47 Comments

1. richard mcenroe:

Interesting. Someone accused Charlie Johnson of the same thing. Got a feeling we’re being punked?

Dec 19, 2004 - 5:58 pm 2. BigFire:

In other news, George Soros appears to be underwriting Saddam’s defense. I guess nothing is low enough when it comes to spiting W.

My suspicion on Ali quitting is two fold:

1. Ali is participating in the election not only as a voter, but a candidate/campaigner. Blogging sort of interferes with this.

2. Ba’athists have send their death threat to him.

Dec 19, 2004 - 6:01 pm 3. Retread:

Ali’s last post is a bit cryptic but maybe Mohammed and Omar will have something to say when they post.

BigFive, I sure hope you are wrong on speculation 2.

Dec 19, 2004 - 6:09 pm 4. David Thomson:

ì2. Ba’athists have send their death threat to him.î

I doubt very much if the Baathists know who he is. If they did, there would likely be no warning. This fascists scum bags would simply murder him. It would be similar to what was depicted in the gangster movie,”Goodfellas.”

Dec 19, 2004 - 6:19 pm 5. asher:

I’m afraid I find it difficult to believe that the Ba’athists are unaware of the Fadhil brothers. In fact, I would be somewhat surprised if the brothers have not received death threats before.

I would like to think there is nothing more behind Ali’s announcement than the need to free up time for political work; unfortunately some of his recent comments suggest that there’s more to it than that. It sounds as if Omar and Mohammed came away from their US tour with some pretty unfavorable impressions, which may have been reinforced for Ali by something he saw from his end of things. Beyond that it’s impossible to speculate.

We will have to wait for word from the Fadhils. If some opportunistic politicians have abused the trust of the Americans and our Iraqi friends, they will surely answer for it.

Dec 19, 2004 - 6:28 pm 6. Patrick Tyson:

When are both sides going to realize that it’s not only about them! That there are millions of Iraqis, Afghanis, Iranians..Etc who are suffering daily and who are trying to find a solution and a way to achieve their dreams (with the help they are getting from America) and who do not have the slightest interest in supporting any party in America. The world is bigger than you and your partisan conflicts and frankly I’m getting sick of it. Take this crap somewhere else and leave us alone! We have enough problems to deal with and we are not interested in supporting any party anwhere, as simply we cannot afford the time or the effort.

It makes sense to me.

Dec 19, 2004 - 6:43 pm 7. asher:

Roger, as I wrote in my e-mail to you, I did not mean to suggest that President Bush was among those “opportunistic politicians” nor do I believe this is true. I do suspect that the Fadhils may have been treated shabbily by some bureaucrats and other self-interested parties, however.

Here is a selection of relevant posts compiled by Wadard:

This is the most insightful (into the mystery) post, I think:

Ali writes on Sunday 19 Dec:

ìÖit’s the act of some Americans that made me feel I’m on the wrong side here. I will expose these people in public very soonÖî

And we all are wondering of whom he is speaking. Perhaps heís already told us.

Ali wrote Thursday 16 Dec. ìAnswers and Clarificationsî:

ìÖwe were promised by “Spirit of America” to pay for the costs of our NGO “Friends of Democracy” and its projects to help build democracy in IraqÖî

ìThe thing that upset me the most is that if there are some powers that are trying to use us and our writings as propaganda toolÖ ì

In the comments, Ali paid a visit to answer Lydia and Lisa:

ìNo Lydia, not conservatives but some group of extremist conservatives. I have nothing against American conservatives and I see them as true friends.

Ali. | Email | Homepage | 12.18.04 – 2:49 pm |î

ìThey [Mohammed and Omar] were used during the trip, and Lee C is right. I have to wait for my brothers before I explain everything although I have no doubt what so ever about these people and their hypocracy. I was shocked when I discovered this as I truly thought they cared about us.

Ali. | Email | Homepage | 12.18.04 – 3:08 pm |î

The next day, Ali signs off.

Brian K

You nailed it Brian. I am proud of Ali for keeping his independence.

Wadard | Email | Homepage | 12.19.04 – 10:02 pm | #

Dec 19, 2004 - 7:09 pm 8. asher:

And no, I don’t know who Ali is referring to, nor do I know who Wadard thinks he is referring to (”Perhaps heís already told us.”). I’m just providing those posts as a reference.

Dec 19, 2004 - 7:13 pm 9. Strabo The Lesser:

Iraq the model has been evidence for me that we are doing the right thing in Iraq. It has bolstered my certainty that we are working in the tradition of other great American liberators over the centuries. If even a desperately pro-American is now turning from us, we are doing something dramatically wrong in our execution and we need to fix something- the way we get our message out, perhaps- to improve our position.

Dec 19, 2004 - 8:53 pm 10. Manco_Dollars:

Strabo The Lesser:

I don’t agree. WE aren’t doing anything wrong. The ones sending the wrong message are the LLL media and perhaps Ali is confusing it with the rest of America.

Dec 19, 2004 - 11:15 pm 11. ed:

Hmmm.

Considering all three brothers have very limited experience with how America and her politics works I’d be very cautious about any accusations coming from them. As an example these are people who didn’t even know about liberal blogs until fairly recently. And blogs are the least complicated aspect of modern American politics.

Dec 20, 2004 - 12:17 am 12. Charlie (Colorado):

Does anyone else ever feel like the whole region could use the widespread application of lithium and Xanax?

Dec 20, 2004 - 2:27 am 13. Matt Evans:

I’m assuming the Brothers exposure to politics here is limited. Both extremes (right and left) would use them as pawns- the far right, to justify democracy building and the left, to justify criticism of the war.

I was a bit worried when I heard about the Brothers making the rounds- for every Roger Simon they met, I suspect they met 10 other people with agendas- that certainly takes its toll, especially if they no longer feel that the support they receive in America is for them but is more so for Americans justifying the war.

Personally, I think you have to be careful how seriously you take stuff like this. Like many of you, I’ve read Iraq the Model and taken heart from their positive tales of reconstruction- I, like most of you, are actually rooting for the Iraqis for their own sake, not just for the sake of America. At the same time, these men are subject to the same types of failings as those of us here – ego, depression, dissatisfaction, etc and those things will typically be expressed in their writings.

Ali’s writings almost seem to be sour grapes – its my understanding that he did not accompany the brothers on their US tour ?

Dec 20, 2004 - 4:47 am 14. Peter G.:

Howard Kurtz writes about the brothers here in today’s Washington Post:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A12395-2004Dec19.html

Nothing you haven’t read before, but the first time several hundred thousand others will have read about them.

Dec 20, 2004 - 6:09 am 15. chuck:

Ali has promised an explanation, so why don’t we just wait and see what it is? I know, I know, gotta know right now, so we speculate, which probably reveals more of us than of Ali. Patience all.

Dec 20, 2004 - 6:26 am 16. asher:

Charlie (CO)

Don’t know, but I sure could.

Dec 20, 2004 - 6:54 am 17. richard mcenroe:

Either

1: Someone did something really stupid on our end.

2. Some has claimed someone did something really stupid on our end and Ali believes them.

3. Ali has causes and interests of his own this serves (don’t make the lefty, condescending/racist mistake of automatically assuming anything a foreign person does is a reaction to our evil deeds.

We won’t know until they tell us. In the meantime, we wait, and keep track of who’s jumping to take advantage of this over here…

Dec 20, 2004 - 7:14 am 18. Michael in SC:

Has anyone notice the absence of the Spirit of America link from “Links”? It was there in Nov. I googled and couldn’t find it cached in Dec.

To Roger Simon: Did you not state that all your proceeds for the contest were to go to ITM or did I misunderstand or just get confused?

Dec 20, 2004 - 7:52 am 19. Roger:

Michael in SC, I don’t know what you are referring to. The proceeds of the recent Blogger Challenge from this and other blogs all went to SoA. This was clearly stated in all posts. It was also noted on here and elsewhere with the SoA Blogger Challenge logo. ITM participated in the challenge. In fact, they won.

I don’t know what “links” you are talking about in the first part of your post.

Dec 20, 2004 - 8:04 am 20. PJ:

When you think about it, the last year has been one of cataclysmic change for the ITM brothers. One year ago they reached out to the world from behind the Saddam Curtain. They were unknowns; today they are political figures on an international stage. Of course things will change, and not always smoothly, as they define their new identity.

I salute the brothers and wish them well on this new phase of their journey. Anyone who has met them knows their levelheadedness. I have great faith that they will make wise decisions for their own future and for Iraq’s.

Dec 20, 2004 - 8:12 am 21. PeterArgus:

Spirit of America has a new blog

entry that might shed some light on this controversy. The entry by Jim Hake,

CEO, addresses a number of issues apparently raised by some people concerning

SoA’s motives and relationships. In particular he discusses SoA’s involvement

with a Cyber Century Forum. Here is an interesting bit:

Oil Money” Cyber Century Forum?s 2003 tax return notes a $109k investment

in Schlumberger. CCF has held 2,000 shares of Schlumberger as an investment

since 1998. Some have interpreted an investment made in 1998 by Cyber Century

Forum as evidence that we are under the control of ?Big Oil? in 2004. That

is as silly as it sounds. Spirit of America was not involved with CCF in 1998,

which pre-dates our existence by five years, and we don?t know why CCF invested

in Schlumberger at that time. Nonetheless, Spirit of America would accept

donations by oil and oil service companies, if they were offered. We would

use such donations to fund Spirit of America projects.

I think this gives us a pretty good clue as to what is going on. I googled

a little and indeed was able to find a website touting what I am sure many savvy

members of blogworld would guess from the above: certain individuals are claiming

that SoA is some kind of front for oil interests. This website is also claiming,

in the same spirit as Juan Cole et al., that Iraq the Model was a puppet of

Wolfowitz. I am not going to provide the link here because I don’t want to add

more traffic. Suffice it to say if you google "Cyber City Forum" and

scroll through you’ll find it.

So I suspect Ali has been fed this sh*t and has decided to dissassociate himself

from the whole ITM enterprise. He is running for office afterall and needs to

think about appearances. Is he angry at SoA or at the Left, or both, over this?

Only time will tell I suppose.

Dec 20, 2004 - 8:27 am 22. PeterArgus:

Roger:

The exact wording of the first sentence of the post by Michael in SC was also posted in comments section for Ali’s announcement of the ITM website. He seems to be getting around.

Dec 20, 2004 - 8:50 am 23. asher:

PeterArgus,

Thanks for that bit of info! That may indeed be the missing piece that puts this whole baffling affair into perspective.

We can expect the Left to invent all kinds of fairytales (n.b. no offense to tiny supernatural beings) with this, as with anything else that comes their way. I don’t blame Ali for being confused.

Dec 20, 2004 - 9:02 am 24. charlotte:

I certainly hope that this is not about tenuous connections to Big Oil, as cited above. I receive oil royalty income, have oil and gas stock in my portfolio, drive a car and purchase gasoline, and I gave to the Spirit of America campaign. Does that taint my donation to the Iraqi bloggers?

I am always amazed how leftist misanthropes, prevaricators and conspiracy mongers have no shame. Were Betty Crocker to give some money to help Iraqis promote democracy, anti-American Americans would call it a neocon plot to undermine the Iraqis’ diet with fatty baked goods and sugar so that our capitalist pharmaceutical giants could sell them anti-cholesterol pills and insulin.

Too many apologists for fascism and terror want the US and Iraqis to fail in their bid for democracy in the ME. Too many spoilers want the Iraqis to distrust the US, their chief liberator and proponent who has spent precious blood and treasury for security and a greater good. Too many delusional do-gooders living in affluence and liberty are blind to the poverty and tyranny they would wish upon others.

Allah forbid that money from oil concerns even indirectly factor into anything having to do with helping Iraqis. Meanwhile, Big Oil money from UN/Saddam corruption purchased a lot of obstructionism to freeing Iraq and still funds terrorist ops in Iraq today…

Dec 20, 2004 - 10:38 am 25. Michael in SC:

Roger Simon,

About my previous post and as to “I don’t know what you are referring to.” Please refer to “Putting Our Money Where Our Mouths Are – Blog Division” Nov 19, 2004 and I quote:

“I’ll be one of those hosting them here in LA. I look forward to meeting them and I dedicate all the contributions made by this blog to ‘Spirit of America’ to them.” (my emphasis) Hence my question.

Secondly, “Links” referred to the right-hand side of the web page where, obviously, the links to various websites are, including yours. “Spirit of American” is no longer there but it was in November and I was wondering when it might have gotten deleted.

I was simply try to find out more info about why Ali quit not to start a flame war.

Dec 20, 2004 - 10:56 am 26. Michael in SC:

PeterAugus,

Apparently I’m NOT the only one “who gets around”, tattletail.

Asher: And your point is?

Dec 20, 2004 - 11:02 am 27. PeterArgus:

Charlotte:

Thar’s oil in them thar brownies!

Michael:

Well maybe you ought “to get around” to the SoA website where you will find that the challenge ended midnight Dec. 16. Maybe thats why the “blogger challenge” link is now gone from this and many other sites.

Dec 20, 2004 - 11:18 am 28. charlotte:

Thar’s oil in them thar brownies!

How could I have overlooked the canola connection? I’m losing my homemaker touch. Thanks, PeterArgus!

Dec 20, 2004 - 11:35 am 29. Terrye:

I understand that the Iraqis are concerned about even the appearance of their oil being the root of all this and not democracy. The conspiracy theories that abound to that effect are everywhere in Europe and the Arab world. And in truth the oil of the region does lend to its strategic importance because such wealth in the hands of men like Saddam is disastrous for the people of the region and the world. It is amazing how much damage unearned wealth can do to a society that is limited by a lack cultural and political freedom.

I would not be surprised if Ali thinks he has been betrayed by people who are aligned with the oil industry, or if he is concerned that the association would do him damage. But the Spirit of America has done some good and that should be recognized.

Dec 20, 2004 - 11:39 am 30. Patrick Tyson:

PeterArgus—

It isn’t only the Blogger Challenge link that is gone. Spirit of America is no longer in the Links list at Iraq the Model. No other current links have been removed since the November 2004 archive.

Dec 20, 2004 - 11:39 am 31. PeterArgus:

Patrick:

Thanks for the clarification and my apologies to Michael. His first post on this did not indicate that he was refering to the ITM website.

Dec 20, 2004 - 12:04 pm 32. Michael in SC:

PeterArgus:

What does the end of the contest on Dec 15 mid-night PST possibly have to do with the context of this thread? I NEVER wrote of a missing SoA Blog Challange logo (which was display near the page top just above “News”) but rather “Spirit of America” which was always dispayed under “Links” just after “Truthful News”. Get relevant, better yet, get a life.

Dec 20, 2004 - 12:08 pm 33. Roger:

“Get relevant, better yet, get a life.”

Michael in SC, ad hominems of this nature are not appreciated on this blog. If you would like to post here, please refrain.

Dec 20, 2004 - 12:18 pm 34. Matt Evans:

Terrye, you raise a good point about oil. Back when I was bothering to argue with barking moonbats about the reasons for the Iraq war, I was constantly assaulted with “its about the oil”. My response has always been “well of course it is”. Oil is a substantial factor in our decision to remove Sadaam Hussein- the oil permitted him to buy and build weapons, pay terrorists, oppress his neigbors, etc. Oil is also a substantial factor in conflict with the Middle East- the last thing we want is for the oil fields across the M.E. to be in the hands of the Islamofacists.

So yeah, its about oil. And its about democracy and freedom and stability and woman’s rights and the rights of the Iraqi people to benefit from their own oil and about establishing a base in the heart of the Middle East from which we can fight terror.

I like to think of Americans as practical first and foremost, then altruistic- that is what we have here in Iraq- from a practical standpoint, our purpose is to establish a MIddle Eastern government, using democratic principles, who will be friendly the the United States and its allies. The Iraqi people benefit from this practical approach to fighting terror in that they don’t have to deal with Hussein killing their families and will have the chance to democratically elect their own government. In short, everybody wins, except the far left and the Islamofacists.

I fail to see what the hell is wrong with winning and doing some good at the same time.

Dec 20, 2004 - 12:47 pm 35. Athos:

I see a lot of speculation on the motives – but we need to wait for Ali to follow-up when he is ready.

It’s interesting in the speculation and attacks that the motives of Roger and Charles (LGF) were called into question – followed by efforts to target / blame SoA.

I don’t recall seeing any such speculation into how the comments from Juan Cole and the resulting kerfuffle might have played into any decision.

It seems the attitude of using Ali’s decision as yet another reason to generate political attacks is just an example of the bigger problem – and it’s one here, not in Iraq.

Dec 20, 2004 - 2:54 pm 36. asher:

Athos, Ali seemed to be getting the better of Cole, and he had no trouble expressing himself there. That is probably why the Cole business has not been suggested.

For my part, I have my own opinions about LGF, but I’ve never had any reason to question SoA. It would be really easy for me to blame the whole thing on LGF, but I’m refraining from doing so because I don’t see any direct evidence that there’s a connection. Those “extreme conservative” elements could be anyone, anywhere.

OTOH, some of the previous posts on this thread (and back at ITM) suggest that questions have been raised about SoA’s integrity. These accusations might well be false and completely baseless; but if the Fadhils believed them, then it would account for the disappearing SoA link, as well as their refusal to discuss the matter until Omar and Mohammed are safely back in Baghdad. (Since they are traveling on SoA’s tab, they presumably would not want to cause trouble while they are still enroute, lest they get stuck in Germany with their tickets cancelled!)

If that’s the case, I dearly hope that the whole thing is a big misunderstanding.

And yes, this is all pure speculation. No doubt we’ll all feel pretty foolish when the full story emerges. But I hope this helps to explain the various theories that have been flying around.

Dec 20, 2004 - 3:10 pm 37. Caroline:

I have found myself trolling around lately and posting this on a variety of websites, but honestly I can’t help myself. There’s so much conspiracy theory about America’s “real” motives -whether we are truly interested in WMD’s or God forbid OIL, or is it “purely” about bringing democracy to Iraq, or whatever. But isn’t it possible that it is all just a little more complicated than that? And is it possible that America’s interests and 3rd world interests and very humanitarian interests could all possibly come together? And that the much maligned “neo-con” vision actually encompasses all of this together?

So please, I hope people will take a minute to read this (a cut and paste link), because I suspect (or perhaps I merely hope) that this is the kind of geopolitical strategy underlying our going into Iraq: And if this is much of what is going on then I must admit I find it hard to argue with:

http://www.thomaspmbarnett.com/published/pentagonsnewmap.htm

Dec 20, 2004 - 4:14 pm 38. Caroline:

Wow – don’t ask me how it happened but that was my first successful link. Can I have a cigarette now?

Dec 20, 2004 - 4:17 pm 39. asher:

Caroline, as far as I’m concerned you may not only have a cigarette but a glass of champagne as well. Thanks for a very thoughtful post, and a great article.

I believe you are exactly right, that the “much maligned neo-con vision” is a good one, firmly based on a concept of enlightened self-interest. And for the last 30 years, most of America’s liberal establishment have been talking the talk of “human rights” while excusing some of the vilest dictatorships in the Middle East. Roger has spoken quite eloquently about this. I’ll only add that the neocons get such a bad rap from the press precisely because they have caught the reactionary “liberal” world in its great hypocrisy.

Dec 20, 2004 - 5:12 pm 40. Caroline:

Thank you Asher. I am actually so interested in Thomas Barnett’s ideas that I emailed him and asked him whether 1) he defines himself as a “neocon” and 2) he actually has much influence on American foreign policy. As Victor Davis Hanson actually took the time to email me back twice (OK – no doubt it was his assistant but what a great guy, huh?) I thought it was worth a shot. My thinking is that if Barnett really does represent the future of American foreign policy then I can confidently claim to be a liberal, a conservative, and everything that lies in between – a believer in American “exceptionalism” as VDH puts it. I have seen other links to neocon thought such as “Project for a New American Century” – and frankly it didn’t do much to dispel my suspicions about American “imperialism”. Bartnett’s ideas frankly go far to dispel my suspicions. If he emails me back I’ll be sure to let you know (I did warn him that I was posting his ideas on popular blogs like Roger’s). And Asher – thanks for re-introducing into my vocabulary the term “enlightened self-interest.” (I admit to being a total dunce, despite an excellent education -how sad is that?). “Enlightened self-interest” could be exactly the term to sum it all up and if it’s not -then it darned well should be!

Dec 20, 2004 - 5:56 pm 41. Caroline:

And to borrow stereotypes, is it not the case that “enlightened” could possibly pass as the buzz-word of the “left” while “self-interest” could pass as the buzzword of the right? I do hate to do that to the right – it seems rude somehow – but I’m really grooving now on the concept of “enlightened self-interest”…..

Dec 20, 2004 - 6:06 pm 42. Lost on Earth:

Caroline,

Don’t know if you’re around right now, it’s 10:30pm EST, but CSPAN is airing Barnett’s TPNM and taking questions.

Dec 20, 2004 - 7:23 pm 43. Lost on Earth:

Oops, the program was just ending but it will be airing again at 11:24pm EST w/the call-ins. Here’s a link to Barnett’s page at CSPAN. http://www.booknotes.org/Program/?ProgramID=1782 (Sorry, don’t know how to link.)

On the right, there’s a link to a transcript and a link that says you can watch the original program but for some reason it’s not working for me. I rarely comment here but some time ago I asked around about this Barnett fellow. Hope this helps.

Dec 20, 2004 - 7:37 pm 44. asher:

Caroline, thanks! Congratulations on getting e-mails back from VDH. Hope you had a chance to catch Barnett.

Dec 20, 2004 - 8:13 pm 45. PJ:

Amen, Matt Evans–and all the others who posit the mixed altruistic/self-interest reason behind Iraq policy.

If the slogan were instead “It’s all about the FOOD!” would the war somehow be more morally palatable? Oil is as necessary as food for the survival of everyone, China and Bangladesh as well as for the US. And of course those countries won’t help us–they know we’d do it anyway.

So unless leftists are willing to plunge the globe into a Dark Ages of economic depression and pre-enlightenment savagery, they should come up with a reasonable alternative to deposing the ME oil despots or shut the frick up.

Dec 20, 2004 - 8:45 pm 46. Caroline:

Lost on Earth – darn it I had just gone to bed – (only to be up for the day by 3:30am -will definitely be looking into that Lunesta!). I read your link though and I see that his ideas are indeed very influential. And if he’s building on Fukayama, quite obviously he is a neocon. If he becomes more of a household name, it might do much to dispel the “evil neocon” meme.

Dec 21, 2004 - 1:40 am 47. Caroline:

Way dead thread but this was Barnett’s reply to my email: “Try the book and I think you’ll have a hard time classifying me. I don’t know Strauss so hard to be a neocon, I imagine.”

Dec 23, 2004 - 9:18 am

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: