Iraq Update


Armageddon Alert Global War Articles The Truth

 

                        ***IRAQ UPDATE***

                             J. Adams
                         2:00 AM, Friday
                        October 10th, 1997

                    The *Spirit Of Truth* Page
               http://www.ucc.uconn.edu/~jpa94001/

    What are  the  tragic  consequences  of  pervasive  iniquity, 
inequity and injustice?  How does the anger of  God  manifest  as 
wrath upon a world that has rejected truth,  gone against God and 
systematically violated the Golden Rule of Love?  What happens to 
a society that has mainly received abundance and prosperity  from 
its Creator yet choses to deny its Maker?  
    Maybe  this  is what "Saddam's Revenge" and the coming global 
war are  all  about.  Maybe  the  West's  self-serving,  arrogant 
treatment  of  the  rest of the world is the source of the West's 
own undoing.  And  maybe  the  time  for  that  undoing  is  fast 
approaching.  
    Saddam has just about picked  a  new  fight  with  the  West.  
Today  the  U.S.   made  a  open  threat  that  continuing  Iraqi 
violations of No-Fly Zones over northern and southern  Iraq  will 
result in a U.S.  military response.  This military reponse could 
be shooting  down  Iraqi  warplanes  or  cruise  missile  attacks 
against Iraqi military targets.  
    As I have been warning,  such renewed fighting with Iraq will 
likely be used as a pretext for some sort of extreme reactions by 
Saddam  Hussein.  I think one of these reactions,  one element of 
Saddam's Revenge,  could involve a chemical SCUD  missile  attack 
against Israel and/or setting-off a new Arab-Israeli. This war in 
the  Middle  East,  in  turn,  will  lead  into  a global nuclear 
holocaust compliments of the antichrist (Mikhail  Gorbachev).  In 
other  words,  Western agression against Saddam Hussein's Iraq in 
the near-future, driven by US oil real-politics,  could seemingly 
touch-off world war three here.  
    Developments concerning Iraq appear  to  be  culminating into 
this weekend to some extent.  On Saturday, October 11th, a report 
will  be  presented to the Security Council critical of Baghdad's 
poor cooperation with UN weapons' inspectors seeking to eliminate 
Iraqi weapons of mass  destruction.  Saddam's  reaction  to  this 
report and the prospect of continuing, if not worsening, economic 
and political sanctions might be what provokes  a  U.S.  military 
response.  Possibly  in relation to this,  on Sunday the aircraft 
carrier battlegroup promptly dispatched to the Persian Gulf  last 
week will arrive in the Gulf.
    One  might note that October 11th  (or  from  sunset today to 
sunset  Saturday)  is  Yom  Kippur,  also  known  as  the "Day of 
Atonement",  the most holy Jewish holiday.  It was on Yom  Kippur 
in October of 1973 when the Arabs last launched a surprise attack 
against  Israel  since  this  is  when the Jewish people are most 
vulnerable.  This is also when the Jewish people are called  upon 
to answer for their sins.  
    It's remarkable how history repeats itself because man  fails 
to  learn  from  past mistakes.  This is why there are persistent 
stock market cycles of greed and fear- collective confidence  and 
then  mass  disappoinment-  because  the  errors  of  history are 
being systematically repeated.

           http://www.lowrisk.com/crash/87vs97.htm

         http://www.ucc.uconn.edu/~jpa94001/j06.html

         http://www.ucc.uconn.edu/~jpa94001/j08.html

       http://www.ucc.uconn.edu/~jpa94001/content.html

-----------------------------------------------------------------
                         RELATED ARTICLES
-----------------------------------------------------------------
                      
                "U.S. Tightens Iraq `No-Fly Zone'"
                         By Robert Burns 
                     
             Thursday, October 9, 1997; 8:00 p.m. EDT 

                         
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The United States is tightening enforcement of 
a no-fly zone over southern Iraq,  and Defense Secretary  William 
Cohen said Thursday that Iraq will "bear the consequences" if its 
warplanes continue to violate the ban.  

Asked  to  explain  what  consequences  Cohen  had  in mind,  his 
spokesman Kenneth Bacon declined,  but he noted the  presence  in 
the Persian Gulf of U.S. strategic bombers and Navy ships capable 
of firing Tomahawk cruise missiles.  

In  addition,  the Nimitz carrier battle group is steaming toward 
the Gulf, and Bacon said its fighter aircraft should be flying in 
the area by this weekend.  

Bacon said the United States is tightening its enforcement of the 
no-fly zone by patrolling closer  to  the  33rd  parallel,  which 
marks  the  northern edge of the zone.  He said larger numbers of 
U.S. planes are participating in each patrol, too.  
                        
In a later interview on PBS's "Newshour with Jim  Lehrer,"  Cohen 
was more explicit in his warning.  

"Saddam  Hussein  is  probing  for  weaknesses,  trying to flaunt 
the...no-fly zones," Cohen said, adding that U.S. pilots know how 
to react.  "The word has gone forth that any violations  will  be 
strictly dealt with and that would include shooting them down." 
                         
The  no-fly  zone  was created after the 1991 Gulf War to prevent 
Iraqi government forces from attacking rebel  Shiite  Muslims  in 
the southern marsh areas.  The last time a U.S. plane attacked an 
Iraqi violator of the zone was Jan.  18, 1993,  when an Air Force 
fighter shot down a MiG-25 with an air-to-air missile.  
                        
Cohen  said Iraqi aircraft have periodically crossed into the no-
fly zone recently.  He accused Iraqi President Saddam Hussein  of 
playing a dangerous game.  
                        
"He  is  posing a risk to himself,  his pilots as such,  whenever 
they start to challenge the no-fly zone,"  Cohen  told  reporters 
during  a  photo session in his office.  "If they make a mistake, 
they will have to bear the consequences." 
                        
Several  times  in  recent  days  U.S.  officials  have  publicly 
cautioned  Iraq  against  flying in the restricted zone,  but the 
comments by  Cohen  and  Bacon  seemed  to  suggest  the  Clinton 
administration was considering possible retaliatory measures that 
might go beyond simply shooting down Iraqi violators.  
                        
Bacon's mention of cruise missiles appeared to be a reminder that 
Tomahawk missiles from Navy ships and submarines in the Gulf were 
fired at Iraqi air defense positions in the no-fly zone below the 
33rd  parallel  in  September  1996.   The  U.S.  attack  was  in 
retaliation for Saddam's siege of the Kurdish-controlled city  of 
Irbil.  

Bacon  also  noted that the U.S.  Air Force has two B-1 strategic 
bombers in the Gulf state of Bahrain.  This is in addition to the 
fleet of U.S.,  French and British fighters based in Saudi Arabia 
that are patrolling the no-fly zone over Iraq.  
                        
"We have shown in the past  that  we  are  willing  and  able  to 
enforce  the  no-fly  zone,"  Bacon  said.  "We  have  a powerful 
military force in the area.  ...  Rather than speculate about the 
future,  I will just point to the fact that we have protected our 
interests there in the past." 

Asked directly whether the administration was thinking of  taking 
retaliatory  measures other than shooting down Iraqi violators of 
the no-fly zone,  Bacon would say only that the United States  in 
the  past  has used "a variety of military assets" to protect its 
interests in Iraq. "I'll leave it at that," he said.  
                        
Besides its incursions  into  the  no-fly  zone,  Iraq  also  has 
recently  interfered  with  U.N.  weapons  inspectors.  Some U.S.  
officials see this, combined with the no-fly zone violations,  as 
a new pattern of Iraqi defiance.  

Bacon  said  the  Iraqis  had not violated the no-fly zone in the 
past 24 hours.  The first recent incident  was  last  week,  when 
Iraqi planes responded to attacks by Iranian warplanes on Iranian 
rebel bases in southern Iraq.  

That  incident prompted Cohen to accelerate by about one week the 
Nimitz battle group's deployment to the Gulf.  It skipped a  port 
call  in  Singapore  to get there early.  Two Navy ships that had 
been scheduled to end their deployment in the Gulf this week were 
ordered to stay until the Nimitz arrived, Bacon said.  

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

                               CNN
                 SHOW: CNN WORLDVIEW 18:00 pm ET
         October  9, 1997; Thursday 6:05 pm Eastern Time
                     Transcript # 97100902V18

             "U.S. Sending Message To Saddam Hussein 
                   to Stay Out of No-Fly Zone"

                By:  Bernard Shaw, Jamie McIntyre

    The Pentagon has issued a warning to Saddam Hussein,  telling 
him  to stay out of the no-fly zone.  The statement has been made 
in reaction to the recent breaking of  the  no-fly  agreement  by 
Iraq.  

   BERNARD SHAW,  CNN ANCHOR:  The United States issued a warning 
to Saddam Hussein Thursday,  as it announced tighter  enforcement 
of  the  no-fly  zone  of  southern  Iraq.  Our  Military Affairs 
Correspondent Jamie McIntyre is at the Pentagon.  He joins us now 
with more.  

   JAMIE MCINTYRE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Bernie, more muscular words 
from the Pentagon today, which says Iraq is continuing to violate 
the no-fly zone in southern Iraq on a periodic basis.  A U.S. air 
patrols  of  the  no-fly  zone  are  not everywhere all the time.  
Iraqi pilots have apparently figured out how to dart in  and  out 
quickly  enough to avoid getting shot down.  In effect,  thumbing 
their noses at the U.S..  In response, the Pentagon is increasing 
the number of  planes  patrolling  the  zone,  and  sending  them 
farther  north,  right  up  near the 33rd parallel,  the northern 
boundary of the restricted  airspace.  The  intended  message  to 
Saddam Hussein is "get back in your box!" 

   (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

   WILLIAM COHEN, U.S. DEFENSE SECRETARY: But he is posing a risk 
to himself, his pilots, as such, whenever they start to challenge 
the no-fly zone.  If they make a mistake they will have  to  bear 
the consequences of it, but we have taken measures to tighten the 
area  around  which  they  seem intent on seeking to exploit on a 
very quick and piecemeal basis.  

   (END VIDEO CLIP)

   MCINTYRE:  In case Saddam Hussein still doesn't get point, the 
U.S.  underscored  today  that it has considerable military might 
in the region, 122 warplanes,  including two B-1 bombers based in 
Bahrain.  As well as Tomahawk cruise missiles on U.S.  Navy ships 
in the Persian gulf.  And  reinforcements  are  on  the  way.  By 
Sunday  the  U.S.  aircraft carrier Nimitz will be in position in 
the Gulf to contribute 50 more warplanes for duty patrolling  the 
no-fly zone.  

   Bernie?

   SHAW: Jamie, you mentioned B-1 bombers and the Tomahawk cruise 
missiles.  Is  there  any  suggestion  the United States might do 
more than shoot down the offending planes, such as perhaps strike 
other targets if the violations continue?  

   MCINTYRE:  Well,  I think what the Pentagon is doing is pretty 
clear.  It's  trying to send as powerful a message as possible to 
Saddam Hussein to back off.  As one official here put it,  "we're 
not  doing  this  to  launch  a  war,  we're  doing it to get his 
attention." So while the Pentagon has  not  ruled  anything  out, 
sources  tell  us  that  no  purely retaliatory strikes are under 
consideration.  

   Bernie?

   SHAW: Jamie McIntyre at the Pentagon.

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

          "U.S. Warns Iraq Not to Violate No-Fly Zones"
                       By Charles Aldinger 

                  Thursday October 9 5:52 PM EDT 

WASHINGTON (Reuter) - The United States Thursday refused to  rule 
out  cruise  missile  or  other  strikes  against  Iraq  if Iraqi 
warplanes continued to violate no-fly zones over that country.  

"We have a powerful military force in the Gulf ready  to  protect 
our interests there," Defense Department spokesman Ken Bacon told 
reporters  in  response  to  questions.  He  declined to rule any 
action in or out,  or to say whether U.S.  forces might go beyond 
trying to shoot down Iraqi jets.  

"We have in the past used a variety of military assets, including 
Tomahawk   (cruise)   missiles  and  aircraft,   to  protect  our 
interests.  And we will be able to do that in  the  future,"  the 
spokesman said when pressed by reporters.  

Meanwhile,  the  State Department said that Washington planned to 
press for the "strongest possible action" by the  United  Nations 
to make Iraq comply with a U.N. commission charged with scrapping 
Iraq's weapons of mass destruction.  

"I  don't  want  to  be in a position to discuss all the options, 
except to say that we of course would want the strongest possible 
action by the (Security) Council to back up the important work of 
the U.N.  special commission," State Department  spokesman  James 
Rubin told reporters.  

Bacon  noted  that  the  U.S.   aircraft  carrier  Nimitz  and  a 
protective  cordon  of  warships  capable  of  firing  long-range 
Tomahawks would arrive in the Gulf this weekend ahead of schedule 
on orders from Defense Secretary William Cohen.  

Bacon also said the United States had a force of about 20 fighter 
jets  and  two  B-1  bombers capable of firing cruise missiles on 
temporary duty in nearby Bahrain.  

He said U.S.  warplanes,  including fighters based in Kuwait  and 
Saudi  Arabia,  recently began flying closer to the 33rd parallel 
some 40 miles south of Baghdad while patroling  in  the  southern 
no-fly zone.  

The   planes,   Bacon   added,   were   also   flying  in  larger 
concentrations of aircraft in order to better  protect  the  zone 
from penetration by the Iraqis.  

U.S.  forces  have launched cruise missiles against Iraqi targets 
on several occasions since the 1991 Gulf War,  including in  1993 
against  a Baghdad plant used to fabricate components for nuclear 
enrichment material and in 1996 against air  defense  targets  in 
southern Iraq.  

Pressed  by reporters on whether Iraqi incursions into the no-fly 
zone in southern Iraq in recent  weeks  might  spark  retaliation 
other  than  U.S.  attempts  to shoot down the Iraqi jets,  Bacon 
responded: 

"I think we have shown in  the  past  that  we  are  prepared  to 
protect  our  interests  and to enforce the no-fly zone.  We have 
used a variety of military assets to do that. And I will leave it 
at that." 

Cohen himself warned earlier Thursday at the  Pentagon  that  the 
U.S.  military  had  tightened  control over the no-fly zones and 
that Iraqi  warplanes  would  "bear  the  consequences"  if  they 
continued to violate the air spaces.  

As  for  suspected  Iraqi  weapons  sites,  the  Security Council 
intends to discuss on Oct.  16 a report released this week by the 
head of the U.N.  special commission, Richard Butler.  The report 
listed  a  series  of  incidents  of  Iraqi   interference   with 
inspections of such sites.  

"We  will  be working with our colleagues on the Security Council 
to make sure the strongest possible message is sent to Iraq  that 
if  they  don't  comply  with these requirements,  they are never 
going to have the (existing U.N.) sanctions lifted," Rubin told a 
news briefing.  

So far there has been little reaction in New York, with diplomats 
saying  they  doubted  further   sanctions   would   be   imposed 
immediately  against  Baghdad  as  the Council,  at U.S.  urging, 
threatened in June.  

Iranian jets launched strikes last week against the bases of  the 
Iranian Mujahideen opposition movement in Iraq and Iraqi aircraft 
rose  to defend the area,  at times violating the no-fly zones in 
the process.  

But defense officials say Iraqi jets also continue to  flit  into 
the  southern  zone  and back out simply to test U.S.  ability to 
patrol the area.  

Cohen last week ordered the Nimitz to skip a scheduled port  call 
in  Singapore  and  speed  to  its destination in the Gulf and to 
arrive five days earlier than planned.  

The 73,000-ton carrier  has  about  50  F-14  and  F/A-18  combat 
aircraft.  The  United  States also has a force of as many as 200 
Air Force jets based nearby in Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and elsewhere 
in the Gulf.  

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

             "Iraq violating no-fly zone unpunished"
                  Tuesday October 7 7:18 PM EDT 

WASHINGTON, Oct. 7 (UPI)- Despite an increased American presence, 
Iraqi  warplanes have violated no-fly zones with impunity several 
times in the past week,  prompting a top White House official  to 
warn that United Nations forces will act to end those flights.  

President  Clinton's  national security adviser Sandy Berger said 
today, "We'll do what is necessary to apply the no-fly zone." 

Pentagon spokesman  Capt.  Mike  Doubleday  said  earlier  today: 
"There  have been violations of the no-fly zone by Iraqi aircraft 
but...the (Western) coalition continues  to  enforce  the  no-fly 
zone and we will do so in the future." 

Doubleday  would  not  detail  how many times the southern no-fly 
zone, intended to protect Kuwait from Iraq,  had been penetrated, 
beyond  using  the  word  "several."  He  described  most  of the 
incursions as "skirting" the zone,  but declined to say why U.S., 
French and British jets have not guarded the zone more zealously, 
despite increase sorties in the last week.  

Berger,  meanwhile, said "a no-fly zone is a no-fly zone," and it 
includes any Iranian planes that venture  into  the  U.N.-secured 
airspace  in southern Iraq.  Iranian warplanes reportedly entered 
Iraq during skirmishes with anti-Iranian militia based in Iraq.  

The United States ordered the aircraft carrier Nimitz to the Gulf 
last week,  five days earlier than scheduled,  and Doubleday said 
deployment  should  represent  a clear message to Iraqi President 
Saddam Hussein.  

He said, "I think the signal of the aircraft carrier going to the 
region (and) the constancy of our flights over there make it very 
clear that the Iraqis are very restricted  in  their  ability  to 
carry  out  flight  operations,  and  if they do carry out flight 
operations they risk getting shot down.  We've done that  in  the 
past, we stand ready to do it in the future." 

The zones were created after the Gulf War to keep Iraqi President 
Saddam  Hussein's troops from threatening Kuwait to the south and 
Kurds in the north. 

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

                 "Jews gearing up for Yom Kippur"
             By Melissa McCord, the Associated Press.  

JERUSALEM  (October  9,  1997  4:28  p.m.  EDT)  -- Swinging live 
chickens over their heads to symbolically cast away  their  sins, 
Jews  prepared  Thursday  for Yom Kippur,  the holiest day on the 
Jewish calendar.  

Devout Jews traditionally perform the ritual in the runup to  Yom 
Kippur,  or  Day  or  Atonement,  which  is marked by fasting and 
prayer.  Yom Kippur begins at sundown Friday and ends at  sundown 
Saturday.  

In  Jerusalem's  ultra-Orthodox Mea Shearim neighborhood,  men in 
thin plastic aprons sold  squawking  chickens  from  hundreds  of 
colored crates stacked in the streets. Men with long black coats, 
black  hats,  beards and side locks rocked back and forth as they 
recited blessings.  

"On Yom Kippur,  you're supposed to dispose of your  sins,"  said 
one man, who only gave his first name, Eli, as he swung a chicken 
above his head.  

His  wife  Huvy scolded him for holding the chicken by the wings. 
"You're supposed to hold it here,"  she  said,  pointing  to  the 
bird's legs, which were bound with string.  

After  the blessing,  the chickens were slaughtered with a razor-
sharp knife.  Men in rubber boots hosed down the narrow street to 
get rid of the blood and feathers.  

Many  Jews,   including  those  belonging  to  other  streams  of 
Orthodoxy,   reject  the  practice  as  barbaric  and  based   on 
superstition.  They  note that rabbis have ruled that cash -- or, 
recently,  even credit cards -- may  be  used  in  the  atonement 
ritual.  

Most  of  those  who  do  swing  the chickens give the birds to a 
charity that distributes them to the poor,  although some opt  to 
keep the chicken and donate money instead.  The ritual,  known as 
"kapparot," or sacrifice of atonement,  has been practiced  since 
the Middle Ages.  

Bands of small children crowded around the crates, staring at the 
chickens.  One  woman,  Rivka,  wearing a long purple dress and a 
white head scarf, brought her 3-year-old son,  Shalom,  whose big 
blue  eyes  were  transfixed  by the birds.  "He rarely sees live 
animals," she said.  

The Ten Days of Penitence begin at the Jewish New Year,  or  Rosh 
Hashana,  and  culminate  in  Yom Kippur,  when Jews abstain from 
food, drink and work.  

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

          "Kuwait says it is now ready to defend itself"

KUWAIT CITY (October 8, 1997 08:46 a.m.  EDT) - The Kuwaiti army, 
which was virtually wiped out during Iraq's 1990 conquest, is now 
ready  to defend the borders of the oil-rich emirate,  the chief-
of-staff said Wednesday.  

"Now we are able to defend our borders with courage and fight  to 
the  last  soldier  and we have a reserve force at the ready that 
can be on the battlefield in 24 hours," said  Lt.  Gen.  Ali  al-
Moumen.  

Asked  by  the  newspaper  Al-Rai  Al-Aam if the army was able to 
repel an attack, the army chief was more cautious.  "That depends 
on the size, type and strength of the aggression," he said.  

Moumen  said  the  situation  on  the  border  was calm with only 
routine Iraqi movements, though this could change at any time.  

"Therefore,  in the Kuwaiti army we are  working  to  maintain  a 
level of readiness and alertness.  This situation will stay until 
there is a complete change in the political situation," he said.  

"And what also calls for the continuing this state  of  readiness 
is  what is happening between Iraq and Iran,  and the behavior of 
Iraq," he said, without elaborating.  

Iran on Sept.  29 staged air raids on Iranian rebel  bases  in  a 
"no-fly  zone"  over  southern Iraq patrolled by U.S.  and allied 
planes.  Baghdad has  threatened  to  retaliate  to  any  further 
attacks.  

Kuwait  began  a  12-year  drive  costing  $12 billion in 1992 to 
rebuild its army,  which was swept aside by Iraqi forces Aug.  2, 
1990.  

The regular army has about 20,000 troops including reserves,  but 
the emirate still depends for  its  security  on  the  main  1991 
Persian Gulf war coalition partners:  the United States,  Britain 
and France.  That coalition expelled Iraqi troops from Kuwait  in 
1991.  

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

                      Chattanooga Free Press
                   September 16, 1997, Tuesday

         "Army Briefing Civilians On Biological Weapons"
                     By The Associated Press

   FREDERICK, Md. -- The Army is taking its expertise in handling 
biological weapons such as anthrax and plague and sharing it with 
civilians nationwide.  

   "We still have increasing intelligence reports that countries, 
including Iraq, are still manufacturing biological weapons," said 
Maj.  Julie Pavlin.  "After the bombing in Oklahoma City and  the 
Tokyo subway attack, there's a lot more civilian interest in this 
program." 

   A three-day satellite video conference that was to begin today 
reflects  rising  worries  about  U.S.  medical  preparedness for 
biological,  chemical and nuclear attacks from military  foes  or 
terrorists, producers of the $1 million program said.  

   It  is  the  first in a planned series of high-tech classes to 
better prepare  military  and  civilian  health  specialists  for 
nuclear, biological and chemical attacks.  

   "We have always invited civilians,  we just haven't always had 
the capability to reach out to them as we are now," said Lt. Col. 
Carl Curling of the U.S.  Army Office of the Surgeon  General  in 
Washington.  

   More  than  5,000  people  were expected to participate in the 
interactive program,  broadcast live from a  Gaithersburg  studio 
and linked to 300 U.S.  sites and Israel. Expected were all 1,500 
employees of the VA Medical Center in Oklahoma City who  assisted 
in the response to the April 1995 bombing that killed 168 people.  

   In March 1995,  a Tokyo subway attack with the nerve gas sarin 
left 12 people dead and thousands injured.  


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

                       The Washington Times
              August 11, 1997, Monday, Final Edition

             "Biological terrorism is a real threat"

                           By Fred Reed

    The  terrorism  racket  grows  more  interesting.  What  with 
trials  of  terrorists  in  New York for the bombing of the World 
Trade Center,  and now the fellows who  were  going  to  blow  up 
Manhattan's subways, things don't look as safe as they might.  

    A  sort  of  terrorism that hasn't gotten a lot of attention, 
but may yet, is bio-terrorism.  

    Remember the petri dishes of  raspberry  Jell-O  or  whatever 
that  were  left  outside B'nai B'rith and tied up Washington for 
most of a day?  And that wasn't even real.  

    A fellow I know is Steve Hatfill, a medical doctor with years 
of experience in the Third World, and therefore with the diseases 
to be found there.  What would happen, he wonders, if terrorists, 
with or without the support of governments like Iraq's,  tried to 
use  diseases  as  biological weapons against America?  How would 
they do it?  Is it really possible?  

    Dr.  Hatfill has thought carefully about bio-  terrorism.  He 
made some intriguing points.  To wit: 

    There exist at  least  four  reasonably  distinct  levels  of 
possible biological attack.  

    The  first  is  the  B'nai  B'rith variety,  in which no real 
organisms  are  used.  ("Hello.  This  is  Abdul.   We  have  put 
anthrax  in  the  food  at  Throckmorton Middle School." In fact, 
Abdul hasn't.) We empty public buildings for  bomb  threats.  How 
about for anthrax threats?  After all,  sooner or later one might 
be real.  

    The second level consists in the release of real bacteria  or 
viruses, but without the intention of infecting many people.  

    For example, a bad guy might spray plague bacteria around the 
men's room in the World Trade Center.  Probably only a few people 
would get it, and perhaps none would die - but it would take only 
one  plague case to shut down the entire building,  especially if 
the bug had been sprayed on several floors.  Then the call comes: 
"Let our man loose, or we'll do a school." 

    The third level consists in trying to get  a  lot  of  people 
sick,  and  maybe  dead,  but  not  necessarily  to start a self-
sustaining epidemic.  Anthrax spores  put  into  the  ventilation 
system  of  a movie theater would do the trick.  The result would 
be horrendous panic even if only 100 people  got  sick  or  died.  
After all,  if it worked in a theater, what public place would be 
safe?  

    The fourth level consists of a  self-sustaining,  unstoppable 
epidemic sweeping the nation.  

    While  that  idea  makes  good  copy,  it isn't likely.  Most 
serious diseases are containable or self-limiting.  Some have  to 
be  transmitted  by contact,  which can be prevented.  Others are 
spread by coughing,  but most don't last long outside  the  body, 
and so on.  

    The  important point is that you don't need a raging epidemic 
to paralyze a city.  Remember B'nai B'rith.  

    Dr.  Hatfill points out that the comparatively  high  quality 
of   American  medical  facilities  doesn't  necessarily  provide 
protection against even a smallish outbreak of nasty diseases.  

    The first patients would get  excellent  care  in  the  small 
number  of  places  that are set up to handle such diseases.  The 
ensuing wave of very sick people would  swamp  the  system.  They 
would not get good care.  

    How hard, really, would it be to carry out a bio-attack?  Not 
very, Dr.  Hatfill says.  

    Culturing bacteria is easy and almost universally understood.  
Getting  the culture past customs would be no problem.  You could 
almost certainly just carry it in a small bottle in your pocket.  

    Dr.  Hatfill, who is familiar with such things, showed me how 
to culture bacteria with supplies that can be bought at  Safeway.  
A bright high-school student could manage it.  

    For  that matter,  nasty bugs indeed can be found wild within 
the United  States  in  certain  animal  populations  that  don't 
transmit  them  to  humanity.  Since  this  isn't  a  school  for 
terrorists, I'll let it go at that.  

    And,  Dr.  Hatfill says,  spending on public health has  been 
diverted  from prevention and control of epidemics to such things 
as discovering why certain groups commit suicide more often  than 
others.  Rates of vaccination are down, he says.  

    Some extraordinarily unpleasant bugs are out there.  Some are 
old ones traveling by the most dangerous disease vector known - a 
Boeing  747.  People  here  do not have the natural resistance to 
these diseases that people who live in their  regions  of  origin 
have.  

    Others  are  emerging  diseases  about which little is known.  
The United States is,  he  believes,  becoming  more,  not  less, 
vulnerable to such pathogens.  

    Few police,  in fact few people of any kind,  are prepared to 
deal with bio-terrorism.  

    Something to think about, no?  

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

                     Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
                     August 24, 1997, Sunday

                       "IT CAN HAPPEN HERE"

                       BY WESLEY W. POSVAR

   Americans have been slow to acknowledge  that  terrorism  from 
foreign  sources can happen here.  The World Trade Center bombing 
and last month's discovery of a bomb  cache  in  Brooklyn,  while 
alarming, may still seem like isolated instances to most citizens 
across the country.  

   Two  leaders in national security,  former assistant secretary 
of defense Joseph Nye and former CIA Director James Woolsey, have 
called for giving the threat of terrorism with  weapons  of  mass 
destruction  the  highest priority.  Their proposal (published in 
the Post-Gazette on June  4)  should  be  strongly  endorsed  and 
understood by all Americans.  

   Two  decades  ago,  Zbigniew  Brzezinski,  then  the  national 
security adviser,  launched an organization to prepare the United 
States  for  terrorist  attacks.  I was asked to play a role.  We 
expected then that European and Middle  Eastern  terrorism  would 
continue  to expand and soon cross the Atlantic.  We stood on the 
lawn outside the West Wing and looked down the Potomac, where the 
enemy at some time could launch a nuclear  weapon  at  the  White 
House.  

   Thus began the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The 
advisory board included Paul Nitze,  Edward Teller,  Herman Kahn, 
Brent  Scowcroft  and  other  leading   strategic   experts.   We 
anticipated  and  examined  threats  of  destruction  up to whole 
cities and communication networks.  

   But in the stability provided by  nuclear  deterrence  in  the 
Cold  War,  the  FEMA  mission  faded  away  to  what it is now - 
hurricanes and earthquakes.  

   Terrorism captures the national attention from time  to  time. 
The whole story is much more fearsome.  

   *

   The  menace is real and imminent.  Global stability is greatly 
diminished. We have - or should have - anxieties about a possibly 
grim future,  unforeseen threats  shaped  by  ethnic  strife  and 
hatred,   distant  regional  turmoil  and  proliferating  massive 
nuclear, chemical and biological weapons.  

   All of our armed forces,  intelligence services  and  economic 
levers  must  be  ready  and  used  as  needed  for  new kinds of 
prevention and protection.  

   History provides a warning.  When the victors of a war  review 
their  military policy and purpose,  change is seldom the result. 
There is a tendency to cling to winning strengths in the face  of 
the unknown future.  

   The latest U.S. defense review essentially retains the present 
force structure, which brought us through the consummation of the 
Cold War:  a dozen aircraft carrier battle groups, 13 mobile army 
and marine divisions of ground forces, a dozen active air fighter 
wings and a very small strategic force of old  and  new  bombers, 
plus ICBMs.  

   Within this vast system, the really relevant strengths now are 
for  rapid  deployment abroad of air and army units,  some in one 
day direct  from  the  United  States,  and  new  super-sensitive 
target-seeking weapons.  

   Secretary of Defense William Cohen does wisely express concern 
about   urgent  nuclear  disarmament  with  Russia,   and  likely 
proliferation of nuclear,  biological and chemical  weapons.  The 
threats  now  grow  in  "rogue states," including Iraq,  Iran and 
Libya,   plus  others  that  may  sponsor  or   house   terrorist 
organizations.  

   *

   There  is  for  Americans  a  special  and  perhaps surprising 
problem.   Pervading  all  our  international  perceptions  is  a 
subjective influence that is deeply psychological: 

   The  accustomed  suppression  of awareness and fear of general 
nuclear war/Armageddon.  

   The basic explanation of this is that  the  policy  of  mutual 
nuclear  deterrence  really  did  work.  To  the  normal citizen, 
nuclear war was never seriously contemplated;  its likelihood was 
virtually zero.  

   Even to  the  strategic  planner,  the  prospective  scale  of 
"general"  nuclear  war  was,  and  even  now,  is  so great that 
virtually  all  planning  attention   is   directed   at   making 
preparedness, warning and response foolproof and certain.  

   But  now  there  are  new  horrors  that are feasible and thus 
thinkable - such as a real possibility of 10 or 20 megatons being 
fired or set off by a rogue state, having prepared in secret; or, 
more simply,  the destruction of New  York  City  by  a  chemical 
weapon  of  mass  destruction,  such  as anthrax,  concealed in a 
freighter, covering 100 square miles.  

   Some of our difficult concerns are bureaucratic  preparedness, 
pertaining    to    major    organizational    structure.     For 
counterterrorism on a massive scale, we must fully integrate with 
out military  strengths  two  other  broad  sectors  of  national 
security:  intelligence, largely existent; and crisis management, 
to be developed.  

   The Central Intelligence Agency  does  not  now  fulfill  this 
need,  in  part  because  it is "central." The CIA and the lesser 
intelligence agencies must provide  information  about  potential 
enemies  that is detailed and available at all levels of possible 
conflict.  It should also have the  character  of  presenting  to 
decision-makers  an  undistilled  range  of  threats  of  varying 
nature, however implausible.  

   Intelligence functions that affect military operations  should 
be  integrated  with them,  including covert operations,  if any. 
Probably there should remain a separate  but  closely  supervised 
intelligence  agency  for  research and analysis.  It should have 
open relationships with international and regional experts,  most 
of whom are in the academic community.  

   Crisis  management  will  require  new  national organization. 
Crisis planning for anti-terrorism and  for  surprise  attack  by 
weapons  of  mass  destruction must also be devolved to state and 
local government. It must include all feasible national guard and 
reserve forces,  coordinated with local police,  fire and  public 
health  services,  for  action  in  the  absence  of  functioning 
national government.  

   Nye and Woolsey  call  for  inter-departmental  direction  and 
oversight.  But  the  effort must be pervasive and will surely be 
complex beyond any present specification.  In any case,  I  argue 
that   both   crisis   management   and  intelligence  should  be 
represented on or close to the National Security Council.  

   Finally,  the whole national security establishment,  defense, 
army,   navy,   air  force,  marines,  intelligence,  and  crisis 
management  should  be  rained  and  adapted  for  the   emerging 
international  missions  of "peace-keeping" in its various forms. 
The ultimate  systems  for  protecting  all  mankind  from  these 
horrors   will   surely   involve   some  kind  of  international 
organization.  

   The ringing phrase "Remember Pearl Harbor" is memorable  as  a 
call  for retribution against an enemy surprise attack.  Today it 
is relevant,  and we hear  it  again  regarding  terrorism  as  a 
powerful  historical  reminder of disastrous surprise,  a present 
need for continuous and penetrating  alert,  with  ultra-advanced 
information technology.  

   Weapons  of  mass  destruction,  if  widely used against us by 
enemy forces or terrorist covert groups,  would be a  cataclysmic 
reverse of history.  

   Yet  the  organized  means  of  prevention  are themselves the 
avenue  to  solution  -a  global,   interdependent  and  mutually 
enriched society.  

   Wesley  W.  Posvar  is  former chancellor of the University of 
Pittsburgh. A specialist in international security, he has served 
in the Pentagon and as a professor  at  military  and  Air  Force 
academies.  

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

                         U.P.I. BC cycle
                     August 5, 1997, Tuesday

    "Biowar: panic more deadly than missiles UPI Science News"

   An  international  weapons inspector says that an Iraqi attack 
with biological weapons during the Persian Gulf  War  would  have 
been  militarily ineffective.  The inspector adds,  however,  the 
massive panic in the civilian population  could  have  been  more 
deadly than the weapons themselves.  Raymond A. Zilinskas ("zill-
LIN-skus"),  a  member  of  the  U.N.   Special  Commission  that 
investigated Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program, provides 
his  perspective  today  in  the  Journal of the American Medical 
Association.  Zilinskas says Iraq's biological warfare capability 
was not used during the Gulf War.  He contends that  even  though 
such  an attack would have been militarily ineffective,  it still 
could have been an effective " terror weapon" against  cities  or 
other   civilian   targets.   In  fact,   he  says  the  targeted 
population's terrified reaction to the missiles would likely have 
caused more harm than the  missiles  themselves.  Zilinskas  says 
the  guidance  systems  on  the  Iraqi  SCUD  missiles  were  too 
inaccurate to strike  a  specific  military  target,  but  cities 
occupy  large  areas  and  could be easily hit.  Iraq launched 39 
SCUD  missiles  against  Israeli  cities  during  the  Gulf  War. 
Zilinskas  says  only  two  of  the 11 deaths and only 234 of the 
1,049 injuries from these attacks were caused by explosion of the 
missiles.  Many of  the  other  casualties  were  due  to  panic, 
including  injuries  suffered  when  running  from missiles or to 
shelters. Also, some frightened victims suffocated when they used 
gas masks incorrectly yet refused to take them off.  

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

                  The Christian Science Monitor
                     July 30, 1997, Wednesday

                    "Missiles Bring War Home"

                        By Scott Peterson, 
          Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

Advances in range and power put everywhere on the front lines

Etan  and  his  young family will never forget the first time the 
air-raid sirens pierced the chill night above Tel Aviv.  

Israel's largest city was shaken awake, and with hearts pounding, 
the family raced for their basement bomb shelter.  

Terrified by the sight of his parents in gas masks,  Etan's four-
year-old  son  at  first refused to wear his mask.  The child was 
sealed into a protective tent that soon ran short of  oxygen.  He 
could  only  be  comforted  through  rubber gloves affixed to the 
side.  

It was the peak of the Gulf War in  1991,  when  an  American-led 
military coalition was poised to push Iraq's invading Army out of 
Kuwait.  

Looking  for  a  way  of  striking  back,  Iraqi President Saddam 
Hussein broke an unwritten rule that had stood in the Middle East 
for nearly 20 years:  He fired a  ballistic  missile  at  Israel. 
Risking  overwhelming  retaliation from Israel's nuclear arsenal, 
he fired another Scud missile, and then another.  

Huddled in their bomb  shelter,  Etan's  family  could  hear  the 
explosive  impacts.  Before dawn they had fled Tel Aviv,  part of 
an exodus of thousands.  "We are not war heroes," Etan says.  "We 
were very scared that night, with the helpless feeling of knowing 
that we were not protected." 

For two decades the threat was always there:  Israel had missiles 
that could target its adjoining  Arab  enemies;  and  they  could 
target  most  of  Israel in return.  So both sides tacitly agreed 
never to fire.  

Changing the rules 

Then Iraq upset the balance.  For Israelis,  the 39 missiles that 
rained  down  brought  a  terror  they  had  never known.  Strong 
pressure from the United States at that  time  kept  Israel  from 
hitting  back,  so  that  the  anti-Iraq alliance would not break 
apart.  But across the Mideast,  the  message  was  unmistakable: 
Israel was vulnerable.  

"There is a balance of terror now, because of what Saddam Hussein 
has  done,"  says Reuven Pedatzur,  an Israeli missile expert who 
taught at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.  "There  are 
no  taboos  anymore.  The  whole  Arab  world  saw that we didn't 
retaliate, saw the weak spot, and think they can try it." 

The lesson was clear in Baghdad.  "Iraqi missiles  have  awakened 
the  spirit  of resistance and defiance among Arabs and Muslims," 
proclaimed the official Al-Jumhouriya newspaper. They had "buried 
forever the theory of Israeli security." 

Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has himself noted that 
one of the "primary threats to Israel  in  coming  years  is  the 
massive  arming of the Arab armies and Iran in surface-to-surface 
missiles...." During the  Gulf  War,  Mr.  Netanyahu  was  caught 
during a live CNN television interview by an air-raid siren,  and 
dramatically put on a gas mask.  

There is still no foolproof defense  against  the  ever-improving 
ballistic  missile.  Though  missiles were widely used during the 
Iran-Iraq conflict of the 1980s - in  the  "war  of  the  cities" 
between  Tehran  and  Baghdad - their dominance in the region has 
grown.  

Now they are  causing  an  upheaval  of  the  region's  strategic 
assumptions.  As these long-range missiles inevitably improve, so 
does the killing power of the chemical  and  biological  warheads 
they carry.  

A new vulnerability 

Today  these  can  be  as lethal as some nuclear weapons,  though 
secret nuclear programs are also under way. Missiles are the most 
effective means of delivering such weapons of  mass  destruction. 
For  Israel's foes,  missiles are the only chance to defeat a far 
superior Israeli Air Force.  

Israel's small size also has meant  using  conquered  land  as  a 
buffer  to  create  "strategic depth" to shield the Jewish state. 
But "as we approach  the  21st  century,  'strategic  depth'  has 
little meaning," says Shimon Peres,  an architect of the Israeli-
Palestinian peace process and former prime  minister  of  Israel.  
"Long-range  ballistic  missiles  and weapons of mass destruction 
have turned the home front into the front line." 

President Bush made the same point to Congress in 1991, after the 
Gulf War.  "We have learned in the modern age,  geography  cannot 
guarantee security," he said.  

Israeli  sources  estimate that by 2010,  there will be more than 
3,000 ballistic missiles in the Middle East. Today's chief threat 
comes from technology developed  a  half-century  ago:  The  Scud 
design is based on Germany's World War II V-2 rockets.  

Still,  today's  improving  technologies  add up to a revolution. 
Finding lasting peace will be the  greatest  challenge,  even  as 
vast  and  growing arsenals and old animosities point toward more 
war.  

Israel's quest for security 

The ups and downs of  the  American-brokered  Arab-Israeli  peace 
process  are a useful starting point,  since Israel has long been 
the  focus  of  violence.   Though  based  on  a  US  formula  of 
exchanging Israeli-occupied Arab land for peace,  the process has 
faltered lately under Netanyahu's right-wing government.  

Since the 1940s, Arab states have refused to acknowledge Israel's 
right to exist.  Egypt's President Gamal  Abdel  Nasser  famously 
declared  in  1956,  "The Arab national aim is the elimination of 
Israel." 

Five major wars have been fought to wipe out the fledgling Jewish 
state - or for Israel to add more land to its "strategic depth." 

"The Israeli map extending from the Suez Canal to the  Golan  was 
seen  by  many  of  our  citizens  as a guarantee of security and 
stability," wrote Abba Eban,  a former foreign minister,  in  the 
Jerusalem  Post  recently.  "  Butâ  Israel  has never known less 
security than during the period of the 'Big Map.' " 

Israel's formidable arsenal 

To ensure its survival,  Israel has created a formidable arsenal. 
Its  Army  - with more combat-ready heavy divisions than NATO can 
deploy in Europe,  according to one analysis - is among the  most 
efficient in the world.  

Israel  also  has  chemical  and  biological  weapons,  a nuclear 
"deterrent" believed to number as many as 200  warheads,  and  an 
official  American  commitment  that  Israel's  war  machine will 
always have a "qualitative edge" over its Arab foes. But Israel's 
increasing vulnerability to missiles will make that edge tough to 
maintain.  

There are also geographic disadvantages:  At one point Israel  is 
little  more  than  a strip of beach along the Mediterranean Sea, 
just nine miles wide.  

"More missiles and possible nuclear weapons  are  incentives  for 
peace  deals,"  says  Zeev  Maoz,  head  of the Jaffee Center for 
Strategic Studies at Tel Aviv University.  "But the military must 
think  of  the  worst-case scenario and assume that at some point 
peace will again be violated." 

Cause for concern 

Critics charge that Israel is obsessed  with  its  own  security, 
living   with  a  siege  mentality  that  does  not  respect  the 
legitimate security needs of other countries.  "Israel  makes  so 
much  fuss  about missiles and Scuds,  but a lot of it is made-up 
propaganda,"  says  Mohamed  el-Sayed  Said  of  the  Center  for 
Political and Strategic Studies in Cairo.  

But  considering  that  Iraq's  missile threat was also dismissed 
before the 

Gulf War,  many say that Israel -  and  the  Middle  East  -  has 
reasons to worry: 

*  Syria:  Taking  its  cue  from  the  Gulf War,  and to counter 
Israel's nuclear arsenal,  Syria has doubled the  number  of  its 
missile launchers and tripled the capability of its warheads.  It 
can target all of Israel with chemical  and  biological  weapons. 
Its vast conventional forces, by contrast, are largely obsolete.  

*  Iran:  Growing evidence suggests that Iran - the Islamic state 
that Washington considers the top supporter of global terrorism - 
is secretly improving its missile  arsenal  with  purchases  from 
Russia,  North Korea,  China,  and Germany.  One source, The Iran 
Brief,  based in  Kensington,  Md.,  claims  that  Iran  is  also 
developing a "Zelzal-3" missile with more than triple the range.  

*  Egypt:  A  leaked  CIA  report last year expressed alarm about 
illegal Egyptian imports of advanced Scud C  missile  parts  from 
North  Korea.  The  Scud  C  would  enable  Cairo  to hit targets 
throughout Israel.  Egyptian officials  say  this  was  a  "phony 
crisis"  created  by Israel to bolster its own arguments for top-
of-the-line American hardware.  

* Iraq:  Despite a six-year  United  Nations  effort  to  destroy 
Iraq's ballistic missiles - along with its nuclear, chemical, and 
biological  weapons programs -Iraq could resume production within 
a month,recent reports claim . Iraqi tactics have included hiding 
missile-guidance gyroscopes in the mud at the bottom of a  Tigris 
River canal in Baghdad.  

Saudi  Arabia:  Largely  unnoticed,  Saudi Arabia has the missile 
with the longest range of all in the region,  the Chinese  CSS-2, 
which  could  reach  Rome.  China is taking its own CSS-2s out of 
active service, however,  and the aging Saudi version is expected 
to be obsolete in a few years. Though Saudi Arabia is a strong US 
ally,  two  bomb attacks against US military personnel there have 
left 26 people dead and raised  questions  about  Saudi  Arabia's 
long-term political direction.  

Lebanon:   Israel's  Army  chief  has  claimed  that  Iran-backed 
Hizbullah guerrillas fighting Israeli troops in southern  Lebanon 
have   acquired   long-range   Katyusha   rockets   that  pose  a 
"significant threat." Syria also  backs  Hizbullah,  but  Western 
military sources in Lebanon discount the claim.  

Libya:  Though  rarely  deemed  a  missile  threat because of its 
disorganized programs,  Libya was named in a secret  NATO  report 
published  by  the  Spanish  newspaper  El Mundo last November as 
possibly having ballistic missiles with a range of 600  to  1,800 
miles by 2006.  

Israel:  The  Jewish  state  itself  has  the  most sophisticated 
missile arsenal in the region.  It can fit any of its  long-range 
Jericho  2  missiles with enhanced nuclear and chemical warheads, 
an escalation that prompted Moscow,  at the peak of the cold  war 
in  1987,  to  ominously  declare  it  a "direct challenge to the 
Soviet Union." 

Israel's Shavit II rocket -  designed  for  launching  satellites 
into  space  -  can  also  be "modified for military purposes and 
converted into a powerful ballistic missile,"  according  to  the 
London-based monthly newsletter Jane's Sentinel.  

Israel  has  also  shown that it can carry out air strikes across 
the region virtually unimpeded.  Its  jet  fighters  destroyed  a 
nuclear reactor in Iraq in 1981,  and struck Palestine Liberation 
Organization headquarters in Tunis - 1,550 miles away - in 1985.  

Added to its state-of-the-art weapons of mass  destruction,  this 
capability  poses  both  a  threat  and  a  deterrent to Israel's 
neighbors.  But Israel still has no  effective  missile  defense. 
"You  have  to shoot a lot of missiles into Israel before you can 
walk over and take it.  But  the  possibilityâ  will  change  the 
balance  of  power  with  a new threat," says one US Army missile 
expert in the Persian Gulf.  

"Ballistic missiles  have  become  an  instrument  of  terror,  a 
publicity piece.  Israel has to consider that they are the weapon 
of the future." 

-----------------------------------------------------------------
                    ARTICLES FOR FAIR USE ONLY
-----------------------------------------------------------------