Omar, thank you. thank you thank you thank you. as a continuation of the conversation on the last thread i would like to pick up right where we have left off w/ever the pollyanna lyn assuring us..

But it is also true that this is the best opportunity that we and the Iraqis have had, to try to pull Iraq back from the precipice of civil war.


i would like to ask "since when"? yesterday??? at every stage we are being treated to this 'group think' from the media, ushering us all into the idea that is prearranged for our consumption. why? why? we say its one way, they say.. ah, look at how it is so hopeful even when the obvious situation, as you (Omar) so aptly described.

it is, in a sense, telling people they are safer now, because they are in a prison cell. history is being written before it occurs by framing a situation that if everyone just believd, we would all be fine. we are not being treated to the entire picture becaue the entire picture is ugly. only the revisionist view, the false narrative (in which i provided links in the last thread) places peices in the puzzle in such a form as to present a reality that serves ..who??not iraqis. then who.

the consumption of the american people. i would like to present a comment from badger in the comment section of this link.

what is now being concocted is another, different set of lies to justify an American-style "withdrawal". In the trauma of war and occupation and civil war, the whole idea of Iraq as a nation of living, breathing people with living cultural traditions and the rest of it (which people of common sense and good will more or less assumed as one of the reasons why the invasion was wrong) has been (for the purposes of the US-administration PR machine) washed away. The horror and tragedy that were unleashed by the invasion have been turned against the Iraqi people, by that PR machine, so as to create a new set of lies based on the idea that Iraq no longer exists as a cohesive country with even minimal rules for co-existence and the rest of it. Thus maximizing the need for continued US influence of one kind or another.

It was in this sense that the speaker said "maybe what they (the think tanks and so on) should do is just recognize Iraq's right to exist."

... US policy from now on is going to be based, in one form or another, on the idea that there is no longer any Iraq. And this new set of lies will maximize the scope of continued and renewed American adventures in the region.

a noose has been placed are the society and now we are told it is 'good, better, hopeful, come home iraqis' but it is not. there is no sustainability for the current conditions of separations by sect in bghdad, or iraq without a continued US presence of containment.

why? because iraq cannot live like this! iraq needs solutions for UNITY yet where are the plans to unify the nation?? from the beginning there has never been a plan to UNIFY iraq, only benchmarks and designs aimed at iraqs division. so now iraq is being divided and who is calling it peace? hope? good? who is calling the current unsustainable condition 'the best opportunity that we and the Iraqis have'?

no. it is not. it will never be no matter how much the ptb/msm/think tanks/image creators.. tell us.

obviously the vision for a whole unified self sustaining iraq is unacceptable to US foriegn policy. why? because it would not need a permanent presence of US occuptation. because a whole iraq would completely control their resources (the ones we want to privatize ie own).

there is an obvious coordinated campaign to convince people the soft partition is 'safer'.

more badger


But if we don't have a clue about Iraqi culture, including Iraqi forms of social cohesion, and at the same time we are asked to buy into a public-relations strategy that says essentially that the country has already been disabled as a cohesive nation, and we are asked to do that in careless or deliberate ignorance of the whole of Iraqi culture, including the forms of social cohesion, then we do have a bit of a problem.

more lyn...

Those who advocate a violent upheaval of the current GOI

who? who is asking for this? this is the only alternative strawman we are offered? why? why is it the only people who can be considered 'moderate' acquiesce america's vision of a permanently divided privatized iraq open to foriegn intervention?

what is happening in baghdad now, is not moderate. it is a model of 'build a prison and call it safety'.

People attacked TB? The fact is, he posted a very favorable effort in which he quoted friends and family in Baghdad as saying that conditions had improved considerably. Then, he got his feelings hurt by a few 'I told you so' comments, petulantly took down the whole post and followed up with his usual defeatist rhetoric in which he is most comfortable. It would be too easy to speculate why some Iraqi bloggers can't accept the possibility that Iraq may actually be on the road to recovery---without them.
But, the Times UK is telling the same 'lies'---

Road From Damascus
Iraqis are voting with their feet by returning home after exile

The figures are hard to estimate precisely but the process could involve hundreds of thousands of people. The numbers are certainly large enough, as we report today, for a mass convoy to be planned next week as Iraqis who had opted for exile in Syria return to their homeland. It is one of the most striking signs that not only has violence in Baghdad and adjacent provinces decreased dramatically in recent months, but confidence in the economic and political future of Iraq has risen sharply. Nor is this movement the action of men and women who could easily reverse course and turn back again. Tighter visa restrictions imposed by Damascus mean that those who are returning to Iraq cannot assume that they could quickly retreat again to Syria if that suited them. This is, for many, a one-way decision. It represents a vote of confidence in Iraq.

The homecoming is not an isolated development. The security situation in Baghdad, while far from totally peaceful, has improved substantially in the past few months, with civilian fatalities falling by three quarters since the early summer. This has been reflected on the streets with markets, clubs and restaurants that had been closed for months, especially at night, now reopening. This good news has not attracted the attention that it should because critics of the conflict in 2003 and its aftermath have been extremely reluctant to acknowledge progress in the country. Yet even observers from publications long hostile to US policy in Iraq, such as The New York Times, are finally conceding that “the violence has diminished significantly since the United States reinforced troop levels in Iraq and adopted a new counter-insurgency strategy”.

The “surge” associated with General David Petraeus is indeed paying extraordinary dividends. The positive effects were seen in Anbar province, which had become a hotbed of Sunni resistance to the overthrow of Saddam Hussein, and are increasingly seen in the Iraqi capital. It has enabled Sunnis to disassociate themselves decisively from al-Qaeda in Iraq, in effect switching sides, while some of the extreme Shias linked to the rebel cleric Moqtada al-Sadr have felt obliged to observe a ceasefire. All these fundamental shifts have allowed Iraqis the chance to rebuild an economy that, particularly with oil at its current price, should be among the strongest in their region. This opportunity has been recognised by exiles such as those who have been located in Syria. Iraq can only benefit from the return of some of its most talented citizens.

None of this means that Iraq is set on a certain path to imminent prosperity. While the numbers of car bombings and military fatalities have fallen dramatically there is always a risk that atrocities will take place. In fact, it is certain that there will be further tragedies. There remains a compelling need for the political parties and factions in Iraq to settle on an acceptable compromise on the Constitution, the internal distribution of oil revenues and the fate of those who were once members of the Baathist establishment.
Related Links

* Better security sees Iraqis flood home

The crucial point, however, is that American and British policy towards Iraq should reflect the optimism of the moment. Troops should not be withdrawn prematurely when tangible success is being recorded. It would be catastrophic for those soldiers to retreat just at the time when Iraqis themselves are returning home in droves.

“The crucial point, however, is that American and British policy towards Iraq should reflect the optimism of the moment... It would be catastrophic for those soldiers to retreat just at the time when Iraqis themselves are returning home in droves.”

I cannot say but: I totally agree with you.

What I’m saying in this post, and I believe what BT tried to say in his post too, is that this is not improved security. This is what the violence has resulted in; a sectarian-divided Baghdad that people cannot live in all of it at the same time. You need to be of a certain sect to live in a certain neighborhood.

Imagine this: you want to go have lunch or dinner with friends in Brooklyn, NY, and some militias on the borders of the neighborhood [because now I need you to imagine that the neighborhood has borders, like the ones in Baghdad] prevent you from entering the neighborhood, in fact kill you on the borders, because you are “white” and Brooklyn is a “black” neighborhood, or because you are “black” and Brooklyn is a “white neighborhood.”

Is this security? Is this a safe environment to live in? Is this progress, after you and hundreds of thousands paid a high price to topple a dictatorship? Is that how you get rewarded?

Think about it and then try to logically analyze what’s happening in Baghdad.

Thanks a lot for this good post. I believe what you have said is very important for people in the west to read about the reality instead of looking at the surface. Things are deeper and a lot deeper than they are being reported in America and Britian's propoganda media.

Cheers!

"One of them is a bloger who claims to be Iraqi and knows everything about Iraq, more than Treasure of Baghdad and I do, although he left Iraq more than 25 years ago and was never back since. Now, I invite him to go to Iraq and live “normal life” with his relatives and report from there!"

Ouch!

I think we all know who that pathetic creature is.

I think you should respond to the slanderous lies about you and other Iraqi bloggers posted by the losers at "Iraqi Bloggers Central".

No, I shouldn’t.
One time, an Arab intellectual said something like: if you collect all the publications that say bad things about you and pile them all together and stand on them, you will be higher [taller]

I already feel that I am higher than them! I can look ahead and have a better view!

I fail to understand the unwillingness to accept that security for many Iraqis has improved measurably. I have read numerous accounts in the press, on blogs (even TB before he pulled the entry), first hand accounts of a US soldier on the ground, who tell me that Iraqis are roving about freely, shopping, eating out even at night-- even liquor stores have reopened in neighborhoods that had all but been deserted two months ago! Does that not indicate some level of improved security to you?

the analogy to US neighborhoods being secure to all is pretty naive , by the way. You must not get out much if you believe all races and ethnicities can walk freely in any neighborhood anywhere. Let's be honest.

Is it 'security' when many Iraqi neighborhoods are now divided by sectarian interests? Yes--no, not the ideal. Was it 'security' when Iraqis lived in neighborhoods divided by allegiance to Saddam's regime and only had to fear running afoul of the tyranny somehow or getting caught up in its evil?

I believe that there could be a revolution occurring among the people of Iraq. Many Iraqis tell us the majority only needs someone to stand up to the insurgents and militias that divide them. that is happening and US and Iraqi forces are living in the neighborhoods to keep them out. I think that for those Iraqis to achieve some success, they must be supported, admired, even celebrated. If they succeed, the government will follow and find some way to take the credit. That's the way it always happens. Be hopeful, and thankful. Would you rather things be as they were 6 months ago?

Why do you insist on misinterpreting what I am saying if it talks about what is really happening in Iraq?

Did I say Iraqis are not walking in the streets? Did I say that the American and Iraqi forces are not doing what they have to do? [in fact I always celebrated what the Americans and some of the Iraqi forces do to help my country]

What I said was “Women have to wear headscarf outside the house. Women cannot drive. Men cannot wear shorts. Men cannot walk with women in the street, unless they are relative of some kind,” which means they are in the streets, but they are not free and they are not safe. Can you deny that Sunni neighborhoods are controlled by Sunni insurgents and Shiite neighborhoods are controlled by Shiite militias? If you do, go read your White House statements.

Can you deny that kids are not going to schools? If you do, then go to Iraq and talk to kids and their parents.

Can you deny that employees don’t go to work? Then why nothing is improving in Iraq’s infrastructure and economy? Why no street has been renovated yet? Why are the buildings that were bombed during the invasion still rubble and the buildings that were destroyed by car bombs and other violent acts are still destroyed?

Why there are no trash cleaners in most of Baghdad now?

Why don’t you want to get my message? It was clear: “We need to realize that what is happening in Baghdad now is not an improved security situation. What is happening now is the result of violence. Baghdad is carved into sectarian neighborhoods now; Shiite and Sunni neighborhoods. Sunnis cannot go to Shiite neighborhoods and Shiites cannot go to Sunni neighborhoods. Therefore, there are not as many targets in the streets like before. And that’s why you think that the number of people killed in the streets is less and violence has decreased.”

“the analogy to US neighborhoods being secure to all is pretty naive , by the way”

Don’t you dare to compare the U.S. to Iraq. Don’t you dare because that is just insulting and demeaning to what my people went and are going through. Don’t you dare bring into this thread what you call “violence” in the States because that will just disrespect the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi lives that we have lost so far in the conflict.

Would you rather things be as they were 6 months ago?

unfortunately for the ptb, iraqis are smarter than this.

lets go back further than 6 months shall we?

obviously before the msm informed us, the 'ideal' of the surge was to do exactly what it has done. the 'solution' for the violence was the segregation of the neighborhoods.

prior to the surge, this started happening. clearly. was it co ordinated? ok, it is uncomfortable to perceive this. that the results of what we presumably consider 'insurgent action' could facilitate a result that furthered, or better stated preceded, the surge results.

was the 'solution' the surge and 'insurgents' provided actually the intended outcome and why/how did the prior instability and sectarian nature of the separated neighborhoods service the 'solution'?

prior to current affairs (the 'success' that isn't) what groundwork could have been laid to have baghdad, and iraq, be unified? was that ever given an option?

what is happening now, serves the idea of 3 separate communities. baghdad is a micro version of an 'ideal'. not in terms of the security, but definitely in terms of the divisive nature.

we are supposed to feel a sense of relief. relief that we can come home, be safe but also ACCEPT the division. iraqis are being trained to conceptualize themselves as separate sects. and all the while being told this is the way they have always been under the surface.

why? who does this serve?

Would you rather things be as they were 6 months ago?

ahh.how long will it take for iraqis to get so fed up w/the lack of security, death, absence of utilities.. everything.. until they accept this version of life as what is their best hope?

and what then? always another excuse? no, we cannot negotiate w/you until you reel in your radicals?

little palestines. all those neighborhoods are little palestines.

Yes--no, not the ideal. Was it 'security' when Iraqis lived in neighborhoods divided by allegiance to Saddam's regime and only had to fear running afoul of the tyranny somehow or getting caught up in its evil?

yes. compared to today, it really was.

it is really sad (criminal actually) that after all iraq has gone thru you have to compare it to the hell of 6 months ago, or the hell of saddam to make this american version of freedom look good.

someone is talking to you can you hear him?? is there any opening in your facade, your reality that can absorb what he is saying? or are you so programmed to spew the talking pts of your masters? what if you aren't right.

can you ever get off the 'hope scenario' and let perceptions of these iraqi voices penetrate.

as we ponder the idea of iraqis streaming back to neighborhoods they cannot leave ( take me to my cell!) has it occurred to you, the implication of arming all sides?

The Problem with Militias.

pardon me for asking but whats the solution?

are we supposed to get excited about the next election? right now, in present time, some think tank is writing the talking pts for what comes next.

this is the 'soft partition'. how do you like it iraq?


1. Easily molded, cut, or worked.
2. Yielding readily to pressure or weight.

if it doesn't feel soft, no doubt it is all your fault.

annie: "Omar, thank you. thank you thank you thank you."

Wow, 24, you really made annie's day! She's been suffering through all these news stories and posts and our comments saying things are improving in Iraq. It's been driving her crazy(-ier), as you can see. So she is so happy you've posted a counterpoint that she even bothered to sign her name. Nice work.

I freely admit that I am very happy at the possibility that Iraq may have finally turned a corner for the better. Qualified? Yes. Tenuous? Yes. Incomplete? Yes. Etc.

For those who want to tell BT "I told you so" or want you to admit progress, I gotta say I disagree with them. You guys call it as you see it, and if you choose to call it as still a mess then I'm not going to take you by the lapels and shake you. "Recognize the progress dammit!" I don't think so. You are still getting reports from friends & family that there's still fear and violence, that they are still scared. OK.

On the other hand, is it fair of you to grab others by the lapels and shake them? "Why don't you see it as badly as I do dammit!" I mean, you have your perspective and they have theirs, right? Maybe Mojo has been gone a quarter of a century, but he still has friends and family there who are reporting improvement. Right? Likewise Iraqi Pundit. Likewise Konfused Kid, who has been gone only about as long as you, right? How about Zeyad's brother in law Mohammed, who is still there? They all report some measure of progress. That doesn't mean we're all done, that there's no danger left or problems left to tackle. It just means, for once, maybe Iraq is headed in the right direction, maybe.

derd I fail to understand the unwillingness to accept that security for many Iraqis has improved measurably.

maybe that's because you don't know what it really means to be american. i think some iraqis are mre american thatb you!

inscribed on a plaque in the stairwell of the pedestal of the Statue of Liberty: “They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

sorry about my sloppy typos

i think some iraqis are more american than you!

earth to rhus, nothing you or your propaganda artists post makes me suffer, nor does it have the power to drive me crazy.

don't flatter yourself. here's what makes me suffer.. reality. so far, nothing has driven me crazy.

btw, one can't post @ bt's w/out loggin in w/google. since i posted earlier, i'm logged in. as i clearly stated earlier, i am not going to bother registering only to post here since we have posters that remain anonymous (like earlier on this thread). why should i take the time to offer this respect when it is not reciprocated? besides, you all know who i am by now.

annie: "earth to rhus, nothing you or your propaganda artists post makes me suffer, nor does it have the power to drive me crazy."

Fair enough. But by now all of the major MSM have picked up on the improving security situation in Iraq. You are clearly upset by the possibility that this is really happening, and thus oh-so-happy to hear 24 say it still sucks. Earlier today I told Bruno he'd be the second-to-last person on Earth to admit attacks are tapering off in Iraq. You'll be the last.

I never noticed you being anonymous and not signing your posts until after I caught you in a red-handed lie. Maybe it's just a coincidence, but I'm certainly not going to take your word for it.

Lets see "24" clearly states
the control is in ther hands of
a Shia government whose main
influence is Sistani ...

Then annie prattles on stating
that this was US policy all along
this division of Iraq was what
Bush wanted ... Oh really ...
when Allawi was appointed TEMPORARY
PM by Bremmer et all .... all the left
wingers jumped and called Allawi
a puppet ... Oh wait now with
Sistani calling the shots its what
Bush wanted all along ... its contradictory ... Bush wants a big war with Iraqn right ??? But Bush
also wants Sistani who has close ties to Tehran to control
Iraq ??? get real ....

The palin and simple fact is this division of Baghdad and perhaps the other cities is a means toward
an end ... if al-queda can be eliminated entirely ... and security can be brought to neighborhoods at least ...

It moves the process clearly
to a purely Iraq--Iraqi one
which it should be ....allowing
Americans to come home ....

Hmm I recall all the left-wing idiots also stating in the past
that it was the mere prescence
of US soldiers which is causing
the violence .... now "24's" recent
piece seems to contradict that as well .... lets hope Baghdad
can gradually unify over time even if it is separated now.

I never noticed you being anonymous

then you aren't paying attention. i have never denied it is me and respond to questions and comments directed to 'annie'. besides, who else posts here who has horrid spelling, never capitalizes and is left?

until after I caught you in a red-handed lie.

you are a delusional liar. writing a post asserting it on your propaganda 'iraqi bloggers that actually are nothing more than zionist trolls' website won't make it so.


all of the major MSM have picked up on the improving security situation in Iraq.

picked up? surely you jest. the ptb are driving the story (just like you), just like the mwd that weren't. just like the nyt via judy miller 'picked up' on the story of wmd's that weren't and the classified nie that was slipped to her by the WH. the msm and robert murdocks don't 'pick up' stories. they are fed stories by william the bloody and novak and libby and AEI and freedom watch (anti freedom that is, if you're muslim) all their other neocon liars.

get a life, you're getting rhusty.

You are clearly upset by the possibility that this is really happening

yawn, you wish. go flush your head in a toilet, it will guarantee more of a rise than you're gonna get from me. try telling Omar he is 'clearly upset' there is 'progress in iraq'. spare me your total BS you coward. you think you can manipulate me? lol.

ok, i dare you. try telling Omar he is 'clearly upset' there is 'progress in iraq'

i'll tell you what upsets me. reality in iraq.

anon, there are enough strawmen in your comment to sink a ship. i am not bothering to to counter any arguments you couldn't back up if your kids life depended on it. thats starting w/your first 'clearly' sentence following thru w/you last assertion. no wonder you don't copy/paste.

lets hope Baghdad
can gradually unify over time even if it is separated now.

good of you to throw in one statement that isn't mired in BS.

annie: "ok, i dare you. try telling Omar he is 'clearly upset' there is 'progress in iraq'"

Omar's upset that there isn't enough progress; you are upset that there is any. No? That is absolutely how you come across.

me: "until after I caught you in a red-handed lie."

I doubt anyone else cares to see you caught in a lie, but I do consider it a sort of karmic honor to have caught you where you thought you'd weasel out of it.

Far as the media goes with its emphasis on the 'improved' security, changes in Iraq have taken place in the last few months, that we must somehow admit for the benefit of the doubt.
Theree have been certain improvements in suburbs of Baghdad, has it not?

By the way, Betool fekaiki is such a great artist who won the best art in UK recently for one of the latest paintings :)

Iraqi Security Forces and Civilian Deaths for the last ten months:

Feb 07 - 3,014
Mar 07 - 2,977
Apr 07 - 1,821
May 07 - 1,980
Jun 07 - 1,345
Jul 07 - 1,690
Aug 07 - 1,674
Sep 07 - 848
Oct 07 - 679
Nov 07 - 360

Q.E.D.

*

rhus, we have had this karmic honor conversation so many times i am beginning to think you pull this canard everytime you want to divert. your 'proof' of a 'red handed lie'?

you don't get it, you will never get it, and i am not wasting more bandwidth, nor another distraction of Omar's topic to discuss it w/you. you seem to have some obsessive investment in my 'state of mind'...

you are upset

You are clearly upset

oh-so-happy

you really made annie's day!

She's been suffering

It's been driving her crazy

So she is so happy

can we move on now? quit trying to degrade the messenger, it's a stupid form of argument and a red herring


Omar's upset that there isn't enough progress; you are upset that there is any. No? That is absolutely how you come across.

leaving your obsession (sans evidence) of how i 'come across' out of this...

progress towards what? obviously there is not only progress, there are clear signs of progression.

my point, i don't think it is in a direction that will lead to freedom. likely more oppression and more war.

some people might think building walls that separate people means good progress, i am not one of them. some people think dismantling iraqs society is good progress, i am not one of them. some people think bombing iran is good progress, i am not one of them. some people think eliminating certain countries altogether is good progress, i am not one of them. get it.

this diversionary tactic of saying i an upset because there is 'progress' means you are essentially IGNORING (for the sake of argument) my point, and Omar's point

Why don’t you want to get my message? It was clear: “We need to realize that what is happening in Baghdad now is not an improved security situation. What is happening now is the result of violence. Baghdad is carved into sectarian neighborhoods now; Shiite and Sunni neighborhoods. Sunnis cannot go to Shiite neighborhoods and Shiites cannot go to Sunni neighborhoods. Therefore, there are not as many targets in the streets like before. And that’s why you think that the number of people killed in the streets is less and violence has decreased.”

get it

That doesn't mean we're all done, that there's no danger left or problems left to tackle. It just means, for once, maybe Iraq is headed in the right direction, maybe.

huh? it just means for once maybe?

gee rhus, where i come from when a person says maybe, the alternative applies.. like.. or maybe not. perhaps you could go just a little further and cross that line and examine Omars point in the post, instead of trying to divert away from it w/your drama queen tactics.

i'm noticing what else you DID NOT respond to

has it occurred to you, the implication of arming all sides?

pardon me for asking but whats the solution?

get it? did you read the problem w/militias link?

what outcome might a logical person fear from the idea of many well armed militias be???

certainly it doesn't take a wild conspiracy theorist to assume they may turn against eachother, no?

there's progress alright, some people just may think that progress doesn't paint a very pretty picture. again, from american prospect

U.S. objectives for Iraq, broadly, concern the country's transformation into a stable staging ground for American power in the Middle East -- or at least, at this late hour, to keep Iraq from imploding. Absent actual reconciliation, which Stanton believes will be "generational" in coming, this year's strategy had the short-term effect of reducing violence to 2006 levels, and the probable long-term effect of hastening Iraq's disintegration. Even by the standards of Iraq's numerous predictable disasters, this one is glaring and obvious. We might as well call it victory.

did he say glaring and obvious?

no wonder you want to divert from this to talk about.... me. or, how 'improved' the situation is.

Do I deny the existence of the litany of continuing problems you choose to find the most important topic? Yes--I do. All those problems exist in some areas, they are non-existent in others. The areas where they exist are rapidly shrinking thanks to noble efforts of many, and that's what I choose to find most important.

Some react as if they have been threatened when it's suggested that things may be on the right track in Iraq. I find that an interesting example of extreme narcissism, but not terribly important in the overall scheme of things.

Omar,

Kids don’t go to schools because they fear to be kidnapped.

Really?

Here's what UNICEF reported (here and here) last month:

Nearly six million Iraqi children are going back to the classroom this week - a remarkable achievement due to extraordinary efforts by parents, teachers and local officials to keep Iraq's schools open and functioning.

All that hard work and courage shown by the thousands of teachers and parents and their children don't mean anything to Omar, it seems, because their effort doesn't fit in with his master-narrative of thorough commitment to NO PROGRESS IN IRAQ.

It's very, very sad.

*

Annie: ""what is happening in Baghdad now is not an improved security situation. What is happening now is the result of violence.""

Guess what? The security and essential liberties you enjoy today are the result of Violence! Lots and lots of violence! You are able to keep them only because others are willing to engage in and endure lots and lots of violence to keep it that way.

On this thread you accused me of having no understanding of what it means to be an American while at the same time quoting B Franklin on liberty AND proclaiming life under a brutal tyranny is preferable to life endured during a time of revolution. Do you have a logical and consistent thought you can share or is your humor intentional but very subtle?

'proof' of a 'red handed lie'

No further distractions to Omar's topic are necessary.

Here's something for you to be thankful for, annie. AQ's not finished yet. Hooray!

That Times article is incredibly sketchy to me. Why would they quote the Iraqi government about the number of internally displaced being 170,000 when everyone else is saying the figure is over 2million, and 1.5milion of those happened this year. Ridiculous!

Sorry if I'm repeating anyone I can't be bothered to slog through the bickering going on above.

derd, the quote wasn't mine, it was in italics, it is from Omar's post.

Omar, a very very moving video. on this day of thanks i would like to extend a prayer for all those who suffer. may we all find comfort in our hearts for loved ones, friends and all good people we have to be thankful for. they are what makes our life worth living.

peace.

annie

"I have to say, I am losing faith in journalism every day!"

Hi there 24!

Here is an article that you might find interesting to read:

INVASION - A COMPARISON OF SOVIET AND WESTERN MEDIA PERFORMANCE - PART 1
Link:
http://www.medialens.org/alerts/07/071120_invasion_a_comparison.php

Peace/
Nadia

Thanks for writing this post 24. Earlier today, the ABC national news made a big deal of following Lt. General Odierno around Baghdad as he made his rounds. They reported that Odierno and many junior officers are very optimistic that things are getting better in Baghdad and other parts of Iraq. I think they see some trees, but not the whole forest. I am glad that Iraqi civilian and U.S. military deaths are way down. However, based on your post, and BT's, I believe that this is just a temporary situation that could very well change when U.S. troops leave. I know there are Sunnis who are currently helping the U.S. fight Al Qaeda who also want to "liberate" Baghdad at some point in the future. The Sunnis are gathering their arms and waiting for a chance to fight Shias, and the Shias are gathering their arms to defend what they have taken. There has been no political reconciliation, and neither side seems to want one. Both sides are biding their time waiting for the U.S. forces to get out of the way. When that happens, I think that all Hell may break loose in an all out fight for control of Baghdad.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/22/AR2007112201568.html?hpid%3Dartslot&sub=AR

Days after she returned from Syria, 23-year-old Melal al-Zubaidi and a friend went to the market on a pleasant night to eat ice cream. It was a short walk, yet unthinkable only a month ago for a woman in the capital. Still, her parents were nervous, and Zubaidi wore a head scarf and an ankle-length skirt to avoid angering Islamic extremists.

The Zubaidis, a Shiite Muslim family, have yet to pass another boundary. When they fled Iraq five months ago, a Sunni family took over their large house in Dora, a sprawling neighborhood in southern Baghdad. When the Zubaidis returned this month, they were too scared to ask the new occupants to leave. So they rented a small apartment in Mashtal, a mostly Shiite district.

Improvement?!!!

Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, seeking to improve his movement's image, ordered his Mahdi Army militia to freeze operations.

What happens when decides to unfreeze these operations?!!!



"Baghdad feels like a military base," said Haadi, 48, a Sunni. "Safety without these barriers is real safety."

There you go! No more words to add...

"We don't go outside Karrada," said his wife, Anwar Mahdi, 43. "Now I am afraid to go to my parents."

As soon as they can save enough money, Haadi said, they hope to go back to Damascus. That could prove difficult. Syria now allows only Iraqis with special visas to enter.

How dare she say such a thing? Wouldn't Bush be mad at that?

When have the people of Iraq ever been secure?

This post has been removed by the author.

"When have the people of Iraq ever been secure?"

In the sixties and seventies, Iraqis lived the best kind of life in metropolitan cities like Baghdad, Basra, and Mosul... Industry, secularity, and education bloomed at the time...

Thanks to Saddam (whom America supported in 80s in his war against Iran), and the 1990 invasion of Kuwait and the international sanctions that followed, and thanks to the US invasion and the disasters they brought to the country that made Iraq in this shape. Iraq was the best country in the region for decades...

AQ's not finished yet

heavens no. here's another story!

Al-Qaeda in Iraq gunmen disguised as official security forces killed at least 10 U.S.-backed Sunni fighters on Thursday, the latest attack on the American effort to form neighborhood-based armed patrols, Iraqi officials said.

.......

The insurgents had dressed up in police uniforms and commandeered vehicles before the attack, which killed at least 10 of the U.S.-backed fighters and wounded five Iraqi soldiers, according to an Interior Ministry official who spoke on condition of anonymity because he is not authorized to speak to reporters.

An Air Force F-16 fighter jet later destroyed the van by dropping a 500-pound bomb on it, the military said.

well, that settles that.

let's see: people dressed up in police uniform with "commandeered vehicles". looks like police, walks like police, smells like police - must be "al-qaida".
better explanation: shia policemen fighting with a local sunni gang of "concerned citizens"with the US taking sides with sunni..

but, we wouldn't want anyone to get the impression 'our' shia good guys are killing 'our' sunni good guys. why.. people would suspect the only difference between the sect fighting then and now is that both sides are sanctioned by the US.

moving right along...goodness gracious aren't we creative..(once again)Plan Increases Role of G.I.’s in Iraq Training

i'm shocked. let's read this keeping in mind we have about 12 US translators in the army. let's just hit some of the money quotes of this orwellian article everyone should read from the pravada.

The approach is strikingly different from the plans advocated by many United States politicians, including some Democratic presidential contenders

lol, another dem bashing report! actually this doesn't surprise me in the least. the 'reporter' being michael gordon, that michael gordon? the one who , along w/judy miller won some pulitzer or something for writing the bs that no doubt came straight from the WH, that all turned out to be total lies intended to scare americans into an invasion....

i'm so shocked. the killer quote tho comes here..

“The White House has been informed conceptually,” said one senior Bush administration official, referring to planning. “Fundamentally, this concept is not going to change.”

lol, the WH has been informed? more like WE ARE BEING INFORMED THE NEW CONCEPT IS THE SAME AS THE OLD CONCEPT.

in other words, our cover for being in iraq, once again, is we are 'training more soldiers' to 'step up' when we 'step down'. (which reminds me more and more of israel claiming to negotiate w/palestinians someday when israel determines they are ready which is of course....never.

Transferring security to the Iraqis was at the core of the initial United States strategy in Iraq.

core strategy, or core propaganda verbage? how exactly is it we are training iraqis how to, or not to kill?? how are we forming the concept of unity for a whole strong country in these fighters. (because seriously, does it take american soldiers to 'train' iraqis how to fight?? this is bizarro. no, presumably we are training them whose allegience to follow, namely ours. here's where the historical narrative comes in (lest we forget..)


But efforts to quickly transfer authority often backfired. In Diyala Province, for example, Iraqi Army commanders carried out a sectarian agenda, detaining local Sunni leaders whom American commanders were trying to engage, and failing to curb the inroads made by Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia, a largely Iraqi insurgent group that American intelligence officials say has foreign leadership. After much of Baquba, the provincial capital, fell under insurgent control, the American military was forced to mount an offensive in June to reclaim the city.

did everybody get that?? ok, now for the punchline..


In addition, the Iraqi military is expanding. It is creating three new divisions, including the 11th Iraqi Army Division to be established in Baghdad over the next several months. That unit will enable nine battalions sent to the capital from other regions to return home, strengthening the Iraqi military presence in those areas.

3 new divisions? 9 battalions? is it just a coincidence??? everything divisible by 3. 3 regions.

i'm just curious but i wonder if the experience these 9 battalions learned 'securing' baghdad will be used to help 'secure' the other regions is also being used in the 'soft partition' plan.

that is what is going on is it not? i know we heard about this in one little news blurp around the time the congress voted on it. nothing before, nothing after.. but it is 'the plan' is it not. (the silence is deafening)

“Don’t do it too fast,” said Lt. Gen. James M. Dubik, who oversees the training of Iraq’s security forces. “Transfer those responsibilities that you can to the organizations that can handle them and withhold responsibility from organizations that can’t.”

ahhh, this should be a long drawn out process this 'training'.

i wonder how long we can keep the propaganda geared up to calling side we are bombing AQ?

UN news service

Responding to recent public reports about refugees returning to Iraq in limited numbers, a spokesperson for the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) today cautioned against an organized effort to send civilians back to the war-ravaged country.

“We welcome improvements to the security conditions and stand ready to assist people who have decided or will decide to return voluntarily. However, UNHCR does not believe that the time has come to promote, organize or encourage returns,” agency spokesperson Jennifer Pagonis told a press briefing in Geneva.

“That would be possible only when proper return conditions are in place – including material and legal support and physical safety,” she said, pointing out that there is currently “no sign of any large-scale return to Iraq as the security situation in many parts of the country remains volatile and unpredictable.”

interesting, especially following the links and their comments. i would be interested in hearing what any iraqis have to say about this petition report.

annie (the last ones were mine too).

Annie,

I will bring your comment from Zeyad's over here where it belongs.

as for 24, have you checked out his new post? lol, i think he totally debunked your bullshit on the end of the last thread

Yes, Annie, I did. And, no, he hasn't debunked anything. I have never said that Iraq has become perfect. I have merely tried to point out that there has been an improvement. Some of 24's complaints(sectarian bias) are things that will not be overcome overnight. We can only try to create an environment where people can start to work on these types of issues. Which is what we are starting to see happen. If 24 wishes to refuse to acknowledge that, that is his choice. No doubt he has his reasons.

lyn your persistence astounds me sometimes. i make a perfectly reasonable comment regarding zeyad's new (at the time) post. not denying or confirming anything, merely looking at the figures he presents. i hardly ever comment there (that bastion of 'freedom watch' propaganda bloggers for the empire or whatever conservative lobbying group supports you guys) because it is troll central. no sooner to i comment, primarily because so far on the thread NO ONE had even addressed the topic, (after i posted i did notice directly prior to mine, IA posts)
what so you do but come on w/your blathering 'shoo shoo annie' statement dragging 24 into it, for what? claiming i am harrassing him? for what?

to one up me or something. i am telling you lyn you are like a little old grandmotherly fly. just buzzing around making either innocuous worthless additions "I wanted to say something profound, but maybe this is a discussion for others." or lame attempts to smear me and call attention to yourself. nothing like a little blog hopping to stir the pot.

make no mistake, i never said Omar debunked YOU, or had intention to debunk YOU. this post however does lend itself to debunking the theory of 'iraq is so much safer and getting safer everyday and aren't we all lucky to 'maybe' (kudos to rhus for the admission) be on the long awaited path to freedom and peace that is sure to come eventually even tho by then another million iraqis will be dead but so what, they deserve it because they have a slave mentality or aren't willing to fight for their freedom or whatever idiotic hogwash you guys vomit out of your consciousness every single day for god's sake.

he hasn't debunked anything

lyn, go back and read the post.

I have merely tried to point out that there has been an improvement.

thats your specialty, claiming to be merely. spare us please. you are all (once again oh i am repeatedly moved by shocking pulsations) on the same drool mindless repetitions of the same talking pts.

well dear, as far as merely pointing out improvements i would like you to absorb that any incident in life one can find improvement in. doesn't mean they outweigh the negative aspects, or reflect relative gravity in reality or lead to an overall positive direction.

Some of 24's complaints(sectarian bias)

oh really? is that what it is? and i suppose since it appear in this topic BT agrees w/him be shares the same sectarian bias?

can you read the post? i think it reflects a rather clear discontent w/the government security in iraq no? do you imaging this is because of sect also.

maybe it is because of sect i don't like bush?

sometimes its just life, death and BAD POLITICS.

what, i don't hang out on zeyad comment section enough for you to be sure i hear your blathering response over there so you want to drag it here?

go flush your head in the toilet lyn. you are a little troublemaking pipsqueak and share the commonality of others trying to evade furthering the TOPIC by dragging personal animousity into the thread, compounded by dragging from another blog??

We can only wish to create an environment where people can start to work on the types of issues that will bring lasting peace and reconcilliations. Which is what we don't see happening as a result of the surge. If you wish to refuse to acknowledge that, that is your choice. No doubt you have your reasons.

if i ignore your little meaningless retort, it means i don't think it's even worthy of responding.

just so we all know what the 'looking at the brigh tside' folks do in their spare time???

that's for you lyn, just to entertain yourself in those lonely moments contemplating what you will merely say next.

Annie,

*sigh*

Now I see why you have taken to running around to other blogs. Nobody is here to play with you. Two things:

Many of my friends tell me that “it is all either Shiites or Sunnis now. If you mix, you get killed.”

Annie, when I talked about 24 having a complaint(sectarian bias), I was referring to the sectarian bias that is present in Iraq. As this statement shows.

As for my comment over at the Kids, I wanted to acknowledge his work in doing that post, but I didn't want to interfere in what seemed a personal issue for Iraqis. Which is why I said what I did.

Now, I think I am going to go fill one of my lonely moments by baking cookies. ;) Later.

hmm, how interesting. it seems that website from the last link has been disabled. let's just hope it's a little mixup and not a result of retaliation by embarrassed conservatives.

it's certainly made the rounds, here's another blog that found humor in conservapedia's statistics.

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/NBC_Wave_of_violence_against_women_1124.html">NBC: 'Wave of violence' against women in US-occupied Iraq

"Iraqi women were once the most emancipated in the Arab world," says correspondent Tom Aspell. "Educated, encouraged to work and vote; even allowed to divorce."

(you mean before karen hughes liberated them?)

check out the video.

'running around to other blogs?'

excuse me while i swat a fly.

This post has been removed by a blog administrator.

This post has been removed by a blog administrator.

This post has been removed by a blog administrator.

My respected readers,
Please do not reply or be upset of what the impolite, silly and childish creature is writing under “anonymous.”

I really don’t have time to monitor delete all the racist and full-of-hatred comments he or she is posting. After all, they are showing the kind of background they come from and the careless parents they had, who had no interest in saving the world by raising good and educated citizens.

But I trust the readers in filtering what’s relevant and what’s not.

Thanks for your patience.
Omar

Omar,

Ahh well, usually I do try to ignore Annie whether she writes under "Annie" or "Anonymous". ;)

Many Iraqis like Omar seem to view the world in terms of black and white, off and on: either Iraq is safe or it is not safe.

Dear Omar,
Lots of lies and deception going on by the media about what is really happening in Iraq.
I was in Baghdad and left about a month ago. The situation is not good.
Deaths have been less indeed, but the reason behind that is not the improved security. The reason behind it is that Baghdad is now divided into sectarian areas where all the sunnis know the shiaa areas and all the shiaa know the sunni areas, and upon that they don't go there.
It is not that Baghdad is safer know, its the people have known their limits. You are allowed to move within the area of your sect. Trespasser will be killed. Sorry, tormented and then killed.

Pressure for Results: The Politics of Tallying the Number of Iraqis Who Return Home

The description of the scope of the return, however, appears to have been massaged by politics. Returnees have essentially become a currency of progress.....Some Iraqi lawmakers said that overly broad figures were being used intentionally.

“They are using this number because they want to show that Maliki is succeeding,” said Salim Abdullah, a lawmaker and member of the largest Sunni bloc, known as the Accordance Front, referring to Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki. “But this does not make the number correct. I think dozens of Iraqis return home daily, but not 1,600.”

.....

A half-dozen owners of Iraqi travel agencies and drivers who regularly travel to Syria agreed that the numbers misrepresented reality.

They said that the flow of returnees peaked last month, with more than 50 families arriving daily from Syria at Baghdad’s main drop-off point. Since Nov. 1, they said, the numbers have declined, and on Sunday morning, during a period when several buses used to appear, only one came.

A United Nations survey released last week, of 110 Iraqi families leaving Syria, also seemed to dispute the contentions of officials in Iraq that people are returning primarily because they feel safer.

The survey found that 46 percent were leaving because they could not afford to stay; 25 percent said they fell victim to a stricter Syrian visa policy; and only 14 percent said they were returning because they had heard about improved security.

Underscoring a widely held sense of hesitation, many of those who come back to Iraq do not return to their homes.

Raad al-Kihani, a prominent Shiite tribal leader in Baghdad and supporter of the prime minister, said that most people returning were still restricted by the fear of sectarian violence. “There are no Shiite families moving back to Sunni neighborhoods and no Sunnis moving back to Shiite neighborhoods,” he said.

thanks for deleting the gross postings Omar.

"The reason behind it is that Baghdad is now divided into sectarian areas where all the sunnis know the shiaa areas and all the shiaa know the sunni areas, and upon that they don't go there.
It is not that Baghdad is safer know, its the people have known their limits. You are allowed to move within the area of your sect. Trespasser will be killed. Sorry, tormented and then killed."


The Iraqis should pull their heads out of their butts and stop tormenting and killing each other. If they want to kill each other so badly, stop blaming Americans for what Iraqis do to each other.

Here is an article from the New York Times today. Click

This is what I call real journalism, which gives you the whole picture, not only propaganda to prepare for troops withdrawal.

Or you only believe what paints a rosy picture from Iraq?

Omar, i am shocked to find out you do not open each and every one of my links! ;)

ok, we have both linked to the same article (mine, 12:09 am). i am a little surprised the nyt broke w/the meme flooding the airwaves. what are they smoking?

annie

It's not that I don't open the links on the comments section. I just read this piece right when I woke up and linked to it before I read the new comments.
Also, it doesn’t hurt to read it twice!
Thanks for the note.

I haven't found the rosy picture, yet. I have found only some stories that give some glimmer of hope, and apparently that is unacceptable in some quarters. Those who don't want the troops to withdraw see the more hopeful outlook as a ruse to make the withdrawal easier to accomplish, and those who want the troops out don't want there to be any hint of success to be associated with their leaving-- they must have been defeated!

On the one hand, the lower level of violence is attributed to a change in tactics and more troops at the neighborhood level. On the other hand, the lower level of violence is attributed to the effective segregation of the population so that opposing sides are less likely to come into conflict (that it just happened to coincide with the change in tactics and troop levels doesn't see to confront the logic of the anti-war faction, but facts rarely do).The truth no doubt lies somewhere in the middle as the truth usually does in all things.


The passion and driving forces in Iraqi society are for sectarian division and radical fundamentalism. Those with resources, feel threatened and have no driving motivation for division have fled the country. Many of those who lack the resources are passively accepting of the will of the more passionate among them. So, if Iraq becomes and remains divided, it will be the will of Iraqis and no number of troops will change that. Perhaps the return of some Iraqis for whatever reasons will build a movement the passions for liberty, but they will have to want it more than than the opposing forces want to rob them of such things. The Iraqi mentality seems to be entrenched in hopeless victim hood, so my hopes aren't great.

To borrow your title: So why don't you go then? You demand others sacrifice to bring about things of which your bravely blog, but risk little beyond enduring annoying comments, apparently. Again I ask, is there a force for modernism and liberty in Iraq? If not, why not, and why aren't you and others seeking to create such a force? There are plenty of Iraqis online to rehash history and bitch and moan about the hapless plight of Iraq. Visionaries and leaders towards modernity are in short supply, or have I been looking in the wrong places?

Here is another picture from the "improved security"in Baghdad.
NOTE: please notice that the Iraqi ministry of Interior said they have no information about the attack!


By SINAN SALAHEDDIN
Associated Press Writer
BAGHDAD (AP) — Masked gunmen stormed the family home of a pro-Baath journalist and killed 11 of his relatives, colleagues said Monday, as Shiite legislators denounced a proposal to ease curbs on former members of Saddam Hussein's ruling party, dimming hopes for the U.S.-backed measure aimed at national reconciliation.

Dhia al-Kawaz, editor of the Jordan-based Asawat al-Iraq news agency, was in Jordan when his sisters, their husbands and children were reportedly killed in Baghdad. According to the news agency's Web site, witnesses said more than five masked gunmen broke into the home and opened fire, then planted a bomb inside.

"Sectarian militias killed 11 family members of Dhia al-Kawaz," the agency's statement said, apparently referring to Shiite death squads that frequently target minority Sunnis and their supporters.

Mohammed Salman, a colleague of al-Kawaz in the Jordanian capital of Amman, confirmed the attack in the northern neighborhood of Shaab, a Shiite militia stronghold. Al-Kawaz, his wife and children live elsewhere.

Another colleague, who refused to be named because he feared reprisal, said al-Kawaz has received threats for his stance against the U.S. occupation and sectarian strife in Iraq.

That colleague said an SUV without license plates stopped at the gate of the house and threw two bombs on Sunday, killing al-Kawaz' two sisters, their husbands and seven children aged 5 to 10 while they were eating breakfast.

Al-Kawaz, who declined to comment Monday, has rejected the U.S. occupation and accused majority-Shiite Iran of seeking to dominate the Iraqi government.

Officials with the Interior Ministry, which oversees Iraqi police, said they had no information about the attack, and local police refused to comment.

The attack, which could not be independently confirmed, is the latest to raise concerns about the sustainability of a recent lull in violence in the capital.

Reporters Without Borders condemned the killings and called for a government investigation, saying Iraqi police at a nearby checkpoint failed to intervene.

"The impunity reigning in Baghdad for the past five years encourages attacks on journalists and their families," the Paris-based media advocacy group said. "It is even more disturbing when security forces see what is happening and yet take no action."

Reporters Without Borders said al-Kawaz had recently been threatened by the Badr Brigades, the militant arm of Iraq's largest Shiite party the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council.

The debate over rehabilitating former members of Saddam's ruling Baath Party has been a major obstacle to Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's push to stem support for the insurgency by bringing minority Sunnis into the political process.

A parliamentary session on Sunday adjourned in turmoil after lawmakers loyal to anti-American Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr pounded their fists on their tables in protest.

"There are Baathists who committed crimes and atrocities against the Iraqi people and those must be tried," Bahaa al-Araji, a lawmaker from al-Sadr's 30-member bloc, said Monday at a news conference.

He complained that the legislation failed to distinguish between Baath members who were forced to join and those who willingly participated in suppression of majority Shiites.

"We have to first compensate the families of those who were killed and imprisoned by those Baathists and then discuss the law," he said.

Mahmoud Othman, a Kurdish lawmaker, said parliament would discuss the draft again on Wednesday. "The country is in dire need of national reconciliation. ... Iraqis should abandon revenge and adopt forgiveness," he said.

Enacting and implementing legislation on so-called de-Baathification is one of 18 so-called benchmark issues the U.S. has set as measures for progress.

The Sadrists also are angry about recent raids against followers, primarily in southern Iraq where rival militias have been battling, raising fears that an order by the radical cleric to his Mahdi Army militia to stand down won't hold. In Baghdad, thousands of his supporters marched Monday to demonstrate their allegiance, chanting "We are ready to sacrifice ourselves for Muqtada and his father."

U.S. troops targeting al-Qaida in Iraq north of Baghdad detained 10 suspects, including some responsible for planning car bombings, the U.S. military said.

During one of the raids in the Tigris River valley, locals reported that al-Qaida was using a school as a meeting place and safe house, the military said. It gave no specific locations, but said U.S. troops briefly entered the school.

In violence Monday, at least two people — a civilian and a policeman — were killed in separate drive-by shootings by gunmen on motorcycles in the predominantly Shiite city of Kut, 100 miles southeast of Baghdad, police said.

Iraqi soldiers also thwarted terrorism suspects disguised as a bride and groom trying to pass through a checkpoint along with their "wedding procession" north of the Iraqi capital, the Iraqi Defense Ministry said Monday.

The procession Sunday near Taji, about 12 miles north of Baghdad, raised suspicion because most of those celebrating were men, an official in the ministry told The Associated Press. Soldiers searched the car carrying the purported bride and groom and discovered the "couple" were two wanted men: Haider al-Bahadili and Abbas Latif. Two other suspects were detained along with them, according to the Defense Ministry.

The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity due to ministry orders, said the investigation of the suspects was ongoing. He declined to release further information.

"So, if Iraq becomes and remains divided, it will be the will of Iraqis and no number of troops will change that."

I agree.

"Sectarian militias killed 11 family members of Dhia al-Kawaz," the agency's statement said, apparently referring to Shiite death squads that frequently target minority Sunnis and their supporters.

Interesting that the article doesn't mention that Kawaz is Shiite.

The passion and driving forces in Iraqi society are for sectarian division and radical fundamentalism.

oh really? maybe if you keep saying that you won't feel any responsibility for what has gone on. whereas i suppose the passion and driving forces within the US are all seeped in goodness no doubt.

if Iraq becomes and remains divided, it will be the will of Iraqis and no number of troops will change that.

lol! that is really the perfect grand illusion!

The Iraqi mentality seems to be entrenched in hopeless victim hood, so my hopes aren't great.

seriously, you are blaming the invaded for the situation. you don't think anyone cannot hear the total bs in your concepts! get a life.

the US is pressing for the UN mandate for the continued presence in all this, the permanent bases, driving the story all is well in iraq, sending out little trollers from you know where to manage the message. and you have the nerve to come here and blather your BS about Omar not being there, fodder for death or assassination. you know damn well there is no safety if you do not completely tow the line . get real.

go read your self some SAIC.

perception management

Iraqis Dehumanized

None of this -- from the unending "incidents" themselves to the way the Pentagon has dominated the reporting of them -- would have been possible without a widespread dehumanization of Iraqis among American soldiers (and a deep-set, if largely unexpressed and little considered, conviction on the American "home front" that Iraqi lives are worth little). If, four decades ago, the Vietnamese were "gooks," "dinks," and "slopes," the Iraqis of the American occupation are "hajis," "sand-niggers," and "towel heads." Latent racism abets the dehumanization process, ably assisted by a mainstream media that tends, with honorable exceptions, to accept Pentagon announcements as at least an initial approximation of reality in Iraq.

Whether it was "incidents" involving helicopter strikes in which those on the ground who died were assumed to be enemy and evil, or the wholesale destruction of the city of Fallujah in 2004, or the massacre at Haditha, or a slaughtered wedding party in the western desert of Iraq that was also caught on video tape (Marine Major General James Mattis: "How many people go to the middle of the desert.... to hold a wedding 80 miles from the nearest civilization? These were more than two dozen military-age males. Let's not be naive."), or killings at U.S. checkpoints; or even the initial invasion of Iraq itself, we find the same propaganda techniques deployed: Demonize an "enemy"; report only "fighters" being killed; stick to the story despite evidence to the contrary; if under pressure, launch an investigation; if still under pressure, bring only low-level troops up on charges; convict a few of them; sentence them lightly; repeat drill.

i can hear your total lies.

btw, now that we have effectively armed all sides i guess it seems normal to call everyone back home before the real bloodbath begins. something tells me iraqis may not be quite as stupid as the ptb are planning on.

you don't really think most people actually BELIEVE all your o so obvious BS do you?

annie

well 24, I guess you are calling your fellow Iraqis liars, because they are the ones saying that security is improved.
It seems you have a vested interest in the negative, you should re-read your posts. you are not objective or balanced and are losing credibility.

if Iraq becomes and remains divided, it will be the will of Iraqis

really, this is just like... OUTRAGEOUS. the idea that the GOAL of the invader just happens to be the inevitability after years of occuaption.. that it means it is the WILL of the people all along?

seriously, what kind of idiots do think we are. mojo, you have got to be kidding if you are this stupid.

you are not objective or balanced and are losing credibility.

lol, from the anonymous know it all! know wonder you are too cowardly to put a name to your insults. if you truly even believed this you would not bother w/this site. your presence hear confirms the OPPOSITE. that you in fact DO think Omar's views have a lot of credibility. so much so the truth is what to you?

DANGEROUS

don't for a minute think we don't see the perception management behind your lies.

truth is your enemy.

that it means it is the WILL of the people all along?

seriously, what kind of idiots do think we are. mojo, you have got to be kidding if you are this stupid.


It wasn't Americans who've repeatedly bombed Shia marketplaces and drilled holes in Sunni heads. I'm not surprised that we must remind some Iraqis and non-Iraqi Arabs that much of the killing in Iraq has been done by Iraqis and non-Iraqi Arabs.

This is by a person who posts as anonymous: "know wonder you are too cowardly to put a name to your insults."

LOL!

24's Cite: "Iraqi soldiers also thwarted terrorism suspects disguised as a bride and groom trying to pass through a checkpoint along with their "wedding procession" north of the Iraqi capital, the Iraqi Defense Ministry said Monday."

Dang! Those ISF are getting pretty good. God bless 'em. I know many events like this go unreported, and it's a shame. They are putting their lives on the line for Iraqis and are getting better all the time. More professional, more experienced, less corrupt, less sectarian. Godspeed.

re: Withdrawal: Yeah, even though there's new talk about a long term US-Iraqi security arrangement that will drive "some people" nuts, many of our troops will be gone by the end of next year.

24, you should read this about the IA's progress. Here is the conclusion:

"The Iraqi Army is replacing the US forces departing Iraqi by the end of 2008 at rate of two Iraqi brigades for one US brigade.

While the surge brigades will eventually depart, the Iraqi Army is not leaving Iraq."

On Iraq's division, I'll put my dinars on it being temporary, at worst. Shamelessly using you and BT as an example, I have detected no permanent animosity between you two over the months because of your different sect. I choose to think many Iraqis are likewise. It's only the thugs, criminals, and terrorists who are trying to divide Iraqis by sect, and their days are numbered.

Mojo, if she signs her name she can't say "you cannot find me saying that" afterward !!

RhusLancia,
“It's only the thugs, criminals, and terrorists who are trying to divide Iraqis by sect”

I agree with you. In fact, one of them comments here. We all know who!

Just one little thing, if you do want to be accurate: I don't belong to a sect. One day, when it is the right time, I will post something about my background and religious and political views. I just don't like people to assume things that are not true.
I have said this before, but you and others seem to insist that you know who I am better than I do. Suit yourselves, it doesn’t harm me, but I just wanted to set it clear for those who want to be accurate.

Iraqi mojo says: "Interesting that the article doesn't mention that Kawaz is Shiite."

That's because he is Sunni, you ignorant!
When are you going to spend more than one second on the info. that you get spoon fed and try to search for more?

Plus, I haven't seen any Sunni on this platform saying "Interesting that the article doesn’t mention that Kawaz is Sunni.”

Why do we care if he were Sunni or Shiite? The people who were killed were Iraqis after all, or do you disagree?

Isn’t that another proof that you are a sectarian rat who doesn’t give a shit about Iraq’s wellbeing?

"That's because he is Sunni, you ignorant!" -24 stl

The article you posted does not mention Kawaz's sect. This article does: "Earlier I was accused of being pro-US and so had to flee to Germany and now I am accused of being a Saddamist," said Kawwaz, a Shiite, who has lived in Germany for the past 20 years.

"Why do we care if he were Sunni or Shiite? The people who were killed were Iraqis after all, or do you disagree?" --24 stl

I do not disagree, but the article you posted implies that the murders were sectarian in nature. I think it's important to note that Kawaz is a Shiite who has criticized the Iraqi govt and Shia militias. I think it's also interesting that the murderers have no problem killing innocent Shia and relatives of political opponents - something Saddam's regime used to do.


"Isn’t that another proof that you are a sectarian rat who doesn’t give a shit about Iraq’s wellbeing?" --24 stl

Interesting use of insults by a person who insists that we do not insult each other. Again, the article you posted implies that the murders are sectarian in nature, and that appears not to be the case.

Dhia al-kawaz is from Haditha in western Iraq. He is a Sunni. Go check your info. and stop the propaganda.

Just becasue AFP said Kawaz is shiite doesn't mean he is! Arn't you Iraqi and know everything about Iraq and it's community and culture? How come you don't know Kawaz family and where they come from?

I don't pretend to know everything about Iraq, never have.

“I think it's also interesting that the murderers have no problem killing innocent Shia and relatives of political opponents”

What’s so interesting about Shiites being killed in Iraq now, when all Iraqis are being killed on the same pace? You always insist on making a sectarian point, and I, as real Iraqis would do, insist that you are wrong.

What is so interesting about Shiites being killed in Iraq?

Shia militias murdering innocent Shia is not only interesting, it is very sad. Also they've murdered relatives of their political opponents, something I thought only Saddam's regime did.


"always insist on making a sectarian point, and I, as real Iraqis would do, insist that you are wrong." --24 stl


Dude, even the great article you posted mentions the sect of the murderers and the sects of the Iraqis who are usually murdered by them. The nature of much of the violence in Iraq has been sectarian in nature. Do you disagree?

"Go check your info. and stop the propaganda." --24 stl

I will check other sources, but fyi, posting an article by AFP is not "propaganda"

“The nature of much of the violence in Iraq has been sectarian in nature. Do you disagree?”

What have you been smoking today? Have you read my blog before?

“Shia militias murdering innocent Shia is not only interesting, it is very sad.”

And it wasn’t “interesting” and “sad” for you when they were murdering innocent Sunnis?

And by the way: is this the first time you hear about Shiite militias killing Shiite Iraqis? Where have you been?

I guess the Pentagon and White House statements don’t usually tell all the story!

“Also they've murdered relatives of their political opponents, something I thought only Saddam's regime did.”
Isn’t this the Iraqi government that you insist that it has a chance to succeed and that it represents the majority of Iraqis and their will? Isn’t it the same government that whenever I publish something to show its inability to achieve anything in Iraq, you go on and on about how “inaccurate” I am?
Well, Maliki just included 18,000 more of those militia members to the security forces a few weeks ago.

I’ve been saying that this government cannot be good for Iraq or Iraqis since it came to power and I’ve been analyzing the news of its failure and put it for you in small bites for you to understand, but you insisted to disagree.

Next time, before you assume that I am a Sunni and then decide to disagree with me just because you think I am a Sunni, please read and analyze.

One more thing:

Dhia al-Kawaz is a Sunni!

This is by a person who posts as anonymous: "know wonder you are too cowardly to put a name to your insults."

mojo, i have already registered my name twice this morning, and google keeps dropping it. i am not going to register everytime i post. rhus you are such a friggin pathetic blowhard.

“It's only the thugs, criminals, and terrorists who are trying to divide Iraqis by sect”

I agree with you.

me to. especially since the people whi initiated this fiasco are all criminals.

speaking of which. in case anyone is stupid enough to now know why cheney is still supporting this completely corrupt government in iraq.. here's the answer.




StumbleUpon

US, Iraq deal sees long-term US presence

its almost a done deal guys, we are getting, right on schedule, what we came for. iraq we officially be americas foremost permanent outpost staging area in the ME.

President Bush on Monday signed a deal setting the foundation for a potential long-term U.S. troop presence in Iraq, with details to be negotiated over matters that have defined the war debate at home — how many U.S. forces will stay in the country, and for how long.

The agreement between Bush and Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki confirms that the United States and Iraq will hash out an "enduring" relationship in military, economic and political terms. Details of that relationship will be negotiated in 2008, with a completion goal of July, when the U.S. intends to finish withdrawing the five combat brigades sent in 2007

.....

It also would help the Iraqi government thwart any attempt to suspend or repeal a constitution drafted with U.S. help and adopted in a nationwide vote in 2005. That appeared to be a reference to any attempt to remove the government by violence or in a coup.

Two senior Iraqi officials familiar with the issue say Iraq's government will embrace a long-term U.S. troop presence in return for U.S. security guarantees as part of a strategic partnership.

more

Monday's announcement means that the Bush administration and Iraq will work out the future of US forces in Iraq in the shadow of the November 2008 US presidential election and despite sky-high US public opposition to the war.

Any resulting agreement could limit the ability of Bush's successor to break with the current US strategy, as Democratic candidates have promised to do amid increasingly vocal calls for a US withdrawal.



annie (da)

posting an article by AFP is not "propaganda"



lol, afp the propaganda free zone lololololo

a

What have you been smoking today? Have you read my blog before?

No I haven't read all your posts.


And it wasn’t “interesting” and “sad” for you when they were murdering innocent Sunnis?

I would ask you here if you've read my blog before, but I don't expect that you have. Omar, how long were innocent Shia mass murdered before Shia militias started murdering innocent Sunni Arabs? Or is this question just too "sectarian" for you and your fine non-sectarian blog?


And by the way: is this the first time you hear about Shiite militias killing Shiite Iraqis? Where have you been?

No. I have read about Shia militias murdering Iraqi Shia for all kinds of stupid reasons. But this particular example is quite horrid.


"Next time, before you assume that I am a Sunni and then decide to disagree with me just because you think I am a Sunni, please read and analyze."

LOL, I don't give a crap if you're Sunni. Omar of ITM is Sunni, and I think he's the coolest cat, much cooler and smarter than you:) Furthermore, I have read and analyzed other articles about this sad story, and one article by AFP says Kawaz is Shiite.


One more thing:

Dhia al-Kawaz is a Sunni!

I thought sect isn't important to you. hmmmm:) Whatever you say, Omar. Kawaz is Sunni. This crime is horrid nonetheless, and I hope the murderers are caught and brought to justice.

"mojo, i have already registered my name twice this morning, and google keeps dropping it."

Perhaps then you should not attack people who post anonymously when you post anonymously:)

"Omar, how long were innocent Shia mass murdered before Shia militias started murdering innocent Sunni Arabs?"

I hear this a lot, not only from people who have no idea what is going on in Iraq, like yourself, but from politicians who have been granted high position in the current Iraqi government, which you support blindly.
And my question is always: And that makes it legal to kill Sunnis?

I support the current Iraqi govt blindly? LOL! Obviously you don't read my blog. I don't expect you to.

And my question is always: And that makes it legal to kill Sunnis?

It doesn't make it legal or right. It just makes you look biased (and sectarian!) when you don't mention the fact that Shia were mass murdered long before Shia militias started drilling holes in guys named Omar. But then, I didn't start reading your fine non-sectarian blog until recently.

Omar, how long were innocent Shia mass murdered before Shia militias started murdering innocent Sunni Arabs?

you don't mention the fact that Shia were mass murdered long before Shia militias started drilling holes in guys named Omar.

yawn, and you know this how? oh yeah, because you believe anything the info warriors tell you. back when everything was sunni's fault, before they magically all became awake?

earth to mojo, if you read who attended his funeral there is every indication this reporter simply made some unfounded assumptions. even i know this, and i wouldn't be able to distinguish a shia or sunni if my son's life depended on it.

here is the sort of people you believe because you don't know any better.

However, the Iraqi interior ministry's director of operations, Major General Abdel Karim Khalaf, said he had no knowledge of the attack.

"This is a lie. Nothing like this has happened. If such a big crime happens, we always launch an investigation," Khalaf told AFP.

because if one of your blogging head wacko friends uses a term like the fact, you think it is one!!!!!

hahahahah

you could link to the article but maybe you are pimping your new post here because hardly anyone comes to your site. wonder why?

people who post at 'iraqi bloggers central???" lolol

sometimes truth can be figured out simply by using your BRAIN.

oh yeah, that was me, annie, in case some of you think i am hiding so rhus can't screen shot my everyword to try to prove i am a liar

hahahhahahahahah

yawn, and you know this how? oh yeah, because you believe anything the info warriors tell you. back when everything was sunni's fault, before they magically all became awake?

LOL! sounds like somebody is in denial. I guess we shouldn't believe the media. Perhaps you would like us to ignore everything except what Omar of "24 Steps to Liberty" tells us, and maybe Uruknet too!

Here's an interesting compilation of links to articles about suicide bombings in Iraq since 2003.

Look at the number of bombings before 2006, before the Shia militias started murdering innocent Sunni Arabs. And those are just suicide bombings. But I guess we're not supposed to believe the mainstream media. LOL!

Before I am attacked for being "sectarian" I should point out that many of those bombings were aimed at police and army recruits in Sunni Arab neighborhoods. annie, do you think the Americans were behind those bombings? or the Iraqi govt?

Look at the number of bombings before 2006, before the Shia militias started murdering innocent Sunni Arabs.

you are delusional. the US newsweek reported about the salvadoran option the year before that. if you think the shia sat around twiddling their thumbs being good little soldiers for 3 years til 06.. you're nut a nut.

Annie - It's presumptuous to force others to have to figure out whether it's you or someone else who preferred to remain nameless when you post as "anonymous"; I could understand if it was somehow difficult to log in, but it isn't. You evidently have a lot you want to say about the situation in Iraq - ever considered starting your own blog?

Oh damn, I forgot that I am "sectarian" because I'm pointing out the FACT that for the most part, Iraqi Shia were mass murdered by Sunni Arab insurgents long before Shia militias started mass murdering innocent Sunni Arabs.

FACT: "The Sunni insurgency first targeted American troops, but soon, with the involvement of al-Qaida in Iraq, it attacked the Shia as well. The targets: Shiite holy sites; Shiite neighborhoods in Baghdad and elsewhere, and ordinary Shiite civilians, thousands of whom have been abducted and murdered."

annie, do you think the Americans were behind those bombings? or the Iraqi govt?

unlikely. nonethe less i think it is extremely unlikely neither the US or the iraqi government were not complicit in many many clandestine bombings, blaming their adversaries. that is simply common sense.

one would have to live in some fantasy world where america always plays by the book to not ACKNOWLEDGE that 1/2 the fighting personnel (possibly more because presumably a very high % of US troops do not engage in fighting and remain indoors) of the invader comes in the form of private militias loyal to their employers, namely corporations who are not held accountable for their crimes.

i high number of recruits for these special forces come from places like south africa, the american ones are predominently ex special forces. these guys DO clandestine operations.

an interesting story lately. the crime of bribery and questionable contracts in procurement funds was recently reported that the DAY after a female officer allegedly 'confessed' she became the 4th officer who suicided in this investigation. the $11 million contract she helped push thru and supposedly gained bribes from, was horrid on its face but the story doesn't ebd their. we either get the story of the missing weapons distributed out of warhouses, or the illegal contracts to get the warhouses, there has been no specific article exploring the fact that the same warhouses involved in the $11 no bid, were the ones storing the missing weapons. also, the recent suicide, she was transfered to the pentagon even AFTER she supposedly made these deals. the person in charge of the weapons, petraeus. his assistant is being questioned.

so you tell me .. where did all these hundreds of thousands of missing weapons end up? the witnesses said that petraeus representative was there several times a week, all withdrawls of weapons..all under military escort. also some south african mercenaries picking up weapons, all authorized presumably. now, you think maybe some guy running the warehouse was designing a civil war? unlikely. this wasn't in 06, it was back in 04..

these weapons were supposedly for the army recruits.

so, you want to talk about suicide bombers.

no wonder.

annie

earth to mofo, your hilariously titled (in big fat capital letters no less) 'fact' link

When the United States invaded Iraq four years ago, on March 20, 2003, it didn't set out to deepen the Sunni-Shia divide in the Islamic world.

lets all suspend reality and imagine npr isn't a bastion of impartiality.

npr

Media Matters noted that the totals showed appearances by representatives of right-leaning think tanks outnumbered their left-leaning counterparts 239-141.

hello CLUELESS,

Longtime Republican fundraiser Cheryl Halpern was elected the new chair of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting earlier this week. Halpern has overseen such government-funded media projects as Voice of America, Radio Marti in Cuba and Radio Free Iraq. She has also accused National Public Radio of anti-Israel bias. We speak with Celia Wexler of Common Cause. [includes rush transcript] Earlier this week, longtime Republican fundraiser Cheryl Halpern was elected the new chair of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, replacing Kenneth Tomlinson whose two-year term had ended. Before President Bush appointed Halpern to the CPB in 2002 she served on the Broadcasting Board of Governors overseeing such government-funded media projects as Voice of America, Radio Marti in Cuba and Radio Free Iraq. Halpern is also the former national chair of the Republican Jewish Coalition and she has accused National Public Radio of being biased against Israel. Like her predecessor, Kenneth Tomlinson, Halpern has also criticized the journalism of Bill Moyers.

Two years ago she publicly agreed with Senator Trent Lott's comment that Moyers is "the most partisan and nonobjective person I know in media of any kind." Halpern has given over $300,000 dollars in political contributions in recent years almost all to Republicans. Recipients have included President Bush, Senator Trent Lott of Mississippi and Sam Brownback of Kansas. The group Common Cause warned Monday that the selection of Halpern may "mean more politicizing for public broadcasting."

The CPB also elected Gay Hart Gaines, a member of the Heritage Foundation, as Vice Chair. Gaines has served as president of the Palm Beach Republican Club and is a former chairwoman of Newt Gingrich's GOPAC, the GOP political action committee that raised millions of dollars for Republican candidates across the country.

now, why don't you google Kenneth Tomlinson and see his gop connections.

FACT, just becasue they call it 'public broadcasting' doesn't mean what they report is UNBIASED OR MODERATE FACT.

you are such a fool. ps, everything we were hearing at the run up to the war was not true. everything we heard during the beginning of the war was not true. everything we hear now isn't true. you know why?? because think tanks write a lot of what is in the news, sometimes before it even happens.

annie

I cannot believe that annie is a "liberal". Since when did so many liberals become such scum buckets??

annie, you are such a fool.

lol. scum bucket? now i am going to have to clean my keyboard. i must remember not to eat around it when you idiots are posting.

anyway, i am not surprised you had nothing to say about the myth of npr or pbs being 'fact' or 'liberal'. heck they broadcast a tiny bit of liberal views. however the neocon blatherers get full swing. like pearle getting an hour to justify why we invaded. what a piece of work. like whinning conservatives screeching about nyt being 'liberal' when they have judy miller getting talking pts from libby!, cheney's right hand man!

you guys are too much. meanwhile the fcc wants to consolidate even more of the news.

please.

annie, you are such a fool.

wow, that is quite a retort, i'm so impressed. nice catchy little name you got going there.

imitation is the highest form of flattery. i guess you were impressed w/earth to mofo

lol

still laughing. hey, can you tell who's writing this or shall i sign my name? maybe our pet fly can buzz around and say something worthless AGAIN.

anymore facts mojolita?

I was just listening to NPR. An American Colonel was interviewed. They were talking about the drop in violence, but admitted that it may not last and said that people in Baghdad still cannot move freely from one area to another. They said that the drop in violence may be attributed to the fact that Sunni Arabs have left Shia neighborhoods and Shia have left Sunni Arab neighborhoods. They didn't seem biased to me, other than looking at Iraq from an American point of view. They took some calls and one caller pointed out that the proposed oil law favors the oil companies and screws Iraqis. I thought it was a good honest interview, but according to annie, we should not listen to NPR, apparently because they point out some facts that she doesn't agree with.

“They said that the drop in violence may be attributed to the fact that Sunni Arabs have left Shia neighborhoods and Shia have left Sunni Arab neighborhoods. They didn't seem biased to me…”

What have I been saying for months now? Or just because the one who said it now is an American makes it “didn’t seem biased” ?

This is one of the reasons why Americans don’t want to listen to Iraqis; because Iraqis are not Americans. And it is one more reason why Iraqi is in the shit hole it is now. Americans wouldn’t listen or believe even when the Iraqis are telling the truth and even when they are saying exactly the same thing the Americans say, only the Iraqis say it months, if not years earlier!

Omar, did any Americans say they don't believe you?

What Iraqis say? Yes, if we had only listened to the wise Iraqi people who in their remarkable history and culture have demonstrated a depth of understanding of themselves and the possibilities set before them that we mere Americans can only marvel in gape jawed wonderment. Gee whiz, if only we had listened.........by the way, are you presenting yourself as their spokesman, and if not, can you direct me to that person?

You know, if "annie" has so much trouble signing her comments or logging in to blogger, maybe we should take her opinions on Iraq's complexities & American politics with a grain of salt ??

annie: "screen shot my everyword to try to prove i am a liar"

Been there, done that.

Funniest thing, to me, is that I saw your comment about the "karmic honor" of the "Resistance" on TAI's (RIP) blog and thought it was exactly the kind of thing you'd delete and deny writing later. Even though it was TAI who deleted it, it was still a great moment in screen-cappery !!

That reminds me... I still need to get back to Zeyad's and cap your gem about wanting to get paid to "fight the empire"... !! (not that you can delete from Zeyad's, but who wants such a gem to slip away?)

I would not be surprised if annie is Catholic Sunni Shia.

Really? The bile-spewing is similar, but CSS comes across as fairly intelligent, even if she's cast her lot as she has. I used to think she was queen of the racist bigots, but then I "met" bRABIDie. And of course, Layla Anwar, as official spokeswoman of all Iraqis (at least those who were deposed almost a half-decade ago), has her own "charm".

OK, here's "annie" lookin' for a job !!

Well, shoot... nothin' on Monster.com for ya right now, annie.

Nothin' on Hotjobs, either.

... too bad Howard Dean's not running in '08, eh?

la di da! how boring it is to talk about anything RELEVANT to the post!

What? Permanent U.S. bases in Iraq? I've never heard of anything so absurd! Why, you -- you -- you conspiracy theorist! How can you be so shrill, so irresponsible, so, so, so...Oh, wait.

i can see i am not the only one w/the reaction....

Make no mistake: this is Nouri al-Maliki offering the U.S. a permanent presence in return for guaranteeing the security of his government. .... In exchange for a platform for the indefinite projection of American power throughout the Middle East, the Bush Administration probably considers protection for Maliki and his coterie to be a small price to pay. No wonder the negotiation of a mandate for foreign troops in Iraq at the United Nations -- where this deal would begin to take shape -- is one of Bush's new post-benchmark benchmarks.

rhus is back to chewing that old bone. lol, boring.

did i say npr was ALWAYS wrong? no, i did not. they are simply part of the meme pushers.

hey did anyone else hear the new exciting news to distract us from talking about how wonderful the new permanent bases are going to be, or how bush signed w/maliki , or how marvelous the surge is?? ....uncle binny has a new tape out! (doncha love the way he gets resurrected every time there is a crisis in perception management)
this time it is to the european union. yawn.

seems like everyone is getting in on the Spoof.....

A Surge In Iraq Rationalizations

Since the “surge” was announced in January, there was never any doubt that by December, the Pentagon would have to begin reducing the number of combat brigades no matter what the conditions on the ground were, because the US simply did not have the numbers to sustain the increase. The only question was how the Administration would spin the inevitable reduction.

Right on schedule, the Pentagon announced it will remove a combat brigade in December — about 5,000 troops — from Diyala Province. The same inexorable math will force reductions of about a brigade a month until next June. But instead of just admitting this, the Administration tried to spin it to obscure its plans for an indefinite occupation.
.....

The Pentagon either believes the surge’s increased troop levels helped reduce violence or they don’t. There are competing narratives that attribute reduced violence to buying off Sunni tribal leaders, exhaustion of neighborhood ethnic “cleansing,” the Sadrist militia’s decision to stand down for now, and the removal of coalition forces, as occurred when the British withdrew from Basra. But if increased troop levels were a factor in reducing violence, as the Administration wants to claim, how is it possible that reducing troop levels on the strict timetable dictated by the math will sustain reduced violence levels if, as everyone concedes, there has been no underlying political reconciliation?

Part of the Pentagon’s answer is to pretend that as American forces leave, the Iraq Army will take over security. So on Friday, the Times Michael Gordon dutifully replayed the Pentagon line that US combat forces can gradually shift from direct combat duties to training of Iraqi forces (sound familiar?).

there's more at the link. i'd say you guys are loosing more credibility by the drip drip drip.

now lets talk about the big lie between saying something IS or WOULD BE.

naturally this is eversomuchmore productive for people w/their tail between their legs who can't squirm out of obvious implications of the ISSUES.

maybe we should take her opinions on Iraq's complexities & American politics with a grain of salt

lol, as if you guys ever listen to anything besides the neocon thought police. hey , it is not like i am saying anything every everyother person in the blogisphere is saying (except the malkin bloviators). its not like the entire american public hasn't already figured out we are in a seriously deep propaganda warzone.

Americans wouldn’t listen or believe even when the Iraqis are telling the truth and even when they are saying exactly the same thing the Americans say, only the Iraqis say it months, if not years earlier!

Omar, the only reason americans are saying this now is because it works w/their timetable. its all politics. notice how the 'surge' was supposed to be about reconciliation. but did they focus on that or.... dividing and bribing sects. now that the schedule for the troop pullout (prior to election) the ptb simply frame it and use the suffering of iraqis for their political agenda..

redefine the mission to require combat troops, while claiming the real objective is not political “reconciliation” but instead “accommodation.”

“Accommodation” means accepting that Sunnis and Shias may never reconcile, but they can coexist as long as US combat troops stand between them. It also means backing US diplomats who must explain to the grateful Iraqis who don’t know better why it’s important to pass a budget, or pass laws on local elections or hiring back former Baathists, or oil revenue sharing. And above all, we have to make sure the Iraqis agree to the “enduring relationship” the President unilaterally signed today that provides the legal fig leaf for indefinite occupation. Does Congress matter any more?

Overseeing “accommodation” is the new term for being in the middle of an undeclared, just below the surface civil war, which means we need combat troops there indefinitely. It’s just a side benefit that an intimidating combat presence helps US diplomats babysit Iraqi politicians who can’t seem to agree on a budget. The condescension and rationalization evident from the colonialist attitude is striking, but it’s fortunate the Iraqis have Administration officials to teach them all about working with the opposition to maintain fiscal responsibility, apolitical hiring practices and a fair allocation of wealth. !!!!

(can you smell the snark on this mainstream blog? from the last link, w/a grain of salt of course.)

annie

24: "I have said this before, but you and others seem to insist that you know who I am better than I do."

Of course I know you, Omar! Be lookin' out for the Size 13 mocassins (the green ones that you like) I sent you for Festivus. I sent 'em to your address on a houseboat in Oklahoma...

No, but I knew you were "not the same sect" as BT, and that it didn't appear to matter for your friendship. All right, I did assume you were Sunni from your name and bits & pieces I picked up. But I guess not "every" Omar is Sunni, nor is "every" Ali Shia. I wonder if that could mean not "every" Kawaz is... ehm- I don't wanna get into that one!

But OK, you recently said you weren't Sunni and of course it shouldn't matter.

[b will derd] "Yes, if we had only listened to the wise Iraqi people who in their remarkable history and culture have demonstrated a depth of understanding of themselves and the possibilities set before them that we mere Americans can only marvel in gape jawed wonderment."

You mean the same Iraqis that told you there were no WMD in Iraq?

Or do you mean the same Iraqis that told you that they would resist if you invaded?

Or are you referring to those Iraqis that predicted that Iraq would go up in flames if the US persisted in its illegal invasion?

I too, am bewildered after struggling through your nonsensical remark.

[rhus] "I used to think she was queen of the racist bigots,"

Given that you are the King of the racist bigots, I'd say you and Barabie are a match ...


Annie -

"“Accommodation” means accepting that Sunnis and Shias may never reconcile, but they can coexist as long as US combat troops stand between them."

that comment was very good. Well done.

Folks, take a look at this article. It shows how the so-called democracy is nothing more than an inconvenience to be ignored if it gets in the way of the permanent occupation of Iraq:

An excerpt:

"In 2006, Maliki's office requested the renewal of the U.N. mandate without consulting the legislature, a process that many lawmakers maintained was a violation of Iraqi law. The problem was that Maliki didn't have the authority to make the request under the Iraqi constitution. Article 58, Section 4 says that the Council of Representatives (the parliament) has to ratify "international treaties and agreements" negotiated by the Council of Ministers (the cabinet). Specifically, it reads: "A law shall regulate the ratification of international treaties and agreements by a two-thirds majority of the members of the Council of Representatives."

Prime Minister Maliki had claimed that the constitution didn't refer to the U.N. mandate. A senior Iraqi lawmaker, speaking on condition of anonymity, said of the assertion: "If we are asked to approve a trade agreement concerning olive oil, should we not have the right to pass on an agreement concerning the stationing of foreign military forces in our national soil?"

In June, we reported that the parliament had passed a binding resolution that would force Maliki to go to the parliament and give Iraqi lawmakers an opportunity to block the extension of the mandate. It was signed by the majority of the 275-seat legislature, then sent to the president. According to the Iraqi constitution, the president had 15 days to veto it by sending it back to the parliament; otherwise it automatically became a ratified law. The 15 days passed without a veto and the resolution became the law of the land in mid-June 2007.

Something happened, however, between the passage of that law and the latest report by U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon. According to Moon's latest report to the Security Council (PDF), dated Oct. 15, the law that had been passed by the duly elected legislature of Iraq became nothing more than a "nonbinding resolution":

http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/67383/?page=entire

Sorry, Bruno- I only have eyes for BetOnIraq.com Girl's eyes (though I have it on good authority that she is actually Moroccan).

bruno, where have you been? jeez it is like beating back pesky racist mesquitos around here.

rhus, i am afraid 'she' is not moroccan..


So, who are we?
We are freedom loving Americans that believe a liberated, resource rich Iraq can become a force in the world economy. We believe the efforts of the coalition are noble, and will be effective.

'she' is being used as a photo op. she has no voice unlike Barabie, your perfect match.

Apparently people who think annie is an idiot are deemed racist. Of course!

You're the one who started biting with your insults, estupida.

But I suppose that "earth to mofo", "hello clueless" and "you are such a fool" are supposed to be answered with flowery messages of peace and love. Just like the Iraqi Shia were supposed to embrace their Sunni brothers as Iraqi Shia children were slughtered along with their parents in front of them by the hundreds every day in 2004.

annie, I listened to NPR on the way to work this morning. They discussed proposed leglislation to help Iraqi translators come to the US. Steve Israel, the sponsor of the bill, talked about the "injustice" done to Iraqi translators by the US govt. He almost sounded like Omar of "24 Steps to Liberty". Listen to the entire interview: Lawmakers Lobby to Bring Iraqi Translators to U.S.

Iraqis have told us many things and many of them were contradicted by other Iraqis, and that's just in the blogosphere which is hardly a cross section of the population. I would be willing to bet that a majority of Iraqis thought Saddam still had WMD on hand at the time of the invasion. I have read several interviews of former Iraqi generals who were certain there were still WMD weapons on hand. Saddam told his interviewers that he wanted the world, Iran especially, to think he had stockpiles and he wanted his own generals to think that his other generals had them in case one of them thought a coup was preferable to an invasion. There are several Iraqis who have sworn that they participated in helping Russian military specialists remove many WMDs to Syria, some of which may have been in that smoking hole that Israel (US, probably?) left on the Syrian side of the border recently and which NO ONE, including Russia, has complained about for some mysterious reason. There are many documents and statements from the former regime that prove without doubt that Saddam retained the ability to reconstitute his WMD programs and had every intention of doing so as soon as it was possible, so what would you propose as a solution to the problem? And all Iraqis knew it, they knew war was coming, and they did nothing but wait for it to happen. So much for Iraqi sophistication and wisdom.

Which Iraqis do you believe? The ones that support your own views, just like the rest of us. Don't pretend you know what 'they' think. It seems pretty clear that 'they' have no more of an idea of what 'they' think than the rest of us do. If their thinking reflects their actions, there is little to analyze, anyway. Emotions are not solutions.

annie: "rhus, i am afraid 'she' is not moroccan.."

A very nice anonymous commenter on Mojo's blog pointed out that that style of veil is worn by Moroccan women. Also he/she provided a link showing a little more of the pic.

So all I know is that is one of the prettiest women I've ever not seen much of, wherever she's from.

[annie] "bruno, where have you been? jeez it is like beating back pesky racist mesquitos around here."

LOL, but Annie, you're doing just fine, methinks. Heck you even had enough free time to visit Zeyad's place and take it to them there as well ... :)


[derd] "I would be willing to bet that a majority of Iraqis thought Saddam still had WMD"

It doesn't matter what "most Iraqis" thought. It matters what the UN thought. And thanks to the US, we had an illegal war instead of waiting for that civilised outcome.

[derd] "There are many documents and statements from the former regime that prove without doubt that Saddam retained the ability to reconstitute his WMD programs and had every intention of doing so as soon as it was possible, so what would you propose as a solution to the problem?"

Gee, what about UN inspections?

Oh, wait, those actually WORKED, so that's no real solution for our bewildered friend.

[derd] "And all Iraqis knew it, they knew war was coming, and they did nothing but wait for it to happen."

LOL! ROTFL! What the heck were they SUPPOSED to do, you twit? Hold demonstrations against the invasion? Oh, yeah, they tried that, and it didn't work, did it?

Here's an interesting article on the reasons for the invasion of Iraq, setting aside the laughable WMD/AQ/democracy bullshit for a second:

"Although completely unreported by the U.S. media and government, the answer to the Iraq enigma is simple yet shocking -- it is in large part an oil currency war. One of the core reasons for this upcoming war is this administration's goal of preventing further Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) momentum towards the euro as an oil transaction currency standard. However, in order to pre-empt OPEC, they need to gain geo-strategic control of Iraq along with its 2nd largest proven oil reserves. The second coalescing factor that is driving the Iraq war is the quiet acknowledgement by respected oil geologists and possibly this administration is the impending phenomenon known as Global "Peak Oil." This is projected to occur around 2010, with Iraq and Saudi Arabia being the final two nations to reach peak oil production. The issue of Peak Oil has been added to the scope of this essay, along with the macroeconomics of `petrodollar recycling' and the unpublicized but genuine challenge to U.S. dollar hegemony from the euro as an alternative oil transaction currency."

http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/RRiraqWar.html

Omar, is this article acceptable?

Baghdad: Quieter but Not Peaceful

annie, where are you today? still having trouble logging into blogger? or does your employer not allow you to do that?

Anonymous said...
I would not be surprised if annie is Catholic Sunni Shia.

7:27 PM

They're two different people. They just share the same psychosis.

One of the core reasons for this upcoming war is this administration's goal of preventing further Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) momentum towards the euro as an oil transaction currency standard.

i'm shocked. i wonder if npr would cover that story. they play safe basically, w/more than a little think tank meme mixed in for good measure.

bruno, a good friend of mine messes in oil futures. he told me something i hadn't previously heard. from wapo (circa 05)

As a vocal camp in Congress recoils at the prospect of a Chinese state-owned company, Cnooc Ltd., taking control of the California-based Unocal Corp., the Bush administration's decision to wage the war in Iraq stands out as a crucial factor in explaining how China came to scour the earth for energy and why the effort is likely to remain central to U.S.-Chinese relations for some time, those analysts say.

...

"Many people argue that oil interests are the driving force behind the Iraq war," said Zhu Feng, a security expert at Beijing University. "For China, it has been a reminder and a warning about how geopolitical changes can affect its own energy interests. So China has decided to focus much more intently to address its security."

my friend thinks the US plans to leverage iraq's oil to offset the trillions in debt to china. i don't know enough about economics to have an opinion about this, but we can be sure the economic mess we are in wrt this looming debt, and the falling of the dollar is going to be catching up w/us.

as americans become more bloated and fat on other peoples resources and blood, when do we pay a price?

annie

Iraqi Refugees Told by UN It’s Still Too Dangerous to Go Home

BC-IRAQ-REFUGEES
c.2007 Bloomberg News

By Bill Varner and Viola Gienger

Nov. 27 (Bloomberg) -- Iraq remains too dangerous for the more than 2 million people who have fled the country to Syria and Jordan to return, the United Nations cautioned today in an attempt to limit repatriations.

This is not the time "to promote, organize or encourage returns," the Geneva-based agency that assists refugees said in a statement. That would only happen when "proper return conditions are in place -- including material and legal support and physical safety," the agency said.

The UN said that while about 1,500 people cross the border from Syria each day, compared with about 500 who go the other way, "there is no sign of any large-scale return to Iraq as the security situation in many parts of the country remains volatile and unpredictable."

More than 4.6 million Iraqis have been displaced by violence in the past four years, including 2.4 million who left their homes and remained in the country and 2.2 million who went to Syria and Jordan.

The level of violence has fallen in and around Baghdad following a security crackdown since February by U.S. and Iraqi forces.

The decline hasn't allowed the UN refugee agency to send more international staff into the country, according to spokesman Tim Irwin. The agency has one worker in the country "from time to time" and depends on national staff and other aid groups to provide tarpaulins and blankets for homeless people, he said.

The people who are returning are doing so mainly because their visas have expired, they have run out of money or face difficult living conditions, the UN said. Iraqi government payments of up to $800 and free bus or plane rides also play a role, the UN said, citing a survey of refugees.

"Some were indeed encouraged by the reports regarding improvement of security, but many expressed concern about longer- term security, citing the fact that militias are still around and many areas remain insecure," the agency said.

I’m going to ask you once to log in as yourselves, or as anonymous or any names you want, but do not insult any of the readers by logging as “NAME is lame” or “NAME is fool” or this kind of childish name-calling. We can all do that, but some of us are polite and educated enough to realize that this kind of insults doesn’t make any points.

And if you keep logging in using this silly way, I will delete your comments. Maybe people will have the time to read them before I do, but they will not last. It’s for you to decide.

I have said before that this platform is for exchanging thoughts and opinions in a civilized way.

Why do I need to remind some people that they should respect themselves and the readers?

re: "Iraqi Refugees Told by UN It’s Still Too Dangerous to Go Home"

The UN is disagreeing with Iraqis who want to go home? Racist bigots!

I see that Omar is doing a great job of "uniting" Iraqis. LOL! You go buddy!

is this article acceptable?

mojo, imo (which i suppose means nothing ntl..) the article you linked to " Quieter but Not Peaceful' could very well portray the state of affairs in baghdad at this time.

however i am not sure this is quite enough 'security' for some people to place their trust things will necessarily get better, or more to the point, the way it is getting better, by these divisios, is acceptable for a lifestyle they consider safe. for example..

Shootings at US roadblocks kill 5 Iraqis

these were employees carpooling to work at their bank in a mini van. apparetly the road was only for 'cars'. roadblocks and such do not mean safety necessarily, any more than a prison cell means safety. don't we already have a community in the ME w/this kind of 'safety'? what happens essentially is the community will always have members like the 'wedding party' at BT's. because of this you will always have ALL the civilians at risk. and they likely know that.

so while it is ever-so-obvious some people want iraqis to come home for political reasons, iraqis are no different than you and me, and my mother. they are not going to put their family in danger because of a pr campaign that frankly, WE JUST DON"T KNOW the future or the IMPLICATIONS. why? because the supposed rationale of the so called 'surge' WAS NOT sold to iraqis simply as a safety measure.. it was sold as a period that was going to set the stage, or contribute to..RECONCILIATION. something their is NO indication of. iraqis know this. also they no that this requirement has been dropped or changes to the 'accomodation' meme which some may percieve as being no more than containment

now, we are already quite familiar w/the way neocons deal w/containment, and walls, and changing goal posts, and requiring to show how good they have become before they can have their soveriegnty..

The UN is disagreeing with Iraqis who want to go home? Racist bigots!

yeah rhus, it is becoming all to transparent you do not want to have any kind of rational discussion here. there are plenty of comments on this thread that are racist, the UN's position not being one of them. this form of argument is unproductive.

can anyone understand the reluctance of iraqis having hesitation to believe the pr, considering so far the pr has not indicated the people spewing it lack either the power or the will to carry it thru to fruition? or do you think they are just 'irrational' and prone to conspiracy theories?

annie

''What the heck were they SUPPOSED to do, you twit? ''

It doesn't take a lot of intellectual capacity to answer that question, Bruno. Give it a stab--- what could Iraqis have done that might have prevented the invasion....?

Just to stretch your capacity, go back over the last 2 or 3 decades and ask if there is anything Iraqis could have done that might have prevented the many wars, sanctions, ethnic cleansing that were their high points during those years? Do the Iraqi people bear NO responsibility or are they like small children at the mercy of adults?

I know, in the convoluted definition used here, suggesting that Iraqis are in any way culpable for their own sorry fate is 'racist'. Thinking of them as hapless, inept victims of great American corporate conspiracies is more PC and is the view of superior persons.

I see that Omar is doing a great job of "uniting" Iraqis.

excuse me? for a supporter of an invader who has armed both sides of this fiasco, made deals w/both sides, made serious overtures at DIVIDING iraq into different regions and completely failed to provide any benchmarks or proposed legislation that actually PROMOTE unification.. i would say your accusations are highly inappropriate.

to construe all iraqis come home has anything to do w/unification when what they are coming home to is segregated neighborhoods (as a result of our surge) is hypocritical.

annie

I wasn't talking about what the US has done, or the Iraqi govt has done, or what I have done. Omar claimed in another thread that he will "unite" Iraqis. I was referring to and laughing at what Omar has done to "unite" Iraqis. Or is annie trying to change the subject, par usual?

Omar claimed in another thread....is annie trying to change the subject

gee mojo, picking something up from another thread would indicate YOU were changing the subject. excuse me for assuming you were implying that by Omar posting about the current situation, in the current thread, he was somehow contributing to the divisions in iraq.

Thinking of them as hapless, inept victims of great American corporate conspiracies is more PC and is the view of superior persons.

i seriously doubt any person of superior intellect could or would consider iraqis as a group hapless or inept. a racist on the other hand....

as for corporate conspiracies.. naw, we were just being helpful?

lol. let's all pretend corporations have no power, evil intent or greed. speaking of corporations, CHECK OUT ..

IRISH ROUTE

annie

annie, in the comment at 12:24 I was laughing at Omar's attempts to "unite" Iraq as he has claimed before. I never claimed to be able to unite Iraqis, so how am I a hypocrite? I was pointing out that Omar has not done much to unite Iraqis. You claimed that I'm being a hypocrite. How is that? I never claimed to unite Iraqis - in fact I've written about how Iraqis are divided and will be divided as long as Arabs and Iraqis are going around murdering Iraqis based on their sect. I have been called 'sectarian' for this.

Again, annie, I was talking about Omar's claims of "uniting" Iraqis and then you jumped in with your claims that I'm being a hypocrite because according to you I support the invader, who, according to you, is dividing Iraqis. It seems that you are deflecting attention from my comment at 12:24 and trying to focus attention on me and how the invaders have "divided" Iraqis. I think your claims are complete BS, but I wasn't talking about what the US or Iraqi govt have done to unite Iraqis. I was talking about what OMAR has done to unite Iraqis. Comprende? I doubt it.

It seems that you are deflecting attention from my comment at 12:24 and trying to focus attention on me and how the invaders have "divided" Iraqis.

yes, of course i was deflecting attention away from your diversion from the topic of the thread which , for your information , has everything to do w/how the invaders, and the IG, have divided iraq by sect.

obviously this is nothing you care to explore or discuss. hence you choose to change the subject.

you are a hypocrite because you accuse me of doing exactly what was the intention of your post.. which is NOT the subject, and frankly taken out of context, without even a link to your topic, completely out of context, and irrelevant to this discussion, i have no idea how Omar desires to go back to iraq and unite his people relates at this juncture. taunting him, daring him, challenging him, and laughing at him is very transparently a diversion. if you have no respect for our host by all means go elsewhere.

is annie trying to change the subject

i would like nothing better than to remain on topic. if YOU wish to change the subject, to Omar's or any iraqis failure to unite, by all means, go post about it on your blog.

i have no desire to converse about this diversion w/you further. hence it will not be me discussing yur diversion w/you in future posts.

i am amazed at the leeway and patience of our host to even put up w/you. you are an embarrassment to any proud culture.

annie

LOL! annie wants us to talk about how the Americans have supposedly divided Iraqis and not about how Omar has united Iraqis. OK annie:) You go girl!


"i am amazed at the leeway and patience of our host to even put up w/you"

Do you think Omar should ban me? That would be very Ba3thi of him! Too bad he's not a Ba3thist, huh annie?

Omar, I wrote a post about this post and your comments here. Check it out!

Nobody here is interested in your blog or your comments Mojo so no need to advertise your blog here, that sort of advertising is more suitable on the blog of your American friends over at Jarrarsupariver.

Everyone sit back and watch the Mojo show. When he gets upset he begins to post ridiculous comments using various aliases sometimes even having a conversation with himself.

First he will start off calling everyone scum, then hypocrites, then he will progress to jarab.

He's a cartoon character, he's treated as such on most the blogs he visits and when he gets upset he is almost theatrical. Almost? He is theatrical.

Quite the freak he is, comprende?

And no Mojo, this is not Annie, Yasmin, Barabie, CSS, Layla, Baghdad Treasure, Zeyad, Omar or anyone else that you "think" it is. I'm just someone who has been reading your senseless comments for one to many years and thought you should know that your a joke.

"I'm just someone who has been reading your senseless comments for one to many years"

Maybe you should stop reading my comments then, wise one, lest you become "to angry". LOL!

You are a sad, bitter, angry little man.

Maybe so, but I am happy that violence is dropping in Baghdad; I hope it continues to drop and I hope all Iraqis can soon move about freely in Baghdad.

I am also happy that I've figured out how to piss off the schmucks of the Iraqi & Arab blogosphere without resorting to the use of "jarab" - I apologize to all the good Arabs who were offended by this.

Insha Allah yiseer khair:)

I'm not upset, I just think you are a redundant troll. I did however check out your last post tho I said that you needn't advertise here. You certainly needn't capitilize AMERICAN in your name. Everyone with two brain cells knows that you are much more AMERICAN than Iraqi. Never in the Iraqi blog scene (and I have been following every single blog since the beginning) has there been an "Iraqi" that exhibits not a single Iraqi characteristic. You poor pathetic bitter thing, seems you fled Iraq before any of the fine Iraqi dignity that is exhibited across religious divides could seep into your useless brain. You'll never fit in anywhere Mojo. You saw what happened on your blog when Jeffrey thought you got out of hand, he cyber slapped you back into place for making that comment about marines, then you begged him for forgiveness. The Americans will never truly accept you. Neither will the Iraqis no matter what sect they are. I do believe that Omar is Shii and everyone knows that BT is. Neither of them are what you call "Baathi" or "Salafi" scum, yet you have managed to alienate even them and a lot of other Iraqi bloggers. You should be thrown into a recyling bin already you are useless my lad, useless.

I don't believe in using blogging names, it's all a pointless waste of time. But so you know I am Irish, male, age 34 living in the UK. The only reason I say this is so that you don't obsess over who it "might" be.

And please use the term jarab all you want, it doesn't offend me it just curious.

24, be advised that you should ban Mojo. He will ruin your blog like he did for so many you will see.


Saad, Shi'i, IRAQI (just IRAQI no matter how many years I will live somewhere for me I will always only be IRAQI - can you understand this Mojo?).

Annie as usual you are doing a good job, that's why they hate and attack.

Bless you!

saad wants me banned too. boo hoo:( saaaaaad, do you think I "ruined" Zeyad's blog? I hardly comment there anymore. I usually don't comment here either, but part of this post is about me.


"for me I will always only be IRAQI - can you understand this Mojo?"

Yes, my parents consider themselves to be Iraqi too even though they've lived outside Iraq since 1982, but my parents speak Arabic very well and they are true nationalists, just like you Sa3oodi:) I moved to the USA when I was a kid and we left Iraq after my relatives were murdered by Abu 3uday, after my father feared for his life. I wonder if your children will consider themselves to be "only IRAQI" in 25 years, especially if your relatives in Iraq are murdered by AQI and or Ba3thists. I doubt you will ever understand this.

"Annie as usual you are doing a good job, that's why they hate and attack."

Sad, annie is the one who started attacking me here. But I guess that's cool with "real" Iraqis like you and Omar. LOL!

"Never in the Iraqi blog scene (and I have been following every single blog since the beginning) has there been an "Iraqi" that exhibits not a single Iraqi characteristic"

Have you been following IraqPundit? How about Talisman Gate? Iraq The Model? I suppose they are also not "real" Iraqis who do not display a single Iraqi characteristic. Does the Iraqi character blame all of Iraq's ills on America like Omar of 24 arduous steps to liberty does? I disagree.

LOL

The difference between you and the bloggers you mentioned above is that even if they have offensive politics they don't act stupid like you on other blogs and then expect to be taken seriously.

You are not a real Iraqi. You are American. You don't even call yourself IRAQI American. You called yourself Iraqi AMERICAN. And it is a good thing you do that because the rest of the real Iraqis don't want you dirtying their name. And I do know what Abu Uday did to your family, you aren't the only one. Most families in Iraq regardless of whether they are Shii or Sunni had something happen to someone in their family because of Abu Uday but still most of them have class, dignity and pride and don't behave like an ignorant child like you do. Tell me do your "real Iraqi" parents know how you have behaved on various blogs? Do they know about your disgusting outbursts on AA? I wonder how your father would feel to see his son acting like a silly little girl.

Out of respect to Omar's blog I will stop fighting with you and go back to ignoring you.

LOL saad, silly little girls don't get angry and say "3arab jarab". But you're right, my father would be ashamed, and I did apologize. Again I apologize to the good Arabs. Not all Arabs are bad people. I got very angry that one day on AA because somebody claimed that I've lied about my relatives being murdered by Saddam's regime. I'm sorry I reacted the way I did.

If you've read my first post, you'd know that my father's best friend was a Sunni Arab who was murdered by Abu 3uday.

thanks saad, you should drop by more often and help us normal poster hold down the fort and actually try to discuss the excellent topics Omar writes about. i try to give a voice for all americans who aren't rabid racist neocon fanatical rightwing scum, you know, like the type that love hanging out here.

moving right along. mojo, thanks for illuminating a segue in this topic although i'm sure it wasn't your intention to open your mouth so i could stick my foot into it.

LOL! annie wants us to talk about how the Americans have supposedly divided Iraqis

actually i think i blamed the occupation AND the IG. wrt to THE TOPIC (which yes i want to discuss)

My parents, who live in a Sunni neighborhood, tell me that “we cannot leave our neighborhood because if we do we will end up in a Shiite neighborhood and be killed, like what happened to many others

earlier i mentioned (or was it in the last thread) the incredible good fortune of the alleged 'terrorists bombings' that served to initiate and isolate the segregated neighborhoods that were all in the plan anyway as demonstrated by the zionist inspired walls.

lets all expand our imaginations to assume this wasn't some last minute on the fly plan since it did require forthought, planning and 1000000000 of tons of cement. let's look at the timing. it syncronized so nicely w/the bridges blowing up.

or we could pretend the terrorists did it all for us and we were just making lemons out of lemonaide by using this division plan to further our own mission w/the surge. lets not. we had many conversations about all this when the zionist walls first appeared. they were for our 'safety'.

so yes, the divisions were an american plan. i don't know how much the IG had to do w/the implementation or agreement, but i will consider it a puppet affair.

thats just my opinion, but its on topic.

Not all Arabs are bad people.

sheesh.

My uncles, who lived in a Sunni neighborhood (Amriya) all their lives, were expelled in 2005 by "mujahideen" - they moved to Najef and still live there. My uncle's wife's sister's husband decided to stay in Baghdad because he had a good job as a translator. He was murdered in fron of his family in the summer of 2005. I don't remember any Iraqi bloggers or "liberals" complaining about sectarian violence in 2005. And now annie wants me to blame Americans for dividing Iraqis.

These are just facts, and they are on topic.

mojo, i ave not blamed you for iraqis division. i think many many people were complaining in 05 about the sectarian violence. we could go back to the archives. i think 'liberals' (not just liberals, all anti war people) were concerned right at the beginning about the divide. divide and conquer is not exactly a new concept. there is an abundance of evidence the policies that were implemented ALL coincided w/dividing iraqis. from the way the parties were formed, from the debaathification, from the CONSTANT INDENTIFYING OF PEOPLE BY SECT, all the time. of course we were complaining about sectarian violence. the death squads were sectarian violence.

i think it was instilled in the culture at the beginning of the invasion..by design.

anyway, i don't blame you for iraqs divisions.

"i don't blame you for iraqs divisions"

damn, annie, I think that's the nicest thing you've said to me on this blog:)

gee, i just realized i read your statement wrong. i don't expect you to blame the US for anything.

sorry to hear about your family.

thanks, annie. I do blame the US for bringing Saddam and the Ba3ath to power in the 60s. I blame the US for helping Saddam during the 80s. I've blamed the US for enforcing cruel sanctions for 12 years while Saddam built I don't know how many palaces for himself and his filthy sons - this was also discussed on NPR last night:)

I’ve written about the dropping of cluster bombs in civilian areas in 2003.

Check out my posts about Blackwater.

But I suspect that isn't good enough for you and your fans here.

Nonentity Mouse (Oirish Fella),

I don't believe in using blogging names, it's all a pointless waste of time.

For you, it certainly is.

But so you know I am Irish, male, age 34 living in the UK.

I guess using a name like the rest of us so you are responsible for ALL of your comments is asking too much, right?

Several years back I battled a bunch of cheese-eating anony-mice. Who knows? You were probably one of them.

*squeak squeak squeak*

Aw! I saw your little nose sticking out of your mousehole! How cute!

*

ahhhh. mojo, i will send you an email so we do not continue to fill up Omar's post rehashing what is or is not 'good enough for me' and why/how i think you have gotten yourself on the wrong side of reality in some regards.

Mojo is my friend, but we do not agree on all issues. I think this is basic, right? Mojo and I have different pasts, different views of people and events, but we do share hope for both a successful future in Iraq and for America. We both recognize who the real enemy is in Iraq: Jihadi terrorists and the resistance who have killed tens of thousands of Iraqi citizens while only killing around 3,000 American soldiers (hostile deaths), in league with the foreign Jihadis, over the last five years.

Do you guys know any two people who agree on everything? Jeez, even some of the Koz kidz must disagree from time to time. I do not agree with Mojo that we supported Saddam in the 80s. I have written at length in the past and posted countless graphs showing how France, the Soviet Union, and China, among others, were the ones who supplied military weaponry to Saddam. MiGs, Exocets, and T-72s are NOT US military products. The US provided a handful of helicopters that were supposed to be used for agriculture.

I'm sure there are other issues on which we disagree. But we respect each other's views and try to learn from one another. Sounds good to me.

*

Jeffrey, I have seen those documents that show arms sales to Iraq in the 80s - RhusLancia posted them on my blog a year ago. They do indeed show that the USSR, China, France, and Germany sold most of the weapons to Saddam's regime. But this doesn't mean that the US did not support Saddam behind the scenes during the 80s. Based on what I've read, Reagan's admin provided satellite intelligence that helped Saddam in his war with Iran. The evidence points to a US alliance with Saddam until Halabja forced the US to publicly denounce him. I understand US motives were to support the lesser of two evils at the time and Americans really didn't want to see Khomeini win the war, but for Iraqis who suffered under Saddam during the 80s, it's still difficult to accept. Also my parents could not apply for political asylum in 1982 because Saddam was seen as an ally of Washington at the time.

But you're right - you and I agree on what's happening in Iraq today.

Mojo,

I'm trying to finish grading papers for tomorrow, so this will have to be really brief. I hope at some other point we can get back into this in more detail.

Based on what I've read, Reagan's admin provided satellite intelligence that helped Saddam in his war with Iran.

Hold it. Saddam won that war? I'm skeptical of how much intelligence was passed along and how important it was. But I'm open to viewing any evidence you might have.

The evidence points to a US alliance with Saddam until Halabja forced the US to publicly denounce him.

I think "US alliance" is an extreme misrepresentation here. The US and Britain have an "alliance" that goes back a long way now. We have never had a true "alliance" with Iraq. In my opinion.

I understand US motives were to support the lesser of two evils at the time and Americans really didn't want to see Khomeini win the war, but for Iraqis who suffered under Saddam during the 80s, it's still difficult to accept.

This is a good comment. But the source of Iraqis' suffering in the 1980s was because Saddam went to war with Iran, right? I don't think anyone forced him. It wasn't long after the "victory over Iran" that Saddam ran his tanks into Kuwait. I'm afraid the majority of the suffering of Iraqis is due to the fact that they were living under a tyrant who modeled himself after Stalin.

Also my parents could not apply for political asylum in 1982 because Saddam was seen as an ally of Washington at the time.

That's a pretty strong accusation. I trust you on this.

Crap, back to the red pen.

*

Mojo,

Your parents applied for political asylum in 1982? Well, Reagan was in his second year as president then. And this was after the Iranians screwed Carter by not releasing the hostages until Reagan took office. Hm. I'll think about this more tomorrow.

*

Jeffrey, my parents wanted to apply for political asylum - that would have been the easiest way to get Green Cards. I wrote about it in my first post: "The lawyer studied the reports and the entire case and advised my father that applying for political asylum would be a waste of time, because Saddam was an ally of Washington at the time."

Omar the uniter, I see you haven't responded to my post. What's wrong man? CSS got your tongue? What do you say about Dhia al Kawaz's relatives being buried in Najef? You still think they're Sunni? Maybe Dhia married a Shi3iya?

Having spent some time in the past on the subject of US support of Saddam during the '80's, the only confirmed support of which I am aware was the decision to use Navy assets to protect oil tankers using Iraqi ports during the 'Tanker War' and one instance of the US passing along satellite intelligence when a very large Iranian invasion force was being assembled and the Iraqis clearly were unaware that they were about to be overrun. so am I to understand that makes the US responsible for Saddam? We should have let Khomeini have Iraq and peace would reign on Earth forever?

The CIA's involvement in ousting Qassim is the real reason the US was responsible for Saddam.

"We came to power on a CIA train, admitted Ali Saleh Sa'adi, the Baath Party secretary general who was about to institute an unprecedented reign of terror. CIA assistance reportedly included coordination of the coup plotters from the agency's station inside the U.S. embassy in Baghdad as well as a clandestine radio station in Kuwait and solicitation of advice from around the Middle East on who on the left should be eliminated once the coup was successful. To the end, Qassim retained his popularity in the streets of Baghdad. After his execution, his sup- porters refused to believe he was dead until the coup leaders showed pictures of his bullet-riddled body on TV and in the newspapers."

Omar the uniter and annie the know-it-all, I just found another article from "afp the propaganda free zone":

Kawwaz, a Shiite who has lived in Germany for the past 20 years, said he plans leave for Frankfurt in the "coming few days" to settle there with his wife and six children, who have German nationality.

"Everyday, I play with fire by writing and posting information on my Web site about corruption and abuse of power in Iraq," said Kawwaz, whose site is known for its strong stance against the U.S. military occupation of Iraq.

As Omar of 24 steps forward and 48 steps backward to "liberty" claims to be able to unite Iraqis, Sistani repeats his call to unite Iraqis and end the violence:

Iraq's top Shiite cleric calls for unity

NAJAF, Iraq (AP) — Iraq's top Shiite cleric renewed his call for an end to sectarian violence in the country and for Sunni and Shiite Muslims to unite, according to a Sunni cleric who met him Tuesday in this holy city south of Baghdad.

Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani's plea for peace and unity came as a group of Sunni and Shiite clerics met in Najaf in the latest attempt by clerics from both sects to stem the violence. The meeting was sponsored by the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council, Iraq's most influential Shiite party, which is closely linked to al-Sistani.

Later, Khaled al-Mulla, one of the 10-member Sunni delegation, said the Iranian-born religious leader called for solidarity between the two sects and an end to the bloodshed, which has intensified after a major Shiite shrine north of Baghdad was bombed in February 2006 by Sunni militants.

"I am a servant of all Iraqis," al-Mulla quoted al-Sistani as saying.

The wave of sectarian killings that followed the Samarra bombing continues until today, but has significantly abated since a major Iraqi-U.S. security plan was launched nine months ago.

Najaf, Nov 27, (VOI)- Top Shiite Cleric Ali al-Sistani urged Shiites to protect their Sunni brothers and defend them, head of south Iraq's scholars body said on Tuesday.

Shiekh Khaled al-Mulla said at a press conference held in Najaf after the visit made by a delegation of Sunni and Shiite clerics to al-Sistani, "The top cleric asserted on the sanctity of Iraq's blood, urging Shiites to protect and defend Sunnis."
Sistani said in the two-hour meeting "I'm a servant for all Iraqis and there is no difference between Sunnis, Shiites, Kurds, or Christians."

"Sistani also warned Iraq's clerics of enemies' plots to differentiate between Iraqis," Sheikh Mulla said.

Preparations are currently underway to hold the first national meeting between Shiite and Sunni clerics in the city of Najaf. The delegation consisted of clerics from Iraq's Kurdistan, Basra, al-Nasriyah, and Falluja.

Journalist's family deny death by gunmen

Baghdad - Voices of Iraq

Wednesday , 28 /11 /2007 Time 6:53:17

Baghdad, Nov 28, (VOI) – An 11-member family of an Iraqi journalist, reported to have been slain by unknown gunmen two days ago, denied the death news and said they had repudiated him for making the allegation, a source from the Journalistic Freedoms Observatory (JFO) said on Wednesday.

"The observatory recognized this fact after contacting the family of Diaa all-Kawwaz and Kut Governor Adel al-Tarfa, who denied attending the funeral services allegedly held by al-Kawwaz in the city," a JFO source told the independent news agency Voices of Iraq (VOI) by phone.
Al-Kawwaz, an Iraqi journalist residing in Jordan and the editor-in-chief of the Shabakat Akhbar al-Iraq (Iraq News Network), said on Monday that his 11-member family were killed by unidentified gunmen during a raid on his house in Baghdad's northern al-Shaab area.
Iraqi Interior Ministry Spokesman Abdul Karami Khalaf had denied the news.
The observatory further revealed that the funeral services allegedly held by al-Kawwaz for his family were for an old man called Hamid Khamees al-Aameri, who died in his house in Kut.
Established in 2003 after the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, the JFO, a non-governmental Iraqi organization that monitors violations and aggression against media staff in Iraq, revealed that 218 media workers, including 112 journalists, have been killed in Iraq since the U.S.-led invasion in 2003.


SS

Oh yes poor mojo all he wants is to be able to insult the three amigos on Jeffreies blog without anyone getting mad at him.

And why do you ask Omar if CSS has his tongue? What she got to do with this? Always you are never making sense. What a complete ignorant.

...admitted Ali Saleh Sa'adi, the Baath Party secretary general...

Mojo,

Why would you trust anything the Baath Party secretary general says?

That's not evidence in my book.

Of course the Baath want to blame the U.S. for their own reign of terror. They point blame anywhere but at their own philosophy.

sad, I thought you were going to ignore me. I want "to be able to insult the three amigos on Jeffreies blog without anyone getting mad" at me?? dude maybe you should start making some sense.

I made an assumption about your dear friend CSS that maybe I should not have made - I assumed that she's been in touch with Omar the uniter. But today I must say that CSS is a cool cat for posting the articles about Sistani. sad, what do you think of Sistani?

"Of course the Baath want to blame the U.S. for their own reign of terror."

K, Ali Saleh Sa'adi wrote that they came to power on an American train. They didn't blame America for their reign of terror. All I'm saying is that since the US helped bring Saddam to power, it is quite appropriate and responsible of them to take him out of power. They shoulda done so in 1991 when it would have been much easier than 2003, imo.

I'm not fond of any of the religious types we have in Iraq.

What business do you have if anyone is CSS friend? Are you the police or her father or her brother? You leave comments about her on different blogs saying CSS said this and that. Get a life Mojo.

And why do you call her my dear friend? Is that any of your business? I like her blog, I like her news and I respect that she takes hours from her day to educate the Americans about what is happening in Iraq and she is not from Iraq. Is this your business?

Oh sad, you don't know the history of my personal relationship with CSS. I won't go into details other than to say that she was a good friend of mine too, sad. I also like her blog - that's where I got those articles about Sistani.

I'm not into fundamentalists, but it seems that Sistani has done more to unite Iraqis and avoid violence than any Iraqi. Except Omar the uniter, of course:)

So what has been happening in Iraq?

Does anyone really know?

This post has been removed by the author.

I don't want to know about your history with CSS. I don't really care and I'm sure most other people don't care either. So why don't you move on and stop talking about her. And you should stop talking about Omar, Zeyad and Baghdad Treasure. When you disagree with some persons politics you have a bad habit of talking about those people to anyone that will listen it borders on sick sometimes. Its one of reasons why I dont go to your blog and comment because we will disagree and then you will talk about me like you talk about everyone else.Every single time I am going to one of these blogs you are there making stupid comments about these people. Most of the time they ignore you but you are like a plague of rats that will not go away. I am disappointed that Omar stooped to your level with this post which was meant for you but you gossip like a woman about everyone. Ruin your own blog with gossip not everyone else. Maybe you don't do that because your father reads your own blog?

Omar, what do you think of the article that I posted before anonymously about the journalist making up the story about his family being killed. I did not find this in other places and I am searching.

sad, my comments about CSS are intended to annoy CSS, that's all. You've commented on my blog and we've disagreed about some stuff and we had it out on my blog before. Did I talk about you anywhere else? Actually I thanked you on my blog for teaching me a few things. And I gossip like a woman? That's quite the sexist comment, sad. I'm making fun of Omar here because he attacked me and accused me of claiming to know more about Iraq than he and the great "Treasure of Baghdad". I am responding to these accusations with humor and facts here AND on my blog. Did you not read my post about Omar the uniter? I'm sorry you are not amused:(

But why come here if you don't like what he has to say? You are not a kid you should have something more better to do than coming to a blog where it feels like you are not welcome???? And making comments to annoy CSS is silly. You should grow up Mojo. If you think of yourself as even one half as an Iraqi then start acting like it. We don't act this way. Grow up.


استنساخ لا تحمد عقباه
فاتح عبدالسلام

مازال هناك صورة مشوشة إزاء استنساخ البشر في العالم. فالدول الكبري لا تنظر إلي الناحية الدينية التي قد تثار هنا وهناك. ولكن ثمّة مخاوف أخري من الصعب أن تفصح عنها أجهزة الاستخبارات الكبيرة في العالم. غير ان تجريم الاستنساخ دولياً لم يحصل حتي الآن .. وقد لا يحصل وتمر عاصفة الاستنساخ لتصبح أمراً واقعاً. ويكون بمقدور الدول استعادة التراكيب البيولوجية لشخصيات عبقرية أو هزيلة مرّت في حياتها، وإذا كان متعذراً استعادة نسخ من شخصيات مضت منذ قرون طويلة، فإنّ المتاح منذ تقدم علم الخارطة الجينية قد يكون مدعاةً للخوف أيضاً. فمازال هناك شخصيات يمكنها أن تقلب موازين كل شيء فيما لو استنسخت. ومازال هناك جدل حول اذا كان استنساخ الرئيس بوش يصاحبه تكرار في شن حروب عالمية في افغانستان والعراق في غضون تكرار هجمات نيويورك .. وهل ان استنساخ شخصيات من الحقبة السوفييتية بإمكانه أنْ يعيد الحرب الباردة أو ربما اعادة ما حال بين تلك الحرب وبين أن تكون نووية وشاملة. والصينيون المعروفون بعلم التحنيط ومعرفة أسرار الجراحة والدواء العشبي منذ آلاف السنين قد يكون لهم مفاجأة ويستعيدون شخصيات من عهد كونفوشيوس.. أو قائداً من الفترة الذهبية للجيش الأحمر قد لا يرضيه تقارب الصفقات بين واشنطن وبكين.
وربما كان المواطن العربي ازاء ذلك كله الأقل طموحاً في هذا المضمار.
فمن النادر أن يطمح مواطن عربي استنساخ حاكم عربي، فطموحه في الآتي الذي يجلب له تغييراً في حظوظ معيشته وكسب رزقه وحريته .. غير ان المخاوف قد تكون جدية إذا كان بين العلماء عالم عراقي "مزدوج الحقد" علي الشعب والامريكيين في آن واحد، وأراد عمل مقلب في البيت الابيض والعراقيين معاً وقام خلسةً باستنساخ شخصية رئيس الحكومة في العراق نوري المالكي .. فأي مستقبل سيكون للأمريكان في هذا البلد .. وأي حقبة مظلمة جديدة سيدخل فيها العراقيون وكم عقداً من عهد المليشيات وفرق الموت والفساد ستكون في انتظار هذا الشعب النازف!؟

Azzaman International Newspaper - Issue 2845 - Date 13/11/2007

جريدة (الزمان) الدولية - العدد 2845 - التاريخ 13/11/2007

FASL
ارسل هذا الخبر الى صديق بالبريد الالكتروني

OK no more time for you. Bye

"But why come here if you don't like what he has to say?"

Saad, should I ignore the lies Omar has written about me? I never claimed that I know more about Iraq than Omar the Uniter and the great Treasure of Baghdad. NEVER! And then on top of that he calls me "ignorant" and a "sectarian rat" because I said that this journalist Kawaz is Shiite - this is according to AFP. Omar the Uniter's response was to tell me to stop the propaganda. Am I supposed to walk away from this?


"You are not a kid you should have something more better to do than coming to a blog where it feels like you are not welcome????"

This is natural, I think. Many people I don't like have come to my blog and left nasty comments - the most recent is "aisha" - she called me a traitor. But I don't discourage her from leaving comments on my blog. I commend Omar the Uniter and Zeyad for not banning me.

"And making comments to annoy CSS is silly."

Yes you are right about this. I should let go and move on, but again you don't know what happened. You want to know the details? email me at iraqimojo@gmail.com

Thank you, Saad, for being nicer to me than annie and Omar the Uniter. And thanks for that article about Kawaz. Why would he lie about his family being murdered??

Mojo don't misundestand, I dont like you and I will not email you asking for details about anything. I am interested in Iraq not in the silly soap opera life that you have. If you want to have your soap opera life on message boards and blogs about anyone do it on your blog not in the comments section for anyone else. Like I said before if you are half of one Iraqi man you should start behaving like one.

Then sad, you should ignore me. I tried to be nice and you spit in my face. Is this how "real" Iraqis act? I will continue to refute the lies people tell about me. You don't like it? Too bad sad:( Now go back to CSS's blog and tell her about your discoveries.

Hi Mojo, yes, you are supposed to walk away from these situations. If you don't like the sort of names you are being called here then the most realistic solution would be for you to stop talking about Omar in the comments section of other blogs. A few weeks ago I went to three blogs on the same day and I found you talking about him and the very great BT all in the same day. You want the Iraqi bloggers to respect you? Then stop talking about them to Jeffrey. Also telling people to email you so you can tell them about whatever happened with you and CSS is childish as Saad stated "grow up" and stop acting like a stalker with all the bloggers and stop using political blogs about Iraq to talk about your personal life.

P.S. when one of the Iraqi bloggers started complaining about the comments I left I used my common sense and stopped leaving comments on his blog. It's not that hard, try it!

Saad,
I don’t know if the journalist was lying or not. He was on Jazeera today and talked about the issue. I don’t see why I shouldn’t believe him. It happened before when a group of Sunni insurgents attacked the house of another journalist from Ramadi and killed him and his pregnant wife. That was I think two years ago.

But I can only think that the family is trying to save what is left. They are stuck in Iraq, as Kawaz said today, and maybe they don’t want to insist that the Shiite militias did it, fearing reprisal attacks? Maybe that’s what is happening.

"You want the Iraqi bloggers to respect you? Then stop talking about them to Jeffrey."

But that's what Iraqi Bloggers Central is for - we are supposed to talk about the Iraqi bloggers. Don't like it? Don't go there. And I didn't go into details about my personal life anywhere.

Now if Omar the Uniter wants me to stop leaving comments here, he can tell me so, and I will go away. Even if part of the post is about me.

You make a good point 24, and he still has family in Iraq it was his family that said it was not true not him so maybe they are trying to save themselves.

Mojo no thanks I am not in high school or a girl to run and gossip on CSS blog for you.

I'm sorry dear Omar I will try to stick to Iraq here but sometimes the people here make it difficult for me.

Furthermore, I don't want all the Iraqi bloggers to "respect" me. But I will defend myself when people lie about me.


"but sometimes the people here make it difficult for me."

I make it difficult for you to stick to Iraq?? Boo Hoo Sad. LOL!

The English or Arabic Jazeera, I caught a few hours of the English this morning and didn't see it.

some people are gluttons for punishment.

Then sad, you should ignore me.

you are making it very difficult for anyone to ignore you.

this is a political blog, not a gossip forum. if you want to use your blog to carry out your personal vendetta that is up to you. however, there are people who are interested in whats going on in iraq AT PRESENT, not just rehashing the old saddam (who is dead btw) crap.

we have an opportunity here to discuss what is really happening vs what is newspeak, what are solutions, what's realistic in terms of progress etc.

there is a difference between vigorously debating a topic and using SOMEONE ELSE'S BLOG to air your dirty linen in public.

now you have used this blog, of someone you clearly do not respect to pimp your post about said person. we all have the opportunity to visit your blog and get in on this.

moving right along. why is the topic of the post so inflamatory? it all comes down to perceptions. either we understand, or conceive, there are powerful forces determined to shape the way we absorb events, or we believe the reports we are being told (like for example lyns bike story) represents the overal conditions on the ground. that seems to me to be at the gist of the friction.

here's what i want to know, and i would appreciate your views.

why is the iraqi government AT THIS JUNCTURE trying to get iraqis to return? doesn't it seem logical that people returning would seek some reconciliation news FIRST? for example, this proposed meeting.. doesn't it seem logical the call for iraqis to return would come AFTER the meeting and plans for reconciliation?

personally, i think i might feel a bit like a guini pig if i were going back now, after all it is not like this supposed 'calm' has taken hold for any period of time that guarentees to be lasting. does it?

one would think for the conflicts to be resolved THE LESS citizens expected to maintain peace, the easier? no?

annie

hm, that last sentence didn't come out right. of course, ideally everyone is supposed to maintain peace. i guess i mean at the beginning. for peace, would a regugee want to know they could travel from one end of the city to the other first?

He was on Arabic Jazeera.

if theyt show him again, i'll record it and translate it for you guys.

Thanks Omie!

"this is a political blog, not a gossip forum"

And the vast majority of my comments have been about Iraq.

regarding the new report about the deaths. according to this source, who i am unfamiliar with, the story generated from VOI, voices of iraq. does anyone know this source?

as far as al jazeera, last summer since the management changed (Is There a ‘Foxification’ Underway at Al Jazeera Television?) i have noticed we don't hear about how they are pimping terrorists anymore from bushco.

i think they may be a vital source for pushing questionable stories to a large audience now.

just saying. the story does seem to back up the official one coming out from the government, the one we support. it seems a little odd the journalist would not know whether or not his relatives were all dead. this should be easily confirmed.

annie

"according to this source, who i am unfamiliar with, the story generated from VOI, voices of iraq. does anyone know this source?"

LOL! And Omar the Uniter slams ME for not knowing enough about Iraq! Too funny.

annie, you having trouble logging into blogger again? or are you at work?

annie and Omar the Uniter, did you see the article I posted at 8:09 am from "afp the propaganda free zone"??

when i said 'know' i meant 'know the leaning, or the reputation or who owns, runs it'. i have heard of it of course.