] As I [Blix] reported to the council on the 19th of December last
] year, Iraq did not declare a significant quantity, some
] 650 kilos or bacterial growth media, which was
] acknowledged as reported in Iraq's submission to the
] Almarim panel in February 1999. As a part of its 7
] December, 2002, declaration Iraq resubmitted the Almarim
] panel document but the table showing this
] particular import of media was not included. The absence
] of this table would appear to be deliberate, as the pages
] of the resubmitted document were renumbered.

This is the raw text of Chief U.N. Inspector Blix's report to the U.N. this morning. I watched it live, and wish that the transcript could convey the dry sarcasm that I detected in Blix's voice when he read this part. Paraphrasing: In one of its declarations in 1999, Iraq mentioned 650 kilos of "growth media" which could potentially be used for the creation of biological weapons. In the December 2002 declaration however, the same report was submitted, but the chart mentioning those 650 kilos was absent, and "the absence of this table would appear to be deliberate, as the pages of the resubmitted document were renumbered."

Iraq is hiding some nasty nasty stuff, I'm certain of it. As to what should be *done* about it, I'm not as certain. But I'm 100% positive that they're lying about what they have.

Blix Delivers Report to U.N.

Rattle wrote:
] Elonka wrote:
] ] A valid concern... Then again, those weapons could be given
] ] to Al Qaeda regardless of whether we attack or not.
]
] And they may already have. Who knows?
]
] ] An even bigger decision factor with me, has to do with the
] ] stance of Iraq's military against us. They're already
] ] shooting at us, and have been for years. If I were Bush, I
] ] would wait for the U.N. Inspector official report next week,
] ] give the State of the Union, and then wait for the next time
] ] the Iraqis fire at one of our planes (or do a radar lock in
] ] preparation for firing), and then I'd start moving troops
] ] in.
] ]
] ] As you can see, I'm definitely on the "hawk" side of the
] ] dove/hawk debate. The main thing that does give me pause
] ] though, is that I wonder, "Okay, if we attack Iraq, just what
] ] exactly is the mission?" Are we going in to prove that the
] ] WMD are there? Is our goal to kick Saddam out of the country?
] ] Change the government? Enforce a free election? I mean, if
] ] Bush were to order the attack now I'd still support it, but I
] ] still have misgivings. Before giving my *full* support to an
] ] invasion, I personally would want to know, "How will we know
] ] when we've won??"
]
] I guess I'd be a dove.. I got peace turned up so loud.
]
] I can't support unilateral military actions. I can't support
] military actions without a clear goal. Too many unanswered
] questions.

"peace turned up so loud..." Heh, nice way of putting it!

How did you feel about invading Afghanistan? Do you think we did the right thing, kicking out the Taliban after September 11th?

Elonka :)

] Iraq has failed to explain or account for:
]
] -- large quantities of anthrax, botulinum toxin, and the
] carcinogen aflatoxin;
]
] -- ballistic missiles that exceed a U.N.-mandated range
] of 150 kilometers;
]
] -- efforts to procure uranium from abroad for its nuclear
] weapons program;
]
] -- 1.5 tons of the powerful nerve agent VX;
]
] -- 550 mustard gas-filled artillery shells and 400
] biological weapons-capable aerial bombs, and hundreds,
] possibly thousands, of tons of chemical precursors;
]
] -- 30,000 empty munitions that could be filled with
] chemical agents;

I've been hungry for more data on just what we think that Iraq has. I wanted to know -- do we have information on current weapons that they possess, or are we just looking for data on the stuff that we knew that they *did* possess? This report answers some of those questions.

Now as for the claim that we should wait for weapons inspectors to *find* it again in order to have proof -- I disagree. Yes, it would be nice if we *could* track some of it down ourselves, but I find myself looking around my own city and thinking, "If someone wanted to hide a truckload of missile warheads even as close as within a 100-mile radius of my own home, I don't know if *I* could find it, in an area that I'm familiar with." So, having a team of a few hundred inspectors combing an area the size of France, looking for something that other people may be trying very hard to keep hidden? It does feel more like a needle in a haystack problem.

This report raises some good points. If we have data on large amounts of prohibited material that Iraq had in the past, then I think the burden should now be on Iraq to explain what happened to that material, rather than the burden being on *us* to prove that they still have it.

White House Report Details Iraq's Efforts to Block U.N. Inspections

Website for Saudi Arabia's English-language newspaper (circulation reported to be approximately 50,000)

ArabNews

This is the website of an English-language newspaper in the United Arab Emirates -- Another spot on the web where it's possible to find out what the Islamic world is saying about itself.

I like getting alternative news sources such as these, rather than having to rely solely on the bits that show up on western news sources such as BBC and CNN. I especially find their "opinions" section interesting, such as the column on, "Al Jazeera can change American Perspective" about the upcoming Al Jazeera English-Language website. That particular column can be read at this URL:

http://www.gulf-news.com/Articles/news.asp?ArticleID=74385

I may not agree with everything they say, but I'm very eager to listen and try to understand why they're saying it!

Gulf News Online

] "A U.S. anti-terrorism program that forces tens of
] thousands of Muslims and Arabs to report to the
] government for fingerprinting and photographing expands
] to include Saudis and Pakistanis next week, raising new
] cries of ethnic and religious discrimination."

This program concerns me greatly. On the one hand, I *do* think it's a good idea for us to get a better sense of who and how many immigrants from Al Qaeda-linked areas are in the United States with expired or incomplete paperwork. On the other, I think it's wrong to immediately arrest anyone whose paperwork isn't in perfect order, especially when (1) they're voluntarily registering to indicate there's a problem, and (2) those paperwork problems are frequently the fault of our own government!

Also, with the growing sense from many Islamic communities that they're being perceived and treated as the bad guys, regardless of whether or not not they've done anything wrong, this kind of persecution is *not* helping matters.

Controversial U.S. Anti-Terror Program in New Stage

Good collection of translated articles from Arabic media into English. Seems to cover viewpoints from all sides, too.

MEMRI: The Middle East Research Institute

] "Al-Jazeera, the Arab satellite television channel known
] to broadcast statements from Osama bin Laden (news - web
] sites), will reach out to the West starting in February
] with an English-language Web site. "

Yes!

I've been craving the opportunity to read the Al-Jazeera news stories directly, and not just be limited to excerpted bits from BBC and CNN. I have yet to find a good online translator that would convert Arabic websites into something English-readable. So it'll be great to get Arabic news from the source (or at least closer to the source).

Elonka :)

Al-Jazeera to provide English-language Web site

If some international issue is not being covered by CNN (or slashdot), or if I want to get an outside viewpoint on an issue involving the U.S., I'll check the BBC news site. Especially if it's a matter affecting one of the European countries, the BBC is more likely to cover it in depth than any of the American news sources.

BBC NEWS - World Edition