Al-Sadr demands date for US Iraqi pullout

Iraqi Shia leader Muqtada al-Sadr has called on his community's senior religious leaders to insist on a timeline for a US troop withdrawal.

"This is a message from Sayid Muqtada. I call on all religious and political powers that pushed towards the elections and took part in them to issue an official statement calling for a timetable for the withdrawal of the occupation forces from Iraq," Sayid Hashim Abu Raghif told worshippers gathered for Friday prayers in the Shia city of Kufa.

Al-Sadr, who earlier belittled last week's vote, said he would no longer refrain from commenting on political developments in Iraq after keeping quiet for months, according to a statement Abu Raghif read from al-Sadr to thousands of worshippers.


A majority of Shia, who make up about 55% of the population, voted in an affirmation of the political process championed by their senior most religious figure, Iranian-born Ayat Allah Ali al-Sistani.

Al-Sadr's Mahdi Army militia battled US troops for seven months last year before laying their arms down in October.

source:
english.aljazeera

first the kurdish unrest in the north,
and now the shia leader has risen his voice against the u.s.?
what is going on in iraq?
dosent sound too "democratic".

Al Sadr is not the Iraqi Shia leader, he is a discredited thug. Al Sistani is the Shia leader and he supports the U.S. presence.

Well is not a surprised, sooner of latter the struggle between diferent groups will start and the US presence in their lands will be now more expresed by the Iraqi people as something that they don't want anymore.

The country will go through a series of internal conflicts due to their complicated tribal and religious structure, that is something that the US will not have anything to said about.

Iraq will be a muslin country regarless, and a theocratic democracy will be the final goal given the change for them to work on their own.

I was wondering when Mookie would start his whining again. Hopefully the coalition will finish the job with him this time, instead of falling for his white flag waving every time we had him cornered.

Al Sadr is not the Iraqi Shia leader, he is a discredited thug. Al Sistani is the Shia leader and he supports the U.S. presence.

Now that the elections are over, Mookie wants us to think he is a player, when the above quote sums up the situation quite precisely.

Notice, the former insurgent commander and religious leader, S.M. al-Sadr, is not calling for the withdrawl of US troops. He is also not stating that the US must give a time-table.

He is calling on the democrats in the country (those working for elections and democracy) to do this, he is giving them authority as representatives of the people of iraq, and even then making the reasonable request for a 'withdrawl plan' or date of sorts, not even requesting that they ask the US to leave.

I had great suspicsions that he was an ambitious and popular fellow, ever since there was such a stall in the attacks of his Mehdi Army (c.f. apocalyptic army, the army of the mehdi, ) on the US military, ever since it holed up in the Holiest Shrine of All Shia, working out negotiations with the US, which hasn't hesitated to attack militants in mosques (at least later in the war anyway), for an extended period of time. THe negotiations also resulted in the Mehdi Army keeping its weapons, if I recall correctly, and not being arrested en mass. It made him a sort of 'legitimate' resistance, as opposed to the ravenous thugs that kidnap civilians and rip their heads off.

Now thats politicing!

And his dad, his dad was executed by sadam's thugs, on his express orders, only after watching his sister get gang raped by the security thugs, and then having his beard set on fire. Now thats a story, thats a national story that can pull things together and wash out the 'invasion' and replace it with unifying character. I mean, its almost as good as 'I cannot tell a lie, I chopped down the cherry tree', better, since it actually happened!

I believe Al-Sadr goal will be to play a part on the politics later on when the next Iraqi elections be in place without US intervention.

Either that or his goal is much bigger as to become a very important leader in the religious sector.

After all religious leaders like Imam are very powerful figures in the muslin countries.

It doesn't matter who gives a warning or threat to us I have come to beleave we americans feel we have a right to go around the world "saving" it from itself. Just look at the fact that no one here really cares that bush lied to get this war. Do I have proof that he lied, no more than you have proof he didn't

Originally posted by marg6043
I believe Al-Sadr goal will be to play a part on the politics later on when the next Iraqi elections be in place without US intervention.

I don't know if he was on any of the party lists this time. I suspect that he is holdling back to 'wait and see'. Afterall, the actual form of the government, which is what the electors are going to work on, isn't technically too important to him being succesful, and he can already influence the constitutional congress from his current position.

Either that or his goal is much bigger as to become a very important leader in the religious sector.

I suspect he seeks to be a secular and ecclesiastical leader. al-Sistani is old, not pope old but old, so someone has to succeed him, and the al-Sadr's dad was a very important religious leader, so he's probably has that covered, to be The major Shi'ite leader in Iraq. I tend to lean torwards him also wanting political/temporal power.

Think about. President the honourable Mullah Moqtada Al-Sadr of the Free Iraqi Republic. Seems plausible no? And he will owe something to the US, after all, it didn't destroy his militia and the mosque, it didn't kill him or his leadership personally, and it actually allowed him to keep his militia armed and leave the situation not looking like a jerk, looking like a member of the resistance (which, of course, he is).

This might be enough to allow the US to influence him to keep Iraq integrated and moderately secular, which is a win-win for everyone really.

Actually the Shiites are divided between the conservative friendly to the US run by the senior Shiite cleric Ayatollah Ali Al-Sistani they want a democratic and state of Iraq.

And in the other hand they have the Shiites group run by Muqtada Al-Sadr, the young firebrand Shiite cleric, might differ with Al-Sistani’s style of politics, he has not hidden his ambition for the creation of an Islamic state of Iraq.

So do I see power struggle in the same Shiite group?

The majority of Ali Al-Sistani followers are members of the Supreme Council of Islamic Revolution of Iraq (SCIRI) headed by Abdul Aziz Al-Hakim, and the Al-Da’awa Party, headed by Ibrahim Al-Jaafari, the Vice President of Iraq.

They want power and to show it in numbers with the elections and they are more for what the US investment firms can bring to Iraq and them.

They account for the educated part of the Shiites.

The Al-Sadir followers are the opposite. They belong to the poor, lower class, less educated and unemployed Shiites with Arab nationalist tendencies. Al-Sadr followers have associated the Shiite dominated government in Baghdad with the U.S., which they consider to be their enemy.

US tried many times to bring Al-Sadir to the political arenal and make him an allie after all he does hold power withing the poor and oppress.

But Sadir stayed away and when the conflict between his followers and the US started the target was to kill him, but he was smarted than that and rather than having his people die for him he decided to go in the background until elections.

He wants to emerge as a leader a religious leader to the poor and oppress group of his tribe.

While the younger followers that wanted to fight the US joined forces with the sunnis.

Al-Sadir is not what many Americans were fed by the media about, he will become a very important figure in his country and among his people.

This is going to turn into wealthy against poor and viceversa.


[edit on 4-2-2005 by marg6043]

Nygdan, thats a great point and cause for hope...IF he proves to be a reasonable man and depending on the size of the chip on his shoulder. at least there is hope

Originally posted by marg6043
Actually the Shiites are divided between the conservative friendly to the US run by the senior Shiite cleric Ayatollah Ali Al-Sistani they want a democratic and state of Iraq.

And in the other hand they have the Shiites group run by Muqtada Al-Sadr, the young firebrand Shiite cleric, might differ with Al-Sistani’s style of politics, he has not hidden his ambition for the creation of an Islamic state of Iraq.

Intersting, I had not gotten the impression that he was so openly in favour of an islamic republic, nor that there was any kind of 'struggle' between sistani and sadr. Do you see this as a conflict that has to be resolved, or can al-sadr not 'overcome' sistani if sistani directly opposes him?

Is a lots of things going on internally in Iraq that the media will not cover is been protest between the tribal groups and also some dissatisfy Iraqis, some said that a civil war will be imminent, and the power struggle is on going, but all we get is whenever US is involve on some attacks.

Perhaps that is one of the reasons Al-Sadr has been a on low profile lately.

Originally posted by djohnsto77
Al Sadr is not the Iraqi Shia leader, he is a discredited thug. Al Sistani is the Shia leader and he supports the U.S. presence.

What do you expect from the puppet government? I'm sure they're begging us to stay.
This is presicely why Bush said the other day "We'll leave if the Iraqis want us to leave" What a farce.

Originally posted by djohnsto77
Al Sadr is not the Iraqi Shia leader, he is a discredited thug. Al Sistani is the Shia leader and he supports the U.S. presence.

Actually Al-Sadr, has always been a figure in the shiites but under Sadam he was oppress as many of the Shiites, now Al-Sadr is the leader of the poor Shiite class.

The only reason you only hear about the Al Sistani is because he favors the US stay in Iraq and the money that good relations will bring to the few elite to rule Iraq under his group in which Allawi is a member and the US companies to invest in Iraq.

But nobody mention the poor on the other side, the ones that will not get anything coming from the elite group.

[edit on 4-2-2005 by marg6043]

Al Sadr is a low level cleric at best while al Sistani is a Grand Ayatollah. There is no comparing their religious status among the Shia Muslims.

Originally posted by djohnsto77
Al Sistani is the Shia leader and he supports the U.S. presence.

Al Sistani is Iranian, and he is not THE Shie leader. Montazeri is the only man who can claim to be the leader of all Shies.

Originally posted by djohnsto77
Al Sadr is a low level cleric at best while al Sistani is a Grand Ayatollah. There is no comparing their religious status among the Shia Muslims.

I dont know if this al-Sadr has anything to do with Muhamad Baqir al-Sadr, but if he does, then he is more than just a low level cleric.

Who is Muqtada al-Sadr?

His father, the Grand Ayatollah Mohammed Sadiq al-Sadr, was the most powerful Shiite cleric in Iraq in the late 1990s. His uncle, Ayatollah Mohammed Baqir al-Sadr, was a leading Shiite activist who was executed by Saddam Hussein’s forces in 1980. Muqtada al-Sadr went underground in February 1999 after a spray of gunfire—from Saddam’s agents, according to most accounts—killed his father and two brothers. He inherited a network of schools and charities built by his father, along with the allegiance of many of the elder Sadr’s followers. In his early thirties, Muqtada al-Sadr lacks the decades-long religious training required of the highest-ranking Shiite authorities, so he bases his claim to authority on his lineage, leadership of the rebellion, and popular support. Lately, experts say, Sadr has been claiming the title of hojatolislam,

Yes he will be an ayatollah, and Iraqi one also.

No, he is not low cleric he is real and for his Iraqi people, he will become a powerful figure in post-US Iraq.

Who are his followers, poor impoverished Iraqis, in the slums of Iraq.

He is rival to Al-Sistani, and his popularity among the Shiites is growing, He has the loyalty of about 3 to 5 million Shiites that will die for him, Al-Sistani have none.

When the time comes to chose between the 75 year old Al-Sistani and the young firebrand Al-Sadir, the tables will turn and the majority will follow Sadir.



www.cfr.org...

Sistani tsunami



"I stood aside for the elections and did not stand against them as I did not want to show disobedience toward the
Marjaiya [senior Shia clergy]. I did not join these elections so that I wouldn't be one of the West's pawns."

"The West is so proud that they have held the elections but I would ask: Who is responsible for the blood that day?" he asked.

"Americans are in for a shock," he said, adding that one day they would realize, "We've got 150,000 troops here protecting a country that's extremely friendly to Iran, and training their troops."

Sharif Ali bin Hussein, head of the Constitutional Monarchy Party, likened the vote outcome to a "Sistani tsunami" that would shake the nation.




source:
sfgate

Well, when Al-Sadr speaks, America jumps!...

Oh, wait, I forgot, we don't give a crap what he says. Nevermind