January 08, 2006

• Oh boy....
• Oh boy....
• "Raed in the Middle" is one of the most prominent and notable Iraqi blogs out there. Self-link, true... but if this were prefaced with a "Curious George," no one would mind. I think this is kind of awesome, and would say "don't delete."
• I'd say a delete and repost in the format t'bone suggests. We only have a few rules and the no self-link one is a good one.
• I'd like to say welcome to Monkeyfilter, raed, and express solidarity to your cause. Peace to you and yours.
• Good luck with that project. We all know how responsive big oil the Bush regime is to the concerns of countries whose resources they are busy stealing. As to link itself, both his posts are self-links. It's probably a cultutral issue. Can someone with more energy than meemail the member, and explain how this place works?
• No, no, no, this is different. In this case the post should stay. This is COMPLETELY FUCKING DIFFERENT from some douche posting their live journal or something, OK? Let's not be pedantic pinheads, this is an order of five thousand times more important.
• The guy's fucking country has been raped, for fuck's sake, I think he has more important things to worry about than the extant rules of this site. IN THIS CASE the post should be considered a charitable post and remain. It is a completely different situation than a 'self post' so please stop your carping.
• I agree with Chyren, albeit in a less abrasive manner.
• Relax Chryen. The response so far has been, very, very, mild. I don't see anyone going postal about the link. Chidingis the word I'm looking for, methinks. If you care so much, email the poster as I suggested. I'd do it, but I'm mixing some complicated drinks.
• I'm just trying to head them off at the pass. /slinks away
• What Chyren said.
• sorry about the self-linking thing! I didn't know about it. Next times, I'll link to other sites with related issues. Thank you very much for your support
• OH. A Pre-emptive strike, you sez? Good idea! In the case of the WAR ON TERRORISM ®, I guess we've ALL seen how effective that's been. Now if we're gonna discuss this, here's what I'd like to see. Since this frikken conflict is postively medieval in nature, complte with the seige of an isolated kingdom, how about if we have a hostage exchange? Dick Cheney and George Bush can offer up their daughters as hostages to ensure the just distribution of Iraq's oil wealth after the US withdrawal.
• Can we offer Bush and Cheney (and Hastert and Frist and Rumsfeld and Rice and Gonzalez) instead?
• Well, I can see Americans getting all sentimental about some semi-cute,low-rent, Girls Gone Wild, white chicks; and wanting to get THEM back. But...as for Dick and George? Hmmm...not so much.
• I don't get it. If your country has been raped it's OK to self-post? So, if you are a Native American, Aboriginie, or a person who lived in Poland in '39 it's OK to self-post. Hate to be a stickler...but rules are rules.
• Stake to be a Hitler...blurt sure ale user.
• Considering the message he has been working so hard to spread, this tiny, little oversight can be ignored, can it not? Honestly, I think the message overrides the rule and, yes, if you were Native American, or whatever, and you had some socially impacting, and important message to bring up--I have no problems with self-link FPP's. It's fairly obviously that he would get far more attention posting the way he did versus......not. This is a pretty well-known blog. But then, I tend to buck the system anyway so, whatever. /my 0.02 cents
• Yeah, I'd say that native americans, aboriginies and dead people from 1939 Poland could get a pass on the Rules. I've read Raed's blog for several years now, and, while I don't agree with many of his opinions, they are a valuable source of information on how the conservative Iraqis are reacting to the sloppy mess the US has created. And, while you haven't been looking, most of the Iraqi bloggers who were happy that the invasion had taken place have lost their hope that things will get better. Sadly enough, the post he linked shows as much naivete about US state vs. federal politics as most of ours do about about Iraq. But, I'd like to see it stand. We don't often get to see the results of western aggression from the view point of those we've "inconvenienced," I've linked here to his mother, Faisa's, blog several times. She's even visited the US to take courses in peacemaking, but has not modified her opiniion that we are evil. Maybe we have something to learn from that. I don't quite know what, but do know that we're not winning in the opinion indices. Faisa and her husband now live in Jordan, because Iraq is too dangerous. I think that Raed now lives in California. But, neither has found any reason to love us. I'd be happy if all the Iraqi bloggers would self post here to give us unfiltered opinions of the west. Please let this stand.
• I recall getting a little flak from monkeys for eeking raed's post the last time. You people! For the sake of my sanity and the guidelines, I'm slapping a Curious George on this mofo. And that's that. Thank you for noticing the "no self-linking" thing this time around, raed. We all look forward to more posts from you in the future, especially if they're within the guidelines.
• Good call, trace, exactly right.
• However ill-advised and badly conducted it may have been, I don't think the invasion of Iraq is morally on a par with Saddam's invasion of Kuwait, as the proposed 'compensation project' appears to suggest. Saddam was not attempting to terminate a series of catastrophic, opportunistic aggressions by Kuwait, nor to restore freedom and democracy: he did not seek the support of the UN or attempt to restore the stability or infrastructure of the country. I'd have a good deal more sympathy with claims for compensation over the unprincipled support the US and UK previously gave Saddam - but the Iranians would probably be the main beneficiaries in that case. I can be easily reached on jarrar.raed(at)gmail. We can be easily reached here if you can be arsed to come back and see what reaction your post has evoked.
• Uff da. We have the opportunity to bring an Iraqi into the Monkeyfilter commuity; an internationally famous, wonderfully intelligent, and fascinating Iraqi at that. And we're completely arseing it up. This is about as unwelcoming of a thread as it gets. Well, other than trolls by LwC I'm willing to start a project asking for compesation to Iraq. The Project will be based on the UNCC's methodology for compensation, the one Iraq respected and obayed for the last decade in paying compensation to Kuwait. raed jarrar: What exactly are you proposing? I don't understand the UNCC's methodology for compensation. How would you ask for compensation? Who are the target donors? What is the scope of this project? Good luck.
• "We can be easily reached here if you can be arsed to come back and see what reaction your post has evoked." hearts and minds.
• Compensation to Iraq from whom? What does UNCC stand for? (etc) The link to a blog frontpage isnt that enlightening.
• Considering the message he has been working so hard to spread, this tiny, little oversight can be ignored, can it not? I don't mind the link, but this reasoning is a bit unfair. If I was to start a website advocating big oil's involvement in democratizing the Middle East and requesting support for the so-called American hegemonization of countries like Iraq, and then link to it, it wouldn't matter how much hard work I put into it or how sincerely I believed in the good it might accomplish, it would not excuse me, nor would it stop the ensuing barrage of anti-self-linking comments (not to mention the message of said link), and rightly so. Just because you agree with the message doesn't mean the rules should be broken. It's the exact definition of a slippery slope.
• That said, raed, welcome, and I hope you will continue to post with us. We are a lovable group, truly.
• raed, welcome!
• The problem that's obvious here is that both of raed's posts to MoFi have spawned next to no discussion of the topic and plenty on the merits of the linking. That's probably a good reason to disallow self-links in future no matter who the poster is. For that reason, from now on I will eek self links whether by raed or by another high-profile blogger. It winds up being all noise and no signal, and serves only as front-page free advertising.
• > American hegemonization of... i've never seen this word "hegemonization" before. what does it mean? [relate to from a hegemonic position?]
• Attempt to restore the infrastructure of the country? Would that perhaps be the infrastructure our good ole boys bombed the fucking crap out of?

• What does UNCC stand for?

  uncc is the united nations compensation commission, described here. the uncc was created to deal with claims arising out of iraq's invasion of kuwait. what's not clear to me is whether raed proposes to pursue an individual claim or to campaign in favour of a governmental claim by the iraqi government. it also seems unlikely that the uncc is the correct audience for such a claim.
• ... bombed the fucking crap out of... Of course. I'm not saying the US etc are the fairy godmother to Iraq's Cinderella. But they're not the Saddam to its Kuwait, either, which, so far as I can tell, seems to be the premise of the post.
• I think it's a bit of tit-for-tat. Iraq invaded Kuwait and claims were paid to individuals, companies and governments to offset losses and damages that stemmed from dislplacement, loss of income, etc. I believe Raed's reasoning is that similar compensation should be paid to Iraqis to offset what they've suffered. The "Claims" section on the UNCC page lists the various categories of claims and amounts of compensation: for example, "Category "C" claims are individual claims for damages up to US$100,000 each. Category "C" claims can be made for twenty-one different types of losses, including those relating to departure from Kuwait or Iraq; personal injury; mental pain and anguish; loss of personal property; loss of bank accounts, stocks and other securities; loss of income; loss of real property; and individual business losses. The Commission received approximately 420,000 category "C" claims submitted by eighty-five Governments and eight offices of three international organisations, seeking a total of approximately US$9 billion in compensation. In addition, the Central Bank of the Government of Egypt submitted a consolidated category "C" claim on behalf of over 800,000 workers in Iraq for the non-transfer of remittances by Iraqi banks to beneficiaries in Egypt. This consolidated Egyptian category "C" claim comprised 1,240,000 individual claims with an asserted value of approximately US$491 million." My guess is that Raed is trying to get compensation for Iraqis at all levels, not so much for himself. I know that he spent months documenting Iraqi casualties immediately after the invasion and later did research to get a total count of Iraqis killed because of the invasion and its aftermath. Besides, if compensation were mandated by the UN, it would be a loss of honor for the US and Bush, similar to the shaming of Iraq and Hussein. The loss of face for the US may be as important to him as the money that could be distributed.
• Fair enough, Pleg.
• Thanks path for the excellent explanation. I think this is a great idea. How would you do it?
• ian would say - that's what raed is asking. And Plegmund, I believe that he is making exactly that comparison. I see many reasons not to agree with his take on this, but I'm not an Iraqi. And, Raed's family had a pretty comfortable life before the invasion, from what I've read, and it isn't as comfortable now, but I don't think that's his focus. On the other hand, I don't think he focuses on the mass killing of Ireqis under Hussein's regime I guess we, individually, have to decide whether stopping Hussein merits the losses Iraqis have suffered since the invasion.
• I'm going to email raed to see if we can get him back into the thread to give us more info. Some of you may want to do the same. Just take it easy on your invitations if you really want to hear what he has to say.
• >I guess we, individually, have to decide whether stopping Hussein merits the losses Iraqis have suffered since the invasion. That's what we have to decide, is it? What business did we ever have deciding that? "Hmm... I just can't decide if deposing your government is worth burning down your house and killing your family. Hmmmmm. Yeah... yeah, I guess it is."
• Sorry- not trying to be personally antagonistic. The whole subject makes me see red.
• Stan - what we did is sunk cost. Aguing about whether we should have done it may be soul satisfying, but it won't change what has happened. I think the thing to now is to figure out how to deal with the outcome. I'm not someone who thought we should have invaded - as bad as their government was for the mass of people, the idea of invading a sovereign nation seemed outside of the realm of US interest, to me. But it happened, like 3 years ago. Where we go from here is the issue. We can't go back in time and change it. So, what raed is asking is what kind of compensation should the affected parties get for our misdeeds? We're probably not the best forum to deal with that question, but the issue is interesting. I've tried to be neutral in exp0laining what I think he meant. I hope he'll come back and talk more about this.
• >Aguing about whether we should have done it may be soul satisfying, No, it's not even likely to be that. I just can't help myself. But yeah, I know where you're coming from.
• I agree with Stan the Bat, to be honest, the whole issue makes me want to smash my fists into things in rage. But saying, oh it's all in the past now, so we should get on with it, doesn't really assuage me in any way. Oh, it's all water under the bridge, now. I get mad when people say that. Hey, I killed three hookers 7 years ago, but it's all water under the bridge now. There's a concept known as Justice. Justice doesn't say, oh it's all in the past, Justice doesn't set limits on things like that, Justice is about balance. Injustice makes me fucking mad. It worries me that by saying, oh it's happened, we have to live in the now not in the past, may be an enabling attitude to these things happening again.
• Look: bottom line is, any big company is evil, by definition. Coorporations ARE NOT NICE. Local businesses are fine, as long as they're not Starbucks etc. But in the end, it's in the nature of money to make other people unhappy, and with the best will in the world I can't see a way to escape that. Now to read the thread.
• Damn and blast. That wasn't for this thread, but the 'boycott' thread. Do excuse, I can't count.
• >It worries me that by saying, oh it's happened, we have to live in the now not in the past, may be an enabling attitude to these things happening again. (Marge): "What have you done to the car? I don't think it had broken axles before." (Homer): "Before! Before! You're living in the past, Marge. Quit living in the past." At the risk of interjecting humor inappropriately.
• I think that giving compensation to iraq is in the interest of all sides. It's in the interest of Iraqis because it'll help them rebuild their country and have a better life, and it's in the interest of the coalition countries because that will help all the parties involved in the current crisis to start a new page after the withdrawal of the occupation troops, instead of leaving Iraq bleeding and Iraqis seeking revenge. Protecting the future of Iraq, the United States, and the rest of the coalition countries should be based on a solution that eliminates any excuses for future revenge and violence. If there should be a war on extremism and fundimentalism, giving compensation is the first battle in it.
• My guess is that Raed is trying to get compensation for Iraqis at all levels, not so much for himself. I know that he spent months documenting Iraqi casualties immediately after the invasion and later did research to get a total count of Iraqis killed because of the invasion and its aftermath. this is very important to mention. The US government already approved $10 million as compensation to Iraqi casualties based on the work of CIVIC (the NGO established by my work partner marla ruzicka) This fact can be used as a precedents to approve further compensation.
• Tell us what you really think ;)
• sorry for soundling like god with all the dramatic echo of my first comment!
• Tell us what you really think ;) hmmm, I'm really thinking about my hair cut. But I just told you what I think about the compensation project!
• thank you path for your explination, and for contacting me to come back here. I thought the post lasts for one day, and that's why I didn't come again today. And thank you tracicle for calling me a "high-profile blogger"! you made my day (hehe).
• Was anyone successful in claiming compensation from Iraq, after Saddam did his number on Kuwait?
• Is this compensation to be in the form of cash doled out to each and every Iraqi, or is it to be in the form of paying to rebuild their damaged infrastructure? If it's the latter, I think that's what's already being done right now.
• ahhhh... Iraq paid billions of dollars to kuwait and still paying every month. Iraq is paying more than $50 billion in total for the six months occupation. you can visit the website of The United Nations Compensation Commission to read more about this.
• rocket88 you're right, there are very small moves for rebuilding infrastructure and stuff. My idea is just to regulate them and make them on a national scale. if you missed the very big news about the bush administration stopping all the "iraq reconstruction" funds, just google it.
• PareidoliaticBo:' check out the "Claims" section of the UNCC link. Billions of dollars were paid out. And racket88 - cash was paid out by Iraq based on the individual claims filed with the UN. I think Raed is asking whether that's the best way to do it. Does infrastructure stuff matter? I don't know, Is the insurgency's trashing of electrical, petroleum and other facilities our fault? If it is deemed to be, than I'd guess we'd have to keep paying for fixing it till the end of time, since it may never stop.
• the exact total amount to be paid by Iraq is: $52,467,525,834 Iraq paid more than 20 billion of that until now.
• the exact total amount to be paid by Iraq is: $52,467,525,834 Iraq paid more than 20 billion of that until now.
• I assume 'paying to rebuild damaged infrastructure' means paying a big defense contractor like, say, Halliburton to rebuild some of the stuff that they also got paid to destroy. That 'racket88' typo up there is funny- I was just sitting here thinking, maaan, what a racket.
• path- according to the forth geneva convention, the occupation authorities are risponsible for keeping the blah blah blah. but anyway, these attacks are negligible when you look at the big picture.
• stan the bat- Sorry for the rAcket typo. (sorry rocket88) The best way for rebuilding Iraq is to start nation-wide grassroots projects. You can know more about this by reading my master thesis! I can email it to you if you wanted :*)
• raed - can you post a link to the thesis, so we can all read it?
• raed - can you post a link to the thesis, so we can all read it?
• Ok, here's some ideas: 1: Put together a cohesive press kit on this issue, including all necessary UNCC information and proper arguments as to why this is applicable to the USA. 2: Package it all up in a nice and clean website. Include in this site the easy, short, understandable press release; a more indepth report and analysis; and media contact info for all involved in this project. (Raed, etc) 3: Hit the press release out to all the liberal bloggers, Sean Paul, Billmon, Juan Cole to name a few. With a name like yours, Raed Jarrar, you will be listened to (read). Starting a move to push the US torwards claims payments will be slow and require a good grassroots movement to get any mainstream media attention. Most important would be to put this together like any project would be put together. State the vision, state the arguments, make the press releases, make the nice website. And then recruit people to the cause, make it enough of a movement that the media has to pick it up. I think it'd be entirely possible to pick up the newspaper in three months, and see on the front page that a group spearheaded by Raed Jarrar is attempting to force the US to pay compensation. Whether or not payments will ever come to pass, however, I have doubts.
• *seconds desires for a link to raed's master thesis*
• You must be using Opera, that double posts things sometimes.
• ian would say- thank you for all your ideas and compliments! This outline is what I was thinking on indeed. I'm meeting Proff. Juan Cole next week to have his feed back, and I already emailed some senators about it. Where should I start to have a good site? (and secure against hackers). Do you think I should wait until I have enough funds and strart a fancy site or put my ideas on a blogspot page then expand?
• Ian gives good advice. Getting away from your advocacy limited to your personal site and getting broader attention is really important. As for a grassroots movement in the US, well that could be a problem, since the majority is happy with the idea that they've saved your country from Satan. There may be channels to the UN that wouldn't depend on US opinion. I have no idea what they would be, however. Maybe finding a way to get worldwide opinion on your side is the best bet.
• hmmm, I'm really thinking about my hair cut. Get someone you like to rub your bald head and you will never want hair again. It feels wonderful!
• path- I don't think the compensation project should be seen as "punishment" to the US. On the contrary, it should be delt with as an investment for peace building. Compensation to Iraq will make us all live in peace and will prevent any future excuses for attacks against anyone. It'll take away the excuses used by extremists to recruit fighters against "the evil west"
• homunculus hahaha! in fact... niki, my partner, turned me into a skinhead today after a small mistake while cutting my hair. So yeah! It DOES feel good!
• As for a grassroots movement in the US, well that could be a problem, since the majority is happy with the idea that they've saved your country from Satan. I completely and utterly disagree. It's like that classic bumbersticker, "If you're not outraged, you're not paying attention". A USA-UNCC compensations demand will only be grassroots to those who are paying attention, but there's alot of us, and we're growing every day. Raed, you have the distinct advantage of being able to make a casual comment like "I'm meeting Proff. Juan Cole next week". I think that you are the kind of person who could absolutely pull this off as a grassroots effort - especially with US bloggering communities. This is kind of a starting point right here. Here's some more ideas:
• Come up with the brand. The name. What is this movement to get the USA to pay compensation called? It has to be catchy, something understandable. This is what the project is called, what the papers are titled, what the URL is.
• Get a server. Linode or something like that. 20 bucks a month would get you 50 gigs of transfer, enough to be able to handle a good bit of traffic. And if you're doing 50 gigs in a month on a site on a USA UNCC violation, then you're well on your way to grassroots success.
• Get a site designer. I'd offer my services if I was any good. Monkeys - Who's here? Raed - Who do you know that could design the site for you?
• Write the action plan. The website contents. Clearly spell out what the goals are and how they will be accomplished.
• Proslyetize. Find out what Juan Cole has to say. Talk to marketing gurus. Sean Paul. To use a Malcolm Gladwell-ism, figure out how you make your message "sticky".
This is a big project and it could take a hell of a lot of work. As long as you rest on solid legal footing (which IANAL, but it seems the argument for compensation is strong) then it'd entirely an issue of how to make this a viral idea. I'd love to help out in any way.