Sorry Harrak, None the wiser I'm afraid.

Submitted by PCMadness (New Zealand), Mar 9, 2006 at 02:34

Thanks Harrak I checked through the sources, but I'm afraid I can't see what point you are making. The sources I can read all point to groups or organisations that are predominantly muslim and all you've really done is strengthen infidels case. What exactly did you correct and what really was your point, I really just don't see it.


Sadrist movement:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muqtada_al-Sadr
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/815FF50A-4D63-43CB-A404-84DF9E6CDF70.htm

Very interesting but I not sure what your argument is. As of early 2004, he was the de facto ruler of the Sadr City section of Baghdad and commanded the loyalty of the Mahdi Army, an insurgent force making a bid for power in Iraq.

Daawa party( not up to date as Ayatollah Fazlullah has succeeded Baqir al Hakim)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daawa_party

The Islamic Dawa Party is an Iraqi political organization. It is one of the main Shi'ite parties. In the lead-up to the January 2005 Iraqi election it cooperated with the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq and other Shi'ite groups in the United Iraqi Alliance. The party is led by Ibrahim al-Jaafari, a doctor, who now serves as Iraq's Prime Minister.

Article on Donald Rumsfeld
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4783688.stm

British spies in Iraq:

alalam.ir
http://www.sciri.btinternet.co.uk/Arabic/arabic.html

No use to me sorry, I can't read arabic. Unfortunately, the only one I was really interested in. Funny that. Consipiracy theories on an Arabic site, unheard of :)

http://www.cpa-iraq.org/government/Iraqi_Ministers.html

Lists the cabinet 17 out of 25 being muslim

In short you've not made any point except confirm that most of the troublemakers are muslim.

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".