submitted by techadvisor

Bush, Blair to announce 'phased withdrawal' from Iraq
Michael Smith | London | May 22

Raw Story - Tony Blair and George Bush will announce that they are to begin withdrawing troops from Iraq at a summit in Washington as early as this week, RAW STORY has learned.

The process has already been carefully choreographed in an attempt to bolster the popularity of both Bush and Blair who have suffered domestically for their handling of the war.

The scope of the phased withdrawal, which will see the 133,000 US force levels cut to around 100,000 by the end of the year and British numbers almost halved, has already been agreed, one senior defence source said.

The actual announcement will come in response to a statement from Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki that his government believes coalition forces are no longer needed in a number of provinces.

Blair made a surprise visit to Baghdad today for talks with al-Maliki that are understood to have included discussion of the withdrawal but full details will not be disclosed until he arrives in Washington. A joint statement issued after the talks said: "By the end of this year, responsibility for much of Iraq's territorial security should have been transferred to Iraqi control."

Lt-Gen Sir Rob Fry, the British deputy coalition commander, said recently that a withdrawal from Iraq would begin "in the pretty near future" and would occur province by province over a period of up to two years.

more at link

Fry, who is a key member of the joint Coalition/Iraqi committee examining the prospects for coalition forces to pull out, pointedly said the new government would be "extremely keen" to see coalition forces start withdrawing "in order that it can demonstrate its own sovereignty."

The timing of the announcement has been on hold waiting for the new government to be sworn in, with officials ready to prepare the Bush-Blair summit within 48 hours of al-Maliki signaling the withdrawal should begin.

It will be described as a "transition" to Iraqi security forces taking control of the country rather than a withdrawal to avoid it looking as though the allies are being forced out by rising levels of attacks on their forces.

The Americans have already lost more than 120 servicemen in the past six weeks, making it one of the worst periods for casualties since last autumn.

The British have lost eight in the same period, including five personnel killed when a Lynx helicopter was shot down two weeks ago and two soldiers killed by a roadside bomb last Saturday.

'Complete' withdrawal unlikely

The concept of transition was "very simple," one senior source said. "It can mean moving out completely, but it could mean leaving mentoring staff behind to look after the Iraqi forces."

Gen Peter Pace, the Chairman of US Joint Chiefs of Staff, told the Senate last week that US troops could not completely pull out of any of its provinces this year.

But defence sources said the crucial word in that statement was "completely." Coalition commanders remain concerned that the Iraqi armed forces command and control system is not good enough to allow the Iraqis to maintain security, Pace said.

So small numbers of coalition forces will remain in some of the provinces, integrated within the Iraqi forces to "mentor" them and ease the command and control problems, allowing coalition commanders to withdraw the bulk of their troops.

US troops are expected to start withdrawing from some of the more peaceful provinces in their area of operations, with the Kurdish provinces of Dahuk, Irbil, Tamim and Sulaymaniyah first on the list.

The British will pull out of Meysan province in the north of the UK region, a province where British troops have had difficulty winning over the local population, and Muthanna on the border with Saudi Arabia.

Lt-Gen Peter Chiarelli, the US operational commander, said on Friday that three-quarters of the Iraqi army would be in control of its own sectors by the end of the summer. The new government taking charge was "absolutely critical."

Michael Smith, a reporter for the London Sunday Times, broke the Downing Street Minutes in 2004.

This one's pretty eyebrow-raising to me

---

_{SINAN SALAHEDDIN | BAGHDAD | MAY 22}

AP -Guards pulled the sole woman on Saddam Hussein's defense team from the court Monday after she had a shouting match with the chief judge, prompting her to throw off her lawyer's robe in rage.

Defense lawyers raised an uproar over the removal of Bushra al-Khalil, accusing the chief judge of trying to intimidate them.

Saddam also had a heated exchange with chief judge Raouf Abdel-Rahman after objecting to al-Khalil's removal. The judge told him to be silent, and Saddam shouted back: "I'm Saddam Hussein, president of Iraq! I am above you and above your father!"

"You are a defendant now, not a president!" the judge barked, banging his gavel.

The stormy scene was a new distraction in the 7-month-long trial after several weeks of remarkable order. During that time, the prosecution wrapped up its case and the defense has started presenting witnesses.

U.S. officials observing the court have said the proceedings could finish by late June, after which the judges would adjourn to consider their verdict. Saddam and his regime members are being tried for a crackdown against Shiites in the town of Dujail after a 1982 assassination attempt on Saddam there.

Hundreds of men, women and children were arrested. Some allegedly were tortured to death and 148 Shiites were sentenced to death by Saddam's Revolutionary Court for alleged roles in the assassination attempt.

Saddam and his seven co-defendants could be hanged if convicted.

Abdel-Rahman took his post as chief judge at the beginning of the year after his predecessor was criticized for letting the defendants delay the trial with outbursts and speeches. Abdel-Rahman has taken a tough line, throwing out several lawyers and defendants to impose order.

In an April 5 session, he removed al-Khalil when she raised an objection.

The Lebanese-born al-Khalil was back in court Monday, and Abdel-Rahman opened the session by saying he would remove her again if she caused any disturbance.

It only took a few words from al-Khalil for that to happen.

"Please, I want to know what procedures have I broken," she said.

Abdel-Rahman snapped at her, "Sit down!"

"I would like to know what they are so that I do not repeat them," she said.

"Sit down!" the judge shouted again, then yelled at the guards to take her away.

In anger, al-Khalil pulled off her black lawyer's robe and threw it on the floor, then tried to push away the guards grabbing her hands.

"Get away from me!" she shouted. "Don't touch me! I am a Muslim woman!"

Later, an Egyptian defense lawyer loudly objected to her expulsion, accusing Abdel-Rahman of trying to "intimidate and frighten us." That sparked another argument with the judge, who let him off with a warning.

Al-Khalil said Abdel-Rahman may be singling her out for harsh treatment because she is a woman. "Some people say he has a complex about women," she told The Associated Press.

She also said she believed she was being targeted because she is the sole Shiite Muslim on the defense team. "There is a decision to distance me because I come from a well-known Shiite family," said al-Khalil.

Many of Iraq's Shiites and Kurds are eager to see Saddam executed because of his regime's oppression of their communities. Abdel-Rahman is a Kurd, and the defense has accused him of bias against Saddam.

After the squabble, three defense witnesses testified with little interruption. They included the highest-ranking member of Saddam's inner circle to take the stand so far, his half brother Sabawi Ibrahim al-Hassan, a former presidential adviser who has been in U.S. custody since February 2005.

The first witness of the day was Murshid Mohammed Jassim, a former employee of the Revolutionary Court, headed at the time of the 1984 Dujail trial by defendant Awad al-Bandar. Jassim insisted the court was fair, though he acknowledged he did not work there at the time of the Dujail trial.

Al-Bandar was allowed to question Jassim, asking him: "Did I ever throw any lawyers out of the court, even if they stepped out of bounds?"

"No, never," Jassim replied, then turned to Abdel-Rahman to add: "He was never angry, he let people speak. He would never do that."

The prosecution has argued the Shiites were convicted in a show trial in which they had no chance to defend themselves. Al-Bandar has admitted there was only one defense lawyer for all 148 detainees and that the trial lasted only 16 days, but he has insisted the proceedings were fair.

The next witness, al-Hassan, was on the list of 55 most-wanted regime figures when U.S. forces invaded Iraq in 2003. He was suspected of being a leading financier of the anti-U.S. insurgency and was arrested in Syria.

Al-Hassan insisted his full brother, former intelligence chief Barzan Ibrahim, had no role in the crackdown on Shiites in Dujail.

"He told me that he only went there (to Dujail) to check if what happened was due to any neglect from the guards and that he didn't take part in anything else," al-Hassan said.

He also praised Saddam, saying he was more angry than the former president over the assassination attempt. He said Saddam tried to calm him, saying, "Please, don't blame the people of Dujail."

"Mr. President doesn't have the spirit of revenge and aggression, and there is no hatred in his heart. He is brave and generous. He is my big brother and I'm proud of that," al-Hassan said.

_{"at some point I'm hopeful I'll figure out something to put here"}

Troop pull-out from Iraq to be speeded up

Handover to local security forces will begin in July, Blair says in Baghdad

Will Woodward in Baghdad and Ewen MacAskill
Tuesday May 23, 2006
The Guardian

A US soldier stands at the scene of a car bomb in Baghdad. Photograph: Hadi Mizban/AP

George Bush and Tony Blair are to discuss in Washington this week a programme of troop withdrawals from Iraq that will be much faster and more ambitious than originally planned.
In a phased pullout in which the two countries will act in tandem, Britain is to begin with a handover to Iraqi security forces in Muthanna province in July and the Americans will follow suit in Najaf, the Shia holy city.

Other withdrawals will quickly follow over the remainder of the year. Officials in both administrations hope that Britain's 8,000 forces in Iraq can be down to 5,000 by the end of the year and that the American forces will be reduced from 133,000 to about 100,000.

Yesterday Nuri al-Maliki, the new Iraqi prime minister, told a joint press conference with Mr Blair in Baghdad that Iraqi forces could take over from the US-led coalition in 16 of the country's 18 provinces by the end of the year.

Mr Blair and Mr Maliki said the "process of transition" would start in some provinces in the coming months, and that "by the end of this year responsibility for much of Iraq's territorial security should have been transferred to Iraqi control".

more
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,1780993,00.html

ROBERT H. REID
Associated Press

BAGHDAD, Iraq - Iraq's new prime minister has made security his top priority, but violence is so pervasive that it may take months - if not years - before he keep that promise without help from American troops.

That's not the impression sometimes created by upbeat statements from U.S. and British leaders, who are eager to bring their forces home.

President Bush hailed the new coalition government of Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds as a turning point in the war, and Prime Minister Tony Blair said there was no longer any "vestige of an excuse for anyone to carry on with terrorism or bloodshed."

In Baghdad, however, American diplomats and senior military commanders say they'll reserve judgment until the government installed last weekend has been in place for at least six months. Some analysts believe even that is still too little time to know if it will succeed.

"Americans need to understand that it will be well into 2007 before the final system of government in Iraq is both defined and actually operating, even in the best case scenario," said Anthony Cordesman of the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

That means likely another year of car bombings, kidnappings and suicide attacks - with substantial numbers of U.S. troops in harm's way. At least 275 American service members have been killed this year, including 51 this month.

Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, a Shiite, appears personally committed to halting violence, promising "maximum force" if needed. Plans are in the works for U.S. and Iraqi troops to launch new, major operations to pacify Baghdad, Ramadi and several other cities.

To do that, however, the prime minister must confront not only the Sunni Arab-dominated insurgents but fellow Shiites as well. That will require significant numbers of U.S. forces to continue playing a major security role, even in areas where Iraqi forces have nominally assumed the lead.

Much of the violence this year has been blamed on sectarian death squads. Some are believed to operate out of the Shiite-controlled Interior Ministry, which is at the forefront of the war against Sunni insurgents in Baghdad.

Under U.S. pressure, al-Maliki has promised to appoint an interior minister without ties to militias. But the condition has meant the key post - as yet - remains unfilled. Al-Maliki has also promised to abolish the militias by integrating them into the armed forces and police, under tighter control.

That won't be easy. No major Shiite party acknowledges it even operates a militia. They insist their previously-armed groups have been transformed into unarmed political units.

But that change is hard to see on the street.

In January 2005, the U.S. military brokered a deal with the Shiite Mahdi army to turn in its weapons. Yet black-clad Mahdi militiamen still patrol Baghdad's Sadr City slum and other areas - albeit under the guise of local security forces.

Even if militias are disbanded, it's unclear whether that will stop the killing.

Every day, police find mutilated bodies dumped on the streets or in vacant lots in Baghdad. But U.S. and Iraqi officials are uncertain how many killings are done by organized militias, and how much by criminal gangs or even just families seeking retribution.

Iraqi society has a long tradition of vendetta killings. Saddam Hussein's dictatorship controlled it somewhat but today "violence is almost on autopilot," said Kenneth Katzman, a Middle East specialist for the Congressional Research Service.

"After years of pent-up hatred, now we're getting scores settled, vendetta killings - and the ability of leaders to control that is severely restricted."

The Sunni-dominated insurgency also remains a potent force, even though it has suffered severe defeats.

For more than two years, U.S. troops have swept Sunni communities in Anbar province west of Baghdad, only to have insurgents reappear again. On Saturday, a suicide bomber killed five Iraqi policemen in an attack on the new police headquarters in Husaybah, scene of a major U.S. assault last November.

U.S. diplomats and senior commanders have long believed the key to ending the insurgency is to bring Sunni Arabs into the government, giving them a stake in the political process.

Under the new government, one of two vice presidents is a Sunni Arab, as is the parliament speaker. Efforts are under way to find a Sunni to head the Defense Ministry.

However, Sunni Arabs held top positions in the last two governments, and their presence alone was not enough.

Michael O'Hanlon of the Brookings Institution says Sunni Arabs are more concerned with issues - such as sharing oil wealth, allowing low-ranking members of Saddam Hussein's party to hold government jobs and reining in Shiite militias - than specific Cabinet posts.

"I have seen little if any progress on that agenda this calendar year, largely because of paralysis in the formation of a government," O'Hanlon said. "And it is long overdue."

Such matters are to be hashed out by a committee that will review the constitution over the next four months. Any proposed changes would be sent to voters in a referendum within 60 days.

The issues are the same ones that negotiators failed to resolve when drafting the constitution last fall. And the chances of success now - amid even higher tensions and worse violence - probably rest on how much Shiites and Kurds are willing to give up.

Mercury News

-----

I posted the entire article, because it's subscription only.

Insurgents fight U.S., Iraqi forces to stalemate in Ramadi
By TODD PITMAN
Associated Press writer Wednesday, May 24, 2006

RAMADI, Iraq -- Whole neighborhoods are lawless, too dangerous for police. Some roads are so bomb-laden that U.S. troops won't use them. Guerrillas attack U.S. troops nearly every time they venture out -- and hit their bases with gunfire, rockets or mortars when they don't.

Though not powerful enough to overrun U.S. positions, insurgents here in the heart of the Sunni Muslim triangle have fought undermanned U.S. and Iraqi forces to a virtual stalemate.

"It's out of control," says Army Sgt. 1st Class Britt Ruble, behind the sandbags of an observation post in the capital of Anbar province. "We don't have control of this ... we just don't have enough boots on the ground."

Reining in Ramadi, through arms or persuasion, could be the toughest challenge for Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's new government. Al-Maliki has promised to use "maximum force" when needed. But three years of U.S. military presence, with nearly constant patrols and sweeps, hasn't done it.

Today Ramadi, a city of 400,000 along the main highway running to Jordan and Syria, 70 miles west of Baghdad, has battles fought in endless circles. Small teams of insurgents open fire and coalition troops respond with heavy blows, often airstrikes or rocket fire that's turned city blocks into rubble.

"We're holding it down to a manageable level until Iraqis forces can take over the fight," Marine Capt. Carlos Barela said of the daily violence battering the city.

How long before that happens is anybody's guess.

U.S. and Iraqi commanders say militants fled to Ramadi from Fallujah during a devastating U.S.-led assault there in 2004. Others have joined from elsewhere in Anbar, blending into a civilian population either sympathetic to their cause or too afraid to turn against them.

They've destroyed police stations and left the force in shambles. The criminal court system doesn't function because judges are afraid to work; tribal sheiks have fled or been assassinated.

While al-Maliki has vowed to crush the insurgency, a major military operation to clear Ramadi risks destroying any hope of reaching a political settlement with disaffected Sunnis.

U.S. commanders also say a Fallujah-style operation is not in the cards, at least not yet, and might not have the desired effect. "That would set us back two years," said Lt. Col. Stephen Neary, commander of the 3rd Battalion, 8th Marine Regiment.

However, the status quo with its bloodletting doesn't sit well with the troops.

"We just go out, lose people and come back," said Iraqi Col. Ali Hassan, whose men fight alongside the Americans. "The insurgents are moving freely everywhere. We need a big operation. We need control."

Some Americans also say ground needs to be taken and held. Most U.S. missions typically consist of going out, coming under fire and returning to base -- leaving behind a no-man's-land held by neither side that insurgents in black ski masks always pour back into.

"This just 'we ride out, hold it for an hour, get hit, ride back in and now we don't hold it anymore,' what's the point?" said Ruble of the Army's 1st Battalion, 506th Infantry Regiment. "I believe in the cause and I believe in doing good, but when were going out, getting hurt and ... not accomplishing anything, why are we going out there? If you're saying killing one insurgent is worth one of my guys getting hurt ... you're crazy. That's like killing one guy in the Chinese army. What have you done? not a thing."

The sheer scale of violence in Ramadi is astounding.

One recent coalition tally of "significant acts" -- roadside bombs, attacks, exchanges of fire -- indicated that out of 43 reported in Iraq on a single day, 27 occurred in Ramadi and its environs, according to a Marine officer who declined to be named because he's not authorized to speak to the media.

And that, he said, was "a quiet day" -- when nothing from Ramadi even made the news.

By TODD PITMAN
Associated Press writer Wednesday, May 24, 2006

RAMADI, Iraq -- Whole neighborhoods are lawless, too dangerous for police. Some roads are so bomb-laden that U.S. troops won't use them. Guerrillas attack U.S. troops nearly every time they venture out -- and hit their bases with gunfire, rockets or mortars when they don't.

Though not powerful enough to overrun U.S. positions, insurgents here in the heart of the Sunni Muslim triangle have fought undermanned U.S. and Iraqi forces to a virtual stalemate.

"It's out of control," says Army Sgt. 1st Class Britt Ruble, behind the sandbags of an observation post in the capital of Anbar province. "We don't have control of this ... we just don't have enough boots on the ground."

Reining in Ramadi, through arms or persuasion, could be the toughest challenge for Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's new government. Al-Maliki has promised to use "maximum force" when needed. But three years of U.S. military presence, with nearly constant patrols and sweeps, hasn't done it.

Today Ramadi, a city of 400,000 along the main highway running to Jordan and Syria, 70 miles west of Baghdad, has battles fought in endless circles. Small teams of insurgents open fire and coalition troops respond with heavy blows, often airstrikes or rocket fire that's turned city blocks into rubble.

"We're holding it down to a manageable level until Iraqis forces can take over the fight," Marine Capt. Carlos Barela said of the daily violence battering the city.

How long before that happens is anybody's guess.

U.S. and Iraqi commanders say militants fled to Ramadi from Fallujah during a devastating U.S.-led assault there in 2004. Others have joined from elsewhere in Anbar, blending into a civilian population either sympathetic to their cause or too afraid to turn against them.

They've destroyed police stations and left the force in shambles. The criminal court system doesn't function because judges are afraid to work; tribal sheiks have fled or been assassinated.

While al-Maliki has vowed to crush the insurgency, a major military operation to clear Ramadi risks destroying any hope of reaching a political settlement with disaffected Sunnis.

U.S. commanders also say a Fallujah-style operation is not in the cards, at least not yet, and might not have the desired effect. "That would set us back two years," said Lt. Col. Stephen Neary, commander of the 3rd Battalion, 8th Marine Regiment.

However, the status quo with its bloodletting doesn't sit well with the troops.

"We just go out, lose people and come back," said Iraqi Col. Ali Hassan, whose men fight alongside the Americans. "The insurgents are moving freely everywhere. We need a big operation. We need control."

Some Americans also say ground needs to be taken and held. Most U.S. missions typically consist of going out, coming under fire and returning to base -- leaving behind a no-man's-land held by neither side that insurgents in black ski masks always pour back into.

"This just 'we ride out, hold it for an hour, get hit, ride back in and now we don't hold it anymore,' what's the point?" said Ruble of the Army's 1st Battalion, 506th Infantry Regiment. "I believe in the cause and I believe in doing good, but when were going out, getting hurt and ... not accomplishing anything, why are we going out there? If you're saying killing one insurgent is worth one of my guys getting hurt ... you're crazy. That's like killing one guy in the Chinese army. What have you done? not a thing."

The sheer scale of violence in Ramadi is astounding.

One recent coalition tally of "significant acts" -- roadside bombs, attacks, exchanges of fire -- indicated that out of 43 reported in Iraq on a single day, 27 occurred in Ramadi and its environs, according to a Marine officer who declined to be named because he's not authorized to speak to the media.

And that, he said, was "a quiet day" -- when nothing from Ramadi even made the news.
>more

BAGHDAD, Iraq | May 24
AP - A former Iraqi foreign minister and deputy prime minister testified for the defense in Saddam Hussein's trial, saying the regime had to strike back with a crackdown on a Shiite town after a 1982 assassination attempt on the former Iraqi leader.

Tariq Aziz, once a close member of Saddam's inner circle, took the stand wearing checkered pajamas and looking pale. Aziz, 70, who is in U.S. custody, has complained of health problems and his family has been pressing for him to be released temporarily for medical treatment. [snip]

Saddam and seven former members of his regime are on trial for alleged crimes against humanity in a crackdown on the Shiite town of Dujail after a 1982 assassination attempt on Saddam.

The defense has focused on two main themes: that the crackdown was a legitimate response to the assassination attempt and that the prosecution has blamed the wrong authorities for the sweep. In particular, they have said the general security services were responsible for the arrests, not Ibrahim's Mukhabarat or the People's Army, headed at the time by co-defendant Taha Yassin Ramadan.

During Wednesday's session, Saddam stood and insisted he didn't order Ibrahim or Ramadan to oversee the crackdown.

"This issue took its normal path. The security service is in charge of Iraqis inside Iraq while Mukhabarat was in charge of foreigners inside Iraq and Iraqis outside Iraq." he said. "I didn't order either Taha or Barzan in the Dujail issue."

"Why accuse Taha and Barzan in such a wrong way? But you see the director of General Security or you ask the interior minister ... that's a natural thing. But to accuse someone who doesn't have anything to do with it is not normal," he said.

Aziz, who was deputy prime minister at the time of the events in Dujail and has been jailed since he surrendered to U.S. forces in April 2003, also hit both the main defense themes.

He turned the accusations around, saying members of the Shiite Dawa Party - which carried out the shooting attack on Saddam - should be put on trial. He pointed to Dawa leaders who, since Saddam's fall, have become leaders of Iraq's first elected governments: current prime minister Nouri al-Maliki and his predecessor, Ibrahim al-Jaafari.

Speaking in a hoarse voice, he said the Dujail attack was "part of a series of attacks and assassination attempts by this group (Dawa), including against me." He said that in 1980, Dawa activists threw a grenade at him as he visited a Baghdad university, killing civilians around him.

"I'm a victim of a criminal act conducted by this party, which is in power right now. So put it on trial. Its leader was the prime minister and his deputy is the prime minister right now and they killed innocent Iraqis in 1980," he said.

He said the arrests were in response to the assassination attempt. "If the head of state comes under attack, the state is required by law to take action. If the suspects are caught with weapons, it's only natural they should be arrested and put on trial," he said.

"Barzan and other Mukahabarat employees had nothing with Dujail case. Barzan didn't take over Dujail's case at all," he said.

"Saddam is my colleague and comrade for decades, and Barzan is my brother and my friend and he is not responsible about Dujail's events," Aziz said.

_{"at some point I'm hopeful I'll figure out something to put here"}

NEIL A. LEWIS | May 25 | FORT MEADE, Md.

NYT - Testifying at the court-martial of a dog handler accused of abusing prisoners at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, Maj. Gen. Geoffrey D. Miller said Wednesday that he never suggested that dogs be used to intimidate prisoners during interrogations in Iraq.

General Miller, who was the commander of the detention center at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, was sent to Iraq in August 2003 by senior Pentagon commanders to review the interrogation and detention system there and recommend ways to improve the collection of intelligence about the growing insurgency.

Within days of his visit, Lt. Gen. Ricardo S. Sanchez, the commander of the coalition forces in Iraq, issued guidance that seemed to allow for the use of dogs in interrogations.

_{"at some point I'm hopeful I'll figure out something to put here"}

Armed Groups Propel Iraq Toward Chaos

Dexter Filkins | BAGHDAD, Iraq | May 23

NYT - Even in a country beset by murder and death, the 16th Brigade represented a new frontier.

The brigade, a 1,000-man force set up by Iraq's Ministry of Defense in early 2005, was charged with guarding a stretch of oil pipeline that ran through the southern Baghdad neighborhood of Dawra. Heavily armed and lightly supervised, some members of the largely Sunni brigade transformed themselves into a death squad, cooperating with insurgents and executing government collaborators, Iraqi officials say.

"They were killing innocent people, anyone who was affiliated with the government," said Hassan Thuwaini, the director of the Iraqi Oil Ministry's protection force.

Forty-two members of the brigade were arrested in January, according to officials at the Ministry of the Interior and the police department in Dawra.

Since then, Iraqi officials say, individual gunmen have confessed to carrying out dozens of assassinations, including the killing of their own commander, Col. Mohsin Najdi, when he threatened to turn them in.

Some of the men assigned to guard the oil pipeline, the officials say, appear to have maintained links to the major Iraqi insurgent groups. For months, American and Iraqi officials have been trying to track down death squads singling out Sunnis that operated inside the Shiite-led Interior Ministry.

But the 16th Brigade was different. Unlike the others, the 16th Brigade was a Sunni outfit, accused of killing Shiites. And it was not, like the others, part of the Iraqi police or even the Interior Ministry. It was run by another Iraqi ministry altogether.
MORE AT LINK

_{"at some point I'm hopeful I'll figure out something to put here"}

Anti-terror police quiz suspects

BBC - Eight men are being questioned by police following raids on 19 addresses across England. The raids came as part of an operation aimed at those suspected of aiding attacks on targets in Iraq.

More than 500 police took part in the operations in Greater Manchester, the West Midlands, Middlesbrough, London and Liverpool. Three of those held were detained under anti-terrorism legislation and five under immigration laws. Two other people were arrested, but later released.

The eight detained men are reported to be Libyans.

The Home Office confirmed five of the people held were detained under the home secretary's powers to "deport individuals whose presence in the UK is not conducive to the public good for reasons of national security".

One of the men arrested in Manchester is Libyan-born Tahir Nasuf, a 44-year-old. He moved to Manchester in 1993 and is married with four children. The offices of a charity he works for - the Sanabel Relief Agency - were also raided in Birmingham.

The BBC's Nick Ravenscroft said it was beginning to emerge that the raids probably centred on activities in Iraq. GMP chief constable Michael Todd said there was no threat of an attack on the UK. The operation was jointly organised with MI5 and followed an intelligence-gathering investigation that has been going on for "at least a year", said Mr Todd. MI5 recently established a regional headquarters in the north-west of England.

Three people were held under the Terrorism Act and three under immigration legislation in Greater Manchester, one in Merseyside under immigration legislation and one in London under immigration legislation, police said.

A spokeswoman for the Greater Manchester force confirmed an "extensive operation targeting individuals suspected of facilitating terrorism abroad" was under way. She would not confirm the exact nature of the alleged offences.

_{"at some point I'm hopeful I'll figure out something to put here"}

Reuters - Gunmen shot and seriously wounded a senior Defence Ministry official in Baghdad, police said, in what appeared to be part of a campaign against the top echelons of Iraq's US-backed administration.

The shooting of General Khalil al-Ibadi, in charge of food supplies for the armed forces, and his driver as they were about to leave for work occurred a day after another prominent security official was killed in the capital.

Police General Ahmed Dawod, a deputy chief of Baghdad municipality's protection units, was shot dead as he left for his office.

Such attacks underline the urgency that new Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki faces in strengthening his forces to quell widespread militant and sectarian violence three years after US forces invaded Iraq to remove Saddam Hussein.

Two months ago, a sniper shot the commander of the Iraqi division in Baghdad in the head and, 10 days later, a roadside bomb hit a convoy of cars used by the armed forces chief of staff, General Babakir Zebari, who was not present.

Maliki has yet to decide who will head the defence and interior ministries, jobs that are crucial for restoring stability but still vacant because of wrangling between Shi'ite, Sunni Arab and Kurdish politicians in his grand coalition.

The United States and Britain, the main allies in the Iraqi war, count on the tough-talking Shi'ite Islamist to tackle the Saddam loyalists, al-Qaeda militants, party militias and criminal gangs who have turned Iraq into a killing field.

US President George W Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair, both under domestic pressure over an increasingly unpopular war, are meeting in Washington to discuss Iraq.

In other violence in Baghdad, a bomb planted in a building wounded 13 people. And in what has become a daily occurrence in a cycle of attacks and revenge killings, four bodies were found in the city with gunshot wounds and showing signs of torture.

North of the capital, a judge was kidnapped in the small town of Dujail, the latest in a wave of attacks on members of the judiciary highlighted by a UN report this week.

"The targeting of judicial professionals is particularly worrisome in the context of the deterioration of law and order," the bi-monthly human rights report on Iraq said.

"There are reports that many judges, especially those working on terrorism or serious criminal cases, are facing intimidations or threats," it added.

Washington and London have a combined total of 140,000 troops in Iraq, suffering daily casualties in roadside bomb and other attacks, and both countries are keen to see progress so that they can start reducing their military presence.

However, they have resisted setting firm timetables, playing down comments by Maliki this week that Iraqi forces can take over security across Iraq by the end of 2007 and saying that conditions on the ground will determine when they can leave.

_{"at some point I'm hopeful I'll figure out something to put here"}

Washington | May 26

BBC - There is no excuse not to back Mr Maliki, Mr Blair argued.Tony Blair and George W Bush have called for the international community to give its full support to the new Iraqi government.

The British prime minister said it was important to Iraq's leaders to know that "we will stand firm with them to defeat the forces of reaction".

The US president defended the invasion, but admitted there had been "setbacks".

Mr Blair is in Washington for talks, in which Iran is also expected to dominate the agenda.

The two leaders will hold further talks on Friday.

Both have seen their popularity drop and are keen to ensure a positive legacy as their terms draw to a close, correspondents say.

(more)

May 25, 2006

Investigations aim to uncover truth in alleged Iraq massacre

By Gayle S. Putrich
Times staff writer

Marine Corps leaders are preparing Congress for what is expected to be the terrible truth uncovered in the investigation of a Nov. 19 incident that left as many as 24 Iraqi civilians dead and three Marines relieved of their commands.

A key member of Congress said he “wouldn’t be surprised” if a dozen Marines faced courts-martial for allegedly killing Iraqi civilians in Hadithah last November. Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., said that the number of dead Iraqis, first reported to be 15, was actually 24. He based that number on a Wednesday briefing from Marine Corps Commandant Gen. Mike W. Hagee.
Subscribe Today!

Brig. Gen. John Kelley, legislative assistant to Marine Corps Commandant Gen. Mike Hagee, was expected on Capitol Hill Thursday to make the rounds with lawmakers and staff to brief them on the status of the investigation.

Hagee himself was on Capitol Hill Wednesday in anticipation of the release of two investigation reports, which are expected to show that among the 24 dead civilians, five of the alleged victims, all unarmed, were shot in a car with no warning, Murtha said. The killings took place in Hadithah, 125 miles northwest of Baghdad. At least seven of the victims were women and three were children.

Following a briefing with Sens. John W. Warner, R-Va., and Carl Levin, D-Mich., the chairman and ranking Democrat of the Senate Armed Services Committee, respectively, Hagee would not predict when the reports, one on administrative issues and the other on criminal charges, would be completed. The two parallel investigations have been under way for six months.

Hagee said only that “the investigations are ongoing.”

According to the Pentagon, one investigation, being done by Multi-National Forces Iraq, is expected before the end of the week. The Naval Criminal Investigative Service is handling the other investigation, which is due in June.

Warner and Levin deferred to Hagee for comment on what could happen to the members of Kilo Company, 3rd Battalion, 1st Marines.

Hagee said no sweeping decisions would be made. “Each individual will be looked at as an individual,” he said. “Once the investigations are complete, we will follow the same legal procedures that we always do.”

Though Hagee would not confirm that charges are pending, defense attorneys who handle military cases are bracing for what could fast become a busy summer season in the courtroom.

“It looks like it’s coming,” said one San Diego area-based civilian defense attorney who has handled other cases of assault and manslaughter and has gotten a sort of “warning order” about potential new cases.

“I think there’s a lot of pressure to do something,” the civilian attorney said.

“It’s going to be extraordinarily difficult for them to find enough defense counsel,” one Marine Corps attorney said.

....

“They originally said a lot of things. I don’t even know how they tried to cover that up,” he said.

The Marine Corps originally said a convoy from the Camp Pendleton, Calif.-based Kilo Company, 3rd Battalion, 1st Marines, hit a roadside bomb Nov. 19 that killed Lance Cpl. Miguel Terrazas, 20, of El Paso, Texas.

Marine officials initially said 15 Iraqi civilians also were killed in the blast, but later reported that the civilians were killed in a firefight that took place after the explosion.

But a 10-week investigation by Time magazine resulted in a March 27 report that included claims by an Iraqi civil rights group that the Marines barged into houses near the bomb strike in retaliation, throwing grenades and shooting civilians who were cowering in fear.

Three officers from the 3/1, including battalion commander Lt. Col. Jeffrey Chessani, were relieved April 7 for “lack of confidence in their leadership abilities stemming from their performance during a recent deployment to Iraq.”

The two other Marines who were relieved, Capts. Luke McConnell and James Kimber, were company commanders in the battalion.

At the time, officials would not explicitly connect the firings to the Hadithah investigation.

“If the allegations are substantiated, the Marine Corps will pursue appropriate legal and administrative actions against those responsible,” said Col. David Lapan, a spokesman at Marine Corps headquarters.

“The investigations are ongoing, therefore any comment at this time would be inappropriate and could undermine the investigatory and possible legal process,” he said. “As soon as the facts are known and decisions on future actions are made, we will make that information available to the public to the fullest extent allowable.”

http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-1825747.php

AP

- resident Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair looked less like cheerleaders for the latest milestone of democratic political progress in Iraq and more like world-weary leaders who had met their match.

Subdued and understated, the two politicians most responsible for beginning a war now highly unpopular with both their publics acknowledged sour notes during a news conference at the White House on Thursday night, possibly their last joint appearance. Bush displayed almost none of his trademark backslapping bonhomie. Blair looked dour even when reporting hopeful signs from his trip to Iraq this week.

Both men were euphoric in victory when their military juggernaut dethroned Saddam Hussein. The three years since then have been costly, and both leaders talked remorsefully about mistakes made.

"Not everything since liberation has turned out as the way we had expected or hoped," Bush said. "We've learned from our mistakes, adjusted our methods and have built on our successes."

Bush admitted in hindsight he regrets rough and tumble rhetoric, such as saying he wanted Osama bin Laden "dead or alive" and taunting terrorists to "bring it on." He also cited the shameful abuse of Iraqis at the hands of American captors at Abu Ghraib.

Blair pointed to the wholesale dismissal of Saddam loyalists who ran the top military and government posts and the shocking strength of the insurgents.

"Yesterday's men is the phrase that occurred to me," said Jonathan Clarke, a former British diplomat now at the libertarian Cato Institute in Washington.

Bush is highly unpopular in Britain, and the late hour of the news conference meant most viewers there weren't awake to see Blair with the American president. Blair himself has a precarious hold on office.

Both politicians know that success in Iraq, and a graceful exit, depend on factors that are almost entirely outside their control, Clarke said. They are stuck, and the best they can hope to do is stick it out.

The United States has about 133,000 troops in Iraq, Britain about 8,000. Britain has been the United States' steadiest ally in the three-year-old war.

Joined at the hip in Iraq, Bush and Blair are also tied together by parallel political misfortune: Historically low poll numbers driven by dissatisfaction over Iraq, political mutinies among their own parties, staff shake-ups more cosmetic than substantive.

They have come a long way since the early days of Bush's administration, in February 2001, when Bush was hard-pressed to identify much common ground with the Labor leader who had been so close to Bush's predecessor, Bill Clinton.

"We both use Colgate toothpaste," Bush managed then, with Blair at his side at a Camp David summit.

Bush's approval ratings hover in the low 30s. Blair's are even deeper in the basement, at about 26 percent. Both men are approaching lame duck status, as well.

Bush's term expires at the end of 2008 but his political clout will likely diminish after this fall's midterm congressional elections. Blair is under siege to quit long before his term runs out in 2009.

During a one-hour East Room session almost entirely focused on Iraq, Bush and Blair tried to do together what neither has done alone so far: Reassure skittish publics that the Iraq war is worth fighting and that the end is in sight. They waved off questions about when troops can come home now that Iraq has a permanent government.

"They didn't try and promise things they couldn't promise," said Reginald Dale, a Europe scholar at the Center for Strategic and International Studies who supports the war and said he found the session thoughtful and refreshing.

___

EDITOR'S NOTE: Anne Gearan covers foreign affairs and diplomacy in Washington.

_{"at some point I'm hopeful I'll figure out something to put here"}

http://daytodayiniraq.blogs.nytimes.com/?p=45

I don't know wjere he gets his info about Saudi Arabian women drivers- my knowledge may be out of date but as far as I know,driving is only allowed for women in the desert.... - nymole.

---

Konfused Kid | May 26

Fashion in Baghdad took weird detours this past week: we have increasing numbers of veiled women, women in jubbahs, shiny-bald women, young men in torn jeans and young men with fuzzy, barely-grown beards.

In other worlds — broadcast to us as scenes from a distant, unreal parallel universe — all the suits, turbans and what-nots simultaneously patted each other, saluted, threatened and bickered in the quite ceremonious formation of the government in last Saturday’s Parliament session.

But as far as I’m concerned, people have been more concerned about and affected by some recent commandments that just about everyone is attributing to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi —Sharia-like threats which are reportedly being widely circulated by way of fliers in parts of Baghdad. This shows who’s really running things in town so far, and it’s not the brand new Iraqi government.

These fliers were not collected by me, I haven’t even seen one, and as far as I know, the fliers do not have Zarqawi’s name on them. Not all fliers contain all the commandments — a given flier may contain five or four of them, bound to change from time to time. The reason they are connected to Zarqawi is that he the only character known to practice such acts.

Still, everyone is positive that Zarqawi is behind this; it is a strand only condoned by the most extreme of the extremist terrorists . . . Al Qaeda . . . Neither Shiite militias nor Iraqi-bred “freedom fighters” have this on their agenda. The fliers reek of Zarqawi’s doing.

People have been talking of two Christian college girls being forced to get out of their college-transit vans and shave their heads in Hay al-Jamia, a district of Baghdad that is a prime candidate for inclusion in Zarqawi’s tentative Islamic Emirate, that much-maligned creation said to dominate terror-ridden parts of the capital such as Amariya and Dora — the latter district is said to be ole Zarq’s new base of operations.

Other haphazard reports are circulating: four men killed in their blasphemous shorts; women beaten for wearing jeans in public; hordes of men ordered to wear beards.

Some of his commandments follow a sick 7th-century logic: Thou Shalt Wear Hijab: all right. Women around the capital obeyed, some wearing veils only inside the transit lines they ride to college or work, to be taken off afterwards. Others have opted to wear safer garb, such as the jubbah (traditional Muslim outfit). Other commandments however are just plain weird, and sometimes downright ridiculous: Thou Shalt Not Sell Ice? I know the people in prophet’s time drank water straight from the oasis, but . . . come on, Abu Musab . . . be a sport, take more reasonable methods.

COMMANDMENTS

1. Women Shalt Wear Hijab (veil)
2. Women Shalt Not Drive (Interestingly, in Saudi Arabia, women are encouraged to drive because in society’s eyes it is better than a woman taking a taxi.)
3. Thou Shalt Not Wear Jeans, or Shorts.
4. Thou Shalt Not Wear A Goatee
4. Thou Shalt Not Sell Ice
5. Thou Shalt Not Activate Electric Generators
6. Thou Shalt Not Sell Newspapers
7. Thou Shalt NOT . . . do anything the prophet hasn’t done in his time . . .

Gee dude, what about car bombs? Or the semi-automatic guns you kill people with? The Holy Prophet (peace be upon Him) didn’t go shopping for AK-47’s from black-markets, remember?

---

_{Konfused Kid, 21, attends college in Baghdad, where he studies computer engineering. He is a fan of science fiction and an aspiring guitarist. His blog is Eject: Iraqi Konfused Kollege Kid, which he started in July 2005.}

_{"at some point I'm hopeful I'll figure out something to put here"}

Women have formed six teams who compete in nationwide championship of ‘invaders’ softball.

----

I don’t believe 'women' are allowed to play sports in Iran—they were recently forbidden just to attend soccer games.

In Quatar Tennis is played And in Morocco, they won gold medals in Special Olympics

In Iraq, they're wearing shorts to play soccer That's just with a couple of minutes of Googling. Expect there are lots of sports that are played in shorts. The article also mentioned Oman and Lebanon.

Sounds to me like shooting people because they wear shorts was confined to an isolated incident.

What would Iraq be doing with all these new sporting facilities? if they don't plan to
play in them dressed appropriately for the sport? You may have to scroll down to the heading Giving Iraq a Sporting Chance for the list of all the planned activities and new facilities.

Iraq backs Iran on nuke goal
BAGHDAD| May 27

WAPO - Iraq's Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari said on Friday that Iran had the right to develop nuclear technology for peaceful uses but that he hoped for a diplomatic solution to a crisis that has strained Iran’s relations with the United States.

_{"at some point I'm hopeful I'll figure out something to put here"}

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/5024104.stm

May 28

More than 1,000 members of the British military have deserted the armed forces since the start of the 2003 Iraq war, the BBC has discovered.

It comes as Parliament debates a law that will forbid military personnel refusing to participate in the occupation of a foreign country.

During 2005 alone, 377 people deserted and are still missing. So far this year another 189 are on the run.

Some 900 have evaded capture since the Iraq war started, official figures say.

The Ministry of Defence is very secretive about the number of men and women who desert from the armed forces.

'Definite increase'

But the BBC has been told that more than 1,000 military personnel went absent without leave and failed to return since the beginning of the Iraq war in 2003.

Some were subsequently arrested but about 900 have evaded capture, according to official figures.

During 2005 alone, 377 people deserted and are still missing. So far, this year, another 189 are on the run.

The Ministry claims it does not keep details of whether desertion is on the rise but a Labour MP, John McDonnell, told Parliament this week there had been a tripling in cases over the past three years.

He was speaking in a debate about new laws which would make refusal to take part in the occupation of a foreign country punishable by a maximum life sentence in prison.

It is unclear how many troops are deserting because they do not want to go to Iraq and how many are doing so because of personal reasons such as family problems.

Lawyers who represent members of the military at courts martial say that they are increasingly being contacted by people who want advice about getting out of having to serve in Iraq, even if they do not want to go to the extreme of deserting.

'Illegal acts'

Justin Hugheston-Roberts was the solicitor for Flight Lieutenant Malcolm Kendall-Smith who was sentenced to eight months in prison for refusing to follow orders in connection with a deployment to Iraq.

He says: "As part of my day to day job, I am approached regularly by people who are seeking to absent themselves from service. There has been an increase, a definite upturn.

Deadly Attack On CBS News Crew
Two Team Members Killed, Correspondent Seriously Injured By Roadside Bomb In Baghdad

BAGHDAD, May 29, 2006

(CBS/AP) Two members of a CBS News team, veteran cameraman Paul Douglas, 48, and soundman James Brolan, 42, were killed and correspondent Kimberly Dozier, 39, was seriously injured Monday when the Baghdad military unit in which they were embedded was attacked.

They were reporting on patrol with the 4th Brigade Combat Team, 4th Infantry Division, when their convoy was struck by a roadside bomb.

The attack was among a slew of car and roadside bombs left about three dozen people dead before noon Monday, including one explosion that killed 10 people on a bus. Nearly all the attacks occurred in Baghdad.

CBS News Correspondent Kimberly Dozier, 39, sustained serious injuries in the attack and underwent surgery at a U.S. military hospital in Baghdad. She is in critical condition, but doctors are cautiously optimistic about her prognosis."

Dozier and her crew are among the latest American television journalists to become casualties in Iraq. Former ABC News "World News Tonight" co-anchor Bob Woodruff and cameraman Doug Vogt suffered severe injuries in a roadside bombing in Iraq Jan. 29, 2006. Woodruff is still recovering from serious head injuries and broken bones. Cameraman Vogt has returned home to France for more rehab.

On April 6, 2003, David Bloom, 39, an American journalist for NBC television, embedded with U.S. troops in Iraq died from an apparent blood clot near Baghdad.

All over the region, explosions began just after dawn, with one roadside bomb killing 10 people and injuring another 12 who worked for an Iranian organization opposed to the regime in Iran, police said.

The explosions began just after dawn, with one roadside bomb killing 10 people and injuring another 12 who worked for an Iranian organization opposed to the regime in Iran, police said. more

Basra bomb kills two British soldiers

link

Two British soldiers died and two others were injured after a bomb attack struck in the southern Iraqi city of Basra, the Ministry of Defence (MoD) has announced.

Peacekeeping forces appear to have been patrolling the city when a roadside bomb blew up at around 9:30 local time last night, killing and injuring soldiers from the Queen's Dragoon Guards, part of the Basra city battle group.

The MoD issued a statement this morning saying that the 'next of kin have been informed and have asked for a period of time to come to terms with their tragic news'.

Reports suggest the explosion occurred in the northwest region of the city.

'It was with profound sorrow that I heard of the tragic deaths last night of two British soldiers,' said the defence secretary, Des Browne.

'Our thoughts are with the families and friends of these brave men.'

The latest deaths add growing weight to an acceleration in the number of British casualties in the Iraqi peacekeeping effort.

Adam Morris, 19, and Joseva Lewaicei, 25, died two weeks ago from a similar roadside bomb attack, while earlier this month five UK soldiers, including the first British servicewoman fatality, died when a Lynx helicopter was brought down by insurgents in the city.

‘Withdraw, move on and rampage’
Iraq’s resistance evolves

Iraq is simultaneously descending into both a civil war and a war of resistance against foreign occupation. The United States has been hoping to exploit the divide between Iraqi patriots and global jihadists, but the Sunni opposition is growing more structured and unified as it adapts to changing conditions, and may transcend those divisions.

By Mathieu Guidère and Peter Harling (Le Monde Diplomatique)

Descriptions of Iraq’s armed opposition often divide it into a set of wholly independent categories which apparently do not have much in common. The categories include the patriotic former army officers, the foreign terrorists, the Sunni Arabs determined to regain power, the Muslims opposed to any kind of foreign occupation, the tribal factions pursuing their own specific vendettas, the die-hard Ba’athists - and the “pissed-off” Iraqis (in coalition soldier jargon, POIs) who are simply sick of the foreign forces occupying their country.

While a few key figures have emerged, such as the Jordanian Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and the former Saddam acolyte Izzat Ibrahim al-Douri, they do not appear as uncontested leaders. The armed opposition has not set up any kind of civilian political representation, as the Northern Irish republicans did with Sinn Fein, for example. Nor have they published a specific political programme. So the dominant image remains that of a diffuse and largely anonymous multitude. But though that perception may have been accurate in 2003, the opposition has come a long way since then.

Broadly speaking, the change can be seen as a form of stabilisation. At first the opposition was multi-confessional and represented a cross-section of Iraqi society as a whole. But it has grown more focused as the political landscape has polarised, and it is now almost exclusively Sunni Arab. A number of large, easily recognisable groups have emerged, further simplifying the situation. The most important of these are the Islamic army, Tanzim al- Qaida fi balad al-rafidein (the organisation of al-Qaida in the land of the two rivers); the Army of the Partisans of the Tradition of the Prophet; and the Army of Muhammad. There are others (1). Increasingly, each of these groups dominates certain specific, clearly defined geographical areas. There are still pockets of confusion as to who has the upper hand where (one example is in the Diyala governorate near Baghdad) but these are now exceptions.

One area where the opposition is particularly settled is the al-Anbar governorate in northwestern Iraq. Here Iraqi aid workers negotiate safe passages with opposition leaders via what is almost an institutional process. A formal procedure is in place for lorry drivers to pay an insurance fee that allows them to cross the governorate, as long as they are not supplying the enemy.

[...]

The US persists in dividing the enemy into two separate categories. But events have shown that these two categories, international jihadist networks and local resistance, are capable of cooperating flexibly. They have resisted a counter-insurrectional campaign whose main aim was to exploit their divisions. Alarmingly, the prospect of civil war does not seem to have divided the armed opposition either. Iraqi fighters could have blamed their foreign collaborators for deliberately fanning the flames of civil war, and broken away from them. They have not. On the contrary, the atmosphere has only reinforced the tactical unity of the armed opposition, which is rooted in the fault lines running through Iraqi society, fault lines that US policy has only served to deepen.

May 30 |The Guardian | Letter to the Editor

Jane Hoskins' simplistic strictures on Iraq (Letters, May 29) define out of the equation those Iraqis trying to build a sovereign and federal polity after decades of minority rule. Hoskins ignores the new and non-sectarian Iraqi labour movement that was pulverised by Saddam, but has won nearly a million members in just three years.
A recent Labour Friends of Iraq delegation met many union leaders from across Iraq. They are not "puppets" but real people, who asked us to encourage moral and material assistance so that they can help overcome the physical and psychological legacy of decades of fascism and war. It is perfectly possible to walk and chew gum: to oppose the invasion, as they did, but also to assist Iraqi civil society to democratise their country. This isn't a part of the "white man's burden", but elementary solidarity and it's high time we saw much more of it.

Gary Kent
Director, Labour Friends of Iraq
labourfriendsofiraq.org.uk

_{"at some point I'm hopeful I'll figure out something to put here"}

Murder 'is the cheapest form of censorship'
FERGUS SHEPPARD | The Scotsman

CHRIS Cramer, the managing director of CNN International, had just finished an address on the safety of journalists when the first details confirming the deaths in Iraq of two CBS crew members emerged.

He told The Scotsman: "This is yet another tragic example of how terrifyingly high the stakes are for the media in Iraq.

"It used to be considered safer to be an embedded journalist, to be travelling with the military, and patently it's not."

Earlier, the IPI conference heard that 146 journalists had been killed doing their job last year, 48 in Iraq. Until yesterday, this year's death toll had been 29 in 13 countries.

The International News Safety Institute, set up by the IPI, has spent the past year compiling a report on the risks to journalists.

Rodney Pinder, its director, said most journalists killed did not die in war zones but "in their own countries, trying to do a job of work".

The conference heard journalists were being targeted in countries such as the Philippines, Colombia and Haiti.

"Journalists around the world are being targeted as never before," Mr Pinder said. "Murder remains the cheapest and most effective form of censorship in many countries."

_{"at some point I'm hopeful I'll figure out something to put here"}

take control of much of southern Iraq
By Tom Lasseter
Knight Ridder Newspapers

BASRA, Iraq - Southern Iraq, long touted as a peaceful region that's likely to be among the first areas returned to Iraqi control, is now dominated by Shiite Muslim warlords and militiamen who are laying the groundwork for an Islamic fundamentalist government, say senior British and Iraqi officials in the area.

The militias appear to be supported by Iranian intelligence or military units that are shipping weapons to the militias in Iraq and providing training for them in Iran.

More

-----

KILLING FIELDS
Iraq Is the Republic of Fear
By Nir Rosen
Sunday, May 28, 2006; Page B01

Every morning the streets of Baghdad are littered with dozens of bodies, bruised, torn, mutilated, executed only because they are Sunni or because they are Shiite. Power drills are an especially popular torture device.

I have spent nearly two of the three years since Baghdad fell in Iraq. On my last trip, a few weeks back, I flew out of the city overcome with fatalism. Over the course of six weeks, I worked with three different drivers; at various times each had to take a day off because a neighbor or relative had been killed. One morning 14 bodies were found, all with ID cards in their front pockets, all called Omar. Omar is a Sunni name. In Baghdad these days, nobody is more insecure than men called Omar. On another day a group of bodies was found with hands folded on their abdomens, right hand over left, the way Sunnis pray. It was a message. These days many Sunnis are obtaining false papers with neutral names. Sunni militias are retaliating, stopping buses and demanding the jinsiya , or ID cards, of all passengers. Individuals belonging to Shiite tribes are executed.

Under the reign of Saddam Hussein, dissidents called Iraq "the republic of fear" and hoped it would end when Hussein was toppled. But the war, it turns out, has spread the fear democratically. Now the terror is not merely from the regime, or from U.S. troops, but from everybody, everywhere.

At first, the dominant presence of the U.S. military -- with its towering vehicles rumbling through Baghdad's streets and its soldiers like giants with their vests and helmets and weapons -- seemed overwhelming. The Occupation could be felt at all times. Now in Baghdad, you can go days without seeing American soldiers. Instead, it feels as if Iraqis are occupying Iraq, their masked militiamen blasting through traffic in anonymous security vehicles, shooting into the air, angrily shouting orders on loudspeakers, pointing their Kalashnikovs at passersby.

Today, the Americans are just one more militia lost in the anarchy. They, too, are killing Iraqis.

Last fall I visited the home of a Sunni man called Sabah in the western Baghdad suburb of Radwaniya, where the Sunni resistance had long had a presence, and where a U.S. soldier had recently been killed. On Friday night a few days before I came, his family told me, American soldiers surrounded the home where Sabah lived with his brothers, Walid and Hussein, and their families and broke down the door. The women and children were herded outside, walking past Sabah, whose nose was broken, and Walid, who had the barrel of a soldier's machine gun in his mouth. The soldiers beat the men with rifle butts, while the Shiite Iraqi translator accompanying the troops exhorted the Americans to execute the Sunnis.

As the terrified family waited outside, they heard three shots from inside. It then sounded to them as though there was a scuffle inside, with the soldiers shouting at each other. Thirty minutes later the translator emerged with a picture of Sabah. "Who is Sabah's wife?" he asked. "Your husband was killed by the Americans, and he deserved to die," he told her. At that he tore the picture before her face.

Walid was then taken away, and inside the house the family found Sabah dead. His bloody shirt showed three bullet holes that went through his chest; two of the bullets had come out of his back and lodged in the wall behind him. Three U.S.-made bullet casings were on the floor. Sofas and beds had been overturned and torn apart; tables, closets, vases of plastic flowers, all were broken and tossed around. Even the cars had been destroyed. Photographs of Sabah had been torn up and his ID card confiscated. One photograph remained on his wife's bureau: Sabah standing proudly in front of his Mercedes.

I later asked Hussein if they wanted revenge. "We are Muslim, praise God," he said, "and we do not want revenge. He was innocent and he was killed, so he is a martyr."

Across town, U.S. troops had also raided the Mustapha Huseiniya, a Shiite place of worship in the Ur neighborhood. The Huseiniya, similar to a mosque, belonged to the nationalistic and anti-occupation Moqtada al-Sadr movement, and in front of its short tower were immense signs with images of the movement's important clerics. The Sadr militia, known as the Army of the Mahdi, had been using the Huseiniya as a base for counterinsurgency operations. Mahdi militiamen kidnapped Sunnis suspected of supporting the insurgency, tortured them until they confessed on video, and then executed them.

When the Americans raided the Huseiniya, they brought Iraqi troops with them. They killed not only Mahdi fighters but also innocent Shiite bystanders, including a young journalist I knew named Kamal Anbar, in what witnesses described to me as summary executions. Although neighbors blamed the U.S. troops, Iraqi troops were so laden with gear, flak jackets and helmets provided by the Americans, they were often indistinguishable.

When I visited the next morning, the Huseiniya's floors, walls and ceilings were stained with blood; pieces of brain lay in caked red puddles. Just as Shiites cheered when the Americans hit Sunni targets, Sunni supporters of the insurgency greeted news of the U.S. raid with satisfaction.

(snip)

The world wonders if Iraq is on the brink of civil war, while Iraqis fear calling it one, knowing the fate such a description would portend. In truth, the civil war started long before Samarra and long before the first uprisings. It started when U.S. troops arrived in Baghdad. It began when Sunnis discovered what they had lost, and Shiites learned what they had gained. And the worst is yet to come.

Washington Post

May 30, 2006
U.S. Is Sending Reserve Troops to Iraq's West
By DAVID S. CLOUD, NY Times

WASHINGTON, May 29 — The top American commander in Iraq has decided to move reserve troops now deployed in Kuwait into the volatile Anbar Province in western Iraq to help quell a rise in insurgent attacks there, two American officials said Monday.

Although some soldiers from the 3,500-member brigade in Kuwait have moved into Iraq in recent months, Gen. George W. Casey Jr. has decided to send in the remainder of the unit after consultations with Iraqi officials in recent days, the officials said.

The confirmation that the number of American forces in Iraq would grow came on a day of soaring violence in Baghdad. Two Britons working as members of a CBS News television crew were killed on Monday and an American correspondent for the network was critically wounded when a military patrol they were accompanying was hit by a roadside bomb.

The movement of the brigade comes as several senior American officials in Iraq have begun to raise doubts about whether security conditions there will permit significant troop reductions in coming months.

"General Casey has been working with the government of Iraq, and he has asked permission to draw forward more forces that will be operating in Anbar," a senior military official said. The officials were granted anonymity because they were not authorized to talk officially about continuing troop movements.

I checked to see if he was posting again this month -
a couple of weeks old,but still relevant,and with a link to another good but rough to read blog (http://iraqiscreen.blogspot.com/):

---

Tuesday, May 16, 2006
And the weirdness continues.

Ahmad’s father is attacked while in a taxi in the Shula district. Mind you, nothing personal, he is just a lowly employee in a government job he means nothing on the scale of the big fish. Just some freak who probably was bored and decided to shoot a random car. Luckily he and the taxi driver are only wounded and rushed to the hospital near by.

Ahmad gets a phone call and leaves work to go check on his injured father. Shula is a Shia district and although it has seen its share of violence it was never as mad as neighbouring Ameriyah, so he wasn’t that worried about going there.

When he gets there he finds out that his father will survive and other than the injury he doesn’t have much to worry about. He walks out of the hospital and before he gets to his car he is bundled up and kidnapped.

A couple of hours later his body is found, decapitated. His head in a plastic bag near the body and no explanation.

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

The latest news from Ameriyah is that the Jihadis there have distributed leaflets advising women against wearing that devilish invention called Trousers. A friend of my mother who usually goes to work in the local bank in trousers has taken a couple of days off to go look for skirts.

The driver of the mini-bus who drives my cousin to university from Ameriyah has told all the girls that if they don’t wear a headscarf they are not getting on the bus “they won’t kill you, they will kill me”.
My cousin now has her first collection of scarves matching her purses.

Islamists:2 Freedom & Democracy: Nil

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

It should not be a surprise to you if you have been following the news of Iraqi ministries that the Ministry of Health is controlled by the supporters of Moqtada al-Sadr and it is not yet clear whether in the new government this will be the same.

And since every good Muslim knows that when a man and a woman are alone the devil will be their third the minister, in an effort to minimize the possibility of such devilish threesomes, has segregated the elevators. When you walk into the ministry today you will see the elevators marked like toilets, one for men and one for women.

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

One of my parents’ friends house was robbed last week. It’s a big house but they are both retired and they don’t really have much, which really pissed off the 6 armed men who barged into the house late that night.

While the house was being ransacked they found the couple’s passports. Chief-thief threw it at them and asked a VERY wise question: “When you two have passports can you tell me what you are still doing here?”

I ask myself the same question almost everyday. And clearly answering “this is home” really isn’t cutting it anymore.

Weirdness continues

---

Sunday, May 14, 2006

Boys and girls do yourselves a favour and go read Iraqi Screen.
You will thank me.

She is funny, she is wise and she could kick your ass if you looked her up the wrong way.

do yourselves a favor

---

more entries at LINK

_{"at some point I'm hopeful I'll figure out something to put here"}

Iraq PM to declare state of emergency in Basra
31 May 2006 13:01:52 GMT
Source: Reuters
Printable view | Email this article | RSS [-] Text [+]

(Adds details)

BAGHDAD, May 31 (Reuters) - Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki will on Wednesday declare a state of emergency for a month in oil-rich Basra which is in the grip of a power struggle between Shi'ite factions, a government source said.

"He will announce it soon because of the security situation in Basra," the source told Reuters.

The source said security forces will be deployed in the streets of Basra all day and night, they will also conduct searching operations.

Maliki, who is heading a delegation to Basra to restore security, has vowed to crack down with an "iron fist" on gangs threatening security in the city.

Security has deteriorated sharply in Basra over the past year as rival factions from the Shi'ite Muslim majority tussle for a share of the power handed to Shi'ites by the U.S. overthrow of Saddam Hussein's Sunni-dominated administration.

Basra, whose oil accounts for virtually all of Iraq's state revenues, is a major prize for all parties.

Maliki said he would order his security services to come up with an urgent plan to restore security in Iraq's second city.

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/KAR146751.htm

Reuters Baghdad May 31 - Four defence witnesses in the trial of Saddam Hussein were arrested on Wednesday after the court ordered them held on suspicion of making false allegations against the prosecution, the ousted leader's attorney said.

Khalil al-Dulaimi, who heads the defence team, said the witnesses were arrested after "their testimony destroyed the credibility of the court."

Earlier, a U.S. official close to the trial said they would be held for an investigation into their allegations that prosecutor Jaafar al-Moussawi had attended an event celebrating a 1982 assassination attempt on Saddam.

[...]

The toppled president's defence attorneys also tried to tear apart the testimony of key prosecution witness Ali al-Haidari by showing a video aired on Arabic television channel al-Arabiya on Tuesday which they said showed he had committed perjury.

The defence team showed footage of his original testimony for the prosecution in which he said there was no assassination attempt on Saddam in Dujail and that shots were fired in the air to celebrate the former president's visit to the town.

A video was then shown of Haidari giving a speech in Dujail on July 8, 2004, during a celebration in which he said people from the "heroic" town tried to kill Saddam.

"It was a historic day in the life of this town when they tried to kill the worst tyrant ever known in history ... when this religious group wanted to save the Iraqi people from this tyrant," he said on the video.

The defence said another part of the tape aired by al-Arabiya and presented in court showed that Moussawi was among those celebrating in Dujail in the same group as Haidari.

The chief prosecutor denied this and brought in a man who looks like him, Abdul Razzaq al-Bandar, and said he was the person in the video.

[...]

I read the stories on this thread. One question:

Does this mean we're still winning?

Damn.

I did inhale.

Fareed Zakaria | May 31

Wapo - I'm glad that the president has finally admitted to some mistakes in Iraq. But what worries me is that he seems to be persisting in one important error. At his news conference last week, the only concrete plan he outlined to move forward -- on a path out of Iraq -- was a better-functioning Iraqi army and police force. In this respect Bush is hardly alone. Many who criticize him on the right and left say that the training of Iraqi troops is happening too slowly, or that we need more American troops, or that we should flood the city of Baghdad with forces to stabilize it. But all these solutions are technocratic and military, while the problem in Iraq is fundamentally political. Until we fully recognize this, doing more of the same will accomplish little.

Initially the Sunnis thought they could use military power -- through the insurgency -- to get their way. Now many Shiites think they can use military power -- through the government's security services and militias -- to get their way. For our part, despite the denials, we believed that what we needed was more troops, Iraqi troops. Except that 260,000 Iraqi soldiers and police are "standing up" and it hasn't led to any significant withdrawal of Americans. The reality is that only an effective political bargain will bring about order. There needs to be a deal that gives all three communities strong incentives to cooperate rather than be spoilers.

While the United States can push hard in this direction, forging this bargain falls largely on the shoulders of the new prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki. I met Maliki a year ago in a small safe house in Baghdad. He was then a Dawa party official, with no position in the government. He is a big, strapping man and came across as straightforward and confident. He also came across as a hard-line Shiite, unyielding in his religious views and extremely punitive toward the Sunnis. He did not strike me as a man who wanted national reconciliation in Iraq.

But many Iraqi and U.S. officials who have spoken to him since he became prime minister believe that he understands his new role. If so, he will have to tackle quickly the two big political challenges Iraq faces: weakening the insurgency and disbanding sectarian militias. Neither can be done purely militarily.

Co-opting the majority of the Sunnis is the simplest way Maliki can cripple the insurgency. So far he has said some encouraging things about national unity. On the other hand, he has given Sunnis only 11 percent of cabinet posts, though they are 20 percent of the country. Tariq al-Hashimi, the new Sunni vice president, complains that when he details violence by death squads, Iraq's leaders remain highly unresponsive. "Even if you have complete evidence, they are not open-minded. It's really phenomenal," he says.

Maliki will have to stake out national positions on the proposed amendments to the constitution, the sharing of oil revenue and other such matters. But even sooner he will have to address the core Sunni demand: an end to the de-Baathification process, which has thrown tens of thousands of Sunnis out of jobs and barred them from new ones. Iraq's deputy prime minister, Barham Salih, a Kurd, told me that "the time has come for us to be courageous enough to admit that there were massive mistakes in de-Baathification." The American ambassador to Iraq, Zalmay Khalilzad, argued similarly, saying that "de-Baathification has to evolve into reconciliation with accountability." Khalilzad added that Prime Minister Maliki supported the notion that de-Baathification "has to focus on individuals who are charged with specific crimes, not whole classes and groups of people." If so, it would mark a major and positive shift in policy.

Maliki's second challenge is with his own. The Shiite militias now run rampant throughout non-Kurdish Iraq. Khalilzad believes that they will have to be largely disbanded -- "perhaps 5 percent of them can be integrated into the national army and security services, but most have to be given civilian jobs." The greatest challenge here comes from the large and growing Mahdi Army of Moqtada al-Sadr. This renegade cleric is mounting a frontal challenge to the United States and to the authority of the new Iraqi government (even while he takes charge of some of its ministries).

Maliki will have to handle Sadr politically as well as militarily, enlisting Ayatollah Ali Sistani's help. If Maliki cannot handle him, Moqtada al-Sadr will become the most powerful man in Iraq. And Nouri al-Maliki will not be the first elected prime minister of a new Iraq, but the last prime minister of an experiment that failed. Iraq will continue down its slide into violence, ethnic cleansing and Balkanization. In places such as Baghdad, with mixed populations, this will mean the city will be carved up into warring neighborhoods, with gangs providing a mafia-style system of law and order, and constant guerrilla attacks. It will be Lebanon in the 1980s, except that 130,000 American troops will be in the middle of it all.

_{"at some point I'm hopeful I'll figure out something to put here"}

from Riverbend's blog

_{Viva Muqtada...}

It’s fascinating to watch the world beyond Iraq prepare for the World Cup. I get pictures by email of people hanging flags and banners, in support of this team or that one. Oh we have flags and banners too- the hole-ridden black banners all over Baghdad, announcing deaths and wakes. The flags are all of one color, usually- black, green, red, or yellow- representing a certain religious party or political group.

A friend who owns a shop in Karrada had a little problem with a certain flag last week...

After the war, SCIRI, Da’awa and other religious parties instantly opened up bureaus in the area. Soon, instead of pictures of the charming women advertising Dior perfume, shops began putting up pictures of Sistani, looking half-alive, shrouded in black. Or pictures of Sadr, grim and dark, and almost certainly not smelling like Dior.

The last time I visited G. in his shop was two weeks ago. Since January, G.’s shop has been the center of some football (soccer) activity. His obsession with football has gotten to the point where the shop closes up two hours early so that E., the cousin and various other friends can gather for PlayStation FIFA tournaments. These tournaments are basically a group of grown men sitting around, maneuvering little digital men running around after a digital ball, screaming encouragement and insults at each other...

G.’s cousin, who has lived in Canada for nearly 15 years, recently sent G. a large, colorful Brazilian flag- perfect for hanging on a shop window. He told us how he was planning to hang it right in the center and paint under it in big bold letters “VIVA BRASILIA!!”. E. looked dubious as G. excitedly described how he’d be changing the colors of the display- green and yellow to match the flag.

It was up for nearly two whole days before the problems began. The first hint of a problem came through G.’s neighbor. He stopped by the shop and told G. that a black-turbaned young cleric had been walking past the shop window, when the flag attracted his attention.

According to the neighbor Abu Rossul, the young cleric stopped, gazed at the flag, took note of the shops name and location and went on his way. G. ...

A day later, G. had a visit at noon. A young black-clad cleric walked into the shop, and had a brief look around. He claimed to be a ‘representative’ from the Sadr press bureau which was a few streets away and he had a message for G.: the people at the abovementioned bureau were not happy with G.’s display. Where was his sense of national pride? Where was his sense of religion?

Instead of the face of a heathen player, there were pictures of the first Sadr, or better yet, Muqtada! Why did he have a foreign flag plastered obscenely on his display window? Should he feel the need for a flag, there was the Iraqi flag to put up. Should he feel the necessity for a green flag, like the one in the display, there was the green flag of “Al il Bayt”… Democracy, after all, is all about having options.

G. wasn’t happy at all. He told the young cleric he would find a ‘solution’ and made a peace offering of some inexpensive men’s slippers and some cotton undershirts he sometimes sold. That evening, he conferred with various relatives and friends and although nearly everyone advised him to take down the flag, he insisted it should remain on display as a matter of principle. His wife even offered to turn it into a curtain or bed sheets for him to enjoy until the games were over. He was adamant about keeping it up.

Two days later, he found a rather dramatic warning letter slipped under the large aluminum outer door. In a nutshell, it declared G. and people like him ‘heathens’ and demanded he take down the flag or he would be exposing himself to danger. It takes quite a bit to shake up a guy like G., but the same day he had the flag down and the display was back to normal.

As it turns out, Muqtada has a fatwa against football (soccer). I downloaded it and this is a translation of what he says when someone asks him for a fatwa on football and the World Cup:

“In reality, my father's position on this topic isn't deficient... Not only my father but Sharia also prohibits such activities which keep the followers too occupied for worshiping, keep people from remembering [to worship]. Habeebi, the West created things that keep us from completing ourselves (perfection). What did they make us do? Run after a ball, habeebi… What does that mean? A man, this large and this tall, Muslim- running after a ball? Habeebi, this ‘goal’ as it is called…

...if you want to run, run for a noble goal. Follow the noble goals which complete you and not the ones that demean you. Run after a goal, put it in your mind and everyone follows their own path to the goal to satisfy God. That is one thing. The second thing, which is more important, we find that the West and especially Israel, habeebi the Jews, did you see them playing soccer? Did you see them playing games like Arabs play? They let us keep busy with soccer and other things and they've left it. Have you heard that the Israeli team, curse them, got the World Cup? Or even America? Only other games... They've kept us occuppied with them- singing, and soccer, and smoking, stuff like that, satellites used for things which are blasphemous while they occuppy themselves with science etc. Why habeebi? Are they better than us- no we're better than them.”

Important note: Islamic Sharia does not prohibit soccer/football or sports- it’s only prohibited by the version of Sharia in Muqtada’s dark little head. I wonder what he thinks of tennis, swimming and yoga…

I listened to the fatwa, with him getting emotional about playing football, and I didn’t know whether to laugh or cry. Foreign occupation and being a part of a puppet government- those things are ok. Football, however, will be the end of civilization as we know it, according to Muqtada. It’s amusing- they look nothing alike- yet he reminds me so much of Bush. He can barely string two sentences together properly and yet, millions of people consider his word law. So when Bush raves about the new ‘fledgling Iraqi government’ ‘freely elected’ into power, you can take a look at Muqtada and see one of the fledglings. He is currently one of the most powerful men in the country for his followers.

So this is democracy. This is one of the great minds of Bush’s democratic Iraq.

Sadr’s militia control parts of Iraq now. Just a couple of days ago, his militia, with the help of Badr, were keeping women from visiting the market in the southern city of Karbala. Women weren’t allowed in the marketplace and shop owners were complaining that their businesses were suffering. Welcome to the new Iraq.

It’s darkly funny to see what we’ve turned into, and it is also anguishing. Muqtada Al-Sadr is a measure of how much we’ve regressed these last three years. Even during the Iran-Iraq war and the sanctions, people turned to sports to keep their mind off of day-to-day living. After the occupation, we won a football match against someone or another and we’d console ourselves with “Well we lose wars- but we win football!” From a country that once celebrated sports- football (soccer) especially- to a country that worries if the male football players are wearing long enough shorts or whether all sports fans will face eternal damnation… That’s what we’ve become.

_{"at some point I'm hopeful I'll figure out something to put here"}

New footage[link at site, graphic]

The US military has told the BBC it is investigating an incident in which 11 Iraqi civilians may have been deliberately killed by US troops.

Video footage obtained by the BBC appears to challenge the US account of events in the town of Ishaqi in March.

The US said at the time that four people died during a raid, but Iraqi police said 11 were shot by US troops.

The video evidence comes in the wake of the alleged massacre by US marines of up to 24 Iraqi civilians in Haditha.

The troops are also suspected of covering up the deaths in November 2005.

The Haditha incident and several others are being investigated by the Pentagon, according to US military sources.

The US army has also announced that coalition troops in Iraq are to have ethical training following the alleged incident in Haditha.

However, the BBC's Ian Pannell in Baghdad says the move is likely to be greeted with cynicism by many Iraqis, as the troops have long been accused of deliberately targeting civilians.

'Massacre' video

The video pictures obtained by the BBC appear to contradict the US account of the events in Ishaqi, about 100km (60 miles) north of Baghdad, on 15 March 2006.

The US authorities said they were involved in a firefight after a tip-off that an al-Qaeda supporter was visiting the house.
According to the Americans, the building collapsed under heavy fire killing four people - a suspect, two women and a child.

But a report filed by Iraqi police accused US troops of rounding up and deliberately shooting 11 people in the house, including five children and four women, before blowing up the building.

The video tape obtained by the BBC shows a number of dead adults and children at the site with what our world affairs editor John Simpson says were clearly gunshot wounds.

The pictures came from a hardline Sunni group opposed to coalition forces.

It has been cross-checked with other images taken at the time of events and is believed to be genuine.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/middle_east/5039714.stm

Published: 2006/06/02 07:00:25 GMT

from the June 02, 2006 edition - http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0602/p02s01-usmi.html

War atrocities: awareness grows, tolerance drops

By Brad Knickerbocker | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor
Revelations that US troops may have targeted and killed civilians in Iraq last year are focusing a bright light on America's rising awareness of and intolerance for war atrocities.

Such acts have become far less acceptable since World War II. And if it took decades before the shootings of Korean War refugees at No Gun Ri or the atrocities by the rampaging US Army "Tiger Force" in Vietnam were made public, such episodes are much harder to ignore or cover up today.

The result is that allegations that US marines shot and killed 24 civilians in Haditha last November have already spawned two military investigations and heavy media coverage.

"The marines I know are as horrified as anyone at the possibility that the stories coming out of Haditha are true," says political scientist John Allen Williams of Loyola University Chicago, who's also a retired US Naval Reserve captain. "We won't know for sure until the investigation runs its course, which it will. There will be no coverup."

At a Pentagon briefing Wednesday, officials said their initial inquiry shows that the Iraqi civilians were killed in an unprovoked attack, contradicting the troops' initial account that they had been fired upon.

"The forensics painted a different story than what the marines had said," said one official, speaking on condition of anonymity. "Bad things happened that day, and it appears marines lied about it."

Meanwhile, military officials in Iraq this week were quick to acknowledge another incident involving civilian casualties. Two women - cousins racing to a maternity hospital in Samarra because one of them was about to give birth - were killed by US forces when they entered a prohibited area and failed to stop.

One reason Americans learn about atrocities more quickly than in previous wars is the arrival of the digital age. Every GI, it seems, carries a digital camera and cellphone along with his weapon, and he also has access to the Internet and e-mail.

At the same time, the media, having either ignored or been kept from knowing about earlier atrocities, now are more eager to investigate and expose them. Modern means of communication - including reporters with satellite phones embedded with combat troops - allow for nearly immediate publication and widespread broadcast of photos and other evidence.

"There is no question in my mind that things are different," says retired Air Force Col. Sam Gardiner. "Clearly, we see a compression in the time an incident can be hidden from the public."

Another reason has to do with the change in the way the nation defines its military role, according to experts. And this may make the issue of civilian casualties - "collateral damage" - more acute.

In World War II, US forces were avenging aggression, and there was little talk of liberating Japan or Germany. Because Americans saw themselves as victims justified in retaliating (as well as retaliating on behalf of victims abroad), US forces were given more latitude in waging war, says defense analyst Loren Thompson of the Lexington Institute in Arlington, Va.

"Once you begin describing yourself as a liberator rather than an avenger, the standard of behavior is raised considerably," says Dr. Thompson.
MORE

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/6/2/113431.shtml?s=ic

June 2

Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld on Friday defended the training and conduct of U.S. troops and said incidents like an alleged massacre of Iraqi civilians shouldn't happen.

"We know that 99.9 percent of our forces conduct themselves in an exemplary manner. We also know that in conflicts things that shouldn't happen, do happen," he said.

While he said he can't comment on the investigation because it could taint the case, he said, "We don't expect U.S. soldiers to act that way, and they're trained not to."

Rumsfeld spoke to reporters at a defense ministers conference in Singapore.

99.9% still leaves upwards of 135 gun toting maniacs roaming Iraq. That's the equivalent of one 'Company'. - stonehouse

U.S. Military Denies New Abuse Allegations at Ishaqi
Officials Concluded Troops Followed Rules of Engagement

By JONATHAN KARL
June 2, 2006 — - Horrific images of Iraqi adults and children have fueled new allegations that U.S. troops killed civilians in the Iraqi town of Ishaqi.

ABC News has learned, however, that military officials have completed their investigation and have concluded U.S. forces followed the rules of engagement.

A senior Pentagon official told ABC News that the investigation concluded that American forces in this case properly followed the rules of engagement and that allegations of intentional killings of civilians were unfounded.

Military commanders in Iraq launched an investigation soon after the March 15 raid in the village of Ishaqi, about 50 miles north of Baghdad.

Maj. Gen. William Caldwell is expected to make a statement about the Ishaqi allegations today in Baghdad, ABC News has learned.

In Ishaqi, American forces were going after a high-value terrorist target, whom they succeeded in apprehending.

The U.S. military reported in March that four people had died when U.S. forces destroyed a house from the air and ground.

Previously unaired video shot by an AP Television News cameraman at the time, though, showed at least five children dead, several with obvious bullet wounds to the head. One adult male was also seen dead
more

Jun 2, 12:10 PM EDT

Al-Zarqawi Urges Sunnis to Take on Shiites

By MAGGIE MICHAEL
Associated Press Writer

CAIRO, Egypt (AP) -- The leader of al-Qaida in Iraq urged Sunnis to confront Shiites and ignore calls for reconciliation in a new audiotape posted Friday on the Web, saying Shiite militias are killing and raping the Sunni Arab minority.

The tape was a four-hour sermon by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi against Shiites, denouncing their top cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani as an "atheist," and saying the community had collaborated with invaders throughout Iraq's history.

"Oh Sunni people, wake up, pay attention and prepare to confront the poisons of the Shiite snakes who are afflicting you with all agonies since the invasion of Iraq until our day. Forget about those advocating the end of sectarianism and calling for national unity," al-Zarqawi said.

The authenticity of the audiotape could not be independently confirmed. It was posted on a Web forum often used by his al-Qaida in Iraq for messages and the voice resembled that of al-Zarqawi's on other confirmed tapes from him.

A written statement said Friday's tape was made two months ago and that the group had intended to post it then, but "circumstances" prevented it from doing so. The statement, posted with the audio, did not elaborate.

It was the first message from al-Zarqawi since April 29, when he appeared in a video saying that any government formed in Iraq would be merely a "stooge" of the Americans. That video was the first time al-Qaida in Iraq had released images showing his face.

Al-Zarqawi, a Jordanian, has claimed responsibility for some of the most high-profile suicide bombings in Iraq and also for other attacks in Jordan, including the bombing of three hotels in Amman in November that killed 63 people.

In the video, al-Zarqawi denounced militias linked to Shiite political parties in the new government that many accuse of running death squads killing Sunnis in a wave of sectarian violence the past months
more

_{Checkpoint attack, grisly find in Baquba}

Mohammed Tawfeeq and John Vause | June 3

CNN - Gunmen killed a Russian diplomat and kidnapped four others in Baghdad on Saturday, according to the Russian Foreign Ministry.

Efforts were being made to secure the hostages' release, Alexei Sazonov of the ministry said in a statement on Russian television.

"We are paying respects to the relatives of the killed colleague," he added.

The gunmen attacked the diplomats' car shortly before 3 p.m. (7 a.m. ET) in the upscale Mansour neighborhood in the west of the Iraqi capital, where the embassy is located.

The fatally wounded man was taken to the embassy, where he died a short time later, according to Iraq's Interior Ministry.

It is unclear whether the assailants, who drove up in two cars, singled out the diplomats or whether the attack was random. The diplomats' ranks are also unknown.

Six foreign diplomats have been kidnapped since the war began; among them, Egypt's ambassador to Iraq, Ihab al-Sherif, was executed last July. Al Qaeda in Iraq claimed responsibility.

The United Arab Emirates consul in Iraq, Naji Noemi, was kidnapped last month and released after two weeks.

---

Gruesome discovery

Authorities found the heads of eight Sunni men on Saturday, police said, in a fruit box left near a highway in Ahdaid, just east of Baquba.

A leaflet found in the box identified one of the victims as a man who killed four Shiite doctors and a former government official, police said.

---

Separately in Baquba -- a town northeast of Baghdad -- insurgents armed with rocket-propelled grenades and small arms attacked a police checkpoint, killing three police officers and wounding a dozen people shortly after noon, police said.

Among the wounded were nine students and three police officers.

_{"at some point I'm hopeful I'll figure out something to put here"}

Chris Floyd's interesting blog

Wednesday, 31 May 2006
Many observers have compared the methodical murder of 24 innocent civilians by U.S. Marines in the Iraqi town of Haditha – now confirmed by Pentagon and Congressional sources – to the infamous My Lai massacre in Vietnam, when American troops slaughtered hundreds of civilians in a bloody rampage. But this is a false equation, one that gravely distorts the overall reality of the Coalition effort in Iraq.

For it is not the small-scale Haditha atrocity that should be compared to My Lai: it is the entire Iraq War itself. The whole operation – from its inception in high-level mendacity to its execution in blood-soaked arrogance, folly, greed and incompetence – is a war crime of almost unfathomable proportions: a My Lai writ large, a My Lai every single day, year after year after year.

(MORE AT THE LINK)

THE PARANOIDS ARE OUT TO GET US!

Could Haditha be just the tip of the mass grave? The corpses we have glimpsed, the grainy footage of the cadavers and the dead children; could these be just a few of many? Does the handiwork of America's army of the slums go further?

Published: 03 June 2006
Robert Fisk
The Independent UK

I remember clearly the first suspicions I had that murder most foul might be taking place in our name in Iraq. I was in the Baghdad mortuary, counting corpses, when one of the city's senior medical officials - an old friend - told me of his fears. "Everyone brings bodies here," he said. "But when the Americans bring bodies in, we are instructed that under no circumstances are we ever to do post-mortems. We were given to understand that this had already been done. Sometimes we'd get a piece of paper like this one with a body." And here the man handed me an American military document showing the hand-drawn outline of a man's body and the words "trauma wounds".

What kind of trauma? Indeed, what kind of trauma is now being experienced in Iraq? Who is doing the mass killing? Who is dumping so many bodies on garbage heaps? After Haditha, we are going to reshape our suspicions...

link

(full text of this frontpaged Independent article also available here, at Seattle P-I, retitled "The Way Americans Like Their War".)