The person who runs the War (of Words) With Syria blog has caught United Press International yanking a story and replacing it with an altered version. Around 5 PM Eastern on 02 May 2003, UPI ran a story headlined "Rice Blocked Plan for Raids on Syria" on its Website. But that link now brings up a story headlined "Rice Actions on Syria Disputed," which is datelined 02 May at 7:54 PM. [Here's the link]. The two outlets that pick up many of UPI's stories—the Washington Times and Newsmax—quickly pulled the original story and replaced it with the new one.
The heavily-rewritten new article reiterates the high points of its spiked predecessor, but the whole thing is framed as a probable media misfire. The headline says that Rice's actions are being disputed, and the article opens with a vehement three-paragraph denial by a White House communications counselor, who calls the meeting a "complete fabrication."
Here's a screenshot of Google News showing the article on the Websites of UPI and the Washington Times: ... For the record, here's the complete text of the deleted article:
Rice blocked plan for raids on Syria
By Richard Sale UPI Terrorism Correspondent
WASHINGTON, May 2 (UPI) -- Key White House advisers, ignoring pressure from Pentagon hawks and senior Israeli officials, abruptly shut down proposed U.S. plans to expand the Iraqi ground war to Syria in the closing days of combat, administration officials have told United Press International.
The US strikes on Syria would have taken the form of brief across-the-border forays under "hot pursuit" rules of engagement, these sources said.
Contingency plans for such raids were being drawn up by Doug Feith, undersecretary of defense for policy, after the approval of Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, these sources said on condition of anonymity.
But the stern refusal to expand US military actions in Iraq to another country came from national security adviser Condoleezza Rice, backed by the president's chief domestic adviser, Karl Rove, and Secretary of State Colin Powell, according to the sources.
One proponent of the plans disagreed: "I saw no reason why we shouldn't have gone in. Powell wanted to return to regular bilateral relations with states in the area, but the balance of power (in the region) had changed, and we had the troops and we had the momentum.
"Rice's message was quite succinct: There will be no further military adventures during the remainder of the president's first term," one senior administration official said.
Another source with close knowledge of the White House meetings said: "The hawks didn't understand the emphasis had all changed: Everything was focused, not on the war any more, but on the president's re-election."
This official added that Rove had handled the elections of 2002 on the basis that "the American public knew the economy was a disaster, but the president asked them to put the war on terror first, and to vote Republican. And the public voted Republican. We think he felt any movement into Syria was pushing his luck."
Government spokesmen did not return calls from UPI seeking comment.
The hawks proposed punitive raids because Syria and the United States already were bristling at each other, and the war simply took an unfortunate series of circumstances and brought them to a point of crisis, administration sources said.
In spite of Syria's heightened cooperation in the war on terror, with Syria giving the United States much useful information about al-Qaida, it was still supporting Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein in the war.
In an April 13 Washington Post report, Powell issued a harsh warning to Syria against giving safe haven to Iraqi officials fleeing Baghdad. At a Pentagon press conference, Rumsfeld charged, "We are getting scraps of intelligence saying that Syria has been cooperating in facilitating the move (of senior members of Saddam Hussein's regime) from Iraq to Syria."
He warned that arms and supplies were moving into Iraq from Syria as well. Syria replied strongly that such charges were "baseless."
In an interview with The Washington Times, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz was quoted as saying: "Syria is shipping killers into Iraq to kill Americans."
There was some truth to this, say serving and former U.S. intelligence officials.
Former senior CIA officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, told UPI that U.S. combat forces in Iraq detained at least 700 Lebanon-based Hezbollah fighters who came in buses over the Syrian border to fight against the U.S. coalition.
In one incident, a bus filled with Lebanese Hezbollah militants stopped in Iraq included two dozen Chechen terrorists, a very former senior agency official said.
He added that another 100 members of Hezbollah are being detained at a camp at Tanaa in Iraq. After stern U.S. warnings, Syria tightened up scrutiny at checkpoints, but more Hezbollah and jihadis "simply went over the border" with weapons and explosives, he said.
"We were seeing some very disturbing signs of plans for anti-U.S. activity" on the part of the Hezbollah, another administration official said, speaking on condition of anonymity.
(Naim Qassem, Hezbollah's deputy secretary general, told UPI's Claude Salhani in an interview in Beiurt last week, "We are not a threat to anyone." Qassem said that although now he felt Hezbollah was stronger politically and militarily than ever, it was not to attack anyone, "but only to defend ourselves.")
The hawks also saw Syria as the only remaining military threat to Israel.
Former CIA Middle East expert Bob Baer told UPI that Syria possesses "a chemical arsenal that is much more lethal than anything Saddam has," and explained that "in Israeli strategic thought, the most dangerous threat is the geographically closest" -- which would mean Syria.
According to an April 18 report in Middle East International, Israeli intelligence chief Gen. Rossi Kupperwasser told a Knesset committee, "It is possible that Iraq has transferred missiles and weapons of mass destruction into Syria."
UPI previously reported that U.S. intelligence agencies believe that rogue elements of Syria's ruling elite have accepted millions of dollars in bribes in return for providing a safe haven for some of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, according to U.S. administration officials, both former and serving.
Chemical and biological weapons were taken by truck to a Syrian munitions compound near a military base near Khan Abu Shamet, about 50 miles northeast of Damascus, these officials told UPI. The chief suspects in the operation are Bushra Assad, the sister of Syrian President Bashar Assad, and her husband, Gen. Assaf Chawkat, No. 2 in Syria's military intelligence organization, the Mukhabarat.
The latest Pentagon press for action against Damascus was bolstered by the visit of Israeli National Security Adviser Efrian Halevy, who visited Washington on April 12-14, invited by the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, according to Israeli Embassy officials.
According to a Haaretz report of April 13, Halevy and another senior aide to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, Dov Weisglass, were visiting Washington to "suggest that the United States take care of Iran and Syria because of their support for terror and pursuit of weapons of mass destruction."
The report added: "Israel will point out the support of Syria and Iran for Hezbollah."
The meeting with Halevy took place in the president's conference room with only top NSC officials and White House advisers in attendance, administration sources said.
In response to Halevy's entreaties for action, Rice repeated her assertion of no more military adventures for the rest of Bush's first term, according to sources with knowledge of the meeting. They said Rumsfeld objected, and, at one point, turned to Rove and asked his opinion. Rove said the president agreed with Rice, and the meeting came to an end.
On April 15, the Washington Post quoted Rice as saying of Syria, "The president has made clear that every problem in the Middle East cannot be dealt with in the same way."
A side-by-side comparison of the two articles is here.
News article copyright 2003 UPI/News World Communications/Rev. Sun Myung Moon. Reprinted here for the purposes of education, media criticism, and political comment.
posted 06 May 2003 | thanks to Mark
>>> In "'Good American' Revisionism" (Christian Science Monitor, 29 April 2003), David Kirby writes:
Curiously, recent revelations show that the very architects of the Vietnam war were opposed to it.
In 1995, former Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara confessed in his memoirs that he had known the war was wrong.
And from Michael Beschloss's "Reaching for Glory: The Secret Lyndon Johnson Tapes, 1964-1965," we learn that, very early in the war, Johnson confessed, "I don't think it's worth fighting for, and I don't think we can get out."
Now they tell us? Now, after more than 200,000 American casualties and countless more on the other side? After the scarring at home, the destruction of whole families, the carving of a division that still hasn't healed?
posted 06 May 2003