Home > What They’re Not Telling You About the “Election”

What They’re Not Telling You About the “Election”

by Open-Publishing - Wednesday 2 February 2005
12 comments

Edito Wars and conflicts International Elections-Elected

The day of blood and elections has passed, and the blaring trumpets of corporate media hailing it as a successful show of “democracy” have subsided to a dull roar.

After a day which left 50 people dead in Iraq, both civilians and soldiers, the death toll was hailed as a figure that was “lower than expected.” Thus...acceptable, by Bush Administration/ corporate media standards. After all, only of them was an American, the rest were Iraqis civilians and British soldiers.

The gamble of using the polling day in Iraq to justify the ongoing failed occupation of Iraq has apparently paid off, if you watch only mainstream media.

“Higher than expected turnout,” US mainstream television media blared, some citing a figure of 72%, others 60%.

What they didn’t tell you was that this figure was provided by Farid Ayar, the spokesman for the Independent Electoral Commission for Iraq (IECI) before the polls had even closed.

When asked about the accuracy of the estimate of voter turnout during a press conference, Ayar backtracked on his earlier figure, saying that a closer estimate was lower than his initial estimate and would be more like 60% of registered voters.

The IECI spokesman said his previous figure of 72% was “only guessing” and “was just an estimate,” which was based on “very rough, word-of mouth estimates gathered informally from the field. It will take some time for the IECI to issue accurate figures on turnout.”

Referencing both figures, Ayar then added, “Percentages and numbers come only after counting and will be announced when it’s over ... It’s too soon to say that those were the official numbers.”

But this isn’t the most important misrepresentation the mainstream media committed.

What they also didn’t tell you was that of those who voted, whether they be 35% or even 60% of registered voters, were not voting in support of an ongoing US occupation of their country.

In fact, they were voting for precisely the opposite reason. Every Iraqi I have spoken with who voted explained that they believe the National Assembly which will be formed soon will signal an end to the occupation.

And they expect the call for a withdrawing of foreign forces in their country to come sooner rather than later.

This causes one to view the footage of cheering, jubilant Iraqis in a different light now, doesn’t it?

But then, most folks in the US watching CNN, FOX, or any of the major networks won’t see it that way. Instead, they will hear what Mr. Bush said, “The world is hearing the voice of freedom from the center of the Middle East,” and take it as fact because most of the major media outlets aren’t scratching beneath film clips of joyous Iraqi voters over here in the land of daily chaos and violence, no jobs, no electricity, little running water and no gasoline (for the Iraqis anyhow).

And Bush is portrayed by the media as the bringer of democracy to Iraq by the simple fact that this so-called election took place, botched as it may have been. Appearances suggest that the majority Shia in Iraq now finally get their proportional representation in a “government.” Looks good on paper.

But as you continue reading, the seemingly altruistic reasons for this election as portrayed by the Bush Administration and trumpeted by most mainstream media are anything but.

And Iraqis who voted are hearing other trumpets that are blaring an end to the occupation.

Now the question remains, what happens when the National Assembly is formed and over 100,000 US soldiers remain on the ground in Iraq with the Bush Administration continuing in its refusal to provide a timetable for their removal?

What happens when Iraqis see that while there are already four permanent US military bases in their country, rather than beginning to disassemble them, more bases are being constructed, as they are, by Cheney’s old company Halliburton, right now?

Antonia Juhasz, a Foreign Policy in Focus scholar, authored a piece just before the “election” that sheds light on a topic that has lost attention amidst the recent fanfare concerning the polls in Iraq.

Oil.

I think it’s worth including much of her story here, as it fits well with today’s topic of things most folks aren’t being told by the bringers of democracy to the heart of the Middle East.

On Dec. 22, 2004, Iraqi Finance Minister Abdel Mahdi told a handful of reporters and industry insiders at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. that Iraq wants to issue a new oil law that would open Iraq’s national oil company to private foreign investment. As Mahdi explained: "So I think this is very promising to the American investors and to American enterprise, certainly to oil companies."
In other words, Mahdi is proposing to privatize Iraq’s oil and put it into American corporate hands.
According to the finance minister, foreigners would gain access both to "downstream" and "maybe even upstream" oil investment. This means foreigners can sell Iraqi oil and own it under the ground - the very thing for which many argue the U.S. went to war in the first place.
As Vice President Dick Cheney’s Defense Policy Guidance report explained back in 1992, "Our overall objective is to remain the predominant outside power in the [Middle East] region and preserve U.S. and Western access to the region’s oil."
While few in the American media other than Emad Mckay of Inter Press Service reported on - or even attended - Mahdi’s press conference, the announcement was made with U.S. Undersecretary of State Alan Larson at Mahdi’s side. It was intended to send a message - but to whom?
It turns out that Abdel Mahdi is running in the Jan. 30 elections on the ticket of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution (SCIR), the leading Shiite political party. While announcing the selling-off of the resource which provides 95 percent of all Iraqi revenue may not garner Mahdi many Iraqi votes, but it will unquestionably win him tremendous support from the U.S. government and U.S. corporations.
Mahdi’s SCIR is far and away the front-runner in the upcoming elections, particularly as it becomes increasingly less possible for Sunnis to vote because the regions where they live are spiraling into deadly chaos. If Bush were to suggest to Iraq’s Interim Prime Minister Iyad Allawi that elections should be called off, Mahdi and the SCIR’s ultimate chances of victory will likely decline.

I’ll add that the list of political parties Mahdi’s SCIR belongs to, The United Iraqi Alliance (UIA), includes the Iraqi National Council, which is led by an old friend of the Bush Administration who provided the faulty information they needed to justify the illegal invasion of Iraq, none other than Ahmed Chalabi.

It should also be noted that interim Prime Minister Iyad Allawi also fed the Bush Administration cooked information used to justify the invasion, but he heads a different Shia list which will most likely be getting nearly as many votes as the UIA list.

And The UIA has the blessing of Iranian born revered Shiite cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani. Sistani issued a fatwa which instructed his huge number of followers to vote in the election, or they would risk going to hell.

Thus, one might argue that the Bush administration has made a deal with the SCIR: Iraq’s oil for guaranteed political power. The Americans are able to put forward such a bargain because Bush still holds the strings in Iraq.
Regardless of what happens in the elections, for at least the next year during which the newly elected National Assembly writes a constitution and Iraqis vote for a new government, the Bush administration is going to control the largest pot of money available in Iraq (the $24 billion in U.S. taxpayer money allocated for the reconstruction), the largest military and the rules governing Iraq’s economy. Both the money and the rules will, in turn, be overseen by U.S.-appointed auditors and inspector generals who sit in every Iraqi ministry with five-year terms and sweeping authority over contracts and regulations. However, the one thing which the administration has not been unable to confer upon itself is guaranteed access to Iraqi oil - that is, until now.

And there is so much more they are not telling you. Just like the Iraqis who voted, believing they did so to bring an end to the occupation of their country.

http://dahrjamailiraq.com/weblog/ar...

Forum posts

  • It’s what we suspected all along, unfortunately. The US find a few greedy self seeking Iraqis to ’lead’ their country. They hand over the oil, natural resources to the US government, the corporates are happy, rednecks can now run their SUV’s at subsidised rates going to and fro Walmart, and corpses of women and children lie shrivelled and dried in the Iraqi sun.

  • You pretty much got it right on...I’m wondering why that people don’t seem to notice that the election celebration is way too fluffed up. It’s almost like it sounds to good to be true.

    • your just a bunch of boneheads who are disgusted that Iraq is no longer being ruled by a brutal dictator. You prefer to see wicked people rule the world, while the innocent are persecuted. Your sick!!!!!!!! really sick!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • WOLF, meeting with a Lamb astray from the fold, resolved not to lay violent hands on him, but to find some plea to justify to the Lamb the Wolf’s right to eat him. He thus addressed him: "Sirrah, last year you grossly insulted me." "Indeed," bleated the Lamb in a mournful tone of voice, "I was not then born." Then said the Wolf, "You feed in my pasture." "No, good sir," replied the Lamb, "I have not yet tasted grass." Again said the Wolf, "You drink of my well." "No," exclaimed the Lamb, "I never yet drank water, for as yet my mother’s milk is both food and drink to me." Upon which the Wolf seized him and ate him up, saying, "Well! I won’t remain supperless, even though you refute every one of my imputations."

    The tyrant will always find a pretext for his tyranny.

  • You are all so blinded by your hate for George Bush that you refuse to accept that something good and powerful is happening in Iraq. Democracy is spreading and democratic governments don’t wage war against one another because their leaders are elected and beholden to the will of the people. George Bush won fair and square and he has the will of the people. If you are a real liberal you believe in freedom, equality, human rights and opportunity. Most of you are not real liberals. You are simply America haters. Hypocritical cynics who don’t offer solutions, merely criticisms.

    • hate starts with anger usually from something you don’t agree with and I don’t agree with anything Bush thinks and does to say it very very gently.

    • Hey "You are all so blinded by your hate for George Bush...":

      You are all so blinded by your love for George Bush that you refuse to accept that something bad and weak is happening in Iraq. Tyranny is spreading and tyrannical governments wage war against one another because their leaders are tyrants not beholden to the will of the people. George Bush won unfairly and crookedly and he has spread fear among the people. Since you are a fake Republican you believe in slavery, inequality, inhumanity and involuntary servitude. Most of you are not real Republicans. You are simply Freedom haters. Hypocritical surrealists who offer fantasy, not altruism.

      Yankee Blue Veteran

  • In responce to that last comment.

    I really believe that lie, "democratic governments don’t wage wars against one another because their leaders are elected and beholden to the will of the people." What a joke. When the people elected a socialist in Chile, what did the US do? it backed a nationalist movement that usurped the rightful leader. This nationalist was none other than Pinochet—you remember him don’t you—tried for crimes against humanity in the Hague. No of course you don’t. Nor do you feel in any way responsible for his actions. You believe this pie in the sky story about democracies not attacking one another. Ohh, and I suppose you don’t know that the only reason we don’t join the international criminal court is because Bush and his cronies are trying to protect the Secretary of state from that period—the person who supported Pinochet—Henry Kissenger, who is also accused of crimes against humanity.

    Another point, it was America that supported Sadam in the first place. Look up Rumsefeld’s history as an ambassador. He was sent a few times to Sadam to express the support of Americans in the War against Iran.

    Think, you stupid idiot. The only reason we are over there is to protect our interests: we don’t want oil flowing into hands other than our own. We don’t want any form of communistic government over there, nor do we want any of the Islamic nations to have Nukes. The last is not because we fear any damage from them but because it would inherently stabilize a government, creating an autonomous state that would not be helpful to the interests of a nuclear and expanding Israel.

    In other words, the administration gives not a whit about the lofty goals of being benevolent towards the people, except insofar as that ideologue controls people like you. You give them your money and your faith, believing them bestowed with god’s divine essence. And you continue believing this until you start to see your brother, your sister, or your mother being rounded up, all because of a blacklist created expressly to eradicate dissenters. And you wonder how they knew that your brother was a dissenter? Well it has to do with certain provisions where the government can access and record what websites you have visited. And while there would be purposes for doing this in response to terrorists, it is only a matter of time till they use it for other ends. Look up Rome 2000 years ago, then Nazi Germany only 50 years ago, and who knows maybe you might look up the Japanese that were rounded up in the US around the same time.

    And if you don’t believe this last remark, regarding dissenters, ask yourself, have you heard anyone really dissenting in government politics lately? Have you seen a flag burning? Is that a no. In a more personalized example, I myself am afraid to place a “Bush Cheated” bumper sticker on my car, when I have a pile of evidence to indicate that this last election was fraudulent. You want to know why I am afraid? It is because of zealots like you who don’t know the truth. You are the Nazis of the 21st century, believing everything your religion—in other words politics and the mainstream media—tells you. You will commit the worst of atrocities, believing you doing the work of God. Ohh…look up the inquisition for that last comment.

    And lastly, I do hate America. I grew up in the middle of the country and have seen the supposed best out of Americans, and lately it isn’t very good. However, I am also an academic and have come to love the concepts that our founding fathers emplaced within our system of government. Unfortunately, right now that system of government, which was premeditated upon laws, no longer exists. WHAT EXISTS IS COMMERCIALLY CONTROLLED DUMBED DOWN SOCIETY THAT WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO RECOGNIZE OR ACCEPT CULPABILITY IF IT WAS HIT WITH A 20 MEGATON NUCLEAR EXPLOSION—in other words, people just like yourself.

    As for the cynic comment I view that as a compliment. Shaw wrote, “a person who perceives reality as it really is, is perceived as a cynic by others.” Thus, maybe you should get more insight into reality.

    • Or maybe you should leave the gilded halls of academia once in awhile to visit the real world. The theories you share with your like-minded syncophants hold no water in reality. You try and use American actions during the cold war struggle to justify your distorted political views and tired arguments. You probably consider bathist insurgents to be heros. Do they offer opportunity or liberalism to the Iraqi people? Nope, just death, destruction and servile slavery. You have freedom of speech so I encourage you to use it. It will only demonstrate to all that you are not an asset to this society, just a disenfranchised academic that hypocritally feeds off the breadcrumbs of a society you despise.

      P.S. You should send another $1000 to MoveOn.org so they can flush it down the toilet for you!

    • Actually, Mr.(Ms.?) Academic is a tremendous asset to the country since he uses his freedom of speech exactly as the founding fathers intended : to sound the alarm bells when government seeks to have the people serve it instead of government serving the people. That would make him(her?) a patriot a la Washington, Jefferson or Franklin , while critics of dissent continue to sound like McCarthy, Goebbels or Yosemite Sam.

    • I wouldn’t have said it better myself!

    • I am relieved to see patriots starting to come together. I am relieved to see that people do see a bigger picture as to what is going on. I am still disheartened, because with the passage of patriot acts one and two,- I believe, it’s to late to change our destiny, but by repentance and a miracle.
      In the end, only faith, and belief in the one true God, saves us anyway, so let the shit fly, the containments begin, and "let’s gether done".
      Best to All.