Pro-American Iraqi blog provokes intrigue, outrage

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ss...headline/world/2997286
When I telephoned a man named Ali Fadhil in Baghdad last week, I wondered who might answer. A CIA operative? An American posing as an Iraqi? Someone paid by the Defense Department to support the war? Or simply an Iraqi with some mixed feelings about the American presence in Iraq? Until he picked up the phone, he was just a ghost on the Internet.

The mystery began last month when I went online to see what Iraqis think about the war and the Jan. 30 national election. I stumbled into an ideological snake pit. Out of a list of 28 Iraqi blogs in English at a site called Iraqi Bloggers Central, I clicked on Iraq the Model because it promised three blogging brothers in one, Omar, Mohammed and Ali.

It delivered more than that. The blog, which is quite upbeat about the American presence in Iraq, had provoked a deluge of intrigue and vitriol. People posting messages on an American Web site called Martini Republic accused the three bloggers of working for the CIA, of being American puppets, of not being Iraqis and even of not existing at all.

Then abruptly, at the end of last month, Ali quit the blog without telling his brothers while they were in the United States attending a blogging conference at Harvard and taking part in a tour sponsored by Spirit of America, a nongovernmental group founded after Sept. 11, 2001, that describes itself as "advancing freedom, democracy and peace abroad."


Ali's last post sounded ominous, a kind of blogger's "Dear John" note:

"I just can't keep doing this anymore. My stand regarding America has never changed. I still love America and feel grateful to all those who helped us get our freedom and are still helping us establishing democracy in our country. But it's the act of some Americans that made me feel I'm on the wrong side here. I will expose these people in public very soon, and I won't lack the means to do this."

What happened?

Ali seemed to have gone through a radical transformation when he found out that his brothers, both described as dentists on their Web site, had met President Bush. Odd. I scrolled down a bit into the past and found that in mid-December a conspiracy theory had emerged about Iraq the Model on Martini Republic.

One of the principal bloggers there, Joseph Mailander, had some questions for the Iraqi brothers. He wanted to know whether someone in the U.S. government or close to it had set up the blog. (The Web host, based in Abilene, Texas, is called CIATech Solutions.) And what about the two brothers' tour of the United States? Did the U.S. government "have a shadow role in promoting it?"

The questions boiled down to whether Iraq the Model had been "astroturfed." Astroturfing occurs when a supposedly grass-roots operation actually is getting help from a powerful think tank, governmental agency or any outside source with an agenda. Why else, Martini Republic asked, would the brothers have been feted in Washington?

Ali, while he was still at Iraq the Model, tried to quell some of the doubts: "Hi, I would be happy to answer your questions, as you do raise some valid questions." To the question of the Web host in Abilene, he responded, "All I remember is that we started our blog through the free blogger.com!"

Ali explained the name of the Web host, CIATech Solutions, by pasting in an e-mail message he got from an employee of the company explaining that the CIA in the name is short for Complex Internet Applications and that the company "has nothing to do with the U.S. government."

As for financing, Ali said that Iraq the Model had received private donations from Americans, Australians, French, British and Iraqi citizens. In addition, the brothers were promised money from Spirit of America. But, he added, "We haven't got it yet."

That did not quiet the suspicions on Martini Republic. A man posting as Gandhi reported that his "polite antiwar comments were always met with barrages of crude abuse" from Iraq the Model's readers. His conclusion? The blog "is a refuge for people who do not want to know the truth about Iraq, and the brothers take care to provide them with a comfortable information cocoon." He added, "I hope some serious attention will be brought to bear on these Fadhil brothers and reveal them as frauds."

What kind of frauds? One reader suggested that the brothers were real Iraqis but were being coached on what to write. Another, in support of that theory, noted the brothers' suspiciously fluent English. A third person observed that coaching wasn't necessary. All the CIA would need to do to influence American opinion was find one pro-war blog and get a paper like USA Today to write about it.

Martini Republic pointed out that the pro-war blog was getting lots of attention from papers like The Wall Street Journal and USA Today while anti-war bloggers like Riverbend, who writes Baghdad Burning, had gone unsung. Surely Iraq the Model did not represent the mainstream of Iraqi thinking?


Ali finally got exasperated: "The thing that upset me the most is that if there are some powers that are trying to use us and our writings as a propaganda tool, you and other bloggers as well as some of the media outlets are doing the same with anti-American Iraqi bloggers."

But his "if" seemed to signal that Ali, too, was indeed worried about being used.

That was on Dec. 12. Ali's "Dear John" letter followed on Dec. 19. Then he quietly resurfaced on the Internet as a blogger called Iraqi Liberal and, when that name generated too much online debate about what "liberal" meant, Free Iraqi.

Using an e-mail address listed on Iraq the Model, I got in touch with Ali to see what in the world was going on. And last week I finally got to talk on the telephone to Ali Fadhil, a 34-year-old doctor who was born to Sunni Muslims but said, "I don't look at myself as one now."

Why did he quit Iraq the Model? When was he going to expose the Americans who made him feel he was on the wrong side?

He was surprisingly frank. The blog had changed him. When the blog began, he said, "People surprised me with their warmth and how much they cared about us." But as time passed, he said, "I felt that this is not just goodwill, giving so much credit to Iraq the Model. We haven't accomplished anything, really."

His views took a sharp turn when his two brothers met with the president. There wasn't supposed to be any press coverage about their trip to the United States, he said. But The Washington Post wrote about the meeting, and the Arabic press ended up translating the story, which, Ali felt, put his family in real danger.

Anyway, he said, he didn't see any sense in his brothers' meeting with Bush. "My brothers say it happened accidentally, that it was not planned." But why, he asked, take such an "unnecessary risk"? He explained his worries: "Here some people would kill you for just writing to an American."

Ali never did expose the people who made him feel that he was on the wrong side, and in fact conceded that he couldn't. As he confided on the phone, "I didn't know who the people were." Instead, he started his own blog. He said he had always wanted to do that anyway.

"Me and my brothers," he said, "we generally agree on Iraq and the future." (He is helping his brother Mohammed, who is running on the Iraqi Pro-Democracy Party ticket in the Jan. 30 election.) But there is one important difference: "My brothers have confidence in the American administration. I have my questions."

Now that seems genuine.
Wouldn't surprise me if the Bush administration was behind other forms of propaganda like this in order to bolster support of the war on Iraq.
 
Sep 12, 2004
16,852
59
86
At least these guys will prove they are Iraqis. Riverbend who, btw, is also hosted by CIATech, refuses to do so. There's been lots of specualtion that Riverbend is actually an American chickendove posing as an Iraqi and forwarding her agenda that way. She refuses to even give her real name.

I'm sure you're not concerned about those facts though.
 
Sep 12, 2004
16,852
59
86
Originally posted by: conjur
There are more accusers other than Riverbend. Sorry, TLC.

I'm very familiar with the situation. I've read ItM every day since it's inception as well as Free Iraqi.

The article is distorting the facts and glossing over some important points to make it seem as if it's something it's not, such as the reason Ali left.

I would suggest you go read Iraq the Model and Free Iraqi (Ali provides an explanation on his site), then decide for yourself. The truth of the situation is on those sites in plain view. It's not in that article.
 
Sep 12, 2004
16,852
59
86
Ali and the Mohammed at ITM respond to the slanted piece printed by the NY Times.

From Ali:

I feel I should give my opinion on the NY times article about me and Iraq the Model that has created some variable reactions on the blogosphere. The article was, despite Ms Boxer's kindness, a bad piece of journalism. I had around 45 minutes long phone call with the reporter about my journey with Iraq the Model, my new site, the elections, the general situation here in Baghdad but she (or the paper) seems to have a certain agenda and managed to change the whole issue into a very silly gossip (going as far as quoting trolls!) that is way beneath any respectable paper and certainly beneath me so I won't give it more attention but lesson learned and I won't make the mistake of talking to anyone from the NY times again. It's important to note though that my feelings of respect, gratitude and love for the American people have never and will never change.
NO! Say it ain't so, Joe. The NY Times having an agenda?

From Mohammed:

Sarah Boxer (boxer@nytimes.com) in her latest piece on the NYT tried hard to put together some rotten limbs to produce a creature that satisfies her fantasy but she ended up introducing a new mutant to the readers and to the methods of journalism.
It wasn't a surprise for me as it was just another reproduction of the old ways of the corrupt side of the MSM in dealing with facts and events.

One short look at the "article" shows how naïve the writer was and how old the methods used in writing this post are. This post has fixed another nail in the casket of the gasping media.

I won't be exaggerating if I said that I find a close resemblance between the ways of the media and those of terror in dealing with events; both are using ugly and cheap maneuvers to get attention. These methods could be even horrible and dangerous but never convincing.
It doesn't seem that the media is working hard to catch up with time and progress; at least the performance says so.

Let's go back to the "article" itself and particularly to its beginning; the writer allowed herself to put all the accusations in the front and considered the possibility that we are Iraqis as the last possible theory on the list.

Maybe she thought it's too much for us to be Iraqis and love our country at the same time, so she added "who have mixed feelings?".
From Boxer's point of view, an Iraqi who supports America's efforts in liberating his country from the worst tyrant in modern history and rebuilding his country after that is either a paid agent or a mentally confused person. As if clear thinking is an exclusive gift that only a journalist from the NYT could possess while anyone outside her office is simply confused.

If Boxer had spent few more minutes in reading any of our posts she would've learnt that we're first of all, pro-Iraq. We never ceased to look forward for a new Iraq that is democratic and prosperous and the reason why we are pro-US is because we saw that America-the people and the administration-has made the right decision by liberating Iraq and this certainly serves the interests of both nations.

We're advertising for nothing but the new Iraq that we've always dreamed of and we believe that having America's support is a necessity and a vital element in the process.
We're still looking forward to seeing a strategic partnership between the two nations; a partnership from which both countries can benefit.

Boxer has forgotten to mention a single word about our efforts in building the "Arabic blogging tool". We've been doing that for months now with support from the American people via "Spirit of America".
She forgot to acknowledge that we're trying through this project to spread freedom of speech in the Arabic world by giving our people the opportunity to voice their opinions through a tool that overrides the barrier of language.
Now, as I understood it, journalists are usually in support of anything that brings freedom of speech, and more tolerance and understanding while lessening violence.

But maybe it's just that this tool will be the response that Boxer and her colleagues fear the most; they will have to deal with thousands of Iraq the models when our countrymen begin using this tool.
The fact that her pathetic article might endanger us and our friends over at Friends of Democracy will not stop us from continuing the work we're doing and we're determined to accomplish what we've started because we feel responsible towards our readers and we don't write our posts to throw stupid accusations here and there.

As much as I was annoyed by that "article" I cannot describe my happiness when I began reading the reactions and defense posts and comments from our brothers in the big family of the blogosphere as well as from our regular readers.
These were much bigger than that mutant little incoherent group of words of Boxer's.
I would like to thank you all my friends and once again I promise that I won't disappoint you.
I can write a book about this "article" that has more holes than Swiss cheese (we have Swiss cheese here incase you don't know that Sarah!) but I'm not going to waste my time or our readers' on this as we all have more important things to do.
Well Mohammed. There are people in the US who disagree with you because they obviously know what Iraqis desire and what is best for them and will gladly tell you how wrong you are.
 

dgevert

Senior member
Dec 6, 2004
362
0
0
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
At least these guys will prove they are Iraqis. Riverbend who, btw, is also hosted by CIATech, refuses to do so. There's been lots of specualtion that Riverbend is actually an American chickendove posing as an Iraqi and forwarding her agenda that way. She refuses to even give her real name.

I'm sure you're not concerned about those facts though.

What facts?

"There's been lots of specualtion [sic]"

Speculations are facts now?
 
Sep 12, 2004
16,852
59
86
Originally posted by: dgevert
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
At least these guys will prove they are Iraqis. Riverbend who, btw, is also hosted by CIATech, refuses to do so. There's been lots of specualtion that Riverbend is actually an American chickendove posing as an Iraqi and forwarding her agenda that way. She refuses to even give her real name.

I'm sure you're not concerned about those facts though.

What facts?

"There's been lots of specualtion [sic]"

Speculations are facts now?
Congratulations on your lack of reading comprehension.

 

dgevert

Senior member
Dec 6, 2004
362
0
0
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: dgevert
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
At least these guys will prove they are Iraqis. Riverbend who, btw, is also hosted by CIATech, refuses to do so. There's been lots of specualtion that Riverbend is actually an American chickendove posing as an Iraqi and forwarding her agenda that way. She refuses to even give her real name.

I'm sure you're not concerned about those facts though.

What facts?

"There's been lots of specualtion [sic]"

Speculations are facts now?
Congratulations on your lack of reading comprehension.

And congratulations on yet another TastesLikeChicken flame post.

Out of curiosity, when you came up with your name, were you referring to troll meat?
 

dgevert

Senior member
Dec 6, 2004
362
0
0
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: conjur
There are more accusers other than Riverbend. Sorry, TLC.

I'm very familiar with the situation. I've read ItM every day since it's inception as well as Free Iraqi.

The article is distorting the facts and glossing over some important points to make it seem as if it's something it's not, such as the reason Ali left.

I would suggest you go read Iraq the Model and Free Iraqi (Ali provides an explanation on his site), then decide for yourself. The truth of the situation is on those sites in plain view. It's not in that article.

That's like saying "I've read FreeRepublic and The Drudge Report every day, so I'm familiar with American politics." It's horse shit. You've already obviously chosen to agree with everything that ItM and Free Iraqi have to say, since you've already decided it fits your worldview.
 
Sep 12, 2004
16,852
59
86
Originally posted by: dgevert
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: dgevert
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
At least these guys will prove they are Iraqis. Riverbend who, btw, is also hosted by CIATech, refuses to do so. There's been lots of specualtion that Riverbend is actually an American chickendove posing as an Iraqi and forwarding her agenda that way. She refuses to even give her real name.

I'm sure you're not concerned about those facts though.

What facts?

"There's been lots of specualtion [sic]"

Speculations are facts now?
Congratulations on your lack of reading comprehension.

And congratulations on yet another TastesLikeChicken flame post.
Not my problem you can't read.

Out of curiosity, when you came up with your name, were you referring to troll meat?
Another unworthy challenger?

::yawn::
 

yllus

Elite Member & Lifer
Aug 20, 2000
20,577
432
126
... attending a blogging conference at Harvard ...
What the hell? Haha.

I'd try to feign interest in this topic, but whether or not some blogger is real or not...yeah, not the sort of thing I'm gonna waste much time on. :p
 

dgevert

Senior member
Dec 6, 2004
362
0
0
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Not my problem you can't read.

You know, you talk a lot of stuff about liberals not having anything worthy to say, so why is it that all you ever do is link to conservative sites, commit plaigarism by copying often-copywrited material to these forums (which is sadly and unfortunately common here, I know), and post unadulterated liberal-bashing ramblings? Hypocrite much?
 
Sep 12, 2004
16,852
59
86
Originally posted by: yllus
... attending a blogging conference at Harvard ...
What the hell? Haha.

I'd try to feign interest in this topic, but whether or not some blogger is real or not...yeah, not the sort of thing I'm gonna waste much time on. :p
It actually goes deeper than merely whether they're real or not. We know they're real. The question was whether or not they are "pawns" of the Republicans/conservatives or Americans psoing as Iraqis. They would question these guys who give their names and appear publicly and are known to live in Iraq while they accept Riverbend - who refuses to make herself public - kudos and a free pass simply because she aligns with their ideological thinking.

Things along the same lines have been exposed in this forum recently. People are more interested in supporting their ideological homeboys instead of being concerned with facts. To some folks, facts don't appear to be nearly as important as slamming the US or the US admin.

 
Sep 12, 2004
16,852
59
86
Originally posted by: dgevert
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Not my problem you can't read.

You know, you talk a lot of stuff about liberals not having anything worthy to say, so why is it that all you ever do is link to conservative sites, commit plaigarism by copying often-copywrited material to these forums (which is sadly and unfortunately common here, I know), and post unadulterated liberal-bashing ramblings? Hypocrite much?
When I see you complaining about the liberals in here regurgitating TalkingPointsMemo.com on a regular basis, you might have something. Until then, your comment is just as hypocritical. iow, look who's talking?

 

dgevert

Senior member
Dec 6, 2004
362
0
0
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
When I see you complaining about the liberals in here regurgitating TalkingPointsMemo.com on a regular basis, you might have something. Until then, your comment is just as hypocritical. iow, look who's talking?

I have regularly backed up my arguments with others here with facts and references, which is something I've never seen you do. So until you grow up, (looks at avatar) Gramps, I'm just going to assume you're incapable of rational, intelligent discourse, and I'm going to stick to playing with the big boys.
 

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: dgevert
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Not my problem you can't read.

You know, you talk a lot of stuff about liberals not having anything worthy to say, so why is it that all you ever do is link to conservative sites, commit plaigarism by copying often-copywrited material to these forums (which is sadly and unfortunately common here, I know), and post unadulterated liberal-bashing ramblings? Hypocrite much?
When I see you complaining about the liberals in here regurgitating TalkingPointsMemo.com on a regular basis, you might have something. Until then, your comment is just as hypocritical. iow, look who's talking?
says the guy posting threads from captainsquartersblog.com? :confused:

And, since I was curious, I typed in http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com. I figured you were joking. Ooof...what a pathetic site.

No, liberals or libertarians don't need to be told what to think, unlike the "dittoheads"
 
Sep 12, 2004
16,852
59
86
Originally posted by: conjur
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: dgevert
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Not my problem you can't read.

You know, you talk a lot of stuff about liberals not having anything worthy to say, so why is it that all you ever do is link to conservative sites, commit plaigarism by copying often-copywrited material to these forums (which is sadly and unfortunately common here, I know), and post unadulterated liberal-bashing ramblings? Hypocrite much?
When I see you complaining about the liberals in here regurgitating TalkingPointsMemo.com on a regular basis, you might have something. Until then, your comment is just as hypocritical. iow, look who's talking?
says the guy posting threads from captainsquartersblog.com? :confused:
Why be confused? I don't hide my agenda and I've explained it before.

Is Captain's Quarters wrong on the article I posted? I could have linked Powerline or any other numerous blogs. I could have linked a liberal site but, mysteriously, liberal sites were eerily silent on this subject. I wonder why? Don't you wonder why too?

And, since I was curious, I typed in http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com. I figured you were joking. Ooof...what a pathetic site.

No, liberals or libertarians don't need to be told what to think, unlike the "dittoheads"
BWAHAHAHA. Sure they don't. ;) Thanks for the laugh.