Well.. clearly... The "reporter" and "doctors" are either al Qaeda operatives trying to stir support for their cause.. or are just Iraq's version of Liberals who hate Democracy..

this is non-news.. it's all made up.. Bush wouldn't let anything like this happen.. Just ask Steve F, he'll back me up on this..

"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"

I don't understand why this is a problem. Isn't this exactly how most senators and representatives vote here in the good old USA?

"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 ... 're-examination, comparison and verification because they [voter turnout figures] are relatively high compared with international averages for elections' of this kind.

Sounds like they're right on track for creating a George Bush American style democracy, at least in regards to "free and fair elections" (and probably with Ohio style "re-examination, comparison and verification" procedures).

Quite surprising to learn that 82% of the Iraqi population are insurgents.

RLM #3

"U.S. Encouraged by Vietnam Vote:
Officials Cite 83% Turnout Despite Vietcong Terror

The size of the popular vote and the inability of the Vietcong to destroy the election machinery were the two salient facts in a preliminary assessment of the nation election based on the incomplete returns reaching here. "

But that was as contrived to fool only the fools as the current "bring democracy" rhetoric is.

History repeats itself ...

By now we should know that the lie machine that lied about the reasons for invading Iraq has lied about everything else it cares to comment on.

The Plame/Wilson outing was another lie infested event.

The FBI has recently interviewed her neighbors who had no idea she was an American CIA agent (link here).

So the lies put out to cover up the treason were natural to this lie machine posing as government.

The Iraqi people are suffering, being tortured, and dying as they have for years.

The admin is also lying when they compare the vote and constitution there with our own constitutional development.

Has anyone suggested to them that our forefathers were not occupied by a superior power that had invaded and put american leaders to death or put them in jail?

Has anyone told them that we did our independence and constitution on our own ... that it was not forced by the barrel of a gun?

Someone should tell them Iraq smells like Vietnam and it stinks, that it is not a pleasant aroma like when our movement for freedom began.

Arrogant rightwingers disregard Iraqi's opinions anyway. These polls won't be in the news on TV.

And the Iraqi vote is brought to you by the same operatives who brought you the 2004 election. You know, the one where Kerry won by 5 million according to the exit polls? But the "final count" said Bush won by 3 million?

I guess we turned the corner in Iraq with this historic vote. The same way we turned the corner for the last vote years ago, "mission accomplished", the Fallujah invasion, etc...etc...etc...

We turned so many corners, we're going in circles!!!

Janice Kapynski appears to be a competent, intelligent, rational and honest person. She is also a US Army colonial (formerly a Brigadier General). She has written a book and is now willing to tell all as she knew it about the military prisons in Iraq. She was not in the abuse loop and had raised objections about what little she became aware of. She was not what this Administration wanted.

Col. Kapynski was just on with Amy Godwin of Democracy Now. An open and forthright general officer is, I fear, much out of place in today's Army. She speaks directly of memos and instructions from Rumsfield, Gonzales, Gen. Miller and other top level officials.

I find Col. Janice Kapynski to be most refreshing and one telling it like it is. I would encourage you to help maximize her exposure and the hidden realities that she is now providing. I don't have contact info but you folks know how to accomplish that better then I.

I am being blocked from e-mailing the above post. So many new uses for our Patriot Act.

I'm wondering if that poll included one other key question: "Do you think the Coalition Forces should withdraw from Iraq?" We can guess at what the results might be, but it would be useful to have an actual number to quote.

I've tried pointing out how the "original Constitution in Iraq" was -nothing- like the legaleze it is now.. and it was all about "securing Iraqi rights", now it's about free markets and foriegn interests being able to buy up their oil..

citizen spook just smacked down firedoglake for their coverage of the wilson "smear" lie

citizenspook thinks bushco should be tried for treason and espionage act violations but he (she?) also makes a strong case that wilson and corn are in cahoots with busco

SPOOK LINK

citizen spook just smacked down firedoglake for their coverage of the wilson "smear" lie

citizenspook thinks bushco should be tried for treason and espionage act violations but he (she?) also makes a strong case that wilson and corn are in cahoots with busco

SPOOK LINK

Declare "Victory" and leave.

• less than one per cent of the population believes coalition forces are responsible for any improvement in security;

• 72 per cent do not have confidence in the multi-national forces.

What these statistics say really don't matter, because it is basically fact now that the number of terrorists in Iraq now compared to before we occupied Iraq are HUGE. There are so many terrorists in Iraq because of the existence of Coalition forces that are carrying out so many attacks on the Iraqi people that they definitely are NOT safer than before the war. I do believe that the situation will eventually get better, but from the looks of it, that is probably a very long time from now.

One poll number that was very important is the 45% of the country supports the attacks on British and American troops. I blame part of this on the propaganda machine that is Al Jazeera. But outside of that, our forces obviously aren't getting the job done. If the people were secure, they wouldn't be blaming Coalition Forces for their problems. I hope that they will eventually realize that the insurgents are just prolonging their misery and disrupting their security. It's important to note that if they feel insecure, it's not the US that they're worried about, its the insurgents.

And I hope that more people from our country realize that it is our past and present foreign policy that makes it easier for radical Muslim leaders to preach jihad to vulnerable Arabs and get new recruits to the insurgency. This viewpoint of many Iraqis that the U.S. is the problem does come from a radical interpretation of Islam, but the only reason that radical interpretation exists is because of what we have done in the past.

Only a moron believes a small exit poll sample over real numbers. Oh look, a whole room full of morons.

"It's important to note that if they feel insecure, it's not the US that they're worried about, its the insurgents."

I think you are making a broad assumtion here. The U.S. has been reported to have killed dozens of civilians in the past week (but claiming here in the U.S. that "insurgents" were killed). Bombings of civilian gatherings would make me feel pretty insecure.. As well as the raiding that's been going on (and reported by our own soldiers).. kicking in doors, taking food, taking property.. The "insurgents" aren't the only "bad people" in Iraq.. some of our own troops are doing pretty heinous things to the Iraqi people..

They also might be upset about the situation that's likely continued from when all this started.. remember the picture of the guys on a tank and the writing on the wall by a U.S. soldier? "Our god is better than your god"? Na, not inflamitory or antagonistic at all.. I'm sure our "christian" soldiers are being perfectly respectful of their "lessor god" now.. right?

Trying to shift the blame from our troops or our president is futile. You can try to help yourself fall asleep better at night, but the -fact- is, the Iraqi people have -reason- to dislike us.. and it goes a lot further than "propaganda about infidels"..

"because it is basically fact now that the number of terrorists in Iraq now compared to before we occupied Iraq are HUGE."

Yup.. and it's OUR FAULT.. they weren't there -before- we went in.. they came in to fill the power vaccume WE CREATED.. -just- like was predicted by "us" folks that took 2 seconds to stop and think about what would happen if we invaded..

Nice comment there, Medium Moron.. I suppose you think math and science are all willy-nilly-magical-nonsense?

Statistics is typically used to get the sample number needed to be 99+% accurate.. depending on how far from that "sample number" you go, the farther from 99% you get.. with something like a 1% sample, you can be within 2% (+-1%) of what you'd have if you "sampled everyone".. That is, if they talked to enough "people", you get a "picture" of what "everyone" thinks..

Polls paint a picture.. and if done right, a very very very accurate picture.

This may be out there already, but I just have to pass it along.

Got to google,
type in failure and select the I Feel Lucky button.

...Medium Right said on 10/26/2005 @ 1:28pm PT...

Only a moron believes a small exit poll sample over real numbers. Oh look, a whole room full of morons.

He says ,looking about the room he sits in...

"I think you are making a broad assumtion here. The U.S. has been reported to have killed dozens of civilians in the past week (but claiming here in the U.S. that "insurgents" were killed). "

Wow Savanster.

Are you honestly saying that Iraqi civilians are equally worried about US troops? Your post, in a round about way puts them in the same category as the insurgency. Now one of the democratic party's spokespersons - Cindy Sheehan - has referred to the insurgency as "freedom fighters" and referred to Bush as a "the world's biggest terrorist". Do you agree with Cindy Sheehan?

I am not trying to be argumentative (though I may be depending on what your response will be) or condescending.

I read all the articles associated with this poll, and it seems to hold the same standards as the poll taken and used as evidence in the John Hopkins Study done that determined Iraq had lost over 100,000 people as a result of this war (very early on) when the actual statisitcs showed somewhere around 25,000. The fact that it was a "secret" poll makes me suspicious. The fact that the NEW YORK TIMES (the building Ann Coulter wished Timothy McVeigh would have gone to ) have not referred to this poll at all in any of their recent articles (granted I searched quickly and used various phrases and found nothing) shows how serious this poll is and knew that immediately it would have been attacked and spit out. As for the Chicago Sun Times, Tribune, Los Angeles Times, Boston Globe, etc. I haven't bothered searching those. Feel free to do so.

I mean come on, "conducted by an Iraqi University? Which one? LOL.

The reasons you stated SAV in your first post on this thread would be likely if I felt that this was solid evidence that held significance, but since it doesn't, you won't hear me complaining or alleging anything hysterical in regard to accusations - I will leave that to the liberals.

Why don't we discuss things logically? How about you read Condoleeza Rice's three-part political-military strategy for achieving success in Iraq and debate the ideas? Explain to me why she is wrong and what you suggest we do.

BTW On behalf of my hometown of Chicago.....GO SOX.....you should hear the fireworks outside our windows right now!

Ann Coulter's new column has been posted tonight. After reading it, I think liberals can scratch "apoligist for GWB" off of their list of complaints against her....LOL.

condi is a know liar

"condi is a know liar "

I do not think this is true, but the "idea" set forth by her is not a testimony. It's an introduction of an idea set forth by the administration. Just wanted opinions on the IDEAS. This was all part of the CSPAN hearings on Oct 19 where she put forth the idea and answered other questions put to her by Senators.

I have a few questions for Steve F, regarding his comment #20:

SInce when is CIndy Sheehan a spokesperson for the Democratic Party?

Are you really saying that this Sunday Telegraph article cannot be true because it wasn't mentioned by the New York Times?

#25 Winter Patriot,

I think there is nothing wrong about questioning the validity of the Sunday Telegraph article. I agree with you that getting in print in the New York Times is a bad standard for whether it is legitimate or not. But this is a "secret poll," which means (1) we don't know if it was done scientifically, (2) we don't know the wording of the questions, which has a profound impact on answers you get, (3) the poll may have been kept to one or only a few regions in Iraqa that were predominantly anti-Coalition and (4) we don't know if the results were manipulated to forward a political stance. The Sunday Telegraph has an anti-war bias and may be trying to persuade its British readers that the Iraqis don't want us here. I'm not saying that because of these reasons the poll HAS TO BE wrong, just that this is reason enough to QUESTION the validity of it.

Savantster - I think that one of the problems here is that the number of civilian deaths from our troops has been overstated quite a bit to make our soldiers look bad. I know that it does happen, but I am willing to bet that 95% + of bombings and shootings against civilians are from the insurgents. Our soldiers do sometimes make mistakes, and there are a few who are over there for the wrong reasons. But 100% of the insurgency don't care about human life, they just want to destroy the "infedels". It's only a very small percentage of our forces who are troublesome.

You all should already know that I was against starting the war in Iraq, although I DO believe that there was going to come a time when national security demanded that we do something. I think that the way we choose to enter this war has had a profoundly negative impact on our ability to build a free Iraq. But there are thousands of soldiers over in Iraq who truly are doing great work, and are working to give the Iraqis a better life. A lot of people, like Cindy Sheehan, seem to forget that we are doing at least some good over there. You all refuse to admit that or back totally exaggerated stories because you think that will weaken your position against the war. I'm against this war, but at the same time I know the good we are doing over there.

The MSM is actually part of the problem. They aren't involved in any right or left wing conspiracy to hide the news. They just hink that the worse they make it look over there, the more people will watch their networks. They could give a damn about politics when it comes to the war.

#21 Steve F,

I know this is way OT, but most of my family is from the South Side. I grew up as a diehard Cubs fan, which came from my Grandfather and mother (who is also from the South Side.) But everyone else in my family is from there or still lives there, and they are all huge Sox fans. They are ecstatic and having the time of there lives right now. I'm happy for all the Sox fans, they deserve this after waiting 88 years for a championship. I just wish that the baseball gods didn't continue to hate on the Cubs.

"Savantster - I think that one of the problems here is that the number of civilian deaths from our troops has been overstated quite a bit to make our soldiers look bad. I know that it does happen, but I am willing to bet that 95% + of bombings and shootings against civilians are from the insurgents."

And, YOU are believing, AGAIN, the position of the -same- people who LIED us into war.. who LIE to us on a regular basis.. Do I fully accept that the numbers "from Iraq" might be skewed? sure I do.. But I'm MORE inclined to believe OUR government is lying MORE.. why? their track record.. And, you'll note, it makes me SICK to not be able to trust my government.. but when it's made up of greedy bastard liars who are willing to start an illegal war for profit and to push their principles onto a soveriegn nation, I don't have a choice but to question/doubt -everything- they say.

And, I don't believe the "insurgents" are all about the Islamic Jihad either.. I think a LOT of the "insurgents" -are- freedom fighters.. based on a report that showed/claimed only 4% - 10% of the "insurgents" were from "other countries".. Given the -fact- that we know there weren't many (if any) terroists in Iraq -before- we went in.. that means it's likely that 90% of the "insurgent forces" are Iraqis trying to get us out (and, of course, distrupt the power grab in Iraq.. but, that's been going on there for thousands of years.. we really shouldn't have gotten involved).

Part of the problem here is, Americans are so damned ethnocentric that we just can't get our brains around other people's cultures.. The Iraqi "leaders" drew up a Constitution that was all about a socialism.. THAT is what the Iraqi people wanted.. But, it's not what WE wanted FOR them.. So, we sent in some "people" who had closed door meetings.. at one point, handing a proposed draft of the Constitution TO THEM.. hoping they would accept it.. Now the constitution allows for outsiders (a big no no in their culture) to "buy up the oil rights".. and "open businesses".. We're not bringing Democracy to Iraq, we're bringing our business model to them.. and securing rights to start exploiting them, DESPITE their wishes.

As far as the poll.. I "question" it too.. just less than I question our Government.. Our Government has been PROVED to be lying about tons of crap.. The Iraqis haven't been shown to be lying about -anything-.. that I've seen. And, how telling is it that "we're there to help them and save them".. then turn around and in the next breath say "they are liars and trying to send out propaganda.. they -want- us there.. "? that is to FORCE your point of view on them, weather they want it or not.. seems kinda... Un-American.. and WRONG.. to me..

Here are some truths I keep in mind while reading articles like this. (1) The United States LIED about evidence it used to justify the war. (2) The United States -continues- to lie about actions/consequences in order to keep up their image at home (the bombing of a wedding party that was reported here as an attack on insurgents, never mind the CHILDREN that were there and killed.. the government said no civilians were killed). (3) The United States has a culture of corruption running the show. They are content to lie to everyone to get what they want. (4) The United States has been lying to the American Public (and the world) about all kinds of things for decades.. ONLY admitting them once all the facts come out (Iran-Contra.. fabricated evidence for the FIRST gulf war.. TONS of other things that I don't bother to remember because the details are no longer pertinant.. the "idea" that our government can't be trusted is all that matters, and there is TONSof evidence/proof/reason to believe that.. I could make a list of dozens or hundreds of examples where we were lied to, but there's no point.. you get the idea, I hope).

And Steve at #20.. I agree that since Bush LIED to the WORLD to get into Iraq that HE, is in fact, NO better than a terrorist.. The "freedom fighters" bit is overly simplistic in my book. Sure, -some- of the insurgents are probably the equivalant of "freedom fighters", but I'd suspect more are "rebels".. trying to disrupt the political process. Given that the "leaders" were "elected" (and lets not forget the reports of how U.S. troops kept a lot of the Sunni voting stations closed.. and is only spun as "Sunnis didn't come vote much"), the bulk of the insurgents are "bucking the government'.. That's not "freedom fighters" in the strictest sense, now is it? Though, when you toss in the FACT that the Constitution is what the U.S. wanted, and NOT what the Iraqis -originally- came up with, I can see where the "insurgents" railing against the "system" might be construed as them trying to throw off the chains the West is trying to put on them.. and, in -that- respect, could be seen as "freedom fighters". The problem, it seems, is it "looks like" they are railing against their "elected officials".. which, if they gave in to greed/corruption/pressure from us, may well be justifed. I mean, if they (the elected officials) wanted a Constitution that said X, and we 'negotiated' Y and Z, the "people" may well be pissy about our interference.. And, if this report (above) is true, and the people didn't get to read the draft, their vote is meaningless.. they will revolt anyway. I -also- see a HUGE problem with the Sunnis having listened to the Shia and Kurds when they said "look, we'll let you talk about changing things -after- we get it signed and taken care of". That wreaks of "well, we heard your points and don't care.. it stands as is".. which will likely start a civil war.. don't you think?

Savantster #28

Another thing the neoCons keep harping on is the love of freedom.

Their argument is a two-edged sword, because if it is true that there is an innate, natural human want for freedom, then that means there is an innate, natural human dislike for occupational forces.

It seems reasonable to think any nation would resent being invaded and told what to do and think.

And they would have a dislike of torture. So the polls do have some semblance of validity.

WATCH OUR NEW VIDEO! YOUR LIFE DEPENDS ON IT!

ACT AMERICAN II

www.URBANTERRORISTS.com

">

I am constantly amazed at how two people can look at the same thing and see it completely differently.

In this case it's Nittany Lion's

The MSM is actually part of the problem. They aren't involved in any right or left wing conspiracy to hide the news. They just hink that the worse they make it look over there, the more people will watch their networks. They could give a damn about politics when it comes to the war.

I respect your right to your own opinion but mine is quite different. I agree that the MSM is actually part of the problem but I have no idea how you draw the conclusion that "they just hink that the worse they make it look over there, the more people will watch their networks."

To me it seems as though they will do anything possible to avoid talking about the war, and if forced to talk about it they make every attempt to minimize how bad it is over there, and over here too.

While we're at it, I disagree totally with your assertion in a prior comment that Aljazeera is a "propaganda machine". I have been reading Aljazeera as well as a number of other foreign and domestic news sites regularly for a long time. And in my opinion there's nothing in the world that rivals the propaganda machine based in the White House.

They admitted that they would lie to us, and to everyone else in the world, and they certainly have been true to their word on that one. Possibly the only time it's happened.

I would just like to point out to you guys I am from the UK and it really made me laugh seeing the The Sunday Telegraph described as anti war...lol...people in the uk will know what i mean...

It is the most right wing Newspaper on Par with Rupert Modocs bunch it is very pro war and very anti Euopean. It is the paper george Galloway successfully sued for printing information with regards to him and Iraq. So dont believe the bullshit, however the difference is here in the UK if the pro war papers are beginning to shift in their opions.

Yeah, SAF, I know what you mean too, even though I don't live in the UK.

There's a ton of bullshit on this thread, way more than I would ever have time to debunk, but the lie about the Sunday Telegraph is one of the best, isn't it?