How Arabs reach out to their Iraqi “brothers”

I find it interesting how some Arabs try to reach out to me on my blog and other blogs. Recently two of my Arab brothers, a Lebanese Australian and a Palestinian American, dropped by to “reach out” by leaving some friendly, Arab-like comments for my post “Obama Talks to Arabs & Muslims”. The Lebanese Australian brother’s first comment on my blog:

”Finally the curiosity got the better of me.
Books you're reading:
Elie Wiesel?!!
For godssake mojo!
Elie Wiesel who's closer to a viper than to a weasel? For godsake, mojo!! Should I remind you how despicable this person is? This 'benefactor of humanity', the "great advocate for human rights' who never had anything to say about the Palestinian tragedy but scorn, contempt and accusations of anti-Semitism? Do you provide bags for those who feel like throwing up or should I bring my own?”

So Elie Wiesel is despicable, and I should not have his book displayed on my blog, lest my Arab brothers may vomit when visiting here. I did not know that Wiesel was a journalist for the Irgun, the militant Zionist group that participated in the attack on Deir Yassin in 1948, but I don’t think he deserves to be called “despicable” and I haven’t seen evidence that he supports the expulsion of Palestinians from their homes. Before this discussion, I knew Wiesel only from his book Night.

After the lovely exchange with my Lebanese Australian brother, who has attacked me for my “sectarianism” on other blogs before, a Palestinian American brother chimed in with this comment:

"So Mojo, it is not despicable to support colonialism and settlements in Palestine"?

It depends on what “colonialism” and “settlements” mean, I responded. I insisted that I haven’t seen evidence that Wiesel supports the expulsion of natives from their homes. Colonialism is not necessarily the expulsion of natives from their lands, he retorted. He compared Jewish settlers to the Taliban. Some Jewish settlers are fanatical and some have engaged in horrific violence against Palestinians, but like the Taliban they are not. I wrote that I often see Arabs making inappropriate comparisons, “like comparing Guantanamo to Saddam-like imprisonment, or like comparing Abu Ghraib before 2003 to Abu Ghraib after 2003. Like comparing the IDF to Nazis. It is embarrassing.” He said “you are the embarrassment Mojo.”

He demanded that I tell him if I believe Hamas is a terrorist organization or legitimate resistance. The Arabs are in love with resistance. They drink, eat, and breathe resistance. But they have no answers when I point out that many Arabs who’ve lived all their lives just miles from occupied Palestine ended up traveling hundreds of miles to the east to mass murder Iraqis, except to say that it’s much easier to enter Iraq than to enter Israel or the West Bank, and that I should not use the term "3arab jarab". They have no answers to my bewilderment at the large number of non-Iraqi Arab suicide bombers who have killed and maimed mostly innocent Iraqis. They stay mum when I compare how the Arabs have resisted the occupation of Palestine to how the Arabs have resisted the occupation of Iraq. Apparently they would rather compare Israelis to Nazis.

He went on to write: “The good thing is our Shia brothers in Iraq overall support Palestine and the Palestinians. You are in the minority when it comes to your community and that is a good thing.”


So naturally I had to defend myself and show him that I do in fact support Palestine. I have written about Palestine on my blog. I support Palestine’s right to contiguous independent statehood, to freedom and prosperity, to peace. But I loathe the Palestinians who showed support for Saddam and Zarqawi. I will always call Arabs who supported Saddam and Zarqawi “3arab jarab”.

A few comments later my Palestinian American brother wrote this:

"Mojo, that is why i am reaching out to you but i feel that because i am Palestinians you are automatically rejecting me and judging me and my views.

I believe you support Palestine but i also believe you can't have it both ways, you can't be critical of only Arabs but not Americans who back these Arabs or who back Israel."

I asked him to give me an example of my sectarianism. He responded with: “I said i never saw you use the term Arab Jarab when it comes to Shia death squada. It is always in reference to Sunnis from what i have seen.”

Me: “There are Shia jarab, for sure. They just haven't killed any of my relatives. And the Shia jarab did not incite sectarian conflict in Iraq. There would have been no Shia Death Squads of there were no Sunni Death Squads like Al Qaeda to begin with.”

My Palestinian American brother, reaching out:

“You have no proof of that claim on death squads, it is all assumptions on your part.

Can't we argue there would be no Sunni death squads if they weren't disenfranchised?”

That’s when I found no patience left in me. I wrote “So the Baathists, with the help of 3arab jarab like Abu Musab al Zarqawi, responded to de-Baathification by blowing up markets, buses, police stations, weddings, funerals, universities.“

This is how my Arab “brothers” have reached out to me. It’s not the first time I’ve been called “sectarian”. Maybe I am sectarian. Would I be “sectarian” if the hardcore Baathists and their Wahhabi allies had not mass murdered Iraqi Shia in the first place? I doubt it.

It is not enough to commend the American President for wanting to help establish a contiguous Palestinian state. It is not enough that I have expressed sympathy with Palestinians who were expelled from their homes, who lost their children to Israeli bombing. Apparently Iraqis must express support for Hamas as well, or at least agree that Hamas is a legitimate “resistance” organization. We must condemn American support for Israel and US foreign policy in the Middle East in general, even as the same Arabs who hate America emigrate to America and become successful in America. We must not become angry when our Palestinian American friends say “bad move Shia” when we express joy or satisfaction at the hanging of Saddam or one of Saddam’s henchmen - we should at least find the humor in such statements, I am told. We must agree with our Arab “brothers” that Americans caused the sectarian conflict in Iraq, and IF Sunni Arabs caused violence in Iraq, it is because they were disenfranchised. We should not “demonize” Palestinians by linking to articles that show how some Palestinians supported Saddam or Zarqawi. We should avoid discussing Saddam's crimes before 2003, and if we must discuss life for Iraqis before 2003, we should say that it was better than after 2003, and we should blame the Americans for that and nobody else. And we must not display on our blogs books written by such “despicable” characters as Elie Wiesel.

Revenge of the 3arab jarab

When I think about the number of suicide bombers who have blown themselves up among Iraqis in the last five years, I am always shocked. It is difficult to comprehend how so many people can be convinced to kill themselves and other humans, even after you subtract the number of bombers who were tricked into doing it or drugged before being strapped with bombs and sent into a crowd of innocent Iraqis. The ones who do it voluntarily really believe they go straight to heaven after dying. It is mind boggling.

In 2003, before the invasion, Iraqis knew that the Ba3thi elite (Saddamists) would fight hard and if overthrown would want revenge, and they would kill Iraqis en mass, as they were quite used to it, in order to regain power. But I did not realize that non-Iraqi Arabs would join them, and volunteer as suicide bombers, often targeting markets, cafes, buses, universities, weddings, funerals, and restaurants. I have no problem calling those murderers "jarab" because that is what they are. More than 1,100 suicide bombers, even if they are not 3arab, are definitely jarab. They murder for their sect, their cult, although they have murdered many Sunni Iraqis. They are against reconciliation between Iraq's Shia Arab, Sunni Arab, and Kurds. Today they struck a packed restaurant where Iraqis had gathered to talk peace between Arabs and Kurds. And when I describe them as "jarab" some Arabs get angry with me.

People who say that there were no suicide bombings in Iraq before 2003 say the truth, but most people who say this do not ask why there were no suicide bombings in Iraq before 2003, and why it took months after the invasion for the number of suicide bombings to rise. After their overthrow, the Ba3thi leadership allied themselves with "mujahideen" like Abu Musab al Zarqawi and together they have been engaged in the most horrific crimes in human history, causing sorrow and suffering among millions of Iraqis.

3arab jarab unimpressed by Iraqi democracy

"Region Unimpressed by Balloting in Iraq"

Our Arab "brothers" are still the scum of the earth, it seems. I loathe the cockroach 3arab jarab.

Shia don't bomb Sunni markets

I think it's important to note that the Iraqi Shia have shown great restraint this year in the face of Sunni extremist terrorism directed at them. The Iraqi Shia showed similar restraint in 2004 and 2005, after hundreds of bombings killed and maimed thousands of innocent Shia and Iraqi ISF. Even at the height of the sectarian violence in 2006 and 2007, Iraqi militia did not bomb markets in Sunni neighborhoods.

Even more remarkably, in my opinion, the Iraqi Shia did not bomb markets in Sunni neighborhoods before 2003. During the 24 years of totalitarian rule by Sunni dictator Saddam Hussein, Shia rebels did not cause mass casualty bombings in markets or police stations in his home town or any Sunni neighborhood, maybe because the Shia knew that doing so would result in the deaths of innocent people. The Shia did not bomb markets or Saddam's security forces, despite Saddam's campaign of imprisonment, murder, and ethnic cleansing against Iraq's Shia that started in 1979. Nor do Shia bomb markets in Doha, Riyadh, or Amman. It is simply immoral and unjust to punish innocent Sunni civilians for the actions of Sunni extremists.

Western journalists have acknowledged the sectarian nature of the conflict in Iraq, but many still ignore the history of sectarian conflict in Iraq before 2003, and many Arabs continue to refuse to describe Iraq in sectarian terms. Even calling Saddam a "Sunni" dictator just two years ago drew condemnation from some people in the blogosphere. Where are those people now? How do they feel about the incredible violence that Sunni extremists continue to level at innocent Iraqis? They don't seem to be blaming America as much, but they don't blame the Wahhabi-influenced 3arab jarab either.

Perhaps western journalists are more objective than Arab journalists. But almost every day I read articles that assert the 2003 US invasion triggered sectarian violence in Iraq. From a Reuters article:

'The 2003 U.S. invasion triggered years of sectarian bloodshed between Iraq's once dominant minority Sunnis and majority Shi'ites, who stand to dominate any democratic vote.

Sunni Islamist insurgents such as al Qaeda consider Shi'ites heretics, and by bombing Shi'ite targets, they were able to spark a sectarian war that almost tore Iraq apart.

But more recent attacks on Shi'ites have failed to trigger a similar response, partly due to government crackdowns on Shi'ite militias, militia ceasefires, and reluctance of the Iraqi public to support sectarian causes after years of war.'

So was it the US invasion that triggered sectarian violence or was it Sunni Islamist insurgents? The US invaded Iraq in March, 2003, but Sunni extremists seemed more inclined to kill Iraqi Shia, Kurds, and Iraqi ISF than American soldiers, especially after Saddam was captured.

I have posted about the number of suicide bombings as a line graph before, but perhaps it is more explanatory as a bar graph with key events:



I find these numbers to be astounding and horrifying. But the Angry Arab and most Arab bloggers don't seem to be angered by the horror caused by the murderous 3arab jarab in Baghdad, and overall Arab bloggers don't seem to care as much about Arab terrorism as they do about occupation and "resistance".

I asked on KABOBfest today: 'Do any of our Arab "brothers" here give a shit about the seemingly unending Arab terrorism that continues to mass murder and maim innocent Iraqis?' Yesterday I asked an Arab American (on her blog) currently living in Cairo how Egyptians perceive Iraqis, and whether the Egyptian press has covered the deaths of 127 innocent Iraqis. She did not respond. Arab and Arab American apathy about Arab terrorism in Iraq is clear enough, but it's always good to get confirmation.

The Arabs and "Ummah" never cared about Iraqis

The more I read other Arabs' and Muslims' comments praising "resistance" and condemning "occupation" and "traitors" the more I wonder if they really care about Iraqis. It also compels me to think about the history of Iraq and the Middle East and I want to learn more. In a comment, a self-proclaimed Muslim told me "The target is the occupation, and whoever aligns with them. If zero Iraqis ally with them, then zero Iraqis are the target. If 12 million Iraqis ally with them, then 12 million Iraqis are target. This is completely up to them."

Also she said "The first time I ever heard of Saddam Hussein was in 1990. Iraqi internal goings-on are a separate matter from this Crusade today."

I responded:

Meanwhile in the House of Islam, Saudis and other khaleeji jarab have been aligning themselves with Americans since 1973. The mentally handicapped "Ummah" mass murders Iraqis as Muslims drink lattes at Starbucks in Mecca and as Americans plan their "crusade" from their HQ in Doha, Qatar.

Saddam's crimes of the 80s and 90s are separate from today's "Crusade" but I remind people of the history of Saddam's crimes to show that the Arabs and 'Ummah' did not care about the mass murder of Iraqis back then. They didn't care about how many bombs the Crusaders dropped on Iraq in 1991. They cared only about Sunni domination.

The hypocrisy is incredible. At least to me it is.

The Shia now have control of Iraq, and that is what the 3arab jarab got truly pissed about. The retarded Arabs and "Ummah" have never cared about Iraqis.

I should have added that zero American soldiers died in combat in Iraq last month. Most victims of bombings have been Iraqi civilians, and most of them have nothing to do with politics or "occupation".

Iraqi lives worth less

As the the death toll in Iran reaches into the dozens and outrages American leaders, the "resistance" in Iraq and other jarab continue to mass murder Iraqis in the numbers we have become accustomed to seeing there, without the outrage expressed by the President. It's as if Iraqi lives are worth less than Iranian lives. It reminds me of the comment by Madeline Albright, about the sanctions being worth the price. Iraqis have always been expendable, especially to the 3arab jarab.

'Dozens dead' in Baghdad bombing

At least 60 people have been killed by a bomb blast in the eastern Sadr City area of Baghdad, say officials.

Iraqi police said the bomb went off in a market place in the predominantly Shia area of the Iraqi capital.

More than 130 people were also reported to have been injured in the blast, one of the worst in Iraq this year.

It comes less than a week before US soldiers pull out of all Iraqi cities in advance of a complete withdrawal by the end of 2011.

continued

Justice in America

You may have read about the Massachussets man named Tarek Mehanna who wanted to kill Americans at a US shopping mall and US soldiers in Iraq. He is probably one of the many Arab Americans who was influenced by 3arab jarab who portrayed US soldiers as murderers of innocent Iraqis, not realizing that Arabs led by Saddam Hussein had been murdering Iraqis for more than two decades prior to the US invasion of Iraq. He may have been moved by images of US soldiers abusing Iraqis at Abu Ghraib, not knowing that Arabs led by Saddam had been torturing, raping, and murdering innocent Iraqis at Abu Ghraib and other Iraqi prisons for 24 years before 2003. I'm glad he was arrested before he killed anybody.

"If convicted, Mehanna faces up to 15 years in prison on the charge of material support of terrorism."

This morning I happened to be watching an excellent documentary (on IFC) about New York's Rockefeller Drug Laws and an African American man who was convicted of possession and sentenced to 15 years to life in state prison.

So the man who conspired to murder Americans may be given a lighter sentence than a man who received a package of cocaine in the mail. And they call this justice? In America?

Suicide bombings kill 30 in Baquba

"A string of three deadly suicide bombings killed 30 people in the former insurgent stronghold of Baqouba on Wednesday, including a blast from a suicide bomber who rode in an ambulance with the wounded before blowing himself up at a hospital, police said."

Meanwhile the KABOBfest continues and the 3arab jarab are still pissed off about Mossad's assassination of a Hamas weapons buyer in a Dubai hotel.

"Resistance" continues to kill Iraqis

"A bomb in a parked car ripped through a Sadr City neighborhood Wednesday evening, killing seven young people who had gathered at a nearby cafe to drink tea and play dominoes, Iraqi officials said.

The attack comes just days after a string of shootings and bombings convulsed the country in Iraq's worst violence so far this year. The violence appears designed to stir up sectarian tensions at a time when Iraq still has no new government after inconclusive parliamentary elections and as U.S. troops prepare to go home."

The "resistance" killed Iraqis at yet another cafe just two days after a suicide bomber killed 55 Iraqis at a textile factory in Hilla. Meanwhile the 3arab jarab continue to drink Starbucks without worry in Riyadh, Doha, Cairo, Amman, and LA.

Son kills father for working for US military

Some Iraqis used to turn in their own family members to prove their loyalty to Saddam. These are the epitome of 3arab jarab.

"An al-Qaida-linked insurgent shot and killed his own father as he slept in his bed Friday for refusing to quit his job as an Iraqi interpreter for the U.S. military, police said, a rare deadly attack on a close family member over allegations of collaborating with the enemy.

The attack happened on a particularly bloody day in Iraq, with at least 27 people killed nationwide in bombings and ambushes largely targeting the houses of government officials, Iraqi security forces and those seen as allied with them.

Hameed al-Daraji, 50, worked as a contractor and translator for the U.S. military for seven years since shortly after the U.S.-led invasion that toppled Saddam Hussein in 2003.

He was shot in the chest about 3 a.m. while sleeping in his house in Samarra, a former insurgent stronghold 60 miles (95 kilometers) north of Baghdad, police Lt. Emad Muhsin said.

Authorities arrested the son and his cousin, saying the young men apparently were trying to prove their loyalty after rejoining the insurgency. Police were also looking for another son who allegedly took part in the attack."

"Injustice" compelled him to act

It's interesting how some people act when they see injustice. Muntadhar al Zaidi saw the injustice that befell Iraq, and so he threw his shoes at American President George W. Bush, as if Dubya was the only person in the world responsible for the injustice in Iraq. That's how many people, especially Arabs, prefer to see the Iraq war: it was all Bush's fault. If only Bush had left poor little Saddam to stay in power in Baghdad, everything would be fine in Iraq. Certainly the Sunni Arabs would be happy, and there would have been no bombings of markets in Shia neighborhoods.

In 2006 the Angry Arab was inundated with comments from people who truly believed that the bombs being detonated at police stations and at public places in Iraq were planted by the US military, as if the US wanted to incite sectarian violence in Iraq, as if the sectarian violence somehow helped the US agenda.

Muntadhar al Zaidi writes: "Our patience and our solidarity did not make us forget the oppression. But the invasion divided brother from brother, neighbour from neighbour. It turned our homes into funeral tents."

No mention of the 3arab jarab, many of them Saddamists, who directly mass murdered Iraqis and forcefully divided "brother from brother" all over Iraq. It is as if there was no injustice in Iraq before 2003, as if Iraqis were all united. Why did Muntadhar al Zaidi not act when he saw the injustice of Saddam's regime? Or did he not see the injustice of Saddam's regime?

Muntadhar al Zaidi wrote about the "scandal of Abu Ghraib" as if there was no torture or murder at Abu Ghraib before 2003, as if torture and murder of innocent Iraqis happened only after the US invasion, as if Iraqis were united for 24 years under the dictatorship of Saddam.

Perhaps Muntadhar al Zaidi was too young to remember the oppression, torture, and murder of Iraqis in the 1980s. Maybe he doesn't know that Saddam's Republican Guards and other security apparatuses slaughtered Iraqi Shia by the tens of thousands in 1991, or maybe that bit of oppression and violence can be blamed on Bush Sr. Maybe he was too young and impressionable to realize that by 2000, Iraqis had already fled Iraq by the millions, not because the US invaded Iraq, but because Saddam's tyranny was too much for Iraqis to bear. Maybe Muntadhar al Zaidi is just a typical Arab who in 2003 did not know what Saddam's regime had been doing to Iraqis for 24 years, and with the discovery of honest reporting in the Arab media (actual reporting done by Jewish American journalist Seymour Hersh) in 2004, the images of abuse at Abu Ghraib by US soldiers angered him, like they angered so many Arabs.

It is as if throwing his shoes at Dubya has solved any of Iraq's problems. If throwing your shoes at a leader is an appropriate response to injustice, why doesn't Muntadhar al Zaidi throw his shoes at the people who have been causing the explosions at Iraqi markets, police stations, universities, restaurants, and even weddings and funerals? Was it Bush who caused those explosions? Or should we forget about them and focus on the crimes committed by American forces, like the Arabs do? US troops withdrew from Iraqi cities almost three months ago, but last month "insurgent attacks produced the highest monthly death toll among Iraqis in 13 months." Is that not injustice, ya Muntadhar? And why didn't you throw one of your shoes at the incompetent Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki?

Nibras Kazimi asks appropriately: "Would al-Zaidi dare to throw a shoe at Syrian President Bashar al-Asad, whose regime enabled jihadists and Ba'athists to wage the bloody insurgency against the New Iraq?"

3arab jarab never held real elections

"In other words, Iraq's critical political transition is so far going as well as could be expected, both for the country and for the Obama administration. The very uncertainty of the outcome is shaming the regimes of all the other Arab states, which have never held such competitive elections. If the fierce competition among rival blocs can be confined to the vote count and the negotiations to form a new ruling coalition -- and does not escalate into sectarian violence -- Iraq will cross a major threshold."

Sunday Bloody Sunday

"The double suicide bombing in Baghdad on Sunday was the deadliest attack in Iraq for over two years. It claimed more than 130 lives, and wounded hundreds more."

The resistance strikes again, at Iraqis of course, and our Arab brothers do not seem to be very concerned about it.

As Mish3an Jabouri dreams of unity between Iraq and Syria (but not unity with the Iraqi government), and as 3arab jarab praise Saddam and preach "resistance" from their homes in California, the "resistance" continues to mass murder Iraqis, targeting Iraqi security forces and government employees.

Well at least the "resistance" is no longer targeting markets and cafes. That is considered progress in the Arab world. Anthony Shadid (Arab American journalist) wrote: "Unlike the carnage unleashed by attacks in crowded mosques, restaurants and markets, aimed at igniting sectarian strife, these blasts appeared to rely on a distinctly political logic." I do not understand how "distinctly political logic" can result in the murder of 137 people, but I betchya the Arabs do.

From David Ignatius of the Washington Post: 'But my Iraqi friends were surprisingly upbeat about the future, even after Sunday's terrible bombings. "In every sector, Iraq is coming back to its normal mode," said one. "There is no way it will slip back," insisted the other. I wondered at their confidence on such a day, but that is part of the Iraqi toughness.

Rather than talking about the bombings, we talked politics. My friends sharply criticized the incumbent prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki. But as we were debating, one turned to me with a smile: "Here we are talking about who will run the government after the elections. Could you do that in any other country in the Arab world?"

Barack Obama on the bombings: "The United States will stand with Iraq's people and government as a close friend and partner as Iraqis prepare for elections early next year, continue to take responsibility for their future, and build greater peace and opportunity," President Barack Obama said in a statement that condemned the bombings."

From our friends in Europe: "Sweden, which currently holds the EU's rotating presidency, said in a statement: "The presidency of the European Union condemns today's car bombs in Baghdad."

It seems that only our Arab "brothers" cannot bring themselves to condemn these bombings that target Iraqi government employees, who are after all ordinary IRAQIS.

The Arabs never ask "why does the Arab resistance attack the Iraqi government by murdering innocent Iraqis?" They do not consider what was happening in Iraq before 2003 and wonder if Baathist extremists would mass murder Iraqis in order to gain power, like they did before 2003.

The bombings apparently do not make the "Angry Arab" angry enough to condemn the Arabs who continue to mass murder Iraqis in the most horrific ways. Instead, California Professor As'ad Abu Khalil wrote recently: "So the US comes to Iraq, sets up a puppet government and tells the puppets that they now have a democracy. So the puppets believe it. I find that quite amusing."

On the same day the Angry Arab wrote about Sistani, who has repeatedly called for peace and unity between all Iraqis. The professor wrote on Friday: "He [Sistani] is one of the worst puppets in the Middle East, and will go down in history as the Cleric of Foreign Occupation. So this man says that he does not interfere in politics but recently has been making noises insisting on open electoral lists."

Incredibly the professor wrote on the same day a post about the Saudis promoting a "Saddam TV satellite channel that will air Saddam speeches and songs non-stop". So Iraqis cannot count on even an educated, respected, liberal Arab American professor who has acknowledged the sadism and criminality of Saddam, to condemn the Arab extremists who continue to mass murder Iraqis.

I suppose I should not expect ordinary Arabs and Arab Americans to condemn the mass murderers of Iraqis, after Arab nationalist poets lauded Saddam, and after Arab American academics still call it a puppet government in Baghdad while ignoring the Arab insurgency that continues to kill Iraqis 6 years after the toppling of the former dictator. I have never seen an Arab or Arab American condemn the bombers, who are obviously Arab and who have killed thousands of innocent Iraqis this year, and this has been a relatively peaceful year in Iraq compared to the sectarian violence of 2006 and 2007.

So these are our Arab "brothers". They seem to have no problem fighting "imperialism" by mass murdering Iraqis. It makes me very sad.

Update (Oct 26): On the Palestinian Pundit, where blaming America for all of Iraq's problems is quite normal, the Arab American blogger Tony posted an article by an Iraqi British "senior lecturer" at London Metropolitan University: 'the Iraqi people are still paying with their blood for the US-led invasion and occupation of their country......the Iraqi people will not freely accept a pro-US regime in Baghdad and that the "exit strategy" will inevitably result in long-term occupation, and bring only more bloodshed and destruction. Why are the Iraqi people expected to elect a disparate collection of corrupt and sectarian pro-US politicians?'

Our Lebanese Australian friend who contributes to the Palestinian Pundit and to the Angry Arabs Comments Section, quoted Juan Cole, who pointed out that "The Minister of Public Works is Riyadh Gharib, a prominent member of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq, which is close to the clerics in Tehran. Public Works as a ministry would thus have a lot of ISCI party members as employees and it is also a huge source of political patronage. Baathists or Sunni extremists would have every reason to hit it."

But this is the part of Cole's article that interested our respected Lebanese Australian friend: "The Republican's avaricious and illegal war on Iraq destabilized the eastern Mediterranean, perhaps for decades, creating long-term challenges to US and global security of which the Baghdad blasts are very possibly only minor omens."

I guess Iraqis should have stuck it out with Saddam so that the eastern Mediterranean would remain "stable" in the eyes of Juan Cole and non-Iraqi Arabs.

Also today the Angry Arab wrote about the bombings: 'Look at this language about the bombings yesterday: "leaving a scene of carnage that raised new questions about the government’s ability to secure its most vital operations." You would not know from this sentence that the US has some 130,000 troops.'

And you would not know from any Arab "intellectual" that Arabs murdered around 150 Iraqis yesterday, including 30 Iraqi children.

Update (Oct 27): "Iraq's government pledged tighter security the day after two suicide bombings claimed at least 155 lives, including two dozen children trapped in a bus leaving a day-care center."

Sistani tries to mediate

I'll never forget the 3arab jarab, like the Lebanese American professor As3ad Abu Khalil, who denounced Sistani because he did not use his great influence to encourage the Iraqi Shia to fight Americans.

'Iraq’s top Shiite Muslim cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, may be exerting his influence with squabbling politicians to speed up the formation of a new government as the U.S. withdraws troops, a U.S. diplomat said.

“We know he is following this issue on a daily basis,” departing U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Christopher Hill said at a briefing in Washington yesterday. “I suspect any role he can play he is playing. I suspect he is playing it in the best way he can to ensure that there is a positive outcome here.”

Iraqis are facing uncertainty stemming from a five-month deadlock over the formation of a new government and a renewal in violence as the U.S. completes the pullout of its combat forces from Iraq this month. Sistani, revered by the Shiite community in Iraq, has said in the past all political groups should be included in the government in order to give Iraq stability.

Rarely seen in public, Sistani could be using his influence to end protracted talks that broke down Aug. 16 between the two top vote-getters in the March 7 parliamentary elections, Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki and former premier Ayad Allawi.

Sistani believes “that when the government is finally formed, you will see Sunnis, Shia and Kurds in that government together,” said Hill, who spent the past 16 months in Baghdad.'

"The Hurt Locker" wins best pic on Election Day 2010

The Hurt Locker won the Academy award for best motion picture last night. When I saw ads for the movie last summer I was looking forward to seeing it and I even posted about it in anticipation before it was released. I was hoping the movie would show how US soldier are helping Iraqis. I saw it a few days after its release date and was surprised to see few people in the theatre. Scott Bowles of USA TODAY wrote "no movie embraced obscurity like best-picture winner The Hurt Locker, which became the lowest-grossing film of all time to win best picture."

It was a good movie, but I did not think it was that good. Most Iraqis in the movie seem to be angry at American soldiers and want to kill them. Only one Iraqi professor and one Iraqi boy in the movie are shown interested in befriending the main character, an American soldier who specializes in defusing bombs. I doubt this portrayal of Iraqis as seeking death for US soldiers is accurate. Iraq Pundit seems to agree, and he may have liked the movie less than I did.

Also I was expecting to see in the movie a depiction of at least one market bombing. The bombings of Iraqi markets and public places occurred with horrific frequency between 2004 and 2007, yet there is not a single scene in the movie that depicts the reality of the "resistance", which has killed and wounded many times more Iraqis than Americans.

Nor did the movie reflect the reality of suicide bombers. There have been at least 1,700 suicide bombings in Iraq, a figure unprecedented in the history of the middle east. The majority of suicide bombers have been non-Iraqi and the majority of victims of such bombings have been Iraqi civilians. Many bombers and recruiters of bombers came from Jordan. Abu Musab al Zarqawi, the Jordanian terrorist who was belatedly killed by US forces, led his Arab brothers in mass murdering Iraqi Shia. Not a single mention of this fact in the movie. Instead the movie was shot IN Jordan! One of the award recipients thanked the "team in Jordan" for their role in the movie. This pill is still hard to swallow. I simply hate the Jordanian 3arab jarab.

Maybe I should not have expected so much from a Hollywood flick. I should not expect an accurate portrayal of Iraqis or Iraqi history and politics in any American movie. The Hurt Locker focuses more on the relationships between the soldiers. Perhaps I should be thankful that at least the movie shows what the resistance does to Iraqi boys who befriend American soldiers.

Remembering the KABOBfest about Iraq

Before I go for a long drive, I wanted to document here, to remember how the Arabs on KABOBfest, whose authors appear to be mostly North Americans of Palestinian and Lebanese descent, reacted to the war in Iraq. In general they did not condemn the Arabs who mass murdered Iraqis as much as they condemned the Americans who overthrew Saddam the murderous dictator. I think some of my comments and those of a few Kabobers are worth posting here:

My first comment was "The Kabobers would probably condemn the bombing of a volleyball game if Americans did the bombing." You responded be telling me that your are concerned about the consequences of US policies, as if this justifies the Kabobers' lack of condemnation of Arab terrorism.

I searched for "Iraq" on KABOBfest, hoping to find strong condemnation of the extremists who have been responsible for the mass murder of Iraqis.

A few interesting posts, some of which I've read before, like "18 Arab Leaders You Would Want with You in a Bar Fight" By Hanitizer, who summarized the criminality of Saddam. Also I read with great interest "Western Hypocrisy Shines at the Racism Conference" By Will, who wrote "Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have paid with their lives. " But he blamed the deaths of Iraqis directly on "Westerners". No mention of the thousands of Arab "mujahideen" and "resistance" dickheads who repeatedly bombed and attacked innocent Iraqis.

Also I just read "A Moving Diatribe to Mobilize the Iraqi Police" By Will, who condemned the American soldier's lecturing of Iraqi police, even though they deserved to be lectured like that because Shia militias had infiltrated the Iraqi police and some of them killed innocent people, often attacking Sunni Arabs. One would think that Sunni Arabs should applaud the soldier's lecture. But no, Will wondered "if this video is planted by Military strategic communication experts to show why the Iraqi police are inadequate and a US presence is needed, and how the US is trying to get them in shape to take control of their country." WOW

I noticed Kalash wrote on March 8, 2009 in which he appeared to condemn the suicide bombers (he actually mentioned them!), and he wrote that "Sunni residents of Samarra welcomed over a million Shia pilgrims. No major acts of violence were reported. Three years ago, the Golden Mosque was attacked sparking a bloody civil-war." WOW I thought, this Kabober is not like the others. But at the bottom he wrote : "Ali Hassan Al Majid (aka Chemical Ali) was given his third death sentence… That court is more of a joke than the ICC." So Iraq isn't even allowed to try and convict a mass murderer? The court is a joke?

I noticed this Kalash guy has written many posts that mention the horrendous violence in Iraq. Almost a year ago he wrote in "Remembering Iraq (Dec 19 – Jan 18)": "Well over 175 people have died in Iraq over the past month (in addition to any casualties resulting from military operations). That number pales in comparison to the dead in Gaza, but it is a clear sign that the beleaguered nation still has a long way to go."

At first glance it appears to be a condemnation of the terrorists who kill innocent Iraqis, but it's just a condemnation of America and Bush, who according to the Kabobers have caused the deaths in Iraq, which was hunky dory before 2003. In that post Kalash wrote: "Although he’s already been given two death sentences, a new trial began for Ali Hassan al Majid (aka Chemical Ali). This time the charade is centered on his role in the Halabja massacres ."

So Kalash, the smartest of the Kabobers, does not know of Ali Hassan al Majid's role in the massacres of Kurds and called his trial a "charade". How fitting!

In "Remembering Iraq: House of Saddam" Kalash criticized the film for not covering US support for Saddam in the 80s, the crippling effect of sanctions, and most importantly, the atrocities following the 2003 invasion. I wonder if Kalash even knows about the 1991 intifadha and how Saddam's goons mass murdered Iraqis. Also, if the film were to cover the atrocities following the 2003 invasion, wouldn't they have to tell the story about Zarqawi and the thousands of Arabs who travelled hundreds of miles to ostensibly fight the American occupiers, but ended up mass murdering mostly Iraqi civilians and Iraqi security forces?

But Kalash did write: "Saddam Hussein was a ruthless thug responsible for the misery of millions of Iraqis. There were good reasons to take him out". I agree with him on this! Kalash wrote a few of these "Remembering Iraq" posts and on Nov 28, 2008 he called it "Iraq’s elected representatives" - that is progress for an Arab! Kalash has written a lot about Iraq, and I thank him for it. But like most Arabs, he seems more interested in condemning Americans and their "occupation" of Iraq rather than condemning the Saddamist and Salafi scum of earth who continue to mass murder Iraqis.

I will search further back because many posts (507) mention Iraq, and I thought surely one of you Kabobers must have been angered by the civil war of 2006 and 2007. Very interesting reading on KABOBfest that symbolizes how biased (and sometimes clueless) the Arabs are on Iraq.

Maybe that was a bit harsh, because the more I read, the more I did find condemnation, albeit light and infrequent and certainly not as strong as their condemnation of Bush & Cheney:

"Nabeel: "I do not want to be one of those people who was not publicly criticising Zarqawi & Co. when he was blombing Shia areas, but immediately took offense to his targeting of Arab Sunnis."

Iraqi Mojo: "Actually that is the first time I've seen any Arab say something like that. A big SHUKREN to Nabeel, even though it's more than 4 years late."

Then I found this golden nugget:

I just read this: 'what about the militants that come into Iraq to defend “Islam” and all its glory at the present state. I’m sorry but this is disgusting, another sign of why we don’t get along and why arabs will never be friends.'

on "Saudi Jarabia" By NarcelX.

EXCELLENT! Thank you NarcelX!

So NarcelX is the smartest Kabober, not Kalash. Where is NarcelX these days?

Then I wrote this:

I just discovered that NarcelX is Iraqi, and that he quit this blog after one of the clueless Kabobers called NarcelX an idiot for hating the 3arab jarab of KSA. No wonder I agreed with NarcelX, and no wonder the other Kabobers attacked him for expressing his outrage, which other Kabobers evidently did not share. His post "Saudi Jarabia" was the strongest condemnation of "mujahideen" I've seen on KABOBfest. But he is Iraqi, and that makes sense!