Baghdadee بغدادي > Is civil war a possibility?

Full Version: Is civil war a possibility?

Baghdadee بغدادي > Politics سياسه > Hot issues سياسه ساخنه

baghda

Apr 3 2006, 10:00 AM

Salim wrote the following as a reply , It might need a better attention

QUOTE

A friend of mine asked me why I am not so worried about civil war threat in Iraq.
It was a question that might go both ways, either I don't care about Iraq or that I really don't think this a real possible scenario YET.
While my personal commitment to follow Iraq daily progress might be convincing that I am not in the first category, what about the second.

I believe that the civil war is a possible but it is not the right description to put the current situation under.. Why?

First of all a civil war can happen any where. In Ireland between Protestant and Catholic. In USA between Afro american and whitees, In Quebec between french and british decedents . In egypt between Copts and Muslims. In pakistan In India , In China, Russia , any place you name it. The issue is always not about the possibility but about if there is enough public driving force to ignite and then naturally maintain such war.
In Current Iraq there were a very huge efforts by some regional and international organizations to ignite such war.. However the natural force to maintain it is not available. The ALQaeda sick mind did all what any body can imagine to spark it, the western liberal propaganda harmonized by some Pan Arab factionist media tried their best to politicize such conflict. However there is no one sign till now that Iraqis are responding to such campaign on any measure.. all what is happening is that alqaeda operatives , supported by Sadamists, used some sunni arab factionist fears to legitimize the killing and terrorizing of Iraqi shia . Faced by a limited response by mainly Almehdi Army personals in areas of contact to protect Shia community after the large fail of the American and government to protect people. They attacked some who are thought to be terrorist or linked to ..

There is still the big question, What is the percentage of alqaeda sympathizers in Iraq among sunni Arab? The other question is about if such fears reaction by Shia could be extended to include sunnis in general?
To answer these two questions , let me claim that Wahabee sect, the qaeda nurturing school of thought, had never penetrated the Iraqi sunni community at any significant scale. That is very clear during secular saddam era who fought that ideology at the beginning then turn to allow it at later times and it is the case after the fall of the regime.. Any one can tour around sunni mosques in Iraq to find that there is very limited influence of wahabism thoughts ..Most Sunni Iraqis are hanafees, which are considered by salafees Jihadist as Kafirs , same as Shia. Indeed the main two mosques of Sunni Iraqis are the mosque of Abo Hanifa in Adhamia and Al Kailani in central baghdad, both of them where build beside the shrines of prominent Imams, some thing wahabees consider non Islamic. That is why they had attacked shia shrines in Kerbala and Najaf in the nineteen century and that is why they keep refusing shia calls and rights to rebuild the destroyed Shia imams shrines in Almadina in Saudi Arabia till today..

However the Sadamist Qaeda coalition had created a different short term mechanism that encouraged some Sunni arab to support Alqaeda missions in what they thought fighting back to the Shia domination.. But once they found such support had never succeeded to stop Iraqis and to be going to cost them the ultimate price of losing every thing by igniting a civil war in a place where they are minority, they immediately distant them self from that coalition and started other ways. Encouraged by the American smart policy of showing open hands that went so far to appoint a sunni Muslim American at the highest position in American embassy.

In his letter Zarqawee was regretting such stand by majority of sunni Iraqis calling them "Murjia" that follow their easy materialistic interests. As a Jordanian he was very surprised by type of Sunni Iraqi mentality of conciliation with their cousins Shia Arab.. Coming from a narrow mind nomadic style society he was unable to realize that the Iraqi Arab society had ran into its own chance of historical hegemony despite all efforts by sunni state policies of keep the two sides a part, specially during the last thirty years. Indeed Alqaeda policy went to the worse of the interests of the Sunni Arab. It weakened their case and showed them as terrorists, it encouraged the shia arab widely divided groups to unite.

On the other side, the fear feelings among Shia was not directed toward Sunni's , it was always toward those wahabist who legitimize Shia killings. There is no even one call by any Shia political or religious figure to retaliate on the Sunni broad bases. Indeed it is considered as a shame among Iraqis to call to other side by it's name. Iraqi Sunni who support Shia killing, call them persians. On the Shia side the call came under the name of Nawasib, which for some ignorant be interpreted as Sunni. Indeed the nawasib is a historical description to all those who hate Imam Ali, In Arabic " Nasab Ali Aledaa" while sunni are strongly believing in Imam Ali. For them He is the fourth Khaleef and the husband of Prophet daughter. Historically Nawasib was first used to call Khwarig who fought Imam Ali fourteen hundreds years ago. Khawarig are a very small sect of muslims who believe that all Muslims are kafirs as far as they don't strictly believe in their ways. A lot of Muslims today thought Salfee Jihadist as the new Khawarig.. So the Shia propaganda was never based on anti sunni banner . Indeed Muqtada who is using the Nawasib naming is the one who keeps strongest calls to unity of Shia and sunni..Today a very common practice by Baathist propaganda machine, is to point to the current Iraqi security issues as a result of fight between the zarqawees and alsaderees..

As for the current crises of scattered killing on identity or very limited people cleansing. It is very clear this is happening in the regions where sadamists and jihadists keep a strong hold specially in the farming areas around baghdad where Sadam planted and encouraged some brutal sunni arab tribes to reside . Most of their adults were part of Sadam security apparatus. .. But we need also to not underestimate personal criminal motives.. a friend on mine told me in one incident that the owner of a house wanted to force a tenant to leave, Iraqi courts prohibits that, he recruited some one to send the tenant a letter threatening them to leave on faction bases. Nevertheless ,in west baghdad neighborhood where some shia cleansing is really happening, those who do it never claim these doing as against Shia but against government secret informative. In the east baghdad , where very rare Sunnis were forced to leave , those who do it claims the victims are Zarqawee supporters, never say they are sunni.

I think the current escalation is partly a long term plan by Sadamists to ring Baghdad by a shia free islands controlling the main roads that connect the capitol.. They think in the old believe that who ever controls Baghdad can control Iraq. They know that such control can't be granted with such larger shia percentage and strong presence of Almehdi army in alsader city. The current Almostafa mosque unfortunate incident might be one sign of their penetration into the American army information collection process. By trying to misleading the Americans , they are leaving the hard job of fighting the almehdi army to the americans and to jump on later to collect the gains while they have the strong ring seal around baghdad, that is after the tired Americans ran away. I noticed in clear evidences that Sadamist propaganda machine after the Samara golden mosques bombing and the sudden emergence of the Mehdi Army as the real threats to any possible baathis return to power, , the Baathist focused their attention to warning from the Alsderes leaving their continual claims of Bader death Squads allegations. They even cooperated with some of their Sunni Arab politician allies to stand firm against Alsader ally Aljaafree at a time dropping Aljaafree would automatically bring in Dr. Abdul Mehdi, the BAder SCRI leader. !!

Indeed the well done managed respose by Alsadrees to the Mustafa mosque incident was to show that they might be fully aware of such plans to drag them to clash with American Army. . Today Rice in her reply to question by a reporter about the American stand toward the militia, she was so smart to emphaziz that there is no place for any militia in a democratic country, however this need to be delt with after the government succeeded in fighting back the terrorist. I don't know if my interpretation to her comment was right though. There is no doubts that new Iraq need to be a country of law and order with no place for any militia or race or factions based miltia.. Being Beshmerca, or bader or Mehdi or old Sadam miltia of baathists criminals. Any cleansing of Iraq from these miltia need to come through a well timely balanced managed program that is ran by the united national governemnt to assure rights of all. And not to the anti new Iraq groups timing .!
Some one might reasonably feel this scenario to be based on very wide imagination and extra ordinary fears. However those who experienced sadamists recovery after the three fatal defeats in 82, 91 and 2003, can tell better about their plans.

I am not trying to say that there is no possibility or to lessening civil war current threats, but to describe what is happening today as a civil war might be a another way to ignite it and not to pin point to it's threats .. On good intentions , such claims might be for serving a narrow political interests of some losers!

Just to articulate my point .. Look around, Iraqis main demand today is security. No nation ran into civil war had security as THE main demand at the beginning of such war, it was always the call for revenge.. Something that no one can claim Iraqis are asking for on any significant dimension.. Even for Shia who paid the very high price , their open hand policy to the sunni side is amazing while killing to Alqaeda at same time!

salim

Apr 10 2006, 01:21 AM

Egyptian president description to the current security situation as a civil war and the Suadi forgien minster confirmation to such description might flag many questions.
Why Iraqi leaders are denying it if it is really happening. One might say such denial , supported by american officials reports, are comming as part of denial to the fail of current political process. such point need to be throughtly investigated

It is well known that qaeada and sadamist strategy is to ignite such war, and that they work all possibilities to see it happening. It might be understandable that Iraqi and asmerican politicians keep dynying such thing, at least to please them self. The real question though is why some Iraqi politicians and Arab anti Iraq fredom are keep insisting on it. That is in full support by liberal westren media.

A question that I might comment on later..

salim

Apr 12 2006, 01:29 AM

Just to understand how stupid the statement by the Old Egyptian president and why it got such wide ouraged response by most Shia in the world , excluding the Iranian of course, let me give an example.
It is just like he comes up with statement saying, that the fight with Alqaeda in USA is a civil war as there are couble of thousands die in one day. And that all or most of American muslims are believing in terorism more than they do in their living country..
Just imagine what such statement might be considered. Isn't it considered as a support to terrorist? how American mUslims would react.

Now , is he really so stupid to say such a ruppish or he is aiming to some other thing.?

salim

Apr 13 2006, 03:00 AM

http://radiosawa.com/article.aspx?id=843586

In Arabic.. Education Iraqi minister " A sunni Arab" denounce the Egyptian president sattement. Alrawee said, 99% of Shia in the south are Arabs, the president might get fooled by some one..He said that if there is a possibility for civil war then it might be happened three years ago.

salim

Apr 15 2006, 07:59 AM

ِAbbas kadhum wrote this article for Alahram newspaper..

QUOTE

The demonization of the Arab Shia wherever they live in the Arab world is not new. In modern times, this practice began by the ideologues of Arab nationalism who revised history and created a scapegoat for the failing of their ideology, having been supported by intolerant religious leaders. The symptoms of this folly then moved fast to the mostly semi-illiterate part of the Arab masses and finally found its way to the corridors of politics. The Shia were said to be responsible for the killing of the third caliph, Uthman, the wars against the fourth caliph, Ali, the killing of Imam Hussein, the fall of the Umayyad state and the fall of Baghdad in the hands of the Mongols. Hence, Shi`ism came to be considered, as Ahmed Amin put it in his book Fajr Al-Islam, 'a refuge for anyone who wanted to destroy Islam'

In the current times, this practice is on the rise. The most recent accusation by Egypt's president Hosni Mubarak that the Shia 'are mostly always loyal to Iran and not to the countries where they live' were preceded by statement of King Abdullah of Jordan alleging the rise of a 'Shia Crescent' threatening the region as he perceived it. While the allegation of the Jordanian king was a novelty so absurd that even he did not stand by it, President Mubarak's statement is more deep-rooted in the minds of many people who suffer from the Shia scare.

The corollary of this statement is that the Shia are traitors and potential domestic enemies to their own countries. It is highly disturbing that the president of a major Arab country would think in this manner about a population that, in his words, amounts to 65% in a country such as Iraq. It is no wonder that the Shia of Iraq view the silence of Arab governments towards the atrocious crimes of Saddam Hussein as a sign of consent, if not encouragement. After all, for Arab governments and many in their intellectually sequestered populations, the Shia are nothing but 'Iranian agents' who represent the worm in the otherwise very healthy Arab apple.

As an Iraqi Shia, I have seen during my entire time in the country discriminatory practice of the Ba'athist regime, which was a continuation of the past governments ever since the Ottoman times. There had been walls after walls between the Shia individual and any rights if this individual refused to sell his soul to the devil; the devil being the armies of regime security institutions whose only job was to hunt down 'domestic enemies' the agents of Iran and America at the same time, mind you!

It is past due to set the record straight, at least by visiting a few facts as this limited space may allow. In spite of centuries of Ottoman abuse against the Shia of Iraq, they sided with the Ottomans against the British after World War I and fought the British in the 1920 revolution, which forced the British to give up their plan to annex Iraq. For all of their sacrifices, they were not given even one ministry. And until 1936, the entire senior officer corps in the Iraqi army had one Shia officer only, a major named Husain Alwan. Furthermore, of all the coups and conspiracies against the Iraqi government in 1936, 1941, 1958, 1963 and 1968, none was a Shia affair. It goes without saying that the war against Iran, financed and praised by Western and Arab countries was fought by the alleged 'Iranian agents,' the Shia, who paid the heaviest casualties.

There is no question that the Shia feel certain affinity to their coreligionists in Iran. But this is a far cry from the allegation that the Shia are traitors. Sectarian affinity, however, does not capture the whole story. Our Arab brothers have done nothing to embrace us, as they keep demanding proofs of 'loyalty', whatever that means. From the organized atrocities in Iraq to the denial of our existence in Saudi Arabia and Bahrain. This abominable hostility among the Muslim community has lasted for centuries because no sustained effort was ever made to end it. Indeed, it has always been more fashionable to compete in adding more fuel to the raging fire.

Airedale

Apr 15 2006, 11:26 PM

QUOTE(salim @ Apr 12 2006, 08:00 PM)

Just an article about the Iraqi citizens taking issue with Egyptian president.
And Mubarak doing a little "damage control".

Thousands of Iraqi Shias demonstrate against Mubarak
(AFP)

15 April 2006

NAJAF, Iraq - Several thousand Shias demonstrated in Iraq’s holy city of Najaf Saturday to denounce remarks by Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak questioning whether their loyality lay with Iran.

“Mubarak, traitor,” chanted the crowd assembed in the center of the city, also calling on Mubarak to “remove the Israeli flag”, a reference to the presence of an Israeli embassy in Egypt.

On Saturday, Mubarak tempered his April 8 remarks to Al Arabiya television that Shias were more loyal to Iran than their own countries, by explaining that he meant it in religious terms, rather than political ones.

“My remarks about Shias dealt with their religious loyalties and sympathies, without putting into question the patriotism of Shias in Iraq or any other country,” he told the government weekly Akhbar al-Yom.

The comments were denounced by the governments of both Baghdad and Teheran, while the Shia imams described the 77-year-old Egyptian president as “ignorant” and “nostalgic” for the previous regime.

Saturday’s demonstration follows on a smaller protest that came after Friday’s weekly prayers.

http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticle...ion=focusoniraq

salim

Apr 16 2006, 06:49 AM

A note from the Moderator: Because of its importance, this post was revised and re-edited.

In Arabic there is a quote "An excuse, sometimes, is worse than the guilt"

Indeed the old Egyptian president had chosen the wrong message to excuse his ignorance at the wrong place.
First if that is what he meant by accusing the Shia Islam around the world to be loyal to Iran in the religious sense, then he might need to remember that the central "Vatican like" for Shia is Najaf in Iraq and the tradishinist Al-Sistani today is the undisputed Pop of Shia. Yes the Iranian revolutionist Ayatollah Khamanie is claiming Grand Marjia, but it is local to a very small scale support that can't be compared to Al-Sistani. Mubarak may rely on his supervisor’s ignorance to say that he might mean Iranian figures and not political system. If that is the case, then he needs to know that Najaf was the centre of Shiasim over the last thousand years and that the Imams of Shia are all Arab descendent of the prophet while the four Grand Imams of the four Sunni sects are Persians or non proven Arab. As for Al-Sistani, he himself is a decedent of an Arab Alawi (prophet decedent) family who fled to Iran during the great oppression on Shia and he used to live in Najaf over theast 50 years of his 67 years!

As to where Mubarak chose to post his apology, it was another wrong doing that fails to fulfil the blessing of the outraged Arabs of Iraq who feel ashamed that an Egyptian, who doesn't know from which Arab tribes he is decedent from, is accusing them not to be loyal to their countries. First, ALAKHBAR is not a government official newspaper. Second, he should stand to the moment by facing people on same Saudi-sponsored TV Channel to give the full apology not to re-interpret his clear mischiefing words

A Non Iraqi reader might not understand the level of hurting that such statement had made to the Iraqi Arabs feeling. In Iraq, most families are still keeping their family trees that shows their ancestors of more of a thousand years. Iraq is a frontier Arab country that Arab tribes are very sensitive on such issue. Egypt is a newly Arab transformed country where most of population are from non Arab so this might not be a very critical issue..

Today, Al-Merbid, the famous Arabic poet festival had it's start in Basra. Al-Merbid is a very old Arab tradition, when Arab poets race with their new poems. Saddam had used to transform it as part of his regime propaganda machine, where some greedy poets from all around Arab world came to praise his regime and left with a pocket full of oil coupons money. This year most of the attendees were real day to day Iraqis. The Deputy minister of Education Mr. Jaberee had a very touching opening speech. He commented on Mubarak's remarks. He said that those who want to donate 14 million Iraqis to Iran needs to remember that Iraqis were the ones who taught others how to read Arabic but unfortunately they misread Arabic and might read in English! He was referring to ancient Arab Basraian scholars who invented "Tahreek" (arabic vowel signs) to help newly transformed non-Arab to read Arabic text. The Deputy added also in another point that they should know that Condoleezza Rice is not governing Iraq. He added with a big admiring smile, that "though she is the most beautiful wonderful Foreign Minister I ever saw". Attendees were applauding him so hard with a lot of cheering !!

BahirJ

Apr 16 2006, 01:18 PM

The president of Egypt, in his informal defensive comments in AlAkhabar newspaper, mentioned that he doesn't discriminate against Iraqis whether they were Muslims or Shia, etc.

In his comment he’s even done more damage to his cause, he is discriminating against Shia by putting them in a different categories than Muslims.
It is like you saying I don't discriminate between Catholics and Christians. Would that be acceptable by the Catholics?
This proves to me how shallow those Arab leaders are.

Airedale

Apr 16 2006, 05:11 PM

QUOTE(BahirJ @ Apr 16 2006, 06:18 AM)

Is it possible he was misquoted?
His quote;" he doesn't discriminate against Iraqis whether they were Muslims or Shia "
It's almost like he was saying Sunni Arabs are at war with Persian Shia but not Arab shia.

The Sunni arab leaders fear a nuclear Persia.

I saw an article that Mubarak is rounding up political leaders and putting them back in jail.

Now is it because of recent prisoner releases in Egypt and Saudi Arabia that a rise in attacks on Christians in Egypt has resulted?
this is an al Jazeera article link.[/size]
Second man dies in Egyptian unrest

An Egyptian has died of wounds sustained during clashes between Copts and Muslims in the city of Alexandria as more communal violence marred Palm Sunday, medical sources and witnesses say.
......
...

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/3F8...F900F0E270D.htm
more at the link but I have two points.

first
The way I understand al Jazeera and how they report is this.
What they will not say is;

"An Egyptian Christian has dies of wounds sustained during a clash....."

second
Mubarak has a growing problem of unrest that will not be reported in the western MSM.
The way al Jazeera reports it wothout adding their "editorial opinions" to the story is doing western MSM a favor.

Denial isn't a river in Egypt ( but MSM can deny stories out of Egypt this Easter season )

(The word "denial" and "the Nile" (river in Egypt ) sound very much alike in English ) -just meaningless play on words humor.

salim

Apr 18 2006, 04:40 AM

http://www.radiosawa.com/article.aspx?id=849018

In Arabic, a report by American gov sponsored radioSawa about the last appology by Mubarak which was worse than his first mistake. Famouse writer Dr. Alnafees , professor of Medical college of Masoura in Egypt showing his woderings and upset about the second mistake which might worsen the accusation by excluding Shia from Muslims. " Same allegation that most Salafees believe in " . Dr. Alnafees called for Egyptian gov to have a better attitude toward Shia ..

salim

Apr 18 2006, 05:03 AM

http://www.radiosawa.com/article.aspx?id=849548

Alsadree rep denoucing the second statements by Mubarak. Mr. Mousawee said , either Mubarak is ignorant or is really working for the civil war in the region..!

About Adhdamia riots

Apr 19 2006, 09:51 PM

Below is the press release by the Iraqi governemnt

According to the release, Terrorists from different groups had gathered in Adhamia and over the last two months. They spread rumers that Interior ministery forces are planning to attack Adhadamia among majority Sunni neighborhood. The Discret it self is under control of Defence ministery forces . Around 50 terrorists , wearing police uniforms, attacked the Iraqi military base at night. Where a sever battel had happened. The governemnt is denouncing any irrisponsible statemets by some political parties to cover or twist the facts. The ministery of interior had no any involvement in the incidents.

QUOTE

دائرة الاتصالات الحكومية في مجلس الوزراء - احداث منطقة الأعظمية

[19-04-2006]
جـــــمــهورية الـــعـــراق
مجلس الوزراء- دائرة الإتصالات الحكومية
العلاقات الإعلامية
بيان صحفي / Press Release
الأربعاء 19-4-2006

بيان صادر من دائرة الاتصالات الحكومية في مجلس الوزراء

على ضوء ما تمت مناقشته في جلسة مجلس الوزراء لهذا اليوم حول احداث منطقة الأعظمية اصدرت دائرة الاتصالات الحكومية في مجلس الوزراء بياناً يوضح حقيقة ما حدث وفيما يأتي نص البيان:

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

اجتمع مجلس الوزراء هذا اليوم الموافق 19-4-2006 وتم مناقشة احداث منطقة الأعظمية، ضمن جدول اعمال جلسته ويود المجلس ان يبين مايأتي:

تأكدت معلومات استخباراتية في وزارتي الداخلية والدفاع ومنذ شهرين ان عصابات الارهابيين من الجيش الاسلامي وكتائب ثورة العشرين والتوحيد والجهاد وتنظيم القاعدة وبعد ان فشلوا في كافة انحاء العراق من خلال انخفاض نسبة العمليات الارهابية في الموصل وتلعفر وديالى وتكريت وسامراء والمنطقة الغربية اصدروا تعليماتهم بتوجيه العناصر الارهابية الى بغداد للظهور المسلح ولتقويض حالة الامن والاستقرار في المدينة لما تمثله من ثقل سكاني وسياسي واعلامي وروجوا اشاعات مغرضة مفادها انهم من مغاوير قوات وزارة الداخلية وقامت هذه الجماعات المسلحة بالرمي على معسكر للجيش من خلال هجومين مسلحين مستخدمين فيهما قذائف الهاون والقاذفات والأسلحة الخفيفة منطلقين من ازقة وشوارع منطقة الأعظمية، وبما انه يتم في حالة معالجة أي وضع امني في اية منطقة في بغداد والمحافظات من خلال التنسيق المشترك بين قوات وزارتي الدفاع والداخلية والقوات متعددة الجنسيات، لذا فأن الحكومة تستغرب من تصريحات بعض المسؤولين في الكتل السياسية عما حدث من اعمال عنف في مدينة الاعظمية، حيث لاحظ ابناء الاعظمية الكرام ورجال الدين ووسائل الاعلام كيفية بث الاشاعة المغرضة بين صفوف اهالي المنطقة وتحريضهم على حمل السلاح والتعرض على القطعات العسكرية اكثر من مرة ولاحظ اهالي المنطقة ايضاً الضبط العالي والروح الوطنية التي تمتعت بها العناصر العسكرية العراقية في ضبط الامن في المنطقة ومعالجة المسلحين فقط دون الاعتداء اوالمداهمة واعتقال اي مواطن، حيث كانت المعالجة منضبطة من وحدات الجيش ولم تتدخل قوات وزارة الداخلية بأي واجب في مدينة الاعظمية وهذا ما يؤكد بطلان ادعاءات البعض الذين يحاولون بكل الوسائل تشويه صورة العناصر الامنية في الوزارتين ويكشف زيف وكذب هذه الافتراءات.
ان الحكومة سوف تقاضي كل من يحاول بث النزعة الطائفية وتحريض المواطنين على فتح النار على العناصر الامنية التي تمثل سيادة الدولة والقانون استناداً لقانون مكافحة الارهاب.

salim

Apr 20 2006, 02:08 AM

What had happened in Adhadamia was kind of expected. Over the last two eeks, Bathists and their supporters had a very intensive propaganda spreading rummers that Alsader Mehdi Armi will attack Adhamia " a majority Sunni neighborhood in east Baghdad. They even posted flyiers supposdely printed by Alsadrees that clearly refer to the Main Sunni mosque of Abo Hanifa.At that time the Bathist rumer machine said that this will be the scenario if Aljaafree step down. Many people in Adhamia whom I contacted, told me that this is just a propagnda that Baathists and their Qaeda supporters are trying to speared to raise the sceterian tention in that mixed part of the city. I already refered to these in some of my comments on Moqtada Alsader's letter tlast week that Alsadrees are not critically asking for Aljaafree and that All iraqis need to unite.

Then all of a sudden this breaking voilance happened over the the last four days. Today I called some friend in Adhdamia, they confirmed to me that a non usuall calm is there excluding some fire near to the Mashatil but no longer there. A friend of mine told me that on Monday she went to her school in Eshreen street when she noticed the school be occupied by What she Called " Qaeda" militia ! She also noticed that some Mosquea where also filled with what she called STRANGERS. She also told me that there many strangers who occupied some mosques and schools and asks locals or force them to donate money and food to them, so they can defend them .
Different people talk different stories. In general those who are in sympathy with baathists, say that Shia Militia men dressing in police attacked the discret while those who are anti Qaeda and bathist say that hundereds of terrirst had entred Adhamia and started the violance by attacking the Army bases at night " that is also the government story". No one for sure knows the exact details , however it seems that the governemnt forces " Defence" are restoring the security and that many terrorists had beed captured or killed.

The religous sunni Tawafuc spoeksman Alanni went yesterday with the first story though not giving any proves to his allegations.

I personally think this to be a nother baathists and Qaeda terrorist plan to ignite a civil war . They chose adhamaia because they keep a very strong base among some locals their. Also because the nieghborhood is heavily mix and easily errupt civil unrest . I don't think they will be achiving any luck here too. Most of those whom I talked to were fully aware of these plans and were full with more angry with all damages than with factionist feelings!

Airedale

Apr 20 2006, 04:28 PM

Salim,
you said

QUOTE

...
A friend of mine told me that on Monday she went to her school in Eshreen street when she noticed the school be occupied by What she Called " Qaeda" militia !

She also noticed that some Mosquea where also filled with what she called STRANGERS. She also told me that there many strangers who occupied some mosques and schools and asks locals or force them to donate money and food to them, so they can defend them .

This is an excerpt from this very short article. Is your friend familiar with this district ?

QUOTE

"Two terrorist groups beheaded two teachers in front of their students in the Amna and Shaheed Hamdi primary schools in Shaab district in Baghdad," a ministry statement said.

http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews....INGS.xml&rpc=22

Anyway, as fast as this short article was reported, there was a fast denial response tucked away in a later article. Said the event never happened.

But last month it happened to an English teacher.
the event happened in Ramadiand
was burried deep in another story about various events in Iraq;

QUOTE

Sunday, March 26, 2006; Page A14
.......
.......more violence was reported across Iraq, including a terrifying incident earlier in the week in the western city of Ramadi.

On Wednesday, armed insurgents burst into the classroom of Khidhir al-Mihallawi, an English teacher at Sajariyah High School, accused him of being an agent for the CIA and Israeli intelligence and beheaded him in front of his students, according to students, fellow instructors and a physician at a local hospital.

One teacher, who spoke on the condition that he not be named because he feared retaliation from insurgents, said that most students ran from the classroom but that some stayed to watch.
Many stopped coming to school after the incident, he said.
Another teacher, who said he moved his mathematics class to his home to accommodate frightened students, said Mihallawi had earlier been threatened because he worked as a translator for U.S. forces in Ramadi, a hotbed of the Sunni Arab insurgency.
....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...6032501003.html

His only crime was teaching English , he was not a spy of some imaginary zionist,imperialist forces of darkness.

If the Iraqi government doesn't get their hous in order soon,
only boys will be allowed to attend madrassas in some parts of Iraq.
They teach the ways of darkness and destruction,not an English teacher,trying to educate his students in the best way to communicate and interact with the outside world.

Will the forces of darkness destroy more teachers next month? Only to have our MSM ignore and bury it as not important to what liberal westerners need to know ? When people hear about beheadings in the west they think al Queda...many in the liberal west do not want to hear about beheadings in the news as it disturbs them

Hearing about these al Queda activities should be on the front page news but people in the west have political agendas and want to talk division at home if it will gain them power.

Salim, could you follow up with your friend if her school on Eshreen street is near this school in the Shaab district ?
There was a follow up story to the Shaab district that denied anything bad even happened at the school.
Could those in charge of security in that district , if it was Iraqi or US, be [b]embarrassed that it happened ?

Of course, maybe it is possible it never happened but why would a Ministry of State for National Security go on record and say it happened at all?

QUOTE

[b]Iraq neighbors deny teacher-beheadings claim
Ministry said 2 teachers 'slaughtered' in Baghdad primary schools

MSNBC News Services
Updated: 12:04 p.m. ET April 19, 2006
BAGHDAD, Iraq - Local police and neighbors of two Baghdad schools where gunmen had reportedly beheaded teachers in front of their students Wednesday said the slayings never happened, despite an official statement to the contrary.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12342623/

So where is the truth?
If beheadings happen again,and it seems possible based on what happened last month,
will the next story also be hidden so the west can ignore it?

salim

Apr 20 2006, 10:42 PM

Airedale
My friend is living in the Adhdamia discret .. Eshreen street is not in Alshaab discret where that " supposdely " incident of beahding might happened>

As for the Beheading, the misntery of Education denied such act . There were some news circulated by Arab media internet websites with no official confirmation to it. Then the ministery spokesman came on Iraqia TV to officially deny it. I don't know why MSN twisted the facts saying it was reported by misistry officials.!
As for the last month other report of beheading , there was no any official confirmation to it.

salim

Apr 25 2006, 01:47 AM

http://www.wattan4all.org/printarticle.php?id=14005

QUOTE

قناة الحرة: الحزم في الحكم ايضاً يقارن باتهامات طائفية او شوفينية، كيف التوفيق بين هذا وذاك؟
رئيس اقليم كوردستان:صعب جداً ان ترضي الجميع، هناك مصلحة عامة وهناك ثوابت وطنية وهناك قوانين وعدالة وقناعة وجدانية وهناك قانون ودستور ونفذ القانون بقناعة وجدانية وبعدالة وبمنطلقات وطنية والذي يعترض فليعترض، اللصوص سوف يعترضون، ازلام النظام البائد سوف يعترضون وكذلك الارهابيون والتكفيريون سوف يندمون.

In arabic.. Kurd barazani interview with US governemnt sponsored AlHura TV. When asked about the dilema of once you being firm with terrorists, you got accused to be factionists or secterian.. Barazani relied firmly : "You can't satisfy every one, there are national interests and justice that need to be implemented, there are laws and constitution, those who oppose such firm measure might oppose . Theifs will oppose, sadamists will oppose also Terrorists, they all will feel sorry "

Guest

May 1 2006, 06:55 PM

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/01/world/mi...st/01tapes.html

Some See Hints of Disharmony in Qaeda Tapes

QUOTE

The tactic could have been intended to soften the group's reputation. Many Iraqis who use violence to oppose the occupation began to turn away from Mr. Zarqawi after he openly called on fighters to kill Shiite civilians last fall.

So the question , if this the above is true, and I think it is, then how come a civil war be a possibility while iraqi Sunnis are turning away from this criminal beacuse of his factioninst calls?

Guest_layth_*

Jun 1 2006, 08:45 AM

QUOTE(Airedale @ Apr 15 2006, 11:26 PM)

QUOTE(salim @ Apr 12 2006, 08:00 PM)

Just an article about the Iraqi citizens taking issue with Egyptian president.
And Mubarak doing a little "damage control".

[color=#3333FF]Thousands of Iraqi Shias demonstrate against Mubarak
(AFP)

15 April 2006

NAJAF, Iraq - Several thousand Shias demonstrated in Iraq’s holy city of Najaf Saturday to denounce remarks by Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak questioning whether their loyality lay with Iran.

“Mubarak, traitor,” chanted the crowd assembed in the center of the city, also calling on Mubarak to “remove the Israeli flag”, a reference to the presence of an Israeli embassy in Egypt.

On Saturday, Mubarak tempered his April 8 remarks to Al Arabiya television that Shias were more loyal to Iran than their own countries, by explaining that he meant it in religious terms, rather than political ones.

“My remarks about Shias dealt with their religious loyalties and sympathies, without putting into question the patriotism of Shias in Iraq or any other country,” he told the government weekly Akhbar al-Yom.

The comments were denounced by the governments of both Baghdad and Teheran, while the Shia imams described the 77-year-old Egyptian president as “ignorant” and “nostalgic” for the previous regime.

Saturday’s demonstration follows on a smaller protest that came after Friday’s weekly prayers.

http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticle...ion=focusoniraq

BahirJ

Oct 22 2006, 09:01 AM

نص وثيقة مكة المكرمة

الحمد لله رب العالمين ، والصلاة والسلام على رسول الله محمد وآله وصحبه أجمعين ، وبعد ..

بناء على ما آلت إليه الأوضاع في العراق وما يجري فيه يوميا من إهدار للدماء وعدوان على الأموال والممتلكات تحت دعاوى تتلبس برداء الإسلام والإسلام منها براء ، وتلبية لدعوة الأمين العام لمنظمة المؤتمر الإسلامي ، وتحت مظلة مجمع الفقه الإسلامي الدولي التابع للمنظمة.

نحن علماء العراق من السنة والشيعة ، اجتمعنا في مكة المكرمة ، في رمضان من عام 1427هـ وتداولنا في الشأن العراقي ، وما يمر به أهله من محن ويعانونه من كوارث ، وأصدرنا الوثيقة الآتي نصها:

أولا : المسلم هو من شهد أنه لا إله لا الله وأن محمدا رسول الله ، وهو بهذه الشهادة يعصم دمه وماله وعرضه إلا بحقها وحسابه على الله. ويدخل في ذلك السنة والشيعة جميعا ، والقواسم المشتركة بين المذهبين أضعاف مواضع الاختلاف وأسبابه . والاختلاف بين المذهبين ـ أينما وجد ـ هو اختلاف نظر وتأويل وليس اختلافا في أصول الإيمان ولا في أركان الإسلام. ولا يجوز شرعا لأحد من المذهبين أن يكفر أحدا من المذهب الآخر. لقول رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم " من قال لأخيه يا كافر فقد باء بها أحدهما" ولا يجوز شرعا إدانة مذهب بسبب جرائم بعض أتباعه.

ثانيا : دماء المسلمين وأموالهم وأعراضهم عليهم حرام. قال الله تعالى "ومن يقتل مؤمنا متعمدا فجزاؤه جهنم خالدا فيها وغضب الله عليه ولعنه وأعد له عذابا عظيما" وقال النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم " كل مسلم على المسلم حرام دمه وماله وعرضه" وعليه فلا يجوز التعرض لمسلم شيعي أو سني بالقتل أو الإيذاء، أو الترويع أو العدوان على ماله أو التحريض على شيء من ذلك، أو إجباره على ترك بلده أو محل إقامته أو اختطافه أو أخذ رهائن من أهله بسبب عقيدته أو مذهبه ومن يفعل ذلك برئت منه ذمة المسلمين كافة مراجعهم وعلماؤهم وعامتهم.

ثالثا: لدور العبادة حرمة. وهي تشمل المساجد والحسينيات وأماكن عبادة غير المسلمين. فلا يجوز الاعتداء عليها أو مصادرتها أو اتخاذها ملاذا للأعمال المخالفة للشرع ويجب أن تبقى هذه الأماكن في أيدي أصحابها وأن يعاد إليهم ما اغتصب منها وذلك كله عملا بالقاعدة الفقهية المسلمة عند المذاهب كافة أن " الأوقاف على ما اشترطه أصحابها " وأن " شرط الواقف كنص الشارع " وقاعدة أن "المعروف عرفا كالمشروط شرطا" .

رابعا: إن الجرائم المرتكبة على الهوية المذهبية كما يحدث في العراق هي من الفساد في الأرض الذي نهى الله عنه وحرمه في قوله تعالى "وإذا تولى سعى في الأرض ليفسد فيها ويهلك الحرث والنسل والله لا يحب الفساد " وليس اعتناق مذهب، أيا ما كان، مسوغا للقتل أو العدوان ولو ارتكب بعض أتباعه ما يوجب عقابه إذ " ولا تزر وازرة أخرى ".

خامسا: يجب الابتعاد عن إثارة الحساسيات والفوارق المذهبية والعرقية والجغرافية واللغوية ، كما يجب الامتناع عن التنابز بالألقاب وإطلاق الصفات المسيئة من كل طرف على غيره، فقد وصف القرآن الكريم مثل هذه التصرفات بأنها فسوق قال تعالى " ولا تلمزوا أنفسكم ولا تنابزوا بالألقاب بئس الاسم الفسوق بعد الإيمان ومن لم يتب فأولئك هم الظالمون".

سادسا: ومما يجب التمسك به وعدم التفريط فيه ، الوحدة والتلاحم والتعاون على البر والتقوى وذلك يقتضي مواجهة كل محاولة لتمزيقها قال تعالى "إنما المؤمنون إخوة" وقال "وان هذه أمتكم أمة واحدة وأنا ربكم فاتقون" ومن مقتضى ذلك وجوب احتراز المسلمين جميعا من محاولات إفساد ذات بينهم وشق صفوفهم وإحداث الفتن المفسدة لنفوس بعضهم على البعض الآخر .

سابعا : المسلمون من السنة والشيعة عون للمظلوم ويد على الظالم ، يعملون بقول الله تعالى " إن الله يأمر بالعدل والإحسان وإيتاء ذي القربى وينهى عن الفحشاء والمنكر والبغي يعظكم لعلكم تذكرون " ومن أجل ذلك يجب العمل على إنهاء المظالم وفي مقدمتها إطلاق سراح المختطفين الأبرياء والرهائن من المسلمين وغير المسلمين . وإرجاع المهجرين إلى أماكنهم الأصلية

ثامنا : يذكر العلماء الحكومة العراقية بواجبها في بسط الأمن وحماية الشعب العراقي وتوفير سبل الحياة الكريمة له بجميع فئاته وطوائفه ، وإقامة العدل بين أبنائه ، ومن أهم وسائل ذلك إطلاق سراح المعتقلين الأبرياء ، وتقديم من تقوم بحقه أدلة جنائية إلى محاكمة عاجلة عادلة وتنفيذ حكمها ، والأعمال الدقيق لمبدأ المساواة بين المواطنين.

تاسعا : يؤيد العلماء من السنة والشيعة جميع الجهود والمبادرات الرامية إلى تحقيق المصالحة الوطنية الشاملة في العراق عملا بقوله تعالى " والصلح خير " وبقوله " وتعاونوا على البر والتقوى " .

عاشرا : المسلمون السنة والشيعة يقفون بهذا صفا واحدا للمحافظة على استقلال العراق ، ووحدته وسلامة أراضيه ؛ وتحقيق الإرادة الحرة لشعبه ؛ ويساهمون في بناء قدراتهم العسكرية والاقتصادية والسياسية ويعملون من أجل إنهاء الاحتلال ، واستعادة الدور الثقافي والحضاري العربي والإسلامي والإنساني للعراق.

إن العلماء الموقعين على هذه الوثيقة يدعون علماء الإسلام في العراق وخارجه ، إلى تأييد ما تضمنته من بيان ، والالتزام به ، وحث مسلمي العراق على ذلك. ويسألون الله وهم في بلده الحرام ، أن يحفظ على المسلمين كافة دينهم وأن يؤمن لهم أوطانهم ، وأن يخرج العراق المسلم من محنته وينهي أيام ابتلاء أهله بالفتن ، ويجعله درعا لأمة الإسلام في وجه أعدائها. وآخر دعوانا أن الحمد لله رب العالمين.

from www.alrafidayn.com

salim

Oct 23 2006, 01:04 AM

QUOTE

رابعا: إن الجرائم المرتكبة على الهوية المذهبية كما يحدث في العراق هي من الفساد في الأرض الذي نهى الله عنه وحرمه في قوله تعالى "وإذا تولى سعى في الأرض ليفسد فيها ويهلك الحرث والنسل والله لا يحب الفساد " وليس اعتناق مذهب، أيا ما كان، مسوغا للقتل أو العدوان ولو ارتكب بعض أتباعه ما يوجب عقابه إذ " ولا تزر وازرة أخرى ".

اتمنى لو ان هذا الاعلان يتم تعميمه على كل دوائر الافتاء لدى المسلمين وان يكون الاعلان عن رايهم صريحا بشانه ومن دون لبس . خصوصا دار الافتاء في السعوديه و جامعه الملك عبد العزيز. ان عدم توقيع كلا الطرفين على الوثيقه وكما فعل الازهر الشريف قد يعطي القتله من التكفيرين نافذه يتسللون بها الى ضعاف النفوس كي يبرروا افعالهم الاجراميه . لذا فان موقفا حاسما وعلى مستوى الافتاء الاسلامي هو المطلوب لمساعده العراقيين للخروج من محنتهم الحاليه

tajer

Nov 25 2006, 10:56 AM

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15873863/

QUOTE

Revenge-seeking militiamen seized six Sunnis as they left Friday prayers and burned them alive with kerosene in a savage new twist to the brutality shaking the Iraqi capital a day after suspected Sunni insurgents killed 215 people in Baghdad's main Shiite district.

QUOTE

The gruesome attack, which came despite a curfew in Baghdad

If there is a curfew , then how come they laft the Friday prayer? One might argue that these are local comunities where they can walk to near by Mosques. If that is the case then the Mosque is in a sunni neighbohood.."which is not" , then how these Shia criminals get into that neighborhood?
Every one in baghdad know that this is no more than a propaganda by Arab media to cover the acts of mass killing of Alsader city .. Have a look

QUOTE

But Imad al-Hasimi, a Sunni elder in Hurriyah, confirmed Hussein's account of the immolations. He told Al-Arabiya television he saw people who were drenched in kerosene and then set afire, burning to death before his eyes.

So , who is this guy? is he a known name or just some one called Alrabia TV. What credibility he got to make his allegation on main pages of westren media? What agenda this media ia holding for Iraq?

Many questions. No answers!

BahirJ

Jan 14 2007, 02:21 AM

Inside Baghdad's civil war

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
'The jihad now is against the Shias, not the Americans'

As 20,000 more US troops head for Iraq, Ghaith Abdul-Ahad, the only correspondent reporting regularly from behind the country's sectarian battle lines, reveals how the Sunni insurgency has changed

Ghaith Abdul-Ahad
Saturday January 13, 2007

Guardian

One morning a few weeks ago I sat in a car talking to Rami, a thick-necked former Republican Guard commando who now procures arms for his fellow Sunni insurgents.
Rami was explaining how the insurgency had changed since the first heady days after the US invasion. "I used to attack the Americans when that was the jihad. Now there is no jihad. Go around and see in Adhamiya [the notorious Sunni insurgent area] - all the commanders are sitting sipping coffee; it's only the young kids that are fighting now, and they are not fighting Americans any more, they are just killing Shia. There are kids carrying two guns each and they roam the streets looking for their prey. They will kill for anything, for a gun, for a car and all can be dressed up as jihad."

Rami was no longer involved in fighting, he said, but made a tidy profit selling weapons and ammunition to men in his north Baghdad neighbourhood. Until the last few months, the insurgency got by with weapons and ammunition looted from former Iraqi army depots. But now that Sunnis were besieged in their neighbourhoods and fighting daily clashes with the better-equipped Shia ministry of interior forces, they needed new sources of weapons and money.

He told me that one of his main suppliers had been an interpreter working for the US army in Baghdad. "He had a deal with an American officer. We bought brand new AKs and ammunition from them." He claimed the American officer, whom he had never met but he believed was a captain serving at Baghdad airport, had even helped to divert a truckload of weapons as soon as it was driven over the border from Jordan.

These days Rami gets most of his supplies from the new American-equipped Iraqi army. "We buy ammunition from officers in charge of warehouses, a small box of AK-47 bullets is $450 (£230). If the guy sells a thousand boxes he can become rich and leave the country." But as the security situation deteriorates, Rami finds it increasingly difficult to travel across Baghdad. "Now I have to pay a Shia taxi driver to bring the ammo to me. He gets $50 for each shipment."

The box of 700 bullets that Rami buys for $450 today would have cost between $150 and $175 a year ago. The price of a Kalashnikov has risen from $300 to $400 in the same period. The inflation in arms prices reflects Iraq's plunge toward civil war but, largely unnoticed by the outside world, the Sunni insurgency has also changed. The conflict into which 20,000 more American troops will be catapulted over the next few weeks is very different to the one their comrades experienced even a year ago.

In Baghdad in late October I called a Sunni insurgent I had known for more than a year. He was the mid-level commander of a small cell, active against the Americans in Sunni villages north of Baghdad. Sectarian frontlines had been hardening in the city for months - it took us 45 minutes of haggling to agree on a meeting place which we could both get to safely. We met in a rundown workers' cafe.

Kidnapped

"Its not a good time to be a Sunni in Baghdad," Abu Omar told me in a low voice. He had been on the Americans' wanted list for three years but I had never seen him so anxious; he had trimmed his beard in the close-cropped Shia style and kept looking towards the door. His brother had been kidnapped a few days before, he told me, and he believed he was next on a Shia militia's list. He had fled his home in the north of the city and was staying with relatives in a Sunni stronghold in west Baghdad.

He was more despondent than angry. "We Sunni are to blame," he said. "In my area some ignorant al-Qaida guys have been kidnapping poor Shia farmers, killing them and throwing their bodies in the river. I told them: 'This is not jihad. You can't kill all the Shia! This is wrong! The Shia militias are like rabid dogs - why provoke them?' "

Then he said: "I am trying to talk to the Americans. I want to give them assurances that no one will attack them in our area if they stop the Shia militias from coming."

This man who had spent the last three years fighting the Americans was now willing to talk to them, not because he wanted to make peace but because he saw the Americans as the lesser of two evils. He was wrestling with the same dilemma as many Sunni insurgent leaders, beginning to doubt the wisdom of their alliance with al-Qaida extremists.

Another insurgent commander told me: "At the beginning al-Qaida had the money and the organisation, and we had nothing." But this alliance soon dragged the insurgents and then the whole Sunni community into confrontation with the Shia militias as al-Qaida and other extremists massacred thousands of Shia civilians. Insurgent commanders such as Abu Omar soon found themselves outnumbered and outgunned, fighting organised militias backed by the Shia-dominated security forces.

A week after our conversation, Abu Omar invited me to a meeting with insurgent commanders. I was asked to wait in the reception room of a certain Sunni political party. A taxi driver took me to a house in a Sunni neighbourhood that had recently been abandoned by a Shia family. The driver came in with me - he was also a commander.

The house had been abandoned in a hurry, cardboard boxes were stacked by the door, some of the furniture was covered with white cloths and a few cheap paintings were piled against a wall. The property had been expropriated by the local Sunni mujahideen and we sat on sofas in a dusty reception room.

Abu Omar had been meeting commanders of groups with names like the Fury Brigade, the Battalions of the 1920 Revolution, the Islamic Army and the Mujahideen Army, to discuss options they had for fighting both an insurgency against the Americans and an escalating civil war with the Shia.

Abu Omar had proposed encouraging young Sunni men to enlist in the army and the police to redress the sectarian balance. He suggested giving the Americans a ceasefire, in an attempt to stop ministry of interior commandos' raids on his area. Al-Qaida had said no to all these measures; now he wanted other Iraqi insurgent commanders to support him.

'Do politics'

A heated discussion was raging. One of the men, with a very thin moustache, a huge belly and a red kuffiya wrapped around his shoulder, held a copy of the Qur'an in one hand and a mobile phone in the other. I asked him what his objectives were. "We are fighting to liberate our country from the occupations of the Americans and their Iranian-Shia stooges."

"My brother, I disagree," said Abu Omar. "Look, the Americans are trying to talk to us Sunnis and we need to show them that we can do politics. We need to use the Americans to fight the Shia."

He looked nervously at them: suggestions of talking to the Americans could easily have him labelled as traitor. "Where is the jihad and the mujahideen?" he continued. "Baghdad has become a Shia town. Our brothers are being slaughtered every day! Where are these al-Qaida heroes? One neighbourhood after another will be lost if we don't work on a strategy."

The taxi driver commander, who sat cross-legged on a sofa, joined in: "If the Americans leave we will be slaughtered." A big-bellied man waved his hands dismissively: "We will massacre the Shia and show them who are the Sunnis! They couldn't have done anything without the Americans' support."

When the meeting was over the taxi driver went out to check the road, then the rest followed. "Don't look up, we could be monitored, Shia spies are everywhere," said the big man. The next day the taxi driver was arrested.

By December Abu Omar's worst fears were being realised. The Sunnis had become squeezed into a corner fighting two sides at the same time. But by then he had disappeared; his body was never found.

Baghdad was now divided: frontlines partitioned neighbourhoods into Shia and Sunni, thousands of families had been forced out of their homes. After each large-scale bomb attack on Shia civilians, scores of mutilated bodies of Sunnis were found in the streets. Patrolling militias and checkpoints meant that men with Sunni names dared not venture far outside their neighbourhoods, while certain Sunni areas came under the complete control of insurgent groups the Shura Council of the Mujahideen and the Islamic Army. The Sunni vigilante self-defence groups took shape as reserve units under the control of these insurgent groups.

Like Abu Omar before him, Abu Aisha, a mid-level Sunni commander, had come to understand that the threat from the Shia was perhaps greater than his need to fight the occupying Americans. Abu Aisha fought in Baghdad's western Sunni suburbs, he was a former NCO in the Iraqi army and followed an extreme form of Islam known as Salafism.

Jamming

Deep lines criss-crossed his narrow forehead and his eyes half closed when he tried to answer a question He seemed to evaluate every answer before he spoke. He claimed involvement in dozens of attacks on US and Iraqi troops, mostly IEDs (bombs) but also ambushes and execution of alleged Shia spies. "We have stopped using remote controls to detonate IEDs," he volunteered halfway through our conversation. "Only wires work now because the Americans are jamming the signals."

On his mobile phone he proudly showed me grainy images of dead bodies lying in the street, their hands tied behind their backs . He claimed they were Shia agents and that he had killed them. "There is a new jihad now," he said, echoing Abu Omar's warning. "The jihad now is against the Shia, not the Americans."

In Ramadi there was still jihad against the Americans because there were no Shia to fight, but in Baghdad his group only attacked the Americans if they were with Shia army forces or were coming to arrest someone.

"We have been deceived by the jihadi Arabs," he admitted, in reference to al-Qaida and foreign fighters. "They had an international agenda and we implemented it. But now all the leadership of the jihad in Iraq are Iraqis."

Abu Aisha went on to describe how the Sunnis were reorganising. After Sunni families had been expelled from mixed areas throughout Baghdad, his area in the western suburbs was prepared to defend itself against any militia attack.

"Ameriya, Jihad, Ghazaliyah," he listed, "all these areas are becoming part of the new Islamic state of Iraq, each with an emir in charge." Increasingly the Iraqi insurgency is moving away from its cellular structure and becoming organised according to neighbourhood. Local defence committees have intertwined into the insurgent movement.

"Each group is in charge of a specific street," Abu Aisha said. "We have defence lines, trenches and booby traps. When the Americans arrive we let them go through, but if they show up with Iraqi troops, then it's a fight."

A few days later Rami was telling me about the Sunni insurgents in his north Baghdad area. A network of barricades and small berms blocked the streets around the car in which we sat talking. A convoy of two cars with four men inside whizzed past. "Ah, they are brothers on a mission," Rami said.

Like every man of fighting age, Rami was required to take part in his local vigilante group, guarding the neighbourhood at night or conducting raids or mortar attacks on neighbouring Shia areas.

But he paid $30 a week to a local commander and was exempted.

According to Rami and other commanders, funding for the insurgents comes from three sources. Each family in the street pays a levy, around $8, to the local group. "And when they go through lots of ammunition because of clashes," Rami said, "they pay an extra $5." Then there are donations from rich Sunni businessmen, financiers and wealthier insurgent groups. A third source of funding was "ghaniama", loot which is rapidly becoming the main fuel of the sectarian war

'A business'

"Every time they arrest a Shia, we take their car, we sell it and use the money to fund the fighters, and jihad," said Abu Aisha. The mosque sheik or the local commander collects the money and it is distributed among the fighters; some get fixed salaries, others are paid by "operations", and the money left is used for ammunition.

"It has become a business, they give you money to kill Shia, we take their houses and sell their cars," said Rami. "The Shia are doing the same.

"Last week on the main highway in our area, they killed a Shia army officer. He had a brand new Toyota sedan. The idiots burned the car. I offered them $40,000 for it, they said no. Imagine how many jihads they could have done with 40k."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,,329684808-103550,00.html

salim

Feb 19 2007, 12:38 PM

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/19/world/mi...9oilfields.html

QUOTE

Iraqi Sunni Lands Show New Oil and Gas Promise

Article Tools Sponsored By
By JAMES GLANZ
Published: February 19, 2007

KARABILA, Iraq, Feb. 18 — In a remote patch of the Anbar desert just 20 miles from the Syrian border, a single blue pillar of flanges and valves sits atop an enormous deposit of oil and natural gas that would be routine in this petroleum-rich country except for one fact: this is Sunni territory.
Skip to next paragraph
Reach of War
Go to Complete Coverage »

Huge petroleum deposits have long been known in Iraq’s Kurdish north and Shiite south. But now, Iraq has substantially increased its estimates of the amount of oil and natural gas in deposits on Sunni lands after quietly paying foreign oil companies tens of millions of dollars over the past two years to re-examine old seismic data across the country and retrain Iraqi petroleum engineers.

The development is likely to have significant political effects: the lack of natural resources in the central and western regions where Sunnis hold sway has fed their disenchantment with the nation they once ruled. And it has driven their insistence on a strong central government, one that would collect oil revenues and spread them equitably among the country’s factions, rather than any division of the country along sectarian regional boundaries.

Though Western and Iraqi engineers have always known that there are oil formations beneath Sunni lands, the issue is coming into sharper focus with the new studies, senior Oil Ministry officials said. The question of where the oil reserves are concentrated is taking on still more importance as it appears that negotiators are close to agreement on a long-debated oil law that would regulate how Iraqi and international oil companies would be allowed to develop Iraq’s fields. [Page A6.]

The new studies have increased estimates of the amount of oil in a series of deposits in Sunni territory to the north and east of Baghdad and in a series of deposits that run through western Iraq like beads on a string, and could contain as much as a trillion cubic feet of natural gas. The revised figures, though large, would not mean that deposits in Sunni territories could challenge the giant fields elsewhere in the country.

And while it would take years actually to begin pulling gas and oil out of the fields even if the area soon became safe enough for companies to work in, energy corporations have been excited about the area’s potential, even if it falls short of reserves in the Shiite south and Kurdish north.

The analysis, still little known outside a small circle of specialists, is important enough that on Friday, Brig. Gen. John R. Allen of the Second Marine Expeditionary Force, who is deputy commanding general of Multi-National Force-West, which has responsibility for Anbar Province, made the long trip into the desert to visit the blue wellhead. General Allen’s duties include promoting the economic development of the province.

The deposit beneath is the Akkas field, one of the beads on the string that runs from Ninewa Province in the north to the border with Saudi Arabia in the south.

“It’s phenomenal standing here,” General Allen said. “What this does is it gives Anbar and the Sunnis an economic future different from phosphate and cement,” he said, referring to products of some of the aging factories in the area.

“This gives them a future and a hope,” he said. Nearby, a few pieces of laundry flapped in front of one of the only structures in sight, a cinder-block shack probably belonging to a shepherd.

.

salim

Feb 27 2007, 09:12 AM

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/arti...05fa_fact_hersh

QUOTE

THE REDIRECTION
Is the Administration’s new policy benefitting our enemies in the war on terrorism?
by SEYMOUR M. HERSH
Issue of 2007-03-05
Posted 2007-02-25

A STRATEGIC SHIFT

In the past few months, as the situation in Iraq has deteriorated, the Bush Administration, in both its public diplomacy and its covert operations, has significantly shifted its Middle East strategy. The “redirection,” as some inside the White House have called the new strategy, has brought the United States closer to an open confrontation with Iran and, in parts of the region, propelled it into a widening sectarian conflict between Shiite and Sunni Muslims.

This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.