Major shrine in Samarra damaged by large explosion

[ECH1969]

Iraqi authorities say an explosion has shaken the city of Samarra, which is about 60 miles north of Baghdad. And police say the blast damaged the country's most famous Shiite religious shrines.

A police official says the early morning explosion happened at the Askariya Shrine, which contains the tombs of two revered Shiite imams.

US and Iraqi forces surrounded the shrine, famous for its golden dome, and began searching houses in the area. Residents said by phone that were no reports of deaths or injuries, but damage to the dome was extensive.

The shrine contains the tombs of the tenth and eleventh imams, Ali al-Hadi who died in 868 AD and his son Hassan al-Askari who died in 874 A-D. The shrine is visited by Shiite pilgrims from throughout the Muslim world.

http://www.kxan.com/Global/story.asp?S=4534384&nav=0s3d

[lapfog_1]

1. civil war, anyone???

[sam sarrha]

2. they are eating their own... makes you want to convert..

[HuffleClaw]

3. CIAl Qaeda

[burrowowl]

8. Could be

could be.

[file83]

11. From one of the articles:

afp.com article:

The attack was seen as likely to further raise tension between the majority Shiite and minority Sunni communities in the country at a time when political factions bicker over the formation of a 'national unity' government.

Yeah, but "who" would want to "further raise tension between" the Shiites and the Sunnis by blowing up one of the holiest Islamic buildings on the planet? Not a Muslim. Then "who" does that leave? Who would want to do this? You called it.

[malaise]

51. Not a Muslim

Mossad or CIA!!

[megatherium]

80. Not a Shiite Muslim.

But the Sunnis have a long history of savage attacks against Shiites, both in Iraq and elsewhere.

[wordpix]

108. back up your conspiracy theory with facts, why don't you? You sound child

-ish

[DS1]

114. Thank you!

Muslims are apparently infalliable, and would never blow each other/their own stuff up.

Nope, never happens. That cement truck bomb was just an industrial accident.

[StrafingMoose]

171. Sorry, war is ugly

I wouldn't put it past what the goons over there could do. That is, the good soldiers over there end up being victims of these black ops.

[StrafingMoose]

174. Childish? Tell that to the CIA and the private contractors over there then

[NIGHT TRIPPER]

208. Wordpix is Murkin-Don't tell him the CIA harms anyone!! that's childish!!

n/t

[wordpix]

211. the childish part is accusing the CIA with no evidence but you didn't get

it

[Zynx]

120. Sunni extremists consider Shia infidel cultists

They have no reason to have any respect whatsoever for a Shia holy site.

[Xithras]

159. Exactly. Sunni's consider Shia to be heretics.

Many people in the west tend to think the division is mellow, like the philosphical differences between Baptists and Methodists, where both agree that they're one religion but disagree on the details.

The reality is that the very word Sunni means "Of the Sunnah". The Sunnah is the way of life described by Muhammed. To them, if you aren't following the teachings of Muhammed, you aren't Muslim. Because you have to follow the Sunnah to be Muslim, and because by definition the Sunni are the people who follow the Sunnah, Shia are imposter heretics who practice a false religion. Most Sunni look on Shia the same way Catholics look on Scientologists.

Interestingly, the schism isn't so wide going the other way. Shia do actually consider Sunni to be Muslim, they just consider them to be misguided and in need of conversion.

[StrafingMoose]

172. I've spoken with two Iraqis

in my whole life (whatever it's worth) and really, they think we're going to such lenghts trying to explain these "differences" trough theological explanations. Fact is that Iraq was, no matter how starved trough UN resolutions, quite a modern country in which, yes, you do have religious differences but nothing on the scale where people want to actually kill each other over it.

If you look at it by the book, yes, the differences are susbtancial, but these once translated in real life result much more into "Bahhh, whatever, lemme preach where I want when I want and that's all I need".

[Xithras]

181. I have an Iraqi sitting eight feet from me.

She's an Assyrian who lived in Baghdad her entire life, until leaving after the first gulf war. She's far more versed on Islam than I since she grew up surrounded by both Sunni and Shia friends and family (yes, there is intermarriage).

These violent elements have always been present in Iraq, and they have always been a minority. Most Shia and Sunni get along just fine, but there are fanatics on both sides who would love to see a war between the religions and do everything possible to bring that about. The difference is that under Saddam, the secret police were in place to catch these people and execute them before they could pull these kinds of atrocities off. Saddams policy was to kill anyone who attempted to forment any kind of sectarian violence in the country (he had no problem with oppression, but anything that could spark rebellion was put down with all the military force he could gather). That kind of force isn't present in Iraq today, so the extremists are now able to pull these kinds of attacks off.

[StrafingMoose]

183. Agreed

But I still think that there are people who could give less than a feck about religion who are exploiting these differences.

[Politicub]

90. That's the first thing I thought too

when I heard about this on the radio this morning. As long as there is civil unrest in Iraq and people are dying, the war machine is pleased.

[barb162]

4. It sounds like it was a beautiful building and will be a real loss

[CBHagman]

123. I know. I just hate all this.

If you read the articles, you know that there were a lot of people out and about at this particular time, including young children. The shrapnel injuries sound hideous.

But the emotional and spiritual loss of that shrine must be devastating to those who are Shi'ite. I feel for them, too. I hate what is happening.

What's most troubling is the rise in sectarian tensions and the apparent brutality of the violence. Sadly, things like this can persist for years.

Granted, the Sunnis controlled Iraq for years, and the tensions surely have been buildling over that time. But what I think the Bush administration has helped to do is create a situation of ghastly and dangerous instability, thus ensuring suffering for millions of people. It will take a long time, perhaps many years, to undo the harm that has come to pass.

[Endangered Specie]

5. Cnn.com says "destroyed"...

>
BREAKING NEWS

Explosion at a Shiite holy site in Samarra, Iraq, destroys the al Askariya "Golden Mosque," U.S. military says. Probe under way.


http://www.cnn.com/

[SoCalDem]

6. Found some pics of it here

http://images.google.com/images?svnum=10&hl=en&q=Askari+Shrine&spell=1

[JNelson6563]

94. So beautiful!

War destroys all, even ancient history. :cry:

[Snivi Yllom]

148. damage photo - dome is gone

looks pretty badly damaged to me

[jseankil]

165. Shia-Sunni violence in Pakistan is common as well

Sorry but this is a fact. Want to blame the CIA for that was well?

[StrafingMoose]

192. Maybe not the CIA

But the USG in general for supporting a military dictatorship (Pakistan) which has much advantage in having its population divided in sectarian conflicts rather than united against the regime.

[jseankil]

194. So you don't want the U.S. to support Pakistans dictatorship?

Do understand what you would be left with instead?

[StrafingMoose]

196. It is quite insulting to say to

any country out there that they aren't worth better than a military dictatorship, therefore that we are justified to impose them dictators. These imams praising violence and stirring up the hatred of the West are playing right into the hands of it. They stir the masses, violent demonstrations happen, the governement let them go on long enough so AP, CNN et all get their little footage and use them to make us think here that in Pakistan, for example, there is only two options: military rule or crazy islamofascists.

Don't get me wrong, there ARE extremists, muslim in this case, who wouldn't know better than blowing the whole West into smithereens, but IMO they are quite incapable of acheiving anything without external support.

[jseankil]

197. Let's get the facts stright...

U.S. didn't impose a dictatorship on Pakistan and had nothing to do with Musharraf coming into power, before 9/11 U.S. did not have warm realtions with Pakistan. While it might be insulting to a country to say they are better off with a dictor like Musharraf it is also true. Musharraf took control of the country with support of his people and only recently became a target of assassination when he sided with the U.S. after 9/11. Go read about Pakistan if you don't believe Islamofascists could come into power and then you'll understand why it is nessassary for the U.S. to support such a dictator for this nuclear power.

Unfortunately the world politics is far too complicated to allow the U.S. to have a general policy that is against all dictatorships, Pakistan being a leading example.

[StrafingMoose]

198. Re...

Well, you summed it up in a pretty 'neo-conian' way.

Sorry, I don't buy the nuclear card. The nuclear option is a dead end, even more so in the case of Pakistan. Pakistan has the tech, but not the stockpiles I beleive. Any nuclear attacks by Pakistan, being strategically useless, would only be a fast lane to it's own destruction.

I never said Musharraf came to power directly because of USA's support - altough I wouldn't discard this theory because he's been much of a lapdog since the beggining of the "war on terror" which awarded him great gifts like F16s.

I don't think there's any good reasons to support a dictatorship, other than one's own interest. If a democraticaly elected, truely integrist governement would emerge in Pakistan in the event where we would stop supporting Musharraf, then be it. If the Pakistanis don't like it, let them go full circle and get rid of it, with our support if they need it.

Do you honestly think that if Musharraf steps down, sectarian conflicts will be so bad that all of them will beg for martial law ?

[jseankil]

206. disagree

You believe that the nuke option is dead because it's strategically useless to Pakistan? That wouldn't stop a fundamentalist from passing nuclear elements and/or know-how to other parties, we know this for a fact as it has already happen in Pakistan via AQ Kahn, dismissing the idea that this could happen again under a leader who supports it and helps conceals it is dangerous and ignorant, no offense.

While you may call Musharraf a 'lap dog' he did what was best for his country, what do you think happens to Pakistan if they don't ally up with the U.S. right after 9/11?

There is some sectarian violence now and yes I do think it would get worse without Musharraf and I do think support for terror elements against the U.S. would increase. I base my assessments on facts so please save the 'neo-con' label for someone else.

Personally I think Musharraf needs to be pushed further along and increase his cooperation with the U.S. his apprehensiveness to do so is understandable as he is already targeted for the cooperation he has already given. I do not want an anti-U.S. leader in power as it can only lead to a neagitive outcome for both Pakistan and the U.S. as a whole.

[StrafingMoose]

217. We seem to differ in opinions...

on basic key points, that I think we will have to agree to disagree.

I don't beleive in al-Qaeda in the terms described by the Bush administration and most of the West, I don't buy the "indepedant dangerous terrorist networks" theory either since most of the countries supporting them seem to be key allies of the West and that all of the official stories of their attacks (9/11, 7/7, Amman, etc) have glaring holes in them. We know that the most powerful organisations on earth are what we today call "multi-billions intelligence agencies" and that if they decide to knock you down, down you go my friend. Being a religous zealot doesn't necesarilly make you dangerous, smart, or indetectable.

I also tend to differ from the arrogant view "we must support dictators otherwise, their countries will fall into civil war and it'll be nothing but a last man standing situation". That's a code for saying "We will loose a part of a sphere of influence".

Musharraf is a lapdog in the sense that he did exactly what he had to do; not catch bin Laden and not come to the obvious conclusion that "Hey, we're not that stupid! If we looked around an area for 4 years with massive support from our friends and haven't found OBL, well shite, most probably he aint't here!" -- successfully keeping alive the OBL & al Qaeda myth.

As for AQ Khan, I would have to find this compilation of articles I had about it, but he definitaly got help from the West to keep his "nuclear wal-mart" rolling, these guys don't operate alone undetected. Nuclear components are not the sliced bread, ham and mustard of your typical ham sandwich.

And get real, you know the neocons, any "anti-US" leader de facto becomes "pro-US" because they are exactly what the warmongers need to move into the region.

[greenleaf]

204. I know

why bother with all that democracy nonsense. Just elect USA as the king of the world and let it appoint governments worldwide. Would be much simpler and more honest.

[jseankil]

207. You don't make much up a point when you take it an extreme

that no one is suggesting. What I do suggest is that the U.S. help lockout those with violent and dangerous philosophies from ruling nations and oppressing people. The world is not black and white, it is not a 'you are with us or against us' world. There are tough political choices to be made and some times you choose the lesser evil of the two.

[SoCalDem]

193. Not "blaming" anyone..just a link to the pics

:)

[burrowowl]

7. Black Ops!?!

http://www.afp.com/english/news/stories/060222062853.bcof56hw.html

Bombers strike Shiite mausoleum in Iraq
22/02/2006 06h30
Bombers struck a celebrated Shiite mausoleum in Samarra, north of the Iraqi capital, bringing down part of its celebrated golden dome, police said
©AFP/File - Karim Sahib

SAMARRA, Iraq (AFP) - Bombers struck a celebrated Shiite mausoleum in Samarra, north of Baghdad, bringing down part of its celebrated golden dome, police said.

The head of the Sunni religious endowment organisation, Ahmad Abdel Ghaffur al-Samarrai, immediately condemned the attack, terming it "a criminal act".

I don't think Sunnis would do this. It is a Shia site but revered by all Muslims.

Edit: US says probe underway .... hmmmm!?!?!

[JVS]

150. Danes?

[951-Riverside]

9. Trying to rush this civil war thing so they can remain in Iraq

[rfkrfk]

10. blowing up those stone Bhuddas --> bad karma

[file83]

12. VERY. BAD. KARMA. That didn't take very long to come back around

to nip the Islamic world, did it?

[fujiyama]

56. Thing is

the Taliban was Sunni and actually discriminated against Shiites as well.

Being an agnostic/athiest, I find it unfortunate when historical statues, buildings and structures of any religion are destroyed. In my opinion, the art that has arisen from religion is one of the only aspects of religion I actually find worth preserving.

[rfkrfk]

115. some sects of Islam, do not like ornate buildings

this is from memory.

some sects, perhaps the Wahabis{spelling?},

in past times, went around tearing down every
building they did not like, for obvious reasons,
that makes enemies

disclaimer: I ave no special knowledge, of what happened

[Xithras]

164. Sunni Islam has major prohibitions against idolatry.

It's not simply "ornate" things, but anything which might be revered. Believe it or not, an archaeologist discovered foundations in Saudi Arabia that may have actually been the house that Muhammed himself was born in. When word got out about the discovery, the Saudi's quickly moved in and bulldozed the site before it could be excavated. At the minimum, they destroyed a 1500 year old home site that might have given valuable insight to archaeologists on Arabian life at that time. At the most, they destroyed the family home and birthplace of the founder of Islam himself. Why? Because Sunni Islam prohibits idolatry, and the birthplace of Mohammed could potentially become a shrine and place of worship for Muslims. According to their religion, it's better to destroy the site than to permit that to happen.

If they look at a simple stone foundation with that kind of disdain, you can just imagine how they look at the elaborately beautiful Shia mosques and shrines. To call these beautiful buildings "Islamic" is simply blasphemous to them.

[Orrin_73]

188. Please do not confuse the Saudi wahhabists with Sunni's

After reading that I was devastated about it.
Read this piece and you will understand what sunnis think about it. Islamica on the destruction of the Hijaz

[greenleaf]

205. No

I read about this and IIRC the site was carefully excavated and photographed before being razed.

[Maraya1969]

70. Buddhism is not Islam.

[JVS]

145. I bet it was Buddhists seeking sweet sweet vengeance

;-)

[JVS]

149. Now wait! Incoming news, men seen leaving the scene reported to look ....

like this.


I guess it was Danish and Norwegian payback for the whole embassy burning thing.

[enigma000]

185. damn Vikings n/t

[Critters2]

227. You'd be testy, too, if you had to eat kumla and lutefisk

[rodeodance]

13. it was on a few short months ago that Rummy said he saw NO signs

of civil war. What the heck is this man is the DOD for?

[Moderator]

14. Kick

[Bluebear]

15. Explosion destroys Golden Dome, Shi'ite shrine

SAMARRA, Iraq - A large explosion Wednesday heavily damaged the golden dome of one of Iraq's most famous Shiite religious shrines, sending protesters pouring into the streets. It was the third major attack against Shiite targets in as many days.

Police believed some people may be buried under the debris after the 6:55 a.m. explosion at the Askariya mosque but there were no confirmed figures. The shrine contains the tombs of two revered Shiite imams, both descendants of the Prophet Muhammad.

Tradition says the shrine, which draws Shiite pilgrims from throughout the Islamic world, is near the place where the last of the 12 Shiite imams, Mohammed al-Mahdi, disappeared. Al-Mahdi, known as the "hidden imam," was the son and grandson of the two imams buried in the Askariya shrine.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060222/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_explosion

[aquart]

16. I really don't wanna think about the retaliation.

If it were me, I'd want brutal.

[MADem]

17. Holy shit--this is a BIG deal

That is one of the holiest sites in shi'a Islam. Damn, this is INSANE. It's almost as though SOMEONE wants them at each other's throats.....

[Dogmudgeon]

18. War is Good Business

Re-invest the Prophets!

--p!

[Wilms]

21. I think you meant Holy Shi'ite.

But I agree.

[Bluebear]

22. :rimshot:

[neweurope]

25. Yes.The USA and GB have been doing their damndest

to provoke civil war.

I am absolutely certain no muslim did this. That place is holy to all muslims.

--------------------

Remember Fallujah

Bush to The Hague!

[fujiyama]

60. Why is it so difficult

to believe that Sunni extremists could be behind this?

It's been the case for decades that Sunnis have ruled Shiites in Iraq under Saddam. Now many Sunnis are angry to lose the power they once had.

All I see is countless knee jerk "This was black ops/CIA", but no real proof of this. I'm not dismissing it out of hand, but it very well could have been fanatical Sunnis.

[Maraya1969]

72. I have trouble believing it unless the Sunnis are not very religious

It would be like Catholics in the US bombing the Vatican if we were at war. It is too Holy of a site - unless you are not religious or don't care about your history.

I should look this up but I don't want to. I'm tired. :-)

[fujiyama]

76. No

It would be like Protestands bombing the Vatican, but if the Vatican were housed in say Northern Ireland where relations between Catholics and Protestants is very tense (and up that tension by a factor of a thousand and that's what you get with Iraq).

" The Golden Mosque contains the remains Imam Ali al-Hadi, who died in 868 A.D. and his son Imam Hassan al-Askari, who died in 874 A.D. Both were descendants of the Prophet Muhammad.

It's a ``major source of pilgrimage through the Shiite world , including Iraq, Iran and India,'' Robert Hillenbrand, professor of Islamic Art at the University of Edinburgh, told the British Broadcasting Corp. ``It's an absolutely integral part of their religious life.'' "

Now most Sunnis would condemn such an attack because it does house descendents of Muhammad, but there are deep conflicts both historically and theologically between Shia and Sunni Islam and ignoring these conflicts is part of the reason we're stuck there right now.

[IA_Seth]

125. Agreed, much better anaology...

It would also be similar to Catholics, Lutherans, Methodists, or any of the "mainstream" Christians bombing Pat Robertson's or another evangelical church.

Not that I am endorsing that or anything.

[JVS]

147. Wasn't there an Onion article about Terror in the Middle-west...

that involved Lutheran fundamentalists from Wisconsin blowing up a tollgate right across the WI-IL border?

[megatherium]

82. The site is holy for Shiites.

The Sunnis have a long history of attacks against Shiites. This isn't the first mosque bombing by Sunnis -- in other countries too.

[LynnTheDem]

87. And the divorce rate in Iraq s/be skyrocketing.

Since Shia & Sunni in Iraq are inter-TRIBAL and inter-MARRIED and have been for eons.

Funny thang tho how the US "media" never do bother pointing them facts out.

[enigma000]

112. But there is Shia-Sunni Conflict

Sectarian tensions in private lives are far from universal: Iraqis of different sects have mixed for decades and still do. But anecdotal evidence provided in interviews with lawyers, court clerks and social workers suggests that fault lines that have always existed are now becoming more distinct.

An analysis provided by one family court in central Baghdad suggested that mixed marriages were rare to begin with, making up 3 to 5 percent of all unions in late 2002. But by late 2005 they had practically stopped: The court did not record any in December, and last month registered only two such marriages out of 742.

"For the coming 10 years you can record the biggest changes in the Iraqi community," said Ansam Abayachi, a social researcher who works with Iraqi women and families. "The Sunnis will be on one side, the Shia on the other, and there is no mixed family."

http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/02/19/news/sect.php

[LynnTheDem]

122. I love links...

I ask myself why the Americans are rubbing this Sunni-Shia thing so hard. Let's turn the glass round the other way. If a violent Sunni movement wished to evict the Americans from Iraq - and there is indeed a resistance movement fighting very cruelly to do just that - why would it want to turn the Shia population of Iraq, 60 per cent of Iraqis, against them? The last thing such a resistance would want is to have the majority of Iraqis against it.

http://www.robert-fisk.com/articles360.htm


Why we say the troops must get out of Iraq;

The US warns of the danger of civil war, but at the same time it is setting up structures of rule which institiutionalise sectarian and ethnic divisions. Like all occupying imperialist powers, the US can only maintain its dominance by playing different groups off against one another.

As political analyst Wameed Nadhmi told Egypt's Al-Ahram Weekly newspaper, "the US aim is to weaken Iraq-to divide it on sectarian and ethnic lines while keeping it geographically intact."

The warning of an imminent civil war has no historical basis.

We should also be very suspicious of US claims that the mainly Sunni-based armed resistance is targeting Shias. For example, after the horrific dual bombings in Karbala and Baghdad in March that killed over 200 people, hundreds of people in the Sunni city of Fallujah-the heart of the armed resistance-queued to donate blood to the mostly Shia victims.

http://www.iso.org.au/socialistworker/531/p6c.html

The Sunni Versus Shia Myth

Much that has been written about the ‘division’ between the Sunni and Shia in Iraq is not only a total distortion of the demographics of the Iraqi population, it also feeds into the propaganda campaign of ‘divide and rule’ tactics that even opponents of the war and occupation can fall into the trap of accepting as true...

http://www.williambowles.info/ini/ini-0156.html

As regards the Shias in the south, their divide from Baghdad has been much exaggerated as part of the anti-Saddam propaganda. It is totally overlooked that the historic Sunni-Shia divide no longer exists.

http://asianaffairs.com/may2003/us_invasion.htm

On Iraq Division

Iraq does not divide logically or neatly between Sunni Arab and Shia Arab. They live intermixed in much of Iraq and in Baghdad, where an estimated 60 percent of the population is Shia, 20 percent Sunni Arab, and 20 percent Kurd and Turkman. Sunni Arabs live in the southern cities of Basra and Zubayr and along the borders with Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. Iraq's Arabs-Sunni or Shia-do not now and never have sought division.

There is a long tradition of inter-communal cooperation and intermarriage. Many Sunni Arab clans and families, including Saddam's, have Sunni and Shia branches.Iraq's Sunni and Shia Arabs are Iraqi first and pan-Arab last. Arab nationalist sympathies have a long history in Iraq.

http://www.menavista.com/articles/yaphe.htm

Sowing The Seeds Of Civil War In Iraq

Some Shia and Sunni religious leaders formed an anti-sectarian front, the Muslim Scholars Committee. The MSC has organised demonstrations in Baghdad and other cities encouraging Muslims to unite and pray at each others' mosques, where secularpeople are also welcome. The committee invited over 30 secular and Christian organisations to attend the First Founding Iraqi Conference Against the US Occupation. This significant development attracted little media coverage, as it contradicts the notion that Iraqis are incapable of working collectively.

The western media predicted that civil war was imminent after explosions at Shia mosques killed hundreds of people in March. But instead, these explosions generated a massive show of unity across Iraq. People blamed the US (and Israel) for planning the atrocities or turning a blind eye to the perpetrators.

Bush and Blair continue to peddle the myth, beloved of old colonialists, that Iraqis will start a civil war if the "benevolent" presence of the occupation forces is removed.

It is the US-led presence itself which is dividing Iraqis now. The US is deepening a split between a minority for and an overwhelming majority against the US-led forces.

-Sami Ramadani is a senior lecturer in sociology at London Metropolitan University and was a political exile from Saddam's regime

http://www.countercurrents.org/iraq-ramadani030704.htm

Dahr Jamail; Unembedded in Iraq

The Shia/Sunni rift is largely a CIA generated myth. There are countless tribes and marriages alike that are both Shia/Sunni. There are mosques here where they pray together.

There is the possibility of war if the Kurds go independent, but the more likely possibility of that war would be Turkey invading Kurdistan before any Shia/Sunni action would occur regarding this.

Another Iraqi man pointed out that if there were a civil war, no Shia or Kurdish attack on Fallujah could ever possibly compare to the devastation the US military has caused there. I think he makes a good point.

http://www.alternet.org/mediaculture/20669


The Bush administration has promoted the idea that Iraq will descend into civil war and chaos without the occupation. This argument is no more credible than the “terrorist base” argument.

Unlike the United States, Iraq has never had a full-fledged civil war. There have been various revolts and revolutions, but never a full-fledged civil war on the scale of the American civil war. This propaganda about the inevitability of civil war if the US pulls out plays off stereotypes and prejudices many Americans have about “third world” peoples – that “they” are extremely unstable, have lots of civil wars, frequent coups and major ethnic tensions. Such stereotypes simply do not apply to Iraq.
http://question-everything.mahost.org/Socio-Politics/Iraq.html

[enigma000]

132. I fear the sentiments expressed in those articles no longer hold true

Many of the links are from 2003 and 2004, things have evolved. Besides which, I don't see the Iraqi resistance behind this attack but our old foe Al Zaquari (assuming he is still alive) & his jihadist friends.

They declared war of the Shia. Suicided bombed a couple of Jordanian hotels late last year. A civil war would work peachy for him.......

[LynnTheDem]

133. Zaqawri is an equal-opportunity hater. He also hates the Sunnis,

just as he hated Hussein.

[enigma000]

135. Good point Lynn. the guy really suffers from free-floating hostility

When are you due back in the True North Strong and Free?

[LynnTheDem]

137. Leaving here SUNDAY!!! (now ya got me all over-excited!)

Driving up, so I'm figuring next Sat/Sun arrival in the Van!!!

WOOOHOOOO!!!

(Hubby says "thanks a LOT for getting me all worked up." :sarcasm: )

:D

[enigma000]

139. Van-Groovy: that's where it's at

Sunshine Coast, Stanley Park, clean Pacific Ocean air....

Drive Safe.

[LynnTheDem]

141. I am sooooo

EXCITED!!!

*Hubby says will you PLEASE stop egging me on as I'm making him nuts. :D

[megatherium]

144. self-deleted. nt

[daleo]

176. One family court is simply too small

and potentially too biased a sample to draw conclusions from, especially at this remove. It is like drawing conclusions about the state of race relations in the U.S. from one family court.

[Maru Kitteh]

95. No - that's a bad analogy

it would be more like a large organized group of Protestants blowing up the Vatican in a war between themselves and the Catholics. There are some Protestants who hate Catholics that much and visa versa. Protestants and Catholics have gone to war before and blown up each others churches, and I'm sure they all considered themselves to be very religious.

There's no reason at all why this could not have been Sunni extremists.

Saddam kept a brutal choke-hold on excessive religious displays and protests and many other things for an obvious reason.

[verdalaven]

110. Wasn't Saddam agnostic?

Many of his hard core followers might have shared his views, and their bias against Shi'ites might trump recognition of a historical religious site.

Start praying for our kids over there, because you know they are going to get hit hard for this.

[enigma000]

113. Saddam worshiped his maker. And he was a self-made man

When he ordered "God is Great" written on the Iraqi flag in the early 1990s, he was referring to himself (Saddam).

I suspect many Iraqis have "gotten" religion from all the troubles lately.

[file83]

33. You are right. ALL HELL is about to break loose.

[leftchick]

47. yes indeed

SOMEONE certainly benefits from the chaos.

[Bozita]

19. It will only be a civil war when Bush says it is

The MSM is amazing.

[tocqueville]

20. civil war anyone ?

they just blew up the Shiites Vatican...

now it's really time for the US to pack home...

[Comadreja]

23. Maybe they had it done?

Remember the two Brits picked up for suspicion of planting bombs by the Iraqi Forces then released by force?

[neweurope]

26. Absolutely.

--------------------

Remember Fallujah

Bush to The Hague!

[0007]

53. Words can't say or make one believe Iraq is striving for Democracy

or the United States is concerned with the welfare of the Iraqis.

[file83]

36. Yep, I believe this is the story you speak of:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1573681,00.html

They've done it before and I believe they have done it again. Notice the timing between the UAE 6 U.S. ports controversy and this latest bombing incident. It'll be the only thing we hear about for the next 2 weeks - just enough time for the American public to forget about the port deal.

[file83]

24. Gee, now I wonder *cough*cia*cough* who could have done that?

[Bluebear]

27. This would be like a Catholic bombing St. Peter's basilica

But some "insurgent" did this?

[Azathoth]

31. No, this would be like Pat Robertson bombing St. Peter's basilica

Assuming, of course, that the bomber was Sunni.

[Bluebear]

38. "Assuming, of course, that the bomber was Sunni."

Assuming.

[Bridget Burke]

142. I'd chime in with "Ian Paisley bombing St Peter's"

He's certainly expressed his hatred for the idol worshiping Scarlet Woman of Rome.

Except: The bombers are destroying mosques & shrines in their own country. In Ireland, the finest old churches were not destroyed, but were taken over by the Church of Ireland. Sometimes they switched hands several times. The religious ruins found in Ireland are more the result of destruction or neglect by an invading power--not by Irish Protestants.

Of course Protestants & Catholics get along fine in many countries. But an occupying power can encourage sectarian conflict to make their dominion easier.

[file83]

32. Exactly - any true Islamic fanatic would NEVER do this. They would

go straight to hell - Do not pass GO - Do not collect 72 virgins.

I kid, but seriously, you nailed it. Remember the British special forces guys that were caught posing as insurgents and attacking a police station a while back?

From the memory hole: http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1573681,00.html

The fighting broke out after two British soldiers, allegedly dressed as Arabs, opened fire on a police patrol killing one officer and wounding another.

So we know how the "coalition forces" operate, this latest attack fits their MO.

[ButterflyBlood]

200. No it'd be like some anti-Catholic fundie nutjob bombing the Vatican

Not a totally unlikely scenario. The loyalist terrorist group Orange Volunteers carried out bombings of Catholic churches in Northern Ireland, claiming they were "refuges of the antichrist"

[laheina]

29. It just keeps getting better and better

doesn't it? :sarcasm:

[wordpix]

100. yeah, how do you know the CIA is involved? Give a link instead of theories

based on nothing.

[file83]

154. Oh sure, I'll just hack into the CIA database and provide a link...

it's called an OPINION, - I'm sure other people that are capable of thinking for themselves can probably figure that out. Do I need to spell it out for you - IT'S A HUNCH. Gut feeling. Get it? Good gawd.

[Blue_Tires]

28. an operation from one of the mercenary firms?

like Blackwater, maybe?

[file83]

40. No - this is a Pentagon operation carried out by an elite

Special Forces type unit like the Delta Force. Blackwater doesn't do this sort of clandestine stuff - it's US Military "jurisdiction". It's the kind of black ops stuff that makes old crusty Generals cream their pants - no way are they going to give the fun operations away to a civilian contractor.

[Azathoth]

42. Dude, calm down with the conspiracy talk

While it's not outside the realm of possibility that this was a US black op, it's quite possible that this was just business as usual for one of the Iraqi insurgent groups. Iraq is already well into the initial stages of civil war; they don't need any help from the CIA to attack each other.

[file83]

44. Yeah, there are no "conspiracies" the US has planned for the Middle East

How foolish of me. What was I thinking?
:sarcasm::sarcasm::sarcasm::sarcasm::sarcasm:

[Maru Kitteh]

103. It's just that it's fantastically foolish to jump straight to histrionic

"It's the CIA! It's black ops!" In the face of so much available and obvious evidence before you leading to the MUCH more probable scenario.

Civil war was warned against over a decade ago when Poppy went in to Iraq. It was warned against in this invasion too but Georgie just didn't give a crap. Now it's come to fruition. No surprises here.

Simply put - you don't need to look for a boogieman on this one, it was predictable, predicted and now it's here. We didn't have to do anything to "stir the pot". It's always been on a low boil just under the surface.



I swear, it gets harder and harder to laugh at the lunatics who rant about the "Clinton body count" with some of the things I see on our side.

[file83]

155. Yes, but by your very same reasoning you could conclude that this was

a covert Government operation. You see, to you it may seem completely unreasonable to think that the US Government would conduct a black op of this magnitude - but if you had ever cracked a book highlighting the CIA's involvement of manipulating foreign political situations through the use of black ops - then you'de realize how completely "plausible" my HUNCH was.

Furthermore, when I made that comment last night - there was ZERO "evidence" of the kind you required as to who exactly was responsible for the attack. NONE. So how could you claim to have "known" who did it, if you yourself were violating your own standards? Hypocrite.

[Maru Kitteh]

191. No, see that's where you're so wrong and what makes this idea so daft

I don't think it's unreasonable for a black ops of this magnitude, I think it's unreasonable to waste time and energy on a black ops that's so unnecessary. Why go through all that when you can just sit back and wait for what you know will happen to come to be? It's a patently stupid notion that they would waste time and energy arranging a civil war that is already here.

I've cracked the books sweetheart, I'm just not a lunatic who has ceded all pretense to logic. I'm well aware of our track record. I'm also well aware that some will read any crackpot garbage they can get their hands on and take it as sacred gospel just because it's on a printed page. Stable, rational people will take in all kinds of information, weigh credibility, evidence, facts and use logic to form an analytic and coherent opinion. Not breathless, third-rate, knee-jerk, unsubstantiated declarations like "this is a Pentagon operation carried out by an elite
Special Forces type unit like the Delta Force".


Critical reading skills are so important, really. Show me where in the post of mine above where I required evidence?

[fujiyama]

62. But remember!

Muslims never kill Muslims and there are no ethnic tensions in Iraq. Nevermind that Sunnis are pissed that their base of power has been greatly diminished since the invasion of Iraq.

God, every time something bad happens in the world, the Godly presence of the Bush admin and the CIA are at work.

[Maru Kitteh]

105. The Bush administration and the CIA must be conspiring with

THE ALMIGHTY CLENIS!


Only the combined chess-master intellect of the Bush team combined with the awesome force of the Clenis could wield such mighty power.

[pecwae]

73. Delta lives for this type of stuff

Walk into Bennigans in Fayetteville and you can even hear them bragging about some of their exploits. I don't know that this one is theirs, but it sounds like their MO.

[file83]

158. Thank you for that story and your comment. Can you believe how

ignorant some of these people are around here? They jump ALL OVER you if you vocalize a HUNCH that this is a black op. It's laughable, but sad, because they have NO IDEA how involved our government is in these kinds of operations. Not a clue.

[wordpix]

97. I agree, tone down unless you can give a link & back up your theory with

firm facts. We have enough scary, fucked up facts about the neoCons to contend with without conspiracy-based-on-no-facts shit. Geez.

[file83]

160. Once again - tone it down in your own mind. It's a HUNCH, and if you

can't figure that out, you need to study the topic of which I'm speculating on. Go to the Amazon and read for yourself of one example of how these tactics/strategies are used in war: Covert Ops: The CIA's Secret War in Laos. But it. Read it. Study it.

Stop claiming to be an authority on a matter of which you obviously have put very little hours into.

[wordpix]

161. Dear Hunch: The ME is not Laos & we have NO INFORMATION the CIA caused

this bombing, just your HUNCH.

BTW,I've put in thousands of hours reading about the ME-Bush connections/PNAC/Carlyle Group/Bush Cabal members etc. ad infinitum. I may not be an "expert" but I read up, watch Frontline and other documentaries and do my homework, you insulting clod.

[file83]

167. Mr. "Facts". Since you seem to be so enlightened with facts, why don't

share with us, with LINKS, historical evidence of Muslims blowing up Mosques. Not bombings outside of Mosques. Not bombings of people hanging out around a Mosques. But ACTUAL bombings of Mosques. I'd be very interested to know what you know. Get to it.

[wordpix]

178. hey, buddy, I don't take orders from YOU! Who do you think you are?

[file83]

184. LOL!!! But it's okay for YOU to tell me what to do?

You can dish it out, but you can't take it. How does your own medicine taste now?

[wordpix2]

202. all I've asked for are your facts. I'm not getting them from you

[ConcernedCanuk]

30. Good thing the USA got Saddam outta there, eh?

.
.
.

From the posted article:

"The shrine contains the tombs of the 10th and 11th imams, Ali al-Hadi who died in 868 A.D. and his son Hassan al-Askari who died in 874 A.D and was the father of the hidden imam."

Just about 1,000 years before the USA was "born"

USA sticks their evil nose in and millenniums of history gets destroyed

And it will be millenniums before the world forgets, if ever, the evil unleashed by the USA's greed . .

That's my Canuk Opinion anyhow . . .

(sigh)

[file83]

34. And once word gets around that it was US/British Special Forces

units dressed as arabs that did it - you think the reaction from the Muslim world for the cartoons was bad. This could start the holy war that Bush and his End-Times buddies have always wished for.

[AntiFascist]

48. At least they found those terra-ists in Ohio....

I hope that was the only sleeper cell.

:hide:

[wordpix]

98. again, how do you know it was US/Brit forces? Irresponsible BS doesn't

help our cause at all so please tone it down unless you have some facts to back up your statements. We're not stupid, you know.

[file83]

157. I'm glad to hear that you, as you say are, "not stupid." Then why is it so

hard for you to come to your own conclusion that what I'm saying is SPECULATION? What part of that can you not figure out? There are others that have studied the CIA/USG's involvement in these kinds of operations and so know EXACTLY what I'm talking about. It's completely possible and backed up with historic fact of which it is NOT my responsibility to inform you of (it's yours), so quit complaining about your own ignorance on this matter and blaming that on me.

If your HUNCH is that this was just insurgents fighting insurgents, then, by all means, SPECULATE. I won't bite your head off even though (as of last night when I made these comments) there would be no "facts" to back it up.

[Maru Kitteh]

107. Jesus CHRIST ON A TRAILER HITCH - back your shit up with facts

or GIVE IT UP! You haven't backed up one histrionic, electro-shock therapy gone wrong, lunatic theory you have presented with a damn thing.

I've met freaks in the subway that had more coherent conspiracy theories backed up with more research than what I've seen posted here.

[file83]

156. It's SPECULATION - Do I need to hold your hand?

[wordpix]

162. OK, now he admits it's speculation---we have enough REAL FACTS to freak

over, so stop speculating it's our own CIA that did this when you have NO FACTS to back that up

[NIGHT TRIPPER]

209. Why do you SPECULATE that those best equipped in Iraq AREN'T doing this?

Your speculation that it is religious fanatics is actually more valid?
Why? because you listen to CNN and FOX?
(The same folk who brought you weapons of MASS dee-struk-tion bring you
news of "civil war)"--


logic anyone?
Why would the conquerers want to divide the country?


Did you even hear about the Brits arrrested recently planting bombs?
Check the DU threads.
Dressed as Arabs/ arrrested/ then busted out of jail by the British Secret Service who used Tanks to pllow down the walls of the building--

[wordpix]

213. fact is I'm NOT speculating, period. I have NO EVIDENCE to accuse

any one or any group. But here on DU, people sitting comfortably in their American living rooms seem to KNOW it's the CIA. So I'm just asking, How do you know? Facts and sources, please.

I'm not saying it was the Sunnis, either. Those investigating are staying pretty quiet about it but saying it has the fingerprints of an al Quaeda operation. However, I have no idea, based on a nebulous report like that, that it is al Quaeda, either.

[cornermouse]

35. No.

Not the USA's greed. Bush's greed. I've been against this from day 1.

[Dover]

37. I feel sick............

..........the Bushco neanderthals are the same as those fundamentalist Taliban that destroyed the giant Buddas. Of course we must consider they had no problem taking down the Twin Towers with thousands inside either.

[file83]

41. It hasn't even started to get "interesting" yet. This is how World Wars

are begun. It's the kind of "bomb heard around the world" type event. This is what the US will need to provoke Iranian leadership into shutting down nuclear talks. This action was designed to make the Muslim world rise up and demand war against the US.

The perfect kind of "motive" used as a cover story for oh, say, an unfortunate nuclear event on U.S. soil. Hopefully I'm just a moron, right?

[Dover]

46. Yep. If we eliminated all the covert-op provocations that have

gone on over the last 4-6 years, the world would be at peace. Maybe this is the buildup to the neocon's next American "terra" event......taking out the White House, so they can all move their operations to the underground bunkers they've been practicing for over the years since Reagan.

They almost managed to take it out during 9/11 so this time surely they'll hit the mark and maybe even take out that bothersome Congress while they're at it. And then they'll say....well the terraists just came back to finish what they started on 9/11.

[Hardrada]

39. Well, aren't the Bushbots trying to provoke Shi'ite Iran?

This might be part of that.

[Rageneau]

43. Those good Christian Freepers are giggling with glee about this.

They see it as a catalyst to a horrible civil war in which hundreds of thousands will die, which, being Christians, is fine with them.

[roguevalley]

45. what a horrendous sacrilege. I am so sorry for this and for the

people that got hurt. This is beyond the pale.

[BeyondThePale]

78. Wait, I am Beyond the Pale!

Seriously, I whole-heartedly agree with you!

[rodeodance]

49. cnn -reporting now--huge demonstrations going on because of this.

[rodeodance]

50. 3rd major attach on Shites in 3 days.

[RebelOne]

69. Attach?

[OnceUponTimeOnTheNet]

75. This looks very bad

Alot of damage in that pic. So hopeless, the idea of Democracy in this region.

[leftchick]

52. Damaged? Try DESTROYED!

This is horrible...



Iraqis walk past the damaged shrine following an explosion in Samarra, 95 kilometers (60 miles) north of Baghdad, Wednesday, Feb. 22, 2006. A large explosion Wednesday heavily damaged the golden dome of one of Iraq's most famous Shiite religious shrines, sending protesters pouring into the streets. It was the third major attack against Shiite targets in as many days. (AP Photo/Hameed Rasheed)

And these folks are furious...



Iraqis rally in protest in reaction on the shrine explosion in Samarra, in holy Shiite city of Najaf, 160 kilometers (100 miles) south of Baghdad, Wednesday, Feb. 22, 2006. A large explosion Wednesday heavily damaged the golden dome of one of Iraq's most famous Shiite religious shrines, sending protesters pouring into the streets. It was the third major attack against Shiite targets in as many days. (AP Photo/Alaa AL-Marjani)

[OKNancy]

54. Here is a "before" picture

[aaronbees]

57. beautiful ...

incredible to see what's happened to it :( just infuriating

[leftchick]

58. this is just heartbreaking

:cry:

[OKNancy]

61. I'm getting a feeling that this may be an event

that takes an all-out civil war from "possible" to "probable".

[Maru Kitteh]

109. I'm thinking it's already reality.

So many already knew this civil war would happen, but of course George didn't care. What an unbelievable tragedy this all is.

[rodeodance]

68. must have taken lots of explosives to do that much damage.

[rfkrfk]

81. not necessarily, dome built in 1905

built in 1905,according to Fox News

the dome would be designed to hold up its own weight,
not survive a blast from the inside.

[mogster]

55. Well, was it the insurgents or was it these guys?

Remember them?









BAGHDAD, Sept. 19 (Xinhuanet) -- Iraqi police detained two British soldiers in civilian clothes in the southern city Basra for firing on a police station on Monday, police said.

"Two persons wearing Arab uniforms opened fire at a police station in Basra. A police patrol followed the attackers and captured them to discover they were two British soldiers," an Interior Ministry source told Xinhua.

The two soldiers were using a civilian car packed with explosives, the source said.

He added that the two were being interrogated in the police headquarters of Basra.
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2005-09/19/content_3514065.htm
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/19/AR2005091900572_pf.html

From the WP:
"Iraqi security officials on Monday variously accused the two Britons they detained of shooting at Iraqi forces or trying to plant explosives. Photographs of the two men in custody showed them in civilian clothes."

Here's the shrine in question, called the Golden Mosque, now utterly destroyed:


Is this what it seems to be? I think it's fair to ask the question - the goal of the Sunni 'insurgents' seems to coincide to well with the goal of Mr. Ledeen and other neoconservative hawks.

[leftchick]

59. yeah I remember them

and it was my very first thought who could do this. It still is my thought. :(

[OKNancy]

65. I don't think the goals are the same

I really doubt this. The goal of the neocons is to spread democracy by force over the middle east. To me this has the opposite effect. This enrages both sides even more and harms their(neocons) ridiculous dreams of a secular democratic state. Iraq looks to be headed for an Iranian friendly theocracy.
It looks to me that if before there may have been some willingness to compromise with the Sunnis, that's going to really be hurt by this event.

[mogster]

79. I have to disagree on that

Why would Christian extremists want a democratic state in Iraq? Aren't they disassembling the US democracy as fast as they can?

As far as I know, their goal is two or more wars going on, and this falls to perfectly into their rethoric against Iran.

[megatherium]

83. completely illogical.

Our goal was for a stable, safe secular, pro-western Iraq -- to weaken the medieval Muslim tyrannies in the region, and to serve in particular as a staging area for possible action against Iran (viewed as the real threat in the region). Of course, we've failed spectacularly, due to the colossal stupidity of Bushco.

All of the blame-Bush, blame-CIA crowd forgets that we are not the only assholes on the planet. There are parties in Iraq who want violence for their own purposes. The Sunnis (who ruled that unfortunate country before our arrival) want to regain control. People talk about the possibility of a civil war in Iraq. Truth is, they're already having a low-grade civil war. There are something like a thousand Iraqi casualties a month in the conflict (bombings, death squad activity, etc).

[mogster]

84. Well *cough*

The stated goal was to disarm Saddam Hussein because he had weapons of mass destruction.

If there was another goal behind the illegal invation of Iraq, I didn't hear it before the war started. But maybe you did.

I'm sorry, but I belong to the blame-Bush crowd.

[megatherium]

88. oh please,

like anyone actually thought that's what the reason for the invasion was. Remember the story about Tony Blair and how the intelligence was being "sexed up" to justify the invasion? Remember Valerie Plame, who was outed as a CIA agent by Libby/Rove because her husband published a devastating opinion piece that pulled apart the Adminstration's claims about WMD? Those bastards knew they had no evidence for WMD.

Now -- blaming Bush for fucking up everything with his monumentally stupid invasion, yes, I suppose that's a reasonable conclusion. But Bush and his people are most assuredly not behind today's outrage.

[mogster]

91. Well, here's a very good point from the other thread

Would Muslims blow up a Mosque?

Besides, the official reason they got their ways was the WMD, the most used term on planet Earth in 2002. I was there, I know.
Why do you belittle their lie by implying that this wasn't their official reason for the invasion?

I know the subsequent history, but this is now, that was then.
They lied about WMD, and the world, even though suspicious about Bush motives, had to believe it because the American president put all of his credibility behind that lie.

Now, that credibility is a little pock-marked, and so I ask questions about their next sham.

[megatherium]

101. OK, maybe they did believe in the WMD.

In fact, I recall Chalabi's people were telling them that the WMD existed (Chalabi wanted us to invade so that he could become Iraq's next leader). But I think it's clear that the WMD was not the primary motivation for the invasion, their goal was to replace the regime by a friendly regime. Stupid, yes. But that was one of their stated reasons -- the WMD was only the legal justification for the invasion.

But it is not at all true that Muslims do not blow up mosques. They've been quite busy at it, not just in Iraq but in in places like Pakistan (where the Sunni/Shiite conflict has been going on in our absense for a long time).

[mogster]

111. OK, maybe Sunnis blow up Shiite Mosques

I have no history to prove they don't. But you should still have a look at the original discussion around the two men arrested last year:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4820809

We are way beyond any coincidental events, everything that happens now does place us on the Last Train to Iran ;-)

Bush isn't dumb, he's got an IQ of over 130 points. He's spoiled and a drunkard, but not dumb.
No one is as dumb as this, it's just too unbelievable.
They fucked up the Iraqi war because they wanted to, not because they couldn't get it right. To be fair, wars are seldom won that's not based in a just cause, but this war has all too many hallmarks of being intentionally unjust.

I don't believe in it, just as I don't believe in the 'war' on terror.

[megatherium]

128. Bush had an IQ in the 120s

based on his reported performance on the SAT (in the 1200s). Heavy drinking may have degraded his mental ability (read Bush on the Couch for details and evidence for this theory). But you're right, the sinistral country-bumpkin speaking pattern is in part a put-on.

But I can't understand just why the Bush people want to start a goddamn civil war in Iraq. What's the point? An out-of-control conflict would interrupt Iraq's oil production and directly threaten neighboring states. It seems too dangerous for me to justify any possible gains. Please clarify.

[LynnTheDem]

89. Rather, that was the neocon "stated" goal.

None of which was ever true or feasable, as the vast majority of the entire world pointed out

[megatherium]

102. So what the hell was their real reason for invading? nt

[LynnTheDem]

106. Oil.

No US govt wants democracy in the ME.

1. The vast majority of citizens in the ME don't care much for us.

2. Democracy in the ME = representative government.

3. Representative government = govt that don't care much for us.

US gov wants US-puppets in the ME.

For oil.

[megatherium]

124. I didn't say they wanted a democratic Iraq.

I said they wanted a safe, stable, pro-western Iraq. But you're right, they want a stable middle east that is in their control, to secure the energy supply. This goal might not even be sinister -- perhaps they're less interested in who owns/profits from the oil than in securing a stable supply of oil for the US, Europe and Asia. In the event, the Iraq war has proved to be a huge miscalculation: we will not accomplish this goal. The supply of petroleum and gas is less stable than before, and the world economy is imperiled. When peak oil manifests itself (in the 0-20 year time frame), things will get really hairy.

[LynnTheDem]

127. What you said...and a lot of innocent men, women & babies are dead.

I despise the bush regime.

[Igel]

126. Many neocons are Jewish.

You're conflating numerous factions and trends into nice archetypal enemies, forgetting you've done the conflation, and then thinking in terms of those archetypes as though they were reality. It may work in specific instances; it's also guaranteed to fail, in others.

[wordpix]

152. what's your point? Bush & Cheney, heads of the cabal, are NOT Jewish so..?

[ButterflyBlood]

201. The Neocons are not Christian extremists

Quite a bunch are Jewish, Wolfowitz anyone? Most are secular. People tend to lump all right wing bad apples into the same bunch here. Neocons and fundie nutjobs are both awful no doubt, but there are some key differences between them.

[wordpix]

216. "quite a bunch are Jewish:" Again, there are many neoCons who aren't so

what are you saying? This whole mess in Iraq is because of the Jews?

Hitler thought all his problems were because of the Jews, too.

[ButterflyBlood]

219. No, hardly.

I was simply rebuking the point that neocons and Christian fundies are one and the same.

[PassingFair]

180. Not just these two....

Other brits were arrested by Iraqi police just a short while ago.

I'll look for a link.

[Jacobin]

63. A Civil Holy War

Lovely. Just lovely. I hope the neo con idiots are happy now

[wicket]

64. God this is horrible

:cry:

[rodeodance]

66. cnn just reported that two Suni mosques were attacked today

[saigon68]

116. Civil war heating up

This development is more dramatic than a couple of cartoons

[wicket]

134. I agree completely

This is an utter disaster :(

[0007]

67. This brings to mind the World Trade Centers. n/t

[DemonFighterLives]

71. C-spn reported

an armed group took over the guards and went in and set explosives and demolished it on the way out.
War on Terror survives another day.

[0007]

74. Did John Negroponte know before hand?

[LynnTheDem]

77. Goodbye to more beauty, making the world uglier than ever.

Thanks to bush.

[katinmn]

85. The destruction of the antiquities is never discussed.

Lives are most important, but the destruction of so much history and irreplaceble antiquities is sickening.

[LynnTheDem]

86. Well they are discussed...but only when it's propaganda value to bush.

IE the Taleban & the Budhas.

NEVER EVER discussed is whenever the USA commits atrocities.

[Mika]

104. Destroying history is central to BushCrimeInc's Orwellian strategery.

Know your Orwell.

http://www.online-literature.com/orwell/1984/4/

What happened in the unseen labyrinth to which the pneumatic tubes led, he did not know in detail, but he did know in general terms. As soon as all the corrections which happened to be necessary in any particular number of The Times had been assembled and collated, that number would be reprinted, the original copy destroyed, and the corrected copy placed on the files in its stead. This process of continuous alteration was applied not only to newspapers, but to books, periodicals, pamphlets, posters, leaflets, films, sound-tracks, cartoons, photographs -- to every kind of literature or documentation which might conceivably hold any political or ideological significance. Day by day and almost minute by minute the past was brought up to date. In this way every prediction made by the Party could be shown by documentary evidence to have been correct, nor was any item of news, or any expression of opinion, which conflicted with the needs of the moment, ever allowed to remain on record. All history was a palimpsest, scraped clean and reinscribed exactly as often as was necessary. In no case would it have been possible, once the deed was done, to prove that any falsification had taken place. The largest section of the Records Department, far larger than the one on which Winston worked, consisted simply of persons whose duty it was to track down and collect all copies of books, newspapers, and other documents which had been superseded and were due for destruction. A number of The Times which might, because of changes in political alignment, or mistaken prophecies uttered by Big Brother, have been rewritten a dozen times still stood on the files bearing its original date, and no other copy existed to contradict it. Books, also, were recalled and rewritten again and again, and were invariably reissued without any admission that any alteration had been made. Even the written instructions which Winston received, and which he invariably got rid of as soon as he had dealt with them, never stated or implied that an act of forgery was to be committed: always the reference was to slips, errors, misprints, or misquotations which it was necessary to put right in the interests of accuracy.

But actually, he thought as he re-adjusted the Ministry of Plenty's figures, it was not even forgery. It was merely the substitution of one piece of nonsense for another. Most of the material that you were dealing with had no connexion with anything in the real world, not even the kind of connexion that is contained in a direct lie.

[wordpix]

99. goodbye to beautiful historical heritage sites & thanks, *, for keeping

world "safe," you fucking moron.

[katinmn]

138. AP: U.S. Says Will Help Rebuild Bombed Shrine

http://news.yahoo.com/fc/world/iraq
U.S. Says Will Help Rebuild Bombed Shrine
AP - 17 minutes ago
BAGHDAD, Iraq - Top U.S. officials strongly condemned the bombing of a revered Shiite shrine Wednesday, calling it a desperate and despicable act designed to foment sectarian strife. "Given the historic, cultural and religious importance of this shrine, this attack is a crime against humanity," the U.S. ambassador and the commander of U.S. forces in Iraq said in a joint statement. "The Shrine should be rebuilt and the United States will contribute to its reconstruction."
:eyes:

[LynnTheDem]

140. 1. Yeah surel. Cept last mth bush said no more $ for Iraq rebuilding.

2. Rebuild a centuries-old shrine.

3. Like the Iraqis want us touching the shrine destroyed because of (by?) us.

4. Guess we're staying in Iraq (sorry Iraqis, know ya want us to go but oh well tough shit!) unless we're "rebuilding" their shrine the way we "rebuilt" their schools that are already falling apart.

5. Yeah sure we will.

:eyes:

[wordpix]

151. with what, our $8.5 trillion debt? BU$HCO should pay for the rebuilding!

[daleo]

186. That will go over well

From the Iraqi point of view (especially the view of the very devout):
- Christian crusaders invade their country.
- One of their greatest shrines is destroyed.
- The crusaders "help" to rebuild it.

I can't see it.

[maxrandb]

187. And in a wierd twist of irony

Haliburton wins the "no-bid" contract for the "reconstruction"!

[katinmn]

189. I'm waiting for the announcement that Halliburton will manage the ports

It's the only way Busheney will ever cave in.

[wordpix]

214. I was recently told that Carlyle Grp is invested in Halliburton so DP

World might be a Halliburton spin off or just a name change for one of its operations. Part of CSX was sold to Carlyle Group.

[Mithras61]

92. Interesting article in Forbes Online

http://www.forbes.com/work/feeds/ap/2006/02/22/ap2543984.html

Associated Press
Update 28: Explosion Destroys Dome of Shiite Shrine
By ZIAD KHALAF , 02.22.2006, 06:13 AM

A large explosion destroyed the golden dome of one of Iraq's most famous Shiite shrines Wednesday, sending protesters pouring into the streets. The third major attack against Shiites in as many days threatened to enflame sectarian passions at a time when talks on a coalition government have bogged down.

Shiite leaders called for calm, but scattered attacks occurred against Sunni mosques in Baghdad. U.S. and Iraqi forces deployed around major Sunni mosques, and 500 Iraqi soldiers were sent to Sunni neighborhoods in the capital to prevent clashes between Shiites and Sunnis, army Capt. Jassim al-Wahash said.

No group claimed responsibility for the early morning attack on the Askariya shrine in this city 60 miles north of Baghdad, but suspicion fell on Sunni extremist groups such as al-Qaida in Iraq led by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.

emphasis added by me

I find this a very interesting attrribution, because the last time I checked, Al Qaida was a WAHABBI sect, not a SUNNI sect. This tends to lend credence in my mind to the charges of some here that this was a black ops operation, since they are clearly trying to both blame it on the Sunnis and to onflame already tense relations. I think WE'RE playing a VERY dangerous game here...

[LynnTheDem]

93. 1. Sunnis are a tiny minority in Iraq.

Why would they want to piss off the huge (very heavily armed) majority?

2. Sunni & Shia in Iraq are TRIBAL; meaning pretty much EVERY Sunni tribe has a Shia branch, and vice versa.

3. Sunni & Shia have intermarried for eons. Are all the Sunni & Shia now suddenly divorced?

4. Sunni & Shia have worshipped together for eons, and in fact do use most the same mosques to worship in.

5. How come the US "media" never point these facts out?

No, it wasn't the Sunni.

[Zynx]

118. Sunni extremists consider Shia infidels and idol worshipers

[ButterflyBlood]

203. So? The same could be said for Protestants and Catholics

I was born of a Protestant-Catholic intermarriage. I know plenty of other such cases of such marriages. My parents have gone to both Protestant and Catholic churches together, they both have lots of Protestant and Catholic friends. They all get along fine.

Does that mean there aren't a few extremist Protestant and Catholic wackos who consider the other denom heretics and would have no problem attacking their churches?

[ECH1969]

96. Now that is stupid

There is only two groups who benifit from this attack Zarqawi and Iran.

One of those people was behind it. Iran would love for the attack to happen because support was coalesing around Mahdi in Parliment and this will throw it back to Sadr's choice of Jaafari. Zarqawi would love it as well because it would wreck the political process and throw the negotations to radical Shia thus increasing the chance of a civil war.

America and the Iraqi people are the big losers from this.

[karynnj]

190. Except Iran is a theocracy and they cherish this site

[fujiyama]

117. Wahabbiism

could be considered a sub sect of Sunniism.

The Taliban was Wahhabbiist, but could still be considered Sunni. They also discriminated against Shiites. It's one of the reasons Iran was not at all upset to see the Taliban go.

So, no it does not really lend credence to black ops. There are some historical theological differences and conflicts that must be taken into consideration before jumping to a conclusion that this was the CIA. Is it possible? Sure, nothing can be discounted outright, but I have seen no real evidence or even clear explanation supporting this claim.

But ultimately Bush can still take a lot of blame for the violence. The chaos, power vacuum and violence is all the result of the invasion.

[Mithras61]

121. I'm more inclined to believe...

that the bombers were Wahhabbi than Sunni (regardless of if Wahhabbi is Sunni sect or not). The bombing of a Shi'ite mosque in Iraq at the present time doesn't benefit Sunni interests, only Wahhabbi interests.


I say WE'RE playing the game because we've been fueling the fight between Sunnis & Shi'ites since we've been there (probable thinking: a divide & conquer aproach), but we've also been the impetus behind much of the recruiting worldwide for Al Qaida (our invading Iraq has increased their recruitment substaintially). Invading Iraq and playing Sunnis vs. Shi'ites was like throwing gasoline on a fire, and by conducting black ops dressed as Arabs (previously - as in the British) doesn't help alleviate suspicions of our involvement in attempts to weaken the Shi'ite leaders with their armies of followers (like Al Sadr).


We've taken the approach that we can somehow win by killing enough terrorists, when most rational people know that killing terrorists tends to result in more terrorists (as the families & friends of the killed join the fight).

[fujiyama]

130. I agee to some extent

The US has definetely played different groups off against each other. There is no doubt about that. And at this point, it's also pretty clear thaat both sides hate us.

But the tensions have existed long before the US invaded. Shiites were persecuted under Saddam (including one particular attack after the first GW when poppy urged the Shiites to revolt against Saddam and then left them to get slaughtered) and there is no doubt that Sunni power has diminished since the US invaded.

But I agree completely with you that invading Iraq has increased Al Qaeda recruiting and that these attacks don't further most Sunni's interests (violence by extremists rarely ever furthers that group's interests), and only the extreme Wahhabi Sunni elements.

As for that British 'black ops' incident, I read a bit about it, and it certainly is a very bizarre story. I am not exactly sure what to make of it. Someone said a possible explanation was to break out some Brits that were inside. Either way it doesn't help our credibility any.

[wordpix]

129. ultimately * is to blame for his "easy-targets-in-Iraq" reasoning to

go to war---obviously, he didn't get educated about the Sunni-Shi'ite conflicts and what a power vacuum would do. ASS!! and this will all blowback on us instead of HIM unless we impeach him and ALL his cronies and shake them down to return their riches to the US Treasury and Iraq.

[fujiyama]

131. It's funny you bring that up

but just a few weeeks before the invasion I recall reading an article (I think it was in the Atlantic Monthly) about Bush's ignorance about the different ethnic and religious groups in Iraq.

Finally they gave him a crash course. I think it was Condi explaining "There are Kurds in the north, Shiites in the South...".

[MrsMatt]

136. Wahhabis despise Shias

and they have a history of destroying holy places.

http://www.nmhschool.org/tthornton/wahhabi_movement.htm

[Massachusetts]

119. Juan Cole

Wednesday, February 22, 2006

Shiite protests Roil Iraq

Tuesday was an apocalyptic day in Iraq. I am not normally exactly sanguine about the situation there. But the atmospherics are very, very bad, in a way that most Western observers will miss.
-Informed Comment

http://www.juancole.com/

[Odin2005]

143. Oh. My. God. We might as well get out now.

The Shia are going to want Sunni blood, and we'll be able to do nothing to stop it. :scared:

[genie_weenie]

146. The *TRUTH* on the Destruction of the Shrine

Unrepentant descendants of the Society of Assassins, begun by the Old Man on the Mountain, and their current leader Hasan I Sabah XII, together with a secret clan of Warriors of Tamerlane, were contacted by the Ghost of Deep Throat, who informed them via Ouija Board to blow up the Shrine in order to stop the Return of the Mahdi (who will be portrayed by the bones of Laurence Oliver). The Mahdi, upon receiving instructions from the Skull of the Black Madonna will institute the Creation of the Canals, which metaphorically will combine all mankind...

[hedgehog]

153. You know, it doesn't matter who really planted the bomb

Everyone will blame their favorite target, Sunni, Shiite, CIA, Black Ops, etc etc. There's plenty of hatred and anger to go around, so in the end, I'm not sure it even matters anymore who planted the bomb.

[coalition_unwilling]

163. Cui bono? (Who benefits?)

If you ask yourself the old Latin question "Cui bono?" ("Who benefits?"), one can make a plausible case that this was a CIA black ops, designed to foment sectarian violence.

Early reports said the folks who planted the bomb were wearing Iraqi police uniforms.

Now why would the CIA be interested in "fomenting violence"? Well, among other things, it gives the U.S. an excuse to maintain the occupation. It allows the U.S. to take a slap at Iran and its various local proxies, like Muqtada al Sadr (who has said he will take up arms against the U.S. if it attacks Iran). More important, it allows media to spin the event as "those crazy Arabs" thereby helping perpetuate anti-Arab cultural stereotypes that have flourished here since the end of the Vietnam War.

Read Graham Greene's "The Quiet American" to see how this type of scenario played itself out in pre-1954 Vietnam.

[wordpix]

168. I'm not buying that it's our CIA black ops--provide some FACTS, please

[jseankil]

169. Ever feel that DU is being hijacked by conspiracy theorists?

I wouldn't ever send anyone who is in the center to this site, they would be pushed away by all conspiracies.

[wordpix]

175. I know, and even those with just a "Hunch" are really insulting if you ask

them to cite sources. Mr. Hunch said his source is a book about the CIA in Laos...huh?

[anotherdrew]

224. past performance is the best indicator of future actions

know them by their deeds.

[Odin2005]

218. "Ever feel that DU is being hijacked by conspiracy theorists?"

I know, it sucks. I know many left-wingers on other forums that left DU because they couldn't stand the knee-jerk "BFEE DID IT" every time something bad happened.

[ButterflyBlood]

220. Yes, and just as bad

is the ridiculous notion that many here seem to hold that the crimes of Bush and co. somehow absolve every other awful world leader out there and criticism of any world leader who is not a Bush ally somehow translates into support for Bush and his actions. This has been said to people who have said negative things about such saints like Fidel Castro or that idiot President of Iran.

Then of course there was the cases a few weeks ago where anyone complaining about the violence in the protests over the cartoons was accused of being Iraq war supporters, or the notion that the Iraq invasion somehow excused the violence. Looks like neither side of the political spectrum has a monopoly on logical fallacies.

[wordpix2]

225. & when I ask for sources/evidence re: "Bush/CIA did the Gold Dome

bombing," I get nasty email and board replies about how much of a Bush lover I am and "people will die" because I question these posters' evidence and sources---whhich so far, have not been provided.

Here's a message to such posters: We have ample facts to know Bush lied about going to war and many other important matters and the CIA has been involved in unsavory dealings through the years but in the case of the Gold Dome, we have nothing to support "hunches" that BushCo/CIA did the bombing. Show us the sources of your "evidence" and then we can evaluate them. Statements from nutjobs like the "Holocaust-never-happened" leader of Iran are not credible sources, IMO.

[wordpix2]

223. yeah, I'm thinking of doing same but good to know there are some non-knee

jerk reactors still on this board

[coalition_unwilling]

170. You ask for "facts" from someone who is reading the

same reports as you. If the people who planted the bombs were dressed in Iraqi Police Uniforms (reported on ABC "GMA" today), then the question naturally arises, Where did the uniforms come from? (Is it possible Halliburton or one of its subsidiaries has the contract for tailoring Iraqi Police Uniforms?)

I merely note that the trope of "Iraqi sectarian violence" suits U.S. imperial purposes as much or more than it serves any particular sect in Iraq.

[wordpix]

173. does not make sense as even * called for end to sectarian violence

I'm open to hearing all theories but I have yet to see a single bit of REAL news that this was work of CIA

[coalition_unwilling]

179. Haven't you figured out yet that * says one thing and

means exactly its opposite? Sectarian violence allows the U.S. a pretext to stay there as "peace keepers," once every other rationale has been trotted out and found wanting. Meanwhile, * can publicly deplore sectarian violence, thereby having his cake and eating it too.

Or am I missing something? (Everyone who posts here would profit from reading Graham Greene's "The Quiet American" or seeing the recent film version with Michael Caine. You'll see how black is white, up is down and inside is outside in the world of black ops.)

[NIGHT TRIPPER]

210. LOL !!! Wordpix like to Believe in our "Leader"- our glorious IDIOT SON!

spelling edit

ha ha ha --quoting Bush as a source of "truth" on a Progressive Discussion board!!

LOL!!!

That has to be the funniest thing EVER !!!!

[wordpix]

215. it makes sense to believe * on just this one thing because

it doesn't suit Chimpy's aim to make money off Iraqi oil if he has civil war on his hands and he can't get control of the oil because the pipelines keep getting blown up and KBR/contractors/US military are caught in crossfire. So I do believe * would rather not have sectarian violence.

Just being pragmatic.

[StrafingMoose]

221. Re...

"it doesn't suit Chimpy's aim to make money off Iraqi oil if he has civil war on his hands and he can't get control of the oil because the pipelines keep getting blown up and KBR/contractors/US military are caught in crossfire. So I do believe * would rather not have sectarian violence."

Divide and conquer my friend, if the Iraqis manage to unify this thing back together again (which I strongly hope they do) the Coalition would have no reason left to stay there and so long for these permanent bases!

As for the oil infrastructures being blown up, in the Iraqis' view of course it's bad, they can't restart the oil industry in high gear.

In KBR et al's view, it's a gift. Destruction brings them new contracts, at YOUR expenses (and mine, and everyone elses of course). You certainly haven't paid enough taxes in your life to get that one haven't ya ? Since the Iraqi oil industry is not profitable enough, who do you think ends up paying the bills ? Haliburton? KBR? No, YOU my friend.

Private contractors of all sorts make more money staying longer in Iraq. How do you stay longer in Iraq? By having the country embroiled in civil war. Nevermind the fact that the gas prices are staying very high because 11% of the world's oil known reserve are locked up in there.

Now, do I have evidence that they blew up this or that mosque? No. But you seem the adopt the view that Bush & company are actually trying to do something good, but unfortunately, "failing". Am I right ? Actually, where do you stand? Approved or disapprove the "war on terror" and all of its ramifications and implications ?

[wordpix2]

222. where do I stand? Completely against the war, * lies, & BushCo corporate

takeover of the nation.

Still, I have no evidence BushCo or CIA are responsible for the dome bombing. Maybe they are, but show me some evidence.

[wordpix]

177. further BushCo is interested in money making & not in taking sides

in a sectarian religious struggle. So I doubt even the BFEE would have directed CIA to do this, although it can certainly act on its own. However, there is no evidence.

[coalition_unwilling]

182. Yes, I'll concede you BushCo's pecuniary motives.

But there are two alternatives:

a) Iraqi society to unites behind throwing the occupiers out, e.g., forming a National Liberation Front a la 1960 South Vietnam

or

b) keeping Iraqi society divided, thereby allowing military basing, continued money laundering through mercenaries, theft of natural resources

Don't you think it's plausible that Bushco would choose option B as the alternative that allows them to keep making money?

[flashdebadge]

199. would an American be allowed in a mosque over there ?

[NIGHT TRIPPER]

212. what? do they Check ID's?---------As IF

there aren't any "brown skinned" Americans who could "dress up" for the occasion?

Covert operations are NOT unusual.

[jseankil]

166. Shia-Sunni violence in Pakistan is common as well

That's a fact, are we blaming the CIA for that as well?

[Divine Discontent]

195. the violence is all too common

before and after from same distance




GET THE AMERICAN MILITARY OUT NOW! This is a moment in time where we should act, to get our troops out of harms way, that they cannot effectively control anymore!



http://www.cafepress.com/ARABPORTCONTROL

[XemaSab]

226. This thread has just had

a visit from the Broccoli Fairy!