Rendition Round-up in the Horn of Africa
Thanks to Reprieve for this valuable information on yet another batch of US prisoners being carted around to torture by the CIA.
http://www.reprieve.org.uk/documents/070321HOArenditionreportfinal.pdf
Monthly archives: March 2007
London 7/7 – The Story is Far From Over
Rachel from North London has been setting the scene for coming media coverage of new information on what was known and done about the London 7/7 attacks, both before and after. She is also calling on readers to sign the Downing Street petition for a public enquiry into the events.
“And then I started to follow a trail. I read, I researched, I found out more and more and more. I talked to people. I listened. I made it my business to know, as much as I could find out. Why? I didn’t want to let anyone down, by not being as briefed as I could be.
But what I found out was devastating. First, whispers, rumours. Then, facts, and I checked, and followed up, and I sat with what I knew, and sometimes I cried. And I bit my lip and waited…
It was, and is, not just about a failure of intelligence, but a failure to use intelligence. A failure of imagination. A misguided belief in a ‘Covenant of Security’, that was never security; that was a lie.
And for me, it is about the screaming I hear, still, in the darkness, when I sleep.
That might have been avoided, knowing what I know, what they knew, what we will all know, soon. And so I wait, and I write, and I wish, for what is coming soon…”
This is of course not the first attempt to build public and political momentum for an enquiry. However, it sounds as if April will probably see a new chapter in our understanding of what happened and why.
In Iraq, public anger is at last translating into unity
“For four years, Britain and the US have aimed to encourage sectarianism, but ultimately they will fail to divide the country”
By Sami Ramadani in The Guardian
Sami Ramadani was a political exile from Saddam’s regime and is a senior lecturer at London Metropolitan University
Two catastrophes have been in the making since President Bush and Tony Blair launched their war on Iraq four years ago. Both are epoch-making, and their resolution will shape regional and world politics for decades to come.
The first catastrophe relates to the political and moral consequences of the war in the US and UK, and its resolution is the urgent task facing the American and British peoples. The second concerns the devastation wrought by the war and subsequent occupation, and the lack of a unified political movement within Iraq that might overcome it.
Bush and Blair are in a state of denial, only offering us more of the same. They allegedly launched the war at first to save the world from Saddam’s WMD, then to establish democracy, then to fight al-Qaida’s terrorism, and now to prevent civil war and Iranian or Syrian intervention.
Four years after declaring “mission accomplished”, the US government is sending more combat troops to add to the bloodbath – all in an effort to impose its imperial will on the Iraqi people, and in the process plunging its own country into its deepest political-moral crisis since Vietnam. Under heavier pressures, Blair, the master of tactical subterfuge, is redeploying Britain’s forces within Iraq and Afghanistan, under the guise of withdrawal. He has long known that British bases in Basra and the south were defenceless against attacks by the Sadr movement and others.
Bush, on the other hand, is escalating Iraq’s conflict and threatening to launch a new war, this time against Iran. It is hard not to presume that what he means by an exit strategy is to install a client regime in Baghdad, backed by US bases. The Iraqi people will not accept this, and the west should be alerted to the fact that US policy objectives will only lead to wider regional conflicts, rather than to full withdrawal.
In attempting to achieve their objective, the occupation forces will escalate their war with the resistance forces within and north of Baghdad, as well as clashing with the popular Sadr movement in the capital and the south. The latter is, despite the ceasefires and political manoeuvrings, Iraq’s biggest organised opposition force to the occupation.
Meanwhile, the destruction of Iraq continues apace and its people are subjected to levels of sustained violence unknown in their history. Overwhelmingly, the violence is a direct or indirect product of the occupation, and the bulk of sectarian violence is widely known in Iraq to be linked to the parties favoured by Washington. For example, forces in control of the various ministries, including the interior ministry, clash regularly.
It is not difficult to see how this violence is linked to the occupation, for it has spawned a multitude of violence-makers: 150,000 occupation forces; 50,000 and rising contracted foreign “mercenaries”; 150,000 Iraqi Facilities Protection forces, paid by the Iraqi regime, controlled by the occupation and engaged in death-squad activities, according to the prime minister, Nuri al-Maliki; 400,000 US-trained army and police forces; six US-controlled secret Iraqi militias; and hundreds of private kidnap gangs. Pitted against some or all of these are tens of thousands of militias and resistance forces of various political hues. In total there are about 2 million actively organised armed men in the country. There are about 3,000 attacks on occupation forces every month, while tens of thousands of Iraqis languish in prison, where torture is widespread and trials considered an unnecessary formality.
The success of the occupation’s divide-and-rule tactics and their insistence on basing the new political and military structures on sects, religions, and ethnicities is threatening the communal cohesion that was once the country’s hallmark. This is a factor in the absence of a united movement, capable of leading the struggle to end the occupation. The occupation has sown divisions where there were none and transformed existing differences into open warfare.
And is it any wonder that the long-suffering Iraqi people find themselves at an impasse. Try catching your breath after decades of brutal dictatorship, 13 years of economic sanctions and four years of an obscene war .
But even in the absence of a unified anti-occupation front, the resistance of the Iraqi people has managed to thwart the world’s greatest military empire. And there are signs of a mass rejection of these sectarian forces, and the possibility that public anger will translate into the very unity that is so desperately needed. Rage against corruption and the collapse of public services is sweeping the country, including Kurdistan. Similarly, the proposed corporate occupation of Iraq, disguised as a legal document to tie the country to the oil companies for decades to come, has reminded the population of one of the main reasons for the US-led invasion. It has also reminded them what a self-respecting, sovereign Iraq looked like in 1961, when the government nationalised Iraq’s lands for future oil production.
In an opinion poll released by the BBC yesterday, 86% of people are opposed to the division of Iraq. This and other polls also show majority support for armed resistance to the occupation. Four years into this terrible adventure, both the US and Britain must realise that it is time to pack up and leave.
See also: Civil War in Iraq: The Salvador Option and US/UK Policy
Secret Confessions and Torture
Mohammed Sheikh Khalid has now, voluntarily and of his own free will, admitted he masterminded every significant event from the Norman Invasion through the bubonic plague, fall of Constantinople, and Great Fire of London, to the Battle of Little Big Horn, assassination of JFK and the Oklahoma bombing.
Or he might as well have. The extraordinarily comprehensive list of terrorist outrages for which he claims responsibility would be beyond the capacity of any but the most brilliant and inspired mortal; Khalid, I fear, is a more run of the mill thug.
But in truth, we have absolutely no idea what, if anything, he has confessed at all. The BBC brazenly reported all of yesterday that while Khalid did allege he had been tortured during his four years of secret detention by the CIA in various locations around the globe, he is now freely confessing under no duress and does not retract any of his confession.
Who says? The proceedings being held in Guantanamo Bay, and which the BBC report so uncritically, are held behind barbed wire, machine guns, gun emplacements, reinforced steel and concrete and combination locks, before an exclusively military panel. Khalid does not even have a lawyer present. For all we know, his confession could be an entire fabrication. The blandness of the BBC reporting in these circumstances is one of the worst examples of the appalling desertion of the principles of that once worthwhile institution.
The readiness of the rest of the media to push the “instil fear” button on behalf of the Orwellian government is predictable. They report as fact that Khalid also planned to blow up Heathrow, Canary Wharf, Big Ben, Buckingham Palace and any other British building the Pentagon had heard of.
If Khalid really is freely and openly confessing all of this stuff, then what possible reason can there be to deny him a lawyer, and not allow public and media access to his trial? The atrocities he allegedly confesses – the Twin Towers, Madrid, Bali – left thousands of bereaved families. They have a right to see justice done, rather than this elaborate propaganda set-up, with its total lack of proper legal process or intellectual credibility.
Did Khalid really do all of this? Two facts must be considered. He has been through years of vicious torture and of solitary confinement. If the experience of others who survived extraordinary rendition is typical, he has been kept in total isolation, in darkness, beaten, cut, suffocated and drowned, suffered white noise and sensory deprivation. He will have been moved around, often not even knowing which country he is in. One good contact has told me that the CIA gave the Uzbek torturers their turn with him. I do not know that for certain, but who can contradict me?
After years of this, a person can be so psychologically damaged that they believe the narrative of their torturers to be the truth. It is perfectly possible that he now in fact believes he did all that stuff on the list, when he did not.
Alternatively, he may have decided to exaggerate his own role and achievements for the personal glory it brings. We can get the appalling situation where both the sides which benefit from and wish to promote the War on Terror – Al Qaida and the CIA – indulge in what becomes a grim mutual cooperation in exaggeration as each seeks to glorify their role. Thus do those on both sides who actually desire a “Clash of Civilisations”, promote one.
What is happening now in Guanatanamo Bay is a disgrace. We cannot in present circumstances accept anything that comes out of it as other than a completely unsubstantiated claim by the Pentagon. Some of it is quite possibly true. But this is no way to make the case.
Beyond Quagmire
Rolling Stone magazine has produced a must read for anyone interested in the ongoing geopolitical disaster and humanitarian catastrophe that is Iraq. A pannel of experts comment on the best, worst, and most likely scenarios
“The big danger is what I call the August 1914 Syndrome. The assassination of Archduke Ferdinand in Sarajevo — what would have been in the scale of history a minor event — set in motion activities that turned out to be beyond the ability of the Western powers to control. And they ended up in one of the most brutal wars in man’s history by accident…
A Shia Saddam — without nearly as much brutality, but still a strongman — is actually one of the best hopes…
I can’t help but think we’ve signed Jordan’s death warrant….
You’re going to see borders changing, governments falling. Lebanon is already on the precipice…
There isn’t any upper limit to how many people could get killed. Depending on how long the war lasts — a million casualties?
Once the Israelis get involved, then everybody piles on. And you’ve got nuclear events going off in the Middle East. That would be about as bad as it could get….
This is a dark chapter in our history. Whatever else happens, our country’s international standing has been frittered away by people who don’t have the foggiest understanding of how the hell the world works. America has been conducting an experiment for the past six years, trying to validate the proposition that it really doesn’t make any difference who you elect president. Now we know the result of that experiment [laughs]. If a guy is stupid, it makes a big difference.”
The lid is well and truely off – its just that no one knows for sure what’s in the box
Update: March on the Pentagon.org are organising a major protest at, err, the Pentagon this Saturday, 17th March. Their video can be viewed here.
Debate on Iraq, Iran and Foreign Policy After Blair: Westminster Hall 20th March
On the 20th March, the fourth anniversary of the Iraq invasion, The People’s Assembly will convene in Westminster Hall to debate the following agenda:
1 Iraq: The Debate Parliament Won’t Have
2 Why We Should Oppose an Attack on Iran
3 British Foreign Police After Tony Blair
Speakers will include:
* DENNIS KUCINICH: US Congressman, candidate for the Democratic nomination for the 2008 presidential election will be the Assembly’s opening speaker at 2pm (http://kucinich.us/bio.php)
MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT: * Bob Wareing MP, * John McDonnell MP, * Michael Meacher MP, * Linda Riordan MP, * Harry Cohen MP, * Jeremy Corbyn MP, * Katy Clark MP, * Sarah Teather MP, * John Hemming MP, * Lynne Featherstone MP, * Adam Price MP, * Elfyn Llwd MP, * George Galloway MP, * Kelvin Hopkins MP
And others including musician Brian Eno and comedian and campaigner Mark Thomas.
The debate is open to all.
Those wishing to attend can register here.
Torture and Murder by UK Troops: No One Found Guilty
A new level of shame was brought on the now ex- Queens Lancashire Regiment as it emerged that a sucessful prosecution for the torture and murder of Iraqi civillians had been thawted. Remember that this is the same regiment that smugly rejected the relatively minor accusations of abuse published by the Daily Mirror newspaper – while at the same time they were effectively covering up much more serious crimes. The failure of the investigation and court martial to convict anyone for the murder of Mr Musa is a bad day for the British army and another nail in the coffin of ‘hearts and minds’ in Basra.
Iraq abuse case ends with soldiers acquitted
By Kim Sengupta in The Independent
The most high-profile court martial over the Iraq war has ended with the acquittal of six British soldiers and accusations from the military over “politically motivated prosecutions”.
The case also led to the disclosure that the Army high command had sanctioned brutal abuse of prisoners and condemnation from the trial judge of a cover-up surrounding the killing of Baha Musa, an Iraqi prisoner. The six acquitted soldiers’ all of the Queen’s Lancashire Regiment, now the Duke of Lancaster Regiment ‘ had pleaded not guilty to charges linked to Mr Musa’s death.
Another defendant, Cpl Donald Payne, of the same regiment, who pleaded guilty to a war crimes charge when he admitted the inhumane treatment of persons, will be sentenced at a later date. But at the end of the trial which lasted 93 days and cost an estimated ’20m’ no one has been convicted over the killing of Mr Musa, a 26-year-old father of two who suffered 93 injuries including fractured ribs, a broken nose and kidney failure during his detention.
Yesterday, his father, Dawood, told The Independent: “What they have done in this case will cause a lot of anger in Basra… Everyone knows what happened to my son.”
There has also been anger in the military over this and other courts martial, which some claim have been driven by Lord Goldsmith, the Attorney General, whose legal advice paved the way for the Iraq War. Some believe the soldiers have been made scapegoats. But a spokesman for Lord Goldsmith denied he had made the decision to prosecute.
Outside the court yesterday at Bulford Camp, Wiltshire, Col David Black, a former commander of the Queen’s Lancashire Regiment, said: “It has been gravely disappointing that it took over three years for the judicial authorities… to decide to bring to trial a number of gallant young men… Why, and what cost to the public? These are questions to be addressed by the Attorney General, who made final decisions over the trial.”
Among those cleared was Col Jorge Mendonca, the commander of the Queen’s Lancashire Regiment and the highest ranking officer charged over prisoner abuse, and three men under his command ‘ Sgt Kelvin Stacey, L/Cpl Wayne Crowcroft and Pte Darren Fallon ‘ after the court heard the mistreatment, in contravention of the Geneva Conventions, was approved by the Army hierarchy.
The military jury also found Major Michael Peebles, 35, and Warrant Officer Mark Davies, 37, both of the Intelligence Corps, not guilty of charges of negligently performing a duty.
Defending the decision to prosecute, Major General Howell, head of the Army Prosecuting Authority, said: “The APA was satisfied… that there was sufficient evidence to proceed and it was in the public interest.”
He “utterly refuted” suggestions of any political or military pressure.
The Breaking of the Military Covenant
Following the weekend run of stories on the medical neglect of British soldiers injured in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Independent on Sunday has published an open letter to the Prime Minister. Politicians, leading figures in the arts and entertainment, and relatives of dead soldiers have put their names to it. Signatories include the playwright Harold Pinter, campaigner Bianca Jagger, Sir Menzies Campbell, leader of the Liberal Democrats, and MPs Peter Kilfoyle and Ben Wallace.
The letter is reproduced below via MFAW
To sign the letter write to [email protected]
Dear Prime Minister
We the undersigned believe that the military covenant is a cornerstone of our democracy, a mutual obligation between the nation, the armed forces, and every serviceman and woman. It is a common bond of identity, loyalty and responsibility that has sustained the armed
forces – and the country – throughout an often difficult history. In practice, this means that governments make the decisions, and the armed forces implement them. In return, the armed forces have:
* the right to expect any war to be lawful;
* the right to have adequate resources to carry out the tasks the
politicians demand of them;
* the right to be properly cared for in the event of injury;
* the right to know that, in the event of their death, their families
will be looked after properly.
This is a terrible war that has led to hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians being killed, maimed or displaced. At best, the legality of the war is dubious. Britain’s hard-pressed armed forces have been denied the support they require; in some circumstances, service personnel have paid with their lives because of this failure to make required equipment available.
Accommodation for many of the armed forces and their families back home is, as General Sir Mike Jackson, former chief of the general staff, says, “frankly shaming”. Military hospitals in this country have been closed while they have never been more essential, and wounded soldiers evacuated from the battlefield suddenly find themselves on civilian wards and at risk of physical or verbal attack from members of the public.
Servicemen and women are receiving insufficient treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder, and many are desperately ill, out of work, homeless, and even suicidal. We also believe that the Government is failing properly to look after the British widows and the children left behind.
We believe that the military covenant is broken, and that you have neglected the young men and women who carry out your orders in our name. At a time when the country is asking so much of our overstretched forces, it is failing to play fair by them. In this, you have prime responsibility, and you should at the very least meet the families of the bereaved to discuss their concerns. We call on you to reconsider your approach towards our military personnel, to restore the vital covenant, and to deliver to our men and women the just and proper treatment they deserve.
Hans Blix restates the facts for the record
From Sky News
Mr Blix became a powerful critic of the US-led invasion after his teams failed to find the significant stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons that Tony Blair and President George Bush insisted Saddam Hussein was hoarding.
He told Sky News’ Anna Botting the invasion was “clearly illegal” and said Mr Blair had not been completely straight with the evidence used to justify military force. Mr Blix said: “They put exclamation marks instead of question marks. There were question marks but they changed them to exclamation marks.
“And I think they got the political punishment for that. They lost a lot of confidence. Both Bush and Blair …”
He said that allowing the UN inspectors to continue their work could have avoided the war. More than 130 UK troops, over 3,100 US forces and tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians have died since the invasion as the country threatens to tumble into full-scale civil war. Mr Blix said: “I think if they’d allowed us to carry on the inspections a couple of months more then we would have been able to go to all the sites suspected of by intelligence.
“And since there weren’t any weapons we’d have come with that answer: there are no weapons at all the sites you’ve given us.”
The former Swedish foreign minister added that he hoped Iraqi people could be empowered and turn around their country’s fortunes, saying: “I don’t see that the US can succeed.”
Stop the Clash of Civilizations
At Avaaz.org they are campaigining for the start of meaningful middle east peace talks. They are also concerned about the rise in fear induced by leaders on both sides of current conflicts.
“Talk is rising of a ‘clash of civilizations’. But the problem isn’t culture, it’s politics ‘ from 9/11 to Guantanamo, Iraq to Iran. This clash is not inevitable, and we don’t want it.”
Click the play button below to watch their thought provoking video
Virtual Relationships
Virtual relationships have their pitfalls. In acknowledging the team who keep this website going, I credited Tim, Richard, Andrew and Wibbler but not Clive. That is because I have been happily communicating for two years under the impression that Clive and Wibbler are the same person. I now learn they are not! Great embarassment.
The Iraq Dossier is back
Old news? – maybe not. Apparently the information commissioner is currently ruling on whether the first draft of the dossier should be released. In the Guardian comment is free…, Chris Ames tells us why Draft Dodging by the government could result in further severe embarrassment for Blair et al.
The author also has a piece in the New Statesmen and has set up Iraqdossier.com, a site dedicated to “to telling the truth about the British government’s September 2002 dossier Iraq’s Weapons of Mass Destruction”. Well worth a look.
Levy, Blair and Injunctions
Much has been said about the injunctions, or attempted injunctions, against the BBC and Guardian, to prevent the publication of information relating to Lord Levy’s alleged attempt to pervert the course of justice in the cash for honours enquiry.
For the benefit of bemused non-British readers, in the UK the media are not allowed to publish the details of any potential evidence in a criminal trial, in case the jury are prejudiced by media reports before they enter the jury box.
Most other countries see no need for such restrictions. I have mixed thoughts about the system, though like all media restriction it is in danger of being made redundant by the internet and other new technologies. It is no longer a question of controlling a handful of presses and broadcast channels.
But what is undeniable is that in Britain today there is no attempt at fairness in the application of this principle. Senior New Labour figures are entitled to the full protection of this law. Is the same consideration applied to Muslims accused of terrorist offences?
The answer is a resounding no. Instead we receive a constant drip-feed of supposedly terrifying information, from police, Home Office and security services, sometimes open and sometimes just named as, for example, “Police sources”. So in the case of the so-called “liquid bomb plot”, such sources were only too keen to tell us under whose bed suicide videos had been found, near whose home were bottles containing hydrogen peroxide, who had a map pf Afghanistan, and a whole welter of such information. This was spun all over our front pages for a fortnight.
Where was Lord Goldsmith and his concern for the right to a fair, unprejudiced trial then?
I heard Louise Christian, a lawyer involved in the defence of a number of such cases, speak on precisely this point in January. She recalled a local newspaper printing a front page photo of two of her clients the day before their trial, with the banner headline “Terror sisters”. That is not permitted under our law – but it is one of the many protections of the rights of citizens that no longer in practice applies to Muslims in the UK.
Meanwhile, I am stunned that last week Sir Ian Blair, head of the Metropolitan police, shared the top table at a Jewish community dinner with Lord Levy. Blair is the head of the police force that has arrested Levy, removed his passport and, from the actions of Lord Goldsmith this week in seeking to suppress information that may be used at the trial, is likely to charge him shortly with an imprisonable offence.
It cannot possibly be right for the head of the Metropolitan Police to be hobnobbing socially with a prominent alleged criminal. And this is the ultra-sensitive Ian Blair, whose concern for social form is so acute that he demanded an offical report when a female Muslim police officer refused to shake hands with him. The report presumably explained that many Muslim females do not shake hands with men.
Ian Blair and Levy are of course both close members of the Prime Minister’s social and political circle. It is by no means the first time that they have dined together. In July 2005 the two of them ran up a ‘140 ($270) bill at a London restaurant, which Sir Ian Blair charged to the taxpayer. There was no investigation into Levy at the time, but his being dead sleazy was hardly a secret.
Ian Blair’s explanation of that charge to the taxpayer was that Levy was a representative of the Jewish community. Now, there are many eminent and worthwhile people in London to whom that description applies, but I don’t think that Levy holds any community posts. He is no more a representative of the Jewish community than I am of the Scottish community. Besides, how many one to one ‘140 meals has Ian Blair had with a representative of the Muslim community? Or the Irish, Iranian, Kurdish, Turkish, Polish, Palestinian or Greek communities? Other than ultra-rich New Labour supporters who happen to have that background?
So Ian Blair and Levy have form. In current circumstances it was a gross error of judgement for Ian Blair to sit at a top table with Lord Levy. Levy should have realised that himself and made his excuses, but nobody could mistake Lord Levy for a gentleman. Therefore Blair should have made an excuse and left. As it is, some of the smell has rubbed off. Ian Blair should resign.
Campus Spying
The Scotsman 7 March 2007
Special Branch to badge up after campus spying claims
KEVIN SCHOFIELD EDUCATION CORRESPONDENT
SPECIAL Branch officers last night said they would wear badges identifying themselves if they visit a university campus in future, after they were accused of “spying” on students.
Craig Murray, the former diplomat who last month succeeded TV personality Lorraine Kelly as rector of Dundee University, said he had been “appalled” to learn that members of Special Branch had attended the university’s student freshers’ fair last year. Mr Murray, 48, claimed that the officers, who were members of Tayside Police’s community contact unit (CCU), had been taking down the names of students who signed up to support the “Stop the War” movement – a claim the force has strenuously denied.
Mr Murray, who left the Foreign Office three years ago after alleging that the United States and Britain were involved in torture in Uzbekistan, said: “I was approached by students at Dundee who told me that Special Branch were on the campus spying on Muslim students. “They were at the fresher’s fair taking notes of those who joined the Stop the War movement. That seemed appalling to me. I began to wonder what I could do about it, so I decided to stand for rector.” Mr Murray defeated former Scotland rugby captain Andy Nicol last month in a two-horse election race to succeed Ms Kelly as the university’s rector.
Detective Chief Superintendent Angela Wilson, who has overall responsibility for the CCU, last night denied that students’ names had been taken down and insisted Special Branch officers would identify themselves more clearly in future. She said: “I’m not aware of names being taken down. They were handed leaflets and the person who handed them out said that if they’d known who they were, they wouldn’t have done it. “Our policy has always been to be very open about these things and they didn’t disguise who they were. But in future, they would wear a badge identifying themselves. “And if people were uncomfortable with them being there, all they would have to do is ask them to leave and they will.”
Det Chief Supt Wilson added: “Having been made aware that Mr Murray may have these views, should he have any continuing concerns, I’m more than happy to meet with him. But I haven’t been approached as yet.” The CCU was established in the wake of the terrorist bombings in London on 7 July, 2005 to provide information on potential extremism. The Muslim Association of Britain has claimed that the unit has contributed to a deterioration in relations between the police and the Islamic community. The force, however, insists that they have actually created closer community links.
Ambassador who attacked ‘selling of souls’
CRAIG Murray was appointed the British ambassador to Uzbekistan in 2002. While serving as ambassador, Mr Murray protested that intelligence on Islamic terror suspects in the landlocked country was being gained through torture. He branded the practice unreliable, immoral and illegal and accused the British government of “selling our souls for dross”. The story of his time in Uzbekistan is set to be turned into a film, with comic Steve Coogan signed up to play the lead role. Angelina Jolie is set to play Nadira, a young Uzbek hairdresser with whom Mr Murray admits having an affair, costing him his marriage. He has also criticised extraordinary rendition – the CIA practice of flying terrorism suspects to countries in Asia and other parts of the world for interrogation.
Special Branch Campus Spying
An article from today’s Scotsman (posted above).
The Special Branch admit that they were at the Fresher’s Fair, incognito, but deny that they were spying on students. They have failed however to provide any alternative explanation of why they were there. Reliving their student past? Hoping to gatecrash a free gig?
Becoming a Blogger
In a sense, this is my first blog entry. That may seem strange for a blog with almost a thousand entries and on the receiving end of over 600 weblinks. But this is the first entry I have actually tried to enter and post myself, like a real blogger. It will therefore possibly appear upside down, or screw up the formatting of the entire blog. But at least I am trying.
Previously I wrote entries, or selected articles, and emailed them to the team to post. Andrew and Richard also came to select and post stuff themselves. None of this would have been possible without day to day support from Tim and Wibbler. We will continue to function as something of a collective. But there will be much more day to day blogging from me.
That may also bring something of a change in tone, as I will be blogging not only when I have something heavyweight to say. Expect to see a lot about the frustrations of travelling the country on ailing public transport, and about the running of Dundee University. I hope again to do more on Uzbekistan than we had recently, and keep up the commentary on the increasingly mad “War on Terror”. And I hope that we will increase the level of comment and interaction from you.
Anyway, if this posts, I shall feel like a real blogger at last!
How Far is Iran from the Bomb? Who the Hell Knows?
From Counterpunch
By RAY McGOVERN – Former CIA analyst
That was one of the key questions asked of newly confirmed Director of National Intelligence Michael McConnell at a Senate Armed Forces Committee hearing on Tuesday. Why had McConnell avoided this front-burner issue in his prepared remarks? Because an honest answer would have been: “Beats the hell out of us. Despite the billions that American taxpayers have sunk into improving U.S. intelligence, we can only guess.”
But the question is certainly a fair, and urgent one. A mere three weeks into the job, McConnell can perhaps be forgiven for merely reciting the hazy forecast of his predecessor, John Negroponte, and using the obscurantist jargon that has been introduced into key national intelligence estimates (NIEs) in recent years. McConnell had these two sentences committed to memory:
“We assess that Iran seeks to develop a nuclear weapon. The information is incomplete, but we assess that Iran could develop a nuclear weapon early-to-mid-next decade.”
At that point McConnell received gratuitous reinforcement from Lt. Gen. Michael Maples, head of the Defense Intelligence Agency. With something of a flourish, Maples bragged that it was “with high confidence” that DIA “assesses that Iran remains determined to develop nuclear weapons.”
After the judgments in the Oct. 1, 2002 NIE assessing weapons-of-mass-destruction in Iraq’judgments stated with “high confidence”‘turned out to be wrong, National Intelligence Council officials decided to fine-tune the word “assess” to cover their asses. The council took the unusual step of including a short glossary in its recent NIE on Iraq:
“When we use words such as “we assess,” we are trying to convey an analytical assessment or judgment. These assessments, which are based on incomplete or at times fragmentary information are not a fact, proof, or knowledge. Some analytical judgments are based directly on collected information; others rest on previous judgments, which serve as building blocks. In either type of judgment, we do not have “evidence” that shows something to be a fact.”
So caveat emptor. Beware the verisimilitude conveyed by “we assess.” It can have a lemming effect, as evidenced Tuesday by the automatic head bobbing that greeted Sen. Lindsay Graham’s (R, SC) clever courtroom-style summary argument at the hearing, “We all agree, then, that the Iranians are trying to get nuclear weapons.”
Quick, someone, please give Sen. Graham the National Intelligence Council’s new glossary.
Shoddy Record on Iran
Iran is a difficult intelligence target. Understood. Even so, U.S. intelligence performance “assessing” Iran’s progress toward a nuclear capability does not inspire confidence. The only quasi-virtue readily observable in the string of intelligence estimates is the kind of foolish consistency that Emerson called “the hobgoblin of little minds.” In 1995 U.S. intelligence started consistently “assessing” that Iran was “within five years” of reaching a nuclear weapons capability. But, year after year that got a little old and tired…and even embarrassing. So in 2005, when the most recent NIE was issued (and then leaked to the Washington Post), the timeline was extended and given still more margin for error. Basically, it was moved ten years out to 2015 but, in a fit of nervous caution, the estimators created the expression “early-to-mid-next decade.”
Small wonder that the commission picked by President George W. Bush to investigate the intelligence community’s performance on weapons of mass destruction complained that U.S. intelligence knows “disturbingly little” about Iran. Shortly after the most recent estimate was completed in June 2005, Robert G. Joseph, the neo-conservative who succeeded John Bolton as undersecretary of state for arms control, was asked whether Iran had a nuclear effort under way. He replied:
“I don’t know quite how to answer that because we don’t have perfect information or perfect understanding. But the Iranian record, plus what the Iranian leaders have said…lead us to conclude that we have to be highly skeptical.”
Is help on the way? A fresh national intelligence estimate on Iran has been in preparation for several months’far too leisurely a pace in present circumstances. Will it have any appreciable effect in informing policy? Don’t count on it.
U.S. troops delete images of civillian killings
From Seattlepi
By Amir Shah
KABUL, Afghanistan — Afghan journalists covering the aftermath of a suicide bomb attack and shooting in eastern Afghanistan Sunday said U.S. troops deleted their photos and video and warned them not to publish or air any images of U.S. troops or a car where three Afghans were shot to death.
Afghan witnesses and gunshot victims said U.S. forces fired on civilians in cars and on foot along at least a six-mile stretch of road in Nangarhar province following a suicide attack against the military convoy. The U.S. military said militants also fired on American forces during the attack. The U.S. military and Afghan officials said eight Afghans died and 34 were wounded in the violence. One U.S. soldier was also injured.
A freelance photographer working for The Associated Press and a cameraman working for AP Television News said a U.S. soldier deleted their photos and video showing a four-wheel drive vehicle in which three people were shot to death about 100 yards from the suicide bombing. The AP plans to lodge a protest with the American military.
The photographer, Rahmat Gul, said witnesses at the scene told him the three had been shot to death by U.S. forces fleeing the attack. The two AP freelancers arrived at the site about a half hour after the suicide bombing, Gul said.
“When I went near the four-wheel drive, I saw the Americans taking pictures of the same car, so I started taking pictures,” Gul said. “Two soldiers with a translator came and said, ‘Why are you taking pictures? You don’t have permission.'”
It wasn’t clear why the accredited journalists would need permission to take photos of a civilian car on a public highway. Gul said the U.S. soldiers took his camera, deleted his photos and returned it to him. The journalists came across another American soldier, showed their identification cards, and he agreed that they could take pictures.
A Western military official who asked not to be identified said the troops were Marine Special Operations Forces, the Marine Corps component created in February 2006 of the U.S. Special Operations Command. “The same soldier who took my camera came again and deleted my photos,” Gul said. “The soldier was very angry … I told him, ‘They gave us permission,’ but he didn’t listen.”
Gul’s new photos were also deleted, and the American soldier, speaking through a translator, warned him that he did not want to see any AP photos published anywhere. The soldier also raised his fist in anger as if he were going to hit him, but he did not strike, Gul said.
Lt. Col. David Accetta, a U.S. military spokesman, said he did not have any confirmed reports that coalition soldiers “have been involved in confiscating cameras or deleting images.”
Khanwali Kamran, a reporter for the Afghan channel Ariana Television, was in a small group of journalists working alongside Gul. Kamran said the American soldiers also deleted his footage.
“They warned me that if it is aired … then, ‘You will face problems,'” Kamran said. Taqiullah Taqi, a reporter for Afghanistan’s largest television station, Tolo TV, said American soldiers were using abusive language.
“According to the translator, they said, ‘Delete them, or we will delete you,'” Taqi said.
A freelance cameraman for AP Television News said that about 100 yards from the bomb site, a U.S. officer told him that he could not go any closer to the scene but that he could shoot footage. The cameraman asked not to be named for his own safety.
“Then I started filming the suicide attack site, where there was a body and U.S. soldiers, and farther away, there was a four-wheel drive vehicle in which three people were shot to death,” he said.
As he was filming, a U.S. soldier and translator “ordered us not to move.” The cameraman said they were very angry and deleted any footage that included U.S. soldiers, as well as part of an interview from a demonstration. Hundreds of Afghans had gathered to protest the violence.
Reporters Without Borders condemned the actions of the U.S. forces, saying they dealt with the press poorly.
“Why did the soldiers do it if they don’t have anything to hide? The situation is very tense in Afghanistan, and the media should be able to report about it freely and safely,” said Jean-Francois Julliard, a spokesman for the Paris-based Reporters Without Borders.
What’s it good for?
Ugly Rumours – Tony Blair’s band from his days at university have reformed and look set to rock the world by entering the top 10 with this weeend charts.
A new Ugly Rumours line up have recorded a version of the old Edwin Starr hit, War (what is it good for?). It has already reached number six in the midweek charts and can be downloaded for a fee from here. All profits go to Stop the War.
Update 09.03.07: From Stop the War
“SPOOF ‘BLAIR’ SINGLE MAKES HISTORY
Many thanks to everyone who bought the spoof Tony Blair single WAR! WHAT IS IT GOOD FOR? The mid-week chart prediction of a number 6 placing in the Top 40 translated to number 21 when the Top 40 chart was published last Sunday. This was due to the outrageous decision by the chart compilers to invalidate thousands of sales because some people bought more than one copy by mobile phone text message, the first time this method had been used for sales.
So the Blair spoof was just outside the top 20. How convenient that this avoided the widespread media coverage that would have followed a top 20 placement. That said, over the previous week it was a featured item on most of the main TV news channels, and the record still made chart history by being the highest entry ever by an act unsigned to a record label.”