| Parliament met to hear the constitutional "amendments" read on Wednesday in Baghdad, but did not actually vote on them. The speaker of the house, Hajim al-Hasani, said that a vote was "not necessary." Only 157 parliamentarians were present, and parliament had earlier announced a recess of several weeks. Was it that they could not muster a convincing number of votes for the constitution under these circumstances. I just scratch my head at "amendments" to the "constitution" that are "adopted" but never voted on by parliament. Things are being done by powerful party leaders dickering with one another in closed rooms thick with cigarette smoke, and then just announced. No vote is necessary. It has all been taken care of already. Iraq has gone from being a dictatorship to being an oligarchy. |
ol·i·gar·chy (?l'?-gär'k?, ?'l?-)
n., pl. -chies.
1. _a. Government by a few, especially by a small faction of persons or families.
__ b. Those making up such a government.
2. A state governed by a few persons.
Meanwhile, back in the real Iraq, the concern by civilians for this sham document, according to Robert Fisk, Middle East correspondent for The Independent, is a bit different:
| He said that the portrayal of Iraq by Western leaders of efforts to introduce democracy, including Saturday's national vote on the country's proposed constitution was "unreal" to most of its citizens. In Baghdad, children and women were kept at home to prevent them from being kidnapped for money or sold into slavery. They faced a desperate struggle to find the money to keep generators running to provide themselves with electricity. "They aren't sitting in their front rooms discussing the referendum on the constitution." |
No comments:
Post a Comment