Update: It appears to be a hoax and the photo on the website appears to be that of an action figure.

Bad news to report. A U.S. Soldier reportedly has been captured by Iraqi miltants and they are threatening to behead him.

The posting, on a Web site that frequently carried militants' statements, included a photo of what appeared to be an American soldier in desert fatigues seated with his hands tied behind his back. A gun barrel was pointed at his head, and he is seated in front of a black banner emblazoned with the Islamic profession of faith, "There is no god but God and Muhammad is His prophet."

The website suggests the group has killed other soldiers and currently is holding more.

“Our mujahedeen heroes of Iraq’s Jihadi Battalion were able to capture American military man John Adam after killing a number of his comrades and capturing the rest,” said the statement, signed by the “Mujahedeen Brigades.”

How many soliers are missing and for how long?

Not to beat a dead horse, but it 's worth pondering that in 1967, the U.S. crowed about the good turnout in the Vietnam election. As we mentioned yesterday in our open thread post, there's an eerie similarity between the two.

Martini Republic has some thoughts on who will control the new Iraqi Government. Abdul Aziz al-Hakim , a Shi'ite leader, already is calling the election a victory for the United Iraqi Alliance. And, big surprise, Iraq's President today said he wants U.S. troops to stay in Iraq.

"It's only complete nonsense to ask the troops to leave in this chaos and this vacuum of power," al-Yawer, a Sunni Arab, said.

by TChris

An audit has raised questions about the $8.8 billion disbursed by the American occupation authority that governed Iraq until the middle of last year. Much of the money was transferred to Iraqi ministries with no budget or procedures to account for its use.

The report does not cite direct evidence of corruption with the Iraqi ministries but notes, among other examples, that one ministry received money to pay 8,206 guards while the presence of only 602 guards in that ministry could be verified.

Oops.

Lest the cheerleaders overtake the conversation, here is some balance:

• Juan Cole
• James Wolcott
• Lenin's Tomb
• Raed in the Middle
• Needlenose

[hat tip to Unfair Witness]

• Voting Irregularities in North (ABC News)
• Bombs Keep Sunnis Away (Times OnLine)
• Kurds to Demand Key Iraq Post
• Outlook Brightens, No Quick Fix (LA Times)
• Uncertainty Reigns (LA Times)
• Elections are Not Democracy (Newsweek)

This is not to say I agree with all of the content in these posts and articles--I am just trying to encourage everyone to read both sides, before buying into the freedom and democracy or elections=success memes. Simply stated, we are still a long way from Kansas.

The right-wing blogosphere, like President Bush, considers the elections a triumph for democracy. The top liberal bloggers, Daily Kos, Atrios, Josh Marshall, knowing better, are either ignoring the elections or have moved on.

Other liberal bloggers express their criticism: Oliver Willis, Talking Dog; Maxspeak; Jerome Armstrong of MyDD; Armando at Daily Kos; Juan Cole.

For the most part, Iraqi bloggers are jubilant. Raed in the Middle is not. If you're reading news coverage, don't forget to read reports from the Arab world to get both sides.

If you've commented on TalkLeft about the elections, tune into MSNBC between 5:30 and 6:00 pm. I'll be discussing blogger reaction opposite Jeff Jarvis on Ron Reagan and Monica Crowley's new show, and they intend to read a few of your comments on the air.

Journalist Chris Allbritton writes on his blog, Back to Iraq:

9:34:37 AM So far, not as much violence as everybody feared. The question is why? Is the insurgency taking a pass on this one? (It's possible. Our sources in the insurgency say the election will make no difference to them, so why expend a lot of energy?) Is the insurgency much weaker than previously thought? Or is the level of security sufficient to keep it in check? If that's the case, then that is discouraging, too, because the measures that have kept today safe (so far) are truly draconian. No driving, dusk to dawn curfews, states of emergency. If that's what it takes to provide security in Iraq, why erase one police state only to replace it with another?

Here's a Reuters photo from Mosul:

Polls have now been open for three hours. There has been a steady flow of voters in some parts of Baghdad--and a steady round of explosions and gunfire. 14 million Iraqis are eligible to vote. How many will actually vote is still unknown.

This should be contrasted with Ramadi where Jim Maceda, MSNBC's reporter, says the election has been a "total failure." With 600,000 residents, only 150 people have voted. Only one voter showed up at Maceda's polling place. He says the intimidation worked. Ramadi is considered a litmus test because of the large number of moderate Sunnis.

Then there's this: An unscientific poll from the new issue of Time Magazine on Americans' views on the future of Iraq.

[edited to delete graphic, it skewed the site.]

[via Baghdad Dweller.]

Via television, Reuters has reported explosions around polling places. A suicide car bomber blew up a car at a security checkpoint. One policeman was killed and two soldiers were wounded. One reporter says the frequency of explosions has increased in the past five to ten minutes. The reporter counted seven to eight explosions in the past 45 minutes. He can't tell if they are mortar shells or car bombs.

In a nutshell, the media, while reporting "loud explosions," is downplaying the significance at this point, saying it was expected.

Update: The cable news channels are taking different approaches. Fox has Geraldo who is absolutely gleeful with the success of the elections. MSNBC is doing news reporting with experts. For the first hour, CNN showed taped videos of past death and destruction. There's been a shortage of live shots so far at polling places. Geraldo said people were turning out in droves, and the reason you didn't see them when they showed the polling places was because they were all inside voting. "An amazing, wonderful, inspiring turnout. The terrorists are going to lose." He did, at least, caution that he was only speaking from his location between Baghdad and Fallujah, not for the whole country.

The polls have been open for an hour. Things are slow, but it's only 8 am in Iraq. What to look for?

• What kind of turnout will there be?
• Will the Sunnis vote?
• Will the anticipated violence be significant enough to disrupt the elections?

The media is speculating that Iraqis are at home watching tv to see whether its safe to go vote.

As to the significance of elections in establishing a democracy, check out Columbia Law Professor Samuel Issacharoff's Washington Post op-ed, Democracy Isn't Built on One Election Alone.

Update: Iraq Voting on Uncertain Future (LA Times.)

Has anyone in the media noted a similarity between the jubilant, Iraqi expats who believe they are creating a democracy with their votes and the Cuban expats in Miami, most of whom turned out to be conservative Republicans?

How bizarre, just after I wrote that CNN began airing a "then and now" profile of Elian Gonzales. Less than one hour before the polls open in Baghdad.

The Rocky Mountain News reports on the expats who can't vote because they don't live near one of these cities:

The closest polls to Colorado are in Chicago and the Los Angeles area, each roughly 1,000 miles away. And voters had to travel twice: to register one week and to vote the next. Other polling places are in Detroit, Washington, D.C., and Nashville, Tenn.

Only 25,946 Iraqis have registered to vote in the United States. An estimated 240,000 were eligible.

Why so few polling places?

Salon reporter Jill Carroll is in Baghdad, and reports on the fear of Iraqis. She also provides a succinct description of how things are supposed to proceed in the election:

David Enders provides this election primer as he reports from Baghdad for Mother Jones: There are 7,471 candidates from 111 parties for 275 slots in the national assembly and most of them have declined to provide their names to the public. Over 50 parties recently have dropped out due to the violence, but they remain on the ballot. There's another election for local councils.

If all goes as expected to plan, the Shi'ites, backed by the U.S., will win handily. It's leader, Allawi, has been dominating the airwaves to the exclusion of many other candidates. The minority Sunnis resent the U.S. occupation and support for the Shi'ites and are expected to stay home and forego voting.

The expats who have chosen to vote are delighted. But Iraqis remain very divided over the elections. The New York Times has this updated analysis.

Polls open tomorrow at 7 am Baghdad time, which is 11pm ET Saturday night. Insurgents today promised a bloodbath for Sunday.

"For the last time, we warn that (Sunday) will be bloody for the Christians and Jews and their mercenaries and whoever takes part in the (election) game of America and Allawi," Zarqawi's faction said in a statement posted on an Islamist Web site.

Bush today said we will stay in Iraq after the election.