'Shoe-thrower of Baghdad' brings Iraqis on to the streets
As Muntazer al-Zaidi remains in detention, his countrymen demonstrate their support for his anti-Bush protest
The Independent
By Patrick Cockburn
Tuesday, 16 December 2008
Details emerged yesterday of how the 29-year-old Shia reporter, who has been working for al-Baghdadiyah television for three years, had been hit by all sides in the Iraq war. "He hates the American material occupation as much as he hates the Iranian moral occupation," another brother, Dhirgham, said.
Last year, Mr Zaidi was kidnapped by militants in a Sunni area in west Baghdad and held for three days during which he was badly beaten before being released. This January he was arrested in an American raid. Troops searched his apartment, he was held overnight and then let go with an apology. Friends said the journalist had also covered the US bombing of Sadr City this year and had been affected by the destruction he had seen. ..........
The US commander in Iraq, General Ray Odierno, has suggested that US forces might still support Iraqi troops in urban areas, but the popular enthusiasm for Mr Zaidi's action shows that it will be difficult to dilute the agreement on withdrawing US troops without provoking a patriotic reaction among a significant number of Iraqis.
The Independent
By Patrick Cockburn
Tuesday, 16 December 2008
Details emerged yesterday of how the 29-year-old Shia reporter, who has been working for al-Baghdadiyah television for three years, had been hit by all sides in the Iraq war. "He hates the American material occupation as much as he hates the Iranian moral occupation," another brother, Dhirgham, said.
Last year, Mr Zaidi was kidnapped by militants in a Sunni area in west Baghdad and held for three days during which he was badly beaten before being released. This January he was arrested in an American raid. Troops searched his apartment, he was held overnight and then let go with an apology. Friends said the journalist had also covered the US bombing of Sadr City this year and had been affected by the destruction he had seen. ..........
The US commander in Iraq, General Ray Odierno, has suggested that US forces might still support Iraqi troops in urban areas, but the popular enthusiasm for Mr Zaidi's action shows that it will be difficult to dilute the agreement on withdrawing US troops without provoking a patriotic reaction among a significant number of Iraqis.
I used to think that all these official visits did little harm, even if they did no good
Tuesday, 16 December 2008
One of the many infuriating, though also ludicrous, events in Iraq since the invasion of 2003 has been American and British leaders, arriving in secret at the enormous US base at Baghdad airport and travelling, accompanied by numerous armed guards, by helicopter to the heavily-fortified Green Zone. After a few hours there they would give upbeat press conferences, sitting alongside the Iraqi leader of the day, claiming significant improvements in security and chiding the assembled journalists for ignoring such clear signs of success.
Periodically reality would break in, such as the time a mortar bomb exploded nearby the press conference hall at the very moment when UN Secretary General Ban ki-Moon was lauding security improvements, compelling him to cower down behind a display of artificial flowers.
Periodically reality would break in, such as the time a mortar bomb exploded nearby the press conference hall at the very moment when UN Secretary General Ban ki-Moon was lauding security improvements, compelling him to cower down behind a display of artificial flowers.
Comment:Yet again I have to commend Cockburn for daring to go where not many other journalists do. I totally agree with him, Iraqis and Afghanis have grown tired of these secretive visits and the meaningless press conferences.
Just like the pre war propaganda ignored totally what people in the region and inside Iraq want or think, the same policy has continued after the war. Iraqis wanted to end sanctions that the US suddenly and illegally decided will continue so long as Saddam was in power. Having endured 13 years of the harshest economic sieges in modern history, few Iraqis believed the US has good intentions towards their country.
The claim of great successes in Iraq by the UK and US governments while Oxfam report of 2007, talks of a humanitarian disaster are baffling to say the least.. Even while there was a noticeable reduction in violence during the 'surge', there was no improvement whatsoever in the basic services let alone in the health and education services.
Unless one comes to the conclusion that the US and UK governments had and continue to have little care and consideration for the welfare of the Iraqi people, then and only then, it all makes sense. In my opinion this is exactly the conclusion that the Iraqi people have reached, this is why the occupation is hated so much.
I therefore take issue with the Cockburn's claim of 'mistakes' committed by the US administration in Iraq. 'Mistakes', such as dissolving the army and the 'debaathifaction',were important steps for the preservation and 'success' of the occupation, given the chance they would do it again.
Anyone under the illusion that the US who spent $3 trillion on this war only to withdraw completely from Iraq in three years time needs to wake up and smell the oil and the Iranian dates! The Iraqi parliament was only allowed just over a week to discuss such an important document as the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA), without consulting specialised lawyers and there is talk of wide spread bribery for those who voted yes.
PS have you noticed how every year around Christmas, the UK government talks about a major draw down and/or imminent 'complete' withdrawal from Iraq?
Just like the pre war propaganda ignored totally what people in the region and inside Iraq want or think, the same policy has continued after the war. Iraqis wanted to end sanctions that the US suddenly and illegally decided will continue so long as Saddam was in power. Having endured 13 years of the harshest economic sieges in modern history, few Iraqis believed the US has good intentions towards their country.
The claim of great successes in Iraq by the UK and US governments while Oxfam report of 2007, talks of a humanitarian disaster are baffling to say the least.. Even while there was a noticeable reduction in violence during the 'surge', there was no improvement whatsoever in the basic services let alone in the health and education services.
Unless one comes to the conclusion that the US and UK governments had and continue to have little care and consideration for the welfare of the Iraqi people, then and only then, it all makes sense. In my opinion this is exactly the conclusion that the Iraqi people have reached, this is why the occupation is hated so much.
I therefore take issue with the Cockburn's claim of 'mistakes' committed by the US administration in Iraq. 'Mistakes', such as dissolving the army and the 'debaathifaction',were important steps for the preservation and 'success' of the occupation, given the chance they would do it again.
Anyone under the illusion that the US who spent $3 trillion on this war only to withdraw completely from Iraq in three years time needs to wake up and smell the oil and the Iranian dates! The Iraqi parliament was only allowed just over a week to discuss such an important document as the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA), without consulting specialised lawyers and there is talk of wide spread bribery for those who voted yes.
PS have you noticed how every year around Christmas, the UK government talks about a major draw down and/or imminent 'complete' withdrawal from Iraq?
SIUI
