Counting
Other things that may not have been counted.
SCOTT RITTER SAYS U.S. PLANS JUNE ATTACK ON IRAN ...and... ‘COOKED’ JAN. 30 IRAQI ELECTION RESULTS
Mark Jensen
February 19, 2005 UPPC (WA)
Scott Ritter, appearing with journalist Dahr Jamail yesterday in Washington State, dropped two shocking bombshells in a talk delivered to a packed house in Olympia’s Capitol Theater. The ex-Marine turned UNSCOM weapons inspector said that George W. Bush has "signed off" on plans to bomb Iran in June 2005, and claimed the U.S. manipulated the results of the recent Jan. 30 elections in Iraq. more.
More more here and here.
Ritter said that U.S. authorities in Iraq had manipulated the results in order to reduce the percentage of the vote received by the United Iraqi Alliance from 56% to 48%.
Ritter is the former UN weapons inspector who said there were no WMD's left in Iraq prior the prep for the latest war. That was before everyone realised Scott Ritter was right, at which point Rhetoric took a sharp turn towards "Democracy". Is this the end of the road for Rhetoric? Which way can it turn now?
If Saddam's regime had no weapons left and was on it's last legs anyway, and if a whole bunch of people wanted to vote regardless of war or not... does Iraq need troops at all?
29 Comments
i don't understand how every wild and crazy conspiracy theory that shows america in a negative light gets posted, while never in a million years would you post one positive article or comment about the US. you people couldn't have an agenda, could you?
John
John
Why when every time information gets out that suggests we should be asking a few more questions about war and motive, does someone like yourself always start freaking out about image? Wouldn't have an agenda, would you?
This site is about Iraq, Iraq bloggers, and issues related to Iraq. It is not about greasing your American ego at the expense of truth.
I care about real democracy and if that means taking flack for taking a deeper look at what's happening, so be it.
Ok, they have plans and so what. They have lots of plans. I wouldn't be surprized it they were working on plans to invade. The are differences betweeen having plans and planning on use the plans.
Look "if" you say something has to be done about Iran. "If" the Europeans want the stop to building NB they have to something to be able to say if you don't do this we won't be able to stop the Americans from doing something. GWB is very serious about change. Do you expect them to wait for the talks to fail and then start planning?
Anonymous,
The "Wild and Crazy" conspiracy theorists were right about Bush's intentions to invade Iraq. The nutty Scott Ritter was right about WMDs, and the cost of the war estimated by the administration-turfed Shinseki was right in claiming that that the 50 billion price tag envisioned the greeted as liberators/shock and awe gang was absurd.
Maybe it's time you listened to guys like Ritter rather than the fools selling you moonpies and lollipops.
Steve
Moonpie and lollipops? Oh sweet days they were, when our web was scattered about with used tinsel wrappings and scrunched up empty take-out bags.
Oh for those days, when there were pie in the sky and no fly in the eye.
How wild and crazy it was back then. All conspirational and confessional. But now? Oh dear bleak truth, how scorched the net 's become.
emigre, i understand that you have to show a loyalty to your iraqi bloggers and viewers because that is what this site was made for. however, iraq and the US are very intertwined and i dont feel it is beneficial to iraq to continuously post bizarre conspiracy theories and make iraqis paranoid and possibly violent, unless that is your intent. you're not taking a deeper look at things, but instead you're posting anything anti-american that you can find and that doesnt help the situation. i'm sure you would receive more credibility and more respect if you actually made some positive and negative posts, since the positive far outweight the negative. because you only post negative things with little facts that support these conspiracies it makes me question your motives and credibility as a blogger.
John
They gonna bomb Iran?
better them than us.
I know I know but I feel this way towards everything, so call me a selfish chicken.. I've been called worse names before.
Cheers.
richsanter
You have never mentioned "Iraq The Great" here before.
It will remain in the blogroll nonetheless.
One can hardly claim to maintain a definitive Iraq blog directory if one begins disappearing Iraq blogs. It exists and that is all. Nobody is forcing you to read it.
Re Ritter; he is a former UN weapons inspector. His allegatons are serious.
i read the great iraq and was disgusted by its hatred and promotion of violence. i agree that this type of muslim extremism is what is destroying the world today, especially in iraq. this isnt democracy, this is promoting violence. read it for yourself and judge....
The resistance has not stopped a beat. Today, as I write this column, it has been reported that four U.S. soldiers have been killed in fighting and almost 40 Shi’ite worshippers were killed in mosques. The resistance is expanding its front.
The Mujahideen Strikes during the Month of Ramadan !
Promises made and fulfilled by the Ba’ath
and the Resistance and liberation Command !.
More than 310 Iraqi scientists are thought to have perished at the hands of Israeli secret agents in Iraq since fall of Baghdad to US troops in April 2003, a seminar has found.
AN INTERVIEW WITH GENERAL ABU AL MU'TASSIM,
A BA’ATH PARTY OFFICIAL AND IRAQI RESISTANCE LEADER….
Twenty-eight percent of Marines had killed a civilian
...this is democracy and freedom in the blogroll? this is the sickest form of blogging and i hope you, emigre, put an end to it.
Brent
richsanter, John, Brent etc
Considering the vile and violent language some of your compatriots have used here in the past, I find it odd to hear you have suddenly all become expert in discerning taste where other blogs are concerned.
Smear all you like, I am not going to get caught up in back-stabbing and de-linking just because some of you are throwing a tiz over Scott Ritter.
What was it that Martin Niemoller said?
"...They came for the Communists, and I didn't object for I wasn't a Communist.
They came for the Socialists, and I didn't object for I wasn't a Socialist.
They came for the Labor leaders, and I didn't object for I wasn't a Labor leader.
They came for the Jews. And I didn't object.
Then they came for me and there was no one left to object."
*heaves sigh*
richsanter
Are you trying to tell me you have converted to pacifism now? I would be delighted if that were true.
So tell me, richsanter, if The Great Iraq offends you so ~ do all the US soldiers blogs in the blogroll here offend you in equal measure? Are you calling for a wider purge of all violence?
And torture, does that offend you too? Are you urging a POW amnesty? Are you calling for the release of all prisoners?
Oh glory day, perhaps all this non-biased blogrolling and seeking of peaceful solutions is paying off.
Em..... this anti-american attitude in sheeps clothing is the same reason you were canned from Iraqi Elections Blog.
Displaying this type of agenda here at least generates comments and interest in Iraq Blog Count. Is that why you are motivated to always post in this vien? You allow the insane views of Khalid here as well. Is this again just to create traffic? Knowing that he attracts flies like fecal matter.
I'm wondering if you feel attention waning yet? Iraq is fast becoming just another country. Soon there will be only normal interest in the affairs of Iraq. Which, is a very healthy position to be in.
After the election there is a sense of new hope in the air. There was a collective OHhhhhhh! from the anti-war crowd. A realization that their world view was incorrect, for whatever reasons. Sure, there are still some hangers on who refuse to admit what the Iraqi people told them. But, we are not going to see the 'peace' demonstrations in Milan, Rome, London, Paris, NYC, Sydney or San Fran anymore. The struggle is nearly over and Iraq is winning.
TheBlueFinger
Blue Finger
Firstly, that comment was off-colour.
I don't know what it is about some of you pro-war people, but you just can't seem to post a comment without referring to bodily waste when it comes to alternative viewpoints. Can you.
Secondly. You know as well as I that this is far from over. Iraq still does not have a government, it still does not have a constitution, it still does not have a prime minister elected by the people (the current interim government chose him). There are still many refugees camping with relatives, many ordinary people trying to rebuild their lives, still troops pouring into the place. There are still POW's in detention, there are still unresolved torture allegations, still assassinations and disappearances.
There are many, many things, blue finger, that deserve due scrutiny.
I have said it before and I will say it again, I watched in stunned silence while Saddam was installed after the first gulf war. I do not intend to stand by in silence a second time.
Pro war types? My dear, are you speaking of the Pro war, initial stage types? Or the Pro war continuation types?
I am a pro war initial stage type, yes. I feel that it is in my immediate interest and in the interest of future generations to follow that we have some moderation and self-determination in the ME. To wait for natural internal change was to dangerous and may never have taken place.
I beleive this will also bring sorely needed levels of prosperity to the region as well.
As for the pro war continuation types. Well, you might well call them insurgents and their supporters. In view of the fact that we now have a government forming that was elected by the people, I suppose that now we can call them insurrectionists. Whatever you prefer to name them, it's quite evident who sits in their camp. They stick out like a finger unblued.
TheBlueFinger
ps- Of course it's not over yet. Get to work helping, will ya! Oh, and excuse the bodily function re.
Blue Finger,
Since you disagree with Emigre and would not pay to give her a platform for her and Rittter's views, you are obviously a Nazi.
Der Commissar
Hahahahahha......
No, I'm not that talented to be a Nazi.. I'm just a pro war type. But I have aspirations.
TheBlueFinger
ps- Em, I've always said you are a very bright woman... Whatever the differences, I admire your talent. But would you please adapt your viewpoint...:)
Ahem..
somehow we drifted off course..
strange thing I've noticed these last few days:
They've been showing interviews with captured terrorists everyday at 9, these guys are the Allahu-Akbar types, and they ALL claim in addition to their confessions of murder and rape and all that, they've been trained and funded by Syrian Intelligence Agencies..
Now how something this big went unnoticed by even OUR local newspapers I don't know.. there's some sort of media blackout on this subject.. and if you didnt happen to be watching that single station broadcasting this show you would've missed it for sure..
What is the story here?
WHY show these terrorists with "the SYRIAN-connection" now so close after Al-Hariri's murder "allgedly done by Syrians as well"
I say America is yet again on the Warpath, and all of us Anti-war types should go hide for the time being.. WAR-mongerer Neanderthals abound everywhere!
Cheers!
emigre, you said a mouthful yourself. tbis blogroll was never about the iraqi people, they're scum right? this was about you and your views about america. you saw injustice in the first gulf war and there is no way you are going to let that go unnoticed a second time, no matter who gets hurt or how wrong you may be. but that wouldnt be a bias right? starting the blogroll with an obvious hatred for americans and an agenda to uncover every mistake that could possibly occur was the reason behind the start of this blogroll after all. thanks for clearing that up. second, richsanter was right, you didnt need to act all high and mighty and make fun of his comments because it seems as if he really believs in them...and iraq the great is a horrible blog. instead you tried to humiliate him, but when the blue finger made a little comment you didnt like, well, that was "off-color." in fact, your comment was the perfect response at the perfect time. you are too easy on people sometimes actually. before you would simply delete posts that you didnt like, but now you keep those posts on so you can make jokes about the writers for your amusement. he wasn't saying anything stupid or vulgar and it was a very good point. i had never noticed that blog before and i was very upset when i read it. not just for americans but for all the people he talks about in it. what will help iraq is for groups of people to come together, in a pro-democracy environment, and allow all views to be heard as long as violence in not an issue. this blog goes past that line and innitiates violence. if a soldier put up a blog laughing about how many iraqis he killed, you would have taken a much different stance. and i dont like how you shout every down that opposes you. they are always a racist, pro-war, a nazi, bush lover, pro-american, etc. why cant there be two viewpoints? i dont understand why everyone has to follow you and khalids ideas? are we not as smart as you two? did i miss the great literary piece that was the great iraq? personally, i thought it was sick garbage and i only read the first page. i'm deeply concerned about how this blogroll is being run
Ted
ok, i dont get the whole ritter story, i've said it before. what would be the point of reducing the percentage form 56% to 48%? everyone already knew way ahead of time that sistanis party would be the winner by a very large amount, and they were. so what did those 8 points mean? according to the iraqi constitution the govt needs 2/3 majority to form a government, so if they had 56 or 48, it was already known that they would have to unite, most likely with the kurds. so what would be the point of messing with the totals? that would only cause the very low parties that got a small % of the vote to get people in the parliament. did the US really want members of the iraqi communist and socialist party to get extra seats? it seems like a whole lot of work for no point. the new PM was going to be a shiite party member not allawi, and that was known for months ahead of the election, so what would be the reason for this conspiracy and coverup? doesnt seem to make any sense to me. i dont see a major benefit.
john
Rich, Ted,
If you won't pay to support Emigre's Ritteresque postings, then you're just Nazis.
Your sources are highly suspect of having their own agenda. You need to wake up and smeel the stench of what they are telling you. You know of course who is paying Ritter's salary and putting over $30,000 a month into his Swiss bank account, right? You also should know that you don't have ALL the facts and the ones you do have were carefully cultivated to give you a distorted picture of reality. Can you say the Baathists in Syria and al Jeezera (the terrorist's mouthpiece). You only know what you are permitted to know in your little corner of the world. So you don't want to be free? Move to Iran. Is it possible that the WMD's were moved to Syria right before the conflict in those 80+ big rigs that were spotted moving across the Iraq/Syria border? Is it possible Iran is a major threat to the entire world if they get nukes? Is it possible that you have your head crossthreaded and reality isn't reaching your brian?
Isn't this the Scott Ritter that was Saddam's paid mouthpiece in the States?
*I have said it before and I will say it again, I watched in stunned silence while Saddam was installed after the first gulf war. I do not intend to stand by in silence a second time.*
Emigre,
Saddam was "installed" after the first Gulf War??? That is the most bizarre statement I've ever heard. Care to back it up?
cmar i was pretty confused by that too. obviously saddam was in power well because they US roughed him up in the early 90s. i've heard some muslims refer to the iraq-iran war as the first gulf war before, but that doesnt make sense either because saddam was obviously in charge way before the end of that war....he used chemical weapons on the iranian troops. so basically, i have no idea what emigre means. it sounds like she is saying that the US installed saddam after the first gulf war in 1991, but she couldnt have said that...could she have? is this a new conspiracy theory that i have yet to hear?
John
is there any way someone other than emigre could run the blogroll, or is this strictly an anti-american dictatorship blogroll with no outside opinions? personally, i feel someone a little more mellow and moderate would be better in bringing the iraqis and non-iraqis together in sharing opinions without all the negative views, conspiracy theories, and violent blogs. does anyone know if there is anyone else i can talk to about this?
Frank
John
Re election result fiddling; Very simple motive. A high percentage of votes in a particular groups favour was in danger of sparking "vote rigging accusations", so the result was "fine tuned" to make it still look legit.
Re Saddam installed after Gulf War I; I should clarify ~ re-installed. He was supposed to have been usurped, but wasn't.
Frank
If you mean "run" as in "administrate" there have been several administrators at various times. Usually at least two at a time (although I think at one point there were three).
Administrators do not "choose" Iraq blogs, administrators simply update the count total and blogroll with, more often then not, what other people have found.
The blogroll is compiled from many sources. I link whatever I find, and whatever other contributors find, and sometimes what commenters find and sometimes what people send in emails. In that repect I am a link servant.
It's like a phonebook Frank, if you want to call Miss Smith, you dial Miss Smith. If you don't want to call Miss Smith, you don't look up her number. It's that simple.
anarki13
Re Syria; Disturbing. I devised a personal conspiracy theory two years ago that this would happen, but hoped that I was wrong. Foresight is a curse. Still, we do have an alternative future in which everybody lays down their weapons. Oh for that day.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
*Re Saddam installed after Gulf War I; I should clarify ~ re-installed. He was supposed to have been usurped, but wasn't.*
Emigre,
Yeah. That's a big difference. And taking that tact, we can say that George W. Bush was "re-elected" by the Democratic Party in the last Presidential election because they failed to defeat him.
(Heard of Black Magic? Emigre employs "Black Logic".)
cmar ii
I don't get your comment about "Black". Was it derogatory, and if so, are you being racist?
Post a Comment
<< Home