baghda Posted January 27, 2004 Report Share Posted January 27, 2004 مقال مهم جدا للسيد "باسم المستعار" حول ظاهره السيد السستاني وابعاد تحركه في ظل ظروف العراق والمنطقه..نطرحه للنقاش الخميني ا لاخر وامريكا الجديده ِA very interesting article by Basim A. about Alsistani and his current conflict with the Americans.. The writer is discussing the points of common interest between The Americans and Sistani.. Also debating all those points that the opponents were raising against his latest call for UN intervene ,.. The Article is in Arabic, Please finf translation below, thanks for Maha 's hard work! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maha Hussam Posted January 28, 2004 Report Share Posted January 28, 2004 Translation of the first paragraphs of the article. The whole article will be available in Engish soon. It is rather long, so I am translating it step-by-step. Completed now 02/06/2004 The current distinguished brightness of Alsayed Al-sistani surprises a lot of Iraqi political affairs specialists, and it might remind some to the that of Alsaid Alkhumainy . He stole the spot lights through his distinguished political movement, by requesting that the United Nations gets authority of deciding weather to hand over the power to an elected government instead on a chosen one, as agreed with the government council. This gesture was considered by some westerner reporters as the greatest challenge to the American plans in organizing a democratic Iraqi scenario that suits America’s goals. For the time being,this movement’s dimensions and results might not be able to put into a full analytical device, yet, it’s important to stress a few sides of the movement. In spite of considering this movement-by some people- a deadly critical hit for the Americans, I think that it may go on the other way. This movement is so peculiar and well-timed, to take the American-Iraqi relations to an advanced level that depends on a healthier interaction instead of confronting each other. And to reach a mutual understanding that serves both sides and let it be a real substitute for the untrustworthy condition at the moment.The call for election is complying with the american claims and goals for democratic ME, but to put these claims on the real exame to proof it's real cause. From that, it came to express such suspect by the massive ordinary people about the real intentions of the American war, and the dealing with this suspection would for sure narrow the gap of untrust toward the Americans today. The call would also be considered as a severe hit to all those who are using the liberation and national slogans for their causes such as those childish Islamists and the terrorists. The call came to comply with the simplest rights of normal Iraqi persons whom all those propagandist are claiming representation of. While some of these groups might show solidarity with the call, they would no longer see themselves participating in building the quiet and moderate leadership of alsistani who shared Iraqis their suffering during Saddam's era and became a national and islamic figure that would drow from under those groups feet , the claim of people representation .. The call had shocked all those who kept encourging the terrorists , and caused a temporary silence on all their media facilities... However, while some of their propagandists started to reject the involvement of UN and the election, they really pushed themselves in a very bad corner, as this would be received by Iraqis as a call to accept the appointment by Americans, at a time these groups are claiming that their cause is the liberation. The similicity and transperency that the call had come with, flags a new Iraqi and Shia situation. It deserves a detailed analysis as it might effect a lot of what new Iraq and the region are going through. From one side it was up to the people needs and at the same time it fully fill the most American sensitive need of having a legitimate "democratic" transition before the presidential elections hot campaigns later this year.. This call to have the process be monitored by the UN might be considered as a breaking to the exclusive control by the US, but it was put in a such neat way to deal with the American cry, The need for the UN legitimate blessing to the next transition process. The UN intervene and decision " election or not" would give the next process the full legitimacy and will be considered as the full approval for the next government and would make the UN as full partner and responsible in executing the process. This coverage by itself was an American dream that the American couldn't achieve with all the power and push. The UN might be able to reject a request by the American but it can't with a request by some nation asking for help in deciding which way is the best one. At the same time the Americans are pretty sure that the UN would not risk recommending the election if it is not possible. And also relying on those inside UN who are really afraid from what is called "Shia majority" on the new government. As from iraqi prospective, the call would achieve one of the most national demands.. it would end up with the move to the legitimate government rather than the temporary government dilemma , some thing to happen for the first time in the iraqi history . Also, it would break the american only rule of the country .. It is well known that the october agreement didn't assign any rule to the Un and the call was to fine tune the agreement and to legitimize the coming process in order to reach sooner the stability and the removal of the occupation. Many might be skeptical about the call, claiming that this was just to force the majority shia on the new council.. Those are probably not putting in mind that the new council agreement would not allow this, the representation is based on regional areas and baghdad discretes. In both cases " elected or appointed" an arab sunni/shia can't represent kurdish arbil, a shia can't represent sunni mosul, annbar or alaadiamia. at the same time a sunni cann't represent shia alsader , kerbala or Emara. Regarding the claim that such election might drive a majority of radical islamic groups, I don't think that there isn't any thing sillier than such .. The current GC includes the most radical islamic groups "shia and sunni, ", so why should we be afraid from those being elected. The majority of Iraqis don't agree with the clergy being in control of politics. The solidarity of people with Sistani, expresses clearly this fact, preferring his way over others who might call for the rule of clergy. Letting people to choose the real representatives will provide a legitimate way to push away all those who try to take over peoples destiny;being a shia, sunni, arab, kurds , muslims or others. As for the religious bases for the call , there is no concern of having systani to transform into a giant political organization that might establish an islamic dictatorship state. Firstly, Systani is not Iraqi and he has no political chances even if he likes it. Secondly , his ideological and judgment background. It is well known that systani is belonging to Khuee and Alhakeem school of classical shia teachings which reject the clergy rule of state "wiliah al faqueh" that the religious system in Iran relys on. Also because of the circumstances of balanced ethnic distribution in Iraq that makes such scenario impossible. The concerns that some arab Sunni groups are showing, is not because of the fear of having a shia majority, as some analisysit might think or claim. This would happen in both ways as explained above. The real concern is to have a legitimate government that would make chances impposible to return back to unilateral government. The dream that those folks might still live for. In any case , such concerns would push these groups to move faster to join the current political process. By such , one of the strong bases of the sadammies and salafies terrorists would fall. That is by isolating them from their strong holds within the arab sunni population who start to fed up with these acts and be in dispair of having any impact on the Americans . Coming to the Kurdish parties, the agitation of some of the traditional leaders toward the election is because of their fear of having the free ellection results be not as they way they would like. It might push away their only leadership of people. It is very strange that such complains are expressed while the kurdish area is relatively stable and secure..There were elections even during the Saddam era and the elections might disclose all those areas out side Kurdistan ,with majority of kurds ..So why don't they like it? From all the above , in my opinion, the call is fitting a huge public desire to participate and be in charge of rebuilding Iraq. The confrontation to this call on the bases of being factional or religious , is just another way of pushing away the people and get over on behalf of them. That is from the Iraqi prospective, As for the general Shia situation.. The success of Alsistani in assuring the Iraqi democratic transition will bounce back to him as to the regard of "Fellowship of Shia " Takleed. It is well known that though Alsistani never left Njaf/Iraq over the last four decades, yet his followers in Iran and other parts of the world are not a small percentage., and this percentage is expected to shoot up as he build up his wise leadership to the Iraqi people demands... Such increase will be for sure, be a night mare to the religious regime of Iran which rely on the rather new concept of "The rule of clergy".. It will be a very hard question that Iranian will ask: How you governing us on this concept that our most knowledgeable clergy isn't accepting? Those who know Alsistani, remember very well his academic debates with one of the greatest philosophers of "rule of clergy" Alsader in the sixties.. It is well known that the Clergy council of Iran don't recognize Alsistani as one of the great nine Alyats in the world. We need to remember that there are hundreds of thousands of Iranians visiting Kerbala and Najaf every month today .. Most of them areof the religious popular class, and they will be for sure feel amazed seeing their Iranian fellow and beloved clergy leading Iraqis toward democracy and liberty. It will provide the reformers a very strong tool to argue with the convervatives in Iran.. There are a lot of Ayats in Iran already started declaring their concerns with the Rule of clergy through some academic published researches. For all the above reasons , there are a lot of ears that should listen carefully to Alsistani.. It might be true that his intervene made him another Khunmaini, but it is true also that on the contrary, he prohibits the clergy from taking political positions. It might be true that America might get shocked and concerned with such a build up, but it is also true that America today is more experienced and matured and knowledgeable of ME . While America's interests pushed her to fight the first one.. the same interests would make the new America after 9/11, very anxious to open on the second.. If Khumaini left Najaf to get Iran into the clergy rule, Alsistani will stay in Najaf, probably to contribute in rebuilding ME on open fair and free democratic Islam and as per New America wishes,, at least for the time being! Finished Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baghda Posted January 31, 2004 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2004 Copy and past of the important reply by Abu Ahmed from inside Iraq..Published under his post..Under Insider Iraqis Baghda ننسخ ادناه الرد المهم من قبل ابو احمد من داخل العراق والمنشور تحت عموده على هذا الموقع تحت "من داخل العراق" الانتخابات والمرجعيه سمعنا ونسمع الكثير من الفضائيات العربيه والعالميه تتحدث كثيرا عن الانتخابات والسيد السيستاني وباراء ووجهات نظر مختلفه ومتباينه وانا كمواطن عراقي سوف اقول رايي من خلال مااراه حولي في الشارع العراقي معظم الناس هنا تؤيد راي السيد السيستاني في ان نقل السلطه يجب ان يكون من خلال استفتاء عام من قبل الشعب العراقي وليس الشيعه فقط بل انه راي اغلبية الناس حسب مااعتقد ولكن هذا لايعني بالضروره ان الشيعه يرغبون باقامة نظام (عمايم ) على غرار السلطه في ايران اطلاقا بل على العكس فحتى الشيعه وبمختلف ثقافاتهم لايرغبون باقامة نظام ( العمايم ) وخير دليل على ذلك ان السيد بذاته لايريد ان يقحم نفسه في السياسه اطلاقا لذلك هو لحد الان لم يقابل أي مسؤول من قوات التحالف وكان جوابه واضحا ..انا رجل دين ولست رجل سياسه ولكن اصراره على اجراء الانتخابات نابع من ان هذا هو الحل الوحيد لاستقرار الامن والسلطه في العراق فمهما كانت نزاهة السلطه المعينه من قبل التحالف فسيبقى اسمها يتردد بانها سلطه معينه من قبل الامريكان وكان السلطات العربيه جميعها منتخبه واي حل غير الانتخابات سوف يثير الكثير من التساؤل والشبهات ولن يحل المشكله ومثال ذلك مجلس الحكم الذي بقي ضعيفا لحد هذه الساعه ولم يحقق انجازات تذكر وهذا ليس قصورا فيه بل في فكرة تعيينه من قبل سلطة التحالف وفي هكذا ظروف متشابكه من خلال دول الجوار المسمومه والحكومات العربيه الغير راغبه في استقرار الامور في العراق . صحيح ان الانتخاب على اساس البطاقه التموينيه ليست صحيحه مئه بالمئه على اعتبار ان هناك الكثير من المهجرين والمهاجرين والخ من هكذا امور نتيجة سياسة النظام السابق ولكنها على الاقل صحيحه بنسبة ثمانين او سبعين بالمئه وهذا افضل من لاشيء وكما قال السيد المطلوب انتخابات باحسن الميسور والسلام. ولااجد هذا مستحيلا ابو احمد من داخل العراق Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest_Mutergem Posted February 2, 2004 Report Share Posted February 2, 2004 Translating Abo Ahmed's from inside Iraq.. The election and Marjiea About the election and alsaid Alsistani, we are hearing a lot from the media, but as Iraq , I would like to talk about what I am seeing on the ground inside Iraq, I would say most people , not only Shia are with the Sistani call in election. This is not to say that Shia are looking for religious rule as the case in Iran., but on the contrary most of people are against any rule of the clergy on the government. Sistani him self doesn't want to intervene in politics.That is why he refused to meet with Mr.. Bremer, saying: I am a clergy and not politician.. He insists on election as he sees it as the only way to get into stability and full control in Iraq.What ever is the sincerity of the new government and the credibility of it it's members, as the case with GC, it will be looked at as an american appointed. It might be true that the election may not be perfect 100% as there are a lot of Iraqi immigrants out side Iraq, but at least better than nothing.. I don't think that this will be impossible Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted February 7, 2004 Report Share Posted February 7, 2004 Seems that Mr. Basim was reading in the crystal ball.. Copying from Mr. Cole Web link http://www.juancole.com/2004_02_01_juancol...605686683614625 Reformers implore Sistani to Intervene in Iran Crisis Ali Nourizadeh of the Saudi newspaper ash-Sharq al-Awsat reports today that more than 400 Iranian writers and cultural figures, along with some members of parliament, have penned a letter to Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani of Najaf, requesting that he express his opinion on the "massacre of democracy and the transformation of parliamentary elections into a mere stage play." They wrote, "We have followed with appreciation your courageous positions in calling for the holding of free, fair, and direct elections in Iraq, where the population did not have, until the fall of the Baath regime, the right to own a shortwave radio. That is, holding free elections that can escape foreign influence is a difficult matter if not an impossible one. Nevertheless, your excellency is insisting that the first and last word in the matter of choosing rulers and representatives belongs to the Iraqi people. How wonderful it would be if your excellency would express your opinion regarding the farce that some in your native land of Iran are attempting to impose on its people, who are wide awake, under the rubric of "elections." Najaf has always been a support for freedom lovers in Iran, for in the Constitutional Revolution [of 1905-1911], your righteous predecessors such as Mirza Na'ini, Akhund Khurasani, and Allamah Mazandarani, supported the devotees of liberty in Iran. Without their famous fatwa, the people would not have been able to bring down the tyrant Muhammad Ali Shah." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salim Posted February 8, 2004 Report Share Posted February 8, 2004 مقال تحليلي عميق ومهم للكاتب العراقي الاسلامي حمزه الجواهري.. بالعربي http://www.nahrain.com/d/news/04/02/08/nhr0208w.html يتطرق المقال الى مقارنه ذكيه بين طبيعه مايسمى بالانظمه الاسلاميه منذ الخلافه الراشده ولحد نظام ولايه الفقيه في ايران مستثنيا "نظام الطالبان القمعي" ليصل الى نتيجه ان جميعها متشابهه في بنيتها التحيتيه من الغاء المفهوم الاسلامي لولايه الشعب وحريته في الاختيار ثم يتطرق الى موضوعه موقف ايه الله السستاني ليصل الى نتيجه وهكذا، أيضا، نجد دور الدين في المجتمع المدني لا ينتهي بل يتعزز كثيرا ولكن ليس إلى حد الاستئثار بالسلطة بالكامل، وهذا الشكل أبقى من النوع الآخر وإن كانت العلاقة بين الدين والدولة أضعف، فالشكل الذي يرفض ربط الدين بالسلطة، كما هو الحال في العراق، تيار آيه الله السيستاني، وها نحن نرى اليوم إن علاقته بالسياسة قوية جدا، خصوصا في ظل الفراغ السياسي الذي حدث يوم سقوط نظام البعث الشمولي، حيث كان أية الله السيستاني هو القائد الكاريزمي بلا منازع رغم إنه ينأ بنفسه عن السلطة، واليوم نجد هذا التيار هو أحد أقوى المحركات السياسية وأهم حكم على أداء سلطة الاحتلال وسلوك السلطة الانتقالية في العراق، وهذا الدور السياسي الذي يقوم به، لا يعني إنه جنوح للاستيلاء على السلطة، ولو كان ذلك صحيحا، لأستولى السيستاني عليها منذ اليوم الأول لسقوط سلطة البعث في العراق، وكذا نجده كان حاضرا حضورا قويا أيام الدكتاتورية المطلقة في العراق، ولو كان قد اتخذ له دورا آخر غير النأي عني السلطة، لما وجدنا اليوم رجل دين واحد في العراق، حيث السلطة البعثية ستعمل على اجتثاثهم وهم الذين دائما حاضرون بين الناس. Very interesting article by Islamist Iraqi writer Hamzaa Aljawahree.. The writer compares all those what are called "Islamic governments " Since Alrashideen till the Iranian style of "Wilayat alfaqeeh" excluding the brutal Talaban one. He concludes that all those governments are similar in violating the basic Islamic rule of self governing by people and the freedom of choice.. He then , comments on the Alsistani teachings of isolating relegion from government Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salim Posted February 9, 2004 Report Share Posted February 9, 2004 Interesting article in Alhayat daily about the latest from Alsistani.. 1- Accepting any one to be ellected what ever his relegion or sec or ethnic Iraqi group. 2- All Iraqis should have the rights to express their ideas and to practice their religions and sects.. السيستاني يهاجم الطائفية ويرحب بانتخاب أي عراقي إلى السلطة النجف - حليم الأعرجي الحياة 2004/02/5 قال المرجع الشيعي علي السيستاني لجموع المهنئين بعيد الاضحى, أن "ما مضى (الإقتراحات الأميركية وعودة الأمم المتحدة والإصرار على الانتخابات) كان محاولات جس نبض من أطراف دولية وأقليمية". وقال إن "الآتي هو المواجهة الصعبة ضد كل قوى الشر التي تحاول منع العراق والعراقيين من التمتع بحقهم في حياة حرة ديموقراطية". وشدد على أن وصول أي عراقي إلى السلطة بواسطة الانتخابات "بغض النظر عن دينه أو طائفته هو ما نعمل من أجله". وأوضح أنه يريد أن تشهد الأمم المتحدة "باعتبارها طرفاً محايداً, كما يفترض, على نزاهة الانتخابات وديموقراطيتها", معلناً أن "المنظمة الدولية قررت وبشكل نهائي الاضطلاع بدورها الطبيعي في عملية إعادة اعمار العراق". وقال إن "فريقين من الأمم المتحدة أحدهما أمني وصل إلى العراق, وآخر سياسي سيصل في غضون الأيام القليلة المقبلة". وأشار إلى أن حواراً سيجري بين الفريقين الدوليين وفريقين واحد آمني وآخر سياسي عراقيين في نقاط ترغب الامم المتحدة في إثارتها ومعرفة وجهة نظر العراق فيها". وأكد السيستاني أن تشكيل الحكومة العراقية الجديدة يجب أن يكون شاملاً وشفافاً, مع ضرورة أن "يشعر كل أطياف الشعب العراقي بأنه ممثل في هذه المؤسسة التي ينبغي ألا تكون لطيف أو فئة دون أخرى". ولفت إلى ان "شهادة الامم المتحدة على شرعية ونزاهة وديموقراطية الانتخابات تتطلب مراقبة كاملة وشاملة في كل أنحاء العراق. وهذا بدوره يتطلب سياسة مميزة للمنظمة الدولية". وطمأن زواره الى ان المستقيل سيكون الى جانبهم. لكنه نبه الى أن الوضع "يتطلب مزيداً من الحذر والوعي والاستعداد لبذل الغالي والنفيس عندما تستوجب الحالة ذلك" مذكراً بأن "ما جرى في ثورة العشرين كان استجابة واعية لنداء الجهاد في ثورة عارمة صادقة صائبة مخلصة استطاعت أن تنزع البلاد من مخالب العدو". لكنه شدد على "اننا ينبغي ان نستخلص الدرس, الذي لم يستخلصه أحد في ذلك الوقت لسبب أو لآخر", معترفاً بفشل ثورة العشرين في اعطاء "أولئك الأبطال الأفذاذ ما يستحقون من اهتمام بقضاياهم وأوضاعهم. فكان ان أصيب ثوارها بنكسة التهميش والتغييب". وتوقف كثيراً أمام هذه النقطة, مؤكداً أن "ليس من الحق والعدل أن يشعر أي إنسان عراقي في هذا البلد بالغبن بسبب مذهب أو دين أو رأي أو موقع سياسي أو اجتماعي", وقال: "وعلى ذلك ينبغي اللجوء الى الخيارات الصعبة في تقرير مستقبل العراق". وحذر من مغبة الانسياق وراء "الدعوات المشبوهة لضرب الأخ بأخيه", مشدداً على أن "الدعوات الطائفية والعرقية لا تريد للبلاد غير الخراب والدمار", مشيراً الى ان هناك "خلف الحدود من يحاول زرع الفتنة بين أبناء البلد", مؤكداً أن "شعب العراق شعب واحد بعربه وكرده وتركمانه, بمسلميه ومسيحيه وصابئته, بسنته وشيعته, بشماله وجنوبه ووسطه, بعراقيي الداخل وعراقيي الخارج, كلهم شعب واحد لا ينبغي التفريق بين هذا وذاك". وتحدث السيستاني مطولاً عن المستقبل وما ينطوي عليه من مؤشرات ايجابية كثيرة, وقال إن "النظام الطائفي ليس النظام الذي يتولى قيادته السنّي أو الشيعي, أو أن يجعل كل إدارته وصولاً الى الشرطي سنّياً أو شيعياً, بل الطائفي هو الشخص الذي يفكر بتفكير طائفي, أي انه يحاول توظيف المشاعر والأحاسيس الطائفية لمصلحة أغراضه ونياته الشخصية في بسط نفوذه وتعزيز سيطرته. كما فعل النظام السابق". وقال إن "وصول أي عراقي بصرف النظر عن مذهبه او دينه او قوميته بطريقة ديموقراطية حرة هو الأمر الذي نعمل من أجله". إلى ذلك, حمل أحد العاملين في مكتب السيستاني, على ما وصفه بأسلوب "الابتزاز الذي تتبعه الإدارة الأميركية في التعامل مع العراق". وأشار الى موجة "الكراهية" التي تشنها أجهزة الأعلام الأميركية, معتمدة أساليب "التضليل والتشويه", مستغلة موقف "السيد السيستاني من المسؤولين الأميركيين, إذ رفض سماحته استقبالهم والتحاور المباشر معهم". وقال لـ"الحياة": "إنهم يحاولون اظهار السيد السيستاني وكأنه عدو للغرب وللشعب الأميركي والمسيحية, متناسين أن السيد السيستاني استقبل ممثل الأمم المتحدة الراحل سيرجيو فييرا دي ميلو وتباحث معه بشكل مباشر, كما تلقى رسائل ومكالمات هاتفية من عدد كبير من المسؤولين في العالم. بيد أنه لم يضع يده بيد مسؤول أميركي, لأنه يرى فيهم المحتل الغاصب لبلاده, وليس لديه أي كراهية او عداء للشعب الأميركي الذي نتمنى له السعادة والعيش بعيداً عن لغة القوة والضم والسيطرة". وقال المصدر إن الأميركيين يهددون بتقسيم العراق, مشيراً الى ما نقل عن أحد المسؤولين في إدارة بوش حين قال بالحرف الواحد: "لا يمكننا ببساطة ارساء سابقة يكون فيها لآية الله السيستاني سلطة للاعتراض على تصرفاتنا. انه في حاجة إلى أن يفهم أنه اذا فشلت العملية التي تقودها الولايات المتحدة, فمن المستبعد Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salim Posted February 9, 2004 Report Share Posted February 9, 2004 Part 2 of Aljawahree article.. In Arabic http://www.nahrain.com/d/news/04/02/09/nhr0209k.html part 3.. Debating some Islamist who calls for the religious state.. In arabic http://www.nahrain.com/d/news/04/02/09/nhr0209a2.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tajer Posted February 10, 2004 Report Share Posted February 10, 2004 رساله من مسيحي عراقي الى السيد السستاني.. كم جميل انت ياعراق وانت تخطو الخطوات الاولى http://www.kitabat.com/r17289.htm A letter from an Iraqi christian to Alsistani.. How beuty the new Iraq will be Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tajer Posted February 10, 2004 Report Share Posted February 10, 2004 تقرير لاحد كتاب النييورك تاميز.. الغريب انه بعد مقدمه واقعيه , يقع في خطأء غير مبرر عندما يذكر نتسجه اخصائيه لاادري من اين اتى بها توضح ان نسبه كبيره نمن العراقيين تريد جمهوريه اسلاميه! http://www.almustaqbal.com/stories.aspx?StoryID=49581 An article in NT "in arabic" .. Interesting but strangely based on a poll that no one heard about.. He claims that 56% of Iraqis wanted Islamic republic! Strange! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tajer Posted February 10, 2004 Report Share Posted February 10, 2004 http://www.aljeeran.net/viewarticle.php?id...pg=index&aتقرير الجامعه العربيه Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tajer Posted February 13, 2004 Report Share Posted February 13, 2004 http://www.elaph.com.:9090/elaph/arabic/fr...692500860025900 مقال يقارن فيه كاتبه بين الخميني والسستاني.. ويحمل الثاني كل تبعات الاحتلال الامريكي للعراق والشرق الاوسط! واضح من المقال ان صاحبه له المام كبير بفكر الشيعه الحوزوي وله اطلاع ببعض الاصول الفقهيه .. الكاتب يحمل السستاني مسؤليه الاحتلال الامريكي للعراق والمنطقه.. لاادري هل هذا مرتبط بدعوه السستاني للانتخابات ام انه ماذا؟ An article in arabic.. The writer seems to be knowlegable about the Shia studies and teachings.. He praises Alkhumaini and accuse Alsistani of being helping the Americans in occupying Iraq and ME.. Don't know if this is related to Alsistani call for ellection though>> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salim Posted February 15, 2004 Report Share Posted February 15, 2004 مقال مهم جدا في وول ستريت جورنال .. مع الاسف ليس لدي رابطه وانما حصلت على صوره له عبر الفاكس.. المقال بعنوان " الانتخابات ولماذا لا؟" يتطرق كاتب المقال الى دعوه السستاني بمقال طويل شارحا وبعمق خلفيات الدعوه والاطراف المعارضه لها مستخلصا نتيجه مفادها "انه واضحا ان السيد بريمر يريد تشجيع السنه على المشاركه. ولكن الطريقه لذلك هي بضمان حقوق الاقليه ضمن مجتمع ديمزقراطي وليس بحرمان الاغلبيه من حقهم بالتمثيل السليم" Very interesting article in The WallStreet Journal by title "Why not elections?" Unfortunetly I got a hard copy only..Would appreciat if some one arrange the soft copy.. The article is tallking about the recent call by Alsistani for elections with a great depth about it and those who are against. The writer concluded that : "Mr. Bremer would want to lure the Sunnis into a new government.But the way to do that is by garanteeing minority rights in a democratic system, not by denying the majority their proper representation" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salim Posted February 16, 2004 Report Share Posted February 16, 2004 The following is very interesting.. I got it by email from a friend.. It is by a asunni tribe learder who had visited Alsistani lately.. Dear All, Yesterday, I went to visit Ayattollah Ali Sistani!! Only six months ago, who would have believed that one day I might go and visit any clergyman of any creed? But there you areÖthe things one has to do for oneís country! The truth of the matter is that I, like everybody else, have been following this gentlemanís stand on democracy and electionsÖand the whole thing had a rather comic tone to it: here was this old religious leader, supposedly living in the dark ages, making a stand for democracy while the US, the champion of democracy, was dragging itís feet! The fact that members of our esteemed governing council were not enthusiastic about democracy, came as no great shock to me; most of them would become laughing stock in any democratic electionsÖand they knew it! On the other hand, some circles in the sunni clergy started speaking against democracy. Now I found this really sad! Some people started circulating the idea that Sistani was for democracy because the Shiites were a majority. Well, I never bought that for the simple reason that Shiites were not a single political block! To cut a long story short, I put on two hats hadnít worn for a long time and that I am not usually fond of (one of a sunni and the other of a tribal chief) and joined a small delegation representing sunni tribes from the sunni hexagon (I donít see why we should have fewer sides than the Pentagon!) and went to see Sistani. My hats didnít fit, they had holes in them; I felt like a hypocriteÖbut I was not to be deterred! It was a small delegation representing the Obaid (yours truly), the Janabeyeen, the Azza and Kurdish Sorchi tribe. A few other ìShiiteî friend tagged along for the honour of seeing "His Holiness". So much for a rather long introduction! We were an hour and a half late for the appointment (the traffic jams were something I have never seen the like of). Nevertheless, his staff, his son (and later, he himself) went out of their way to make us feel welcome. We sat on the floor of a sparsely furnished room (very much like the reception room of a not-very-poor peasant), were served tea, had a pleasant chat with his son, a very bright (and obviously very ambitious), courteous young man of around 30. He came in a few minutes later, didnít shake hands and squatted in that way only clergymen know how. We were introduced one by one, his eyes were alive and alert and very much like an earthly man, examining each closely! Nazar Al-Khaizaran spoke first saying that his eminence was talking for all Iraqis when he wanted elections. As sunnis we were fully with him on that. Then he responded. He had a heavy (and I mean really heavy) Persian accent which he didnít (and couldnít) hide. He used classical Arabic, but the structure of his sentences was not perfect. He talked a lotÖa lot! His response for 30 seconds of courteous pleasantries was a 10 minute monologue! That was when I was shocked! The man was a secular! I have never heard a clergyman saying the things that we lot take to represent our secularism! In response to Nazarís statement, he went on and on about sunniís and shia saying that these were doctrines differing on how to interpret Islam and they were all decent and good-intentioned. They were definitely no reason for bloody strife. He talked about the ancient pillars of the sunni doctrine and praised them all in detail and said how he respected them as men of faith and as scholars. The difference between the shia and sunna, he believed, was far less significant than the danger facing the Iraqi nation at present. Well, personally that put him on my right side! Then Omer S. sounded his fear that through democracy the shia would dominate Iraq, and consequently the Kurds. He said that he didnít believe there was much danger of that happening. The shia were not a single political entity. Some are atheists, some are secular; even religious shia did not all follow the same leader. He said that he firmly believed that the clergy should not interfere with the running of peopleís lives, with government or with administration. He had forbidden his followers from putting their noses into the stateís affairs. He said that clearly and categorically (several times to stress the point!) It was my turn and I said something like ìAs an Iraqi I am grateful for Your Eminenceís honourable stand on democracy and I think that the country is fortunate to have you in this position in this particular instant of history.î (Yes I did!! And I meant it!!!!!!!) I then asked him why he had requested the UN to examine the possibility of conducting elections. (I was partly moved by some fear I still have that the panel of UN experts may ìconcludeî that it is too soon or too unstable to have elections at present. Then we really would have a major problem in our hands!) He denied that flatly and said that he never did and that my information was probably based on media reports (which was true!). He said he did not feel obliged to accept the UN ruling on elections. He thought the Americans wanted the UN involved because they were having difficulties! He was set on calling for elections as the only possible way for Iraq to regain its sovereignty. Some of the other things he said (This is a rather loose translation!): "The most important thing at this time is unity. Division of the people is treason! Even silence, in these turbulent times, is evil! " "Give my regards to your tribes and to the sunna clergy and tell them that Sistani ìkisses their handsî and begs them to unite with all Iraqis, Shia, Kurds, Christian, Turkmen. You just unite, and count on me to stand up to the Americans! The worst that could happen is that I die! That doesnít worry me!" He mentioned the late de Milo of the UN and said he was ìa good manî He mentioned ìthe one who was killed in Najafî and said that he had ìtalked to himî, meaning ìadvised himî. I took that to refer to Al-Hakeem. This was the only disguised statement he made in more than an hour of talking. He mentioned the ìArab Nationî so many times! He evidently viewed himself as an Arab. Being born Persian did not affect the fact that he was a Sayyed. He made that perfectly clear. He does not believe in ìWilayat al Faqeehî as the clergy in Iran do (as you know, this is the cornerstone of Khomeiniís doctrine). He repeatedly stressed that religion has to be separated from government! He was extremely humble in his talk, his attire and his mannerisms. He was much younger than I had thought; looked like early seventies but quite agile and healthy-looking. He talked so softly, almost in whispers, that I had to really stress myself to hear what he was saying. (Being the insolent person that I am, at one time during the meeting I said I wasnít hearing him well !!!!! There were only three people between us! There was some space on either side of him which people left out of respectÖand he invited me to sit next to him which I did!) He didnít use any of the rhetoric clergymen usually wrap everything they say with. He was quite plain and direct. I found that really odd for a person in his position! We were late for our appointment. We stayed there for about an hour and a half. Apparently someone else was waiting to see him. So, his son (who was apparently managing the old manís schedule) was obviously beginning to sweat, but was too polite to say anything. We finally took the hint! There you are! I felt that I should share this experience with you and I have tried to reflect as much as I could of it in its true spiritÖwil Abbas (non-Iraqis, this is a shite oath)! I now believe that the American Administration could not have wished for a better person at the head of the shia clergy hierarchy. Letís wait and see how they handle him! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salim Posted February 16, 2004 Report Share Posted February 16, 2004 The following is very interesting.. I got it by email from a friend.. It is by a asunni tribe learder who had visited Alsistani lately.. Dear All, Yesterday, I went to visit Ayattollah Ali Sistani!! Only six months ago, who would have believed that one day I might go and visit any clergyman of any creed? But there you are ,the things one has to do for one's country! The truth of the matter is that I, like everybody else, have been following this gentlemanís stand on democracy and electionsÖand the whole thing had a rather comic tone to it: here was this old religious leader, supposedly living in the dark ages, making a stand for democracy while the US, the champion of democracy, was dragging itís feet! The fact that members of our esteemed governing council were not enthusiastic about democracy, came as no great shock to me; most of them would become laughing stock in any democratic electionsÖand they knew it! On the other hand, some circles in the sunni clergy started speaking against democracy. Now I found this really sad! Some people started circulating the idea that Sistani was for democracy because the Shiites were a majority. Well, I never bought that for the simple reason that Shiites were not a single political block! To cut a long story short, I put on two hats hadnít worn for a long time and that I am not usually fond of (one of a sunni and the other of a tribal chief) and joined a small delegation representing sunni tribes from the sunni hexagon (I donít see why we should have fewer sides than the Pentagon!) and went to see Sistani. My hats didnít fit, they had holes in them; I felt like a hypocriteÖbut I was not to be deterred! It was a small delegation representing the Obaid (yours truly), the Janabeyeen, the Azza and Kurdish Sorchi tribe. A few other ìShiiteî friend tagged along for the honour of seeing "His Holiness". So much for a rather long introduction! We were an hour and a half late for the appointment (the traffic jams were something I have never seen the like of). Nevertheless, his staff, his son (and later, he himself) went out of their way to make us feel welcome. We sat on the floor of a sparsely furnished room (very much like the reception room of a not-very-poor peasant), were served tea, had a pleasant chat with his son, a very bright (and obviously very ambitious), courteous young man of around 30. He came in a few minutes later, didnít shake hands and squatted in that way only clergymen know how. We were introduced one by one, his eyes were alive and alert and very much like an earthly man, examining each closely! Nazar Al-Khaizaran spoke first saying that his eminence was talking for all Iraqis when he wanted elections. As sunnis we were fully with him on that. Then he responded. He had a heavy (and I mean really heavy) Persian accent which he didnít (and couldnít) hide. He used classical Arabic, but the structure of his sentences was not perfect. He talked a lotÖa lot! His response for 30 seconds of courteous pleasantries was a 10 minute monologue! That was when I was shocked! The man was a secular! I have never heard a clergyman saying the things that we lot take to represent our secularism! In response to Nazarís statement, he went on and on about sunniís and shia saying that these were doctrines differing on how to interpret Islam and they were all decent and good-intentioned. They were definitely no reason for bloody strife. He talked about the ancient pillars of the sunni doctrine and praised them all in detail and said how he respected them as men of faith and as scholars. The difference between the shia and sunna, he believed, was far less significant than the danger facing the Iraqi nation at present. Well, personally that put him on my right side! Then Omer S. sounded his fear that through democracy the shia would dominate Iraq, and consequently the Kurds. He said that he didnít believe there was much danger of that happening. The shia were not a single political entity. Some are atheists, some are secular; even religious shia did not all follow the same leader. He said that he firmly believed that the clergy should not interfere with the running of peopleís lives, with government or with administration. He had forbidden his followers from putting their noses into the stateís affairs. He said that clearly and categorically (several times to stress the point!) It was my turn and I said something like ìAs an Iraqi I am grateful for Your Eminenceís honourable stand on democracy and I think that the country is fortunate to have you in this position in this particular instant of history.î (Yes I did!! And I meant it!!!!!!!) I then asked him why he had requested the UN to examine the possibility of conducting elections. (I was partly moved by some fear I still have that the panel of UN experts may ìconcludeî that it is too soon or too unstable to have elections at present. Then we really would have a major problem in our hands!) He denied that flatly and said that he never did and that my information was probably based on media reports (which was true!). He said he did not feel obliged to accept the UN ruling on elections. He thought the Americans wanted the UN involved because they were having difficulties! He was set on calling for elections as the only possible way for Iraq to regain its sovereignty. Some of the other things he said (This is a rather loose translation!): "The most important thing at this time is unity. Division of the people is treason! Even silence, in these turbulent times, is evil! " "Give my regards to your tribes and to the sunna clergy and tell them that Sistani ìkisses their handsî and begs them to unite with all Iraqis, Shia, Kurds, Christian, Turkmen. You just unite, and count on me to stand up to the Americans! The worst that could happen is that I die! That doesnít worry me!" He mentioned the late de Milo of the UN and said he was ìa good manî He mentioned ìthe one who was killed in Najafî and said that he had ìtalked to himî, meaning ìadvised himî. I took that to refer to Al-Hakeem. This was the only disguised statement he made in more than an hour of talking. He mentioned the ìArab Nationî so many times! He evidently viewed himself as an Arab. Being born Persian did not affect the fact that he was a Sayyed. He made that perfectly clear. He does not believe in ìWilayat al Faqeehî as the clergy in Iran do (as you know, this is the cornerstone of Khomeiniís doctrine). He repeatedly stressed that religion has to be separated from government! He was extremely humble in his talk, his attire and his mannerisms. He was much younger than I had thought; looked like early seventies but quite agile and healthy-looking. He talked so softly, almost in whispers, that I had to really stress myself to hear what he was saying. (Being the insolent person that I am, at one time during the meeting I said I wasnít hearing him well !!!!! There were only three people between us! There was some space on either side of him which people left out of respectÖand he invited me to sit next to him which I did!) He didnít use any of the rhetoric clergymen usually wrap everything they say with. He was quite plain and direct. I found that really odd for a person in his position! We were late for our appointment. We stayed there for about an hour and a half. Apparently someone else was waiting to see him. So, his son (who was apparently managing the old manís schedule) was obviously beginning to sweat, but was too polite to say anything. We finally took the hint! There you are! I felt that I should share this experience with you and I have tried to reflect as much as I could of it in its true spiritÖwil Abbas (non-Iraqis, this is a shite oath)! I now believe that the American Administration could not have wished for a better person at the head of the shia clergy hierarchy. Letís wait and see how they handle him! Translation by Vala: ترجمه اعلاه أعزائي… ذهبت البارحة لزيارة آية الله السيستاني!! من كان يظن ,قبل ستة اشهر فقط , انه يمكن لأي شخص أن يذهب لزيارة أي رجل دين من أي عقيدة كانت ؟ ولكن هاأنت ذا "الأشياء التي يمكن أن يؤديها المرء من اجل بلده". في حقيقة الأمر , انه أنا وكحال الجميع, تتبعت مسيرة هذا الرجل باتجاه الديمقراطية والانتخابات , والوضع كله كان يبدو ذو نغمة مضحكة :ها هنا هذا القائد الديني المسن , والمفروض انه يعيش في العصور المظلمة , يتخذ موقفا" من اجل الديمقراطية بينما تجر الولايات المتحدة , بطلة الديمقراطية, أقدامها جرا" من اجل الغاية نفسها. والحقيقة إن أعضاء من حكومتنا المحترمة لم تكن متحمسة للديمقراطية , ولم تكن بالصدمة الكبيرة لي إن الكثيرين منهم اصبحوا كالأصنام الضاحكة في أي انتخابات ديمقراطية وهم يعرفون ذلك. ومن ناحية أخرى , بعض الجماعات من رجال الدين السنة بدءوا بالحديث ضد الديمقراطية. وألان وجدت ذلك حقا" محزن جدا"!.وبدأ بعض الناس ينشر فكرة إن السيستاني هو وراء الديمقراطية لان الشيعة هم الأغلبية. ولم اقتنع بذلك لسبب بسيط إن الشيعة ليسوا قالب سياسي أحادى . ولاختصار القصة الطويلة , أخذت مسؤولية كلاوين لم يكونا معروفين من وقت طويل والذي لست مولع" بهما دوما" ( أحدهما انني من السنة والآخر رئيس عشيرة ) والتحقت بوفد صغير يمثل عشائر السنة من المسدس السني (لا أرى سببا" يمنعنا من أن يكون لدينا أطرافا" كثيرة مثل البنتاغون!) وذهبت لرؤية السيستاني . وبدا أن المسؤولية التي أخذتها على عاتقي لم تكن مناسبة, كان فيهم الكثير من الثغرات, وشعرت وكأني منافق ولكني لم اكن لأتراجع.! وكان وفد صغير يمثل, العـبيد, ( خاصتك) والجنابيين والعزاويين وعشيرة سورجي الكردية. وآثر بعض الأصدقاء الشيعة في شرف رؤية "قداسته". قلت الكثير لمقدمة طويلة نوعا" ما. كنا متأخرين لساعة ونصف الساعة عن الميعاد ( ازدحام الطريق لم اشهد له مثيل من قبل). ومع ذلك فان موظفيه , وولده ( ولاحقا" هو نفسه) ساروا في طريقهم ليجعلونا نشعر بالترحاب. جلسنا على الأرض في غرفة قليلة الأثاث (تشبه غرفة الاستقبال لفلاح ليس بالمعدم كثيرا" ) وقدموا لنا الشاي , وكان لنا حوار لطيف مع ابنه .وهو شاب في الثلاثين من عمره, ذكي جدا"ومؤدب (وأيضا" طموح جدا") . وجاء هو بعد دقائق لاحقا", لم يسلم بيده وجالس القرفصاء بالطريقة التي يعرفها رجال الدين فقط. وقدمونا إليه الواحد بعد الآخر . وكانت عيناه حية ويقظة وتشبه عيني رجل من الأرض , ويفحص كل واحد منا عن كثب. وتكلم نزار الخيزران أولا" قائلا" أن سموه كان يتحدث عن كل العراقيين عندما أراد الانتخابات. ونحن والسنة كنا كليا" معه في هذا الموضوع. وبعدها أجاب. وهو يمتلك لهجة قوية (واعني إنها لهجة قوية جدا") من اللهجة الفارسية والتي لم يتمكن (ولا يستطيع) إخفائها.واستخدم اللغة العربية الفصحى,ولكن تركيب جمله لم يكن مثاليا". وتحدث كثيرا"! وكانت إجابته لثلاثين ثانية من المزاح اللطيف, عشر دقائق من المونولوج ! وهنا صدمت أنا! الرجل كان دنيوي !لم اسمع أبدا"رجل دين يتحدث بالأشياء التي نتحدث بها كثيرا" لنمثل بها الدنيوية!* وللإجابة عن جملة نزار , استمر بالحديث طويلا" عن جماعة السنة والشيعة قائلا" بأنهما معتقدات دينية يختلفان بتفسير الإسلام وانهما كلاهما نزيهين وذي نيات حسنة .ولم يكن هناك قطعا"داعي للصراع الدموي . وتحدث عن الأسس القديمة لمذهب السنة وشاد بهم كلهم بالتفصيل وذكر كيف انه يحترمهم كرجال إيمان وكعلماء .وان الفرق بين السنة والشيعة, كما يعتقد, لم يكن بأهمية الخطر الذي يواجه شعب العراق في الوقت الحالي. وشخصيا" هذا وضعه إلى جانبي الصحيح! وبعدها أبدى عمر سورجي مخاوفه من انه من خلال الديمقراطية سوف يحكم الشيعة العراق و الأكراد أيضا". وقال انه لا يظن بوجود خطر كبير في حصول ذلك.حيث إن الشيعة ليسوا كيان سياسي وحيد, فالبعض منهم ملحدون لا يؤمنون بوجود الله , والبعض دنيويين وحتى الشيعة المتدينين لا يتبعوا كلهم القائد نفسه. وذكر انه يؤمن بشدة بان رجل الدين لا يجوز له التدخل بإدارة حياة الناس أو الحكومة أو الإدارة. وانه قد منع تابعيه من التدخل في شؤون البلد. وانه ذكر بوضوح وبتصنيف ( عدة مرات للتأكيد على هذه النقطة!). ثم كان دوري وقلت شيئا" مثلا: " كعراقي أنا ممتن إلى سموك الكريم للحصول على الديمقراطية واعتقد أن الدولة محظوظة لتكون أنت معهم في هذا المركز في هذه الحقبة الزمنية "(حقا" أنا أؤمن بذلك واعنيه!!!!). وبعدها سألته لماذا طلب من الأمم المتحدة فحص إمكانياتها لقيادة الانتخابات .(وكنت متأثر قليلا" من الخوف ,والذي امتلكه لحد ألان, من إن جدول خبراء المحلفين للأمم المتحدة يمكن أن يصلوا إلى نتيجة بأنه من المبكر جدا" أو إن الوضع الغير المستقر لا يسمح بالانتخابات في الوقت الحالي.و هكذا ستكون لدينا مشكلة كبيرة حقا" بين أيدينا). أنكر ذلك ببساطة وقال بأنه لن يحصل ذلك.و من المحتمل إن معلوماتي تستند إلى تقارير وسائل الإعلام (وهذا هو الواقع!).وقال بأنه لم يكن مجبرا" على قبول تولي الأمم المتحدة الانتخابات.واعتقد بان الأمريكان أرادوا استخدام الأمم المتحدة لأنهم كانوا يلاقون الصعوبات في ذلك! وكان يحث على إقامة الانتخابات لأنها الطريقة الوحيدة الممكنة للعراق لاسترداد سيادته. ومن بعض الأشياء التي ذكرها (وهذه ترجمة غير محكمة نوع" ما): "إن أهم شيء في هذه الفترة هي الوحدة. إن تفرقة الناس في هذه الفترة هي الخيانة العظمى! وحتى الصمت , في هذه الأوقات المضطربة ,هو شي سيئ للغاية". "ابلغوا تحياتي إلى عشائركم والى رجال الدين السنة واخبروهم بان السيستاني يقبل أيديهم ويرجو منهم التوحد مع كل العراقيين, الشيعة والأكراد والمسيحيين والتركمان. فقط اتحدوا واعتمدوا علي بالوقوف بوجه الأمريكان ! أسوأ شيء يمكن ان يحدث بان أموت !وهذا الشيء لا يقلقني . أشار إلى دي ملنيو الأخير من الأمم المتحدة وقال انه رجل جيد. أشار إلى الشخص الذي قتل في النجف وقال بأنه تحدث معه ويعني بذلك بأنه قد نصحه, و أدركت بأنه يعني - الحكيم -. وهذه كانت الجملة الوحيدة الغامضة التي ذكرها في حديث يزيد عن الساعة. أشار إلى الدول العربية العديد من المرات ! ومن الجلي انه اعتبر نفسه كعربي. وكون ان ولادته في إيران لا تمنع من كونه (سيد ), واظهر ذلك بمنتهى الوضوح. ولم يؤمن بولاية الفقيه كما يفعل رجال الدين في إيران (وكما تعلم, بان هذا الركن الأساسي في نظام خميني). وقد أكد دوما" بان الدين يجب عزله عن السلطة! وكان شديد التواضع في حديثه , و ملبسه وأخلاقه. وكان اصغر بكثير مما اعتقدته : يبدو عليه انه في السبعينات ولكن رشيق تماما" وذو صحة جيدة. وتكلم بصوت هادئ , يكاد يكون همسا", بحيث كنت أجاهد نفسي لأسمع ما يقول.(وكوني وقحا", جعلني أقول في إحدى المرات أثناء الاجتماع , بأنني لا اسمعه جيدا"!!!!! كان هناك ثلاث أشخاص فقط بيننا!وكان هناك بعض المجال من جانبيه والذي يتركه الناس احتراما" له, وقد دعاني لأجلس بجانبه وفعلت ذلك!). لم يستخدم أي من فن الخطابة الذي يلف رجال الدين حديثهم به عادة عندما يتحدثون.كان واضحا" جدا" ومباشر.ووجدت هذا غريب جدا" لشخص في مركزه! كنا متأخرين عن موعدنا . وبقينا هناك ما يقارب الساعة والنصف ومن الظاهر إن شخص آخر كان في انتظار رؤيته.وهكذا بدا ابنه (والذي كان من الظاهر انه المسؤول عن جدول مواعيد الرجل المسن) بالتعرق , ولكن كان من الأدب بدرجة ليقول أي شيء. وأخيرا" أدركنا الموقف! وها أنت ذا ! شعرت انه يجب أن أشاركك معي في هذه التجربة وحاولت أن اعكس أقصى ما يمكن بروحها الواقعية –والعباس- (لغير العراقيين , هذا قسم شيعي)! ألان أؤمن بان الإدارة الأمريكية لم تتمنى شخص افضل من السيستاني على راس طبقة رجال الدين الشيعة .ولننتظر ونرى كيف سيتعاملون معه!. *عدم المبالاة بالدين او بالاعتبارات الدينية. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.