Pray4Iraq

Iran's offer of peace and the US's Hubris.

2006-05-26T15:33:00.000+01:00

Apologies for the sporadic posting. The exams are almost over!

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

According to Gareth Porter of Antiwar.com, back in 2003 Iran had offered peace to the United States and Israel in return for security assurances from the US. Unsurprisingly, the offer came in April or May of that year, just weeks after the US military had strolled to Baghdad.

Iran blinked when they offered peace but the US was too arrogant to realise it. They took it as a sign of weakness and set their sites on marching to Tehran from Baghdad. Saddam's army had folded in 3 weeks so the Iranians would be no great shakes. However now, after 3 years of being softened up by the sunni arab Guerilla insurgency in Iraq, they are in no fit state to step into the ring with Iran.

While the US is the stronger and heavier fighter who undoubtedly can still cause damage to its lighter opponent, it steps into the ring with weak knees. Under normal circumstances Iran may have folded under a US bombing campaign, but with 150,000 US hostages in iraq as Iraqi blogger Riverbend put it, they will be supremely confident of hurting the US.

Also, the mess that is iraq has detered any Anti-regime elements in Iran from working against the state. As bad as they see things, there is no way they want the chaos to be found next door. The people will rally around the flag instead of turning against their leaders. What the US hasnt grasped is the strong Iranian nationalism that seems to transcend ethnicity or political ideology. EVERY iranian ive spoken to from Khomeinists to shah loyalists, insist that Iran has the right to a nuclear programme, which of course they do under international law.

The reason iraqis allowed the invasion was because the Baathist regime had treated them so horrendously. The clerics in Iran, love them or hate them, simply havent engaged in that sort of oppression, nor do I believe is it their intention to. For an "axis of evil" state, its political landscape is quite diverse, as opposed to Saddams strict idol worship state. If america thinks that internal opposition to the Iranian clerics is similar to that faced by saddam, they are grossly mistaken.

They would do well to ignore the sun soaked exiles in LA and the Manucher Ghorbanifars' of this world, when they tell the Bush Administration that they will be greeted by cheering crowds. Otherwise, as Juan Cole rightly points out, Arlington cemetary will have a busy century.

Anti-Racist rally, London 29/04/06

2006-05-03T21:16:00.000+01:00

Anti-Racism rally, Trafalgar Square, london 28/04/06

The recent increased focus on the British National Party (BNP) has caused fears amongst some that the racist group are about to make a breathrough on the political scene in the UK, in this weeks local elections. Labour MP and Cabinet Member Margaret Hodge warned that the BNP could command as much as 80% of the votes in Barking, a district in East London, whilst think-tanks and policy groups have also warned of the BNP's potential victory in some areas, as the party fields a record number of candidates to contest the elections.

However, last saturday the youth of England came out in force to show exactly what they thought of the BNP and their racist platform. At an event organised by the 'Love Music Hate Racism' (LMHR) organisation, Trafalgar Squared rocked and skanked to the delight of the 45,000 people who had turned up. The rally, which doubled up as a free concert, was supported by Trade Unions and other anti-racism movements, which were trying to encourage people to come out and vote on May 4th in order to halt the BNP in their tracks.

As the square basked in sunshine, a mix of 'urban' and 'indy' acts took the stage, playing to the equally mixed crowd. The organisers of the event had very deliberately catered for the different genres of music which have captured the imagination of today's youth, and it worked a treat. The Heartless Crew, Roll Deep and energetic young rapper Akala represented for the 'urban' youths, while the 'suburban' kids rocked out to the Mentalists, the Paddingtons and a Babyshambles missing their infamous front-man Pete Doherty. Doherty was arrested on the morning of the concert for allegedly injecting a female fan with Heroin, with pictures of his apparent crime splashed all over the pages of the Sun 'newspaper'.

Regardless, the show went on, with Lethal Bizzle being the best performer by far. As he knocked out his crowd pleasers like 'Shame' and 'Pow', the whole crowd sung along in unison. What was striking about this concert was the way so-called 'skaters' and 'rudeboys' had managed to come together and really get into the spirit of things. The 'rudeboys' moved their heads to the 'indy' artists and the 'skater' kids moshed and crowd-surfed enthusiastically to Lethal and the other 'urban' acts. It was a real sign of hope that Britain's youth, be they black, white, asian, jewish, muslim, hindu or anything else, had managed to come together and unite against the fascism and hatred of the BNP.

There were the obligatory speakers, ranging from trade unionists and politicians to a spokeswoman from the Muslim Council of Britain and a Gay rights activists, and 'f**k the BNP' was the chant of the day. Despite any differences anyone may have had before hand, they all managed to put it all aside for this very worthy cause. In these dark days of the War on Terrorism, the illegal war in Iraq, ID cards and increasingly polarised societies everywhere, this show of youthful unity and love provided a searing ray of hope that there will be a better future for us all. The sooner the grown up's can learn from the kids and get their act together, the better.

P.S. a special mention must go out to the young mixed-race rapper who performed a song about the discrimination faced by Irish people at the hands of the British Establishment. The emotional and heartfelt performance, which talked about innocent people being labeled 'IRA' and 'terrorists', is similar to the plight faced by muslims today. If anyonewas there around 2pm and knows the artists name, let me know!

Anti-Racist rally, London 29/04/06

2006-05-01T05:22:00.000+01:00

Apologies for the lack of posts in recent weeks, end of year exams have been eating up my time!

Will have a full report on the Anti-Racism rally/concert in London on saturday up later today.

Ali Al-Adeeb a possible compromise candidate?

2006-04-07T22:00:00.000+01:00

Baghdad: Sources in Baghdad suggested late friday that the deadlock in the Iraqi political process could be eased with the winners of December's elections, the Shia UIA, putting forward a compromise candidate, Ali Al-Adeeb of the Dawa Party, for the post of Prime Minister.

Incumbent Prime Minister Ibrahim Jafari has faced opposition for a second term from the Kurds and the Sunni arabs, despite winning an internal party vote against Adel Abdel Mahdi, a formerly secular Baathist and Maoist who has now turned Islamist. Mahdi called for Jafari to step down earlier this week and it was feared that this act of political betrayal may have caused a split in the shia list between Mahdi's SCIRI and the Sadrists who had supported Jafari's bid for a second term.

It has been reported that tensions have been high in the holy cities of Kerbala and Najaf, where Muqtada Sadr's Mahdi Army and SCIRI's Badr Brigades have engaged in low-level clashes. This is on top of the increasing tensions between Sadr and the US army. The occupying force attacked a Husseiniyeh, a shia place of worship, last Sunday and killed 37 unarmed worshippers, thought to be supporters of Anti-US Cleric Sadr.

Jafari is easily the most popular politician on the street and his impending exit will be a hard pill to swallow for democrats all over the country, thousands of whom came out during the week to protest against the US backed effort to oust Jafari. According to the source, Mahdi's own demise is linked to those in the shia list, many of them SCIRI members, who remember his role in the theft of Billions of Dollars from Iraq's defence budget in 2004. When former Baathist Ayad Allawi was Prime Minister, his Defence Minister, Hazem Shallan embezzled $1.4Billion dollars from the procurement budget. Mahdi was the finance minister at the time and he oversaw all the transactions which took place. Although no evidence has been offered to suggest Mahdi benefitted personally, this scenario has apparentely highlighted his incompetence, and has led many to doubt whether he could handle the demands of the top job.

The UIA official, who is close to the negotiations, said that talks were under way to produce a compromise candidate. Ali Al-Adeeb of the Dawa Party has been suggested and it is thought that he commands the respect of SCIRI, Dawa and the Sadrists as well. A united Shia list will be one step to the formation of a new government, which Iraq's bleeding people are crying out for to end their suffering. The source of everything evil in Iraq today, as far as the Iraqi people are concerned, is the illegal occupation and the sooner that is concluded, the sooner this battered and bruised nation can rebuild itself.

US interfering in Iraqi Affairs.

2006-03-29T02:55:00.000+01:00

US Ambassador to Iraq, Zalmay Khalilzad, has apparently passed a message on to the shia list that President Bush himself will not accept Jafari as Prime Minister. It is indeed unnacceptable for the US to involve itself in Iraq's affairs in this way, especially with the shia list furious over the murders of around 20 worshippers at a baghdad mosque by the US army earlier this week, although with 133,000 US troops stationed in the country it shouldn't come as a surprise that the US is making a mockery of Iraq's sovereignty.

Some shia are refering to Zalmay Khalilzad's current one-sidedness in his approach to them as being an indicator of 'The second great US betrayal', with the first betrayal being the US leaving Saddam to slaughter the shia back in 1991, after Bush I had called on them to rise up. Indeed, the succesful sunni insurgency has made the US rethink their approach to the Iraq situation and there has now been a convergence of US-Sunni interests. However, they are trying to mollify the sunnis at the expense of the shia and it is a risky game they are playing. The success of the minority sunni's tactic of bombing their way back to the negotiating table is down, in no small part, to the fact that they made up the majority of Iraq's military class under Saddam and thy have utilised their expertise to deadly effect.

But the shia have organised militias, some trained by Iran, like the Badr Brigade, and some with previous experience of battle against the US, like Moqtada Sadr's Mahdi Army and their sheer number should surely put the US off antagonising this community. Indeed Badr's political wing, SCIRI, have called for Khalilzad to be expelled from Iraq and other members of the shia political elite have called on the US to hand security responsibility to them. If indeed Bush has deemed Jafari to be unacceptable to him, he is once again showing his ignorance of the reality on the ground in Iraq. By pursuing this path of provoking the shia, he may be nailing the coffin shut on his own Iraq project, whatever that was. To this day, it is still unclear as to why he really invaded Iraq. Was it to bring democracy to Iraq and empower the shia islamists? Not likely. Was it to disarm Saddam of his WMD's? They have been proved to be a myth.Was it to make Iraq a long-term base for US imperial goals? How long does he think the Iraqi people will tolerate the occupation, especially when he prods the majority of it's population the way he is doing through Khalilzad? Some say his only goal was to bring sectarian strife and chaos to Iraq. If so he has succeeded. However his own armed forces, and much more importantly, the Iraqi people may pay a huge price in blood for doing so.

Islam in Rwanda

2006-03-19T19:23:00.000Z

despite all the lies about Islam in the media, this report shows how Islam has helped many people in the aftermath of the genocide a decade ago.

The pictures are very powerful.

EX UN man says iraq less safe.

2006-03-03T20:23:00.000Z

According to John Pace, a former UN official who worked in Iraq, the country is less safe than it was under Saddam. Apparently, now all aspects of Iraqi society are targets as opposed to before when at least sunnis and baath party members were safe.

I see. So it was better before when only shia and kurd were being killed, but now that the sunnis have been brought down from their perch its only bad now. I suspect when he was in Iraq he spent most of his time with the ethically bankrupt foreign jounalists who equate the shia militias with sunni terrorists. There is no moral equivalence between the conduct of the insurgents and the militias who are protecting their community where the US has failed. Even to this day, the shia clergy are restraining their followers whereas the sunni Association of Muslim Scholars dares to blame Ayatollah Sistani for the recent upsurge in violence. To be sure, those who attacked sunnis indiscriminately in the aftermath of the Al-Askariyah bombing should be punished for their behaviour but the outside world should understand that the shia have been victims of a massive provocation. 1400 years of pain for the shia and the world remained silent, and the Iraqi sunnis have been victims to an illegal US occupation (just like every other iraqi) and now the world wants to talk about human rights abuses?

Cry the sunnis a river if you wish... it will be a river mixed with thousands of years worth of shia blood.

End attacks on sunnis NOW.

2006-02-23T18:45:00.000Z

(left) A member of Muqtada Sadrs Mahdi Army stands guard outside a sunni mosque in the mainly shia town of Basra.

After the apocalyptic events of yesterday, there have been reports of well over 130 sunni being killed in reprisal attacks.

THESE MUST STOP IMMEDIATELY.

We are muslims first and foremost. The Sunna of our Holy Prophet (saw) does not teach us to be angry and to let rage cloud our judgement. Our Holy Imams (as) whose graves were desecrated in such an evil manner would also NOT want to see innocent blood spilt as a result of this.

The shia have shown ourselves to be the most patient peoples in the world, bar none. Our doctrine demands violence only in self defence, and even then it MUST be controlled. Surely Allah (swt) does not like those who exceed the limits laid down in the Holy Books. We are cleaner than those who committed this act, whoever it was, and to stoop to their level is to betray our core beliefs and makes us weak.

But it is vital for outsiders to understand that in Iraq we have been the victims of genocide of 35 years, some would even say over 1400 years. For the last 3 years we have been targetted by the arrogant ones, in a shameless manner, our Imams beheaded, our children killed, our mosques bombed, our leaders assassinated. Like warriors we stood firm and didnt snap, but yesterdays events sparked a response from the shia that has never been seen before. There is no moral equivalence between the few shia who have attacked these sunnis recently and the small number of sunnis who have subjected the shia to misery and oppression for years.

We will not allow the Holocaust against the shia to continue for one day longer, however we must not, under any circumstances, resort to killing sunnis just because of the sins of a few who claim they are sunnis. This is not the way of the Prophet (saw), and it makes us as bad as those who committed the atrocities against us. We are better than that as we have the glorious example of Rasulallah (saw) and his Progeny. The Sadr militiaman in the photo above is following this example and we all need to do so, especially at this time when they mock our Prophets (saw) and our faith and try to plunder our wealth.

We showed unity over the cartoon insults and the enemies of Islam became scared. Now, it is an incredible coincidence that that unity is coming under threat at this time. We as muslims must not let that happen.

End of silence.

2006-02-22T19:41:00.000Z

Pray4Iraq is ending the silent protest against the gridlocked political system in Iraq to urge for Patience and peace in Iraq after the bombings today in Sammara.

Details are still hazy, however it seems that there have been revenge attacks on 29 sunni mosques, with Moqtada Sadrs militia men swarming baghdads streets to protest the bombs. There have been reports of clashes, and Tarek al Hashimi has threatened revenge for the initial revenge attacks.

Iraqis must stay calm and understand that there is no evidence that such an attack was caused by the sunnis. They must also understand the implications of a civil war. if they rise to the bait, this could lead to a one of the darkest periods of human history. A civil war in Iraq would pit sunni arab vs shia arab. this could lead to the regional powers getting involved (Saudi vs. Iran) and evetually draq in an increasingly energy hungry China against the USA.

Shia of Iraq, the future of the planet could very well lie in our hands. By following the sunnah of the Prophet (pbuh) we must stay calm and not allow anger to cloud our judgement.

Jafaari to remain PM.

2006-02-14T00:20:00.000Z

Almost two months after the Iraqi elections, Ibrahim Al-Jafaari has been chosen by the UIA to be the next prime minister of Iraq.

This is good news as it makes a unity government between the sunni and shia arabs more likely.

However the negotiations to decide the make up of the rest of the cabinet will take even more time, highlighting the gridlock that has come to characterise Iraqi politics

The protest continues... see you in April perhaps.

Protest

2006-02-02T20:58:00.000Z

Pray4Iraq will continue to be off-line until an Iraqi government is formed.

It is a protest against the system of spoils which has been used to appoint cabinet ministers. Iraqs ministries are not being run on merit by the best people for the job, but are being handed out to political groups as a reward for their performance during the elections. The Democrats in the US dont hold cabinet positions and neither do the Conservatives in the UK, so why should Iraq be lumbered with such an inefficient system? It is especially depressing, given the fact that the government needs the most skilled people it has to run the country more than ever before. Yet we see ministers filling their offices with people from their own parties, some of whom dont even have high school certificates, and Iraq's most skilled are left jobless, with many having to leave the country to find work.

The process of awarding the ministries is also wasting valuable time, as the squabbling continues. Iraqis just want their lives to be restored to some form of normalcy and the delays brought about by these negotiations arent going to achieve that. Until a government is in place this blog will remain silent.

Iraqi elections released.

2006-01-20T22:11:00.000Z

Here are the election results from Iraq's December 15th election.

Naturally everyone has fewer votes this time round due to the sunni vote diluting everyone elses.

The only thing I fail to see is how Allawi won 25 seats, when all the preliminary results pointed to him only getting 21.

Internal politics of the UIA.

2006-01-20T19:59:00.000Z

Reidar Visser writes an excellent piece about the Internal divisions within the UIA, and breaks down the actual make up of the co-alition. He cites the Sadrists as the largest bloc, with the main sadrists and fadila combining to make up 36% of the 109 seats already apportioned. Dawa unites with its off-shoots to make up 24% while SCIRI is last with around 19% of the seats.

This is important on many fronts. Firstly it almost guarantees that Ibrahim Jafari, the head of the Dawa Party, will continue as Prime Minister, as the sadrists have already announced that they will support his nomination.

Secondly, as Helena Cobban points out at Just world news, it disspells the myth that many western media outlets have spread that somehow Abdel Aziz Al-Hakim, the head of SCIRI, is Iraq's most powerful man. It's fair to say that should Jafari become PM once more, he will be the most powerful man in Iraq, perhaps more powerful than he has been this last year.

Thirdly, it puts into serious doubt, Hakim's efforts to be 'political overseer' of the UIA. This position that he wanted to award himself, which is not enshrined in any way by the constitution, would have given him the power to dictate much policy of the entire gov't aswel as the UIA. On what basis would he claim his right to take up this role? SCIRI are no longer the biggest party in the UIA, according to the article, and Hakim can do little to challenge Jafari's nomination for PM so his hand is extremely weak. Moqtada Al Sadr has more legitimacy to take up this role, similar to the Chief Whip position in UK politics, and I've argued before that he is more suited to reach across the political spectrum than Hakim could ever wish to be. He has recently declared that he doesn't want to play too dominant a role in Politics and so would probably turn down the position.

Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, the Dawa and Sadr blocs can progress with their attempts to form good relations with the Sunni Islamists, like Adnan Dulaimi and Tariq Al Hashimi. The 2 groups also declared recently that they are against any move towards a break up of the country and could form a strong enough bloc to oppose the proposed plans for federalism, as envisioned by Hakim. Hakim has set about antagonising the Sunni's recently with his comments about pushing ahead with the formation of shia mini states in the south, and he has done so just as progress is being made between the Dulaim tribe in Ramadi and the Jafari Govt. He has also tried to claim that these attempts to form alliances with the sunnis will be fruitless, and will not effect the insurgency. It sounds like he is extremely annoyed at the way things are unfolding and is trying his best to disrupt the course of events which will inevitably lead to him being sidelined.

PS. The religious Kurdish groups have also won 5 seats and this could strengthen any Pan-Islamic bloc, wishing to implement elements of Islamic Laws.

Update on Sunni-Shia links.

2006-01-19T16:20:00.000Z

As has been reported recently, members of the largest Shia coalition in Iraq, the United Iraqi Alliance, have begun talks with Adnan Dulaimi of the Iraqi Accord Front, the Sunni Islamist party, with regards to forming a government of national unity. Today, however, Al-Hayat reports that there is an attempt underway by certain Sunni groups to form a broad based Sunni coalition which brings Salih Mutlaq and his secular National Dialogue Council into the fold. These attempts are most probably the work of the Neo-Baathists who are terrified of being left behind, and are trying to attach themselves to the religious Sunni movement.

The Shia leaders must make it very clear to Adnan Dulaimi that the involvement of the Baathists really is a red-line that will not be crossed, in order for such a threat to pass. Otherwise there is a chance that the Shia will pull away from Dulaimi, and that will put paid to any hopes of a national government being formed.

Deal between Iraqi Govt and Sunni leaders?

2006-01-19T01:48:00.000Z

Juan Cole has today reported that Iraqi Prime Minister Ibrahim Jafari has struck a deal with Sunni leaders of the Dulaim tribe in Ramadi, which is concerned with security arrangements in that area of Anbar province. According to Cole's translation of the Al-Hayat article, the agreement is based on US troops withdrawing and being replaced by Iraqi troops from Anbar itself. In return the tribal leaders will put pressure on the foreign fighters who are loyal to Abu Musab Al Zarqawi. This is indeed a good sign and shows the religious shia and sunni are prepared to work together and make compromises for a better future.

Cole compares it to a similar attempt to withdraw US troops in Fallujah back in the spring of 2004. Once the US had left, the guerillas took control of the city. However, this time around there are important factors which are a cause for hope. Back in 2004 Paul Bremer ruled Iraq and his ability to ensure his plan worked was limited by the fact that he was very simply an outsider, ruling the country with no mandate from the Iraqi people. Jafari, on the other hand, is Iraq's first elected leader since Saddam's fall and has shown a strong willingness to work with the Sunni Arabs, providing they aren't Baathists, something he and other shia leaders have described as a 'red line' they are not willing to cross. Indeed his advisers have already held talks with Adnan Dulaimi, the leader of the Sunni Arab block which did the best in the December 15th elections and the two sides are reported to agree on many key points with regard to the path they want the nation to take in the future.

Also, Ramadi's Sunnis have come to the rescue of their Shia brethren in the past, when the latter were being targetted by the fanatical Wahabi followers of Zarqawi. The Sunnis set up groups to protect the shia inhabitants from the Wahabis. This shows that they are willing to work with the shia and would work hard to ensure the agreement remained in place. As the article states,

The only sticking point is the agreement to work against the foreign fighters. The majority of fighters in Iraq are Iraqis themselves, and it is uncertain how much difference any crackdown on the foreign fighters will make. The main group to target should be the secular Baathist fighters, who are attacking Shias in the hope of provoking a civil war that will give them the chance to come back to power. They are separate from the resistance, who have limited themselves to only attacking the US troops in the country, and the agreement between Jafari and the Dulaim will not affect the 'rejectionists'. The Baathists, however, need to be dealt with in no uncertain terms.

Those who continue to work against the Iraqi nation will no doubt be devastated by this development, and it is important that this agreement works, in order that both sides learn to trust each other and work together for the long term benefit of Iraq.

Still no results.

2006-01-16T11:45:00.000Z

More than a month after the december 15th elections in Iraq, the results are estimated to still be about a week away from being announced. This is probably a deliberate attempt by the powers that be to delay the announcement until the governments formation is ready and to give the impression of a swift settlement, unlike last time when it took around 3 months after the results had been announced for the government to form itself. This was mainly down to the kurds making ridiculous demands during the negotiations, thus drawing the entire process out. That course of events led to the hope of the January 30th elections being turned to despair and frustration on the part of the Iraqi people.

The next government has a gigantic task on its hands, including rebuilding the shattered economy and healing a nation being crushed by some of the world's highest cancer rates, caused in no small part by the barbaric and evil use of depleted Uranium by the US in the first gulf war.

And the task is not made any easier by the savage and criminal nature of the terrorist war on Iraq, waged by both the Baathists and the US. The Iraqi people are facing a war on two fronts and against two ruthless and evil enemies. Firstly, let us consider the US as an enemy to Iraq. As Juan Cole puts it on Informed Comment today

"The US has increased the number of its bombing raids in Iraq from 25 a month last summer to 150 in December."

He goes on to correctly point out that this tactic is not useful in terms of counter-insurgent strategy. Especially when more civilians are killed by these bombs than insurgents are. Just recently the media has been alive with reports that the US launched an airstrike within Pakistan in an attempt to get Al-Qaeda's number 2, Ayman Al Zawahiri. They failed to get him and killed 18 innocent people instead. This is happening EVERY DAY in Iraq, and will continue to happen as long as the US remains in Iraq. These acts are morally reprehensible not to mention the fact that all it is doing is feeding resentment for the US and in turn the elected shia-led government on the part of the sunni arabs. It means that the US is creating the ripe conditions needed for an all out civil war, which may well be sparked by a military withdrawal.

The other enemy, the baath party, are also trying to drag Iraq into a civil war, in order for them to make an attempt at regaining power. It is clear from the election results that they DO NOT enjoy popular support amongst the sunni arabs, as the Neo-Baathist Salih Mutlaq, and his list are predicted to have only won 11 seats, whilst the religious sunni list is predicted to have won around 42 seats in the parliament. The Baath know that if Iraq falls into a civil war then everyone will be forced to choose their sides, the fences will go up and each of Iraq's ethnic communities will put their internal differences aside and will concentrate instead on trying to annihilate the other groups. The baath, already hiding behind the cloak of Iraq's real resistance, will then be able to draw on a significantly higher level of resources with which to make its bid for power, and it will do so in the name of the sunni arabs that they will claim to represent.

It is clear that the real sunnis do not support the baath in significant enough numbers, and so the shia and kurds must ensure that they create a strong enough alliance with Adnan Dulaimi and the others like him to further isolate the baathists.

The emphasis will then be on the sunnis to stop harbouring the people who are destroying Iraq's oil refining capabilities and other infratructure and who are depriving the people of their nations wealth. Once they give this criminal element up, Iraq will have overcome a huge hurdle in its path to development. It is important to distinguish between the baathists and the resistance. The resistance are those who attack the US troops only, in an attempt to free their nation from an illegal foreign occupation and it is their absolute right to do so. The baathists are the ones who attack the shia in their mosques and their homes purely on a sectarian basis and the shia must continue with their incredible tolerance and patience to ensure that the baathists will fail.

The baathists would rather see Iraq destroyed than let anyone other than themselves rule. The Iraqi government needs to make sure that the people of Iraq understand the choice that they have. Either they stay the democratic course, which has already borne much fruit, in the midst of all the decay or they go back to the barbaric old regime, whose crimes need no mentioning. The Iraqi people cannot be allowed to lose confidence in the current order due to the hardship they are facing, because the alternative is much worse. It is upto every Iraqi, especially those living abroad to do all they can to ensure that this great nation can rise again.

Iraq-Iran-China axis?

2006-01-11T19:18:00.000Z

This is the latest article by Noam Chomsky.

The chances that this will turn out to be true seem quite high. If so it would be a nightmare for washington, as it is seriously doubtful that they spent all that time and money to deliberately strengthen the hand of China and Iran.

The arrest of Ali Fadhil & the threat of civil war.

2006-01-10T03:28:00.000Z

The Guardian of London runs with a story about US troops arresting a prize winning journalist, Dr Ali Fadhil, in Baghdad. Dr Fadhil was investigating a story about millions of dollars worth of Iraqi money which had gone missing in the hands of US and British authorities. The troops burst into his house, firing bullets into the bedroom where he slept with his wife and children. The article mentions the fact that only a few days earlier, Dr Fadhil's team had approached the Americans for an interview, regarding the findings of his investigation. The troops seized several tapes which haven't yet been released, and the likelihood is that they never will be either.

It is the seemingly small stories like this, which take place each and every day, which have led to even the top US General in Iraq admitting that most Iraqis want the troops out. The constant humiliation as a result of the occupation has taken its toll on the Iraqi people. And the US isn't the only country to come under fire. The prison break incident in Basra back in september 2005 involved UK troops, and highlighted the lack of respect that the occupation holds towards Iraq's sovereignty. In that incident, two british SAS men, dressed in Arab clothing and wearing wigs were arrested by Iraqi police after they killed one policeman. The British army then went charging in and knocked down the prison walls with their tanks and set the two men free. Around 50 other criminals escaped as a result, and the British press set about painting the freed men as heroes, despite the extremely suspicious circumstances surrounding the whole affair. It is inevitable that eventually, the Iraqi people will get sick and tired of the current state of affairs and will drive the occupation out by force. The Iraqi political and religious elite are also running out of patience and it may not be long before a call is made for the US and her allies to leave. Should this happen, the US may have no other option but to comlpy.

The one thing stopping Iraq's government from asking the US to leave now is the fear of falling into civil war. For the past year, leading Iraq observers, such as Juan Cole, who runs an incredibly informative blog, have constantly claimed that Iraq is on the verge of an all out civil war, and for the past year they have been proven wrong. The threat is very real, but to the great credit of the Iraqi people, they haven't allowed themselves to be dragged into a mutually destructive battle just yet. The Shia community in particular have maintained an incredible level of restraint, in the face of huge provocation. At the same time, the sunni arabs are producing leaders of immense courage, such as Tariq Al Hashimi and Adnan Al Dulaimi, who have entered into negotiations for a 'national unity' government.

In order for the threat to be lifted forever, the shia leadership must continue to restrain their constituents, as they have been doing to great success so far. This includes telling the SCIRI leadership to keep their militia, the Badr brigades under control. Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, being the most authoritative voice for the Shia, deserves the most credit for keeping his followers restrained. Had it not been for the tradition of the Shia to follow the rulings of their most senior clerics, Iraq would already have been in the middle of one of the worst human tragedies in history.

The Shia political leadership also have a role to play. They must make the sunni arab representation in the 'national unity' government as strong as possible in order to make the coalition solid. If the Sunni's are firmly onside, then there is every chance the Baathist and Salafi forces driving the insurgency will be isolated and defeated. At the moment, the baathists in particular, enjoy a reasonable amount of support from the sunni arab populace, and if Dulaimi and Hashimi can draw that support away from them, then it will only be a matter of time before they are defeated. A lot rests on these two men making a sincere and whole-hearted commitment to Islam, Iraq and peace. Only they can convince the Sunni people that the Baathists do not have their best interests at heart and only they can offer a realistic alternative.

An unbreakable bond between the leaders of Iraq's ethnic groups is the only way in which the Baathist reign of terror will come to an end. They feed on the divisions which have grown in the last few years, and a unified Iraq, determined and steadfast in the face of their aggression, is their worse nightmare. It is the duty of every Iraqi to strive to ensure that this nightmare becomes a reality for them.

Yet another "mistake" by the US.

2006-01-07T03:03:00.000Z

If you look down at the post named "US Army keeps killing Iraqis. Bush betrays Iraq", you'll see that i wrote about the US killing members of the same family in Baiji, in Northern Iraq, in an airstrike. I also suggested that they should have gone in with ground troops.

Well guess what? They hit the wrong house. It was bad enough when i thought a whole family had been needlessly killed for the 'crimes' of a few of its members. Imagine how angry I am now that i realise the ENTIRE family was innocent.
Had they gone in with ground troops, like i suggested (and i'm no general), they would've A) realised they were wrong and B) would've then diverted their attention to finding the people they were actually looking for. Just say a prayer for this poor family who died at the hands of the worlds 'best-trained military'.

The sooner they leave the better.

The REAL Sunni voice speaks out!

2006-01-07T02:43:00.000Z

This is from Juan Cole's Blog:

"The Association of Muslim Scholars and the Iraqi Islamic Party, both Sunni fundamentalist groups, condemned the attacks on Shiites. The AMS said in a communique, "Dozens of innocent Iraqi victims fell in the city of Karbala as a result of a suspicious, criminal operation." It added, "The AMS decries these terrorist crimes and condemns the party behind them, whoever it may be.""

This confirms what i wrote a few days ago about the Sunni Islamic parties throwing in with the political process, and they have also answered my calls (not to mention the calls of millions of iraqis) to condemn the barbaric nature of the Baathist war. The sectarian tone of these attacks are aimed at getting Iraq drawn into a civil war, but with the real sunnis on board, theres a chance the baathists could be isolated and will fail in their endeavours.

I now have a brighter hope for the future of our great nation!

The Brave "Mujahideen" fights on.

2006-01-05T22:45:00.000Z

Yes people, those courageous "Holy Warriors" are back, bravely going where no one has gone before! Firstly a suicide bomber blows himself up at a funeral, on Wednesday. Around 32 people were killed according to the report, but that number is bound to rise. Oh yeah and they were all Shia, but I'm sure you all guessed that anyway. Then earlier today, on Thursday the 5th January, a suicide bomber blew himself up near the Holy shrine dedicated to Imam Hussein, the martyr of Kerbala. Around 60 people are reported to have died so far, with the figure again expected to rise. Again, all the victims were Shia Muslims whose only crimes were their faith, their devotion to one of Islam's holiest warriors and their mourning of his martyrdom at the hands of one of Islam's most reviled figures, Yazid (although Sunni's are more reserved in their criticism of him).

How brave are these "Holy Warriors" who kill innocent men and women without remorse!

And in an act of sabotage, almost definitely planned by the Baathists, around 60 more people were killed at a recruiting station for the Iraqi Police and Army. The terrorists can keep on with their campaign of terror but it just makes the Iraqi people stronger, and makes them firmer in their stand against evil. But now is the time for the REAL Sunni arabs to stand up and condemn these cowardly and sectarian attacks. If indeed this is the CIA or MOSSAD trying to incite a civil war, then the Sunni's need to stand up and show that they are on the side of the righteous and that they condemn this poison.

look at these pictures.

I chose to go to the BBC because the other pictures I've seen online are too disturbing. (Not that these aren't).

US Army keeps killing Iraqis. Bush betrays Iraq.

2006-01-03T22:25:00.000Z

According to Reuters 14 Iraqis were killed in a US Army airstrike on Tuesday If these people were indeed insurgents then why not go in with ground troops? This way they ensured the deaths of children and women and gave more fire to the insurgency! This Indiscriminate murder of people just shows that america doesnt give a damn about ordinary Iraqis. all they are interested in is their own pockets. the more bombs they drop, the more demand there is for the big defense corporations to keep making more weapons, thus keeping the american oligarchs rich. The US taxpayer pays with his money, and the Iraqi citizen pays with his blood.

And Bush's announcement that Iraq is to receive no more money for reconstruction (AFTER THEIR OFFICIALS STOLE MOST OF IT!) just highlights my point.

The sooner these murderers get their troops out of Iraq, the better.

Will Iraq's next President be Arab again?

2006-01-03T02:50:00.000Z

There is much talk in Iraq these days about the possible make up of the next Iraqi Government, and one issue which has been given very little attention until now is the identity of Iraq's new President. More talk has been about who will fill the more important position of Prime Minister, as that is the office where the real power lies within post-Saddam Iraq. Now that Ibrahim Jafari seems certain to remain in that position, people are asking whether Jalal Talabani, Iraq's first kurdish President will stay on in the largely symbolic position.

After the meeting earlier this week between Talabani and Abdel Aziz Al-Hakim, the head of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI) one of the large Shia parties, it emerged that Hakim endorsed Talabani to remain as President, without consulting first with his counterparts at the UIA, the Shia alliance. It seems that in the next few weeks of wrangling the UIA, as a matter of policy, will seek to have an arab as Iraq's President once more. This is a move aimed at re-affirming Iraq's 'arabness', and more importantly is seen as a way of building bridges with the Arab League. The fact that Iraq's President was a kurd coupled with the fact that many view Iran as dominating Iraqi politics, has left many Iraqis arabs, particularly sunni's, feeling quite threatened. This move will go a long way to addressing those fears and this time around the kurds do not hold the voting power to do much about it. It will also probably lead to a certain degree of trouble in the kurdish controlled north as Talabani will return home to find rival kurdish leader Massoud Barzani sitting comfortably in his seat as the president of Kurdistan. He has had time to consolidate his position while Talabani has been in Baghdad and if Talabani comes home trying to assert himself once more it could cause severe friction between the two.

As far as the Iraq Presidency is concerned, it will almost certainly go to a sunni and Adnan al Dulaimi is one possible choice although perhaps he lacks the statesman-like qualities of someone secular like Adnan Pachachi or even former President Ghazi al Yawer. However these last two have almost completely disappeared off the radar, and if the Iraqis want to use this move to dampen the insugency, then Dulaimi is the favourite choice. He heads one of Iraq's biggest clans, the Dulaim, and has the respect of some sections of the insugency. Should he become President, he could bring many of the legitimate resistors onside, and this could lead to the isolation of the salafi and baathist element of the insurgency.

Corruption Charges for Allawi?

2006-01-02T18:36:00.000Z

Firstly, I must correct myself (again!) on the status of Ibrahim Bahr Uloom. It seems I got it right (the first time!), and the Iraqi Oil Minister has now indeed been sacked. It seems that after I wrote 'the growing pains of Iraqi democracy', he had returned from his son's wedding and was given a compulsory 30 day holiday by Prime Minister Ibrahim Jafari. So apologies for that!

Secondly, it gives me immense pleasure to report to you that former Iraqi Prime Minister Iyad Allawi may become the subject of an investigation into the corruption which took place under his short term in office, according to a well placed Iraqi source. The High Commission of Public Integrity will launch a thorough inquiry into the disappearance of around $2 Billion of public money, $1 Billion of which is alleged to have been taken from the Ministry of Defence by Hazem Shallan, Allawi's Defence Minister. The investigation will examine whether Allawi himself knew about the thefts and whether he personally profited as a result.

The source added that the political elite in Baghdad are accelerating Allawi's demise by drawing his own political support away from him, as it seems certain that some of those who ran on his list will be granted cabinet positions in the new Iraqi Government. And Moqtada Sadr's faction have refused to enter into any alliance with Allawi, which means that there is absoutely no way back for him. Even if the US attempts to perform a coup, Allawi enjoys almost no popular support and now that his own allies are deserting him, he his rule would last abut 30 seconds.

The source also said that there have been some other very positive development coming out of the negotiations for a 'National Unity' government, one of which is an initial agreement between the Sadr faction and the Iraqi Islamic Party, led by Tariq Al-Hashimi. Also, some of Ibrahim Jafari's advisors met with Adnan Dulaimi, leader of the Iraqi Accord Front, on the day of the elections and reported a very positive dialogue took place. It seems that the Iraqi authorities will deal with the Islamist sunni's who they view as seperate from the Neo-Baathist elements of the sunni population, such as Salih Mutlaq, a former baathist, who has categorically been rejected as a possible partner in the next government. This may lay the foundations for a Pan-Islamic coalition, which will lead to a growing prominence of Islamic law in Iraqi legislation.

Jafari's path cleared for role of PM?

2006-01-01T13:30:00.000Z

Happy new year everyone!

The following is from www.Juancole.com:

"The leadership of SCIRI has concluded, according to al-Hayat's source, that the United Iraqi Alliance will direct the Iraqi government for the next four years. This prospect requires a "Political Overseer" to ride herd on all factions, within the UIA as well as without, and to resolve the big issues. SCIRI believes that its leader, Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, is best suited to head the bloc and to play this role, such that he would be considered the one to take on the "political" process. If al-Hakim were to be given this role, he would drop the candidacy of SCIRI figure Adel Abdul Mahdi for the post of prime minister, allowing it to go to Jaafari of the Dawa Party."

^^^If this turns out to be true, it would confirm what i have been predicting for months, which is that Jafari would remain as PM. He was chosen to be PM after the January 30th elections of last year as he was simply the only one qualified enough, not to mention clean enough, to be the Prime Minister. 2005 didn't see anyone new emerging as a significant force, and so I didn't envisage the UIA changing course. Jafari has had an interesting 9 months or so in the job, and now he can go into his 4 year stint as PM that much more confident of what is to be expected. Call it 'work experience'!

"The language used here, "marja`iyyah siyasiyyah," makes an analogy from the political role of the Overseer to the role of Sistani as the spiritual overseer of the Shiites. I'm not sure what is being envisaged. Is it a role similar to the Chief Whip of the ruling party in the British lower house of parliament? Or, more ominously, is it patterned more on the part played by Supreme Jurisprudent Ali Khamenei in the Iranian system? Significantly, many Shiites in Pakistan, e.g., say that Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani is their spiritual authority (marja`), but that Khamenei is their political marja`. It is an extra-constitutional office that is being proposed, but then I suppose that so is that of Chief Whip in Britain."

^^ I would imagine that if Hakim was to "ride herd" over other political factions, then this would strike me as similar to the Chief Whip in the UK Parliament, who is almost literally meant to whip dissenting MP's into line. In fact I wouldn't mind seeing Moqtada Sadr in this role, as i think he is able to reach across the political spectrum more effectively than Hakim.

Growing pains of iraqi politics.

2005-12-30T23:52:00.000Z

Earlier today, i mistakenly wrote that Iraq's Oil Minister, Ibrahim Bahr Ul-Ulum was fired, based on Al-Jazeera's description of him being 'given leave' by Iraq's government. It turns out that he was literally given leave to attend his son's wedding, as opposed to being fired. As it goes, however, he actually was a whisker away from being sacked due to him breaking ranks with the government over the raising of fuel prices. According to a source, speaking on condition of anonymity, Prime Minister Ibrahim Jafari was incensed. He had already decided to fire him and had actually signed the form authorising his dismissal when a last minute intervention on Ul-Ulum's behalf from some of Jafari's advisors convinced him to change his mind. In the UK, we have an unwritten rule, a convention if you will, called collective responsibility. What this means is that if a cabinet minister disagrees with one of the government's policies, he must either resign in protest or voice his concerns to the cabinet only, and must not publicly express his displeasure. Either Ul-Ulum had never heard of this concept or had simply been moved by more selfish motives, like distancing himself from an unpopular but neccesary policy. At the very least, it was very unprofessional of him and he can count himself lucky that he hasn't lost his job. With Iraq making the transition from dictatorship to democracy, it is to be expected that problems like these will occur. We just hope that as time goes by, and Iraq's leaders gain experience, these occurences will be less and less frequent. Ul-Ulum's acting successor at the Oil Ministry, Ahmed Chalabi, stands a good chance of being involved in the next government, despite his awful showing at the polls. The source said that, as deputy Prime Minister, he had been an active and useful member of the Iraqi government and added that Prime Minister Jafari considered him a very competent deputy. It seems like Chalabi was Jafari's prefered deputy (he had several!) and that he delegated most responsibility to him when he was out of the country. Should Jafari remain as PM, it is almost certain that Chalabi will feature in some way.
Now for some excellent news :-)
Speaking on the possible make-up of the future Iraqi government, the source added that Iyad Allawi is struggling to keep his list together, as its members are abandoning his sinking ship and are doing what almost everyone in Iraqi politics is doing these days: looking out for themselves! Allawi's list didn't win enough seats to be a force in the next parliament, so it makes sense that the people on his list are protecting their own interests and are negotiating with the Kurds and the Shias. With him being unable to keep his own house in order, it seems that Allawi's political career has finally been put to bed.
In the words of that great orator, Nelson, from The Simpsons... Ha Ha!

Two people who do have a chance at being the next Prime Minister of Iraq are the incumbent Prime Minister Ibrahim Jafari, and Adel Abdel Mahdi, one of Iraq's two Vice-Presidents. Jafari enjoys considerable support within the shia alliance and this has forced Mahdi to seek support from outside the alliance. Apparently Mahdi has sought the backing of current Iraqi President Jalal Talabani, who has expressed frustration at Jafari and has openly expressed a desire to be more than just a ceremonial president. Considering the fact that the alliance is ultimately the one who chooses the Prime Minister, I'd say that Jafari is now the odds on favourite to be Iraq's Prime Minister for the next 4 years. Jafari is seen as the one who is most qualified to do the balancing act required to be Prime Minister. Whoever accepts the role must balance the demands of the sunni and the shia, the arabs and the kurds, and the religious and the secular, as well as dealing with an occupation. The Prime Minister must also lead a government at war with terrorists who are waging a war against Iraq. These people are not the rejectionists who are fighting the US army only, they are the ones killing shias, blowing up pipelines which carry the nations wealth, killing anyone associated with the new government etc. The Shia alliance is lending its support to Jafari to be the man to lead this government, and they have confidence that he has the ability to do the job.

Chalabi becomes oil minister.

2005-12-30T17:46:00.000Z

Ahmed Chalabi has taken over the oil ministry amid an impending oil cirisis. Ibrahim bahr Ul-Ulum was relieved of his duty's by the gov't.

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/35CADFBB-7D78-4847-85E2-3E6AE80BDC67.htm

I don't know what to say except i hope he knows what he's doing, because the oil ministry is key to Iraq's development.

More shias were killed today, this time in a Baghdad bomb. I dont know whether sunnis are the ones who are massacring the shia on a daily basis but i would like to see them condemn these atrocities, if indeed it isnt them doing this.

Shias still being massacred. where are the Media?

2005-12-29T19:18:00.000Z

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L29143985.htm

This horrific story of 'sunnis' killing an innocent family of shias just because they wouldnt move out of their predominantly sunni area makes me burn inside with a rage so intense it hurts. I actually feel like crying and my chest is actually getting tight.

And where the hell is Al-Jazeera? I sometimes wish Bush had blown this Munafiqeen piece of shit television station of the face of the Earth, because you'll be hard-pressed to find this heart-breaking story on their website.
Even the BBC runs this story. Imagine that; The "Kafir-Zionist-Freemason-crusader" broadcasting company will run the story, but the "Brave-Defender of free speech-Protector of all the muslims" bunch acts as if it hasnt happened.

The hate mongers at Al-jazeera weren't slow to report the "torture" of 120 animals at the Ministry of Interior but they will ignore human beings being massacred in such an evil way. Those dogs who were allegedly mistreated by the Interior Ministry were admittedly enemies of the democratically elected government. whats the problem?

If anything this government is being too soft on the terrorists. They are just lucky that Prime Minister Jafari is a God-fearing man, because he would be well within his rights to put down the rebellious bunch in as equally a vicious manner with which they are conducting their campign of hate.
Only unity between the Shia, Kurds and the real Sunnis can defeat this cancerous scum.

Victory to Iraq.

A Confused American policy.

2005-12-27T12:03:00.000Z

Just recently I asked Iraq Expert Juan Cole about the rift in the US government over what course it should take in Iraq. He confirmed that there is a Neo-Con/Pentagon Pro-Shia faction and a State Department Pro-Secularist/Allawi faction. This rift is worrying for the simple fact that if the American oligarchs can't come up with a solution, then what hope is there for the Iraqi politicians who are trying to figure a way out of this mess? I simply do not understand what the Americans want to happen in Iraq. Let's look at the State Department faction first. Some people would have you believe that this is the 'reality based' community within the US administration. What is reality based about trying to force Iyad Allawi on the Iraqi people when nobody wants him as their leader? As Mr.Cole says on todays Informed comment, one of the myths circulating within the US is that Iraqis are a secular bunch. Once upon a time maybe, but not any longer. I think the last two election results have proven this, so shouldn't the State Dept get in touch with reality and drop Allawi like a hot potato? And as for the Neo-cons/Pentagon? On the one hand, Cheney flies in to give Ibrahim Jafari his support to continue as PM for four more years and to call for a 'Unity Government', whilst on the other hand, new figures released show that the US army has stepped up its number of air strikes, mainly in Sunni areas. Apparently, over two times more civilians are being killed than insurgents, and this is fuelling more hatred against the US and the Shia govt. How do they expect the Shia to form a 'Unity' govt with the Sunni's, when they are pushing the Sunni's more and more into the arms of the terrorists?

And why the sudden pressure on the Shias to give up their political rights anyway? After all, the Sunni's are the ones who have vowed to keep killing US troops, whilst also pursuing a political path, yet in November the US army 'accidently' discovered alleged Shia torture prisons. They attempted to stain the reputation of Jafari's government and I believe this about-turn against the Shias was an attempt to push Allawi into power on December 15th. Now that Allawi's gone will this deadly American game against the Shia stop, or will they continue to sabotage the rightful rule of the majority in Iraq?

I guess the white folk over in Washington only support democracy when the results suits them. But democracy, means the rule of the majority, and if the Shias are the majority then the US is morally obliged to accept this rule. If they don't, I predict that the Shias will finally kill off the long suffering US project in Iraq.

Civil war is Inevitable.

2005-12-26T11:01:00.000Z

With the sunni arabs of Iraq continuing their morally bankrupt demonstrations against the election results, about 1,000 shiites have come out to show their support for the Government of Ibrahim Jafari.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/25/AR2005122500745.html

The sunni's dont seem to understand that they are a minority in Iraq, and that democracy pretty much protects the interests of the majority and no one else. I don't see the point in wasting time negotiating with them as they will always demand more. They will not be satisfied until they are back in power, and no amount of talking will mollify them. They've vowed to continue their policy of terrorism whilst pursuing a political path. Many are likening them to Sinn Fein and the IRA in Northern Ireland.

As it goes the election results are pretty consistent with the populaton figures and so the sunnis really have nothing to complain about. They are afflicted with a racist mentality that has been hammered home by years of dominance over the shias. They repeat the mantra that before the war, there was no difference between sunni and shia, that everyone was equal. Well I'm sorry to be the one to break it to you but this was never the case guys. The shias were treated abysmally under the former regime while the sunnis prospered and remained silent at the persecution of the "brothers". Now that the shias are the ones in power, they can't deal with it and are throwing their toys out of the pram, to deadly effect. What's worse is the media's criminal neglect of the simple facts. They go on and on about "shia death squads" but hardly mention the brutal sectarian nature of this guerilla war. When Jafari's government took power, the sunni's war of terrorism and misery went into overdrive. They attempted to show the Iraqi people that the shia Islamist parties couldn't protect them, and that what was really best for them was a return to the old order. In order to stem the tide of death, the Interior Ministry sent elite squads like the Wolf brigades out into sunni areas to combat the violence. In late November, the US Army 'Accidently' stumbled across an Interior Ministry prison, where about 170 people, mainly sunnis, were found in a pretty bad way. By their own admission these people were actively involved in the violent war against the government, so why the fuss? What was the government supposed to do, ask nicely for them to stop killing people? They had taken part in a crippling campaign of death and destruction against the Iraqi people and yet all the media could do was hold interviews with people like Iyad Allawi, where he talked about how wonderful life was under Saddam and how bad those shias were for daring to defend themselves. And you can call me paranoid but I'm convinced that certain secrect agencies of some western nations (CIA?) were taking part in this campaign of terrorism and sabotage, in order to make the shia Islamists look bad by the time Iraqis went to the poll on Dec 15th. The ploy failed as the people remained steadfast and voted in huge numbers for the UIA, the coalition of shia parties.
Faced with such a racist and pig-headed enemy, who refuses to use any logic or humanity to resolve the crisis, the only alternative for the shia government is to finally give in and put down the rebellion by any means neccessary. The shia have shown immense restraint and patience while their mosques have been bombed and their Imams beheaded, purely for being shia. This has been down, to a great extent, to Ayatollah Sistani controlling the people. The time has come, however, to throw the Idea of a 'National Unity' government out of the window, and to face facts. Such a unity government would be good in theory if the Iraqi people had a decent and sane partner to work with but the sunni arabs have proved that they aren't any of these things.
I have already stated that the sunni arab people must isolate the Baathists and Salafi's, and produce their own independent leaders. Until this happens, then they are responsible for everything that happens in their name, and must therefore be prepared to reap the consequences of what they've sowed.

Merry xmas to everyone.

2005-12-25T14:48:00.000Z

Merry xmas to everyone! i hope you all have a peaceful day, be you muslim, christian, jewish, hindu buddhist or anything else!

Allawi killed six people? Cheney plotting coup?

2005-12-24T22:03:00.000Z

http://fairuse.1accesshost.com/news2/smh41.html

And he had the cheek to say the current government is worse than Saddam!

and maybe we havent seen the end of Allawi after all...

http://www.tehrantimes.com/Description.asp...&Cat=14&Num=001

Divide and Rule.

2005-12-24T18:20:00.000Z

It is often said that the number one rule for any occupying force to adhere to in order to control the masses is to 'divide and rule'. In the Post 9-11 world, it is alarming to find the pace with which the west has achieved this, with regard to the muslim world. Just over 4 years after the attacks in Washington and New York, it has not become uncommon for muslims meeting each other for the first time to ask 'are you sunni' or 'are you shia', even in the west. This newly emboldened sectarianism within the Ummah (the global muslim brotherhood) is referred to as 'fitna', something which is forbidden by the Holy Quran.
The Western media, 'independent' or not, contributes to this with ridiculous articles such as Nancy Youssef's:
http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/13468354.htm

The mistakes she makes are so obvious you could be forgiven for thinking they are deliberate. The title itself is ridiculous; 'Many Sunni Muslims diverting anger from Israel to Iran'. She writes as if she is speaking for the 90% of the 1.3 billion muslims who would identify themselves as sunni, when firstly she is only refering to sunni's in Iraq. She also doesn't consider that sunni kurds in Iraq hold no ill-will towards Iran. It's true that some sunni arabs in the middle east are suspicious of Iran but it's pushing the boat out to suggest that the majority of these arabs have now decided to forgive the Israelis for their crimes and are instead hating the Iranians. And even the Iraqi sunni arabs would say that Israel is the main target of their hatred. Nancy, with her suspiciously mis-spelt muslim surname (I have NEVER met anyone who spells Yousef with 2 S's), quotes TWO people. It hardly constitutes the 'many sunni muslims' her article claims to represent. I know for a fact that the sunni arabs in Iraq ultimately blame Israel for pushing this war which unseated them in the first place. Are we going to conveniently forget that the Neo-cons who pushed for this war were almost all Jewish-Americans with extremely close ties to Israel? Are we going to believe that the Iraqi sunni arabs are going to just forgive Israel for the US push to war? How can this woman sit there and seriously expect us to believe that the sunni's generally have decided to forgive Israel for everything thats happened in the last 58 years in the middle east? Her article is of such a poor standard that quite frankly I'm a little disappointed that Antiwar.com (a very good site) ran with it.
One of the Iraqi sunni's she quoted thinks that the Israelis would be more merciful than the Iranians. I'm sure the sunni arabs of Palestine would disagree. Even the most notorious and extreme arab of recent times, Osama Bin Laden endorsed the Iranian Regime and warned muslims against indulging in 'fitna' that would separate them. Any hatred of Iran is a result of arab nationalism so it would be a mistake to say sunni 'muslims' hate Iran, as this would suggest that it is a hatred born out of religious differences. Rivalry between the persians and the arabs goes back hundreds of years and I'm sure there is an element of this competition here. This arabism, encouraged by Saddam and the other arab regimes is dying out as an ideology in the face of a new-born Islamist current of thought, brought about by the 9-11 attacks and the west's response to them. Iran's new President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is currently doing his best to unite this Islamism under Iranian leadership, with his recent tirades against Israel. For most of the muslim world, only Ahmadinejad is speaking out against Israel's crimes, while the sunni arab regimes do the complete opposite by seeking 'normalisaton' with the Israeli's. This is doing plenty of good for Iran's standing amongst the sunni muslims, with Islamic Jihad and Hamas already declaring that they will attack Israel should Iran come under attack. Even Baathist Syria finds itself getting closer and closer to Tehran everyday, in the face of growing Israeli and Western pressure. But the majority of muslims aren't even arab and I fail to see why a sunni from Indonesia, for example, would now hate Iran more than Israel. Is Iran oppressing muslims? No. Is Israel? Yes. That's all there is to it for these people.
The sunni arab governments are just getting antsy because the balance of power in the middle east has shifted in Iran's favour. The majority of their people, however, are quietly praying that Iran acquires nuclear weapons and delivers a fatal blow to Israel, because they know there's no chance of their own leaders doing it. Not that this is what the Iranians would do, should they get these weapons, but im sure there are some who want to see this outcome.
I don't want to waste much more time on this blatant attempt to cause discord amongst the muslims. The article is mis-leading, uninformed and poorly-written, and to such an extent that it leads me to conclude that maybe the US hasn't limited itself to planting stories in the Iraqi media only and is indeed broadening its scope!
There have been, and will be, many stories of this nature, trying to highlight the percieved strains within the muslim community. Now while shia-sunni relations are strained in Iraq, the emergence of Iran as the voice of the muslims, will surely temper these tensions, and lead to a more unified Ummah. I just urge all muslims to ignore the nature of these articles and to remain vigilant in the face of such trouble-making.

The race to become Iraq's next Prime Minister.

2005-12-24T14:40:00.000Z

What with the UIA looking very likely winners of the December 15th elections, the focus now turns to who will become the next Prime Minister. As was reported here on thursday, incumbent PM Ibrahim Jafari is seeking to remain in Iraq's top job. He will face a challenge from Adel Abdel Mahdi, who is a member of SCIRI, Iraq's most pro-Iran party. The former Maoist, who spent his years in exile in france, is seen by Washington and London as the best hope for Iraq, now that the message has got through that Iyad Allawi's political career is dead. This support from the west may prove to be Mahdi's undoing, as the UIA politburo weighs up his credentials against Jafari's. He has been eager to sign deals with major US oil companies regarding exploration of Iraq's fields, and this is sure to work against him. Also it important to remember that SCIRI is led by Aziz Al-Hakim, and it is almost certain that any Mahdi premiership will mean a lot of decision will be made by Hakim behind the scenes. SCIRI's closeness to Iran will also work against Mahdi, especially as the nationalist Sadrists are now a part of the equation. The Sadrists clashed with SCIRI earlier this year, and Jafari had to reprimant both sides like a teacher would reprimand two school kids scrapping in the play ground.

I personally wonder whether the UIA will indeed give SCIRI the premiership in return for the interior ministry, in the hope of avoiding civil war. Many analysts of Iraq have said that if the country is to move in the right direction, then the Badr Brigades, SCIRI's militia, should be reigned in, and the Interior Ministry be given to a Shia party which doesn't have an over-bearing militia, in other words Dawa (Jafari's party). If the SCIRI lost the Interior Ministry then the only thing that could mollify them would be the Prime Minister's office. They can't have the Defence ministry as the Sunni's look likely to retain that, and swapping the Sunni's to the Interior Ministry is out of the question. The Foreign Ministry is headed by a kurd, Hoshyar Zebari, and he is doing a very good job of it by all acounts. Perhaps SCIRI could be given the Oil Portfolio, although from what i gather Ibrahim Bahr AL-Ulum is the best qualified person for the job.
SCIRI will not settle for any of the smaller ministries, and so this is the only scenario in which I can envisage Mahdi becoming PM. But i honestly don't see Dawa giving up the PM's office in return for the Interior Ministry, and i think that Jafari's standing within the party, as well as his standing amongst the country's leading shia clerics makes him the favourite to win the contest.

Rumsfeld on troop reduction

2005-12-23T09:21:00.000Z

Today's announcement from Donald Rumsfeld confirms the exclusive given here at pray4iraq, that the US will indeed scale down their troop levels. Rumsfeld cited 2 brigades were to be drawn down, and with each brigade consisting of around 4,000 soldiers, this is consistent with the figure of 7000 given yesterday.
the only contentious issue is the timing, which the Financial Times reports as being early next year, and yesterday's report put the draw down as taking place by the years end. However it remains to be seen whether Rumsfeld is witholding some information, for security reasons.

7000 US troops to leave Iraq within the week?

2005-12-22T22:39:00.000Z

According to sources in Baghdad, there will be an anouncement regarding an imminent US troop reduction, which will take place around midday (GMT) tomorrow (friday 23 december). 7000 American troops will leave Iraq in the next 7 days.

This can only be described as good news for the Iraqi people who are suffering under the strain of this occupation and may even see some insurgent groups call a truce, temporarily anyway.

Ibrahim Jafari WILL seek to remain PM.

2005-12-22T13:21:00.000Z

According to very reliable sources in Baghdad, Ibrahim Jafari WILL throw his hat into the ring for the Job of PM. He is favourite to retain his position as Iraq's most powerful man. His only real challenge will come from Adel Abdel Mahdi, a former Moaist with good relations with washington. This however may work against him, as the UIA will now comprise of more anti-US voices in the form of Moqtada sadr's followers. Also the sadrist's may feel uneasy with SCIRI, headed by Abdel Aziz Al-Hakim, getting the top job. Sadr's Mahdi Army clashed with the Badr organisation, SCIRI's militia, in the summer and there are also historic tensions between the Sadr and the Hakim clerical dynasties. This could lead to Ibrahim Jafari, a student of Moqtada's uncle Syed Mohammed Baqr Al-Sadr, gaining enough internal support to become PM for a full four years.

If the UIA enters into a coalition with the Kurds again, however, they may find troubles ahead. Earlier this year, Iraqi President Jalal Talabani called for Jafari to resign, and complained that Jafari had ignored the kurds demands. They could block Jafari's nomination, although i seriously doubt that the kurds will be successful. It is also unlikely that they will waste that much political capital trying to block Jafari's path. No matter who the UIA nominates to be Prime Minister, that person will have to work with the consent of the party, and will not concede anything Jafari didnt concede.

Ibrahim Jafari is looking quite strong at the moment, but this is Iraq and anything can happen.

Saddam complains of beatings

2005-12-22T00:03:00.000Z

Saddam Hussein today complained of being beaten while being held in custody by US and Iraqi custody. He seems to be able to make these complaints with a straight face even though his victims would never have come even close to being treated as well as he is being treated. The videos from yesterdays posting would support that.

On a more important note i have just finished watching series 4 of 24. My life is now empty and meaningless. I guess this blog will have to fill the massive void which has been left behind :-)

Allawi comes 3rd in Baghdad

2005-12-20T09:07:00.000Z

According to The Guardian website Iyad Allawi has come 3rd in Baghdad, behind the main shia and sunni coalitions. this was an area where he was predicted to do well. the paper mistakenly projects this to mean he's 3rd overall in Iraq. He wont get any votes in the kurdish north, he'll get some in the sunni west and may do ok with the secular shia in the south. but i dont see him getting more than the sunni list or the kurdish list.

Electoral Fraud Allegations?

2005-12-20T07:52:00.000Z

Juan Cole talks a little about the allegations of electoral fraud on his excellent blog, informed comment. As he knows i dont agree with everything he says, and this is one of them. While i agree that there probably were instances of fraud, i dont think it was a swidespread as some are saying. What with the security situation being as bad as it is, i dont think these elections went to badly, and if there was fraud, all sides took part in it and the blame cannot rest solely with UIA. The first source he uses is The Guardian of London, a notoriously anti-religion paper (it's secular tone is highlighted by the fact that Salman Rushdie has an article with them). And his second source is one of Iyad Allawi's allies, who is most probably just displaying symptoms of that seasonal illness, sour grapes. Victims usually contract it during the chilly post-election period.

Allawi really makes my blood boil. This is the man who accused the current government of being worse than Saddam's regime. If that were the case, wouldn't Allawi have been tortured and executed by now for his dissent? Wouldn't his family have been charged for the bullets used to kill him? Wouldn't all the male members in his family be shot dead as a warning to anyone else who wants to challenge the government? There isn't a word in the dictionary to describe this man. 'Chutzpah' is the cleanest of the ones swirling around in my head.

Anybody want to see how lovely the baath party were? Here's the people Allawi wants to bring back to power.

WARNING. THE FOLLOWING LINKS CONTAIN EXTREMELY GRAPHIC LEVELS OF VIOLENCE: CHILDREN ARE STRICTLY WARNED NOT TO VIEW THESE VIDEOS.

http://inhonor.net/videos/uped/fl_video.php?f_num=83500

or how about this one.

http://inhonor.net/videos/uped/fl_video.php?f_num=76500

granted, this is from Fox News, but just concentrate on the footage from Iraq.

http://inhonor.net/videos/uped/fl_video.php?f_num=53800

I'm very sorry if anyone was disturbed by this footage but this is what Iraq is up against today. These are the kind of people waging war on the people of Iraq.

And Allawi talks about having compassion for them and allowing them back into government.

Thanks but no thanks Iyad.

violence returns to Iraq

2005-12-19T06:49:00.000Z

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2005%5C12%5C19%5Cstory_19-12-2005_pg7_1

Again innocent iraqis are targetted, this time at the shia district of kadhimia in Baghdad. Why do we rarely hear anything in the western press about this sort of sectarian strife? lets be honest here, the shias are still suffering more than anyone in Iraq, yet all they focus on is the torture of people who admit to being insurgents. and the baathists have the gall to claim that the sunnis are being ethnically cleansed, even though they themselves massacred innocent sunnis as well as shias.

The sunnis of Iraq have to take responsibility for their future. At the moment they are being represented by either salafi extremists or baathists, and the kurdish and shia factions assume that all sunni fall into one of the two groups, when this is untrue (although some would say that the US army's policies have pushed normally moderate people into one of these camps).
http://www.mezomorf.com/week/news-9633.html

John F Burns writes a good article on this issue.
If the sunnis want to play a role in Iraqs future, they MUST condemn the sectarian nature of attacks aimed at shia holy sites and mosques. They constantly claim that before the 2003 invasion there was no such thing as sunni or shia, you were simply iraqi. The onus is on the sunnis to prove this claim by showing their solidarity with the shias and by condemning these attacks. Otherwise shia patience will run thin, and Grand Ayatollah Sistani and the US troops may no longer be able to restrain the long suffering and much provoked shia of Iraq.

Unofficial election results

2005-12-19T01:46:00.000Z

Unofficial election results are indicating that my election day predictions could be accurate and that the UIA has a commanding lead.

The key number is 138 seats. anyone who has this has a majority.

these are the rough figures, as we are still a week or two away from the final official result.

The UIA have an estimated 132 seats
the kurdish alliance has 57 seats
the sunnis have 54 seats
Allawi has around 21 (around half the number he got last time)

apparently the smaller independant shia groups won 10 seats. if this is true the UIA could absorb these smaller parties and could rule without having to form a coalition although i doubt that will happen. Hopefully an alliance can be struck with the sunnis and we can have some degree of unity after way too much sectarian bloodshed.

Prime Minister Jafaari in Najaf, Pan-islamic coalition?

2005-12-18T23:59:00.000Z

Iraqi Prime Minister Ibrahim al jafari has been in Najaf, meeting with Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani and Moqtada al-Sadr. In a joint press sonference with Sadr, he welcomed the high Sunni turnout in the elections, and told the sunni's that 'your brothers in Najaf, Karbala and Hilla have long waited to work with you'. A huge crowd turned out to welcome him, which disproves the idea that some have of Iraq being so dangerous that no politician can venture out of the Green Zone. Yes, Baghdad is dangerous but the south has been relatively peaceful, as has the north.

Look above at the picture of the Prime Minister in Najaf. See any shoes flying his way? any rocks? Does this look like it has been staged like so many of Allawi's photo-ops?

THIS is our leader. THIS is the man we trust, and we beg the West to understand that the freedom they claim to have given us must be respected. If you try to force Allawi onto the People we WILL NOT accept it. Iraqis will decide on the future of Iraq and no one else, and if we make a mess of it then thats our problem, not anyone elses.

Hopefully if the Prime Minister can secure some sort of alliance with the sunni's of Iraq then it may pave the way for a Pan-islamic coalition, and could pull Iraq back from the brink of Civil war. We hope that this is the case.

What Ahmedinejad was trying to say?

2005-12-18T04:37:00.000Z

This is something i wrote a little while ago after a deep conversation i had with one of my (Iraqi!) jewish friends...

"l was having a discussion with my friend the other day and he made a good point and it was that, had it not been for the racist white supremecist tendencies of the europeans throughout the ages, theodore herzl and the other founders of zionism would never have needed to even come up for a plan for the jewish state. for hundreds of years jews were persecuted and treated as 2nd class citizens, from london to moscow. from shakespeares 'the merchant of venice' to the all out attack of goebble's propaganda machine the jews have been portrayed as evil rats, who plot to destroy the community they live in. this, despite the fact that wherever they have gone, they have contributed so much to the communty they live in. the jews in the middle east were treated better than anywhere in the world in their 4,000 year history. in iraq the jews were the ones who built the roads, hospitals and other infrastructure. they lived peacefully among the muslims for hundreds of years. this is down to the fact that islam acknowledges that the jews and muslims are natural semite cousins, through Prophet Abraham, due to the fact that Isaac's lineage went on to become the jews and that Ismael's lineage went on to become the arabs, and hence the muslims. the natural love between jews and muslims is clear for all to see, as true islam preaches love and peace between all humanity.
The golden age for the jews in europe was in spain during muslim rule! and then in came the 'christian' white men with their inquisition, and the jews were once again being murdered. anyway fast forward a few hundred years to Hitler and you get the straw that broke the camels back. even though the Holocaust was 50 years after theodore herzl started his campaign for a jewish state in palestine, it was just what was needed for the international community to be cowered into acquiescing to all and any jewish demands. the zionists then managed to bore into their faith and use it to further and justify their political goals just like the saudi royal family is doing to islam.

Now the zionists are committing horendous acts of murder and sabotage all throughtout the middle east in order to achieve their goal of greater Israel, from the Nile to the Euphrates. but we must understand that at the root of their evil lies hundreds, if not thousands, of years of persecution, which is now being taken out on the poor palestinians and the muslims in general. the emphasis is on the europeans to do more than just cower to any demand that israel makes. even though it is understandable that the jews are humiliating the european governments in this way, the governments must use their political capital to knock heads together to get a fair result for both sides, a real peace deal that is fair to both sides. Either that or they can give up some of their land to create a jewish state. It is unjust for the palestinians to be the ones to suffer the consequenses of racist Europe's blood letting."

Maybe Ahmedinejad was trying to make a similar point, which is that Europe is ultimately to blame for the Arab-Israeli conflict. It should be those nations who pay the jews the compensation they deserve, including a homeland, and it was a huge injustice that the palestinians had to lose their nation because of someone elses crimes.

Election predictions.

2005-12-17T18:51:00.000Z

The UIA, Iraq's largest shia muslim co-alition is well ahead by all indications. the battle for 2nd place is between the kurdish and sunni arab list. Allawi is way back and may not even come 4th.

no one in iraq likes Allawi. there is this insistence in the western media that Allawi is really popular and that he will be the next PM. sometimes it's almost as if they think they know whats best for us. well to the Financial Times, which has desperately (and perhaps slanderously) been criticising Ibrahim al-Jafari for the last year, and to everyone else who thinks they know whats best for Iraq i say this:

Noone knows whats best for Iraq, except for Iraqis. WE will decide on our path and WE will decide who is the best person to lead us. It was condescending foreigners who came to enlighten us backward iraqi people about the merits of Democracy, even though WE were doing democracy thousands of years ago that got us into this mess in the first place.

you got rid of Saddam. thank you. now leave the rest to us. this election has met international standards, yet surprise surprise Allawi's camp is complainign of fraud. The only fraud iraqis are angry about is the $1.3 BILLION theft from the Ministry of Defence, by Hazem Shallan, under Allawi's reign as PM. THAT is the man the west is hailing as the best hope for Iraq.

According to the election results i think the majority of Iraq agrees with me when i say:
you can keep him.

US army in desperate shape,

2005-12-17T18:26:00.000Z

This 'Baltimore Sun' report from fortwayne.com is quite interesting with regards to the make up of the US army.

WASHINGTON – "The Army met its recruiting goal for November by again accepting a high percentage of recruits who scored in the lowest category on the military’s aptitude tests, Pentagon officials said Thursday, raising renewed concerns that the quality of the all-volunteer force will suffer.
The Army exceeded its 5,600 recruit goal by 256 for November, while the Army Reserve brought in 1,454 recruits, exceeding its target by 112. To do so, they accepted a “double digit” percentage of recruits who scored between 16 and 30 out of a possible 99 on the military’s aptitude test, said officials who requested anonymity.
Last month, the Baltimore Sun reported that the Army reached its recruiting goals in October by accepting 12 percent from these low scorers, known as Category IV recruits. The Army may accept no more than 4 percent annually, according to Defense Department rules. While officials last month disclosed the percentage accepted in October, Thursday they refused to reveal the November figure.
“We are not giving out (aptitude test) categories during the course of the year,” said Douglas Smith, a spokesman for the Army Recruiting Command at Fort Knox, Ky.
Still, Army officials continue to say that at the end of the recruiting year, next Sept. 30, the total percentage of Category IV soldiers will be no more than 4 percent.
For more than a decade, the Army kept its Category IV soldiers to 2 percent of its recruitment pool.
But last year, faced with a difficult recruiting climate because of the war in Iraq, Army Secretary Francis Harvey decided to double the number of Category IV soldiers.
“We will be at 4 percent at the end of the fiscal year, that’s what matters,” said Lt. Col. Bryan Hilferty, a spokesman for Army personnel.
The increasing reliance on the lowest-scoring recruits is troubling to former officers who fear that the quality of the force will erode.
They say that the increasingly high-tech Army needs even more qualified soldiers. And with troops facing more complex duties involving nation building and peacekeeping duties, good judgment is more important."

This shows how desperate the US has become and shows the pitiful state of the army. with the chaos in Iraq the army has been struggling to meet recruitment levels for about a year.

talk about scraping the barrel.

and this is a gem from Saudi Arabia's new ambassador to the US:

Saudi Arabia's new ambassador to the United States on Thursday denigrated in an interview with the Washington Post the Iranian president's description of the Holocaust as a myth, saying the "horrific genocide" is a "historical fact" no longer in dispute, adding that the Arab world has "made our peace" with the Jewish state's establishment.
In the interview, Prince Turki al-Faisal said "As far as Saudi Arabia is concerned, [the Holocaust is] a historical fact, you cannot deny that, and people should move forward from that."

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/658450.html

Made their peace? try telling the palestinians that.

God help us.

2005-12-16T09:00:00.000Z

i just picked this off juancole.com.
cnn has a report which says that Abu MusaB Zarqawi, the jordanian terrorist leader in iraq, was arrested and then mistakenly released.
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/12/15/zarqawi.captured/

if the most wanted man in iraq can slip through the authorities' hands, what hope is there in finding the other terrorists who do not wish to be celebrities in the way Zarqawi does.

God help us.

Ahmadinejad - Village idiot or political genius?

2005-12-16T04:41:00.000Z

Following Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Iran's President, recalling ayatollah Khomeini's call for Israel to be wiped off the face of the Earth, he has followed it up by saying that the holocaust was a myth and that Europe should pay for persecuting the Jews and not the muslims of palestine. He suggested moving Israel to Europe or North America. He kinda has a point in this regard. I personally have several Jewish friends who i hold dearly and they are saddened, like me, that Jews and Muslims now hate each other even though we have suffered more as a result of European policies than anyone else.

Many have criticised the president for a lack of political nouse, saying his inexperience is causing Iran a great deal of trouble on the world stage and is inviting an Israeli attack (apparently scheduled for the end of march). But seeing how the likudniks have been planning this attack for a while now, i dont think his remarks really change things that much. i think instead he is playing up to the muslim audience around the world, showing them that the only nation that cares about the sunni palestinians is shia Iran. what with sunni-shia tensions boiling over in Iraq, he is trying to appeal to the sunni majority to create some unity of the Muslims and is also showing up the cowardice of the sunni Arab regimes which remain silent on the Israel issue, and who are indeed making tentative moves to a 'normalisation' or relations with Israel. when the Israeli attack comes Iran will have the support of the entire muslime world and no one will even say the words 'sunni' or 'shia', it'll simply be Islam against the aggressive zionists.

Ahmadinejad's tactics are reminiscient of Saddam Hussein's in the 1st gulf war when he shelled Israel to gain the support of the muslims. He was successful in creating an image for himself of being a strong, brave leader who was prepared to defy the west.

If Ahmadinejad is successful in winning the support and unity of muslims all over the world, it could even help ease tensions in Iraq, where the sunni arabs are deeply suspicious of Iran.

Allawi's political career in ruins?

2005-12-15T19:36:00.000Z

This latest electoral prediction just in from Baghdad...

The UIA will win 120 seats, they are way out in front, with the sunni's and kurds battling for second. heres the juice though... Allawi is way back in 4th or 5th. if this turns out to be true then id say that, short of attempting a coup, his hopes of running Iraq are over forever.

News coming from Iraq yesterday says that Dr laith kubba, Ibrahim al-Jafari's spokesman, had offered his resignation in order to run for parliament and for there to be no clash of interst with the UIA. but Syed Jafari refused, saying that Kubba Could continue serving the government. Dr Kubba had wanted to run on the UIA list but would've been too far down the list to have stood a chance. so he started his own list which will probably be invited back into any governing co-alition.

Ahmed Chalabi will also apparently come back to the alliance if he gets a seat... he seems to have drawn votes away from Allawi, namely secular middle-class iraqis, and i wonder if this was a deliberate ploy.

the election december 15th 2005

2005-12-15T11:17:00.000Z

i have just voted for list 555, the United Iraqi Alliance. The Inclusion of SCIRI has given me doubts as to the independence of this list but Dawa and Sadr Movement has tipped the balance for me. Dawa is the oldest iraqi institution, if you could call it that. Founded in 1958 by the Great Syed Mohammed Baqr al Sadr, it was set up to counter the influx of communist ideology. Syed Ibrahim al Jafari, a mujtahid, heads the party today and is currently the Prime Minister of Iraq. It advocated an Islamic republic but one very different from the iranian model. The Khomeinist 'wilaya al-faqih' model would not work within iraqi society, historically quite a secular society, and Syed Baqr Sadr's model is a much more pragmatic and accomodating system. He envisioned an Islamic state based on islamic social and economic principles, where people cannot be forced to believe. Instead they should be invited/called to islam (Dawa) and should follow the faith voluntarily.

His nephew, im sure we all know about. Moqtada al sadr led 2 uprising against the US in 2004, and draws passionate emotions from all sides... basically you either love him or hate him! i cant say i love him, but his uprising showed the US that if they were to provoke the wider shia community in the way they provoked him then they would be in serious trouble. his Mahdi Army were a small militia of poor shia from Sadr City, a Baghdad Slum, representing a tiny fraction of the Shia and together with the Sunni uprising had caused more US military deaths than any other time since the end of the war. If the US went against the wider shia community then that would have been good night for their project and i believe moqtada, along with syed Sistani's more peaceful approach, helped us get the direct elections in Iraq, which have lifted the shia majority in iraq to a position we have never been in before.

needless to say his militia has swelled and is responsible for security in large parts of the capital Baghdad, especially Sadr City, named after his father syed Mohammed sadiq al Sadr.

As for SCIRI, they are a party of old time Dawa guys, created, funded and trained by Iran. it remains that way today and while i support the Islamic Republic, i do not believe it has a place in iraqi politics, and i cannot support SCIRI.

but the UIA is not just SCIRI it is the shia list, i just hope it makes serious attempts to reach out to the Sunnis in Iraq. while i wish nothing but misery on the Wahabi and Baathist murderers in Iraq today, i refuse to believe that 5 million people are all guilty. this mindset is unislamic, racist and just wrong.

Welcome!!

2005-12-15T10:36:00.000Z

hi and welcome to pray4iraq!

this blog is my place to get my message off to people about the situation in iraq, try to bring you what ever news i can as well as bringing in the views of others.

the blogosphere is full of iraq-related blogs, i just hope this one is informative!

will start posts soon but i have to go and vote!
to read more about me check out my profile!

Eisa