A visit to France .... cont.

The plane take off at its scheduled time, we reached the Amman international airport, in Jordan. the company correspondent, Ahmad, (is his name) was with us, he took us to the Hyatt grand hotel. We reached the hotel at 7:00 pm we were very tired, as we were on our feet from 9:00 am, and without lunch except the food served in the plane.

After we took a rest we gathered in the lobby of the hotel, Ahmad invite us for a dinner in one of the restaurant in the hotel, it was Thailand restaurant, serve special Asian food, mainly sea food. For the first time in my life I ate Shrimp and other Sea food, for the truth some of it was very delicious. we went to sleep at 12:00 pm to be ready for the next trip to Paris at 5:00 am.
We were ready at time, Ahmad took us to the airport, but unfortunately, he couldn't get the Visa to accompany us to Paris.

He gave us the tickets, the reservation in the Hotel in France and the phone number of the responsible person in Paris who suppose to meet us at the airport.
The direction of the plane was toward the west, so we gain two hour, the time difference between Iraq and France. The trip last 4.5 hours.
We reached Paris, there were a heavy rain in Paris at that time, the airport was over crowded. but we didn't found any body in the airport from the company, we keep looking for any sign or any thing to know if there is any one to take us to our hotel. All of us were in Paris for the first time, no one of us speak french, which was a big problem their.

After an hour or so of fruit less waiting, we called the number Ahmad gave us, when we informed that no body came to meet us because it was Sunday and it is weekend, but we get confirmation that the hotel reservation is OK, and we have to take taxis to the hotel by ourselves, and cars will be waiting for us next morning to take us to the company.

We took 3 taxis, gave the address to the drivers, they took us to our hotel which was in the city of Versailles. it take about an hour to reach the hotel in that rainy day.

We are now in France, Versailles is one of the most beautiful city I have ever seen.

to be continue

A visit to France

The Iraqi Ministry of Health bought a Gamma Cameras for the Nuclear Medicine centers in Iraq.
One of these Cameras was for Mosul Nuclear Medicine.
The Cameras we bought are up to date and need special skills and knowledges to operate it, and to interprete the results.

They chose two doctors from Mosul to train on the usage of this Camera in the country where it has been build (France), I was one of those two doctors.

April 30/2006 was the date in which we suppose to take the plane to Paris. the company correspondence in Iraq supposed to take care of the visa and the plane reservation. He took our passport for this purposes.

He sent me an e mail to be in Baghdad in a well known place where other doctors from Baghdad are gathered, to take special cars to take us to the airport. our date was at 9:00 am on 4/30/2006. our plane take of at 3:30 pm.
The extra time was to overcome any difficulties or problems in the road to the airport.

As you may know, the road from Mosul to Baghdad is not save, and not always easy to reach Baghdad. so we decided to go to Baghdad one day in advance just in case there is any problem in the road.

We arrange a taxi with a professional driver to pick us at 6:00 am just after the end of the curfew.
At 6:30 we were in the taxi ready to go, but all the bridges of the city were closed for no clear reason.
We stayed in the car waiting for the bridge to open till 11:00 am where they allow the cars to cross the bridge, but one at a time, we cross the bridge and so we pass the first obstacle, as we knew later the bridges closed again few minutes later for the rest of the day.

At the city of Baiji, mid way to Baghdad there was an explosion and the main street was closed, we forced to take a detour in an unpaved side way, after we left Baiji by few tens of kilometers there was a three American vehicle closing the high-way and all the car are forced to drive in the farms where there is no distinct way, just find a way to drive your car through and go on. It take about 45 minute in such a miserable sandy way.

After that the road to Baghdad was open with no problem except when we met an American high-way patrol, they move very slowly and don't allow any car to pass them, cars wait till they took an exit or change their way to move in their ordinary speed. We reached Baghdad about 6:00 PM. It was a 12 hours trip,usually take only 4 hours.

The next day we were all ready at the specified place , but a little problem arise, our passports are still in the French embassy for the Visas, the company correspondence suppose to pick the visa in the morning and meet us at 9:00 am. but he didn't show up. at 11:00 am we get him at his mobile phone, he told us that there were fire-shoot at the vicinity of the embassy and the road to the embassy is closed and he couldn't reach it, at 1:00 pm he call us saying he reached the embassy and waiting there for the passports and Visas. at 2:00 pm he arrived with the Taxis to take us to the airport.

We reached the Airport safely and completed the necessary arrangement and took our seats in the plane just at time.

Thanks God we are now in our way to Paris.

To be continued

I am back

Hi every body

I am back. I am writing from mosul now after a 33 day out,in France.
It was a an afficial bussiness visit, but there were a lot of fun and social activities.
I am preparing my self for a new posts describing my impression about what I saw there.
It is difficult to describe all the beuty and charm of France in few words, but I will try.

One month break

Hi every body.

I will be out of Iraq for official bussiness for one month (May).
During this month I don't know if I could find time for further posting or for moderation of comments.

Don't be worry about me, I will be back at the beginning of June. Till then, good bye, and have a good time

The new Iraq

On Saturday,April 21, 2006. The Iraqi parliament meet to announce the new head of the parliament, the new president and the new prime minister.

There were voting for these positions!, although they announce in advance the names!.
The end result end with a clear sectarian partitioning of the posts!

The head of the parliament is Sunni Arab with two deputies, one Kurd and the other Sheii Arab!.

The president, a Kurd with two deputies, one Sunni Arab and the other Sheii Arab!

The prime minister is A Sheii Arab, he is; Nory Kamil Al-Ali, "AKA Jawad Al-Maliky"
He is from the same party and the same list as the previous PM Al-Jaafari.
He promised the parliament and the Iraqis that he will form the new government depend on qualification not on sectarian factors, that sound very good for me, and for all the Iraqis also, but we look foreward to see it on the ground in the form of acts not just a nonsense promises that stay as "ink on paper" as the well known Arabic proverb said.

All what we can do today is just wait and see, it is only 30 days till the new government will announce and every thing will be as clear as the Sun.

The U.S. Military is in DU Denial

The U.S. Military is in DU Denial
by Susu Jeffrey

"My name is John Marshall. I was exposed to DU (depleted uranium). I am 100 percent disabled and I am pissed-off. In fact, I was advised by a couple of my counselors not to do this [interview] because I'm so angry with the government -at the VA system, at the way I'm treated and other veterans are treated. It's very impersonal. They don't give you any time. They ask us to go fight their wars, do the dirty work and then they can't take care of you."


Most people don't believe the U.S. has been poisoning its own troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, or they've heard about uranium "tipped" bombs-like fingernail polish painted on the outside of a shell casing. On the contrary, these are solid uranium core projectiles.

"I got a thank you (letter) from some lieutenant colonel. 'Thank you for serving our country. We express our deepest gratitude but we believe you were one of these men who were exposed to depleted uranium either through shrapnel or inhalation of dust.'

"I'm 35, I take 17 medications, I've had cancer-lymphatic cancer, Hodgkin's disease-Lennert's lymphoma was the initial diagnosis-immune system."

Read more

Mission Accomplished

I recieved the following article by e-mail from a friend.
It deserve reading.

Bush Didn't Bungle Iraq, You Fools
THE MISSION WAS INDEED ACCCOMPLISHED
by Greg Palast
for The Guardian

20 March 2006

Get off it. All the carping, belly-aching and complaining about George Bush's incompetence in Iraq, from both the Left and now the Right, is just dead wrong.

On the third anniversary of the tanks rolling over Iraq's border, most of the 59 million Homer Simpsons who voted for Bush are beginning to doubt if his mission was accomplished.

But don't kid yourself -- Bush and his co-conspirator, Dick Cheney, accomplished exactly what they set out to do. In case you've forgotten what their real mission was, let me remind you of White House spokesman Ari Fleisher's original announcement, three years ago, launching of what he called, "Operation Iraqi Liberation." O.I.L.
How droll of them, how cute. Then, Karl Rove made the giggling boys in the White House change it to "OIF" -- Operation Iraqi Freedom. But the 101st Airborne wasn't sent to Basra to get its hands on Iraq's OIF.

"It's about oil," Robert Ebel told me. Who is Ebel? Formerly the CIA's top oil analyst, he was sent by the Pentagon, about a month before the invasion, to a secret confab in London with Saddam's former oil minister to finalize the plans for "liberating" Iraq's oil industry. In London, Bush's emissary Ebel also instructed Ibrahim Bahr al-Ulum, the man the Pentagon would choose as post-OIF oil minister for Iraq, on the correct method of disposing
Iraq's crude.

And what did the USA want Iraq to do with Iraq's oil? The answer will surprise many of you: and it is uglier, more twisted, devilish and devious than anything imagined by the most conspiracy-addicted blogger. The answer can be found in a 323-page plan for Iraq's oil secretly drafted by the State Department. Our team got a hold of a copy; how, doesn't matter. The key thing is what's inside this thick Bush diktat: a directive to Iraqis to maintain a state oil company that will "enhance its relationship with OPEC."


Enhance its relationship with OPEC??? How strange: the government of the United States rdering Iraq to support the very OPEC oil cartel which is strangling our nation with outrageously high prices for crude.

Specifically, the system ordered up by the Bush cabal would keep a lid on Iraq's oil production -- limiting Iraq's oil pumping to the tight quota set by Saudi Arabia and the OPEC cartel.

There you have it. Yes, Bush went in for the oil -- not to get MORE of Iraq's oil, but to prevent Iraq producing TOO MUCH of it.

You must keep in mind who paid for George's ranch and Dick's bunker: Big Oil. And Big Oil -- and their buck-buddies, the Saudis -- don't make money from pumping more oil, but from pumping LESS of it. The lower the supply, the higher the price.

It's Economics 101. The oil industry is run by a cartel, OPEC, and what economists call an "oligopoly" -- a tiny handful of operators who make more money when there's less oil, not more of it. So, every time the "insurgents" blow up a pipeline in Basra, every time Mad Mahmoud in Tehran threatens to cut supply, the price of oil leaps. And Dick and George just LOVE it.

Dick and George didn't want more oil from Iraq, they wanted less. I know some of you, no matter what I write, insist that our President and his Veep are on the hunt for more crude so you can cheaply fill your family Hummer; that somehow, these two oil-patch babies are concerned that the price of gas in the USA is bumping up to $3 a gallon.

No so, gentle souls. Three bucks a gallon in the States (and a quid a litre in Britain) means colossal profits for Big Oil, and that makes Dick's ticker go pitty-pat with joy. The top oily-gopolists, the five largest oil companies, pulled in $113 billion in profit in 2005 -- compared to a piddly $34 billion in 2002 before Operation Iraqi Liberation. In other
words, it's been a good war for Big Oil.

As per Plan Bush, Bahr Al-Ulum became Iraq's occupation oil minister; the conquered nation "enhanced its relationship with OPEC;" and the price of oil, from Clinton peace-time to Bush war-time, shot up 317%.

In other words, on the third anniversary of invasion, we can say the attack and occupation is, indeed, a Mission Accomplished. However, it wasn't America's mission, nor the Iraqis'. It was an Mission Accomplished for OPEC and Big Oil.

**********

It makes me laugh

There is a proverb in Arabic means "The worse catastrophe is which makes you laugh"
You should read this and laugh.

Someone Should Tell Bush Why We Went to War

By Scott Galindez
t r u t h o u t | Perspective

Wednesday 22 March 2006

After yesterday's presidential news conference, I am beginning to wonder if George W. Bush knows why we went to war with Iraq. He should just come clean and admit that we went to war because Dick, Wolfie, and Rummy told him to.

Three years into the war and the President still can't answer the question of why we went to war in the first place. It is perfectly clear now why he can't meet with Cindy Sheehan. Imagine him saying to Cindy, "after September 11th, we realized killers could destroy innocent life." Hmmmm, we have a president who didn't know that prior to 9/11?

Imagine him telling Cindy that we invaded Iraq because "the Taliban provided safe haven for al Qaeda. That's where al Qaeda trained...." Someone also needs to tell George that the Taliban probably wanted Saddam out of power too; bin Laden did. Of course he knows the Taliban were in Afghanistan, doesn't he?

When he finally got to Iraq, he rewrote history again. "We worked with the world, we worked to make sure that Saddam Hussein heard the message of the world. And when he chose to deny inspectors, when he chose not to disclose, then I had the difficult decision to make to remove him. And we did, and the world is safer for it" said Bush.

The world didn't agree, that's why there was no vote at the UN authorizing the war. I seem to remember inspectors in Iraq until we warned them that it wouldn't be safe for them to remain. I also want to know what Iraq was supposed to disclose if they had no WMD?

Please, one of you neo-cons, brief the President on the real reason for the war in Iraq, so the next time a reporter asks him a real question he doesn't embarrass us again.

Excerpted from the transcript of yesterday's press conference:

Helen Thomas: I'd like to ask you, Mr. President, your decision to invade Iraq has caused the deaths of thousands of Americans and Iraqis, wounds of Americans and Iraqis for a lifetime. Every reason given, publicly at least, has turned out not to be true. My question is, why did you really want to go to war? From the moment you stepped into the White House, from your Cabinet - your Cabinet officers, intelligence people, and so forth - what was your real reason? You have said it wasn't oil - quest for oil, it hasn't been Israel, or anything else. What was it?

The President: I think your premise - in all due respect to your question and to you as a lifelong journalist - is that - I didn't want war. To assume I wanted war is just flat wrong, Helen, in all due respect -

Helen Thomas: Everything -

The President: Hold on for a second, please.

Helen Thomas: - everything I've heard -

The President: Excuse me, excuse me. No President wants war. Everything you may have heard is that, but it's just simply not true. My attitude about the defense of this country changed on September the 11th. We - when we got attacked, I vowed then and there to use every asset at my disposal to protect the American people. Our foreign policy changed on that day, Helen. You know, we used to think we were secure because of oceans and previous diplomacy. But we realized on September the 11th, 2001, that killers could destroy innocent life. And I'm never going to forget it. And I'm never going to forget the vow I made to the American people that we will do everything in our power to protect our people.

Part of that meant to make sure that we didn't allow people to provide safe haven to an enemy. And that's why I went into Iraq - hold on for a second -

Helen Thomas: They didn't do anything to you, or to our country.

The President: Look - excuse me for a second, please. Excuse me for a second. They did. The Taliban provided safe haven for al Qaeda. That's where al Qaeda trained -

Helen Thomas: I'm talking about Iraq -

The President: Helen, excuse me. That's where - Afghanistan provided safe haven for al Qaeda. That's where they trained. That's where they plotted. That's where they planned the attacks that killed thousands of innocent Americans.

I also saw a threat in Iraq. I was hoping to solve this problem diplomatically. That's why I went to the Security Council; that's why it was important to pass 1441, which was unanimously passed. And the world said, disarm, disclose, or face serious consequences -

Helen Thomas: - go to war -

The President: - and therefore, we worked with the world, we worked to make sure that Saddam Hussein heard the message of the world. And when he chose to deny inspectors, when he chose not to disclose, then I had the difficult decision to make to remove him. And we did, and the world is safer for it.

Scott Galindez is the Managing Editor of truthout.org.

Another Collateral Killing. More pictures

I am sorry to publish those pictures.
But I think all American citizens should see how their brave soldiers defeated the terrorists Iraqi children.

Another Collateral Killing

Precise Collateral Damage .... المحتلون الأمريكان يـَفنون عائلة كاملة مع أطفالهم



This news item is now reported by the Associated Press:

"An unidentified relative mourns over the bodies of children, reportedly killed during a U.S. raid, as they arrive in a hospital in Tikrit, 130 kilometers (80 miles) north of Baghdad, Iraq, Wednesday, March 15, 2006. Eleven people, most of them women and children were killed when a house was bombed during a U.S. raid north of Baghdad early Wednesday, police and relatives said. The U.S. military acknowledged four deaths in the raid that they said netted an insurgent suspect (emphasis added) in the rural Isahaqi area, about 80 kilometers (50 miles) north of the capital. (AP Photo/Bassim Daham)
Iraqis Say U.S. Raid Kills 11 People March 15, 2006

This news item has a picture gallery of this massacre. Can the U.S. military count? or are they in their usual low level mode of 'counting' killed U.S. soldiers, instead of declaring the true figures of dead soldiers?
.
يـُعرض مع هذا الخبر بالإنكليزية عدة صور للضحايا الأطفال. يقول الجيش الأمريكي بأن عدد الضحايا هو أربعة فقط، بضمنهم "المشتبه" فيه. ألا تستطيع قوات الإحتلال الأمريكية العــدّ بالنظر المـُجرّد الى هذه الصور؟ أم أنها على سجيتها في "التقليل" من العدد المـُعلن لضحايا جنودها الذين يـُقتلون على أيدي المقاومة؟"ـ
.
The Iraqi version:

"Amer Fiadh, the Councillor of Al-Ishaqi (pronounced Al Is-haqi) District in Salah Al-Din province said that the American forces have executed eleven people belonging to one family, including a six-months old baby and four children who were less than eleven years old.
Fiadh further stated today that these people were executed in front of their home, after having their hands tied behind their back and summarily shot. After their execution, American helicopters then strafed the family's home levelling it to the ground."
The Councillor of Al-Ishaqi District claims that the American forces have executed eleven members of one family (In Arabic) March 15, 2006
.
ـ" قال عامر الفياض مدير ناحية الاسحاقى فى محافظة صلاح الدين العراقية ان القوات الامريكية اعدمت أحد عشر شخصا من عائلة واحدة من بينهم طفل عمره ستة اشهر واربعة اطفال لا تتجاوز اعمارهم 11 سنة.ـ
وقال الفياض فى تصريح اليوم ان الاشخاص اعدموا امام منزلهم بعد ان اوثقت القوات الامريكية ايديهم واطلقت النار عليهم مضيفا ان المروحيات الامريكية قصفت بيت العائلة بعد عملية الاعدام ودمرته تدميرا كاملا ."ـ
مدير ناحية الاسحاقي يقول ان القوات الامريكية اعدمت 11 شخصا من عائلة واحدة
ـ15 آذار، 2006

Iraqis Say U.S. Raid Kills 11 People

By STEVEN R. HURST, Associated Press WritersWed Mar 15, 6:30 PM ET

A U.S. raid north of the capital Wednesday killed 11 people — most of them women and children, said police and relatives of the victims. The American military confirmed the attack but said only four people died — a man, two women and a child.

Police Capt. Laith Mohammed said the attack near Balad, 50 miles north of Baghdad, involved U.S. warplanes and armor that flattened a house in the village of Isahaqi.

An Associated Press reporter at the scene said the roof of the house had collapsed, three cars were destroyed and two cows were killed.

The 11 victims were wrapped in blankets and driven in three pickup trucks to the Tikrit General Hospital, about 45 miles to the north, relatives said.

AP photographs showed the bodies of two men, five children and four other covered figures arriving at the hospital accompanied by grief-stricken relatives. The victims were covered in dust with bits of rubble tangled in their hair.

The U.S. military said the target of the raid was a man suspected of supporting foreign fighters of the al-Qaida in Iraq terror network, and he was captured.

"Troops were engaged by enemy fire as they approached the building," said Tech. Sgt. Stacy Simon, a military spokeswoman. "Coalition forces returned fire utilizing both air and ground assets."

Riyadh Majid, who identified himself as the nephew of Faez Khalaf, the head of the household who was killed, told AP at the hospital that U.S. forces landed in helicopters and raided the home early Wednesday.

Khalaf's brother, Ahmed, said nine of the victims were family members who lived at the house and two were visitors.

"The dead family was not part of the resistance, they were women and children," he said. "The Americans have promised us a better life, but we get only death."

The Sadr city massacre ... A Black Operation by the American Intelligence?

Free Iraq an Iraqi blogger, published this post on March 13.
It contains very important facts. It may shed more light on those who are benifited from the Iraqi civil war.

The Sadr city massacre ... A Black Operation by the American Intelligence?

مجزرة مدينة الصدر .... هل هي من عمليات فرق موت ( السي آي أيه ) الأمريكية ؟

Muqtada Al-Sadr has pointed out that:

"the American forces had provided an air cover, with several drones circling the Sadr city, and then cutting off all wireless communication throughout Sadr city, just before the setting off of the six car explosions that resulted in the death of around 60 people and the injury of 200 others in Sadr city on Sunday."
Al-Sadr: The cars exploded under American air cover (In Arabic) March 13, 2006
.

ـ"وكان الصدر قد إتهم القوات الاميركية بتوفير غطاء جوي لتفجير ست مفخخات بمدينة الصدر في بغداد امس وهدد بالانسحاب من العملية السياسية، وقال ان القادة السياسيين منشغلون بتوزيع المناصب والشعب العراقي يذبح يوميا. وفي مؤتمر صحافي له بمنزله وسط مدينة النجف (160 كم جنوب بغداد) اليوم حمـّل الصدر، الذي يقود التيار الصدري وله 30 مقعدا في مجلس النواب الجديد، القوات الاميركية بتوفير غطاء جوي لتنفيذ ست مفخخات في مدينة الصدر معقله الشيعي من اجل زعزعة الاوضاع في المناطق الشيعية وقال ان طائرات التجسس الاميركية كانت تحلق في سماء مدينة الصدر وقطعت الاتصالات ثم جرت التفجيرات التي أدت الى مقتل حوالي 60 شخصا واصابة 200 اخرين."ـ

الصدر : مفخخات أمس بغطاء جوي أميركي

الإثنين 13 آذار، 2006

.

'President' Talabani, meanwhile (in the same item above), accused "Takfiris (aka Al-Qaida) and Saddamist terrorists" for the attack, not mentioning that Al-Mahdi Army is in total control of Al-Sadr city (on the ground but not over its air space), and would only allow known 'faces' to enter their city.

في حين إتهم الطالباني من جهته " الإرهابيين من تكفيريين وصداميين " بالقيام بتلك المجزرة مـُتغاضياً عن التنويه بأن جيش المهدي هو المـُسيطر على أمن مدينة الصدر ( على الأرض وليس على أجوائها )، وإنهم لا يسمحوا بالدخول إلى المدينة، وخاصة عقب الأحداث الأخيرة، سوى الأشخاص "المعروفة وجوههم" لهم.ـ

There is also a recent report that a police patrol in Basrah had captured, last Thursday (March 9, 2006) night, three persons in the act of planting a bomb near the Iraqi Islamic Party headquarters in Basrah. Upon investigation, they found out that the three were British wearing Arabic garb in disguise. Immediately afterwards, the British army arrived and arrested the police patrol along with their captives. The British then released the British captives and detained the Iraqi policemen.

Basrah police capture three British wearing Arabic garb (In Arabic) March 12, 2006

فضيحة اخرى لفرق الموت الاميركية البريطانية
شرطة البصرة تعتقل 3 بريطانيين متنكرين بزي عربي لدى محاولتهم نسف مقر الحزب الاسلامي

الأحد 12 آذار، 2006

والعـِبرة لـِمن إعتـَبر ....ـ

What happened to me is happenning to many others.

I wrote a post about what happened to me when an American soldier shot at me. That post brought a lot of comments from many Americans, some felt sorry for that action, others tried to find an excuse or to justify it.

But what happened yesterday, (Thursday) afternoon, about 5:00 PM is beyond justification.

My uncle, the only living one from my mother’s side, is about 80 years old, a healthy, handsome and good looking gentleman. He was in his way to bring his wife home; she was in a visit to her parents, when he was shot by American soldiers, he was alone in his car, no eye witness, several bullets penetrate his car, three of them penetrate his body, he died immediately.

Iraqi police were there, they found his ID, and his mobile, with phone list, they called my cousin, a university Prof. who went to the postmortem unit at the main hospital to receive the body, the American officer there told him "we are sorry."

It is as simple as this, they are sorry and every thing is settled, no problems, as far as the victim is an Iraqi.

There is another similar accident when the American Soldiers shot a family consist of a man, his wife and his daughter and killed them all.(this happened this week at Alhadba district in Mosul)

At the funeral, I heard many similar stories, all of them contain the same subjects but different detailes, innocent Iraqi civilians were killed at the hands of American soldiers for no obvious reasons. Or just because a scared boy holding a gun and and hidding behind his Stryker is protected from the law, this what changed him from a human to a monster.

GO HOME AMERICANS, WE DON'T WANT YOU HERE

What happened in Samarra

Ziad Khalaf write an article about what happened in Samarra.

The truth is still a mystery. Iraq for all news published the "strange" statement of the Interior Minister explaining what happened.

The Interior Minister has issued a statement (In Arabic) stating that "the terrorist unit controlled the shrine on Tuesday night, February 21, 2006 at 7:55 p.m. (local time)" but that "the two bombs exploded on Wednesday morning, February 22 at 6:40 a.m." while stating that "the shrine is guarded by 35 police guards".

The Interior Minister statement (in Arabic)

وزير الداخلية يصدر بيانا حول تفجير ضريحي الامامين علي الهادي و الحسن العسكري في سامراء
و كالة الاخبار العراقية : : 2006-02-22 - 18:49:02

وزير الداخلية يصدر بيانا حول تفجير ضريحي الامامين علي الهادي و الحسن العسكري في سامراء

22 شباط فبراير /و.خ.ع/ بيان / داخلية :

اصدر وزير الداخلية بيانا بخصوص تفجير ضريحي الامامين علي الهادي و الحسن العسكري في سامراء فيما يلي نصه:

"في كل يوم يبرهن الطائفيون التكفيريين الإرهابيون ومن يقف وراءهم بأنهم أعداء الله والإنسانية فقد قامت مجموعة إرهابية مساء الثلاثاء 21/ شباط في الساعة السابعة وخمسين دقيقة أحدهم يرتدي ملابس عسكرية مرقطة وثلاث يرتدون بدلات سوداء وسيطروا على ضريح الإمامين علي الهادي والحسن العسكري عليهما السلام وقاموا بوضع عبوات ناسفة داخل الضريحين المقدسين.

وفي الساعة السادسة و40 دقيقة صباح هذا اليوم 22/ شباط تم تفجير العبوتين مما أدى إلى هدم القبة بشكل كامل وجزء من الجدار الشمالي للضريح وعلى الفور تحرك لواء المغاوير في سامراء إلى محل الحادث وتمت السيطرة على الموقف.

وتود وزارة الداخلية أن تبين أن قوة حماية الضريح تبلغ 35 عنصر من قوة حماية المنشآت

إننا في الوقت الذي نستنكر فيه مثل هذا العمل الجبان الذي استهدف مقدسات المسلمين في مشارق الأرض ومغاربها ندعوا الجميع إلى توخي الحذر في تصرفات هؤلاء الطائفيين التكفيريين الذين يحاولون الإساءة إلى العراقيين الشرفاء والنيل من الوحدة الوطنية وعلى الفور شكلنا لجنة تحقيقية للوقوف على مجريات الحادث وسيتم إشعاركم بالاجراءات

I personally feel very sorry for this criminal action, and condemned who planed and who executed this act.
Till now there are more than 160 mosques attacked and some set to fire by men in black, claimed they are belong to the Mehdi army ( armed militia under the controll of Moqtada Al Sader). Tens of dead bodies were found at different places near Baghdad.

Congratulation America you did what you are came for.

This happened to me.

The New York Time web journal Published the story of the American soldier who shot to kill me.
It is a real story happened to me at the first day following the holiday of the Eid, as I was in my way home.

"A cowboy on his steel horse shot at me.

This Happened to Me

The four days of the Eid al-Adha holiday were calm and peaceful – no explosions, no roadside bombs, no clashes in the streets. But all that changed on Saturday, January 14th, the first day after the holiday.
I was driving home from my clinic around 5:15 p.m., the time I usually return home, because it's not safe to be out past sunset. I was 50 meters away from my house – which is located on a service road parallel to a main street. The street and the service road are separated by a curb two meters wide.
While I was driving slowly on the service road, an American patrol, which consisted of three armored-car Strykers, passed by on the main street, moving in the same direction as I was. When the first Stryker passed me, a soldier riding on top fired two shots in my direction. One bullet came in through the half-opened driver's window and hit the window of the opposite door, smashing it to pieces. Thank God, somehow it missed me.
I stopped the car and got out, thinking that the soldiers might stop and explain why they had shot at me. But they didn't. They kept on driving. There were no other people in the vicinity, except a neighbor at a shop nearby, who saw the whole thing. The next morning I went to replace the broken window. Nearly every person I met in the repair shop had a similar tale to tell.
I wonder now, if the shot had had killed me, how would the troops have explained it? Would I have become a terrorist killed while trying to explode himself near an American patrol? Or perhaps I would only be collateral damage, killed while soldiers chased a terrorist? Or maybe a terrorist had killed me, and the Americans chased him, though he managed to escape.
I will leave you to decide. In the chaos of this occupation, innocents are killed by all sides. But don’t we have the right to hate the people who are now occupying our country. Shall we celebrate the freedom and democracy brought to us by the occupation in spite of the perils our citizens face?
Questions need answers. Who will answer them?

Cartoons and Hypocrisy

Fury Continues in Muslim World Over Cartoons
By VOA News
03 February 2006

Angry Muslims are stepping up demonstrations against the publication of cartoons in European newspapers depicting the Islamic Prophet Mohammed.

In Islamabad Friday, Pakistani lawmakers unanimously passed a resolution condemning the caricatures, saying they "hurt the faith and feeling of Muslims all over the world."

In Indonesia, at least 70 members of the Islamic Defenders' Front forced their way into the lobby of a building housing the Danish Embassy and threw eggs at the embassy's symbol. The group left without incident a short time later.

Protests are also reported Friday in several other regions, including the Palestinian territories, Iran and Malaysia.

Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen has summoned foreign envoys to Copenhagen for a meeting to discuss the protests. The drawings of Mohammed originally appeared in a Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten last September.

Protests ignited Wednesday after several European newspapers including papers in Spain, France and Germany reprinted the drawings in a show of solidarity for press freedom.

Danes Finally Apologize to Muslims (But for the Wrong Reasons)

By RACHARD ITANI
02 February 2006

In many European countries, there are laws that will land in jail any person who has the chutzpah to deny not only the historicity of the Jewish holocaust, but also the method by which Jews were put to death by the Nazis. In some of these countries, this prohibition goes as far as prosecuting those who would claim or attempt to prove that less than 6 million jews were slaughtered by the Nazis. In none of these countries are there similar laws that threaten people with loss of freedom and wealth for denying that large percentages of gypsies, gays, mentally retarded, and other miscellaneous "debris of humanity" were also eliminated by the Jew-slaughtering Nazis.

Quickly now: what defines a hypocrite? Answer: a person who follows the letter of the law, but not its spirit. The laws against anti-semitism are just that: laws against anti-semitism enacted by hypocritical Europeans with blood on their hands from the genocides in their recent and distant past, and much guilt to atone for in their hearts and minds.

The spirit of the law, which would extend this protection to Muslims as well, if not indeed other religious groups, is nowhere to be found in the Western legal code. You can curse the Prophet of the Muslims at will and with total impunity. However, approach the holocaust at your own risks and perils if you do not include in your discussion the standard, ritualistic incantations about the six million Jewish victims of the European Nazis. There is a word for this in the English language: hypocrisy.

I used to have a lot of respect for the Dutch, the Danes, and the Norwegians, and still do. However, I cannot claim that this respect is not more nuanced today. The coloring started when the Dutch, who are invariably and automatically described as being amongst the most "tolerant" people in the West, if not the world, proved that their tolerance was little more than skin deep. Their reaction to the murder of Theo Van Gogh was anything but driven by tolerance. They behaved as a mob in reaction to the criminal, despicable action of an extremist and murderer, by painting the whole Dutch muslim community with the same broad brush that Vincent Van Gogh would have eschewed. They burnt Muslim schools and mosques. They directed opprobrium at Muslims in their midst, calling on them "to go home" though many had been born in the Netherlands. No subtlety in the Dutch reaction. Just collective anti-semitism which they directed not at the Jews, but at the Jews' cousins, the Muslims.

Then the Danes, who must have felt left out, decided to go the Dutch one better: a Danish paper published cartoons that are no less offensive to Muslims than anti-semitism is to Jews. The cartoons were described by Danish politicians and the press as not provocation, but a principled case of free speech, although many Danish and Scandinavian newspaper editors are on record stating that they published the cartoons as an act of defiance against "radical Islam." This is akin to these ignorant morons recommending that the U.S. ought to nuke Tehran because that would teach Iranian President Ahmadinejad a lesson.

What free speech are we talking about here? The law says thou shalt not utilize or publish anti-semitic language or imagery. Consequently, Danish (and other European) papers will refrain from doing so, lest they fall foul of the law and offend Jewish sensitivities. The law does not say: thou shalt not offend muslims or use imagery that may be deeply offensive to them. So Danish papers will not refrain from doing so, in fact they will go out of their way to offend Muslims both in Denmark and around the world, in the name of "free speech." And the Norwegians? Well, they just decided to follow the Danes down perdition lane, all in the name of holy hypocrisy, so a Norwegian paper also published the offending cartoons. The statement about "confronting radical Islam" was in fact made by the Norwegian editor of a newspaper that is described as a "Norwegian Christian Paper." And now that other European papers and Magazines have also followed suit, if there was any doubt that this affair is one of anti-Muslim bias, it was swept away by the statements of the Editor in Chief of Die Welt, the German magazine, who declared that the right to publish the cartoons was "at the very core of our culture" and that Europeans cannot "stop using our journalistic right of freedom of expression within legal boundaries." It's the "legal boundaries" qualifier that gives the game away: there are no legal boundaries in Europe protecting Muslims from the same ignominies that the law protects Jews from.

And what further argument does Die Welt put forward to justify its "legal" action? " It pointed out that "Syrian TV had depicted Jewish rabbis as cannibals." You can imagine how helpful a similar argument would hold up in a court of law: "But your honor, I only killed one guy and raped two women: the other guy killed four and raped 10!" That a German editor-in-chief of a major German paper should use the "legal" argument to justify offending the religious sensitivities of Muslims, when that same "legal" framework would see him thrown in jail faster than he could spell the word legal if he offended the sensitivities of Jews, may be a testament at least of his own deep-seated contempt for Muslims. That so many European papers have now reprinted the offensive cartoons is an indication that the contempt for Muslims does not stop with the editor-in-chief of Die Welt.

This whole affair is nothing but an over-reaction to a simple cartoon, you say? Not if you remember a certain other cartoon that appeared in the British newspaper, The Independent, on 27 January 2003. It depicted Prime Minister Sharon of Israel eating the head of a Palestinian child while saying: "What's wrong? You've never seen a politician kissing babies before?" Jews in Britain and around the world erupted with indignation, arguably because the depiction reminded them of millennial charges levied against them by Christians who accused them of using the blood of babies in ritualistic killings. You see, Sharon can actually kill, maim and spill the real, actual blood of Palestinian babies: that is not offensive to Zionist Jews and their apologists in the West. But let Sharon be depicted in a cartoon metaphorically as the ogre that he has proved to be in his real life, symbolically eating a Palestinian child, and the world will erupt in offended indignation. A cartoon that is offensive to Muslims, on the other hand, is depicted as nothing but an expression of "free speech." There is a word for this in any language: hypocrisy.

Before the Danish cartoon incident started to evolve into a growing international crisis, the Danish Prime Minister and the publisher of the Danish newspaper that first published the offending cartoons both declared that they would never apologize on grounds of free speech and because publishing the cartoons had not broken any Danish laws. (Yes, the "no law broken" argument again.) Yesterday, however, they both ended up apologizing in the face of a growing tsunami of protests on the part of Arab and Muslim governments, some of whom withdrew their Ambassadors from Copenhagen. The Danish prime minister did not apologize because his moral compas suddenly found True North again. The real reason, of course, is that he understood, though a tad too late, the potential economic consequences of a widespread boycott of Danish goods on the part of one billion people. There is a word for this in the Danish language: realpolitik.

Muslims and other reasoning people around the world understand well that European laws against anti-Semitic speech, writing, and behavior, were enacted for two reasons. The stated reason was to protect the Jews from the continued onslaught of anti-Semitic attacks, both verbal and physical, which culminated historically in the repeated pogroms that Christian Europeans launched against Jews repeatedly through the centuries. (Historically, it was the Arabs who protected the Jews and took them in whenever they fled Christian barbarity, especially in the Middle Ages.) The real reason, of course, is to protect the Europeans from the pangs of their own conscience, which has very good reason to feel guilty indeed, given what Europeans did to Jews in the last millennium, especially in the 19th and 20th centuries, not to mention what they did to the indiginous people of the Carribean and the Americas since the 1600s, and to the people of Asia, Africa and Oceania as well. I have long thought that it's European Christians, more so than Jews, who ought to observe Yom Kippur, or adopt a similar atonement observance of their own.

While the spirit of the law is that Europeans shalt not offend any ethnic or religious groups including Muslims, this seems to be lost only on the Europeans themselves, or at least the Danes, the Germans and their ilk amongst them, who only care about, or fear, the letter of the law. Why should we therefore be shocked when Muslims depict Europeans as nothing but a bunch of hypocrites? Why shouldn't Governments of Muslim countries recall their Ambassadors to Denmark in protest, as some did? The only disappointment is that no Western or non-Muslim government, the meek complaints to a French newspaper by the French Foreign Office excepted, had the moral and ethical courage to publicly, unequivocally and forcefully condemn an act that is as deeply offensive to Muslims as the desecration of a Torah scroll, or of a Jewish cemetery, is offensive to all civilized people in the world, be they Jewish, Muslim, Christian, Buddhist, Animist, or Atheist.

There are two ways for Europeans to redeem themselves: the immediate temptation would be to call on their national parliaments to extend the protections of the laws against anti-Semitism and Holocaust denying to Islam and Muslims, as well as any other religious group . That would be the wrong recommendation however. The right recommendation would be to repeal the laws that govern holocaust denying and other laws that favor one group over another, so that the issue truly becomes one of free speech. And if Europeans are the civilized people they claim to be, then their politicians and newspaper publishers ought to find it easy to immediately apologize when they have unwittingly offended the taboos of any human community, be it religious or otherwise.

Muslims and Arabs have suffered enough hypocrisy on the hands of European Christians, just as Jews suffered in the past on the hands of these same Europeans, and as Palestinian Muslims and Christians alike are suffering today on the hands of Americans, Europeans and, of course, Zionist Jews, both Sephardim and Ashkenazi. If Europe thinks of itself as a civilized society, then it ought to do its utmost to redress the wrongs that too many people around the world have suffered as a result of European misbehavior and often outright criminal actions, most especially since the 1400s.

Muslims deserve nothing more nor less than for Christians in the U.S. and Europe, and Zionist Jews in Israel, to simply abide by the golden rule: treat others as you would have others treat you. So far, Christians and Zionist Jews have proven that they only abide by the alternative definition of this rule: "They who have the gold, make the rule." The gold in this case is a combination of economic and military might. Of this, Europeans, Zionist Jews and their American overlords have aplenty in reserve. Were it that they also had an equal reserve of un-hypocritical, civilized morality and ethical behavior to underpin their feelings of sanctimonious superiority.

And the other measure that Europeans can adopt to redeem themselves? The European people can start by throwing out of office, and initiating criminal proceedings against, any politician responsible for sending a single soldier to invade, occupy, and initiate pogroms against the people of Iraq: these politicians have been guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity, which makes them unfit for the honors that continued office holding bestows upon them. Europeans can also give the boot to any politician who has approved or turned a blind eye to a single rendition flight that sent any person to the torture chambers of the Americans or their surrogate torturers in some Arab or Muslim countries. These are the same countries whose religious sensitivities we should all respect as strongly as we respect Jewish sensitivities when it comes to the Jewish holocaust, not because the law says so, but because it's the right thing to do. These are also the same countries whose human rights trespasses Europeans ought to condemn as equally and vehemently as they should condemn the continued human rights abuses and state terrorism perpetrated by the Israeli government in Palestine/Israel, and by some European governments in Iraq, Afghanistan, and in other out-of-sight/out-of-mind places like Haiti, Africa, and elsewhere.

In other words, Europeans can start by applying the simple rule of one weight and one measure to both friends and foes, equally to themselves and to the rest of the world, because policy and politics, both domestic and foreign, ought to be based upon and subject to principled moral considerations, not expediency of the economic, financial or religious kind.

Is that such an unreasonable moral proposition to consider?

Rachard Itani can be reached at: racharitani@yahoo.com