The 5th Anniversary of the Opening of Guantanamo Bay detention Facility

On the 5th anniversary of the opening of Guantanamo Bay, the Islamic Human Rights Commission calls for the closure of the prison facility.

Boston Protesters Cry Out, Shut Down Guantanamo, Now!

Stop Guantanamo Bay NOW!

Top Ten Features of Bush's New Iraq Plan

January 10, 2007

Provided By:
CBS
Late Show:
with Dave Letterman

News Links:

No Change of Strategy in Bush’s ‘Surge’ of Troops in Iraq

President's Radio Address

American Muslim is Lowest in Court System

Janauary 13, 2007

by Housewife4Palestine

I went to this corner pharmacy; I like to go to because there is a nice young woman there that we sometimes visit when she is working.

While I was visiting with her, I got to handing the change to the customer’s checking out, because I was trying to make it easier for them having to reach out of their way to get the change and I kind of might have been in the way a little.

My friend asked me how I got started handing the change which she thought was nice. At first, I saw an elderly man with a cane and I thought I would save him a step or two.

Before you know it, everyone was smiling, laughing and talking instead of the usual drudgery that sometimes goes these days.

One American woman, who happened to be on vacation asked me what we called our religious leaders because my friend happened to mention a friend of hers that I did not know, was getting married soon.

I nicely explained to the woman what they were called and in a very simplified way to make it easy because, she knew little about Islam in general.

It turned out the vacationing American was a court recorder and she thought she should learn a few things about Islam in case it came in her job. Because she did have to admit with all the cases that went through the court in the state she worked; their were very few cases that involved Muslims.

Of all the people that went through the court system, she had to admit the ones least likely to be involved in any kind of court case; criminal or other wise was not the Muslims.

With all the American propaganda splashed all over the world, how there is so much alerts in American of Muslim Terrorist and how they have to be so worried of the millions of Muslims isn’t it interesting of all the billions of people in America and the group with the least problems at least in this woman’s state, is Muslims.

Moreover, I have to admit I have talked to other American’s in government or state jobs that have admitted the same.

Well I always say, I did flunk criminal school myself, saying this with a happy heart and a good smile.

Note:

Most of the Muslim's in the court recorder's home state, are from Palestine and Iraq.

Stolen Lives Postscript

January 13, 2006

by Housewife4Palestine

Thought I should mention a little more, about my friend and my views on friendship:

My friend that I wrote about has always been my best friend even through all the years that we had lost contact. While you may think she is Muslim like myself; in fact she was raised American Christian.

With the fundamentalist Christians out there, raising all their hate smears with the saliva dripping from their lips, I wonder if they realize that we as Muslims have friends that are different then ourselves and loved them just as much as if they were family.

In my travels, I have had many friends that are from different nationalities and religions and I have loved and appreciated every one of them.

People thinking we just stay with our own or are cruel to people different then ourselves is a misnomer because the divide seems to became for some more fluent with the attacks against each other and the created problem‘s of lack of trust.

As we are taught in Islam and by our Mother's, especially mine as well as my Grandmother that we are to love everyone.

I will readily admit the only people I have anything against are those who are occupying my country and murdering us, as well as the few underhanded idiots that once in awhile jump out of nowhere in attack mode. The latter I think, is more of sheepoholic lack of better judgment or right education.

While yet some of us still do not fully understand this divide, maybe someday it will close again and love will flow again upon the earth like the oceans.

Palestinians harassed by Jewish settler

Tape obtained by B’Tselem shows just one example of suffering Palestinians endure on daily basis from Jewish settler. [Hat tip: Wassim Al-Adel]

Part 1




Part 2


Having Technical problems sometimes, if you find you have troubles viewing try the above links.

Police Perspective

Police official: Hebron incident reflects reality / Efrat Weiss

(VIDEO) Senior official in West Bank Police responds to video clip revealed in Ynet showing settler cursing Palestinian family. Settler summoned for police investigation, but doesn't show. B'Tselem, of all groups, asks not to turn her into scapegoat
Thank you. Full Story

Olmert Outraged?

Olmert on settler violence: I am ashamed?

People like Olmert, created these people with no conscience to delve out any cruelty to people different then their Zionist value system.

If Olmert is ashamed, it is because a 16-year-old Palestinian caught one of his products.

People like Olmert, threw the baby out with the bath water along time ago.

I for one and do not plan to see it from any Israeli, is actions speak louder then words to repair their criminal actions.

Gerald Ford’s Belated Roast on Carter and Others a Little to Convenient?

This 23 September 1976 file photo shows then US president Gerald R. Ford (R) with Jimmy Carter (L) during their first televised debate in Phildelphia, PA. Ford, who became president on August 9, 1974 after Richard Nixon resigned following the Watergate wiretapping scandal, died Tuesday, his office in Rancho Mirage, California, reported. He was 93.(AFP/Library of Congress)

At a time when Jimmy Carter comes out with a controversial book pertaining to the Palestinian question, that an article supposedly being released after Gerald Ford’s recent passing that seems to defaming Carter’s character. Especially, when so many people already in the media or in the forefront going back and forth already making Carter look more like a Tennis match then a person.

What makes it more ironic is how Gerald Ford is not alive to defend if the information is actually reprehensive of his true criticisms.

It is even more interesting, how Ford declined to comment on Bush, saying the best excuse; that he did not know him very well while usually these people run in the same dog pack.

Furthermore, Ronald Reagan would have been better in a dog Kennel, then the way he hurt American economically, when he was the alleged sleeping President.

Ford called Carter a 'disaster'

January 12, 2007

GRAND RAPIDS, Mich. -In 25 years of interviews with his hometown paper that could only be released upon his death, former President Ford once called Jimmy Carter a "disaster" who ranked alongside Warren Harding, and said Ronald Reagan received far too much credit for ending the Cold War.

"It makes me very irritated when Reagan's people pound their chests and say that because we had this big military buildup, the Kremlin collapsed," Ford told The Grand Rapids Press.

Ford contended his own negotiation of the Helsinki accords on human rights did more to win the Cold War than Reagan's military buildup.

The best president of his lifetime, Ford said, was a more moderate Republican: Dwight D. Eisenhower.

Harry Truman "would get very high marks" for his handling of foreign crises, Ford said. He also praised Richard Nixon as a foreign policy master, despite the Watergate scandal that drove him from office.

Ford considered John F. Kennedy overrated and Bill Clinton average. He admired George H.W. Bush's handling of the Persian Gulf War and had mixed opinions of Carter, who defeated Ford in 1976.

In 1981, Ford said: "I think Jimmy Carter would be very close to Warren G. Harding. I feel very strongly that Jimmy Carter was a disaster, particularly domestically and economically. I have said more than once that he was certainly the poorest president in my lifetime."

But two years later, he praised Carter's performance on the Panama Canal treaty, China and the Middle East. And in 1998, he said Carter "will be looked on as a better president than some comments we hear today."

"He was a very decent, fine individual," Ford told the paper. "There were no major mistakes. There just weren't a lot of exciting results."

Ford's gave the interviews on the condition that his remarks be withheld until after his death.

According to the newspaper, Ford declined to rate George W. Bush, saying he did not know him well enough.

Ford said Reagan, who challenged him unsuccessfully for the GOP nomination in 1976, was "a great spokesman for attractive political objectives" such as a balanced budget and defeating communism, "but when it came to implementation, his record never matched his words."

Reagan was "probably the least well-informed on the details of running the government of any president I knew," Ford said. In a separate interview, he said Reagan "was just a poor manager, and you can't be president and do a good job unless you manage."

Under the 1975 Helsinki accords signed by Ford, the United States recognized borders in Soviet-dominated Eastern Europe in exchange for the Soviets' pledge to respect basic human rights.

Ford said other key factors that won the Cold War were the Marshall Plan that helped rebuild Europe after World War II and the establishment of NATO.

"When you put peace, prosperity and human rights against poverty, a massive unsuccessful military program and a lack of human rights, communism was bound to collapse," he said. "No president, no Democrat or Republican, can claim credit for those programs. I'll tell you who deserves the credit — the American people."

Shark Bate

Hey Bush, more troops in Iraq, get the picture?

Guantanamo Bay Deployment: Where Torture is a Day at the Beach

JTF Guantanamo Bay
“HONOR BOUND TO DEFEND FREEDOM”

Deploying to Guantanamo Bay

Feb 27 2005

By Kathleen T. Rhem, American Forces Press Service

NAVAL STATION GUANTANAMO BAY, Cuba -- This is not your typical deployment location in the war on terror. Troops here get to scuba dive in their off time and have an assortment of restaurants and bars to unwind in at the end of long days spent guarding enemy combatants.

The troops who manage the detention facility here belong to Joint Task Force Guantanamo. They're deployed for varying tour lengths from all services, both active and reserve components.

"They come here on deployment, and they're actually coming to a place that is not as bad as (many) deployments," said Navy Capt. Leslie J. McCoy, commander of the naval base.

JTF Guantanamo is a tenant organization on the base. The 2,200 JTF personnel live alongside the roughly 9,000 permanent-party sailors, family members, U.S. government civilians and contractors, and third-country nationals who reside and work here.

Sailors assigned to the base typically come for three-year tours and can bring their families. Deployment length for troops assigned to JTF Guantanamo depends on their service. Soldiers typically deploy for one year, Marines and sailors for six months, and airmen for four-month stints.

Living conditions vary considerably within the JTF. Enlisted servicemembers generally live in prefabricated individual buildings, which they call "houses" with a touch of cynicism. The shipping-container-like quarters each house four to six servicemembers. The troops typically divide the space as evenly as possible and then partition "rooms" by hanging blankets and shower curtains.

Each building contains a bathroom with a toilet and a sink. And men's and women's community latrines, with showers, sinks and toilet stalls, are located within each group of quarters.

Senior enlisted members and officers generally live in converted Navy family housing left over from when the base housed a larger population of permanent- party personnel. For instance, one two-bedroom apartment might be assigned to four junior officers.

Troops live and work together here depending on what their jobs are, but irrespective of their service. "I think it's an important part of how they form as a team to that they can do their mission here in the JTF," said Army Brig. Gen. Jay Hood, commander of JTF Guantanamo. "We have members assigned to the JTF that have come from assignments around the world, and so it's important that we allow them to live and work together and know each other and build as a team."

Living conditions for the servicemembers have improved considerably since the military began sending prisoners here more than three years ago. "If you go back and look at early pictures of the JTF, our troopers were all living in tents, eating out of temporary dining facilities," Hood said.

And officials continue to seek ways to improve living conditions. "Ideally what we'd like to do is have them all housed in barracks, so we're now looking at plans to do that," McCoy said. "We're trying to take as best care of (the JTF troops) as we can to ensure their quality of life is good. And part of that is to ensure they live in good rooms, good barracks or houses wherever they are."

"Gitmo" also is loaded with morale, welfare and recreation facilities and opportunities. Servicemembers can rent boats and fishing equipment, become certified in scuba diving, or spend their time off snorkeling and watching the vast array of aquatic wildlife that fills the crystal-clear waters of the bay and surrounding Caribbean Sea.

Aside from water sports, the base features a golf course -- troops generally play with hot-pink balls because white balls are too easy to lose in the gray desert landscape -- a brand-new miniature golf course, several gyms and outdoor sports fields, and two outdoor movie theaters. Considering the year-round warm weather and scant rainfall -- it rains only about three to five times a year here -- movies rarely are cancelled.

"They come to a small community. We provide a sense of normalcy for those who are (deployed) here," McCoy said. "They can come to our churches; they can take part in our college programs (and) the MWR facilities."

In turn, the captain explained, the base gets a lot from the JTF members deployed here. Since nearly 70 percent of Joint Task Force Guantanamo is made up of reserve-component members, they bring a lot of civilian-acquired skills with them.

"We get people here who are teachers, people who have different functions in their towns that they bring to Guantanamo Bay," McCoy said. "So actually the synergy that we have with the joint task force works out very well. We help support one another."

Joint Task Force Guantanamo even has their own magazine.

This is the cover of this months issue.

No Peace with Brutal Israeli Occupation

One Palestinian rock compared to an Israeli/American plane or tank, who is the bad guys?

Who Hijacked Islam??!

I turn on the TV and I'm amazed the type of characters they have explaining my religion to the masses. No wonder the world is confused about Islam.

The Road To Guantanamo (Movie)

Part 1

Part drama, part documentary, The Road to Guantánamo focuses on the Tipton Three, a trio of British Muslims who were held in Guantanamo Bay for two years until they were released without charge.




Contiued



Road To Guantanamo (Tipton3) Interviews

Groups urge end to Guantanamo

Protesters in 20 countries call for detainees to be given a fair trial and the camp to be closed [AFP]

January 11, 2007

Detainees at the US military prison camp in Guantanamo Bay need to be charged or released and the jail shut down, human rights groups have said.

Amnesty International has undertaken global vigils in countries including Israel, Italy, the US, Japan, Spain, and the UK, to mark the fifth anniversary of the camp's opening.

Michael Ratner, president of the New York-based centre for constitutional rights, said: "It has become iconic in the Muslim world and the wider world ... for everything that the US has done wrong in the war on terror."

Irene Khan, Amnesty International's secretary-general, said: "No individual can be placed outside the protection of the rule of law, and no government can hold itself above the rule of law.

"The US government must end this travesty of justice."

Five years

The first detainees flown to Guantanamo five years ago were captured in the US-led war on Afghanistan following the September 11, 2001, attacks on the US.

"We're keeping enemies of our nation, enemy combatants, or terrorists if you will, off the battlefield"
Harry Harris,Guantanamo official

Harry Harris, a navy commander of the detention centre, said: "What we are doing is an important and integral part of the global war on terror."

"We're keeping enemies of our nation, enemy combatants, or terrorists if you will, off the battlefield.

"We don't do anything today that's coercive in nature. I believe we are doing things correctly here."

The detention camp itself has undergone a transformation since the early days when prisoners were kept in metal open-air cages and used buckets for toilets.

Jumana Musa, Amnesty's advocacy director for international justice, told Al Jazeera: "People ask, have conditions improved since it was opened five years ago? Absolutely.

"But one of the things that is a lot less tangible and harder to understand is not the physical abuses, but the mental pressure, the mental stress and the psychological strain of indefinite arbitrary detention."

James Carafarno, Heritage Foundation expert on military affairs, however, denied this interpretation.

"It's not arbitrary, and it's not intended to be indefinite.

"There is an annual review process, and when a person is determined to be no longer a threat to the US, and a place can be found for them where they won't be tortured, that person is released."

"I suggests all prisoners must be tried in a proper court of law and rehoused accordingly or released"

Syed,Worcester, UK

Habeas corpus

Since 2001, more than 770 captives have been held there and of those 10 have been charged with crimes, sparking criticism by foreign governments and rights groups. About 395 suspects remain in the camp in southeast Cuba.

Colonel Morris Davis, the chief prosecutor, said that the US military plans to charge 60 to 80 of the detainees, and expects military trials to start next summer.

"It certainly looks like we're much closer to getting these guys their day in court," he said.

Most of the remaining detainees, however, may never be tried by a military court.

In 2004, the US supreme court ruled that detainees could go to American courts to seek their release or changes in confinement conditions.

However, the military commissions act, signed by George Bush, the US president, in October, deprives them of the right to contest their imprisonment in a civilian court, known as habeas corpus.

An Israeli activist [AFP]

Katherine Newell Bierman, a Human Rights Watch counter-terrorism counsel, said military hearings that allow prisoners to challenge their detention before a neutral decision-maker are inadequate.

"Without habeas corpus proceedings, there is no check on the executive power or decisions just to lock people up indefinitely."

Moral authority

Chito Peppler, a Pentagon spokesman said: "There is no requirement under the law of war ... that a detaining power charge enemy combatants with crimes, or give them lawyers or access to the courts in order to challenge their detention.

"The information gathered from detainees at Guantanamo has undoubtedly saved the lives of US and coalition forces in the field. That information has also thwarted threats posed to innocent civilians at home and abroad."

Amnesty said the US operation at Guantanamo Bay has weakened human rights and the rule of law and undermined Washington's moral authority to speak on other human rights issues such as the fighting in Darfur, Sudan, which Washington has described as a genocide.

Adil al-Zamil, sent home from Guantanamo in November 2005 and cleared by a court in Kuwait of all terrorism charges, said that detainees are "living in hell".

"I pray to God to give them patience," he said. "If I was still there, I'd be a crazy person."

Source

US Iraq raid draws Iranian anger

11 January 2007

US forces have stormed a building in the northern Iraqi town of Irbil and seized six people said to be Iranians, prompting a diplomatic incident.

Iranian and Iraqi officials said the building was an Iranian consulate and the detainees its employees.

The US military said it was still investigating, but that the building did not have diplomatic status.

The troops raided the building at about 0300 (0001GMT), taking away computers and papers, according to local media.

AFP news agency quoted Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman as saying he did not know the nationality of the six but said they were "suspected of being closely tied to activities targeting Iraq and coalition forces".

"I can confirm for you through our forces there that this is not a consulate or a government building," he said.

However, Tehran said the attack violated all international conventions. It has summoned ambassadors from Switzerland, representing US interests, and Iraq.

A spokesman for Iran's foreign ministry described the raid as an attempt to sabotage Tehran's relations with Iraq. One Iranian MP said it showed America's cruelty and meanness.

The raid comes amid high Iran-US tension.

In a major speech on Wednesday, President George W Bush said the US would take a tough stance towards Iran and Syria, whom he accused of destabilising Iraq.

The US also accuses Iran of seeking nuclear arms. Iran denies both charges.

Tehran counters that US military involvement in the Middle East endangers the whole region.

Pressure

A local TV station said Kurdish security forces had taken over the building after the Americans had left.

Irbil lies in Iraq's Kurdish-controlled north, about 350km (220 miles) from the capital Baghdad.

Reports say the Iranian consulate there was set up last year under an agreement with the Kurdish regional government to facilitate cross-border visits.

Dozens of casualties resulted from a truck bombing in Samarra

One Iranian news agency with a correspondent in Irbil says five US helicopters were used to land troops on the roof of the Iranian consulate.

It reports that a number of vehicles cordoned off the streets around the building, while US soldiers warned the occupants in three different languages that they should surrender or be killed.

In December, US troops detained a number of Iranians in Iraq, including two with diplomatic immunity who were later released.

Thursday's raid came as US President George W Bush unveiled his new strategy in Iraq, which included increasing troop numbers and a commitment to stop Iranian support for "our enemies in Iraq".

BBC diplomatic correspondent Jonathan Marcus says the raid could signal a ratcheting-up of pressure on the Iranians, in line with the rhetorical thrust of his speech.

Meanwhile in the Iraqi capital, the five off-duty policemen were killed in an ambush in the western al-Khadra neighbourhood, hospital officials said

Security sources said another man was killed wounded in an attack on a money changer in downtown Baghdad.

In the restive Anbar province, the US military said that one of its troops was killed on Tuesday by a roadside bombing.

Other violence was reported in Mosul, where gunmen killed a professor driving home from work, and Samarra where a suicide truck bomber attacked the mayor's house, killing three people and wounding 33, including the mayor.

source

Rebuilding the Gulf Coast to Iraq: Bush's View?

Murder rate in New Orleans is such an epidemic, they are thinking of restarting a Curfew.

Exorbitant cost of living, has forced starvation and poverty to become rampant.

American power is on the decline

January 12, 2006

By Abdulkhaleq Abdullah

US President George W. Bush has found himself in an unenviable situation following the execution of former Iraqi president Saddam Hussain.

It seems that the hangman's noose is getting tighter around Bush's neck with the increasing death toll of American soldiers, which surpassed 3,000, in addition to more than 23,000 injuries and disabilities.

December was the bloodiest month of 2006 for the United States, while the cost of the war has so far exceeded $500 billion, which is 10 times the cost of the Vietnam War in 20 years.

Bush may have felt satisfied after Saddam was executed but he will wail over his misfortune until the end of his political life. He will remain in endless confusion, searching for the reasons behind the collapse of the American project in Iraq.

Bush is now living in a state of self- conflict, looking for solutions to get out of the Iraqi quagmire.

Bush's idea of Democracy Iraq Style

As a president of the world's sole superpower, Bush is now wondering how to save his prestige and his country's position. Many questions arise while he was trying to find the way out. Is it possible to draw up a new strategy or would it be better to increase the number of US troops?

Would it be better to announce an immediate withdrawal as called for by the Democrats who seized control of the US Congress under the leadership of an iron lady - Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House of Representatives?

And would it be better to support Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Al Maliki who unveiled his sectarian face during the execution procedure and lost the faith of Iraqis or would it be better to replace the current government with a stronger one?

Can the US preserve the unity of Iraq or is it time to admit that Iraq has already been divided into Sunni, Shiite and Kurdish states?

Strategic dialogue

What is better for Iraq? Is it to open a strategic dialogue with neighbouring countries as recommended by the James Baker report or to step up the political tension with Iran and turn it into a military confrontation as recommended by the neoconservatives in the Bush administration?

Suddenly, all Bush's choices have become extremely difficult and painful while his strategies are unrealistic. Bush's decisions are unconvincing while the Democratic Congress's proposals are inapplicable.

Although the recommendations of veteran diplomat Baker are not obligatory, 80 per cent of the Americans support his call for withdrawing US troops by 2008. More than 70 per cent of the Americans call on the new Congress to apply more pressure on Bush to set a pullout timetable within six months.

On the Iraqi side, 95 per cent of Iraqis believe that Iraq is worse off now under the US occupation than it was during Saddam's era.

Bush, however, had no other choice except to sacrifice some of his administration's symbols, change some security and military commanders and send 20,000 more troops to Iraq, to cover up his political and military failure and regain his prestige.

Opinion polls showed that 86 per cent of Americans do not trust their president anymore and hold him responsible for the catastrophic consequences of the Iraq war.

Apart from its defeat in Iraq, the US is facing the Latin American rebellion led by Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, North Korea's nuclear challenge, the growing Chinese economy, Russia's growing political role and Darfur issue, which all together have added to Bush's burdens.
While the world's sole superpower lives in a state of defeat and confusion after its president lost his sense of direction, the entire world is definitely in extreme danger.

There is nothing worse than an arrogant superpower but a confused superpower led by a lost president, and this is the case in Washington.

The world can no longer trust such a confused superpower and can no longer respect a president who doesn't know what to do.

Poor performance

The US is losing respect in the world due to the poor performance in Iraq and the excessive use of force after the September 11 attacks.

As respect for America declines, fear of its power is diminishing too. The US defeat in Iraq indicates that it is not the absolute power and hence its threats are not convincing anymore and can simply be ignored. Washington can be ignored exactly as North Korea, Iran, Venezuela, Sudan and Syria do.

Even resistance parties, such as the Lebanese Hezbollah and the Palestinian Hamas movement, as well as individuals such as Ayman Al Zawahiri, Al Qaida's second man, do ignore the US.
Confusion, failure and delusion have reached their highest levels in the US, and respect, faith and fear from the superpower have reached the lowest.

Such a country is not dangerous to itself but more harmful to the world which looks for security and stability.

Dr Abdulkhaleq Abdullah is Professor of Political Science at UAE University, Al Ain.

How to solve the Mideast crises

Illustration by Nino Jose Heredia/Gulf News

January 12, 2007

By Patrick Seale

Imagine for just a moment that, instead of a stubborn and belligerent president in the White House, instead of an impotent UN Security Council, a divided Europe, a squabbling Israeli cabinet and a seething Muslim world, there were a benevolent angel able to wave a healing wand over the Middle East.

What would he (or perhaps she, because we don't know the sex of angels) do?

The angel might begin with Lebanon because, in spite of appearances, it could be the easiest crisis to solve. The heart of Lebanon's problem would seem to be that the Shiite community, mainly located in the south of the country and in the southern suburbs of Beirut, has for long been denied its fair share of state power.

Since independence 60 years ago, this community has been neglected by the central government. It is now demanding its rightful place.

The discrimination the Shiites have suffered is all the more striking because today they constitute the largest single community in Lebanon and, virtually single-handed, have defended the country against Israel's repeated assaults and invasions from the 1970s to the present.

Lebanon's National Pact of 1943, a power-sharing agreement between Maronites and Sunnis which was amended at Taif in 1989, no longer reflects Lebanon's demographic and political realities. A new pact is required which will ensure a better representation of all communities in the country's institutions.

Ideally, the Lebanese should decide to abolish the confessional system altogether, which has been the source of many conflicts and replace it by a new model of secular citizenship, in which any capable Lebanese - man or woman, Christian or Muslim - should be able to accede to the highest positions in the state.

Twenty-one years ago, in January 1986, former president Ameen Gemayel proposed that a post of vice-president of the Republic should be created for the Shiites. That proposal was not adopted. Today, a still more radical reform is required to overcome the sterile ideological quarrels which are tearing Lebanon apart.

Such a reform should not be seen as a threat to Lebanon's other communities or to the interests of any external power. On the contrary, by consolidating Lebanon's national unity, it would be a major contribution to the stability of the entire region.

The angel would also need to direct his or her attention to healing Lebanon's relations with Syria, which have been severely battered over the past couple of years. Yet, a permanent estrangement between Beirut and Damascus is unthinkable.

Carved out of the same flesh, the two countries are indispensable to each other. But, for the current hostility to be overcome, mistakes must be corrected. Officials of both countries responsible for past crimes and abuses must be punished.

The angel would probably recommend that senior officials from both countries - perhaps at prime ministerial level - should arrange to meet soon, in a neutral country like Switzerland, to put an official end to their quarrel and hammer out the terms for future coexistence.

Diplomatic relations should be established on a basis of dialogue not coercion, and ambassadors exchanged.

History and geography dictate that Syria and Lebanon are bound together by a "special relationship", unique in the region. The immediate task is to put these relations on a healthy basis.

Resolving Israel's conflict with the Palestinians and with Syria may require not just a single supernatural mediator but an entire heavenly host of angels and archangels.

The problem is that Israel has so far been unable to produce a government willing and able to do what is necessary - namely withdraw from the occupied Palestinian territories, including Arab Jerusalem, dismantle the colonies and come down from the Golan. All hope, however, is not entirely lost.

As for US President George W. Bush, it is reliably reported that he is causing much despair among the community of angels. Instead of seeking to resolve Middle East conflicts by encouraging Israel to seek peace with its neighbours and by engaging Iran and Syria in dialogue, he is doing the very opposite.

A shadowy group of Washington officials drawn from the State Department, the National Security Council, the Pentagon and the CIA has been plotting to bring about "regime change" in Syria, by providing generous funding to opposition groups and at the same time cripple Iran by undermining its banking system and preventing foreign firms from investing in and developing its oil fields.

Biggest headache

The war in Iraq is by far Bush's biggest headache. But he is evidently not yet ready to acknowledge defeat and wind up this disastrous adventure.

All the indications are that, against the sage advice of the Baker-Hamilton Iraq Study Group, he is still intent on pursuing his bankrupt "victory strategy" - a doomed enterprise in which more lives and much treasure will be thrown away.

But that is not the end of Bush's mischief. Driven by such neoconservative hawks as Eliott Abrams at the National Security Council, the US is seeking to destabilise Hezbollah in Lebanon - in effect, to complete the job Israel failed to do last summer.

To achieve this goal, the US has been arming the Internal Security Forces of the Siniora government and has put great pressure on General Michel Aoun, the Christian leader of the Free Patriotic Movement, to break with Hezbollah.

The US seems equally determined to destroy the Palestinian resistance movement Hamas by supplying arms, training and tens of millions of dollars to its Fatah rival.

This appears to be another covert programme conceived by Eliott Abrams and implemented on the ground by David Welsh, a senior State Department official.

Rather than bringing peace to the troubled region, these programmes will fan the flames of war. Little wonder that the angels are said to shake their heads in despair at the folly of men. There is even talk that they may give up their healing mission in disgust.

Patrick Seale is a commentator and author of several books on Middle East affairs.

Uncle Sam’s Foreign Policy Blunder since Vietnam

Bush war plan draws fire on Capitol Hill

Bush's dangerous blunder

Haniyeh Asks Groups to Prevent Civil War

Palestinian supporters of the Fatah party march during a rally marking the 42nd anniversary of the founding of the group in the West Bank town of Tulkarm on Wednesday. (AP)

Hisham Abu Taha

GAZA CITY, 11 January 2007 — Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh yesterday called on rival groups to work to prevent internal violence from exploding into an all-out civil war. “We stress the necessity of sparing the Palestinian people any internal confrontations and to avoid using weapons as a medium for dialogue and to focus on dialogue only to solve our differences,” he said before a Cabinet meeting. “The differences exist, they are there, but this does not mean that they should be solved by gunfire.”

Haniyeh’s Hamas group, which controls the Cabinet and Parliament, and the more moderate Fatah, headed by President Mahmoud Abbas, have been engaged in bloody street battles that have killed 35 Palestinians over the past month.

Haniyeh said the fighting “will please enemies of the Palestinians, who want to see civil war.” Haniyeh spoke a day after Hamas-linked fighters gave their first word on the condition of an Israeli soldier they captured more than six months ago.

“Gilad Shalit is in good health and is being treated according to Islamic standards of dealing with prisoners of war,” said Abu Mujahid of the Palestinian Resistance Committees, a militant group linked to Hamas.

Meanwhile, Fatah’s strongman in Gaza branded the ruling Hamas “a bunch of murderers and thieves” yesterday, in the latest verbal salvo between the rival Palestinian factions.

“They lost the Palestinian street, which sees what they have become. A bunch of murderers and thieves who execute Palestinians only because they are Fatah members,” Mohammed Dahlan said in an interview with Israel’s Haaretz daily.

The comments marked the latest assault in an escalating war of words between Fatah and Hamas.

Stolen Lives

January 11, 2007

by Housewife4Palestine

I write the following with thoughts, memories and a sad heart:

It is strange the things that pop up in life, my friend who I had not seen for over thirty years happened to find me as I had looked for her just as long.

She reminded me of many things about my mother that after a person has passed away and time goes on you tend to put in the back of your mind for safe keeping.

The main thing most people seem to remember about my mother was her extreme kindness and how she cared so much for others.

Nevertheless, this particular friend remembered something that has always been the most heartbreaking thing in my family, that fact that we wanted to go home. Even when my mother was running out of time on the bed she would pass away in, she told me that more then anything she just wished for me to go home.

While my mother sometimes had troubles talking in ways people could understand her, my friend remember parts of things she said and after all these years, what did they mean.

As she put it, she knew she came from “over there” meaning the Middle East, she could not truly understand that home was Palestine, until now. She could now understand why we couldn't go home. The problem was that even for a visit it was thought at one time that if you were a refugee you would never see home again, forced to live in the far reaches of the earth more wearing out suitcases then furniture. For some of us it is still this way.

While I admit I loved my mother’s advice and she was smarter then many people may have given her credit for, she lived in a world that was so foreign to her that she lived her whole life for lack of a better word lost, tormented by all the strangeness and hardships.

The few people in our travels that had been able to understand us made us happier then I wonder if they ever knew because even before the blow up of 9/11, refugee families like mine roamed the earth and many settled in so many different places sometimes never seeing family or friends ever again.

I never realized I guess because I have always had a problem with shyness, how much I have been appreciated in my life even now because I have always thought the kind of person I am was more towards humility and I am the person that Allah made to be just the way that I am. And as my father liked to remind me, I am too like my Mother.

It also a strange thing to tell and old friend that you are fighting of all things, peace. That all the injustice in the world needs to stop so we can all be happy again and I will even have to admit the wish my mother had for me to be able to go home and stay without someone shooting at me would be a blessing within itself.

I wonder how things have gotten so bad that we have gotten pitted against each other and with so much hate in the world this within itself is a crime. I am amazed how people’s religion, origin has came so much into play in my lifetime, when what should been most important is friendship!

As for all my mother’s hope and dreams, I too wish someday the world will be happy and Palestine will be a free country where we can all be friends and neighbors again.

For all my mother taught me and those who remember her, she was a great woman and I know in my heart she is in Paradise telling her poor jokes with her unusual laugh.

People think a lot about the stealing of land in Palestine, not that they also have stolen lives.

Dorian Gray Bush's Picture on Iraq Troop Deployment

President's Address to the Nation

For Immediate Release

Office of the Press Secretary

January 10, 2007

The Library

(President's Remarks: click viewer)

THE PRESIDENT: Good evening. Tonight in Iraq, the Armed Forces of the United States are engaged in a struggle that will determine the direction of the global war on terror -- and our safety here at home. The new strategy I outline tonight will change America's course in Iraq, and help us succeed in the fight against terror.

When I addressed you just over a year ago, nearly 12 million Iraqis had cast their ballots for a unified and democratic nation. The elections of 2005 were a stunning achievement. We thought that these elections would bring the Iraqis together, and that as we trained Iraqi security forces we could accomplish our mission with fewer American troops.

But in 2006, the opposite happened. The violence in Iraq -- particularly in Baghdad -- overwhelmed the political gains the Iraqis had made. Al Qaeda terrorists and Sunni insurgents recognized the mortal danger that Iraq's elections posed for their cause, and they responded with outrageous acts of murder aimed at innocent Iraqis. They blew up one of the holiest shrines in Shia Islam -- the Golden Mosque of Samarra -- in a calculated effort to provoke Iraq's Shia population to retaliate. Their strategy worked. Radical Shia elements, some supported by Iran, formed death squads. And the result was a vicious cycle of sectarian violence that continues today.

The situation in Iraq is unacceptable to the American people -- and it is unacceptable to me. Our troops in Iraq have fought bravely. They have done everything we have asked them to do. Where mistakes have been made, the responsibility rests with me.

It is clear that we need to change our strategy in Iraq. So my national security team, military commanders, and diplomats conducted a comprehensive review. We consulted members of Congress from both parties, our allies abroad, and distinguished outside experts. We benefitted from the thoughtful recommendations of the Iraq Study Group, a bipartisan panel led by former Secretary of State James Baker and former Congressman Lee Hamilton. In our discussions, we all agreed that there is no magic formula for success in Iraq. And one message came through loud and clear: Failure in Iraq would be a disaster for the United States.

The consequences of failure are clear: Radical Islamic extremists would grow in strength and gain new recruits. They would be in a better position to topple moderate governments, create chaos in the region, and use oil revenues to fund their ambitions. Iran would be emboldened in its pursuit of nuclear weapons. Our enemies would have a safe haven from which to plan and launch attacks on the American people. On September the 11th, 2001, we saw what a refuge for extremists on the other side of the world could bring to the streets of our own cities. For the safety of our people, America must succeed in Iraq.

The most urgent priority for success in Iraq is security, especially in Baghdad. Eighty percent of Iraq's sectarian violence occurs within 30 miles of the capital. This violence is splitting Baghdad into sectarian enclaves, and shaking the confidence of all Iraqis. Only Iraqis can end the sectarian violence and secure their people. And their government has put forward an aggressive plan to do it.

Our past efforts to secure Baghdad failed for two principal reasons: There were not enough Iraqi and American troops to secure neighborhoods that had been cleared of terrorists and insurgents. And there were too many restrictions on the troops we did have. Our military commanders reviewed the new Iraqi plan to ensure that it addressed these mistakes. They report that it does. They also report that this plan can work.

Now let me explain the main elements of this effort: The Iraqi government will appoint a military commander and two deputy commanders for their capital. The Iraqi government will deploy Iraqi Army and National Police brigades across Baghdad's nine districts. When these forces are fully deployed, there will be 18 Iraqi Army and National Police brigades committed to this effort, along with local police. These Iraqi forces will operate from local police stations -- conducting patrols and setting up checkpoints, and going door-to-door to gain the trust of Baghdad residents.

This is a strong commitment. But for it to succeed, our commanders say the Iraqis will need our help. So America will change our strategy to help the Iraqis carry out their campaign to put down sectarian violence and bring security to the people of Baghdad. This will require increasing American force levels. So I've committed more than 20,000 additional American troops to Iraq. The vast majority of them -- five brigades -- will be deployed to Baghdad. These troops will work alongside Iraqi units and be embedded in their formations. Our troops will have a well-defined mission: to help Iraqis clear and secure neighborhoods, to help them protect the local population, and to help ensure that the Iraqi forces left behind are capable of providing the security that Baghdad needs.

Many listening tonight will ask why this effort will succeed when previous operations to secure Baghdad did not. Well, here are the differences: In earlier operations, Iraqi and American forces cleared many neighborhoods of terrorists and insurgents, but when our forces moved on to other targets, the killers returned. This time, we'll have the force levels we need to hold the areas that have been cleared. In earlier operations, political and sectarian interference prevented Iraqi and American forces from going into neighborhoods that are home to those fueling the sectarian violence. This time, Iraqi and American forces will have a green light to enter those neighborhoods -- and Prime Minister Maliki has pledged that political or sectarian interference will not be tolerated.

I've made it clear to the Prime Minister and Iraq's other leaders that America's commitment is not open-ended. If the Iraqi government does not follow through on its promises, it will lose the support of the American people -- and it will lose the support of the Iraqi people. Now is the time to act. The Prime Minister understands this. Here is what he told his people just last week: "The Baghdad security plan will not provide a safe haven for any outlaws, regardless of [their] sectarian or political affiliation."

This new strategy will not yield an immediate end to suicide bombings, assassinations, or IED attacks. Our enemies in Iraq will make every effort to ensure that our television screens are filled with images of death and suffering. Yet over time, we can expect to see Iraqi troops chasing down murderers, fewer brazen acts of terror, and growing trust and cooperation from Baghdad's residents. When this happens, daily life will improve, Iraqis will gain confidence in their leaders, and the government will have the breathing space it needs to make progress in other critical areas. Most of Iraq's Sunni and Shia want to live together in peace -- and reducing the violence in Baghdad will help make reconciliation possible.

A successful strategy for Iraq goes beyond military operations. Ordinary Iraqi citizens must see that military operations are accompanied by visible improvements in their neighborhoods and communities. So America will hold the Iraqi government to the benchmarks it has announced.

To establish its authority, the Iraqi government plans to take responsibility for security in all of Iraq's provinces by November. To give every Iraqi citizen a stake in the country's economy, Iraq will pass legislation to share oil revenues among all Iraqis. To show that it is committed to delivering a better life, the Iraqi government will spend $10 billion of its own money on reconstruction and infrastructure projects that will create new jobs. To empower local leaders, Iraqis plan to hold provincial elections later this year. And to allow more Iraqis to re-enter their nation's political life, the government will reform de-Baathification laws, and establish a fair process for considering amendments to Iraq's constitution.

America will change our approach to help the Iraqi government as it works to meet these benchmarks. In keeping with the recommendations of the Iraq Study Group, we will increase the embedding of American advisers in Iraqi Army units, and partner a coalition brigade with every Iraqi Army division. We will help the Iraqis build a larger and better-equipped army, and we will accelerate the training of Iraqi forces, which remains the essential U.S. security mission in Iraq. We will give our commanders and civilians greater flexibility to spend funds for economic assistance. We will double the number of provincial reconstruction teams. These teams bring together military and civilian experts to help local Iraqi communities pursue reconciliation, strengthen the moderates, and speed the transition to Iraqi self-reliance. And Secretary Rice will soon appoint a reconstruction coordinator in Baghdad to ensure better results for economic assistance being spent in Iraq.

As we make these changes, we will continue to pursue al Qaeda and foreign fighters. Al Qaeda is still active in Iraq. Its home base is Anbar Province. Al Qaeda has helped make Anbar the most violent area of Iraq outside the capital. A captured al Qaeda document describes the terrorists' plan to infiltrate and seize control of the province. This would bring al Qaeda closer to its goals of taking down Iraq's democracy, building a radical Islamic empire, and launching new attacks on the United States at home and abroad.

Our military forces in Anbar are killing and capturing al Qaeda leaders, and they are protecting the local population. Recently, local tribal leaders have begun to show their willingness to take on al Qaeda. And as a result, our commanders believe we have an opportunity to deal a serious blow to the terrorists. So I have given orders to increase American forces in Anbar Province by 4,000 troops. These troops will work with Iraqi and tribal forces to keep up the pressure on the terrorists. America's men and women in uniform took away al Qaeda's safe haven in Afghanistan -- and we will not allow them to re-establish it in Iraq.

Succeeding in Iraq also requires defending its territorial integrity and stabilizing the region in the face of extremist challenges. This begins with addressing Iran and Syria. These two regimes are allowing terrorists and insurgents to use their territory to move in and out of Iraq. Iran is providing material support for attacks on American troops. We will disrupt the attacks on our forces. We'll interrupt the flow of support from Iran and Syria. And we will seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and training to our enemies in Iraq.

We're also taking other steps to bolster the security of Iraq and protect American interests in the Middle East. I recently ordered the deployment of an additional carrier strike group to the region. We will expand intelligence-sharing and deploy Patriot air defense systems to reassure our friends and allies. We will work with the governments of Turkey and Iraq to help them resolve problems along their border. And we will work with others to prevent Iran from gaining nuclear weapons and dominating the region.

We will use America's full diplomatic resources to rally support for Iraq from nations throughout the Middle East. Countries like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, and the Gulf States need to understand that an American defeat in Iraq would create a new sanctuary for extremists and a strategic threat to their survival. These nations have a stake in a successful Iraq that is at peace with its neighbors, and they must step up their support for Iraq's unity government. We endorse the Iraqi government's call to finalize an International Compact that will bring new economic assistance in exchange for greater economic reform. And on Friday, Secretary Rice will leave for the region, to build support for Iraq and continue the urgent diplomacy required to help bring peace to the Middle East.

The challenge playing out across the broader Middle East is more than a military conflict. It is the decisive ideological struggle of our time. On one side are those who believe in freedom and moderation. On the other side are extremists who kill the innocent, and have declared their intention to destroy our way of life. In the long run, the most realistic way to protect the American people is to provide a hopeful alternative to the hateful ideology of the enemy, by advancing liberty across a troubled region. It is in the interests of the United States to stand with the brave men and women who are risking their lives to claim their freedom, and to help them as they work to raise up just and hopeful societies across the Middle East.

From Afghanistan to Lebanon to the Palestinian Territories, millions of ordinary people are sick of the violence, and want a future of peace and opportunity for their children. And they are looking at Iraq. They want to know: Will America withdraw and yield the future of that country to the extremists, or will we stand with the Iraqis who have made the choice for freedom?

The changes I have outlined tonight are aimed at ensuring the survival of a young democracy that is fighting for its life in a part of the world of enormous importance to American security. Let me be clear: The terrorists and insurgents in Iraq are without conscience, and they will make the year ahead bloody and violent. Even if our new strategy works exactly as planned, deadly acts of violence will continue -- and we must expect more Iraqi and American casualties.

The question is whether our new strategy will bring us closer to success. I believe that it will.
Victory will not look like the ones our fathers and grandfathers achieved. There will be no surrender ceremony on the deck of a battleship. But victory in Iraq will bring something new in the Arab world -- a functioning democracy that polices its territory, upholds the rule of law, respects fundamental human liberties, and answers to its people. A democratic Iraq will not be perfect. But it will be a country that fights terrorists instead of harboring them -- and it will help bring a future of peace and security for our children and our grandchildren.

This new approach comes after consultations with Congress about the different courses we could take in Iraq. Many are concerned that the Iraqis are becoming too dependent on the United States, and therefore, our policy should focus on protecting Iraq's borders and hunting down al Qaeda. Their solution is to scale back America's efforts in Baghdad -- or announce the phased withdrawal of our combat forces. We carefully considered these proposals. And we concluded that to step back now would force a collapse of the Iraqi government, tear the country apart, and result in mass killings on an unimaginable scale. Such a scenario would result in our troops being forced to stay in Iraq even longer, and confront an enemy that is even more lethal. If we increase our support at this crucial moment, and help the Iraqis break the current cycle of violence, we can hasten the day our troops begin coming home.

In the days ahead, my national security team will fully brief Congress on our new strategy. If members have improvements that can be made, we will make them. If circumstances change, we will adjust. Honorable people have different views, and they will voice their criticisms. It is fair to hold our views up to scrutiny. And all involved have a responsibility to explain how the path they propose would be more likely to succeed.

Acting on the good advice of Senator Joe Lieberman and other key members of Congress, we will form a new, bipartisan working group that will help us come together across party lines to win the war on terror. This group will meet regularly with me and my administration; it will help strengthen our relationship with Congress. We can begin by working together to increase the size of the active Army and Marine Corps, so that America has the Armed Forces we need for the 21st century. We also need to examine ways to mobilize talented American civilians to deploy overseas, where they can help build democratic institutions in communities and nations recovering from war and tyranny.

In these dangerous times, the United States is blessed to have extraordinary and selfless men and women willing to step forward and defend us. These young Americans understand that our cause in Iraq is noble and necessary -- and that the advance of freedom is the calling of our time. They serve far from their families, who make the quiet sacrifices of lonely holidays and empty chairs at the dinner table. They have watched their comrades give their lives to ensure our liberty. We mourn the loss of every fallen American -- and we owe it to them to build a future worthy of their sacrifice.

Fellow citizens: The year ahead will demand more patience, sacrifice, and resolve. It can be tempting to think that America can put aside the burdens of freedom. Yet times of testing reveal the character of a nation. And throughout our history, Americans have always defied the pessimists and seen our faith in freedom redeemed. Now America is engaged in a new struggle that will set the course for a new century. We can, and we will, prevail.

We go forward with trust that the Author of Liberty will guide us through these trying hours. Thank you and good night.

A more visible Alcoholic President, giving the address to his failings, making a situation bad to worse.

END

Meet Adel Hamad

Adel Hamad was a teacher of elementary school orphans, a hospital worker, and someone who coordinated the delivery of food, medicine and blankets to refugees. He has been imprisoned for 5 years and classified as an enemy combatant, despite the lack of any allegations or evidence that he ever acted against the U.S. or its allies, or even had political sympathies for those who did. His friends and colleagues describe him as a funny, apolitical man who loved charity work and ping-pong. One of the U.S. Army Majors at his Tribunal called his detention unconscionable.
(Click on Poster for further information.)



Guantanamo Unclassified





Update:

January 25, 2007

A lot has happened in 3 weeks at Project Hamad.

37,000 people have watched Guantanamo Unclassified

People from 33 states and 28 countries have joined the project

Amnesty International approached us to work together on bringing attention to Adel Hamad

Read how else Project Hamad and other organizations are bringing habeas corpus and the Guantanamo detention center back into the news on our new Project Hamad Blog:

http://projecthamad.org/blog

Here's what you can do to help us keep the momentum:

Get your friends, family and co-workers to sign up:
http://projecthamad.org/take-action/spread-the-word

Put up a posters at your organizations, churches, businesses and schools:
http://projecthamad.org/take-action/poster/

Post photos to our photo gallery:
http://projecthamad.org/gallery

Write your representatives calling for the restoration of habeas corpus:
http://projecthamad.org/take-action/representatives/

Thank you. Keep in touch,

David, Ben and Laura
Project Hamad

One Last Chance for Sanity in Iraq

10, January, 2007
Ramzy Baroud

President George W. Bush’s new war strategy, which is yet to become official and will likely meet an uphill battle at the now Democrat-controlled Congress, is a slap on the face of the majority of American voters, and indeed, the democratic process altogether.

The majority of Americans made their voices heard loud and clear last November when they voted out Bush’s archaic thinking, a mixture of old imperialist ideas, bent on territorial accumulation and strategic positioning, notwithstanding misguided religious beliefs.

Bush is yet to learn however, that the United States is not Rome, and strengths and weakness are no longer measured alone by a nation’s number of combatants. The last three and a half years of utter failure in Iraq should have been the sign any rational leader would need to change course; but few ever argued that the president is an icon of leadership or even headedness; thus the “new” Iraq strategy.

Just one day after the leadership of the US Congress was handed over to the victorious Democrats, after many years of deserved absence, Bush began to reshuffle his war generals in a way that is neither consistent with the wishes of the American people, nor the majority of Congress.

Though the Iraq strategy is scheduled to be laid out officially today, early signs show that the president intends to beef up his war efforts, and perhaps prepare for a new showdown, this time with Iran: An early ominous sign came when President Bush signaled his intentions for a troop surge in Iraq, with an additional 20,000 to 40,000 soldiers to bolster the 140,000 already on the ground. Bush insists that such a dramatic increase is temporary and will only come about when he receives guarantees from the current Iraqi government — a puppet government by any standards — that it is willing to take charge and play its part.

Expectedly, many Democratic members of Congress, and even some members of Bush’s own party, are opposed to such a move. That rejection was articulated in an open letter released on Friday that was written by the new leaders of Congress, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. “Adding more combat troops will only endanger more Americans and stretch our military to the breaking point for no strategic gain. And it would undermine our efforts to get the Iraqis to take responsibility for their own future,” Pelosi and Reid wrote.

But disgruntled Democrats are not alone in objecting to Bush’s imprudent proposal; the military leadership also finds it reckless and futile. Therefore, top army brass Generals Casey and Abizaid, who are deeply skeptical regarding increasing troop numbers in Iraq, are on their way out to be replaced by war supporters: Gen. David Petraeus, a war supporter who participated in the March 2003 invasion of Iraq, is set to take over from Gen. George Casey as the top ground commander.

Moreover, the president reportedly intends to endorse William Fallon to head the US Central Command. The choice of Fallon, according to the New York Times reporter in Washington, as the top military commander in the Middle East — to replace Gen. John Abizaid — came as a big surprise to the Pentagon for the former is a naval officer with little experience in that region.

But things will fall neatly in place when one considers that Bush’s choice has more to do with Iran than repairing the damage done in Iraq: “Any mission against Tehran would rely heavily on carrier-based aircraft and missiles from the Persian Gulf,” according to the Times, and the expertise of Fallon is most needed in that type of military scenario.

But boosting the number of US troops at a time that the US Army seems to be stretched to its maximum is not an easy job even for the can-do president. Military analysts suggest that Bush can only successfully make up his force surge by extending tours and resorting to the reserves. Both moves will likely increase the number of US causalities at a higher rate than the present — keeping in mind that henceforth over 3,000 US soldiers have been killed in the war — and will make the war bill a whole lot more expensive — keeping in mind that around $350 billion have already been spent without even an emblematic constructive outcome.

Most of the new troops will be positioned in Sunni areas in Baghdad and Anbar Province, seen as the heart of the resistance. Only a naïve person would argue that such stratagem would lead to anything other than greater bloodshed and would further enliven and validate the so-called insurgents.

Although the Sunni insurgency remains the prime target of the US military in Iraq, there is a growing realization among US officials and war generals that the unruly Shiite militias and their death squads are a greater cause of instability and violence.

Ironically, the rise of the Shiite militias was an early American strategy that put the many Shiite factions on a crash course with the Sunni resistance in order to divide and weaken the Iraqis, and lower the risk of American casualties. Now that the Iraqi Army and police are composed mostly from those same militant thugs, many Iraqis find themselves victimized by their supposed national army and police force. Those who are expecting Iraqis to “take responsibility for their future” seem oblivious to the fact that the future of Iraq is most bleak under the current US-devised sectarianism where Sunnis are murdered with impunity and Shiites are blown up in their markets.

The humiliating execution of Iraqi President Saddam Hussein at the hands of masked Shiite guards purporting to act as an executive arm of a legitimate government was indeed the last attestation that will forever categorize the ongoing strife in Iraq as one between Shiite and Sunni, the former allied to invading foreigners and the latter fighting for mere survival.

The fact that Iraqi strife is now categorically defined along sectarian lines, President Bush must realize that the situation in Iraq has reached a point of unprecedented sensitivity, and his macho politics and infamous stubbornness can lead only to further disasters. His actions this week and expected moves to follow will lead to a situation that neither his party nor the Democrats with their blurred policy outlook can repair.

Bush must immediately provide a roadmap for withdrawal from Iraq to be carried out in stages to allow for synchronized, constructive regional and international roles that would engage the United Nations, the Arab League, but most importantly all Iraqi social groups; otherwise, a divided Iraq with all the ills and regional mayhem that it will bring about will remain an inescapable last option.

Save Nazanin Mahabad Fatehi

Please help to save a life:


On January 3, 2006, 18-year-old Nazanin Mahabad Fatehi was sentenced to death for murder by court in Iran after she stabbed one of three men who attempted to rape her and her 16-year-old niece in a park in Karaj (a suburb of Tehran) in March 2005. She was seventeen at the time. Iran is signatory to international treaties which forbid them to execute any one under the age of 18; however they continue to do so.

The injustice of this case propelled Nazanin Afshin-Jam to take immediate action and start a petition to help save the life of her namesake. The petition now has over 200 000 signatures from around the world.

Since initiating the Save Nazanin Campaign with Mina Ahadi- the Head of the International Committee Against Execution and Stoning- and through the help of other human rights groups and individuals, they have been able to engage the UN, Canadian Parliament, the EU, Amnesty International and others to pressure the Iranian Officials to spare the life of this child.

On June 1st 2006, the Head of Judiciary Ayatollah Shahroudi announced a stay of execution and the call for a complete new retrial. Nazanin Fatehi’s retrial will take place January 10th, 2007 (20th of Dey 1385 in the Iranian calendar).

Nazanin Mahabad Fatehi

For more information and to sign the petition.

Mini video collage of Nazanin's case

David Etebari, creator of www.mypace.com/savenazanin has creatively put together a compilation collage of Nazanin's case using the Persian Prince's rap song about Nazanin Fatehi. Please pass it along and share it with others.

Update:

After 350,000 signatures and more then two years in jail Nazanin was eventually released on bail on January 31, 2007.