Sunni Kuwaiti Cleric Differentiates between Iraqi Shia Nationalists and those Supporting Iran
The USC Open Source Center translates a statement by a Sunni Salafi cleric in Kuwait that allows that some Arab Shiites in Iraq are "honorable" but not those allied with Iran.
Kuwaiti Shaykh Differentiates Between Iraqi Shia Supporting, Opposing Iran
Jihadist Websites -- OSC Summary
Wednesday, May 7, 2008 . . .
Terrorism: Kuwaiti Shaykh Differentiates Between Iraqi Shia Supporting, Opposing Iranian 'Plan'
On 24 April, a forum participant "Al-Ikhwani al-Salafi" posted to a jihadist website a question addressed to Kuwaiti pro-jihad [Sunni] Shaykh Hamid al-Ali about the differences among the Shia in Iraq. Shaykh Hamid al-Ali responds by stating that it is very important to differentiate between those supporting and opposing the Iranian 'plan' in Iraq. This is because differences with the former can be resolved through dialogue, whereas the Iranian plan needs dealing with in another manner.
A translation of the questions and answer follows:
"In the name of God the Merciful, the Compassionate.
"Shaykh Hamid al-Ali responds to a question in regards to the honorable Arab Shia.
"I spoke of two or three topics concerning the honorable Arab Shia who stand against the Safavid expansion. I asked the [Sunni] Association of Muslim Scholars regarding the revealing of names of the honorable Shia, who are a few in number. This is because, according to the principle that says 'ask the knowledgeable,' I asked Shaykh Hamid al-Ali, may God protect him, about the Arab Shia. His response was brief and clear. I will leave the comments to you.
"The question: Honorable shaykh, God knows how I love you in God. I want your opinion with regards to the honorable Arab Shia.
"First, what is your opinion concerning some of the Shiite leadership in Iraq such as Al-Husni al-Baghdadi, Shaykh Al-Mu'ayyid, and Shaykh Al-Khalissi. This is especially since Al-Sistani and Al-Hakim are angry with the three of them and they have been expelled from Iraq. Meanwhile, their followers are being sent to prison because of their stances regarding the American occupation and the Safavid Iranian occupation.
"Shaykh Al-Mu'ayyid forbids the vilification and slandering of the companions of the Prophet. Hence, is it legitimate to support them or pray for their guidance, especially since the Sunni Association of Muslim Scholars stated that those people shared a similar stance as theirs? Is cooperation with them in fighting the Iranian and American occupation legitimate?
"Second, what is the shaykh's opinion on the Arab Shiite Southern Tribes Council that is funded by the Sunni Association of Muslim Scholars and headed by Shaykh Harith al-Dari? Iran has killed 37 Shiite tribal chiefs because they were against its perverse attitudes. Is not fighting Iran and America a proof of their honesty? Is what the Association of Muslim Scholars is doing in opening lines of communication with them legitimate?
"Please respond to me because many people inside and outside Iraq are interested in the subject.
"Response of Shaykh Hamid al-Ali:
"I mentioned in the Al-Jazirah meeting that it is imperative to differentiate between the Shiite ideology and the Safavid political plan.
"Regarding the honorable Shia in Iraq who have stood against the Safavid [i.e. Iranian] plan, our differences with them are ideological and can be resolved through dialogue, as always has been the case throughout the history of our nation.
"As for the advocates of the Safavid [Iranian] plan, and I do not know to which of the Shiite scholars you referred in Iraq, this plan is a destructive danger and there is another way of dealing with it. If they really are against the Safavid plan, the people of Iraq should benefit from all communities in the society who are against the American and Safavid occupiers. Without doubt, Shaykh Harith al-Dari is a trustworthy personality, is honorable, and has solid and good stances; hence, his opinion should be taken with regards to the Shia who are against the Safavid occupation. God is All-Knowing.
"The words of Shaykh (Hamid al-Ali) have come to a close. Those who do not believe need to ask him once more online."
Labels: Iraq
posted by Juan Cole @ 5/08/2008 12:05:00 AM
Click to join Infoco
2 Comments:
We (Americans) are accustomed to having The War, (for lack of a better word or phrase to describe whatever the hell Mission it is that our troops are doing, Over There) just completely disappear, as it has recently done ~ from our televisions and our newspapers' front-pages, and our above-the-fold awareness, thus.
That it, The War News we receive has apparently evaporated in the midst of a Presidential election is remarkable. But to have The War drop out as it has: while we are engaged in a new, major battle is, in my humble opinion, astounding.
The battleground, Sadr City, is a BIG thing, folks, we're talking 2.5+ million people; that's 4x larger than the last City we laid seige to, Fallujah; or, 2x Gaza.
Over 1,000+ people have so far lost their lives in the Battle of Sadr City. Estimates of (serious) wounded approach ~10,000; WIA being anywhere from 6x to 12x KIA, typical ...and now there are reports bubbling up here and there about the MIA = refugees from battle, and a big-time humanitarian crisis, apparent.
Not to menation that there's lots of BANG-BANG action going on, as we speak: All that entertainment value content being wasted, as our bandwidth is entirely filled with the amusing word-parsing trivial pursuit and "identity" politics of candidate = product branding, etc. yadda ~ yadda, as we watch (or read) news people (or, "news entertainers" posing as real news anchors / actual journalists) interview one another, and ask themselves, as if they were academics or experts (!) What do you think, fellow newsperson / pundit cιlθbre?
I... really don't know, "Why?", frankly; I have no answer (that makes any sense) other than to say that future historians will no doubt take note, and believe it to be significant: that so few of us Over Here, including our own government and news media ~ really made any effort, really appeared to give a damn about a Big Battle, thousands of deaths, tens of thousands of wounded peoples, and hundreds of thousands of refugees / displaced persons...
...or that we Americans, Over Here even cared enough to express any interest whatsoever in the actions / well-being / morals and morale of our own troops-?
What exactly is this 'safavid' project that the Iranians are supposedly pursuing? As a shia iranian i am lost. I didnt realise we had an agenda. Not invading another nation aggressively for centuries doesnt strike me as expansionist. Saddam attacked iran, not the other way around.
Dont worry about Baghdadi he is the man who said he would use the nuke to make the whole world muslim. Funnily enough Islam wasnt spread by the sword and yet here is a tired old stereotype spread by a muslim himself. Pathetic.
Please someone tell me what this 'lurking snake' is trying to do. As far as i can tell it is simply to rid the ME of the colonialists and the ignorant mentality of the Arabs which allows it to persist.
Post a Comment
<< Home