Sistani most popular Iraqi leader,US pollsters find

By Donald Macintyre in Baghdad
31 August 2004

Ayatollah Ali-al Sistani, who halted the three weeks of fighting in Najaf, is the most popular public figure in Iraq, says a poll which shows a deep undercurrent of respect for religious parties ahead of campaigning for elections planned for January.

Even before the three-week battle for control of Najaf, Iraq's most venerated Shia cleric came just ahead of leading figures in the interim Iraqi government and well ahead of Muqtada al-Sadr, the man he ordered to lay down his arms last Thursday night.

But Sadr, a leading figure in agitation for a US pullout from Iraq, was high the league table of public figures, with 57.19 percent of Iraqis viewing him positively before his gunmen fought coalition and Iraqi forces in the holy city.

The confidential poll, for the International Republican Institute, an offshoot of the US Republican Party and chaired by Senator John McCain, is one of the most comprehensive surveys of Iraqi public opinion since the fall of Saddam Hussein 16 months ago. It shows that most Iraqis see the restoration of a full electricity supply as their primary concern in reconstruction of the country; The biggest group regard crime as the issue most affecting them, and the ability to maintain "order and stability" is the key factor by which they will judge the political parties.

The survey, seen by The Independent after being shown to several Iraqi political parties, was done at the end of July and is a snapshot of opinion a month after the handover of sovereignty. But at its heart are complex and sometimes contradictory attitudes on the role of religion in the future of the country.

The Islamic parties Dawa, SCIRI, and the IIP are viewed most positively by potential electors and 29 per cent - the biggest single group - believes religious figures will make the best candidates in the elections, ahead of university academics (24 per cent), party leaders(16 per cent) and dissidents against the former regime (5.25 per cent) Almost 70 per cent of those polled agree with the proposition that Islam and sharia should be the "sole basis" of all laws, and 70 per cent say they would prefer a "religious" state. Only 23 per cent would opt for a secular one.

But only 4.74 per cent regard a party's religious ties as a key factor by which it will judge whether to vote for a political party. compared with nearly 20 per cent who regard stability and order as the key criterion. Even fewer, 4.52 per cent and 4.28 per cent, respectively say they will judge a party according to whether it is from their own religious or ethnic group.

The latter finding on ethnicity suggests sectarian rivalries between groups, including Sunnis, Shias and Kurds, may be a less potent electoral factor than has sometimes been assumed.

But despite the reflexive emphasis on the importance of sharia, a total of 68 per cent say that they would prefer politicians to be "pragmatic" compared with only 26 per cent who value "principled" politicians most. And 63 per cent would prefer them "modern", to 18 per cent "traditional." Some analysts will see this as strong evidence that Iraqi public opinion does not favour a fundamentalist religious state on the model of Iran.

That is supported by the huge popularity of Ayatollah al-Sistani who even before his authority was enhanced by his role in ending the battle for Najaf had 73.98 per cent approval ratings, and who is widely believed not to favour a strict Islamic state in which clerics play a leading political role.

One of the most striking figures in the survey is that 80 per cent of potential electors have not yet identified with a particular political party, a finding which suggests a continuing and potentially dangerous vacuum, but also that parties which do not yet have a profile among the nascent Iraqi electorate may have everything to play for. Dawa, and to a lesser extent SCIRI, (who both have "very positive" ratings of more than 23 per cent) have a high profile and are seen to have borne the most savage impact of their long-standing opposition to the Saddam regime.

Sadr's rating was notably high - at least before the events of the past month - the biggest single group of voters (44 per cent) are less likely to vote a party because it has a militia compared with a mere 7 per cent who say they would be more likely to vote for such a party.

Another striking finding is that 84 per cent value highest in politicians the characteristic of "mature and experienced", compared with only 11 per cent who want them "dynamic and youthful". Seventy per cent would rather see their politicians as "deliberative" than "decisive", which got 26 per cent.

The personal ratings show that Ghazi Al Yawer, the country's President, is strongly or "somewhat" approved by 72 per cent of electors, which may suggest Iraqis are not yet used to the idea that the Presidency is a much more honorific post than others. Iyad Allawi, the Prime Minister, is at 72 per cent while the figures also show a striking popularity for Ibrahim Jaffari, the moderate Islamist vice president who publicly criticised the government's handling of the Najaf crisis.

Abdel Aziz al Hakim, the leader of SCIRI and brother of the Shia leader Mohammed al-Bakr Hakim, murdered a year ago, is at 61.53 per cent, and Adnan Pachachi, whose Iraqi Independent Democrats has yet to acquire a high profile, has personal approval ratings of 46.5 per cent.

URL: http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/story.jsp?story=556761

Sistani most popular Iraqi leader,US pollsters find

By Donald Macintyre in Baghdad
31 August 2004

Ayatollah Ali-al Sistani, who halted the three weeks of fighting in Najaf, is the most popular public figure in Iraq, says a poll which shows a deep undercurrent of respect for religious parties ahead of campaigning for elections planned for January.

Even before the three-week battle for control of Najaf, Iraq's most venerated Shia cleric came just ahead of leading figures in the interim Iraqi government and well ahead of Muqtada al-Sadr, the man he ordered to lay down his arms last Thursday night.

But Sadr, a leading figure in agitation for a US pullout from Iraq, was high the league table of public figures, with 57.19 percent of Iraqis viewing him positively before his gunmen fought coalition and Iraqi forces in the holy city.

The confidential poll, for the International Republican Institute, an offshoot of the US Republican Party and chaired by Senator John McCain, is one of the most comprehensive surveys of Iraqi public opinion since the fall of Saddam Hussein 16 months ago. It shows that most Iraqis see the restoration of a full electricity supply as their primary concern in reconstruction of the country; The biggest group regard crime as the issue most affecting them, and the ability to maintain "order and stability" is the key factor by which they will judge the political parties.

The survey, seen by The Independent after being shown to several Iraqi political parties, was done at the end of July and is a snapshot of opinion a month after the handover of sovereignty. But at its heart are complex and sometimes contradictory attitudes on the role of religion in the future of the country.

The Islamic parties Dawa, SCIRI, and the IIP are viewed most positively by potential electors and 29 per cent - the biggest single group - believes religious figures will make the best candidates in the elections, ahead of university academics (24 per cent), party leaders(16 per cent) and dissidents against the former regime (5.25 per cent) Almost 70 per cent of those polled agree with the proposition that Islam and sharia should be the "sole basis" of all laws, and 70 per cent say they would prefer a "religious" state. Only 23 per cent would opt for a secular one.

But only 4.74 per cent regard a party's religious ties as a key factor by which it will judge whether to vote for a political party. compared with nearly 20 per cent who regard stability and order as the key criterion. Even fewer, 4.52 per cent and 4.28 per cent, respectively say they will judge a party according to whether it is from their own religious or ethnic group.

The latter finding on ethnicity suggests sectarian rivalries between groups, including Sunnis, Shias and Kurds, may be a less potent electoral factor than has sometimes been assumed.

But despite the reflexive emphasis on the importance of sharia, a total of 68 per cent say that they would prefer politicians to be "pragmatic" compared with only 26 per cent who value "principled" politicians most. And 63 per cent would prefer them "modern", to 18 per cent "traditional." Some analysts will see this as strong evidence that Iraqi public opinion does not favour a fundamentalist religious state on the model of Iran.

That is supported by the huge popularity of Ayatollah al-Sistani who even before his authority was enhanced by his role in ending the battle for Najaf had 73.98 per cent approval ratings, and who is widely believed not to favour a strict Islamic state in which clerics play a leading political role.

One of the most striking figures in the survey is that 80 per cent of potential electors have not yet identified with a particular political party, a finding which suggests a continuing and potentially dangerous vacuum, but also that parties which do not yet have a profile among the nascent Iraqi electorate may have everything to play for. Dawa, and to a lesser extent SCIRI, (who both have "very positive" ratings of more than 23 per cent) have a high profile and are seen to have borne the most savage impact of their long-standing opposition to the Saddam regime.

Sadr's rating was notably high - at least before the events of the past month - the biggest single group of voters (44 per cent) are less likely to vote a party because it has a militia compared with a mere 7 per cent who say they would be more likely to vote for such a party.

Another striking finding is that 84 per cent value highest in politicians the characteristic of "mature and experienced", compared with only 11 per cent who want them "dynamic and youthful". Seventy per cent would rather see their politicians as "deliberative" than "decisive", which got 26 per cent.

The personal ratings show that Ghazi Al Yawer, the country's President, is strongly or "somewhat" approved by 72 per cent of electors, which may suggest Iraqis are not yet used to the idea that the Presidency is a much more honorific post than others. Iyad Allawi, the Prime Minister, is at 72 per cent while the figures also show a striking popularity for Ibrahim Jaffari, the moderate Islamist vice president who publicly criticised the government's handling of the Najaf crisis.

Abdel Aziz al Hakim, the leader of SCIRI and brother of the Shia leader Mohammed al-Bakr Hakim, murdered a year ago, is at 61.53 per cent, and Adnan Pachachi, whose Iraqi Independent Democrats has yet to acquire a high profile, has personal approval ratings of 46.5 per cent.

URL: http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/story.jsp?story=556761

Bigotry

By Charley Reese

It's easy to avoid bigotry if you just remember that most of the time when our minds leap from the particular to the general, we are making an error in reasoning. Inductive reasoning, which goes from many, many particulars to the general, does not condone going from one or two particulars to the general.

One of the worst racial bigots I know is a man from Brooklyn who was badly beaten as a youth by three black hoodlums. Instead of recognizing that three individual hoodlums do not represent the whole, he has spent his life hating black people. Some black people, having had bad experiences with white individuals, spend their lives hating whites.

And so it goes with whatever group happens to be the target of the day. Bigotry is so persistent because it is the lazy way to cope with complexity. One doesn't have to think, and most people find thinking a difficult and noxious task. It is so much easier to condemn a group than to evaluate individuals. It is so much easier to accept the pronouncements of demagogues than to do one's own research.

Some of the worst people in our society today are encouraging bigotry toward Muslims. After all, didn't 19 Muslims attack us on Sept. 11, 2001? Yes, but a billion other Muslims did not attack us, nor did they condone or support the attackers. Islam does not condone the murder of innocents, terrorism, torture or war except in self-defense. Neither does Christianity, yet we all know that not all Christians follow the rules of their religion, and so it is with some Muslims.

The truth is that the entire human race can be divided into two categories — the decent and the indecent. Some of both are in every single ethnic, racial or religious group. You might as well look at the homicide rate in America and conclude that all Americans are murderers as conclude that all Muslims are terrorists.

One of the banes of our republic has been the development of talk radio and talk television, sometimes mistakenly referred to as cable news. Some of these broadcast yahoos have condemned Muslims for not condemning the terrorists. This is unjust outrage. Muslim leaders have condemned the terrorists and do condemn the terrorists, only their condemnations are not reported by the same yahoos who complain of their alleged silence.

I have a number of Muslim friends, and they are not unlike Christians. Some are devout. Some show up only on holidays. But they are all fine people and fiercely patriotic Americans. I have never heard anyone condemn Osama bin Laden in harsher language than my Palestinian friends, who are contemptuous of his alleged support of Palestinian independence. They were so angry about the attack on the United States, some of them sputtered with rage.

Arabs, by the way, are a minority of the world's Muslims, and not all Arabs are Muslim. Some are Christians. Christianity, after all, was born on the West Bank in Bethlehem. It would be as stupid to try to racially profile Muslims as it would be to racially profile Americans. We come in all shapes, sizes and colors, and so do Muslims. If he shaved his beard and moustache, Osama could easily pass for an American.

I learned a long time ago that if you want to know something, go to the source. If you want to know what communism is like, talk to people who lived under it. If you want to know about Islam, talk to Muslims. The great thing about America is that whatever country you want to know about, you can find people who were born there and lived there. Whatever subject you are interested in, you can find people who know it firsthand.

Don't be a sheep. Don't let demagogues, politicians and special interests herd you hither and yon for their hidden purposes. Use your public library. Use the Internet, and recognize that television is an unreliable source, especially those yahoos who have to yakety-yak for a living. They are celebrity talkers, not newspeople — though God knows, print journalism has its own faults.

Life is too short to hate, and public policy is too important to be based on fiction, imagination and propaganda. We have the capacity to be rational beings, but only if we have the will and are willing to learn how to think accurately. The world is complex, and none of us can afford to stop learning.

It really is better to light one candle than to curse the darkness, and it is certainly better to add to the light of reason than to contribute to the darkness of ignorance and hate.

Published on For Monday,August 23,2004
© 2004 by King Features Syndicate, Inc.

URL:http://reese.king-online.com/Reese_20040823/index.php

We're Not in Lake Wobegon Anymore

The party of Lincoln and Liberty was transmogrified into the party of hairy-backed swamp developers and corporate shills,....

Rich ironies abound! Lies pop up like toadstools in the forest! Wild swine crowd round the public trough! Outrageous gerrymandering! Pocket lining on a massive scale! Paid lobbyists sit in committee rooms and write legislation to alleviate the suffering of billionaires! Hypocrisies shine like cat turds in the moonlight! ...

By Garrison Keillor

Something has gone seriously haywire with the Republican Party. Once, it was the party of pragmatic Main Street businessmen in steel-rimmed spectacles who decried profligacy and waste, were devoted to their communities and supported the sort of prosperity that raises all ships. They were good-hearted people who vanquished the gnarlier elements of their party, the paranoid Roosevelt-haters, the flat Earthers and Prohibitionists, the antipapist antiforeigner element. The genial Eisenhower was their man, a genuine American hero of D-Day, who made it OK for reasonable people to vote Republican. He brought the Korean War to a stalemate, produced the Interstate Highway System, declined to rescue the French colonial army in Vietnam, and gave us a period of peace and prosperity, in which (oddly) American arts and letters flourished and higher education burgeoned-and there was a degree of plain decency in the country. Fifties Republicans were giants compared to today's. Richard Nixon was the last Republican leader to feel a Christian obligation toward the poor.

In the years between Nixon and Newt Gingrich, the party migrated southward down the Twisting Trail of Rhetoric and sneered at the idea of public service and became the Scourge of Liberalism, the Great Crusade Against the Sixties, the Death Star of Government, a gang of pirates that diverted and fascinated the media by their sheer chutzpah, such as the misty-eyed flag-waving of Ronald Reagan who, while George McGovern flew bombers in World War II, took a pass and made training films in Long Beach. The Nixon moderate vanished like the passenger pigeon, purged by a legion of angry white men who rose to power on pure punk politics. "Bipartisanship is another term of date rape," says Grover Norquist, the Sid Vicious of the GOP. "I don't want to abolish government. I simply want to reduce it to the size where I can drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub." The boy has Oedipal problems and government is his daddy.

The party of Lincoln and Liberty was transmogrified into the party of hairy-backed swamp developers and corporate shills, faith-based economists, fundamentalist bullies with Bibles, Christians of convenience, freelance racists, misanthropic frat boys, shrieking midgets of AM radio, tax cheats, nihilists in golf pants, brownshirts in pinstripes, sweatshop tycoons, hacks, fakirs, aggressive dorks, Lamborghini libertarians, people who believe Neil Armstrong's moonwalk was filmed in Roswell, New Mexico, little honkers out to diminish the rest of us, Newt's evil spawn and their Etch-A-Sketch president, a dull and rigid man suspicious of the free flow of information and of secular institutions, whose philosophy is a jumble of badly sutured body parts trying to walk. Republicans: The No.1 reason the rest of the world thinks we're deaf, dumb and dangerous.

Rich ironies abound! Lies pop up like toadstools in the forest! Wild swine crowd round the public trough! Outrageous gerrymandering! Pocket lining on a massive scale! Paid lobbyists sit in committee rooms and write legislation to alleviate the suffering of billionaires! Hypocrisies shine like cat turds in the moonlight! O Mark Twain, where art thou at this hour? Arise and behold the Gilded Age reincarnated gaudier than ever, upholding great wealth as the sure sign of Divine Grace.

Here in 2004, George W. Bush is running for reelection on a platform of tragedy-the single greatest failure of national defense in our history, the attacks of 9/11 in which 19 men with box cutters put this nation into a tailspin, a failure the details of which the White House fought to keep secret even as it ran the country into hock up to the hubcaps, thanks to generous tax cuts for the well-fixed, hoping to lead us into a box canyon of debt that will render government impotent, even as we engage in a war against a small country that was undertaken for the president's personal satisfaction but sold to the American public on the basis of brazen misinformation, a war whose purpose is to distract us from an enormous transfer of wealth taking place in this country, flowing upward, and the deception is working beautifully.

The concentration of wealth and power in the hands of the few is the death knell of democracy. No republic in the history of humanity has survived this. The election of 2004 will say something about what happens to ours. The omens are not good.

Our beloved land has been fogged with fear-fear, the greatest political strategy ever. An ominous silence, distant sirens, a drumbeat of whispered warnings and alarms to keep the public uneasy and silence the opposition. And in a time of vague fear, you can appoint bullet-brained judges, strip the bark off the Constitution, eviscerate federal regulatory agencies, bring public education to a standstill, stupefy the press, lavish gorgeous tax breaks on the rich.

There is a stink drifting through this election year. It isn't the Florida recount or the Supreme Court decision. No, it's 9/11 that we keep coming back to. It wasn't the "end of innocence," or a turning point in our history, or a cosmic occurrence, it was an event, a lapse of security. And patriotism shouldn't prevent people from asking hard questions of the man who was purportedly in charge of national security at the time.


Whenever I think of those New Yorkers hurrying along Park Place or getting off the No. 1 Broadway local, hustling toward their office on the 90th floor, the morning paper under their arms, I think of that non-reader George W. Bush and how he hopes to exploit those people with a little economic uptick, maybe the capture of Osama, cruise to victory in November and proceed to get some serious nation-changing done in his second term.

This year, as in the past, Republicans will portray us Democrats as embittered academics, desiccated Unitarians, whacked-out hippies and communards, people who talk to telephone poles, the party of the Deadheads. They will wave enormous flags and wow over and over the footage of firemen in the wreckage of the World Trade Center and bodies being carried out and they will lie about their economic policies with astonishing enthusiasm.

The Union is what needs defending this year. Government of Enron and by Halliburton and for the Southern Baptists is not the same as what Lincoln spoke of. This gang of Pithecanthropus Republicanii has humbugged us to death on terrorism and tax cuts for the comfy and school prayer and flag burning and claimed the right to know what books we read and to dump their sewage upstream from the town and clear-cut the forests and gut the IRS and mark up the constitution on behalf of intolerance and promote the corporate takeover of the public airwaves and to hell with anybody who opposes them.

This is a great country, and it wasn't made so by angry people. We have a sacred duty to bequeath it to our grandchildren in better shape than however we found it. We have a long way to go and we're not getting any younger.

Dante said that the hottest place in Hell is reserved for those who in time of crisis remain neutral, so I have spoken my piece, and thank you, dear reader. It's a beautiful world, rain or shine, and there is more to life than winning.