Daily Kos

Remind Us Again What the Governing Council Supposedly Does ...

by Meteor Blades

Thu Dec 04, 2003 at 02:28:02 PM PDT

The U.S. seems to have exported Catch-22 to Iraq:

By JOEL BRINKLEY

BAGHDAD, Iraq, Dec. 3 — Iraqi census officials devised a detailed plan to count the country's entire population next summer and prepare a voter roll that would open the way to national elections in September. But American officials say they rejected the idea, and the Iraqi Governing Council members say they never saw the plan to consider it.

The practicality of national elections is now the subject of intense debate among Iraqi and American officials, who are trying to move forward on a plan to give Iraqis sovereignty next summer. As the American occupation officials rejected the plan to compile a voter roll rapidly, they also argued to the Governing Council that the lack of a voter roll meant national elections were impractical.

The American plan for Iraqi sovereignty proposes instead a series of caucus-style, indirect elections.

Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, the most influential Shiite cleric, is calling for national elections next June, not the indirect balloting specified in the American plan for turning over control of the country. But American officials, and some Iraqis say the nation is not ready for national elections, in part because the logistics are too daunting.
 No census, no voter rolls, no voter rolls, no direct elections. What’s the story? Aren’t there enough Diebold machines available yet to produce the outcome the Bush Administration desires in Iraq?

It’s amazing when the puppet-master doesn’t even trust the puppet. First, the Governing Council wasn’t given any advance input on how to spend the $20 billion U.S. taxpayers are contributing to reconstructing Iraq. Now we learn that the IGC was never consulted about holding a census.

Not content with their general record in the employment arena, the Bush Administration seems determined to put satirists out of work as well.
  • ::

Tags: (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions

Permalink | 47 comments

  •  Bizarre (none / 0)

    I find it a little bizarre that a police state like Saddam's Iraq wouldn't have very detailed statistical information.

    But maybe the only statistics they kept were for nefarious ends.

    by praktike on Thu Dec 04, 2003 at 02:35:07 PM PDT

  •  census working over time (none / 1)

    Does Halliburton do censi/censuses?

    ~ have a powerful day ~

    by moeman on Thu Dec 04, 2003 at 02:38:45 PM PDT

  •  Well, of course the administration rejected it . . (none / 0)

    they saw how much trouble direct elections caused them in 2000.  Plus, until Ashcroft gets his hand-picked lawyers over there to revamp the legal system, they can't be sure the Iraqi courts will bail them out of any election snafu.

    by Heraklitus on Thu Dec 04, 2003 at 02:41:19 PM PDT

    •  Re: Well, of course they rejected it (none / 0)

      What did you expect? Without his brother and Tammy Faye Harris in town to rig the election for him, why the hell would Bush let them hold one?
      Lick Bush in '04! Sharp Left Turn

      by Sharp Left Turn on Thu Dec 04, 2003 at 02:55:45 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Domestic considerations paramount (none / 0)

      Perhaps what bothered the Bush administration is that the Iraqi elections were supposed to be held in September. A resounding defeat of American interests in that election would have gone over VERY poorly in the general election in the U.S.

      My prediction: they delay the census by less than 6 months. Just long enough to make the Iraqi election after the U.S. election.

      "We're borrowing money from China to buy oil from the Persian Gulf to burn it in ways that destroy the planet." Al Gore

      by jd in nyc on Thu Dec 04, 2003 at 03:45:11 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Bush hates democracy (none / 1)

    I say this obviously means that Bush is against democracy in Iraq.  How can he promise sovereignty by next summer and then claim that Iraq doesn't have the infrastructure to ensure that their citizens are properly represented.  I understand the arguments but they are obviously bs.

    Why does Bush hate democracy so much?

    by seamus on Thu Dec 04, 2003 at 02:44:59 PM PDT

    •  Re: Bush hates democracy (none / 1)

      This is precisely correct and sooner or later--probably sooner--Dean and Trippi are going to rip huge holes into Bush for it.

      Think about it.  The Lying War Felon Psycopath Creep never said a word as he was lying about wmd's.

      Now that they're nowhere to be found, why, the reason we went over there is to establish Democracy.

      It's total bullshit.  If that was the case, why shut down a Iraqi TV station?  Why not have real elections?

      Democracy for Iraq is simply another freaking lie!  They don't even want a real election, for whatever greedy reason is in their heads.

      Man this is going to be cakewalk if they keep this up.  Iraq is going to kill Bush.

      by paradox on Thu Dec 04, 2003 at 03:10:53 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Re: Bush hates democracy (4.00 / 2)

        Now that they're nowhere to be found, why, the reason we went over there is to establish Democracy.

        The thing is, it should be so easy to refute Bush's claims of humanitarian reasons for going into Iraq, if people would only dig a bit. There's a little-known quote from an ABC "This Week" interview during the 2000 campaign which could really kill Bush's humanitarian credibility if people will pick it up and start spreading it around:

        When asked in an interview if the "world community" should stop ethnic cleansing if it could, Bush said, "I disagree with that. I think the president of the United States must clearly delineate what's in our national strategic interests. Europe is in our national strategic interest, the Far East is in our national strategic interest, our neighborhood is in our national strategic interest, as is the Middle East. But beyond that, the United States is going to have to work with organizations like the United Nations to encourage them to stop genocide. We should not send our troops to stop ethnic cleansing and genocide in nations outside our strategic interest. I don't like genocide and I don't like ethnic cleansing, but the president must set clear parameters as to where troops ought to be used and when they ought to be used." When the interviewer asked if Bush would do anything if another Rwanda took place, Bush said, "I would work with a world organizations and encourage them to move, but I would not commit our troops."

        Cites for this are at ABCNews.com, CNN.com, and a mirror of Gore's factsheet on Bush. A transcript of the entire interview is apparently available here, but it would cost $20--anyone out there feel like dropping $20 for a chance to nail Bush where it counts, and send it on to the Dean and Clark campaigns?

        Sin lies only in hurting others unnecessarily. All other "sins" are invented nonsense.

        by Catsy on Thu Dec 04, 2003 at 07:46:05 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Re: Remind Us Again (none / 0)

    More policy based on three stooges-like head-thunking: "Doh! No voice for you!"
    Mmmm, what a way to build democracy and impress the surrounding Arab states how friendly we are and how we want them to have freedom. Can true success be far behind?

    http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-02-19-mccain-roe_x.htm

    by joojooluv on Thu Dec 04, 2003 at 02:48:07 PM PDT

  •  Re: Remind Us Again What the Governing Council (none / 0)

     Not content with their general record in the employment arena, the Bush Administration seems determined to put satirists out of work as well.

    ROTFLMAO!!!

    (reminds me of what jon stewart said when bush v gore was finally decided: (i'm paraphrasing) "as a human i'm appalled, but as a comic i know the next 4 yrs are gonna be easy street")

    We declared war on terror--it's not even a noun, so, good luck. After we defeat it, I'm sure we'll take on that bastard ennui. (jon stewart)

    by jb in nyc on Thu Dec 04, 2003 at 02:48:26 PM PDT

  •  Re: Remind Us Again What the Governing Council Sup (none / 0)

    Aren't there enough Diebold machines available yet to produce the outcome the Bush Administration desires in Iraq?

    LOL!

    Sounds like it's time for another no-bid contract.

    by fly on Thu Dec 04, 2003 at 02:52:49 PM PDT

  •  incoming turkey (none / 0)

    Time for scalia to do a highly secured sneak in / sneak out 2 hour visit.

    ~ have a powerful day ~

    by moeman on Thu Dec 04, 2003 at 03:00:03 PM PDT

  •  Re: What the Governing Council Supposedly Does (none / 0)

    I'll tell you one thing that the Iraqi Governing Council is going to do:  drag the Bush Administration kicking and screaming into accepting Iraqi soverignty.

    by EphemeralNotion on Thu Dec 04, 2003 at 03:00:48 PM PDT

  •  Only one shot...and misses (none / 1)

    The Arabs don't trust us as a just broker for anything: peace, democracy, civic freedom or self-determination. We had one chance to correct this impression and we blew it by insisting on selectocracy. In a matter of weeks the whole country will be against the occupation.

    I thought for a moment we were going to see a struggle not unlike that of the Bani Sadr government in Iran but we're going straight to revolution. Doesn't look good, we may see Baghdad looking like Grozy.

    by paper tigress on Thu Dec 04, 2003 at 03:03:12 PM PDT

    •  Re: Only one shot...and misses (none / 0)

      Doesn't look good, we may see Baghdad looking like Grozy.

      Do you mean Grozny, as in Chechnya?

      Hmm... let's see...

      • 25,000+ refugees in 2003, destablizing the region
      • discredited elections led to puppet president
      • a few thousand armed resistance members hold off ten times as many "professional soldiers"
      • majority of those killed are civilians
      • widespread "common crime" such as carjackings, murders, robberies and thefts
      • buildings and cars blown up
      Yep... I think you might be right.

      Night and day you can find me Flogging the Simian

      by Soj on Thu Dec 04, 2003 at 05:35:19 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Re: Remind Us Again What the Governing Council Sup (none / 1)

    No census, no voter rolls, no voter rolls, no direct elections.

    Well, this is easily solved, if they really wanted to. Each person gets their hand stamped with indelible ink right before they cast their ballot. Check for the stamp.

    You would get a small amount of fraud (foreign nationals, people voting in the wrong district), but nothing major.

    Of course, the administration probably doesn't want this to be solved.

    (-7.38,-2.51) 76% of dKos readers think I'm a secret wing-nut operative!

    by Gustavo on Thu Dec 04, 2003 at 03:04:24 PM PDT

    •  Re: Remind Us Again What the Governing Council Sup (none / 0)

      Yes, isn't hand-stamping what they do in countries that are new to elections and/or don't have real vote rolls?  Does it matter that people might not be in exactly the right  place to vote for local councils?

      John McCain--he's not who you think he is.

      by Mimikatz on Thu Dec 04, 2003 at 03:39:51 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Re: Remind Us Again What the Governing Council Sup (none / 0)

        I know they did it in South Africa after apartheid (and still do it I think in some places).  I know because I saw it with my own eyes.  At the time I thought it was primitive but after I thought about it for a while I realized it was genius because no man or woman can have an "extra" hand.

        The ink was clearly obvious and totally impervious to any kind of soap we could find - which was about a week after the elections.  But it did wear off after maybe a month of normal wear and tear.  

        Night and day you can find me Flogging the Simian

        by Soj on Thu Dec 04, 2003 at 05:53:48 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Re: Remind Us Again What the Governing Council Sup (none / 0)

      You know, they do this in Venezuela and no doubt in other countries as well.  But it's probably too risky for this administration to do anything so democratic and so fair.

      GOD is not DEAD; HE is merely DEAF

      by Roadrage on Thu Dec 04, 2003 at 05:27:08 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Re: Remind Us Again What the Governing Council Sup (none / 0)

      This administration has an alternative solution borrowed from its close ally Saudi Arabia: they are going to cut off a hand of everyone who votes. Problem solved.

      Strateg(er)y for Du(DEM)mies

      by daunte on Thu Dec 04, 2003 at 09:45:22 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  democracy = elections = census (none / 0)

    So if we are in the business of promoting democracy in Iraq, what's wrong with a census? Sounds like democracy to me. Could be a number of reasons, some real, some purely political. First I can could see that conducting a census during what amounts to war time could be problamatic. Second the oppoutunties for gaming the numbers would be rampant. Third, who do we want to count and what are the qualifications to be "counted". Seems to me the administration would prefer certain political blocks to be either undercounted or would like to dream up some reason why the more radical elements can't participate qat all.

    However, even given these difficulties I think a decent job of conducting a census can be done (Sounds like a good place for some statistical sampling methods! - oh, never mind) but this administration does not want to go down the path that the census points to. They are not interested in real democracy in Iraq at all, only the image of a democratic Iraq as cover for the real power that will continue to be in US hands

    by freemti on Thu Dec 04, 2003 at 03:06:43 PM PDT

    •  Re: democracy = elections = census (none / 0)

      There is already a general census-like apparatus already handy and could easily be used as the basis of one for purposes of voting: the ration cards/ration system that the Ba'aths instituted in order to distrubute UN food supplies.  That would pretty closesly reflect all households, since people would want to ensure inclusion on those lists, and the government had a vested interest in keeping them relatively accurate.

      Words can sometimes, in moments of grace, attain the quality of deeds. --Elie Wiesel

      by a gilas girl on Thu Dec 04, 2003 at 07:27:26 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Re: democracy = elections = census (none / 0)

        Unfortunately, many households--especially ones which were self-sufficient, in outlying areas, or in places where Saddam deliberately slighted them--don't have the ration cards. Nor does anyone who had fled the country but now has returned.

        It's a nice idea, and the data will certainly be helpful, but it's not a solution in and of itself.

        Sin lies only in hurting others unnecessarily. All other "sins" are invented nonsense.

        by Catsy on Thu Dec 04, 2003 at 07:50:33 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Re: democracy = elections = census (none / 0)

          Does it not offer a basis from which a census could reasonable and rather efficiently be built?  Or is that too far off the path of its original purpose?

          Words can sometimes, in moments of grace, attain the quality of deeds. --Elie Wiesel

          by a gilas girl on Thu Dec 04, 2003 at 07:56:30 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Re: democracy = elections = census (none / 0)

            It offers a basis, yes, but it's not a solid or consistent enough basis on which to build a census. You'd still need other methods of counting and registering the people who aren't covered by the ration cards, and you'd still have to collect additional information on the people who do.

            I'm not saying they're worthless, just that we'd need other methods anyway. At best the ration cards would be of use for corroborating and validating what census information we do collect.

            Sin lies only in hurting others unnecessarily. All other "sins" are invented nonsense.

            by Catsy on Thu Dec 04, 2003 at 07:58:58 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Re: democracy = elections = census (none / 0)

              The Iraqi Census officials seem to disagree with you about the ability to conduct a Census. Since censuses have been conducted in Iraq in the past, I'm inclined to believe that they have a better idea of what's possible than Bremer does.

              by KeithH on Fri Dec 05, 2003 at 12:24:51 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

  •  Re: Remind Us Again What the Governing Council (none / 0)

    Aren't there enough Diebold machines available yet to produce the outcome the Bush Administration desires in Iraq?

    How does that kool-aid taste, Kos?

    by no1dad on Thu Dec 04, 2003 at 03:50:47 PM PDT

    •  Re: Remind Us Again What the Governing Council (none / 0)

      Anybody who thinks Diebold's voting machines aren't broken is drinking kool-aid. I mean, it really wouldn't be that difficult to seriously screw up an election with those things. Why the right isn't upset about them is beyond me.

      by m on Thu Dec 04, 2003 at 04:02:37 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Re: Remind Us Again What the Governing Council (none / 0)

      In the first place it's MeteorBlades, not Kos.

      In the second place if you think the machines are satisfactory the you have drunk then kool-aid, my friend.

      Are the machines good?  I ask.  Yes, you reply.

      How do you know?  I reply to that.

      There is no answer to that question.  There is no way to know.  None.

      The machines are a total disgrace and a manifest threat to American democracy.  Why do you hate democracy so much?

      by paradox on Thu Dec 04, 2003 at 04:49:27 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Re: Remind Us Again What the Governing Council (none / 0)

      Let's use slot machines instead!

      They're more secure, and we can all drink Kool-aid in the hot Baghdad weather while we're at it!

      by CSTAR on Thu Dec 04, 2003 at 05:56:09 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Re: Remind Us Again (none / 1)

    How annoying.  Why not ask the Jimmy Carter Center for some advice.  Other large countries seem to have solved the problem of handling free elections for the first time.

    by 537 votes on Thu Dec 04, 2003 at 03:52:38 PM PDT

  •  Censusing is dangerous (none / 0)


    Count the warlords too.

    ~~~~~~~

    ~ have a powerful day ~

    by moeman on Thu Dec 04, 2003 at 04:13:39 PM PDT

  •  Not in this NYT story but I have seen it in others (none / 0)

    There apparently is an up to date population enumeration: the Oil for Food Progam household ration information. Apparently it is intact and quite accurate. Some IGC person suggested it be used instead of a full census in order to handle that all-important first election in a timely manner.

    Of course the idea was rejected by the Occupation Office of All Things.

    What a country.

    (Sorry, no link)

    --felix

    by felix19 on Thu Dec 04, 2003 at 08:39:01 PM PDT

Permalink | 47 comments