NationStates Jolt Archive

I think not.

Read here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iyad_Allawi


Especially the last part about "Interim Prime Minister".

I think not.

Read here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iyad_Allawi
Especially the last part about "Interim Prime Minister".

You quoted the Wikipedia as a source??? ROFL! ANYONE can write ANYTHING about any subject in the Wikipedia. It's an open-source encyclopedia, which means just what it says ... any and all sources can write and post.

I would give a LOT more credence to the following:

Soldier says Iraq is turning around

Like a lot of people who work in big cities, Lance Varney puts in
long hours, goes to a lot of meetings and spends a lot of time stuck
in traffic.
Unlike most people, Varney does his work in a war zone.

A major in the 1st Cavalry Division, Varney spends his days
navigating the streets of Baghdad as part of the U.S. military's
efforts to rebuild the city. And while Varney, the son of Florence
residents Ben and Linda Stovall, doesn't make light of the dangers,
he says Iraq isn't the scene of unrelenting chaos and destruction
people might think from news reports.

"I think we're already seeing a turning point in most of the
communities, despite what may be prevalent in the news," he said
during a telephone interview following a long Friday on the job. "The
markets are full of people shopping, driving. The open-air markets
are completely full, the streets are packed with people driving up
and down selling all kinds of stuff. Kids are back at school. Soccer
fields are being used that used to be trash heaps."

As a member of what's called a governorate support team, he works
closely with top advisers to Baghdad Mayor Alaa Mahmood al-Tamimi
coordinating infrastructure projects. Since arriving seven months
ago, his unit has been working to repair and improve water and sewer
facilities, restore electric and garbage services, and get schools,
police stations and fire stations back in operation.

The unit's marquee project is restoring Abu Nawas Street, a former
boulevard of parks, restaurants and shops along the Tigris River that
once was the gem of Baghdad. Crews recently finished clearing rubble
from the two-mile riverside esplanade and are preparing to lay new
water and electric lines before putting in new walkways, fountains
and lawns.

After that, Iraqi contractors will begin repair and construction of
shops and restaurants in the area. The project is a top priority for
Tamimi, who sees it as a tangible example of the city's slow return
to normalcy and proof of the U.S. military's commitment to rebuilding
Iraq.

"He made a commitment to give that park back to the people of
Baghdad," Varney said.

Although things are getting better in Baghdad, Varney said there's no
question that dangers remain. Troops wear body armor and travel in
armored vehicles whenever they leave the relative safety of the well-
guarded international zone at the city's center, and when they're not
carrying weapons they have them within easy reach.

"I'll just say this up front: There are some bad things that happen
here in Iraq, no one can refute that," said Varney, whose unit is not
involved in combat operations. "What that means, in our daily
routine, is that we have to be extremely cautious when we go places
outside our immediate secure area. We go fully prepared, we go with
the right armored vehicle, we go with the right force protection, we
go with the right personal protective equipment, because it's a
lifesaver."

That said, Varney asserts that most of the violence in Baghdad is
caused by a very small number of people, many of them fighters from
outside Iraq determined to thwart the American effort. The vast
majority of Baghdadis seem to support the troops and their rebuilding
projects, he said.

"When we drive by in our military vehicles going from Point A to
Point B, the people for the most part, especially the kids, wave and
give us the thumbs up sign," Varney said. "Women and children wave.
That's kind of reassuring to see."

The city itself also is showing signs of recovery, he said. Trash and
rubble are being cleared up, business are reopening and the streets
are crowded. Even billboards are reappearing along major streets.

The effort has rehabilitated hundreds of schools, rebuilt a hospital
and made noticeable strides in restoring basic services. Varney said
Army units have put police and fire stations back in operation so
that when attacks do occur, Iraqis often are first on the scene.

"Back in March, you didn't see any first-responders out there," he
said. "Now when something unfortunate or tragic happens, all the
things we would normally see (at home) are there immediately."

Varney works closely with the mayor's staff, so much so that he's
made a number of close friends among the engineers and advisers
helping to plan the infrastructure projects.

"The people I work with in the mayor's office endured the entire
regime of Saddam Hussein," he said. "They talk to me about what it
used to be like when everything was rationed, all decisions were
micromanaged. There was a great amount of tyranny and fear among the
people, and they were destitute, they had nothing. And now they have
a lot."

Varney said there's no question that the American effort has a long
way to go before life in Baghdad is anything like that in a modern
democracy. But he said the people, by and large, believe it will
happen.

"It's not a question of, do they trust us. They know exactly what
we're trying to achieve, and for the most part we're partnering up to
achieve what they want," he said. "They're optimistic. I think
they're very optimistic."

Want a reason why Allawi isn't trustowrthy? Look at this graphic compiled by Knight-Ridder News services.

http://www.realcities.com/images/realcities/realcities/9759/95245418768.gif


Remember how Allawi was saying that the violence was limited to Fallujah and that was about all? Look at the deaths, especially in the last two months, and how they're spread out all over the country. This is since April. April 2004--not 2003. Take a good look and then tell me that the situation is improving.

Want a reason why Allawi isn't trustowrthy? Look at this graphic compiled by Knight-Ridder News services.

http://www.realcities.com/images/realcities/realcities/9759/95245418768.gif


Remember how Allawi was saying that the violence was limited to Fallujah and that was about all? Look at the deaths, especially in the last two months, and how they're spread out all over the country. This is since April. April 2004--not 2003. Take a good look and then tell me that the situation is improving.

What does this have to do with trustworthiness?

What does this have to do with trustworthiness?Allawi was painting a far rosier picture of the situation during his visit ot the US with President Bush. He's obviously full of crap. Ergo, he is not trustworthy.

I learned that Wikipedia is a reliable source of information. What you read in it is not just "pulled" out of someone's ass. Especially the supporting links in this entry give it a lot more credbility than the soldier "report" propaganda I recently see here.

Allawi was painting a far rosier picture of the situation during his visit ot the US with President Bush. He's obviously full of crap. Ergo, he is not trustworthy.

Show me the link to Allawi saying that the violence was "only in Fallujah and thats about all". From the graphic you posted it lends credence to the view that the majority of fighting is around Fallujah, Najaf and Baghdad which would be fairly close to what Allawi was claiming. Of course, I cannot make that judgement until you show me the comments your were referring to.
Even so, because he gives an optimistic version of events in his country does not mean he is full of crap and untrustworthy. Like a lot of people, they see what they want to see in a situation.

Your Wilkipedia report also doesn't make any sense, except as Leftist propaganda. For example, it was the US government that wanted to get rid of al'Sadr, after repeated provocations, and the Shia leader Allawi that would on again, off again allow and then revoke permission to use limited force against the man. Allawi seemed to be doing everything in his power to come to an accomidation with the young ayatollah.

I have noticed that recently the Left have been courting al'Sadr, as a possible ally against the Americans. Their own fedayeen is apparently ruthless enough, and with kidnappings is relatively economically sufficient as well, but is also hideously unpopular with the Iraqi people. The locals regularly inform on them to the US military. I think they hoped to use al'Sadr as a sort of front man, as his militants have somewhat more credibility even though they aren't especially liked either, to hopefully tap into young, disillusioned Shia youths that might be of help to their insurgency. Besides, every Shia the US troops have to fight weakens the Coalition's image in Iraq, and allows the essentially Sunni post-Ba'ath a freer hand to plant bombs and snipe at Coalition soldiers.

Iyad Allawi - A trustworthy man? What do you mean? He's only a US puppet.

Iyad Allawi - A trustworthy man? What do you mean? He's only a US puppet.
Sure he is. Thus why I asked people to read the Wikipedia entry themselves. Most people have no clue who he is.

You quoted the Wikipedia as a source??? ROFL! ANYONE can write ANYTHING about any subject in the Wikipedia. It's an open-source encyclopedia, which means just what it says ... any and all sources can write and post.

I would give a LOT more credence to the following:

Soldier says Iraq is turning around

Like a lot of people who work in big cities, Lance Varney puts in
long hours, goes to a lot of meetings and spends a lot of time stuck
in traffic.
Unlike most people, Varney does his work in a war zone.

A major in the 1st Cavalry Division, Varney spends his days
navigating the streets of Baghdad as part of the U.S. military's
efforts to rebuild the city. And while Varney, the son of Florence
residents Ben and Linda Stovall, doesn't make light of the dangers,
he says Iraq isn't the scene of unrelenting chaos and destruction
people might think from news reports.

"I think we're already seeing a turning point in most of the
communities, despite what may be prevalent in the news," he said
during a telephone interview following a long Friday on the job. "The
markets are full of people shopping, driving. The open-air markets
are completely full, the streets are packed with people driving up
and down selling all kinds of stuff. Kids are back at school. Soccer
fields are being used that used to be trash heaps."

As a member of what's called a governorate support team, he works
closely with top advisers to Baghdad Mayor Alaa Mahmood al-Tamimi
coordinating infrastructure projects. Since arriving seven months
ago, his unit has been working to repair and improve water and sewer
facilities, restore electric and garbage services, and get schools,
police stations and fire stations back in operation.

The unit's marquee project is restoring Abu Nawas Street, a former
boulevard of parks, restaurants and shops along the Tigris River that
once was the gem of Baghdad. Crews recently finished clearing rubble
from the two-mile riverside esplanade and are preparing to lay new
water and electric lines before putting in new walkways, fountains
and lawns.

After that, Iraqi contractors will begin repair and construction of
shops and restaurants in the area. The project is a top priority for
Tamimi, who sees it as a tangible example of the city's slow return
to normalcy and proof of the U.S. military's commitment to rebuilding
Iraq.

"He made a commitment to give that park back to the people of
Baghdad," Varney said.

Although things are getting better in Baghdad, Varney said there's no
question that dangers remain. Troops wear body armor and travel in
armored vehicles whenever they leave the relative safety of the well-
guarded international zone at the city's center, and when they're not
carrying weapons they have them within easy reach.

"I'll just say this up front: There are some bad things that happen
here in Iraq, no one can refute that," said Varney, whose unit is not
involved in combat operations. "What that means, in our daily
routine, is that we have to be extremely cautious when we go places
outside our immediate secure area. We go fully prepared, we go with
the right armored vehicle, we go with the right force protection, we
go with the right personal protective equipment, because it's a
lifesaver."

That said, Varney asserts that most of the violence in Baghdad is
caused by a very small number of people, many of them fighters from
outside Iraq determined to thwart the American effort. The vast
majority of Baghdadis seem to support the troops and their rebuilding
projects, he said.

"When we drive by in our military vehicles going from Point A to
Point B, the people for the most part, especially the kids, wave and
give us the thumbs up sign," Varney said. "Women and children wave.
That's kind of reassuring to see."

The city itself also is showing signs of recovery, he said. Trash and
rubble are being cleared up, business are reopening and the streets
are crowded. Even billboards are reappearing along major streets.

The effort has rehabilitated hundreds of schools, rebuilt a hospital
and made noticeable strides in restoring basic services. Varney said
Army units have put police and fire stations back in operation so
that when attacks do occur, Iraqis often are first on the scene.

"Back in March, you didn't see any first-responders out there," he
said. "Now when something unfortunate or tragic happens, all the
things we would normally see (at home) are there immediately."

Varney works closely with the mayor's staff, so much so that he's
made a number of close friends among the engineers and advisers
helping to plan the infrastructure projects.

"The people I work with in the mayor's office endured the entire
regime of Saddam Hussein," he said. "They talk to me about what it
used to be like when everything was rationed, all decisions were
micromanaged. There was a great amount of tyranny and fear among the
people, and they were destitute, they had nothing. And now they have
a lot."

Varney said there's no question that the American effort has a long
way to go before life in Baghdad is anything like that in a modern
democracy. But he said the people, by and large, believe it will
happen.

"It's not a question of, do they trust us. They know exactly what
we're trying to achieve, and for the most part we're partnering up to
achieve what they want," he said. "They're optimistic. I think
they're very optimistic."
You call this credible? The report of an American soldier? And you don't even have a link to your source.

Perhaps then you would prefer an Iraqi civilians views?

Allawi’s speech was articulate, impressive and honest and most Iraqis I talked to lately share the same opinion with me, but much more impressive was the reaction of all members of the congress who were there. That was the American people there, the whole American nation not just republicans, standing and cheering not Allawi but what he stood for; IRAQ. They were showing support and friendship to Iraq not Allawi and that was a rare moment in history where the two nations Iraq and America stood as equal friends, no actually it was more like family as one American friend described. Insulting Allawi and Bush and the whole speech, speaking so harshly of that unique moment is an insult not to Bush or Allawi but to both the Iraqi and American nations, and yes that goes for everyone did that.

Source: http://iraqthemodel.blogspot.com/

Yes, its a blog but if you take the time to read their accounts of the happenings in Iraq from the start of the invasion to now it may give you another perspective on the situation in Iraq.

Perhaps then you would prefer an Iraqi civilians views?



Source: http://iraqthemodel.blogspot.com/

Yes, its a blog but if you take the time to read their accounts of the happenings in Iraq from the start of the invasion to now it may give you another perspective on the situation in Iraq.

Nice job Tygaland. I'll be taking a look at this when I get back from Breakfast. Keep up the good work.

I have noticed that recently the Left have been courting al'Sadr, as a possible ally against the Americans.
Care to point out who the mysterious, elusive "Left" are?

Nice job Tygaland. I'll be taking a look at this when I get back from Breakfast. Keep up the good work.

No worries, enjoy!

These reports that may or may not be from genuine sources, are not convincing me. American soldiers reporting (of course in favour of the war), Iraqi civilians supposedly reporting since the beginning of the aggression and occupation until now. It is just too convenient a propaganda tool for my liking, to be considered trustworthy.

The struggle of the Americans to justify the war in hindsight, despite the world knowing that it's oil and geostrategical gains which are behind this war, are suspicious. On all fronts Americans present "facts" and justifications why the US suddenly can act against the UN charter and hold other countries accountable while breaking all sorts of laws. This is totally unacceptable and will not be successful.

trustworthy? he dont need to, he is a Dictator.
I

trustworthy? he dont need to, he is a Dictator.
I

Can you show me proof that he is a dictator?

Can you show me proof that he is a dictator?
He was installed by the US. And is their puppy.

He was installed by the US. And is their puppy.

But yet, you have forgotten history already. The Iraqis wanted him and the UN and the US wanted someone else. When that someone else declined to be PM of Iraq, only then did the US and UN agreed to Allawi. I guess you have forgotten this. I have not.

Show me the link to Allawi saying that the violence was "only in Fallujah and thats about all". From the graphic you posted it lends credence to the view that the majority of fighting is around Fallujah, Najaf and Baghdad which would be fairly close to what Allawi was claiming. Of course, I cannot make that judgement until you show me the comments your were referring to.
Even so, because he gives an optimistic version of events in his country does not mean he is full of crap and untrustworthy. Like a lot of people, they see what they want to see in a situation.
I didn't read it online--I saw Bush's news conference with Allawi. It was on all the major networks, and Kerry rebutted it right afterwards with a speech of his own and noted how Allawi was contradicting himself from only a couple of weeks previously.

Look, I don't blame Allawi for saying what he did. He's a puppet and he knows it, and he wouldn't last in power five minutes without the US troops there. But by the same token, he's got a vested interest in Bush's re-election, since he's Bush's guy. That makes his statements at least questionable, especially since they fly in the face of available evidence.

I didn't read it online--I saw Bush's news conference with Allawi. It was on all the major networks, and Kerry rebutted it right afterwards with a speech of his own and noted how Allawi was contradicting himself from only a couple of weeks previously.

And Cheney came out and bashed Kerry who bashed an ally. Ok now that we have that out of the way.

Look, I don't blame Allawi for saying what he did. He's a puppet and he knows it, and he wouldn't last in power five minutes without the US troops there. But by the same token, he's got a vested interest in Bush's re-election, since he's Bush's guy. That makes his statements at least questionable, especially since they fly in the face of available evidence.

And how is he a puppet when our military really can't do anything, save for self defense purposes only, without his approval? Did you know that the US wanted to take out Al Sadr but Allawi said no? Did you know that he put a raid on to take him out and then postponed it?

I guess not.

And Cheney came out and bashed Kerry who bashed an ally. Ok now that we have that out of the way.



And how is he a puppet when our military really can't do anything, save for self defense purposes only, without his approval? Did you know that the US wanted to take out Al Sadr but Allawi said no? Did you know that he put a raid on to take him out and then postponed it?

I guess not.
Allawi is not an ally. Germany is an Ally, France is, The United Kingdom is aswell or Poland. Allawi is an installed puppet, an extension of the US President to rule over Iraq as the US colony it might become. Calling Allawi an "Ally" is a slap in the face of those countries who *are* your allies - or used to be, considering the newly found friends the US has and the way allies are being treated by the US.

Can you show me proof that he is a dictator?No (well I could, But i dont feel like it...it just too obvious))....
BTW the earth is round...and before you ask...I not to show you proof...even if you cry...

Allawi is not an ally. Germany is an Ally, France is, The United Kingdom is aswell or Poland. Allawi is an installed puppet, an extension of the US President to rule over Iraq as the US colony it might become. Calling Allawi an "Ally" is a slap in the face of those countries who *are* your allies - or used to be, considering the newly found friends the US has and the way allies are being treated by the US.

Damn the German and French Governments. They don't have the balls for a fight. Allawi is an ally as is Britain and Poland and Pakistan and South Korea and Japan and Italy and many other nations that are in Iraq either with troops or pledging support for the invasion and liberation of Iraq.

Calling Allawi an ally shows that we differentiate between the Iraqi people and the former regime. Allawi is doing all he can to help protect his people and the US is helping him in this regard as an Ally should.

No (well I could, But i dont feel like it...it just too obvious))....
BTW the earth is round...and before you ask...I not to show you proof...even if you cry...

He knows that the world is round as I do! Anyone with access to a computer can call up satellite images and see that the Earth is Round. You better not insult someone's intelligence that you don't know.

And Cheney came out and bashed Kerry who bashed an ally. Ok now that we have that out of the way.
All right Formal. Since you want to be petulant, here's a link to the press conference. (http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/iraq/2004/09/iraq-040923-whitehouse01.htm) Here's the quote that contradicts the graphic I posted earlier.
PRIME MINISTER ALLAWI: Let me explain something, which is very important. I have noticed -- and the media have been neglected and omitted several times -- in the Western media -- Iraq is made out of 18 provinces, 18, 1-8. Out of these 18 provinces, 14 to 15 are completely safe, there are no problems. And I can count them for you, starting from Basra moving into Iraq Kurdistan. There are three areas, three provinces where there are pockets of insurgents, pockets of terrorists who are acting there and are moving from there to inflict damage elsewhere in the country.

So, really, if you care to look at Iraq properly, and go from Basra to Nasiriyah to Kut to Diyala to Najaf to Karbala to Diwaniya to Samaraa to Kirkuk to Sulaymaniyah to Dahuk to Arbil, there are no problems. It's safe, it's good. There are problems in Fallujah. Fallujah is part of a province; the province is called Al Anbar. It's vast, very big; it has many other important towns, such as Ana, such as Rawa, such as Ramadi. There is nothing there. In Ana and Rawa, indeed, there is nothing, no problem, except on a small pocket in Fallujah.

So, really, I call upon the responsible media -- throughout the world, not only here -- to look at the facts as they are in Iraq and to propagate these facts to the international community.

I am not trying to undermine that there are dangers. There are dangers in Iraq; there are problems, and we are facing international terrorist onslaught on Iraq. I, personally, receive every day a threat. In the last four weeks, they found four conspiracies to kill me. And, likewise, there are killing people -- they are killing officials, they are killing innocent people. But the Iraqis are not deterred, and we are not going to be deterred. I went the next day and saw our recruitment center for the police, after they killed, massacred 40-45 people. I found hundreds of people coming to be volunteer -- to volunteer to the police and to the army. I spoke to them. They are all upbeat. They are resolved to beat terrorism and to defeat the insurgents.

And how is he a puppet when our military really can't do anything, save for self defense purposes only, without his approval? Did you know that the US wanted to take out Al Sadr but Allawi said no? Did you know that he put a raid on to take him out and then postponed it?

I guess not.
Do you really think that if the US military wanted to take some action and Allawi told them no, that they would listen? How naive are you?

Besides, wouldn't that mean that President Bush has put our military under the control of a foreign power? That wouldn't go over very well with the American people, would it, considering that one of the primary bogus accusations they make against Kerry is that he would turn over our national security to the UN.

But yet, you have forgotten history already. The Iraqis wanted him and the UN and the US wanted someone else. When that someone else declined to be PM of Iraq, only then did the US and UN agreed to Allawi. I guess you have forgotten this. I have not.
He still is a puppet of the empire of evil.

All right Formal. Since you want to be petulant, here's a link to the press conference. (http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/iraq/2004/09/iraq-040923-whitehouse01.htm) Here's the quote that contradicts the graphic I posted earlier.


And how is he a puppet when our military really can't do anything, save for self defense purposes only, without his approval? Did you know that the US wanted to take out Al Sadr but Allawi said no? Did you know that he put a raid on to take him out and then postponed it?

I guess not.
Do you really think that if the US military wanted to take some action and Allawi told them no, that they would listen? How naive are you?[/QUOTE]

Not as Naive as you think I am! Obviously you don't follow the news as closely as you think you do. I've heard reports FROM IRAQ of operations planned and called off due to Allawi. Do you really think that since we handed over power to the Iraqi Interum government that we can do just about whatever we want? How naive are you? I guess you just don't understand that our military is doing joint missions with Iraqi Troops. I guess you don't understand the political structure that is in place now! I don't really understand it myself but from what I do understand is that Allawi is incharge as is his Defense Minister and our forces can not launch major operations without their say so. How do I know this? My DAD is in the military and has served over in Iraq and knows more of what is going on than the Media is saying.

He still is a puppet of the empire of evil.

And yet, I don't see proof of this statement! Care to provide it?

And yet, I don't see proof of this statement! Care to provide it?
He thanked the US for getting rid of Saddam when he was speaking in the UN. If thats not a show of submissivenes towards his new, evil masters.

Besides, wouldn't that mean that President Bush has put our military under the control of a foreign power? That wouldn't go over very well with the American people, would it, considering that one of the primary bogus accusations they make against Kerry is that he would turn over our national security to the UN.

Interesting you brought that up. Our forces are still under command of US Officers. Plans however have to be approved by Allawi. Iraqi forces are somewhat under their own commanders but the US is still helping them out.

All we do is provide support and help out the Iraqis. If that means we have to go through them to launch an american operation, that does not necessarily mean we are under a Foreign Power.

What constitutes being under a foreign power is when US Forces are taking orders from a foreigner. In this case, we are just getting approval from the legitament government for launching our operations. There is a difference and I'm surprised that you have not seen that difference.

He thanked the US for getting rid of Saddam when he was speaking in the UN. If thats not a show of submissivenes towards his new, evil masters.

Ok so he thanked the US for getting rid of an Evil dictator that raped and tortured his own citizens and you call this submissive? Give me a break.

Now what is your proof that he is a dictator and a puppet?

Ok so he thanked the US for getting rid of an Evil dictator that raped and tortured his own citizens and you call this submissive?
And was replaced by one thats just as bad. George Bush. Through his Allawi marionet.

And was replaced by one thats just as bad. George Bush. Through his Allawi marionet.

Ok! You have provided no proof that Allawi is a dictator so I'm going to assume that you have no idea what you are talking about.

Ok! You have provided no proof that Allawi is a dictator so I'm going to assume that you have no idea what you are talking about.
To quote from the Wikipedia entry:

On July 17, two Australian newspapers, the Sydney Morning Herald [17] (http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/07/16/1089694568757.html?oneclick=true), [18] (http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0716-01.htm) and The Age [19] (http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/07/16/1089694560142.html?oneclick=true), published an article alleging that one week before the handover of sovereignty, Allawi himself summarily executed six suspected insurgents at a Baghdad police station. The allegations are backed up by two independent sources [20] (http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2004/s1155990.htm) and the execution is said to have taken place in presence of about a dozen Iraqi police, four American security men and Interior Minister Falah al-Naqib. Mr Allawi reportedly said that the execution was to "send a clear message to the police on how to deal with insurgents". Both Allawi's office and Naqib have denied the report. US ambassador John Negroponte did not clearly deny the allegations.


Now if that is not a good indication what the Iraqis can expect from their future "king", what is?

i hear he's the kind of guy that if you pay him a bribe to get something done, that something does indeed get done. maybe that's the best the iraqi people can hope for at this point, honest well regulated corruption controlled from the top.

Ok! You have provided no proof that Allawi is a dictator so I'm going to assume that you have no idea what you are talking about.
Like you have provided any proof that he isn't one?

Not as Naive as you think I am! Obviously you don't follow the news as closely as you think you do. I've heard reports FROM IRAQ of operations planned and called off due to Allawi. Do you really think that since we handed over power to the Iraqi Interum government that we can do just about whatever we want? How naive are you? I guess you just don't understand that our military is doing joint missions with Iraqi Troops. I guess you don't understand the political structure that is in place now! I don't really understand it myself but from what I do understand is that Allawi is incharge as is his Defense Minister and our forces can not launch major operations without their say so. How do I know this? My DAD is in the military and has served over in Iraq and knows more of what is going on than the Media is saying.
You're fooling yourself if you think that Allawi has any real power over the US military. No general worth a damn would allow Allawi to countermand an important operation--he'd be cashiered and rightly so.

And as to those "joint operations," well, they can't work out (http://www.eagletribune.com/news/stories/20040422/FP_003.htm) when the Iraqi securtiy force you've trained to fight alongside you is continually defecting and turning their US weapons over to their Iraqi brethren who are fighting us.

To quote from the Wikipedia entry:



Now if that is not a good indication what the Iraqis can expect from their future "king", what is?

This is twice that you brought out Wikipedia! Now as for what you are alleging regarding the insurgents, that has not been proven as to my knowledge. Now, do you have a news source for what you have linked like from CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, ABC, CBS, and NBC?

Like you have provided any proof that he isn't one?

The burden of proof falls onto you Jever.

Allawi Shot Inmates in Cold Blood, Say Witnesses
by Paul McGeough, Chief Herald Correspondent, in Baghdad


Iyad Allawi, the new Prime Minister of Iraq, pulled a pistol and executed as many as six suspected insurgents at a Baghdad police station, just days before Washington handed control of the country to his interim government, according to two people who allege they witnessed the killings.

They say the prisoners - handcuffed and blindfolded - were lined up against a wall in a courtyard adjacent to the maximum-security cell block in which they were held at the Al-Amariyah security center, in the city's south-western suburbs.

They say Dr Allawi told onlookers the victims had each killed as many as 50 Iraqis and they "deserved worse than death".

The Prime Minister's office has denied the entirety of the witness accounts in a written statement to the Herald, saying Dr Allawi had never visited the center and he did not carry a gun.

But the informants told the Herald that Dr Allawi shot each young man in the head as about a dozen Iraqi policemen and four Americans from the Prime Minister's personal security team watched in stunned silence.

Iraq's Interior Minister, Falah al-Naqib, is said to have looked on and congratulated him when the job was done. Mr al-Naqib's office has issued a verbal denial.

The names of three of the alleged victims have been obtained by the Herald.

One of the witnesses claimed that before killing the prisoners Dr Allawi had told those around him that he wanted to send a clear message to the police on how to deal with insurgents.

"The prisoners were against the wall and we were standing in the courtyard when the Interior Minister said that he would like to kill them all on the spot. Allawi said that they deserved worse than death - but then he pulled the pistol from his belt and started shooting them."

Re-enacting the killings, one witness stood three to four meters in front of a wall and swung his outstretched arm in an even arc, left to right, jerking his wrist to mimic the recoil as each bullet was fired. Then he raised a hand to his brow, saying: "He was very close. Each was shot in the head."

The witnesses said seven prisoners had been brought out to the courtyard, but the last man in the line was only wounded - in the neck, said one witness; in the chest, said the other.

Given Dr Allawi's role as the leader of the US experiment in planting a model democracy in the Middle East, allegations of a return to the cold-blooded tactics of his predecessor are likely to stir a simmering debate on how well Washington knows its man in Baghdad, and precisely what he envisages for the new Iraq.

There is much debate and rumor in Baghdad about the Prime Minister's capacity for brutality, but this is the first time eyewitness accounts have been obtained.

A former CIA officer, Vincent Cannisatraro, recently told The New Yorker: "If you're asking me if Allawi has blood on his hands from his days in London, the answer is yes, he does. He was a paid Mukhabarat [intelligence] agent for the Iraqis, and he was involved in dirty stuff."

In Baghdad, varying accounts of the shootings are interpreted by observers as useful to a little-known politician who, after 33 years in exile, needs to prove his leadership credentials as a "strongman" in a war-ravaged country that has no experience of democracy.

Dr Allawi's statement dismissed the allegations as rumors instigated by enemies of his interim government.

But in a sharp reminder of the Iraqi hunger for security above all else, the witnesses did not perceive themselves as whistle-blowers. In interviews with the Herald they were enthusiastic about such killings, with one of them arguing: "These criminals were terrorists. They are the ones who plant the bombs."

Before the shootings, the 58-year-old Prime Minister is said to have told the policemen they must have courage in their work and that he would shield them from any repercussions if they killed insurgents in the course of their duty.

The witnesses said the Iraqi police observers were "shocked and surprised". But asked what message they might take from such an act, one said: "Any terrorists in Iraq should have the same destiny. This is the new Iraq.

"Allawi wanted to send a message to his policemen and soldiers not to be scared if they kill anyone - especially, they are not to worry about tribal revenge. He said there would be an order from him and the Interior Ministry that all would be fully protected.

"He told them: 'We must destroy anyone who wants to destroy Iraq and kill our people.'

"At first they were surprised. I was scared - but now the police seem to be very happy about this. There was no anger at all, because so many policemen have been killed by these criminals."

Dr Allawi had made a surprise visit to the complex, they said.

Neither witness could give a specific date for the killings. But their accounts narrowed the time frame to on or around the third weekend in June - about a week before the rushed handover of power in Iraq and more than three weeks after Dr Allawi was named as the interim Prime Minister.

They said that as many as five of the dead prisoners were Iraqis, two of whom came from Samarra, a volatile town to the north of the capital, where an attack by insurgents on the home of Mr Al-Naqib killed four of the Interior Minister's bodyguards on June 19.

The Herald has established the names of three of the prisoners alleged to have been killed. Two names connote ties to Syrian-based Arab tribes, suggesting they were foreign fighters: Ahmed Abdulah Ahsamey and Amer Lutfi Mohammed Ahmed al-Kutsia.

The third was Walid Mehdi Ahmed al-Samarrai. The last word of his name indicates that he was one of the two said to come from Samarra, which is in the Sunni Triangle.

The three names were provided to the Interior Ministry, where senior adviser Sabah Khadum undertook to provide a status report on each. He was asked if they were prisoners, were they alive or had they died in custody.

But the next day he cut short an interview by hanging up the phone, saying only: "I have no information - I don't want to comment on that specific matter."

All seven were described as young men. One of the witnesses spoke of the distinctive appearance of four as "Wahabbi", the colloquial Iraqi term for the foreign fundamentalist insurgency fighters and their Iraqi followers.

He said: "The Wahabbis had long beards, very short hair and they were wearing dishdashas [the caftan-like garment worn by Iraqi men]."

Raising the hem of his own dishdasha to reveal the cotton pantaloons usually worn beneath, he said: "The other three were just wearing these - they looked normal."

One witness justified the shootings as an unintended act of mercy: "They were happy to die because they had already been beaten by the police for two to eight hours a day to make them talk."

After the removal of the bodies, the officer in charge of the complex, General Raad Abdullah, is said to have called a meeting of the policemen and told them not to talk outside the station about what had happened. "He said it was a security issue," a witness said.

One of the Al-Amariyah witnesses said he watched as Iraqis among the Prime Minister's bodyguards piled the prisoners' bodies into the back of a Nissan utility and drove off. He did not know what became of them. But the other witness said the bodies were buried west of Baghdad, in open desert country near Abu Ghraib.

That would place their burial near the notorious prison, which was used by Saddam Hussein's security forces to torture and kill thousands of Iraqis. Subsequently it was revealed as the setting for the still-unfolding prisoner abuse scandal involving US troops in the aftermath of the fall of Baghdad.

The Herald has established that as many as 30 people, including the victims, may have been in the courtyard. One of the witnesses said there were five or six civilian-clad American security men in a convoy of five or six late model four-wheel-drive vehicles that was shepherding Dr Allawi's entourage on the day. The US military and Dr Allawi's office refused to respond to questions about the composition of his security team. It is understood that the core of his protection unit is drawn from the US Special Forces units.

The security establishment where the killings are said to have happened is on open ground on the border of the Al-Amariyah and Al-Kudra neighborhoods in Baghdad.

About 90 policemen are stationed at the complex, which processes insurgents and more hardened offenders among those captured in the struggle against a wave of murder, robbery and kidnapping in post-invasion Iraq.

The Interior Ministry denied permission for the Herald to enter the heavily fortified police complex.

The two witnesses were independently and separately found by the Herald. Neither approached the newspaper. They were interviewed on different days in a private home in Baghdad, without being told the other had spoken. A condition of the co-operation of each man was that no personal information would be published.

Both interviews lasted more than 90 minutes and were conducted through an interpreter, with another journalist present for one of the meetings. The witnesses were not paid for the interviews.

Dr Allawi's office has dismissed the allegations as rumors instigated by enemies of his interim government.

A statement in the name of spokesman Taha Hussein read: "We face these sorts of allegations on a regular basis. Numerous groups are attempting to hinder what the interim Iraqi government is on the verge of achieving, and occasionally they spread outrageous accusations hoping they will be believed and thus harm the honorable reputation of those who sacrifice so much to protect this glorious country and its now free and respectable people.

"Dr Allawi is turning this country into a free and democratic nation run by the rule of law; so if your sources are as credible as they say they are, then they are more than welcome to file a complaint in a court of law against the Prime Minister."

In response to a question asking if Dr Allawi carried a gun, the statement said: "[He] does not carry a pistol. He is the Prime Minister of Iraq, not a combatant in need of any weaponry."

Sabah Khadum, a senior adviser to Interior Minister Mr Naqib, whose portfolio covers police matters, also dismissed the accounts. Rejecting them as "ludicrous", Mr Khadum said of Dr Allawi: "He is a doctor and I know him. He was my neighbor in London. He just doesn't have it in him. Baghdad is a city of rumors This is not worth discussing."

Mr Khadum added: "Do you think a man who is Prime Minister is going to disqualify himself for life like this? This is not a government of gangsters."

Asked if Dr Allawi had visited the Al-Amariyah complex - one of the most important counter-insurgency centers in Baghdad - Mr Khadum said he could not reveal the Prime Minister's movements. But he added: "Dr Allawi has made many visits to police stations ... he is heading the offensive."

US officials in Iraq have not made an outright denial of the allegations. An emailed response to questions from the Herald to the US ambassador, John Negroponte, said: "If we attempted to refute each [rumor], we would have no time for other business. As far as this embassy's press office is concerned, this case is closed."

You're fooling yourself if you think that Allawi has any real power over the US military. No general worth a damn would allow Allawi to countermand an important operation--he'd be cashiered and rightly so.

Actually he does. He is the Prime Minister of the Soveriegn Nation of Iraq. Thus he has to approve operations that we want to do. If we go in without his authority, what messege would that send to the world? It would tell them that we don't care what Allawi thinks. That is what the messege would be. As for Cashering, then I guess some generals should be cashiered because that is what is happening.

And as to those "joint operations," well, they can't work out (http://www.eagletribune.com/news/stories/20040422/FP_003.htm) when the Iraqi securtiy force you've trained to fight alongside you is continually defecting and turning their US weapons over to their Iraqi brethren who are fighting us.

And yet, we have conducted joint raids on numerous occassions including a raid on Al Sadr's house even though he wasn't in. The fight around the mosque he was walled up in was a joint operation too. There have been others but I can't think of them off the top of my head. So are you going to deny that we have done joint operations with the Iraqi security forces?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5457368/

Allawi Shot Inmates in Cold Blood, Say Witnesses
by Paul McGeough, Chief Herald Correspondent, in Baghdad


Iyad Allawi, the new Prime Minister of Iraq, pulled a pistol and executed as many as six suspected insurgents at a Baghdad police station, just days before Washington handed control of the country to his interim government, according to two people who allege they witnessed the killings.

They say the prisoners - handcuffed and blindfolded - were lined up against a wall in a courtyard adjacent to the maximum-security cell block in which they were held at the Al-Amariyah security center, in the city's south-western suburbs.

They say Dr Allawi told onlookers the victims had each killed as many as 50 Iraqis and they "deserved worse than death".

The Prime Minister's office has denied the entirety of the witness accounts in a written statement to the Herald, saying Dr Allawi had never visited the center and he did not carry a gun.

But the informants told the Herald that Dr Allawi shot each young man in the head as about a dozen Iraqi policemen and four Americans from the Prime Minister's personal security team watched in stunned silence.

Iraq's Interior Minister, Falah al-Naqib, is said to have looked on and congratulated him when the job was done. Mr al-Naqib's office has issued a verbal denial.

The names of three of the alleged victims have been obtained by the Herald.

One of the witnesses claimed that before killing the prisoners Dr Allawi had told those around him that he wanted to send a clear message to the police on how to deal with insurgents.

"The prisoners were against the wall and we were standing in the courtyard when the Interior Minister said that he would like to kill them all on the spot. Allawi said that they deserved worse than death - but then he pulled the pistol from his belt and started shooting them."

Re-enacting the killings, one witness stood three to four meters in front of a wall and swung his outstretched arm in an even arc, left to right, jerking his wrist to mimic the recoil as each bullet was fired. Then he raised a hand to his brow, saying: "He was very close. Each was shot in the head."

The witnesses said seven prisoners had been brought out to the courtyard, but the last man in the line was only wounded - in the neck, said one witness; in the chest, said the other.

Given Dr Allawi's role as the leader of the US experiment in planting a model democracy in the Middle East, allegations of a return to the cold-blooded tactics of his predecessor are likely to stir a simmering debate on how well Washington knows its man in Baghdad, and precisely what he envisages for the new Iraq.

There is much debate and rumor in Baghdad about the Prime Minister's capacity for brutality, but this is the first time eyewitness accounts have been obtained.

A former CIA officer, Vincent Cannisatraro, recently told The New Yorker: "If you're asking me if Allawi has blood on his hands from his days in London, the answer is yes, he does. He was a paid Mukhabarat [intelligence] agent for the Iraqis, and he was involved in dirty stuff."

In Baghdad, varying accounts of the shootings are interpreted by observers as useful to a little-known politician who, after 33 years in exile, needs to prove his leadership credentials as a "strongman" in a war-ravaged country that has no experience of democracy.

Dr Allawi's statement dismissed the allegations as rumors instigated by enemies of his interim government.

But in a sharp reminder of the Iraqi hunger for security above all else, the witnesses did not perceive themselves as whistle-blowers. In interviews with the Herald they were enthusiastic about such killings, with one of them arguing: "These criminals were terrorists. They are the ones who plant the bombs."

Before the shootings, the 58-year-old Prime Minister is said to have told the policemen they must have courage in their work and that he would shield them from any repercussions if they killed insurgents in the course of their duty.

The witnesses said the Iraqi police observers were "shocked and surprised". But asked what message they might take from such an act, one said: "Any terrorists in Iraq should have the same destiny. This is the new Iraq.

"Allawi wanted to send a message to his policemen and soldiers not to be scared if they kill anyone - especially, they are not to worry about tribal revenge. He said there would be an order from him and the Interior Ministry that all would be fully protected.

"He told them: 'We must destroy anyone who wants to destroy Iraq and kill our people.'

"At first they were surprised. I was scared - but now the police seem to be very happy about this. There was no anger at all, because so many policemen have been killed by these criminals."

Dr Allawi had made a surprise visit to the complex, they said.

Neither witness could give a specific date for the killings. But their accounts narrowed the time frame to on or around the third weekend in June - about a week before the rushed handover of power in Iraq and more than three weeks after Dr Allawi was named as the interim Prime Minister.

They said that as many as five of the dead prisoners were Iraqis, two of whom came from Samarra, a volatile town to the north of the capital, where an attack by insurgents on the home of Mr Al-Naqib killed four of the Interior Minister's bodyguards on June 19.

The Herald has established the names of three of the prisoners alleged to have been killed. Two names connote ties to Syrian-based Arab tribes, suggesting they were foreign fighters: Ahmed Abdulah Ahsamey and Amer Lutfi Mohammed Ahmed al-Kutsia.

The third was Walid Mehdi Ahmed al-Samarrai. The last word of his name indicates that he was one of the two said to come from Samarra, which is in the Sunni Triangle.

The three names were provided to the Interior Ministry, where senior adviser Sabah Khadum undertook to provide a status report on each. He was asked if they were prisoners, were they alive or had they died in custody.

But the next day he cut short an interview by hanging up the phone, saying only: "I have no information - I don't want to comment on that specific matter."

All seven were described as young men. One of the witnesses spoke of the distinctive appearance of four as "Wahabbi", the colloquial Iraqi term for the foreign fundamentalist insurgency fighters and their Iraqi followers.

He said: "The Wahabbis had long beards, very short hair and they were wearing dishdashas [the caftan-like garment worn by Iraqi men]."

Raising the hem of his own dishdasha to reveal the cotton pantaloons usually worn beneath, he said: "The other three were just wearing these - they looked normal."

One witness justified the shootings as an unintended act of mercy: "They were happy to die because they had already been beaten by the police for two to eight hours a day to make them talk."

After the removal of the bodies, the officer in charge of the complex, General Raad Abdullah, is said to have called a meeting of the policemen and told them not to talk outside the station about what had happened. "He said it was a security issue," a witness said.

One of the Al-Amariyah witnesses said he watched as Iraqis among the Prime Minister's bodyguards piled the prisoners' bodies into the back of a Nissan utility and drove off. He did not know what became of them. But the other witness said the bodies were buried west of Baghdad, in open desert country near Abu Ghraib.

That would place their burial near the notorious prison, which was used by Saddam Hussein's security forces to torture and kill thousands of Iraqis. Subsequently it was revealed as the setting for the still-unfolding prisoner abuse scandal involving US troops in the aftermath of the fall of Baghdad.

The Herald has established that as many as 30 people, including the victims, may have been in the courtyard. One of the witnesses said there were five or six civilian-clad American security men in a convoy of five or six late model four-wheel-drive vehicles that was shepherding Dr Allawi's entourage on the day. The US military and Dr Allawi's office refused to respond to questions about the composition of his security team. It is understood that the core of his protection unit is drawn from the US Special Forces units.

The security establishment where the killings are said to have happened is on open ground on the border of the Al-Amariyah and Al-Kudra neighborhoods in Baghdad.

About 90 policemen are stationed at the complex, which processes insurgents and more hardened offenders among those captured in the struggle against a wave of murder, robbery and kidnapping in post-invasion Iraq.

The Interior Ministry denied permission for the Herald to enter the heavily fortified police complex.

The two witnesses were independently and separately found by the Herald. Neither approached the newspaper. They were interviewed on different days in a private home in Baghdad, without being told the other had spoken. A condition of the co-operation of each man was that no personal information would be published.

Both interviews lasted more than 90 minutes and were conducted through an interpreter, with another journalist present for one of the meetings. The witnesses were not paid for the interviews.

Dr Allawi's office has dismissed the allegations as rumors instigated by enemies of his interim government.

A statement in the name of spokesman Taha Hussein read: "We face these sorts of allegations on a regular basis. Numerous groups are attempting to hinder what the interim Iraqi government is on the verge of achieving, and occasionally they spread outrageous accusations hoping they will be believed and thus harm the honorable reputation of those who sacrifice so much to protect this glorious country and its now free and respectable people.

"Dr Allawi is turning this country into a free and democratic nation run by the rule of law; so if your sources are as credible as they say they are, then they are more than welcome to file a complaint in a court of law against the Prime Minister."

In response to a question asking if Dr Allawi carried a gun, the statement said: "[He] does not carry a pistol. He is the Prime Minister of Iraq, not a combatant in need of any weaponry."

Sabah Khadum, a senior adviser to Interior Minister Mr Naqib, whose portfolio covers police matters, also dismissed the accounts. Rejecting them as "ludicrous", Mr Khadum said of Dr Allawi: "He is a doctor and I know him. He was my neighbor in London. He just doesn't have it in him. Baghdad is a city of rumors This is not worth discussing."

Mr Khadum added: "Do you think a man who is Prime Minister is going to disqualify himself for life like this? This is not a government of gangsters."

Asked if Dr Allawi had visited the Al-Amariyah complex - one of the most important counter-insurgency centers in Baghdad - Mr Khadum said he could not reveal the Prime Minister's movements. But he added: "Dr Allawi has made many visits to police stations ... he is heading the offensive."

US officials in Iraq have not made an outright denial of the allegations. An emailed response to questions from the Herald to the US ambassador, John Negroponte, said: "If we attempted to refute each [rumor], we would have no time for other business. As far as this embassy's press office is concerned, this case is closed."

So which Newspaper is this one? Is this from a European Newspaper, Asian, American, or Latin American? Chief Herold does not tell me a whole lot.

So which Newspaper is this one? Is this from a European Newspaper, Asian, American, or Latin American? Chief Herold does not tell me a whole lot.
Paul McGeough, the chief Baghdad correspondent for The Sydney Morning Herald

took less than a minute to google it

http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2004/s1156122.htm
http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2004/s1156119.htm

An interesting read.

In other words, nothing is proven that it occured or not.

Actually he does. He is the Prime Minister of the Soveriegn Nation of Iraq. Thus he has to approve operations that we want to do. If we go in without his authority, what messege would that send to the world? It would tell them that we don't care what Allawi thinks. That is what the messege would be. As for Cashering, then I guess some generals should be cashiered because that is what is happening. Hint: We don't give a rat's ass about what Allawi actually thinks because we own him. He's in power because we say he is in power. If we pull our backing, or we pull our troops, Allawi's as good as dead and he knows it.
And yet, we have conducted joint raids on numerous occassions including a raid on Al Sadr's house even though he wasn't in. The fight around the mosque he was walled up in was a joint operation too. There have been others but I can't think of them off the top of my head. So are you going to deny that we have done joint operations with the Iraqi security forces?Sure, we've done joint operations. You obviously didn't read the article--it noted that during many of those operations, the Iraqi security forces have deserted and taken their equipment to their fellow Iraqis--the ones fighting US troops.

Nothing is proven that it occured or not. WOW! You use the same logic people use to say that Iraq HAD NO WMD and WAS NO THREAT TO THE US!

Nothing proven, no definite evidence.

Nothing is proven that it occured or not. WOW! You use the same logic people use to say that Iraq HAD NO WMD and WAS NO THREAT TO THE US!

Nothing proven, no definite evidence.

Actually, we have him on tape that states that he wanted to take us down. So in this regard, he did pose a threat to the US, if only by words alone. As for the WMD, I always did consider it a weak charge but frankly didn't care.

Hint: We don't give a rat's ass about what Allawi actually thinks because we own him. He's in power because we say he is in power. If we pull our backing, or we pull our troops, Allawi's as good as dead and he knows it.

He's in power because the guy we wanted didn't want to be in power. Did you not read that post that I posted regarding that. He was the person that the Iraqis wanted. Only after the other guy declined did we and the UN relent to what the IRAQIS wanted. So YES we do care what Allawi actually thinks.

Sure, we've done joint operations. You obviously didn't read the article--it noted that during many of those operations, the Iraqi security forces have deserted and taken their equipment to their fellow Iraqis--the ones fighting US troops.

And yet they are still getting recruits as is the Police Force and that is including women on the Police Force. Yes things are still chaotic, I will not deny it but in the end, things will settle down.

He knows that the world is round...How do you know he knows? Unless you are him...or do you have telephatic powers?

... You better not insult someone's intelligence that you don't know.I can tell wether you are an idiot...without knowing you.

How do you know he knows? Unless you are him...or do you have telephatic powers?

Careful how you talk to her buddy. She knows me personally!

Careful how you talk to her buddy. She knows me personally!and does she know everything you know? is she inside your brain all the time?

Like i said... the earth is Round and i wont show you proof.

Careful how you talk to her buddy. BTW i am not your Buddy.

And yet they are still getting recruits as is the Police Force and that is including women on the Police Force. Yes things are still chaotic, I will not deny it but in the end, things will settle down.
Of course they keep getting recruits. Unemployment in some parts of the country is 60%. You get desperate enough, you'll take anything, even if it could easily mean your death. It doesn't mean that the situation is any rosier.

...that. He was the person that the Iraqis wanted......What Iraqis...who are these Iraqis?

Im pretty sure you are not talking about the people of Iraq...cos they are yet to hold Presidential Elections...

Then again you may be talking about whatever...cause you are so "intelligent" :D cause you are so "connected" to reality...

dont forget....the earth is round....

...What Iraqis...who are these Iraqis?

Im pretty sure you are not talking about the people of Iraq...cos they are yet to hold Presidential Elections...

Then again you may be talking about whatever...cause you are so "intelligent" :D cause you are so "connected" to reality...

dont forget....the earth is round....

Actually the people of Iraq wanted Allawi to be Prime Minister. US and the UN did not want Allawi as PM! However, the other guy did not want the job for fear of being seen as the US Puppet so he declined. Only then did the US and the UN agreed on Allawi being the Prime Minister of Iraq! I guess you did not know this even though it was blasted all over the news.

As for the Presidential Elections, they are coming in January.

I will not argue for Formal Dances regarding being connected to reality. She can do that herself.

As for the Earth being round, No shit sherlock!

and does she know everything you know? is she inside your brain all the time?

Like i said... the earth is Round and i wont show you proof.

For a person her age, she is rather informed. More informed than you apparently.

And before you say anything else, we are related, Formal and I.

Actually the people of Iraq wanted Allawi to be Prime Minister. US and the UN did not want Allawi as PM! However, the other guy did not want the job for fear of being seen as the US Puppet so he declined. Only then did the US and the UN agreed on Allawi being the Prime Minister of Iraq! I guess you did not know this even though it was blasted all over the news.

As for the Presidential Elections, they are coming in January.

I will not argue for Formal Dances regarding being connected to reality. She can do that herself.

As for the Earth being round, No shit sherlock!
If you mean Chalabi with "US puppet" then yes, he had even less legitimacy than Allawi, seeing that it was Chalabi who gave the CIA and other services the "info" that Iraq had WMD, which was thoroughly debunked afterwards.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmed_Chalabi


Chalabi is a highly controversial figure for many reasons. In the lead-up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, under his guidance the INC provided a major portion of the information on which U.S. Intelligence based its condemnation of Saddam Hussein, including reports of weapons of mass destruction and alleged ties to al-Qaeda [1] (http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?030512fa_fact) [2] (http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml%3Fi=20030707&s=dreyfuss) [3] (http://www.majority.com/news/spyring.html) [4] (http://www.newyorker.com/online/content/?030512on_onlineonly01) [5] (http://www.amconmag.com/12_15_03/article3.html). Much of this information has turned out to be false. In addition, many observers point to the cozy political and business relationships between Chalabi and some members of the United States government, including some prominent neoconservatives within the Pentagon. Chalabi is said to have had political contacts within the PNAC, most notably with Paul Wolfowitz, a student of nuclear strategist Albert Wohlstetter and Richard Perle who was introduced to Chalabi by Wohlstetter in 1985. He also enjoyed considerable support among politicians and political pundits in the United States, most notably Jim Hoagland of the Washington Post, who held him up as a notable force for democracy in Iraq. Chalabi's opponents, on the other hand see him as a charlatan of questionable allegiance, out of touch with Iraq and with no effective power base there. In a survey of nearly 3000 Iraqis in February 2004 (by Oxford Research International, sponsored by the BBC in the United Kingdom, ABC in the U.S., ARD of Germany, and the NHK in Japan), only 0.2% of respondents said he was the most trustworthy leader in Iraq (see survey link below, question #13).

Chalabi is the scion of a prominent Shi'a family, one of the wealthy power elite of Baghdad, where he was born. Chalabi left Iraq with his family in 1956 or 1958 and spent most of his life in the USA and the UK. In 1969, he received a Ph.D. in mathematics from the University of Chicago (dissertation title: On the Jacobson Radical of a Group Ring, see [6] (http://www.genealogy.ams.org/html/id.phtml?id=6597)), after which he took a position in the mathematics department at the American University of Beirut.

Iraq had a president before the war, whose name is Saddam Hussein. And although one my argue whether or not his election was democratic, he got 99% of the Iraqi votes. Make of that what you will. Most likely it was the absence of opposition that led to this "victory".

Wasn't talking about Chilabi. I don't even care about Chilabi.

What I was talking about was the Iraqi population. The majority of them wanted Allawi and were upset that we were considering someone else. When that person, Name escapes me, said no, then we relented on Allawi.

Iraq had a president before the war, whose name is Saddam Hussein. And although one my argue whether or not his election was democratic, he got 99% of the Iraqi votes. Make of that what you will. Most likely it was the absence of opposition that led to this "victory".

HAHAHA!! He was a dictator Gigatron. He had NO and I mean NO free elections for President. If you think those 99% was legitament, then I got a Bridge for sale in San Fran with a Beach in Daytona.

Wasn't talking about Chilabi. I don't even care about Chilabi.

What I was talking about was the Iraqi population. The majority of them wanted Allawi and were upset that we were considering someone else. When that person, Name escapes me, said no, then we relented on Allawi.Are you perhaps talking about the Ayatollah al-Sistani? Why should he take the job when he already has the power?

Are you perhaps talking about the Ayatollah al-Sistani? Why should he take the job when he already has the power?

No it was not al Sistani. That name I would've remembered.

It doesn't really matter anyway. The fact is that Iraq hasn't yet had free elections, and won't for a while yet, so to say that Allawi is anything other than a puppet is to ignore reality.

It doesn't really matter anyway. The fact is that Iraq hasn't yet had free elections, and won't for a while yet, so to say that Allawi is anything other than a puppet is to ignore reality.

Well judging by what I've seen and heard, Allawi is not a puppet. As for the elections, they will take place in about three to four months. Hopefully it can be done but there will be violence between now and then and after.

Just so you don't claim you were not informed.


IRAQ: US still calls the shots

Doug Lorimer

The selection of Iyad Allawi as prime minister of the Iraqi “interim government” is a clear demonstration that Washington has no intention of relinquishing its control over Iraq on June 30.

Allawi was selected as Iraq's new PM on May 29 by Lakhdar Brahimi, UN secretary-general Kofi Annan's special envoy to Iraq. Brahimi had previously collaborated closely with US officials to give UN endorsement to the US puppet regime in Afghanistan, following the ousting of the Taliban regime in late 2001.

Born into a wealthy Shiite family, Allawi is the head of the Iraqi Nationalist Accord (INA), an organisation of former Iraqi military officers formed in 1990 that has been backed for more than a decade by the US State Department, the CIA and Britain's MI6 intelligence service.

Other than a failed CIA-backed military coup against Saddam Hussein in 1996, Allawi is best known for being the source, via MI6, for British PM Tony Blair's claim that Hussein's (nonexistent) weapons of mass destruction could be deployed, battle ready, in 45 minutes.

A member of the US-controlled Iraqi Governing Council who has worked closely with the US occupation officials on “security matters”, Allawi is a cousin of IGC member Ahmad Chalabi. Chalabi was US Vice-President Dick Cheney and defence secretary Donald Rumsfeld's favourite to head an Iraqi puppet government, but has now been accused by the CIA of being an agent for Iranian intelligence.

The selection of Allawi as PM and fellow IGC member Sheik Ghazi Yawar as Iraqi's new, ceremonial, president, indicates that Brahimi's original plan to select a government made up of “non-political technocrats”, rather than members of the highly unpopular IGC, has been overridden by Washington.

The May 31 New York Times reported that while US officials maintain that Allawi was Brahimi's choice, “people close to Brahimi say he reluctantly endorsed him only after US officials aggressively recommended him.

“One person conversant with the negotiations said Brahimi was presented with `a fait accompli' after President Bush's envoy to Iraq, Robert D. Blackwill, `railroaded' the Governing Council into coalescing around him.”

The dictator of Iraq

Asked at a June 2 Baghdad press conference what role US occupation officials had in the selection of Allawi and other members of the interim government, Brahimi responded: “I sometimes say, I'm sure he doesn't mind me saying that, [Paul] Bremer [head of the US-run Coalition Provisional Authority] is the dictator of Iraq. He has the money. He has the signature. Nothing happens without his agreement in this country.”

Newspaper editorials and analysts across the Arab world described the outcome of the selection process as changing nothing. “Nearly nothing has changed. It can be assumed without hesitation that the American maestro will continue to lead the [Iraqi] orchestra”, wrote Lebanese political analyst Rajeh Khoury in Beirut's leading An Nahar daily.

Indeed, US occupation officials moved well before the interim government selection charade to ensure that they will continue to call the shots after the nominal June 30 “handover of sovereignty”.

Headlined “Behind the scenes, US tightens grip on Iraq's future”, an article in the May 13 Wall Street Journal reported that Haider al Abadi, appointed last year by Bremer as Iraq's provisional communications minister, “no longer calls the shots there. Instead, the authority to license Iraq's television stations, sanction newspapers and regulate cellphone companies was recently transferred to a commission whose members were selected by Washington. The commissioners' five-year terms stretch far beyond the planned 18-month tenure of the interim Iraqi government that will assume sovereignty on June 30.

“The transfer surprised Mr Abadi, a British-trained engineer who spent nearly two decades in exile before returning to Iraq last year. He found out the commission had been formally signed into law only when a reporter asked him for comment about it. `No one from the US even found time to call and tell me themselves', he says.”

The WSJ reported that Bremer has set up a series of these commissions “that effectively take away virtually all of the powers once held by several ministries”. The members of these US-staffed commissions, the WSJ added, “will serve multiyear terms and have significant authority to run criminal investigations, award contracts, direct troops and subpoena citizens”.

These commissions will in practice be directed by the new US embassy that the CPA, which currently has 1500 employees, will be transformed into on June 30. Staffed, according to the WSJ report, by 1300 US officials and 2000 Iraqi employees, the massive new US embassy in Iraq — the largest in the world — will operate out of the current CPA headquarters — ousted dictator Saddam Hussein's Republican Palace complex, “seen by many Iraqis as a symbol of Iraqi sovereignty”.

The US embassy will have branches in every major Iraqi city to, as Bush stated in his May 24 speech to the US Army War College, “to work closely with Iraqis at all levels of government”.

Not only will Iraqi ministries continue after June 30 to be under the supervision of several hundred US “technical advisers”, the interim constitution that the CPA has decreed the new “fully sovereign” Iraqi government will operate under forbids alteration of any of the edicts enacted by the CPA.

In his May 24 speech, Bush singled out one of these edicts — falsely attributing it to the IGC — for particular praise: “Iraq's Governing Council approved a new law that opens the country to foreign investment for the first time in decades.”

Opening up Iraq's economy, particularly its nationalised oil industry, to be sold off to US corporations was the unstated central objective behind Washington's invasion and occupation of the oil-rich Middle East country.

Using the US military forces to “extend free trade and free markets to every corner of the globe” is an explicit part of the Bush administration's National Security Strategy, presented to Congress in September 2002.

Following on from this, and in preparation for its invasion of Iraq, in December 2002, the Bush administration announced the launching of its Middle East Partnerships Initiative. The stated purpose of the MEPI is “to link Arab, US, and global private sector businesses, non-governmental organizations, civil society elements, and governments together to develop innovative policies and programs” focused “on region-wide economic and employment growth driven by private sector expansion”.

[b]A family affair

According to the US State Department website, the MEPI is coordinated by the department's deputy secretary Richard Armitage, while its “daily responsibilities” are directed by US deputy assistant secretary for Near Eastern affairs Elizabeth Cheney-Perry, Dick Cheney's 38-year-old daughter.

Prior to being appointed to this post in the State Department, she worked at Armitage Associates, the corporate consulting firm founded by her current boss Richard Armitage. Among Armitage Associates' major clients were the Rockefeller family's JP Morgan Chase investment bank and Dick Cheney's Halliburton oil services company.

Under the US occupation regime, JP Morgan Chase has been contracted to “reconstruct” Iraq's banking system, including managing the country's oil export earnings, and Halliburton has been awarded $9 billion in contracts to “reconstruct” its oil industry and to provide logistical services for the US occupation army.

Washington's moves to “handover sovereignty” to Iraqis, and to bring them “freedom” and “democracy” are nothing more than a public relations charade to disguise what is really going on — the installation of a puppet regime that will provide an Iraqi face to the US corporate takeover of the Iraqi economy.


http://www.greenleft.org.au/back/2004/585/585p15.htm

greenleft.org can be suspect.

What are the major news outlets saying on the matter?

greenleft.org can be suspect.

Not to mention being almost 4 months out of date, it was written BEFORE the handover of power to the Interim Government.

Iraq had a president before the war, whose name is Saddam Hussein. And although one my argue whether or not his election was democratic, he got 99% of the Iraqi votes. Make of that what you will. Most likely it was the absence of opposition that led to this "victory".

If you had any credibility to lose, you would have just lost it.

Perhaps then you would prefer an Iraqi civilians views?



Source: http://iraqthemodel.blogspot.com/

Yes, its a blog but if you take the time to read their accounts of the happenings in Iraq from the start of the invasion to now it may give you another perspective on the situation in Iraq.
So I guess it comes down to which individual that YOU choose to believe?

http://www.riverbendblog.blogspot.com/2004_09_01_riverbendblog_archive.html#109602421527384036

What makes the blog that you suggest anymore credible than the one I posted? Who is Ali? Who is River? WHO is right??????

I don't imagine that the US and Iraq would be asking for HELP if everything was as rosey as they say it is???

My guess? Ali is full of shit, or else the appeal to the UN would never have taken place. As well as articles such as the following:

Iraq's Power Woes Becoming Pressing Issue

http://www.wjla.com/headlines/0604/152696.html

Security woes delaying Iraq reconstruction

http://www.azstarnet.com/dailystar/printSN/19266.php

Reality Intrudes on Promises in Rebuilding of Iraq

http://www.globalexchange.org/countries/iraq/2257.html

Power woes leave Baghdad sweltering

http://www.detnews.com/2004/nation/0407/29/a04-226323.htm

So believe "Ali" if you will, it appears that he is just another Bushite shill?

So I guess it comes down to which individual that YOU choose to believe?

http://www.riverbendblog.blogspot.com/2004_09_01_riverbendblog_archive.html#109602421527384036

What makes the blog that you suggest anymore credible than the one I posted? Who is Ali? Who is River? WHO is right??????

I don't imagine that the US and Iraq would be asking for HELP if everything was as rosey as they say it is???

My guess? Ali is full of shit, or else the appeal to the UN would never have taken place. As well as articles such as the following:

Iraq's Power Woes Becoming Pressing Issue

http://www.wjla.com/headlines/0604/152696.html

Security woes delaying Iraq reconstruction

http://www.azstarnet.com/dailystar/printSN/19266.php

Reality Intrudes on Promises in Rebuilding of Iraq

http://www.globalexchange.org/countries/iraq/2257.html

Power woes leave Baghdad sweltering

http://www.detnews.com/2004/nation/0407/29/a04-226323.htm

So believe "Ali" if you will, it appears that he is just another Bushite shill?

If you would care to read the website, there are actually three separate contributors, not just Ali. I guess you just flicked through the first entry and made your judgement.
Maybe you did not even read the whole thing. Who knows. It looks like you just went straight to the opposing blog which "Ali" linked to on his site.

Your first link is 3 months old, Ali's post is 2 days old. Your next article is 5 months old, the next one 3 months old and the latest one 2 months old. Whose view is more accrurate? A story from 2-5 months ago by someone not there or one from a couple of days ago that is living in Baghdad? A lot changes in 2-5 months. I have, however, found a more recent story:

http://www.portaliraq.com/shownews.php?id=488

And this from way back in December 2003:

"Electricity generation is now about 3,500 to 4,000 megawatts, short of the prewar level of 4,500 megawatts. Under Saddam electricity in Iraq was sporadic and inequitably distributed. Often Baghdad had power at the expense of other parts of the country. Coalition officials want to distribute power more evenly and provide some consistency."
(Source: http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2003-12-07-baghdad-sabotage_x.htm )

Both of which lend credence to Ali's claims that power was distributed inequitibly under Saddam and that the supply is improving to better than pre-war levels.

Ali also went on to say even before the war permanent power supplies were not available, some cities having as little as 4-6 hours per day under Saddam. He also goes on the say that now the power is spread evenly rather than the privileged few getting supply.
Ali also provided a scan of his power bill to back up his claims that power is not infinitely more expensive now then before Saddam. The only thing that has changed is that the value of the Dinar is much better and the average wage much higher now.
As I said, have a read for ANOTHER PERSPECTIVE of whats happening in Iraq. I fear it may be just asking a little too much of you.

If you truly think Ali and his brothers are "full of shit" why don't you leave a comment on their blog for them to respond to. I am sure they would be happy to discuss their thoughts with you.