Have your say! "Free Speech" or Muslim bashing? Do you support Iraq troop withdrawal? Iran invasion?
  • Please read our posting policy before adding a comment
  • Target areas: Operation "Anyone But Labour" 2006
  • Sunday, January 30, 2005

    Reports Iraq election turnout at 72%

    According to this article this afternoon, about 3 hours ago, the turnout for the Iraqi elections was reported to be at about 72% of registered voters:

    National turnout in Iraq's historic elections is estimated at 72 percent of registered voters by 2 p.m. (11 a.m. British time), a far higher figure than most expected, the country's Electoral Commission says. Officials told a news conference turnout was 90 percent or more in many Shi'ite areas. The polls are due to close at 5 p.m. Commission official Adil al-Lami said nearly 99 percent of polling stations had opened around the country, with only a few not able to open for security reasons or because of a lack of staff. Around 13 million Iraqis registered to vote in the elections -- around half of the population. Some eligible voters did not register, due to intimidation or because they were boycotting the polls.
    See all recent "A Logical Voice" posts


    At 1/30/2005 03:22:00 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

    so.....the "illegal invasion" of the "rogue regime" brings the first real chance of freedom these people have ever had....what do you have to say about that mr. logical?

    tell me how "illegal" it is....tell me horrid the American's are and how they just want oil and to torture the Iraqis....maybe you would have prefered these 72% of Iraqis to be under Saddam's boot instead of deciding their own path...maybe you would prefer the strong to sit back and watch tyrants subject the weak....maybe for one who speaks out against torture so much ought to realize that might doesn't make right but under some circumstances might will be the only thing that will correct it. what do you say now mr. i hate america...what now? tell me buddy...tell me. all of your hateful words now ring hollow.

    At 1/30/2005 04:04:00 pm, Blogger Voice 1 said...

    Perhaps I would have liked to see a free and fair election without intimidation of Iraqis by either side, with voters knowing who they are voting for, and not being bribed into votting by threats to cut off their food rations if they did not vote.

    Maybe that would be real "freedom and democracy" in action.

    You still cannot say that has been introduced.

    At 1/30/2005 04:25:00 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

    i can only say that you and your fiery rhetoric is just that....words. and all of them are turning out to be wrong!

    At 1/30/2005 04:39:00 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

    and would you have seen those things that you say you wanted for the Iraqis by continuing with the "get nothing done" policies of the UN the EU and the court of world opinion? NO. you would be blaming America for something else instead. it doesn't matter what rhetoric you come up with next...you know the truth is Iraqi democracy just took it's first step and this would have never ever happened if it were up to you. if it were up to you Saddam would still be torturing and killing and you would simply accept it as something that can't be changed.

    At 1/30/2005 04:43:00 pm, Blogger Voice 1 said...

    Sorry, it's not rhetoric, it's fact that voters have either been intimidated into either voting or not voting, and it's also fact that many Iraqis don't even know who or what they are voting for. Not rhetoric at all.

    At 1/30/2005 04:48:00 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

    SO WHAT!

    even if it is true...which if it is a link anywhere on your blog than it is probably fiction. there has been voting problems in every democracy since it's creation....in your country...in my country....again SO WHAT.

    you want to dismiss all of this because of one criteria of legitimacy that only "YOU" find imperative. 72% of Iraqis are not accepting your lame argument and feel like they have accomplished something here. only time will tell if that is true, but you have decided the whole thing should be thrown out as a result of ANY voter/democracy issues. you sir have given up. i am so pleased that you are in charge of NOTHING.

    At 1/30/2005 04:55:00 pm, Blogger Voice 1 said...

    Ah, so now you say so what if the elections are not free and fair, at least you are sometimes honest.

    At 1/30/2005 04:59:00 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

    The figure of 72% was given by an Iraqi election official who wouldn't tell reporters how he arrived at the figure. Perhaps a more accurate number will be known in time...

    At 1/30/2005 05:04:00 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...


    "electoral official Adil al-Lami did not say how these figures had been reached."

    At 1/30/2005 05:13:00 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

    On whether ir not the invasion was illegal:

    Article VI of the U.S. Constitution:

    This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.

    Article 2 of the UN Charter which the U.S. ratified and is thus "the supreme law of the land":

    The Organization and its Members, in pursuit of the Purposes stated in Article 1, shall act in accordance with the following Principles.

    The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members.

    All Members, in order to ensure to all of them the rights and benefits resulting from membership, shall fulfill in good faith the obligations assumed by them in accordance with the present Charter.

    All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.

    All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.

    Article 33 of the UN Charter:

    The parties to any dispute, the continuance of which is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security, shall, first of all, seek a solution by negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice.

    The Security Council shall, when it deems necessary, call upon the parties to settle their dispute by such means.

    Article 39 of the UN Charter:

    The Security Council shall determine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression and shall make recommendations, or decide what measures shall be taken in accordance with Articles 41 and 42, to maintain or restore international peace and security.

    At 1/30/2005 05:30:00 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

    Well old son if we had to wait for the UN Saddam would still be in power - and south Sudan would still be killing fields, oh wait, they still are.

    It's all about anti-Americanism, sneering leftist self styled elites hate the freedom and success of the USA. If a few million Iraqis, or Vietnamease, or Cambodians, or Sudanese, or .... have to die so be it.

    At 1/30/2005 05:47:00 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

    "If a few million Iraqis, or Vietnamease, or Cambodians, or Sudanese, or .... have to die so be it."

    There it is. Ho hum. A few million people. How did they die in Vietnam again? And which nation was it that pushed to get the Khmer Rouge admitted to the UN?

    Come back to us when you have gotten your prescious government to stop providing millions of dollars in military aid to a madman who is notorious for boiling political prisoners to death. (You're such a clever guy. You surely know to whom I am referring.)

    At 1/30/2005 06:14:00 pm, Blogger Voice 1 said...

    Well, I guess it's difficult to trust the words of people who are known to have handed out $100 to journalists, and have been involved in intimidating voters. So if that's where the 72% figure has come from, I think the figure should be taken with a pinch of salt.

    At 1/30/2005 07:44:00 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

    A pinch of salt and a rap on the knuckles for those who support Islam Karimov and Saparmurat Niyazov.

    At 1/31/2005 04:38:00 am, Anonymous Anonymous said...

    no you jack a s s, that is not what i said.

    At 1/31/2005 05:07:00 am, Anonymous Anonymous said...

    Give it a rest already, Karimov supporter.

    "Iraq Electoral Commission backtracks on turnout

    "BAGHDAD, Jan 30 (Reuters) - Iraq's Electoral Commission backtracked on earlier estimates of voter turnout in the election, saying a previous figure of 72 percent "was just an estimate" and indicated the actual figure was lower.

    "At a news conference, commission spokesman Farid Ayar called the 72 percent figure a "guess" and said maybe up to 8 million Iraqis voted, which would be a little over 60 percent of registered voters.

    "Percentages and numbers come only after counting and will be announced when it's over ... It's too soon to say that those were the official numbers," he said. "The numbers are only guessing."

    At 1/31/2005 05:40:00 pm, Blogger Voice 1 said...

    Well it seems that the turnout for overseas Iraqis was something approaching 23%, i'm interested in how the turnout figures will be spun for Iraq itself, and whether they will use the figure as a percentage of all elligible voters, or all registered voters.

    At 2/01/2005 10:39:00 am, Anonymous Anonymous said...

    Holy crap! Looks like around 50% showed up to vote, not 72%.

    At 2/01/2005 07:16:00 pm, Blogger Voice 1 said...

    Indeed, and the figures for overseas Iraqis turnout was something approaching 23% of all elligible voters. You would have thought if Iraqis really wanted this "freedom and democracy" there would be far more of a turnout overseas than in Iraq wouldn't you?


    Post a Comment

    << Home