January 26, 2005


Zarqawi vs Sistani: In one corner is Shi'ite leader Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, who has proved himself to be a political genius in turning the toppling of Saddam Hussein into a seemingly permanent victory for Shi'ites. In the other corner is Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, whose sole weapon is the use of terror. Iraqis now have to decide between the two. (Ehsan Ahrari, 1/26/05, Asia Times)

Imagine how much contempt you have to have for Islam to believe there's a decision involved there?

Posted by Orrin Judd at January 26, 2005 7:49 AM

"Imagine how much contempt you have to have for Islam to believe there's a decision involved there"

Given the history of Islam, how could an intelligent person come to such a contemptuous attitude. Really incredible, isn't it OJ.

Posted by: h-man at January 26, 2005 8:15 AM


Well, if the contempt is justified, I guess we shouldn't care whether Sistani or Zarqari wins, should we? In fact, it might be better if the latter wins because Sistani will just confuse us wets and cloud the issue.

Posted by: Peter B at January 26, 2005 8:22 AM


Yes, you'd have to know almost nothing about Islam to think it was a tough call.

Posted by: oj at January 26, 2005 9:24 AM

Ehsan Ahrari is a PHd, and he apparently thinks it's a tough enough call to write an article, but granted a PHd doesn't prove that he is knowledgeable about Islam. Perhaps he was swayed by trivia such as Bin Laden having a 64% approval rating in Pakistan.

Posted by: h-man at January 26, 2005 10:20 AM

If another massive attack happens here Peter you will be right. It won't matter.

Posted by: BJW at January 26, 2005 11:13 AM

Contempt is active. Since he is a reporter Ockham says he's just a vocal lump.

Posted by: LUCIFEROUS at January 26, 2005 3:04 PM