Sadr City Update

The Mahdi Army in Sadr City are not disarming. Seems our man Allawi has backed out of his end of a peace negotiation reached just yesterday, fearing its restrictions on American autonomy. Also looks like Muqtada's announcement that he would disarm the militia and enter politics brought home an unpleasant reality to Allawi, leading him away from the negotiation table and perhaps back to shows of force. We'll see.

One thing is certain. Muqtada's popularity has only grown from the uprising, whereas Allawi's has suffered (and was never strong to begin with). Tomorrow morning's NY Times:

Talks to disarm hundreds of insurgents in the roiling Sadr City ghetto in Baghdad collapsed Tuesday, after a tentative peace pact was abruptly canceled by Prime Minister Ayad Allawi.

Leaders of the Mahdi Army, the rebel force led by the Shiite cleric Moktada al-Sadr, and two well-placed Iraqi sources said an agreement had been reached late Monday that called for the disarming of the rebel force and a halt in American military operations in Sadr City.

Mahdi Army commanders and other Iraqi sources said Tuesday that Dr. Allawi backed out of the agreement on Tuesday morning.

The failure of negotiations raised the prospect of more violence from Mr. Sadr's Shiite insurgency, meaning the Iraqi government may not be able to direct its full political and military resources to quelling the continuing Sunni insurgency in other parts of the country.[...]

Mr. Nasiri said he had been told by one of the government's negotiators, Qassim Daoud, the minister of state, that Dr. Allawi had objected to the restrictions placed on Americans soldiers operating in the area. Under the agreement, the Americans would be limited to performing reconstruction work; anything more aggressive than that would require the permission of the Iraqi government.

Dr. Allawi could not be reached for comment.[...]

But an Iraqi source said Dr. Allawi had decided to take a harsher approach toward Mr. Sadr and the Mahdi Army, possibly including the use of military force. The source said Dr. Allawi appeared to be motivated by disappointment with the agreement in Najaf, which ended the bloodshed there but left the Mahdi Army intact and made Mr. Sadr stronger than ever, in the eyes of many Iraqis.

In addition, the Iraqi source said, Dr. Allawi had recently come under intense pressure from Shiite political parties that fear that the entry of Mr. Sadr into the political mainstream could diminish their own potential success at the polls. Those groups would prefer that Mr. Sadr be eliminated, the Iraqi source said.

The groups include the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, which was long based in Iran and which has close ties to Ayatollah Sistani, and Dawa, a prominent religious movement. Such established organizations tend to see Mr. Sadr as an upstart.

The Iraqi source said it was possible that Dr. Allawi's intention was to kill or capture Mr. Sadr, in hopes of striking a death blow to his increasingly popular movement, which has the support of many poor Shiites and of 150 imams around the country. He wants to humiliate Moktada," the source said of Dr. Allawi. "He needs a victory."

Sistani? Is this Iraq source insinuating that Allawi will be crushing Sadr on behalf of the Shiite religious leadership? Why does that ring a little hollow to me?

Wholly Unrelated, I'm Sure

Dana Milbank has a piece in today's WaPo that would seem to warrant (it would in a Democratic administration anyway) the launch a thousand investigations.

Four days ago, retired naval Rear Adm. William L. Schachte Jr. seconded accusations made by the group Swift Boat Veterans for Truth seeking to discredit Democratic presidential nominee John F. Kerry's record in Vietnam. But since then, Democrats have discovered that Schachte is also a long-standing supporter of President Bush and a lobbyist whose client FastShip Inc. recently won a $40 million grant from the federal government.

On Aug. 27, Schachte issued a statement saying that after he "avoided talking to media" for months, he was reluctantly stepping forward to challenge Kerry's award of one of his Purple Hearts on Dec. 2, 1968. "Kerry had himself in charge of the operation, and I was not mentioned at all," he said. "He also claimed that he was wounded by hostile fire. None of this is accurate. I know, because I was not only in the boat, but I was in command of the mission."

Kerry has said Schachte was not on the boat that night, adding another mystery to the disputed events of 36 years ago. But other events are not in dispute. According to a March 18 legal filing by Schachte's firm, Blank Rome, Schachte was one of the lobbyists working for FastShip on issues such as the effort to win funding for a new marine cargo terminal. On Feb. 2, Philadelphia-based FastShip announced that it would receive $40 million in federal funding for the project.

In addition, David Norcross, Schachte's colleague in the Washington office of Blank Rome, is chairman of this week's Republican convention in New York. Records also show that Schachte gave $1,000 to Bush's 2000 and 2004 campaigns.

The Kerry campaign alleges foul play. "It's amazing what a $40 million government contract can do for your memory," Kerry spokesman Chad Clanton said, noting that Schachte did not challenge Kerry's Purple Heart while describing the incident in an interview last year. Schachte is listed as "of counsel" on Blank Rome's Web site, but a receptionist at the firm said he is retired, and messages left for him and a firm spokesman were not returned.

Pandemic

It seems that investigations of spying are contagious and spread both quickly and globally. Reuters reports:

-Iran has arrested dozens of spies, including several who passed secrets about its nuclear program to its enemies, Intelligence Minister Ali Yunesi said on Tuesday.

The United States accuses Iran of using its atomic program as a smokescreen for building nuclear weapons, but Tehran insists the program is solely dedicated to meeting booming domestic demand for electricity.

"The Intelligence Ministry has arrested a number of spies that transferred Iran's nuclear intelligence (abroad)," Yunesi was quoted as saying by the official IRNA news agency.

Yunesi said most of those arrested were linked to the Iraq-based Iranian opposition group the People's Mujahideen Organization (MKO).

To which I'll only add, for now, these two remarks from Juan Cole the other day. First:

The Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization (MEK or MKO) has a front organization, the "National Council of Resistance" or NCR. The NCR has been a significant source of charges about the Iranian nuclear program, and probably spies on Iran for both the Pentagon and Israel. (I am reasoning back from AIPAC's WINEP-associated "scholars" supporting the MEK, which is very odd unless there is a big quid pro quo). They probably exaggerate, playing a game similar to that of Ahmad Chalabi in Iraq. That would be another reason for which Franklin would try to stop its Iraq commanders being turned over to Iran by the US in return for top al-Qaeda leaders that Tehran holds.

And also:

Iran is reported to have Abu Musab al-Zarqawi in custody in summer of 2003, and to be entirely willing to hand him over to the US in return for some high-ranking MEK terrorists. But first the neocon network, including Franklin, Harold Rhode and Michael Ledeen, intervenes to stop the trade (see below). Then, mysteriously, everything that goes wrong in Iraq from about January of 2004 begins being blamed on Zarqawi (is it alleged that Iran let him go, to deliberately disrupt Iraq by blowing up Shiites? More likely, when Iran won't accommodate the Neocons because of the latters' ties to MEK, the neocons decide to smear Iran as "harboring" terrorists and "sending" them to Iraq. They know this path might even lead to a US war on Iran, which is what they want. That is one reason they did not want the prisoner exchange to succeed).

In fact, I'd suggest reading back over the last few days worth of posts at Informed Comment and then go back and reread that Reuters piece above.

[UPDATE] And with that bit of Zarqawi related knowledge in mind, might I suggest some further reading.

News To Be Spread Far And Wide

Here's something that, sixty some odd days before the most important Presidential election in recent history, we'll unfortunately see little coverage of in the major media. Unless the story is picked up and spread by the blogosphere and individual folks. If your state is using Diebold machines this election season, write a letter (or forward the story below) to your local paper. Tell a friend. Call your mother. Inform the folks at the office. Contact CNN, MSNBC, and FOX. Make sure this information gets out. From geek-central Slashdot:

Black Box Voting has exposed a security hole in Diebold machines that tabulate votes collected from electronic voting machines. A code entered into the tabulator's user interface duplicates the "secure" counts into an insecure count which can be changed, and counted instead. The "double books" vulnerability and exploit were reported to the manufacturer over a year ago, and confirmed, while major customers (California and Washington states) were notified shortly thereafter. In spite of some revisions, the latest version of the software remains insecure. Diebold voting machines running GEMS version 1.18.x are vulnerable, running in about three dozen states. Although the software is widely deployed, and scheduled for use in shortly upcoming elections, risk mitigations are available, mostly protocols restricting physical or network access to the machines. Other auditing/accountability measures for ensuring only trusted access to the system are recommended.

This is proof positive, in my mind, of a proactive and conscious attempt to use these machines to affect, alter, rather than simply record, the ballot counts in three dozen states. If the election is to be as close as 2000's was, this type of tampering in one or two battleground states could determine the outcome of the presidential election. A baker's dozen, now, that could even provide the beneficiary candidate with a mandate.

Flipped and Blown

Missed this exchange on Friday, and after stopping by Informed Comment and seeing Juan Cole reference the conversation, I went off looking for the transcript. Here is Alex Witt on MSNBC speaking by phone with former State Department official and CIA agent Larry Johnson, discussing the Larry Franklin investigation.

JOHNSON: ...I've heard about this investigation for, you know, several months now. And you know it is-it actually is tied into the forged memo regarding the sale of uranium to Iraq from Niger. [...]

JOHNSON: What I've been told is that there's a strong belief that the forgery was carried out by Israel in an effort to help build up the evidence to allow the United States to justify going to war. So, this whole thing that started with the outing of Valerie Plame, the CIA officer, started growing and expanding when they saw that there's this forged memo and then people linked to the office of-in the office of Paul Wolfowitz and Douglas Fife at the Department of Defense were seen as having some very close contacts and sharing information with the Israeli intelligence sources. [...]

WITT: So my question to you, the timing of this release, it is Friday night. We're heading into the weekend, leading into the Republican National Convention. Anything to be tied to that?

JOHNSON: Potentially, yes. You know, this would be a political black eye for the Bush administration if it turns out to be true. Well and again, it is-I know that the FBI has been very reluctant to talk about it. I've been hearing about it through people who have had access to people who have been involved with the investigation. And they've been trying to run down these various leads. [...]

WITT: Now Larry, from your perspective, how big might this be?

JOHNSON: Well I think it'll be huge. I mean I've heard some of the other names that are being looked at and you know one of the concerns is it goes over to the National Security Council as well. So this could expand beyond the Department of Defense and go into the National Security Council. I mean I know that there were targets that are being looked at. Now whether they've collected enough evidence to be able to prosecute, that's a whole other issue.

Johnson had been hearing about this for months and makes a point of mentioning that the FBI has been very reluctant to talk about it. As I suggested earlier, the leaking of this investigation seems not to have been aimed at embarrassing the president or anyone else, but rather to cut the legs of the investigation out from under it. Juan Cole agrees:

It appears to be the case that someone in the Pentagon got wind that Larry Franklin had been flipped, and was terrified that the investigation might go on up the ladder at the Pentagon, in AIPAC, and with the Israelis. So they leaked news of the investigation to make sure that everybody clammed up and shredded everything.

Earlier, I came across this column on the subject from Karen Kwiatkowski, who has questions of her own:

The story of spies in the Pentagon will percolate, no doubt. I have no answers, but perhaps the questions themselves will help explain what is going on in the current administration, and the administration that is sure to come.

Was the release of Larry's name at this time politically motivated? And was that to hurt the Bush presidency or to save it, as Laura Rozen muses, with a "controlled burn"?

Why would Larry need to give draft documents on policy anywhere in the Middle East to AIPAC, when all the big decisions are already coordinated between Israel and the U.S. at far higher levels?

Why is Larry the result of FBI investigational success instead of the names of the Pentagon senior operatives who shared classified information with Ahmad Chalabi regarding American success in reading coded Tehran communications, specifically now as neoconservatives rage for war in Iran? Or instead of the names of senior White House operatives who revealed and destroyed the U.S. security mission of Valerie Plame?

Are there any advantages gained in front-page stories on a "spy for Israel" who is not one of the usual suspects? You know, a person with no business dealings dependent upon American (and Israeli) decisions, a person without an openly pro-Israel ideology or someone who was never known as a passionate advocate of U.S. power to promote Israel's security and economic viability? A career-constrained professional rather than fly-by-night political appointees who have written widely and acted most consistently to advance the interests of Israel in American policy towards the Middle East? Qui bono?

You'll remember Kwiatkowski as the author of the even more relevant story in Salon from March of this year, The New Pentagon Papers, detailing the active attempts by the OSP to bring the Neocon dream of invading Iraq to fruition. In a nutshell (and clipped from an LA Times interview with her from before the Salon article's publication), here's a bit of bio:

After two decades in the U.S. Air Force, Lieutenant Colonel Karen Kwiatkowski, now 43, knew her career as a regional analyst was coming to an end when -- in the months leading up to the war in Iraq -- she felt she was being "propagandized" by her own bosses.

With master's degrees from Harvard in government and zoology and two books on Saharan Africa to her credit, she found herself transferred in the spring of 2002 to a post as a political/military desk officer at the Defense Department's office for Near East South Asia (NESA), a policy arm of the Pentagon.

Kwiatkowski got there just as war fever was spreading, or being spread, as she would later argue, through the halls of Washington. Indeed, shortly after her arrival, a piece of NESA was broken off, expanded and re-dubbed with the Orwellian name of the Office of Special Plans. The OSP's task was, ostensibly, to help the Pentagon develop policy around the Iraq crisis.

She would soon conclude that the OSP -- a pet project of Vice President Dick Cheney and Defense Secretary Don Rumsfeld -- was more akin to a nerve center for what she now calls a "neoconservative coup, a hijacking of the Pentagon."

So Very Khan-esque

Or maybe it's just me. An article in today's NY Times has more on the Franklin investigation. It's mostly a backgrounder on Franklin himself, along with a discussion of yesterday's repeated denials by AIPAC (who were hosting a "welcome party" and convention kick-off in NYC yesterday, by the way), but what immediately leaped off the screen at me was this:

The Pentagon official under suspicion of turning over classified information to Israel began cooperating with federal agents several weeks ago and was preparing to lead the authorities to contacts inside the Israeli government when the case became publicly known last week, government officials said Sunday.

The disclosure of the inquiry late on Friday by CBS News revealed what had been for nearly a year a covert national security investigation conducted by the F.B.I., according to the officials, who said that news reports about the inquiry compromised important investigative steps, like the effort to follow the trail back to the Israelis.

As a result, several areas of the case remain murky, the officials said. One main uncertainty is the legal status of Lawrence A. Franklin, the lower-level Pentagon policy analyst who the authorities believe passed the Israelis a draft presidential policy directive related to Iran.

Franklin had already been been flipped (as Laura Rozen had speculated yesterday), and was cooperating with the FBI. Until the investigation was leaked to the press last week, compromising the whole endeavor. Compromised, leaked, by whom is the fundamental question here. It seems it was definitely someone looking to stop the investigation in its tracks. Someone who knew of the investigation in the first place, obviously.

I could speculate on where that leak may have originated, but I won't. If there were some sort of precedent, say, of particular agencies leaking information to the press to achieve positive or negative political goals, that would be a very good indicator, though.

[Update] Word has it that the leak originated in the FBI field office in New York. How far up? Don't know. Not yet, anyway.

New York, New York

It's a hell of a town. This New Yorker in exile is very proud of his city today. A quarter-million strong, streaming past the front entrance of Madison Square Garden. One thousand flag-draped coffins. This is what democracy looks like.

Cole on Franklin, et al

Juan Cole does an excellent job of bringing together the various elements of reportage and history regarding the Lawrence Franklin espionage scandal. To hear Dr. Cole tell it, it's much bigger than any of the individual pieces alone might suggest. There seems to be ample evidence of collusion between the Bush administration and its resident (and satellite) neoconservative intellectuals, the right-wing Italian government of Silvio Berlusconi, the "proto-fascist" Italian military intelligence agency SISMI, Ariel Sharon's Likud party, and various and sundry other players with varying allegiances and agendas. The story is so involved and convoluted as to resemble a spy thriller, which I guess it is. In a nutshell:

Franklin's movements reveal the contours of a right-wing conspiracy of warmongering and aggression, an orgy of destruction, for the benefit of the Likud Party, of Silvio Berlusconi's business in the Middle East, and of the Neoconservative Right in the United States. It isn't about spying. It is about conspiring to conscript the US government on behalf of a foreign power or powers.

As that last sentence suggests, a serious as all these revelations are, they are most probably not the root of the FBI's investigation, or at the very least, they are not the root of the scandal here. Rather, the specific incident mentioned (the passing of a draft presidential directive on US Iran policy to AIPAC) is relatively innocuous.

As Cole puts it, it's a lot "like getting Al Capone on tax evasion." In other words, the real crimes are many and large (and largely absent, so far, from major media coverage of this whole debacle), but this is simply the manner in which they were able to actually catch Franklin. Whether this passing of the document is indeed what alerted the FBI to Franklin's doings, and therefore initiated the investigation (as opposed to being the fruit of an investigation already under way), is still a matter of conjecture. In any case:

[...] he (Franklin) might also have been prepping AIPAC for the lobbying campaign scheduled for early in 2005, when Congress will have to be convinced to authorize military action, or at least covert special operations, against Iran. AIPAC probably passed the directive over to Israel for the same reason--not to inform, but to seek input. That is, AIPAC and Israel were helping write US policy toward Iran, just as they had played a key role in fomenting the Iraq war.

If Cole's assessment is correct, in addition to overt Israeli influence on American foreign policy, this shows that there has been (as many of us have been speculating for some time now) a concerted effort on the part of the Bush administration (in concert with many others, it now seems) to expand the war in Iraq over the Iranian border, bringing full-scale warfare and chaos to both countries. Why?

With both Iraq and Iran in flames, the Likud Party could do as it pleased in the Middle East without fear of reprisal. This means it could expel the Palestinians from the West Bank to Jordan, and perhaps just give Gaza back to Egypt to keep Cairo quiet. Annexing southern Lebanon up to the Litani River, the waters of which Israel has long coveted, could also be undertaken with no consequences, they probably think, once Hizbullah in Lebanon could no longer count on Iranian support. The closed character of the economies of Iraq and Iran, moreover, would end, allowing American, Italian and British companies to make a killing after the wars (so they thought).

So many threads, so many pieces. So little time.

Seriously. Time is short.

Nothing is Over

All praises due for the successful avoidance of destroying the Imam Ali Shrine in order to "save Najaf," but while that cultural, diplomatic, and religious catastrophe has been sidestepped, nothing is over. Sadr City, Muqtada al Sadr's largest base of support, is still alight, and aerial bombardment of Fallujah continues. From the AP

Shiite militants and U.S. forces battled throughout the Baghdad slum of Sadr City, and a mortar barrage slammed into a busy neighborhood in the capital in a new wave of violence Saturday that killed at least five people and wounded dozens of others.

U.S. warplanes and tanks later bombarded targets in Sunni stronghold of Fallujah, and U.S. forces exchanged gunfire with insurgents along the city's eastern outskirts and the main highway running to neighboring Jordan, witnesses said. The fighting left at least 14 people injured, hospital officials said.



Though Najaf remained calm, fighting flared in Sadr City, an al-Sadr stronghold in Baghdad named for the cleric's slain father, as militants armed with rifles and mortars fought with U.S. forces.

Sadr City has been the scene of repeated clashes in the 16 months since the fall of Saddam Hussein (news - web sites), but the violence intensified in recent weeks as the Najaf fighting spread to Shiite communities across the country.

Allawi blamed the continuing violence on renegade al-Sadr followers who do not want to honor the peace deal.

"I believe there are some people who are disobeying Muqtada al-Sadr's orders" to stop fighting, he told Al-Iraqiyah television.

JMM Chimes In

Over at TPM, Joshua Micah Marshall (one of two collegaues Laura Rozen mentioned working with on the forthcoming Washington Monthly piece dealing with Iran) adds his uniquely educated perspective on the Israeli spy case:

A few thoughts though about this story.

I'm told the evidence the FBI has on Franklin -- at least on the narrow facts of case -- is quite strong and involves wire tap information, though why a career DIA analyst like Franklin would allow himself to get tripped up on a phone call mystifies me.

The main focus thus far has been on the highly sensitive and troubling allegation that an ally, Israel, was spying on the United States or the recipient of classified information from a US government official.

However, I strongly suspect that as this story develops the bigger deal will be less the alleged recipient of the information, Israel, than the country that is the subject of the information, Iran.

I don't mean to imply that it's an either/or. It can very much be both. But the reportage thus far has understated the degree to which this is an Iran story -- it grows out of the simmering and unresolved administration battle over policy toward Iran.

As regular readers will be plainly aware, I'm inclined to agree with Josh.

Playing the Same Tune?

Craziness just gets crazier. Again by way of War and Piece, this Knight Ridder bit, in its reporting on the spy scandal.

The officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the subject's sensitivity, said the FBI also is investigating the same official's contacts with Iraqi exile leader Ahmad Chalabi and with Manucher Ghorbanifar, a controversial Iranian arms dealer. Chalabi was a source of much of the discredited pre-Iraq war intelligence about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction and ties to al-Qaida.

In June, U.S. intelligence officials said they had evidence that Chalabi's security chief had long been a paid agent of Iran's intelligence service and that Chalabi or an aide in his Iraqi National Congress had tipped the Iranians off that the United States had broken some Iranian communications codes. Chalabi has denied the charge.

The CIA has twice labeled Ghorbanifar, a figure in the 1980s Iran-Contra scandal, untrustworthy. Nevertheless, two Pentagon officials, Harold Rhode and Larry Franklin, a Defense Intelligence Agency analyst who worked on Iraq policy for Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas Feith, met secretly with Ghorbanifar to discuss Iran.

Perhaps the reason for all of the recent Vietnam nostalgia is rooted in the fact that America has (and the occupied territories, as it were), it seems, to some extent, become a battleground upon which Iran and Israel fight for the upper hand. We are Vietnam. We're just so loaded on consumerism and gluttony we don't even realize it.

This is going to take some looking in to. To say the least. There will be many, many pieces in motion in the coming days, I suspect.

Laura Rozen Rocks

For some truly illuminating information regarding the situation with the Israeli spy over at the Pentagon, head on over to Laura Rozen's blog. The woman rocks. Incredible sources and breaking hard news frequently.

For months, I have been working with my colleagues Paul Glastris and Josh Marshall on a story for the Washington Monthly about US policy towards Iran. In particular, it involves a particular series of meetings involving officials from the office of the undersecretary of defense for Policy Doug Feith and Iranian dissidents. To that end, we have pursued and cultivated numerous sources with knowledge of those officials, those meetings, and more broadly, Feith's office's seeming attempts to forge a rogue US foreign policy to Iran out of the Pentagon.

As part of our reporting, I have come into possession of information that points to an official who is the most likely target of the FBI investigation into who allegedly passed intelligence on deliberations on US foreign policy to Iran to officials with the pro-Israeli lobby group, AIPAC, and to the Israelis, as alleged by the CBS report. That individual is Larry Franklin, a veteran DIA Iran analyst seconded to Feith’s office.

Here is what I was told in the days before the FBI investigation came to light...

Makes you want to read more, doesn't it. Well, go do so.

Plaza Hotel, NYC

Sweet.

Played Again, cont.

From the NY Times, more on the Pentagon mole:

The espionage investigation has focused on an official who works in the office of Douglas Feith, the under secretary of defense for policy, officials who have been briefed about the investigation said. The F.B.I. has gathered evidence that the official passed classified policy documents to officials at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, a major pro-Israeli lobbying group, who in turn provided the information to Israeli intelligence, the officials said. [...]

The American Israel Public Affairs Committee also denied any wrongdoing. The organization said in a statement: "Any allegation of criminal conduct by the organization or its employees is baseless and false." The group added, "We are fully cooperating with the governmental authorities and will continue to do so." The F.B.I. inquiry has been underway for at least a year, and has been one of the bureau's most sensitive spy cases in years, officials said. One official said that the suspected involvement of people working at a major pro-Israeli lobbying organization in the spy case led the Justice Department to move cautiously.

The fact that the Pentagon official under investigation works for Mr. Feith has also made the case politically sensitive for the Bush administration.

Before the war in Iraq, Mr. Feith created a special intelligence unit that sought to build a case for Iraq's ties to Al Qaeda, an effort that has since been heavily criticized by American intelligence professionals as an effort to justify the war. [...]

Some of the classified information that investigators suspect was passed to Israel dealt with sensitive policy discussions about the United States position toward Iran, officials said.

As a result, the investigation is likely to give rise to questions about whether Israel may have used the information to influence American policy in the Middle East.

The Pentagon analyst who officials said is under suspicion was one of two department officials who traveled to Paris for a secret meeting with Manucher Ghorbanifar, an Iranian arms dealer who had been a central figure in the Iran-contra affair.

Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld confirmed last year that the secret meeting had occurred, but he defended it as an appropriate diplomatic effort. He said the talks went nowhere.

It was not immediately clear whether the espionage investigation was directly related to the secret meeting with Mr. Ghorbanifar. Nor was there immediate evidence of whether money had changed hands in exchange for classified information.

To which we can add (by way of diarist praktike at Dkos) this further speculation on whom the mole may be. Via a story on Ghorbanifar from Newsweek last December:

What was international man of mystery Manucher Ghorbanifar up to when he met with top Pentagon experts on Iran? In a NEWSWEEK interview in Paris last month, Ghorbanifar, a former Iranian spy who helped launch the Iran-contra affair, says one of the things he discussed with Defense officials Harold Rhode and Larry Franklin at meetings in Rome in December 2001 (and in Paris last June with only Rhode) was regime change in Iran. Ghorbanifar says there are Iranians capable of organizing a peaceful revolution against the ruling theocracy. He says his contacts know where Saddam Hussein hid $340 million in cash. With American help, he says, this money could be retrieved and half used to overthrow the ayatollahs. (The other half would be turned over to the United States.) Ghorbanifar says he told his U.S. interlocutors that ousting the mullahs would be a breakthrough in the war on terror because top Qaeda leaders, including Osama bin Laden, are in Iran. ("You won't be surprised if you find that Saddam Hussein is on one of the Iranian islands.") Among other intel Ghorbanifar says he and associates gave the Pentagon: a warning that terrorists in Iraq would attack hotels. He also says he had advance info about Iranian nukes and a terrorist plot in Canada. Financial gain was never his objective, he says: "We wanted to give them the money, not to take the money."

Played Again

We'll see who this is. And yes, I understand a great many of you will say, "Well of course, how can you be surprised...why Sharon and Likud have been behind every foreign policy move the Bush regime has made." I don't think it's ever been all that simple, and is rather much more a case of many different beasts piggybacking off each other's agendas. In any case, there is this from the CBS Evening News:

CBS News has learned that the FBI has a full-fledged espionage investigation under way and is about to -- in FBI terminology -- "roll up" someone agents believe has been spying not for an enemy, but for Israel from within the office of the Secretary of Defense at the Pentagon.

60 Minutes Correspondent Lesley Stahl reports the FBI believes it has "solid" evidence that the suspected mole supplied Israel with classified materials that include secret White House policy deliberations on Iran.

At the heart of the investigation are two people who work at The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), a powerful pro-Israel lobby in Washington.

The FBI investigation, headed up by Dave Szady, has involved wiretaps, undercover surveillance and photography that CBS News was told document the passing of classified information from the mole, to the men at AIPAC, and on to the Israelis.

CBS sources say that last year the suspected spy, described as a trusted analyst at the Pentagon, turned over a presidential directive on U.S. policy toward Iran while it was, "in the draft phase when U.S. policy-makers were still debating the policy."

This put the Israelis, according to one source, "inside the decision-making loop" so they could "try to influence the outcome."

The case raises another concern among investigators: Did Israel also use the analyst to try to influence U.S. policy on the war in Iraq?

With ties to top Pentagon officials Paul Wolfowitz and Douglas Feith, the analyst was assigned to a unit within the Defense Department tasked with helping develop the Pentagon's Iraq policy.

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has been made aware of the case. The government notified AIPAC today that it wants information about the two employees and their contacts with a person at the Pentagon.

The Bush administration gets played by the Iranians through Chalabi, and played by the Israelis through...someone. A "trusted analyst at the Pentagon." The arrogance of this crew is matched only by their incompetence, fed at every turn by their own greed and lust for power.

Undoubtedly more to come on this one.

Barnes Storming

By way of Josh Marshall comes this must see video clip of Ben Barnes, the former Speaker of the House in Texas (also the former Lt. Governor, some time back, as he speaks to in the clip). It should put to rest any doubt of how George W. Bush found that coveted spot in the Texas Air National Guard. Josh's transcription of Barnes' words, speaking at a recent John Kerry rally:

Let's talk a minute about John Kerry and George Bush and I know them both. And I'm not name dropping to say I know 'em both. I got a young man named George W. Bush in the National Guard when I was Lt. Gov. of Texas and I'm not necessarily proud of that. But I did it. And I got a lot of other people into the National Guard because I thought that was what people should do, when you're in office you helped a lot of rich people. And I walked through the Vietnam Memorial the other day and I looked at the names of the people that died in Vietnam and I became more ashamed of myself than I have ever been because it was the worst thing that I did was that I helped a lot of wealthy supporters and a lot of people who had family names of importance get into the National Guard and I'm very sorry about that and I'm very ashamed and I apologize to you as voters of Texas.

Now compare that to this bit from the Washington Post from July of 1999 on then candidate Bush:

Bush learned that there were pilot openings in the Texas Air National Guard during Christmas vacation of his senior year at Yale, when he called Staudt, the commander of the 147th Fighter Group, and, he said, "found out what it took to apply."

"He recalls hearing from friends while he was home over the Christmas break that the Guard was looking for pilots and that Colonel Staudt was the person to contact," said his communications director, Karen Hughes. She said Bush did not recall who those friends were.

Retired Col. Rufus G. Martin, then personnel officer in charge of the 147th Fighter Group, said the unit was short of its authorized strength, but still had a long waiting list, because of the difficulty getting slots in basic training for recruits at Lackland Air Force Base in San Antonio. Martin said four openings for pilots were available in the 147th in 1968, and that Bush got the last one.

Staudt, the colonel who twice had himself photographed with Bush, said his status as a congressman's son "didn't cut any ice." But others say that it was not uncommon for well-connected Texans to obtain special consideration for Air Guard slots. In addition to Bush and Bentsen, many socially or politically prominent young men were admitted to the Air Guard, according to former officials; they included the son of then-Sen. John Tower and at least seven members of the Dallas Cowboys.

"The well-to-do kids had enough sense to get on the waiting list," Martin said. "Some [applicants] thought they could just walk in the door and sign up."

One address for those seeking help getting in was Ben Barnes, a Democrat who was then the speaker of the Texas House and a protege of Gov. John B. Connally. A top aide to Barnes, Nick Kralj, simultaneously served as aide to the head of the Texas Air National Guard, the late Brig. Gen. James M. Rose.

An anonymous letter addressed to a U.S. attorney in Texas, produced in a discovery proceeding for an ongoing lawsuit, charged that Barnes assisted Bush in getting into the Guard. The suit was brought by the former director of the Texas Lottery Commission, who believes Barnes, now a lobbyist, may have played a role in his dismissal.

In a deposition for the suit, Kralj confirmed that he would get calls from Barnes or his chief of staff, Robert Spelling, "saying so-and-so is interested in getting in the Guard." Kralj said he would then forward the names to Gen. Rose.

In an interview, Barnes also acknowledged that he sometimes received requests for help in obtaining Guard slots. He said he never received such a call from then-Rep. Bush or anyone in the Bush family.

However, when asked if an intermediary or friend of the Bush family had ever asked him to intercede on George W.'s behalf, Barnes declined to comment. Kralj, in his deposition, said he could not recall any of the names he gave to Gen. Rose.

Hughes, Bush's spokeswoman, said: "The governor has no knowledge of anyone making inquiries on his behalf."

A Damn Shame

God rest his soul. Another casualty of war. With such beautiful, hopeful children.

The hostage takers who grabbed Italian journalist Enzo Baldoni on the road between Baghdad and Najaf in Iraq have killed him, the Italian government confirmed Thursday.

"We can confirm it was him, unfortunately," a spokesman for Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi said.

Arabic language television channel Al Jazeera said Baldoni's kidnappers killed him because Italy refused to heed their earlier deadline to withdraw troops from Iraq.[...]

[...]Berlusconi responded quickly with a statement reiterating his determination to keep Italian forces in the U.S.-led coalition and condemning Baldoni's killing.

"There are no words for an act lacking any humanity and which at a stroke cancels out centuries of civilization and takes us back to the dark ages of barbarity," he said.

Italian newspapers said Baldoni and his driver-interpreter were caught in an ambush between Baghdad and Najaf, scene of a Shi'ite rebellion. His driver was found dead Saturday.

Tuesday, the Islamic Army in Iraq gave Italy 48 hours to withdraw its 2,700 troops from Iraq or Baldoni would be killed.

Italy, which has the third-largest foreign military contingent in the country, refused to bow to the kidnappers' demands.

As well as a reporter for the Milan-based weekly "Diario," Baldoni was volunteering for the Red Cross while in Iraq, his daughter, Gabriella Baldoni, told Italian television on Wednesday.

"He was trying to save human lives in Najaf by helping a Red Cross convoy in a spirit of solidarity which has always underscored his thinking and his actions," she told RAI television.

Albritton on Point

Literally. Christopher Allbritton's in Najaf and posting. Go read. A taste:

I don’t know what the news is from the rest of Iraq or even what’s going on with the governor of Najaf. I do know what’s happening with the police department, however. They’re raiding the Sea of Najaf hotel and rounding the 100 or so journalists at gunpoint and subjecting them to mass arrest.

But I’m getting ahead of myself.

We started out to the shrine again today, using a different route. The front is constantly shifting and the fighting is very fierce between the Mahdi, the Americans and the New Iraqi Army. Several times my group — which included reporters and photographers from the New York Times, the Observer and CNN — had to turn back because of tanks and Bradleys firing on Mahdi positions. It seemed a little presumptuous to ask them to stop firing so a gaggle of journalists could cross the street...

I should say, too, that this is actually the second of two great Najaf posts by Christopher. Yesterday he was inside the Imam Ali Shrine. That's more than worth the read as well.

Fragility and Malaise

As with the Abu Ghraib revelations, when they first came out, the events in the wider war are starting to take their toll upon me. As hostilities flared up again in Najaf last week, I found myself drawn, the proverbial moth to the flame, into the rapidly changing events on the ground. I sought out minute by minute updates, of which there were few. Regardless, I latched on to every bit of news from Najaf I could find.

As best as I was able that is, starving for wire services to report more detail, fanatically checking every blogger on the ground I could think of, on every side. Bit by bit I "watched" from afar, from the comfort and safety of home, shocked and appalled and beside myself with regret for my country's actions, for every step taken this last year toward the present situation in Najaf.

Arrogance, pure unbridled arrogance brought us to where we are today, with people, human beings, every one someone's child, killing and being killed, daily. For four days and nights I was up nearly twenty-four hours at a stretch, cataloguing and distilling reports in a series of diaries at Dkos, feeling angry, sad, and impotent.

And then yesterday I came across the two distinct and separate, yet equally utterly heartbreaking stories of soldiers, come home from Iraq physically intact, but who ultimately took their own lives, one within 24 hours of setting back down on American soil. There are no limits, it seems, to tragedy where this (or any other, I suppose) war is concerned. Sadness is truly heavy indeed.

In the midst of all this I find I crumble under the weight and all but succumb to a selfish desire to stop. To look away and not consider the toll in terms of both individual human beings and humanity as a whole. To ignore the probable paths from here, each taking Iraq, the United States, and indeed the whole of the world, toward futures at least equally as bleak and ugly as our present. To clip my empathetic nerve, wherever it may be, and stop feeling so much pain by proxy. I am weak, I suppose.

All of this is a long and, I'm afraid, overly melodramatic way of saying that if posting is scarce around here for the next couple of few days, it's simply a matter if exhaustion. I am too, though, a glutton of many sorts, and there's every possibility I'll post again in an hour. But for now, right now, I wanted to say what's now been said.

And yet, just yesterday I was tossing around the idea of launching an active online fundraising attempt to enable me to do this full-time. I've always been the self-destructive type....

The Cost of War

The price of war is ultimately incalculable on a human scale. Body counts say nothing at all of the cost to individuals, families, communities. Heartbreaking stories abound. From This Is Rumor Control:

If you ask Marine Lance Corporal Jeffrey Lucey's mother what happened, she will tell you that her son died in Iraq. He wasn't physically dead yet, but when Jeffrey came back from the war a year ago, he just wasn't the same; some fundamental part of him got left behind. Noisy demons followed him everywhere.

There was no respite from the accusatory chatter in his head, the creeping sense of impending doom, the hopelessness that invaded every hour in a relentless march of endless days. Sometimes he would drink himself into unconsciousness, but even sleep was no safe haven.

On June 22 at about 6:45 in the evening, Jeffrey Lucey's father discovered him hanging in the basement cellar, his neck encircled by a noose fashioned from a garden hose. Jeffrey left three suicide notes, one of them, a practice version his father thinks, was found tucked behind the television set.

"Dear mom and dad, I can not express my apologies in words for the pain I have caused you but I beg for your forgiveness. I want you to know that I loved you both and still do but the pain of life was too much for me to deal with. Again, I beg of you not to blame yourself because I lived a happy childhood and a great life thanks to you. Unfortunately I am weak and cannot deal with the emotional pain. It feels as if I lost the most important part of my life that will ever exist."

Jeffrey spent 5 months in Iraq with the 6th Motor Transport Battalion and came home safe and sound, his parents thought, in July of 2003. But in his journal Jeffrey was "writing down how he saw dead people, not dead soldiers," says Mr. Lucey. "Somebody at Camp Pendleton said, 'if you keep talking like that, you'll not be able to go back home. You'll have to stay here from two to four months.'" His sister's wedding was coming up, so on the debriefing questionnaire beside the box that asked if psychiatric help was needed, Jeffrey ticked "no". He just wanted to go home.

Soon after Jeffrey got back people started noticing that something was wrong. One friend who'd known him since high school, an active-duty Marine who'd served with him in Iraq put it this way "His attitude changed, we used to play a lot of sports before and then after Iraq I'd call him and say do you want to shoot some hoops or something and he never would."

He refused to take off the dogtags that he wore around his neck, tags he said he taken from two Iraqi soldiers. Jeffrey told his father he'd been ordered to shoot the two unarmed men at close range. "Jeff had described how his gun was shaking and he looked at the eyes of one of the men and he thought, God this is someone's son, he could be somebody's father." says Kevin Lucey. Then, as Jeffrey told it, someone shouted "pull the fucking trigger Lucey". Later, back home, he told his sister he felt like a murderer.

There's more at the link above. If you can read it without breaking down, I recommend doing so. I also recommend sharing it with everyone you know.And then, go read this story at The All Spin Zone:

This past Tuesday, August 17th, four members of the New Hampshire Air National Guard returned from deployment in Iraq. Sergeants Chris Moisan, Nancy Young, Dave Guindon, and Mike Steer left for duty on February 18th, 2004, according to an article in the NHANG newsletter, The Refueler.

In the photo to the left from Wednesday's edition of the Manchester Union Leader , the four airmen appear pretty darn happy to be home. While six months in Iraq is not an extended tour (at least in terms of the length of time that many units are remaining in country) it's still a long time to be away from friends and family. So, it's not surprising that in an airport interview, Dave Guindon told a reporter:

"It feels fantastic. It's hard to explain it, it feels so good," Guindon said about being home, shortly after he arrived at Manchester Airport. "I'm just going to take today slow, wake up tomorrow, and see what it's like to be back in a normal place."

...Sharon Guindon, Dave Guindon's wife, said she was elated. While no definite plans for his return had been made yet, she said, the two plan to catch up on all the things that have happened during the past six months.

"I tell you, it's such a big relief that he's coming home," Mrs. Guindon said, adding later, "You don't realize what they go through until you have someone over there."

On Wednesday, not 24 hours after saying those words, Dave Guindon put a gun to his head and pulled the trigger.

TSgt Dave Guindon was 48 years old, and left behind his wife and two children.

Good News

Thank God. At least we have one life spared. Micah Garen has been released by his captors. Reuters is reporting:

U.S. journalist Micah Garen was on Sunday freed by an Iraqi group who had held him hostage in the southern Iraqi city of Nassiriya.

"I am very grateful to everyone who worked to protect me and guarantee my release and I thank my friends in Nassiriya and my family and fiance who spent three months with me in Nassiriya," Garen told Arab satellite television Al Jazeera by telephone.

He was speaking from the Nassiriya office of rebel Shi'ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr.

"Today he was brought to the office of Sheikh Sadr in Nassiriya and he is now there. We have called the human rights body in Nassiriya to come and receive him," Aws al-Khafaji, an aide to Sadr, told Al Jazeera.

Damn That's Bold

Please forgive me from veering away from the ever more depressing, even frightening state of affairs in terms of the war in Iraq, the possibility of its spreading, the worthless waste of lives on all sides. That said, as I've often found myself lately, assuming the stance of its subject, let me pass on this bold and breaking news regarding Edvard Munch's masterpiece "The Scream." Via Agence France Presse:

A version of Edvard Munch's masterpiece "The Scream" and another famous painting by the great Norwegian artist were stolen from an Oslo museum by armed and hooded robbers, police said.

The thieves burst into the Munch Museum, home to dozens of works by the early modernist genius, and made off with the "The Scream" (1893) as well as "Madonna (news - web sites)" (1893-94).

"I can confirm that there was an armed robbery. The criminals threatened an employee with a gun and took the two canvasses," police official Kjell Pedersen said Sunday.

The thieves -- two or three according to varying accounts -- escaped in a dark-coloured vehicle and were being sought by police.

The museum confirmed that an armed robbery had taken place but declined to comment further.

"The Scream" has become an iconic symbol of Expressionist angst, showing an individual on a bridge, hands clasped around the head and mouth wide open in an apparent yell of despair.

Yep.

Open Season On Journalists

Yet another disappearance and probable abduction of journalists in Iraq. The BBC is reporting that two French journalists,George Malbrunot of Le Figaro newspaper and Christian Chesnot of French radio, have gone missing, and the interpreter for missing Italian journalist Enzo Baldoni has been found dead near Najaf. At the same time, though, the death threat against Micah Garen seems to have been withdrawn. Of course, this was before the renewed fighting in Najaf (and as I write, reports are coming in that Najaf is ablaze; for more, check here). In any case, God watch over all of these journalists who have actually gone into the shit to find the story.

Seymour Hersh's October September Surprise

I'd like to take a moment here to state my belief that Seymour Hersh is a national treasure and a reminder of the power of journalism. I feel even more strongly about that this morning.

The inimitable Mr. Hersh will be releasing a book on Sept. 13, the aptly titled Chain of Command: The Road from 9/11 to Abu Ghraib. I'd imagine this book will have information Hersh has said he has, but has yet to publish in the New Yorker Harper Collins has a publicity blurb over on their site:

Since September 11, 2001, Seymour M. Hersh has riveted readers -- and outraged the Bush Administration -- with his stories in The New Yorker, including his breakthrough pieces on the Abu Ghraib prison scandal. Now, in Chain of Command, he brings together this reporting, along with new revelations, to answer the critical question of the last three years: how did America get from the clear morning when hijackers crashed airplanes into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon to a divisive and dirty war in Iraq?

Hersh established himself at the forefront of investigative journalism thirty-five years ago when he broke the news of the massacre at My Lai, Vietnam, for which he won a Pulitzer Prize. Ever since, he's challenged America's power elite by publishing the stories that others can't, or won't, tell. In exposés on subjects ranging from Saudi corruption to nuclear black marketeers and -- months ahead of other journalists -- the White House's false claims about weapons of mass destruction, Hersh has cemented his reputation as the indispensable reporter of our time.

In Chain of Command, Hersh takes an unflinching look behind the public story of President Bush's "war on terror" and into the lies and obsessions that led America into Iraq. He reveals the connections between early missteps in the hunt for Al Qaeda and disasters on the ground in Iraq. The book includes a new account of Hersh's pursuit of the Abu Ghraib story and of where, he believes, responsibility for the scandal ultimately lies. Hersh draws on sources at the highest levels of the American government and intelligence community, in foreign capitals, and on the battlefield for an unparalleled view of a crucial chapter in America's recent history. With an introduction by The New Yorker's editor, David Remnick, Chain of Command is a devastating portrait of an Administration blinded by ideology and of a President whose decisions have made the world a more dangerous place for America.

Chain of Command is available now for pre-order at Amazon. It should be a very revealing, interesting, explosive, and, I fear, disturbing read.

Inside

Must read piece by Scott Baldauf in the Christian Science Monitor. He and a group of journalists made a journey into Najaf and into the shrine today to assist other colleagues who were inside the shine and were afraid they'd never make it out alive. Baldauf and the others went as friends trying to help friends, but with, obviously, the journalistic opportunity represented by such a journey not lost on them either.

We had two goals: First, to seek what may be the final comments of the top leadership of Moqtada al-Sadr's Shiite militia, the Mahdi Army, who were taking shelter in the holy site. Second, we wanted to help two colleagues, freelance photographer Thorne Anserson and freelance reporter Philip Robertson, get out of the shrine after they had spent a harrowing three days at the epicenter of this armed showdown.

Between us and the shrine were two US military checkpoints, countless snipers, and hundreds of Mahdi Army fighters who had already committed themselves to die for their cause....

...Outside the shrine walls, there was a different "conversation" entirely. Outgoing mortars and incoming artillery shells indicated that, even with journalists inside, the war would continue. Each of us found ourselves surrounded by Sadr supporters, all seeking to convey their message. Some alleged that the Americans had used chemical weapons on them and promised to bring the evidence. They showed us shell fragments but those could be from any shell casing, conventional or otherwise. One Sadr supporter chastised our interpreter, Alah, for failing to hide her hair under her scarf.

We made our way to the shrine's combat hospital, where fighters are brought for treatment. They begged us to take away a man with severe head wounds, who appeared to be dying. We promised to send an ambulance, but say we cannot take the man out ourselves. That would compromise our neutrality. The hospital staff are disappointed. Our interpreter Alah breaks down in tears.

Hell of a read.

Lebanisation

From a piece just up on The Telegraph UK, an analysis of the Najaf situation (bleak):

A western official closely involved in talks in Najaf said yesterday that if Sadr did not capitulate or was not defeated, similar uprisings could see emboldened insurgents take control in cities across Iraq. "That to me sounds like a Lebanisation of Iraq," he said, referring to the breakdown of Lebanon into self-ruling religious cantons.

He added: "But obviously we don't want a bloodbath in the shrine. It's a holy site."

The problem is that a military assault may be seen by Mr Allawi as the best of two bad options and it is unclear whether Mr Bush has the authority to tell him to spare the world images of Muslims being slaughtered in the shrine. Some intelligence reports suggest fanatics will detonate explosives strapped to themselves if the shrine is attacked.

Sadr has no political organisation and scant chance of becoming a nationwide electoral force, but now has the power virtually to destroy the American project in Iraq if Mr Allawi does not act with considerable wisdom - and has a measure of good luck.

That's one of them, whatayacallit? Oh yeah. A lose-lose situation.

Najaf, Sadr City, Folly

Just as an FYI to regular readers: I got caught up in events in Iraq today, but began collecting everything in a diary entry over at Dkos. There was too much, I felt, going on to keep cross-posting here and there, and making either worthwhile.

I decided to keep that thread going to keep track of the day's events, and I'm updating it even now. I do encourage y'all to check out the diary for now, but I'll be back here with a more in-depth analysis of it all a little later on.

The View in Najaf

Unfotunately, this next pic seems to be from within the Imam Ali Shrine compound:

Iran's Stance, cont.

For what appears to be the first time, Iran is threatening offensive actions against US forces in Iraq. From the AP report:

In an interview with pan-Arab satellite channel Al-Jazeera, (Iranian Defense Minister) Ali Shamkhani was asked how Iran would respond if America were to attack its nuclear facilities.

"We will not sit to wait for what others will do to us," he said. "There are differences of opinion among military commanders (in Iran). Some commanders believe preventive operations is not a model created by Americans ... or is not limited to Americans. Any nation, if it feels threatened, can resort to that."

And from the AFP, more detail of his words:

"Some military commanders in Iran are convinced that preventive operations which the Americans talk about are not their monopoly,

"America is not the only one present in the region. We are also present, from Khost to Kandahar in Afghanistan; we are present in the Gulf and we can be present in Iraq (news - web sites)," said Shamkhani. ...

"Where Israel is concerned, we have no doubt that it is an evil entity, and it will not be able to launch any military operation without an American green light. You cannot separate the two."

"The US military presence (in Iraq) will not become an element of strength (for Washington) at our expense. The opposite is true, because their forces would turn into a hostage" in Iranian hands in the event of an attack, he said.

Developing, obviously.

More on Sadr City

A Chicago Tribune piece on the Sadr City offensive offers greater perspective on just what sort of battle this may turn out to be.

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but a battalion is roughly 900 soldiers, is it not?:

A U.S. Army battalion moved into the district of at least 2.5 million people late in the afternoon to fight Sadr's al-Mahdi Army in its stronghold.

Capt. Brian O'Malley, a military spokesman, said the objective is "to flush out enemy forces" but declined to give further details.

A densely populated and long-neglected neighborhood where sewage floods many streets, Sadr City is full of the poor and disaffected Shiite young men who form the core of the cleric's following. The district is named for Sadr's father, a prominent ayatollah killed by assassins from Saddam Hussein's regime.

Sadr has a more devoted following in the slum than in Najaf, and experts believe the number of Sadr supporters is far greater in the capital.

"Sadr has never been a Najaf-based politician. His institutional power is strongest in Sadr City, where there's a mini-civil war going on. There, his forces are much more disciplined," said Toby Dodge, an Iraq expert at The International Institute for Strategic Studies in London.

U.S. soldiers say hidden explosives line virtually every major street of Sadr City, and fighters pop out from alleys to fire rocket-propelled grenades whenever U.S. forces enter....

...Amid threats against them and their families, about half the members of an Iraqi National Guard battalion in Sadr City have not shown up for work since renewed fighting began. One Iraqi captain who tried to come in was captured at a checkpoint operated by al-Mahdi militia members, although he was released a day later, said Capt. Darrell Gayle, the Army liaison with the battalion.

Militants hit a U.S. helicopter on the edge of Sadr City last week, forcing the helicopter to crash-land on a fence of a mosque.

As they frantically searched for the crew members, who fled the wreckage, U.S. soldiers fought off waves of attackers firing rocket-propelled grenades, automatic weapons and mortars. The crew members were found unharmed.

Commanders said they believe Sadr's al-Mahdi Army has used the cease-fire since late June to plan and fortify its defenses in Sadr City.

US Forces Move Into Sadr City

As I've said before, here is where it gets tricky. Reuters reporting:

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - U.S. forces killed more than 50 Shi'ite militiamen Wednesday in a significant advance into a Baghdad suburb that is a powerbase for radical cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, the military said.

The forces, backed by tanks and Bradley fighting vehicles, advanced some 1.5 miles into Sadr City, a slum of two million mainly Shi'ite inhabitants, meeting sporadic resistance.

A U.S. officer said soldiers killed "slightly over" 50 Iraqis identified as firing upon the advancing forces. There was no immediate independent confirmation of the death toll.

In recent days, remember, while discussing the possibility of a truce in Najaf and still before today's surprise announcement of accepting conditions to lay down arms and leave the Imam Ali Shrine, al Sadr was telling followers that no matter the situation in Najaf, the uprising should continue throughout Iraq.

Now that he is, it seems, accepting a cessation of hostilities in Najaf, for the US military to push on into Sadr City seems overly confrontational, for this specific moment. This report is only minutes old at this point, however, and there may be more to come.

The more I think about it, given this incursion into Sadr City as reports of Sadr's acceptance of a truce are being made public, the more reason we have to doubt the reports in the first place. Perhaps the "truce" and Sadr's acceptance are simply some sort of psy-ops ruse? Perhaps an attempt to quell potential resitance before the tanks and Bradleys began to roll?

Imagery

Sometimes a picture is the only way to capture a nuanced social situation. By way of example, consider this photo from The Portland Tribune, and the accompanying caption:

An unidentified supporter of President Bush tries to silence protester Kendra Lloyd-Knox (right) outside Southridge High School in Beaverton. Elsewhere in Portland, supporters of Democratic candidate Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., rallied on the waterfront.

Pretty indicative, no?

Iran's Stance, Magnified

As an update to the previous post, let me pass along this AP piece from NY Newsday, showing more of the public stance Iran's assumed:

Accompanied by a warning that its missiles have the range, Iran on Tuesday said it would destroy Israel's Dimona nuclear reactor if the Jewish state were to attack Iran's nuclear facilities.

"If Israel fires a missile into the Bushehr nuclear power plant, it has to say goodbye forever to its Dimona nuclear facility, where it produces and stockpiles nuclear weapons," the deputy chief of the elite Revolutionary Guards, Brig. Gen. Mohammad Baqer Zolqadr, said in a statement.

More as it develops.

Iran's Stance

Zaman, a Turkish news outlet, is reporting that Yadullah Cawani, the "Political Bureau Chief of the Iran Revolution Guard" is openly claiming that:

Iran was capable of striking any target within Israel, and that their rockets were therefore a deterrent to any military action by the US, or Israel, against Iran.

Yadullah Cawani, the Political Bureau Chief of the Iran Revolution Guard, who spoke yesterday with the Iran Students New Agency said, "All the Zionist lands, including the nuclear bases and arsenals, are within range of our advanced rockets." Considering Iran's capabilities added Cawani, someone would have to be stupid and furious to attack Iran. In response to news that "American and Israel war planes could strike Iran's nuclear installations," Tehran announced the successful test of an advanced model of their medium range Sahab-3 rocket last week...

...A high-ranking Israeli officer, who evaluated Tehran's last statement, said, " Such statements made by Iran legitimize Israel's development of a rocket defense system against missiles like the Arrow-2."

In 1981, Israel successfully attacked the Osirak Nuclear Reactor in Iraq. Yet, in the case of Iran, many diplomats and defense specialist said that an air attack on Iran's nuclear program would be insubstantial since they are underground. That, coupled with Iran's assured response, is a deterrent to Israeli military action in Iran. Iran has not admitted Israel's right of existence since the 1979 revolution.

Perhaps a confrontation between Iran and Israel was inevitable, but circumstances in the region being what they are now, after Bush's invasion of Iraq, the likelihood is seeming greater every day. Will the offensive in Najaf become the flashpoint to set events into active motion? We'll see, but there is some evidence of Iranian involvement in Sadr's uprising. There's no denying the ratcheting up of rhetoric on everyone's side, to say nothing of the growing rage amongst the Shia community worldwide. Or will the ultimate tipping point be Israel's encouragement of the Kurds to declare an independent Kurdistan, or an attempt by Israel to strike Iran's nuclear facilities, as has been threatened? Perhaps some combination of the above and more?

At the very least, the world will be confronted with two (covertly) nuclear powers engaged in an arms race inside a tight geographic region, a la India and Pakistan but fueled by thousands of years of religious conflict as opposed to simply territorial dispute.

American propelled events in Iraq have provided even more fertile ground for all of the above, in a part of the world where there's no need for any added motivation, on anyone's part. As I've said before, the ramifications of Bush's folly will be affecting the wider world for many years to come, perhaps generations.

Mazel Tov

Slim posting, I know, and my apologies for the lack of contact. Lots on the proverbial plate, and will post as I'm able, but wanted to share this from Haaretz:

WASHINGTON - Seventy-five percent of Jewish American voters will vote for Democratic candidate John Kerry in the upcoming November elections, according to a survey released Monday.

The study, sponsored by the National Jewish Democratic Council, found that 75 percent of Jews polled said they would vote for Kerry, while only 22 percent said they would re-elect President George W. Bush.

The results contradict Republicans' claims that American Jewry is facing a historic change in voting habits, leading to mass support of Bush in the upcoming elections.

Republicans believed a record 40 percent of Jews would vote for Bush in November, but according to Monday's study, the president's base of Jewish supporters has not changed significantly since the 2000 elections, when he received 19 percent of the Jewish vote.

The study also shows Jews ranked Kerry highly on issues such as domestic affairs and the economy. Two-thirds of respondents also said that they believed Kerry would be better for Israel than Bush.

Iranian Fighters

The Guardian UK is reporting that 30 Iranians have been captured in Kut, fighting for Sadr's Mahdi Army. I suppose it could simply be a case of "true believers" coming across to fight what they perceive to be a righteous jihad against the American occupiers, but somehow I doubt it's that pure. Iran most definitely has a horse in this race, in a big way, and it's not the American horse at all:

Security officials in Baghdad were last night urgently investigating the background of 30 Iranians who were caught fighting for a rebel Shia cleric in Iraq, amid mounting concern over the involvement of the Tehran regime in the uprising.

The Guardian has learned that the most senior members of the Iraqi government were briefed about the capture of the men yesterday, and also told of other evidence that fighters and equipment have been crossing the border from Iran.

The 30 men were captured in the southern city of Kut on Wednesday and officials are trying to establish whether they have any links to Tehran.

"We are checking their identities but if they are found to have links to the Iranians then that would be tantamount to a declaration of war by them," said a senior Iraqi source, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

And I suppose that, given such a declaration of war, Mr ANonymous Senior Iraqi Source (who says they're not growing an American-style-democracy?) Iraq would have no choice then but to engage the Iranians.

Only one question: You and what army?

Oh yeah. Ours.

Ramifications

The Guardian is reporting that Iraqi Shia leaders in the south are advocating a breakaway movement from the "interim" government.

As the health ministry said that at least 172 Iraqis had died and more than 600 had been injured since Wednesday in fighting across southern Iraq, at least two prominent Shia figures called for the separation of some southern governorates from Baghdad.

Basra's deputy governor, Salam Uda al-Maliki, said he backed a breakaway as the interim government was "responsible for the Najaf clashes."

In Nassiriya, meanwhile, Aws al-Khafaji, the representative of Moqtada al-Sadr, echoed the call. "We have had enough of Baghdad's brutality," he said. "The authorities in Nassiriya will no longer cooperate with Baghdad." He said it was a response to "the crimes committed against Iraqis by an illegal and unelected government, and occupation forces."

I'm not sure how to reconcile al-Khafaji's statement with the Western media reports of a new truce being negotiated, but I do believe that should the call grow louder, the violence spread wider, and the demonstrations grow larger, the Balkanization of Iraq is a very real possibility, with at least the Shia south following in the steps of Iran, circa 1978-1979.

There's a piece in today's Christian Science Monitor that does a good job of laying out the stakes here. While media attention is focused on Najaf, awaiting the promised unleashing of Hell by American forces, the problem is much, much wider. Like Karzai in Afghanistan, Allawi may have US-enabled control over Baghdad and Baath Party buildings and offices, but he has no grip on the country and is seen widely as wholly and totally illegitimate and under American control.

What's at stake is not just the control of Najaf, but perhaps Iraq's territorial integrity. Key territories in Iraq are controlled by armed groups opposed to central government control from Baghdad. Kurdish militias in the north are vying for control of the crucial oil field town of Kirkuk; Sunni insurgents, many of them loyal to Saddam Hussein, control much of the center and the Northwest, including the transit link to Jordan.

Though there's great anticipation all around of the "final assault" on Najaf, even if al Sadr's house, the Imam Ali mosque, even if the entire town is laid to waste by the Marines, it will do little to stem the tide of resistance to American occupation, as well as any American installed government. And Sadr's movement, though branded ad infinitum that of a "Radical Shiite Cleric," is gaining in popular support. Including that of the Iraqi police forces, as the CSM article describes:

As fighting in Najaf seemed to approach a climax, there were other battles raging across the southern portions of Iraq as well, claiming 165 lives over 24 hours. In the southern city of Kut Wednesday, wire services reported that Iraqi and coalition forces battled militants loyal to Sadr who attacked police stations, the city hall, and Iraqi National Guard barracks. In what was the fiercest battle there in months, 72 people were reported killed and more than 100 wounded. Many, if not most, of these casualties are civilians, something that could turn sentiment against the Iraqi government and its US backers.

On Tuesday, the deputy governors of Basra, Dhiqar, and Maysun announced their intention to secede from Iraqi central government control, mimicking similar autonomy arrangements enjoyed by Kurdish militias, and the Sunni triangle insurgents in the cities of Fallujah, Ramadi, and Samarra....

...Meanwhile in the crucial oil-port city of Basra, where 90 percent of the country's oil flows out to global markets, Sadr's Mahdi Army controls the center of the city. They took the city after British troops stopped patrolling and retreated into their bases following heavy fighting on Tuesday. The fighting left one British soldier dead and many injured. Since then the Mahdi Army have taken over the streets. The Iraqi police still there are working hand-in-hand with the rebels.

Thursday, outside the Mahdi Army's main political office in the center of Basra, groups of bearded militiamen casually wandered the streets carrying machine guns and RPGs while in the building's forecourt two policemen sat calmly smoking atop a police car.

Inside the Mahdi Army's main political office, Sadr's leading commander in the south, Sheikh Saad al-Basri, reveled in the success of a public demonstration in support of Sadr Thursday morning, which drew thousands into Basra's streets.

"We made this demonstration to show that we are not only interested in fighting but that we would prefer to settle our differences peacefully," says Mr. Basri, who is now in de facto control of Iraq's second largest city.

Allawi's government will never have legitimacy among the rank and file Iraqi populace, and in fact the only hope he has of retaining control of the country at all is thorugh his promised "iron fist." Allawi's Iron Fist is, of course, limited solely to the US military. While the military might of the world's only remaining superpower is fierce and awesome indeed, it does not endear Allawi to the Iraqi people in the least, as the CSM article points out as well, citing Tarak Barkawi from Cambridge University:

While some experts say that religious passions will be inflamed if Sadr is killed and if the shrine comes under military attack, others say that the larger problem is that Allawi has inherited a government whose major decisions continue to be made by US military commanders, and without sufficient resources to extend its own authority, legitimacy, and control.

"Since the end of the occupation, US forces have in significant measure withdrawn to barracks and reduced their tempo of operations," says Tarak Barkawi, a strategic expert at the Center for International Studies at the University of Cambridge.

"This is good in the sense of reducing their highly unpopular visibility; it is bad in that the lid is off of the insurgents or local militias, and poorly prepared Iraqi forces are left holding the ring. When they can't do so, they must call on US forces, producing further casualties and further unpopularity. This strikes me as a downward spiral."

Conservatives for Kerry

In a piece in today's Christian Science Monitor, the authors of The Right Nation: Conservative Power in America discuss five reasons why true conservatives may actually hope to see George W. Bush lose.

In a nutshell, the reasoning is: Bush has spent too much, increased the size of government, engaged in a war of choice, alienated allies, eliminated the friend conservatives have in government gridlock, and besides, his loss would bring them back four years later, stronger than ever, with a new understanding of what, exactly, is 21st Century Conservatism.

Interesting read. I recommend it, and suggest you share it with your conservative friends. Very interesting details, right from the beginning:

In 1976, many conservatives saw the trouncing of the moderate Gerald Ford as a way of clearing the path for the ideologically pure Ronald Reagan in 1980. George H.W. Bush's 1992 defeat provoked celebration not just in Clintonite Little Rock but also in some corners of conservative America. "Oh,yeah, man, it was fabulous," recalled Tom DeLay, the hard-line Texas congressman, who'd feared another "four years of misery" fighting the urge to cross his party's too-liberal leader. At the Heritage Foundation, a group of right-wingers called the Third Generation conducted a bizarre rite involving a plastic head of the deposed Bush on a platter.

On a similar note, a reader sent this link. Not sure what to make of it, but the more the merrier. It takes a nation to save the nation.

Imam Ali Shrine

It's looking increasingly more likely that US military forces will storm the Imam Ali Mosque in Najaf. Signs are pointing that way. From a BBC report:

"Iraqi and US forces are making final preparations as we get ready to finish this fight that the Moqtada militia started," said Col Anthony Haslam, commanding officer of the 11th Marine Expeditionary Unit in Najaf.

"The desired end state is one of stability and security, where the citizens of Najaf do not live in fear of violence or kidnappings, and where the city of Najaf can once again return to peace and prosperity."

The US military said on Monday that Najaf's Governor, Adnan al-Zorfi, had given its troops permission to raid the Imam Ali mausoleum. The US says the insurgents are using the shrine as a refuge, but an attack could anger Shia Muslims.

This follows two days of similar statements by military officials, including this NY Times report from Monday in Najaf.

Spokesmen for the United States command say they have explicit authority from Dr. Allawi to enter the cemetery, where they claim to have killed more than 360 rebel fighters, and to advance on the shrine itself, if that proves necessary to dislodge the rebels.

A senior military official told reporters in Baghdad on Monday that the command would wait a few days to see how the rebels responded to their situation in the area of the mosque.

But he also hinted that an assault on the shrine had not been ruled out. "At the moment we are not conducting operations in that area, but we are ready to do so at a moment's notice," he said.

The spokesman laid down a possible rationale for an assault, saying that the rebels had used the shrine and the cemetery to stockpile arms and ammunition, and were fighting from behind tombs and headstones. All of this, the spokesman said, stripped the shrine of protection under the Geneva Conventions. "The use of that site makes it a legitimate target under international law," he said.

Developing.

High Profile

According to Reuters, right-wing dropbox The Washington Times is running with a story of al Qaeda planning a "high-profile political assassination, triggered by a new message from Osama bin Laden," and followed by multiple attacks across the US.

U.S. officials familiar with intelligence reports, speaking on condition of anonymity, disclosed that the assassination plan was among new details of al Qaeda plots and would target a U.S. or foreign leader either in the United States or abroad, according to the newspaper.

Planning for the attacks to follow involves "multiple targets in multiple venues" across the United States, one official was quoted as saying.

"The goal of the next attack is twofold: to damage the U.S. economy and to undermine the U.S. election," the official told the newspaper.

The article even alludes to whispers that the bin Laden tape may have already been uncovered. The source of this new and troubling information?

The Washington Times reported that the plot was among detailed al Qaeda plans found on a laptop computer belonging to captured al Qaeda suspect Muhammad Naeem Noor Khan.

Information from Khan, a computer expert, prompted the United States to issue a new security alert for financial institutions in Washington, New York and New Jersey and led to the arrest of a dozen al Qaeda suspects in Britain.

Khan's capture was part of a Pakistani crackdown, which began a month ago and has dealt al Qaeda a major blow.

We'll see what sort of blow has been dealt to al Qaeda, hopefully a devastating one, but the consensus seems to be that whoever had leaked Khan's name to the media compromised what could have been an invaluable source moving forward, and outing him ultimately hurt the US much more than those who would do us harm. If this information is correct, it would only serve to underscore the loss.

While the Washington Times is what it is, there is a history of valid intelligence leaks to, and subsequent scoops for the paper, and should not be immediately discounted. I shudder to think of the consequences should al Qaeda'a assassination target be either Kerry or Bush. Either way, the result would be disastrous, regardless of outcome.

On A Roll

The drama continues in Iraq, with further moves made toward consolidating power on the part of the current, ever more doubtfully "interim" government. The move against Chalabi may just be the beginning of a political cleansing, removing both active and dormant threats to the totality of Allawi's power. One dictator for another. Perhaps Alawi, too, will win 98% of the votes when the free and soveriegn Iraq holds its elections.

The BBC is reporting that the Iraqi National Congress, Chalabi's group, to whom a great deal of credit should go for the snowing of American intelligence, is being forced from its offices in Iraq, but the story is more than that.

The interim Iraqi government has ordered the party of former exile and anti-Saddam Hussein activist Ahmed Chalabi to leave its Baghdad HQ.

The Iraqi National Congress was given 24 hours to vacate its offices, which used to house the intelligence services.

A government spokesman said more orders would follow against parties that had seized state property.

The INC said the order was part of a continuing conspiracy against it.

A host of other Iraqi parties occupy buildings and property that housed security and government offices before the fall of Saddam Hussein.

The story goes on to rehash the known elements of the Chalabi arrest warrants and subsequent denials, but what struck me was the point made that more of such orders would soon follow. The parties currently occupying former Baath Party buildings will be evicted. In a sense, the legitimacy of these other parties is in dispute here. Displacing the parties physically is but the first step.

There is so much activity going on in Iraq now, so much movement in play, just under the surface, by the Allawi government, it's hard to keep track. One thing we should not forget though is that it all comes at a time when the attention paid by American media to Iraq has waned considerably and Al Jazeera, often openly hostile to the US, has been ejected from the country. And it should be understood that Allaw has no force of his own. What will follow on "his order" will be a show of primarily US force, on the ground and in the skies.

Today saw pounding American airstrikes against Mahdi Army fighters in Najaf, and it seems a massive offensive is about to begin. The American millitary is saying as much, amplified and broadcast. The AP reportmakes this sound as though it's some sort of psy-ops component of the battle, but I'd be inclined to see it as a sincere warning.

U.S. forces adopted a new tactic Tuesday in their sixth day of battles in this city south of the capital, sending patrols armed with loudspeakers into the streets to demand that militants loyal to a radical cleric drop their arms and leave Najaf immediately or face death.

The call, broadcast in Arabic from American vehicles, added a psychological component to the U.S. offensive. It came as U.S. helicopter gunships pummeled a multistoried building 400 yards from the gold-domed Imam Ali Shrine with rockets, missiles and 30 mm cannons -- one of the closest strikes yet to what is one of the holiest sites in Shia Islam.

I think what we're about to, as it turns out, not see will make the battle for Fallujah (which ended with control over the city being ceded from the Americans to a former-Baathist run security team) look like a relative skirmish. And as we saw yesterday, the American commanders on the ground have basically assumed the opinion that the Imam Ali Shrine is no longer protected under the Geneva Conventions (not that that our track record with the Conventions has been stellar thus far in Iraq). I do think the gloves are coming off. More to come.

The Burb's

The Guardian reports that fighting erupted at dawn across Iraq, including Sadr City:

Battles in other cities have, however, killed dozens of people as the radical Shia uprising spreads, presenting Mr Allawi with his toughest challenge since taking office on June 28.

In Sadr City, Baghdad - a suburb named after Mr Sadr's father - clashes erupted as militia fighters ignored a curfew order from Mr Allawi's government. The first shots were heard as US tanks and Iraqi national guardsmen moved into the area at daybreak.

Suburb? That's a bit of a faulty characterization there. Sadr City is much less suburb than slum. In fact, it is, more than anything, a pit dug by Saddam in which to dump the poorest of the Shia poor. A background blurb from GlobalSecurity.org:

Once known as Saddam City, then as Al Thawra, Sadr City is named for the Imam Mohammed Sadr, an Iraqi religious leader killed by Saddam Hussein. Many residents still call it Al Thawra, meaning "Revolution City."

Subdivided into six sections, the district is one of the poorest in Baghdad. The population consists mostly of Shiite Moslems. Unemployment is rampant. Homes are in disrepair. It is also a haven for criminals released from Iraqi prisons by Saddam shortly before the start of Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Sadr City, built by Saddam Hussein, was the scene of numerous confrontations between coalition forces and residents in 2003. Infrastructure problems still plague portions of the district. Electrical services are intermittent. Parts of some streets in some neighborhoods are flooded with sewage from long-neglected pipes. Trash pickup stopped during the war, and residents started dumping their trash on the medians in the potholed streets.