Trust Tony's judgment
by Bill Clinton

Tuesday March 18, 2003 - The Guardian

Last October, when I spoke at the Labour conference in Blackpool, I supported the efforts of President Bush and Prime Minister Blair to renew efforts to eliminate Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction, and to try to accomplish this through the UN.

In November, the UN security council adopted unanimously resolution 1441, giving Saddam a "final opportunity" to disarm, after 12 years of defying UN resolutions requiring him to do so. The resolution made it clear that continued sanctions were not sufficient and that continued defiance would lead to serious consequences.

The credit for 1441 belongs in large measure to Blair, who saw it as a chance to disarm Saddam in a way that strengthened the UN and preserved the Atlantic alliance. Unfortunately, the consensus behind 1441 has unravelled. Saddam has destroyed some missiles but beyond that he has done only what he thinks is necessary to keep the UN divided on the use of force. The really important issues relating to chemical and biological weapons remain unresolved.

The Guardian | Bill Clinton: Trust Tony's judgment

] Reaction has been coming in from around the world
] following US President George W Bush's deadline for
] President Saddam Hussein and his two sons to leave Iraq
] by 0100GMT on Thursday 20 March or face war.

Quotes from a variety of countries: France, Japan, Germany, Denmark, Italy, Mexico, Canada, China, Russia, Philippines, Iran, the Arab League, Asean (Association of Southeast Asian Nations), New Zealand, and the Vatican. All over the scale, from "we're for it" to "we're against it," to "we're staying out of it and minding our own business".

BBC NEWS : In quotes: Reaction to Bush ultimatum

I posted a fairly angry rant about this earlier. Then I found this. CNN did cover the story. Look carefully at the "before" and "after" pictures. Look at the top of the bulldozer. These are not the same bulldozers. Look at the skyline. This is not the same place. These pictures create a misleading sense of timeline.

So it IS possible that they guy simply didn't see her. Questions remain. Trouble is that neither the IDF nor this American group can really be trusted to tell the truth.

CNN.com - Israeli bulldozer kills American protester - Mar. 17, 2003

] Open acts of defiance by opponents of Saddam Hussein's
] regime have intensified in the past week, with saboteurs
] carrying out attacks against Iraq's railway system and
] protesters openly calling for the overthrow of the Iraqi
] dictator.
]
] The most blatant act of sabotage took place 20 miles
] south of the north Iraqi city of Mosul when members of
] the Iraqi opposition blew up a stretch of track on the
] Mosul-Baghdad railway, causing the derailment of a train.
]
] Before fleeing back to their base in Kurdistan, they left
] piles of leaflets by the side of the track urging the
] Iraqi soldiers who were sent to investigate the explosion
] to join the "international alliance to liberate Iraq"
] from "Saddam the criminal". In a separate incident, a
] rocket-propelled grenade was fired at a train illegally
] transporting fuel from Baghdad to Syria.

Telegraph | News | Iraqis launch campaign of sabotage and defiance to undermine Saddam

] To the loyal expectants who endlessly inquired about the
] launching date of the outstanding game, the first of its
] kind in the Arab world. The good news is that:
]
] The Game is now available in the markets, and includes
] many surprises.
]
] To obtain the game, which includes all that an anxious
] persons dreams of in order to participate in facing the
] Zionist enemy
]
] Call the accredited distributors at your country
]
] Special Force game will render you a partner of the
] resistance.

Special Force - Islamist Video Game

] I'm calling in from the highly-guarded border of Iran and
] Kurdistan. A truck is waiting for us to transport CNN
] staff, our personal belongings, and our television gear
] into kurd-controlled northern Iraq. We're crossing into
] this region to cover the northern front of a potential
] war with Iraq, in an area dense with oil-rich fields
] along the northern no-fly-zone.

This guy is fucking nuts. (With apologies to Elonka.)

That having been said, this could be one of the more interesting weblogs in the coming weeks.... Unless someone actually starts blogging from Bagdad. Or, you know, they actually negotiate a peace. Or the Aliens arrive and colonize the planet.

Kevin Sites Blog

] In any case, we shall continue our work at the
] waitingforthewebcaminiraq so that you could organize the
] projections at the walls and screens of your towns. Also,
] journalist Antonio Baquero is going to try to send us a
] usual everyday photo from a Baghdadi street that we would
] like to film.

Baghdad Webcam update. Evidently technical and licensing problems are preventing the installation of the webcams themselves so far, though there is a journalist who is sending out daily photos which are being posted on this site at http://www.webcaminiraq.org.

There also seems to be information and pics at the following domain:
http://www.waitingforthewebcaminiraq.org

And an explanation of some of the difficulties in obtaining a "webcam license" from the Baghdad authorities, who are evidently indicating some suspicion about the use of the webcam, here:
http://www.webcaminiraq.org/estado_english.htm

The WebCamInIraq site seems to be posted by Spanish journalists, with text in either Spanish or (moderately understandable) English. At least it's a daily pic update though!

Thanks to Mr. Kobeissi of Asharq Al-Awsat for the info and links!

Webcam in Iraq Project

Everything you need to know about the new Iraq deal in 30 seconds thanks to Elonka. My comments follow.

] The benchmarks listed below would be criteria for Iraq to
] follow within a week or 10 days if it wanted to avoid war,
] by showing it was fully complying with U.N. disarmament
] obligations.

Summarizing for brevity:

(1) Saddam would have to make a public, broadcasted statement, in Arabic, that Iraq has made a strategic decision not to produce or retain Weapons of Mass Destruction, and he should further publicly encourage all Iraqis to come forward if they have any such info, disregarding any orders that they might have received in the past to hide such information.

(2) At least 30 Iraqi scientists selected by UN Inspectors must be made available for private interviews, with their families, outside of Iraq.

(3) All remaining anthrax or anthrax production capability must be either surrendered, or credible evidence must be provided to account for the whereabouts or destruction of known past stockpiles.

(4) All remaining Al-Samoud missiles must be destroyed.

(5) Credible evidence on the purpose of the unmanned or remote-piloted vehicles must be provided, along with a full accounting of the organizations and technology involved.

(6) (wording still being worked on) Iraq must give up all mobile biological production labs for destruction.

-=-=-=-

I feel like we have a real chance to negotiate a peace here. I would have added some humanitarian stuff to this list as well, but whatever.

If we put out some clear, acheivable guidelines that the international community can agree with, then it is all really up to Iraq. The US won't be in a position to make it impossible for Iraq to comply.

Trouble is, France has stated that they will veto ANY new resolution. Can they really be serious about this? There must be SOMETHING they can agree to.

And, of course, Iraq is unlikely to comply.

British Draft List of Iraqi Tasks

crankymessiah wrote:
] ] THE first President Bush has told his son that hopes of
] ] peace in the Middle East would be ruined if a war with
] ] Iraq were not backed by international unity.

I think these articles are taking Bush Senior out of context. The text of his talk is linked here. Way I read it, he is actually saying that International differences that exist over this issue are likely to be easy to heal later on. Basically the opposite of the conclusion here. He is saying its ok to go forward without international unity.

However, I've been really busy and I didn't spend much time with it. Take a look and make up your own mind.

Text of Bush talk, RE: Bush Sr warning over unilateral action

digitalreporter wrote:
] ] As she wrote in an op-ed essay for the Atlanta Journal-
] ] Constitution: "I was frightened that my neighbors were
] ] going to hurt me because I dared to express my opinion.
] ] This could not be happening. Not in America, right?"
] ]
] ] But it is happening here.

This incredulty sounds false to me.

The reality is that politics are FAR more polarized right now then they usually are.

You either think that the U.S. attacked Afghanistan primarily because they wanted to build an oil pipeline or you think that we should turn Iraq into a parking lot. We live in an emotionally charged time and the radicals rule, on both ends of the spectrum. Woe be to one whose gut takes them to the wrong side of the spectrum, whether you are right in San Francisco, or left in Houston, or middle of the road anywhere. You will be attacked. You are being attacked.

Calling yourself out as a victim in the manner portrayed in this article is just self serving bullshit. Its a way of claiming the moral high ground. There is no moral high ground. You will be attacked if your beleifs conflict with your community, regardless of where your community is on the spectrum.

Its really affecting MemeStreams. We're all here and we're all posting and we know we all have different feelings about whats going on. We're NOT discussing. We can. The capability is there. The will is not. I sense that people are afraid to really engage this subject because they know that any engaged discourse is just going to devolve into bitter arguement.

Weblogging has taken over the past world of bulletin board systems BECAUSE weblogging is a way of broadcasting your views AS OPPOSED to conversing about them. Blogging is popular NOW because of the war, and the polarization.

At some time in the distant future we will seek warmer and more engaged forms of conversation. Today we do not because the tension between all of us is as thick as mud, and we dare not cut it for fear that we will rip our society apart.

RE: Pseudo patriotism vs. American values