No Polling Places in Many Sunni Cities

The Iraqi Independent Electoral Commission declared Saturday that about 70 ballot stations have not opened in Anbar, western Iraq for security reasons.

Member of the commission, Hussein Al-Hindawi said in a press conference that 60 out of 209 polling stations have not opened in Anbar for security reasons whereas the other stations, especially in Fallujah and eastern Ramadi have opened.

Continued....

The vote is a farce to begin with.

You cannot create a new constitution under occupation, and expect it to be considered legitimate.

The very ones that have the power to reject the imposed government are being denied their chance to vote.

Democracy applies to all or it does not exist.....

Democracy in Iraq only applies to the people that are nice and friendly to the US anybody else are "insurgents"

Originally posted by marg6043
Democracy in Iraq only applies to the people that are nice and friendly to the US anybody else are "insurgents"

Nice opinion...
Pity doesnt hold up IMO.


PS arch, if it requires no Coalition soldeirs in the are could you suggest a solution?

[edit on 26/02/2005 by devilwasp]

he does have a point. The constitution, if you can call it that, is most likely to be rejected by the Sunnis, as they are being sidelined. For the vote to have a load of polling stations closed, in a largely Sunni province is a bit fishy.....

Although, on the flip side, why does America always have to have some sort of "constitution" put in place after it invades somewhere? The US form of Government is far from perfect (and far from being democratic), so why go round and implement it everywhere else?


"Money, money, money...It's so funny........"

PS arch, if it requires no Coalition soldeirs in the are could you suggest a solution?

I was waiting for you to edit this, but enough time has passed.

I have no idea what you are saying....

Originally posted by stumason
he does have a point. The constitution, if you can call it that, is most likely to be rejected by the Sunnis, as they are being sidelined. For the vote to have a load of polling stations closed, in a largely Sunni province is a bit fishy.....

Where is the news/facts on these polls being ‘mysteriously’ closing/not opening/not available etc etc other than another allured to in a 'less than' 20 line squib, the posters opinion and your comment?


.

The objective is a democracy, where people vote. If you legitimately vote in your country, you live in one of several types of democracy.

In the first Iraqi election, a number polling booths in Sunni areas were bombed, or evacuated, or abandoned, but not necessarily avoided by the general population. Despite the fear factor, they do want to vote, and they will.

The Sunnis, a minority, ruthlessly ruled the country with an "iron hand", and committed violent atrocities that the world (the United Nations) considered wrong. People living in Iraq, understand that throughout their history, the strongest tribe rules, even if they aren't the majority.

Currently, the US Military forces, are the stongest tribe, and desire that elections be held. The Sunnis, the second strongest tribe, object to that. Obviously they would like to return to a condition prior to the current one.

The question, is whether an election under conditions of "pre-civil war", is valid. Considering that the portion of the country that is at civil unrest, is primarily responsible, as a collective group, for the current situation, it might be reasonable to proceed without input from portions of that population. The exception, is that the general population of the suppressed areas is valid, and has an equal right to express themselves.

The puzzle, is in getting a violent sub-group of the minority, to peacefully allow the expressions of the people by voting, when they knowingly are the cause of the situation, both before, and after.

The Iraqis need to declare, as a sovereign country, with or without a constitution, by majority, that violence is not tolerated. The groups responsible for the violence, need to be declared criminal, perhaps non-citizens, perhaps disallowed a right to vote, and treated according to the laws of the land.

Originally posted by ArchAngel

You cannot create a new constitution under occupation, and expect it to be considered legitimate.

Really??? Japan and Germany might disagree with you on that they both created new constitutions under US occupation. We all know how bad that turned out for those two countries what a mess they have become

[edit on 15-10-2005 by ShadowXIX]

Originally posted by cjf
Where is the news/facts on these polls being ‘mysteriously’ closing/not opening/not available etc etc other than another allured to in a 'less than' 20 line squib, the posters opinion and your comment?

Is Reuters a reputable source?

RAMADI, Iraq (Reuters) - Hours before a crucial referendum on a new constitution, voters in western Iraq, where many are expected to say "No," were asking themselves a troubling question: where are the polling stations?

"There are no voting centers in cities like Haditha, Hit, Rawa, Qaim, Ana, Baghdadi and the villages around them," Mahmoud Salman al-Ani, a human rights activist in Ramadi, said on Friday, listing locations across western Anbar province.

"There aren't actually any voting centers or even voting sheets in these cities ... Nobody knows how and where to vote if they decide to," he said of the predominantly Sunni Arab region.

Co ntinued....

Polling station locations and scheduling brought to you by the good folks at Diebold.

Originally posted by ArchAngel

I was waiting for you to edit this, but enough time has passed.

I have no idea what you are saying....

If it requires Coalition soldiers to leave then could you suggest a solution to that problem?

Originally posted by devilwasp
If it requires Coalition soldiers to leave then could you suggest a solution to that problem?

I did not say it was required, only that it would not be perceived as legitimate wile they are occupied, and Bush would agree.

All Syrian military forces and intelligence personnel must withdraw before the Lebanese elections for those elections to be free and fair.

The solution could be just what we demanded from Syria.

Or do you think its not fair if we have to do what we demand of others?

"Do as I say not as I do"

Originally posted by ArchAngel
I did not say it was required, only that it would not be perceived as legitimate wile they are occupied, and Bush would agree.

So how did the japanese and german ones suceed under occupation?

All Syrian military forces and intelligence personnel must withdraw before the Lebanese elections for those elections to be free and fair.

I dont care about bush, its blair that would intrest me.

The solution could be just what we demanded from Syria.

Or do you think its not fair if we have to do what we demand of others?

"Do as I say not as I do"

Leave? Sure can you explain how the violence would stop and we would stop the country going into civil war?

Originally posted by ArchAngel
Is Reuters a reputable source?

Yes, thanks..I couldn't find much on the Western Regions of Iraq 'not having access to polls' after reading this thread. There seems to be some constancies as to why this may be the case; however.

Your cited source:

U.S. troops have run a series of operations across the province in the past three weeks, trying to hunt down guerrillas and prepare the generally lawless region for the vote.....

This seems to be what is being consistently reported via most wire/press services in similar form. Some quick examples:

Sunnis Join Millions for Iraq Charter Vote

About 250 polling stations did not open because of technical or security problems, election officials said.
(Link)

UN hails "incredibly peaceful" Iraq vote

"The process has gone smoothly and well from a technical point of view," said Carina Perelli, the head of the U.N. team providing technical assistance to the Iraqi government….
….In areas like the insurgent stronghold of Anbar province in the west, she said the difficulty for voters of casting a ballot in the conflict zone or where militants were intimidating people against voting had been recognised by waiving regulations that people must vote at a specific polling station near their home.
(Link)

Large Turnout for Iraq Constitution Vote

The minimal turnout in Anbar — as in the January election — suggested the key battleground between U.S.-Iraqi forces and insurgents, would remain alienated from the political process.
(Link)

Endangering persons is an issue when establishing Iraqi voting stations in western rural provinces, ipso...if there was a very large coalition military presence I'm sure the 'press' would report intimidation in the voting.

.....In Ramadi, a group of residents said they had walked around their neighborhood looking for a voting center and not found one….

LOL...I did like this one; I need the number to the Human rights guy.. “Thair al-Hadeethi” so I can whine about the same thing in my own neighborhood!

It seems they are already learning that "the squeaky wheel get the grease"
.

Originally posted by ArchAngel
No Polling Places in Many Sunni Cities

Maybe this says differant?Millions of ballots are being counted in Iraq

From the BBC

Overall turnout in the vote, which passed off relatively peacefully, was more than 60% of the 15.5m voters.

I would say that is pretty good, wouldn't you?

Originally posted by Bikereddie

Originally posted by ArchAngel
No Polling Places in Many Sunni Cities

Maybe this says differant?Millions of ballots are being counted in Iraq

From the BBC

Overall turnout in the vote, which passed off relatively peacefully, was more than 60% of the 15.5m voters.

I would say that is pretty good, wouldn't you?

If 250+ Polling stations did not open then I would not say it is pretty good.

It stinks reflecting the reality.

Selective voting is not democracy.

Iraqs future hangs on this vote being legitimate, and it was not.

[edit on 16-10-2005 by ArchAngel]

Originally posted by ArchAngel
If 250+ Polling stations did not open then I would not say it is pretty good.

But 5,855 did actually open, therefore 250 seems insignificant don't you think? Look at the reasons they did not open. Its in the link you supplied.

Originally posted by ArchAngelIt stinks reflecting the reality.

Really? Is this just your opinion? 60% say different.

Originally posted by ArchAngelSelective voting is not democracy.

Not sure it is selective.Or is that the Sunnis reflection?

Originally posted by ArchAngelIraqs future hangs on this vote being legitimate, and it was not...

Why wasn't it? Enlighten me here please..

edit for quotes...........



[edit on 16-10-2005 by Bikereddie]

[edit on 16-10-2005 by Bikereddie]

It's the Sunni's fault if some polling stations didn't open
Their leaders have done everything they could to boycott the Constitution but their tactics didn't work. They are loosing their reign of terror they had over the Shiites and Kurds for centuries and they cannot do anything about it except vote and participate in politics. Nobody is forcing them to vote
The Irakis are fed up with their bombings and executions , I hope this draft is approved

[edit on 16-10-2005 by Vladtepes]

Why wasn't it? Enlighten me here please..

Look back to the one line of mine you did not quote.

That is the reason, and the reference is above.

If 250+ Polling stations did not open the vote was not legitimate.

Originally posted by ArchAngel

Why wasn't it? Enlighten me here please..

Look back to the one line of mine you did not quote.

That is the reason, and the reference is above.

If 250+ Polling stations did not open the vote was not legitimate.

Which line was that?

250 stations did not open for security reasons. That to me is a good enough reason not to open them. Guess they were thinking about the suspected loss of human lives eh?

You continue to quote 250+, yet the link you supplied quotes different.

About 250 polling stations did not open

About is different than 250+ don't you think?



[edit on 16-10-2005 by Bikereddie]