My Life and Times

11 Die, 180 Hurt After Train Hits SUV
19 minutes ago
By TIM MOLLOY, Associated Press Writer
GLENDALE, Calif. - A suicidal man parked his SUV on the railroad tracks and set off a crash of two commuter trains Wednesday that hurled passengers down the aisles and turned rail cars into smoking, twisted heaps of steel, authorities said. At least 11 people were killed and more than 180 injured.
AP Photo
AP Photo
Slideshow: Deadly Train Crash in Calif.

Calif. Train Crash Ruled a Homicide(AP Video)
Related Links
•
A List of Other U.S. Train Accidents (AP)

The SUV driver got out at the last moment and survived.
The collision took place just before daybreak on the outskirts of Los Angeles. Employees at a Costco store rushed to the scene and pulled riders from the tipped-over double-deck cars before the flames reached them. Dazed passengers staggered from the wreckage, some limping. One elderly man on the train was covered in blood and soot, his legs and arms apparently broken.
"I heard a noise. It got louder and louder," said passenger Diane Brady, 56. "And next thing I knew the train tilted, everyone was screaming and I held onto a pole for dear life. I held on for what seemed like a week and a half it seemed. It was a complete nightmare."
Dozens of the injured were in critical condition, and more than 120 people were sent to hospitals in the nation's deadliest train accident in nearly six years.
Killed were one woman and nine men, including sheriff's Deputy James Tutino, 47, whose flag-draped body was saluted by law officers and firefighters as it was carried from the wreckage.
An 11th body was discovered in the wreckage after nightfall. Los Angeles Fire Department spokesman Jim Wells said he did not know whether the body was that of a man or woman.
Before his rescue, one trapped man apparently used his own blood to write a note on a seat bottom. Using the heart symbol, he wrote "I love my kids" and "I love Leslie." The man's identity was not known, but Los Angeles Fire Department spokesman Rex Vilaubi said the man was alive when he was removed.
The wreck set in motion a huge rescue operation involving more than 300 firefighters, some of whom climbed ladders to reach the windows of the battered train cars. A triage center was set up in a parking lot, where the injured lay sprawled on color-colded mats — red for those with severe injuries, green for those less seriously hurt.
Authorities said Juan Manuel Alvarez, 25, of Compton, parked his sport utility vehicle on the tracks and got out before a Metrolink train smashed into the Jeep Grand Cherokee. The train then derailed and collided with another train going in the opposite direction. That train also jumped the tracks.
Alvarez was arrested and expected to be booked for investigation of a "homicide-related offense," said police Sgt. Tom Lorenz. Alvarez had also slashed his wrists and stabbed himself, but the injuries were not life-threatening. Authorities said Alvarez had a criminal record that involved drugs. District Attorney Steve Cooley said no decision had been made on charges in the wreck.
"This whole incident was started by a deranged individual that was suicidal," Glendale Police Chief Randy Adams said. "I think his intent at that time was to take his own life but changed his mind prior to the train actually striking this vehicle."
Alvarez's sister-in-law, Maricela Amaya, told Telemundo TV that he had separated from his wife, Carmelita, three months ago. She said the wife got a court order to keep him away, but he had tried to see his wife and son.
"He was having problems with drugs and all that and was violent and because of that he separated from her," Amaya said in Spanish. "A few other times he went around as if he wanted to kill himself. I said if you're going to kill yourself, go kill yourself far away. Don't come by here telling that to my sister."
She said he had also threatened suicide in front of his son.
According to the request for a temporary restraining order, which was granted Dec. 14, Carmelita Alvarez said her husband "threatened to take our kid away and to hurt my family members."
"He is planning on selling his vehicle to buy and gun and threatened to use it," she said in the court documents. "He is using drugs and has been in and out of rehab twice."
The crash occurred at about 6 a.m. in an industrial area of Glendale, a suburb north of Los Angeles. One train was headed for Los Angeles' Union Station from Moorpark, a western suburb. The other train was outbound from Union Station to the San Fernando Valley.
Costco employee Jenny Doll said trapped passengers — some severely injured — screamed for help as flames raced toward the front of the train car and smoke and diesel fumes filled the air. Forklift operators, truck drivers and stock clerks from Costco worked side-by-side to pull victims out, using store carts to wheel some of the most severely injured to safety.
"There were people stuck in the front. Everything was mangled," Doll said. "You could not even tell that it was a train cab at all."
It was the worst U.S. rail tragedy since March 15, 1999, when an Amtrak train hit a truck and derailed near Bourbonnais, Ill., killing 11 people and injuring more than 100.
Investigators from the FBI (news - web sites), National Transportation Safety Board (news - web sites) and Federal Railroad Administration were sent.
Past crashes have raised questions about whether rail lines should be separated from roadways to prevent the possibility of vehicles getting onto train tracks. But Wednesday's tragedy also drew criticism over the configuration of the train that struck the SUV.
Timothy Smith, state legislative chairman for the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen, faulted the rail line for its use of the "cab-car" to lead the train, with the locomotive pushing from the rear. Unlike a locomotive, a cab car has a small control booth for the engineer, along with passenger seating.
If the heavier locomotive was at the front of the train, Smith said, it would have probably pushed the vehicle off the tracks and avoided a derailment. Having a locomotive pushing from the rear also creates an "accordion" effect on the middle cars, increasing damage, he said.

Wednesday, January 26, 200511:00:56 AMViewed 1 time
Iran says it is building a civilian nuclear energy programmeIran rejects Mossad nuclear claim Iran has rejected a warning by Israel's Mossad intelligence agency that it could have a nuclear bomb within three years as "baseless". Iran's foreign ministry insisted its nuclear regime was peaceful and accused Israel of misleading world opinion. Meanwhile Israeli Defence Minister Shaul Mofaz said Israel could not accept a nuclear-armed Iran but played down the possibility of air strikes. He said diplomatic action should be the priority for the US, the UN and Europe. Iran has always insisted it is building a civilian nuclear energy programme. However, Israel and the US maintain the Islamic state is using the energy programme as a front for a covert weapons regime. The unfounded claims were made to deviate world attention from Israel's organised terror activities and efforts to strengthen its nuclear power Hamid Reza Asefi Foreign ministry spokesman Gen Mofaz, speaking in London, echoed a warning by Israel's Mossad spy agency that Iran was "very close to the point of no return" on the nuclear issue. He said: "The way to stop Iran is by the leadership of the US supported by European countries and taking this to the UN and using the diplomatic channel with sanctions as a tool, plus a very deep inspection regime and full transparency." Gen Mofaz said decisions on further action would have to be taken at the time if diplomacy did not work. "This is the main threat to Israel and the free world in the long run," he said. "We know Iran has a high desire to be a nuclear power. It is an extremist regime." Defuse tensions But Iran's foreign ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi is quoted by the Iranian news agency Irna as saying Israel's allegations were "unfounded" and designed to distract attention from its own nuclear capabilities. Israel "brazenly tries to portray Iran's nuclear activities as a threat to the world", Mr Asefi said, while continuing to strengthen its own nuclear power. Last week US Vice-President Dick Cheney said Iran's nuclear programme put it "top of the list" of global issues. He also warned that Israel might launch a pre-emptive strike on its own to shut down Iran's nuclear programme Iran agreed in November to halt uranium enrichment under pressure from the US, Europe and the International Atomic Energy Agency - but wants to be allowed to continue. Gen Mofaz dismissed the agreement negotiated by Britain, France and Germany as a way of Iran "buying time". The BBC News website's World Affairs correspondent Paul Reynolds says Gen Mofaz was trying to defuse tensions raised by Mr Cheney. But he was also laying down a warning for the future and indicating that only about a year remained during which this issue could be solved by diplomatic action, our correspondent

36 U.S. Troops Die in Iraq in Their Bloodiest DayWed Jan 26, 2005 11:12 AM ET By Matt SpetalnickBAGHDAD (Reuters) - Thirty-one U.S. troops were reported killed in a helicopter crash and five more died in insurgent attacks Wednesday in the deadliest day for American forces since they invaded Iraq 22 months ago.Guerrillas also killed 10 Iraqis in a string of bombings and raids Wednesday. President Bush urged Iraqis to defy the insurgents, who are waging a bloody campaign to disrupt Sunday's landmark election, a cornerstone of U.S. plans.CNN, quoting the U.S. military, reported that 31 Marines died when their transport helicopter went down in the deserts of the restive Anbar province of western Iraq.The military confirmed casualties to reporters but gave no figures, as search and rescue teams scoured the area. The cause of the crash was not immediately known."Obviously, anytime you lose life it is a sad moment," Bush told a White House news conference. Mounting U.S. deaths have increased public pressure for a clearer exit strategy from Iraq.Four U.S. Marines were killed in action in Anbar province, and an American soldier died in a rocket-propelled grenade attack north of Baghdad, U.S. officials said.The latest surge of insurgent attacks appeared aimed at sowing panic even as the U.S.-backed interim government vowed stringent measures to safeguard the election, Iraq's first since the fall of Saddam Hussein in April 2003."I urge all people to vote. I urge people to defy these terrorists," Bush said, calling the election a "grand moment in Iraqi history.""They (the terrorists) have no clear view of a better future. They're afraid of a free society," he added.In a closely coordinated attack, three suicide car bombers hit the town of Riyadh, a Sunni Arab area southwest of the northern city of Kirkuk.Two explosives-laden cars blew up simultaneously close to an Iraqi army post and police station and a third vehicle detonated minutes later on a nearby highway, a local police chief said.Four Iraqi policemen, two Iraqi soldiers and three civilians were killed, and at least 12 people were wounded, police said.Shortly after the blasts, a U.S. combat patrol heading to the scene came under small arms fire and two U.S. soldiers were lightly wounded, the military said.The previous deadliest day for U.S. forces was March 23, 2003, the third day of the war, when 28 U.S. soldiers died mostly in fierce fighting in southern Iraq.STRING OF ATTACKSPolice in Baquba, a mixed Shi'ite and Sunni town 65 km (40 miles) north of Baghdad, said one Iraqi policeman was killed and at least eight people were wounded when gunmen fired on the local offices of three parties contesting the polls.Sunni insurgents have repeatedly targeted the country's fledgling security forces in the countdown to the election, accusing them of collaborating with U.S.-led occupiers.Iraq's Shi'ite majority is expected to dominate the vote after decades of rule by Saddam's Sunni minority.In the northern city of Mosul, a rebel stronghold that has seen persistent violence, a video filmed by insurgents showed three Iraqi men who had apparently been taken hostage and who said they worked for Iraq's electoral commission in the city.On the video, a hooded insurgent carrying a pistol read out a statement as another masked guerrilla crouched with a rocket-propelled grenade launcher on his shoulder."We are mujahideen in the province of Nineveh. What they call elections have no basis in the Islamic religion and that's why we will hit all election centers," the statement said.Several guerrilla groups in Iraq -- including militants loyal to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, al Qaeda's leader in the country -- have declared war on Sunday's elections, vowing to attack polling stations and kill those who dare to vote.The government plans extraordinary security measures, including closing Baghdad airport and land borders over the election period, extending night curfews in cities and banning cars from roads on election day.Zarqawi, a Jordanian with a $25 million bounty on his head, says the election is a plot by Washington and Iraqi Shi'ite allies against Sunni Arabs, who now fear being marginalised.Iraq's Shi'ites, oppressed under Saddam, strongly support the elections. A list of candidates dominated by Shi'ite Islamists and drawn up with the guidance of revered cleric Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani is expected to win the most votes, cementing the newfound political power of Shi'ites.But many Sunni Arab parties will boycott the polls, saying the insurgency raging in Iraq's Sunni heartlands will prevent their supporters from voting and skew the results.Tension between Shi'ite and Sunni Arabs has been stoked by a series of bomb attacks on Shi'ite targets, raising fears of sectarian conflict.Insurgents have also assassinated several leading officials. Tuesday a top Baghdad judge was killed along with his son in an ambush as they left home during morning rush hour.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------All rights reserved. Users may download and print extracts of content from this website for their own personal and non-commercial use only. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content, including by framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters. Reuters and the Reuters sphere logo are registered trademarks or trademarks of the Reuters group of companies around the world. © Reuters 2005
[Copy Link]

January 26, 2005OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR Martyr ComplexBy JONATHAN SPENCE New Haven — WHY has the Chinese government been so intent on showing that the former Communist Party chief Zhao Ziyang was a man of no significance, a man whose life should not be celebrated and whose death should pass unsung? The answer that comes most readily to the historian's mind is that Mr. Zhao played a role that has often made Chinese governments deeply uneasy: that of a bold and visionary reformer who insistently calls for change and openness in a tightly controlled political environment. Saluted for a time as one of the leaders of the country, Mr. Zhao sought to use his power and visibility to grant a hearing to the voices of those excluded from the inner circles where decisions were normally made. And when he persisted in this course in the face of opposition from senior leaders in his party, he had to be discarded.Many others have played similar roles in China's long history, from as early as the seventh century B.C. Ancient texts suggest a tendency for historians to personalize the idea of reform, to let one or a few individuals give a human face to inchoate and broad-based pleas for change and innovation. Often, those seeking reforms were punished by their own colleagues, so that the concept of reform led to the construction in China of an elaborate and emotionally powerful martyrology.China's recent history is studded with such cases that also serve as markers for major political shifts. Near the end of the Qing dynasty, China's last in the long imperial cycle that had endured for over two millenniums, there was a dramatic example. The year was 1898, and the country was smarting from its recent defeat by Japan, and the loss of Taiwan as one of the spoils of war. China's political structure seemed frozen in time, unable to adjust to a new world's market and military forces. Persuaded of the need for change, the emperor himself tried to open up the system by inviting a group of independent-minded scholars to the court, where they swiftly introduced plans to develop the economy and tax system, transform education, foster industry, increase the productivity of agriculture, develop the press, and begin discussion of constitutional government and the possibilities of popular participation in decision-making. Before the year was out, the conservative opponents rallied, the emperor was placed under a form of palace arrest, and six of the most outspoken reformers were arrested and summarily executed. Those who had fled in time made it to Japan and a life of exile. The reform movement of 1898 became associated with the names of these six martyrs, though indeed they had spoken for a much larger constituency. In the years after the dynasty's fall in 1912, other individuals made parallel gestures or mounted similar challenges to central establishments, knowing how high the risks might be. One of the new breed of politicians who had risen to prominence in China's first republican elections, held in late 1912, used his newfound influence to challenge the centralizing and militaristic tendencies of China's interim president; he was gunned down in the Shanghai railway station en route to taking up a leadership position in the new Parliament. When Chiang Kai-shek was consolidating his power over the Nationalist Party in the 1920's, one of his closest lieutenants sought to increase the participation of leftists and to shift the government onto a more populist course. He too was shot dead on his way to a meeting. In 1946, just after the end of World War II, the popular poet Wen Yiduo cried out in anger against what he saw as government coercion against the liberals who were trying to open up the Nationalist Party - a goal that President Harry Truman's personal emissary to China, Gen. George Marshall, also sought to promote. Wen was shot and killed, just after giving a passionate speech daring the government to take action against him.The list could be expanded with many figures in the People's Republic: those who thought they could use the government's Hundred Flowers campaign of 1956-57 to bring a new humanity and a new openness to Communist Party rule; those who sought after the Great Leap Forward of 1958-60 and the famine that followed to bring back private plots and jump-start the rural economy; or those like the army marshal and minister of defense Peng Dehuai, who privately challenged Mao Zedong to open up the shutters that had darkened the economy since the Great Leap, and to listen to the voices of those who were suffering.In 1976, after his speech of homage to the deceased Prime Minister Zhou Enlai, when the people of Beijing demonstrated in thousands on Tiananmen Square, it was Deng Xiaoping who seemed to be demanding change; for that bravado, he was purged from the party for a second time. In 1987, it was Hu Yaobang, the party chief who was one of Deng's new protégés, who fell from grace because he was considered too soft on the fledgling democracy movement. Hu was replaced by Zhao Ziyang, who fell in his turn as he tried to persuade the government to respond more favorably to some of the ideas for greater political participation being framed so vociferously by the demonstrating citizens and students of Tiananmen Square. As the guns were being brought in, Zhao Ziyang wept, and for that the world remembers him.In contrast to many earlier reformers, Mr. Zhao was allowed to live out the 15 years of life that remained to him in house arrest in Beijing. But the main issues he had raised about political openness were not addressed. Instead, it was the market-energizing plans, which he had formulated in earlier years in Guangdong and Sichuan provinces, that were enshrined as basic policies for China's boom economy of the late 20th century. It did seem like petty spite for China's government to refuse Mr. Zhao a formal funeral and to deny him the credit that was his due.But, if the past is any guide, there will be a kind of corrective justice, as China's leaders seem already to be realizing by modifying their tough stance on the exact funeral arrangements. Indeed, the last thing that China's leaders probably want is for Mr. Zhao to join the long list of reforming martyrs who have made their mark before him. Jonathan Spence, a professor of modern Chinese history at Yale, is the author, most recently, of "Treason by the Book."Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company Home Privacy Policy Search Corrections RSS Help Back to Top

EDITORIAL The Wrong Attorney GeneralAlberto Gonzales's nomination as attorney general goes before the Senate at a time when the Republican majority is eager to provide newly elected President Bush with the cabinet of his choice, and the Democrats are leery of exposing their weakened status by taking fruitless stands against the inevitable. None of that is an excuse for giving Mr. Gonzales a pass. The attorney general does not merely head up the Justice Department. He is responsible for ensuring that America is a nation in which justice prevails. Mr. Gonzales's record makes him unqualified to take on this role or to represent the American justice system to the rest of the world. The Senate should reject his nomination.The biggest strike against Mr. Gonzales is the now repudiated memo that gave a disturbingly narrow definition of torture, limiting it to physical abuse that produced pain of the kind associated with organ failure or death. Mr. Gonzales's attempts to distance himself from the memo have been unconvincing, especially since it turns out he was the one who requested that it be written. Earlier the same year, Mr. Gonzales himself sent President Bush a letter telling him that the war on terror made the Geneva Conventions' strict limitations on the questioning of enemy prisoners "obsolete."These actions created the legal climate that made possible the horrific mistreatment of Iraqi prisoners being held in Abu Ghraib prison. The Bush administration often talks about its desire to mend fences with the rest of the world, particularly the Muslim world. Making Mr. Gonzales the nation's chief law enforcement officer would set this effort back substantially.Other parts of Mr. Gonzales's record are also troubling. As counsel to George Bush when he was governor of Texas, Mr. Gonzales did a shockingly poor job of laying out the legal issues raised by the clemency petitions from prisoners on death row. And questions have been raised about Mr. Gonzales's account of how he got his boss out of jury duty in 1996, which allowed Mr. Bush to avoid stating publicly that he had been convicted of drunken driving.Senate Democrats, who are trying to define their role after the setbacks of the 2004 election, should stand on principle and hold out for a more suitable attorney general. Republicans also have reason to oppose this nomination. At the confirmation hearings, Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, warned that the administration's flawed legal policies and mistreatment of detainees had hurt the country's standing and "dramatically undermined" the war on terror. Given the stakes in that war, senators of both parties should want an attorney general who does not come with this nominee's substantial shortcomings.Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company Home Privacy Policy Search Corrections RSS Help Back to Top

Across the harbor from Boston, a number of houses in the frigid community of Hull were coated with ice in the wake of a blizzard that left as much as 38 inches of January 25, 2005Storm Leaves Boston Struggling With Another Big DigBy PAM BELLUCK WAYLAND, Mass., Jan. 24 - Gary Burton, the Wayland superintendent of schools, insists that his having grown up in Newfoundland is not the reason he decided to open the schools Monday in this western suburb of Boston.So what if almost every other school district in eastern Massachusetts was closed, grappling with the aftermath of a blizzard that left much of the region nearly paralyzed by hip-deep snow, blistering winds and biting cold?"It's New England," Dr. Burton said. "It's going to snow."But even in this hardy community, where parents are well aware that the schools rarely close, the weekend's ferocious northeaster was too much for many."A number of parents have called to tell me that I guessed wrong," Dr. Burton acknowledged. "It's running about 60-40 against me today. Mostly it seems to center around road conditions. And some of the town's sidewalks have not been plowed, so some children are forced to walk in the roads, which I agree they should not be doing. Some parents are also asking, if all these other schools have closed, what do I know that they don't know. I do think there are some parents who - well, today I'm not one of their favorite people."In most places in the region, from Boston to Hyannis to Gloucester, communities capitulated to the elements: schools, courts, government offices and many businesses remained shut."We just can't handle it," said Bob Burns, the emergency management operations officer for the town of Plymouth, which tied with Salem for the most snow in the state: 38 inches, according to the National Weather Service."Our plows and stuff just can't move this kind of stuff around," Mr. Burns said. "We've had a lot of our equipment get stuck. We called in the National Guard to use front-end loaders to move the snow - heavy, heavy equipment."Mr. Burns said that while much of the state had gotten light, fluffy snow, Plymouth and some other coastal areas had been hit by the heavy, wet variety, which snapped power lines and left some people without heat, forced to take refuge in an emergency shelter.On Cape Cod, smothered with three feet of snow and with conditions so dire that for the first time in memory The Cape Cod Times did not publish a newspaper on Monday (it did turn out an online edition), Adrienne Morosini, Dana Heilman and their two children were still trapped in their house in Harwich as of Monday afternoon.Twelve years of experience on the Cape had taught them that "usually it doesn't snow that much, and if it does it melts pretty quickly," Ms. Morosini, a real estate agent, said by telephone.Anyway, their four-wheel-drive vehicles are usually able to navigate any snow that falls. But, Ms. Morosini said, "our driveway is about 500 yards long, and the snowdrifts in some places are eight feet tall.""We don't have a regular plow guy," she said. "We made calls, and now we're just begging people to come and get us."They put a sign at the end of their driveway: "Plow for Money," with their phone number. And they hunkered down, glad that unlike Sunday, this was a day with electricity and heat. Boston, meanwhile, where the temperature was as low as 3 degrees early Monday morning, was a frigid white labyrinth, with shoveled sidewalks wedged alongside mountains of snow. On fashionable Newbury Street, where crossing pedestrians needed to scale a three-foot-high snowbank to get to the sidewalk, Elissa Bjorck, 19, was at work at Jasmine Sola, a clothing store selling spring-break attire: bikinis, sun hats and a hot-pink sleeveless dress.Only one customer showed up Monday morning, but "people have come in here just to keep warm," Ms. Bjorck said.The extreme weather resulted in at least one death in Massachusetts. The Boston Police Department said a 10-year-old boy from the Roxbury section died of carbon monoxide poisoning Sunday after sitting in a running parked car whose tailpipe was blocked by piled-up snow and ice.Logan Airport, closed for nearly 30 hours beginning Sunday morning, reopened but was then hounded by an hourlong electrical failure that stopped elevators and escalators and slowed passenger check-in to a crawl.And on Nantucket, where the entire island lost power on Sunday and many were still without electricity Monday, about 100 people were staying at an emergency shelter at the high school.A family with a 10-month-old baby took refuge at the shelter after winds blew the glass out of their storm door Sunday."That's how I got out," said the baby's mother, who did not want to give her name. "I climbed through the broken glass. The drifts made it impossible otherwise. I couldn't open the door."Sasha Cavender contributed reporting from Nantucket for this article, and Katie Zezima from Boston

January 26, 2005At Least Nine Are Killed as Trains Derail in CaliforniaBy THE ASSOCIATED PRESS Filed at 11:56 a.m. ETGLENDALE, Calif. (AP) -- A Metrolink commuter train struck a vehicle, derailed and sideswiped another train early Wednesday, killing nine people and injuring more than 100 others, authorities said.Firefighters picked through twisted wreckage scattered across the tracks and carried wounded passengers from the trains to a triage center set up in a nearby parking lot.``At this time, we believe we have nine fatilities,'' Fire Chief William Battmare said. More than 100 people were transported to hospitals, he said.One commuter train was headed from Los Angeles' Union Station to downtown Burbank, and the other was bound to Union Station from Moorpark, Metrolink officials said.``I heard a noise. It got louder and louder,'' said passenger Diane Brady, 56, of Simi Valley. ``And next thing I knew the train tilted, everyone was screaming and I held onto a pole for dear life. I held on for what seemed like a week and a half, it seemed. It was a complete nightmare.''In a light rain, firefighters climbed ladders into windows of a battered train tipped onto its side.Nearly 300 firefighters were at the scene in the suburb north of Los Angeles and 35 ambulances were taking injured passengers to hospitals, officials said.A sheriff's deputy on his way into work from his home in Simi Valley was killed in the crash, said county Sheriff Lee Baca. Baca did not name the deputy.Dazed passengers, some limping, gathered at tables in a nearby store, while the injured sprawled on color-coded mats in the parking lot: red for those with severe injuries, green for those less seriously harmed.The accident started when one of the Metrolink trains struck a vehicle at a crossing, according to Kathryn Blackwell, a spokeswoman for Union Pacific in Omaha, Neb. One of the Metrolink trains then struck a parked Union Pacific car, tipping it onto its side, she said.Among the train passengers who died was a sheriff's deputy on his way into work from his home in Simi Valley, said county Sheriff Lee Baca. Baca did not identify him.One Metrolink car was sent twisting backward by the force of the crash, which occurred after 6 a.m. A small fire erupted, and smoke could be seen wafting from the wreckage.George Touma, 19, of Burbank, said he was called by his mother, who was on one of the Metrolink trains.``She told me she was bleeding in the head and her arm was really hurting,'' said Touma, who was searching for her. ``I'm really worried because she has vertigo and when I tried to call back she wouldn't answer.'' He said she told him of hearing ``sequential loud noises and then somebody pulled her out of the train while it was burning.''Metrolink began service in 1992 and operates seven lines, part of a multibillion-dollar transportation network aimed at reducing pollution and congestion in Southern California

washingtonpost.com
More Than 30 Die in Marine Copter Crash in Iraq 5 More U.S. Troops Killed in Combat as Insurgent Attacks Flare in Advance of Election
By Fred Barbash and Cameron W. BarrWashington Post Staff WriterWednesday, January 26, 2005; 10:42 AM
A U.S. Marine helicopter crash in western Iraq early this morning killed more than 30 Marines, the Associated Press reported, quoting U.S. officials. Another five troops died in combat today as violence accelerated in advance of Sunday's election.
A military statement in Iraq said a search and rescue operation was under way after a transport helicopter went down near Ar Rutbah at about 1:20 a.m. Baghdad time. There was no official announcement of the toll, but military officials said earlier that 31 Marines were killed.
The CH-53 helicopter was being flown by members of the 3rd Marine Aircraft Wing, who were transporting personnel of the 1st Marine Division. A senior administration official told the AP there was bad weather in the desert at the time of the crash but added, "I have not heard anybody attribute a cause."
President Bush, asked at a news conference about the incident, said the Defense Department was investigating. "Obviously, any time that we lose life it is a sad moment," Bush said.
Of the five troops who died elsewhere, four were Marines who were conducting combat operations against enemy forces in Anbar Province where the city of Fallujah is located. The military provided no detail.
The fifth was a soldier in the Army's 1st Infantry Division who died near Tikrit when insurgents attacked his combat patrol with rocket-propelled grenades about 11:20 a.m. Two other soldiers were wounded in the assault, one of whom was reported in serious condition, according to the U.S. military.
Earlier in the morning, a car bomb detonated on the eastbound lane of the notoriously dangerous Baghdad airport access road, wounding four soldiers, the military said.
To the north near Kirkuk wire services reported that three car bombs exploded in quick succession in an attack on Iraqi police, killing at least nine people, including four police officers, two Iraqi soldiers and at least three civilians. At least 12 others were wounded, the local police chief told the Reuters news agency.
The election Sunday is to elect members of an assembly which will draw up a permanent constitution and set of laws for the nation.
While the leadership of Iraqi's majority Shiite Muslim community is participating in the process, offering up slates of candidates to voters, many of their Sunni Muslim counterparts are shunning it or boycotting it.
On the extreme, some Iraqis are promising more violent disruptions in an attempt to discourage voters from going to the polls on election day.
At his news conference, Bush called on Iraqis to participate but declined to predict turnout.
"We anticipate a lot of Iraqis will vote. Clearly, there are some who are intimidated," Bush said. "I urge people to vote. I urge people to defy these terrorists."
To head off intimidation of voters, U.S. and Iraqi forces have stepped up raids across the country over the past few weeks.
One joint operation conducted last night near the Al Rasoul Mosque in eastern Baghdad netted 19 suspected insurgents and various weapons, the military said. Nineteen suspects were taken into custody along with 15 AK-47 assault rifles, four 9 mm pistols and four machine guns.
Another operation this morning uncovered six unexploded roadside bombs in Baghdad, the military said. One of the devices consisted of four gas cans daisy-chained together with a timing device. Another was a 155-millimeter artillery round with wires protruding from it, the military said.
"We've been very successful finding and destroying improvised explosive devices in Baghdad, limiting the insurgent's ability to kill or injure innocent Iraqis," Maj. Philip Smith, a spokesman for the 1st Cavalry Division, said in a written statement.
In the Mosul area, joint teams have detained 314 individuals and confiscated numerous weapons and munitions in the past two weeks, the military said, promising that the operations would continue through election day.
In another security development today, the interim government announced that it would ban travel between provinces and extend the hours of curfew as part of heightened security before the weekend national elections, wire services said.
Interior Minister Falah Naqib said the curfew would be extended from 7 p.m. until 6 a.m. starting Friday evening through Monday, the day after the balloting.
During that period, only vehicles with special permits would be allowed to travel between Iraq's 18 provinces.
The government has already announced plans to close Baghdad International Airport and seal the nation's borders during the election period. Weapons will be banned, and al-Naqib announced rewards for Iraqis who turn in "terrorists."
Barr reported from Baghdad. Wire services contributed to this story.
© 2005 The Washington Post Company

January 26, 2005Cause Is Still Unknown; Another Incident Leaves 4 Marines DeadBy JOHN F. BURNS and TERENCE NEILAN BAGHDAD, Iraq, Jan. 26 - Thirty-one marines died today when a transport helicopter crashed in the desert in western Iraq, the United States military said in a statement here today.There was no immediate explanation of what caused the crash.The crash was the largest single loss of life for the American military in one incident since the Iraq war started 22 months ago.Some officials said bad weather might have been a contributing factor. It was also possible, they said, that the craft hit a power line, what the military calls a wire strike.Military officials said today's crash occurred over the town of Rutbah, a way station for American forces in Anbar Province, a third of the way between the Jordanian border and Ramadi, west 0f Baghdad in the so-called Black Desert.Large troop movements have been stepped up as next Sunday's elections approach.A Pentagon official said the incident today involved a CH-53 Sea Stallion helicopter transporting marines, The Associated Press reported, although there was no immediate word on how many were aboard.Since a spate of incidents in late 2003, military helicopters have followed revised flight procedures. They now routinely fly at low altitudes - they are often seen flying just above the reeds on the Tigris River - and maintain a zigzag flight pattern to avoid ground fire. Those procedures have sharply decreased the number of incidents.A search and rescue team has reached the site of the crash, the military said in a statement, and an investigation is being conducted.In Washington today, President Bush said he had been informed of the crash but declined to give any details, saying it was still being investigated. "Obviously, any time we lose lives it's a sad moment," he said.Asked about polls that showed declining support among Americans for the war in Iraq, he said, "The story today is going to be very discouraging to the American people.""We value life," he said, "and we mourn when our soldiers lose their lives. But our long-term objective is to spread freedom."He again stressed the importance of the elections proceeding as planned Sunday. Asked what level of turnout he would consider a success, Mr. Bush said, "The fact that they're voting is in itself a success."The previous most deadly helicopter crashes in Iraq occurred in November 2003. In the first, a Chinook helicopter ferrying soldiers bound for vacation was shot down by a surface-to-air missile, leaving 16 soldiers dead. In the second, 18 soldiers died when two helicopters dodging insurgent fire from the ground collided over the northern city of Mosul.A blast in a mess tent in Mosul late last year killed 18 Americans and 4 others; 14 of the Americans were members of the military. Today's helicopter incident came on another day of scattered violence in Iraq.Four marines were killed in Anbar Province while conducting combat operations against insurgent forces, the military said, while providing no further information.A soldier with the Army's First Infantry Division was killed and two were wounded in a rocket-propelled grenade attack by insurgents near the town of Duluiya, a statement from the military said.The combined death toll from today's helicopter incident and the fighting with insurgents - a total of 36 killed - surpasses the highest previous American death toll for one day. That came on March 23, 2003, when 29 American troops were killed during the early days of the invasion of Iraq. Today, two car bomb attacks on American military convoys took place on the road leading to the Baghdad International Airport, a frequent target of rebel strikes.Four soldiers were wounded in the first attack, at about 10:25 a.m., the military said. A second car bomb wounded three soldiers on the same road at about 2:35 p.m. and an armored Humvee was damaged, the military said.Five people, including three policemen, were killed when three car bombs went off in Riyadh, north of Baghdad, news agencies reported.In Sadr City, a heavily populated Shiite area of eastern Baghdad, American and Iraqi forces arrested 19 suspected insurgents in a raid Tuesday night outside the Rasoul Mosque, the military said.The area was the frequent site of heavy clashes last year between American forces and Moktada al-Sadr, a fiery Shiite cleric, until a peace agreement was reached after the intervention of the Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani.

January 26, 2005LETTER FROM EUROPE Glum Days in Poland: Graft, Russophobia and WorseBy RICHARD BERNSTEIN WARSAW - From outside this country, Poland seems as if it ought to be a happy place, securely democratic after all those years of Communist dictatorship, enjoying a growing economy, membership in the European Union and a greater role than ever in world affairs.But that is not the case. Objectively, as one commentator, Helena Luczywo, deputy editor of Gazeta Wyborcza, put it recently, Poland is better off than at any time since the 16th century. Yet, as Ms. Luczywo readily allows, the mood is gloomy. Charges of high-level corruption dominate the news. The ruling coalition, led by the Alliance of Left Democrats, or S.L.D., is deeply unpopular. Far-right nationalist parties are threatening to flow into the vacuum. Why do the Poles feel bad when things are good?"There are three reasons," said Leszek Jesien, a political scientist and former government adviser on Poland's entry into the European Union. "One reason is corruption."Recently, parliamentary commissions have been holding televised hearings on suspected malfeasance in the sale of Polish state assets to private companies, and the sessions have been full of melodramatic accusations - most notably of a secret and somehow sinister meeting between Poland's most famous captain of finance and the Russian intelligence service. "Second, in 2001, there was the total decomposition of the right," Mr. Jesien continued, referring to the collapse of the government associated with the Solidarity democracy movement. "Now, there's the total decomposition of the left, without any prospect that either of them can be recomposed."And third," Mr. Jesien said, "before, we were the poor orphans of Europe. Now, we're an equal member of the all-powerful E.U., but we are still poor." In other words, there may be a touch of hypochondria to the Polish malaise. But that does not mean that the problems, especially of corruption, are imaginary. This is a country, after all, where the mayors of several towns - and, in at least one case, almost the entirety of the municipal administration - have been indicted or are already in prison after having been convicted of corruption of one sort or another.Still, something seems a bit strange about the various corruption scandals and investigations. The corruption seems a bit on the petty scale, not quite worthy of a great political crisis. In one high-level, high-visibility case, a film producer, Lew Rywin, reportedly a friend of a former prime minister, Leszek Miller, was found guilty of trying to solicit a bribe from Adam Michnik, the editor of Gazeta Wyborcza, to enable Gazeta to bid on the sale of a state-owned television station.But, more generally, the investigations have revealed little in the way of a clear story of systematic corruption. Because of that, the investigations are beginning to take on an aspect of political theater: grand, made-for-TV gestures motivated more by the eagerness of party leaders to grab the spotlight than to use it to shed light."The Parliament is a platform for political struggle," Jozef Gruszka, the head of one of the investigating commissions, acknowledged in an interview, "and it's hard to say that investigating commissions are completely free of political influence."The main corruption scandal has to do with the sale of Poland's biggest oil company, Orlen. This is the subject of the commission headed by Mr. Gruszka.But he is not investigating whether bribes were paid or assets were sold off at ridiculous prices. The charge is that Orlen may have been sold to the oil giant Lukoil, which belongs to the country that the Poles love most to hate, Russia."The basic problem was that there were many conversations between the political establishment and the Russian government and parties," Roman Giertych, leader of the rightist League of Polish Families, said in a brief interview in the Polish Parliament. "It's important not only for the economy. It's a question of economic sovereignty."The strange thing, however, is that Orlen was not actually sold to Lukoil or to any other Russian company. In other words, the biggest allegation of malfeasance in the privatization process involves an event that did not actually occur. The investigation concerns the possibility that, had it not been stopped, it might have occurred.Here is where accounts of meetings between a Polish businessman and a supposed Russian agent come into the picture. The businessman, Jan Kulczyk, generally referred to as Poland's richest man, met last year in Vienna with Vladimir Alganov, a Russian who is almost a household name in Poland. Mr. Alganov served in the Kremlin's embassy in Warsaw through most of the 1980's and early 90's, reportedly working for Russian intelligence. The parliamentary commission that has been holding hearings on Orlen released a lurid Polish intelligence report on that meeting, which included unsubstantiated claims that Mr. Alganov complained to Mr. Kulczyk that Russia had not succeeded in buying Orlen even though millions of dollars in bribes were paid to Polish officials. After that, the head of Polish intelligence, Zbigniew Siemiatkowski, appeared before the commission and delivered a stark warning."I'm afraid that the Russian empire is being restored," he said. "Yesterday it was tanks. Today it is oil. The commissars are being replaced by politicians and businessmen."Other prominent political figures in Poland - former Treasury Minister Wieslaw Kaczmarek, for example - have offered the opinion that if cash-rich Russia wants to invest in cash-poor Poland, Poland would be well advised to seize the opportunity. Ignoring that common sense, some hotter heads in Poland have been trying to stir up public anxiety about dark Russian dealings.Mr. Giertych is among those who have been most active in drumming up Russophobia. Of course, he happens to head a nationalist party that has been picking up influence as the mainstream parties have declined. "It's true that Poland hasn't been in such good shape since the 16th century," Marek Beylin, a commentator for Gazeta Wyborcza said, asked about Ms. Luczywo's comment. "But we are in a deep crisis," because the political parties are trying to destroy one another

January 26, 2005For Tsunami Orphan, No Name but Many ParentsBy SOMINI SENGUPTA KALMUNAI, Sri Lanka, Jan. 25 - In the pediatric ward of the town hospital here, Sri Lanka's most celebrated tsunami orphan dozes, drools and, when he is in a foul mood, wails at the many visitors who crowd around his crib. His identity is unknown. His age, according to hospital staff, is somewhere between 4 and 5 months. He is simply and famously known as Baby No. 81, the 81st admission to the ward this year.Baby No. 81's awful burden is not in being unwanted, but in being wanted too much. So far, nine couples have claimed him as their own son. Some among them have threatened suicide if the baby is not delivered into their arms. Countless other parents who lost their babies to the tsunami have also rushed in to see if Baby No. 81 is theirs. The national newspapers have carried almost daily narratives about his fate. The hospital has been so mobbed that for a while, the staff hid the baby in the operating theater every night for his own protection. In the storied obscurity of Baby No. 81 lies a hint of the raw and peculiar distress of Sri Lanka's bereaved parents. Of the 30,000 dead in Sri Lanka, Unicef estimates that 4 of 10 were children, a great many of them babies. Could it possibly be that nine couples honestly believe Baby No. 81 to be their flesh and blood? Could it be that childless parents are looking for a boon amid the disaster? Could it be that a photogenic baby boy has inspired a craving that a girl would not have? All these theories circulate on the streets of Kalmunai. Dr. K. Muhunthan, the hospital gynecologist who has taken on Baby No. 81's case, finds himself puzzled. The couples he has met seem so utterly traumatized that it is hard to know what they think. "Most of them believe this is their baby," Dr. Muhunthan said. "Maybe all children they look at, they think it's their baby. I'm not angry at them really."In the end, only a DNA test will offer proof of biological claim. Judge M. P. Moahaidein, the Kalmunai magistrate handling the claim filed by one of the nine would-be parents, intends to order a test when the case next comes before him on Feb. 2. "All the people of this community are affected, physically and psychologically," the judge said, offering an explanation on Tuesday as he handed out death certificates in his packed small-town courtroom. "They don't know what they are doing. In the meantime, the court has to do the right thing." For all the worldwide attention on tsunami orphans, they are in fact rare. Only a handful of stranded babies in Sri Lanka did not have relatives to care for them. According to Unicef, of the 981 children who were left with no parents, 945 have been taken in by extended family. Anxious about trafficking, Sri Lanka has instituted a temporary ban on the adoption of tsunami orphans.Baby No. 81's journey began on Dec. 26, when, amid the rush of dead and injured streaming into the hospital, someone brought in a baby. He had been found wailing amid the wreckage. In the pandemonium of that afternoon, no one recorded who brought in the child - some on the staff think it was an elderly man - nor exactly where he was found. The baby seemed to be in good health. There were a few bruises on his head. Some of the nurses started calling him Little Brother, in Tamil.Within days, word spread of the baby found in the wreckage. Hysterical, hopeful mothers and fathers streamed in. A few came and saw and walked away, heads hung in dismay. Nine couples came and saw and were convinced the boy was theirs. Jeyaraja Junitha, 25, and her husband, M. Jeyaraja, 30, were among them. "He has a birthmark here," Mrs. Junitha said, and touched the back of her head. "I know the shape of his ear," she went on. "I can recognize my son." She has threatened to kill herself if she doesn't get custody of Baby No. 81 - to her, Jeyaraja Abhilas, her first born. She points out that she and her husband are the only ones among the nine couples who have bothered to file for custody in a court of law. Her son, she explained, was right next to her in her sister's arms when the waves hit her house, just steps from the sea. Mrs. Junitha was found in the wreckage later that day. Her sister was found safe, tangled up in a tree. The baby was not. Relatives counseled her to accept his death. She and her husband refused. Three days later, they felt vindicated when a family friend came to say the baby was in the hospital. Since then, armed with a court order, the couple visits Baby No. 81 twice a week. Whatever tests the court orders, they say, they will gladly submit. "If they want to cut us into two pieces and test us, they can," Mr. Jeyaraja said. At the hospital, Dr. Muhunthan has advised them to consent to a DNA test. But there is something else that he cannot bring himself to suggest to any of the families who claim the baby: to look at the pictures of the dead. In the days immediately after the tsunami, he photographed hundreds of bodies that were brought into the hospital and copied them onto a compact disc for the police. Among the bodies were many, many babies. Some were about the same age as Baby No. 81

January 26, 2005Bush Aides Say Budget Deficit Will Rise AgainBy EDMUND L. ANDREWS WASHINGTON, Jan. 25 - The White House announced on Tuesday that the federal budget deficit was expected to rise this year to $427 billion, a figure that includes a new request from President Bush to help pay for the war in Iraq.The White House's announcement makes it the fourth straight year in which the budget deficit was expected to grow; as recently as last July the administration had predicted that the deficit, which was $412 billion last year, would fall this year to $331 billion. The deficit figure announced by the White House, which includes part of an additional $80 billion that Mr. Bush requested mostly for Iraq, was higher than the $368 billion estimate announced earlier in the day by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, though that figure did not include supplemental costs for the war. The deficit estimates are roughly consistent with each other with the inclusion of those costs, which cover bombs, bullets, armor for vehicles used in Iraq, and the replacement of tanks and Humvees blown up by insurgent forces.Neither estimate includes the cost of privatizing part of the Social Security program, the leading element of Mr. Bush's domestic agenda. Estimates of the cost of creating those accounts range from $1 trillion to $2 trillion over the next two decades.The Congressional Budget Office noted that if Mr. Bush wins Congressional approval to make his tax cuts permanent, a top priority for the administration, the deficit would grow by $2 trillion over the next 10 years. If war costs in Iraq and Afghanistan taper off gradually, the agency estimated that price tag over the next 10 years could total nearly $600 billion. In a briefing for reporters on Tuesday, senior administration officials insisted they were still on track to fulfill Mr. Bush's campaign promise of reducing the federal budget deficit by half by 2009. But Mr. Bush is already well behind in reaching his goal. The deficit this year will amount to about 3.5 percent of the nation's gross domestic product, the broadest measure of the economy, a figure that is still below where the United States was in the late 1980's. Beyond the war costs, administration officials did not spell out the precise reasons for the deficit increase. Tax receipts are expected to climb by about $200 billion in 2005, but mandatory spending for entitlement programs like Medicare and Medicaid is expected to rise significantly faster than the rate of inflation. Mr. Bush defended his $80 billion request for Iraq in a written statement on Tuesday - he had no public events where he could be questioned about it by reporters - saying "our troops will have whatever they need to protect themselves and complete their mission." But on Capitol Hill, Democrats made clear that while the $80 billion was likely to be approved, they would use the debate on it to question Mr. Bush's war strategy, just as they have done with the confirmation hearings for Condoleezza Rice, the nominee for secretary of state.The White House made no estimate of the cost of the war beyond the next year, being careful not to tip its hand about how long Mr. Bush expects American troops to remain. But on Monday, Lt. Gen. James J. Lovelace, the director of Army operations, said that the Army was operating on the assumption that the number of American troops in Iraq would remain above 100,000 through 2006. One military expert who has been briefed by the Pentagon said on Tuesday that part of the $80 billion would be used to establish more permanent military bases in Iraq, assuming the new Iraqi government permits a long-term American military presence. The Congressional agency estimated that the war in Iraq and other military operations against terrorism could cost $285 billion over the next 5 years.Democrats quickly seized on the administration's announcement and the new Congressional deficit report, accusing Mr. Bush of making a bad fiscal situation worse by pushing for permanent tax cuts at a time of war. "The administration remains in denial about these fiscal results," said Representative John M. Spratt Jr., Democrat of South Carolina and the ranking Democrat on the House Budget Committee.In contrast to the White House budget forecasts, which extend only 5 years, the Congressional projections look ahead 10 years and include many of Mr. Bush's most costly initiatives. For example, extending his tax cuts adds little to the deficits over 5 years but would add $1.8 trillion over 10 years. Preventing an expansion of the Alternative Minimum Tax, a parallel tax that was designed to prevent wealthy people from taking advantage of loopholes, would cost about $500 billion.Administration officials dispute the notion that creating private Social Security accounts would be as expensive as it first appears. They argue that the government would eventually save at least as much money as it spends by lowering the cost of future benefits to retirees. The government, however, might have to borrow as much as $100 billion a year over the next 20 years to pay full benefits to existing retirees, as even the administration has begun to acknowledge.Even without any changes to current law, the Congressional agency predicted that annual interest costs on the federal debt would almost double from $160 billion last year to $314 billion in 2012. That would be about six times what the federal government spent last year on education.White House officials provided few details about how they want to use the $80 billion in supplemental war costs that Mr. Bush plans to request.A senior administration official said on Tuesday that about $75 billion would go for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, and would come on top of $25 billion that Congress already appropriated for the first few months of this fiscal year, which began on Oct. 1.Much of the request, which is a big jump from last year, is to cover rapidly rising costs of repairing and replacing equipment. Many soldiers and their families have complained about a shortage of properly armored vehicles. But Pentagon officials have been struggling even more with the wear and tear on tanks and weapons that are being used constantly in grueling conditions.One official said on Tuesday that Bradley fighting vehicles were being driven about 4,000 miles a year in Iraq, six times their normal mileage.The administration also intends to spend about $1 billion on technology and equipment to fend off "improvised explosive devices," the roadside bombs that have killed hundreds of American soldiers and many more Iraqis over the last year.About $5 billion of the $80 billion would be used on programs like financial aid to Palestinians as they try to build a democratic government and a heavily fortified embassy in Iraq for the State Department.Administration officials predicted they would spend about $35 billion of the emergency request this year, and the balance in 2006 and later.The biggest fiscal problem confronting Mr. Bush is that more than 80 percent of the $2.3 trillion federal budget is currently off-limits for cutting. More than two-thirds of the annual budget goes to mandatory entitlement programs, mainly Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare.More than $500 billion will go to the military and domestic security, not counting the extra money being spent in Iraq and Afghanistan. Administration officials want to increase financing for the military and domestic security above the rate of inflation for the foreseeable future.That leaves less than $500 billion for all the other discretionary domestic programs, like space exploration, education and tax collection. Administration officials hope to freeze that spending at current levels, which would lead to real cuts after adjusting for inflation. But that, according to the Congressional Budget Office, would save only about $9 billion a year.David E. Sanger and Eric Schmitt contributed reporting for this article.

January 26, 2005CAMPAIGN Insurgents Vowing to Kill Iraqis Who Brave the Polls on SundayBy DEXTER FILKINS BAGHDAD, Iraq, Jan. 25 - The black sedan made its way down Madaris Street, the young men inside tossing leaflets out the window."This is a final warning to all of those who plan to participate in the election," the leaflets said. "We vow to wash the streets of Baghdad with the voters' blood."Thus was the war over Sunday's nationwide elections crystallized in a single incident on Tuesday in Mashtal, an ethnically mixed neighborhood on the eastern edge of Baghdad, where many Iraqis say they would like to vote, and where a small, determined group of people are doing everything they can to stop them.The leaflets, like many turning up on sidewalks and doorsteps across the capital, were chilling in their detail: they warned Iraqis to stay at least 500 yards away from voting booths, for each would be the potential target of a rocket, mortar shell or car bomb. The leaflet suggested that Iraqis stay away from their windows, too, in case of blasts."To those of you who think you can vote and then run away," the leaflet warned, "we will shadow you and catch you, and we will cut off your heads and the heads of your children."The effect of such intimidation across the country will not be known until Sunday. Estimates vary, but Iraqi officials say they will be pleased if the nationwide turnout reaches 50 percent of the 14 million eligible voters. In some areas, like the Sunni-dominant cities of Ramadi and Falluja, even a meager turnout would be welcomed.In Madaris Street, the men in the black sedan got a hostile reception: Iraqi police officers spotted the car and opened fire, killing two of the men, residents said. The rest got away, after killing three officers.Guerrilla groups have vowed to step up attacks to disrupt the voting. On Tuesday, in Al Jededa, in southeast Baghdad, gunmen shot and killed Qais Hashem al-Shamari, a senior judge in the Justice Ministry, as he drove to work, and wounded one of the judge's guards. Ansar al-Sunna, one of the most active insurgent groups, took responsibility for the attack in an Internet posting, claiming that the murder of Judge Shamari "would make God and the Prophet very content.""Our heroes ambushed one of the heads of infidelity and apostasy in the new Iraqi government," the statement said.Among the operations Ansar al-Sunna has claimed responsibility for is the suicide bombing last month of a mess tent in Mosul that killed 21 people, including 18 Americans, and wounded 69 others.American commanders and Iraqi officials say they are preparing for a surge in attacks leading up to election day. Some are predicting that the worst of the attacks could happen before Sunday, when streets around the country will be closed to almost all vehicular traffic and an 8 p.m. curfew will go into effect.On Tuesday the Islamic Army of Iraq, another insurgent group, called on its followers to unleash attacks to disrupt the elections. "O brave mujahedeen! O lions! O people of zeal! Go and fight and God will be with you," the group said in an Internet posting. In the fighting around Baghdad on Tuesday, a total of 11 Iraqi police officers were killed and 9 were wounded, hospital officials said. One battle unfolded on Madaris Street, less than three hours before the black sedan came, when a bomb exploded in a school that was designated one of the capital's 1,200 polling sites. Schools will serve as polling sites across the country. American soldiers also found and defused a bomb near a primary school in western Baghdad.In other aspects of the insurgency, an American taken hostage in November appeared on a videotape and pleaded for his life, according to news agencies.The American, Roy Hallums, who was kidnapped during an assault on his compound in the Monsour district, sat cross-legged in front of a dark background, according to The Associated Press and Reuters. As he spoke, the barrel of an assault rifle hovered inches from his head. The tape is the first to have surfaced of Mr. Hallums since he and five colleagues at a Saudi Arabian food contractor were taken from their compound on Nov. 1. Four have been freed; Robert Tarongoy of the Philippines is still missing. In the tape, Mr. Hallums appealed to Arab leaders, including Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi of Libya, to help save him. "I have been arrested by a resistance group in Iraq," Mr. Hallums said. "I am asking for help because my life is in danger, because it has been proved that I work for American forces."On Madaris Street on Tuesday, the threatening anti-election leaflets had an uncertain effect. Residents said they did not support the guerrillas, but some said they were terrified at the violence that election day might bring."I want to vote," said Khalidayah Lazem, a 40-year-old Sunni, standing outside her home. "But as you can see, the situation is getting worse. We see these leaflets every day."Most of the Iraqis interviewed expressed disapproval for the insurgents. They said the men in the black sedan, for instance, had come from outside the neighborhood. And while some, like Ms. Lazem, were clearly frightened, others said they planned to vote, whatever the price. "We are not afraid of these leaflets," said Mohammed Adel, 24. "I must go to the polling center to vote. I want security and stability for my country."A spokesman for Iraq's Electoral Commission said Tuesday that results would probably be known about 10 days after election day. In other military news, American officials said six soldiers had been killed Monday in separate incidents in and around Baghdad. Five soldiers with the Army's First Infantry Division were killed Monday night when a Bradley armored personnel carrier rolled into a canal during a sandstorm near Khan Bani Saad, northeast of the capital, the military said. Another soldier died from wounds from a roadside bomb.Also Tuesday, Prime Minister Ayad Allawi refused to set a date or a timetable for the withdrawal of American forces from Iraq. Dr. Allawi is running for the national assembly and is a possible candidate for prime minister. Some candidates have suggested that if they were elected, they would set a timetable for the pullout of American forces."Others spoke about the immediate withdrawal or setting a timetable for the withdrawal of multinational forces," Dr. Allawi said. "I will not deal with the security matter under political pretexts and exaggerations that do not serve Iraq and its people."

today's papersHole-y Cow!By Eric UmanskyPosted Wednesday, Jan. 26, 2005, at 1:20 AM PT
The New York Times, Los Angeles Times, and USA Today lead with the White House widening its estimate of the current budget deficit to $427 billion, $15 billion more than last year. The president earlier had promised to halve the deficit by the end of his term. The Washington Post fronts the deficit but leads with Democratic senators swinging at Condoleezza Rice during more hearings. "I really don't like being lied to repeatedly, flagrantly, intentionally," said Sen. Mark Dayton of Minnesota. "It's wrong; it's undemocratic; it's un-American; and it's very dangerous." The Wall Street Journal goes high with the latest from Iraq, where according to early morning reports a Marine transport helicopter has crashed. No word on casualties. The military also announced that one GI was killed by a roadside bomb near Baghdad. A senior Iraqi judge was assassinated, and the LAT says five Iraqi police and soldiers were killed during fighting in Baghdad. Insurgents also released a video of an American hostage, contractor Roy Hallums, pleading for his life.
The higher-than-forecast red ink is partially a result of war appropriations. The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, which put out a similar deficit estimate yesterday, also cited late-year spending increases and tax cuts. The congressional number-crunchers also flagged a "deteriorating" long-term budget outlook. They said that making the president's tax cuts become permanent, as the White House has called for, would add about $2 trillion to the hole over 10 years. (The NYT has a nice chart of the different projections.)
As a percentage of GNP, the deficit is apparently a smidge lower than last year and much lower than the Reagan-era bloat. Not that USAT, the LAT, or Post care much. The WP's headline is typical: "RECORD '05 DEFICIT FORECAST."
The Post notices the money allocated for the war(s)—Afghanistan and Iraq—has been increasing a bit each year: $78.6 billion in 2003, $88 billion in 2004, and now $105 billion ($80 billion newly requested plus $20 billion already in the pipeline).
Yesterday, TP wondered if anybody could get the administration to explain how the $80 billion will be divvied up. Today's Post says "administration officials refused" to do so. One "senior official," though, did tell the papers that the war in Iraq is running $4.3 billion monthly and Afghanistan $900 million.
The NYT's budget piece has this iffily sourced morsel: "One military expert who has been briefed by the Pentagon said on Tuesday that part of the $80 billion would be used to establish more permanent military bases in Iraq, assuming the new Iraqi government permits" it.
Knight Ridder notices that the Shiite coalition likely to win the election has backtracked from saying it will demand a deadline for the U.S. to withdraw. The second item on its campaign platform used to call for "setting a timetable for the withdrawal." Now it says, "The Iraq we want is capable of protecting its borders and security without depending on foreign forces."
The NYT off-leads threats to potential voters. "To those of you who think you can vote and then run away," one flyer warned, "we will shadow you and catch you, and we will cut off your heads and the heads of your children." Some unknown number of the Iraqis the Times spoke with said they're voting anyway. "We are not afraid of these leaflets," said one man.
A Post piece about the U.S.-funded training of (all) political groups, gives a similar sense of determination. Minutes after a bomb exploded outside the building for one scheduled training session, nearly all those who were invited showed up anyway. "They were waiting outside in the smoke and the wreckage and the body parts," said one trainer. Citing a U.S.-funded poll, the WP says 80 percent of Iraqis plan on voting. (It would have been helpful if the paper had noted that the poll, which excluded the two most restive provinces, pegged the number of Sunni very or somewhat likely to vote at 53 percent.)
In a piece about how utility shortages are affecting the election campaign, the NYT notes that Iraq's electricity supply has been "plummeting," from a November high of 5,300 megawatts—20 percent more than prewar levels—to 3,500 megawatts earlier this month. (A gas shortage has followed basically the same timeline.)
Editorials in both the Post and NYT urge senators to vote down Alberto Gonzales' nomination for attorney general. The WP has the meatier take. After noting that Gonzales was "vague, unresponsive and misleading" during his hearing, the paper says he was much clearer in his followup written responses:
According to President Bush's closest legal adviser, this administration continues to assert its right to indefinitely hold foreigners in secret locations without any legal process; to deny them access to the International Red Cross; to transport them to countries where torture is practiced; and to subject them to treatment that is "cruel, inhumane or degrading," even though such abuse is banned by an international treaty that the United States has ratified. In effect, Mr. Gonzales has confirmed that the Bush administration is violating human rights as a matter of policy.
Flashback to the NYT two weeks ago: "GONZALES SPEAKS AGAINST TORTURE DURING HEARING."
The Journal says on Page One that President Bush has ordered a "high-level review" of relations with Russia. Despite the top play, the Journal suggests it's not a big deal, noting that such reviews are "not uncommon" and emphasizing as one "top Russia aide" to Bush said, "There will be no radical reassessment."
The Post's Howard Kurtz collars another pundit sort of on the administration's payroll. Syndicated columnist Maggie Gallagher got $21,500 for doing ghostwriting and consulting on the White House's marriage initiative, which she also pushed in some columns, without of course mentioning the money. "Did I violate journalistic ethics by not disclosing it?" she asked Kurtz. "I don't know. You tell me." Meanwhile, she just published a column: "I should have disclosed a government contract when I later wrote about the Bush marriage initiative. I would have, if I had remembered it."Eric Umansky writes "Today's Papers" for Slate. He can be reached at todayspapers@hotmail.com.Article URL: http://slate.msn.com/id/2112684/

January 26, 2005In Senate, Democrats Assail Rice and U.S. Policy in IraqBy SHERYL GAY STOLBERG and JOEL BRINKLEY WASHINGTON, Jan. 25 - Senate Democrats on Tuesday denounced Condoleezza Rice as the architect of a failed and misleading Iraq policy, turning a daylong debate on her nomination as secretary of state into a prolonged discussion of the conduct of the war. Even as they acknowledged that her confirmation was a foregone conclusion, Democrats assailed Ms. Rice - and, by extension, President Bush - and accused her of having exaggerated the threat of unconventional weapons before the war and failing to offer a realistic portrait of the continuing difficulties facing American forces in Iraq. The debate came on a rare day in the Senate devoted exclusively to foreign policy, and even a few Republicans used it to acknowledge the challenges in Iraq as it approaches elections next week."Hopefully Iraq will someday be a democratic example for the Middle East," said Senator Chuck Hagel, Republican of Nebraska. "But Iraq could also become a failed state. We must not let that happen." Another Republican, Senator Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, offered an uncharacteristically dour view of the region. "I don't believe we need an exit strategy in Iraq," Mr. Alexander said. "I think we need a success strategy. But such a strategy may mean taking a little more realistic view of what we mean by success."Senator Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts, one of more than half a dozen Democrats who said they would vote against confirmation on Wednesday, called the war "a catastrophic failure, a quagmire."The debate came as the administration said it would request an additional $80 billion in spending to cover the continuing operations in Afghanistan and Iraq through September - a request that is likely to receive intense scrutiny on Capitol Hill."I don't like to impugn anyone's integrity, but I really don't like being lied to repeatedly, flagrantly, intentionally," said Senator Mark Dayton, Democrat of Minnesota. "It's wrong; it's undemocratic; it's un-American; and it's very dangerous. It is very, very dangerous. And it is occurring far too frequently in this administration."The remark brought a sharp rebuke from Republicans, including Senator John McCain of Arizona. "You disagree with our policy in Iraq," he said in an interview. "I understand why people do it, but to challenge Condoleezza Rice's integrity I think is out of bounds."The leader of the Republicans, Senator Bill Frist of Tennessee, called Ms. Rice well qualified and the mission well justified, saying: "Outlaw regimes must be confronted. Dangerous weapons proliferation must be stopped. Terrorist organizations must be destroyed."Republicans complained that Democrats were using partisan politics in an effort to delay the confirmation of the first black woman to be secretary of state. But Democrats said they were appropriately exercising their role, to advise and consent. Democrats also suggested that they believed that they had found a winning political issue in Iraq. Senator Barbara Boxer, Democrat of California, sent out a fund-raising letter on Tuesday on behalf of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, drawing attention to her pointed questions of Ms. Rice during 11 hours of confirmation hearings last week."In order to put the brakes on four more years of misdirection in Iraq and reckless policies at home, we need to elect more Democrats to the Senate during the 2006 midterm elections," the letter said. "Because after Dr. Rice is confirmed, the Senate will face many more crucial decisions in the coming months: confirmation of President Bush's choice for attorney general, Alberto Gonzales, social security, Iraq and possibly a Supreme Court nomination."The letter drew pointed criticism from Republicans. "This fund-raising solicitation crosses the line," said Senator John Cornyn, Republican of Texas. He added, "Dr. Rice is entitled to an apology."Mr. Bush had hoped to swear in Ms. Rice last Thursday, the day he was inaugurated for a second term. But Senate Democrats delayed her confirmation, after a contentious hearing in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in which Senator Boxer and Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts, the former Democratic nominee, among others, grilled Ms. Rice over the justification and conduct of the war. Mr. Kerry, who was one of two Democrats to vote against the nomination in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee last week (Ms. Boxer was the other) did not take part in the debate on the floor. Neither did Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware, the ranking Democrat on the committee, who criticized her strongly last week but voted in favor of her nomination.Dr. Frist, the majority leader, and Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the Democratic leader, both predicted a quick confirmation on Wednesday, by a large bipartisan majority.The discussion on Tuesday signified perhaps the most extensive and substantive Senate debate over the war in Iraq since the fall of 2002, when Congress voted to approve the resolution authorizing the use of force - a vote that some Democrats said they might not have taken had Ms. Rice been more forthcoming. Senator Robert C. Byrd, the West Virginia Democrat who was one of the most vocal opponents of the war, said Ms. Rice simply did not deserve to be promoted. "I cannot support higher responsibilities for those who helped set our great nation down the path of increasing isolation, enmity in the world and a war that has no end," Mr. Byrd said. His voice quivering, he offered a plaintive lament: "Oh, when will our boys come home?"But Democrats were not united in their opposition. Senator Dianne Feinstein of California warmly embraced Ms. Rice; the two are friends from Ms. Rice's days as provost of Stanford University. Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, Democrat of Connecticut, praised Ms. Rice as highly qualified. "The world knows that she has the president's trust and confidence," Mr. Lieberman said.Senator Richard J. Durbin of Illinois, the assistant Democratic leader, did not say how he would vote; his aides said he wanted the night to think about it. But with the Iraqi elections approaching next week, he wondered aloud if the vote would really reflect the popular will."We have to ask what kind of elections they will be if candidates names can't be published, if polling places can't be designated and when few Sunni Muslims are able to participate," Mr. Durbin said.Senator Jack Reed, Democrat of Rhode Island, was one of several who criticized Ms. Rice for her stewardship of the Iraq Stabilization Group, an internal committee that took management of Iraq policy away from the Department of Defense and centralized it in the White House.In October 2003, Mr. Reed said, Mr. Bush "announced the formation of the Iraqi Stabilization Group because it was obvious the present policy was not working.""And Dr. Rice was named to head that group," he said. "Well, there has been no product of this committee, no impact on policy, a void in terms of what it has done. This raises serious questions in my mind."Senator Carl Levin, Democrat of Michigan, said voting to confirm Ms. Rice would be "a stamp of approval for her participation in the distortions and exaggerations of intelligence" that the administration used in the prelude to the war.But Mr. Cornyn of Texas said Ms. Rice could not be blamed. "The truth is we were all misled by erroneous intelligence," he said
Share this picture:
http://vegasmike433.yafro.com/photo/8035126