Thousands of Sadrists Protest Security Pact With US; Sistani Aide Demands Parliament Vote

Thousands of followers of Shiite leader Sayyid Muqtada al-Sadr peacefully protested across southern Iraq on Friday, according to McClatchy. They prayed and then stood silently in solidarity against the security agreement being negotiated by PM Nuri al-Maliki with George W. Bush.


Sadrists Demonstrate in Kufa. Courtesy Amara.net, a Sadrist site.

(On both the Iraqi and American side, this agreement is being characterized as a mere understanding between two executives. It is not being categorized as a treaty and there is no plan to submit it either to the Iraqi parliament or to the US Congress. It seems that the Bush team hopes it will take on the force of law just by virtue of existing and having been signed by the two leaders.)

Aljazeera had a debate between Hasan Salman, who supports al-Maliki, and Nizar al-Samarra'i, a Sunni dissident, this afternoon. Salman said that the agreement might be stipulated to be only for one year, so as not to detract from Iraqi sovereignty. He also said he welcomed the Sadrist demonstrations because they strengthened al-Maliki's negotiating position.

Except that I don't think the demonstrations are intended to help al-Maliki, but rather to delegitimize and bury him.

Even Jalal al-Din Saghir, a member of parliament from the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq, which is allied with al-Maliki, preached a sermon at the Buratha Mosque in north Baghdad, saying, according to McClatchy:

'"The Iraqi people should see every single letter in (the agreement) and it should be transparent. What the people accept we do and what they reject we do," said ISCI lawmaker Jalal al Din al Saghir in his Friday sermon. "Most of what the Americans offered was against Iraq's sovereignty. If this treaty is done it won't be on Iraq's sovereignty, constitution and its land." '

Al-Hayat reports in Arabic that there is broad Sunni and Shiite uneasiness with the agreement, even inside Iraqi governing circles.

Al-Hayat says that those familiar with the current draft of the agreement says that it speaks of the establishment of 400 US military sites and bases through the country, of legal immunity for American troops and citizens, and an abrogation of any undertakings previously made, to share in the reconstruction of the country.

Another source told al-Hayat that US Ambassador Ryan Crocker is pressing for language permitting permanent US bases, and removal of other language forbidding the US to attack a third country from Iraqi soil. (This source does not sound reliable to me. US officials have repeatedly said they do not want "permanent" bases, and the provision disallowing the use of Iraqi soil as a launching pad for one country to attack another is in the Iraqi constitution.)

The Iranian Speaker of the House, Ali Larijani, called on Iraqis to resist the security agreement with the US with the same courage that they oppose the Occupation itself.

Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani is also said to oppose provisions of the agreement.

The source told al-Hayat that there tensions pervade the US-Iraqi relationship because of disputes over the text of the agreement.

Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, leader of the Islamic Supreme Council in Iraq, the largest bloc in parliament and cornerstone of the al-Maliki government, issued a statement through his office. He spoke of the existence of:

' a national consensus on rejecting many of the points put forward by the American side in the agreement, because they detract from national sovereignty." He said that such a consensus existed in the National Security Council, which is composed of the leaders of the major political blocs in the parliament.'

Unlike the Sadrists, who reject the agreement altogether, al-Hayat says that ISCI simply has problems with some specific provisions. For instance, it objects to US troops being able to arrest Iraqis at will and hold them, and to be able to use deadly force at will without coordinating with the Iraqi government. It also objects to extraterritoriality (immunity from prosecution in Iraqi courts) for American troops, civilians and private security guards.

Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi, a Sunni Arab and leader of the fundamentalist Iraqi Islamic Party, agreed with al-Hakim's stance. He said in a statement issued on Friday that Iraq's sovereignty is a "red line".

Al-Hayat's sources also say that US Ambassador Ryan Crocker privately told the Iraqi government that the US rejects the holding of a national referendum on the provisions of the agreement. He is alleged to have brandished the threat that if the agreement was not reached, Iraq would remain under Chapter 7 of the UN Charter, i.e. in a sort of receivership to the UN Security Council.

If this allegation is true, it puts Crocker on a collision course with Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, since, Al-Hayat maintains, Sistani is absolutely insistent that the provisions of the agreement be submitted to a popular referendum.

In Karbala, Sistani's representative, Sheikh Ahmad Safi, said in his Friday sermon that the agreement must not be allowed to shackle future generations of Iraqis, and must not detract from Iraqi sovereignty. He insisted that the agreement would be null and void if it was not voted on by the elected Iraqi parliament.

(I don't think it will be voted on by parliament.)

On another front, al-Hayat says, former prime minister and former Da'wa Party leader Ibrahim Jaafari has founded and new nationalist political current that will seek to reach out across ethnic and sectarian divides to unite Iraqi nationalists across the board.

Meanwhile, the CSM reports on rogue Mahdi Army splinter groups in Risala, in Baghdad, and the way they terrorize residents.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Suicide Bombers Kill 20, Wound Dozens in North; Firefight with Jihadis in Tikrit; VP Abdul Mahdi Praises IranP

At least 35 persons died in political violence in northern Iraq on Thursday. Suicide bombers killed 20 persons and wounded dozens in three attacks on police and recruits, with the largest attack at Sinjar. In Tikrit, Awakening Council tribesmen armed and paid by the US shot to death 15 jihadis in a tanker headed for Baghdad with suicide belt bombs when the driver and his passenger opened fire at a checkpoint. (Details below).

"Turkish warplanes struck 16 Kurdish guerrilla targets in northern Iraq on Thursday morning . . . The statement on the General Staff's Web site said the operation against the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) rebel group, launched at 0800 GMT, had been completed successfully. "

Al-Hayat reports in Arabic that Adil Abdul Mahdi, one of two Iraqi vice presidents, is in Tehran for a visit with President Mahmud Ahmadinejad. Abdul Mahdi, considered close to the Americans in Baghdad, is nevertheless also a leader of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq, the leading political party that was founded in 1982 in Tehran for Iraqi expatriates by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.

In Tehran, Abdul Mahdi spoke at a news conference with Ahmadinejad, saying he considered the Iranian president's recent trip to Baghdad "a turning point in the history of the relations between the two countries." He added, "The people and government of Iraq have long valued Iranian support for Iraq and its role as the path of their progress." He said that his visit to Iran is for the purpose of "discussions of economic issues and services, as well as political and security matters."

Gee, that's not how the US talks about Iran. Yet here is Iraq's elected Vice President, and he doesn't seem to agree with John McCain's characterization of Iran's role in Iraq.

For his part, Ahmadinejad said that the "enemies" are afraid that Iraq might turn into a base against global arrogance (i.e. Western imperialism). He said the Iraqi government and people have a bright future.

Christopher Cerf and Victor Navasky at Tomdispatch.com examine John McCain's actual stances on the Iraq War from 2003 and find that he didn't actually initially oppose it and that he sounded at every point just like Bush. At the same site this week, Frida Berrigan on how the Pentagon has been turned into the Swiss Army Knife of bureaucracies by the Bush administration.


Tom Engelhardt points out that "the U.S. military has, in the last two months, fired at least 200 Hellfire missiles into the Iraqi capital, according to the Washington Post, most of them into Sadr City, the vast, heavily populated Shiite slum in east Baghdad. ("Just six" had been used in Baghdad in the previous three months.)"

Well no one is more happy than I that US military casualties are way down in May. But apparently it is because US troops didn't have to fight in Sadr City so much, because we like bombed it back to the Stone Age, with all those civilians densely packed in there. And no wonder the Mahdi Army suddenly decided to let al-Maliki's troops in. 200 missiles is a lot of missiles to rain down on your extended family.

The proselytizing Marine at Fallujah has been removed from the checkpoint and is under investigation. Apparently it was just one guy flying solo. It will take some time to repair the damage he did.

McClatchy reports political violence on Thursday:

' Baghdad

Gunmen throw a hand grenade in a Kia minibus as both vehicles were driving down Muthanna Military Base Street heading towards Alawi al-Hilla, central Baghdad at 10 am Thursday. The hand grenade detonated severely injuring 6 civilians.

2 unidentified bodies were found in Baghdad by Iraqi Police today. 1 in Saidiyah and 1 in Palestine Street.

General Manager of a private Iraqi oil company, Hussein Ali Abdulhussein survived an assassination attempt in al-Masbah neighbourhood in Karrada at around 9.30 pm. He is now in the neurosurgery hospital being treated for his wounds.

Nineveh

16 recruits killed and 21 others, some severely injured when a suicide bomber wearing an explosive belt detonated in a crowd of young men queuing in front of the Directorate of Police in the southern part of the town Sinjar, 120 km to the west of Mosul at 10.30 am Thursday. They were applying for positions in the police force. The Chief of Police of Sinjar has been deposed as a result of this incident.

2 policemen killed and 10 people, 5 policemen and 5 civilians injured when a suicide car bomber detonated targeting a Rapid Response Force patrol in the Ghabat area to the north of Mosul. The suicide bomber was dressed in police uniform and driving a police vehicle, said the commander of RRF battalion. The explosion also caused a great deal of material damage in the area.

Diyala

A roadside bomb targeted an Iraqi Army patrol in Bizayiz Buhruz, 20 km to the south of Baquba at 10 am Thursday, killing 2 servicemen.

A roadside bomb exploded on he main route between Khanaqeen and Qara Teppa 70 km to the northeast of Baquba seriously injuring a man and his son. Rasheed Nebeel and his son Husam are both in hospital.

Salahuddin

A tank truck was stopped at a Sahwa checkpoint at the northern entrance to Tikrit. The truck that was headed towards Baghdad was stopped and the driver was asked to open the tanker for searching. Instead of complying with the order, the driver and his assistant took out weapons and started shooting. The Sahwa members and the security forces returned fire and killed them both. Then they opened the tanker and found at least 10 men with explosive belts on. They took them out and executed them." '

For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Haeri Fatwa Against Security Agreement; Al-Alam: Basra Pols Oppose Security Agreement with US

The USG Open Source Center translates the fatwa of Ayatollah Kadhim al-Ha'iri (Haeri) condemning any security agreement between Iraq and the United States (Via BBC Monitoring). Haeri, an Iraqi, lives in Qom because he refuses to reside under foreign military occupation. He is sometimes called Iraq's 'fifth grand ayatollah.' The other four live in Najaf and are less involved in politics than Haeri.

OSC also translates a program of the Iranian Arabic-language satellite channel, al-Alam (The World) on opposition by Iraqi politicians in the southern Shiite port city of Basra to the proposed US-Iraqi security agreement. The report quotes a member of the al-Da'wa Party but that party has 2 branches and it is not clear if it is Prime Minister al-Maliki's branch. It also quotes Sadrist Salah al-Obeidi. The allegation is made that there are fatwas from Iraqi Shiite ayatollahs forbidding the agreement.

'May 29, 2008 Thursday

IRAQ'S AYATOLLAH AL-HA'IRI ADVISES AGAINST SECURITY AGREEMENT WITH US

Text of report by Lebanese-based Shi'i News Agency website

[Shi'i News Agency headline: "Statement by Religious Authority Al-Sayyid Al-Ha'iri on the US Government Agreement with the Iraqi Government"]

The religious authority, His Eminence Grand Ayatollah Al-Sayyid Kazim al-Husayni al-Ha'iri, may his shadow lasts, has issued a statement on the US agreement with the Iraqi government. The following is text of the statement:

In the name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate. praised be God, and may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon Muhammad and his good, chaste family members. "And incline not to those who do wrong, or the Fire will seize you" "Islam rises above all and none rises above it." [Koranic verses]

My dear sons in our occupied Iraq: May the peace and blessings of Allah be upon you.

You are aware that the occupiers of Iraq want to legalize their illegitimate presence on our land so that it will be possible for them to tamper with the security of the homeland and the citizen and to continue to plunder the country's resources and thus increase the poverty and deprivation. They want to force the Iraqi Government to agree, under the excuse of removing Iraq from the Seventh Chapter of the UN Charter, to completely concede Iraq's independence and resources and make its presence and future go with the wind, where it will not have authority or sovereignty, and force it to agree to provisions that will stamp the stigma of humiliation and disgrace on Iraq's forehead forever.

Such enforcement on the government will not leave any dignity or sanctity to the individual. They want their dog, which is squatting on Iraq, protected from any accountability by the government or the nation. They want all Iraq's political and legal entities: The presidency, Prime Ministry, and Council of Representatives, as well as the nation to be accountable to the Americans. "If they enter a country, they despoil it, and make the noblest of its people its meanest. Thus do they behave." [Koranic verse]

Besides, the American, who has entered Iraq with the slogan of liberation, soon announced himself an occupier. He did not fulfil any promise. Therefore, is any goodness expected from such agreements?

From the position of fatherhood, I give my advice to every official in this nation not to stain himself with such an agreement. Let him fear God for what is left of his dignity.

Let everyone know also that such an agreement will not be binding to anyone, except to the one who signs it. No one should ever think that he can plot against our nation despite its preoccupation with its tragedies; the killing, destitution, starvation, and deprivation. All this is the work of the Americans and their supporters. The nation, whom Prophet Muhammad, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, awakened, will not accept humiliation and disgrace. Here is his grandson, Al-Husayn, peace be upon him, crying out defiantly: "Never will we be humbled."

Our zealous sons, we are going through a difficult test. We have no other choice but to adhere to the truth together. Do not ignore what is being plotted against you and do not busy yourselves with trivial matters that lead to differences between you. This is the wish of your enemy, who is lying in wait for you.

Place your trust in Allah, close your ranks, stay alert, and watch out of your enemy.

I address the occupation from my place here by repeating the words of our Lady Zaynab, peace be upon her: "Go ahead and plot and do what you like, but by God you will never wipe out our Koran and revelation."

Dear sons: Let me tell you. The blessed religious seminary in Iraq is dearer, cleaner, higher, and nobler than the recognition of the legitimacy of such an agreement.

May the peace and blessings of Allah be upon you.

[Signed] Kazim al-Husayni al-Ha'iri, 15 Jumada al-Ula 1429 Hegira

Source: Shi'i News Agency website, Mount Lebanon, in Arabic 21 May 08'


'Al-Alam TV: Basra's Political, Religious Leaders Oppose Security Treaty With US
Al-Alam Television
Thursday, May 29, 2008

(Newsreader) Representatives of political, religious parties and currents in Basra were unanimous in their rejection of the security treaty which Washington plans to conclude with Baghdad. Shaykh Salah al-Ubaydi, representative of the Sadrist Trend in Basra, said that the Trend was committed to fatwas issued by religious authorities which prohibited such treaties.

(Reporter) A political and popular rejection of the security treaty to be signed between Iraq and the United States was voiced by representatives of political and popular forces in Basra. Basra's representatives in the Iraqi parliament rejected the treaty on the grounds that it is an infringement on Iraq's sovereignty and a threat to neighboring countries. It goes against the Iraqi constitution which specifies that Iraq must not be used as a springboard for aggression against neighboring countries.

(Abd al-Musawi, Al-Dawah Party MP) We should not sign a treaty with the US which threatens our neighbors. We do not accept for Iraq to become a base from which to launch attacks on our neighbors or to set up bases in Iraq which threaten our neighbors or seek to interfere in their interests.

(Salah al-Matat, member of Basra's Provincial Council) If this treaty is not clear and not formed on the basis of parity, then it will represent a future threat. We want Iraq to be independent and not to fall under anyone's protection.

(Reporter) The spokesman of the Sadrist Trend Shaykh Salah al-Ubaydi reiterated his rejection of the treaty and said that it aims to solidify the US presence in Iraq, a matter which religious authorities have prohibited.

(Shaykh Salah al-Ubaydi) The office of the Martyr Al-Sadr has made clear its position on the security treaty between the US and Iraq. It is rejected and is unacceptable and there are many fundamental reasons why it is unacceptable. One of these is the verdict of the religious authorities in this regard. Sayid al-Ha'iri has issued a statement in which he rejected (the security treaty) and also the office of Sayid Al-Sistani has clarified in a number of oral questions a rejection of the treaty.

(Reporter) On the fringes of a human rights meeting, the leaders of Basra's religious and political blocs have urged the Iraqi government to reject the security treaty with the US forces and replace it with treaties with Iraq's neighbors that guarantee Iraq's security and sovereignty. The US-Iraqi treaty thus faces popular and political rejection because it is seen as an infringement on Iraq's sovereignty and a cause of concern for the region's security.

(Description of Source: Tehran Al-Alam Television in Arabic -- IRIB's 24-hour Arabic news channel, targetting a pan-Arab audience)'

For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Sadr demands Referendum on SOFA; Sistani said to Support Referendum

CNN is reporting that Shiite leader Sayyid Muqtada al-Sadr is demanding that any US-Iraqi security agreement be submitted to a national referendum.

Al-Hayat reports in Arabic that he is in good company:

' Sources close to the office of the Shiite Supreme Exemplar, Ayatollah Ali Sistani, told al-Hayat that he called on the Iraqi prime minister during the latter's visit to Najaf recently, to deal cautiously with the agreement and called on him to organize a national referendum on it.'

So the idea of a national referendum on any Status of Forces agreement seems to be spreading. In my view, one impetus for this adoption of a California-style referendum approach is that the Iraqi parliament is not seen as strong enough to express the will of the people. Parliament often cannot hold a session because it lacks a quorum. The United Iraqi Alliance and the Kurdistan Alliance run it as a tyranny of the majority, when the UIA can get Shiite independents to vote with it. Often if al-Maliki is afraid he cannot get a law passed, he will avoid holding a precise one-by-one vote of the parliamentarians. Rather he'll ask for general assent without a voice vote. In essence, Iraq is being run by the cabinet, which often doubles as both executive and legislature (functioning as a sort of senate).

In 2006, the Sadrists in parliament demanded that the Iraqi government request for the renewal of the UN mandate for US and other foreign forces in Iraq be submitted to parliament before it was sent to the UN. Al-Maliki rejected that demand.

So if the legislature is rendered relatively toothless, it loses a great deal of legitimacy.

Hence the demand for a national referendum.

Any opposition of the Shiite religious leaders to a US-Iraqi security treaty could put it in question, in a big way.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Sunni Arabs Pull out of Talks with al-Maliki; Bush Benchmark in Doubt; Marines Proselytize Sunnis with Gospel

On Wednesday, the Sunni fundamentalist Iraqi Accord Front (IAF, Tawafuq) withdrew from talks on rejoining the government of Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki of the Shiite fundamentalist Islamic Mission Party (Da'wa).

Despite the confidence of Iraqi Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi, a Sunni, that his bloc would eventually rejoin the government, the development was a blow to al-Maliki. Al-Sharqiya television had reported on Tuesday (via USG Open Source Center and BBC Monitoring):

"The United Nations has committed Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki to present the names of the new ministers to his government before the beginning of the International Compact Conference on Iraq that will be held in the Swedish capital, Stockholm. Informed sources said that Al-Maliki held a meeting with Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi after Al-Tawafuq Front MPs suddenly escalated their tone against the Iraqi Government, accusing it of impeding a settlement and of humiliating the Front, as was said by Al-Tawafuq Front MP Zafir al-Ani. Umar Abd-al-Sattar, key leader in the Iraqi Islamic Party, expected the collapse of the negotiations. The sources added that the meeting between Al-Maliki and Al-Hashimi tried to salvage the negotiations, and anticipated the announcement of the new names of Al-Tawafuq ministers before the beginning of the Stockholm conference so as to give a boost to the prime minister in front of the participants, namely, that his government is a unity government."

As it happened, al-Maliki had to show up in Stockholm without his Sunni Arabs in tow.

The collapse of these talks and the failure of al-Maliki to achieve substantial reconciliation with Sunni Arabs are blows to the success of the US troop escalation ("surge"), which was advertised as necessary to move Iraq toward communal peace. This Sunni-Shiite reconciliation was one of four major benchmarks announced by George W. Bush in January of 2007, which he said should be achieved by June, 2007. In the subsequent year and a half, al-Maliki's national unity government collapsed, the Sunnis have remained in the opposition, and hundreds of thousands of Sunni Arabs have been ethnically cleansed from Baghdad in the meantime. Many of them are sweltering in Syria as refugees, their life savings dwindling, their former homes occupied by Shiite squatters.

Iraqi Sunnis have just gotten the bad news that they will need visas for Jordan. There are between 500,000 and 750,000 Iraqis in Jordan, almost all of them Sunnis, with some 360,000 being there illegally. (Jordan's population is only a little over 6 million).

Many Sunni Arab Iraqis, once the country's ruling elite, now feel oppressed by Shiite, Kurdish and American Christian dominance. The story that Marines are passing coins to Sunnis in Falluja with Christian messages on them is felt as a further humiliation, especially coming after the incident of the US soldier using the Qur'an for target practice. The coins passed in Fallujah had John 3:16 inscribed on one side, "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life." This verse is not a good place to begin a Christian-Muslim dialogue. The Qur'an explicitly rejects the idea that the One God can have a "son" as polytheistic. Some Islamic theologians have argued that the phrase "Son of God" is a metaphor, which cannot be translated literally into Arabic. In any case, there are lots of Gospel verses that Muslims might find interesting, but they would generally take this one as a clear signal that Bush's Christian Soldiers consider Iraqi Muslims to be supine and abject.

The USG Open Source Center translates an Aljazeera report on the withdrawal of the IAF or Tawafuq from negotiations about rejoining the al-Maliki government. The report says that the negotiations collapsed because al-Maliki rejected a cabinet nominee of the Iraqi Islamic Party (IIP), one of three components of the IAF. The IIP, an Iraqi offshoot of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, is headed by Tariq al-Hashemi, one of Iraq's two vice presidents. Apparently IIP's coalition partners did not agree on that slate of candidates for inclusion in the cabinet. The report says that the collapse of the negotiations may reinforce a Sunni conviction that al-Maliki's government is biased against them.


'May 28, 2008 Wednesday

IRAQI AL-TAWAFUQ FRONT WITHDRAWAL MAY HAVE "SERIOUS" EFFECTS - AL-JAZEERA

LENGTH: 580 words

Doha Al-Jazeera Satellite Channel Television in Arabic at 0507 gmt on 28 May carries the following announcer-read report over video: "Iraqi Al-Tawafuq Front has decided to suspend its talks with Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki regarding its return to the government. Dr Salim al-Juburi, official spokesman for the Al-Tawafuq Front said that the decision to withdraw the candidates was taken following Al-Maliki's objection to a candidate who was proposed by the front to occupy cabinet posts."

The channel then carries a three-minute video report by its correspondent Aziz al-Mirnisi, who speaks about "a new crisis on the horizon of the Iraqi political scene." He says: "After long talks with the government on some cabinet posts, the Sunni bloc, represented by the Iraqi Al-Tawafuq Front, decided to stop its talks seeking to return to Nuri al-Maliki's government. The front, which has five ministers and one deputy prime minister in the current government, said that Al-Maliki's government, which is dominated by Shi'is and Kurds, did not respond to the front's demands regarding a list of nominees that it proposed to occupy cabinet posts. The front justified this decision as being a result of Al-Maliki's objection to one of the nominees to the post of deputy prime minister for security affairs."

Speaking about repercussions of the withdrawal decision, Al-Mirnisi says: "The withdrawal decision may provoke once again accusations against Al-Maliki's government of bias against the Sunnis in Iraq, which may have serious political and security effects on the political process as a whole if the matter is not addressed by the government. Convincing the front to rejoin the government's makeup is a main US policy objective, and a step that many consider necessary to realize national reconciliation among Iraqis."

Immediately afterwards, the channel's anchorwoman Fayruz Zayyani interviews Khalaf al-Ulayyan, National Dialogue Council chairman and Al-Tawafuq Front MP, via telephone from Baghdad on the front's suspension decision.

Al-Ulayyan says: "We were not aware of such a list, neither the first nor the second. This matter was only limited to the Iraqi Islamic Party [IIP], who nominated a number of figures from within the IIP and others close to the IIP to occupy these positions without consulting other members in Al-Tawafuq Front. We did not know anything regarding this list; we expressed our objections to the prime minister and nominated a number of independent technocratic ministers and asked the prime minister to choose whom he deems suitable to occupy cabinet positions."

When asked if he could confirm leaked news by the Iraqi Government on disagreements within the Al-Tawafug Front, Al-Ulayyan says: "This is true; there are disagreements. Our brothers at the IIP want to dominate the entire [Al-Tawafuq] Front in addition to the nominated ministers as happened in the past, not leaving the chance for others to participate in decisionmaking or nominating any figure for any cabinet positions."

Speaking on possible consultations with the front on the current disagreement with the IIP, Al-Ulayyan says: "We tried, for several times, to sit with the IIP leaders to discuss these issues; however, the IIP obstinacy made this matter almost impossible. Moreover, Dr Adnan al-Dulaymi, who is head of the [Al-Tawafuq] Front, is extremely biased towards the IIP and does not care about others."

Source: Al-Jazeera TV, Doha, in Arabic 0507 gmt 28 May 08 '
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Halliburton and Iran

The moral of the below: If you can't join them, beat them.

Reddit readers have dug up an article by Jason Leopold alleging that Halliburton, of which Dick Cheney was CEO in 1995-2000, and which did business in Iran until 2007, supplied Iran with equipment that could have been useful to its nuclear program. Among Halliburton's Iranian partners was Cyrus Nasseri, who was also a point man in the Iranian nuclear program. Leopold's update shows that Cheney lobbied intensively on behalf of Iran in Congress in the late 1990s. (He also tried to get the boycott on Saddam Hussein's Iraq lifted).

The USG Foreign Broadcast Information Service, as carried by BBC Monitoring, translated this article from an Iranian newspaper in 2005. It supports the substance of Leopold's article. It contains a twist, though, accusing Halliburton of espionage on the Iranian nuclear program.

'January 18, 2005, Tuesday

Iran's nuclear negotiator said behind contract with USA's Halliburton

SOURCE: Resalat web site, Tehran, in Persian 17 Jan 05

LENGTH: 387 words

Text of report entitled: 'An explanation of the dimensions of the cooperation of a senior diplomat in Iran's nuclear negotiations with senior officials of the American government, " published 'by Iranian newspaper Resalat web site on 17 January

An informed source has explained the new dimensions of the joint economic cooperation of the senior diplomat in Iran's nuclear negotiations with senior officials of the American government.

In an interview given to Fars News Agency he stated that a study of the contract signed between the Iranian government and the American Halliburton Company shows that the main individuals who paved the way for the contract were Dick Cheney, the American Vice President, and Sirus Naseri, the lynchpin in Iran's nuclear negotiations and special adviser of the Supreme National Security Council.

He added: The participation of Iran's valuable oil contract with the Halliburton Company involving drilling 12 wells in phases nine and 10 of Southern Pars oilfields goes back to early 1383 year beginning 21st March 2004 .


In phases nine and 10 in Southern Pars gas is expected to be found in Iran's land and marine sections over 52 months up to 1385, and 50 million cubic meters of natural gas and 400 tonnes of sulphur is expected to be extracted.

He added: With a proposal worth 282 million dollars Halliburton wanted to achieve success in this phase of the Southern Pars project.

According to this informed source, before this, too, the American company, along with the American Schlumberger, wanted to participate in phases two and three of the region, something that it failed to achieve.

Stating that there were several aspects to Halliburton's new participation in Iran, the informed source added: The first of this is that the contact concluded with Halliburton is nearly 70 billion tumans more than the amount the company had sought. That is to say, while Halliburton had asked for nearly 23 million dollars for drilling each of the oil wells, amounting to a total of 282 million dollars for drilling the 12 wells in Oslavieyyeh, the Iranian government, in the contract that has been signed, has granted some 360 million dollars to the Halliburton-Oriental consortium, which is nearly 70 billion tumans more than the amount asked for in the bid.'
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

McClellan: Bush in Permanent Campaign Mode, Less than Forthright on Iraq

Former White House press spokesman Scott McClellan has come to the realization that Bush's presidency veered badly off course and that the Bush White House was in "permanent campaign mode"-- by which he appears to mean that the honesty and transparency necessary to govern were foregone in favor of constant propaganda of the sort it is only decorous for an out-of-power candidate to deploy.

Now if only we could get past the idea that a temporary campaign mode is legitimate, if by "campaign" one means propagandizing.

McClellan writes:

' “History appears poised to confirm what most Americans today have decided: that the decision to invade Iraq was a serious strategic blunder. No one, including me, can know with absolute certainty how the war will be viewed decades from now when we can more fully understand its impact. What I do know is that war should only be waged when necessary, and the Iraq war was not necessary.” '

Gee, that's not what I hear from John McCain. But of course, he might be in "permanent campaign mode."

The former official cannot quite let go of the idea that Bush had good intentions but was misled:

' “I still like and admire President Bush,” McClellan writes. “But he and his advisers confused the propaganda campaign with the high level of candor and honesty so fundamentally needed to build and then sustain public support during a time of war. … In this regard, he was terribly ill-served by his top advisers, especially those involved directly in national security.” '

But elsewhere he says,

' Bush was “clearly irritated, … steamed,” when McClellan informed him that chief economic adviser Larry Lindsey had told The Wall Street Journal that a possible war in Iraq could cost from $100 billion to $200 billion: “‘It’s unacceptable,’ Bush continued, his voice rising. ‘He shouldn’t be talking about that.’”'

But if Bush had been honest and sincere, only misled, then wouldn't he want to know why Larry Lindsey had come to that conclusion (he under-estimated the cost by about a factor of 10)? No, Bush was about suppressing anything but his own party line.

McClellan's revelations about the 'permanent campaign mode' and Bush's anger at straight talk on costs help explain the current narrative about Iraq shaped by his spinmeisters. On the one hand he is telling us that the Iraqi Army imposed itself on Basra and Mosul. On the other, the Pentagon comes out and says violence has fallen to March, 2004 levels in the country as a whole. But if the Iraqi army is engaged in hard-fought battles for control of entire cities with a tenacious insurgency, surely violence levels would be up? Then you start to notice that there haven't actually been any battles in Mosul.

In the permanent campaign, as in the permanent war, assertions made to the public about how well the victory is going do not have to be consistent or make sense.

McClellan lays to rest the myth of the 'liberal media.':

' “If anything, the national press corps was probably too deferential to the White House and to the administration in regard to the most important decision facing the nation during my years in Washington, the choice over whether to go to war in Iraq. “The collapse of the administration’s rationales for war, which became apparent months after our invasion, should never have come as such a surprise. … In this case, the ‘liberal media’ didn’t live up to its reputation. If it had, the country would have been better served.” '

He clearly seems surprised that network news, owned by rightwing corporations obsequious toward the US government, did not cover the rationales for the war critically! Was he expecting GE to instruct NBC to move to the left? (Though to be fair, NBC has recently gone some way toward redeeming itself, with Matt Lauer's recognition in 2006 that Iraq had fallen into civil war, and with MSNBC's backing for Keith Olbermann's courageous and honest evening magazine show. Bush's White House is signalling to General Electic that it should rein NBC in; the rich and powerful are not used to hearing criticism from channels owned by their friends and the beneficiaries of their largesse.)

Then there is this about Plamegate:

' “There is only one moment during the leak episode that I am reluctant to discuss,” he writes. “It was in 2005, during a time when attention was focusing on Rove and Libby, and it sticks vividly in my mind. … Following [a meeting in Chief of Staff Andy Card’s office], … Scooter Libby was walking to the entryway as he prepared to depart when Karl turned to get his attention. ‘You have time to visit?’ Karl asked. ‘Yeah,’ replied Libby.

“I have no idea what they discussed, but it seemed suspicious for these two, whom I had never noticed spending any one-on-one time together, to go behind closed doors and visit privately. … At least one of them, Rove, it was publicly known at the time, had at best misled me by not sharing relevant information, and credible rumors were spreading that the other, Libby, had done at least as much. …

“The confidential meeting also occurred at a moment when I was being battered by the press for publicly vouching for the two by claiming they were not involved in leaking Plame’s identity, when recently revealed information was now indicating otherwise. … I don’t know what they discussed, but what would any knowledgeable person reasonably and logically conclude was the topic? Like the whole truth of people’s involvement, we will likely never know with any degree of confidence.” '

The only time two people have to try hard to get their stories straight is when they have done something wrong and are planning to lie about it.

A primer on the Plame scandal is here.

Oh, and about that "permanent campaign mode" thing. That's nothing compared to the "permanent war mode."
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Sadr Threatens Weekly Demos; The Forgotten Refugees; Same old Retired Guys on the Take, on TV

Muqtada al-Sadr is urging Iraqis to hold weekly demonstrations after mosque prayers on Fridays against the proposed security agreement being negotiated by the al-Maliki government with the US. Sadr fears al-Maliki will give up too much of Iraq's sovereignty.

McClatchy says that Bush wants to give $600 million for the Iraqi police; but he wants to cut back support for American police!

Blue Girl reminds us about the millions of displaced Iraqis, whose lives have not improved despite Bush's renewed optimism on Iraq.

Not only did the corporate television news channels ignore the NYT report outing their "defense analysts" as deeply intertwined with private defense contractors and privy to special briefings by Bush's Pentagon, but they apparently intend to go on shamelessly serving up the same fare.

Let's just imagine that you are a retired senior officer, and that you have a cushy deal with a corporation that depends on Pentagon contracts. And lets say you are asked if it is a good idea to get up a war with Iran. Remember, your friends' contracts and your own retirement home in Palm Springs depend on it.

For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Cole in Salon: John McCain's Arab-American Problem

My fortnightly column in Salon.com is now out: "John McCain's Arab-American Problem".

Excerpt:

' Arab-Americans do, however, have some distinctive concerns in common. They are more likely to care about the Iraq war and the Arab-Israeli peace process than other Americans. They are also particularly sensitive to racial profiling and assaults on civil liberties.

That has put them at odds with the Bush administration and the Republican Party, and has contributed to a hard swing toward the Democrats. After a plurality voted for Bush in 2000, the community favored Kerry in 2004 and has been increasingly trending Democratic. About 40 percent have been consistently Democratic since 2000, but the proportion identifying themselves as Republicans nationally has fallen in the past eight years from 38 percent to 26 percent.

Arab-Americans are both very likely to vote -- their turnout is 20 percent higher than that of the general population -- and they are concentrated. Two-thirds of them live in just 10 states, including the swing states of Florida, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Virginia. In Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida, Arab-Americans have made up 2 percent of the electorate in recent elections. That sounds like a small proportion, but in a close race it can make a difference. In 2000, Bush won the Arab-American vote over Gore by 7.5 percentage points. Bush took Ohio that year by only 165,000 votes. He and Gore virtually tied in Florida in the popular vote.

The Arab-American presence is most significant in Michigan. An estimated 300,000 Arab-Americans reside in the southeastern portion of the state. More than a third of Michigan's Arab-Americans have Lebanese ancestry; most of that population is Shiite. Another third of the state's Arab-Americans are Iraqi, and many of those residents are Christian.

In other words, up to 5 percent of Michigan's vote is Arab-American. The Democratic candidate has won the state in each of the last two presidential elections by no more than 200,000 votes. Recent polling suggests that in a head-to-head contest between John McCain and Barack Obama, the two would split the state down the middle. Many analysts believe that the Democrats cannot win in November without winning Michigan.'

Read the whole thing.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

2 GIs Killed, 4 Wounded on Memorial Day; Bike Bomber kills 6, wounds 18;

In a grim Memorial Day reminder of the risks facing US troops in Iraq, two sets of guerrillas used roadside bombs to kill and wound GIs on Monday. Sunni Arab guerrillas hit a US convoy in Salahuddin Province, killing one and wounding 2. Then in southern Iraq, a dissident Shiite group blew up a US vehicle in Qadisiya province southeast of the holy city of Najaf, also killing one and wounding 2.

In Baghdad, , "A suicide bomber on a motorcycle killed at least six members of a U.S.-backed neighbourhood patrol and wounded 18 others on Monday, police said. The attack took place at a checkpoint in Tarmiya, a town just north of Baghdad."

Al-Zaman reports in Arabic that differences over Kirkuk between the United Iraqi Alliance and the Kurdistan Alliance may delay the holding of the provincial elections.

McClatchy reports that some educational institutions in Baghdad are still closed because of sectarian violence, leaving students high and dry.

Amit Paley profiles Sayyid Muqtada al-Sadr's attempt to gain respectability. It seems a little unlikely that he will ever be thought a great scholar. But since he is clearly a talented sectarian leader, he may go on to great things. The word for trained religious jurisprudent, by the way is 'mujtahid', meaning to exert oneself, i.e. in deciding what the law is based on scripture and other sources.

The USG Open Source Center translates a transcript of a news broadcast in Iraq:

' During its evening bulletins on 25 May, Al-Sharqiyah Television highlighted the lack of services in Baghdad and Mosul, Al-Sadr Trend's position on latest government measures pertaining to Friday prayers in Basra, and various security developments.

Within its 1300 gmt newscast, the station reported the following: . . .

"The Al-Sadr Trend has threatened to quiz the Iraqi prime minister in the Iraqi Council of Representatives against the backdrop of what he termed as his ongoing violations of the constitution and for not allowing the supporters of the trend to perform their religious rituals, including Friday prayers in Basra, southern Iraq. In press statements, Al-Sadr Trend Deputy Aqil Abd-al-Hasan said that the fact that trucks - with the support of security agencies - demolished the fence of one of the squares designated for hosting Friday prayers in the Kamsah Mil area in the Basra Governorate is considered a clear message to the Al-Sadr Trend that it will not be allowed to perform Friday prayers from now on, noting that this will make the trend pursue all peaceful and legal means to stop these violations against its supporters." '

The same Sharqiya broadcast included these reports:

-"Citizens in Baghdad and other cities complained of the decline in water and electricity services, especially in the previous week. Citizens in Baghdad said to Al-Sharqiyah that there has been a power outage in some areas on the Al-Karkh side for more than five days. In the meantime, citizens in Al-Rusafah side said that the power is on for only one hour everyday. The residents of Baghdad are now facing a new problem represented by the sudden cut off of potable water to all areas that lasted throughout yesterday, without knowing the reasons. The Baghdad Mayoralty did not outline the reason for the water cut off. "

And with regard to Mosul, a city of 1.7 million hundreds of miles north of Baghdad:

-"The residents of Mosul have appealed to the Trade Ministry's officials to make available the items of the ration card, stressing the scarcity of the items that are received, not to mention that many of the items are received after months of delay, noting that the validity date of some items expired. They also indicated that living conditions have deteriorated, and that unemployment and prices have sharply risen." -" Mosul Governor Durayd Khashmulah strongly attacked those who criticized him, in a reference to the deputies who accused him of distancing himself from the city, terming them as insignificant. Kashmulah stressed that he deals in a very impartial manner with all of the people's problems and concerns. "

McClatchy reports political violence in Iraq for Monday:

' Baghdad

Five civilians were injured when a bomb exploded inside a park near Abbas Ebin Firnas intersection in west Baghdad around 10:00 a.m.

Five people were killed (3 Sahwa council members and 2 policemen) and eleven others were injured (5 police and 6 Sahwa council members) when a suicide motorcycle bomb targeted a Sahwa checkpoint near the supporting forces headquarters in Tarmiyah district in north Baghdad around 10:30 a.m.

Two civilians were injured when a roadside bomb exploded near a moving bus in Shaab neighborhood in north Baghdad around 11:00 a.m. some commercial shops and private cars were damaged by the explosion.

Around 4:00 p.m. a mortar shell hit al Muthanna airport in west Baghdad. No news about casualties.

An Iraqi soldier was killed and eight others were wounded in a parked car bomb in the entrance of Hurriyah neighborhood in west Baghdad around 6:00 p.m.

Police found two unidentified bodies in Baghdad. The first body was found in Shaab neighborhood while the second body was found in Amil neighborhood.

Kirkuk

A driver of an ambulance and a civilian were injured when a roadside bomb exploded in Tuz Khurmatu town south of Kirkuk on Monday morning.

A source in the Kurdish security forces (Asayish) said that a bomb exploded near the house of a Turkmen teacher in al Askari neighborhood in downtown Tuz Khurmatu south of Kirkuk city on Monday morning.

A source in the Iraqi army said that a force of the Iraqi army raided on Monday morning al Rashad area west Kirkuk city and arrested a person that is called the prince of the Iraqi Islamic state in that area.

Najaf

A roadside bomb exploded in the al Shamiyah area south of Najaf at around 9 p.m. on Sunday. A source from the Iraqi army has told us that an American humvee was destroyed, a soldier was killed and two others were injured. US military said in an emailed reply that they confirm the new of the death of a coalition soldier.

Nineveh

A source in the Iraqi army said that an insurgent attacked a patrol that was joining the director of the tribes affairs in the ministry of interior affairs Major General Marid abdul Hussein. The source said that the insurgent attacked the patrol with the grenades in Sarj Khana area in downtown Mosul city north Iraq. Seven people were injured in the attack including one of the guards of the director.

Police forces arrested six young boys who were accused of being suicide bombers. The boys were arrested in one of the houses in Sumer neighborhood in west Mosul.

Diyala

Gunmen from al Qaida attacked Mohammed Taha , a village east of Baquba city on Monday morning. A member of Sahwa councils was killed and two others were wounded.

A policeman was killed and two others were injured when gunmen attacked Abi Saida village east of Baquba city

A policeman was killed and his six years old son was injured when a bomb exploded near the policeman’s house in Bani Saad district south of Baquba.'

For "cont'd" postings, click here.

White: UK Deportation of Yezza "Orwellian"

Ben White writes from Nottingham, UK with a guest editorial:

“I don’t like to use clichés, but this is really Orwellian”. So said my friend Hicham Yezza, speaking to me this weekend from Colnbrook Immigration Removal Centre where he was being held awaiting deportation. Moved last night to Campsfield detention centre near Oxford, for “Hich”, the nightmare continues, almost two weeks after his initial arrest by Nottinghamshire police using ‘anti-terror’ powers.

Hich, a 30 year old Nottingham University employee and former PhD student, was arrested along with student Rizwaan Sabir. The two were detained without charge for six days before being released. Hich, however, was immediately re-arrested for an alleged immigration-related offence.

The original arrests came after Sabir, while researching his dissertation on “the American approach to ‘al-Qaida in Iraq’” downloaded an al-Qaida document from a US government website. He sent the 1,500 page file to Hicham in order to save on printing costs; and after a tip off, police arrested both men, raided their homes and seized personal items.

Hicham was initially told his immigration hearing would be held in July. Inexplicably, however, the charges were suddenly dropped as the Home Office moved for an emergency deportation. Not only is Hicham facing the possibility of losing the life he has built for himself in Nottingham over 13 years, but there is also the worry that on arrival in Algeria, he will be at risk of further human rights violations given the circumstances of his deportation.

Concern – and suspicion – has been expressed by Nottingham South MP Alan Simpson, who wrote in a letter to Minister Liam Byrne:

"I can see no reason for an emergency deportation of Mr Hicham Yessa other than to cover the embarrassment of Police and Intelligence services…To race him out of the country will only provoke widespread protests against an arbitrary deportation with no right to a proper hearing. Mr Hicham Yessa was scheduled for a hearing on 16th July 2008. I can see no reason why you should race this forward and would urge you to revert to the original timescale with which a proper hearing and proper representations can be made."

This is not the only suspicious aspect of the whole affair. Hicham was an influential member of the peace movement, and during the investigation, police apparently “‘regularly attempted to collate information about student activism and peaceful campaigning’”, including “numerous questions about the student peace magazine ‘Ceasefire’”, of which Hicham was the editor.

The worrying wider context, threats to academic freedom, as well as the latest government attempts to increase the length of time people can be held without charge or trial.

For now, there is still every chance that Hicham’s deportation can be prevented. A campaign is well under way, which needs support and donations; you can join a Facebook group, as well as contact your own MP and the Home Office. On Wednesday, meanwhile, there will be a protest about the arrests themselves in Nottingham.

Ben White
Nottingham, UK
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

War without End

Hoda Abdel Hamid of Aljazeera English has made a multi-part documentary on the Iraq conflict from January, 2006, through the present, entitled "War Without End." Truth in advertising: I make a couple of appearances as a commentator.

This is Part I:



and here is Part II:

For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Trotta: Take Obama Out

Liz Trotta, a veteran journalist who helped pioneer a place for women at the front as war correspondents, was being interviewed on Fox News on Sunday by Eric Shawn, when she commented on Hillary's Clinton's reference to RFK's assassination:

' "And now we have what some are reading as a suggestion that somebody knock off Osama, uh Obama. Well, both, if we could." She laughed. '

Here's the video:



She laughed.

And Mr. Shawn did not stop her, did not say "Surely you do not mean that," and just went on with the interview:

' "But do you really think that--she didn't mean that she thinks that he going to get assassinated, and she apologized--

Trotta: "Well, that's beside the point, whether she meant it or not."

Shawn: "And she's just using it in a historical context?"

Trotta: "She's tone deaf, because it's a radioactive word. And the whole question of the first black man becoming a candidate for presidency of the United States has all kinds of overtones and all kinds of caveats that really have to be considered in this thing. And his security has been a real issue. He's had bodyguards earlier than anybody else. Surely this woman had to know that that was a third rail to say 'assassination.' And it's hard to argue for her on this, because it isn't the first time she's made this step." '

And Trotta thinks that Hillary Clinton is tone deaf!

Trotta appeared to have no remorse whatsoever for what she had said.

Is this what Rupert Murdoch's petty, spiteful, poisonous media have brought us to in this country, jokes about killing our presidential candidates and pairing their names with those of mass murderers? Under the rules of the Federal Communications Commission as they existed before the Supreme Court gutted the Fairness Doctrine in 1987, Fox would have been hugely fined or closed as a thinly disguised Republican Party House organ. (As for the argument that there are lots of news points of view to choose from now, I'm still waiting for the Socialist Party to have its cable station available in almost all US markets.)

Some are petitioning for Trotta to be banned from Fox, but it seems to me what is actually appropriate is an apology, from Rupert Murdoch himself, for all the false and vicious things he has purveyed to the American people through his phony bought and paid for "journalism." And if he won't apologize and reform, maybe it is time for a consumer boycott of Fox's major advertisers. In our corrupt corporate media system, Shawn's interview of Lotta was actually rented out to advertisers; so who paid for that piece of excrement to be on the air? Should we be buying that product?

If we analyze Trotta's brief, murderous faux pas, the language issues come to the fore.

Americans need to be told that Usamah Bin Laden does not own the name Usamah, and there are lots of wonderful people named Usamah. It is just a classical Arabic word for "lion." It is given by Christian as well as Muslim families, and some of the physicians who heal us of serious maladies are named Usamah. Moreover, there is no "o" in Arabic. It is not Osama but Usamah. It does not rhyme with Obama and is not related in any way to it. Obama is an African (presumably Dholua or other West Nilotic) word, not a Semitic one.

Then can we ban this euphemism, "take out"? In its tertiary sense, according to Merriam Webster,, it means to "eliminate, kill, destroy." If that is what it means, then say it, damn it.

Bush used to always talk about "taking out" Saddam. Well, we now know that what he meant was "to have him lynched by the fanatical Shiite Mahdi Army." A euphemism like "take out" seems less innocuous, perhaps, than just "kill." But killing should not be made to seem innocuous. People should say what they mean. If you want to kill someone, be brave enough to admit it.

Journalists Shawn and Trotta have just brought the US presidential campaign to a new low of innuendo, viciousness, cavalier disregard for the sanctity of life, and peculiar lack of self-reflection. But in most ways, they are just continuing the Fox and Murdoch house traditions.

Tone deaf, indeed.

--

Update: Trotta apologized, sort of, on Monday morning. But Fox cleverly put the apology very deep into an interview on the same subject, suggesting that Trotta retained the ability to function as a dispassionate analyst on this subject! In her apology she talked about 'falling all over herself' to make it appear as though she wished Obama "or any other candidate" harm. To fall all over yourself to do something is not to behave awkwardly but rather to be eager to do something. Was this a Freudian slip? And, why bring up other candidates. It was only Obama she wanted offed.

This "apology" is completely unacceptable and people should keep the pressure on Fox. Shawn must apologize for not interrupting her and demanding she explain herself right there.

Or maybe it is all right electronically to lynch some people, with impunity.

Here is the site of the petition to Fox to have her sacked.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Sistani Opposes SOFA; "As Long as he is Alive; Al-Maliki Advisor seems to, Too; 5 Killed, 22 Injured in Baghdad

Mark Kukis at Time reports on Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani's insistence with Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki that Iraq recover its sovereignty on all levels.

The report is bolstered by this one on Iran's al-Alam channel:

The USG Open Source Center translates transcripts of Arabic language satellite stations reporting on the controversies over recent statements of Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani. (Via BBC Monitoring). Note that Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki's adviser on cultural affairs went on Iranian television and slammed the US positions in the negotiations for a Status of Forces Agreement. .

'May 25, 2008 Sunday

AL-SISTANI NOT TO ALLOW US-IRAQ AGREEMENT "AS LONG AS HE IS ALIVE" - AL-ALAM TV

LENGTH: 271 words

Text of report by state-run Iranian Arabic-language television news channel Al-Alam on 25 May

[Presenter] There have been further reactions to the security agreement, which the US occupation and the Iraqi government intend to sign. A source close to the [Shi'i] religious figure Ayatollah Sayyid Ali al-Sistani has said that Al-Sistani told Prime Minister Al-Maliki, during their meeting in the holy city of Al-Najaf, that he totally rejects the agreement.

He [Al-Sistani] said he would not allow the signing of the agreement as long as he is alive. However, at the same time, he voiced support to the Iraqi government and to efforts by Iraqi officials and people to establish security and stability in the country.

Mr Husayn Barakah al-Shami, advisor to the Iraqi prime minister for cultural affairs, said that through this agreement, the US wants Iraq to be a launch pad to control the region. He added that Iraqis and their political leaders and religious figures have a lot of reservations about the agreement and its implications.

[Al-Shami] Iraq is very serious about getting out of Chapter 7 [of the UN Charter]. The Americans have their special project and their strategy in the region and in Iraq. They want Iraq to be their launch pad to control the region and to strengthen their influence there. The Iraqi people, political leaders and religious clerics voiced their reservations about this agreement. But they must enter this agreement [after seeking] clarifications on the issues of military bases, arrests, prisons and the use of Iraq's air space.

Source: Al-Alam TV, Tehran, in Arabic 1700 gmt 25 May 08 '

Sawt al-Iraq writes in Arabic that a close associate of Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani in Karbala, who declined to be identified, denied that he had prepared a fatwa of jihad against foreign troops in Iraq. He said that Sistani urged resistance to the occupation, but wanted Iraqis to deploy non-violent means to end the foreign troop presence.

[While this statement is true, it does not actually address the legal issue. Sistani was said by AP to have replied privately to Shiite militiamen who asked him about the legitimacy of attacking multi-national troops in Iraq. He was said to have confirmed, in private and in person, that in Shiite law, attacking a foreign occupier is legitimate. There is no contradiction between him holding those views as a matter of considered opinion on the law, and his actual policy of encouraging peaceful resistance.]

The Kuwait News Agency carried the following with regard to reports that Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani was issuing private statements to Shiite militiamen that it is legitimate to attack foreign troops:

' BAGHDAD, May 23 (KUNA) -- An Iraqi MP Friday brushed aside reports suggesting Sayyed Ali Sistani had issued a religious fatwa permitting armed resistance against foreign forces, and affirmed that the Shiite cleric had called, since collapse of baathist regime, for peaceful resistance.
Sheikh Jalaluddin Al-Saghir, head of the United Iraqi Alliance (UIA) bloc at the parliament, told KUNA these press reports about the alleged fatwa "are totally baseless." He said the policy of Sistani was based "on resisting the occupiers via peaceful means and he is still supporting the political process therefore there these claims are false." A source close to Sistani in Najaf said the senior cleric did not issue the fatwa, and was still committed to his previous position which emphasized that Iraq was not a scene for "jihad or armed confrontation." The source, speaking to KUNA on condition of anonymity, said Sistani's position was clear since the toppling of Saddam Hussein's regime. "He had called repeatedly for peaceful resistance to get the foreign forces out of Iraq," he added.
Iraqi and Western media working in Iraq said Sistani has issued a number of fatwas permitting armed resistance against foreign forces.'

Sistani's fatwa against selling food to the Americans would be consistent with what these officials are saying. One wag in the blogosphere called it, a "No soup for you!" policy.

Najaf, where Sistani lives has told the US that it does not want the "Awakening Council" model but will accept US development aid.

The Iraqi parliament has still not passed an elections law, a prerequisite for holding provincial elections-- which are therefore likely to be delayed. Al-Arabiya t.v. had a program on this issue, and I came away from it pessimistic that the law would soon be passed or that provincial elections would actually be held in 2008.

McClatchy reports political violence on Sunday:

' Baghdad

- Around 10am, a roadside bomb targeted a police patrol at Al-Maghrib Street in Adhamiyah neighborhood (north Baghdad) near the Turkish embassy .Five people were injured including two policemen.

- Around 1pm,a car bomb targeted the Babil governor’s convoy near Yarmouk hospital at Yarmouk neighborhood (west Baghdad). 11 people were injured (7 guards who were with the convoy and 4 other civilians).

- Around 1:15pm,a roadside bomb targeted an American patrol at al-Ghadeer neighborhood of new Baghdad(east Baghdad). No casualties reported.

- Around 4pm,a roadside bomb exploded at Suleikh neighborhood(north Baghdad).One civilian was killed and four others were wounded.

- Around 4:15pm, a mortar shell hit Wihda section in Karrada neighborhood(downtown Baghdad). Two people were injured in that incident.

- Police found 4 dead bodies in the following neighborhoods in Baghdad: 2 were found in Karkh bank(west Baghdad); 1 in Hurriyah and 1 in Mansour while 2 were found in Risafa bank (east Baghdad); 1 in Jisr Diyala and 1 Suleikh .

Kirkuk

- Before noon, a roadside bomb targeted a police patrol at Al-Tiseen neighborhood in downtown Kirkuk .Four policemen were injured.

Anbar

- Around 10am, a roadside bomb targeted the Sheikh Mishhin Mohammad Abbas’ convoy in Gharma (east of Falluja).Three of his guards were injured in that incident. Sheikh Mishhin is the head of Jamila tribes and the Sahwa leader in the area. A curfew was announced for further notice on vehicles and pedestrians.

Diyala

- Around 8am, gunmen attacked an Iraqi army check point at Imam Weis village (37 miles north of Baquba).A tanker driver was killed . Then, a roadside bomb targeted an army patrol in the same area killing one officer and injuring four soldiers.

- Around 7am, gunmen opened fire on police patrol at Al-Mafraq (west Baquba).One civilian was killed.

- Around 10am,a random shooting by gunmen at Azzat village (west of Baquba) led to kill a member of the Sahwa in the area.'

Jimmy Carter, still talking sense in his 80s-- on an Iraq withdrawal timetable, on lifting the siege of Gaza, on talking to Iran.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Memorial Day, 2008

Memorial Day is about honoring those who have sacrificed themselves for the nation, in our armed forces. We cannot honor them properly unless we know the full extent of their sacrifice.



We have to count the victims of Post Traumatic Distress Syndrome, what we used to call being shell-shocked, as victims of the war. The number of those victims has been covered up.

Investigative reporters at CBS News found that in 2005, 6,250 veterans took their lives, nearly 18 a day. Emanuel Margolis writes,

' Dr. Ira Katz, chief of mental health services for the Department of Veterans Affairs, sent an e-mail to a VA colleague this past February that read:

"Shh! Our suicide prevention coordinators are identifying about 1,000 suicide attempts per month among the veterans we see in our medical facilities. Is this something we should (carefully) address ourselves in some sort of release before somebody stumbles on it?"'

Margolis charges that Katz covered up this startling statistic, showing 12,000 attempted suicides a year while in VA care, when he testified before Congress.

Have 30,000 veterans died of suicide in the past 5 years? Have 60,000 tried to? Shouldn't these deeply depressed men and women be added to the casualty tolls? Is war a plague on the mind of those who fight it?

Margolis writes,

' • 120 veterans commit suicide every week.

• 1,000 veterans attempt suicide while in VA care every month.

• Nearly one in five service members returning from Iraq and Afghanistan (approximately 300,000) have post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms or major depression.

• 19 percent of post-Iraq and Afghanistan veterans have been diagnosed with possible traumatic brain injury, according to a Rand Corp. Study in April.

• A higher percentage of these veterans suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder than from any previous war because of "stop loss" or an involuntary extension of service in the military (58,300), multiple tours, greater prevalence of brain injuries, etc. '

19 percent of returning vets from Iraq and Afghanistan would also be nearly 300,000 persons, suffering from traumatic brain injury.

Wounded vets often face quality of life issues for the long term.



Others face profound moral dilemmas growing out of a conviction that they have been ordered to commit atrocities. The warping of the moral being may not be an inevitability of war but it is a severe risk.

Active duty soldiers in a war zone have a fear of becoming mere statistics, a fear I've had expressed to me in correspondence from Iraq. The LA Times profiles those soldiers from California who have given their lives to this war. The LAT says,

' Kelsey Johnson remembered that her husband, Marine Cpl. Stephen P. Johnson, 24, told her that he had "a really bad feeling" about an upcoming mission. Johnson, of Yreka, was among 31 troops killed when their helicopter crashed in the Iraqi desert.

"I dropped down on the ground and started screaming," she said. She was 19 when her husband was killed. . .

Army Spc. Daniel F. Reyes told his mother that if he died, he wanted to be buried next to his brother, Roberto Esparza, who was 21 when he was killed in a bike accident in San Diego.

Reyes was survived by his wife, Rebekah, 23, and year-old son, Daniel Fernando. "He was always thinking of us," she said. "He called me every morning in Iraq."

Like many of those killed, the severity of Reyes' wounds from an explosion precluded an open-casket service. Mortuary affairs personnel in the war zones have developed a word for such cases: unviewable.'

But in a way, all of the casualties from the Iraq War are "unviewable."

We aren't told the scale of the sacrifice by our corporate media or Washington officials. Michael Munk has done a fine job of focusing in like a laser on the real numbers of casualties for the Iraq War. Here is the last dispatch I have from him, dated May 6, 2008:

'US military occupation forces in Iraq suffered at least 108 combat casualties in the week ending May 6, as the official casualty total reached at least 65,500. The total includes 33,325 dead and wounded by what the Pentagon classifies as "hostile" causes and 32,175 (since over a month ago on March 1) dead and injured from "non-hostile" causes.*

The actual total is over 85,000 because the Pentagon chooses not to count as "Iraq casualties" the approximately 20,000 casualties discovered only after they returned from Iraq -mainly brain trauma from explosions.**

In addition, a rare report showed that 1,123 "US civilian contractors" has been killed since the invasion, including a record 353 in 2007. No numbers are available on the wounded and injured, nor about casualties among the "contractors" who are not US citizens. (Houston Post, Feb. 9, 2008.)

US media divert attention from the actual cost in American life and limb by routinely reporting only the total killed (4,073 as of May 6) and rarely mentioning the 30,004 wounded in combat. To further minimize public perception of the cost, they cover for the Pentagon by ignoring the 31,325 (as of March 1)*** military victims of accidents and illness serious enough to require medical air evacuation, although the 4,058 reported deaths include 752 (no change last week ) who died from those same causes, including 145 suicide as of March 1.

* The number of wounded is updated weekly (usually Tuesdays) by the Pentagon at this site (pdf.). The dead are reported by Iraq Coalition Casualties .

** see USA Today, Nov. 23, 2007

*** the number of "non combat" injured is reported by Iraq Coalition Casualties.

Visit my website '

I think all of us Americans fall down crying this time every year. We want it to be over with.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Sistani Forbids Feeding Americans; Warns against Security Agreement; Hundreds of Sadrists Arrested

Fars News reproduces in Persian on May 24, 2008, another anti-American fatwa by Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani of Najaf. It says that its correspondent in Najaf reports that an Iraqi Shiite submitted the following to Sistani:

'I sell foodstuffs. Sometimes the Occupying Powers or their associates come to my establishment. May I sell them foodstuffs?'

Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani replied:

' Selling foodstuffs to the Occupying Powers is not permitted.'

Last I knew, the US military in Iraq does not buy its food from Iraqis but rather imports it, for fear that Iraqi nationalists might poison it. But I'm told US soldiers do buy food and snacks from Shiite shops in Baghdad when out on patrol. So the fatwa would affect the latter but not the former. But if Sistani is laying the grounds for a Gandhi-style non-cooperation movement, he certainly could put a crimp in the American military's style in Iraq. I can't imagine US troops could function in the Shiite south or much of Baghdad without Shiite cooperation. Sistani still has a great deal of moral authority, and would be backed by less cautious clerics such as Muqtada al-Sadr and Ayatollah Jawad al-Khalisi.

This fatwa is significant in light of the reports that Sistani has been orally permitting attacks on US troops by Shiite militiamen loyal to the Shiite religious authorities in Najaf.

Then an Iranian news service reported yesterday that Sistani is also coming out against the proposed mutual security agreement between the United States and Iraq that is intended to serve as a Status of Forces Agreement after the United Nations Security Council authorization for US troops to be in Iraq expires in December.

The report says:

' The Grand Ayatollah has reiterated that he would not allow Iraq to sign such a deal with "the US occupiers" as long as he was alive, a source close to Ayatollah Sistani said. The source added the Grand Ayatollah had voiced his strong objection to the deal during a meeting with Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki in the holy city of Najaf on Thursday. '

Sistani may have been forced to take a stand on this issue because his clerical peers and rivals are coming out vocally on it.

The man some consider the 'fifth Grand Ayatollah of Iraq,' Sayyid Kadhim al-Ha'iri (who resides in Qom, Iran because he cannot abide the Occupation regime in Iraq) has denounced the proposed security agreement in no uncertain terms.

Fars News had reported in Persian on May 22 that al-Ha'iri (Haeri) rejected the security agreement. "Every knows that America intends to legitimize its illegitimate presence in our country," so as, he said, "to loot its wealth and spreak poverty and deprivation." Haeri argues that the US is hoping to use the new bilateral security agreement to escape from Chapter 7 of the UN Charter, which subjects its actions in Iraq to the authority of the UN security council.

Haeri said that the US wants to ensure that "even American dogs in Iraq are reassured and protected from any threat of being tried by the state or the people, while all political institutions and courts, including the president of the republic, the prime minister, the representatives in parliament and the populace of Iraq must be answerable to the Americans."

He called on Iraqis to work toward their liberty and said that America had never honored any of its treaties. He warned Iraqis against so humiliating themselves, quoting a saying from the Prophet Muhammad, "Beware abasement!" He called on Iraqis to unite against the conspiracies of the enemy.

On Friday, Arch-conservative Ayatollah Ahmad Khatami of Iran weighed in on the debate, saying in a sermon:

' “American forces will keep the ministries of defense, interior and intelligence under their supervision for 10 years”. . . “Iraqi tribunals will not be able to judge American military personnel and employees of firms who work for the US military”, Khatami added. [The] Iranian cleric also uttered: "It is open-ended slavery." “It is the worst humiliation… Any hand that signs such an agreement will be considered by Iran as a traitor to Islam, to Shiism and to the Iraqi people," he added. '

So Sistani no doubt feels he has to make himself heard on all this or become irrelevant.

The agreement will specify how many bases the US may have in Iraq, where, and for how long. It will probably also grant US troops extraterritoriality, that is, a guarantee that they will not be tried in an Iraqi court for any crime committed on Iraqi soil.

The extraterritoriality of foreign troops was a common legal feature of colonial arrangements in the region. It was one of the things the nationalist movements campaigned about, and typically they abrogated it as soon as they came to power. Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini made the legal immunity of US troops in Iran in the 1960s and 1970s a plank in his platform of revolution against the Shah.

Both the US and the Iraqi government appear to recognize that US bases in Arab Iraq are likely to be contentious, and apparently the thinking is now increasingly to site most of them in Kurdistan, where the population is more welcoming. That scenario, however, seems to me to have severe drawbacks. Iraqi Kurdistan is harboring guerrillas of the Kurdish Workers Party (PKK), who have frequently hit Turkey and provoked strong Turkish reprisals. You want to put US troops in the middle of that? The bases would have to be provisioned via Incirlik Air Force Base in Turkey, so the Turks could always blackmail the US military into supporting them against their Kurdish hosts! Kurdistan is landlocked and surrounded by potentially hostile powers-- Iran, Syria, and and the arab provinces of Iraq. Is that the sort of place it is wise to site thousands of US troops?

Meanwhile, Al-Sharq al-Awsat reports in Arabic that a wave of arrests of between 200 and 400 Sadrists by US troops and interventions to prevent them gathering for prayers by the Iraqi military is threatening the truce.

The Australian has more. The arrests were apparently made during prayer times in largely Shiite, Sadrist areas such as Bayaa.


My recent appearance on the PBS News Hour with Jim Lehrer, regarding PM Nuri al-Maliki's recent security campaigns, is now available in transcript and streaming video.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Clinton Touches off National PTSD

Senator Clinton's reference to the assassination of Robert F. Kennedy in June of 1968 does not seem to me consequential, for all the brouhaha it has provoked. She was just saying that many previous primaries have gone on into June, including that of Bobby Kennedy before he was cut down.

The idea that she was thinking of the possibility that her rival, Barack Obama, might meet a similar fate is absurd. But I saw pundits on cable t.v. intimating that it was plausible.

I fear she inadvertently stumbled into a hornet's nest, though.

Because fears for Obama's safety are widespread, and they are shared by Homeland Security, which gave him Secret Service protection 18 months ago.

It is well known that Colin Powell's wife did not let him run for president because she was afraid he would be assassinated. Imagine the power of that fear to shape American life. Imagine if Powell had run and won, forestalling W. from ever coming to power.

Former Republican presidential aspirant (and apparently huge tool) Mike Huckabee recently went so far as to joke about Obama being shot at. He was speaking at a National Rifle Association event:

' Huckabee made an off-color joke during his speech in Louisville, Kentucky, when a loud bang was heard off-stage. "That was Barack Obama," Huckabee quipped, "He Just tripped off a chair. He was getting ready to speak. Somebody aimed a gun at him and he…he dove for the floor." '

The shadow that falls on African-Americans who devote themselves to public service at the highest levels is that of Dr. Martin Luther King.

In evoking the tumultuous year of 1968, Clinton was trying to remind people of the long and divisive Democratic primary. But without meaning to, she reminded them of April 4, not June 5, of MLK along with RFK.


I don't think it is healthy that the information age causes such memes to circulate with such velocity that they are given far more significance than they deserve. Seeing Hillary abjectly and in a stunned voice apologize for any offense made me feel sorry for her. When you speak in public, you always risk misspeaking or having the audience misunderstand your intent. We make our presidential candidates speak constantly in public for 2 years straight, now. It is like a medieval form of torture. It is amazing that anyone runs this gauntlet.

Elections should be about issues, not about this sort of hothouse speculation about personalities.

But there is one sense in which her campaign, at least, bears some responsibility for her current straits. Clinton operatives behind the scenes have been smearing Obama as a Muslim, and it was they who dug up that photo of him in Kenyan clothes. Clinton even said Obama was not a Muslim "as far as I know." The malice demonstrated in those actions laid the groundwork for people to believe that Clinton was capable of such hostility toward Obama.

The incident, it seems to me, does tell us two other things.

The first is that the strategy of the Clinton camp, of continuing to campaign even after victory at the polls became numerically impossible--in hopes that Obama might stumble and alienate sufficient numbers of superdelegates--was not crazy. I don't approve of it, but that it could work or could have worked seems clear. It could easily have been Obama who stumbled yesterday. Ironically, it was Clinton.

The second thing the incident tells us is how traumatized the nation still is by those horrible killings 40 years ago, and how much unfinished business of healing those wounds there is. Hillary didn't mean to pick at the scab. But she did. And we bled a little, all over again.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

6 Marines Injured, 1 Soldier Killed; Sistani Aide: Jihad Fatwa May Come; Karbala'i: Punish Blasphemous GI

Al-Sharq al-Awsat writing in Arabic carries a follow-up article on the AP story regarding Sistani's oral rulings on the permissibility of attacking multinational troops in Iraq. The article seems to me to reverse the best practices of journalism. It interviews two Sistani aides, one far away from Iraq in London and one in Najaf. It highlights the London interviewee and relegates the Najaf one to the very end. So I am reversing them:

"An official in the office of Sistani in Najar said that he neither denies nor affirms that the fatwas were issued in a special form, but he did indicate that an open call for jihad might come at a future time."

As for the London representative of Sistani, Sayyid Sa`id al-Khalkhali, he said he thought it unlikely that Sistani would issue such fatwas, and insisted that if they actually existed he would know about them. He also disputed AP's report that the fatwas were private and oral and therefore secret. He said that fatwas are public and bear the jurisprudent's seal.

Al-Khalkhali is not on the scene, however, and he is just saying what he thinks likely. His point is correct, that what the AP described was a set of private conversations in which an opinion was expressed, not a fatwa, which must be written down and sealed. But what you call the opinion is not the most important thing.

Al-Khalkhali, moreover, would be under some pressure from the British government to deny that attacks on British troops in Basra are legitimate.

Britain has moved so far toward being a national security state that a Ph.D. student researching Islamic radicalism was himself arrested and held by police for 8 days for having downloaded an al-Qaeda manual.

The phone conversation that Al-Sharq al-Awsat had with the aide in Najaf suggests that if Sistani hasn't already started authorizing attacks on foreign soldiers in Iraq, he may not be far from it. I see that graf as more or less confirmatory of the AP story.

There are lots of reasons for Sistani to be furious with the US these days. Al-Hayat reports in Arabic that Sistani's representative in Karbala, Abdul Mahdi al-Karbala'i, in hisFriday sermon demanded the severest punishment for the US soldier who used the Qur'an for target practice. Al-Karbala'i said that the desecration "was a direct insult to all Muslims in Iraq and in the world." He added, "Muslims must not satisfy themselves with the apology proffered by the officers of the Occupation forces to the local officials and tribal sheikhs, since this incident concerns not just the Muslims in that area but rather everyone." He said the incident constituted "open enmity toward Muslim sanctities, a violation of their nobility, and an abasement of their sacredness." He demanded an official US apology "to all Muslims in the world, and the expulsion of the soldier from Iraq, and the trial of perpetrator, such that a just punishment would be meted out to him, so that he can serve as an object lesson to others, such that they might not repeat the offense."

[Note that he called the US military "Occupation forces." That is the language of political opposition in Iraq and is not the discourse of the ruling establishment, which has pleaded with the Arabic press not to use the phrase.]

Sheikh Hasan Tu`ayma, the sermonizer at the Khalisiyyah Seminary in Kadhimiya, said a stop must be put to the offenses being committed in some quarters against Islam and Muslims." He said that the incident proved that the Occupation forces have contempt for the things Muslims hold sacred.

Meanwhile the fragile peace in Basra was disturbed, according to AP:

' Iraqi soldiers fired in the air over supporters of anti-U.S. Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr to prevent them from gathering for Muslim prayers Friday in the southern city of Basra, enraging the worshippers and straining a fragile truce with the government. In another worrisome sign, a top aide to al-Sadr accused Iraqi forces of violations of a separate truce in Baghdad's Sadr City, where thousands of Iraqi troops have deployed in what has so far been a peaceful campaign to impose control. '

Some reports that one man was killed and two were injured in the confrontation, though the Basra morgue could not confirm it. Saddam used to prevent Shiites from gathering for large Friday prayers services, and it is a little surprising that the al-Maliki government, itself religious Shiites, would use armed force to prevent people from going to the mosque.

In the Sunni Arab areas west of the capital, UPI reports that "A roadside bomb near Falluja killed an Iraqi interpreter and wounded six U.S. Marines Friday, military officials said. . . The military also announced that a U.S. soldier was killed Thursday by a bombing southwest of Baghdad."

Alexandra Zavis has more details of violence in al-Anbar Province, which she says has provoked fears that "al-Qaeda" is attempting to return to strength in its former stronghold:

"There was at least one other explosion in the city during the day, underscoring fears that Sunni Arab militants loyal to Al Qaeda in Iraq may be attempting to stage a comeback in their former stronghold. . . . However, the province recently has been hit by a string of bombings targeting U.S. and Iraqi security forces and their tribal allies. A U.S. military statement said the Marines were attacked by unknown assailants northwest of the city. In a separate incident Friday, Fallouja police chief Col. Faisal Ismail Hussein said an explosives-laden car detonated as officers took the vehicle inside their compound to be defused, injuring four officers."

You know how the NYT blew the whistle on the 'independent' Pentagon analysts we see on t.v. all the time? And how the cable television networks refused to cover their own peccadilloes? Well at least Congress is looking into it.

Farideh Farhi explains the way the Shiraz mosque bombing is playing out in Iranian politics, and why Tehran is now laying the blame for it at the feet of the Bush administration.

In an alarming turn of events, the leader of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood praises Usamah Bin Laden as a holy warrior and says he supports its attacks on occupying forces, but not on civilians. The Muslim Brotherhood is the second most important party in Egypt.

See also Phillip J. Cunningham's pieces on Burma and China at our joint Global Affairs blog.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.