Bush Assures Americans Iraq Sovereignty Near

Fri May 14, 2004
By David Morgan - BRIDGETON, Mo. (Reuters)
http://www.newsnow.co.uk/cgi/NGoto/58802330?-1377

"They're glad to be rid of Saddam," Bush said. "And they obviously want to run their own country. If I were them I'd want to run my own country too."

"That's why the June 30 transfer date is a solemn date," he said. "We'll help the Iraqis of course."



It'll take a change of regimes here in the U.S. before we loosen our grip on Iraq.



President Bush said November 17 that the United States will not pull out of Iraq when a provisional government is established there.
http://usinfo.state.gov/xarchives/display.html?p=washfile-english&y=2003&m=November&x=20031117181524ssorw0.760586&t=usinfo/wf-latest.html

Bush made the promise in a meeting in the Oval Office with five prominent Iraqi women who told the president of the hardships they had suffered under Saddam Hussein.

"I assured these five women that America wasn't leaving," Bush said.

"When they hear me say we're staying, that means we're staying," Bush said.

The Iraqi people have indicated in a number of different ways, he said, such as opinion polls and statements by Governing Council representatives, "that they want us to stay until the job is finished. And part of that job is making sure that we have a secure environment for the Iraqi people.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Interview of President Bush by Sir David Frost on BBC TV
http://usinfo.state.gov/xarchives/display.html?p=washfile-english&y=2003&m=November&x=20031117152622samohtj0.8043939&t=usinfo/wf-latest.html

Iraqis "need to know that we won't leave the country prematurely," said President Bush in an interview with David Frost on BBC TV that was broadcast November 16. "They need to know two things: We're not going to cut and run; and two, we believe they have the capacity to run their own country."


THE PRESIDENT: "Well, first of all, you've got to know I don't pay attention to polls. I just don't."


80% of Iraqis Distrust US, according to a recent poll conducted for the US occupation authority: The Washington Post, May 13, 2004:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/world/daily/graphics/iraqipoll_051304.html


Me Book

There will likely be civil unrest centuries from now. That's no excuse for not leaving, of course, but the factions there have no interest in the U.S. military serving as enforcer or protectors.

As you know, a good deal of the violence is directed at our imposed 'authority' there. If we withdraw our counterfeit Council at the same time we withdraw our forces, that would diminish most of the violent reprisals and violent expressions of liberty that our occupation breeds and aggravates.

the security of the Iraqi people. Our "leaders" consider the Iraqi population a nuissance. They can't wait to ditch them.

The oil fields and the bases are a very different story. They have *love* for those things.

Executive Order, 13303 decrees that 'any attachment, judgment, decree, lien, execution, garnishment, or other judicial process is prohibited, and shall be deemed null and void', with respect to the Development Fund for Iraq and "all Iraqi petroleum and petroleum products, and interests therein." (The Development Fund, derived from actual and expected Iraqi oil and gas sales, apparently will be used to leverage U.S. government-backed loans, credit, and direct financing for U.S. corporate reconstruction operations in Iraq.)

In other words, all of the oil, resources and industry are the property of the U.S.; to trade, sell, and disperse at its discretion. The only ones who will benefit from the robbery of the Iraqi oil are the companies that we will allow to exploit it. The oil mongers will incestuously share the stolen profits at the expense of American lives.

No Iraqi should expect to wrest control over their own wells from the U.S. or its allies. It's likely that the only contact Iraqis will have with their own oil will be at the foreign-owned gas stations.

monkey fuck face.

White House Says Iraq Sovereignty Could Be Limited
By STEVEN R. WEISMAN

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/23/politics/23DIPL.html?ei=5007&en=e87d3da402b2bef7&ex=1398052800&adxnnl=1&partner=USERLAND&adxnnlx=1084567216-Fdwjd0IK/5MlQHVJEia21A

WASHINGTON, April 22 — The Bush administration's plans for a new caretaker government in Iraq would place severe limits on its sovereignty, including only partial command over its armed forces and no authority to enact new laws, administration officials said Thursday.

These restrictions to the plan negotiated with Lakhdar Brahimi, the special United Nations envoy, were presented in detail for the first time by top administration officials at Congressional hearings this week, culminating in long and intense questioning on Thursday at the Senate Foreign Relations Committee's hearing on the goal of returning Iraq to self-rule on June 30.

Only 10 weeks from the scheduled transfer of sovereignty, the administration is still not sure exactly who will govern in Baghdad, or precisely how they will be selected. A week ago, President Bush agreed to a recommendation by Mr. Brahimi to dismantle the existing Iraqi Governing Council, which was handpicked by the United States, and to replace it with a caretaker government whose makeup is to be decided next month.

That government would stay in power until elections could be held, beginning next year.


MFF.

Maybe enough Americans know the definition of sovereignty, that they'll see right through this propaganda effort. No doubt all Iraqis will know the score.