Iraq: Wedding bomb toll climbs to 23

Break up Iraq. Let the Sunni, Shiites and Kurds have their own states. It's clear these people can't live together without requiring a dictator nor do they WANT to live together peacefully. Not even the glorious Koran can keep these members of the "peaceful religion" peaceful. Things couldn't be much worse having three countries in place of the one mess currently occupying the site.

Did you know that Iraq's Sistani will not meet with the unclean?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/27/AR2006102701106.html

Did you know that Iraq's Sistani will not meet with the unclean?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/27/AR2006102701106.html

Posted by: StillBreathing at November 1, 2006 08:11 AM

At first I thought he was quite lonely being in a Muslim country. Then I clicked the link. I now understand.

ISLAM, I laughed. After writing my entry, I thought, "Someone could go into a demogogic speech about how I was calling non-Muslims unclean." I've seen this sort of thing done. (Pat Buchanan once castigated Krauthammer for referring disrespectfully to those who live in trailer parks or some such, when Krauthammer was quoting Howard Dean and doing so without approval.) I think the bruhaha over John Kerry's babblings is also demogogic, by the way.

It is unfortunate that the United States, whose birth was hailed as a triumph of the Enlightenment, is supporting Sharia, an anti-Enlightenment.

Assalamau Laikum all,

Whatever the living was like under Saddam ...it was not like this.

The Amerkie said they wanted to bring freedom, security, wealth and democracy (and a guaranteed oil supply)to Iraq.

None of these things have happened...the only success the Amerekie has had is "blood on their hands...lots of it ...direct and indirect". They talk big, eat big ...but they cannot rid Iraq of the mess they have created...many muslims have helped in creating the mess...I agree that it is not the Amerekie alone.

The Amerikie can now help by showing many of them the way...let me elaborate on this very important point.

The peoples of Iraq...they don't really know what the Amerike means by security, wealth and democracy....so you need to show them....and educate them.

This can be achieved by taking a statistical sample of the Iraqi peoples back to the Amerike/coalition countries with them, showing them what these things mean.

The sample could be say 10,000 familes to go, live, work and earn in the Amerikie and other Western countries of interest for say a period of a 18 months. The sample of peoples are "carefully screened" but chosen country wide across Iraq, and will be a mix of sunni, shia, kurds, christian etc.

Obviously, things have to be made ready in the Amerikie, the UK, Poland, Australia etc...but the West is good at this type of logistical exercise. Whilst in these host countries, attendence to freedom/democracy/moderate Islam seminars, work training etc are mandatory.

In effect the 18 months is a carefully structured "moderate islam training program" with some input from Iraqi authorities.

These peoples are then rotated...i.e. they are flown back into Iraq and a different 10,000 familes are jetted away. This program would be in effect for 50,000 familes say.

Rules can be set up and agreed by these families , that any childrains born in the "exchange" are still Iraqi citizens...and that can not remain in the Coalition countries.

And why woiuld you want to di this? Well, when back in their Iraqi homes these people are distributors of information about democracy, freedom, wealth and how this can be realised in Iraq too.

They share their experiences...tell them of the freedom and the meaning of democracy.

In essence it is the people of Iraq who need to take charge back of their country...all you will have done is inject them with this spirit.

They are the ones who will no longer accept the sadrs and the mahdi army and the violence, Knowing the terrain and the culture.... they will rid them out of their midst....and whoala....you have your exit strategy.

"Did you know that Iraq's Sistani will not meet with the unclean?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/27/AR2006102701106.html"
-- from a posting above

A click on that link pulls up an article that appeared in The Bandar Beacon on October 27, 2006. This is the first paragraph of that article:

"The question directed this week to the National Security Council press office was straightforward: "Has the Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani met with any American official, either military or civilian, since the U.S. invasion in 2003?" The answer reveals the extent to which the Bush administration is now, and always has been, out of its depth in Iraq."

What should have been an obvious question about why Sistani never ever met with Bremer or any American official save for Khalilzad (a Sunni but still a Muslim in Shi'a eyes -- the reverse is not always true), was not asked, in the so-called Major Media (Bandar Beacon, New Duranty Times, etc.), until a few days ago. No one wanted to puncture the balloon of comforting illusion. No one thought that perhaps the Shi’a Lobby that had been so successful, and that had a claque to applaud the Great Sistani at My Weekly Standard (Gerecht and Schwartz, especially) and also among certain Shi’a commentators such as the too-influential Fouad Ajami who, in his tellingly mistitled “The Foreigner’s Gift” – it should have been “The Infidel’s Gift” and Ajami, if he reflects, will admit at least to himself the correctness of that observation) tells of how deeply impressed he was with Sistani, who of course had no objections to meeting with fellow Shi’a Ajami.

Now that the Shi’a Lobby has had its day (though Taheri, and Rend al-Rahim, and Vali Nasr, are still in there manfully pitching their woo), having through a whole series of charming and plausible and of course westernized and secularized and deeply unrepresentative men (Makiya, Chalabi, Allawi, and others) managed to charm and inveigle those making American policy to invade – as the Shi’a very much wanted – Iraq, and to make sure that nothing was done early on to prevent the transfer of power, through whatever means necessary (even that purple-thumbed affair, about which the Shi’a were so enthusiastic, and for such obvious, but apparently not obvious enough, reasons), it is the time of the Sunni Lobby to step forward.

And it is. Headed by Turki al-Faisal, ambassador of Saudi Arabia, ably assisted by James Baker (whose Commission which will offer a face-saving way, if only Bush will take it, to get out of Iraq, but also offer the dreary and dangerous mixture as before, complete with doing the bidding of the Saudis, and making sure the Sunnis in Iraq are protected instead of welcoming the natural growth of Sunni-Shni’a hostilities, and not only in Iraq, and, not to be overlooked, the recommendation of renewing pressure on Israel by means of that idiotic, because ignorant of Islamic triumphalism, policy of pushing that "two-state solution" – a policy that squares with the four who make up that infamously windy “Quartet.”

Visitors to Jihad Watch knew all about this long ago, and were told serenly the truth about Sistani, even when the likes of Tom Friedman were suggesting that Sistani was just the man to receive the next Nobel Prize for Peace. Remember? Or have you forgotten?

If you have, here is one among many discussions of Sistani that sustained you all along:

MARCH 21, 2005

Fitzgerald: Sistani for Nobel?

"Everyone will have his own startling encounter with Islam -- the real thing, not what Muslim apologists, hoping to give everyone a carefully-circumscribed "peek into the Koran" (and let's make sure that none of these unwary Infidels manages to read anything beyond the Michael Sells "Approaching the Qur'an" and by all means, keep them from looking into the Hadith or the Sira), have on offer. It is almost always limited to highly selective quotation from the Qur'an. The Hadith, and the Sira -- sorry, off limits for now.

One keeps being surprised at how little people think they need to know before making grand pronouncements. Yesterday, amused by the latest display of vacuity and portentousness by Tom Friedman, nominating -- modestly -- Ali al-Sistani for the Nobel Prize -- I went to www.sistani.org to look around. There, between Sistani's complete banning of chess (and to think that checkmate is merely the Persian "shakh mat"), and his discussions of all the usual subjects that inquiring Muslims wish to know about, from whether it is okay to marry the sister of a man you have sodomized, or who has sodomized you (I forget which) to whether your canonical prayers count if you haven't performed the wudu (ablutions) correctly -- you know, all the stuff that you want to know, was something else, and that something was all about what is considered by Sistani and those who seek his guidance to be "Najis" or "unclean."
If you click on "Muslim Laws" on the left, and then, once a list comes up, click on "najis things," you will get a list -- #84 -- and if you then go a little further, and click on the menu where, among those unclean things, the "kafir" (which is to say, the Unbeliever, that is to say -- You and I, Dear Reader) you will get a further discussion of how, in the wonderful, "moderate" Islam of the al-Sistani variety, the Unbeliever, the Infidel, the Kafir (guilty of "kufr" or "ingratitude" for failing to receive the Revelation of the Last of the Prophets in the right, accepting, submissive way) is viewed.

So here, for everyone out in Ames, Iowa, is just a little sample of what you are missing, and what one suspects that Mohammed Fahmy, and Tariq Ramadan, and Hamid Dabashi, and Zeinab Bahrani, and a cast of hundreds of millions, would prefer that you not inquire into too deeply. And please, whatever you do, in order to accommodate them, at least promise that you will NOT read the websites www.dhimmitude.org and www.faithfreedom.org and www.co-jet.org and www.jihadwatch.org, and certainly do NOT read anything by Bat Ye'or, but especially do not read "Islam and Dhimmitude" or "The Decline of Eastern Christianity Under Islam." And do not read Ibn Warraq's "Why I Am Not a Muslim." And let's not even talk about Robert Spencer. These books will only confuse you. And never pay attention to a man named Ali Sina or any of those ex-Muslims who appear at his website. Never google the name "Habib Malik" to read what he has to say about the historic relationship of Islam to Christianity; never read a similar article by James V. Schall, a professor at Georgetown; never take a peek at Western scholars of Islam whose work may be sampled in the anthology The Legacy of Jihad by Andrew Bostom.

Here is what you can find at www.sistani.org:

"84. The following ten things are essentially najis: 1. Urine 2. Faeces 3. Semen 4. Dead body 5. Blood 6. Dog 7. Pig 8. Kafir 9. Alcoholic liquors 10. The sweat of an animal who persistently eats najasat [i.e., unclean things].

108. The entire body of a Kafir, including his hair and nails, and all liquid substances of his body, are najis.

109. If the parents, paternal grandmother and paternal grandfather of a minor child are all kafir, that child is najis, except when he is intelligent enough, and professes Islam. When, even one person from his parents or grandparents is a Muslim, the child is Pak (The details will be explained in rule 217).

110. A person about whom it is not known whether he is a Muslim or not, and if no signs exist to establish him as a Muslim, he will be considered Pak. But he will not have the privileges of a Muslim, like, he cannot marry a Muslim woman, nor can he be buried in a Muslim cemetery."

So who wants to second the nomination of Al-Sistani for the Nobel Prize? Anyone out there in Ames, Iowa?"

Naseem -

There are already too many Muslim immigrants in the USA and Canada. We don't want anymore. In fact, we would be delighted to send those who have already enjoyed all the benefits of our culture, our education, our health care, our freedom of speech back to Iraq to educate their countrymen. No rotation - just a one way trip.

It is time to divide Iraq up, because it has become a civil war situation like what had happened in Yugoslavia in the 90's before it broke up completely.

Is this the same "Ur" of Mesopotamian fame and glory? Ya know Sumarians etc... If it is, you mean to tell us that since the 4th Century Before Christ (BC), the ideology remains?? Sheesh.

So who wants to second the nomination of Al-Sistani for the Nobel Prize? Anyone out there in Ames, Iowa?"

Posted by: Hugh at November 1, 2006 09:06 AM

Well, I'm not from Iowa but I am from its next door neighbor so I'll second the notion. If the father of modern terrorism can get a Nobel for peace why not this fine man?

Naseem, we would welcome the Christians from Iraq. The muslims can't get their heads out of their islamic a$$'s long enough to realize they could have freedom. They first have to rid themselves of the koran and their idea that women are lower than dirt.

We could preach freedom til the cows come home and unless they burned the koran, their "religion" keeps them bound and gagged.

Naseem:In effect the 18 months is a carefully structured "moderate islam training program" with some input from Iraqi authorities.

"Moderate islam training program" Now 'thats' funny and an oxymoron...

Did you know that Iraq's Sistani will not meet with the unclean?

I'll bet he smells like a pen of goats. (and we're unclean)

About the little ones killed:
This must be particularly pleasing to allah.
Molach (who is of the same cloth as allah) preferred that children be "passed through the fire" to honor him. Satan by any other name.

The only Nobel prize Islamic ilk deserve is dynamite.

Naseem ,
Please tell us the reasoning behimd your reckoning that the blood of these innocents shed in this particularly wicked act is on AMERICAN hands ? Do you have any doubt at all that the perpetrators were other than Muslims - Nominally your brothers - who fully deserve the deepest torment of hell and not pleasuring by virgins when their time comes to face judgement? What sort of God condones and rewards such depravity ?
I had you down as a man of (at least) goodwill , if constrained by loyalty to your birth religion to overlook its' fundamental love of death as being somehow admirable . Please do what Muslims seem unable or unwilling to do , and condemn these atrocious acts as being both perpetrated by Muslims and entirely without justification whatsoever . If you recognise wickedness then there is yet hope for you , but my regret is that most Moslems are already too far gone in the hardness of their hearts .

Naseems has no consciencs when muslims kill each other, a typical coward, blame anyone else, ie American,but a never the culprit, ie muslims who actually murdered their own. naseem you are nothing more than a whore. you can whore out your own people for the rubbish you call the coran.

Naseem is a troll stop feeding it. It knows that Americans are not 'Amerikie'.