| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Dhimmi Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
From "Results Show Islamic Parties Surging Ahead in Iraqi Vote" in the New York Times (thanks to Jerry Gordon):
BAGHDAD, Feb. 5 - Shiite religious parties moved closer to an overwhelming electoral sweep in southern Iraq and Baghdad, as the first results in contests for local governing councils showed those parties, many with ties to neighboring Iran, leading in all nine provinces that have had a substantial number of their votes counted....A leading figure in a Christian political party that had boycotted the elections was kidnapped Saturday on the road between Baghdad and the northern city of Mosul, Iraqi officials in the city reported. The man, Enas Ebrahim al-Youssefi, had recently been involved in a dispute over whether to fly the Iraqi or the Kurdish flag over the city council building in his home town, just north of Mosul, one of the officials said....
Mr. Lami and Dr. Ayar continued to play down reports of widespread election irregularities in the vicinity of Mosul, although they said the incidents would be checked. Some local officials have claimed that hundreds of thousands of Kurdish Christians were prevented from voting because balloting materials did not arrive. "There are complaints that are serious," Mr. Lami said....
And what do the victorious Shi'ites plan to do? From "Leading Shiite Clerics Pushing Islamic Constitution in Iraq," also in the Times:
AJAF, Iraq, Feb. 4 - With religious Shiite parties poised to take power in the new constitutional assembly, leading Shiite clerics are pushing for Islam to be recognized as the guiding principle of the new constitution.Exactly how Islamic to make the document is the subject of debate.
At the very least, the clerics say, the constitution should ensure that legal measures overseeing personal matters like marriage, divorce and family inheritance fall under Shariah, or Koranic law. For example, daughters would receive half the inheritances of sons under that law.
On other issues, opinion varies, with the more conservative leaders insisting that Shariah be the foundation for all legislation....
And Shiite politicians, recognizing a possible backlash from secular leaders and the Americans, have publicly promised not to install a theocracy similar to that of Iran, or allow clerics to run the country. But the clerics of Najaf, the holiest city of Shiite Islam, have emerged as the greatest power in the new Iraq. They forced the Americans to conform to their timetable for a political process. Their standing was bolstered last Sunday by the high turnout among Shiite voters and a widespread boycott by the Sunni Arabs, and the clerics will now wield considerable behind-the-scenes influence in the writing of the constitution through their coalition built around religious parties....
The leading Shiite clerics say they have no intention of taking executive office and following the Iranian model of wilayat al-faqih, or direct governance by religious scholars. But the clerics also say the Shiite politicians ultimately answer to them, and that the top religious leaders, collectively known as the marjaiya, will shape the constitution through the politicians.
Some effects are already being felt locally. In Basra, the second-largest city in Iraq, where one of Ayatollah Sistani's closest aides has enormous influence, Shiite religious parties have been transforming the city into an Islamic fief since the toppling of Mr. Hussein. Militias have driven alcohol sellers off the streets. Women are harassed if they walk the streets in anything less than head-to-toe black. Conservative judges are invoking Shariah in some courts.
I have seen this coming for a long time.
Posted by Robert at February 6, 2005 7:26 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
I hope I am wrong, but this sounds like theocracy from the shadows. The puppet master hides in the dark and his democrat puppets dance to his every wish. A kind of theocracy lite.
Posted by: obl r us![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at February 6, 2005 7:43 AM
Ledeen's not worried:
SHIITES [Michael Ledeen]
"It's hard to imagine the MSM getting stupider, but there they go again...a raft of articles today on the "pro-Iranian Shi'ite list" in the Iraqi elections. It's totally wrong. The Iranians dread the Iraqi Shiites, because the Iraqis, from Sistani to Chalabi to Hakim and on down, all oppose the Iranian heresy of the "Supreme Leader," a cleric at the top of the state. The traditional Shiite view is that such an event can only take place when the "12th Imam" returns from his disappearance--more than a millennium ago--to claim rightful leadership of the entire Muslim world. Until then, people in turbans should stay in the mosques, and the state should be governed by non-clerics. Sistani, Chalabi, and Hakim all said they were opposed to clerics in the government. Chalabi said--loudly and publicly, IN TEHRAN--that he and all the members of his list were opposed to the creation of an Iranian-style Islamic Republic in Iraq, and Chalabi also said, publicly on television, sitting next to the Iranian Ambassador to Baghdad, that Iraqi freedom was due to the brave leadership of George W. Bush.
"Despite their tricky recent statements endorsing the Iraqi elections, the mullahs know that the Iraqi democratic revolution is a mortal threat to them, and to their heretical version of Shiism. They are now quaking in Tehran, not--as the "expert" commentators and reporters would have us believe--drooling over new-found control over Iraq. If Najaf reestablishes its traditional role as the center of Shiism, the Iranian mullahs will be even further discredited. And that will be quite an achievement for a group that is already fully despised by its own people."
Posted by: rb at February 6, 2005 8:30 AM
Devastating.
And alas, also probably inevitable.
PS: Tks for the info in yopur post, rb. Hope springs eternal, I guess. ANyways Dubya has warned the Iranian mullahs in his sotu speech. And Condi flirtatiously tells the eurodhimmis that military options against iran are not on thwe agenda 'at this point'.
Posted by: voletti at February 6, 2005 9:20 AM
Islamist parties are leading in the Iraqi balloting according to articles in today's "gray lady" and so why should it surprise us that Ayatollah Sistani and the other Shia clerical leaders want a Constitution based on Shari'a, eh? And the US led coalition and transitional government leaders like Dr. Alawii are "shocked, shocked." Doesn't surprise me. After all the much plumped for hype surrounding the emergence of democracy in the Arab Muslim heartland from the Iraq war was tantamount to giving the vast bulk of the popular vote to the oppressed Shia, but at a price-the deprivation of secular Iraq and especially women's interests in the "new" Iraq that was to emerge this year following the January 30th vote. Now, we presume that NYU law professor, Noah Feldman adviser on such matters to our National Security Council MidEast staff who has written about the prospect of integrating elements of Shari'a with what we would normally expect as a western style democratic constitution will have an agonizing time knitting those pieces together with the transitional government. I can see the Kurds and what remains of the Chaldean Christians in their midst deprived of their ballot opportunities by the Kurdish overlords opting for a mini-state of their own in the case of the Kurds and possible flight from Iraq in the case of the Assyrian Chaldean Christians. The Shia Mullahs across the open border with Iran must be ecstatic about the prospects of a possible Islamic Republic next door in the revered heartland of the Muslim Shia sect notwithstanding Michael Ledeen's"iptimistic" view that the Iranian Mullahs are disqueted. Far from it. Now, what the Bush administration has on its hands is trying to placate a newly liberated Shia majority in Iraq and endeavoring to guarantee minority rights for secular Shia, Kurds, Assysrian Chaldeans and even truculent Sunni and former Ba'athists endeasvoring to kill Iraqi transitional government leaders, security forces and our troops with their RPG's and home made explosive devices. Then there are the wary Turks, Syrians and Iranians upset at the possible prospects of a de facto Kurdish mini-state giving rise to Kurdish irridentism in their countries, deprived of "free Kurdistan" in the wake of the Treaty of Sevres in the early 1920's by the then League of Nations. It looks like humpty dumpty, meaning Iraq, which was artificial to begin with thanks to the British colonial office led by Sir Winston Churchill and suicidal Gertrude Bell in the 1920's, may come acropper.
Last January I wrote a white paper that was circulated among a number of concerned parties that basically discussed a new strategic vision in the Middle east and adjacent regions. It was based in part on the suggestions of Professor Modecchai Nisan of Hebrew University and Mid East analysrt Walid Phares in the early 1990's. The core of the "white paper" was the concept of creating min-states for oppressed non- Muslim minorities in the Middle East that included Assyrian Chadeans, the nettlesome Kurds in iraq, the Copts in lower Egypt-sizable minoroity that they are, a Christian Mini-state in Lebanon when the Syrian Ba'athist overlords and Hezbollah were routed, a largely Christian animist south Sudan Republic. Israel and thec United States would act as guarnators of the sovreignty of these non-Muslim Middle east mini-states. Oil would be involved in the equation as both the areas in question in Kurdish/Chaldean Iraq produce it and have established pipelines to ports in Lebanon and Israel. Similarly the bulk of Sudan's vast oil resources lie in the South could be used in a IMF type oil trust for development purposes akin to that in neighboring Chad. Similar thoughts impacted on what to do in Nigeria and surrounding oil producers in south west Africa to separate them from the Muslim northern provinces. Members of the Black caucus in the US Congress have actually broached the African initative to include the Southern largely Chrsitian provinces in Nigeria and adjacent oil producing entities like the off shore Sao Tome and Principe and Angola. Then ther's the tantalizing prospects of empowering the Kabyles in Algeria, who are Berbers and proponents of secularization in a state that has violently oppressed democratic rampaging Islamists with a death toll well above 100,000, less we forget.
Sound like crazy out of the box thinking, eh? What are your comments?
Posted by: Chinese Gordon
at February 6, 2005 10:28 AM
America has now invested over 300 billion dollars setting up what will now be a Shi'ite Islamic state while trying to fight Islamic terrorism.
Terrorism in a state needs two main resources to flourish, which are funding and popular support. Islamic terrorism has achieved the first through 50 trillion dollars of Middle Eastern oil revenue since 1973, and the second through shortsighted multicultural policies, which have allowed muslim immigration into Western lands at an unprecedented rate. Therefore the real solutions to fight terrorism are as follows:
1. Cease all trading with Islamic states. Invest heavily in alternative fuel resources, and buy crude oil from Russia or other producers until a successful transition can be made. (One can only dream how far down this road we would be if 300 billion dollars had been invested in this goal). This would also deal with the very real threat of global warming.
2. Stop all muslim immigration into Western lands with immediate effect. Offer financial incentives for all muslims already living in the West to return to their countries of origin.
3. Invest heavily in educating the Western population about the threat of Islam. Universities with Middle East funding should be made to either find other patrons or be closed down. Lecturers who continue to mislead and deceive about Islam should be made to resign from their position. All this should ensure the public are aware and understand the measures which are being taken, and realise that such measures are necessary to deal with "Islamic Terrorism", and ultimately with Islam itself.
As some of you are aware, all of the above has been said at this website before by other posters, but should be repeated regularly so people understand what must be done, and hopefully prevent another 300 billion dollars being wasted in Iraq and other ventures.
Now investing even 1 billion dollars in Jihadwatch and other such websites, which try to inform the public about the dangers of Islam to Western Democracy would be money much more wisely spent.
Posted by: Amicus at February 6, 2005 10:48 AM
Great 'saw that coming' article, Mr. Spencer.
Hmmmm, looks like we have made Iraq safe for a radical Islam dictatorship to take the place of Saddam's dictatorship.
No wonder people weren't afraid to show their purple fingers - they all voted for the Clerics Muslim rule over secular democracy rule!
Americans fought and died and spent lots of cash to make Iraq safe for religious dictatorship. Didn't they see that coming?
To me it shows that our leadership is still unwilling to understand how immovable Muslims are from their religious indoctrination, how their identity is enmeshed in the teachings of the Koran, period. That, for now is WHO THEY ARE, and for them to resist that is to court failure and the wrath and displeasure of their god. It's very powerful.
Our Christian fundamentalists also preach that the gays and abortionists and sinners of all kinds are bringing the wrath of god down on our country, that 9/11 was god getting really mad and losing patience with America. That god will love us only if we are good and obey the rules.
Religious superstition in all forms comes down to the same thing: human beings were not meant to make their own rules and to be free to 'live and learn', but are meant to live under divine law handed down by people like Mohammad and Moses - from the lips of God, HIMself.
While I agree that the Christian religion is benign and compassionate for the most part and gives advice oh how to live well among all people, I don't see the same in Islam because it is too chauvinistic and overbearing, arrogant about it's being the ONLY religion that has any value and if you don't get that, you can just stay out of the way or will be PUT out of the way.
I will resist living under somebody's religious dictatorship, put together by 'know-besters' of any kind. But it doesn't look like the Iraqi's have evolved through their superstition enough to do that.
The only reason we have to bother with them and the rest of the backward Arab countries at all is the vast wealth they inherited from the universe they now use to impose their will on the rest of the world.
Oh well, if it isn't that, it's something else. Know peace - no religious dogmatism.
Posted by: Patricia
at February 6, 2005 11:19 AM
Folks,
There are many comments today (as there often are) about how difficult it is to deal with the threat posed by Islam.
There are two major shields protecting Islam from any effective response, and they are:
1) Political Correctness, a Post-Modernist concept, and
2) The idea that a major monotheistic religion can never be an evil construct.
Until and unless we are willing to deal with each of these shields, we will remain at risk, and condemned to living on the defensive for all time.
Just watch the background talks about all the security at the Super Bowl today. It is insane to accept the need to live this way.
at February 6, 2005 12:11 PM
People, do not panic.
The election of Islamicists may be lamentable but hardly suprising. It does not at all spell doom for the American enterprise, though much of the world hopes that it will. It is merely a challenge that lends itself to two possible outcomes: Either the Shiites will be able to parlay their ascension to power into the utter subjugation of all opposition to their will, or they will be rebuked, chastised, and humiliated in this attempt.
By protecting the opposition and the dissenting parties, the American military will be able to ensure the latter outcome.
Keep the faith.
Posted by: montfort at February 6, 2005 1:12 PM
Surely there's the danger that Iraq will go Islamist, but the Shias will never keep Iraq together if they do not cut deals with the Kurds, who overwelmingly reject Islamism.
Furthermore, let's keep in mind that this article was published by one of the most anti-Bush newspapers in America.
Posted by: Rublev at February 6, 2005 2:06 PM
Intellectual Nabobs, Sociologists, Anthropologists, Religious Scholars, Political Scientists and hoards of other so called experts give us their evaluation of all the different groups that comprise the population of Iraq. The US Government no doubt has employed the best of these people and have got this Iraq situation well under control. Left wing liberal rag newspapers like the NYT are so far down the food chain when it comes to professionals like the afore mentioned that their reports simply contain no credibility. The NYT "news reports" are not believable by any thinking person. Or at best need to be throughly proven by further research to sift out what little truth their stories may contain. Hey libs, do you have any idea of how many trees are slaughtered by the New York Times Corporation to print your obscenely large newspaper, look at how awfully fat that paper is, my gawd. What an assault to our environment, how disgusting!
Anyway, the point I want to make is that Democracy is more than the sum of its parts.
Lastly, we in America have a can do attitude. We aren't worrying and second guessing that our efforts in dealing with these thickheaded islamic numbskulls will fail. Other countries can doubt themselves if they want to and be fearful thats fine, but not us.
Posted by: cross at February 6, 2005 3:10 PM
The main task of the new government will be drafting the new constitution. This will require negotiation with the Sunni Arab, Sunni Kurd, secular and other non-Muslim portions of the electorate. If not, the new constitution will not be approved by the voters. I find it hard to believe that Iraqi women will vote in favor of the aspects of Sharia that relegate them to second class citizens. I suppose it could happen, but why would they?
It seems to me that the ultimate "defanging" of Islamofacism must be done in the Islamic world. The only environment where this can possibly take place is a free society. Free, Islamic societies are in pretty short supply these days, and the term might even be considered an oxymoron.
We now have a chance to help the Iraqis create such a society. We may have another chance in Iran in the not-too-distant future. Afghanistan is also on the right track. Success is not guaranteed, but neither is failure.
This "new" theme in the NYT should be recognized for what it is: yet another moving of the goal posts to miminize anything that would credit GWB and conservatives in general.
at February 6, 2005 3:35 PM
I know that there are many good people who want democracy for Iraq. I am not sure that will happen, making the deaths of our brave soldiers even more tragic than they are already. On the day of the elections, a leading member of the Mandaean sect (non-Muslim and non-Christian) was shot 90 times in front of his children. Ballot boxes in several Christian areas never showed up, depriving at least 100,000 Christians of their right to vote. And, although thousands of Iraqi Jews live in Israel, the interim Iraqi government, whose has not yet written a constitution, declared that they do not recognize Israel as a legitimate country and, therefore, Iraqi Jews living in Israel had no right to vote...althought they had no problems with thousands of Iraqi Shiites voting who live withing the borders of their enemy, Iran. Yes, I am quite sure that the Ayatollah Sistani (who doesn't look secular to me and, in fact, looks very sinister) will soon be running Iraq. Of course, he will have to send intermediaries to tell that to the Americans....he doesn't meet personally with unclean non-believers.
Posted by: maryrose at February 6, 2005 5:09 PM
All of the factions in Iraq need a serious reality check.
The Sunnis need to realize that the Kurds and the Shiites are sitting on oil and can break away if they want to. The Shiites control Iraq's only ports, leaving the Sunnis with the no resources except for the symbolic holding of Baghdad.
For the Shiites, it's going to be hard to get foreign investors and workers to put their money and lives into yet another Islamic state, no matter how high the wages may be. Sharia and insurgency do not make for good investment or career opportunities.
The Kurds need to know that any attempt to establish a Kurdistan will only result in the crushing of the Kurd minorities in Syria, Turkey and Iran.
All of these factions really have no choice but to stay together in a secular state. They all lose if their is a civil war or a Sharia state.
Posted by: 3812Michelle at February 6, 2005 5:38 PM
Michelle: You are reasoning with common sense and logic!
They dont: They have ISLAM instead.
One writer the other day stated that 'you can't make chicken salad with chicken shit'- and I say it will be a long time before reason, common sense and logic rules the ME.
I don't have that hope.
But I'll fight for ISRAEL anytime!
Posted by: Terminator at February 6, 2005 8:02 PM
Sistani has been running the show behind the scenes since the day the war officially ended. He has kept the Shi'ites under control, told them to bide their time, vote, and then reap the rewards of majority rule. Of course, there ends "democracy." Democracy, as much as I wish it could be, will never be in Iraq or anywhere else in the ME. Not in our lifetimes, probably never. I hate to think that we have lost almost 1500 of our troops and spent billions of dollars to help the Iraqis build an Islamic state.
Six months or a year ago, I'm not sure, but when someone insisted that the new Iraqi constitution must be based on Sharia, Iraqi women marched in the streets in protest. So much for Iraqi women. The Iraqi Christians are already dhimmis; they were not allowed to vote.
It's hard to believe that Condi Rice doesn't get it either, but she's over there parroting the same old platitudes and cliches, acting like there really is some hope of a permanent, peaceful solution between the muslim barbarians and the Israelis. You might be fooled into believing that this is all about settlements, occupation, barriers, etc. if these same hackneyed statements had not been made by hundreds of previous diplomats over the last fifty years. Listen to old news clips from 20, 30 years ago. Today's sound exactly the same. Will this be a 100 year war? A 500 year war? An eternal war? It's a sick game that can't be won under the current rules. Someone needs to change the rules. I pray for Israel, the only light in a sea of gloom.
at February 6, 2005 10:41 PM
Sadly this is all predictable (as Mr. Spencer mentions). What annoys me no end is the reverence the right holds for Bush & Co. and the hatred they (principally, from LGF) direct towards the Democrats, as if the Democrats would love to see Islam spread and Bush is a bulwark against it. For those of us who believe we understand the nature of the enemy, Bush is no ally. There are many in the GOP who are in bed with Islam (like Norquist, for instance) as there are many Democrats who do not see Islam as a threat. The sad thing is that Bush's policies are so incredibly stupid and stupidly carried out that they are putting the U.S. in serious danger. Next to OBL, Bush has had, as it now seems in Iraq, more Americans killed in the service of Islam than anyone else. 1200 and $300Billion spend to create a Shi'ite state along side Iran. What the hell are they thinking? The Neocons in Govt? Are they really that stupid? $300billion, a sapped military; 10000s mained; 1200 killed. And for what?
Posted by: Seymour Paine at February 6, 2005 11:09 PM
Seymour - Outstanding post.
I can't understand the optimism of some of the above posts. The new regime is going to be a nest of vipers - and you are trying to find the positive side in all this? GOOD LUCK! The USA has screwed up - AGAIN. It's been a little Vietnam, this intervention has gone the same way as Lebanon in the 80's and Somalia in the 90's, -admit it.
The Iraqi people, who you liberated, have stabbed you in the back. They know no gratitude. They want to see you all dead, or converted to their vile Fascist cult. And you want to send your young men to die for these people?
The best thing you can do now is create an independent Kurdistan so that they don't have to live in the shadow of this Islamic Frankenstein's monster you've created. If you don't, it will always be on your country's conscience.
........
SHUT UP YOU F*****G LEFTIE SON OF A BITCH. F*** YOU! GOD SAVE AMERICA.
There you go Cross, I've saved you all the bother of posting a reply.
.........
at February 7, 2005 2:51 AM
“I can't understand the optimism of some of the above posts.”
Posted by Timbo.
What else is new? We know that liberals and anti-American pricks can’t understand optimism. Optimism is a foreign concept to you. Pessimism, negativity, and obsessive political correctness are fundamental attributes of your kind. Cram that in your bong and hit it.
That’s right, we’ve liberated people, imagine that, doing something good for people. If they stab us in the back that’s too bad for them and they will pay the price. You and your kind on the other hand just stab from the front so it’s no surprise. Your 30+ year old liberal way of thinking is a dinosaur anyway and your ideology is a dismal failure. You really don’t matter much anymore, the world has moved on and left your kind behind.
Thought I would post this link about the real environmental polluters and guess what, it’s not the USA. In fact we are the largest contributors to clean the environment. Check it out if you can handle the truth!
BTW, didn’t you say you lived in England and India and visited the islands that got smashed by the waves and now you live in Australia? You’re a jinx; everywhere you go it’s an environmental disaster. Needless to say, Americans don’t need you around.
Here’s proof, try posting some of your own next time, K?
Britain has bad pollution
http://www.guardian.co.uk/waste/story/0,12188,1397838,00.html
5 million air pollution deaths in India
http://www.zapworld.com/about/news/watch_indiapollution.asp
Gee, 5 million? That’s even more that got killed in Iraq.
I thought I would save this for last, proving that you Timbo are just another finger pointing faker, a loathsome self important hypocrite.
If you live in Australia and I think you once said you were a “native” THEN YOU ARE A MEMBER OF THE PEOPLE WHO EMIT THE MOST GREENHOUSE PRODUCING GASES IN THE WORLD! YOU HAVE THE HIGHEST PER CAPITA CO2 EMMISONS OF ANY OTHER COUNTRY ON THE ENTIRE PLANET!!
READ THIS AND WEEP!
http://www.tai.org.au/Publications_Files/DP_Files/Dp66sum.pdf
Isn’t it time you started making sense Timbo?
at February 7, 2005 6:05 PM
For what Mr. Paine?
For this:
_"Iraqi Amputees celebrate new hands and newfound freedom"
_"Sewing Centers for Women In Iraq Provide Clothes and Jobs"
_"Water Barrels Deliver Source of Life and Goodwill"
_"[Spirit of America] Donates Tons of School Supplies, Medical Supplies and Frisbees to Marines for the Iraqi People"
_"Marines Provide Dental Kits to Families in Al Hillah, Iraq"
_"Iraqis Blunt Insurgent Assaults; 19 Suspects Nabbed in Joint Raid"
_"Multinational Security Command Trains, Equips Iraqi Forces"
_"Sunni Clerics OK Election Participation at Baqubah 'Peace Day'"
_"Iraqi, U.S. Forces Detain More Than 100 Insurgents"
_"Poll Finds Iraqis Overwhelmingly Favor Elections"
_"Iraqis Net 'Top Suspect' Among Scores Of Recent Detentions"
Posted by: gopchristian at February 7, 2005 6:07 PM
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)