Open Letter to the American People on Independence Day, 4th July

Open Letter to the American People on Independence Day, 4th July

Professor Mohammad Al-Ani, Chairman, Iraqi Consultants Council

Monday, 06 July 2009 01:43

On the 4th of July of each year, you celebrate your independence day, which you consider America’s most precious day, as it represents your freedom and true independence that you achieved by resisting British Occupation. You sacrificed for this day and fought for eight years to achieve your just aim, by simply refusing any kind of occupation and loss of true sovereignty.

Your country became the strongest nation in the world. But instead of spreading peace and freedom between mankind, your governments started to enslave nations economically in your name; punishment for anyone who does not want to be under your sphere of influence became the name of the game. This attitude was clearly crystallised when your government decided to break international law by invading Iraq under the disguise of weapons of mass destruction. But the whole world knows now the fallacy of this claim, and it has become crystal clear for all that the true aim is to have hands on control on the natural resources of Iraq. Your government believes that it has achieved this aim by imposing an ideologically polarized political system and constitution, and embedding wide spread corruption in the system, in order to reap the reward of controlling oil fields and other natural resources through false and orchestrated auctions.

But let me tell you what your country has achieved for you. Your government has committee the most evil act against humanity for the sake of controlling the resources of another nation in your name, in the name of your humanity and your civilisation. It tried to legalise this evil crime by initiating a so called treaty with the so called government of Iraq. History will Judge those Iraqis who signed, voted and who are quite about it as having committed high treason against the people of Iraq; it is simply an attempt to legalise the most evil act committed in the history of humanity. I do not mean the millions of orphans, or the millions of widows, or the millions of displaced people, or the crimes committed by your military army against detainees, or the destruction of Iraq’s infrastructure. I mean the use of the American military of at least 2000 tons of depleted uranium in the war against Iraq, which has polluted more or less all aspects of the environment in my beloved Iraq.

Depleted uranium is the true weapon of mass destruction, especially the way its pollution affects all aspects of normal life, land and water. To find out the true effect of this weapon, go and visit what ever is left of Iraqi hospitals; to see with your own eyes the crimes of your government and military. This inhumane weapon has caused wide spread cancer especially in women and children, and even unborn foetuses and genes. Yes it will affect genes for ten and probably hundred of years to come. An if you can not visit Iraqi hospitals, visit the hundred of thousands of your own veterans who are suffering from long term illnesses caused by depleted uranium according to the reports of your own institutions. That is correct; your government has even committed hideous crimes against your own soldiers.

You need to stop this hypocrisy of yours. On your independence day, I would like to remind you that resisting occupation is the right of all free people in the world, and it is the right of the people of Iraq to resist your occupation and hijacking their true sovereignty. You are not aware of the true losses Iraqi resistance has inflected on your military. The findings of your own academics and research institution indicate that the causalities are as high as half a million dead and disabled veterans with terminal illnesses. This is what your government has achieved in this unjust war on the people of Iraq as a result of the actions of the heroic Iraqi resistance. As to the so called withdrawal of the US military from Iraqi cities and towns and the charade of handing over sovereignty, I can assure you that free Iraqis are all too aware of this deception and will not be deceived by it. Free Iraqis will continue their resistance until all foreign troops are withdrawn from Iraq, and gain true independence and sovereignty. Just like their grandfathers in the last century who fought British rule until they gained independence. In order to know the willpower and tenacity of free Iraqis, read about the twenties revolution, as your future generations will read about the war of the twenty first century.

You must understand that the people of Iraq will not forgive you until you apologies and compensate justly for all the crimes and damages your government and military have committed again the people of Iraq and their environment. You can rest assure that if you do not, Iraqi people including future generations will hold you legally accountable for these crimes to gain a just compensation even after independence.

Lastly, I say to you that your country is less than two hundred and fifty years old. But the cradle of civilisation in Mesopotamia is thousands years old. This free land went through trials and tribulation from time to time over the centuries, but it has always regained its freedom and independence at the hands of its free sons.

Professor Mohammad Al-Ani
Chairman, Iraqi Consultants Council
4th July 2009

New Reaper sensors offer a bigger picture

New Reaper sensors offer a bigger picture

By Michael Hoffman – Staff writer
Posted : Thursday Feb 19, 2009 7:39:15 EST

The Air Force plans to install a wide-area airborne surveillance sensor under its MQ-9 Reapers that lets troops look at more of the battlefield from more angles. Ten of the service’s Reapers will start getting the sensor in spring 2010.

The $15 million sensor will film an area with a four-kilometer radius underneath the Reaper during both day and night operations from 12 angles, said Robert Marlin, technical adviser for Air Force intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities.

The Army started using a similar wide-area surveillance sensor, the Constant Hawk, in 2006 and the Marine Corps followed suit with an upgrade called Angel Fire in 2007. Those sensors are mounted under manned aircraft in Iraq and Afghanistan

The Air Force now has improved on Angel Fire with its Gorgon Stare, named after Medusa’s gaze that turned her enemies to stone. Gorgon Stare allows any user to choose from the 12 angles that it can broadcast simultaneously, Marlin said; Angel Fire allows multiple users to view its imagery but can broadcast back only one at a time. Angel Fire is also limited to day operations.

Gorgon Stare will allow a combat controller on the ground, a commander at headquarters and an intelligence officer back in the U.S. all to choose a different angle from the same Reaper, said Maj. William Bower, deputy program manager for the MQ-9 Reaper.

The sensor will supplement but not replace the multi-spectral targeting pod aboard the Reaper and the MQ-1 Predator that records full-motion video, Marlin said. He described the Gorgon Stare’s feed as “motion imagery, which will be like a slow, jumpy version of the full-motion video feed.”

Viewing that wider area, though, will allow airmen to “see the bigger picture” and have a better idea where to point full-motion video sensors, Marlin said.

Reapers and MQ-1 Predators are often called on to track vehicles and hover over buildings to watch for “squirters,” or insurgents running out of buildings during U.S. operations. Airmen controlling the sensors sometimes lose track of those vehicles or squirters if they drive or run out of view too fast.

Gorgon Stare will be invaluable in such instances, Bower said. Even if a vehicle drives out of the view of the full-motion video sensor, it will still be within Gorgon Stare’s range. Even if 12 squirters run in 12 directions, Gorgon Stare could dedicate one angle to each one, Marlin said.

Even after a mission is complete, Gorgon Stare will keep providing fresh intelligence by recording each angle. Airmen can then return to a previous mission and view all 12 angles to ensure nothing was missed, Bower said.

Reapers will initially be the only aircraft to fly with the Gorgon Stare, but the RQ-4 Global Hawk and manned aircraft could fly with it later, said Col. Christopher Coombs, 703rd Aeronautical Systems Group commanders, whose unit is in charge of UAV acquisition. The MQ-1 Predator and the Army MQ-1C Sky Warrior could be fitted with Gorgon Stare if Air Force engineers can figure out how to lighten the 1,100-pound sensor, Marlin said

The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency is working with a wide-area airborne surveillance sensor that could provide up to 60 views.

“We’re enhancing this capability and will soon be able to study 30 to 60 targets with one MQ-9 pod,” said Lt. Gen. David Deptula, deputy chief of staff for intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance.

What the Gorgon Stare won’t be able to do is replace Reaper and Predator missions, Marlin said.

“I think there is a misperception out there that because it can look at 12 different angles that it will be able to replace 12 Reapers,” he said.

Members of the Senate Armed Services Committee, for example, threw their support behind Gorgon Stare in part for “its potential to reduce the requirement for UAS with FMV and to make the latter more effective,” according to a committee report on the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009.

“That’s just not true, but it will be a very powerful tool the Air Force will be able to use,” Marlin said.

ORDINARY PAKISTANIS “INSPIRING EXAMPLE,” SAYS UN OFFICIAL:

ORDINARY PAKISTANIS “INSPIRING EXAMPLE,” SAYS UN OFFICIAL:

06/07/2009 (MaximsNews Network)

UNITED NATIONS – / MaximsNews Network / 06 July 2009 – UN Humanitarian Coordinator for Pakistan Martin Mogwanja praised Pakistanis today for the help they have rendered to the 2 million of their countrymen and women who have been forced from their homes by the conflict in the country’s North West Frontier Province (NWFP).

He opined, “The everyday people of Pakistan are the real heroes of this current crisis in Pakistan …They set an inspiring example of extraordinary generosity for the whole world.”

Despite the massive influx of displaced persons, the population has played a large role in ensuring that they have food, somewhere to stay, and other necessities. The majority of the refugees are sheltered in local homes rather than in internally displaced persons camps.

Mr. Mogwanja commended them to the international community as a model of generosity and urged other countries to step up their aid and help to the millions in Pakistan who fled the violence that wracked the region as a result of clashes between federal troops and opposition fighters. However, not all of those menaced by the fighting in the North West Frontier Province have been able to escape to safer areas.

Eric Laroche, Assistant Director General of the Health Action in Crises Cluster of the World Health Organisation, warned, “There are major challenges facing the displaced and those people still caught in the conflict area, for example in the Swat Valley and other conflict zones, where health facilities have been damaged or destroyed.”

The UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF) is also worried about the plight of women and children, many of whom are still stuck amidst the fighting. One UNICEF official indicated that reports suggest they are facing “intolerable circumstances without proper access to clean, potable water, medical services and food.

Among those who fled the conflict zone, apparently over 60 percent are under 18 who are in need of help of all kinds, as well as access to education.

Dr. Laroche warned that the deficits in the medical system in Pakistan must be remedied because the population is already affected by a variety of diseases. Without new shipments of vital drugs and equipment and further personnel, not only to care for the sick but also to prevent new outbreaks, the country risks serious damage to public health. For some drugs, there is only enough for a couple more weeks.

Because the women are uncomfortable with male medical personnel, he emphasized that “we need to have other women, Pashtun women doctors, Pashtun women workers, health workers, to be taking care of them… This is a major challenge.”

Dr. Laroche was particularly worried by the health care resources in the communities, while reporting that he was pleased with the provision of medical care found in the internally displaced persons camps.

Despite the laudatory willingness of the population to take in refuges, the addition of the displaced to the local population has stretched the infrastructure, including sanitation, water, and medical, to their breaking point.

Nonetheless, WHO has successfully detected and contained more than 30 cases of spreading infectious diseases, thanks to an early warning initiative set up by the agency.

Dr. Laroche was in Pakistan last week to observe and analyze conditions there and make recommendations on how to best proceed.

Still, funding is very short, he observed, “We have gotten only 27 per cent of what we were asking for. And what we are asking for is not even 10 per cent of the overall [total]. We are asking for $4 million.” Without more money, the critical operations of the UN agencies will not be able to continue.

French monks killed by Algeria, not Islamists: source

French monks killed by Algeria, not Islamists: source

By Thierry Leveque

PARIS (Reuters) – A French general has said seven French monks murdered in Algeria in 1996 were killed by the army there rather than by Islamist militants and Paris helped cover up the truth, a judicial source said on Monday.

Retired General Francois Buchwalter, France’s defence attache in Algiers at the time, told a closed-door inquiry an army helicopter killed the Catholic monks when it fired on an isolated camp they thought was a militant hide-out.

Algeria says the Trappist monks, who lived in a hilltop monastery in Tibehirine 70 km (45 miles) southwest of Algiers, were abducted by militants in March 1996 and found dead with their throats slit two months later.

When an Algerian source told him the official version, which blamed the Islamists for their death, was false, Buchwalter informed Paris but was told to keep quiet, according to a report in Le Figaro daily confirmed by the source.

The murder shocked France and strained relations with Algeria.

Asked about the charge while at a French-British summit in Evian, President Nicolas Sarkozy said he had been deeply upset by the murder at the time and the present inquiry must find out the truth. “Justice must do its job,” he said.

A lawyer for relatives of the monks called for secret defence files on the case be opened, a demand seconded by former Prime Minster Jean-Pierre Raffarin. “We must find out what happened. This is a very painful affair,” he said.

ONLY HEADS HANDED OVER

France opened a probe into the killings in 2004 after a former Algerian secret service agent said Algiers had ordered agents to kidnap the monks as part of a plot. But militants in the area seized them from the agents and later killed them.

The aim of the plot is not clear. One theory in the French media says it was to warn the monks, who had refused to leave the area that had become a stronghold of the militant Armed Islamic Group (GIA). Another says it was to discredit the GIA.

According to Le Figaro, Buchwalter said his source, an Algerian officer, told him his brother had been in the attacking helicopter and that it landed at the camp after the shooting.

“The monks’ bodies were riddled with bullets,” he quoted the source as saying. Buchwalter said his superiors told him to keep quiet to avoid harming relations between France and Algeria.

In other testimony to the investigation, Trappist Procurator General Rev. Armand Veilleux said he went to Algeria after the murders and insisted on opening the coffins to identify the monks.

They contained only the dead men’s heads, he said, adding he thought someone disposed of the bodies to hide the evidence of how they died. He said the French embassy had urged him not to discuss this in public.

Buchwalter also told the inquiry he suspected Algerian authorities were behind the killing of the Catholic bishop of Oran, Pierre Claverie, shortly after the monks were murdered.

Distracting manoeuvre (Practicing for the Day of Attack)

090706_submarine

Israeli sub transits Suez Canal

Distracting manoeuvre

Monday, 06 July 2009 05:37 Jordan Times

An Israeli navy submarine reportedly sailed into the Arabian Gulf last month, ostensibly as part of an Israeli military drill. But the submarine, believed to carry nuclear weapons, is more likely to have been on a far more sinister preparatory mission and a potential Israeli military offensive on Iran is still very much in the cards.

This is a dangerous and entirely unwanted development. The region is in enough turmoil as it is, with Israel in large part to blame, without the potentially catastrophic consequences an Israeli strike on Iran could have.

Israel, of course, does not do irony. Otherwise, its insistence that Iran is the greatest threat to regional stability, and not Israel, which occupies land and attacks neighbours at will, might be seen as some warped post-modernist political spin.

But Israel does not like competitors. Like an over-bloated and unchallenged industrial monopoly, Israel fears that its hegemony could be challenged. It applauded and encouraged the US-led invasion of Iraq, not for any other reason than because it put paid to one possible competitor. And Israel’s insatiable desire for safety without sacrifice will always see it encourage Arabs to fight Arabs or the international community to distract itself with anyone but Israel.

And so the country appears to be heading towards stirring yet another war in the region. Anything to take away the spotlight from the uncomfortable fact that it is Israel that is the greatest source of instability and conflict in this region.

It is Israel that stands in contradiction to international law, whether in its occupation of Arab land, in its war crimes in Lebanon or Gaza, in its inhumane treatment of Palestinians under occupation or refusal to allow refugees their right of return, or in its refusal to become a signatory to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty that nuclear powers are obliged to sign.

And now, with an American administration less inclined to see the world through the warped lens of Israeli interests, Israel is preparing to take matters in its own hands. An Israeli strike on Iran would be a catastrophic event for the region.

It must not be allowed to happen, and it is the duty and responsibility of every state in this region and further afield to see to it that it does not.

Source: Jordan Times

US denies giving Israel ‘green light’ to attack Iran

US denies giving Israel ‘green light’ to attack Iran

By Lachlan Carmichael – 12 hours ago

WASHINGTON (AFP) — US President Barack Obama’s administration denied Monday that it is giving Israel the green light to attack Iran or that it is reconsidering plans to engage diplomatically with the Islamic Republic.

Iranian parliament speaker Ali Larijani, formerly the country’s top nuclear negotiator, warned Tehran would hold Washington responsible for any such strike after Vice President Joe Biden said Washington would not dictate how Israel deals with Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

But State Department spokesman Ian Kelly poured cold water on suggestions that Biden could be seen as giving the Jewish state a green light to attack Iran, which it views as an existential threat.

“I certainly would not want to give a green light to any kind of military action,” Kelly told reporters.

But he echoed Biden’s point that Washington considered Israel a “sovereign country” with a right to make its own military decisions.

“We’re not going to dictate its actions,” Kelly added. “We’re also committed to Israel’s security. And we share Israel’s deep concerns about Iran’s nuclear program.”

He also refuted any idea that Biden was signaling a move by the Obama administration to drop its policy of diplomatic engagement with Iran.

“I wouldn’t read into it any more than what you see,” Kelly said.

In an interview with ABC television broadcast Sunday, Biden said: “Israel can determine for itself — it’s a sovereign nation — what’s in their interest and what they decide to do relative to Iran and anyone else.

“We cannot dictate to another sovereign nation what they can and cannot do when they make a determination, if they make a determination, that they’re existentially threatened,” he added.

But Admiral Mike Mullen, the chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, warned in a separate interview Sunday of the dangers posed by any military strike against Iran, despite saying military options should not be ruled out.

Obama has said he wants to see progress on his diplomatic outreach to Iran by year’s end, while not excluding a “range of steps,” including tougher sanctions, if Tehran continued its nuclear drive.

Hawkish Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has not ruled out a possible military strike against Iran.

Larijani warned that Iran “will consider the Americans responsible in any adventure launched by” Israel, a country he said that nobody can imagine acting “without getting the green light” from Washington.

Speaking on a visit to Qatar, Larijani warned that Iran’s response to an attack would be “decisive and painful.”

Biden’s comments, said Trita Parsi, who heads the National Iranian American Council, were “not helpful to those who are trying to find peaceful change in Iran.”

But Parsi said it would be wrong to interpret them as heralding a policy shift, even if the administration’s plans for engagement now face a “rough ride.”

Suzanne Maloney, a former State Department specialist on Iran, said Biden’s remarks are not new and did not signal a policy shift, even if the Iranians read more into them.

“Particularly for this administration, an Israeli strike on Iran would have devastating consequences for all its foreign policy initiatives,” she said, citing its efforts to broker Arab-Israeli peace and stabilize Iraq and Lebanon.

But she feared the Obama administration may find the Iranians are not in the right “mindset” to engage in talks if they get “so caught up in this narrative of an externally-sponsored velvet revolution.”

Honduras: One week after the coup – mass mobilisation continues – Army prevents Zelaya’s come back

Honduras: One week after the coup – mass

mobilisation continues – Army prevents Zelaya’s

come back

By Jorge MartínMonday, 06 July 2009

All kinds of manoeuvres are taking place after the coup in Honduras. The coup organisers want to hold on, but pressure is being brought to bear for some kind of compromise solution, which however cannot satisfy the masses. The only real answer lies in the full mobilisation of the Honduran workers and peasants.

Hundreds of thousands had marched to the Toncontin airport and broken through police lines to make sure Zelaya's plane could land.Hundreds of thousands had marched to the Toncontin airport and broken through police lines to make sure Zelaya’s plane could land.

On Sunday, July 5, a week after having been removed by a military coup, Honduran president Mel Zelaya boarded a Venezuelan plane in Washington with the aim of going back to his country. Hundreds of thousands had marched to the Toncontin airport and broken through police lines to make sure his plane could land. However, the army opened fire on the unarmed demonstrators, injuring scores and killing at least one. Zelaya’s plane was prevented from landing by the Army which positioned vehicles on the landing strip. The government of Micheletti ‑ imposed by a coup ‑ has closed down all of the country’s airports.

Men, women, children, workers, peasants, the poor, had gathered from early in the morning to march to the airport to receive their president. A report from Radio Globo put the figure at half a million, others put the number at 200,000 people. The live broadcast from Telesur showed a huge crowd of hundreds of thousands, far bigger than the 65,000 that had marched against the coup the day before in Tegucigalpa. Speaking from Honduras to In Defence of Marxism, Democratic Unity (UD) party MP Tomás Andino said: “This demonstration was unprecedented, probably the largest in the history of Honduras”. We have to take into account that the population of the country as a whole is only 7.5 million people. This demonstration was the biggest so far against the coup and dwarfed any of the demonstrations organised by the coup plotters during the week.

This massive movement of the people of Honduras has taken place despite the fact that the new regime has imposed a curfew (which has not been extended and is in place between 6pm and 6am every night), has arrested dozens of known trade union and popular movement activists and leaders, has killed a number of them (the correspondent from El Pais has reported that people have been taken to hospital by the police with bullet wounds every single night), has suspended constitutional guarantees (a de facto state of emergency situation) and put in place a media blockade (a number of radio and TV stations have been closed down). According to police officials 651 people were arrested on Saturday and Sunday alone. None of this has stopped the movement and the strikes which have paralysed mainly the education system and the telecommunications and electricity companies. Peasant and indigenous organisations are maintaining road blocks in many of the districts in the interior of the country.

Hundreds of thousands had marched to the Toncontin airport and broken through police lines to make sure Zelaya's plane could land.Hundreds of thousands had marched to the Toncontin airport and broken through police lines to make sure Zelaya’s plane could land.

The scope of the movement against the coup and growing the international pressure is already opening up rifts within the camp of the coup organisers. According to some reports, businessmen Ricardo Maduro, Rafael Ferrari and Carlos Flores Facussémet met with representatives of the coup organisers until early in the morning trying to get them to reach an agreement. But the coup plotters, led by Micheletti, are particularly obtuse representatives of the Honduran oligarchy, and having taken the step of organising the coup, are now in no mood to make any concessions. In a farcical press conference Micheletti alleged that Nicaraguan troops were massing at the border in preparation for an invasion of Honduras. When pressed by the journalists to give more details, he changed his tune and said that it was just a “psychological invasion”!

On Saturday, July 4, Micheletti’s junta also rebuffed OAS general secretary Insulza, who had gone to Honduras in a last minute attempt to reach a compromise. It is clear that this coup is highly embarrassing for the current US administration and that pressure is being put on the coup plotters to at least make some concessions which could allow for a negotiated settlement, probably including some guarantees on Zelaya’s part that he would not seek to call a referendum on a Constituent Assembly.

The role of the United States in the coup

Photo by ALBA TVPhoto by ALBA TV

There has been a lot of speculation about whether the Obama administration was involved in this coup or not. On this question, Andino was very clear: “We think it is impossible for the Honduran Army to have acted without at least tacit approval on the part of US intelligence”.

All the information that has come out over the last week confirms what we said just after the coup:

“It is clear and public knowledge that the US knew that a coup was being organised. They had had conversations with the leaders of Congress in which the coup had been discussed. The advice from the US had been against taking the step of arresting Zelaya. Probably the US administration, faced with the mass mobilisation on Friday and having learnt some lessons from Venezuela, was not very confident in taking what might be seen as an illegal step and were more in favour of continuing with the script of the “constitutional coup”,leaving the removal of Zelaya for another, more favourable, moment.” (Defeat the reactionary military coup in Honduras – Mass mobilisation in the streets and general strike!)

US ambassador Hugo Llorens had stated on a number of occasions that he was against the consultation being proposed by Zelaya on the possibility of a referendum on a constituent assembly, but he phrased his opposition in typical diplomatic language: “one cannot violate the Constitution in order to create a Constitution”, he said (La Prensa, June 4). This was precisely the argument used by the oligarchy to block Zelaya’s proposed consultation.

Photo by ALBA TVPhoto by ALBA TV

However, Llorens stressed that: “whatever is finally done, it should be done within the law, within the Constitution”. On June 17, he echoed the arguments of the Honduran capitalists: “The political situation in the country does not help to create an investment friendly climate. Uncertainty in a country does not help investment” (La Prensa). And he added that the dispute about the consultation should be resolved by Congress. What he was saying, loud and clear, was that the US were in favour of a “democratic constitutional coup”.

Right up to the eve of the coup, US ambassador Llorens was talking to the coup plotters. On June 21, there was a meeting in the US embassy with the presence of president Zelaya, as well as all the coup plotters: Congress president Micheletti, Liberal and National Party presidential candidates Santos and Lobo, and the head of the Armed Forces, Romeo Vásquez. According to the report in the Honduran La Prensa, Zelaya was told that “the best way out of the crisis” would be for him to “cancel the consultation and carry out an opinion poll instead”. (La Prensa, June 22). The very fact that the US ambassador is meddling in the internal affairs of a sovereign country in this manner is a clear indication of the status of Honduras as a “banana republic” dominated by US imperialism. The message to Zelaya was clear: cancel the referendum or else.

Photo by ALBA TVPhoto by ALBA TV

It would be extremely naïve to think that Llorens did not know of the plans for a coup ‑ in fact this was being openly discussed in the Honduran media in the days leading up to it ‑ and even more naïve to think that he had not reported to Washington. Llorens is not a newcomer, he was nominated as US ambassador to Honduras by the Bush administration and had been Head of Andean Affairs at the National Security Council in 2002 and 2003. This position made him Bush’s main advisor on matters related to Venezuela, Colombia, Bolivia, Peru and Ecuador. He therefore was well aware of the failure of the 2002 coup in Venezuela.

The policy of the new Obama administration regarding Latin America has been one of hiding the stick and mainly waving the carrot. The aims are the same, but after the fiasco of Bush’s bullish policy in the region, Obama is keen to push back the revolutionary wave sweeping the continent by leaning on the “reasonable left” governments in the region. He cannot, therefore, afford the embarrassment of a military coup. Certainly the US administration wanted to remove Zelaya, who had become a thorn in their side, by joining ALBA, siding with Chavez, refusing for months to accept the new US ambassador, Llorens, as a gesture of solidarity with Bolivia (where the US were involved in another attempted coup in September last year) and by generally contributing to a sharpening of the class struggle (“polarisation”) in Honduras with his “irresponsible” statements about the rich and poor, and “freeing the country from imperialism”. They merely preferred to do so by constitutional means.

Photo by ALBA TVPhoto by ALBA TV

On June 25 the Honduran congress declared itself in “permanent session”. They were going to carry out the coup by declaring thedisqualification of the president. The coup was averted at the last minute with the intervention of Llorens and even, according to some reports, of US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton herself. But this only delayed the coup until Sunday 28, when the army took Zelaya in the middle of the night and put him on a plane to Costa Rica.

This was revealed in the lukewarm and belated statements of the Obama administration in the aftermath of the coup. The first official pronouncement of the White House was along the lines of an appeal to “all political and social players in Honduras to respect democratic norms, the rule of law and the tenets of the Inter-American Democratic Charter”. That was an appeal for all players to respect democracy, when some of them had just carried out a coup! It was only after the strongly worded condemnation of the coup by the ALBA member countries, led by Venezuela, that the US was forced to utter the word “coup”, and threatened to curtail military aid to Honduras. However, ambassador Llorens was left in Honduras, in order to keep an open line “with all players”.

Photo by ALBA TVPhoto by ALBA TV

Even though Zelaya has been in Washington for a few days, neither Obama nor Clinton have thus far met with him, preferring to allow the OAS to deal with the matter. The Organisation of American States has been charged with trying to find a reasonable solution to this mess, one that would save face by bringing Zelaya back, but on the basis of neutralising him – and above all the masses who support him. After all, even if he came back, he does not have control of Congress, nor the Supreme Court, nor the Army, and there are elections scheduled in November in which he cannot legally participate. When Zelaya announced that he was going back to the country on Thursday, July 2nd, the OAS gave the regime a 72-hour ultimatum, thus delaying his return. Then Zelaya announced that he would go back on Saturday 4th, only for OAS general secretary Insulza to announce his own visit to Honduras on that day, delaying Zelaya by one more day.

But Insulza was met with derision on the part of the coup plotters who announced that, before anyone kicked the out, they would be leaving the OAS. There are certain elements in politics that are never completely under anyone’s control. Here we saw the most obtuse representatives of the Honduran oligarchy biting the hand that was offering them a way out.

Photo by ALBA TVPhoto by ALBA TV

The Spanish El Pais, always reflecting faithfully the opinions of imperialism, put it quite bluntly last week: “It is urgent to find a way out within the agreed [OAS] deadline, in order to prevent Venezuelan president, Hugo Chavez, from filling the vacuum which might be left afterwards. If the OAS, with US support, does not reinstate Zelaya, the road would then be open for the insurrectionary solution that Chavez is suggesting. The US seems to be conscious of the fact that it is running more risks here than they could have ever imagined in a country like Honduras, and is attempting to be very careful in its moves, so that Zelaya can win but without a victory for what he represents. In other words, without a victory for Chavez and populism”. (El Pais, July 2ndUltimátum de la OEA a los golpistas)

El Pais, incidentally came out against the coup but supported the reasons for it, after having written a vitriolic denunciation of Zelaya the day before the coup, in an editorial which ridiculed Chavez’s warning that a coup was being prepared in Honduras. (Editorial: Crisis en Honduras, June 26th)

Negotiations and mass action

Photo by ALBA TVPhoto by ALBA TV

Nonetheless, in the next few days, more pressure will be exerted on the coup leaders to reach a settlement. This was confirmed today in an article in the Washington Post: “U.S. officials confirmed that Honduras’s de facto government had sent a message to the OAS seeking to open negotiations, a move that one official described as positive. ‘We think this could create the basis for continuing movement by the OAS on diplomatic initiatives,’ one official said.”

Tomás Andino, the UD deputy, told us that Carlos Flores was in negotiations with Washington to find a negotiated way out of the current crisis. “They want to bring back Zelaya, but bound hand and foot”. He pointed out that the businessmen fear that if the current efforts do not force the coup plotters to step down they will be faced with an armed mass uprising of the people which would threaten the whole of the capitalist regime.

Photo by ALBA TVPhoto by ALBA TV

However, we must be clear on one point: no amount of diplomatic pressure can defeat the coup in Honduras unless the masses of workers and peasants fight for it on the streets as they have done in the last few days. It may even come to pass that Zelaya is returned to Honduras, only for Congress to start proceedings to remove him from the presidency before the end of his term in January.

Over the last week, the mass movement in Honduras has become broader, more confident and more radicalised. This is precisely what the coup plotters feared, and the reason why they organised the coup. The struggle of the hundreds of thousands of Honduran working people, who have come out on the streets over the last week braving repression, is not only for the reinstatement of the president, but also for the trial and punishment of the coup plotters. Even more than that, it is a fundamental struggle for jobs, bread, land, dignity, and national sovereignty. None of this will be achieved simply with the return of Zelaya alone. If a negotiated settlement is finally reached, this will not satisfy the demands of the masses for justice, and it will certainly not solve the economic and social problems that have pushed them to rally behind Zelaya.

Photo by ALBA TVPhoto by ALBA TV

Speaking to Tomas Aquino, from the Honduras Democratic United Party, he made it very clear that the Peoples’ Resistance Front Against the Coup rejects any kind of negotiation with the coup-plotters and stands for the unconditional reinstatement of the president. He added that the masses of the people have become radicalised through their own experience. “They no longer demand a referendum on the Constituent Assembly, they want a Constituent Assembly full stop, as they are not prepared to deal any more with the political institutions that organised the coup”.

The return of Zelaya, if it does finally take place in the next few days, will only be a real victory for the mass movement if it is achieved without concessions on his part. If so, it will strengthen the resolve of the workers and peasants, it will increase their confidence in their own strength.

Photo by ALBA TVPhoto by ALBA TV

This last week of struggle has been a very rich school of political education for the masses. Under the whip of repression their political understanding has developed by leaps and bounds. All that Zelaya wanted, apparently, was to carry out a consultation on the possibility of a referendum to decide on a Constituent Assembly! And just because of that, the oligarchy en bloc organised a military-civilian coup. As Andino explained to us, the coup has the support of all traditional political parties, the hierarchy of the Evangelical and Catholic churches, the monopoly mass media groups, the owners of industry, the landowners, the judiciary and the tops of the Army. The whole of the capitalist political establishment is against a minor democratic reform! Because they are terrified of the revolutionary implications of the direct participation of the masses of the workers and peasants in politics. The capitalist system cannot allow it. Andino added that, “what we see is the beginning of a revolution”, and he is correct.

The two main lessons to be learnt from these events are, on the one hand, that the oligarchy in these underdeveloped capitalist countries cannot allow even the most moderate progressive reforms if these are accompanied by a process of politicisation and mobilisation of the masses. They fear the revolutionary consequences of the active participation of the masses in politics. On the other hand it should by now be clear that it is utopian to expect that the institutions of the capitalist state (the judiciary, army hierarchy, mass media, police, etc.), will allow genuine revolutionary change to take place without them stepping in to defend the interests of their masters, the ruling class. This is a serious warning for the revolutionary movement in Bolivia, in neighbouring El Salvador, in Ecuador, etc.

Photo by ALBA TVPhoto by ALBA TV

The only way forward for the movement in Honduras is to continue the mobilisation against the coup. This must be organised and coordinated nationally through committees in every workplace, neighbourhood and village. An appeal must be made to the ranks of the Army, the ordinary soldiers who are also part of the people. Mass demonstrations must be protected by defence committees made up of the workers and peasants themselves. The army generals have already shown what they are capable of, the people cannot face them unprotected. Tomás Andino reported to us lots of different examples of fraternisation of police officers and soldiers with the protestors. These have not yet crystallised in any section of the army openly rebelling, but this could happen in the next few days.

Finally, the main weapon of working people against the oligarchy and the coup is the general strike. Without the permission of the working class not a wheel turns and not a light bulb shines in Honduras. Workers can bring the country to a halt and prevent the coup regime from functioning. Andino reported to In Defence of Marxism that about 60% of public sector workers had participated in the strike against the coup and that this week would see the spreading of the strike movement to the private sector. The call for strike action had been made by the three trade union confederations, all of them part of the Peoples Resistance Front.

Tomás Andino also made an appeal for action to the international working class. “There should be blockades against Honduran products on the part of dockers and transport workers. This can hit the capitalist class where it hurts”.

International solidarity on the part of working people and the labour movement internationally is also crucial. We stand firmly on the side of the Honduran people and against any attempts to water down their fundamental demands.

For the immediate return of Zelaya!

Trial and punishment for the coup plotters!

Full support for the struggle of the people of Honduras!

Obama faces a Persian rebuff The Hindu: India’s National Newspaper

Obama faces a Persian rebuff

The Hindu: India’s National Newspaper
Thursday, Jul 02, 2009
M.K. Bhadrakumar

The Iranian regime shows definite signs of closing ranks and pulling its act together in the face of what it assesses to be an existential threat to the Vilayat-e faqih system.

The street protests in Tehran fizzled out. Twitter can revert to its
earlier plan of shutting down its Iran services and attend to overdue
maintenance work. Twitter goes into recess pleased that it embarrassed a regional power and itself became a hot topic of worldwide curiosity. The United States government owes Twitter a grand salute for rendering yeoman service.

However, Persian stories have long endings. The Iranian regime shows
definite signs of closing ranks and pulling its act together in the face of what it assesses to be an existential threat to the Vilayat-e faqih system. And London and Washington cannot simply walk away. The signs are that even if they want to, which is eminently sensible and logical, Tehran won’t let them do that.

When supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei used a colourful Persian idiom to characterise the European and American officials and underscored that the ground on which they stood inevitably gets “soiled,” he made it plainly clear that Tehran would not easily forget the fusillades of mockery that the West — the U.S. and Britain in particular — fired over the past fortnight in a well-crafted ploy to tarnish its rising regional and global standing. In a veiled warning, Ayatollah Khamenei said: “Some European and American officials with their idiotic remarks about Iran are speaking as if their own problems [read Iraq, Afghanistan] have all been resolved and Iran remains the only issue for them.”

Iran has a tortuous history. The “red line” for Tehran has always been a foreign attempt at forcing a regime change. In its assessment, that line has been breached. Retribution, therefore, must inexorably follow. All indications are that the highly skilled Iranian intelligence is already digging deeper and deeper into what really happened. Gholam Hossein Nohseni Ejei, the powerful Intelligence Minister, has alleged from available data that there has been a concerted attempt to stir up unrest by world powers that were “upset about a stable and secure Iran.”

It is easy to pooh-pooh such allegations. But uncomfortable questions will arise in the coming days and weeks. There are already serious doubts about the mysterious death of Neda Aqa-Soltan. Again, who led the charge of the light brigade? Was it London or Washington? Finally, were the two capitals in it together or was it that the tail wagged the dog? It is little known slice of history that in the countdown to the Anglo-American coup in Tehran against Mohammed Mosaddeq in 1953, the Central Intelligence Agency lost nerve just as the unrest on Tehran’s streets was about to erupt but British intelligence outpost in Cyprus, which coordinated, held firm and
created a fait accompli.

At any rate, Tehran is going after Britain — “the most treacherous of
foreign powers,” to use Ayatollah Khamenei’s words. Marching orders have been given to two British diplomats posted in Tehran and local employees working in the British embassy have been nabbed for questioning. This is despite gesticulations by London that it is not stepping anything up on Tehran’s streets. The Foreign Office statement in London pleaded that it is Iran’s nuclear programme that is driving Gordon Brown, and not outrage over the violation of civil rights or the death of innocents.

London is keen on vacating the scene, and hopes it could be business as usual with Iran. But U.S. President Barack Obama cannot hope to get away so lightly. The challenge facing him is that not only has the Iranian regime not cracked, but it has again shown resilience in countering western pressure. If the prognosis was that the intriguing silence of former President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani meant he was plotting and was on the verge of challenging Ayatollah Khamenei’s writ, it was not to be. On Sunday, Mr. Rafsanjani openly came out with a statement endorsing the supreme leader.

“The developments following the presidential vote were a complex
conspiracy plotted by suspicious elements with the aim of creating a rift between the people and the Islamic establishment and causing them to lose their trust in the [Vilayat-e faqih] system. Such plots have always been neutralised whenever the people have entered the scene with vigilance,” he said.

He praised Ayatollah Khamenei for extending the Guardian Council’s move to extend the deadline by five days to review issues pertaining to the elections and removing ambiguities surrounding them. “This valuable move by the leader to restore the people’s confidence in the election process was very effective,” he pointed out. In a separate meeting with a delegation of Majlis members on Thursday, Mr. Rafsanjani said his attachment to Ayatollah Khamenei was “endless” and that he enjoyed a close relationship with the supreme leader and he fully complied with the Vilayat-e faqih.

On Saturday, the Expediency Council, headed by Mr. Rafsanjani, called on all defeated candidates to “observe the law and resolve conflicts and disputes [concerning the election] through legal channels.” Meanwhile, the Opposition candidate, Mohsen Rezaei, and the leading political personality, former Majlis Speaker Nateq-Nouri, have also reconciled. Thus Mir-Hossein Mousavi stands badly isolated. Disregarding Mr. Mousavi’s demur, the Guardian Council ordered on Monday a partial recount of 10 per cent of random ballot boxes across the country in front of the state television cameras.

If the prognosis was that the Majlis Speaker, Ali Larijani, was showing promise as a dissident leader, it has also been debunked. On Monday, while addressing the Executive Committee meeting of the Organisation of Islamic Conference at Algiers, Mr. Larijani lashed out at the U.S. policy of “interfering” in the internal affairs of the Middle East countries. He advised Mr. Obama to abandon the policy. “This change will be beneficial both to the region and to the U.S. itself”.

The Obama administration has some hard choices to make. It was sustained criticism and pressure mounted by networks of anti-Iranian groups and powerful lobbies in the U.S. that forced Mr. Obama to harden his stance. Softening the hard stance will be difficult. Much statesmanship is needed. The best outcome is that Washington can take a pause and resume its efforts to engage Iran after a decent interval. The commencement of a meaningful dialogue anytime soon seems improbable. In sum, the Obama administration has badly fumbled after such a magnificent start in addressing the situation around Iran.

Paradoxically, the Obama administration will now deal with a Khamenei who is at the peak of his political power. As for President Mahmoud
Ahmedinejad, he will now be negotiating from a position of strength.
Arguably, it helps when your adversary is strong so that he can take tough decisions, but in this case the analogy may not hold.

Also, the regional milieu can only work to Iran’s advantage. Turkey
distanced itself from the European opinion. Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan,
Afghanistan and Pakistan greeted Mr. Ahmedinejad’s victory. Moscow
followed suit. Beijing has never before expressed such staunch solidarity with the Iranian regime. Neither Syria nor Hezbollah and Hamas showed any inclination to disengage from Iran. True, Syria’s ties with Saudi Arabia improved in the last six months and Damascus welcomes the Obama administration’s recent overtures. But far from adopting the Saudi or U.S. agenda toward Tehran, Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem openly criticised the legitimacy of the street protests in Tehran.

He warned last Sunday when the Tehran streets were witnessing unrest:
“Anyone betting on the fall of the Iranian regime will be a loser.
The[1979] Islamic revolution is a reality, deeply-rooted in Iran, and the international community [read U.S.] must live with that.” Mr. Moallem called for the “establishment of a dialogue between Iran and the United States based on mutual respect and non-interference in Iran’s affairs.”

Again, in an interview with the CNN on Saturday, Syria’s ambassador in
Washington Imad Moustapha advised the Obama administration to “exercise caution” in adopting strident criticism of the election verdict as it will “harm the efforts” to find a solution to the nuclear issue. He said Iran was a “very important country in the Middle East” and a close friend of Syria. Outside interference in Iran’s internal affairs was damaging regional stability. Equally, success of Saad Hariri as the newly-elected Prime Minister of Lebanon — and the country’s overall stability — will hinge on his reconciliation with rivals allied to Syria and Iran.

All things taken into account, therefore, there has been a goof-up of
major proportions in Washington. The Obama magic suddenly wore off when he sounded like George W. Bush in disregarding convention and courtesy, contrary to the abundant promise in the Cairo speech.
It is inconceivable that the Obama administration harboured the notion that the commotion inTehran’s middle-class districts would weaken the Iranian regime or make it diffident and dilute its resolve while the critical negotiations on the nuclear and other issues regarding the situation around Iran commenced.

Mr. Ahmedinejad left hardly anything to interpretation when he stated in Tehran on Saturday: “Without doubt, Iran’s new government will have a more decisive and firmer approach towards the West. This time the Iranian nation’s reply will be harsh and more decisive” and will aim at making the West regret its “meddlesome stance.”

(The writer is a former Indian diplomat.)

Hundreds of armed Han Chinese march in Urumqi

Chinese paramilitary police stands on duty following riots in ...

Chinese paramilitary police stands on duty following riots in Urumqi, western China’s Xinjiang province, Monday, July 6, 2009. Police sealed off streets in parts of the provincial capital, Urumqi, after discord between ethnic Muslim Uighur people and China’s Han majority erupted into riots.

(AP Photo/Ng Han Guan)

AP

Mon Jul 6, 9:38 AM ET

Hundreds of armed Han Chinese march in Urumqi

By WILLIAM FOREMAN, Associated Press Writer William Foreman, Associated Press Writer 52 mins ago

URUMQI, China – Police fired tear gas Tuesday to try to restore order as hundreds of Han Chinese armed with clubs marched through the Xinjiang capital of Urumqi, smashing shops and knocking over food stalls run by Muslims.

Vodpod videos no longer available.
more about “untitled“, posted with vodpod

The city, where rioting and ethnic clashes killed 156 people two days ago, was extremely tense, with security officials breaking up a separate protest by the train station. Also, Muslim women in traditional headscarves faced off with armed Chinese police, wailing for the release of their sons and husbands detained after the riots.

Police used loudspeakers to appeal to the Han Chinese crowd to stop, but a group of about 300 protesters were joined by two other columns of marchers on Jiefang Nan Road. They appeared to be heading for the Grand Bazaar, the predominantly Muslim area of the city, but were blocked by police.

The crowd, which took up several blocks of the five-lane road, chanted “Unite” and “Modern Society,” and waved wooden sticks, lead pipes, shovels and hoes in the air. As they headed down a back street toward a mosque, several loud explosions rang out followed by rising white puffs of smoke — followed by the smell of tear gas.

The Han Chinese march follows a protest by about 200 people, mostly women from the Uighur minority group, who protested against the security crackdown that has led to more than 1,000 arrests in Urumqi following Sunday’s riot, the area’s worst ethnic violence in decades.

The women said police came through their neighborhood Monday night and strip-searched men to check for cuts and other signs of fighting before hauling them away.

“My husband was detained at gunpoint. They were hitting people, they were stripping people naked. My husband was scared so he locked the door, but the police broke down the door and took him away,” said a woman, who gave her name as Aynir. She said about 300 people were arrested in the market in the southern section of town.

The protesters briefly scuffled with paramilitary police, who pushed them back with long sticks before both sides retreated. The 90-minute protest played out in front of foreign reporters on a government-guided tour.

Outside the city’s southern railway station around mid-day, groups of 10 or so Uighur men with bricks and knives attacked Han Chinese passersby and shop-owners until police ran them off, witnesses said.

“They were using everything for weapons, like bricks, sticks and cleavers,” said a Mr. Ma, an employee at a nearby fastfood restaurant. “Whenever the rioters saw someone on the street, they would ask ‘are you a Uighur?’ If they kept silent or couldn’t answer in the Uighur language, they would get beaten or killed.”

It was not immediately clear if any one was killed in those reported attacks.

The violence and protests expose the tensions between the minority Uighur people, largely Muslim, and the ethnic Han Chinese in Xinjiang — a strategically vital region three times the size of Texas that shares borders with Russia, Pakistan, Afghanistan and other Central Asian countries. The region has been one of China‘s fastest growing, buoyed by oil and gas industries, attracting Chinese migrants.

Yet many Uighurs (pronounced WEE-gurs) resent the influx and say they are not benefiting from the growth, and they say their religious freedoms have been restricted as well.

Without the foreign reporters present, Tuesday’s protests might not have become known. The government is restricting mobile phone services, has blocked Twitter, whose servers are overseas, and is heavily censoring Chinese social networking and news sites, as it blames Uighur exiles for fanning resentments against Chinese rule.

Urumqi Communist Party Secretary Li Zhi told a news conference that more than 1,000 people had been detained as of early Tuesday and suggested more arrests were under way. “The number is changing all the time,” Li said. “We will let those who did not commit serious crimes go back to their work units. But to those criminal suspects trying to flee, we will never let them off.”

The official Xinhua News Agency said earlier Tuesday that 1,434 suspects had been arrested, and that checkpoints had been set up to stop rioters from escaping.

Officials at the news conference said they could not give a breakdown of how many of the dead were Uighurs and how many were Han Chinese. State television has shown predominantly Han Chinese victims, while overseas Uighur groups say the death toll is much higher for Uighurs.


Suspected US attack kills 12 in Pakistan

Suspected US attack kills 12 in Pakistan

AP

By MUNIR AHMAD, Associated Press Writer Munir Ahmad, Associated Press Writer 21 mins ago

ISLAMABAD – Suspected U.S. missiles slammed into a training camp ran by Pakistani Taliban leader Baitullah Mehsud on Tuesday, killing at least 12 militants in the latest in a flurry of strikes against him and his followers, intelligence officials said.

Five foreigners were among the dead in the attack in South Waziristan close to the Afghan border, the officials said, but their nationalities were not known. Top Arab leaders of the al-Qaida terror network are believed to be hiding in the region, as well as scores of militants from nearby countries, especially Afghanistan and Uzbekistan.

Two missiles hit the camp in Jangara, a village close to Makeen, the hometown of Mehsud, four officials told The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to media. The missiles were believed fired by unmanned American planes.

One official said communication intercepts indicated that militants were now telling one another to move to safe places because there were more drones in the sky and there could be more attacks.

The officers said reports from agents in the field said between 12 and 14 militants were killed and several wounded.

Mehsud was not among the victims, the officers said.

The United States is thought to have launched more than 40 missile

strikes against targets in the border area since last August, according to a count by The Associated Press.

Washington does not directly acknowledge being responsible for launching the missiles, which kill civilians as well as militants and contribute to anti-U.S. sentiment in Pakistan.

Islamabad officially protests the strikes as violations of its sovereignty. Any admission it works with the United States in attacks on its citizens likely would be damaging for the shaky civilian government.

Most experts, however, believe the country’s civilian and military leaders secretly endorse the strikes and likely provide the United States with intelligence on possible targets, especially since Mehsud is now a key target of the Pakistan army.

Tuesday’s attack was the fourth in two weeks against Mehsud and his followers in his stronghold of South Waziristan. One attack on the funeral of a slain militant killed up to 80 people.

Pakistan’s army is deploying troops in South Waziristan and launching regular air strikes of its own to try and kill or capture Mehsud, who is blamed for organizing many of the bloodiest suicide attacks in Pakistan over the last few years.

Hariri Slams Netanyahu’s ‘Negative Messages and Distortion of Facts’

Hariri Slams Netanyahu’s ‘Negative Messages and Distortion of Facts’

Premier-designate Saad Hariri accused Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu Monday of twisting facts after the latter said he will hold Lebanon responsible for any attack on Israel.
“Netanyahu never ceases to convey negative messages to Lebanon and to the Lebanese government,” Hariri told foreign and diplomatic delegations.

The Israeli premier’s “latest statements … in which he holds Lebanon responsible for any attacks on Israel is simply a distortion of facts,” he added.

Al-Mustaqbal Movement leader called on the international community to address “these negative messages and to warn Israel against the dangers of any threat to Lebanon’s security and sovereignty.”

Lebanon has “for years been a target of aggression,” Hariri said, reminding his visitors that “a part of (the country) is still occupied by Israel and its sovereignty repeatedly violated by space, land and sea in breach of Resolution 1701.”

Hariri said that Israel’s espionage networks that were being uncovered in Lebanon also violated the U.N. resolution.

Israeli Spy Parachutes Invade Sky above South Lebanon

Israeli Spy Parachutes Invade Sky above South Lebanon

Parachute-like objects lit up the sky above southern Lebanon overnight in what appeared to be a new Israeli spy method.
Security reports said a “shining object” resembling a gas cylinder fell over the southern village of Nmaireh around 10:30pm Monday and another over Zafta in the Nabatiyeh province.

Security forces rushed to the scene and went straight into on a fact-finding mission to find out the truth about these objects.

The daily An-Nahar on Tuesday described the parachute-like objects as a “new kind of Israeli espionage war on Lebanon.”

It said Israel has been recently dropping these objects over the mountainous terrain of southern Lebanon and near residential houses.

Al-Akhbar newspaper, however, quoted local sources as saying the object over Zafta was likely a meteor that fell from the sky or an Israeli parachute or even a spy device.

But security sources said the object could be an “explosive arrow” that was shot from a nearby location.

IS MILITARY RESEARCH HAZARDOUS TO VETERANS’ HEALTH? LESSONS SPANNING HALF A CENTURY

IS MILITARY RESEARCH HAZARDOUS TO VETERANS' HEALTH?

LESSONS SPANNING HALF A CENTURY

103d Congress, 2d Session - COMMITTEE PRINT - S. Prt. 103-97 A STAFF REPORT PREPARED FOR THE COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS UNITED STATES SENATE DECEMBER 8, 1994 JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West Virginia, Chairman DENNIS DeCONCINI, Arizona FRANK H. MURKOWSKI, Alaska GEORGE J. MITCHELL, Maine STROM THURMOND, South Carolina BOB GRAHAM, Florida ALAN K. SIMPSON, Wyoming DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania THOMAS A. DASCHLE, South Dakota JAMES M. JEFFORDS, Vermont BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL, Colorado Jim Gottlieb, Chief Counsel/Staff Director John H. Moseman, Minority Staff Director/Chief Counsel Diana M. Zuckerman, Professional Staff Member Patricia Olson, Congressional Science Fellow

FOREWORD

U.S. Senate,
Committee on Veterans’ Affairs,
Washington, DC, December 8, 1994

During the last few years, the public has become aware of several examples where U.S. Government researchers intentionally exposed Americans to potentially dangerous substances without their knowledge or consent. The Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, which I have been privileged to chair from 1993-94, has conducted a comprehensive analysis of the extent to which veterans participated in such research while they were serving in the U.S. military. This resulted in two hearings, on May 6, 1994, and August 5, 1994.

This report, written by the majority staff of the Committee, is the result of that comprehensive investigation, and is intended to provide information for future deliberations by the Congress. The findings and conclusions contained in this report are those of the majority staff and do not necessarily reflect the views of the members of the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs.

This report would not have been possible without the dedication and expertise of Dr. Patricia Olson, who, as a Congressional Science Fellow, worked tirelessly on this investigation and report, and the keen intelligence, energy, and commitment of Dr. Diana Zuckerman, who directed this effort.

John D. Rockefeller IV, Chairman

www-gulfweb-org_bigdoc_rockrep-cfm_tzhpirj2

Military to go after former proxy forces: Zardari

Military to go after former proxy forces: Zardari

Tuesday, July 07, 2009

News Desk

RAWALPINDI: President Asif Ali Zardari has broken with decades of strategic policy of Pakistan by declaring that military will turn its guns on extremist groups it formerly supported as proxy forces in its battles with India, reports a London-based English daily.

Zardari said in an interview with The Daily Telegraph that operations would in the future target the figures who were the military’s “strategic assets”.“I don’t think anybody in the establishment supports them any more,” he said. “I think everybody has become wiser than this,” he added.

“Military operations are all across the board against any insurgent, whether in Karachi, Lahore or whether he is in any part of Pakistan,” said Zardari. “My problem is terror. I have focused myself on terror. The PPP has focused itself against the extremist mindset. Terror is a regional problem, it cuts across borders. “I would love to be remembered for creating a Pakistan where militancy — I know it can’t totally be diminished — is defeated.”

A day earlier, Zardari gained important support when Army chief Gen Ashfaq Parvez Kayani said the “immediate internal threat” of the Taliban militancy was greater than any “external threat” — a code for India. Diplomats took comfort that Zardari appeared to speak for the most important power brokers in Pakistan.

Gestures of goodwill towards India allied to a campaign to end militants’ influence have attracted criticism, but for the moment, his opponents are at bay. “It rankles the small mind,” he said.

“It does not rankle the Army, because after India and Pakistan became nuclear powers, that position of being able to take over another state is nullified,” he added.“Karzai and myself are friends,” he said. “Our military chiefs have met, our intelligence chiefs have met,” he added.

So serious is Pakistan’s internal struggles that Zardari disclaimed much interest in America’s role in Afghanistan. “What the US does in Afghanistan is its own business. It is a sovereign state,” he said.

Zardari was once accused of corruption and high living. He bridled at being reminded that he was known as Mr 10 per cent. “It was a cliche created by the opposition and they tried me for 11 and a half years (the time he served in jail without being sentenced). I think a man should be judged by the fact he has walked the fire and come out without a spot.”

He reiterated a call for the US to sell aerial drones to the Pakistani military in place of mounting cross-border attacks. “My position is that I have always asked for possession of the drone; I want the Pakistani flag on it.”

The legacy for which he aims is wrapped up in the continuing impact of Benazir Bhutto’s assassination. On that day, he said, he had saved Pakistan. “The people in the street were calling for blood and we went for a democratic offensive.”

Saudi Arabia, the Royal Center of Terrorism

Iraqi Commentators: Saudi Arabia Is Behind Terror in Iraq – And Will Never Accept Shi’ite Rule There

By: D. Hazan *

Currently, Iraqi-Saudi relations are at a nadir. While Iraq has time and again officially reiterated its desire to strengthen relations and resolve disagreements with Saudi Arabia, the Saudi response has been less than enthusiastic. The Saudis have repeatedly rejected Iraq’s proposal that Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Al-Maliki visit Saudi Arabia or meet with Saudi King ‘Abdallah bin ‘Abd Al-‘Aziz, and have procrastinated over opening a Saudi embassy in Iraq – even though Iraq has already sent an ambassador to Saudi Arabia.

Saudi King ‘Abdallah refused to meet with Al-Maliki on the periphery of the March 30, 2009 Doha summit, on the grounds that Saudi Arabia was “not sure that true conciliation has indeed been achieved in Iraq” and that “Al-Maliki has not kept his promise to appease all political forces in Iraq and to involve them [in the political process].” [1] This statement is a manifestation of the conflict between the Saudis and the Shi’ite Iraqi government, with the Saudis having set themselves up as protectors of Iraq‘s Sunni minority.

The Saudis assume that Iran is influencing the Al-Maliki government and fear the spread of the Iranian/Shi’ite influence in Iraq. Thus, Prince Turki Al-Faisal, former Saudi intelligence chief and ambassador to the U.S. and Britain, has called “to bring Iraq back to the Arab world at any cost, so that it can play its natural role in the Arab nation and serve as a defensive wall against [outside] interference in its own affairs and in the affairs of the [Arab] nation.” [2]

In response, Iraqis have recently been attacking Saudi Arabia, depicting it as the main force the destabilization of Iraq. The first to attack Saudi Arabia were Iraqi press commentators, who accused the Saudis of helping terrorists infiltrate Iraq and of being behind suicide attacks carried out on Iraqi soil – especially in light of recent fatwas issued in Saudi Arabia permitting suicide attacks in Iraq as “jihad against the occupiers.” Other commentators accused Saudi Arabia of looking down on Iraq and of refusing to accept its Shi’ite government, and called on Al-Maliki to desist from further attempts to visit Saudi Arabia or to meet with its king, and called these attempts humiliating to Al-Maliki, the Iraqi people, and the government. However, one commentator called on Iraq to seek conciliation with its neighbors, including Saudi Arabia, and to try to allay their fears, even if those countries were indeed interfering in Iraq‘s domestic affairs.

Unlike the commentators, Saudi officials have refrained from making explicit allegations against Saudi Arabia. On April 18, 2009, Nouri Al-Maliki called on the countries neighboring Iraq, without mentioning names, to stop supporting terrorism and to show good will towards Iraq. “Stop those who are harming Iraq [via our shared borders], lest Iraq be compelled to defend itself,” he said, adding: “Declare your intentions to forge friendly, loving, positive relations [with Iraq],” and “Offer us one finger, so we can offer you our hand [in return].” [3]

However, as terrorism in Iraq increased in the lead-up to the June 30, 2009U.S. withdrawal from Iraq‘s cities, official Iraqi sources began to openly accuse Saudi Arabia of aiding terrorism in Iraq in order to prevent the withdrawal.Hadi Al-Ameri, chairman of Iraq’s parliamentary Security and Defense Committee, accused Saudi Arabia of heading a group of countries in the region opposed to the withdrawal. He said that Saudi Arabia was responsible for the recent bombings in Iraq, and must take a stand against them. He added that the bombings had been financed from outside the country, and that the perpetrators were members of Al-Qaeda and the Iraqi Ba’th Party. Al-Ameri demanded that a firm position be taken against the countries supporting terrorism, indicating that fatwas declaring Shi’ites as apostates issued recently by Saudi clerics had made them targets for violence. [4]

Saudi Arabia, for its part, accused pro-Iranian forces and elements in Iraq of attempting to dissociate Iraq from its Arab dimension and to subjugate it to Iran, and claiming that the statistics showing that Saudis constitute a high proportion of terrorists in Iraq were distorted.

Following is a brief overview of recent developments in this matter, as reflected in the Iraqi and other Arab press over the past several months:

Official Iraqi Line: “An Iraq-Saudi Security Agreement Will Be Signed in the Near Future”

Al-Maliki’s national security advisor, Muwaffaq Al-Rubaie, stated that Iraq wished to tighten relations with Saudi Arabia and to resolve all disagreements between it and Iraq in a way that would serve the interests of both countries and their people. He added: “In the near future, some important developments will take place in these relations, since both leaders are sincerely interested in [promoting] them.” Al-Rubaie further stated that the two countries had begun discussing the draft of an agreement submitted by Saudi Arabia, so as to draw up a framework for future cooperation and to decide the fate of Iraqi prisoners held by Saudi Arabia and Saudi prisoners held by Iraq. [5]

Iraqi Interior Minister Jawad Al-Bulani stated that an Iraqi-Saudi security agreement would be signed in the near future; the agreement would increase security cooperation between the two countries in fighting terrorism, organized crime, and arms smuggling, as well as in the extradition of wanted individuals and in the exchange of information. [6]

Ghanem Al-Jamili, Iraq’s first ambassador to Riyadh in 18 years, stated on May 3, 2009 that the unresolved problems between Iraq and Saudi Arabia were not extensive, and that their shared border is more orderly than any other Iraqi border. In his estimation, it is only Iraq’s domestic security situation that is keeping Saudi Arabia from opening an embassy in Baghdad. [7]

The Iraqi parliamentary human rights committee reported that an Iraqi-Saudi agreement had been recently signed for extraditing Saudi prisoners to Saudi Arabia. [8] Iraqi Immigration Minister ‘Abd Al-Samad Rahman Sultan stated that Saudi Arabia is currently holding 1,000 Iraqis, most of them on charges of illegal entry into Saudi Arabia. [9] According to the Elaph website, “based on unofficial sources, Saudi Arabia is currently holding 800 Iraqis under arrest, while Iraq is holding 100 Saudis, most of them on charges of terrorist involvement or illegal entry into Iraq.” [10] A senior security official at the Saudi Interior Ministry said that the Iraqi-Saudi exchange of detainees exchange reflected a joint effort to strengthen security cooperation between them and to lay the groundwork for an exchange of prisoners. He claimed, however, that except for eight Saudi detainees extradited to Iraq in September 2008 in return for 16 Iraqi detainees, there had been no exchange of detainees between the two countries. [11]

The Saudi Foreign Ministry denied a recent Iraqi press report that Saudi Foreign Minister Sa’ud Al-Faisal would be visiting Iraq soon, and stated that such a visit was not on the minister’s agenda. [12]

Iraq‘s Failed Attempts to Arrange an Al-Maliki/King Abdallah Meeting

However, Saudi-Iraqi relations have remained at their lowest ebb, and Iraq’s efforts to arrange a meeting between the Saudi king and the Iraqi prime minister have proved fruitless. [13] A source associated with Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Rafi Al-‘Issawi reported on April 2, 2009 that Al-‘Issawi intended to travel to Saudi Arabia to fulfill the ‘umra commandment (a pilgrimage to Mecca performed apart from the hajj) and to try to persuade Saudi Arabia to consent to a visit from Prime Minister Al-Maliki. Previously, as has already been mentioned, King ‘Abdallah had refused to meet Al-Maliki on the periphery of the March 30, 2009 Arab summit 2009 in Doha, on the grounds that he was “not sure that true conciliation has indeed been achieved in Iraq” and that “Al-Maliki has not kept his promise to appease all political forces in Iraq and to involve them [in the political process].” [14]

Al-Maliki’s media advisor Yassin Majid denied reports linking Al-‘Issawi’s visit to Saudi Arabia to Iraq’s attempts to arrange a meeting between Al-Maliki and Saudi senior officials, and stated that Al-‘Issawi had visited Saudi Arabia in order to fulfill the commandment of ‘umra. Regarding Al-Maliki’s failure to meet with the Saudi king at the Doha summit, Majid stated that there had been no attempt on the eve of the summit to arrange such a meeting, and that as a result Al-Maliki and King ‘Abdallah had merely exchanged a ceremonial handshake, as is the norm. Majid contended that Iraq sought to strengthen relations with all Arab countries, including Saudi Arabia, provided that such relations were founded on mutual respect and on the principle that no country would either interfere with another’s internal affairs, or pressure another. He added that such relations must not be based not on Iraq’s weakness but rather on its strength, which he said was beginning to emerge as its security situation stabilized and due to the government’s successful endeavors. [15]

Iraqi Journalist: Saudi Arabia Will Never Accept Al-Maliki – Because He’s a Shi’ite

In response to these reports, in an April 4, 2009 article posted at www.abdulkhaliqhussein.com, Iraqi reformist and liberal writer Dr. ‘Abd Al-Khaliq Hussein, who resides in London, criticized the Saudi regime for religious and ethnic discrimination against all non-Wahhabis, and for aiding terrorism. He stated that the Saudi regime abhorred Iraq’s democracy and that only the restoration of the Sunni Ba’th rule in the country would satisfy it. He wrote: “It must be noted that this is not the first time King ‘Abdallah has refused to meet with Al-Maliki. The same thing happened… over a year ago, when Saudi Arabia refused to receive Al-Maliki on [other] hollow pretexts…

“Relations between Iraq and Wahhabi Saudi Arabia have never been good… The only time they improved at all was during the dark era of Saddam’s Ba’th party, which caused the Iraqi people great suffering.”

Dr. Hussein ridiculed Saudi Arabia’s excuses for refusing to meet with Al-Maliki: “Fancy the Saudi king being concerned that all political forces should be involved in running [Iraq] – when it is well known that in his country the ruling family has usurped all authority, precluding even its own people from participating in government – not to mention treating members of non-Wahhabi ethnic groups as [the lowest caste]… [In contrast,] the Iraqi government is the only government in the Arab world, and in the [entire] Middle East, elected by the people in free elections…”

Dr. Hussein further stated: “The true reason for the Saudi king’s refusal to meet with Al-Maliki is his disgraceful ethnic [bias] and his abhorrence of Iraqi democracy. The Saudi regime will never be satisfied with a government in Iraq that comprises all elements of the Iraqi people… Has a Shi’ite Iraqi no right to be president in his country, if he has attained the post via fair elections?… The Saudi regime can envision conciliation [with Iraq] only if the fascist Ba’th regains power…”

Dr. Hussein emphasized the hypocrisy and double standard of the Saudi attitude towards terrorism. He wrote: “It should be noted that every year the Saudi king doles out tens of millions of dollars to convene summits for what is known as the ‘interfaith dialogue,’ so as to render [the Saudi regime’s] ugly face less disgusting and to wash it clean of its aid to the Wahhabi terrorism that is ravaging the world… The Arab, and especially Saudi, media calls terrorism in Iraq ‘jihad’ and ‘national resistance’ – but when these very organizations carry out the same [kind of] operations in their own countries, they call it ‘terrorism.'”

Dr. Hussein concluded: “The Saudi regime will not accept the situation in Iraq unless the Ba’th regains power… The Saudis will not accept Al-Maliki, or anyone else, unless he abolishes democracy and opens the door for the return of the Ba’th members…

“Thus, I call on Al-Maliki to stop trying to visit Saudi Arabia or to meet with the Saudi king – because these attempts humiliate himself, our people’s honor, and our national government.” [16]

Iraqi Liberal Daily Al-Ahali: The Problem is Saudi Arabia’s Supercilious Attitude Towards the Other Arab Countries – Particularly Iraq

Kurdish political commentator ‘Esam Al-Faili stated that Iraq’s political ties with Arab and other countries are contingent on its domestic affairs, which he called “extremely complex,” because all elements of Iraqi society have a national common ground, but the politicians elected to represent them do not agree among themselves. He claimed that Iraqi-Saudi relations began breaking down when the Saudi king refused to receive Al-Maliki.

Heval Zakhoyi, editor of the liberal Iraqi daily Al-Ahali, on the other hand, saw the problem in Iraqi-Saudi relations as stemming from the Saudis’ illusory self-perception “as leader of the Arab and Islamic nation,” and from its “constant presenting of itself as the central axis of the Arab [world].” He wrote: “Saudi Arabia looks down on all the Arab countries, particularly Iraq.” He expressed his disapproval of the Arabs’ position following the fall of Saddam Hussein, saying: “Most Arab countries that pretended to criticize the dictatorial regime [in Iraq] are now pretending to bemoan Iraq – but actually bemoan [the passing of] Saddam – and are exporting terrorism to Iraq.” [17]

Kurdish Political Commentator Calls on Iraq to Strengthen Relations with Saudi Arabia, Allay Its Fears

In response to Majid, Kurdish writer and political commentator Sami Shawrash wrote that it is Iraq that should play the key role in resolving its disagreements with Saudi Arabia and the other countries in the region – despite the fact that they are interfering in Iraq’s internal affairs. He called on Iraq to strengthen its relations not only with Saudi Arabia but also with Kuwait, Jordan, and other countries in the region, and to strive to placate them. He wrote: “Arab countries, and particularly Saudi Arabia, are concerned about loopholes in Iraq’s political process and about Iran’s interference [in Iraq’s domestic affairs]; they labor under the assumption that Iran has influence over Iraq – that is, over the Al-Maliki government.” [18]

Iraqi Accusations: Saudi Arabia is Behind Terrorist Attacks in Iraq

The most forceful accusation against Saudi Arabia came from Hadi Al-Ameri, chairman of Iraq’s parliamentary Security and Defense Committee, who accused Saudi Arabia of heading a group of countries in the region that opposed the U.S. withdrawal from Iraq’s cities. Al-Almeri said that Saudi Arabia was responsible for the recent bombings in Iraq, and must take a stand against them. He added that the bombings had been financed from outside the country, and that the perpetrators were members of Al-Qaeda and the Iraqi Ba’th Party. [19]

In the article mentioned above, Dr. ‘Abd Al-Khaliq Hussein accused Saudi Arabia of promoting terrorism in Iraq: “Reliable reports have proven that 50% of all terrorists sent to Iraq, as well as most of those who carry out suicide attacks there, are from Saudi Arabia. As is well known, the Saudi regime is a police regime, [so that] no Saudi terrorist can enter Iraq without the authorization and blessing of the Saudi government.” [20]

The Aswat Al-Iraq website also held Saudi Arabia responsible for suicide terrorist attacks carried out in Iraq in years past: “According to reports published following violent operations [in Iraq], most of those Al-Qaeda [members] who carried out suicide attacks [there] are Saudis who crossed into Iraq from neighboring countries, with the aim of carrying out their missions in Iraqi cities. Likewise, Saudi clerics have issued fatwas permitting terrorist attacks in Iraq. The most notorious of these was issued three years ago, by 26 Saudi clerics; in it, they sanctioned all means, including suicide attacks, on the grounds that they served “jihad against the occupier.” [21]

Reports of Saudis’ involvement in terrorist attacks in Iraq have appeared recently in both the Saudi and Iraqi press. The London-based Saudi daily Al-Hayat stated that a senior Al-Qaeda official, a Saudi, who served as an Al-Qaeda commander in a Saudi-Iraqi border area, had turned himself in to the Saudi authorities. Security sources reported that the official possessed extensive information about Al-Qaeda cells recruiting operatives in Saudi Arabia for terrorist activities in Iraq. [22] Similarly, the Basra operations headquarters reported that during a raid on a house in the southern part of the city of Basra, Iraqi security forces had arrested a commander of Al-Qaeda in southern Iraq, Ihsan Mu’jam, a Saudi national, as well as three of his Iraqi aides. [23] The Saudi Interior Ministry announced that Saudi security forces had received no information in this regard from their Iraqi colleagues. [24]

Saudi Arabia: Pro-Iranian Elements in Iraq Blame Saudi Arabia for Destabilizing Iraq, Twisting Facts

Prince Turki Al-Faisal attributed Saudi Arabia’s marginal role and negligible influence in Iraq to the fact that since 2003 – and especially in mid-2006 – certain Iraqi forces and elements have been trying to distance Iraq from its Arab dimension and subjugate it to Iran’s rule. [25]

With regard to the high percentage of Saudis among terrorists operating in Iraq, the Saudi government daily ‘Okaz claimed that the anarchy prevailing in Iraq since the 2003 U.S. invasion had attracted hundreds of foreign fighters, including Saudis, enticed by empty slogans into fighting against U.S. forces. The daily emphasized, however, that it was undoubtedly the security anarchy, rather than political reasons alone, that was the reason for the high proportion of Saudis among the fighters coming to Iraq from different countries. At the same time, it was claimed, the statistics on Saudi participation in terrorist activities in Iraq are distorted, since the majority of arrested Arabs falsely claimed that they were Saudi, and since their documents were forged. Indeed, the Saudi authorities revealed that three out of the six wanted Saudis extradited in March 2008 were not Saudis, but nationals of other Arab countries, including Yemen.

The deputy director of the Gulf Research Center in Dubai, Dr. Mustafa Al-‘Ani, demanded that Iraq reveal the identities and publish the photos of the alleged Saudi detainees, instead of portraying Saudis as the main force in destabilizing Iraq. He added that the Iraqi leadership includes a group of Iranian loyalists who believe that blaming Saudi Arabia for destabilizing Iraq serves Iranian interests – and that therefore Saudi Arabia must try to prove, with the help of the media, that Iraqi reports, and especially reports claiming that the detainees are Saudi nationals, are untrue. [26]

*D. Hazan is a Research Fellow at MEMRI.


[1] www.ipairaq.com/index/php?name=inner&t=politics&id=10477, April 2, 2009.

[2] Al-Quds Al-Arabi (London), April 22, 2009.

[3] Al-Sharq Al-Awsat (London), April 19, 2009.

[4] Radionawa.com/ar/NewsDetail. June 28, 2009.

[5] www.elaph.com/web/politics/2009/3/418508.htm, March 12, 2009.

[6] ‘Okaz (Saudi Arabia), March 23, 2009.

[7] Al-Sharq Al-Awsat (London), May 3, 2009.

[8] Al-Quds Al-Arabi (London), March 2, 2009.

[9] Al-Quds Al-‘Arabi (London), May 4, 2009.

[10] www.elpah.com/web/politics/2009/3/418508.htm, March 12, 2009.

[11] ‘Okaz (Saudi Arabia), April 21, 2009.

[12] Al-Madina (Saudi Arabia), April 30, 2009.

[13] www.elaph.com/Web/Politics/2009/4/431451.htm, April 19, 2009.

[14] www.ipairaq.com/index/php?name=inner&t=politics&id=10477, April 2, 2009.

[15] http://ar.aswataliraq.info/wp-content/themes/aswat/print.php?p=138029, April 4, 2009.

[16] http://www.abdulkhaliqhussein.com/print_version.php?id=279, April 4, 2009.

[17] http://ar.aswataliraq.info/wp-content/themes/aswat/print.php?p=138096, April 5, 2009.

[18] http://ar.aswataliraq.info/wp-content/themes/aswat/print.php?p=138096, April 5, 2009.

[19] Radionawa.com/ar/NewsDetail. June 28, 2009.

[20] http://www.abdulkhaliqhussein.com/print_version.php?id=279, April 4, 2009.

[21] http://ar.aswataliraq.info/wp-content/themes/aswat/print.php?p=138096, April 5, 2009. For more information on the fatwa by 26 Saudi clerics, see MEMRI Special Dispatch No. 896, “Reactions and Counter-Reactions to the Saudi Clerics’ Communiqué Calling for Jihad in Iraq,” April 21, 2005, http://memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=archives&Area=sd&ID=SP89605. It should be noted that since then, the official Saudi position has diametrically changed, and October 1, 2007, Saudi Mufti ‘Abd Al-‘Aziz Aal Al-Sheikh issued a fatwa prohibiting Saudi youth from traveling to Iraq for purposes of jihad. For more, see MEMRI Special Dispatch No. 1731, “Saudi Mufti Issues Fatwa Prohibiting Saudi Youth From Engaging In Jihad Abroad,” October 3, 2007,http://www.memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=countries&Area=saudiarabia&ID=SP173107.

[22] Al-Hayat (London), March 27, 2009.

[23] http://www.alrafidayn.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=articles&id=6374:2009-04-19-12-18-07&catid=1:news&itemid=18

[24] ‘Okaz (Saudi Arabia), April 21, 2009.

[25] Al-Quds Al-Arabi (London), April 6, 2009.

[26] ‘Okaz (Saudi Arabia), April 21, 2009.