Huge Explosion Rocks Baghdad, Kills 15 [18], Wounds 75;
3 US Troops Killed;
Sistani wants Parliament to Approve Security Pact
A big explosion in north Baghdad killed at least 15 [late reports say 18] persons and wounded 75 on Wednesday. Iraqi police said it was a suicide bombing. The US military said it was an accidental explosion of munitions a Shiite militia was moving up for an attack on US forces. Robert Reid writes, "The force of the blast crumbled several two-story buildings, buried cars under rubble, sheared off a corrugated steel roof and left a large crater on the residential street." There were several other bombings and attacks, making Wednesday a particularly violent day in Iraq (details below).
Sadly, Reid notes, "The three American soldiers died when gunmen opened fire on them near the town of Hawija, 150 miles north of Baghdad, a U.S military statement said. No further details were released.".
Patrick Cockburn has also gotten details of the proposed Bush- al-Maliki security agreement: "Secret Plan to keep Iraq under US Control"
Former Iraqi finance minister Ali Allawi weighs in on the security agreement. He sets the current negotiations in the historical context of the humiliation Iraqis felt over the 1930 treaty imposed on them by the British Empire as it prepared to give Iraq nominal independence but retained bases and continued to intervene in Iraqi politics. Allawi is a voice of reason and wise US officials would pay special attention to what he has to say here.
Al-Hayat writing in Arabic reports that Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, the leader of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq (the leading bloc in parliament and keystone of the government of Nuri al-Maliki) is saying he spoke to Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani about the security agreement with Washington. He says that Sistani laid out four points to which any such agreement must adhere:
Al-Hakim met with Sistani Wednesday evening, along with some journalists. The journalists reported that the grand ayatollah stressed national Iraqi unity in the face of challenges, expressed his concern about the lack of services for citizens, including electicity and water, and said the water shortage was especially harming farmers. He also urged haste in the rebuilding of the Askariya Shrine in Samarra.
Al-Hakim said that his own party felt the current American draft detracts too much from Iraq's sovereignty and fails to protect Iraqi wealth. He said that Sistani did not go into details but stressed general principles. He maintained that in general Sistani shared the concerns of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq.
Meanwhile,al-Hayat says, Akbar Hashimi Rafsanjani, the head of the Assembly of Experts (Iran's clerical senate), said that the Americans are trying to enslave Iraqis through this security agreement and that the "Muslim nation" would not permit it.
Al-Zaman writes in Arabic that Iraqi political parties are already gearing up for this fall's provincial elections, and that the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq, led by Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, wants to use religious symbols and pictures of Grand Ayatollah Sistani in its campaign, even though technically deploying such images would be unconstitutional. Sheikh Hamid Mualla, an ISCI official, rejected criticism of this campaign technique by secularists. He said that the Sadrists would likely use images of the late leader Ayatollah Muhammad Sadiq al-Sadr, and the Islamic Virtue Party (Fadhila) would use pictures of Ayatollah Muhammad Yaqubi, and that if they liked, the Communists could use pictures of Marx and Lenin.
Iraq's independents and secularists reject use of such images by a political party in its campaign. Mahmud Osman [Uthman], an MP in the Kurdistan Alliance, said he objected to the use of Ayatollah Sistani's picture in political advertising because he is not a member of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq or of any other party. As for pictures of mosques, he said, these are places of worship, he was less opposed in that case and anyway it was already routine practice in Iraq.
Critics of the Islamic Supreme Council argued that its decision to plaster Sistani's image everywhere in its campaign posters showed that the party was intellectually bankrupt and had no real political platform whereby it might appeal to voters who are disillusioned with the results of past elections (which the United Iraqi Alliance coalition led by the Islamic Supreme Council won at the level of the federal parliament and 9 of 11 provinces where there are substantial Shiite populations).
Mualla argued for a closed list system in the forthcoming elections, whereby the populace votes for party lists without really knowing who exactly will fill the slots. He said the alternative, an open electoral system where candidates campaign for individual slots, would be too hard to organize in Iraq by October. He said disputed provinces such as Kirkuk would have to undertake a time-consuming census first if you were going to have open elections.
Other headlines from Al-Zaman:
Fred Kaplan argues that Obama's 'talk to your enemies' strategy is not only not naive, it is the height of common sense diplomatically.
McClatchy reports political violence in Iraq on Wednesday:
' Baghdad
- Gunmen assassinated Col. Dhafir Al-Ani of the general inspector office in the interior ministry. His brother who was with him was injured in that attack.
-A suicide truck bomber targeted a police officer's parent's house in Shaab neighborhood in northeast Baghdad. Five people were killed and ten others were injured.
- A car bomb targeted commandos police patrol at the Ali Al-Lami restaurant at the main street leads to Jadriyah neighborhood. Three policemen were killed and six others were injured including three civilians. Police who were furious started shooting randomly killing and injuring some other civilians.
- Police found four dead bodies in Baghdad today: 2 in east Baghdad (Risafa bank); 1 in Zayuna and 1 in Palestine street .While 2 were found in northwest Baghdad; 1 in Shoala and 1 in Hurriyah.
Anbar
Around 11:30 am, a roadside bomb targeted an army patrol which was accompanied by the Arabia T.V. crew , who were filming a program called” the death road “ . One vehicle was damaged with no casualties reported , an officer of intelligence in Falluja police station said .
Around 12:30 pm, another roadside bomb targeted a combined patrol for Iraqi army and police who were in 50 patrols in Hamra area which is called the Tigris arm . Three policemen were killed (including an officer ) and four others were injured . During the raids the forces arrested 12 wanted people including 7 Qaeda leaders.
Salhuddin
- On Tuesday night two roadside bombs targeted a police patrol in downtown Tikrit transporting detainees to the police headquarters. One detainee who was arrested by the police was killed and eight policemen were injured.
Basra
- Tuesday night, a cameraman for the government channel Iraqia in Basra was injured when a roadside bomb exploded near a musician shop in Saymar neighborhood in the old city of Basra.
- Gunmen killed a shop owner of jewelry with his son inside their shop in Zubair (21 miles west of Basra) .'
Labels: Iraq

|
17 Comments:
Obama's AIPAC speech was soo bad, it is brilliant. Although he is infinitely better than McCain, his inexperience was claring.
The Zionists, rather than being satisfied with his wholesale sell out, smell blood and want more and more. So he hasn't won them over.
His Jerusalem promise is an amazing blunder, but will turn out to be very useful.
First of all he just killed the peace process, literally. If Osama Obama "gave" E Jerusalem to Israel then all the earlier promises about serious negotiatiation were just deceptions.
There is no way now, regardless of the outcome of the US elections, that Abbas or any of the pro-US Arab leaders can sell the negotiations. This is a good thing. The Arabs collectively have enormous wealth and weight, and will now use them rather than wait for the US to do something. In fact, Abbas and Hamas are in serious talks (as we speak) to end the Palestenian split!
Obama's promise may seem normal to the Americans, but it is obscene to the rest of the world. What authority does he have? And under what laws? Moreover, annexing East Jerusalem will finish off the "Jewish State" because it adds a large number of Arabs to Israel's population, which will tip the balance almost immediately. But Obama promises in the same speech that Israel will remain Jewish. How is he going to do that?
The version of the SOFA agreement being put out by Patrick Cockburn in the Independent is crude and primitive colonialism. But I can believe it - that these are the terms being proposed.
They remind me rather of the Treaty of Sèvres, the 1920 agreement to break up Ottoman Anatolia, which proved to be a dead letter in face of Ataturk's revolt.
I can't imagine anything more likely to provoke a nationalist reaction than this vision of permanent slavery.
Of course, in the White House, they don't believe in Iraqi nationalism.
You've been right, Juan, these last days to home in on the SOFA agreement as a fundamental issue for the future.
I was going to comment about Obama's promise on Jerusalem, but Anonymous got there first.
The man must be extremely stupid, or exceptionally ill-advised. He's gone off my list of wannahave US presidents. How could he have been so stupid as to state this just when he came into a position where he could hold back on stupid promises until he might become President and could continue 60 years of American policy on Jerusalem?
This is likely the real reason for al-Maliki's visit to Tehran:
The Iranians have put things in no uncertain terms: get U.S. forces out of your country in the very near future or we can promise you there will never be stability in Iraq.
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
Iraq lawmakers want U.S. forces out as part of deal
Wed, 04 Jun 2008
A majority of the Iraqi parliament has written to Congress rejecting a long-term security deal with Washington if it is not linked to a requirement that U.S. forces leave, a U.S. lawmaker said on Wednesday.
Two Iraqi lawmakers whose parties were listed as signatories testified to Delahunt's panel [Rep. William Delahunt, dem-MA] on Wednesday that U.S. troops should leave Iraq, and that talks on the long-term security pact should be postponed until after they are gone.
"What are the threats that require U.S. forces to be there?" asked Nadeem Al-Jaberi, a co-founder of the al-Fadhila Shi'ite political party, speaking through a translator.
Full piece Here.
.
Sistani is faking Nationalist stand against SOFA. But will eventually buckle up under his American masters and accept the Security Agreement as presented by the con-men of the New World Order. That is what the Shia sect was invented for in the first place, the propagation of the New World Order, One World Government and the coming of the One World Leader Mahdi. They are predisposed and preprogrammed to serve the Americans from ages past. Remove the fake and deceptive Islamic cover “TAKIYEH” and Shia is nothing more than a New World Order / One World Government Movement. The American NWO con-men do understand that well and as you may have examined past statements, action and strategy, you can ascertain that it is a true fact, they did always mentioned that Shia will help America and that Sunni will fight.
They will be the primary tool that will be used to bring human enslavement world wide, they will do anything and everything to fulfill their roll that they are chosen and destined for, they may not know it, just like the Hebrew did know who really chosen them and for what agenda.
Once again, Patrick Cockburn ( How Does He Do It? ) reveals "Secret plan to keep Iraq under US control
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/revealed-secret-plan-to-keep-iraq-under-us-control-840512.html
cheney / bush wants 50 military bases, control of Iraqi airspace and legal immunity for all american Occupiers and mercenaries
I don't think this was much of a secret. Many assumed this was the goal from the beginning. I think BushCo looks at it this way: Iran was once governed as a reliable US client. It was ours, we engineered it. We had a right to it. But weak US leaders allowed it to escape. If we had had troops in Iran, with unlimited power to arrest, kill and bomb, we could have prevented the revolution. Now we have to fight to get Iran back to its rightful status as a US client. That won't be easy-- it may require a few nukes. We can't let that happen to Iraq.
I'd like to know where Obama came up with "That is why I opposed holding elections in 2006 with Hamas on the ballot. The Israelis and the Palestinian Authority warned us at the time against holding these elections. But this Administration pressed ahead, and the result is a Gaza controlled by Hamas, with rockets raining down on Israel." The PA didn't want the elections? Since when? This seems like Obama is re-writing history like the Bushies BUT it makes sense once you really get into his policy re Iraq; forget a complete withdrawal or banning the use of mercenaries like Blackwater; does anyone want to address the fact that their are more 'private contractors' engaged in 'defense activities' than the entire State Dept. defense personnel WORLDWIDE?
I am furious about the way in which Hillary Clinton was treated; furious. But, I can support Barack Obama. I just wish that Obama would not feel that he has to show that his foreign policy will really be like John McCain's in order to become President.
The problem is by showing how fierce you are, you will likely be fierce as President. I was highly displeased with Obama on Latin America and increasingly on the Middle East. What the hecks is he doing in playing so much to wild neo-conservatives?
Obama began by threatening Pakistan, then moved to threatening Venezuela and even Bolivia and now is threatening Iran and does not seem to admit Somalia exists.
Are we to have a show of a little troop draw-down in Iraq coupled with an increase in the occupying forces in Afghanistan? That would be the indication.
On Israel and Palestine, where is Obama different from George Bush?
Cuba? Where is Obama different than McCain.
So, even if I go past the horrid way in which Clinton has been treated by the media and so many self-styled progressives, can Obama show me there will be a difference in foreign policy?
what everyone seems to misunderstand about the iraq war is that it clearly shows the severity of the economic crisis that america and the world faces.
i wont go into an explanation because to do so is a waste of time, but ask yourself this question:
if the high price of oil is curbing economic activity everywhere, why is the u.s threatening iran instead of having open talks to resolve things?
the price of oil would drop and isn't that what everyone wants, or is it?
The transcript of Obama's prepared remarks to AIPAC's "Policy Conference" are available online (link below). Below I included several quotes concerning his policy toward Syria, Iran, the Palestinians, US "foreign military assistance" and his tribute to Israel's accomplishments. US "foreign military assistance" to Israel is said to be about $3 billion annually and Obama's remarks said he's committed to continuing assistance at that level over the next decade. However he said US-Israel defense cooperation must be "deepened".
Concerning Syria his prepared remarks said "Syria continues its support for terror and meddling in Lebanon. And Syria has taken dangerous steps in pursuit of weapons of mass destruction, which is why Israeli action was justified to end that threat." Also he said "As President, I will do whatever I can to help Israel succeed in these negotiations. And success will require the full enforcement of Security Council Resolution 1701 in Lebanon, and a stop to Syria's support for terror. It is time for this reckless behavior to come to an end."
Concerning Iran his remarks said "The Iranian regime supports violent extremists and challenges us across the region. It pursues a nuclear capability that could spark a dangerous arms race, and raise the prospect of a transfer of nuclear know-how to terrorists. Its President denies the Holocaust and threatens to wipe Israel off the map. The danger from Iran is grave, it is real, and my goal will be to eliminate this threat."
Concerning the Palestinians his remarks said "The Palestinians need a state that is contiguous and cohesive, and that allows them to prosper – but any agreement with the Palestinian people must preserve Israel's identity as a Jewish state, with secure, recognized and defensible borders. Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided."
Concerning US "foreign military assistance" to Israel his remarks said "I will bring to the White House an unshakeable commitment to Israel's security. That starts with ensuring Israel's qualitative military advantage. I will ensure that Israel can defend itself from any threat – from Gaza to Tehran. Defense cooperation between the United States and Israel is a model of success, and must be deepened. As President, I will implement a Memorandum of Understanding that provides $30 billion in assistance to Israel over the next decade – investments to Israel's security that will not be tied to any other nation. First, we must approve the foreign aid request for 2009. Going forward, we can enhance our cooperation on missile defense. We should export military equipment to our ally Israel under the same guidelines as NATO. And I will always stand up for Israel's right to defend itself in the United Nations and around the world."
Also near the end Obama's remarks offered a tribute to Israel's accomplishments: "Just look at what Israel has accomplished in 60 years. From decades of struggle and the terrible wake of the Holocaust, a nation was forged to provide a home for Jews from all corners of the world – from Syria to Ethiopia to the Soviet Union. In the face of constant threats, Israel has triumphed. In the face of constant peril, Israel has prospered. In a state of constant insecurity, Israel has maintained a vibrant and open discourse, and a resilient commitment to the rule of law."
Link (PDF): http://aipac.org/Publications/SpeechesByPolicymakers/PC_08_Obama.pdf
We can understand why a fair approach to policy on Israel-Palestine is so difficult, but Obama is doing what he must be elected. Remember though, Clinton whom you criticized harshly was only doing the same. Both Obama and Clinton took the same approach to Iran, after all.
I think you were too harsh on Clinton, though I agree with your criticism in general. Obama is doing what must be done, just the same. I always expected Clinton to moderate as President.
The first Anon. in this response section brings up an excellent point regarding the population demographics in Israel. As Israel illegally continues to annex more Palestinian land, they inevitably will also end up integrating more Arabs into their state. The only reason the Israelis have not outright annexed the entire West Bank is because if they were to do so, they will be living in a state where Palestinians are a majority population. If Israel is to remain a democracy, then that state would cease to be Jewish.
The Israelis will be left with two alternatives. The first would be to institute some form of Apartheid in their government to prevent from being outvoted by Arabs. In that case, democracy is finished in Israel. The second would be to engage in some sort of ethnic cleansing process to eliminate the “Arab demographics” problem, which would be considered a crime in international law.
As Anon. said earlier, Obama does not address this contradiction.
Israe relents somewhat on Gaza Fulbrights. Is this the delicate, always endangered, bastion of democracy Obama was talking about?
Why do we treat Israel like it is a nearly defenseless entity surrounded by fierce powerful enemies? Israel has proved over and over again that it has the power and will to wage military violence against its neighbors, with little consequence to itself. And don't forget the nukes.
Given its enormous military advantage over it antagonists, why do we have to constantly support and guarantee its security? All we are doing is giving the schoolyard bully steroids.
When it looks like the Palestinians might be gaining enough strength to stop Israeli Fulbrights from going to the US, then we should be concerned. Meanwhile let Sparta be Sparta.
As for Obama, unless he can grow and show some spine between now and November, he'll end up being a McCain look-alike, but without the the POW duds.
Patrick Cockburn With Another Stunning Report. This guy justs keeps churning out the hits !!!
US issues threat to Iraq's $50 Billion foreign reserves in military deal
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/us-issues-threat-to-iraqs-50bn-foreign-reserves-in-military-deal-841407.html?r=RSS
The US is holding hostage some $50 Billion of Iraq's money in the Federal Reserve Bank of New York to pressure the Iraqi government into signing an agreement seen by many Iraqis as prolonging the US occupation indefinitely.
US negotiators are using the existence of $20 Billion in outstanding court judgments against Iraq in the US, to pressure their Iraqi counterparts into accepting the terms of the military deal.
Post a Comment
<< Home