Cry Me A Riverbend II

What I'm Raeding Today

2010-03-13T09:33:00.000-08:00

Click Read More in the Iraqi Bloggers blogroll in the right sidebar to view the latest posts by Iraqi bloggers. Same with the "Other Blogs of Interest".

What's the Deal with Muslims and Pigs

2007-04-24T14:38:00.000-07:00

Cropped image from Cox&Forkum

I realize that pigs are unclean in Islam, but...well, lets start with this event:

Police Investigate Ham Incident At School

April 19, 2007

LEWISTON, Maine --Police are investigating as a possible hate crime an incident in which a ham steak was placed in a bag on a lunch table where a group of Somali students were sitting.

A Lewiston Middle School student was suspended after the incident, which happened April 11.

Superintendent Leon Levesque said the incident is being treated seriously and police are investigating. The center for the Prevention of Hate Violence is working with the school to devise a response plan.

The incident is the second of its kind in Lewiston in recent months. Last summer, a man rolled a pig's head into a mosque in Lewiston, which has a large Somali population. A court later ordered the man to stay away from the mosque.

Here is an article in the local Lewiston newspaper, which I think places the incident in a larger context of harassment toward the Somali students based on their religion.

Still, how an act can be a "hate crime" if it wouldn't be a crime at all otherwise is beyond me, but I never understood hate crime laws anyway.

Which brings me to the question of Muslims and pigs. Why is it that people from Islamic cultures so famously can be so gulled by pigs and pig by-products. Ham is also forbidden to Jews as well, but only for eating. No one would think to offend a Jew with a pig. He would use symbols like swastikas that carry an underlying threat of violence. There isn't the notion that Jews become unclean before God because a pig (or a pig effigy) is near them.

I offer the famous British Piglet ban.

In Texas, a Muslim congregation built a mosque next to a pig farm and then tried to drive the farmer away. So he responded by holding pig races every Friday.

These are a few among many minor incidences (we'll leave aside for now the major ones) that founds the bias among Westerners that people from Islamic cultures are irrational (that they attach a magical import to symbols and offenses), and treat them appropriately ("Don't offend them, they might kill someone.")

If I'm missing a larger issue, I sure wish someone would point it out to me.

Contrary To What You've Been Hearing: The Pro-Iraq Forces Have Regained the Initiative

2007-04-10T14:54:00.000-07:00

...or so says The Weekly Standard (hattip Gateway Pundit).

Scroll to the end of the article to read about the inflated media reports of the lack-luster crowds of Sadrite protesters.

On murder-suicide bombings:

The mass casualty suicide attacks, which have incited the Shia population to support sectarian violence in the past, have been absent from Baghdad since an attack at a Shia market on March 29th. Al Qaeda has conducted several attacks in the provinces, most notably a chlorine gas suicide strike in Ramadi and conventional suicide bombings in Kirkuk and Khalis. The Ramadi attack, the eighth chlorine attack in Anbar province, was another attempt to break the Anbar Salvation Council, a grouping of Sunni tribes and former insurgent groups opposed to al Qaeda's Islamic State of Iraq. The Khalis strike was intended to stir up sectarian violence in the mixed Sunni-Shia province of Diyala, while the Kirkuk strike was an effort to pit Kurds against Arabs in the contested and oil rich northern city.

On jihadis and insurgents:

The Baghdad Security Plan has resulted in the death or capture of three senior al Qaeda operatives over the past week.

Diyala Mission:

Multinational Forces Iraq deployed a Stryker Battalion to Baqubah, the provincial capital, and since has been conducting a series of targeted raids, clearing operations, search and destroy missions and some permanent presence missions in the Diyala River Valley north of the city. The latest operation resulted in 30 terrorists killed and another 28 captured. The raids also uncovered an al Qaeda in Iraq training facility and 25 weapons caches.

Western Iraq Mission:

In Mosul, over 179 insurgents were captured and eight killed during operations over the past week. Violence in Niwena province has increased since U.S. and Iraqi forces shifted towards Baghdad. In Anbar, Iraqi and Coalition forces are pushing outward from the larger cities and towns into the rural farmlands that snake along the Euphrates River Valley.

Shi'a Militia Busting:

Operations are ongoing in Diwaniyah, where elements of Muqtada al Sadr's Mahdi Army fled after the announcement of the Baghdad Security plan. The split in Sadr's Mahdi Army has left a large segment of that group looking to reconcile with the Iraqi government. The extremist elements of the militia have reestablished themselves in Diwaniyah, and security in the city is said to have been deteriorating ever since. The Iraqi government and the Coalition are pursuing the Mahdi Army holdovers remaining in Diwaniyah. Thirty-nine Mahdi fighters have been captured since the operation began on April 6, and several have been reported killed.

CMAR II says "Check it out".

Greyhawk @ Mudville Gazette posts on how the Iraq Liberation Critics have been rooting for the failure of the Iraq mission from the beginning

2007-04-10T07:07:00.000-07:00

Like a child re-reading her Wish List on Christmas Eve, those opposed to the Iraq mission (for no other reason than that it was Dubya's idea) have been predicting it's failure almost from the moment of commencement.

Greyhawk cites a long list of prominent reporters declaring the battle for Iraq lost within days of the start of the fighting.

Incidentally, it didn't start with Iraqi. NY Times columnist, R.W. Apple, declared Afghanistan a "quagmire" within three weeks of US soldiers arriving on the field of battle. That was October 31, 2001...SEVEN WEEKS after 9-11.

The following is probably my favorite part of the post . Greyhawk cites a March 2003 post by a "peace activist" entitled 'Bush Wins': The Left's Nightmare Scenario

But this outcome is less likely than many assume, and the antiwar movement would be well advised to plan for a third scenario: "Bush Wins."
[...]
In order to prevent such an eventuality, the movement needs to work overtime now to inoculate the American people against...the "mirage" of democracy that will likely be planted in Iraq after a short war.
[...]
Even more discouraging, when I asked a senior organizer why the movement doesn't expand the focus of protests to include regimes like Sudan's, which is prosecuting a decade-long war of slavery and genocide, she replied that she feared President Bush would agree with protesters, and use their arguments as a pretext to invade Sudan next.

That's right. Remember those complaints that deposing Saddam was hypocritical because he was not the "most evil" dictator in the world? Well, don't suppose that meant the people saying that actually wanted anything done about those other evil tyrannies. It was just a ploy.

It's past time to question the patriotism of the American detractors of the war against Islamofascism.

Anyway, check out Greyhawk's post.

Iraq Shi'a Cleric Campaigns for Secular Governance

2007-04-10T06:53:00.000-07:00

IraqPundit posts on a Shi'a Cleric Iyad Jamaleddin. His POV is no surprise if you are familiar with Ayatolla Sistani's Shi'a branch that believes imams should not be involved in politics.

Why?

"not because I'm against religion, but because I want to safeguard religion. Some politicians ask me how could you say such things while you're a clergyman. It's because I'm a clergyman that I want to defend my religion."

IraqPundit notes:

Jamaleddin, who praises the virtues of dance and soccer (unlike Al Sadr, who regards soccer as a Zionist plot), believes that Iraqi secularism was reflected in the national reaction to the Iraqi singer, Shada Hassoun. Her recent triumph on "Star Academy," the Arab world's version of "American Idol," was wildly celebrated by all Iraqis regardless of sect.

Pro-Iraqi Forces Bust Rival Shi'a Gangs in Diwaniyah

2007-04-10T06:42:00.000-07:00

The town leaders of a Shi'a town south of Baghdad requested help driving out the Mehdi Army (Sadr's gang) and the Badr Brigade who had each imposed Sharia law.

This could have something to do with Sadr's desperate ploy yesterday to call for attacks on US troops on the anniversary of Saddam's fall.

heh heh...If Sadr wants the US out, he should return to Iraq from Iran and lead the fight himself.

Big Pharoah Becomes A Great Statanist

2006-02-25T22:33:00.000-08:00

Recounting a conversation with co-workers in which they proposed that the U.S. was behind the bombing of the Golden Mosque in Samarra, he says:

"Well, thanks, you just made me a worshipper of America. I stopped believing in God. Because if what you are saying is true, then America was in fact capable of convincing thousands of Sunni youth from outside Iraq to not just kill Shias but to die in the process as well. Definitely America has supernatural power in order to be able to convince such a huge number of suicide bombers and therefore the statue of liberty and the casinos of Vegas are God. America Akbar!"

I suspect there those of you out there with an annoying tendency to apply logic to these things. You are probably wondering how it is in America's interest, after spending lots of money and blood on a democratic government and installing "puppets", to now spoil everything by stirring up a civil war. Oh, you silly superstitious logicians! Let me clue you into a recent conversation that America, the Great Satan, had with an Arab:

Arab: "But, Great Satan! How does stirring up chaos and civil war in Iraq help your ingenius evil plan to steal Iraq's oil? No one can get oil out of Iraq in all that mayhem!"
Great Satan: "Ha ha ha! Silly Arab! Don't you understand anything? I don't care if another drop of oil comes out of the Middle East. At any time, I can just have my oil companies and car companies start making those cars that run on cooking oil. I could have done that a long time ago, but I kept the designs away from the public because that would have been "good" and I don't do good. I never do good and I never let good things happen. If something good happens it is either a trick of mine or an Arab did it and I cover it up. Don't you get it? Causing trouble is FUN! Fun, fun, fun, fun, FUN!"
That's the reason I attacked Pearl Harbor and blamed the peaceful Japanese and why I caused 9-11 and blamed that famous pacifist Osama Bin Laden. Why do you think I faked the landing on the Moon? Because tricking people is FUN. Remember when Columbus "discovered" America? Even that was faked. There's no North and South American continents and there never were. If you sail West, you you'll arrive at mini-mart in Karaikal, India. (We've been calling the people Columbus found "Indians" but you gullible people never caught on. ha ha!)"
I'm not going to say who was behind that original hoax, but I will say that those Muhammed cartoons nearly blew the lid off the whole thing. I guess I got a little carried away in the thrill of it all. So I blew up the shrine to distract everyone. See? I'm always doing stuff to distract people. (You noticed, I'm sure, people all over the Muslim world stopped protesting anything as soon as they heard about it and went back to drinking tea.)"
Arab: "Wow. That's amazing!"
Great Satan: "That's nothing. Someday I'll tell you how I faked the discovery of electricity!"

The Basic Rules For Deserving and Receiving Apologies

2006-02-19T16:11:00.000-08:00

A Primer On Apologies and Culpability

Here is a truly ignorant statment about the Muslem Cartoon Protests:

Both the Danish newspaper and the protesting Muslims are wrong.

Maybe this is true, or maybe not. I don't think the newspaper was wrong considering the context as described by the editor. Even if you think publishing the cartoons was wrong, it is simply not true that they are EQUALLY wrong.

Even if you think that the Danish newspaper owed Muslims an apology on the morning after the cartoons were published, the newspaper does NOT owe Muslims an apology anymore.

Let me explain the basic rules of owing and receiving apologies:

If you are offended, you have the RIGHT to ASK for an apology. You do not have the right to RECIEVE an apology. True apologies can only be freely given.
-
If you go ape, that is, if you freak out in an outrageously offensive manner totally out of proportion to the offence, then you might even POISON the ability for you and those sharing your cause to RECEIVE an *honest* apology.

When that happens, the only apology you can possibly receive will have all the intrinsic meaning of the soothing words a cop gives to someone threatening to jump off a ledge. It is just words meant to calm down a maniac. It will never be an true apology after that.
-
Furthermore, if you act that way, then you no longer even DESERVE an apology. You deserve only REBUKE instead. And that is all Muslims as a whole deserve anymore. Why? Because their leaders and spokesmen have failed to rebuke the outrageous behavior of Muslims.

Christians call this "excommunicating". It means essentially, "throwing someone out of your community" and an excommunicated party is consigned to Hell (unless he gets a chance to repent and be accepted back into the community).

Muslim leaders haven't done this with the outrageous behavior of the protestors, or the murder-suicide bombers or others who murder in the name of Islam. They haven't stated the obvious, that martyr is killed for his Faith. He does not kill himself. They have not repudiated the belief that Paradise awaits those who offer such a repugnant sacrifice to Allah...or even declared that such an act does not weigh in their favor. Instead, the Islamic leaders and the public faces of Islam have excused and justified those actions. Consequently, Islam's banner has been hijacked by the whoever is willing to act the most insanely and brutally in order to attract the attention of cameras.

So, now when reasonable Muslims ask for an apology, it is like asking for money from someone while there is a big guy with a black mask and hunting knife behind him who is your friend. You may not be doing anything threatening, but the threat is there anyway.
-
However, simply being Muslim at an individual level does not cause your owe an apology for the maniacs protesting the cartoons. If you have always repudiated beheaders and other killers who claim to share your religion, you stand with the rest of the reasonable world: neither owing or deserving an apology.

Now you know.

What Is Wrong With the Middle East

2006-01-31T21:12:00.000-08:00

At Iraqi Bloggers Central, I've posted on the opinions of secular Iraqis about the Iraqi democracy and the recent elections elsewhere in the Middle East.

Check it out.

My Response To Khalid

2005-11-13T11:19:00.000-08:00

I made a series of posts at Secrets In Baghdad. in response to Khalid Jarrar's responses to me regarding his most recent post (Jeffery also commented on it today here). Khalid now monitors comments and blocked them giving excuses for doing so that were lies. Khalid says he now enjoys playing the dictator. Well, I don't say he is a dictator, but in order to illustrate the fecklessness of dictatorships, I'm posting my comments to him here:

Re: The Jordanian Newspaper's Report that the Bombing in Iraq killed American Forces
Has the newspaper issued a retraction and admitted that the evil insurgency in Iraq killed mostly Iraqis rather the evil Kaffirs? Or do they continue to erroneously report that the insurgency is mostly killing "occupiers". You fail to recognize that the reason Jordanians support the insurgency is BECAUSE the liked Saddam. In their case, support for the insurgency is NOTHING BUT love for Saddam in thier hearts. Just like Saddam's Orphans in Iraq.

Note: Dishonest Khalid did not respond to this.

Re: Salam Pax
Rather than address what Salam has said, you accuse him through his parents. However, UNLIKE YOU Salam was critical of Saddam before he was deposed, he was critical of him during the invasion, he was critical of him immediately afterwards, and he was critical of him ever since. He certainly didn't become an apologist for the US or the new Iraq government to do that as you would know if you read his early blog. Suggesting Salam Pax is an opportunist is either serious ignorance or an evil slur.

YOU on the other hand are Palestinian, and Palestinians DID receive benefits under Saddam that were not available to ordinary Iraqis.

YOU ALSO have given NO REASONS that make you glad Saddam was deposed...ever you haven't even mentioned Saddam's trial. That is why I say you are a Saddam apologist.

Note: Khalid promised to respond to my challenge for him to name three things that make him happy Saddam was deposed. In return, I promised to give three reasons I wish the US had not invaded Iraq. The LIAR Khalid has never fulfilled that that promise.

Re: Jeffrey
I think he is non-religious. Perhaps in YOUR understanding of your religion, YOU think gays should be beheaded. There is no reason to think Jeffrey would think that.

Then I wrote:

Khalid,
[you said:]
well i dont knwo if salam knows about this -well i hope not, otherwise he would be a fatter liar
You haven't shown a single way in which Salam Pax has lied. Even if he knew that that Jordanian newspaper had its head up its butt it would not be a lie to report what it said.

On the other hand, you stood spouting your "democratic rights" before a judge who you believe could be righteously murdered by an insurgent. So who is the real liar here??

I also wrote:

Khalid,
[Khalid said] "i talked (many times) about my opinion about kiling civillians on one hand and attacking police and national guard and the occupation troops on the other hand and the deference between them"
Unfortunately, you don't acknowledge that the same people organizing the one
are organizing the other as well.

Strange that--although you can unjustly differentiate between car bombs that kill police and those that kill civilians going to work--you are not willing to accept that harm to non-culpable people by the US forces, ING, and IP occurs because of the insurgency that targets civilians, civil servants, and utilities: who in short, are targeting any level of Iraqi society that can't get them first. They could have chosen to go after only "the occupiers" but early on discovered that would likely get themselves killed so they now hit mostly "soft" targets as this religious former Republican guard insurgent -who began organizing jihadists and Ba'athists under Saddam's orders- explains.

[Khalid said] i am just saying maybe, because if the goal of explosions is to kill civillians then the best place to go would be mecca mall for example, or Abdon mall, or any of the big malls in amman that has thousands of people in them with no security measurments at all

I think it is obvious that they wanted to kill innocents in places that were --what they ignorantly and wrongly thought to be-- American. Unfortunately (and this is the way capitalism generally works) those hotels with American names were owned by JORDANIANS. And it is typical that when your friends the terrorists attack "occupiers" they hurt mostly the ordinary people.
Why?
Because they are "are brain-less crazy men that just wake up
one day feeling like bombing themselves and killing others" because some evil
Saddam Orphan or al-Qaeda stooge told them it was a short-cut to Paradise.
The "Jordanian" as you call him is as much a Saddam Orphan as the former Republican Guard and Fedayeen Saddam that are aiding him. Saddam let him in, healed him, and sent him to the North of Iraq to conduct assassinations against Kurdish leaders where he couldn't touch them personally. There are no "good insurgents" and "bad insurgents". After the US leaves, whether the insurgents want Saddam to return or an Islamic caliphate, they know they will have to kill many many Iraqis to take control of Iraq. So they kill Iraqis now: ING, IP, their families, and ordinary people going to the wrong mosque.

By the way, Khalid, given your stated opinions about killing IP and ING and government officials, were the IP wrong to suspect you as a terrorist??

Khalid never answered this question. I wonder why??

This is some of Khalid's response:

Dear Cmar, you are about to face sentense of banning too, watch ( and wash) that mouth.you had some good point in the comments you posted, i deleted them all except one because they all had either bad language or false accusations to me. :)

Well as anyone can see now, I used no bad language. That was another Khalid (Saddam's Sausage Boy) Jarrar LIE.

As for false accusations? Khalid, say what those false accusations are and if they are false I will humbly apologize. I wouldn't want to smear the Jarrar good name anymore than what the Jarrars themselves have done already.

as for salam: he would be a liar cause he used the rumor about the newspaper to say that Jordanians love to see Iraqis being killed, and that is an unbelievably terrible lie, what does he want, an arab-arab general civil war?

No Khalid. An Arab-Arab civil war is what YOU want in Iraq after the US leaves and you have said so in effect. You don't really think the elected Iraqi government (or as you all it, "the Puppets") is going to be deposed without a fight do you?

Salam pointed out that in a recent poll Jordanians support suicide bombers in Iraq and Israel. The fact they their media consistently pretends that these attacks do not kill Iraqis is NO EXCUSE.

The fact is that Jordanian commentators immediately came out saying that the attack in Amman was reprehensible but human bombs in Iraq and Israel were great!

Salam Pax is not alone in his truth-telling. Hammorabi pointed this out as well. For you to excuse those Jordanian newspapers and Jordanian attitudes in general is reprehensible because YOU KNOW BETTER. (*cough*liar*cough)

as for the judge, when i said these thignsto him i was being sarcastic, totally, like: ( isnt this the crap you tell us all the time since the war? how come i am in prison for surfing the net then? ).i dont support killing judges or any civilian or any person that helps building the country positively. but i cleared that already haven't i? :) it's getting funny, maybe i should copy paste this part at the end of every post:) with a note "for Cmarii"

Hmm...did that judge...
[to whom you gave the following defense, when you were locked up in the hoose-gow for being a suspect terrorist,
"I was practicing my democratic right of viewing people’s opinion about a certain topic on a site that people visit from all the countries around the world to give their opinions"]
...know you were being "sarcastic"? Because if he didn't then it's not sarcasm...its a LIE.

It didn't seem "sarcastic" the way you described it. Its sounded desperate. (*cough*lying coward*cough*)

As for which Iraqis it is alright to kill, maybe you should clarify it again, because (despite what you say) I'm still having trouble pinning you down precisely except that the government officials, the Police, and the ING are PUPPETS.

So spell it out. Which of these Iraqis is it okay for the insurgents to kill, Khalid?

IP?
-
ING?
-
Government officials?
-
Judges?? (If you answered yes to the three above, why not judges?)
-
Children in restaurants?

I am hereby banning myself from commenting at Khalid's site. There is no point when he isn't even going to be honest about what he truly thinks.

My Latest Favorite Chomsky Quote

2005-11-01T11:49:00.000-08:00

(h/t sandmonkey):

"...there remain suspicions over how he has managed to become an expert, seemingly, on every conflict since the second world war; it is assumed by his critics that he plugs the gaps in his knowledge with ideology.
"Chomsky says...'the best scientists aren't the ones who know the most data; they're the ones who know what they're looking for.'"

Note that he has accepted that the criticism is true, but he has spun it as preferable!

He is saying the following in a remarkably appealing way that never would have occurred to me:

It is better to have an ideological agenda than to know actual facts about a subject.

What a great way to frame your faults! I think he might well be the smartest man on Earth!

Maybe he could give me some tips for my next interview! :D

A clarification of terms: Bloghdad

2005-10-27T09:27:00.000-07:00

This is a term I am coining as of this moment to describe blogs devoted to the situation in Iraq.

Iraqi blogosphere just wasn't cutting it.

Bloghdad obviously includes the bloggers living in Iraq. It also includes Iraqi expatriates and their children living and born in other countries. It includes milbloggers in Iraq. It includes sites devoted to Iraqi bloggers and the events in Iraq like this one and IBC whether or not they are hosted by Iraqis. When blogs devoted to many different things, or to politics generally address the situation in Iraq as Sandmonkey does or TRP does or the still-mourned Chrenkoff did with his Good News from Iraq posts, they are also part of Bloghdad. It also includes the Comments sections of Bloghdad and their participants.

And, Yes, Bloghdad is full of tourists who pass through and just admire the scenery.

Bloghdad was/is the name of a now dormant blog by the Italian journalist, Enzo Baldoni, a journalist who was killed by brave freedom-fighter terrorists in Iraq last summer. Slate once used the term in a very small way to refer to its columns on the war. The word is essentially up for grabs, and it's service is now desperately needed. So I'm calling it out of Reserve status.

Bloghdad. Add that to your glossaries.

Good Morning, citizens of Bloghdad!

Someone sent me a email recently to ask if there were any Iraqi soldiers or police in Bloghdad (obviously she didn't use that term). I had to confess that I didn't know of any. The first time an Iraqi security professional starts to blog, it will be like Salam Pax's first post. If someone knows of one or notes the first to come out, please let me know. Bloghdad has for too long been without a lawman.

Of course, the godfather of Bloghdad is Salam Pax, the original Baghdad blogger, who seems to have once again descended to the Underworld. But as gods are want to do, he will surely rise again. I'm working on a Who Is Salam Pax post. So stay posted, get posted, whatever.

STOLEN!!!

2005-10-17T09:21:00.000-07:00

Regarding the allegations of fraud in the recent Iraqi elections, I have posted my response here.

A Glossary for Reading Zawahiri's Letter to Zarqawi

2005-10-13T08:36:00.000-07:00

NOTE: I originally posted this at IBC. I usually only post short stuff there as an outlet to sudden blogging urges, and I save my more extensive posts for here. But I didn't realize this post was going to be so long when I started. Posts at IBC tend to get pushed aside pretty quickly in favor of the next day's post. So I thought I would mirror it over here, because I like it and I think it is even useful.

Zawahiri's letter has been translated. Since I would not want it lost to posterity, you can read it here or here.

Some people might not be Islamic/Middle Eastern scholars like me or Juan Cole, so I thought I ought to provide an explanation for terms that Westerners are not familiar with:

Praise and blessings be upon the Messenger of God, his family, his Companions, and all who follow him It is traditional for extremist Islamists like Zawahiri or Faiza Jarrar to offer gratuitous praise to a lot of people who have been dead for 1300 years. He also offers praise at this time for maniacs like Zarqawi who bring the good news message of the butcher knife to the hapless Iraqis, idolatrous infidel NGO workers, and anyone doing anything to improve living standards in Iraq.

Sunna of His Prophet The religion of Islam. It is also the supposed religion of the "turncoat deviants" (see below).

Greatest Criminals and Apostates In the Heart of the Islamic World "Criminals" are the Western soldiers. "Apostates" (in this case) are the Iraqis working for a free, prosperous, democratic Iraq whether they be Kurds, Sunni Arabs, or Shi'a Arabs.

Hadiths of the Messenger of God The Quran and other traditions surrounding Muhammed's activities and sayings.

Caliphate Essentially, a Muslim state run by a civil and religious leader considered to be a successor to Mohammed a representative of Allah on earth: the Muslim pope with a territory-expanding army. During the 90s, the was what Saddam was marketing himself as. Since there can only be one caliph (ala the movie Highlander), al-Qaeda didn't line up at the time to join Uncle Saddam's great religious plan.

Levant Palestine, Israel, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan; all the regions to the east of the Mediterranean between Turkey and Egypt. Also, a type of leather, but I don't think Zawahiri means that since I don't think he cares whether his dreamed caliphate is founded in heavy coarse-grained leather. It also means "to leave hurriedly with unpaid debts" which is more likely what that Ba'athist, rejectionist, anti-American poser Raed did when he sneaked off to live in one of America's swankiest cities.

Hijaz Essentially, Saudi Arabia around Mecca and Medina. Let his reference to this area be instructive to those who say OBL's only initial beef with the US was the troops protecting SA from Saddam. Israel is also too darned close to those holy cities and for some reason that is the US's doing.

Idolatrous Infidels Westerners, and I suppose the teensy Christian communities in Iraq. We'll have no truck with this "People of the Book" nonsense. I mean, we we're not crazy about the theologically error-prone majority of Muslims. Nope. It's safer just to sort them all in the pile of bodies labeled "Kaffirs" and move on.

Traitorous Apostates Sunni Muslims (whether Kurd or Arab) working with the Idolatrous Infidels to build a free, stable democracy in Iraq.

Turncoat Deviants Iraqi Shi'a.

Spearhead of Jihad What used to be the murder spree against democracy in Afghanistan and is now the same thing moved to Iraq.

Tenets of the Secularists, Detractors, and Inferiors Essentially, free and tolerant democracy. Secularists are of course those who don't want muttawi harassing them on the streets. Its anybody's guess who the "detractors" and "inferiors" are, but chances are YOU are one of them.

Pure Way of the Prophet Piles of dead turncoat deviants and traitorous apostates.

Sublime Goal of the Prophet For Zawahiri to get the heck out of Kashmir and to start heading up that caliphate in the Levant.

Imam al Husayn bin Ali Grandson of Mohammed and, ironically, a central figure to Shi'a Muslims. While escaping from Caliph Yazd, he and 200 followers were trapped near Kufa and slaughtered on the October 10th, 680. The wickedly Turncoat Deviants see his death as having sacrificial value.

Abdallah bin al-Zubair (Zubayr) A fellow tribal leader with Ali and the son of one of Mohammed's "companions". He chose not to join Bin Ali. But after Ali's massacre, Mecca was in general free-for-all insurrection. In the course of things Bin al-Zubayr went to Mecca and led an insurrection against the Syrian caliphate. He was massacred there.

Abul Rahman bin al-Ashath An 8th century military commander of the Umayyad Empire that lead an insurrection against al-Hajjaj. He was defeated and fled to what is today Turkey.

Typical of the confusing Muslim history of this era, al-Hajjaj was also a Muslim and so were the Umayyad caliphs. However, al-Hajjaj, conquered Mecca and maintained control over it with legendary cruelty: the original Saddam Hussein. The Umayyad caliphs and their agents typically play the role of the enemies of of the good-guys in Muslim history.

Note that all these heroes lived and died during what's known in the West as "the Dark Ages". To the jihadis, a hero doesn't count for anything unless he died at least 800 years ago. Gene Roddenberry, had a better ear for this kind of thing:
When people in the TV show Star Trek would rattle off names of great people, he would deliberately throw in something recent like "That man is considered a great philosopher on this planet; in the vein of Plato, Lincoln, and Duraben of the Indleblatt system."

The Hour of Resurrection The moment of the bodily resurrection of believers. According to the Quran, this happens sometime after Jesus comes back, defeats the anti-Christ and his followers, ends all wars, and brings in an era of peace. Until then, we need to butcher every unbelieving S.O.B. Christian we can catch.

Shura methodology Literally, this means "consultation". This is supposed to be how Arabian tribes before Mohammed selected leaders and made major decisions: by "consulting" with the Muslim community. Zawahiri states that for al-Qaeda in Iraq to rule their Iraqi caliphate without the popular support of the people ("minimum support", really) would be contrary to Shura.

Of course, Zawahiri also says that the Taliban, for which al-Qaeda was the military armed force, did not do much consulting with the Muslim community in Afghanistan. Nor does there seem to be much consultation with the people in ultra-religious Saudi Arabia and Iran. I don't recall Hezbollah being to interested in input from those who disagree with them (or as they are technically referred to: "traitorous apostates"). There is a principle in Islam that embodies this paradox: it's called irony.

Sharia amirate Sharia kingdom or Islamic theocracy. Zawahiri says Iraq's Islamic theocracy would be "a political endeavor in which the mujahedeen would be a nucleus around which would gather the tribes and their elders, and the people in positions, and scientists, and merchants, and people of opinion, and all the distinguished ones who were not sullied by appeasing the occupation and those who defended Islam." Hmmm...no doubt the Iraqis that fit that bill will be top-shelf indeed. Too bad for the "scientists, merchants, and people of opinion" who don't make the cut.

Ulema The mullahs taken as a whole. Zawahiri tells Zarqawi not to make too much of doctrinal differences (for the time being) regardless of how contemptible they might be (good advice for to guys like Zarqawi, I'd say). The reason for this, Zawahiri says, is that "there may be...a heresy or an inadequacy in [a sect] which may have something to give to jihad." That is, "they can still die for us in our struggle for control of Iraq."

Umma The worldwide Moslem community taken as a whole including traitorous apostates, turncoat deviants, and heretics who have fallen into error.

Matridism The ("heretical" per Z.) Maturidiyyah school of the Sunni sect, founded by Abu Mansur al-Maturidi in the 10th century. One of the four schools of the Sunni Muslim sect. The Sunnis believe that the rightful first successor to the Prophet was his father-in-law, Abu Bakr, rather than Ali ibn Abi Talib, his cousin and son-in-law. This split occurred in the 7th century.

Asharism The ("heretical" per Z.) Ash'ariyyah, founded by Abu al-Hasan 9th and 10th centuries and continued to be developed into the 11th century. As this site describes it, "an attempt not only to purge Islam of all non‑Islamic elements which had quietly crept into it but also to harmonize the religious consciousness with the religious thought of Islam."

Salafism Wahhabbism, the religion of OBL and Zawahiri and God. It was founded by Muhammad ibn Abd al Wahhab in the 18th century and stated that every sect founded after around 950 AD is tainted and heretical. They don't like to be called Wahhabbis and they don't like to be called a sect. They are pure Islam; true Islam. They have the knife, who are you to argue about it?

Hanafism A Sunni legal school on which the Ottoman empire was based in the fifteenth century. Zawahiri notes that it was a doctrine of wicked Matridism.

Incidentally, although Zawahiri is willing to overlook (for now) the error of some Muslims, since he thinks he has to as most Muslims are Matridi or Ashari, he assures us that that doesn't mean he is for cottoning the "hypocritical traitors who are in allegiance with the crusaders", but says we shouldn't talk so much about that.

About this point, Zawahiri goes right over the top in showing off his oh-so-intricate knowledge of every Muslim in history. That's when I realized, "Oh my gosh! Zawahiri is a smarty-pants." ...or to use another term: he's an annoying nerdy git. He's one of those guys who is so anxious to prove that he's the one who knows everything so don't bother trying to debate him. Remember Al Gore in the first 2000 Presidential debate? That's Zawahiri. The plank up this guy's butt has a plank up it's butt.
I'm laughing my head off imagining Zarqawi (I presume it is Zarqawi even though Zawahiri "cleverly" tries to throw us off track in case the letter were intercepted or found) sitting in his smelly garage apartment, having to change houses every night, trying to organize the next car bomb, NOW having to read this pompous diatribe from a guy who is hiding so far back in a cave that he can't even get T.V. (but somehow is swallowing every Internet boilerplate rumor about Iraq) telling him how to run his insurgency, pushing his lame writings on him, while he hits him up for money! "Hey can you toss me a $100,000 or so?"
Serves him right!

Mullah Muhammad Omar The reclusive leader of the Taliban in Afghanistan, which banned the sale of birds in the market because they insisted on being so unIslamic as to sing. Zawahiri says that although Omar is one of the heretical Hanafists, yet "he stood in the history of Islam with a stance rarely taken." Brother, you can say that again.

Izz Bin Abdul Salam A 7th century Shafi'i scholar. Zawahiri says he was also a hated Ashari, which I guess could just as well be true although it seems anachronistic to me.

al-Nawawi (Abu Zakariyya Yahiya Ibn Sharaf al-Nawawi) A 13th century Syrian scholar. Also an Ashari (according to Zawahiri).

Ibn Hajar (Imam Al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar Al-'Asqalani) An 8th century Egyptian scholar. When he was 9 years old, he memorized the Qur'an. Unfortunately, an Asharist, although once again: anachronistic?.

Nur al-Din Bin Zanki Predecesor of Saladin who united Syria against the 2nd Crusade in the 12th century. Asharist.

Salahal-Din al-Ayyubi Saladin. Say no more. Asharist. Kurdish (which is a double whammy).

Sayf al-Din Qatz I'm not entirely sure about this one, but I think he is referring to Saif ad-Din Ghazi I who helped defend Damascus during the Second Crusade in the 12th century. He "fell into errors, sins, and heresies".

Rukn al-Din Baybars Administrative official in the Mamluk Sultanate, a 14th century Egyptian Islamic kingdom who oversaw the creation of an ornate version of the Quran and restored a mosque. He seized the throne from his Sultan, naming himself Baybars II, and was executed 11 months later when his boss came back. He died theologically in error.

al-Nasir Muhammad Bin-Qallawun Baybars's boss who executed him (see above). He finished the Madrasa of Sultan al-Nasir Muhammad ibn Qalawun in Cairo. He ruled for thirty years after taking his throne back from Baybars II. What is significant to Zawahiri is that he unfortunately "fell into errors, sins, and heresies".

Muhammad al-Fatih Sultan of the Ottoman Turks who conquered Constantinople in the 15th century. Theologically in error.

Sheikh al-Islam Ibn Taymiya A 13th century Sunni scholar who spent much of his life in a Cairo prison for teaching that God was a corporeal being. Despite that, Zawahiri gives him his props for urging Bin-Qallawun (see above) to go on jihad.

Jamil al-Rahman The leader of the Afghanistan Wahhabi party Jama`at Ahl-al-Kitab wal-Sunna (in 80s-90s Afghanistan, "party" means army) who split off from the Hezbi Islami party in 1985. He was assassinated by an Egyptian gunman in 1991, and al-Kitab, subsequently defeated by the the Hezbi Islami, fell apart. Z. says al-Rahman was killed and his "movement shattered" because it failed to address "the realities on the ground." Hmm...it was an assassin. Granted he didn't see that one coming, but...whatever.*

You know what, Zawahiri? Here's a news flash from the ground:
IT'S NOT THE FIFTEENTH CENTURY!!

* Kat from The Middle Ground takes a shot at what Zawahiri was getting at:

Here Zawahiri is warning Zarqawi that his puritanical purification of the ranks might end up getting him betrayed or killed by one of their own allies, destroying their efforts, if he does not refrain from enforcing his version of Islam wherever he goes and on all who come to contribute to the effort.

Al-Sharq al-Awsat An Arabic language newspaper in London.

Abu Rasmi I don't want to speculate about who Abu Ramsi is. It is not an uncommon name. I could presume it is someone Z. thought was connected but that doesn't narrow things much. What is significant about this guy however, (laughing) is that Zawahiri gave him one of his books to try to get it published. Nothing came of it. Now Z. has lost his original manuscript and wants to get the book back. Anyone want to take bets on the likelihood that Ramsi chunked the book in the trash as soon as he was out of eye-shot?

Zarqawi: Hey, Zawahiri just sent me a letter (rolleyes). Can you send him his stupid manuscript back to him? He's lost his copy and he's driving me up the wall about it.
Ramsi: Yeah, right! Like I'm gonna carry that jihadi confetti through customs. I tossed it.
Z: He says you told him you were going to try to get it published?
R: He wouldn't get off my case about it, what would you do? Finally, I said 'Fine. Give it to me and I'll show it around.' But I didn' t mean it. No one's going to publish that crap. Anyway, you should have seen it. If you wanted to bottle pomposity, you could squeeze it from those reams.
Z: You're telling me? I told you he sent me a letter, right? He wanted me to know all the books he's been writing lately. If he really wants to do something for the cause, why doesn't he drag his aging can over here and strap on a martyrs vest. Oh. By the way. He's asking for money again.
R: Dead beat.

Raed Jarrar & CMAR II: A Correspondence

2005-09-27T21:01:00.000-07:00

"Iraqi" blogger Raed has recently shut down his Comments section on his site. He claims this is because he is concerned about the "abusive comments" and fears about being sued. I found this funny because only a few weeks previously he had threatened to sue me for things he claimed I said in a blog. He also asked if I wouldn't mind (oh by the way) giving him my personal information so he could sue me.

The truth, as it turned out, was that Raed was about to apply for a work permit in the Imperialistic United States, and his blog comments section had attracted the lowest denominator in supporters of the Iraqi Insurgency. His brother, an insurgent supporter himself, had been arrested by the Iraqi counter-terrorist team just for perusing Raed's comments section for a few minutes. The police spent two minutes reading the bile posted there, and were convinced anyone who would read it must be a hardened bomb-planter. Obviously, his blog as it stood was not going to look good for his upcoming Green Card interview.

Raed is not Iraqi although his mother is. He is "Palestinian" because, I guess, that's what his father is. Most of his life has been spent outside of Iraq too. He cares little for Iraq or Iraqis as I judge from his blogs. He cares about Arab National identity. For those who don't know Arab Nationalism is the Fascism of the Middle East. It is a KEY reason that the region has slipped steadily toward the 19th century for the last 50 years.

This is MY side of a correspondence I had with Raed when he contacted me because I am a contributor to Iraqi Bloggers Central. He informed me that unless the said site stops identifying him as a Ba'athist on its sidebar or proves that he has at sometime joined the Ba'athist Party that he will sue me personally in court for making untrue statements about him. He did not quote any specific instances in which I state something about him that is untrue. Apparently, he sent the same emails to Jeffrey and Mister Ghost.

I began replying to him because I hoped to learn more about his specific background: the ways exactly his family benefited under the Saddam regime and so forth.

An so we begin:

Dear, dear, Raed,

Thank you for the heads up about your upcoming nuisance suit.

I would be anxious to correct any statement I have made about you that is untrue, but you must specify exactly *what* I have said that is untrue (as you will be required to do in court).

I don't recall ever saying you had joined the Ba'athist Party, so I can't take that back. I have said that you are a Saddamist and a Ba'athist. But in a practical sense, one no more needs to join a party to be a Ba'athist than one needs to join the American Socialist Party or the Iraq Communist Party to be a Socialist or Communist. I myself have been accused of being a "neoconservative" many times in the comments section of my blog (here -- you should check out the update section of that post) while in fact I am not a member of any political party of that name or any other and never have been (I don't have the time).

Of course, if your law suit ever comes to trial, I will bring as evidence the fact that your brother Khalid was suspected of being an insurgent by the Iraqi authorities simply for *viewing* your blog for a short time...these were officials who, according to Khalid's own testimony, could barely speak English and knew nothing of your blog beforehand, but they only had to read a few articles to be assured that they were these were the words of one who yearned for "The Return".

If you don't like being thought of as a Ba'athist, you should stop talking like one. Personally, I *don't* think you are merely a Ba'athist. I think you are a cheerleader for any dictatorship anywhere in the world: Saddam, Iran, Syria, Arafat's corrupt regime, and most recently the military dictatorship of Imperial Japan (prior to WWII).

Raed, unfortunately I'm not sure how this law suit will ever come off. Not even Jeffrey or Mister Ghost know who I am, nor do I know who they are or if they have ever met each other. So, as you can imagine, there is no way I would ever willingly provide my personal identity to a fellow-traveler and, in my opinion, financier of the black-hole-minded monsters blowing up cars on the streets of Iraq and targeting the families of Iraqi civil servants.

Keep up the good work my Ba'athist friend. No doubt you have proved to be valuable bait for the Iraqi authorities to identify the terrorists in their midst.

CMAR II

***************

Raed responded with various insults and repeated claim that my statements were libelous, and more insults in an attempt to get me to give him my personal information. While his first missive was very legalistic, this next one was a positive barking rant. I responded:

Dear, dear, Raed,
Wow! Respond to the (current) morose and confused Raed, and get a reply from the (classic) off-his-lithium, drunk-off-his-ass Raed. Cool!
"1) [quote from Raed informing me that calling him a Ba'athist when I know he is not a Party member is a crime in Iraq]
In that case, you should sue me in the Iraqi courts. Welcome to America, Raed!
[quote from Raed that I should preface calling him a Ba'athist the words "in my opinion]
You sure do sound like a Ba'athist to me. (Ba'athism: The National Socialism of the Arab world!) You apparently also sound like a Ba'athist to the Iraqi security forces whose job it is to track down Saddam's Orphans (the violent sort however - not the "shaking his tiny fist at the world" sort like you).

Actually, you sound like a young man mourning his missed opportunity to slip Uncle Saddam a big slurpy tongue -- but that's just my opinion, of course. I don't have any evidence that you tried to join the "We Stuck Our Tongues Down Saddam's Throat Club" (WSOTDSTC), but were denied admission because you were too old.

Thanks for the permission to express my right of free speech, but I'll take advantage of it any way I please, thank you very much.
[quote from Raed that no one knows who I am (even my father) and everyone knows who he is (including my mother): he is Raed Jarrar]
"World-famous crack-pot and alcoholic extraordinaire!" "Boy-whore of murdering, kidnapping, criminal swine." "Bum-rugger and subsister on the mongrel dogs of the world" (like some kind of canine Jeffrey Dahmer). Yes, Raed, we all know you.
[Raed ask why don't I just give him my attorney's contact information.]
Because you are in bed with and financing (with what you don't steal from that kitty you call a "charity") the midge-witted crocodiles who kill decent Iraqis whenever they can find them. I would no more hand over my personal contact information to you than pet a rabid squirrel.
Besides all that, you don't have a case, and merely conversing with you is plenty of entertainment for me. [Note: As it turned out I overplayed my hand in saying this.]
Now that I have answered your questions, I have a couple of questions for you. Please don't take too much time to respond:
How are you paying your U.S. attorney?

Is your capitalist father fronting the money, O Principled One?

Or is the money coming from your "charity"?

Did you read this post of mine from last year? I'm curious about the
special benefits you and your family may or may not have received from
Saddam while the rest of Iraq languished under the U.N. sanctions.

Could you please refute or elaborate on the claim that Palestinians and other immigrants (including yourself) received special stroking from the government in order to buck-up Saddam's homicidal regime?
Your correspondent,
CMAR II

************************

In his next email, Raed says he is responding to me because I am only adding to the evidence against me.

He says he has never read my blog because he does not read junk. He denies that he or his family have any connection direct or indirect, political or financial with the Iraq leadership and that I should beware making accusations without proof. [Note: Since to my knowledge Raed has never held a real job, where the avowed Socialist Raed gets his money is certainly worth thinking about. He's never mentioned robbing banks for a living or anything. So someone who works for a living must be giving it to him.]

He says he will sue me not under Iraqi law but under US law which takes into account the danger my claims place him in Iraq. He says his attorneys will take his case on the prospect of me paying damages to him and his attorney fees as well. (hee hee) He expresses his love of the American legal system.

And so my long response was:

Raed, Raed, Raed,
Well, "proof" one way or the other is what I'm trying to obtain. But you didn't quite answer my question. I can't believe you haven't read my blog, because if you think merely calling you a "100% National-Fuhrer-Approved, Uber-Ba'athists R Us" is libelous, you should definitely read every line of my blog for important evidence in your case.
In order to make things easier for you to answer question #2, I'll paste the text of what I've been told: [I quote from here:]

So how 'bout it? Can you confirm, deny, or elaborate on any of this? Did you or your family receive perks that were unavailable to average Iraqis based on your father's Palestinian status? Can you provide anymore information on advantages that Saddam provided to foreign Sunni Arabs and especially Palestinians?
Yes, usually I do [love the US legal system]. And I'm touched that you are an admirer of the American system. But from what you are saying, I'm thinking that someone may be taking advantage of you. Have you ascertained that your counselors' legal education consisted of more than watching every episode of the "Ally McBeal" TV show? Let me give you a broad overview of the definition of libel (in most jurisdictions):
The statement(s) must be published to at least one other person other than you the offended party. The statements must be "of and concerning" you. People reading the statement(s) must identify it specifically with you.
Well, that certainly applies.
The statement(s) must actually harm your reputation, instead of being merely insulting or offensive.
This is the first place you're going to have problems. See, your blog does far more than anything I, or anyone else, could say or do to identify you as a Ba'athist, as a Saddam wet-dreamer, as one who is filled with nostalgia for the old regime. As evidence, Iraqis who never heard of me thought the same thing when they monitored Khalid reading your blog. So you see, I have not harmed your reputation. The Ba'athist that lives in your mouth has already done that beyond any further damage.
The statement(s) must also be a false statement of fact.
What does that mean? They must be provably untrue. Name-calling, hyperbole, etc. is explicitly identified as being unprovable and so, is not applicable to a libel claim. In other words, you can't sue a person for calling you a name....such as Ba'athist. Because, even though it is a self-evident implication from your blog, it cannot be proven true or false.
Finally, the statement(s) must also have been made "with fault".
That's a complicated term. It means something like "you should have known better". "Fault" is determined primarily on the status of the plaintiff (that's you). In your case, people in the public eye, such as well-known individuals and people involved in specific public controversies, are required to prove actual malice.
That is another specific legal term which means someone positively knew his statement was false or recklessly disregarded the truth or falsity of his statement. Well, Raed, as you have told me, you are a very well-known individual. Not only do I not KNOW you are not a Ba'athist (or even whether or not you joined the Ba'athist Party), I firmly believe you are one in your heart. Nor have I recklessly disregarded your claims that you never joined the Ba'athist Party since as I have stated, it doesn't matter. Your Ba'athism is evident in your blog: that you gloat when harm comes to the elected Iraqi government, you rail against its viability, authenticity, credibility, and value, and you gleefully prophesy an Iraqi civil war. In fact, you stated that you not only expect a civil war, but that the U.S. should pull out and let that happen (have you deleted that post?).
Raed Jarrar = Ba'athist...and a host of other names I could provide.
[Raed also demanded I prove he has mishandled his charity's money. He warns me that I could be charged with the crime of not reporting a crime in progress.]
Okaaay, I will attempt to prove it if I can. Send me copies of all your paycheck stubs, tax records (you say you have "personal funds" -- so you have paying job, right?), PayPal bank account balances, and receipts since September of 2004. Mind, I don't know whether it is a crime for you take money from this charity for personal use. I can't imagine who has jurisdiction over it if it were. I doubt you've legally registered it as a non-profit organization. In short, these aren't public funds. If you spent most of it on a vacation with your girlfriend, that's probably the business of no court in the world unless you have failed to pay some required income tax. I doubt the cretins who sent you money would care one way or the other.
Also, in America, there is usually no law requiring anyone to report "a crime in progress" (except in some cases with stock brokers and lawyers). But, I don't know, after you send me all that stuff, perhaps I'll have a cause to report something to somebody.
I find it interesting that you have twice now neglected to deny that you are a financier of the terrorists either in providing them with food supplies or in direct funds. Which brings me to your penultimate statement:
[Raed urges me to put my trust in the US legal system and assures me that my personal information will stay between our lawyers.]
I'm already suspicious of the quality of your "lawyers", and anyway you would certainly have a right to any information your attorney has. Nevertheless, I want to assure you that I will never, never give personal information to a fellowtravelerr and financier of those walking apollyons that murder Iraqi civil servants and their family members for $1000 or less...who kidnap retarded children and force them to be murder-suicide bombers...who even trick their own compatriots into being murder-suicide bombers. These people are bottomless pits without evidence of humanity, and if someone chooses to provide aid to their cause (even as only an apologist), what possible assurances could that person give anyone?
[Raed says that if I took back my misstatements we could converse civilly and be friends.]
Actually, we've already conducted a far more civilized dialog with each other than I ever would have thought possible -- and that only happened (in part) because of the statements I've made about you. Without those statements we probably would never have conversed at all. For that reason alone, I'm not inclined to stop.
[There...I blew it right here. Raed cease to continue serious discourse because of that statement.]
But I'm not unreasonable. I'll tell you what, here is how you can make me change my conviction that you are a Ba'athist. On your next post on your blog write a detailed list of things happening in Iraq today that make you glad Saddam was removed by the Coalition forces. I'm not asking you to be happy with everything happening in Iraq today. I would just like to know what makes you happy Saddam is gone.

For example, if I were talking to Khalid, I would point out that he is now able to read blogs that disagree with his government, that he can legally have a blog of his own of that sort, and that if some errant police officer arrests him for that, he can say that it is his right to do those things...and saying that will get him released.

So how about you? What makes you happy that Saddam is gone?

Your Correspondent,
CMAR II

************************

Raed tells me I am a nobody and to say hello to my mom and dad (if I can find him), and that he will not have anything more to say to me unless I give him my personal information. See? I got cocky and went too far. But I take a shot anyway:

Dear Ba'athist Raed (a.k.a The Terrorists' Fluffer),
Who am I? Apparently, I am the savager of the reputation of the highly regarded Raed Jarrar (world-famous crack pot and alcoholic extraordinaire)!

Things you didn't say in your last email:
Any denial that you and your family received special perks under the Ba'athist regime.

Any of the proofs I requested that your "charity" is a not a personal vacation fund/car-bomb kitty.

One single thing that makes you glad Saddam is gone.
I presume your silence springs from an uncharacteristic seed of honesty.

Your Correspondent,
CMAR II

************************
Raed responds with a similar email and says that I will never move him from his "anti-Ba'athist/anti-Occupation ideas". Another comment about my mom and dad. But I'm not giving up yet. Maybe I can still draw him out:

Dear Ba'ath-boy (a.k.a. Saddam's Monkey),

(sigh)
Okaaaay.

My name is Keith Myass
(the last name is French so you have to put the inflection on the second syllable)

My address is the carbuncle on the dog's butt of your "good name". I realize that's not a precise location because your good name has two dog's butts -- one on each end.

Now that I've answered your question have there are some other things you have so far failed to note in your emails. In addition to:
No denial that you and your family received special perks under the Ba'athist regime.

None of the proofs that your "charity" is a not a personal vacation fund/car-bomb kitty.

Not one single thing that makes you glad Saddam is gone.
Also:
You neglected to note whether you have a job or if the "personal funds" you mentioned came from Daddy (Warbucks) Jarrar or from your Raed's Romantic World-wide Spree charity.
And since when have you ever staked out an "Anti-Ba'athist position?? That's pathetic.
If you are not a Ba'athist then please explain this picture of you and Saddam together:
Your Correspondent,
CMAR II

*********************

Now Raed is just sending the same email over and over. I keep trying:

Hey Fluffer!

I loved the reference in your last post to the "mistakes" Saddam made. LOL At least 300,000 mistakes buried in mass graves. Not to mention all the money (designated for food and medicine) that Saddam stole to pass extra pats to Palestinians and other Arabs with foreign visas...and the constant fear Iraqis lived in that they might DREAM something revolutionary (but you didn't have to worry about that.).
"Mistakes".
That's a good one.
So the answer is that you you can't think of ONE thing that makes you glad Saddam is gone.

Talk to you later, Saddamy!

Your Correspondent,
CMAR II

P.S. My mom says she DOES remember you! I'm attaching a picture she had of the two of you.

*****************************

Raed resent his previous email (without the mention of my mother this time).

I gave the project up for lost.

Was The Iraq War Discretionary?12 Reasons Why It Wasn't

2005-09-17T18:33:00.000-07:00

It depends. Was the war against Germany in 1942 discretionary for the U.S.?

At the end of 1941 we had been attacked by Japan. Hitler, perhaps presuming we would be busy with Japan anyway, declared war on the U.S. Well, that's what we remember now. Actually, the next day after it was reported, the German government denied that it had declared war on the U.S. At the time, the U.S. went to war against Germany because it was believed that Germany had materially supplied Japan in its invasion of the U.S. or actually helped it as described quite well here. So was the war on Germany based on lies?

Lets assume full hindsight. Was the war with Germany discretionary? That depends on what the meaning of "discretionary" is.

Germany was not an "immenent" threat to the U.S. She was at war with her former ally the USSR on her Eastern flank and at war with the British Empire to her West. Thanks to 50 destroyers supplied to Britain at a crucial moment in 1940, the Battle of Britain had failed. And thanks to the discovery of RADAR, the Germany luftwaffe was neutered.

But the US strategists couldn't have been sure of all that at the time, could they? What they were looking at was the possibility that Britain or the USSR would form a truce with Germany essentially making a truce with both a certainty. Western Europe would be dominated by a poisonous collectivist political philosophy of National Socialism. Where that didn't dominate, it's flip-side, Communism, would. National Socialism was already gaining ground in Argentina and Uruguay. And they still believed Germany was providing material support to Japan with whom we were in a non-discretionary war.

Just because a danger isn't imminent doesn't mean taking it on is discretionary.

Is it especially likely a foreseen danger will persist until it is imminent?
Will the forseen danger be more difficult to solve in the future?
Will the danger be more dangerous in the future.

If the answer is Yes to all three (as was true of the Nationalist Socialists), then talk of "imminence" is absurd. It is worse than choosing to only buy house insurance "when a hazard seems immient". It is more like only calling the police when the prowler outside your house has actually gotten through the open window.

With that in mind, was the war in Iraq discretionary? Here are 12 reasons why it was not.

1) 9-11 seriously upped the ante on the threat of terrorism. In the three months afterward, the U.S. lost 1 million jobs. The ultimate effect of 9-11 actually made the almost 3000 lives lost on that day insignificant. It was the equivalence of fighting a war by undermining the money-supply with counterfiet currency. Another similar attack or two could conceivably remake the economic map of the world. U.S. tall buildings could be made impractical by being made a likely target. U.S. cities could be uninhabitable by the threat of a dirty bomb. Anthrax in the mail slow a postal system to a halt.

2) 9-11 exposed the hopelessness of treating terrorists as mere criminals. The terrorists had governments that harbored them safe from U.S. prosecution. They didn't have ulterior motives like bank robbers (who wanted money) or rapists (who wanted to brutalize and get away without being identified). There existed a statistically small but numerically imposing number of people who wanted only to kill us and die. It was inevitable that they would get us unless we "got" them first in some way.

3) Saddam Hussein had invaded two neighboring countries in less than a decade. I'm not going to debate the U.S.'s support for Iraq during the 1980's because 1) Such scenarios are over-blown and 2) they are irrelevant to discussion of whether the 2003 invasion was discretionary.

But every square mile of oil-rich territory Saddam obtained, made him more dangerous by making him better financed to quell dissention in territories he controlled and to attack his neighbors for more oil-rich territory.

4) After being driven from Kuwait in 1991, Saddam was required to verify the destruction of his WMDs and the destruction of the infrastructure and documentation to create them them. His failure to do so - caused the major intelligence agencies of the world (including France) to conclude he retained them.

Actually the invasion of Iraq provided two categories of invaluable knowledge:

That there were likely no enormous stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons in Iraq which would otherwise tie down U.S. resouces worrying about them in a post-9-11 world.
That Saddam was hiding equipment and documentation to restart his WMD programs after the world looked the other way.

5) The world was about to look the other way: the U.N. sanctions were erroding and would likely have been lifted by now.

6) Like certain other Middle Eastern nations such as Iran, Syria, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia, Iraq was harboring known international terrorists.

7) Saddam had employed terrorists against the U.S. in 1993 when he employed a third-party assassin against former President George H.W. Bush.

8) The U.N. sanctions were a being used by Islamic and Arab Nationalist extremists to recruit terrorists such as the ones Saddam was feared to potentially employ.

9) 1-8 placed the U.S. is an untenable situation. Saddam was too dangerous to "let out of the box" and the box itself was making the U.S. and the world increasingly unsafe by radicalizing Muslims and Arabs. And 9-11 had shown, that Saddam would not need a powerful army to strike at the U.S. anyway.

10) The invasion of Iraq relinquished the necessity to keep U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia (which was Usama bin Laden's original causus belli for the World Trade Center attacks).

11) Just as the invasion of Afghanistan helped to make the U.S. Pakistan policy something besides hopeless, the invasion of Iraq re-stirred the pot of democratic momentum in the Western Middle East which had begun to clump since 1991 with tyrannical Iran and Iraq competing for the role of Anti-U.S. and financially supporting worst actors in the West Bank, Egypt, Jordan, and Syria. It is no accident that the fall of Baghdad led to Libya getting serious about disarmament, to the Lebanese felt confidence in standing up to Syrian control of their government, and to Saudi Arabia and Egypt at least making a pretense of democratic reform.

12) Although the successful invasion and remaking of Afghanistan is said to have been "a certainty" now, it wasn't in 2002. The same terrorists now said to be being created by the invasion of Iraq, were then being created by the invasion of Afghanistan (which were previously being created by the Iraqi sanctions that "kept Saddam in a box"). Afghanistan was said to be a potential "quagmire" (a term first used in the New York Times for the Afghanistan invasion on October 31st, 2001).

Winning a pitted war against the Muslim and Arab extremists would have been quite difficult in Afghanistan, especially with other nations in the region supporting them. It had no seaports or international airports for ferrying in supplies. It had no highways connecting the Eastern and Western regions. It's people were already shown to tend to be belligerantly fractous and backward.

Taking the battle to Iraq, weakened the enemies of liberal democracy in the region and moved the battle to a modern, accessible theater where it really is a certainty that we will ultimately win if we don't beat ourselves (as the French did against the Germans in WWII).

Parallels clear between WWII, war on terror

Some Debate on Whether the "Who Is Riverbend?" Post Belongs on the Riverbend Wikipedia Article

2005-08-28T17:47:00.000-07:00

A Riverbend supporter shows a typical Ba'athist love for freedom of critical analysis.

What If It Happened To You?

2005-08-25T14:10:00.000-07:00

This is Unrealist Retort #457:

Q: What if the United States were invaded by another nation? What they overthrew your leaders and imposed the sort of government they liked? What if their soldiers were driving through your streets telling people what to do?
CMAR II, you are a patriotic American. So what would you do about that? Wouldn't you rise up and throw the invaders out?

This is just the sort of question I would expect from an Unrealist. Let me ask a similar question:

Q: If a doctor tried to inject you with morphine and cut open your chest would you:
Try to defend yourself
OR
Thank him for saving your life
A: That would depend on whether or not I was having a heart attack. The difference in my medical condition would determine whether this hypothetical doctor was Jack the Ripper or Dr Kildare.

See? So here is my answer to Unrealist Query/Retort #457:

A: IF I had lived under a stalinist dictator like Saddam for three decades and Saddam Hussein HIMSELF:
Sent troops that overthrew my dictator
Established general freedom of speech and thought for the first time
Oversaw free elections and a democratic constitutional process within 21 months
THEN I would put a bullet in the head of any so-called Red-Blooded American who tried harm my liberators. (To say nothing of people who would kill Americas new civil-servants, police, and national security forces.)

Simply put: If the DEVIL sent his imps to do those things, they would be angels to me.

Anyone who prefers his nation, party, race, ethnicity, heritage, or religion (as he sees it) over liberty of mind and voice for himself and others has allied himself in his heart to evil, whatever else he might call it.

Let me say it one more time:

Tyrannical dictators are by definition illegitimate. It does not matter who you are or what you've done before or why you are doing it: if you depose a tyrant and replace him/her with a representative democracy it is always legitimate and righteous. It needs no further qualification. It doesn't justify everything or even anything else you do, but *that* act is pure, unadulterated justice.

Who Was SPC Casey Sheehan?

2005-08-18T11:47:00.000-07:00

UPDATE

I've updated the Who IS Cindy Sheehan post to link to the Open Letter from a Mother whose son enlisted in the Army at Casey Sheehan's encouragement.

Army SPC Casey Sheehan was the son of Cindy Sheehan. He was killed April 4, 2004 in Sadr City. But you wouldn't recognize him from his mother's description of him today.

His is not the story his mom tells of how he was an infantalized dummy who was fooled into joining up.

Army SPC Casey Sheehan was a war hero and he was a real man. Having recently reenlisted with the Army, SPC Sheehan volunteered to be part of a Quick Response Force (QRF) into Sadr City to rescue soldiers trapped by obstacles under serious enemy fire on the day of the heaviest fighting and most casualties suffered in Iraq since Baghdad's fall; known to the troops as Black Sunday.

Here is Melinda Liu's coverage of the battle for Newsweek. She says:

"Suddenly, Aguero found his unit heading into a Mad Max gauntlet of burning tires and road obstacles of every imaginable description: concrete blocks, metal market stalls, air conditioners, scrap metal, truck axles, even refrigerators. The burning debris put out so much choking black smoke that visibility was down to 300 meters. The street had become 'a 300-meter-long kill zone,' recalls Aguero. The vehicles swerved and ran onto sidewalks, rolling on the rims of flat tires, as gunmen kept up the barrage of bullets.”

Here is another one by Melinda Liu with Rod Norland.

Read the full story here by Ed Marek.

Ed Marek is not the writer that Liu is. His telling has more of the feeling of a "brain dump" than a careful ordering of the facts. But if you are patient, you will gather both a story of a tragic confluence of events and a saga of real heroes including SPC Sheehan.

He takes Liu's reporting and statements from participating soldiers to provide a military expert's account the Black Sunday operation. Point-by-point he fisks and elaborates on eye witness-statements and Liu's reporting of the events of that day, he provides an exceptional analysis of the events that combined to create a perfect storm for the soldiers of the 1st Armored Cavalry Division that day in southern Baghdad -- the most important of which to my mind is this:

The point we wish to leave you with here is that the Battle of Sadr City occurred on April 4, 2004. Formal changeover of responsibility for Baghdad and Sadr City occurred on April 15, 2004. For the April 4 battle, most soldiers had been there for only a week or two, and most of the officers had been there only a month. The commander responsible for the main thrust into Sadr City officially took command about 15 minutes after the battle got nasty. He fought valiantly, as did his soldiers, but one cannot ignore this timing when analyzing the April 4 battle.

Marek also reports how Sheehan volunteered for the mission to rescue his fellow soldiers -- he didn't have to, and he wasn't the only one:

"They had guys who normally don't fight who volunteered to help their buddies. There were guys fighting to get on that convoy."

Cindy Sheehan knows he volunteered for that mission despite now memorializing him has a useful idiot of the Neo-cons. Since we are letting her speak, lets hear what she said to Marek about this too:

“And the sergeant said, 'Sheehan, you don't have to go,' because my son was a mechanic.' And Casey said, 'Where my chief goes, I go.' "

Why should Cindy Sheehan's opinions carry more weight than SPC Sheehan's opinions?
His sister, Carly, said:

“He didn’t have to go,” said Sheehan’s 23-year-old sister, Carly. “He would do anything for anybody. He’d give you the shirt off his back. He was just a loving and caring person...That’s all he wanted to do was serve God and his country his whole life...He was a boy scout from age 6 or 7 and an Eagle Scout. It was kind of a natural progression to go into the military from that. He said he was enjoying the military because it was just like the boy scouts but they got guns.”

Check it out.

Who Is Cindy Sheehan(aka Let Cindy Speak For Herself

2005-08-17T13:52:00.000-07:00

UPDATE (Hattip Sandmonkey)
OPEN LETTER TO CINDY SHEEHAN by Mom of Two Soldiers

Residing in the same town as you once resided and knowing your family, I must ask you,"Whatever are you thinking?"
Your son was the one who encouraged my youngest son to enlist. You were very proud of Casey and what he was doing then and he believed very much in what he was doing.
[...]
Cindy, you've changed since the Kerry campaign contacted you in early July of last summer. You're not the same grieving mom, especially after you started traveling on the road to support John Kerry's campaign. You've turned into a political puppet for those who are exploiting you and its not pretty nor does it do anything for Casey's memory.
[...]
How can you consistently state that you don't want your son's name to be acknowledged by him and on the same hand, turn around and use the name of Joe Williams' Mike, as an example for your cause despite the many requests of the family for you not to do so? How could you print Mike's name in your anti-war advertisement in the newspaper even after seeing the grief and effort his mother went through to go to Crawford to personally remove it from your cross. You knew it caused them pain.

Check it out. Read it all.

UPDATE
Cindy Sheehan took part in the 9-11-05 protests.
Lest there be any doubt about Mrs Sheehan's opinion on the invasion of Afghanistan, she said:

There have been four failures of this administration: Sept. 11, Afghanistan, Iraq and now Hurricane Katrina.

*********
Cindy Sheehan has become the darling of the Unrealists. So I say let her speak for herself. This is great, because I think Raed Jarrar should give Cindy his login information to post at his blog so we can have a contest to see who can guess which posts are whose:

"I was raised in a country by a public school system that taught us that America was good, that America was just. America has been killing people...since we first stepped on this continent, we have been responsible for death and destruction. I passed on that bullshit to my son and my son enlisted.
[...]
"This country is not worth dying for.
[...]
We were not attacked by Iraq. We might not even have been attacked by Osama bin Laden if [perhaps the neo-cons staged 9/11 because] 9/11 was their Pearl Harbor to get their neo-con agenda through and, if I would have known that before my son was killed, I would have taken him to Canada. I would never have let him go and try and defend this morally repugnant system we have. The people are good, the system is morally repugnant.
[...]
What they’re saying, too, is like, it’s okay for Israel to have nuclear weapons. But Iran or Syria better not get nuclear weapons.
[...]
We are waging a nuclear war in Iraq right now. That country is contaminated. It will be contaminated for practically eternity now. It’s okay for them to have them, but Iran or Syria can’t have them. It’s okay for Israel to occupy Palestine, but it’s – yeah – and it’s okay for Iraq to occupy – I mean, for the United States to occupy Iraq, but it’s not okay for Syria to be in Lebanon. They’re a bunch of fucking hypocrites!

The above is part of Sheehan's speech at San Francisco State University hosting Lynne Stewart Esq. who was recently convicted of forwarding statements by her terrorist client to his followers urging them to violence.

The event was sponsored by International Socialist Organization which proudly states on the "WHERE WE STAND" page of its website:

Revolution Not Reform

Reforms within the capitalist system cannot put an end to oppression and exploitation. Capitalism must be overthrown.The structures of the present government–the Congress, the army, the police and the judiciary –cannot be taken over and used by the working class. They grew up under capitalism and are designed to protect the ruling class against workers.

It was also sponsored by Students Against War which put out this gem of a flyer:

SAW regularly posts its activities on the Marxism Mailing List, so its connection to ISO is not a fluke.

In the above cited speech, Cindy Sheehan said:

I just want to say that you students, Students Against War, you have all my support and all my organization’s support. I told Kristen if you have any actions and you need a ringleader, that I only live about an hour away. I’ll be here. If I can sleep on somebody’s floor, we can have this, we can camp out, do whatever we need.

Um hm. These are the folks discussing the really interesting question of whether Americans should be on the side of the insurgents (the people who actually killed her son). Cindy thinks they're great!

This is an email from Cindy Sheehan to the producers of Nightline. She was unhappy with Ted Koppel's treatment of her during an "townhall" style panel discussion. I should note that Koppel and the producers of Nightline have made the news several times as opponents of Bush and skeptics on the progress of the New Iraq. It was posted to a Google Group on March 14th, 2005.

Am I emotional? Yes, my first born was murdered. Am I angry? Yes, he was killed for lies and for a PNAC Neo-Con agenda to benefit Israel. My son joined the Army to protect America, not Israel. Am I stupid? No, I know full-well that my son, my family, this nation, and this world were betrayed by a George Bush who was influenced by the neo-con PNAC agenda after 9/11.
[...]
It would be so amazing if your show would put me, or another parent who lost their child on who disagrees with the war and this administration: to have just an entire show..without presenting the false side of the debate.

Okaaaay. None of that "showing both sides" nonsense for Cindy.

This is what she says about the email today:

Another “big deal” today was the lie that I had said that Casey died for Israel. I never said that, I never wrote that. I had supposedly said it in a letter that I wrote to Ted Koppel’s producer in March. I wrote the letter because I was upset at the way Ted treated me when I appeared at a Nightline Town Hall meeting in January right after the inauguration. I felt that Ted had totally disrespected me. I wrote the letter to Ted Bettag and cc’d a copy to the person who gave me Ted’s address. I believe he changed the email and sent it out to capitalize on my new found notoriety by promoting his own agenda. Enough about that.

Hmmmm...this letter was posted in March, Cindy. You didn't have any "new found notoriety" then.

Here's more:

The other thing I want him to tell me is 'just what was the noble cause Casey died for?' Was it freedom and democracy? Bull---t! He died for oil. He died to make your friends richer. He died to expand American imperialism in the Middle East .

And she also said:

Saddam was our national leader, And yeah, I know I know…he was a dictator, he was stupid, and self-destructive, but he was our national leader that I didn’t [want] any external forces to come and change....But he was a national leader, and more a phenomena than a person.A phenomenon that Iraq must go through to reach to a better future.

Okay, I lied. That wasn't Cindy. It was Raed.

Check out Mohammed's letter to Cindy at Iraq the Model.

The Iraqi Shi'a Don't Rise To The Terrorist's Bait

2005-02-19T14:09:00.000-08:00

I'm not supposed to posting, but I just wanted to mention how impressed I am with the Shi'a clerical leadership.

The terrorists (as was their stated goal a year ago) have been trying to instigate a civil war between the Shi'a and Sunni Arabs and the Kurds and Sunni Arabs. But the Shi'a aren't going for it.

Whatever Riverbend says about the Shi'a clerics, they have shown themselves to be quite enlightened so far in the necessities of democracy and the disastrous results of retribution. Compare them to the most vocal Sunni clerics calling for the murder of the "occupying infidels" and "apostates" and to the clerics permitting mosques to be used as weapons depots and it is easy to see who are the real wolves in shepherds' clothing.

Personally, I would be quite satisfied to see a goodly number of certain Sunni clerics taken out in the streets and kicked senseless (and my church congregation has never been attacked by a murder-suicide bomber). But the Shi'a as a whole have show themselves wiser than my inclinations.

I can't find the post but I read an Iraqi blog a month or so ago in which al-Sistani was reported saying "I don't care if they blow-up the whole town, don't strike back." Honestly, I don't fully trust Sistani. However, if I'm ever in a situation where every action seems bad and any wrong move to the left or right will destroy me, I want someone to advise me who has the steady nerves and cool pragmatic mind behind a command like that one.

Changes At This Blog

2005-02-14T08:54:00.000-08:00

Friends,

This is to let everyone know that with increasing commitments at work, I will not be making any attempt to update this blog regularly in the near future. I'm gratified by the 1200 or so visitors that have come by here each month, and if you have a blog on Iraq, it is likely I'll be checking you out eventually. I'll do some occasional profiles on Iraqi bloggers, and I'll post some new pictures and links I've been gathering on Kaddaffi's all-girl bodyguard (here here and here), but I'm not going to be very active on this blog or others.

Anyway, it looks like I'm not very much needed anymore. Why should I fisk Riverbend, when there are 100 Iraqi blogs that can reveal her as a liar just by writing the truth. After Riverbend's last post and also Raed's and Khalid's latest posts, and with the results of the elections, it has been increasingly clear to me that the Unrealists have lost.

There are reports that average Sunnis are upset with Association of Muslim Scholars for calling a boycott since A) by listening to them and those like them, the Sunnis feel like the train left without them and B) the AMS now says they will "respect" the results of the election (so after the vote the AMS is willing to accept the elections -- ha ha ha). Also, the Ayatolla-supported UIA party failed to capture 50% of the vote so they will have to work with the secular Kurds to form a constitution. And both the Kurd and Shi'a leadership say that they consider including Sunnis in the constitution process to be "vital". Sistani may attempt to influence the constitution process, but that ship has sailed -- there will be no theocracy. If Sistani tries to force one or even one by another name, he will be marginalized. If he doesn't, then he will only lend credibility to the process.

So it looks like everything is going to work out. There are going to be some bumps, but the possibility of Iraq becoming a failed state becomes more remote each day and nothing seems likely to change the momentum. The Ba'athists have lost (Riverbend's family), the Islamists are losing, Tehran is going to lose Eastern Kurdistan (IMO), Sen. John Kerry -- who claimed the Iraqi liberation was a mistake but he would send Americans to die there anyway -- lost, Michael Moore -- a pariah now even among Unrealists -- lost, Juan Cole has been revealed as a joke over and over again. Can you see the smile on my face? Ear to ear, my friends.

Zarqawi and his group have openly declared war on democracy, and the other terrorists are kidnapping retarded children and forcing them to be living bombs. Why would anyone need me to explain to them that the Iraqis are fighting a war against the most sinister evil? And if they do, what more could I say to persuade them?

In advance, I morn and honor those Iraqis who will die this year at the hands of abaddon-minded dead-enders. But I can see now that the future of Iraq is entirely in the hands of Iraqis and the Mult-national force will more and more play the role of assistant rather than partner.

Riverbend has gone back to telling drama-queen fiction breaking out in tears because (supposedly) some stranger said she ought to wear a skirt:

No one could talk that way before the war and if they did, you didn’t have to listen. You could answer back. Now, you only answer back and make it an issue if you have some sort of death wish or just really, really like trouble.

Oh, come now, Riverbend. Of course they didn't talk to you that way. Confronting someone with close ties to Saddam's government could get you in trouble. In fact, many reported feeling just the way you describe now:

The problem with defiance is that it doesn’t just involve you personally, it involves anyone with you at that moment- usually a male relative. It means that there might be an exchange of ugly words or a fight and probably, after that, a detention in Abu Ghraib.

Now I ask you Riverbend fans, have you ever read Riverbend acknowledge that that this was a constant fear for the vast majority of Iraqis in the good ol' days of Saddam? Has she ever acknowledged that people seem to have felt the same worry when talking to her once upon a not so very long time ago?

All this presumes Riverbend isn't blowing the event way out of proportion or making it up entirely. I'd love to see a blog devoted to instances of the enforcement of conservative dress on Iraqi women or on the harassment of women who wear pants or don't cover their heads. Until now, it is only Riverbend who talks about it, and she is no one I would believe about anything anymore. She's a Rejectionist by her own words now. And she's been shown to be a liar in the past.

And Raed? Khalid? They're blogs have been a fountain of the most pathetic blatant rumor-mongering. If they were Americans, they would be called "black helicopters types": people who will buy any conspiracy theory that views the world in terms of powerful hidden forces and weak mind-controlled robots/huddling victims.

What does Khalid say?: The elections were an exoneration of Rejectionists like himself. Yes. He he did write that yesterday. Raed seems pretty much through with Iraq. If he's not reiterating some bizarre conspiracy theory, he's railing against newly elected Palestinian Authority leader Abbas for acting to keep the cease-fire with Israel, or against the government of Jordan. Hmmmm....He doesn't like elected leaders and he doesn't like secular monarchies. The only government that atheist communist Raed seems to like is the Iranian theocracy:

I still have this faith in the Iranian government, that has better potentialities of having internal revolutions and evolution, a government that can produce a real national democracy in the long run.

Faiza still complains, but she is really uninterested talking about the legitimacy of the New Iraq anymore. She's in Jordan now, and who knows if she'll ever go back? She says she will. She says she wants to do something to help Iraqi women. That sounds admirable.

So I don't have time to update this blog regularly for the next few months, and frankly, why bother? The terrorists, the Rejectionists, and the Unrealists are getting the message out for me.

I'll see ya'll when I see ya. You can still reach me by email and Yahoo! IM.

[UPDATE]
I can't help it! Saudia Arabia religious police crack down on the observance of Valentines Day, even among husbands and wives...the color red is banned for clothes and flowers:

...Religious authorities call it a Christian celebration that true Muslims should shun.

Each year shortly before Feb. 14, the country's religious police mobilize, heading out to hunt for - and confiscate - red roses, red teddy bears and any signs of a heart.
[...]
Valentine's items descend underground, to the black market, where their price triples and quadruples. Salesmen and waiters avoid wearing red.
[...]
"Female voices demand the re lease of the red rose," read a headline in Sunday's Asharq al- Awsat. Women complained to the paper that no one had the right to ban flower sales.

In a town outside Riyadh named Thumama, Sheik Abdullah al-Dakhil, head of the muttawa, or religious police, told Al- Eqtisadiah newspaper that "despite awareness campaigns and the confiscation of flowers, chocolate and other items, there were 15 infractions" for Valentine's Day indiscretions last year.

Does anyone believe that a majority of Iraqis are going to sign up this sort of nonsense?

The Electricity situation in Iraq

2005-02-10T06:59:00.000-08:00

Riverbend's blog has become little more than an intermittent status report on the electricity supply at her house. A discussion in the comments section of the last post has inspired me to post about Iraq's power supply now.

The unrealists are crowing all over the blogosphere about a statement from Gen. Bostwick in January. He said that Iraq's base power capacity is currently at 3600MW.
The unrealists are jumping on this. They say,

See?! The US has been in Iraq for 22 months and the power capacity is less than under Saddam!!! It was 4400MW under Saddam, and now it is only 3600MW!

Based on the cited article, I can only assume the unrealists are attempting to mislead (as typical). The famous article states:

Bostwick blamed the shortfall on sabotage and the deterioration of Iraq's electricityi nfrastructure under Saddam's rule. Through October, power generation was at 5,600 megawatts, but the electricity supply shrunk when Electricity Minister Ayad Al-Samarrai opted to carry out large-scale repairs to the aging network that month, Bostwick said.

Bostwick compared Iraq's electricity infrastructure to an old car. "You can choose to drive it until it breaks, but when it breaks, there will be multiple problems."

The US and Iraqi authorities hope the repairs will be completed before June when the temperatures soar, he said.

I pointed out that the biggest slow-down in the power situation, so I have been told by responsible soldiers, is deliberate sabotage by the terrorists and that the Iraqi power grid was in a seriously decayed state and generally "held together with chewing gum." Cpt Teeg responded:

I stumbled on your blog and you are absolutely right in regards to the Iraqi power grid. I am a civil affairs soldier who spent 13 months in Iraq. The power grid was basically held together by chewing gum as you so eloquently described.

Saddam used the power grid (power on/power off) as punishment for Shiitesand Sunnis alike if they did not tow the party line. It was never made a huge issue because the alternative punishment was death/torture/family rape and execution. If you travel just 2K outside Baghdad into the suburbs (slums) most places hadn't seen power since the last Shiite uprising in 1991. ...I am a Democrat, not a huge fan of Bush but am smart enough to see the facts. Like I said, I was there...I saw. Be well
- CPT Teeg

Thanks Captain, and thank you for your service to us.

As for the state of the power grid this summer, I read this article in the
July 2004 issue of International Water Power and Dam Construction Magazine which confirms Cpt Teeg's report. It said:

[Iraq's] electrical generating base was often deliberately kept low during Saddam Hussein’s reign, as electricity was one of those perks that could be favourably rationed, because the base capacity, 4000MW, was so inadequate.

Did you catch that? They say Iraq's pre-war base capacity was 4000MW, not 4400MW! What's with that?

The article continues:

Typically, parts of Baghdad, Fallujah and Tikrit would receive electricity up to 24 hours a day. Everyone else was getting between 0 and 10 hours. Indeed since the early 1990s, the Kurdish Region to the north was entirely cut off from the central electricity grid.
...in July 2003, one of the first steps of the Coalition Provisional Authority and the former Electricity Minister, Dr Ayham al-Samarrai, was to equalise the distribution of electricity across the country.

This agrees with Ali's post at Iraq The Model when he accused Riverbend of distortion and outright lying about the power situation in Baghdad. (Ali now has a separate blog at Free Iraqi).

The article then says:

It had been hoped that by the changeover date of 30 June 2004, 6000MW of capacity would be installed. Unfortunately due to the uprising in April, the ‘Spring Maintenance Programme’ was significantly curtailed and the actual figure was more like 4500MW.

It is a great article. I recommend you check it out. It was quite optimistic about Iraq's power capacity in the near term, and since the capacity was up to 5600MW by October, I'd say their predictions were realistic. Now Iraq apparently has to take the next step to modernizing their grid to be dependable.

To be fair, I have heard hearsay that there is also an organized crime problem with the stealing and black-marketing of copper cabling. I don't know if this is true. If anyone can provide first hand confirmation of this, I'll report it.

No News Is Good News

2005-02-07T01:53:00.000-08:00

Riverbend has not posted since the election. I presume she will not until something bad happens since she's sure as hell is not going to discuss the election without a sinister turn to it.

I point this out because I check her blog twice a day in anticipation of her take on the 'fraud' elections that her countrymen braved so much to take part in.

Ordinary Iraqis Turn the Tables On Insurgents: Kill Five

2005-02-04T10:23:00.000-08:00

The residents of a small Iraqi village have killed five insurgents who had attacked them for voting in last weekend's national elections. Several other insurgents were also wounded.
The insurgents raided the village of al-Mudhiryah south of Baghdad after warning its inhabitants not to vote in the election.
The villagers fought back, killing five of the insurgents and wounding eight others.
The insurgents' cars were then set alight.
Al-Mudhiryah's tribal sheikh says his people are sick of being threatened by Islamic extremists.
By ABC News Middle East correspondent Mark Willacy

I know the terrorists have killed a couple dozen good people so far today (and who knows how many of their own they've killed for the fun of it), but this is such marvelous good news, I couldn't help but share it.

Ali, at Free Iraqi, got the story before I did and is giddy about it as you would expect.

Emigre Finally Banned At Iraqi Elections Discussion

2005-01-31T16:13:00.000-08:00

She posts her "side" here. Although she isn't especially forthcoming, it seems she had something pithy to say about the Nazi holocaust.

Whatever the reason, I say it was too long coming. She offered nothing to the discussion but rejectionist propoganda.

I'll let you know more when I know more.

Egyptian Sandmonkey To Raed: "Go F*** Yourself"

2005-01-31T10:11:00.000-08:00

Sandmonkey just discovered Raed Jarrar. A whole new world is about to open up to him.

To Raed (who is half-Palestinian) he says:

You remind me of this other dude that I was reading yesterday, who was going on and on how this election is illegitimate cause it is done under occupation. So following that same logic, Abu Mazen’s* victory is illegitimate as well? Last I checked where he was campaigning it’s called the “occupied territories”. That must make him an illegitimate Palestinian president then. That makes perfect sense. Or doesn’t. whatever

*Abu Mazen was just elected President of the Israeli occupied West Bank

He also correctly points out that the picture Raed put at the top of his post (claiming that the high turnout was due to Iraqis being denied their ration cards if they didn't vote -- apparently 35% of Iraqis don't care if they eat) is of a woman in Najaf who is CRYING TEARS OF JOY after voting. I thought I was the only person to notice that.

To see this and other pictures go to http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6887461/site/newsweek/

You'll also see a picture of a man receiving medical attention after being shot in the face by one of Khalid Jarrar's glorious insurgents for showing up to vote.

Unrealists Disrupt Iraqis Casting Ballots in Sydney

2005-01-29T21:52:00.000-08:00

The unrealists never sleep:

The disturbance broke out when a group of 20 protesters started to shout insults at voters leaving the centre.

[UPDATE]
And it wasn't just in Austrailia.
In Spain as well (Hat-tip: Little Green Footballs)

People shout slogans during a protest in central Madrid January 30, 2005. Marchers were protesting Iraq holding national elections under what they called U.S occupation. At least 10 suicide attacks targeted polling stations and voters on Sunday, but Iraqis still voted in large numbers.
REUTERS/Susana Vera

[UPDATE]
Londonkurd reports that they did the same in LONDON!! Why didn't the BBC report this??

[UPDATE]
Terrorists use a mentally disabled child as a suicide bomber.

Voting Starts Today!

2005-01-28T06:53:00.000-08:00

This picture is a kind of statue of liberty, don't you think?

Congratulations to Iraqis around the world on Iraq's first step into the Free World!

Good luck to every voter in Iraq on Sunday, and God be with the candidates, policemen, and National Guardsmen. Now get out and vote.

Riverbend? Put on your fuzzy-hat and vote. Khalid? Act from principle and vote. I'm told it is your religious duty. Raed? Get your muddled brain to the polls and vote. Faiza? This is the first step to getting the "occupiers" out of the country -- Go vote.

Also the military wing of The Islamic Front for Resistance says it will not target the elections, voters, or polling stations. Lets see them put their money where their mouth is and PROTECT those places from attack!

When the Presidential elections approach in the U.S., I like to follow the electoral map to get an idea of how it will go. Well, Zeyad has provided something like that. Check it out. Here's one I thought he should have included.

My Ears Burning at the Straight Dope Forum

2005-01-14T14:41:00.000-08:00

I was working here at my computer when suddenly my ears turned red hot. "Holy Otolaryngologist! Someone's talking about me!"

So I closed my eyes and clicked on my AdFree Stats link at random. Sure enough, someone had accessed my site through the Straight Dope forum.

Somehow the conversation there turned to Riverbend, and a poster had recommended this lil' shack as a supplement to her blog. (Thanks Ryan Liam. I'm honored!)

Then someone started talking smack about me and this blog, sooooo I jumped into the mix.

Here's the conversation. Enjoy. :)

By the way, I included in that give-and-take my challenge to any Unrealist who thinks the removal of Saddam was illegal or a war-crime:

If Saddam was removed "illegally" then he should released from jail, returned to power, and compensated with the funds and weapons necessary to put down the newly empowered opponents of his regime. If you don't believe that should happen, then you don't really consider the act illegal. Pick one.

I've yet to get an Unrealist to admit that Saddam should be reinstated or to explain why he shouldn't be even though the invasion was illegal. But the offer still stands. In fact, if any Unrealist is willing to take this statement on -- answer it honestly or explain why the alternatives are irrelevant -- I'll post his responses in full on this blog.

[UPDATE]
I finally got a taker on my challenge. He/She didn't leave a name, did make a valient attempt:

Your challenge doesn't stand up to much scrutiny. Most opponents of the war were also opponents of Saddam. His removal was the silver lining of an extremely large cloud. Naturally that does not make an unprovoked attack on a sovereign country legal, and overall it has probably done much more harm than good. That's no reason to undo the single good thing that came out of it.
A similar argument to yours would be the following:
A burglar breaks into a house. When he gets in, he finds a man having a heart attack and calls an ambulance, saving the man's life, before escaping with his life savings. If you think the burglary was an illegal act, you should have the homeowner killed, as he was only saved because of an illegal act. If you think the homeowner should be allowed to live, you don't believe the burglary
was illegal (and you should let the burglar keep the man's life savings).

Nice try. You seem to be suggesting that the INVASION was illegal, but deposing Saddam was not. I'm sorry, but that simply won't fly:

Saving a life is perfectly legal. If the invasion was illegal -- a war crime -- then removing Saddam Hussein was NOT legal.

Any response?

[UPDATE]
Jeff Kantor has taken up my challenge. Nicely done too. I suspect I am about to cry "Calf Rope".

Get your user's certificaton in International Law in the Comments section of this post.

BTW I screwed up my last response. Jeff's quotes and my response are inexplicably set in the same paragraphs, but Jeff's words are italics and that is how you will know the difference.

[UPDATE -- "Calf Rope!"]
Okay. Jeff Kantor has definitely proved his point. IF the invasion of Iraq were illegal under international law, then it WOULD NOT require that Saddam be released, reinstated, and provided with funds and munitions to fend off his enemies.

International law is not what it would appear to be...not even as what it's most fierce propronents seem to think of it. His response is too long and involved to do justice here but I definitely recommend you read it in the Comments section of this post.

However, I don't think his explanation of international law and why Saddam can be left in history's ashtray is really what the unrealists have in mind when they call the invasion illegal.

CMAR II says "Check it out"

Iraqi Boy Helps Lead Troops to Roadside Bomb

2005-01-12T19:39:00.000-08:00

Let's Talk About Civil War

2005-01-12T11:41:00.000-08:00

You know what surprises me most? Iraqi bloggers -- those living in Iraq, that is -- rarely (relatively) speak directly of civil war. In America right now, if you watch the talking-head programs, you would think a civil war in Iraq is annual occurrence marked with anticipation by everyone, like Marti Gras in New Orleans ("Are we going to have a civil war in Iraq?" "Can we do anything to prevent a civil war among Iraqis? "How long do you think it will take for a civil war to develop in Iraq?").

Riverbend spoke of it last month, however. Guess who she blamed? Foreign Islamists? Ba'athist recalcitrants? Hmmm....I see you've never met our Riverbend:

We've been avoiding discussing the possibilities of this last week's developments… the rioting and violence. We don't often talk about the possibility of civil war because conferring about it somehow makes it more of a reality. When we do talk about it, it's usually done in hushed tones with an overhanging air of consternation. Is it possible? Will it happen? Sunnis and Shi'a have always lived in harmony in Iraq and we still do, so far. I'm from a family that is about half Shi'a and half Sunni. We have never had problems as the majority of civilized people don't discriminate between the two. The thing that seems to be triggering a lot of antagonism on all sides is the counterinsurgency militia being cultivated by the CPA and GC which will include Chalabi's thugs, SCIRI extremists and some Kurdish Bayshmarga.

What can I say, but Ha ha ha. As typical for Riverbend, it is attempts to arrest terrorists (who have stated their intention to foment a sectarian civil war) that are to blame for any violence or civil war.

For about a week the unrealists in the West became attached to a jag that having elections would lead to a civil war. That one is almost as rich as anything Riverbend could come up with.

Riverbend is an exception. Most Iraqi bloggers who will openly analyze the possibility of a civil war, tend to be those most optimistic about the new Iraq and they typically do not consider a civil war an odd's favorite. Which brings us to Mohammed's most recent post at Iraq the Model. He takes apart the theory that the a civil war in Iraq is inevitable or that elections will lead to them. This is his conclusive point:

I want to say that I think what happened in Palestine yesterday and what happened in Afghanistan before that proves that if the people really want to have elections, then they can do it and it's another indication that we're moving on the right track here and it's another accomplishment for the ongoing change in the region.

Ali at Free Iraqi, taking on the financiers of the terrorist side in the War of Iraqi Liberation says:

"They bet for a long time on a civil war in Iraq or isolating Iraq from the international society, but Iraq came back to the political arena stronger than before the war and there are no real signs for civil war yet (and in my mind there won't be any). "

I love the Mohammed and Ali, but I'm not certain too much optimism in this case is a good thing. I'm more like Hammorabi. He believes in the new Iraq but he's not so sure a civil war isn't quite possible. Even better, he agrees with me about the motive of those pushing to have the elections postponed:

At last those who think that civil war may happen in Iraq are not very wrong but the possibility of it is happening without election is more than after election and this is why the terrorists are pushing to prevent the election...
...Brent Scowcroft and Zbigniew Brzezinski forgot about what will happen if the civil war resulted in the terrorists becoming strong inside Iraq whether with or without controlling the power especially if the USA pulled! It will certainly be the worst disaster for the region since the WWII and will give birth into another 11 Septembers in many areas regional and abroad.

I said Riverbend is an exception. Well Faiza is an exception too. Most of the time, it's the same ol' Faiza with her bitching that America has harmed Iraq so much by getting rid of Saddam. And, then, out of nowhere...it becomes clear that she is not for chaos and she knows who the chaosmasters are:

And there are some who want to start a civil war between the Iraqis, especially between the Sunni and Shi’aat. It didn’t work between the Muslims and Christians. Nor between the Arabs and Kurds. So, the last card remains, between the Sunni and Shi’aat.When we are at the shop, and some people come in, Iraqis, somehow the talk would run around to the topics of the new government, the Sunni, the Shi’aat, and the conflict would almost start to loom ahead, then I usually stop, cut the talk with a laugh, and say: well, well, that is enough, no Sunni, and no Shi’aat, we are Iraqis, and Muslims, right? I usually get the answer: Right. We all laugh, and that would be the end of it.I do hope the Iraqis would remain with these kind hearts, good intentions, and love for each other, and so be able to cross this crises.

I tell you, I'm crying tears of joy to read this again. Then, again, maybe she thinks America is the one trying to start a civil war.

About the same time, Rose speculated about the terrorists and their goals to drag Iraq into a civil war:

The Iraqis have strong bonds between them, in spite of religion or ethnic differences, we all work together, have neighbors from other religions, visit each other and respect our differences. my neighbors are shias, my best friends are Christians and Kurds and I’m Sunni, but we all have good relations between us. I’m afraid of those who are trying hard to tear us a part, for me I don’t think they will succeed but I’m sure they are from outside Iraq, and they want Iraq to separate into several parts or maybe drag it to civil war.
[...]
also today, my father told me that he is afraid from a civil war, he said that those who are doing these things they know exactly what they are doing. I tried to tell him it’s impossible but he said no, they will succeed in making a civil war and then divide Iraq to peaces. I still don’t believe in this, The US will not allow this to happen because it will mean that they have failed in everything they fought for.

I wish I could believe with Rose that only foreigners want to see an Iraqi civil war. I will also say that if it is only some fraction of the Sunni Arabs who support the terrorists, then there will be no civil war, and the terrorists will lose. But if the Kurds, choose adamantly to secede from Iraq, I believe it will launch a chain of events that will require US troops to retreat to Jordanian border and watch as Iraq tears itself to pieces. The most dangerous thing for Iraq is for the Sunni terrorists to attempt to strike a deal with the Kurds..."you support our independence drive, and we'll support yours."

Should the US withdraw troops? Riverbend, Raed, and Khalid say they should. Every other Iraqi blogger I've read who lives in country states emphatically that a US pull-out would precipitate a civil war and that that would be a bad thing. Only Riverbend states openly to prefer civil war to U.S. troops....hmmm...I wonder who she thinks that would benefit? The Jarrar boys leave to us to infer it.

Rana Imad at the BBC Iraq Log says:

I don't think that the withdrawal of the American forces would be wise. It would make the situation much worse...In my opinion, if they leave now a civil war could follow in Iraq.

Neurotic Iraqi Wife agrees:

But once those troops leave Iraq, then believe me, the atrocities and the barbaric activities will escalate even more. People will start killing each other, and yes a civil war will break out. Iraqis who have been brainwashed by Saddam, and by religeous fanatics will take the opportunity to slay everyone that says NAY to them. This process is already taking place now.....

There are some Iraq bloggers who are more ambivalent about the troops leaving. Samir Ali at the BBC's Iraq log portrays the schizophrenic POV that seems so common among so many Iraqis and simply makes me crazy:

I worry that if the Americans leave there will be civil war; all that we Sunnis want is a definite time schedule for them to leave and a government that involves all Iraqis. I think the Americans want to stay here for a long time.

If the Americans want to stay a long time, why would the Sunnis worry about the Americans leaving? The first fear is not unfounded, Samir. Americans are so anxious to pull out their soldiers from Iraq, their palms sweat.

They are like a man that has mortgaged his house to finance a friend in a high-stakes poker game when the friend is not doing so well and has asked for extra cash. He wants to answer, "No, just give me what's left of my money and I'm out of here." But if he does, he will lose his house. So the man will loan his friend more money and the US will keep the troops their until the new Iraqi government can defend itself. But as soon as the man's friend has won his money back, the man will take it and go. And as soon as Iraq will not collapse when the US troops leave, the troops will be out of Iraq. That seems so obvious to me.

Don't worry about the Americans staying too long. Do everything you can to build up your country before the American public gets bored with building new democracies and turns to other things.

During the liberation of Fallujah, Zeyad at Healing Iraqi spoke of civil war as though it were inevitable (he hasn't mentioned it since though):

What is worse is that the first chapter of the future Iraqi civil war is currently being written. The Sunni armed groups have made no secret this time of their true intentions. According to them, the Iraqi NG's are now just infidel 'Kurd and Shi'ite' militias taking their revenge against the peace-loving Sunnis. The Association of Muslim Scholars issues fatwas calling Iraqi security forces 'apostates' because "Iraqis should not be fighting Iraqis under the occupation". This fatwa implies that if the occupation ends tomorrow then it would be okay for Iraqis to kill each other then, since that has always been the case over the last three decades.

On the subject of a civil war, Raed seems believe (as closely as I can discern a rational thought in that sad scattered mind) that civil war in Iraq is inevitable:

Iraq is really going through a critical time, and any of these clashes can turn into civil war easily, especially with the mistakes of the US administration in Iraq like putting Kurdish peshmerga against Arab fighters, and Shia Iraqis against Sunni Iraqis. I used to say this 20 months ago, and I'm still repeating it. The real war in Iraq didn't start yet. The real bad time didn't start yet.

Typical for Raed, it is hard to determine what he is getting at. I think he's saying that the real war in Iraq will start after all the Iraqis rise up and cast out the infidels (secular infidels I'm sure Raed would stipulate) and choose their new National Leader who is more of a phenomenon than a person. But your guess is as good as mine, and he's welcome to comment here and clarify what the hay-dees he's talking about.

(Note to self: Calling an evil thug "more of a phenomenon than a person", absolves you of assigning critical moral judgments to that evil thug. After all, how can you expect a phenomenon to answer for its crimes?)

And in October, after those ING heroes were murdered by Zarqawi's group, Ferid the Great expressed amazement that there was not a civil war considering how the Arabic media was playing the coverage.

Kurdo, a few weeks ago was reminding everyone that elections of themselves will not end the terrorist attacks, make all Iraqis happy with the government, or solve all of Iraq's problems:

Elections are not some magic-sticks that could touch Iraq and make it as safe as heaven. I remember in 1992 before the Kurdistani general elections, we had this view of Kurdistan after the elections. A free, organised, democratic, western style country. There was even [a] TV series called "After the Parliament". In these TV programmes, they used to show Kurdistan as a (arms-free), democratic, prosperous country. In the shows, a few people were saying "When is this going to happen"? The answer and the end of the show was "Dwaii Parlaman" "After electing the Parliament".
But, after the elections, Kurdistan turned into hell. A bloody civil war that continued for about 7 years devastated the country.So anyone thinking that this Iraqi election is going to make things anything better, should stop thinking about that now. Yes if you are George W. Bush or Tony Blair, it will help a lot. But if you are some poor Iraqi family then forget it about it.

Kurdo is right. Things still could blow-up after the elections. The Kurds could declare independence. The Sunni Arabs could turn in en masse to support the terrorists or Ba'athists or anyone who could promise that they would not have live as equals among the Kurds, Turkomen, and Shi'a. Well, the Kurds declaring independence is the most realistic danger.

But this time we have something in our corner that the Kurds did not have in 1992. Then, Kurds did not appreciate that their democracy could fail (although even the U.S. had a very bloody civil war and it had a couple of rebellions shortly after the War For Independence from Britain).

Now, we have the very bracing danger of an impending civil war. Fear of the Abyss is a useful virtue to get everyone to keep his eye on the ball. The more Iraqis remember that a civil war could realistically occur and that it would be the very worst thing that could happen, then the more likely it won't happen.

I've said before that while I'm not superstitious, talking about something too loudly and too often can cause it to occur. But in this case, I think the civil war story is something useful for Iraqis to tell each other regularly right now.

Is El Salvador the Model for Iraq?

2005-01-10T13:34:00.000-08:00

John Lyons in the WSJ explains on how El Salvador beat homegrown terrorists with elections.

"In El Salvador you had the image of old farmers lined up to vote, crouching to get out of the line of fire, and then getting back into line. It was about as graphic a demonstration of the desire for democracy as you can have."

Can Iraq do the same? Why not, considering that when El Salvador held its first election in 1982, communist insurgents controlled a third of the country? As bad as the situation in Iraq is, it isn't that bad.

This is as sure an explanation as any for why the terrorists and the unrealists are united in calling for the elections to be "postponed".

A Bleak Scenario If Iraqi Kurds Declare an Independent State

2005-01-07T13:17:00.000-08:00

Iraqis are seeking a referendum from the U.N. to have Iraqi Kurdistan recognized as an independent Kurdish homeland.

Meanwhile, Kurdo has been increasingly dubious regarding the feasibility of the Iraqi elections, and has been hinting that postponing them might not be a bad idea.
(here and here)

The Iranian Kurd Medya is saying flat out that permitting a Shi'a majority democracy is a bad idea, and he is openly calling for a partition of Iraq:

If Sunni [Arab], Shiite and Kurds can't live toghether why should we make them to do so ?

Medya considers the Unified Iraq policy to be a Turkish plot to keep Kurdistan bottled up.

I think some elements among the Iraqi Kurds have decided they don't want to be part of a democratic Iraq (in which they are a minority among a Shi'a majority) any more than radical Sunni Arabs do.

To be fair, there are plenty of Kurdish voices that are openly backing the elections, even if they are distressed at the current events:
Dilnareen
Sami
Yad

I'm sympathetic to the Kurds in their asperations for an independent state. They've wanted it for a long time, and one can imagine that after being driven from their homes and gassed by an Arab-dominated government, they would not see themselves as patriotic "Iraqis".

But here is the reason why (for the time being) the Iraqi Kurds must remain part of Iraq.

If they break loose of Iraq, the first question to be settled will be their exact borders. This brings up the question of Kirkuk, but it puts in dispute places like Mosul which also have large Arab populations. When the Kurds break loose, three things will happen:

The government of Iraq will lose its core fighting-force in the form of the Peshmurga, making it less able to to fight insurgencies within its non-Kurdistan areas

The Sunnis will seek their own homeland separate from the Shi'a -- and the battle for Baghdad will begin.
The Arabs and Kurds will start fighting over Mosul, Kirkuk, etc.

What is the next thing that will happen? Turkey, Syria and Iran will clamp down on their own Kurdish populations to premptively prevent similar independence actions in their own countries. This means the hard-won (albeit insufficient) liberties recently secured for Kurds in Turkey will be lost. These clamp-downs will probably not succeed in preventing revolts and there will be multiple Halabjas within those countries.

Simultaneously, each of these countries also will move into portions of the new Kurdistan (as well as Iraq) to secure real estate as a buffer to the chaos that will swiftly envelope all of Iraq.

So the new Kurdistan will be at war with the countries on its West, East, North, and South: Turkey, Iran, Syria, Iraq and the attempted independent Sunni state.

At the same time, each of these entities will begin handing out money and supplies to secure aliances with the local Arabs and other ethnicalities, and with rival Kurdish groups within the new Kurdish state. So in addition to fighting a war on every front, the new Kurdistan will be engaged in a no-holds-barred civil war with itself. Not to mention that it will have an increasingly radicalized Arab failed-state(s) on its southern border -- it's only path to a port. Kurdistan will become the center of a maelstrom with a maelstrom.

The result? Tens of thousands of dead Kurds throughout the Middle East. At least four Middle East nations in flames. Iraq becomes a black-hole. The surrounding dictatorships smugly assure their citizens of the dangers of liberty, and hold up the Iraqi Kurdistan as proof that the Kurds can't be trusted with self-governance.

For now the Kurds need to concentrate on keeping Kurds free in Iraq.

As George Packer said in his New Yorker article,

Fanaticism is the legacy of Saddam’s Arabization policy.

We must not let Saddam win.

"Unrealists" or "Freedom Haters"?

2005-01-06T10:57:00.000-08:00

If you take issue with my designation of those "ideologically invested in the failure of democracy in Iraq" as unrealists...well...as least I haven't taken the (reasonable) step that Anne Applebaum has at the Washington Post.

In the very near future, I'm going to be adding to this post in the near future to investigate what the Unrealists want -- intend and hope for -- in Iraq. (The wife and kids are in town this week, so I have had little time for posting)

Zarqawi Collared?

2005-01-04T06:22:00.000-08:00

Kurdish sources are reporting that Jordanian terrorist and Saddam hatchet-man, al-Zarqawi, who was reportedly the man who personally beheaded all those people on video, has been captured.

[UPDATE]

MSNBC is now reporting US military and intelligence sources that are deny reports that Zarqawi has been captured.

(sigh)

[UPDATE]

Now Al-Jazeera is reporting Zarqawi has been captured.

I'm torn. I can't decide whether this makes the story more or less likely to be true.

I want to hope like, Kender (see the comments) that the story is true and the MNF is keeping the story under wraps to nail more of his cronies, but I can't risk hoping for this. The disappointment would be too great.

[UPDATE]

An anonymous commentor reports:

Aljazeera.net, the website of Al Jazeera, the TV station based in Qatar, has NO stories about the "capture" of Zarqawi. The link provided is to aljazeera.com a site, with no Arabic version, by a publishing company based in Dubai. This fake Al-Jazeera (aljazeera.com) has nothing to do with the Qatari TV station.

Ah yes! This "Al-Jazeera" is from the United Arab Emerates. Pay close attention to those URLs.

Liberal Iraqi outs himself

2005-01-03T11:58:00.000-08:00

As some have suspected for a while, he is Ali from Iraq the Model. He mysteriously quit there a couple weeks ago. It turns out he went undercover as Liberal Iraqi. He offers an explanation, mea culpas, and...heck...another great Iraqi blog.

He's also changed the name to Free Iraqi.

Check it out.

The Peace to End all Peace now reigns at the Iraqi Elections Blog.

2005-01-03T11:44:00.000-08:00

I mentioned previously that some trouble was going on at Iraqi Elections Blog. It seems that what happened was that Stephen had stripped Khalid Jarrar of his co-author status at the blog (which suits me just fine). But then he began to purge unrealist Shirin and Jeffery--New York from Iraqi Bloggers Central. When I heard this, I interceded:

Shirin is saying he’s been banned from these Comments. Considering the fact that Khalid Jarrar is a contributor, I don’t see anything he’s posted so far to justify this. Is this true, and if so, what gives?

Note that I was under the presumption that Khalid was still a co-author. After some back and forth, Stephen posted this:

You are persuasive.Shirin and Jeffrey are unblocked. Khalid Jarrar has been reinstated as a co-author. Let the flamefest begin. It won’t kill me to see how this goes.

To which I responded:

What!!? I didn’t know I was REINSTATING Khalid!!! Wait, Stephen! Wait! Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaait!

New Years Greeting From Cox & Forkum

2004-12-31T13:14:00.000-08:00

Trouble At Iraqi Elections Blog.

2004-12-31T11:27:00.000-08:00

There seems to be an insurgency over at Iraqi Elections Blog. Unrealist Khalid Jarrar (of Tell Me A Secret) is one of the contributors there, and yesterday, Khalid posted a link to his most recent blog claiming that elections would be a provocation to civil war.

One day, someone is going to get Khalid to admit that all he wants is a civil war and to have Saddam reinstated.

In the comments section, I wrote:

Why give Khalid Jarrar a voice at all on a page devoted to the Iraqi elections? He doesn’t want elections. He believes (ahem) that elections will provoke violence and civil war (what’s going on now?). He would have rather seen Iraq go without elections entirely for the forseeable future rather than have someone from the “outside” take down Saddam Hussein’s regime. Khalid is a reactionary and you cannot wedge a strand of hair between his political alliegances, desires, plans, and worldview and those of the ex-Republican Guard working with the Islamofascists blowing up power lines, water treatment plants, kidnapping NGO workers, and killing Iraqi policemen.

My point is, why is Khalid Jarrar’s view of the upcoming elections any more worthwhile than Zarqawi’s?

Then top contributor Stephen appended a comment to Khalid's post (rather than simply placing it in the comments page). Khalid then posted an outrage at this action and a demand that Stephen remove his...er...appendage!

I posted a comment to Khalid's new post saying that I thought Stephen was being too generous with Khalid already.

Within a couple hours, Khalid's complaining post was removed, but Stephen's comment remains. Hmmmm...I really would have liked to see the emails flying between Stephen and Khalid.

My Discussion Over At "Calling It Like Is"

2004-12-30T13:02:00.000-08:00

Abbas Kadhim is an Iraqi Berkley doctoral candidate in the department of Near Eastern Studies.

I recall or have inferred that he is (at least by heritage) a Shia Muslim. He's no fan of President Bush's, but despite what you may gather from our current discussion, it is not really easy to tell from his blog what he thinks about about the MNF's deposing of Saddam. Maybe he's as confused as I am.

Anyway, Abbas has referenced an article, here, from "The Guardian" columnist, Naomi Klein, who (like Khalid Jarrar) believes elections will provoke a civil war. She also says that the MNF should get out immediately, and (by the way) pay reparations to the Iraqis.

(And after the REAL civil war is over, who shall we make the check out to? A re-installed Saddam? Zarqawi? Some Islamofacist beast who -- as the Taliban did -- turns men over to the torturers for trimming their beards and outlaws birds from the market because they sing?)

This idea that elections will be the cause of a civil war is an interesting new angle for the Unrealists. It is sort of akin to the one that says the troops that deposed Saddam and allowed Shiya to freely practice their faith are a provocation to the Saddamist dead-enders (like Khalid) and Saddam-wanna-be's like Muqtada al-Sadir (well of course they are!)

Abbas says:

I never liked Saddam and even fought against him, but here and important point you need to remember: Saddam gave the UN hundreds of thousands of documents, even when he was given an impossible deadline. The U.S. government dismissed what he provided, just hours after he produced it. They even did not wait until someone looked at it.That is why the rest of the world did not want to side with President Bush. He wanted war no matter what. He was wrong, and this is the genesis of today's catastrophe.

The truth is while I really like Abbas' blog and his writing, I'm getting very weary of this tact "I hated Saddam but I'm indignant at how he was mistreated by Dubya in the run-up to the war". There's something about it I just find hard to buy-off on. I might be more patient of it coming from a reasonable voice like Abbas' if I had not heard it ad nausem from maniacs like Raed and Khalid Jarrar.

Anyway, our discussion in in the comments section. Check it out.

[UPDATE]
The following is what I've asked Shirin in the comments section. Any Unrealist may consider it an open letter himself/herself:

I don't know what to say to you Shirin. You say Iraq is occupied, so the MNF is holding elections. You say the elections are not free without third-party monitoring. There are third-parties monitoring them but the UN won't because they don't think it's "safe". Of course, MNF and Iraqis are no less safe than the UN would be. So what do you want?

You have implied that there is no Zarqawi, that there are no Arabs that did well under Saddam and would like his regime returned. Then who are they and what would placate them?

Do you want the MNF to leave right away? You seem to be denying that you believe there will be no civil war if that happens, so what do want?
I can't decide whether you live in fairlyland or an endless conspiracy theory but if you ever make it to reality you're welcome to bunk at my house.

Quit hiding behind snide sarcasm (a common stance of the Unrealists) and come out and say what you want to see happen in Iraq. Just come out and say it.
Forget about whining about how Saddam was screwed because I'm not going to cry over Saddam or any of his cronies or supporters (dead or alive).

This is today. January 1st, 2005. What do you think should happen?

[UPDATE]

This is the answer Shirin gave:

Like the overwhelming majority of Iraqis I want the American occupation of Iraq to end, and the sooner the better. I want them to get out of Iraq lock, stock, barrel, bombs, tanks and helicopters. I want them to take their imported "Iraqis" with them. I want them to pay reparations for what they have done to Iraq

Now Shirin had previously accused me of misconstruing meaning of his words so I responded:

Great! Now I know. Now there's no danger of misconstuing your intentions. You want civil war. Great idea. So much better than elections.You also believe that the Iraqis who fled Iraq from Saddam Hussein should be sent into permanent exile.Let's get on to those reparations. Who should we cut the check to? The current government? Or to one of the two dozen warlords who will be in power two weeks from now? Maybe should release Saddam, Chemical Ali, Dr. Germ, and Dr. Anthrax from from their cells and give the checks to them.
How about the Kurds? Why don't we split the money between Turkey, Iran, Syria, and Saudia Arabia since those powers will definitely be moving into the country as the only way to secure their borders and prevent chaocracy from developing next to them.Maybe we could cut the checks separately to each Iraqi....hmmm...of course we can save money by holding off a year since about a third of them will be dead by that time.
Pick one of these or choose your own method. Don't bother posting that I'm misrepresenting you because I'm not representing you at all. I would really like to know how you expect things to play out after the MNF leaves.

Shirin's response was:

What do you think you accomplish with these kinds of games? Do you really think this is a good argument technique? Well, it isn't. What it is is a good way to bring a discussion to a screeching halt.If you are going to play these kinds of games, I am finished with you.

It always ends this way. When I plumb for details the Unrealists either go silent or get snippy and then dance some more. Shirin got snippy and then went silent.

But I'm still seeking answers to these questions so any Unrealists who would like to take a better shot at this than Shirin are urged to enter their comments here.

Glance Back

2004-12-29T13:32:00.000-08:00

I've suggested (based on information provided in Riverbend's blog) that Riverbend's family were important members Saddam's regime. I suggested at that time that she got her cushy IT job through her family connections and therefore lost it when Iraq was liberated and her family lost their positions in the Saddam's Orwellian kleptocracy. If you ask, "why should that matter?" I'll answer that you might as well ask why should we not accept the Bush Twins' opinions on merits of John Kerry as those of impartial informed observers.

It seems I was not the first to question Riverbend's credibilty or to suspect she was a Saddam booster. Ays at Iraq at a Glance on December 9, 2003:

it is obvious that you are one of “ Al-Mtannigain”, ( in Iraqi slang, it means: a haughty person with arrogance-look, as all of Saddamists were!).

Apparently "al-Mtannigain" was a pejorative name for someone closely connected to Saddam's regime. Gee, that's as good a term as "Unrealist". (He politely does not mention Riverbend's name, but he's fisking this post)

CMAR II says "Check it out".

Ali At "Iraq The Model" Calls It Quits

2004-12-29T06:40:00.000-08:00

While his brothers Omar and Mohammed were on their US tour (including meetings with President Dubya), the third brother, Ali, was calling it quits.
I'll give the quote, but some background is necessary. Iraq the Model was completely ignored by the Unrealists since its inception. Ali noted this silence only a few weeks ago:

Speaking of the sides of the blogosphere, I wanted to say that I only knew about the left side of the blogosphere months after we started. I thought that the right side was the whole thing, as in the beginning I thought we were just posting our thoughts 'into the darkness' and get lots of visitors without having any idea were they come from except Iraqi blogs. Later we found about the major blogs such as Instapundit, Andrew Sullivan, Buzz Machine, LGF, Tim Blair, Roger Simon, Right Wing news…Etc and for long months I thought these were the only major bloggers! I didn't know because these were the sites linking to us and from were we get lots of visitors and when I used to go to their sites I would find a somewhat similar list. It turned out to be that the other side top bloggers rarely if ever mentioned us or other Iraqi blogs except for the very anti-American [Iraqi blogs]. I realized lately that the blogosphere was divided into two major parts with very few bridges.

But when they arrived on American shores they seem to have become impossible to ignore anymore -- even for experts at ignorance. The ITM boys became the subjects of nasty little slurs that they were CIA fronts for some secret PR plot to undermine the Anti-Liberation effort -- most famously by the ferret-faced Juan Cole. I won't go into that story any more than to direct you here, here, here, and here where the subject was tracked in depth.

The upshot is that the Unrealist Juan Cole made a very bad mistake in slurring the ITM boys and comparing them unfavorably to Riverbend. This was a bad mistake because A) Ali was doing the blogging at the time and, B) unlike the weasel-mugged Dr. Cole, Ali has a very firm grasp on a long gnarly Reality Stick and he knows how to wield it.

This whole event almost seemed to be a set piece because both Riverbend and Mr. Wiskers himself have previously been put through painful vivisections by Ali for spreading lies.

Ali set about here and here to introduce Dr. Cole to Reality in a manner likely to permanently alter his appearance (for which he should be grateful).

Note: Among the myriad of deficiencies Ali notes in the quack Dr. Cole's post is that when he compared Riverbend to Iraq the Model, he provided a hyperlink to Baghdad Burning but (oops!) neglected to do so for Iraq the Model. All part of a pattern for the Unrealists apparently.

But just as the blogosphere formed a circle around Ali and Cole, and as it whirred with the chants of "Fight! Fight! Fight!", Ali posted this enigmatic message:

This is the last time I write in this blog and I just want to say, goodbye. It's not an easy thing to do for me, but I know I should do it. I haven't told my brothers with my decision, as they are not here yet, but it won't change anything and I just can't keep doing this anymore. My stand regarding America has never changed. I still love America and feel grateful to all those who helped us get our freedom and are still helping us establishing democracy in our country. But it's the act of some Americans that made me feel I'm on the wrong side here. I will expose these people in public very soon and I won't lack the mean to do this, but I won't do it here as this is not my blog. At any rate, it's been a great experience and a pleasure to know all the regular readers of this blog, as I do feel I know you, and I owe you a lot. Best wishes to all of you, those who supported us and those who criticized us as well.
Yours
sincerely,Ali.

So Ali was quitting the blog. He reaffirms his alliance with America, with Americans, and with the democratic cause in Iraq; so what does he mean by these "Americans that made me feel I'm on the wrong side here"? He promises to "expose" these Americans but he won't do it on Iraq the Model. Will he start his own blog?

There has been a lot of speculation. Andrew Sullivan implied that he thought it had to do with Abu Ghraib.

[SEE UPDATE BELOW]

So why did Ali quit? There were rumblings about this only a week prior. On Dec. 11th Ali said,

We were all invited in the beginning and I was very excited to meet our friends that we met through this blog, and I wanted to be able to say "Thank you America" in America, but I decided few days before the trip not to go (for reasons that I'll discuss in the future, probably). However, my invitation was cancelled even before I tell the people who set up the trip about my decision. So I asked Mohammed and Omar to go ahead, as I thought it might be good for our project "Friends of Democracy" and Iraq.I still hope to visit America some day, but I would love this to happen normally, and not through exceptional procedures and I would be so happy to meet all my American friends and to say thank you to the American people. More on this in the future, probably.
I still hope to visit America some day, but I would love this to happen normally, and not through exceptional procedures and I would be so happy to meet all my American friends and to say thank you to the American people.More on this in the future, probably.

Can his brothers provide any illumination? No. Not yet, anyway. Omar posted an equally strange non-explanation a couple days later:

Ali's decision to leave the blog is a personal decision that neither I nor Mohammed want, or have the right to interfere with, but I'm sure that he had his reasons which he preferred to keep for himself, at least for now. Anyway, he only left the blog because he thinks he can serve his country in a better way through doing other things but we still hope that he will reconsider his decision.

The really weird thing about this post for me is that Ali seems (so far) to be unwilling to elaborate on his reason for quitting the blog to his brothers.

It's too bad about Ali. I miss him already. I hope his brothers won't take this as a criticism when I say that I enjoyed his posts the most. They were orderly, analytical, and God help those who earned his wrath.

Hopefully, we'll hear more on this in the near future.

We have innocent men in jail,
The insane asylums are filled.
We've got unrighteous doctors
Dealing drugs that will never cure your ills.
- Bob Dylan

[UPDATE]
Ladel up a big helping of crow for me. I called Justin Raimondo at antiwar.com a liar for saying that Ali had identified "extreme conservatives" as the"some powers" trying to use Iraq The Model as a propaganda tool. I searched the ITM blog and found nothing but I didn't search haloscan.com and the quotes were in the Comments section of ITM. Furthermore, haloscan does not show any comments for Ali's posts although there are literally hundreds. I retract my statement and apologize to Justin. I've removed the comment from this post lest someone see it and not read this Update.

Here's what is known about why Ali quit. He says here:

The thing that upset me the most is that if there are some powers that are trying to use us and our writings as propaganda tool, you and other bloggers as well as some of the media outlets are doing the same with anti-American Iraqi bloggers yet still have the nerve not only to criticize all those who support us (who are not exclusively conservatives) but also insult us and apply the worst description to our efforts and hopes in building our country, many times going as far as disfiguring facts and using stupid conspiracy theories.

In the Comments, a reader Quentin said:

Don't you ever think that the war in your country has deep consequences for the people of the U.S. Tell me, do you?

To which Ali responded:

Yes of course I do. What I said is that I'm not going to support any party over the others, and that these parties should remember that it's not all about them. Some people just have forgot about us and deal with Iraqis as pawns to win more control inside the US. All they are interested in is news, not what these news mean in term of humans that are involved. They just look for news that support their stand; good news for the right and bad for the extreme left.

Then reader Lydia said:

I'm a little confused, Ali. Are you saying you're sorry that the trip was used and politicized by the MR blog and Juan Cole? Or that conservatives used it politically? Or... what?

To which Ali answered:

No Lydia, not conservatives but some group of extremist conservatives. I have nothing against American conservatives and I see them as true friends.

Lee C. commented:

Einstein claims the universe is finite (sorta "round"). You go far enough to the left and you wind up on the right.

And Lisa New York said:

Ali, I'm a little confused also and I think maybe you should clarify what you meant. Do you mean that you think your brothers were "used" during the actual trip, in who they met and what they did or do you mean that some people on the Internet or elsewhere used them by talking about the trip in a certain way. I think it's an important distinction.

To which Ali responded:

They were used during the trip, and Lee C is right. I have to wait for my brothers before I explain everything although I have no doubt what so ever about these people and their hypocracy. I was shocked when I discovered this as I truly thought they cared about us.

So who are these people -- these "extreme conservatives" -- that Ali says "used" his brothers during the trip? Spirit of America? They are the most likely candidates since Ali seems to have come to his decision about them before Omar and Mohammed even left for the states. His brothers don't seem to agree with him about them (whoever they really are).

Its difficult for me to understand why Ali would not feel comfortable "exposing" them on Iraq The Model but I don't claim to have insight into the dynamics of every family. What did they do that stepped over the line in Ali's opinion? Were the brothers given "talking points" or asked to limit what they said in some way?

It is increasingly difficult to believe that Omar and Mohammed do not know what happened to dissaffect Ali. It certainly seems that they don't agree on it, however. The two brothers could be staying quiet for one of two reasons:

They believe Ali's complaint has some merit or at least apparent merit and do not repeat it for fear of slandering them.
They (in their mind) are protecting Ali because they think revealing the reason would make him seem petty.

But if Ali starts a blog and "exposes" these "people", well, what then? Will the other two brothers come to their defense?

I think that if Spirit of America is not the people Ali is referring to then Omar and Mohammed should say they aren't. Because, it does look like they are the ones we are talking about. And if it is Spirit of America, then the brothers should lay out the facts and let the people decide rather than have everyone speculate on what horrible things they have might have done. Either way, their silence is not being merciful to Spirit of America.

A clarification of terms: Unrealists

2004-12-28T15:58:00.000-08:00

What shall I call those who are ideologically committed to the failure of democracy in Iraq?

The anti-warriors? No, that won't do. They managed to hold their "peace" (ironically) while Clinton bombed the bejeezus out Saddam, Kosovo, and a Sudan aspirin factory (not that I'm complaining about it...I just saying is all). Anti-democrats? Well, they will vociferously deny that. They're for democracy...if some politician they like is doing it, or if it is done in some dream-world way (like Saddam and his sons deciding not to commit wholesale genocide to root out reformers), or if the new democracy is led by an American-hating Marxist...well, in those cases, they are for democracy, and they will tell you so every time.

However their comparisons of President Dubya to Hitler Hitler Hitler Hitler for biting the bullet and taking out Saddam at last and liberating Iraq from 12 years of sanctions (all the while ignoring the fact that Saddam was a freakish metamorphosis of Hitler and Stalin) is a kind of lifting of their collective leg to the absolutely necessary effort (made clear by 9-11) to bring freedom to a region that for too long has been oppressed by dictators. Maybe they ought to be represented by a picture of dog peeing on a fire hydrant with the words "Free Iraq". But once again, that's not fair (they'll say), because they would support a free Iraq if it could be accomplished via some impossible method where the US or Republicans or the Religious Right or Eugene McCarthy could be criticized for something.

Come think of it, it seems that a firm grasp on unreality is the one thing that holds these pseudo-peace-mongers together. So I'll hence forth call them "Unrealists". Add that to your glossary for future reading.

Weather Report: The Flow OF Posts Will Slow To A Drizzle Until After Christmas

2004-12-16T14:47:00.000-08:00

The Missus is flying into town tomorrow night (gotta clean up and do laundry tonight)...and then there are those 38 hours of driving there and back for Christmas.

So not much in the way of posting until the 28th.

If an emergency arises you might catch me on line via Yahoo IM (see the sidebar).

Strange Conflations

2004-12-15T17:16:00.000-08:00

Okay Livejournal has a section devoted to Computer-Mediated Anthropology...or CMA for short. I once wrote a post speculating on Riverbend's background.

Now, like chocolate and peanut butter, these two purposes have found each other in a single article entitled Online Accents?.

Dr. Evil Restarts His War Machine

2004-12-15T13:19:00.000-08:00

"I don't believe that man's ever been to medical school!"

Once there was a boy named Jeffrey -- New York.

Jeffrey enjoyed posting to the comments sections of Iraq-related bloggers. His comments were strange, outrageous, and hostile. Reading them was like injecting your brain with epoxy until it congealed and then stretching it out at arms length. They also had the added nutritious value of being mostly dead-on true.

I tend to be anal retentive. But Jeffrey would never retain his anus. His anus ran about totally without retention. There was something in Jeffrey's posts to the Comments of blogs that was similiar to Raed's posts. There's definitely a maniacal quality to them. The difference is that Jeffrey's comments were from an obvious desire to see Iraq free and prosperous, and Raed is a backer of tyranny in Iraq, Iran, and wherever you find it.

Jeffrey loved everything about the Iraqi bloggers and even conversed with Raed and Khalid Jarrar via email.

He used to post at the old Cry Me A Riverbend blog. Then when the site shut down due to implied threats, and as I started this one in answer to that, Jeffrey started the Jarrars Up a River blog. Blogging changed Jeffery. His blog posts became increasingly more lucid and straightforward. People remarked that it was hard to imagine that it was truly the same person that had posted the bizarre cursing responses in the comments sections. After a short while he even changed the name of his blog in an attempt to make it less personally in the Jarrars' faces. After toying with a couple names, he settled on Iraqi Bloggers Central.

After posting all summer, he declared he was going to stop blogging in protest of the MNF letting Sistani mediate a peace in Najaf rather than wiping out the Muqtada mob of thugs. But it seemed to me that the truth was Jeffrey was tired. He was a teacher, school had started, and blogging can be all-consuming...especially the way he does it. So the posts at IBC ceased and the inimitable Jeffrey was silenced.

But recently...maybe it was Raed's decision to provide comments on his blog....Jeffery emerged from his spiderhole into the Comment sections. At first it was Blogger Jeffrey. the reasonable critiquer of Iraqi opinion. But soon.... Comment Jeffrey was back!

EVERYONE JOIN IN! SLIP ON YOUR BLACK PAJAMAS! HOIST THE FAMILY AK! LET'S ALL DO THE AK-DANCE! DANCE! DANCE! DANCE! "Hey, there's Al-Jazeera! We're going to be on TV!" DANCE! (He he.)
Jeffrey -- New York

I would say pull your panties out of the crack of your ass, but I don't think they make panties with burlap.He he.
Jeffrey -- New York

And then, it happened. In response to someone's comment about Jeffrey's silenced blog, he wrote:

Yes, I can think of a few others besides yourself who sighed with relief when I suspended major operations, unfurled my "Successful Evisceration" banner, and flew onto that floating carrier in my crotch-itching flight suit. However, I wonder if you have seen any of the Austin Powers flicks? If I resemble anyone on this beauteous orb it would be Doctor Evil. Drip. Drip. Drip. Oh-oh. It seems I'm starting to thaw.
Jeffrey -- New York

Dr. Evil's war machine is now up again and thrumming like a planet-sized kitten.

CMAR II says "check it out."

Senior Zarqawi thug killed...aids arrested

2004-12-15T08:53:00.000-08:00

Speaking of Kurdish Independence...

2004-12-14T16:01:00.000-08:00

Here's a Kurdish joke....

You'll get an error message. Read it.

The Next Iraqi War?

2004-12-14T14:13:00.000-08:00

Very good article by George Packer on the future problems between Iraqi nationalities bequeathed by Saddam. If you are a Kurd, and you are concerned about the whether Kirkuk will be a "Kurdish" city (and if you are a Kurd, I know you are), then you should read this:

Fanaticism is the legacy of Saddam’s Arabization policy. Every aspect of Kirkuk’s history is now violently contested. Kurds, Arabs, and Turkomans all make claims of ethnic primacy in a city where there are only pluralities. (According to the 1957 census, conducted before Arabization began, the city was forty per cent Turkoman and thirty-five per cent Kurdish.)

Ali Bayatli, a Turkoman lawyer, insisted that his people were direct descendants of the Sumerians and therefore the first residents of Kirkuk, with unspecified rights. Kurdish politicians have two slogans designed to end any argument: “Kirkuk is the heart of Kurdistan” and “Kirkuk is the Jerusalem of the Kurds.” Arabs, meanwhile, are angry about the sudden loss of power that followed the removal of Saddam. Luna Dawood’s view of her city’s future is grim. “It will be war till the end,” she said. “Everyone says Kirkuk belongs to us: Arabs, Kurds, Turkomans. To whom will it belong?"

Iraqi President Yawer says chaos could produce an Iraqi Hitler

2004-12-13T19:17:00.000-08:00

Actually, they had one only 20 months ago.

Iraqis,
Its time clean-up your neighborhoods.

GI Gets Three Years for Mercy Killing of Iraqi Terrorist

2004-12-13T19:15:00.000-08:00

You're not allowed to perform them in the US. You can't perform them on the battlefield either.

8 Hussein Henchmen Refuse Meals in Jail

2004-12-13T19:13:00.000-08:00

Good. The money spent to feed them can better spent on more worthwhile citizens of Iraq.

Raed Triumphs the People's Government of Iran As the Great Middle Eastern Democracy

2004-12-13T19:02:00.000-08:00

But Iraqi federalist democracy is a colonialist plot.

The US administration is giving Kurdish dirty leaders their small haven, in exchange for them supporting the occupation.

Gosh, Raed's knack for Logic Of The Bizarre places him in competition with only himself. How does he do it? How does he continuously top himself as the High Priest of the Absurdist philosophy. He's a national treasure.

[Addendum] Raed also says:

If anyone outside the US forgot about the "Balkanization" that the US administration did in Yugoslavia, please read more about it. If anyone inside the US survived the collective amnesia and still remember the Balkanization, please try to spread the word.

A) The US didn't "Balkanize" Yugoslavia. Perhaps certain European countries made it worse by recognizing declared states before it was clear they could stand on their own, but the only thing the US did was to give Europe the backbone it needed to stop the ethnic cleansing in Bosnia and Kosova. (You remember the Bosnians and Kosovans, Raed? Those secular Muslims the US rescued?)

B) For the record, I was against the US getting involved in Bosnia and Kosova in Serbia. I thought the most we should have done is partitioned the region into defensible Croatian, Serbian, and Bosnia territory and only bombed the hell out of areas that left their little fascist corners. Unlike Iraq, I didn't see how it was in the US interest create a pluralist state in Eastern Europe (but then that was before 9-11). And I thought that if we did anything in Serbia we should declare Kosova independent from Serbia and grant Serbia some of the historic sites in the northern part of the region.

Still, that's not what we did. And I can understand the honest liberal point of view that motivated the chosen policies there.

But Raed? As always he has sided with the dictators, the genociders, and the most cruel dregs of modern governments. So lets update the list of noble leaders Raed has sidle-up to:

Slobodan Milosevik
Radovan Karadzic
Arafat
The Iranian Mullahs
Saddam Hussein

Who is next? How long before Stalin is becomes a harmless do-gooder threatened by the US?

Riverbend grumbles because gasoline is hard to get

2004-12-13T18:52:00.000-08:00

She grumbles about oh so many things.

Riverbend, here's how you can do your part to improve things with the shortages. Every Iraqi gets to keep an AK-47 in their home. Next time you see terrorists hiking through your Arab Sunni neighborhood with an IED or RPG, poke that rifle out the window and shoot one in the head.

If each Iraqi who is sick of shortages and chaos would purpose to shoot one terrorist, there would soon not be a problem.

Many Iraqis are putting their lives on the line in the ING and the police force (not to mention, but I should, working for the water utility and oil production departments of the government). These are the heroes of Iraq. We need more. It seems to me that neighborhoods that shelter these guys are the enemies of Iraq and it is the job is the Iraqis to fix.

[Addendum] Incidentally, I meant to mention that Riverbend is complaining about spend $1 big fat dollar for a gallon of gas (which is about half of what Americans pay after taxes). Saddam was driving the economy of Iraq into the ground by selling it for 5 cents a gallon. The IPG has continued subsidizing the gas while slowly incrementing it up. I discussed this previously here.

Riverbend yearns for a return to the days of Saddam.

My conversation with Mitch at WarCrimes

2004-12-13T18:48:00.000-08:00

...and for those who say the Islamofacists would not work with the Baathists or Saddam loyalists

2004-12-13T18:45:00.000-08:00

Saddam planned insurgency before invasion

2004-12-13T18:42:00.000-08:00

Now why would anyone say the terrorists are Saddam-loyalist?

Ladybird Throws Down The Gauntlet

2004-12-06T20:23:00.000-08:00

I'd be lying if I said I was not itching to go.

I've sent to Rubicon for the details.

Hammorabi Reports Outrageous Sectarian Attacks

2004-12-06T20:06:00.000-08:00

He declares that it is time for a no-holds barred onslaught againts the the terrorists and their supporters. I agree that that is needed, and I have said that Iraq will have no peace until these beasts - who cannot and will not benefit Iraq in life - benefit their country by fertilizing it with their bodies.

However, I hope the Shiia and Kurds do not forget that there are plenty of Sunni Arabs (like Zeyad) who are of vital importance to Iraq's future.

Then there are those like Riverbend and Raed who feel the same way as the monsters, but they are not like them and can be put to work in the new Iraq however grudgingly.

What the terrorists want to do is provoke a civil war. They would rather see the country in flames than see its liberation successful. What they most fear is not death, but elections - the Iraqi people unified without any further need of masters.

Elections are to these fiends what sunlight is to vampires.

Bring on the elections!

Iraqis, get out and vote! Campaign for your parties! A ballot is as good as a bullet in freeing Iraq from these brain-diseased vermin.

Another Foreign Policy Turn-Around On Iraq

2004-12-06T13:47:00.000-08:00

India is expected to agree to help monitor the elections in Iraq.

This is the second turn around I've learned about today. Canada was the last one.

Found in Fallujeh: Ice Cream Truck Converted Into Car Bomb Factory

2004-12-06T07:05:00.000-08:00

Among the most novel finds: An ice-cream truck that had been converted into a mobile car-bomb factory, complete with all the parts and weaponry needed to turn any vehicle into a weapon on the spot.

"You got a ice-cream truck, it's loaded with munitions, weapons, equipment to construct a car bomb," explained one senior U.S. military official here, who declined to be identified. "It could potentially drive anywhere, stop, convert a car into a car bomb and drive away. ... I don't think there was any ice cream."

Big surprise for the terrorists: Ice cream has actually been found to be more nutritious for children than car bombs. No mention of this by Raed or Riverbend.

Forkum and Cox have a new cartoon.

Fayrouz posts video from Iraq

2004-12-06T06:56:00.000-08:00

If, as for me, the video does not properly display from her link, you can access it at the Operation Truth Video Gallery.

Fayrouz says:

[The] nation of Iraq will never die. For the terrorists who made Iraq their holy ground, there is no place in heaven for you.

Amen, Fayrouz. But, God Willing, the ING and MNF will speed them on to Hell.

Two Terrorist Cell Leaders Captured In Separate Raids

2004-12-06T06:46:00.000-08:00

This captures occurred yesterday in Tikrit and Al-Owja.

New Photos From Ladybird

2004-12-06T03:59:00.000-08:00

Returning Fallujans will face clampdown

2004-12-06T02:56:00.000-08:00

It's encouraging to know that the scorpions will not be permitted to return to their former holes.

No doubt we'll hear from Riverbend and the Jarrars about what a burden this is to the Fallujahns. I hope they don't make me cry too much. ;-)

(Hat tip to a commenter)

2004 Best Middle East or African Blog Award Nominations

2004-12-06T02:45:00.000-08:00

Iraq The Model and Riverbend's Bagdhad Burning are on the list.

[Update] And Healing Iraq too. Oh, heck here's the whole list:

An Unsealed Room
"A window on life in Israel"
A star from Mosul
By a 16 girl, Aunt Najma, in Mosul
Chan'ad Bahrini
"Info and opinions about Bahrain, the region, chan'ad, and other rubbish"
Healing Iraq
By Zeyad, a Sunni Arab, living in Baghdad
Not a Fish (provincially speaking)
By Shoosha, an Israeli
Iraq the Model
By those three mavelous brothers: one who can swallow the sea, one who can stretch his legs indefinitely, and one who can hold and hold his breath (they need two more)
Ha ha ha! I'm soooo funny!
Living in Egypt
By Maryanne Stroud, living in Egypt
Black Looks
"Musings and Rants by an African Fem"
from South Africa
Baghdad Burning
From that darling Baathist princess who haunts my dreams so
Crikey - Life is grand
By Paul Watson in South Africa
Israellycool
Another Israeli blog
Jo'blog
and another South African blog
Mental Mayhem
"Scribbles From Across the Middle East"
By a Jordanian college student...well written and it doesn't hurt at all that she's a cutie.
So I Want to be an Astronaut
By "a Kuwaiti girl simply dreams of being an astronaut"
Crossroads Arabia
An informative blog on news mostly from Saudia Arabia but elsewhere in the Middle East as well

Kurdo Settles On The Term "Terrorist" For The Insurgents

2004-12-06T02:37:00.000-08:00

I've been on this jag for sometime. It's nice to know I'm not alone.

US Consolate Possibly Under Attack in Saudi Arabia

2004-12-06T02:35:00.000-08:00

[Update] 9 Killed in Attack

[Update] Pictures

Kofi Annan Refuses To Resign Over The Oil For Food Scandal

2004-12-06T02:28:00.000-08:00

That's always the first thing they say.... :-)

Spiegel Editors Add Their Voices To the Call To Put Off Elections

2004-12-06T02:17:00.000-08:00

A UN official says the same thing. Raed calls the elections "fake" (ha ha). It is interesting that those with an ideological investment in Iraq's failure are those first to call for the elections to be put off.

Look, the terrorists will always be ready to provide reasons to put off the elections. They've killed at least 70 this weekend. Doing so because of their murders would only encourage them to kill more people. The Iraqis must have the elections now. We can think about expedited follow-up elections later, but putting off the current ones is only likely to get more people killed.

IMHO

Anyway, if Raed is against them, the January elections are probably a good thing.

Meanwhile, Canada will send monitors for the elections, although they probably will not provide troops to increase security.

Iraqi National Guard break ground on Najaf barracks

2004-12-04T11:41:00.000-08:00

The construction job was awarded to an Iraqi contractor.

Progress!

[Update] Reconstruction projects in Sadr City.

[Update] New $65000 police station in Balad

Iran Backs Elections

2004-12-04T11:32:00.000-08:00

The head of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI), Abdelaziz Hakim in Tehran says,

"Elections are a great development and an important factor in retaining Iraq's legal structures, which could pave the way for rulership of the people's will."

Help! I'm drowning in irony!

On the other hand, this statement is packed weird nuance. He seems to be suggesting that elections are something separate from "the rulership of the peoples' will." Oh, well. I'll just take the whole thing at face value and assert that free unfettered elections could do the same for Tehran.

Norway To Send Military Instructors To Iraq

2004-12-04T11:28:00.000-08:00

The Coalition of the Willing steps up.

Sucide Bombers Kill 14 Across Iraq

2004-12-04T11:23:00.000-08:00

The terrorists are voting now. I hope every other Iraqi will vote in January.

Ladybird Reports That Hospitals Have Been Refusing Patients From Fallujah For "Security" Reasons

2004-12-03T14:55:00.000-08:00

This is reportedly a Health Ministry order!

Ladybird heard this originally from Basra.net (and was justly skeptical), however she says she has independent confirmation from sources in Bagdhad.

I can't imagine what security issues would arise from taking injured patients from Fallujah, even if every one of them were terrorists. Actually I would think the MNF and ING would like a common collection facillity to pick up all the terrorists who narrowly got away. This makes no sense to me.

But Ladybird is on the case and perhaps we'll get a more complete answer in the future.

Photoblog

2004-12-03T08:08:00.000-08:00

This was started as a blog of pictures from Fallujeh but has lately been documenting the murders of police and government workers in throughout Iraq as well as pictures of fallen Marines.

Cleric Says God Sent Giant Spiders To Combat US Forces In Iraq

2004-12-03T08:03:00.000-08:00

"The first miracle that occurred in Fallujah took the form of spiders that appeared in the city – each spider larger than this chair, or about the size of this chair. The American soldiers left, holding the legs of this spider, and I too, in one of the Friday sermons, held up a spider, with all its magnitude, in front of the satellite channels and in front of the world. This spider also had thin black hair. If this hair touches the human body, within a short period of time the body becomes black or blue, and then there is an explosion in the blood cells in the human body - and the person dies."

Some Arab Internet sites have repeated claims of Iraqis about the spiders, and there also are stories circulating of phantom white-robed knights on white horses sent by Allah that killed U.S. Marines in battle.

In a statement reminiscent of Saddam Hussein's spokesman, "Baghdad Bob," the sheik claimed the U.S. was underestimating the number of American casualties in Iraq by a factor of 100.

Al-Sumide'i claimed there were mass graves in Iraq filled with the bodies of American forces.

"A mass grave was created in a desert area near the Saudi boarder for the American soldiers killed. There is also a lake near Al-Sa'diya. The Americans place the casualties inside white or black bags, seal them and toss them from a plane into the lake."

Poems, Bombs, and the Road to Baghdad

2004-12-02T13:28:00.000-08:00

Matthew Doherty was a contractor in Iraq. This article appeared in Poetry Magazine. The money quote is:

I have no sympathy for the insurgency. With a view toward my own preservation, I wish they would all cut it out. But apart from pure self-interest, I think that every mortar, whether it hits or misses, every burst of gunfire or roadside bomb is a dismal impediment to what can only be called progress. The wisdom and righteousness of our going to war are uncomfortable questions. But the insurgents rest on a justification that only the most ardent relativism could withstand. There’s nothing noble about them. They’re the Sopranos East.

But my favorite part of this article is at the beginning....fuuuunny:

The man I am talking with speaks pretty good English. He can read English, too.

“Look,” he says, running his hand across the soccer jerseys he has on offer: “Manchester United. Chelsea.” He also sells DVDs, cigarettes, watches, old Iraqi coins and “money-new”—the new Iraqi currency, whose certain ascendancy to its pre-Gulf War value is an article of faith among the bulk of the American expatriate workforce.

[...]

“I’m looking for books,” I say. “Iraqi poetry.”

He’s not sure what I mean.

“Poems,” I say. “Poems. You know?” And I ask him if he knows any poets—anyone local who writes poems, or reads them, who could talk to me about them.

He makes a noncommittal gesture, something between a nod and a shake of the head. “Yes, I do know,” he says. “There are some people, not too far.”

“You think they’d come down here? I could talk with them?”

“We could arrange it. But here’s no good,” he says. He looks around.“Too much problem. The soldiers, they would come and ask what are we talking about.”

[...]

“You know what I’m talking about, right? People who write poems, or read poems, or know about them . . .”

“Yes,” he says. “There are some people.”

“ So you think they will come?”

He says he will talk to them. Not today, but he will see them. Probably they will come. He tells me they will want some money. Not unreasonable, I think—it would cost them time and some expense to get here.

“No problem. I could give them money,” I say. “But, you know, I’m just
going to talk with these people. Conversation.”

“Yes,” the man says, leaning forward and speaking a shade more quietly.

“You want to talk”—he wraps his hands together then splits them apart—“about the bombs.”

Killer. (hat tip: Andrew Sullivan)

Riverbend Posts

2004-12-02T01:03:00.000-08:00

Without anything to talk about she only grumbles and rumor mongers:

I don't know about the chemical weapons. [...] I keep having flashbacks of that video they showed on tv [...] There was one brief video that showed [...] this old man leaning against the wall and there was blood running out of his eyes- almost like he was crying tears of blood. What 'conventional' weaponry makes the eyes bleed?

Possibly any bomb if you're close enough. But one must question whether she saw any such thing in that "brief video". Riverbend? Have you ever seen what a car bomb does to the eyes of children? Have you seen what a pistol does to a CARE workers hair-do? Have you seen how a sharp knife can wrinkle your collar?

The wounded in Falloojeh aren't getting treatment and today we heard about a family with six children being bombed in the city.

How could it be that families of terrorists get bombed? Because the Terrorists keep their children close to bring them into the family business. See here.

The situation in Baghdad isn't a lot better. Electricity has been particularly bad. Our telephone has been cut off for the last week which has made communication (and blogging) particularly difficult. The phone difficulties are quite common all over Baghdad. It usually happens in an area after a fresh bombing.

See here for the truth about Riverbend's electricity complaints. So the phones go out after the terrorists start mortaring and cutting lines. Hmmmm...I wish I could figure out why that happens.

Around 10 days ago, there were a series of very large explosions in our area and the third or fourth one took out three of the windows on one side of the house.[...]A'miriyah, A'adhamiyah, Ghazaliyah and Haifa to name a few. The rest of us just get our usual dose of daily explosions and gun fire.

Some of the poor Fallujehns, no doubt. On vacation in your neighborhood. Well, keep your eye on those MNFs and the INGs. We wouldn't want those tourists made to feel unwelcome.

Elections are a mystery. No one knows if they'll actually take place and it feels like many people don't want to have anything to do with them.

Well, of course they'll take place, but that so many people around you don't want to participate tells us the crowd you run in.

They aren't going to be legitimate any way. The only political parties participating in them are the same ones who made up the Governing Council several months ago.

Here's a list of the Parties submitting lists. Seems like a pretty broad collection to me. If you want to participate, Riverbend, start a Party and submit a list.

Allawi, in spite of all his posturing and posing, has turned himself into a hateful figure after what happened in Falloojeh.

Sure he has. To you and the terrorists.

As long as he is in a position of power, America will be occupying Iraq. People realize that now. He's Bush's boy. He has proved that time and again and people are tired of waiting for something insightful or original to come from his government.

Like elections?

Kurdish PKK Members Assassinated Near Mosul

2004-12-01T21:31:00.000-08:00

The PKK is a Marxist Kurdish group that uses violence in attempt to gain independence of Kurdish territory from Turkey. Obviously, this is an attack orchestrated by the Turkish government. The last thing Iraq needs now is a side-war (covert or otherwise) between Kurds and Turkey within its borders.

Zarqawi Slaughters Dozens In Mosul

2004-12-01T21:24:00.000-08:00

Ladybird Believes US Corporations Are Stealing Iraqi Oil Money

2004-12-01T20:14:00.000-08:00

Ladybird asks:

Iraq is exporting the same amount oil now like under Saddam, the price of oil is double, no UN stealing or obstruction, no reparation, no army, no rebuilding, people unemployed so no salaries, ...yet we do not see evidence of this Iraqi’s oil money

Look, there seems to be a case that the US has not taken anywhere close to sufficient oversight of moneys being spent in Iraq. And some of that money is the money coming from Iraqi oil revenue.

However, (maybe I'm wrong but) I think I see where she is going with this. This is a subtle and totally fantastic passage to the old War For Oil canard.

One of the ways that Saddam was running the economy of Iraq into the ground in order to hold on to his power is that he provided gasoline to Iraqis at the impossibly low rate of FIVE CENTS PER GALLON. For those of you on the metric system, Americans (with federal, state, and local taxes) were paying over TWO DOLLARS a gallon (more than 40 times as much).

The MNF wanted to avoid sticker shock for the Iraqis so they've been subsidizing the price of gasoline since the invasion. That's where some the Oil money (and reconstruction money) has gone.

The IPG has been slowly increasing the price to market levels. I'm not going to bother finding the news article here's an anti-war site that repeats an AP story on it.
There has been obstruction. Its called Terrorism. Iraqis are the primary perpetrators of it (especially the Sunni Arabs but the Shiia and even some Kurds have been involved).
There has been rebuilding. You've documented some of it. Sewage lines, power to regions of Iraq south of Baghdad that weren't getting it before, the re-flooding of the Marsh Arabs' lands, the training of policemen, bridges rebuilt, Fallujah to be rebuilt, etc, etc.
There are people unemployed but there certainly are salaries being paid as well.
There is an army, its called the ING and they are facing constant dangers in just enlisting. They need better armor but apparently the average soldier is still better armed and trained than in Saddam's days.
Some of the lackadaisical methods for handling money are due to the desire to permit commanding officers to disburse it quickly at their own discretion.

Both the US and Iraqi citizens want their money to be spent efficiently, but lets be reasonable here.

The terrorist son of a Fallujahn Terrorist is dead, but he will fight on.

2004-12-01T13:57:00.000-08:00

But he hasn't summed up the courage yet to tell the boy's mother that her son is dead.

I fear that many Sunni Arabs will have to be sent to Paradise before Iraqis in this world will have any peace.

Residents said that in [the 13 year old boys] first operation in March, he hung out at the mayor's office for days, selling candy on the street and joking with U.S. soldiers. Once his presence became familiar, he managed to leave a homemade bomb at the building, which detonated. Soon after, he joined his father as a fighter.
[...]
Abu Mohammed sent his son to fetch ammunition from among the rocket-propelled grenades, mortar shells, rockets and AK-47 assault rifles that he kept in a hole next to their one-room house. The boy ran, crouching, about 600 yards down a street lined with ocher-colored buildings. As he did, he was struck about 6:10 p.m. by a bullet whose source his father did not see. It pierced the back of Ahmed's neck and tore through his chest. The boy was buried three hours later, at a cemetery next to the Farouk mosque, with four others killed that day.

"Your voice is as precious as gold. No, it's more than that!"

2004-12-01T13:43:00.000-08:00

New post at Iraq The Model on traveling on the highway through Latifriyah, recently cleared of terrorists.

Arab-language press finally starts to ask why only OCCUPIED Arab countries get elections

2004-12-01T13:27:00.000-08:00

Could this be the start of the exoneration of the so-called neo-cons? This is, after all, what Wolfowitz claimed would happen after the liberation of Iraq and Afghanistan; that they would be "a reformist project that seeks to modernize and transform the Arab landscape. Iraq would be the starting point, and beyond Iraq lies an Arab political and economic tradition and a culture whose agonies have been on cruel display."

Al-Jazeera TV (Qatar), November 23, 2004
Interviewer: "We've heard that [head of the Sunni Clerics Council in Iraq] Sheik Al-Dhari says the purpose of [Sharm Al-Sheikh] summit aims to assist the occupation…"

Nabil Sharaf Al-Din: "This Al-Dhari is a mufti of terrorism and slaughter. This Al-Dhari is the military branch of the murderers, the military branch of terrorism and televised slaughtering This Al-Dhari … and his group… Sir, please… First and foremost, the claim that this summit was meant to save America… When have the Arabs succeeded in resolving their own crises and conflicts?"

Al-Sharq Al-Awsat (London), November 24, 2004.
"...the talk of the illegitimacy of the [Iraqi] government … allows us to raise questions regarding [the legitimacy] of most of the regimes in the region. "

Al-Hayat (London), November 25, 2004
"Anyone who watches what is going on could, if he did not know the truth, almost believe that the Arab countries – which throughout their history have never known what elections are – have become the [countries] most keen that Iraq's upcoming elections will reflect the will of the Iraqi people, with all its elements – and will particularly [reflect the will of] the Sunni minority that in Saddam Hussein's day was, for well-known reasons no one even questioned, [considered] a 'majority.'
"It is outrageous, and amazing, that the first free and general elections in the history of the Arab nation are to take place in January: in Iraq, under the auspices of American occupation, and in Palestine, under the auspices of the Israeli occupation."

Iraqi Government Works To Gain International Support of the Upcoming Elections

2004-12-01T13:17:00.000-08:00

Meanwhile the terrorist kill average Iraqis working to bring order to their people.

Most of the Arab (undemocratic) governments don't seem to crazy about the upcoming elections. I can't imagine why not. Jordan is a notable exception.

The Premier is to head to Germany and Russia to try to get them to face the future Iraq. Naturally, he's not even going to bother with France.

Abu Ghraib Soldier Being Tried For Crimes

2004-12-01T13:16:00.000-08:00

More US Troops Being Sent to Iraq

2004-12-01T13:14:00.000-08:00

..to bolster security against those who hate elections.

Iraq's Sunni president backs election

2004-12-01T13:13:00.000-08:00

The Body Found In Fallujah Was Not Margaret Hassan's

2004-12-01T13:11:00.000-08:00

One presumes however, based on the reported video, that she is in fact dead.

Day In the Life of Iraq at the BBC

2004-11-30T16:01:00.000-08:00

The BBC has a new daily log of Iraqis. They tell what they do each day and sometimes answer questions. Here are the contributors (as described on the BBC site):

Yasmin Abdul Aziz is a 29-year-old doctor. She lives in Baghdad and is not married. The main part of her work is for the national inoculation programme run by the Iraqi Health Ministry.

Sarab al-Delaymi is a housewife living in the al-Dorah area of Baghdad. She is in her late 30s, married and a mother.

Dhia Abdulwahab is a civil servant living in Baghdad. He is in his late 40s, married and a father.

Rana Imad is an Iraqi medical student and researcher, living in Baghdad. She is Shia Muslim. She returned to Iraq after living in Britain for several years following the invasion of Iraq and the fall of Saddam Hussein.

Samir Ali is 29 and an Iraqi doctor who lives and works in Baghdad. He supports his mother and sister. He is thinking of leaving Iraq for a better life abroad, but his mother does not want him to go.

Stuart Ritchie is a 61-year-old UK citizen and a contractor working for an international company in the International or Green Zone in Baghdad. He has lived and worked outside the UK for more than 30 years.

Lieutenant Bryan Suits is an officer in the US Army's 1st Battalion, 161st Infantry Regiment currently in Baghdad. His is a National Guard battalion from Washington State attached to the 1st Cavalry Division. When he's not on active duty he is a radio talk show host in Seattle in the United States.

CMAR II says "check it out".

7 Suicide Cars Found in Iraq Mosque

2004-11-29T07:22:00.000-08:00

My church organizes Bible studies and soup kitchens for the homeless.
I guess there are churches and then there are churches:

A mosque raided by security forces in southern Baghdad contained a workshop to rig suicide car bombs, with seven vehicles ready for terror attacks, an Iraqi Defense Ministry official said Sunday.

National Guard forces raided the Sunni Muslim Al-Yassen Mosque in the Baghdad area of Abu Dshir on Saturday, said Gen. Saleh Sarhan. In addition to the seven cars, guardsmen found 30 rocket-propelled grenades, high-powered rifles, mortars and remote control detonators, Sarhan said.

Faiza speculates in her latest post

2004-11-29T05:27:00.000-08:00

Faiza ruminates:

There is that who decided to make Iraq a burning inferno, for an open period of time, without a limit. No reconstruction, no building, no projects, no new constitution, no new state, and no new Iraq, no life at all… under the slogan: Fight, fight, and fight…..until the occupation forces move out of here.
I do not know whether this is an Iraqi faction who loves Iraq, and want the best for it…or it is a foreign faction, who has other interests…

Faiza? It's your son.

Classic Raed Post

2004-11-29T03:25:00.000-08:00

The old Raed has resurfaced. The bizarre self-contradictory logic...the inscrutable P.O.V. The only thing this one lacks is the maniacal laugh.

Raed shows pictures of a neighborhood flooded by crude oil due to terrorists blowing up a pipeline. Raed (self-styled "secular Muslim" ha ha ha), following the lead of the Saudi theocracy, suggests the act was perpetrated by the Jews! He inexplicably ties this act to a governmental failure to provide utilities to residents. And, finally, he asserts that this is not an attack on Iraq and the Iraqis but against DICK CHENEY.

Raed, I don't know who has been writing your posts lately, but we're glad to have you back.

Hmmmm...I thought it seemed awfully quiet around here

2004-11-24T11:14:00.000-08:00

I specifically remember setting up the Comments section and the way I set it up. But when I examined them just now, they were all wrong.

My apologies to those who took time to comment only to discover that you couldn't, or that your comments weren't saved. If you notice any problems in the future please let me know via email (crymeariverbendii(at_symbol)yahoo.com) or by Yahoo! Instant Messenger: crymeariverbendii

Light Posting Warning: Happy Thanksgiving

2004-11-23T17:28:00.000-08:00

Can't post and eat turkey at the same time.

Even if you aren't American, go ahead and give thanks to God for what you have.

:)

Slideshow....All the details on Fallujah

2004-11-23T17:25:00.000-08:00

Where the slaughter houses were....what they found there.

Where the mosques were that were used as forts and weapons depots...what they found there.

Where the war crimes were committed and what they did.

What the IIG is doing to bring humanitarian relief to Fallujah.

(Hat-tip Ladybird)

Fallujehn Terrorist Song Translated

2004-11-23T11:47:00.000-08:00

It was translated by Ladybird and posted by Keld Bach's Press Cutting.

It begs to be fisked.

Disclaimer: Note that I made modest corrections of grammar in LB's translation - but I do recognize that she speaks English a heck of a lot better than I speak Arabic. Also, neither LB or Keld claim to be endorsing the sentiments behind this song, they are just reporting. By the same token, I'm not responding to them, only to the writers of this song.

Verses:

Long live the people of Fallujha
We will write it in poems
The whole people of Anbar cheers them
With God's support and their effort our city is protected
They hit America where it hurts

Long live the people of Fallujha
Every one is as a wolf
If they locked the enemy, they will never fall with shooting,
All women get pregnant and deliver
But nothing like the mothers of Fallujha:
They deliver heroes

"US and Iraqi troops have discovered kidnappers’ lairs filled with corpses or emaciated prisoners half-mad with fear, and piles of bodies of men who had refused to fight with the insurgents. As the guerrillas run their last sprint from death, sympathy for their cause is running out among
Iraqis."

What can you say on the people of the city
Who protected their borders
And painted the “White House” in black-prayers
The people of Fallujha, they don’t need witnesses
All the media talking about their achievement

Hey! Guardian! Le Monde! New York Times!
Al-Jazeerah! MSM! They're talking about you!

The news from Fallujha is joyful
The soil of city became a grave to our enemy
Fire surround the city and the city is just like an oven for them
We will disembowel them [the enemy]

In the south of Fallujah yesterday, US Marines found the armless, legless body of a blonde woman, her throat slashed and her entrails cut out. Benjamin Finnell, a hospital apprentice with the US Navy Corps, said that she had been dead for a while, but at that location for only a day or two. The woman was wearing a blue dress; her face had been disfigured. It was unclear if the remains were the body of the Irish-born [humanitarian] aid worker Margaret Hassan, 59, [...] married [an Iraqi] and held Iraqi citizenship.

Long live the men who offer themselves and their blood
We will write them poems and build memorials to them
The men who stand very firm deserves a statue

Cheers to the men who aren't afraid of death
And walked into the fire each one equal hundred
If they hear the call, the people of Fallujha will be there if you need them

Cheers to the men who always have been followed by vultures.

It's a little too easy to say why those vultures are really following them

I pray for the people who don’t sleep to keep the effort
Of implementing horror and shock in the heart of the enemy
They rise all against the enemy's aggression

"They kidnapped a wounded policeman from the hospital and cut him into pieces and then hung him up..."

They became a fire and a smoke in the eyes of the enemy

Parts of Mosul were set ablaze last week when insurgents ransacked and torched about 10 police stations in coordinated attacks, panicking police who abandoned their posts.
[...]
The policemen, discovered in an industrial area not far from the scene of some of the worst clashes in Mosul, appeared to have been killed by a bullet to the head, an AFP correspondent said.
Four of the corpses were also badly burned, the correspondent said. Senior Iraqi and US military sources said they probably belonged to an Iraqi army unit that had joined US troops for a massive onslaught against insurgents in the country's third-largest city. With US attack helicopters and soldiers covering them, Iraqi national guardsmen retrieved the bodies.
"These are not my men. They all have IDs from outside Baghdad. It seems they had been on leave and were returning to their barracks," said Lieutenant Colonel Ammar Abdelhadi.
A witness said he saw gunmen execute some of the men who were found dead.

Their deeds are just like praying and fasting Ramadan
Their deeds make us stand tall their deeds are real Arab courage
Their weapons are part of their souls
They sacrifice their fortune and children because of their land

Repeat chorus:
We will write them a telegram and send a message
"Long live the people of Fallujha, the strongest men”

People still get telegrams? What is this, 1880?

South Baghdad? Meet Fallujeh

2004-11-23T11:38:00.000-08:00

The Iraqi Arab Sunnis insist on being taught what the Taliban already learned:

If you harbor terrorists, you will share their fate.