Except timing the propaganda against Syria, this report “Syria Is Said to Be Strengthening Ties to Opponents of Iraq’s Government” adds nothing we don’t know.
Just explaining some facts, the link above don’t tells you about.
The split in Iraqi Ba’ath Party, you can call it the hawks (Izzat Al-Douri), and the pigeons (Younis Al-Ahmad).
The link is trying to make Al-Ahmad wing, is the most powerful because it is supported by Syria, while the reality is 90% of the Ba’athists left Al-Ahmad as reported by AL-Arabiya this year in January (Al-Arabiya removed its article, here is a link on other web site) “The conflict between the two Ba’ath Party wings”.
As for the split reason, it was reported that last year Al-Ahmad was negotiating the recent Iraqi government (same source above).
But was it Syria who canceled the conference as the New York Times said?
Watan reported at that time the following:
The Syrian intelligence did not intervene in the matter only with providing protection for the conference, which disappointed Al-Ahmad group, who were expecting at least, support and contribution from Syria to their position.
The recent announcement of forming the new front Liberation and Jihad led by Izzat Al-Douri wasn’t welcomed by Al-Ahmad group and they reacted:
Source from Ba’ath Party (Younis Al-Ahmad wing) said that the new front under Izzat Al-Douri command was announced for propaganda purposes only, to cover the negotiations held with the occupation forces.
The factions said to be more than 22 are only fictitious names, and the members of all these factions do not exceed 100 people, Ba’ath Party insiders know this well.
I hope people noticed that the New York Times article tell (we already know) that Al-Ahmad is living in Syria, but they don’t tell us where is the Izzat Al-Douri?
According one Arabic newspaper:
Iraqi sources in Amman said that Izzat Al-Douri is Saudi Arabia, with the announcement of the new Liberation and Jihad Saudi Arabia decided to play Al-Douri card and work to restore Ba’ah party to power in Iraq.
Most of Iraqi resistance leaders are in the Gulf countries, Yemen and Jordan, except Al-Ahmad group Syria is hosting other resistance leaders that worth to be mentioned.
The New York Times is only propaganda, they are just don’t want to mention that the US-friendly Arab countries are hosting the same people (resistance) fighting the US in Iraq.
Pingback: NEWSDESK HELSINKI FINLAND
It is no secret that Al-Ahmed and his gang engaged in covert talks with the the US and representatives of Maliki in late 2006 and that the precipitate liquidation of President Saddam Hussein was part of the dirty deal that was concluded. The timing of the so-called conference in Homs (Syria), hurriedly convened by Al-Ahmed during the 40 day mourning period for the martyred President with the aim of hijacking the leadership of the Iraqi Ba’ath Party, caused revulsion and outrage.
With regard to Izzat Ibrahim Al-Douri, the notion that he is a card to be played by anyone, let alone Saudi Arabia, is preposterous. I think it is more likely that he is in Yemen, along with many other prominent Ba’athists, including the indefatigable Resistance activist Salah Al-Mukhtar.Yemen was also the venue of a large memorial gathering in honour of the martyred President Saddam Hussein, attended his daughters Raghad and Hala and some his grandchildren.
Thanks LadyBird, we’ve been considering this article after we read it a couple of days ago ;)
Do you think it would be Syria (and Iran), and not the U.S. who are playing the “Muslim Brotherhood” (Hamas) card in Iraq?
The Baath issue will be resolved very soon.
No, No
Muslim Brotherhood are not supported by Syria or Iran
The Muslim Brotherhood are supported by Jordan, Egypt, but I don’t mean governmental support, the Muslim Bros. are rich enough to support themselves (think about the “Islamic Banks”).
As for Iraq the Muslim Bros. are existed since the 40’s, but the revived themselves in 1991 and established the Islamic party.
This period (end 80’s and begin 90’s) was an awaking for many Muslim Bros. in many Arab countries.
And for the question why at that time?
It was the same period when Arab-Afghans or the Arabs came back for the fights in Afghanistan came back to their original countries and brought extremism and problems with them.
The Muslim bros. offered an alternative “solution” for the Arab government and public.
You can see this very clear in Egypt for example, they came to power when Mubarik saw that he don’t need them any more, he excluded them from practicing politics.
The same goes for Jordan.
Good to have you around, that’s what we thought too (just happened to encounter such a weird idea elsewhere and had to confirm the non-existence of this never-heard-before-issue).
Our view about the MB is very simple: its the old caliphate dictatorship (as that of bin Laden’s al-Qaida), but with a worldly U.S. puppet caliph variously called e.g. the Prez — (in Egypt) or the King (in Jordan).
MB is where the U.S. is — just like al-Qaida.
It is just this Muslim Brotherhood that has been disturbing us lately what comes to the Baath c/o Jordan. Have a look at this:
(1) Al-Douri has announced to “fight al-Qaida”, and
(2) “sever ties with al-Qaeda and sign up to the programme of the national resistance, which includes routing Islamist terrorists and opening up dialogue with the Baghdad government and foreign forces” (from the same source).
Furthermore, right from your posting above,
(3) “Iraqi sources in Amman said that Izzat Al-Douri is Saudi Arabia, with the announcement of the new Liberation and Jihad Saudi Arabia decided to play Al-Douri card and work to restore Ba’ah party to power in Iraq.” (Note also that Saudi-Arabia is where al-Hashemi (MB) is currently)
(5) The “democracy” claim of the new front — instead of the Caliphate sketched above — is not too convincing as al-Douri appears to already have taken all the positions (i.e. the Prez, the Party leader, the High Command etc.) to himself. Caliphate it is.
In other words, the new “front” and the new “Baath” (c/o Jordan) does not appear to be Muslim/Islamic at all, but rather a U.S. styled puppet protectoriate of Al-Anbar “fighting the extremists” just as all the others alike, a “Muslim” brotherhood.
Naturally, we’re keeping keen eye on this matter so to resolve it soon (cf. our recent reposting here if you haven’t seen it yet. Note also the related discussion here).
Good to have you around.
Louhi
There is something you need to know about Izzat Al-Douri, and this information is from personal experience because in a period in my life, Al-Douri was my neighbor (didn’t last very long, he moved later).
Al-Douri is extremely Sufi, from the Naqshbandi order, and I know that because I saw him many time organizing Sufi celebration rituals in his house, but this is in his private life.
In his political life he is an “old school” (Arab Nationalist), maybe for the current situation he cooperating with the MB and extreme Islamists, but I am sure this is not going to be like this in the future and for the long term.
The report highlighted NDHF was immediately recognised as bogus and a smear at the time. Saudi-owned Al Hayat is a notorious source of disinformation. Even the wording of the article is a complete give-away:
Baghdad, 22 August (AKI) — The leader of Iraq’s banned Baath party, Izzat Ibrahim al-Douri, has decided to join efforts by the Iraqi authorities to fight al-Qaeda, one of the party’s former top officials, Abu Wisam al-Jashaami, told pan-Arab daily Al Hayat.
“AlDouri has decided to sever ties with al-Qaeda and sign up to the programme of the national resistance, which includes routing Islamist terrorists and opening up dialogue with the Baghdad government and foreign forces,” al-Jashaami said.
How can anyone give credence to such rubbish?
NDHF ought to wise up to the fact that the Arab and Western media are brim full of deliberate disinformation. I would also like to point out that Al-Douri does not run the Ba’ath Party as a one-man band and that in practice there is a collective leadership. The Ba’ath is also committed to a PLURALISTIC programme of National Liberation and Independence.
NDHF ought to turn to http://www.albasrah.net for information about the Ba’ath instead of relying on disinformation peddled by the enemies of the Ba’ath. How often has it been reported that Al-Douri is either dying of cancer or already dead?!
@ LB: Thanx ;)
@ Alison: Thanx, too ;)
What troubles us with the pluralistic programme of the Baath party (Jordan) is that there are already existing
(a) Change and Jihad front — With a democratic program
(b) Reform and Jihad front — With a clerical program
What is not included yet is the third state form i.e. dictatorship style caliphate/kingdom/presidency, a goal of full three parties, namely:
1. Al-Qaida (with Caliph)
2. Muslim Brotherhood (with Prez/King)
3. Baath (with Prez, chiefing all the posts just as al-Douri now does)
All the state froms of this style — whether dictatorships or not — are sooooooo easily puppeted (because all the power’s concentrated) that we do not deem any of the options too sensible.
And once more, thanks for you both for being in: we have no agenda whatsoever, except but that of sorting out the baath issue.
Also, why we’re actually most sceptical is that it is said, e.g. here
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0„2129675,00.html
“Leaders of the three groups [Speaking in Damascus, the spokesmen for the three groups — the 1920 Revolution Brigades, Ansar al-Sunna and Iraqi Hamas ], who did not use their real names in the interview, said the new front, which brings together the main Sunni-based armed organisations except al-Qaida and the Ba’athists, had agreed the main planks of a joint political programme, including a commitment to free Iraq from foreign troops, rejection of cooperation with parties involved in political institutions set up under the occupation and a declaration that decisions and agreements made by the US occupation and Iraqi government are null and void.”
In other words, first and foremost we side with the Baath Armed resistance, the actual combatants in Iraq, whatever front they belong, not with the Baath in Jordan or Syria.
So, once more, thank you for taking interest in this, we’re sure this can be sorted out fast.
To NDHF: Ladybird’s blog is not the place for a detailed exchange between us on what have, regrettably, become very complex and involved issues. As I observed in comments on your own blog, I have been following developments relating to the Iraqi Resistance since 2003, so I am better able to put things in perspective. By contrast, you seem to be latching on to bits and pieces, often of dubious provenance, and then trying to connect the dots without sufficient insight into the nature of the issues and the forces that are at work.
As I have previously observed, the Iraqi Resistance in general and the Ba’ath in particular have been subject to persistent and damaging conspiracies orchestrated by America’s Arab clients (Saudi Arabia, Jordan etc) and more recently by the Syrians and their stooge Mohammed Younis Al-Ahmed, who also has links with Allawi. The latter has been used by the US as a go-between in all its (cynical) dealings with Resistance organisations. (Allawi also attends regular meetings with the heads of the intelligence services of Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Turkey etc).
I have to tell you that a number of aspects of the Guardian article, ‘Out of the Shadows’ rang alarm bells with me and indicated that the groups mentioned in the article – although well intentioned — have come under the influence of forces, posing as friends, that are really up to no good. These forces are out to undermine the Ba’ath, once the umbrella organisation for the IR, and to DILUTE the programme of the Iraqi National Resistance. The same forces – client regimes of the US — had previously inflitrated and hijacked some of the Islamic (Salafi) Resistance organisations and planted a hideoous cannibalistic cuckoo in the nest of the Iraqi Resistance in the shape of the ISI with aim of driving Iraqi patriots into the arms of the US.
The new front announced in the Guardian was in fact aimed at sidelining a similar front established in 2005 by an alliance of the Arab Ba’ath Socialist Party and the Iraqi Patriotic Alliance (see: http://www.iraqipa.net/), a former dissident group made up of left-wing Ba’athists, patriotic communists and Arab nationalists, whose leaders were invited to Baghdad by Saddam Hussein in 2002 in a bid to put together a broad coalition against the invasion/occupation.
@ Alison:
“Ladybird’s blog is not the place for a detailed exchange between us”
Any better suggestions? Your place or my place?
Seriously, then Alison, we all know the truth, don’t we:
The groups mentioned in the article [i.e. The 1920 Revolution Brigades, Ansar al-Sunna and Iraqi Hamas] – although well intentioned – have come under the influence of forces, posing as friends…”
What comes to this, our attitudes are unchanged: There’s nothing wrong with 1920 Revolution Brigades, Ansar al-Sunna, Iraqi Hamas, the Islamic Army of Iraq, Al-Rashideen and so on and so on.
Quite the contrary, these forces, and all the others belonging to the Reform and Jihad Front as well as the Change and Jihad Front + the Islamic Front for Iraqi Resistance are the armed IRAQI RESISTANCE.
Of course the time will show this & that so we in NDHF are moderates not proceeding right away blaming traitors as such, rather coming out only after the Iraqi Resistance Mujahideen themselves (or those plotting against them) have expressed their opinion first.
“By contrast, you seem to be latching on to bits and pieces, often of dubious provenance, and then trying to connect the dots without sufficient insight into the nature of the issues and the forces that are at work“
– What comes to this we’d like to point you out that recently we received an email from a party that has supported the Armed Iraqi Resistance from the very beginning of the Iraq war (they themselves in possession of a site of their own) congratulating us for “Your team doing the best struggle in the cyber space.”
Though all too kind compared to the outstanding effort of those behind this estimate, we assure you that we’re not latching on to bits and pieces, but putting forth sound and solid reports one after another with proper understanding of the situation:
We exposed first the details of the Iraq Study Group plot.
We followed the track of al-Hashemi and IIP treason.
We took up the Al-Qaida situation discussion.
We took up the Jordanian Baath question in the form we’re now discussing it here. (Our Jordanian vs. Syrian Baath report is nearly ready, so that you may expect us to repost it today or tomorrow at leas)
We intend to proceed exacly the same way.
To show you what we mean by that, here’s
Six Iraqi insurgent groups announce formation of a “political council” to liberate Iraq
The Associated Press
Published: October 11, 2007
CAIRO, Egypt: Six main Iraqi insurgent groups announced the formation of a “political council” aimed at “liberating” Iraq from U.S. occupation in a video aired Thursday on the Arab TV station Al-Jazeera.
The council appeared to be a new attempt to organize and assert the leadership of the multiple insurgent groups, which have moved to distance themselves from another coalition of insurgent factions led by al-Qaida in Iraq.
In the video aired on Al-Jazeera, a man identified as the council’s spokesman — wearing traditional Iraqi garb and his face blacked out — announced the council’s formation and a “political program to liberate Iraq.”
He said the program was based on two principles.
“First, the occupation is an oppression and aggression, rejected by Islamic Sharia law and tradition. Resistance of occupation is a right guaranteed by all religions and laws,” he said.
“Second, the armed resistance … is the legitimate representative of Iraq. It is the one that bears responsibility for the leadership of the people to achieve its legitimate hopes,” he said.
The groups forming the council include the Islamic Army of Iraq, the Mujahideen Army, Ansar al-Sunna, the Fatiheen Army, the Islamic Front for the Iraqi Resistance (Jami) and the Islamic Movement of Hamas-Iraq.
The step could be a bid by the insurgents for a more cohesive political voice at a time of considerable rearrangement among Sunni insurgent groups and Iraq’s Sunni Arab minority.
Splinter factions of two insurgent groups, the 1920 Revolution Brigades and the Mujahideen Army, have cooperated with U.S. forces in fighting insurgents allied to al-Qaida in Iraq.
Earlier this year, other groups — the Islamic Army of Iraq, the main faction of the Mujahideen Army, a branch of Ansar al-Sunna and the Fatiheen Army — formed a coalition called the Jihad and Reform Front opposed to al-Qaida in Iraq, though they have continued attacks on U.S. and Iraqi forces.
To NDHF: The Resistance formations which you mention are genuine — that is not in dispute. What is in dispute is the wisdom of accepting help and advice from the governments of Saudi Arabia and Turkey (etc), as reported in the Guardian!
We both support the Iraqi Resistance wholeheartedly and most of your reporting has been very good. However, you have recently started latching onto some very DAMAGING DISINFORMATION regarding the genuine Iraqi Ba’ath currently led by Izzat Ibrahim Al-Douri. The statements of the genuine Iraqi Ba’ath are posted on Al-Moharer.net and Albasrah.net, bona fide Resistance websites, and signed by the Iraq Leadership. Iraq Culture and Information Bureau. So why do you keep harping on about the Jordanian Ba’ath? The defamation of the genuine Iraqi Ba’ath, which spearheaded the Iraqi National Resistance and nurtured many of the groups you mention under the guidance of martyred President Saddam Hussein is something which I am simply not willing to tolerate!
The thing is the Thing is: today, al-Basrah published Iraqi Resistance Report containing a story:
Six Iraqi Resistance groups form Political Council for the Iraqi Resistance
In a dispatch posted at 2:26pm Makkah time Thursday afternoon, Mafkarat al-Islam reported that six Iraqi Resistance organizations affiliated with the Salafi Islamist current and the Muslim Brotherhood organization have announced that they had forced the Political Council for the Iraqi Resistance.
Mafkarat al-Islam reported the organizations issued an appeal calling for the liberation of Iraq from the activity of the foreign occupiers on the path to complete independence. The six groups in the new Political Council represent two of the five main blocs of forces that have been engaged in armed struggle against occupation in Iraq.
the Islamic Army, the Army of the Mujahideen, the Army of the Fatiheen, and the Shari‘ah Board of the Ansar as-Sunnah. These organizations reflect a Sururi Salafi Islamist orientation.
The other two member organizations in the new Political Council are the Hamas In Iraq Movement, and the Islamic Front for Iraqi Resistance, (known by its Arabic acronym Jami‘). These organizations have their roots in the Muslim Brotherhood movement.
Three major blocs engaged in armed struggle against the US occupation in Iraq that are not affiliated with the new Political Council are: the Front for Jihad and Change, an organization inspired by the Association of Muslim Scholars of Iraq; the Supreme Command for the Jihad and Liberation, a newly formed umbrella organization of 22 Resistance groups that have chosen Baath Party leader ‘Izzat Ibrahim ad-Duri as their commander; and the so-called Islamic State of Iraq – the front organization for al-Qa‘idah.
—–
We reject the idea that the Reform and Jihad Front (+ Shari’a Council of Ansar al-Sunna) we’re not affiliated with the Change and Jihad Front (+ Association of Muslim Scholars in Iraq, AMSI).
Since Change and Jihad Front is out of question, the sole possible candidate for the party not affiliated with the Reform and Jihad Front is the Supreme Command for the Jihad and Liberation, a former al-Qaida associate Izzat Ibrahim al-Douri and the so-called Islamic State of Iraq. Which is precisely what we’re suggesting: that all the other fronts are to unite, except the two excluded by the Iraqi Armed Resistance groups in the guardian article we cited you earlier.
Thus, Muhammad Abu Nasr, a recognized good man is publishing in Al-Basrah, a recognized site a piece containing basically the very same thesis as we put forth.
We do not necessarily think al-Basrah and al-Moharer that have done indefinite services to the Iraqi Resistance are bad sites, but however want to rise discussion on this issue so that all the sites around would benefit from that.
In this sense we’re very thankful for you too.
Yours,
Ed. Louhi & NDHF Staff
To NDHF: I find it difficult to follow your reasoning (outlined above). One thing I do know for certain is that you are committing serious and damaging errors with regard to the position and role of the legitimate IRAQI Ba’ath Party, whose previous Secretary General, martyred President Saddam Hussein, engineered the Iraqi National Resistance, the foundations of which were laid before the invasion, as described by former ambassador, Saddam confidante, Ba’ath thinker and indefatigable Resistance activist Salah Al-Mukhtar among others.
http://comitesirak.free.fr/baath/baath-041031-eng.htm
Unfortunately, the Resistance has become much more fragmented in the last couple of years. There have been concerted moves to isolate, sideline, discredit and divide the Iraqi Ba’ath, not to mention the catastrophic conspiracy against the Resistance by Arab intelligence services giving rise to the hideous ISI. Many of the factions that once co-operated harmoniously under the Ba’ath umbrella have struck out on their own. In doing so, they have ended up seeking help and guidance from parties that are far less trustworthy or committed to the liberation and independence of Iraq than the legitimate Iraqi Ba’ath.
Former Ambassador Salah Al-Mukhtar has analysed these and other issues in depth in his many articles (in Arabic) on http://www.albasrah.net. His email address is easily accessible. Why don’t you contact him if you want to know more about what has really been going on behind the scenes? (He is in Germany at the moment, but will no doubt be back soon.)
P.s. The Front established by the Arab Ba’ath Socialist Party, the IPA etc in 2005 was called the Patriotic, National & Islamic Front. A number of its communiqués were circulated in translation.
We’re somewhat aware of the Jordanian Baath as well as those of Syria and Iraq, of course (the latter rather being former “baathists” now offering their services to the two main resistance fronts existing, the Reform and Jihad Front and the Change and Jihad Front).
“the Resistance has become much more fragmented in the last couple of years. There have been concerted moves to isolate, sideline, discredit and divide the Iraqi Ba’ath, not to mention the catastrophic conspiracy against the Resistance by Arab intelligence services giving rise to the hideous ISI.“
– To our knowledge the direction has been exactly the opposite, namely towards the unification. While we agree with the Arab intelligence agencies conspiracy giving rise to the hideous ISI, we remind you of the following:
§1. It was Izzat Ibrahim al-Douri (c/o Baath c/o Jordan) who worked with ISI from 2004 to 2007
§2. All the Armed resistance groups proper belong now either to the Reform and Jihad or Change and Jihad Fronts which have excluded both the groups mentioned in §1 from the Unified front for the Iraqi Resistance now in formation (which is usually done because of somebody’s been familiarizing with the occupier).
We’re very busy at the moment and actually not so much interested in al-Mukhtar? Why do not you write him (and other Baathists as well) so to inspire some discussion? It would be certainly good to sort this issue out properly.
To NDHF: I suggested that YOU contact Mr Salah Al-Mukhtar because YOU are the ones labouring under an extremely grave misapprehension regarding the role of the legitimate Iraqi Ba’ath Party, which spearheaded and nurtured the Iraqi National Resistance, not me. The longer you go on repeating UGLY SMEARS, the less inclined I am to believe that you are acting in good faith. Your outrageous claims amount to nothing less than DEFAMATION.
We’re outstretched with all the reporting, reposting and commenting we’re currently doing
“YOU are the ones labouring under an extremely grave misapprehension regarding the role of the legitimate Iraqi Ba’ath Party”
Once more, it is not us that is smearing here: we’re just troubled about — to mention you some — the following facts:
§1. It’s been known for long that the Baath party in question is not in a possession of Armed Resistance Formations (thus said e.g. by Ibrahim al-Shammari, the spokesman to IAI, whom we trust). As this is confirmed by the non-appearance of any significant numbers of Baath Armed Resistance videos, the Baath is not Armed.
§2. The appearance of the Baath front “Jihad and Liberation” with new never-heard-before formations coincidents with the timing in which the sole new military groups in formation are the U.S.-backed Sunni militia troops. As you remember from the discussion above, it was reported also that the al-Douri was working with the U.S. and so not resisting the attacks. If this is true, the Baath is no more armed than resistance either, a bad bad fault in any faction these days (as the Armed Resistance is the representative of the Iraqi people).
§3. Both the Reform and Jihad Front and the Change and Jihad front have excluded the Baath party — as well as ISI — from the new coalition, so that we — accepting both fronts in question we define our position according to their guidance: Armed Resistance is the legal and legitimate representative of the Iraqi people, and if they say they exclude Baath, we’ll certainly believe they’ve sound reasons for doing so.
§4. As reported by Abu Muhammad al-Nasr (c/o al-Basrah), apparently the Baath party in question is not in friendly terms with the Reform and Jihad Front ‚an attitude we find impossible to accept: RJF is the another front we gladly accept, not only because the solid fight they’ve put forth, but also because they’re backed by decent Iraqi Clerical Council (namely the Brigades of Ansar al-Sunna Sharia Council).
So, we’re not smearing, but simply quoting sources and facts we find trustworthy.
We just discuss about the issue (we could do some posting on our site, but we haven’t done that lately because we rather let the RJF and CJF to release their own attitudes rather than passing them by ourselves (this is also because their plans are often very intelligent and with more depth than you are able to recognize in the first look).
We come out only after they’ve done that themselves, and currently there’s no strategic hurry whatsoever:
§1. The U.S. forces achieved nothing militarily in the Diyala province (the al-Anbar Salvation scumbags), so that we rather concentrate on the Al-Qaida situation there.
§2. Though we have little hope left what comes to the al-Douri (and the Baath faction in question) we — though we may be rather naïve in thinking so) still have some 1% of our hope towards al-Douri and the Baath left, if not because them, then because the Armed Resistance certainly has a proper plan to deal with the situation and so not to interrupt their plans we rather go on keeping low profile with this (as we’re now doing here).
Perhaps we might get started if you replied to the following:
§1. Do you think RJF and CJF are hijackers plotting against the Baath party c/o Jordan (including IPA)?
§2. Do you believe they both are puppeted by Syria (which in turn is supposedly puppeted by Iran)?
§3. Why you think Allawi would have been appointed as the ambassador of Jordan, if he’s the one who’s plotting with the Syrian Baath? Wouldn’t it be quite difficult to meet Syrian-based Baath in Jordan while easy to meet Jordanian Baath in Jordan?
It seems you cannot smell a rat even when it is perched on your own shoulder! You are so FULL OF MISCONCEPTIONS regarding the Ba’ath that I can only conclude that parties with a GRUDGE against the legitimate Iraq Ba’ath (the so-called ‘Saddam loyalists’) have been poisoning your mind and taking you for a ride by feeding you a stream of disinformation.
Goodness knows where all this GARBAGE about the so-called JORDANIAN (????!!!) Ba’ath is coming from!! Al-Douri is the General Secretary of the legitimate IRAQI Ba’ath Party, not the Jordanian Ba’ath. The notion that Izzat Ibrahim Al-Douri is in cahoots with Ayad Allawi is not only without foundation. It is so inherently implausible as to be frankly ludicrous!!!
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article666433.ece
As I already pointed out in a previous comment, Ba’athist units – drawn from an elite of the old Iraqi Army, the Republican Guards and other military organisations – are under the UNIFIED COMMAND OF THE MUJAHIDEEN ARMED FORCES, which used to co-ordinate all the other major Resistance factions as well.
A revealing snapshot of the state of play in early 2005 is provided by Iraqi Patriotic Alliance activist Sammi Alaa, who was interviewed in the fringes of the World Social Forum in Porto Alegre:
http://www.fritirak.dk/artikler/english/articles/2005/0201-sa.htm
I do not have the time to refute all your misconceptions one by one, and even if did, you would probably not believe me. That is why I referred you to SALAH AL-MUKHTAR, a former ambassador, a leading Ba’athist Resistance activist and a man of integrity. Do not pretend that you are too busy to contact him!!! You are not too busy to spread disinformation!!!
@ Alison: As we told in the connection of our related postings, we’ve ourselves seen Naqshabandi video on strike against the U.S. (which is certainly genuine).
Yesterday we read a Hamas statement (cf. our repostings) okaying Naqshabandi (the al-Douri group) as Sufi resistant mujahideen, which we now trust based on the their word (also refuting their previous statement on rejecting baath, which we mentioned earlier), so that you don’t have to worry about us spreading any disinformation: we do not side specifically any armed resistance group, but — according to the AMSI program — all of them under one unified resistance front. This is the true victory strategy and the goal of the armed resistance, which we back up with all the possible means.
What comes to this, furthermore we want to be absolutely sure before making any commitment, since there are some de-baathified “baathists” in al-Anbar (of the calibre of al-Reesha, Ri.I.P.) working with the so-called al-Anbar Salvation (read: Slavation) council, equipped with sunni militia forces in collaboration with the U.S., a hideous cover front for the partition of Iraq, a threat indeed of these days, if any besides the al-Qaida infiltration situation, of course. For that reason we do not commit to any baath party or section that the Reform and JIhad and Change and Jihad Fronts have confirmed genuine.
We have nothing against the Baath, well aware that there are a lot of former Baath members both in the Reform & Jihad Front and Change & Jihad Front, two groups that are very close to our hearts (ourselves seeing these formations not only defending Iraq, but the entire Human Kind against the evil plans of the United States and their associates, so that we fully side with them in everything and let these parties define our position in everything: there is nothing that we pray daily more than their success in forming a common resistance front: once that is done, everything else will be sorted out, so we concentrate on that as best as we can).
So, when you say (or shout) “WHILE THE ARMED RESISTANCE IS HUGE AND CONSOLIDATED, THE POLITICAL FRONT IS STILL LACKING”, this is nearly not the case: just a couple of days ago the Reform and Jihad Front announced a political front and yesterday we posted a related wire by Change and Reform Front asking for further information concerning this front and its attitudes.
From this point of view the political front is only one step away from being born (namely the unification of the Reform and Jihad and Change and Jihad Fronts)
What comes to our “pretending” to be too busy, we’d like to point you out that we’re reading a huge number of news wires daily, choosing the most important and reposting them besides of our other activities in our real lives so that we’re truly so busy that we don’t have to time to finnish our own reports but barely here and then.
So, instead of shouting (as we told we Finns are not impressed with emotional blackmailing) what you could do is that you — obviously knowing this and that about the Baath — e.g. made some investigations in who are the de-baathificated baathists plotting in the al-Anbar Slavation & Partition council with the Americans, which would certainly be helpful in this situation more than anything else. With this sort of activities we could perhaps achieve something constructive.
Pingback: Fake reports: The hunt of Izzat al-Duri :: from www.uruknet.info :: news from occupied Iraq - it
Pingback: Propaganda: Syria and Iraqi resistance - Roads to Iraq via MySpace News