#12: voting

(Apologies from Andy Rich: Though Cliff sent this on Feb. 1, for some reason it went to my junk mail folder. I didn't find it until Feb. 5. So this is late.)

Dear Friends, Family, and All Good People,

The Iraq election has just taken place. CPT is still in Kerbala where we
have observed a smoothly run election. But the information we are
gathering from the rest of Iraq portrays a catastrophe. If this election
had taken place in the United States, a revolution, coup, or collapse
would have occurred.

Alan Slater and I have been talking together, trying to picture what this
election would look like, superimposed on our respective countries.
Listen carefully as I draw the picture.

In one region of the country, Atlanta and Birmingham with their
surrounding areas, the vote went smoothly. High percentages, 80 – 90
percent, of the population voted and most had registered in advance of the
election.

In the largest city, New York, thirteen suicide bombers struck polling
sites, occupation targets, and security personnel. Resistance fighters
shot down an occupying plane and fifteen soldiers died. The city was in
turmoil as the election proceeded. It was reported that 65% of those
registered, voted.

Numbers are being used to manipulate the appearance of the election. A
Canadian spokesperson reports that 90% of the US citizens in Canada, who
are registered to cast their ballot in the safety of Canada, voted in the
election! But only 10% of the eligible citizens had registered. This
means that only 9% of the eligible U.S. citizens in Canada voted in the
election! This manipulation of percentages continued to be used from
other polling sites.

In the Death Triangle around Baltimore and Philadelphia, there was no
voting. The same is true in Dallas and Houston and also Kansas City – all
places the occupation troops had invaded to make sure that the election
could take place smoothly and on schedule! Oh, in the Dallas/Houston
area, the report was that 65% voted. No explanation that the city was a
wasteland, leveled by the troops that made it safe for an election, and
the people were mostly refugees in other places.

In Chicago, the third largest city, initial reports were that 72% of those
registered, voted. No explanation that twice all the 800 election staff
had resigned under threat from the resistance. No explanation that this
had earlier been displayed as a city that supported the occupation, but
had become a place where even most of the local police force had deserted
from the occupation as the resistance had strengthened their fight. What
really took place in Chicago? How many people voted?

In San Francisco and Los Angeles, where the occupation regime was running
more smoothly under the Japanese and the British, it was reported that
only 60 – 65% of registered voters went to the polls. The Japanese had
developed good relations with the occupied population by repairing the
infrastructure that was being destroyed elsewhere across the country and
the locals were much more supportive of this occupation presence. So why
was there such a low voter turnout?

In the U.S. Northeast the voter registration and turnout to vote was very
high. This area has been basically autonomous since the 14 years of
sanctions were placed on the U.S., so they are much more supportive of the
occupation and the election may allow them to declare independence along
with the Canadian Maritimes.

It appears at this early stage, after votes have been counted, but maybe
ten days before the election results will be reported, that the two
parties most likely to support the continuing occupation will sweep the
election. It is not clear why there is a delay in the reporting. Nor is
it clear how the candidates who support the occupation can represent the
population, which has been adamant (over 80% demanding an occupation
pullout) that the occupation troops must leave right after the election.

Yes, the election went smoothly in Atlanta, Birmingham, and the Northeast,
but the reporting about the election seems to cover up major, even
disastrous, flaws in this election that was set in place by the
occupation. The one bright side of the election is that it may be used by
the occupation itself to justify a quick withdrawal from the country.
Some of the occupied people have been allowed to express their vote freely
and, in a roundabout way, may achieve their desire to bring an end to the
occupation!

Hopefully you can see in this rough outline a rugged picture of what has
happened in Iraq with the election. This picture is based on our own CPT
experience, news from around the world, sources in the local and national
election commissions, and sources among the local and national election
observers.

Voting with my life,

Cliff Kindy