The following New York Times article pretty much hits the nail on the head.

In a word, regardless of what the American -- or other Western -- news media
report, the vote in Iraq is a complete and total farce. It is a sham. Iraq
is NOT a democracy, and probably never will be a true democracy. It is an
occupied nation which has been under the control of a foreign power for
seven years now -- the USA. It is a deeply divided nation filled with
continuous violence and hate. The people in power are Shi'ite thugs and
puppets of the US Government; no more, no less. If it wasn't for their
compromise with the US Government, they wouldn't even be in power right now.
On election day alone, nation-wide politically-motivated violence resulted
in the death of dozens of people.

And the Obama Administration has the nerve to say that democracy is working
in Iraq? Give me a break! Just who do they think they are kidding?

I warned everyone. Obama is no better than Bush in some regards, and in some
ways he is even worse. Obama bamboozled the American public, just as every
presidential candidate before him has done. These candidates promise the
American public the moon, and then they slowly backtrack on just about every
single campaign promise made. Sound familiar?


Region Unimpressed by Balloting in Iraq

By MICHAEL SLACKMAN - NYT

March 8, 2010


CAIRO -- Elections across this region have long been viewed as not much more
than window dressing to tidy up the image of authoritarian leaders and
absolute monarchs eager for greater legitimacy.

So from the outset, when Iraqis poured into the polls on Sunday to elect a
new Parliament, the mere act of voting was not seen as a step toward
democracy. That perception, combined with Election Day violence, American
occupation and Iranian influence, left few analysts and commentators in the
Middle East declaring the elections a success and Iraq on the road to
stability.

"Iraq is a failure and a big mess," said Hussein al-Shobokshy, a columnist
for the Saudi Arabian owned pan-Arab newspaper Asharq Alawsat. "Iraq is a
scary model right now," he added. "It is so divided, vulgarly so."

But that attitude, expressed in interviews with people across the Arab
world, was also tempered by what was widely seen as the enduring spirit of
the Iraqi people as they braved violence, again, to cast their ballots. And
some political scientists and researchers said they drew a glimmer of hope
from what appeared to be early stages of political pragmatism taking hold
despite strict sectarian and tribal allegiances.

"It is very far from a real democracy," said Osama Safa, general
director of
the Lebanese Center for Policy Studies. "This voting exercise is not seen as
the winds of democracy blowing through the region. People here still see
Iraq as a very sad country, a lot of pain and hugely polarized. But that
they are able to do something like this, that is what they found
impressive."

Praise, when it was offered, was cautious.

"It's still a small step in Iraq; it's a small minor turning point," said
Abdul Khaleq Abdullah, a political science professor at United Arab Emirates
University. "Iraq is still full of challenges, and they are formidable
challenges."

But after seven years of occupation, with so many killed, maimed and
displaced, and with so many scandals, like Abu Ghraib, this is a very
cynical audience. If the United States had hoped that the sight of millions
of average Iraqis streaming out to vote might have begun to edge regional
public opinion about American involvement in Iraq to at least a more neutral
place, it is likely to be disappointed.

"It could be seen in the West as very symbolic, as nice, as something that
proves it was worth getting rid of Saddam, but definitely not in the Arab
world," said Randa Habib, a political analyst and newspaper columnist in
Amman, Jordan. "Jordanians still see Iraq as being manipulated by outside
forces. Their minds have been manipulated by Americans and Iranians, and the
outcome of the election will not be the best for Iraqis."

The fear of undue Iranian influence, a common concern, may have sectarian
underpinnings. Most of the region is majority Sunni, while Iran is a Shiite
theocracy and Iraq has a newly empowered Shiite majority.

Even if elections are seen as a step toward democracy, which few allowed,
elections under occupation are not, said Emad Gad, an expert on
international relations with the Ahram Center of Political and Strategic
Studies, a government-financed research center in Cairo.

"Free elections are the last step in a democracy," he said.
"Before that,
you have to have a democratic society that accepts the values of democracy.
In Iraq we see religious conflicts, sectarian conflicts. These are elections
without democratic values."

Across the region, the news media operate with varying degrees of
restrictions. But even in the most censorship-prone nations, news
commentators are often allowed to opine about events beyond their borders.
They have been especially vocal about Iraq, flogging the West and its allies
for unleashing chaos there.

But there was surprisingly little commentary written about the Iraqi
elections in the days before the vote, which has been attributed to
weariness with the topic and skepticism over the validity of the exercise,
according to political analysts and Mideastwire.com, the news media
monitoring company based in Beirut.

"People viewed it cynically -- critically and skeptically," said Ghanim
Alnajjar, a political science professor at Kuwait University.

Once voters did go to the polls, Arab news media took notice, though
primarily to report on the mechanics of the election, said Mirella Dagher, a
regional analyst at Mideastwire.com.

"In contrast to the Western and especially U.S. portrayal of these elections
as 'do or die,' " Ms. Dagher said, "the Arab media seems to be under no
illusion that Iraq is heading toward either progress and democracy or
complete disaster with these polls. Instead 'more of the same' is generally
being seen as a continuation of the country's problems."

For the average news viewer, it seemed like more of the same.

People around the region said they saw images of Iraqis voting, but also the
more familiar and disturbing images of violence. That set people on edge and
diluted what the West hoped might be a positive message of
self-determination for Iraqis.

"I saw on Al Jazeera that Obama said that the elections went well in Iraq
without problems," said Dr. Ghada Fathy, 40, as she left a grocery store in
the Nasr City district of Cairo. "But that wasn't true; there was lots of
violence. I became mad when I heard Obama's words."

It may be too soon to say with certainty if the outcome of the election will
move Iraq closer to unity and healing, or if it will drive the factions
further apart.

But it is certain, people around the region said, that it will be a long
time before Iraq is viewed broadly as free and democratic.

"People in the region are definitely interested in democracy and in
practicing their own rights," said Mr. Abdullah, the political science
professor from United Arab Emirates University. "But the Iraqi experience
will have an impact on the region only once it stabilizes. Right now, it is
so sectarian and unstable that it turns people off. If it becomes a stable
democracy, then it will have some impact."



Jeff Snyder, SysOp - Armageddon BBS  Visit us at endtimeprophecy.org port 23
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your Download Center 4 Mac BBS Software & Christian Files.  We Use Hermes II


--- Hermes Web Tosser 1.1