for personal reference only:
WASHINGTON - The E. coli outbreak spread to two more states Wednesday, and investigators reported finding contaminated spinach in the refrigerator of one victim.
The outbreak has sickened at least 146 people in 23 states, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. One person has died and 76 others have been hospitalized, some with kidney failure.
In a break that could help isolate the source of the outbreak, New Mexico’s public health laboratory isolated E. coli from an opened package of spinach, the CDC said. Spinach had only been the suspected source of the bacteria, based on interviews with victims.
The package of Dole brand baby spinach came from the refrigerator of a patient who ate some of the leafy greens before becoming ill, New Mexico department of health officials said. The New Mexico laboratory completed “DNA fingerprinting” tests late Tuesday, and state and federal officials then matched it to the strain of the bacteria — E. coli O157:H7 — implicated in the outbreak.
That find could help investigators narrow their hunt for the source of the contamination to a specific producer or processor.
Dole is one of the brands of spinach recalled Friday by Natural Selection Foods LLC, of San Juan Bautista, Calif.
Meanwhile, FDA inspectors began visiting California farms this week, seeking signs of past flooding or cases in which contaminated surface areas had come into contact with crops. They also were looking for potential sources of bacteria inside packing plants.
California produces 74 percent of the nation’s fresh spinach crop. The Salinas Valley accounts for roughly three-quarters of the state’s share, and it has been the focus of the investigation. The area has links to both Natural Selection Foods and a second company that’s also recalled fresh spinach products, River Ranch Fresh Foods of Salinas.
A third company, RLB Food Distributors of West Caldwell, N.J., has has recalled Balducci’s and FreshPro brand spinach products distributed to East Coast states because some of the spinach could have come from Natural Selection Foods.
Also Wednesday, Arizona and Colorado joined the list of states reporting E. coli cases.
The other states are California, Connecticut, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska, New Mexico, Nevada, New York, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Utah, Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin and Wyoming. Wisconsin has reported the most cases, as well as the lone death.
Among those sickened, 71 percent were women. Among those victims who could provide a date, they reported falling sick between Aug. 19 and Sept. 5, according to the CDC.
Officials continued to recommend consumers not eat fresh spinach.
© 2006 The Associated Press.
Thursday, September 21, 2006
AIDS testing recommended for most Americans
for personal reference only:
ATLANTA - All Americans between the ages of 13 and 64 should be routinely tested for HIV to help catch infections earlier and stop the spread of the deadly virus, federal health recommendations announced Thursday say.
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said HIV testing should become about as common as a cholesterol check. Nearly half of new HIV infections are discovered when doctors are trying to diagnose a sick patient who has come for care, CDC officials said.
“We know that many HIV infected people seek health care and they don’t get tested. And many people are not diagnosed until late in the course of their illness, when they’re already sick with HIV-related conditions,” said Dr. Timothy Mastro, acting director of the CDC’s division of HIV/AIDS prevention.
“By identifying people earlier through a screening program, we’ll allow them to access life-extending therapy, and also through prevention services, learn how to avoid transmitting HIV infection to others,” he said.
The announcement was hailed by some HIV patient advocates and health policy experts. They said the guidelines could help end the stigma of HIV testing and lead to needed care for an estimated 250,000 Americans who don’t yet know they have the disease.
“I think it’s an incredible advance. I think it’s courageous on the part of the CDC,” said A. David Paltiel, a health policy expert at the Yale University School of Medicine.
The recommendations aren’t legally binding, but they influence what doctors do and what health insurance programs cover.
Some physicians groups predict the recommendations will be challenging to implement, involving new expenditures of money and time for testing, counseling and revising consent procedures.
Some physicians also question whether there is enough evidence to expand testing beyond high-risk groups, said Dr. Larry Fields, the president of the American Academy of Family Physicians.
“Are doctors going to do it? Probably not,” Fields said.
But the recommendations were endorsed by the American Medical Association, which urged physicians to comply.
“This is important public health strategy to stop the spread of HIV,” Dr. Nancy Nielsen, a Buffalo, N.Y.-based physician who sits on the AMA’s governing board, said in a statement.
No consent form neededPreviously, the CDC recommended routine testing for those at high-risk for catching the virus, such as intravenous drug users and gay men, and for hospitals and certain other institutions serving areas where HIV is common. It also recommends testing for all pregnant women.
Under the new guidelines, patients would be tested for HIV as part of a standard battery of tests they receive when they go for urgent or emergency care, or even during a routine physical.
Patients wouldn’t get tested every year: Repeated, annual testing would only be recommended only for those at high-risk.
There would be no consent form specifically for the HIV test; it would be covered in a clinic or hospital’s standard care consent form. Patients would be allowed to decline the testing.
CDC officials have been working on revised recommendations for about three years, and sought input from more than 100 organizations, including doctors’ associations and HIV patient advocacy groups. The CDC presented planned revisions at a scientific conference in February.
Since then, the CDC has strengthened language on informed consent to make sure that no one is tested without their knowledge, and emphasized the need for doctors to provide information on HIV tests and the meaning of positive and negative results.
© 2006 The Associated Press.
ATLANTA - All Americans between the ages of 13 and 64 should be routinely tested for HIV to help catch infections earlier and stop the spread of the deadly virus, federal health recommendations announced Thursday say.
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said HIV testing should become about as common as a cholesterol check. Nearly half of new HIV infections are discovered when doctors are trying to diagnose a sick patient who has come for care, CDC officials said.
“We know that many HIV infected people seek health care and they don’t get tested. And many people are not diagnosed until late in the course of their illness, when they’re already sick with HIV-related conditions,” said Dr. Timothy Mastro, acting director of the CDC’s division of HIV/AIDS prevention.
“By identifying people earlier through a screening program, we’ll allow them to access life-extending therapy, and also through prevention services, learn how to avoid transmitting HIV infection to others,” he said.
The announcement was hailed by some HIV patient advocates and health policy experts. They said the guidelines could help end the stigma of HIV testing and lead to needed care for an estimated 250,000 Americans who don’t yet know they have the disease.
“I think it’s an incredible advance. I think it’s courageous on the part of the CDC,” said A. David Paltiel, a health policy expert at the Yale University School of Medicine.
The recommendations aren’t legally binding, but they influence what doctors do and what health insurance programs cover.
Some physicians groups predict the recommendations will be challenging to implement, involving new expenditures of money and time for testing, counseling and revising consent procedures.
Some physicians also question whether there is enough evidence to expand testing beyond high-risk groups, said Dr. Larry Fields, the president of the American Academy of Family Physicians.
“Are doctors going to do it? Probably not,” Fields said.
But the recommendations were endorsed by the American Medical Association, which urged physicians to comply.
“This is important public health strategy to stop the spread of HIV,” Dr. Nancy Nielsen, a Buffalo, N.Y.-based physician who sits on the AMA’s governing board, said in a statement.
No consent form neededPreviously, the CDC recommended routine testing for those at high-risk for catching the virus, such as intravenous drug users and gay men, and for hospitals and certain other institutions serving areas where HIV is common. It also recommends testing for all pregnant women.
Under the new guidelines, patients would be tested for HIV as part of a standard battery of tests they receive when they go for urgent or emergency care, or even during a routine physical.
Patients wouldn’t get tested every year: Repeated, annual testing would only be recommended only for those at high-risk.
There would be no consent form specifically for the HIV test; it would be covered in a clinic or hospital’s standard care consent form. Patients would be allowed to decline the testing.
CDC officials have been working on revised recommendations for about three years, and sought input from more than 100 organizations, including doctors’ associations and HIV patient advocacy groups. The CDC presented planned revisions at a scientific conference in February.
Since then, the CDC has strengthened language on informed consent to make sure that no one is tested without their knowledge, and emphasized the need for doctors to provide information on HIV tests and the meaning of positive and negative results.
© 2006 The Associated Press.
Torture in Iraq worse now than under Saddam?
for personal reference only:
GENEVA - Torture in Iraq may be worse now than it was under Saddam Hussein, with militias, terrorist groups and government forces disregarding rules on the humane treatment of prisoners, the U.N. anti-torture chief said Thursday.
Manfred Nowak, the U.N. special investigator on torture, made the remarks as he was presenting a report on detainee conditions at the U.S. prison in Guantanamo Bay as well as to brief the U.N. Human Rights Council, the global body’s top rights watchdog, on torture worldwide.
Reports from Iraq indicate that torture “is totally out of hand,” he said. “The situation is so bad many people say it is worse than it has been in the times of Saddam Hussein.”
Nowak added, “That means something, because the torture methods applied under Saddam Hussein were the worst you could imagine.”
Some allegations of torture were undoubtedly credible, with government forces among the perpetrators, he said, citing “very serious allegations of torture within the official Iraqi detention centers.”
“You have terrorist groups, you have the military, you have police, you have these militias. There are so many people who are actually abducted, seriously tortured and finally killed,” Nowak told reporters at the U.N.’s European headquarters.
“It’s not just torture by the government. There are much more brutal methods of torture you’ll find by private militias,” he said.
A report by the U.N. Assistance Mission in Iraq’s Human Rights office cited worrying evidence of torture, unlawful detentions, growth of sectarian militias and death squads, and a rise in “honor killings” of women.
Iraq’s government, set up in 2006, is “currently facing a generalized breakdown of law and order which presents a serious challenge to the institutions of Iraq” such as police and security forces and the legal system, the U.N. report said, noting that torture was a major concern.
Nowak has yet to make an official visit to Iraq and said such a mission would be unfeasible as long as the security situation there remains perilous. He based his comments on interviews with people during a visit to Amman, Jordan, and other sources.
“You find these bodies with very heavy and very serious torture marks,” he said. “Many of these allegations, I have no doubt that they are credible.”
According to the U.N. report, the number of Iraqi civilians killed in July and August hit 6,599, a record-high that is far greater than initial estimates suggested, the U.N. report said Wednesday.
It attributed many of the deaths to rising sectarian tensions that have pushed Iraq toward civil war.
© 2006 The Associated Press
GENEVA - Torture in Iraq may be worse now than it was under Saddam Hussein, with militias, terrorist groups and government forces disregarding rules on the humane treatment of prisoners, the U.N. anti-torture chief said Thursday.
Manfred Nowak, the U.N. special investigator on torture, made the remarks as he was presenting a report on detainee conditions at the U.S. prison in Guantanamo Bay as well as to brief the U.N. Human Rights Council, the global body’s top rights watchdog, on torture worldwide.
Reports from Iraq indicate that torture “is totally out of hand,” he said. “The situation is so bad many people say it is worse than it has been in the times of Saddam Hussein.”
Nowak added, “That means something, because the torture methods applied under Saddam Hussein were the worst you could imagine.”
Some allegations of torture were undoubtedly credible, with government forces among the perpetrators, he said, citing “very serious allegations of torture within the official Iraqi detention centers.”
“You have terrorist groups, you have the military, you have police, you have these militias. There are so many people who are actually abducted, seriously tortured and finally killed,” Nowak told reporters at the U.N.’s European headquarters.
“It’s not just torture by the government. There are much more brutal methods of torture you’ll find by private militias,” he said.
A report by the U.N. Assistance Mission in Iraq’s Human Rights office cited worrying evidence of torture, unlawful detentions, growth of sectarian militias and death squads, and a rise in “honor killings” of women.
Iraq’s government, set up in 2006, is “currently facing a generalized breakdown of law and order which presents a serious challenge to the institutions of Iraq” such as police and security forces and the legal system, the U.N. report said, noting that torture was a major concern.
Nowak has yet to make an official visit to Iraq and said such a mission would be unfeasible as long as the security situation there remains perilous. He based his comments on interviews with people during a visit to Amman, Jordan, and other sources.
“You find these bodies with very heavy and very serious torture marks,” he said. “Many of these allegations, I have no doubt that they are credible.”
According to the U.N. report, the number of Iraqi civilians killed in July and August hit 6,599, a record-high that is far greater than initial estimates suggested, the U.N. report said Wednesday.
It attributed many of the deaths to rising sectarian tensions that have pushed Iraq toward civil war.
© 2006 The Associated Press
Abbas: Unity government to recognize Israel
for personal reference only:
UNITED NATIONS - Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas said Thursday that the planned national unity government will recognize Israel and renounce violence, warning that failure to resolve the conflict would leave the door open to more terrorism and violence worldwide.
The Hamas-led Palestinian government that won elections in January has refused to recognize Israel, end violence, and honor past agreements between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization, which Abbas heads.
Abbas told the U.N. General Assembly’s annual ministerial meeting Thursday that he has recently sought to establish a government of national unity “that is consistent with international and Arab legitimacy” and that responds to the demands of the key parties promoting Mideast peace — recognition, ending violence and honoring past agreements.
Abbas, a moderate who leads the Fatah Party, and the militant Islamic group Hamas, which currently rules alone, agreed last week to form a national unity government that would strive to establish a Palestinian state alongside Israel — implying recognition of the Jewish state.
Abbas said Thursday that they would do so.
“I would like to reaffirm that any future Palestinian government will commit to all the agreements that the Palestine Liberation Organization and the Palestinian National Authority have committed to,” he said.
These include the letters of mutual recognition exchanged on Sept. 9, 1993, by the late Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and PLO chairman Yasser Arafat, whom Abbas called “the two great late leaders.”
Renewed contact?“These letters contain mutual recognition between Israel and the PLO, renunciation of violence, and commitment to negotiations as the path towards reaching a permanent solution that will lead to the establishment of the independent state of Palestine alongside the state of Israel,” Abbas said.
Abbas, who met Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni on Monday in the first working session between high-ranking Israeli and Palestinian officials in four months, also welcomed recent signs that Israel might resume contacts.
“We have heard lately from the government of Israel that it will abandon the policy of unilateralism and one-sided actions,” he said. “This is encouraging, provided that the alternative is not stagnation or the imposition of facts on the ground, but rather a return to the negotiation table and reaching a comprehensive solution to all of the permanent status issues.”
Livni struck a more conciliatory tone toward the Palestinians in her General Assembly address on Wednesday, saying the two did not necessarily have to remain at odds and the only way to resolve their conflict was at the “bilateral negotiating table.”
“We have no illusions about the difficulties before us — we must face them and not ignore them,” she said.
She also reiterated their desire to reopen a serious dialogue, including with the creation of a permanent channel “to pursue ways to advance together.”
President Bush called Abbas a “man of courage” on Wednesday for trying to revive Mideast peace talks despite a continued political stalemate with Hamas militants.
Saudi Arabia’s Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal said Thursday that Arab countries have reached a “very significant” consensus after the recent war in Lebanon that there must be a new start with fresh ideas to the Middle East peace process.
Also Thursday, at a Security Council meeting later Thursday, Bahrain’s Foreign Minister Shaikh Khalid Bin Ahmed Al-Khalifa called for initial negotiations between Israel and the Arabs with a concrete timeframe, as well as a report from U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan on the best way to hold those negotiations.
Abbas, who has been weakened since January when Hamas, which seeks the destruction of Israel, warned that a failure to resolve the conflict “will keep the door wide open to all forms of violence, terrorism, regional confrontations and global crises.”
Click for message board
Discuss: What do you think of Abbas’ announcement?
“It is unfortunate today to see that international plans and initiatives, foremost amongst it the road map ... have reached a state of stagnation and even regression,” he added.
Abbas also called on the international community to “provide tangible evidence that they will support the unconditional resumption of negotiations, and will provide them with a true international cover and support to ensure their success through the cessation of settlement activity, collective punishment and separation walls.”
Hamas’ refusal to recognize Israel has led to international sanctions that have devastated the Palestinian economy. Israel and Western donors cut off hundreds of millions of dollars in funding to the Palestinians.
Financial pressureFacing intense pressure as it has been unable to pay tens of thousands of civil servants because of the sanctions, Hamas agreed last week to form the coalition with Fatah in hopes of lifting the boycott imposed by Western countries.
The coalition talks have stalled in recent days as the U.S. seeks assurances that the Islamic militant group will renounce violence and recognize the Jewish state.
The efforts for peace were further set back this summer after militants allied with Hamas tunneled from the Gaza Strip into Israel to kidnap an Israeli soldier. The attack, which came after Israel withdrew last year from the Gaza Strip, sparked a large military offensive in the Palestinian area in which more than 200 Palestinians have been killed, most of them militants.
© 2006 The Associated Press.
UNITED NATIONS - Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas said Thursday that the planned national unity government will recognize Israel and renounce violence, warning that failure to resolve the conflict would leave the door open to more terrorism and violence worldwide.
The Hamas-led Palestinian government that won elections in January has refused to recognize Israel, end violence, and honor past agreements between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization, which Abbas heads.
Abbas told the U.N. General Assembly’s annual ministerial meeting Thursday that he has recently sought to establish a government of national unity “that is consistent with international and Arab legitimacy” and that responds to the demands of the key parties promoting Mideast peace — recognition, ending violence and honoring past agreements.
Abbas, a moderate who leads the Fatah Party, and the militant Islamic group Hamas, which currently rules alone, agreed last week to form a national unity government that would strive to establish a Palestinian state alongside Israel — implying recognition of the Jewish state.
Abbas said Thursday that they would do so.
“I would like to reaffirm that any future Palestinian government will commit to all the agreements that the Palestine Liberation Organization and the Palestinian National Authority have committed to,” he said.
These include the letters of mutual recognition exchanged on Sept. 9, 1993, by the late Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and PLO chairman Yasser Arafat, whom Abbas called “the two great late leaders.”
Renewed contact?“These letters contain mutual recognition between Israel and the PLO, renunciation of violence, and commitment to negotiations as the path towards reaching a permanent solution that will lead to the establishment of the independent state of Palestine alongside the state of Israel,” Abbas said.
Abbas, who met Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni on Monday in the first working session between high-ranking Israeli and Palestinian officials in four months, also welcomed recent signs that Israel might resume contacts.
“We have heard lately from the government of Israel that it will abandon the policy of unilateralism and one-sided actions,” he said. “This is encouraging, provided that the alternative is not stagnation or the imposition of facts on the ground, but rather a return to the negotiation table and reaching a comprehensive solution to all of the permanent status issues.”
Livni struck a more conciliatory tone toward the Palestinians in her General Assembly address on Wednesday, saying the two did not necessarily have to remain at odds and the only way to resolve their conflict was at the “bilateral negotiating table.”
“We have no illusions about the difficulties before us — we must face them and not ignore them,” she said.
She also reiterated their desire to reopen a serious dialogue, including with the creation of a permanent channel “to pursue ways to advance together.”
President Bush called Abbas a “man of courage” on Wednesday for trying to revive Mideast peace talks despite a continued political stalemate with Hamas militants.
Saudi Arabia’s Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal said Thursday that Arab countries have reached a “very significant” consensus after the recent war in Lebanon that there must be a new start with fresh ideas to the Middle East peace process.
Also Thursday, at a Security Council meeting later Thursday, Bahrain’s Foreign Minister Shaikh Khalid Bin Ahmed Al-Khalifa called for initial negotiations between Israel and the Arabs with a concrete timeframe, as well as a report from U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan on the best way to hold those negotiations.
Abbas, who has been weakened since January when Hamas, which seeks the destruction of Israel, warned that a failure to resolve the conflict “will keep the door wide open to all forms of violence, terrorism, regional confrontations and global crises.”
Click for message board
Discuss: What do you think of Abbas’ announcement?
“It is unfortunate today to see that international plans and initiatives, foremost amongst it the road map ... have reached a state of stagnation and even regression,” he added.
Abbas also called on the international community to “provide tangible evidence that they will support the unconditional resumption of negotiations, and will provide them with a true international cover and support to ensure their success through the cessation of settlement activity, collective punishment and separation walls.”
Hamas’ refusal to recognize Israel has led to international sanctions that have devastated the Palestinian economy. Israel and Western donors cut off hundreds of millions of dollars in funding to the Palestinians.
Financial pressureFacing intense pressure as it has been unable to pay tens of thousands of civil servants because of the sanctions, Hamas agreed last week to form the coalition with Fatah in hopes of lifting the boycott imposed by Western countries.
The coalition talks have stalled in recent days as the U.S. seeks assurances that the Islamic militant group will renounce violence and recognize the Jewish state.
The efforts for peace were further set back this summer after militants allied with Hamas tunneled from the Gaza Strip into Israel to kidnap an Israeli soldier. The attack, which came after Israel withdrew last year from the Gaza Strip, sparked a large military offensive in the Palestinian area in which more than 200 Palestinians have been killed, most of them militants.
© 2006 The Associated Press.
Group urges prosecution of 83-year-old Nazi
for personal reference only:
Deported woman served as WWII prison guard, married Holocaust survivor
BERLIN - An 83-year-old German woman deported from the United States for concealing her Nazi past as a concentration camp guard is a war criminal and should be prosecuted, the Simon Wiesenthal Center said on Thursday.
Efraim Zuroff, head of the agency that tracks Nazis, said that U.S. authorities deserved praise for their diligence in finding Elfriede Lina Rinkel, who reportedly never told her late husband, a concentration camp survivor, of her past.
The U.S. Justice Department said this week Rinkel, who went to the United States in 1959, admitted she had served as a guard at the Ravensbruck concentration camp for women north of Berlin for the last 10 months of World War Two. She was deported to Germany earlier this month.
“She is a war criminal, she volunteered to work as a guard and walked around the camp watching over inmates with an attack dog,” Zuroff said in a telephone interview from Jerusalem. “There’s no room for misplaced sympathy. I hope Germans will prosecute her.”
A spokeswoman for the German Justice Ministry in Berlin said they had not yet received any formal notification about Rinkel’s deportation. She added, however, the authorities would be investigating if there were any grounds for suspicion of crimes.
Rinkel has reportedly returned to stay with a sister in a town near Dusseldorf but local authorities said they have no records of her registering with police as required.
Married to Holocaust survivorKurt Schrimm, state prosecutor and head of the Ludwigsburg central agency for clarification of Nazi war crimes, said he was informed about Rinkel by U.S. authorities but the agency had no records of the woman, whose maiden name was Huth.
“We’ve searched our archives but don’t have anything on her,” said Schrimm, whose agency has investigated 100,000 cases and helped prosecutors in more than 6,000 cases.
Zuroff said that the Wiesenthal Center also did not have any archive material on Rinkel, who according to the charging document filed in U.S. immigration court in San Francisco used a trained attack dog to carry out her duties.
He said the U.S. Justice Department’s Office of Special Investigations deserved credit for finding Rinkel, who according to the San Francisco Chronicle newspaper had never told her husband, a Jew who fled Nazi Germany, about her Nazi past.
Zuroff said the case was extraordinary for two reasons: Rinkel is a woman and married a concentration camp survivor.
“It doesn’t happen every day,” he said.
“But it is not uncommon that the closest relatives of people who served in Nazi units will not know what their loved ones did. This is the most difficult punishment for many — when their families learn what they really did during the war.”
Copyright 2006 Reuters Limited.
Deported woman served as WWII prison guard, married Holocaust survivor
BERLIN - An 83-year-old German woman deported from the United States for concealing her Nazi past as a concentration camp guard is a war criminal and should be prosecuted, the Simon Wiesenthal Center said on Thursday.
Efraim Zuroff, head of the agency that tracks Nazis, said that U.S. authorities deserved praise for their diligence in finding Elfriede Lina Rinkel, who reportedly never told her late husband, a concentration camp survivor, of her past.
The U.S. Justice Department said this week Rinkel, who went to the United States in 1959, admitted she had served as a guard at the Ravensbruck concentration camp for women north of Berlin for the last 10 months of World War Two. She was deported to Germany earlier this month.
“She is a war criminal, she volunteered to work as a guard and walked around the camp watching over inmates with an attack dog,” Zuroff said in a telephone interview from Jerusalem. “There’s no room for misplaced sympathy. I hope Germans will prosecute her.”
A spokeswoman for the German Justice Ministry in Berlin said they had not yet received any formal notification about Rinkel’s deportation. She added, however, the authorities would be investigating if there were any grounds for suspicion of crimes.
Rinkel has reportedly returned to stay with a sister in a town near Dusseldorf but local authorities said they have no records of her registering with police as required.
Married to Holocaust survivorKurt Schrimm, state prosecutor and head of the Ludwigsburg central agency for clarification of Nazi war crimes, said he was informed about Rinkel by U.S. authorities but the agency had no records of the woman, whose maiden name was Huth.
“We’ve searched our archives but don’t have anything on her,” said Schrimm, whose agency has investigated 100,000 cases and helped prosecutors in more than 6,000 cases.
Zuroff said that the Wiesenthal Center also did not have any archive material on Rinkel, who according to the charging document filed in U.S. immigration court in San Francisco used a trained attack dog to carry out her duties.
He said the U.S. Justice Department’s Office of Special Investigations deserved credit for finding Rinkel, who according to the San Francisco Chronicle newspaper had never told her husband, a Jew who fled Nazi Germany, about her Nazi past.
Zuroff said the case was extraordinary for two reasons: Rinkel is a woman and married a concentration camp survivor.
“It doesn’t happen every day,” he said.
“But it is not uncommon that the closest relatives of people who served in Nazi units will not know what their loved ones did. This is the most difficult punishment for many — when their families learn what they really did during the war.”
Copyright 2006 Reuters Limited.
Tuesday, September 19, 2006
'New' Tolkien tale to be published
for personal reference:
An unfinished tale by J.R.R. Tolkien has been edited by his son into a completed work and will be released next northern spring, the US and British publishers announced on Monday.
Christopher Tolkien has spent the past 30 years working on The Children of Hurin, an epic tale his father began in 1918 and later abandoned
Excerpts of The Children of Hurin, which includes the elves and dwarfs of Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings and other works, have been published before.
"It has seemed to me for a long time that there was a good case for presenting my father's long version of the legend of The Children of Hurin as an independent work, between its own covers," Christopher Tolkien said in a statement.
The new book will be published by Houghton Mifflin in the United States and HarperCollins in England.
Tolkien's Lord of the Rings trilogy has sold more than 50 million copies and was adapted by director Peter Jackson into a blockbuster, Academy Award-winning trio of films.
An unfinished tale by J.R.R. Tolkien has been edited by his son into a completed work and will be released next northern spring, the US and British publishers announced on Monday.
Christopher Tolkien has spent the past 30 years working on The Children of Hurin, an epic tale his father began in 1918 and later abandoned
Excerpts of The Children of Hurin, which includes the elves and dwarfs of Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings and other works, have been published before.
"It has seemed to me for a long time that there was a good case for presenting my father's long version of the legend of The Children of Hurin as an independent work, between its own covers," Christopher Tolkien said in a statement.
The new book will be published by Houghton Mifflin in the United States and HarperCollins in England.
Tolkien's Lord of the Rings trilogy has sold more than 50 million copies and was adapted by director Peter Jackson into a blockbuster, Academy Award-winning trio of films.
3 dead in shooting at ballfield in Tenn.
for personal reference only:
DANDRIDGE, Tenn. — A long-running child custody dispute erupted in gunfire after a 10-year-old boy's baseball game, leaving three of his grandparents dead and his father wounded, officials said Tuesday.
The shooting began Monday night as players and families were making their way to the parking lot. When it stopped, one witness said he looked out and saw the boy standing among the bloody bodies of his family.
"Maybe he was in shock, I don't know. He was walking around and it seemed he didn't have an expression on his face," said Wayne Treadway, treasurer of the South Jefferson County Little League.
Austin Shands' paternal grandparents, Ellen E. "Sue" Shands, 62, and Jerry D. Shands, 63, both were killed. His father, Jerry B. "Brent" Shands, 39, was seriously wounded. And his maternal grandfather, Samuel L. Noe, 61, also was dead.
A gun was recovered, but authorities weren't saying whom it belonged to or who fired it. They also refused to speculate about what happened in this mountain foothills community about 30 miles east of Knoxville.
"There are a lot of things that we are finding out more and more," said Dandridge Police Chief Carson Williams. "It is just a tragic situation that could happen anywhere and just unfortunately happened here."
But family members say it stemmed from the bitter divorce of Austin's parents, Brent Shands and Diane Shands Robbins, and their court fight over the boy's custody dating to January 2005.
Diane Shands Robbins was arrested in a drug raid in April 2005. On Sept. 13, she pleaded guilty to a federal charge of conspiring to distribute marijuana. She was remanded to the federal prison system while awaiting sentencing Dec. 1, court records show.
Bobby Shands, who is the brother of Jerry Shands and uncle of Brent Shands, said Noe believed Jerry Shands turned her in. Bobby Shands claimed Noe "had threatened to shoot" the Shandses several times before.
"They were afraid of him on account of that," he said. Still, he said, he was "terribly shocked" to learn of the shooting.
About 75 people, including children, were in the area when the shooting occurred. No one else was injured, though authorities were offering counseling from a chaplain.
Brent Shands was flown by helicopter to a hospital in Knoxville for emergency surgery. His condition was serious, his uncle said.
DANDRIDGE, Tenn. — A long-running child custody dispute erupted in gunfire after a 10-year-old boy's baseball game, leaving three of his grandparents dead and his father wounded, officials said Tuesday.
The shooting began Monday night as players and families were making their way to the parking lot. When it stopped, one witness said he looked out and saw the boy standing among the bloody bodies of his family.
"Maybe he was in shock, I don't know. He was walking around and it seemed he didn't have an expression on his face," said Wayne Treadway, treasurer of the South Jefferson County Little League.
Austin Shands' paternal grandparents, Ellen E. "Sue" Shands, 62, and Jerry D. Shands, 63, both were killed. His father, Jerry B. "Brent" Shands, 39, was seriously wounded. And his maternal grandfather, Samuel L. Noe, 61, also was dead.
A gun was recovered, but authorities weren't saying whom it belonged to or who fired it. They also refused to speculate about what happened in this mountain foothills community about 30 miles east of Knoxville.
"There are a lot of things that we are finding out more and more," said Dandridge Police Chief Carson Williams. "It is just a tragic situation that could happen anywhere and just unfortunately happened here."
But family members say it stemmed from the bitter divorce of Austin's parents, Brent Shands and Diane Shands Robbins, and their court fight over the boy's custody dating to January 2005.
Diane Shands Robbins was arrested in a drug raid in April 2005. On Sept. 13, she pleaded guilty to a federal charge of conspiring to distribute marijuana. She was remanded to the federal prison system while awaiting sentencing Dec. 1, court records show.
Bobby Shands, who is the brother of Jerry Shands and uncle of Brent Shands, said Noe believed Jerry Shands turned her in. Bobby Shands claimed Noe "had threatened to shoot" the Shandses several times before.
"They were afraid of him on account of that," he said. Still, he said, he was "terribly shocked" to learn of the shooting.
About 75 people, including children, were in the area when the shooting occurred. No one else was injured, though authorities were offering counseling from a chaplain.
Brent Shands was flown by helicopter to a hospital in Knoxville for emergency surgery. His condition was serious, his uncle said.
Monday, September 18, 2006
Variety of 'walking' shark among them; discoverers warn of threats
for personal reference only:
Dozens of fish, shrimp and coral species, including two new types of a shark that walks on its fins, have been discovered in waters off New Guinea in the South Pacific, conservationists announced Monday.
The researchers described the area as “Earth's richest seascape” and “the most biodiverse marine area on the planet.” But they also warned that it faces threats such as fishing with dynamite and cyanide, commercial fishing and degraded water quality from mining and logging in Papua province, a section of New Guinea governed by Indonesia.
“These Papuan reefs are literally ‘species factories’ that require special attention to protect them from unsustainable fisheries and other threats so they can continue to benefit their local owners and the global community,” expedition leader Mark Erdmann, a researcher with Conservation International, said in a statement.
Six of our survey sites, which are areas the size of two football fields, had over 250 species of reef-building coral each — that’s more than four times the number of coral species of the entire Caribbean Sea,” he added.
The entire area covers 45 million acres off a peninsula in northwest New Guinea. Researchers have counted 1,200 species of fish there and 600 species of reef-building coral — the latter equal to 75 percent of the world’s known total.
Australia’s Great Barrier Reef, covering an area 10 times bigger, has more types of fish — 1,464 species — but just 405 species of coral. And the bigger Caribbean Sea has fewer than 1,000 species of fish and just 58 types of coral.
During two surveys earlier this year, Conservation International and Indonesian experts found at least 36 new species of fish, coral and mantis shrimp in the waters, which are peppered with 2,500 islands and submerged reefs. The area also includes the largest Pacific leatherback turtle nesting area in the world, and is visited by whales, orcas and several dolphin species.
Two of the new species are members of the epaulette shark family, which distinguishes itself by sometimes using its fins to scamper away. Their name comes from the fact that they have two large round spots near their heads that look like epaulettes, the shoulder ornaments on military uniforms.
Dynamite, cyanide threatsThe researchers, who plan additional surveys next year, said it's already clear that Indonesia should extend protections around the region, only one-tenth of which now has national park status.
Erdmann told MSNBC.com that as resource-rich as the region is, it faces immediate threats such as the use of dynamite and cyanide by locals to stun and then capture live fish for export.
"At two sites we heard ear-shattering fish bombing blasts in the near vicinity," he said, "and our socio-economic team from the State University of Papua documented a number of villages where cyanide fishers were actively targeting grouper for capture with cyanide before exporting to China live.
"We also saw past evidence of illegal logging, though I'm happy to say that the Indonesian government's crackdown on illegal logging over the past five years seems to have greatly reduced this activity in Papua and we did not see any active logging. We are, of course, concerned about stated plans for both mining and logging in steep coastal areas that would be done legally.”
Commercial fishing in areaErdmann said a potentially greater problem could be the introduction of commercial fishing in the area as Indonesia transfers fishing pressure from its overfished western seas eastwards towards Papua.
"During our survey our socio-economic team did interview one Chinese-owned fish processing plant that is set up in the southeast of the Kaimana coastline," he said. "They are currently fishing just offshore for shrimp using trawls, but confided they had plans to bring approximately 100 additional vessels on line over the next two years targeting fish stocks just offshore. Needless to say, this is only one company, and this level of investment would clearly be unsustainable and likely collapse the fishery within three to five years at most."
Conservation International — which has been working with Indonesia as well as The Nature Conservancy and the World Wildlife Fund — said it was optimistic that Indonesia would see the value of protecting the region.
"We've been very pleased with the positive response of the Indonesian government to our survey results, and with indications ... of their interest in expanding a network of marine protected areas to both protect the unparalleled marine biodiversity and also ensure sustainable management of fisheries in order that local communities maintain their food security."
Papua's amazing biodiversity was brought to the public's attention last February, when Conservation International reported that an expedition to the Foja Mountains, some 200 miles inland, had revealed a "lost world" of wildlife.
Dozens of fish, shrimp and coral species, including two new types of a shark that walks on its fins, have been discovered in waters off New Guinea in the South Pacific, conservationists announced Monday.
The researchers described the area as “Earth's richest seascape” and “the most biodiverse marine area on the planet.” But they also warned that it faces threats such as fishing with dynamite and cyanide, commercial fishing and degraded water quality from mining and logging in Papua province, a section of New Guinea governed by Indonesia.
“These Papuan reefs are literally ‘species factories’ that require special attention to protect them from unsustainable fisheries and other threats so they can continue to benefit their local owners and the global community,” expedition leader Mark Erdmann, a researcher with Conservation International, said in a statement.
Six of our survey sites, which are areas the size of two football fields, had over 250 species of reef-building coral each — that’s more than four times the number of coral species of the entire Caribbean Sea,” he added.
The entire area covers 45 million acres off a peninsula in northwest New Guinea. Researchers have counted 1,200 species of fish there and 600 species of reef-building coral — the latter equal to 75 percent of the world’s known total.
Australia’s Great Barrier Reef, covering an area 10 times bigger, has more types of fish — 1,464 species — but just 405 species of coral. And the bigger Caribbean Sea has fewer than 1,000 species of fish and just 58 types of coral.
During two surveys earlier this year, Conservation International and Indonesian experts found at least 36 new species of fish, coral and mantis shrimp in the waters, which are peppered with 2,500 islands and submerged reefs. The area also includes the largest Pacific leatherback turtle nesting area in the world, and is visited by whales, orcas and several dolphin species.
Two of the new species are members of the epaulette shark family, which distinguishes itself by sometimes using its fins to scamper away. Their name comes from the fact that they have two large round spots near their heads that look like epaulettes, the shoulder ornaments on military uniforms.
Dynamite, cyanide threatsThe researchers, who plan additional surveys next year, said it's already clear that Indonesia should extend protections around the region, only one-tenth of which now has national park status.
Erdmann told MSNBC.com that as resource-rich as the region is, it faces immediate threats such as the use of dynamite and cyanide by locals to stun and then capture live fish for export.
"At two sites we heard ear-shattering fish bombing blasts in the near vicinity," he said, "and our socio-economic team from the State University of Papua documented a number of villages where cyanide fishers were actively targeting grouper for capture with cyanide before exporting to China live.
"We also saw past evidence of illegal logging, though I'm happy to say that the Indonesian government's crackdown on illegal logging over the past five years seems to have greatly reduced this activity in Papua and we did not see any active logging. We are, of course, concerned about stated plans for both mining and logging in steep coastal areas that would be done legally.”
Commercial fishing in areaErdmann said a potentially greater problem could be the introduction of commercial fishing in the area as Indonesia transfers fishing pressure from its overfished western seas eastwards towards Papua.
"During our survey our socio-economic team did interview one Chinese-owned fish processing plant that is set up in the southeast of the Kaimana coastline," he said. "They are currently fishing just offshore for shrimp using trawls, but confided they had plans to bring approximately 100 additional vessels on line over the next two years targeting fish stocks just offshore. Needless to say, this is only one company, and this level of investment would clearly be unsustainable and likely collapse the fishery within three to five years at most."
Conservation International — which has been working with Indonesia as well as The Nature Conservancy and the World Wildlife Fund — said it was optimistic that Indonesia would see the value of protecting the region.
"We've been very pleased with the positive response of the Indonesian government to our survey results, and with indications ... of their interest in expanding a network of marine protected areas to both protect the unparalleled marine biodiversity and also ensure sustainable management of fisheries in order that local communities maintain their food security."
Papua's amazing biodiversity was brought to the public's attention last February, when Conservation International reported that an expedition to the Foja Mountains, some 200 miles inland, had revealed a "lost world" of wildlife.
Saturday, September 09, 2006
BRITISH TROOPS: A REASSESSMENT
FOR PERSONAL REFERENCE ONLY:
The 'war on terror', which began with the attacks on the US, is five years old. It has killed tens of thousands and drawn British troops into conflicts around the world - but in Afghanistan, where the first victory was won, all the gains are in danger of slipping away
By Raymond Whitaker in London and Tom Coghlan in Kabul
Published: 10 September 2006
The West is fighting a crucial battle in the "war on terror", and British troops are in the front line.
British-led Nato forces are engaged in a make-or-break struggle in southern Afghanistan, where the biggest ground offensive in the history of the alliance was launched in Panjwayi district, near Kandahar, just over a week ago. The aim is to throw back a resurgent Taliban.
Yesterday, Nato said Operation Medusa had killed 40 Taliban fighters in the previous 24 hours, and several hundred more were surrounded. If the offensive succeeds, it will be a first step towards reversing the tide of instability that has engulfed an increasing area of the country and led to the deaths of 19 British military personnel this month (14 of them in an air crash).
But commanders admit it is an extremely close-run thing: if the offensive fails, the position of British forces in neighbouring Helmand province - where they were deployed this year with the then Defence Secretary, John Reid, expressing the blithe hope that they could complete their three-year mission "without firing a shot" - could become untenable.
Afghanistan was where the first victory in the "war on terror" was won. Less than three months after the 9/11 horror, al-Qa'ida's Taliban sponsors had been overthrown and Osama bin Laden was on the run. Yet tomorrow, when the fifth anniversary of the attacks on New York and Washington are commemorated, the world will reflect that Bin Laden remains at large somewhere along the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan. Mullah Omar, the Taliban's one-eyed leader, has also evaded capture, and his movement is regaining strength. What has gone wrong?
For General Sir Michael Rose, who led the SAS and commanded British forces in Bosnia, it is simple. "Having defeated the Taliban in 2001, the West then mistakenly shifted its effort and resources to Iraq, leaving most of Afghanistan insecure," he said. "This has allowed the Taliban to return." In other words, not only have gains in the real "war on terror" been dangerously eroded, the reckless detour into Iraq has made things worse. Far from hunting Bin Laden down, the West has been forced to prevent his allies re-establishing a foothold in Afghanistan.
After months of public denials by commanders and politicians, they are finally admitting that military forces in southern Afghanistan are stretched. Yesterday, as security forces in Kabul cleared the debris of the worst suicide bombing in the Afghan capital for two years - in which at least 16 people, including two US soldiers, died - senior military commanders from all 26 Nato nations were meeting in Warsaw to answer an appeal from Nato's supreme commander, US General James Jones, for up to 2,500 more troops at what he called "this decisive moment".
The Taliban cannot hope to win a head-on clash against Western forces, though General Jones admitted last week that the alliance has been surprised by the ferocity of the movement's response. The tactical initiative has been with the insurgents, who have kept Nato forces off-balance with hit-and-run attacks, suicide bombings and frontal assaults on isolated outposts in northern Helmand, where small British detachments have sustained a steady trickle of casualties as they fight off attackers.
"The fighting is extraordinarily intense. The intensity and ferocity ... [are] far greater than in Iraq on a daily basis," the commander of British forces in Helmand, Brigadier Ed Butler, said this month. Instead of calming an area by their mere presence, British soldiers have become a magnet for insurgents. Afghan forces remain unreliable, while the local population is equivocal, at best. The only secure point is the main British base, Camp Bastion, isolated in the desert north-west of the provincial capital, Lashkargar. One senior Western diplomat in Kabul called the situation "dire".
British and Irish aid agencies working in Afghanistan have been producing monthly reports on the state of the country since well before 2001, and the latest one makes grim reading. "The underlying security situation affecting the day-to-day mobility of the population, as well as the operations of the government and of the aid and reconstruction communities, is deteriorating in many areas," it says. "The Taliban have an increasing presence at the local level in large areas of the south and are in a strong position to threaten security, intimidate and also build a support base."
The big push in Kandahar province, where Canadian forces are doing most of the fighting, is aimed at regaining the advantage. The Canadians have chased the Taliban away in Panjwayi district many times before, only for the insurgents to seep back once Nato forces have gone. This time, officers say, the aim is to hold the ground once it has been captured. That, however, requires boots on the ground - and they are desperately short.
At the end of this month, Nato's commander in Afghanistan, Britain's Lieutenant-General David Richards, takes responsibility for all foreign forces in the country apart from a handful of Americans engaged in the hunt for al-Qa'ida leaders. General Richards has already indicated that he aims to take a more subtle approach than the gung-ho Americans, whose aerial bombardments are thought to have caused high civilian casualties.
In what is known as an "ink-spot" strategy, the intention is to start developing "Afghan development zones" in the south. Where the security situation has been stabilised, there will be a deluge of aid - first in the form of "quick impact" projects, and later of more sustainable development assistance. Nato and special forces will range around these zones, harrying the Taliban and preventing them upsetting the security balance within the safe areas. In the next stage, the roads between these zones will be gradually secured and the influence of the government extended around them. Like ink spots on a piece of blotting paper, the zones will grow until they merge together.
That, at least, was the theory when British forces deployed in Helmand this year. Amid relative calm, they would support development and drugs eradication in a province that contributes the largest share of the booming Afghan opium crop. It has not worked out that way. British commanders quickly dissociated themselves from efforts to destroy poppy fields when it would leave farmers no other source of income, but it was too late to prevent an alliance between the opium trade and the Taliban, which has destabilised Helmand and made aid work all but impossible. Particularly worrying is the apparent decision of a number of the province's powerful tribes to side with the Taliban.
In many areas, Nato has found the populace incensed by what General Rose called "American search-and-destroy tactics", but the danger is that troop shortages will force Nato, like the Americans, to make up in firepower what they lack in numbers.
The mission, in short, has changed drastically from the one outlined by Mr Reid in January. Hence Operation Medusa, which is merely the largest engagement in the second of a series of offensives against the Taliban. Backed with artillery and large-scale aerial bombing, they aim to weaken the Taliban decisively in battle and then prevent it reorganising and regenerating itself during the traditional winter break in the Afghan fighting season. That would theoretically mean a weakened insurgency next year and create permissible conditions for the "ink spots" to begin spreading in the south.
"In the relatively near future, certainly before the winter, we will see this decisive moment in the region turn in favour of the troops that represent the government," said General Jones. Commanders believe that a majority of the populace in the south is still waiting to see who will gain the decisive advantage. Once that becomes clear, the situation will change dramatically and quickly.
According to General Jones, it is a matter of a few hundred extra troops, though those are proving difficult to find. Many nations that have forces in Afghanistan, notably Germany, refuse to allow them to engage in all-out fighting, while Britain is already at full stretch. Even if everything goes according to the Nato chief's projections, that is just the beginning of the struggle to get back to where we were at the moment of victory in 2001.
Despite the weakness and unpopularity of the central government, Afghan security forces are an integral part of the strategy to reclaim the south. The Afghan army, which has so far trained 42,000 men, is better regarded than the police, but is of very uneven quality. One report from British trainers with a unit in Musa Qala claimed Afghan soldiers refused to fight, extorted money from local people, spent much of their time high on drugs and even threatened to shoot their British allies.
Nato will have no choice but to rely on them. The alternative is committing the sort of troop numbers the Russians put into Afghanistan. "It would require 40,000 or 50,000 troops to garrison Helmand," said one Western diplomat in Kabul. "We can't do that, and we don't want to."
For General Rose it is already too late. "Given the level of resources Nato has at the moment, and the strategy we are pursuing, we simply cannot win. The forces there can't achieve the objectives they have been given."
The West is fighting a crucial battle in the "war on terror", and British troops are in the front line.
British-led Nato forces are engaged in a make-or-break struggle in southern Afghanistan, where the biggest ground offensive in the history of the alliance was launched in Panjwayi district, near Kandahar, just over a week ago. The aim is to throw back a resurgent Taliban.
Yesterday, Nato said Operation Medusa had killed 40 Taliban fighters in the previous 24 hours, and several hundred more were surrounded. If the offensive succeeds, it will be a first step towards reversing the tide of instability that has engulfed an increasing area of the country and led to the deaths of 19 British military personnel this month (14 of them in an air crash).
But commanders admit it is an extremely close-run thing: if the offensive fails, the position of British forces in neighbouring Helmand province - where they were deployed this year with the then Defence Secretary, John Reid, expressing the blithe hope that they could complete their three-year mission "without firing a shot" - could become untenable.
Afghanistan was where the first victory in the "war on terror" was won. Less than three months after the 9/11 horror, al-Qa'ida's Taliban sponsors had been overthrown and Osama bin Laden was on the run. Yet tomorrow, when the fifth anniversary of the attacks on New York and Washington are commemorated, the world will reflect that Bin Laden remains at large somewhere along the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan. Mullah Omar, the Taliban's one-eyed leader, has also evaded capture, and his movement is regaining strength. What has gone wrong?
For General Sir Michael Rose, who led the SAS and commanded British forces in Bosnia, it is simple. "Having defeated the Taliban in 2001, the West then mistakenly shifted its effort and resources to Iraq, leaving most of Afghanistan insecure," he said. "This has allowed the Taliban to return." In other words, not only have gains in the real "war on terror" been dangerously eroded, the reckless detour into Iraq has made things worse. Far from hunting Bin Laden down, the West has been forced to prevent his allies re-establishing a foothold in Afghanistan.
After months of public denials by commanders and politicians, they are finally admitting that military forces in southern Afghanistan are stretched. Yesterday, as security forces in Kabul cleared the debris of the worst suicide bombing in the Afghan capital for two years - in which at least 16 people, including two US soldiers, died - senior military commanders from all 26 Nato nations were meeting in Warsaw to answer an appeal from Nato's supreme commander, US General James Jones, for up to 2,500 more troops at what he called "this decisive moment".
The Taliban cannot hope to win a head-on clash against Western forces, though General Jones admitted last week that the alliance has been surprised by the ferocity of the movement's response. The tactical initiative has been with the insurgents, who have kept Nato forces off-balance with hit-and-run attacks, suicide bombings and frontal assaults on isolated outposts in northern Helmand, where small British detachments have sustained a steady trickle of casualties as they fight off attackers.
"The fighting is extraordinarily intense. The intensity and ferocity ... [are] far greater than in Iraq on a daily basis," the commander of British forces in Helmand, Brigadier Ed Butler, said this month. Instead of calming an area by their mere presence, British soldiers have become a magnet for insurgents. Afghan forces remain unreliable, while the local population is equivocal, at best. The only secure point is the main British base, Camp Bastion, isolated in the desert north-west of the provincial capital, Lashkargar. One senior Western diplomat in Kabul called the situation "dire".
British and Irish aid agencies working in Afghanistan have been producing monthly reports on the state of the country since well before 2001, and the latest one makes grim reading. "The underlying security situation affecting the day-to-day mobility of the population, as well as the operations of the government and of the aid and reconstruction communities, is deteriorating in many areas," it says. "The Taliban have an increasing presence at the local level in large areas of the south and are in a strong position to threaten security, intimidate and also build a support base."
The big push in Kandahar province, where Canadian forces are doing most of the fighting, is aimed at regaining the advantage. The Canadians have chased the Taliban away in Panjwayi district many times before, only for the insurgents to seep back once Nato forces have gone. This time, officers say, the aim is to hold the ground once it has been captured. That, however, requires boots on the ground - and they are desperately short.
At the end of this month, Nato's commander in Afghanistan, Britain's Lieutenant-General David Richards, takes responsibility for all foreign forces in the country apart from a handful of Americans engaged in the hunt for al-Qa'ida leaders. General Richards has already indicated that he aims to take a more subtle approach than the gung-ho Americans, whose aerial bombardments are thought to have caused high civilian casualties.
In what is known as an "ink-spot" strategy, the intention is to start developing "Afghan development zones" in the south. Where the security situation has been stabilised, there will be a deluge of aid - first in the form of "quick impact" projects, and later of more sustainable development assistance. Nato and special forces will range around these zones, harrying the Taliban and preventing them upsetting the security balance within the safe areas. In the next stage, the roads between these zones will be gradually secured and the influence of the government extended around them. Like ink spots on a piece of blotting paper, the zones will grow until they merge together.
That, at least, was the theory when British forces deployed in Helmand this year. Amid relative calm, they would support development and drugs eradication in a province that contributes the largest share of the booming Afghan opium crop. It has not worked out that way. British commanders quickly dissociated themselves from efforts to destroy poppy fields when it would leave farmers no other source of income, but it was too late to prevent an alliance between the opium trade and the Taliban, which has destabilised Helmand and made aid work all but impossible. Particularly worrying is the apparent decision of a number of the province's powerful tribes to side with the Taliban.
In many areas, Nato has found the populace incensed by what General Rose called "American search-and-destroy tactics", but the danger is that troop shortages will force Nato, like the Americans, to make up in firepower what they lack in numbers.
The mission, in short, has changed drastically from the one outlined by Mr Reid in January. Hence Operation Medusa, which is merely the largest engagement in the second of a series of offensives against the Taliban. Backed with artillery and large-scale aerial bombing, they aim to weaken the Taliban decisively in battle and then prevent it reorganising and regenerating itself during the traditional winter break in the Afghan fighting season. That would theoretically mean a weakened insurgency next year and create permissible conditions for the "ink spots" to begin spreading in the south.
"In the relatively near future, certainly before the winter, we will see this decisive moment in the region turn in favour of the troops that represent the government," said General Jones. Commanders believe that a majority of the populace in the south is still waiting to see who will gain the decisive advantage. Once that becomes clear, the situation will change dramatically and quickly.
According to General Jones, it is a matter of a few hundred extra troops, though those are proving difficult to find. Many nations that have forces in Afghanistan, notably Germany, refuse to allow them to engage in all-out fighting, while Britain is already at full stretch. Even if everything goes according to the Nato chief's projections, that is just the beginning of the struggle to get back to where we were at the moment of victory in 2001.
Despite the weakness and unpopularity of the central government, Afghan security forces are an integral part of the strategy to reclaim the south. The Afghan army, which has so far trained 42,000 men, is better regarded than the police, but is of very uneven quality. One report from British trainers with a unit in Musa Qala claimed Afghan soldiers refused to fight, extorted money from local people, spent much of their time high on drugs and even threatened to shoot their British allies.
Nato will have no choice but to rely on them. The alternative is committing the sort of troop numbers the Russians put into Afghanistan. "It would require 40,000 or 50,000 troops to garrison Helmand," said one Western diplomat in Kabul. "We can't do that, and we don't want to."
For General Rose it is already too late. "Given the level of resources Nato has at the moment, and the strategy we are pursuing, we simply cannot win. The forces there can't achieve the objectives they have been given."
The 'war on terror', which began with the attacks on the US, is five years old. It has killed tens of thousands and drawn British troops into conflicts around the world - but in Afghanistan, where the first victory was won, all the gains are in danger of slipping away
By Raymond Whitaker in London and Tom Coghlan in Kabul
Published: 10 September 2006
The West is fighting a crucial battle in the "war on terror", and British troops are in the front line.
British-led Nato forces are engaged in a make-or-break struggle in southern Afghanistan, where the biggest ground offensive in the history of the alliance was launched in Panjwayi district, near Kandahar, just over a week ago. The aim is to throw back a resurgent Taliban.
Yesterday, Nato said Operation Medusa had killed 40 Taliban fighters in the previous 24 hours, and several hundred more were surrounded. If the offensive succeeds, it will be a first step towards reversing the tide of instability that has engulfed an increasing area of the country and led to the deaths of 19 British military personnel this month (14 of them in an air crash).
But commanders admit it is an extremely close-run thing: if the offensive fails, the position of British forces in neighbouring Helmand province - where they were deployed this year with the then Defence Secretary, John Reid, expressing the blithe hope that they could complete their three-year mission "without firing a shot" - could become untenable.
Afghanistan was where the first victory in the "war on terror" was won. Less than three months after the 9/11 horror, al-Qa'ida's Taliban sponsors had been overthrown and Osama bin Laden was on the run. Yet tomorrow, when the fifth anniversary of the attacks on New York and Washington are commemorated, the world will reflect that Bin Laden remains at large somewhere along the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan. Mullah Omar, the Taliban's one-eyed leader, has also evaded capture, and his movement is regaining strength. What has gone wrong?
For General Sir Michael Rose, who led the SAS and commanded British forces in Bosnia, it is simple. "Having defeated the Taliban in 2001, the West then mistakenly shifted its effort and resources to Iraq, leaving most of Afghanistan insecure," he said. "This has allowed the Taliban to return." In other words, not only have gains in the real "war on terror" been dangerously eroded, the reckless detour into Iraq has made things worse. Far from hunting Bin Laden down, the West has been forced to prevent his allies re-establishing a foothold in Afghanistan.
After months of public denials by commanders and politicians, they are finally admitting that military forces in southern Afghanistan are stretched. Yesterday, as security forces in Kabul cleared the debris of the worst suicide bombing in the Afghan capital for two years - in which at least 16 people, including two US soldiers, died - senior military commanders from all 26 Nato nations were meeting in Warsaw to answer an appeal from Nato's supreme commander, US General James Jones, for up to 2,500 more troops at what he called "this decisive moment".
The Taliban cannot hope to win a head-on clash against Western forces, though General Jones admitted last week that the alliance has been surprised by the ferocity of the movement's response. The tactical initiative has been with the insurgents, who have kept Nato forces off-balance with hit-and-run attacks, suicide bombings and frontal assaults on isolated outposts in northern Helmand, where small British detachments have sustained a steady trickle of casualties as they fight off attackers.
"The fighting is extraordinarily intense. The intensity and ferocity ... [are] far greater than in Iraq on a daily basis," the commander of British forces in Helmand, Brigadier Ed Butler, said this month. Instead of calming an area by their mere presence, British soldiers have become a magnet for insurgents. Afghan forces remain unreliable, while the local population is equivocal, at best. The only secure point is the main British base, Camp Bastion, isolated in the desert north-west of the provincial capital, Lashkargar. One senior Western diplomat in Kabul called the situation "dire".
British and Irish aid agencies working in Afghanistan have been producing monthly reports on the state of the country since well before 2001, and the latest one makes grim reading. "The underlying security situation affecting the day-to-day mobility of the population, as well as the operations of the government and of the aid and reconstruction communities, is deteriorating in many areas," it says. "The Taliban have an increasing presence at the local level in large areas of the south and are in a strong position to threaten security, intimidate and also build a support base."
The big push in Kandahar province, where Canadian forces are doing most of the fighting, is aimed at regaining the advantage. The Canadians have chased the Taliban away in Panjwayi district many times before, only for the insurgents to seep back once Nato forces have gone. This time, officers say, the aim is to hold the ground once it has been captured. That, however, requires boots on the ground - and they are desperately short.
At the end of this month, Nato's commander in Afghanistan, Britain's Lieutenant-General David Richards, takes responsibility for all foreign forces in the country apart from a handful of Americans engaged in the hunt for al-Qa'ida leaders. General Richards has already indicated that he aims to take a more subtle approach than the gung-ho Americans, whose aerial bombardments are thought to have caused high civilian casualties.
In what is known as an "ink-spot" strategy, the intention is to start developing "Afghan development zones" in the south. Where the security situation has been stabilised, there will be a deluge of aid - first in the form of "quick impact" projects, and later of more sustainable development assistance. Nato and special forces will range around these zones, harrying the Taliban and preventing them upsetting the security balance within the safe areas. In the next stage, the roads between these zones will be gradually secured and the influence of the government extended around them. Like ink spots on a piece of blotting paper, the zones will grow until they merge together.
That, at least, was the theory when British forces deployed in Helmand this year. Amid relative calm, they would support development and drugs eradication in a province that contributes the largest share of the booming Afghan opium crop. It has not worked out that way. British commanders quickly dissociated themselves from efforts to destroy poppy fields when it would leave farmers no other source of income, but it was too late to prevent an alliance between the opium trade and the Taliban, which has destabilised Helmand and made aid work all but impossible. Particularly worrying is the apparent decision of a number of the province's powerful tribes to side with the Taliban.
In many areas, Nato has found the populace incensed by what General Rose called "American search-and-destroy tactics", but the danger is that troop shortages will force Nato, like the Americans, to make up in firepower what they lack in numbers.
The mission, in short, has changed drastically from the one outlined by Mr Reid in January. Hence Operation Medusa, which is merely the largest engagement in the second of a series of offensives against the Taliban. Backed with artillery and large-scale aerial bombing, they aim to weaken the Taliban decisively in battle and then prevent it reorganising and regenerating itself during the traditional winter break in the Afghan fighting season. That would theoretically mean a weakened insurgency next year and create permissible conditions for the "ink spots" to begin spreading in the south.
"In the relatively near future, certainly before the winter, we will see this decisive moment in the region turn in favour of the troops that represent the government," said General Jones. Commanders believe that a majority of the populace in the south is still waiting to see who will gain the decisive advantage. Once that becomes clear, the situation will change dramatically and quickly.
According to General Jones, it is a matter of a few hundred extra troops, though those are proving difficult to find. Many nations that have forces in Afghanistan, notably Germany, refuse to allow them to engage in all-out fighting, while Britain is already at full stretch. Even if everything goes according to the Nato chief's projections, that is just the beginning of the struggle to get back to where we were at the moment of victory in 2001.
Despite the weakness and unpopularity of the central government, Afghan security forces are an integral part of the strategy to reclaim the south. The Afghan army, which has so far trained 42,000 men, is better regarded than the police, but is of very uneven quality. One report from British trainers with a unit in Musa Qala claimed Afghan soldiers refused to fight, extorted money from local people, spent much of their time high on drugs and even threatened to shoot their British allies.
Nato will have no choice but to rely on them. The alternative is committing the sort of troop numbers the Russians put into Afghanistan. "It would require 40,000 or 50,000 troops to garrison Helmand," said one Western diplomat in Kabul. "We can't do that, and we don't want to."
For General Rose it is already too late. "Given the level of resources Nato has at the moment, and the strategy we are pursuing, we simply cannot win. The forces there can't achieve the objectives they have been given."
The West is fighting a crucial battle in the "war on terror", and British troops are in the front line.
British-led Nato forces are engaged in a make-or-break struggle in southern Afghanistan, where the biggest ground offensive in the history of the alliance was launched in Panjwayi district, near Kandahar, just over a week ago. The aim is to throw back a resurgent Taliban.
Yesterday, Nato said Operation Medusa had killed 40 Taliban fighters in the previous 24 hours, and several hundred more were surrounded. If the offensive succeeds, it will be a first step towards reversing the tide of instability that has engulfed an increasing area of the country and led to the deaths of 19 British military personnel this month (14 of them in an air crash).
But commanders admit it is an extremely close-run thing: if the offensive fails, the position of British forces in neighbouring Helmand province - where they were deployed this year with the then Defence Secretary, John Reid, expressing the blithe hope that they could complete their three-year mission "without firing a shot" - could become untenable.
Afghanistan was where the first victory in the "war on terror" was won. Less than three months after the 9/11 horror, al-Qa'ida's Taliban sponsors had been overthrown and Osama bin Laden was on the run. Yet tomorrow, when the fifth anniversary of the attacks on New York and Washington are commemorated, the world will reflect that Bin Laden remains at large somewhere along the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan. Mullah Omar, the Taliban's one-eyed leader, has also evaded capture, and his movement is regaining strength. What has gone wrong?
For General Sir Michael Rose, who led the SAS and commanded British forces in Bosnia, it is simple. "Having defeated the Taliban in 2001, the West then mistakenly shifted its effort and resources to Iraq, leaving most of Afghanistan insecure," he said. "This has allowed the Taliban to return." In other words, not only have gains in the real "war on terror" been dangerously eroded, the reckless detour into Iraq has made things worse. Far from hunting Bin Laden down, the West has been forced to prevent his allies re-establishing a foothold in Afghanistan.
After months of public denials by commanders and politicians, they are finally admitting that military forces in southern Afghanistan are stretched. Yesterday, as security forces in Kabul cleared the debris of the worst suicide bombing in the Afghan capital for two years - in which at least 16 people, including two US soldiers, died - senior military commanders from all 26 Nato nations were meeting in Warsaw to answer an appeal from Nato's supreme commander, US General James Jones, for up to 2,500 more troops at what he called "this decisive moment".
The Taliban cannot hope to win a head-on clash against Western forces, though General Jones admitted last week that the alliance has been surprised by the ferocity of the movement's response. The tactical initiative has been with the insurgents, who have kept Nato forces off-balance with hit-and-run attacks, suicide bombings and frontal assaults on isolated outposts in northern Helmand, where small British detachments have sustained a steady trickle of casualties as they fight off attackers.
"The fighting is extraordinarily intense. The intensity and ferocity ... [are] far greater than in Iraq on a daily basis," the commander of British forces in Helmand, Brigadier Ed Butler, said this month. Instead of calming an area by their mere presence, British soldiers have become a magnet for insurgents. Afghan forces remain unreliable, while the local population is equivocal, at best. The only secure point is the main British base, Camp Bastion, isolated in the desert north-west of the provincial capital, Lashkargar. One senior Western diplomat in Kabul called the situation "dire".
British and Irish aid agencies working in Afghanistan have been producing monthly reports on the state of the country since well before 2001, and the latest one makes grim reading. "The underlying security situation affecting the day-to-day mobility of the population, as well as the operations of the government and of the aid and reconstruction communities, is deteriorating in many areas," it says. "The Taliban have an increasing presence at the local level in large areas of the south and are in a strong position to threaten security, intimidate and also build a support base."
The big push in Kandahar province, where Canadian forces are doing most of the fighting, is aimed at regaining the advantage. The Canadians have chased the Taliban away in Panjwayi district many times before, only for the insurgents to seep back once Nato forces have gone. This time, officers say, the aim is to hold the ground once it has been captured. That, however, requires boots on the ground - and they are desperately short.
At the end of this month, Nato's commander in Afghanistan, Britain's Lieutenant-General David Richards, takes responsibility for all foreign forces in the country apart from a handful of Americans engaged in the hunt for al-Qa'ida leaders. General Richards has already indicated that he aims to take a more subtle approach than the gung-ho Americans, whose aerial bombardments are thought to have caused high civilian casualties.
In what is known as an "ink-spot" strategy, the intention is to start developing "Afghan development zones" in the south. Where the security situation has been stabilised, there will be a deluge of aid - first in the form of "quick impact" projects, and later of more sustainable development assistance. Nato and special forces will range around these zones, harrying the Taliban and preventing them upsetting the security balance within the safe areas. In the next stage, the roads between these zones will be gradually secured and the influence of the government extended around them. Like ink spots on a piece of blotting paper, the zones will grow until they merge together.
That, at least, was the theory when British forces deployed in Helmand this year. Amid relative calm, they would support development and drugs eradication in a province that contributes the largest share of the booming Afghan opium crop. It has not worked out that way. British commanders quickly dissociated themselves from efforts to destroy poppy fields when it would leave farmers no other source of income, but it was too late to prevent an alliance between the opium trade and the Taliban, which has destabilised Helmand and made aid work all but impossible. Particularly worrying is the apparent decision of a number of the province's powerful tribes to side with the Taliban.
In many areas, Nato has found the populace incensed by what General Rose called "American search-and-destroy tactics", but the danger is that troop shortages will force Nato, like the Americans, to make up in firepower what they lack in numbers.
The mission, in short, has changed drastically from the one outlined by Mr Reid in January. Hence Operation Medusa, which is merely the largest engagement in the second of a series of offensives against the Taliban. Backed with artillery and large-scale aerial bombing, they aim to weaken the Taliban decisively in battle and then prevent it reorganising and regenerating itself during the traditional winter break in the Afghan fighting season. That would theoretically mean a weakened insurgency next year and create permissible conditions for the "ink spots" to begin spreading in the south.
"In the relatively near future, certainly before the winter, we will see this decisive moment in the region turn in favour of the troops that represent the government," said General Jones. Commanders believe that a majority of the populace in the south is still waiting to see who will gain the decisive advantage. Once that becomes clear, the situation will change dramatically and quickly.
According to General Jones, it is a matter of a few hundred extra troops, though those are proving difficult to find. Many nations that have forces in Afghanistan, notably Germany, refuse to allow them to engage in all-out fighting, while Britain is already at full stretch. Even if everything goes according to the Nato chief's projections, that is just the beginning of the struggle to get back to where we were at the moment of victory in 2001.
Despite the weakness and unpopularity of the central government, Afghan security forces are an integral part of the strategy to reclaim the south. The Afghan army, which has so far trained 42,000 men, is better regarded than the police, but is of very uneven quality. One report from British trainers with a unit in Musa Qala claimed Afghan soldiers refused to fight, extorted money from local people, spent much of their time high on drugs and even threatened to shoot their British allies.
Nato will have no choice but to rely on them. The alternative is committing the sort of troop numbers the Russians put into Afghanistan. "It would require 40,000 or 50,000 troops to garrison Helmand," said one Western diplomat in Kabul. "We can't do that, and we don't want to."
For General Rose it is already too late. "Given the level of resources Nato has at the moment, and the strategy we are pursuing, we simply cannot win. The forces there can't achieve the objectives they have been given."
Brad Pitt: We Won't Marry Until Gays Can
for personal reference only:
New York, NY -- Actor Brad Pitt says in an interview released Friday that he will not marry Angelina Jolie until restrictions on gay marriage are lifted so that all Americans can marry.The couple, who met in the 2005 film Mr. & Mrs. Smith, have joint guardianship of adopted children, four-year-old Maddox and 18-month-old Zahara. Jolie herself has said she's in no hurry to wed again. She's been married to actors Jonny Lee Miller and Billy Bob Thornton.
"Angie and I will consider tying the knot when everyone else in the country who wants to be married is legally able," the 42-year-old actor told Esquire magazine for its October issue.Last year Academy Award Winner Charlize Theron told reporters she would not marry boyfriend Stuart Townsend until gay and lesbian marriage was legalized.The Esquire article focuses on what Pitt says are "fifteen things I think everyone should know," and revolves around the issues of parenthood, life in the public eye and adopting Angelina’s kids Maddox and Zahara."They're as much of my blood as any natural born, and I'm theirs," says Pitt. "That's all I can say about it. I can't live without them. So: Anyone considering [adoption], that's my vote."
New York, NY -- Actor Brad Pitt says in an interview released Friday that he will not marry Angelina Jolie until restrictions on gay marriage are lifted so that all Americans can marry.The couple, who met in the 2005 film Mr. & Mrs. Smith, have joint guardianship of adopted children, four-year-old Maddox and 18-month-old Zahara. Jolie herself has said she's in no hurry to wed again. She's been married to actors Jonny Lee Miller and Billy Bob Thornton.
"Angie and I will consider tying the knot when everyone else in the country who wants to be married is legally able," the 42-year-old actor told Esquire magazine for its October issue.Last year Academy Award Winner Charlize Theron told reporters she would not marry boyfriend Stuart Townsend until gay and lesbian marriage was legalized.The Esquire article focuses on what Pitt says are "fifteen things I think everyone should know," and revolves around the issues of parenthood, life in the public eye and adopting Angelina’s kids Maddox and Zahara."They're as much of my blood as any natural born, and I'm theirs," says Pitt. "That's all I can say about it. I can't live without them. So: Anyone considering [adoption], that's my vote."
Friday, September 08, 2006
Timeline: Saddam Hussein trial
for personal reference only:
Saddam Hussein and seven different defendants have been put on trial for the killing of 148 Shias in Dujail in 1982. A verdict is due on 16 October. Here is a day-by-day account of the trial, summarising the key evidence and events.
WEDNESDAY 19 OCTOBER
Summary: The trial began in the heavily fortified Green Zone in Baghdad. Saddam Hussein defiantly questioned the validity of the court before he and his seven co-defendants pleaded not guilty to charges of ordering the killing of 148 Shias from the village of Dujail. After just over three hours, the trial was adjourned until 28 November. The chief judge, Rizgar Mohammed Amin, a Kurd, said the main reason was that witnesses had not shown up.
Key moments: Saddam Hussein and his co-defendants were led into pens in the centre of the courtroom.
Saddam sat next to Barzan Ibrahim al-Tikriti, who was his intelligence chief; former Vice-President Taha Yassin Ramadan; Awad Hamad al-Bandar, a former chief judge; and Dujail Baath party officials Abdullah Kadhem Ruaid, Ali Daeem Ali, Mohammed Azawi Ali and Mizher Abdullah Ruaid.
The former Iraqi leader refused to confirm his identity telling the presiding judge: "Who are you? What is all this?"
Amid some verbal sparring with the judge, the Saddam stated: "I preserve my constitutional rights as the president of Iraq. I do not recognise the body that has authorised you and I don't recognise this aggression.
Later, as the trial adjourned, he was involved in what appeared to be a scuffle with the guards who wanted to grab his arms to escort his out.
Defiant Saddam pleads not guilty
Analysis: Opening salvoes of Saddam trial
Analysis: Two sides of the Saddam coin
Analysis: Saddam trial sparks Arab ambivalence
MONDAY 28 NOVEMBER
Summary: The trial heard its first witness testimony, from a former Iraqi intelligence officer who investigated the 1982 assassination attempt which triggered the alleged massacre in Dujail. Saddam Hussein complained that his foreign guards had taken his pen away, rendering him unable to sign court papers. At least four defence lawyers failed to turn up and the trial was adjourned until 5 December so the defence team could replace two murdered lawyers.
Key evidence: In his testimony, taped before his recent death from cancer, Waddah al-Sheikh said hundreds of people were detained after the ambush in Dujail, which was estimated to have been carried out by between seven and 12 assailants.
"They rounded up 400 people from the town - women, children and old men. Saddam's personal bodyguards took part in killing people," he said.
"I don't know why so many people were arrested. [Barzan Ibrahim al-Tikriti] was the one directly giving the orders."
Mr Sheikh noted that Saddam Hussein had decorated intelligence officers who had taken part in the operation.
Deathbed evidence at Saddam trial
Analysis: High drama in Baghdad courtroom
Scene: Saddam in court
MONDAY 5 DECEMBER
Summary: The first witness to appear in person at the trial gave evidence - angrily interrupted by Saddam Hussein and his half-brother. Saddam Hussein told the court he was not afraid of being executed. Earlier, the trial was suspended for more than an hour because of a walkout by defence lawyers protesting at the refusal of the chief judge to let them challenge the legitimacy of the process in open court.
Key evidence: Ahmed Hassan Mohammed gave a moving account of torture at the hands of the Iraqi security services.
He told how women and children were tortured, and said that dead babies were often abandoned in public.
"People who were arrested were taken to prison and most of them were killed there. The scene was frightening. Even women with babies were arrested," Mr Mohammed said.
The Iraqi forces' torture equipment included a mincing machine sometimes fed with living human bodies, he added.
The court heard Mr Mohammed describe how one of his friends was killed: "They broke him. They broke his arms, his legs, and they shot at his feet."
Saddam trial told of 'massacre'
Analysis: Rocky road to justice in Iraq
Analysis: Torture testimony at Saddam trial
TUESDAY 6 DECEMBER
Summary: The trial heard evidence from three witnesses from the town of Dujail. All the witnesses were allowed to retain their anonymity and gave evidence behind a curtain. When the judge said the trial would continue on Wednesday, Saddam Hussein said he was exhausted, and told him to "go to hell".
Key evidence: With her voice disguised to protect her identity, Witness A said she had been forced to take off her clothes by a security agent, beaten and then tortured with electric shocks.
Afterwards, she said, she was held in the notorious Abu Ghraib prison for four years.
When questioned by the judge, the woman could not pin any specific blame on the defendants, but said Saddam was responsible because he was running the country.
Another witness, Witness C, testified that he was taken by security forces along with his parents and two sisters, and spent 11 months at Abu Ghraib where his father died after being beaten on the head.
"They used to bring men to the women's room and ask them to bark like dogs," he said.
Saddam trial told of Iraq torture
WEDNESDAY 7 DECEMBER
Summary: The day was dominated by hours of wrangling over how to proceed when Saddam Hussein made good on his threat to boycott the trial, refusing to attend. In the end the trial was resumed without him and two anonymous witnesses gave evidence of alleged torture, before the hearing was adjourned until 21 December.
Key evidence: Speaking from behind a curtain, Witness F described his treatment during 70 days of detention in Baghdad intelligence prison, followed by a year-and-a-half in Abu Ghraib prison.
He told the court of beatings and said Saddam's half-brother and co-defendant Barzan al-Tikriti was present at one point.
However, he admitted under questioning that he had been blindfolded and had been told by other detainees that it was Barzan who spoke.
Witness F said prisoners were tortured every day in Abu Ghraib through sleep deprivation, starvation, being forced to stand for days.
Saddam Hussein boycotts trial
Analysis: Saddam's tactic could backfire
WEDNESDAY 21 DECEMBER
Summary: Saddam Hussein told the court that he had been beaten by US troops while in custody. "I have been beaten on every place of my body, and the signs are all over my body," he said. The prosecution ridiculed his claims. The former Iraqi leader spent much of the day listening quietly as two witnesses testified.
Key evidence: Two witnesses gave accounts of torture at the hands of the Iraqi security services and said Dujail had been attacked by helicopter gunships following the attempt to assassinate Saddam.
Ali Mohammed Hassan al-Haydari, the first witness, said his entire family of 43 had been rounded up and tortured. Some of his brothers were shot dead.
"I saw my brother being tortured in front of my eyes," said Mr Haydari, who was then 14-years old.
Witness G, who gave evidence anonymously from behind a curtain, told the court that Saddam Hussein's half-brother Barzan al-Tikriti, had been present at the detention centre.
"When I was being tortured, Barzan was sitting and eating grapes," he said.
Barzan al-Tikriti later began shouting at the judge, saying he was a politician, not criminal.
"My hand is clean," he said, holding it up.
Witnesses name Saddam spy chief
Americans tortured me - Saddam
THURSDAY 22 DECEMBER
Summary: The trial was adjourned until 24 January after further graphic testimony about torture and killings. Saddam again interrupted proceedings to denounce the US, saying it had lied about weapons of mass destruction before invading Iraq, and was lying again by denying his allegations that his American jailers had beaten him. There were also outbursts by Barzan al-Tikriti, who complained that television coverage of the trial had been censored by the authorities.
Key evidence: Three witnesses testified at a brief closed session on Thursday, speaking from behind a curtain to conceal their identities.
The first, Witness H, said he was eight years old during the killings in Dujail.
He said his grandmother, father and uncles had been arrested and tortured, and that he had never seen his male relatives again.
Saddam said the witness was too young at the time of the incident for his testimony to be reliable.
The former Iraqi leader said he was sorry to hear the witnesses' accounts of torture.
"When I hear that any Iraqi has been hurt it hurts me too," he said.
'No evidence' Saddam was tortured
Arab media unclear on Saddam claims
Saddam turns accuser at his trial
TUESDAY 24 JANUARY
Summary: The trial was postponed until 29 January after the court failed to convene. Officials said witnesses were still out of the country after the Hajj pilgrimage, which had ended 11 days previously.
There were also suggestions of a row among the tribunal panel over the replacement chief judge. Judge Raouf Abdul Rahman was appointed on 23 January to take over from Judge Rizgar Amin, who resigned amid accusations from government officials that he was too lenient towards the defendants.
Saddam Hussein trial is postponed
Iraq court names new Saddam judge
Profile: Judge Raouf Abdul Rahman
SUNDAY 29 JANUARY
Summary: Saddam Hussein walked out of court just minutes after his trial resumed, following his defence team and two more of his co-defendants.
The walkouts came after new chief judge Rahman had Saddam's half brother and co-defendant Barzan al-Tikriti removed from the court for complaining at length about the treatment he was receiving for his medical condition (cancer).
The judge accused the defence lawyers of leading defendants to think they could show disrespect the court's authority. A defence lawyer was ejected from the court, and as a result the rest of Saddam's defence team stormed out. Saddam launched into a vigorous exchange with the judge. He was also eventually removed.
Four new defence lawyers were appointed but two of the defendants, Taha Yassin Ramadan and Awad Hamad al-Bandar, said they did not approve and also left the court. The trial was adjourned until 1 February.
Saddam walks out in trial uproar
'New direction' for Saddam trial
Key extracts: Saddam court tirade
WEDNESDAY 1 FEBRUARY
Summary: The new chief judge said he would allow the trial of Saddam Hussein to proceed without the former Iraqi leader being present.
Five of the eight defendants did not appear for the latest hearing after walking out with Saddam on Sunday. Their defence lawyers also stayed away after demanding the removal of Judge Rahman whom they claim is biased.
A defence team was appointed by the court instead.
The hearing was held without argument or disruption and was dominated by witness testimony.
Key evidence: The court heard from five prosecution witnesses.
Among them was a woman who testified that she was arrested by Saddam Hussein's security forces and tortured in prison.
She said she was stripped naked, hung by her feet and kicked repeatedly in the chest by the then intelligence chief Barzan al-Tikriti.
Saddam fails to appear in court
Saddam trial to resume in Baghdad
THURSDAY 2 FEBRUARY
Summary: The trial resumed with none of the eight defendants in court. Saddam Hussein and four other defendants who had boycotted the trial on Wednesday did not reappear, while the remaining three were barred by the judge because of what he called chaos and disorderly behaviour outside the courtroom.
After hearing from two witnesses, the trial was adjourned for ten days.
Key evidence: Two prosecution witnesses gave evidence.
One of the witnesses testified from behind a curtain to hide his identity.
He said he and other members of his family had been tortured by Saddam Hussein's security forces.
"They tortured us severely. Even one of my sisters, they took her clothes off and beat her up in front of me. They hanged me from the ceiling and subjected me to electric shocks," he said.
Saddam trial faces fresh delays
MONDAY 13 FEBRUARY
Summary: Saddam Hussein caused uproar as he was forcibly returned to the court after having boycotted sessions with his seven co-defendants.
He shouted slogans against the US and the new chief judge, Raouf Abdul Rahman, who he continued to insist must be removed on the grounds he was biased. "This is not a court, this is a game," Saddam Hussein shouted.
Judge Rahman pressed on with the case. "The law states that if the defendants refuse to appear before the court, he will be forced to appear," he said.
Key evidence: Two key former Saddam Hussein aides appeared in court but both complained they were being forced to testify. They were the former head of Saddam Hussein's office, Ahmed Khudayir, and the former chief of foreign intelligence, Hassan al-Obeidi.
Mr Khudayir was shown a document, purported to contain his signature, which apparently showed Saddam Hussein had ratified killings at Dujail in 1984. Mr Khudayir said: "I don't remember. I don't remember anything at all."
Uproar as Saddam returns to court
New dynamic to Saddam trial
TUESDAY 14 FEBRUARY
Summary: The court session opened with shouting and defiance from the defendants. Saddam Hussein announced he and his seven co-accused had been on hunger strike for three days in protest at the way the court was treating them.
Saddam Hussein's half-brother Barzan Ibrahim al-Tikriti appeared dressed in long underwear for the second day running to signal his rejection of the court.
Key evidence: Two former intelligence officials appeared - one hidden behind a curtain, the other, Fadil Mohammed al-Azzawi speaking in open court.
But Mr Azzawi insisted he was there against his will and could provide no information about the Dujail massacre, adding that he had only signed a witness statement because he had not had his glasses and could not read the paper.
Barzan al-Tikriti made his liveliest defence statement yet, insisting that he had ordered the release of Dujail prisoners and had nothing to do with the massacre. "I released all the detainees inside the hall - more than 80 persons. I swear to God I said goodbye to them one by one and apologised," he said.
A former culture minister and personal aide to Saddam Hussein, Hamed Youssef Hamadi, also appeared.
He was shown a piece of paper recommending rewards for six officials for their part in the Dujail arrests, bearing the hand-written word "agreed".
When asked to identify the handwriting Mr Hamadi said: "It looks like President Saddam's."
Saddam in hunger strike protest
TUESDAY 28 FEBRUARY
Summary: Saddam Hussein's defence team makes its first appearance in a month after boycotting the trial on the grounds that the chief judge is biased. The team immediately calls for the chief judge and chief prosecutor to be removed and for the trial to be postponed. The chief judge refuses and two top defence lawyers walk out.
But proceedings are calmer and the eight defendants take their seats relatively quietly.
Key evidence: Chief prosecutor Jaafar al-Moussawi presents a memo dated 16 June 1984. He says it contains the signature of Saddam Hussein approving the death sentences of 148 Iraqi Shias from the village of Dujail, where the ex-president survived an assassination attempt in 1982.
Another document, dated two days earlier and announcing the death sentences, is signed by co-defendant Awad al-Bandar, Mr Moussawi alleges.
'Execution memo' at Saddam trial
Saddam calls off hunger strike
WEDNESDAY 1 MARCH
Summary: Saddam Hussein and his seven co-defendants appear quietly for a second day of prosecution evidence. All the defence lawyers, except one of the two who walked out on Tuesday, also appear.
But in a dramatic development as the court comes to a close for the day, Saddam Hussein declares he alone is responsible for the actions of his regime and the court should not be trying anyone else. He admits razing the farms of those that died, but denies he committed any crime.
Key evidence: The chief prosecutor presents more documents and letters that he claims implicate those on trial.
They include death certificates of nearly 100 Dujail villagers, as well as transfer orders showing how their families were sent into the desert and their properties seized.
One letter reveals that four of the accused were executed by mistake, while two were released by mistake. Another shows that nearly 50 died during interrogation, rather than by hanging.
No-one else to blame, says Saddam
Saddam admits razing Dujail farms
SUNDAY 12 MARCH
Summary: Former Baath party official Mizher Abdullah Ruaid appears in court to deny testimony by witnesses accusing him of helping round-up Dujail residents and demolish their property.
Mr Ruaid's father and another former Baath party official, Ali Daeem Ali, also appear in the dock and deny any wrongdoing.
Saddam's trial hears defendants
MONDAY 13 MARCH
Summary: Co-defendant Awad Hamad al-Bandar acknowledges he sentenced 148 Shias from Dujail to death - but says this was done "in accordance with the law".
Mr Bandar, who was chief judge of the Revolutionary Court in the early 1980s, says all the men had received a proper trial. He says the group had confessed to attacking the president on the orders of Iran, which Iraq was fighting at the time.
The prosecution says no such trial took place.
Earlier, Mohammed Azawi Ali, a former Baath party official from the Dujail area, denied before the court that he detained anyone in Dujail.
Saddam-era executions 'were fair'
Saddam co-defendants in spotlight
WEDNESDAY 15 MARCH
Summary: Saddam Hussein begins his formal defence by attacking the court as a "comedy".
In an apparent reference to the bombing of a Shia shrine at Samarra, he warns Iraqis against sectarian violence but praises the insurgency as "the resistance to the American invasion".
After Saddam Hussein rejects the judge's warnings against using the trial as a political platform, the press is barred from the rest of the hearing. The trial is later adjourned until 5 April.
Earlier in the day, Saddam Hussein's half-brother and former spy chief, Barzan al-Tikriti, denied any involvement in the deaths in Dujail.
Mr Tikriti said he had only visited the village once after the assassination attempt. On that visit, he said he had chided the security forces for making unnecessary arrests and ordered several prisoners to be set free.
Mr Tikriti also denied that he was in charge of the security sweep in Dujail, saying this was the responsibility of other government agencies.
Key evidence: The prosecution showed a letter, apparently signed by Mr Tikriti, asking for several intelligence officials to be commended for their work in Dujail.
Mr Tikriti denied the signature on the letter was his, saying it had been forged.
Saddam denounces 'comedy' court
WEDNESDAY 5 APRIL
Summary: Saddam Hussein dismisses evidence as fake, as he is cross-examined for the first time.
The prosecution produces identification cards suggesting that 28 people whose executions the former Iraqi leader approved had been under 18 - the minimum legal age for the death sentence under his rule.
But Saddam Hussein dismisses the evidence, saying ID cards can be forged.
He also says prosecution witnesses at his trial had been bribed and coached in what to say.
In acrimonious exchanges with the trial judge, the defendant accuses him of being scared of the interior minister.
The former leader also calls for an international body to examine signatures on an order approving death sentences against those accused of organising an assassination attempt against him in Dujail in 1982.
Meanwhile, a defence lawyer is ordered from the court by the judge when she tried to display photos of Iraqis tortured in US-run prisons.
Key evidence: The prosecution produces identity cards for some of the people it says were minors when Saddam Hussein approved their executions.
Saddam dismisses them, saying ID cards can easily be forged.
Saddam dismisses evidence
MONDAY 17 APRIL
Summary: Handwriting experts say Saddam Hussein signed the death warrants for 148 Shias in Dujail in 1984, prosecutors claim.
The prosecution reads out a report by experts who say the signature on the orders matches the writing of the former Iraqi leader, at the resumption of his trial.
Defence lawyers claim the experts cannot be independent because they have links to Iraq's interior ministry, and call for a fresh set from abroad.
The trial is then adjourned until Wednesday to give the experts more time to study the alleged signatures of Saddam Hussein and his former head of the intelligence service, Barzan Ibrahim al-Tikriti.
Mr Tikriti also dismisses the prosecution's attempt to prove his role in the Dujail killings, saying his signature was forged.
Key evidence: The prosecution reads from a report by handwriting experts who say the signature on Dujail death warrants matches the writing of the former Iraqi leader.
Defence lawyers dispute the claims, challenging the experts' independence because of their alleged links to Iraq's interior ministry.
Saddam linked to Dujail killings
WEDNESDAY 19 APRIL
Summary: The judge announces that handwriting experts have concluded that signatures on documents - including the death warrants of Dujail villagers - did belong to Saddam Hussein.
Barzan al-Tikriti's signature was also verified. He said the documents were fake and accused the prosecution of "using any means to make the accused guilty".
Saddam 'did sign death warrants'
MONDAY 24 APRIL
Summary: The prosecution plays a recording it says is of a telephone conversation between Saddam Hussein and former Iraqi Vice-President Taha Yassin Ramadan, discussing the destruction of farmland in Dujail.
It also hears a report by more handwriting experts confirming the signatures of Saddam Hussein and six of his co-defendants on documents linking them to the crackdown on Shia villagers.
The experts cannot verify the signature said to be of the seventh co-defendant, Mizher Abdullah Ruaid.
Former intelligence chief Barzan Ibrahim al-Tikriti, Saddam Hussein's half-brother, again disputes the evidence, saying it was aimed at ruining the reputations of the accused.
Trial hears 'Saddam phone call'
MONDAY 15 MAY
Summary: Saddam Hussein refuses to enter a plea as detailed formal charges are read out against him, marking the end of the prosecution's case.
"I can't just say yes or no to this," he tells the judge when asked to plead guilty or not guilty. "I am the president of Iraq according to the will of the Iraqis and I am still the president up to this moment."
Saddam Hussein and his half-brother and former intelligence chief, Barzan al-Tikriti, are charged with ordering the murder of 148 people in the later phase of the crackdown on Dujail. They are also charged with ordering the murder of nine people in the early days of the crackdown.
The illegal arrest of 399 people, the torture of women and children and the destruction of farmland make up the rest of the charges against the two.
In total, formal charges are issued against eight defendants, all of whom either plead not guilty or refuse to enter a plea.
Defiant Saddam refuses to plead
TUESDAY 16 MAY
Summary: The defence calls witnesses to give evidence for three of the lesser-known defendants, who are all former Baath party officials with responsibility for the Dujail area.
Relatives of the three men - Abdullah Kadhem Ruaid, his son Mizher and Mohammed Azawi Ali - are among the unidentified witnesses who give evidence from behind a curtain.
Saddam Hussein and the other more senior co-defendants are not in court.
Key evidence: Two witnesses say the Ruaid family were low-ranking party members and simple farmers whose land was among that razed in retaliation for the attack on Saddam Hussein.
One witness, a family member, says Mizher Ruaid - who is accused of helping to round up residents and demolish their property - was made to stay at his post at the town's telephone exchange at the time of the crackdown.
"He was on night shift for the government, how would he have been able to take on another task?"
Another tells the court: "My father is a tribal sheikh and people loved him for his love and fairness towards people... It's a crime to bring him here."
Saddam defence trial continues
WEDNESDAY 17 MAY
Summary: All defendants appear in court, as witnesses testify in defence of four of the lesser-known defendants.
The judge agrees to allow the defence to call Saddam Hussein and Barzan Ibrahim al-Tikriti as a witnesses for co-defendant Taha Yassin Ramadan.
Key evidence: Witnesses screened by a curtain testify that the defendants are good men and low-ranking officials with no responsibility or involvement in the killings in Dujail.
Trial hears defence case
MONDAY 22 MAY
Summary: The chief judge clashes with one of the defence lawyers, Bushra Khalil. She is expelled from the courtroom after the judge tells her to wait for her turn to speak. Saddam Hussein protests to the judge - but he too is told to be quiet.
Key evidence: Three defence witnesses appear. Sabawi Ibrahim al-Tikriti, half-brother of Saddam Hussein, testifies for the ex-leader's co-defendant, former intelligence head Barzan Ibrahim al-Tikriti.
Another witness also testifies for Mr Tikriti from behind a screen. The third is a former Revolutionary Court employee, who denies that 148 Shia men executed over the 1982 attempt on Saddam Hussein's life were tried unfairly.
Lawyer thrown out of trial
WEDNESDAY 24 MAY
Summary: Former Iraqi Foreign Minister and Deputy Prime Minister Tariq Aziz testifies for the defence, calling Saddam Hussein his "colleague and comrade for decades".
There is another spat between the chief judge and defendant Barzan al-Tikriti, who accuses the former of "insulting a woman" by throwing out defence lawyer Bushra Khalil in the previous session.
Key evidence: Mr Aziz says the defendants cannot be guilty for the deaths of 148 men following a 1982 assassination attempt on Saddam Hussein because the state had a right to punish such an action.
Saddam Hussein's director of personal security, Abed Hamid Mahmud, gives details of how the assassination attempt was made.
Aziz testifies for Saddam defence
MONDAY 29 MAY
Summary: Two defence witnesses testify on the fairness of the trial in which 148 Shia men from Dujail were sentenced to death over their alleged involvement in an assassination attempt against Saddam Hussein.
Key evidence: The first witness, a former Revolutionary Court lawyer, appears on behalf of Awad al-Bandar, one of Saddam Hussein's co-accused and the chief judge when the court sentenced the Shias to death.
He says the court was fair, provided adequate defence and gave defendants ample chance to speak.
A second witness, once a defendant at the same court, says it was just in all of its handling of his case.
Witnesses say Dujail trial was fair
TUESDAY 30 MAY
Summary: A witness for the defence tells the court that 23 of the 148 Shia villagers said to have been executed over their alleged involvement in an assassination attempt against Saddam Hussein are in fact alive.
The judge calls on the defence to limit the number of witnesses it plans to call, saying quality of testimony is most important.
Key evidence: The unidentified witness, a teenager in Dujail in 1982, offers to write a list of names of people said to have been executed who are still alive. He says there are "around 23" of them. He says they fled abroad but returned after Saddam was overthrown in 2003.
Witness: Saddam victims alive
WEDNESDAY 31 MAY
Summary: The defence accuses the prosecution of fabricating its evidence, charges the prosecution denies, and calls for the trial to be halted for an investigation into the claims.
One defence witness accuses the chief prosecutor of bribing him to give false testimony. The prosecutor calls for the witness to be prosecuted. The defence shows DVD footage to discredit a key prosecution witness.
Judge Raouf Abdul Rahman orders Barzan Ibrahim al-Tikriti, half brother and co-accused of Saddam Hussein, from the court for repeatedly arguing with him.
Key evidence: The unidentified witness claims chief prosecutor Jaafar al-Moussawi offered him $500 to give false evidence and said his family was threatened.
The DVD played to the court shows key prosecution witness Ali al-Haidari praising the attempted 1982 assassination of Saddam Hussein in Dujail, the defence says. Mr Haidari told the court in December there was no such attempt on the ex-president's life.
Saddam defendant ejected by judge
MONDAY 5 JUNE
Summary: The defence team contests the authenticity of the documents presented in the case, demanding the trial to be halted to investigate its claims. It also protests over the arrest of its four witnesses held on suspicion of making false statements.
Two witnesses are called for Ali Daeem Ali, a former Baath official and mayor of Dujail who is accused of providing lists of people to be arrested during the crackdown in 1982.
The trial is adjourned until 12 June.
Key evidence: The defence reads out a list of 15 people from the 148 said to have been executed after the Dujail attempt on Saddam Hussein, saying 10 of them are still alive and the rest died natural deaths later or were killed in the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s.
Judge Rahman orders the defence to provide documents to back up their claim.
The two witnesses for Ali Daeem Ali say he has done nothing wrong and "has never hurt anyone".
Saddam lawyers dispute executions
MONDAY 12 JUNE
Summary: The resumption of the trial is marred by angry outbursts.
One of the co-defendants on trial with Saddam Hussein is thrown out of court. Barzan al-Tikriti is removed by security guards after arguing with the chief judge, Abdel Rahman.
Defence lawyer Curtis Doebbler asks the judge for more time for the preparation of the defence's case.
Mr Doebbler says the defence is "at a serious disadvantage" because of the handling of the trial. He also says the prosecution was given more than five months to present its case, while the defence is being "rushed" to conclude within weeks.
Judge Rahman tells the court that action has been taken against four witnesses who were arrested last week for accusing the prosecutor of trying to bribe them to give false evidence.
Three of the witnesses had testified that some of those allegedly killed at Dujail were still alive. The defence said this undermined the credibility of the whole prosecution case.
The trio were arrested for perjury.
The judge reads alleged confessions to perjury by the men. "We reached a decision that these witnesses were lying and we took action against them," the judge says.
Anger erupts in Saddam courtrooms
TUESDAY 13 JUNE
Summary: Presiding Judge Raouf Abdel Rahman opens the session by saying it will be the last afforded to defence testimony.
He reprimands the defence team for indulging in "endless rhetoric", and says later: "You've presented 62 witnesses. If that's not enough to present your case, then 100 won't work."
He also bars Barzan al-Tikriti, who was thrown out the day before after persistent interruptions and called the judge a "dictator".
The case is adjourned until the following week, when closing arguments will begin.
Key evidence: Saddam Hussein's former bodyguards say after the assassination attempt against him he ordered them not to return fire, for fear of hurting innocent people.
Defence case brought to close
MONDAY 19 JUNE
Summary: Chief trial prosecutor Jaafar al-Mussawi delivers the final arguments for the prosecution, calling for Saddam Hussein, his half-brother Barzan al-Tikriti and the former Vice-President, Taha Yassin Ramadan, to be sentenced to death.
He says: "They were spreading corruption on Earth... and even the trees were not saved from their oppression."
The trial is adjourned to 10 July, when the defence will deliver its final arguments and the five-judge panel will retire to consider its verdict.
The prosecution asks for charges against one defendant, Baath party official Mohammed Azzam Azzawi, to be dropped and for him to be freed.
Prosecution demands Saddam death
MONDAY 10 JULY
Summary: Saddam Hussein announces a boycott of the trial, saying it makes a mockery of international and Iraqi law and is driven by "malicious" US aims.
His criticism, spelled out in a letter to Chief Judge Raouf Abdel Rahman, comes as the court is due to hear closing arguments from the defence.
Saddam's lawyers and those of three of his top co-defendants - his half-brother Barzan Ibrahim al-Tikriti, Taha Yassin Ramadan and Awad Hamad al-Bandar - say they will also boycott proceedings.
The lawyers tell Mr Abdel Rahman they will not attend the trial until their security is improved and other demands are met.
Their protest follows the abduction and killing of one of Saddam's defence lawyers, Khamis al-Obeidi, in June. He is the third defence lawyer to be killed since October.
Meanwhile lawyers for two of the more minor defendants - Ali Daeem Ali and Mohammed Azawi Ali, both former Baath party officials for the Dujail area - give their closing statements.
Saddam boycotts 'malicious' trial
TUESDAY 11 JULY
Summary: Chief Judge Raouf Abdel Rahman adjourns the trial until 24 July, insisting that defence lawyers end their boycott at that time.
The judge tells the lawyers the court is prepared to appoint its own lawyers to take their place, adding that they will harm their clients if they continue their boycott.
Saddam Hussein and several of his co-accused continue to stay away from the court, although two minor defendants do attend.
Lawyers for Abdullah Kazim Ruwayyid and his son Mizhar give their closing statements.
Boycott forces Saddam trial delay
MONDAY 24 JULY
Summary: The trial resumes but without Saddam Hussein, who is ill in hospital as a result of a hunger strike.
The entire defence team also boycott the session, claiming their demands for a fair trial have not been met.
Chief Judge Raouf Abdel Rahman accuses Saddam's half-brother and former intelligence chief, Barzan Ibrahim al-Tikrit, who is present in court, of having blood on his hands.
The case is adjourned until Wednesday, when the judge says he hopes lawyers for the defendants would present their case.
Trial resumes without Saddam
WEDNESDAY 26 JULY
Summary: Saddam Hussein returns to court, saying he has been brought in forcibly from his hospital bed.
He says if he is found guilty and condemned to die, he would like to be shot, not hanged.
Shooting is the appropriate means of execution for a military man like himself, he says.
The former leader, who appears thinner because of the hunger strike he has been on, is later reported to be taking food.
Court-appointed replacement lawyers have been named as his defence team continues to boycott the trial. Saddam Hussein says he objects to them.
Saddam plea against being hanged
Saddam 'forced' back to his trial
Analysis: Thinner Saddam still packs a punch
THURSDAY 27 JULY
Summary: The trial is adjourned until 16 October when a verdict is expected.
Saddam Hussein does not appear in court for this final session.
Two defendants are there for summations - former Vice-President Taha Yassin Ramadan, who refuses to allow the court-appointed lawyer to represent him, and Awad Hamad al-Bandar.
Saddam to learn fate in October
MONDAY 21 AUGUST
Summary: Saddam Hussein refused to enter a plea and, as in the Dujail trial, he challenged the court's legitimacy.
The chief judge entered pleas of not guilty for both the former Iraqi leader and his cousin Ali Hassan al-Majid, who had also refused to plead.
The judge also rejected a petition by the defence counsel that the court was illegal.
The prosecution began setting out its case, saying 182,000 people lost their lives during what was known as Operation Anfal, meaning "spoils of war".
The trial's chief prosecutor, Munqith al-Faroon, said entire villages were razed, troops repeatedly used poison gas, and the elderly, women and children were subjected to terrible conditions in detention camps.
"It is difficult to fathom the barbarity of such acts," he said.
Saddam Hussein angrily rejected the prosecutor's claim that women were raped while in detention.
"I can never accept the claim that an Iraqi woman was raped while Saddam was president," he declared.
No Saddam plea at genocide trial
TUESDAY 22 AUGUST
Summary: The court heard from the first two prosecution witnesses, who described chemical weapons attacks which they said were carried out on their villages.
Both witnesses spoke in Kurdish and said foul-smelling smoke had blinded people and made them vomit. One witness said he saw many people die.
Two of the defendants, top-ranking Iraqi officials at the time, said that the Anfal campaign targeted Iranian troops and Kurdish guerrillas supporting them. The Iran-Iraq war was not yet over.
One of the defendants, Sultan Hashim Ahmed, commander of Anfal and a former defence minister, said civilians were moved safely to other areas.
Saddam trial hears of gas attacks
Saddam Hussein and seven different defendants have been put on trial for the killing of 148 Shias in Dujail in 1982. A verdict is due on 16 October. Here is a day-by-day account of the trial, summarising the key evidence and events.
WEDNESDAY 19 OCTOBER
Summary: The trial began in the heavily fortified Green Zone in Baghdad. Saddam Hussein defiantly questioned the validity of the court before he and his seven co-defendants pleaded not guilty to charges of ordering the killing of 148 Shias from the village of Dujail. After just over three hours, the trial was adjourned until 28 November. The chief judge, Rizgar Mohammed Amin, a Kurd, said the main reason was that witnesses had not shown up.
Key moments: Saddam Hussein and his co-defendants were led into pens in the centre of the courtroom.
Saddam sat next to Barzan Ibrahim al-Tikriti, who was his intelligence chief; former Vice-President Taha Yassin Ramadan; Awad Hamad al-Bandar, a former chief judge; and Dujail Baath party officials Abdullah Kadhem Ruaid, Ali Daeem Ali, Mohammed Azawi Ali and Mizher Abdullah Ruaid.
The former Iraqi leader refused to confirm his identity telling the presiding judge: "Who are you? What is all this?"
Amid some verbal sparring with the judge, the Saddam stated: "I preserve my constitutional rights as the president of Iraq. I do not recognise the body that has authorised you and I don't recognise this aggression.
Later, as the trial adjourned, he was involved in what appeared to be a scuffle with the guards who wanted to grab his arms to escort his out.
Defiant Saddam pleads not guilty
Analysis: Opening salvoes of Saddam trial
Analysis: Two sides of the Saddam coin
Analysis: Saddam trial sparks Arab ambivalence
MONDAY 28 NOVEMBER
Summary: The trial heard its first witness testimony, from a former Iraqi intelligence officer who investigated the 1982 assassination attempt which triggered the alleged massacre in Dujail. Saddam Hussein complained that his foreign guards had taken his pen away, rendering him unable to sign court papers. At least four defence lawyers failed to turn up and the trial was adjourned until 5 December so the defence team could replace two murdered lawyers.
Key evidence: In his testimony, taped before his recent death from cancer, Waddah al-Sheikh said hundreds of people were detained after the ambush in Dujail, which was estimated to have been carried out by between seven and 12 assailants.
"They rounded up 400 people from the town - women, children and old men. Saddam's personal bodyguards took part in killing people," he said.
"I don't know why so many people were arrested. [Barzan Ibrahim al-Tikriti] was the one directly giving the orders."
Mr Sheikh noted that Saddam Hussein had decorated intelligence officers who had taken part in the operation.
Deathbed evidence at Saddam trial
Analysis: High drama in Baghdad courtroom
Scene: Saddam in court
MONDAY 5 DECEMBER
Summary: The first witness to appear in person at the trial gave evidence - angrily interrupted by Saddam Hussein and his half-brother. Saddam Hussein told the court he was not afraid of being executed. Earlier, the trial was suspended for more than an hour because of a walkout by defence lawyers protesting at the refusal of the chief judge to let them challenge the legitimacy of the process in open court.
Key evidence: Ahmed Hassan Mohammed gave a moving account of torture at the hands of the Iraqi security services.
He told how women and children were tortured, and said that dead babies were often abandoned in public.
"People who were arrested were taken to prison and most of them were killed there. The scene was frightening. Even women with babies were arrested," Mr Mohammed said.
The Iraqi forces' torture equipment included a mincing machine sometimes fed with living human bodies, he added.
The court heard Mr Mohammed describe how one of his friends was killed: "They broke him. They broke his arms, his legs, and they shot at his feet."
Saddam trial told of 'massacre'
Analysis: Rocky road to justice in Iraq
Analysis: Torture testimony at Saddam trial
TUESDAY 6 DECEMBER
Summary: The trial heard evidence from three witnesses from the town of Dujail. All the witnesses were allowed to retain their anonymity and gave evidence behind a curtain. When the judge said the trial would continue on Wednesday, Saddam Hussein said he was exhausted, and told him to "go to hell".
Key evidence: With her voice disguised to protect her identity, Witness A said she had been forced to take off her clothes by a security agent, beaten and then tortured with electric shocks.
Afterwards, she said, she was held in the notorious Abu Ghraib prison for four years.
When questioned by the judge, the woman could not pin any specific blame on the defendants, but said Saddam was responsible because he was running the country.
Another witness, Witness C, testified that he was taken by security forces along with his parents and two sisters, and spent 11 months at Abu Ghraib where his father died after being beaten on the head.
"They used to bring men to the women's room and ask them to bark like dogs," he said.
Saddam trial told of Iraq torture
WEDNESDAY 7 DECEMBER
Summary: The day was dominated by hours of wrangling over how to proceed when Saddam Hussein made good on his threat to boycott the trial, refusing to attend. In the end the trial was resumed without him and two anonymous witnesses gave evidence of alleged torture, before the hearing was adjourned until 21 December.
Key evidence: Speaking from behind a curtain, Witness F described his treatment during 70 days of detention in Baghdad intelligence prison, followed by a year-and-a-half in Abu Ghraib prison.
He told the court of beatings and said Saddam's half-brother and co-defendant Barzan al-Tikriti was present at one point.
However, he admitted under questioning that he had been blindfolded and had been told by other detainees that it was Barzan who spoke.
Witness F said prisoners were tortured every day in Abu Ghraib through sleep deprivation, starvation, being forced to stand for days.
Saddam Hussein boycotts trial
Analysis: Saddam's tactic could backfire
WEDNESDAY 21 DECEMBER
Summary: Saddam Hussein told the court that he had been beaten by US troops while in custody. "I have been beaten on every place of my body, and the signs are all over my body," he said. The prosecution ridiculed his claims. The former Iraqi leader spent much of the day listening quietly as two witnesses testified.
Key evidence: Two witnesses gave accounts of torture at the hands of the Iraqi security services and said Dujail had been attacked by helicopter gunships following the attempt to assassinate Saddam.
Ali Mohammed Hassan al-Haydari, the first witness, said his entire family of 43 had been rounded up and tortured. Some of his brothers were shot dead.
"I saw my brother being tortured in front of my eyes," said Mr Haydari, who was then 14-years old.
Witness G, who gave evidence anonymously from behind a curtain, told the court that Saddam Hussein's half-brother Barzan al-Tikriti, had been present at the detention centre.
"When I was being tortured, Barzan was sitting and eating grapes," he said.
Barzan al-Tikriti later began shouting at the judge, saying he was a politician, not criminal.
"My hand is clean," he said, holding it up.
Witnesses name Saddam spy chief
Americans tortured me - Saddam
THURSDAY 22 DECEMBER
Summary: The trial was adjourned until 24 January after further graphic testimony about torture and killings. Saddam again interrupted proceedings to denounce the US, saying it had lied about weapons of mass destruction before invading Iraq, and was lying again by denying his allegations that his American jailers had beaten him. There were also outbursts by Barzan al-Tikriti, who complained that television coverage of the trial had been censored by the authorities.
Key evidence: Three witnesses testified at a brief closed session on Thursday, speaking from behind a curtain to conceal their identities.
The first, Witness H, said he was eight years old during the killings in Dujail.
He said his grandmother, father and uncles had been arrested and tortured, and that he had never seen his male relatives again.
Saddam said the witness was too young at the time of the incident for his testimony to be reliable.
The former Iraqi leader said he was sorry to hear the witnesses' accounts of torture.
"When I hear that any Iraqi has been hurt it hurts me too," he said.
'No evidence' Saddam was tortured
Arab media unclear on Saddam claims
Saddam turns accuser at his trial
TUESDAY 24 JANUARY
Summary: The trial was postponed until 29 January after the court failed to convene. Officials said witnesses were still out of the country after the Hajj pilgrimage, which had ended 11 days previously.
There were also suggestions of a row among the tribunal panel over the replacement chief judge. Judge Raouf Abdul Rahman was appointed on 23 January to take over from Judge Rizgar Amin, who resigned amid accusations from government officials that he was too lenient towards the defendants.
Saddam Hussein trial is postponed
Iraq court names new Saddam judge
Profile: Judge Raouf Abdul Rahman
SUNDAY 29 JANUARY
Summary: Saddam Hussein walked out of court just minutes after his trial resumed, following his defence team and two more of his co-defendants.
The walkouts came after new chief judge Rahman had Saddam's half brother and co-defendant Barzan al-Tikriti removed from the court for complaining at length about the treatment he was receiving for his medical condition (cancer).
The judge accused the defence lawyers of leading defendants to think they could show disrespect the court's authority. A defence lawyer was ejected from the court, and as a result the rest of Saddam's defence team stormed out. Saddam launched into a vigorous exchange with the judge. He was also eventually removed.
Four new defence lawyers were appointed but two of the defendants, Taha Yassin Ramadan and Awad Hamad al-Bandar, said they did not approve and also left the court. The trial was adjourned until 1 February.
Saddam walks out in trial uproar
'New direction' for Saddam trial
Key extracts: Saddam court tirade
WEDNESDAY 1 FEBRUARY
Summary: The new chief judge said he would allow the trial of Saddam Hussein to proceed without the former Iraqi leader being present.
Five of the eight defendants did not appear for the latest hearing after walking out with Saddam on Sunday. Their defence lawyers also stayed away after demanding the removal of Judge Rahman whom they claim is biased.
A defence team was appointed by the court instead.
The hearing was held without argument or disruption and was dominated by witness testimony.
Key evidence: The court heard from five prosecution witnesses.
Among them was a woman who testified that she was arrested by Saddam Hussein's security forces and tortured in prison.
She said she was stripped naked, hung by her feet and kicked repeatedly in the chest by the then intelligence chief Barzan al-Tikriti.
Saddam fails to appear in court
Saddam trial to resume in Baghdad
THURSDAY 2 FEBRUARY
Summary: The trial resumed with none of the eight defendants in court. Saddam Hussein and four other defendants who had boycotted the trial on Wednesday did not reappear, while the remaining three were barred by the judge because of what he called chaos and disorderly behaviour outside the courtroom.
After hearing from two witnesses, the trial was adjourned for ten days.
Key evidence: Two prosecution witnesses gave evidence.
One of the witnesses testified from behind a curtain to hide his identity.
He said he and other members of his family had been tortured by Saddam Hussein's security forces.
"They tortured us severely. Even one of my sisters, they took her clothes off and beat her up in front of me. They hanged me from the ceiling and subjected me to electric shocks," he said.
Saddam trial faces fresh delays
MONDAY 13 FEBRUARY
Summary: Saddam Hussein caused uproar as he was forcibly returned to the court after having boycotted sessions with his seven co-defendants.
He shouted slogans against the US and the new chief judge, Raouf Abdul Rahman, who he continued to insist must be removed on the grounds he was biased. "This is not a court, this is a game," Saddam Hussein shouted.
Judge Rahman pressed on with the case. "The law states that if the defendants refuse to appear before the court, he will be forced to appear," he said.
Key evidence: Two key former Saddam Hussein aides appeared in court but both complained they were being forced to testify. They were the former head of Saddam Hussein's office, Ahmed Khudayir, and the former chief of foreign intelligence, Hassan al-Obeidi.
Mr Khudayir was shown a document, purported to contain his signature, which apparently showed Saddam Hussein had ratified killings at Dujail in 1984. Mr Khudayir said: "I don't remember. I don't remember anything at all."
Uproar as Saddam returns to court
New dynamic to Saddam trial
TUESDAY 14 FEBRUARY
Summary: The court session opened with shouting and defiance from the defendants. Saddam Hussein announced he and his seven co-accused had been on hunger strike for three days in protest at the way the court was treating them.
Saddam Hussein's half-brother Barzan Ibrahim al-Tikriti appeared dressed in long underwear for the second day running to signal his rejection of the court.
Key evidence: Two former intelligence officials appeared - one hidden behind a curtain, the other, Fadil Mohammed al-Azzawi speaking in open court.
But Mr Azzawi insisted he was there against his will and could provide no information about the Dujail massacre, adding that he had only signed a witness statement because he had not had his glasses and could not read the paper.
Barzan al-Tikriti made his liveliest defence statement yet, insisting that he had ordered the release of Dujail prisoners and had nothing to do with the massacre. "I released all the detainees inside the hall - more than 80 persons. I swear to God I said goodbye to them one by one and apologised," he said.
A former culture minister and personal aide to Saddam Hussein, Hamed Youssef Hamadi, also appeared.
He was shown a piece of paper recommending rewards for six officials for their part in the Dujail arrests, bearing the hand-written word "agreed".
When asked to identify the handwriting Mr Hamadi said: "It looks like President Saddam's."
Saddam in hunger strike protest
TUESDAY 28 FEBRUARY
Summary: Saddam Hussein's defence team makes its first appearance in a month after boycotting the trial on the grounds that the chief judge is biased. The team immediately calls for the chief judge and chief prosecutor to be removed and for the trial to be postponed. The chief judge refuses and two top defence lawyers walk out.
But proceedings are calmer and the eight defendants take their seats relatively quietly.
Key evidence: Chief prosecutor Jaafar al-Moussawi presents a memo dated 16 June 1984. He says it contains the signature of Saddam Hussein approving the death sentences of 148 Iraqi Shias from the village of Dujail, where the ex-president survived an assassination attempt in 1982.
Another document, dated two days earlier and announcing the death sentences, is signed by co-defendant Awad al-Bandar, Mr Moussawi alleges.
'Execution memo' at Saddam trial
Saddam calls off hunger strike
WEDNESDAY 1 MARCH
Summary: Saddam Hussein and his seven co-defendants appear quietly for a second day of prosecution evidence. All the defence lawyers, except one of the two who walked out on Tuesday, also appear.
But in a dramatic development as the court comes to a close for the day, Saddam Hussein declares he alone is responsible for the actions of his regime and the court should not be trying anyone else. He admits razing the farms of those that died, but denies he committed any crime.
Key evidence: The chief prosecutor presents more documents and letters that he claims implicate those on trial.
They include death certificates of nearly 100 Dujail villagers, as well as transfer orders showing how their families were sent into the desert and their properties seized.
One letter reveals that four of the accused were executed by mistake, while two were released by mistake. Another shows that nearly 50 died during interrogation, rather than by hanging.
No-one else to blame, says Saddam
Saddam admits razing Dujail farms
SUNDAY 12 MARCH
Summary: Former Baath party official Mizher Abdullah Ruaid appears in court to deny testimony by witnesses accusing him of helping round-up Dujail residents and demolish their property.
Mr Ruaid's father and another former Baath party official, Ali Daeem Ali, also appear in the dock and deny any wrongdoing.
Saddam's trial hears defendants
MONDAY 13 MARCH
Summary: Co-defendant Awad Hamad al-Bandar acknowledges he sentenced 148 Shias from Dujail to death - but says this was done "in accordance with the law".
Mr Bandar, who was chief judge of the Revolutionary Court in the early 1980s, says all the men had received a proper trial. He says the group had confessed to attacking the president on the orders of Iran, which Iraq was fighting at the time.
The prosecution says no such trial took place.
Earlier, Mohammed Azawi Ali, a former Baath party official from the Dujail area, denied before the court that he detained anyone in Dujail.
Saddam-era executions 'were fair'
Saddam co-defendants in spotlight
WEDNESDAY 15 MARCH
Summary: Saddam Hussein begins his formal defence by attacking the court as a "comedy".
In an apparent reference to the bombing of a Shia shrine at Samarra, he warns Iraqis against sectarian violence but praises the insurgency as "the resistance to the American invasion".
After Saddam Hussein rejects the judge's warnings against using the trial as a political platform, the press is barred from the rest of the hearing. The trial is later adjourned until 5 April.
Earlier in the day, Saddam Hussein's half-brother and former spy chief, Barzan al-Tikriti, denied any involvement in the deaths in Dujail.
Mr Tikriti said he had only visited the village once after the assassination attempt. On that visit, he said he had chided the security forces for making unnecessary arrests and ordered several prisoners to be set free.
Mr Tikriti also denied that he was in charge of the security sweep in Dujail, saying this was the responsibility of other government agencies.
Key evidence: The prosecution showed a letter, apparently signed by Mr Tikriti, asking for several intelligence officials to be commended for their work in Dujail.
Mr Tikriti denied the signature on the letter was his, saying it had been forged.
Saddam denounces 'comedy' court
WEDNESDAY 5 APRIL
Summary: Saddam Hussein dismisses evidence as fake, as he is cross-examined for the first time.
The prosecution produces identification cards suggesting that 28 people whose executions the former Iraqi leader approved had been under 18 - the minimum legal age for the death sentence under his rule.
But Saddam Hussein dismisses the evidence, saying ID cards can be forged.
He also says prosecution witnesses at his trial had been bribed and coached in what to say.
In acrimonious exchanges with the trial judge, the defendant accuses him of being scared of the interior minister.
The former leader also calls for an international body to examine signatures on an order approving death sentences against those accused of organising an assassination attempt against him in Dujail in 1982.
Meanwhile, a defence lawyer is ordered from the court by the judge when she tried to display photos of Iraqis tortured in US-run prisons.
Key evidence: The prosecution produces identity cards for some of the people it says were minors when Saddam Hussein approved their executions.
Saddam dismisses them, saying ID cards can easily be forged.
Saddam dismisses evidence
MONDAY 17 APRIL
Summary: Handwriting experts say Saddam Hussein signed the death warrants for 148 Shias in Dujail in 1984, prosecutors claim.
The prosecution reads out a report by experts who say the signature on the orders matches the writing of the former Iraqi leader, at the resumption of his trial.
Defence lawyers claim the experts cannot be independent because they have links to Iraq's interior ministry, and call for a fresh set from abroad.
The trial is then adjourned until Wednesday to give the experts more time to study the alleged signatures of Saddam Hussein and his former head of the intelligence service, Barzan Ibrahim al-Tikriti.
Mr Tikriti also dismisses the prosecution's attempt to prove his role in the Dujail killings, saying his signature was forged.
Key evidence: The prosecution reads from a report by handwriting experts who say the signature on Dujail death warrants matches the writing of the former Iraqi leader.
Defence lawyers dispute the claims, challenging the experts' independence because of their alleged links to Iraq's interior ministry.
Saddam linked to Dujail killings
WEDNESDAY 19 APRIL
Summary: The judge announces that handwriting experts have concluded that signatures on documents - including the death warrants of Dujail villagers - did belong to Saddam Hussein.
Barzan al-Tikriti's signature was also verified. He said the documents were fake and accused the prosecution of "using any means to make the accused guilty".
Saddam 'did sign death warrants'
MONDAY 24 APRIL
Summary: The prosecution plays a recording it says is of a telephone conversation between Saddam Hussein and former Iraqi Vice-President Taha Yassin Ramadan, discussing the destruction of farmland in Dujail.
It also hears a report by more handwriting experts confirming the signatures of Saddam Hussein and six of his co-defendants on documents linking them to the crackdown on Shia villagers.
The experts cannot verify the signature said to be of the seventh co-defendant, Mizher Abdullah Ruaid.
Former intelligence chief Barzan Ibrahim al-Tikriti, Saddam Hussein's half-brother, again disputes the evidence, saying it was aimed at ruining the reputations of the accused.
Trial hears 'Saddam phone call'
MONDAY 15 MAY
Summary: Saddam Hussein refuses to enter a plea as detailed formal charges are read out against him, marking the end of the prosecution's case.
"I can't just say yes or no to this," he tells the judge when asked to plead guilty or not guilty. "I am the president of Iraq according to the will of the Iraqis and I am still the president up to this moment."
Saddam Hussein and his half-brother and former intelligence chief, Barzan al-Tikriti, are charged with ordering the murder of 148 people in the later phase of the crackdown on Dujail. They are also charged with ordering the murder of nine people in the early days of the crackdown.
The illegal arrest of 399 people, the torture of women and children and the destruction of farmland make up the rest of the charges against the two.
In total, formal charges are issued against eight defendants, all of whom either plead not guilty or refuse to enter a plea.
Defiant Saddam refuses to plead
TUESDAY 16 MAY
Summary: The defence calls witnesses to give evidence for three of the lesser-known defendants, who are all former Baath party officials with responsibility for the Dujail area.
Relatives of the three men - Abdullah Kadhem Ruaid, his son Mizher and Mohammed Azawi Ali - are among the unidentified witnesses who give evidence from behind a curtain.
Saddam Hussein and the other more senior co-defendants are not in court.
Key evidence: Two witnesses say the Ruaid family were low-ranking party members and simple farmers whose land was among that razed in retaliation for the attack on Saddam Hussein.
One witness, a family member, says Mizher Ruaid - who is accused of helping to round up residents and demolish their property - was made to stay at his post at the town's telephone exchange at the time of the crackdown.
"He was on night shift for the government, how would he have been able to take on another task?"
Another tells the court: "My father is a tribal sheikh and people loved him for his love and fairness towards people... It's a crime to bring him here."
Saddam defence trial continues
WEDNESDAY 17 MAY
Summary: All defendants appear in court, as witnesses testify in defence of four of the lesser-known defendants.
The judge agrees to allow the defence to call Saddam Hussein and Barzan Ibrahim al-Tikriti as a witnesses for co-defendant Taha Yassin Ramadan.
Key evidence: Witnesses screened by a curtain testify that the defendants are good men and low-ranking officials with no responsibility or involvement in the killings in Dujail.
Trial hears defence case
MONDAY 22 MAY
Summary: The chief judge clashes with one of the defence lawyers, Bushra Khalil. She is expelled from the courtroom after the judge tells her to wait for her turn to speak. Saddam Hussein protests to the judge - but he too is told to be quiet.
Key evidence: Three defence witnesses appear. Sabawi Ibrahim al-Tikriti, half-brother of Saddam Hussein, testifies for the ex-leader's co-defendant, former intelligence head Barzan Ibrahim al-Tikriti.
Another witness also testifies for Mr Tikriti from behind a screen. The third is a former Revolutionary Court employee, who denies that 148 Shia men executed over the 1982 attempt on Saddam Hussein's life were tried unfairly.
Lawyer thrown out of trial
WEDNESDAY 24 MAY
Summary: Former Iraqi Foreign Minister and Deputy Prime Minister Tariq Aziz testifies for the defence, calling Saddam Hussein his "colleague and comrade for decades".
There is another spat between the chief judge and defendant Barzan al-Tikriti, who accuses the former of "insulting a woman" by throwing out defence lawyer Bushra Khalil in the previous session.
Key evidence: Mr Aziz says the defendants cannot be guilty for the deaths of 148 men following a 1982 assassination attempt on Saddam Hussein because the state had a right to punish such an action.
Saddam Hussein's director of personal security, Abed Hamid Mahmud, gives details of how the assassination attempt was made.
Aziz testifies for Saddam defence
MONDAY 29 MAY
Summary: Two defence witnesses testify on the fairness of the trial in which 148 Shia men from Dujail were sentenced to death over their alleged involvement in an assassination attempt against Saddam Hussein.
Key evidence: The first witness, a former Revolutionary Court lawyer, appears on behalf of Awad al-Bandar, one of Saddam Hussein's co-accused and the chief judge when the court sentenced the Shias to death.
He says the court was fair, provided adequate defence and gave defendants ample chance to speak.
A second witness, once a defendant at the same court, says it was just in all of its handling of his case.
Witnesses say Dujail trial was fair
TUESDAY 30 MAY
Summary: A witness for the defence tells the court that 23 of the 148 Shia villagers said to have been executed over their alleged involvement in an assassination attempt against Saddam Hussein are in fact alive.
The judge calls on the defence to limit the number of witnesses it plans to call, saying quality of testimony is most important.
Key evidence: The unidentified witness, a teenager in Dujail in 1982, offers to write a list of names of people said to have been executed who are still alive. He says there are "around 23" of them. He says they fled abroad but returned after Saddam was overthrown in 2003.
Witness: Saddam victims alive
WEDNESDAY 31 MAY
Summary: The defence accuses the prosecution of fabricating its evidence, charges the prosecution denies, and calls for the trial to be halted for an investigation into the claims.
One defence witness accuses the chief prosecutor of bribing him to give false testimony. The prosecutor calls for the witness to be prosecuted. The defence shows DVD footage to discredit a key prosecution witness.
Judge Raouf Abdul Rahman orders Barzan Ibrahim al-Tikriti, half brother and co-accused of Saddam Hussein, from the court for repeatedly arguing with him.
Key evidence: The unidentified witness claims chief prosecutor Jaafar al-Moussawi offered him $500 to give false evidence and said his family was threatened.
The DVD played to the court shows key prosecution witness Ali al-Haidari praising the attempted 1982 assassination of Saddam Hussein in Dujail, the defence says. Mr Haidari told the court in December there was no such attempt on the ex-president's life.
Saddam defendant ejected by judge
MONDAY 5 JUNE
Summary: The defence team contests the authenticity of the documents presented in the case, demanding the trial to be halted to investigate its claims. It also protests over the arrest of its four witnesses held on suspicion of making false statements.
Two witnesses are called for Ali Daeem Ali, a former Baath official and mayor of Dujail who is accused of providing lists of people to be arrested during the crackdown in 1982.
The trial is adjourned until 12 June.
Key evidence: The defence reads out a list of 15 people from the 148 said to have been executed after the Dujail attempt on Saddam Hussein, saying 10 of them are still alive and the rest died natural deaths later or were killed in the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s.
Judge Rahman orders the defence to provide documents to back up their claim.
The two witnesses for Ali Daeem Ali say he has done nothing wrong and "has never hurt anyone".
Saddam lawyers dispute executions
MONDAY 12 JUNE
Summary: The resumption of the trial is marred by angry outbursts.
One of the co-defendants on trial with Saddam Hussein is thrown out of court. Barzan al-Tikriti is removed by security guards after arguing with the chief judge, Abdel Rahman.
Defence lawyer Curtis Doebbler asks the judge for more time for the preparation of the defence's case.
Mr Doebbler says the defence is "at a serious disadvantage" because of the handling of the trial. He also says the prosecution was given more than five months to present its case, while the defence is being "rushed" to conclude within weeks.
Judge Rahman tells the court that action has been taken against four witnesses who were arrested last week for accusing the prosecutor of trying to bribe them to give false evidence.
Three of the witnesses had testified that some of those allegedly killed at Dujail were still alive. The defence said this undermined the credibility of the whole prosecution case.
The trio were arrested for perjury.
The judge reads alleged confessions to perjury by the men. "We reached a decision that these witnesses were lying and we took action against them," the judge says.
Anger erupts in Saddam courtrooms
TUESDAY 13 JUNE
Summary: Presiding Judge Raouf Abdel Rahman opens the session by saying it will be the last afforded to defence testimony.
He reprimands the defence team for indulging in "endless rhetoric", and says later: "You've presented 62 witnesses. If that's not enough to present your case, then 100 won't work."
He also bars Barzan al-Tikriti, who was thrown out the day before after persistent interruptions and called the judge a "dictator".
The case is adjourned until the following week, when closing arguments will begin.
Key evidence: Saddam Hussein's former bodyguards say after the assassination attempt against him he ordered them not to return fire, for fear of hurting innocent people.
Defence case brought to close
MONDAY 19 JUNE
Summary: Chief trial prosecutor Jaafar al-Mussawi delivers the final arguments for the prosecution, calling for Saddam Hussein, his half-brother Barzan al-Tikriti and the former Vice-President, Taha Yassin Ramadan, to be sentenced to death.
He says: "They were spreading corruption on Earth... and even the trees were not saved from their oppression."
The trial is adjourned to 10 July, when the defence will deliver its final arguments and the five-judge panel will retire to consider its verdict.
The prosecution asks for charges against one defendant, Baath party official Mohammed Azzam Azzawi, to be dropped and for him to be freed.
Prosecution demands Saddam death
MONDAY 10 JULY
Summary: Saddam Hussein announces a boycott of the trial, saying it makes a mockery of international and Iraqi law and is driven by "malicious" US aims.
His criticism, spelled out in a letter to Chief Judge Raouf Abdel Rahman, comes as the court is due to hear closing arguments from the defence.
Saddam's lawyers and those of three of his top co-defendants - his half-brother Barzan Ibrahim al-Tikriti, Taha Yassin Ramadan and Awad Hamad al-Bandar - say they will also boycott proceedings.
The lawyers tell Mr Abdel Rahman they will not attend the trial until their security is improved and other demands are met.
Their protest follows the abduction and killing of one of Saddam's defence lawyers, Khamis al-Obeidi, in June. He is the third defence lawyer to be killed since October.
Meanwhile lawyers for two of the more minor defendants - Ali Daeem Ali and Mohammed Azawi Ali, both former Baath party officials for the Dujail area - give their closing statements.
Saddam boycotts 'malicious' trial
TUESDAY 11 JULY
Summary: Chief Judge Raouf Abdel Rahman adjourns the trial until 24 July, insisting that defence lawyers end their boycott at that time.
The judge tells the lawyers the court is prepared to appoint its own lawyers to take their place, adding that they will harm their clients if they continue their boycott.
Saddam Hussein and several of his co-accused continue to stay away from the court, although two minor defendants do attend.
Lawyers for Abdullah Kazim Ruwayyid and his son Mizhar give their closing statements.
Boycott forces Saddam trial delay
MONDAY 24 JULY
Summary: The trial resumes but without Saddam Hussein, who is ill in hospital as a result of a hunger strike.
The entire defence team also boycott the session, claiming their demands for a fair trial have not been met.
Chief Judge Raouf Abdel Rahman accuses Saddam's half-brother and former intelligence chief, Barzan Ibrahim al-Tikrit, who is present in court, of having blood on his hands.
The case is adjourned until Wednesday, when the judge says he hopes lawyers for the defendants would present their case.
Trial resumes without Saddam
WEDNESDAY 26 JULY
Summary: Saddam Hussein returns to court, saying he has been brought in forcibly from his hospital bed.
He says if he is found guilty and condemned to die, he would like to be shot, not hanged.
Shooting is the appropriate means of execution for a military man like himself, he says.
The former leader, who appears thinner because of the hunger strike he has been on, is later reported to be taking food.
Court-appointed replacement lawyers have been named as his defence team continues to boycott the trial. Saddam Hussein says he objects to them.
Saddam plea against being hanged
Saddam 'forced' back to his trial
Analysis: Thinner Saddam still packs a punch
THURSDAY 27 JULY
Summary: The trial is adjourned until 16 October when a verdict is expected.
Saddam Hussein does not appear in court for this final session.
Two defendants are there for summations - former Vice-President Taha Yassin Ramadan, who refuses to allow the court-appointed lawyer to represent him, and Awad Hamad al-Bandar.
Saddam to learn fate in October
MONDAY 21 AUGUST
Summary: Saddam Hussein refused to enter a plea and, as in the Dujail trial, he challenged the court's legitimacy.
The chief judge entered pleas of not guilty for both the former Iraqi leader and his cousin Ali Hassan al-Majid, who had also refused to plead.
The judge also rejected a petition by the defence counsel that the court was illegal.
The prosecution began setting out its case, saying 182,000 people lost their lives during what was known as Operation Anfal, meaning "spoils of war".
The trial's chief prosecutor, Munqith al-Faroon, said entire villages were razed, troops repeatedly used poison gas, and the elderly, women and children were subjected to terrible conditions in detention camps.
"It is difficult to fathom the barbarity of such acts," he said.
Saddam Hussein angrily rejected the prosecutor's claim that women were raped while in detention.
"I can never accept the claim that an Iraqi woman was raped while Saddam was president," he declared.
No Saddam plea at genocide trial
TUESDAY 22 AUGUST
Summary: The court heard from the first two prosecution witnesses, who described chemical weapons attacks which they said were carried out on their villages.
Both witnesses spoke in Kurdish and said foul-smelling smoke had blinded people and made them vomit. One witness said he saw many people die.
Two of the defendants, top-ranking Iraqi officials at the time, said that the Anfal campaign targeted Iranian troops and Kurdish guerrillas supporting them. The Iran-Iraq war was not yet over.
One of the defendants, Sultan Hashim Ahmed, commander of Anfal and a former defence minister, said civilians were moved safely to other areas.
Saddam trial hears of gas attacks
Baghdad violence 'not declining'
for personal reference only:
The Iraqi ministry of health says more than 1,500 people were killed in attacks in Baghdad last month.
The figure is far higher than previously thought, and only slightly lower than July's figure.
US military and Iraqi officials had previously said a major new security operation in Baghdad had dramatically reduced the number of killings.
In the latest violence, three people were killed by a bomb in the Karrada district on Friday.
The bomb apparently targeted a local police commander, who survived the attack.
And in a separate development, at least five Iraqi border guards were seized on the border with Iran, and are being held in Iranian custody.
The guards were detained during an incident on Thursday, details of which are not clear.
One report says there was an exchange of fire before the Iraqis were taken prisoner.
American forces, who were patrolling the border with the Iraqis, withdrew from the area with no injuries.
BBC Baghdad correspondent David Loyn says mistakes are easy to make along this section of the border, with different maps showing the border in different places.
Revised numbers
The Iraqi health ministry says its final count for violent deaths in Baghdad in August is 1,536.
That is nearly three times the same ministry's estimate issued last week.
Correspondents say this indicates a nearly undiminished level of sectarian and insurgent killings.
Last month the US military spokesman in Iraq, Maj Gen William Caldwell, said the rate of violent deaths in Baghdad had fallen significantly from July to August.
US officials had suggested that the murder rate in Baghdad had dropped 52% in August compared to the daily rate for July.
The health ministry's figures are complied from reports by hospitals and mortuaries in Baghdad area.
The Iraqi ministry of health says more than 1,500 people were killed in attacks in Baghdad last month.
The figure is far higher than previously thought, and only slightly lower than July's figure.
US military and Iraqi officials had previously said a major new security operation in Baghdad had dramatically reduced the number of killings.
In the latest violence, three people were killed by a bomb in the Karrada district on Friday.
The bomb apparently targeted a local police commander, who survived the attack.
And in a separate development, at least five Iraqi border guards were seized on the border with Iran, and are being held in Iranian custody.
The guards were detained during an incident on Thursday, details of which are not clear.
One report says there was an exchange of fire before the Iraqis were taken prisoner.
American forces, who were patrolling the border with the Iraqis, withdrew from the area with no injuries.
BBC Baghdad correspondent David Loyn says mistakes are easy to make along this section of the border, with different maps showing the border in different places.
Revised numbers
The Iraqi health ministry says its final count for violent deaths in Baghdad in August is 1,536.
That is nearly three times the same ministry's estimate issued last week.
Correspondents say this indicates a nearly undiminished level of sectarian and insurgent killings.
Last month the US military spokesman in Iraq, Maj Gen William Caldwell, said the rate of violent deaths in Baghdad had fallen significantly from July to August.
US officials had suggested that the murder rate in Baghdad had dropped 52% in August compared to the daily rate for July.
The health ministry's figures are complied from reports by hospitals and mortuaries in Baghdad area.
'No Saddam link to Iraq al-Qaeda'
for personal reference only:
There is no evidence of formal links between Iraqi ex-leader Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda leaders in Iraq prior to the 2003 war, a US Senate report says.
The finding is contained in a 2005 CIA report released by the Senate's Intelligence Committee on Friday.
US President George W Bush has said that the presence of late al-Qaeda leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi in Iraq before the war was evidence of a link.
Opposition Democrats say the report has harmed Mr Bush's case for going to war.
The BBC's Justin Webb in Washington says that the US president has again and again tried to connect the war in Iraq, which most Americans think was a mistake, with the so-called war on terror, which has the support of the nation.
The report comes as Mr Bush makes a series of speeches on the "war on terror" to coincide with the fifth anniversary of the 11 September attacks.
Requests rejected
The report is the second part of the committee's analysis of pre-war intelligence. The first dealt with CIA failings in its assessment of Iraq's weapons programme.
The committee concluded that the CIA had evidence of several instances of contacts between the Iraqi authorities and al-Qaeda throughout the 1990s but that these did not add up to a formal relationship.
It added that the government "did not have a relationship, harbour or turn a blind eye toward Zarqawi and his associates".
It said that Iraq and al-Qaeda were ideologically poles apart.
"Saddam Hussein was distrustful of al-Qaeda and viewed Islamic extremists as a threat to his regime, refusing all requests from al-Qaeda to provide material or operational support," it said.
The Senate report added that the Iraqi regime had repeatedly rejected al-Qaeda requests for meetings.
It also deals with the role played by inaccurate information supplied by Iraqi opposition groups in the run-up to the war.
'Devastating indictment'
White House spokesman Tony Snow told the Associated Press news agency the report contained "nothing new".
"In 2002 and 2003, members of both parties got a good look at the intelligence we had and they came to the very same conclusions about what was going on," he said.
But Democrat Senator Carl Levin described the report as a "devastating indictment" of the administration's attempts to link Saddam Hussein to al-Qaeda.
Zarqawi, who is believed to be responsible for numerous killings and kidnappings in Iraq since the war, was killed in a US raid in June.
Saddam Hussein and several close associates are standing trial for the killings of Shias in the village of Dujail in the early 1980s and of more than 100,000 Kurds in 1988.
There is no evidence of formal links between Iraqi ex-leader Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda leaders in Iraq prior to the 2003 war, a US Senate report says.
The finding is contained in a 2005 CIA report released by the Senate's Intelligence Committee on Friday.
US President George W Bush has said that the presence of late al-Qaeda leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi in Iraq before the war was evidence of a link.
Opposition Democrats say the report has harmed Mr Bush's case for going to war.
The BBC's Justin Webb in Washington says that the US president has again and again tried to connect the war in Iraq, which most Americans think was a mistake, with the so-called war on terror, which has the support of the nation.
The report comes as Mr Bush makes a series of speeches on the "war on terror" to coincide with the fifth anniversary of the 11 September attacks.
Requests rejected
The report is the second part of the committee's analysis of pre-war intelligence. The first dealt with CIA failings in its assessment of Iraq's weapons programme.
The committee concluded that the CIA had evidence of several instances of contacts between the Iraqi authorities and al-Qaeda throughout the 1990s but that these did not add up to a formal relationship.
It added that the government "did not have a relationship, harbour or turn a blind eye toward Zarqawi and his associates".
It said that Iraq and al-Qaeda were ideologically poles apart.
"Saddam Hussein was distrustful of al-Qaeda and viewed Islamic extremists as a threat to his regime, refusing all requests from al-Qaeda to provide material or operational support," it said.
The Senate report added that the Iraqi regime had repeatedly rejected al-Qaeda requests for meetings.
It also deals with the role played by inaccurate information supplied by Iraqi opposition groups in the run-up to the war.
'Devastating indictment'
White House spokesman Tony Snow told the Associated Press news agency the report contained "nothing new".
"In 2002 and 2003, members of both parties got a good look at the intelligence we had and they came to the very same conclusions about what was going on," he said.
But Democrat Senator Carl Levin described the report as a "devastating indictment" of the administration's attempts to link Saddam Hussein to al-Qaeda.
Zarqawi, who is believed to be responsible for numerous killings and kidnappings in Iraq since the war, was killed in a US raid in June.
Saddam Hussein and several close associates are standing trial for the killings of Shias in the village of Dujail in the early 1980s and of more than 100,000 Kurds in 1988.
Wednesday, September 06, 2006
British tabloid: Blair sets date to leave office
for personal reference only:
Prime minister reportedly to exit 10 Downing St. 10 years after succession
LONDON - A national tour and a bevy of TV appearances to buff his legacy: Tony Blair's advisers have mapped out what they hope will be a triumphant end to his years in office, a purportedly leaked memo showed Tuesday.
But political reality may intervene with their plans as a restive Labor Party grows anxious for the prime minister to step aside sooner than he might like.
Britain's The Sun tabloid reported that Blair would leave office on July 26, 2007 — after 10 years as Britain's premier. Two ministers from Blair's Cabinet said that next year was likely to see him step down.
The newspaper's Wednesday edition, available late Tuesday, splashed across its front page that Blair would resign as leader of the governing Labor Party on May 31, 2007 — triggering a leadership election likely to take around eight weeks. He would then be replaced as prime minister on July 26, the tabloid said.
Blair was appointed Labor leader in July 1994 and took office on May 2, 1997.
George Pascoe-Watson, political editor of The Sun, told Britain's Sky News television he would not disclose the sources of the story and said only that his newspaper's previous predictions on the date of elections had been "absolutely bang on the money."
Britain's Daily Mirror tabloid said in its Tuesday edition it had been leaked a copy of the purported memo setting out the details of Blair's leaving plans — but not any departure date.
Lawmakers from the party were also circulating a letter demanding he set a resignation date, news reports said.
Blair's Downing Street office said it would not comment on tabloid speculation about his departure but said the prime minister had received a private letter on Tuesday from a group of 17 legislators. Officials declined to discuss the contents.
A call to ‘focus on the future’In an interview last week, Blair said that his critics should stop obsessing about when he'll say goodbye, but the Daily Mirror said the leaked memo suggested his office was giving the matter careful thought.
"As TB enters his final phase, he needs to be focusing way beyond the finishing line, not looking at it," the newspaper quoted the memo as saying. "He needs to go with the crowds wanting more. He should be the star who won't even play that last encore. In moving towards the end, he must focus on the future."
The memo reportedly recommended that Blair reach out beyond the political media by appearing on an eclectic mix of television programs, including the children's show "Blue Peter" and the British Broadcasting Corp. religious music showcase "Songs of Praise."
Overnight visits to at least six British cities, as well as stops at 20 of the most striking buildings built or refurbished since he took office in 1997, should also be on the schedule of a final month planned down to the minute, the memo reportedly said.
The whirlwind tour would send a message that Blair's most important legacy was not the specific changes he made, "but the dominance of (his political) ideas ... the triumph of Blairism."
The thorn in his side: IraqHe will not be able to ignore Iraq, the advisers reportedly said. Blair's decision to go to war there, and his close alliance with President Bush, are deeply unpopular in Britain and have been a major blow to him politically.
"We need to incorporate this into our media plan," the memo reportedly said. "It's the elephant in the room, let's face up to it."
Neither the prime minister nor many of his senior staff have seen the memo, Blair's official spokesman said Tuesday. He would not comment on the accuracy of the Daily Mirror's excerpts.
The spokesman said Blair was focused on the key issues facing Britain, including crime, energy and pensions, and not on any effort to improve the public's views of him before leaving office.
"What he's interested in is substance, not image," the spokesman told reporters, speaking on condition of anonymity in line with government policy. "What he is interested in is analyzing the issues and developing answers to those issues."
Pressure from within Labor for Blair to publicly set a time frame for his departure has intensified recently. Critics worry that the uncertainty over when he will leave is damaging the party's electoral hopes, while Blair's waning popularity is giving the resurgent Conservative Party an opening.
‘Conventional wisdom is reasonable’Blair last week shrugged off demands that he announce his plans at the party's annual conference later this month.
"The conventional wisdom is that the prime minister sees himself carrying on for about another 12 months, and it seems to me that conventional wisdom is reasonable," Environment Secretary David Miliband told BBC radio. He said he had not spoken to Blair about it directly.
Armstrong told BBC television "the perceived wisdom, although I might have advised something differently, is that he (Blair) acknowledges that by conference next year, there'll be a new leader in place."
Commentators questioned whether the comments by the two traditionally loyalist lawmakers were a calculated attempt by Blair's office to placate party unrest.
Demands from party lawmakersAt least 17 of Labor's 353 lawmakers have signed a letter demanding that Blair set a departure date, the BBC said. Sion Simon and Chris Bryant, the legislators who reportedly organized the letter, did not immediately return calls for comment.
Labor Party legislator Karen Buck quickly organized a second letter — signed by 49 lawmakers — urging Blair to maintain his stance and refuse to heed the clamor for him to set a date, her office said.
Setting an explicit timeframe for resignation would likely make Blair an instant lame duck, draining his authority and power. He could hammer out a behind-the-scenes understanding with his likely successor, Treasury chief Gordon Brown, and let him reassure the party that a handover was in the works.
© 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved
Prime minister reportedly to exit 10 Downing St. 10 years after succession
LONDON - A national tour and a bevy of TV appearances to buff his legacy: Tony Blair's advisers have mapped out what they hope will be a triumphant end to his years in office, a purportedly leaked memo showed Tuesday.
But political reality may intervene with their plans as a restive Labor Party grows anxious for the prime minister to step aside sooner than he might like.
Britain's The Sun tabloid reported that Blair would leave office on July 26, 2007 — after 10 years as Britain's premier. Two ministers from Blair's Cabinet said that next year was likely to see him step down.
The newspaper's Wednesday edition, available late Tuesday, splashed across its front page that Blair would resign as leader of the governing Labor Party on May 31, 2007 — triggering a leadership election likely to take around eight weeks. He would then be replaced as prime minister on July 26, the tabloid said.
Blair was appointed Labor leader in July 1994 and took office on May 2, 1997.
George Pascoe-Watson, political editor of The Sun, told Britain's Sky News television he would not disclose the sources of the story and said only that his newspaper's previous predictions on the date of elections had been "absolutely bang on the money."
Britain's Daily Mirror tabloid said in its Tuesday edition it had been leaked a copy of the purported memo setting out the details of Blair's leaving plans — but not any departure date.
Lawmakers from the party were also circulating a letter demanding he set a resignation date, news reports said.
Blair's Downing Street office said it would not comment on tabloid speculation about his departure but said the prime minister had received a private letter on Tuesday from a group of 17 legislators. Officials declined to discuss the contents.
A call to ‘focus on the future’In an interview last week, Blair said that his critics should stop obsessing about when he'll say goodbye, but the Daily Mirror said the leaked memo suggested his office was giving the matter careful thought.
"As TB enters his final phase, he needs to be focusing way beyond the finishing line, not looking at it," the newspaper quoted the memo as saying. "He needs to go with the crowds wanting more. He should be the star who won't even play that last encore. In moving towards the end, he must focus on the future."
The memo reportedly recommended that Blair reach out beyond the political media by appearing on an eclectic mix of television programs, including the children's show "Blue Peter" and the British Broadcasting Corp. religious music showcase "Songs of Praise."
Overnight visits to at least six British cities, as well as stops at 20 of the most striking buildings built or refurbished since he took office in 1997, should also be on the schedule of a final month planned down to the minute, the memo reportedly said.
The whirlwind tour would send a message that Blair's most important legacy was not the specific changes he made, "but the dominance of (his political) ideas ... the triumph of Blairism."
The thorn in his side: IraqHe will not be able to ignore Iraq, the advisers reportedly said. Blair's decision to go to war there, and his close alliance with President Bush, are deeply unpopular in Britain and have been a major blow to him politically.
"We need to incorporate this into our media plan," the memo reportedly said. "It's the elephant in the room, let's face up to it."
Neither the prime minister nor many of his senior staff have seen the memo, Blair's official spokesman said Tuesday. He would not comment on the accuracy of the Daily Mirror's excerpts.
The spokesman said Blair was focused on the key issues facing Britain, including crime, energy and pensions, and not on any effort to improve the public's views of him before leaving office.
"What he's interested in is substance, not image," the spokesman told reporters, speaking on condition of anonymity in line with government policy. "What he is interested in is analyzing the issues and developing answers to those issues."
Pressure from within Labor for Blair to publicly set a time frame for his departure has intensified recently. Critics worry that the uncertainty over when he will leave is damaging the party's electoral hopes, while Blair's waning popularity is giving the resurgent Conservative Party an opening.
‘Conventional wisdom is reasonable’Blair last week shrugged off demands that he announce his plans at the party's annual conference later this month.
"The conventional wisdom is that the prime minister sees himself carrying on for about another 12 months, and it seems to me that conventional wisdom is reasonable," Environment Secretary David Miliband told BBC radio. He said he had not spoken to Blair about it directly.
Armstrong told BBC television "the perceived wisdom, although I might have advised something differently, is that he (Blair) acknowledges that by conference next year, there'll be a new leader in place."
Commentators questioned whether the comments by the two traditionally loyalist lawmakers were a calculated attempt by Blair's office to placate party unrest.
Demands from party lawmakersAt least 17 of Labor's 353 lawmakers have signed a letter demanding that Blair set a departure date, the BBC said. Sion Simon and Chris Bryant, the legislators who reportedly organized the letter, did not immediately return calls for comment.
Labor Party legislator Karen Buck quickly organized a second letter — signed by 49 lawmakers — urging Blair to maintain his stance and refuse to heed the clamor for him to set a date, her office said.
Setting an explicit timeframe for resignation would likely make Blair an instant lame duck, draining his authority and power. He could hammer out a behind-the-scenes understanding with his likely successor, Treasury chief Gordon Brown, and let him reassure the party that a handover was in the works.
© 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)