Crazy_dog no.3 Posted October 16, 2002 Share Posted October 16, 2002 BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) -- Saddam Hussein won another seven-year term as Iraq's president in a referendum in which he was the sole candidate, taking 100 percent of the vote, the Iraqi leader's right-hand man announced Wednesday. All 11,445,638 of the eligible voters cast ballots, said Izzat Ibrahim, vice chairman of the Revolutionary Command Council that is Iraq's key decision-making body. "This is a unique manifestation of democracy which is superior to all other forms of democracies even in these countries which are besieging Iraq and trying to suffocate it," Ibrahim said at a news conference in Baghdad, apparently referring to the United States. The White House had dismissed the one-man race in advance, and the results seemed to bear out the criticism. To get a vote total at all -- let alone a 100 percent "yes" vote -- Iraqi officials would have had to gather and count millions of paper ballots, some from remote areas far from Baghdad. "Obviously, it's not a very serious day, not a very serious vote and nobody places any credibility on it," press secretary Ari Fleischer said in Washington on Tuesday as ballots were being cast in Iraq. Parliament members were expected to go to Saddam sometime Wednesday to administer the oath of office for the new term. Iraqis in Baghdad could be heard firing in the air in celebration after Ibrahim's announcement of the results in Parliament. The government already had declared the day a national holiday, even before the results. Clusters of men took to the streets, dancing, at the news. Nabir Khaled Yusef, a van driver, and one of them: "My feeling is of happiness. This referendum and the 100 percent shows that all Iraqis are ready to defend their country and leader." Mahmoud Amin, a retired civil servant, echoed the idea. "This is a great day to celebrate," he said. "We are not surprised with the 100 percent vote for the president, because all Iraqis are steadfast to their president, who has been known to them for 30 years." On Tuesday, it was apparent that the vote was different from what most people know in democratic societies. Some voters stuffed bunches of ballots into boxes, saying they represented the votes of their entire families. Ibrahim defended the 100 percent figure when asked by reporters whether such a percentage wasn't absurd. "Someone who does not know the Iraqi people, he will not believe this percentage, but it is real. Whether it looks that way to someone or not," he said. "We don't have opposition in Iraq. They are situated in northern Iraq. Inside Iraq, there is no opposition. A poll among Kurds in northern Iraq -- who are not under Saddam's control -- bore out Ibrahim's statement on the opposition. The poll conducted by the Iraqi Institute for Democracy showed 94.5 percent of Iraqi Kurds questioned said they would not vote for Saddam. The institute, which is based in the northern Kurdish enclave and calls itself a nonprofit group promoting democracy, said said about 3,000 Kurds were questioned Tuesday as Iraqis went to the polls in the referendum. The poll was published Wednesday by the London-based Al Hayat daily, which reported only 64 Kurds said they would vote for Saddam while 129 said they were undecided. In the last referendum in 1995, Saddam got 99.96 percent of the vote -- according to the official Iraqi results -- and officials had said they expected him to top that figure. "This is a day of pride, honor and dignity as Iraqis express their free will to say "yes" to the pinnacle of their glory and loftiness," Ibrahim said, referring to Saddam. The vote was widely advertised not only as backing for Saddam but as a rebuke to the United States, which has been pressing in the United Nations Security Council for a resolution that would allow a war to topple Saddam. Ibrahim referred to the United States as the "forces of injustice and illusion," and called Iraq the land of "civilization and creativity." Saddam, 65, became president in 1979 in a well-orchestrated transfer of power within his Baath Party. Iraq has been under U.N. Security Council sanctions since invading Kuwait in 1990. U.N. resolutions require the country to destroy all its weapons of mass destruction, but it is widely believed to retain chemical and biological weapons, and the United States has accused it of trying to develop nuclear weapons. The United States wants a new Security Council resolution that would give U.N. weapons inspectors wide powers to uncover Iraq's arms and to trigger a war on Iraq if it resists full inspections. France has led a campaign in the Security Council to drop from the resolution the idea of an automatic trigger for war. I was looking around CNN.com after one of STTCT's posts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Havoc Stryphe Posted October 16, 2002 Share Posted October 16, 2002 Sadly, if you view old World War II movies from Germany, you will witness many a man, woman and child rally to Adolf Hitler. Wether at his speeches or at a book burning. Just because they believe in their leader, does not necessarily mean they would not be much better off with a different leader. The same can be said of any country, including the U.S. However, mob mentality, ignorance, lack of education or never knowing a life any different, and fear can certainly play a role in making for a wonderful display of love and affection for a tyranical leader leading a country down the road to perdition. It is human nature to follow someone charismatic and full of promises, especially if our lives are lacking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy_dog no.3 Posted October 16, 2002 Author Share Posted October 16, 2002 Hey in this thread I'm not taking sides. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kvan Posted October 16, 2002 Share Posted October 16, 2002 Well I'm taking sides! Its unfortunate that the Iraq people are kept in the dark to a lot of things (we are too, but just not as much). Its sad (like Stryphe said), but it happens in a lot of nations where their ruler opressess them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy_dog no.3 Posted October 16, 2002 Author Share Posted October 16, 2002 Hey Kvan, nice to see ya (this is my 3rd account, BTW;) ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tie Guy Posted October 16, 2002 Share Posted October 16, 2002 "It does not matter who cast the votes, it only matters who's counting them." The other thing is, who is on the other side of the ballet? No one! They had to vote for Saddam, they had no choice. And i seriously doubt they could've just stayed at home if they wanted to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breton Posted October 16, 2002 Share Posted October 16, 2002 TIE guy they could have voted no for Saddam. The voting is also totally anonymus. And when people are partying in the streets to celebrate Saddam, they don't look very unhappy about him. The people loves Saddam. This is much because of his propaganda, but the way US is acting does it much easier for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kvan Posted October 16, 2002 Share Posted October 16, 2002 And if anyone did vote against him, I doubt they are with us anymore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tie Guy Posted October 16, 2002 Share Posted October 16, 2002 Qui-Gon, if you believe for a second that voting is anonymous there then i'm sorry, but you are deluding yourself. Besides, they can't vote no. There was only one canidate, they could vote for him or not at all, and if you think that everyone, EVERYONE, came out to vote and not a single person missed because they really, really wanted to show there support for Saddam then that is pathetic. We barely have 50% attendence at most of our elections, and this isn't Iraq. The entire story is propaganda! they are just trying to preent getting crushed by trying to make Saddam look like a legitamate and respectable leader. Its like all those votes in Russia a while back (i think it was Russia) where the President declared himself the winner but everyone later found out he'd actually lost in a landslide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breton Posted October 16, 2002 Share Posted October 16, 2002 You know, the election has been FILMED. You can SEE all the people voting (anonymus). It has been PROVEN that the election is anonymus, it has been PROVEN that people all over Iraq are celebrating Saddam. Don't make this into another stupid and meaningless discussion. (this was not meant for just you TIE, it was meant for everyone) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kvan Posted October 16, 2002 Share Posted October 16, 2002 Originally posted by JM Qui-Gon Jinn You know, the election has been FILMED. You can SEE all the people voting (anonymus). It has been PROVEN that the election is anonymus, it has been PROVEN that people all over Iraq are celebrating Saddam. Don't make this into another stupid and meaningless discussion. (this was not meant for just you TIE, it was meant for everyone) Well what you see isn't always whats happening And I love meaningless discussion! I can see you do to Kidding there man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breton Posted October 16, 2002 Share Posted October 16, 2002 Lets just discuss something cool and interesting. Like Durins folk. Or the Valar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tie Guy Posted October 16, 2002 Share Posted October 16, 2002 Originally posted by JM Qui-Gon Jinn You know, the election has been FILMED. You can SEE all the people voting (anonymus). It has been PROVEN that the election is anonymus, it has been PROVEN that people all over Iraq are celebrating Saddam. Don't make this into another stupid and meaningless discussion. (this was not meant for just you TIE, it was meant for everyone) I'm sure we can see all 11,000,000 people individually voting. Of course we don't, we see what he wants us to see, and its the same with the weapons of mass destruction. Whether we like it or not, we only see what facilities he wants us to see. "Obviously, it's not a very serious day, not a very serious vote and nobody places any credibility on it," press secretary Ari Fleischer said in Washington on Tuesday as ballots were being cast in Iraq. Why, you afraid of gettingcaught in a losing argument again? If you don't want discussion then don't offer your opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kvan Posted October 16, 2002 Share Posted October 16, 2002 Originally posted by JM Qui-Gon Jinn Lets just discuss something cool and interesting. Like Durins folk. Or the Valar. HAHAHAHAH! Well gee, I wasn't expecting you to say that! You're alright!*hands JM an apple from rhetts basket* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy_dog no.3 Posted October 17, 2002 Author Share Posted October 17, 2002 Originally posted by Tie Guy Qui-Gon, if you believe for a second that voting is anonymous there then i'm sorry, but you are deluding yourself. Besides, they can't vote no. There was only one canidate, they could vote for him or not at all, and if you think that everyone, EVERYONE, came out to vote and not a single person missed because they really, really wanted to show there support for Saddam then that is pathetic. We barely have 50% attendence at most of our elections, and this isn't Iraq. The entire story is propaganda! they are just trying to preent getting crushed by trying to make Saddam look like a legitamate and respectable leader. Its like all those votes in Russia a while back (i think it was Russia) where the President declared himself the winner but everyone later found out he'd actually lost in a landslide. I can't seem to remeber that happening (I truly don't, I'm not bieng sarcastic) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tie Guy Posted October 17, 2002 Share Posted October 17, 2002 Originally posted by Crazy_dog no.3 I can't seem to remeber that happening (I truly don't, I'm not bieng sarcastic) Hmm, it may not have been Russia then, but it was a while ago so you probably would not have been there. I was only told about it myself. I know it happened somewhere, but i could be wrong about it being Russia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dagobahn Eagle Posted October 20, 2002 Share Posted October 20, 2002 Its like all those votes in Russia a while back (i think it was Russia) where the President declared himself the winner but everyone later found out he'd actually lost in a landslide. A country where the president who got the least votes get to stay president? Now, what undemocratic propaganda state wold that be? Uhmmmm... China? North Korea? USSR? East Germany? No, the USA (Florida). Sorry, just teasing. I just love that story, that's all . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NamelessSith Posted October 20, 2002 Share Posted October 20, 2002 LOL! I love the results of the last Florida election... THEY STILL CAN'T VOTE!!!! As for Saddam... America wants Saddam, too. Okay, maybe they just want his head on a plate, but STILL! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taos Posted October 21, 2002 Share Posted October 21, 2002 Democracy........in Iraq????? That's like beach front property in Iowa...... Sounds a lot more like tyranny to me........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.