RE: Syria and Iran threatened by US

["Craven, Jim" <jcraven@xxxxxxxxx>]

From: M. Junaid Alam [mailto:redjaguar@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, March 28, 2003 2:11 PM

"4. All evidence points to the fact that rather being Iran the one that
stopped the Shi'ites from "revolting" against the Iraqi government once the
US troops entered Iraq, was the other way around.  The decision of many
Shi'ites to resist the US/British troops is forcing the hand of Iran from
"neutrality" into a token support for the resistance."

I don't really know what the hell happened here. The Supreme Council for
Islamic Revolution told the Shiites in the south to keep their heads down at
least until it was clear the Americans would win decisively, then in Reuters
their leader made a press statement to revolt. That shit had zero effect on
the ground, and I didn't even see that report on a single other news site
afterwards.

Response(Jim C): On Al Jazeera it was reported that one of the top clerics
among the Shi'ites in Southern Iraq, authorized to issue Fatwas, issued a
general Fatwa stating that all Shi'ites have a primary duty to resist the
invasion of Iraq by the "coalition" of the
overtly/covertly/sort-of/dragged-into "willing" with Saddam to be dealt with
later.

Jim C.

~~~~~~~
PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.