Iraq Shiites Demand Elections in Protest
Associated Press

BAGHDAD, Iraq - Tens of thousands of Shiite Muslims marched peacefully in Baghdad on Monday to demand an elected government.

Huge crowds of Iraqi Shiites, estimated by reporters at up to 100,000, marched about three miles to the University of al-Mustansariyah, where a representative of Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Husseini al-Sistani delivered a speech he said was directed at Annan, the U.S.-led occupation authority and its Iraqi allies.

It was the biggest display of Shiite political power in Baghdad since Saddam Hussein's regime collapsed in April. It followed a similar demonstration on Thursday by some 30,000 Shiites in the southern city of Basra.

Al-Sistani, the country's most influential Shiite leader, has rejected a U.S. formula for transferring power through a provisional legislature selected by 18 regional caucuses, insisting on direct elections instead.
The legislature is supposed to appoint a transitional government, which will take over from the U.S.-led coalition administration July 1 before holding full elections in 2005.

"The sons of the Iraqi people demand a political system based on direct elections and a constitution that realizes justice and equality for everyone," al-Sistani's representative, Hashem al-Awad, said. "Anything other than that will prompt people to have their own say."

The crowd responded by chanting: "Yes, yes to elections! No, no to occupation!"

Two U.S. military helicopters hovered low over the demonstrators but otherwise there was no sign of American soldiers. Scores of armed Iraqi police stood by.

"This demonstration is a message to America that we want elections," said Naim Al-Saadi, a 60-year-old tribal chief. Many marchers linked hands. Others carried portraits of al-Sistani and other Shiite leaders and waved computer printout banners saying, "Real democracy means real elections."

This march would never have happened if Bush had listened to NOIN, ANSWER, IAC and their fellow travelers.

Viva la democracie, viva W.

Damn right. The issue is not "whether" elections will be held. The issue is when.

And none of this would be possible if we had listened to the anti-war fools.

Puck thinks we have that idiot in the white house to thank... or rather, the Iraqis have that idiot to thank for "bringing democracy" to Iraq.

Puck... you and all of your right wing pals should think about this. You and your idiot friends have "liberated" Iraq, and Iraqis will now (sometime this decade... perhaps) have the right to "elect" their leaders.

Well, the majority are Shia... they have no love for the U.S. and are allies to Iran. When they democratically vote in a hostile anti-U.S. government... THEN what will you do. You probabably won't be jumping up and down with your silly "viva democracy" slogans.

But you right wing trogs shouldn't be too worried because there never will be democratic elections in Iraq... not if Washington can help it. The above is the ONLY scenario is there WERE free and open elections. This was NEVER about democracy or getting rid of a tyrant... it was ALWAYS about stealing Iraq's oil.

Face the facts... you've already lost the war

I'll hold you to it.

...is that without the liberation, the Shia would never have had the opportunity to democratically vote.

Why can't you acknowledge that simple fact?

nonanarchist

*** This comment was posted from an IP associated with a disruptive poster. The MD5 hash of their IP is dcbfebfbdce. This value is the same even if the user uses another name. Only posters deemed disruptive by the editorial collective will have this text appended to their posts. We apologize for any erroneous misidentifications.