The following is an archived copy of a message sent to a Discussion List run by the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.

Views expressed in this archived message are those of the author, not of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.

[Main archive index/search] [List information] [Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [casi] Question - Iraqis attitude toward regime change



Dear List,

There is again a clear effort to draw us into side discussions through
personal attacks. This happens every time discussions over a new aggression
against Iraq dominate the news. It seems there are some in the anti-sanctions
lists who are delegated the job of distracting us from our objective. Perhaps that
is where some of those CIA millions are going...

I am an Iraqi, and I declare here that the opinions expressed in the original
message of Yasser are not mine, nor of those Iraqis whom I know and with whom I
talked in Iraq, the US, Europe, Egypt and Syria.
The difference between us is that I was raised in Iraq where I lived most of my
life. I left Iraq when Yasser was born.  My understanding is that Yasser was
raised in the UK, and as a young man of 22, he still doesn't know about Iraq
except what is told to him by a certain "group" of Iraqis.

To say "we, the Iraqi people, cannot get rid of Saddam Hussein", presupposes
having some mandate to represent the Iraqis and talk in their name. That, I assure
you, is not the case.

Let us not forget that the same people who are now opposing Saddam Hussein,
were part of his regime and enjoyed the positions and the benefits they brought
with them. Many of them supported Saddam and helped him get to the position where
he is in now. Suddenly, in the 1990's they discover he was a bad guy... Of course
that is accepted. But it is not accepted when Scott Ritter changes his mind; he is
accused of being bought...

Who are the opposition that are referred to:

As I explained in a previous post some time ago, they are groups of people who
have no credibility inside Iraq or among Iraqis, nor even among Iraq's neighbors.

Who would trust a banker who emptied his bank into his pockets and escaped,
and who would go jail if he sets foot in Jordan?

Who would trust the son of the former Prime Minister who sold his country to
the British in an agreement that caused riots and the death of tens of Iraqis in
Baghdad? All that man did since the 1950's was run a horse race track in the
US....

Who would trust Iyad Allawi or Salah Omar al-Ali, two former Ba'athists and
Saddam supporters, who fell off with Saddam for personal reasons?

Who would trust Wafiq al-Samarrai, Saddam's chief of Military Intelligence
until 1994?

Who would trust Nizar Al-Khazraji, Saddam's Chief of Staff during the Kuwait
crisis and the Gulf War and the commander of Anfal campaign

Who would trust Najib Al-Salihi, or Tawfiq al-Yassiri or the rest of officers
who all served under Saddam, supported his regime, and got where they got because
of being members in the Ba'ath Party?

Who would trust Sharif Ali Hussein, who wants to be king of Iraq? Iraqis never
accepted King Faisal who was forced unto them by the British, and now someone who
is not even eligible for the throne wants to claim it. The Rules of succession
should thus be explained.

"The Iraqi Constitution (as amended in November 1943, and on which Sarif Ali
seemingly bases his claim) stipulates that the Crown is only heritable by lawfully
begotten males of Iraqi nationality, according to primogeniture, and from the
family of King Faisal I of Iraq by his Queen. Failing male heirs of King Faisal,
the next in succession being his brothers, the sons of King Hussein ibn 'Ali of
the Hijaz, and their male issue, according to primogeniture, provided they were
also Iraqi nationals."
Sharif Ali is the son of Princess Badi'a bin Ali and his father was Husain ibn
Ali, an Egyptian by birth and nationality. He does not fulfill any of the above
requirements...

And finally, who would trust Baqir al-Hakim and his group, who have no problem
cooperating with the same powers that let them down,gassed them in 1918 and killed
their brothers, in Iraq and Iran? Baqir al-Hakim has a party, on whose central
committee sit a few Iranian officials, and who can not do anything without the
approval of Iran. That man should rule Iraq? One of his advisers was Adel
Abdul-Mahdi Al-Mintafji, another former Ba'athist, who decided to change sides..

Between 1958 and 1963, when Iraq was almost controlled by communists inside
the army and around Abdul-Karim Qassem, almost all members of the Hakim family
were communists. Simple Shi'is were convinced to become communists because those
Shi'is who approached them told them that being a Shiu'i (communist) meant also
being a Shi'i.
A group of Shi'i Ba'athists and Arab Nationalists approached the then Shi'i
supreme spiritual leader, Sayyed Muhsin Al-Hakim (the father of Baqir), asking him
to intervene and state that Communism was not in line with Islamic teachings. He
refused... Now the same people are suddenly either devout Muslims, or human rights
activists...

Until those in the opposition can find respectable people with a clean history
to represent them, they will not enjoy any support nor gain respect from anyone.

Perhaps it is comical when people say "let the Iraqi people decide", but it is
not as criminal as saying that bloodshed from a US aggression against Iraq is
acceptable, because blood will be shed anyway. Well, it is not their blood that
will be shed, so who cares. Iraqis can die, by sanctions or bombs, while they live
in comfort in the US and the UK, enjoying millions from the CIA and fighting
Saddam by telepathy...

My enemy's enemy is not necessarily my friend. Syria tried that in 1990-1991,
only to discover how wrong it was. Having cooperated with the US against Iraq,
pressure against it increased instead of decreasing, and it is threatened more now
that before. Only the simple minded don't learn from history.

Regards
Hassan

Traitor: is someone who betrays his country and cooperates with the enemy
during war between his country and that enemy. This is the worst crime anywhere in
the world. In the US, which is supporting those people with money and even arms
and encouraging them to betray their country, this crime is punishable by death..

_________________________________________________________
You won't believe our Women section! Fitness, cooking, make up, fashion, men, under 20, 
mother-hood, Muslim women, shopping, and more. It's all there for YOU at
http://www.maktoob.com/



_______________________________________________
Sent via the discussion list of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.
To unsubscribe, visit http://lists.casi.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/casi-discuss
To contact the list manager, email casi-discuss-admin@lists.casi.org.uk
All postings are archived on CASI's website: http://www.casi.org.uk


[Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]