"Abu Musab al-Zarqawi died. His name is used by the occupants to remain in Iraq "
Babel Fish translation of
http://www.lemonde.fr/web/article/0,1-0,36-689730,0.html
Sheikh Jawad Al-Khalessi is Imam Shiite of mosque Al-Kazemiya, in Baghdad, and senior of the contiguous religious school. He is in Paris after the interreligieuse meeting of Sant' Egidio, in Lyon.
Abu Musab al-Zarqawi declared the "all-out war" with the Shiites and perpetrated the bloodiest massacre in Baghdad, Wednesday September 14, since the beginning of the war in Iraq. What do you think of this declaration?
I do not think that Abu Musab al-Zarqawi exists as such. He is only one invention of the occupants to divide the people because he was killed in the north of Iraq at the beginning of the war whereas it was with the group of Ansar Al-Islam, in Kurdistan. His family, in Jordan, even proceeded to a ceremony after her death. Abu Musab al-Zarqawi is thus a toy used by the Americans, an excuse to continue the occupation.
It is a pretext not to leave Iraq. But why declare the "all-out war" with the Shiites?
In order to bring them closer the occupying forces. In this manner, the Shiites will find refuge near the Americans rather than to join resistance. Because the Shiites take part in resistance to the south, as the recent made attacks testify, in particular, in Bassora.
However, it has been just announced that Nadjaf had passed under the control of the Iraqi forces and that other cities of the South were going to follow?
It is not true. It is right an effect of advertisement for the media. Actually, the Iraqi forces do not control the situation and the troops of occupation remain with the periphery to intervene as soon as there are problems.
The project of Constitution adopted will be subjected to a referendum on October 15. What do you think about it?
It is a text adopted with haste to answer the diary of the Americans. It does not reflect the hopes of the Iraqi people, which are worried more by his survival from day to day and his safety. The project was concocted in the "green zone", in Baghdad, under the crook of the American ambassador. Like said it a British specialist in Iraq: "the Constitution, it is as if one occupied oneself of arranging the deckchairs on the bridge of Titanic running". However Iraq is sinking.
Will the referendum be a success, like were to it the elections of January 30?
Personally, I call with the boycotting, but if my fellow-citizens decide to go to vote "not", we will not oppose it. In any event, - George Bush has prepared a declaration affirming that this consultation was a success and a progress on the way of the democracy. But what will that change for Iraq?
What is the position of grand ayatollah Ali Al-Sistani on this referendum?
He did not give an opinion yet. Those which are in favour of the process will try to use it to encourage the population to vote. It can say "yes" or not speak. For January 30, it had supported the elections, but the Iraqi people of not drawn the discounted effects and the promises were not held. Since, the situation did nothing but worsen. Those which were elected are worried by their place and their wellbeing that by that of the people.
The corruption is generalized. Even the budget of the rebuilding could not start to be carried out. Ibrahim Al-Jaafari is a bad Prime Minister as he is a bad doctor. It is not like your Pétain, which was a good General before being a bad politician...
Then, in your opinion, what are the solutions to save Iraq?
First thing: a calendar of withdrawal of the troops. Secondly: to put national competences under the supervision of UNO at the service of the country, and either of the politicians. Thirdly: a national dialogue with the organization of elections under international supervision. If the occupation continues, the situation only will not worsen and Iraqi will join resistance more and more.
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/zarqawi_dead.html
comment: The only living Al Qaeda they seem to be able to come up with is
Adam Pearlman!