demanding that the U.S. appointees resign and that elections be immediately held.
http://www.counterpunch.com/-snip-
The trouble is, the Iraqi people seem more interested in democracy than President Bush. Just three weeks ago, 10,000 Iraqis marched on the U.S.-installed governing council in Nasiriyah, just south of Baghdad, demanding that the U.S. appointees resign and that elections be immediately held.
The Bush administration's response? Paul Bremer, U.S. head of the Iraq occupation, categorically declared that there will be no elections before the planned June "handover" of "sovereignty" to Iraqis. Which begs the question: are a people truly "sovereign" if they have no say in their country's future?
-snip-
"With the RTI's guidance, the military will execute the plan. It will select neighborhood councils, which in turn will select district councils, which in turn will select county councils, which in turn will select a provincial council, which, finally, will select a governor. Members of the new councils will be appointed rather than elected. Local leaders will be consulted, and some groups will actually cast votes to select neighborhood leaders. But the final decisions will be made by the military and the RTI."
Military planning and decision-making? Five steps of selection? Appointments rather than elections? No wonder that one Iraqi from Taji--where locals had set up their own elected council, only to have it disbanded--told the Post, "We feel we are going backwards."
-snip-
---------------------------
the article ends by saying the Iraqi people are tired of excuses and platitudes.
as long as the bloody hands bushgang is in power Iraq will not be a democracy. it will be a place where the gang has many military bases and a huge embassy with 3000 employees. the Iraqi people will be the slaves and their country will continue to be trashed.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
