BAGHDAD, Sept. 28, 2007

Iraq PM: Senate Proposal A "Catastrophe"

Prime Minister Sharply Rejects Government Decentralization Plan Pushed By Biden, Others

  • Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki looks back as he sits in his seat during the 62nd session of the United Nations General Assembly, Wednesday, Sept. 26, 2007, at U.N. headquarters. Photo

    Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki looks back as he sits in his seat during the 62nd session of the United Nations General Assembly, Wednesday, Sept. 26, 2007, at U.N. headquarters.  (AP Photo/Ed Betz)

  • Interactive Iraq: 4 Years Later

    The conflict wears on as the nation struggles to rebuild.

  • Interactive Battle For Iraq

    The government, the insurgency, key players, background and photos.

(CBS/AP)  Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki on Friday rejected a U.S. Senate proposal calling for the decentralization of Iraq's government and giving more control to the country's ethnically divided regions, calling it a "catastrophe."

The measure, whose primary sponsors included presidential hopeful Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., calls for Iraq to be divided into federal regions for the country's Shiite, Sunni and Kurdish communities in a power-sharing agreement similar to Bosnia in the 1990s.

In his first comments since the measure passed Wednesday, al-Maliki strongly rejected the idea, echoing the earlier sentiments of his country's vice president.

"It is an Iraqi affair dealing with Iraqis," he told The Associated Press while on a return flight to Baghdad after appearing at the U.N. General Assembly in New York. "Iraqis are eager for Iraq's unity. ... Dividing Iraq is a problem and a decision like that would be a catastrophe."

Iraq's constitution lays down a federal system, allowing Shiites in the south and Kurds in the north to set up regions with considerable autonomous powers. But Iraq's turmoil has been fueled by the deep divisions among politicians over the details of how it should work, including the division of lucrative oil resources.

Many Shiite and Kurdish leaders are eager to implement the provisions. But the Sunni Arab minority fears being left in an impoverished central zone without resources. Others fear a sectarian split-up would harden the violent divisions among Iraq's fractious ethnic and religious groups.

On Thursday, Iraqi Vice President Adel Abdul-Mahdi said decisions about Iraq must remain in the hands of its citizens and the spokesman for the supporters of radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr agreed.

"We demand the Iraqi government to stand against such project and to condemn it officially," Liwa Semeism told the AP. "Such a decision does not represent the aspirations of all Iraqi people and it is considered an interference in Iraq's internal affairs."

In other developments:

  • Turkey and Iraq signed a counterterrorism pact Friday aimed at cracking down on separatist Kurdish rebels who have been attacking Turkey from bases in Iraq. The agreement, however, falls short of meeting Ankara's demand to send troops in pursuit of Kurdish rebels fleeing across the border into northern Iraq, Turkey's Interior Minister Besir Atalay said. "It was not possible to reach a deal on chasing Kurdish rebels, however, we hope this issue will be solved in the future," Atalay said. "We are expecting this cooperation against terrorism to be broadened as much as possible."

  • A military panel on Friday acquitted Spc. Jorge G. Sandoval on charges he killed two unarmed Iraqis, but it convicted him of planting evidence on one of the men in attempt to cover up the shooting. Sandoval, 22, had faced five charges in the April and May deaths of two unidentified men. While prosecutors said Sandoval did nothing to stop the slaughter of unarmed men, his defense lawyers said he was only following the orders of his superiors in both the April and May incidents.

  • South Korea plans to send an assessment team to Iraq next month to help determine whether to end or extend its 1,200-troop mission there, a Defense Ministry official said Friday. The team of about 10 officials will make a weeklong trip to Iraq, and their findings will be reflected in a report to parliament next month.

  • Australia said it has taken command of the multinational naval task force guarding Iraq's two oil terminals in southern Iraq for the third time. The job protecting the vital facilities rotates between Australia, Britain and the United States.

    Iraq's prime minister also said he discussed the role of U.S. troops and private security contractors in the country, stressing that Iraq is a sovereign nation and it should have control over its own security.

    Security "is something related to Iraq's sovereignty and its independence and it should not be violated," he said.

    Al-Maliki's comments come after a Sept. 16 shooting in central Baghdad that killed some 11 Iraqi civilians allegedly at the hands of Blackwater USA guards providing security for American diplomats.

    The North Carolina-based company said its employees were acting in self-defense against an attack by armed insurgents. Iraqi officials and witnesses have said the guards opened fire randomly, killing a woman and an infant along with nine other people, but details have widely diverged.

    In a related story, a congressional investigation publicized Thursday found that Blackwater triggered a major battle in Iraq by sending an unprepared team of security guards into an insurgent stronghold, a move that led to their horrific deaths and a violent response by U.S. forces. (Read more)Peter Singer, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, has been warning about the dangers of relying on private contractors since early in the war, reports CBS News national security correspondent David Martin.

    The Washington Post reported Friday that a preliminary U.S. Embassy report found the shooting involved three Blackwater teams.

    It said one was ambushed near a traffic circle and returned fire before fleeing the scene, another was surrounded by Iraqis when it went to the intersection and had to be extracted by the U.S. military and a third came under fire from eight to 10 people in multiple locations.

    The report said the three teams had been trying to escort a senior U.S. official who had been visiting a "financial compound" back to the U.S.-protected Green Zone when a car bomb struck about 25 yards outside the entrance. The official was unharmed, it said.

    An unnamed U.S. State Department official described the report to the newspaper and stressed it was only an initial account.

    The New York Times also reported Friday that the shootings occurred as Blackwater was trying to evacuate senior American officials with the United States Agency for International Development after an explosion occurred near the guarded compound where they were meeting.

    Participants in the operation said at least one guard continued firing on civilians while colleagues called for the shooting to stop, according to the newspaper's account, which cited American officials who have been briefed on the investigation.

    It also said those involved have told U.S. investigators they believed they were firing in response to enemy gunfire but at least one guard also drew a weapon on a colleague who did not stop shooting.

    American officials have publicly remained mum on their findings pending the results of a series of investigations.

    © MMVII, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.

    Video and Galleries from Iraq After Saddam

    Add a Comment See all 111 Comments
    by tnichlsn September 28, 2007 7:13 AM PDT
    This guy is almost as incompetant as Bush, so you know anything he is opposed to is a good idea...
    Reply to this comment
    by usayesterday September 28, 2007 7:19 AM PDT
    Though I would agree with the decentralization of Iraq. Sadly, I fear that it could lead to a repeat of what happened to (former) Yugoslavia when it broke into smaller republics after the fall of Tito. The late 80''s to early/mid 90''s saw some of the worst genocide and concentration camps since WW2.

    At this point, anything is worth trying instead of "stay the course".
    Reply to this comment
    by jraf766 September 28, 2007 8:00 AM PDT
    The hell with the Iraqi President, since it is and Iraqi internal affair, what the hell we doing there then. Im a two tour combat veteran of Iraq, they need to get their head out of there ***. We are better off protecting our home front. Our mission is complete and is accomplished regime change was success.
    Reply to this comment
    by jraf766 September 28, 2007 8:08 AM PDT
    Im sicken tired of the Iraqi people, they know who the bad guys are. They dont say anything, when you ask them cause supposely they are scared. They will smile in front of you, and then try to blow you and your buddies later. The Iraqi Army cant even stay in uniform, they are lazy. Who cares if there is genocide they had a chance for 4 yrs to unify. Iran is worth going to fight! They talk to much, I will happily kick their *** too. I pumped up for Iran. I would love to go one on one kick their president ***! The hell with Iraq stupid smelly country!
    Reply to this comment
    by formrusmcsgt September 28, 2007 8:19 AM PDT
    Whether through legislation or not and regardless of how long we stay, Iraq will disentegrate into secular states just as the former Yugoslavia did after Tito''s demise.
    Reply to this comment
    by gkc99 September 28, 2007 8:29 AM PDT
    The Kurds deserve better than being under the bootheels of Shia or Sunni. Creating an autonomous Kurdistan would at least create something of value of the disastrous Iraq invasion. The Sunnis and Shia have been slaughtering each other for 1000 years, nothing will change that. And if the Turks don''t like an independent Kurdistan, too bad. "No grass grows in the footprint of the Turk."
    Reply to this comment
    by omnibus66 September 28, 2007 8:37 AM PDT
    If the greatest fiction author in thr world had written the story of Bush''s war, say, 20 years ago, nobody would have published it, because it would have been too unbelieveable.

    Is this a really bad dream, or are we living in Bizarro World? Day after day after day, we are watching our soldiers as well as Iraqi civilians being slaughtered because we have a madman in the White House. As if that isn''t bad enough, he is there only because of a corrupted election system.

    Our entire government, from top to bottom, is corrupt. It has been taken over by corporate money, greed, and the quest for power. Unfortunately, as with a stage four cancer, there is probably no cure.

    I grew up, back in the 50''s, in a GREAT country. We didn''t pay heed to Eisenhowers warnings, and now I will spend my remaining years doing what I can to fix this insanity, but with little hope for success.
    Reply to this comment
    by Hybdiesel September 28, 2007 8:49 AM PDT
    Lets draft another Bushit and see which country stinksthe worst.
    Reply to this comment
    by prinzowhales September 28, 2007 9:04 AM PDT
    This has been the Zionist plan from the beginning. The noted plagirist, Senator Biden, who proclaimed to the world on Shalom TV that he was a brutal racist thug--a Zionist--heads the foreign relations committee. The largest contributor to American political campaigns at the national level are the Zionist, Israel-first and America-last interests. Washington votes money to Israel and it comes back in the form of contributions, lobbying and propaganda for its agents in American public life.

    http://www.thecatsdream.com/blog/2007/09/old-zionist-dream-partition-of-iraq.htm

    Since the beginning of the US invasion, the seizure of control over Iraq''s oil and the destruction of Iraq and its people has been the goal--NOT freedom, NOT democracy, NOT the aspirations of the Iraqi people who are the victims of this US genocide.

    The dismissal of the Iraqi Army, the firing of officials, the orchestrated and protected looting and destruction of the symbols of the Iraqi nation, the leaving of arsenals unguarded and Bush''s frank pre-war admission to the Spanish leader that ''we''ll be in Baghdad by March whether Saddam is there or not''.
    Reply to this comment
    by houser123 September 28, 2007 9:04 AM PDT
    We are better off protecting our home front. Our mission is complete and is accomplished regime change was success. Posted by jraf766 at 08:00 AM : Sep 28, 2007

    You are right in that we accomplished regime change. However, there is a story beginning to surface from Spainish officials and with great credability that Saddam Hussein had offered to go into excile weeks before the invasion of Iraq. He asked for $1B dollars and a few other conditions that were very workable. How sad it is that this Administration would balk at such a deal. This story needs to be investigated and if proven true, Bush and others need to be held accountable.
    Reply to this comment
    by toldyouso21 September 28, 2007 9:14 AM PDT
    Al Maliki has a biiiig problem. He cannot be the next Saddam and give payback by ethnically "cleansing" the Sunnis if they are autonomous. Instead of hearing from this PM that was NEVER elected but was appointed 1 year after the elections...perhaps it is time to hear from the actual people of Iraq. Make it a referendum vote:

    DO THEY WANT SEPARATE REGIONS WITH EQUITABLE SHARING OF OIL REVENUES or don''t they? And if anyone attacks any other region--then it will be time for America to step in and police again.

    What Al Maliki is advocating is continual sectarian violence with himself at the helm. Given the ration of Shia to Sunni and Kurd--he is betting on being the last man standing.

    Somebody tell this puppet--that when America wants his opinion, we''ll give him one to give us.
    Reply to this comment
    by prinzowhales September 28, 2007 9:25 AM PDT
    Americans, 20% of whom can''t find their own country on a map, have no business telling anyone how to run their countries. We are busy opening our borders, lowering our living standards, destroying our land, water and air with pollution, filling our prisons, exporting our jobs, buying tainted food and goods from abroad...who are these obese, mall-crawling, savages who presume to tell other people how to live when they can''t evil govern themselves?
    Reply to this comment
    by panhandlpete September 28, 2007 9:50 AM PDT
    Talk about the possible exile of Saddam prior to 9/11 and more investigation needed. You are absolutely correct. The very idea of this proves that WAR was not necessary for our national security.

    While on the subject of Spanish involvement, make a further inquiry into the involvement by Spanish bankers who are investing in the Super Highway being planned to go from Texas to Canada to be leased for 50 years by this group. America is being sold piece by piece to foreign entities.

    When you add to this scenario the statements made by those involved in the NAU and APP about how "change" occurs faster in times of crises, and that our constitution slows progess as it was written to protect FREEDOM, then it does make one question the whole big picture of ONE WORLD ORDER/GLOBALIZATION.
    I say leave Iraq to the Iraqis, bring the troops home to patrol the southern and northern borders, and focus on doing something positive to save this country from being handed over to foreigners and making us all slaves to the filthy rich. Furthermore, one has to ask if their statements are telling us that 9/ll was the crisis that put their plan into action.

    Reply to this comment
    by markdeckard September 28, 2007 9:51 AM PDT
    Hey Dems. It looks like that Biden has become guilty of that which he judged another. He always accused Bush of arrogance and imposing himself upon other countries. Yet for more than a year Biden in all his wisdom drafted and sold a plan for which he got glowing recommendations from everyone except...oops the Iraqi leadership. And now they reject it as a catastrophy. Arrogance does not pay off Joey. Oh well Iraqi leadership are stupid too arent they..but then again we cant say that, it''s not becoming of someone so wise in diplomacy, someone who wants to repair the damage done to American diplomacy. Hmmm what to do? Without the Iraqi leaderships cooperation your plan is nothing more than a stack of paper. Shall we pay them off, or shall we start a new regime change? Maybe we should dispute the last Iraqi election results and get Maliki replaced with a proper president? Or maybe just maybe we should grow up and realize that establishing stability is far more difficult than writing a campaign speech.
    Reply to this comment
    by superdem September 28, 2007 10:01 AM PDT
    Just pull the ships up, load in all the equipment, march the men in, and let''s get the hell out of that god forsaken hell hole. I don''t want to hear any Democrat saying we need to leave enough troops to do ANYTHING - not train Iraqi policemen, not fight insurgents, and certainly NOT to protect our EMBASSY - we''re starting to hear that now. If we did indeed build this magic kingdom embassy in Baghdad, the largest in the world, then we are too stupid to believe, building a sand castle in the wave zone. It''s like the Israelis using our tax dollars to build settlements on contested arab land, they did it on purpose to force the nation to defend it. We need to get OUT, not construct reasons to stay IN.
    Reply to this comment
    by markdeckard September 28, 2007 10:05 AM PDT
    rafterman, you may be right, but the point I find so ironic is that it seems that all the approaches Bush is castagated for in his handling of this war are slowly and inevitably the very traits democrats find thems selves forced to adopt. As this evolution continues towards election day, it only serves to prove that the criticism of this war is more about getting elected than actual succesful policymaking. Note the massive flopping sound at the last democratic debate. How did we get from "When I become president I''ll have the troops home in January 2008" to "Id like to see them home by the end of my first term. (2013!)" I mean the top 3 candidates flips are so dramatic they should join the chinese circus. Perhaps HIllary already has. Hsu knows?
    Reply to this comment
    by nexgen99 September 28, 2007 10:07 AM PDT
    Both Al-Maliki and Al Sadr should be taken out to the center of Baghdad and shot. They are the main cause for all the grief and deaths over their.
    Reply to this comment
    by juwboy September 28, 2007 10:07 AM PDT
    PrinzofWhales:

    Jews are out-numbered by about 50-to-1 in the US.

    Why are Gentile-Americans like yourself so weak and ineffective at presenting your views to Congress and the President?
    Reply to this comment
    by markdeckard September 28, 2007 10:30 AM PDT
    If it were not so tragic I would find it humorous that you people think you can predict what entire populations will do in response to our policies. If there is one thing we have learned, it is that what ever we hope poeple will do, they probably wont. In fact they will probably listen to our policy predictions and deliberatly do something else just to show us we cannot engineer them like some petri dish experiment.
    Reply to this comment
    by v_1618 September 28, 2007 10:36 AM PDT
    STOP WASTING THE MONEY IN ARMS AND WAR... THERE''S A LOT OF POVERTY AROUND THE WORLD AND THE MONEY IS NEEDED TO BATTLE THE POVERTY AND HUNGER . IS WASTING IN WARS ARMS AND STUPID THINGS...
    Reply to this comment
    by tomar0317 September 28, 2007 10:37 AM PDT
    So now our elected officials, who can''t run this country are going to tell the Iraqis how to run(or is that ruin)theirs! Mr Biden... do your own job and for a change, make a difference by doing something for our country. Oh, and Mr Biden, forget about raising the retirement age to fix the financial woes you and the administration created.
    Reply to this comment
    by pastdue1 September 28, 2007 10:49 AM PDT

    "On Thursday, Iraqi Vice President Adel Abdul-Mahdi said decisions about Iraq must remain in the hands of its citizens and the spokesman for the supporters of radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr agreed. "

    Why are we still there? Of course, we know the answer from the administrations point of view and from the oil companies point of view, so consequently, many of congress''s point of view. But, from the American taxpayers point of view, looking at our falling-down bridges, our roads full of pot-holes, our citizens without health coverage, our schools without proper funding, our borders insecure, and that is not counting the debt, WHY are we there?
    Why are we continuing to stay in this country that we broke, but who increasingly does not want us interfering. Is it because Blackwater, Halliburton, the oil companies, the administration still need to siphon off more money from our treasury and the tax payer? Give us a break!!!
    Reply to this comment
    by prinzowhales September 28, 2007 10:52 AM PDT
    juwboy--Zionism and Judaism are two different animals, as you well know. So, first of all, the attempt to divert the conversation from one of Zionism to one of Jews vs. Gentiles is not going to work. Orthodox Jews and Jews against Zionism will spell out the differences if you are ignorant of them.

    Americans, Gentiles and Jews, have been sold a bill of goods with regard to Israel. It is a Zionist State--not a Jewish State. Its leaders serve Anglo-American financial interests--not Jewish interests. This is readily apparent in the case of the "Ringworm Children" where over one hundred thousand Sephardic children were irradiated by the Zionists--many died on the spot, others later, many linger on today with chronic illness and genetic maladies that have been passed to the next generation. The X-ray machines and payments for this crime were provided by the Washington Regime--pure eugenics at work--no different than what was called for by the "Eugenicist Movement" in America.

    Reply to this comment
    by prinzowhales September 28, 2007 11:04 AM PDT
    juwboy--The Racialist doctrines that are the underpinnings of Zionism are little different from those of Chamberlain and the Aryan supremists. The Zionists have a superior PR advantage today because of the "selling" of Israel to Americans on the basis of natural sympathy for the plight of the Jewish people and the misrepresentation of the goals of the Zionist State vis a vis the Arabs as well as the white-washing of Zionist crimes and the spot-lighting of Arab cruelties as they fight for their freedom.

    The Jewish masses in America naturally support Israel...they see Jews under attack, but what the Arabs are fighting are the Zionists.

    One sees how Iranians and Arabs, for instance, genuinely liked Americans after World War II, but as our elites moved to manipulate and exploit them this like and respect has slowly changed to one of fear and hatred, which the American propagandist cleverly re-perculate in our media to rouse Americans against the people of the Middle East.

    Reply to this comment
    by juwboy September 28, 2007 11:05 AM PDT
    Prinzowhales:

    Thank you so much for answering my question. Now I understand perfectly why Gentile-Americans like yourself are so weak and ineffective at presenting your views to Congress and the President.

    You have defeated your own argument and strengthened mine.
    Reply to this comment
    by luigi999-2009 September 28, 2007 11:12 AM PDT
    This is one of the few times I agree with Maliki. Let''s be honest and recognize that the Democrats in congress are simply "in the way." Their ideas impede congress and their immaturity is outrageous. How did these clowns get elected?
    Reply to this comment
    by radiob-2009 September 28, 2007 11:13 AM PDT
    Zionist "racist" ? Jews are not a race, they are a religious belief. And what has this have to do with Iraq? Need someone else to blame for the invasion besides Bush and congress? Do not forget yourself in the blame if you did not speak out PRIOR to the war beginning. Anyone that followed the news PRIOR to the invasion knew Iraq was not a threat to the US.
    Reply to this comment
    by prinzowhales September 28, 2007 11:19 AM PDT
    juwboy--Arabs, Jews and Christians lived in relative peace in Iraq and in the Moslem rule for hundreds of years--until, not surprisingly, the coming of the colonialists. With the colonization of Palestine by the Europeans, opposition among Arabs hardened and the conflict became one of religioun and not of ideology, colonization and land ownership. This was exactly what the imperialists wanted--as a matter of fact you can see this strategy of using religion as a weapon by athiests in power politics in the Israeli use of the religiously oriented Hamas against the secularist PLO or the American funding of the madrasahs to wage holy war against the Soviets in the southern tier of the old USSR as part of their ideological conflict. The Communists tried the same trick using liberal theologians...but, burning churches and killing priests makes many religious people somewhat uneasy about supporting an atheistic ideology--at least one that openly advocates the destruction of religion.

    The Capitalist ideologues make use of Christianity and other religions in their war for profits. The CIA''s interest in religion has been well documented. Billy Graham himself was plucked from his revival tent by the TIME proprietor, Henry Luce to lead the Christian jihad against the Communists...and these people aren''t shy about lumping liberals, leftists, unionists and others under the ''Communist'' umbrella.

    Reply to this comment
    by ioweign September 28, 2007 11:24 AM PDT
    This is one of the few times I agree with Maliki. Let''''s be honest and recognize that the Democrats in congress are simply "in the way." Their ideas impede congress and their immaturity is outrageous. How did these clowns get elected?

    Posted by Luigi999 at 11:12 AM : Sep 28, 2007

    The Democrats didn''t land on the USS Abraham Lincoln and declare "Mission Accomplished" either and that was May 1, 2003! "Grand Standing"

    Bush campaigned on "Accountability"

    Bush DIDN''T supply "Accountability" so the "clowns" are !!

    How did they get elected, You answered it - "Let''s be Honest" especially about Iraq !
    Reply to this comment
    by killtheliars September 28, 2007 11:28 AM PDT
    We will never leave Iraq, it is part of a plan to secure oil and get Israel back inot the oil business. Syria, Iran and Lebanon have plans to build pipelines through Iraq, the problem is they all end at points other then Israel.
    Israel does not have any natural resources, they cannot rely on a service industry because the rest of the region does not want to do business with them and alot of thier money is tied into our U.S. economy which is pretty unpredictable right now. Therefore without being in the oil business they can never become self sufficient.
    http://www.sandersresearch.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1118&Itemid=63
    "Out of the frying pan, into the fire

    Will securing pipelines through Israel help secure oil for America''s needs? Only if the US could do this without spreading even more anger throughout Southwest Asia. Turkey would be foolish to continue cooperating with the US after it invades Syria and Iran -- Turkey''s pipe is next on the list.

    Securing oil through Israel means that the US becomes dependent on Israel -- our only %u201Cfriend%u201D in a hostile world. Israel would control the tap to the American economy -- a tap that America paid to build. Not only would Tel Aviv be our crucial supplier, they would have other markets in Asia should Uncle Sam go bust. A great plan for securing the realm, a terrible plan for America."
    This is not a plan that is good for us in america. Let Israel worry about herself and we will take care of ourselves.
    Reply to this comment
    by rstein6 September 28, 2007 11:31 AM PDT
    I can understand the underlying hostility against aipac and the zionist doctines which come forth from Israel.
    But wait as I recall after the fall of the Ottoman
    Turkish empire and in 1916 1 year before the armistice
    was signed in 1917 it was the U.K via the Balfour
    declaration which supported a Jewish State. It was
    James Arthur Balfour who wrote to Lord Rothchild about
    that that British parliamnent which acquired the land
    which was occupied later by the Palestinians, that
    they supported a"jewish State". Later the idea was
    approved by the U.S and the U.S supported Israel through fear and intimidation by the Israelis.

    Understand that the Jews had come from the "holocust"
    and originally the Arab nationists welcomed Jewish
    settlers, but the problem had been exacerbated when
    the Jews declared their independence from their hosts.
    (war of Independence)....... The partition plan from the UN in 1948 through gas on the fire.

    Now what a holocust is continuing in Iraq. Its the roots of imperialsm which is "root of all evil as well as greed of corporations. Avarice, Greed, Self destruction. Mankind is too stupid to learn from mistakes.

    Now we have are go
    Reply to this comment
    by prinzowhales September 28, 2007 11:37 AM PDT
    radiob--I''ve been fighting this war for years before it was started. I fought the first Bush war against Iraq and am fighting against the war they want to fight against Iran....If you take a close look at racists--like Adolph, the pin up boy--he''s a mutt, like most of human-kind...and the Zionist preaches a superioty due to selective breeding over the years not one of a particular racial purity based on the inheritance of genes from some, speculatively, ''pure'', Ur-racial stock.

    juwboy--It is in the interests finance capital that Jews and Christians support the expansion of the Zionist State and not reach an accomodation with the Arabs. If the political and economic situation changed, you can bet your kippa that the propanda juggernaut that now supports Israel would turn on a dime, just as in post World War I Germany, anti-Semitism surged forward--with Hitler actually being a moderate in some of the political campaigns compared to the big-business backed parties of the Nationalists.

    The Jews of Hungary made the mistake of thinking that the Zionists were their friends--their ''friends'' cut a deal with their ''friends''--the Nazis--and the head of the Zionist head of the Jewish Community and his select group of Zionists in Hungary went to Palestine...1,000,000 Jews that weren''t so ''select'' went to Auschwitz and almost certain death. The lovely Mr. Kastner, I believe his name was, was later gunned down on an Israeli beach...just deserts, well served.
    Reply to this comment
    by lars008-2009 September 28, 2007 12:03 PM PDT
    it is fascist nazi terrorislam stupid,,,

    non muslims of the world unite,,, fight against the tyranny of the fascist nazi terrorslam imperialist empire of the darkside,,,

    I was a fanatic...I know their thinking, says former radical Islamist
    By blaming the Government for our actions, those who pushed this "Blair''s bombs" line did our propaganda work for us.
    More important, they also helped to draw away any critical examination from the real engine of our violence: Islamic theology.
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=465570&in_page_id=1770

    Bless the Beasts and Children
    Fascist nazi terrorslam kills every man woman and child in the village again%u2026 typical mo for terrorslam%u2026
    http://www.michaelyon-online.com/wp/bless-the-beasts-and-children.htm

    Our Prophet commanded us to fight the kaafirs when we are able and to attack them in their homelands and to give them three choices before we enter their lands: either they become Muslim and be like us, sharing our rights and duties; or they pay the jizyah (poll tax) and feel themselves subdued; or they fight, in which case their wealth, women, children and homes become permissible as booty for the Muslims.
    http://islamqa.com/index.php?ref=13759&ln=eng&txt=before%20islam%20arabia%20pagan

    the truth about fascist nazi terrorislam...
    http://www.terrorismawareness.org/what-really-happened/
    Reply to this comment
    by prinzowhales September 28, 2007 12:08 PM PDT
    juwboy--It is instructive to watch the Zionist Regime''s response to crimes against Jews...When the Interpol-named drug gang, our good ally, the KLA was busy ethnicly cleansing Kosovo of Serbs, Jews, Gypsies, Turks, etc., Tel Aviv said narry a word. But, when Mr. Putin hits back at the Russian Oligarchs, who are allied with Anglo-American capital, the media begins ruminating about a return of anti-Semitism in the USSR...

    It wasn''t Jews who were high-fiving and hamming it up for the video-tape as the WTC collapsed in the background--these were agents of the Zionist state working for an moving company owned by a citizen of the Zionist State who was allowed to flee the country by agents of Zionism inside our own government--did this serve the interests of Jews? Certainly Not!

    Did it serve the interests of Zionists and the Anglo-American financiers that they front for? Most certainly! Even Bibi Netanyahu said that 9-11 benefited Israel! What do the financiers want--Iraqi Oil, Iranian Oil and a weak and divided world that they can control--And don''t for a minute imagine that Americans will benefit from this ''New World Order'' of mega-corporations, Blackwaters and Enrons...Jewish or Gentile, if you work for a living, you are going to victimized by this tyranny.
    Reply to this comment
    by lars008-2009 September 28, 2007 12:19 PM PDT
    LOOK WHO IS TARGETING CIVILIANS!!!

    Qaeda warns of attacks ''worse than 9/11''
    http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=070530102648.wuwa6k96&show_article=1

    Hizbullah Deputy Sec-Gen Sheikh Naim Qassem: We Have Jurisprudent Permission to Carry Out ''Martyrdom'' Operations, Fire Missiles on Israeli Civilians From Ayatollah Khomeini
    http://memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=SD154907

    Switching Sides: Inside The Enemy Camp

    But then in 2000, well before his arrest, something happened which would make Abas question everything he believed in: a fatwa, a religious edict, was issued by Osama bin Laden.

    "It should be understood that killing Americans and Jews anywhere found are the highest act of worship and the highest form of good deeds in the eyes of Allah," Simon quotes bin Laden.

    Abas and his fellow commanders were ordered to read the fatwa to their men and make sure they carried it out. The others obeyed, but Abas refused. It was his moment of truth. He firmly believed that jihad was to be fought only on the battlefield in defense of Islam; he had always been taught that the killing of civilians had nothing to do with holy war and that it was forbidden.

    The fatwa justified killing non-Muslim civilians everywhere.
    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/05/04/60minutes/main2761108.shtml?source=RSSattr=60Minutes_2761108
    American Al Qaeda Member Threatens Attack
    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/05/29/terror/main2865282.shtml
    Reply to this comment
    by klifton2-2009 September 28, 2007 12:22 PM PDT
    This unabated interference in the affairs of other sovereign nations is the main reason behind all the troubles in the Middle East. None of us wants an outsider to meddle in our private affairs and the same applies in international relations. America is a meddler and in some instances, even a bully.
    Reply to this comment
    by lars008-2009 September 28, 2007 12:24 PM PDT
    VOTE FOR JEFFERSON,,, VOTE AGAINST FASCIST NAZI TERRORISLAM,,, VOTE GOP,,,

    dnc are like john adams and want to give the jihadist their lunch money hoping they will leave us alone,,,

    gop are like thomas jefferson and want to spend their lunch money on weapons and go kick the jihadists in their arses,,,

    What Thomas Jefferson learned from the Muslim book of jihad,,,

    Thomas Jefferson knew about fascist nazi islam,,, he killed plenty of them,,,

    In 1786 Jefferson and John Adams went to negotiate with Tripoli''s envoy to London, Ambassador Sidi Haji Abdrahaman or (Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja). They asked him by what right he extorted money and took slaves. Jefferson reported to Secretary of State John Jay, and to the Congress:

    The ambassador answered us that [the right] was founded on the Laws of the Prophet (Mohammed), that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have answered their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as prisoners, and that every Mussulman who should be slain in battle was sure to go to heaven.[1]
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Barbary_War
    http://www.usvetdsp.com/jan07/jeff_quran.htm
    muslim justifies slavery and piracy%u2026
    http://www.hawaiireporter.com/story.aspx?6bdec278-6a71-4436-bc4d-29d1c54b0ad7
    Reply to this comment
    by coffee_guy1 September 28, 2007 12:32 PM PDT
    "This unabated interference in the affairs of other sovereign nations is the main reason behind all the troubles in the Middle East. None of us wants an outsider to meddle in our private affairs and the same applies in international relations. America is a meddler and in some instances, even a bully."

    Maybe just like in America, you just have to fool everybody into thinking they''re in charge.
    Reply to this comment
    by condumism September 28, 2007 12:36 PM PDT
    SUPPORT the ISRAELI, REPUBLICCON, CORPORATE AMERICA FASCIST ALLIANCE, VOTE GOP:

    1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism
    2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights
    3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause
    4. Supremacy of the Military
    5. Rampant Sexism
    6. Controlled Mass Media
    7. Obsession with National Security
    8. Religion and Government are Intertwined
    9. Corporate Power is Protected
    10. Labor Power is Suppressed
    11. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts
    12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment
    13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption
    14. Fraudulent Elections
    15. Vigorous DENIAL of all of the above!

    Reply to this comment
    by prinzowhales September 28, 2007 12:36 PM PDT
    Most Americans are deluded enough to think that our leadership is ''Christian'' or "Judeo-Christian''. They are not--and you can see this in American foreign policy--where pro-Anglo-American-fascist leaders in Indonesia were given full assistance in destroying Christians--all for economic advantages. Religion is used, like ethnicity to play one group off against another--that is what they do in America, playing race against race, ethnicity against ethnicity, *** against ***, sexual orientation against sexual orientation.

    It is common place for insurance agents to attend church for the sake of their business...you can imagine the painstaking religiosity of the corporatists attending church and temple so as to be seen as part and parcel of hoi-polloi...so people will identify with them and support their goals as their own.
    Reply to this comment
    by signof4 September 28, 2007 12:57 PM PDT
    Iraq PM: Senate Proposal A "Catastrophe"

    90% of what democrats do is a catastrophe. Too bad liberals aren''t as smart as an average Iraqi.
    Reply to this comment
    by sevenveils September 28, 2007 1:08 PM PDT
    Perhaps this man knows where the real catastrophe with his government lies. And it starts with him and the people who put him in power. They themselves are nonsecular, militant and guilty of ethnic atrocities.
    Reply to this comment
    by lars008-2009 September 28, 2007 1:08 PM PDT
    Posted by coffee_guy1 at 12:32 PM : Sep 28, 2007

    wrongggggggggggggggggg it is fascist nazi terrorislam,,,

    "This unabated interference in the affairs of other sovereign nations is the main reason behind all the troubles in the Middle East. None of us wants an outsider to meddle in our private affairs and the same applies in international relations. fascist nazi terrorislam is a meddler and in all instances, even a bully."
    Reply to this comment
    by lars008-2009 September 28, 2007 1:10 PM PDT
    Posted by coffee_guy1 at 12:32 PM : Sep 28, 2007

    look whom is interferring,,,

    the war Muhammad ali baba started rages on 1400 years later...
    623 - Battle of Waddan
    623 - Battle of Safwan
    623 - Battle of Dul-''Ashir
    624 - Muhammad and converts begin raids on caravans to fund the movement.
    624 - Zakat becomes mandatory
    624 - Battle of Badr
    624 - Battle of Bani Salim
    624 - Battle of Eid-ul-Fitr and Zakat-ul-Fitr
    624 - Battle of Bani Qainuqa''
    624 - Battle of Sawiq
    624 - Battle of Ghatfan
    624 - Battle of Bahran
    625 - Battle of Uhud. 70 Muslims are killed.
    625 - Battle of Humra-ul-Asad
    625 - Battle of Banu Nudair
    625 - Battle of Dhatur-Riqa
    626 - Battle of Badru-Ukhra
    626 - Battle of Dumatul-Jandal
    626 - Battle of Banu Mustalaq Nikah
    627 - Battle of the Trench
    627 - Battle of Ahzab
    627 - Battle of Bani Quraiza
    627 - Battle of Bani Lahyan
    627 - Battle of Ghaiba
    627 - Battle of Khaibar
    628 - Muhammad signs treaty with Quraish.
    630 - Muhammad conquers Mecca.
    630 - Battle of Hunsin.
    630 - Battle of Tabuk
    632 - Muhammad dies.
    http://www.carm.org/islam/islam_chronology.htm
    Reply to this comment
    by lars008-2009 September 28, 2007 1:11 PM PDT
    Posted by coffee_guy1 at 12:32 PM : Sep 28, 2007

    look whom is interferring,,,

    the war that fascist nazi terrorislamic muslims started rages on 1400 years later,,,

    The Truth about Islamic Crusades and Imperialism

    Historical facts say that Islam has been imperialistic%u2014and would still like to be, if only for religious reasons. Many Muslim clerics, scholars, and activists, for example, would like to impose Islamic law around the world. Historical facts say that Islam, including Muhammad, launched their own Crusades against Christianity long before the European Crusades.
    http://www.americanthinker.com/2005/11/the_truth_about_islamic_crusad.html
    http://www.americanthinker.com/2004/08/the_muslim_crusades.html

    the truth about fascist nazi terrorislam...
    http://www.terrorismawareness.org/what-really-happened/

    Islamic origins
    http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/pdf/compass/hico_058.pdf

    Origin of Islam
    http://www.allaboutreligion.org/origin-of-islam.htm
    http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Origin+of Islam%3A Secular History
    Reply to this comment
    by lars008-2009 September 28, 2007 1:12 PM PDT
    Posted by coffee_guy1 at 12:32 PM : Sep 28, 2007

    look whom is interferring,,,

    almost all the global conflicts in the world today involve fascist nazi terrorislam and somebody else,,,
    Reply to this comment
    by jsilver2th September 28, 2007 1:15 PM PDT
    "Iraqis are eager for Iraq''s unity." Oh uh huh- right- no problem there- what a joke - a disaster to HIS government-

    SignOf4: "90% of what democrats do is a catastrophe." Yeah like rolling over and playing dead after Florida and supporting Bush''s dirty little war from the get go.
    Reply to this comment
    by prinzowhales September 28, 2007 1:22 PM PDT
    Troops Home Now! Its time to end this war and deal with the real enemy--the enemy who launched this war for Oil and Israel. Its time to bring the troops home, respect Iraqi sovereignty and stop trying to stir up yet another war--this time against Iran.

    Troops Home Now! Let''s take care of our veterans. Let''s stop abusing our reservists and national guard with repeated, long term assignments--this is not the purpose of our reserve forces. Our troops have been abused with repeated rotations to combat zones-- and the shame of it is, is that this war is not being fought for American principles--it is being fought for a vile and contemptible and manipulative and vicious oligarchy and its poisonous ideologies.

    Troops Home Now!
    Reply to this comment
    by lars008-2009 September 28, 2007 1:31 PM PDT
    HITLERY KLINTOON IS GOING TO STICK HER THERMOMETER UP AMERICA"S ARSE,,,, LOL
    Reply to this comment
    by lars008-2009 September 28, 2007 1:33 PM PDT
    ===90% of what democrats do is a catastrophe. Too bad liberals aren''''t as smart as an average Iraqi.===

    Liberals aren''''t the ones who led us into the disaster that is Iraq. Too bad our president isn''''t as smart as the average dog.
    Posted by rafterman1 at 01:13 PM : Sep 28, 2007

    ummmmm congress, both demonic-rat and gop, all voted for the continuation of hostilities in iraq,,,

    bush had no vote,,,
    Reply to this comment
    See all 111 Comments
    • MOST POPULAR
    • Viewed
    • Commented
    Latest News
    Featured Blogs