Page 1 of 15

From: Ruth DeLaMater Bundy or Ralph Charles Whitley, Sr.

Date: 2/6/2011 11:45:09 AM
To: Chirho33@aol.com; MARK CARPENTER
Cc: Inquiries; info@who.int
Subject: AMERICA IS NOT AT WAR but Secretary of Defense is allowing the
murder and killing of innocent men, women, children, animals and pets under a
Status Of Forces Agreement in Iraq TODAY plus killing our own Military and Law
Enforcement Officers and potentially even First Responders or Fire Department
personnel in the future by providing ineffective Bullet Proof Vests to Military, State,
Federal, County, Municipal personnel in ALL CITIES AND TOWNS PLUS ALL
STATES , Embassies, Courthouses, Federal Buildings.

Could not resist sending the message copy to BOTH of you fine upstanding American's
who no doubt criticize everything and blame same on someone you call a "Birther" in
America. Corrected WORD Military in Subject line.

-------Original Message-------

From: Ruth DeLaMater Bundy or Ralph Charles Whitley, Sr.

Date: 2/6/2011 11:15:51 AM
To: Senator Bill Nelson; Senator John McCain; Rep. Paul; askdoj@usdoj.gov;
crimetips@conus.army.mil; criminal.division@usdoj.gov; ncistipline@ncis.navy.mil; APFN;
APFN-1; Officer In Charge; Chuck Palazzo; chris2karen@gmail.com
Cc: Reggie Roundtree WTSP; costingyou@wtsp.com; dr_taitz@yahoo.com;
orly.taitz@gmail.com; Attorney Apuzzo; Philip Berg; philjberg@obamacrimes.com;
news@wfla.com; news@worldnetdaily.com
Subject: AMERICA IS NOT AT WAR but Secretary of Defense is allowing the murder and
killing of innocent men, women, children, animals and pets under a Status Of Forces
Agreement in Iraq TODAY plus killing our own Military and Law Enforcement Officers and
potentially even First Responders or Fire Department personnel in the future by providing
ineffective Bullet Proof Vests to Military, State, Federal, County, Municipal personnel in ALL
CITIES AND TOWNS PLUS ALL STATES , Embassies, Courthouses, Federal Buildings.

Ladies and Gentlemen:

I have tried to get EVERYONE who can read to realize the brave men and women
are dying almost daily in America and Abroad wearing inferior bullet proof vests
called Interceptor when the Dragon Skin body armor has never had a penetration.
Further, what in GOD'S NAME are we doing in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and
elsewhere killing innocent men, women, children without CONGRESS stepping in
to stop a President and Joint Chiefs of Staff plus Secretary of Defense and State
from continuation of a WAR POSTURE whereby America is the Tip of the Spear
killing our own troops. I even gave a method learned and developed while in the
U.S. Navy on how to find and recover ALL GOLD AND SILVER anywhere
underground and underwater but everyone seems to feel this decorated American
Veteran at 70 is INSANE !

I realize the sitting President NEVER SERVED IN THE MILITARY and still
believe Barack Hussein Obama was indeed born in Kenya as reported with

2/6/2011
 Page 2 of 15

Evidence filed in Federal Courts so some badge carrying Law Enforcement Officer
should have used the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, Form AO 91 and filed
a Criminal Complaint appearing before a Magistrate or Judge who would read the
Criminal Complaint, WITNESS THE BADGE CARRYING OFFICER'S
SWEARING TO SAME THEN SIGNING IN FRONT OF THE MAGISTRATE
OR JUDGE SIGNING OF THE DOCUMENT then there is clearly a place for
the Magistrate or Judge to SIGN then ISSUANCE OF AN ARREST WARRANT
IS MANDATORY ! Obama can be in JAIL along with his spouse who may be an
accessory to the fraud and perjury, Grand Larceny under Federal Custody plus
his family in protective custody in no more than 1 FULL HOUR with assistance of
the U.S. Secret Service, FBI, DOJ and others. Instead the FOREIGN BORN
OCCUPANT OF THE WHITEHOUSE HAS THE BLACK BOX WITH LAUNCH
CODES AT HIS FINGERTIPS PROTECTED BY THE U.S. SECRET SERVICE
WHO NEVER DID A FULL SECURITY CLEARANCE ABOVE TOP SECRET
INVESTIGATION AND A CITIZEN LUCAS DANIEL SMITH PAID A BRIBE
IN MOMBASA TO GET THE TRUE BIRTH CERTIFICATE STAMPED AND
SIGNED WHICH ATTORNEY ORLY TAITZ FILED IN FEDERAL COURT
WHEN SUING OBAMA AND OTHERS.

Constitution has provisions for one REMOVED FROM THE OFFICE OF

PRESIDENT FOR HIGH CRIMES OR TREASON IF NOT ARREST. Vice
President Biden may, IF NOT GUILTY OF HIGH CRIMES OR TREASON
ALONG WITH OBAMA AND OTHER'S, take over as President temporarily then
the Speaker of the House may be temporarily sworn in as Vice President. The
VATICAN BANK FUNDS STORED ILLEGALLY INVOLVING BILLIONS TO
SPECIFIC OFFICIALS AND PAST OFFICIALS OF GOVERNMENT was part
of the estimated $60 TRILLION removed of the funds belonging to the People
from the U.S. Treasury via the BACK DOOR ACCESSED BY THE PRESIDENT
OR HIS ASSIGNED PEOPLE who took the money, started specific accounts in the
Vatican Bank as reported then suddenly someone started really checking and some
were found which is a SUPER FELONY !

Florida Representative George LeMieux has the documentation reported on the

huge theft of public funds from the U.S. Treasury not to mention the giving of
public funds to Private Corporations under color of law or authority forbidden by
45 State Constitutions....BUT WHO LOOKS INTO THESE FELONY ACTS when
perhaps the controller senior Officials or Officers declare "DO NOT
INVESTIGATE" on higher orders. President controls three letter agencies but the
Oath taken by those badge carrying officers is NOT TO THE PRESIDENT ! Still
no investigations of even MURDER !

Someone else might ask members of Congress what is happening with the Status
Of Forces Agreement only under the control of the President and those he appoints
rather than Congress and the American People who have paid TRILLIONS OF
DOLLARS from the Public Funds for these actions which border on Murder
through uses of Depleted Uranium Munitions still contaminating Air, Soil, Water
plus Agent Orange contamination WORLDWIDE ! How many died, were
wounded and their families or friends are DYING WORLDWIDE because of
America using Agent Orange, Toxins and Depleted Uranium Weapons which have
particles contaminating all soil, food, air, water for 4.5 BILLION YEARS HALF

2/6/2011
 Page 3 of 15

LIFE. Better get those $1,000 TRILLION in Gold because American may have to
pay off a lot of people shortly!

HAVE YOU A MEMORY OF THE LAST PRESIDENT STATING THE WAR IN

IRAQ WAS OVER ? Read what has been done with your family members then
start notifying your elected Officials in Congress, DOJ, FBI, Military Police and
find out HOW THIS COULD HAPPEN WITHOUT FULL CONGRESSIONAL
APPROVAL AND KNOWLEDGE PLUS OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD BY
ANY AND ALL AMERICAN CITIZENS !

Read the items submitted below under duty/obligation/protection of TITLE 18 U.S.

Code Sections 2,3,4 and others as a Federal Witness/Florida Whistleblower please.

Ralph Charles Whitley, Sr.

A Decorated American Veteran
Florida Whistleblower
020611 @ 11:15 AM Eastern

U.S.–Iraq Status of Forces Agreement

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Wikisource has original text related to this article:
Status of Forces Agreement, 2008

The U.S.-Iraq Status of Forces Agreement (official name: "Agreement Between the
United States of America and the Republic of Iraq On the Withdrawal of United
States Forces from Iraq and the Organization of Their Activities during Their
Temporary Presence in Iraq") is a status of forces agreement (SOFA) between
Iraq and the United States. It establishes that U.S. Combat forces will withdraw
from Iraqi cities by June 30, 2009, and all U.S. Forces will be completely out of
Iraq by December 31, 2011, subject to possible further negotiations which could

2/6/2011
 Page 4 of 15

delay withdrawal and a referendum scheduled for mid-2009 in Iraq which may
require U.S. Forces to completely leave by the middle of 2010.[1][2] The pact
requires criminal charges for holding prisoners over 24 hours, and requires a
warrant for searches of homes and buildings that are not related to combat.[3] U.S.
Contractors working for U.S. Forces will be subject to Iraqi criminal law, while
contractors working for the State Department and other U.S. Agencies may retain
their immunity. If U.S. Forces commit still undecided "major premeditated
felonies" while off-duty and off-base, they will be subject to the still undecided
procedures laid out by a joint U.S.-Iraq committee if the U.S. Certifies the forces
were off-duty.[4][5][6][3]
The Iraqi government also approved a Strategic Framework Agreement with the
U.S.,[7] aimed at ensuring international cooperation including minority ethnicity,
gender, and belief interests and other constitutional rights; threat deterrence;
exchange students; education;[8] and cooperation in the areas of energy
development, environmental hygiene, health care, information technology,
communications, and law enforcement.[9]
Several groups of Iraqis protested the passing of the SOFA accord[10][11][12] as
prolonging and legitimizing the occupation, and Grand Ayatollah Ali Husseini al-
Sistani expressed concerns with the ratified version.[13][14] Some other Iraqis
expressed skepticism that the U.S. Would completely end its presence by 2011.[15]
U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates has predicted that after 2011 he would
expect to see "perhaps several tens of thousands of American troops" as part of a
residual force in Iraq.[16] Some Americans have discussed "loopholes"[17] and
some Iraqis have said they believe parts of the pact remain a "mystery".[14]
Contents [hide]
1 Negotiations
2 Approval process
2.1 Approval by Iraqi Cabinet
2.2 First signing of the agreement
2.3 Ratification by Iraqi Parliament
2.4 Approval by Presidency Council
3 Reaction to approval
3.1 U.S.
3.2 Iraq
3.3 International
4 Role of Contractors under SOFA
5 December 14th, 2008 press conference incident
6 Iraqi March 2009 referendum
7 See also
8 References
9 External links
9.1 Provisional versions
9.2 Ratified versions
[edit]Negotiations

American-led Coalition forces participating in the 2003 invasion of Iraq were

initially subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of their parent states. After the
handover of sovereign power to an Iraqi administration, Coalition forces in Iraq
were nominally subject to Iraqi jurisdiction, and operated without any Status of
Forces Agreement.[18] In theory, Iraqi Courts had the right to try Coalition forces

2/6/2011
 Page 5 of 15

for any alleged offenses, though this right was never exercised.[citation needed]
In an interview January 24, 2008, US Defense Secretary Robert Gates indicated
that work on a SOFA had barely been started. [19] On June 13, 2008, Iraqi Prime
Minister Nuri al-Maliki said that negotiations with the United States on a long-
term security pact were deadlocked because of concern the deal infringes Iraqi
sovereignty. "We have reached an impasse because when we opened these
negotiations we did not realize that the US demands would so deeply affect Iraqi
sovereignty and this is something we can never accept", he said in Amman, Jordan.
"We cannot allow US forces to have the right to jail Iraqis or assume, alone, the
responsibility of fighting against terrorism", Maliki told Jordanian newspaper
editors, according to a journalist present at the meeting.[20]

On July 1, 2008, Zebari said he briefed members of the Iraqi Parliament that US
contractors would no longer have immunity from Iraqi prosecution under
negotiated terms of the long-term security pact. US State Department officials
could not be immediately reached for comment, but Iraqi member of parliament
Mahmoud Othman said he attended the meeting and that Iraqi representatives
were very pleased with the immunity agreement.[21]
On July 8, 2008, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani rejected the proposed agreement
on the basis that it violates Iraqi sovereignty, following a meeting with Iraq
National Security Advisor Mowaffak al-Rubaie.[22] Rubaie, clarifying remarks by
Maliki on July 7 that Iraq would accept a memorandum of understanding in lieu of
a SOFA, stated "We will not accept any memorandum of understanding if it does
not give a specific date for a complete withdrawal of foreign troops."[23] Deputy
speaker Khaled al-Attiyah also said on July 8 that the Iraqi parliament would
insist on vetting any agreement with the U.S. and would likely veto the agreement
if American troops were immune from Iraqi law: "Without doubt, if the two sides
reach an agreement, this is between two countries, and according to the Iraqi
constitution a national agreement must be agreed by parliament by a majority of
two thirds."[24]
On October 16, 2008, after several more months of negotiations, U.S. Secretary of
Defense Robert Gates and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice briefed senior U.S.
lawmakers on the draft SOFA, and Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki prepared to
circulate it with Iraq's Political National Security Council before going on to the
Council of Ministers and the Iraqi parliament. Despite a compromise on the issue
of jurisdiction over off-duty U.S. troops who commit crimes under Iraqi law, issues
related to the timeline for U.S. withdrawal and Iraqi insistence on "absolute
sovereignty" remained.[25]
[edit]Approval process

On November 16, Iraq's Cabinet approved the agreements; on November 27, the
Iraqi Parliament ratified them; on December 4, Iraq's presidential council
approved the security pacts.[26]
[edit]Approval by Iraqi Cabinet
On November 16, 2008, Iraq's Cabinet approved the agreement, which cited the
end of 2009 for the pull out of US troops from Iraqi cities, and 2011 as the fixed
deadline for removal of US military presence in country. US concessions involved a
ban on U.S. forces searching and raiding homes without Iraqi approval, the right
of Iraqis to search shipments of weapons and packages entering the country for
U.S. recipients, and the right of Iraq's justice system to prosecute American troops

2/6/2011
 Page 6 of 15

for serious crimes under some circumstances. The vote was passed by 27 of the 37-
member cabinet, of which nine members were absent and one opposing. The
agreement then went before Parliament.[27] However, on November 19 the Iraqi
Parliament was adjourned for a day after lawmakers loyal to Shiite cleric Moqtada
al-Sadr shouted down the second reading of the agreement's text. Speaker
Mahmoud al-Mashhadani adjourned the session after Sadrist MP Ahmed al-
Massoudi aggressively approached a lawmaker from the ruling coalition, who was
reading aloud the text of the agreement.[28]
The Aswat al-Iraq news agency reported a mixed reaction among the Iraqi
population at large to news of cabinet approval of the agreement. Residents of Sadr
City in Baghdad, a stronghold of Muqtada al-Sadr, said they believed the
agreement was signed too quickly[29], while a broader 'vox pop' of Iraqis around
the country said they thought the agreement would become a point of contention
[30]
The same day, Secretaries Gates and Rice held classified
briefings for U.S. lawmakers behind closed doors, and neither
official commented to reporters. Democratic Representative
William Delahunt said: "There has been no meaningful
consultation with Congress during the negotiations of this
agreement and the American people for all intents and
purposes have been completely left out." And Oona Hathaway,
Professor Law at the University of California at Berkeley called
the lack of consultation with United States Congress
unprecedented, asserting that aspects of the accord exceed the
independent constitutional powers of the President of the United
States.[31]
Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki warned Iraq would not seek to
extend the UN mandate of U.S. troops and they would pull out
immediately if the Iraqi parliament failed to approve a pact.[32]
Tariq al Hashimi, the country's Sunni Muslim vice president,
complained the U.S. would cease providing many "wide-scale
services" if Iraq did not approve the pact. Hashimi said many
Iraqis looked "to this attitude as a matter of blackmailing."[33]
[edit]First signing of the agreement
On November 17, 2008, the Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshiyar Zebari and U.S.
ambassador Ryan Crocker signed the agreement in an official ceremony.[34]
[edit]Ratification by Iraqi Parliament
On November 27, 2008, the Iraqi Parliament ratified a Status of Forces Agreement
with the United States, establishing that U.S. combat forces will withdraw from
Iraqi cities by June 30, 2009, and all U.S. forces will be completely out of Iraq by
December 31, 2011, but allowing for further negotiation if the Iraqi Prime Minister
believes Iraq is not stable enough. The pact requires criminal charges for holding
prisoners over 24 hours, and requires a warrant for searches of homes and
buildings that are not related to combat.[3] U.S. contractors will be subject to Iraqi

2/6/2011
 Page 7 of 15

criminal law. If U.S. forces commit still undecided "major premeditated felonies"
while off-duty and off-base, they will be subject to the still undecided procedures
laid out by a joint U.S.-Iraq committee if the U.S. certifies the forces were off-duty.
[4][5][6][3] A referendum of Iraqis will be held in mid-2009 on the pact, which may
require Coalition forces to leave by the middle of 2010.[1] Parliament also passed
another U.S.-Iraqi bilateral pact called the Strategic Framework Agreement,
aimed at ensuring minority Sunni interests and constitutional rights.[9]
In Iraq's Parliament, the pact was supported by 149 of 275 members (~54%) from
SCIRI, Dawa, the two Kurdish parties and members of the Sunni-based Iraqi
Accord Front.[35] The pact was opposed by 35 members, mostly from the Sadrist
bloc.[36] 91 members did not vote, fearing for their future if they said yes, others
fearing the same if they said no.[11]
[edit]Approval by Presidency Council
Further information: Presidency Council of Iraq
The Presidency Council of Iraq consists of one President and two deputies, or Vice-
Presidents.[37] The Council currently consists of Kurdish President Jalal Talabani, Shi'a
Vice President Adel Abdul Mahdi, and Sunni Vice President Tariq Al-Hashimi. The
Council must agree to all decisions unanimously.[37]
On December 4, 2008 Iraq's presidential council approved the security pact. "Nothing
has been changed (in the accord)", presidency secretary Nasir al-Ani said after it was
reviewed by the body. The council decision marks the final hurdle for the pact in terms
of Iraqi government or legislative approval.[26]
[edit]Reaction to approval

[edit]U.S.
Some anonymous U.S. officials and specialists who follow the war have argued they
believe that parts of the agreement may be circumvented and that other parts may be
open to interpretation, including: the parts giving Iraqi legal jurisdiction over United
States soldiers who commit crimes off base and off duty, the part requiring for US
troops to obtain Iraqi permission for all military operations, and the part banning the
U.S. from staging attacks on other countries from Iraq.[38] For example, administration
officials have argued that Iraqi prosecution of U.S. soldiers could take three years, by
which time the U.S. will have withdrawn from Iraq under the terms of the agreement. In
the interim, U.S. troops will remain under the jurisdiction of America's Uniform Code of
Military Justice. Michael O'Hanlon, of the Brookings Institution research group, said
there are "these areas that are not as clear cut as the Iraqis would like to think."[17]
U.S. President George W. Bush hailed the passing of the agreement between the
two countries. "The Security Agreement addresses our presence, activities, and
withdrawal from Iraq", Bush said. He continued that "two years ago, this day
seemed unlikely - but the success of the surge and the courage of the Iraqi people
set the conditions for these two agreements to be negotiated and approved by the
Iraqi parliament."[39]
Army planners have privately acknowledged they are examining projections that
could see the number of Americans hovering between 30,000 and 50,000, but
maybe as high as 70,000, for a substantial time beyond 2011. Pentagon planners
say those currently counted as combat troops could be "re-missioned" and that
their efforts could be redefined as training and support for the Iraqis.[40] Joint
Chiefs Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen has also said "three years is a long time.
Conditions could change in that period of time."[41]
In a letter to U.S. military personnel about new rules of engagement, Gen. Ray

2/6/2011
 Page 8 of 15

Odierno said that U.S. forces would reduce their visibility but that this does not
mean "any reduction in our fundamental ability to protect ourselves." Odierno
wrote that U.S. forces would coordinate "operations with the approval of the GoI
(Government of Iraq), and we will conduct all operations by, with, and through the
Iraqi Security Forces." "Despite some adjustments to the way we conduct
operations, the agreement simply reinforces transitions that are already underway,
and I want to emphasize that our overarching principles remain the same", he
further wrote.[42]
General Raymond Odierno said that some U.S. forces would remain at local
security stations as training and mentoring teams past the June 2009 deadline
specified in the status of forces agreement. In contrast, Robert Gates estimated
U.S. troops will be "out of cities and populated areas" by June 30. "That's the
point at which we will have turned over all 18 provinces to provincial Iraqi
control," he predicted.[43] A spokesman for Odierno, Lt. Col. James Hutton,
reiterated that the soldiers staying in cities would not be combat forces but rather
"enablers," who would provide services such as medical care, air-traffic control
and helicopter support that the Iraqis cannot perform themselves.[44] Odierno's
comments sparked outrage among some Iraqi lawmakers who say the U.S. is
paving the way for breaching the interim agreement.[45]
When asked by Charlie Rose in a PBS interview how big the American “residual”
force would be in Iraq after 2011, Secretary of Defense Gates replied that although
the mission would change, “my guess is that you’re looking at perhaps several tens
of thousands of American troops.”[16]
[edit]Iraq
To protest an agreement they saw as prolonging a "humiliating" occupation,[46] tens of
thousands of Iraqis burned an effigy of George W. Bush in a central Baghdad square
where U.S. troops five years previously staged a tearing down of a statue of Saddam
Hussein.[47] The Iraqi parliament was the scene of many protests before[48] and during
the vote.[49]
After the deal passed, over 9,000 Iraqis gathered to protest in Baghdad's eastern suburb
of Sadr City. Protesters burned a U.S. flag and held banners reading: "No, no to the
agreement".[50] "We condemn the agreement and we reject it, just as we condemn all
injustice", Sheikh Hassan al-Husseini told worshippers right after the vote at the weekly
Friday prayers in Baghdad. [51] Iraqi theologian, political, and militia leader Muqtada
al-Sadr called for three days of peaceful protests and mourning after the passing of the
agreement.[52] Grand Ayatollah Ali Husseini al-Sistani's expressed concerns with the
ratified version of the pact and noted that the government of Iraq has no authority to
control the transfer of occupier forces into and out of Iraq, no control of shipments, and
that the pact grants the occupiers immunity from prosecution in Iraqi courts. He said
that Iraqi rule in the country is not complete while the occupiers are present, but that
ultimately the Iraqi people would judge the pact in a referendum.[53] Sistani considers
parts of the agreement "a mystery" and said that the pact provides "no guarantee" that
Iraq would regain sovereignty.[14]
On December 3, 2008, about 2,000 Syrian-based Iraqi refugees staged a protest against
the Iraq-US military pact saying that the agreement would place Iraq under US
domination. "We denounce the security agreement, a shameful and dishonorable
agreement of American occupation", read one banner outside a shop in the mostly Shiite
neighborhood where the protest occurred.[12] The Association of Muslim Scholars, a
group of Sunni religious leaders in Iraq, accused the Sunni Accordance Front, a party
which supported the pact, of "selling Iraq"[11] and also denounced the deal as

2/6/2011
 Page 9 of 15

"legitimising the occupation".[54]

Some other Iraqis expressed skeptical optimism that the U.S. would completely end its
occupation in three years.[15]
[edit]International
A majority of foreign troops that have been part of the force in Iraq will depart by
December 31, 2008. Forces from Azerbaijan,[55] Poland,[55] Macedonia,[55] Japan,
[56] Bosnia,[55] South Korea,[55] and Georgia[55] have left. The Iraqi and British
governments are negotiating a security agreement reported to be similar to the Iraq-U.S.
status of forces agreement. The pact may be informal and the role of British troops is
expected to be very minimal by the end of 2009. Along with the British and American
military, only a very small number of forces will remain from two or three other
countries.[55]
Before the pact was passed by Iraq's parliament, Senior Iranian lawmaker Kazem Jalali
said "the Iraqi Parliament should take the interests of the people of Iraq into
consideration and make the right decision, worthy of its nation".[57] Ayatollah
Mahmoud Hashemi Shahroudi, the Iranian judiciary chief, said the Iraqi government has
done very well regarding this (security pact)".[58]
Syrian officials and academics argue that the pact is a risk to Syria’s security. “The
American presence in Iraq, whether permanent or temporary, threatens Syrian security”
Syrian vice-president Farouq al-Shara said. President Bashar al-Assad said the deal
would turn “Iraq into a launch pad for attacking its neighbours instead of supporting
them.” “The continued US presence in the region, with what Newsweek magazine says
is the largest embassy in the world [in Baghdad], means… it will interfere in all of the
region’s affairs,” said Jasim Zakariya, a Syrian political analyst. According to Syria, the
U.S. carried out an air strike in September 2008 on a Syrian village killing eight
civilians.[59]
[edit]Role of Contractors under SOFA

U.S. contractors working for U.S. forces will be subject to Iraqi criminal law, while
contractors working for the State Department and other U.S. agencies may retain their
immunity. "The immunity question, the largest question being talked about, is not
addressed in the ... agreement," said Alan Chvotkin, who works on behalf of contractors,
including Moyock, N.C.-based Blackwater Worldwide. Chvotkin said he believed
Blackwater's guards still have immunity under Decree 17 issued by L. Paul Bremer.
Blackwater currently has no license to work in Iraq.[60]
[edit]December 14th, 2008 press conference incident

Main article: Muntadhar al Zaidi#Shoe incident

Bush ducks a thrown shoe as Muntadhar al-Zaidi screams "This is for the widows and
orphans and all those killed in Iraq!"
On December 14, 2008, U.S. President George W. Bush signed the security pact with
Iraq. In his fourth and final trip to Iraq, the president appeared with Iraq's prime minister
and said more work is to be done.[61] During the press conference discussing the
signing of the pact[62] with Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki in his palace in the heavily
fortified Green Zone, President Bush dodged two shoes thrown at him from the
audience. The man who threw his shoes, Muntadhar al-Zaidi, an Iraqi journalist with
Egypt-based al-Baghdadia television network, could be heard yelling in Arabic: "This is
a farewell ... you dog!" as he threw his first shoe, and when throwing his second shoe al-

2/6/2011
 Page 10 of 15

Zaidi could be heard yelling: "This is for the widows, the orphans and those who were
killed in Iraq!”[63] While pinned on the ground by security personnel, he screamed:
"You killed the Iraqis!"[64] As the man’s screaming could be heard outside, Bush said
“That’s what people do in a free society, draw attention to themselves."
Two New York Times reporters described al-Zaidi as having been "embraced around
the Arab world."[65] Al-Zaidi found support from thousands of protesters in Iraq and
his employer. A statement released by Al-Baghdadia television said, "Al-Baghdadia
television demands that the Iraqi authorities immediately release their stringer
Muntadhar al-Zaidi, in line with the democracy and freedom of expression that the
American authorities promised the Iraqi people."[66] The "vast majority" of viewers of
al-Baghdadia TV who telephoned to the station in order to express their opinions said
that they approved al-Zaidi's actions.[67]
The government of Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki called the shoe throwing "a
shameful savage act" and demanded a public apology from Al Baghdadia. "The act
damaged the reputation of the Iraqi journalists and journalism in general," a statement
said.[68]
[edit]Iraqi March 2009 referendum

Further information: Iraqi Status of Forces Agreement referendum, 2010

A referendum on the pact between the United States and Iraq will be held in Iraq before
30 July 2009.[69] If the referendum result is against the SOFA, the Iraqi government
will give notice to end the agreement and US troops will be required to leave Iraq within
one year - by July 2010.[70] "If the Iraqi people reject the pact in the referendum ... the
government of Iraq will be committed, according to the law, to the result of the
referendum and will convey this will to the American administration. The pact will be
annulled", Iraq's Sunni Vice-President Tareq al-Hashemi said. The deal can be
terminated if either signatory gives the other side a year's notice.[71]
White House spokesman Dana Perino said in December 2008 that "if there is a national
referendum, Iraq is a sovereign country, and they could decide to do lots of different
things with it." "But I think that the fact that their representative leadership has signed
this agreement today, that they recognize that they are going to continue to need our
help for the next little while", she continued.[72]
"We do understand that the Iraqi military is not going to get built out in the three years.
We do need many more years. It might be 10 years," Iraqi government spokesman Ali al
Dabbagh said in December 2008. "We expected something odd," said Alaa Maki, a
member of a Sunni Muslim political bloc that's forced Maliki to put the security
agreement before voters as a referendum next year. "That is the reason we pushed for
the referendum", he said. Mahmoud Othman, a Kurdish member of parliament who also
voted for the pact, said "for us to think about extending the U.S. presence by planning
another (security agreement) is premature."[73] "What was announced about the Iraqi
forces needing 10 years in order to be ready is only his personal point of view and it
doesn't represent the opinion of the Iraqi government," Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's
office said in a written statement. "I think that al-Dabbagh's comments are the first sign
that nobody is going to adhere to the timetables and the U.S. soldiers are staying in Iraq
beyond the 2011 date," said Sadrist MP Nasir al-Saadi.[74]
Thousands of Iraqi have gathered weekly after Friday prayers and shouted anti-US and
anti-Israeli slogans protesting the security pact between Baghdad and Washington. A
protester said that despite the approval of the Interim Security pact, the Iraqi people
would break it in a referendum next year.[75]
[edit]See also

2/6/2011
 Page 11 of 15

Council of Representatives of Iraq

Iraqi Status of Forces Agreement referendum, 2009
Iraq War
Multinational force in Iraq
Status of Forces Agreement
[edit]References

^ a b BBC News (November 27, 2008) "Iraqi parliament backs US pullout"

^ White House: Iraq Status of Forces Agreement
^ a b c d Status of Forces Agreement
^ab
On the other hand, Iraq has primary legal jurisdiction over off-duty soldiers and
civilians who commit "major and premeditated crimes" outside of U.S. installations.
These major crimes will need to be defined by a joint committee and the United States
retains the right to determine whether or not its personnel were on- or off-duty. Iraq also
maintains primary legal jurisdiction over contractors (and their employees) that have
contracts with the United States.
Arms Control Center: How Comfortable is the U.S.-Iraq SOFA?
^ab
Committees assigned to deal with U.S.-led combat operations and jurisdiction over U.S.
military personnel are among those that have not met even as Iraq moves toward
sovereignty, U.S. Army Gen. Ray Odierno told reporters.
Los Angeles Times: In Iraq, transfer-of-power committees have yet to take shape
^ a b Rubin, A. (November 27, 2008) "Iraqi Parliament approves security pact"
International Herald Tribune
^ White House: Strategic Framework Agreement
^ English Language Teaching and Learning Program (US State Dept.)
^ a b Karadsheh, J. (November 27, 2008) "Iraq parliament OKs pact on U.S. troops'
future" CNN
^ "Iraq: Cleric al-Sadr calls for peaceful protests" (Associated Press)
^ a b c SOFA not sitting well in Iraq
^ a b Iraqi refugees in Syria protest against military pact with US
^ Al Jazeera: Iraqi people will judge on U.S. pact
^ a b c Washington Post: Top Shiite Cleric in Iraq Raises Concerns About Security Pact
^ a b Feelings are mixed as Iraqis ponder U.S. security agreement
^ a b New York Times: Trying to Redefine Role of U.S. Military in Iraq
^ a b McClatchy: U.S. staying silent on its view of Iraq pact until after vote
^ Mayur Patel (March 2004). "The Legal Status of Coalition Forces in Iraq After the
June 30 Handover". American Society of International law. Retrieved 2007-05-14.
^ "US not interested in permanent Iraq bases: Gates". AFP. January 2008. Retrieved
2008-01-25.[dead link]
^ "Maliki says talks on Iraq-US security pact deadlocked". AFP. June 2008. Retrieved
2008-06-16.
^ "Iraqi minister: Deal seeks to end security contractors' immunity". CNN. July 2008.
Retrieved 2008-07-01.
^ "Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani rejects SOFA". UPI. July 2008. Retrieved 2008-07-08.
^ "Iraq to reject US deal without pullout timetable". AFP. July 2008. Retrieved 2008-07-
08.
^ Abbas, Mohammed (July 2008). "INTERVIEW-Iraq parl't must approve any US

2/6/2011
 Page 12 of 15

security deal -MP". Reuters. Retrieved 2008-07-08.

^ Karen DeYoung (October 2008). "Gates, Rice Brief Lawmakers On Draft Accord
With Iraq". The Washington Post. Retrieved 2008-10-17.
^ a b Zawya: Iraq presidential council endorses US security pact
^ "IRAQ: Cabinet approves plan for total U.S. troop withdrawal in 2011". Los Angeles
Times. November 2008. Retrieved 2008-11-16.
^ RTT Staff Writer (November 2008). "Sadrist MPs disrupt Iraqi parliamentary debate
on security pact". The RTTNews. Retrieved 2008-11-19.
^ Govt. hastily approved SOFA – Sadr City residents
^ Iraqis believe security pact to cause division. Aswat al-Iraq news agency. November
18, 2008.
^ Dan Robinson (November 2008). "US Lawmakers Debate US-Iraq Security Accord".
The Voice of America News. Retrieved 2008-11-19.[dead link]
^ Radio Free Europe: Iraq PM Says US Troops Will Leave If No Pact
^ McClatchy DC: U.S. threatens to halt services to Iraq without troop accord
^ Graft, Peter (2008-11-17). "Iraq, US sign pact on troops withdrawal deadline".
Reuters. Retrieved 2008-12-16.
^ Iraq: The Thirteenth Hour
^ Iraq must not give the US an excuse to leave
^ a b Constitution of Iraq, Article 134(4)
^ OmanTribune: Key parts of US-Iraq pact could be lost in translation
^ White House: Statement by the President on Agreements with Iraq
^ Campaign Promises on Ending the War in Iraq Now Muted by Reality
^ U.S. military chief says Iraq conditions may change
^ CNN: U.S. troops to keep lower profile in Iraq
^ Gates Disputes Commander On Troop Pullout
^ Some U.S. troops in Iraq will stay longer
^ US, Iraq officially seal security deal
^ Examiner: Iraqi Shiites burn Bush effigy in anti-US protest
^ LATimes: Army Stage-Managed Fall of Hussein Statue
^ PressTV: Iraq parliament sees protests over SOFA
^ Reuters: Iraq parliament passes U.S. security pact (p.2)
^ Iraq suicide bomber kills 9, wounds 15, in Shiite mosque
^ Islam Online: Iraqis demonstrate against US pact
^ "Iraq: Cleric al-Sadr calls for peaceful protests" (Associated Press)
^ Al Jazeera: Iraqi people will judge on U.S. pact
^ Iraq deal will not end occupation
^ a b c d e f g New York Times: Troop Pullout to Leave U.S. and Britain as Iraq Force
^ Japan ends Iraq mission
^ Press TV: Iran advises Iraq on US security deal
^ USA Today: Iran's judiciary chief lauds U.S.-Iraqi pact
^ Syria sees Iraq-US pact as threat
^ Washington Post: New year brings less clarity to Blackwater in Iraq
^ USA Today: Bush signs security deal in Iraq
^ White House: President Bush and Iraq Prime Minister Maliki Sign the Strategic
Framework Agreement and Security Agreement
^ Touting New Security Deal, Bush Makes Final Iraq Visit
^ Iraqi journalist throws shoes at Bush in Baghdad
^ Williams, Timothy; Sharon Otterman (2008-12-15). "Shoe-Hurling Iraqi Becomes a
Folk Hero". The New York Times. Retrieved 2008-12-15.

2/6/2011
 Page 13 of 15

^ Iraq cheers reporter for Bush shoe attack

^ Shoe-hurling Iraqi journalist becomes a folk hero
^ Shoe insult against Bush resounds in Arab world
^ AFP: Iraqi parliament approves landmark US military pact
^ TIME: Iraq Approves Long-Debated US Security Pact
^ Referendum planned on reform of US-Iraqi security pact
^ White House: Press Briefing by Press Secretary Dana Perino (December 4, 2008)
^ Iraq spokesman says U.S. troops might be needed another decade
^ Iraqi PM dismisses comment US to stay 10 years
^ Iraqis hold anti-US rally in Baghdad
[edit]External links

Wikinews has related news: Iraqi journalist throws shoes at US president George
Bush
Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA): What Is It, and How Might One Be Utilized In
Iraq?
Maliki and Bush: Conflicting priorities
Security agreements mean Iraq occupation will continue to 2012 and beyond
Iran Backs Referendum on US-Iraqi Security Pact
Podcast: An Account of the Shoe-Throwing Incident
Global Justice Project: Iraq
[edit]Provisional versions
US-Iraq Status of Forces Agreement (13 August 2008)
US-Iraq Status of Forces Agreement (17 November 2008)
US-Iraq Status of Forces Agreement (27 November 2008)
[edit]Ratified versions
White House: Iraq Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) (Dead Link)
White House: Iraq Strategic Framework Agreement (SFA) (Dead Link)
[hide]
v•d•e
Iraq War
Prior events
Disarmament crisis A WMD claims A Rationale A Popular opinion A Public relations A
February interview A Biological weapons
Invasion
Multi-National Force A Timeline A Battle of Nasiriyah A Invasion of Baghdad A Debecka
Pass A Firdos Square statue A Mission Accomplished Speech
Occupation
Military operations Coalition Provisional Authority A Iraq Interim Governing Council A
Insurgency A Human rights A Civil war A Execution of Saddam Hussein A U.S. troop
withdrawal A Insurgent attacks A Aircraft loses
Opinions
Opposition A Protests A Criticism A Legitimacy A United Nations A International
community A Associated people
Controversy
Mahmudiyah killings A Blackwater Baghdad shootings A Haditha killings A Ishaqi
incident A Mukaradeeb wedding party massacre A Baghdad airstrike A Abu Ghraib
prisoner abuse A Iraq War documents leak A Baghdad Museum looting
Aftermath
Refugees A Duelfer Report A Damage to Baghdad A Aid and Investment A Economic

2/6/2011
 Page 14 of 15

reform A Financial cost A Casualties A Chilcot Inquiry

Timeline
2003 A 2004 A 2005 A 2006 A 2007 A 2008 A 2009 A 2010
Iraq War at Wikinews A Commons
Categories: 2008 in Iraq | Foreign relations of Iraq | Iraq – United States relations |
Occupation of Iraq | Protests against the Iraq War | Treaties of the United States |
Treaties concluded in 2008 | Treaties entered into force in 2008 | 21st-century military
alliances
Log in / create account
Article
Discussion
Read
Edit
View history

Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact Wikipedia
Toolbox
Print/export
Languages
???????
This page was last modified on 13 October 2010 at 15:53.

END OF ARTICLE SUBMITTED HEREIN

Ralph Charles Whitley, Sr. CFC032631

Backflow Prevention, Inc.
4532 W. Kennedy Blvd. PMB-276
Tampa, Florida 33609-2042 USA
Phone: 813-286-2333

NEW WEB PAGE:  www.RalphWhitleySr.124online.com

SCRIBID ID: ralphwhitleysr

SKYPE ID: ralphwhitleysr

SCRIBD WEB PAGE:  www.scribd.com/ralphwhitleysr  

2/6/2011
 Page 15 of 15

backflow.prevention@verizon.net

2/6/2011