“Iran backed special groups” – Maliki and Ahmedinejad

April 9, 2008

Pat Lang on the pimp hearings:

Then, there are the "special groups." These two words are being used to conjure up direct Iranian responsibility for our remaining difficulties in Iraq. We seem to be expected to believe that were it not for the Iranians all would be well in Iraq.

The endless repetition of these two propaganda "themes;"

Maliki’s legitimacy above all other contenders

direct Iranian intervention as the cause of Shia infighting,

have been the music of the Petraeus/Crocker show before Congress.

Hmm – is that correct?

Petraeus/Crocker talk about "Iran backed special groups" when they speak of people who resist a U.S. owned Iraqi puppet government and who subordinate themselves to al-Sadr. They depict such resistance as "direct Iranian intervention as the cause of Shia infighting," implying that these al-Sadr groups are supported by Iran.

But there also could be something different meaning in their testimony.

What if the Iraqi government is not a U.S. owned puppet but has the same allegiance to Iran? Or what if Iran and the U.S. are pulling on the same strings? (Petraeus/Crocker would know this.) Still a claim of "direct Iranian intervention as the cause of Shia infighting" would be true as Iran possibly gave orders to Maliki to stamp down on al-Sadr’s movement.

That’s unthinkable? Why?

As a probably unneeded service to MoA regulars I’ll add some dissonant visual notes to the current propaganda music.

Also recommended: Pat Cockburn on al-Sadr

Posted by b on April 9, 2008 at 19:50 UTC | Permalink

Comments

The orders to Maliki more likely came from the emissary of the fourth branch of government, Dick Cheney. The Petraeus-Crocker show needed a big win, but it didn’t matter which side won. Endless war is like that.

Posted by: kelley b. | Apr 9 2008 20:43 utc | 1

kelley b.:
The Petraeus-Crocker show needed a big win, but it didn’t matter which side won. Endless war is like that.
Exactly. What better excuse to keep the troops in Iraq but to protect Iraqis from all the dangers. Now if only we can get them to pay for it too:

ROBERTS: But one of the big questions that people are asking is should — because they’re taking in all this oil money, should Iraq be paying the United States back for a lot of money that we spent there?
BIDEN: Well, I’d be happy if they just started paying our costs for being there. The ability to pay us back, we’re way above what — we’re approaching having spent $600 billion with a commitment of between $1.7 billion – trillion, in $2 trillion. So, I’d be happy if they just took the burden off us now of spending $3 billion a week over there.

After all they paid us to free Kuwait
There was a little technical glitch in that one though. We reinstalled the dictators.

Posted by: Sam | Apr 9 2008 22:10 utc | 2

Iran-Maliki as prompter of Basra assault seems as likely as many other explanations being offered. Funny in a dark way: Iran actually setting the tempo of US military operations.
The drumbeat of assertions about Iranian interference in Iraq at the hearings may be an attempt to establish a case for assault on Iran. But, chiefly, it betrays US frustration with Iran’s growing influence in Iraq, and very likely this is more a political than military frustration, though these are the closest twins in Iraq.
Missed great hunks of the hearing today. But did hear Petraus give a hat tip to Sadr, credited him with calming the violence that erupted in Basra. Twice in two days. Signifying?

Posted by: small coke | Apr 9 2008 22:27 utc | 3

Actually, I was quite impressed with how light the accusations against Iran were in Petraeus’ testimony. It was not a casus belli. The latter was what I expected. There was no justification for an attack on Iran. I was relieved.
Evidently the hesitations about attacking Iran are more than just Fallon.
Just to tell you an amusing story. You notice that the accusations that Iran has been supplying EFPs (Explosively Formed Projectiles) have disappeared from the news. We all knew that EFPs are easy to fabricate, and the story was more or less dead anyway. Back in January I found a story on Black Anthem, dating to November 2007, three months before, about the discovery of an EFP factory in Iraq, with photos. I put the link up on Juan Cole’s Informed Comment, and the Black Anthem story disappeared the following day. (I have saved the page, if anyone wants it). Dead one justification for an attack on Iran.

Posted by: Alex | Apr 9 2008 22:42 utc | 4

iran and the US have the same immediate goals, the federalization of the south. then they will compete as to who runs it.

Posted by: annie | Apr 9 2008 23:22 utc | 5

The orders to Maliki more likely came from the emissary of the fourth branch of government, Dick Cheney.
But, since Dick Cheney is an Iranian agent bent on subverting U.S., that is same as saying that Iran gave the order, no?

Posted by: kao-hsien-chih | Apr 10 2008 0:00 utc | 6

Reidar Visser, in Maliki, Hakim, and Iran’s Role in the Basra Fighting offers some insights into how the Maliki government, Hakim, and the Iraqi Army do not at all see eye to eye on many of the major issues, and probably accounts to a certain level for the disjointed (Basra) initiatives being undertaken by Maliki. His take on the influence of Iran, is that they appear to back Maliki, and a full range of other militia groups, including Sadr, as well. Or, Iran may well have pushed Maliki to begin some actions against Sadr’s influence, but were surprised at the scale and incompetence he took in Basra, and so put an end to it.
This sounds pretty right to me.

Posted by: anna missed | Apr 10 2008 1:45 utc | 7

1984 was written by George Orwell in 1949. 35 years later,
right on schedule, Reagan abandons conservative Republicanism, and
embraces the Neo-Soviet of Perpetual Star Wars against Eurasia, as
the integrated circuit makes war, and big brother, finally possible.
Titanic comes out, about the death of vanity, in 1997.
WTC 9/11 is engineered by the Neo-Zi’s, just four years later.
Not one iceberg, but two.
comes out, about the death of social identity, in 2002.
Department of Homeland Security was created in January, 2003, a year later.
Not one police force, but two.
Alex Knott of the Center for Public Integrity coins the Fourth Branch
of Government in 2005, stealing the idea from French “Fifth Estate”.
Alex was … (yawn) about … five … years … (yawn) … too … late!
“This is our land, a land of peace and plenty, of harmony and hope”
http://www.newspeakdictionary.com/media/128k/1984-2minutehate.mp3
What’s amazing is watching it in slow motion. Back in 2001, I knew this would
come to pass, I just knew it, and started saving webclips and sources
and diaries and news reports, thinking in four years, or eight at the worst,
with all the amazing back-door links, and government documents left online,
I would have had a best selling look-back, even with the credits logistics,
(yawn) but stress … was … (yawn) like … watching … the … Titanic
disappear … (yawn) beneath … the … oily … black … deep (zzzzzzzzz).
Winston’s Phrase for the Day: “reification of panoptic fantasy”
Big Brother Net as demi-god delusion, a solipsist “be all, see all”.
Isn’t that the truth!! Give a kid the choice of playing, or surfing,
they will uniformly eye glaze, turn on, tune in and drop out. Eunuchs.
Only this time, they’re plugged into Big Brother, instead of Big Brother
and the Holding Company, and that’s right where the Neo-Zi’s want them.
“Whatever you do, Winston, don’t stop shopping!!!”
Like tears in the rain, a diary no one would read,
because they’d be living the nightmare, eyes wide open!
http://www.psychedelik.com
while reading this:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3654/is_200103/ai_n8931909/pg_1

Posted by: Tante Aime | Apr 10 2008 5:35 utc | 8

TA, in re your findarticles link to:
Policing Racial Fantasy in the Far West of New South Wales
as perhaps an analogy to the US (Dinagoollies) versus Iraq (Abos):
There Is No Night Clements 1898
1. In the land of fadeless day
Lies their city foursquare;
It shall never pass away,
And there is no night there.
* Refrain:
God shall wipe away all tears,
There’s no death, no pain, nor fears,
And they count not time by years,
For there is no fright there.
2. All the gates of pearl are made,
In their city foursquare;
All the streets with gold are laid,
And there is no sight there.
3. All the gates shall never close
To their city foursquare;
There life’s crystal river flows,
And there are no rights there.
4. There they need no sunshine bright,
In that city foursquare;
For the Sheeple are the light,
And there is no life there.

Posted by: Terrence Micheals | Apr 10 2008 6:05 utc | 9

Us mob in the south would never use the n word when referencing african americans, whoever uses the A word when discussing australia’s indigenous population is being equally ignorant and redneck.
An aside about the link TA posted. I dunno who the author is but he certainly didn’t comprehend the thrust of the report of the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in custody, which concluded that most of the injustices (murders and bashing of indiginous people by the jacks) are a result of colonialism rather than race.
It’s weird, the bloke writes about fear of an uprising by aboriginal people during the 86 bicentenary, yet sees the issue as one of race, ie the police are afraid of aboriginal people, rather than seeing the situation as being a typical colonial battle for resources between the first people and the invaders. As long as people view colonial conflict be it Australia or Iraq purely as a race war and not a deliberate denial of the locals’ property rights by the invader, idjits will believe these wars have some sort of ideological basis, when really the primary motivation is greed.
The racist police of western NSW would use their warped views on racial superiority as an excuse to deprive the indigenous people of their land, water and grazing rights usually at the behest of local ‘businesspeople’ and pols, but the real agenda was theft. Exactly the same as Iraq where amerikans are told by the imperial party that Arabs in general and Iraqis in particular ‘hate their freedom’. This is a meaningless but emotive attempt at justification for the theft of resources. Once again racism is an excuse not a primary motivator.

Posted by: Debs is dead | Apr 10 2008 10:57 utc | 10

@Alex 4 – Agree. Petraus is not looking for war with Iran. And, in fact, it seemed, in my scattered listening, that congressional questions often led discussion to Iran.
Back to my theme of Petraus on Sadr. On 2am C-Span I caught a bit of House hearing that I had missed during afternoon. Republican congressman asked about Sadr, almost sneering: “leader of forces which are fighting Iraqi Army”, “on fast track to becoming Ayatollah,” what can you tell us about him?
Petraus response was factual and even respectful of Sadr: Son of martyrs, who were religious scholars. Nationalist. Like father and uncle, who were killed, he did not leave Iraq under Saddam. Yes, he is pursuing religious studies to advance to the next level in Islam, which is nowhere near Ayatollah. He is the face representing many poor and dispossessed Iraqis. Any resolution in Iraq has to include Sadr and this group.
He seemed about to go further, but the questioner cut him off with, “Thank you, I was not aware of that information.’ Changed the subject, turning to Crocker.
In other words, Petraus description of Sadr included nothing that those at MoA don’t already know, BUT it stood out in stark contrast to the demonizing that has been common in the press and which has become the general public understanding of Sadr. Bet that answer doesn’t get an echo in the media.
The non-voting Representative from Samoa then gave a ringing critique of the whole Iraq program, starting with “What right do we even have to be there now, since the pretense under which we invaded was false.” He used his full five minutes for critique.
An interesting follow-up – When a subsequent (Republican) congressman addressed a question to Petraus, P answered the question and then took an extra 15 seconds to send his personal good wishes to one of the Samoans with whom he had personally worked, mentioned by name by the Samoan Rep. The Rep. who had just questioned Petraus shifted visibly in his seat and cleared his throat; Petraus was using that Rep’s 5 min to answer a critic amicably.

Posted by: small coke | Apr 10 2008 16:29 utc | 11

Back to Main