Iraqis for the "Occupation"


sorabji.com: What do you want?: Iraqis for the "Occupation"
By spunky on Saturday, December 13, 2003 - 12:02 pm:

    Yesterday's demonstrations in Baghdad and other Iraqi cities were a benchmark: Iraq's resistance to terrorism has begun. Ironically, the first TV station to report such a revolutionary development was none other than al-Jazeera, the jihad channel across the Arab world.

    But the exclusive airing of such footages was not so innocent. The Qatar-based media understood much faster than Western networks the real dimensions of these marches. Therefore it decided to report it first, and, through condescending coverage, demean it in the eyes of Iraqi and Arab viewers, a traditional-yet-efficient subversive tactic. But whatever were the desperate attempts to pre-empt the unfolding realities, the latter rolled on.

    Almost 20,000 men and women - twice the number reported by al-Jazeera - marched across central Baghdad, while others repeated the move in different cities of Mesopotamia yesterday. The demonstrators, from all walks of life and from all religions and ethnicities of Iraq, shouted one slogan in Arabic: "La' la' lil irhab. Na'am, na'am lil dimucratiya." That is: "No, no to terrorism. Yes, yes to Democracy!"


    The rest of the Story

    Read it.


By Nate on Saturday, December 13, 2003 - 01:59 pm:

    they hate us because of our freedom.


By The other side on Saturday, December 13, 2003 - 04:47 pm:

    but where were you when 15 million people around the
    world marched against occupation in Irak and for peace?

    Stop the double standard.

    Triumphalist.


By spunky on Saturday, December 13, 2003 - 06:09 pm:

    Since you are sitting there, on your cable modem all safe in Canada calling yourself "The Other Side" I suppose that means you wish the Ba'ath Party were still in control?


By The other side sigh on Saturday, December 13, 2003 - 06:33 pm:

    Go ahead if you wish to ram words in my mouth. And please
    feel free to destabilize me by showing you can trace my ip
    address. I have seen worse.

    But to address the argument, I don't "wish" that an un-
    democratic party stays in power. It's just that if war must be
    made against all undemocratic governments, man. It would
    be war against the whole world.

    This was not the rationale behind this war. The idea was to
    channel petroleum profits and control a region.

    What is sad is that the US has a long tradition of tolerance
    and of dialogue over conflict resolution (even if it was not
    always the case, re: Vietnam). So please don't throw away
    this habit.

    Hey, I like this site, but not when doubtful arguments are
    made about such a dangerous subject as war-making.


By Rowlfe on Saturday, December 13, 2003 - 07:40 pm:

    "they hate us because of our freedom"

    I blame extremist religion......







    ....for everything


By wisper on Sunday, December 14, 2003 - 12:47 pm:

    (i'd just like to point out that both me and Rowlf know how to spell Iraq)

    on our cable modems.
    in canada.


By patrick on Monday, December 15, 2003 - 12:31 pm:

    i think it was one of those deliberate misspellings.

    you know, like how some feminists spell 'women' 'womyn'.




    spunk, ive watched 40% more news this weekend because of the BEEG BEEG story and im not sure i know anything about this protest you speak of.

    Even if the story is accurate, the site, is questionable.


    america.com says they hate us because of our freedom.