The New Symbol Of Oppression

In the community of Azamiyah in Baghdad, the U.S. military has begun implementing their new strategy to protect the minority Sunnis in that area: building a three-mile wall around it. That's right. The Bush Administration seems to think that building a wall will solve anything. I suggest you read my other article published sometime earlier called, "Masonry Of The Mind". I can't even think of where to begin on how stupid of an idea this is. If anything it will symbolize U.S. occupation and authority thus becoming yet another target of bombings.
In addition, the wall has begun construction and much to the surprise of the neighbors being walled in. Without even asking the residents how they feel about the dramatic new plan, the U.S. military decided that it had the authority to do whatever it wanted and started building anyway. Dawood al-Azami, head of the council in Azamiyah did say that the military asked him to sign a document allowing the construction of the wall but according to him, “I told the soldiers that I would not sign it unless I could talk to residents first. We told residents at Friday prayers, but our local council hasn’t signed onto the project yet, and construction is already under way.”
Many Sunnis in the neighborhood see this wall as a prison and even further separates their support from the U.S. military. If they didn't feel like we were enough of an occupation force in their country, they sure as hell do now. I just wonder if George W. can tell the difference between Iraqis and Mexicans?

Revelation Of A Revolution

A word rarely heard among Americans, except when conversing about the birth of the nation, is revolution. A revolution is the means to a swift change in society as well as government. And while I feel that there is no need to overthrow our form of representative democracy, I do feel that there is a need to make a swift change. Our government has become too comfortable in its way of thinking that they can do whatever they want once elected to power. We, Americans, have become too comfortable in our way of thinking that once they are elected, our government officials can do whatever they want. Thomas Jefferson once said, "Yes, we did produce a near-perfect republic. But will they keep it?"

Americans who defend the war in Iraq claim that freedom is not free. And while I argue that this war was never about freedom from the beginning, the price of freedom here in America has been reduced to nearly zilch. We have forgotten that the price of freedom and democracy is not in terms of money or loss of life of our soldiers; the price of having a democracy is the willingness to use it. Because when democracy is no longer used by the people for the people, it will devour itself in the form of tyranny.

From the Patriot Act to the mild voter turnouts across the country, our democratic rights given to us by the Constitution that remain the rock of this nation are slowly being taken away from us because we are too lazy to open our eyes and protest. And if this country continues down this path of idle democracy while politicians quietly edit out the parts of the Constitution they don't like, revolution may be a word used more often in this society. Without participating in a democratic government the people make themselves obsolete and then open to direct abuses. And who will speak for the people once the people have something to say and yet their voices have become numb from lack of use?

We are not at that point yet, but I urge all Americans to get involved in government; if not directly, at least vote and speak out. A protest every now and then is healthy if a democracy is going to survive. And how can we say that we are fighting for democracy in Iraq when we are amateurs ourselves? It won't be until the situation is at its most dire hour when the word "revolution" spills from the people's tongues and dampen their lips like Pavlov's dogs reacting toward freedom from the other side of the cage. With the death toll of American soldiers in Iraq already at 3,311 and climbing, one day Americans will have had enough of the death brought about by this war. Unfortunately, though, the seeds of revolution grow only in well fertilized soil.

Iraq: A Self-Devour

Iraq is a lone fighter, who

blinded by His light,

with his sword

cuts his own wrists while hacking away

at his most potent enemy.

A War Without A Reason

Today, the death toll in Iraq again has peaked in the three digits and so I asked myself what is going on? And as I thought of this three things came to mind. One of them was that this entire war on terror started with our focus on al-Qaeda--a Sunni terrorist organization. And we were doing a good job in Afghanistan. But then, for some unknown reason, Bush decided that Iraq needed to be invaded. So, he made up some bullshit, got the country behind him and went to war. Now our focus has shifted from our original enemies to the new ones we created in Iraq. And as if irony wasn't enough of a bitch, now we are fighting al-Qaeda in Iraq because since we stretched out our forces and put all of our energy into Saddam, the terrorist organization gained in strength and followed us.
Also, I have realized that we have our military--the strongest and most well-trained in the world--in a country without a war. What the hell are they going to do? There is no war. Armies are trained to fight wars and now that the war is over, they remain in Iraq with nothing more to do than defend themselves from the insurgents who want them to leave.
And one of the biggest problems is that because we have in office a thick-headed authoritarian Billy Bob Hitler, our government has been cursed with the inability to adapt to the changing scenarios in Iraq. Thanks to Bush's tunnel-vision tactics, our military is fighting a war that doesn't exist and we are waiting for a victory that will never come. It would have also been great if this administration had planned for more than a few days when it came to preparing for war.
If I sound a little...I don't know...distraught over the war in Iraq, perhaps it is because it was the brain child of a brainless man who had no concept of action and consequences and even less regard for human life! When are we going to leave? If George is waiting for Judgement Day, it may very well come sooner than later the way he's running things. I can't...no, I refuse to imagine a world that is more screwed up than the one Bush created when he bumbled into the White House. Why don't we give every psychopath with delusions of violence without repercussion a job in U.S. politics? I can't seem to stress how wrong this war is. I apologize if I'm simply ranting on at this point but I need some sort of pressure valve to release my frustrations at this administration and its worthless foreign policies or else I'll blow up. Hey, maybe that's why there's so many people exploding in Iraq?

Blind Man Lead Thyself

It was announced that religious leaders from the Shiite and Sunni sects within Iraq have met with each other and have agreed that they need to band together as one nation in the name of peace. One religious leader, though, who has been very controversial since the beginning of the war has been neglected in the talks for peace--Muqtada al-Sadr. Now, I may seem by now to be an advocate of his but in fact I am an advocate of peace and I do not see why someone with such religious importance as well as political has been left out of the equation. And to prove that this situation in Iraq is not as black and white as most people think, here are some of the facts I learned from picking up a Time Magazine and reading it.
I wonder if our soldiers, some of whom have not even graduated high school and are yet given the responsibility of pulling a trigger, even know the differences between the Shiites and the Sunnis. Other than the historical differences they have certain names that appear in only one of the two sects, they pray in different mosques, they pray in different fashions, depending on a predominantly one-sect region they can have differing accents and also their cars can give away signs. One such sign would be a picture of a holy figure belonging to one of the sects or a license plate from a region with a large Shiite or Sunni population. This can be helpful at security checkpoints.
Also, there is validity to the Shiite grudge that they have been oppressed. The predominantly Sunni Middle East has treated the Shiites as a lower class with what Time said as being, "institutionalized prejudice". And Iraq is right in the middle of some of these grievances. Ali ibn Abi Talib, the person Shiites believed to be the next to follow in the prophet Muhammad's footsteps and later became the fourth Caliph of the Muslim faith was killed in 661 in none other than what is today, Iraq. It is time now for a change to the unequal distribution of power and rights and time for Muslims to come together in Iraq as nothing less than Iraqi citizens.
And even in 1991, after the Gulf War, Shiites attempted to rebel against Saddam but without any backing from outside forces the rebellion was quickly stopped and nearly 300,000 Shiites were killed. Another factor in this current scenario is that Iran is a Shiite nation and coincidentally an enemy of the United States. It is also worth mentioning that though many organizations such as Hezbollah and other terrorist groups may praise those such as the Madhi Army in Iraq, they are two separate people fighting for two separate causes and should not be confused. And in case anyone was wondering, al-Qaeda is a Sunni terrorist group.
When al-Sadr's Mahdi Army of Shiites fought the U.S. early in the war they were celebrated by even the Sunni insurgents. al-Sadr himself was praised as a hero for Iraqis and not just Shiites. But in the end, the current government in Iraq chose to side with the U.S. who helped them gain power and hold onto it. This created a common enemy in al-Sadr. And it is this choosing of U.S. support over the people of Iraq that has fueled the ongoing fighting in violence. This is why six ministers of the Cabinet resigned yesterday who were followers of al-Sadr.
Originally the fighting was between Sunnis and Shiites to fill in the newly formed power vacuum. But because of the U.S.'s poor planning for the war and stubborn leadership in the White House, the common enemy between Iraqis became the U.S. occupation itself. And now the sectarian violence is more between Iraqis and government supporters of U.S. occupation than it is Sunni vs Shiite. And while both sects continue their violent acts against each other throughout Iraq, it is clear that one thing they all agree on is that this is their fight and we are merely getting in the way.
And while those who may suggest that Time Magazine, the source of most of this information, may be a liberal magazine I will not suggest alternative sources for other people. This was a source I decided to use and none of the facts were incorrect though you might disagree with my ideology concerning their nature. For those who wish to learn more about this intricately complex issue, I suggest that you do your own research. Do not listen to people who say that this source is unbiased or that source is right. Only you can make up your own mind and educating yourself is a monumental step in being an individual voice and not just another follower.

Mr. al-Sadr Leaves Baghdad

If I sound like I am repeating myself in these articles at times it is for two reasons: 1) the information being repeated needs to be emphasized and 2) the same stupid shit keeps happening. So today, six ministers of the Iraqi Cabinet who are loyal followers of Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr resigned in protest to the government's refusal to support a pull-out date for the U.S. With tens of thousands of Iraqis marching only a couple of weeks ago in protest to the U.S. occupation and now the resignation of six ministers of the Cabinet, the Iraqi people are getting fed up with us being there. And the majority of Americans recently feel the same way. The U.S. military has become yet another road block in Iraq's progress toward peace.
With the resignation of those six ministers, al-Sadr has shown he still has a firm grip on the Shiite community as a powerful leader. The U.S. has brushed this off suggesting that it will go fairly unnoticed and the government will remain intact. Meanwhile, Iraqis within the government fear that this is a huge setback. As al-Sadr continues to defy the U.S. and Iraqi government for supporting the occupation, he has been slandered more now by these two governments than ever before. The Associated Press wrote that "Forty-two victims of sectarian murders were found in Baghdad the past two days...U.S. and Iraqi officials have blamed much sectarian violence on Shiite death squads associated with the Mahdi Army [of al-Sadr]." But also, "The brazen nature of the targets of the attacks are similar to previous assaults that blamed on al-Qaida fighters..." With so much violence in Iraq, it is difficult to determine who is to be blamed for what.
I hope that al-Sadr is not merely blamed for the violence because he defies the "powers that be". After all, al-Sadr helped Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki get to power and now that he is in that position he has turned his loyalties from his people and toward the U.S. which is helping him keep that power. We should all hope that bias on politics does not promote slanderous propaganda on al-Sadr and that focus aim more toward diplomacy. Though al-Sadr is an enemy of the U.S. occupation he is a pivotal ally in peace within Iraq.

Iraq's Bridges Burning Down

Americans have become detached from the realities of war. Instead of listening to the news or reading the paper, many people have given in to listening to our politicians give their opinions on how the war is going. John McCain has said that there are streets in Baghdad that are safe to walk on. Meanwhile, the citizens of Baghdad have been begging him to tell them where this safe street is because no one seems to be living on it. Our politicians have their own agendas and make the war to be something that it is not. It is a smoke and mirrors trick in a whole show of illusions to influence voters that this party or that has the right stuff to become our next White House administration. The republicans want to convince people that they are succeeding and that Iraq is becoming freer, safer and an all around better place to be since the fall of Saddam. The democrats are making this out to be the war that puts them into the White House. But no one is actually considering that this is a civil war in which people are dying each day because we continue to bicker here in America all the while neglecting those affected most by this war: the Iraqis. This war has shifted its concern from them and onto the soldiers fighting it in an increasing effort to show which American political party cares most about our troops. The prize for the winner--a comfortable seat in the White House.

But we still can't get a bill passed into law. The president has continued to flank himself with family members of war veterans as his new sheep's clothing and has made repeated statements that he wishes to discuss the differences between republicans and democrats but at the same time is unflinchingly stubborn in his stance on the bill. And the democrats continue to stand their ground, barely, demanding that the troops come home. The only difference between these two stubbornly defiant stances is that Congress is representing the majority of Americans (democracy) while the president is representing his own image invested heavily in this war (tyranny). But if diplomacy can't even work here in America how the hell is it going to work in Iraq which has come to depend on us for its very survival?

And as this stalemate rages on in Washington, vice president and part-time grim reaper Dick Cheney said in a recent interview about the democrats, "They will not leave the troops in the field without the resources they need." He said this after making a prediction that soon the democrats in Congress will give in and accept the president's terms. Bull S*&t! This is more word spinning on the vice president's part. By cutting off the funding for the war, the troops will not be left in Iraq with stones and sticks to defend themselves. If the funding is stopped, then the war itself ends and the troops come back home. And if anyone should be blamed for this delay in funding it is President Bush for remaining stubborn on this issue and not even considering other options in his failed war.

It is not Congress's job to get involved in war but when the war is begun and fought with no exit strategy in sight, someone needs to pull our soldiers from the wreckage this war has become. And so far, the only people willing to put an end to this bloodshed are the democrats in Congress. Bush burned his bridges early in the war so that there was no turning back without victory. But now that the victory he imagined turns out to be exactly that--imagined--we need to start constructing a way out.