Archive By Date | Today's Links to Search By
Activists' News | Nuclear | Depleted Uranium | Military | Police
Alternative Energy Etc. | From Subscribers
NUCLEAR
Near miss at nuclear plant
A Ringing Nuclear Alarm
Britain boosts stock of antiradiation pills
Greens sensing victory on nuclear issue
Iran denies having secret parallel nuclear program
Iranian FM to seek European support over nuclear program
Iran Denies Troops Running Secret A - Bomb Project
Toshiba, GE to tie up with nuclear power plant project in US
Review offers rare peek at nuclear lab
No cause found yet in outage at nuclear plant
MILITARY
Amnesty Reports Sudan Fighting
Britain to deploy up to 4,000 additional soldiers
Army exodus: SAS troops quit
China uses navy to whip up patriotic banner
Elections Make Inroads in China
EU expansion reshapes future of Europe
Eastern Europeans mark milestone in post-Soviet evolution
Germany to shorten missions abroad, take guards off US bases
Italian hostages 'sitting ducks' after US troops disarmed them
'We Won': Fallujah Rejoices in Withdrawal
US marines reset their big guns around Fallujah
For White House, Reversed Iraq Tactics
As a New Iraqi Force Goes to Work in Falluja,
Israelis Urged to Approve Gaza Withdrawal
At Least 5 Killed in Office Attack in Saudi Arabia
Attack in Saudi Arabia Kills 6
Horrific new evidence of soldiers' brutality in Iraq
Seven Iraqis die in British custody. How many soldiers are charged? None
General Suggests Abuses at Iraq Jail Were Encouraged
Abuse by UK soldiers in Iraq 'common'
Prisoner Abuse Probe Widened
Photos Show Abuse by British Soldiers
U.S., U.N. Gird for Major Effort to Pick Iraqi Leaders
Iraq oil-for-food kickbacks 'higher than suspected'
Howitzers Are Leaving Slopes for Tour of Duty
POLICE / PRISONERS / COURTS / JUSTICE
In Re Scalia the Outspoken v. Scalia the Reserved
Bush Executive Powers in the Balance
Airports to Test New Defenses Against Terrorist Infiltration
U.S. Airports Testing Defenses Against Possible Missile Strikes
Airlines Confirm Giving Passenger Data to FBI After 9/11
Patriot Act allows surge of secret searches in United States
Guantanamo -- A Holding Cell In War on Terror
POLITICS
TV broadcast listing US dead sparks outrage
Doubts over authenticity of Iraq abuse photos: BBC
Censorship Dishonors the Dead -- and the Truth
Iraq reporting under fire again
Bush makes no jokes about weapons of mass destruction
President Declares Iraqi Life Better
National Guard Officer Offers Criticism of Bush's Iraq Plans
Missouri Voters Favor None Of the Above
ENERGY
Solar ovens catching on in U.S.
Going solar
Agency Plans to Harvest Wind Power Off Jones Beach
OTHER
Why Antarctica will soon be the only place to live - literally
San Francisco Restores Plan For Homeless
ACTIVISTS
Student activist Noriaki Imai
-------- NUCLEAR
------- accidents and safety
Near miss at nuclear plant
RAF Hercules's breach of power station no-fly zone covered up for months
02 May 2004
By Rob Edwards, Environment Editor
Sunday Herald
http://www.sundayherald.com/print41703
A large military aircraft came within a few hundred feet of Scotland's oldest and most vulnerable nuclear plant in a near-miss incident which has been covered up for more than four months.
A RAF Hercules C130 transport plane breached the no-fly zone around the Chapelcross nuclear power station in Dumfries and Galloway on December 19, 2003. But the incident was only confirmed yesterday by the Ministry of Defence (MoD), which said it was still conducting an investigation.
The MoD also disclosed that the no-fly zones over three other nuclear plants had been breached five times in the past three years. One breach was at the Torness nuclear power station in East Lothian, one at Dungeness in Kent and three at Berkeley in Gloucestershire.
But experts are most worried about the breach at Chapelcross because its facilities, built largely in the 1950s, would probably not be able to withstand a direct hit by a large aircraft. "You would get a massive release of radioactivity," said John Large, an independent nuclear consultant.
He pointed out that the reactors had no secondary containment, and that parts of their primary cooling circuits were exposed. "They were not designed with aircraft crashes in mind," he claimed. "If cooling was lost, the fuel could start burning."
After the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington on September 11, 2001, the government doubled the restricted area for aircraft around nuclear installations to a radius of two nautical miles (2.3 miles). The aim was to reduce the risk of planes crashing into reactors and radioactive waste stores.
Since then, the MoD has investigated 32 complaints that restricted areas have been infringed. It insists that, even in the six instances where infringements are now known to have occurred, there was never any danger of a crash.
But politicians and environmentalists fear otherwise. "The consequences, should a crash occur, would be an unimaginable catastrophe," said the Welsh Labour MP Llew Smith, who has been researching nuclear near misses.
He also attacked the MoD for keeping details of the breached no-fly zones secret. "It is very worrying, the way this information has emerged. The Ministry of Defence should reveal such incidents."
The revelation about the near miss at Chapelcross, near Annan, clears up a mystery that surrounded a report in the Sunday Express five weeks ago. It said that a military aircraft had come within 100ft of one of the Calder Hall cooling towers at Sellafield nuclear plant in Cumbria in December.
This was categorically denied by British Nuclear Fuels (BNFL) and the government. However, sources told the Sunday Herald yesterday that the report had just confused the location of the incident, mistaking Chapelcross for its sister nuclear station, Calder Hall.
Chapelcross consists of four 45-year-old old Magnox reactors, plus a secretive military plant for producing radioactive tritium for the nuclear warheads carried by Trident submarines. There are also cooling ponds for spent fuel and other facilities for radioactive waste.
The Hercules C130 aircraft is a four-engined cargo and troop- carrying plane with a wingspan of over 130ft. Fully fuelled, it weighs over 50 tonnes and it is designed to carry a further 20 tonnes.
BNFL yesterday confirmed that an incident involving a Hercules C130 had occurred at Chapelcross in December. "Restricted flying zones exist around nuclear power stations to prevent aircraft flying below typically 2000ft and within two nautical miles," said a spokesman for the state-owned company.
"We report all alleged incidents of low-flying [aircraft] to the Civil Aviation Authority who have the responsibility for enforcing the restricted zones. If we can identify the aircraft as belonging to the military, we also report the incident to the Ministry of Defence."
The MoD said that all reports were investigated, but infringements were very rare. No disciplinary action had been taken against offending pilots, but they were informed so that they could learn from their mistakes.
"In no case was it considered that there was any danger to the installation from the infringement," said a MoD spokeswoman. "Flight safety is something we have always taken very seriously."
British Energy, the private company that runs the Torness nuclear power station, refused to comment. In November 1999 a burning RAF Tornado crashed into the sea less than half a mile from Torness, its two pilots having safely ejected over land.
Environmentalists pointed out that the breaches of no-fly zones were all accidents. "We also need to guard against a deliberate attempt to crash an aeroplane into nuclear facilities, which were not designed with such an attack in mind," said Greenpeace nuclear consultant, Pete Roche.
"Even if the nuclear reactor is not breached, there are other facilities on these sites, like spent fuel ponds, which if damaged would lead to a large release of radioactivity into the atmosphere."
----
A Ringing Nuclear Alarm
Los Angeles Times,
May 2, 2004
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-ed-livermore2may02,1,4194542.story;
Imagine a mansion filled with a priceless art collection. Burglars are casing the neighborhood, but the homeowner downplays warnings from neighbors and the police. Instead of installing a top-notch security system, the owner decides to cheap it out, adding a few deadbolt locks. A few weeks later, criminals loot the art and trash the house.
This is the kind of overconfidence that the Energy Department displays with its inadequate nuclear security measures at numerous nuclear laboratories. A new General Accounting Office study and a hearing held by Rep. Christopher Shays (R-Conn.) last week indicate that despite years of warnings, the department continues to underestimate the threat of a terrorist attack in order to hold down security costs.
The government has nuclear materials stored in at least seven weapons sites. The most vulnerable is probably Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, a defense research lab managed by the University of California and surrounded by homes in Alameda County.
Energy Department analysts estimated in 2002 that if well-trained terrorists penetrated Livermore's Superblock building, which contains weapons-grade material, they could rapidly assemble and set off a nuclear device, leveling the surrounding city and killing tens of thousands.
Since then, the Energy Department has taken some minimal steps, including more frequent checks of vehicles. But the GAO says that although these measures may increase visible security, they may undermine it in reality. Guards are overworked, undertrained and quick to quit. What's more, the department uses inadequate measures to secure nuclear materials, claiming they're less significant than nuclear weapons. Any community hit by a "dirty bomb" is unlikely to make such a distinction.
Perhaps most startling is the department's resistance to accepting intelligence analyses that a much larger terrorist force might attack than it estimates.
True to its blinkered nature, the department held a hearing Tuesday outlining its proposal to double the amount of plutonium held at Livermore. Instead of pursuing the proposal, Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham should consolidate plutonium stocks, which are spread out at different laboratories. The sensible safety move would be to shift Livermore's nuclear materials to the far more secure Nevada Test Site, where the government used to conduct underground nuclear testing. In addition, Abraham should take the painfully obvious steps of drawing up long-range cost estimates as well as a plan for new security measures.
Perfect security will never exist, but with government investigators pointing out such glaring shortcomings, the fixes are dangerously overdue.
-------- britain
Britain boosts stock of antiradiation pills
LONDON SUNDAY TELEGRAPH,
May 02, 2004
http://www.washtimes.com/world/20040501-114206-5891r.htm
LONDON - The British government has extended its supply of antiradiation pills to cover 50 percent of the population because of the increased risk of a terrorist attack.
-------- europe
Greens sensing victory on nuclear issue
Chinese say they have lost interest in buying reprocessing plant in Germany from Siemens
May 2, 2004
By William Pratt
Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung
http://www.faz.com/IN/INtemplates/eFAZ/docmain.asp?rub=%7BB1311FCC-FBFB-11D2-B228-00105A9CAF88%7D&doc=%7B0DE99BBB-2046-4DEE-AD97-12586A076B01%7D
April has been a good month for the Greens, the junior partner in Germany's coalition government. First, the country's top court endorsed a special energy tax that the party has made a main feature of its environmental policies. Then, on Tuesday, China delivered a decision on a nuclear issue that had triggered tensions between the Greens and their senior coalition partner in Berlin, the Social Democrats: A spokesman for the Chinese Foreign Ministry said the government was ending negotiations to buy a mothballed nuclear reprocessing plant in the central German city of Hanau.
The announcement was a cause for celebration by the Greens. "The coalition is saved," said Hans-Christian Ströbele, a member of the Greens. But even while the Greens were expressing their satisfaction, other officials in Berlin were pointing out that the Chinese announcement had not officially ended the effort. They noted that the company trying to sell the facility, Siemens, had not backed off its plan and that the issue remained under review.
The Chinese, however, were clear in expressing their point of view. "The contacts are over," a spokesman for the Chinese Foreign Ministry said. "I don't think Prime Minister Wen Jiabao will bring the matter back up with the Germans."
Wen raised the issue with Schröder in December during the chancellor's visit to China. Schröder expressed his support for the deal, worth EUR50 million ($59.5 million). "It doesn't appear that there is anything that speaks against it," he said. But the Greens, the driving force behind Germany's decision to shut the country's 19 nuclear power plants, saw many issues that spoke against it. Their main worry was that plutonium from the facility could help China's arms program.
Siemens challenged this argument. "The facility is not designed to produce weapon-grade plutonium," a spokesman said.
But such assurances did nothing to end the opposition. In one attempt to block the deal, the non-profit group International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War organized a fund-raising campaign to outbid the Chinese by one euro. The group says it has raised more than EUR1 million thus far. But it is not prepared to drop the effort just yet. "As long as the German government has not decided that the facility may not be exported, we will remain active," a group spokesman, Jens-Peter Steffen, told the wire service dpa on Tuesday.
The original idea for the facility was to create the world's largest production of fuel rods for nuclear power plants. Siemens eventually invested about EUR720 million in the plant. But the work was accompanied by determined opposition from the Greens. One of the leading critics was today's foreign minister, Joschka Fischer. In the 1990s, he was the environmental minister for the state of Hesse, where Hanau is located, and helped build barriers to the plant. Siemens abandoned the idea in 1995.
Five years later, the Russians expressed an interest in buying the facility. The Greens protested the idea, too. But officials said the deal fell through because of Russian financial issues.
-------- iran
Iran denies having secret parallel nuclear program to produce A-bomb
TEHRAN (AFP)
May 02, 2004
http://www.spacewar.com/2004/040502135419.3wj0nb05.html
Iran on Sunday denied that it has secret parallel nuclear program aiming to produce atomic weapons, as claimed by the main Iranian armed opposition group.
"In order for the hypocrites to continue their existence they have to fabricate news for their master the United States and Westerners", Iranian foreign ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi said, using Tehran's name for the People's Mujahedeen, in his weekly press conference.
The Mujahedeen-dominated National Council of Resistance of Iran said last week that Tehran is rushing to complete a first nuclear bomb in "between one and two years."
It said the drive is being pursued by a special military unit of 400 experts and researchers working secretly outside the Iranian Atomic Energy Organization and under the personal supervision of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khamenei, Iran's supreme ruler.
In a recent report, the United Nations International Atomic Energy Agency said parts of Iran's nuclear program are under military control.
The Islamic republic has persistently denied ever having a nuclear weapons program and says its facilities and programs are used only for the generation of electricity and are peaceful.
----
Iranian FM to seek European support over nuclear program
TEHRAN (AFP)
May 02, 2004
http://www.spacewar.com/2004/040502101659.htoc1jmy.html
Iranian Foreign Minister Kamal Kharazi will meet European leaders this week ahead of an International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) meeting to review Tehran's nuclear program, a spokesman said Sunday.
Kharazi will hold talks with Europenan Commission President Romano Prodi and European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana from Monday before heading to Germany and Denmark later in the week, spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi said.
He said the minister wanted to "talk about Iran's peaceful nuclear program and the situation in the region".
"He will also talk about Iran's cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency and our agreement with the Europeans, and the region's developments, especially Iraq."
Kharazi met Belgian, Italian, Irish, British and French officials in Europe almost two weeks ago, seeking their support ahead of a June meeting of the IAEA board of governors to discuss Tehran's use of nuclear technology.
In October Iran gave the IAEA what it said was a complete declaration of its nuclear activities but the dossier was later found to have significant omissions, including its acquisition of designs for sophisticated centrifuges that can produce weapons-grade uranium.
The IAEA board of governors passed a resolution in March that condemned Iran for failing to report crucial technologies such as the advanced centrifuge designs.
IAEA chief Mohammad ElBaradei returned to Vienna three weeks ago from Tehran, where he had hammered out an agreement for Iran to adhere to a timetable to answer outstanding questions about its nuclear activities.
The United States claims Iran is secretly developing nuclear weapons and is seeking a tougher stance against Tehran.
But under a deal struck last year, Britain, France and Germany offered to provide peaceful nuclear assistance to Iran if the IAEA cleared the country of running a secret weapons programme.
--------
Iran Denies Troops Running Secret A - Bomb Project
May 2, 2004
By REUTERS
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/international/international-iran-nuclear.html
TEHRAN (Reuters) - Hard-line troops are not running a secret nuclear weapons program, Iran said Sunday, rejecting the latest accusations from a prominent exiled opposition group.
The group last week said a special Revolutionary Guard unit was running a secret atomic weapons program parallel to the civil program declared by Iran's Atomic Energy Organization.
When asked about this accusation from the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi told reporters: ``The group resorts to any deceitful remark to guarantee its survival.''
The NCRI is the political arm of the People's Mujahideen Organization seeking to topple the Iranian government. The Mujahideen is listed as a ``terrorist organization'' by the United States and the European Union.
The NCRI has made similar revelations in the past about Iran's nuclear facilities, which have later been confirmed by the U.N. nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
Washington accuses Iran of using its atomic program as a smokescreen for building a bomb and insists the Iranian military is intimately involved in Tehran's nuclear activities.
Tehran says its nuclear scientists are committed to the peaceful generation of electricity.
The Revolutionary Guards were set up after the 1979 Islamic revolution as a force dedicated to protecting revolutionary values. They work in parallel with the regular army and their head is appointed directly by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
NCRI also said the guards, devoted to safeguarding the values of the 1979 Islamic revolution, were supervising some 400 atomic experts to prevent further leaks of sensitive nuclear information.
Since August 2002, the IAEA has been trying to determine whether Tehran's nuclear program is entirely peaceful. However, Iran has in the past withheld information from the IAEA about potentially weapons-related technology.
-------- u.s. nuc facilities
Toshiba, GE to tie up with nuclear power plant project in US: report
TOKYO (AFP)
May 02, 2004
http://www.spacewar.com/2004/040502025940.xlvkio0j.html
Japan's Toshiba Corp. has teamed up with US power giant General Electric Co. (GE) in an effort to win a nuclear power plant deal in the United States, the Nihon Keizai Shimbun said Sunday.
A consortium led by the two firms has filed with the US Department of Energy for permission to conduct a feasibility study for construction of advanced nuclear reactors, the business daily said.
Among other members of the consortium are the Tennessee Valley Authority, major contractor Bechtel Corp., enriched uranium fuel supplier USEC Inc. and Global Nuclear Fuel Americas LLC, a joint venture by GE, Toshiba and Hitachi Ltd.
The move follows the decision by the administration of US President George W. Bush to support construction of nuclear power plants, the newspaper said.
Washington had suspended nuclear power plant construction since a major accident at Three Mile Island in 1979.
Upon obtaining government permission, the firms will begin a feasibility study for installing in Alabama an advanced boiling water reactor with an output of over one million kilowatts, the daily said.
Total construction costs are estimated at more than three billion dollars.
The partnership in the consortium might pave the way for closer collaborations between Japanese and American firms in nuclear technology, the newspaper said.
Japanese manufacturers used to rely on nuclear power plant technology developed by GE and Westinghouse Electric Co.
But since there has long been no construction of nuclear power plants in the United States, Japanese firms are now said to have a technological edge over their American counterparts, Nihon Keizai said.
Toshiba is separately trying to join a US project to produce a high-temperature gas-cooled reactor, which is likely to become mainstream among nuclear reactors in the future, it said.
The project has been conducted by Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory, it added.
-------- california
Review offers rare peek at nuclear lab
The Lawrence Livermore study reveals facts about site's management and environmental effects
By Michael Doyle --
Sacramento Bee Washington Bureau
Sunday, May 2, 2004
http://www.sacbee.com/content/politics/story/9151008p-10076593c.html
WASHINGTON - The stars are aligned to shed a little more light on the usually secret world of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, including its plans for ongoing explosives testing in San Joaquin County.
The nuclear weapons lab wants to build a 40,000-square-foot center for testing high explosives at its Site 300 east of Tracy, plans scrutinized last week at Energy Department headquarters show. Consequently, things could get bumpy for local red-tailed hawks and prairie falcons.
"Diurnal raptors that forage directly over the facilities are the species most vulnerable to flying debris and shock overpressure," the Energy Department acknowledges in the Lawrence Livermore study that's now in the spotlight.
For the first time since 1992, the Energy Department is conducting a wide-ranging environmental review of Lawrence Livermore. By happenstance, the review occurs just as the University of California is preparing to compete - possibly against the University of Texas, among others - for the contracts to oversee the Lawrence Livermore and Los Alamos labs.
This combination brings into public focus both the management of the lab that employs 10,600 people, many of whom commute from the northern San Joaquin Valley, and the lab's policy and environmental fallout. In particular, facts are bubbling up from the approximately 2,000-page environmental study and a series of five public hearings that concluded Friday.
"This is a rare glimpse into the activities, current and future, of the lab," said Loulena Miles, staff attorney for the Livermore-based group called Tri-Valley CARES.
The Livermore group wants to convert the laboratory to nonweapons work. That's a political long shot, as the laboratory's annual budget includes nearly $1 billion for nuclear weapons activities.
The lab is completing its multiple-laser National Ignition Facility, useful for weapons development, and future plans anticipate boosting production of the "plutonium pits" used to trigger modern nuclear weapons.
As part of the Livermore group's lab-monitoring efforts, Miles flew to Washington for the public hearing Friday. Fellow skeptics predominated, as allied groups from the Natural Resources Defense Council to the Federation of American Scientists also raised objections to various revelations in the Lawrence Livermore study.
Site 300, for instance, could store up to 3,000 pounds of high explosives in its proposed Energetic Materials Processing Center, according to the study. Used for testing explosives since 1955, the 7,000-acre site off Coral Hollow Road south of the Altamont Pass will be employed for future testing on a "weekly to daily basis," the study says.
"We look at what is foreseeable for approximately the next 10 years," said Tom Grim, who is managing the Lawrence Livermore environmental document.
More broadly, the lab anticipates doubling the amount of plutonium it can store at the heavily guarded Superblock facility in Livermore, to 3,300 pounds from the current limit of 1,540 pounds. An essential fuel in nuclear weapons, plutonium can also kill when inhaled in very small amounts; breathing in several ten-thousandths of a gram can cause cancer.
The number of hazardous and radioactive waste shipments into and out of the 1.3-square-mile Livermore facility would likewise grow to an estimated 310 over the next decade, the new study shows - a big increase over the 88 shipments expected if lab operations stayed as they are.
The Energy Department will continue collecting public comments on Lawrence Livermore's future through May 27 and expects to make its final decisions by January.
The nuclear weapons lab management contracts are moving on a different track, and some officials don't expect the formal requests for proposals to be issued until after the November presidential election.
Related link Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Experimental Test Site
http://www.llnl.gov/site300/
-------- texas
No cause found yet in outage at nuclear plant
By JACK DOUGLAS JR.
Fort Worth Star-Telegram
Wed, Jun. 02, 2004
http://www.duluthsuperior.com/mld/duluthsuperior/news/nation/8819580.htm
A cause has not been determined for an hourlong complete power outage at a nuclear weapons plant near Amarillo, and the investigation is expanding, an official said Tuesday.
The May 19 blackout affected the entire Pantex plant, America's only nuclear weapons assembly and disassembly facility, but backup power kicked in "very, very quick," said Jud Simmons, plant spokesman.
Simmons said that it was the most severe power outage ever at the plant -- a depository of large amounts of radioactive materials -- but that security was never compromised.
When such an emergency occurs, he said, "we have a lot of different backup systems to make sure we can place all weapons systems in a safe and stable configuration."
After more than two weeks of searching for a cause for the outage, Simmons said the internal probe has expanded, including hiring additional people to investigate. "We are keeping the Department of Energy informed, of course, on what we're doing," he said.
Considered a potential terrorist target, Pantex is a 16,000-acre facility, 17 miles northeast of Amarillo, where some nuclear warheads are put together, others are disassembled, and still others have their radioactive components -- plutonium and uranium -- removed to heavily guarded storage banks.
In January, Pantex was cited by federal investigators who said workers there could have caused a catastrophic event when they taped together broken pieces of highly explosive materials taken from the plutonium trigger of an old warhead. If any of the explosives had been dropped during the improper handling, it could have set off a "violent reaction," the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board said in a letter to Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham.
In the May 19 power outage at Pantex, Simmons would not comment on whether officials had ruled out sabotage of the power system.
"Until a final determination is made, I think it's premature to speculate on anything," he said.
John Salsman, the radiation safety officer for Texas A&M University and the former emergency planning manager for the Comanche Peak nuclear plant near Glen Rose, characterized the Pantex outage as minor, as long as backup systems engaged quickly.
However, the fact that the plant still does not know what caused the outage could be an "area of concern," Salsman said.
Mavis Belisle, who lives across the highway from the plant and is the director of Peace Farm, a nuclear watchdog group, said she suspects that Pantex is playing down the significance of the event.
Even a brief loss of power could affect the air conditioning that cools the plutonium and uranium, stall radioactive monitors and disengage palm-print machines that control access to the facility, Belisle said.
"Anyone who thought it [the power outage] wasn't a concern is being extremely naive," she said.
A Pantex news release, issued soon after the outage occurred, said plant operations were suspended until power was restored. "For security reasons," the release said, "some plant personnel were temporarily restricted from entering or exiting the plant."
Walt Kelley, emergency management coordinator for the city of Amarillo, said Pantex officials have told him that they did not notify outside emergency services -- such as hospitals or fire departments -- at the time because they felt "there was nothing in a critical mode."
Since the outage, Kelley said, Pantex officials have agreed to give outside authorities at least a "courtesy notification" if such an event happens again. Jack Douglas Jr., (817) 390-7700 jld@star-telegram.com
-------- MILITARY
-------- africa
Amnesty Reports Sudan Fighting
May 2, 2004
By REUTERS
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/02/international/africa/02suda.html
CAIRO, May 1 (Reuters) - The human rights group Amnesty International said late Friday that fighting was persisting in western Sudan despite a cease-fire between the government and rebels, and that time was running out to avert a disaster among civilians before the rainy season.
The Sudanese government and two main rebel factions in the west, the impoverished Darfur region, signed a truce on April 8 to allow aid to reach about one million people.
Relief officials say rains are expected to start in late May and could hinder the distribution of aid and medical supplies. Rebels took up arms against the government in February 2003 to push for a larger share of power and Sudan's resources.
Amnesty said, "Two time bombs are ticking in Sudan in a countdown to disaster: the approaching rainy season, which means that by June many areas may be cut off from food and medical supplies from outside; and the danger that a complete collapse of the cease-fire will lead to an escalation of violations."
Attacks on villages, indiscriminate and deliberate killings of civilians, rape and lootings were continuing, Amnesty said.
Monitors from the African Union designated to investigate cease-fire violations were not in place, it added.
An official from the Sudan Liberation Army, one of the two main rebel groups, said Thursday that Arab militias from Darfur had crossed about six miles into Chad and attacked refugees and local villages.
Rebels and others accuse the government of arming the Arab militias, known locally as janjaweed, to loot and burn African villages. The government in Khartoum calls the militias outlaws.
"Unless the international community puts maximum pressure to ensure that the government militia are disarmed and removed from the region, the conflict will worsen and spread," Amnesty said.
Amnesty said most villages in Darfur had been destroyed.
United Nations officials have said the situation in Darfur is one of the world's worst crises, with more than 110,000 refugees camped in Chad.
The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees said in a statement on Friday that its emergency relocation operation in eastern Chad had so far moved 45,000 Sudanese refugees away from the insecure Chad-Sudan border. It said it hoped to move at least 60,000 by the start of the rainy season.
-------- britain
Britain to deploy up to 4,000 additional soldiers
LONDON DAILY TELEGRAPH
By Sean Rayment
May 02, 2004
http://www.washtimes.com/world/20040501-114207-4647r.htm
LONDON - Thousands of troops are to be sent to Iraq to take control of the Shi'ite holy city of Najaf in the largest expansion of British forces since the start of the war more than a year ago.
Up to 4,000 troops will begin arriving in Iraq in the next few weeks to plug the gap left by the 1,300 Spanish soldiers who were withdrawn from the country last week.
Prime Minister Tony Blair made the decision to send additional troops to Iraq after meeting President Bush at the White House two weeks ago.
The British government has refused to make an official announcement about the decision.
Defense officials have backed the deployment, but have warned the government that the army is fully stretched and would struggle to deal with any other international emergency requiring the use of troops.
Senior officers also have warned that the deployment of troops to Najaf and Kut, where heavy fighting recently has taken place, is likely to lead to extensive casualties.
Najaf, which contains the most important Shi'ite shrine in Iraq, is where the anticoalition cleric Sheik Muqtada al-Sadr spends most of his time.
The sheik's militia repeatedly has battled coalition troops, and the United States has said it wants to capture him dead or alive.
The British force will be composed of troops from the Royal Marine commandos, a parachute regiment battalion and an infantry battalion, as well as supporting elements from the artillery and logistics units.
The force will be lead by Brig. Jim Dutton, the commander of 3rd Commando Brigade, who also served during the war.
The first move toward deployment began Thursday when a strategic reconnaissance team of senior army officers from the Permanent Joint Headquarters, in Northwood, England, flew to Iraq.
It is understood that officers from 3rd Commando Brigade headquarters also will be flying out within the next week to conduct reconnaissance of the area.
The reconnaissance team will deliver its findings to Gen. John Reith, the chief of Joint Operations, who will brief Defense Secretary Geoff Hoon on the plan of action.
The first tranche of troops, either from the commandos or the Parachute Regiment, could arrive in Iraq within the next two weeks and take up the position left by the Spanish troops in Najaf.
At present, the area of Iraq south of Baghdad is divided into two military areas, commanded by multinational divisions. Multinational Division South East, which includes Basra, is commanded by Maj. Gen. Andrew Stewart and is where most of the British army's 7,500 troops are based.
The extra troops will deploy to the neighboring Multinational Division Central South, which is under Polish command and is where the Spanish troops were deployed.
The plan drawn up by senior British army officers will result in Central South divisional areas being brought under British command.
Although it is possible that other countries might offer to commit more troops to Iraq, U.S. generals have made it clear that their preferred option is for more British reinforcements.
The move will have a significant impact on the army's future domestic commitments, such as large-scale exercises and routine deployments to Northern Ireland.
However, the decision to send the troops is widely regarded as the least damaging option to both the security and stability of the U.S.-led coalition.
"Not sending troops was never really an option because of the message it would have sent to the rest of the coalition," a senior Defense Ministry official said. "It is difficult to predict how long these troops will have to remain in Iraq, but it won't be less than two years. This means that many troops, mainly from the infantry and logistical support units, will have to complete a six-month tour of duty in Iraq every 10 months. ..."
A spokesman for the Defense Ministry said plans for the deployment of troops had been drawn up, but added: "Formal decisions have not yet been made."
Twenty persons have been killed in Najaf, including soldiers from the United States and El Salvador, and more than 100 injured in fighting between troops and Sheik al-Sadr's militia.
The rebel cleric has warned coalition troops that they will face suicide attacks if they attack Najaf.
The United States has avoided an all-out offensive against Najaf for fear of antagonizing Iraqis.
U.S. troops killed 64 members of Sheik al-Sadr's militia in Kufa, a small town six miles to the northeast of Najaf on Monday night.
-------- business
Army exodus: SAS troops quit
By Frank Walker
May 2, 2004
The Sydney Morning Herald
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/05/01/1083224649510.html
Up to 40 members of the elite SAS force have quit the army since the regiment fought in Iraq, with some going back there as highly paid private security guards.
Australia's highly regarded SAS troopers can triple their pay overnight to $1500 a day by switching to the swelling private security forces in Iraq, and recruiters are hovering to snap them up.
The exit has left the Defence Force scrambling to cover the gaps left by the troops, who gained valuable experience in Iraq, Afghanistan and East Timor.
With one SAS soldier costing about $2 million in training and irreplaceable experience, the loss to Australia's defence capability is enormous.
There are 500 in the SAS regiment, but only 100 saw combat in Iraq. They left as soon as their job was finished and were replaced by 300 commandos.
Four SAS soldiers who fought in Iraq 12 months ago are back in the country working as private operators for AKE, a British-based international security group. Advertisement Advertisement
One veteran commanded a squad involved in heavy fighting in Iraq 12 months ago and was regarded as a huge loss to the regiment.
Paul Jordan, a former SAS trooper who runs AKE in Australia, said they took only SAS men as they were the best.
"We have 13 former Australian SAS guys in Iraq," he said. "We aren't poaching from the SAS. We only talk to troopers who have already put in their discharge papers."
But he conceded SAS soldiers knew they could walk into security jobs like AKE, where they could double or triple their income.
"The guys are in high demand," he said. "We take only lower ranks as they have been on the front line.
"The guys we take are all trained paramedics.
"They can liaise with coalition forces and the Iraqi locals to ensure our clients can do their job in safety."
The former SAS try to be invisible and don't brandish weapons openly like most private guards. They go unarmed if possible. Their weapon of choice is a pistol tucked into the back of the pants and an M4 assault rifle hidden nearby.
But former SAS working with AKE have twice had to pull out their concealed weapons to protect clients.
One operator had to fire to escape an ambush and saved two clients.
In the second incident, a car crammed with gun-toting Iraqis drew up beside two vehicles carrying a CNN news team and opened fire. Two local men were killed in the rear vehicle but the AKE operator in the first car returned fire. The Iraqi gunman fell and the Iraqi vehicle drove off.
The Australian Defence Force won't say how many troopers have left the SAS since the Iraq engagement, but sources close to the elite special forces regiment say it is about 40.
Former West Australian deputy commissioner for veterans affairs Jim Dalton, who has taken up the cases of injured SAS soldiers fighting for more compensation, said many SAS were leaving because of what they saw as a lack of government concern for injured SAS soldiers and their families.
-------- china
China uses navy to whip up patriotic banner and sway discontented HK public
HONG KONG (AFP)
May 02, 2004
http://www.spacewar.com/2004/040502035157.e8kbvr44.html
A show of Chinese naval strength in Hong Kong last week was part of a broader campaign to appeal to the territory's patriotism as it heads towards legislative elections that could see an upset by pro-democracy candidates, analysts said.
The visit by some 1,500 officers of the Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) Navy and a fleet of eight warships to mark the 55th anniversary of the navy task group came amid a growing row over democratic reforms in the former British colony.
It was the largest display of Chinese naval might in the territory since the 1997 handover from Britain, and was greeted by several hundred flag-waving supporters and an A-list of Chinese and Hong Kong officials, including chief executive Tung Che-hwa.
"The Chinese government is trying to whip up the banner of patriotism in order to consolidate the pro-Beijing forces in Hong Kong," said Hong Kong University political scientist Sonny Lo. "You can identify that it is a very-well orchestrated, united front strategy. They are appealing to the pro-Beijing community to vote for them over the democrats," he added.
September's legislative elections are crucial for Hong Kong's pro-Beijing camp as it tries to check a burgeoning democracy movement.
Since July last year Hong Kong has been rocked by a number of huge public protests over the pace of democratic reform.
Public anger towards Beijing was running high again last week after the National People's Congress in Beijing decided Monday to block direct elections for the city's leader in 2007 and the entire legislature in 2008, crushing hopes of early democracy.
No date was given when full democracy would be allowed although China has said its ultimate aim was to achieve universal suffrage, but in a "gradual and orderly" manner.
In a move that incensed the pro-democracy camp, Beijing also declared it had the final say over any political reforms in Hong Kong.
But Ivan Choy, another political analyst at the Hong Kong University, said China has to tread carefully given growing frustration in the territory. He said it was unlikely that efforts to win hearts and minds such as the naval visit would sway discontented voters away from the democrats.
"The mood in the society at the moment is quite confrontational," Choy said. "I don't know if the naval visit would be effective because Hong Kong is going through quite a sensitive period. Hong Kong people are quite frustrated and they will try to find all opportunities to express their grievance."
Public dissatisfaction with the Hong Kong government's handling of relations with the central authorities in Beijing is at its highest level since the 1997 handover from Britain, an opinion poll showed Wednesday.
Some were excited by last week's arrival of Chinese warships.
"I am proud of our country. I've never thought we have warships with such high quality. It gives me a sense of belongings," said 15-year-old student Simon Yeung.
But others weren't so easily swayed. In Hong Kong's financial district, 35-year-old banker Leung Chi-fai asked, "How would a few ships change our mind on how we see China?
"The damage has been done," he said.
----
Elections Make Inroads in China
Many Head to the Polls, but Vote's Impact Is Limited in Yunnan Province
By Edward Cody
Washington Post Foreign Service
Sunday, May 2, 2004; Page A24
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A59930-2004May1?language=printer
ZHONGJAI, China -- Ang Chenli, a sun-burnished peasant who farms a little more than three acres here on the lush hillsides of southwestern China, has voted twice in his 63 years, both times for the same candidate.
"I voted because I have the right to vote," he declared during a break from an afternoon of stacking straw in the barnyard of his ramshackle brick home. "And I voted for the man I like."
Ang, who has raised five children, has not seen his life or theirs transformed by the votes. He has continued to live in this village of 540 residents, earning a meager living in return for constant hard labor. But the votes -- first in 2000, then again last August -- have made Ang the face of a potentially significant development in China's timid experiment with political reform.
Across the 13,500 villages of Yunnan province, farmers allowed to cast ballots for their village leaders have turned out twice in heavy numbers, with more than 90 percent of those eligible voting both times, according to the provincial Civil Affairs Department. The participation level has made Yunnan an exception in the cautiously circumscribed village voting program that has been underway across China for 17 years.
China's Communist Party leadership has portrayed the nationwide village voting program as a first step toward eventual broader changes in the authoritarian, one-party system that has ruled the country since 1949. Democracy is the goal, party leaders have said, although without detailing what kind of democracy they have in mind and when it might begin.
In most areas, however, village elections have had limited practical impact -- and little promise for democracy to come -- because the winners end up with little real power. Party bosses have retained the final say in village affairs and often influence nominations in the first place. Moreover, elected village leaders have little if any autonomous funding to carry out decisions.
Estimates vary widely of the number of China's 700,000 villages that have actually held the elections as stipulated by a national program begun in 1987 and made into law in 1998. In those that do organize a vote, family ties and the local Communist Party secretary often mean more than the number of ballots cast.
In Yunnan province, too, the local party secretary has kept his role as ultimate authority, village and county leaders said. And voters have stuck with traditional leaders in some of the ethnic minority communities that make up a third of Yunnan's 43 million residents. But the level of participation and interest, in village affairs as well as the voting itself, suggest self-rule has entered the region's bloodstream in a way that the rest of China has yet to experience. What people say here about their villages, if applied to China's national leadership, would be a revolution.
"The head of our village should be chosen by us," said Wang Jiling, 33, who lives 200 yards down a stone alleyway from Ang in this hamlet 80 miles east of Kunming, the Yunnan capital. "Furthermore, we should pick the one who dares to speak out for us."
Not far from Wang's home, where a black goat strained at his tether and firewood lay stacked in the front yard, a chalkboard affixed to a stone wall laid out the village finances: so much in, so much out. As stipulated in provincial regulations, the village committee leader and his local representative had posted the results of their administration for villagers to scrutinize. Any complaints about where the money went are received in mandatory, twice-monthly meetings, officials said.
Yang Jianneng, who heads the village committee in Haiyi, which encompasses tiny Zhongjai, said he has not faced any serious challenges over finances yet, except for the time an aide inadvertently dropped a zero when writing accounts on the chalkboard. But residents of another Yunnan village were so suspicious that they organized a recall soon after the first election and voted in new leadership, according to Jiang Li, whose Grass Roots Governance and Community Development section at the provincial Civil Affairs Department trains committee members.
Yang, 56, whose family farms tobacco and corn, said his authority has also been strengthened in other areas. Villagers were satisfied enough with his administration that they voted him in for a second three-year term in August, with 824 ballots out of 1,300 cast, he said.
Yang has had ample practice running Haiyi and its six satellite villages. For years before voting began here, he was the resident representative of the Shi Lin County government. The difference now, he said, is that his influence has grown because voters selected him.
"The three most important people in the village are the party secretary, me and him," he said, pointing to his deputy, Li Shejian, 38, who runs a small pharmacy.
Yang said the village committee, working from past rules handed down from county and township authorities, has elaborated a "mini-constitution" to regulate village life, including the committee's operations. One regulation stipulates that anyone caught pilfering an eggplant must pay a fine ranging from 6 to 12 cents.
"This year there have been very few such thieves," Yang said.
Yang, whose committee shares its headquarters with the local Communist Party committee, said he and his fellow committee members consult with the party secretary on all important matters, the understanding being that the party provides leadership and clout when it comes time to solicit funds from the county, township or provincial governments. Since he was elected, for instance, Yang said three miles of new roads have been built, with $36,500 in revenue from village enterprises such as the movie theater and $48,800 provided by the national and provincial governments.
"If you talk about our relations with the party secretary, the party leads the committee," said Shi Liang, 50, who heads Puzi Village, 55 miles southeast of Kunming. "But if you talk about the work we do, it is done in harmony."
Ma Juli, a social welfare professor at Yunnan University who has spent the last three years researching and consulting on village voting, said party secretaries usually head a separate committee that organizes a primary election in which village candidates are chosen before the main vote. Villagers nevertheless can nominate whom they please, sometimes producing several runoff votes before a majority is reached, Jiang noted.
Shi said his success in the elections -- he, too, was reelected to a second term in August -- has given him broad authority over Puzi's 5,721 residents. People fighting over land come to him, he said, as do families fighting over who should take care of their elderly relatives. Even suggestions on what to plant are welcomed by the farmers of Puzi, he said.
"This year's recommendation is for more pigs, more lotus roots and more tobacco," Shi explained.
Not all Puzi residents have joined the movement. Gao Jiaomin, 30, interviewed after he drove up on his motorbike, said he did not vote last August because "I don't care about that very much."
The village committee has done good work for the village, he said, but a little grease is necessary to get what you need: "You know, sometimes you still have to give them gifts or money to get things done."
Ma ascribed Yunnan's high participation level in part to a strong identification with villages among a population that lives largely in rural and often remote areas. Moreover, he said, provincial government officials such as Jiang have been particularly vigorous in propagandizing about the virtues of voting.
"They took the orders from Beijing seriously," he said. "It's not like that everywhere."
Many Communist Party, county and township officials across China demonstrated reluctance to foster the village voting program for fear it could place real power into the hands of village committees and displace their own, Ma said. To a certain degree, this was true of Yunnan as well, he noted, but the provincial party secretary at the time the program started in 2000 was a strong advocate, reducing the chances of obstruction.
Jiang, 38, said Yunnan began organizing village elections well behind China's other provinces. The reason, she said, was that Beijing officials feared the province's strong minority population and geography -- it shares 1,600 miles of border with Burma, Laos and Vietnam -- made stability a problem. But one result, she added, was that Yunnan benefited from others' mistakes.
"It's not all bad to be late," she said.
In addition, Yunnan has been particularly open to foreign observers and advisers. Foreign groups have been attracted to Yunnan because the program is still new and susceptible to change, Jiang said.
"We are a clean slate," she said. "You can start fresh here."
A program run by the International Republican Institute, a group affiliated with the U.S. Republican Party that promotes democracy abroad, advised on setting up the voting. The University of Oslo helped establish a training program for elected villagers that Jiang described as particularly effective. And the European Union recently has begun a program to help evaluate how things are going.
-------- europe
EU expansion reshapes future of Europe
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
By Louis R. Golino
May 02, 2004
http://www.washtimes.com/world/20040501-113136-2847r.htm
The largest enlargement of the European Union in its history, which formally took place yesterday, is an important geopolitical development that should be of considerable interest to Americans, specialists on Europe say.
Ten countries joined the 15 existing European Union member-states to form an economic, political and military bloc with a combined population of 450 million people and an economy that produces one-quarter of the world's annual output.
The new members include eight Central European countries - the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovenia and Slovakia - plus Malta and the southern Greek-Cypriot part of Cyprus. Their inclusion is widely expected to help shape the future character of the European Union, how it governs itself, and the world role it pursues. It is also seen as an affirmation of their European identity and of their break with a communist past.
To qualify for membership, these countries had to enact thousands of pages of EU laws, treaties and regulations over the past decade. Their accession to the European Union, experts say, is a historic achievement not just for themselves and Europe, but also for the United States. That is because a unified European continent is a long-standing goal of American policy pursued by every U.S. administration since that of President Harry S. Truman.
In addition, most of the new members are close allies of the United States. For example, Poland, the new EU member-state with the largest population and economy, currently supports the U.S. mission in Iraq by commanding a multinational division deployed to the south-central region of that country.
According to Radek Sikorski, director of the New Atlantic Initiative at the American Enterprise Institute and a former deputy foreign and defense minister of Poland: "The inclusion of countries that were isolated, impoverished, and politically transformed by half a century of Nazi and communist totalitarianism will change Europe - economically, politically and above all culturally - in ways its politicians have not yet begun to comprehend."
Trans-Atlantic magazine
Anticipating wider interest in the new Europe, especially among Americans of European descent, the Center for Transatlantic Relations in Washington recently launched a new bimonthly magazine called TransAtlantic: Europe, America and the World. It is designed primarily for the nonspecialist reader.
The Center for Transatlantic Relations is part of the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins University, commonly referred to as SAIS. It is also the coordinating office of the American Consortium of European Union Studies - a partnership comprising Johns Hopkins and four other Washington-area universities.
Funded by the European Commission, the EU's executive branch, the Consortium is recognized as one of a select number of centers for the study of the European Union. It and the SAIS center were established to promote increased awareness of Europe and European-American relations and to address gaps in the study of Europe in the United States, such as the need for more policy relevancy and interdisciplinary work.
Europeans frequently point out that most Americans do not have a very solid understanding of what is happening in Europe, and especially of how the European Union functions. But specialists on Europe explain that the European Union is such a unique and complicated geopolitical entity that even they sometimes have trouble following all the intricacies of its politics and bureaucracy.
They also say that U.S. government officials tend to focus primarily on bilateral relations with their European counterparts, even though key decisions are increasingly being made by supranational EU institutions such as the European Commission.
Drifting apart?
To help Americans stay informed on developments in Europe, SAIS decided to publish Transatlantic magazine. The publisher of the magazine and the director of the SAIS center is Daniel Hamilton, who is also Richard von Weizsacker professor at SAIS and executive director of the Consortium. Mr. Von Weizsacker is a former president of Germany.
Mr. Hamilton is a former senior U.S. government official who served most recently as deputy assistant secretary of state for European affairs, with responsibility for NATO and trans-Atlantic security issues, during the Clinton administration.
According to the conventional wisdom, Europe and America are drifting apart. But Mr. Hamilton maintains that the two societies are actually colliding with each other.
He argues that Europe and the United States are so intertwined that there is "a quasi-domestic" relationship between them, and that the resulting frictions "affect such fundamental domestic issues as the ways Americans and Europeans are taxed, how our societies are governed, and how our economies are regulated."
Mr. Hamilton said he hopes the new magazine will help promote increased trust and understanding between the two sides of the Atlantic in the aftermath of their deep rift over Iraq.
Specialists say that trans-Atlantic relations descended to their lowest level since World War II over the recent Iraq war, but that in the period since President Bush declared the end of major combat operations on May 1, 2003, ties between the United States and Europe have generally been on the mend.
For example, in recent months the trans-Atlantic allies have discussed how to promote democracy in the greater Middle East region, although that effort, specialists say, remains clouded by historic differences between the United States and Europe over the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and by the desire of Arab countries to provide greater influence on democratization plans.
The Iraq coalition
Meanwhile, the Bush administration has been working to further internationalize the stabilization force in Iraq with more troop contributions from other countries and by making it a NATO operation or otherwise increasing NATO's role in Iraq.
The alliance currently provides logistical and other support to the Polish-led multinational force of 9,500 troops deployed to south-central Iraq that includes 2,400 Polish soldiers.
France and Germany, among other European countries, have said they will not send troops to Iraq unless that deployment is authorized by the U.N. Security Council and requested by a sovereign Iraqi government. Specialists also say that NATO is unlikely to assume a greater role in Iraq unless those conditions are met.
In addition, the recent deterioration of the military situation in Iraq has highlighted the risks facing troops sent there and decreased the chances for greater internationalization of the U.S.-led coalition.
That has created strains in the coalition because countries such as Poland face strong domestic pressures to withdraw their troops from Iraq. A number of countries have already done so. For example, the new Spanish government recently withdrew 1,300 troops deployed to the same sector of Iraq controlled by the Polish-led force, while considering plans to increase its deployment of peacekeepers to Afghanistan.
Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden recently issued a taped message offering a truce with European countries that withdraw from Muslim nations. The offer was widely seen as an effort to split the international coalition against terrorism, and specifically Europe from the United States. It was immediately rejected by European officials who stressed, as do American officials, that they never negotiate with terrorists.
Fight against terrorism
After the September 11, 2001, attacks, European governments pledged their unlimited solidarity with Americans and stepped up their cooperation with the United States in the fight against terrorism. They also deployed significant combat and peace-enforcement troops to Afghanistan.
However, specialists say, over time the war on terrorism has emerged as a source of tension in trans-Atlantic relations, mostly because of differences between the United States and Europe over how to define and respond to terrorism.
Europeans have played a significant role in the war on terrorism, but tend to disagree with the concept of a global war against it. They place somewhat greater emphasis than do Americans on addressing the root socioeconomic and political causes of terrorism. They also view the war in Iraq as a development that is fueling terrorism, rather than making their countries more secure.
After the March 11 terrorist attacks in Madrid, EU countries bolstered their anti-terrorism strategy by appointing a terrorism-policy czar. They also pledged to cooperate more closely with each other and with the United States, and to fully implement steps they agreed to take after the September 11 attacks, such as an European Union-wide arrest warrant.
According to Tomas Valasek, director of the liberal Center for Defense Information's Brussels office, U.S.-European differences over Iraq "now threaten cooperation on essential parts of the campaign against perpetrators of terrorism."
"The challenge now is to disentangle opposition to Iraq from cooperation on terrorism; to restate the definition of the causes and nature of terrorism, and to agree on basic principles."
Mr. Valasek added that "the reality is, the West is far stronger together than divided" and that "neither side is able to deal with terrorism effectively without aid from its allies."
"This is particularly true of the intelligence and investigative dimensions of the campaign, and in cases where the use of hard military power might be required."
Mr. Hamilton of SAIS has called the U.S.-European relationship the core of the global fight against terrorism.
Newsletter successor
U.S.-European cooperation on terrorism is one of the key themes that will be covered in SAIS' TransAtlantic magazine. The publication's editor in chief is Robert J. Guttman, a senior fellow at the SAIS center run by Mr. Hamilton. Mr. Guttman previously served as head of publications for the European Commission office in Washington and was editor in chief of Europe magazine.
Europe magazine, first published as a newsletter in 1954, was the official magazine of the European Union. It was published by the Delegation of the European Commission to the United States until January 2003. Mr. Guttman explained that after learning that the European Commission had decided to stop funding Europe magazine, he came up with the idea of publishing a new magazine that would have "more of a focus on U.S. foreign policy towards Europe, as well as news from Europe and the European Union."
He described the new publication as a nonpartisan forum for discussion on the leading issues of the day in Europe and the United States, and said it will feature articles and interviews on such topics as European integration, Middle East peace, and social and cultural trends in Europe.
Mr. Guttman said the main goal of TransAtlantic is "to keep Americans informed of what is happening in Europe during some of the more troubled times in trans-Atlantic relations."
--------
Eastern Europeans mark milestone in post-Soviet evolution
May 02, 2004
ASSOCIATED PRESS
By William J. Kole
http://www.washtimes.com/world/20040501-113215-3981r.htm
PRAGUE - Revelers across ex-communist Eastern Europe celebrated their historic entry to the European Union yesterday amid scattered protests by demonstrators decrying a loss of national sovereignty.
The overall jubilation differed sharply from May Days under communism, when people were forced to march in parades carrying banners picturing Soviet Union founder Vladimir Lenin and Soviet flags and listen to dreary speeches by party apparatchiks.
Former Czech President Vaclav Havel, the playwright who led the Velvet Revolution that ended communist rule in 1989, said enlargement would help his countrymen become "self-confident citizens of Europe."
Czechs awoke yesterday as members of a bloc "that is not a result of wars, that is not based on the violent domination of some over others, but which was born, evolves, strengthens and expands out of the free will of European nations," Mr. Havel said.
The EU swelled from 15 nations to 25 by taking in the former communist states of the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia, along with the Mediterranean nations of Cyprus (the Greek half) and Malta.
Together, they boost the EU's population to 450 million.
Ireland, which holds the EU's rotating presidency, kicked off a "Day of Welcomes" with festivities ranging from Slovak folk dancing in Cork to a Hungarian poetry reading in Sligo to a banquet of Eastern European delicacies in the streets of Dublin.
Spirits were high across most of the region, where hundreds of thousands were celebrating their countries' return to the European mainstream 15 years after shaking off communism.
In Hungary, the government served breakfast on Budapest's signature Chain Bridge for 500 children born on May 1 since Hungary returned to democracy in 1990.
Thousands of people in Prague attended concerts held on 10 islands in the Vltava River to symbolize the 10 EU newcomer nations.
In Poland, President Aleksander Kwasniewski repeatedly wiped away tears as an orchestra played the national and EU anthems before breakfast for 2,000 guests in the gardens of Warsaw's Royal Castle, the former seat of Polish kings.
Not everyone celebrated. Anarchists in the Czech Republic and nationalists in Poland protested the expansion.
--------
Germany to shorten missions abroad, take guards off US bases
BERLIN (AFP)
May 02, 2004
http://www.spacewar.com/2004/040502105411.flfq0jcd.html
Germany will shorten the length of its troop missions abroad and stop guarding US bases on its soil by the end of the year, Defence Minister Peter Struck said in an interview published Sunday.
The German military, the Bundeswehr, has more troops deployed abroad as peacekeepers and in the fight against terrorism than any country apart from the United States, but it is currently undergoing massive cost-cutting reforms.
"We will reduce the duration of international missions from six months to four months in the second half of the year," Struck told the weekly Welt am Sonntag newspaper.
Germany has some 7,700 soldiers deployed on foreign operations: around 2,000 with the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan; 4,900 troops in Kosovo and Bosnia; 250 in the Horn of Africa and others on smaller missions.
"At the end of the year, we want to stop the German federal armed forces guarding American military bases," Struck also told the newspaper.
The US defence department is currently studying a "base re-alignment and closure" (BRAC) programme aimed at redeploying troop bases around the world so Washington can react quickly to new military threats.
A number of bases are likely to close in Germany and tens of thousands of troops move out of the country, probably to central and eastern Europe.
Some 2,500 German personnel guard around 100 US military facilities in Germany, and the Bundeswehr has been protecting the bases since January 2003, when it became clear that Washington was going to attack Iraq.
Earlier this year, Struck announced a sweeping reform of the armed forces that foresees 26 billion euros (32 billion dollars) in military spending cuts in the coming years.
At the heart of the reforms is a planned reduction of 35,000 troops in the army's manpower to 250,000 by 2010, but with a core element capable of rapid deployment abroad.
-------- iraq
Italian hostages 'sitting ducks' after US troops disarmed them
02/05/2004
By Colin Freeman in Baghdad and Bruce Johnston in Rome
UK Telegraph
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/05/02/wduck02.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/05/02/ixnewstop.html
The four Italian security guards kidnapped in Iraq had their personal protection weapons confiscated by American soldiers just hours before they were seized by suspected rebels, colleagues have revealed.
According to Paolo Simeoni, the former leader of their security team, soldiers manning a checkpoint in one of Baghdad's most dangerous districts confiscated their three high-powered assault rifles and two pistols.
Breaking his silence about the incident, Mr Simeoni said the Americans claimed that the Italians had flouted gun permit rules. The soldiers issued a receipt so that the arms could be collected at a later date.
The men, who had been on their way back to Italy, were forced to return to their hotel and search for substitute weapons. They managed to find just a single machine pistol and two handguns, which friends fear left them vulnerable to their attackers.
One of the hostages, Fabrizio Quattrocchi, was executed by the kidnappers, an Iraqi Islamist group, two days after the men were captured, on April 12. His death was videotaped and the plight of the three remaining captives continues to cause intense public anguish in Italy. Yesterday, a statement sent to the Arabic television station al-Jazeera, purporting to be from the Islamic group, said that the three men would not be harmed. The kidnappers supposedly said they had been swayed by a 6,000-strong peace march at the Vatican in Rome on Thursday in which the men's families pleaded for their release.
In Rome, an adviser to the Italian government said that the authorities were keen to question Mr Simeoni as he was considered "the key to understanding what really happened". "This man is not technically being sought, as he would be if in Italian territory,' he said. "But the Italian authorities have not heard from him since the incident. Let's not forget that a man has been killed, and an inquiry has been opened by Italian magistrates in Genoa."
Last night Mr Simeoni, 32, told The Sunday Telegraph that the receipt for the guns from the Americans was in his possession. "My colleagues were driving home from Baghdad to Jordan that morning when they came across a checkpoint manned by US soldiers," he said.
"We do not know exactly why the soldiers confiscated the weapons. The Iraqi interior ministry does not issue weapons permits to Westerners - they say that normally all you need to do is show an ID card, such as a passport. All my men had Italian passports on them, and Fabrizio had a pass for the Coalition Provisional Authority headquarters in Baghdad's Green Zone. Normally that is more than enough proof that they were working in security for the coalition, but in this case the soldiers wouldn't accept it."
The kidnappers pounced as the Italians drove along Highway 10, the main road leading from Baghdad to Jordan which passes through the lawless area around Fallujah.
"Four men with powerful assault rifles in a car might have stood a chance against these guys," said one security consultant who used to employ the men. "Four men with just one MP5 and a couple of pistols between them would probably not have."
Mr Simeoni's revelations come amid growing criticism from the estimated 12,000 private security guards in Iraq that US-led forces are not doing enough to protect them. Many say that coalition troops refuse to come to their aid if they are attacked, yet prevent them carrying heavier weapons to defend themselves.
Technically, foreign security staff must have a weapons permit with a serial number that matches the gun they are carrying. The rules are normally relaxed, however, for Western security guards, who are waved through checkpoints.
"If they had been British or American, I think it would have been fine," Mr Simeoni claimed. "It may be that because they were Italians and their English was not quite perfect, the soldiers did not trust them."
Mr Simeoni believes that his men were the victims of a well-planned ambush, and admits that more powerful weapons may not have saved them. "I think it had something to do with the taxi drivers who took them out, that they led them into a trap," he said. "But I am still angry that the US army just took their weapons away from them like that - these were professional security people and doing that put them in immediate risk."
He said that he had talked to Italian officials in Iraq after the incident. The government adviser said that only one of the kidnapped men, Salvatore Stefio, had adequate experience in foreign security. "If the Italians had acted professionally, they would never have made the journey in the first place," he said. Last night, the Italian foreign ministry refused to comment on the disclosures.
A US Army official said: "We are still investigating this matter and cannot comment further."
----
'We Won': Fallujah Rejoices in Withdrawal
By Rajiv Chandrasekaran and Naseer Nouri
Washington Post Foreign Service
Sunday, May 2, 2004; Page A01
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A59357-2004May1?language=printer
FALLUJAH, Iraq, May 1 -- Covering their faces with checkered head scarves, militiamen loyal to a former Iraqi army general jubilantly took to the streets of this battle-scarred city Saturday to celebrate what they called a triumph over withdrawing U.S. Marines.
As the militiamen drove through Fallujah in trucks and congregated on deserted street corners, residents flashed V-for-victory signs and mosques broadcast celebratory messages proclaiming triumph over the Americans.
Although the militiamen were scheduled to take over checkpoints and patrol duties from Marine units Friday, many of those tasks appeared to go unfulfilled Saturday. Several of the militiamen, clad in street clothes and toting battered AK-47 rifles, said they were still waiting for orders from their commanders. But as they waited, many said their first priority was to rejoice.
"We won," said one of the militiamen, a former soldier who gave his name only as Abu Abdullah, meaning the father of Abdullah. "We didn't want the Americans to enter the city and we succeeded."
A few miles away at the headquarters of the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force, Lt. Gen. James T. Conway, the top Marine commander in Iraq, also praised the turn of events in Fallujah. He told reporters that the new Iraqi force, which he authorized in an effort to quell insurgent activity, "marked the formation of a military partnership that has the potential to bring a lasting, durable climate of peace and stability."
A senior U.S. military official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said the Marine command was not alarmed by the gleeful reaction in the city. Of more significance, the official said, is whether the militiamen will succeed in restoring security to a level sufficient enough for U.S. troops to enter the city without being attacked.
"If we can drive into town shoulder to shoulder with legitimate Iraqi authorities and we can go down and start delivering humanitarian aid . . . to a city that has been left in the cold for the last year, that's our victory," the official said. "Owning a rubbled city gets us nowhere."
In Baghdad, the chief spokesman for the U.S. military command in Iraq, Army Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt, told the Agence France-Presse news service that the U.S-led occupation authority and the Iraqi Defense Ministry had not endorsed the Iraqi general selected by Conway to lead the force in Fallujah. Kimmitt said Conway's choice, former Maj. Gen. Jassim Mohammed Saleh, would undergo a full background check.
Saleh, who is from Fallujah but had been living in Baghdad, served as the commanding general of the Iraqi army's 38th Infantry Division before the U.S. administrator of Iraq, L. Paul Bremer, dissolved the Iraqi army almost a year ago. Earlier in his military career, Saleh served in the Republican Guard, an elite branch of the army used at times to suppress internal dissent by former president Saddam Hussein.
"I would suspect that the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force doesn't have access to all the background information on General Saleh or any of the other leadership" of the new force in Fallujah, Kimmitt told Agence France-Presse. "It will be important for all of the leaders to go through a vetting and approval process conducted by the ministry of defense and the coalition."
Conway said his staff had already vetted the leaders of the new force, which the Marines are calling the 1st Battalion of the Fallujah Brigade. The senior military official said the Marines "ran their names though databases -- both military and nonmilitary services of the U.S. government and nothing detrimental came up."
"Most of these guys may not be squeaky clean, but they're pretty clean," Conway said.
Saleh's force is supposed to grow to as many as 1,100 men by midweek, Conway said. Saleh has already assembled 300 men and intended to double that figure by Monday. But members of the force said that only 160 participants had been selected, all of them officers.
Several participants said other members would be chosen by the officers and would consist largely of people from the officers' neighborhoods. It was not clear whether participants would be required to be former Iraqi soldiers, as Marine commanders have said. It also appeared unlikely that individual members would be screened by the Marine command, which has the names of only a half-dozen leaders of the force.
Conway acknowledged that some of the participants would be people who fought against his Marines over the past month. "We think that some of them were inside the city and prepared to defend the city," he said.
But Conway said he would not allow in people with "blood on their hands," nor would he "make any deals with hard-core elements inside the city," including foreign fighters. He said the new force would pursue the foreign fighters.
"They understand our view that these people must be killed or captured," he said.
As they conduct those operations, Conway said members of the new force would have to abide by the same rules of engagement and laws of warfare used by U.S. troops. But he also said the force would not need to obtain U.S. approval to conduct missions. Instead, the general said, the force would operate similarly to military units from other nations, which have significant autonomy in their areas of responsibility and report directly to regional commanders such as Conway.
Inside Fallujah, however, members of the new force -- who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they said they were under orders not to talk to reporters -- expressed more desire to negotiate with the foreign fighters than to battle them.
"The resistance will not fight us. They will not shoot at us," said a former army colonel who stood next to seven other militiamen, their faces covered by scarves. Instead of confronting them, the former colonel said he expected many of the foreign fighters to leave Fallujah and conduct operations in other parts of Iraq. Military officials estimate that there are 200 foreign fighters in the city.
The senior military official said the migration of foreign militants out of Fallujah was the top concern of Marine commanders. But he added, "They're more vulnerable now that you got them on the run."
The former colonel and other members of the new force said the key to restoring security in the city was not more raids or checkpoints but the exclusion of U.S. forces. "If the American army doesn't enter the city, nobody will shoot at them," the former colonel said.
But Conway said the pullback of Marine units from positions in the city did not mean Marines would avoid the city in the future. He said he planned -- as a test of the ability of the new forces to restore order -- to have Marines drive into the city in the coming days.
Two Marine units -- the 1st Battalion, 5th Marine Regiment, and the 2nd Battalion, 2nd Marine Regiment -- withdrew from their positions in the southern part of Fallujah on Friday. The 1st Battalion had moved back to a base about five miles from the city, while the 2nd Battalion has moved south of the city. Two other battalions remain to the north and east of Fallujah. Their movement away from city will depend on improvements in security, the officials said.
Meanwhile, attacks against U.S. soldiers and foreign contractors working for the occupation authority continued unabated following the bloodiest month for U.S. forces since President Bush declared an end to major combat operations in Iraq a year ago.
One U.S. soldier and two contractors were killed Saturday in separate attacks near the northern city of Mosul, while another U.S. soldier died of wounds sustained in a roadside bombing a day earlier. The military also announced Saturday that two U.S. sailors were killed the day before in an attack in Anbar province in western Iraq. Sailors are sometimes used for logistics or hospital work.
In Najaf, the southern shrine city, the standoff between U.S. forces and a firebrand cleric, Moqtada Sadr, paused while a delegation of tribal leaders and police arranged a temporary truce.
Sadr, who is wanted by U.S. forces on murder charges, commands a militia known as the Mahdi Army, which has controlled Najaf and the adjoining city of Kufa for weeks. U.S. forces encircling the area are seeking to avoid a military confrontation in a city holy to Iraq's Shiite majority after weeks of sporadic fighting. The truce, reportedly for three days, will allow talks to continue.
Correspondents Sewell Chan and Scott Wilson in Baghdad contributed to this report.
----
US marines reset their big guns around Fallujah
CAMP FALLUJAH, Iraq (AFP)
May 02, 2004
http://www.spacewar.com/2004/040502130540.tovw7c40.html
Artillery fire shook this dusty military base outside Fallujah Sunday as US marines realigned their big guns after leaving some of their positions in the flashpoint city.
A dozen explosions echoed across the marine base as artillery gunners fired 155 mm Howitzers cannons to ensure the accuracy of their targeting, said Major T.V. Johnson.
"They are realigning the guns as the troops shift positions," said Johnson, a spokesman for the 1st Marine Expeditionary Unit.
He said the exercise would ensure the troops on the ground can rapidly call for back-up fire if they come under attack from "the bad guys."
Since Friday, the marines who have besieged Fallujah for almost a month, have been gradually moving back from positions around the city to allow a new Iraqi force, the Fallujah Brigade, to take over security duties.
----
For White House, Reversed Iraq Tactics Are Billed as Bumps on Road to Peace
May 2, 2004
By RICHARD W. STEVENSONand DAVID E. SANGER
The New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/02/international/middleeast/02DIPL.html?hp=&pagewanted=all&position=
WASHINGTON, May 1 - Two months before its self-imposed deadline to give Iraqis limited power to run their country, the Bush administration is showing an increased willingness to reverse or alter elements of its occupation tactics, and a new hesitation to engage in military confrontations that could inflame the Iraqis, government officials say.
Always reluctant to acknowledge publicly that events are not unfolding as expected, President Bush's senior aides are characterizing the moves as course corrections en route to an unchanging goal, even if they involve scrapping or rewriting plans that the White House or the head of the American occupation in Iraq, L. Paul Bremer III, announced months ago.
The new tactics include ceding substantial power to the United Nations to pull together a transitional government; easing the ban on Baath Party members in the new government; and reopening the question of whether the United States should have disbanded the Iraqi Army.
Pressed to explain the changes, a senior administration official who is playing a central role told reporters on Friday, "I'm not going to look in the rear-view mirror here," adding that the focus now was on making the transfer of sovereignty work.
"We have a strategy and we have a plan and we are doing our best to implement it," the official said. "And it runs into bumps in the road, as all plans do."
Presented with a short list of the most notable recent reversals - the abandonment of Mr. Bremer's plan for the transfer of power; the pullback from declarations that Moktada al-Sadr, the renegade Shiite leader in Najaf, must be arrested or killed; a last-minute decision to allow former Iraqi Army soldiers to quell the insurgency in Falluja - the official shrugged.
Academic historians, he said, will have to consider those issues.
Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld has made similar points.
"It's never been an easy road to go from a dictatorship to a free system," he said Thursday in an interview with MSNBC. "It's bumpy. It's hard. And it isn't going to be a straight path."
But in Iraq, even military officers who support the president's broad goals say the administration seems to be reaching for any proposals that promise to bring calm by June 30. From the military to the State Department, where many feel frozen out of a strategy developed largely at the White House and in the Pentagon, officials say Mr. Bush and his aides badly underestimated what it would take to pacify Iraq, and have stubbornly refused to admit that mistake.
In his weekly radio address on Saturday, the anniversary of his declaration that major combat operations were over in Iraq, Mr. Bush said the United States and its allies were "implementing a clear strategy in Iraq."
He said that strategy was built first on establishing an "atmosphere of security" throughout Iraq, a goal that would involve supporting "the efforts of local Iraqis to negotiate the disarmament of the radicals in Falluja," and following through on demands that insurgents in Najaf disarm.
The willingness to shift direction, even at the risk of appearing to grasp for solutions, was particularly evident over the past week as the White House grappled with how to deal with insurgents holed up in Falluja. When President Bush convened a videoconference of his national security team last Saturday from Camp David, the Pentagon was on the verge of mounting an all-out assault there.
But at that meeting the administration decided to hold off and try conducting joint patrols with Iraqi security forces. Days later that plan was abruptly dropped, replaced by an agreement to allow a former Iraqi Army major general to intercede in Falluja with a reconstituted battalion of his own.
The White House said the changes were prudent attempts to avoid house-to-house combat and the enraged reaction that would no doubt have brought throughout the Arab world.
Critics said the changes were evidence of floundering by an administration that had failed to plan for or acknowledge the difficult reality of occupying and rebuilding a hostile and devastated nation.
Though Mr. Bush has held fast to the June 30 date to transfer a limited measure of self-government to Iraqis, he has shown a willingness to recalibrate or jettison many of the policies he had set out to get there.
After initially keeping the United Nations largely on the sidelines, Mr. Bush is now relying heavily on it to build a transitional government. Since last fall, he has abandoned or substantially reshaped most of the major elements of his proposal for drafting a constitution and holding elections.
The chief United Nations adviser responsible for Iraq, Lakhdar Brahimi, is to return to the country next week to find candidates to run the transitional government, including a president, a prime minister and more than a score of technocrats, and the administration is giving him wide discretion.
Administration officials said that the White House had always wanted the United Nations to play a real role in Iraq, but that the United Nations pulled out after an attack last summer, and had sought maximum flexibility by insisting that it not be tied to too many specific responsibilities.
Where the United States has changed policy, it has most often been at the behest of the Iraqis, as they sought more power over their own future, White House officials said.
The moves by the administration to keep the insurgency from derailing the transfer of authority have focused new attention on many of the assumptions used and policies set over the last year by Mr. Bush and Mr. Bremer.
It was Mr. Bremer who decided to disband the Iraqi Army, saying that after it melted away, there was very little to preserve. He turned the purge of Baath Party members over to Ahmad Chalabi, a prominent Iraqi exile leader who is now publicly opposing many American policies. The purges excluded many of the Baathists who had skills vital to reconstituting a viable government.
Mr. Bremer, according to some disaffected officials here and in Iraq, also underestimated the influence among the Shiite majority of the Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, and failed to head off the violent threat posed by Mr. Sadr, the cleric whose forces are currently surrounded by occupation troops in Najaf.
The administration at first believed it could convince the Kurds in northern Iraq to accept the presence of Turks as peacekeepers. But that failed, and Washington had to disinvite the Turks from playing that role.
Mr. Bremer and his team spend most of their time within what amounts to a security fortress, leaving them, in the view of some American officials who have served there, dangerously cut off from Iraqi popular opinion and the reality of life in that country.
"For me, all these changes reflect the continuation of a lack of understanding of the political dynamics in Iraq," said one administration official who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the political and diplomatic sensitivities involved. "There's been this inability from the beginning to look at the various groups in Iraq and see the complexities."
At a time when polls suggest that the public is increasingly wary of involvement in Iraq and upset by the mounting death toll of American troops there, Mr. Bush reiterated in his radio address on Saturday that the United States would make good on its commitment to bring peace and stability.
"As the transfer of sovereignty approaches on June 30, we are likely to see more violence from groups opposed to freedom," he said. "We will not be intimidated or diverted. On July 1 and beyond, our reconstruction and military commitment will continue."
Mr. Bush's change in tactics have prompted criticism - some of it partisan - that his drive to transfer sovereignty has more to do with showing voters at home that he has an exit strategy than with what would be best in the long run for Iraq.
Mr. Bush's Democratic opponent in the presidential race, Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts, has seized on the reversals and policy modifications to argue that Mr. Bush has come around to tactics that Mr. Kerry embraced more than a year ago.
Mr. Kerry's chief foreign policy adviser, Rand Beers, a former official of the National Security Council, said in an interview on Friday, "I think that the fact that the administration has moved in the direction that we have advocated for so long reflects the reality of the situation on the ground."
Other critics said that administration officials had expected an unrealistically warm reception from Iraqis during the occupation, that they had put too much stock in the opinions of Iraqi exiles who turned out not to represent the broad strains of Iraqi public opinion, and that they had not fully appreciated the deep divisions between Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds.
"Whatever the plan was, there would have had to be constant improvisation and adaptation," said Anthony Cordesman, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. "But the fact is the administration went into this war with something approaching a fantasy world."
White House officials said that the administration had done far more than it had got credit for to prepare for what would come after the ouster of Saddam Hussein, and that it had succeeded in averting any humanitarian crisis or substantial disruption to Iraq's oil-producing capabilities.
There is little question that the administration did not expect the intensity or the duration of the violence in Iraq, and that the insurgency has slowed much of the reconstruction work.
"The security situation is of paramount importance," said one White House official. "It effects many different things in Iraq. So to the extent you have an increase in violence in Iraq, it causes people to focus very closely on that issue and how to better address it."
John F. Burns contributed reporting from Baghdad for this article and Steven R. Weisman from Washington.
--------
As a New Iraqi Force Goes to Work in Falluja,
Questions Arise About Its Leader's Record
May 2, 2004
By JOHN KIFNER
The New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/02/international/middleeast/02IRAQ.html
FALLUJA, Iraq, May 1 - The new Marine-approved Iraqi force began taking up positions on Saturday on a few quiet street corners in this embattled city amid reports that some residents were celebrating its arrival as a victory over the Americans.
But the past record of the man chosen to lead the force - a commander in Saddam Hussein's feared Republican Guard - appeared to be raising questions in the American command, which has appeared somewhat confused over the sudden turnabout here in which old enemies have become new allies.
Although some officials in the Pentagon told reporters on Friday that Maj. Gen. Jasim Muhammad Saleh had not been a member of the Republican Guard, intelligence and other Marine officers here reconfirmed their own Friday comments that General Saleh had been a ranking officer in the Republican Guard, one of the special units close to Saddam Hussein, before being named to command the Iraqi Army's 38th Infantry Division.
Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt, the chief military spokesman for the Coalition Provisional Authority in Baghdad, said the authority and the new Iraqi Ministry of Defense would have to investigate General Saleh's background, including whether he had been in the Republican Guard.
"I would suspect that the First Marine Expeditionary Force doesn't have access to all the background information on General Saleh," General Kimmitt said, "or any of the other leadership" of what the Marines are calling the First Battalion of the First Falluja Brigade.
"It will be important for all the leaders to go through a vetting and approval process conducted by the Ministry of Defense and the coalition," General Kimmitt said. "In terms of the Falluja Brigade leadership, we'll wait and see what the vetting and approval process brings up."
The military said Saturday that two American sailors had been killed Friday in Al Anbar Province, the mainly Sunni area around Falluja stretching toward the Syrian border, which is the operating area for the Marines. In addition, an Sunni area around Falluja stretching toward the Syrian border, which is the operating area for the Marines. In addition, an Army soldier was killed Saturday by a roadside bomb in northern Iraq.
The brief announcement of the death of the sailors said only that they were killed "while conducting operations against anticoalition forces" in conjunction with the marines.
Navy forces operating here include medical personnel who serve with marine combat units; construction battalions, or Seabees, who conduct major building projects and are unlikely here to be involved in direct combat; and some Seals, the Navy's Special Operations teams. The teams operate secretly, conducting operations like kidnapping terrorists or freeing hostages.
Inside Falluja, Reuters reported, some people were celebrating the replacement of the American presence with Iraqi forces. Guerrilla gunmen were said to be dancing in the streets under green Islamic banners.
"God has given this town victory over the Americans," a voice called from the loudspeakers of a mosque, the Reuters report said. "This victory came by the acts of the brave mujahedeen of Falluja who vanquished the American troops."
Lt. Gen James T. Conway, the commander of the First Marine Expeditionary Force, said the creation of the new Iraqi force "marked the formation of a military partnership that has the potential to bring a lasting, durable climate of peace and stability to Falluja and Al Anbar province as a whole."
"The army has always been the most respected institution in Iraq," the general told a news conference at the marine base here. "At 1600 yesterday, on schedule, a group of former members of the Iraqi Army, many from Falluja, answered their nation's call.
"That call was to reduce bloodshed and devastation in and around Falluja and to help secure the future of the people of Iraq by a return to duty."
The siege of Falluja began April 5, after four American security contractors were killed and their bodies mutilated. Marines drew a tight cordon around the city, but faced a persistent armed resistance. Hundreds of Iraqis have been killed.
General Conway said that at the beginning, the new Iraqi force would be stationed in relatively stable areas of the city, rather than the neighborhoods like Jolan in the northeast that are controlled by insurgents. But he said that he expected in coming days that the force would be able to provide security for a Marine convoy driving through the center of town.
As of Saturday, he said, the force numbered around 300 with hopes of moving up to around 1,000 soon.
The plan to deploy the Iraqi force came, he said, just as it appeared "there were no options that would preclude attacks on the city."
Were the Marines to "go into the city, clearing house to house, I can assure you a lot of people would die," General Conway said.
If the deployment of the Iraqi force could prevent that, he said, "I think there is an obvious attraction to that."
-------- israel / palestine
Israelis Urged to Approve Gaza Withdrawal
Associated Press
Sunday, May 2, 2004; Page A30
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A59844-2004May1.html
JERUSALEM, May 1 -- Israel's defense minister urged Likud Party members to approve a referendum on withdrawing from the Gaza Strip, saying in a Saturday radio broadcast that they must seize "this historic opportunity."
Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz told Israel Radio that the plan is good and that its rejection could harm Israel's relationship with the United States by making Israel appear to be an unreliable partner. The interview was broadcast the day before the vote by 193,000 members of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's party.
Polls in recent days have forecast defeat for the referendum. Opponents have run an all-out campaign, visiting tens of thousands of Likud members in their homes. Thousands of Gaza settlers spent the weekend with relatives in Israel for a final push in synagogues Saturday and at polling stations Sunday.
Mofaz said he remained optimistic the plan will be approved.
"This plan is the best possible one for Israel, at this time and in the current reality," he said. "We must not miss this historic opportunity."
Sharon, who remains hugely popular among Likud members, has portrayed the vote as a show of confidence in him, but stopped short of saying he would resign if the plan was defeated.
Meanwhile, in Gaza, an 8-year-old Palestinian boy was killed and 12 Palestinians were wounded, 10 of them minors, by army fire near Israeli settlements, hospital officials said. The army said soldiers fired in response to an antitank missile and several firebombs.
-------- mideast
At Least 5 Killed in Office Attack in Saudi Arabia
May 2, 2004
By NEIL MacFARQUHAR
The New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/02/international/middleeast/02SAUD.html?hp=&pagewanted=all&position=
CAIRO, May 1 - Gunmen believed to be religious militants burst into an engineering office on Saturday in Yanbu, Saudi Arabia, on the Red Sea coast, shooting dead at least five Western engineers and taking one hostage who was dragged naked behind their getaway car, according to reports from United States Embassy officials, a company spokesman and witnesses.
Five engineers - two Americans, two Britons and an Australian - died in the attack on the office of the firm ABB Lummus, a Houston-based subsidiary of the giant Swiss engineering firm, said Bjorn Edlund, the company spokesman, in Zurich.
Two Americans were hospitalized and their condition was not immediately available, he said. The five were among some 50 foreigners working on a project to upgrade an oil refinery owned by Saudi Basic Industries Corporation in Yanbu, an specially-developed industrial city 160 miles north of Jidda.
The attack seemed to be the latest in a string of terrorist attacks carried out against Western and government targets inside the kingdom over the past year, coming less than two weeks after a suicide bombing in Riyadh on April 21 killed five people and wounded almost 150.
The initial reports were somewhat confused, even as to the number of victims.
Local reporters and others quoted Yanbu residents as saying there were a number of attacks throughout the city. But Western embassies and the first official statement from the Saudi government confirmed only one attack.
The United States Embassy in Riyadh confirmed the two American deaths but said their names could not be released pending the notification of families. The British Embassy said it was still investigating the incident. A 57-year-old Australian, Anthony Richard Mason, was among the dead, a spokeswoman for the Foreign Ministry in Canberra confirmed.
In April, the United States ordered the departure of nonessential United States government employees and family members from Saudi Arabia and urged private citizens to depart. The embassy had warned of "credible indications of terrorist threats aimed at American and Western interests in Saudi Arabia."
A brief report from the government-run Saudi News Agency quoted an official source at the Interior Ministry saying that four gunmen burst into the contracting building just before 7 a.m. on Saturday.
The gunmen opened fire inside the building, then tried to flee by commandeering vehicles off the streets, while being pursued by Saudi police officers. Three of the assailants were killed and a fourth assailant injured in the shootout was captured, the statement said.
According to local press reports, the gunmen demanded that the Westerners move into a separate group from the Saudi employees and then they opened fire on the Westerners.
Three of the Westerners died at the scene, while a fourth was stripped naked, tied to a vehicle and dragged as the assailants fled in two separate cars, according to witnesses interviewed by reporters from The Saudi Gazette, an English-language paper in Jidda.
It was not immediately known if he survived.
Pictures broadcast from the scene showed a security vehicle riddled with bullets, with one bloody leg hanging out the back door.
The vehicle had been commandeered by the men and then attacked by security officers. There were reports that one Saudi security officer was killed and another seriously wounded.
There were also scattered reports of gunfights erupting at various points in the city while the gunmen tried to escape, including one near an American fast-food restaurant, an American hotel and the International School.
While it could not be immediately confirmed whether the man dragged through the streets died, word of the attack quickly spawned gloating remarks on the Web sites that are the haunt of the supporters of Osama bin Laden, the leader of Al Qaeda. Although the attack could not immediately be tied to Al Qaeda, Mr. bin Laden and his assistants have called on Muslims to attack Americans and other Westerners wherever they find them.
Several postings on the Islah Forum Web site by a man identified as Sohail al-Hakim praised the attackers.
"They entertained Yanbu today with the scene of this Westerner dragged in the streets in front of the people," it said, adding that employees came out of their offices to witness this "beautiful scene that we see every day in Falluja, Chechnya and Afghanistan."
Average Saudis have expressed increasing disgust with militants, taking pains to tell foreign visitors to the kingdom that they represent a radical fringe of Islam. The Saudi government has killed some eight of the most wanted suspects it announced it was looking for last year, but 18 remain at large. Western embassies have given the Saudi security forces high marks for their efforts, but the shear scale of the fight and the size of the government means more attacks are suspected.
"The kind of horrific attacks that happened today in Yanbu must be condemned by all those who want to see peace and prosperity in the Middle East," Ambassador James C. Oberwetter said in a statement, extending his condolences to the families of all the victims. "The United States appreciates everything the Saudi authorities are doing to fight terrorism, including here in the Kingdom."
Although analysts don't believe such attacks pose any real threat to unseating the ruling family, one Web posting mocked the inability of the security forces to stop such attacks.
"The most remarkable result of this is the fall of the state's power and the fall and horror of its soldiers," the posting said. "For an hour and a half no one could stop them or even shoot them, they were at the utmost of the glory and pride as grooms on their wedding day."
A witness at the scene quoted the arrested man as shouting repeatedly that Saudis should undertake jihad, or holy war, and not stay at home like women, according to the Saudi Gazette report.
Another Web site from Yanbu quoted witness accounts of what people were seeing on the streets.
"I saw two burned bodies in a Kia car and I saw a third one coming out of the car burning and he died immediately," said one posting. The man, identified only as Ibn al Bandar, said he also saw a dead body in jeep from the border guards in another location, which had been stolen from a colonel.
"The terrorist was killed by the security men and he was armed with time bombs," the witness said. "Security men asked people to stay away for fear of a big explosion."
Saudi Arabia depends heavily on foreign workers, with about one-third of the country's roughly 21 million population non-Saudis. While most are Asians laborers, there are tens of thousands of Westerners in the country working in technical fields, including some 30,000 Americans.
Despite the increasing violence, many of them stay, drawn by higher salaries than they would earn elsewhere.
After attacks on three housing compounds in Riyadh last May, in which 52 people as well as numerous Saudis were killed, the Saudi government increased security around the places where foreigners live and work. Most are now ringed by heavy concrete barriers, barbed wire and watched by guards around the clock.
But the threat of continued violence exists, with the United States Embassy ordering the evacuation last month of all family members and nonessential personnel due to a higher threat level.
--------
Attack in Saudi Arabia Kills 6
Two Americans Among Dead After Raid on Oil Company Office
By Adnan Malik
Associated Press
Sunday, May 2, 2004; Page A28
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A59842-2004May1.html
RIYADH, Saudi Arabia, May 1 -- Attackers sprayed gunfire in an oil contractor's office on Saturday, killing two Americans and four other Westerners and wounding 25 people before leading police on a bloody chase with the body of one victim tied to their car.
Police pursued the four gunmen through the industrial city of Yanbu, engaged them in a shootout outside a Holiday Inn and finally overpowered them on a downtown street, witnesses said.
Officials said three attackers were killed at the scene and the fourth died later from his wounds. A member of the Saudi National Guard also died, European diplomats said.
There was no word on the motive for the attack, but U.S. officials had warned in recent weeks of possible attacks against foreigners in Saudi Arabia, an important U.S. ally. A Saudi diplomat called the attack an "indiscriminate evil rampage."
The last attack that killed Americans in Saudi Arabia was in May 2003, when eight Americans were among 34 people killed in a series of coordinated suicide bombings in the capital, Riyadh. That attack and a November assault on a housing compound that killed 17 people were blamed on al Qaeda.
Intelligence reports have suggested that the terrorist network wanted to strike at Saudi oil interests. Its leader, Osama bin Laden, has called for the overthrow of the Saudi royal family.
"The kingdom will eliminate terrorism no matter how long it takes," Crown Prince Abdullah said in televised comments Saturday night.
The Interior Ministry said in a statement that the gunmen walked into the offices of a Saudi oil contractor in Yanbu, 550 miles west of Riyadh, Saturday morning and "randomly shot at Saudi and foreign employees." The contractor, ABB Lummus, said the attack occurred at about 6:30 a.m.
Saudi TV footage showed one victim -- a man wearing what appeared to be a uniform -- lying in the bloodstained front seat of a sport-utility vehicle, his leg dangling out an open door with a rifle nearby and several bullets on the floor.
The attackers tied the body of one of the victims to the back of a commandeered car before fleeing, according to one witness.
The two Americans killed were engineers for ABB Lummus, the energy arm of ABB, a multinational engineering company. A British ABB employee, a British contractor and an Australian employee were also killed, ABB spokesman Bjorn Edlund said in Zurich. A European diplomat said another Australian was also killed in the attack.
-------- prisoners of war
Horrific new evidence of soldiers' brutality in Iraq
Secret report from notorious Baghdad jail reveals beatings, rape and torture of prisoners by US troops
By Raymond Whitaker, Andy McSmith and Andrew Johnson
02 May 2004
UK Independent
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/story.jsp?story=517323
Shocking new evidence of brutality by coalition troops against Iraqi detainees emerged last night in a secret US military report into the treatment of prisoners at the notorious Abu Ghraib prison.
The revelation that US military police and intelligence officers had beaten Iraqi detainees, set dogs on them and threatened them with rape came as the world recoiled at photographs of British soldiers seemingly mistreating Iraqis in custody. The sight of servicemen humiliating and tormenting a bound and hooded Iraqi prisoner caused fury in the Arab world and brought condemnation from Tony Blair.
Ill-treatment of prisoners, if proved true, was "completely and utterly unacceptable", the Prime Minister said. He added: "We went to Iraq to get rid of that type of thing, not to do it. In fairness, however, we should say that there are thousands of British troops in Iraq doing a very brave and extraordinary job on behalf of the Iraqi people and on behalf of our country."
The photographs are now under close scrutiny by the Royal Military Police. Last night there were reports circulating, apparently from sources close to the regiment concerned, that the pictures are not genuine.
They surfaced two days after pictures were published of laughing US service personnel humiliating Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib prison. But a 53-page report, obtained by the renowned US investigative journalist Seymour Hersh and published in the forthcoming issue of The New Yorker magazine, makes it clear that the mistreatment went much further than that shown in the photographs.
The report into the military prison system in Iraq, by Major General Antonio Taguba, said there were "sadistic, blatant and wanton criminal abuses" at Abu Ghraib, and listed some of them: "Breaking chemical lights and pouring the phosphoric liquid on detainees ... beating detainees with a broom handle and a chair; threatening male detainees with rape ... sodomising a detainee with a chemical light and perhaps a broomstick, and using military working dogs to frighten and intimidate detainees ... and in one instance actually biting a detainee."
Gen Taguba's report makes it clear that far from being isolated actions by low-level personnel,intelligence interrogators encouraged the military police to "soften up" detainees. He recommended disciplinary action for at least two senior officers apart from Brigadier General Janis Karpinski, whose suspension as chief of military prisons in Iraq was revealed after the photographs were published last week.
The shaming news about British and American abuses in Iraq follows Robert Fisk's revelation in The Independent on Sunday in January that a Basra hotel receptionist, Baha Mousa, had died in British military custody. Possible manslaughter charges are being considered by the military authorities, who are still investigating six other deaths.
Such incidents, worsening local hostility against occupation forces, are increasing pressure on Mr Blair not to embroil British troops any more deeply in Iraq.
Privately, Mr Blair is being urged by military experts not to deploy British troops in the parts of Iraq now under US control, in case they become caught up in the violence, which could then spread to the southern zone around Basra policed by the British.
The warnings have been echoed by Air Marshal Sir Tim Garden, a former RAF deputy chief of staff named yesterday as a Liberal Democrat life peer. "Certainly, the chiefs of staff would be saying, 'Hold on, we're doing what we're doing - let's stick to that'," Sir Tim told The Independent on Sunday. Asked about the possibility of Britain taking on duties in the former Spanish zone, Mr Blair said it was "under review".
Meanwhile, the Government has banned ministers and other VIPs from visiting Iraq, to avoid the risk of a high-profile kidnapping. Tony Blair's human rights envoy to Iraq, Ann Clwyd MP, confirmed she is among those forbidden to travel. She said: "I hope to get back in a fortnight, but we shall have to see."
----
Seven Iraqis die in British custody. How many soldiers are charged? None
This is not the first incident to involve the Queen's Lancashire Regiment and allegations of brutality.
Andrew Johnson and Severin Carrell report
02 May 2004
UK Independent
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/story.jsp?story=517303
Amid the furore caused by yesterday's publication of photographs showing British troops abusing Iraqi prisoners were claims by the Ministry of Defence and General Sir Michael Jackson, the Chief of the General Staff, that the photographs were of an isolated incident caused by the "ill discipline of a few soldiers".
But it is a year and two days since Ather Karen al-Mowafakia died in British custody in Basra. During the next five months another six men died while in the custody of British soldiers.
And it is four months since the first details of these deaths first emerged in The Independent on Sunday, when our Middle East correspondent, Robert Fisk, gave an account of the death of Baha Mousa, 26, a hotel receptionist. Mr Mousa was allegedly beaten to death in September by members of the Queen's Lancashire Regiment - the same regiment shown abusing prisoners in yesterday's photographs. Kifah Taha, a hotel worker arrested at the same time as Mr Mousa and who suffered acute renal failure after being kicked by soldiers during questioning, said each of the Iraqis was given a nickname: "They called us by the names of footballers and kept telling us to repeat them, so we would remember who we were."
A year after the first death, and six months after the last, the Royal Military Police (RMP) is still investigating six cases. No disciplinary action has been taken against any soldier, and no soldier has been charged, although in the case of Mr Mousa possible manslaughter charges are being considered by the Army Prosecuting Authority.
Frustrated at this lack of progress, Mr Mousa's father, Colonel Daoud Mousa, a senior police officer, has decided to go to the High Court in London on Wednesday to seek compensation and a full judicial inquiry into his son's death. It is the first case of its kind involving British forces in Iraq. The failure to clear up the cases quickly led to charges yesterday that the MoD was involved in a "cover up". The other six cases are:
- Ather Karen al-Mowafakia, who died on 29 April. No more is known about him.
- Radhi Natna, who died on 8 May. The RMP investigation concluded that he died from natural causes after a heart attack and that no further action needed to be taken. But his family says that he had no history of heart trouble, and questions remain over his treatment.
- Ahmad Jabber Kareem Ali, 17, also died on 8 May. According to his friend Ayad Salim Hanoon, the two were arrested in Basra by British troops, taken to the Shatt al-Basra waterway and ordered to swim across. Ayad said: "We reached the deepest point but Ahmad couldn't swim. He sank and I couldn't find him."
- Abd Al Jubba Mousa, 53, a headmaster, died on 17 May. He was seen being beaten with rifle butts as he was led away by British troops.
- Said Shabram died on 24 May. Nothing more is known about him.
- Hassan Abbad Said, died on 4 August. Nothing more is known about him.
Details of the seven men who died only emerged through a series of questions tabled by the Plaid Cymru MP Adam Price following Robert Fisk's report in September. Yesterday Mr Price said: "How can the Ministry of Defence be surprised about these photographs? These allegations about the Queen's Lancashire Regiment have been in the public domain for six months. Clearly there has been disgusting treatment by a small minority of soldiers.
"But what seems to have happened is that there has been a cover up by people higher up in the hierarchy of the Army. The deaths in custody happened over a period of five months, involving different regiments. The pattern of abuse has been similar ... To say this is an isolated incident is wrong. Seven people have lost their lives. No one has been charged one year on."
The regiments involved in allegations of abuse include the Royal Fusiliers and Black Watch, as well as the QLR.
Further evidence of brutality by British troops is included in a report published by Amnesty International. It said: "Many detainees have alleged they were tortured and ill-treated by US and UK troops during interrogation. Methods often reported include prolonged sleep deprivation; beatings; prolonged restraint in painful positions, sometimes combined with exposure to loud music; prolonged hooding and exposure to bright lights. Virtually none of the allegations of torture or ill-treatment has been adequately investigated."
It quotes the case of Abdallah Khudran al-Shamran, a Saudi Arabian national, who claimed he was threatened with execution by a British officer while in hospital in Basra where he was recovering from beatings and electric shocks administered by the Americans.
Yesterday's photographs were not the first to shock the British public. Eleven months ago photographs showing Iraqi prisoners strung up in a net from a fork lift truck were published in The Sun. Again the investigation launched by the Ministry of Defence into the soldiers who were allegedly involved, including Gary Bartlam, 18, of the Royal Fusiliers, has not been completed.
A Ministry of Defence spokeswoman said this week that some soldiers were facing charges but the Army Prosecuting Authority had not yet decided whether or not the charges should be brought. They are believed to involve indecent and cruel conduct. But the soldiers are still serving, some in Kosovo.
The MoD has consistently denied that hoods are routinely used against Iraqi prisoners. But last month the Defence minister Adam Ingram did admit that, "members of the armed forces may only use blindfolds on apprehended individuals for reasons of operation security, such as when there is movement through military-sensitive areas."
Little is known about the seven men who died. The MoD is refusing to release any personal details, such as age or occupation. Mr Ingram has admitted that even the cause of death is not in the scope of the RMP inquiries.
----
General Suggests Abuses at Iraq Jail Were Encouraged
May 2, 2004
New York Times
By PHILIP SHENON
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/02/international/middleeast/02ABUS.html
WASHINGTON, May 1 - The Army Reserve general whose military police officers were photographed as they mistreated Iraqi prisoners said Saturday that she had been "sickened" by the pictures and had known nothing about the sexual humiliation and other abuse until weeks later.
But the officer, Brig. Gen. Janis Karpinski of the 800th Military Police Brigade, said the special high-security cellblock at the Abu Ghraib prison, west of Baghdad, where the abuses took place had been under the tight control of a separate group of military intelligence officers who had so far avoided any public blame.
In her first public comments about the brutality - which drew wide attention and condemnation after photographs documenting it were broadcast Wednesday night by CBS News - General Karpinski said that while the reservists involved were "bad people" and deserved punishment, she suspected they were acting with the encouragement, if not at the direction, of military intelligence units that ran the special cellblock used for interrogation.
Speaking in a telephone interview from her home in South Carolina, the general said military commanders in Iraq were trying to shift the blame exclusively to her and the reservists.
"We're disposable," she said of the military's attitude toward reservists. "Why would they want the active-duty people to take the blame? They want to put this on the M.P.'s and hope that this thing goes away. Well, it's not going to go away."
She said the special cellblock, known as 1A, was one of about two dozen in the large prison and was essentially off limits to soldiers who were not part of the interrogations.
She said repeatedly in the interview that she was not defending the actions of the reservists who took part in the brutality, who were part of her command. She said that when she was first presented with the photographs of the abuse in January, they "sickened me."
"I put my head down because I really thought I was going to throw up," she said. "It was awful. My immediate reaction was: These are bad people, because their faces revealed how much pleasure they felt at this."
But she said the context of the brutality had been lost, including the fact that the military police officers involved represented only a small fraction of the nearly 3,400 reservists who reported to her from 16 different prisons and similar locations around Iraq.
She said she was also alarmed that little attention has been paid to the military unit that controlled Cellblock 1A, where her soldiers guarded the Iraqi detainees between interrogations.
She said that the floor space of the two-story cellblock was only about 40 feet by 20 feet, and that military intelligence officers were in and out of the cellblock "24 hours a day."
"They were in there at 2 in the morning, they were at 4 in the afternoon," said General Karpinski, who arrived in Iraq last June and who was the only woman to hold a command in the war zone. "This was no 9-to-5 job."
The photographs of American soldiers smiling, laughing and signaling "thumbs up" as Iraqi detainees were forced into sexually humiliating positions provoked outrage just as the American military was seeking to pacify a rising insurgency and gain the trust of more Iraqis before turning over sovereignty to a new government on June 30.
General Karpinski, who has returned to South Carolina and her civilian profession as a business consultant, said she visited Abu Ghraib as often as twice a week last fall and had repeatedly instructed military police officers under her command to treat prisoners humanely and in accord with international human rights agreements.
"I can speak some Arabic," she said. "I'm not fluent, but when I went to any of my prison facilities, I would make it a point to try to talk to the detainees."
But she said she did not visit Cellblock 1A, in keeping with the wishes of military intelligence officers who, she said, worried that unnecessary visits might interfere with their interrogations of Iraqis.
She acknowledged that she "probably should have been more aggressive" about visiting the interrogation cellblock. She stressed that she had received no reports from any of her commanders of possible prisoner abuses in the cellblock.
After the first allegations of abuse circulated earlier this year, Lt. Gen. Ricardo S. Sanchez, the senior American commander in Iraq, ordered sweeping inquiries into whether any commanders - including General Karpinski - should be held responsible. He also ordered a review of policies and procedures at all of the prisons controlled by occupation forces in Iraq.
The administrative review, known in the military criminal justice system as an AR15-6, was completed March 1 by Army Maj. Gen. Antonio M. Taguba, who had assembled a team of officers trained in military detention. The report was approved by his superior, Lt. Gen. David D. McKiernan, commander of American ground forces in the Middle East, and forwarded to General Sanchez on April 4.
The finding documented the abuses illustrated by the photographs circulating this week, as well as other problems in the military's detainee system in Iraq.
----
Abuse by UK soldiers in Iraq 'common'
Sun 2 May 2004
BRIAN BRADY AND MIKE THEODOULOU IN CYPRUS
Scotsman
http://news.scotsman.com/uk.cfm?id=498152004
IT WAS pitch dark when Walid Fayay Mazban drove home through British-controlled southern Iraq late on August 24 last year.
As so often happened amid the confusion still gripping Iraq less than six months after the fall of Saddam Hussein, the street lights were not working.
Mazban's family are convinced this was why he did not see the makeshift roadblock erected by British soldiers near their base in Basra. They also believe that one 'mistake' cost him his life.
When the 42-year-old drove through the checkpoint, punishment was immediate: the troops opened fire and he was hit several times in the back. It is believed he was dead by the time they got to his car.
After a perfunctory search, the soldiers found nothing suspicious in his vehicle and the incident was written off as a tragic accident. The following month, his family was given around £1,000 as a "humanitarian" payment, although the Ministry of Defence insists the gesture does not signify guilt.
The incident is among a series of cases compiled by Amnesty International as evidence of what it claims is the continuing "abuse" of civilians in Iraq, and the apparent failure of coalition forces to deal with them correctly.
As is often the case with war zone images, a handful of pictures apparently showing British troops abusing an Iraqi detainee have done more damage to the UK's image than all the reported - but unphotographed - incidents that came before.
At a stroke, the perhaps naive, complacent assumption that UK forces were benign, beret-wearing versions of their trigger-happy American brothers in arms has evaporated.
"It comes as no surprise to us that there are allegations of torture involving British forces in Iraq," said Nicole Choueiry, Amnesty's Middle East spokeswoman.
"It is true that the Americans are in general involved in more incidents of brutality than the British, but we have discovered a pattern of torture in the British zone as well."
Amnesty estimates more than 10,000 Iraqi civilians have been killed as a direct result of the military intervention in Iraq, and the forces ostensibly attempting to pacify the country do not escape the blame.
The organisation also claims to have evidence of "numerous cases" where British forces "resorted to lethal force and killed Iraqi civilians even though their lives and the lives of others did not appear to be in danger".
In the first eight months of the occupation, some 17 civilians died at the hands of British forces in southern Iraq. The British government has paid out almost £10,000 in compensation to 22 civilians injured at the hands of its forces. The image of British troops winning the "hearts and minds" of the civilian population, has been taking a battering for some time.
Even before the pictures appeared in the Mirror, Amnesty was warning that Iraqis had complained they were being tortured and ill-treated by both US and UK troops during interrogation.
"Methods often reported include prolonged sleep deprivation, beatings, prolonged restraint in painful positions, sometimes combined with exposure to loud music, prolonged hooding and exposure to bright lights," Amnesty says.
In the southern zone, where some 85 prisoners remain under British control, the sudden avalanche of allegations can hardly improve what is becoming an increasingly tense situation on the ground.
Foulath Hadid, an Oxford University academic and former diplomat in close contact with officials in the new Iraqi administration, said he had received several reports of such cases. "I think this has been going on for a while and there are many more Iraqis being humiliated in this way," he said. People who are in the new government tell me of Iraqi men being abused by soldiers in front of their own families.
"The UK government says it is going to investigate this one incident but is it really going to play detective and find all the people who have been abused?"
The Muslim Association of Britain said the images explained why moderate Iraqis were rallying against coalition troops.
Spokesman Anas Altikriti said he had been attempting to highlight abuses by British troops for several months. "I am not surprised by these images because I have heard for months about such things. What surprises me is that someone had the arrogance to photograph what they were doing."
The pictures of soldiers allegedly mistreating an Iraqi prisoner have caused shock and horror within the Cyprus-based regiment involved.
Lieutenant-colonel Jorge Mendonca, the commanding officer of the 1st Battalion, The Queen's Lancashire Regiment, was told on Friday evening that the brutality allegations would surface yesterday. "He was devastated," a source in Cyprus - where the regiment has been based since February - told Scotland on Sunday.
Four soldiers from the same regiment are already under investigation for allegedly mistreating prisoners in Iraq. "When the regiment were told the first lot were being investigated, they just didn't believe it. There's a general feeling of despondency," the source said.
----
Prisoner Abuse Probe Widened
Military Intelligence at Center of Investigation
By Sewell Chan and Michael Amon
Washington Post Foreign Service
Sunday, May 2, 2004; Page A01
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A59750-2004May1?language=printer
BAGHDAD, May 1 -- A top Pentagon intelligence officer is leading an investigation into interrogation practices at an Army-run prison where Iraqi detainees were allegedly beaten and sexually abused, officials announced Saturday. The move came amid allegations that military guards abused prisoners at the behest of military intelligence operatives.
A soldier accused of abusing prisoners at the Abu Ghraib facility wrote to his family last December that military intelligence officers encouraged the mistreatment, according to correspondence provided by the soldier's family.
"We have had a very high rate with our style of getting them to break," the soldier, Staff Sgt. Ivan L. "Chip" Frederick II, wrote in a Dec. 18 e-mail released by Frederick's uncle. "They usually end up breaking within hours."
Frederick also wrote that he questioned some of the abuses. "I questioned this and the answer I got was: This is how military intelligence wants it done," he wrote.
The Army Reserve commander who oversaw the prison said that military intelligence, rather than the military police, dictated the treatment of prisoners at Abu Ghraib. "The prison, and that particular cellblock where the events took place, were under the control of the MI command," Brig. Gen. Janis L. Karpinski said in a telephone interview Saturday night from her home in Hilton Head, S.C.
Karpinski, who commanded the 800th Military Police Brigade, also described a high-pressure atmosphere that prized successful interrogations. A month before the alleged abuses occurred, she said, a team of military intelligence officers from the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, came to Abu Ghraib last year. "Their main and specific mission was to get the interrogators -- give them new techniques to get more information from detainees," she said.
The naming of Maj. Gen. George R. Fay, the former deputy commander of the Army Intelligence and Security Command, to review the methods and procedures used in questioning Iraqi prisoners represents a widening of the probe into conditions at Abu Ghraib, a prison about 20 miles west of Baghdad that was notorious for torture and executions under the government of former president Saddam Hussein.
A spokesman for the Central Intelligence Agency said Saturday that its inspector general is working with the Pentagon to determine whether the CIA was involved in the abuses, which have drawn international attention. "We are opposed to abusing prisoners in Iraq, and we have found no direct evidence connecting CIA personnel with incidents" of abuse, the spokesman said.
On Saturday, Arabic satellite television networks repeatedly broadcast photographs of naked prisoners being humiliated. The images have been broadcast around the world and drawn condemnation from President Bush and U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan.
In March, the Army charged six military police officers, all from one Army reserve unit, with the physical and sexual abuse of 20 prisoners at Abu Ghraib in November and December. A criminal probe into the actions of four other soldiers is continuing.
In an e-mail, a commissioned officer in the unit, the 372nd Military Police Company, based in Cumberland, Md., acknowledged that the abuses had occurred but attributed them to a far-reaching failure in leadership.
"I won't defend my soldiers," the officer wrote, on the condition of anonymity. "They knew better."
The officer added: "I am extremely disappointed in the way the Army has handled the entire situation and feel the leadership has been made the scapegoat for a few individuals. I think the leadership problems go much higher than the brigade commander."
An issue emerging in the defense of military police allegedly involved in abuse is whether the treatment was condoned or encouraged by military intelligence units interrogating Iraqi prisoners.
According to a source familiar with the March findings of an administrative review conducted by the Army, the 205th Military Intelligence Brigade, which helped oversee the questioning of prisoners at Abu Ghraib, pressed members of the military police unit, 372nd Military Police Company, to use rough tactics to prepare prisoners for questioning.
U.S. officials said the review, by Maj. Gen. Antonio M. Taguba, found that prisoners at Abu Ghraib were regularly subjected to cruel and harsh punishments. In an article posted on its Web site, the New Yorker magazine reported in its May 10 issue that Taguba found a pattern of "sadistic, blatant, and wanton criminal abuses" at the prison.
According to the New Yorker article, by Seymour M. Hersh, a report last November by Maj. Gen. Donald J. Ryder, the Army's top law enforcement officer, concluded that military intelligence did not order military police to put pressure on prisoners to prepare them for interrogations. Taguba, the article states, disagreed.
"Contrary to the findings of MG Ryder's report, I find that personnel assigned to the 372nd MP Company, 800th MP Brigade were directed to change facility procedures to 'set the conditions' for MI interrogations," Taguba wrote, according to the article. Army intelligence officers, CIA personnel and private contractors "actively requested that MP guards set physical and mental conditions for favorable interrogation of witnesses," according to the article's account of Taguba's report.
The top U.S. military spokesman in Iraq, Army Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt, made no attempt Saturday to defend conditions at Abu Ghraib, which holds a majority of the nearly 8,000 detainees in Iraq.
"The very fact that we can't hold our detainee operations as a shining light for how things should be done is personally and professionally embarrassing to me," he said Saturday evening during a somber talk with reporters.
Kimmitt added that he and other commanders in Iraq felt "absolute disgust" at the images, which CBS first broadcast Wednesday night. However, he disputed the idea that the abuses were a result of inadequate training or supervision. "Those soldiers knew what the right thing to do was," he said.
The 372nd Military Police Company was attached to the 800th Military Police Brigade, based in Uniondale, N.Y. In January, 17 soldiers from the company, including seven officers and the six soldiers who were later charged, were suspended from their duties.
Karpinski said she was stunned and sickened to learn of the abuses months after they had occurred.
"If I had ever heard -- and soldiers were never afraid to talk to or approach me about everything -- that there was even a hint or suggestion of abuse, I would have responded immediately and vigorously, and I was never given the chance," she said. "I became aware of these abuses -- these crimes -- when the investigation was near complete and Sanchez was being briefed on it," she added, referring to the top U.S. commander in Iraq, Lt. Gen. Ricardo S. Sanchez.
"I hadn't been included, I hadn't been informed, and I knew nothing," she said. Following the administrative review, Karpinski was reassigned.
Frederick, the most senior of the six soldiers charged, wrote of inmates being shot with non-lethal bullets, forced to sleep in 3-by-3-foot closets, handcuffed for long periods to the doors of their cells and made to go naked or wear women's underpants.
Frederick's uncle, Bill Lawson, provided the correspondence. He said his nephew began keeping detailed notes of conditions at the prison after Jan. 14, when the military began its investigation. Later that month, Frederick sent single-spaced hand-written letters to four family members in late January.
In one letter, Frederick alleged that an inmate's death in November was covered up. "They stressed him out so bad that the man passed away," Frederick wrote. His body was placed in a black bag, Frederick wrote, and packed in ice for about 24 hours in a shower stall. Frederick alleged that the death was never documented.
Prisoners were interrogated using physical coercion, Frederick wrote. One prisoner with a broken arm was choked, he wrote, and dogs were used as tools of intimidation. Prisoners were made to remain for as long as three days in damp isolation cells without a toilet or running water, he wrote.
In addition to Frederick, criminal charges were filed against Spec. Megan M. Ambuhl, Sgt. Javal S. Davis, Cpl. Charles A. Graner Jr., Spec. Sabrina D. Harman and Spec. Jeremy C. Sivits, according to sealed charging papers provided to The Washington Post.
The appointment of Fay came two days after the military announced that another two-star general, Maj. Gen. Geoffrey D. Miller, has taken over U.S. military prisons in Iraq in the new position of deputy commander for detainee operations.
Human rights workers in Iraq said the military has allowed only one group, the International Committee of the Red Cross, to enter Abu Ghraib to interview prisoners and inspect conditions. "One of the key problems is that because we have not been given access by the military, we are not in a position to judge how systematic and widespread these abuses are," said Hania Mufti, a Human Rights Watch representative in Iraq.
Amon reported from Washington. Staff writers Dana Priest, Thomas E. Ricks and Christian Davenport in Washington contributed to this report.
--------
Photos Show Abuse by British Soldiers
May 2, 2004
By THE NEW YORK TIMES
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/02/international/middleeast/02BRIT.html
LONDON, May 1 - The Ministry of Defense announced that it was starting an investigation into allegations of abuse by British troops in Basra, Iraq, after the publication on Saturday of photographs that appeared to show a hooded Iraqi prisoner being beaten with rifle butts and being urinated on by British soldiers.
The photographs were published in The Daily Mirror, which said soldiers from the Queen's Lancashire Regiment had brought them to the newspaper.
One told the newspaper: "We are not helping ourselves out there. We are never going to get them on our side. We are fighting a losing war."
According to the soldiers' accounts in The Mirror, the prisoner was arrested for stealing, and, during an eight-hour interrogation, his jaw was broken and his teeth smashed.
The photographs show the hooded man being beaten with rifle butts in the head and groin. One shows a gun barrel placed through the hood into his mouth. One soldier is seen urinating on him. The final few photographs show the man lying limp. He was eventually driven away from the army camp and then dumped off the back of a moving vehicle, the soldiers told The Mirror. They did not know whether he survived.
Prime Minister Tony Blair, in Dublin, called the images of the British soldiers "completely and utterly unacceptable."
-------- un
U.S., U.N. Gird for Major Effort to Pick Iraqi Leaders
With Handover Looming, Factions and Instability Present Challenges as Envoys Consider Candidates
By Robin Wright
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, May 2, 2004; Page A27
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A59758-2004May1?language=printer
Top U.N. and U.S. envoys will launch the last big push this week to form a new Iraqi government, following secret discussions at the United Nations late last week to help expedite the filling of the four leadership jobs and 25 cabinet posts, according to U.S. officials.
Favorite candidates for the top four jobs have emerged, with particular focus on two emerging Shiite politicians for prime minister and veteran Sunni politician Adnan Pachachi as the possible president, U.S. and coalition officials say.
With only two months before the handover of power on June 30, the U.S.-led coalition is cautiously optimistic that a new government can be named within 10 days.
When U.N. special envoy Lakhdar Brahimi "goes in, he's almost ready to start naming names. He's ready to start pulling things together. He's into the end game. He's created a structure," said a State Department official familiar with the Iraq talks. "We could go from political anarchy to the end game in a few days."
U.S. and U.N. officials also warn, however, that identifying new leaders and balancing disparate ethnic and religious communities -- plus coping with the anticipated backlash from excluded parties, including key members of the Iraqi Governing Council -- could eat up the entire month. Iraq's volatility could also complicate or defer consultations.
"Brahimi wants to finish it on this trip, if he can. But there may be other complications, like Fallujah on his last trip," said Ahmed Fawzi, Brahimi's spokesman.
But much of the political legwork has quietly been done over the past two weeks in Baghdad and Washington as well as the United Nations. Names of candidates for the four senior positions have already begun to circulate in Washington and New York, despite categorical denials from the United Nations and the Bush administration that final decisions have been made.
"Brahimi doesn't have definite plans. He's going in with an open mind having launched his sketchy ideas two weeks ago. He'll see how things will play out. We don't have a handbook that says, 'Instructions, here's how we do it,' " Fawzi added.
During talks in Baghdad last month, Brahimi asked several parties -- from a panel of Iraqi judges and the Governing Council to the U.S.-led coalition ruling Iraq -- to come up with slates of candidates. From these, he hopes to find common ground and then name a slate of candidates, U.S. and U.N. officials say.
As prime minister, a favorite of the U.S.-led coalition in Baghdad is Planning Minister Mahdi Hafez, the Shiite minister of planning who met Secretary of State Colin L. Powell and other senior U.S. and U.N. officials during a quiet visit to the United States last week, U.S. officials said. Hafez, a former communist who became a moderate, is considered a capable technocrat who could lead a caretaker government until elections are held early next year, U.S. and Iraqi officials said.
"People think he's honest and not corrupt, which is rare," said a senior U.S. official who served in Iraq. Added a Kurdish official: "He's a solid compromise candidate. No one is likely to feel threatened by him."
But U.S. officials are also concerned that U.S. and British news reports naming Hafez last week, before Brahimi and National Security Council Iraq troubleshooter Robert D. Blackwill get to Baghdad, could taint or doom his potential candidacy.
The other politician cited by many is Ibrahim Jafari, the Shiite leader of the Islamic Dawa Party and one of 25 members on the council that is likely to be dissolved and replaced by the interim government. Among Iraq's many political parties, Dawa had the highest support, at 14 percent, in an ABC News poll in mid-March.
Jafari also held talks with the United Nations and the Bush administration last week about forming a new government. "There needs to be consensus on the interim government," Jafari told reporters in Washington. "It may not reflect what I want as it's not elected, but it should be close to it."
He also pledged to work with the Brahimi-Blackwill mission. "We have to work with them so they succeed," Jafari said.
But Brahimi and Blackwill could face serious opposition from other Iraqis. Muhammed Bahr Uloum, a prominent Shiite member of the Governing Council, rejected Brahimi's mediation and warned Friday that Iraqis would rise up if the United Nations is allowed to pick the new government.
"We are not under age in need of a guardian. Iraqis are not a herd of 27 million people to be directed by Brahimi and the coalition," Uloum said. "Iraqis will take to the streets if Brahimi insists on his view."
The position of Shiite politicians is important because Shiites make up more than 60 percent of Iraq's population. The coalition is also scrambling to develop a political exit strategy because Iraq's top Shiite cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, rejected two handover plans. One of the biggest uncertainties over the next two months is how Sistani will react either to the U.N. plan or the Iraqis selected as caretakers, U.S. officials said.
Shiites are also expected to assume two of the top four posts and the largest share of cabinet positions. The prime minister is expected to be a Shiite, while the largely ceremonial presidency would be a Sunni and the two vice presidents would be a Shiite and a Kurd, U.S. and U.N. officials said.
The two Kurds mentioned by U.S. officials as possible vice presidents are Barham Salih of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan and Rowsch Shaways of the Kurdish Democratic Party. But Kurds have their own concerns.
After talks with U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan and Brahimi on Friday, Iraqi Kurdish leader Jalal Talabani insisted that political parties must be at the center of the transition. He pressed for the Governing Council to be retained and expanded from 25 to 50 or 75 people. Talabani is also on the council.
"This would be in parallel to the caretaker government," said Salih, who accompanied Talabani. It "would act like a senate or a national conference."
Under Brahimi's tentative plan, a national gathering of 1,000 to 1,500 Iraqis would meet, probably after June 30, to select a body of 100 to 200 people to act as an advisory council to the caretaker government.
Although Brahimi will take the lead, Blackwill has become his partner in the process and is likely to remain in Baghdad until a government is named, U.S. officials said. But unlike earlier efforts, the United States will keep a low profile.
"It's important that the U.N. be seen as an independent entity out there," the senior administration official said. "If he's seen as an instrument of the United States, it would undermine the outcome we wish to have."
Staff writer Colum Lynch at the United Nations contributed to this report.
----
Iraq oil-for-food kickbacks 'higher than suspected'
By Philip Sherwell
02/05/2004
UK Telegraph
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/05/02/wsadd102.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/05/02/ixnewstop.html
Kickbacks paid to Saddam Hussein's regime on contracts signed under the United Nations' oil-for-food programme were far higher than the 10 per cent rake-off previously assumed to be the norm.
In one of the many deals funded by UN-supervised oil exports from Iraq, a delivery of cameras and audiovisual equipment for the culture ministry - sent as "humanitarian" items, under a loophole - was valued at 100 per cent above its true cost.
According to new documents recovered in Baghdad, multi-million pound deals with the public works ministry for sanitation and water filtration equipment were often marked up by as much as 30 per cent.
The discrepancy represents the kickbacks for leaders and regime officials who skimmed off billions of pounds from the scheme that was supposed to provide food, medicine and essential supplies for the Iraqi people.
Some went straight into the bank accounts of Saddam, his family and supporters, in addition to officials who negotiated the deals. The Iraqi dictator, however, is also alleged to have paid millions of pounds in cash and oil trading vouchers to foreign companies and individuals from the kickbacks.
According to a Western official with access to the contracts, staff from the Coalition Provisional Authority who have been poring over more than 2,500 outstanding contracts worth almost £5.9 billion since the UN left Iraq last year, are shocked by the rake-offs.
Former Iraqi oil ministry staff had said that suppliers or middlemen were routinely required to add 10 per cent to the value of contracts to win a tender. As a result, when the CPA took over the administration of existing contracts, it assumed that the 10 per cent mark-up was correct.
Now, its latest discovery means that the total lost to kickbacks and surcharges could far exceed the American Congressional estimate of £2.6 billion. Oil smuggling is believed to have lined the coffers of Saddam's regime with a further £3.4 billion.
CPA staff believe that some border inspectors working for the Swiss company Cotecna at Iraqi frontier posts were bribed to turn a blind eye to discrepancies between goods that were contracted and what was delivered.
The inflated contracts were apparently not noticed or ignored at the UN in New York, even though strict checks were supposed to ensure that Iraq did not receive goods banned under economic sanctions.
Last week, a US Congressional investigator testified that UN auditors had refused to release 55 internal audits covering seven years of the oil-for-food programme to the General Accounting Office, the federal body carrying out one of the investigations into the scandal.
Joseph Christoff, a GAO official, said that the audits were shown routinely only to Benon Sevan, the UN Under Secretary General who ran the programme whose name was on a list of 270 companies and individuals who allegedly received vouchers. Mr Sevan has denied wrongdoing.
-------- us
Howitzers Are Leaving Slopes for Tour of Duty
Sunday, May 2, 2004
Washington Post
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A59781-2004May1.html
Even at ski resorts, wartime brings hardship.
On the slopes of Mammoth Mountain and Alpine Meadows, high along California's Sierra Nevada range, resort operators have grown accustomed to using five leased Army howitzers to blast loose dangerous drifts of snow packed high on mountainsides.
"They work really well for avalanche control work," said Pam Murphy, senior vice president for Mammoth Mountain ski resort.
But the military wants the big guns back. It needs them for troops fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Army officials came knocking for the artillery cannons a few days ago, saying they had no choice but to break their deal with the ski resorts because the weapons, once surplus stock, now have to be hastily spruced up and shipped out to the front lines overseas.
The old howitzers have been a godsend to the two resorts. Firing long-range artillery rounds into thick overhangs of snow keeps skiers safe and resort staff from having to clear the threatening heaps up close. The overhangs can trigger avalanches when they fall.
The Army's request startled the resorts. Now, they have to find new ways to prevent avalanches, and fast, because their ski seasons are not over.
But the resorts are not complaining. They say they stand ready to do their part for the nation.
"We certainly do not believe our own cause is above the war effort," Murphy said.
-------- POLICE / PRISONERS / COURTS / JUSTICE
-------- courts
In Re Scalia the Outspoken v. Scalia the Reserved
May 2, 2004
By ADAM LIPTAK
The New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/02/politics/02SCAL.html?pagewanted=all&position=
PHILADELPHIA, April 29 - About 20 minutes into stock remarks in praise of the Constitution, Justice Antonin Scalia paused. "Everything I've said up to now," he told a hotel ballroom full of lawyers here on Thursday, "has been uncontroversial."
What followed was not.
In emphatic phrases punctuated by operatic gesticulation, he then launched into an attack on a series of the most important Supreme Court decisions of the last 40 years. The court was wrong, he said, to say the Constitution requires that lawyers be provided to poor people accused of crimes. It was wrong, too, to find that the First Amendment imposes limits on libel lawsuits.
"We have now determined," he continued, "that liberties exist under the federal Constitution - the right to abortion, the right to homosexual sodomy - which were so little rooted in the traditions of the American people that they were criminal for 200 years."
He said his colleagues may soon discover a right to assisted suicide between the lines of the text of the Constitution.
"We're not ready to announce that right," he said, more than a little sarcastically. "Check back with us."
Citing long judicial tradition, Justice Scalia speaks eloquently about his desire to stay out of the public eye. But with his frequent and colorful public speeches, his 21-page defense in March of his duck-hunting trip with Vice President Dick Cheney, and his forceful, cutting and almost uniformly conservative opinions, Justice Scalia cannot help attracting attention.
His writing alone makes him stand out.
"He ranks with Holmes and Jackson as a writer," said Cass R. Sunstein, a law professor at the University of Chicago, referring to Justices Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. and Robert H. Jackson.
But Stephen Gillers, who teaches judicial ethics at New York University, draws a different comparison: "Since World War II, I think it's fair to say, the extrajudicial conduct of only three justices have become significantly newsworthy in a harmful way: Fortas, Douglas, Scalia."
Justice Abe Fortas resigned in an ethics scandal in 1969, and Justice William O. Douglas's unorthodox private life and public statements led Gerald R. Ford, then the House minority leader, to call for his impeachment in 1970.
"Scalia is calling undue attention to himself, by mixing it up publicly in a way we associate with players, not referees, which is what a judge is supposed to be," Professor Gillers said.
Cited by George W. Bush during the 2000 presidential campaign as one of his two favorite justices, along with Clarence Thomas, Justice Scalia was not long ago widely mentioned as a possible successor to Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist.
These days, while he remains the great hope of many conservatives, even some of his admirers say his public profile in a bitterly divided Washington has made such a move unlikely.
Television cameras were banned from Thursday's speech at the justice's direction, but reporters were allowed to make audio recordings of his remarks "for note-taking purposes but not for broadcast." That was a new accommodation, resulting from an incident in April in which a member of Justice Scalia's security detail ordered two reporters to erase recordings of his speech that day at a high school in Mississippi.
In other settings, the justice is less bashful.
He dominates oral arguments on the court with his active and sometimes withering questioning. His written opinions are pungent, trenchant and immensely readable. He is a hero to the American right.
Yet at the same time his opinions are sometimes so brash that they fail to attract the additional four votes needed to determine an outcome, some scholars say.
"His writing style is entertaining in the way that shouting matches on `Hardball' are entertaining," said Mark Tushnet, a law professor at Georgetown. "Nobody persuades anyone by shouting on `Hardball.' "
His jurisprudence - with its emphasis on the original meaning of the Constitution, on the literal words of statutes and on categorical rules rather than ad hoc balancing - is aimed, legal experts say, at the lower courts, at law schools and at posterity.
"He recognizes that his influence is largely in the strength of his own words and not in the number of votes he attracts to his opinions," said Douglas Kmiec, a law professor at Pepperdine.
In private, Justice Scalia is a gregarious man with many friends in the Washington elite, including people with whom he served in the Nixon and Ford administrations. But he is also on good terms with many of his ideological opposites, including lawyers for liberal advocacy groups like the American Civil Liberties Union and the Sierra Club.
He is a man of varied tastes, with a fondness for poker, opera and, as all the world now knows, hunting. His friends call him Nino, and they say he enjoys nothing more than a good joke at his own expense.
The justice seems to enjoy informal exchanges and verbal jousting. Justice Scalia, a former law professor, would occasionally drop by to commandeer a constitutional law class at Catholic University, recalled Professor Kmiec, who was then the dean of the law school there.
"He'd go up to the lectern, ask the instructor what the topic of the day was, and literally take control of the class," Professor Kmiec said.
"He'd say, almost in so many words, `If you think I'm wrong, then fight me about it.' "
Though he tries to keep most of his fights private, his efforts to stay out of the news have lately failed spectacularly.
In October, he recused himself from the case considering whether the words "under God" may be spoken in the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools. He gave no explanation, but his decision was almost certainly based on his having remarked on the case the previous January at a Religious Freedom Day ceremony sponsored by the Knights of Columbus in Fredericksburg, Va. The remaining justices are expected to rule shortly.
His decision not to withdraw from a case involving Mr. Cheney has been the subject of caustic commentary. The case was argued on Tuesday, and Justice Scalia was, as usual, an active questioner.
His combative tone in front of his audience on Thursday was mixed with a measure of defensiveness, perhaps prompted by these matters. Though he did not refer to them directly, he did reflect on the reputation he brought with him to the Supreme Court in 1986. He was seen, he said, as a good and honest lawyer.
"I'm not going to shade a decision," he said, "you know, make it come out the way I wanted it to come out."
And he was quick to assure his audience that he might not be prepared to follow all of his criticisms to their logical conclusion, which could entail rolling back half a century of constitutional law.
"I am a textualist," he said. "I am an originalist. I am not a nut."
Nadine Strossen, the president of the A.C.L.U. and a friend of the justice's, noted that his principles had led him to results that might not match his generally conservative policy preferences. She noted that he was in the majority in a 1989 decision that struck down a Texas law banning flag-burning. His dissents from the court's recent campaign finance decision and a 2000 decision limiting protests outside abortion clinics also showed, she said, great sensitivity to the First Amendment.
He also has many times ruled in favor of criminal defendants, particularly when their cases involved questionable searches.
Financial disclosure records, which report travel reimbursements, suggest that he makes more speeches than any other justice.
But the speeches are not publicized in advance and the texts are not made public. The Supreme Court's Web site contains 27 speeches by Chief Justice Rehnquist, 11 by Justice Stephen G. Breyer, 5 by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and one each by Justices Sandra Day O'Connor and Anthony M. Kennedy. And none by Justice Scalia.
Justice Scalia, who is 68, joined the court in 1986, confirmed by a vote of 98 to 0. That, he suggested Thursday, would never happen today.
"Just between you and me," he said to the assembled lawyers, "I have always been a fairly conservative person. I think that was known 18 years ago."
Indeed, many experts say that the nation's polarized political environment and Justice Scalia's high profile would doom any chance he has of succeeding Chief Justice Rehnquist.
"I think he recognizes," Professor Kmiec said, "that the political reality is that in a closely divided Senate, where they have been filibustering far less well known figures, any proposed elevation to the ranks of chief justice would be vigorously opposed by those who have a different understanding of the Constitution than he has. I think that's unfortunate."
Paul Weyrich, of the Free Congress Foundation, a conservative research group, said Justice Scalia remained the first choice of the American right.
"Sometimes White Houses are just afraid to buy into any controversy at all," Mr. Weyrich said. "That hasn't been the hallmark of this White House."
Before his nomination, by President Ronald Reagan, he had served for four years as a judge on the federal appeals court in Washington, and in the early 1970's he held several posts in the Nixon and Ford administrations.
But his primary work before becoming a judge was academic. He taught law at Georgetown, the University of Virginia and the University of Chicago, and an academic predisposition toward provocative debate informs and colors his judicial work.
His appetite for the sort of discussion and debate he enjoyed as a law professor has not been sated by the conferences the justices hold after oral arguments. Under Chief Justice Rehnquist, they are said to consist of little more than a tally of votes.
"I don't like that," Justice Scalia said after a speech at George Washington University in 1988, two years after he joined the court. "Maybe it's just because I'm new. Maybe it's because I'm an ex-academic. Maybe it's because I'm right."
Professor Tushnet of Georgetown said he sensed that Justice Scalia's frustration with the atmosphere inside the court might have only grown in recent years.
Justice Scalia is the only child of Eugene and Catherine Scalia. His father, an immigrant from Italy, taught Romance languages at Brooklyn College. His mother was an elementary-school teacher. He was educated at Xavier High School, a Jesuit school in Manhattan, at Georgetown and at Harvard Law School.
He has nine children, a fact that influences his legal philosophy.
"Parents know that children will accept quite readily all sorts of arbitrary substantive dispositions - no television in the afternoon, or no television in the evening, or even no television at all," he said at a Harvard lecture in 1989. "But try to let one brother or sister watch television when the others do not, and you will feel the fury of the fundamental sense of justice unleashed."
He is often in dissent. According to Thomas Goldstein, a Washington lawyer who follows the court closely, only Justice John Paul Stevens has dissented more often in recent years. In the last term, Mr. Goldstein said, Justice Thomas was the most frequent dissenter, followed by Justice Scalia.
The justice's style can verge on the insulting. Dissenting in a 2002 decision prohibiting the execution of the mentally retarded, he wrote, "seldom has an opinion of this court rested so obviously upon nothing but the personal views of its members." An argument made by Justice O'Connor, he wrote in a 1989 abortion case, "cannot be taken seriously." Another of her arguments, he wrote in the same case, was "similarly irrational."
Opinions vary about whether other justices take offense.
Steven G. Calabresi, a law professor at Northwestern and a former Scalia clerk, said the other justices look the other way.
"His colleagues all recognize that he feels very strongly in some cases and that those temper tantrums blow over," Professor Calabresi said. "I watched him talk to Justice O'Connor and Justice Kennedy a lot, and my sense is that they got along very well."
Some scholars detect a rightward drift in Justice Scalia's recent decisions.
"When I worked for him, he had a set of principles, and those principles led to principled results, which were sometimes conservative and sometimes liberal," said Lawrence Lessig, a law professor at Stanford who was also a law clerk to Justice Scalia. "I don't understand anymore how his jurisprudence follows from his principles."
Sometimes he seems perplexed by the attention he receives.
After the stir in April at the Mississippi school over the recording of his speech, he sent a gracious and reflective apology to one of the reporters, Antoinette Konz.
"I abhor as much as any American the prospect of a law enforcement officer's seizing a reporter's notes or recording," he wrote. "It has been the tradition of the American judiciary not to thrust themselves into the public eye." He added, "It may be that my efforts to pursue it are doomed to failure."
--------
Bush Executive Powers in the Balance
Supreme Court Opinions Expected to Define Authority to Combat Terrorism
Sunday, May 2, 2004; Page A13
By Charles Lane
Washington Post Staff Writer
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A59734-2004May1.html
After hearing the final oral arguments of the term last week, the Supreme Court enters an intense two-month period of opinion-writing that legal analysts expect to produce some of the most momentous legal pronouncements in recent memory -- and no one has more at stake in the outcomes than President Bush.
To a significant extent, what the court will be ruling on is the Bush administration's effort to carve out greater presidential power and privilege, in the realms of foreign and domestic policy.
That is the theme that unifies cases concerning the administration's executive detention of two U.S. citizens whom the president has declared "enemy combatants"; its rejection of federal court jurisdiction over pleas for freedom by suspected terrorists held at the U.S. naval base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba; and its effort to keep the internal workings of Vice President Cheney's energy task force off-limits to the public.
As such, the cases represent key tests not only of the president's anti-terrorism strategy, but also of his political standing in an election year. Bush has faced criticism at home and abroad from those who say that his approach to governance is excessively secretive and violates civil liberties.
The terrorism cases alone "are the most monumental cases to confront the court in at least a decade," said Tom Goldstein, a Washington lawyer who frequently argues at the Supreme Court.
In addition, the court will have to work its way through a mountain of other major cases that are not directly related to the war on terrorism, but whose cumulative importance will mark this term as an unusually eventful one.
The Bush administration also has a major stake in a California atheist's challenge to the mandatory classroom recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance including the phrase "under God."
Additionally, the justices will determine whether disabled people can sue the states for damages when denied access to public buildings; they will rule on patients' right to sue their health insurance companies for damages when denied benefits; and they will decide key questions regarding the scope of the right to remain silent in police custody.
Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist likes the court to stick to a firm schedule according to which all majority opinions must be circulated to all justices by the beginning of June. Then June remains for the drafting of dissenting opinions and the revision of majorities. The whole process is supposed to be wrapped up by the beginning of July, in time for the court's summer recess.
The result is a constant flurry of work as the justices, aided by their law clerks, endeavor to produce their own assignments and to review a stream of writings flowing out of the other eight chambers in the court.
"The last day of oral arguments is a little like the last day of final exams, and then you wake up the next day and have to grade all the papers," said David Frederick, a former law clerk to the late Justice Byron R. White.
Meanwhile, the court's normal work of accepting or rejecting appeals petitions and ruling on last-minute applications for stays of execution continues unabated.
For clerks, "the accumulated fatigue that sets in is hard to express unless you've been through it," Frederick said.
In the terrorism cases, which are closely related, the challenge for the court is not only to write opinions that are persuasive in each case, but to write opinions that make sense taken together.
"They need a vision," Goldstein said. "The question is, will they do as good a job as they would have done if they had more time?"
These are among the most closely watched cases awaiting decision by the court:
• Rasul v. Bush, No. 03-334, and al Odah v. U.S., No. 03-343. In these consolidated lawsuits, British, Australian and Kuwaiti detainees at Guantanamo Bay asked the court to recognize their right to ask a U.S. court for a writ of habeas corpus. The Bush administration says the jurisdiction of U.S. courts does not include a prison for enemy combatants outside U.S. territory.
• Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, No. 03-6696, and Rumsfeld v. Padilla, No. 03-1027. These are the cases of two U.S. citizens, suspected of aiding terrorist organizations, who have been declared enemy combatants by Bush and held without charge in a military brig. They are asking the court to say that the president lacks authority to detain citizens without charge; the administration counters that the detentions are part of the president's overall use of force against terrorism, which Congress approved.
• Cheney v. U.S. District Court, No. 03-475, involves the vice president's energy task force, which critics accuse of having been under the undue influence of industry. The White House has been fighting the suit for two years, arguing that disclosure of the task force's deliberations would chill the free flow of confidential advice to the president.
• Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow, No. 02-1624, is the case of the California atheist who objects to his daughter's class being required to recite the Pledge of Allegiance. The school district, backed by the Bush administration, says that the pledge is not a prayer but a patriotic exercise.
• Tennessee v. Lane, No. 02-1667, a major test of the court's states' rights doctrine, presents the question of whether disabled people can sue state governments for failing to provide access to state buildings; the state objects that Congress lacked the power to subject it to such a suit.
-------- homeland security
Airports to Test New Defenses Against Terrorist Infiltration
Sunday, May 2, 2004; Page A08
By Sari Horwitz
Washington Post Staff Writer
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A59766-2004May1.html
The Transportation Security Administration is launching new measures at selected airports in the country aimed at thwarting terrorists who might use uniforms or identification stolen from airline or airport employees to carry out attacks.
Airports in Newark and Miami are among the largest of eight in the country where a pilot program using biometric technology to control access to secure areas will begin in the coming weeks. In most instances, employees will be able to pass through gates or use elevators to secure sections of airports only if their fingerprints or an eye scan matches information on a special biometrical ID card.
Other airports involved in the pilot program, which will be announced this week, are in Minneapolis-St. Paul; Boise, Idaho; Savannah, Ga.; Fort Myers, Fla.; Tampa; and Providence, R.I., according to TSA documents.
The Homeland Security Department has warned airport authorities about thieves stealing uniforms and ID cards from airline and airport workers.
In a confidential April 8 bulletin, "Potential Terrorist Use of Official Identification Uniforms or Vehicles Update," the agency told federal, state and local agencies that "attempts to acquire official identification, uniforms or vehicles to facilitate attacks or smuggle personnel or weapons would be consistent with the tactics and techniques of [al Qaeda] and other extremist groups."
"Terrorists overseas have disguised vehicles and used emergency, police and other official vehicles in carrying out bombing attacks," the bulletin said. "They have also, in at least one case, disguised themselves as law enforcement officers to carry out an attack."
Homeland Security officials would not comment on the confidential bulletin except to say they have no evidence that the uniforms and credentials have been stolen by terrorist groups.
"But we want to remind security officials to secure all official uniforms and identification cards," said agency spokesman Brian Roehrkasse.
A first confidential warning about stolen uniforms and credentials was sent by Homeland Security officials to federal, state and local authorities in July -- a week after burglars took uniforms, keys and identification from the New York apartment of two Delta Air Lines flight attendants. That warning said that the TSA "continues to receive reports" about such thefts and that "recent reporting also suggests a possible trend in the thefts of uniforms, vehicles and other items used by police, firefighters and emergency response personnel."
In the more recent bulletin, the agency advised aviation officials to keep comprehensive records of official identification cards, badges, decals, uniforms and license plates. They should also document any anomalies and cancel access for items that are lost or stolen, Homeland Security officials said.
Stolen uniforms, identification and vehicles have been used in recent terrorist attacks in other countries.
In November, al Qaeda members disguised themselves as police officers to attack an upscale residential compound in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Seventeen people died. In October, Iraqi insurgent groups used an ambulance to penetrate the Baghdad office of the International Committee of the Red Cross. The ambulance exploded, and 10 people died.
TSA spokesman Mark Hatfield said the pilot program is expected to expand to other airports.
John Mazor, spokesman for the Air Line Pilots Association, a union representing 67,000 commercial pilots, said the program represents a long-awaited effort to make airports more secure -- one that pilots hope will become mandatory at all airports.
"Identification cards using these technologies are virtually foolproof," Mazor said. "It's one of those ideas that you wonder why they didn't do years ago."
--------
U.S. Airports Testing Defenses Against Possible Missile Strikes
Sunday, May 2, 2004; Page A10
By Sara Kehaulani Goo
Washington Post Staff Writer
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A59856-2004May1.html
U.S. airports across the country are conducting exercises aimed at improving their defenses against a possible surface-to-air missile attack on a commercial airliner.
No fresh intelligence has spurred the efforts, the Transportation Security Administration said. But Homeland Security officials have said they are concerned that terrorists may try to strike in the United States at some time in this presidential election year.
The exercises reflect a new push by government and aviation leaders to broaden their overall response to the threat from relatively inexpensive and readily available shoulder-fired missiles.
In recent weeks, airport officials, airlines, local police and even nearby community groups have been asked to participate in tabletop exercises, in which participants discuss how they would handle various scenarios ranging from suspicious persons observing takeoffs and landings near an airport to the emergency response to an airliner shot out of the sky.
TSA spokeswoman Yolanda Clark said the exercises are intended to heighten readiness among agencies and officials. "The focus is largely on our reaction to the threat and coordination" with various agencies and property owners near airports, she said. The exercises are part of an earlier threat "mitigation" program last year in which the agency evaluated each U.S. airport's vulnerabilities to a missile attack.
Some government and aviation leaders recently have shifted their views about how best to protect the nation's airliners from shoulder-fired missiles. Last year, lawmakers were eager to spend as much as $6 billion to equip commercial planes with anti-missile devices that would send the weapons off course. The cost -- $1 million per aircraft -- the lengthy evaluation process and a number of operational questions have prompted an effort to include a wider array of protective measures.
"There are a whole host of problems" with installing anti-missile technology on commercial airplanes, said Rep. John L. Mica (R-Fla.), who once championed the idea but said other measures might be more effective in the near term.
Instead of rushing ahead to install anti-missile equipment on planes, Mica authored legislation that was passed last week out of the House aviation subcommittee he chairs calling for a quick federal review of the anti-missile technology and urging the Bush administration to work with foreign countries to control the number of missiles.
The aviation industry has balked at the expense and maintenance associated with installing the anti-missile technology. James C. May, the airline industry's chief lobbyist in Washington, said last week that the technology would be akin to "putting a Volkswagen bus on the belly of an airplane" in terms of added expense and maintenance.
Israeli airline El Al announced last week that it is moving forward to test anti-missile technology for its planes and is seeking permission to install the equipment on its planes flying to the United States. But the effort to take similar steps for a U.S. fleet of more than 6,800 passenger planes has proved to be much more complicated.
Airbus North America Holdings Chairman Allan McArtor yesterday said he was skeptical about the anti-missile technologies currently being tested by the Department of Homeland Security in a study. "I don't believe we have the enabling technology" to do it now, McArtor said.
One system that would emit flares from the aircraft's belly to confuse incoming missiles poses too many safety risks to aircraft on the ground and would require extensive maintenance, he said. Another technology would confuse and distract a heat-seeking missile but its lasers could become a distraction for pilots on the ground, he said.
Mica said he changed his mind about rushing ahead with anti-missile devices after visiting a facility in California earlier this year where the equipment was being installed on military aircraft. He learned that the laser technology requires large amounts of energy that commercial airplanes do not have and the installation of the device would take as long as month, resulting in many planes being out of service for too long. In addition, Mica said any anti-missile technology would have to be approved by the Federal Aviation Administration.
"If we go through the normal process of FAA certification for this equipment, it might not be until our kids are flying as adults that we see these things on aircraft," Mica said. Instead, his new bill calls for an expedited FAA review process, and he said he would like to require anti-missile devices on new aircraft such as the superjumbo jet now being built by Airbus.
Still, some security experts say the threat of an airliner being shot down requires faster action to install the anti-missile devices. "Once, God forbid, one U.S. airliner will be blown up by a missile and we will lose hundreds of innocent lives, you will see how the government will not only have $8 billion [for the technology], the government will have $16 billion," said Isaac Yeffet, former director of security at El Al. "We need to act."
In the past several decades, five large turbojets have been attacked by shoulder-fired missiles and two were hit, resulting in 171 fatalities, according to a Congressional Research Service report issued last year. All but one of the incidents occurred in Africa; the other was in Afghanistan. In war-torn areas such as Africa, Afghanistan and Iraq, military and commercial aircraft have been targets of attacks by ground-based missiles, which can be shot from as far away as 30 miles and reach 18,000 feet.
In 2002, two shoulder-fired missiles were fired at an Israeli passenger aircraft in Kenya, but they missed.
Bush administration officials said they are already taking steps outlined in the new bill. "We've done a multi-layered approach, and it's a multi-agency approach, too," said Homeland Security spokeswoman Michelle Petrovich. She said it involves diplomatic efforts from the Department of State and the Air Force, which is studying how aircraft can survive a missile attack.
This summer, three contractors that won awards from Homeland Security to develop and test anti-missile technology for commercial airlines are expected to complete studies. By summer 2005 they will test prototypes.
--------
Airlines Confirm Giving Passenger Data to FBI After 9/11
Sunday, May 2, 2004; Page A14
By Sara Kehaulani Goo
Washington Post Staff Writer
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A59859-2004May1.html
The nation's largest airlines said yesterday that they provided passenger records to the Federal Bureau of Investigation after the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, in an acknowledgement that data sharing between the industry and government had been more widespread than previously known.
The FBI requested as much as one year's worth of passenger records from American, United, Delta and Northwest airlines in the days after the attacks, those airlines said yesterday. That could amount to millions of individual records. The airlines said they were willing to comply with the request because the FBI issued subpoenas and because they felt a sense of duty to assist the investigation.
"This was a criminal investigation by the FBI that involved two of our planes and 18 of our employees," United Airlines spokeswoman Jean Medina said. "We complied fully with their request."
It was not clear yesterday whether other carriers received the FBI requests for data, which were first reported yesterday by the New York Times. Southwest Airlines said it was never asked to turn over passenger records to the FBI. US Airways and Continental Airlines did not return phone calls seeking comment.
An FBI spokeswoman said yesterday that the bureau wanted the data to get information about the 19 hijackers and possible co-conspirators. She said the information has likely been shared with the bureau's joint terrorism task forces, which include local law enforcement and other anti-terror officials from agencies such as the Department of Homeland Security.
"The airlines were very cooperative in the investigation, especially given the seriousness of the situation," FBI spokeswoman Donna Spiser said. "We needed to use the records to see if there were different travel patterns [among the hijackers] and to see if there were additional threats, especially because there was a rumor about a second wave of attacks."
Spiser said she believes the information request was a one-time event and the FBI is not currently receiving passenger data from U.S. airlines.
In the past year, several airlines admitted that they had secretly provided the same kinds of records, which contain home addresses, telephone numbers and credit card information, to government agencies or contractors as part of airline security projects.
JetBlue, Northwest and American airlines face class action lawsuits filed on behalf of passengers who claim the carriers violated their privacy because they shared their private information without telling them. Many carriers' published privacy policies dictate they will only share information with travel-related companies, and some give passengers the option to not allow data sharing. Following the initial disclosure that information was shared, many companies have said they will only provide passenger data to government agencies when required to do so. Northwest Airlines was involved in both the FBI data sharing and a separate project in which the airline provided three months' of passenger information to the National Aeronautics and Space Administration for an airline security study. The airline previously defended its cooperation with NASA, and yesterday said its cooperation with the FBI was appropriate. "By providing the passenger name record data directly to the FBI, in the context of a federal law enforcement investigation, Northwest acted appropriately and consistently with its own privacy policy and all applicable federal laws," the airline said in a statement. "It is the policy of Northwest Airlines to cooperate fully with government authorities in aviation security and counter terrorist activity."
Privacy advocates raised a concern about the breadth of the subpoenas, saying the disclosure represents a troubling precedent in which private companies are willing to comply with broad subpoenas for private records, especially when it's not clear how the information will be used or shared with other groups.
"What this all goes to is how vulnerable we now are to the government snooping around in our records," said Barry Steinhardt, director of the American Civil Liberties Union's technology and liberty program.
-------- justice
Patriot Act allows surge of secret searches in United States
Sunday, May 02, 2004
By Richard Schmitt,
Los Angeles Times /Seattle Times
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2001917897_search02.html
WASHINGTON - Underscoring changes in domestic surveillance allowed under the USA Patriot Act, the Justice Department said in a report released today that it conducted hundreds more secret searches in the United States last year under foreign intelligence surveillance laws.
The department said the use of covert search powers, which were enhanced under the Patriot Act, shows how federal investigators have stepped up the war against terrorism in the United States over the past 32 months.
But civil-liberties groups expressed concern over the increase because the targets of the searches are given fewer legal protections than suspects in normal criminal cases. The process of obtaining approval and executing the searches and surveillance also is shrouded in secrecy.
In an annual report to Congress, the Justice Department said it obtained approval to conduct electronic surveillance and physical searches in more than 1,700 intelligence cases last year. According to the Justice Department, the number of searches has surged 85 percent in the past two years; about 1,200 searches were authorized in 2002, and only 900 in 2001.
The report did not identify or discuss specific cases.
Attorney General John Ashcroft said in a prepared statement that the data illustrated how the Justice Department and the FBI are "acting judiciously and moving aggressively" to uncover and prevent terrorist attacks in the United States. "These court-approved surveillance and search orders are vital to keeping America safe from terror," Ashcroft said.
The burst of activity is a direct result of the easing of standards for intelligence-gathering that was authorized by the Patriot Act, the terror-fighting law enacted six weeks after the attacks on the Pentagon and World Trade Center.
Under the new law, the government can obtain secret warrants by showing that a significant purpose of the search has to do with intelligence-gathering, as opposed to a criminal investigation.
The new procedures were upheld in court in November 2002.
The search applications are reviewed by a federal tribunal known as the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, known as FISA for the act it regulates. The court was set up in the mid-1970s as a check on government power amid revelations of massive illegal spying on political dissidents and other citizens by the FBI.
But the court - whose proceedings are secret - has become a lightning rod for civil-liberties concerns in the post-Sept. 11 era.
A major fear is that investigators are using FISA procedures to bypass stricter requirements that cover the issuance of search warrants in criminal cases, in which the government must show probable cause that a crime was committed. The concern is that the process is enabling the government to chip away at protections afforded defendants under the Fourth Amendment prohibition against illegal searches.
Information gleaned from the intelligence searches can be used later in criminal prosecutions, but defendants in such proceedings have fewer rights to attack the basis of the searches or to obtain intercepted information.
Moreover, if intelligence searches do not lead to criminal prosecutions, targets never are told that they were under surveillance; criminal suspects, even if never charged, must receive notice of any surveillance.
"The real mistakes never come to light" in intelligence cases, said James Dempsey, executive director of the Center for Democracy and Technology, a Washington think tank.
-------- prisons / prisoners
Guantanamo -- A Holding Cell In War on Terror
Prison Represents a Problem That's Tough to Get Out Of
By Scott Higham, Joe Stephens and Margot Williams
Washington Post Staff Writers
Sunday, May 2, 2004; Page A01
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A58702-2004May1?language=printer
GUANTANAMO BAY, Cuba -- The newest prison in the war on terrorism is a multi-winged $31 million complex of gray concrete and steel designed to hold 100 captives for years to come. It stands in stark contrast to the original detention camp here, a collection of chain-link cages used two years ago to hold suspected terrorists and Taliban fighters caught when their sanctuary in Afghanistan collapsed.
Next week, officials will gather at the U.S. Navy base on this parched crescent of land in the Caribbean to commemorate the opening of the new facility, known as Camp 5. The new building signals permanence. It also signifies a problem yet unsolved.
While U.S. officials continue to see this patch of scrub encircled by brilliant blue water as the perfect place to hold prisoners in a war seemingly without end, the facility has evolved into a prison of sorts for the administration. It was easy to get in, but it is proving vexingly difficult to get out.
Today, the government remains responsible for about 600 detainees at the base, half of whom Pentagon officials would send back if they could obtain proper security guarantees from foreign governments. One hundred forty-seven detainees have been returned to their home countries. Six of the 600 have been designated to stand trial before military tribunals. Many of the detainees have been in custody for two years. Only a handful have seen a lawyer, and two have been formally charged.
The open-ended detentions have been condemned by foreign governments and human rights groups and are now being weighed by the U.S. Supreme Court, which is expected to rule by early summer. Some government advisers involved in the evolution of the prison camp are questioning the decision to indefinitely detain the men as enemy combatants, rather than classifying them as prisoners of war.
There are strains with close allies, including Britain. The Saudi government has carried complaints directly to President Bush and has grown frustrated by the lack of progress. "They are in a bind, and they don't know how to get out of it," said a senior Saudi official, who requested anonymity because of diplomatic sensitivities.
U.S. officials counter that they are making changes and releasing captives as quickly as possible, while trying to keep the world safe from terrorist attacks. "We freely admit we're learning this as we go along," said Paul W. Butler, who supervised detainee operations and is now a special assistant to Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld. "There were no blueprints for this."
The tale of how the Pentagon reached this point is a chronicle of a cascading series of decisions, made on the fly in the face of tremendous pressure. It is a narrative marked by bold moves and false starts, psychological warfare between guards and inmates, threats and incentives, allegations of mistreatment and pleas from families whose loved ones have been gone for months or years without explanation.
Some of the released detainees contended they were treated harshly and forced to falsely confess. But those reports remain unconfirmed, and members of Congress who have visited the base praised the humaneness of the captives' treatment and the professionalism of the troops.
Much of what has happened at Guantanamo has been shrouded in government secrecy, with most of the prison off-limits, detainee interviews prohibited and the names of the captives kept confidential. The Washington Post spent three months examining "Gitmo," touring portions of the prison camp and interviewing the military officials in charge, U.S. and foreign diplomats, congressional staffers, administration advisers and others with firsthand knowledge of the prison camp.
Using news accounts and information from lawyers and Web sites, the newspaper also compiled the largest public list of detainee names, encompassing 370 out of the 745 or so men detained at the camp since January 2002. Most of the detainees identified by name come from countries where al Qaeda has its deepest roots: Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen. The largest contingent comes from the country that supplied most of the Sept. 11, 2001, hijackers: Saudi Arabia.
Going to 'Gitmo'
The Guantanamo strategy was crafted in a hurry.
Twenty-six days after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, the United States began bombing attacks in Afghanistan, whose Taliban government had sheltered Osama bin Laden and his followers. Soon, U.S. troops were rounding up hundreds of ragtag soldiers and suspected terrorists on the battlefield. Other captives were being turned over by Afghan warlords.
The Pentagon wanted to put the captives out of circulation and find out what they knew.
Exactly how to do that raised novel legal questions for lawyers at the White House, the Pentagon, the Justice Department and the CIA. Should Taliban fighters be granted prisoner-of-war status? What about suspected members of al Qaeda? And where would the military hold the men?
There was little debate over how to classify those suspected of fighting for al Qaeda. The terrorist group was not a country and had never been a party to the Geneva conventions. Moreover, al Qaeda members intentionally killed civilians. Suspected terrorists captured by U.S. forces, the lawyers agreed, should be classified as enemy combatants and not given legal status as prisoners of war.
The status of Taliban fighters was less clear. Some lawyers reasoned that Afghanistan had signed the Geneva conventions and that the Taliban was recognized by some nations as a legitimate government, though not by the United States. These lawyers thought the Taliban fighters should be granted prisoner-of-war status, entitling them to certain rights and protections.
Other lawyers disagreed, arguing that the Taliban fighters should also be classified as enemy combatants.
"They were basically a criminal gang," said a former Justice Department lawyer who participated in the strategy sessions and requested anonymity because of the confidential nature of the deliberations. "They massacred civilians. They summarily executed prisoners. If people violate the core notion of the law, they shouldn't receive prisoner-of-war status. It's reserved for honorable warriors."
That argument prevailed.
The lawyers turned to identifying a detention site that would be outside the jurisdiction of the U.S. legal system, safe from attack and quiet enough for focused interrogations. Prison ships were considered. So were remote Pacific islands and the island of Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean, where the United States operates a military base under a lease with Britain.
Diego Garcia would have required agreements with the British, and Asian locations were deemed too vulnerable. Planners winnowed their list to include a military facility at Fort Leavenworth, Kan., and Alcatraz, the infamous island prison turned tourist attraction in San Francisco Bay, said Mark R. Jacobson, a former Pentagon official who helped devise the detention operation.
A more attractive choice remained.
The U.S. Navy base at Guantanamo Bay is the country's oldest overseas military installation. It dates to 1903, when the U.S. government leased 45 square miles from Cuba to establish a refueling station. Thirty-one years later, the two nations signed an open-ended agreement granting the United States use of the land and waterways. The U.S. government pays Cuba about $4,000 a year.
Over the years, Gitmo had served as a port for Navy ships, a holding facility for Haitian and Cuban refugees, and an operations base for U.S. drug interdiction efforts. The government lawyers reasoned that the base was beyond the reach of U.S. courts and could be easily defended. The remote location and the unlikelihood of escape or rescue could also put psychological pressure on the captives, adding to their "desperation" and compelling them to talk, said Jacobson, who is now a visiting scholar at Ohio State University.
The Bush administration approved the plan.
On Jan. 11, 2002 -- four months to the day after the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon -- a military transport plane touched down at Guantanamo, taxiing alongside a cavernous hangar resembling an old-style roller skating rink. Twenty suspected terrorists and fighters were on board that day. Over the next 10 days, five more planes would bring 140 more captives.
The men were taken to Camp X-Ray through two rows of chain-link fencing topped with razor wire. Unpainted plywood shacks on wooden stilts served as guard towers. A plywood hut doubled as a command center and a place for soldiers to escape the Caribbean sun. The captives were escorted to the cages, each 8 feet by 8 feet. Constructed on slabs of concrete and covered with sheets of metal and wood, the collection of padlocked cages looked like an oversize dog kennel.
A Navy photographer took pictures that were transmitted around the world. Louise Christian, a human rights lawyer in London, recalled seeing the images flash across her television screen.
"I was aghast," Christian said.
One picture showed the captives at Camp X-Ray, shackled and clad in orange jumpsuits, kneeling in the dirt and gravel. The military had strapped muffs over their ears, surgical masks over their mouths and goggles spray-painted black over their eyes. Authorities described the gear as necessary for security during the long plane trip from Afghanistan.
The photographs touched off international protests. A British tabloid declared on its front page: "Torture!"
An infuriated Bush administration went on the offensive. "These are the worst of a very bad lot," Vice President Cheney said.
Human rights groups pressured Britain and other countries that had citizens held at Guantanamo to take a stand. The families of men who went missing during the Afghan war began calling lawyers such as Christian. "The outrage was sparked by those original images," she said.
Control of the Block
By the time John R. VanNatta arrived at Guantanamo in May 2002, military contractors were constructing a new, more permanent prison complex called Camp Delta. The warden of a maximum-security prison in Indiana, VanNatta also served as a command sergeant major in the Army Reserves.
The differences between the old and new camps were striking.
"X-Ray was a very primitive camp. It was extremely hard on the soldiers. They were put in tents right next to it. They never had an escape from the wire. The chanting and name-calling continued into the night. They had no relief," he said. "It was also hard on the detainees. The location was further away from the shore, and the less air flow, the hotter it became."
In November 2002, VanNatta was put in charge. By then, there were more than 600 detainees from 42 countries, and Camp Delta was experiencing difficulties.
Military police officers were not trained to work in what had become a maximum-security prison. There was no classification system at the camp -- cooperative captives were commingled with hard cases. There were few consequences for bad behavior.
Factions had also formed in the camp, and detainees were accumulating power. Leaders of the factions were intimidating other captives, threatening to harm their families if they cooperated, VanNatta said. Feces and mixtures of toothpaste and soap were flung at MPs and at detainees suspected of providing information. Detainees stopped up toilets and backed up sewage lines with clothing and pieces of plastic meal containers, creating fetid pools of waste that stewed in the heat of the sun.
Detainees vowed to kill the MPs and their families. Name tags and unit insignias on the MPs' uniforms allowed captives to identify their home regions. The captives called out to the MPs using their last names, threatening to dispatch terrorists to their homes in the United States, VanNatta said.
To bolster security, the chain-link fences of Camp X-Ray were replaced with thick, wire-mesh walls at Camp Delta. Each cell contained a squat-style flush toilet, a blanket, some prayer beads, a Koran and black, spray-painted arrows on the steel bunks pointing the way to Mecca. While conditions had improved, the captives could still communicate by talking through the open-air cages. They discussed who they believed was cooperating, and plotted threats and intimidation.
The International Committee of the Red Cross had largely refrained from publicly criticizing the camp for fear of losing access to the detainees. But on Oct. 9, 2003, a series of suicide attempts prompted the organization to announce that it was troubled by the "deterioration in the psychological health of a large number" of prisoners. "One cannot keep these detainees in this pattern, this situation, indefinitely."
By then, there had been 32 suicide attempts by 21 captives. The most serious involved a captive from Saudi Arabia last year, said Najeeb Nuaimi, a former justice minister of Qatar who is representing the families of dozens of prisoners. The Saudi was attending school in Pakistan when he was seized in a raid by U.S. and Pakistani forces, Nuaimi said. The man was interrogated and then flown to Guantanamo, where he told authorities he was not a terrorist and had not fought for the Taliban.
"He tried to tell them he would try to kill himself, 'if you don't release me.' " Nuaimi said. "They didn't listen."
The man wrote a letter saying goodbye to his family and tied a makeshift noose around his neck in his cell. MPs cut him down. But he suffered a brain hemorrhage and fell into a coma. The Pentagon considered sending him home, Nuaimi said, but the man's relatives decided that his best chance for recovery rested with the doctors at Guantanamo. He has since come out of the coma and has been slowly regaining his ability to talk and walk with the help of physical therapists. He can now dictate letters to his family, Nuaimi said.
VanNatta said he was concerned by the growing number of suicide attempts.
"If you have no idea what's going to happen to you, that's extremely stressful," he said. "But if the mission is to collect intelligence and get information that is beneficial to our side, then despair and depression may be a good thing."
Some attempts were made by men who were truly despondent, he said. But the vast majority appeared to have been feigned, designed to curry favor with faction leaders. Other captives knew that they would be moved closer to an MP station on the cell block after a suicide attempt, where they could overhear conversations and possibly collect intelligence, VanNatta said.
He said changes at the camp, coupled with a requirement that MPs enter cells during suicide attempts without waiting for response teams, lowered the number of attempts. Over time, the camp also borrowed tricks from U.S. prisons, such as swapping standard military blankets -- which can be twisted into garrotes -- with foam-like blankets that rip when they are twisted or stretched.
'A Tremendous Motive'
The military worked to transform Delta into a modern-day prison. MPs received better training and their uniforms were "sterilized" -- they placed duct tape over their name plates, and some covered their unit insignias. They fastened green fabric screens to fences throughout the camp, blocking communication between cell blocks and recreation yards.
A reward system was established -- a "disciplinary incentive matrix" that is used in many U.S. prisons. After 30 days of good behavior, detainees could be moved to less restrictive camps that offer perks, such as communal meals and soccer games. Cooperation could earn games of checkers or chess, a religious-themed novel or two desserts at dinner.
Allowing cooperative detainees to swap their bright-orange coveralls with white ones, which look more like traditional Afghan garb, became one of the most productive incentives. MPs make a show of carrying the white clothing through a cellblock, then parading the newly outfitted detainees through the facility.
"It's a big deal for them," said Jacobson, the former Pentagon official.
The new system also improved the flow of intelligence, VanNatta said. "We may have stopped some terrorist attacks."
But interrogation experts, psychologists and military lawyers say promises of favors and better treatment can lead captives to concoct tales. "It appears to create a tremendous motive to give the investigators and interrogators what they want," said Navy Lt. Cmdr. Philip Sundel, a military lawyer assigned to defend a captive suspected of being a bodyguard of bin Laden.
Sundel's client, Ali Hamza Ahmed Sulayman al Bahlul of Yemen, has been in solitary confinement at what is called Camp Echo. Sundel said he is concerned that detainees such as al Bahlul may fabricate stories to obtain better treatment.
Camp Echo is off-limits to most visitors. Some who have been there describe it as a collection of small, one-story "sea huts" divided into two rooms. Inside each, a single captive is kept in a cage, guarded by an MP 24 hours a day.
Salim Ahmed Hamdan has been held at Camp Echo since December 2003, court records show. He allegedly admitted that he served as a driver on bin Laden's farm in Afghanistan. His lawyer, Navy Lt. Cmdr. Charles Swift, argues that the planned military tribunals are unconstitutional and that Bush needs congressional approval for them to proceed.
To help examine the case of his client, Swift brought in Daryl Matthews, a psychiatry professor at the University of Hawaii at Manoa who visited Guantanamo last year as part of a Pentagon medical team.
After reviewing a sworn statement by Hamdan, Matthews wrote in an opinion filed in court that the captive was let out for exercise only three times a week. Matthews added that Hamdan was becoming increasingly despondent over his situation.
"The conditions of his confinement make Mr. Hamdan particularly susceptible to mental coercion and false confession," Matthews wrote.
U.S. Army Gen. Geoffrey D. Miller, who commanded the detention operation until recently, dismissed speculation about false confessions and bad information. He said that each piece of information is vetted by a variety of domestic and foreign intelligence sources and databases, and that 90 percent of the intelligence ultimately proves to be valid. Miller is now in charge of the detainee operation in Iraq, where 8,000 prisoners are being held and six American soldiers have been charged with mistreating some of the captives.
Establishing Rapport
Intelligence at Guantanamo is collected by five-member "Tiger Teams." They are composed of interrogators, analysts, translators and representatives from agencies such as the FBI and the CIA. The teams can question captives at any time, escorting them into interrogation rooms in squat white buildings near the cell blocks. The rooms have tables, a few chairs and one-way mirrors. In some, posters in Arabic tell detainees that they are missed by their families and needed back home. The captives can be shackled and chained to steel rings fastened to the floor.
The sessions are not videotaped or tape recorded, Miller said. The interrogations are designed primarily to yield intelligence, not evidence for a court, he said, adding that taping "causes us legal problems." Detainees might gain access to tapes through court proceedings. "Then, it becomes exculpatory," Miller said.
Tiger Team members may not hit or slap a detainee, said Jacobson, the former Pentagon official, who has observed some of the sessions. In fact, the most effective interrogations involve establishing rapport, not intimidation. For example, Jacobson said, an interrogator may praise a detainee's ingenuity in designing a particular bomb. "Interrogation is not screaming at someone for hours," he said.
In one case, an interrogator used a blackboard to list every counterintelligence technique employed by a particular detainee -- such as staring intently at a wall to block out his questioner's voice. Next to each technique, the interrogator listed the page number in a standard al Qaeda manual from which the technique was taken. The detainee eventually lost his composure and smirked, Jacobson said, and a tenuous bond was achieved.
"It is a game; you are playing back and forth," Jacobson said. "And some of these detainees are very tough."
Back in the United States, the value of the intelligence has been met with mixed reviews. While administration officials said it has been significant, some intelligence officers and others familiar with the interrogation sessions said they are not impressed.
One former CIA officer, Peter Probst, said he believes the Tiger Teams at Guantanamo have wrung the detainees dry. Probst said the captives might be of more use after they are released because intelligence agencies could monitor them.
"Even if they were marginal, they would be of interest when released," Probst said. Some released detainees might actually have been enticed into becoming double agents, he said, while others could carry misleading intelligence back to al Qaeda leaders. That could create paranoia and disrupt terrorist operations.
Another U.S. source familiar with Guantanamo said Pentagon officials are in a lose-lose situation with the less-valuable detainees. "After a while, intelligence gets stale and you begin to get the sense that we're just holding these people forever," the source said. "They weren't building cases against them. They were just holding them and keeping them off the street because they were afraid that one or more would do something bad."
The secrecy surrounding the operation has also provided ammunition to critics of the administration. The military has permitted hundreds of journalists to visit the base, but they must adhere to strict rules and be accompanied by handlers at all times. Journalists are required to sign contracts not to speak to detainees. Last year, a detainee shouted to a group of visitors, asking if they were journalists. When the visitors replied that they were from the British Broadcasting Corp., military escorts quickly ended the tour.
Even members of the Senate have had trouble getting responses from the Pentagon. Last December, Sens. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.) visited the base and asked Rumsfeld when the detainees' status would be resolved.
"We firmly believe it is now time to make a decision on how the United States will move forward regarding the detainees," the senators wrote to Rumsfeld on Dec. 12.
Two months later, Rumsfeld replied that a determination on the status of the detainees was up in the air because "our nation continues to be in an armed conflict. As with any armed conflict, no one can predict when its end will occur."
Butler, the Pentagon official who oversaw Guantanamo, said the administration is doing the best it can under difficult circumstances. He said that nearly a third of the captives are "hard-core" terrorists and Taliban fighters, and that interrogators have collected valuable information from them, enabling intelligence officers to disrupt terrorist cells and figure out how al Qaeda is organized and financed.
"You are balancing two very important concepts: The notion of wanting to provide security and not allowing people to go back to terrorism and do harmful things, against recognizing the fact that we have people in custody . . . and we've got to do something with them," Butler said.
Though the Pentagon remains reluctant to disclose much information about the captives and the intelligence they have provided, Butler released limited descriptions of 10 suspected terrorists without identifying them by name.
One is believed to have links to a financier of the Sept. 11 hijackings. Another is a suspected al Qaeda member who was allegedly planning attacks on oil tankers in the Persian Gulf. A suspected member of an al Qaeda-supported terrorist cell in Afghanistan allegedly took part in a grenade attack on a foreign journalist's car. A fourth is suspected of serving as an explosives expert for al Qaeda and allegedly designed the prototype of a shoe bomb that could bring down an airliner.
Butler called the group "merely illustrative" and "not comprehensive."
The captive with the Sept. 11 link appears to be Mohamed al Qahtani, who investigators suspect was planning to meet lead hijacker Mohamed Atta in Orlando a month before the attacks. Qahtani was prevented from entering the country by an alert U.S. Customs agent and later captured in Afghanistan.
U.S. officials have never disclosed where they are holding their most-valued detainees, including Khalid Sheik Mohammed and Ramzi Binalshibh, both suspected of masterminding the 2001 terrorist attacks. In addition to Guantanamo, captives are being held at Bagram air base and Kandahar in Afghanistan, and the government has placed others in undisclosed locations.
'A Very Bad Way to Live'
With political pressure building, the Pentagon began to send some detainees home. On Oct. 27, 2002, three Afghans and one Pakistani were released. Five months later, 18 detainees were set free. In May 2003, 14 more went home, and four Saudis were sent to their country for further detention.
The Pentagon, in an attempt to relieve political pressure, is releasing some suspects who should still be behind bars, Jacobson contended. He said that may be the unavoidable result of not granting the detainees prisoner-of-war status from the beginning. If the Pentagon had followed that route, it could have used a formal legal process to deny rights to those who are truly enemy combatants.
"We were too clever by half on this one," Jacobson said, referring to himself and his colleagues at the Pentagon. "We put ourselves in a more difficult position."
Some of those released became local celebrities. Most denied working for al Qaeda or the Taliban, saying instead that they were in the wrong place at the wrong time. Some said they were forced to fight for the Taliban. Most recounted being taken to U.S. military installations at the Bagram air base or in Kandahar, where they said they were abused during interrogations.
Once in Cuba, most said they were treated well but traumatized by their uncertain fate.
"I was in such a small cell and couldn't go outside for many days," recalled one man from Afghanistan, Sulaiman Shah, who said he was picked up for no reason by U.S. troops. "My toilet was next to my bed, and it was a very bad way to live."
This January, the Pentagon released three juveniles who had been held in a special camp called Iguana, named after the three-foot lizards that roam the base. One of the boys, Ismail Agha, told The Post in Afghanistan that he was treated well and learned to read and write English during his stay. He said he played soccer, slept in an air-conditioned room and showered twice a day. "Me go to Cuba, speak English now," the 15-year-old said proudly.
But others released recently have told more troubling tales. On March 9, the Pentagon returned five British captives to Britain, where authorities immediately set them free. Three of them said in newspaper interviews that they were roughed up and forced to falsely confess to terrorist activities.
Pentagon officials dismissed the stories as lies. Human rights groups monitoring Guantanamo have found little evidence of mistreatment or the use of "stress and duress techniques," such as depriving detainees of sleep or forcing them to stand for extended periods of time. "We are not getting any information that severe types of stress are being applied at Guantanamo," said Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch, an international group based in New York. "We have some indication that at Guantanamo, over time, they have become more convinced a 'good cop' approach is more effective."
Still, the stories of mistreatment fueled anger overseas.
In recent months, relatives of detainees have traveled to the United States to tell their stories. Azmat Begg's son, Moazzam, has been in U.S. custody for two years, first at Bagram, now at Guantanamo. U.S. officials contend that Begg learned to make chemical bombs at an al Qaeda training camp in Afghanistan and translated motivational speeches for al Qaeda fighters. He is one of the six men designated to stand trial before a military tribunal, but formal charges have not been filed.
His father said that if his son committed a crime, he should be prosecuted.
"I would like to see the charges published against him," Azmat Begg said. "The mother cries. The whole family cries."
A Unique Environment
Before the 2001 terrorist attacks, the Navy was downsizing Guantanamo. Today, the base is booming. When Camp 5 opens next week, the prison's capacity will rise to 1,100. The military spends about $118 million a year to run the prison camps and related operations. It has awarded $110 million worth of work to KBR, formerly Kellogg Brown & Root, a subsidiary of Halliburton Co., to build prison cells and other facilities. Another company, the Dick Corp., has received a $14.5 million contract to build a headquarters for a criminal investigation task force. Tens of millions of dollars are being spent on new water lines, street lights, power generators, officers' housing and air conditioners for the elementary school of base officers' children.
Butler, the senior Pentagon official, said a review system is now in place to determine who can go home. Many could join the 134 who have already been released and the 13 transferred. Butler said "at least half" of the 600 who remain could be returned to their home countries immediately for further detention or prosecution. That has not happened, he said, because the United States has been unable to secure guarantees from foreign governments.
"There is a large group of that remaining population that we would love to be able to transfer back to their countries," Butler said. "We're really not interested in being the world's jailer."
The Supreme Court may be the deciding factor. By early summer, the justices are expected to rule on whether the U.S. Constitution extends to Guantanamo and if the detainees can be held indefinitely without being charged or provided with lawyers.
VanNatta ended his tour as superintendent of Camp Delta in September. Today, he says he is proud of what he and his troops accomplished.
"That was the most important year I ever spent, because I think we saved lives," said VanNatta, now back running the maximum-security prison north of Indianapolis.
"If it comes out the way I think it will, it will be viewed as the most unique prison environment ever created. If it comes out that the information we collected did save lives, it will be viewed as one of the smartest moves ever made. If it's proven that there was no intelligence, then it's going to be viewed as a superpower using its power unchecked."
Staff writers John Mintz, R. Jeffrey Smith and Dana Priest in Washington and David B. Ottaway in Saudi Arabia contributed to this report.
-------- POLITICS
-------- propaganda wars
TV broadcast listing US dead sparks outrage
May 2, 2004
Reuters
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/05/01/1083224646929.html
Veteran US journalist Ted Koppel devoted his Nightline program on Friday to broadcasting the names and photographs of 721 American soldiers killed in Iraq, sparking outrage from conservatives who called it anti-war propaganda.
But Koppel said the show, extended to 40 minutes from its normal half-hour to accommodate all the names, was a politically neutral way of honouring those who had died.
"Our goal tonight was to elevate the fallen above the politics and the daily journalism," he said at the end of the program. "The reading of those 721 names was neither intended to provoke opposition to the war nor as an endorsement."
Koppel said he was not opposed to the war in Iraq. "I am opposed to sustaining the illusion that war can be waged by the sacrifice of a few without burdening the rest of us in any way. I oppose the notion that to be at war is to forfeit the right to question, criticise or debate our leaders' policies," he said.
The show was broadcast on the eve of the anniversary of US President George Bush's May 1, 2003, "mission accomplished" declaration from the deck of an aircraft carrier that major combat in Iraq was over. Advertisement Advertisement
Since then, a guerilla war waged by a range of anti-US groups has intensified - 134 Americans were killed in April alone, the bloodiest month for US forces since the war began.
A media company whose executives have been strong supporters of Mr Bush, Maryland-based Sinclair Broadcast Group, barred its stations from airing the Nightline broadcast, calling it a political statement that failed to give all sides of the story.
----
Doubts over authenticity of Iraq abuse photos: BBC
LONDON (AFP)
May 02, 2004
http://www.spacewar.com/2004/040502102312.5hq17dyf.html
Sources close to the British armed forces have questioned the authenticity of photos apparently showing British troops abusing an Iraqi detainee, the BBC reported Sunday.
The British military has launched an investigation into photographs published Saturday in Britain's mass-circulation Daily Mirror newspaper appearing to show troops beating and urinating on an Iraqi prisoner in a camp near Basra in British-controlled southern Iraq.
However, Britain's national broadcaster said sources close to the Queen's Lancashire Regiment, from whose soldiers the Daily Mirror said it had obtained the photos, believe several aspects of the pictures are suspicious.
The rifle appears to be an SA80 mk 1, which was not issued to soldiers in Iraq, the BBC said.
Troops also wore berets or hard hats, not the floppy hats as seen in the pictures. The truck in the photo also appears to be a type never used in Iraq, the broadcaster said.
The photos, showing a man in army uniform appearing to urinate on a bound captive who had a bag over his head, were condemned by British Prime Minister Tony Blair on Saturday as "completely and utterly unacceptable"
Further pictures inside appeared to show a soldier jabbing the man -- who was picked up for suspected theft -- in the groin with a rifle, and the prisoner lying on the floor with a soldier's boot on his head.
The Daily Mirror -- the strongest voice of opposition to the Iraq war among the British press -- said that the prisoner, aged 18-20, was savagely beaten before being thrown from a moving truck. His fate is not known.
----
Censorship Dishonors the Dead -- and the Truth
Hiding coffin photos makes no sense. They pay tribute to sacrifice and function as a dose of reality for policymakers.
May 2, 2004
By William M. Arkin
William M. Arkin is a military affairs analyst who writes regularly for Opinion. E-mail: warkin@igc.org.
Los Angeles Times
http://fairuse.1accesshost.com/news1/latimes136.html
SOUTH POMFRET, Vt. - One day after the United States started bombing Iraq - the first time, in 1991 - Gen. H. Norman Schwarzkopf strode to a podium in Saudi Arabia and declared: "We're never going to get into the body count business." His intention, based on deeply felt belief, was to honor the American soldier and expunge the corruptions of Vietnam, where inflated enemy body counts had been used to sustain support for a conflict that proved impossible to win. But Schwarzkopf's personal principle has evolved over time to become a sweeping policy used by politicians to muzzle any talk of casualties in war-including American casualties.
Now with "Coffingate," the controversy over the Pentagon's censoring photographs of coffins of those killed in Iraq and Afghanistan, Schwarzkopf's principle has been extended even further. The Bush administration argues that its policy is one of respect for the fallen soldiers and their families. Sen. John F. Kerry argues that it's a matter of the American people's right to know.
Caught in the middle are those who have loved ones serving in Iraq. They find themselves face to face with old wounds, having to defend their sons and daughters, as parents did during Vietnam, in a world of highly polarized views. Their loyalty to their loved ones forces them into unquestioning support for U.S. policy, despite a string of government missteps and broken promises to the troops.
Though it is difficult to measure morale for the 135,000 troops in Iraq, one thing is clear: For a lot of common soldiers, censoring pictures of coffins, whatever boost that gives to morale back home, denies soldiers who gave their lives an honor they deserve.
"If a soldier is to make the ultimate sacrifice," one young soldier wrote from Iraq, "the least we can do, as individuals and as a nation, is to honor that sacrifice and say loudly to the rest of the world that this soldier, this Pfc. or this sergeant died for his country, and I will not let his death go untrumpeted. I will not hide his body away like something shameful."
On Jan. 18, 1991, when Army Gen. Schwarzkopf explained his so-called body count policy, he dismissed initial press reports about numbers of Iraqis killed in the Allied bombings as "nothing more than rough, wild estimates."
"Body count means nothing, absolutely nothing," Schwarzkopf repeated two weeks later. "All it is, is a wild guess that tends to mislead people as to what's going on.... I personally don't like the idea of issuing body counts on a comparative basis. I think it puts undue pressure on commanders to come up with numbers that are unreal."
Air Force Gen. Charles A. Horner, who led the air campaign in 1991, explained Schwarzkopf's feeling this way: "If you had Success A today, then you have to have Success B bigger the next day, or people become disenchanted.
"I don't think there was a day during [the Gulf War] that we didn't touch back and sort of touch those sore points from Vietnam," Horner said in his official oral history. "One of the first casualties in Vietnam was integrity.... "
Schwarzkopf later told Life magazine, "There was a loss of confidence on the part of the American people in their military leadership" as a result of the Vietnam War.
How did Schwarzkopf's adamant refusal to count enemy dead turn into today's fetish about controlling photographs of U.S. coffins returning from Iraq - photos that demonstrate the dignity and respect with which the remains are treated?
My guess is that in the 1991 Persian Gulf War, precision bombing and overwhelming military superiority had the potential to kill so many Iraqis that the numbers could have become politically and morally embarrassing. If military leaders had claimed that a small number of Iraqis died in a particular engagement, it might have been interpreted by some as covering up. Conversely, low numbers might have encouraged some to expect ever less bloody battles in the future.
Even a decade ago, it was widely believed that sensitivity to casualties was the United States' greatest weakness on the battlefield. So the body count mentality was recast. Any rending of clothes about American deaths in battle might be interpreted as insensitivity to the deaths of others. A comparatively small number of American casualties might connote an "unfair" fight waged by a remote and immune superpower. A large number might provide unwelcome succor for America's enemies.
Now we are back in Iraq, with all of the complications and emotions associated with what has become America's most deadly military conflict since the Vietnam War.
In much of the Arab and Islamic world, where gross images of Iraqi civilian casualties flourish and stories of excessive use of force by the U.S. military proliferate, Americans are seen as indifferent to Iraqi deaths. Meantime, other foreign news is filled with assertions that the administration wants to keep images of coffins out of the media to sanitize the war and manipulate American support for the occupation; in short, the administration is portrayed as duplicitous on the principles of free speech.
As a result of all this, the feelings of military families are in danger of being manipulated and the reputation of the American military is in danger of being tarnished once more.
Families and others may still believe in Operation Iraqi Freedom, be proud of military service and see the wisdom of a longer stay in Iraq. But they must resist being hijacked by Vietnam analogies, pro or con. Iraq may be a quagmire, but no one in the United States associates this war with the warrior. It is an article of faith in America today, across the political spectrum, that the all-volunteer military deserves our support, regardless of what one thinks of the war.
Meanwhile, the administration should truly honor those families and those who serve by lifting the prohibition on taking and releasing photographs of coffins from Iraq and Afghanistan arriving at Dover Air Force Base in Delaware.
The caskets serve as a poignant reminder of the premature loss of life. They counteract the tendency of some Americans not to pay much attention to the military. And they are a useful dose of reality for policymakers all too ready to rely on our super-competent military for everything.
To Kerry, I say: Drop the Vietnam fixation. There are plenty of good reasons for the U.S. to leave Iraq. There is much national soul-searching still needed about our erroneous justification for war and the strategy we pursue that brings us to where we are today. But I don't hear you arguing for withdrawal or for a radically different approach than Bush's.
As for the U.S. military, the body count business does come back to them. We need more integrity and candor from American military leaders, active and retired. Otherwise they are in danger of repeating their mistakes in Vietnam. We need to know what they really think: Are American troops just following orders and doing their duty, or is there - behind the fog of battle and the smoke of politics - a sensible military strategy and a real prospect of "winning" in Iraq?
----
Iraq reporting under fire again
May. 2, 2004.
ANTONIA ZERBISIAS
Toronto Star
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1083363013838&call_pageid=968867495754&col=969483191630
There is some good news coming out of the hunt for WMDs, as coalition forces in Iraq have, in fact, uncovered and disarmed one of the most dangerous and destructive weapons known to man: the free press.
- Jon Stewart, The Daily Show, April 5.
The word "ironic'' is totally inadequate for conveying the horrors unleashed after the White House's hand-picked "temporary governing body" in Iraq shut down Al-Hawza, a paper sponsored by the popular anti-American cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, at the end of March.
The reason the Coalition Provisional Authority cited for the closure was that the weekly - whose circulation was under 50,000 - "repeatedly uses rhetoric designed to incite violence against U.S. soldiers." Which it didn't, although it did carry an inaccurate report blaming a fatal bombing on the U.S. But given all the bombs dropped on Iraqis so far, who can blame Iraqis for thinking the U.S. might have blasted them again?
This is where the irony part comes in: The CPA said Al-Hawza incited violence against Americans, and shuttered it - therefore inciting violence against Americans.
Bottom line: In bringing freedom to the Iraqi people, the occupation team takes away the free press in Iraq.
Go figure.
But George W. Bush has little time for press freedom, though it's the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. (Of course, this is a leader with so small regard for the Constitution that he'd change it to ban same-sex marriages and violate it to divert resources into his war.)
Bush professes not to read any papers. He avoids answering journalists' questions. He has held a fraction of the solo news conferences his predecessors did. And he recently snapped at reporters, saying that they don't represent the public.
And maybe they don't, since they're not elected. (Some would say he wasn't elected either but let's not go there today.) Yet somebody has to ask the questions and tell citizens what is going on because the White House sure isn't about to. The government doesn't even want citizens to see the anonymous flag-draped caskets of the troops, when the boys and girls finally return home.
Then last week, the Bush-friendly Sinclair Broadcasting, one of the biggest TV station owners in the U.S., pushed ABC Nightline off its airwaves because host Ted Koppel planned to honour the 700-plus Americans killed. Sinclair spokesperson Mark Hyman told the New York Times that "Mr. Koppel's reading of the fallen will have no proportionality."
Yeah, tell that to the Iraqis, who count their civilian dead in the thousands. Thanks to the coverage on the news channels Al-Jazeera, based in Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates-based Al-Arabiya, they can.
The former in particular has been a thorn in Bush's butt ever since it telecast that first video from Osama Bin Laden. Its reporters have been bombed, shot, arrested and beaten by the Americans and yet they keep on keeping on.
Control Room, a behind-the-scenes look at Al-Jazeera during the actual war last spring, closes out the Hot Docs festival tonight. Watching it, and the efforts of its journalists to be as fair and balanced as they can be, you can't help but get the feeling that truth is in the eyes of the beholder. In fact, one of the central characters in the film, U.S. Marine Lt. Josh Rushing, a Central Command spokesperson, says Al-Jazeera is no different in that regard from the Ÿber-Bush-boosting Fox News, which "plays to American patriotism."
The film's comic relief comes from U.S. Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, shown constantly nattering on about truth: "It's up to all of us to try to tell the truth, to say what we know, to say what we don't know and recognize that we're dealing with people that are perfectly willing to lie to the world to attempt to further their case."
Last month, Rumsfeld attacked Al-Jazeera again, this time for showing images of Iraqi dead in Falluja. He called the programming "vicious, inaccurate and inexcusable."
Last week, the Bush administration began squeezing Al-Jazeera through government channels. Said State Department spokesperson Richard A. Boucher, both Al-Jazeera and Al-Arabiya "make the situation more tense, more inflamed and even more dangerous for Americans, for Iraqis, for Arabs."
How much longer until the U.S. shuts them down? And then what fresh hell will be ignited?
Perhaps the U.S. waged its war all wrong. Maybe it should never have bothered with changing the regimes in Iraq. It should have just forced everybody to change the channel.
-------- us politics
Bush makes no jokes about weapons of mass destruction
WASHINGTON (AFP)
May 02, 2004
http://www.spacewar.com/2004/040502044343.bj7cpvjf.html
US President George W. Bush refrained from making any jokes late Saturday about the US failure so far to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, adopting a rather dark tone at a traditional annual dinner organized by journalists covering the White House.
During a March 25 dinner for US television journalists, Bush remarked about a picture showing him down on all fours in his office, saying, "Those weapons of mass destruction have got to be somewhere!"
This joke drew criticisms from opposition Democrats.
This Saturday, President Bush made some jokes related to questions he had to contend with during his latest press conference on April 13.
He admitted he was "stumped" when a journalist asked him about the most serious mistake of his presidency.
"My biggest mistake was calling on him," Bush said.
He also suggested that reporters henceforth ask their questions through Bob Woodward, a famous journalist from The Washington Post.
"Then I would tell Bob Woodward, then he would tell you," the president joked.
Bob Woodward has just published a book chronicling a period leading up to the war in Iraq that was launched in March 2003.
"Our country is in a period of testing and sacrifice," Bush declared, adopting a more somber tone. "This evening we think about the families who grieve or wait for a loved one safe return."
Since the beginning of the war in Iraq, more than 700 US soldiers have been killed, including more than 130 in the past month alone.
----
President Declares Iraqi Life Better
By Rob Stein
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, May 2, 2004; Page A06
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A59732-2004May1.html
While the United States still faces difficult challenges in Iraq, life for the Iraqi people is steadily improving and the United States remains committed to establishing a free and peaceful nation, President Bush said yesterday.
One year after declaring that major combat operations had ended, Bush acknowledged in his weekly radio address that "on the ground in Iraq, we have serious and continuing challenges."
"Illegal militias and remnants of the regime, joined by foreign terrorists, are trying to take by force the power they could never gain by the ballot. These groups have found little support among the Iraqi people," the president said.
But since the U.S.-led invasion, "life for the Iraqi people is a world away from the cruelty and corruption" of former president Saddam Hussein's government, and "daily life is improving."
"Electricity is now more widely available than before the war. Iraq has a stable currency, and banks are thriving. Schools and clinics have been renovated and reopened, and power plants, hospitals, water and sanitation facilities, and bridges have been rehabilitated," he said.
Coalition forces are "implementing a clear strategy," which included efforts of "local Iraqis to negotiate the disarmament of the radicals in Fallujah," the site of intense fighting in recent days, Bush said.
The president warned, however, that "we've also made it clear that militias in Najaf and elsewhere must disarm or face grave consequences. American forces are in place, and we are prepared to enforce order in Iraq."
The president predicted that as the June 30 deadline for handing over control to an interim government approaches, "we are likely to see more violence from groups opposed to freedom" but "we will not be intimidated or diverted."
"We will finish our work in Iraq because the stakes for our country and the world are high," he said.
"The failure of Iraqi democracy would embolden terrorists around the globe, increase dangers to the American people, and extinguish the hopes of millions in the Middle East," he said.
In the Democrats' weekly radio address, Iraq war veteran 1st Lt. Paul Rieckhoff said Bush should take responsibility for what Rieckhoff called a poorly planned war that has left U.S. forces vulnerable.
"The people who planned this war were not ready for us. There were not enough vehicles, not enough ammunition, not enough medical supplies, not enough water," he said.
"I worry for the future of Iraq, and for my Iraqi friends. I worry for my fellow soldiers still fighting this battle. I worry for their families. And I worry for those families who will not be able to share another summer or another baseball game with the loved ones they've lost," he said.
----
THE TROOPS
National Guard Officer Offers Criticism of Bush's Iraq Plans
May 2, 2004
By ANTHONY RAMIREZ
The New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/02/international/middleeast/02SOLD.html
National Guard officer from Manhattan who recently returned from combat in Iraq delivered the Democratic Party's response to President Bush's radio address yesterday, saying that while progress was being made in Iraq, the American effort was poorly planned and poorly executed.
The officer, First Lt. Paul Rieckhoff, spoke in a radio spot usually reserved for members of Congress and political figures.
"The people who planned this war were not ready for us," he said in his address. "There were not enough vehicles, not enough ammunition, not enough medical supplies, not enough water."
Lieutenant Rieckhoff's address was broadcast on the first anniversary of Mr. Bush's "Mission Accomplished" speech and came directly after the president's weekly radio address.
Lieutenant Rieckhoff, a 1998 graduate of Amherst College and former president of the student government there, is a registered Democrat. He approached the Democratic Party about his concerns about the war, but has not yet decided whether to endorse Senator John Kerry for president. He is one of only a few nonpolitical figures to deliver the Democrats' response, said a Kerry campaign official
In his remarks, recorded in Manhattan, Lieutenant Rieckhoff said two images kept replaying in his mind: the scrolling list of war dead and Mr. Bush's April 14 news conference in which he said he would "stay the course."
"Well, it is time for a change," Lieutenant Rieckhoff said in his address. "Our troops are still waiting for more body armor. They are still waiting for better equipment. They are still waiting for a policy that brings in the rest of the world and relieves their burden."
In an interview after his address, he said he was speaking as a private citizen who wanted to convey the mixed situation in Iraq.
"The Iraqi people are making progress and the American military is helping them make that progress," he said. "But at what cost to the American military and what cost to the American people? I'm not sure that our country is better off now. I'm pretty sure that our military is not better off now."
He said he was speaking out because he felt American soldiers in Iraq, many of them working-class people or immigrants, were not being heard. "Not too many people from Amherst in the military," he said, adding, "these are the guys who are stuck interpreting foreign policy on a corner in Baghdad in Arabic."
Lieutenant Rieckhoff returned from Iraq in February but said he still kept in touch through e-mail and telephone calls with his unit: Company B of the Third Battalion, 124th Infantry. "I got an e-mail from a guy who used to be in my platoon recounting to me a story about an R.P.G. round that came through the center of his Humvee and blew apart a kid next to him." An R.P.G. is a rocket-propelled grenade.
As part of a light infantry unit, his men did not use heavy armored vehicles, Lieutenant Rieckhoff said, but they still needed transportation. Two men in his unit whom he described as a former car thief and a former mechanic happened upon a fleet of Land Rovers and Nissan sport utility vehicles that they requisitioned.
"So we ripped doors off them to roll around Baghdad," he said. "We were like the A-Team, and the kids put on Eminem on the stereo."
But there were some 500 soldiers in his battalion and only two or three armored Humvees. The soldiers "would pretty much drew straws as to who was going to ride in the armor who was going to ride in the other ones."
He said he did not know for sure what he planned to do in the near future, but would probably apply to graduate school in public policy. But if he is called back to Iraq again, which could be as early as June, he would serve again, he said. "If I get the call tomorrow, I'm going."
--------
Missouri Voters Favor None Of the Above
Neither Bush Nor Kerry Impresses Focus Groups
By Dan Balz and Richard Morin
Washington Post Staff Writers
Sunday, May 2, 2004; Page A01
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A59729-2004May1?language=printer
ST. LOUIS -- In the opening stages of the presidential campaign in this habitual battleground state, the news for President Bush is far from encouraging. For his Democratic challenger, John F. Kerry, it's even worse.
The escalating death toll in Iraq has elevated concerns about the U.S. commitment there, with voters unsettled by their fear that Bush has no plan for success and frustrated by their conviction that there may be no alternative but to stay the course.
At home, a sense of anxiety remains over the strength of the economic recovery, the loss of manufacturing jobs and the export of American jobs to overseas. "I was not scared five years ago," said Judy Bierman, 50, a homemaker who learned recently that a 50-year-old friend was about to be laid off. "Now it's scary; it's scary all the time."
The apprehensions over war and the economy represent clear obstacles in the president's path to reelection and an opening for Kerry. But the Massachusetts senator has problems of his own. At this point, he is barely part of the political conversation, particularly among the relatively small percentage of voters who have not picked sides.
Many voters know little about Kerry or what he would do to fix the economy or Iraq. There are signs that the Bush campaign's effort to paint Kerry as a man of few firm convictions has begun to stick. First impressions of Kerry are not particularly positive: He is seen as "boring" and "aloof," a somewhat frosty New Englander with an affected air.
The Washington Post convened two groups of voters on a recent evening in the St. Louis suburbs, one comprising people who were generally optimistic about the economy, the other comprising people who were generally pessimistic. Most said they had not made up their minds on the presidential race.
The two groups, totaling 18 people, do not constitute a scientific sample of the Missouri electorate, but their opinions closely parallel what The Post and other news organizations have found in recent national polls, and their animated conversations provided a greater understanding of the challenges confronting both candidates.
Four years ago, Bush narrowly won Missouri over Al Gore, continuing the state's near-perfect record of voting for the winner in presidential elections, and both sides see another hard-fought campaign for the state's 11 electoral votes.
Already they are being barraged by television commercials from the Bush and Kerry campaigns and from independent Democratic groups, and Bush's visit on Opening Day of the baseball season did not go unnoticed. "He threw a strike," Bierman said.
But one of the president's ads, which showed flag-draped remains being removed from Ground Zero, sparked a negative reaction from some who described it as out of line, which in turn prompted others to defend Bush. "It was a defining moment," said Gary Frimel, 48, a self-employed investment manager.
Iraq produced the most anguished discussion, with dismay that the conditions there have turned so ugly and that the United States faces even greater isolation around the world. There is clear disagreement over whether Bush has a plan that can succeed.
"I can hardly stand to listen to the news," said Jane Coughlin, 50, a paralegal. "It's deaths every morning. I force myself to listen to it. I'm not that concerned about the economy, but I'm obsessed with the war."
Bush's most vehement critics offered harsh assessments. Patrick Dunsford, 39, a computer technician, accused Bush of taking the country to war "to divert attention away from his failing economic package." Others said the president had offered shifting rationales for going to war. Elijah Hill, 70, a retired policeman, called Bush "a cowboy" who "lacks sophistication" and "really doesn't understand world politics."
More pervasive was the feeling that, while going to war to remove Saddam Hussein from power was worth it, getting out will be messier and far more costly in U.S. lives than expected. "The war was over a long time ago," said Sue Koppel, 46, an organizational psychologist. "What are we still doing in there, and why are there so many casualties?"
Bush's recent news conference failed to satisfy those looking for a plan to accomplish the U.S. goals of stabilizing Iraq and turning power over to the Iraqis. "I wanted to hear what his plan was," said Ruth Rozen, 70, a retired fundraiser.
Bush's defenders disputed that view. "I do believe Bush has a plan," said Shakira Franklin, 30, a project manager for an electrical firm. "The American public and maybe the international public may not agree with some of the moves that they're making, but I think that they're making moves that they think are appropriate."
Even Bush's sharpest critics saw no way the United States could count on a quick exit from Iraq, however much they favored that. "You can't leave," said Hill, who an hour earlier had burst out, "Bring the troops home."
Susan Phillips, 48, an architectural representative, said she has friends with families in Iraq who are "thrilled" to have Hussein gone. "But I have the same feelings of some other people here, that I think something needs to be done to actually transfer the power. And of course, that's the $64,000 question. How the heck do we do that?"
The economy produced less consensus. The participants described two economies, based on their experiences: one for those with secure and good-paying jobs and the other under continuing pressure, with job creation slow and insecurity high.
Coughlin, for example, was as upbeat about the economy as she was downbeat about Iraq. "We have no job concerns," she said. "My friends are all working. All the kids are starting to graduate from college." Asked whether she gives Bush credit, she replied, "Yep!"
George Manoli, 29, a drugstore operator, described his relatively recession-proof business, while Greg Conklin, 40, a county employee, said he feels secure and that friends in the construction business are doing well. "Everyone I know is out there working," he said.
But through other prisms, the economy appeared far less rosy. After Coughlin offered her assessment, Angela Jones, 39, who works in a university accounting office, responded, "She's one who has money; she's fine. Someone who has an average income may be struggling. . . . I know someone who just got laid off on Friday."
Phillips said jobs "have been disappearing for a long time. The only thing we had on our side were service jobs, and we are now losing the service jobs, so I think that's a very scary situation." One of nine children, she added, "We're all in our fifties or older, and two of the nine are out of work."
Jan Sova, 52, works in the home furnishings business and complained about the loss of jobs to overseas competition. "Everything I'm seeing is being shipped over from China now, and it really upsets me that I know people who have been laid off because their job is no longer there, because it is in China."
Given the mixed indicators they are seeing -- more economic growth but slow job creation -- even some of the optimists expressed caution. "It is better," Rozen said, "but I think it has a long way to go."
Iraq and the economy represent political trouble for Bush, and although he had several ardent defenders among the two groups, overall the reviews on his first term were mixed.
Bierman said she was surprised to discover that her husband and brothers, past Bush supporters, were disinclined to vote for his reelection. "I started to wonder why, and basically because the war is dragging on, health care is still in the same spot it was six months ago," she said. "The economy is getting, creeping better, but Bush can't say, 'I did it.' "
Nor can Bush count on interest in other proposals to attract support. His plan for exploration of the moon and Mars drew outright ridicule. "I couldn't care less," Jones said. "I mean, we've got kids graduating that can't even spell Mars."
Yet when pushed to say how they would vote if the election were held now, Bush narrowly prevailed over Kerry in both groups, with several undecided. The reason has much more to do with Kerry than Bush. Kerry has other problems to deal with before he can take advantage of the president's problems.
Bush has relentlessly attacked Kerry in his television ads, seeking to portray his challenger as soft on defense, lacking in core convictions and willing to say what he thinks people want to hear. Kerry, in turn, has repeatedly attacked Bush on Iraq and the economy, charging that Bush has been too stubborn to reach out to the rest of the world and that he has but one policy for the economy: tax cuts that are tilted heavily toward the wealthy.
Kerry advisers believe that public concerns about Iraq and the economy eventually will give their candidate a boost, but it was clear from what the focus group participants said that Kerry has other work to do first.
Phillips said she attended a Kerry event in Florida this year and came away unimpressed. "He gave a great speech, but who isn't going to say, 'I want a chicken in every pot, I want every kid to get a college education.' I mean, I started laughing in the middle of the speech. . . . I want somebody to get in there and tell me what it is they're going to actually do."
"I read recently that he's going to have 500,000 jobs in the first six months of being in office, or words to that effect," said Kate Wolfe, 63, who is unemployed. "Well, where are those jobs coming from?"
"I'd like to know more, where he stands on stuff," Conklin said.
But beyond the hunger for information were negative impressions.
"I hear what Kerry is saying, but he's not attractive to me at this point," said Samuel Ansari, 55, a baker.
Brice Evans, 44, a letter carrier, said, "I think Missouri would go Democratic, but I don't think they like Kerry that much. . . . I think he'll get eaten alive when it comes to a one-on-one debate with Bush."
These Missourians suggested that Kerry's New England roots would not translate well in the Midwest. "I've worked with people primarily from Connecticut, Massachusetts, New York, and they just have an air of arrogance about them," said Dunsford, who was perhaps Bush's toughest critic in either group.
Chris Behnen, 25, a college student, said he had recently seen a videotape of Kerry from his days as an antiwar protester. "He had this accent from when he was speaking that I don't necessarily hear in his voice now," he said, "and there was just something about it that just came off as very arrogant."
"He's so busy talking about what Bush isn't doing," Jones said, "that it's hard to know what he's going to do."
-------- ENERGY AND OTHER
-------- alternative energy
Solar ovens catching on in U.S.
May 02, 2004
(UPI)
http://www.washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20040501-095723-8097r.htm
CHICAGO, , May. 1 -- Sales of solar ovens in the United States have jumped almost 400 percent in the last month, the Chicago Tribune reported Saturday.
"It's probably the rise in fuel prices," Paul Munsen, president of Sun Ovens International Inc., based in Elburn, Ill., told the Tribune. "Our North American sales spurts usually result from some negative. We got a nice boost out of Y2K."
The ovens operate outside and focus solar rays in the baking compartment, producing temperatures of 360 to 400 degrees Fahrenheit. The only fuel is sunlight.
"Most of our sales are in developing countries, but there is pent-up demand in this country," Munsen said. "People like the idea of an oven that works on renewable energy, and when something gives them an excuse to buy, they do."
The ovens sell for $229.
-------
Going solar
5/02/04
Asbury Park Press
By DAVID P. WILLIS BUSINESS WRITER
http://www.app.com/app/story/0,21625,956053,00.html
You cannot see it from the ground outside the Danskin Insurance Agency Inc. in Wall. But up on the roof, technology is turning the sun's rays into electricity to power the firm's computers and lights.
The company's system of solar cells was powered up in March and supplies an estimated 35 percent to 40 percent of the firm's electricity, said Charles Casagrande, Danskin's vice president and secretary.
Meanwhile, homes throughout Monmouth and Ocean counties are being fitted with solar panels. In February, the solar panels on top of James Franchi's roof in Holmdel were turned on, electrifying his house.
"I see it as a social investment," Franchi said. "The more houses we get over to solar power, the less need we will need to have more electric generation."
After a slow start, solar energy, helped by generous rebates, which cover up to 70 percent of the installation's price tag, and lower technology costs, is gaining a foothold in New Jersey.
"It is becoming more fashionable," said Jeff Tittel, executive director of the Sierra Club's New Jersey chapter. "People say 'I can do something for a cleaner environment. I can put solar panels on my house.' "
The numbers show the growth.
In 2003, 85 solar electric systems were installed in Monmouth and Ocean counties, including 80 residential projects, according to the state Board of Public Utilities, which administers the New Jersey Clean Energy Program. That's up from 37 systems in 2002, including 27 systems for homes.
In 2001, only three projects at the Jersey Shore went through the program, the BPU said.
"This is not just the alternative-energy folks, the tree-huggers that say, 'I am going to do this,' " said Michael Winka, director of the BPU's office of clean energy. "Businesses are looking at this and saying, 'This can help me lower my cost for energy.' "
Solar energy is easy to understand. When sunlight hits solar electric cells, which normally are panels made of a silicon-based product, electricity is created. A converter switches the type of current from direct-current, or DC, to alternating current, or AC, which can power a home.
But solar power doesn't mean total independence for its users. Typically, homes and businesses with solar panels stay connected to the electric grid.
By staying connected, the idea is that solar energy will become more of a part of the electricity that everyone uses.
While still a very small portion of the state's electricity use, 90 megawatts of the state's electricity will be generated by solar cells by 2008, the BPU said. Right now, about 4 megawatts, out of 18,000 megawatts used in New Jersey, comes from solar power. New Jersey hopes to get 20 percent of its power from solar energy by 2020.
New Jersey's efforts to brighten solar energy is getting some buzz. Recently, the Solar Energy Industries Association said the state is challenging California as the "Solar Energy Capital of the United States."
"The growth here in New Jersey is explosive," said Lyle Rawlings, president of the Mid-Atlantic Solar Energy Industries Association. "New Jersey has put into place strong governmental incentives to do solar."
So why has solar energy taken off? New Jersey began to provide rebates in May 2001, using money from the state's $124 million Clean Energy Fund, which is funded through a charge on utility bills.
But the project was new and relatively few people signed up. "It was a very cumbersome and not-very-understood process," said BPU President Jeanne M. Fox.
So in 2003, the BPU made some changes, making it simpler to obtain the rebates and increasing the percentage covered from 60 percent to 70 percent. Regulators also set up rules requiring electricity suppliers to buy excess power generated by solar cell systems.
The reaction was swift. People started installing solar electricity systems. Companies were created to do the work. There are about 90 companies installing solar systems, also called photovolataics, up from two in 2001, Winka said.
Here's how the rebates work. A typical residential solar system that generates seven kilowatts of power can cost $56,000 to install, said Winka. The rebate covers $39,200, leaving you with a bill of $16,800. Right now, it can take 10 to 12 years to recoup the investment, Winka said.
The system would generate power during the day. Anything that you don't use gets sent back to the electric utility over its wires, essentially running your electric service meter backwards.
At night, or when the solar system doesn't generate enough power to run your house, such as when the air conditioning is on during the summer, you pull electricity back and use it.
"It is an ebb and flow of electricity," said Thomas Matulewicz, a partner at GeoGenix LLC, a solar system installer in Rumson. "After a year, this whole thing hopefully will balance out so that they are generating as much as they use in electricity."
Meanwhile, the electricity generated by the solar cells helps to reduce the strain on the electric grid, BPU President Jeanne M. Fox said. "Our peak problem time is July and August, when we have the sun," she said. "It helps reduce the peak, which lessens the possibility for brownouts and blackouts."
The BPU is looking to quicken the payback from about 10 years to six years, Winka said.
As part of a set of standards recently adopted by regulators, energy suppliers will be able to buy so-called renewable energy certificates to meet a requirement to generate power from renewable sources such as solar and wind. System owners would sell those certificates to the suppliers.
The certificates won't be sold in New Jersey until June 1, Winka said. Prices will vary according to the market. For instance, in New England, solar certificates sell for $200 a megawatt hour.
"It is going to be dependent on supply and demand," Winka said. "If there are more of those on the market, the price will go down."
Along with electricity savings, selling those certificates may help pay for the system faster. For instance, over a year, a seven-kilowatt system would generate about nine megawatt hours of power, yielding certificates that could sell for an estimated $200 per megawatt hour, or $1,800.
"These systems will last for 25 years," Winka said. "You will pay for that system in six years. Everything else beyond that six years is on the plus side for you."
The rebates have made a difference, said Dan Lichtman, owner of Absolutely Energized Solar in Millstone Township. "We have six contracts in our hand at any one time that haven't been installed yet," Lichtman said. "We are basically installing them as fast as we can."
The rebate made the project affordable for Holmdel resident Franchi. He had to pay about $15,000 for his $51,000 system. "With the state putting up a huge chunk of the money, it made it a lot easier for people like me to be the first ones in."
He hopes to lower his electricity bill, which totaled about $1,500 last year. "I wouldn't be surprised to see it drop to about $300 for the whole year," he said. "That is where the payoff comes from."
The cost of the technology has also gone down, making the systems more affordable, Rawlings said. In the 1970s, solar systems cost $80 a watt with an average home requiring about six or seven kilowatts (a kilowatt is a thousand watts). Now prices are down to about $7.50 a watt installed, Rawlings said.
"The technology has gotten easier to install," he said. "It has gotten much more reliable."
Homeowners, businesses and schools have installed solar systems. For instance, two new elementary schools in Howell have solar panels to generate electricity. Brick has a proposal to put 903 solar panels on top of its municipal building on Chambers Bridge Road.
"We have an over-reliance on traditional forms of energy, which is basically off the grid," said Brick Mayor Joseph C. Scarpelli. "We decided that we need something that we can rely on so we don't need to rely on (the utilities.) We can rely on our own solar power to heat our buildings and light our lights."
Peter Russo, owner of Octopus's Garden, a seafood restaurant in Surf City, installed solar panels on his restaurant and home in April 2003.
"I felt that I was doing something morally good," he said. "If more people were to do this, there would be less demand on the grid at peak season when everyone is turning on their air conditioners and everything."
-------
Agency Plans to Harvest Wind Power Off Jones Beach
May 2, 2004
New York Times
By BRUCE LAMBERT
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/02/nyregion/02windmill.html?pagewanted=all&position=
Imagine a modern windmill, sleek and metallic.
Make it giant-sized - specifically 425 feet tall, equal to a 40-story building and taller than the Statue of Liberty.
Now picture 35 to 40 such windmills, all standing in the Atlantic Ocean, clustered near Jones Beach.
The Long Island Power Authority says it will soon start turning that imaginary scene into reality, to harvest electricity from the steady sea breezes that have drawn people, from the ancient Indians to modern suburbanites, to the shoreline.
The authority says that in the coming weeks it will announce its choice of the company to build and operate the windmills. Officials will not identify the bidders, but industry sources say the two leading contenders are Arcadia Windpower Ltd., based in Manhattan, and FPL Energy, based in Florida. The project could produce the first offshore windmills outside of Europe, wind power experts say. While land-based windmills are increasingly common around the world, offshore sites are relatively new.
A larger proposal for 130 offshore windmills is pending on Cape Cod, but residents have mounted a $1 million campaign to block it, citing economic, environmental and scenic concerns. Some Long Islanders have raised similar objections, but so far there is little organized opposition.
The Long Island project would cost hundreds of millions of dollars and take up to four years, authority officials say. The exact price and other details will be announced later. "At a time when oil prices are going through the roof, this makes imminent sense," said the agency's chairman, Richard M. Kessel.
Those rising prices forced the authority to impose fuel surcharges on electricity customers. Growing demand for power is also forcing the purchase of new generators and supply cables, leading to greater expense and more disputes over sites. And Gov. George E. Pataki is requiring the use of more clean energy, though it costs more than power from fossil fuels in the current market.
The windmills would represent only about 2 percent of the authority's total power use, and would have a minimal impact on electricity bills.
Many environmentalists, including some who criticize the authority on other issues, have long advocated windmills. "Windmills are a necessity, not only for Long Island, but for the state and nation," said Adrienne Esposito, executive director of the Citizens Campaign for the Environment, one of several groups endorsing the project.
Windmills use a limitless resource without harming the environment, supporters say. Wind energy also reduces dependence on Middle East oil with its gyrating prices and volatile politics. "The fuel is free from Mother Nature, and the cost is predictable," said Gordian Raacke, executive director of two energy groups, the Citizens Advisory Panel and Renewable Energy Long Island.
Still, the plan poses a host of concerns. Skeptics cite noise and vibration, dangers to migrating birds, disruption of prime squid fishing, and intrusive underwater cables and power connections on land.
Most of all, critics have focused on the permanent alteration of the ocean view from the South Shore.
But authority officials said the impact would be minimal on birds, fish and even the view. Because the windmills would be 2.5 to 6 miles from shore, they would appear small on the horizon, proponents contend.
While the precise location has not been decided, the windmills would be somewhere off the coast of Jones Beach and possibly Long Beach or the western end of Fire Island.
Jones Beach is jammed on hot summer weekends. Long Beach and neighboring communities are the most densely populated stretches of oceanfront in Nassau and Suffolk Counties. Fire Island has a major park and summer resort.
"Why Jones Beach rather than anywhere else on the South Shore?" said Joseph M. Kralovich, president of the Old Lindenmere Civic Association in Merrick. "It's a sore subject, but the answer is obvious. It's to avoid people with expensive waterfront homes. Nobody lives there." He opposes the windmill plan. "I moved here from the city because of Jones Beach, to get closer."
The Long Island Power Authority says it chose the site because the water is shallow, the winds average about 19 miles an hour, and an existing substation in nearby Massapequa would connect to the windmills, serving densely developed Nassau and western Suffolk.
Windmill defenders call the view a minor issue. "We have to make a choice: whether we want to look at smokestacks or windmills," Mr. Raacke said. "It's worth paying that small price." He said he had found no opposition to offshore windmills in Europe, adding, "People are quite proud of them, actually."
Ms. Esposito said that windmills would become a tourist attraction, as they have elsewhere. "And if acid rain and smog keep up, we're not going to have a view, anyway."
As a sun worshiper, the authority's chairman, Mr. Kessel, said: "No one loves Jones Beach or goes there more often than I do. A passing tanker ship is going to be a lot more visible than these windmills that you can barely see. It'll be a comforting sight, dedicated to a cleaner environment for Long Island."
Some fishing companies, though, are opposed. "Some of our largest catches are right there in the area they're talking about," said Sima Freierman, general manager of Montauk Inlet Seafood, which unloads, packs and transports fish. "There's enough places on land where they can do this."
Ms. Freierman said that more than two million pounds of squid were netted by trawlers from New York in the planned windmill site each summer, as well as catches by boats from other states. The site also yields millions of pounds of bluefish, butterfish, flounder, fluke, monk and whiting. For boats, "putting windmills there is like putting concrete poles in the middle of the Long Island Expressway," she said.
But proponents of windmills say they will use only about five square miles, a small part of the fishing grounds. Windmills could act as an artificial reef and a preserve that would help replenish fish stocks, said Prof. Malcolm J. Bowman of the marine science center at Stony Brook University. Many recreational fishers are keen on the windmills, which they say will attract fish.
Before the windmills are built, more public hearings will be held, and 18 official approvals are required from various state and federal agencies, including the Federal Aviation Administration, which will require blinking warning lights.
The windmills will generate 3.6 megawatts of power. The entire group will generate 100 to 140 megawatts, enough for 30,000 homes.
The critics' biggest fear seems to be that if the windmills succeed, more will go up. "If this works, they're talking about stringing this along the entire South Shore, putting us out of business," Ms. Freierman said.
Mr. Kralovich expressed a similar fear. "Once they put this in, wind farms are going to go in, up and down the East Coast,'" he said. But Mr. Kessel is taking a shorter view. "We want to take this one step at a time," he said. "It's a project that's never been done before in North America, and we want the public to see it and give acceptance, which I think they will, before we even look at expansion."
-------- OTHER
-------- environment
Why Antarctica will soon be the only place to live - literally
By Geoffrey Lean,
Environment Editor
02 May 2004
UK Independent
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/environment/story.jsp?story=517321
Antarctica is likely to be the world's only habitable continent by the end of this century if global warming remains unchecked, the Government's chief scientist, Professor Sir David King, said last week.
He said the Earth was entering the "first hot period" for 60 million years, when there was no ice on the planet and "the rest of the globe could not sustain human life". The warning - one of the starkest delivered by a top scientist - comes as ministers decide next week whether to weaken measures to cut the pollution that causes climate change, even though Tony Blair last week described the situation as "very, very critical indeed".
The Prime Minister - who was launching a new alliance of governments, businesses and pressure groups to tackle global warming - added that he could not think of "any bigger long-term question facing the world community".
Yet the Government is considering relaxing limits on emissions by industry under an EU scheme on Tuesday.
Sir David said that levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere - the main "green- house gas" causing climate change - were already 50 per cent higher than at any time in the past 420,000 years. The last time they were at this level - 379 parts per million - was 60 million years ago during a rapid period of global warming, he said. Levels soared to 1,000 parts per million, causing a massive reduction of life.
"No ice was left on Earth. Antarctica was the best place for mammals to live, and the rest of the world would not sustain human life," he said.
Sir David warned that if the world did not curb its burning of fossil fuels "we will reach that level by 2100".
-------- poverty
San Francisco Restores Plan For Homeless
Reuters
Sunday, May 2, 2004
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A59733-2004May1.html
SAN FRANCISCO, May 1 -- A California appeals court has restored an assistance program championed by Mayor Gavin Newsom for San Francisco's large and very visible homeless population.
The state Court of Appeal in San Francisco on Friday reversed a lower court ruling striking down Newsom's "Care Not Cash" plan to slash monthly welfare checks for the homeless and use the money to pay for beds in city shelters, counseling and other services.
At as much as $410 a month, the city's welfare checks are the most generous in California.
Newsom put the homeless care program before the voters in 2002 when he was a city legislator.
San Francisco's Office of Homelessness counted 8,640 homeless people in its most recent survey in October 2002. The population of San Francisco is about 775,000.
Newsom's plan is to cut monthly assistance to $59 and tap the estimated $13 million in savings to pay for housing, food, and drug and mental health treatment for people who live on the streets. Voters approved it by a comfortable margin.
-------- ACTIVISTS
Student activist Noriaki Imai - Teen comes from family of communists
MAY 2, 2004 SUN
http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/news/story/0,4386,248940,00.html
TOKYO - THE Imai family home in Sapporo, Hokkaido, is said to be notorious for being a gathering place for local communist sympathisers and peace activists. A teenage activist who talks like an adult, Mr Imai plans to study conflict resolution.
It was in such an atmosphere that 18-year-old Noriaki Imai, the second son in the family, grew up.
To be fair, only his mother Naoko is a card-carrying member of the Japan Communist Party. She also works in a party-affiliated hospital.
His father is a school teacher, a profession in Japan well known to be populated with leftists.
The younger Imai was, by all accounts, polite and helpful. In his third year in middle school, he was head of the students' council.
But the rather unusual family background clearly left its mark on the impressionable teenager. The family's favourite newspaper was after all Akahata, the communist party mouthpiece.
While his classmates buried their heads in comics and video games, he showed interest in environmental problems and often engaged his teachers in debate on social issues.
He threw himself into grassroots activities, another area said to be often dominated by leftists.
His obsession with depleted uranium weapons began after a talk by a peace activist. Last December, he helped set up a non-governmental organisation (NGO) to urge for a ban on such weapons.
The following month, he took friends and NGO colleagues by surprise when he declared his intention to visit Iraq to collect material for an illustrated book on the effects of depleted uranium bombs.
A chance meeting in March with volunteer worker Nahoko Takato, who invited him to accompany her to Baghdad, strengthened his resolve.
They reportedly opposed Japan's deployment of troops in Iraq, a position shared by the communists.
Even if their kidnap was not staged, the government is apparently vexed that communists and leftists could have tried to exploit the crisis to pressure it into withdrawing its troops.
It is yet unclear why Mr Imai's family agreed to let him leave for Iraq despite the obvious dangers.
This autumn, he is due to go to Bradford University in Britain to study conflict resolution and other peace-related subjects....
-------
------- OneList (submissions from subscribers)
------- Depleted Uranium Keeps On Killing!
-----------
Posted
without profit or payment for research and educational
purposes only,
in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107.