Mohammad of Vancouver (a Canadian-Iranian) has relatives in the
streets of Tehran, but he says that Ahmadinejad likely won the election, and
the west, with its "warm ears" for Moussavi, is choosing to hear what it wants from the demonstrations. And Ayatollah Rafsanjani, the former Iranian president, has manipulated the
electoral crisis in Iran for his own gain.
Based on opinion polls conducted a few weeks before the election by
Terror Free Tomorrow (TFT), Ahmadinejad was expected to win with even a
larger margin than announced in the official vote. The polls were
reported both in the Huffington Post and the Guardian and had several
interesting findings. First, even if the majority of the
undecided votes went to the reformist camp, it was still highly likely
that Ahmadinejad could secure the 50% + 1 vote needed to avoid a
run-off.
Second,
more than half of the electorate had a neutral or favorable view of the
economic situation, and there was a relatively-even split between those
that felt who the president's economic policy positively contributed to
the reduction of inflation and the unemployment rate and those who did
not. Lastly, the vast majority of the Iranian electorate believe
that religious expertise is a very important attribute of a successful
president. While some may claim that bias or fear led to these results,
these same Iranians were not afraid to answer extremely-controversial
questions. For instance, a free press and free elections were seen as
important issues that the government must address– by pluralities of the
electorate sampled.
In the actual vote as announced, Ahmadinejad performed 7 points poorer than in the poll by TFT.
Based on my own conversations with people inside Iran who were acting
as election monitors, Ahmadinejad did well in the poor areas of Tehran,
as well as the rural areas in central Iran and the northeast region of
Khorasan and Mashhad. In the Facebook sphere, I am already seeing
skepticism among some Mousavi supporters who are not buying into the
whole “it is very obvious that the election was rigged” statement. The
idea that “the results just don't make sense” is absurd. Mousavi did
very well in Tehran, Yazd, Azarbaijan, and other ethnic-minority
regions that he capitalized on while campaigning.
Nate Silver at 538.com agrees
that the argument that the election was rigged is weak. (A subsequent post at 538 finds some of the Iranian regional numbers "fishy".)
But if the election results are not the problem, then what is?
To
find the roots of the current crisis, one has to go back and look at
the history of Rafsanjani’s presence in the political scene in Iran.
Don’t forget that he is the second most powerful man in Iran and his
family has amassed wealth beyond the borders of Iran. Rafsanjani also
has a network of supporters outside of Iran that stretches from
individuals, Iranian press and web sites outside of Iran all the way to
the National Iranian American Council, whose positions are strikingly
favorable to him.
Rafsanjani challenged Ahmadinejad in the 2005 elections and lost.
Ever since then, he has been sabotaging Ahmadinejad’s plans of
reforming the political and economic structures in Iran. He has been
moving slowly from his moderate position to become the patron saint of
the reformist camp. In this round of the election, Rafsanjani did not
personally participate, but instead invited Moussavi, Karrubi and
Rezaee (all three with historical ties to Rafsanjani) to throw
themselves in the maelstrom of the anti-Ahmadinejad ring. The strategy was
to create enough voter distractions so as to prevent Ahmadinejad from
getting elected in the first round of voting.
Millions of dollars were spent on these three campaigns, most of it
provided by Rafsanjani’s children and cronies who look at this kind of
spending as a way of investing in the future government. The way this
support was distributed among the candidates was very complicated and
followed an elaborate pattern. Rezaee was asked to run in order to
weaken Ahmadinejad’s support among the Revolutionary Guards, since he
was the head of this force during the Iran-Iraq war. The reformist
coalition were divided between Karrubi and Moussavi with the former
receiving the support of reformist personalities like Karbaschi, Abtahi
and Abdi and the latter receiving the support of reformist
organizations and political parties (Mosharekat and Mojahedine
Enghelab).
This dividing of resources by Rafsanjani was done to diversify and
overlap the campaigns at the same time, while Rafsanjani and his
children would remain in the background by only providing funds and
logistical support to the anti Ahmadinejad camps. But things started to
go wrong when opinion polls from inside Moussavi’s own campaign began
to show a hardening of support for Ahmadinejad. That is when the nature
of his campaign changed. The color green was picked as a protest color,
and the rumors of voter fraud began circulating in the Moussavi
campaign so as to continue the fight beyond election day.
The culmination of this happened days before the vote. In a letter
written to the Iranian leader Ayatollah Khamenei, Rafsanjani threatened
to start a social volcano if Moussavi was not declared the “obvious
winner”. (The letter in Farsi) This suspicious move, together with Rafsanjani’s wife’s
comments after casting her vote–encouraging people to pour
into the streets if Moussavi was not declared the winner– show that the plans
for social disturbances and support from the outside world was the
opposition’s plan B, even before the election results were announced.
The public confrontation between Rafsanjani and his family from the one
side and Khamenei from the other side exposed for the first time the
major role played by Rafsanjani and his family in the election.
The night of the election and only two hours after closing of the
polls, Moussavi, under pressure by his campaign manager, advanced his
prescheduled post-election press conference, planned for Saturday
morning, and declared himself the winner in front of CNN, BBC and other
foreign press reporters in Iran. There is no explanation for this move.
This preemptive assumption of victory was done to sow the seeds of
doubts and discontent before any results were even published.
The timing of this early press conference points to the fact that
Moussavi’s camps were aware of the existence of warm ears outside of
Iran waiting for any kind of news of doubts in Ahmadinejad’s victory.
Otherwise, why wouldn’t Mousavi wait for the morning after to declare himself a winner?
In
my opinion, the speedy announcement of results by the Interior
Ministry, something that most people quote as the evidence of tampering
with the votes, only took place to counterbalance Moussavi’s early declaration of victory.
Had Moussavi waited, the results would have appeared more normal and
acceptable. As I have already explained, the switch from plan A to plan
B required the Moussavi camp to quickly dismiss Ahmadinejad’s victory
and move on to challenge the results as soon as possible.
Here are questions that I and my friend Ali
Sanaee have been circulating among Iranians to widen the debate about
the election results:
1-What is the real material evidence of voter fraud? Moussavi had
representatives in more than 95 per cent of the polling stations. Among nearly 6000 representatives who signed off on the polling results, only 220 of them
were barred from attending polls, due to lack of
identification papers. What happened to the rest?
2- Why did Moussavi and his friends begin to doubt the results a few
weeks before the vote? If he had serious doubts about the honesty of
the electoral system, why even bother to declare your candidacy? What
is Moussavi’s pre-election evidence for fraud?
3- Why Did Moussavi change the time of his post-election press conference abruptly?
4- Why did Rafsanjani and Moussavi’s wives speak out about fraud right after casting their votes?
5-Why did the Western media, who are normally against Iran and pro
Israel (CNN, Fox, Voice of America, BBC, Huffington Post, Roozonline,
Radio Zamaneh and Radio Farda), describe Moussavi the frontrunner as
soon as Moussavi’s camp began to cast doubt on the elections, weeks
before the vote? What degree of coordination was there between Moussavi’s campaign and
the western media about this message?
6-Why was the Rockefeller Foundation-sponsored survey, done by a credible team of investigators (Terror Free Tomorrow), not highlighted in the coverage of the election in the West?
Related posts:
{ 158 comments }
← Previous Comments
The US doesn't send billions in aid and military technology every year to underwrite Zionism in Israel, largely instigated by Political Judaism and pro-Zionists in the US Congress? It doesn't routinely veto UN resolutions on Zionism's behalf? Jewish Zionists don't comprise around 20% of the Democrats' seats in the US Senate even though Jews are under 2% of the US population? The Israel lobby didn't play a "decisive" role in instigating the Iraq war (as documented per Walt and Mearsheimers exhaustive research)? Which alleged "conspiracy theory" of mine are you disputing? Or is labeling my contentions "conspiracy theories" just another misleading and underhanded Zionist approach to debate when you know the facts aren't on your side?
Probably some tentacle of the National Endowment for Democracy.
Ed – sometimes you are a perceptive cat (othertimes is other story). I do agree that there may be similarities when it comes to politicized religous/ethnic/cultural movements that tend to be hidden under normal circumstances but extraordinary events expose the superficial colorings that set them apart. Political islam, like political Judaism (cf zionism), like political evangelism tend to corrupt all that was good in the religion in the first place, because, well, politics is like that. Politics by its nature implies partisanship, adversity and affinity to power and that tends to turn even the best and purest of religions into ideologies. Kind of like a contaminating process. One caveat – the parallel you probably want to draw is with political judeo-christian zionism (no muslim component there, notice?) as the creed that's set up against political islam (or islamo-halabism, as in saudi arabia, or islamo-shiitism as in parts of iran). in the US the former, at its most egregious, gave rise to neoconuttism. I expect that, given time and power so will the latter (however they call it). In the end, it's all about getting drunk on power and wan wanting to keep it, sometimes subverting the deepest religious principles in the process. Zionsim in israel, for example, went from relatively humble roots (OK, I know you disagree about humble, but I'm talking regular people here) of "let's get some place where jews can be proper farmers for a change" to the jingoistic/chauvinistic mad cap tsunami of entitlism we see rolling through that land now (it's all ours because we are jews and by god, we deserve it). Where we might agree is in your observation (somewhat implied?) that political movements combined with religious fervor tend to have similar dynamics. In Iran, this alliance between the religious and the political is showing its internal cracks big time (it's a big country) and that's how both you and Mohammad can be right.
you may have a point (or two) here, but color "revolutions" notwithanding, what's happening in Iran should be viewed on its own terms. The thing I noticed is how many young people they have over there, kind of confirming the statistics. many of these just want to have greater opennes inside the country, even at the cost of religious correctness. hardly a surprise. That there are outsiders who did and will try to turn things to advantage goes without saying – but there's clearly a deep internal angle in Iran too. There's good news in all this too, IMO. These events have done more to humanize the people of Iran in a few days than the few dissenting columnists like Roger Cohen have in as many months. can anyone imagine bombing these people to smitherins now that we have seen their faces and saw the positive determination and resourcefulness they are capable of?
Genius: it was published in Iran, so you're not going to find it unless you read Farsi. I'm guessing you don't.
You can't project a landslide from a poll where the Undecided/Other/Refused number is at 52%. You can't project a landslide from a poll where the incumbents approval rating on the economy is in the high 40's – you can't project a landlside defeat either, though. I don't see why these three scenarios are incompatible: 1. Ahmadinejad victory (plurality or landslide) 2. Massive fraud by the interior ministry to inflate A's vote 3. Rafsanjani power-grab In fact, given that this is Iran, the intersection of those three scenarios is not only possible, but highly likely.
Supporting a leadership which guns down peaceful protesters is only someone so peaceful as yourself could do.
Witty has the nerve to call somebody else a mouthpiece for a particular government, when I haven't come across a bigger mouthpiece than him on Zionism and the loony state of Israel.
YOU are a joke.
I wouldn't doubt at all that Israel would be perfectly happy to bomb Iranis to smitherins, especially after seeing how resolute the Iranis are and how fiercely they have stood by their man, Moussavi. Iran has been seething for years and it has finally boiled over. I think a powerful movement will spawn out of this and whoever is the ultimate winner will have to tread carefully and allow the Iranians greater freedom and better democratic venues, if not outright democracy yet. Lest some Westerners get too happy, I seriously doubt that they will allow their country to become a puppet regime or let go of their rights to peaceful nuclear energy. Iranians are a proud and independent minded people. Many westerners are assuming that these protests are a sign that they Iranians want to be "pro-Western' (whatever that means).
This is a good article and it ties in with the fact that I think it was clearly planned outside of the country by those "friends" of Rafsanjani's. Perhaps the 70-80 million the Pentagon allocated for regime change in Iran just might have had something to do with it. Maybe part of that money was spent on the PR firm of Burson-Marsteller and their "social networking" spin campaigns that I detailed at this site… they actually have Youtube video of spin doctors using the "TruCast" system to spin stories on the web and through Twitter and Facebook…. http://willyloman.wordpress.com/2009/06/17/burson...
Great to see Mondoweiss becoming an outlet for Teheran's propaganda. I am sure you're not on the Shura's paybill yet, so you may as well ask for a check. Please, the elections were a total sham – any idiot with a brain can understand that. No votes were ever counted, and people were being beaten and locked up before the sun set. You have to have negative twenty twenty vision to miss this. Of course some of your sources fed you Rafsanjani's letter. I thought you were smart kiddo. Had me going there.
good points. I tend to agree – something is happening in Iran that those of us out in the west who have been deprived of sensible information about that country, are having a hard time fully comprehending. It is up to the citizens of Iran to decide whether they wish to take their rightful place as a major power in the middle east. They know they sit on top of some of the best caches of a key resource, one the world craves and one the great superpowers will not hesitate to go to war over (iraq, right…?). With that resource becoming increasingly scarce, the game is on. Looking at this from the outside, it seems to me that a process has begun in Iran to lay claim to the kind of government that their status and geography and history qualify them for. Ahmadinejab may be a step along the way, but his government has not been up to the task. What is happening may just be a start. I am pinning my hopes on some kind of power sharing arrangement in the end, to pave the way for the new government to be perhaps a couple of years from now. Either way, I see it as a good thing that the people from all ages and walks of life have become so politically aware and so willing to clamor for what they feel is justly theirs – a fair election. This awareness is their best bet against the dastardly designs others outside their borders have on their resources. My comment by no means should imply that Israelis will not be willing to bomb them. Frankly, israel seems to be able and willing to bomb anything and anyone they designate as the threat-de-jour, and I don't mean just arabs or muslims. But Americans may feel a bit differently, which is why it is such a joy to see the neocons frothing at the moment….maybe they see what I see (no one ever said neocons were stupid. Just nutcases)
I'm really surprised at how much doubt is being cast on what is happening in Iran, by people who have very little understanding of the situation. Regarding the poll you speak of: http://www.mashrotenews.com/?p=4643 answers many of your questions. Regarding fraud: http://www.mashrotenews.com/?p=4643 A mathematician determines fraud with 99.3% significance. Here is my reply to your post: The power of Rafsanjani is overrated, specially after his defeat in 2005 and subsequent appointments of the militarist factions in various high positions of Iran. He is not a puppet master but someone who fears for his position in this power struggle where the militarists have taken over. 1-What is the real material evidence of voter fraud? Moussavi had representatives in more than 95 per cent of the polling stations. Among nearly 6000 representatives who signed off on the polling results, only 220 of them were barred from attending polls, due to lack of identification papers. What happened to the rest? – All of Karroubi's election monitors were removed. Election monitors were asked to leave at key times. ID papers were constantly promised but not given. Also see the statistical analysis of the results I've attached. 2- Why did Moussavi and his friends begin to doubt the results a few weeks before the vote? If he had serious doubts about the honesty of the electoral system, why even bother to declare your candidacy? What is Moussavi’s pre-election evidence for fraud? They didn't. They claimed that the use of government resources was illegal, against the constitution and this is part of their complaint: http://www.mashrotenews.com/?p=4643 3- Why Did Moussavi change the time of his post-election press conference abruptly? I don't know. Possibly because the night of their election the MoI contacted them, telling them that they had won, then mobiles were shut off in Tehran,and their committee was attacked by Basij? 4- Why did Rafsanjani and Moussavi’s wives speak out about fraud right after casting their votes? Because of the fiasco with missing ballots, refusal to issue papers for election monitors, removal of election monitors during key times. 5-Why did the Western media, who are normally against Iran and pro Israel (CNN, Fox, Voice of America, BBC, Huffington Post, Roozonline, Radio Zamaneh and Radio Farda), describe Moussavi the frontrunner as soon as Moussavi’s camp began to cast doubt on the elections, weeks before the vote? What degree of coordination was there between Moussavi’s campaign and the western media about this message? I don't know but again don't see how this is relevant. 6-Why was the Rockefeller Foundation-sponsored survey, done by a credible team of investigators (Terror Free Tomorrow), not highlighted in the coverage of the election in the West? Please see the video from the Charlie Rose Interview
Again, My fear is that Mohammed is articulating the rationale that could, and that HE is encouraging, be used to suppress democracy in Iran, in the form of mass arrests, political murders, suppression of civil liberties. Its what happens when a large minority feels suppressed, on either side, and results in civil tension if not civil war. The SAME prospect applies to Israel/Palestine in the event of any single-state proposal.
All of this demonstrates why libertarianism is the only rational long term solution. Cut the politics (government) down to the bare essentials, guard its integrity and dispute resolution moral authority ruthlessly, and let the marketplace of ideas hash out the rest.
I do read Farsi, and I haven't seen the photoshopped pics appear anywhere either. Mehrnews.com, which is where the pictures appear to be from, has unphotoshopped pictures of the rally, and they have had all day. I don't come down one way or another on the fraud issue, but I think it's suspicious that the supposedly photoshopped pic does not show the name or date of the newspaper, or even any surrounding articles that might give us a clue as to which publication it is.
Apparently, even though Iran has a lot more rural poor than college students, we assume students represent the majority. Strange huh? Of course, I would like to see MA loose. The sad fact is that he has been spending lots of money in the rural areas and those people probably don't twitter. Who really knows what's going on?
Wow. Our networks declare winners right after polls close? Have you never watched election coverage?
@MRW, "this worldwide news event which has captivated so many" This worldwide news event has been tweaked and blown way out of proportion by the MSM, perhaps to drum up support for an eventual attack to change the regime (wipe Iran off the map, to paraphrase the spinners), definitely to divert any and all attention away from the visit of the Israeli fascist Lieberman who now walks the streets of the USA, instead of being declared a Kahanist terrorist and warming a bench in a jail cell, where he belongs. What's good for the goose… PM
@Ed "Cut the politics (government) down to the bare essentials, guard its integrity and dispute resolution moral authority ruthlessly, and let the marketplace of ideas hash out the rest. " AMEN!!!
This story emanates from an Iranian film director supporter of Moussavi in France. If it was at all true, then Moussavi certainly jumped the gun. He could have waited overnight to announce vistory, but didn't. There is plenty of circumstantial evidence that the current 'uprising' is the result of the usual suspects' meddling. The US voted $400 million for destabilisation of Iran (Jundullah, etc), so the 'Twitterisation' of North Tehran would be chump change. I don't like AN for quite personal and subjective reasons (don't trust people with squinty eyes), but I'm convinced he really did win.
Richard Witty is, as usual, obfuscating., and introducing feints to change the subject. Iran doesn't face the prospect of just two 'nationalities' like a binational Palestinian state, but more than several (Lurs, Azeris, Baluchis, etc). To keep them all in one over-riding nation is a major achievement (one which the US with its $400 million funding for destabilisation (including monies to Jundullah terrorists, MKK etc) is doing its very best to upset. In this campaign, 'Twitterisation' of the youth is chump change. Otherwise why did the US State Department ask Twitter to keep going during the 'protests'? Giving out cell-phones (or at least subsidizing the cellphone suppliers very heavily) – ie dumping) costs virtually nothing against funding well-armed terrorist groups, and the resulting messages from hysterical youths that show up in the West are wonderful propaganda. I don't like Ahmedinajad for purely personal, subjective reasons (I don't like squinty-eyed people), but I am coming to the conclusion that he did win, and won big.
this whole thing is nothing more that stage-setting for war with iran. we need a war as a pretext to close hormuz, and we need to close hormuz to herd oil to israel, the med, and europe. donald duck could be installed as president of iran, but he'd still get his ass bombed as long as he sold gas and oil to china, because israeli america needs that gas and oil to defend israel as israel completes its ethnic cleansing of the high ground in the west bank: the israelis will eventually need that high ground as global warming progresses, and global warming is sure to progress now that china has become the number one producer of co2. and the president of iran, donald duck, would still get his ass bombed even if he completely scrapped his nuclear power project, because nothing would change: we'd still have rabid israelis and israeli americans screeching about a covert iranian nuke weapons program, in complete absence of evidence, just like they are now. it's all showbiz, just like the heroic "color revolutions" in ukraine, georgia and kyrgyzstan.
it's just too damn bad that putin doublecrossed everyone and reclaimed russian gas, oil and pipeline routes from the israeli russians who were scheduled to guarantee fuel to the israeli american armies post 9/11, as israeli american armies remodeled the middle east to israeli spec. so now we're gonna have to do it the hard way. thank god the big looters on wall street are crashing the american economy… we wont have as far to fall once oil goes to $300 a barrel when hormuz is closed.
I do not recall any political development in recent years, at least since the collapse of the Soviet bloc, in which people, normally on the same side, have split like they have on the Iranian election. While I greatly respect Mohammad and agree with him most of the time, I find other progressive Iranians outside of the country who seem to be just as knowledgable and who have a very differenttake on the election. While not totally convinced, I tend to side with them, considering Ahamadinejad to have been a disaster for the people of Iran on the world stage whose frequently infantile posturing has put his country and the world in jeopardy. I also will not make excuses for a regime that unleashes its police on unarmed demonstrators and forbids foreign journalists from reporting on it. It is not surprising that Ahamadinejad's re-election came as a relief to the Israeli government and its warmongering supporters in the US who were afraid that had he lost, the impetus for attacking Iran would have been lost. As the president of AIPAC, David Victor described him at the May AIPAC conference,Ahamadinejad is "the gift that keeps on giving." I have no more faith in the wisdom of the Iranian voters to make the intelligent decision than I do of those from any other country, and a look around the world, starting with Western Europe makes my point.
Thank you for giving us a look on the other side of the coin. People should not jump into conclusions based on what they hear and see from the media. There are a lot of things that needs to be considered before you speak up on this matter. Iran is a nation in turmoil right now and the last thing it needs are people calling for this and that without clearly understanding what happened. For my part, I just hope that this matter will be settled peacefully and as soon as possible.
That's what I'm afraid of, Paul. But I dont speak Farsi so I am subject to the same see-saw as everyone else. Meanwhile, as someone pointed put elsewhere here, they used this week to ban Max Blumenthal's Jerusalem video on YouTube. ;-)
This is relevant: "him and his children financed most of those election meetings in public squares and streets and universities." Check it out, those rich children were heavily involved behind the public scenes.
You mean like Lieberman, just hosted by Hillary? Or is he more like Ahmadinejad?
Some Israeli leaders want Iran to stick with the little guy who wants Israel to vanish: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB12452622611592402...
jeff blankfort- not all iranians in or out of iran are "progressives". many are conservative and religious. they seem to have a view more in line with mohammeds
"I have no more faith in the wisdom of the Iranian voters to make the intelligent decision than I do of those from any other country, and a look around the world, starting with Western Europe makes my point."–Blankfort How about the American voters? So does this mean you do not believe in the majority vote of the people style Democracy?
Most Iranians are still religiously conservative…
When you are someone like Rafsanjani who wields his power through his vast amounts of money, you can help create "A volcano will erupt on the social scene." scenario…
Frankly, I think that in order to vote people should be required to know what they are voting on and even then a vote by a majority has no bearing on whether something is write or wrong, just or unjust. If it was up to the voters of the US, we would still have racial segregation in the US in all its disgusting aspects and we probably would have dropped atomic bombs on North Korea, Vietnam, Libya and Iran. Almost every time the "enlightened" voters in California have voted on a proposition that affects people's lives, they have done do from either a racist or a sexist position. Democracy is a concept. In reality it has been used to cover up criminality at every level. As someone once said, "if voting really changed anything, they would make it illegal." Witness the first hundred plus days of Obama. What have we got? Chump change. What have trhe banks got? Billions. Anti-war Obama? Please? Now we have Af-Pak, most Americans being too lazy or too contemptuous of other peoples to pronounce a foreign country correctly. Have I answered your question?
I was referring to those Iranians I know and who are progressive and not a single one has supported Ahmadinejad. When some wanted to raise issues about Ahmadinejad at an ANSWER sponsored anti-Iraq war protest they were turned down since ANSWER has mechanically supported any regime that the US sees as an enemy. They supported the Chinese crackdown at Tienamen Square, brushed aside criticisms of Chinese aid to Pol Pot, they just loved Ceaucesku…but we were talking about Iran. I am not aware of Iranians outside of Iran supporting Ahamdinejad. The fact that someone with whom one disagrees politically takes the same side you do is no reason to change one's position. Pat Buchanan, for example, who is a racist when it comes to immigrants from Mexico and Latin America, and who in the past, white-washed Nazi war criminals, has a better analysis of the US role in Iraq and the Israel-Palestine conflict than does, for example, Noam Chomsky.
Mondoweiss is NOT news. It's 99% opinion with not-so-well hidden agendas. The articles are all from people that are less than objective, so there's no reason for it to be categorized as news. That and the rampant racism in the comments section is enough to warrant the move.
Here we go again, Blame the Jews, keeping Mondoweiss in the #1 spot for racist comments on a BLOG.
Have you ever asked yourself why you have to bring up ONE man that committed a lone, terrible act 15 years ago? Have you ever wondered why these acts are so rare among Jews, and why they are so common amongst Muslims? How many exactly? 13,421 Islamic terrorist attacks since September 11th! I guess you can't list all the Palestinian terrorists!!!
Get your facts right. The TFT Poll shows 34% for Ahmadi, and 14% for Moussavi, while 27% are undecided yet. To me 14% + 27% = 41%, which is more than 34% and still you state: "First, even if the majority of the undecided votes went to the reformist camp, it was still highly likely that Ahmadinejad could secure the 50% + 1 vote needed to avoid a run-off. "
An excellent article and a feisty, informative debate. Well done again Phil Weiss! I hadn't seen this article when blogged my own article about Iran today = see http://sydwalker.info/blog/2009/06/19/more-respec... It seems to me the most ifnormed consensus is that the election was genuine – and the outside destabliation attempt all too real. Having just watched Ali Khamenei tthis eveing, I rather tink the Rafsanjani crowd have bitten off more they they can chew even with outside connections.that presumably go back to Iran-Contra days.
I have noticed the exact same thing about Robert Fisk…
چرا جواب کامنت انگلیسی را فارسی می دهی؟ یعنی کسی که فارسی بلد نباشد حق اظهار نظر ندارد؟ عچب روش علمی یاد می دهند تو دانشگاه نیو یورک!!! دمت گرم دکتر
Carnas, you are a useful idiot. Nothing consipratorial about that.
Well, if you have any recollection over the last 8 years you would realize that it has been the goal of Zionists and Neocons to attack Iran, and their efforts at destabilization have reached a crescendo now that "our" guy Mousavi got a good shilacking by the incumbent, just as Rafsanjani did last time around. Do yourself a favor and read a little about the CIA involvement in these color-coded revolutions and you'll see their calling card. I mean, they even reported this in 2007 on the news concerning tens of millions of dollars being used for blackops in Iran aimed at destabilizing the country. These things take time. You'd be surprised at the impact propaganda can have over time on public opinion – ask Edward Bernays. This was orchestrated to a T – the stage was set, and the media was on the scene to support the narrative of vote fraud, even though there wasn't a shred of evidence supporting this. And seeing John McCain come out of his crypt to decry this "fraud" almost had me on the floor laughing.
Let's not forget our own militarized "police" clubbing heads at demonstrations when someone strays from their "free speech zone:" Or the lack of network news coverage of said demonstrations. When my brother took part in the MASSIVE protest in NYC during the RNC in 04 and i saw barely a mention of it on the news – yet this is the leading story everywhere in the US? I smell a rat. I smell a lot of them. I think Daniel Pipes got a boner when he learned Ahmadinejad won.
some of the best, earliest background on the current use of Iran elections to overthrow the regime by the CIA-Israel was already documented in the prior one of 2005: http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/GG06Ak03...
some of the best, earliest background on the current use of Iran elections to overthrow the regime by the CIA-Israel was already documented in the prior one of 2005: http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/GG06Ak03...
Wow! He speaks another language! Why don't you just tell us whether you're a Zionist or not? Wouldn't that make it a lot easier?
Wow, more credible with every post. First there was this gem: "But I couldn't have killed him, your honor! I used the passive voice in all my threats!" Now there's, "A wealthy powerful person with a political agenda couldn't possibly be trying to provoke anything behind the scenes." Brilliant. NYU must be proud.
Of course Zionism-firsters like Witty could care less if Iran is destabilized and thousands die. He couldn't even drag his hypocritical ass to an Iraq war protest because a few people were carrying "Free Palestine" signs. And thank you, Richard01, for mentioning the US State Department's quiet request that Twitter postpone its maintenance so that the hysterics could continue unabated. One more piece of the already rather obvious puzzle.
It's true what Jeff Blankfort says–this Iranian election hoopla has divided people to a surprising extent. I wonder if that wasn't one of the major motives and goals of those who were spending the hundreds of millions of dollars to destabilize that country. I am especially surprised however by the number of intelligent commentators who have been swept up in manufactured, color-coded emotional political zeal. Blankfort is now the most recent example. He writes, about Ahmadinejad, that his "frequently infantile posturing has put his country and the world in jeopardy." This is absolutely absurd on its face. Does Blankfort remember that Iran was part of David Frum's "axis of evil" before Ahmadinejad was even president? Does Blankfort think that the tone of a presidents' remarks are somehow more dangerous than the actions of a country's armed forces? Presumably, even while the U.S. military causes the deaths of over a million Iraqis, the bigger issue, the decisive factor, is that Ahmadinejad isn't diplomatic or polite enough when discussing imperialism and Zionism. Finally, Blankfort calls Iranian protesters who threw molotov cocktails "unarmed"… what does he imagine might happen to protesters throwing firebombs in the United States, Israel, or any other country in the world? And that is not to say that police have not abused their authorities and practiced brutality in these recent events in Iran–but is that not a common occurrence in the U.S., Israel, and every other country in the world as well? I am not content with Ed's earlier list of possible explanations for the Iran coup d'etat cheerleaders among us–sure some are Zionists and some are closeted beneficiaries of the globalized corporate status quo despite their liberal and progressive costumes. But there's something else going on here. I think these Americans are yearning for a revolution of their own. And they see on their television sets all those passionate, green-vested youths in a land far, far away, and they think back to their own youth, and the revolution that never happened, and the imagery of 24 hour internet and cable coverage is their unrequited rebel soul's nepenthe. And back here in reality, we're on the path to war. Seriously… How pathetic.
Khamenei must be proud of a halfwit like you defending dictatorship, even as he prepares to create a bloodbath on the streets of Tehran tomorrow. History will bury your ilk.
Actually, I hate the Israeli government with every fiber of my being, have been active in Palestine activism for years, and support a secular, democratic, one-state solution in Palestine. And I support the movement to establish real democracy in Iran and end the tyranny known as Velayat-e Faqih Wow! Did your brain just explode??
خوب چه عرض کنم. ما هنوز به شیوه های نوین علمی که شما حزباللهی ها از سید علی گدا آموخته اید پی نبردیم.
Israel and the Zionist lobbt has had Iran as a target going back before the Iraq war but what does that have to do with the validity of last Friday's Iranian elections? What Ahmadinejad has done, with his antics, is to give an air of "legitimacy" in the West the Israeli mantra that Iran's nuclear program is an "existential" danger to Israel and therefore must be eliminated. They began with his hosting of a conference on the holocaust, having been egged on to do so by Robert Faurisson, who has made defending Germany's role in WW2 a lifetime task. There are certainly legitimate questions that may be asked about the "official holocaust narrative" crafted by the zionists, but what did Ahamadinejad gain by holding the conference except to have the entire country branded as "holocaust deniers" which, given the election results, fair or foul, will be a further excuse for Israel to launch an attack. Then, his continued bating of Israel and anti-zio rhetoric may have gained him approval from countries within the region, after all Khomeni was doing that while Iran was trading arms behind the scenes with Israel, but what did that contribute except to build more support ad more justification in the eyes of Israel and its supporters, including almost 90% of the US Congress which can be counted on to give an Israeli attack its unconditional approval should it happen, even though its consequences may make the horrors of Iraq look like a garden party. Of course, folks in this country who have never set foot in that part of the world, and who have no idea what it means to be clubbed and gassed by the police, and in Iran's case,shot, cannot be expected to understand what experience is like but they might have least have the decency to respect others who have. And, as for those alleged Molotov cocktails, please send me the reference.
Who knows if what you say is true or false, adequate or inadequate, right or wrong. Nevertheless, I appreciate the food for thought, and the balance it provides to the mindless unanimity of Western media outlets.
← Previous Comments
Comments on this entry are closed.