Apr 10 2008

Sistani Does Join Maliki And Isolates Sadr

Published by at 10:37 am under All General Discussions,Iran,Iraq,Sadr/Mahdi Army

Bumped to Top, More Updates Below!

I posted the news yesterday that Iraq Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani had basically thrown Mookie Sadr under the bus and sided with the Iraqi government of Maliki, and then waited all day to see any secondary reporting the act. None came but Sadr did have spokesman come out and claim Sistani had told him to keep his Mahdi Army. It seems Sadr lied (and the SurrenderMedia bought it hook-line-sinker and bobber). Bill Roggio has the confirming news, so far the SurrenderMedia is embarrassingly mum:

With the Iraqi government applying pressure to the Sadrist movement and Muqtada al Sadr to disband the Mahdi Army, Iraq’s senior Shia cleric has weighed in on the issue. Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, the most revered Shia cleric in Iraq, backed the government’s position that the Mahdi Army should surrender its weapons and said he never consulted with Sadr on disbanding the Mahdi Army. Instead, the decision to disband the Mahdi Army is Sadr’s to make.

Sistani spoke through Jalal el Din al Saghier, a senior leader of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq, a rival political party to the Sadrist movement. Saghier was clear that Sistani did not sanction the Mahdi Army and called for it to disarm.

“Sistani has a clear opinion in this regard; the law is the only authority in the country,” Saghier told Voices of Iraq, indicating Sistani supports Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki and the government in the effort to sideline the Mahdi Army. “Sistani asked the Mahdi army to give in weapons to the government.”

Sadr did not consult with Sistani on the issue of disbanding the Mahdi Army, disputing a claim from Sadrist spokesmen who intimated Iraqi’s top cleric told Sadr to maintain his militia. “The top Shiite cleric had not been consulted in establishing the Mahdi Army, so [he] could not interfere in dissolving it,” Saghier said. “Whosoever established the al-Mahdi army has to dissolve it; Sayyed Muqtada al-Sadr established this army and it is only him who has to dissolve it.”

Sistani is telling Sadr you either follow the law and do right or become a criminal and suffer the consequences. But it is Sadr’s responsibility to chose his path. Sadr is now completely exposed while his militia causes death and destruction fighting the authorities. Now the bloodshed is on his hands, as it was all the time.

And now the SurrenderMedia needs ask itself why it allowed itself to be dupes for a two-bit thug like Sadr. Why did they report propaganda that could not be confirmed. Why did they buy into the implausible, since Sistani has been against the militias for a long time and has been a supporter of the new Iragi government since its creation. Why would the liberal media defy all that history and run with Sadr’s cow manure?

Was it to give a boost to the Surrendercrats in Congress? Is our media willing to pass on lies to the American people as fact? Lies promulgated by a thug whose minions are killing US soldiers as we speak? At some point a price must be paid for this kind of support to our enemies, accidental or not.

If the SurrenderMedia and Surrendercrats don’t do some hard soul searching on how they are the useful puppets of the killers of our people, then America will do the soul searching and decide what to do about this terribly screwed up situation. We don’t need people echoing the lies of murderers of Americans, just to give them more cause to murder more Americans.

In related news Petraeus told Congress the actions against Sadr’s Mahdi Militia could take months. Then again the thug could collapse much quicker now that he is clearly working against the Shiite spiritual leaders.

Also, the UK SurrenderMedia is all miffed that Maliki snubbed UK forces when it needed some back up in Basra.

Iraq has snubbed British forces in Basra, turning to US troops to help fight Shia militia in the southern city despite the presence of British soldiers.

The withdrawal by British troops in September from their base at Basra palace to the relative safety of Basra airport outside the city has been blamed for the decision by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, to call for American help fighting the Mahdi army two weeks ago.

The UK Forces did not try to use the counter-insurgency tactics that the US did which turned the tide against al-Qaeda. They used the liberal “declare victory and leave a vacuum” and did to Basra what the Surrendercrats in Congress want to do to Iraq – which is hand it over to a new generation of thugs. Those finding for something more lasting and humane – like democracy in Iraq – would obviously pass by the offer to have more of the same bad ideas which brought about much of the hate in the Middle East in the first place.

Update: As we learn more (and ignore the myopic media) we see that the Basra move was, as I said a while back, an effort by Iran to take control of the port city of Basra – something Iran has been trying to do for decades.:

A GAMBLE that proved too costly.

That’s how analysts in Tehran describe events last month in Basra. Iran’s state-run media have de facto confirmed that this was no spontaneous “uprising.” Rather, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) tried to seize control of Iraq’s second-largest city using local Shiite militias as a Trojan horse.

The Iranian plan – developed by Revolutionary Guard’s Quds (Jerusalem) unit, which is in charge of “exporting the Islamic Revolution” – aimed at a quick victory. To achieve that, Tehran spent vast sums persuading local Iraqi security personnel to switch sides or to remain neutral.

The hoped-for victory was to be achieved as part of a massive Shiite uprising spreading from Baghdad to the south via heartland cities such as Karbala, Kut and al-Amarah. A barrage of rockets and missiles against the “Green Zone” in Baghdad and armed attacks on a dozen police stations and Iraqi army barracks in the Shiite heartland were designed to keep the Maliki government under pressure.

he expected call from the Najaf ayatollahs to stop “Shiite fratricide” failed to materialize. Grand Ayatollah Ali-Muhammad Sistani, the top cleric in Iraq, gave his blessings to the Maliki-launched operation. More broadly, the Shiite uprisings in Baghdad, Karbala, Najaf and other cities that Quds commanders had counted upon didn’t happen. The “Green Zone” wasn’t evacuated in panic under a barrage of rockets and missiles.

But the blindfolded media and liberals claim Iran is perfectly reasonable and are not involved in Iraq. In fact, Barack Obama wants to sit down to tea with the Mad Mullahs and Ahmedinejad (God’s messenger, so he claims) and chat about Iraq. No wonder they tried to grab the southern part of Iraq before our elections. H/T to reader Kathie

Update: Make sure to check out the interview with Bill Roggio at Front Page:

FP: So what about the news reports that indicated that the U.S. and the Iraqi Security Forces’ Basra offensive against Sadr was a failure?

Roggio: The reports of the death of the Iraqi Army in Basrah were widely exaggerated. The Iraqi Army and police met some stiff resistance in the opening days, but the media jumped to call this failure. Prime Minister Maliki did not plan well for the operation and jumped the gun on its execution by months (it was to be carried out in July). An Iraqi Army brigade fresh out of basic training was thrown into the fight and cracked – about 500 troops “underperformed or deserted” according to the New York Times, and 400 police deserted. But the other estimated 44,500 Iraqi security forces in Basrah held.

The Iraqi command rushed in reinforcements – about 1 Division or 7,000 troops, and by the weekend the Iraqi security forces began to get the upper hand. Then Sadr ordered his Mahdi Army to leave the streets. By the end of the fighting, more than 500 Mahdi fighters were killed, about 1000 wounded and another 300 captured in the fighting in Basrah, Baghdad, and the great South, where the military performed well against the Mahdi Army.

FP: What role is Iran playing? This whole face-off revealed Iranian military intervention in Iraq to be a given, right?

Roggio: To streamline operations in Iraq, Iran’s Qods Force established a unified command, called the Ramazan Corps, and split Iraq into three roughly geographical regions. I obtained a detailed description of the Ramazan Corps’ command and control network, storage and distribution facilities, training camps, and ratlines – or supply lines – into Iraq last fall.

The Ramazan Corps is a military command with senior Qods Force generals in charge. They direct the flow of weapons, cash, and the deadly rockets, mortars, and explosively formed projectiles into the hands of the Special Groups working in Iraq. The Ramazan Corps also brings Iraqi fighters in Iran to train them, and runs training camps inside Iraq as well.

The Times Online just released information that the Ramazan Corps “were operating at a tactical command level with the Shi’ite militias fighting Iraqi security forces” during the recent fighting in Basrah. “Some were directing operations on the ground.” This should come as no surprise to anyone following Iranian activities inside Iraq or have an understanding of the Ramazan Corps. Iran is fighting a thinly veiled, undeclared war against both the Iraqi people and the United States.

IF the news media were truly journalists and not propagandists this news would be headlines across the nation. The view from the region is Sadr and the Mahdi Army are toast – definitely read this one!

The young Shiite leader’s sin is that he did not find out from the start, and perhaps still has not found out, how Iran used him to deepen the sectarian divide in Iraq, despite his moderate stance in this respect. His pursuit of revenge from the “Baathists,” the followers of Saddam, who killed his father and uncle, has turned into an out of control, generalized campaign of sectarian eradication. Iran’s objective for adopting, arming and financing Al-Sadr’s militia was to create a “balance of terror” with Sunni dissidents seeking to defend their position and interests in the new system. Consequently, the “Mahdi Army” that grouped fighters from every impoverished region of Iraq, including some criminal gangs, turned into security groups led, controlled, and directed by Iranian intelligence, which took advantage of decades of social and political oppression.

The media and liberal ‘experts’ really screwed up on this one. How many mulligans do these people get before they are tossed out of the game?

Update: How long can the media hide the truth about how Sistani just threw Sadr to the sharks:

“Al-Sistani has a clear opinion in this regard; the law is the only authority in the country,” al-Saghier told Aswat al-Iraq – Voices of Iraq (VOI).

“The top Shiite cleric had not been consulted in establishing al-Mahdi army, so it could not interfere in dissolving it,” he added.

“Whosoever established the al-Mahdi army has to dissolve it,” he underlined.

“Sayyed Muqtada al-Sadr established this army and it is only him who has to dissolve it,” he explained.

“Al-Sistani asked al-Mahdi army to give in weapons to the government,” the Shiite official said.

Now, will Sadr do as he was asked by the Grand Ayatollah? H/T Protein Wisdom.

60 responses so far

60 Responses to “Sistani Does Join Maliki And Isolates Sadr”

  1. kathie says:

    Norm…..We all know that Iran has their fingers in every pie, Syria, Lebanon, the Palestinian territories, Venezuela, etc. OK….the point I was making is that the Iraqi’s are not fighting a civil war in the south, they are fighting Persians or stooges of the Persians by the name of Sadr’s army, lead, supplied and paid for the Persians, who want their oil supply, who want to annex their land……..they stood up and fought, because they are Iraqi’s. So yes many of the Iraqi’s lived in Iran, but maybe they think of themselves as Iraqi’s not an extension of Iran.

  2. truthhard2take says:

    Whose water are you carrying? The American Empire’s “right” to dominate the Middle East and in this case to dominate Iraq. Yeah, I “confess,” the Persians have a right to more influence in Iraq than America does, just as America has a right to have more influence in Canada than does Iran. And your favored attempts to thwart Iran are doomed, because more Iraqis see it Persia’s way.

  3. Whippet1 says:

    Evidence has been given to you time and time again and you choose to not see it. You are the one who is incapeable of discussion because you are blind to the truth. 75’s statement is dead on.

  4. truthhard2take says:

    Kathie, you’re an uneducated fool who blinds your eyes to the fact Maliki and the Badr Corp and SCIRI are also paid “stooges of Iran,”
    with more historic ties to being so than al Sadr. Many of their militias were trained by Iran. America is merely fighting a defensive stalling game at the mercy of Iran’s “balancing act.” Also at the mercy of the temporarily aligned Sunnis who have no intention of participating in a pro-American government but are merely using American largesse to gain as much power as possible vis a vis their Shia rivals before America is forced out.

  5. 75 says:

    Norm, ok, you want to play this stupid game? Fine.

    “if the news media were truly journalists and not propagandists…” we wouldn’t even be in iraq.”

    This comment alone makes you the moron you are and there are many, many, many more from you. Not only does it imply that Bush wouldn’t have won a second term without the media, which in itself is complete nonsense, it gives the impression that you actually believe the media is in Bush’s corner…a claim so far off base that you should be fitted for a rubber room by now.

  6. Whippet1 says:

    Interesting that you use the term Persians for Iranians…Your veil is slipping and you have exposed yourself.

  7. 75 says:


    What claims of influence does Iran have in Iraq?
    What claims does America have in Canada?
    What makes you believe that Iraqis actually favor Iranians?
    And when have you last had a CAT-Scan?

  8. Whippet1 says:


    “Yeah, I “confess,” the Persians have a right to more influence in Iraq than America does, just as America has a right to have more influence in Canada than does Iran.”

    Really…I wish I had known this when I lived closer to the Canadian border. I didn’t know there was an “influence” rule. Can you link the applicable requirements to the influence laws so that we can all take advantage?


  9. norm says:

    75…who do you want to start with? judith miller of the ny times? she wrote exactly what cheney and libby told her to write. then cheney went on meet the press and said; “…see, it’s right there in the ny times…”. or maybe we should talk about bob woodward. he knew about the administration leaking a covert operatives name just prior to the 2006 election but did not write about it. do you really think that would have had no effect on the outcome? but they say bad case makes bad law…let’s look big picture. we could talk about sunday morning “news” shows where 61 percent of the guests are conservative as opposed to 39% liberals. or maybe you would like to look at newspapers where 60% of newspapers run more conservative columnists than liberal columnists. only 20% run more liberals than conservatives. or maybe you just want to call me a moron.

  10. 75 says:

    Norm, you really ARE dumber than dirt, aren’t you?

    Judith Miller got caught with her hands inthe proverbial cookie jar of falsehoods. She wouldn’t rat out her source because she knew she had misreported what the source told her. this is a common tactic of leftist journos who need the truth buried…see Dan Rather.

    Woodward reported no leak because there wasn’t one, dummy. Hell, even Fitz knew and has said there was no leak. And not only no leak, but no covert agent either. Libby should sue Fitz for everything he’s got.

    And now…just for laughs…”Hey everybody!! Norm actually thinks the media is biased towards conservatives!!”

    60% conservative columnists? You’re high or stupid. Either way, you’re way out of your league in this forum. I’d call you a liar but I think everyone already knows it.

  11. truthhard2take says:

    There was absolutely no challenging of the cherrypicked and false intelligence Bush and Co presented to the public by the MSM, pre-war. THE MSM cheer-led for the war.


    You had to go to Pat Buchanan’s authentic, non-Lobby owned
    Conservative publication and other alternative periodicals to get the truth behind the lies.

  12. truthhard2take says:

    75 is a charlatan kickshaw type who has the knowledge of a kindergartener re Shia cross-border affinity. That is, no knowledge at all.

    While it is true many Iraqi Shia are only lukewarm about Iranian influence, the overwhelming majority absolutely abhor America occupation and have since 2004.


    Posted 4/28/2004 3:32 PM Updated 4/30/2004 6:54 A BEYOND WORDS

    Poll: Iraqis out of patience
    By Cesar G. Soriano and Steven Komarow,USA TODAY
    BAGHDAD — Only a third of the Iraqi people now believe that the American-led occupation of their country is doing more good than harm, and a solid majority support an immediate military pullout even though they fear that could put them in greater danger, according to a new USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll. (Graphic: Iraqis surveyed)

  13. 75 says:

    Truthy..since we’ve established you and Norm are clearly disreputable…all that’s left to us is to gauge the damage. Do you or Norm have any 9/11 conspiracy theories you can share with us? How about a building 7 claim? or an Osbama Bin Laden/Bush rendez -vous in the Lincoln bedroom? How about some Paulbots? I mean…why hold back now?

  14. 75 says:

    Must be time to circle the wagons…Truthy has gone back to a tried and failed tactic of quoting old polling data…and probably bogus data as well. Note the source. And a new wrinkle…a kindgergarten reference….oooooooh.

    Perhaps you can share a poll from 1980 with us as to how much the Iranians loved the Iraqis?

  15. 75 says:

    Must be time to circle the wagons…Truthy has gone back to a tried and failed tactic of quoting old polling data…and probably bogus data as well. Note the source. And a new wrinkle…a kindgergarten reference….oooooooh.

    Perhaps you can share a poll from 1980 with us as to how much the Iranians loved the Iraqis?

  16. truthhard2take says:

    “Prolonging the war in Iraq will be like walking through a V-shaped land or swimming in a swamp infested with alligators,” it reads. “To the American people, the true salvation to your economy and security can be achieved by pulling out of Iraq.”


    Take it from a Sunni insurgent leader temporarily aligned with America thru financial bribery who knows. The “Awakening”
    crews take money to fight Al Qaeda while also attacking American forces. The war is lost.

  17. truthhard2take says:

    If there is justice in the world, 75 has kith, kin and loved ones whose life and limb are at stake in Iraq, who will suffer the defeat directly and/or more hopefully indirectly-that is, if my counsel since 2003
    of bringing the troops home was/is followed.

    If he doesn’t, of course, he is merely a cowardly chickenhawk & ignoramus who is free to crow without personal risk , and was free to crow about imminent victory also in 2004, as the leadership he still trusts and promotes was indeed crowing.

  18. missy1 says:

    You are pathetic, truther, bile that can type.

  19. Cepik says:


    Have you served in Iraq?

  20. Cepik says:


    Oops, I hit the wrong button. The reason I ask is if you wish to pull the chickenhawk meme, then the only way you can pull it is if you served, no? Just sayin’.