29th August 2005, 11:30 PM
More proof, as if anyone needed any, that Bush lies whenever he talks about caring about spreading democracy...
He supports the proposed constitution and hopes it passes. Why? Because it's politically advantageous to him for there to be a constitution, so he has something to point to to the American voters and say "Look! We're getting things done in Iraq!"... he does not care one bit about the Iraqis, of course, so any concept of the idea that this is a bad document which gives religion power over government to a significant degree wouldn't even enter his head. After all, they live waaay over there in Irak, who cares about THEM?
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/08/29/b...index.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/29/intern...gewanted=3
I know, we have somewhat limited influence in Iraq. But if we'd actually made it clear what we wanted, and told them "nothing less is acceptable" on certain issues... yeah, we wouldn't have a proposed constitution right now. But in the long run, would that really be worse than having THIS as the proposed document?
He supports the proposed constitution and hopes it passes. Why? Because it's politically advantageous to him for there to be a constitution, so he has something to point to to the American voters and say "Look! We're getting things done in Iraq!"... he does not care one bit about the Iraqis, of course, so any concept of the idea that this is a bad document which gives religion power over government to a significant degree wouldn't even enter his head. After all, they live waaay over there in Irak, who cares about THEM?
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/08/29/b...index.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/29/intern...gewanted=3
Quote:Under the new constitution, Islam would become the official religion of the Iraqi state, and be regarded as "a main source of legislation." Clerics would more than likely sit on the Supreme Court, and judges would have broad latitude to strike down legislation that conflicted with the religion. Clerics would be given a broad, new role in adjudicating family disputes like marriage, divorce and inheritance. Under most interpretations of Islamic law, women enjoy substantially fewer rights than men.
The heavily Islamic cast of the constitution, influenced by the Shiite religious parties who won the January elections, has troubled many of Iraq's women and secular leaders, even with the constitution's many guarantees for religious freedom and individual rights. Mr. Hassani, the Assembly speaker and one of the few Sunnis to come out in favor of the constitution, said Sunday that he was quite unhappy with parts of it.
"This constitution has too much religion in it," Mr. Hassani said. "The rights of women; they took away a lot of the rights of women."
Even some Shiites and Kurds, for all their relief that the constitution was finally complete, expressed uneasiness about the way it was achieved.
"What is important for me is something that would make Iraqis feel more united," said Mahmood Othman, a Kurdish member of the constitutional panel. "That didn't happen."
I know, we have somewhat limited influence in Iraq. But if we'd actually made it clear what we wanted, and told them "nothing less is acceptable" on certain issues... yeah, we wouldn't have a proposed constitution right now. But in the long run, would that really be worse than having THIS as the proposed document?