Joking aside, it is just me being cranky at how much effort it took to get that lousey post thru.

Of course there are no govt agencies filtering the Internet.

Cheers Doug

(Hmmmm - got it thru after all that - scrap the copy I sent you Bill)

Am not convinced Sadr is Iran's boy - the evidence seems to paint a picture of Iranian support for al-Sistani plus al-Hakim and only moderate (among some hardliners in Tehran) support for al-Sadr. (Hope you aren't confusing support for 'Badr brigades' with 'Sadr brigands' :-).
I would agree that some hardliners in Iran may be using al-Sadr to create problems for US, but Iraninan govt already has one pro-Iranina on the IGC and also the loyaly and support of al-Sistani who totally outweighs al-Sadr both in power and religious sincerity. Sistani is the real leader of the Shia. al-Sadr is a firebrand posing as a religious leader and in his determination to gain some influence in Iran, is being willingly used by various factions.
I have assembled some material here but I believe the best is the link at the very bottom (a pdf doc)



Iranian Press criticises media support for al-Sadr
[link|http://www.daneshjoo.org/generalnews/article/publish/printer_5680.shtml|http://www.daneshjoo...rinter_5680.shtml]
EXTRACT >>
The issue is not whether or not America's claims are correct, but that the Americans are less interested in finding out the truth than in finding excuses against Iran. So we cannot remain silent before reckless initiatives now and then, years later, examine and reconsider the record of decision-makers and executors. If our actions in Afghanistan, Bosnia, Lebanon and Palestine have imposed certain unnecessary costs on us, it is not so difficult to make up for them. But Iraq is a case apart. Firstly, we already have experiences which can guide our policymakers. Secondly, on one side of the recent clashes in Iraq is an ambitious young man who has already shown his nature.
He once accused Iran of having a hand in Iraqi unrest, and another time insulted Ayatollah [Ali] Sistani and urged him to leave Iraq merely for being of Iranian origin. The Al-Jazeera network, which soon after the fall of Saddam, worked hard to present Muqtada Sadr as a Shi'a jurisprudent and religious authority, is more than any other medium publicizing his activities. During the American invasion of Iraq, the news network gave full coverage to the extravagant claims of [the Iraqi information minister, Muhammad] Sa'id al-Sahhaf, until minutes before the fall of Baghdad; certain media in Iran regrettably emulated the Al-Jazeera approach, without considering the fact that the satellite network was based in a country that also played host to the American forces attacking Iraq!
Today too, regardless of the chief goals of that network, which include spreading the idea that there are divisions among Iraq's senior Shi'a jurisprudents, and that Muqtada Sadr is equal in rank to such sources [of emulation] as Ayatollah Sistani, some of the media in our country are presenting the activities of Sadr's followers as the widspread resistance of the Iraqi people.
Clearly no friend of liberty would defend the occupation, but it is one thing to oppose occupation and another to take sides in a fight where none of the potential winners are favourably inclined toward Iran!
<<



This article seems to be the most balanced re Iranian 'support' for al-Sadr. Speaks of multiple factions in Iran who have different agendas. Iran's moderates support al-Sistani and al-Hakim. Some harline factions have been egging a--Sadr on.
[link|http://www.ocnus.net/artman/publish/article_11282.shtml|http://www.ocnus.net...ticle_11282.shtml]

REPORT >>
Rafsanjani Lets Cat Out Of The Bag
By Jalal Ghazi and Sandip Roy,Pacific News Service 9/4/04
Apr 10, 2004, 09:34

When Iran's influential former president, Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani recently hailed the Shi'ite Muslim militia of wanted Iraqi cleric Muqtada al-Sadr as "heroic," he might have been signaling that Iran is finally coming out from behind the scenes in the confrontation between the U.S. and al-Sadr that has left dozens dead.
The U.S.-led coalition has said the main reason it has issued an arrest warrant for al-Sadr is because he is wanted for the murder of another Shi'ite cleric, al-Khoei in the holy city of Najaf last year. But that line has few takers in Iraq. A survey of Arab television reveals a deep-seated suspicion about the real motives behind the arrest warrant. Ordinary Iraqis quoted on television wonder why the warrant came from Baghdad and not Najaf where the murder actually took place. And they point out that the murder happened last year. So why issue an arrest warrant for that now?
The answer might lie in Tehran which has huge influence on the Shi'ites in Iraq. The Shi'ites in Iran are not unified. They can be divided into two groups - the moderates and hardliners. The moderates who want to work with the United States are led by Abdel-Aziz al-Hakim who is a member of the Iraqi Governing Council. The hardliners, led by the likes of Muqtada al-Sadr, are opposed to the coalition forces and make no secret about wanting the Americans to leave Iraq.
This split mirrors in many ways the tension between reformists and conservatives in Iran as well. But in the recent elections in Iran, the reformists led by President Khatami were outmaneuvered and defeated by the conservatives who ally with Supreme Leader Khamenei. Though the means were dubious since many reformist candidates were banned from running, the end result has been a strengthening of the conservatives' power in Iran. Now they are able to come out more openly in support of al-Sadr. Previously when they had invited al-Sadr to Iran, President Khatami had refused to meet him though he had met with the moderate al-Hakim.
The hardliners have always supported al-Sadr because they agree ideologically. Both distrust the United States and do not wish to enter into deals with the Americans. They also would like the U.S. to be stuck in the Iraqi quagmire so as to make sure that it does not put Iran on its hit list next.
What has been worrying the U.S. lately is that the increased Iranian support to the Shi'ites led by al-Sadr could actually lead to transnational Shi'ite alliance hostile to Washington. The militant group Hizbollah in Southern Lebanon has already thrown its support behind al-Sadr, who responded by saying he would be their "striking hand in Iraq." The U.S. has been watching these developments in alarm because they did not go into Iraq to create Iran Number 2.
Paul Bremer, the Coalition Provisional Authority administrator, probably hoped that by taking on Muqtada al-Sadr, he could nip this alliance in the bud, send a strong message to Tehran and empower the moderate Shi'tes like the ones on the governing council. By issuing an arrest warrant he is hoping to force Shi'ites in Iraq to make a choice. But the choice may not be so easy to make. Iraq's Grand Ayatollah al-Sistani is the figure many Iraqi Shi'ites are looking to for direction. There has historically been bad blood between al-Sistani and al-Sadr's father who was assassinated by Saddam Hussein's regime. But al-Sadr has already declared his own allegiance to al-Sistani who will not want to come out openly against al-Sadr, Iran and Hizbollah. So he has been issuing ambiguous statements that call for calm but also criticize the American forces.
While the final outcome might still depend on al-Sistani, the increasing confrontation between the U.S. and al-Sadr's Imam Mehdi army shows Bremer may have underestimated al-Sadr as no more than a young firebrand with limited support. The danger in igniting this confrontation is that it raises the possibility of Iraq's majority Shi'ites reaching out to the Sunnis who have already been fighting the coalition forces in places like Fallujah. There are already signs that this is happening as residents of dominantly Sunni Fallujah tell al Alam television, an Arabic news channel out of Tehran, that they view al-Sadr as a political hero that the U.S. is trying to silence him by shutting down al Hawza newspaper which supported him.
But the biggest danger is that the turmoil will allow hardliners in Iran to openly take up a prominent position in the unfolding drama. If it declares its full support to al-Sadr, it could be the key that would help him come out on top of the struggle between the conservatives and the moderates
<<




[link|http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/headline/world/2507926|http://www.chron.com...ine/world/2507926]
EXCERPT >>
The United States gave tacit approval to the Iranian envoy's visit to Iraq, a State Department official said on condition of anonymity.
Sadeghi was in Najaf today after meeting with current Governing Council president Massoud Barzani the night before and offering to help mediate in the standoff with al-Sadr.
The U.S. nod to the Iranian intervention reflected the complex relationship Tehran and Washington have had over Iraq. The United States and Iran are bitter enemies, and U.S. officials frequently accuse Iran of allowing militants to cross from its territory into Iraq.
But Iran has enormous influence in mostly Shiite southern Iraq and shares Washington's interest in keeping it peaceful. The U.S.-led political process, which could be derailed by any large outbreak of violence, will likely end with a Shiite-led government friendly to Tehran.
Iran has endorsed the U.S.-picked Governing Council -- which has some close Iranian allies among its members -- and has not tried to stir up Iraqi Shiites against the U.S.-led occupation.
Tehran and Washington have been holding behind-the-scenes communication on how to restore order in Iraq, Iran's Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi said Wednesday, though he said they have been "going nowhere."
Both countries also want to avoid a U.S. attack on Najaf, site of the holiest Shiite site -- the Imam Ali Shrine, only yards away from the office where al-Sadr is located, surrounded by armed gunmen.
<<


Iran's most significant concern at the moment is any attack on the holy cities ..
[link|http://www.juancole.com/2004_04_01_juancole_archive.html|http://www.juancole....cole_archive.html]

EXTRACT >>
Najaf Crisis and International Implications
Iran: US Will Pay a 'Heavy Price'

Iran warned the American government that it would "pay a heavy price" if its forces attacked the cities of Najaf and Karbala. Ayatollah Muhammad Taskhiri, the representative of Supreme Jurisprudent Ali Khamenei, told al-Hayat, "The American forces will have committed the biggest act of stupidity in their entire lives if they took this vile step."
In Riyadh, Abdul Rahman al-Atiyah, the secretary general of the Gulf Cooperation Council, blamed the occupation authorities for the current events, including the deterioration of the security situation. He called on the Coalition forces to cooperate with all political forces in Iraq in seeking an end to the downward spiral. He said it was unlikely that any Gulf countries would provide peacekeeping troops in Iraq.
Meanwhile, the British military is extremely concerned about the possibility of a general Shiite uprising in Basra, according to the Telegraph:
' the commander of British troops in southern Iraq, Brig Nick Carter, admitted that he would be powerless to prevent the overthrow of Coalition forces if the Shia majority in Basra rose up in rebellion. Brig Carter, of the 20 Armoured Brigade, who has been in Iraq for four months, said British forces would stay in Basra with the consent of local Shia leaders, or not at all. Last month, 14 British soldiers were injured in Basra, at least three seriously, when they came under attack from demonstrators armed with petrol bombs, rocks and a grenade. "A crowd of 150,000 people at the gates of this barracks would be the end of this, as far as I'm concerned," Brig Carter said. "There would be absolutely nothing I could do about that . . ." During an interview in Basra last week Brig Carter acknowledged that the Coalition's presence in southern Iraq was entirely dependent on the goodwill of the local Shia Muslim leader, Sayid Ali al-Safi al-Musawi. He represents Ayatollah Sistani, Iraq's leading Shia cleric. "The moment that Sayid Ali says, 'We don't want the Coalition here', we might as well go home," Brig Carter said. '
<<

There is no doubt that Iran wields great influence over events in Iraq but the evidence clearly paints a picture of a struggle between moderate Iranian elements (govt) & some hardliners opposed to th current 'moderate' govt.

Another excellent article that covers all views & angles but leans toward Iran not liking Sadr is here
[link|http://www.fpif.org/pdf/gac/0404neoconsadr.pdf|http://www.fpif.org/...404neoconsadr.pdf]

Doug Marker

the original format was as all the other posts I do. Also the item finally posted was the exact same one I zipped & sent to you (I merely cut & pasted it into the post area).

Also remember that I tried adding it in pices as an update to the cooment post I was able to get thru.

Also remember that I couldn't even email it to myself at the time it was not getting thru.

Also, I went thru 6 months of this in 2002 up until departing HK.

I am in little doubt as to posts being intercepted if they contain phrases of interest to security agency.