Determined to defeat the U.S.

I see where many fair-weather Americans, liberal left bloggers, and other enemies of the U.S. are trying to spin the recent detention of Ammar al-Hakim and some of his bodyguards as they crossed from Iran back into Iraq as a blunder. As usual, they are wrong AGAIN!

Ammar al-Hakim is the son of (SCIRI) Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq's leader Abdul Aziz al-Hakim. While a sometime supporter of the US policy (on the surface) in Iraq, the Shiite based SCIRI has been linked to fueling tensions between the US and Iran along with the infiltration of weapons and Iranian agents.

The blog, Mudheads in Mudville, suggests this is just another blunder. Not surprising as this site blindly attacks any success we have in Iraq or our War on Terror. One comment on this anti-US success blog sarcastically remarks - It makes you wonder what he was doing in Iran. Probably just shopping or, sightseeing.

Now for the truth as to why detaining Ammar al-Hakim was NOT a blunder and had many far reaching effects ---

The SCIRI is used to help Iran's Quds force and other Iranian paramilitary forces infiltrate Iraq's military. SCIRI is also the main Shiite proponent of partitioning Iraq, along with the Kurdish parties. US Senator Joe (I got a plan) Biden also supports this misguided thinking.

The partitioning of Iraq, as I have posted before, will be disaster in the middle east. The effect on our national security, future of our country and War on Terror will be devastating. According to press accounts, Hakim was in Iraq to promote the partition plan where Iraq's Shia provinces would follow Kurdistan out of the Iraqi Federation.

Besides the threats to our national security and more unrest in the middle east, partitioning of Iraq has been tried before and did not work.

From Open Democracy --

A feature of political discussion of Iraq in recent weeks has been another flurry of propaganda by United States politicians in favour of dividing Iraq into three statelets or semi-independent federal entities.

The schemes are strikingly similar, and their proponents indefatigable: Iraq is dismissed as an "artificial entity"; its "proper" and "natural" constituent components are instead identified as three ethno-religious communities – Shi'a Arabs, Sunni Arabs and Kurds.

In fact, Iraqi history fails to support such ideas – and particularly the notion that it should be necessary to enforce barriers between the Sunni and Shi'a Arabs.

Among several key Iraqi leaders who never went into exile abroad, the situation is much the same. "Federalism" appears not to exist in the vocabulary of the Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani – who consistently emphasises national "unity" in his official pronouncements – and Muqtada al-Sadr's radical Islamism comes with a strong Iraqi nationalist component that foreigners often overlook.

In sum, then, the process of regionalisation in Iraq is far more tentative and open-ended than the orderly caricature maps currently bandied about in western think-tanks would indicate.

But those partition schemes are more than a distortion of Iraqi history and today's realities. They also demonstrate flagrant contempt for the fragile democratic process which is underway in Iraq.

So again, misinformation and trying to spin any success we have in Iraq as a blunder, is the mission of many in our country and abroad. Out of spite and unabated hate for President Bush these people put personal agendas before the security of our country and the free world in jeopardy.

KING