If you voted NO to trusting the results of the electronic voting machines.

Do you believe they are tainted because of intentional efforts to alter the election results.

Yes or No

Simple Yes or No:  Do you trust the results of the electronic voting machines?  

If No, take the next poll. (See Above)

There has been muffled talk about those eligible to vote in Iraq, so I thought I would look at who that might include?

The Iraqi population is approximately 26 million.  10 million are not old enough to vote, so we should be looking at a voting block of 16 million people who, on the surface, should be eligible to vote.  The official numbers I read are closer to 14.2 million people, eligible to vote.  I have heard there are upwards of 30,000 polling stations.  Not to bad if you believe the numbers and if you see polling stations as safe.

Registering to vote is a difficult process for these people, and they are subjected to it every time they are displaced.  I have searched in vein for a clear understanding of how an Iraqi in Iraq would go about the process.  It is not so difficult if you are out of the country.

http://www.iraqocv.org/php/content.php?link_id=43&lang=eng  

Distanced from the immediate affects of the war: hmmmmmm!  I would have to assume that anyone who got out, had the means to do so.  Do these people represent a class of people likely to have a particular interest that may not be that of the rest of those left to vote under the veil of threats from all sides?

However, no matter how hard I search, I see nowhere, an official number.  It is my understanding that those displaced must first get their ration cards from their new regions and use this to register where they are now.  Polling stations do not equate to places where one can register and insurmountable security makes it hard to believe that 98% (Remember Casey on Stephanopoulos 3 weeks ago) of the 14.2 million people are actually registered to vote at a polling station they can get too.

When the day is done, will the mainstream media or even us that get news from the blogosphere ever really know how the vote spread will be tallied.  Will any of the world really believe the results if given to us by Condoleezza Rice and the United States government at any level.  After all, we have no reason to doubt the integrity of elections in the USA?

Do I appear cynical of the process?  OK let me give it the benefit of doubt and say... damn the torpedoes, it will get better with time.  This is a good first step; really, it is, no really!

OK, OK.... I am being a pessimist... let us assume that everyone has their papers and everyone who wanted to vote did.  Pretty impressive numbers that we have never achieved here in the good 'ole U S of A.  I mean 98% of 14.2 million would mean that we should see that well over 13 million votes are tallied.  

Therefore, if you believe the Rice and the media that are no longer present in the arena, and trust that this election is not the result of stuffed ballot boxes and intimidation from many sides...

Have you read this constitution?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/24_08_05_constit.pdf

I find contradictions written into the articles themselves.  For instance:

Article 2:
1st-Islam is the official religion of the state and is the basic source of legislation:
(a) No law can be passed that contradicts the undisputed rules of Islam.
(b) No law can be passed that contradicts the principles of democracy.
(c) No law can be passed that contradicts the basic freedoms outlined by this constitution.

No, I do not think it takes a political scientist to see that one of the basic principles of democracy is the separation of Church and State.  Therefore, within the first page Article 2 section A contradicts Article 2 section B.  Undisputed laws are disputed among the religious leaders, and will likely void most of this document before it ever really takes affect.  Read the whole thing and you will be amazed how it flip-flops with the simply use of colons, semi-colons and commas.

Am I suspect at the purported, perhaps success of yesterday's vote?  You bet I am.  Even if a fair and free election where possible this document contradicts itself, over and over again.  

One interesting point for another diary... they do guarantee "Social and Health Insurance" to all Iraqis in Article 30.  We are the stewards of these people and I guess that means all Iraqis will have healthcare at our expense, when do we get this "right" in the United States?

Just a short one... please smack me down if I am wrong.

On This Week with Stephanopoulos, General Casey stated that:
1.) The Iraqi's had met all of "their" milestones
2.) That 98% of the Iraqi's eligible to vote are registered to vote have done so
3.) Polls show that 80% to 90% intend to vote
4.) The Suni's intend on joining the process this time.

Now looking at this I have four questions:
1.) Who is "their" when he speaks about milestones?
2.) If 98% of the "eligible" Iraqi's are registered, what percentage of the total Iraqi population is not eligible and more importantly: WHY are they not eligible?
3.) Who even answers an Iraqi pollster and is the polling split between the Kurds, Shi'as, and Sunis?
4.) If the Suni's are planning on participated, then have 98% of them registered already.  Was not that a problem for the Iraqi "Political Process", which is doing so well?

Am I missing something here, these questions are screaming to me from the answers I heard!

The miserable response by the Bush administration should be no shock to any of us here.  I think though that there is a bigger story.  Our Congressmen and Senators have let Bush lead us into acceptance of the Department of Homeland Security. Everything changed all in the name of safety.  We were guaranteed that this system would in fact leave us prepared to have all government agencies act in concert with each other in case of a terrorist attack.  This terrorist was mother nature; she warned us in Miami with a category 1 and threatened louder each day: 2, 3, 4, 5.....  What next, an attack on the Sahara desert for being the launching ground for these horrific storms?  

Never mind the global warming that doesn't exist and the warmer waters that are the cause of something natural we just haven't figured out yet.  Good science, bad science... no science.

How anyone can say they did not see this coming is besides me.  Chertoff claiming that no one saw two catastrophes coming at once... nobody said anything about the potential of what would happen should a category 3 hit....GIVE ME A BREAK.  Simple math folks;  The Southeast Louisiana Urban Flood Control Project came to a halt in 2003 due to budget cuts.
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001051313
Even though the warmer waters in the gulf, the engine behind a hurricane, was not good enough science for the Bush administration.  They are more concerned with intelligent design, as if intelligence drives any of their decisions.  Warmer waters, category three would devastate, category 4 heading for New Orleans ... and we didn't know this would happen.  Please!