Revolution in Iran?

[K-DoG7p7]

Its becoming more and more dangerous in Iran at the moment as supporters of Mir Hossein Mousavi have begun masking themselves as they take to the streets..
and unconfirmed reports that there is a coup d'état taking place..

[Cam63]

I hope no one does something stupid.

[KevinTBrown]

I hope no one does something stupid.

Too late for that. They rigged the election. They were idiotic in the way they rigged it. People are pissed.

If they wanted Ahmadinejad to win, they shouldn't given him a 63% win. 52% is still a win and people may not be rioting right now.

And, yeah, it's very obvious the election was rigged. WAY too many inconsistancies, especially based on the news that Mousavi handily won Tehran.

[Cam63]

Looks like we'll have to count on that famous Middle Eastern sense of humour to prevail.

[K-DoG7p7]

http://www.vg.no/uploaded/image/bilderigg/2009/06/13/1244900499734_686.jpg
http://www.vg.no/uploaded/image/bilderigg/2009/06/13/1244900670823_407.jpg

also two norwegian journalists where beaten by police

[Eliseu Gouveia]

Let me try to look surprised.


...................
.................
..................

[K-DoG7p7]

Let me try to look surprised.


...................
.................
..................
Come on!!! You can do it!
just a little bit harder!!

[Charles RB]

Mousavi's backers are vowing to appeal for a re-run, but it's considered unlikely to happen. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8098305.stm)

BBC's reporter in Tehran says:

He adds that this is the worst public violence in Tehran since the Islamic revolution 30 years ago, with protesters chasing away secret policemen who were infiltrating the crowds.

The authorities had earlier sealed off Mr Mousavi's campaign HQ, preventing his supporters from holding a news conference.

Interior Minister Sadeq Mahsouli said that any demonstrations needed official permission, and none had been given.

The AFP news agency quoted a senior police official as saying: "The time of dancing and shouting is over."

One opposition newspaper has been closed down and BBC websites also appear to have been blocked by the Iranian authorities.

And it's not just Mousavi thinking it's dodgy:

The head of the Committee to Protect the People's Votes, a group set up by all three opposition candidates, said the group would not accept the result, alleging fraud.

They have asked Iran's Guardian Council - a powerful body controlled by conservative clerics - to cancel the results and re-run the elections. A second opposition candidate, Mehdi Karroubi, declared the results "illegitimate and unacceptable".

[Samuel Catalino]

You don't protest the ayatollahs without consequence.

The guy who is said to have gotten 60 plus percent of the vote has their backing, and I suspect they are not fond of this demonstration.

Has fraud actually been proven in this election?

[West Mantooth]

I agree. Rigging it to look like a landslide victory was not a good idea with the polling indicating a close race.

But I doubt the protest will be anything more than a blip. Partly because I don't think Iran is as tolerant of political protest that isn't against the US. Shocking I know.

[PatrickG]

This underlines a central problem I have with theocratic states and large scale organized religion:

If you need guns and soldiers for protection, God is not on your side.

I'll apply this equally to the Ayatollah, the Pope, Scientology, etc.

The lion does not fear the gazelle. Holy men have no fear.

If you have fear, if you use worldly means to protect yourself and your agenda, you are an enemy of any God you claim to believe in or your God is not worthy of worship.

[Charles RB]

Has fraud actually been proven in this election?

Mousavi claims millions of ballots were not sent out, and the other opposition candidates are backing claims of fraud. Unless Iran lets foreign observers take a look, that's as close as we'll get to proof.

I doubt the protest will be anything more than a blip.

The violence in Terhan is said to be the worst since the Revolution, that's not a sign of a blip.

[Lester C.]

Here is some random trivia. Assyrians from Iraq and Assyrians from Iran really don't like each other. If an Assyrian with parents from one country is dating someone else with parents from the other county than both sides of the family will shun the couple.

[FalconX2000]

Mousavi claims millions of ballots were not sent out, and the other opposition candidates are backing claims of fraud. Unless Iran lets foreign observers take a look, that's as close as we'll get to proof.



The violence in Terhan is said to be the worst since the Revolution, that's not a sign of a blip.

The Obama administration says it finds it not credible that Mousavi lost his hometown.

[ShaunN]

Hi! I'm not convinced that there was wide-scale fraud, though we will have to wait and see what the future reports bring. Until recently, Ahmadinejad was expected to win handily, and it's only been over the past week or two that people started talking about Moussavi being a spoiler. It could be that Moussavi was being overhyped, leading to inflated expectations.

One thing to bear in mind is that Iranian politics is very complex. Ahmadinejad has many enemies, both on the conservative and reformist side of the political spectrum. Recently, the NYT had an article about a powerful Iranian political figure working to unseat Ahmadinejad because he (Ahmadinejad) had spoken of corruption and disaffection within the revolutionary regime itself. (Which would make his winning the election by fraud sadly ironic). The revolutionary figure, Rafsanjani, felt that Ahmadinejad was attacking the foundations of the republic.

All of which is to say that while I am sure there was some fraud, it may not have been enough to make the decisive difference. Ahmadinejad is very popular among the poor and the rural voters, of which there are great many in Iran. On the other hand, as the article notes, the fact that Ahmadinejad seems to have done so well in areas where he did not before and even in Moussavi's strongholds seems extremely suspicious.

I'm going to wait for more information on this before making up my mind.

[Arrogantcur]

I was hoping that Ahmadinejad would lose this, because then relations with Iran would've theoretically been reset. As long as he's in power, there's going to be the belief that he's making nuclear weapons which he intends to use against Israel, giving either Israel or the U.S. an excuse to launch a preemptive strike that will certainly kill innocents, and that's not something I want to see.

Rigged or not, this result is will not make things any better and will quite possibly make them worse.

[the4thpip]

Cop cycle being burned:

http://www.spiegel.de/img/0,1020,1553441,00.jpg

The cop:

http://www.spiegel.de/img/0,1020,1553446,00.jpg

Tehran is burning:

http://www.spiegel.de/img/0,1020,1553450,00.jpg

But will this revolution be televised in Iran?

http://www.spiegel.de/img/0,1020,1553451,00.jpg

[Charles RB]

BBC News front page is showing images of the rioting, and a video with a Disturbing Image warning. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8098834.stm) (I dunno if it works outside the UK)

Even in shots not showing many people, you can from the noise that there's a lot of stuff going on. And then there's the other shots showing a LOT of people. One clip shows the riot police kicking at and hitting a man who is already down and being dragged off; another shows a group beating on someone who'd tried to run, even though they don't appear to be doing anything to fight back.

The penultimate clip shows the road FULL of people.

[West Mantooth]

Hi! I'm not convinced that there was wide-scale fraud, though we will have to wait and see what the future reports bring. Until recently, Ahmadinejad was expected to win handily, and it's only been over the past week or two that people started talking about Moussavi being a spoiler. It could be that Moussavi was being overhyped, leading to inflated expectations.

One thing to bear in mind is that Iranian politics is very complex. Ahmadinejad has many enemies, both on the conservative and reformist side of the political spectrum. Recently, the NYT had an article about a powerful Iranian political figure working to unseat Ahmadinejad because he (Ahmadinejad) had spoken of corruption and disaffection within the revolutionary regime itself. (Which would make his winning the election by fraud sadly ironic). The revolutionary figure, Rafsanjani, felt that Ahmadinejad was attacking the foundations of the republic.

All of which is to say that while I am sure there was some fraud, it may not have been enough to make the decisive difference. Ahmadinejad is very popular among the poor and the rural voters, of which there are great many in Iran. On the other hand, as the article notes, the fact that Ahmadinejad seems to have done so well in areas where he did not before and even in Moussavi's strongholds seems extremely suspicious.

I'm going to wait for more information on this before making up my mind.

I agree. I'm not saying Ahmadinejad lost fair or unfair( I lived through two Bush elections), but he wouldn't have thrashed the competition like that.

But Ahmadinejad works as a straw man. The face Americans place at the forefront of the nuclear program, Jew hating Iranians. When he's a very small cog in the wheel.

[Sean Walsh]

I hope no one does something stupid.

Who is this no one you speak of? Ahmadinejad, or the people?

Because - quite honestly - if Ahmadinejad rigged the election (which is what everyone suspects) and denied fair democracy, then the people need to take him and his regime down the only other way possible - by force.

And with the growing disdain for him in Iran, I think this is the way his fall needs to happen. Not by US and NATO and whoever going in and starting World War 3, but by the people rising up, screaming they've had enough, and toppling this guy themselves.

[Lester C.]

For the record things wouldn't be like this if the Assyrian Empire was still running the Middle East. After it was lost in BC that's when the whole neighborhood went to hell.

[K-DoG7p7]

But will this revolution be televised in Iran?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p43YYovonS0

[Weetomuncher]

I'm hoping that the people topple the entire Islamic republic and move towards a modern, more secular Iran which could be more like Turkey which is probably the model for a modern Islamic nation.

I'm really hoping that Iran heads for reform as the whole structure of Iran is twisted against anyone who isn't a supporter of the government and religious administration.

[Michael P]

Who is this no one you speak of? Ahmadinejad, or the people?

Because - quite honestly - if Ahmadinejad rigged the election (which is what everyone suspects) and denied fair democracy, then the people need to take him and his regime down the only other way possible - by force.

And with the growing disdain for him in Iran, I think this is the way his fall needs to happen. Not by US and NATO and whoever going in and starting World War 3, but by the people rising up, screaming they've had enough, and toppling this guy themselves.

And the people who get beaten and trampled to death in the rioting are what, the collateral damage of history?

[cactusmaac]

Not really. Ten, fifteen years ago mouthing off about the government would get you a visit from the secret police. Doesn't happen anymore.

[Charles RB]

And with the growing disdain for him in Iran, I think this is the way his fall needs to happen. Not by US and NATO and whoever going in and starting World War 3, but by the people rising up, screaming they've had enough, and toppling this guy themselves.

Actually, it'd be a lot preferable if the Ayatollahs said "whoops, we'll do a recount/another vote" and he lost that. Less people get shot dead that way.

[Christopher Cross Is God]

For the record things wouldn't be like this if the Assyrian Empire was still running the Middle East. After it was lost in BC that's when the whole neighborhood went to hell.

So the Assyrians brought eternal peace & prosperity, but when they went down every minute of life in the Middle East has been hellacious.......Whatever you say, lol.


I'm hoping that the people topple the entire Islamic republic and move towards a modern, more secular Iran which could be more like Turkey which is probably the model for a modern Islamic nation.


Yeah, right. Turkey's not a good country to emulate.

The only reason bad international press on them is minimal is because they haven't been conflicting much with other countries.

[Arrogantcur]

Actually, it'd be a lot preferable if the Ayatollahs said "whoops, we'll do a recount/another vote" and he lost that. Less people get shot dead that way.

Let's hope that's how it goes. Losing your right to vote is bad, but so is losing your life. The Iranian people should not have to choose between those two.

[Charles RB]

Let's hope that's how it goes. Losing your right to vote is bad, but so is losing your life. The Iranian people should not have to choose between those two.

Especially not when there's no point to a vote-rig - as cactusmaac notes, Iran's more tolerant than it used to be already, and every law passed has to be vetted by the Guardian Council anyway. If Mousavi had won - or got enough votes for a run-off election, which I don't think he'd have won but it would've been a huge boost for reformists to get to that stage - it wouldn't have let to a gigantic collapse of theocracy, reforms would be manageable. (And that's not even counting Mousavi is a former Iranian PM, during the 1980s no less)

It looks to me like someone panicked.

[Christopher Cross Is God]

Especially not when there's no point to a vote-rig - as cactusmaac notes, Iran's more tolerant than it used to be already, and every law passed has to be vetted by the Guardian Council anyway. If Mousavi had won - or got enough votes for a run-off election, which I don't think he'd have won but it would've been a huge boost for reformists to get to that stage - it wouldn't have let to a gigantic collapse of theocracy, reforms would be manageable. (And that's not even counting Mousavi is a former Iranian PM, during the 1980s no less)

It looks to me like someone panicked.

Exactly. There wouldn't have been that much of a change....I think the difference would've been not much shit-talking about Israel, and possibly calmer international relations.......Perhaps also slightly more lenient laws, but treatments of homosexuals wouldn't have changed, nor much else.

As far as the elections being rigged, a lot of Iranians tend to think that about each election. I remember, after the past two elections, asking some Iranians (Who live in Iran) why they were popular enough to get voted in, and they dismissed the question, saying it's all rigged and a lot of people don't pay attention.

Whether elections have been rigged or not, that's probably just a defeatist mentality, due to resentment over the form of government they have.

I haven't paid attention to the current election, really, so I don't know much about Mousavi, aside from what you said (Former PM in the 80's).......I'd assume the riots going on are mainly from the younger generation, who are all into text messaging, the internet, etc.....So they're more amped up because they acquire more information than Iranians did in the past 20-30 years.

[Lester C.]

So the Assyrians brought eternal peace & prosperity, but when they went down every minute of life in the Middle East has been hellacious.......Whatever you say, lol.



When your ancestors were living in mud huts, we built the Tower of Babylon which is history's first skyscraper.:mad Put my people back in charge and we'll fix everything.

[Christopher Cross Is God]

When your ancestors were living in mud huts, we built the Tower of Babylon which is history's first skyscraper.:mad Put my people back in charge and we'll fix everything.

So Assyrians having historically significant architecture a couple thousand years ago is indicative of them running the entire Middle East smoothly?

Nevermind the fact that, throughout history, most great societies had significant inventions & developments going.

Your claims are akin to Greeks or Iranians talking about how great their people were way back in time........Doesn't mean much in regards to what they're doing today, especially when Greece & Iran still have their own countries, while Assyrians are predominantly a minority population in Iraq, Syria, and Iran.

[Knightmare27]

When your ancestors were living in mud huts, we built the Tower of Babylon which is history's first skyscraper.:mad Put my people back in charge and we'll fix everything.

If I remember correctly you p.o. God and he screwed up everyone's languages so you couldn't finish so no thank you.

Yeah if the violence does continue it will probably end in a massacre like Tienanmen square. We all know when people without guns face people with guns it rarely is very pleasant.

[Charles RB]

As far as the elections being rigged, a lot of Iranians tend to think that about each election. I remember, after the past two elections, asking some Iranians (Who live in Iran) why they were popular enough to get voted in, and they dismissed the question, saying it's all rigged and a lot of people don't pay attention.

Report I saw (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8083867.stm) noted:

the election of President Mohammad Khatami in 1997, and of President Ahmadinejad in 2005, were both unexpected.

So if people behind the scenes are trying to fix the election, they are either not very good at it, or they are afraid to be seen to be going too strongly against the will of the people.

So I'd presume that's a defeatist mentality, yeah. You get those in every country.

I'd assume the riots going on are mainly from the younger generation, who are all into text messaging, the internet, etc.....

They don't all look that young in the footage, there's older men there too.

[the4thpip]

.I'd assume the riots going on are mainly from the younger generation, who are all into text messaging, the internet, etc.....So they're more amped up because they acquire more information than Iranians did in the past 20-30 years.

You do realize that Iran is like the youngest country in the world? The younger generation there IS the majority of the population.

The government asked them to make lots and lots of babies after all the deaths in the war against Iraq.

[ShaunN]

Dear Friends,

Here is Juan Cole's quick take of the Iranian election. He also indicates that it looks like a large and very clumsy fraud was perpetrated on the Iranian people. He also makes the points that it changes relatively little for US dealings with Iran and that even if Mousavi had won, the US would have been facing many of the same foreign policies from Iran, both because Mousavi differs from Ahmadinejad more in style than substance on FP issues and because Iran's Supreme Leader, Ali Khamanei, is the one who really matters on FP questions

http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2009/06/13/iran/

Shaun

[Samuel Catalino]

Mousavi claims millions of ballots were not sent out, and the other opposition candidates are backing claims of fraud. Unless Iran lets foreign observers take a look, that's as close as we'll get to proof.

Which means we have no proof of fraud and not likely to get any.

[Samuel Catalino]

This underlines a central problem I have with theocratic states and large scale organized religion:

If you need guns and soldiers for protection, God is not on your side.

I'll apply this equally to the Ayatollah, the Pope, Scientology, etc.

The lion does not fear the gazelle. Holy men have no fear.

If you have fear, if you use worldly means to protect yourself and your agenda, you are an enemy of any God you claim to believe in or your God is not worthy of worship.

Patrick,

Do you know of any government that does not use force for protection?

[the4thpip]

Which means we have no proof of fraud and not likely to get any.



Patrick,

Do you know of any government that does not use force for protection?

Samuel,

why do you always defend evil?

[KevinTBrown]

US is rejecting Ahmadinejad's claim of victory:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090613/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_us_iran

[Charles RB]

Which means we have no proof of fraud and not likely to get any.

You can't seriously think it was above board.

[Adam C]

Who is this no one you speak of? Ahmadinejad, or the people?

Because - quite honestly - if Ahmadinejad rigged the election (which is what everyone suspects) and denied fair democracy, then the people need to take him and his regime down the only other way possible - by force.

I'm probably being a needless pedant on this part, but it's not like Ahmadinejad actually has the power to rig the election. It's not his regime. It's Ayatollah Khamenei's and boy did he just pull a strategic blunder.

[PatrickG]

Patrick,

Do you know of any government that does not use force for protection?

Do you believe any government speaks as an agent of God?

If we're going with Judeo-Christian history, I seem to recall that God opposed his chosen people getting a king like everyone else.

If we're going with Christian history, I seem to recall Jesus' attitudes on such things being:

A) Pay your taxes because money is the domain orf governments, not God.

B) Keep your money changing and worldly business and power the Hell away from God's temple.

God doesn't give a damn about governments. But no government speaks for God. At best, they can be serviceable to His plans, like anyone and anything else in the world.

But I'm calling BS on the idea that any institution, person, place or thing of material power has God's blessing... and saying that if it did, it wouldn't need the material power backing it up because God's power would suffice.

[SUPERECWFAN1]

Ahhh Iran...bastian of democracy !


I can't believe that Yackoff Smirnoff's twin brother rigged an election. To shame....(cues the whole WHAT A COUNTRY line)

[section 8]

Ahhh Iran...bastian of democracy !


I can't believe that Yackoff Smirnoff's twin brother rigged an election. To shame....(cues the whole WHAT A COUNTRY line)

He learned from Bush's example.

[SUPERECWFAN1]

He learned from Bush's example.

Well as much as I hate the fact Bush won the 2004 election , given his being a fucking moron....well he did win it. I voted Kerry but the man was as lifeless and didn't inspire anyone to believe in him. The best result of that 2004 election was Barack Obama making that speech in 2004. That put him on the map.

And I remember I told some in CBR....thats who needs to run in 2008. A few told me he was too young and that he didn't have the experince. But hey....who knows what the future holds.

[schwamp]

Why the fuck does anyone care? The elected position is a figurehead anyway, isn't it? I thoughtt he Ayatollah is the true power in Iran, anyway.

[CYOTI]

Then why did the Ayatollah even bother rigging the election if he was the true power then? Or why put the leading opposition candidate and co. under arrest for that matter?

[Adam C]

Then why did the Ayatollah even bother rigging the election if he was the true power then? Or why put the leading opposition candidate and co. under arrest for that matter?

The whys are a matter of speculation, but authoritarian states and the guys in charge are often the most paranoid and insecure (while paradoxically the most arrogant and meglomanaical, but I figure that's basic bully psychology). Just because Ayatollah Khaemenei holds all the power through the office of Supreme Leader doesn't necessarily mean he'll do something stupid out of fear that his regime's might be jeopardized.

Patrick,

Do you know of any government that does not use force for protection?

It's obvious he's talking about the way the Iranian regime is an authoritarian state that largely relies on violence or the threat thereof to maintain power rather than democratic legitimacy and consent as with democratic states, with use and threat of force supplementing that. What's so hard to understand about that?

[Adam C]

Why the fuck does anyone care? The elected position is a figurehead anyway, isn't it? I thoughtt he Ayatollah is the true power in Iran, anyway.

Presumably the Iranian people care because the regime just undercut one of the view channels they had to expressing their views and choices in the political field, however limited it was. And now pent up frustration against the regime from over the years is being vented.

[mgs]

Presumably the Iranian people care because the regime just undercut one of the view channels they had to expressing their views and choices in the political field, however limited it was. And now pent up frustration against the regime from over the years is being vented.
Many of the Iranian people, particularly the young, are pissed off, like those in China were a couple of years ago. B/c the gov't doesn't let them have freedom of press, and other amenities, they deserve to have. The new leaders would have supposedly fought for these freedoms and it would have been good.

[K-DoG7p7]

More then a 100 politicians arrested in their homes the night

[the4thpip]

More then a 100 politicians arrested in their homes the night

Some of them former government officials, no less. They did not go after people who threw stones. They went after the opposition leaders.

[king mob]

More then a 100 politicians arrested in their homes the night

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8099218.stm

[Christopher Cross Is God]

Well as much as I hate the fact Bush won the 2004 election , given his being a fucking moron....well he did win it. I voted Kerry but the man was as lifeless and didn't inspire anyone to believe in him. The best result of that 2004 election was Barack Obama making that speech in 2004. That put him on the map.

I think he was referring to the 2000 election, not 2004.


Some of them former government officials, no less. They did not go after people who threw stones. They went after the opposition leaders.


How do you know they didn't go after people who threw stones?

[K-DoG7p7]

I think he was referring to the 2000 election, not 2004.





How do you know they didn't go after people who threw stones?

because they where all people who worked for the guy who actually won the election by 8 million votes..

[Charles RB]

Not everyone's oppressed though, the Ahmadinejad supporters are getting to have a massive rally... (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8099501.stm)

[CYOTI]

~20% of the populace is still a lot.

[Charles RB]

CNN has a clip of Ahmadinejad defending the arrests as being a rule-of-law issues & everyone being subject to law, and completely dodging a quesiton about whether he guarantees Mousavi's safety. (http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/06/14/iran.election.rival/index.html)

[CYOTI]

Of course he is going to dodge it, according to one reporter, there is a good chance that Ahmedinejad and his paramilitary cronies might want Mousavi killed.

[Arrogantcur]

Well as much as I hate the fact Bush won the 2004 election , given his being a fucking moron....well he did win it.

As C.C.I.G. said, I'm pretty sure he was referring to 2000, although I'm not yet totally convinced that 2004 was won entirely legitimately. (I think it was, but I have a sliver of doubt.)

The elected position is a figurehead anyway, isn't it?

If so, the ship would look a lot better without this particular figurehead!

[ShaunN]

Hi! Here is Juan Cole's response to the argument that Western media may have overestimated Mousavi's support because they were talking to the urban, educated elites and ignoring the poor masses who support Ahmadinejad:

http://www.juancole.com/2009/06/class-v-culture-wars-in-iranian.html

[Lester C.]

CNN has a clip of Ahmadinejad defending the arrests as being a rule-of-law issues & everyone being subject to law, and completely dodging a quesiton about whether he guarantees Mousavi's safety. (http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/06/14/iran.election.rival/index.html)

I fear for the lady who asked that question. She has courage that most of us, myself included, will never know. Never.

[SUPERECWFAN1]

As C.C.I.G. said, I'm pretty sure he was referring to 2000, although I'm not yet totally convinced that 2004 was won entirely legitimately. (I think it was, but I have a sliver of doubt.)



If so, the ship would look a lot better without this particular figurehead!

Ahhh ok... sorry guys...I stand corrected there. Thanks...

[Charles RB]

I fear for the lady who asked that question. She has courage that most of us, myself included, will never know. Never.

She's a foreign journalist, she's very unlikely to get whacked.

[Corrina]

LIke that American journalist that Iran was holding prisoner until recently, you mean?

[West Mantooth]

She was freakin Hot,too!

[Eliseu Gouveia]

She was freakin Hot,too!

She still is.:wink:

[Charles RB]

LIke that American journalist that Iran was holding prisoner until recently, you mean?

They let her go, and I doubt they'd want to go through the political aggro again now.

[the4thpip]

Holy spit, the Ayatollah ordered a review of the election results,

[Typo Lad]

Holy spit, the Ayatollah ordered a review of the election results,
Link please?

But that'a HUGE.

[Crowforge]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jun/15/iran-opposition-rally-banned-mousavi

[KevinTBrown]

Holy spit, the Ayatollah ordered a review of the election results,

Link please?

But that'a HUGE.

Ayatollah: "Let's do a "re-count" to to make it look like we're listening. I'm tired of wasting bullets."

Ayatollah lackey: "Yes, your highness!"

Ayatollah: "Just make sure that the results only change enough to give Ahmadinejad a slight win."

Ayatollah lackey: "Yes, your highness!"

Ayatollah: "And make sure Mousavi learns the error of his ways."

Ayatollah lackey: "Already being done, your hiighness!"

Ayatollah: "It's good to be the Ayatollah. Oh piss boy!"

[Crowforge]

and you look like a bucket of shit

[Corrina]

She still is.:wink:

I saw the news last night. It was Christine Amanpour who tried to get the question answered.

She's always had guts and brains.

[Corrina]

and you look like a bucket of shit

WTF Crowforge??

Stop that. Official mod warning.

[Crowforge]

WTF Crowforge??

Stop that. Official mod warning.
It's a play on History of the World, Part I. It's not meant to be taken serously. Do I still get the warning?

[Corrina]

It's a play on History of the World, Part I. It's not meant to be taken serously. Do I still get the warning?

Aha. Sorry.

But try to be clearer next time, 'kay. Put it in quotes or something.

[Matt Algren]

Which means we have no proof of fraud and not likely to get any.
Statistically speaking, we're getting darn close. fivethirtyeight.com has an analysis of the reported results (http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/06/iran-does-have-some-fishy-numbers.html) which, once you dig into them, are pretty revealing.

These pictures were taken at the demonstration in Tehran within the last hour.

http://web4.twitpic.com/img/12541818-a4741ae9f26967fa46625af2d8e8703f.4a366a33-full.jpg

http://web4.twitpic.com/img/12544843-cf2d30004eb94c7ac7fcbc4173fc4e6c.4a366ba2-full.jpg

http://web1.twitpic.com/img/12541738-c6364fac4431827778bcbc40aa4e4cee.4a366c18-full.jpg

Twitterers, @persiankiwi (http://twitter.com/persiankiwi) and @madyar (http://twitter.com/madyar) are the ones to follow right now.

edit: Not sure the pictures will show up. Go here (http://twitpic.com/photos/madyar) for the pictures. edit again: Warning: Graphic pic on page two. If the man isn't dead, he's close to it.

[KevinTBrown]

I really like the job fivethirtyeight.com does. More often than not, they're pretty much dead on.

IIRC, for the MN senate recount, they had Al Franken winning by about 250 votes. (I wish I could fine the Rachel Maddow link where she interviewed the fivethirtyeight.com founder on it.) Right now, Franken leads by about 320.

[ShaunN]

Hi! Here is a link to a Salon piece on the various arguments for and against the idea that the Iranian election was rigged. Looks like there are decent arguments on both sides, though the weight of the evidence does seem to lean to the idea that some significant fraud occurred.

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2009/06/15/iran_results/

Interesting point about how, a few weeks ago, a poll showed that Ahmadinejad was ahead 2-1. However, as the commentator notes, the numbers involved are a bit misleading.

Shaun

[Charles RB]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jun/15/iran-opposition-rally-banned-mousavi

Oh hell.

For those who didn't click the link:

Shots have been fired at an opposition rally in Tehran where more than 100,000 Iranians were protesting against the re-election of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

An Associated Press photographer saw one person killed when shots were fired from a compound for pro-government militiamen. Several other people appeared to have been seriously wounded in Tehran's Azadi Square. BBC's Persian service quoted an eyewitness saying that four protesters have been killed.

A reporter on Iran's English-language Press TV said: "There has been sporadic shooting out there ... I can see people running here."

Speaking live on the air, he said: "A number of people who are armed ... I don't know exactly who they are, but they have started to fire on people, causing havoc in Azadi Square."

Local residents said they had heard shooting in three districts of northern Tehran.

[Charles RB]

Extra detail at BBC News:

correspondents said riot police had been watching the rally during the afternoon and had seemed to be taking no action.

But reports at 2045 local time (1615 GMT) said shots were being fired.

"There has been sporadic shooting out there... I can see people running here," Reuters quoted a reporter of Iran's Press TV as saying from Tehran's Azadi Square.

"A number of people who are armed, I don't know exactly who they are, but they have started to fire on people causing havoc in Azadi Square."

A photographer at the scene told news agencies that security forces had killed one protester and seriously wounded several others.

He said the shooting began when the crowd attacked a compound used by a religious militia linked to the country's powerful Revolutionary Guard.

The AFP news agency reported that police fired tear gas and groups of protestors set motorbikes alight.

Assuming the compound attack is what caused it and not a coincidence, then at least we're not in a situation where people are being shot just for protesting loudly.

[Matt Algren]

Still amazed that there are this many people at this demonstration.

http://photos-c.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc1/hs084.snc1/4895_91788009453_45061919453_1759002_5332867_n.jpg

[Charles RB]

This bit just got added to the previous BBC article (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8101098.stm):

A man is said to have been arrested over the shooting.

The way it's been written makes it sound like someone behind the shooting has been arrested, which I wouldn't have thought would be right.

Holy spit, the Ayatollah ordered a review of the election results,

Where did you see that? :confused:

[Michael P]

Where did you see that? :confused:

I saw it earlier today on the TV news. Don't recall which channel (I was just walking through the living room on the way to the kitchen to get some milk).

But here it is from Arutz Sheva (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/Flash.aspx/166517), The Financial (http://www.finchannel.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=40161&Itemid=1), and the Brisbane Times (http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/world/supreme-leader-orders-inquiry-into-fraud-claim-20090615-catj.html).

[Paul McEnery]

I saw it earlier today on the TV news. Don't recall which channel (I was just walking through the living room on the way to the kitchen to get some milk).

But here it is from Arutz Sheva (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/Flash.aspx/166517), The Financial (http://www.finchannel.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=40161&Itemid=1), and the Brisbane Times (http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/world/supreme-leader-orders-inquiry-into-fraud-claim-20090615-catj.html).

I got it from the Guardian today, too.

I have so not one fucking clue as to what's going on or where it's going right now; but it looks to me like Khameni was trying to shore up his power base for the election of the electors who elect the Supreme Leader (or whatever it is they do). And that this plan appears to be going tits up.

OTOH, it could be that the Western news has indeed badly wished in one hand over Iran, and published what they wanted to see.

[Charles RB]

I have so not one fucking clue as to what's going on or where it's going right now

There's a fuck-up's going on and it's going to Shit Creek, if that helps.

[CYOTI]

They have apparently shut down all major internet service in tehran.

[Paul McEnery]

There's a fuck-up's going on and it's going to Shit Creek, if that helps.

I'm actually glad I've been too broke to go to the bar. Since my local bar's owned by a pair of Iranians. Who really had their hopes up last week.

[Charles RB]

More on the Guardian Council announcing a recount. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8102400.stm)

Iran's powerful Guardian Council says it is ready to recount disputed votes from Friday's presidential poll.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's re-election is being contested by rival Mir Hossein Mousavi and other moderate candidates, who are seeking a rerun.

The BBC's Jon Leyne in Tehran says they may not accept the recount offer.

Several people died in a protest on Monday and Mr Mousavi urged followers not to take part in a rally planned for Tuesday, amid fears of new violence.

"This headquarters calls on people to avoid the trap of planned clashes," a Mousavi spokesman told AFP news agency.

...

The Guardian Council - Iran's top legislative body - said votes would be recounted in areas contested by the losing candidates.

But a spokesman for the council told state television it would not annul the election - as moderate candidates have demanded.

The opposition says millions of ballots may have gone astray.


Eight people are confirmed as having been killed in the shooting.

Unrest spreads:

There are reports of fresh demonstrations at Tehran University - one of the main centres of tension in recent days. About 120 university lecturers have resigned.

The powerful Speaker of parliament, Ali Larijani, has condemned an attack by police and militia on a student dormitory.

Iranian media quoted him as saying: "The interior minister is responsible in this regard."

Unrest has been reported in other parts of Iran. One of Mr Mousavi's websites said a student had died on Monday in clashes with hardliners in the southern city of Shiraz.

Our correspondent says the authorities appear to be weakening in their support for President Ahmadinejad.

The country's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has ordered an inquiry into the allegations of vote-rigging.

BBC's John Leyne weighs in from Tehran:

The more I see this announcement about being willing to recount ballots, the more I think it is just a political ruse to try and wrong-foot the opposition. They have offered a recount, but they have not said who is going to carry it out. Maybe the same people who did the election count to start with.

In any case, the opposition says there were so many other irregularities, that a recount alone would not satisfy them. For example, many more ballot papers were issued than counted, they say. Some people did not get enough ballot papers so they could not vote in areas loyal to the opposition. Polling stations were closed early, and so on and so forth.

[moonknight11]

Don't know if it has been posted yet but whatevs. http://twitter.com/NextRevolution

[Charles RB]

More rallies in Tehran, despite the offer of a recount. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8103577.stm)

Since then, the authorities have imposed tough new restrictions on foreign journalists operating in Tehran - the most sweeping restrictions our correspondent in Tehran, Jon Leyne, says he has ever faced.

They must now obtain explicit permission before leaving the office to cover any story.

Journalists have also been banned from attending or reporting on any "unauthorised" demonstration - and it is unclear which if any of the protests are formally authorised.

Some telephone, SMS and internet services have also been restricted, prompting some protesters to turn to the internet messaging service Twitter to communicate.

The official said the state department contacted Twitter over the weekend to urge it to delay a planned upgrade that could have cut daytime service to Iranians.

The importance of such new means of communication was highlighted by a US official on Tuesday.

The Twitter thing is interesting, because that's the US government taking an action that assists the protestors...

BBC's man in Tehran:

In a way we've reached a bit of a deadlock. The government can't work out how to deal with the unprecedented demonstrations. But the opposition is disorganised, it has no co-ordination, no strategy.

And the demonstrators, despite the radical nature of what they are doing, don't fully perceive the way in which they are threatening the foundations of Islamic Republic. This has gone way beyond disputed elections.

I don't think the offer of a recount will have much effect. They haven't said who would do the recount, what about irregularities on election day? Nothing less than a full re-run of the election would satisfy the opposition. I can't see how government would offer that. The Supreme Leader has staked so much on the results of this election, it would be a massive u-turn.


Here's the downside in the Iranian government's arresting of 100 reformist figures, or so it seems to me - now it's less likely someone could take control or have some influence on the protests, without which how are you going to end them or negotiate?

[CYOTI]

I dont think the security forces or the supreme leader is interested in negotiating. Their grand strategy presently seems to be to crack as many heads as possible and intimidate the populace during the ten day period.

[Charles RB]

I dont think the security forces or the supreme leader is interested in negotiating.

Even if they're just interesting in getting the protestors to accept something and go away, they'll need some figure who they can force to the table. Disorganised movements are dangerous, there's no one to talk to and no one to say "we'll stop now".

[CYOTI]

I dont think the protestors are willing to accept anything, but Mousavi as the winner at this point and Ahmadinejad has made himself too unpopular that even if he wins by another legitimate election, they are going to riot again. The only option to his side is to intimidate or outlast the protestors. Doing an about face is seriously going to weaken the Supreme Leader.

[Charles RB]

(crosspost)

And yet more protests are planned, while the state's volunteer militia do vicious raids on universities. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8104466.stm)

Jon Leyne raises an interesting issue:

It's quite clear that there are enormous disputes going on behind the scenes. But the people who run this country are not stupid. There are some quite smart people, even loyalists to Mr Ahmadinejad, and they must realise how much deeper they are digging themselves into this mess every day.

But at the moment, quite inexplicably, the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei seems to be quite in thrall to Mr Ahmadinejad. It's almost as if he's taking his orders from him. He usually stays above the fray and interestingly he's still not been seen in public since the election.

[king mob]

The Iranian national football team wore green armbands in support of Mousavi at a World Cup qualifier in South Korea.

As many as eight players wore green wristbands and the captain, Mehdi Mahdavikia, wore a green armband, symbolising support for Mir Hossein Mousavi, the opposition challenger, at the high-profile game, which was broadcast live on Iranian state television.

By the second half of the match, only most of the players had removed the green bands.
In Tehran, Mr Mousavi, whose supporters claim Friday's election was rigged, called for a third public rally as pressure increased on the Islamic regime over President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's fiercely-contested re-election.

Meanwhile, outside of the stadium in Seoul, dozens of Iranians staged a protest ahead of the match between Iran and South Korea to condemn the weekend election results that gave Mr Ahmadinejad a second term.

They unfurled a banner that read "Go To Hell Dictator" and chanted "Compatriots, we will be with you to the end with the same heart."

Protesters said they would display the banner during the match.

Since the official result of the election gave President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad an overwhelming victory, Iran has seen protests on a scale unprecedented since the 1979 revolution that created the Islamic republic.

Iran needed to win the match against South Korea - and rivals Saudi Arabia and North Korea, playing simultaneously, needed to draw - in order to guarantee Iran's football team automatic qualification for the 2010 World Cup in South Africa.




http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/5559871/Iranian-football-team-shows-support-for-Mousavi-with-green-arm-bands-at-Seoul-World-Cup-qualifier.html

[Charles RB]

THIS is a worrying new development: someone's printing off photocopies of a letter that allegedly proves a vote-fix (http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/fisk/robert-fisk-secret-letter-proves-mousavi-won-poll-1707896.html)

the photocopy appeared to be a genuine but confidential letter from the Iranian minister of interior, Sadeq Mahsuli, to Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, written on Saturday 13 June, the day after the elections, and giving both Mr Mousavi and his ally, Mehdi Karroubi, big majorities in the final results. In a highly sophisticated society like Iran, forgery is as efficient as anywhere in the West and there are reasons for both distrusting and believing this document. But it divides the final vote between Mr Mousavi and Mr Karroubi in such a way that it would have forced a second run-off vote – scarcely something Mousavi's camp would have wanted.

Headed "For the Attention of the Supreme Leader" it notes "your concerns for the 10th presidential elections" and "and your orders for Mr Ahmadinejad to be elected president", and continues "for your information only, I am telling you the actual results". Mr Mousavi has 19,075,623, Mr Karroubi 13,387,104, and Mr Ahmadinejad a mere 5,698,417.

Could this letter be a fake? Even if Mr Mousavi won so many votes, could the colourless Mr Karroubi have followed only six million votes behind him? And however incredible Mr Ahmadinejad's officially declared 63 per cent of the vote may have been, could he really – as a man who has immense support among the poor of Iran – have picked up only five-and-a-half million votes? And would a letter of such immense importance be signed only "on behalf of the minister"?

...

Mr Ahmadinejad's loyalists will undoubtedly blame "foreigners" for the "letter" to Ayatollah Khamenei. But its electrifying effect on the Mousavi camp will only help to transform suspicion into the absolute conviction that their leader was quite deliberately deprived of the presidency. Marjane Satrapi, the acclaimed author and the Oscar-winning director of the black and white cartoon Persepolis, was in Brussels brandishing the same document.

Whether this letter is accurate or a forgery - and for the reasons Fisk states it probably isn't accurate - is irrelevant if the protestors believe (and want to believe) it's accurate. That's not fuel for the fire, it's a whole oil tanker.

There's also this interesting development on the protest and how the authorities are reacting to it (emphases mine):

they were far fewer than Monday's million-strong march and scarcely a fifth of their number reached Azadi Square from the centre of Tehran. Their enthusiasm to maintain their protest – led yesterday by a cavalry of a hundred or more motorbike riders – was cruelly treated by the organisers, who clearly had little idea whether they were supposed to direct them to a central venue or all the way out to Azadi. At times, they stood in the heat for more than a quarter of an hour while organisers argued about the route. This was no way to overthrow a government.

What was significant, however, was that once more the security authorities chose not to confront the Mousavi demonstrators. Military conscripts wearing bright yellow jackets and standing with their hands clasped behind their back – rather than holding batons – lined the first mile of the road but then abandoned the marchers to their own devices. This followed less than 24 hours after the frightening confrontation between up to 20,000 Mousavi and Ahmadinejad supporters at Vanak Square on Tuesday night when Iranian special forces paramilitary police protected Mr Mousavi's men and women from the government "Basiji" militia. Although some civilians were later hurt in fist-fights on the street, the government cops brought in reinforcements and prevented the Basiji and thousands of other Ahmadinejad supporters from entering north Tehran.

Oh, and the Iranian parliament is not happy, and neither are other figures:

Fifty-two MPs have asked the interior minister why he could not prevent the post-election intimidation and violence. Parliament has asked for a fact-finding investigation into the vandalisation of Tehran University property. Ali-Akbar Mohtashemi, a member of the Combatant Clerics Assembly – an important figure who founded the Iranian Revolutionary Guards and sent them to Lebanon when he was Iran's ambassador to Damascus – has demanded a committee to investigate the election results, made up of senior clerics, MPs, members of the judiciary, the Council of Guardians and an official of the interior ministry.

...

It emerged that the daughter of Hashemi Rafsanjani, the head of the influential Assembly of Experts that has the right to dismiss the Supreme Leader, had attended Tuesday's opposition rally. Faezeh Rafsanjani's public display of support for Mousavi, in defiance of a ban on unauthorised marches from the interior ministry, was widely interpreted as another sign of high-level rifts in the Islamic Republic.

[K-DoG7p7]

http://gfx.dagbladet.no/labrador/679/679152/6791525/jpg/active/960x.jpg

[Infra-Man]

Saw this yesterday..

Iran election turnouts exceeded 100% in 30 towns, website reports (http://www.guardian.co.uk/global/2009/jun/17/iran-election-rigging)

Turnouts of more than 100% were recorded in at least 30 Iranian towns in last week's disputed presidential election, opposition sources have claimed.

In the most specific allegations of rigging yet to emerge, the centrist Ayandeh website – which stayed neutral during the campaign – reported that 26 provinces across the country showed participation figures so high they were either hitherto unheard of in democratic elections or in excess of the number of registered electors.

Taft, a town in the central province of Yazd, had a turnout of 141%, the site said, quoting an unnamed "political expert". Kouhrang, in Chahar Mahaal Bakhtiari province, recorded a 132% turnout while Chadegan, in Isfahan province, had 120%.

Ayandeh's source said at least 200 polling stations across Iran recorded participation rates of 95% or above. "This is generally considered scientifically impossible because out of every given cohort of 20 voters, there will be at least one who is either ill, out of the country, has recently died or is unable to participate for some other reasons," the source said. "It is also unprecedented in the history of Iran and all other democratic countries."

The claims are impossible to verify, but they are consistent with comments made by a former Iranian interior minister, Ali Akbar Mohtashamipour, who said on Tuesday that 70 polling stations returned more completed ballot papers than the number of locally eligible voters.

Supporters of the defeated reformist candidates, Mir Hossein Mousavi and Mehdi Karoubi, have complained that their campaigns' inspectors were refused access to or ejected from polling centres on election day.

Abbas Abdi, a Karoubi supporter who was among the radical students who took over the US embassy in Tehran in 1979, said some polling stations had run out of ballot papers as early as 10.30am – even though it is standard procedure to issue each voting centre with more ballots than the number of voters.

After polling times were extended beyond the original 6pm closing time, other stations refused to provide ballot papers for fear that participation would exceed the number of voters on the register, Abdi told Radio Zamaaneh, a Farsi-language station based in the Netherlands.

As a side note, the demonstration in Union Square in Manhattan last night was pretty big. A friend coming into town tomorrow mentioned some demonstration or gathering at the UN Building on Saturday that we're both going to check out.

[the4thpip]

Only Ahmadinejad would be so popular that more than 100% of the people would come out to vote for him!

[DavidAllred]

My neighbor's uncle was arrested during pre-op for a stomach surgery:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article6527580.ece

That's about as close to home as I can imagine this getting, but something tells me it's going to get worse before it gets better.

[CYOTI]

Only Ahmadinejad would be so popular that more than 100% of the people would come out to vote for him!
He is even more popular than that. According to Wiki, voters were jumping over to his side and changing their votes even after the election was over.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:FakeResults_Iran.jpg

[KevinTBrown]

Well, this is not good for Iran: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/ml_iran_election

Nearly a million people (from some estimates, including Iran's principle tv station) in peaceful protest on Thursday may not be so peaceful today.....

[Charles RB]

That was not a smart move.

I do like this bit of disconnect though:

"Some may imagine that street action will create political leverage against the system and force the authorities to give in to threats. No, this is wrong," he said.

The supreme leader left open a small window for a legal challenge to the vote. He reiterated that he has ordered the Guardian Council, an unelected body of 12 clerics and Islamic law experts close to the supreme leader, to investigate voter fraud claims.

The Council has said it was prepared to conduct a limited recount of ballots at sites where candidates claim irregularities.

[ShaunN]

Dear Friends,

Here is a concise rundown on the different factions at play in Iran:

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2009/06/19/iran/

Sadly, I suspect that things are about to become a lot more violent in Iran. A lot is going to depend on if Mousavi is willing to go the next step and, most importantly, will the security forces fire on the protestors? My sense has always been that the Iranian security forces will do what they are told by the government; however, while this article emphasizes that is true of the Revolutionary Guards and the Basij militia. it is not so obvious it is true of the regular army and police. What happens may come down to that.

The article also mentions the Council of Ayatollahs, who have the power to remove Khamanei. However, I've seen no indication that they are ready to do this.

The interesting thing about Khamanei's speech is that it makes lots of good points - no functioning government can afford to give in to mob rule, and all we have to prove that voter fraud occurred is a lot of very powerful suspicions and seemingly illogical/peculiar outcomes in many places. But, of course, the deck is stacked heavily in favour of the authorities on this because they control information, etc. They simply lack credibility with the public - the breakdown in the legitimacy of the state with a significant part of the public seems complete.

That being said, we need to remember that a sizable proportion of the Iranian population did vote for Ahmadinejad. It is entirely plausible that in an indisiputably free/fair election, Ahmadinejad would win. What makes the Iranian situation really dangerous is that we probably are dealing with a deeply polarized society that is fairly evenly divided. The problem, of course, is that the power in charge represent only one part of that society and have actively resisted reaching political compromise with the other half - leading, almost inevitably, to the kind of showdown going on now.

Shaun

[ShaunN]

PS -someone mentioned earlier the idea that Ahmadinejad seems to have Khamanei in his thrall. I disagree - I think that what is going on now illustrates the extent to which Khamanei is really in charge. In a sense, the protests have forced the puppetmaster to put down the puppet and take control more directly. Ahmadinejad is just a figurehead, representing certain political views and ideas, which are held by Khamanei.

The main concern of both the "liberals" and "conservatives" in Iran, of course, is over domestic social policy. In the case of foreign policy, both Mousavi and Ahmadinejad are on the same page, though the tone is different. Obama has been criticized for making this point, though he is correct in this narrow sense.

At any rate, things look bad - both parties have backed each other into corners from which there is no easy way out.

Take care,

Shaun

[PatrickG]

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/06/19/iran.election.us/index.html

Khamenei defends elections, says cheating is impossible, said protests are unacceptable, bragged about Iran's human rights record, cited Waco as an example of U.S. human rights abuse...

And Iranian TV is airing confessions from people who claimed they were Iraqis paid by the U.S. to destabilize Iran by challenging the elections.

[Charles RB]

It's kicking off again: (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8110582.stm)

Iranian police have warned they are ready to use force to prevent a rally in the capital, Tehran, over the disputed presidential poll.

Hundreds of police are said to have gathered in the city centre, amid an atmosphere of extreme tension.

There are conflicting reports as to whether the rally will go ahead.

But correspondents say a demand by the country's Supreme Leader to end street protests appears to have made some protesters merely more determined.

People contacting the BBC from Tehran spoke of a heavy security presence in the area around Enghelab Square. Users of the micro-blogging site Twitter said protesters were gathering.

One witness told AFP news agency that he saw police beating people trying to reach rally site.

The reports could not be independently confirmed, and foreign news organisations - including the BBC - have been subjected to strict controls which prevent reporters from leaving their offices.

...

an aide to Mr Karoubi said his party had cancelled the protest.

The BBC's Jon Leyne in Tehran says that even if the rallies are formally cancelled, it is so late now that many protesters are expected to turn up anyway.


Mr Mousavi had been expected, along with fellow challengers Mr Karroubi and Mohsen Rezai, to discuss more than 600 objections they had filed complaining about the poll at a meeting of the Guardian Council, which certifies elections, on Saturday.

But neither Mr Mousavi nor Mr Karroubi attended the meeting - which suggests, our correspondent says, they have abandoned their legal challenge to the election results.

State TV quoted the Guardian Council as saying it was "ready" to recount a randomly selected 10% of ballot boxes.

It had previously offered a partial recount of disputed ballots from the election, rather than the full re-run of the election demanded by protesters.


There was also a pre-Ahmadinejad rally:

The rally was attended by President Ahmadinejad. But former President Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani - a close associate of Mr Mousavi, and open critic of President Ahmadinejad - did not attend.

But correspondents say the ayatollah's warning only appeared to incite protesters, and the nightly chants of "God is great" - which have echoed from rooftops around Tehran in a call to protest - became louder on Friday night.

Although the Supreme Leader controls many levers of power, Mr Rafsanjani heads the Assembly of Experts, which has the power to elect the leader, supervise him, and theoretically even to dismiss him, our correspondent says.

Behind the scenes, he says, there appears to be both a political battle between two veterans of the Islamic Revolution, but also a titanic dispute about the whole future of Iran, whose outcome no-one can predict.

Jon Leyne reports:

The situation is very tense and very confused. We don't have direct, immediate reports from the scene because of course we're not allowed to go there.

It's not even entirely clear whether the opposition wanted the demonstration to go ahead. There were a lot of mixed messages through the day whether or not it had been called off. My instinct is that I think opposition supporters are so fired up, they're going to turn up anyway.

They've been very good at getting messages between themselves very quickly, so it's possible they might move the demonstration if there are riot police in the planned location.

[the4thpip]

His eyes make me wonder how well he is still sleeping at night:

http://www.spiegel.de/img/0,1020,1560495,00.jpg

[CYOTI]

^Pretty well, he is kinda crazy like old Adolf.

[ShaunN]

Dear CYOTI,

Hi! On what basis do you compare Ahmadinejad to Adolph Hitler? Ahmadinejad may be an ideologue and fairly ruthless in his actions to his detractors but, as far as I am aware, he has done nothing to put him into the category of "mass murderer" (though that may change over the next few days). Indeed, he has a long, long way to go before he has as much blood on his hands as, say, George Bush Jr, Richard Nixon or Henry Kissinger.

Also, doesn't comparing Ahmadinejad to Hitler just cheapen the analogy?

I'm not trying to argue here, I am just genuinely curious as to why you would make this comparison.

Thanks,

Shaun

[PatrickG]

The buzz on Twitter is that helicopters are dousing protesters with a chemical irritant that feels like scalding water (but doesn't actually scald).

[PatrickG]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sW3HVHGvgkE

[PatrickG]

Student Protestors shot on camera:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NmmixxfKggk

The rumors circulating are that the army has been given the order to kill protesters but many are resisting and that Mousavi has announced he's prepared to become a martyr.

Keep in mind, the Iranian government allegedly has disinformation specialists on Twitter now. Which is probably easier for them than photoshop considering their horrible track record with faked weapons tests and, more recently, fake pro-government rallies created with bad photoshop edits.

[K-DoG7p7]

Its total chaos now..

Itd unconfirmed reports of Iranian Soldiers who are refusing to follow orders, hopefulle trhose numbers will get huge

[beetlebum]

The buzz on Twitter is that helicopters are dousing protesters with a chemical irritant that feels like scalding water (but doesn't actually scald).

Despite what people say, I'm actually learning a lot about this on Twitter.

Speaking of which, here's a tweet that got to me:

"Basij are marking doors to attack later. Use petrol to remove marks."

May God be with them all.

[Charles RB]

The buzz on Twitter is that helicopters are dousing protesters with a chemical irritant that feels like scalding water (but doesn't actually scald).

I'm waiting for actual confirmation on that before I believe it. (Practically, why'd you bother air-dropping a chemical on guys the police and militias are within splash distance of when you already have water cannons, tear gas, and guns?

The other buzz is European embassies are treating the wounded. Possible, but by now BBC News would have that up if the British Embassy was doing that.

[Charles RB]

The Iranian authorities are ramping up the disinformation:

a story posted Saturday on the Web site of the government-run Press TV, Iran's deputy police commander said 400 police personnel had been wounded since the opposition rallies began last weekend. Watch police and protesters clash Saturday »

"Families of those killed or injured in the events since June 12 have filed 2,000 complaints so far," acting Police Chief Brigadier General Ahmad-Reza Radan told Iran's Fars news agency.

Radan said 10,000 complaints had been filed by people asserting that their daily lives had been disrupted, adding, "They have called on the police to deal with rallies firmly."

"The recent rallies destroyed 700 buildings, burst 300 banks into flame, damaged 300 cars and 300 public properties," Radan said.


And the latest BBC correspondent log is: (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8105207.stm)

1900 GMT
We have this daily cry now from the roofs of Allahu Akhbar - God is Great - it's an opposition protest and night after night it seems to get louder and longer.

Earlier logs report the security forces aren't doing as well as they initially seemed, being outnumbered and losing control in places.

[Corrina]

Despite what people say, I'm actually learning a lot about this on Twitter.

Speaking of which, here's a tweet that got to me:

"Basij are marking doors to attack later. Use petrol to remove marks."

May God be with them all.

As pointed out, while Twitter is a good source, it's an ultimately unreliable source unless things can be substantiated otherwise.

It's too easy to hide behind an anonymous handle and tell untruths. Could be Iranian secret police trying to scare protesters, could be some joker on 4chan...could be anyone.

It's *likely* to be legitimate but take it with a grain of salt. It's good that we are getting *some* information and it looks like Twitter is one of the few ways but that doesn't meant it's always accurate.

[FalconX2000]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sW3HVHGvgkE

Now that's a huge crowd.

[Charles RB]

It'd be useful to see what the Iranian protestors are saying and believing, of course. Like the letter allegedly claiming Mousavi won a big vote share (see earlier pages) - it's almost certainly a fake, but a lot of the protestors believe it and will act on it.

[CYOTI]

I'm waiting for actual confirmation on that before I believe it. (Practically, why'd you bother air-dropping a chemical on guys the police and militias are within splash distance of when you already have water cannons, tear gas, and guns?

Because the basij are in the hospitals waiting and arresting those who are seeking treatment.

[beetlebum]

As pointed out, while Twitter is a good source, it's an ultimately unreliable source unless things can be substantiated otherwise.

It's too easy to hide behind an anonymous handle and tell untruths. Could be Iranian secret police trying to scare protesters, could be some joker on 4chan...could be anyone.

It's *likely* to be legitimate but take it with a grain of salt. It's good that we are getting *some* information and it looks like Twitter is one of the few ways but that doesn't meant it's always accurate.

Yes, I get that point.

(There's no need to reiterate it with me.)

However, I do get your reasons for bringing this up again, and it is a worthwhile reminder.

[beetlebum]

I'm not sure if the authorities there are actually spraying people with chemicals, but I do know they've been spraying people with purple water cannons.

Here's why: (http://www.slate.com/id/2193473/)

A photo on the front page of Wednesday's Wall Street Journal showed protesters being doused with colored-water cannons in the Indian city of Srinagar. Why would police spray protesters with purple water?

To identify and arrest them later. Many water cannons on the market today come with a tank specially designed to store a semi-permanent colored dye. If police decide they want to "tag" protesters with the dye, they can press a button to inject it into the main water stream. Once the water cannon is trained on a crowd, anyone hit by the spray will be easily recognizable by police. India isn't the only country to use dye in its water cannons: During the last 15 years, protesters in Hungary, Indonesia, and Israel have all been showered with colored water.

Police say the dye they use has helped them identify rioters in Srinagar, where authorities arrested at least 30 state government employees who were protesting for higher pay. But according to the local daily Rising Kashmir, the purple water cannons also hit shopkeepers, auto-rickshaw drivers, and the Getty Images photographer who took the shot that accompanies this article. Locals have also complained that the purple dye is toxic, potentially causing skin rashes and cancer. (The purple dye is reportedly the same chemical that Indians have been cautioned not to use during Holi, the Hindu color festival.) Srinagar police denied the charges, responding that the dye was "harmless."

[Charles RB]

Iran TV is now referring to demonstrators as terrorists: (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8111352.stm)

The state TV report said 10 people had been killed and more than 100 wounded in clashes between police and "terrorist groups" in Tehran. It said "rioters" had set two gas stations on fire and attacked a military post.

Earlier it said an unspecified number of people had died when "rioters" set a mosque on fire. But later reports said there had been no deaths at the mosque. A correction was also issued reducing the overall death toll to 10 from 13.

Our correspondent says the reports could serve as a warning to Iranians that if they take part in further protests they risk getting embroiled in violence, or being identified as a "terrorist".

...

state TV said members of the exiled opposition group Mujahideen Khalq Organisation (MKO) had been arrested for "terrorist activities". The report said they had been burning buses and smashing public property - and had been taking orders from their operation room in the UK.

Yep, us Brits are the enemy again. BBC Persia must be REALLY pissing the regime off.

Further evidence of political struggle:

State media also say five family members of one of Iran's most powerful figures, Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, were arrested during the protest.

...

Mr Rafsanjani's daughter, Faezeh - who addressed supporters of protest leader and defeated presidential candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi on Tuesday - was among the Rafsanjani family members arrested on Saturday.

It is not clear whether they have since been released.

The arrests suggest the political dispute is fracturing the heart of the Iranian leadership, our correspondent says.

Mr Rafsanjani has maintained a public silence over recent days, but it is certain that he is active behind the scenes, he adds.

Jeremy Bowen, BBC News, Tehran
There seems to be an expectation based on things that we're hearing here that there will be more demonstrations later on today, and that means that perhaps the pattern of yesterday might be repeated.

I think that what's important is that there's a split at the top of the country, that both sets of leaders on either side are digging in their heels, and that's then mirrored by the split on the streets between those people who really think the election was a fraud and people who don't.

That suggests there's a serious fracture that's happened which means this isn't going to go away. They're not going to kiss and make up in the near term.

Oh, and BBC's correspondent Jon Leyne has been ordered by the authorities to leave Iran.

[the4thpip]

I just saw them interview a young woman on CNN who is one of the protesters. She recalled how one of the militia told her to run away, and she said she replied to him "How can I run when I am so proud to be here" and then he hit her with a club.

Anyone who acts patronizing to protesters like that, who thinks they don't really know what freedom is because of the way they were raised has neither a brain nor a heart.

[Christopher Cross Is God]

Here's a group of nice vids regarding the situation, which a couple people I know posted on facebook. They all happened today.


This one's some female protester who got shot down. It's on facebook itself, didn't find a youtube link for it:

http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=200249100507&ref=mf

The ranting in the background is a few people yelling in anguish for her to stay alive, then one person in the background is cursing about the Basijees..............One of the words I caught is "daiyoos", which means something along the lines of "one who pimps out his sister." Sounds goofy in English, but it's a strong curse-word in Farsi.




I'll paste the comments that were on the links:



Natural gas lines of Basij Head quarter was set on fire after Basijie's locked themselves inside . at 0:05 you can see the whole building exploded at least 5 from Basijies were killed you can see fire in different parts of city location

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cGyZo2jOOYY




2009 Iranian Revolution - Basij in plain cloth attack protesters

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHteqbHS_BU

[Christopher Cross Is God]

Then there's this, apparently taken from an article from The Guardian (That's what I assume based on some of the text towards the end)......A lot of it seems kind of scattered, partially due to the guy's English not being perfect, but it's easy to understand.

Just a slight tidbit, but "enghelab" means revolution. They probably named the street such after the Islamic Revolution.

[Christopher Cross Is God]

Tehran, Saturday june 20 2009 - 4.30 local time, Enghelab Street:

I meet with my students on Saturdays for a private class. We cook and eat together, then talk of philosophy. This time there is no class. We only try to keep up our morale. We are very determined but scared. That is how I can describe most of the people who came out to attend the demonstration today. After the Supreme Leader’s fierce speech at the Friday prayers, we knew that today we would be different. We feel so vulnerable, more than ever, but at the same time are aware of our power. No matter how strong it is collectively, it will do little to protect us today. We could only take our bones and flesh to the streets and expose them to batons and bullets. Two different feelings fight inside me without mixing with one another. To live or to just be alive, that’s the question.

There is another student who would have her lunch with us, but is not coming to the demonstration. She’s too scared and while pretending to be in control bursts into tears. She says she hates to see people suffer. We tell here we have suffered for years. She says she doesn’t want people to die. I tell her tens of thousands die each year on the roads in Iran, at least this time it would be for a good cause. She says we are elites and can save ourselves for better times when we can be more useful. We reply there is no difference between people when we are all in such a condition.

We finish the lunch and sit to read poems of Mirzadeh Eshgi. That’s what I suggest. He was a revolutionary anarchist at the time of Constitutional Revolution 1906-11, killed for speaking out. It fits our situation. Poems play an important role here. Nothing influences Iranians like poetry. And these days, everything is about influence and fear.

The poems we read are bitter, ironical and they make us laugh. When sorrow is more than you can tolerate, you burst into laughter. Then we get going. It’s a quarter to four. But the following hour proves funnier than we expected.

In the bus everybody is going to the same place. All the streets to Enghlab Square are blocked. Guards tell you where to go and where not to go. They show us a small street that leads to Enghlab. I panic: Why have they left it open? Do they want us to go in and surround us? Two demonstrations were taking place, one in Enghelab and the other in Azadi, respectively meaning, ‘revolution’ and ‘freedom’. I tell my students, ‘We’re recycling the names.’

Enghlab is busy, very busy, but there is no demonstration. People show the V sign with their fingers but walk in silence. In front of Tehran University, I see the students inside, clutching the rails of the gates, as if behind bars. They shout. But I can’t hear them. In front of the students on the sidewalk, on the other side of the bars, there are two rows of anti-riot police and a row of Basij militia holding posters insulting the demonstrators of the previous days. One says, ‘The trouble-makers pertain to MI6’. An hour later, when the street is no longer so crowded, I go to the guy holding the poster and ask him, ‘What is MI6?’ ‘Britain’s intelligent service’, he replies. ‘Is it different from Scotland Yard?’ I ask. ‘No, they’re the same thing.’ ‘Oh, I see.’

We walk up and down. We’re a group of four. We find friends, but don’t join them. We don’t want to change the mood by changing our companionship. We’re enjoying ourselves.

Then comes the attraction of the day. Two water-spraying machines. They’re huge, the size of a bus but taller, with fenced windows and two water-guns on top of each. We burst into laughter. They don’t know how to use them. They shoot second floor windows, anti-riot police and the people, including girls in tight manteaus. It’s more Zurich than Tehran. One machine is stuck. They don’t know how to drive it. It’s a hot day, the sun is intolerably shiny and it feels good to become wet. Much of the time, the sprays are not powerful. It’s as if they’re watering grass. And it just does not fit the horror that’s in the air, the aggression with which the people are hit with batons. A beautiful day. It has been beautiful throughout the past week. You wonder whether nature is ironical.

They push the crowd back and forth, from here to there but soon realize people are on all sides. We hear bullets, but people don’t rush away. They’re fake. Nobody’s shot.

Then in a couple of minutes, the street is not crowded as before, the anti-riot police leave, and the students are gone. We don’t understand why. Deprived of communication, you never get the big picture. Maybe they have attacked the university from the back.

We hear in Azadi Square there’s a huge crowd. So we get going. As we pass the fences, a student, his face covered, smiles bitterly, ‘They’ll storm the dormitory tonight.’

We have to walk. We feel awful. There’s a demonstration somewhere and we can’t get there. We wish we were in a crowd. That’s the only way we feel better. We have joked for hours now, but we need to shout. Something is pressing from within.

Then at Towhid Square the scene changes drastically. The streets to Azadi are blocked. But this time, people don’t change their path. They fight for it. There’s a shower of stones. Tear gas. Fire. People jam the sidewalks. The battle scene is huge. We cannot see the limits but it extends to nearby street. My student is keener to go forward than I am. Her mother could persuade her to stay home for two days, but now allows her to go out on the most dangerous day. The people shout, ‘Down with the dictator’. The anti-riot police are also throwing stones. People don’t run back anymore. I grab a broken brick and throw. I’m amazed. I never thought I’d do it. I should practice. It was a very bad shot. I grab another one, the size of a pomegranate and keep it with me, hiding it behind my back. My feeling is a mixture of a university teacher and a hooligan.

If we want to go forward we need to pass through tear gas. So we ask a car to give us a lift. Then there is an attack. They cannot tell enemy from other people although they want to show everything is fine and they’re only after trouble-makers. There is a woman who is being beaten. She’s horrified and hysterical but not as much as the anti-riot police officer facing her. She shrieks, ‘Where can I go? You tell me go down the street and you beat me. Then you come up from the other side and beat me again. Where can I go?’ In sheer desperation, the officer hits his helmet several times hard with his baton. ‘Damn me! Damn me! What the hell do I know!’

I ask myself, ‘how much longer can these officers tolerate stress? How many among them would be willing to give their lives for somebody like Ahmadinejhad?’

The driver tells us that he did not vote but he has come out to the streets to beat the Basijis. At each intersection he is guided by officers in a different direction and after a while we realize we are back where we started. We see officers load people in a van used for carrying frozen meat. Then a couple of minutes later, a new scene unfolds. We get out. Here’s a true battleground. And this time it’s huge. Columns of smoke rise to the sky. You can hardly see the asphalt. Only bricks and stones. Here people have the upper hand. Three lanes, the middle one separated by opaque fences, under construction for the metro. The workers have climbed up the fences and show the V sign. They start throwing stone and timber to the street to supply the armament. I tell myself, ‘Look at the poor, the ones Ahmadinejhad always speaks of.’ But the president’s name is no longer in fashion. This time the slogans address the leader, something unheard of in the past three decades. It’s a beautiful sunset, with rays of light penetrating evening clouds. We feel safe among people moving back forth with the anti-riot police attacks.

Two Basiji motorcyles are burning. People have learnt how to do it fast. They lay the motorcycle on its side, spilling the gasoline and lighting it on fire. We climb up a pedestrian bridge and watch. People shout from the bridge, ‘Down with Khamenei’ and ‘your aura is gone for good’. A Basiji is caught: He soon disappears under the crowd beating him. As if in a roman coliseum those on the bridge shout, ‘Beat him up!’ I shout with them before coming to my senses. What is with me? He staggers away as a group of ten people kick and punch him.

At Gisha, there’s a similar scene. Again the people have the whole crossing in their control and you can hear the uproar and horns. Motorcycles are burning in smoke. But I’m suddenly stunned. I see a red object, which later proves to be a man, about 50, his head covered with blood, crouching, people passing him by as if he was a garbage can. Then comes a guy with a long stick who wants to beat up the already beaten Basiji. People gather and stop him. He’s furious, ‘Why should I not? They beat tiny girls! They beat everyone! Bastard!’

I shout at him, ‘But we’re not beasts! We’re not like them!’ Somebody takes the Basiji away as people curse him. I think, ‘But the bastard deserves it. To come out of your house in the morning, just to beat up people you don’t even know.’ I don’t recognize myself and my feelings anymore.

You can get in any car to go back home. People trust one another now. The woman in the back seat sitting next to me says, ‘It’s no longer about Mousavi or election results. We have suffered for thirty years. We didn’t live a life.’ An old man next to her offers me fresh bread. They tell jokes about the political figures and laugh out loud. They feel victorious. ‘I had waited thirty years for this. Now I feel relieved.’ She writes down my phone number to send me news. ‘Send it to The Guardian!’, she says.

I will. I promise.

[Charles RB]

They cannot tell enemy from other people although they want to show everything is fine and they’re only after trouble-makers. There is a woman who is being beaten. She’s horrified and hysterical but not as much as the anti-riot police officer facing her. She shrieks, ‘Where can I go? You tell me go down the street and you beat me. Then you come up from the other side and beat me again. Where can I go?’ In sheer desperation, the officer hits his helmet several times hard with his baton. ‘Damn me! Damn me! What the hell do I know!’

If accurate, you do have to wonder how long the police can put up with the stress and confusion before they break.

[Charles RB]

Sunday report: (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8112036.stm)

Witnesses said there were no rallies in the capital on Sunday, a day after 10 people were reported killed in clashes between police and protesters.

A number of alleged protest leaders are reported to have been arrested.

The authorities have also continued a crackdown on foreign media - expelling the BBC's Tehran correspondent.

The corporation confirmed Jon Leyne had been asked to leave the country, but said the BBC office in Tehran would remain open.

Campaign group Reporters Without Borders says 23 local journalists and bloggers have been arrested over the past week.

On Sunday, thousands of security officers were out on the streets but protesters stayed away.

The BBC's Jeremy Bowen, in Tehran, says many residents of northern Tehran could be heard shouting from the rooftops "death to the dictator" and "Allahu akbar" on Sunday evening.

The chants have become a popular form of protest, and our correspondents says men, women and children joined in and Sunday's chanting was much louder than on previous days.


As the security forces continued to round up protesters on Saturday, they arrested several family members of Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani - a powerful opponent of Mr Ahmadinejad.

Analysts said the arrests came as a surprise because Mr Rafsanjani is head of the Assembly of Experts - a cleric run group which has the power to remove the supreme leader.

All of Mr Rafsanjani's relatives were reported to have been freed by Sunday evening.

Reporter's log: (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8105207.stm)

JEREMY BOWEN, TEHRAN, 1635 GMT

The strong show of force for a second day meant that there were no demonstrators on the streets but that doesn't mean the crisis is over. Far from it. The splits in the country and in the leadership are too deep for that.

Neither side shows any sign of giving in. The Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei has demanded that all the Iranian people accept an election result he insists was fair.

The violence on the streets has sharpened the message coming from Mir Hossein Mousavi who believes he was cheated of victory. He's sounding more and more certain of his ground. In a manifesto on his website, he's called for the election to be annulled, for free speech and for fundamental reform to create a new kind of politics in the Islamic republic.

It all adds up to an unprecedented direct challenge to the Supreme Leader himself.

We're past the point where this can be resolved with negotiation, at least not until after there's been enough violence and damage to sicken people into negotiating. Nice one, Supreme Leader.

[Samuel Catalino]

It is not freedom that the people are all wound up about.

What the news media has not been talking about that much, although the New York Times mentioned it in a pre-election story.

The double digit inflation rate and the double digit unemployment rate, now up to about 17 percent.

Depending who you believe, inflation is either at 14 or 23 percent in Iran.

You kind of wonder what will happen if those numbers show up in the USA, what will the people here do?

[Charles RB]

It is not freedom that the people are all wound up about.

That must be why they keep yelling loudly about demands for freedom, have specifically rallied around a social reformist banner, started this over a fraudalent election...

Did you think AT ALL before posting? If this was solely economic, they wouldn't be yelling about freedom and votes, they'd be yelling about their lack of money. Obviously.

[Corrina]

Yes, I get that point.

(There's no need to reiterate it with me.)

However, I do get your reasons for bringing this up again, and it is a worthwhile reminder.

Didn't mean to jump on you, beetle.

It's just a pet peeve with me. I think my information substantiated, when possible.

However, I don't think that's possible with this situation and I'm very grateful that some information is getting through.

And I hope that none of it's staged. (No, that sounds callous because people are dying on camera. I mean that I hope, horrific as it is, we are getting the truth, even if the truth is horrific.)

[SUPERECWFAN1]

It is not freedom that the people are all wound up about.

What the news media has not been talking about that much, although the New York Times mentioned it in a pre-election story.

The double digit inflation rate and the double digit unemployment rate, now up to about 17 percent.

Depending who you believe, inflation is either at 14 or 23 percent in Iran.

You kind of wonder what will happen if those numbers show up in the USA, what will the people here do?

Well right now if it happens....they'll blame Bush. Since he pretty much led the country for 8 years and marched us into some shit. If it happens in a year ...or 2 ....Obama gets the blame. I know your in a hurry to blame Obama ...but any smart person could say "6-7 months in office....vs someone who was there....8 years and was responsible when it all started crashin down last fall."

[Samuel Catalino]

That must be why they keep yelling loudly about demands for freedom, have specifically rallied around a social reformist banner, started this over a fraudalent election...

Did you think AT ALL before posting? If this was solely economic, they wouldn't be yelling about freedom and votes, they'd be yelling about their lack of money. Obviously.

First, you can not prove it was a fraudulent election.
Second, Mousavi has a track record for a decent economy. Does he support repudiating the theocracy? No. He is also slamming the current President for no strategy for falling oil prices.
It is all about power.

If you had taken the time to read about the issues that between the two candidates prior to the election, you would understand what is actually dividing them, why people are out on the streets....

23 percent inflation and 17 percent unemployment and the same guy gets re-elected President? All the rest of this is window dressing to get a guy into power who had the same policies back in the 1980s when he was the head guy.

[Samuel Catalino]

Well right now if it happens....they'll blame Bush. Since he pretty much led the country for 8 years and marched us into some shit. If it happens in a year ...or 2 ....Obama gets the blame. I know your in a hurry to blame Obama ...but any smart person could say "6-7 months in office....vs someone who was there....8 years and was responsible when it all started crashin down last fall."

It will switch to Obama if things don't get better by the end of the year.

Actually he has continued the same failed policies which Bush began at the end of his term. Policies that Obama voted for and supported while he was a Senator.

[Samuel Catalino]

As pointed out, while Twitter is a good source, it's an ultimately unreliable source unless things can be substantiated otherwise.

It's too easy to hide behind an anonymous handle and tell untruths. Could be Iranian secret police trying to scare protesters, could be some joker on 4chan...could be anyone.

It's *likely* to be legitimate but take it with a grain of salt. It's good that we are getting *some* information and it looks like Twitter is one of the few ways but that doesn't meant it's always accurate.


You mean people hide behind sockpuppets in Twitter too, Corina?

Say it isn't so!!!

[Charles RB]

First, you can not prove it was a fraudulent election.

Whether I can prove it or not is irrelevant because the demonstrators believe it anyway.

And that's what they're protesting about. Which should be obvious because they're being very vocal about it./

Second, Mousavi has a track record for a decent economy. Does he support repudiating the theocracy? No. He is also slamming the current President for no strategy for falling oil prices.

He was also making big noises about social reformist policies. Which was getting him a large amount of support. Which got widely reported before the election.

Would he have done these reforms if he got in? Again, irrelevant - his supporters believed it.

23 percent inflation and 17 percent unemployment and the same guy gets re-elected President?

Oh, so now you're agreeing the election was rigged.

All the rest of this is window dressing to get a guy into power who had the same policies back in the 1980s when he was the head guy.

That explains why the protests and demonstrations are no longer under his control and happen whether he calls them or not.

[PatrickG]

I don't think it is necessarily all about freedom in the sense that we in the west have come to think about it.

But I think we may be very well on the cusp of an Islamic Enlightenment era, perhaps somewhat fueled by the fuel crisis and some of the economic policies.

The American Revolution was fueled by taxation without representation. Simply put, if life sucks, I at least want a measure of control in it sucking. People can handle life sucking because of their own choices and shortcomings much easier than they can handle life sucking and having no voice and no control.

That's what I think a lot of the situation boils down to in Iran and I think it is a situation we can find common ground on by looking to our past.

The modern issues dealing with Freedom in the West have to do with political factions, the erosion of local government and the proliferation of federal power and bureaucracy and corporate infrastructure. Like the problems in Iran, we also deal with hegemony but it's taken on a different form here and I expect our solutions will be different if discontent and hardship rise up to that boiling point where change has to come.

I think the U.S. would probably benefit from some form of parliamentary representation, particularly to compensate for the erosion of states' rights. The states toe the federal line on many issues to receive federal funding and the states representatives in the legislature are lobbied by national lobbies and deal with national issues to an extent where I think there are and will continue to be too many large and disenfranchised minorities.

IF we had an issue in this country, I think there would be a push to:

A) Formally and finally codify judicial review, ending any lip service still paid to strict constructionism.

B) Curtail executive powers.

C) Redefine how legislative representation is allotted as geography is less a source of identification than education level, ethnic identity, industry of employment, sexual orientation. States are increasingly moot except as local branches of federal authority and new technology like the internet aligns people more on non-geographical issues and terms of identification.

The Libertarian's Free State Project and the way district lines get drawn and redrawn are a perfect examples of why and how representation is broken and how real representation for minority ideological groups often requires cheating. The various civil rights and equal rights movements over the last century have also been unfairly forced to rely on judicial activism or strong executive pressure because of the unfairness of how representation is allotted. There are also paradoxes to consider like how red states are more reliant on tax dollars despite ideological opposition to pork and how a state like California can wind up bankrupt, pushing for tons of programs and simultaneously pursuing tax cuts.

There's a reason why congress has the worst approval rating in the US. It doesn't represent the US as well as the executive branch (which would do so better without the electoral college, admittedly) and it doesn't represent a tradition of legal opinion and progress like the Supreme Court... and it fails to represent people by ideology but is instead populated with too many carpet baggers who pretend to have home states despite being, effectively, Washington natives and who represent majorities to the exclusion of minority coalitions, conservative, liberal and otherwise, who have sizable national followings but are disadvantaged by the way district lines and state lines are drawn.

[Matt Algren]

I don't think it is necessarily all about freedom in the sense that we in the west have come to think about it.

But I think we may be very well on the cusp of an Islamic Enlightenment era, perhaps somewhat fueled by the fuel crisis and some of the economic policies.

The American Revolution was fueled by taxation without representation. Simply put, if life sucks, I at least want a measure of control in it sucking. People can handle life sucking because of their own choices and shortcomings much easier than they can handle life sucking and having no voice and no control.

That's what I think a lot of the situation boils down to in Iran and I think it is a situation we can find common ground on by looking to our past.

The modern issues dealing with Freedom in the West have to do with political factions, the erosion of local government and the proliferation of federal power and bureaucracy and corporate infrastructure. Like the problems in Iran, we also deal with hegemony but it's taken on a different form here and I expect our solutions will be different if discontent and hardship rise up to that boiling point where change has to come.

I think the U.S. would probably benefit from some form of parliamentary representation, particularly to compensate for the erosion of states' rights. The states toe the federal line on many issues to receive federal funding and the states representatives in the legislature are lobbied by national lobbies and deal with national issues to an extent where I think there are and will continue to be too many large and disenfranchised minorities.

IF we had an issue in this country, I think there would be a push to:

A) Formally and finally codify judicial review, ending any lip service still paid to strict constructionism.

B) Curtail executive powers.

C) Redefine how legislative representation is allotted as geography is less a source of identification than education level, ethnic identity, industry of employment, sexual orientation. States are increasingly moot except as local branches of federal authority and new technology like the internet aligns people more on non-geographical issues and terms of identification.

The Libertarian's Free State Project and the way district lines get drawn and redrawn are a perfect examples of why and how representation is broken and how real representation for minority ideological groups often requires cheating. The various civil rights and equal rights movements over the last century have also been unfairly forced to rely on judicial activism or strong executive pressure because of the unfairness of how representation is allotted. There are also paradoxes to consider like how red states are more reliant on tax dollars despite ideological opposition to pork and how a state like California can wind up bankrupt, pushing for tons of programs and simultaneously pursuing tax cuts.

There's a reason why congress has the worst approval rating in the US. It doesn't represent the US as well as the executive branch (which would do so better without the electoral college, admittedly) and it doesn't represent a tradition of legal opinion and progress like the Supreme Court... and it fails to represent people by ideology but is instead populated with too many carpet baggers who pretend to have home states despite being, effectively, Washington natives and who represent majorities to the exclusion of minority coalitions, conservative, liberal and otherwise, who have sizable national followings but are disadvantaged by the way district lines and state lines are drawn.
tl; dr

[Adam C]

If you had taken the time to read about the issues that between the two candidates prior to the election, you would understand what is actually dividing them, why people are out on the streets....

[...] All the rest of this is window dressing to get a guy into power who had the same policies back in the 1980s when he was the head guy.

Amazing. You're lecturing Charles about not reading about the lead-up to the election and then claiming that Mousavi has the same policies as when he was Prime Minister in the 1980s. Yet during this campaign he vowed to review laws that discriminate against women (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8075603.stm), liberalization of the media (http://www.presstv.com/election2009/detail.aspx?id=90057), and pledged to do away with Iran's moral police (http://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2009/05/30/74342.html). It's also worth noting that his major, behind-the-scenes backer, Ayatollah Rafsanjani a rival to both Khameini and Ahaminedjad favours economic liberalization.

And as the Times Online notes the blatant electoral fraud, Khameini's clamping down, and the protest movement has pushed him to be more bold (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article6550303.ece) in opposing the regime as well as making the opposition rally around him. And as every analysis I've read of Iran so far in the media has stated, he's supported by a young population frustrated with the economic policy and corruption of the current regime that has little memory of the Shah or the early days of the Islamic Revolution, and with that Mousavi.

But god forbid we actually use fact-based analysis that actually deals with the fact that political actors can change their stance based on the changing dynamics of the world they operate in and the constellation of forces around them. Mousavi won't be a miracle, but claiming he'll be exactly like he was in the 1980s ignores the actual facts in regards to the campaign, the pressures on him from the people who support him, and the fact that a great deal of the leaders of Iran's reformist wing were ex hardliners. Amazing that. People actually change their opinions and stances.

[Adam C]

First, you can not prove it was a fraudulent election.

If he can't it sure friggin' looks like it (http://www.chathamhouse.org.uk/files/14234_iranelection0609.pdf) unless we're to believe we're to believe Ahmadinejad took 44% of former Reformist voters despite a decade of conflict between that and the conservative faction. Especially when 30 towns report more than 100% turnout. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/global/2009/jun/17/iran-election-rigging)

[PatrickG]

tl; dr

TLDR version:

Iran and many middle eastern states are facing different issues with Freedom than we are in the west. If discontent rises up here, it will take a different form.

They're dealing with "taxation without representation"-type issues. That "taxation" is not necessarily monetary in all cases but it can and does affect the pocketbook, personal freedom and many other areas where the government can take from its people.

In the west, our issue is not lack of representation but imperfect representation. Large minorities get shafted. States are moot in many ways, particularly with the advent of the internet and erosion of geographical culture.

If push comes to shove, we need a parliament.

Theocratic middle eastern states need executive reform. Western powers need more legislative reform... although our executives have become uncomfortably powerful too.

[SUPERECWFAN1]

It will switch to Obama if things don't get better by the end of the year.


I think even Obama has said when elected "Its not gonna be an overnight thing. Its gonna take some work to get back."

I mean sure I wish things would have turned ASAP around once he was in office. But common sense tells us it wouldn't. Its gonna take a few years to be honest to undo the damage. Just being honest...its not something in a month...or 2 months that can be fixed. The economy as some claim will actually rebound by the fall/winter of 2009. Pull outta recession I mean by rebound....

Actually he has continued the same failed policies which Bush began at the end of his term. Policies that Obama voted for and supported while he was a Senator.

Isn't a lot of Bush's policies in place until the end of 2009 ? And some of what he has planned will take effect after Bush's failed policies run out ?

[king mob]

The Guardian has been running a live blog for (http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/blog/2009/jun/22/iran-ayatollah-ali-khamenei)a few days in order to try to piece together just what is actually going on.

[Samuel Catalino]

Whether I can prove it or not is irrelevant because the demonstrators believe it anyway.

And that's what they're protesting about. Which should be obvious because they're being very vocal about it./

Or what the media is telling everyone. I am not under the delusion that these folks want freedom and give everyone the right for free religious expression.



He was also making big noises about social reformist policies. Which was getting him a large amount of support. Which got widely reported before the election.

It was a bit vague too, but did not specify the changes he wanted to make in the Iran Constitution.

Would he have done these reforms if he got in? Again, irrelevant - his supporters believed it.
It is not irrelevant, because according to you, they would be protesting him next if he did not deliver.



Oh, so now you're agreeing the election was rigged.
No, I am not. I am just talking about the figures about inflation where one side says it is one figure and the other says it is another. How you made that leap of logic that I noted that automatically means I agree with something that has not been proven is beyond me.



That explains why the protests and demonstrations are no longer under his control and happen whether he calls them or not.

He is calling for them and continuing to call for them, so that is not certain either.

[Samuel Catalino]

I think even Obama has said when elected "Its not gonna be an overnight thing. Its gonna take some work to get back."

A year is not an overnight thing. You can be sure his numbers will suffer if things are turning around by the end of the year.

I mean sure I wish things would have turned ASAP around once he was in office. But common sense tells us it wouldn't. Its gonna take a few years to be honest to undo the damage. Just being honest...its not something in a month...or 2 months that can be fixed. The economy as some claim will actually rebound by the fall/winter of 2009. Pull outta recession I mean by rebound....

That is what I said, if there is not positive news by the end of the year, he is going to be in trouble.



Isn't a lot of Bush's policies in place until the end of 2009 ? And some of what he has planned will take effect after Bush's failed policies run out ?

His tax policies are the only ones that are in place, which Obama has not done anything about as far as I know. He has continued the bailouts which are part of the failed policies, policies he voted yes when he was a Senator. His spending policies are the same as Bush.

[Samuel Catalino]

If he can't it sure friggin' looks like it (http://www.chathamhouse.org.uk/files/14234_iranelection0609.pdf) unless we're to believe we're to believe Ahmadinejad took 44% of former Reformist voters despite a decade of conflict between that and the conservative faction. Especially when 30 towns report more than 100% turnout. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/global/2009/jun/17/iran-election-rigging)

Isn't that the reporting more than 100 % sound like the canard of Coleman in Minnesota?

You may believe it looks like it, but you can not prove it.

[the4thpip]

I think this could be pretty big:

As the upheaval in Iran heads into its second week, there are growing indications of severe fissures in Iran’s theocratic government, with high-ranking government officials disputing the validity of the June 12 election results on national television.

Among the key players in the internal battle is Ayatollah Hashemi Rafsanjani, a former moderate president of Iran. Although Rafsanjani has kept quiet since the nationwide protests erupted, his daughter has been seen at protests addressing large crowds.

A report from the Times of India says Rafsanjani’s daughter has now been arrested.

UPDATE: AP is now reporting that four other relatives of Rafsanjani have also been taken into custody.

And Iran’s parliamentary speaker, Ali Larijani, launched a subtle attack on hardline supporters of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad yesterday.

“I wish certain members [of Iran's Guardian Council] would not side with a certain presidential candidate,” Larijani told state TV.

That sets up two clear axes of power in the Iranian government: The hardline conservatives, with spiritual leader Ayatollah Khamenei and purported election victor Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on one side; and Mir Hossein Mousavi, the de facto opposition leader, Larijani and Rafsanjani on the other.

All the more remarkable is the fact that this dispute is taking place in the state-run media. This could be an indication that the country’s ruling class is itself uncertain which way power will shift in the country in the coming days and weeks.
http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/06/21/iranian-state-tv-13-dead-in-saturday-protests/

[KevinTBrown]

Isn't that the reporting more than 100 % sound like the canard of Coleman in Minnesota?

You may believe it looks like it, but you can not prove it.

If it walks like a duck, quacks like a ducks, and acts like a duck....

[Charles RB]

I am not under the delusion that these folks want freedom

Then you're an idiot.

There's no middle ground or debate here - you are deliberately being ignorant of the situation, despite heavy coverage some of which is linked to on this thread and discounting what the Iranians themselves are saying. Hence, idiot.

[Charles RB]

I think this could be pretty big:

http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/06/21/iranian-state-tv-13-dead-in-saturday-protests/

Yeah, that's shaping up to be big. Last report was all his arrested relatives were released, so that was almost certainly a "keep your mouth shut, we can get you" gesture.

[Charles RB]

Protests are planned for today - so's a Revolutionary Guard crackdown: (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8112812.stm)


In a statement posted on their website, the Guards said their troops would break up street protests and force protesters from the streets.

"Be prepared for a resolution and revolutionary confrontation with the Guards, Basij [pro-government militia] and other security forces and disciplinary forces," the Associated Press news agency quoted the Guards as saying.

The plain-clothed Basij militia was involved in quelling earlier protests during more than a week of demonstrations against the re-election of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

The weekend violence led many Iranians to abandon protest plans. One regular protester, a 20-year-old student called Behrooz contacted by the BBC several times in recent days, said he was concerned he would be attacked if he took part.

"My mother went to the demonstration on Saturday. She wasn't hurt, but she saw guards attacking people and hitting them with batons," he said.

"She is the bravest of us all, but I don't think she will go out this afternoon (Sunday), because the clashes are getting bloodier every day."

Following complaints, the powerful Guardian Council, which oversees the electoral process, now says it has found evidence that more votes were cast in some constituencies than there were registered voters.

But the number had "no effect on the result of the elections", a council spokesman said on Monday.

Speaking at a news conference, foreign ministry spokesman Hassan Qashqavi accused Western governments of explicitly backing violent protests aimed at undermining the stability of Iran's Islamic Republic.

"Spreading anarchy and vandalism by Western powers and also Western media... these are not at all accepted," he said.

Opposition supporters passing messages online said they planned to carry candles at a rally in Tehran in the evening in memory of those killed.

[Samuel Catalino]

If it walks like a duck, quacks like a ducks, and acts like a duck....


That would be AFLAC, wouldn't it?

So you are agreeing with Coleman's supporters too?

[Samuel Catalino]

Then you're an idiot.

There's no middle ground or debate here - you are deliberately being ignorant of the situation, despite heavy coverage some of which is linked to on this thread and discounting what the Iranians themselves are saying. Hence, idiot.

I suppose you believe everything you see too. I have seen enough demonstrating for cameras to be fed to the West to be skeptical of anything reported over there.

Some people want to believe that this is a repeat of the falling down of the Berlin Wall, but there are many more issues in play than what they believe. Much like what happened in Iran in 1979. A lot of people thought the same thing back then too and I remember that having lived through the rosy predictions after the Shah left Iran and the Ayatollah came out of exile from Paris to take power.

You are naive.

[Matt Algren]

I suppose you believe everything you see too. I have seen enough demonstrating for cameras to be fed to the West to be skeptical of anything reported over there.

Some people want to believe that this is a repeat of the falling down of the Berlin Wall, but there are many more issues in play than what they believe. Much like what happened in Iran in 1979. A lot of people thought the same thing back then too and I remember that having lived through the rosy predictions after the Shah left Iran and the Ayatollah came out of exile from Paris to take power.

You are naive.
The fall of the Berlin Wall was far from uncomplicated.

[KevinTBrown]

That would be AFLAC, wouldn't it?

So you are agreeing with Coleman's supporters too?

There were, what, 2 recounts? And in those recounts Franken increased his lead both times.

At this point Coleman might as well stop while he's behind. As should you.

[Michael P]

Hey, isn't it really weird how there hasn't been a big media push to brand Coleman a sore loser? You'd think the Jew-run liberal media establishment would be all over that.

[Samuel Catalino]

There were, what, 2 recounts? And in those recounts Franken increased his lead both times.

At this point Coleman might as well stop while he's behind. As should you.

I do not give a fig about Coleman, but what is interesting to me is the accuasations of more votes in certain precincts than voters registered.

Has that charge ever been repudiated? That is something that can be investigated here in the USA, unlike what is going on in Iran.

[Samuel Catalino]

The fall of the Berlin Wall was far from uncomplicated.

True, but no one (especially all of those news reporters not to mention all of those "intelligence" types) saw the 1979 Iranian revolution coming.

Many people wished for the Berlin Wall to come down, and I suspect many people wish for freedom to come to Iran.

It isn't that simple in Iran.

[Nick Soapdish]

I do not give a fig about Coleman, but what is interesting to me is the accuasations of more votes in certain precincts than voters registered.

Has that charge ever been repudiated? That is something that can be investigated here in the USA, unlike what is going on in Iran.

Yes, it has. Repeatedly.

[Charles RB]

there are many more issues in play than what they believe.

There's certainly more than you believe because you are ignoring some, deliberately.

That's why you're an idiot. You are willingly being an idiot, seemingly out of bigotry - you are refusing to accept that Iranians might want more freedom, to the extent of claiming they do not understand the concept.

[Charles RB]

A rally has started and been assaulted: (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8112812.stm)

Iranian riot police have fired tear gas to break up a new opposition rally in the centre of the capital Tehran, hours after a stern warning to protesters.

Some 1,000 people had gathered on Haft-e Tir Square despite the warning from Iran's Revolutionary Guards against holding unapproved rallies.

Reports say the police were reinforced by Basij militiamen wielding clubs.

The Guards, an elite armed force, vowed to crack down on new street protests over the presidential election results.

Eyewitnesses said hundreds of riot police were used to drive the protesters from the square.

"There are lots of people but they are scattered, and lots of police guards.

"They are firing bullets in the air and using tear gas against the crowds. It's a very dangerous situation but our brave people are still here in the streets."

Police wore helmets and were armed with steel clubs and cables, according to other witnesses. Some rode motorbikes and carried guns.

An eyewitness living close to the square told the BBC News website he had seen riot police "on every corner and by every set of traffic lights" as he drove home on Monday.

Also:

In other developments on Monday:

• Italy instructed its embassy in Tehran to provide humanitarian aid to protesters wounded during clashes

• The UK Foreign Office said it was evacuating the families of staff based in Iran "until the situation improves"

That's pretty big, especially Italy's action - there'd been unsubstantiated claims that European embassies were assisting the wounded, now one actually is and by official instruction. That'd be Italy taking a side.

[K-DoG7p7]

If this does not die out soon.. I wonder... will the Shah of Iran return?
Will Iran become a Constitutional monarchy?

[Nick Soapdish]

If this does not die out soon.. I wonder... will the Shah of Iran return?
Will Iran become a Constitutional monarchy?

Not likely. He died in 1980.

He does have two sons and two surviving daughters, but I'd be surprised if they have much support. The Shah was only the second of his line.

[K-DoG7p7]

Not likely. He died in 1980.

His son now hold the title.. and many in iran still refer to him as the Shah of Iran
he has however stopped using the title himself.. and now only refers to himself by his name or "Fr Crown Prince"

[Christopher Cross Is God]

It is not freedom that the people are all wound up about.

What the news media has not been talking about that much, although the New York Times mentioned it in a pre-election story.

The double digit inflation rate and the double digit unemployment rate, now up to about 17 percent.

Depending who you believe, inflation is either at 14 or 23 percent in Iran.

You kind of wonder what will happen if those numbers show up in the USA, what will the people here do?

You keep mentioning the Iranian economy. It could be one of the factors, but it's not the sole reason for what's going on, regardless of what you'd like to think.

My question to you is, since when has the Iranian economy, since the time of the Islamic Revolution, ever flourished?

I remember Iran always having high inflation during the Islamic regime. After the revolution, factories were left to rot, everything was going to shit, and the subsequent war with Iraq made matters worse.

Your argument would make more sense if the country was going through good times, economically.....But, under the Islamic government, it never was.

I understand being sceptical about what's being told, especially via the US media, but the economy is one small part of the big picture for the current protests/riots.

[Charles RB]

He does have two sons and two surviving daughters, but I'd be surprised if they have much support.

I bet the one thing that would unite the factions in Iran is the idea the Son of Shah wants to come back and take over.

[Christopher Cross Is God]

Not likely. He died in 1980.

He does have two sons and two surviving daughters, but I'd be surprised if they have much support. The Shah was only the second of his line.


The younger of the two daughters died around 8 years ago.


His son now hold the title.. and many in iran still refer to him as the Shah of Iran
he has however stopped using the title himself.. and now only refers to himself by his name or "Fr Crown Prince"


He'd be a lot better than the Islamic regime, since the current government is corrupt as all hell, but the Shah's son doesn't have enough widespread support. Even if he did have such, there's too much crap in the country, it's likely he'd get assassinated within the first year of being there.

[K-DoG7p7]

I bet the one thing that would unite the factions in Iran is the idea the Son of Shah wants to come back and take over.

Can someone go to Potomac, Maryland and ask Reza Pahlavi if he wants the throne?

[Christopher Cross Is God]

Can someone go to Potomac, Maryland and ask Reza Pahlavi if he wants the throne?

I think, when he said, "would unite the factions in Iran", he meant the Islamic government would put aside their differences and unite against a common enemy.

[Nick Soapdish]

His son now hold the title.. and many in iran still refer to him as the Shah of Iran
he has however stopped using the title himself.. and now only refers to himself by his name or "Fr Crown Prince"

Many? Most of the royalists are abroad. Or if they're in Iran, they're keeping really quiet about it and we aren't hearing from them.

The younger of the two daughters died around 8 years ago.


She's the third daughter. The Shah had another daughter by his first wife.

[Adam C]

Isn't that the reporting more than 100 % sound like the canard of Coleman in Minnesota?

What the hell is "canard of Coleman in Minnesota" and what does it have to do with reports that 30 Iranian towns were reporting more than 100% turnout? Moreover, why do you insist on this niggling point despite all evidence to the contrary?

And now the Guardian Council is finally admitting to some irregularities (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8112173.stm) but still upholding Ahaminedjad's vicotry.

You may believe it looks like it, but you can not prove it.

Which is pretty meaningless when all substantive evidence points to blatant fraud and has the population up in arms as a result.

Or what the media is telling everyone. I am not under the delusion that these folks want freedom and give everyone the right for free religious expression.

Then why do we see photos of Iranians holding up signs like "We Want Democracy" (http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_9nTItnS3VNk/ST2TgA-0GII/AAAAAAAApFc/xM5CfJzFMc4/s400/iran+students+protests+in+teheran+dec+7+2008.jpg) and "Where Is My Vote?" (http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/blog/2009/jun/18/iran-unrest)

And while the economy is certainly a major factor (http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2009/06/laura-secor-why-tehran-matters.html) in fueling discontent with this regime why is it the sole reason you claim when what touched this off was electoral fraud and the protesters initially came out in support of a candidate, who as I pointed out earlier, pledged to allow for private TV stations and do away with moral police? And even if they don't want quite the same level of freedom we have in North America how is it reasonable to assume that freedom is not an issue? As the BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8111695.stm) points out part of the reason for the protests is that most of Iran's population is young and has been living double lives getting information from the outside world. To merely dismiss that the issues of freedom and rights as non-existent is absurd and counter factual.

[Adam C]

His son now hold the title.. and many in iran still refer to him as the Shah of Iran
he has however stopped using the title himself.. and now only refers to himself by his name or "Fr Crown Prince"

Well as far as I know Reza Cyrus Pahlavi says he is not seeking the restoration of the monarchy (http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jyLW_9FvKkYn8A9DdkQRUcF0E7sA). And I'd take him at his word for it since as far as I know he realistically couldn't and he doesn't have any clout within Iran.

[Samuel Catalino]

You keep mentioning the Iranian economy. It could be one of the factors, but it's not the sole reason for what's going on, regardless of what you'd like to think.

My question to you is, since when has the Iranian economy, since the time of the Islamic Revolution, ever flourished?

I remember Iran always having high inflation during the Islamic regime. After the revolution, factories were left to rot, everything was going to shit, and the subsequent war with Iraq made matters worse.

Your argument would make more sense if the country was going through good times, economically.....But, under the Islamic government, it never was.

I understand being sceptical about what's being told, especially via the US media, but the economy is one small part of the big picture for the current protests/riots.

Things were actually better during the 80s in Iran economically. Guess who was the leader of the government at that time under the ayatollahs? Yep, you guessed it, the guy who ran against the incumbent.

Unemployment has doubled under the current President and inflation has increased just in the last year or so.

I agree that it does not seem to be a bed of roses over there, but it has gotten worse the last few years.

[Samuel Catalino]

What the hell is "canard of Coleman in Minnesota" and what does it have to do with reports that 30 Iranian towns were reporting more than 100% turnout? Moreover, why do you insist on this niggling point despite all evidence to the contrary?

Look it up. Same charge.

the Guardian Council is finally admitting to some irregularities (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8112173.stm) but still upholding Ahaminedjad's vicotry.


What kind of irregularities and what is the big deal since it upholds the incumbent's victory?


s pretty meaningless when all substantive evidence points to blatant fraud and has the population up in arms as a result.

It has to be proven. Saying it again and again does not make it a fact. Much of the population is not up in arms. Had much of the population been up in arms, the ayatollahs would have been overthrown.



y do we see photos of Iranians holding up signs like "We Want Democracy" (http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_9nTItnS3VNk/ST2TgA-0GII/AAAAAAAApFc/xM5CfJzFMc4/s400/iran+students+protests+in+teheran+dec+7+2008.jpg) and "Where Is My Vote?" (http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/blog/2009/jun/18/iran-unrest)

These people want Western sympathy and Western dollars. Look how much we poured into Iraq.

the economy is certainly a major factor (http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2009/06/laura-secor-why-tehran-matters.html) in fueling discontent with this regime why is it the sole reason you claim when what touched this off was electoral fraud and the protesters initially came out in support of a candidate, who as I pointed out earlier, pledged to allow for private TV stations and do away with moral police? And even if they don't want quite the same level of freedom we have in North America how is it reasonable to assume that freedom is not an issue? As the BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8111695.stm) points out part of the reason for the protests is that most of Iran's population is young and has been living double lives getting information from the outside world. To merely dismiss that the issues of freedom and rights as non-existent is absurd and counter factual.

And to believe that is what they really want makes about as much sense as though who believed the same back in 1979.

[the4thpip]

I wanna say something but I can't because this is a moderated thread. :frown:

[the4thpip]

These people want Western sympathy and Western dollars. Look how much we poured into Iraq.




Of all the Samuel Catalino things you said, this must be the Samuel Catalino-est.

You think any country in the world wants the treatment the US gave to Iraq?

Oy.

[Matt Algren]

Yes. Because people in Iran dearly love America. They have celebrations in our honor!

Oh wait, they don't? Huh.

[Adam C]

Look it up. Same charge.

The Franken/Coleman dispute? Coleman's weak nitpicking where they can find no irregularities really compares to 30 districts reporting over 100 voting or Ahaminedjad picking up a much larger share of the vote than he did in 2005 despite increasing polarization between the conservative and reformist factions? Moreover, he never even made a similar claim and mostly argued for recounting of ballots.

What kind of irregularities and what is the big deal since it upholds the incumbent's victory?


It means that despite the regime's earlier claims of no irregularities it's being forced to give ground on the issue.

It has to be proven. Saying it again and again does not make it a fact.

And yet all the facts point to massive irregularities?

These people want Western sympathy and Western dollars. Look how much we poured into Iraq.

And to believe that is what they really want makes about as much sense as though who believed the same back in 1979.

Then why don't you actually provide proof for your claims like I just did instead of ignoring facts that counter your opinion? Because despite your claims to contrary greater freedom of speech (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BUE/is_7_135/ai_n18615090/) and action is a major concern (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3053383.stm) among Iran's rather young population (http://www.slate.com/id/2220390/) that accounts for the majority of the populace.

[KevinTBrown]

I wanna say something but I can't because this is a moderated thread. :frown:

I admire your restraint.

[Samuel Catalino]

Of all the Samuel Catalino things you said, this must be the Samuel Catalino-est.

You think any country in the world wants the treatment the US gave to Iraq?

Oy.

Yep, we forced freedom upon them and they are not ready for it. So we throw money at them.

Of course they keep on taking that money.

[Samuel Catalino]

I wanna say something but I can't because this is a moderated thread. :frown:

You just wrote something. :biggrin:

[the4thpip]

Yep, we forced freedom upon them and they are not ready for it. So we throw money at them.

Of course they keep on taking that money.

Is that how events played out on Earth Catalino?

It certainly didn't happen like that on Earth Prime.

You ever hear of the Pottery Barn rule?

[Samuel Catalino]

Is that how events played out on Earth Catalino?

It certainly didn't happen like that on Earth Prime.

You ever hear of the Pottery Barn rule?

I don't go by those rules, and there is no Earth Catalino.

[Christopher Cross Is God]

Things were actually better during the 80s in Iran economically. Guess who was the leader of the government at that time under the ayatollahs? Yep, you guessed it, the guy who ran against the incumbent.

Yet Iran was far better, economically, before '79.......The people around during Mousavi's reign as PM would've noticed this.



Unemployment has doubled under the current President and inflation has increased just in the last year or so.

I agree that it does not seem to be a bed of roses over there, but it has gotten worse the last few years.


Again, the state of Iran's economy is one of several catalysts. For the vast majority of protesters, it's not the main focal point.






And to believe that is what they really want makes about as much sense as though who believed the same back in 1979.

Are you actually trying to say the Iranians involved in the revolution didn't want freedom of rights back in '79?




Much of the population is not up in arms. Had much of the population been up in arms, the ayatollahs would have been overthrown.


Such things don't happen overnight.

[Nick Soapdish]

Deleted.

It's off-topic here and just a distraction.

[Adam C]

Yep, we forced freedom upon them and they are not ready for it. So we throw money at them.

What do you even base this on? The U.S. invaded Iraq but ignored any planning for the post-war occupation and thus dithered on proper reconstruction (http://www.harpers.org/BaghdadYearZero.html) while extremists took advantage of the situation to drum up support to settle their scores. Never mind that the questionable legitimacy of the whole enterprise meant there was going to be a likelihood of a guerilla insurgency in any case.

Never mind that occupying and rebuilding a foreign country was going to be expensive in any case, but it was more expensive because of continuous military costs (http://usliberals.about.com/od/homelandsecurit1/a/IraqNumbers.htm) to deal with the insurgency and massive corruption (http://www.newsweek.com/id/60320) from even early on in the occupation.

And even then Iraq is still wracked with violence (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hwK_CSpBxsNuVUEaDuOwmSSCiqGwD98VSCD81) and corruption (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/22/world/middleeast/22iraq.html?ref=world) and based on the most recent statistics umeployment is at 23 to 38%, well above Iran's. I see no basis for assuming that Iran actually wants the U.S.' largesse based on the example of Iraq, which is really a mess.

[the4thpip]

What do you even base this on? The U.S. invaded Iraq but ignored any planning for the post-war occupation and thus dithered on proper reconstruction (http://www.harpers.org/BaghdadYearZero.html) while extremists took advantage of the situation to drum up support to settle their scores. Never mind that the questionable legitimacy of the whole enterprise meant there was going to be a likelihood of a guerilla insurgency in any case.

Never mind that occupying and rebuilding a foreign country was going to be expensive in any case, but it was more expensive because of continuous military costs (http://usliberals.about.com/od/homelandsecurit1/a/IraqNumbers.htm) to deal with the insurgency and massive corruption (http://www.newsweek.com/id/60320) from even early on in the occupation.

And even then Iraq is still wracked with violence (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hwK_CSpBxsNuVUEaDuOwmSSCiqGwD98VSCD81) and corruption (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/22/world/middleeast/22iraq.html?ref=world) and based on the most recent statistics umeployment is at 23 to 38%, well above Iran's. I see no basis for assuming that Iran actually wants the U.S.' largesse based on the example of Iraq, which is really a mess.

But don't you see how other countries will look at Iraq and say: Wow, they're down to like one car bomb and 10 suicide bombers a month now, I wish America bombed us back into the stone age, too!
I hear San Marino is seriously considering pretending they have weapons of mass destruction just to get in on that deal.

[Samuel Catalino]

Yet Iran was far better, economically, before '79.......The people around during Mousavi's reign as PM would've noticed this.
True, but the Shah was known to indulge in excesses. That and being too modern displeased many people. Mousavi was in power during the 80s if memory serve me correctly.



Again, the state of Iran's economy is one of several catalysts. For the vast majority of protesters, it's not the main focal point.
It is where he is getting much of his support.





Are you actually trying to say the Iranians involved in the revolution didn't want freedom of rights back in '79?

Look at what they got, and how it unfolded.





Such things don't happen overnight.

They did in 1979. I remember how quickly events unfolded. The only thing that unfolded quicker was South Viet nam back in 1975 (I think it was 1975 or 1974)

[Corrina]

Yep, we forced freedom upon them and they are not ready for it. So we throw money at them.

Of course they keep on taking that money.

We *forced* freedom on them?

You're being ironic, right?

Because the Shah was put in power by the U.S.--a move that overthrew the democratically elected gov't of Iran. At the time, the U.S. was worried about the Russian sympathies of the democratically elected leader (Moussadaq, i think) but we still get rid of democracy to put the Shah in power.

Khomeini played on the desire for democracy and the very real anger toward the Shah for his policy of crushing political opponents to seize power. Since then, he and his successors have balanced between allowing proper democracy whle still maintaining secular and religious power. The Iran/Iraq war probably helped in that case, considering they were the ones attacked and the people supported their government while under duress. (An attack by Iraq which, btw, was supported by the U.S. govt back when Saddam Hussein was our buddy.)

Inch by inch, there have been some democratic reforms in Iraq but, obviously, the Supreme Leaders felt somewhat threatened by this and arranged for his guy to get an overwhelming majority of the vote. Mousavi wasn't going to be Mr. Democracy, people supported him because they wanted *some* change, even if just a little.

But now the opposition is radicalized and far less certain to listen to their Supreme Leader--in other words, they pushed the opposition into a corner and they came out not surrendering, but swinging.

[PatrickG]

We *forced* freedom on them?

You're being ironic, right?


He's talking about Iraq.

[Typo Lad]

Hey, isn't it really weird how there hasn't been a big media push to brand Coleman a sore loser? You'd think the Jew-run liberal media establishment would be all over that.

That's why we're staying away from it, too obvious.

Yes. Because people in Iran dearly love America. They have celebrations in our honor!

Oh wait, they don't? Huh.

But look how many of them have flags!

Yep, we forced freedom upon them and they are not ready for it. So we throw money at them.

Of course they keep on taking that money.

We did not force "freedom" on them. Only an ignoramus with no-understanding of Middle Eastern History would say that. What we did was a modern update of what the West has always done. We took the person in power, who was a bastard, and replaced him with our bastards, who only remain our bastards as long as we keep writing them checks. It's bank check colonialism, It's how Bin Laden's men were trained, and it's exactly how Sadam rose to power in the first place. and it's why I believed Rumsfeld when he said there were WMDs... because I assumed we had sold them to the bastard..

This really is the Middle East's problem with the US. It's the paternalistic, interventionist, greedy, stalking-horse using bastardism that has cost me friends and loved ones and I am so damned sick of people calling it freedom. It's not freedom. You don't know a damn thing about how life in a tribal society works. Western models do not work in these societies. We have our own forms and they worked fine for centuries. While my people were being tortured in the Christian world, we were able to live side-by-side in the Moslim world. There were restrictions but we had our own as well, so big deal. Until the 20th centuries there were no Ghettos in the Muslim world, no expulsions of Jews, almost no Pogroms, and we were allowed our own court systems. Compare that to your "Enlightened West".

Freedom is letting the masses handle themselves, not coming in and saying "Oh look, you're free now. The bad man is gone. Now you can have Democracy! Where all the rich Tribal members who can afford to run can oppress you, and now it's okay because American says it is."

You wonder why the world hates you?

[Adam C]

Look at what they got, and how it unfolded.


Iran 1979 isn't the same place where Iran is now. Khomeini and the clerics were stronger opposition forces against the Shah then because the Shah underestimated them and focused more on his liberal and Marxist opponents. Additionally, with the exception of the Marxists Khomeini worked to unite the opposition behind him by focusing on socio-economic objections to the Shah's regime while keeping mum about his eventual theocratic plans. There's some historical debate over how much popular support the Islamic Republic actually had especially when before the Revolution denied that he wanted power (http://www.iranian.com/Opinion/2003/August/Khomeini/). However, Iran's clerics did wield more prestige and authority at the time among Iran's population as they were poorer and more alienated from westernizing influences.

But now the focal point of opposition is an ex-hardliner turned reformer and its being driven by a much younger population who's grown up with Khomeini's legacy and is fed up with it. And as I have repeatedly pointed out they are much more interested in western culture and the freedoms of western democracies than you've been claiming.

[Adam C]

And it's why I believed Rumsfeld when he said there were WMDs... because I assumed we had sold them to the bastard..

But the U.S. didn't sell the weapons to Iraq. It loaned it the money to buy those weapons from U.S. allies!

[TCJohnson]

Yes. Because people in Iran dearly love America. They have celebrations in our honor!

Oh wait, they don't? Huh.

I have been reading up on a lot of experts on Iranian culture. There is a consensus that Iran has one of the most pro-american population of any arabian population.

[Typo Lad]

But the U.S. didn't sell the weapons to Iraq. It loaned it the money to buy those weapons from U.S. allies!
Right, my bad! Sorry. My specialty is a few nations over.

But wasn't Rumsfeld's job at one point special advisor to our good buddy Sadam?

[the4thpip]

He's talking about Iraq.

Incredibly, insanely, illogically, he is.

[Christopher Cross Is God]

True, but the Shah was known to indulge in excesses.

Meanwhile, all other rulers (Ayatollahs included) lead such frugal lives.



That and being too modern displeased many people.

Only with the religious extremists, which you seem to think consists of the vast majority of Iran's population.





It is where he is getting much of his support.

That would mean something if the protests were simply about Mousavi.



They did in 1979. I remember how quickly events unfolded. The only thing that unfolded quicker was South Viet nam back in 1975 (I think it was 1975 or 1974)


Nah, regardless of how you remember events unfolding, it didn't happen overnight.

But, I'll go for the devil's advocate approach and act like it did happen overnight......What difference would that make? You actually think because a particular revolution supposedly happened overnight, all revolutions within a particular country would go the same route, via very similar time-frames? What kind of illogical thought process is that?

[Christopher Cross Is God]

Iran 1979 isn't the same place where Iran is now. Khomeini and the clerics were stronger opposition forces against the Shah then because the Shah underestimated them and focused more on his liberal and Marxist opponents. Additionally, with the exception of the Marxists Khomeini worked to unite the opposition behind him by focusing on socio-economic objections to the Shah's regime while keeping mum about his eventual theocratic plans. There's some historical debate over how much popular support the Islamic Republic actually had especially when before the Revolution denied that he wanted power (http://www.iranian.com/Opinion/2003/August/Khomeini/). However, Iran's clerics did wield more prestige and authority at the time among Iran's population as they were poorer and more alienated from westernizing influences.

But now the focal point of opposition is an ex-hardliner turned reformer and its being driven by a much younger population who's grown up with Khomeini's legacy and is fed up with it. And as I have repeatedly pointed out they are much more interested in western culture and the freedoms of western democracies than you've been claiming.

Exactly........And while Khomeini united the Shah's opposition, one of his allies was an Iranian who was educated in France. I wish I could remember his name, but he was the guy who gathered the liberals, young/students, etc. to the cause of overthrowing the Shah. They were promised more rights, were told religion would not be forced upon the masses, etc.......After the revolution was over, Khomeini had the French-educated "ally" executed.

I'll assume that Catalino, after reading your post, will probably hum loudly while pressing his hands against his ears, since the truth of the matter goes against his tunnel-visioned outlook.



I have been reading up on a lot of experts on Iranian culture. There is a consensus that Iran has one of the most pro-american population of any arabian population.

Sucks that it's not an Arabian population.


Many? Most of the royalists are abroad. Or if they're in Iran, they're keeping really quiet about it and we aren't hearing from them.

Yeah, the majority are abroad, although there are quite a few still living in Iran........They're just not stupid enough to voice out their opinions. They had too many friends/relatives killed off to make the same mistake.

Around the time of the revolution, some had to fake support for Khomeini. I have a relative who gathered a bunch of teens (He was a teenager at the time) in his city together for pro-Khomeini rallies.......He did such so members of his immediate family, including himself, wouldn't get carted off & executed. We already had some family members killed off by the new gov't.......He mentioned one of the perks of doing these rallies was he had easier access to a lot of girls, since most of the teenagers in the city ended up knowing who he is......It's mildly amusing that leading pro-Khomeini rallies resulted in him getting laid a lot more, but whatever.

[Adam C]

Right, my bad! Sorry. My specialty is a few nations over.

But wasn't Rumsfeld's job at one point special advisor to our good buddy Sadam?

They called it Special Envoy to the Middle East which basically consisted of doling out not only strategic advice, but military intelligence and hardware. Also turns out the U.S. did provide pathogenic agents to Iraq and facilitated the the transfer of military material (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_support_for_Iraq_during_the_Iran%E2% 80%93Iraq_war#Foreign_Materiel_Acquisition_and_Bea r_Spares) to Iraq.

[Adam C]

Exactly........And while Khomeini united the Shah's opposition, one of his allies was an Iranian who was educated in France. I wish I could remember his name, but he was the guy who gathered the liberals, young/students, etc. to the cause of overthrowing the Shah. They were promised more rights, were told religion would not be oppressed on the masses, etc.......After the revolution was over, Khomeini had the French-educated "ally" executed.

Mehdi Bazargan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mehdi_Bazargan)? He was educated in France and a major liberal leader of the Iranian opposition, but he wasn't executed. (Did have his political dreams utterly crushed though.)

[TCJohnson]

Sucks that it's not an Arabian population, then.

Then muslem population in the middle east. Most of Iranian citizens really like America, it is only the leadership that doesn't.

[Christopher Cross Is God]

Mehdi Bazargan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mehdi_Bazargan)? He was educated in France and a major liberal leader of the Iranian opposition, but he wasn't executed. (Did have his political dreams utterly crushed though.)

No, wasn't him.......The guy was a lot younger than Bazargan, and looked totally different. Lighter skin-tone, smaller eyes, straight hair, etc....I simply can't remember the guy's name.

[Christopher Cross Is God]

Then muslem population in the middle east. Most of Iranian citizens really like America, it is only the leadership that doesn't.

There are a lot of Iranian citizens who can't stand America, but I'd agree that more Iranians seem to like America than most other Middle Eastern countries.......Which is surprising, since the Iranian government tried to brainwash Iranian children into hating America. They'd force kids to gather together, and they'd lead the children into making "death to America" chants and such.

I remember my mom laughing because she talked to one of my cousins on the phone back then (He was a little kid at the time), and he was telling my mom that they force him to yell "death to America" with everyone else, but that he doesn't really mean it because he doesn't want us to die (My mom & myself).

[Adam C]

There are a lot of Iranian citizens who can't stand America, but I'd agree that more Iranians seem to like America than most other Middle Eastern countries.......Which is surprising, since the Iranian government tried to brainwash Iranian children into hating America. They'd force kids to gather together, and they'd lead the children into making "death to America" chants and such.

Well if you take a look at any of the links I've posted one thing that's important to note is the role that the growth of mass communications have played in shaping the attitudes of the younger Iranian populace. Granted many of Iran's reformist leaders were ex-regime hard liners so it's also much more complicated than that.

Though over on the Comm board Paul did claim that "Death to" is what everyone chants in the Middle East because they're too polite to use sexual or scatological imagery.

[TCJohnson]

Well if you take a look at any of the links I've posted one thing that's important to note is the role that the growth of mass communications have played in shaping the attitudes of the younger Iranian populace.


And the younger Iranian populace is the Iranian populace right now. 2/3 of the country is under 35...which means most of them were not alive or barely remember when America meddled in their affairs 30 years ago.

Add to that, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is very unpopular in Iran and most Iranians see Americans as his polar opposite.

[Matt Algren]

2/3 of the country is under 35...
Jesus Christ, that's scary.

[Crowforge]

There are a lot of Iranian citizens who can't stand America, but I'd agree that more Iranians seem to like America than most other Middle Eastern countries.......Which is surprising, since the Iranian government tried to brainwash Iranian children into hating America. They'd force kids to gather together, and they'd lead the children into making "death to America" chants and such.

I remember my mom laughing because she talked to one of my cousins on the phone back then (He was a little kid at the time), and he was telling my mom that they force him to yell "death to America" with everyone else, but that he doesn't really mean it because he doesn't want us to die (My mom & myself).
That's either adorable or sick.

[Typo Lad]

They called it Special Envoy to the Middle East which basically consisted of doling out not only strategic advice, but military intelligence and hardware. Also turns out the U.S. did provide pathogenic agents to Iraq and facilitated the the transfer of military material (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_support_for_Iraq_during_the_Iran%E2% 80%93Iraq_war#Foreign_Materiel_Acquisition_and_Bea r_Spares) to Iraq.

Right, so when he said Sadam had them, I figured he was most likely to know.

Seriously.

[Michael P]

Right, so when he said Sadam had them, I figured he was most likely to know.

Seriously.

From the works of Bill Hicks:

"Iraq? Incredible weapons."
"How do you know?"
"We looked at the receipt."

[Charles RB]

You don't know a damn thing about how life in a tribal society works. Western models do not work in these societies. We have our own forms and they worked fine for centuries.

This deserves to be quoted, because a lot of the crap that goes on in Iraq and Afghanistan seems to come from Western models of democratic government being imposed whether that makes sense for those countries. And some people note that and say "look, democracy doesn't work there!", when the logical assumption is "it needs a different model".

Hell, initially the protestors in Iran just wanted a recount, they didn't want (for the most part) to do a huge reform, chuck out the ayatollahs etc. And why should the West assume "oh they can't have really wanted freedom" from that? The House of Lords and the monarchy, we don't elect them and yet no one says the UK isn't a real democracy.

[KevinTBrown]

I haven't seen this posted in here yet, but, despite its graphic nature, it needs to be seen:

Neda Salehi shot and killed by the Basij. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TtkiLBfHnvw)

Again, this is VERY GRAPHIC!

[Christopher Cross Is God]

I haven't seen this posted in here yet, but, despite its graphic nature, it needs to be seen:

Neda Salehi shot and killed by the Basij. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TtkiLBfHnvw)

Again, this is VERY GRAPHIC!

I posted that clip a few pages earlier, but the clip I linked to didn't have the picture intro.

[Crowforge]

Saw this first thing in the morning, I think that may be the first time I watched someone die on tv proper.

[king mob]

Hell, initially the protestors in Iran just wanted a recount, they didn't want (for the most part) to do a huge reform, chuck out the ayatollahs etc. And why should the West assume "oh they can't have really wanted freedom" from that? The House of Lords and the monarchy, we don't elect them and yet no one says the UK isn't a real democracy.


We're not a real democracy, whatever that exactly means as democracy isn't just the American standard they've tried to impose on countries like Iraq.

[Charles RB]

Neda Salehi shot and killed by the Basij. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TtkiLBfHnvw)

And from the fiance's account (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8113552.stm), she wasn't even in the fucking demo. They've gone and shot dead a bystander for getting out of a gridlocked car to get some air.

[Charles RB]

Guardian Council closes ranks and declares no major voting irregularities after all: (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8114195.stm)

Iran's legislative body, the Guardian Council, has said there were no major polling irregularities in the 12 June election and ruled out an annulment.

Opposition supporters called for the vote to be set aside and the elections re-run amid claims of vote tampering.

But Guardian Council spokesman Abbas Ali Kadkhoda'i said there was "no major fraud or breach in the election".

...

On Monday, it had conceded there had been voting irregularities in 50 districts, including local vote counts that exceeded the number of eligible voters.

However, it said they were not enough to affect the overall result and incumbent Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had indeed won by a landslide.

The council's spokesman said most of the irregularities happened before the election, not during or after voting.

...

An independent British analysis of the disputed election results has found irregularities in the reported turnout, as well as "implausible" swings in the vote in favour of Mr Ahmadinejad.

Analysts from St Andrew's University and the Chatham House think-tank said votes in favour of Mr Ahmadinejad in a third of the provinces would have required an "unlikely scenario" of voting patterns.

Meanwhile, opposition candidate Mehdi Karoubi urged Iranians to mourn for dead protestors on Thursday.

Mr Karoubi, who is among those asking for the election to be set aside, wants mourning ceremonies to be held around the country, his aide Issa Saharkhiz said.

His call echoed an earlier one from cleric Grand Ayatollah Hossein Ali Montazeri, who has called for three days of national mourning for those killed in the street protests.

-

And how BBC Persian is trying to get around the new restrictions. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8113882.stm)

staff at the channel - many of them young Iranians who only came to the UK for its launch - have been working double shifts, trying to produce extra programming on a highly sensitive story even as information has become harder to obtain.

Often this has been done under the extra burden of worrying about friends and family in Iran.

"It's very emotional for all of us," says Rana Rahimpour, a 26-year-old reporter.

"It's your home, it's your streets, the people you grew up with, the places you played in."

In the days that followed the 12 June election BBC Persian - broadcast in Farsi but already banned from working in Iran - was jammed, forcing the channel to use two new satellites to try to get round the blockage.

Agency footage almost dried up, meaning it has had to rely on material sent in by viewers, known as "user-generated content".

"The user-generated videos suddenly became the main way of reporting," says Sina Moutalebi, who turns round interactive material for the channel's programmes and news bulletins.

The material has required careful sifting, including checking pictures taken of the same event from different angles against each other.

But the torrent of contributions and the story as a whole has clearly provided BBC Persian with a boost.

Though audience estimates are yet to be published, the channel - which had set a target of eight million viewers by 2011 - already thinks it has millions of viewers.

It increased broadcasting from the previous daily limit of eight hours, and streams BBC Persian radio when off air.

Up to 10,000 e-mails have been received on a single day, and there were some three million hits on the BBC Persian website on Saturday, the day of protests when at least 10 people died.

"For the past five to six months we encouraged people to send us user-generated video and to send us something other than from their tourist trips in Iran or to Europe," says Mr Moutalebi.

"Then suddenly they began to show us all this video from the clashes and demonstrations."

This has included not only passive, observational footage, but also actively gathered material such as an interview with a prominent critic of the regime conducted by a citizen on his mobile phone during a demonstration last week.

...

"The streams are getting narrower and narrower - from phone connections to internet connections, to people just being brave enough to contact us," says Pooneh Ghoddoosi, who presents the channel's interactive programme.

"It has become more and more sensitive and dangerous for people to talk to us or tell us their stories, but that has very much surprisingly not stopped them."

And a rather BBC problem:

Even so, upholding BBC values of impartiality and balance has been a challenge.

Before the election, the interactive programme received a number of phone calls from people purporting to be opposition supporters, who began to sing President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad praises as soon as they got on air.

Since Mr Ahmadinejad was declared to have won the election, his supporters have stopped calling, and Ms Ghoddoosi has been left appealing in vain for his backers to contribute.

Enayat Faim, who presents a political debate that was broadcast weekly before the elections and is now shown daily, says he finds himself playing devil's advocate with pro-opposition guests.

...

"We have been very careful about not falling into the trap of becoming opposition TV. We've at no point said 'these elections were rigged'. We've been very measured - so much so that we've had criticism from all sides."

[the4thpip]

Sickening news bit:

Iranian authorities told the family of 19-year-old Kaveh Alipour, a young man who was shot in the head during Saturday's protests and later died, that they had to pay a $3,000 "bullet-fee" to have his body returned to them. By all accounts, Alipour was politically inactive and was tragically caught in the violent crossfire of the protest while returning home from an acting class in Tehran.

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/

[Charles RB]

This is the time when the Iranian authorities should want to keep as many people as possible on their side - what are they thinking here?!

[KevinTBrown]

This is the time when the Iranian authorities should want to keep as many people as possible on their side - what are they thinking here?!

I need to find the article, though I think someone posted it elsewhere in this thread, but Musavai keeps calling out to the Basij and Revolutionary Guard and calling them "their brothers". I strongly suspect that some will switch sides eventually... and that'll make things even more interesting.

[the4thpip]

I need to find the article, though I think someone posted it elsewhere in this thread, but Musavai keeps calling out to the Basij and Revolutionary Guard and calling them "their brothers". I strongly suspect that some will switch sides eventually... and that'll make things even more interesting.

With 2/3 of the country being under 35, some of the militia members will know some of the demonstrators from school, soccer, etc. etc. In the streets, it could quite literally be brother against brother.

[Charles RB]

There's already claims that some of the authorities are panicked or unhappy, or had minor clashes with the Basiji (they're probably not likely to turn, being hardcore supporters).

[Sean Walsh]

This is the time when the Iranian authorities should want to keep as many people as possible on their side - what are they thinking here?!

I really don't think they're aware of how much of a grip they're losing. It's like they really don't understand how much the rest of the world is seeing of all this. The new medias (Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, etc) are really unveiling the harshest of their tactics.

Obama's keeping up the diplomatic stance, but it seems to just be for formality. No matter what happens, Ahmadinejad and the clerics will yell "U.S. meddling!" to try and get some pity in the Arab world, when all we (and many millions of others around the world) really seem to be able to do is just watch the Iranian people rising up day after day (defying the pundits who said these protests wouldn't last a week) and the subsequent collapse of the Iranian government's grasp on logic and common sense.

[the4thpip]

I really don't think they're aware of how much of a grip they're losing. It's like they really don't understand how much the rest of the world is seeing of all this. The new medias (Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, etc) are really unveiling the harshest of their tactics.

Obama's keeping up the diplomatic stance, but it seems to just be for formality. No matter what happens, Ahmadinejad and the clerics will yell "U.S. meddling!" to try and get some pity in the Arab world, when all we (and many millions of others around the world) really seem to be able to do is just watch the Iranian people rising up day after day (defying the pundits who said these protests wouldn't last a week) and the subsequent collapse of the Iranian government's grasp on logic and common sense.

Open support from the US president would probably be counter productive right now. I was wondering what the heck Simon Peres was thinking when he publicly supported the protesters.

[Charles RB]

I really don't think they're aware of how much of a grip they're losing.

They're firing live rounds at people and temporarily arresting family members of important political figures - I think they know they're in trouble. The problem is, it's making them lose their heads (using live rounds itself is stupid, you radicalise the demonstrators and give their cause martyrs).

[Sean Walsh]

Open support from the US president would probably be counter productive right now. I was wondering what the heck Simon Peres was thinking when he publicly supported the protesters.

Oh, agreed. Open support would definitely give Ahmadinejad's cries of meddling grounds in reality, so (even though it kinda sucks) it's best for Obama to be relatively mum.

However, why be shocked that the president of Israel supports the protesters?

They're more as risk than America will ever be when it comes to Iran. And it's a considerable olive branch of peace of the people and a sharp slap in Ahmadinejad's face, since he's the guy who's been heralding calls for "the extermination of Israel" for years.

So Israel sides with the people rather than being mum about it and thus giving the masses cause for concern about why Israel kept quiet.

And if Ahmadinejad snaps and start lobbing missiles at Israel now, then who's really going to side with Iran given how he and the clerics are handling these protests and his own people?

[Samuel Catalino]

Iran 1979 isn't the same place where Iran is now. Khomeini and the clerics were stronger opposition forces against the Shah then because the Shah underestimated them and focused more on his liberal and Marxist opponents. Additionally, with the exception of the Marxists Khomeini worked to unite the opposition behind him by focusing on socio-economic objections to the Shah's regime while keeping mum about his eventual theocratic plans. There's some historical debate over how much popular support the Islamic Republic actually had especially when before the Revolution denied that he wanted power (http://www.iranian.com/Opinion/2003/August/Khomeini/). However, Iran's clerics did wield more prestige and authority at the time among Iran's population as they were poorer and more alienated from westernizing influences.

But now the focal point of opposition is an ex-hardliner turned reformer and its being driven by a much younger population who's grown up with Khomeini's legacy and is fed up with it. And as I have repeatedly pointed out they are much more interested in western culture and the freedoms of western democracies than you've been claiming.

How many of them have actually experienced the freedom of a western democracy? Not to mention that many of the European democracies are not nearly as free as they are advertised.

1979 was the revolution and what is happening over in Iran is not going to reverse it and I don't see anything that changes my opinion.

I wish they were for a United States type of Constitution that does have the supreme body not imposing one religion on all, but it is not going to happen.

[Samuel Catalino]

Incredibly, insanely, illogically, he is.

It is neither insane or illogical.

[Samuel Catalino]

Meanwhile, all other rulers (Ayatollahs included) lead such frugal lives.

I was talking about the Shah, not the straw man.


Only with the religious extremists, which you seem to think consists of the vast majority of Iran's population.

They are the ones in power with authority and at the end of the day...they will be still there.






That would mean something if the protests were simply about Mousavi.

Mousavi is the binding principle.






Nah, regardless of how you remember events unfolding, it didn't happen overnight.

But, I'll go for the devil's advocate approach and act like it did happen overnight......What difference would that make? You actually think because a particular revolution supposedly happened overnight, all revolutions within a particular country would go the same route, via very similar time-frames? What kind of illogical thought process is that?

You need a principle ruler much like the Ayatollah who came into power a fortnight after the Shah left. There is no one that fits that criteria.

[Christopher Cross Is God]

I was talking about the Shah, not the straw man.

Yet you lump the Shah together with the straw man........And my point was, the ayatollahs/ruling body indulge in excess as well. They're known for such.




They are the ones in power with authority and at the end of the day...they will be still there.

How do you know they'll still be there? There's no telling what will result from what's going on right now.


Mousavi is the binding principle.

He's the excuse.


You need a principle ruler much like the Ayatollah who came into power a fortnight after the Shah left. There is no one that fits that criteria.

So you claim, but we'll see. Unlike yourself, I'm not looking at this with a narrow-minded POV.

Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if everything continues to escalate, and the ruling body eventually get killed off. Contrary to what you think, there are a lot of people in Iran who detest the religious government enough to do such.

I think the biggest problem isn't the lack of a supposed principle ruler to lead the charge, but the fact that the majority of people protesting are young and probably don't have any sort of strategic military background. Maybe people with such backgrounds will emerge, but we don't know of any yet, as it's all still in the beginning stages.

[Adam C]

Not to mention that many of the European democracies are not nearly as free as they are advertised.

Not nearly as free as advertised? Such as...?

How many of them have actually experienced the freedom of a western democracy?


I wish they were for a United States type of Constitution that does have the supreme body not imposing one religion on all, but it is not going to happen.

And no, they haven't actually experienced the freedom of western democracy, but here's the problem. The issue of greater political and social freedoms in Iran is important to its young populace and is driving the protests. That's what all the evidence says and you can't simply dismiss because they haven't experienced a proper democratic regime.

[Nick Soapdish]

How many of them have actually experienced the freedom of a western democracy? Not to mention that many of the European democracies are not nearly as free as they are advertised.


Neither is ours which should have become especially apparent in the last eight years, but that's hardly the only time that we've failed to live up to our billing.

And there is a pretty large Iranian population in the US that retains ties with friends and relatives still in Iran. It's not too hard for an Iranian to find somebody that knows somebody in the US and hears about life over here.

I don't even understand the logic behind needing to have specifically experienced freedom to want it. They may not know the specifics of it and for that matter, may not want exactly the same sort of freedoms that we do, but it doesn't mean that they wouldn't want freedom. Otherwise, how could anyone have ever wanted freedom?

Do you think that the blacks didn't want the vote because they hadn't gotten to vote before? That they didn't want equal rights because they hadn't ever experienced them? If anything, they want them more because they know that they're missing out on something important. In the US where most of us haven't lived under tyranny and don't understand how bad it is, we don't seem to really appreciate our freedom. Just look at the voting rates, particularly for local elections.

[KevinTBrown]

Neither is ours which should have become especially apparent in the last eight years, but that's hardly the only time that we've failed to live up to our billing.

And there is a pretty large Iranian population in the US that retains ties with friends and relatives still in Iran. It's not too hard for an Iranian to find somebody that knows somebody in the US and hears about life over here.

I don't even understand the logic behind needing to have specifically experienced freedom to want it. They may not know the specifics of it and for that matter, may not want exactly the same sort of freedoms that we do, but it doesn't mean that they wouldn't want freedom. Otherwise, how could anyone have ever wanted freedom?

Do you think that the blacks didn't want the vote because they hadn't gotten to vote before? That they didn't want equal rights because they hadn't ever experienced them? If anything, they want them more because they know that they're missing out on something important. In the US where most of us haven't lived under tyranny and don't understand how bad it is, we don't seem to really appreciate our freedom. Just look at the voting rates, particularly for local elections.

Also, based on the fact of the numerous Twitter, Flikr and YouTube postings, I'm sure younger Iranians have a fairly decent idea about what freedom is like because of their use of the internet.

[Samuel Catalino]

Yet you lump the Shah together with the straw man........And my point was, the ayatollahs/ruling body indulge in excess as well. They're known for such.

Not when it comes to their religion they aren't and that was a major complaint against the Shah.

How do you know they'll still be there? There's no telling what will result from what's going on right now.

Pretty much the same way I thought the fellows in charge of China would be there after T-Square.

He's the excuse. One of many.



So you claim, but we'll see. Unlike yourself, I'm not looking at this with a narrow-minded POV.

It is just that I have seen this scenairo play out so many times before.

Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if everything continues to escalate, and the ruling body eventually get killed off. Contrary to what you think, there are a lot of people in Iran who detest the religious government enough to do such.

You may be in for a big surprise.

I think the biggest problem isn't the lack of a supposed principle ruler to lead the charge, but the fact that the majority of people protesting are young and probably don't have any sort of strategic military background. Maybe people with such mindsets will emerge, but we don't know of any yet, as it's all still in the beginning stages.

It helps to have a polarizing principle. There isn't any in Iran, and at the end of the day, I doubt that a groundswell rebellion will overthrow the theocracy.

[Samuel Catalino]

Not nearly as free as advertised? Such as...?

You will have to do your own research on that one.


And no, they haven't actually experienced the freedom of western democracy, but here's the problem. The issue of greater political and social freedoms in Iran is important to its young populace and is driving the protests. That's what all the evidence says and you can't simply dismiss because they haven't experienced a proper democratic regime.


The protests are being driven by a deteriorating economy, and to write english words like freedom and vote is to elicit western response and aid. When the goal is reached, those who offered the aid will be shown the door.

[Samuel Catalino]

Neither is ours which should have become especially apparent in the last eight years, but that's hardly the only time that we've failed to live up to our billing.

And there is a pretty large Iranian population in the US that retains ties with friends and relatives still in Iran. It's not too hard for an Iranian to find somebody that knows somebody in the US and hears about life over here.

I don't even understand the logic behind needing to have specifically experienced freedom to want it. They may not know the specifics of it and for that matter, may not want exactly the same sort of freedoms that we do, but it doesn't mean that they wouldn't want freedom. Otherwise, how could anyone have ever wanted freedom?

Do you think that the blacks didn't want the vote because they hadn't gotten to vote before? That they didn't want equal rights because they hadn't ever experienced them? If anything, they want them more because they know that they're missing out on something important. In the US where most of us haven't lived under tyranny and don't understand how bad it is, we don't seem to really appreciate our freedom. Just look at the voting rates, particularly for local elections.

I am inclined to agree with you there, and those rights have eroded over the past sixty to seventy years. Homeland Insecurity is the result of many years of eroding of our freedom, but hey it started way back in the late 1700s with the Alien and Sedition Act....

[K-DoG7p7]

You will have to do your own research on that one.



You made the clame.. you bring the proof..

[Sabrinaset]

You will have to do your own research on that one.


No, you can't fall back on that here. If someone is asking you to back up an assertion YOU made, than it falls upon *you* to back up what you said, and not the person asking you what you mean.

[Nick Soapdish]

I am inclined to agree with you there, and those rights have eroded over the past sixty to seventy years. Homeland Insecurity is the result of many years of eroding of our freedom, but hey it started way back in the late 1700s with the Alien and Sedition Act....

60 or 70 years?

I think that on the whole, our rights have gotten more protection over that time. (Ask anybody that was involved in the civil rights movement. Or a woman. Or a gay.) However, our government's ability to restrict those rights on a whim has also increased thanks to improved transportation and communication.

And heck, back in the 1700s, most of us didn't have rights. Just the rich white males. It's also worth noting that it was overturned so it was (another) hiccup in citizens' rights.

[Christopher Cross Is God]

Not when it comes to their religion they aren't and that was a major complaint against the Shah.

Incorrect. The ayatollahs indulging in excess is in direct conflict to their religion.


It is just that I have seen this scenairo play out so many times before.

lol, you mean like overnight revolutions?


You may be in for a big surprise.

Nah, I see all sorts of different possibilities, so it's unlikely I'll be in for a big surprise.......But, you, with your tunnel-vision mentality, are far more open to such.

[Charles RB]

to write english words like freedom and vote is to elicit western response and aid.

Again, you are being deliberately ignorant when you say that. You have to actively ignore what modern Iran is like and has been like, what the Iranians are saying, what the analysts are saying, and how the regime is reacting in order to claim this.

And you are! Jesus wept.

[the4thpip]

Incorrect. The ayatollahs indulging in excess is in direct conflict to their religion.

Nah, I see all sorts of different possibilities, so it's unlikely I'll be in for a big surprise.......But, you, with your tunnel-vision mentality, are far more open to such.

And there is a wall at the end of the tunnel, and a train wreck happening in the tunnel. Oh, and the tunnel is filled with a hallucinogenic gas. A powerful one.

[Tobias March]

Cameron Stewart is claiming on twitter that Iran has Leprechauns....

This would be the flagrant lies Ahmenajad has been accusing the Western media of so.

[Christopher Cross Is God]

I know nothing about Twitter, so I don't know how legit this is (Can they really track people down via timezones on Twitter?), but I saw this message via a friend on facebook:


"If anyone is on twitter, set your location to "Tehran" and your time zone to GMT +3.30. Security forces are hunting for bloggers using location/timezone searches. The more people at this location, the more of a logjam it creates for forces trying to shut Iranians' access to the internet down. Cut & paste & please pass it on."

[Paul McEnery]

They're firing live rounds at people and temporarily arresting family members of important political figures - I think they know they're in trouble. The problem is, it's making them lose their heads (using live rounds itself is stupid, you radicalise the demonstrators and give their cause martyrs).

Of course, having the nasty turn of mind I do, it occurs to me that the most effective thing an agent provocateur could do is to shoot live rounds into the crowd.

And we do know that we've placed armed agent provocateurs inside the Iranian border.

[Paul McEnery]

Open support from the US president would probably be counter productive right now. I was wondering what the heck Simon Peres was thinking when he publicly supported the protesters.

Stirring shit so they can have their war after all?