EGYPTIAN PAPER: LETS BLAME THE JEWS (AS USUAL)

Al Akhbar (Cairo)
February 26, 2003

Scholars tell us that the military build-up against Iraq is in fact the working of international Zionism. In the Talmud and Midrash as well as in the Torah, Jews are ordered to occupy Iraq and not to leave it until it is completely destroyed and burned. Politicians and economists give us another opinion. It is absolutely against America's interests that Iraq becomes a waste land, the country possessing the world's second largest oil reserve; a reserve which America's industry is thirsty for? Still, a questions hovers over our heads: why all this universal might now being mobilised? Is it to strike against an impoverished country rendered most feeble by diseases and famine?

 

HOLIDAY GREETINGS FROM YASSER ARAFAT TO SADDAM HUSSEIN

Holiday greetings from Yasser Arafat to Saddam Hussein
Special Dispatch - Palestinian Authority/Iraq
The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI)
February 26, 2003

On February 5th, 2003, Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat sent a telegram to Saddam Hussein in honor of the 'Id. The following is the text of the telegram as reported by the Iraqi newspaper Al-Jumhuriya(1):

"President Saddam Hussein, may Allah protect him, received a congratulatory telegram for 'Id Al-Adha [The Feast of the Sacrifice] from Mr. Yasser Arafat, President of Palestine and Chairman of the Executive Committee of the PLO.":

"Your Excellency, Brother-President Saddam Hussein, greetings and the blessings of Allah to you."

"As our glorious nation celebrates 'Id Al-Adha, the holiday of sacrifice and redemption, it is our pleasure to send to you, and through you to your revered government and your people – our brethren – in the name of the Palestinian people and leadership, and from me personally, our warmest regards, our heartfelt and sincere congratulations, and our deepest prayers to Allah the Glorious, may He lead our steps onto the road of virtue, success, and progress to our peoples, and strengthen our brotherly ties, cooperation and solidarity in a way that will serve our interests, our rights, our nations, and the future of our generations and repel all dangers that loom presently over us in our region."

"On this blessed occasion, which we are celebrating with our Palestinian people in the holy land of Palestine, the first of the two Qibla [the direction to which Muslims turn in prayer], the land of Al-Israa wa Al-Mi'raj [Prophet Muhammad's night ascent to heaven from Jerusalem, and his return to earth], I wish, with all confidence and hope, that all our brethren in our great nation [will strengthen] their stand beside us, [and] increase their support to us in this difficult and dangerous phase we are going through, with all its old wounds and hurt. To reduce the suffering of our patient and enduring people, to support our ongoing steadfast resistance in confronting the Israeli war-machine, aggression, murders, and destruction."

"To undermine the attempts and plans by which the Israeli government – the occupying power – is trying to blow up the peace process and the foundations and institutions of our national Palestinian authority, and even to forcefully change its elected leadership and to impose on us an Israeli solution that serves Israel's interests and covetous greed in our holy land, and in our resources [in order] to enhance the vile settlement and occupation of our land."

"Any kind of support and assistance from you in these difficult times will enable us to continue our persistence and resistance until we put an end to the occupation, in all its manifestations, of our holy Al-Quds [Jerusalem] and the Islamic and Christian holy shrines, and exercise our legal and lasting rights, based on international legal resolutions, and most importantly our rights for self determination, for repatriation, and for establishing our independent state with its capital Al-Quds Al-Sharif [Jerusalem]."

"Once again we send you our heartiest brotherly wishes, and to your Excellency we wish the best of health and happiness, and may Allah the Powerful protect Iraq from the great dangers and evils that loom over it ... and together, hand in hand [we will march] to Al-Quds Al-Sharif with the help of Allah."

"[Signed] Yasser Arafat, President of the State of Palestine and Chairman of the PLO, Ramallah. February 5, 2003."

Endnote:
(1) Al-Jumhuriya (Iraq), February 22, 2003.

 

THE FUTURE IS MUSLIM, EUROPEAN OR AMERICAN

The future is Muslim, European or American
The world's future is being decided at this time.
By Dennis Prager
World Net Daily,
February 25, 2003

Such moments are extremely rare in history. And when they have occurred, they have between two, not three, competing ideologies.

But there are now three ideologies competing to shape the future of mankind. They are militant Islam, Western European secularism and socialism, and American Judeo-Christianity and capitalism. The first is being spread both peacefully and violently, the second is being spread peacefully, and the third is not being spread.

Though most people ignore the fact, almost all of the world's believing Muslims believe that all of mankind should be Muslim. This, in and of itself, is not troubling – after all, most Christians would like the whole world to be Christian, and most Westerners would like the whole world to democratic. What is troubling is that if only 10 percent of these Muslims are prepared to use violence to impose their religion on others, we are talking about 100 million people.

This is the reason about 1 million non-Muslim Sudanese have been killed in the last 15 years – because they are resisting the violent imposition of Islam by the Islamic government in Khartoum. This is the reason for the Muslim-Christian violence in Nigeria – Christians there, too, are resisting the violent imposition of Islam. And this is the reason for Islamic terror – to weaken those countries, particularly the United States and Israel, that stand in the way of an Islamic takeover.

The second ideology seeking to dominate the world is secularism and socialism as practiced in Western Europe and supported by educated elites around the world. This is a primary reason for the anti-American demonstrations in Western Europe and in the United States. They were far more against America (especially the America of George W. Bush) than they were against war. Most of these people could not care less about the wars of the world. They have been silent throughout the mass murder of Sudan's blacks, during the genocide in Rwanda, during China's crushing of Tibet, and during Saddam's wars against Iran, Kuwait and Iraq's own Kurds. American and European "peace" activists have found those atrocities and wars quite boring.

Western European socialists and their American (and Canadian, and Latin American) supporters are as passionate about secularism and socialism as believing Muslims are about Islam. And they want to dominate the world as much as militant Muslims want Islam to. Their vehicles are the United Nations, the European Union, international treaties such as the Kyoto Protocols, and international institutions such as the International Court.

Regarding the American way, there are serious impediments to its success.

First, while the first two ideologies – Islam and socialism/secularism – dominate many countries, the third ideology only dominates one – America. There is no other country that claims to be Judeo-Christian and no other that has such strong support for capitalism and small government (the opposite of socialism). Therefore, while both the militant Muslims and the socialists/secularists have supporters around the world, American values have few. That is why America goes it alone – with the partial exceptions of Israel and Britain, no other society has the same values as we do.

Second, neither Judeo-Christian nor capitalist values are secure in America. Many Americans, including almost its entire intellectual class, are as hostile to Judeo-Christian and non-socialist values as the militant Muslims and European socialists are.

Third, almost no one is teaching the next generation of Americans (as almost no one taught the present adult generation) what is unique, let alone superior, about American values. Our children are overwhelmingly educated by people who believe in Europe's values, not in ours.

As neither China nor the rest of Asia, nor Africa, nor Latin America are offering an ideology that can dominate the world, either Europe's, or the militant Muslims', or America's way of life will prevail.

But the American way can only prevail if Americans believe in it. That is why, as important as the military and ideological battles against militant Islam are, the most important battle is the ideological one within America. But with America's universities, unions, professional associations, mainstream news media, and one of its two major parties ideologically aligned with Europe, and with big businesses constantly undermining Judeo-Christian values, the battle within America itself for America's unique values is far from won. And given that only America offers a viable alternative to both militant Islam and secularism-socialism, if we lose the battle here, humanity has a very dark future.

 

YOU CAN’T “CONTAIN” SADDAM

You can't 'contain' Saddam
Cold War doctrine doesn't apply in the age of terror
By John Howard
The Wall St. Journal
February 26, 2003

Critics of U.S. policy on Iraq have lately begun to employ the term "containment" to describe an alternative approach. That alternative essentially is to muddle along with endless further U.N. resolutions, which Iraq either ignores or partially obeys under intense pressure, with inspectors given "more time" to disarm Iraq.

It's not surprising that containment has been invoked. It's had a good diplomatic history – quite illustrious really. It described the West's successful response to the Soviet Union's expansionism after World War II and stretching into the 1950s. We all know that in the end the Soviet Union imploded. The liberal democratic values of the West won the ideological contest, and the U.S. has emerged as the one superpower. With a track record like that, why wouldn't America's opponents over Iraq want to annex "containment" to their cause?

It is, however, a false historical comparison. Worse, it completely misstates the character of the threat which the world now faces.

Moscow was "contained" because of the possession of atomic/nuclear weapons by both the West and the Soviets. The doctrine of Mutual Assured Destruction guaranteed the maintenance of the status quo delivered by containment, until the internal implosion of the old Soviet empire. The view, validly held, was that because both sides had weapons of mass destruction, the potential human cost of military action by the West and the Soviet Union at the time of Hungary in 1956, or Czechoslovakia in 1968, would have been infinitely greater than the human cost (bad though it was) in leaving dictatorial Soviet-backed regimes in power there. Then, the potential cost of doing something was greater than the cost of doing nothing. Now, in the case of Iraq, the potential cost of doing nothing is clearly much greater than the cost of doing something.

If Iraq isn't effectively disarmed, not only could she use her chemical and biological weapons against her own people again and also other countries, but other rogue states will be encouraged to believe that they too can join the weapons of mass destruction league. Proliferation of chemical, biological and, indeed, nuclear weapons will multiply the likelihood of terrorist groups laying hands on such arms. The consequences for mankind would be horrific.

In other words doing nothing about Iraq, potentially, is much more costly than using force, if necessary, to ensure the disarmament of Iraq.

Incidentally, in the very short term, the failure of the U.N. to deal effectively with Iraq will have consequences for the world's dealings with North Korea. Can it seriously be suggested that the Security Council can discipline North Korea if it fails to discipline Iraq?

Not one person wants war. We all abhor it. Those who marched a week ago in the cities of the world do not have a mortgage on detestation of military conflict or of human suffering. They do not exclusively occupy the moral high ground. Have they seriously addressed the human suffering that could flow from the world's failure to deal once and for all with Iraq's 12-year-long defiance of the community of nations? Are they morally comfortable with the suffering Saddam Hussein continues to inflict on Iraqi children through his corruption of the U.N.'s "oil for food" program? What do they say of the torture and arbitrary executions that are a part of everyday life in Iraq?

Military action against Iraq will involve casualties. But a powerful case can be made that the potential casualties will be much greater if the world does not act effectively and now.

A peaceful outcome in the short term, which does not imperil our longer-term security and safety, appears remote at present. It could be made less remote if the world acted with greater unity. Iraq does respond to pressure. The inspectors are in Baghdad because of the American military buildup. Hans Blix and Kofi Annan have both said that. America's critics know it, too, but won't admit it. Rather, their illogical starting point is the presence in Iraq of weapons inspectors, only there because of U.S. pressure – the very pressure they have attacked!

Given past Iraqi behavior, there is a faint hope that a united expression of view from the Security Council, combined with pressure from neighboring Arab states (which carry a special responsibility), might just induce a decisive change of heart somewhere in Baghdad. But true containment of Iraq can be achieved only if the world recognizes that the challenges of today are so different from those of 50 years ago.

The nuclear balance, which through the Cold War alternately traumatized and reassured the world, has been replaced by the constant specter of weapons of mass destruction in the hands not only of more states but also terrorists operating without constraint in a borderless world. That is what is at stake in containing Iraq. The cost of doing nothing is infinitely greater than the cost of acting.

(Mr. Howard is the prime minister of Australia.)

 

HOWARD COULD END UP IN COURT

Iraq justified in launching pre-emptive strikes: Experts
Howard could end up in court for backing U.S.-led war on Iraq, say Australian barristers
IslamOnline.net & News Agencies
February 26, 2003

A U.S.-led military aggression on Iraq would be a violation of international law that could end in the world court, 43 Australian legal experts warned Wednesday, February 26.

In an article published by the Sydney Morning Herald, the group of leading barristers and academic lawyers stressed the so-called "coalition of the willing" talked about by U.S. President George Bush, including Australia, had not yet presented any persuasive arguments that an invasion of Iraq could be justified by international law.

Iraq would now be justified in launching a pre-emptive attack against the United States and its coalition partners because it is Iraq that is now facing a direct threat, according to the experts.

The group, which includes a former High Court judge, senior counsel and international law professors from Australia's top universities says international law recognizes two bases for the use of force.

The first, enshrined in Article 51 of the United Nations Charter, allows force to be used in self-defense only if the attack was actual or imminent.

"The second basis is when the U.N. Security Council authorizes the use of force as a collective response to the use or threat of force."

But the group says the Security Council is bound by the terms of the U.N. Charter and can authorize the use of force under charter seven only if there is evidence of an actual threat which could not be averted by other means such as negotiation and further weapons inspection.

"Ironically, the same principle would justify Iraq now launching pre-emptive attacks on members of the coalition because it could validly argue that it feared attack," said the experts.

The group said even if the use of force against Iraq could be justified, the Geneva Convention significantly limits the means and method.

These include prohibitions on targeting civilian populations or civilian infrastructure and causing extensive destruction of property not justified by military objectives.

Intentionally launching an attack knowing it would cause "incidental" civilian casualties and which would be clearly excessive in relation to the expected military outcome "constitutes a war crime."

"The military objective of disarming Iraq could not justify widespread harm to the Iraqi population, over half of whom are under the age of 15," stressed the legal experts.

They said the creation of the International Criminal Court last year had provided a stronger system of scrutiny and adjudication of violations of humanitarian law.

The court now has jurisdiction over war crimes and attributes criminal responsibility to individuals responsible for planning military action that violates international humanitarian law and those who carry it out.

"It specifically extends criminal law to heads of state, leaders of government, parliamentarians, government officials and military personnel," the group said.

"Respect for international law must be the first concern of the Australian government if it seeks to punish the Iraqi government for not respecting international law."

Publication of the article follows Australian Prime Minister John Howard's strong support Tuesday, February 25, for the U.S.-British draft resolution that could provide a trigger for war on Iraq within two weeks.

Australia and Britain are the only two countries to have committed forces to a possible war against Iraq, although Howard maintains no decision has yet been made to commit Australian troops to fighting.

On Wednesday, February 5, Howard suffered a historic defeat in an unprecedented no-confidence vote by Australia's Senate over his handling of the Iraq crisis.

The Labor opposition, left wing Greens, Democrats and Independent senators used their upper house majority to pass the motion by 34 votes to 31, following an emotional, 11-hour debate over the looming war.

It was the first time in the 102 year history of the Australian parliament that the upper house has censured a serving prime minister with a vote of no confidence.

Howard's conservative Liberal-National government was also censured in the motion, which condemned its decision to deploy troops to the Gulf without reference to parliament and contrary to public opinion.

Sydney and other major Australian towns were theatre for biggest anti-war protests ever seen in Australia.

Up to a quarter of a million demonstrators jammed the center of Sydney Sunday, February 16, in the biggest of a series of nationwide rallies to coincide with a coordinated weekend of global protest.

The rally, organized by a coalition of left-wing activists, trade unions, church groups and pacifists, filled a city park and stretched for two kilometers (a mile and a half) around, making crowd estimates difficult.

 

ROCKET THAT COULD STRIKE AT THE HEART OF ISRAEL

Rocket that could strike at the heart of Israel
By James Bone
The Times of London
January 26, 2003

The missile at the centre of the looming showdown between Iraq and the United Nations may be part of an ambitious secret project to develop a much longer-range missile that could hit Tehran or Tel Aviv, UN and independent missile experts believe. The specifications of the al-Samoud 2 missile appear to have been designed so that it could be fitted with a second engine, making it a much more potent threat than previously realised, the experts have told The Times.

Hans Blix, the chief UN weapons inspector, has demanded that Iraq should begin destroying the missiles by Saturday, and UN sources say he is ready to call an emergency meeting of the Security Council this weekend if it fails to do so. If Dr Blix reported a violation to the Security Council it would be tantamount to finding Iraq in "further material breach" of UN demands and would transform the diplomatic landscape at a stroke. Even France, the leading opponent of a war, has insisted that Iraq follow Dr Blix's order to destroy the missiles.

The UN inspectorate has dispatched Demetri Perricos, its chief of operations, from New York to Baghdad to oversee arrangements for dismantling the missiles. He is due to arrive in Iraq on Thursday.

Tony Blair predicted yesterday that Iraq would destroy the missiles at the last minute. "Of course Saddam will offer concessions," he told MPs. "This is a game with which he is immensely familiar. As the threat level rises so the concessions are eked out." But Saddam Hussein indicated in an interview with CBS television on Monday that Iraq would resist. "Iraq is allowed to prepare proper missiles and we are committed to that," the Iraqi President said. "We do not have missiles that go beyond the permitted range." Until now the missiles appeared a poor casus belli because the threat they posed seemed limited.

Dr Blix's inspectors have said that the al-Samoud 2 flew over the maximum permitted range of 150km in only 13 of 40 test flights, reaching a maximum distance of 183km.

But experts say that the specifications of the al-Samoud 2 and its use of a Russian-designed Volga SA2 engine suggest that Iraq might be trying to develop a missile with a much longer range that could threaten the entire region.

In building the new missile, Iraq ignored a 1994 UN letter restricting the missile's diameter to less than 600mm. The UN issued the order with the express intent of preventing Iraq equipping the missile with two engines. Baghdad also violated a 1997 UN letter prohibiting the use of engines from certain surface-to-air missiles, such as the Volga SA2, in surface-to-surface missiles.

UN inspectors in Iraq have determined that the al-Samoud 2 has a diameter of 760mm, which would make it possible to equip it with two Volga engines instead of one. Moreover, the diameter of the "fat Samoud" – as inspectors call it – was mysteriously increased from its original 750mm design in 1994, possibly better to accommodate two engines.

"You can put two engines in there," said Tim McCarthy, a former UN missile inspector now with the Monterey Institute of International Studies, which has studied the al-Samoud 2. "You indeed can carry a larger payload or go a longer range ... There is no question it can go proscribed ranges. It would increase by a factor of two or three the range of this thing."

One source close to Dr Blix said the inspectors suspect that Iraq is copying India's Prithvi single-stage missile. The Prithvi, which is a metre in diameter, can carry a 1,000kg payload, sufficient to transport a nuclear device and has a similar twin-engined design based on SA2 technology. Adding to suspicions is the fact that a new missile test stand at al-Rafah is capable of testing rocket engines above the permissible thrust. Iraq has said that it built a bigger stand after the site was bombed so that it could test two rocket engines side by side. Dr Blix has ordered that the test stand be placed under UN supervision.

Other independent experts say that the al-Samoud 2 may be intended as a two-stage missile like Iraq's previous al-Tammuz project. The al-Tammuz used a Scud as the first stage and a Volga engine as the second stage to reach a range of up to 2,000km.

Iraq first admitted making a "paper study" of the al-Tammuz, but later conceded that it had actually constructed mock-ups of the missile.

Colin Powell, the US Secretary of State, told the Security Council this month that Iraq "has programmes that are intended to produce ballistic missiles that fly over 1,000km". One liquid fuel system was intended to reach 1,200km, he said.

"Saddam Hussein's intentions have never changed," General Powell said. "He is not developing the missiles for self-defence. These are missiles to project power -chemical, biological, and, if we let him, nuclear weapons."

The UN's 150km limit was imposed on Iraq's missiles as a condition of the ceasefire that ended the Gulf War to make it hard to reach Kuwait City, which lies about 100km from the Iraqi border. Israel is about 300km away and Tehran just over 500km away.

PETA SHOWS ITS STRIPES WITH LETTER TO ARAFAT

PETA shows its stripes with letter to Arafat
The Los Angeles Daily News
February 21, 2003

For decades I have looked on as animal-rights activists crusaded against veal, against rigid confinement for poultry and against medical research conducted on myriad living things that don't happen to be human.

I have watched them splatter paint on mink-wearing matrons.

And I have seen these passionate souls chain themselves to department store entryways in hopes of saving sables and seals and chinchillas everywhere.

But today it is too much. Today, in wartime, the whale-lovers and chimp-saviors have crossed over into the territory of blatant bad taste.

It started with a letter from Ingrid Newkirk, president of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, to Yasser Arafat, Palestinian Authority chairman (always photographed in olive drab sans even fur collar).

Simply put, Newkirk's note called attention to a Jerusalem terror bombing last month in which explosives were concealed on a donkey. Some Palestinian thug hit a detonator, charges went off and the donkey was blown to pieces. There were no human casualties.

'We have received many calls and letters from people shocked at the bombing,' PETA's leader wrote Arafat. 'If you have the opportunity, will you please add to your burdens my request that you appeal to all those who listen to you to leave the animals out of the conflict?'

Obviously, for the price of the same stamp, Newkirk could also have asked Arafat to use his influence to leave humans 'out of the conflict.' But, no, the subject was donkeys – and even PLO cats left in Arafat's compound to dodge Israeli bulldozers.

All this to save four-legged noncombatants when so-called Palestinian martyrs – teenagers and young adults who pack their bodies with dynamite – are the real animals of the Middle East.

Truly, Newkirk's letter throws mud on the graves of so many innocent Israeli parents and children whose lives were taken by bloodthirsty fanatics. Further, PETA's moralizer-in-chief pelted decency in the face when asked to persuade Arafat to help stop the bombing of civilians.

'It's not my business,' Newkirk was quoted as saying, 'to inject myself into human wars.'

So that's it. Her brief on behalf of suffering and death stops with donkeys. Or cats. Maybe camels slain by stray shrapnel. No satirist – not Mort Sahl or Bill Maher or Richard Pryor – could come close to such callous conceit. It is tantamount to a contractors association bemoaning the wreckage of buildings and ignoring the bodies inside.

 

ARAFAT GETS ASS-ININE PLEA FROM PETA ON INTIFADA

Arafat gets ass-inine plea from PETA on intifada
By Kerry Dougherty
The Virginian-Pilot
February 10, 2003

Every so often, I violate my own policy against giving PETA – People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals – the publicity it desperately desires and doesn't deserve.

I do this whenever the Norfolk-based animal rights group does something so astonishing, it simply can't be ignored.

This is one of those times.

But our story doesn't begin in Norfolk. It begins in Israel.

On Jan. 26, a bomb exploded on the road between Jerusalem and the settlement of Gush Etzion.

As terror attacks go, this one was minor. Most of us didn't hear about it because, with the exception of a few bus passengers treated for shock, no one was injured.

Thank God.

Palestinian terrorists delivered the bomb to its destination by donkey. They strapped explosives and a remote device to the animal and detonated the bomb by cell phone as an Israeli bus passed by.

The donkey, of course, was killed.

You know where this is going, don't you?

That's right. PETA, the group that never before expressed concern about the carnage in Israel, is suddenly outraged.

All because a donkey died.

Never mind that, according to the Israeli embassy, which keeps track of such grim statistics, 729 Israelis have perished in terrorist attacks since September 2000.

It took the death of a donkey for PETA to find its voice.

Leave the animals out of it, they cry.

Determined to make Hampton Roads look like a breeding ground for wackos to the rest of the world, PETA President Ingrid Newkirk this week fired off a fax to Yasser Arafat.

She began the letter with a polite salutation: "Your Excellency."

I can think of lots of titles for Arafat. Excellency isn't among them.

But I digress.

"...We have received many calls and letters from people shocked at the bombing ... in which a live donkey, laden with explosives, was intentionally blown up.

"All nations behave abominably in many ways when they are fighting their enemies, and animals are always caught in the crossfire. The U.S. Army abandoned thousands of loyal service dogs in Vietnam. (Odd. No mention of our dead soldiers, MIAs, POWs or even loyal South Vietnamese allies who were left behind, but again, I digress.)

"Al-Qaeda and the British government have both used animals in hideously cruel biological weaponry tests."

Brace yourselves. It gets worse.

"We watched on television as stray cats in your own compound fled as best they could from Israeli bulldozers"

Fleeing cats! PETA confronts the horror of war.

"Animals claim no nation. They are in perpetual involuntary servitude to all humankind, and, although they pose no threat and own no weapons, human beings always win the undeclared war against them...

"If you have the opportunity," Newkirk beseeched Arafat, "will you please add to your burdens my request that you appeal to all those who listen to you to leave the animals out of this conflict?" In other words, Newkirk seems to be begging the Palestinians not to stop the slaughter, but rather to find a different delivery system for their bombs.

Appalling.

Perhaps Ms. Newkirk would prefer that the Palestinians used suicide bombers instead of burros. Oh, that's right, they usually do.

Lisa Lange, PETA's vice president of communications, told me yesterday that Newkirk's letter was written after their offices had been bombarded with calls from PETA members who had learned of the donkey bomb.

Lange said it's PETA's philosophy that human cruelty often begins with animal cruelty.

The Washington Post this week asked Ms. Newkirk if she had "considered asking Arafat to persuade those who listen to him to stop blowing up people as well" as animals.

Her response should be required reading for all would-be members of PETA:

"It's not my business to inject myself into human wars," Newkirk told the Post.

How does one respond to such moral ambiguity?

How about a body count of human bodies?

In January 2003 – the month in which the donkey died – 21 Israelis and eight foreign nationals were killed by terrorists in Israel, and 127 others were injured.

Yet PETA weeps for the ass.

Radio talk show host Tony Macrini got it right when he remarked recently that "PETA" was an acronym for "People Embarrassing the Tidewater Area."

One can only hope that Newkirk left off her Norfolk return address on that asinine letter to Arafat.

FULL ARTICLES

EXTREMISTS JOINING FORCES

Extremists joining forces, CSIS warns
Unlikely partners: White supremacists allying with Islamists, document claims
By Stewart Bell
The National Post
February 21, 2003

White supremacist groups are working to expand their support in Canada, according to a top-secret intelligence document released yesterday as federal authorities tried to figure out what to do with Holocaust denier Ernst Zundel.

"We do have, unfortunately, our share of homegrown problems. By way of an example is the white supremacist movement," said the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) document, dated last Nov. 22.

The briefing report, obtained by the National Post under the Access to Information Act, cites efforts by hate groups "to increase their support and criticize the immigration policies of the Canadian government.

"In addition, over the past year, the firebombing of a Jewish community centre in Saskatoon and threats against the Jewish community in Ottawa have been troubling events."

The document did not present evidence of a link between these incidents and white supremacists.

Experts say Canada's extreme right has been largely in disarray since the 1994 collapse of the Heritage Front, a Toronto-based white supremacist group that united the Ku Klux Klan, Aryan Nations and a U.S. criminal terrorist group called The Order.

But such hate groups have found a common cause recently with Muslim extremists in the Arab world who have been promoting Jewish conspiracy theories and attempting to deny the legitimacy of Israel, experts say.

"The threat from the far right has not disappeared, though it's been overshadowed by the threat from Islamism and Arabism," said Manuel Prutschi of the Canadian Jewish Congress. "And indeed, in some ways, they have re-energized each other. It's a bizarre alliance, but nonetheless there it is."

A source familiar with Canada's extreme right agreed, saying: "The people in leadership of the right wing are always looking for opportunities."

But he called the white supremacist and Islamist alliance a "blip," and said that while hate groups once targeted Jews, they are now focusing more on government.

"The situation with the right wing in Canada, it's cyclical. It has its ups and downs. We're at the low but you're going to see a resurgence. The next Canadian hate movement, I think, will be more directed against the government."

Mr. Zundel was "one of the pioneers" of the alliance between the anti-Israeli movement in the Middle East and the Holocaust denial movement in the West, Mr. Prutschi said.

When he was charged in 1984 with "spreading false news," Mr. Zundel had been distributing not only propaganda denying that six million Jews were killed by Nazi Germany, but also a four-page letter called "The West, War and Islam."

The letter was mailed to 1,200 addresses in the Middle East.

"Obviously he saw the Middle East as an area where his views would be well-received and also as a source of funding," said Mr. Prutschi, who has tracked right-wing extremists for many years.

In 1989, 17 Canadian white supremacists were invited to Tripoli to attend the 20th anniversary of the Libyan revolution, including Wolfgang Droege, a former KKK member and a founder of the Heritage Front.

Mr. Droege, an associate of Mr. Zundel's, hoped to obtain financing from the Libyans in exchange for supplying information on Canadian Jewish groups. But CSIS succeeded in planting an informant inside the Front and it eventually collapsed.

Evidence of the ties between the extreme right and Muslim extremists can be found on the Internet site operated by Mr. Zundel's spokesman, Mark Weber. He devotes significant space to the Middle East and one of his columns on the "powerful Jewish lobby" was republished by a newspaper in Saudi Arabia.

 

MIDLAND NAZI TURNS TO ISLAM

Midland Nazi turns to Islam
By Amardeep Bassey
The Sunday Mercury (Birmingham, UK)
February 16, 2003

A "Satanic Fuhrer" who urged neo-Nazis to fight a race war has turned full circle to become an Islamic fundamentalist.

Midland-based David Myatt, 51, was the political guru behind white supremacist group Combat 18 and has been the leading hardline Nazi intellectual in Britain since the 1960s.

Now the self-confessed Pagan and Adolf Hitler worshipper hails al Qaida leader Osama bin Laden as his inspiration and praises the World Trade Center attacks as acts of heroism.

Writing under various pseudo-nyms, including his Islamic name Abdul Aziz, the thrice-married Physics graduate has posted messages on Islamic religious websites supporting suicide missions and urging young Muslims to take up Jihad.

He is also believed to be the author of several anti-semitic and anti-West articles entitled 'The Crusader War Against Islam and The Zionist Quest for World Domination', written under the name Abdul Aziz ibn Myatt.

It is a far cry from his previous literary works which included the 1997 fascist terrorist handbook 'The Practical Guide to Aryan Revolution'. The book inspired Brixton nail-bomber David Copeland, who is now serving six life sentences.

According to anti-fascist magazine Searchlight, Myatt was also the Grand Master of a secret occult sect called the Order of the Nine Angels, which was alleged to have practised human sacrifice.

But a Sunday Mercury investigation suggests that his sudden conversion to Islam three years ago may be just a political ploy to advance his own failing anti-establishment agenda.

We discovered that Myatt uses various online identities to simultaneously post supportive messages on right-wing nationalist websites, while calling for the creation of a global Islamic superstate on Islamic religious internet sites.

On one site, Aryan Nation, he attempts to reconcile the differences between both extremes under the title Islamic Liaison Group dating his messages with his trademark yf (Year of the Fuhrer).

On another he argues that Muslims and Aryans share the same common enemy in the Jewish nation and western capitalism, supporting his diatribe with claims that more than 60,000 Muslims joined Hitler's SS in the Second World War.

He also continues to publish newsletters for his own German Nazi-modelled National Socialist Movement (NSM) which counted Copeland as a branch organiser and advocated terrorist insurrection to spark a race war.

On Islamic internet discussion sites he likens the American attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq to the Allied occupation of Hitler's Nazi Germany.

One Muslim internet user told the Sunday Mercury that Myatt, who has an IQ of 187, had convinced other users he was an Islamic scholar with his eloquent arguments backed with Koranic verses.

He said: "After September 11 Abdul Aziz's messages started to become more extreme.

"But because he wrote with authority, many less-knowledgeable Muslims thought he was a holy man and began supporting his fundamentalist views.

"When his true identity was revealed by other users on the site, he changed his online name to Abdul bin Aziz and then al Haqq.

"Other e-mail addresses he used included sheikh@al-qaeda.com.

"He was a very popular and controversial figure until he was unmasked late last year, after which people became much more wary about what he was writing and his messages dried up."

Gerry Gable, from anti-fascist magazine Searchlight, said: "Myatt is an ethereal character who has used numerous aliases to post messages on extremist websites.

"He is a dangerous man who has twice been jailed for his violent right-wing activities and who openly asked for blood to be spilled in the quest for white Aryan domination.

"We believe that despite his claims to be a devout Muslim he remains a deeply intellectual subversive and is still one of the most hardline Nazi intellectuals in Britain today.

"Myatt believes in the disruption of existing societies as a prelude to the creation of a new more warrior-like Aryan society which he calls the Galactic Empire.

"Now he has has simply jumped on the Islamic extremist bandwagon to further his own wish of a society divided on ethnic lines.

"He believes they have common enemies but it is his disillusionment with the ineptitude of the Nazi movement that has led to this most unholy of alliances."

Michael Whine, Chairman of the Board of Deputies of British Jews, added: "Myatt has a long history of involvement with Nazi activity and anti-semitism.

"The fact that he has converted to Islam and allied himself with its extremist fringe is in line with the opportunist politics that have seen him dabble in Buddhism and Chinese Taoism in the past.

"I would advise all Muslims to have nothing to do with this man."

But one hardline Islamic group has defended Myatt and welcomed him with open arms.

Sheikh Omar Bakri, leader of the extremist Al Muhajiroun organisation, said: "When you become a Muslim you start afresh with a clean slate so it does not matter what views he held before.

"I am very keen to meet up with him as we both share a lot in common and I am sure he can help the Islamic cause."

Myatt was last night unavailable for comment, having moved from his Leigh Sinton home in Worcestershire some years ago.

 

GERMAN MUSLIM’S RADICAL PAST WAS PAVED BY SAUDIS

German Muslim's radical past was paved by Saudis
By David Crawford and Ian Johnson
The Wall Street Journal
February 24, 2003
[Extracts]

In a deposition that revealed rare details about how an Islamic extremist was recruited, a German man linked with last year's Djerba, Tunisia, synagogue bombing has told police how a respected Muslim leader in Germany sent him on a path of study that led him to Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Chechnya, and friendship with an al Qaeda suicide bomber. Mr. Ganczarski, a convert to Islam, was offered a chance to study at a university in Medina, Saudi Arabia. His deposition provides a glimpse of how Saudi educational institutions and religious leaders helped recruit young Europeans to study its puritanical strain of Islam.

 

ATTACKS ON JEWS INCREASE BY 15 PERCENT IN A YEAR

Attacks on Jews increase by 15 per cent in a year
By Marie Woolf
The Independent (London)
February 21, 2003

Violent attacks on Jews and the desecration of synagogues and Jewish sites have increased rapidly in the past year, evidence revealed yesterday.

Anti-Semitic incidents rose to 350 in 2002, the second- highest number recorded, provoking fears that the rising tide of hatred has been fuelled by tensions in the Middle East.

Forty-seven violent assaults against Jewish people, an increase of 15 per cent since 2001, included seven in which victims needed hospital treatment. There was also a marked increase in synagogue and cemetery desecration including the wrecking of a synagogue in Finsbury Park, north London, and attacks on seven Jewish cemeteries where graves were daubed with swastikas.

Since 2000 there has been a 400 per cent increase in attacks on British synagogues, including the attempted petrol bombing of one in Edinburgh.

Jewish groups blamed anti-Israel feelings and a rise in radical Islamic groups for the increase yesterday.

In one incident, a Middle Eastern man on a London Underground train pointed at a Jewish passenger, shouted "Yahud" (Arabic for Jew) and pretended to blow himself up like a suicide bomber.

One religious Jew was viciously beaten in London and left for dead on the street before being taken to hospital.

Two Jewish people were beaten by attackers from anti-Israel demonstrations and a woman was called a "filthy Zionist Jew Bitch" by someone on an anti-Israeli goods boycott demonstration outside a Marks & Spencer store in London.

Mike Whine of the Community Security Trust, which protects the Jewish community from abuse, said: "There was a worrying increase in violent assaults on Jewish people some of which were life- threatening. The majority of these were unprovoked and involved the use of anti-Semitic words or behaviour.

"More than any other trend this reflects the cumulative effect of the promotion of hatred against the Jews that come from the Middle East and from radical Islamist groups."

Of the 350 incidents recorded 100 involved references to Israel or the Middle East, while 48 were linked to right-wing or fascist groups or sentiments.

 

ANTI-SEMITIC “PROTOCOLS” PUBLISHED IN PALESTINIAN PRESS

Anti-Semitic "Protocols" published in Palestinian press
By IDF
February 21, 2003

In a new chapter appearing in the most recent edition of the A-Shuhada'a newspaper (no. 47), sections of the age-old, anti-Semitic forgery, "The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion", were published.

A-Shuhada'a, published by the political office of the Palestinian National Security Force, relates to many political, military, and economic topics in accordance with new developments in the Palestinian, Arab, and international arenas. For example, an editorial penned by Ahmed Hilas, the paper's Editor-in-Chief, addresses the current Cairo talks between Fatah and Hamas.

A-Shuhada'a is an official newspaper of the Palestinian Authority intended for officers of the National Security Force in the Gaza Strip. In a chapter that relates to military matters, there is an article that examines Israel's military industry, as well as an article that reflects upon Islam's stance vis-a-vis the Jews.

 

ISRAELI ARABS TAKE LESSONS AT YAD VASHEM BEFORE PLANNED TRIP TO AUSCHWITZ

Israeli Arabs take lessons at Yad Vashem before planned trip to Auschwitz
The Jerusalem Post
February 18, 2003

Yad Vashem is holding special preparatory classes about the Holocaust for an unusual delegation of Israeli Arabs that is planning to visit the site of the Auschwitz death camp.

Some 35 people are scheduled to take part in the trip to Poland, which has been entitled, "From Memory to Peace." In media interviews delegation members have said the purpose of the trip is to better understand the trauma experienced by the Jews and its role in the establishment of Israel.

Yad Vashem said it would hold classes on Wednesday for the group at its International School for Holocaust Studies, which will include a tour of parts of the memorial and a lecture by Avner Shalev, Chairman of the Yad Vashem Directorate.

Participants are to be issued with literature about the Holocaust translated into Arabic.

FULL ARTICLES

ANTI-WAR PROTESTS COMPLICATE AMERICA’S PR EFFORT ON IRAQ

Anti-war protests complicate America's PR effort on Iraq
The Associated Press
February 19, 2003

President George W. Bush is shrugging off global anti-war protests, saying his role as a leader is to put national security first and confront Saddam Hussein.

Yet the size of the protests, drawing millions to the streets of world capitals last weekend, complicated White House efforts to rally world support for disarming the Iraqi leader.

The administration mounted a public relations campaign Tuesday in an effort to liken the protests to demonstrations against NATO's staging of missiles in Germany in the early 1980s – rather than to the massive protests against the Vietnam War three decades ago.

"I respectfully disagree" with those who doubt that Saddam is a threat to peace, Bush said. "I owe it to the American people to secure this country. I will do so."

The weekend demonstrations, the largest anti-war protests since the Vietnam era, presented an unwelcome distraction to the White House as it joined with Britain in pressing for a new Iraq war resolution before the U.N. Security Council. More demonstrations are scheduled for March 1 in Washington and San Francisco.

"These marches are 1983 all over again," White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said, referring to angry street protests against NATO's positioning of intermediate-range missiles in what was then West Germany.

In that case, the missiles helped contribute to the collapse of the Soviet Union, the end of the Cold War and the reunification of Germany, Fleischer suggested.

"There is no question that, as a result of peace through strength, communism was defeated and the Berlin Wall came down," Fleischer said.

"The point I'm making is that mass street protests don't always lead to the results people think," the spokesman added. "Often the message of the protesters is contradicted by history."

He also noted that there was substantial anti-war sentiment in the United States in the late 1930s and early 1940s, but that President Franklin D. Roosevelt rallied the U.S. public in World War II "to save the world."

Historians and analysts suggested that the recent demonstrations are not really comparable to those against the Vietnam War – held as the war was going on and as thousands of Americans and hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese were losing their lives.

Such protests "are not going to have the same policy implications as Vietnam, because this war is going to be over fast even if it goes badly," said Michael O'Hanlon, an analyst with the Brookings Institution. "So you're not going to have that sense of a protracted military stalemate."

As with those missile protests in Europe, the current demonstrations are "serious but ultimately containable," O'Hanlon said. Even so, he said, the missiles-in-Germany flap "had the potential to really divide the alliance. And it took a lot of work to get beyond it."

At the very least, O'Hanlon said, the level of global opposition now to war in Iraq makes it harder for Bush to press ahead with military action anytime soon.

Bush talked about the protests in a question-and-answer session Tuesday with reporters after a White House swearing-in ceremony for new Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman William H. Donaldson.

"Democracy is a beautiful thing," Bush said. "I welcome people's right to say what they believe."

But he said neither the size of the protests nor the anti-war message of the demonstrators would sway him. That would be "like deciding ... policy based upon a focus group. The role of a leader is to decide policy based upon the security – in this case, the security of the people," the president said.

"War is my last choice. But the risk of doing nothing is even a worse option as far as I'm concerned," Bush said.

As to negative public reaction, particularly in countries that are traditional U.S. allies, Bush said, "I think anytime somebody shows courage, when it comes to peace, that the people will eventually understand that."

Polls show that Bush has persuaded a majority of Americans about the need for military action against Iraq, but most want more time for the United Nations to build a broad alliance.

 

IRAQ FOR THE IRAQIS

Iraq for the Iraqis
After the invasion, leave it to us to establish democracy.
By Ahmad Chalabi
The Wall St. Journal
February 19, 2003

We the Iraqis are ready to embark on a final journey to fulfill our destiny as a dignified and free nation. Here in northern Iraq, I am surrounded by fellow Iraqi patriots, many of whom are now gathering in this liberated zone. We have long been united around the goal of claiming our country from the hands of tyranny. Our struggle for freedom has been a long epic, but our hour of liberation is now beginning.

While the day of Iraq's freedom is at hand, a day of reckoning for U.S.-Iraqi relations is also close by. After decades of struggle the Iraqi people, with the assistance of the U.S., have a chance finally to construct a free and democratic society at peace with itself and with the world. This cooperation between the Iraqi people and the U.S. also has the potential of being a historical watershed between the Arab and Muslim world and America.

No doubt the U.S. will carry the heavy burden of the immediate military campaign. However, we in the democratic Iraqi opposition have been carrying the equally heavy burden of the political struggle against Saddam for many long and lonely decades. The polite term of "regime change" is new in the American political vocabulary. But the idea of democracy in Iraq and liberty for the Iraqi people have been in the conscience of Iraqis for three generations. We have sought it, dreamed of it, and fought for it--always paying a high price in lives lost. As deliverance approaches, we therefore intend to be full participants in shaping the future Iraq. American help is essential – and is welcomed – in winning the fight against Saddam. But the liberation of our country and its reintegration into the world community is ultimately a task that we Iraqis must shoulder.

This is why the proposed U.S. occupation and military administration of Iraq is unworkable and unwise. Unworkable, because it is predicated on keeping Saddam's existing structures of government, administration and security in place – albeit under American officers. It would ultimately leave important decisions about the future of Iraq in the hands of either foreign occupiers or Saddam's officials. Unwise, because it will result in long-term damage to the U.S.-Iraq relationship and America's position in the region and beyond.

The current U.S. plan proposed for Iraq, as outlined by senior officials in congressional testimony and in discussions with the Iraqi opposition, calls for an American military governor to rule Iraq for up to two years. American officers would staff the top three levels of Iraqi government ministries with the rest of the structure remaining the same. The occupation authorities would appoint a "consultative council" of hand-picked Iraqis with non-executive powers and unspecified authority, serving at the pleasure of the American governor. The occupation authorities would also appoint a committee to draft a constitution for Iraq. After an unspecified period, indirect elections would be held for a "constituent assembly" that would vote to ratify the new constitution without a popular referendum.

Here in Iraqi Kurdistan, it is easy to sense the people's mood of jubilation as President Bush moves closer to ending Saddam and his Baath party's 35-year reign of terror over Iraq. The Baathist ideology is rooted in the racist doctrines of 1930s fascism and Saddam has used the Baath to create a one-party totalitarian state. For Iraq to rejoin the international community under a democratic system, it is essential to end the Baathist control over all aspects of politics and civil society. Iraq needs a comprehensive program of de-Baathification even more extensive than the de-Nazification effort in Germany after World War II. You cannot cut off the viper's head and leave the body festering. Unfortunately, the proposed U.S. plan will do just that if it does not dismantle the Baathist structures.

We deserve better. The U.S. has a moral obligation to Iraqis to fight for more. Apart from the practical and ethical problems in terms of loss of Iraqi sovereignty, it is a recipe for disaster on two grounds. First, it puts Americans in the position of having to defend Baathists. What will happen when Iraqis step forward to accuse Baathist officials of torture and crimes? Will American soldiers protect these officials?

Second, it forces American officers to make difficult decisions about Iraqi society and culture with very little knowledge. For example, will an American colonel at the ministry of education decide on the role of Islam in school curricula? How will American officials determine issues of compensation and restitution for the hundreds of thousands of displaced people returning to their homes, which may be occupied by others? Will America have a seat at OPEC and the Arab League, or the Islamic Conference? Will it redesign Iraq's flag – or, even worse, keep the existing one, which was created by Saddam?

The truth is, there is more to the liberation of Iraq than battlefield victory or the removal of Saddam and his top-tier cadre of torturers. The transition to democracy – the task of exorcising Saddam's ghosts from the Iraqi psyche and society – can only be achieved through self-empowerment and a full return of sovereignty to the people. This is our job, not that of a foreign officer. We are a proud nation, not a vanquished one. We are allies of the U.S. and we welcome Americans as liberators. But we must be full participants in the process of administering our country and shaping its future.

Today, members of the Iraqi opposition and representatives of the many resistance groups inside government-controlled areas are gathering for a conference that marks the beginning of the final phase of our struggle. The biggest joke here is the criticism from our opponents in the West that we are fractured. Iraq is a diverse society and this multifaceted nature of the opposition is not its weakness – it is our core strength on the road to democracy. In embarking on a journey toward freedom in Iraq, the U.S. does not need to handpick a successor to Saddam, nor does it need to predetermine every single step in the post-Saddam era. But we expect the U.S. to make a full commitment to accepting the will of the Iraqi people and not fail us in our desire for justice. The idea that those who struggled against tyranny with blood and lives should have less of a say than those who have found a way to get by inside the tyranny is outrageous. We hope Washington and other allies of the Iraqi people will hear the message from this conference. We are ready to assume responsibility for the transition to democracy.

(Mr. Chalabi is head of the Iraqi National Congress.)

 

IRAQ SCIENTIST SAYS SADDAM HIDING ARMS UNDERGROUND

Iraq scientist says Saddam hiding arms underground
By Ruben Alabastro
Reuters
February 18, 2003

A former top Iraqi scientist said on Tuesday he believed Saddam Hussein had dismantled his nuclear program but was making chemical and biological weapons that were hidden deep underground beyond the eyes of U.N. inspectors.

Hussain Al Shahristani said the Iraqi president did not have the capacity to deliver a payload of the weapons to distant countries but could pass them to overseas cells of supporters which he had built up over the years.

"There's no way that they can really find them, unless by pure accident," Shahristani, a former chief scientific advisor to the Iraqi Atomic Energy Commission, told a briefing organized by an association of foreign journalists in the Philippines.

"These materials are hidden deep underground or in a tunnel system."

He said he was jailed for 11 years by Saddam's regime for refusing to develop banned weapons but that he escaped from Iraq in 1991. He now lives in London.

Shahristani said his information came from former colleagues and dissidents who had recently fled the country.

"My understanding is that the nuclear program has been, for all practical purposes, dismantled," he said. "But the program to produce chemical and biological weapons continued even during the years when the inspectors were in Iraq in the 1990s."

Hans Blix, chief weapons inspector for the United Nations, said in a report to the world body's Security Council on Friday that his teams had discovered no banned weapons in Iraq.

The report was seen as a setback for U.S. and British efforts to get U.N. endorsement to use military force against Iraq over its alleged failure to get rid of weapons of mass destruction.

Shahristani said he believed Saddam planned to make his last stand in Baghdad in the event of a U.S.-led attack and use the capital's four million residents as human shields.

Reports that Saddam had look-alikes to confuse potential assassins were "absolutely true," Shahristani said.

"I have seen them," he said. "There are usually between four and eight convoys that leave the palace through different doors – identical convoys of black Mercedes – each of them having one who looks like Saddam. They leave in different directions."

 

THIS IS NOT ISRAEL’S WAR, BUT IT WOULD BENEFIT

This is not Israel's war, but it would benefit
By Yossi Alpher
The Financial Times
February 17, 2003

In recent months, Arab commentators and others have sought to identify Israel as a key catalyst of the US effort to remove the Saddam Hussein regime. It is even alleged that the real goal of the war is somehow removing Yassir Arafat from power, ending the Palestinian uprising and compelling Arab states to make peace with Israel.

Before the war starts, it is important to set the record straight. Israel has a far-reaching strategic interest in the destruction of the non-conventional capabilities of Mr Hussein's regime, along with the elimination of its support for Palestinian suicide terrorism. All the other talk of an Israeli role or interest is largely without foundation.

In recent decades Israeli strategic planners have focused on three main threats to the country: large scale conventional attack by our neighbours; terrorism aimed at undermining the resilience of the state and its citizens; and non-conventional attack by one of the region's radical states – Iran, Iraq, Syria or Libya. Over the years, the Israeli threat assessment has evolved to the point where conventional attack is now assigned low probability, while terrorism and non-conventional attack are in some instances seen as a single threat – for example, Iraq or Syria pro viding radical Palestinians with a non-conventional capability.

Until recently, Israel essentially faced these threats alone. In recent years, it became increasingly concerned about the difficulty of mustering the resources to deal with distant hostile states such as Iran as their nuclear and missile programmes advanced. From an operational standpoint, it was clear that the dramatic attack on Iraq's Osiraq reactor in 1981, which set back Baghdad's nuclear programme for a decade, could not easily be repeated. Washington was supportive – financially, technologically and in pressing Russia to deny critical nuclear knowhow to Tehran. But at the end of the day, we knew we were on our own.

Then came the tragic events of September 11 2001, which led the US to revise its view of the threat posed by radical states and movements. Some question the logic and order of the US priorities that have emerged from this reassessment. Some say that September 11 merely reinforced the existing inclination of the administration's neo- conservatives. From the Israeli standpoint, such debates are legitimate but largely irrelevant.

The US and UK have now concluded that Iraqi, Iranian and Syrian weapons of mass destruction, and support for terrorist organisations such as Hizbollah and Hamas, also threaten them and their legitimate interests. At the 11th hour, Israel finds itself no longer alone - a source of immense relief.

Israel stands to gain from an allied attack on Iraq. The Iraqi dimension of the two most pressing strategic threats – non-conventional attack and financial incentives for Palestinian suicide terrorism – will be dealt with by means far more effective than Israel could muster on its own.

Some in Israel and in Washington (and even here and there in the Arab world) have persuaded themselves that getting rid of Mr Hussein will also somehow democratise the Middle East, render Israel's neighbours more friendly, or moderate the Palestinian independence movement. This is wishful thinking that appears to have little basis in the likely postwar reality.

Indeed, the very opposite scenario – a wave of anti-American radicalism and terrorism sweeping the Middle East, Iraq engulfed in ethnic unrest, and millions of refugees destabilising neighbouring countries – is equally plausible. But Israel can reasonably hope that Mr Hussein's forcible removal by a US-led invasion will prove sobering for Iraq's immediate neighbours, Iran and Syria. It should also deter North Korea, which already supplies most of the missiles to the region and is liable to begin offering nuclear weapons as well.

Washington has wisely asked Israel to sit this war out. Israel would benefit from the war, but did not instigate it and Israel-related considerations are secondary to the US war effort. But if Israel is attacked by Iraq and serious losses of life are incurred, Jerusalem may insist on retaliating. Israel may also be the target of attacks by Hizbollah or Palestinian terrorists designed to change the nature of the war in Arab eyes. So Israel may pay a price. But support among Israelis for an offensive against Iraq is near-universal. It would be worth the risk.

(The writer is co-editor of bitter lemons.org, an internet-based Israeli-Palestinian dialogue. He was formerly director of the Jaffee Centre for Strategic Studies at Tel Aviv University.)

 

“HUMAN SHIELDS” HOLD FIRST WAR COUNCIL IN BAGHDAD

"Human shields" hold first war council in Baghdad
Western human shields in Baghdad, America may bomb them?
IslamOnline.net & News Agencies
February 18, 2003

The first "war council" opened late Monday, February 17, in the Iraqi capital Baghdad, with the human shields planning to select their targets carefully and split up into different units while coordinating the action once the battle gets underway.

For Ben, a 25-year-old American, there's a lot of work to be done. "We have no plan. We don't have an organization. We don't have a leadership," he admitted at the opening of a first war council of the "human shields" who have come to Baghdad, reported Agence France-Presse (AFP).

Their ambitions run high. They hope to prevent thousands of tons of U.S. bombs raining down on Iraq at the launch of any campaign to (allegedly) overthrow President Saddam Hussein for allegedly concealing banned arms programs in defiance of the United Nations.

Gathered in a smoke-filled hall of a Baghdad hotel, they have come from around the world in a bid to keep at bay the armada mobilized around Iraq by the United States and Britain.

Westerners in Palestinian keffiyehs (head covers) and dungarees mingle with Islamic scarves worn by young women from Turkey, as some 30 activists huddle in a circle to debate how to combat the mighty war machine.

"We have to decide where, when and how we want to be human shields," he told the meeting on the first floor of the Andalous Hotel.

John Ross, 65, surveys the meeting with one eye, the other one hidden behind a black patch since he lost it in an accident. A veteran fighter for causes, he wears his white hair in a pony-tail.

"We are here to protect the population in Iraq, we want to make the American government change its plans," said Ross, a journalist, poet and writer.

For the resident of Mexico who renounced U.S. citizenship, the Iraq crisis brings back memories of Vietnam.

"I was the first conscientious objector to be sent to prison. I went to jail on August 4, 1964," just three days before Congress passed the Gulf of Tonkin resolution which launched the Vietnam war, he said.

A translator is busy at work for the hefty contingent from Turkey, as the chief of staff meets to draw up a plan of action for the 200 or so human shields who have arrived so far in the Iraqi capital.

Gordon, a young and athletic man, reasons that they should be careful with the choice of sites to be protected.

"We should choose the best sites. If we go to a purification plant, it should be the one that produces the best water," he recommends to his fellow human shields.

A fellow American, Bruce, who sports a tan, is worried and says they must deploy quickly. He proposes drawing up a list of priority targets.

"It gives us hope in the future," said Ross, pointing to the group of young men and women who have come from as far a field as New York, London and Istanbul to fight against all odds.

Godfrey Meynell, in his late 60s, says he had no hesitation in joining the "crusade", although the grueling double-decker bus journey from London has left his legs weak.

JAPANESE “HUMAN SHIELDS”

On Sunday, nine Japanese anti-war activists left Tokyo for Baghdad to act as human shields in the event of a U.S.-led attack against Iraq.

The nine were traveling with 20 Japanese peace activists, including a 18-year-old high school girl.

They held a banner at Japan's Narita international airport that read "Iraq-Japan: Peace and Friendship" and two young men carried placards that said: "I am going to Iraq to stop war" and "Do not attack Iraq!"

Japan on Friday advised its nationals in Iraq to leave immediately, saying it was getting difficult to secure departure flights from the country.

On Saturday, thousands of people took to the streets of downtown Tokyo to join a global protest against a possible war.

MANDELA INVITED TO JOIN THE CLUB

On Thursday, February 13, the mostly western human shields said they had invited Nobel Prize winner Nelson Mandela to join their "voice for peace."

"We have written to ask (former South African president) Nelson Mandela to join us here in Baghdad as a voice for peace," said Canadian Roberta Taman, a leading member of the first group, which arrived in Baghdad a week ago.

"We have not had a response from him yet, but we know that he has said he would come to Baghdad if he was invited. So we have extended that invitation and are waiting to hear from him," she told a press conference.

Taman said her group of 15 volunteers comprised two Canadians, a Spaniard, a Turk and 11 Italians. The group brought with them food and medicine supplies to distribute as well as a Saint Bernard dog.

"More are on their way. There are 40 Italians arriving tomorrow, some people from Spain, a large group from Turkey," she said.

"We are here as part of our own 'human shields' effort; we are here independently as a group of people representing families from each of our countries," she said.

"We came independently. Nobody is funding us. Nobody asked us to come," she added.