the Registered Republicans/Democrats; but, they can't calculate the cross-voters, the swing-voters. It keeps them on their toes.

And, I do believe in keeping them on their toes!

MONs

Each time on of the Committee mentions this, it sounds like MONs. Something is very highly classified and appears to have come from the Clinton Administration, should have gone to the Bush Administration.

Ben Veniste and Fred Fielding (both) mentioned the MONs. They seem to be pushing for declassification and it sounds important.

The hearings still seem very partisan. I can only hope that when they are in closed session they are less partisan and more determined to straighten this out for the country.

The responsibility rests on the shoulder of all Congress, much of the Clinton Administration, and much of the Bush Administration. We don't know how far back it goes. Some of the problems resulted in the appearance of cures. I doubt all was cured and do have the opinion that we will be hit again.

THE WALL

For years, there was a "wall." The meaning of this is that there was a separation between the FBI and the CIA--they were not to act in tandem. The FBI was authorized to investigate criminal activities within the US, while the CIA was authorized to conduct activities outside the US. Neither was to cross the line; both were to act independently--in short, they were not permitted to coordinate their separate duties.

This was one of the things which hampered the intelligence which might have prevented 9/11. The fear was that the two powerful organization could work together to overthrow the government and the "wall" was intended to make it much more difficult. It was intended as a protection for the people; it turned out to be a hinderance in saving the people.

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!