Posted 10:53 AM by Steve
HEY PEACE ACTIVIST? HOW DOES IT FEEL TO BE THE PUPPET OF A MURDEROUS THUG?

By JAMES GORDON MEEK
DAILY NEWS WASHINGTON BUREAU

WASHINGTON - Iraq sent spies from Canada to New York and Washington this month to snoop and stir up anti-war demonstrations, according to a government report obtained by the Daily News.


The classified document also reveals a plot by Al Qaeda-linked militants in Zimbabwe to attack American targets in that country and elsewhere if the U.S. declares war on Iraq.


It suggests the group, Tablik Ja'maat, could be a "conduit for communication" between Osama Bin Laden's terror network and Iraqi leaders.


The threats, disclosed to U.S. spy agencies yesterday, are detailed in a secret report prepared by an intelligence unit in the Homeland Security Department.


It comes as the White House weighs the release of classified information to prove Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein's links to Al Qaeda and efforts to evade UN weapons inspectors.


A source identified as a member of the Iraqi opposition told U.S. agents that Iraqis in Canada were ordered to recruit Arabs and other foreigners for espionage missions in the U.S., the report said.


The Iraqi Embassy in Ottawa sent operatives to New York and Washington with instructions to "intensify spying activities and to carry out anti-U.S. demonstrations to stop a war against Iraq," the report said.


The report said the Iraqis were willing to spend "large sums" to back the effort.


The report also describes a plot by Tablik Ja'maat to carry out "coordinated attacks" against U.S targets in Zimbabwe if war is declared on Iraq. Other attacks, revealed by the group's leader at a Jan. 18 meeting at a mosque in Harare, would take place in Pakistan, Indonesia, Nigeria, Turkey, South Africa and Israel, the report said.


An Associated Press report last week said that the FBI is looking to question as many as 50,000 Iraqis living in the U.S. to root out potential spies and terror cells.

Posted 10:38 PM by Steve
YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!
-Jack Nicholson (Colonel Nathan Jessup) in "A Few Good Men"

Iraq has continued its weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs in defiance of UN resolutions and restrictions. Baghdad has chemical and biological weapons as well as missiles with ranges in excess of UN restrictions; if left unchecked, it probably will have a nuclear weapon during this decade.

Baghdad hides large portions of Iraq's WMD efforts. Revelations after the Gulf war starkly demonstrate the extensive efforts undertaken by Iraq to deny information.

Since inspections ended in 1998, Iraq has maintained its chemical weapons effort, energized its missile program, and invested more heavily in biological weapons; most analysts assess Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program.

* Iraq's growing ability to sell oil illicitly increases Baghdad's capabilities to finance WMD programs; annual earnings in cash and goods have more than quadrupled.

* Iraq largely has rebuilt missile and biological weapons facilities damaged during Operation Desert Fox and has expanded its chemical and biological infrastructure under the cover of civilian production.

* Baghdad has exceeded UN range limits of 150 km with its ballistic missiles and is working with unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), which allow for a more lethal means to deliver biological and, less likely, chemical warfare agents.

* Although Saddam probably does not yet have nuclear weapons or sufficient material to make any, he remains intent on acquiring them.

How quickly Iraq will obtain its first nuclear weapon depends on when it acquires sufficient weapons-grade fissile material.

# If Baghdad acquires sufficient weapons-grade fissile material from abroad, it could make a nuclear weapon within a year.

# Without such material from abroad, Iraq probably would not be able to make a weapon until the last half of the decade.

* Iraq's aggressive attempts to obtain proscribed high-strength aluminum tubes are of significant concern. All intelligence experts agree that Iraq is seeking nuclear weapons and that these tubes could be used in a centrifuge enrichment program. Most intelligence specialists assess this to be the intended use, but some believe that these tubes are probably intended for conventional weapons programs.

* Based on tubes of the size Iraq is trying to acquire, a few tens of thousands of centrifuges would be capable of producing enough highly enriched uranium for a couple of weapons per year.

Baghdad has begun renewed production of chemical warfare agents, probably including mustard, sarin, cyclosarin, and VX. Its capability was reduced during the UNSCOM inspections and is probably more limited now than it was at the time of the Gulf war, although VX production and agent storage life probably have been improved.

* Saddam probably has stocked a few hundred metric tons of CW agents.

* The Iraqis have experience in manufacturing CW bombs, artillery rockets, and projectiles, and probably possess CW bulk fills for SRBM warheads, including for a limited number of covertly stored, extended-range Scuds.

All key aspects—R&D, production, and weaponization—of Iraq's offensive BW program are active and most elements are larger and more advanced than they were before the Gulf war.

* Iraq has some lethal and incapacitating BW agents and is capable of quickly producing and weaponizing a variety of such agents, including anthrax, for delivery by bombs, missiles, aerial sprayers, and covert operatives, including potentially against the US Homeland.

* Baghdad has established a large-scale, redundant, and concealed BW agent production capability, which includes mobile facilities; these facilities can evade detection, are highly survivable, and can exceed the production rates Iraq had prior to the Gulf war.

Iraq maintains a small missile force and several development programs, including for a UAV that most analysts believe probably is intended to deliver biological warfare agents.

* Gaps in Iraqi accounting to UNSCOM suggest that Saddam retains a covert force of up to a few dozen Scud-variant SRBMs with ranges of 650 to 900 km.

* Iraq is deploying its new al-Samoud and Ababil-100 SRBMs, which are capable of flying beyond the UN-authorized 150-km range limit.

* Baghdad's UAVs—especially if used for delivery of chemical and biological warfare (CBW) agents—could threaten Iraq's neighbors, US forces in the Persian Gulf, and the United States if brought close to, or into, the US Homeland.

* Iraq is developing medium-range ballistic missile capabilities, largely through foreign assistance in building specialized facilities.


Discussion
Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction Programs

In April 1991, the UN Security Council enacted Resolution 687 requiring Iraq to declare, destroy, or render harmless its weapons of mass destruction (WMD) arsenal and production infrastructure under UN or International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) supervision. UN Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) 687 also demanded that Iraq forgo the future development or acquisition of WMD.

Baghdad's determination to hold onto a sizeable remnant of its WMD arsenal, agents, equipment, and expertise has led to years of dissembling and obstruction of UN inspections. Elite Iraqi security services orchestrated an extensive concealment and deception campaign to hide incriminating documents and material that precluded resolution of key issues pertaining to its WMD programs.

* Iraqi obstructions prompted the Security Council to pass several subsequent resolutions demanding that Baghdad comply with its obligations to cooperate with the inspection process and to provide United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM) and IAEA officials immediate and unrestricted access to any site they wished to inspect.

* Although outwardly maintaining the facade of cooperation, Iraqi officials frequently denied or substantially delayed access to facilities, personnel, and documents in an effort to conceal critical information about Iraq's WMD programs.

Successive Iraqi declarations on Baghdad's pre-Gulf war WMD programs gradually became more accurate between 1991 and 1998, but only because of sustained pressure from UN sanctions, Coalition military force, and vigorous and robust inspections facilitated by information from cooperative countries. Nevertheless, Iraq never has fully accounted for major gaps and inconsistencies in its declarations and has provided no credible proof that it has completely destroyed its weapons stockpiles and production infrastructure.

* UNSCOM inspection activities and Coalition military strikes destroyed most of its prohibited ballistic missiles and some Gulf war-era chemical and biological munitions, but Iraq still has a small force of extended-range Scud-variant missiles, chemical precursors, biological seed stock, and thousands of munitions suitable for chemical and biological agents.

* Iraq has preserved and in some cases enhanced the infrastructure and expertise necessary for WMD production and has used that capability to maintain a stockpile of WMD and to increase its size and sophistication in some areas.

UN Security Council Resolutions and Provisions for Inspections and Monitoring: Theory and Practice

Resolution Requirement

Res. 687 (3 April 1991) Requires Iraq to declare, destroy, remove, or render harmless under UN or IAEA supervision and not to use, develop, construct, or acquire all chemical and biological weapons, all ballistic missiles with ranges greater than 150 km, and all nuclear weapons-usable material, including related material, equipment, and facilities. The resolution also formed the Special Commission and authorized the IAEA to carry out immediate on-site inspections of WMD-related facilities based on Iraq's declarations and UNSCOM's designation of any additional locations.

Reality:
Baghdad refused to declare all parts of each WMD program, submitted several declarations as part of its aggressive efforts to deny and deceive inspectors, and ensured that certain elements of the program would remain concealed. The prohibition against developing delivery platforms with ranges greater than 150 km allowed Baghdad to research and develop shorter-range systems with applications for longer-range systems and did not affect Iraqi efforts to convert full-size aircraft into unmanned aerial vehicles as potential WMD delivery systems with ranges far beyond 150 km.

Requirement:
Res. 707 (15 August 1991) Requires Iraq to allow UN and IAEA inspectors immediate and unrestricted access to any site they wish to inspect. Demands Iraq provide full, final, and complete disclosure of all aspects of its WMD programs; cease immediately any attempt to conceal, move, or destroy WMD-related material or equipment; allow UNSCOM and IAEA teams to use fixed-wing and helicopter flights throughout Iraq; and respond fully, completely, and promptly to any Special Commission questions or requests.

Reality:
Baghdad in 1996 negotiated with UNSCOM Executive Chairman Ekeus modalities that it used to delay inspections, to restrict to four the number of inspectors allowed into any site Baghdad declared as "sensitive," and to prohibit them altogether from sites regarded as sovereign. These modalities gave Iraq leverage over individual inspections. Iraq eventually allowed larger numbers of inspectors into such sites but only after lengthy negotiations at each site.

Requirement:
Res. 715 (11 October 1991) Requires Iraq to submit to UNSCOM and IAEA long-term monitoring of Iraqi WMD programs; approved detailed plans called for in UNSCRs 687 and 707 for long-term monitoring.

Reality:
Iraq generally accommodated UN monitors at declared sites but occasionally obstructed access and manipulated monitoring cameras. UNSCOM and IAEA monitoring of Iraq's WMD programs does not have a specified end date under current UN resolutions.

Requirement:
Res. 1051 (27 March 1996) Established the Iraqi export/import monitoring system, requiring UN members to provide IAEA and UNSCOM with information on materials exported to Iraq that may be applicable to WMD production, and requiring Iraq to report imports of all dual-use items.

Reality
Iraq is negotiating contracts for procuring—outside of UN controls—dual-use items with WMD applications. The UN lacks the staff needed to conduct thorough inspections of goods at Iraq's borders and to monitor imports inside Iraq.

Requirement:
Res. 1060 (12 June 1996) and Resolutions 1115, 1134, 1137, 1154, 1194, and 1205. Demands that Iraq cooperate with UNSCOM and allow inspection teams immediate, unconditional, and unrestricted access to facilities for inspection and access to Iraqi officials for interviews. UNSCR 1137 condemns Baghdad's refusal to allow entry to Iraq to UNSCOM officials on the grounds of their nationality and its threats to the safety of UN reconnaissance aircraft.

Reality
Baghdad consistently sought to impede and limit UNSCOM's mission in Iraq by blocking access to numerous facilities throughout the inspection process, often sanitizing sites before the arrival of inspectors and routinely attempting to deny inspectors access to requested sites and individuals. At times, Baghdad would promise compliance to avoid consequences, only to renege later.

Requirement:
Res. 1154 (2 March 1998) Demands that Iraq comply with UNSCOM and IAEA inspections and endorses the Secretary General's memorandum of understanding with Iraq, providing for "severest consequences" if Iraq fails to comply.

Res. 1194 (9 September 1998) Condemns Iraq's decision to suspend cooperation with UNSCOM and the IAEA.

Res. 1205 (5 November 1998) Condemns Iraq's decision to cease cooperation with UNSCOM.

Reality:
UNSCOM could not exercise its mandate without Iraqi compliance. Baghdad refused to work with UNSCOM and instead negotiated with the Secretary General, whom it believed would be more sympathetic to Iraq's needs.

Requirement:
Res. 1284 (17 December 1999) Established the United Nations Monitoring, Verification, and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC), replacing UNSCOM; and demanded that Iraq allow UNMOVIC teams immediate, unconditional, and unrestricted access to any and all aspects of Iraq's WMD program.

Reality:
Iraq repeatedly has rejected the return of UN arms inspectors and claims that it has satisfied all UN resolutions relevant to disarmament. Compared with UNSCOM, 1284 gives the UNMOVIC chairman less authority, gives the Security Council a greater role in defining key disarmament tasks, and requires that inspectors be full-time UN employees.

In conclusion, as President George W. Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair have made abundantly clear, Iraq, is in material breach of U.N. resolution 1441 because the U.N. inspectors have concluded that Iraq is not being totally forthcoming and honest about their weapons programs.

Posted 11:07 PM by Steve
My local rag, The Oregonian devoted nearly a half page to
so-called "peace advocacy" letters in it's "letters to
the editor" section of Sunday's paper. Since even the
more most leftist polls show 51% approval for military
action in Iraq, I would hope the Oregonian would want
to present a fair and balanced representation of the
views of the American people.

First and foremost, let's start by addressing
"peace advocacy". I've always found something specious
and empty about this position. Saying you want peace
is sort of like saying you like sunny days and ice
cream cones...or oxygen. It is a basic and natural
condition for humans to prefer peace as opposed to
war. If you prefer strife and conflict, there is
something seriously wrong with you. Odds are, you
probably aren't a contributing member of society. It's
a sure bet you aren't the President of the United
States. The real hypocrisy of American "peace advocacy" position is that it's foundation is a society based on a Revolutionary war. Note that the founding fathers and the minutemen didn't hold a "sit-in". In other words, if the "peace advocates" truly believed in their cause they would be british subjects. The only reason the peaceful protests of the civil rights movement ever worked was because the protesters could count on the strength and guns of the police protection. You can slowly change hearts and minds over time with peaceful protests but, without police protection, it only takes one or two violent people in opposition to turn your protest in to a riot or a slaughter. Being truly peaceful, as opposed to being a victim, is only possible when you are prepared and strong. Strength is tested in conflict. Over the years, America's military might has gone from a continental rabble to the most powerful force on the planet. Overwhelmingly, it has been a force for freedom and for the good of the world.

Reading the letters to the editor it appears that
for many disgruntled and frustrated Democrats "peace
advocacy" is a convenient disguise for Bush-bashing.
The term "war-mongers" is as laughably cliched as it
is unrealistic. No American wants war and it is asinine to
suggest that the United States will somehow profit
from one.

Certainly the economy of the world will benefit
from the confidence that a victory over the threat of
fundamentalist Islamic terror will provide. If we show
that terrorists, both individually and nationally,
will be dealt with decisively we win a major battle
in the war on terror.

I find it hard to stomach the ability of these
so-called "peace advocates" to look the other way at
atrocities committed by Saddam Hussein and his regime
in Iraq. It seems like the ultimate hypocrisy to mourn
the potential suffering of innocent Iraqis if the U.S.
acts, when those same Iraqis suffer a worse fate under
Hussein's rule. We know that Hussein used mustard and
nerve gasses on thousands of Iranian soldiers after
first testing the gasses on 5000 Iraqi Kurds. We know
that Hussein has extorted, murdered and raped his own
citizens to enforce his will. If it wasn't O.K. to
turn a blind eye towards Nazi cruelty and genocide in
the 1940's why is it O.K. to ignore Iraqi cruelty and
genocide?

The so-called "Peace Advocates" blame America
first and this attitude comes through in their
mudslinging. They claim America is an "empire" bent on
dominating the world, but these are the same people
that accused the Republicans of being isolationists
when we opposed Clinton's "nation building" and
bombing in Kosovo and Somalia. One so-called "peace
advocate" says we only fight to distract Americans
from the domestic economy. The economy is slowly
getting back on track and grew 3% last year. Another
so-called "peace advocate" says it's for "oil". If
that is the case why did the American Petroleum
Institute lobby for the lifting of sanctions prior to
the 9/11 attacks? Another so-called "peace advocate"
claims the war is being waged because Bush wants to
save the family honor and finish the job for dear ole'
dad. This strikes me as the looniest argument of the
whole bunch. President George Bush accomplished his
objectives in the first Gulf War to the letter. The
U.N. resolution did not allow for invasion of Iraq or
regime change.

All this petty bickering ignores the most
important fact: That in the post 9/11 world it is
unacceptable to allow a rogue state with terror ties
to develop and build weapons of mass destruction.
Iraq, despite the claims of innocence by so-called
"peace advocates", is connected to varying degrees with
Al-Queda and other terrorist organizations such as:

* Egyptian Islamic Jihad;
* Jamaat Islamiyya, also from Egypt;
* the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group;
* the Islamic Army of Aden, in Yemen;
* Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Muhammad, in Kashmir;
* the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan;
* the Salafist Group for Call and Combat and the Armed
Islamic Group, both of Algeria;
* Abu Sayyaf Group, in Malaysia and the Philippines.

These groups share al-Qaeda's Sunni Muslim
fundamentalist views. Note that Saddam, although
accused of being secular, is also a Sunni.
Intelligence officials and terrorism experts also say
that al-Qaeda has increasingly been cooperating on
logistics and training with Hezbollah, a radical,
Iran-backed Lebanese militia drawn from the minority
Shiite strain of Islam.

Both al-Qaeda operatives and Iraqi intelligence
officers have reportedly backed Ansar al-Islam, a
Kurdish militia fighting other, U.S.-backed Kurds who
oppose Saddam Hussein's government. Beyond that, some
Iraq-watchers suspect that al-Qaeda members trained at
Iraq's Salman Pak terrorist training camp; Muhammad
Atta, a mastermind of the September 11 attacks, met an
Iraqi intelligence agent in Prague; and fleeing
al-Qaeda members have reportedly taken refuge in Iraq.

Everyone, even the French and the Germans,
realize the threat Iraq poses. It comes down a choice
between failed diplomacy or action. Remember, we have
had inspectors in Iraq before. Saddam cajoled,
distorted, obfuscated and otherwise lied then as he is
doing now. Once he sensed that the world was bored
with the whole affair, and that the U.S. had no
backbone, he illegally threw the inspectors out of
Iraq.

Trying to differentiate between Iraq and
terrorists is like differentiating between a "crack
house" and drug dealers on your block. The presence of
the one permits the existence of the other. We live in
a post 9/11 world. A new racist, sexist, and
homophobic enemy has shown itself. It is an enemy that
would love nothing more that to unleash weapons of
mass destruction on innocent American and Israeli
civilians and non-combatants. Fundamentalist Islamic
terrorism is an acknowledged threat and the nations
that support this terror must be neutralized.