james ridgeway & jesse trentadue on democracynow friday discussing the motherjones article on more evidence of fbi complicity in the 1995 oklahoma city bombing
democracynow program:

a Salt Lake city lawyer searching for the truth behind his brother’s death has uncovered a wealth of new information that could implicate the FBI. The documents he dug up through countless freedom of information requests suggest the FBI knew about the plot to bomb the Alfred P. Murrah federal building in advance but did little to prevent it.
Jesse Trentadue’s brother Kenney Trentadue was found dead in his prison cell in Oklahoma City in August 1995. The FBI calls it a suicide but Jesse maintains Kenney beaten to death during an interrogation. Jesse has spent the last 12 years battling the Department of Justice and FBI to find out why his brother was killed. He believes the FBI mistook his brother for the missing second suspect in the Oklahoma city bombings – the so-called “John Doe #2.” His research also suggests that the bombing was not the work of one or two men, but involved a wider network connected to the far-right white supremacist movement.
Earlier this year Jesse Trentadue’s theory of a wider plot was echoed by Danny Coulson, former Deputy Assistant Director of the FBI, who was in charge of collecting evidence from the Murrah building in 1995. Coulson told the BBC in March of this year that he is calling for a federal grand jury investigation into the bombings because he questions whether everyone involved was caught. He also said that FBI headquarters prematurely shut down their investigation into the alleged links between a white supremacist community called Elohim city and the bombings.
This controversy is the subject of the latest investigation by James Ridgeway. It is the top story in the July-August issue of Mother Jones. It’s called “In Search of John Doe No. 2: the Story the Feds Never Told about the Oklahoma City Bombing.” And Jesse Trentadue joins us on the phone from Salt Lake City. He is an attorney whose brother Kenney Trentadue was killed in prison in August 1995. Jesse has since dug up FBI files that implicate the FBI in his brother’s death and in the Oklahoma city bombings. Jesse now represents Terry Nichols and is seeking a deposition for him.

mothejones article: In Search of John Doe No. 2: the Story the Feds Never Told About the Oklahoma City Bombing

Federal officials insist that the Oklahoma City bombing case was solved a decade ago. But a Salt Lake City lawyer in search of his brother’s killers has dug up some remarkable clues—on cross-dressing bank robbers, the FBI, and the mysterious third man.

primary sources

Posted by: b real | Aug 3 2007 17:14 utc | 4

this is the low contempt we have of the Iraqis we’re supposedly “liberating”.
448 days (time served) and demotion to private is the penalty for murdering an innocent Iraqi? What the fucking fuck?
guess it’s more time than the war criminals who started this bullshit war will ever get though, sadly.

Posted by: ran | Aug 3 2007 17:55 utc | 6

a little story of loss

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Aug 3 2007 18:05 utc | 8

Well, at least he was only demoted and is still in the Army. Why not send him back to Iraq with his unit on its next rotation and see if the Iraqis agree that justice was done.

Posted by: Ensley | Aug 3 2007 19:12 utc | 10

One thing to understand about the ‘damage’ cycle, is that the coercion almost (..//….) never stems from ordinary ppl, but to to shady actors exploiting them on their behalf.
Most often, the ppl on the ground get nothing, or worse are excluded and vilified, or championed and adulated, because of media exposure, taking a stand, etc. That can f** up their lives big time. Sometimes, of course, some member of the community sees big bucks up top, and will exploit, but it is rather rare. imho.
I have tried to find out how Swiss compensation was paid out to ppl on the ground, (the Swiss accounts scandal ant the payments made) but got no joy, as CH signed an agreement that they would have no right to oversight, or even information, in this matter. There are some informational scrapings, to be sure, but those I cannot quote.
Main point: Questions of morality, ethics, cannot be addressed if it is not known what the concrete, material, real world, end result of moral arguments are. The lack of described, attested, outcomes voids them absolutely.
Turning ppl into victims hoping for cash, or recognition (etc.) is a way of dumbing them down, turning them into non-actors, ppl who have no say, no life, hope only of handouts..no doubt that is why so very few ppl agree to be pictured and quoted as such, and even the Israelis have had to scrape around to find some ppl who would agree being pictured sobbing, demanding, claiming, thanking…the PTB of course loves it as it costs almost nothing and keeps ppl in their victim, poor, clueless, etc. status.

Posted by: Norette | Aug 3 2007 19:53 utc | 12

Thanks for #8
Refugee journeys do not end neatly. Sagar is in Sweden but his head is in Nauru and, by extension, Australia, a place he may never see.
R’giap, very moving story indeed.

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Aug 3 2007 22:08 utc | 14

Liberated, fuck the L.A.Times, I’m at the end with the msm, ‘NO QUARTER’ I say….
Pinochet-era general is caught

An intelligence official under the Chilean dictator, Raul Iturriaga Neumann fled after his conviction in an activist’s disappearance.
August 3, 2007
SANTIAGO, CHILE — A fugitive ex-general from the Pinochet era was captured Thursday, Chilean authorities said.
Former Gen. Raul Iturriaga Neumann, 69, was arrested without incident in an apartment in the resort town of Viña del Mar, on Chile’s Pacific coast, officials said.
Once a high-ranking figure in the military’s feared intelligence service, Iturriaga is one of the best-known convicted human rights abusers from the dictatorship of the late Augusto Pinochet, who ruled from 1973 to 1990. His case drew attention to right-wing discontent with human rights prosecutions.
Iturriaga was a commander at a clandestine jail known as the “Sexy Blindfold” and “The Discotheque” because of the sexual abuse inflicted on blindfolded prisoners as loud music masked their screams.
The ex-general was convicted in connection with the 1974 disappearance of a political activist, Luis Dagoberto San Martin, who was last seen at the lockup and is presumed dead. He denied any wrongdoing and refused to surrender to authorities in June for the start of a five-year prison term.
The government says San Martin, who was 21 when he disappeared, is among the almost 3,200 people killed for political reasons under Pinochet, who was facing human rights and corruption charges when he died in December at the age of 91.
Before going on the run in June, Iturriaga issued a widely circulated video manifesto railing against the “injustice” of the Chilean system.
“I openly rebel before this arbitrary, biased, unconstitutional and anti-judicial conviction,” Iturriaga said.
The former general’s denunciations were seen as a direct challenge to the Chilean state, which has been under democratic rule for 17 years. The government has pledged to prosecute human rights offenders from the Pinochet era.
Iturriaga’s case highlights the outrage of former military officials now facing prosecution for their roles during the dictatorship. As many as 500 face charges of human rights violations.
But officers serving in the country’s modernized armed forces refused to side with Iturriaga, proclaiming their loyalty to the elected government and calling his trial and sentence fair. The military and defense leadership uniformly condemned Iturriaga’s flight and urged the fugitive to turn himself in.
Chilean authorities launched a major search for Iturriaga. He was also wanted in neighboring Argentina, where he was linked to the killings of a dissident Chilean general and his wife in a car bombing carried out under Operation Condor, in which South American dictatorships hunted down enemies beyond their borders.
It remained unclear whether the fugitive had received assistance from a web of right-wing sympathizers, as many here feared. Iturriaga was carrying a pistol when arrested, but put up no resistance, officials said.
As he was being transferred to a prison near the capital, hecklers yelled, “Asesino!” (Murderer!) and tossed eggs at the police motorcade.
“In this case now there is tranquillity for society,” said attorney Nelson Caucoto, who represents the family of San Martin.
Iturriaga’s lawyer, Jorge Balmaceda, said his client “didn’t want to comply with a sentence that he considered unjust.”
Among those also facing charges are Iturriaga’s boss in the intelligence service, former Gen. Manuel Contreras, who already has been convicted here for a 1976 car bombing in Washington that killed Orlando Letelier, the exiled former Chilean foreign minister, and a U.S. colleague.

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Aug 3 2007 22:30 utc | 16

In Terrorism-Law Case, Chiquita Points to U.S. – Firm Says It Awaited Justice Dept. Advice
WaPo gets confused about terror and murder. Mistakes collusion for ass-covering. Introduces a degree of legitimacy to the idea that US corporations aiding terrorists is a heart-wrenching, complicated issue when US interests are at stake. Wade through a lot of pro-Chiquita, false debate WaPo bullshit, and find the pearls…

On April 24, 2003, a board member of Chiquita International Brands disclosed to a top official at the Justice Department that the king of the banana trade was evidently breaking the nation’s anti-terrorism laws.
Roderick M. Hills, who had sought the meeting with former law firm colleague Michael Chertoff, explained that Chiquita was paying “protection money” to a Colombian paramilitary group on the U.S. government’s list of terrorist organizations. Hills said he knew that such payments were illegal, according to sources and court records, but said that he needed Chertoff’s advice.
Chiquita, Hills said, would have to pull out of the country if it could not continue to pay the violent right-wing group to secure its Colombian banana plantations. Chertoff, then assistant attorney general and now secretary of homeland security, affirmed that the payments were illegal but said to wait for more feedback, according to five sources familiar with the meeting.
(…)
Sources close to Chiquita say that Chertoff never did get back to the company or its lawyers. Neither did Larry D. Thompson, the deputy attorney general, whom Chiquita officials sought out after Chertoff left his job for a federal judgeship in June 2003. And Chiquita kept making payments for nearly another year.
What transpired at the Justice Department meeting is now a central issue in a criminal probe…
Chiquita’s executives left the meeting convinced that the government had not clearly demanded that the payments stop.

Why, there’s a legitimate debate about United Fruit/Chiquita bribing the AUC because they are not al qaeda; Chiquita serves as stabilizing force in the region; and this all thus serves legitimate US interests.

Justice officials have acknowledged in court papers that an official at the meeting said they understood Chiquita’s situation was “complicated,” and three of the sources identified that official as Chertoff. They said he promised to get back to the company after conferring with national security advisers and the State Department about the larger ramifications for U.S. interests if the corporate giant pulled out overnight.
(…)
But legal sources on both sides say there was a genuine debate within the Justice Department about the seriousness of the crime of paying AUC. For some high-level administration officials, Chiquita’s payments were not aiding an obvious terrorism threat such as al-Qaeda; instead, the cash was going to a violent South American group helping a major U.S. company maintain a stabilizing presence in Colombia.
(…)
Then, on April 24, the company executives met with Justice officials, including Chertoff. They disclosed the payments and Justice officials said they were against the law. Hills said he agreed, but stressed that Chiquita would have to withdraw from the country if it did not pay AUC, and noted this could affect U.S. security interests in that region.

United Fruit/Chiquita’s arms-running side operation is news to me. I guess the malfeasance must just stop with arms and bribes. Probably no drug running involved.

An Organization of American States report in 2003 said that An Organization of American States report in 2003 said that An Organization of American States report in 2003 said that Chiquita participated in smuggling thousands of arms for paramilitaries into the Northern Uraba region, using docks operated by the company to unload thousands of Central American assault rifles and ammunition.
Iguaran, whose office has been investigating Chiquita’s operations, said the company knew AUC was using payoffs and arms to fund operations against peasants, union workers and rivals. At the time of the payments, AUC was growing into a powerful army and was expanding across much of Colombia and, according to the Colombian government, its soldiers killed thousands before it began demobilizing. Chiquita participated in smuggling thousands of arms for paramilitaries into the Northern Uraba region, using docks operated by the company to unload thousands of Central American assault rifles and ammunition.
Iguaran, whose office has been investigating Chiquita’s operations, said the company knew AUC was using payoffs and arms to fund operations against peasants, union workers and rivals. At the time of the payments, AUC was growing into a powerful army and was expanding across much of Colombia and, according to the Colombian government, its soldiers killed thousands before it began demobilizing.Chiquita participated in smuggling thousands of arms for paramilitaries into the Northern Uraba region, using docks operated by the company to unload thousands of Central American assault rifles and ammunition.
Iguaran, whose office has been investigating Chiquita’s operations, said the company knew AUC was using payoffs and arms to fund operations against peasants, union workers and rivals. At the time of the payments, AUC was growing into a powerful army and was expanding across much of Colombia and, according to the Colombian government, its soldiers killed thousands before it began demobilizing.

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Aug 4 2007 1:01 utc | 18

grrrrr…
grrrr… somethings not right w/typepad…

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Aug 4 2007 1:07 utc | 20

addendumb: (re# 17)
This adam gadahn was born Adam Pearlman…
Fake Al Qaeda
Adam Yahiye Gadahn
Eve Yahweh Goddamn

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Aug 4 2007 1:32 utc | 22

Hey Uncle, can we get a group rate? I’d wear it.

Posted by: beq | Aug 4 2007 2:55 utc | 24

mats,
I don’t know if its systematic or what, but I did notice the same thing that you mention awhile back. I got cash back from a refund where normaly my credit card would have been credited. I thought it was odd too. Maybe just coincidence?

Posted by: Rick | Aug 4 2007 4:19 utc | 26

another somalian warlord back in power

BELETWEIN, Somalia Aug 3 (Garowe Online) – Residents in the central Somali town of Beletwein, 300km north of Mogadishu, were concerned today that armed conflict might erupt in the region between the old governor of Hiran and the newly-appointed governor, Yusuf “Daboged” Ahmed.
Daboged, backed by an unknown number of troops and armored trucks, arrived in the southern Hiran district of Jalalaksi on Thursday, where he was received by district officials and loyal gunmen, sources said.
He departed from Mogadishu after President Abdullahi Yusuf renamed him to the post of Hiran governor in July. Daboged was appointed governor of Hiran by Prime Minister Ali Mohamed Gedi in 2006 but he was expelled from the region’s capital, Beletwein, by the Islamic Courts militia last August.
Like fellow warlords, Daboged was returned to power by the Ethiopian army as they swept through town-after-town dismantling the Islamist militia.

if he can keep it, though. didn’t last very long the first time he was appointed, and it’s open season on political appointees of the re-established warlord TFG…
Another district commissioner assassinated in Somalia

MOGADISHU, Somalia Aug 3 (Garowe Online) – A district commissioner in northern Mogadishu was assassinated at his home Friday evening, officials and relatives said.
Two unidentified gunmen armed with pistols knocked on the door of Ali Fidow, commissioner of Yaaqshiid district, at 8pm local time today. Relatives said Fidow’s armed guards were not around at the time so he personally opened the door.
“He suffered gunshot wounds but died later at the hospital,” said one relative in shock.
Col. Hassan “Jifyare” Mohamud, commander of the Yaaqshiid police station, confirmed the killing but admitted that police units who were on the scene within minutes failed to capture the killers.
Fidow is the second district commissioner of Yaaqshiid to be killed by suspected insurgents. He replaced his predecessor who was assassinated in February.
So far, six of Mogadishu’s sixteen district commissioners and several of their deputies have been assassinated.

— — — — —
other than that the penultimate section seems a bit out of place given the clear msg in what precedes it, here’s an excerpt from a pretty strong, clear analysis of the problems that the u.s. empire is facing w/ it’s AFRICOM project, taken from the written testimony of a witness at thursday’s u.s. house of representatives committee on foreign affairs subcommittee on africa and global health (gasp! allow me a moment to catch my breath…) hearing, titled “Africa Command: Opportunity for Enhanced Engagement or the Militarization of U.S.-Africa Relations?”
[also, who’s the (neo-)person/org that keeps getting peter scam pham added as a last minute witness to these hearings on africa?]
testimony of Dr Wafula Okumu, head, african security analysis programme, institute for security studies, pretoria, south africa

Why Africans are reluctant to embrace Africom
The coldness with which Africans hold Africom was displayed in July when Gen Kip Ward, the newly appointed first commander of Africom, was denied a meeting with the South African minister of defence, Mosiuoa Lekota, during his visit to the country to drum up support for the planned command. There are a number of reasons why Africans are reluctant to embrace Africom.
First, any country hosting the command will be criticised for violating Africa’s common positions on African defence and security, which discourages the hosting of foreign troops on the African soil. In particular, it is thought, such troops could be used to undermine the Continent’s Non-Aggression Pact, solemn declaration on common African defence and security, and other positions on hosting foreign bases in Africa.
Second, Africans vividly remember that colonialism was preceded by philanthropic missionaries who came to fulfil God’s Will of rescuing Africans from the clutches of barbarism. To paraphrase Kenyatta’s allegory, “when the Whiteman came to Africa, he was holding a Bible in one hand and asked us to close our eyes and pray. When we opened our eyes after the prayer, his other hand was holding a gun and all our land was gone!” Africa’s colonial history was characterised by military occupations, exploitation of its natural resources and suppression of its people. After testing decades of independence, these countries are now jealously guarding their sovereignty and are highly suspicious of foreigners, even those with good intentions.
Third, when Africans reflect on the continent’s relations with the U.S., they see ambiguity, neglect, and selective engagement. For instance, during the period of decolonization, the U.S. did not openly support the UN decolonization initiatives, particularly when these were not aligned with its Cold War positions. Often, the U.S. was reluctant to support anti-colonial and anti-apartheid liberation movements in Southern Africa and colonial Portugal, a member of NATO. U.S. forcefully reacted to African regimes that forged close relations with the Soviet Union and China, while aligning closer to anti-Communist African despots who were anti-democratic and had horrendous human rights records. With this historical background, Africom might be considered in Africa if its objectives did not appear to be based on the principle of “manifest destiny” of “saving Africa.” The proposal will be seriously considered if it primarily seeks to strengthen the capacity of the African Union and other African organizations to implement Africa’s development, peace and security agendas.
Fourth, Africans are not comfortable dealing with the military in matters related to their development and sovereignty. Africans are concerned that the establishment of Africom might do more harm than good—“the poised hammer that makes everything suddenly look like a nail,” in the words of Esquire magazine. They would be much more comfortable dealing with American diplomats, USAID and Peace Corp volunteers rather than the U.S. Marine. Africans are nervously concerned that Africom will sanction the militarization of diplomacy and severely undermine multilateralism on the continent. Africans have consciously adopted multilateralism as a common approach to addressing the continent’s problems and confronting its challenges. Africom seems to be a unilateral approach that would be counter to the current trend towards unity on the continent. Consequently, the establishment of Africom must secure an African consensus otherwise it would bring new and grave threats and challenges to the continent’s peace and security agenda. The issue of foreign military presence on the African soil is in violation of this agenda.
Additionally, the U.S. should bear in mind that following the emergence of other players in Africa; any initiative aimed at the whole continent cannot be unilaterally conceived and implemented. Although it is factually acknowledged that the U.S., as the most powerful global military and economic power, has the will and capacity to undertake unilateral actions, there are severe limitations and far-reaching consequences for the unconsidered use of power. The U.S. engagement in the Middle East has proved that the policy of consolidating democracy in the region, destroying al-Queda and removing abhorrent regimes from power can fail despite all its seemingly good intentions.
Fifth, the launching and the aggressive promotion of Africom are taking place at the same time that Africa is debating the “Union Government” proposal. There are feelings, as expressed in a recently held consultative meeting of the African Union PCRD in Lusaka, Zambia, that Africom is an American attempt to ensure that the aspiration for African Unity is checked by a heavy U.S. military presence on the continent. This concern is based on the track record of American military intervention in Africa. The image of U.S. military involvement in Africa becomes more confusing when one looks at the “hard” security concerns of Africa. Many Africans are asking why American troops were not deployed to prevent or restrain the Rwandan genocidaires. Why the U.S. forces remained anchored safely off the coast of Liberia when that country, the nearest thing America ever had to an African colony, faced brutal disintegration in 2003? Why the U.S. has not supported the AU Mission in Somalia (AMISOM) and instead supported the Ethiopian intervention through airpower from CJTF-HOA stationed in Djibouti? Is the U.S. really interested in addressing the felt security needs of Africans, or does its proposed military presence foreshadow the kind of destruction we have seen recently in Somalia? Is Africa to become merely another theatre of operations in which winning the “hearts and minds” forms an essential component of a “security” driven agenda? Why should ordinary Africans welcome an American presence that will create African targets for extremists where none existed, and add an unwelcome dimension to already complex local conflicts? Why is Washington not able to do something to address Africa’s needs by modifying its trade policy? If the U.S. is really committed to participating in the continent’s development why not support the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD)? This would surely have a greater developmental impact, if improving the livelihoods of the people is what the U.S. wants; maybe this has not been clearly stated as such in the previous definition of Africa’s needs.
Sixth, Africans were never consulted during the conceptualization of Africom. Rather Africom was announced and has been presented as a fait accompli. Africans are presently experiencing the exuberance of self-importance and confidence to drive their own destiny. There is a prevailing mood on the continent to reassert African self-worth and self-determination. This is why “consultation” has become a common cliché on the continent.
Seventh, there is also a concern that Africom will suffer from mission creep by being transformed from engagement in humanitarian missions to an interventionist force, as was the case with Operation Restore Hope in Somalia in 1992. The change of the humanitarian objectives could also come about due to the nexus of energy, poverty, and terrorism. Despite the oil wealth of African countries, 23 West African nations are ranked bottom on the UN human development index on poverty. The test case for this mission would be the Niger Delta region where an insurgency has been taking place since 2004, when unemployed youths took up arms to demand an equitable distribution of Nigeria’s oil wealth. Besides using violence, sabotage and kidnapping tactics, these youths under the Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta (MEND), have shut off approximately 711,000 barrels per day (bpd) of Nigeria’s output of 2.5 million bpd. There is a strong feeling that if such activities interfere with U.S. oil supplies in Africa, there is a high likelihood that Africom could be used to protect U.S. interests.
Eighth, militarization of U.S.-Africa relations—Africans are wary of the U.S. record in Iraq and concerned that the Pentagon is taking the lead role in the promotion of U.S. interests. Establishment of Africom could be seen as President Bush’s approach of using military force to pursue U.S. strategic interests. Africom will not only militarise U.S.-African relations but also those African countries in which it will be located. This could have far-reaching consequences, as the presence of American bases in these countries will create radical militants opposed to the U.S. and make Americans targets of violence.
Ninth, the mixed messages being relayed to Africa by the U.S. government have compounded the confusion and heightened the suspicions Africans have of Africom’s objectives:

In 1995, the DOD in its U.S. Security Strategy for Sub-Saharan Africa stated that the U.S. had “very little traditional strategic interest in Africa.” But Theresa Whelan, the Assistant Secretary for Defence, has recently argued that Africa is providing “tens of thousands of U.S. jobs, …possesses 8% of the world’s petroleum; and it is a major source of critical minerals, precious metals and food commodities.”

Ryan Henry, the Principal Deputy Undersecretary of Defence for Policy and Pentagon pointman on Africom, has stated that its purpose is not to wage war but “to work in concert with (U.S.) African partners for a more stable environment in which political and economic growth can take place.” However, Gen Wald minced no words when he stated that: “I’d like to have some forward bases in Africa. The world has changed and we are going to make our security. The Halcyon days are over.”

General Bantz Craddock, the EUCOM Commander, told journalists in Washington in June that protecting energy assets, particularly in West Africa and the Gulf of Guinea, would guide the focus of Africom. Gen Craddock added that Africom will “enable countries (in West Africa) to improve their security of any type of production—oil, natural gas, minerals.”

These intentions are reflective of the bold recommendations made by Vice President Dick Cheney’s National Energy Policy Development Group, in 2001, that the Bush administration “make(s) energy security a priority of (U.S.) trade and foreign policy.” One year later, the Bush administration rolled out its “West Point Doctrine” that essentially stated that the U.S. would not allow a major economic, political or military competitor to emerge.
Almost all African countries are reluctant to host Africom; some have made it clear that they do not want anything to do with it while others have even warned that it should not be stationed in any country neighbouring them. These countries are aware that the generosity of providing military advisors can easily turn into sending of conventional forces and a full-blown military intervention. For instance, Africom could provide Nigerian armed forces training to combat the Niger delta insurgence, which could later be upgraded to limited special operations to rescue American hostages and hunt down those who have attacked American economic interests.
…

Posted by: b real | Aug 4 2007 4:52 utc | 28

The first armed robots have hit the streets of Iraq and are now hunting evil-doers with high-powered M249 machine guns. The robots are called SWORDS, which stands for “Special Weapons Observation Reconnaissance Detection System”. Army focus groups apparently preferred this acronym over the more obvious PUBE (Predatory Unmanned Battle Engine). The robots are currently being piloted through the streets of Bagdad using remote control. According to an interview on CNET with Chief Army Scientist Thomas Killion however, the army soon plans to make the killing machines fully automatic.
Interestingly enough, I saw a similar demo a few weeks ago, put on by our wonderful arms services at the local small town mall here in Missoula. It was surrounded by the kiddies, I remember wondering at the time if the parents that drop their kids off at the mall know that they are being preyed upon by the U.S. Army. It’s all fun and games, until someone loses an eye their whole country. /snark

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Aug 4 2007 6:36 utc | 30

Arming the Sunni resistance, “concerned citizens”: In Iraq, a Perilous Alliance With Former Enemies

U.S. commanders are offering large sums to enlist, at breakneck pace, their former enemies, handing them broad security powers in a risky effort to tame this fractious area south of Baghdad in Babil province and, literally, buy time for national reconciliation.
American generals insist they are not creating militias. In contracts with the U.S. military, the sheiks are referred to as “security contractors.” Each of their “guards” will receive 70 percent of an Iraqi policeman’s salary. U.S. commanders call them “concerned citizens,” evoking suburban neighborhood watch groups.

Posted by: b | Aug 4 2007 6:56 utc | 32

b., it is interesting to watch the United States use its money and power to influence nations, people and factions.
Without a united vision the attempts are scattered self-serving and counterproductive. I suppose some might benefit from the chaos.
A good report on counterpunch has Noam Chomsky interviewed, his response about the way newspapers skew the viewpoint, he notes that even if an editorialist or reporter acts completely within their own ethics, their viewpoint would simply never be published if it did not serve the controlling interests.
He also says that there is a higher standard for those of us who enjoy freedom of study and expression. Unlike the masses the intellectuals have freedom and with that comes responsibility.
The topic was Chomsky’s advice in 1969 to MIT students.

Posted by: jonku | Aug 4 2007 7:16 utc | 34

b real@28
Thanks.
if the South African’s, who are one of the least likely subjects of Africom activities are so hostile towards Africom, it tells quite a lot.
and though not mentioned in the article, the USA failed to support the AU’s initiatives in Darfur as well.
makes me wonder what kind of people in this day & age would think they can treat Africa so condescendingly & still be welcomed with open arms. Are these people for real ?
It amounts to some sort of delusion and they are going to keeep doing it.

Posted by: jony_b_cool | Aug 4 2007 8:53 utc | 36

b #37,
I knew there was an overall disgust for the Iraqis and foreigners by the military/Americans in Iraq, but I am surprised at this. But why anything surprises me anymore concerning the hypocrisy and irony of it all is a mystery. I suppose all this is justified on the basis of “security”. As I mentioned in another thread, such racism and prejudice are exactly the things that breed terrorism and is actually making Americans less secure, not only over there, but over here and everywhere. It makes me sick to continually hear, usually coming from Bush and Republican Senators/Congressman, “We are fighting them over there so we don’t have to fight them here.” Actually if we keep fighting “them” there, we will end up fighting “them” here – whoever the hell “them” is. I still haven’t figured out who “them” and “they” are yet, I guess I need to watch more Fox News.

Posted by: Rick | Aug 4 2007 11:31 utc | 38

re jonku at 31. Baudrillard’s rejection of the distinction between ‘fake’ and ‘real’ to put it briefly, is very valuable.
For ex. many in the US consider 9/11 to have been ‘real’, as outlined in the official narrative, yet they are very reluctant to show adherence to the script, follow up, etc. (Except, possibly for some, as an excuse for hate, vengeance, invasion, etc.)
Victims, such as first responders now dying of cancer, or the injured (there were plenty but they get no press) are ignored or dismissed.
Commemorations are invisible, or tinny, or even triumphant, as if the attacks were positive, cementing the in-group. Such turning the face away from the victim is often a sign of guilt or complicity, not just a reluctance to involve oneself, actively defend the victimized.
For. ex, see David Plotz on Slate: first sentence: The Pentagon 9/11 ceremony this morning feels less like a memorial than a celebration.
slate
Or one victim here, supported by the Elisha Zion peace foundation:
link
We humans are symbolic beings, creatures that adhere to narrative, to myth, to group think, accepted stories. They are the fabric that form our lives. But behavior in the real world shows what is considered to be ‘really real’ and what is ‘fake’ yet accepted. 9/11 was just too ‘fake’ for it to be ‘believed’, by a large chunk of the US population.

Posted by: Noirette | Aug 4 2007 17:27 utc | 40

Malooga @39,
I think I understand what your saying but I’m not so sure that all of these Iraqis & (non-Western) foreigners are making a lot of money. And I’m not so sure you can multiply U.S $ by a minimum factor of 10 to get the “local Iraqi equivalent” (whatever that is) in buying power. With many of them, I would guess that their families are in dire need and this is the only employment available. Their pay maybe goes to support many families. Add to that the risk to their own lives of secretly working for the “Coalition”, and things may not be as rosy as you paint for these people. It is easy for you and I to say that we would refuse such work, but maybe things aren’t so good in Iraq since the many years of sanctions and war. I don’t know, never been there, but just throwing out some thoughts to put things in perspective.
And I’m not so sure “house niggers” had much of a choice of where they worked either, at least back when they were slaves in my country. But even assuming they had a choice; they certainly didn’t get paid better than those they served. I will assume you are not a racist, and are using the term “house nigger” in a non racial sense to refer to any one by the distinct caveats that they live in or near the place where they work, and most importantly, they get treated like shit by those they work for. In that respect, many of us are “house niggers”. Actually, I have been getting treated like shit by large corporations for a long time now, ones that I do not even work for, but I am all but forced to buy from because of my government. And don’t even mention the way my government treats me. So, why are you just attacking the Iraqis and foreigners? Aren’t we all “niggers” now?

Posted by: Anonymous | Aug 4 2007 21:47 utc | 42

Aren’t we all “niggers” now?
not yet Rick. most of us have a pretty decent life compared to the other 5 billion people in the world. it could be better sure, but it aint bad even if somethings are distasteful and we can no longer believe the things we grew up knowing to be true.
I frankly don’t believe that Iraqi translators are pulling down that much jack. the US government only pays a maximum of $2,500 for the accidental killing of an Iraqi.
as for despising those who work with the enemy, that is a tough call. since all of us continue to buy US products and services we too are supporting the war. ideally, if all Iraqis refused to collaborate with the occupiers it would make the occupation that much harder. would it make a change? would the US decide that it was just too hard to do and leave? probably not.

Posted by: dan of steele | Aug 4 2007 22:37 utc | 44

One of Chicago’s top Republican fund-raisers, Terry Duffy, has just announced that he’s endorsing Democratic Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton for the 2008 election.
He’s the executive chairman of the entity formed by the 2007 merger of the Chicago Mercantile Exchange (CME) and the Chicago Board of Trade (CBOT), which respectively were the largest and second largest derivatives exchanges in the U.S.
Duffy says Mrs Clinton “understands the important role that financial markets play in our global economy as well as the economic opportunities and risk management benefits these critical markets create for all.”

Alex Cockburn in “>today’s CounterPunch
So now we can see plainly that apart from a few rabid neo-cons, that the pragmatic conservatives ie the Corporate Capitalists recognise that no Rethug even Abe Lincoln hisself could get enough traction to pull a greasy stick outta a dog’s ass let alone win the 08 prez contest, and are therefore backing the next best thing, Hilary Obama.
Yeah yeah our team’s gunna win – go team go – yawn.
If any of the mob of dingbats, deadbeats and desperates running for dem nomination are elected, the winner will carelessly drop the pawl into place while convincing another generation of young voters that the left are a bunch of mean ass tight fisted control freaks who delight in spoiling everyone else’s fun.
The current crop of candidates took careful note (as was intended) when the weak as piss pseudo-liberal pile of steaming cat turds called Clinton/Gore were hounded with credibility and career destroyingly accurate lobs from every faction of amerika’s ruling elite. They got shit on from a great height even though they didn’t do fuck all. They didn’t do fuck all and never intended to but the crooks and mainchancers needed two things to happen. Firstly since energy resources were getting low a regime that would do fuck all, namely expand the empire, was needed to be forced into place. They got that. Secondly that regime would end after a maximum of 8 years and if they horsewhipped Willie and Al badly enough up to 2000 the other uppity n…..s would see that and decide martyrdom didn’t look too pretty up close. It is something best viewed through the telescope of history and 8 years isn’t long enough ago.
The two main contenders for next amerikan prez learned the lesson well, after all one was searingly close to ground zero as the missiles lobbed in.
There is no chance at all that Hilary Thingummyjig will undertake any action which could expose her to the same. She has just spent a couple terms as a senator crawling up the anus of every conservative corporate capitalist in amerika so there is no chance that she will risk being shit out now. As for Barack, well he didn’t get where he is today without kissing a lot of ass.
The rest. The other senators and congresspeople lining up funds and backers and where a betting person can be fairly sure the next prez will actually come from. Let’s face it Barack Clinton has peaked much too early. Well this is the mob who refuse to impeach murderers crooks, thieves and liars, let alone the sly mouthpieces and briefs who enabled the murderers. They ain’t goin to do anything to risk the attack dogs being slipped off the leash if they make it into Pennsylvania Ave. They got where they are today by being gutless wonders, why change now?
Which brings me to my original contention about the way young people view a so called leftist or liberal government that doesn’t confront inequality or injustice.
All the government has can do is that traditional leftist stuff a good many of us at MoA hate, interventionism, the petty interference in people’s lives, the governance by edict instead of education. Education costs money, edicts only cost as much as the paper and ink.
I see the result all around me here. I’m sure amerikans who live in states run by a dem regime which has been cowed by the corporatists see the same.
A classic example. Schools in NZ always expected the kids to bring their lunch. it worked fine for 80 years or so when food was cheap and plentiful and there was generally a parent at home to prepare the lunch. I can’t remember a single instance when I went to school of a kid not having lunch except on the rare occasions when some kid would forget to pack his her lunchbox. That was never a big deal since we all shared the stuff out anyway (you know how it goes – one kids poison is another kids meat).
Anyway – All the changes to people’s lives arising out of the destruction of the welfare state and everyone having to work, combined with huge cut-backs in education funding meant that school ‘tuck shops’ took off in a big way. The PTA mums work behind the counter selling food to kids who no longer have anyone at home to prepare their lunch.
Pretty soon kids started getting a helluva lot fatter as they ate the crap – packaged processed foods with the high retail margins the schools liked to sell to pay for class trips n stuff. Sure a lot of schools had dedicated types who tried to make nice healthy fresh foods, but let’s get real here. What 10 year old is going to buy sprouts and carrot on wholemeal when they can get a bag of cheezels and a coke for less, so they still have money to buy more garbage on the way home?
The healthy food didn’t sell enough – a lot gets wasted, then the school doesn’t make any money. Meanwhile the garbage food makers wise up and push their crap on TV – on the kids shows after school. Kids get fatter and schools make money from it.
The situation needed to be fixed. Apart from anything else there is the whole credibility issue that arises in an inquiring young mind when they are told in PE or Science what to eat and what not to eat, yet go to the school shop to find that stuff they shouldn’t be eating or drinking gets pushed at em.
The schools need the tuck shops as much if not more than the kids since the kids can always stop at a store on the way to school. Diabetes amongst kids on the up. All the problems with that poison that shouldn’t be made, let alone sold are coming home to roost.
The ‘leftist’ government needed to do something to fix the problem. They had tried to ignore it but the Green Party wouldn’t let them and health costs were sky-rocketing.
So the weak as piss assholes passed a law banning schools from selling the crap. This is without addressing the issue of school funding which they had increased a lot, tho not in the areas that the schools had learned to fund themselves.
eg the teachers copped a number of big pay rises which was fair enough but a bit skewed, possibly the result of so many teacher’s union officials in the government. Exactly the same thing has occurred in the health sector where health funding has doubled but the number of procedures undertaken has fallen .
By passing a law against selling the food, the lefties managed to piss everyone off and still not solve the problem. The kids will buy the crap on the way to school, the Tuck Shops will lose their profits and the schools particularly in poorer areas will really struggle. The kids will stay fat while everyone hates being told what to do, so another entry has been made on the list of ‘prohibitions made by leftists’.
The real alternative of feeding kids at school for free which would have cost a gazillion to set up and solved that problem plus a heap of others. – kids learning on an empty stomach was dismissed as impractical even before the debate began.
This is only a small thing but it is indicative of how leftist administrations who have been cowed by neo-cons behave. They can’t restrain corporations lest the ‘market’ shit on them, so they won’t amend the broadcasting Act to prevent the poison from being pushed at kids. Instead the poison manufacturers enter a ‘voluntary code of conduct’ which means they push lesser poisons such as ‘fruit juice drinks’ which still contain added sugar and colours, and sit in the machine next drinks of the same parent brand which are chocka full of sugar, caffeine and alla the other poisons.
Drugs, law and order etc – all those issues which we could debate for years are addressed by these cowed lefties by passing lots of laws which constrain the citizenry, while never addressing the underlying issues which are causing the problem.
I’m sure that amerikans have seen the same types of behaviour from dem state administrations.
These guys are worse than rethugs because not only do they do the same stuff as rethugs they turn possible supporters of change away from the leftist ideology.

Posted by: Debs is dead | Aug 5 2007 1:34 utc | 46

On the torture of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the New Yorker’s Jane Mayer writes The Black Sites A rare look inside the C.I.A.’s secret interrogation program.

According to the Bush Administration, Mohammed divulged information of tremendous value during his detention. He is said to have helped point the way to the capture of Hambali, the Indonesian terrorist responsible for the 2002 bombings of night clubs in Bali. He also provided information on an Al Qaeda leader in England. Michael Sheehan, a former counterterrorism official at the State Department, said, “K.S.M. is the poster boy for using tough but legal tactics. He’s the reason these techniques exist. You can save lives with the kind of information he could give up.” Yet Mohammed’s confessions may also have muddled some key investigations. Perhaps under duress, he claimed involvement in thirty-one criminal plots—an improbable number, even for a high-level terrorist. Critics say that Mohammed’s case illustrates the cost of the C.I.A.’s desire for swift intelligence. Colonel Dwight Sullivan, the top defense lawyer at the Pentagon’s Office of Military Commissions, which is expected eventually to try Mohammed for war crimes, called his serial confessions “a textbook example of why we shouldn’t allow coercive methods.”
…
Concern about the legality of the C.I.A.’s program reached a previously unreported breaking point last week when Senator Ron Wyden, a Democrat on the intelligence committee, quietly put a “hold” on the confirmation of John Rizzo, who as acting general counsel was deeply involved in establishing the agency’s interrogation and detention policies. Wyden’s maneuver essentially stops the nomination from going forward. “I question if there’s been adequate legal oversight,” Wyden told me. He said that after studying a classified addendum to President Bush’s new executive order, which specifies permissible treatment of detainees, “I am not convinced that all of these techniques are either effective or legal. I don’t want to see well-intentioned C.I.A. officers breaking the law because of shaky legal guidance.”
A former C.I.A. officer, who supports the agency’s detention and interrogation policies, said he worried that, if the full story of the C.I.A. program ever surfaced, agency personnel could face criminal prosecution. Within the agency, he said, there is a “high level of anxiety about political retribution” for the interrogation program. If congressional hearings begin, he said, “several guys expect to be thrown under the bus.” He noted that a number of C.I.A. officers have taken out professional liability insurance, to help with potential legal fees.
…
While Mohammed was being held by the agency, detailed dossiers on the treatment of detainees were regularly available to the former C.I.A. director George Tenet, according to informed sources inside and outside the agency. Through a spokesperson, Tenet denied making day-to-day decisions about the treatment of individual detainees. But, according to a former agency official, “Every single plan is drawn up by interrogators, and then submitted for approval to the highest possible level—meaning the director of the C.I.A. Any change in the plan—even if an extra day of a certain treatment was added—was signed off by the C.I.A. director.”
…
Agency scientists found that in just a few hours some subjects suspended in water tanks—or confined in isolated rooms wearing blacked-out goggles and earmuffs—regressed to semi-psychotic states. Moreover, McCoy said, detainees become so desperate for human interaction that “they bond with the interrogator like a father, or like a drowning man having a lifesaver thrown at him. If you deprive people of all their senses, they’ll turn to you like their daddy.” McCoy added that “after the Cold War we put away those tools. There was bipartisan reform. We backed away from those dark days. Then, under the pressure of the war on terror, they didn’t just bring back the old psychological techniques—they perfected them.”
The C.I.A.’s interrogation program is remarkable for its mechanistic aura. “It’s one of the most sophisticated, refined programs of torture ever,” an outside expert familiar with the protocol said. “At every stage, there was a rigid attention to detail. Procedure was adhered to almost to the letter. There was top-down quality control, and such a set routine that you get to the point where you know what each detainee is going to say, because you’ve heard it before. It was almost automated. People were utterly dehumanized. People fell apart. It was the intentional and systematic infliction of great suffering masquerading as a legal process. It is just chilling.”
…
Soon after Mohammed’s arrest, sources say, his American captors told him, “We’re not going to kill you. But we’re going to take you to the very brink of your death and back.” He was first taken to a secret U.S.-run prison in Afghanistan. According to a Human Rights Watch report released two years ago, there was a C.I.A.-affiliated black site in Afghanistan by 2002: an underground prison near Kabul International Airport. Distinctive for its absolute lack of light, it was referred to by detainees as the Dark Prison.
…
According to sources, Mohammed said that, while in C.I.A. custody, he was placed in his own cell, where he remained naked for several days. He was questioned by an unusual number of female handlers, perhaps as an additional humiliation. He has alleged that he was attached to a dog leash, and yanked in such a way that he was propelled into the walls of his cell. Sources say that he also claimed to have been suspended from the ceiling by his arms, his toes barely touching the ground. The pressure on his wrists evidently became exceedingly painful.
Ramzi Kassem, who teaches at Yale Law School, said that a Yemeni client of his, Sanad al-Kazimi, who is now in Guantánamo, alleged that he had received similar treatment in the Dark Prison, the facility near Kabul. Kazimi claimed to have been suspended by his arms for long periods, causing his legs to swell painfully. “It’s so traumatic, he can barely speak of it,” Kassem said. “He breaks down in tears.” Kazimi also claimed that, while hanging, he was beaten with electric cables.
…
An American Bar Association report, published in 1930, which was cited in a later U.S. Supreme Court decision, said, “It has been known since 1500 at least that deprivation of sleep is the most effective torture and certain to produce any confession desired.”
Under President Bush’s new executive order, C.I.A. detainees must receive the “basic necessities of life, including adequate food and water, shelter from the elements, necessary clothing, protection from extremes of heat and cold, and essential medical care.” Sleep, according to the order, is not among the basic necessities.
…
Mohammed is said to have described being chained naked to a metal ring in his cell wall for prolonged periods in a painful crouch. (Several other detainees who say that they were confined in the Dark Prison have described identical treatment.) He also claimed that he was kept alternately in suffocating heat and in a painfully cold room, where he was doused with ice water. The practice, which can cause hypothermia, violates the Geneva Conventions, and President Bush’s new executive order arguably bans it.
…
Mohammed was kept in a prolonged state of sensory deprivation, during which every point of reference was erased. The Council on Europe’s report describes a four-month isolation regime as typical. The prisoners had no exposure to natural light, making it impossible for them to tell if it was night or day. They interacted only with masked, silent guards. (A detainee held at what was most likely an Eastern European black site, Mohammed al-Asad, told me that white noise was piped in constantly, although during electrical outages he could hear people crying.) According to a source familiar with the Red Cross report, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed claimed that he was shackled and kept naked, except for a pair of goggles and earmuffs. (Some prisoners were kept naked for as long as forty days.) He had no idea where he was, although, at one point, he apparently glimpsed Polish writing on a water bottle.
In the C.I.A.’s program, meals were delivered sporadically, to insure that the prisoners remained temporally disoriented. The food was largely tasteless, and barely enough to live on. Mohammed, who upon his capture in Rawalpindi was photographed looking flabby and unkempt, was now described as being slim. Experts on the C.I.A. program say that the administering of food is part of its psychological arsenal. Sometimes portions were smaller than the day before, for no apparent reason. “It was all part of the conditioning,” the person involved in the Council of Europe inquiry said. “It’s all calibrated to develop dependency.”
The inquiry source said that most of the Poland detainees were waterboarded, including Mohammed. According to the sources familiar with the Red Cross report, Mohammed claimed to have been waterboarded five times.
…
The former officer said that the C.I.A. kept a doctor standing by during interrogations. He insisted that the method was safe and effective, but said that it could cause lasting psychic damage to the interrogators. During interrogations, the former agency official said, officers worked in teams, watching each other behind two-way mirrors. Even with this group support, the friend said, Mohammed’s interrogator “has horrible nightmares.” He went on, “When you cross over that line of darkness, it’s hard to come back. You lose your soul. You can do your best to justify it, but it’s well outside the norm. You can’t go to that dark a place without it changing you.” He said of his friend, “He’s a good guy. It really haunts him. You are inflicting something really evil and horrible on somebody.”
…
When pressed, one former top agency official estimated that “ninety per cent of the information was unreliable.” Cables carrying Mohammed’s interrogation transcripts back to Washington reportedly were prefaced with the warning that “the detainee has been known to withhold information or deliberately mislead.” Mohammed, like virtually all the top Al Qaeda prisoners held by the C.I.A., has claimed that, while under coercion, he lied to please his captors.

Confirmation from the Washington Post

The ICRC report, which was given to CIA Director Gen. Michael V. Hayden and has had limited distribution within the administration’s highest ranks, details interviews with the 14 detainees and assesses the CIA program. Sources familiar with the document have told The Washington Post that the report shows amazing similarities in terms of how the detainees were treated even though they were kept isolated from one another.
Sources also have told The Post that the detainees almost universally told the ICRC that they made up stories to get the harsh interrogations to stop, possibly leading U.S. officials astray with bad intelligence. Mohammed confessed to taking part in 31 of the world’s most dramatic terrorist attacks when he appeared at a Combatant Status Review Tribunal hearing at Guantanamo, and he presented officers at the hearing with a document detailing his alleged torture at the hands of the CIA. That document has been classified.

Posted by: b | Aug 5 2007 8:31 utc | 48

This adam gadahn was born Adam Pearlman…
Fake Al Qaeda
Adam Yahiye Gadahn

damn! Uncle @ 22, you are now anticipating the news cycle. I am mightily impressed.
CNN reports
CNN has an image the FBI was generous enough to provide of this guy. funny that someone who grew up in the US has absolutely no photographic record… no high school yearbook pictures, no driver’s license, zip, nada

Posted by: dan of steele | Aug 5 2007 10:41 utc | 50

some more explanation on the global implications of the mortgage crisis:
european housing bubbles and exposure
french axa’s exposure
german fund rescue
noland, if you missed it the first time…gulp

Posted by: slothrop | Aug 5 2007 16:22 utc | 52

Senate website withholding spy law roll call
HAHAHAHA…FUCK THE PEOPLE!

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Aug 6 2007 4:04 utc | 54

Uncle $cam, you’ve probably found this by now (but not where ya oughtta):
Roll call results

Posted by: catlady | Aug 6 2007 4:51 utc | 56

Currently being reviewed by committees in the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate, the Simon Wiesenthal Holocaust Education Assistance Act
Holocaust education aim of federal bill

The act would distribute $10 million – $2 million yearly for five years – in federal funding to establish these programs

Yeah, fuck Katrina victims or the American infrastructure…

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Aug 6 2007 6:57 utc | 58

On reading this Debka file report we may browse what Israeli intelligence is
peddling this week, while Badger’s comments
on the same story offer useful perspective. All that is needed
for a Catch-22 sublimation of our mystification is to learn that the allegedly tunneling clans are subcontracting the work to an appropriate Halliburton subsidiary.

Posted by: Hannah K. O’Luthon | Aug 6 2007 13:20 utc | 60

A follow-up to my earlier post is appropriate to a recent discussion on another thread. The quote below is from an essay about Philip K. Dick’s cosmological experiments in his novels.
There are also great explanations of Baudrillard’s concept of the hyperreal (e.g. is a digital copy of a CD or a youtube video a real thing, a copy of a real thing, or something completely different?) and Dick’s classic technique of creating an artificial novelistic world and then watching with us as his characters attempt to cope with the breakdown of the illusion.
Anyway, the quote below is from that essay by Erik Davis.

Anticipating the more frazzled edge of online libertarianism and the ethical ambiguities of hacker pranks and poachings, Dick went on to claim that in “a totalitarian society in which the state apparatus is all-powerful, the ethics most important for the survival of the true, human individual would be: Cheat, lie, evade, fake it, be elsewhere, forge documents, build improved electronic gadgets in your garage that’ll outwit the gadgets used by the authorities.”[16]

It’s a good read.

Posted by: jonku | Aug 6 2007 16:06 utc | 62

@ catlady #56 – Jim Webb, our hero. Feh.

Posted by: beq | Aug 6 2007 16:48 utc | 64

l.a. times: Security brings technology to Africa
The U.S. will install new computer networks to help the underdeveloped continent fight terrorism, creating opportunities for U.S. firms.

SAN DIEGO — The U.S. military is embarking on a new effort in Africa to help thwart the rise of Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups and as a first step has launched a $500-million program to train African battalions in desert warfare.
And when Uncle Sam commits to a project, contracts for U.S. technology firms are not far beyond.
One of the first is a $300,000 deal with Sentek Consulting of San Diego to work with African governments on building an information-sharing system to connect far-flung nations.
…
Starting today, a group of eight Sentek employees, working with the militaries in Niger, Ethiopia, Nigeria and Ghana, plans a basic, four-day test of a new information-sharing system using the Internet and the GoogleEarth mapping service to link the four locations.
Mock intelligence about military, humanitarian and natural disaster situations will be exchanged via computer with the help of commercial English-French translation software. Part of the plan is to transmit real-time information from satellites to the four nations.

Posted by: b real | Aug 6 2007 18:21 utc | 66

@DoS – 65 – Ralphieboy
please contact me, I may have a business proposal for you
Hey, what about my commission on any deal here at MoA?

Posted by: b | Aug 6 2007 18:42 utc | 68

Did: what’s with the humble mumbling? as a true, ethical, human individual, you’re one of our shining lights! i wish i were bolder in my own daily anarchic exercises.

Posted by: catlady | Aug 6 2007 22:25 utc | 70

You rock, Uncle $cam!!

Posted by: Jake | Aug 7 2007 3:15 utc | 72

As British Leave, Basra Deteriorates

“The British have basically been defeated in the south,” a senior U.S. intelligence official said recently in Baghdad. They are abandoning their former headquarters at Basra Palace, where a recent official visitor from London described them as “surrounded like cowboys and Indians” by militia fighters. An airport base outside the city, where a regional U.S. Embassy office and Britain’s remaining 5,500 troops are barricaded behind building-high sandbags, has been attacked with mortars or rockets nearly 600 times over the past four months.
…
Although neighbor Iran’s presence is pervasive — with cultural influence, humanitarian aid, arms and money — U.S. officials and outside experts think that the Iraqi parties are using Iran more than vice versa. Iraqis in the south have long memories of the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s, one U.S. official said, and when a southern Shiite “wants to tar someone, they call them an Iranian.” He said the United States is “always very concerned about Iranian influence, as well we should be, but there is a difference between influence and control. It would be very difficult for the Iranians to establish control.”

Posted by: b | Aug 7 2007 6:55 utc | 74

Thanks for following the link, Debs.
That article is the first I’ve read that made any sense of PK Dick’s late writings on religion and that “Rome has always been here.”
Dick wrote in the time of Nixon and as a drug-using San Franciscan, knew well his paranoia.
What a story teller! The Man in the High Castle supposes that Germany won WWII, and opens with a Japanese officer shopping in occupied San Francisco for genuine collectible American memorobilia such as coke bottle caps and baseball cards.
The shoe on the other foot — masterfully.
The article talks about how a crazy person like Phil can be right at the same time, making a living off writing cheap paperback science fiction but smart enough to throw his own ideas into the mix of proven buzzwords like Cyclon-B and mutually assured destruction.
There is a half-cartoon half live-action movie out on video right now, starring Keanu Reeves and Robert Downey Junior of Dick’s best novel, A Scanner Darkly. Here’s the trailer..
The joke I best remember from the novel is the three freaks getting together, one has just bought a stolen bicycle for twenty bucks, it is supposed to be a ten-speed. They count the gears, two on the pedals and five on the back axle, and agree that the purchaser has been robbed — there are only seven gears and the thief said it was a ten-speed!
This shows how out of it these guys actually are …
The book is about a cop who takes drugs so he can exist undercover, the drugs mess him up but he has to report on his friends and himself as one of the surveilled.
Great heartfelt book that has as a postscript pages of names of friends who died or went insane as a consequence of drug use.
Here is a youtube clip of Philip K. Dick talking about the times and the book.

Posted by: jonku | Aug 7 2007 7:26 utc | 76

OOps – Democracy Strikes Again!
Lebanese Reject the U.S. Choice and Vote for the “Other Guy” — Election May Be a Bellweather for the fate of the Lebanese Government

They’ve done it again. The Arabs have, once more, followed democracy and voted for the wrong man.
Just as the Palestinians voted for Hamas when they were supposed to vote for the Palestinian Authority of Mahmoud Abbas, so the Christian Maronites of Lebanon appear to have voted for a man opposed to the majority government of Fouad Siniora in Beirut. Camille Khoury – with a strong vote from the Armenian Tashnak party – won by 418 votes the seat that belonged to Pierre Gemayel, murdered last November by gunmen supposedly working for the Syrian security services.
While the Maronite vote had increased against Gemayel’s showing in 2005 elections, the result was a stunning blow to the American-backed government – how devastating that phrase “American-backed” has now become in the Middle East – in Lebanon and allowed Hizbollah’s ally, ex-General Michel Aoun to claim that “they cannot beat me”. Mr Aoun is a candidate in presidential elections later this year.
True, the voting figures showed huge support for Pierre Gemayel’s father Amin – himself an ex-president- who was standing for the parliamentary seat of his murdered son. Although he was a weak and fractious leader – Amin paid a state visit to Damascus to re-cement “fraternal” ties after the Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon – he proved himself a brave man in the aftermath of his son’s murder, calling upon Lebanese to support the government rather than submit once more to the domination of Syria.
Khoury’s score in the Metn hills above Beirut – and a 418 conquest out of 79,000 votes is hardly a crushing political victory – yet again emphasises the divisions among the Christians of Lebanon who have traditionally fought each other – rather than their more obvious enemies – throughout Lebanese history. The Crusaders fought each other in Tyre when Saladin was at the gates of the city; in 1990, Mr Aoun’s own Lebanese army fought the Christian Phalangist militia while still trying to defend themselves from the Syrians. They lost both battles.
Amin’s father Pierre – grandfather of the MP murdered last November – founded the Phalange in 1936 after being inspired by the Nazi Berlin Olympics. “I thought Lebanon needed some of this order,” he admitted to me shortly before his death; the original Phalange dressed in brown shirts and gave the Hitler salute. But they had turned themselves into a neo-respectable right-wing party by 1982 when they were enthusiastically supported by the invading Israeli army which hoped that Amin’s brother Bashir would be elected president. Alas, Bashir turned out to be less pro-Israeli than the then-defence minister, Ariel Sharon, hoped, and was himself murdered in a bomb attack shortly before his inauguration.

Posted by: Bea | Aug 7 2007 12:51 utc | 78

re #79: Kassams are rockets, I meant to add that in brackets. Sorry.

Posted by: Bea | Aug 7 2007 15:23 utc | 80

Quagmire, literally, for our boys in Basra.

Posted by: Cloned Poster | Aug 7 2007 16:17 utc | 82

the peacock rpt: U.S. Commerce Dept. Hires Consultant for Iraq Energy Project — Then Covers Tracks of Contracting Action

A private contractor tasked with training Iraqi oil- and gas-sector officials on matter pertaining to international trade agreements and law is being hired by the U.S. Dept. of Commerce. Lex Mercatoria, a London-based publishing house and consultancy, will be responsible under the contract to provide “technical assistance to Iraq to ensure that laws and regulations pertaining directly or indirectly to the Iraqi oil and gas sector are compliant with international trade law, with international trade agreements to which Iraq is, or may become, a party…”, according to a recently obtained contracting document.
In an unusual move, the FedBizOpps database where the Commerce document was located, the Aug. 5 presolicitation notice was archived the same day it was uploaded to the federal contract-opportunities system; in other words, the document was immediately removed from the daily listing of business dealings made public by the government. Only a word-specific search by The Peacock Report of the FedBizOpps archives produced evidence of this contracting action.

Posted by: b real | Aug 7 2007 18:27 utc | 84

Iraqi interpreters who have risked their lives to help UK forces will not get asylum, a report has claimed.

Interpreters ‘abandoned’ in Iraq
Iraqi interpreters who have risked their lives to help UK forces will not get asylum, a report has claimed.
Whitehall officials ignored appeals by high-ranking army officers for asylum to be given to 91 interpreters and their families, according to the Times.
BBC security correspondent Frank Gardner says interpreters are marked men who “face a horrific death”.
The MoD says it considers requests for help from serving or ex-employees on their “individual merits”.
‘Cold shoulder’
However, the Times reported that one appeal for asylum was rejected even though it was accompanied by a glowing recommendation from a British commanding officer.
[snip]

Posted by: Rick | Aug 7 2007 21:47 utc | 86

pull up a chair when you get time to contribute, jdp. geez, you’ve been away for quite a long time. reckon you’re bound to have some good experiences to share.

Posted by: b real | Aug 8 2007 2:47 utc | 88

2000 Iraq refugees a day into Syria

The Syrian Organization for Human Rights says that the number of Iraqis who have fled to Syria has reached to almost 2 million.
Abdul-Karim al-Rihawi, the head of the organization, said there was a ‘daily influx of some 2,000 Iraqis to Syria’ and that only very few Iraqis leave after their arrival.

Posted by: Rick | Aug 8 2007 4:19 utc | 90

not so fast jdp, stick around, have missed your commentary.

Posted by: anna missed | Aug 8 2007 5:53 utc | 92

For b real et al …
The Devil Came on Horseback
Must-See Film: The Devil Came on Horseback

…captures better than any news story the horror of the Darfur genocide and the doubly horrifying shrug of the international community.
Darfur isn’t the most popular topic at this site, but give me a chance to convince you: you must see this film.

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Aug 8 2007 9:20 utc | 94

Slothrop will not like this:
Iraqi attitudes continue to shift toward secular values

The political values of Iraqis are increasingly secular and nationalistic, according to a series of surveys of nationally representative samples of the population from December 2004-March 2007.

Posted by: b | Aug 8 2007 9:58 utc | 96

Baghdad – 6 Million People,117 Degrees And No Water
A heinous crime against humanity committed by the occupying power.
By Richard Becker
Western Regional Coordinator, ANSWER Coalition
8-3-7

For the past 24 hours, Baghdad has had virtually no running water.
Major parts of the city of six million people have lacked running water
for six days, while daily high temperatures have ranged from 115 to 120
degrees. The tiny amount of water dripping through the pipes is causing
many of those who must drink it to suffer acute intestinal illness.
According to reports, not enough electricity is available to run
Baghdad’s water pumps. This in a country with vast energy resources.
Corporate media outlets-to the extent they have reported this horrific
and mind-boggling story at all-have treated it as a failure on the part
of Iraqis.
In reality, it is an appalling war crime committed by the occupying
power, the U.S. military. It threatens the lives of tens of thousands of
people in the short term and unthinkable numbers of people unless it is
rectified immediately.
According to Article 55 of Geneva Conventions (1949) to which the U.S.
government is a signatory: “To the fullest extent of the means available
to it the Occupying Power has the duty of ensuring the food and medical
supplies of the population; it should, in particular, bring in the
necessary foodstuffs, medical stores and other articles if the resources
of the occupied territory are inadequate.”
Article 59 states: “If the whole or part of the population of an
occupied territory is inadequately supplied, the Occupying Power shall
agree to relief schemes on behalf of the said population, and shall
facilitate them by all the means at its disposal.”
To say that a huge city deprived of running water is “inadequately
supplied” would rank as one of the great understatements of human history.
Of course, the shortage of water-the most vital of all necessities- does
not extend to the U.S. personnel and contractors occupying Iraq….
This latest catastrophe to afflict the Iraqi people is another poisonous
fruit of imperialist occupation. Not even in the worst times during the
U.S. blockade of Iraq from 1990-2003, did such a disaster occur.

Posted by: Bea | Aug 8 2007 10:23 utc | 98

uncle @94 –
that is clearly a propaganda film — a u.s. marine who claims to be one of the only “american” witnesses to “genocide” — and the kos crowd clearly are under-informed & easily misled

Posted by: b real | Aug 8 2007 14:34 utc | 100