------- Index of Articles

NUCLEAR
Environmentalists go to court to halt British nuclear
Germany shuts N-plant after safety incident
German LPX shrugs off nuclear outage
Dutch firm recovers Russian sub Kursk
Main events in Russian Kursk submarine saga
In 15 Hours, Submarine Kursk Is Raised From Sea Floor
COMMENT NEEDED ON RULES TO COMPENSATE NUCLEAR WORKERS
RADIOACTIVE AND CHEMICAL POLLUTION
Reid's Counter-terror U.
A New Marshall Plan?

MILITARY
Say what you want, but this war is illegal
Afghanistan bombed by day, night
Afghanistan: Lessons from the Last War
Rulers' Key Defenses Crippled
Taliban says dozens killed by U.S. airstrikes
Anthrax cases spur FBI probe, concern
Rainbow Farm Marijuana Activists Laid to Rest
Iraq Wants Muslim Condemnation of U.S. Strikes
Gaza Schools and Universities Closed After Protests
Radar Planes From NATO To Patrol U.S. Coast
Angry Mobs in Pakistan Burn U.N. Offices, Banks, Theaters
Pakistan Steps Up Security
Bomb kills four U.N. workers near Kabul
U.N. Says Raids Hamper Afghan Food Deliveries
U.S. warns of spread in terror campaign
Next Phase To Include More Troops
President notifies Congress about troop deployment


OTHER
Food drop intended as a message to Afghans
Alarm over aid drop in 'world's biggest minefield'
Doctors Without Borders calls U.S. food drops 'propaganda'
F.B.I. Shifts Focus to Try to Avert Any More Attacks
Bush limits disclosure of classified data to Congress
Ridge Assumes Security Post Amid Potential For New Attacks
CIA Steps Up Scope, Pace Of Efforts On Terrorism
Suppressed Details of Criminal Insider Trading
IRS center shuts down after hazardous material scare

ACTIVISTS
Anti-war activists continue protests
Court clears Sheridan after arrest in naval base anti-nuclear protest
Why we oppose the war in Afghanistan
Women's International League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF) Statement
Terrorism takes all sides
Anti-war activities
Differences Between Terrorists and US Government
Unjust attacks should stop immediately




-------- NUCLEAR

-------- britain

Environmentalists go to court to halt operation of new British nuclear reprocessing plant

Tuesday, October 09, 2001
Environmental News Network
http://www.enn.com/news/wire-stories/2001/10/10092001/ap_nukes_45199.asp

LONDON -- Environmental organizations attempting to stop a new nuclear reprocessing plant, applied for a judicial review of Britain's decision to allow the long-mothballed plant to operate.

Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace filed papers in the High Court following the government's announcement Thursday of a go-ahead for the mixed oxide (MOX) plant at the Sellafield nuclear site in Cumbria, northwest England.

The government of Ireland, which lies less than 200 miles across the Irish Sea from Sellafield, sharply criticized Britain's decision. Irish Prime Minister Bertie Ahern said his legal advisers might challenge it through the European Court of Justice or a United Nations tribunal if Britain didn't back down.

The MOX plant was completed in 1996 but did not begin operations because of financial questions and after operators of a demonstration plant falsified safety records.

The plant is intended to make fuel from plutonium and uranium separated from spent fuel that is processed mainly at the thermal oxide reprocessing plant also on the Sellafield site.

A report last year by the Nuclear Installations Inspectorate said British Nuclear Fuels PLC, the state-owned company that operates Sellafield, regularly failed to perform safety checks on sample rods. Instead, safety records were copied from previous checks.

The two environmental groups argue that the government decision was unlawful because the economic benefits of the plan allegedly were distorted, and there was insufficient evidence the plant would attract customers.

"The government's decision to allow the MOX plant to open is dangerous, uneconomic and perverse. The decision makes the world an even more dangerous place, said Charles Secrett, director of Friends of the Earth.

"The plant will struggle to find clients and may never make any money. We will challenge ministers to justify this foolish decision in court," he said.

-------- germany

Germany shuts N-plant after safety incident

Planet Ark
GERMANY: October 9, 2001
REUTERS NEWS SERVICE
http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/12713/newsDate/9-Oct-2001/story.htm

BERLIN - A German nuclear reactor was closed temporarily on the weekend following government outrage at a new report of an incident in August that it says raised serious doubts about safety procedures at the plant.

Environment Minister Juergen Trittin said Energie Baden-Wurttemberg AG had agreed voluntarily to the shutdown of one of two reactors at Philippsburg, near Karlsruhe, and it would last several days.

Ministry sources said the company was also likely to be fined several million marks.

"This move is the right and unavoidable consequence of the fact the atomic energy authority has raised lots of questions about safety measures at the plant," Trittin told reporters after talks with company executives.

"The length of the shutdown is not a question of hours or days," Trittin added, saying the plant would only reopen once all questions relating to the incident, revealed in a report last week, were answered.

The 1.4 megawatt pressurised-water reactor, in use since 1984, was operated for two weeks in August following a routine refuelling with a fault in its back-up cooling system, the ministry said. Once discovered it took staff at the plant some days to realise the full extent of the fault.

At no time was there a real security risk, the state of Baden Wuerrtemberg said in a statement.

Nuclear power is a controversial issue in Germany, which since 1998 has been ruled by a coalition of Social Democrats and Greens. The government force the industry last year to agree to gradually phase out the country's 19 operational reactors over the next 25 years or so.

The Greens, of which Trittin is a member, made an end to nuclear power a condition of their participation in government.

---

German LPX shrugs off nuclear outage

GERMANY: October 9, 2001
Reuters
http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/12712/story.htm

FRANKFURT - German electricity traders said yesterday that bearish sentiment on the Leipzig Power Exchange (LPX) showed that utility EnBW's (EBKG.DE) closure of a big nuclear power plant at the weekend had not affected prices.

EnBW closed the 1,400 megawatt German Philippsburg II reactor over the weekend, following government outrage at a new report of an incident in August which it said raised serious doubts about safety procedures.

"All of the market had expected EnBW to be out buying on the LPX to replace that lost power, and that would have pushed up prices," a trader said.

"But that didn't happen, and in fact the LPX prices were lower than OTC levels," he added.

The LPX cleared at 1230 (1030 GMT) at softer levels than OTC ranges, at 21.01 euros per megawatt hour baseload and at 26.69 euros peakload for Tuesday's contract.

Dealers had said earlier yesterday that only once the LPX cleared could they get a full picture of how the outage would affect prices.

But dealers said that Germany's power market was already at over-capacity yesterday, with mild temperatures and rainfall supporting bearish sentiment.

Traders said market expectations that EnBW would close the unit had had a slight bullish effect during Friday's trading for Tuesday, with prices firming by around 50-70 eurocents.

Day ahead OTC power prices opened yesterday at 23.5 euros per megawatt hour baseload and at 31.5-32 euros peakload.

By 1130 (0930 GMT) baseload was unchanged, while peakload had softened to 29.95-30 euros.

Traders said November and December firmed around 15-20 euros cents, but added that they expected any further bullish influence would be limited to the daily products.

"The only effect we would expect is on the short term, because the plant will probably be back in a couple of weeks," a trader said, adding "Though it is not clear yet what will happen to EnBW, what the government will do."

Environment minister Juergen Trittin said the plant would only reopen once all questions relating to the incident were answered.

The Philippsburg II reactor, the larger of two units at the site, last rejoined the grid on August 11 after a two-week maintenance period. Maintenance on the smaller 870 MW block was carried out in June.

-------- russia

Dutch firm recovers Russian sub Kursk

October 9, 2001
By Viktoria Loginova
AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE
http://www.washtimes.com/world/20011009-4210724.htm

MURMANSK, Russia - The long-delayed operation to raise the sunken Kursk submarine from the bottom of the Barents Sea was accomplished yesterday, to the almost palpable relief of the Russian navy.

The lifting of the Kursk began after salvage experts succeeded in wresting the 20,000-ton vessel from a bed of silt 370 feet under water, said Lars Walder, spokesman for the Dutch contractors Mammoet-Smit.

Fifteen hours later, it was all over - or, at any rate, the second phase of the complex salvage operation begun, with the Giant-4 barge operated by Mammoet-Smit towing the crippled sub toward dry dock on the Kola Peninsula.

"It was necessary to use a force of 9,000 tons to raise the wreck from the deep," Mr. Walder told reporters.

The vessel sank Aug. 12, 2000, with the loss of all 118 crew aboard.

On-off preparations to raise the hull have taken almost three months because of bad weather in the Arctic Circle, and salvage workers have been racing against time as the Arctic winter closed in and threatened to postpone the whole operation until next year.

Twenty-six steel cables, each weighing 22 tons, that were lowered from the Giant-4 barge raised the nuclear sub to the point where it could be towed to shore, said Vice Adm. Mikhail Motsak, head of Russia's Northern Fleet.

Adm. Motsak was already in a celebratory mood at the success of the lifting phase, telling journalists, "The emotion was very great when we heard this news, because it means this enormous labor by divers, sailors and technical experts has not been in vain."

"Everything is going according to plan. The freeing of the Kursk from the seabed was even easier than we had thought it would be," said Vladimir Navrotsky, a Northern Fleet spokesman. "The only thing we could fear is the bad weather. According to the weather forecast, we should expect a downturn on Tuesday."

The Kursk, Russia's most modern nuclear-powered sub-marine, sank after a series of explosions on board that have still not been explained.

Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered the vessel raised after promising the seamen's families that their relatives' bodies would be recovered.

Officials hope the $65 million salvage operation will cast some light on the accident that sent the Kursk to the bottom of the sea.

Although the Russian navy says risks are negligible, the presence of 18 torpedoes, 22 Granit missiles and two nuclear reactors inside the sunken vessel has given environmentalist groups and authorities serious reasons to worry.

The Kursk's bow - the most damaged part of the submarine, which holds its torpedoes - is to remain under the sea at least until next year.

The raising of the Kursk was originally scheduled for Sept. 15, but the operation was repeatedly delayed by technical problems and bad weather.

----

CHRONOLOGY - Main events in Russian Kursk submarine saga

RUSSIA: October 9, 2001
Reuters
http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/12716/story.htm

MOSCOW - Russia started yesterday to raise the Kursk nuclear submarine, which sank to the Barents Sea floor just over a year ago, killing all 118 crew, after two explosions ripped through its bow.

Following is a chronology of the main events after the disaster.

Aug 12, 2000 - Nuclear-powered submarine K141, the Kursk, fails to make radio contact during navy exercises north of Russia and Norway. It later emerges that it has sunk 108 metres to the seabed after two explosions ripped through its bow.

Aug 14 - Russia's navy first reports that the 150-metre, 18,000-tonne Kursk has sunk. It says it has radio contact with the crew, rescue vessels are at the scene and that there are no nuclear weapons on board. Britain and the U.S. offer to help.

Aug 15 - A fierce storm hampers rescue efforts but navy says the sailors are alive and communicating by tapping on the hull of the submarine. Russian military officials in Brussels talk to NATO counterparts to discuss possible help.

Aug 16 - President Vladimir Putin speaks on the crisis for the first time from a South Russian resort. Deputy Prime Minister Ilya Klebanov says there are no signs of life on the sub. Russia asks Britain and Norway for help.

Aug 17 - British and Norwegian rescue ships head to the site. Klebanov says the submarine probably sank because it collided with "another object" which ripped open its bow.

Aug 18 - Putin cuts short his stay at a summit of Commonwealth of Independent States to return to Moscow.

Aug 19 - Head of the North Sea fleet's general staff, Mikhail Motsak, says most of the sailors died after the explosion. Norwegian and British rescue teams arrive.

Aug 21 - Norwegian divers open hatches and conclude the crew are all dead. Russia asks Norway to help recover bodies.

Aug 25 - Russian nuclear industry officials say the wreck of the Kursk poses no environmental threat despite ecological organisations' warnings that its two nuclear reactors will leak.

Aug 29 - U.S. officials say tapes made by an American submarine in the Barents Sea show a faulty torpedo caused the explosion that sank the Kursk. Russian navy chief Vladimir Kuroyedov maintains a NATO sub struck the vessel.

Oct 21 - Russian and Norwegian divers start operation to retrieve bodies of sailors.

Oct 26 - Divers find a note on the body of Lieutenant-Colonel Dmitry Kolesnikov proving at least 23 of the crew did not die instantly but gathered for up to two hours in the rear of the Kursk.

Nov 7 - Russia calls off salvage operation on safety grounds after bodies of only 12 crew members are retrieved, but says it will raise the hull, which contains cruise missiles, in 2001.

May 18, 2001 - Russia signs a contract with Dutch salvage firm Mammoet to raise the Kursk's hull from the seabed.

July 16 - Recovery operation begins with underwater tests indicating radiation levels do not exceed those normal for the Barents Sea.

July 22 - Divers begin cutting first of 26 holes in the hull to fix cables that will be used to hoist it to the surface.

July 24 - Russian experts say tests on the submarine show no radiation risks as the reactor shut down after the accident.

September 12 - Salvage team cuts the damaged 25-metre (80-ft) torpedo bay from the hull.

Oct 8 - Salvage teams begin lifting the Kursk off the Barents seabed. Russia plans to raise the remainder in 2002.

----

In 15 Hours, Submarine Kursk Is Raised From Sea Floor

October 9, 2001
By SOPHIA KISHKOVSKY
New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/10/09/international/europe/09KURS.html?pagewanted=print

MURMANSK, Russia, Oct. 8 - The nuclear-powered Kursk submarine that sank in the Barents Sea in August 2000 with 118 crewmen on board was pulled to the surface today in a triumphant 15-hour operation tinged with bittersweet emotion.

For all the success in freeing the submarine and attaching it to a giant barge that will now haul it to dry dock, its recovery may prove to be a distinctly mixed blessing for the Kremlin and the Russian military.

Russian and Norwegian divers who examined the wreck last fall recovered 12 bodies and two notes penned by crewmen before they died, indicating that others, too, may have lived on after the mysterious explosion that sent the Kursk plummeting to the depths.

At the disaster site today, ship sirens wailed and Russian naval officers tossed wreaths onto the water before sailing away from the spot where their fellow sailors had been entombed.

The admiral in charge of the operation said one of the most touching moments was when a flock of dolphins appeared - as if, he said, to say goodbye to the Kursk.

"I felt that this entire labor was not in vain," Vice Adm. Mikhail Motsak told reporters in Murmansk during a video hook-up from the Peter the Great warship near the operation site. "We stayed true to our goal," he said. "This is a worthy conclusion."

A spokesman for Russia's Northern Fleet confirmed near dawn that the Kursk was pulled from its resting place 380 feet down at 3:55 a.m. local time and began to move upward at about thirty feet per hour. At 7 p.m., a spokeswoman for Mammoet, the Dutch heavy lifting company leading the operation, said the submarine was successfully attached to a special compartment within the Giant 4 salvage barge.

The submarine will be towed to shore at Roslyakovo, 120 nautical miles away, where it is expected at noon on Wednesday barring complications from forecast storms.

Reporters have been kept away from the operation site, gathering information instead at an ice-rink converted into a press center.

In videotape shown on a large screen at the press center today, emotions on board the Mayo support ship were evident as Admiral Motsak presented commemorative banners to the European divers involved in the operation, thanking them in English for their work. The divers will stay briefly in the area on the Mayo for a final survey of the disaster site, and drop a memorial plaque on the spot where the Kursk lay.

Igor D. Spassky, Russia's leading submarine designer, who usually speaks in complex scientific terms, first explained why the operation was technically successful. Then, his emotions erupted.

"We've lived through so much in the past year, but everything went remarkably smoothly," he said. "Such emotions," he said with tears in his eyes. "Thanks to everyone, and to the foreign companies, and to the officers. Everyone is wonderful. A great contribution has been made to understand why this happened, so it won't happen again."

Jan van Seumeren, vice-president of Mammoet in charge of the engineering aspects of the operation, also came close to tears. "We did the impossible," he said, choking up. "We raised the submarine with your sailors."

The two mysterious explosions that sent the Kursk crashing bow first to the bottom of the sea cost Russia not only the lives of 118 seamen, but a large measure of pride. Russians watched their leaders lie about the crew's fate, refuse foreign help in trying to rescue them and insist - over the opinion of many experts that the explosions were caused by a malfunctioning torpedo - that a collision with a foreign submarine caused the crash.

Every disaster since then - from the burning television tower that caught fire in Moscow only weeks later, to repeated battle failures in Chechnya and now the downing of a Russian passenger airliner which exploded over the Black Sea last week - has been compared to the Kursk as a symbol of national failure.

By contrast, the salvage operation seemed to exceed expectations, despite many missed deadlines for raising the crippled 17,000-ton submarine without disturbing unexploded torpedoes, 22 cruise missiles and twin nuclear reactors inside.

The navy reported that radiation levels monitored in and around the wreck were "within the norm." Gummy sediment did not prove to be anywhere near the problem that officials had feared.

"We started to pull and there was almost no suction," Larissa van Seumeren of Mammoet told The Associated Press. "It was lifted up easily."

Mr. Spassky said the Kursk was raised "very competently," with pressure applied first to the tail and then to the bow.

The severely damaged first compartment of the bow, a tangled mess of debris, was cut by divers earlier and smoothly disengaged from the rest of the hull during the lifting. It will remain on the sea floor to be raised by the Russian Navy next year. Some believe the secrets of the accident lie with it, but naval officials say they hope to find the cause in the rest of the submarine once it is brought into dry dock.

For relatives of the dead crewmen, the recovery may only open a new, painful chapter. The Interfax news agency reported that the Northern Fleet had placed an order for more than 100 zinc coffins. As the Kursk moved toward shore tonight, Taisia Paramonenko, whose son died on board, summed up her feelings for Russian television. "This," she said, "is like the third circle of hell."

-------- u.s. nuc facilities

COMMENT NEEDED ON RULES TO COMPENSATE NUCLEAR WORKERS

October 9, 2001
ENS
http://ens-news.com/ens/oct2001/2001L-10-09-09.html

WASHINGTON, DC, The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is asking for public comment on two rules under which the department will provide scientific expertise to assist in decision making under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000.

The two rules, "Methods for Radiation Dose Reconstruction" and "Guidelines for Determining the Probability of Causation," were published in the Federal Register on October 5.

Under the Compensation Act, the Department of Labor (DOL) is administering claims by current and former employees of nuclear weapons production facilities and their survivors who seek compensation for cancers caused by radiation exposures sustained in the performance of duty, chronic beryllium disease and silicosis.

The Act directs the HHS to provide scientific information that the DOL will use to evaluate claims by workers who seek compensation for certain cancers caused by occupational radiation exposures but are not requesting compensation under the "Special Exposure Cohort" provisions of the Act. The Special Exposure Cohort includes workers with specified cancers who were employed at specific sites designated in the Act.

"For a program as important as this, we have to bring the best scientific expertise we can to the table and move as quickly as possible," HHS Secretary Tommy Thompson said. "With today's notices, we are taking steps to put some key processes in place immediately as we proceed with further steps to make sure that our products pass rigorous scientific scrutiny and public review."

The rules outline the methods that will be used by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (CDC/NIOSH) in estimating claimants' past occupational exposures to radiation. That process is called dose reconstruction.

The rules also specify the scientific guidelines that the DOL would use in determining whether it is at least as likely as not that an energy employee's cancer was caused by occupational exposure to radiation at nuclear weapons production sites. That process is called determining the probability of causation.

The rules are available at: http://www.cdc.gov/niosh

-------- idaho

RADIOACTIVE AND CHEMICAL POLLUTION FROM NUCLEAR WASTE DUMPING ENDANGERS SNAKE RIVER PLAIN AQUIFER, LARGEST AQUIFER IN WESTERN U.S.

More than one ton of plutonium is in shallow dumps
Energy Department "Clean-up" Program Plagued by Poor Priorities, Inaction

Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2001
From: Lisa Ledwidge / IEER <ieer@ieer.org>

Washington, D.C., October 9, 2001: Nuclear waste dumped at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) is polluting the Snake River Plain aquifer, the primary source of drinking water for 200,000 people, according to a new report. Poison in the Vadose Zone: An examination of the threats to the Snake River Plain aquifer from the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory, by the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (IEER), warns that this important water resource faces further contamination from the migration of long-lived radionuclides and hazardous chemicals from nuclear weapons production wastes buried at the site. The Snake River Plain aquifer is the largest unified aquifer in the western United States and the most important underground water resource in the northwestern U.S. Poison in the Vadose Zone is the first report to comprehensively compile and analyze the available data on the threat posed by plutonium and other transuranic materials to the Snake River Plain aquifer.

"For fifty years, nuclear weapons production has resulted in large quantities of radioactive and hazardous chemical waste being injected directly into the aquifer, discharged into surface ponds, or dumped into shallow pits and trenches," said Dr. Arjun Makhijani, principal author of the report and president of IEER. "These contaminants pose a serious threat to the lifeblood of the region, the Snake River Plain aquifer."

According to the report, official US government data indicate that more than one metric ton of plutonium, packaged in nothing more than cardboard boxes, wooden boxes, or 55 gallon drums, was dumped into shallow trenches on the site in the 1950s and 1960s. Rain, snow, and occasional flooding of the trenches have already caused migration of some radioactive and hazardous materials towards, and in some cases into, the aquifer. Evidence has existed for more than 25 years that these long-lived radionuclides are migrating through the vadose zone to the aquifer much faster than anticipated.

"Sound scientific work indicating threats to the Snake River Plain aquifer has long been ignored by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)," stated Michele Boyd, co-author of the report and IEER's global outreach coordinator. "Plutonium and americium have been detected in the vadose zone, which is the unsaturated area between the ground surface and the aquifer, and in the aquifer since the 1970s. Plutonium is moving through the vadose zone to the aquifer thousands of times faster than assumed by a wait-and-see policy that dominates DOE's approach to clean-up of these dumps."

While the threat to the Snake River Plain aquifer from the buried wastes increases, the DOE has focused on transporting "stored" transuranic wastes, which are kept in relatively secure conditions indoors at INEEL, to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) in New Mexico.

"Insufficient resources are being devoted to cleaning up of the buried transuranic wastes at INEEL," said Gary Richardson, Executive Director of the Snake River Alliance, a nuclear watchdog group of INEEL. "The DOE is essentially playing a shell game by moving wastes from INEEL to WIPP so that more waste can be shipped to INEEL. The DOE's Environmental Management Program has wasted enormous sums of money on poorly designed projects for managing buried wastes. Meanwhile, the DOE is continuing to dump wastes into unlined pits and trenches. A culture of denial seems deeply embedded in the DOE with regard to the threat posed by buried wastes."

Paul Schwartz, Director for Water Policy of Clean Water Action, in welcoming the report said, "Activists and policy-makers should pay far more attention to the threat posed to the purity of critical water supplies in the United States by past radioactive dumping. Clean Water Action is certainly going to do so. There is no room for complacency when it comes to plutonium and americium."

The DOE buried more plutonium containing waste at INEEL than at any other nuclear weapons site. Direct injection of radioactive and hazardous substances into the Snake River Plain aquifer and dumping of wastes into percolation ponds resulted in plumes of pollutants like strontium-90, iodine-129, and TCE in the aquifer. Some areas under the site are contaminated at levels far above the Safe Drinking Water standards set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. While these standards do not apply to the water under INEEL, they do indicate the severity of the problem of water pollution due to past waste dumping and the need for clean-up.

"The combined threat from the radioactive and hazardous chemicals in the buried wastes is enormous," continued Beatrice Brailsford of the Snake River Alliance. "Severe contamination of the Snake River Plain aquifer would have serious consequences for the health of the people and economy of Idaho. The Snake River Plain aquifer is the only source of drinking water for 200,000 people in southern Idaho and a major source of irrigation water for regional crops and fisheries. The produce grown in Idaho is eaten throughout the United States and in many other countries, including Japan, Canada, and Mexico. Idaho's trout farms, which rely on the groundwater, produce 75 percent of the commercial rainbow trout eaten in the U.S."

The report recommends that:

ˇ buried wastes be recovered from the dumps and processed in order to stabilize them for storage,

ˇ all shallow land burial of radioactive wastes be stopped,

ˇ the vadose zone be remediated to the extent possible, and

ˇ a more vigorous groundwater monitoring program be implemented.

"This will not be a simple project and will need to be carried out carefully, with due regard for worker safety," said Dr. Makhijani. "But it is a project that is essential for protecting the health of the Snake River Plain aquifer and also for security. If site control is lost, the dumps would be a potential nuclear weapons mine since they contain more than 200 nuclear bombs worth of plutonium."

For further information, contact: Arjun Makhijani (301) 270-5500 Beatrice Brailsford (208) 234-4782 Bob Schaeffer (941) 395-6773

Portions of the report are available on-line: http://www.ieer.org/reports/poison/toc.html

-------- nevada

Reid's Counter-terror U.

COLUMN: Steve Sebelius
Tuesday, October 09, 2001
Las Vegas Review-Journal
http://www.lvrj.com/lvrj_home/2001/Oct-09-Tue-2001/opinion/17180005.html

Call it pork with patriotism.

U.S. Sen. Harry Reid's latest push is to immediately create a national center for combating terrorism at the Nevada Test Site, the Rhode Island-sized chunk of Nevada desert where scientists currently conduct experiments on the nation's nuclear weapons stockpile.

The move makes sense, Reid says, because some counter-terrorism training already goes on at the test site. In Reid's vision, the center would be expanded to be the place where cops, firefighters and soldiers from the armed forces and National Guard come for training to deal with various forms of terrorism, ranging from nuclear devices to chemical and biological weapons.

And hey, guys, while you're in town, why not drop by the Strip, hit the tables and grab some dinner?

Reid estimates that a national counter-terrorism center would cost between $50 million and $60 million per year, but he's confident the idea has merit, and offered the notion in a Sept. 27 letter to President George W. Bush. "The national center will attract cadres of men and women from the intelligence community, the military and other agencies engaged in combating and responding to terrorism to conduct specialized training suited to each organization's particular skills and needs," Reid wrote to Bush. "The centralized nature of the center will also encourage coordinated training activities between organizations that are not accustomed to working together."

Not only that, but it would bring new jobs, new workers and new money to Southern Nevada, boosting the area economy and ensuring that the appropriate bacon is brought to the appropriate home by the appropriate senator.

But even with the obvious political dimension, the idea has merit. (It's not even an entirely new concept. In June 2000, U.S. Rep. Shelley Berkley proposed using the test site as one of three national locations for counter-terrorism schools, and noted that "the counter-terrorism school would be a great boost to our local economy by bringing in a lot of money for our small businesses and providing well-paying jobs for the construction of this state-of-the-art facility." But a Berkley amendment naming the test site went nowhere.)

But that was then, and this is now. Reid's right to think he's got the momentum on Capitol Hill to establish a national training center here, given how quickly a national terrorism czar (another idea Reid and others advanced) was approved, appointed and funded. (Former Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Ridge, a friend of Reid's from way back, was officially sworn in Monday as the director of the Office of Homeland Security. Ridge's support would be key to setting up a counter-terror school in Nevada.)

At a counter-terrorism summit Reid called Monday at a Henderson fire training facility, Ken Powers, acting manager of the local office of the National Nuclear Security Administration, called Reid's idea a "visionary announcement." And Fred Tarantino, general manager of Bechtel Nevada, said the test site has already trained about 1,500 firefighters and paramedics.

The facility that formerly was home to above-ground trials of atomic weapons has most recently been used to test devices that detect nuclear materials, ground-penetrating radar to detect underground bunkers, emergency communications that could be deployed in the event of a disaster that wipes out regular telephone service, and even radar that can detect a human heartbeat and breathing through eight feet of rubble, Tarantino says.

Not to mention the fact that a national school for training those who fight terrorists and deal with the aftermath of terrorist acts would give a level of prestige to a state that heretofore has been of interest to the federal government primarily for a place to store spent nuclear waste.

(In fact, that raises an interesting question. Would Nevada be considered a better candidate for a nuclear waste dump if it was home to a school aimed at graduating people who could readily defend a waste dump not that far away? As the Review-Journal's Steve Tetreault reported Saturday, the Project on Government Oversight thinks keeping plutonium used by national nuclear labs in California and New Mexico might be safer at the test site than at the labs themselves, which have been penetrated by military teams assigned to test security.)

You can hear the answer now: Those charged with guarding plants can come to Vegas, get their training, and head back home, ready to keep nuclear waste safe and sound, right where it is.

Steve Sebelius is a Review-Journal political columnist. His column runs Tuesday, Thursday and Sunday. Reach him at 383-0283 or by e-mail at Steve_Sebelius@lvrj.com.

-------- us nuc politics

A New Marshall Plan? Advancing Human Security and Controlling Terrorism

By Dick Bell & Michael Renner
Worldwatch Institute
October 9, 2001
From: John Burroughs <johnburroughs@lcnp.org>

What do you think of this advice from a senior U.S. military officer and statesman about how the people of the United States should deal with a part of the world torn by war, poverty, disease, and hunger: "...it is of vast importance that our people reach some general understanding of what the complications really are, rather than react from a passion or a prejudice or an emotion of the moment....It is virtually impossible at this distance merely by reading, or listening, or even seeing photographs or motion pictures, to grasp at all the real significance of the situation. And yet the whole world of the future hangs on a proper judgment."

The speaker was General George C. Marshall, outlining the Marshall Plan in an address at Harvard University on June 5, 1947. Surveying the wrecked economies of Europe, Marshall noted the "possibilities of disturbances arising as a result of the desperation of the people concerned." He said that there could be "no political stability and no assured peace" without economic security, and that U.S. policy was "directed not against any country or doctrine but against hunger, poverty, desperation, and chaos."

As President Bush and his advisors review the results of the initial bombing campaign, they might also consider the relevance of Marshall's strategy to the moral and political problems America now confronts. Of course we should find the people responsible for the deaths of September 11 and bring them to justice, and work with other nations to root out other terrorist networks. But we must do so in a way that does not result in the deaths of even more innocent people, deaths that would only deepen the cycle of anger and rage that led to September 11.

What is largely missing from the administration's rhetoric is recognition of the scale of the underlying problems that have to be addressed, regardless of how successful we may be in the short run in tracking down the perpetrators of the September 11th terrorist assaults. As Marshall's words so plainly suggest, finding the terrorists should be part of a much more ambitious campaign, one in which the rich countries approach the appalling inequities of the world with the same boldness and determination that the United States brought to bear in Europe under the Marshall Plan.

We don't really need to spend another dime on "intelligence" to recognize the conditions that leave whole countries in a state of despair and misery. Some 1.2 billion people worldwide struggle to survive on $1 day or less. 1.2 billion people lack access to safe drinking water and 2.9 billion have inadequate access to sanitation. About 150 million children are malnourished, and more than 10 million children under 5 will die in 2001 alone. At least 150 million people are unemployed and 900 million are "underemployed"-contending with inadequate incomes despite long hours of backbreaking work.

Globalization has raised expectations, even as modern communications make the rising inequality between a rich, powerful, and imposing West and the rest of the world visible to all. Poverty and deprivation do not automatically translate into hatred. But people whose hopes have worn thin, whose aspirations have been thwarted, and whose discontent is rising, are far more likely to succumb to the siren song of extremism. This is particularly true for the swelling ranks of young people whose prospects for the future are bleak. Some 34 percent of the developing world's population is under 15 years of age.

The United States and the other industrial nations should launch a global "Marshall Plan" to provide everyone on earth with a decent standard of living. We can already hear the cries of people claiming that such a global plan would "cost too much." But let's look at the numbers. The cost of our initial response has soared into the tens of billions of dollars, on top of an already large proposed defense budget of $342.7 billion.

For the sake of comparison, let's assume that the United States will spend an additional $100 billion on military actions in the next 12 months. What could we buy if we matched this $100 billion military expenditure dollar-for-dollar with spending on programs to alleviate human suffering?

A 1998 report by the United Nations Development Programme estimated the annual cost to achieve universal access to a number of basic social services in all developing countries: $9 billion would provide water and sanitation for all; $12 billion would cover reproductive health for all women; $13 billion would give every person on Earth basic health and nutrition; and $6 billion would provide basic education for all.

These sums are substantial, but they are still only a fraction of the tens of billions of dollars we are already spending. And these social and health expenditures pale in comparison with what is being spent on the military by all nationssome $780 billion each year.

There is a sad irony in watching the Bush Administration's strenuous efforts to build an international coalition. There is no such muscular effort underway in the United States, or in any of the other rich nations, to build a coalition to eradicate hunger, to immunize all children, to provide clean water, to eradicate infectious disease, to provide adequate jobs, to combat illiteracy, or to build decent housing.

The cost of failing to advance human security and to eliminate the fertile ground upon which terrorism thrives is already escalating. Since September 11, we know that sophisticated weapons offer little protection against those who are out to seek vengeance, at any cost, for real and perceived wrongs. Unless our priorities change, the threat is certain to keep rising in coming years.

By choosing to mobilize adequate resources to address human suffering around the world, President Bush has a unique opportunity to seize the terrible moment of September 11 and earn a truly exalted place in human history. But first, we must all understand that in the end, weapons alone cannot buy us a lasting peace in a world of extreme inequality, injustice, and deprivation for billions of our fellow human beings.

Dick Bell is Vice President for Communications at the Worldwatch Institute (dbell@worldwatch.org)

Michael Renner is a Senior Researcher at the Worldwatch Institute (mrenner@peconic.net)

For further information, please contact Niki Clark, 202-452-1992 x 517, nclark@worldwatch.org

The Worldwatch Institute web site is at http://www.worldwatch.org


-------- MILITARY

Say what you want, but this war is illegal

By MICHAEL MANDEL
The Globe and Mail
Tuesday, October 9, 2001
http://www.globeandmail.ca/servlet/GIS.Servlets.HTMLTemplate?tf=tgam/common/FullStory.html&cf=tgam/common/FullStory.cfg&configFileLoc=tgam/config&vg=BigAdVariableGenerator&date=20011009&dateOffset=&hub=comment&title=Comment&cache_key=comment¤t_row=3&start_row=3&num_rows=1

A well-kept secret about the U.S.-U.K. attack on Afghanistan is that it is clearly illegal. It violates international law and the express words of the United Nations Charter.

Despite repeated reference to the right of self-defence under Article 51, the Charter simply does not apply here. Article 51 gives a state the right to repel an attack that is ongoing or imminent as a temporary measure until the UN Security Council can take steps necessary for international peace and security.

The Security Council has already passed two resolutions condemning the Sept. 11 attacks and announcing a host of measures aimed at combating terrorism. These include measures for the legal suppression of terrorism and its financing, and for co-operation between states in security, intelligence, criminal investigations and proceedings relating to terrorism. The Security Council has set up a committee to monitor progress on the measures in the resolution and has given all states 90 days to report back to it.

Neither resolution can remotely be said to authorize the use of military force. True, both, in their preambles, abstractly "affirm" the inherent right of self-defence, but they do so "in accordance with the Charter." They do not say military action against Afghanistan would be within the right of self-defence. Nor could they. That's because the right of unilateral self-defence does not include the right to retaliate once an attack has stopped.

The right of self-defence in international law is like the right of self-defence in our own law: It allows you to defend yourself when the law is not around, but it does not allow you to take the law into your own hands.

Since the United States and Britain have undertaken this attack without the explicit authorization of the Security Council, those who die from it will be victims of a crime against humanity, just like the victims of the Sept. 11 attacks.

Even the Security Council is only permitted to authorize the use of force where "necessary to maintain and restore international peace and security." Now it must be clear to everyone that the military attack on Afghanistan has nothing to do with preventing terrorism. This attack will be far more likely to provoke terrorism. Even the Bush administration concedes that the real war against terrorism is long term, a combination of improved security, intelligence and a rethinking of U.S. foreign alliances.

Critics of the Bush approach have argued that any effective fight against terrorism would have to involve a re-evaluation of the way Washington conducts its affairs in the world. For example, the way it has promoted violence for short-term gain, as in Afghanistan when it supported the Taliban a decade ago, in Iraq when it supported Saddam Hussein against Iran, and Iran before that when it supported the Shah.

The attack on Afghanistan is about vengeance and about showing how tough the Americans are. It is being done on the backs of people who have far less control over their government than even the poor souls who died on Sept. 11. It will inevitably result in many deaths of civilians, both from the bombing and from the disruption of aid in a country where millions are already at risk. The 37,000 rations dropped on Sunday were pure PR, and so are the claims of "surgical" strikes and the denials of civilian casualties. We've seen them before, in Kosovo for example, followed by lame excuses for the "accidents" that killed innocents.

For all that has been said about how things have changed since Sept. 11, one thing that has not changed is U.S. disregard for international law. Its decade-long bombing campaign against Iraq and its 1999 bombing of Yugoslavia were both illegal. The U.S. does not even recognize the jurisdiction of the World Court. It withdrew from it in 1986 when the court condemned Washington for attacking Nicaragua, mining its harbours and funding the contras. In that case, the court rejected U.S. claims that it was acting under Article 51 in defence of Nicaragua's neighbours.

For its part, Canada cannot duck complicity in this lawlessness by relying on the "solidarity" clause of the NATO treaty, because that clause is made expressly subordinate to the UN Charter.

But, you might ask, does legality matter in a case like this? You bet it does. Without the law, there is no limit to international violence but the power, ruthlessness and cunning of the perpetrators. Without the international legality of the UN system, the people of the world are sidelined in matters of our most vital interests.

We are all at risk from what happens next. We must insist that Washington make the case for the necessity, rationality and proportionality of this attack in the light of day before the real international community.

The bombing of Afghanistan is the legal and moral equivalent of what was done to the Americans on Sept. 11. We may come to remember that day, not for its human tragedy, but for the beginning of a headlong plunge into a violent, lawless world.

Michael Mandel, professor of law at Osgoode Hall Law School in Toronto, specializes in international criminal law.

---------

Afghanistan bombed by day, night

October 9, 2001
By David Espo
ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.washtimes.com/national/default-2001109123511.htm

American pilots bombed targets in Afghanistan day and night today as the Bush administration pressed its campaign to combat terrorism. The United Nations listed four security guards as civilian casualties of the military campaign.

Four weeks after the worst terrorist attack on American soil, President Bush moved quickly to beef up his new Office of Homeland Security and was conferring with German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, whose nation has offered to assist in military operations.

In Florida, the FBI continued its investigation into the death of one man from anthrax, and the exposure of his co-worker to the deadly disease.

``It remains a situation of concern with the federal government,'' said White House spokesman Ari Fleischer, as officials offered antibiotics as a precaution to hundreds who worked in the same building as the two men. Fleischer added, however, that ``it's not unusual at times like this for false alarms to go off.''

Taliban officials in Afghanistan disclosed the onset of nighttime bombing by American warplanes. A Bush administration official offered confirmation, although refused to be identified by name.

It marked the third straight night of attacks by American-led forces. But even before night fell, pilots flew strikes sporadically throughout the day, a sign of increased confidence that whatever air defenses the ruling Taliban regime possessed had largely been suppressed.

``Air operations are continuing, and there won't be obvious starts and stops,'' a Pentagon spokesman, Lt. Col. Dave Lapan, said.

He acknowledged that daytime flights following a two-night bombardment signal U.S. confidence that its aircraft are reasonably safe from antiaircraft fire.

He said some of the ongoing strikes are going after specific targets, while other planes are sent out with a bomb load and told to hunt for ``targets of opportunity.''

Taliban officials said Osama bin Laden, the suspected mastermind behind the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks in New York and Washington, had survived the American assault.

Abdul Salam Zaeff, the Taliban envoy to Pakistan, told reporters the United States had spurned Afghanistan's request for evidence of bin Laden's involvement. ``America is sending warplanes, bombs and cruise missiles in place of evidence,'' he said.

Administration officials said there was proof enough - even before bin Laden's videotaped message released on Sunday praising the attacks that killed thousands and taunting America as a nation afraid.

One day after former Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Ridge was sworn in as the nation's first director of homeland security, the administration was adding new top-level officials to the effort. Administration sources said Richard Clarke, who heads the government's counterterrorism team, will direct the security effort for the nation's information systems. Retired Gen. Wayne Downing was tapped to work with military and intelligence resources, these officials said.

United Nations officials confirmed the deaths of four security guards for a mine-clearing program in Afghanistan, the first independent verification of civilian casualties in the U.S.-led war effort.

U.N. spokeswoman Stephanie Bunker said the four had been spending the night in their office, on the edge of Kabul, and in close proximity to a radio transmission target that was a target of bombs.

``It was assumed they were safe where they were,'' said Ms. Bunker, speaking from the Pakistani capital of Islamabad. ``Otherwise they would have been relocated for sure.''

In an appeal to the United States, she said, ``People need to distinguish between combatants and those innocent civilians who do not bear arms.''

There was no immediate administration response to the reported civilian deaths.

``It's inevitable there will be mistakes that take place in a situation where the lines remain unclear,'' said Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz. McCain, who made his comments in an interview on ABC's ``Good Morning America,'' was a Navy pilot during the Vietnam war, and an American prisoner of war.

Pentagon officials provided no details on the targets of the third night of attacks.

There were signs the warplanes were running short on targets, though, and officials declined to say what follow-up plans they had for special operations forces or other personnel.

Pilots flying from the USS Enterprise in the Arabian Sea returned from Monday night's bombing runs with unused live bombs, the carrier's captain said.

``It's not a real target-rich environment,'' the officer said, referring to a nation that has been involved in warfare for much of the past two decades. The captain could not be identified by name under Pentagon rules.

American officials have identified bin Laden as the leading force behind the Sept. 11 attacks that killed more than 5,000 people at the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and in a plane crash in the southwestern Pennsylvania countryside.

Officials warn daily of the possibility of further terrorist strikes - ``Every American should be vigilant,'' Attorney General John Ashcroft said yesterday- and the FBI launched an investigation during the day into the exposure of a second Florida man to anthrax. One man died of the extremely rare disease last week, and health officials said they found the germ in the nasal passage of a co-worker as well as on a keyboard inside the building where both worked.

``We regard this as an investigation that could become a clear criminal investigation,'' Mr. Ashcroft said. ``We don't have enough information to know whether this could be related to terrorism or not.''

Health officials offered antibiotics to several hundred people as a precaution and the FBI sealed off the Boca Raton building housing several supermarket tabloids where both men worked. Agents donned protective gear before going inside.

There was another scare yesterday, when one of the travelers aboard an American Airlines flight from Los Angeles was subdued by co-pilots and other passengers after he tried to barge into the cockpit. The 30-year-old man was described as mentally ill - not a terrorist - but two military fighters escorted the plane to a safe landing in Chicago after the incident.

In yesterday's action over Afghanistan, five long-range bombers - a pair of B-2 stealth bombers flying from Whiteman Air Force Base, Mo., and three B-1Bs from the Indian Ocean island of Diego Garcia - joined 10 strike planes launched from aircraft carriers in the Arabian Sea. They targeted air defense and other military targets across Afghanistan.

The destroyers USS John Paul Jones and USS McFaul and one submarine launched a total of 15 Tomahawk cruise missiles.

-------- afghanistan

Afghanistan: Lessons from the Last War

National Security Archive Update,
October 9, 2001
The September 11th Source Books, Volume II
http://www.nsarchive.org/NSAEBB/NSAEBB57/

Washington, D.C., October 9 ­ On October 7, the United States launched an attack against targets in Afghanistan in the beginning of what President Bush has promised will be a long campaign against terrorist groups and the states that support them. In response to these events, the National Security Archive offers the second volume of a series called The September 11th Sourcebooks. In this installment, Archive experts John Prados and Svetlana Savranskaya draw on declassified records and the memoirs of former Soviet officials to examine Soviet policymaking, military operations, and lessons learned from the last war in Afghanistan, a bloody, ten-year conflict that pitted Soviet military forces against CIA-backed Afghan rebels. The collection also includes excerpts from an essay written by analyst Steve Galster as an introduction to the Archive's microfiche collection, Afghanistan: The Making of U.S. Policy, 1973-1990, published in 1990.

The documents are available at the following URL: http://www.nsarchive.org/NSAEBB/NSAEBB57/

----

In Afghanistan
Rulers' Key Defenses Crippled, Say Rebels, Whose Gains Are Few

By Peter Baker
Washington Post Foreign Service
Tuesday, October 9, 2001; Page A01
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A27943-2001Oct8.html

QALAI SHARIF, Afghanistan, Oct. 8 -- Rebel leaders said today that two days of U.S.-led strikes have crippled the ruling Taliban militia's key defenses but had not yet allowed the rebels to break out of the pockets they control to contest Taliban-held areas.

The bombs and missiles, which tonight sent thunderclaps rolling through the valleys here north of the capital, Kabul, have destroyed radar systems and damaged Taliban air defenses and its air force, the rebels said. Afghan radio reports said tonight that the Kabul airport and a television transmission tower were struck by massive explosions.

But some commanders of the rebel Northern Alliance were disappointed that the first phase of the U.S. military operation had not done more to help them advance against Taliban positions. U.S. warplanes and cruise missiles, for instance, did not strike the government forces perched above the Bagram air base north of Kabul, a key juncture for any drive toward the capital.

"The U.S. can't win by bombing," Haji Almaz, a top rebel commander, said in an interview today in his headquarters in Charikar north of the front lines. "Bombing is not effective against the Taliban. Soldiers [on the ground] and the Northern Alliance are effective."

In some parts of the country, though, rebels said their forces have taken advantage of the American-led assault. The rebels claimed to have seized control of two districts near Mazar-e Sharif, a strategic town in northern Afghanistan, and captured 200 Taliban soldiers. The Afghan Islamic Press agency reported that Monday's attacks by the United States and Britain struck Mazar-e Sharif and Kunduz, another Taliban-held city close to concentrations of rebel troops.

Opposition leaders said several prominent Taliban commanders agreed to switch sides today and would bring 1,000 fighters with them.

But there were few other signs that the explosive force of the Anglo-American coalition had unraveled Taliban resolve. While some low-ranking Taliban officers were unnerved enough to defect, others made clear that they remained unbowed.

"The United States is the enemy of all Muslims," one Taliban post commander said by two-way radio tonight when his rebel counterpart here in the hills overlooking the Shomali Plain called to suggest he come over to the other side. "They want to destroy all Muslims. We have only begun the jihad against America."

At about noon today, U.S. surveillance aircraft detected four Taliban Mi-17 helicopter gunships attempting to escape from an airfield in Afghanistan's Paktia province to Pakistan's North-West Frontier province, which has cultural and religious ties to the Taliban. One helicopter disappeared from the surveillance tracking, but three landed in the remote Kurram Valley just inside Pakistan, according to officials here.

The helicopter crews told local tribal leaders they were hoping to protect the aircraft from the U.S. attacks, officials said. Pakistani military officials arrived at the site late today and detained the crew members.

Rebels said Taliban leaders have protected their troops in Kabul by moving them to the front lines north of the city at night, both to avoid bombs and missiles aimed at the city and to forestall any offensive by rebel forces. One rebel outpost at the front line in Rabat spotted more than 100 vehicles carrying Taliban troops out of the city Sunday night. At daybreak today, after the U.S. air assault ended for the night, the Taliban troops were transported back into the city. Looking for Bin Laden

The Northern Alliance fired into the mountain village of Estalif tonight after hearing that senior Taliban leaders and perhaps even Saudi-born terrorist Osama bin Laden might be holed up there for the night, according to a front-line rebel commander. However, there was no confirmation that bin Laden was present.

Rebel officials insist that for the United States to succeed in Afghanistan, the Americans must coordinate more with rebel forces. But Almaz, the top rebel commander, added that he was confident the two sides would work together to push the Taliban out of Kabul. "We're very happy that strong enemies will be destroyed," he said. "We expect that when the fighting is finished, the Taliban will be uprooted."

Abdullah, the foreign minister for the Northern Alliance, acknowledged that Washington had not completely involved his government-in-exile in its planning, but dismissed that as one difficulty at the start of a complex operation. "One would not expect full coordination at this stage," he said.

He reiterated that the rebels, who control only about 5 percent to 10 percent of Afghanistan, would move on Kabul only after the first wave of bombing ends, but said it was "quite possible" that the capital could fall within the next week. Abdullah, who like many Afghans uses a single name, estimated that the Taliban has 5,000 Afghan troops on the front lines north of Kabul plus 1,000 soldiers from Pakistan and Arab countries.

The first two days of fighting, though, have relieved any worries that the Taliban would follow through on its pledge to attack rebel lines in case of U.S. bombardment. "If they were capable of doing so, they would not have hesitated," Abdullah said. "This is just a threat."

From positions in rebel-held territory north of Kabul, this evening's strike appeared concentrated in a 90-minute burst. After that, flares of light indicated an exchange of artillery between the Taliban and rebel forces. Leader's Headquarters Hit

While the latest barrage slammed into Taliban positions, U.S. and Afghan opposition officials reviewed the results from the first night of bombing and missile strikes.

Based on opposition spies in Taliban territory and intercepted radio communications, rebel leaders said the bombing "fully destroyed" Taliban leader Mohammad Omar's headquarters in the southern city of Kandahar while damaging the defense ministry in Kabul. The assaults were said to have smashed an arms depot and fuel storage facilities in the capital as well as an air base in Mazar-e Sharif and antiaircraft batteries in Mazar, Kabul, Kandahar, Kunduz and Jalalabad.

The official Iranian news agency IRNA reported that five missiles had hit the Rahdar airport in the Afghan city of Zaranj near the Iranian border during the first night of attacks. The agency reported clashes between Taliban fighters and local citizens in Zaranj after the attacks, but provided no further details. Casualty Estimates

Opposition leaders said an allied bomb or missile damaged a hospital in Kabul that used to be a military hospital and was located near an antiaircraft battery, but said they had no reports of civilian casualties. The Afghan Islamic Press cited an estimate of 20 deaths from the airstrikes, although that could not be independently verified.

Taliban commander Mohammed Hassan, reached by telephone in Kandahar, said four people were killed during strikes Sunday night on the Kandahar airport and three were killed in attacks on the Herat airport in western Afghanistan. He said bombs hit one building in the compound of Omar, the Taliban leader, but that Omar was not injured. It was unclear whether Omar was in the complex at the time. Several weeks ago, Taliban leaders reportedly deserted the official buildings.

Hassan said that Taliban officials were urging residents to remain in their homes, but that many people were fleeing the city for outlying villages, or for the Pakistani border.

Opposition leaders in the north said they have seen fewer refugees fleeing Kabul and other targeted cities than expected, perhaps because those able to leave had four weeks since the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington to do so. But Almaz estimated that 4,000 people had to be evacuated from Bagram and another front-line town in anticipation of fierce fighting in the coming days.

One of them was Noree Gul. The local rebel commander came to her door in Bagram at 9 p.m. today and told the elderly woman she had to leave immediately. She had time only to gather her feeble husband and her five children, her sister-in-law and her four children, and a little bread. Then they walked two hours north until they found a stranger willing to take them in.

"We were very scared, very frightened by the bombing and everything," she said. At one point, she saw what she thought was a Taliban jet -- probably a U.S. reconnaissance plane -- and the sight "was giving me a heart attack."

"I'm not afraid of the missiles of the United States," she added, figuring they would avoid civilian targets. "I'm afraid of the Taliban. I'm afraid of genocide."

Rebel leaders said U.S. airdrops of food and medicine would be inadequate to meet humanitarian needs. "It would be a natural symbolic gesture and a necessary one because any supplies of humanitarian assistance through normal ways and means would take time," Abdullah said. "But this alone would not do the job. The scale of the humanitarian crisis in Afghanistan is so large that it requires a large scale of humanitarian assistance."

The newfound alliance between the United States and the Afghan resistance is forcing some to rethink old assumptions. At the front lines in Rabat, the guerrillas manning a post just opposite enemy positions now find themselves rooting for a country they had once scorned for failing to prevent Taliban rule in the wake of the Soviet Union's defeat in Afghanistan.

"For five years, the United States of America supported the Taliban," said one fighter, Akhtar Mohammed, 24, misstating U.S. opposition to the Taliban but expressing common sentiments here. "Because of that, the United States was our enemy. Then we saw the attacks on New York. My perspective changed because they want to destroy my big enemy, bin Laden."

Correspondent Molly Moore in Islamabad, Pakistan, contributed to this report.

-------

Taliban says dozens killed by U.S. airstrikes

USA TODAY
10/09/2001
Associated Press
http://usatoday.com/news/attack/2001/10/09/taliban-toll.htm

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan (AP) - Afghanistan's ruling Taliban said Tuesday that dozens of people have been killed in U.S.-led air raids, now in their third day. "In this freestyle game, Washington is aiming firstly to hunt the sitting Islamic government in Afghanistan and then every committed Muslim, in the name of terrorism," Abdul Salam Zaeef, the Taliban envoy to Pakistan, told reporters.

Also Tuesday, the United Nations appealed for protection of civilians in Afghanistan after four employees of a U.N.-affiliated mine-clearing agency died in overnight U.S.-led raids on Kabul, the Afghan capital. The deaths were the first civilian casualties independently confirmed in the 3-day-old air campaign.

Zaeef said the attacks on cities, including Kabul, Kandahar and Jalalabad, had destroyed civilian houses. Zaeef also denounced the United States for carrying out the attacks rather than negotiating the fate of Osama bin Laden, the accused terrorist mastermind sheltered by the Taliban.

"We ask America to produce solid proof instead of allegations, but America is sending warplanes, bombs and cruise missiles in place of evidence," he said. "This is open terrorism."

Zaeef also said that the Taliban's supreme leader, Mullah Mohammed Omar, was safe in the wake of the latest airstrikes.

"I spoke to him just 15 minutes ago," he said.

After the first raids, on Sunday night, an aide to the mullah said he had left his office only 15 minutes before the missiles began falling

-------- biological weapons

Anthrax cases spur FBI probe, concern

October 9, 2001
By August Gribbin and Jerry Seper
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20011009-62406640.htm

The FBI yesterday opened a vigorous investigation into the circumstances of the death of one man from anthrax and the revelation that a second had been exposed to the spores that cause the disease.

The second man, a mailroom worker, has not been diagnosed as having pulmonary anthrax, which is not spread by person-to-person contact.

"Two swallows do not make spring," said Dr. Richard Levinson, deputy director of the American Public Health Association.

He and health officials in Florida are reluctant to regard the two cases as anything but coincidences. Dr. Levinson speculates that the patient may have been given antibiotics early enough in the course of the disease's incubation to avert any threat to his life from anthrax.

Attorney General John Ashcroft said the FBI, working with local police and health authorities, has sealed the office building in Boca Raton, Fla., where the two men worked. Agents are trying to determine how the men came to be exposed to the anthrax bacteria.

"We take this very seriously," Mr. Ashcroft said at a press conference at the Justice Department, adding that "we don't have enough information to know whether this could be related to terrorism or not."

"We regard this as an investigation which could become a clear criminal investigation, and we are pursuing this with all the dispatch and care that's appropriate."

Secretary of Health and Human Services Tommy G. Thompson declared last week that the first illness was "an isolated case there is no evidence of terrorism."

Federal investigators handling the cases have eliminated the obvious environmental sources of anthrax, said Barbara Reynolds, a spokeswoman for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta.

Sen. Bob Graham, Florida Democrat, said CDC officials told him that "human intervention" was the likely cause of contamination.

The cases raised concerns because anthrax has been used in germ warfare, and pulmonary anthrax, which comes from inhaling the bacteria, rarely occurs naturally. There were just 18 cases in the 20th century.

The first anthrax victim was Bob Stevens, 63, of Lantana, Fla. Mr. Stevens, a photo editor at the Sun, a supermarket tabloid, was reported Thursday to have been infected. On Friday he died of pulmonary anthrax.

Then late Sunday night a second employee of the Sun, a 73-year-old mailroom worker who already had been hospitalized with pneumonia, was tested for the presence of anthrax. A swab sample taken from his nostrils contained the bacteria. Co-workers identified him to reporters as Ernesto Blanco.

He was in stable condition late yesterday afternoon, health officials said, and is expected to recover from his pneumonia case.

All people who work in the building, which houses the Sun, National Enquirer, Globe and other publications of American Media Inc., are being tested for exposure to the disease. The building has been shut down for 60 days, and reporters and staff are being relocated to the Los Angeles and New York bureaus to continue publication.

"Clearly, they were searching to see if something was planted. It's crazy, it's surreal," one employee of American Media told The Washington Times. The employee, who asked not to be named, was tested yesterday for the virus and said it will be days before the test results will be known.

Many who have been in the building are being given prophylactic doses of antibiotics "to allay fears," said Dr. John Agwunobi, Florida's secretary of health.

But not everyone thinks the two cases are coincidental.

Randy Larsen, a retired U.S. Air Force colonel who is now a terrorism specialist with the nonprofit ANSER Institute for Homeland Security - a research center - says the small number of cases may still indicate a terrorist attack that did not proceed according to plan.

"It is hard to imagine that this is a naturally occurring event. And if it is not, it demonstrates that the terrorists have a bioweapons capability. We're suspicious. We think that what this demonstrates is that it is difficult to deliver this stuff [anthrax bacteria]," meaning that the incident may have been intended as a large attack that failed.

Col. Larsen nonetheless added, "Nothing's confirmed. And there is no reason to panic."

Among the circumstances giving investigators pause:

• Even one case of inhaled anthrax is unusual. Most reported anthrax cases have occurred among agricultural workers who contract the disease by touching or eating infected animals or by processing infected animals' hides or wool. On such occasions, the disease takes the form of skin eruptions and can be successfully treated if caught in time.

• The area in which the American Media headquarters is located was frequented by several of the terrorists implicated in the attacks.

Several of the hijackers sought information about the techniques of crop dusting at a crop-dusting base within 40 miles of the Stevens home and not far from the American Media facility. Among other methods of delivery, anthrax spores can be released from sprayers such as those on crop-duster aircraft.

• Mr. Stevens, who died from the disease, lived about a mile from an airstrip where Mohamed Atta rented planes. Atta has been identified as one of the hijackers and the likely ringleader.

• Audrey Hudson contributed to this report.

-------- drug war

Michigan: Rainbow Farm Marijuana Activists Laid to Rest, Friends Not Resting

Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2001
From: "radtimes" <resist@best.com>
http://www.drcnet.org/wol/203.html#rainbow

At first glance, Rainbow Farms is a beautiful, tranquil rural retreat in the Michigan woodlands. The trees and meadows, the cool, clean air and the country quiet all suggest a peaceful, pastoral place. But then you notice the burnt out hulks of buildings and the gaping holes in the ground where other buildings collapsed, the charred papers blowing across the grounds, and the police tape blocking the entrances. This is where Rainbow Farms owner Tom Crosslin and his life partner Rollie Rohm died over the Labor Day weekend, gunned down by FBI and Michigan State Police shooters, who ended a four-day standoff by ending their lives.

DRCNet reported two weeks ago on the circumstances leading to the confrontation (http://www.drcnet.org/wol/202.html#rainbowfarm): Crosslin's enthusiastic pro-marijuana activism, his use of the campground for pro-pot rallies, the vendetta by Cass County Prosecutor Scott Teter that resulted in Crosslin's and Rohm's arrests in May. After the arrests, things went from bad to worse for the couple, as local authorities threatened them with years in prison for growing marijuana, moved to seize the property, and removed Rohm's 12-year-old son from the family unit. On the Friday before Labor Day, rather than face a bail revocation hearing for holding an unauthorized marijuana rally in August, Crosslin and Rohm retreated to Rainbow Farms and began burning down the buildings rather than let the state take them. By the following Tuesday, both were dead.

The killings, which are now under investigation by both the Michigan Attorney General's office and the US Justice Department, have excited deep anger as well as profound grief from the couple's friends, supporters, and political allies, and stunned disbelief among area residents.

"This is just not right," said 18-year-old Nessa Hunkler of nearby Cassopolis, who had first encountered Rainbow Farms at last year's Roach Roast, where she worked as a vendor. "They were great guys, and the atmosphere here was happy and energetic. Scott Teter said this was their choice," Hunkler told DRCNet, "but it was his choice to hound them and try to take their land and their son. He's the one who chose to shoot and kill. Everything about this is twisted. What do I think about the local authorities? Fuck 'em all," she said.

Such sentiments are unsurprising coming from someone who had enjoyed Crosslin's hospitality, but even more mainstream local people confess to being deeply disturbed by the killings. Cass County Democratic Party chairman Bruce Webb -- not a big marijuana fan -- told DRCNet that local people are in shock. "I think many people were and are stunned, as well as feeling sorry for the deceased because of what they were about. You don't expect this type of Bruce Willis Hollywood-style gangbusters stuff out here. People here are deeply uncomfortable with this, they wish it had never happened," he said.

But in his remarks to DRCNet, Webb also indicated how widely the suspicion of police misconduct has spread. "I think they were executed," he said. "If the county sheriff had been allowed to handle this instead of the FBI and the State Police, we think they would still be alive."

At the encampment of Rainbow Farms supporters at the intersection of Michigan-60 and White Temple Road, a few miles from the farm, popular support could be heard clearly in the honking of horns from passing motorists, including semi-truck drivers, old farm couples in their pick-ups, and middle-aged women passing by. One army vehicle gave supporters a thumbs-down, but according to Huckler, "at least half the traffic is honking for us." It certainly seemed that way when DRCNet visited two weekends ago.

The encampment had been in place since the beginning of the stand-off and featured a 4' x 8' plywood sign reading "Rainbow Farms Lives Forever," as well as flags, posters from the November Coalition and a dozen or so people holding vigil. At one point in the afternoon, a rainbow appeared in the sky above the camp, much to the elation of the crowd.

A much larger crowd attended the funeral of Tom Crosslin in nearby Elkhart, Indiana, earlier in the day. And what a sight it must have been for the good burghers of Elkhart: Hundreds of mourners spilling out of the funeral home on Jackson Boulevard on a sunny Sunday morning: young tye-died hippies; legions of graying, pony-tailed men, several men with obvious prison tattoos who, from their demeanors and the looks of their dreadlocks, had through pot found a path out of petty criminality; men in suits and ties; crying women in their Sunday best; distraught relatives being comforted by family friends; guys who looked like they had just come in from the fields.

But appearances can be deceiving. Spotting one portly, middle-aged man dressed in farm overalls and work boots, DRCNet asked, "Are you a farmer?" "Yeah," he smiled, "mostly indica."

At the funeral service, people began crying as a song played. "I see fire and brimstone coming," ran the refrain. But people smiled through their tears when Crosslin and Rohm's dog, Thai Stick, made an appearance. The dog had been placed in the pound after the raid. "We liberated Thai Stick," people cheered.

After the funeral, DRCNet toured the Rainbow Farms site with Crosslin family spokesman Doug Leinbach, Crosslin's long-time business manager. Leinbach was angry and frightened as he discussed the deaths. There's been an organized conspiracy of government agencies, which included the Cass County prosecutor, Cass county police, the Michigan State Police, the Michigan Attorney General's office, the FBI, and the DEA," he said. "They had been meeting at least twice a year for the last four years to try to figure out how to shut this down. The result is cold-blooded murder. They couldn't stand a man who stood up and spoke for freedom and organized people to get active. So they killed him."

Leinbach paced restlessly. "They knew this would happen," he said. "Tom had told them years ago if they tried to take his land, they'd get nothing but fire and blood." In fact, Cass County Prosecutor Teter has produced a letter written by Crosslin in 1998 saying just that.

An American flag flew upside-down and at half-mast over Rainbow Farms. Leinbach scowled. "I don't know who did that," he said. "Tom would never have done that. He always flew the flag proudly. He was always very patriotic, he loved freedom, that's why he became so outraged at the drug war ruining people's lives all across the country," Leinbach explained.

"But look around you," he said, surveying the burnt-out buildings. "It looks like Bosnia, like a war zone. You see what the drug war reaps. That is what this flag is about. There were tanks, armored vehicles, they were shooting bullets and tear gas, and this was a full-scale assault. They knew what they were doing, because they planned to do this for the past four years. They drove him to this point."

David Watts of nearby Goshen, Indiana, was Crosslin's long-time security chief during events at the farm. This is some hard shit, man," he said as he looked at the farm for the first time since the standoff. "Me and Tom and Rollie go way back. This is really tearing me up." Then he walked off to be alone with his thoughts.

Even as the funerals were taking place and the September 15 scattering of Crosslin's and Rohm's ashes over the property was being planned, the legal wheels were beginning to grind.

Dan Wilson and his wife, attorney Janet Frederick-Wilson, head the parents rights group Parents for Children in Warren, Michigan. Frederick-Wilson is representing Crosslin's and Rohm's parents in a potential wrongful death lawsuit and related matters. Wilson, who is a spokesman for the families, told DRCNet there are four tasks ahead. "We are following the state and federal investigations," he said, "and we need to regain custody of the boy and settle the estates. Keeping that boy from his grandparents is a real tragedy. We're a society that pulls together in a crisis, but here, Cass county, the state, and the federal government are acting to tear this family apart."

Wilson also provided information casting doubt on official versions of how the two men died. In media interviews, FBI and Michigan State Police officials said Crosslin was shot by an FBI agent after pointing a weapon at him and Rohm was shot at by two Michigan State Police officers for the same reason. The officials did not clarify the degree of danger faced by the MSP officers, who shot and killed Rohm from 150 yards away while hiding in a tree line at dawn as Rohm came out of a burning house.

"Crosslin was shot 3 to 5 times," said Wilson, "and Rohm 2 to 3 times. It appears there were several shooters in both cases," he said.

The fourth legal task for the Crosslins and Livermores (Rohm's parents) is the wrongful death suit. "We're awaiting the results of those investigations before we act," said Wilson.

Law enforcement officials are keeping mum. Although the local press has reported that Cass County Prosecutor Teter continues his efforts to seize the farm, a tight-lipped employee at his office would not confirm that. The only thing she would tell DRCNet was: "Everything is under investigation."

Lt. Parrish of the Cass County Sheriff's Office was slightly more forthcoming. "We are not investigating that incident," he told DRCNet. "You'll have to ask the state." He told DRCNet the sheriff's office had not been contacted by state or federal investigators. But Parrish also expressed some sorrow over the killings. "It's too bad it had to happen that way," he said. "No one wanted that to happen."

Chris DeWitt of the Michigan Attorney General's office told DRCNet that both the FBI and the Michigan State Police are completing their reviews. "There's no timeline," he said.

"Tom wanted all this to go to his son, he wrote that in his last hand-written will," said Leinbach, gazing on the green rolling hills of Rainbow Farms. "And we intend to see that happen. Teter will be toast in the 2002 elections, I guarantee it."

Democratic Party head Webb isn't so certain. "It's too early to tell, although he'd already made some enemies in the county," he said. "But he's also got some support."

Not from Nessa Hunkler. "I'm registering to vote," she told DRCNet. "Let's get rid of these guys. Teter said this was their choice, but it was Teter's choice to come after them and hound them and try to take their land. He's the one who chose to shoot to kill."

-------- iraq

Iraq Wants Muslim Condemnation of U.S. Strikes

October 9, 2001
By REUTERS
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/world/international-attack-iraq.html

DOHA (Reuters) - Iraqi Foreign Minister Naji Sabri on Tuesday called on Muslim ministers gathering in Qatar to condemn U.S. strikes on Afghanistan, and said the United States could also target Iraq to settle old scores.

Sabri was speaking before an emergency meeting on Wednesday of the 56-nation Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC).

``It is a hope, more than an expectation, that Muslim countries should defend themselves and their religious values which are being targeted by the new U.S.-Zionist war campaign,'' Sabri told reporters in the Qatari capital Doha.

``So, we hope these countries will reject these strikes...and call for one scale to be used to deal with terrorism and not 1,000 (scales), because if there is a list of terrorist nations then Israel should be on it,'' he said.

Analysts and officials said the OIC would not condemn the U.S.-led strikes on Afghanistan, mainly because Muslim countries are fed up with the extremist Taliban movement, but they said it was expected to express solidarity with impoverished Afghans.

NO CONDEMNATION OF ATTACKS ON U.S. Sabri refused to condemn the September 11 suicide hijack attacks in Iraq's Gulf War foe, the United States, in which about 5,600 people were killed.

``The United States has killed 1.6 million Iraqis...what should we tell the families of victims and martyrs if we extend such a courtesy to the United States,'' Sabri said.

``Our children and sons are being killed every day. They are dying of the blockade, of hunger, of disease, and of bombs,'' he said of U.N.-imposed trade sanctions and frequent U.S. and British strikes on Iraqi sites in two no-fly zones set by the two Western allies shortly after the 1991 Gulf War.

Diplomats at the United Nations in New York said Washington has warned Baghdad not to take advantage of the crisis surrounding the September 11 attacks, and not to make any moves against Iraqi Kurds or Iraq's neighbors.

U.S. planes struck targets in Afghanistan on Tuesday on the third day of attacks to flush out Saudi-born militant Osama bin Laden, who Washington blames for the suicide attacks on U.S. landmarks, and to strike the ruling Taliban for sheltering him.

The United States has also raised the prospect of hitting targets outside Afghanistan.

Sabri earlier told al-Jazeera satellite television: ``Should the United States and its ally Britain wish to expand the range of their aggression on Iraq under the pretext of terrorism that means they want to settle their accounts with Iraq.''

Sabri made similar comments to reporters later and added that Washington could target Iraq because Baghdad was ``not ready to become a colony for the United States, Britain and Israel.''

``The United States and Britain know very well that Iraq has no relation whatsoever to what happened in the United States and no relation whatsoever to the parties accused of doing it,'' he said.

Iraqi sites already come under regular attacks from U.S. and British warplanes patrolling no-fly zones imposed shortly after a U.S.-led coalition ended Iraq's occupation of Kuwait in 1991.

U.S. and British officials say the strikes target military installations. Iraq says hundreds of civilians have been killed in the raids by Western planes on the zones.

-------- israel

THE PALESTINIANS
Gaza Schools and Universities Closed After Protests

October 9, 2001
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/international/AP-Attacks-Palestinians.html

GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip (AP) -- Embarrassed by anti-U.S. protests, Yasser Arafat's government took two unprecedented steps Tuesday: it closed Gaza City's universities to silence Islamic militants and barred foreign reporters from the Gaza Strip to prevent coverage of the events.

The clampdown by the Palestinian Authority came a day after the deadliest internal Palestinian fighting in years, triggered by the militants' show of support for Osama bin Laden. Two civilians were killed and dozens of police and protesters hurt in a clash with guns, stones, clubs and tear gas.

The fighting pitted the Palestinian Authority against its longtime rival, the Islamic militant group Hamas, which has been behind the rallies in support of bin Laden following the Sept. 11 terror attacks on the United States.

Arafat is trying to persuade Hamas to abide by a Sept. 26 truce with Israel, and could be using the clampdown to force it into compliance.

In recent weeks, Arafat had shied away from open confrontation with Hamas and the smaller Islamic Jihad group, even though both had defied his orders to stop attacks on Israelis.

Palestinian analyst Ghassan Khatib said it was easier for Arafat to crack down on the militants over the pro-bin Laden rallies than over the cease-fire, which is largely unpopular.

Many Palestinians are dismayed by bin Laden's attempt in a televised address this week to create a link between the Palestinian cause and his war against the United States.

``The statement that represents average Palestinians and their feelings about bin Laden's speech is to respond: `Leave us alone,''' Khatib said.

The response was vastly different a decade ago, just before the outbreak of the Gulf War, when Iraqi President Saddam Hussein presented himself as the Palestinians' savior, mainly in hopes of fracturing an international coalition against him.

At the time, Arafat embraced Saddam and Palestinians cheered Iraq's promises to drive Israel out of the Middle East.

Palestinian officials later acknowledged it was a mistake. It led to the uprooting of tens of thousands of Palestinians from Gulf states, including Kuwait.

In the current crisis, Arafat has been careful to show support for the United States from the start, including Washington's efforts to arrange an Israeli-Palestinian truce that would make it easier for Arab and Islamic states to support a military strike against terrorism suspects.

Israel has accused Arafat of doing too little to curb the militants, and violence has persisted, with 35 Palestinians and seven Israelis killed in fighting in the past two weeks.

But Israeli officials say there has been a shift in recent days, with the Palestinian Authority issuing public exhortations to honor the cease-fire.

Islamic militant leaders also said Monday they were summoned by the Palestinian Authority and warned there would be a tough response if they went on attacking Israelis.

Three suspected Islamic militants were arrested in the West Bank over the weekend -- but Israel insists that the Palestinians arrest 108 suspects, and has handed over a list of names.

``We will have to see if this will be a sustained effort,'' said Raanan Gissin, adviser to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon.

Tuesday marked the first time since the formation of the Palestinian Authority in 1994 that Gaza City's Islamic University and Al Azhar University were ordered closed.

The order was issued Monday by Palestinian police chief Ghazi Jabali, although on Tuesday, administrators of both universities ran newspaper ads suggesting it was they, not Arafat's government, who decided on the closure. The schools are to stay closed through the week.

The Palestinian government also barred nearly a dozen foreign reporters, including two for The Associated Press, from the Gaza Strip.

A Palestinian official at the Israel-Gaza border cited security reasons. He would not give his name.

An AP photographer was barred from entering the Palestinian-controlled area around the West Bank city of Nablus, where about 1,500 students marched to protest against the shooting of the Gaza students and the U.S. air strikes in Afghanistan.

No Palestinian Authority official was willing to comment on the restrictions. Arafat's security forces have repeatedly tried to prevent reporting on pro-bin Laden marches.

On Monday, journalists were chased away from the Hamas rally in Gaza City. In the West Bank town of Ramallah, a BBC radio correspondent collecting reaction to the U.S. bombing of Afghanistan had her tape confiscated.

-------- nato

Radar Planes From NATO To Patrol U.S. Coast
Canada, France Aiding Effort in Afghanistan

By Keith B. Richburg and DeNeen L. Brown
Washington Post Foreign Service
Tuesday, October 9, 2001; Page A09
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28574-2001Oct8.html

PARIS, Oct. 8 -- The NATO alliance plans to send five European radar planes to help protect the East Coast of the United States from attack, taking over responsibilities normally handled by U.S. aircraft that are taking part in the Afghanistan strikes, officials said today.

As the strikes entered their second day, other allies stepped forward with assistance in the Asian conflict zone itself. Canada said it will send 2,000 troops including a commando unit, six warships and six airplanes to join the campaign, while France said it had intelligence agents on the ground working with the Afghan opposition.

The deployment of AWACS aircraft, four-engine planes outfitted as flying radar stations, is perhaps the most unusual manifestation of the division of labor emerging among the NATO allies. The joint cooperation will place European troops, in this case Germans, in charge of securing the safety of an American coastline.

The AWACS are coming from Geilenkirchen air base in Germany. NATO officials call the new assignment symbolically significant, because the Sept. 11 attacks on New York and Washington were carried out with hijacked airplanes.

"It's a compliment from the United States that they're happy to have their skies patrolled by NATO," said Mark Laity, special advisor to NATO's secretary general, George Robertson. "The tragedy came from the skies."

In the opening days of the military campaign in Afghanistan, the United States is getting aid from allies in many ways, including troops in the field -- British forces participated in the first day's salvos -- access to ports and airfields, and the sharing of intelligence.

Generally, the arrangements are structured to give the Brussels-based NATO a role in the anti-terror coalition, but maintain nearly complete field control in U.S. hands. That way actions can proceed without consultations with numerous allied capitals. "We all know a coalition is never as coordinated as one nation on its own," said Laity.

In some cases, the allies are filling holes created as U.S. troops ship out from their normal stations for duty in the Afghan theater.

On Tuesday, NATO plans to formally authorize a redeployment of European naval forces to the eastern Mediterranean, in part to free up American naval ships there for the Afghan conflict. The decision was made today, NATO sources said, but not announced to give alliance ambassadors time to consult with their home governments.

From the start, the Bush administration has let it be known that as the operation unfolds, the United States will need to redeploy some forces out of the Balkans. Among the forces that might be shifted, a U.S. official said, are specialized medical units in Kosovo and units operating unmanned drones, or low-flying surveillance aircraft.

"We have some specialized units in the Balkans and committed elsewhere in Western Europe to specific European missions," said a U.S. diplomat. "We hope not to, but we may have to pull out temporarily for some counter-terrorism operations. We may just need those specialized units or equipment for counter-terrorism purposes."

Canada's contribution will include the frigate HMCS Halifax, with 230 personnel, which was immediately directed to the Persian Gulf; one destroyer; a supply ship; and Sea King helicopters. Another frigate, the HMCS Vancouver, will be deployed from Canada's west coast.

Canada's air force will provide surveillance and airlift support with three C-130 Hercules, one Airbus plane and two Aurora maritime patrol aircraft. The commandos to be deployed are a component of a unit called Joint Task Force 2.

Defense Minister Art Eggleton said he has authorized 100 members of Canada's armed forces who were serving in exchange programs in the United States and with other allies to participate in operations conducted by their "host units in response to the recent terrorist attack." Earlier, in response to a request from the North American Aerospace Defense Command, a joint U.S.-Canadian organization, eight additional Canadian jet fighters were assigned to patrol North American airspace, up from four before Sept. 11, Canadian officials said.

Australia, meanwhile, has offered 150 elite Special Air Services troops, as well as refueling and surveillance aircraft, bringing the Australian commitment to 1,000 troops.

France has offered use of its naval forces in the Indian Ocean, and defense ministry officials said today that intelligence agents are already on the ground in Afghanistan in contact with the opposition Northern Alliance forces.

The slain Northern Alliance leader, Ahmed Shah Massoud, was fluent in French and had extensive French military contacts, a French military source here said.

Brown reported from Toronto.

-------- pakistan

Angry Mobs in Pakistan Burn U.N. Offices, Banks, Theaters
Police Quell Riots; Musharraf Says Countrymen Are With Him

By Pamela Constable and David Finkel
Washington Post Foreign Service
Tuesday, October 9, 2001; Page A11
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28148-2001Oct8.html

QUETTA, Pakistan, Oct. 8 -- Violent anti-American demonstrations erupted today in several cities near the border with Afghanistan, where angry mobs burned U.N. and foreign charity offices, police stations and movie theaters to protest the U.S. attacks on Afghanistan.

The worst violence occurred in this southwestern Pakistani city, which is home to tens of thousands of Afghan refugees. Protesters rampaged in the streets, torching banks, two theaters that show Western films and buildings that house several U.N. programs. Police fired tear gas and live ammunition at the crowds, killing at least one person.

Noreen Angelo, a staff worker at the office of the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees here, described trying to radio for help and then watching from the roof of the agency's building as a swarm of protesters tried to climb over the compound wall.

"They were banging at the gate. They were throwing stones," she said. "It was so scary." Finally, Angelo said, the crowd gave up, moved to another building that housed the local UNICEF office and set it on fire.

Foreign journalists were prevented from watching the protests after police confined them to a hotel for most of the day. Some witnesses said thick columns of smoke were rising from a number of buildings. By sunset, the crowds had dispersed, but the streets remained littered with rocks and tires.

Although today's demonstrations were scattered and eventually were quelled by security forces, they presented a direct challenge to the Pakistani president, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, who has angered Islamic militants and other Pakistanis by agreeing to support the Western anti-terrorism campaign and the military attack against Afghanistan.

This morning, Musharraf told journalists in Islamabad, the capital, that he was "very positive the vast majority of Pakistanis are with me" in his decision. Appealing to foreigners not to leave the country or cancel business orders, he noted that during previous periods of conflict in Afghanistan, "in Pakistan it was business as usual. . . . I am very positive business will go on as usual."

But in both Quetta and Peshawar, a city in Pakistan's North-West Frontier province where several million Afghan refugees have settled in recent years, the protests threatened to continue with the news that a second wave of U.S. airstrikes on Afghanistan began tonight.

"These attacks are wrong, and they will also be very bad for the United States. Now we are ready to go for holy war," said Afzal, 22, a religious student in Peshawar. "From today I am leaving my studies to go and fight. Tell Mr. Bush if he continues this attack, God willing, we will destroy his country."

At least a half-dozen demonstrations were held at mosques and markets throughout Peshawar. Religious students carried placards that read "Holy war is the only solution for Americans and Jews" and "Our war will continue until the final destruction of America."

Police fired tear gas at one demonstration in Peshawar, and some protesters threw stones, but no casualties or serious damage were reported. In anticipation of further disruption, the government suspended classes and exams at all schools and universities in the metropolitan area indefinitely.

About 50 miles away, in a semiautonomous tribal area bordering Afghanistan, demonstrators torched the offices of a human rights commission, an anti-land mine program and a women's development agency. All appeared to be targeted because they were associated with Western funding or issues.

"These were unruly mobs encouraged by extremists," said Afrasiab Khattak, the Peshawar-based chairman of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, whose tribal-area office was set afire. "There has been a campaign against nongovernmental organizations that identifies them with the West in people's minds."

Some of the U.N. operations attacked in Quetta were preparing to assist thousands of Afghan refugees expected to pour across the border to escape the military strikes. Rupert Colville, a spokesman for the U.N. refugee agency, said the attacks would temporarily hinder its efforts.

"To try to launch an operation like this, in circumstances like this, is a nightmare," he said. "It does leave that big question mark: If they've attacked you once, they might attack you again."

Several of the protests in Peshawar were staged by supporters of Fazlur Rahman, the radical Islamic leader who was placed under house arrest shortly before the U.S. airstrikes began Sunday. His followers vowed to continue their actions despite his confinement.

The Musharraf government has asserted that few Pakistanis oppose its support for the Western attacks, which are aimed at terrorist camps allegedly operated in Afghanistan by Osama bin Laden and at the ruling Taliban militia that shelters him.

But even Peshawar residents who did not participate in the demonstrations voiced anger at the United States and their own government, charging that Musharraf had joined a terrorist alliance against Muslims, along with Israel and India.

"The Americans say Osama bin Laden is a terrorist, but he is a Muslim hero," said Gul Mohammed Shah, 40, an Afghan refugee who quietly watched one demonstration and said he was worried about his relatives in Afghanistan. "When the Americans make a cruise missile attack on another country, that is terrorism."

Another man, sipping tea and reading a newspaper in a restaurant, kissed a headline with bin Laden's name.

"America does not only want to go after bin Laden," asserted the man, a shopkeeper named Sayyad Ahmed, "it wants to get rid of the Taliban and take Afghanistan away from Islam. If they keep going, there will be a clash between the Muslim and Christian tribes and it will be like World War III."

Even a Pakistani police officer assigned to control the demonstrators confided that he agreed with them.

"It is my duty to secure law and order, but in my heart I am a Muslim, too, so my sympathies are with all Muslims under attack," said the officer, whose gave his name as Inayat. "We must obey our orders, but we cannot bear to watch another Muslim country destroyed."

Constable reported from Peshawar, Pakistan; Finkel from Quetta.

--------

IN ISLAMABAD
Pakistan Steps Up Security

October 9, 2001
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/international/AP-Attacks-Pakistan.html

QUETTA, Pakistan (AP) -- Besieged police officers in a restive border province fatally shot a 13-year-old boy and three other students in a second day of violence as Muslim mullahs fanned sentiment against U.S. air raids on neighboring Afghanistan.

Elsewhere, hundreds of pro-Taliban demonstrators in the eastern city of Lahore stoned police, blocked roads and chanted slogans against President Bush and Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf, who supports the U.S. campaign to destroy Osama bin Laden's terrorist network.

Noisy but peaceful protests were held in Karachi, Pakistan's largest city, and Peshawar. In the diplomatic quarter of Islamabad, the capital, troops patrolled the streets in vehicles mounted with machine guns.

The most violent protests have been in this volatile province of Baluchistan, stronghold of the pro-Taliban Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam, or Party of Islamic Clerics.

The shooting cut short a rampage in the town of Kuchlak, 14 miles north of Quetta toward the Afghan border, after crowds screamed praise for the Taliban and Osama bin Laden while vilifying America and its allies.

Maulana Abdul Ghani of the Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam harangued about 2,000 people in Kuchlak before they surged through town, smashing shops and torching the post office.

As they stormed the police station gate, witnesses said, officers opened fire and killed the four youths. French photographers who saw two of the bodies later said both had single bullet wounds in the forehead.

Photographer Patrick Aventurier said they had been shot squarely between the eyes and had exit wounds at the back of head. Neither had other wounds, he said.

Seven other rioters were wounded, two critically, and a policeman was badly hurt, doctors in Kuchlak said. Rioters injured at least 15 people in their rampage through town, according to witnesses.

Shoaib Suddle, Baluchistan inspector general of police, said officers fired in self-defense. He said the rioters were mostly Afghan, and some were armed. Police found bullet marks in the station wall, he added.

``We condemn violence and want protests to be peaceful,'' said Mullah Kifait Ullah, an Ulema-e-Islam leader in Quetta. But he said armed conflict was inevitable because President Bush had declared war on Islam.

``We are against America and any forces that back America,'' he said. ``If they attack Afghanistan, it will be the start of World War III.''

In order to curb protests, Pakistani authorities Tuesday placed two prominent clerics, including the leader of Jamiat ul-Islami, Maulana Fazal-ur Rehman, under house arrest, the Interior Ministry said.

Police confirmed a third cleric, Samiul Haq, leader of the Afghan Defense Council, had been detained, but they would not say where. All three clerics have been organizing anti-American demonstrations.

But the religious opposition insisted that such measures would merely increase hostility, feeding a growing mood of confrontation.

On Monday, thousands of people raged through Quetta in separate bands, burning public buildings and cinemas that showed American or English films. Police shot one rioter dead. Another 26 were wounded or injured.

One group burned the home of a Baluchistan nationalist leader who spoke against the Taliban at a rally on Sunday.

Quetta was peaceful on Tuesday. Many shops stayed closed as merchants feared fresh attacks. But yet another militant rally underscored the tense mood.

A small but enthusiastic crowd chanted in Arabic, ``In the name of Allah, we will fight against non-Muslims,'' and, in Urdu, ``Muslims who are friends of America are enemies of Islam.''

Maulana Noor Mohammed, a Quetta leader of the Ulema-e-Islam, promised to send young volunteers to Afghanistan if the Taliban needed help. If allied forces take cities, he said, they would join guerrilla resistance.

He also denounced Mohammed Zaher Shah, the 86-year-old exiled king of Afghanistan who is mentioned frequently as a potential interim leader for a representative government.

``If he comes to Afghanistan, the Taliban will kill him,'' Mohammed shouted to the crowd.

Radical leaders in Pakistan are finding growing support among unemployed urban youths with limited education and few job prospects. Most of their hardcore followers are students of madressah, the religious schools.

``These schools have a new prestige, and what they teach is militant Islam,'' said Ahmed Basit, a leading Pakistani lawyer. ``After one week with these mullahs, some of these students can turn into monsters.''

-------- u.n.

Bomb kills four U.N. workers near Kabul

October 9, 2001
By MARK KUKIS
UNITED PRESS INTERNATIONAL
http://www.washtimes.com/upi-breaking/default-2001109103059.htm

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan, Oct. 9 (UPI) -- Four U.N. workers died during the second night of U.S. airstrikes in Afghanistan when a bomb struck a U.N. de-mining facility on the outskirts of Kabul, U.N. officials said Tuesday.

"Four staff were killed, and four staff were injured," said Stephanie Bunker, a U.N. spokeswoman for the organization's Afghanistan coordination office. "The four who were killed died on the spot, and the pieces of their bodies are still being recovered from the wreckage of the building."

Bunker said that at about 9 p.m. a bomb or missile struck a building that housed equipment for the land-mine program. Bunker said the four men were all Afghani and worked as security guards at the facility. She said the building was apparently demolished.

U.S. and British forces on Sunday opened a campaign against Taliban sites after the ruling militia refused to hand over Osama bin Laden, the prime suspect in the U.S. search for a possible mastermind behind the Sept. 11 hijackings and attacks on New York and Washington in which some 6,00 people died. Bin Laden has been sheltered by the Taliban for two years and U.S. officials had said that countries that refuse to help deal with suspected terrorists could come under military attack.

Bunker said the U.N. Afghanistan coordination office was urging the international community" to protect civilians from harm" who had "nothing to do with arms and do not bear arms."

The deaths of the U.N. workers were the first confirmed civilian casualties in Afghanistan since the United States and Britain began bombing military targets near major cities Sunday night in retaliation for terrorist attacks on New York and Washington last month.

In Washington, the Pentagon has emphasized that the airstrikes are aimed at military facilities of Afghanistan's ruling Taliban militia and suspected terrorist training camps run by bin Laden.

Taliban officials say up to 20 people have died in the attacks, but the death toll has been impossible to confirm because independent sources have been forced out of the county.

Bunker said the United Nations was "lucky" to have received the information about the deaths since communications between Afghanistan and Pakistan have almost completely broken down. The fighting has forced the United Nations to abandon most of its operations in the country, including the World Food Program, which had stocked Kabul with two weeks worth of food before fighting stopped regular food shipments from Pakistan.

The four U.N. deaths followed a violent demonstration at U.N. offices Monday in Quetta, where protesters staging an anti-American demonstration attacked U.N. High Commission for Refugees offices. U.N. staffers inside at the time were able to escape unhurt.

Anti-American protests kept a U.N. team from inspecting refugee camps near Preshawar, a Pakistani city near the Afghani border.

Monday morning, following the first night of U.S. and British airstrikes inside Afghanistan, the United Nations shuttered its offices in Islamabad for security reasons, keeping on only a skeleton staff. Operations are slowly resuming, Bunker said, with suspended U.N. programs struggling to deal with an expected refugee influx in the wake of the bombings.

U.N. officials said they expected some 300,000 refugees to flee Afghanistan for Pakistan, where some 3 million have already flooded the country. Another 80,000 Afghani refugees are likely to head for Iran, U.N. officials said.

Six cargo planes from Japan carrying tents, blankets, water buckets and plastic sheeting camps were scheduled to arrive in Islamabad, for distribution in refugee camps in Peshawar and Quetta.

--------

U.N. Says Raids Hamper Afghan Food Deliveries

October 9, 2001
By REUTERS
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/world/international-attack-afghan-aid.html

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan (Reuters) - The United Nations said on Tuesday it was becoming increasing difficult to deliver crucial emergency relief in Afghanistan after two days of U.S.-led attacks on to the battle-scarred country.

U.N. spokeswoman Stephanie Bunker told a news conference the ruling Taliban were still denying aid workers access to outside communications and that four more relief vehicles, including three ambulances, had been seized.

Additionally, shipments of U.N. World Food Programfood aid into Afghanistan, where up to six million people depend on handouts, were still suspended due to security fears over the military strikes.

The United States and Britain Sunday launched air strikes against Taliban targets in retaliation for the September 11 suicide hijackings that killed thousands of people in New York and Washington.

But as winter edges nearer, the situation was becoming desperate in the mountainous country ravaged by conflict and drought, aid workers say.

``We're completely stuck, we feel very frustrated. We cannot do this prime job which is the delivery of food before the onset of winter,'' said Alex Renton, spokesman for British non-governmental organization (NGO) Oxfam.

Renton added security fears on the part of the Pakistani army had also hampered work on new refugee camps on the Pakistan side of the Afghan border, being prepared in anticipation of up to a million Afghans expected to attempt to flee their country.

Witnesses in Kabul and other cities say Afghans continue to evacuate urban areas for the relative safety of the countryside.

``There is not mass panic in Kabul, but that does not mean universal calm,'' said the U.N.'s Bunker.

``But (staff) attendance at U.N. agencies and NGOs is continuing to drop. This is not helping our efforts to move along with our programs,'' she added.

STOP AIR DROPS

British Defense Secretary Geoff Hoon said Monday that one aim of the U.S.-led military action had been to air drop supplies of food and medicine to the Afghan people.

Major U.N. partner agencies have joined a rising chorus of opposition to the scheme, saying combining military strikes with relief action were both inefficient and poorly conceived.

The quantities were negligible and only able to feed a handful of the millions of people needing help, they said.

``Airdrops on specific targets like cities are not a bad idea but random air drops are almost guaranteed to cause more problems than they solve,'' said one senior aid worker.

He painted a nightmare scenario in the country with the world's largest unmapped minefields, where 80 people are killed or maimed every month from leftover ordinance.

``The prospect of hungry people leaving roads and walking into the woods in the hope of getting a meal, where we have evidence there is unexploded ordinance, doesn't bear thinking about,'' the aid worker said.

``The problem is no-one knows where the mines are in Afghanistan, the Russians dropped mines randomly throughout the 1980s and no-one knows where they are,'' he added.

WFP FOOD STOCKS SAFE

WFP spokesman Trevor Rowe said in Rome that local WFP staff had distributed 180 tons of food to bakeries in Kabul on Monday and had verified that 5,000 tons of food stored in the Afghan capital was safe.

WFP, the main food aid agency in Afghanistan, hoped to distribute a further 180 tons of food aid to displaced people in the western region of Herat Tuesday, he added.

In a stick-and-carrot strategy, U.S. planes have also dropped food for ordinary Afghans.

But the U.N. fears up to 7.5 million people, over a quarter of the population, could be at risk if sustained international aid cannot be supplied to the country.

WFP, which was forced to withdraw its international staff from Afghanistan following last month's attacks, began moving up to 750 tons of food a day into Afghanistan nine days ago from Pakistan, Iran, Tajikistan and Turkmenistan.

-------- u.s.

U.S. warns of spread in terror campaign

October 9, 2001
By Betsy Pisik
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
http://www.washtimes.com/world/20011009-13934832.htm

NEW YORK - The United States yesterday warned the United Nations that its counterterrorism campaign may expand to include military strikes on other nations besides Afghanistan.

"There is still much we do not know. Our inquiry is in its early stages," wrote U.N. Ambassador John Negroponte in a letter to U.N. Security Council President Richard Ryan, ambassador of Ireland.

"We may find that our self-defense requires further actions with respect to other organizations and other states," Mr. Negroponte wrote.

American diplomats yesterday refused to specify any additional targets or circumstances, saying that the remarks merely reserved for the United States the right of future action.

"This marks the beginning, as President Bush has said, of a military phase of a multifaceted and comprehensive effort against international terrorism which includes military, diplomatic, financial, law-enforcement and intelligence components," Mr. Negroponte said yesterday evening in a briefing to the Security Council.

"We stress that in carrying out these missions we are committed to minimizing civilian casualties," he said.

Mr. Negroponte and British Ambassador Jeremy Greenstock yesterday briefed the council on the first two days of the military offensive targeting the Afghan-based terror network of Osama bin Laden and Afghanistan's ruling Taliban regime, which has refused to surrender bin Laden.

Diplomats inside the room said that all council members spoke, generally in supportive terms, and no one questioned the possibility of wider military strikes.

"I think there is a clear understanding that we are acting in our inherent right to self-defense," Mr. Negroponte said, "and I think that was understood all along."

Yesterday evening's briefing came hours after the U.N. membership elected Syria and four other nations - Cameroon, Guinea, Mexico and Bulgaria - to join the Security Council for two-year terms starting in January.

Syria is one of seven governments on the State Department's list of state sponsors of terrorism, and the prospect of its joining the council - especially as counterterrorism has become a priority issue - generated great concern among Jewish groups and U.S. lawmakers.

Only Israel had publicly opposed Syria's candidacy, saying it was "a sheer absurdity."

U.S. officials, however, could do little to derail Syria's bid. The country received 160 out of a possible 178 votes yesterday, indicating that most nations did not share Washington's concerns.

The U.S. letter to the council is standard procedure when a nation undertakes military action under Article 51 of the U.N. Charter, which guarantees members the right to self-defense.

U.S. officials in New York and Washington repeatedly stressed yesterday that the bombing has been undertaken in a way to minimize civilian casualties.

U.S. Officials also emphasized that the United States is the largest single donor of humanitarian assistance to Afghanistan.

The U.S. letter did appear to spark the first small division between the United States and Britain, which has been the Bush administration's staunchest ally in its bid to avenge the Sept. 11 attacks.

The White House said yesterday that Mr. Negroponte's letter was only the latest such warning from the Bush administration.

"The letter states what the president has been saying very publicly all along, that the United States reserves the right to defend itself wherever it is necessary," Bush spokesman Ari Fleischer told reporters.

But British Foreign Minister Jack Straw sounded a different note yesterday, telling reporters in Luxembourg that military action for Britain would be limited to Afghanistan.

"The agreement at the moment is that [strikes] are confined to Afghanistan," he said after attending a European Union meeting. "That is where the problem is and that is the military action in which we are involved."

U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan yesterday effectively endorsed the military action, referring to the U.N. Charter's guarantee of self-defense, as well as various Security Council resolutions to combat terrorism as a threat to international peace and security.

"The states concerned have set their military action in Afghanistan in that context," he noted in a pre-recorded statement released to international broadcasters yesterday.

Council members yesterday requested daily humanitarian updates on Afghanistan from the U.N. relief agencies.

Afghanistan is likely to be on the security council's agenda for some time, meaning the newly elected members will have to wrestle with a problem that has flared and ebbed for decades.

Syria was the endorsed candidate of the Asian group, taking over the seat currently held by Bangladesh.

Last week, nearly 40 senators wrote President Bush demanding that he oppose Syria's candidacy. But Washington, which had not publicly opposed the country in the months before the Sept. 11 attacks, could do little to stop it yesterday.

State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said yesterday that the United States never discusses how it votes, but added: "The United States will continue to express our concerns regarding terrorism with the Syrian government."

--------

Next Phase To Include More Troops
Ground Soldiers' Role Not Clearly Defined

By Thomas E. Ricks
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, October 9, 2001; Page A01
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28338-2001Oct8.html

When the U.S. bombing campaign in Afghanistan starts to wind down at the end of this week, the Pentagon plans to begin the next phase of the war on terrorism by sending a significant number of additional ground troops to the Mideast and Central Asia, defense officials said yesterday.

The deployment of the additional forces is not a prelude to a full-scale conventional ground attack on Afghanistan, they said, but the next step in what is essentially an ad hoc approach to an unconventional war. Their presence will give planners maximum flexibility as they consider options in the days ahead, a senior defense official said.

"They [the troops] will start to go, but it's not because we have a clear and defined plan," the official said. "We want to position ourself in such a fashion that we have a wide range of options."

The additional troops are a fraction of the number sent to the 1991 Persian Gulf War. They could do everything from bolstering the border defenses of Uzbekistan to flying into Afghanistan to temporarily hold an airfield or cordon off an area that is being searched, officials indicated.

Asked whether the Pentagon is considering large-scale ground attacks inside Afghanistan, one official said, "Nothing has been ruled out."

The movement of ground troops also will be intended to reinforce the message that the U.S. government is determined to carry out a long-term, wide-ranging campaign against terrorism, the senior defense official said. Some Arab allies had worried about the Americans' tenacity, and a major theme of Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld's tour of the Mideast and Central Asia last week was that the United States is in it for the long haul.

The aerial attacks that marked the first phase of the war began Sunday and are expected to last three to five days. Their objective is to punish the Taliban government, by undercutting its power, and destroying the terrorist network inside Afghanistan.

But Rumsfeld and other Pentagon officials have made it clear they understand the limits of air power in a country that after two decades of war has few "high-value targets" standing.

The buildup will begin with the movement of 1,000 soldiers from the Army's 10th Mountain Division to join the 1,000 already in Central Asia. Additional troops will come from posts in the United States, but some almost certainly will be pulled out of the U.S. peacekeeping missions in Bosnia and Kosovo, those officials added.

Other NATO countries are expected to send replacement troops to keep the Balkans operations fully staffed.

"In the next week, you'll see people start moving," one official familiar with the planned movement said. Rumsfeld signed the order for the troop movement on Friday night, another official said, adding, "They will probably deploy, but it isn't clear what they'll do."

The durability of the American commitment is a special concern for the government of Uzbekistan, which has made itself vulnerable by agreeing to host several thousand U.S. troops. The Taliban said recently it had moved troops to the Uzbek border and was prepared to attack if Uzbekistan participated in the U.S.-led strikes.

Underscoring the long-term nature of the U.S. campaign against terrorism, commanders of the units sending the troops are being told to expect the mission to last as long as a year -- although the individual troops probably will be deployed for three to six months, and then replaced by other members of their unit, said an official familiar with the deployment orders.

But the signal being sent is clearer than information about how the troops will be used. The senior defense official said that it is possible they could take part in offensive actions inside Afghanistan. Another official, nearly as well-connected, indicated that the major role played by the new ground troops would be "force protection" -- that is, missions such as providing perimeter security for the Air Force units deploying to Uzbekistan.

Rumsfeld appeared to hedge yesterday on the future role of U.S. troops in Afghanistan. Asked at a Pentagon news conference whether U.S. ground troops would fight there, he said, "I wouldn't want to speculate on that."

But in the next breath Rumsfeld warned that airstrikes alone wouldn't bring success: "I think it's just terribly important to underline that and emphasize it so that people don't go away with the mistaken understanding that some sort of a cruise missile is going to solve that problem, because it isn't."

Also unclear is what other units are being sent, and where they might wind up in the region around Afghanistan. One Army general and another officer said they had been told that elements of the 101st Airborne Division and much of the 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment, both based at Fort Campbell, Ky., had been notified that they should be prepared to deploy overseas by Oct. 16.

One also said that the 101st had been notified that it wouldn't be asked to send a battalion to the peacekeeping mission in the Sinai Desert, as had been planned.

Yesterday was a holiday for the military, and neither the commanders nor the spokesman for the 101st Division could be reached for comment. A spokesman for the Army Special Operations Command declined to comment on whether the 160th had received a deployment order.

The division's Web site does carry the vague message, "Our thoughts and prayers are with the soldiers of the 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault) joining the peacekeeping forces around the world."

Another Army general said he expected that the Army would mount an operation somewhere near Afghanistan that resembled "Task Force Hawk" -- the force of attack helicopters, tanks and soldiers that was sent to Albania during the Kosovo War but never was sent into combat.

The deputy commander of Task Force Hawk was Maj. Gen. Richard A. Cody, a former chief of the 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment and now head of the 101st Airborne.

One defense official said the plan is to put Army helicopters -- most likely from the 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment, the Army's only unit of special operations helicopters -- aboard the USS Kitty Hawk, which recently left Japan without most of its usual complement of aircraft. That aircraft carrier is likely to play a key role in future Special Forces raids into Afghanistan, the official indicated.

Military planners have taken pains to reduce the U.S. military's "footprint" in Pakistan. So the Kitty Hawk will pick up the Army helicopters somewhere in the Persian Gulf region, the official said, and then steam to the Arabian Sea off the coast of Pakistan. The helicopters then will fly to an air base inside Pakistan, where they will be loaded with Special Forces troops flown there on C-130 transport aircraft.

From there, the refueled helicopters will head into Afghanistan, the senior defense official said.

The apparent inclination of the Bush administration to reduce the U.S. troop commitment in the Balkans could prove to be controversial, given the volatile situation in Macedonia last spring and summer.

There are 5,300 U.S. troops in Kosovo and 3,600 in Bosnia. One reason soldiers are being moved from that region is that it can be done quickly, one officer said. The Army requires an extraordinary amount of training, certification and official clearances before shipping a soldier overseas, and the troops in the Balkans already have passed those hurdles.

"They're already trained and certified, they have their shots, they've done their wills and other paperwork," explained this officer.

But another defense official said the war on terrorism was being used as a pretext to draw down the U.S. contribution to the NATO peacekeeping effort in the Balkans. "We're using it to help reduce our presence," he said.

Rumsfeld said in May that he wanted to cut the U.S. presence in the Balkans. "The military job was done three or four years ago" in Bosnia, he said.

--------

President notifies Congress about troop deployment
U.S. claims air supremacy over Afghanistan

CNN
October 9, 2001
http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/10/09/ret.attack.pentagon/

WASHINGTON -- President Bush sent formal notification to Congress on Tuesday of his decision to deploy U.S. troops and forces for combat operations in Afghanistan.

"This military action is part of our campaign against terrorism and is designed to disrupt the use of Afghanistan as a terrorist base of operations," the president said in a letter to House and Senate leaders.

The letter said it was not possible to know the scope or duration of either the combat operation or the overseas deployment.

"As I have stated previously, it is likely the American campaign against terrorism will be lengthy," Bush wrote. "I will direct such additional measures as necessary in exercise of our right of self defense and to protect U.S. citizens and interests."

Bush said he was acting under his constitutional authority to conduct U.S. international policy "as commander in chief and chief executive."

Speaking to reporters shortly after the letter was transmitted to both chambers, Bush refused to characterize what role -- if any -- ground troops might play in the Afghanistan campaign.

"Whether or not we are going to put troops on the ground, I'm not going to tell you," Bush said during a White House appearance with German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder. "We are not going to share intelligence, nor am I going to tell you what we've got planned for the future." U.S. strikes around the clock

Top Defense Department officials, meanwhile, said Tuesday that three days of air raids on Taliban and al Qaeda assets throughout Afghanistan have given the United States control of the skies over the mountainous central Asian nation.

Targets selected by the United States since the air operation began Sunday have included air defense facilities, ground-to-air missile sites, and command and control facilities of Afghanistan's ruling Taliban and the al Qaeda terror network.

Air Force Gen. Richard Myers estimated Tuesday, in an afternoon briefing to reporters, that the first hours of the air operation resulted in an "85 percent" success rate, and had effectively cleared away most fixed, ground-based threats to U.S. aircraft.

"Essentially, we have air supremacy over Afghanistan right now," Myers said.

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, citing early U.S. successes, said, "We believe we are now able to carry out strikes around the clock, as we wish."

The United States tested its ability to stage daytime air raids Tuesday, for the first time since the operation commenced, hitting several targets around Afghanistan a short while after dawn. Among those targets, Pentagon officials confirmed earlier in the day, was a residential compound used by the ruling Taliban's leader, Mullah Mohammed Omar.

The compound, located in the Taliban's "spiritual" capital of Kandahar, housed command and control facilities and was a legitimate military target, a Pentagon official told CNN.

The Taliban ambassador to Pakistan said Omar was still alive following the strike, and Rumsfeld said Tuesday afternoon that he knew of several such compounds used by Omar.

Fresh attacks struck the city of Herat, in western Afghanistan, at nightfall, and Pentagon officials said the U.S.-led strikes would now be "continuous."

Anti-aircraft fire erupted over Kandahar on Tuesday morning, and warplanes screamed overhead as nearby explosions jolted the area. The Taliban said their headquarters was hit in the daylight attacks.

A source at the British Ministry of Defense said Tuesday's raids continued to degrade the Taliban's assets. The source added that the al Qaeda group's terrorist training camps "have been seriously damaged."

Myers offered some proof of that assessment, displaying three photographs of damaged or destroyed targets -- including an al Qaeda terrorist training camp near Kandahar, a SAM anti-aircraft missile site near the Kandahar airport, and an airfield in Shindand, Western Afghanistan.

The camp and SAM site appeared to have been destroyed, while the airfield showed huge craters in its runways.

The terrorist camp, however, was thought to have been evacuated before it was hit. Both Myers and Rumsfeld said it was nonetheless a significant target.

"That is where they have their classrooms, that is where they discuss their methods," Myers said. "That is where they have firing ranges... It would be like destroying (the Marine Corps base) at Quantico, Virginia."

"The airfields aren't permanently destroyed," Rumsfeld added. "And, anything can be repaired. But its adds cost, it adds time, it adds pressure... It is clear the Taliban and al Qaeda are feeling some pressure." Assessing deaths of U.N. workers

Rumsfeld offered the first Pentagon comment about the reported deaths of four Afghan workers affiliated with a non-governmental group that clears land mines from the Afghan countryside. The four were reported to have died when the building in which they slept was struck overnight.

The building in which they worked, East of the Afghan capital, Kabul, sat next to a transmission tower used by the Taliban that may have been the planned target of a U.S. missile.

Rumsfeld said the Pentagon was investigating the reports, and that there was no way to determine whether the ordnance that struck the building came from the air, or from ground-based installations that were firing on overhead aircraft.

"We have no information to confirm this," he said. "Nonetheless, we still regret the loss of life."

The United Nations chastised the United States for the incident.

"People need to distinguish between combatants and those innocent civilians who do not bear arms. They also need to be mindful for protecting assets essential for the survival of Afghan civilians," the U.N.'s Stephanie Bunker said at a news briefing in Islamabad.

The strikes, which began Sunday and continued Tuesday, are aimed at disrupting the activities of the al Qaeda terror group. Its founder, Saudi dissident millionaire Osama bin Laden, has been implicated -- with several key lieutenants -- in the September 11 attacks on New York and Washington.

Bin Laden also remained alive Tuesday, said Abdul Salam Zaeef, the Taliban ambassador to Pakistan.

Myers said Monday's list of targets included some 13 facilities, such as airfield, air defense installations and al Qaeda structure and forces. Five to eight land-based bombers participated, he said, as did 15-18 U.S. strike aircraft launched from aircraft carriers.

Even with the success of the assaults, Myers said, some targets would have to be hit again.

"We did well in our first strikes," Myers said. "But not perfect."

"We're finding that some of the targets we hit need to be rehit," Rumsfeld said.

The defense chief added, however, that his early assessments that the Taliban and al Qaeda had very little in the way of valuable material and infrastructure were being borne out. While some targets needed to be revisited, few new targets have been selected for upcoming raids.

"We're not running out of targets, Afghanistan is," he said.

Airdrops of food and medicine for Afghan refugees were continuing, Rumsfeld said.

-- CNN's Ian Christopher McCaleb and John King contributed to this report.


-------- OTHER

-------- human rights

Food drop intended as a message to Afghans

October 9, 2001
By Nicholas Kralev
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
http://www.washtimes.com/world/20011009-348421.htm

The United States acknowledged yesterday that more than $50 million worth of food dropped in Afghanistan in an "unprecedented mission" during the first two days of airstrikes was largely symbolic and meant to show the Afghan people that the war is not against them.

The Bush administration said the drops were aimed at averting a humanitarian disaster, but their degree of effectiveness - as well as that of a shower of leaflets and broadcasts from U.S. aircraft - won't be clear for some time.

Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld told reporters at the Pentagon that although "37,000 rations in a day don't feed millions" of Afghans, "if you were one of the starving people who got one of the rations, you'd be appreciative."

The leaflets, offering protection and a reward to anyone who shares information about terrorist ringleader Osama bin Laden and his associates, are written in the local languages. Because many Afghans can't read, however, "they include some figures and symbols," Mr. Rumsfeld said.

The food packages came from a previously prepared supply, military officials said, so they do carry a notation saying "Food gift from the people of the United States of America" written in English, French and Spanish.

Comprising at least 2,200 calories per ration, the 2-pound bright-yellow packages contain bread, peanut butter, peas, beans, rice and fruit. They also have a stencil of an American flag and illustrated user instructions as well as a set of plastic cutlery, seasoning, matches and a napkin. They were part of a $320 million humanitarian effort for displaced Afghan refugees announced by President Bush last week.

In an unprecedented move, U.S. aircraft began dropping food and medicine only hours after the first wave of airstrikes. Two C-17 planes completed a barrage of drops worth $25 million early yesterday, and the Pentagon said the number after the second round of strikes would be about the same, if not bigger.

American planes dropped food packages in Bosnia in the early 1990s, but from lower altitudes and not after combat.

Meanwhile, the World Food Program (WFP) halted food convoys into Afghanistan yesterday as a result of the U.S. and British strikes against Taliban targets.

"We have suspended the operation," said spokeswoman Christiane Berthiaume. "Everything has been put on hold because of what happened overnight."

The WFP, which was forced to withdraw its international staff from Afghanistan in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks, began moving in some 500 tons of food a day from neighboring countries 10 days ago.

Asked whether the airstrikes have resulted in a net loss for Afghanistan's starving population despite the U.S. food drops, Mr. Rumsfeld said: "To suggest that what is taking place now is a net loss for the Afghan people would be a total misunderstanding of what is taking place."

The two military cargo planes returned safely yesterday to Germany's Ramstein Air Base, about 100 miles west of Frankfurt, after flying 6,000 miles in 24 hours, military officials said. There were 10 crew members on each plane, all based in Germany, where the United States has a permanent military force of about 70,000.

Mission commander Col. Robert Allardice said the packages contain enough nutrients for the average adult for an entire day.

"We feel this mission was a complete success," Col. Allardice told reporters in Germany. "The overall feeling of the crew is great excitement and enthusiasm to be part of such a mission."

In the meantime, leading aid organizations accused the United States of creating confusion by dropping humanitarian aid into Afghanistan while bombing it. They also said the food being parachuted in was inappropriate for people suffering from malnutrition.

"What sense is there in shooting with one hand and distributing medicines with the other? How will the Afghan population know in the future if an offer of humanitarian aid does not hide a military operation?" French-based Medecins Sans Frontieres (Doctors Without Borders) said in a statement.

"Furthermore, the confusion between military and humanitarian operations only increases the danger for already-complicated humanitarian action, limiting even further the possibilities of intervention," said the group, which won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1999.

Also yesterday, the Voice of America (VOA), the international broadcaster funded by the U.S. government, expanded its broadcasts in Afghanistan's two main languages, Pashtu and Dari, by 30 minutes each per day, for a total of 21/2 hours.

"We want the people of Afghanistan to be informed ... fairly and accurately," a VOA official said.

The VOA had already expanded its Pashtu and Dari programming - each to 1 hour and 45 minutes daily - on Sept. 18, a week after the attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon.

•This article is based in part on wire service reports.

--------

Alarm over aid drop in 'world's biggest minefield'
War on terrorism: Relief

By Peter Popham in Islamabad
09 October 2001
Independent Digital (UK)
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/asia_china/story.jsp?story=98478

The decision by the United States to drop 37,000 food packets on Afghanistan is not just irrelevant but could be lethal, aid workers are warning.

The food aid is being dropped from two C-17 cargo planes flown from Germany at high altitudes to avoid missiles. But high-altitude food drops end up being scattered over wide areas and often do not reach the people they are intended for.

"Random food drops are the worst possible way of delivering food aid," a spokesman for a big international charity active in Afghanistan told The Independent, on condition of anonymity. "They cause more problems than they solve. We only use them as a last resort.

"They create flows of people fleeing the fighting migrating to the sites where the drops have been made. And most important, they are happening in Afghanistan, which is the world's biggest minefield."

Hungry and desperate Afghans could get themselves blown up attempting to retrieve dropped food packets.

According to Omar, an organisation working to rid Afghanistan of its 10 million landmines, there are still large areas of the country seeded with unmapped mines, a legacy of a Soviet policy of random mine drops in the 1980s.

The aid spokesman said: "There are still 10 to 15 mine incidents every day. The food packets were mainly dropped in the central highlands and along the Pakistan border, both areas with suspected mines. We have to ask if the Americans are aware of the situation on the ground."

Apart from the 37,000 small packets - a drop in the ocean of Afghanistan's daily need - for the time being the hungry millions of Afghanistan are on their own. Last week, the United Nations' World Food Programme (WFP) announced with a flourish that deliveries of wheat flour to Afghanistan, suspended after President George Bush's threat to attack the country, had been resumed. The aim was to truck hundreds of consignments of flour into the country in a sort of Dunkirk-style rescue operation so that 150,000 tons would be in warehouses across the country ready for distribution to the starving once winter had made roads impassable in the middle of November.

But last night Khaled Mansour, a spokesman for the WFP, told reporters in Islamabad: "The World Food Programme today temporarily suspended food deliveries into Afghanistan. An aid food truck convoy on the way to Kabul was recalled by the local transporter company after they had reached Jalalabad," a town a short distance from the Pakistan border. The WFP's convoys are trucked in by commercial carriers. While 400 tons have safely arrived in the "hunger belt", the hill country of northern Afghanistan, the fate of a convoy carrying 425 tons to Herat in the north-west is unknown. "They are due to arrive there by the end of the week," Mr Mansoor said. "We hope they arrive safely."

The fog of war descended on Afghanistan in full strength yesterday. Stephanie Bunker, the UN's chief spokesperson in Afghanistan, said: "I have very little to say. There's been almost no radio contact with any UN office in Afghanistan since the attacks began. We don't know the status of the refugee situation or of our programmes in the country."

While all foreign aid workers were expelled by the Taliban soon after President Bush declared war on terrorism, hundreds of local staff are still at work in the country. The UN agencies were unable to give any details to reporters concerning the large numbers of people who were reported to be moving towards border areas in the hope of fleeing the country.

Ms Bunker said: "Some Kabul residents are still moving into areas held by the Northern Alliance ... There are almost no vehicles on the streets of Kabul.

"The situation for IDPs [internally displaced people, in UN jargon] has grown more acute. We emphasise the need to secure control of the country so that aid deliveries can be resumed as quickly as possible. People do not die of hunger over night. They suffer slowly, often for many months, before a final release in death. For some people, another day of delay can mean another death."

The UN expects that eight million people in Afghanistan will be hungry and in need of food aid this winter, more than a third of the population.

Mr Mansoor said: "Although the WFP has 8,000 tons of food inside Afghanistan, the needs are huge - more than three times as many people need food as we have been able to reach in the past month." Rumours of refugees gathering on the Afghan side of the Pakistani border circulated yesterday, including talk of one thousand at the Chaman border crossing near Qetta in the south-west of Pakistan, but independent verification was impossible.

The United Nations' High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) is struggling to make new camps for the expected influx, which has been predicted to reach 1.5 million, but tribal people in two of the 32 planned camps forced teams attempting to prepare the sites to turn back yesterday, protesting that the land was their own.

Yusuuf Hassan, a spokesman for the UNHCR, said: "We are ready to provide shelter for 100,000 refugees and are preparing for an initial influx of 300,000." But Pakistan's President, General Pervez Musharraf, threw these plans into confusion yesterday when he called for any new refugee camps to be established not in Pakistan but over the border in Afghanistan. Mr Hassan commented: "There are no plans to establish camps on the Afghanistan side at present."

Food package drops

The US has dropped around 37,000 individually-wrapped food packages into some of the most impoverished and remote parts of Afghanistan. The areas included the central highlands, where the Hazara ethnic group live in inaccessible valleys.

The packages, which bear the words "Food gift from the people of the United States of America", were dropped from two C-17 cargo planes. Packed in crates designed to break open on hitting the ground, each package has its own paper wing attached to help it survive the high-altitude drop.

Described as "humanitarian daily rations", each pack contains 2,300 calories. Officials admit the drops are as important for their psychological value as their nutritional effect, because the packages often get into the wrong hands.

Each package contains:
Beans and lentils in tomato sauce;
Peanut butter;
Strawberry jam;
Fruit bar;
Beans and tomato vinaigrette;
Biscuit, shortbread and fruit pastry;
Utensil package of salt, pepper, napkin and a match.

Andrew Buncombe

--------

Doctors Without Borders calls U.S. food drops 'propaganda'

October 8, 2001
The Associated Press
http://www.nando.com/special_reports/terrorism/impact/story/126782p-1334784c.html

PARIS - Nobel Peace Prize winner Medecins Sans Frontieres, known in English as Doctors Without Borders, condemned the humanitarian operation accompanying the U.S.-led strikes on Afghanistan as "military propaganda" designed to justify the strikes.

On Sunday, the United States dropped 37,500 food packages from two planes, destined for starving Afghans. Medicine is also expected to be dropped.

In a statement, the French humanitarian group said the operation "isn't in any way a humanitarian aid operation, but more a military propaganda operation, destined to make international opinion accept the U.S.-led military operation."

"What sense is there in shooting with one hand, and giving medicine with the other?" the group asked.

The United States has a stockpile of some 2 million food packets that each provide at least 2,200 calories per day.

Afghanistan is among the world's poorest countries and has the lowest per-person food intake in the world, according to the U.S. Agency for International Development.

Medecins Sans Frontieres won the 1999 Nobel Peace Prize for its medical relief work in more than 80 countries. Like many international aid groups, it suspended its work in Afghanistan shortly after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks in the United States.

-------- police / prisoners

PREVENTION MODE
F.B.I. Shifts Focus to Try to Avert Any More Attacks

October 9, 2001
By PHILIP SHENON and DAVID JOHNSTON
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/10/09/national/09INQU.html

WASHINGTON, Oct. 8 - The Justice Department and the Federal Bureau of Investigation have ordered agents across the country to curtail their investigation of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks so they can pursue leads that might prevent a second, possibly imminent, round of attacks, senior law enforcement officials said.

Since Sept. 11, Attorney General John Ashcroft has become increasingly involved in the details of the F.B.I.'s counterterrorism operation. He often spends hours each day with Director Robert S. Mueller III of the F.B.I. at the bureau's high-tech operations center, demonstrating the importance the Bush administration places on the effort to thwart future attacks.

The officials said the attorney general and the F.B.I. director had also ordered agents to end their investigative surveillance of some terrorism suspects and immediately take them into custody.

The order has resulted in the arrest of many immigrants suspected of involvement with groups linked to Osama bin Laden. But it has also met with resistance from F.B.I. agents who believed that surveillance - if continued for days or weeks - might turn up critical evidence to prove who orchestrated the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

"The investigative staff has to be made to understand that we're not trying to solve a crime now," said a law enforcement official, speaking on condition of anonymity. "Our No. 1 goal is prevention."

Another official said Mr. Ashcroft and Mr. Mueller had struggled to overcome a culture within the F.B.I. in which agents detain terrorist suspects only after collecting detailed evidence, often based on wiretapping and other electric surveillance. The problem is "a culture, a mindset," the official said.

An F.B.I. spokesman, John Collingwood, disputed the suggestion that agents were reluctant to make arrests.

"We all agree that this is the proper course to follow," Mr. Collingwood said. "The F.B.I. must continue investing towards maximum prevention capacity on every front"

Law enforcement officials said the investigation of the Sept. 11 attacks was continuing aggressively. At the same time, they added, efforts to thwart attacks have been given a much higher priority. Mr. Ashcroft and Mr. Mueller have ordered agents to drop their investigation of the attacks or any other assignment any time they learn of a threat or lead that might suggest a future attack.

Officials said Mr. Mueller, who was sworn in last month, believed that his agents had a broad understanding of the events of Sept. 11 and now needed to concentrate on intelligence suggesting that other terrorist attacks were likely. He said at a news conference last week that the bureau was trying to follow up on 260,000 tips, about half of them received on a special hot line and Internet site.

The F.B.I. has described the investigation of the terrorist hijackings as the most exhaustive in its history. Even minor witnesses say they have been interviewed repeatedly, which appears to have alarmed some officials who believe that agents should instead be chasing tips suggesting new terrorist attacks. A woman in Florida who was a neighbor to two of the hijackers said last week that she had been interviewed 18 times by the F.B.I.

At a news conference today, Mr. Ashcroft said federal, state and local law enforcement agencies were placed "on the highest level of alert" after the United States began a military strike on Afghanistan on Sunday.

"We are taking strong precautions and other appropriate steps to protect the American people while we win this war," he said, announcing that 614 people had been arrested or detained during the investigation, up from about 500 early last week.

Some officials suggest that Mr. Ashcroft has in effect taken command of F.B.I. operations along with Mr. Mueller, often spending hours a day in the 40,000-square-foot Strategic Information and Operations Center at F.B.I. headquarters on Pennsylvania Avenue, across the street from the Justice Department.

That has rankled some veteran rank-and-file agents, who regard his assertiveness as an intrusion that threatens the traditional independence of the F.B.I. within the Justice Department, its parent agency. Others at the Justice Department say they welcome the close cooperation between the department and the F.B.I. after years of discord.

"This is important progress," a senior official said.

Mr. Ashcroft's relationship with Mr. Mueller contrasts sharply to that of Janet Reno, the former attorney general, and Louis J. Freeh, who preceded Mr. Mueller. Mr. Freeh was assertively independent, and at times he acted in direct opposition to the wishes of Ms. Reno.

Mr. Mueller appears to be far more willing to coordinate his decision-making with Mr. Ashcroft, a role that Mr. Mueller played earlier this year when he temporarily took the job as deputy attorney general. In part, Mr. Mueller owes his appointment to Mr. Ashcroft. It was Mr. Ashcroft who urged President Bush to select Mr. Mueller and lobbied for him even when Bush aides appeared to want to look elsewhere.

At his news conference today, Mr. Ashcroft declined to say if the government knew of new, credible threats of terrorism. "I am not prepared to, nor will we, get into a situation where we try to outline all the threats that may or may not come to the United States on a regular basis."

He said the F.B.I. had contacted 18,000 law enforcement organizations nationwide and 27,000 corporate security managers advising them of the need for the "highest state of alert."

While urging vigilance, he also said Americans should not succumb to fear and should continue to try to lead normal lives.

"I do not think that Americans should avoid sporting events or should avoid undertaking their lives in a way which is appropriate to American freedom," Mr. Ashcroft said.

-------- security

Bush limits disclosure of classified data to Congress

October 9, 2001
By Bill Gertz
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20011009-1130569.htm

President Bush has ordered national security departments to limit the disclosure of classified information to a few senior congressional leaders.

In a memorandum sent last week to the heads of six government agencies, Mr. Bush ordered the senior department chiefs not to provide classified information to members of Congress who are not part of the leadership.

Mr. Bush stated he would "continue to work closely with the Congress" during the campaign to respond to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

Congressional leaders will be informed about military, intelligence and law enforcement operations, but other members of Congress will lose their access to sensitive military, intelligence, and law enforcement reports, Mr. Bush said in an Oct. 5 memorandum.

The memo was sent to Secretary of State Colin L. Powell, Treasury Secretary Paul H. O'Neill, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, Attorney General John Ashcroft, CIA Director George J. Tenet and FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III.

Mr. Bush told the department chiefs that "only you or officers expressly designated by you" can brief members of Congress on classified matters.

Additionally, the only members of Congress who can be told "classified or sensitive law enforcement information" are the House speaker, House majority and minority leaders, Senate majority and minority leaders, and the chairman and ranking members of the House and Senate intelligence oversight committees.

"This approach will best serve our shared goals of protecting American lives, maintaining the proper level of confidentiality for the success of our military, intelligence and law enforcement operations, and keeping the leadership of the Congress appropriately informed about important developments," Mr. Bush wrote.

A White House National Security Council spokesman said the memorandum was a "pro forma communication" that was standard procedure and not written as the result of anger over any particular disclosure.

--------

Ridge Assumes Security Post Amid Potential For New Attacks
FBI Warns Public, Private Entities To Observe 'Highest State of Alert'

By Eric Pianin
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, October 9, 2001; Page A06
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28188-2001Oct8.html

Former Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Ridge (R) took over yesterday as the country's chief defender against domestic terrorism as the Bush administration warned law enforcement agencies, corporations and utilities to be on "the highest state of alert" against possible retaliatory terrorist acts.

At a White House swearing-in ceremony on the second day of U.S.-British attacks on military targets in Afghanistan, Ridge, 56, said Americans "should find comfort" in knowing that federal, state and local officials have launched an unprecedented mobilization to ensure their security from terrorists. But he acknowledged that "there are gaps in the system" that he must close.

An executive order signed by President Bush yesterday vests Ridge, as director of the Office of Homeland Security, with responsibility for coordinating a wide variety of federal, state and local security activities to combat terrorism, including the gathering and distribution of intelligence reports on terrorist threats, preparedness efforts to deal with potential attacks and actions to prevent such attacks.

Bush vowed that Ridge, his friend for more than 20 years, would have "the full attention and complete support of the very highest levels of our government."

Underscoring the administration's concern about the strong prospects of fresh terrorist acts, Attorney General John D. Ashcroft told reporters that more than 18,000 law enforcement organizations, 27,000 corporate security managers and thousands of power plants, banking and financial institutions, water service providers, information technology firms and railroads have been notified by the FBI to stay on high alert. The FBI issued the warning Sunday through the government's National Threat Warning System.

"I have instructed federal law enforcement to be on the highest level of alert," Ashcroft said during a news conference. "We are taking strong precautions and other appropriate steps to protect the American people while we win this war."

Justice Department officials said later that there are actually two higher terrorist threat levels than the one now in force.

Ashcroft said that since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, federal authorities have arrested or detained 614 people and continue to look for 229 others.

To safeguard nuclear facilities, federal authorities have ordered that they be placed at the highest state of alert and increase police security throughout the facilities, Ashcroft said. The Immigration and Naturalization Service has also beefed up its border security plan.

Meanwhile, thousands of additional armed police and National Guard troops patrolled major cities. New York landmarks such as the Empire State Building, the Brooklyn Bridge and the major railroad stations had noticeably increased security presence. "We shouldn't overdo this," Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani said at a news conference before the start of the annual Columbus Day parade up Fifth Avenue. "The reality is there is extra security because the country is engaged in a military action."

In downtown Los Angeles, newly placed concrete barricades manned by police officers protected City Hall, its annex and Parker Center, the police headquarters. In Atlanta, police assigned to monitor public schools were put on heightened alert.

On Capitol Hill, members of Congress were discouraged from wearing their congressional pins when they are away from the Capitol, according to Rep. John E. Sweeney (R-N.Y.). A Capitol Police official said that members routinely are advised for security reasons to avoid using license plates or anything else that would identify them as members of Congress while they are in public.

But adding to concerns the country may be under siege, authorities reported yesterday that a co-worker of the Florida man who died of anthrax last week has tested positive for the extremely rare disease that experts say could be used as a biological warfare agent. And while many security experts and lawmakers have applauded the government's quick action in tightening security at airports and aboard commercial airliners, they have warned that U.S. borders are still porous.

In addition, they say there are numerous other vulnerable targets for biological and chemical terrorism, and that subways, bus terminals, container ships, trucks and national monuments could be bombing targets.

Trucking industry officials, concerned about lax laws regulating criminal background checks of employees and potential employees, say that trucks easily could be used as weapons of mass destruction.

"A scenario in which a truck driver or motor carrier warehouseman could wreak the same level of destruction as the Sept. 11 perpetrators wrought through air transport means is no longer hard to imagine," Duane Acklie, chairman of the American Trucking Associations, said in testimony prepared for delivery this week before a Senate subcommittee on surface transportation.

Several of the terrorist suspects recently detained by the FBI -- including Nabil Almarabh, a former Boston cab driver who has been linked to an associate of Osama bin Laden -- had fraudulently obtained commercial driver's licenses.

Environmental Protection Agency administrator Christie Todd Whitman has launched a new effort to help guard the nation's drinking water supply from potential terrorist attacks. She said the agency would work with 168,000 public water systems nationwide to help them assess potential vulnerabilities and upgrade security and monitoring capacity.

Whitman last week called the threat of harm from an attack on the water supply "small" and said the EPA had worked closely with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the departments of Defense and Energy to better understand the potential of biological and chemical contaminants.

Ridge was sworn in during an upbeat ceremony in the East Room of the White House that was attended by Bush and his Cabinet but not Vice President Cheney, who stayed away for security reasons. Fearing that terrorists may be targeting the nation's chief executives, the Secret Service has discouraged the president and vice president from appearing together in public.

Ridge's job is to oversee efforts to prevent and anticipate terrorism, but it remained unclear how much access he will have to intelligence from the FBI and the CIA, or precisely how his Cabinet-level office will relate to former White House counterterrorism czar Richard A. Clarke, who will oversee cyberspace security, and Wayne Downing, a retired four-star Army general who once commanded all U.S. Special Forces, who will head a new counterterrorism office.

Their appointments will be announced today.

But Ridge will have no power to veto the budgets of other departments. Instead, he will offer advice on whether what is being spent on homeland security is sufficient and will be asked to certify whether those levels are "necessary and appropriate."

Staff writers Helen Dewar, Dan Eggen, Bradley Graham and Ben White contributed to this report.

-------- spying

CIA Steps Up Scope, Pace Of Efforts On Terrorism
Intelligence Agencies Focus on Cooperation

By Walter Pincus
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, October 9, 2001; Page A04
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28231-2001Oct8.html

The CIA has doubled the size of its counterterrorism center since the Sept. 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, adding not only more of its own analysts and operations officers but also FBI and Pentagon personnel, including members of the Army's Special Forces, according to senior intelligence officials.

The center, long portrayed as an analytical operation, has become a hub for planning and overseeing offensive military operations in Afghanistan as well as key activities related to homeland defense, one official said.

The center also directs clandestine activities in the terrorism area, including covert operations and recruitment of agents.

Although military officers from the U.S. Central Command have always been represented at CIA headquarters, the addition of Special Forces officers involved in the Afghan offensive illustrates the major role intelligence is playing in the war on terrorism.

The overall pace of interagency intelligence activities has also increased. In what one senior official described as a classified two-page, "we are at war" memo, CIA Director George J. Tenet on Sept. 16 directed that employees eliminate turf wars and cut out "bureaucratic impediments to success" because intelligence handling "must be absolutely seamless in waging this war, and we must lead."

Without referring to past controversies and criticisms that intelligence had failed to stop operations by Osama bin Laden in part because of squabbling between agencies, Tenet's memo said "all the rules have changed." There "must be absolute and full sharing of ideas and capabilities," not only inside the agency but in its dealings with "law enforcement, military and other civilian agencies and other intelligence community colleagues."

Attached to the memo, which was first reported by the New York Times, was a list of new intelligence reports and databases to be pulled together.

Reflecting the new across-the-board cooperation between the CIA and the rest of the intelligence community, Tenet spends most days with President Bush and his national security team, according to intelligence officials. On Sunday, for example, he was at the White House for a morning meeting and called back in the afternoon when the U.S. bombing of terrorist sites in Afghanistan began.

Intelligence officials have stepped up their activities in the wake of the attacks.

Several times a day, Tenet and his top aides receive situation reports that provide what subordinates in operations and analysis consider "hot" material, sources said. At least twice a day the CIA holds a senior staff meeting. Tenet receives additional materials at night, and in the morning he gets a briefing in his car while on his way to the White House.

Several times a day, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice runs a telephone conference call that includes Secretary of State Colin L. Powell or his deputy, Richard L. Armitage; a senior Defense Department official; a representative from the Joint Chiefs of Staff; and Tenet or his deputy.

Since the Sept. 11 attacks, Joan Dempsey, deputy director of central intelligence for community management, has chaired a late afternoon intelligence community conference with representatives of the Defense Intelligence Agency, the National Security Agency and the National Imagery and Mapping Agency.

Reports pour into the counterterrorism center not only from CIA operatives around the world but also from FBI agents who operate in more than 20 countries. Much of this information is derived from the liaison relationships both organizations maintain with police and intelligence agencies of the countries in which they operate.

The FBI and CIA have been criticized for failing to fully exchange information. To ensure that there is a more complete exchange of information, officials from the counterterrorism center meet twice a day with FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III and his deputies to go over new data. Cofer Black, the director of the counterterrorism center, regularly confers with bureau officials.

Black has devoted a major part of his career to counterterrorism. He was stationed in Sudan while that country was considered a major sponsor of terrorist activities. He is also credited with bringing down the terrorist who operated under the name "Carlos the Jackal."

--------

Suppressed Details of Criminal Insider Trading lead directly into the CIA`s Highest Ranks
CIA Executive Director "Buzzy" Krongard managed Firm that handled "put" Options on UAL

by Michael C. Ruppert,
FTW Publications,
9 October 2001;
Centre for Research on Globalisation, globalresearch.ca,
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/RUP110A.html

Although uniformly ignored by the mainstream U.S. media, there is abundant and clear evidence that a number of transactions in financial markets indicated specific (criminal) foreknowledge of the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. That evidence also demonstrates that, in the case of at least one of these trades -- which has left a $2.5 million prize unclaimed -- the firm used to place the "put options" on United Airlines stock was, until 1998, managed by the man who is now in the number three Executive Director position at the Central Intelligence Agency. Until 1997 A.B. "Buzzy" Krongard had been Chairman of the investment bank A.B. Brown. A.B. Brown was acquired by Banker's Trust in 1997. Krongard then became, as part of the merger, Vice Chairman of Banker's Trust-AB Brown, one of 20 major U.S. banks named by Senator Carl Levin this year as being connected to money laundering. Krongard's last position at Banker's Trust (BT) was to oversee "private client relations." In this capacity he had direct hands-on relations with some of the wealthiest people in the world in a kind of specialized banking operation that has been identified by the U.S. Senate and other investigators as being closely connected to the laundering of drug money.

Krongard (re?) joined the CIA in 1998 as counsel to CIA Director George Tenet. He was promoted to CIA Executive Director by President Bush in March of this year. BT was acquired by Deutsche Bank in 1999. The combined firm is the single largest bank in Europe. And, as we shall see, Deutsche Bank played several key roles in events connected to the September 11 attacks.

The Scope of Known Insider Trading

Before looking further into these relationships it is necessary to look at the insider trading information that is being ignored by Reuters, The New York Times and other mass media. It is well documented that the CIA has long monitored such trades - in real time - as potential warnings of terrorist attacks and other economic moves contrary to U.S. interests. Previous stories in FTW have specifically highlighted the use of Promis software to monitor such trades.

It is necessary to understand only two key financial terms to understand the significance of these trades. "Selling Short" is the borrowing of stock, selling it at current market prices, but not being required to actually produce the stock for some time. If the stock falls precipitously after the short contract is entered, the seller can then fulfill the contract by buying the stock after the price has fallen and complete the contract at the pre-crash price. These contracts often have a window of as long as four months. "Put Options," purchased at nominal prices of, for example, $1.00 per share, are sold in blocks of 100 shares. If exercised, they give the holder the option of selling selected stocks at a future date at a price set when the contract is issued. Thus, for an investment of $10,000 it might be possible to tie up 10,000 shares of United or American Airlines at $100 per share, and the seller of the option is then obligated to buy them if the option is executed. If the stock has fallen to $50 when the contract matures, the holder of the option can purchase the shares for $50 and immediately sell them for $100 - regardless of where the market then stands.

A "call option" is the reverse of a put option, which is, in effect, a derivatives bet that the stock price will go up.

A September 21 story by the Israeli Herzliyya International Policy Institute for Counterterrorism, entitled "Black Tuesday: The World's Largest Insider Trading Scam?" documented the following trades connected to the September 11 attacks:

Between September 6 and 7, the Chicago Board Options Exchange saw purchases of 4,744 put options on United Airlines, but only 396 call options... Assuming that 4,000 of the options were bought by people with advance knowledge of the imminent attacks, these "insiders" would have profited by almost $5 million.

On September 10, 4,516 put options on American Airlines were bought on the Chicago exchange, compared to only 748 calls. Again, there was no news at that point to justify this imbalance;... Again, assuming that 4,000 of these options trades represent "insiders," they would represent a gain of about $4 million.

[The levels of put options purchased above were more than six times higher than normal.]

No similar trading in other airlines occurred on the Chicago exchange in the days immediately preceding Black Tuesday.

Morgan Stanley Dean Witter & Co., which occupied 22 floors of the World Trade Center, saw 2,157 of its October $45 put options bought in the three trading days before Black Tuesday; this compares to an average of 27 contracts per day before September 6. Morgan Stanley's share price fell from $48.90 to $42.50 in the aftermath of the attacks. Assuming that 2,000 of these options contracts were bought based upon knowledge of the approaching attacks, their purchasers could have profited by at least $1.2 million.

Merrill Lynch & Co., which occupied 22 floors of the World Trade Center, saw 12,215 October $45 put options bought in the four trading days before the attacks; the previous average volume in those shares had been 252 contracts per day [a 1200% increase!]. When trading resumed, Merrill's shares fell from $46.88 to $41.50; assuming that 11,000 option contracts were bought by "insiders," their profit would have been about $5.5 million.

European regulators are examining trades in Germany's Munich Re, Switzerland's Swiss Re, and AXA of France, all major reinsurers with exposure to the Black Tuesday disaster. [FTW Note: AXA also owns more than 25% of American Airlines stock making the attacks a "double whammy" for them.]

On September 29, 2001 - in a vital story that has gone unnoticed by the major media - the San Francisco Chronicle reported, "Investors have yet to collect more than $2.5 million in profits they made trading options in the stock of United Airlines before the Sept. 11, terrorist attacks, according to a source familiar with the trades and market data.

"The uncollected money raises suspicions that the investors - whose identities and nationalities have not been made public - had advance knowledge of the strikes." They don't dare show up now. The suspension of trading for four days after the attacks made it impossible to cash-out quickly and claim the prize before investigators started looking.

"... October series options for UAL Corp. were purchased in highly unusual volumes three trading days before the terrorist attacks for a total outlay of $2,070; investors bought the option contracts, each representing 100 shares, for 90 cents each. [This represents 230,000 shares]. Those options are now selling at more than $12 each. There are still 2,313 so-called "put" options outstanding [valued at $2.77 million and representing 231,300 shares] according to the Options Clearinghouse Corp."

"...The source familiar with the United trades identified Deutsche Bank Alex. Brown, the American investment banking arm of German giant Deutsche Bank, as the investment bank used to purchase at least some of these options..."

As reported in other news stories, Deutsche Bank was also the hub of insider trading activity connected to Munich Re. just before the attacks.

CIA, the Banks and the Brokers

Understanding the interrelationships between CIA and the banking and brokerage world is critical to grasping the already frightening implications of the above revelations. Let's look at the history of CIA, Wall Street and the big banks by looking at some of the key players in CIA's history. Clark Clifford - The National Security Act of 1947 was written by Clark Clifford, a Democratic Party powerhouse, former Secretary of Defense, and one-time advisor to President Harry Truman. In the 1980s, as Chairman of First American Bancshares, Clifford was instrumental in getting the corrupt CIA drug bank BCCI a license to operate on American shores. His profession: Wall Street lawyer and banker.

John Foster and Allen Dulles - These two brothers "designed" the CIA for Clifford. Both were active in intelligence operations during WW II. Allen Dulles was the U.S. Ambassador to Switzerland where he met frequently with Nazi leaders and looked after U.S. investments in Germany. John Foster went on to become Secretary of State under Dwight Eisenhower and Allen went on to serve as CIA Director under Eisenhower and was later fired by JFK. Their professions: partners in the most powerful - to this day - Wall Street law firm of Sullivan, Cromwell.

Bill Casey - Ronald Reagan's CIA Director and OSS veteran who served as chief wrangler during the Iran-Contra years was, under President Richard Nixon, Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission. His profession: Wall Street lawyer and stockbroker.

David Doherty - The current Vice President of the New York Stock Exchange for enforcement is the retired General Counsel of the Central Intelligence Agency.

George Herbert Walker Bush - President from 1989 to January 1993, also served as CIA Director for 13 months from 1976-7. He is now a paid consultant to the Carlyle Group, the 11th largest defense contractor in the nation, and which shares joint investments with the bin Laden family.

A.B. "Buzzy" Krongard - The current Executive Director of the Central Intelligence Agency is the former Chairman of the investment bank A.B. Brown and former Vice Chairman of Banker's Trust.

John Deutch - This retired CIA Director from the Clinton Administration currently sits on the board at Citigroup, the nation's second largest bank, which has been repeatedly and overtly involved in the documented laundering drug money. This includes Citigroup's 2001 purchase of a Mexican bank known to launder drug money, Banamex.

Nora Slatkin - This retired CIA Executive Director also sits on Citibank's board.

Maurice "Hank" Greenburg - The CEO of AIG insurance, manager of the third largest capital investment pool in the world, was floated as a possible CIA Director in 1995. FTW exposed Greenberg's and AIG's long connection to CIA drug trafficking and covert operations in a two-part series that was interrupted just prior to the attacks of September 11. AIG's stock has bounced back remarkably well since the attacks. To read that story, please go to http://www.copvcia.com/stories/part_2.html.

One wonders how much damning evidence is necessary to respond to what is now irrefutable proof that CIA knew about the attacks and did not stop them. Whatever our government is doing, whatever the CIA is doing, it is clearly NOT in the interests of the American people, especially those who died on September 11.

-------- terrorism

IRS center shuts down after hazardous material scare

By Patrick Crowley
The Cincinnati Enquirer,
Tue, 9 Oct 2001

COVINGTON - A 3,500-employee IRS office in Covington is under a full lockdown today, and hazardous materials experts are investigating after workers reported a suspicious sticky substance in an envelope that had been handled by several people.

Emergency workers brought one woman wearing a blue business suit out of the building and began scrubbing her down in a large black tub. After scrubbing her, they removed her clothes, wrapped her twice plastic and took her to St. Elizabeth's Hospital North for further decontamination and observation.

Otherwise, no one was being allowed in or out of the Cincinnati IRS Center on Fourth street, and fire department hazmat teams were seen taking hoses into the building.

Officials placed the suspicious letter in a can, which was placed in a police car and driven to a waiting Hamilton County Sheriff's Office helicopter and flown away.

Chris Kerns, a spokesman for the IRS said the building, which can have as many as 3,500 workers in offices and 188 children in its childcare facility, is in ''standard procedure lockdown.''

The center, which processed 20 million individual and business tax returns from seven states, has had about 20 similar incidents in past 5 years.

But this lockdown, coming as the nation anticipates retribution for the U.S. bombing of Taliban and terrorist targets in Afghanistan comes only a day after six people were hosed down by hazardous materials crews at a doctor's office on Montgomery Road in Sycamore Township , following delivery of a suspicious package Monday.

Local and national officials are scrambling to increase stockpiles of medical tools to fight a potential biological attack and one such incident seems to be unfolding in south Florida.

Federal officials suspect foul play rather than an environmental source is at the root of two Florida anthrax cases that have left one man dead and hundreds of co-workers lining up for medical tests.

The FBI on Monday sealed off the Boca Raton offices of American Media Inc., where both men worked, and agents donned protective gear before going inside.

The IRS center can have up to 188 children in its childcare center for employees. About 5,000 people are employed by the IRS in Cincinnati, with about 3,500 working at the center.

The Associated Press and Enquirer staffers Lori Hayes, Amy Higgins and Chris Mayhew contributed to this report.


-------- activists

Anti-war activists continue protests

Washington Times
October 9, 2001
By Valerie Richardson
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20011009-86335684.htm

While most Americans were applauding President Bush's decision to strike at terrorists in Afghanistan yesterday, clusters of peace activists were doing their best to shift public opinion in favor of peace.

Bands of demonstrators held noisy but peaceful protests yesterday in a dozen U.S. cities, including Boston, New York, Washington, Los Angeles and Berkeley, Calif., calling on the Bush administration to stop fighting and start listening to the grievances of anti-American factions in the Middle East.

"Killing Afghan people and bombing Afghanistan - that doesn't change things," said Barbara Lubin, executive director of the Middle East Children's Alliance, who participated in an anti-war rally in Berkeley yesterday.

"The real hope for us as Americans is to say we really have to start behaving justly in the world," she said. "That means not spending $6 billion every year on Israel. You cannot expect Arab and Muslim people not to be enraged."

At the forefront of the anti-war rallies was the International Action Coalition, an anti-capitalism group founded by former Attorney General Ramsey Clark. The coalition, which has started a protest movement called ANSWER, or Act Now to Stop War and End Racism, yesterday called for a national student walkout and an "emergency response against war" in eight U.S. cities and in Australia.

The group argued that war would only lead to more casualties. "If President Bush gets his way, instead of thousands of people being killed, the number of victims at home and abroad could grow to the tens of thousands and maybe more," the organization said on its Web site. "A new war against the people of the Middle East will only lead to an escalating of violence."

At the coalition's protest in San Francisco, about 1,000 demonstrators chanted, "Hey, hey, ho, ho, we don't want your racist war," while speakers blamed the war on capitalism and the influence of corporations, according to the San Francisco Examiner.

"This war is another war to extend the domination of corporate America," Richard Becker of the International Action Center told the crowd. "And to that, we say no."

By comparison, the Green Party was downright moderate. Although the Greens echoed the coalition's opposition to the military strikes, national spokesman Scott McLarty said the pro-environment political party had no plans to organize protests, and even praised Mr. Bush for saying he would try to avoid civilian casualties.

"We maintain the position that the U.S. should deal with this as an international crime against humanity, instead of a war," Mr. McLarty said. "There was the possibility of further attacks against the U.S. anyway, but this ups the ante quite a bit."

Most elected officials threw their support behind the military strikes, but Berkeley's were the exception. A majority of the nine-member City Council has come out against the bombing, and Vice Mayor Maudelle Shirek was the featured speaker at yesterday's protest rally.

"It's just machoism," said Berkeley City Council member Dona Spring. "Bush has got to prove he'll do something militarily, regardless of where Osama bin Laden is."

The Daily Californian, the University of California at Berkeley's student newspaper, quoted activists at Sunday's anti-war rally in San Francisco, who called for a U.S. defeat in Afghanistan. "It's one of the most disgraceful days in American history. I wish the people of Afghanistan victory against the forces of U.S. imperialism," said Russell Bates of Berkeley.

Rep. Barbara Lee, California Democrat and the only member of Congress to vote against the Sept. 14 resolution giving the president the authority to wage war against international terrorism, was more diplomatic. She issued a statement that stopped short of condemning the attack, but warned that the military strikes could result in the deaths of civilians.

"I pray for the safety and the well-being of the brave men and women in our armed forces who find themselves in harm's way," the Oakland Democrat said in a statement. "We can only hope that the loss of life of innocent men, women and children in Afghanistan is minimized as much as possible."

So far, those protesting the war are far outnumbered by those supporting it. Even peace activists agreed the anti-war rallies number no more than a few thousand.

----

Court clears Sheridan after arrest in naval base anti-nuclear protest

THe Scotsman
John Staples
Tuesday, 9th October 2001
http://www.thescotsman.co.uk/text_only.cfm?id=114670

THE Scottish socialist leader Tommy Sheridan was yesterday found not guilty of causing a breach of the peace during a mass demonstration outside the home of Britain's Trident nuclear submarine.

The 37-year-old Glasgow MSP was among hundreds of people arrested as they protested at the Faslane naval base on the River Clyde earlier this year.

But during an hour-long trial yesterday, Justice of the Peace Anthony Stirling found in Mr Sheridan's favour, stating mass arrests at peaceful demonstrations infringe people's human rights.

After his court hearing at Argyll and Bute district court in Helensburgh, Mr Sheridan said he hoped the verdict would encourage others to protest against nuclear weapons. "This is a significant ruling that shows that people taking part in peaceful protests against the barbarism of these weapons do not deserve to be arrested."

Mr Sheridan was one of 340 people, including the Labour MP George Galloway and several church ministers, arrested at the so-called Big Blockade at the naval base on 12 February.

Recording a not guilty verdict yesterday, Mr Stirling JP told the court: "Throughout the whole evidence here it appears that everyone at this demonstration behaved in a perfectly proper way and that the authorities were well aware of what was going on.

----

Why we oppose the war in Afghanistan
Statement of the WSWS Editorial Board

9 October 2001
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2001/oct2001/war-o09.shtml

The World Socialist Web Site condemns the American military assault on Afghanistan. We reject the dishonest claims of the Bush administration that this is a war for justice and the security of the American people against terrorism.

The hijack-bombings of September 11 were politically criminal attacks on innocent civilians. Whoever perpetrated this crime must be condemned as enemies of the American and international working class. The fact that no one has claimed responsibility only underscores the profoundly reactionary character of these attacks.

But while the events of September 11 have served as the catalyst for the assault on Afghanistan, the cause is far deeper. The nature of this or any war, its progressive or reactionary character, is determined not by the immediate events that preceded it, but rather by the class structures, economic foundations and international roles of the states that are involved. From this decisive standpoint, the present action by the United States is an imperialist war.

The US government initiated the war in pursuit of far-reaching international interests of the American ruling elite. What is the main purpose of the war? The collapse of the Soviet Union a decade ago created a political vacuum in Central Asia, which is home to the second largest deposit of proven reserves of petroleum and natural gas in the world.

The Caspian Sea region, to which Afghanistan provides strategic access, harbors approximately 270 billion barrels of oil, some 20 percent of the world's proven reserves. It also contains 665 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, approximately one-eighth of the planet's gas reserves.

These critical resources are located in the world's most politically unstable region. By attacking Afghanistan, setting up a client regime and moving vast military forces into the region, the US aims to establish a new political framework within which it will exert hegemonic control.

These are the real considerations that motivate the present war. The official version, that the entire American military has been mobilized because of one individual, Osama bin Laden, is ludicrous. Bin Laden's brand of ultra-nationalist and religious obscurantist politics is utterly reactionary, a fact that is underscored by his glorification of the destruction of the World Trade Center and murder of nearly 6,000 civilians.

But the US government's depiction of bin Laden as an evil demiurge serves a cynical purpose, to conceal the actual aims and significance of the present war.

The demonization of bin Laden is of a piece with the modus operandi of every war waged by the US over the past two decades, in each of which, whether against the Panamanian "drug lord" Manuel Noriega, the Somalian "war lord" Mohamed Farrah Aidid, or the modern-day "Hitlers" Saddam Hussein and Slobodan Milosevic, the American government and the media have sought to manipulate public opinion by portraying the targeted leader as the personification of evil.

In an October 8 op-ed column in the New York Times, Fawaz A. Gerges, a professor at Sarah Lawrence College, pointed to the real aims that motivate the US war drive. Describing a conference of Arab and Muslim organizations held a week ago in Beirut, Gerges wrote:

"Most participants claimed that the United States aims at far more than destroying Osama bin Laden's Al Qaeda organization and toppling the Taliban regime. These representatives of the Muslim world were almost unanimously suspicious of America's intentions, believing that the United States has an overarching strategy which includes control of the oil and gas resources in Central Asia, encroachment on Chinese and Russian spheres of influence, destruction of the Iraqi regime, and consolidation of America's grip on the oil-producing Persian Gulf regimes.

"Many Muslims suspected the Bush administration of hoping to exploit this tragedy to settle old scores and assert American hegemony in the world."

These suspicions are entirely legitimate. Were the US to oust the Taliban, capture or kill bin Laden and wipe out what Washington calls his terrorist training camps, the realization of these aims would not be followed by the withdrawal of American forces. Rather, the outcome would be the permanent placement of US military forces to establish the US as the exclusive arbiter of the region's natural resources. In these strategic aims lie the seeds of future and even more bloody conflicts.

This warning is substantiated by a review of recent history. America's wars of the past two decades have invariably arisen from the consequences of previous US policies. There is a chain of continuity, in which yesterday's US ally has become today's enemy.

The list includes the one-time CIA asset Noriega, the former Persian Gulf ally Saddam Hussein, and yesterday's American protégé Milosevic. Bin Laden and the Taliban are the latest in the chain of US assets transformed into targets for destruction.

In the case of Iraq, the US supported Saddam Hussein in the 1980s as an ally against the Khomeini regime in Iran. But when the Iraqi regime threatened US oil interests in the Persian Gulf, Saddam Hussein was transformed into a demon and war was launched against Baghdad. The main purpose of the Gulf War was to establish a permanent US military presence in the Persian Gulf, a presence that remains in place more than a decade later.

Even more tragic is the outcome of US sponsorship of bin Laden and the Taliban. They are products of the US policy, begun in the late 1970s and continued throughout the 1980s, of inciting Islamic fundamentalism to weaken the Soviet Union and undermine its influence in Central Asia.

Bin Laden and other Islamic fundamentalists were recruited by the CIA to wage war against the USSR and destabilize Central Asia.

In the chaos and mass destruction that followed, the Taliban was helped along and brought to power with the blessings of the American government.

Those who make US policy believed the Taliban would be useful in stabilizing Afghanistan after nearly two decades of civil war.

American policy-makers saw in this ultra-reactionary sect an instrument for furthering US aims in the Caspian basin and Persian Gulf, and placing increasing pressure on China and Russia. If, as the Bush administration claims, the hijack-bombing of the World Trade Center was the work of bin Laden and his Taliban protectors, then, in the most profound and direct sense, the political responsibility for this terrible loss of life rests with the American ruling elite itself.

The rise of Islamic fundamentalist movements, infused with anti-American passions, can be traced not only to US support for the Mujahedin in Afghanistan and Pakistan, but also to American assaults on the Arab world.

At the same time that the CIA was arming the fundamentalists in Afghanistan, it was supporting the Israeli invasion of Lebanon. This was followed in 1983 by the US bombing of Beirut, in which the battleship New Jersey lobbed 2,000-pound shells into civilian neighborhoods. This criminal action led directly to retribution in the form of the bombing of the US barracks in Beirut, which took the lives of 242 American soldiers.

The entire phenomenon associated with the figure of Osama bin Laden has its roots, moreover, in Washington's alliance with Saudi Arabia. The US has for decades propped up this feudalist autocracy, which has promoted its own brand of Islamic fundamentalism as a means of maintaining its grip on power.

All of these twists and turns, with their disastrous repercussions, arise from the nature of US foreign policy, which is not determined on the basis of democratic principles or formulated in open discussion and public debate. Rather, it is drawn up in pursuit of economic interests that are concealed from the American people.

When the US government speaks of a war against terrorism, it is thoroughly hypocritical, not only because yesterday's terrorist is today's ally, and vice versa, but because American policy has produced a social catastrophe that provides the breeding ground for recruits to terrorist organizations.

Nowhere are the results of American imperialism's predatory role more evident than in the indescribable poverty and backwardness that afflict the people of Afghanistan.

What are the future prospects arising from the latest eruption of American militarism? Even if the US achieves its immediate objectives, there is no reason to believe that the social and political tinderbox in Central Asia will be any less explosive.

US talk of "nation-building" in Afghanistan is predicated on its alliance with the anti-Taliban Northern Alliance, with whom the Pentagon is coordinating its military strikes. Just as Washington used the Albanian terrorist Kosovo Liberation Army as its proxy in Kosovo, so now it utilizes the gang of war lords centered in the northeast of Afghanistan as its cat's paw in Central Asia.

Since the Northern Alliance will now be portrayed as the champion of freedom and humanitarianism, it is instructive to note recent articles in the New York Times and elsewhere reporting that the vast bulk of the Afghan opium trade comes from the meager territory controlled by the Alliance.

The military satraps of the Northern Alliance are, moreover, notorious for killing thousands of civilians by indiscriminately firing rockets into Kabul in the early 1990s.

The sordid and illusory basis upon which the US proposes to "rebuild" Afghanistan, once it is finished pummeling the country, was suggested in a New York Times article on the onset of the war. "The Pentagon's hope," wrote the Times, "is that the combination of the psychological shock of the air strike, bribes to anti-Taliban forces in Afghanistan covertly supported by Washington and sheer opportunism will lead many of the Taliban's fighters to put down their arms and defect."

Given the nature of the region, with its vast stores of critical resources, it is, moreover, self-evident that none of the powers in Central Asia will long accept a settlement in which the US is the sole arbiter. Russia, Iran, China, Pakistan and India all have their own interests, and they will seek to pursue them. Furthermore, the US presence will inevitably conflict with the interests of the emerging bourgeois regimes, in the lesser states in the region, that have been carved out of the former Soviet Union.

At each stage in the eruption of American militarism, the scale of the resulting disasters becomes greater and greater. Now the US has embarked on an adventure in a region that has long been the focus of intrigue between the Great Powers, a part of the world, moreover, that is bristling with nuclear weapons and riven by social, political, ethnic and religious tensions that are compounded by abject poverty.

The New York Times, in a rare moment of lucidity, described the dangers implicit in the US war drive in an October 2 article headlined "In Pakistan, a Shaky Ally." The author wrote: "By drafting this fragile and fractious nation into a central role in the 'war on terrorism,' America runs the danger of setting off a cataclysm in a place where civil violence is a likely bet and nuclear weapons exist."

Neither in the proclamations of the US government, nor in the reportage of the media, is there any serious examination of the real economic and geo-strategic aims motivating the military assault. Nor is there any indication that the US political establishment has seriously considered the far-reaching and potentially catastrophic consequences of the course upon which it has embarked.

Despite a relentless media campaign to whip up chauvinism and militarism, the mood of the American people is not one of gung-ho support for the war.

At most, it is a passive acceptance that war is the only means to fight terrorism, a mood that owes a great deal to the efforts of a thoroughly dishonest media that serves as an arm of the state. Beneath the reluctant endorsement of military action is a profound sense of unease and skepticism. Tens of millions sense that nothing good can come of this latest eruption of American militarism.

The United States stands at a turning point. The government admits it has embarked on a war of indefinite scale and duration. What is taking place is the militarization of American society under conditions of a deepening social crisis.

The war will profoundly affect the conditions of the American and international working class. Imperialism threatens mankind at the beginning of the twenty-first century with a repetition on a more horrific scale of the tragedies of the twentieth. More than ever, imperialism and its depredations raise the necessity for the international unity of the working class and the struggle for socialism.

--------

Women's International League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF) Statement

Tue, 9 Oct 2001

Dear WILPF Members,

This statement was drafted by the Disarmament Committee and approved by the Board. We will be sending out a statement regarding the bombing soon.

We in the United States Section of the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF) share in the grief over the recent loss of precious human lives at the World Trade Center, in the four civilian aircraft and at the Pentagon. We wish to join those calling for sanity in our nation's response to the attack.

WILPF has rejected violence and war as a means of settling disputes since our founding in 1915 by Jane Addams and women from twelve other countries. We have worked always for peaceful societies under law with liberty and justice for all. We were among the first to propose the League of Nations, and have consistently supported the United Nations and the development of international law.

We commend those in the US government who, in this present time of crisis, grief and national mourning, have had the courage to speak out and refuse to let us "become the evil we deplore." We especially commend Congresswoman Barbara Lee of California who cast the lone vote against surrendering the right of Congress to declare war, and failing in its duty to serve as a check on the Pentagon and the Administration. We hope other members of Congress have since reflected on their own votes, and realize that, in handing over to the President and his military advisors the right to decide when and where to use military force without public debate, they have set a dangerous precedent.

We also commend, those in government who, after the first bellicose statements by some of our national leaders and the media, are now working within the framework of international law. They deserve our respect and our full support. The issue of attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon has been taken to the Security Council, as required under article 51 of the UN Charter. Under the Charter the US cannot now take military action unilaterally and without the support of the Council. International cooperation gives our country added strength. Terrorism is a problem for all nations and peoples and it cannot be wiped out with the counter-terrorism of a unilaterally declared war. The Security Council has invoked Chapter 7, binding on all 187 members of the United Nations, and passed Resolution 1373 requiring all states to prevent financing of terrorists, freeze their assets, eliminate their weapons supplies, deny safe haven to those who finance, plan, support or commit terrorist acts, crackdown on the training and movement of terrorists, and co-operate in any campaign against them including, if necessary, the use of force to maintain international peace and security.

We do have some serious concerns about this resolution, however, and ask the General Assembly to make certain that terrorism is adequately defined, that civil liberties are upheld, and that if force is employed, it must not be directed against civilian populations and should be the minimum necessary to achieve the goal. In no case should weapons already considered illegal under the United Nations, such as those employing toxic chemicals, biological weapons, land mines, depleted uranium or nuclear weapons in any form, be used by our own or any other country to control terrorism.

Now we call on Congress, in addition, to require our government to utilize the court system of the United Nations. These courts are designed to substitute rule by law for the terrorism of war. Countries accused of harboring terrorists, despite the UN Security Council Resolution, can be brought before the International Court of Justice. Individuals accused of supporting or utilizing terrorism can be brought before an ad hoc tribunal under the Security Council. The new International Criminal Court of Justice, which already has 44 of the required 60 ratifications, is expected soon to become operational. Members of Congress and the Administration should support, rather than hinder, its evolution as an important instrument in the international effort to reduce or eliminate terrorism.

Even as we grieve, we believe it is a time for deep reflection, and we hope members of Congress, and thoughtful citizens in the Administration, in the military, in the media, and in the general populace will join us. What changes in policy must we make if we are to lead our own country and our world into a future with human security and human rights for all? How are we to help create a livable world for our own children, and the children in all nations everywhere?

Over half of the United States annual discretionary budget now goes to the military, and less than 1% to non-military foreign aid. The US is the greatest military power in the world, and is responsible for 36% of the world's military expenditures and 50% of the arms sales. Yet our military could not protect us from this attack. Indeed, terrorists tend to turn our own weapons and training against us. Only a stable and peaceful world and international cooperation can protect us -- yet we have withheld funds from the United Nations and its agencies, and also withheld support from international efforts under the UN to control trade in small arms, to eliminate land mines and to control and eliminate weapons of mass destruction.

The United States now has much the largest arsenal of biological, chemical and nuclear weapons in the world. The actual use of these weapons is unthinkable to any who call themselves human, and has now been declared illegal under international law. Yet our country has been slow to rid itself of these weapons, and the administration has recently withdrawn, or threatened to withdraw, support from treaties already in force to eliminate biological weapons, to keep weapons out of space, to eliminate nuclear testing, to control nuclear proliferation and to proceed step-by-step toward nuclear disarmament. Where does this bring us? Certainly we realize that our stockpiles of these weapons make us vulnerable to sabotage and terrorist attack within our own country, and could lead to many more deaths than those that occurred on September 11.

We are also hearing calls for restrictions on our own civil liberties, and for a return to the use of assassinations by our CIA. The former can only destroy the greatest gift we have to share with the world, the latter will make us criminals under international law and, again, draw us deeper into "the evil we deplore."

Finally, we urge our fellow citizens to at least listen to those who, out of love of country, dare to say what many do not wish to hear. Our government, too, has in the past supported terrorists -- including some of the very groups we fear today -- and used the methods of terrorism to unseat democratically elected governments in the service of our own perceived "national interest." Let us have the maturity to face this and other difficult truths about ourselves, and to bring our own policies into harmony with the visions set forth in the United Nations Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

So we in the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom, with undiminished hope for the future, call on Congress, the Administration, and US citizens everywhere to show the best loved face of [America] [our country] to the world. Let us show forth our love for one another, our sense of community, our compassion and generosity, our civil liberties, our courage and creative intelligence, and our ability to work hard locally and globally to build a better world. Let us go forward asserting our faith in democracy, in human rights, in the rule of law at home and internationally, and in our hope for a demilitarized world at peace, with liberty and justice for all.

-------

Terrorism takes all sides
Every nation that kills innocents deserves the 'terrorist' label

by Robert Scheer
Creators Syndicate
10.09.01

For three weeks now, ever since the horror of the World Trade Center, I have been tempted but have lacked the courage to question the use of the label "terrorism." The parsing of language seemed inappropriate in a time of profound national mourning.

Yet, now that we are in a full-blown international war against what our President defines as "terrorism," it's appropriate to ask what it is we're talking about.

Clearly, terrorism applies to acts of violence aimed at innocent civilians, an extension of war beyond its proper boundaries, and therefore the deserved subject of universal contempt.

However, while such acts are obviously deeply despicable, they cannot be simply defined as exclusively the work of stateless maniacs and never the work of recognized governments. Indeed, President Bush has recognized the possibility of state terrorism when he committed to punish those governments that harbor or sponsor terrorists.

Are not all bombings of civilians, even by armies of a state in times of war, acts of terror? What of the tens of thousands of civilian dead in Iraq as the result of our much celebrated success in "Operation Desert Storm?" Was that not an act of real-life carnage despite its movie marquee name?

Or the million civilians killed by the U.S. with napalm and anti-personnel bomblets in the "carpet-bombing" of Vietnam? And that other million dead civilians in Afghanistan whose blood was on the hands of the Soviet communists, one of whom is now the elected leader of Russia and our ally in the war against terrorism? Or the tens of millions of civilians systematically killed during World War II in acts of genocide by armies loyal to the Russian motherland and German fatherland?

What of the dropping of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which resulted, in the death of more than 300,000 people a decision earning President Harry S Truman Time magazine's Man of the Year award in 1945? By its very design, the nuclear weapon must be thought of as an instrument of terror because the purpose of what its makers call "city busters" is to disorientate, demoralize and destroy large numbers of civilians. In the bombing of Hiroshima, with one atomic bomb, pathetically small by today's standards, cutely named "Little Boy" as opposed to the "Fat Man" that obliterated Nagasaki, less than 10 percent of the dead were by any definition, combatants.

Ironically, abandoning our already limited concern about the proliferation of these ultimate terror weapons has been a major, if barely noticed, cost of the alliance against terrorism that the U.S. has assembled. Pakistan and India are involved in the most virulent nuclear arms race in the world today, and our government has dropped all sanctions aimed at ending that dash for oblivion.

It would be healthy for a world transfixed by the scene of devastation in lower Manhattan to glance at the photos of the miles of destruction of family homes and the limbs of babies in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Healthy, because it is inevitable that somewhere, someday, a terrorist cell will be able to lay waste to a major population center unless we get the evil nuclear genie back in the bottle. Healthy because evil does not fester only in the schemes of the obviously deranged but rather, in the case of nuclear weapons, was the product of the most refined thought of our best and apparently, at the time, most balanced thinkers.

It is important to be reminded of the terror committed by governments run by those who paid lip service to the virtues of Western Civilization, the Enlightenment, Christianity, capitalist freedom and socialist justice at time when Islam is all too easily held accountable for such acts of barbarism.

No one is invulnerable to the grip of madness, not of the left or right, religious or secular, educated or illiterate, rich or poor, and sometimes they manage to get the power of a state to endorse their grievances, real or imagined.

How easy to hold the obviously evil Taliban responsible for the Saudi Isamu bin Laden when he is in fact all too common a byproduct of the religious extremism flourishing in his native nation. The hijackers were educated in and traveling on the passports of the very states whose monarchs and dictators now act so perplexed over their citizens' evil behavior. How convenient to forget that it is Saudi Arabia, which owes its existence and wealth to our military intervention, that spews the most vituperative version of the Islamic religion and, indeed, exported it with missionary zeal to the less benighted lands like Afghanistan.

Just another caution that the war against terrorism will not end with the rout of the Taliban.

Robert Scheer's national column appears weekly on WorkingForChange.

--------

Anti-war activities
Ten thousand rally against war in Berlin. Five thousand school students take strike action

Dateline: 9 October 2001

A demonstration of more than 10,000 marched through Berlin against the war on October 8, reports comrade Sascha from SAV, German section of the CWI. The broad anti war coalition, which we are a part of, called it.

During the opening rally three SAV members were amongst the seven speakers. Comrade Daniel chaired the rally, Nelli, a young school student, spoke for the school students' anti war committee, and I spoke for SAV. We sold 22 papers and raised 70 Deutschmarks for the fighting fund.

We distributed many leaflets for a SAV public meeting on Thursday and a school students' meeting on Friday.

After the demonstration more than ten comrades intervened in a protest against a fascist NPD demonstration "against the war". As we were the only ones with a megaphone we could set the tone. The fascists' demo broke up ten minutes after we arrived.

All the comrades here are extremely enthusiastic about today's successes. Now we have to concentrate on recruitment and building International Resistance out of it.

Earlier on October 8 5,000 school students struck in Berlin against the war on Afghanistan. The strike was called by a committee 'School Students against the War', which was formed by International Resistance and German CWI members. We organised school students from over 20 schools in the last few weeks. This has been the biggest school students' demonstration for a long time. Several young CWI members gave speeches, which were regularly interrupted by strong applause.

The SAV got a very good reception at the demonstration and we sold 50 papers, and collected 170 Deutschmarks for the fighting fund. A further 220 Deutschmarks was raised for the school students' committee.

There were many attempts by some teachers and Head masters to intimidate school students. In one school the headmaster locked the doors to keep the school students inside the school. In another school students were forbidden to leave the school even if they had no courses! A teacher threatened two young comrades, saying they would be put on trial for manslaughter (!) if something happened to a school student on the demo!

The demo was supported by the PDS group in the Berlin Federal State parliament and we received some practical support (such as megaphones) from trade unions. The Berlin mayor said that the actions of the school students were an "unexcused absence from school, but nothing more" which can be interpreted as a signal to the headmasters not to take action against strikers.

All over Germany demonstrations took place yesterday and are also taking place today (October 9).

1000 on anti-war demo in Stockholm

On Monday October 8 there were anti-war protests in around ten cities in Sweden against the bombings, writes Marcus Kollbrunner. Most had around 200 participants, and in Gothenburg there were 400. In Stockholm 1,000 people joined the protest called by the Coalition Against War and Terrorism, which was initiated by us. We had two speakers and one of the two chairs. The Coalition in Stockholm is now made up of 30-40 organisations, Left and immigrant groups. The coalition is calling for a demo next Saturday, which could be quite bigger than today's demo. There will be anti-war demos in several other cities on that day.

Over 1,000 rally in SF Bay Area

On October 7 the SF Bay Area Branch of Socialist Alternative (SA) mobilised its forces for a teach-in, reports comrade Carlos. It organised by the SF Town Hall Committee Against War and Hate (4 members of SA sit on its 14-Member steering committee). Our two big banners calling for 'NO War, No Racism, Defend Civil Liberties' were the only banners at the event together with a banner of the coalition with the same slogans. There were several speakers, including comrade Carlos who spoke about the effect of the war amongst immigrant communities and making the concrete motion to mobilise all the forces of the coalition to support the Immigrant Rights Movement's March on October 13. There were about 1,700 people present.

After the teach in, all the people organised into a contingent and joined another 800 people from another coalition in a three hour march throughout the working class neighbourhoods of the City. Our banners were among the most prominent ones. We sold/distributed about 1,500 newspapers/SA statements; 3,000 leaflets with our positions; 2,000 leaflets inviting people to the October 13 march. The demo was joined by hundreds of other people and swelled to 5,000. We got 120 new names of people interested in SA.

On October 8 the SF Bay Area Branch helped to mobilise around 600 students for a rally at noon in UC Berkeley. Comrade Carlos was one of the featured speakers and he was very well received. Journalists present interviewed him and he is now scheduled to appear as the only guest in a half hour TV Show about "Terrorism, War and Immigrants."

'Not in my name' - thousands on NY anti-war demonstrations

On Sunday, October 6th, the SA branch participated at a larger rally at Union Square and a march to 42nd Street. About 3,000 people attended the rally. This a very positive event because it signalled that even at the start of the conflict there would be opposition to the war in NYC. There was a much more pronounced presence of young college students at the rally. We distributed 600 copies of a special flier that we produced and sold 50 Statements and a small number of newspapers. The mood was good and it represented a certain revival for the crumbling NYC liberal Left.

SA comrade Eljeer was prominently displayed in Newsday, a daily metropolitan newspaper with a large circulation. He was photographed at the Oct 7 rally on Sunday having a heated discussion with a pro-war Zionist youth. He was also interviewed by Channel 4 station, but it never made the air, probably because of its radical message. The anti-war rally in Times Square yesterday (Oct 8) was the first in New York since the bombing began on Sunday, and the crowd was fairly small probably 100-150 strong. There was quite a large rally of thousands the day before, and perhaps this was the reason for Monday's small turnout. The anti-war demo was heckled and jeered at by a rowdy group of pro-war types.

We sold 15 copies of our statement, 'End The Cycle Of Terrorism' and distributed 100 leaflets and collected names on our sign-up sheet. One demonstrator gave us $5.00 for the statement. Today we will be intervening in a meeting of the Hunter Coalition against War and Racism. We will also be fly posting for our public meeting this Wednesday at the Hunter College Socialist Club.

Significantly, the healthcare workers union 1199 has come out against the war and a large number of union officials have signed an anti-war statement.

Comrades are reporting some very good discussions at their workplaces as well as an increase in anxiety and fear about what is going to happen.

Since September 11 despite the difficult mood that existed, comrades intervened quite successfully raising issues about why the bombings took place and what was behind the tragedy.

Among some workers there was a mood of quiet scepticism about the situation and a thirst to understand. For many people this was the first time that they had to consider international policy and the world situation. There was a period of three weeks when discussions were taking place about the situation in the Middle East, terrorism, US foreign policy, etc.

We intervened with the SA statement, 'End the Cycle of Terrorism', the CWI statement, Socialism Today magazine and the SA newspaper at Hunter College teach-ins, which were attended by a couple of hundred people.

On Saturday, September 29, several comrades intervened with the same material at a small rally / march (about 300) at 42nd Street against the war preparations. Three people said they were interested in joining us. We sold about 30 copies of the US Statement, about 10 newspapers and 3 copies of Socialism Today. (NY reports by comrades Alan and Margaret).

Chicago protests

The Chicago SA branch intervened in two anti-war protests of thousands on 8-9 October.

Student walk-out planned in Boston

In the wake of the US bombing of Afghanistan, students from five UMass (university) colleges will walk-out of classes and gather at central spots on their respective campuses in protest, reports comrade Chris.

Three thousand march in Melbourne

The Socialist Party (Australian CWI section) made up a contingent on Monday' s emergency anti-war rally and a march in Melbourne, which attracted around 2-3000 people, reports Jim O'Connor.

We distributed an updated colander of anti-war events. We raised A$58 in paper sales and fighting fund. We are finding that our large and artistic banner is attracting people to our stall. We are participating in the broader movement and simultaneously reaching out to high school students by leafleting schools. We are setting up a group called 'Youth Against the War' and received ten names of people interested in joining the SP in less than an hour during the city street stall last Friday. We are also setting up local anti-war groups in selected suburbs.

We are gearing up for the federal election campaign on November 10. The major parties, Labour and Liberal, are pro-war. We are standing comrade Steve Jolly and will be making the war an election issue.

We are attempting to put forward our socialist ideas on platforms at the big anti-war rallies. Groups such as the ISO (SWP) and Democratic Socialist Party (DSP) tend to have strident rhetoric and slogans that are out of touch with the current consciousness of the working class.

Weekly anti-war meetings and rallies continue. The next big one is on Saturday.

London Socialist Party members on the first protests against war Socialist Party members in Britain were out on a demonstration within 30 minutes of the bombings starting on Sunday 7 October, reports Ken Smith. Out of a hastily organised demonstration of 200 we had nearly 40 comrades.

We got a good response and sold over 30 papers. One comrade sold eight papers to passers-by alone. Two comrades, Lois Austin and Nancy Taaffe, were also quoted in the national press the following day.

Lois was recognised as the leader of the demonstration. Dave Nellist, Socialist Party councillor in Coventry and national chair of the Socialist Alliance also issued a press release and was interviewed on two regional radio stations.

At present, Dave is also likely to be the Socialist Alliance speaker on the big anti-war demo, which is scheduled for this Saturday, 13 October.

The following day (Monday) there was an anti-war protest of over 2,000 in London. We sold over 150 papers on this and got hundreds of names for our anti-war campaign. Three people joined the party on the demo.

Again we got good press coverage out of this, and Dave Nellist was described in The Independent (London) the following day as being the organiser of the Stop the War protests.

There has generally been a good response on our paper sales and public meetings. Although some areas reported a flat mood just before the bombings started. But, nevertheless there have been some very good successes, including in Coventry, where comrades sold 67 papers. Bristol also sold 120 papers over two days.

Almost all of our public meetings so far have had new people at them and new people have joined the party in most areas as a result. Also, in some areas comrades are playing a leading role in the anti-war coalitions and some comrades have been platform speakers at their public meetings.

Five hundred outside the US embassy in Brussels

On October 8 there was an anti-war activity in Brussels initiated by a Flemish peace organisation called 'Vrede' (it is mainly a study circle that was originally linked with the Communist Party but which now works independently and is attracting some). Comrade Els explains that many other organisations were involved in this activity, as well as the Flemish Christian Union. Between 400 and 500 people attended the rally outside the US embassy. Twelve comrades sold between 25 and 30 papers. We had a two-language International Resistance leaflet, which advertised the national school student strike on 19 October. The strike was announced at the protest. We called for protests at the EU summit not only to campaign against neo-liberal policies but also against the war.

Building the anti-war movement in the Czech Republic

Immediately after bombing started we sent out a public statement in the name of our organisation and called for a demonstration in the centre of Prague, reports Vasek Votruba, (Socialisticka Alternativa Budoucnost).

Today (8 0ctober) we collected around 20 signatures against war, gave out 50 leaflets and sold 20 issues of our paper and 30 special statements, including a history of Afghanistan.

On the most recent anti-war demo there were around 50 to 100 people. We had Socialisticka alternativa Budoucnost banner - 'Poverty, War, Terrorism = Capitalism'. We collected 30 signatures, sold 30 issues of paper and more than 40 statements.

Unfortunately there is very strong pro-War propaganda by the government and media. Most people think there is not alternative to the "bombing of terrorists". But around 20% in polls stand against this. We try to show them an alternative with our slogans and propaganda: No to war! No to terrorism! which have been quite successful slogan. We have seven names of people who want to help us with this campaign. We have to give the real facts, stand against government and media propaganda and build support for another protest/demo. The Humanist Movement plans a demo for 19 October.

Globalise Resistance just collected signatures under the vague petition 'Stop the War' at the last rally. They do not talk about a solution to Afghanistan, they have no leaflets, and they have no papers. It shows us the importance of the CWI, and to have reports from US, Britain and other sections and how serious our approach is, even if in an unfavourable situation. People who meet us now know this.

We got an e-mail message from a young student who visited our web page, agrees with our statements, and want to help with our campaign against school fees.

Four thousand rally in Tokyo

The international press reports that around 4,000 people rallied and demonstrated in Tokyo, Japan in protest against terrorism and a possible U.S. retaliatory war. The rally was organised by the National Confederation of Trade Unions (Zenroren) and peace organisations.

Protests in five Dutch cities

On Sunday there were hastily organised pickets and demos in five cities, reports Patrick from Offensief, Dutch section of the CWI. On Monday, they took place in twelve cities, such as Rotterdam and Amsterdam. The turnout included 300 in Amsterdam, and 500 in the northern town of Groningen. Other demos were smaller.

There will be a big national demo at Saturday 20 October in Amsterdam, organised by the same broad committee (now including 165 groups) that held the 7,000 strong rally on 30 September.

Offensief was mentioned in a special article in a rightwing/liberal national quality paper. It discussed the relationship between the anti-capitalist and peace-movement. Ronald was quoted as a member of Offensief, saying that if the war were still on at the time of the Brussels demo, it would turn into an anti-war-demo.

Portuguese Left fails to seriously organise anti-war protests

Neither the Portuguese Left parties nor the trade union movement have been taking initiatives against the war, reports Francisco from Alternativa Socialista. Up to now, only an organisation inspired by the Partido Comunista (communist party) has done anything, advertising a rally in front of the Israeli embassy to mark the first anniversary of the Intifada.

We in Alternativa Socialista have translated of the CWI statement on the US bombings, as well as the statement of Socialist Alternative in the USA and we will also publish Trotsky's article on individual terrorism. We have also sent a statement to Left Bloc (a broad Left party) members, union members and others on the Left.

-------

Differences Between Terrorists and US Government
Confused? Having difficulty telling the good guys from the bad guys? Use this handy guide to differences between terrorists and the U.S. government:

by Daniel Solnit,
Dissident Voice,
October 9, 2001

TERRORISTS: Supposed leader is the spoiled son of a powerful politician, from extremely wealthy oil family US GOVERNMENT: Supposed leader is the spoiled son of a powerful politician, from extremely wealthy oil family

TERRORISTS: Leader has declared a holy war ('Jihad') against his 'enemies'; believes any nation not with him is against him; believes god is on his side, and that any means are justified. US GOVERNMENT: Leader has declared a holy war ('Crusade') against his 'enemies'; believes any nation not with him is against him; believes god is on his side, and that any means are justified.

TERRORISTS: Supported by extreme fundamentalist religious leaders who preach hatred, intolerance, subjugation of women, and persecution of non-believers US GOVERNMENT: Supported by extreme fundamentalist religious leaders who preach hatred, intolerance, subjugation of women, and persecution of non-believers

TERRORISTS: Leadership was not elected by a majority of the people in a free and fair democratic election US GOVERNMENT: Leadership was not elected by a majority of the people in a free and fair democratic election

TERRORISTS: Kills thousands of innocent civilians, some of them children, in cold blooded bombings US GOVERNMENT: Kills (tens of) thousands of innocent civilians, some of them children, in cold blooded bombings

TERRORISTS: Operates through clandestine organization (al Qaeda) with agents in many countries; uses bombing, assassination, other terrorist tactics US GOVERNMENT: Operates through clandestine organization (CIA) with agents in many countries; uses bombing, assassination, other terrorist tactics

TERRORISTS: Using war as pretext to clamp down on dissent and undermine civil liberties US GOVERNMENT: Using war as pretext to clamp down on dissent and undermine civil liberties

TERRORISTS: Weapon of choice: a three-dollar box cutter US GOVERNMENT: Weapon of choice: a billion-dollar B1 bomber

Daniel Solnit is Executive Director for the Leadership Institute for Ecology and the Economy, and a supremo with the Sonoma County Green Party.

-----

Unjust attacks should stop immediately

9 October 2001
Asahi Shimbun Newspaper
By Yo Hemmi [Mr. Yo Hemmi is one of the bestselling writers in Japan.]

Is there any international legal or human justification in these retaliatory attacks? Can this struggle be portrayed as one between a mature democratic country and a terrorist organization? Is this a battle between civilization and barbarism, good against evil, as President Bush describes it? My answer to all of these is "No!" These military attacks don't have the least moral justification and should be completely stopped at once. And as long as they continue, we should raise our voices in strong opposition.

Clash of unequal worlds

The closer you examine the issues, what you see behind them is a world that is despairingly unequal. They cannot be portrayed simply as the "insanity" of Islamic extremists against the "sanity" of the rest of the world. Behind Osama bin Laden are not only thousands of armed groups. There is also a deep grudge against the United States held by perhaps hundreds of millions of the poor. President Bush is filled with not just the sense of revenge for the terrorist incidents in September, but also the incredible arrogance of the rich.

Hence, besides the perspective presented by Huntington in "The Clash of Civilizations," doesn't the current conflict also carry the undertones of a struggle between rich and poor? To elaborate, if this is so, it means that the problems created during the twentieth century between the rich north and poor south have intensified as a result of U.S.-led globalization, and are now heading towards conflict. Perhaps this struggle, which is both old and new-rich against poor, abundance against starvation, luxury against despair-is emerging now on a global scale.

Look at tragedy with your own eyes

Another threat exists which must not be overlooked. These days the United States, in a frenzy after the terrorist attacks, and allied countries including Japan, are in the process of throwing off the appearance of modern civil nation-states. The U.S. approach-giving absolute precedence to terrorist countermeasures, taking into custody many "suspects" despite the absence of legal grounds for arrest, and launching large-scale retaliatory attacks while refusing any form of dialog-cannot be described as the approach of a mature democratic country. And the Japanese government is obediently tripping over itself to assist the U.S. retaliatory attacks, to the extent that the Prime Minister himself is willing to violate our Constitution's Articles 9 (renunciation of war) and 99 (duty to respect and uphold the Constitution). Behind the thinking of the hawks now gaining momentum in Japan is probably the revival of the military draft.

Perhaps it is time for us to revise the image we hold of the United States. Is it acceptable to entrust the world's authority to pass judgment, to that superpower of war that has sent its soldiers to fight more than two hundred times since the country was founded? That country has scarcely reflected as a nation upon its war-making, including the use of the nuclear bomb. Japan has probably been seeing the world through the eyes of the United States for too long. Now is the time to see the tragedy of war with our own eyes, and to make our own moral judgments. Because there are already conspicuous signs that the United States is tilting toward a new imperialism.

An absolute majority of nations supports the current retaliatory attacks, but without a doubt, the attacks defy the conscience of an absolute majority of members of humanity. The issue is not, as Bush claims, "Either you are with us [the United States], or you are with the terrorists." Now, more than ever, we must take sides, not with a country, but rather with the people who are below the bombs that are falling.


------- OneList (submissions from subscribers)

------- Depleted Uranium Keeps On Killing!