War Without End

Alpha · Last edited by Alpha on Thu Nov 10, 2005 11:50 pm; edited 21 times in total

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?
xml=/news/2005/10/30/wsyria30.xml&sSheet=/news/2005/10/30/ixworld.htm
l

Syria accuses US of launching lethal raids over its borders
By Harry de Quetteville in Baghouz
(Filed: 29/10/2005)

Syria has accused the United States of launching lethal military
raids into its territory from Iraq, escalating the diplomatic crisis
between the two countries as the Bush administration seeks to step
up pressure on President Bashar Assad's regime.

Concern: A Syrian soldier looks across at Iraqi border

Major General Amid Suleiman, a Syrian officer, said that American
cross-border attacks into Syria had killed at least two border
guards, wounded several more and prompted an official complaint to
the American embassy in Damascus.

He made the allegations during an official press tour of Syrian
security forces on the Iraqi border, which the US claims is a barely
guarded passage into Iraq for hardcore foreign jihadis.

While showing off what he said were beefed-up Syrian border measures
designed to blunt those criticisms, including new police stations
and checkpoints, Maj Gen Suleiman alleged that his own border forces
had come under repeated American attack.

"Incidents have taken place with casualties on my surveillance
troops," he said, near the Euphrates river border crossing between
Syria and Iraq. "Many US projectiles have landed here. In this area
alone, two soldiers and two civilians have been killed by the
American attacks."

The charge follows leaks in Washington that the US has already
engaged in military raids into Syria and is contemplating launching
special forces operations on Syrian soil to eliminate insurgent
networks before they reach Iraq.

"No one in the administration has any problem with acting tough on
Syria; it is the one thing they all agree on," said Edward Walker, a
former US ambassador to Egypt and Israel, who is now head of the
Middle East Institute think-tank. "I've heard there have been some
cross-border activities, and it certainly makes sense as a warning
to Syria that if they don't take care of the problem the US will
step up itself."

But he warned that the increased blurring of battle lines between
Iraq and Syria could turn a diplomatic stand-off between the two
nations, playing out at the UN, into a fully fledged military
confrontation. "It could escalate. With Syrian border guards getting
shot, it could turn into a major issue."

In the Euphrates valley, however, the alleged cross-border fire
fights are already a major issue. The Syrian military said that in
May, in the divided village of Baghouz, which straddles the Syria-
Iraq border about 350 miles north east of Damascus, Abdullah al-
Hassake was manning a rundown concrete frontier outpost when he and
fellow soldiers heard US helicopters.

He went on to the police station roof to survey the impending battle
between US troops and Iraqi insurgents, who flee to the border when
under attack, and was killed by fire from the US helicopters.

Syrian officials said that US charges that they were not doing
enough to prevent insurgents crossing into Iraq are unfair. They
pointed to new barbed wire and reinforced sand barriers across the
400-mile border, which cost £1.5 million, and claimed that they had
deported or arrested about 1,500 foreign fighters heading to Iraq.

Much of the border is impossible to seal. Across the divide, the
continuing violence in Iraq is all too evident. Both sides have
strong ties with the regime of the former Iraqi dictator Saddam
Hussein. "The people here are happy to help fighters go to face the
Americans," said one local. But reinforced security on the Syrian
side had made life harder, he added. That view is supported by some
Western diplomats in Damascus, although US defence officials remain
sceptical.

"The Syrians have stopped actively encouraging jihadis to go," said
one diplomat. "In fact recently they've tried quite hard to stop it."

Across the Euphrates, the border appears to be the likely stage for
a future showdown between the US and Syria.

"Sometimes the US soldiers fire at us every day," said Ibrahim
Brahim, a Syrian security official. "Sometimes it's simply a
mistake, but sometimes it's not. Mostly the US army wants to show us
its power."

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bush and his JINSA/CSP/PNAC Neocons trying to get US to attack Syria as well (for Israel):

http://groups.google.com/group/us.military.army/browse_frm/thread/24cfce41196096b8/2716647613a3442b#2716647613a3442b

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

U.N. Security Council OKs Syria Resolution

By EDITH M. LEDERER, Associated Press Writer
18 minutes ago

The U.N. Security Council unanimously adopted a resolution Monday demanding Syria's full cooperation with a U.N. investigation into the assassination of Lebanon's former prime minister and warning of possible "further action" if it doesn't.

The United States, France and Britain pressed for the resolution following last week's tough report by a U.N. investigating commission, which implicated top Syrian and Lebanese security officials in the Feb. 14 bombing that killed Rafik Hariri and 20 others. The report also accused Syria of not cooperating fully with the inquiry.

The three co-sponsors agreed to drop a direct threat of sanctions against Syria in order to get support from Russia and China, which opposed sanctions while the investigation is still under way. Nonetheless, the resolution was adopted under Chapter VII of the U.N. Charter, which is militarily enforceable.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Syria Supporters Silent Ahead of U.N. Vote
Monday October 31, 2005 2:31 PM

By EDITH M. LEDERER

Associated Press Writer

UNITED NATIONS (AP) - Syria had few vocal supporters ahead of a Security Council vote Monday on a tough resolution that would threaten sanctions if Damascus doesn't cooperate with the U.N. investigation into the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri.

Even Security Council members concerned by some provisions of the resolution did not object to sending Syria a stern message. The United States, France and Britain had little doubt the council would approve the resolution.

Syrian state media, meanwhile, urged the council to ignore American pressure and adopt a ``balanced'' resolution.

The three countries co-sponsored the resolution to follow up last week's report by a U.N. investigating commission, which implicated top Syrian and Lebanese security officials in the Feb. 14 bombing that killed Hariri and 20 others. The report also accused Syria of not cooperating fully with the probe.

Britain's U.N. Ambassador Emyr Jones Parry said that adoption of the resolution by foreign ministers ``is to show the intensity of the concern, and to make it very clear at the highest level what we expect.''

The latest draft would require Syria to detain anyone the U.N. investigators consider a suspect and let investigators determine the location and conditions under which the individual would be questioned. It also would freeze assets and impose a travel ban on anyone identified as a suspect by the commission.

Those provisions could pose a problem for Syrian President Bashar Assad as the suspects include his brother, Maher Assad, and his brother-in-law, Assef Shawkat, the chief of military intelligence.

If Syria does not fully cooperate with the investigation, the draft says the council intends to consider ``further measures,'' including sanctions, ``to ensure compliance by Syria.''

Ahead of Monday's vote, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice hosted a dinner for her counterparts from France and Britain, as well as Russia and China, who oppose the resolution's threat of sanctions.

The two-hour dinner meeting at the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel was a last chance for the five permanent veto-wielding council nations to discuss the resolution.

There was no immediate word from the ministers, including Rice, Russia's Sergey Lavrov, China's Li Zhaoxing, Britain's Jack Straw and France's Philippe Douste-Blazy, on their two-hour dinner meeting.

Lavrov and Li, who met alone for about 45 minutes before dinner, refused to say how they will vote. ``Just wait and see,'' Li said.

Russia said last week it opposed sanctions against Syria, its longtime ally. Late Sunday, Lavrov said that Russia fully backs further U.N. inquiry into Hariri's murder but criticized what he described as attempts to turn the Security Council into an investigative body.

``We are concerned that the draft resolution's co-authors are not just trying to support the commission, but also to meddle into its sphere of responsibility,'' Lavrov said in comments broadcast by Russia's Channel One television.

U.S. Ambassador John Bolton said Friday the resolution has the nine ``yes'' votes required for adoption and will likely have more by the time of the vote. ``I don't foresee a veto,'' he said, a view echoed by his French and British co-sponsors.

But council diplomats said that if Washington, Paris and London want unanimous support from all 15 council nations - which would send a more powerful message to Syria - they will have to drop the sanctions threat.

Otherwise, the resolution will likely be adopted with 12 ``yes'' votes and three abstentions - Russia, China, and Algeria, a non-permanent council member and its only Arab representative, the diplomats said, speaking on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to comment ahead of the vote.

The United States urged foreign ministers of all 15 Security Council nations to come to New York for the vote to send a high-level message to Damascus that the international community is demanding its cooperation with the probe - and almost all the ministers are coming.

Tishrin, a government newspaper in Syria, criticized the draft as ``tough and unbalanced'' and called on the Security Council to adopt ``a balanced and objective'' resolution ``that would not be a clear translation of the U.S. administration's will.''

Syrian Foreign Minister Farouk al-Sharaa also flew to New York Sunday to attend the council meeting and meet with some of the foreign ministers and Secretary-General Kofi Annan.

As al-Sharaa headed to New York, Syrian Deputy Foreign Minister Walid Moallem toured Gulf countries in what appeared to be an effort to rally Arab support ahead of Monday's council meeting.

Syria's official news agency, SANA, quoted Moallem as saying he was bearing a message from the Syrian president to the leaders of Gulf countries concerning ``the dangers Syria faces'' as a result of the U.N. action.

In Saudi Arabia on Saturday, Moallem delivered a message from Assad to King Abdullah ``on the current situation in the region ... and the debate under way in the Security Council concerning the (Hariri) investigation,'' SANA said.

Moallem traveled to Qatar on Sunday where he told reporters that the resolution was prepared in Washington, Paris and London prior to the release of the report by the U.N. investigation.

SANA quoted him as saying the resolution was ``dangerous'' and aimed at hurting Syria, not uncovering the truth in the Hariri assassination. But Moallem said that Syria will ``continue to cooperate'' with the U.N. investigation despite ``legal and political gaps in its report.''

Assad on Saturday ordered that a judicial committee be formed to investigate Hariri's assassination. A presidential decree said the committee will cooperate with the U.N. probe and Lebanese judicial authorities.

While Syria has rejected accusations of its involvement in Hariri's killing, it buckled under international pressure and withdrew its soldiers from Lebanon in April, ending a 29-year presence in its smaller neighbor.

----

Associated Press Writer Samar Kassabli contributed to this report from Damascus, Syria.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

UN Council adopts tough resolution against Syria
31 Oct 2005 16:20:46 GMT

Source: Reuters

UNITED NATIONS, Oct 31 (Reuters) - The U.N. Security Council voted unanimously on Monday in favor of a tough resolution demanding Syria cooperate with a U.N. probe into the death of former Lebanese prime minister Rafik Hariri or face possible punitive measures.

The resolution was adopted 15-0 after the principal drafters, the United States and France, agreed to delete a specific reference to economic sanctions. Instead the resolution would consider possible unspecified "further action" if Syria did not comply.

A dozen foreign ministers or their deputies from the 15 Security Council members traveled to New York for the meeting, underlying the importance of the vote.

The measure demands Syria cooperate "unconditionally" with a U.N. probe into the Feb. 14 assassination in Hariri and orders Damascus to take into custody and make available to U.N. investigators people suspected of involvement in the killing.

It also calls for a financial freeze and travel ban on individual suspects to be named by a U.N. commission, headed by German prosecutor Detlev Mehlis, or the Lebanese government. But any Security Council member can object to a name on such a list.

The death of Hariri, an opponent of Syrian domination of his country, transformed Lebanon's political landscape. The killing led Syria to pull out its troops from Lebanon after three decades and has put increasing pressure on Lebanon's pro-Syrian President Emile Lahoud to resign.

U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice cast the American vote in the Security Council and has sought to isolate Syria over the past year because of Lebanon. And she has accused Damascus of allowing foreign fighters to cross over its border to Iraq where more than 150,000 U.S. troops are fighting a bloody insurgency.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

HON. RON PAUL OF TEXAS
BEFORE THE US HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
October 26, 2005

We Have Been Warned

We have been warned. Prepare for a broader war in the Middle East, as plans are being laid for the next U.S. led regime change-- in Syria. A UN report on the death of Lebanese Prime Minister Rafig Hariri elicited this comment from a senior U.S. policy maker: “Out of tragedy comes an extraordinary strategic opportunity.” This statement reflects the continued neo-conservative, Machiavellian influence on our foreign policy. The “opportunity” refers to the long-held neo-conservative plan for regime change in Syria, similar to what was carried out in Iraq.

This plan for remaking the Middle East has been around for a long time. Just as 9/11 served the interests of those who longed for changes in Iraq, the sensationalism surrounding Hariri’s death is being used to advance plans to remove Assad.

Congress already has assisted these plans by authorizing the sanctions placed on Syria last year. Harmful sanctions, as applied to Iraq in the 1990s, inevitably represent a major step toward war since they bring havoc to so many innocent people. Syria already has been charged with developing weapons of mass destruction based on no more evidence than was available when Iraq was similarly charged.

Syria has been condemned for not securing its borders, by the same U.S. leaders who cannot secure our own borders. Syria was castigated for placing its troops in Lebanon, a neighboring country, although such action was invited by an elected government and encouraged by the United States. The Syrian occupation of Lebanon elicited no suicide terrorist attacks, as was suffered by Western occupiers.

Condemning Syria for having troops in Lebanon seems strange, considering most of the world sees our 150,000 troops in Iraq as an unwarranted foreign occupation. Syrian troops were far more welcome in Lebanon.

Secretary Rice likewise sees the problems in Syria-- that we helped to create-- as an opportunity to advance our Middle Eastern agenda. In recent testimony she stated that it was always the administration’s intent to redesign the greater Middle East, and Iraq was only one part of that plan. And once again we have been told that all options are still on the table for dealing with Syria-- including war.

The statement that should scare all Americans (and the world) is the assurance by Secretary Rice that the President needs no additional authority from Congress to attack Syria. She argues that authority already has been granted by the resolutions on 9/11 and Iraq. This is not true, but if Congress remains passive to the powers assumed by the executive branch it won’t matter. As the war spreads, the only role for Congress will be to provide funding lest they be criticized for not supporting the troops. In the meantime, the Constitution and our liberties here at home will be further eroded as more Americans die.

This escalation of conflict with Syria comes as a result of the UN report concerning the Hariri death. When we need an excuse for our actions, it’s always nice to rely on the organization that our administration routinely condemns, one that brought us the multi-billion dollar oil-for-food scandal and sexual crimes by UN representatives.

It’s easy to ignore the fact that the report did not implicate Assad, who is targeted for the next regime change. The UN once limited itself to disputes between nations; yet now it’s assumed the UN, like the United States, has a legal and moral right to inject itself into the internal policies of sovereign nations. Yet what is the source of this presumed wisdom? Where is the moral imperative that allows us to become the judge and jury of a domestic murder in a country 6,000 miles from our shores?

Moral, constitutional, and legal arguments for a less aggressive foreign policy receive little attention in Washington. But the law of unintended consequences serves as a thorough teacher for the slow learners and the morally impaired.

Is Iraq not yet enough of a headache for the braggarts of the shock and awe policy?

Are 2,000 lives lost not enough to get their attention?

How many hundreds of billions of dollars must be drained from our economy before it’s noticed?

Is it still plausible that deficits don’t matter?

Is the apparent victory for Iran in the Shiite theocracy we’ve created in Iraq not yet seen as a disturbing consequence of the ill-fated Iraq regime change effort?

When we have our way with the next election in Lebanon and Hezbollah wins, what do we do?

If our effort to destabilize Syria is no more successful than our efforts in Iraq, then what?

If destabilizing Syria leads to the same in Iran, what are our options?

If we can’t leave now, we’ll surely not leave then-- we’ll be told we must stay to honor the fallen to prove the cause was just.

We should remember Ronald Reagan’s admonition regarding this area of the world. Ronald Reagan reflected on Lebanon in his memoirs, describing the Middle East as a jungle and Middle East politics as irrational. It forced him to rethink his policy in the region. It’s time we do some rethinking as well.

http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2005/cr102605.htm

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

JINSA/CSP/PNAC Neocons moving fast to get action against Syria in accordance with their 'A Clean Break'/war for Israel agenda that esteemed US intelligence author James Bamford conveys on pages 261-269/321 of his 'A Pretext for War' book (page 403 of the recently released paperback version mentions the AIPAC/Israel espionage via the Pentagon which the Israel first US press/media is hardly covering either)

'JINSA John' Bolton after Syria for Israel at UN:

http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/wake-up-america-your-government-is-hijacked-by-zionism/2005/03/07/jinsa-israel-firster-john-bolton-named-as-us-ambassador.php

Bush is intent on painting allies and enemies in the Middle East as evil
By Robert Fisk - 10 September 2002

http://www.independent.co.uk/story.jsp?story=332011

Just as Americans are recovering from the harrowing television re-runs of the 11 September attacks, their President is going to launch the biggest reshaping of the Middle East since the British and French parcelled out the Arab lands after the 1914-18 war. When he addresses the United Nations on Thursday, George Bush will be threatening not only Iraq ? which had absolutely nothing to do with the crimes against humanity in New York and Washington ? but Syria, Iran and, by extension, Saudi Arabia and Egypt.

The Syrian Accountability Act, which accuses Damascus of supporting "terrorism", will come into force as President Bush is speaking and will follow only days after the State Department branded the Lebanese Hizbollah as the "A-team of terrorism", more dangerous even than Osama bin Laden's al-Qa'ida. Like Iraq, the Hizbollah had nothing to do with the 11 September attacks ? indeed, they were among the first to condemn them ? but the White House now seems set on painting allies and enemies alike in the Middle East as a focus of evil.

Only The Nation among all of America's newspapers and magazines has dared to point out that a large number of former Israeli lobbyists are now working within the American administration and the Bush plans for the Middle East ? which could cause a massive political upheaval in the Arab world ? fit perfectly into Israel's own dreams for the region. The magazine listed Vice-President Dick Cheney ? the arch-hawk in the US administration ? and John Bolton, now under-secretary of state for Arms Control, with Douglas Feith, the third most senior executive at the Pentagon, as members of the advisory board of the pro-Israeli Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (Jinsa) before joining the Bush government. Richard Perle, chairman of the Pentagon's Defence Policy Board, is still an adviser on the institute, as is the former CIA director James Woolsey.

Michael Ledeen, described by The Nation as "one of the most influential 'Jinsans' in Washington" has been calling for "total war" against "terror" ? with "regime change" for Syria, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and the Palestinian Authority. Mr Perle advises the Defence Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld ? who refers to the West Bank and Gaza as "the so-called occupied territories" ? and arranged the anti-Saudi "kernel of evil" briefing by Laurent Murawiec that so outraged the Saudi royal family last month. The Saudi regime may itself be in great danger as the princes of the House of Saud attempt to seize more power for themselves in advance of the depart-ure of the dying King Fahd.

Jinsa's website says it exists to "inform the American defence and foreign affairs community about the important role Israel can and does play in bolstering democratic interests in the Mediterranean and the Middle East". Next month, Michael Rubin of the right-wing and pro-Israeli American Enterprise Institute ? who referred to the outgoing UN human rights commissioner Mary Robinson as an abettor of "terrorism" ? joins the US Defence Department as an Iran-Iraq "expert".

According to The Nation, Irving Moskovitz, the California bingo magnate who has funded settlements in the Israeli-occupied territories, is a donor as well as a director of Jinsa.

President Bush, of course, will not be talking about the influence of these pro-Israeli lobbyists when he presents his vision of the Middle East at the United Nations on Thursday.

Nor will he give the slightest indication that the region is, in the words of its own kings and dictators, a powder keg of resentment and anger. The tectonic plates of the Arab world are now grinding with increasing violence. Into this political earthquake zone, Mr Bush now seems intent on leading his country, with his loyal British ally.

Most of today's Arab nations were fashioned out of the ruins of the Ottoman Empire by Britain and France in the aftermath of the First World War ? and Palestinians still blame Britain today for supporting the formation of a Jewish homeland in Palestine.

Both European nations stationed tens of thousands of troops across the region, suppressing Arab revolts in Palestine, Syria and Lebanon ? itself created by the French at the request of its Christian Maronite community. The whole colonial framework led to the loss of tens of thousands of lives before both the British and French retreated from the Middle East.

Now President Bush seems set on following the colonial powers into the region for another military and political adventure ? ostensibly to spread "democracy" among those nations it most despises (Iraq, Palestine and Iran) but in fact more likely to increase American control of an increasingly anti-Western Arab world.

The Arabs themselves warn that this will lead to massive instability and widespread violence. The Israelis ? and their allies in the US administration ? are hell bent on the whole shebang.

go to top

http://www.robert-fisk.com

Here is the 'Men from JINSA and CSP' article from 'The Nation' which Fisk mentions in the above article from the London Independent:

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20020902/vest

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Syria: The Next Iraq?

By Robert Dreyfuss, TomPaine.com

Posted on October 25, 2005, Printed on October 25, 2005
http://www.alternet.org/story/27284/
Three years ago, the U.S. invasion of Iraq was widely viewed as the first chapter of a region-wide strategy to remake the entire map of the Middle East. Following Iraq, Syria and Iran would be the next targets, after which the oil-rich states of the Arabian Gulf, including Saudi Arabia, would follow.

It was a policy driven by neoconservatives in and outside of the Bush administration, and they didn't exactly make an effort to keep it secret. In April, 2003, in an article in The American Prospect titled Just the Beginning, I wrote: "Those who think that U.S. armed forces can complete a tidy war in Iraq, without the battle spreading beyond Iraq's borders, are likely to be mistaken." And the article quoted various neocon strategists to that effect:

"I think we're going to be obliged to fight a regional war, whether we want to or not," says Michael Ledeen, a former U.S. national security official and a key strategist among the ascendant flock of neoconservative hawks, many of whom have taken up perches inside the U.S. government. Asserting that the war against Iraq can't be contained, Ledeen says that the very logic of the global war on terrorism will drive the United States to confront an expanding network of enemies in the region. "As soon as we land in Iraq, we're going to face the whole terrorist network," he says, including the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), Hezbollah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad and a collection of militant splinter groups backed by nations -- Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia -- that he calls "the terror masters." "It may turn out to be a war to remake the world," says Ledeen. In the Middle East, impending "regime change" in Iraq is just the first step in a wholesale reordering of the entire region.

As the war in Iraq bogged down, and as a public outcry developed in the United States against the neoconservatives over the apparently bungled war, another sort of conventional wisdom began to take flight. According to this theory, the United States no longer had the stomach -- or the capability -- to spread the war beyond Iraq, as originally intended. Our troops are stretched too thin, our allies are reining us in and cooler heads are prevailing in Washington--or so the theory goes.

But the news from Syria shows that the conventional wisdom is wrong. The United States is indeed pursuing a hard-edged regime change strategy for Syria. It's happening right before your eyes. With the ever-complacent U.S. media itself bogged down in Iraq, and with the supine U.S. Congress unwilling to challenge our foreign policy apparatus, Syria is under the gun. As in Iraq, the United States is aggressively pursuing a regime change there without the slightest notion of what might come next or who might replace President Bashar Assad. Might it be the fanatical Muslim Brotherhood, by far the most powerful single force in largely Sunni Syria? Might the country fragment into pieces, as Iraq is now doing? The Bush administration doesn't know, just as they didn't know what might happen to Iraq in 2003. But they are going ahead anyway.

It isn't just the repercussions of the U.N.-led investigation into the assassination of former Lebanon Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, whose murder may or may not have been arranged by Syria's intelligence service. Since 2003, the United States has sought political and economic sanctions against Syria (long before Hariri was killed); sought to isolate Syria diplomatically; singled out Syria for its support for Sunni insurgents inside Iraq; issued a series of ominous threats against the Syrian regime ("our patience is running out with Syria," warned Zalmay Khalilzad, the U.S. proconsul in Iraq); and, according to an October 15 New York Times article, begun threatening "hot-pursuit" and other cross-border military action against Syria. That Times piece noted, in part:

A series of clashes in the last year between American and Syrian troops, including a prolonged firefight this summer that killed several Syrians, has raised the prospect that cross-border military operations may become a dangerous new front in the Iraq war, according to current and former military and government officials.

There is even a Syrian version of Iraq's charlatan Ahmad Chalabi, and there are rumors that Kurdish rebels in Syria northeast, along the Iraqi border, are getting support from Iraqi Kurds who are part of the current interim government in Baghdad.

Various U.S. Syria analysts who have not swallowed the neoconservative Kool-Aid argue that the United States is pursuing Regime Change II in Syria. Among them is Flynt Leverett, a former CIA analyst now at the Brookings Institution, who suggests that Assad is moving slowly in the direction of political and economic reform -- and might want our help. Others, including several former U.S. ambassadors, tell me that Syria can be a key partner in quieting down the crisis in Iraq, but U.S. belligerence is driving Syria in the other direction. And Scott Ritter and Sy Hersh, speaking in New York last week, noted that Syria (and its spy services) has been an important behind-the-scenes partner in attacking Al Qaeda since 2001. But "So what?" argue the neoconservatives. It's regime-change time, and they won't let rational arguments get in their way.

The brilliant Syria weblog Syria Comment, written by Joshua Landis, had this to say on Sunday:

Here is a most extraordinary letter from Syria's Ambassador in Washington Imad Mustapha to Congresswoman Sue Kelly, which has come into my possession. It explains how the American Administration has been stonewalling Syrian cooperation on a host of issues. It explains how Syria is being set up to fail so that the US can isolate it and carry out a process of regime-change at the expense of Iraqi stability and the lives of American soldiers and Iraqi civilians. It explains how the U.S. administration's policy of forcing regime change in Syria is trumping the need to save lives in Iraq. ... For over a year Syria has been trying to cooperate with the West on the Iraq border, on the issue of terrorism finance, on the issue of stopping Jihadists from getting into Syria, on intelligence sharing, and on stabilizing Iraq. Washington has consistently refused to take "Yes" as an answer. Why? The only credible reason is because Washington wants regime change in Syria.

Read the rest of Landis here, including the astonishing full text of Ambassador Mustapha's letter.

So I ask: Is it possible, after everything we've learned about the Bush administration's lies and deception over Iraq, after the staggering cost of that misguided war to the United States, is it possible that the American body politic is going to let Bush, Cheney and Co. get away with shattering another Middle East state?

It's possible. Because it's happening.

Robert Dreyfuss is a freelance writer based in Alexandria, Va., who specializes in politics and national security issues. He is a contributing editor at The Nation, a contributing writer at Mother Jones, a senior correspondent for The American Prospect, and a frequent contributor to Rolling Stone.

? 2005 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/story/27284/

Dreyfuss wrote the following article as well:

http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2004/01/12_405.html

Retired Air Force Lt. Colonel Karen Kwiatkowski is mentioned in the above article and on pages 305-309/430 of the paperback version of esteemed US intelligence author James Bamford's 'A Pretext for War' book as she saw Israeli generals walk to JINSA Israel first operative Doug Feith's office at the Pentagon like they owned the place..

Check out the mention of how JINSA Israel first operative Ledeen might even be behind the Niger forgeries as well via the 'Comments' section of the following URL:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2005/10/24/forged-documents-part-of-_n_9435.html

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

U.S. May Seek Syria Sanctions Over Hariri's Murder (Update1)

Oct. 21 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. will likely ask the United Nations to impose sanctions on the Syrian government or Syrian officials implicated in the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri by a report that Syria's ambassador called a ``big lie,'' Argentine and Russian envoys said.

U.S. Ambassador John Bolton moved quickly today to gather support for action against Syria, saying he would meet with envoys from France, China, Russia and the U.K., the other four permanent members of the Security Council, and with the Romanian envoy who is president of the panel this month.

``We are considering a range of options,'' Bolton told reporters. ``It is a very hard-hitting report. There will be other announcements and statements from us during the course of the day.'' Bolton also called the report ``historic.''

Russian Ambassador Andrei Denisov and Ambassador Cesar Mayoral of Argentina, a Security Council member, said they expect the U.S. to introduce a resolution calling for sanctions against the Syrian government or officials implicated in the report, released yesterday by German prosecutor Detlev Mehlis.

``This is a crisis,'' Denisov said.

``Syria is in a mess,'' Mayoral said.

Peaceful Solutions

U.S. State Department spokesman Adam Ereli, at a briefing in Washington, declined to discuss a range of possible actions, including possible military action, saying ``we seek peaceful, negotiated diplomatic solutions.''

``I think our focus right now is on multilateral collective action,'' Ereli said, when asked whether the Bush administration is considering additional U.S. sanctions under the Syria Accountability Act. Bush imposed sanctions on Syria in May 2004, including banning U.S. exports to Syria except for food and medicine. Further sanctions remain at Bush's disposal under the Act.

Seven senior Syrian officials, including President Bashar al- Assad's brother and brother-in-law, are suspects in the assassination of Hariri, Mehlis said in his 54-page report. Hariri, a five-time prime minister of Lebanon, was killed by a bomb in Beirut on Feb. 14.

Indictments

The report, which doesn't directly implicate Bashar-al-Assad, says there was ``converging evidence pointing at both Lebanese and Syrian involvement.'' One current and three former Lebanese security officials were indicted Sept. 1 in connection with the assassination.

Public outrage at Hariri's assassination and international pressure forced Syria to end a 29-year military presence in Lebanon in April. The Security Council in a resolution adopted Sept. 2, 2004, ordered the withdrawal of all Syrian troops and intelligence agents. Both UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan and U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice have expressed doubts that Syria removed all of its intelligence agents.

``This is absolutely unacceptable,'' Syrian Ambassador Fayssal Mekdad told reporters at the UN. ``It is not a credible report. It is a pity that people are sitting and dreaming and writing reports.''

`Ridiculous' Critique

Mekdad said some Security Council members were ``blackmailing'' the UN into accusing Syrian officials of complicity in Hariri's murder.

Bolton, who said he met for an hour today with Mehlis, called Mekdad's critique of the report ``ridiculous.''

Denisov said Russia considers the report ``credible.''

``Many leads point directly towards Syrian security officials as being directly involved,'' the report said. It said an unnamed witness told Mehlis that Assad's brother, Maher, and brother-in- law Assef Shawkat plotted the assassination, along with five other Syrian officials named in the report.

Mehlis said the assassination had to have been ``carried out by a group with an extensive organization and considerable resources.'' He said Syrian officials cooperated with the investigation ``in form, not substance,'' and ``made it difficult to follow leads established by the evidence.''

Mekdad said Syria ``cooperated fully'' with Mehlis.

The report cited evidence of a series of contacts between Lebanese and Syrian intelligence officials before the attack.

Assassination Decision

The unnamed witness, a Syrian living in Lebanon ``who claims to have worked for the Syrian intelligence services in Lebanon, has stated that approximately two weeks after the adoption of the Security Council resolution, senior Lebanese and Syrian officials decided to assassinate Rafik Hariri,'' the report said.

The report said the Syrian informant ``claimed that a senior Lebanese security official went several times to Syria to plan the crime, meeting once at the Meridien Hotel in Damascus and several times at the presidential palace and the office of a senior Syrian security official.''

It said the last meeting was held in the house of the same senior Syrian security official approximately seven to 10 days before the assassination.

The van that carried the bomb entered Lebanon from Syria on Jan. 21 and was driven by a Syrian army colonel, the report said.

The release of the report created controversy when the UN released two versions, one with the names of the Syrian officials and one that didn't identify them. Mehlis said he ordered the edits after learning that the report would be made public.

``It was supposed to be confidential,'' he said, denying that any governments or UN officials influenced his decisions.

Mehlis is scheduled to brief the Security Council on his report on Oct. 24, and will continue the investigation until at least Dec. 15.

To contact the reporters on this story:
Bill Varner in United Nations at wvarner@bloomberg.net
Janine Zacharia in Washington at jzacharia@bloomberg.net

Last Updated: October 21, 2005 15:02 EDT

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted on Fri, Oct. 21, 2005

M O R E N E W S F R O M
? Condoleezza Rice

Bush: World must hold Syria accountable

BARRY SCHWEID

Associated Press

WASHINGTON - President Bush on Friday said the U.N. should deal quickly and seriously with a report implicating Syria in the assassination of Lebanon's former prime minister, a killing that led to protests and withdrawal of Syrian troops from Lebanon after nearly 30 years as overlord.

"The report strongly suggests that the politically motivated assassination could not have taken place without Syrian involvement," Bush said.

In Damascus, Syrian leaders dismissed the findings, and the government of President Bashar Assad prepared to fight growing Western sentiment to punish it with economic sanctions.

Imad Moustapha, Syrian ambassador to the United States, said the report was baseless and the Bush administration was motivated by Syria's opposition to the war in Iraq.

He said of the report, in Washington, "It will only help fuel anti-American sentiment around the world."

The report was likely to worsen the divisions between Lebanon's pro- and anti-Syrian groups. Syria's opponents in Lebanon welcomed the findings as the long-awaited truth about the assassination and about Syrian interference in Lebanese affairs. Pro-Syrian politicians vigorously criticized the findings.

The United Nations investigative report, which Bush called "deeply disturbing," made a link between high-ranking Syrian officials and their Lebanese allies in the car bombing that killed Rafik Hariri and 20 others in February.

The findings and the reaction to them marked the latest escalation in tensions between the United States and Syria. U.S. officials have accused Damascus of harboring terrorist groups and permitting fighters to cross into Iraq to attack U.S., Iraqi and other forces there.

The report, issued Thursday to members of the U.N. Security Council, did not implicate Syrian President Assad directly, but said his government did not cooperate with the inquiry.

Bush spoke in California after helping dedicate a new pavilion at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library and Museum.

He said he had telephoned Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice earlier in the day and instructed her to call on the United Nations to convene a Security Council session "as quickly as possible to deal with this very serious matter."

Bush was not specific about what steps the international community should take. He said the United States has started talking with U.N. officials and with Arab governments about that.

"Today a serious report came out that requires the world to look at very carefully and respond accordingly," Bush said.

The United States and France are readying Security Council resolutions critical of Syria.

The Security Council, which can impose political and economic sanctions, was already scheduled to meet next Tuesday to consider the report from German prosecutor Detlev Mehlis. The U.S. mission said Friday it had no plans to call for an earlier meeting time.

Separately, the U.N. will soon receive another report on Syrian compliance with last year's U.N. demand that it quit Lebanon and allow political self-determination there.

Rice, on a trip to Tuscaloosa, Ala., said, "Accountability is going to be very important for the international community."

Separately, the head of the State Department's Near East Bureau said Hariri was the victim of a "political crime."

"We would like to see those responsible for this crime and others in Lebanon brought to justice," Assistant Secretary of State C. David Welch said in Washington.

Although Rice has refused to rule out military action against Syria, the Bush administration stressed that it has no plans for military intervention.

"We are seeking a diplomatic solution to this problem," State Department spokesman Adam Ereli said Friday.

Washington withdrew its ambassador from Damascus immediately after Hariri's killing.

The French government, which joined with the United States to pressure Syria to withdraw its troops from Lebanon, said it also was holding consultations in the U.N. Security Council.

"The full consequences of this report must now be examined," the foreign ministry said in Paris.

At the time of Hariri's assassination, Syria had about 14,000 troops in Lebanon and essentially controlled the country along with its Lebanese government allies.

Hariri, once partially allied with Syria, had broken with Damascus and begun a political campaign to establish greater Lebanese independence.

The Mehlis report cited a witness who said Assef Shawkat, the president's brother-in-law and Syria's military intelligence chief, forced a man to tape a claim of responsibility for Hariri's killing 15 days before it occurred. The report also said Syrian Foreign Minister Farouk al-Sharaa lied in a letter to the investigating commission.

Assad's government repeated its claim of innocence in the Hariri killing and declared that the U.N. document was heavily politicized because of Syria's staunch anti-Israeli position.

Information Minister Mahdi Dakhlallah said the report lacked hard evidence and was based on witnesses "who are well known for their anti-Syria stands."

---

Associated Press Writers Deb Riechmann in Simi Valley, Calif., and Anne Gearan in Washington contributed to this report.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

AFX News Limited
Israel's Peres says time for regime change in Syria
10.21.2005, 03:43 PM

JERUSALEM (AFX) - Israeli Deputy Prime Minister Shimon Peres said Friday that it is time for a regime change in Syria following publication of a UN report implicating Damascus in the murder of former Lebanese premier Rafiq Hariri.

'I think Syria needs a change,' Peres told public radio. 'It is neither natural nor acceptable that a family representing a small minority should govern Syria in a brutal fashion.'

That was a reference to President Bashar al-Assad and his father and predecessor, Hafez, who died five years ago after nearly three decades in power. The Assad family belongs to the small Allawite sect of Islam.

'If it is true that the Syrian government is implicated in the assassination of Rafiq Hairi, that will undermine the regime of the Assads,' Peres said.

He called on the United States and France, the former colonial power in Syria and Lebanon, to 'take the initiative for deciding an international response' to the UN report.

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice called the report 'deeply troubling.' 'As to what we do next, that's what we are going to have to discuss,' she said, adding that 'the Security Council is going to have to be a focal point' for action.

ms/al/sjw/tc

The copying, republication or redistribution of AFX News content, including by framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of AFX News.

AFX News and the AFX Financial News logo are registered trademarks of AFX News Limited

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Britain says UN to mull Syria sanctions
by
Friday 21 October 2005 9:33 PM GMT

Jack Straw says sanctions against Syria will be considered

The UN Security Council will consider imposing international sanctions on Syria, implicated in the murder of former Lebanese prime minister Rafiq al-Hariri.

Asked in a BBC interview if the council would set sanctions for Syria at a soon-to-be-held special session, Britain's Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said, "We are going to consider that".

Straw, who is on a tour of Alabama with US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, said on Friday the report showed Syria had to stop interfering in Lebanon, its small neighbour.

"They have to change and they have to change pretty radically," Straw said. "And the international community has to take a stand."

Asked if the goal of the international community was "regime change" in Syria, Straw said there was no discussion about that.

A UN probe into al-Hariri's killing in a Beirut bomb blast on 14 February pointed to Syria's involvement. Damascus has, however, rejected the findings.

The United States, Britain and France are seeking to call a meeting about the report at the council for members' foreign ministers, which would include Rice and Straw, a British official said. A date has not been set, he added.

Reuters
By

You can find this article at:
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/0D95221F-91B8-404D-9F43-CEC171B0C5D5.htm

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Saturday, October 22, 2005
Bush: Syria must be held accountable
Syrian officials dismiss Mehlis' report as 'politicized, unprofessional'

By Raed El Rafei and Majdoline Hatoum
Daily Star staff

BEIRUT: US President George W. Bush has demanded immediate UN action to deal with what he called a "deeply disturbing" U.N. investigative report implicating Syrian officials in the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri. Speaking from California, Bush said: "The report strongly suggests that the politically motivated assassination could not have taken place without Syrian involvement."

U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice also demanded "accountability" for Syria's alleged involvement in the killing.

"Accountability is going to be very important for the international community," Rice said, as she flew with British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw on a tour of Alabama.

However, Syria dismissed as "politicized" and "unprofessional" the findings of the head of the UN inquiry into the assassination, Detlev Mehlis, who pointed a finger of blame directly toward Syrian security officials.

"The report is full of political rumors, gossip and hearsay, and it has not a single shred of evidence that will be accepted by any court of law. We are so disappointed with it," said Syrian Ambassador to the U.S. Imad Mustafa.

But according to Rice, "We cannot have the specter of one state's apparatus having participated or having been involved in the assassination of the former prime minister ... in another state."

"Even an initial reading of the report is deeply troubling," the secretary of state said. "You have clearly a case in which there is an implication that Syrian officials were involved in the assassination of Rafik Hariri. You also have a clear indication that the Syrian government has not been cooperating."

The secretary said she was hammering out with her counterparts on the Security Council, including Straw, exactly how to respond to the report.

Asked if that response would include pressuring Lebanon's President Emile Lahoud to resign after he was implicated in the report, Rice said she was still digesting the UN investigator's findings.

Straw said the report showed Syrian "arrogance" toward a small neighbor it considered

its "fiefdom."

Both Rice and Straw said international diplomacy would focus on stopping any further Syrian meddling in Lebanon.

In a news conference in New York Friday, Mustafa said he was shocked by the "flagrant" politicization of the UN probe that implicated his country in the assassination of Lebanon's former premier.

Asked about specific allegations against Syrian officials, Mustafa said that one need not be a legal expert to notice the "gross contradictions" within the report.

"The main accusations leveled against Syria are attributed to shady personalities," he said. "They have very little credibility. How can they do this to us without any clear evidence?"

In the first official reaction from Damascus, Information Minister Mehdi Dakhlallah said during an interview with Al-Jazeera television early Friday that he believed the report to be "100 percent politicized."

"It is a political statement against Syria based on allega-

tions by witnesses known for their hostility to Syria," he said, adding that the report was "far from professional and will not lead us to the truth.

He continued: "I don't believe we are closer to the truth. On the contrary, probably there is a kind of deception which runs against the truth, against the interest of Syria and Lebanon and against stability in the region."

The European Union urged Syria to cooperate fully with the continuing investigations into the killing, expressing concern Friday at the UN report's findings.

"Syria will harm its own interests if it does not fully cooperate with the inquiry," said EU spokesperson Emma Udwin, adding that it was too early to say if the EU would be taking action against Syria in light of the report.

A French Foreign Ministry spokesperson also condemned the insufficient level of cooperation by Syrian authorities with the investigation team, praising the commission's work as being "independent and professional."

The French official said Mehlis' report concluded that "the crime was carried by a very complex organization, which could not have been carried out without the participation of state and para-state structures."

Welcoming the UN report, Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Lior Ben Dror said the report's release was "a positive act, which is moving in the right direction."

"Israel, which was not implicated in any way in this incident, hopes that in the wake of this report the international community will redouble its efforts to put an end to Syrian involvement in Lebanon," he said. - With agencies

Alpha

Syrian Ambassador to US discusses 'A Clean Break'/war for Israel agenda

http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/wake-up-america-your-government-is-hijacked-by-zionism/2005/06/10/syrian-ambassador-mentions-a-clean-break-war-for-israel.php

Alpha

US and Israel behind Hariri assassination?

http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/wake-up-america-your-government-is-hijacked-by-zionism/2005/03/13/hariri-killed-by-us-and-israel.php

Alpha · Posted: Sat Oct 22, 2005 7:32 am Post subject: High Noon for Syria

washingtonpost.com
High Noon for Syria

By David Ignatius
Wednesday, October 19, 2005; A21

It's the Middle East equivalent of a "High Noon" showdown: This week, the United Nations special prosecutor, Detlev Mehlis, will present his findings on who killed former Lebanese prime minister Rafiq Hariri. If that report alleges Syrian involvement in the killing, as is widely expected, a deadly season will begin in Beirut and Damascus as the United Nations tries to bring the killers to justice.

Like a good sheriff, Mehlis isn't talking. But there are reasons to believe he has some evidence of a Syrian hand. I'm told by a source in contact with Mehlis's team that three of the four pro-Syrian Lebanese generals who were arrested in August are cooperating with the prosecutor. What's more, Mehlis has taken his investigation into the heart of Damascus, quizzing some close associates of Syrian President Bashar Assad.

The next stage of the confrontation will come if Mehlis names individual Syrians. If so, Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad Siniora is expected to ask the U.N. Security Council for new sanctions against Syria -- freezing the suspects' bank accounts, banning travel and otherwise pressuring the regime. The Lebanese leader will also ask the United Nations to allow Mehlis to keep working on the case for two more months.

The highest-stakes showdown is between Assad and President Bush, and not even the most devoted fan of the old Gary Cooper Western can predict how that one will turn out. The two leaders have been playing a game of chicken for months while the clock ticked down to this week's deadline.

The confrontation began with truculence on both sides. Syria sullenly withdrew its troops from Lebanon in April, but a campaign of assassination continued against anti-Syrian journalists and political figures in Beirut. The Lebanese capital today is a political ghost town, with many prominent politicians and journalists outside the country to avoid the Syrian-inspired car bombs or hit men they fear are targeting them.

An angry Bush administration, meanwhile, was actively exploring a policy of regime change several months ago. Bush was furious at Assad for not controlling the insurgents who are using Syria as a base for their attacks on U.S. troops in Iraq, and the president pressed his national security team to explore whether there were good alternatives to Assad.

But the administration pulled back from its regime-change enthusiasm in recent weeks, and officials now speak of the need for "policy" change. A big factor is the new director of national intelligence, John Negroponte, and his analysts at the National Intelligence Council. They have been warning Bush that if Assad is toppled, the result isn't likely to be better in terms of regional stability, and it could well be worse. The analysts also note that there isn't now any coherent, organized opposition to Assad.

Over the past month, Washington and Damascus have been sending feelers -- so far to no effect. Assad has traveled to Egypt and Saudi Arabia, where officials told him what the United States wanted on Iraq and the Palestinian issue as the price of engagement. In late September, Assad's brother-in-law, Asef Shawkat, the chief of Syrian military intelligence, visited France and talked with intelligence officials there. I'm told by one U.S. intelligence source that Shawkat hinted at major Syrian concessions if France and America would make a deal. No takers, thus far.

A warning of the bloody denouement of this drama came last week, when Syria's interior minister, Ghazi Kanaan, was found dead in Damascus of a reported suicide. Almost nobody takes that at face value. One version has it that Kanaan was killed (or handed the gun and told to do the honorable thing) as a fall guy in the Hariri killing. I tend to doubt that version, because Kanaan had been close to both Hariri and Washington. Instead, I wonder if his death was a counter-coup by pro-Assad operatives in Damascus who feared Kanaan as a potential rival. I'm told that Mehlis asked to examine Kanaan's body before it was quickly buried, but was refused.

The gunslingers are facing off, and the last act is about to roll. Assad claimed in an interview with CNN last week that if Mehlis names any Syrian, that person "would be considered a traitor and most severely punished." That looks like a man trying to get ahead of the power curve, and I wouldn't be surprised to see more Damascus "suicides." If Assad's grip weakens and he can't or won't clean house in Damascus, the season of coup and counter-coup will begin for real.

davidignatius@washpost.com

Alpha · Posted: Sat Oct 22, 2005 5:37 pm Post subject:

Forwarded:

Another perspective on the Mehlis report. Note two things: it is inaccurate when it comes to help from Israel -- and Jordan. And it has relied heavily on pro-Hariri sources, reporting rumour from these sources as fact. It does seem that the inclusion of Jibril's name was gratuitous, essentially to implicate all the 'anti-western' forces in the assassination.
Interesting that Ghazi Kana'an's name is not mentioned. If this is not a politicised report, I do not know what is.
Basem

http://angryarab.blogspot.com/

Thursday, October 20, 2005
What did Mehlis Know, and How did He know it? The Mehlis Report, or the Birth Certificate of US-Run Lebanon? So the report is out. How do you know that? Well, the Hariri (Future) TV resumed their unending cheesy Hariri songs. That is how you know. The text that was first posted on the Washington Post's website, wad edited and the "track changes" marks were still on it. I don't know whether they later changed the version that they posted. But I enjoyed reading the text, with the deletions, especially when the names of Maher Al-Asad and Asaf Shawkat were mentioned but marked as deleted. Also, a passage that criticized the spread of rumors in Lebanese media (clearly a reference to Hariri media themselves) was also deleted. Mini-Hariri would not have liked that at all, just as a reference to Lebanese politicians (read Hariri tools) spreading rumors and leaking to the press was also deleted. As a whole, the report is not very strong; i.e. there is no smoking gun technically speaking. But when you read the report as a whole, you find the details and the circumstantial evidence add up to a picture of Syrian and Lebanese military and intelligence culpability. That is certain. I was of the view from the begining that Syrian intelligence may quite likely be behind the assassination, and the question was the level of the decision making. (And while I wrote those words I am pained when I think of many assassinations of Palestinians by Israelis on regular basis, but those murders never generate investigations. They just don't have billions in their bank accounts, and do not know Cheney personally). Also, when you read the report, you can't but think about the Arab Israeli conflict. The skills and efforts of the Israeli intelligence apparatus is directed against the Arabs (including their poets and writers as many were assassinated by Israeli forces over the years), and the skills and efforts--criminal in both cases--of the Arab intelligence apparatus are directed against the Arabs themselves. You see here a picture of Arab regimes; how they operate and how they use people, and how they conspire and how they manipulate, and how they utilize human beings and throw them. You see that they devote so much of their energies and efforts in their little dirty wars, and little campaigns against one another. The Arab media will not say this: not a good picture of Rafiq Hariri emerges here. It only underlines that his conflict with the Syrian regime, which installed him in power with his cronies in 1992, was not over principle, but over one issue: the role of Emile Lahhud. Lahhud became obstructive of Hariri's plans and designs, and when Hariri gave up on changing him and on having his way, he turned, but never publicly, against the Syrian regime. You see this today in Lebanon: the Hariri camp and Jumblat still talk fondly about the regime of Hafidh Al-Asad. That regime was favored by them, because they benefited from it. Human rights violations in Syria AND in Lebanon are the least of their concern. You will notice if you read the report that Hariri, when he went for that famous meeting with Bashshar Al-Asad, visited the headquarters of Rustum Ghazalah twice in the same day: once on the way to Syria, and another time on the way from Syria. When a Hariri senior aide was telling me about the humiliation of Hariri by Rustum Ghazalah, especially in the meeting when Hariri went to tell Ghazalah that he is willing to support Lahhud's extension of his term in the service of Syria--when Ghazalah I am told held him by his shirt to chastise him--, I could only say this: "Why would he take such humiliation? Why would he accept such mistreatment by intelligence functionaries"? "It is all about greed and hunger for power," I said. He could not but agree with my observation. You read the report and you see a picture of extensive culpability by ALL branches of the Syrian military-intelligence apparatus, and by ALL branches of the Lebanese military-intelligence apparatus. The report also adds that there may be involvement by PFLP-GC, and by the Ahbash fundamentalist group, and by various Lebanese politicians. But if that is the case, you wonder: are they that dumb? Are they that stupid? And if that many people and groups were involvement in the planning and execution, how come not a single person yet has cracked? Yes, there are references to two unnamed Syrian sources, but they seem to be low-level. One of them saw the Mitsubishi van in Zabadani camp and another saw it in Hammana camp. But yes, Arab regimes, and the Syrian government has a long record, can be that stupid, not to mention that they can be that criminal and bloody. Witness the beating of Anwar Bunni the other day in Damascus. But why would the Lebanese-Syrian regimes allow so many layers of involvement by so many groups and factions and individuals? But the answer is that they did not anticipate that level of international attention, and that level of outside intrusion by the UN investigation. In other words, if they were clumsy--but not that clumsy given that there is still no smoking gun--it is because they were accustomed to be clumsy and careless. There was no accountability on the behavior of the Syrian AND Lebanese governments over the years, in the post-Ta'if period. Hariri is guilty in that regard, as were all those who were part of the Lebanese government at the time. I mean guilty of crimes. Hariri's assassination was not the first murder by the Syrian-Lebanese military-intelligence apparatus, but that outside UN investigations can only be directed against foes of the US, and never against friends of the US. Remember what happened to Boutros Ghali when he insisted on releasing the Qana massacre report, after heavy political editing. When Lebanese ask about politicization, the answer is of course there is politicization. The US is willing and desirous to politicize every little thing in Lebanon today if it adds pressure on Syria, and if it exploits Lebanese events in the service of US propaganda and plans. How many times has the US ambassador visited May Shidyaq so far? Eight times already? And do you really believe that the US, just like that, suddenly out of the blue decided to care so deeply and so affectionately about the "sovereignty" and "independence" of Lebanon? Can be people be that naive? (Yes, some Lebanonese nationalists are really that naive, or worse than naive). Some parts of the report clearly read like an anthology of the accounts, theories, and opinions of Hariri functionaries: what Basim Sab`, what Ghazi `Aridi, what Walid Jumblat, what Jubran Tuwayni, what Sa`d Hariri, what Marwan Hamadi, and others have told Mehlis. Just like the Fitzgerald Report. But why did the report not include the accounts and opinions of the other side? That was an omission, and will contribute to the impression that will be used by the Syrian government and its supporters and puppets--does the Syrian government allow anybody but puppets?--in Lebanon. I was amused today that the Syrian president received Kamal Shatila, head of the Popular Conference. This is a man who was chased out of Lebanon by the Syrian government (after a phone call from the former Minister of Defense Mustafa Tlas--according to Shatila's account in Al-Jazeera), and now the Syrian government discovered that it has a Sunni problem in Lebanon (and in Syria). For years they marginalized so many Sunni figures in Lebanon, in order to push and promote Hariri. The decent politician Salim Huss was marginalized by the Syrian government for much of the post-Ta'if period. Now, I will get into specifics. The biggest and most suspicious lie of the report: it said in paragraph 19 that: "it is to be regretted that no Member State relayed useable information to the Commission". But why would Mehlis say that in this report when he had said in the preliminary report that ISRAEL and Jordan gave help to his investigation, and when he had told Le Figaro that Israel provided help, and when the Israeli press reported that Israeli intelligence agents had met with his team in Europe? That will only raise doubts about the alleged "objectivity"--they lie to you when they use that word, always--and non-political nature of the report. The account by Rustum Ghazalah in paragraph 27 is so clearly untrue, for anybody who knows anything about the nature of the relationship between Ghazalah and Hariri. Equally lying, is the account of Jubran Tuwayni, and I don't understand why he got into the report except due to his love of the cameras, and to seeing his name in print, just like Sen. Schumer of New York. And the account of Tuwayni, who never was a confidante of Hariri, was not corroborated by anybody else. Nobody except Tuwayni claims that Hariri was threatened with bombings to his face by Bashshar Al-Asad. From his hotel in Paris, Jubran Tuwayni wanted to get into the story, this right-wing untalented writer who is discredited among Muslims and who was told by Christian voters in East Beirut to go to "Hariri's house" when he showed his face after the assassination of Samir Qasir. I talked to a Hariri confidante who saw Hariri just after returning from the meeting with Bashshar on 26th of August. According to that person, Hariri said that the meeting was "not good" but did not report threats. I heard about the comment about "bring down Lebanon over their heads" but that was not said by Bashshar, but was said to Hariri in another setting according to my information. And the tapes conversation between Hariri and Walid Mu`allim does not refer to the threat either, and I am not saying whether it was said or not, but have to dissect the text before me. And Mehlis needed, no needs as he will be with us for years I predict, somebody to help with transliteration of Arabic. In paragraph 28, you see that Hariri's main beef was not principles or the lofty ideals by the professionally hired chanters of the Hummus Revolution. It was about the petty feud between Hariri and Lahhud. I also noticed that the name of Ghazi Kan`an was not mentioned. If Kan`an did not "commit suicide" I bet that his name would have been mentioned. Paragraph 29 may surprise people because Walid Mu`allim always comes across as a jovial fellow, and he may be, but his last meetings with Hariri were pretty tense and conflictual, as I know form an account of an Arab journalist. Paragraph 30 is correct: Walid Mu`allim lied when he portrayed the meeting with Hariri as "friendly and constructive". A journalist who spoke to Mu`allim told me that Mu`allim presented Hariri in the Feb. 1st meeting with a list of Syrian grievances against him. And the report did a good job in tracing the footsteps of Abu Adas, but only mentions that his father died while in Lebanese state custody. Another innocent victim that nobody cares to talk about. Paragraph 63 should have noted that Ashraf Rifi (the current director-general of the Surete Generale), the author of the cited report in this report was a Hariri functionary. There are no objective sources in Lebanon, outside of the Angry Arab zone of course. Paragraph 75 is damning: that Mustafa Hamdan claimed that he did not remember details of his day on 14th of February. If I can remember that day clearly while in California, surely Hamdan, unless he has something to hide, has to remember, and in details that day. Paragraph 80 is not accurate in talking about the home of the Ahbash movement. It is not a Palestinian movement, but mostly Beirut Sunni movement, and Abu Adas lived in a Sunni Beiruti neighborhood and not in a refugee camp. I have an entry of this movement in my Historical Dictionary of Lebanon, and there is an article about them in IJMES by Nezar Hamzeh from 5 years or more. Check it out. It is a very odd movement that got my attention while a graduate student in the 1980s. I was curious about it because a distant relative of ours joined the movement, and his behavior got more and more bizarre. He declared his Muslim father a kafir at one point. This Sunni fundamentalist movement is more like a cult, and named after a Shaykh (al-Harari) who came from Ethiopia, hence the name Ahbash, plural of Habashi, the Abyssinian. The movement is based on iron discipline, and worried the Syrian government back in the 1980s. The Syrian government in Lebanon always dealt carefully with Sunni fundamentalist groups in Lebanon: if they can't be coopted, they have to be captured or killed. But the Ahbash movement was coopted, and became a tool of Syrian intelligence in Lebanon. But why would the Syrian government rely on them for the plan, I wonder. Why not rely on a more reliable pro-Syrian organization? Paragraph 95 really distressed me and bothered me. It shows the utter contempt felt by Arab officials toward their citizens. It also shows the blatant manipulation of Lebanese politics by Syrian AND Lebanese intelligence agents and services. It also bothers me to see how the post-Ta'if regime manipulated and controlled the Labor Movement in Lebanon--the only hope for non-sectarian collective action, with the full participation of Hariri, Birri, Jumblat, SSNP, and the Syrian government of course. This current head of the labor unions in Lebanon is a Nabih Birri puppet, and has no credibility or standing. Paragraph 96 begins to report the account of an unnamed Syrian who now resides in Lebanon. In the first text that I saw, which has editing changes marked, the name of Maher Al-Asad, and Bahjat Sulayman, and Asaf Shawkat were deleted. This witness claimed that he saw the van in Hammana. Why were the Syrian so keen on displaying "tools of the crime" so to speak? And what was his standing within the Syrian intelligence apparatus? Why should we accept this account as credible? And how did the Mehlis team "know" that the van came from Syria? What is the evidence? This same witness throws in the name of Ahmad Jibril in for extra effect. Why Ahmad Jibril? Why would the Syrian government which was, according to the story, relying on its own intelligence agencies and on the Lebanese agencies, need the help of Jibril? Why widen the scope of the planning of the crime?? Paragraph 101 also throws the names of Nasir Qandil and `Ali Al-Hajj as people who knew of the crime before it happened. Why would the circle of those who knew of the crime be so wide, and do those details, and this tendency to accept allegations that incriminate Syria not undermine the credibility of the report and the investigation? I mean if somebody came forward to Mehlis and allege that he knew of an Israeli plot against Hariri, would he put that information in? Would he pass the allegation on and make it part of the report? Paragraph 103 parades yet another unnamed witness, and that claimed that Mustafa Hamdan basically bragged to him about wanting to kill Hariri. Are they that dumb? They could be. They could be. Now the account of Muhammad Zahayr As-Siddiq occupies several paragraphs, and seems to have been a major source for the report according to the Lebanese press. But some of the allegations by Siddiq were refuted (that all those Lebanese and Syrian intelligence leaders met in an apartment in Mu`awwad for example)? And Siddiq's status changed from that of a cooperating witness to that of a suspect, and yet the report adds, almost in passing, that that should add, not diminish, his credibility. Why? Paragraph 111 clearly catches the Syrian government in a lie, and it also shows how dumb Arab governments can be, and that they are not aware that they are being watched and monitored including by satellites. Paragraph 112 and 113 clearly were rushed and do not add up that easily, and do not explain the change in the account of Siddiq. And suddenly paragraph 114, almost in an after thought, says this: "At the present stage of investigation, a certain amount of information given by Mr. Saddik cannot be confirmed through other evidence." The mention of the name of the Lebanese Army's commander-in-chief is very damaging. Here was somebody who has been praised by all sides since the Hummus Revolution because he refused to use the army to suppress popular demonstrations against Syria. But Michel Sulayman clearly is part of the intelligence-military apparatus that was set up with Syrian knowledge and order. The conclusion after paragraph 182 is rather odd. It says: "The evidence does show that it is likely that Mr. Abu Adass left his home on 16 January 2005 and was taken, voluntarily or not, to Syria, where he has since disappeared. " Evidence and "likely" in the same sentence? If there is evidence it should be more than likely, no? The most important damning part was the information on the use of cellphones and landline communications between the various parties. But it was curious that they insisted on throwing in the name of `Umar Karami although there is nothing that links him at all. This was clearly political, and may indicate that Hariri Inc functionaries were quite involved, directly or indirectly, in the preparation of the report. I was surprised that former Lebanese intelligence chief, and later advisor to Bashir Gemayyel, Johny `Abduh, admitted in an interview on LBC-TV that he asked Mehlis about his investigation, and that the latter answered him. Certainly, the phone call between `Abdul-`Al and the cellphone of Emile Lahhud is quite damaging to the latter. The calls for his resignation will only get louder, and Lahhud will never resign. But this damning evidence if pursued may make his position more than precarious. And paragraph 208 was actually hilarious: Mehlis has ideas and plans for the reform of the Lebanese political system and Lebanese society. He says: "Much needs to be done to overcome sectarian divisions". What? How? Why? Does Mehlis has plans to also investigate the origins of Lebanese conflict through history? But you know what? The report could have been more damning of the Syrian and Lebanese governments if they also talked about the various active role played by Rafiq Hariri in preparing for UNSC 1559, AND the fact that the Syrian and Lebanese government knew of those activities in great detail. Hariri's political (if not also security) apparatus was breached, but the report did not want to shed light on that role by Hariri which is either denied or not mentioned at all in Lebanese media. And now, the propaganda wars will begin. It can be predicted that one side (the Hariri funded side) will insist that this is an "objective" and "professional" report, and and that the author, because he is a German--white European--is not capable of politicization because white Europeans are just genetically inclined toward professionalism. Some Hariri people are really talking like that these days, especially the Hariri propgandist Farish Khashshan. The other side, will insist that the report is politicized and will dig holes in it. And the Syrian government will continue to lie, and to even deny the obvious: that the Syrian government hated Hariri at the time of his assassination. The US will have a new tool in its hand to add pressure on Syria, and if the regime feels endangered, the confronation between US and Syria will only get uglier, and the people of Syria, Lebanon AND Iraq will pay the price. The US is still tempted to play with fire in Lebanon, and that will not be pretty, not pretty for anybody. If the Syrian governmet and its allies feel the need, they can play dirty, or dirtier, in Lebanon and beyond, just as the US continues its dirty playing in Iraq, Afghanistan and beyond. And you wonder why I often miss the Cold War?

posted by As'ad @ 7:30 PM link

Alpha

http://www.arabmonitor.info/news/dettaglio.php?idnews=11679&lang=en

Central witness to Mehlis report revealed as a paid swindler

Hamburg, 22 October - The most prestigious German political news-magazine, Der Spiegel, revealed today that the central witness, Zuheir al-Siddiq on whom Detlev Mehlis had relied during his investigations into the assault on Rafiq Hariri, was a dubious person with a criminal record as a convicted felon and swindler. Even the UN Commission which had submitted the Mehlis report to the UN Security Council yesterday, is raising serious doubts about the reliability and credibility of al-Siddiq's declarations, since it was revealed that the alleged former officer of the Syrian secret services had in reality been convicted more than once for penal offences related to money subtraction.

The German magazine reports that the UN investigating Commission is well aware that it had been lied by Siddiq, who at first had affirmed to have left Beirut one month before the assault on al-Hariri, but then had to admit at the end of September his direct involvement in the implementation of the crime. It is quite evident by now that the witness had received money for his depositions, considering that his siblings reveal to have received a phone-call from him from Paris, in late summer, in which Siddiq announced "I have become a millionaire". Doubts regarding the credibility of the man were further fuelled by the revelation that Siddiq had been recommended to Mehlis by the long-term Syrian renegate Rifaat al-Assad, an uncle of the Syrian President who more than once offered himself as "alternative President of Syria".

To Mehlis the central witness Siddiq is supposed to have declared that he had put his apartment in Beirut to the disposition of the conspirators to kill Hariri, among them several Syrian intelligence officials. Of himself he had declared to have gathered intelligence for the Syrian services regarding Palestinian refugee camps in Lebanon. But the Syrian government, revealed Der Spiegel, had sent weeks ago a documentation regarding the man to various Western governments, hoping that Detlev Mehlis would not get caught in the trap of a notorious imposter.

Alpha

U.S., Britain Urge Action Against Syria

By HUSSEIN DAKROUB, Associated Press Writer1 hour, 5 minutes ago

The U.S. and Britain jointly criticized Syria on Sunday and called for international action to be taken over a U.N. investigation that implicated Syrian officials in the killing of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice didn't discuss any specific actions that the United States might push for when the U.N. Security Council considers the investigator's report Tuesday, but said the matter "really has to be dealt with."

"These are very serious charges and they have to be debated at the level of foreign minister," Rice told British Broadcasting Corp. in an interview during a tour of her home state of Alabama with British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw.

Straw pointed to testimony about "false testimony being given by senior people" in Syrian President Bashar Assad's regime.

"The report indicated that people of a high level of this Syrian regime were implicated," Straw said.

The comments came as Syria's deputy foreign minister denied the U.N. report's statement that he threatened Hariri 13 days before the Feb. 14 assassination.

Diplomats at the United Nations and in Washington say U.S. and French officials have been talking with Russia and other nations about anti-Syria resolutions to put before the Security Council, including the possibility of punitive economic sanctions.

The U.N report tied top Syrian officials to the Feb. 14 bombing that killed Hariri, who was an opponent of Syria's domination of Lebanon. It also said Syria's government did not cooperate with the investigation into Hariri's murder.

Syrian officials deny any involvement in the murder and insist they have cooperated.

Syria's deputy foreign minister Walid Moallem said he never threatened Hariri, as the report claimed.

"This is totally untrue," Moallem said in a call to a talk show on Syrian state television, which was monitored in Beirut.

"I did not go to Premier Hariri to make threats," Moallem said. "I went to him to inform him about my mission and ask him to cooperate in order for the mission to succeed."

The U.N. report, released Thursday night, said a tape of a conversation between Moallem and Hariri has Hariri complaining that security services were waging a campaign against him.

"But Lebanon will never be ruled from Syria. This will no longer happen," Hariri said, according to the report.

It said Moallem responded that Hariri was in a corner. "Please do not take things lightly," the report quotes Moallem as saying.

The report said the tape "clearly contradicts" Moallem's testimony to the U.N. commission investigating Hariri's killing. He "falsely described the Feb. 1 meeting as 'friendly and constructive' and avoided giving direct answers to the questions put to him," the report said.

The U.N. investigation said the bombing that Hariri and 20 others in Beirut could not have been carried out without the complicity of the Syrian and Lebanese intelligence services.

At the time, Syrian troops controlled Lebanon, but the killing set off mass demonstrations and international pressures that forced Syria to withdraw its army in April after a nearly three-decade occupation.

Syrian officials have dismissed the report's findings as unproven allegations based on "gossip" from anti-Syrian elements.
Copyright © 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The information contained in the AP News report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press.

Alpha

http://faculty-staff.ou.edu/L/Joshua.M.Landis-1/syriablog/2005/10/syria-is-being-set-up-to-fail-leaked.htm#comments

Syria is being Set Up to Fail: A Leaked Letter from Washington

Here is a most extraordinary letter from Syria's Ambassador in Washington Imad Mustapha to Congresswoman Sue Kelly, which has come into my possession. It explains how the American Administration has been stonewalling Syrian cooperation on a host of issues. It explains how Syria is being set up to fail so that the US can isolate it and carry out a process of regime-change at the expense of Iraqi stability and the lives of American soldiers and Iraqi civilians. It explains how the US administration's policy of forcing regime change in Syria is trumping the need to save lives in Iraq.

I also have the letter written by Congresswoman Sue Kelly, and signed by 100 fellow congressmen, which was originally sent to Ambassador Mustapha on Sept. 30, 2005 and which illicited this reply. It is short and reiterates the usual administration complaints about the lack of Syrian cooperation with the war on terror and effort to stabilize Iraq. I have not had the time to type it in - but it is a demonstration of the US government's failure to appreciate how it is being railroaded by the administration into a confrontation with Syria. One must read Imad Mustapha's response, copied here, to appreciate just how the railroading is taking place.

For over a year Syria has been trying to cooperate with the West on the Iraq border, on the issue of terrorism finance, on the issue of stopping Jihadists from getting into Syria, on intelligence sharing, and on stabilizing Iraq.

Washington has consistently refused to take "Yes" as an answer. Why? The only credible reason is because Washington wants regime change in Syria. The US administration is sacrificing American soldiers in Iraq in order to carry out its program of "reforming the Greater Middle East." Two US policies are clashing head to head - the one is stabilizing Iraq and the other is the reform of the greater Middle East. President Bush is placing his democracy policy over his Iraq policy. This is costing American and Iraqi lives.

The world press has failed to get this story, although it has been staring them in the face for months. Human rights activists in Syria have documented for a long time how Syria is arresting Islamists, cracking down on Syrians who go to Iraq to fight by arresting their family members and jailing the fighters when they return from Iraq. Read Razan Zeitouneh's story about Syria's "Preemptive War" against Islamists here. The Syrian secret police have been terrorizing would be terrorists in Syria for many months now. The US has cut off all intelligence sharing with Syria despite repeated Syrian attempts to cooperate on this most important issue. Rumsfeld refused a Syria delegation of top border officials permission to meet with their Iraq and American counterparts just two months ago. Read the story here.

The Letter (I have highlighted several sentences in bold below.)

The Honorable Congresswoman Sue Kelly
2182 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515

October 5, 2005
Dear Congresswoman Kelly:

Let me start by expressing my deep appreciation for your letter dated September 30, 2005, co-signed by your colleagues, which I received from your office.

Notwithstanding the disturbing and disappointing content of this letter, I feel grateful for it has given me and my country the chance to engage and respond to the grave issues raised. This is what I would expect from an honorable body of representatives who believe that there is still room for engagement and dialogue. This is something Syria has repeatedly called for and, unfortunately, was repeatedly denied.

Let me start by reiterating my country’s position: Syria has continually and repeatedly called for the Americans and Iraqis to engage with their Syrian counterparts. This is necessary in order to solve the problems in Iraq. And Syria has stated, in no uncertain terms, that our will to assist in this situation illustrates not only our hopes for a unified and free Iraq but also the dire consequences turmoil in Iraq will pose for Syrian interests.

Syria has the political will to engage with the US towards finding a solution to the on-going violence and bloodshed in Iraq. It is a detriment to out national security and interests to see Iraq being further destabilized, and our concern for Iraq’s territorial integrity is paramount. We have asked the US Administration time and again to stop this public media campaign against Syria, and told the Administration that it is both unfair and unsubstantiated. Furthermore, we have spared no means to communicate to this Administration our willingness to mutually address all matters of concern to the US. Needless to say, all our initiatives to engage with the US have failed, and the US Administration seems adamant on following a path of public accusations and no direct engagement.

Before providing you and your honorable colleagues with a detailed reply to all the points raised in your letter let me start by submitting to you the following tow suggestions:

1. The government of Syria is willing to invite a bi-partisan congressional delegation for a working visit to Syria in which the honorable members would explore in depth all matters related to the Iraqi issue. This will allow the members of the delegation to witness for themselves what Syria is and has been doing to address the issues discussed in your letter, as well as provide an opportunity to discuss all possible actions with leading Syrian governmental officials. Syria pledges full cooperation with this delegation. We are willing to hear from you, listen to your suggestions, and upon verifying our willingness to engage we expect your assistance in convincing the US Administration that its current policy towards Syria is neither useful nor constructive. We would like the message reiterated that it is in the best interest of both countries to work together and it is counterproductive to continue creating these conditions of hostility and animosity.

2. In recognition of the efforts you might undertake in visiting Syria and helping both countries move forward toward cooperation and joint action, Syria is willing to immediately resume its intelligence and security cooperation with the relevant US agencies. This cooperation was initiated in the aftermath of the tragic events of September 11, and was suspended early this year. Wee expect the US Administration to acknowledge Syria’s cooperation and halt its campaign of accusations and rhetoric in return for our security and intelligence cooperation.

As for the points mentioned in your letter, allow me to address each point in detail to clarify our position and provide the honorable members with a different perspective on these important issues.

1. On Syria’s role as a source of support for terrorism and other activities aimed at destabilizing efforts to build a peaceful and democratic Iraq

A peaceful and stable Iraq holds as much, if not more significance for Syria as any other nation in the region or across the Atlantic. The Syrian mosaic of citizens, in which a wide variety of ethnicities and religious groups live side by side, closely resembles Iraqi society and in fact, may be even more divers. Consequently, the sectarian strife arising in Iraq could spread across the border and result in fatality tearing at the fabric of Syrian society. This situation causes the Syrian government great concern ad compels us to work diligently to help bring peace and stability back to Iraq for the future of its citizens as well as our own.

Syria has always supported the e political process in Iraq. One example of this was during the Iraqi elections when we encouraged the large Iraqi expatriate community in Syria to vote, and proved them with all means necessary to enable them to successfully participate in the Iraqi political process. This is just one example among many others that went unnoticed here in the US, and wee completely ignored by US officials.

Syria does not support the terrorism in Iraq; we have very little influence on the political developments that are taking place there. However, if the US Administration has evidence to the contrary, Syria is willing to work with the Administration and investigate these allegations. This is the only way to put an end to the alleged Syrian support of the insurgency in Iraq.

2. On Border Control

The argument that the Syrian government allows infiltrators into Iraq holds no truth in any regard whatsoever. The facts on the ground along the Syrian-Iraqi border illustrate how diligently Syria has worked to control its side of the border with Iraq. We have increased our border troops from a few hundred to 10,000 in the past two years; built sand barriers, which Syria has recently raised to 12 feet along more than 210 kilometers of the border, installed barbed wires, some of which are double-layered: and erected many Syrian military outposts, numbering in total approximately 540, deployed approximately every 400 meters or 3 kilometers depending on the sensitivity of the area. As a result of these efforts, Syria has captured over 1,500 individuals trying to cross the border and handed them over to the authorities of their country of origin or placed them in prison.

If infiltration continues, it is done despite all our efforts to stop this illegal movement of people occurring without our consent. Moreover, Syria has continually and repeatedly called for the Americans and Iraqis to engage with their Syrian counterparts on this issue because Syria cannot seal this border alone and needs cooperation from the American and Iraqi side. False allegations against Syria will not solve this problem but rather only cooperation, from both sides, can achieve the important goal of sealing this border.

To illustrate my point with specifics, General Abizaid, on April 14, 2005, said, “We’ve got, oh, roughly 10,600 – give or take – prisoners. I think there are like 357, 358, something like that, third-country national, some of whom have been in Iraq for many, many years… I mean, it’s like – the last time I checked, 50 (from Saudi Arabia) and 52 (from Syria)… and 49 (from Iran).” Moreover, the Center for Strategic and International Studies has said that the insurgency numbers about 30,000 individuals with a foreign component of 4-10%. This means that the foreign element in the insurgency numbers from about 1,500-3,000 individuals. Putting these numbers together and after some simple mathematical calculations we find that the total number of individuals which have come from Syria amounts to about 144, equaling 0.5% of the insurgency. With these facts in mind, I would like to remind you that Syria has imprisoned about 1,500individuals trying to infiltrate the Syrian-Iraqi border, amounting to 10 times the number of those that reached Iraq, which illustrates how diligently we are working to seal this border.

In addition, thee US-based Center for Strategic and International Studies released a report about “Saudi Militants” in Iraq stating that the Syrians have “been too forceful in their crackdown on Saudis” entering Syria some of which are en route to Iraq, while others come as tourists. We argue that we have been forceful on all those using Syria as a transit to Iraq, including Saudis.

3. ON the Visa policy for Arab citizens

The allegations concerning the Visa policies in Syria are a classic example of how the US Administration merely looks for pretexts to criticize Syria with a lack of substantial evidence. The fact that Syria has arrested and handed over hundreds of suspects arriving at Syrian entry points is always ignored by the US officials. The Saudi and Jordanian press have been very critical of the Syrian authorities for their stern approach in dealing with their citizens arriving in Syria, being arrested and extradited for merely suspecting that these citizens might have extremist tendencies.

The question that should be addressed to the US Administration is the following: Did you once try to communicate any sort of intelligence about suspected Jihadists planning to arrive in Syria, which the Syrian authorities failed to act on? Did this happen at least once? Our records do not show that such communication has ever occurred.

Our embassies throughout the whole world offer Visas within an hour of the Visa application. We do not have the means of verifying the information submitted in the Visa application form, and our diplomatic missions are incapable of investigating all individuals who request an entry Visa to Syria. However, our intelligence agencies have a wealth of information about fundamentalist extremists. When such individuals arrive in Syria, they are immediately handled by the Syrian authorities. You can verify this with other Arab countries to whom we have extradited hundreds of their citizens upon arrest at Syrian border checkpoints.

Once again, this would not have been an issue had the US Administration been willing to cooperate and engage with Syria. Unfortunately, while the lack of engagement continues to be the norm, the US Administration uses such pretexts to criticize Syria, capitalizing on the fact that few individuals have any knowledge of Syrians policies and positions.

4. On the repatriation of Iraqi assets

Syria has transferred a sum of $262 million to the Iraqi Government, which is the total amount of the Iraqi frozen assets in the Commercial Bank of Syria. In regards to the $580 million mentioned in your letter, this amount was paid to the Syrian private businesses to honor contracts and deals between Iraqi and Syrian parties prior to the war. All these contracts are documented at the Syrian Ministry of Finance and the Federation of Syrian Iraqi officials to visit, investigate and check these documents with full transparency. If the Iraqi officials conclude with doubts about the authenticity of these contracts and financial obligations, Syria will take immediate action to the satisfaction of the Iraqi government.

5. On the claim that former Iraqi regime elements funds are in Syria

Syria received a team of US Treasury inspectors to visit the Commercial Bank of Syria for as long as they deemed fit, and had access to whatever information they required. We thought that this openness and transparency would put an end to these unsubstantiated accusations. On the one hand, thee team left Syria satisfied that our banks were fully cooperating with the US on this particular issue. ON the other hand, the US Treasury Department never acknowledged our cooperation, and continued to repeat the same allegations. Once more we invite the US treasury officials to talk to Syria, not talk past Syria about these accusations. If US officials have acquired new information regarding these funds, Syria welcomes the opportunity to re-examine the issue and fully investigate it in cooperation with the US officials.

6. On Financing Terrorism

Syria has repeatedly informed the US Treasury Department officials that wee are keen on closely cooperating with the US Treasury Department on issues of money laundering and terrorism financing. Syria, has modified all its by-laws and regulations in accordance with recommendations Syria has received fro the US Treasury Department officials. Syria not only did this, but also informed the US Treasury Department that we are willing to do whatever action may be required in the future, if the need arises. This was never publicly acknowledged by the US Treasury Department; on the contrary, we continue to hear the same accusations about cash flow through the borders.

Actually, based on the recommendations of the US Treasury Department, Syria has joined a number of groups including MENA-FATF (Middle East & North Africa Financial Action Task Force), as well as establishing special units of the Syrian Customs on all international borders to combat terrorism financing and money laundering.

It might surprise you to know that Syria’s efforts to curb cash flows into Iraq and elsewhere were faced by obstacles created by the US Administration. Our efforts to eliminate cash dealings and substitute the cas-based system with a credit card system where all financial transactions can be electronically monitored and traced were stalled by the US imposed sanctions on Syria that continue to prevent us from modernizing our banking infrastructure. I hope you will use your good office to convince the US Treasury Department that helping Syria modernize its banking system will actually help the US win its global war against terrorism.

7. Lebanon (Don’t want to copy it all out. It is outdated anyway.)

8. On Sanctions against Syria

When you contemplate imposing new sanctions against the Syrian banking system, I hope you will keep in mind that the suffocation and eventual crash of this system will only benefit illegal transactions, black marketers and money traffickers. Syria has diligently worked hard on bringing its banking systems to world class standards, and to ensure transparency and the security of all financial transactions. Threats of further sanctions will have a negative impact on Syria’s efforts to achieve what the US Administration has repeatedly asked Syria to do, and what we have been working hard on achieving.

In addition, I hope that the honorable members would recall that ten years of economic sanctions on Iraq only led to the impoverishment of the Iraqi people, and the destruction of Iraq’s national infrastructure. Syria invites you to use diplomacy and engagement, no threats and sanctions to try and find solutions for our already troubled region. Please do remember, that if you are being told by the US Administration that they have “credible evidence” that Syria is doing this or not doing that; the same sort of credible intelligence was used in thee past as a pretext to launch war on another Arab country. We hope that this kind of mistake will not be repeated for the same of Syria, the Middle East and the entire world.

We firmly believe that you can play a great role in helping bring the US and Syria to a better understanding and a higher level of cooperation. On our behalf, this is what we are looking for, and this is what we hope the future will hold for both our countries,

Yours Sincerely,

Imad Moustapha, PhD.
Ambassador of the Syria to the United States

Alpha

Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 17:52:43 -0700 (PDT)

Subject: Former CIA analyst comments about Syria and Iran being next in neocon agenda...

From: Donald

Subject: RE: Urgent: US/Britain after Syria (read about 'A Clean Break'/war for Israel agenda on pages 261-269/321 of Bamford's 'A Pretext for War'):
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 19:42:36 -0400

Syria is part of Greater Israel. It is just next in line. Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Egypt, Iran are also in the neocon gunsights. Unfortunately for the Arabs, too many of them are just homicidal morons who are their own worst enemies. The neocons are exploiting this mercilessly. ---DJ

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sent: Sunday, October 23, 2005 6:26 PM

Subject: Urgent: US/Britain after Syria (read about 'A Clean Break'/war for Israel agenda on pages 261-269/321 of Bamford's 'A Pretext for War'):

Urgent: US/Britain after Syria (read about 'A Clean Break'/war for Israel agenda on pages 261-269/321 of Bamford's 'A Pretext for War'):

http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/wake-up-america-your-government-is-hijacked-by-zionism/2005/10/21/jinsa-csp-pnac-neocons-moving-fast-for-action-against-syria.php

Alpha

October 26, 2005
Who Are We to Pick Syria's President?
Could someone recommend one for us?
by Paul Craig Roberts
Someone should tell Condi Rice that the game is up. With the Bush administration dissolving in illegalities committed by key officials in their attempts to protect the lies that they used to justify the U.S. invasion of Iraq, the secretary of state is trying to ramp up war against Syria.

Grasping a UN report that uses unreliable witnesses to implicate Syria in the assassination of a former Lebanese government official, Condi Rice told the BBC on Oct. 23 that Syria's crime cannot be "left lying on the table. This really has to be dealt with."

This is amazing for many reasons. Here is the person in charge of U.S. diplomacy acting as if she is the secretary of war unsheathing military force. Whoever heard of an American diplomat wanting to start a war because a former Middle Eastern government official was assassinated?

The UN investigator, Detlev Mehlis, has no more idea who assassinated the former official than the U.S. knows who is responsible for assassinating the many Iraqi officials under its protection. After more than two and one-half years of war in Iraq, the U.S. still doesn't know exactly whom it is fighting. Yet Mehlis blames Syria for an assassination on the strength of an informer described by the German news magazine Der Spiegel as a convicted felon and swindler.

On the basis of the word of a convicted felon and swindler, Condi Rice wants a high level UN Security Council meeting to condemn Syria so the Bush administration can bring about "regime change" in Syria.

With the U.S. Department of State doing everything it can to demonize and destabilize Syria, Condi Rice's mouthpiece, Adam Ereli, declared that Syria must end attempts to destabilize its neighbors. This is the type of propaganda we were fed about Iraq. Syria is not destabilizing any country. It is all Syria can do to maintain its own stability. The U.S. is the great Middle East destabilizer.

Isn't the secretary of state aware that the government of which she is a part is in dire difficulties because it went to war based on highly unreliable "intelligence" supplied by highly unreliable people?

Does the secretary of state read the CIA reports? Doesn't she know that the U.S. has created extraordinary instability in Iraq? A country that formerly had no terrorists now serves as a training ground for al-Qaeda, according to the CIA.

Is this the time to repeat the Iraq blunder in Syria?

The American people should be terrified by the warmongering ideologues that President Bush has put in charge of his government. The greatest danger that the U.S. faces are the fools in the Bush administration.

Why is Syria being demonized? Syrian troops were part of the U.S. coalition organized by President George Herbert Walker Bush that liberated Kuwait in 1991 from Saddam Hussein. The current head of government in Syria is a mild-mannered ophthalmologist who inherited the post five years ago because his older brother, the original heir apparent, had died in a car crash.

Syria has done nothing to the U.S. and poses no threat to the U.S. The Syrian government is concerned about Syria becoming unhinged by schisms like the Sunni-Shi'ite schism set loose in Iraq by the incompetent Bush administration.

Why does Condi Rice think the Bush administration has the right to decide who heads the Syrian government? According to news reports, the Bush administration has asked the Israeli and Italian governments to nominate a replacement for the current president of Syria.

A country incapable of choosing a better president than George W. Bush has no business choosing a president for any other country. In place of aggressive interference in the internal affairs of other countries, the U.S. needs to find a competent president for itself.

Maybe we should ask the Italians whom they would recommend.

Find this article at:
http://www.antiwar.com/roberts/?articleid=7771

War Without End

The global war against terror, news about the illegal invasion of Iraq, the corporate puppet presidents, the war criminal Tony Blair, September 11th 2001, the USS Liberty and New World Order crimes against humanity.

JINSA/CSP/PNAC Neocons moving fast for action against Syria