Iraq Constitution

[Karlin]

The Iraq Constitution is about to be voted on by Iraqis.
It was drafted under occupation by the USa, and so it can be assumed that it is USA-style.

The words themselves are good enough, its just about rights and the way elections are done.

The proposed constitution in Iraq is the result of the machinations of an illegitimate puppet government, directed by foreign governments and under illegal military occupation. The whole process is a charade that must be exposed as such.
Carlos Flores, Vancouver, Canada

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/talking_point/4335472.stm

"The Sunnis are dominant in four provinces and so therefore effectively hold a power of veto if they turn out in large numbers to vote against it. "
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4341594.stm

Sunni leaders fear the current proposals may lead the country to split, with a Kurdish north and Shia south, depriving Sunni Arabs of access to the country's oil resources.

The BBC's Richard Galpin in Baghdad says it has been easier for the "Yes" camp who dominate government to get their message across on state-controlled media than for the Sunni minority, our correspondent adds.

K - ya ya, same old same old. Media is controlled to support the established ones, which is now the occupiers, Americans. Media works, to a degree. ... they might get the constitution passed, but without the support of the Sunnis and civil war is nigh. It could even be the spark that erupts into civil war.

Omissions are :
- provisions for occupying forces to leave,
- for the economic controls on foreign powers, be they corporate or USA government, in Iraq after occupation ends.
- specifically about how the oil will be used.

omissions tells us as much as inclusions eh?

K






[/quote]

 

[no1important]

Well it is off to a rough start in a way as the power lines have been blown out and Baghdad is currently in the dark.

Insurgents Sabotage Power Lines in Baghdad, Plunging City Into Darkness on Eve of Referendum

Like don't US Soldiers guard the power lines? Especially on the eve of the referendum.

 

[Jo Canadian]

 

[PoisonPete2]

occupiers do not have the right to reconstitute a country. This whole charade is destabilizing the Middle East. But it puts more cash into the coffers of the integrated oil multi-nationals.

 

[Hank C Cheyenne]

.....well its great to see that there is expected to be a major increase in the turnout today....an increase from the prior parlimentary election...... I know many of us are cynical about this but I think we are all united in hoping that the constitution is passed and that Iraq becomes more united as a result of this......obviously there will be the terrorists but hopefully the rest of the folk feel more united after these votes..... a historic day for Iraqi people

 

[Hank C Cheyenne]

Iraqis vote on a constitution aimed at defining the nation's democracy
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Iraqi troops cast their votes in the referendum on the new constitution in Abu Ghraib, Iraq, Saturday. (AP/Mohammed Uraibi)
BAGHDAD (AP) - Iraq's deeply divided Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds voted at heavily guarded polling stations across the country Saturday, deciding whether to support a new constitution aimed at establishing democracy after more than two decades of Saddam Hussein's repressive rule.

As polls closed at 5 p.m. (10 a.m. EDT), people in Baghdad fired guns into the air in celebration. Some Iraqis passed out sweets in the street, just ahead of the end of the day's Ramadan fast.

Insurgents attacked five of Baghdad's 1,200 polling stations with shootings and bombs, wounding seven voters, but there were no major attacks reported as U.S. and Iraqi forces clamped down with major security measures around balloting sites.

The United States hopes the constitution will be approved so Iraqis can form a permanent, representative government and secure the country so Washington can start withdrawing its 150,000 troops.

Vote counting began immediately. In Baqouba, northeast of Baghdad, a handful of men sat around long tables, putting "yes" votes in one pile and "no" votes in another.

Baqouba turnout is key because the city is in a province that is majority Sunni but has sizable Shiite and Kurdish communities. Sunni leaders have sent mixed signals about whether to support the charter.

The draft constitution can be defeated by either a simple majority or if two-thirds of voters in three of Iraq's 18 provinces cast ballots against it. Rejection would be difficult because most of the majority Shiites and Kurds support the charter.

©The Canadian Press, 2005

 

[Ocean Breeze]

October 15, 2005

Today's vote on the Iraqi Constitution is the culmination of 15 years of unrelenting aggression against the Iraqi people. Washington has never wavered in it's to determination to topple Saddam and control Iraqi oil. Saturday's balloting is just another public relations stunt to disguise the criminal intention of the present occupation.

There's a straight line that runs from Gulf War 1, through the genocidal 10 year sanctions, to the present occupation. Are the American people really stupid enough to believe that this policy will change by today's referendum?

Even America's right-leaning media has conceded that the purpose of the constitution is to divide the country. So, why do we call it a constitution at all? Only in the skewed Bush-lexicon does the term "constitution" mean the same as "partition". Most of us believe that a nations' constitution should embrace the collective aspirations of its people. It should outline the commitment to civil liberties, social justice and human rights. In a democracy it should articulate the principles of representative government and the limits on executive authority.

There's nothing even remotely like this in the Iraqi constitution. It was drawn up mainly to appease the Shi'ites and the Kurds in their hopes for regional autonomy, to exclude the Sunnis from future oil wealth, and to incite civil war. Bush had no intention of delivering a constitution that protected the integrity or sovereignty of a unified Iraq. What he has produced are the articles of succession, not a constitution. By this same rationale, Bush would have supported the cause of the Confederacy prior to our own Civil War.

It is not within the legal authority of the occupying power to facilitate the break up of a sovereign nation. The vote itself is a challenge to the international community and the laws that are supposed to govern these activities.

Why hasn't the UN spoken out? Why is there no threat of boycott or sanctions or punitive action if the Bush administration goes through with this farce? What if Israel decides to follow this same prescription and sets up a Palestinian puppet to approve further annexation of the occupied territories?

This is a dangerous precedent for the world, and one that will certainly be noted by other equally conniving leaders.

The constitution paves the way for a balkanized Iraq, but there is also a more sinister motive that has escaped public attention. For weeks, the mainstream press has been parroting the Pentagon-line that the voting will trigger a civil war.

Why? Is it the intention of the administration to ignite more widespread hostilities through the balloting?

We already know that the Shi'ites in Basra and Baghdad are nearly as angry and distrustful of their American overlords as their Sunni brothers. We also know that the Shi'ites are equally suspicious of US and British involvement in the rash of terrorist bombings sweeping across Iraq. So, why would they suddenly take up arms against their fellow countrymen?

The real reason the western media keeps reiterating the civil war mantra is to prepare the public for the intensification of hostilities against the Sunni resistance. The media is simply producing the cover for the Pentagon to act with even greater impunity. In reality, there is no danger of a civil war. Iraqis know their enemy.

It is understandable that the Iraqi people would cast a vote in the vain hope that it might change the harsh conditions of their life under occupation. But, it's inexcusable for the Ayatollah Ali-Sistani to support this American sham. It may be that the Ayatollah is simply trying to establish stronger ties with his friends in Tehran by accepting the idea of partition and an independent Shi'ite province in southern Iraq. Never the less, his cooperation has only reinforced the occupation and strengthened America's regional ambitions.

Regardless of his motives, Al-Sistani has acted like a collaborator and discredited himself as viable leader for the Iraqi people. The mantle of leadership now passes to the next in line, the fiercely-nationalistic Muqtada al-Sadr, a man who has already established his patriotic bona-fides by consistently condemning the occupation.

There should be some celebration in Washington over this latest made-for-TV democratic event, but it will undoubtedly be short-lived. Martial law is not liberation, nor is the callous destruction of the world's oldest civilization, democracy.

The constitution was designed to legitimize the occupation, but the occupation will become increasingly more tenuous as the resistance grows and Washington's cynical plan becomes more apparent.

lest anyone keep getting fooled by the US motives....and deceit.

 

[Ocean Breeze]

"Iraqi poll workers lined up Friday at an American base in Ramadi to be supplied with boxes of ballots and to be taken to voting sites".

Comment by Khalid Baghdadi:
"Why do they have their sleeping bags with them?
Did they sleep overnight at the US army base?
Or were they kicked out of their homes and afraid to return there?"

Meanwhile:

"The need for the White House to produce a fantasy picture of Iraq is because it dare not admit that it has engineered one of the greatest disasters in American history. It is worse than Vietnam, because the enemy is punier and the original ambitions greater. At the time of the invasion in 2003 the US believed it could act alone, almost without allies, and win. In this it has utterly failed. About 1,950 American soldiers have been killed, 14,900 have been wounded, and its military command still has only islands of control. It is a defeat more serious than Vietnam because it is self-inflicted, like the British invasion of Egypt to overthrow Nasser in 1956. But by the time of the Suez crisis the British empire was already on its death bed. The disaster only represented the final nail in its coffin. Perhaps the better analogy is the Boer War, at the height of British imperial power, when the inability of its forces to defeat a few thousand Boer farmers damagingly exposed both Britain's real lack of military strength and its diplomatic isolation."
Iraq: The state we're in October 14, 2005

 

[no1important]

Iraq draft appears headed for passage

Initial estimates of overall turnout Saturday were 61 percent, election officials said.

The lower participation may have been out of belief that success was a sure bet or because of disillusionment with Iraq's Shiite leadership, which has been in power since April with little easing of numerous infrastructure problems.

* To me this says it all*

"Why should I care? Nothing has changed since we have elected this government: no security, no electricity, no water," said Saad Ibrahim, a Shiite resident of Baghdad's Karrada district. "The constitution will not change that. The main issue is not getting this constitution passed, but how to stop terrorism."

click above link for whole story.

 

[Ocean Breeze]

Re: RE: Iraq Constitution

Iraq draft appears headed for passage

Initial estimates of overall turnout Saturday were 61 percent, election officials said.

The lower participation may have been out of belief that success was a sure bet or because of disillusionment with Iraq's Shiite leadership, which has been in power since April with little easing of numerous infrastructure problems.

* To me this says it all*

"Why should I care? Nothing has changed since we have elected this government: no security, no electricity, no water," said Saad Ibrahim, a Shiite resident of Baghdad's Karrada district. "The constitution will not change that. The main issue is not getting this constitution passed, but how to stop terrorism."

click above link for whole story.

how sad. Almost an attitude of resignation. Can one imagine the stress they live under now.?? The US bombs on one side......and the ...um....insurgents.....on the other.

 

[no1important]

It sounds like a horrible life, constant living in fear must be taking a toll on a lot if not most people.

I wonder what the suicide rate must be? Not all people can cope with that kind of constant stress. I wonder if so called coalition has any mental health resources set up for the people? Somehow I doubt it.

 

[Ocean Breeze]

Iraq voting is illegal: the coming invasion of Venezuela too
Henk Ruyssenaars





Whatever the US/UK occupiers - because of their arms the main force in Iraq - draft or call it: holding a referendum about rewriting a Constitution is illegal, like the planned US invasion of Venezuela is too.

Not only international law, but the also by the US signed Geneva Conventions (iv) of 1949, prohibit the modification of the domestic laws or legal institutions of the occupied power.

by Henk Ruyssenaars

FPF - Oct. 16th - 2005 - In what way ever the US 'Lie Factory'* and all collaborators in occupied Iraq via the mainstream media may try to 'cook the books' fabricating 'Newspeak': according to the also by the US signed Geneva Convention*, the Hague Convention (Art. 43) and all earlier valid international laws what the US is doing in Iraq with this 'referendum' is illegal:

"An 'occupant' must ensure public order while respecting, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country. The Geneva Conventions (iv) of 1949, prohibit the modification of the domestic laws or legal institutions of the occupied power."

What part of the word 'illegal' do the warring neocons not understand?

The so called 'draft' of the by the Iraq occupying forces rewritten constitution is illegal, and so is making the people vote for or against it, according to all international law and universal conventions concerned.

The US neocons and their Quislings however, seem to think they are above all laws, and make their own, at the expense of the rest of humanity.

Whether it's an election, a referendum on a draft constitution, other judges and courts or rewriting and fixing a 'new' constitution; doing this in any occupied country is illegal. [Illegal? - Url.: http://tinyurl.com/9u28d]

NO CARS? NO CAR BOMBS...

The fact that Iraq for has been 'closed' - not only the airports but the whole country, complete with wartime curfews and no motorized transport allowed except by the occupying forces - speaks for itself. Claiming a 'peaceful process' is a sick joke: no cars = no car bombs. Elementary, dear Watson!.

The usual propaganda texts and photo-op pictures by disinformation agencies like the very bad Associated Press, UPI, CNN, the disgusting FOX, Reuters, Bloomberg, and most others via the mainstream media of the warring parties, confirms the misery and murderous debacle of anything like human rights.

The Iraqi resistance fights for the liberation of their country, aiming at the US neocon's 'Waterloo'.

VENEZUELA NEXT...

But; while nearly all eyes are made to look in the Iran/Iraq direction, behind our backs the US neocon's and their abject collaborators in England's armed forces, via the PNAC's 'Banking Establishment' in London are busy with the next invasions: Venezuela and the Angel of Death Condoleezza Rice hard-selling the attack on Iran - Url.: http://tinyurl.com/c2g2q

Most likely and secretly venezuela again will be attacked with the collaborating help of the despicable Dutch neocon-management in the NATO-Netherlands, using neighboring countries and the Dutch island colonies (Aruba, Bonaire, or St. Maarten) of shore of Latin America, as bases for the illegal invasion.

Also the Belgian NATO-Navy - like last time - seems to again prepare the illegal invasion of oil rich Venezuela. [Last US made coup with NATO help - Url.: http://tinyurl.com/ey8v8]

Chief Editor Roy Carson of VHeadline.com in Caracas, an Irishman who has lived and worked for a long time in Venezuela, and whom I've known as a foreign correspondent for decades, is like most people in Venezuela very worried about the possible coming invasion of the oil rich country, which the 'Greedy Gringos'* are preparing if one looks at the already now available information.

The US's neocon managers are planning and preparing to repeat in Venezuela what they have done in so many countries, and which I have seen them do for instance in Vietnam during the war, and later on when I was living there - to President Salvador Allende and all Chileans in 1973:

The inhuman rape and bloody murder by the US forces with Henry Kissinger's Killers (CIA etc.) of a sovereign country. Another country in a long list, with a democratically by the people - and not by fraudulent programmed voting machines - elected president: another country to be invaded and wrecked by the US neocons in the name of their (deadly) 'Democracy', as they call their bottomless greed.

Below are the related links solidifying the malignant neocon's nefarious actions, which make us all suffer, pay up, and as too many are made to: just shut up...

DON'T!

Not protesting those permanent crimes against humanity, makes one guilty by association.

ONLY CRIMINALS ARE SILENT ABOUT CRIMES.

Henk Ruyssenaars

RELATED LINKS:

* Venezuela is next - Url.: http://tinyurl.com/cn77d

* Dutch and Belgian Navy units were also involved in Venezuela's April 11, 2002 coup d'etat - Url.: http://www.vheadline.com/readnews.asp?id=6820

* FAIR condemns Parade Magazine's Smear: President Hugo Chavez a terrorist funder? - Url.: http://tinyurl.com/7uxaf

* All working links concerning Iraq and legality can be found here - Url.: http://tinyurl.com/4792w

* The 'New' constitution in Iraq is Illegal - Url.: http://tinyurl.com/czzxe

* United States caught in Iraq car-bombing (Anything in this?) - Url.: http://tinyurl.com/bg38o

* 'The war in Iraq is illegal' - BBC: video & text of the interview of the United Nation's Secretary General Kofi Annan - Url.: http://tinyurl.com/5pl2v

* The leaked 'Downing Street Memos' expose the lies by war criminals like Bush, Blair, Berlusconi (It.) Balkenende (NL) - their collaborating media and other
malignant ilk - Url.: http://www.downingstreetmemo.com/

* MSNBC - Poll: Ninety-four (94) percent believes that George Bush and the neocon media mislead the nation to go to war with Iraq - Url.:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8248969/

* ''The Lancet'' and the ''Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health'' report: ''Over 100.000 killed in the illegal Iraq war'' - Url.: http://tinyurl.com/5gys7

* Bush interview. ABC: No WMD's but many killed: "It was worth it" - Url.: http://tinyurl.com/6bal9

* Former Secr. of State Madeleine Albright in her comment on half a million dead children in Iraq: "We think it's worth it" On CBS 60' Minutes - Url.:
http://tinyurl.com/2vmc8

* The Must See three-part BBC Documentary, "The Power of Nightmares," puts it bluntly: "Al-Qaeda is a (neocon) myth." - See Url.:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/terrorism/story/0,12780,1327904,00
.html

* 'American neocons' - Url.: http://tinyurl.com/b5vsb - The US Federal Reserve and the private banks owning it - Url.: http://tinyurl.com/d3ntq

* Are their Corporate News Media Incompetent, Criminally Negligent or Complicit? - Url.: http://tinyurl.com/cqpfe

* Brainwashed? - Take the free 'Gullibility Factor' test to find out if you're really a mind slave, or not - Url.: http://tinyurl.com/cbgnc

* Colin Powell: 'It is not anti-Semitic to criticize the policies of the state of Israel' - Url.: http://tinyurl.com/22p6c

* Neoconservatism as a Jewish Movement - Url.: http://tinyurl.com/5k7vx

* American car magnate Henry Ford investigated 85 years ago the global problem - Url.: http://tinyurl.com/2xz35

* Help all the troops of whatever nationality to come back from abroad! We need them badly at home in many countries - AND WITH ALL THEIR WEAPONS, WHICH WE PAID FOR BY TAXES - to fight with us against our so called 'governments' and their malignant managers - Url.: http://www.bringthemhomenow.org/

* The World Can't Wait! - Drive out the neocons and their 'Bush Regime' - Mobilize for November 2, 2005! - Url.: http://www.worldcantwait.org/

:evil: Just plain "Mad" as in insane.

 

[no1important]

Iraqi commission to audit referendum results

Amid allegations of fraud, Iraq's electoral commission will be conducting an audit of "unusually high" numbers of ballots in Saturday's landmark referendum on the draft charter.

Click above link for rest.

So this "vote" already has an aura of suspicion already. What a surprise.

 

[Vanni Fucci]

Vote Totals under Inquiry in 12 Iraqi Provinces, Panel Says

 

[no1important]

Iraq Referendum on Constitution: Illegal Legislation


Statement of Sheikh Majeed Al-Gaood, Secretary General of WAHAJ El-Iraq (WE) & spokesman of the Patriotic, National & Islamic Front:

We are appealing to our people to boycott the constitutional referendum, as all illegal legislation emerging from the occupation are illegal.

The constitutional referendum game is part of plans prepared long ago by the occupiers to legalise the invasion and occupation of Iraq and its consequences. The occupation, according to all laws & principles, is considered as a crime committed against a sovereign state, a crime of illegal war of aggression that destroyed our country and in breach & violation of all sound principals of international law.

According to resolution 1514 of the General Assembly of the United Nations, issued on the 14th of December 1960, any occupier of a soil of any state is a violation of the principals of the UN charter. Also, according to article 42 of the additional protocol of the Hague convention of 1907, any soil of a state is considered occupied, when it is under the de facto authority of the enemy army, as it is now in Iraq & that resistance of such an occupation is a legal right for the people of the occupied state.

Also, According to Article 64 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, the occupation forces have no legislative authority in changing laws, nature or form of the political regime in the occupied territory.

Article 53 of The Geneva Convention has also forbid the destruction of personal or collective properties belonging to individuals or states or any general entities.

Click above link for the rest.

 

[jimmoyer]

I don't see the skeptics any better than the optimists at predicting Iraq's ultimate future.

Some where between lies good analysis and more accurate prediction if both skepticism and optimism are combined.

You are seeing simultaneously many things go on.
You're seeing heroes. You're seeing terrorists.

You're seeing a hugely peaceful day of voting.
You also know the insurgency will continue.

You are seeing losses of power. You are seeing more and more generator power being installed.

Remember the Siemens MOAG ? American tax dollars bought that mother of all generators from the German company.

You're seeing the media start to yawn at the violence.
So you're seeing opponents of the war lament the media's dwindling interest. And so you are seeing the ultimate tiresomeness of human nature becoming so jaded that even the terrorist will not get the publicity he so desparately seeks for the more atrocities committed such a cause celebre begets diminishing returns of interest.

But more Iraqis voted and more registered than in the last election despite the media's emphasis of the Shiites percentages falling from a high 70s participation.

 

[Ocean Breeze]

October 18, 2005


“Elections” and other Deceptions in Iraq

Just before Saturday’s so-called constitutional referendum vote in
occupied Iraq, one of my close friends in Baghdad wrote me, “I would
like to point out that we are three days away from the referendum, yet
very large sectors of Iraqi people couldn’t receive part of the five
million copies [of the constitution] from the UN, ie- they will not know
what the constitution contains. Subsequently, they will vote according
to their backgrounds or religious or political preferences. Many people
who will vote yes do not know why they will vote yes...what kind of vote
is this?”

The vote had many similarities to the farce which took place on January
30-aside from a repeat of the draconian measures to provide security and
quite a large dose of propaganda; we once again have what already
appears to be rampant election fraud.

Figures provided by several governorates have required Iraq’s
independent electoral commission (IEC) to order (under heavy Sunni
political pressure) “re-examination, comparison and verification because
they [voter turnout figures] are relatively high compared with
international averages for elections” of this kind; according to a
statement made by the IEC on Monday.

This occurred rather inconveniently after US Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice’s nearly instantaneous belief that the constitution
“has probably been passed.”

I have little doubt that the constitution will still be passed, despite
what the IEC referred to in findings showing “that figures from most
provinces were too high,” referencing voter turnout. Not surprisingly, a
source close to the commission stated, “The problems are not in Sunni
Arab zones,” as reported by Al-Jazeera.

Huge discrepancies are already reported in the Nineveh governorate,
which includes Mosul, showing that while sources close to the IEC were
quoted saying that 55% of the voters there voted against the
constitution, Abd al-Razaq al-Jiburi, the secretary general of the Iraqi
Independent Front said, “I have been informed by an employee of the
electoral high commission in Mosul that the voting for the constitution
has been ‘no.’”

He went on to add that his sources within the IEC said the “no” vote in
Nineveh ranged between 75-80%. This is a critical governorate vote, with
Diyala and Salahedin governorates already appearing to have decisively
rejected the constitution, despite US military repression with ongoing
operations there, as well as in other predominantly Sunni governorates.

Keep in mind that the draft constitution can be rejected by a 2/3 “no”
vote occurring in three governorates.

How many people in the US will actually understand what is happening in
Iraq regarding this referendum vote? Most likely not many when we
consider the ongoing machinations occurring in US mainstream media
outlets. One of my friends in Baghdad who is working by gathering
information for one of these sources wrote me recently, “By the way, I
asked them to omit my name as a contributor to their articles because
the journalists they have writing them are not accurately reporting the
views of Iraqis on the ground.”

He concluded his email with, “Everybody from the family is good. Life
goes on as usual between the explosions. It is God who saves us.”

As usual, it isn’t only the Iraqis who are suffering from the illegal
occupation of their country. A National Guard soldier who has been in
Iraq for nearly a year writes me, “I needn’t tell you…how messed up
everything over here is. Regardless of the intentions of most soldiers
to do a good job and do what’s right, the organizational structure of
our presence here makes it very difficult. The nature of the
conflict--in terms of the insurgency, the attitude of our leadership,
and the demands placed on soldiers because of numbers and
resources—requires aggression where compassion and understanding are
necessary. And this is against a background of profiteering by KBR and
other contractors who are quite honestly raiding the American Treasury
in the name of “providing services.” I was opposed to this war from the
start; what I’ve seen has deepened that opposition into anger, anger
over the exploitation of both American soldiers and third-country
nationals for vain and venal reasons.”

A perfect example of the aggression he refers to occurred in Ramadi
yesterday. Residents claimed that several people, including children,
were congregating around the site where a US military vehicle was
destroyed and five soldiers were killed by a roadside bomb on election day.

US warplanes conducted a strike on the crowd of two dozen people which
had gathered to look at the wreckage and strip it for scrap metal. The
military claimed that they were setting another roadside bomb in the
same location.

Dr. Bassem al-Dulaimi at the main hospital reported that he received 25
dead bodies which were the result of US aerial bombings. Other doctors
and Iraqi police officers reported that the dead were all civilians,
including children.

At least 14 other Iraqis were killed in US air strikes on a nearby village.

The US army stated that the air strikes conducted by US warplanes and
helicopters killed 70 “terrorists” during the air strikes in Ramadi and
surrounding locales, and also said that not one civilian was killed due
to their use of precision weapons.

Another doctor at Ramadi General Hospital who was tending to the dead
and wounded told reporters, “They are not terrorists. They were ordinary
people who were bombed by airplanes.”

Meanwhile, a delusional Mr. Bush told reporters during a recent meeting
with the Bulgarian President, “The way forward [in Iraq] is clear. The
political process will continue, with a constitution, if finally
ratified. And then an election, coupled with a security plan that
continues to train Iraqis so they do the fight.”

Bush is “staying the course” with his propaganda line of getting the
Iraqi army trained before the US can withdraw, despite his top US
commander in Iraq, US Army General George Casey, disclosing to the
Senate Armed Services Committee on September 29th that only one Iraqi
battalion was capable of operating independently.

But facts don’t sway our “resolute” Mr. Bush, who then on October 6th
during a speech to the National Endowment for Democracy said, “Today
there are more than 80 Iraqi army battalions fighting the insurgency
alongside our forces.”

So rather than listening to the delusions of Mr. Bush or the prophesies
of Condoleeza Rice, let us keep our eyes on the facts. Within the last
week we’ve had clashes on the border of Syria between the Syrian Army
and US military; the toll of dead US soldiers is now at least 1,976…with
at least 23 dead in just the last nine days and ten times that number
wounded, with over 110 dead Iraqi civilians in the same time period.
And, lest we forget, there is no timetable for withdrawal.

 

[Jo Canadian]

 

[#juan]

Surely Iraq had an army,

Are they all dead? find all the ex-army types and arm them. Why do they have to re-invent the wheel? Saddam's army didn't have trouble controlling the masses. The difference is that the Americans are there. Most of the problems might still be there after the Americans leave but it is best to let them sort their own problems out. What a bloody mess.

 

[peapod]

Illegitimate, imposed, fraudulent and reactionary


By John Catalinotto

Published Oct 18, 2005 11:39 PM
Pentagon generals sent a clear message on what the Oct. 15 referendum on an Iraqi constitution really meant when two days later they ordered the bombing of the city of Ramadi from the air. Seventy "insurgents" were killed, they claimed. But local witnesses on the ground said the U.S. bombs had murdered 39 civilians.

The contrast between "spin" and reality was all too clear. The vote was stage-managed and reported through a controlled media. A "constitution" with no legitimacy was being imposed by force on an occupied nation through an obviously fraudulent vote.

Now even the puppet government has had to delay announcing the results a do a recount to try to make the inflated vote count look believable.

The Iraqi resistance is still there, however, and the war remains one between the Iraqi people and the U.S. occupiers. In the Pentagon's judgment, only one battalion in the Iraqi army is able to fight without U.S. backup--out of 119. A battalion is 750 troops. (UPI, Oct. 3) The Pentagon now has 162,000 U.S. troops in Iraq and the war is costing almost $6 billion a month.

It is possible to take the draft constitution apart line by line and show that it is reactionary when compared to the existing Iraqi constitution. But the truth is that no matter what the new constitution says, and no matter how many collaborators agree to it, it is completely illegitimate. It is impossible to develop a sovereign constitution under an armed occupation.

First the occupation troops must leave.

On top of this, the occupation forces were carrying out bombings, invasions and other military operations in the days before the vote. The most intense attacks were in those provinces where the population was most actively against the new constitution. No one was allowed to drive cars, there was a curfew, and in these provinces the few polling places were spread far apart.

The armed groups fighting the occupation all consider this "constitution" illegitimate. According to an article published in the Spanish newspaper Rebelión on Oct. 17, "Sunni sources who asked not to be identified asserted that 16 Sunni armed organizations resisting the occupation reached an agreement to suspend their attacks on the day of the vote to allow their community to participate in the referendum and succeed in rejecting the Charter."

The same article quotes Saleh al-Mutlaq, spokesperson for the Council of National Dialog Party, who warns of a possible fraud concerning the counting of the vote. He says that 1,600 of his party's observers assigned throughout the country indicated that 95 percent of Sunni Arabs who voted said they were against the Charter. "I believe that it will help neither the U.S. nor the Iraqis to impose this constitution against the popular will."

"We warn of the risks that if the results of the vote are falsified and [the constitution] is imposed by force, this will generate reactions impossible to contain," Mutlaq added.

Voting fraud

Al-Mutlaq, wrote Al Jazeera, said that "the manager of one of the polling stations in a Kurdish district of Diyala told him that 39,000 votes were cast, although only 36,000 voters were registered there" and also that "soldiers broke into a polling station in Baquba and took ballot boxes heavy with 'no' votes; later results showed a 'yes' majority."

"Bottom line, we can say that the whole operation witnessed interference from government forces," he said.

In provinces where the parties in control are collaborating with the occupation, the "yes" votes were reported to be as high as 97 percent of the total. Even the puppet government knows no one believes this is real.

None of this stopped Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice from celebrating the triumph of the "yes" vote a few hours after the polls closed, or stopped George Bush from hailing the "victory." But the days are gone when he can do a photo-op before a "Mission Accomplished" sign and convince even the people at home, let alone in Iraq.

According to a Pew poll in mid-October, Bush's job approval rating had dropped to 38 percent. The polls also showed that 53 percent told Pew that the U.S. occupation of Iraq is not going well, while half say the decision to invade in the first place was wrong--up from 44 percent in September. An opinion poll by the NBC television network and The Wall Street Journal revealed that, among the African-American population, only 2 percent approve of Bush's performance--the lowest level ever for Black people here.

Attempt to split up Iraq

The attempt to pass this latest version of the "constitution" also shows that Washington is orienting more and more toward splitting Iraq into three parts. Unable to conquer the Iraqi people with an occupation army, U.S. strategists are aiming instead to punish the Iraqis by creating a scenario for civil war.

Most Iraqis didn't get a chance to read the proposed charter. Of those who did, it was only days before the vote. But anyone who did read it or parts of it could see the following:

* It allows, even encourages, development of Iraqi oil fields by foreign oil monopolies, unlike the old constitution, which mandates holding on to the oil reserves for the economic development of Iraq.

* It encourages autonomous development of the northern, mostly Kurdish region, with access to oil reserves there. It does the same to the mostly Shiite region in the South, which also has access to oil reserves. It leaves the mid-section of the country, including Baghdad--which is both Shiite and Sunni--and the provinces to the west that are the most strongly resisting occupation, with almost no access to future oil reserves.

While religious differences among the mostly secular Iraqis had been minimal in the past, a constitution that connects these differences so closely to control of wealth and power is obviously a recipe for civil war. This restructuring of Iraq would be another crime to add to the list of those carried out by U.S. imperialism against the Iraqi people.

Progressive and anti-war forces throughout the world can only continue to work to end the illegal occupation of Iraq as soon as possible and thereby give Iraqi parties an opportunity to avoid such an outcome.

One other point on the so-called constitution: anyone who thought a U.S. occupation of Iraq would bring more rights to women, more democracy, more freedom from religious authority, must be sorely disillusioned. In all these areas the constitution, if enforced, marks a step backward from that of Baathist-led Iraq.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------