Out of the Arab Equation - Part I

Paving the Way

There is one word that has been bothering a lot these past weeks, ever since Ahmadinejad landed in the American occupied Green Zone in Baghdad. That word that keeps recurring in many articles and "analysis" is "unwittingly".

Other variations are "blunders, mistakes, errors, miscalculations..."

You're problably wondering what I'm on about. Ok, I'll tell you the cause of my malaise...

Most of the articles, comments, etc..coming from the U.S and the West and some Arab milieux in particular from the Arab Revolutionary Left (a misnomer) argue the following.

America in its stupidity and arrogance "unwittingly" handed Iraq on a silver platter to Iran. They further argue that America because of poor planning and lack of knowledge and information, committed several strategic errors, blunders, mistakes in Occupied Iraq. And one of those glaring errors is the very prevalent Iranian influence in Southern Iraq, in Baghdad and I would add in "Kurdistan" since Iran played a very important role in the Kurdish separatist movement -- along with Israel.

Now that word "unwittingly" annoys me deeply. It annoys me because it presumes that the Americans really acted in good faith initially. Of course none will come out and say that so bluntly but it is insinuated. The argument is the occupation of Iraq could have been a good thing had it delivered what it promised to deliver because after all (and we go back to the same old broken record) -- Saddam Hussein was a tyrannical dictator.

For the sake of clarity and truth, let us backtrack in history for a moment

The Iraqi National Opposition (INC) was in contact with the American administration since Gulf War 1 i.e since the 1990's. The INC headed by Ahmed Chalabi (and K.Makiya) and comprised but not limited to the following :

- A.Hakeem of the SCII from Iran. (born in Iran and bred in Iran)

- Reps from the Dawa party notably -- M.Al Rubaie, Al Jaafari, Kubba, (Dawa party was formed in Iran and had close links to Hezbollah in Lebanon during the 80's. They were both responsible for the bombs in Baghdad and Beirut during the Iran-Iraq war, targeting Iraqi infrastructure and interests)

- Reps from the shiite Hawza or Marjaiyah for Sistani (exiled in Iran until the occupation) and reps for Al-Sadr.

- Ayad Allawi and Pachachi (a sunni) were amongst the members as well.

- and last but not least, Talabani and Barazani the two kurdish warlords.

The INC headed by Chalabi got the full backing of Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, Cheney, and Perle and of course Bush and millions of dollars were pumped into it preparing them for the subsequent invasion and occupation of Iraq.

These personalities landed with the Americans. Some came from London, others from Tehran and others from the USA.

The plan for the sectarian/ethnic division of Iraq was on the agenda. Hence these personalities with their allegiances to sect and ethnicity were very much needed.

The first fallacy was that Iraq is majority Shia and that Sunnis have been in power ever since the Monarchy hence robbing the Shias of their political rights. Of course this fallacy was picked up by the anti-war movement and other anti-occupation writers such as Cockburn and Co, and became their bread and butter. Needless to add, Chomsky became the first spokesman to further this lie echoing the same song coming from the White House.

And of course you can add the litany of the kurds repression which was beautifully well knitted up by the CIA and Mossad propaganda agencies and swallowed whole by the "well intentioned" lefties in the West including the "alternative media".

I do not want to dilute the subject too much and will expose these fallacies in some other post. (Gosh, I have so much writing to do!)

The reason I am mentioning these little bits of history is to show you the obvious.

Namely that in the 1990's (and well before that in my opinion), the CIA, Pentagon, Israeli and British intelligence, when they concocted the plan for the invasion of Iraq, they knew EXACTLY who this "Iraqi" opposition was and where it came from and where its ultimate loyalties lied.

In other words when delegation after delegation from the INC met in London and Washington, the Americans knew very well, that the SCII, that al-Dawa party (of which Maliki the current "Iraqi" PM is a member), that the highest Shia marjaiya all had their loyalties to Iran. After all this is where they came/flew from, to attend these meetings.

Incidentally and it is very important that I mention that -- During the Iran/Iraq war, 1/5 of the Shiites individual/personal revenues (a form of religious tax) went to Qum -- as contribution money. The money did not go into the Hawza's treasuries in Nejaf or Kerbala, no, it went to Iran at the height of the Iran -Iraq war. The reason I am stating this piece of information, is to show you the overriding Shiites affinity/pledge --in particular in Nejaf and Kerbala -- to Iran. And let me remind the reader that Khomeini spent several years in exile in IRAQ right up to 1978, before being extradited to France on request of the Shah. He returned to Iran in 1979- one year before the Iran-Iraq war!)

When the Americans on behalf of the Zionist lobby drew up the sectarian and ethnic division of Iraq, they knew very well where the majority of the shia's allegiance is. They had prepared the grounds for it since Gulf War 1 (and before) and Iran capitalized on it.

So when some writer or commentator comes up with the words "mistake, blunder, or miscalculation" they are fooling none but themselves. There was NOTHING UNWITTING about the whole plan. It was all well thought out in advance.

In other words, to make it even simpler for you -- and I would ask you to re-read that sentence several times until it really sinks in.

--Without Iran's help, the occupation of Iraq would have never been possible--

The Americans knew that, the Israelis knew that, and the Iranians knew that -- and they prepared for it.

Now the layperson may get very confused, they would think how can that be possible?
What about all this anti-imperialist talk from Iran about the Great Satan, what about its anti-zionist speeches, what about ....? It is called a massive cover up.
Simply put.

And the layperson also wonders, what about US threats of an attack against Iran, what about the sanctions against Iran, what about all the barking from the international community against the Iranian threat ? It is called a psy-op.

There were no mistakes. There were no blunders and nothing was unwitting about the whole diabolical plan.

But why Iraq ? you might think to yourself.

This I will tell you in the next post. Just think about what you have read so far.

And to help you in your reflections I recommend two articles

- the 1st by Wafa'a Al Natheema. Iraq :One hand worth of fingers
- the 2nd by Ghassan Charbel. The Great Satan's Gift

Until next...

Painting : Iraqi artist, Sabah Majeed.


Anonymous said…
Thank you, Layla, for educating us. Looking forward to the continuation. You have lots of work to do, dear Layla, but it is crucial that you continue with all this. You speak on behalf of those who cannot.

God bless and in solidarity.

P.S. Have read 'One hand worth of fingers', and will read the other one soon after this. Thank you.
Anonymous said…
Wonderful article Layla, just wonderful…
This is the best article I have ever seen talking about the so called “US mistakes” in iraq. The US actions in iraq are very rational, systematic and very well thought and executed.
You really feel degusted when you read articles written by the anti-war media about this issue.
You know Layla, there is a saying in Arabic I am sure you know: “to put the poison in the honey.” So that when somebody eats it, he will die enjoying the very sweet taste of the honey. Personally, that is what I think the anti-war media is doing. Since some group of people might not swallow the obvious CNN lies. The job of the anti-war media is to put it in a sweet encapsulate and sell it back again. I watched one of there movies were they talk about the US mistakes in Iraq. They say that the biggest mistakes of all are: dismantling the former Iraqi army, and the dibaathification. Then they say because of their mistakes they handed Iraq to Iran.
The first question to ask is why they dismantled the Iraqi army? Simply they cannot divide Iraq if they kept the Iraqi army, can they? First step to divide a secular country is to terminate its “secular” army. They left all the former army weaponry in the hand of the people, in hope for them to slaughter each others. They were planning for the civil war from day one.
The second question is why they forced the dibaathification? Basically they cannot divide a secular country with the secular educated class, intellectuals, and secular ideologist running the country. So they have do hunt, kill, and remove everyone with secular ideology, by the accusation of being baathest. That is why you can still see former baathest in the current puppet regime, as long as they replaced their greenish army suits with black turbans. They replaced the seculars who were running the country with fanatic religious wolves, because they know this is the only way to divide the country.

So no it was not a mistake, it was well planned. All the actions they did were well planned ahead of time. If you want to get the real picture, you have to understand why they came to Iraq in the first place. First of all they came and they did not plan and are not planning to leave anytime soon. Second, they want to divide the region, starting with Iraq. This is the only way for them to stay. The only way to divide the region is to make the Sunnis and the Shiats fight each other. Divide and conquer, sounds familiar? So it is really utterly stupid for the anti-war shitty media to think that the civil war was not stimulated and orchestrated by the US invaders. Everyone knows (I mean here Iraqis), that the Maliki government and the Iraqi parliament are directly involved in the ethnic cleansing of the Sunnis in Baghdad. And what I mean by directly is that they are carrying the cleansing process personally. And the US is still supporting such government. Well this is completely make sense when you know that the US wants a civil war to take place.

But who’s taking the blame for the civil war? Who is taking the responsibility in carrying the civil war? It is the Iranians. So basically the Iranians are doing the Americans a big favor. They are just going along with the plan in dividing the region. In creating a sunni shia conflict. As you stated in your post, the US cannot and would not invade iraq without the support from iran. Iran is holding the shia in iraq from fighting the Americans, and instead they are fighting the Sunnis. The US should really be grateful for that. The American and Iranian plan in Iraq is exactly, precisely the same. Now, when you listen to the shitty anti-war carp, they say well ok Iran has the right to interfere because they are next on the list. So they have to defend themselves. Man, if hypocrisy is a suit, it sure fits the anti-war movement the best. When Saddam fought the ugly revolution of the Mullahs of Iran, when Saddam invaded the shitty country of Kuwait, when Saddam fought the Kurdish state of Zion, oh he is a horrible monster, he killed his own people. But when Iran kills 1 million Iraqis, that is OK they are defending themselves.
Listen to the God father of the intellectual masturbators, Chomsky, saying that “well the US should leave Iraq to Iran to rule it” his justification is that Iraq is 60% shia and Iran is shia state so Iran should rule it. Well, I got news for this piece of junk Chomsky, believe me the US is trying to do that, and no luck so far.
The big role for Iran in the region is not a mistake by any chance. It is intentional. It is well designed plan. It is not random. The only distraction for the Arab and Muslim nation from fighting the Zionist state is Iran. Iran is creating trouble and instability in Iraq, Lebanon, Yemen, Kuwait, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia. The key to divide the region is in the hands of iran. That is why you see the anti-war movement defending iran oh so passionately.
Don’t you find ridiculously amazing that the Iranian-US staged conflict is taking the whole picture in the anti-war media? The iraq war is almost forgotten. Maybe they show the number of the Iraqi dead count, or blast here and there. Long and long articles and analysis about whether the US will hit iran or not. And no analysis what so ever about the severe implications of the iraq war on the people of iraq. No but wait they sure can give you a reason for that, “well iraq war is done, but we have to stop the next war.” If you don’t call this hypocrisy then I really don’t know what hypocrisy is.
Why no body mentioned that the plan of the serial killer, Ahmadinajad, was guarded by the Americans from the moment he entered iraq to the moment he left. Don’t you think it is worth “analyzing”? Why the neo-cons, the Americans, the invaders of iraq would help and guard the head of the so called “terrorist state” Iran. Would they please analyze this for me? Last time I checked they were saying that the US and Iran are enemies. They don’t seem enemies to me, they look like very close allies.
Last but not least, the only and only mistake the Americans did in iraq, they under estimated the Iraqi ability to defeat them and to resist them, other than that everything happening in iraq are going exactly to the Iranian/American/Israeli plan.

Anonymous said…
Very interesting comments, PSK. Thank you.
Anonymous said…
Layla Anwar, do you really think you can stroll at ease all over As'ad Abu Khalil's blog and leave anonymous one-liners here and there in the comment sections without people recognizing your unmistakable incredibly sagacious and brilliant style ?

Anonymous said…
Sharp eyed,

When I've visited Asssad's blog, I've signed my name...
Mind you my brother dislikes him too, it must run in the family ;-)
Anonymous said…
Little Deer,

Writing about these "historical bits" is akin to opening a can of worms...I realize am quite behind in covering some of the "historical" events that led up to Gulf War1 and the present day occupation. I am not paid to write...so this blog is really taking a lot of my time.
Moreover, I occasionally have terrible problems with my server. Either I lose my documents or I get several hacking attempts or my posts don't show...
It's no easy ride.
Anonymous said…


This is truly excellent. I would like to use this in my next post and credit you with it if you don't mind.
Or have it published in a separate post.The points you raised I was going to cover in the next article...and you made my task much easier.
You summed it beautifully well. Hats off to you!!!
I would be very interested if you could kindly give me where you got the Chomsky quote from.
Anonymous said…
Hi Layla, thanks for your comment. Yes, I realise just how much this must take out of you. You are on your own, and, yes, there must be lots of attempts at hacking - so the challenges are great. If there was a way I could help with editing, etc., I happily would, just to ease the workload on you. :) And to crown it all, you have some scumbags here who take pleasure in insulting your work.

All this in addition to your normal everyday work which, in itself, is a challenge given what's going on in Iraq and the consequences on your daily life.

With all this in mind, what you do is very, very much appreciated.

Big hug to you!

In solidarity.
Anonymous said…
SUPERB!! I could not have said it better, myself, LITERALLY and figuratively, because, I could NOT have said it. So many, many thanks for your wonderfully clear, precise, brilliant exposition. You are a blessing, a true blessing. And, to help understand just how much of a blessing it means to me, and, others, in science it is said that an explanation which is simple but comprehensive is ELEGANT! Thus, is meant, for example, Einstein's theories and equations, or, Newtown's theories and equations, Marx, as well, and so on--elegant simplicity. To achieve that is superb. So, I say to you, you have achieved, are achieving elegant simplicity in your explanations and I think you will then understand the magnitude of what I mean. It is a goal worthy of the Gods. It brings tears to my eyes!--karlmarxwasright (Not only was he correct, but, he would say the same thing about your writing as I do, also, I'm sure, if he were alive. He would be in total agreement).
Anonymous said…
YOUR BROTHER ?????????? !!!!!!!!!!!!


Anonymous said…
Thank you Layla for another excellent and insightful article.

It has been my view over the past few months that the Iranian revolution was a masonic/Mithraic con in order to get the Iranians dying whilst subjugating Great Iraq.

I believe that they want to bring around the ancient empire of Persia exist side by hand with "greater Israel" and that yes they are carving up the golden problem of Iraq.

Numerologicaly there are good reasons to believe this but i may well research and do an article on this in a few weeks or months.

I look forward to reading your opinions and findings and once again commend and salute you for some of the most passionate articles to have come on the web in the past year or two.
Anonymous said…
Dear Layla,
You have the complete right to copy paste, change, edit, even claim for yourself everything I wrote, writing, and will write in the future with full permission and gratitude from me.
As for the Chomsky part, I have long list of interviews and presentations, I will try to dig it up and send it to you,
thank you very much for your woderful work,
Anonymous said…
Have you heard of the latest living shame from Sadatist/Mubarakist Egypt, the fucked-up Israel-worshipping "journalist" Magdi Allam who was baptized by the Pope in Rome ?
Well, I just wanted to "write out loud" here that I HATE him.
He is the crème de la merde of all pseudo-Arab intellectual serpents in the world, worst than all those you have ever mentioned, As'ad & Co. being harmless in comparison.
You should have seen his ugly house slave's face deformed by orgasmic delight at the fall of our beloved Baghdad while "reporting" live from the stolen 19th province of Iraq back in 2003.
You should also have read one of his psycho "articles" of a few years ago calling for a Nobel Prize to be awarded ex-aequo to Sharon and Sistani, "men of peace" (no irony).
He is one of the very last few "things" on the planet who still fools around with the proved absurdities of blessed President Saddam having WMDs and being the mastermind behind 9/11, and of course he still describes the occupation as "liberation" and denies the existence of a resistance movement other than "Al-Qaeda".
I HATE him, I HATE his likes, I HATE Arab traitors with a passion.
Sorry for the out-of-topic outburst, but I am so filled with rage for the spreaders of IGNORANCE, they are as much responsible as the spreaders of death for what has happened to your country, government and people, if not more.
Keep writing, keep enlightening the darkness of our miserable world.
I love you.
Anonymous said…
Hi Layla,
I am sorry I wasn’t able to find the interview I was referring to, but you know what you made me go and research more. This guy, Chomsky, convinced me more than ever that iran/Israel/neo-cons have the same exact agenda.
Ok I will quote him in his exact words:
“suppose the parliament represents popular will, say the popular will of 80 percent of Iraqis who want the occupying forces to withdraw…Well then the occupying forces should immediately initiate withdrawal and leave it to the Iraqis. Now there's a good reason why Washington and London are not contemplating that. …. I mean if you're going to have a Shi'ite majority. Therefore the Shi'ites will have a lot of influence in policy, probably a dominant influence. The Shi'ite population in the south, which is where most of the oil is, would much prefer warm relations to Iran over hostile relations to Iran. Furthermore they are very close relations already, the Badr brigade, which is the militia that mostly controls the south, was trained in Iran. The clerics have long-standing relations with Iran; the Ayatollah Sistani actually grew up there. Chances are pretty strong, they'll move towards a some sort of a loose Shi'ite alliance, with Iraq and Iran. Furthermore right across the border in Saudi Arabia, there's a substantial Shi'ite population, which has been bitterly oppressed by the US-backed tyranny in Saudi Arabia, the fundamentalist tyranny. Any move towards independence in Iraq is likely to increase the efforts to gain a degree of autonomy and justice. That happens to be where most of Saudi Arabia's oil is. So you can see not far in the future a loose Shi'ite alliance controlling most of the world's oil, independent of the US.”
Is this guy talking about the new Middle East famous blood borders map?
The neo-cons invaded Iraq for this specific exact reason, to divide the region and create a shia state that takes part of Saudi Arabia. How come this guy saying that the US will not withdraw from iraq because they are afraid of such shia state they themselves planned in creating and supporting.
You see, when you read about such hideous divide and conquer plan by Ralph Peters you feel it is large pill to swallow. However, when Chomsky put it in a nice sweet lovely way, it is very easy to accept it and go along with it. You see now what I mean by “to put the poison in the honey.”
If you want to put things in the correct perspective, it makes more sense to say, that the Americans will stay in iraq until they can force the new middle east map they want. The only threat to their plans is the secular Iraqi resistance that is still strong enough to take iraq back of what it was, one secular country. The Americans will withdraw only when they know that the blood borders will take place for sure, i.e. such shia state is created. Don’t you think that this makes more sense?
The only real threat to the divide and conquer plan is the secular ideology that the Iraqi resistance has. The religious fanatics, whether they are shia mullahs or alqeda, fit perfectly in their blood borders idea. That is why you see a lot of black turbans running the current Iraqi parliament. That is why religious retards like Sistani, Sader, and hakim have a major role in the new iraq.
Anonymous said…
TO PSK--Thanks for the Chomsky quote. I don't bother reading or listening to him. So, it is helpful for me when others pull out the necessary material reminders of what he says. I stopped listening to him a long, long time ago, when he referred to the Soviet Union as the "Evil Empire," along with our Nazi leadership,amongst others, Reagan.--karlmarx
Layla Anwar said…
Thanks KM for the accolades...

PSK, Hello.

Thanks again --your comments are very valuable. and it saves me so much time digging out stuff.
May I suggest something to you -- why don't you start a blog ? And do let me know.


Thank you for your kinds words.
Layla Anwar said…
Thanks KM for the accolades...

PSK, Hello.

Thanks again --your comments are very valuable. and it saves me so much time digging out stuff.
May I suggest something to you -- why don't you start a blog ? And do let me know.


Thank you for your kinds words.
Layla Anwar said…
strangled scream,

Sorry to disappoint you but I do not discuss family matters online...PERIOD!
Layla Anwar said…

There are too many Magdi Allam's in this world. He is not the first nor the last. And I can understand your anger, I have it myself against a good number of "iraqis and " arab leftists". They kind of amount to the same thing.
Anonymous said…
Hi Layla,
I am glad to be of any help. Although i think it is something i shouldn't be thanked for.
thanks for the blog idea, i just don't know if i have the will power you have to fight such a fight. i will think about it. Meanwhile, i will keep writing here :)
thanks for your work again,
Anonymous said…
Hi there Layla! My! you have certainly got the enemy thrashing and lashing about out all over the place. But you seem to have a good number of supporters there to keep them in check. Thanks for your comment. Been to the army disposals, and getting my gear ready. Should be ready to take off after weekend. Hope I do not have a crash landing.

And Hi there Little Deer! Keep at the their ankles. You are doing a great job!

In solidarity
Anonymous said…
Dear Layla, yes it is your analytical pages that are the stars of your blog. Is it generally known that the Muslim's in Albania are Sunnis and is the background of the new and second Albania, Kosovo, a payback to their isolation, murder and territorial destruction in Iraq? Just an idea that came into my mind. Hard tack as the Albanians seem to be dominated by crime factions, and only compenastion could be wheeling and dealing with them - though available for revenge tactics presumably.I am old 75, but I try to keep my website spot on and it is thanks to you dear woman that there can be a clear understanding of the crimeplans UK,USA,ISRAEL in the middle east. Regards, jocelyn
Anonymous said…
Wow, just wow. The nonsense I read in these comments is completely overwhelming. Such elaborate conspiracies, irrational prejudices, absurd fetishes. You seem to believe that America is this super-organized, goal-directed, Machiavellian organization. Sorry kids, it isn't, the U.S political system is a giant clunky mess. It doesn't get anything done. It's full of people who are almost as dumb as the people on this website. The only thing America wants from Iraq is for it to be stable enough for troops to leave without some asshole staging a coup and killing his millions of enemies. And all this talk of oil! America gets very little oil from iraq. And what it does get it pays the opec rate for, the same fookin price payed before the war! And what is this bullshit about "lining Dick Cheneys' pockets". Cheney only made 9 million dollars in 2005, there are MUCH easier ways to make 9 million dollars than starting a war. And do you wanna know what this evil bastard Dick Cheney did with his 9 million? He gave 7 million to charity, poor kids and medical research, mostly.

Popular posts from this blog

Not so Kind...

Endless Beginnings...

A brief Hate statement...