[Biggest
Islamic
web site in the
U.S.]
P.O. Box 356, Kingsville, MD 21087.
Phone: 410-435-5000.
Disclaimer: Views expressed are not necessarily
shared by editorial committee.
Responses (positive or negative) up to 250 words are welcome.
Names will be withheld on request.
--------------------------------------------
100 Taliban Resisting
U.S-Karzai-Hazara
Operation
in Zabul
Vast Areas of southern, southeastern and
southwestern
Afghanistan
Join Taliban
from our Afghanistan monitor
For a week now (September 2), heavily
armed Afghan mercenaries along
with U.S. Special Forces have been trying to
dislodge nearly 100 Taliban
entrenched in the Dai Chopan mountains of Zabul
province. The U.S. brought in air
strikes and helicopter gun ships to destroy the
Taliban force with little or no
effect. The U.S. claims that it has killed 13 of
the Taliban while the Kabul
"government" claims that 51 of the Taliban have
been killed. Bodies on the
ground indicate that SEVEN Taliban have been
killed.
Meanwhile, Mullah Omar is reported to have
sent more Taliban to join
the fighting. Also, the Taliban have delivered
diversionary raids near Spin
Boldak and in Paktika province killing dozens of
mercenary troops. The U.S. has
admitted five of its troops were killed in these
attacks. More than 20 mercenary
Afghans were also killed.
Large areas of Afghanistan, especially those
populated by Pushtoons, have
reportedly joined the Taliban. Also, on various
border areas with
Pakistan,
the Taliban have the full support of Pakistani
tribes.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEW TREND AHEAD OF THE CURVE
More than SIX MONTHS BACK, New Trend
reported the resurgence of the
Taliban. Finally, about two weeks back National
Public Radio
(NPR)
admitted that
such, alas, is the case. Only a couple of days
back, the
NEW YORK TIMES
also admitted that the Taliban resurgence is a fact.
Think about it, dear reader, your Muslim
source, New Trend, was way
ahead of heavily funded non-Muslim sources. If we
had the money, New York Times
would be no match for us.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agony of Shi'ism: Who Killed Ayatollah Baqir
al-Hakim along with 124 others?
By Buut Shikan (Idol Breaker)
The bloodcurdling bomb attack on August
29, 2003 which killed
Ayatollah Baqir al-Hakim and 124 others and
wounded 500 others raises the question:
why? And who did it?
No one has claimed responsibility. Twelve
people have been arrested but
these seem to be arrests carried out to show that
local authorities are trying
to catch the culprits.
My purpose is to analyze the situation so
that the reality comes out or
that at least my analysis should be as near the
reality as is possible. This
report DOES NOT TAKE SIDES. This is not
propaganda meant to support or oppose
any of the forces at work in
Iraq.
My thesis has two aspects to it. We can
understand the massacre on two
levels: Internally as the result of internal
Shi'ite conflict and externally as
a response to the U.S. occupation of Iraq.
For the INTERNAL CONFLICT, we need a bit of
history:
1. When Imam Khomeini led the successful
revolution in
Iran
and the
Iranian army melted away with the departure of
the Shah, Iraq under Saddam Hussain
took advantage of the situation to invade Iran.
2. The invaders reached the oil fields of
Abadan but were beaten back
owing to heroic resistance put up by the
Revolutionary Guards.
3. Inside Iran, a segment of the Shias known
as Mojahedine Khalq rose in
armed revolt against the Islamic revolution and
were brutally crushed.
Thousands of them fled and later mobilized in
Iraq.
4. After several years of fighting, Iran not
only pushed the Iraqis back
but actually entered Iraq and called on the Iraqi
Shias to rise up against
Saddam. Iraqi Shias were advised by their leader,
Ayatollah al-Khui, to remain
neutral in the battle. Waves of Iranian
Revolutionary Guards attacked Basra and
were slaughtered by the Iraqi defenders. THE
SHIAS OF BASRA DID NOT RISE UP.
5. However, segments of the Iraqi Shias, led
by the al-Hakim family, were
sympathetic to Iran. They were brutalized by
Saddam regime. Members of the
Al-Hakim family were tortured and executed. Some
of them escaped to Iran,
including the target of the current bombing,
Baqir al-Hakim.
6. Most Iraqi Shias did not support the
Al-Hakim family and remained
neutral or did not oppose Saddam owing to
nationalistic reasons.
7. Iraqi prisoners captured by Iran were
sometimes interrogated by
Al-Hakim supporters working for Iran. This
created great bitterness in Iraq against
them, just as Saddam's support for the MKO
created bitterness in Iran against
Iraq.
-----------------------------
AFTER THE U.S OCCUPATION
Soon after the U.S. occupation of NAJAF, an
ugly incident occurred
inside the Imam Ali mosque in which Ayatollah's
Khui's son and inheritor of his
leadership was murdered, ostensibly by pro-Iran
elements loyal to Baqir al-Hakim.
The U.S. WORKING WITH IRAN, permitted
Ayatollah Baqir al-Hakim to return
to Iraq under U.S. protection.
A nationalist Shia Iraqi leader Moqtada
al-Sadr differed sharply with
Baqir al-Hakim and wanted Shias to focus on the
expulsion of U.S. forces rather
than the building of a pan-Shia world movement
led by Iran.
BAQIR Al-HAKIM appointed his representative
to the Ruling Council
formulated by the U.S. occupation forces to
legitimize the U.S. occupation of Iraq.
-----------------------------------
EXTERNALLY the massacre of August 29 should
be seen as part of a series
bomb attacks which have hit groups seen as
sympathetic to or working with the
U.S.
First the JORDANIAN EMBASSY was hit as
symbolic of a regime which works
for the
CIA.
NEXT, the attackers, seeing the U.S.
preparing to bring in the United
Nations to legitimize the occupation, bombed the
UN headquarters in Baghdad
killing the chief of the UN in Iraq and 21 of his
associates, including the U.S.
political officer coordinating with the U.N.
Third came the attack on the most important
Shi'ite personality who had
just signaled support for the U.S. plan for Iraq
by sending his representative
to the Ruling Council. This time the assailants
were ruthless enough to kill
and wound large numbers of innocent people.
---------------------------------------------------
WHO IS RESPONSIBLE and WHY are Such Attacks
Possible?:
It appears that the U.S. had underestimated
the level of Iraqi
resistance to the occupation. Other than two
segments of Kurds, tiny enclaves of
westernized Iraqis with relatives in America and
a few Shi'ite collaborators like
Chalabi, the U.S. has no support in Iraq. The
only important segment of support
for the U.S. which the U.S. could not control
entirely came from pro-Iran,
pan-Shi'ite clerics like Baqir al-Hakim. It seems
that Baqir al-Hakim was seen
as particularly dangerous by anti-U.S. forces
because he could not be placed in
the same category as Chalabi. He was genuine with
an agenda of his own. From
the point of view of the resistance, this
pan-Shi'te agenda intersected with
the U.S. agenda and created a COMMUNITY of SHARED
INTERESTS.
The attack was probably carried out by
Saddam loyalists working with
Shia nationalists opposed to the U.S. A tape from
Saddam Hussain has surfaced
denying a share in the attack. This could be a
propaganda tape sent out because
the death of so many innocent people has created
horror among the general
population as witnessed in the mass funeral of
Baqir al-Hakim attended by more than
300,000 people.
However, such attacks in an occupied country
cannot be carried out
without the support of large segments of the
population providing safe passage,
intelligence, resources and explosives to the
assailants.
IRAQ HAS SEEN MUCH SUFFERING. More than a
million children died SLOWLY
owing to U.S. sanctions supported by the UNO.
Iraq was bombed relentlessly in
1991. For years the U.S. kept attacking Iraqi
forces under the pretense of
preserving "no fly zones." Then the helpless
country was bombed and occupied in
2003 by the U.S. which killed another 7000
civilians. NONE OF THESE LOSSES WERE
MOURNED BY IRAN although they affected most
Iraqis.
When AFGHANISTAN was attacked, Iran
supported the "northern alliance,"
and its groupies among the Hazarajat people have
been used to hunt the
Taliban. The massacre of 3000-plus Taliban
prisoners by the "northern alliance" under
U.S. supervision at Qila Jhangvi did not touch
Iran's conscience. For the
Islamic movements of the world, Iran is also
collaborating with Russia (SILENT on
CHECHNIA)
and with
INDIA
(silent on rape and
murder in
Kashmir).
SADDAM HUSSAIN is a ruthless operator and
is willing to match Iranian
ruthlessness with his own. If he is planning a
come back, the emergence of a
pro-Iranian Shi'ite leader installed in Baghdad
would be the ultimate outrage.
Will peace return to IRAQ? It can be
achieved if the foreigners
withdraw. Foreigners are not the Islamic fighters
reportedly volunteering to fight
U.S. forces in Iraq. The Islamic Ummah is one
Ummah. Fighting against occupiers
and aggressors is ordained in the
Qur'an.
------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, to understand the situation, one
must look at the speech of
Iranian leader Ayatollah Ali Khame'inai and the
statements of supporters of
Ayatollah Baqir al-Hakim. These leaders are NOT
calling for battle against the
occupation forces. They are complaining that the
U.S. has failed to provide
sufficient security, has not guarded the borders
of Iraq properly and hence should
let them do it.
Thus on the one hand these leaders are giving
the impression to ordinary
Iraqis that they are against the U.S. and yet
they do not want to join the
fight against the U.S. directly or indirectly
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2003-09-07 Sun 15:33ct