The United States Army in Operation Iraqi Freedom

Secrecy News -- 07/07/04


Despite extraordinary steps by the Army to limit online public access to a new report on the Iraq war, the study has nevertheless been published without the Army's cooperation.

The Army recently completed a book-length study of Operation Iraqi Freedom entitled "On Point." It is a revealing and fairly critical account of lessons learned from the war.

Last month, the Center for Army Lessons Learned posted the study here:


Incredibly, however, the web version of the Army document is coded in such a way that it cannot be downloaded, or copied, or printed out. It must be read online at the Army site, or not at all.

This may be unprecedented for a government web site. The very notion of a document that cannot be downloaded is antithetical to the web and seems like an artifact from an alternate universe. If the Axis powers had won World War II, the whole internet might look like this.

But in a marvelous feat of textual engineering, the intrepid Francois Boo of GlobalSecurity.org managed to overcome the Army's restrictive coding of the document and to make it publicly available.

It can now be found -- and downloaded or printed -- here:


Among the highlights of the report is the disclosure that the toppling of the statue of Saddam Hussein in Baghdad was not a spontaneous act of an Iraqi crowd, but was instigated by a U.S. Marine colonel backed by a psychological operations unit (reported in the LA Times July 3).


Secrecy News -- 07/07/04

The judicial process was trumped by the "state secrets privilege" as a whistleblower lawsuit brought by former FBI linguist Sibel Edmonds alleging misconduct at the FBI was dismissed yesterday by a federal court on the unusual grounds that it could not be litigated without compromising sensitive classified information.

"Because the Court finds that the plaintiff is unable to establish her First Amendment, Fifth Amendment and Privacy Act claims without the disclosure of privileged information, nor would the defendants be able to defend against these claims without the same disclosures, the plaintiff's case must be dismissed, albeit with great consternation, in the interests of national security," wrote Judge Reggie B. Walton.

The Court acknowledged that "dismissal of a suit, and the consequent denial of a forum without giving the plaintiff her day in court ... is indeed draconian."

"Denial of the forum provided under the Constitution for the resolution of disputes...is a drastic remedy that has rarely been invoked," the Judge wrote, quoting from prior case law.

Still, "Mindful of the need for virtual unfettered access to the judicial process in a governmental system integrally linked to the rule of law, the Court nonetheless concludes that the government has properly invoked the state secrets privilege" in this case and that the case must be dismissed.

Among other interesting features, the Court's ruling includes a summary history of the origins of the "state secrets privilege," dating back to the treason trial of Aaron Burr in 1807.

Explaining why he dismissed the case rather than staying it temporarily, Judge Walton opined that "the imminent threat of terrorism will not be eliminated anytime in the foreseeable future, but is an endeavor that will consume our nation's attention indefinitely."

A copy of the July 6 ruling dismissing the case Sibel Edmonds v. U.S. Department of Justice is available here:


Ms. Edmonds's attorney, Mark S. Zaid, said the decision would be appealed.

Wurde die Bush-Regierung ein Opfer der CIA?

Der Senats-Geheimdienstausschuss entlastet den amerikanischen
Präsidenten, sein Mitstreiter Blair glaubt nicht mehr an die Entdeckung
von Massenvernichtungswaffen...


Mediale Entlastungsmanöver für die Bush-Regierung

Die CIA wird zum Sündenbock stilisiert, andere lancierte Informationen sollen für das drängende Guantanamo-Problem Abhilfe schaffen...


Bush Signs Western Shoshone Bill

Statement by Carrie Dann on George W. Bush signing into “law” HR 884

July 7, 2004

Today the United States government has officially attempted to complete the largest theft of land in United States history. In violation of United States law, including the Constitution, George W. Bush, signed into law HR 884, an attempted payoff of the Western Shoshone land. However, this bill does not change the fact that title of the land still exists with the Western Shoshone. Fraud is fraud, and no matter what the U.S. does to us we will never give up our struggle to protect our Sacred Newe Sogobia – the Earth Mother.

The United States government signed the Treaty of Ruby Valley with the Western Shoshone Nation in 1863. According to Article 6 of the U.S. Constitution, the treaty is the supreme law of the land. But the United States government does not view the treaty this way. If they do not want to follow their own laws, that the constitution is the supreme law of the land, then this country is not a democracy. A democracy would be following the laws of the land.

I have said this a thousand times, I am not taking money for this land. This land has no value, there is no price for it. In Western Shoshone culture, the earth is our mother. We can not sell it. Taking our land is a not only a cultural genocide, it is also a spiritual genocide. The United States is attempting to steal our religion and our cultur.

I ask the United States today to show me how they received title to the land. The sole legal theory stated by the Indian Claims Commission (ICC) was that the Western Shoshone land title was extinguished through “gradual encroachment” by non-indigenous miners and settlers. However, such legal theory is no where found in American law. The only issue decided by the Supreme Court was whether the Western Shoshone had been paid, not who has title to the land. We have never had a court hear the issue of who has title to the land. The ICC was not a court. The United States did not give us the land, nor did they sell us the land. The land is ours. The United States can not show how they obtained title to the land.

The government continues to steal our cattle and horses. But I ask them, if they have clear title to the land, why do they come in the night like a thief to take my horses and cattle – why do they make sneak attacks – why do they attempt to take my livestock with no media attention? If the land title is clearly theirs – why do they act like thieves?

Why does the United States want this land? So they can sell it to large inter-national corporate interests, including mining companies, so they can test more nuclear weapons, so they can write the Indians off? The United States should not be allowed to steal the land so they can test more weapons that kill people. In fact, weapons that kill all life, including the plants and the animals. The United States also should not be allowed to steal the land so they can sell it to companies in order to obtain more gold and in the process ruin the water and kill the plant and animal life. This should not be allowed.

Today, the government has attempted to steal our mother earth – but this will not stop our fight to keep our land. We will not stand by to watch the United States steal our religion. We will not stand for the United States to commit spiritual genocide. For today what happens to us, tomorrow will happen to you. Although George W. Bush, Sen. Reid, and Rep. Gibbons believe that they can now sell this land to private interests, we will fight to stop it. This bill changes nothing. We are here to protect our mother earth. That is our responsibility. Our obligation will not be deterred by thieves.

Carrie Dann

Due to earlier grammatical error in the title, please use slightly revised press release below.

Western Shoshone Defense Project, 775-468-0230,

Press Release – For Immediate Release

George Bush, President of the United States, Signs Western Shoshone “Distribution” Bill – Evidencing Ongoing Historical Atrocities Aginst Indigenous Peoples in the U.S.

July 7, 2004. Crescent Valley, NV. In spite of heavy opposition from the Western Shoshone Nation, this morning, the Western Shoshone Distribution Bill was signed into “law” by George W. Bush, President of the United States. The bill would authorize an alleged payoff of approximately 15 cents an acres for tens of millions of acres of disputed lands in Nevada, Idaho, Utah and California. A majority of tribal councils, representing approximately 80% of the population, the Western Shoshone National Council and all the traditional people strongly oppose the bill, they are supported by the National Congress of American Indians and Amnesty International. This formal opposition was apparently ignored however and an undocumented, unverified straw poll was used instead by the Bush Administration and Nevada legislators to justify the legislation.

White House staffer Jennifer Farley, Deputy Associate Director of the White House Office of Intergovernmental Affairs, informed one Shoshone Tribal Chairman that the bill was “red hot”. The significance of the issue to the White House is apparent: Copies of Assistant Secretary of Interior Stephen J. Griles’ calendars reflect meetings with Interior Department legal staff, including Bush’s Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals nominee, William Myers, regarding “Western Shoshone Trespass (Dann Sisters)” just six months before the Department of Interior started military-style seizures of livestock owned by Western Shoshone traditionalists, including grandmothers Mary and Carrie Dann.

The land base at issue is the third largest gold producing area in the world and cited by a 1999 Interior report as the number one investment opportunity for extraction companies. It is also the site where the nation’s nuclear waste repository would be located, Yucca Mountain, and the home to the Nevada Test Site and Federal Counterterrorism Facility where the Bush Administration has talked of reopening nuclear testing. Both Bush and his political advisor Karl Rove, have made personal visits to Nevada in the last thirty days.

“I am utterly disappointed. It’s unbelievable that the U.S. body that makes the laws has acted in this manner. The fight is not over. A fraud is a fraud - Individuals cannot sell out a nation and the bill, although a threat politically, does nothing to change our inherent rights or our Treaty rights. Congress and the President were informed of all the facts that touch upon this issue. We will use the Treaty of Ruby Valley to stop Yucca Mountain and to protect our lands. Our title is still intact.” Stated Raymond Yowell, Western Shoshone National Council.

“The self-described, private group who pushed for this money are not members of any federally-recognized council and have no authority to speak on behalf of our Tribe or the Western Shoshone Nation. The Nevada legislators and the Bush Administration have been well-advised of this fact. The way this legislation was handled makes an absolute sham of the stated government to government relationship and responsibility of the U.S. government.” Stated Hugh Stevens, Chairman of the Te-Moak Tribe of the Western Shoshone Nation. “Senator Reid has made numerous public commitments regarding resolving land issues for our communities. We will be looking for him to stand by that commitment in an expeditious fashion. We demand that our land issues be resolved in good faith in the same “hot line” fashion as the distribution.” He added.

Mary Gibson, Western Shoshone states: “It’s not over, we still exist and we still have our rights to our land. It makes me sad and angry that myths continue to cloud the Truth in this country. This struggle isn’t a Shoshone v. Shoshone battle, the underlying issue here is the U.S. responsibility and accountability for a Treaty with the Western Shoshone Nation. As long as the people in the U.S. allow this to happen it will continue to happen.”

For additional info, contact the Western Shoshone Defense Project at 775-468-0230.

Western Shoshone Defense Project
P.O. Box 211308
Crescent Valley, NV 89821
(775) 468-0230
Fax: (775) 468-0237

Dieser Funkmast muss weg

Die europaweit vertriebene Zeitschrift "Mach mal Pause" berichtet in der Ausgabe vom 07.07.04 über eine Sendeanlage im Wohngebiet und die damit verbundenen schwerwiegenden gesundheitlichen Folgen für die Anwohner.


Nachricht von Christine Kind

Electromagnetic Fields: Killing Fields


Informant: Alfonso Balmori

War x 4


Who Is Running America?

Informant: Grinn Barrett



Saudis freed Britons in a secret swap of prisoners

We shall never surrender

Click at first on the link below to watch Eric Blumrich's marvellous animation and then to go through the articles....


URL- http://www.ericblumrich.com/liberation.html

Legality of Iraq occupation 'flawed'By Marie Woolf, Chief Political Correspondent
05 July 2004

The senior Foreign Office lawyer who resigned after ministers ignored her advice that the war in Iraq was illegal has issued a damning legal critique of the occupation, claiming that the alleged abuse of prisoners "could amount to war crimes".

In her first newspaper interview since her resignation, Elizabeth Wilmshurst, the former deputy legal adviser to the Foreign Office, said that the basis for going to war should always be based on "facts" rather than an "assertion" about an "imminent threat". Ms Wilmshurst said "it could be alleged that the use of force in Iraq was aggression" while "the kinds of abusive treatment of Iraqi prisoners that have been alleged could amount to war crimes".

Her comments came as Sir Jeremy Greenstock, Britain's former envoy to Iraq, made the clearest admission yet that intelligence that Saddam Hussein had stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons was wrong. He said: "We were wrong on the stockpiles, we were right about the intention."

Ms Wilmshurst expressed concern about the size of the US civilian presence in Iraq. She also said she was worried about the lack of legal protection for Iraqis if they were harmed by allied troops or civilian contractors, including private security guards. She said it was "worrying" that the occupying powers had given immunity to US and British civilians which was "very, very wide" and "not what you would expect". They would be protected from prosecution even if they seriously injured Iraqi women and children.

She said the Bush administration's "war on terror" was legal "nonsense" - conferring no more powers on the US to detain prisoners than "the war against obesity" - and President Bush's policy of pre-emptive self-defence was illegal under international law.

Ms Wilmshurst, who is now head of the international law programme at the think-tank Chatham House, also raised questions about the powers of detention the Americans have in Iraq and Guantanamo Bay. She said it violated the Geneva Conventions to deny inmates in Guantanamo Bay a formal assessment of their status.

Although she said she would not discuss the advice she gave to ministers, she is understood to have told them that British participation in the invasion of Iraq would flout international law. She said there were deep concerns among international lawyers about the implications of the war on terror, which may be used as an excuse to hold prisoners indefinitely. "This rather extraordinary war against terror, which is a phrase that all lawyers hate ... is not really a 'war', a conflict against terror, any more than the war against obesity means that you can detain people," she said.

In a further side-swipe at American foreign policy she said President Bush's policy of pre-emptive self-defence, which would allow the US to invade any country it thought was a threat, was illegal under international law. "What people are worried about is just assertions that there is an imminent threat," she said.

The Butler inquiry report into intelligence on Iraq is to be published on 14 July, and reports suggest it will be critical of the intelligence services.

Sir Jeremy said on BBC's Breakfast with Frost: "There is no doubt that the stockpiles that we feared might be there are not there. We didn't know they were there, but we thought that there was a considerable danger that they were there, because the intelligence, not just in the American and British systems but in the French, German and Russian systems, also was quite compelling at the time." He said Washington was influenced by the Iraqi exile Ahmed Chalabi and underestimated the potential problems of post-war security.

Saudis freed Britons in a secret swap of prisoners
by Andrew Buncombe and Kim Sengupta
05 July 2004


Six Britons convicted on terrorism charges in Saudi Arabia were released last year as part of a secret three-way deal in which the US set free a number of Saudi prisoners being held at Guantanamo Bay. The deal was brokered to obtain Saudi support for the invasion of Iraq.

Diplomatic and intelligence sources have confirmed to The Independent that the Britons, convicted of a fatal car-bombing, were released last August after the US returned five Saudi prisoners, at least two of whom were believed to have trained in al-Qa'ida camps.

At the time, the release of the Saudis was opposed by the Pentagon and the CIA. But the joint releases were subsequently presented as diplomatic triumphs by both the British and Saudi governments.

A senior British source said yesterday: "Of course there were government-to-government talks. We were all anxious to solve the problem. But one must bear in mind that it was the Americans who held the aces with the Saudi detainees, the British government did not have that kind of leverage. So the term 'negotiations' should really be applied to the American-Saudi dialogue. But it was a particularly difficult time with Iraq, and a solution was in everyone's interest."

The Britons - Sandy Mitchell, James Cottle, Les Walker, James Lee, Glenn Ballard and Peter Brandon, and a Canadian, William Sampson - said they were subjected to beating while incarcerated for two years. They had been convicted of a car-bombing in which another Briton, Christopher Rodway, was killed. Many have subsequently said their confessions were forced and are suing the Saudi authorities.

Mr Mitchell, 48, originally from Kirkintilloch, near Glasgow, said last night: "We were definitely pawns in a game. I was sentenced to crucifixion and beheading for a crime the Saudis knew I did not commit.

"They had to tell us during the torture sessions what to confess to. It was a set-up from the very beginning."

The initiative to release the five Saudis from Guantanamo Bay began in July 2002 when Saudi officials visited the camp. According to a report in The New York Times, the proposal was discussed at the highest levels of the US and British governments, both eager to keep the support of the Saudi authorities for the invasion of Iraq. One US official said: "This was something that the Saudis desperately wanted, as a way to show their people that they could get something from the Americans and that it was not just a one-way street."

The following month, a recommendation by the US ambassador to Saudi Arabia, Robert Johnson, outlined a "swap" as a way to keep the Saudis' support. While the Saudi authorities were technically opposed to the invasion of Iraq they allowed the US to use air bases in the kingdom.

The deal that was negotiated deliberately ensured there was a time gap between the release of the Saudis and the subsequent release of the Westerners in order to allow officials to deny there had been a "swap". "We did not want to make it a clear quid pro quo," said a US official. "We did obviously say that we expected [the release of the Westerners] to be resolved."

In March 2003, just days before the American-led coalition invaded Iraq, King Fahd granted clemency to the Western prisoners, though they were not released immediately. On 14 May, the five Saudis were flown to Riyadh. There are contradictory reports as to whether these men have been released by the Saudi authorities or charged with any crime.

Finally, in early August, the Westerners were flown home.

Informed of the secret deal Mr Rodway's widow, Jane, said last night she was shocked by the news and had not been informed of any such swap. "I didn't even know they were coming home until they were on the plane," she said.

A Foreign Office spokeswoman refused to confirm or deny that a deal was done.

The Whole Truth About The Iraq War

An impressive roster of experts is assembled to provide a generally withering commentary on the quality of evidence and possible motivations of the Neo-conservatives who provided the momentum and muscle behind America's venture into preemptive war...


Pre-emptive War; Pre-emptive Arrests

Bush's Police State and Independence Day: Even though you are not a "terrorist," you may be detained, imprisoned, charged, arrested, and tried as one...


Degrees of Fahrenheit

The movie should have focused on how the neocons conned America...


From Information Clearing House

The Grim Balance Sheet Of The Iraq War

The 2003 Iraq war did not come out of the blue: it was the culmination of a long process, dating back to the First World War, aimed at protecting 'Western' oil supplies...


No more lawless interventions

After Iraq, we need a new set of United Nations rules to govern international action against rogue states...


From Information Clearing House

Foreign detainees are few in Iraq

Suspected foreign fighters account for less than 2% of the 5,700 captives being held as security threats in Iraq, a strong indication that Iraqis are largely responsible for the stubborn insurgency...


From Information Clearing House

Iraq magnet to militants in Europe

THE US-led occupation of Iraq had boosted recruitment to Islamist groups in Europe and was a "black hole" pulling in militants from across the Middle East, France's top anti-terrorist judge warned yesterday...


From Information Clearing House

CIA knew there were no WMDs

Some damning evidence has been uncovered by the U.S. government committee looking into Washington's pre-war intelligence on Iraq...


From Information Clearing House

The Republican Road Not Taken: The Foreign-Policy Vision of Robert A. Taft


Informant: David J. Theroux

Morning in Iraq?


Informant: David J. Theroux

The American Revolution and Iraq


Informant: David J. Theroux

Religious groups support global warming bill


Informant: NHNE

Bush Team Pushes Huge Timber Sale Under Guise of Fire Protection

July 07, 2004

Under the guise of preventing forest fires, the Bush administration is planning the biggest timber sale on public lands in modern history. The Biscuit Project would allow logging of 372 million board feet of timber across 30 square miles of southwest Oregon's Siskiyou National Forest—enough timber to fill 70,000 logging trucks. The logging would be done on wildlands of uncommon beauty and ecological diversity, far from any community that could be damaged in a fire.

"It's the biggest logging sale since World War II," says Steve Holmer, communications director with the Unified Forest Defense Campaign, a coalition of national and regional conservation organizations. "Timber companies have made huge contributions to the Bush campaign. This project is political payback."

Holmer tells BushGreenwatch that the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) initially proposed a much smaller project. "When the Forest Service first started looking at the area, they planned maybe a 100 million board feet sale." That changed once Mark Rey, formerly a top lobbyist for the timber industry who is now the administration's undersecretary for natural resources and environment in the Department of Agriculture, began to work on the sale.

Conservationists will "fight tooth and nail" against sales in roadless areas and old-growth reserves, but may support some careful logging in the areas in between, called "matrix lands," says Holmer.

The Biscuit Logging Project may violate federal forest protection rules. Some areas are protected under the Clinton-era Roadless Area Conservation Rule, while the huge size of the project may violate the Northwest Forest Plan, also adopted during the Clinton administration. [1] Moreover, logging will disqualify 48,000 acres of the Siskiyou from consideration as federal wilderness area.

In an unusual step, the USFS has granted "emergency exemptions" to 11 sales included in the project. These exemptions enable the USFS to allow logging to begin immediately after issuing its final plan for each sale, even though there is usually a waiting period required for public appeal.

Holmer sees politics in this rush to cut. "This is an election year. Oregon was a close state in the last election. The Bush administration is using the Biscuit Project to show they've come up with a solution to the fire issue." There is also an economic factor. "If the trees aren't cut soon, they'll rot to the point of losing economic value. If they're not logged this summer, [the timber companies] will pretty much lose their chance."

The areas encompassed by the Biscuit Project were burned in the 2002 "Biscuit Fire," the largest forest fire in Oregon's history. Fire is an intrinsic part of the ecology of western forests, and the Siskiyou has already begun to regenerate. [2] The burned trees are ecologically essential to the area's recovery, and sit on some of the Siskiyou's wildest and most fragile acres--including old-growth reserves, steep streambanks and riverbanks, and salmon spawning grounds.

In addition to being one of the largest public lands logging sales in history, the Biscuit Logging Project may be one of the most expensive to taxpayers, ultimately costing the public over $34 million.

"There are costs to preparing a sale," says Holmer. "The Forest Service has to build roads. Or if it's logging with helicopters, you've got to create landing pads, 2-acre clearcuts. Also, salvage timber sells at 25-percent of green timber. It's the same wood, same volume, at fire sale prices. The timber industry gets a huge windfall because it's a salvage project."

Holmer emphasizes the survival of the forest—a shelter for wildlife and wild rivers—is at stake.

"Under the Clinton administration, the Siskiyou was almost made a national monument. It's an area of unparalleled biological diversity, home to rare species that exist only in this region, clean water for salmon, and very important to the local tourism and recreation industry. If there was going to be a new national park on the west coast, the Siskiyou would be a prime candidate."

You can call your US Senators at 202-224-3121 and let them know what you think of this timber sale. To find out who your Senators are you can go to: http://www.senate.gov

[1] "Biscuit Salvage: Biggest Timber Sale in History," The Wilderness Society:
[2] Ibid.


Attention, Shoppers: You Can Now Speed Straight Through Checkout Lines

By Josh McHugh

I'm in a supermarket called the Extra Future Store in Rheinberg, Germany, 40 kilometers north of Düsseldorf, jonesing for a bit of Philadelphia cream cheese. I feed my request into the touchscreen console on my shopping cart, and up pops a map showing the optimal path to the dairy section. I steer over and grab a box - regular in name but far smarter than the average cream cheese. The package carries a computer chip that talks to a 2-millimeter-thin pad lining the shelf under the box. When I pick up the cheese, sensors in the pad notify the store's database that the box has been removed. I exchange the plain for the mit Kräuter (with herbs) then, wracked with indecision, snag the low-fat version. It turns out it's not really all that low-fat anyhow, so I put it back down. My waffling will produce a flurry of data back at Kraft Foods headquarters. The company, which gets this information in return for subsidizing the smart shelf and the microchips attached to the packages, will use the data to analyze my behavior. The marketing department will likely draw some kind of conclusion from my skittishness - a hint that maybe "low-fatness" is too Spartan a theme for a hedonistic schmear anyway. Of course, they'll also have serious insight into my personal shopping habits.

.....The star of the show is the radio frequency identification chip - a piece of circuitry about the size of a grain of sand. Thanks to the coordinated efforts of the world's biggest retailers and manufacturers, not to mention the persistence of former lipstick marketer Kevin Ashton, these little tags are about to infiltrate the world of commerce.

Depending who you ask, RFID tags constitute

1. the best thing to happen to manufacturing since the cog.

2. the biggest threat to personal privacy since the crowbar.

3. the near-exact fulfillment of the Book of Revelation's description of the mark of the beast.

There's a compelling argument for each of these perspectives - including number three.


Peace - Anna

The irrationality of patriotism

by Andrew Young



[W]henever we step away from patriotism and rationally analyze these arguments, they make no sense. Saying that we must stay in Iraq to preserve national credibility is saying that we should continue to waste the lives of our young people in a war that, even according to military experts, is already lost. To say that we must not allow those who have already died to have lost their lives in vain is to say that, to prevent them from having lost their lives in vain, more people should die in vain. How rational is that?...


Informant: Thomas L. Knapp

DNC's Voting Rights Institute to Teach 'Mechanics of Casting A Vote'


The Democratic National Committee is recruiting volunteers to join their Voting Rights Institute to 'ensure that every single vote counts' in the November election. Established following the 2000 presidential election, the Voting Rights Institute was created so votes 'would be protected and counted in future elections.' 'Americans deserve an election free of errors, intimidation, voter disenfranchisement, chads, and butterfly ballots on November 2,' the Voting Rights Institute stated in an e-mail to supporters on Monday. The Voting Rights Institute hopes to accomplish its goals through education, turnout, and voter protection on Election Day...


Informant: Thomas L. Knapp

Blair says WMD may never be found in Iraq

Dodge City Daily Globe


Facing hostile questioning in parliament, Prime Minister Tony Blair acknowledged on Tuesday some friction in his close relationship with President Bush and the political problems the friendship causes at home. Blair used his sharpest language yet in the long-standing disagreement over the Bush administration's detentions at the U.S. Navy base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, saying they 'must end.' And the British leader said it was likely weapons of mass destruction may never be found in Iraq...


9/11 panel repeats: Iraq-Osama tie weak

Indianapolis Star


The Sept. 11 commission is standing by its finding that al-Qaida had only limited contact with Iraq before the terrorist attacks. The 10-member, bipartisan panel issued a one-sentence statement Tuesday saying it had access to the same information as Vice President Dick Cheney, who suggested strong ties between ousted Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein and al-Qaida...


Informant: Thomas L. Knapp

Hijacking Catastrophe


Informant: kevcross5

USA lassen Kinder foltern

Folter an Kindern durch US-Spezialisten

Drei Berichte: Kulturzeit (3Sat), Report Mainz (ARD/SWR) und junge Welt (Zeitung). Der Bericht von report kann auf der dortigen Seite eingesehen werden. Die Berichte sind mit "###" getrennt.

Wer ueber eine Digital-Schuessel verfügt - Der Beitrag der ARD wird noch eimal wiederholt:

MI 070704 14:15 Uhr EinsExtra Report aus Mainz Magazin



Folter an den Schwächsten
Halten US-Soldaten Kinder gefangen und wenden Gewalt an?

Schreckensmeldungen erreichen uns täglich aus dem Irak. Anschläge und Folter, entführte Soldaten und geköpfte Zivilisten. Ein scheinbar kaum an Tragik zu übertreffendes Szenario. Und doch kann es noch schlimmer kommen: Selbst Kinder werden offenbar von US-Soldaten misshandelt.

Darüber berichtet ein Sergeant der US-Armee. Samuel Provance war ein halbes Jahr im Gefängnis von Abu Ghraib stationiert, mittlerweile lebt er in Heidelberg. Obwohl ihm vom Geheimdienst streng untersagt wurde, mit Journalisten zu reden, hat Provance jetzt doch über seine Erfahrungen gesprochen. Zum Beispiel berichtete er von der Festnahme eines 16-jährigen Jungens: "Die Verhörspezialisten haben ihn mit Wasser übergossen und in einen Wagen gesteckt. Dann sind sie mit ihm durch die Nacht gefahren, und zu der Zeit war es sehr, sehr kalt. Danach haben sie ihn mit Schlamm beschmiert und zeigten ihm seinen ebenfalls gefangenen Vater. An ihm hatten sie andere Verhörmethoden ausprobiert." Nachdem der Vater seinen Sohn in diesem Zustand gesehen habe, sei er bereit gewesen, über alles zu sprechen. Provance weiß außerdem von einem geheimen Kindertrakt in Abu Ghraib.

Schreie und Weinen

Verletzte irakische Kinder

Von dieser Kinder-Abteilung weiß auch der irakische Journalist Suhaib Badr-Addin Al-Baz, der selbst 74 Tage in Abu Ghraib verhaftet war. "Dort sah ich ein Camp für Kinder. Jung, unter dem Pubertätsalter. In diesem Lager waren sicherlich Hunderte von Kindern. Einige sind freigelassen, andere sind bestimmt noch drin." Schreie und Weinen seien an der Tagesordnung gewesen, erinnert sich Suhaib. Er erzählt auch von einem kranken 15-jährigen Jungen, den die Wärter mit schweren Wasserkanistern den Gang rauf und runter gehetzt hätten. So lange, bis er vor Erschöpfung zusammengebrochen sei.

Das Kinderhilfswerk Unicef berichtet ebenso von Kindern, die von Amerikanern gefangen genommen und wie Kriegsgefangene interniert wurden. Das Internationale Komitee des Roten Kreuzes kann solche Berichte bestätigen. "Wir haben zwischen Januar und Mai diesen Jahres insgesamt 107 Kinder registriert", sagt Florian Westphal. "Und zwar während 19 Besuchen in sechs verschiedenen Haftorten. Dazu muss man betonen, das sind Haftorte, die wirklich von den Koalitionstruppen kontrolliert werden."

Auch im Internierungslager Um Qasr sowie in Abu Ghraib registrierte das Rote Kreuz minderjährige Gefangene. Alarmierende Entdeckungen, die auch die Menschenrechtsorganisation Amnesty International empört. Barbara Lochbihler, Generalsekretärin von Amnesty International Deutschland, fordert Konsequenzen: "Die
US-Regierung muss sich natürlich zu diesem Bericht äußern, sie muss konkrete Informationen geben, wie alt die Kinder sind, was die Haftgründe sind, unter welchen Umständen sie inhaftiert wurden. Und ob Kinder eben Folter und Misshandlung ausgesetzt wurden. Und hier wissen wir nicht mal, wie die Kinder heißen, wie viele Kinder dort sind. Unabhängige Inspektionen sind nicht erwünscht. Das ist skandalös."



Report Mainz vom 5. Juli 2004

Sündenfall Irak: Berichte über misshandelte Kinder im Folter-Gefängnis

Moderation Fritz Frey:

Nachrichten aus dem Irak. Der tägliche Anschlag, Saddam vor Gericht, entführte Soldaten, jede neue Meldung überdeckt die vorherige. Der Skandal um das Foltergefängnis Abu Ghraib, ach ja, da war doch was.

REPORT ist am Thema drangeblieben und ist dabei auf einen ganz unglaublichen Verdacht gestoßen. In Abu Ghraib und anderswo seien auch Kinder und Jugendliche inhaftiert und misshandelt worden. Thomas Reutter mit einer schwierigen Spurensuche.


Mit dem Panzerwagen durch die Tür. US-Soldaten stürmen ein Wohnhaus, suchen nach Terroristen. Manchmal verhaften die Soldaten bei solchen Razzien auch Kinder. Was geschieht mit diesen Kindern? Darüber macht das Militär keine Angaben. Wir recherchieren, treffen uns mit Informanten.

Einer, der darüber etwas weiß, ist Sergeant Samuel Provance vom Geheimdienst der US-Armee. Ein halbes Jahr lang war er im berüchtigten Foltergefängnis Abu Ghraib stationiert. Heute, fünf Monate danach, treffen wir Sergeant Provance in Heidelberg.

Seine Vorgesetzten haben ihm streng verboten Journalisten davon zu berichten, was er in Abu Ghraib erlebt hat. Doch Provance will trotzdem darüber sprechen. Ihn plagen Gewissensbisse. Er erzählt uns von einem 16-jährigen Jungen, den er selbst abführen musste.

O-Ton, Samuel Provance, US-Sergeant:

»Er war voller Angst, sehr alleine. Er hatte die dünnsten Ärmchen, die ich je gesehen habe. Er zitterte am ganzen Leib. Seine Handgelenke waren so dünn, dass wir ihm nicht mal Handschellen anlegen konnten. Gleich als ich ihn zum ersten mal sah und zum Verhör führte, tat er mir Leid. Die Verhörspezialisten haben ihn mit Wasser übergossen und in einen Wagen gesteckt. Dann sind sie mit ihm durch die Nacht gefahren, und zu der Zeit war es sehr, sehr kalt. Danach haben sie ihn mit Schlamm beschmiert und zeigten ihm seinen ebenfalls gefangenen Vater. An ihm hatten sie andere Verhörmethoden ausprobiert. Er war aber nicht zum Sprechen zu bringen. Die Verhörspezialisten sagten mir, nachdem der Vater dann seinen Sohn in diesem Zustand gesehen hatte, brach ihm das Herz. Er weinte und versprach ihnen alles zu sagen, was sie wissen wollten.«

Der Sohn aber blieb trotzdem in Haft. Als 16-Jähriger kam der Junge zu den Erwachsenen. Doch Provance berichtet auch von einer speziellen Abteilung, eigens für Kinder. Ein geheimgehaltener Kindertrakt im Horrorgefängnis Abu Ghraib.

Einer, der den Kindertrakt mit eigenen Augen gesehen hat, ist der Journalist Suhaib Badr-Addin Al-Baz. Unser Korrespondent traf ihn vergangene Woche in Bagdad. Der irakische Fernsehreporter berichtet wie er selbst von den Amerikanern bei Dreharbeiten willkürlich verhaftet wurde und 74 Tage in Abu Ghraib saß.

O-Ton, Suhaib Badr-Addin Al-Baz, Fernsehreporter:

»Dort sah ich ein Camp für Kinder. Jung, unter dem Pubertätsalter. In diesem Lager waren sicherlich Hunderte von Kindern. Einige sind freigelassen, andere sind bestimmt noch drin.«

Von seiner Einzelzelle aus im Erwachsenentrakt hört Suhaib ein vielleicht 12-jähriges Mädchen weinen. Später erfuhr er, dass ihr Bruder im zweiten Stock des Gefängnisses einsaß. Ein, zwei Mal, sagt Suhaib, habe er sie selbst gesehen.

In der Nacht seien sie bei ihr in der Zelle gewesen. Das Mädchen habe zu den anderen Häftlingen geschrieen und den Namen ihres Bruders gerufen.

Ein Zeichner hat die Szene für den britischen Fernsehsender ITN gemalt.

O-Ton, Suhaib Badr-Addin Al-Baz, Fernsehreporter:

»Sie wurde geschlagen. Ich hörte sie rufen: Sie haben mich ausgezogen. Sie haben Wasser über mich geschüttet.«

Täglich, sagt Suhaib, habe man ihre Schreie und ihr Wimmern gehört. Manche der Häftlinge hätten deshalb geweint. Suhaib berichtet auch von einem kranken 15-jährigen Jungen. Den hätten sie mit schweren Wasserkanistern den Gang rauf und runter gehetzt. So lange, bis er vor Erschöpfung zusammenbrach, sagt Suhaib. Dann hätten sie seinen Vater gebracht, gefangen. Mit Kapuze über dem Kopf. Vor Schock sei der Junge noch mal zusammengebrochen.

Im sogenannten Kampf gegen den Terror, stürmen die Amerikaner irakische Wohnungen. Laut Suhaib nehmen sie dabei manchmal ganze Familien, die ihnen verdächtig erscheinen, fest. Einzelne Zeugenaussagen, schwer zu überprüfen.

Wir recherchieren nach weiteren Belegen für die Gefangennahme von Kindern. Und tatsächlich. UNICEF in Genf, das Kinderhilfswerk der Vereinten Nationen. Wir finden einen brisanten Bericht. Erst wenige Tage alt.

Darin heißt es:


»Kinder, die in Basra und Kerbala (..) festgenommen worden waren, wurden routinemäßig in eine Internierungseinrichtung in Um Qasr überstellt.«

Das Internierungslager Um Qasr. Aufnahmen aus 2003. Heute ist es für Reporter zu gefährlich, nach Um Qasr zu fahren. Das Camp, ein Gefangenenlager für Terroristen und Kriminelle. Ausgerechnet hier sollen die Amerikaner also Kinder wie Kriegsgefangene interniert halten. UNICEF schreibt:


»Die Einstufung dieser Kinder als Internierte ist besorgniserregend, da sie unbestimmte Haftzeit, ohne Kontakt mit der Familie, Erwartung eines Verfahrens oder Prozess beinhaltet.«

Über den bislang unveröffentlichten Bericht hinaus will sich UNICEF noch nicht äußern. Die eigenen Mitarbeiter im Irak sollen nicht gefährdet werden. Wir suchen nach weiteren Informationen, wenden uns ans Internationale Komitee vom Roten Kreuz. Deren Helfer inspizieren Um Qasr, Abu Ghraib und andere Haftorte. Und nach intensiven Gesprächen dann eine weitere Bestätigung und sogar Zahlen.

O-Ton, Florian Westphal, Internationales Komitee vom Roten Kreuz:

»Wir haben zwischen Januar und Mai dieses Jahres insgesamt 107 Kinder registriert. Und zwar während 19 Besuchen in sechs verschiedenen Haftorten. Dazu muss man betonen, das sind Haftorte, die wirklich von den Koalitionstruppen kontrolliert werden.«

Im Internierungslager Um Qasr und auch in Abu Ghraib registrierte das Rote Kreuz minderjährige Gefangene. Zwei internationale Organisationen bestätigen uns damit unabhängig voneinander, dass die Besatzungstruppen irakische Kinder gefangen halten. Doch an Informationen direkt aus den Gefängnissen kommen wir nicht heran. Den Kinderknast in Bagdad durfte nicht einmal UNICEF besuchen.


»Im Juli 2003 beantragte UNICEF einen Besuch in dieser Haftanstalt, aber der Zugang wurde verweigert.«

Seit Dezember seien im Kinderknast laut UNICEF überhaupt keine unabhängigen Beobachter mehr gewesen. Zwar öffnete die US-Armee das Skandalgefängnis Abu Ghraib für einen Journalistenrundgang. Doch den Reportern wurde eine Vorzeigehaftanstalt präsentiert. Gefangene Kinder bekam die Presse nicht gezeigt.

Wir halten fest: Vier Quellen bestätigen unabhängig voneinander, die Besatzungstruppen halten Kinder als Gefangene fest. Zwei Zeugen berichten sogar über Misshandlungen. Die Menschenrechtsorganisation amnesty international ist empört über die Berichte zu irakischen Kindergefangenen. Barbara Lochbihler von amnesty international Deutschland fordert Konsequenzen.

O-Ton, Barbara Lochbihler, Generalsekretärin amnesty international:

»Die US-Regierung muss sich natürlich zu diesem Bericht äußern, sie muss konkrete Informationen geben, wie alt die Kinder sind, was die Haftgründe sind, unter welchen Umständen sie inhaftiert wurden. Und ob Kinder eben Folter und Misshandlung ausgesetzt wurden. Und hier wissen wir nicht mai, wie die Kinder heißen, wie viele Kinder dort sind. Unabhängige Inspektionen sind nicht erwünscht. Das ist skandalös.«

Abmoderation Fritz Frey:

Selbstverständlich haben wir die Verantwortlichen mit unseren Recherchen konfrontiert. Das britische Verteidigungsministerium ließ mitteilen: Kinder und Jugendliche werden von britischen Truppen nicht gefangen gehalten. Auf eine Antwort vom amerikanischen Pentagon warten wir noch immer.


Berichte der Menschenrechtsorganisation Amnesty International zu Irak

Internationales Komitee vom Roten Kreuz

Das Kinderhilfswerk der Vereinten Nationen UNICEF



06.07.2004, jW-Bericht

Kinder in US-Lagern

TV-Magazin: Hunderte Minderjährige von US-Besatzern gefangengehalten. Mißhandlungen durch Verhörspezialisten

Der Abu-Ghraib-Skandal erreicht eine neue erschütternde Dimension: Im Irak werden von den US-Besatzern Kinder gefangengehalten und mißhandelt. Das berichtete das ARD-Magazin »Report Mainz« in einer Vorabmitteilung zu seiner Sendung am gestrigen Montag abend. Der Beitrag beruft sich auf zwei Zeugen, die unabhängig voneinander die unmenschliche Behandlung gefangener Minderjähriger im Skandalgefängnis Abu Ghraib beschrieben hatten. Ob wie bei den Folterungen erwachsener Häftlinge durch US-Bewacher auch Fotos von den Quälereien gemacht wurden, ist bisher nicht bekannt. Auch lagen am Montag (bei jW-Redaktionsschluß) trotz Anfrage noch keine Reaktionen von US-offizieller Seite vor. Das britische Verteidigungsministerium teilte mit, derzeit keine Kinder im Irak in Haft zu halten.

Die bisherigen Aussagen betreffen bereits Hunderte Fälle, in denen Kinder nach ihrer Verhaftung bei Razzien vornehmlich seitens der US-Armee gefangengenommen und danach in Haft gehalten wurden. Dort kam es zu speziellen »Behandlungen« in Zuge von »Verhören«. Dem Zeugen Samuel Provance zufolge haben dementsprechende US-Spezialisten ein Mädchen in ihrer Zelle bedrängt. Militärpolizei sei erst eingeschritten, so der ehemals in Abu Ghraib stationierte Unteroffizier des US-Militärgeheimdienstes, als die 15- oder 16jährige zum Teil entkleidet war. Ein 16jähriger Junge sei laut Provance mit Wasser überschüttet und durch die Kälte gefahren worden. Danach hätten Vernehmungsspezialisten den Jungen »mit Schlamm beschmiert« und seinem ebenfalls inhaftierten Vater vorgeführt. »Nachdem er dann seinen Sohn in diesem Zustand gesehen hatte, brach es ihm das Herz«, so Provance. »Er weinte und versprach alles zu sagen, was er wußte.«

Ein weiterer Zeuge, der Reporter Suhaib Badr-Addin Al-Bazdes vom arabischen Fernsehsender Al Dschasira, der 74 Tage in Abu Ghraib inhaftiert war, beschrieb, wie ein etwa zwölf Jahre altes Mädchen von US-Soldaten verprügelt wurde. Der Journalist berichtete erstmals von einem Gefangenenlager für Kinder. »Als sie mich von der Zelle ins Camp gebracht hatten, gab es dort ein eigenes Camp für Kinder, jung, unter dem Pubertätsalter. Sicherlich gab es in diesem Camp Hunderte von Kindern.«

Unterdessen bestätigte das Kinderhilfswerk der Vereinten Nationen (UNICEF) die Gefangennahme von irakischen Kindern durch Besatzungstruppen. Laut »Report Mainz« geht aus einem internen UNICEF-Bericht hervor, daß die Militärs irakische Kinder wie Kriegsgefangene in Internierungshaft festhalten. Wörtlich heißt es in dem bislang unveröffentlichten Dokument vom Juni 2004: »Kinder, die in Basra und Kerbala für angebliche gegen die Besatzungsmächte gerichtete Aktivitäten festgenommen worden waren, wurden Berichten zufolge routinemäßig in eine Internierungseinrichtung in Um Quasr überstellt. Die Einstufung dieser Kinder als "Internierte" ist besorgniserregend, da sie unbestimmten Gewahrsam ohne Kontakt mit der Familie, Erwartung eines Verfahrens oder Prozesses beinhaltet.« Zudem erwähnt das UNICEF-Dokument eine neue, von Koalitionstruppen in Bagdad errichtete Haftanstalt für Kinder. Im Juli 2003 beantragte UNICEF einen Besuch dieser Anlage. Der Zugang wurde jedoch verweigert.

Auch das Internationale Komitee vom Roten Kreuz (IKRK) bestätigte die Inhaftierung von Kindern und Jugendlichen durch Besatzungstruppen, unter anderem im berüchtigten Foltergefängnis Abu Ghraib. Florian Westphal, Sprecher des IKRK in Genf: »Wir haben zwischen Januar und Mai dieses Jahres insgesamt 107 Kinder registriert und zwar während 19 Besuchen in sechs verschiedenen Haftorten. Dazu muß man betonen, das sind Haftorte, die wirklich von den Koalitionstruppen kontrolliert werden.« Die Zahl der gefangen gehaltenen Kinder könne auch höher sein.

Die Menschenrechtsorganisation Amnesty International forderte Aufklärung über die Gefangennahme von Kindern. Barbara Lochbihler, Generalsekretärin der Sektion Deutschland, erklärte: »Die US-Regierung muß sich natürlich zu diesem Bericht äußern. Sie muß konkrete Informationen geben: Wie alt die Kinder sind, was die Haftgründe sind, unter welchen Umständen sie inhaftiert wurden und ob Kinder eben Folter und Mißhandlung ausgesetzt wurden.«

Lochbihler erklärte weiter, dass ihre Organisation nicht einmal wisse, »wie die Kinder heißen, wie viele Kinder dort sind. Unabhängige Inspektionen sind nicht erwünscht. Das ist skandalös.«


User Status

Du bist nicht angemeldet.




Juli 2004

Aktuelle Beiträge

Wenn das Telefon krank...
http://groups.google.com/g roup/mobilfunk_newsletter/ t/6f73cb93cafc5207   htt p://omega.twoday.net/searc h?q=elektromagnetische+Str ahlen http://omega.twoday. net/search?q=Strahlenschut z https://omega.twoday.net/ search?q=elektrosensibel h ttp://omega.twoday.net/sea rch?q=Funkloch https://omeg a.twoday.net/search?q=Alzh eimer http://freepage.twod ay.net/search?q=Alzheimer https://omega.twoday.net/se arch?q=Joachim+Mutter
Starmail - 8. Apr, 08:39
Familie Lange aus Bonn...
http://twitter.com/WILABon n/status/97313783480574361 6
Starmail - 15. Mär, 14:10
Dänische Studie findet...
https://omega.twoday.net/st ories/3035537/ -------- HLV...
Starmail - 12. Mär, 22:48
Schwere Menschenrechtsverletzungen ...
Bitte schenken Sie uns Beachtung: Interessengemeinschaft...
Starmail - 12. Mär, 22:01
Effects of cellular phone...
http://www.buergerwelle.de /pdf/effects_of_cellular_p hone_emissions_on_sperm_mo tility_in_rats.htm [...
Starmail - 27. Nov, 11:08


Online seit 7447 Tagen
Zuletzt aktualisiert: 8. Apr, 08:39