------- Index of Articles

NUCLEAR
Iraqi Defector Says Saddam Was Near to Building A-Bomb
Kursk search operation to end on Nov. 11

MILITARY
To Intervene or Not to Intervene

OTHER
Naked Surveillance

ACTIVIST
Killing union activists



-------- NUCLEAR

-------- iraq

Iraqi Defector Says Saddam Was Near to Building A-Bomb

Washington Post
Sunday, November 5, 2000; Page A02
By Vernon Loeb Washington Post Staff Writer
http://washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A9331-2000Nov3.html

After escaping from Baghdad in 1994, Iraq's chief nuclear weapons scientist thought his quest for freedom was over when he offered to tell the Central Intelligence Agency everything he knew about Saddam Hussein's weapons program in exchange for asylum.

But in the satellite telephone call the CIA said it wasn't interested, forcing Khidhir Hamza on a desperate flight from Kurdish-controlled northern Iraq that took him to Turkey, Libya, Tunisia and Hungary. Finally, after Hamza turned up at the U.S. Embassy in Budapest in 1995, the CIA realized its mistake, began debriefing Hamza and smuggled his family out of Baghdad.

"I held secrets no one outside Iraq, and only a handful of people inside the country, could know," Hamza writes in a new book co-authored with journalist Jeff Stein, "Saddam's Bombmaker: the Terrifying Inside Story of the Iraqi Nuclear and Biological Weapons Agenda." "Not even the aggressive U.N. inspectors . . . knew what we still had and how dangerous the situation was. None of them knew that Saddam had been within a few months of completing the bomb when he invaded Kuwait."

Speaking on Thursday to nonproliferation experts at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Hamza said Saddam Hussein probably possesses a crude, two- to three-kiloton atomic bomb and could conceivably begin limited bomb production within two to three years if international sanctions are lifted.

Later, in an interview, Hamza said that he had long ago forgiven CIA officials for the way in which "they rebuffed and even ridiculed my pleas for help in 1994," as he puts it in his book.

"They did redeem themselves," Hamza said. "They went through a large operation to save my family, with a five-man planning team here and a nine-man team in the north of Iraq. They saved my family's lives literally--they all would have been killed. For me, that's a lot. That's everything."

The CIA does not agree that Iraq possesses a crude nuclear weapon. "We don't believe they have the fissile material required for a nuclear weapon," said one senior U.S. official, noting that Hamza has been away from the Iraqi program for six years. "Nor do we believe they currently have the infrastructure to build a nuclear weapon."

But the agency does not minimize what Hamza has contributed to its understanding of Iraq's nuclear capabilities. "He is viewed as valuable," the official said, "and his insights have been valuable."

Now living in Virginia with his wife and three sons, Hamza, 61, received a master's degree from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and his doctorate in nuclear physics from Florida State University. He was teaching at a small college in Georgia in 1970 when he was ordered home to work in Iraq's fledgling atomic energy program.

By 1985, he had become Saddam Hussein's personal nuclear weapons adviser, charged with directing a crash program to make Iraq a nuclear power. The country had 25 kilograms of bomb-grade uranium from a French-built reactor, Hamza writes, and volumes of nuclear weapons technology from the World War II Manhattan Project that produced the first U.S. atomic bomb. Hamza discovered the declassified Manhattan Project reports on a dusty shelf in Baghdad, a gift, he writes, from the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission in 1956.

But by 1994, with Iraq close to enriching its own uranium through diffusion technology, Hamza plotted his escape and soon found himself at the headquarters of the opposition Iraqi National Congress in Kurdish-controlled northern Iraq, talking on a secure, satellite telephone to CIA officers 10,000 miles away in Langley, Va.

"I wasn't a low-level official," Hamza writes. "I had designed Saddam's bomb. That should be easy enough for them to confirm. I also knew about the chemical and biological programs."

But after 15 or 20 minutes, Hamza came to believe his long-distance debriefers had never heard of him and knew little about Iraq's bomb program, headquartered at Al-Atheer. Hamza writes that a CIA officer chuckled at the notion of a weapons plant at Al-Atheer and closed the door on his only demand: asylum.

Warren Marik, a former CIA case officer who was present at CIA headquarters at the time of the call, said Friday that he was "appalled" at the way his colleagues dismissed Hamza. "They blew him off, and you don't do that to a walk-in," Marik said.

Marik said part of Hamza's problem lay in the fact that his call had come through Ahmed Chalabi, the Iraqi National Congress leader who had by then fallen out of favor with the agency. But Marik also faults Hamza for being testy and demanding with the CIA officers and refusing to give them enough information to establish his bona fides.

In any event, the CIA knew Hamza's name a year later, when he showed up at the U.S. Embassy in Budapest. Part of the difference then, Marik said, was that Hamza's approach had been coordinated through a different Iraqi opposition group, the Iraqi National Accord, which had much closer ties to Langley.

"In fact, with every passing hour of my arrival in Germany, where I was first debriefed, the attitude of the CIA grew more trusting, friendly and respectful," Hamza writes.

Once they had flown him back to Washington, Hamza called his oldest son, Firas, in Baghdad and set the CIA's exfiltration plan in motion.

Soon enough, a deranged-looking beggar--actually a Kurdish smuggler working for the CIA--approached Firas Hamza in a Baghdad coffee shop, whispered his name and signaled him to walk outside onto the street.

The Kurd handed Firas Hamza a letter from his father and told him to bring his mother and younger brothers the following day to Mosul, north of Baghdad. From there, the Kurd drove Hamza's family over the mountains to the Kurdish-controlled north of Iraq, where they waited in a safe house to be evacuated.

The team of CIA operatives had more than a little experience in Iraq. One key player, Air Force Lt. Col. Rick Francona, a career intelligence officer on assignment to the CIA, was fluent in Arabic and had served during the Persian Gulf War as Gen. H. Norman Schwarzkopf Jr.'s chief interpreter.

Hamza re-creates the scene in his book, describing how Francona "and his sidekick, a tall blond CIA man," burst through the door of the safe house where his wife and sons sat nervously biding their time.

"Firas jumped up in glee.

"'Who are you guys?'" he asked.

"The CIA man smiled.

"'We're not from around here,' he cracked."

-------- russia

Kursk search operation to end on Nov. 11

The Hindu
Sunday, November 05, 2000
By Vladimir Radyuhin
http://www.indiaserver.com/thehindu/2000/11/05/stories/0305000d.htm

MOSCOW, NOV. 4. The operation to recover bodies from the sunken Kursk submarine will continue for another week, a news agency said quoting the Russian naval chief as saying.

``The operation will be halted on Nov. 11, as envisaged by a contract with the Norway-based U.S. company Halliburton,'' Admiral Vladimir Kuroyedov told the Interfax news agency.

Russian and Norwegian divers have resumed work to cut into the fourth front section of the submarine after storms in the Barents Sea abated on Saturday night. Plans to enter the submarine through a hole in the third section had been abandoned because of too great risks to divers from mangled debris.

Officials said all the 12 bodies raised from the eighth and ninth rear sections had been identified. Altogether, 118 men were killed when Russia's biggest nuclear submarine sank after two explosions ripped its nose open during naval games on August 12.

The recovery operation has so far failed to provide a clue about the cause of the explosions on board the Kursk, with proposed theories ranging from a collision with another vessel to a torpedo attack from a friendly ship taking part in the exercises. The Russian Navy Chief on Friday reasserted his belief that a foreign submarine rammed into the Kursk, causing its stock of torpedoes to explode, the Interfax news agency reported.

``I have facts, but not enough evidence yet. But there will be evidence, it's just a matter of time,'' Admiral Kuroyedov said, adding mysteriously: ``Evidence does not only lie on the seabed.''

He also said a Russian cruiser had detected a foreign submarine close to the Kursk on Friday, suggesting the vessel could be attempting to remove some piece of evidence of the collision.

Britain and the United States have denied their submarines, spotted in the area during the war games, were involved, saying an experimental torpedo could have exploded on board the Kursk. A Russian mini-submarine that searched the seabed around the Kursk last month did not find any proof of collision.

Meanwhile, newspaper reports last week said the Kursk had been accidentally sunk by a Russian navy warship. Two Russian newspapers carried interviews with unidentified naval officers saying a missile fired from the Peter the Great cruiser hit the Kursk.


-------- MILITARY

-------- u.s.

To Intervene or Not to Intervene

Los Angeles Times
Sunday, November 5, 2000
By CHARLES WOLF JR.
http://www.latimes.com/news/comment/20001105/t000105872.html

The question of whether and when the United States should intervene abroad came up during the presidential and vice-presidential debates, but the answers were usually puzzling. However, circumstances may require a clear answer because, for example, U.S. troop deployments in Kosovo are likely to extend well beyond their originally intended duration.

U.S. interventions have taken a wide range of forms: peacekeeping (Bosnia in the past five years); peacemaking (Kosovo in the past 16 months); "operations other than war" (Somalia, Haiti and Rwanda); and humanitarian assistance in militarily insecure circumstances (all of the above). In the lexicon of military planners, these operations are collectively referred to as "small-scale contingencies," in contrast to operations designed to deter or to meet "major theater wars."

At the end of 1999, the U.S. had 253,000 military forces deployed in foreign countries. Most of them are stationed in 11 countries belonging to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, plus Japan and Korea, and reflect America's alliance and treaty obligations. Nevertheless, it is the smaller deployments--Bosnia and Herzegovina (5,800), Serbia including Kosovo (6,400), Macedonia (1,100) and in the Middle East (13,000), a legacy of the Gulf War in 1991--that account for a disproportionate share of the stress and fatigue under which the military establishment currently labors.

There are numerous reasons for this. Families are not allowed in these deployments, a restriction that coincides with a peak in the percentage of married men and women serving in the armed forces. Repeated and protracted separations have disruptive effects on families and on service morale, which add to the services' difficulties in meeting their retention and recruitment goals.

For years, the U.S. military establishment has been sized and configured to deal with major wars, specifically, two simultaneously occurring conflicts in Northeast Asia and the Middle East. It thus assumes that if two major wars can be effectively managed, an unspecified number of smaller deployments, as in Bosnia, can also be handled, because these kinds of deployments are presumed to be less demanding of military capabilities.

Yet, just how effective have these smaller-scale deployments been? Such interventions typically occur in countries whose politics and ethnic tensions are neither well-understood nor effectively managed by foreign policymakers, military forces and cumbersome bureaucracies. The ability of the United States to ameliorate these situations, let alone to resolve the issues at stake, is severely limited and beset by uncertainties and perverse consequences. The sobering ambiguities were strikingly portrayed in a cover photograph in the London Economist last year, which showed a bereaved Kosovo woman below a caption that posed the question: "Victim of Kosovo or NATO"?

Opponents of U.S. intervention--the "realist" school--contend that military deployment abroad should occur only when "vital national interests" are at stake, apart from humanitarian considerations, and whether the contemplated actions are multilateral or unilateral. Furthermore, goes the argument, the interventions in Somalia, Haiti, Rwanda, Bosnia and Kosovo didn't pass this stringent test, although actions in the Persian Gulf to repel Iraq's invasion of Kuwait did.

Supporters of intervention--the "idealist" school--reply that humanitarian considerations, including the furtherance of ethnic and religious tolerance, protection of human rights and the advancement of democracy, represent core American values. Hence, tangible support for these values is itself a vital national interest.

During the presidential debates, Texas Gov. George W. Bush inclined toward the non-interventionist, realist position, while Vice President Al Gore supported a more active, idealist U.S. role overseas. Yet, one important, if perhaps nuanced, element was missing in their exchanges.

The Hippocratic oath instructs doctors to "above all, do no harm." This is too exacting an standard to be applied to military intervention, because these situations defy precision and certainty. Nevertheless, when U.S. policymakers contemplate intervention abroad, they should do so with abundant humility, if not timidity, because of the profoundly uncertain connections between the blunt instruments they can use and the complex ends they seek.

Perhaps there are ways to hone these instruments so they can be used with greater dexterity and less risk of inflicting inadvertent harm. One way, an adaptation of what once was referred to as the Nixon doctrine, is to equip and train the victims of a local conflict (for example, the Bosnians brutalized by the Serbs), instead of committing intervention forces from outside. A second approach is to earmark a part of U.S. military forces for smaller-scale interventions, training and equipping them to maximize their effectiveness in such contingencies. Neither of these measures is riskless, but they may still be better than the alternatives.

Even if the Hippocratic oath is unsuitable to determine the propriety of an contemplated intervention, there is a corollary that should be obligatory: Recognize that harm will be an inevitable consequence of intervention and , therefore, try to demonstrate convincingly, before deployment occurs, that such harm will be substantially less than the desired, although uncertain, improvement sought.

From the standpoint of U.S. policy, a cautionary admonition by Abraham Lincoln is also relevant: "We should not promise what we ought not, lest we be called upon to perform what we cannot."

Charles Wolf Jr. Is Senior Economic Advisor and Corporate Fellow in International Economics at Rand, and a Research Fellow at the Hoover Institution

-------- OTHER

-------- spying

Naked Surveillance

Date: Sun, 05 Nov 2000 23:28:53 -0800
RadTimes # 92 November, 2000
by Russell Madden
http://www.zolatimes.com/V4.45/naked_truth.html

Unbeknownst to Oregon resident Danny Kyllo, a police officer searched his home-even though the officer had not yet served Kyllo a search warrant nor even entered the man's house. What the cop did do in the never-ending War on People (aka "the War on Drugs") was point a thermal imager at Kyllo's residence.

The imager revealed that the suspect's domicile was radiating heat more than usual for such a structure. "Ah-ha!" the sterling upholder of the law thought, "Grow lights!" After combining this initial search with other evidence, a search warrant was issued. Lo and behold, the stalwart officers discovered that the hapless Mr. Kyllo had committed the no-no of growing marijuana plants.

Naturally, Mr. Kyllo took exception to this common practice of law enforcement. Using this thermal information from his home without first obtaining a warrant constituted an "unreasonable search" and thus violated Mr. Kyllo's Fourth Amendment guaranteed rights against unlawful searches. As such, any evidence obtained in this endeavor should be suppressed and not be available in any criminal proceedings initiated against him.

Seems clear enough, right?

The district court said, no, no, the use of a thermal imaging device does not constitute a search, despite the fact that the officer was seeking to obtain information about the conditions inside Mr. Kyllo's home without his permission and without a valid warrant. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed that no search relevant to the Fourth Amendment to our Constitution occurred.

This ruling has now been appealed to the Supreme Court. The Nine in Black have decided to examine this practice and issue a ruling on whether thermal imaging (at least if conducted from a police car rather than an airplane) is to be permitted.

We can only wish Mr. Kyllo good luck in his fight.

Peeping Toms of the State

Even though the average person would be arrested for voyeurism if he engaged in such "Peeping Tom" behavior, this is hardly the only example of agents of the State hoping to catch a glimpse of the "naked truth" about you.

Going on a plane ride? New imaging devices are available that can reveal the "real you" beneath your clothing, and in embarrassing detail. In the name of fighting "terrorism" and "gun nuts," the security folks who boringly process harried travelers may soon be better able than your closest acquaintances to assess the extent of your middle-age spread or the facts about your physique your clothes attempt to disguise or enhance.

Even if you are not one of the fortunate few who currently face this invisible groping, you may be lucky enough to experience a real hands-on search, especially if you match some arcane "profile" based on your sex, race, or ethnic background. No warrants, of course. Mere suspicion suffices. Stripped naked, prodded and poked, perhaps even detained while the upstanding defenders of your freedom wait to examine what you deposit in the toilet, you will no doubt accept unreservedly that such workers are merely "doing their jobs." Who cares that ninety-percent of those detained are sent away, innocent of any ill intent to violate the laws of this country? "Oops. Sorry." (Actually, I doubt your examiners will apologize.)

Now don't you feel ever so much safer as you wing your way through the friendly skies?

Maybe you believe that merely walking sedately down the street will not attract any undue attention. After all, as Obi Wan Kenobi told Han Solo, you prefer to avoid "Imperial entanglements." Be watchful, however, if you exercise your right to carry a weapon in self-defense. You may someday become the random target of officers wielding sensitive metal detectors that reveal your dirty little secret to their probing instruments. If the lovely ladies of the Million Mom March have their way, no appeal to the Second Amendment will protect you (let alone the Fourth Amendment). You will be judged an evil purveyor of "gun violence" merely because you own - let alone bear! - such a instrument of death and destruction. When the War on Drugs, the War on Terrorism, and the slowly brewing War on Guns merge someday into one gigantic War on Everything That They Don't Approve Of, your only hope will be to cower in the safety of your basement.

(Darn. I forgot. That thermal imager thing...)

We already have school officials stripping little girls to their underwear searching for stolen goods. What new excuses will the guardians of our youth dream up tomorrow to justify their violations of our children's bodies and privacy? Regardless, those who will one day mature into our national leaders will be well-conditioned for the world of the future.

Chip Implants to Save the Children

Chip implants that today track the locations of pets and valuable livestock are already being touted as the next wave of convenience and safety for humans. The first widespread appeals to apply this technology to people may be directed to - yes - the children. How could you possibly object to anything that might ensure a teeny-tiny additional margin of safety for your precious offspring? Why, you have been fingerprinting your progeny, have you not? No matter that the real risk of them being abducted is minuscule. Every precaution must be taken. Why, not agreeing to chip implantation might be construed as uncaring and cruel. Child abuse? You wouldn't want to be accused of that, now would you? Besides, simply think of an implant as an extension of the national identification - oh, excuse me - the social security number you obtained for your children. Why, I bet the State could be convinced to offer you a tax credit if you comply! Maybe your insurance rates would drop, too!

No more lost children! What a glorious Utopia! No longer need you worry about exercising your parental authority and responsibility. Just as the State has relieved you of the bothersome necessity of obtaining child care, choosing your child's education, worrying whether or not to vaccinate them against obscure diseases, purchasing their health care, evaluating their toys for safety, deciding whether to buckle up your children or place them in car seats, so, too, will your beneficent guardian angels ensure that you can let your kids run wild.

Nor will you be able (or allowed?) to resist the siren call of this GPS linked little companion. At present, the authorities can only track your position via your cell phone. (For your own good, of course. How else do you expect the good folks manning the 911 phones to find you? What? You didn't ask to "benefit" from this loss of your anonymity. No problem! No need for thanks, either.) In addition to the implant linking you into this global web, it will soon be able to monitor your vital signs. Skyrocketing blood pressure? Heart attack? Gasping for breath? Help is quick at hand.

You will also no longer be pestered by the hassle of passwords or swipe cards or even fingerprints or retinal scanners. Your micro-buddy can handle all those mundane requirements of life for you.

Throw in complete tracking of your purchases, jobs, medical history, emails, phone calls, and travels and there won't be anything about you that those who "feel your pain" won't know. You will stand before them revealed in all your naked glory - either literally or figuratively - any time they so desire. With knowledge comes power. With power comes control. With control comes-slavery?

Well, the politicos and their minions don't want you to take that final mental step. Doing that would reveal that the Emperor has no clothes. Realize that fact - that their "compassion" and their "caring" and their "concerns" for "justice" are nonexistent - and you will laugh.

So, let's all open our eyes and take a good hard look at those who hope to leave us naked and helpless before them. While we still can, let's strip them of the drug (power) they lust after most, and laugh good and loud and long at their naked ambition.

-------- activists

Killing union activists

Date: Sun, 05 Nov 2000 23:28:53 -0800
RadTimes # 92 November, 2000
The Southern California Teamster, page 5, October 18, 2000:

BRUSSELS, Belgium (PAI) -- Standing up for workers' rights is dangerous work. Last year alone, at least 140 trade unionists worldwide were killed or committed suicide after being threatened because of their union activism, reports the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions.

And that's not all. The survey, which examines 113 countries, states that nearly 3,000 people were arrested, 1,500 were injured, beaten or tortured and at least 5,800 were harassed for engaging in legitimate trade union activities in 1999 alone.

The report also found widespread government repression of workers during job actions last year. It notes 80 out of the 113 countries surveyed restricted workers' right to strike. And police violence toward strikers led to workers' deaths and injuries on the picket lines.

------- Onelist (submissions from subscribers)