Notwithstanding the fact that in some cases the response of the Iranian security forces has been overboard, looking at the main pretext of the opposition and whether it holds enough water I can't help but wonder whether there really is a case of fraud or that this whole crying foul thing is a fraud itself. Now, it's not a surprise that the mainstream media which is more accessible to us in the West supports the allegations of the opposition but I've tried researching the other side of the story and I've found that that 'other' side has an interesting case too. Hmm confused.
Independent polls predicted Ahmadinejad win prior to elections:
On the objections of casting of 100%+ votes in some areas in current Elections. Iranian Interior Ministry gave the following explanation of this issue:
"5. Due to summer travel/weekend, in some 50 places, mostly in resort areas of Caspian Sea, the voter turn out was more than 100 percent. There is nothing unusual about this and the official cites specific figures from a number of past elections including parliamentary elections corroborate this. Case in point, he says that in towns of Zorgan and Morv, the votes in the past presidential elections were 200 times more. Some of those areas Mr. Mousavi actually won. There were more than 60000 voting centers and therefore 50 such places are very miniscule."
Mir Hossein Mousavi, the reformist candidate challenging Iran's authorities on the result of last week's presidential elections, is a masterful tactician who wants to overturn the re-election of his rival, President Mahmud Ahmadinejad, with allegations of a massive conspiracy that he claims cheated him and millions of his supporters.
These supporters, identifiable by the color green they have adopted, have taken to the streets in the tens of thousands and on Thursday were to stage a "day of mourning" for what they say is a lost election. This follows a "silent" march through the streets of the capital on Wednesday. To date, at least 10 people - some Iranian sources say 32 - have been killed in clashes.
Mousavi has lodged an official complaint with the powerful 12-member Guardians Council, which has ordered a partial recount of the vote. The complaint's main flaw is that it passes improper or questionable pre-election conduct as something else, that is, as evidence of voting fraud.
The protest, which seeks fresh elections, is short on specifics and long on extraneous, election-unrelated complaints. The first two items relate to the televised debates that were held between the candidates, rather than anything germane to the vote count.
There is also some innuendo, such as a claim that Ahmadinejad used state-owned means of transportation to campaign around the country, overlooking that there is nothing unusual about incumbent leaders using the resources at their disposal for election purposes. All previous presidents, including the reformist Mohammad Khatami, who is a main supporter of Mousavi, did the same.
Another complaint by Mousavi is that Ahmadinejad had disproportionate access to the state-controlled media. This has indeed been a bad habit in the 30-year history of the Islamic Republic, but perhaps less so this year because for the first time there were television debates, six of them, which allowed Mousavi and the other challengers free space to present their points of view.
With respect to alleged specific irregularities, the complaint cites a shortage of election forms that in some places caused a "few hours delay". This is something to complain about, but it hardly amounts to fraud, especially as voter turnout was a record high of 85% of the eligible 46 million voters. (Ahmadinejad was credited with 64% of the vote.)
Mousavi complains that in some areas the votes cast were higher than the number of registered voters. But he fails to add that some of those areas, such as Yazd, were places where he received more votes that Ahmadinejad.
Furthermore, Mousavi complains that some of his monitors were not accredited by the Interior Ministry and therefore he was unable to independently monitor the elections. However, several thousand monitors representing the various candidates were accredited and that included hundreds of Mousavi's eyes and ears.
They should have documented any irregularities that, per the guidelines, should have been appended to his complaint. Nothing is appended to Mousavi's two-page complaint, however. He does allude to some 80 letters that he had previously sent to the Interior Ministry, without either appending those letters or restating their content.
Finally, item eight of the complaint cites Ahmadinejad's recourse to the support given by various members of Iran's armed forces, as well as Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki's brief campaigning on Ahmadinejad's behalf. These are legitimate complaints that necessitate serious scrutiny since by law such state individuals are forbidden to take sides. It should be noted that Mousavi can be accused of the same irregularity as his headquarters had a division devoted to the armed forces.
Given the thin evidence presented by Mousavi, there can be little chance of an annulment of the result.
BBC Caught In Mass Public Deception With Iran Propaganda
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Thursday, June 18, 2009
The BBC has again been caught engaging in mass public deception by using photographs of pro-Ahmadinejad rallies in Iran and claiming they represent anti-government protests in favor of Hossein Mousavi.
An image used by the L.A. Times on the front page of its website Tuesday showed Iranian President Ahmadinejad waving to a crowd of supporters at a public event.
In a story covering the election protests yesterday, the BBC News website used a closer shot of the same scene, but with Ahmadinejad cut out of the frame. The caption under the photograph read, Supporters of Mir Hossein Mousavi again defied a ban on protests.
The BBC photograph is clearly a similar shot of the same pro-Ahmadinejad rally featured in the L.A. Times image, yet the caption erroneously claims it represents anti-Ahmadinejad protesters.
See the screenshots below (click to enlarge).
Well I guess it sure was a popular fictional rally for Mousavi, because I later noticed while browsing the news sites a familiar picture on the BBCs lead Iran story - it shows the same crowd, zoomed in to cut out Ahmadinejad, a reader told the WhatReallyHappened website. It is clearly the same protest as in the background are the same tree and odd circular building. However, the BBC managed to outdo the LA times in quality reporting - their actual comment under the photo from the huge PRO-Ahmadinejad rally reads Supporters of Mir Hossein Mousavi again defied a ban on protests - a blatant lie and deliberately misleading description of what is actually occurring in Iran!
As soon as the truth about the misrepresented images surfaced on the WhatReallyHappened website yesterday, the BBC changed the photo caption on their original article.
This is not the first time the BBC has been caught red-handed using crude image and video framing techniques for the purposes of political propaganda.
During the fall of Baghdad in April 2003, the BBC and other mainstream news outlets broadcast closely framed footage of the mass uprising during which Iraqis, aided by U.S. troops, toppled the Saddam Hussein statue in Fardus Square.
The closely framed footage was used to imply that hundreds or thousands of Iraqis were involved in a Berlin Wall-style historic liberation, yet when wide angle shots were later published on the Internet, footage that was never broadcast on live television, the reality of the mass uprising became clear. The crowd around the statue was sparse and consisted mostly of U.S. troops and journalists. The BBC later had to admit that only dozens of Iraqis had participated in toppling the statue. The entire scene was a manufactured farce yet the propaganda technique of blocking wide-angle shots from being broadcast convinced the world that the event represented a triumphant and historic mass popular uprising on behalf of the Iraqi people.
Whatever your views on the legitimacy of Ahmadinejad and the accuracy of the Iranian election results, the fact that the Anglo-American establishment and its media organs are exploiting and fanning the flames of chaos in Iran to provoke further instability is unquestionable.
Indeed, the U.S. State Department, which routinely demonizes the Internet as a tool of extremists and terrorists when it is used to criticize U.S. foreign policy, took the unprecedented step today of requesting that Twitter.com delay planned maintenance work so that Iranian protesters can continue to use it to post images and reports of unrest, according to a London Times report.
Change for the poor means food and jobs, not a relaxed dress code or mixed recreation... Politics in Iran is a lot more about class war than religion.
Financial Times Editorial, June 15 2009
Introduction
There is hardly any election, in which the White House has a significant stake, where the electoral defeat of the pro-US candidate is not denounced as illegitimate by the entire political and mass media elite. In the most recent period, the White House and its camp followers cried foul following the free (and monitored) elections in Venezuela and Gaza, while joyously fabricating an electoral success in Lebanon despite the fact that the Hezbollah-led coalition received over 53% of the vote.
The recently concluded, June 12, 2009 elections in Iran are a classic case: The incumbent nationalist-populist President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (MA) received 63.3% of the vote (or 24.5 million votes), while the leading Western-backed liberal opposition candidate Hossein Mousavi (HM) received 34.2% or (13.2 million votes).
Irans presidential election drew a record turnout of more than 80% of the electorate, including an unprecedented overseas vote of 234,812, in which HM won 111,792 to MAs 78,300. The opposition led by HM did not accept their defeat and organized a series of mass demonstrations that turned violent, resulting in the burning and destruction of automobiles, banks, public building and armed confrontations with the police and other authorities. Almost the entire spectrum of Western opinion makers, including all the major electronic and print media, the major liberal, radical, libertarian and conservative web-sites, echoed the oppositions claim of rampant election fraud. Neo-conservatives, libertarian conservatives and Trotskyites joined the Zionists in hailing the opposition protestors as the advance guard of a democratic revolution. Democrats and Republicans condemned the incumbent regime, refused to recognize the result of the vote and praised the demonstrators efforts to overturn the electoral outcome. The New York Times, CNN, Washington Post, the Israeli Foreign Office and the entire leadership of the Presidents of the Major American Jewish Organizations called for harsher sanctions against Iran and announced Obamas proposed dialogue with Iran as dead in the water.
The Electoral Fraud Hoax
Western leaders rejected the results because they knew that their reformist candidate could not loseFor months they published daily interviews, editorials and reports from the field detailing the failures of Ahmadinejads administration; they cited the support from clerics, former officials, merchants in the bazaar and above all women and young urbanites fluent in English, to prove that Mousavi was headed for a landslide victory. A victory for Mousavi was described as a victory for the voices of moderation, at least the White Houses version of that vacuous cliché. Prominent liberal academics deduced the vote count was fraudulent because the opposition candidate, Mousavi, lost in his own ethnic enclave among the Azeris. Other academics claimed that the youth vote based on their interviews with upper and middle-class university students from the neighborhoods of Northern Tehran were overwhelmingly for the reformist candidate.
What is astonishing about the Wests universal condemnation of the electoral outcome as fraudulent is that not a single shred of evidence in either written or observational form has been presented either before or a week after the vote count. During the entire electoral campaign, no credible (or even dubious) charge of voter tampering was raised. As long as the Western media believed their own propaganda of an immanent victory for their candidate, the electoral process was described as highly competitive, with heated public debates and unprecedented levels of public activity and unhindered by public proselytizing. The belief in a free and open election was so strong that the Western leaders and mass media believed that their favored candidate would win.
The Western media relied on its reporters covering the mass demonstrations of opposition supporters, ignoring and downplaying the huge turnout for Ahmadinejad. Worse still, the Western media ignored the class composition of the competing demonstrations the fact that the incumbent candidate was drawing his support from the far more numerous poor working class, peasant, artisan and public employee sectors while the bulk of the opposition demonstrators was drawn from the upper and middle class students, business and professional class.
Moreover, most Western opinion leaders and reporters based in Tehran extrapolated their projections from their observations in the capital few venture into the provinces, small and medium size cities and villages where Ahmadinejad has his mass base of support. Moreover the oppositions supporters were an activist minority of students easily mobilized for street activities, while Ahmadinejads support drew on the majority of working youth and household women workers who would express their views at the ballot box and had little time or inclination to engage in street politics.
A number of newspaper pundits, including Gideon Rachman of the Financial Times, claim as evidence of electoral fraud the fact that Ahmadinejad won 63% of the vote in an Azeri-speaking province against his opponent, Mousavi, an ethnic Azeri. The simplistic assumption is that ethnic identity or belonging to a linguistic group is the only possible explanation of voting behavior rather than other social or class interests.
A closer look at the voting pattern in the East-Azerbaijan region of Iran reveals that Mousavi won only in the city of Shabestar among the upper and the middle classes (and only by a small margin), whereas he was soundly defeated in the larger rural areas, where the re-distributive policies of the Ahmadinejad government had helped the ethnic Azeris write off debt, obtain cheap credits and easy loans for the farmers. Mousavi did win in the West-Azerbaijan region, using his ethnic ties to win over the urban voters. In the highly populated Tehran province, Mousavi beat Ahmadinejad in the urban centers of Tehran and Shemiranat by gaining the vote of the middle and upper class districts, whereas he lost badly in the adjoining working class suburbs, small towns and rural areas.
The careless and distorted emphasis on ethnic voting cited by writers from the Financial Times and New York Times to justify calling Ahmadinejad s victory a stolen vote is matched by the medias willful and deliberate refusal to acknowledge a rigorous nationwide public opinion poll conducted by two US experts just three weeks before the vote, which showed Ahmadinejad leading by a more than 2 to 1 margin even larger than his electoral victory on June 12. This poll revealed that among ethnic Azeris, Ahmadinejad was favored by a 2 to 1 margin over Mousavi, demonstrating how class interests represented by one candidate can overcome the ethnic identity of the other candidate (Washington Post June 15, 2009). The poll also demonstrated how class issues, within age groups, were more influential in shaping political preferences than generational life style. According to this poll, over two-thirds of Iranian youth were too poor to have access to a computer and the 18-24 year olds comprised the strongest voting bloc for Ahmadinejad of all groups (Washington Porst June 15, 2009).
The only group, which consistently favored Mousavi, was the university students and graduates, business owners and the upper middle class. The youth vote, which the Western media praised as pro-reformist, was a clear minority of less than 30% but came from a highly privileged, vocal and largely English speaking group with a monopoly on the Western media. Their overwhelming presence in the Western news reports created what has been referred to as the North Tehran Syndrome, for the comfortable upper class enclave from which many of these students come. While they may be articulate, well dressed and fluent in English, they were soundly out-voted in the secrecy of the ballot box.
In general, Ahmadinejad did very well in the oil and chemical producing provinces. This may have be a reflection of the oil workers opposition to the reformist program, which included proposals to privatize public enterprises. Likewise, the incumbent did very well along the border provinces because of his emphasis on strengthening national security from US and Israeli threats in light of an escalation of US-sponsored cross-border terrorist attacks from Pakistan and Israeli-backed incursions from Iraqi Kurdistan, which have killed scores of Iranian citizens. Sponsorship and massive funding of the groups behind these attacks is an official policy of the US from the Bush Administration, which has not been repudiated by President Obama; in fact it has escalated in the lead-up to the elections.
What Western commentators and their Iranian protégés have ignored is the powerful impact which the devastating US wars and occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan had on Iranian public opinion: Ahmadinejads strong position on defense matters contrasted with the pro-Western and weak defense posture of many of the campaign propagandists of the opposition.
The great majority of voters for the incumbent probably felt that national security interests, the integrity of the country and the social welfare system, with all of its faults and excesses, could be better defended and improved with Ahmadinejad than with upper-class technocrats supported by Western-oriented privileged youth who prize individual life styles over community values and solidarity.
The demography of voting reveals a real class polarization pitting high income, free market oriented, capitalist individualists against working class, low income, community based supporters of a moral economy in which usury and profiteering are limited by religious precepts. The open attacks by opposition economists of the government welfare spending, easy credit and heavy subsidies of basic food staples did little to ingratiate them with the majority of Iranians benefiting from those programs. The state was seen as the protector and benefactor of the poor workers against the market, which represented wealth, power, privilege and corruption. The Oppositions attack on the regimes intransigent foreign policy and positions alienating the West only resonated with the liberal university students and import-export business groups. To many Iranians, the regimes military buildup was seen as having prevented a US or Israeli attack.
The scale of the oppositions electoral deficit should tell us is how out of touch it is with its own peoples vital concerns. It should remind them that by moving closer to Western opinion, they removed themselves from the everyday interests of security, housing, jobs and subsidized food prices that make life tolerable for those living below the middle class and outside the privileged gates of Tehran University.
Amhadinejads electoral success, seen in historical comparative perspective should not be a surprise. In similar electoral contests between nationalist-populists against pro-Western liberals, the populists have won. Past examples include Peron in Argentina and, most recently, Chavez of Venezuela, Evo Morales in Bolivia and even Lula da Silva in Brazil, all of whom have demonstrated an ability to secure close to or even greater than 60% of the vote in free elections. The voting majorities in these countries prefer social welfare over unrestrained markets, national security over alignments with military empires.
The consequences of the electoral victory of Ahmadinejad are open to debate. The US may conclude that continuing to back a vocal, but badly defeated, minority has few prospects for securing concessions on nuclear enrichment and an abandonment of Irans support for Hezbollah and Hamas. A realistic approach would be to open a wide-ranging discussion with Iran, and acknowledging, as Senator Kerry recently pointed out, that enriching uranium is not an existential threat to anyone. This approach would sharply differ from the approach of American Zionists, embedded in the Obama regime, who follow Israels lead of pushing for a preemptive war with Iran and use the specious argument that no negotiations are possible with an illegitimate government in Tehran which stole an election.
Recent events suggest that political leaders in Europe, and even some in Washington, do not accept the Zionist-mass media line of stolen elections. The White House has not suspended its offer of negotiations with the newly re-elected government but has focused rather on the repression of the opposition protesters (and not the vote count). Likewise, the 27 nation European Union expressed serious concern about violence and called for the aspirations of the Iranian people to be achieved through peaceful means and that freedom of expression be respected (Financial Times June 16, 2009 p.4). Except for Sarkozy of France, no EU leader has questioned the outcome of the voting.
The wild card in the aftermath of the elections is the Israeli response: Netanyahu has signaled to his American Zionist followers that they should use the hoax of electoral fraud to exert maximum pressure on the Obama regime to end all plans to meet with the newly re-elected Ahmadinejad regime.
Paradoxically, US commentators (left, right and center) who bought into the electoral fraud hoax are inadvertently providing Netanyahu and his American followers with the arguments and fabrications: Where they see religious wars, we see class wars; where they see electoral fraud, we see imperial destabilization.
As the dust settles it has become patently obvious to me that Mr. Mousavi badly misplayed his card and is simply a sore loser. The Interior Ministry has published the results in every single area and has provided the following explanation that has missed US media's attention:
1. Mr. Mousavi had some 40,676 representative at voting centers, a minimum of 2 at more than 95 percent of all the centers;
2. Mousavi was initially alloted some 45000 representatives and some were not accredited due to very late submission and insufficient information, missing photos, etc.
3. At each center, 14 observers including the candidates' observers oversaw the entire process, including inspection of empty boxes at the outset and their sealing at the end, with four locks, and then all signed a certificate of proper election, i.e., Mousavi's own men have certified the clean process.
4. the number of excess voting form 22 was actually 3 percent down compared to the previous election.
5. The official final results were announced at 4 pm the next day, 16 hours after the closure of voting. (all the other projections subject of so much media focus don't really count --KA).
5. due to summer travel/weekend, in some 50 places, mostly in resort areas of Caspian Sea, the voter turn out was more than 100 percent. There is nothing unusual about this and the official cites specific figures from a number of past elections including parliamentary elections to corroborate this. case in point, he says that in towns of Zorgan and Morv, the votes in the past presidential elections were 200 times more. Some of those areas Mr. Mousavi actually won. There were more than 60000 voting centers and therefore 50 such places is very miniscule.
Unfortunately, some US media including the CNN have made a mountain of this mole by citing "official admission of discrepancy." Fact is that this all pales in comparison with how Mousavi abused the process by calling himself the definite winner one hour after closing of votes and then calling on his followers to "stage resistance."
As someone who fully sympathizes with the basic demands of the democratic movement, I am appalled by the implicit US support for the hooligans who have torched hundreds of banks, some 300 buildings, etc., in the name of civic disobedience. US has failed to make any distiction and has one-sidedly criticized government's heavy-handed approach. Finally, the US media has come down hard on Khamenei, who consented to unique open and competitive elections only to see the egregious abuse of process by a self-declared reformist -- who is nothing but an unreconstructed Stalinist with atrocious record on free press and who in my opinion whose ego would not let him concede defeat. The media's Khamenei-bashing and romanticization of Mousavi and street mobs leaves a lot to be desired. None of this should be misinterpreted as condoning excessive violence by authorities however.
What Actually Happened in the Iranian Presidential Election?
By ESAM AL-AMIN
Since the June 12 Iranian presidential elections, Iran "expertsâ have mushroomed like bacteria in a Petri dish. So here is a quiz for all those instant experts. Which major country has elected more presidents than any in the world since 1980? Further, which nation is the only one that held ten presidential elections within thirty years of its revolution?
The answer to both questions, of course, is Iran. Since 1980, it has elected six presidents, while the U.S. is a close second with five, and France at three. In addition, the U.S. held four presidential elections within three decades of its revolution to Iranâs ten.
The Iranian elections have unified the left and the right in the West and unleashed harsh criticisms and attacks from the âoutragedâ politicians to the âindignantâ mainstream media. Even the blogosphere has joined this battle with near uniformity, on the side of Iranâs opposition, which is quite rare in cyberspace.
Much of the allegations of election fraud have been just that: unsubstantiated accusations. No one has yet been able to provide a solid shred of evidence of wide scale fraud that would have garnered eleven million votes for one candidate over his opponent.
So letâs analyze much of the evidence that is available to date.
More than thirty pre-election polls were conducted in Iran since President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his main opponent, former Prime Minister Mir Hossein Mousavi, announced their candidacies in early March 2009. The polls varied widely between the two opponents, but if one were to average their results, Ahmadinejad would still come out on top. However, some of the organizations sponsoring these polls, such as Iranian Labor News Agency and Tabnak, admit openly that they have been allies of Mousavi, the opposition, or the so-called reform movement. Their numbers were clearly tilted towards Mousavi and gave him an unrealistic advantage of over 30 per cent in some polls. If such biased polls were excluded, Ahmadinejadâs average over Mousavi would widen to about 21 points.
On the other hand, there was only one poll carried out by a western news organization. It was jointly commissioned by the BBC and ABC News, and conducted by an independent entity called the Center for Public Opinion (CPO) of the New America Foundation. The CPO has a reputation of conducting accurate opinion polls, not only in Iran, but across the Muslim world since 2005. The poll, conducted a few weeks before the elections, predicted an 89 percent turnout rate. Further, it showed that Ahmadinejad had a nationwide advantage of two to one over Mousavi.
How did this survey compare to the actual results? And what are the possibilities of wide scale election fraud?
According to official results, there were 46.2 million registered voters in Iran. The turnout was massive, as predicted by the CPO. Almost 39.2 million Iranians participated in the elections for a turn out rate of 85 percent, in which about 38.8 million ballots were deemed valid (about 400,000 ballots were left blank). Officially, President Ahmadinejad received 24.5 million votes to Mousaviâs 13.2 million votes, or 62.6 per cent to 33.8 per cent of the total votes, respectively. In fact, this result mirrored the 2005 elections when Ahmadinejad received 61.7 per cent to former President Hashemi Rafsanjaniâs 35.9 per cent in the runoff elections. Two other minor candidates, Mehdi Karroubi and Mohsen Rezaee, received the rest of the votes in this election.
Shortly after the official results were announced Mousaviâs supporters and Western political pundits cried foul and accused the government of election fraud. The accusations centered around four themes. First, although voting had been extended several hours due to the heavy turnout, it was alleged that the elections were called too quickly from the time the polls were closed, with more than 39 million ballots to count.
Second, these critics insinuated that election monitors were biased or that, in some instances, the opposition did not have its own monitors present during the count. Third, they pointed out that it was absurd to think that Mousavi, who descended from the Azerbaijan region in northwest Iran, was defeated handily in his own hometown. Fourth, the Mousavi camp charged that in some polling stations, ballots ran out and people were turned away without voting.
The next day, Mosuavi and the two other defeated candidates lodged 646 complaints to the Guardian Council, the entity charged with overseeing the integrity of the elections. The Council promised to conduct full investigations of all the complaints. By the following morning, a copy of a letter by a low-level employee in the Interior Ministry sent to Supreme Guide Ali Khamanei, was widely circulating around the world. (Western politicians and media outlets like to call him âSupreme Leaderâ but no such title exists in Iran.)
The letter stated that Mousavi had won the elections, and that Ahmadinejad had actually come in third. It also promised that the elections were being fixed in favor of Ahmadinejad per Khamaneiâs orders. It is safe to assume that the letter was a forgery since an unidentified low-level employee would not be the one addressing Ayatollah Khamanaei. Robert Fisk of The Independent reached the same conclusion by casting grave doubts that Ahmadinejad would score third â garnering less than 6 million votes in such an important election- as alleged in the forged letter.
There were a total of 45,713 ballot boxes that were set up in cities, towns and villages across Iran. With 39.2 million ballots cast, there were less than 860 ballots per box. Unlike other countries where voters can cast their ballots on several candidates and issues in a single election, Iranian voters had only one choice to consider: their presidential candidate. Why would it take more than an hour or two to count 860 ballots per poll? After the count, the results were then reported electronically to the Ministry of the Interior in Tehran.
Since 1980, Iran has suffered an eight-year deadly war with Iraq, a punishing boycott and embargo, and a campaign of assassination of dozens of its lawmakers, an elected president and a prime minister from the group Mujahideen Khalq Organization. (MKO is a deadly domestic violent organization, with headquarters in France, which seeks to topple the government by force.) Despite all these challenges, the Islamic Republic of Iran has never missed an election during its three decades. It has conducted over thirty elections nationwide. Indeed, a tradition of election orderliness has been established, much like election precincts in the U.S. or boroughs in the U.K. The elections in Iran are organized, monitored and counted by teachers and professionals including civil servants and retirees (again much like the U.S.)
There has not been a tradition of election fraud in Iran. Say what you will about the system of the Islamic Republic, but its elected legislators have impeached ministers and âborkedâ nominees of several Presidents, including Ahmadinejad. Rubberstamps, they are not. In fact, former President Mohammad Khatami, considered one of the leading reformists in Iran, was elected president by the people, when the interior ministry was run by archconservatives. He won with over 70 percent of the vote, not once, but twice.
When it comes to elections, the real problem in Iran is not fraud but candidatesâ access to the ballots (a problem not unique to the country, just ask Ralph Nader or any other third party candidate in the U.S.) It is highly unlikely that there was a huge conspiracy involving tens of thousands of teachers, professionals and civil servants that somehow remained totally hidden and unexposed.
Moreover, while Ahmadinejad belongs to an active political party that has already won several elections since 2003, Mousavi is an independent candidate who emerged on the political scene just three months ago, after a 20-year hiatus. It was clear during the campaign that Ahmadinejad had a nationwide campaign operation. He made over sixty campaign trips throughout Iran in less than twelve weeks, while his opponent campaigned only in the major cities, and lacked a sophisticated campaign apparatus.
It is true that Mousavi has an Azeri background. But the CPO poll mentioned above, and published before the elections, noted that âits survey indicated that only 16 per cent of Azeri Iranians will vote for Mr. Mousavi. By contrast, 31 per cent of the Azeris claim they will vote for Mr. Ahmadinejad.â In the end, according to official results, the election in that region was much closer than the overall result. In fact, Mousavi won narrowly in the West Azerbaijan province but lost the region to Ahmadinejad by a 45 to 52 per cent margin (or 1.5 to 1.8 million votes).
However, the double standard applied by Western news agencies is striking. Richard Nixon trounced George McGovern in his native state of South Dakota in the 1972 elections. Had Al Gore won his home state of Tennessee in 2000, no one would have cared about a Florida recount, nor would there have been a Supreme Court case called Bush v. Gore. If Vice-Presidential candidate John Edwards had won the states he was born and raised in (South and North Carolina), President John Kerry would now be serving his second term. But somehow, in Western newsrooms Middle Eastern people choose their candidates not on merit, but on the basis of their âtribe.â
The fact that minor candidates such as Karroubi would garner fewer votes than expected, even in their home regions as critics charge, is not out of the ordinary. Many voters reach the conclusion that they do not want to waste their votes when the contest is perceived to be between two major candidates. Karroubi indeed received far fewer votes this time around than he did in 2005, including in his hometown. Likewise, Ross Perot lost his home state of Texas to Bob Dole of Kansas in 1996, while in 2004, Ralph Nader received one eighth of the votes he had four years earlier.
Some observers note that when the official results were being announced, the margin between the candidates held steady throughout the count. In fact, this is no mystery. Experts say that generally when 3-5 per cent of the votes from a given region are actually counted, there is a 95 per cent confidence level that such result will hold firm. As for the charge that ballots ran out and some people were turned away, it is worth mentioning that voting hours were extended four times in order to allow as many people as possible the opportunity to vote. But even if all the people who did not vote, had actually voted for Mousavi (a virtual impossibility), that would be 6.93 million additional votes, much less than the 11 million vote difference between the top two candidates.
Ahmadinejad is certainly not a sympathetic figure. He is an ideologue, provocative, and sometimes behaving imprudently. But to characterize the struggle in Iran as a battle between democratic forces and a âdictator,â is to exhibit total ignorance of Iranâs internal dynamics, or to deliberately distort them. There is no doubt that there is a significant segment of Iranian society, concentrated around major metropolitan areas, and comprising many young people, that passionately yearns for social freedoms. They are understandably angry because their candidate came up short. But it would be a huge mistake to read this domestic disagreement as an âuprisingâ against the Islamic Republic, or as a call to embark on a foreign policy that would accommodate the West at the expense of Iranâs nuclear program or its vital interests.
Nations display respect to other nations only when they respect their sovereignty. If any nation, for instance, were to dictate the United Statesâ economic, foreign or social policies, Americans would be indignant. When France, under President Chirac opposed the American adventure in Iraq in 2003, some U.S. Congressmen renamed a favorite fast food from French Fries to âFreedom Fries.â They made it known that the French were unwelcome in the U.S.
The U.S. has a legacy of interference in Iranâs internal affairs, notably when it toppled the democratically elected government of Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh in 1953. This act, of which most Americans are unaware, is ingrained in every Iranian from childhood. It is the main cause of much of their perpetual anger at the U.S. It took 56 years for an American president to acknowledge this illegal act, when Obama did so earlier this month in Cairo.
Therefore, it would be a colossal mistake to interfere in Iranâs internal affairs yet again. President Obama is wise to leave this matter to be resolved by the Iranians themselves. Political expediency by the Republicans or pro-Israel Democrats will be extremely dangerous and will yield serious repercussions. Such reckless conduct by many in the political class and the media appears to be a blatant attempt to demonize Iran and its current leadership, in order to justify any future military attack by Israel if Iran does not give up its nuclear ambition.
President Obamaâs declarations in Cairo are now being aptly recalled. Regarding Iran, he said, âI recognize it will be hard to overcome decades of mistrust, but we will proceed with courage, rectitude, and resolve. There will be many issues to discuss between our two countries, and we are willing to move forward without preconditions on the basis of mutual respect.â
But the first sign of respect is to let the Iranians sort out their differences without any overt âor covert âinterference.
Esam Al-Amin can be reached at alamin1919@gmail.com
They dont wanna hear that, They would rather have this fantasy while safe abroad , this fantasy of Iranians with western hairstyles, chanting azadi that is freedom in the streets , while being attacked by Arabs loyal to the regime, when in reality the crowds are shouting Ya Ali Ya Hossein, Allahu akbar , while being shot by Iranian Militiamen and possibly Mko terrorists.
Its very sickening how they turned the death of Heda into political spin, with "eye witnesses" seeing an arab man shooting at close range with a pistol , with her father shouting freedom, In reality this was an innocent victim shot from a distance by a rifle to her lungs, with her music teacher standing beside her.
Do not forget the US recently funded 400 Million to overthrow this regime in Iran, one must wonder what one gets for 400 million...
Here are the 8 main points I foudn quite interesting and have changed my persective a little. These are summarised below for those who didn't want to read all the above.
Your thoughts welcome...
Cheers
1. Change for the poor means food and jobs, not a relaxed dress code or mixed recreation... Politics in Iran is a lot more about class war than religion. --Financial Times Editorial, June 15 2009
2. most Western opinion leaders and reporters based in Tehran extrapolated their projections from their observations in the capital few venture into the provinces, small and medium size cities and villages where Ahmadinejad has his mass base of support.
3. At each center, 14 observers including the candidates' observers oversaw the entire process, including inspection of empty boxes at the outset and their sealing at the end, with four locks, and then all signed a certificate of proper election, i.e., Mousavi's own men have certified the clean process.
4. Due to summer travel/weekend, in some 50 places, mostly in resort areas of Caspian Sea, the voter turn out was more than 100 percent. There is nothing unusual about this and the official cites specific figures from a number of past elections including parliamentary elections corroborate this. Case in point, he says that in towns of Zorgan and Morv, the votes in the past presidential elections were 200 times more. Some of those areas Mr. Mousavi actually won. There were more than 60000 voting centers and therefore 50 such places are very miniscule.
5. It is true that Mousavi has an Azeri background. But the CPO poll mentioned above, and published before the elections, noted that its survey indicated that only 16 per cent of Azeri Iranians will vote for Mr. Mousavi. By contrast, 31 per cent of the Azeris claim they will vote for Mr. Ahmadinejad The simplistic assumption is that ethnic identity or belonging to a linguistic group is the only possible explanation of voting behavior rather than other social or class interests.
6. one poll carried out by a western news organization. It was jointly commissioned by the BBC and ABC News, and conducted by an independent entity called the Center for Public Opinion (CPO) of the New America Foundationconducted a few weeks before the elections, predicted an 89 percent turnout rate. Further, it showed that Ahmadinejad had a nationwide advantage of two to one over Mousavi.
7. The great majority of voters for the incumbent probably felt that national security interests, the integrity of the country and the social welfare system, with all of its faults and excesses, could be better defended and improved with Ahmadinejad than with upper-class technocrats supported by Western-oriented privileged youth who prize individual life styles over community values and solidarity.
8. Amhadinejads electoral success, seen in historical comparative perspective should not be a surprise. In similar electoral contests between nationalist-populists against pro-Western liberals, the populists have won. Past examples include Peron in Argentina and, most recently, Chavez of Venezuela, Evo Morales in Bolivia and even Lula da Silva in Brazil, all of whom have demonstrated an ability to secure close to or even greater than 60% of the vote in free elections. The voting majorities in these countries prefer social welfare over unrestrained markets, national security over alignments with military empires.
Abduallh open your eyes, all the above don't change 2 simple facts that ARE DOCUMENTED
1: 4 candiaites took part, 2 of them toook 97% of the vote and the other two togther took 3% of the vote. Is that normal?
2: When counting started, Interior minstry after 2 hours announced a PARTIAL result based on the number of votes counted so far Ahmadi =x%, Moussavi =y% . Amazingly, after 24 hours where they calimed all 40 million votes had been counted by HAND, the exact same ratios appeared as final. Again I ask you is that normal?
of course not, I am not disputing the figures clearly something bogus happened.
However Ahmadinejaad won, He was favored going in, I just do not believe The IRI regime would be stupid enough for an Iraqi or North Korean election with 99% going to their favorite.
I also do not think the Mullahs are stupid enough to stiff the IRCH commander, something has happened, just what remains to be seen, Now 17 - 80 people are dead, No one questions why or how this happened are you Iranians so willing to say No foreign state targets or plots to use any measurable dissent in our nation for their own good?
Ahmadinejad was NOT favored going in. Three weeks before the election, people were called at their homes to be asked who they were going to vote for. A system that doesn't even work in the West, let alone in the Islamic Republic. More than 53 percent of the people declined to answer and the latest polls right before the election favored Moussavi. Combine this with the fact that all 40 million votes were counted after only 3 hours, that Khamenei endorsed Ahmadinejad before the Guardian Council did, that 14 million ballots have become untraceable and that all the other contestants have lost in their home towns and you have fraud written all over the elections. Also, where are the massive number Ahmadinejad supporters? They should outnumber Moussavi 2 to 1.
------------------------------
#Neda
------------------------------
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. -- Stephen Roberts
------------------------------
This message has been edited by Koz4k on Jun 25, 2009 11:04 AM
That is what I have always said for all I know Ahmadi may have actually won it and these elections are now tainted. Due to at least their own incompetence and arrogance of the leader, he was not prepared to order a full count or another election. Now they have painted themselves in the corner and have lost all credibility. Guradian council even admitted that 3 million out of the 40 million votes came from 50 town and cities where the number of votes cast is greater number of voters, but there is no fraud!!!
Even if there was to be a re run, would any Iranian believe any results published by the Interior Minstry and GC, especially when head of GC and Khameani BEFORE the election have backed a candidate?
As far as outside influence goes I honestly don't know, after the election it is a definate possibilty, just look at CNN's gleeeful 24/7 coverage. I can identify 3 internal influene/forec grouping
1: Leader's group backing Ahmadi
2: Leaders opposition, the biggest theif in Iranian history, Rafsanjani backing Moussavi ( high probabilty that Rafi wants to become leader)
3: Rezaie represented a third corrupt group, namely Sepah (the guards), Sepah heas become an extremly important commercial enterprise and their aim is to push Iran to become like Pakistan where the armed forces are the biggest commercial enterprise and in fact they call the shots. Their usuall mode of operation is to get very favourable loans and gurantees from the goverment, for example artifically lowered exchange rate, then buy goods from abroad, bring it in and sell them at much higher price. They also have a HUGE contruction company and get the great amount of infrastructure construction and again buy and sell huge deal of machinery and get favourable contract pricing versus other construction companies. Since ahmadi came to power 5 years ago and due to his stance abroad, Sepah have been labelled a terrorist organization and their assets abroad have been frozen, tand they cannot trade and import goods.
This message has been edited by fariborz_57 on Jun 25, 2009 11:01 AM This message has been edited by fariborz_57 on Jun 25, 2009 11:00 AM This message has been edited by fariborz_57 on Jun 25, 2009 11:00 AM
1: 4 candiaites took part, 2 of them toook 97% of the vote and the other two togther took 3% of the vote. Is that normal?
Im not personally convinced that this is an extraordinary occurrence. There were essentially two camps; the conservatives and the reformists that were seen to represent two main social classes in Iran. Why wouldn't people choose to vote for the main candidate, perceived as representing their particular class, as opposed to splitting the vote and risking the consequences of division of votes?
From above:
''The fact that minor candidates such as Karroubi would garner fewer votes than expected, even in their home regions as critics charge, is not out of the ordinary. Many voters reach the conclusion that they do not want to waste their votes when the contest is perceived to be between two major candidates. Karroubi indeed received far fewer votes this time around than he did in 2005, including in his hometown. Likewise, Ross Perot lost his home state of Texas to Bob Dole of Kansas in 1996, while in 2004, Ralph Nader received one eighth of the votes he had four years earlier.''
2: When counting started, Interior minstry after 2 hours announced a PARTIAL result based on the number of votes counted so far Ahmadi =x%, Moussavi =y% . Amazingly, after 24 hours where they calimed all 40 million votes had been counted by HAND, the exact same ratios appeared as final. Again I ask you is that normal?
I think these points were quite well touched on by Esam Alamin in the last article. Again Im not sure this is extraordinary really:
a) ''Some observers note that when the official results were being announced, the margin between the candidates held steady throughout the count. In fact, this is no mystery. Experts say that generally when 3-5 per cent of the votes from a given region are actually counted, there is a 95 per cent confidence level that such result will hold firm.''
b) ''There were a total of 45,713 ballot boxes that were set up in cities, towns and villages across Iran. With 39.2 million ballots cast, there were less than 860 ballots per box. Unlike other countries where voters can cast their ballots on several candidates and issues in a single election, Iranian voters had only one choice to consider: their presidential candidate. Why would it take more than an hour or two to count 860 ballots per poll? After the count, the results were then reported electronically to the Ministry of the Interior in Tehran.''
2: Leaders opposition, the biggest theif in Iranian history, Rafsanjani backing Moussavi ( high probabilty that Rafi wants to become leader)
3: Rezaie represented a third corrupt group, namely Sepah (the guards), Sepah heas become an extremly important commercial enterprise and their aim is to push Iran to become like Pakistan where the armed forces are the biggest commercial enterprise and in fact they call the shots. Their usuall mode of operation is to get very favourable loans and gurantees from the goverment, for example artifically lowered exchange rate, then buy goods from abroad, bring it in and sell them at much higher price. They also have a HUGE contruction company and get the great amount of infrastructure construction and again buy and sell huge deal of machinery and get favourable contract pricing versus other construction companies. Since ahmadi came to power 5 years ago and due to his stance abroad, Sepah have been labelled a terrorist organization and their assets abroad have been frozen, tand they cannot trade and import goods.
I have said the same things myself with the exception of the IRCG, I said this was a struggle between a Billionaire and an Imposed Ruler however after seeing and reading more I wonder if Khameni isnt near death he looks sick , and why has Ahmadinejaad/IRCG arrested Abassi for meddleing in the elections??
I totaly agree with your rationale however with the arrest of dr Abassi is it possible there is a Ahmadinejad/Ircg faction and the Ayyatollah Khameni is not as in control as he sees, ie a prisoner in a tower?
I am myself an admirer of Ayyatollah Montazeri is it possible to find any communications from him on what is gooing on now?
- Where are the missing 14 million ballots?
- How is it possible that all the contestants, except Ahmadinejad, have lost in their home towns?
- Why did Khamenei endorse Ahmadinejad before the Guardian Council did.
- Why did the latest polls show that Mousavi was favored?
Also, is there any factor, or a combination of factots that you WOULD consider an "extraordinary occurrence" since all these have failed.
------------------------------
#Neda
------------------------------
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. -- Stephen Roberts
Oke, let's assume that as our starting point, that they were about equally popular. That still wouldn't explain why Ahmadinejad received 63% of the votes.
------------------------------
#Neda
------------------------------
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. -- Stephen Roberts
which is why Ive said something bogus has happened.
If the Ahmadinejaad/Khameni faction was trying to steal the election they would have had the sense to make it a Khurrabi 1-2% Razzeghe 5% Ahmadinejaad 47% Mousavi 44%....
Instead we have incompetence First its 3 million votes now you say 13 million votes.
The protests are not so much about election fraud as they are about general discontent and a cry for freedom and mismanagement of the economy, and Iranian people generally speaking are muslims there is no denying that why you do hear cries of Allaho Akbar in the streets. If people where happy with the way things are run in Iran especially when it comes to the way the economy is run and astronomical sums of money that are stolen by these people on a daily basis we would not have seen half of the public outcry we saw now.
However being a muslim and a maffioso is not the same thing, and I find it amusing how some "muslim" people living in the west support the regime simply because of some verbal bravados against the great satan and some support to hezbollah. If you find freedom to be such a laughable thing you should move to Iran and try living there after having enjoyed a life time of freedom and liberty in the west. So easy to be an armchair general with infinite wisdom and judging people who are willing to risk their hide for what they believe in far be it for their opinion to matter about their own country lol.
and no they dont need to hire arabs to their skull bashing, I have never believed in that rumor they dont exactly lack manpower.
I dont know the answer to that question and havent come across an official response to this as of yet. Some say this could be used to steal the election for Ahmadinejad. But I wonder, if:
53 million ballots printed
46 million eligible voters
39 million voted
Ahamdinejad scored 24.5 million
Musavi scored 13.2 million
Difference = 24.5 minus 13.2 = 11.3 million
For the 14 million purportedly unaccounted ballots only 7 million votes are eligible for casting (i.e. 46 minus 39 = 7 million). Even if we offered these votes to Musavi this would still yield 20.2 million votes which is below the 24.5 scored by the incumbent. Am I missing something here at all?
- How is it possible that all the contestants, except Ahmadinejad, have lost in their home towns?
Its worth reading through the articles above. I hope you don't mind me quoting:
The simplistic assumption is that ethnic identity or belonging to a linguistic group is the only possible explanation of voting behavior rather than other social or class interests.
It is true that Mousavi has an Azeri background. But the CPO poll mentioned above, and published before the elections, noted that its survey indicated that only 16 per cent of Azeri Iranians will vote for Mr. Mousavi. By contrast, 31 per cent of the Azeris claim they will vote for Mr. Ahmadinejad
This poll revealed that among ethnic Azeris, Ahmadinejad was favored by a 2 to 1 margin over Mousavi, demonstrating how class interests represented by one candidate can overcome the ethnic identity of the other candidate (Washington Post June 15, 2009). The poll also demonstrated how class issues, within age groups, were more influential in shaping political preferences than generational life style.
A closer look at the voting pattern in the East-Azerbaijan region of Iran reveals that Mousavi won only in the city of Shabestar among the upper and the middle classes (and only by a small margin), whereas he was soundly defeated in the larger rural areas, where the re-distributive policies of the Ahmadinejad government had helped the ethnic Azeris write off debt, obtain cheap credits and easy loans for the farmers. Mousavi did win in the West-Azerbaijan region, using his ethnic ties to win over the urban voters. In the highly populated Tehran province, Mousavi beat Ahmadinejad in the urban centers of Tehran and Shemiranat by gaining the vote of the middle and upper class districts, whereas he lost badly in the adjoining working class suburbs, small towns and rural areas.
- Why did Khamenei endorse Ahmadinejad before the Guardian Council did.
Im not aware that Khamenei explicitly endorsed Ahamdinejad by name. Im only aware that he advised the people that although all candidated were fit to lead some may be better than others and that people should vote for the candidate who possesses decent qualities and morality. I think this is sound advise and indeed some may associate a particular candidate which such traits as honesty and simplicity but this does not amount to recommending a particular candidate. This is sound and neutral advice anywhere in the world and does not have to be misconstrued as being biased as far as Im concerned.
- Why did the latest polls show that Mousavi was favored?
The polls from Iran have been mixed as far as Ive seen and you can see this if you scroll down to the table in the link below:
According to this, the nationwide poll conducted by ISPA on 10th June found Ahmadinejad leading by a fiar amount.
Also, is there any factor, or a combination of factots that you WOULD consider an "extraordinary occurrence" since all these have failed.
As far as Im concerned as an interested observer, Ive read about a lot of allegations and was swayed by them initially but found that there is still no strong evidence to indicate the elections were a fraud. The other side of the story is equally if not more plausible.
The outcomes you cite may not be normal to the causal observer but neither are they outside the realms of possibility. Especially considering many of the above points which have been proposed to explain what mainstream media has been eager to ram down our throats.
All in all and hitherto I dont find the elections to have been a sham as I did before nor has any hard evidence been presented to this effect, notwithstanding the numerous cries of irregulatories. Whatever the case, lets hope the truth surfaces sooner or later.
Cheers.
This message has been edited by Feoniks on Jun 25, 2009 3:00 PM This message has been edited by Feoniks on Jun 25, 2009 2:59 PM This message has been edited by Feoniks on Jun 25, 2009 2:59 PM
@ Abdullah, the 3 million discrepancy in ballots the Guardian Council is referring is not the same as the 14 million untraceable ballots.
Feoniks,
I dont know the answer to that question and havent come across an official response to this as of yet. (...)
==
You haven't come across an official response, because there hasn't been an official response. The question remains unanswered.
Its worth reading through the articles above. I hope you don't mind me quoting: (...)
==
I have read it, but again I must state that no questions are answered. The article makes merely makes a host of assumptions, all of which seem plausible to the author. Which includes the use of an unreliable poll.
"As more information becomes available, it looks likelier and likelier that there was massive rigging of the polls. Candidate Mehdi Karroubi, for example, got 55.5 percent of the votes in his home province in the last presidential election in 2005. This time, according to the official figures, he got only 4.6 percent, with most of the remainder shifting to Ahmadinejad. That is not remotely credible, nor could it have happened by accident."
Im not aware that Khamenei explicitly endorsed Ahamdinejad by name. Im only aware that he advised the people that although all candidated were fit to lead some may be better than others and that people should vote for the candidate who possesses decent qualities and morality. I think this is sound advise and indeed some may associate a particular candidate which such traits as honesty and simplicity but this does not amount to recommending a particular candidate. This is sound and neutral advice anywhere in the world and does not have to be misconstrued as being biased as far as Im concerned.
Two days later of course, he ordered the Guardian Council to pointlessly "investigate" the election results. Why?
The polls from Iran have been mixed as far as Ive seen and you can see this if you scroll down to the table in the link below:
==
In other words, the polls are unreliable?
As far as Im concerned as an interested observer, Ive read about a lot of allegations and was swayed by them initially but found that there is still no strong evidence to indicate the elections were a fraud. The other side of the story is equally if not more plausible.
The outcomes you cite may not be normal to the causal observer but neither are they outside the realms of possibility. Especially considering many of the above points which have been proposed to explain what mainstream media has been eager to ram down our throats.
All in all and hitherto I dont find the elections to have been a sham as I did before nor has any hard evidence been presented to this effect, notwithstanding the numerous cries of irregulatories. Whatever the case, lets hope the truth surfaces sooner or later.
==
That's not what I've asked. My question was, what factor, or combination of factors are necessary to convince you that the outcome of an election is an "extraordinary occurrence"? Because if you consider all these occurrences to be ordinary, in what form would you require "hard evidence" to make it extraordinary?
------------------------------
#Neda
------------------------------
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. -- Stephen Roberts
------------------------------
This message has been edited by Koz4k on Jun 25, 2009 5:35 PM This message has been edited by Koz4k on Jun 25, 2009 3:34 PM This message has been edited by Koz4k on Jun 25, 2009 3:28 PM
>.I wonder if Khameni isnt near death he looks sick , and why has Ahmadinejaad/IRCG arrested Abassi for meddleing in the elections??
Yes that would explain things although so many people have been arrested that I think it is just a far flung net and it is also time to settle scores. Khameneis health is always bad, nowadays there are some rumors going around to the effect that he is close to kicking the bucket.
>>is it possible there is a Ahmadinejad/Ircg faction and the Ayyatollah Khameni is not as in control as he sees, ie a prisoner in a tower?
No I think he still has a hell of lot of power, to start with he controls the streets and I think he can still count on a lot of support in IRGC, even though their command structure seems a bit split.
>>I am myself an admirer of Ayyatollah Montazeri is it possible to find any communications from him on what is gooing on now?
Among the top clerics he certainly has the best reputation or at least we can say that up to now maybe he has not had the opportunity to become corrupt. All the big ones in assembly of experts and GC are so corrupt that you cannot count on any of them doing the right thing without ulterior motives. At the moment I dont believe there are enough people who believe in separation of religion and political power to cause a full upheaval leading to 2nd republic. As such the role of Velayet Fagih stays and among the top clerics Montazeri would be my choice to lead it provided he performs sweeping reforms. For example GC under the constitution does not have any role on vetting candidates for any election. This role was given to them by Khamenei to solidify his and clerics power base. Again even if assembly of experts who up to now have only been a rubber stamp authority for the leader ever decide to choose another one, I doubt Montazeri without peoples and military's help would have any chance. All channels of communication with Montazeri have been severely limited.
This message has been edited by fariborz_57 on Jun 25, 2009 8:43 PM This message has been edited by fariborz_57 on Jun 25, 2009 8:29 PM
Quote: kozaz
"@ Abdullah, the 3 million discrepancy in ballots the Guardian Council is referring is not the same as the 14 million untraceable ballots.
Feoniks,
I dont know the answer to that question and havent come across an official response to this as of yet. (...)
==
You haven't come across an official response, because there hasn't been an official response. The question remains unanswered."
Let me answer that for you illiterates in farsi, yet vocally and superficially "proud of being Persian".
The Guardian Council at no no moment has declared that there is a 3 million vote discrepancy, this is what western media has made from it. If you actually understood farsi and listened to what the Guardian council said, you would know they said, and I quote from memory: the higher voter turnout in these 50 towns (not cities) is because of the fact that many people travel to these small towns during weekend holiday and people can vote at whatever voting station of their choosing, however, even if we were to say that all these votes were invalid, we would only reach 3 million votes.
What the spokesman of the guardian council meant was that even if we were to invalidate these 3 million votes from these 50 towns, the results would still not change.
Now I will advice you one thing kozaz, go look up the video in farsi on youtube and find someone who understands farsi to translate it for you.
And if you were able to understand English, you would have understood that we're not discussing the 3 million votes the Guardian Council was referring to, but the untraceable 14 million ballots.
------------------------------
#Neda
------------------------------
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. -- Stephen Roberts
So let me advice you one thing FlowerOfFanatisicm, LEARN ENGLISH.
------------------------------
#Neda
------------------------------
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. -- Stephen Roberts
14 million votes? wow, you people have really lost it... no connection with reality what-so-ever... the funny thing is that from those 40 million votes, not one is yours...
Arash, I read a post by in which you supposedly speak transliterated farsi. However, as a person fluent in farsi I had no idea what you were trying to say. I think you need some (a few hundred maybe) lessons in farsi.
I see many people on this forum act like they're proud of their heritage, yet they are some of the most disconnected from heritage people I have come across. If you are "proud to be Persian", at least learn the language so you don't embarrass yourself.
This message has been edited by FollowerOfRahbar on Jun 25, 2009 10:43 PM
@FollowerOfRahbar, I will try, I am referring to attempts to breakup crowds gathering for protests following ban by Khamenei, I realize that they where illegal protests but do you not feel they went overboard.
Furthermore do you think that the ban on protests where the right move to make or should they have let the crowds continues to voice their discontent with the results of the election ( mind you I am not making any judgment on the verdict of the election in question )
To answer that question I think its pertinent I separate the protesters:
1. The first two days involved primarily foolish youngsters and some real thugs. The highest estimates were 2000 people. The amount of normal voters among them were minimal. These thugs continued their troubling behavior until the end.
2. The third day until Thursday involved a (few) hundred thousand normal mousavi voters according to highest, yet still acceptable & realistic, estimates. Though the thugs were still among these people.
3. After Friday there were even more real trouble makers. I would say the same amount as the first two days.
The reaction until Friday was very mild and this was I think because of the general approach of Mr. Ahmadinejad and his government to such things. He basically has an "I don't care, say and do what you want" approach.
I think the country was caught off guard and I see this as a healthy experience we can learn a lot from. Even though I have seen videos of weeks before the elections where Mousavi supporters chant, "qiyamat be pa mikonim" if Mousavi loses, influential figures behind Mousavi's have been recorded similar alarming things, and the intelligence agency warned Mousavi of attempts at a 'velvet revolution' would be crushed and that the IRGC has been informed. Even with all these events taking place the country was still caught off guard. I think mainly because it was Mousavi and not someone else.
The group of thugs not only ruined it for the peaceful people, but also gave a very bad image to Iran. I think they should have been crushed arrested and fast. A good example would be South-Korea, for every protester there will be 10 heavily protected police ready. I think the reaction to these people was very mild until it became clear these people are not being reasonable.
The atmosphere even before the elections during these Mousavi gatherings was very alarming and unhealthy. The atmosphere these people created after the elections was an atmosphere of mistrust and many foreign elements are involved. He was talking with such conviction of winning to these people and saying if he lost then there has been rigging... these people have been brainwashed like that for a very long time. Mousavi entrenched himself, and there was no way out without loss of face. As he said, "there is no way back"... it really is like that for him, there is no way back... he has committed political suicide.. it would be the same in any other country.
Our democracy is very young and we have not experienced any such things even though during every election for the past thirty years people have claimed vote rigging, no candidate took it as far as this. You have to understand, Mousavi is a person who in 1986 used to brush off all and any allegations of vote rigging saying the system makes it impossible. This is the same voting system, with even more rules that we are talking about. I know of a person who takes part in vote counting. Counting votes in Iran is done by selected people that are known to be trustable, they re always the same people, unless someone needs to be replaced. So the same people that counted during the period of Khatami were counting now. When the votes are being counted, 7 people are looking at you, when the results are being entered in the PC to be sent, 4 people will be around the person looking at every bit of information being entered. Other than the governmental bodies that are there to check everything, there are representatives of all the candidates (if they can offer enough people). I think the Guradian council made a valid point, of the 40.000 representatives of Mousavi at the balot boxes, not one of them has filled or given a formal form of something going wrong at their station. The things Mousavi mentions might be worth something "on the street" but in an official environment its worthless. All in all, these protests were more of a proof that barely anyone agrees with Mousavi than proof of the opposite. Out of 13 million Mousavi voters only a few hundred thousand (or lets say 4 million to satisfy some people) showed up?
So anyway, I think the reaction was mild because it was unexpected, and then they tried to control it fast. But this is a good experience as I have said.
Do I think they should be allowed to continue protest? No, not under the current atmosphere.
This message has been edited by FollowerOfRahbar on Jun 25, 2009 11:45 PM
14 million votes? wow, you people have really lost it... no connection with reality what-so-ever... the funny thing is that from those 40 million votes, not one is yours...
==
Your inability to read English or follow the news has nothing to do with our "connection with realitly". Also, why the f*ck would I want to vote, if my vote goes straight into the garbage bin?
------------------------------
#Neda
------------------------------
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. -- Stephen Roberts
Also, where are your sources. How the hell do you know who is a thug and who isn't or what numbers are "acceptable"? What about the innocent people that have been killed by the government? Were all of them "thugs"?
By the way, where are you right now Flower?
------------------------------
#Neda
------------------------------
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. -- Stephen Roberts
------------------------------
This message has been edited by Koz4k on Jun 26, 2009 12:21 AM This message has been edited by Koz4k on Jun 26, 2009 12:18 AM
@Pasdar_E-Enghelab<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
>>I think the country was caught off guard and I see this as a healthy experience we can learn a lot from. <<
Yes I am sure all those people in hospitals and the dead who were mainly attacked by YOUR fook face Basij brothers agree with the above.
>>The group of thugs not only ruined it for the peaceful people, but also gave a very bad image to Iran. I think they should have been crushed arrested and fast.
Yes I am sure you do BOY, now tell me are you absolutely sure no innocent was injured/hurt/killed by your fook face Basij brothers ? You know BOY, when someone is riding a motor bike and wielding a club it is slightly difficult to just hit the thugs. By the way BOY have you heard of a nasty thug who just happened to die and her death was filmed and we all saw? Shyt what is her name BOY, any ideas? What amazes me BOY is that not only she was a thug but was surrounded by so many thugs and they all played their roles to perfection, everyone on site claimed one of YOUR fook face basij brothers did it, how do you account for that BOY?
One final question BOY, given the following comparison between legal powers of your beloved Rahbar and the Shah, could you tell us peasants what exactly is the significant difference between the two
1: Shah was head of armed forces and intelligence, so is YOUR beloved
2: Shah could dismiss the Majlis, so can YOUR beloved
3:Shah could appoint and dismiss any minster or the prime minster, YOUR beloved can dismiss president and in fact minsters appointed by him and approved by Majlis
4: Shah was the only person that could declare war, same with YOUR beloved
5: Shah could refuse any law passed by Majlis, so can YOUR beloved
6: Any insult to Shah had penalty under the law, so it is with YOUR beloved
7:In Shahs time the above insult was never defined and it was used as an excuse to take anyone who criticized anything about him and the goverment to SAVAK and have their butts become intimately familiar with a coke bottle , heard of that BOY? So it is with YOUR beloved.
You know BOY, why dont you change your id to FollowerOfShah .
You sure you havent sold yourself cheap BOY?
You may be quite stupid, but dont think for a second that we all are
This message has been edited by fariborz_57 on Jun 26, 2009 3:16 AM
"Yes I am sure all those people in hospitals and the dead who were mainly attacked by YOUR fook face Basij brothers agree with the above."
I'm sure they do not. There are nearly 600 police in the hospitals and 8 have been killed. They don't feel happy about it at all. However, I'm talking from a general perspective.
"Yes I am sure you do BOY, now tell me are you absolutely sure no innocent was injured/hurt/killed by your fook face Basij brothers?"
Most of the innocent people who got hurt or killed were police. Many of the civilian deaths were not caused by the police. Some innocent civilians who were at the wrong place in the wrong time also got hurt. However, a protester who burns buses and attacks a police station should definitely not be surprised that he might be clubbed right after. Certain people need to be beat some sense into.
"You know BOY, when someone is riding a motor bike and wielding a club it is slightly difficult to just hit the thugs."
Brave were they not? Real lion hearts, usually it was a group of two or three police approaching a group of hundreds of protesters.
"By the way BOY have you heard of a nasty thug who just happened to die and her death was filmed and we all saw? Shyt what is her name BOY, any ideas? What amazes me BOY is that not only she was a thug but was surrounded by so many thugs and they all played their roles to perfection, everyone on site claimed one of YOUR fook face basij brothers did it, how do you account for that BOY?"
It is only logical that people die through a variety of reasons during such large protests. Anyone on the streets who does not realize this is not sane/rational. However, there is only one incident where a police shot at protesters, and thats when thugs attacked a police station, the other incidents should not be blamed on the police. I'm very surprised the death toll was so low and no important figures were shot in the process.
"One final question BOY, given the following comparison between legal powers of your beloved Rahbar and the Shah, could you tell us peasants what exactly is the significant difference between the two"
1: Shah was head of armed forces and intelligence, so is YOUR beloved"
After the experience with Banisadr, the first president of Iran of whom we found out he was a member of MKO (in case you didnt know), who was the commander-in-chief of the military and did everything in his power to make Iran lose. The official (the person who has the final say) became the valiyeh faqih. However, what the military does or does not do is not up to one person anymore, it is an agreement between a group of people in charge, valiyeh faqih, the president, chief of joint staffs of all branches, etc.
"2: Shah could dismiss the Majlis, so can YOUR beloved
3:Shah could appoint and dismiss any minster or the prime minster, YOUR beloved can dismiss president and in fact minsters appointed by him and approved by Majlis"
Theoretically he could do that if he is to go to the very borders of what he is allowed to do. However, that would be a very special/unusual case. However, his job is not to be directly interfering in such affairs and he would not. The Shah is a nut case, he even handed over his most loyal people to us for execution because he was afraid.
"4: Shah was the only person that could declare war, same with YOUR beloved"
Well you have to understand that Iran is a velayate faqih. It's a combination of Islamic law with some self-made laws in other areas and that is why we have bodies consisting of jurists and Islamic scholars who decide what the limits of our constitution are. However, in essence Iran is an Islamic country and the question of whether we can declare war is a religious one. Still though, this would be decided by a group of people and not by one person.
"5: Shah could refuse any law passed by Majlis, so can YOUR beloved"
Again in theory yes, however this is not his job. We have two bodies called the expediency council and the guardian council that are responsible to look at any laws passed and say whether they cross the borders of our constitution or not. It is not different from any country you reside in, however different bodies in those countries are responsible for that and the president can veto laws too in those countries.
"6: Any insult to Shah had penalty under the law, so it is with YOUR beloved"
Could you show me the law? It cant be true because the leader himself has said to his followers not to attack those who insult him, he even gave examples. When insults are hurled at him it is not him who gets hurt though, but his followers who see it as a direct attack on themselves, comparable to insulting someones mother, father or other relative. Iran is a religious society and if someone goes to such an extent in showing their discontent, someone on the street is bound to give them a beating. It is only a natural thing to expect in such a society. However, again the leader himself has disproved of his followers doing that, and they are aware of that.
"7:In Shahs time the above insult was never defined and it was used as an excuse to take anyone who criticized anything about him and the goverment to SAVAK and have their butts become intimately familiar with a coke bottle wink.gif, heard of that BOY? So it is with YOUR beloved."
I don't know if they had laws for it or not. The laws of Iran during those times were more like matter in fluidic state, they could and would be changed by the shah himself whenever he felt like it. Either way it is not relevant. During the period of the shah even if you dared hurl an insult through the phone, a few minutes later SAVAK would be at your door and you'd never see the daylight anymore. Anyone who lived in that era could tell you that. People who didn't like him or the system of governance lived in constant terror for most of their life. Even acting in a way which seemed it might dissatisfaction toward the king was considered suicide.
Now compare this to every gathering where you see some foolish people chants slogans against the government. It reminds me of what the old U.S. ambassador to Iran said in interview at Harvard university. He called his old pall in Iran with whom he used to work under the shah, and he said soon after he started to insult and attack the government and system, etc... and the U.S. ambassador laughed he said, don't you see the freedom you have to say these things, if it was during Shah's period you would have been tortured and executed soon after... however he said, the guy paused a bit and continued... irrational and blind hatred, even from the people who were active at the highest levels of the shah and saw all the injustice, yet they do not recognize what they have... that is how I see it.
Your words mean less than a fart in the wind. So I ask you again: where the f*ck are you sources?
------------------------------
#Neda
------------------------------
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. -- Stephen Roberts
And why aren't you living in your beloved Islamic Republic you f*cking hypcriet pussy?
------------------------------
#Neda
------------------------------
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. -- Stephen Roberts
------------------------------
#Neda
------------------------------
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. -- Stephen Roberts
Mashallah, the "Richard Dawkings: Foundation for Reason and Science" has had positive effect on your it seems. May you continue on the same path until the day of judgment inshallah.
I'm sorry, but there is no Day of Judgement. It's a fairy tale to keep feeble minded individuals like yourself in check. And be glad, because if the flames of hell do exist, surely they are meant for the likes of you. Inshallah!
Now answer my questions, where are your sources and why have you fled your beloved Islamic Republic to come live in the West?
------------------------------
#Neda
------------------------------
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. -- Stephen Roberts
------------------------------
#Neda
------------------------------
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. -- Stephen Roberts
>> I'm sure they do not. There are nearly 600 police in the hospitals and 8 have been killed. They don't feel happy about it at all. However, I'm talking from a general perspective.
Oh ha cute, did your sources also quote how many non police were injured or dont they count as humans BOY? It stands to reason that the ones wielding the club would cause more casualties to the other group , no? So how many and how many were innocent?
By the way BOY. do tell me something, in the most unlikely event that one of your fook face Basij brothers, God forbid accidentally just happens to break the laws and cause grieve bodily harm to someone, what is the procedure for holding him accountable ? After all as your leader and president said EVERYONE is accountable to the law, do tell us peasants how is that applied to you lot? Among all these brave basijis that were out in the street not even one incident of breaking the law, ha?
>>Brave were they not? Real lion hearts, usually it was a group of two or three police approaching a group of hundreds of protesters.
BULL FOOKING **** BOY, more like a pack of hyenas than lions. I faced Shahs riot police in my youth about 30 times BOY and I am one of the extremely lucky people who got away with it, and I am proud to say I sent 5 of them to hospital. DONOT lecture me about courage BOY. It takes no courage to drive at 30-40 kms per hour and wield a club and know for sure that even if you kill someone no one is going to ask you jack ****. On the other hand BOY it takes real courage to face them empty handed. First 2 times you face them it is all emotions, after that you keep asking yourself how many times am I going to be lucky? You literally shake from fright boy and you force yourself go through with it. From your description I am sure you have never done anything even half as difficult.I think you would be a member of hyenas pack, and I AM a male lion you little BOY.
>> It is only logical that people die through a variety of reasons during such large protests. Anyone on the streets who does not realize this is not sane/rational. However, there is only one incident where a police shot at protesters, and thats when thugs attacked a police station, the other incidents should not be blamed on the police. I'm very surprised the death toll was so low and no important figures were shot in the process.
LOL didnt answer the question BOY. All people on the scene say it was your brother basij, arte they all lying BOY? What about those 70 thugs that had become university lecturers and were arrested yesterday or the day before after meeting Moussvie? How did they become thugs BOY? Lets force your fooking hand, were the university lecturers and that woman thugs yes or no BOY?
Now about comparing the legal powers
Point 1:
>> After the experience with Banisadr, the first president of Iran of whom we found out he was a member of MKO (in case you didnt know), who was the commander-in-chief of the military and did everything in his power to make Iran lose.
Yes I know who he was, his family even during WWII in Hamedan was bought by British. Very well on this point I concede that there MAY be situations that Rahbar has to intervene although Majlis could do just as well, and it all happened many years ago and your Rahbar has not rescinded power.
Point2 & 3 and 5: You agreed with me, the limit of legal power is same
Point4: Declaration of war
Again you agree with me, you point out that a group takes the decision, same with shah. BOTH of them can refuse to accept the decision and peoples voted representatives through Majlis and president cannot do fook all about it .
Point 6:
>> Could you show me the law? It cant be true because the leader himself has said to his followers not to attack those who insult him, he even gave examples. When insults are hurled at him it is not him who gets hurt though, but his followers who see it as a direct attack on themselves, comparable to insulting someones mother, father or other relative.
Eh I like to point out to you that a number odf newspapers were closed for questioning anything about it people HAVE gone to jail for precieved insults, can yoy even deny that? Either your Rahbar didnt know they have been closed which means his head was up his mothers kunt or he knew and did jack shyt which means crapping out of his fooking mouth which is it? Oops I just insulted his holiness, presumably HE HIMSELF wont mind but the likes of you now feel you can put me in jail , no BOY ?
Pint 7:
>> they could and would be changed by the shah himself whenever he felt like it.
LOL, sort of like him suddenly giving Guardians Council the authority to oversee elections and vetting the candidates,? Do you mean like that when he steam rolled the constitution and peoples representation? I believe it started from 4th or 5th Majlis, is that what you mean?
>> Now compare this to every gathering where you see some foolish people chants slogans against the government. It reminds me of what the old U.S. ambassador to and blah blah blah
So you are saying that after thirty years all the nation has achieved is to be allowed to swear IF one of you mofo Basjis is not around? Because YOU said his supporters like YOU get offended, no?
As I told you BOY change your id to FollowerOfShah, all you have done is change one dictator with another one that wears a turban . Beats me what you sold yourself for, me I wouldnt . After all I am one of the lions and you are one of the hyenas.
This message has been edited by fariborz_57 on Jun 26, 2009 6:19 PM This message has been edited by fariborz_57 on Jun 26, 2009 6:03 PM
Dont mind this guy. He speaks as if his words are the pure wisdom of knowledge. While the science world is more and more becoming finally rational and accept a variety of all possible explanations, these guys (Brights LOL) accuse us of having a narrow minded doctrine, while they probably have more narrow minds than taliban-members.
---------------------------------
"I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones."
What does the massacre of innocent civilians have to do with your outdated and desperate way of thinking? In fact, maybe you can explain to me why you support the killing of civilians in the first place?
------------------------------
#Neda
------------------------------
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. -- Stephen Roberts
------------------------------
This message has been edited by Koz4k on Jun 26, 2009 6:59 PM This message has been edited by Koz4k on Jun 26, 2009 6:56 PM
"Oh ha cute, did your sources also quote how many non police were injured or dont they count as humans BOY? It stands to reason that the ones wielding the club would cause more casualties to the other group wink.gif, no? So how many and how many were innocent?"
The last figures I have read were five hundred something. Your assumption that those with clubs would have less damage is not the right one. The police were not there to harm anyone. They were there is harms way to protect the country from anarchy. I assure you that if they wanted to harm people, all they would be need would be one hour to annihilate everyone in North-Tehran and it would be darn easy too. The police were sent there to supervise the protests and to make troublemakers go home with as little hurting as possible.
"By the way BOY. do tell me something, in the most unlikely event that one of your fook face Basij brothers, God forbid accidentally just happens to break the laws and cause grieve bodily harm to someone, what is the procedure for holding him accountable ? After all as your leader and president said EVERYONE is accountable to the law, do tell us peasants how is that applied to you lot? Among all these brave basijis that were out in the street not even one incident of breaking the law, ha?"
The Basij and police are human too, so it is reasonable to accept that some may have crossed lines in the heat of things. The procedure to file a complaint any particular person would not be any different from any Basij or Police, with the difference that the basij procedure would be handled by dadsetane nezami.
"LOL didnt answer the question BOY. All people on the scene say it was your brother basij, arte they all lying BOY? What about those 70 thugs that had become university lecturers and were arrested yesterday or the day before after meeting Moussvie? How did they become thugs BOY? Lets force your fooking hand, were the university lecturers and that woman thugs yes or no BOY?"
Many Iranians like rumors unfortunately, it really is the land of rumors as they say. However, when trouble occurs basij groups are automatically formed and in case of war eventually turn into divisions. It is part of Iran's alternate military strategy. So it is logical to assume the groups of Tehran were active and the commander of Tehran said they were, so I have no doubt. However, they have denied being active in some of the recorded videos and the commander has said they are investigating who those people were because they are not basij. You might have noticed that quite instantly these basij groups all wore military coats with tags, this was so they could distinguish anyone posing as Basij.
A professor at the university of Tehran informed me that during an exam a large group of male students entered the exam room, yelling, kicking the tables, tearing exam papers, pulling scarfs of the ladies and bashing windows. The university guard had already informed the police and they came running toward the university when the male students ran out. What you subsequently saw on video is that event.
Similarly I know the exact event that took place at the police station that was put on fire and the man from the top of the building started shooting. There are many things you guys are not aware of, and in the absence of trustful information it is best to stay quiet and observe.
"Yes I know who he was, his family even during WWII in Hamedan was bought by British. Very well on this point I concede that there MAY be situations that Rahbar has to intervene although Majlis could do just as well, and it all happened many years ago and your Rahbar has not rescinded power."
Yet it can take very long and a lot of lobbying might be needed to convince the parliament to do anything like deposing the president. Regardless of how long ago whatever event was, one has to learn from past mistakes and build in mechanisms to prevent the same mistakes from occuring.
"Point2 & 3 and 5: You agreed with me, the limit of legal power is same"
Theoretically the valiyeh faqih has a lot of power. However events at which the leader has interceded were rare and all are marked events in our history. My point is that he legally can not change anything based on his wish of wanting some change something somewhere. There has to be a clear reason, a clear failure of governmental bodies, etc, for him to involve himself. This is why the position is there, for fast decisions from a trustful figured knowledgeable on Islamic law and political matters.
"Point4: Declaration of war
Again you agree with me, you point out that a group takes the decision, same with shah. BOTH of them can refuse to accept the decision and peoples voted representatives through Majlis and president cannot do fook all about it wink.gif."
As I have explained, the question of whether war should be declared in the Islamic Republic is a religious question that can not be answered by a non-scholar. Whether the decision is a military sound one will be inputted by the staff of course. The whole point of us having established the Islamic Republic was to be on the path of what is correct, to have an Islamic constitution and to have our future path be protected by scholars. An example is that we had military commanders that wanted to repay saddam by gassing Iraq, yet Imam Khomeini (ra) released a decree banning us from doing it, and even targeting of civilian/near civilian areas with even conventional weapons. This is the position of the supreme leader.
When the supreme leader said, the president is the highest position in the country for governing/maintaining the country, it was not a joke, it really is that.
"Point 6:"
If you ever feel like mentioning the "law" you mentioned, feel free to do it. I have the books of law at home and can check/scan it for you.
"Pint 7:
LOL, sort of like him suddenly giving Guardians Council the authority to oversee elections and vetting the candidates,? Do you mean like that when he steam rolled the constitution and peoples representation? I believe it started from 4th or 5th Majlis, is that what you mean?"
The Guardian council became responsible for elections and candidates very long ago, I have no idea what you are talking about.
"So you are saying that after thirty years all the nation has achieved is to be allowed to swear IF one of you mofo Basjis is not around? Because YOU said his supporters like YOU get offended, no?"
What exactly do you wish for? Not only do you wish to be free to be your vulgar self, but you also want us to force our people not to give you a beating? Go lodge a complaint if you get beaten, it will be heard and it doesn't matter who you are.
That much I have already figured. These members of "Richard Dawkins: Foundation for Reason and Science", seem to be very detached from any reason and or science.
@FollowerOfRahbar, Well so in your opinion only thugs where harmed during the recent clamp down on protesters? and furthermore do you think it is appropriate to use live ammunition against crowds of unarmed protesters? would it not have been more appropriate for them to stick to standard crowd suppressing tactics used by riot police around the world ( I am aware that standard measures where also used to some extent ) instead of involving the basiji forces, live ammunition and other tactics such as the combination of clubs and motorbikes.
It seems to me that the people responsible for giving Iran more of a bad name than it already has are those that took all the decisions about how to handle the crowds. No doubt there are bound to be thugs in any large crowd especially inside such a large city as Tehran but again do you mean to say that only the thugs where harmed or that there was an honest effort being made to respond in such force only against thugs and not anyone seen in the streets?
Or perhaps are you off the opinion that anyone that disregarded the Saturday ban on protests by Khamenei is a thug, which would indeed mean quite a large number of thugs.
So in essence what I am trying to say is, do you honestly feel that things could not have been handled better with fewer casualties?
I think they could have calmed the people down and resolved the situation quite a lot better than they currently did, the ban on protests where just one among many decisions that made people in power loose credibility in the eyes of many Iranians and inflame the situation further.
"That much I have already figured. These members of "Richard Dawkins: Foundation for Reason and Science", seem to be very detached from any reason and or science."
Also could you please elaborate on your reasoning regarding this comment please? perhaps you are not aware of the fact that Richard Dawkins does back up his claims with facts.
Most of the Irainan in this forum only wants to hear one side of the storys and they keep making insult of any ones which is having diferent opion and supporting Iran goverment.
Arash, I read a post by in which you supposedly speak transliterated farsi. However, as a person fluent in farsi I had no idea what you were trying to say. I think you need some (a few hundred maybe) lessons in farsi.
that is because u dont understand persian. U speak a bastardize arabic farsi only known to mullahs and their children.
Al anta dar en gozashteha ayuhalhale al kabiri walik anta shukfi mishi. I know u understand this **** u little prick. PS how much money does your family have and are u of seyyed origins?
FlowerOfFanaticism, ignoring my questions won't make them go away. Either be a man and answer them, or admit you're a fraud. Now let's try this again.
1. Where are your sources? On what do you base your preposterous conclusions?
2. Why did you flee your beloved Islamic Repbulic like a coward to come in the West like a hypocriet?
------------------------------
#Neda
------------------------------
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. -- Stephen Roberts
------------------------------
This message has been edited by Koz4k on Jun 27, 2009 8:46 AM
>>The last figures I have read were five hundred something. Your assumption that those with clubs would have less damage is not the right one.
LOL, so you maintain 600 police and 500 civilinas, well BOY either you live in a cloud and cocos land, or think we lot are stupid or you are bald face liar.Tell you what BOY to prove to yourself which one you are, that is if you dont know, tell those figures to others and see what they think
>>The Basij and police are human too, so it is reasonable to accept that some may have crossed lines in the heat of things. The procedure to file a complaint any particular person would not be any different from any Basij or Police, with the difference that the basij procedure would be handled by dadsetane nezami.
Yes BOY I am sure it is very easy to identify someone hitting you from back of bike whose face is covered,I am also sure the court system is extremely fair and the matter would be investigated fairly and fully. Refer to my recommendation above, tell a third party and see whether many people believe you.
I asked "Let's force your fooking hand, were the university lecturers and that woman thugs yes or no BOY?"
You answered with 3 chicken shyt paragraphs without answering. Sufficient for me to conclude that you are crapping out of your mouth and are dancing round the issue without answering. Tells me and anyone else who reads this that you are nothing but a fook face lil shyt .
>>If you ever feel like mentioning the "law" you mentioned, feel free to do it. I have the books of law at home and can check/scan it for you.
They are the general blasphemy laws, you know the ones that are used to interpret anything and everything as anti Islamic. i.e. if you criticize the leader you get prison. If you dont believe me ask Ayatollah Broojerdi, Akbar Ganji or Hashem Aghajari, all in prison . I am not religious at all but I absolutely respect these men. I would very respectfully argue with them on many points and at the same I admire them greatly. These men are honorable, you fookers are different, you lot are nothing like the Basij that went to the war, nowadys you lot are just a pack of heynas protecting a dictator.
So BOY what did your leader say about these people or the likes of Montazeri? I suppose Montazeri is a thug too, especially now that he has stated these elections are a fraud, you know BOY, you should try to break his legs too.
>>What exactly do you wish for? Not only do you wish to be free to be your vulgar self, but you also want us to force our people not to give you a beating? Go lodge a complaint if you get beaten, it will be heard and it doesn't matter who you are.
LOL, BOY, I knew that if I press the right buttons sooner or later you will show your true face . Listen to me BOY, I am vulgar to the likes of you a hyena because you have whored yourself and are supporting a dictator and CRAP out of your mouth too much.The part about wanting US to force OUR brothers not to give me a beating was quite laughable. For your info boy, WHO THE FOOK do you think you and your Basij brothers are that can beat the citizens? Who the FOOK do you think you are that the rest of us are slaves to you? No one BOY is supposed to beat others, that is the whole fooking point of having fooking laws.
When I was searching for examples of your beloved leader making laws on the spot and the history of GC I came across this little gem BOY. You can find internet links to the text of Iranian constitution yourself
Article 27 states:
Public gatherings and marches may be freely held, provided arms are not carried and that they are not detrimental to the fundamental principles of Islam.
So BOY before that infamous Friday, the gathering of people in the streets were legal, any confrontation with police was restricted to rowdy behavior and there were no armed confrontation. Then your beloved leader shat on the constitution by declaring them intolerable and against the law (made the law up on the spot BOY), you do remember that, right BOY?
YOUR fook face thug brothers from Saturday started attacking people. We all saw it BOY. You lot broke the law, when he CRAAAAAPPPPPED out of his mouth that any harm afflicted upon anyone taking part in future protets is responsibility of people calling for demonstration and not your mofo brothers, hewas protecting the Basij pack of hyneas; as usual you fookers licked all the shyt he spewed off the ground . Did you or any of your ilk even consider for a moment that people have the right to protest?
I am sure you are going to argue that according to other articles in the constitution the leader has the right to do blah blah in times of national security emergency blah blah blah. Dont bother BOY, I am not a lawyer, but what I do understand is that whether he and your FOOK FACE brothers broke the law can only be decided by lawyers and judges. Unfortunately BOY the head of judiciary is appointed by your fook face leader. We both know it is impossible to take him to court despite whatever YOU PERSONALLY crap out of YOUR mouth .
Also my little hyena remember something; the techniques of kidnapping and death squads that you lot have learned from observation of South American dictators can only go so far. Of course I forgot, no one is being arrested and taken to unknmown parts, no one is going missing. Even if they were arrested, their location would be told to their families because not doing so is against the fooking law, right BOY?
This message has been edited by fariborz_57 on Jun 27, 2009 11:54 PM This message has been edited by fariborz_57 on Jun 27, 2009 11:38 PM This message has been edited by fariborz_57 on Jun 27, 2009 6:07 PM
------------------------------
#Neda
------------------------------
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. -- Stephen Roberts
Really? That's the first thing that came to your mind? Interesting...
------------------------------
#Neda
------------------------------
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. -- Stephen Roberts
Fairboz is not being able to control his self you can tell his having angers management problem. Already he getted warning for making to much personal insult to Rahbar just because he is different opinon.
I can't imagine Al Gore, in 2000, calling on his supporters to gather in their millions in the streets to protest the events in Florida that cost him the election. Mousavi needs to learn how to behave in a democracy.
Then MKO Terrorist Group, started sending statements from Europe, against the regime. Worse was yet to come when the son of the late Shah of Iran, requested the Israeli Govt. for help.
The Green Revolution has faded.Iran is not Georgia. The Basijis and Riot police have done a great job. I salute all the Basij martyrs. It is sad that many protesters also died. Enemies have failed once again to uproot the legacy of the system established by the Father of the nation-Late Grand Ayatollah Rohallah Khomeni.
Long Live the Islamic Republic!
Down with the enemies.
How long did it take you to compose the above masterpiece? You have posted the exact same bullcrap in 3 different threads. By the way BOY, you missed the thread about Ayatollah Yazdi.
this its beings totally anglo amerikunts zionazi plottings to enslistings only NONMUSLIM incestuous persians refugees in theirs westrsn porno smuts countrieds grovellings at anglo amerikunts feet as beings appointeds as moderatorsd
why there not beings any ummah brotherhoods members as beings moderators?
wtf moderators doings callings others 'pussy' etc? do they enjoy showings theirs to public?
===========================================
I am old Christiankiller
Sorry for offensive to our good religion christian brothers
I am not hating christians
Titty, no one can control themselfs when they're around fanatics like yourself, Flanker and FlowerOfRahbar. I'm not merely saying this because people like you are cowards and hypocrites (flee your country to come live in the West, then criticize it while you are free to leave) but also because you cannot be negotiated with. "Let it be" is unknown to you. You believe your delusional system is the correct one, although you've fled it yourselfs, while you force others to live by imbecilic rules that stem from the Middle Ages. Your kind will come to an end, mark my words. Except next time there won't be any peaceful rallies.
------------------------------
#Neda
------------------------------
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. -- Stephen Roberts
------------------------------
This message has been edited by Koz4k on Jun 28, 2009 9:39 AM
"Well so in your opinion only thugs where harmed during the recent clamp down on protesters?"
I have said no such thing. The security was there to protect the public from the thugs. However, it is reasonable to assume that some of those with no harmful intentions during such protests or even innocent bystanders were also caught in the clampdown. This is something that regularly happens during many protests, including during protests I have experienced.
"and furthermore do you think it is appropriate to use live ammunition against crowds of unarmed protesters? would it not have been more appropriate for them to stick to standard crowd suppressing tactics used by riot police around the world ( I am aware that standard measures where also used to some extent ) instead of involving the basiji forces, live ammunition and other tactics such as the combination of clubs and motorbikes. "
The security had orders not to carry firearms and they did not, with the exception of a few. I blame no one for carrying one though, I would have carried at least a colt myself. As for clubs and motorbikes, that is standard equipment for the riot police. The motorbikes are good to get the security around the groups pretty fast.
"It seems to me that the people responsible for giving Iran more of a bad name than it already has are those that took all the decisions about how to handle the crowds."
I think that is not a reasonable conclusion to make from this. There have been protests and riots in many European countries, some very large with millions of cars being burnt. This is like a kindergarten party compared to some of the large riots that have occurred in Europe. However, we are not used to such behavior, and this is why I called it all a good experience. Instead of taking the legal approach, Mr. Mousavi decided to call for illegal protests and made unreasonable demands.
"Or perhaps are you off the opinion that anyone that disregarded the Saturday ban on protests by Khamenei is a thug, which would indeed mean quite a large number of thugs."
Anyone who disregards a ban is a criminal and will be approached according to that.
"So in essence what I am trying to say is, do you honestly feel that things could not have been handled better with fewer casualties?
I think they could have calmed the people down and resolved the situation quite a lot better than they currently did, the ban on protests where just one among many decisions that made people in power loose credibility in the eyes of many Iranians and inflame the situation further."
They could have definitely handled everything better. However, Iran was not ready for an (ex) politician to behave in such a way. Iran is a young democracy still learning from its own experiences. The Guardian Council released per box votes and offered to recount 10% of votes at randomly in the presence of and at the choice of those with complaints and to broadcast it live on TV. Next time Iran will be ready for this with even more rules and preparations.
This message has been edited by FollowerOfRahbar on Jun 28, 2009 9:54 AM
Fairboz please take some medicines because you are being to much angry and calling every one as boy. Of course I am angry fook face, I always get angry when people are murdered and some guys openly supports it. The most interesting thing in this thread however is that as soon as I drill a new a$$ hole on him you and your brother, fightclub jump in and try to hijack the thread, now why is that BOY? BY the way BOY, you do remember this thread and the number of times I have told you and your brother fightclub that you two are stupid, don't you BOY ?
"LOL, so you maintain 600 police and 500 civilinas, well BOY either you live in a cloud and cocos land, or think we lot are stupid or you are bald face liar.Tell you what BOY to prove to yourself which one you are, that is if you dont know, tell those figures to others and see what they think"
I am merely quoting police reports. Rumors are not a good source of information for anything really.
"Yes BOY I am sure it is very easy to identify someone hitting you from back of bike whose face is covered, I am also sure the court system is extremely fair and the matter would be investigated fairly and fully. Refer to my recommendation above, tell a third party and see whether many people believe you."
This is the reality one faces during any protest. In the same way it will prove quite difficult for the police to find those who burned buses, broke windows and looted, burned buildings, threw rocks at cars/motorbikes/people passing by and harassed people.
"You answered with 3 chicken shyt paragraphs without answering."
The thing is, most of what you say seem to be statements coming right out of a TuPac music video, I see no questions.
"I asked "Let's force your fooking hand, were the university lecturers and that woman thugs yes or no BOY?""
I am not aware of what you are referring at.
"you lot are nothing like the Basij that went to the war, nowadys you lot are just a pack of heynas protecting a dictator."
The military top consist of practically only war veterans and the basij has very many active war veterans. Who else did you think those old basij men were?
"I suppose Montazeri is a thug too, especially now that he has stated these elections are a fraud"
The current leader does not need to say anything about Montazeri. He has already been discredited by Imam Khomeini (ra). However, approaching this from a different perspective, the guy does not even have access to information about the elections and anything he says holds equal value as any person on the street.
"Article 27 states:
Public gatherings and marches may be freely held, provided arms are not carried and that they are not detrimental to the fundamental principles of Islam."
The constitution is not a blank check. We have criminal laws, civil laws, etc. These laws explain exactly how far someone can go and what could possible be done to them if they don't abide by those laws. Other than that we have our leaders ready for intervention in the wake of a possible velvet revolution or something similar. Other than that these protesters were anything but civil, I'v seen whole streets in Tehran with not one window left unbroken.
------------------------------
#Neda
------------------------------
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. -- Stephen Roberts
Flower, I know you are a confused man who has fled his country to come live in the West because he couldn't put up with the rules he is claiming to support. I also know that this minor detail is destroying every shred of credibility you ever hope to have. Nevertheless, we still require your sources. Do you understand this? It's basic English:
WHERE
ARE
YOUR
SOURCES?
I'll put it more simply: where do you get your information?
On the other hand, maybe you work for the government. Accessing information that the people themselfs can't? How does that work? Censure is oke, as long as it doesn't effect you? Is that it?
------------------------------
#Neda
------------------------------
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. -- Stephen Roberts
------------------------------
This message has been edited by Koz4k on Jun 28, 2009 3:21 PM
It sucks if you can't shut people up, doesn't it? No Basij here to beat me up. At least, no Basij that wouldn't get its ass kicked trying to shut me up.
------------------------------
#Neda
------------------------------
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. -- Stephen Roberts
------------------------------
This message has been edited by Koz4k on Jun 28, 2009 3:24 PM
i would hang those ****in basijis by the balls. They should go start some trouble with the Lur people and Qashqaii in central Iran. We will be happy to tear them a new *******.
Arash and Saifu, stop with the personal insults IMMEDIATELY. This is not the time to test my patience.
------------------------------
#Neda
------------------------------
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. -- Stephen Roberts
------------------------------
This message has been edited by Koz4k on Jun 29, 2009 6:54 PM
>>I am merely quoting police reports. Rumors are not a good source of information for anything really.
LOL of course they are not especially if they help you believe in whatever you like to . Like the fact that 600 police were injured and only 500 civilians
>>This is the reality one faces during any protest. In the same way it will prove quite difficult for the police to find those who burned buses, broke windows and looted, burned buildings, threw rocks at cars/motorbikes/people passing by and harassed people.
Yes I am sure given how unbiased the courts are the investigation into every persons charge will be long and through. They will also ALL have adequate access to defense lawyers and preparation of their cases. In fact I am sure each trial will take a very long time say about a week at least . Aint that so BOY? There will be many prosecutors because obviously one person cannot prepare cases against hundreds of people single handedly and be fair and through. None of the prisoners will have even one scratch on their bodies because torture according to constitution is illegal, aint that so BOY?
>> The current leader does not need to say anything about Montazeri. He has already been discredited by Imam Khomeini (ra). However .
LOL Boy you fell for it. See BOY, you give a person 2-choices and see which of your questions they try to answer and which of your questions they try to avoid . It is quite simple actually. Now just to make you squirm a bit more, ONE MORE TIME, here are 3 examples of blasphemy laws used as an instrument to punish people who question anything especially your beloved leader
1:Ayatllah Brojeerdi : Advocated that the concept of Valet Fagih is not in fact part of our religion. Went to trial in 2006. Authorities charged that he had claimed he is representative of hidden Imam which he denies. While everyone knows the representative of Hidden Imam is the leader, I mean the leader even has a signed and notorized letter from hidden Imam to prove it, aint that so BOY ? Do you have any idea how stupid all of the above sounds?
2:Hashim Aghajari: A university professor charged with apostasy, because he gave a lecture urging Iranians not to blindly follow Islamic Clerics. Given your leader like sheep like yourself obviously that was not to be be tolerated .
3:Akbar Gangji: A war veteran that tried to open up the case chain murders committed by internal security whose boss I understand appointed by YOUR leader . Obviously that ministry has never broken any law, aint that so BOY. He attended a conference in Berlin after Khatamis victory and upon return was jailed.
SO BOY, one more time, what is YOUR opinion of these people? Do you maintain their treatment by the regime has been fair or not .
I know you are going to write a bunch and try your best not to answer any of the above. It is just that I enjoy making you face what a shyt you are
>> The constitution is not a blank check. We have criminal laws, civil laws, etc.
BULL CRAP, the definition of constitution is that it sets parameters for all other laws that follow it. If a law is against the constitution, then either that law must be scrapped or the constitution changed. By extension any action that violets the constitution is illegal . Exactly like your fook face leader and your mofo basij brothers attacking marches of people .
>>Other than that we have our leaders ready for intervention in the wake of a possible velvet revolution or something similar. Other than that these protesters were anything but civil,
BOY, open your ears again, one leader is BOUND, read my fooking lips BOUND by the constitution and cannot make up laws as he wishes, unless of course if he is same as shah . Two protests WERE civil no one had died, before basijss who were protected from prosecution attacked them. You can try to rewrite events as much as you want, but it does seem like your head being in sand. Also BOY making a
>>I'v seen whole streets in Tehran with not one window left unbroken.
LOL, oh dear dear dear, you said too much there BOY. The usuall meaning of the sentence above is you saw "using your own eyes" . Only 3 possibilities exist
1: You are in Tehran, in that case BOY, how do you get around posting here when this site is banned in Iran? You don't happen to be a government snoop , are you boy?
2: You meant to say you saw the pictures of such a thing from a news organization. Given you support murder of people, you wouldn't be above lying, so why dont you prove it and post a link to such picture
3:You saw such a street with your own eyes just before your mofo Basij brothers started killing people and you left Iran immediately . Here BOY I gave you a way out.
BY the way BOY, I talked about your basij and government grabbing people at night as in kidnapping squads and then these people are not heard of again. Shall we look at the constitution together and find the relevant passages about the rights of prisoners and when their families should be informed
This message has been edited by fariborz_57 on Jun 29, 2009 6:06 PM
------------------------------
#Neda
------------------------------
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. -- Stephen Roberts
"I have said no such thing. The security was there to protect the public from the thugs. However, it is reasonable to assume that some of those with no harmful intentions during such protests or even innocent bystanders were also caught in the clampdown. This is something that regularly happens during many protests, including during protests I have experienced. "
Oh I see so they where trying to protect the public from thugs mearly keeping the peace not intimidate everyone they ran into, thugs attacking the crowd could very well happen during any protest but let us be honest here just what kind of a random thug would have the balls to go attacking a crowd of that size in Iran? Sorry but I dont buy your explanation for a second, unless you have a source conforming your story ( an independent one ) it remains nothing but your opinion and one that does not fit imho.
"The security had orders not to carry firearms and they did not, with the exception of a few. I blame no one for carrying one though, I would have carried at least a colt myself. As for clubs and motorbikes, that is standard equipment for the riot police. The motorbikes are good to get the security around the groups pretty fast. "
I wonder how many actually followed that order and to what branches of the security forces it applied ? also if it was indeed an order how come so many defied it? furthermore yes if I was going to suppress people who are voicing their opinion I would also carry a firearm knowing full well that if I ever gave them the opportunity I would be torn into a million pieces.
"I think that is not a reasonable conclusion to make from this. There have been protests and riots in many European countries, some very large with millions of cars being burnt. This is like a kindergarten party compared to some of the large riots that have occurred in Europe. However, we are not used to such behavior, and this is why I called it all a good experience. Instead of taking the legal approach, Mr. Mousavi decided to call for illegal protests and made unreasonable demands. "
Well while discussing the topic of impression made on the world, I think the more reasonable assumption would be to take a look at what those impressions where around the world. Was it that the protesters where thugs and had no right to complain? I think not... rather the worlds impression currently is that 1. there was an election fraud, 2. Iranian people took to the streets to protest the outcome, 3. They where violently suppressed.
yes very well handled indeed bravo!
"Anyone who disregards a ban is a criminal and will be approached according to that. "
OK thus we get to the core of your viewpoint, they where all thugs and should be shown no mercy this explains quite a lot.
"They could have definitely handled everything better. However, Iran was not ready for an (ex) politician to behave in such a way. Iran is a young democracy still learning from its own experiences. The Guardian Council released per box votes and offered to recount 10% of votes at randomly in the presence of and at the choice of those with complaints and to broadcast it live on TV. Next time Iran will be ready for this with even more rules and preparations."
Well I am not of the opinion that Iran is a democracy irregardless of the current situation, however it seems that we agree on a minor point which is that things could have been handled better.
p.s I fear future measures to restore peoples faith in the system will be futile, how should I put it... too little too late?
"Oh I see so they where trying to protect the public from thugs mearly keeping the peace not intimidate everyone they ran into, thugs attacking the crowd could very well happen during any protest but let us be honest here just what kind of a random thug would have the balls to go attacking a crowd of that size in Iran? Sorry but I dont buy your explanation for a second, unless you have a source conforming your story ( an independent one ) it remains nothing but your opinion and one that does not fit imho."
Riot police is meant to intimidate/scare off and in doing so make people spread and be/feel weak as small groups/single person. What happens then is that they either go home or get arrested. This is the basic tactic applied by any riot police around the world.
What I meant is that a big percentage of these rioters actually attacked civilians who had nothing to do with the protests and were doing their daily thing.
"Well while discussing the topic of impression made on the world, I think the more reasonable assumption would be to take a look at what those impressions where around the world. Was it that the protesters where thugs and had no right to complain? I think not... rather the worlds impression currently is that 1. there was an election fraud, 2. Iranian people took to the streets to protest the outcome, 3. They where violently suppressed.
yes very well handled indeed bravo!"
It is not public opinion (westerners) perse that I care or worry about. I really could not care less about the west and its people. This is a problem that was created by an amateurish politician that was retired and was painting for the past 21 years. He went around mechanisms and bodies that were created for this very issue. Imagine Al Gore having done this and what the reaction to him and the people rioting afterward. As noam chomksy said: any dictator would admire the uniformity and obedience of the U.S. media. You'd hear nothing but a controlled story coming from western media outlets.
However, when the smallest of things happens in Iran, western media goes full rpm on negative media about Iran.
They are not our people and their opinions has no value to us and our future. They treat foreigners and Iranians like worthless citizens in their countries and even after doing 300% your best your achievements would still be less valued than that of their own people.
However, what matters is that some countries will use the media spin and public opinion in their own countries to push certain things they have been wanted to push for a long time (sanctions, etc).
"OK thus we get to the core of your viewpoint, they where all thugs and should be shown no mercy this explains quite a lot."
I think I was clear from the beginning, I have nothing against people voicing their opinion, but rioters should be "crushed" (quote from my post above).
"p.s I fear future measures to restore peoples faith in the system will be futile, how should I put it... too little too late?"
You are very mistaken. I don't know what kind of Iranians you talk and associate with, but I guess they are the same kind of strange people like on this forum. I assure you that mousavi has committed political suicide, both in the sense of public opinion and the establishment. Mousavi voters I have spoken to are very disappointed in Mousavi. In fact, many in Iran are even too embarrassed to say they voted for him.
What will come from this is sentences for those who committed crimes during these demonstrations, a new approach to the western countries that (ab)used the situation and even retaliation.
Riot police is meant to intimidate/scare off and in doing so make people spread and be/feel weak as small groups/single person. What happens then is that they either go home or get arrested. This is the basic tactic applied by any riot police around the world.
What I meant is that a big percentage of these rioters actually attacked civilians who had nothing to do with the protests and were doing their daily thing.
==
Does this include beating women, childeren and the elderly with rods because they are merely expressing their constitutional rights? Does this include breaking bones, shooting people, kidnapping and a harrassing them? And this "big percentage" you speak of, where do you get this?
It is not public opinion (westerners) perse that I care or worry about. I really could not care less about the west and its people. This is a problem that was created by an amateurish politician that was retired and was painting for the past 21 years. He went around mechanisms and bodies that were created for this very issue. Imagine Al Gore having done this and what the reaction to him and the people rioting afterward. As noam chomksy said: any dictator would admire the uniformity and obedience of the U.S. media. You'd hear nothing but a controlled story coming from western media outlets.
==
Then why do you live in the West? And if you don't live in the West, where are you right now? How and why are you visiting this website?
However, when the smallest of things happens in Iran, western media goes full rpm on negative media about Iran.
==
Smallest thing such as millions of people across the country protesting an illegitimate government. I wonder how they even managed to noticed this minor detail, especially after the crackdowns.
They are not our people and their opinions has no value to us and our future. They treat foreigners and Iranians like worthless citizens in their countries and even after doing 300% your best your achievements would still be less valued than that of their own people.
==
1. You are not "our people". You are a hypocrite and coward who puts his own interests first, even if that means surpressing a whole nation.
2. Their opinions in fact DO help to shape the future. I'm sure an ingnorant man like yourself is familiar with international politics.
3. How would you know how Westerners treat Iranians?
However, what matters is that some countries will use the media spin and public opinion in their own countries to push certain things they have been wanted to push for a long time (sanctions, etc).
==
Unlike the Iranian regime, who merely lies, censores, threatens and cheats the Iranian people. After all, it's Western countries respnsible for kicking out journalists, kidnapping them, shutting down newspapers, blocking access to the internet, destroying satellite dishes, etc, etc. Beats the hell out of spinning, no?
I think I was clear from the beginning, I have nothing against people voicing their opinion, but rioters should be "crushed" (quote from my post above).
==
And of course, it's up to you to decide who these rioters are? Like for example the 7 year old child that was beaten with a rod, or the girl who was shot in the chest and bled out in the street, or maybe the thousands of other people who have been killed or wounded? Expressing your opinion is fine, as long as it's your opinion. Isn't that right?
You are very mistaken. I don't know what kind of Iranians you talk and associate with, but I guess they are the same kind of strange people like on this forum. I assure you that mousavi has committed political suicide, both in the sense of public opinion and the establishment. Mousavi voters I have spoken to are very disappointed in Mousavi. In fact, many in Iran are even too embarrassed to say they voted for him.
==
And I assure you, you are talking out of your ass. Unlike you, I in fact, do speak and visit people both inside and outside Iran on regular basis. You've either lost all contact with reality and you're deluding yourself or you've lost all faith in the regime and you're hanging on for what it's worth.
What will come from this is sentences for those who committed crimes during these demonstrations, a new approach to the western countries that (ab)used the situation and even retaliation.
==
What are they going to do with the biggest criminals? The ones running our fine Islamic Republic?
Also my hypocrite and cowardly friend, I'm still waiting for you to answer my question. You have time to write down your fantasies, but you can't address a simple question?
------------------------------
#Neda
------------------------------
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. -- Stephen Roberts
------------------------------
This message has been edited by Koz4k on Jul 1, 2009 6:07 PM
In regards to ur thread aimed at Arash that got locked...
look get these points straight before u go on a
crusade against me.
1. I do not believe in any organized religion.
2. Im one of the ppl in the forefront of messing with titanium
and his sick weirded religious wet dream fantasy.
3. I do think that Arash has strong racist tendencies
against alot of different ppl and ethnic groups.
Although, eventhough I admit that u have knowledge in alot of fields
and that u do contribute ur share to the forum, having said that
I think itsvery messed up that someone like u that if not on a hourly
basis but daily basis bullcraps about other religions, especially islam,
is now "hurt" when someone speaks of your native religion.
MInd you I think its a very odd and nonsense way for Arash trying to
insult titty, since titty really doesnt feel hindu, but a muslim.
![[linked image]](http://i416.photobucket.com/albums/pp249/chossmelli/peters.jpg)
? You know BOY, when someone is riding a motor bike and wielding a club it is slightly difficult to just hit the thugs. By the way BOY have you heard of a nasty thug who just happened to die and her death was filmed and we all saw? Shyt what is her name BOY, any ideas? What amazes me BOY is that not only she was a thug but was surrounded by so many thugs and they all played their roles to perfection, everyone on site claimed one of YOUR fook face basij brothers did it, how do you account for that BOY?![[linked image]](http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pixies/2009/6/25/1245885070451/25.06.09-Steve-Bell-on-Ir-002.jpg)
![[linked image]](http://blog.nj.com/njv_shenemans_sketchpad/2009/06/ayatollah-khamenei.jpg)
![[linked image]](http://img25.imageshack.us/img25/675/fallout31010fn6.jpg)
![[linked image]](http://www.mumindesigns.com/images/MD16.gif)
![[linked image]](http://www.metmuseum.org/explore/knights/images/saber_sm.jpg)
![[linked image]](http://i132.photobucket.com/albums/q29/cyrus121/defaultCAQMNWX5.jpg)
![[linked image]](http://img29.imageshack.us/img29/3369/anash1.jpg)
![[linked image]](http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a134/Niroo_Hawaii/IranIran.jpg)