BBC derides Iraqi handover

While the world celebrates Iraq's new found freedom from 35 years of a brutal dictator, the BBC just can't stand the coalition's success.

Paul Reynolds in another one of his "so called" analysis (trust me this guy couldn't analyze a packet of crisps) pours cold water over the most important day in Iraq's history.

The unexpected early handover in Iraq has provided the new interim Iraqi government and the departing Coalition with a rare propaganda coup - but the advantage is likely to be short-lived as Iraq's problems press in.

As if that were all there is to it. The BBC have been at the forefront calling for the coalition to hand over power and critisizing Bush for the delay. Then when the US move the date forward Reynolds calls it a "propaganda coup".

And the hurried nature of the move is an indication by itself that not all is well in the state of Iraq.

If it was, the moment would be one for celebration not for secrecy.

Brilliant deduction Watson, er Reynolds. I'm sure pretty much the whole world knows that all is not well in Iraq. But things get better every day. You wouldn't know that from the BBC though.

As far as having the handover in secrecy, there is another reason that escapes Reynold's sharp "analysis". The US wanted today to be Iraq's day not the coalition's and they want to avoid the impression that the new government is a puppet of the US. The picture the US wants the world to remember is Bremer getting on a plane and flying out of Iraq.

And for celebrating, the method used in that part of the world usually includes large groups of men firing automatic weapons in the air. I would imagine the government thought this would be an unwise move at this point in time.

Some bright spark must have realized that the conjunction of the Nato summit in Turkey with the original handover date of 30 June would give the United States and Britain the chance of controlling the news agenda for a change.

A snide remark? Do I detect jealousy, Reynolds old boy? Lost control of the old news agenda have we? You're sure trying to make up for it here though.

The handover is now dominating the summit, diverting attention from the undercurrents of divisions which marked the G8 meeting three weeks ago and which were threatening this gathering, whatever the show of public unity.

Really, Reynolds? Looks like your "analysis" failed to turn up the fact that NATO agreed to provide training to the new Iraqi forces, send up to 10,000 additional troops to Afghanistan, "Istanbul Declaration" that renews their commitment to collective defense and to work together..., and ended with this statement:

"And it reflects the reality of transatlantic cooperation in NATO today: America and Europe united in a strong alliance " committed to defend and to promote our common values and shared interests in the Euro-Atlantic area and beyond," he said.

Told you Reynolds couldn't analyze a packet of crisps. His fumbling and stumbling continues.

It has also enabled President George Bush and UK Prime Minister Tony Blair to present the argument to their closest allies they have always relied on when other justifications for the war have faltered - that one day Iraqis would govern themselves. Here therefore, they can say, is evidence of this.

Name one Reynolds. Name one justification Bush set out in his UN speech that has faltered.

Weapons of mass destruction found here and more confirmed found by UN inspectors here.

Saddam's oppression of his own people, failure to repatriate Kuwaiti prisoners, ties to terrorism and blatant disregard for 18 UN resolutions, are a matter of record. Not to mention the unfolding UN oil-for-food scandal.

So, come on Reynolds; put up or shut up.

Just when you think Reynolds can't do any worse, he steps up and proves us wrong.

To start with, this is only an interim, appointed government with limited powers. Elections are not due until January and even then there will only be a "transitional" government which will have to write a constitution before full elections are held by the end of next year.

Let's see - interim government, followed by elections, then a transitional government and then full elections. Sounds good. What is wrong with that Reynolds? You have to start somewhere. Or are you advocating that the US should have written the constitution for them and held elections immediately?

So democratic legitimacy is some way off and that makes it hard for this government to rally support from the people.

Reynolds is obviously one of those BBC reporters that sit around the pool and drink G and T all day. How else can one explain his complete lack of information and news?

Organization of the Islamic Conference backs new Iraqi government

The world's largest Islamic group threw its support behind Iraq's interim government

The Islamic world, the UN, and even the Iraqis themselves consider the interim government legitimate. But somehow the BBC and Reynolds feel they know what is best for the Iraqis.

Here is what the Iraqis themselves said about the interim government in a recent poll.

Some key numbers.

68 percent of Iraqis have confidence in their new leaders

73 percent of Iraqis polled approved of Allawi to lead the new government

84 percent approved of President Ghazi Yawar

two-thirds backed the new Cabinet

Four out of every five Iraqis expected that the new government will "make things better" for Iraq

Reynolds goes on to moan about the security in Iraq and the interim governments ability to deal with it.

Secondly, with more than 100 civilians being killed each week, the power of the government to impose its will on the streets is very limited.

While security is a concern, the hand over changes the dynamics of the insurgency in Iraq. Even Iraq's religious leaders have turned on the insurgents and something unheard of in the Islamic world, Sistani through his spokesperson said the following:

"Zarqawi, Zawahiri and bin Laden are filthy infidels who nurture malignance against Imam Ali and his sons," he said.

Powerful words against bin Laden himself!

Even firebrand cleric Sadr's milita, having been defeated by coalitionn forces, have laid down their arms.

Seems to me the interim government having been given legitimacy by everyone in the world except the BBC and now being backed by Iraqi clerics, is gaining in imposing its' "will on the streets". Somehow all this escapes our intrepid analyst, Reynolds.

Government, security, what will Watson, er, Reynolds "analyze now"? Iraq reconstruction, economy and jobs.

This can be seen from the failure to improve the electricity supply. Coalition figures show it was running on a daily average during May of 4144 megawatts, well below the 6000 megawatts planned by the handover date.

Curiously, this "so called analyst", fails to mention that
the country as a whole is producing as much power as before the war and by spring it will be up by 25%. In fact Basra has a power surplus!

So even though the coalition may have (knowing Reynolds as I do, I'm not taking his word for it) missed it's target, the power is back to prewar levels and improving daily.

What about jobs Reynolds?

Sabotage and the threat to foreign workers are obviously factors. Until these issues can be addressed, the rebuilding of Iraq - heralded as one of the main effects of the American occupation with $18bn voted by Congress for infrastructure - will not provide enough good news to counter the bad. Nor will it provide enough jobs.

Well, for starters you will never, ever hear any good news out of Iraq from the BBC. While there is good news all over the place, the BBC in pushing its' anti-American agenda will not tell anyone about it.

If you follow the link to Chrenkoff's blog, be sure to check out the links on the right to his Iraqi good news series. There are four so far and each is a long and detailed review of all the good news in Iraq that mainstream media will not report.

Some notes on the Economy from The Economist.

For many Iraqis, living standards have already risen a lot. Boosted by government make-work programmes, day labourers are getting double their pre-war wages. A university dean's pay has gone up fourfold, a policeman's by a factor of ten.

Before the war, Kifah Karim, a teacher at a Baghdad primary school, took home monthly pay equivalent to just $6. Her husband earned $13 as a factory overseer. Today, with a combined income of close to $450...They buy 2-3 kilos of meat a week, and have recently purchased a new fridge, a television, a TV satellite dish, a VCR and a CD player.

Stacks of such goods now crowd the pavements of Baghdad's main shopping streets.

See how easy it is Reynolds if you just put down that G&T, get off your ass, and at least try your hand at analysis.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------