From a shocked Reuters:

Patrons Yvon Baillargeon (left) and Roland Simoneau sit in a bar with server Carole Casabon in Herouxville, Que., which adopted a ‘declaration of norms.’

Town to immigrants: you can’t kill women

OTTAWA (Reuters) – Immigrants wishing to live in the small Canadian town of Herouxville, Quebec, must not stone women to death in public, burn them alive or throw acid on them, according to an extraordinary set of rules released by the local council.

The declaration, published on the town’s Web site, has deepened tensions in the predominantly French-speaking province over how tolerant Quebecers should be toward the customs and traditions of immigrants.

"We wish to inform these new arrivals that the way of life which they abandoned when they left their countries of origin cannot be recreated here," said the declaration, which makes clear women are allowed to drive, vote, dance, write checks, dress how they want, work and own property.

"Therefore we consider it completely outside these norms to … kill women by stoning them in public, burning them alive, burning them with acid, circumcising them etc."

No one on the town council was available for comment on Tuesday. Herouxville, which has 1,300 inhabitants, is about 160 km (100 miles) northeast of Montreal.

Andre Drouin, the councilor who devised the declaration, told the National Post newspaper that the town was not racist.

"We invite people from all nationalities, all languages, all sexual orientations, whatever, to come live with us, but we want them to know ahead of time how we live," he said…

The Herouxville regulations say girls and boys can exercise together and people should only be allowed to cover their faces at Halloween. Children must not take weapons to school, it adds, although the Supreme Court of Canada has already ruled that Sikh boys have the right to carry ceremonial daggers.

Salam Elmenyawi, president of the Muslim Council of Montreal, said the declaration had "set the clock back for decades" as far as race relations were concerned.

"I was shocked and insulted to see these kinds of false stereotypes and ignorance about Islam and our religion … in a public document written by people in authority who discriminate openly," he told Reuters…

The Herouxville declaration is available, in English and French, at the "avis public" section of the town’s Web site:

http://tinyurl.com/382wgj

Here is the text in English (from the site’s pdf file):

Municipalité Hérouxville

Publication of Standards

The social development and territory security are some of the major objective goals of the democratically voted individuals in our MRC. Hérouxville being part of the MRC, we share these same objectives.

To do this, we would like to invite, without discrimination, in the future, all people from outside our MRC that would like to move to this territory.

Without discrimination means to us, without regard to race or to the color of skin, mother tongue spoken, sexual orientation, religion, or any other form of beliefs.

So that the future residents can integrate socially more easily, we have decided unanimously, to make public, certain standards already in place and very well anchored in the lives of our electors.

These standards come from our municipal laws being Federal or Provincial, and all voted democratically. They also come from the social life and habits & customs of all residents of our territory.

Our objective is to show that we support the wishes of our electors and this being shown clearly by the results of our poll regarding this issue. And our goal is to inform the new arrivals to our territory, how we live to help them make a clear decision to integrate into our area.

We would especially like to inform the new arrivals that the lifestyle that they left behind in their birth country cannot be brought here with them and they would have to adapt to their new social identity.

Published by

The mayor and 6 city counselors of Hérouxville, democratically elected.

Continue…

From the New York Observer:

Biden Unbound: Lays Into Clinton, Obama, Edwards

Loquacious Senator, Democratic Candidate on Hillary: ‘Four of 10 Is the Max You Can Get?’ Edwards ‘Doesn’t Know What He’s Talking About’

By Jason Horowitz

Senator Joseph Biden doesn’t think highly of the Iraq policies of some of the other Democrats who are running for President.

To hear him tell it, Hillary Clinton’s position is calibrated, confusing and “a very bad idea.” John Edwards doesn’t know what he’s talking about and is pushing a recipe for Armageddon in the Middle East. Barack Obama is offering charming but insubstantial fluff. And all of them are playing politics.

“Let me put it this way,” Mr. Biden said. “You didn’t hear any one of them get in this debate at all until they announced for President.”

Mr. Biden, who ran an ill-fated campaign for President in 1988, is a man who believes his time has finally come, announcing this week that he was filing papers to make his 2008 Presidential bid official. Although he admits to a tendency to “bloviate,” he thinks that an aggressive advocate with rough edges might be just what the party needs right now. “Democrats nominated the perfect blow-dried candidates in 2000 and 2004,” he said, “and they couldn’t connect.” …

On a recent weekday afternoon, he was discussing his rivals over a bowl of tomato soup in the corner of a diner in Delaware, about a 15-minute drive from his Senate office. He wore a red cardigan and blue shirt, periodically raising his raspy voice over the sound of loudspeakers summoning customers to pick up their sandwiches. He had showed up carrying a Mead notebook filled with handwritten talking points, but once he’d gotten started, he closed the book and pushed it aside.

The subject he prefers to talk about these days—particularly when contrasting himself with his prospective Presidential rivals—is Iraq.

Addressing Mrs. Clinton’s latest proposal to cap American troops and to threaten Iraqi leaders with cuts in funding, Mr. Biden lowered his voice and leaned in close over the table.

“From the part of Hillary’s proposal, the part that really baffles me is, ‘We’re going to teach the Iraqis a lesson.’ We’re not going to equip them? O.K. Cap our troops and withdraw support from the Iraqis? That’s a real good idea.”

The result of Mrs. Clinton’s position on Iraq, Mr. Biden says, would be “nothing but disaster.” …

“Are they going to turn to Hillary Clinton?” Biden asked, lowering his voice to a hush to explain why Mrs. Clinton won’t win the election.

“Everyone in the world knows her,” he said. “Her husband has used every single legitimate tool in his behalf to lock people in, shut people down. Legitimate. And she can’t break out of 30 percent for a choice for Democrats? Where do you want to be? Do you want to be in a place where 100 percent of the Democrats know you? They’ve looked at you for the last three years. And four out of 10 is the max you can get?”

Mr. Biden is equally skeptical—albeit in a slightly more backhanded way—about Mr. Obama. “I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy,” he said. “I mean, that’s a storybook, man.”

But—and the “but” was clearly inevitable—he doubts whether American voters are going to elect “a one-term, a guy who has served for four years in the Senate,” and added: “I don’t recall hearing a word from Barack about a plan or a tactic.” …

Mr. Biden seemed to reserve a special scorn for Mr. Edwards, who suffered from a perceived lack of depth in foreign policy in the Presidential election of 2004.

“I don’t think John Edwards knows what the heck he is talking about,” Mr. Biden said, when asked about Mr. Edwards’ advocacy of the immediate withdrawal of about 40,000 American troops from Iraq.

“John Edwards wants you and all the Democrats to think, ‘I want us out of there,’ but when you come back and you say, ‘O.K., John’”—here, the word “John” became an accusatory, mocking refrain—“‘what about the chaos that will ensue? Do we have any interest, John, left in the region?’ Well, John will have to answer yes or no. If he says yes, what are they? What are those interests, John? How do you protect those interests, John, if you are completely withdrawn? Are you withdrawn from the region, John? Are you withdrawn from Iraq, John? In what period? So all this stuff is like so much Fluffernutter out there. So for me, what I think you have to do is have a strategic notion. And they may have it—they are just smart enough not to enunciate it.”

The targets of Mr. Biden’s criticism, whether out of shock, indifference or a calculation that it would be unwise in this case to meet fire with fire, declined to respond in kind…

They might have drilled too deep for Mr. Biden’s hair plugs.

Mr. Biden is equally skeptical—albeit in a slightly more backhanded way—about Mr. Obama. “I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy,” he said.

Just like Hillary, Mr. Biden has tripped over his tongue right out of the blocks.

From France’s AFP:

A worker moves a piece of equipment inside the turbine building of the Bushehr nuclear power plant, June 2005. Iran kicks off 10 days of celebrations on 1 February marking the anniversary of the 1979 Islamic revolution, with officials promising the unveiling of a major advance in its controversial nuclear drive.

Iran celebrates revolution vowing nuclear advance

by Pierre Celerier

Iran kicks off 10 days of celebrations on Thursday marking the anniversary of the 1979 Islamic revolution, with officials promising the unveiling of a major advance in its controversial nuclear drive.

The festivities known as the "Decade of Fajr" (Dawn) culminate on February 11, the date 28 years ago when the US-backed Shah’s regime fell to revolutionaries led by the late supreme leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has already said he will announce "good news" about the development of the nation’s nuclear programme during the anniversary celebrations…

The "Decade of Fajr" begins at 9:33 (0603 GMT) on Thursday, the exact time Khomeini landed at Tehran airport, making a triumphant return from exile in France greeted by massive crowds of fervent supporters.

As the clock strikes that minute, school and churches bells will toll, train and ship horns will be sounded and factory sirens wail.

Flowers will also be laid at Khomeini’s shrine in southern Tehran in the main cemetery where many of Iran’s war dead are buried.

Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, Iran’s former president and the current head of its powerful arbitration body, will make a speech at the shrine, which marks the spot where Khomenei told throngs of his revolutionary supporters about the creation of an Islamic regime.

Iran’s outspoken populist president is then expected to make a speech on February 11 in the capital’s main Azadi (Freedom) square, where a 100-strong orchestra will play a "nuclear symphony".

"Iranian people, with faith in God, wisdom and resistance, will defend their inalienable rights… and celebrate the realization of their peaceful nuclear rights during Fajr," Ahmadinejad said Wednesday.

"The country’s overall policies are decided by the supreme leader and the government has to apply them. The president, who heads the executive power, announces our nuclear position," said Ahmadinejad, who has faced increasing domestic criticism over his handling of the nuclear issue.

In December, deputy foreign minister Mehdi Mostafavi was quoted as saying that the first phase of production of nuclear fuel for industrial needs would commence during Fajr.

Iran is planning to increase its enrichment capacity by installing 3,000 centrifuges, the machines which enrich uranium, at an underground facility in Natanz.

It is already running two pilot cascades of 164-centrifuges each in Natanz, allowing for an enrichment capacity that is currently low and research-oriented.

However, there have been conflicting reports about whether the extra centrifuges have already been installed.

Iranian leaders have so far have not shown any intention of yielding to demands of UN resolution 1737 and suspending enrichment despite a call by UN nuclear watchdog chief Mohamed ElBaradei for a "timeout" in the showdown.

Iran could however face more sanctions after February 21 when ElBaradei, director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, is due to submit a report on its compliance to the UN Security Council.

Surely this is the AFP’s idea of ghoulish humor:

Iran could however face more sanctions after February 21 when ElBaradei, director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, is due to submit a report on its compliance to the UN Security Council.

The UN will never do anything to curb any enemy of the US. In fact, it’s a minor miracle they aren’t helping with Iran’s nuclear development. (If indeed, they aren’t.)

Oh, and thanks again Mr. Carter.

From the Houston Chronicle:

[NY Times caption:] After Staff Sgt. Hector Leija was shot in the kitchen of a Baghdad apartment last Wednesday, Pfc. Aaron Barnum retrieved the sergeant’s helmet. Robert Nickelsberg/Getty Images for The New York Times

Images of dying Texas soldier ignite debate

Jan. 31, 2007, 12:23AM

By MICHAEL HEDGES and JAMES PINKERTON

WASHINGTON — A photograph and videotape of a Texas soldier dying in Iraq published by the New York Times have triggered anger from his relatives and Army colleagues and revived a long-standing debate about which images of war are proper to show.

The journalists involved, Times reporter Damien Cave and Getty Images photographer Robert Nickelsberg, working for the Times, had their status as so-called embedded journalists suspended Tuesday by the Army corps in Baghdad, military officials said, because they violated a signed agreement not to publish photos or video of any wounded soldiers without official consent.

New York Times foreign editor Susan Chira said Tuesday night that the newspaper initially did not contact the family of Army Staff Sgt. Hector Leija about the images because of a specific request from the Army to avoid such a direct contact.

"The Times is extremely sensitive to the loss suffered by families when loved ones are killed in Iraq," Chira said. "We have tried to write about the inevitable loss with extreme compassion."

She said that after the newspaper account, with a photograph of the soldier, was published Monday, a Times reporter in Baghdad made indirect efforts to tell the family of the video release later that day. The video was still available for viewing on the Times’ Web site Tuesday night, when the newspaper notified clients of its photo service that the photograph at issue was no longer available and should be eliminated from any archives…

Chief Warrant Officer 4 Robert Lobeck, serving as the Army’s casualty assistance officer with Leija’s family in Texas, said seeing the images of Leija on the Internet was very upsetting to the relatives.

"Oh God, they shouldn’t have published a picture like that," Leija’s cousin Tina Guerrero, who had not seen the images but was aghast about them anyway, told the Houston Chronicle on Tuesday in Raymondville. She said the images would be especially hurtful to the soldier’s parents, Domingo and Manuela Leija, who have remained in the family’s home on the edge of town. ”It’s going to devastate them," Guerrero said. ”They’re having enough pain dealing with the death of their son."

Accompanying the Times article was a picture of Leija on a stretcher, an Army medic using his right hand to compress the sergeant’s wounded forehead. Leija was alive in the photograph. The story noted that he died later in the day.

Later Monday, the Times posted on its Web site a five-minute, 52-second video taken at the scene of the shooting, showing an interview with Leija before he was wounded, then the frantic moments after he is downed by a single shot…

The agreement that journalists are asked to sign as a condition of embedding has 14 rules. Rule 11 covers military casualties: "Names, video, identifiable written/oral description or identifiable photographs of wounded service members will not be released without service member’s prior written consent."

The ground rule goes on to say, "In respect for family members, names or images clearly identifying individuals ‘killed in action’ will not be released." The rule says names of soldiers killed can be released a day after family notification, but it does not address photographs or video images.

Chira said as far as she knew, the journalists had signed the forms. But she also said: "This issue has never been raised before when the New York Times has shown photographs of wounded soldiers." …

Chira also said she had been told by the reporter in Baghdad that he had reached out to two people with Texas connections to act as intermediaries to alert the family that a video was going to be posted. They were Kathy Travis, a press aide to Rep. Solomon Ortiz, D-Corpus Christi, and Principal Gilbert Galvan of Raymondville High School.

Travis had a different account.

"Whoa, that isn’t what happened," she said Tuesday night in a telephone interview. "The reporter called me late Monday afternoon and said he understood that the family was upset and that he wanted us to know that he had the utmost respect for the soldier and wanted us to let the family know that."

Galvan said a New York Times reporter called Monday, saying he could not reach Leija’s relatives and asking Galvan to notify the family of the story and the impending release of the video.

Galvan said he went to the Leijas’ house and relayed the message. "They looked upset," he said…

Here is a link to the New York Times article, "‘Man Down’: When One Bullet Alters Everything."

As the article notes, the photograph has been removed. But you can still see the video there.

If Sgt. Leija had been a POW, publishing photos of his dying would have violated the Geneva Conventions.

But The Times is only concerned about the rights of our enemies.

This is an article from the UK’s New Statesman from a year and a half ago, but it is fitting we should post it during this year’s Ashura festivities:

A Pakistani Shiite Muslim looks for an appropriate set of knives he will use on Ashura Day, in Rawalpindi, Pakistan on Friday, Feb. 18, 2005.

Scars on the backs of the young

Shiv Malik

06 June 2005

Muslim children as young as six are still being allowed to beat themselves with knives on the end of chains. It is illegal, yet the police are not keen to prosecute. Would other religions get away with it?

It was supposed to be a routine doctor’s appointment. Mrs Abbas wanted someone at a hospital in north London to take a look at the rash under her son’s arms. But when the doctor asked 14-year-old Firoz to take off his shirt, he noticed something far more worrying. Criss-crossed on Firoz’s back were more than 50 lacerations. The doctor asked for an explanation. Mrs Abbas said that Firoz had inflicted the wounds himself during a religious ceremony; there was nothing to worry about. The doctor called in the child protection agency.

Through interviewing the family, a joint police and social services investigation team found that Firoz had made the lacerations by whipping himself with a zanjeer – a long chain with a set of curved knives attached at the end – as part of a flagellation ritual at the Idara-e-Jaaferiya mosque in Tooting, an area of Wandsworth, south London. The ritual, known as "zanjeer zani" or "zanjeer matam", was part of the Shia Muslim festival of Ashura, marked at the mosque every year.

The investigation team also discovered that Firoz’s scars had built up over eight years. He had started using a zanjeer when he was seven. His brothers Hanif and Ijaz, who were 12 and nine at the time of the investigation in 2003, had also participated in the ceremony; they, too, had dozens of knife scars on their backs.

At the Abbas family home, officers found video footage that the family had shot during the ceremony in 2002. Spaced well apart in a circle and beating themselves with zanjeers were the two eldest sons, Firoz and Hanif. But they were not the only children involved: the film showed sons from other families flagellating with the same instrument. According to a report by the Crown Prosecution Service (which was asked by the investigation team to give formal advice), the youngest child at that particular ceremony was just six years old.

While children inflicted "considerable blows" on themselves, adult relatives interfered only to stop the older males causing themselves "excessive injury" having "reached a state of frenzy". Mr Abbas was shown participating alongside his sons. As the CPS report puts it, he gestured support and did not intervene: "The apparent image is that of the younger boys trying to emulate the men."

This was not a one-off incident in a single area; it is a national issue. In the past few years, there have been similar cases in Bradford and Blackburn, also involving teenagers and children as young as ten. The commemorative festival of Ashura is central to the identity of Shia Muslims…

The ritual of flagellation with zanjeers is contentious within the Shia world. According to one of the UK’s most prominent Shia religious organisations, the Khoei Foundation, the matam ceremony is "neither obligatory nor recommended . . . it is merely permissible". In other words, it is not mandated by religious authority. In its advice to the investigative team, the foundation ruled that children under the age of 18 should not practise matam with a zanjeer. Those who refused to accept that advice would risk tarnishing the reputation of Britain’s Shia community – or, to quote the foundation: "When the use of zanjeer by children who are below the age of consent is illegal, the Muslim community has to make it clear that it is an obligation on parents to prevent children from participating, otherwise they themselves will face the legal consequences that may arise." …

Letting children self-flagellate with knives on the ends of chains is an offence under Section 1(1) of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933 – one of wilful neglect in a manner likely to cause a child unnecessary suffering or injury. The opinion of the CPS was that it was possible to prosecute. The photographic and video evidence would help to show that the parents were neglectful. However, there were also problems. If the children did not want to give evidence against their parents, the authorities would have to rely on third-party evidence alone such as the medical report and the photographic and video evidence. That wasn’t all. The CPS did not consider it in the public interest to prosecute. "The parents had co-operated fully," it said, "and in fact it was their co-operation which [had] then helped to stamp out this practice among children at the Tooting mosque."

Detective Superintendent Chris Bourlet, who was responsible for the Abbas case as deputy head of the Metropolitan Police’s Child Protection Command, explains why his unit chose to work with the community. "The last thing [we] wanted to do was to police mosques and people’s homes. It’s impracticable, and you don’t want to do that anyway," he says. "What we want is the community to take on this issue themselves. We can help support them. But the last thing we want to be doing is policing faiths, because it’s just not our role. Our role is to protect children." …

"Years ago, agencies were not aware of the ceremony," he says. "The Shia community had to understand that it is a child protection issue and [they] have taken on board some basic principles. We don’t want to send it underground. It is always going to be sensitive, but we can’t use that as an excuse to cover up the issue."

However, not all agencies are giving out the same child protection message. West Yorkshire Police refused to talk about a case that occurred in Bradford during the Ashura ceremony this year, except to confirm that an incident involving a ten-year-old boy was reported on 21 February. An employee of West Yorkshire Police who does not wish to be named said it was decided, at the end of the investigation, that the boy was old enough to decide whether to flagellate or not. The decision reveals a discrepancy at the national level: while a child would find it very hard to participate in zanjeer matam in London, he could travel to Bradford and do it there instead…

Another question that arises is what the authorities would do if such a ritual were carried out by, say, British pagans. It is hard to imagine that it would be dealt with in the same way. Surely a crime is a crime. Should the law make exceptions for certain types of belief?

The issue of zanjeer matam also challenges the notion that, over time, minority communities will automatically take on the value system of the majority. The use of zanjeers has been going on among Shias for hundreds of years, but until very recently no one seemed to think the ritual would be practised in Britain by second – and third-generation children. Yet it is, and as openly in this country as in India, Pakistan or Iraq. On the one hand, it perhaps shows how cut off some communities are from the mainstream. On the other hand, it maybe proves yet again that faith, culture and tradition – those foundation stones of society – are never easily shifted.

The article asks a good question.

What other religion would be allowed to get away with this?

(Thanks to Papa Ray for the heads up.)

From a disappointed Associated Press:

8 arrested in alleged kidnapping, beheading plot

By Rob Harris
Jan. 31, 2007 06:00 AM

BIRMINGHAM, England – Counterterrorism police arrested eight men in an alleged kidnapping plot during pre-dawn raids Wednesday, police said. A broadcaster reported that they wanted to abduct a British Muslim soldier and behead him.

Police would not comment on Sky News reports that part of the plan was to behead the man and post the act on the Internet, but counterterrorism officials – speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the investigation – said the plot was the first of its kind to be uncovered in Britain.

The potential victim was in police custody, Sky reported, saying the kidnapping was going to be an "Iraq-style" execution…

Police were searching 12 homes in the predominantly Pakistani neighborhood in the central England city. Two Islamic book stores were also cordoned off.

The men arrested were accused of committing, preparing or instigating terrorism, police said…

"People don’t trust their own children any more," said Shabir Hussain, chairman of the nearby Ludlow Road Mosque in Birmingham. "You feel like you should challenge your son or daughter: Where are you going at night? What are you watching on TV? What are you doing on the Internet?’

Kids today. What with their loud music and beheading videos. What are you going to do?

Still, it sure sounds like there is a lot of profiling and racial stereotyping going on.

Though, to be fair, this is one of the few articles to mention the religious persuasion of the suspects.

From a disappointed Washington Post:

Dia Abdul Zahra Kadim, the leader of a messianic Shiite cult called ‘Soldiers of Heaven,’ is seen on a poster found in Zarqa, outside Najaf, Tuesday, Jan. 30, 2007.

Iraqis Describe Plot To Kill Shiite Clerics

Cult Leader, Many Allies Died in Siege

By Joshua Partlow and Saad Sarhan
Tuesday, January 30, 2007; A01

BAGHDAD, Jan. 29 — A Shiite cult leader, who claimed to be a revered Muslim figure who vanished in the 10th century, was killed Sunday along with scores of fighters who were poised to attack a holy city in southern Iraq and assassinate the country’s Shiite religious leadership, Iraqi officials said Monday…

The discovery of a heavily armed Shiite-led cult, intent on attacking venerated Shiite symbols and leaders, startled Iraqi security officials who were already contending with rival religious factions battling for supremacy in the country.

"This is a new step in the annals of terrorism," Iraq’s minister of national security, Shirwan al-Wahli, said in an interview. Wahli said the fighters were led by a man known as the Judge of Heaven, who claimed to be a direct descendant of the prophet Muhammad’s son-in-law, Ali. Wahli said the man also declared himself the Mahdi, the reappearance of the 12th imam, or leader of the faithful, who many Shiites believe vanished in the 10th century and whose return will mark an era of redemption and peace.

The cult leader killed Sunday probably sought to assassinate conservative Shiite religious leaders because they likely would have disputed his claim to be the Mahdi, said John O. Voll, a professor of Islamic studies at Georgetown University, in a telephone interview.

The most recent comparable event occurred in 1979 in Saudi Arabia, Voll said, when a man claiming to be the Mahdi took over the holy sanctuary in Mecca. He and his followers were killed.

Wahli said the cult leader came from southern Iraq and had written a book laying out his "supernatural, unbelievable" ideas. Over a matter of months, he recruited the estimated 700 people, known as the Soldiers of Heaven, who lived in tents and huts on farmland near Zarqaa, about eight miles northeast of Najaf, Wahli said.

Iraqi government spokesman Ali Dabbagh said the man’s name was Samer Abu Kamar, but other Iraqi officials assigned him different names.

Iraqi officials said Monday that they had not finished removing explosives or counting casualties from the siege, and their estimates of the number of fighters killed ranged from 200 to more than 400. The U.S. military, which provided backup ground troops along with helicopter and fixed-wing aircraft support, said more than 100 fighters were captured. Two U.S. soldiers died when their helicopter crashed during the operation.

Wahli said the structure of the group was Shiite, but it involved Sunni fighters and "based on the level of training, support and financing, it obviously has received support from outside Iraq."

About 10 Iraqi soldiers and police officers also died in the battle, the Reuters news service cited Wahli as saying…

Iraqi and U.S. military officials characterized the attack as a positive signal that the Iraqi security forces were able to lead a major battle and were willing to target extremists from the same Muslim sect that runs the central government. The U.S. military handed over primary control of Najaf province to Iraqi security forces last month…

"The aggressive manner in which the Iraqi soldiers performed north of [Najaf] going after the anti-Iraqi forces was impressive," said Col. Michael Garrett, commander of the 4th Brigade Combat Team (Airborne), 25th Infantry Division, in the statement…

"There were extensive preparations, they were highly trained, and they fought in an orderly way," said Wahli. "Their leader kept insisting through a loudspeaker that they keep fighting, despite repeated attempts by the Iraqi security forces to get them to stop." …

If this plot had succeeded there would have been real hell to pay. But it didn’t, thanks largely to the brave Iraqi troops who broke it up.

And yet most of the new reports have been about how shaky the Iraqi soldiers were.

From the UK’s Daily Mail:

A drunk and a bigot – what the US Presidental hopeful HASN’T said about his father…

27.01.07

… Mr Obama’s book, Dreams From My Father, is flying off the shelves of US book stores, exciting and astonishing readers in equal measure. It is a bestseller, and no wonder – because the story just gets better and better.

Mr Obama is already Democratic Senator for Illinois. Now he is in the running to be the first black President in the country’s history…

Many believe Mr Obama is a serious threat to Hillary Clinton’s hopes of becoming the Democrats’ choice for their next Presidential candidate – and his lovingly written account of the debt he owes his father, also called Barack Obama, will do no harm at all to his Presidential hopes…

Yet an investigation by The Mail on Sunday has revealed that, for all Mr Obama’s reputation for straight talking and the compelling narrative of his recollections, they are largely myth.

We have discovered that his father was not just a deeply flawed individual but an abusive bigamist and an egomaniac, whose life was ruined not by racism or corruption but his own weaknesses.

And, devastatingly, the testimony has come from Mr Obama’s own relatives and family friends…

Barack Obama Sr started life with the advantage of being able to read and write, but he also felt a profound sense of injustice. His father was a cook for British settlers in Kenya, who demeaningly called him their ‘personal boy’.

Grandfather Obama sent his son to a missionary school but after completing his education, the youth could find little work except goatherding in his remote village of Nyangoma Kogela, in the roadless hills of Western Kenya.

At 18, he married a girl called Kezia. But Obama Sr was more interested in politics and economics than his family and his political leanings had been brought to the notice of leaders of the Kenyan Independence movement.

He was put forward for an American-sponsored scholarship in economics, with the idea being that he would eventually use his Western-honed skills in the new Kenya. At the age of 23 he headed for university in Hawaii, leaving behind the pregnant Kezia and their baby son.

Relatives say he was already a slick womaniser and, once in Honolulu, he promptly persuaded a fellow student called Ann – a naive 18-year-old white girl – to marry him. Barack Jr was born in August, 1961.

Two years later, Obama Sr was on the move again. He was accepted at Harvard, and left his little boy and wife behind when he moved to the exclusive east coast university.

At the time, Ann explained to their son that his father had gone because his meagre stipend would not support the family if they lived together. But finance was the least of her worries.

Mr Obama Jr claims that racism on both sides of the family destroyed the marriage between his mother and father.

In his book, he says that Ann’s mother, who went by the nickname Tut, did not want a black son-in-law, and Obama Sr’s father ‘didn’t want the Obama blood sullied by a white woman’.

In fact Ann divorced her husband after she discovered his bigamous double life. She remarried and moved to Indonesia with young Barack and her new husband, an oil company manager.

Obama Sr was forced to return to Kenya, where he fathered two more children by Kezia. He was eventually hired as a top civil servant in the fledgling government of Jomo Kenyatta – and married yet again.

Now prosperous with a flashy car and good salary, his third wife was an American-born teacher called Ruth, whom he had met at Harvard while still legally married to both Kezia and Ann, and who followed him to Africa.

A relative of Mr Obama says: "We told him[Barack] how his father would still go to Kezia and it was during these visits that she became pregnant with two more children. He also had two children with Ruth."

It is alleged that Ruth finally left him after he repeatedly flew into whisky-fuelled rages, beating her brutally.

Friends say drinking blighted his life – he lost both his legs while driving under the influence and also lost his job.

However, this was no bar to his womanising: he sired a son, his eighth child, by yet another woman and continued to come home drunk.

He was about to marry her when he finally died in yet another drunken crash when Obama was 21…

In his book, he attempts to put the best face on it. His father, he writes, lost his civil service job after campaigning against corrupt African politicians who had ‘taken the place of the white colonials’.

One of Obama Sr’s former drinking partners, Kenyan writer Philip Ochieng Ochieng says, however, that his friend’s downfall was his weak character.

"Although charming, generous and extraordinarily clever, Obama Sr was also imperious, cruel and given to boasting about his brain and his wealth," he said.

"He was excessively fond of Scotch. He had fallen into the habit of going home drunk every night. His boasting proved his undoing and left him without a job, plunged him into prolonged poverty and dangerously wounded his ego."

Ochieng recalls how, after sitting up all night drinking Black Label whisky at Nairobi’s famous Stanley Hotel, Obama Sr would fly into rages if Ruth asked where he had been.

Ochieng remonstrated with his friend, saying: "You bring a woman from far away and you reduce her to pulp. That is not our way."

But it was to no avail. Ruth sued for divorce after her husband administered brutal beatings…

Mr Obama has acknowledged that his father grappled with a drinking problem. But with a gift for words that makes Mrs Clinton’s utterances seem stiff and stale, he has turned it into another component of the myth.

Drink, he says, like drugs, are one of "the traps that seem laid in a black man’s soul".

Mr Obama claims that he, too, has been racially abused, even during his campaign for the White House.

His mother, Ann, decided that he should get an American education and sent him back from Indonesia to Hawaii, where he was admitted to a £7,000-a-year prep school, Punahau Academy, and lived with his maternal grandparents.

And while there, says Mr Obama, he was tortured by fellow pupils – who let out monkey hoots – and turned into a disenchanted teenage rebel, experimenting with cocaine and marijuana.

Even his grandparents were troubled by dark skin, he says in his book, recalling how once his grandmother complained about being pestered by a beggar.

"You know why she’s so scared?" he recalls his grandfather saying. "She told me the fella was black."

Mr Obama says his soaring ‘dream’ of a better America grew out of his ‘hurt and pain’.

Friends, however, remember his time at school rather differently. He was a spoiled high-achiever, they recall, who seemed as fond of his grandparents as they were of him.

He affectionately signed a school photo of himself to them, using their pet names, Tut and Gramps.

The caption says: "Thanks… for all the good times." He worked on the school’s literary magazine and wore a white suit, of the style popular with New York writers at the time.

One of his former classmates, Alan Lum, said: "Hawaii is such a melting pot that it didn’t occur to me when we were growing up that he might have problems about being one of the few African-Americans at the school. Us kids didn’t see colour. He was easy-going and well-liked."

Lon Wysard, who also attended the academy, said the budding politician was in fact idolised for his keen sportsmanship.

"He was the star basketball player and always had a ball in his hand wherever he was," Wysard recalled.

Mr Obama was later admitted to read politics and international relations at New York’s prestigious Columbia University where, his book claims, "no matter how many times the administration tried to paint them over, the walls remained scratched with blunt correspondence (about) niggers."

But one of his classmates, Joe Zwicker, 45, now a lawyer in Boston, said yesterday: "That surprises me. Columbia was a pretty tolerant place. There were African American students in my classes and I never saw any evidence of racism at all."…

A family friend said: "He is haunted by his father’s failures. He grew up thinking of his father as a brilliant intellectual and pioneer of African independence only to learn that in Western terms he was basically a drunken lecher."

This ugly truth, say friends, has made Mr Obama ruthlessly determined to use every weapon that he has to succeed, including the glossily edited version of his father’s story.

"At the end of the day Barack wants the story to help his political cause, so perhaps he couldn’t afford to be too honest," said Ochieng…

He has positioned himself as a devout Christian (having found God, he says, after years as an atheist) and in a new book The Audacity Of Hope, timed to coincide with his campaign, he concentrates on his manifesto for ‘reclaiming the American dream’.

This tome contains one telling paragraph, in a section in which he fumbles to try to justify his abrupt leap into the national political arena: he is, he says, chronically ‘restless’.

"Someone once said that every man is trying to either live up to his father’s expectations or make up for his father’s mistakes, and I suppose that may explain my particular malady."

His parentage probably isn’t as telling as the racist lunatic pastor whom Mr. Obama (Jr) now claims as his role model.

However if any of this this is true, it’s odd it hasn’t been reported by our unbiased watchdog media.

But then again, how much do we know about Bill Clinton’s father?

From the DNC’s Al Jazeera:

Lebanese Hezbollah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah (L) gives a speech as Shi’ite mourn the death of Imam Hussein, Prophet Mohammad’s grandson, during a ceremony marking Ashura in Beirut suburbs, January 30, 2007.

Nasrallah: Bush made Lebanon chaos

Tuesday, January 30, 2007

Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah, has accused George Bush of creating chaos in Lebanon, and rejected the US president’s latest criticisms of the Shia group.

Speaking at Beirut ceremonies marking the climax of the Muslim festival of Ashura, Nasrallah accused the US of ordering Israel to launch last year’s attack on Lebanon.

"The one who fomented chaos in Lebanon, who destroyed Lebanon, who killed women and children, old and young in Lebanon, is George Bush and (Secretary of State) Condoleezza Rice who ordered the Zionists to launch the war on Lebanon," Nasrallah said.

The US president on Monday accused Hezbollah and its allies Iran and Syria of stirring up the latest violence in Lebanon in a bid to topple its government and said "those responsible for creating chaos must be called to account".

Nasrallah said: "The one who must be punished, who must be tried, is the one who ordered the launching of war on Lebanon."

The July-August war killed nearly 1,200 people in Lebanon, mainly civilians, and 157 Israelis, mostly soldiers.

"George Bush wants to punish you because you resisted, he wants to punish you because you won," Nasrallah said.

He made his address to thousands of Shia muslims who converged on Beirut’s southern suburbs to commemorate the killing in battle of Imam Hussein, the Prophet Mohammad’s grandson, in AD 680.

Earlier, the crowd marched in Hezbollah’s Beirut stronghold, rhythmically beating their chests in a sign of grief over Hussein’s martyrdom and chanting "Death to America, death to Israel".

Some carried red, yellow and black flags with religious slogans. Others wore green headbands and chanted, "We will never be humiliated."

"George Bush knows … and we reiterate to him and the whole world should hear that we are a nation that doesn’t succumb and can’t be humiliated, " Nasrallah said…

Is there anything in the world that isn’t Bush’s fault?

From YouTube and Fox News:

Security Training Center: Russian Spy Pic Used in Target Practice

Tuesday, January 30, 2007

MOSCOW — A private facility that trains security personnel used pictures of poisoned Russian ex-spy Alexander Litvinenko’s face for target practice during a competition for special forces, the center’s chief said on Tuesday.

In video circulating the Internet, trainees dressed in camouflage maneuver between slats in a wall, leap through an obstacle course, then tumble to a semi-sitting position with outstretched arms aiming their weapons at a black-and-white target showing Alexander Litvinenko’s face. Several black holes appear on the target near the ex-spy’s nose before the video goes black.

Sergei Lysyuk, Vityaz Center’s chief, said the video is from 2002 and shows military recruits. He said he was unaware the target depicted Litvinenko, who died of radiation poisoning after eating at a sushi restaurant.

The former spy was an outspoken critic of Russian President Vladimir Putin and from his deathbed accused the leader of pulling the strings in a plot to kill him.

"The fact that it was Litvinenko, we only found out later from the press," Lysyuk said. "We did not shoot at Litvinenko; we shot at a target."

Use of the target at the center, which held a competition for Russian special forces, became known this week after Russian media published photographs of Sergei Mironov, head of the Russian parliament’s upper house, visiting the center in early November.

His visit, to present awards in a competition for Interior Ministry special forces, came about a week after Litvinenko fell ill; one photo shows the Litvinenko target in the background behind Mironov.

Lysyuk insisted his company does not normally hold such contests and was granting a favor to former Interior Ministry colleagues, whose own training ground was being repaired.

Litvinenko, once an agent in the Federal Security Service, the Soviet KGB’s main successor, fled to Britain and was granted asylum after accusing his superiors of ordering him to kill Boris Berezovsky, a Russian tycoon and one-time Kremlin insider who also has been granted British citizenship.

Dmitry Peskov, a senior Kremlin spokesman, said using a person’s face as a shooting range "was ethically incorrect," but stressed it was that company’s responsibility and insisted government troops were not involved in the exercises.

"There is no talk of such shooting ranges being used by Russian special forces or by the Vityaz unit," Peskov told AP in a telephone interview. "This [company] has no relation to the elite Vityaz troops."

Also Tuesday, two key figures in the Litvinenko investigation said in a TV interview that they would consider going to Britain if requested by investigators.

Andrei Lugovoi and Dmitry Kovtun met with Litvinenko in London on Nov. 1, hours before he said he fell ill; Litvinenko died on Nov. 23 and doctors said he had been poisoned with a rare radioactive isotope.

Kovtun and Lugovoi were questioned in Moscow in interrogations observed by Scotland Yard investigators last month, and recent British media reports have claimed Lugovoi is seen as the prime suspect.

Lugovoi, in an interview with the government-funded satellite channel Russia Today, said the British reports were lies.

"I stress that I remain a witness in the Litvinenko case," he said.

Russia has said it would not extradite any citizen charged by Britain in the case. But Kovtun, when asked if he would go to Britain if investigators there requested it, said "we will think about this." Lugovoi added: "Never say ‘never.’"

Lugovoi and Kovtun, businessmen who were formerly in the Russian security services, were hospitalized for suspected radiation poisoning in December. They said in the interview that their health is satisfactory but declined to give details.

The Prosecutor General’s office in December opened an investigation into the possible poisoning of Kovtun.

Russian news media have widely suggested Litvinenko was killed by Putin opponents in an attempt to tarnish the Kremlin.

One thing that can be said about Russians, they aren’t very subtle.

From those champions of the faith at Al Jazeera:

Gunmen fired on a minibus carrying Shia pilgrims to a Baghdad mosque for Ashura ceremonies [EPA]

Iraq bombs kill Ashura worshippers

Tuesday, January 30, 2007

Dozens of Shia worshippers marking the festival of Ashura have been killed in a double bombing and a gun attack in Iraq.

Thirteen people died, including three women and a teenage boy, and 39 were wounded when a bomb hidden in a rubbish bin exploded amid a procession of Shias in the town of Khanaqinn northeast of Baghdad, police said.

A suicide bomber also blew himself up among 150 worshippers outside a Shia mosque in the town of Balad Ruz, in Diyala province, killing 23 people and wounding 57, police said.

Armed men shot dead four Ashura pilgrims and wounded six in a minibus heading to a mosque in Baghdad’s Bayaa district.

Ashura ceremonies have been a target in the past.

Suicide bombings and other attacks on Ashura crowds in Karbala and Baghdad in March 2004 killed 171 people.

Iraqi authorities had deployed 11,000 police and soldiers in the city of Karbala, the focus of the Ashura commemoration that marks the death in battle of Imam Hussein, the Prophet Mohammad’s grandson, 1,300 years ago.

His death in AD 680 entrenched the schism between Shia and Sunni Muslims, a split that now continues to divide Iraq.

Tens of thousands have also died in sectarian violence since an attack on a Shia mosque in Samarra in February 2006.

The article neglects to mention the sniper attacks around Ashura just last year, in which terrorists killed at least twenty of their co-religionists.

You’d think that self-mutilation would be enough. But apparently it’s not.

From his fans at the Associated Press:

[Reuters caption:] U.S. senators Tom Harkin (D-IA) (R) and Arlen Specter (R-PA) (L) greet one another as they arrive for a news conference in support of the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act at the Capitol in Washington January 9, 2007.

Specter: Bush Not Sole ‘Decision-Maker’

Sen. Specter Challenges Bush As Sole ‘Decision-Maker’ on Issues of War, Saying Duty Is Shared

By LAURIE KELLMAN

WASHINGTON – A Senate Republican on Tuesday directly challenged President Bush’s declaration that "I am the decision-maker" on issues of war.

"I would suggest respectfully to the president that he is not the sole decider," Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., said during a hearing on Congress’ war powers amid an increasingly harsh debate over Iraq war policy. "The decider is a shared and joint responsibility," Specter said…

"The Constitution makes Congress a coequal branch of government. It’s time we start acting like it," said Sen. Russell Feingold, D-Wis., who is chairing a hearing Tuesday on Congress’ war powers and forwarding legislation to eventually prohibit funding for the deployment of troops to Iraq…

"Read the Constitution," Boxer told her colleagues last week. "The Congress has the power to declare war. And on multiple occasions, we used our power to end conflicts."

Congress used its war powers to cut off or put conditions on funding for the Vietnam war and conflicts in Cambodia, Somalia and Bosnia.

Under the Constitution, lawmakers have the ability to declare war and fund military operations, while the president has control of military forces.

But presidents also can veto legislation and Bush likely has enough support in Congress on Iraq to withstand any veto override attempts.

Managing a war in effect what Boxer and Feingold are proposing is the president’s job, some lawmakers and scholars say.

"In an ongoing operation, you’ve got to defer to the commander in chief," said Sen. John Warner, R-Va., ranking Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee. But the veteran senator and former Navy secretary said he understands the debate over Congress’ ability to check the executive branch.

"Once Congress raises an army, it’s his to command," said Robert Turner, a law professor at the University of Virginia who was to testify Tuesday before the Senate Judiciary Committee…

In recent decades, presidents have routinely bypassed Congress when deploying troops to fight. Not since World War II has Congress issued an official declaration of war, despite lengthy wars fought in Vietnam and Korea.

Congress does not have to approve military maneuvers…

Has Mr. Specter ever read the US Constitution?

We don’t go by "Scottish Law" or any of his other addled fantasies.

Of course the Democrats, in their zeal to lose this war, ignore the basic facts, if they ever knew them. (No wonder Reuters can’t tell "Snarlin’ Arlen" from Tom Harkin.)

Once war has been declared — and it has — it is up to the executive branch to execute it.

Congress can either fund it or not. But that is the full extent of their war powers.

The Framers knew from hard experience that a war can’t be managed by committee.

Hillary Clinton’s remarks made on March 6, 2003 to Code Pink two weeks before the Iraq War began contradict all of her claims made in her first campaign stop in Iowa this weekend.

From YouTube:

YouTube caption: 2 weeks before war, Code Pink meets with Hillary Clinton.

My transcription of Ms. Clinton’s remarks:

I admire your willingness to speak out on behalf of of the women and children of Iraq. There is a very easy way to prevent anyone from being put into harm’s way, and that is for Saddam Hussein to disarm. And I have absolutely no belief that he will. I have to say that this is something I have followed for more than a decade.

If he was serious about disarming, he would have been much more forthcoming coming. There may be progress, we may be destroying the Samoud missiles, but there is no accounting for the chemical and biological stocks. And I just respectfully disagree about what the proximate cause of any action that may be taken is.

Now I also believe that for now nearly 20 years the principal reason why women and children in Iraq have suffered is because of his leadership. His not only tyrannical and dictatorial leadership, but his reign of terror against women and children. And it is a — it is a very unfortunate situation for the Iraqi people that they have been so horribly misgoverned for so long.

Now, I do think that there are continuing discussions ongoing that I hope can make some further progress building on the success of the missile destruction program. But that has been the first real compliance, and it was only brought about when the inspectors discovered the missiles — they were not revealed — that their length was longer than what had been prescribed [sic] under the resolutions ending the Gulf War.

And the very difficult question for all of us is how does one bring about the disarmament of someone with such a proven track record of a commitment if not an obsession with weapons of mass destruction. And I ended up voting for the resolution after carefully reviewing the information and intelligence that I had available, talking with people whose opinions I trusted, trying to discount political or other factors that I didn’t believe should be in any way a part this decision.

And it is unfortunate that we are at the point of a potential military action to enforce the resolution. That is not my preference, it would be far preferable if we not only had legitimate cooperation from Saddam Hussein and a willingness on his part to disarm and account for his chemical and biological storehouses, but that if we had a much broader alliance and coalition.

But we are in a very difficult position right now. And so I would love to agree with you, but I can’t based on my own understanding and assessment of the situation.

In response to a question from an audience member:

… With respect to whose responsibility it is to disarm Saddam Hussein. I just do not believe that given the attitudes of many people in the world community today that there would be a willingness to take on very difficult problems were it not for the United States leadership.

And I’m talking specifically about what had to be done in Bosnia and Kosovo, where my husband could not get a Security Council Resolution to save the the Kosavar Albanians from ethnic cleansing. And we did it alone as the United States. And we had to do it alone.

It would have been far preferable if the Russians and others had agreed to do it through the United Nations. They would not.

I’m happy that in the face of such horrible suffering we did act. And so I see it somewhat differently, if you’ll forgive me, from my experience and perspective.

I’m agreeing with you a hundred percent that even though I am willing to take a very difficult step for me to say we have to disarm this man. That position in no way supports the disastrous economic policies that this administration is pursuing. In fact I think that this is the height of irresponsibility.

And it would be far preferable to be more patient and more thoughtful and more willing to try to engender support with respect to Iraq. That is a decision that has to be made in the world community.

Here at home this administration is bankrupting our economy, forcing us to make the worst kinds of false choices between national and homeland security, which they don’t fund. And between security and everything else, which they don’t want to fund.

So you have me a hundred percent on that. And it is absolutely wrong — it is wrong that for the first time in American history we have a President who is talking about leading this country to war and wanting to cut taxes at the same time.

That is the height of cruel, arrogant irresponsibility.

Now compare her comments with those reported by her fans at the New York Times:

Clinton Calls on Bush to ‘Extricate’ U.S. From Iraq

January 28, 2007
By PATRICK HEALY

DAVENPORT, Iowa, Jan. 28 — Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton called today for President Bush to “extricate our country” from Iraq by the time he leaves office in 2009, and she also said she knew enough about “evil and bad men” to protect the country from its enemies…

One person in the audience pressed Mrs. Clinton on her vote authorizing military action in Iraq in 2002, saying she allowed “the president to go to war,” and asked for specific steps she would take to end the war. She replied by selectively quoting from her speech in 2002 about her vote, saying it was not cast “for pre-emptive war,” but rather as leverage for the president to work diplomatic channels. (She did not mention that she also said at the time that she cast her vote "with conviction.")

Mrs. Clinton also took issue with President Bush’s recent statements that he did not expect to have the troops out of Iraq by the time he leaves office.

“I think it’s the height of irresponsibility and I really resent it — this was his decision to go to war, he went with an ill-conceived plan, an incompetently executed strategy, and we should expect him to extricate our country from this before he leaves office,” the senator said this morning…

Hillary Clinton is a liar.

(And an idiot for talking to Code Pink as if they are a legitimate organization.)

From a mournful Reuters:

Iraqi police commandos flash the victory sign as they return from a battle against gunmen near the holy Shiite city of Najaf.

Iraqi cult leader killed in Najaf battle

Mon Jan 29, 2007 12:14 PM ET

By Khaled Farhan

NAJAF, Iraq (Reuters) – The leader of an Iraqi cult who claimed to be the Mahdi, a messiah-like figure in Islam, was killed in a battle on Sunday near Najaf with hundreds of his followers, Iraq’s national security minister said on Monday.

Women and children who joined 600-700 of his "Soldiers of Heaven" on the outskirts of the Shi’ite holy city may be among the casualties, Shirwan al-Waeli told Reuters. All those people not killed were in detention, many of them wounded.

Iraqi troops, backed by U.S. forces, confronted the group after learning it was planning an attack on the Shi’ite clerical establishment in Najaf on Monday.

"One of the signs of the coming of the Mahdi was to be the killing of the Ulema (hierarchy) in Najaf," Waeli said. "This was a perverse claim. No sane person could believe it."

Authorities have been on alert for days as hundreds of thousands of Shi’ite Muslims massed in the area to commemorate Ashura, the highpoint of their religious calendar, amid fears of attacks by Sunni Arab insurgents linked to al Qaeda.

But Sunday’s battle involved a group of a different sort, a cult which Iraqi officials said included both Sunni and Shi’ite Muslims as well as foreigners.

"He claimed to be the Mahdi," Waeli said of the cult’s leader, adding that he had used the full name Mahdi bin Ali bin Ali bin Abi Taleb, claiming descent from the Prophet Mohammad.

He was believed to be a 40-year-old from the nearby Shi’ite city of Diwaniya: "He was killed," Waeli said.

The final death toll, estimated by other Iraqi officials at 300 gunmen, was still being calculated, Waeli said, putting the initial figure at about 200. Searchers were still scouring the area where U.S. tanks, helicopters and jets reinforced Iraqi troops during some 24 hours of fighting.

Though Sunnis and Shi’ites are engaged in an embryonic sectarian civil war in Iraq, there have been instances in Islamic history where groups drawn from both communities have challenged the authority of the existing clerical leadership…

A government statement said the group was planning "a dangerous criminal act" in Najaf.

"An ideologically perverted group … tried to insult an Islamic holy symbol, the Imam Mahdi, and use him as an ideological base to recruit followers," the statement said.

Waeli said the death toll among Iraqi forces was around 10 soldiers and police. Najaf’s police chief was wounded, he said.

Two U.S. soldiers were killed when their attack helicopter came down during the fighting, the U.S. military said. Iraqi officials and witnesses said it appeared to have been shot down.

Some of the fighters wore headbands describing themselves as "Soldiers of Heaven", Iraqi officials said. It was not clear how many women and children were present: "It is very sad to bring families onto the battlefield," Waeli said.

When police first approached the camp and tried to call on the group to leave, their leader replied: "I am the Mahdi and I want you to join me," Waeli said, adding: "Today was supposed to be the day of his coming."

Other Iraqi officials said on Sunday that a man named Ahmed Hassani al-Yemeni, who had been working from an office in Najaf until it was closed down earlier this month, had assembled the group, claiming to be the messenger of the Mahdi…

It’s quite rare for our watchdog media to actually report on some of the craziness behind the news.

Today begins Ashura, which like the festival of Eid al-Adha is another bloodthirsty Muslim holiday:

From Canada’s CBC:

Shias in Iraq mark Ashura festival amid tight security

Iraqi forces were on alert Sunday in the city of Karbala as hundreds of thousands of Shia worshippers gathered for the annual Ashura religious festival.

It commemorates the killing of the Prophet Mohammed’s grandson, Imam Hussein, in the 7th century.

Under Saddam Hussein, a Sunni, the festival was outlawed. Now, it draws huge numbers of Shias from Iraq and other countries, but also requires heightened security.

At least 8,000 police will be on duty in Karbala, where security authorities have warned hotel owners not to accept any non-Iraqi Arabs or Iraqis without identity documents and to inform authorities about suspicious individuals, said police spokesman Abdul Rahman Mishawi.

Ashura has in the past been marred with outbreaks of Shia-Sunni violence across the Muslim world. In 2004 and 2005, suicide bombings by al-Qaeda in Iraq killed at least 230 people during the ceremonies in Karbala…

The 10-day Ashura mourning period culminates on Tuesday with processions and ceremonies at the city’s sacred shrine, the burial ground of Hussein. His death in 680 AD, during a battle in Karbala for leadership of the Islamic faith, was a key historical event in the ongoing sectarian rift between Sunnis and Shias in Iraq.

Shias regard Hussein and his family as direct descendants of the Prophet, a view that has for centuries put them at odds with Sunni Muslims.

Before the fall of Saddam Hussein’s regime in 2003, the minority Sunnis were in control in Iraq, but the majority Shias gained control after the U.S.-led invasion.

So you see, it’s all George Bush’s fault.

Still, it wouldn’t be so bad if they just stuck to mutilating themselves. But they don’t:

And we wonder why these people are so violent.