its pretty unanimous the finger is pointed at GI Joe as the culprits involved in the bombings :nono:
Although i am not a big fan of "blame everything on UMREECA policy", i am confused abt this 1.
USA was really concerned when Ayatollah Hakim made a comeback from Iran to Iraq.
But then Ayatollah Hakim supported US troops and issues all anti-baath comments.
So its a tricky one to solve.
May Allah's mercy be on the souls of the shohdas, ameen.
Inna Lillahai Wa Inna Ilaiha Raji Un 
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Stu: *
^ wrong jr, we're not in the business of killing based on religion. This is
[/QUOTE]
yeah, we only kill in the name of oil.
May Allah bless their souls...:(
Inshallah this incident will encourage the liberation of iraq from the occupying americans and there british poodles! 
** “The responsibility of Hakim’s death lies with the British and American forces because they neglected security,” the marchers shouted.**
How quickly some of us are bit in the butt.
Ahh “children of innocence afloat on a sea of reality”-Thap a few days ago.
OK, this is getting stupid.. Remember Sadr? he always had this ongoing conflict with Hakim? Now, everyone on the street knows that.. Would Sadr actually order an assination at the holy site? Hell no.. if it were him he'd do it somewhere else.
Could it be Iran? They have the know-how right? Hakim started out as their puppet.. now he's gaining a little free mobility and BAM! Naw... If the Shia back home found out the govt pulled such a stunt near the holy site it could well start a revolt.
What about al Qaeda? Just like Iran, they have the experience.. but this is a different kind of attack. This won't have the same kind of results that they usually go for. Not them.
America? Get real. In case you weren't paying attention, Hakim's last sermon was preaching unity between all, something very nice for the Americans. Yes, Hakim was occasionally a pain for Yankee planners, but not a serious one. Anyway.. if the Americans really wanted someone dead that person would die in their sleep and no one would ever figure it out.
Baathists, or whatever you want to call them.. now these guys are the only ones that could really benefit from this. I really don't like all the "blame the Baathists" mentality in Iraq since half the time it's not really them.. but this one just reeks of them. 1) They get to capitalize on the feud between Hakim and Sadr.. wild speculation from paraniod Shia factions could be enough to start a Shia-Shia civil war. That'd really kick the Yanks' asses and get them off your back. 2) Chaos. Disorder is how they thrive now. They have to weaken all other parties in Iraq to below their own strength before they can gain any real political power. Such attacks clearly add to the destablized nature of the country. 3) They really just don't like the guy. Hakim was always anti-Saddam and all his cohorts. He wanted them out of the way. Can't let that happen, can you? 4) They method of attack also reeks of them. A proximity bomb? At a site that the average Iraqi, not only Shia, respects? They're the only ones ballsy enough to even try such a thing.
You guys really need to quit with that reactionary "it was America!" It just makes you look silly and discredits all your other arguments. The Americans are screwing up enough other things, talk seriously about those.. but don't try blaming them for stuff they clearly didn't do.
On whether America is responsible due to the lack of security.. Nadia covered this already. We can't blame America for not having standing guards on-site.. last time the Yanks went anywhere near the place a few thousand Iraqis wanted to kill them. But we can blame America for not getting someone else to stand there.. some friendly Muslim troops? But then you might find a Shia-Sunni problem arise... So, if they really wanted protection.. they should've done it themselves. I mean, what're they gonna do when the Yanks finally do leave?! Who's to blame then!
spoon US is to blame they have the security and the means to carry out such attricities. they are the occupyign force for you to say clearly they not responsible is a silly statement because when people are quick to blame muslims for bombings without any proof its no problem,
BUt when shoe is on other foot and Americans are accused of bombings its called silly all of a sudden!
Nobody wants the americans there thats is clear, they was told long time ago to get lost!
Here](2003 August) is a good run-down of the bombing, a profile of Hakim/SCIRI, and who could have done this and why.
That blog is also very good for Iraq news that doesn’t always make it to mainstream media.
This is an interesting, though I think flawed, viewpoint:
It’s flawed because of the skill levels involved in the respective roles. Any fool can make a bomb and plans for how to set it off somewhere. It takes a lifetime to develop the proper skill set, cultivate a public personality, etc that can lead (vs coerce) people with rhetoric alone.
A verY clever Move by the Americans. They know pple will blame Sadamz party for the attack. They yet at the same time do not like Iran and the shias, and esp all the religious/political influence. So this serves Us'z interest. Sunnis and Shias can now start fighting and forget about the occupiers.
SST
I must be hanging out with the wrong Americans.. if there's so many of us that are smart enough to cause the tides to change and everything else then I should damn well be a millionaire by now! What gives?!
sunni vs shia
a good distraction from the american occupiers:rolleyes:
well they have manage to capture a few having LINKS WITH AL-QAIDA. interesting indeed. one of the reason why BUSH & CO went to war against saddam. i have no doubt that USA itself is behind these bombings and are now using these ppl as escape-goats to prove that saddam indeed had links with al-qaeeda. very clever :~)
Thap that is what the local people are saying despite the claims of the US occupiers and their detested (ex-baathists) stooges in the local Najaf administration. Ayatollah Hakim was backed by Iran which had always troubled the US, and now Iran is laying the blame squarely with the occupiers:-
***The Iranian Government also issued a statement condemning the outrage and laying the blame firmly on the occupation forces. ***
Iran mourns Shia leader](BBC NEWS | Middle East | Iran mourns Shia leader)
i wouldnt be surprised if this bombing was a dirty trick of MOSSAD agents. I read somewhere that jordan allowed the mossad agents to cross into iraq. if you look at mossads history, ull be surprised at what they have been involved with. This bombing was more likely done by mossad then by AL QAIDA.
uh oh :konfused: He’s one of the privileged & chosen handpicked members of the Iraqi Governing Council. Wasn’t his job praising the occupiers?
Iraqi Official Wants U.S. to Leave Nation, Tarek Al-Issawi, Yahoo News, 2 September 2003
NAJAF, Iraq - A member of the U.S.-picked governing council angrily denounced the American occupation in a eulogy for his slain brother before 400,000 Shiite mourners Tuesday, demanding U.S. troops leave Iraq and blaming them for lax security that led to the revered cleric’s assassination.
…] “The occupation force is primarily responsible for the pure blood that was spilled in holy Najaf, the blood of al-Hakim and the faithful group that was present near the mosque,” the cleric’s brother said.
“This force is primarily responsible for all this blood and the blood that is shed all over Iraq every day … Iraq must not remain occupied and the occupation must leave so that we can build Iraq as God wants us to do.”