Skip to comments.Media Lies About US Backed Coup
Posted on 08/11/2014 6:30:37 PM PDT by mrsmith
Pertinent parts of Iraqi constitution:
"...2- The Council of Representatives may withdraw confidence from the Prime Minister based on the request of one-fifth (1/5) of its members. This request may be submitted only after a question has been put to the Prime Minister and after at least seven days from submitting the request. 3- The Council of Representatives shall decide to withdraw confidence from the Prime Minister by an absolute majority of its members." ---There has not been a successful "no confidence" vote against Maliki.
"...Article 73: First: The President of the Republic shall name the nominee of the Council of Representatives bloc with the largest number to form the Cabinet within fifteen days from the date of the election of the president of the republic." ===Maliki has the largest bloc.
So Maliki is the rightful PM of Iraq. Undisputably (no term limits, or other 'small print' I could find that applies.)
"The President of the Republic SHALL name the nominee of the Council of Representatives bloc with the largest number"
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
The us media backed the coup in hondourus because the obama one blessed it.
According to the BBC several mins ago, Iraq has a new PM, Haider al Abadi, a member of the Islamic Dawa Party, a Shia Muslim, with Obama administration’s approval: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-28749541 — according to Wiki, Islamic Dawa Party, whose leader is (was) Maliki, supports the Khomeinist regime in Iran, and supported Khomeini himself during Iran-Iraq war, still receives financial support from the Islamic regime in Iran. Fabulous? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Dawa_Party
Good post on the Honduran “non-coup” (which I’d forgotten).
A constitution- any constitution- is like a red flag to a bull to Democrats.
If the CIA doesn’t have the Iraqi Supreme Court in it’s pocket it won’t hold.
It’ll be another failure like Obama’s coup in Egypt.
I don’t know.. it all sounds too weird to me. On the one hand am thinking they just don’t have a lot of choices for ‘acceptable’ politicians & on the other installing another Iranian regime backed or sympathizer in Iraq whilst were trying to remove Assad in Syria who is also supported by Islamic gov’t in Iran doesn’t make much sense. Unless they’re trying to counter Sunni Islamists in Iraq..but I don’t think those Islamist care
Every prominent Shia politician is likely in Iran’s pocket LOL!.
The best we can hope for from Obama and kerry’s efforts in Iraq is that Iran will get over-extended there and/or that Saudi and others will get more active against Iran’s expansion.
Yah, that’s what is..Saudis & co vs Iranians & co.
One point to add regarding the Iranian expansion. Approx. 85% of the muslim world is sunni (including in that salafis & wahabis). So I’d say in numbers at least Iranian expansion is almost fully stretched. They simply won’t have the religious support from the rest of the muslim world. It’s not nearly an even match if the idea is to play the sunnis collectively against the shiites. That’s why the Islamic regime in Iran has failed to export its version of an Islamic state to the rest of world after some 35 yrs, whereas the Sunnis can do that more easily. Considering also there are more Arabs than thos of Iranian heritage, even those who aren’t muslims.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.