Monday, November 29, 2010

Sistani not an Iranian lackey

'Two cables from late 2009 described the limits of Iranian sway over its neighbor, with one saying that its "greatest political roadblock" for Iran was differences between Iranian religious leaders and Iraq's pre-eminent Shiite spiritual leader, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani. In the March 2010 parliamentary polls, al-Sistani's call for an open-list ballot - allowing voters to select individual candidates - won out over Tehran's preference for a closed list, which would have favored established parties, the cable said.'

25 comments :

Aton said...

"Iran accuses CIA, Mossad of nuke scientist killing"

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20101129/wl_afp/irannuclearunrest

It was the jooos.

Mister Ghost said...

LOL, Sistani is most certainly Safavid-philic and this Wikileak just exhibits the poor state of diplomatic evaluation concerning Iraq and the Ayatollah. He is an Iranian after all, and as one of the clearest thinkers on Iraq, John Agresto noted from my post at IBC):

The Pollyanish Americans Liberated Iraq and handed it over to Sistani's Shia

We liberated Iraq, and handed Iraq over to the Shia majority, and the leader of the Shia majority, Sistani, wouldn’t even meet with us. It was, and still at the same time, we kept making excuses for that. Well, it’s okay, we’ll talk to his intermediaries. No, he’s a difficult and different man. We’ll talk to his intermediaries. The handwriting was on the wall. We Americans live on hope all the time. We are the most Pollyannish people in the whole world. We are so quick to forgive, we forget immediately, and the rest of the world’s not like that...


On the Problems with Ayatolah al-Sistani's "Liberal" view of Iraq

I do not believe that parties that demand that all public legislation be based on Islamic law as interpreted by Shia imams as liberal. I do not believe that a religious leader who refused even once to meet with Ambassador Bremer or any American, but would gladly meet with every anti-American antagonist and criminal, from Muqtada al-Sadr to Ahmed Chalabi is a 'moderate.

The Intolerant Sistani

I do not believe that the same Sistani who condemned the Interim Iraqi Constitution because it protected the rights of the Kurds and secured property rights to Jews should be be thought of as being terribly tolerant. Indeed, the very first time I heard, in all my months there, an anti-Semitic diatribe was from the Grand Ayatollah. One word from Sistani might prevent the killing of journalists and Western civilians in Basra, stop the frightened exodus of Christians from all of Southern Iraq, and restrain the imposition of sectarian dogmatism now rolling over Iraqi's schools and universities. There is no such word.

The Americans were Naive about Sistani

"You Americans are so naive," Suhail, our Iraqi Christian translator said to me one morning over breakfast. We were talking about the elections and about how they would surely result in a Shiite majority government dominated by the partisans of Ayatolah Sistani. "You are so naive. When you Americans hear the word 'democracy' you see respect and rights and liberty and toleration. When he [Sistani] hears the word 'democracy' all he sees is power. And that's what you Americans are doing, giving power to a religious man who will put an end to all the freedoms you thought you were giving us, once he has the chance and the power."

Sistani the "Moderate"

We insisted that the Ayatollah Sistani was surely a 'moderate' and a friend to civil and religious liberty despite all the hard evidence to the contrary. Let me repeat my previous observations and predictions: The Ayatollah Sistani is an Islamist bent on establishing a theocracy not far removed from that found in Iran. He is an open anti-Semite and not too subtle anti-Christian. He threw his support behind democratic elections because they were the handy vehicles for imposing religious authority over all Iraqi. Nor is he the only one, or even the worst, only the most prominent.

Mister Ghost said...

You deleted my comment, Muhannad.
Shame on you.
Sistani is very Irano-philic, and as Nibras Kazimi has noted,his son is worse.

The Wikileak just exemplifies the poor state of diplomatic evaluation about Iraq and the Ayatollah.

Meanwhile, in the real world:

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2006/02/sistani-funnels-money-to-iran.html

(Via Jihad Watch) From the Wall Street Journal (subscription only), with thanks to Erick Stakelbeck:

Iraq's most prominent Shiite religious leader, Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, maintained close ties with Tehran during Saddam Hussein's rule and today channels millions of dollars monthly into Islamic research centers and theological schools in Iran, according to his Web site, demonstrating the growing convergence of Iran's and Iraq's religious elite.

Mister Ghost said...

And more on the Irano-philic Sistani:

Mugged By Reality or John Agresto Bitch Smacks
Ayatollah Sistani

Iraqi Mojo said...

I did not delete your comment, MG. For some reason it didn't get published. I had nothing to do with it. But I got an email for your post, which I suspect didn't get published because it's too long:

'LOL, Sistani is most certainly Safavid-philic and this Wikileak just exhibits the poor state of diplomatic evaluation concerning Iraq and the Ayatollah. He is an Iranian after all, and as one of the clearest thinkers on Iraq, John Agresto noted from my post at IBC):

The Pollyanish Americans Liberated Iraq and handed it over to Sistani's Shia

We liberated Iraq, and handed Iraq over to the Shia majority, and the leader of the Shia majority, Sistani, wouldn’t even meet with us. It was, and still at the same time, we kept making excuses for that. Well, it’s okay, we’ll talk to his intermediaries. No, he’s a difficult and different man. We’ll talk to his intermediaries. The handwriting was on the wall. We Americans live on hope all the time. We are the most Pollyannish people in the whole world. We are so quick to forgive, we forget immediately, and the rest of the world’s not like that...


On the Problems with Ayatolah al-Sistani's "Liberal" view of Iraq

I do not believe that parties that demand that all public legislation be based on Islamic law as interpreted by Shia imams as liberal. I do not believe that a religious leader who refused even once to meet with Ambassador Bremer or any American, but would gladly meet with every anti-American antagonist and criminal, from Muqtada al-Sadr to Ahmed Chalabi is a 'moderate.

The Intolerant Sistani

I do not believe that the same Sistani who condemned the Interim Iraqi Constitution because it protected the rights of the Kurds and secured property rights to Jews should be be thought of as being terribly tolerant. Indeed, the very first time I heard, in all my months there, an anti-Semitic diatribe was from the Grand Ayatollah. One word from Sistani might prevent the killing of journalists and Western civilians in Basra, stop the frightened exodus of Christians from all of Southern Iraq, and restrain the imposition of sectarian dogmatism now rolling over Iraqi's schools and universities. There is no such word.

The Americans were Naive about Sistani

"You Americans are so naive," Suhail, our Iraqi Christian translator said to me one morning over breakfast. We were talking about the elections and about how they would surely result in a Shiite majority government dominated by the partisans of Ayatolah Sistani. "You are so naive. When you Americans hear the word 'democracy' you see respect and rights and liberty and toleration. When he [Sistani] hears the word 'democracy' all he sees is power. And that's what you Americans are doing, giving power to a religious man who will put an end to all the freedoms you thought you were giving us, once he has the chance and the power."

Sistani the "Moderate"

We insisted that the Ayatollah Sistani was surely a 'moderate' and a friend to civil and religious liberty despite all the hard evidence to the contrary. Let me repeat my previous observations and predictions: The Ayatollah Sistani is an Islamist bent on establishing a theocracy not far removed from that found in Iran. He is an open anti-Semite and not too subtle anti-Christian. He threw his support behind democratic elections because they were the handy vehicles for imposing religious authority over all Iraqi. Nor is he the only one, or even the worst, only the most prominent. '

Iraqi Mojo said...

This is what I got after I clicked "Publish Your Comment":

Request-URI Too Large

The requested URL /... is too large to process.

But it got published anyway.

Iraqi Mojo said...

This must have been written in 2004:

"Iraq's most revered Shia cleric, Sistani is one of four ayatollahs on the religious council called the Hawza, in the holy city of Najaf, and is regarded as a marja, or supreme spiritual guide. Sistani -- who, largely for security reasons, rarely, if ever leaves his residence in Najaf -- issues his pronouncements through a network of aides who serve as his communicators to and from the outside world. Sistani's "quietist," as opposed to activist, brand of Shia Islam maintains a distance between religious authority and direct political involvement, holding that Islamic clerics should not govern or assume political power as in Iran. However, Sistani is plainly cognizant of his own influence and has asserted himself in the demand for direct elections leading up to the June 30 transfer of sovereignty from the Coalition Provisional Authority to an interim Iraqi government. Many Shiite Iraqis say they are ready to challenge, and even fight, the U.S.-led coalition should Sistani's call for elections not be met."

Iraqi Mojo said...

'In January 2010, during a Jumu'ah khutba (Friday sermon), Saudi cleric Mohammad al-Arifi delivered harsh criticism of al-Sistani, calling him an "atheist" and "debauched".[17] The remarks by the Saudi cleric were considered extremely insulting by Shi'a Muslims around the world, causing major outrage in some Shi'a populated countries like Iraq, Iran and Lebanon. Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki rebuked the Saudi religious authorities to allow such criticism of Shi'a clerics.[18] Lebanon-based military organization Hezbollah also condemned the attack on al-Sistani, calling the speech "inauspicious" and praising al-Sistani as one of Shi'a Muslims "most prominent religious references".[19] Al-Arifi's comments have also recently been publicly backed by a council of the highest Saudi clerics.[20]'

Iraqi Mojo said...

"Sistani, of course has cultivated a reputation as a "quietist," that is, as a cleric who does not believe in a noisy role for the Shiite clergy in political affairs, as -- you'll note -- is the opposite of the situation that prevails next door in Iran. There, the clergy rules under a questionable, or bogus, notion of Rule of the Jurisprudent, with the jurisprudent being a fancy word for a learned mullah. The fact that the mullahs in Iran are benighted and decidedly not learned hasn't deterred them from advancing the "Rule" idea, which was dragged out of obscurity by Ayatollah Khomeini, the leader of the 1979 revolution.

Sistani reportedly does not subscribe to Khomeini's Rule, also called the velayat-e faqih doctine. But if he doesn't, he doesn't say so. Apparently, his quietism extends even to being quiet about quietism."

Iraqi Mojo said...

"Like his predecessor Khoei, Sistani does not share the definition of the doctrine of Velayat-e faqih (the authority of jurists) supported by Ayatollah Khomeini and Iran's current supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei. However, his point of view about wilayat al-faqih is more advanced than that of al-Khoei. The only difference between Sistani's wilayat al-faqih and the other two Grand Ayatollahs is in the range of power that a Grand Ayatollah has in ruling the Islamic community. He believes in more power than al-Khoei believes but less than that of Khomeini."

Iraqi Mojo said...

Strange that I get an error message for long comments, yet the comments are published anyway.

Mister Ghost, did you get any error message when you tried posting your comment?

Bruno said...

Mojo, to his credit does not delete comments. At least, I've never had any deleted, and I've gone pretty hammer and tongs with him before.

Dolly said...

☼ Sistani is very Irano-philic ☼

Not really, my impression is that he doesn't recognize the authority of Iran.
There was a rumor that he refused to meet Ahmadi-Nejad.

I'm not a big Shia scholar but there is a concept called Velayate Faqih,
according to which Iranian Ayats would have reign over Iraq's Shiites as well. But I think this Shaytani doesn't subscribe to such a hierarchy

Dolly said...

So Sistani is an American ally, he encouraged soldiers to defect Ba'th army in 2003. (Drop the weapon and flee.) And afterwards he encouraged, even demanded, that his followers should vote in the elections.

↑So after all his sacrifice at the altar of USA and Sarah Palin, you still spit on Sistani.

Dolly said...

☼ Saudi cleric Mohammad al-Arifi delivered harsh criticism of al-Sistani, calling him an "atheist" and "debauched". ☼

Yea I know Aarifi. The position of the 'Ulamaa of Ahl us-Sunnah is that laymen Shia remain muslims, but the scholars are kuffaar.

Dolly said...

Mister Ghost, do you also follow Jack Chick tracts ?

Maury said...

I think Sistani is cool. No, he doesn't like America or Americans. But, he knew the US was doing what Muslim countries weren't willing to do...get rid of Sadman Insane. And, unlike Muqwaq, he didn't rail against the US just to play to the home crowd. Instead, he repeatedly urged the US to do the right thing while in Iraq, and to leave as soon as possible. Exactly what one would expect from a true patriot.

I also admire Sistani for living such a meager lifestyle, and for not being power hungry. He could have made himself king, or at least lived like one. Wouldn't it be nice if more "holy men" set the same example?

Dolly said...

He has been ruled as an infidel by the scholars, so that's where the story ends on Sistani and his status.

And, a "true patriot" doesn't let another country come in and kill the population.

Maury said...

A "true patriot" doesn't want millions of his countrymen to die for no reason. Especially if it would be counter-productive. The US provided a means to an end. Sistani recognized that.

Dolly wants 98% of the world dead. Never mind whether they support the US or not. They don't measure up to her standards, so they have to die. That might work for Dolly, but THANK GOD Sistani isn't that fucked in the head.

Dolly said...

☼ It was the jooos. ☼

Most likely it was, Mossad has a history of assassinations. One time they killed some waiter in Norway by mistake.

C.H. said...

Dolly,

Its just lovely when you complain about civilian casualties, like in Norway. How many times have you justified the mass murder of people in Iraqi cafes?

I think any sane person would agree that killing everyone who voted in Iraq, along with their children and anyone related to them, is worse than what you are pretending to sob about.

Maury said...

Dolly thinks the death penalty for mass murderers is barbaric, but chopping the head off a child of an Iraqi voter is a religeous duty. She has one of those "special edition" Qurans. The ones that allow readers to make up the rules as you go along.

Aton said...

"He has been ruled as an infidel by the scholars,"
Dolly


LOL, 'the scholars'

Dolly, you're f-ing ridicules.

Bruno said...

Aton needs English lessons.

Maybe Dolly will find the time?

Anonymous said...

I seldom leave comments on blog, but I have been to this post which was recommend by my friend, lots of valuable details, thanks again.