Iraqi leader to U.S.: Butt out!

[Imagevision]

<snip> Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari denounced growing U.S. pressure for him to quit Wednesday and warned Americans against interfering in Iraq's politics. Al-Jaafari also defended his recent political alliance with Muqtada al-Sadr, a virulently anti-American Shiite cleric who is now the prime minister's most powerful backer.
http://www.omaha.com/index.php?u_pg=54&u_sid=2142159

[0007]

1. Bring the Troops Home Today!

[HysteryDiagnosis]

2. Hmmmmm..... does he REALLY want to go there?? Another

rendition of shock and awe might soften him up a bit...... NOT.

[bigtree]

3. now al-Jaafari is claiming pressure

Scotty denied any pressure from the WH yesterday.


Bush wants Jaafari to resign, says MP

By Edward Wong in Baghdad
March 30, 2006

THE US ambassador to Iraq has told Shiite officials that President George Bush does not want the Iraqi Prime Minister to remain the country's leader in the next government, senior Shiite politicians said.

The ambassador, Zalmay Khalilzad, told the head of the main Shiite political bloc at a meeting on Saturday to pass on a "personal message from President Bush" to the interim Prime Minister, Ibrahim al-Jaafari, said Redha Jowad Taki, a Shiite MP who was at the meeting.

Mr Khalilzad said Mr Bush "doesn't want, doesn't support, doesn't accept" Dr Jaafari to be the next prime minister, said Mr Taki, a senior aide to Abdul-Aziz al-Hakim, the head of the Shiite bloc. The bloc, which won a plurality in the parliamentary election in December, nominated Dr Jaafari last month to retain his post for four more years.

The US embassy confirmed the meeting on Saturday, but declined to comment on what was said.

The White House spokesman, Scott McClellan, denied that Mr Bush had been interfering in the fledgling Iraqi democracy. "I don't think that's an accurate report at all," he said. "What we are doing is encouraging the Iraqi leaders to move forward on a government of national unity, based on strong leadership."

full story:
http://smh.com.au/news/world/bush-wants-jaafari-to-resign-says-mp/2006/03/29/1143441214632.html

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

4. Al-Jafaari better read up on Ngo Dinh Diem. So should Bush.

On orders from U.S. President John F. Kennedy, Henry Cabot Lodge, the American ambassador to South Vietnam, refused to meet with Diệm. Upon hearing that a coup d'etat was being designed by ARVN Generals led by General Dương Văn Minh, the United States gave secret assurances to the generals that the U.S. would not interfere. Dương Văn Minh and his fellow plotters overthrew the government and executed President Diệm and his younger brother, Ngô Đình Nhu, on November 2, 1963. The United States publicly expressed shock and disappointment that Diệm had been killed, though they had secretly initiated the circumstances that led to his assassination. Coincidentally, U.S. President John F. Kennedy was assassinated soon afterward, along with his brother some time later.

When Madame Nhu, visiting the United States at the time, learned of the coup d'etat, she immediately identified the United States as the perpetrator. She later said, "Whoever has the Americans as allies does not need enemies." Madame Nhu went on to predict a dark future for Vietnam and that, by being involved in the coup, the troubles of the United States in Vietnam were only beginning.

After the Assassination of Ngo Dinh Diem, the U.S. was able to consolidate its control over the government of South Vietnam, facilitating the election of corrupt officials who supported their policies. Among the many who know of the political situations surrounding his death, Ngo Dinh Diem's assassination is considered the decisive political moment during which the Vietnam War was lost. As a result of the solidified American presence post-assassination, internal turmoil ran rampant among South Vietnamese, as soldiers found themselves locked in a Catch-22 between Communist interests and American commercial interests. The assassination also bolstered the North Vietnamese attempts to characterize the South Vietnamese as supporters of colonization, as what was previously lies and speculation became fact.

[Disturbed]

5. Uh, please excuse my ignorance but isn't Iraq once again..

a Sovereign Nation and a domocratic Parliamentary one?

Are the Bremmer Laws still in effect?

The Hand-Over That Wasn't: Illegal Orders give the US a Lock on Iraq's Economy
by Antonia Juhasz

Officially, the U.S. occupation of Iraq ended on June 28, 2004. But in reality, the United States is still in charge: Not only do 138,000 troops remain to control the streets, but the "100 Orders" of L. Paul Bremer III remain to control the economy.

These little noticed orders enacted by Bremer, the now-departed head of the now-defunct Coalition Provisional Authority, go to the heart of Bush administration plans in Iraq. They lock in sweeping advantages to American firms, ensuring long-term U.S. economic advantage while guaranteeing few, if any, benefits to the Iraqi people.

The Bremer orders control every aspect of Iraqi life - from the use of car horns to the privatization of state-owned enterprises. Order No. 39 alone does no less than "transition from a … centrally planned economy to a market economy" virtually overnight and by U.S. fiat.

Although many thought that the "end" of the occupation would also mean the end of the orders, on his last day in Iraq Bremer simply transferred authority for the orders to Prime Minister Iyad Allawi - a 30-year exile with close ties to the CIA and British intelligence.

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0805-07.htm
U.S. Edicts Curb Power Of Iraq's Leadership
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A8665-2004Jun26.html