North Korea Nukes Debated

The issue of North Korea's actual or potential nuclear weapons capabilities has been an important topic in more than one American administration for many years. Noteably, the Clinton administration put forth an effort through clandestine negotiations with the North Koreans in the hopes that their nuclear ambitions could be stopped. Their efforts resulted in the 1994 Agreed Framework, stipulating a halt in North Korea's plutonium refinement in return for the ability to import oil.

Shortly after moving into the oval office, President Bush publicly denounced the government of North Korea and expressed a very clear desire for a regime change in the country. Pyongyang then quite expectedly told the U.S. to go fly a kite, followed by a series of arrogant statements and actions which basically threw the 1994 Agreed Framework out the window. So, unless one has been living under a rock during the past four years, it is well known that Pyongyang has declared time and again that they have nuclear weapons and that negotiations to resolve the issue have been shaky and sporadic.

One of the topics, however, that the mainstream press has yet to honestly examine is the validity of both North Korea's and the U.S. administration's claims regarding Pyongyang's nuclear arsenal. Both sides say they have evidence of nuclear bombs, and so on and so forth. Where is the debate?

In the January/February 2005 issue of Foreign Affairs, Selig Harrison addressed the issue. Then, in the March/April 2005 issue, three experts in this area (Mitchell B. Reiss, Robert Gallucci, and Richard L. Garwin) penned a rebuttal. In the article, Mr. Harrison also responds to the arguments.

So what we have is an honest debate, where each side makes a convincing case to support their viewpoint. I was so thrilled to read this, I nearly soiled my pants. (Well, maybe not...) My point on this is that there is a discussion and that it is freely available to the web-connected public via the links I have provided above.

Please read them. Listen to both sides and make up your own mind on the issue. I can assure you that you will definitely not see this kind of debate on Hannity and Colmes or Air America Radio, nevermind the New York Times or the Washington Post. These guys are only interested in sound bites or blindly dictating government press releases.

Who Was That Woman in the Balcony?

A reader at Daily Kos did some investigative work on the Iraqi woman who was granted a seat in the priviledged section at the SOTU speech this past January. According to the President of the United States:

Eleven years ago, Safia's father was assassinated by Saddam's intelligence service. Three days ago in Baghdad, Safia was finally able to vote for the leaders of her country -- and we are honored that she is with us tonight.

The woman is Safia Taleb Al Souhail, daughter of Sheik Taleb Al Souhail. Mr. Al Souhail was assassinated in Lebanon in 1994, but the murder was never investigated or tried in Lebanon.
One such article that appeared in Al Bawaba in October of 2003 explains a bit more. Ignoring all of the bias and unsupported assumption, the article states thus: Safia's father was the leader of a tribe that plotted an overthrow of Saddam's dictatorial government. Eventhough he was ready to do covertly in 1993 what the U.S. military did in 2003, his well-laid plans were destroyed when his cohorts were captured by Saddam's henchmen and tortured to death.

Why is it that our lackluster press didn't mention anything about this bit of history? It would have placed Bush's comments in a much clearer perspective. Of course, there may be ulterior motives working here, but, without more evidence, it's grist for the conspiracy mills.

My own meager attempts to glean more information about the infamous Iraqi woman led me to a page that holds transcripts of several of Safia's speeches given on behalf of the Alliance Internationale pour la Justice (the very organization that the Daily Kos reader had trouble finding).

Nonetheless, Safia does say some alarming things. First, she outlines the horrific plight of pregnant women in Iraq:

Pregnant women are committing suicide because of neuro psychological damages inflicted upon them as a result of the use of chemical and biological weapons...

Hokey smoke! It's almost as disturbing as a story I heard a long time ago about Saddam's henchmen removing newborns from their incubators and leaving them to die, which was later revealed to be false. In any event, the claim of "neuro psychological" injuries was not supported by any other information. Only the careful followers of alternate media would not be shocked at her revelations. The first Gulf War was a significant contributor to defects and sickness, from both the Iraqi populace and the soldiers on the ground.

Safia's referenced speeches were delivered a full decade after the smackdown. In that war, a lot of depleted uranium ammunition (DU) was used. It is also well-known that there are a lot of complications which may arise from exposure to the uranium:

...kidney damage, cancers of the lung and bone, non-malignant respiratory disease, skin disorders, neurocognitive disorders, chromosomal damage, and birth defects...

It is entirely possible that Safia's accounts were caused by the left-over DU. And, since Iraq had been subjected to many years of sanctions, the availability of proper treatment grew steadily worse after the conclusion of the first Gulf War, which would have exacerbated the problem considerably.

Second, Safia's speeches seem to have drawn material directly from the now-debunked Bush administration's war propoganda:

There is no doubt that the Iraqi government has Weapons of Mass Destruction and used them massively against the Iraqi people and against its neighbor Iran. The US State Department’s Annual Report on terrorist groups has documented the Iraqi regime harboring and sponsoring of terrorist groups. Also, it has been reported that the Iraqi regime has links to Al Qaida terrorists.

It's no wonder that she was able to get a special seat, and a special mention, at the SOTU.

So, what about the mysterious Alliance Internationale pour la Justice? I went to whois.org and discovered this about the site(www.i-a-j.org):

Domain ID:D104925694-LROR
Domain Name:I-A-J.ORG
Created On:24-Sep-2004 08:59:59 UTC
Last Updated On:24-Nov-2004 04:00:32 UTC
Expiration Date:24-Sep-2005 08:59:59 UTC
Sponsoring Registrar:Intercosmos Media Group Inc. (R48-LROR)
Status:CLIENT DELETE PROHIBITED
Status:CLIENT TRANSFER PROHIBITED
Status:CLIENT UPDATE PROHIBITED
Registrant ID:ODN-136173
Registrant Name:INS CONSULT
Registrant Organization:INSCONSULT
Registrant Street1:Nam.Sv.Anny 34
Registrant Street2:
Registrant Street3:
Registrant City:Trencin
Registrant State/Province:SK
Registrant Postal Code:911 01
Registrant Country:SK
Registrant Phone:+421.421326401576
Registrant Phone Ext.:
Registrant FAX:+421.421326401576
Registrant FAX Ext.:
Registrant Email:insconsult@stonline.sk

Intercosmos Media Group is certainly not the Alliance Internationale pour la Justice; they're another provider of internet services and products. The group, however, probably has a presence, since they were a part of a meeting sponsored by the IMS. Their website, as I discovered, is currently experiencing some weird difficulties.

In the end with these facts in mind, it becomes apparent that Safia Taleb Al Souhail is not a woman who spent much time in Iraq since 1968 and, while nobly calling for an end to human rights violations in Saddam's Iraq, used the Alliance Internationale pour la Justice to publish lackey-derived claims for unknown ends. What the press should investigate (yeah, right) are the possible ends to which Safia has been working.

Almost looks like another Chalabi.

Danes Rally Against War

About 1 500 people demonstrated in Copenhagen on Saturday against the US-led occupation of Iraq and called for the withdrawal of Denmark's 525 troops deployed there. Ah, they make me proud.