SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: lurqer who wrote (21241)6/29/2003 2:33:11 AM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 89467
 
Once Hailed, Soldiers in Iraq Now Feel Blame at Each Step

_______________________

By EDMUND L. ANDREWS
The New York Times
June 29, 2003

BAGHDAD, Iraq — After riding into Iraq on a wave of popular euphoria, American and British forces are unexpectedly finding themselves the brunt of criticism for everything that goes wrong these days.

"We are furious about people pointing guns at us," said Hamid Hussein, 33, pushing his broken-down Volkswagen bus to the front door of his house this morning. A United States Army Humvee was parked in the middle of his street, and a soldier in the turret ordered Mr. Hussein in English to stop where he was.

If the complaint is not about security, then it is about the lack of electricity this week in Baghdad.

"Don't talk to me about Saddam Hussein," snapped Ibrahim Aullaiwi, a 46-year-old shop owner in the poor neighborhood of New Baghdad. "The Americans are in charge of everything here. They could have brought generators in here within 24 hours."

Like Mr. Aullaiwi, many residents of Baghdad seem to ignore the fact that the electricity disruption was caused at least in part by sabotage and looting. Seething in 110-degree heat without air-conditioners, fans or refrigerators, many residents were already furious about chronic power failures over the past two months.

Whether battling saboteurs or snipers, American and British occupation leaders find that the public mood has turned critical, even though countless Iraqis remain pleased that Saddam Hussein is gone and still place considerable hope in the Americans and British to improve things.

The scorn, and the risk to the Western forces, can go together. That was the case when an angry crowd in the southern town of Majar al Kabir killed six British soldiers on Tuesday, and many residents contended that the British set off the disturbance by trying to search Muslim homes, a claim the British dispute.

American soldiers sometimes infuriate Iraqis by running afoul of time-honored tradition. On Thursday, soldiers on patrol in an Army convoy here heard gunshots and rushed into a house from all sides. It turned out there was a wedding party under way, a ceremony that often occurs on Thursday evenings and is celebrated with gunfire. The Americans added to the anger among the revelers by roughly grabbing and arresting a young man who was trying to sneak off in a taxi with his gun, according to a witness.

Earlier this month when thousands of American troops raided what they believed were bases for loyalists to Saddam Hussein, provoking a lengthy firefight that killed four Iraqis, the Shiite newspaper Al Dawa described the deaths as "martyrdom."

The drumbeat of daily attacks on allied soldiers, meanwhile, is forcing military leaders to strike back with measures that often increase anger and fear.

Soldiers in full-body armor, often without translators, show up at houses in the middle of the night and politely but firmly demand to search for weapons. Jittery soldiers in Humvees and tanks point machine guns at Iraqi cars that show the slightest hint of irregular behavior.

The tensions seem certain to increase. Attacks on American soldiers, though they do not endanger the overall military plan, have continued steadily for three weeks.

Today in Baquba, about 60 miles northeast of Baghdad, an unidentified person threw a grenade at American soldiers in a Humvee. The grenade missed the soldiers but wounded two Iraqis who happened to be shopping nearby.

The scene made for grisly images today on Al Jazeera, the Arabic television network based in Qatar: bloodied Iraqis at the sides of American soldiers.

Late Friday night, a grenade attack in the Baghdad district of Thawra left one American soldier dead, four soldiers wounded and one Iraqi interpreter wounded.

In yet another neighborhood of Baghdad that night, residents said someone fired a rocket-propelled grenade at an American armored personnel carrier. Military officials could not confirm the incident as of early this afternoon.

Those were merely the most recent deadly incidents in a week that included sniper attacks on individual soldiers, bombs placed under trucks and rocket-propelled grenades fired at Humvees.

American military commanders have greatly stepped up the pace of house-to-house sweeps, in which hundreds of soldiers temporarily close off neighborhoods and then search each house for weapons or any hints of loyalty to Saddam Hussein.

The searches usually proceed without serious conflicts, but the experiences are jarring for many people. On one recent raid, soldiers handcuffed and detained a man who had posters of Mr. Hussein in several of his rooms. The man went peacefully and was released after questioning.

British commanders, who have prided themselves on their ability to project a friendly image to Iraqis, learned this week just how explosive such searches can be.

Conservative Shiite Muslims in the southern town of Majar al Kabir had demanded that British soldiers refrain from house searches because they were disrespectful.

British commanders said they agreed to the demand, but troops set off a melee on Wednesday simply by showing up in the town. Mobs cornered and then killed several soldiers in a police station, and several more outside. Six soldiers died and eight more had been wounded by the time the dust settled.

Today, British forces returned to Majar al Kabir accompanied by at least five tanks as well as helicopters overhead. To ease tensions, the British have distributed leaflets begging residents to believe in the soldiers' peaceful intentions.

"Do not let rumors and misinformation split us apart," the leaflets say. "We will not return to punish you. That was the tactic of Saddam's regime."

One problem facing both British and American officials is their own limited ability to communicate through mass media. The American-led Coalition Provisional Authority inaugurated radio and television broadcasts last month, but the television broadcasts are only a few hours a night and are mostly devoted to reruns of Arab-language entertainment shows.

Meanwhile, Iraqis listen to television broadcasts from the Iranian network Al Alam, which is overwhelmingly critical of American forces in Iraq and the United States in general. Television sets here can receive Al Alam with the help of a large antenna. For the growing number of Iraqis with satellite dishes, the most influential source of news may be Al Jazeera. It has been critical of the allied forces and has assiduously and quickly reported attacks on American soldiers.

Meanwhile, Iraq has seen a flood of new newspapers. While some are balanced, and one or two are pro-American, many are plainly hostile.

An article on the front page of Al Haqiqa, one of several Shiite newspapers, reported that "unemployment and the chaos of security are the root causes of Iraqis clashing with Americans."

And in a separate front-page headline, the newspaper quoted a prominent Shiite leader as saying, "No Dialogue with the Occupier."

nytimes.com



To: lurqer who wrote (21241)6/29/2003 2:37:34 AM
From: stockman_scott  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 89467
 
Is Google God?
_________________________

By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
OP-ED COLUMNIST
THE NEW YORK TIMES
June 29, 2003

Since 9/11 the world has felt increasingly fragmented. Reading the papers, one senses that many Americans are emotionally withdrawing from the world and that the world is drifting away from America. The powerful sense of integration that the go-go-globalizing 1990's created, the sense that the world was shrinking from a size medium to a size small, feels over now.

The reality, though, is quite different. While you were sleeping after 9/11, not only has the process of technological integration continued, it has actually intensified — and this will have profound implications. I recently went out to Silicon Valley to visit the offices of Google, the world's most popular search engine. It is a mind-bending experience. You can actually sit in front of a monitor and watch a sample of everything that everyone in the world is searching for. (Hint: sex, God, jobs and, oh my word, professional wrestling usually top the lists.)

In the past three years, Google has gone from processing 100 million searches per day to over 200 million searches per day. And get this: only one-third come from inside the U.S. The rest are in 88 other languages. "The rate of the adoption of the Internet in all its forms is increasing, not decreasing," says Eric Schmidt, Google's C.E.O. "The fact that many [Internet companies] are in a terrible state does not correlate with users not using their products."

VeriSign, which operates much of the Internet's infrastructure, was processing 600 million domain requests per day in early 2000. It's now processing nine billion per day. A domain request is anytime anyone types in .com or .net. And you ain't seen nothin' yet. Within the next few years you will be able to be both mobile and totally connected, thanks to the pending explosion of Wi-Fi, or wireless fidelity. Using radio technology, Wi-Fi will provide high-speed connection from your laptop computer or P.D.A. to the Internet from anywhere — McDonald's, the beach or your library.

Says Alan Cohen, a V.P. of Airespace, a new Wi-Fi provider: "If I can operate Google, I can find anything. And with wireless, it means I will be able to find anything, anywhere, anytime. Which is why I say that Google, combined with Wi-Fi, is a little bit like God. God is wireless, God is everywhere and God sees and knows everything. Throughout history, people connected to God without wires. Now, for many questions in the world, you ask Google, and increasingly, you can do it without wires, too."

In other words, once Wi-Fi is in place, with one little Internet connection I can download anything from anywhere and I can spread anything from anywhere. That is good news for both scientists and terrorists, pro-Americans and anti-Americans.

And that brings me to the point of this column: While we may be emotionally distancing ourselves from the world, the world is getting more integrated. That means that what people think of us, as Americans, will matter more, not less. Because people outside America will be able to build alliances more efficiently in the world we are entering and they will be able to reach out and touch us — whether with computer viruses or anthrax recipes downloaded from the Internet — more than ever.

"The key point is not just whether people hate us," says Robert Wright, the author of "Nonzero," a highly original book on the integrated world. "The key point is that it matters more now whether people hate us, and will keep mattering more, for technological reasons. I don't mean just homemade W.M.D.'s. I am talking about the way information technology — everyone using e-mail, Wi-Fi and Google — will make it much easier for small groups to rally like-minded people, crystallize diffuse hatreds and mobilize lethal force. And wait until the whole world goes broadband. Broadband — a much richer Internet service that brings video on demand to your PC — will revolutionize recruiting, because video is such an emotionally powerful medium. Ever seen one of Osama bin Laden's recruiting videos? They're very effective, and they'll reach their targeted audience much more efficiently via broadband."

None of this means we, America, just have to do what the world wants, but we do have to take it seriously, and we do have to be good listeners. We, America, "have to work even harder to build bridges," argues Mr. Wright, because info-tech, left to its own devices, will make it so much easier for small groups to build their own little island kingdoms. And their island kingdoms, which may not seem important or potent now, will be able to touch us more, not less.

nytimes.com



To: lurqer who wrote (21241)6/29/2003 11:10:52 AM
From: stockman_scott  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 89467
 
Scandal lurks in shadow of Iraq evidence

____________________________________

By Diane Carman

Denver Post Columnist

It's getting harder to ignore. More and more evidence is emerging to suggest that U.S. intelligence was manipulated to justify going to war with Iraq.

Among the allegations:

U.S. officials cited documents provided by foreign ambassadors - documents that they knew to be forgeries - as proof of the existence of an Iraqi nuclear weapons program.

Aluminum tubes and gas centrifuges that President Bush said were used to "enrich uranium for nuclear weapons" had already been determined by the CIA to be ordinary rocket materials too flimsy to handle nuclear material.

Claims by the administration that Iraq had unmanned aerial vehicles capable of delivering deadly biological agents around the world to the U.S. were known to be false; analysts estimated they didn't have the range even to reach Tel Aviv.

Vice President Dick Cheney had visited CIA headquarters several times in the months before the war to pressure analysts to find evidence that would justify an attack on Iraq.

And evidence that there was no connection between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda was deliberately withheld from Congress and the public in an attempt to mislead everyone about the danger Iraq posed.

Several members of the Senate Intelligence Committee, including Democrats Bob Graham, D-Fla., and Richard Durbin, D-Ill., told The New Republic that they knew that evidence contradicting the Bush administration's claims had been concealed, but they were unable to reveal it because it was classified.

Still, Congress, which spent $80 million to prove that, yes, Bill Clinton did have sexual relations with that woman, has yet to order an investigation.

Rep. Diana DeGette claims to know why.

"It's obvious. It's because the Republicans control Congress and the White House," the Colorado Democrat said.

Last week, she called for a bipartisan investigation to determine if there was a "massive intelligence failure" leading up to the war in Iraq.

Either there never was the irrefutable evidence of weapons of mass destruction and we were deceived, she said, or the deadly weapons exist in Iraq where Hussein is believed to be hiding and our intelligence is not capable of finding them.

Regardless of which scenario Americans prefer to embrace, it's a troubling situation.

We deserve an explanation.

Before the war, DeGette said, "both (Secretary of State) Colin Powell and the president unequivocally said there were biological, chemical and possibly nuclear weapons that were poised to strike and that created an imminent threat."

In fact, when Powell made his dramatic presentation of the purported evidence against Iraq to the United Nations in February, DeGette admitted that she found it disturbing.

The congresswoman, who had voted against the resolution to go to war with Iraq, said Powell raised "very serious questions" about the danger Iraq posed.

She had company. Sen. Ben Nighthorse Campbell, R-Colo., called it "shocking."

The public responded similarly.

In the days following Powell's U.N. appearance, polls showed opposition to the pre-emptive war evaporating in the U.S.

Seventy percent of Americans believed that Iraq had chemical and biological weapons. Sixty percent thought the country was developing nuclear weapons.

"On that basis, we went out and attacked another country," DeGette said.

It was the rationale we presented to the world for going to war.

"Now, it's becoming more and more clear that evidence of those weapons never existed," DeGette said.

And while it's unclear whether the intelligence was flawed, misinterpreted or simply manipulated to produce a predetermined outcome, DeGette said, it's clear something went wrong.

"There's one thing the American public doesn't like," she said, "and that's being duped."

If Congress succeeds in stonewalling an investigation, the damage to the intelligence agencies will be severe. Once their integrity is undermined, they become objects of contempt and ridicule.

That's why DeGette predicts that despite her Republican colleagues' loyalty to Bush, Congress ultimately will vote for an investigation.

"The public will demand it," she said.

As the weeks and months go by, if evidence of weapons of mass destruction isn't found in Iraq, containing the scandal will be impossible, she said. The truth will have to emerge.

"This is not about a political gotcha situation," DeGette said.

"One reason people like me are trying to be respectful and not make this into a political issue is that it goes so much deeper than that. This goes to the integrity of our intelligence, the integrity of our foreign policy.

"This is heavy-duty stuff."

denverpost.com