Seymour Hersh writes for the New Yorker.

I guess Secor knows this because ....... she got it from her favorite Mossad agent?

CIA's CANDIDATE LOSES IN IRAN: I CRY FOR IRAN
Americans have been in control of Iran since Reza Pahlavi's time and now for the third time they are using massive money to modify the system so that the suffering masses of Iranians remain impoverished , while their assets are transferred to the West. Reza Pahlavi's begging letter to President Roosevelt indicates the depth of his powerlessness! It is funny that Reza Junior ignores the fact that he is just a pawn to be used to extract concession in this international game of control of resources in Iran! Neither he nor anybody residing abroad speaks for the suffering masses of Iran.
　
Now, again for the Third time in Iranian history Americans want to modify the Regime, without changing the structure of economic dependency! This is not acceptable. It is a fraud planned and executed by the CIA and is designed to force the modification of foreign policies rather than basic structural changes in Iran!
It is amazing that American Propaganda and money is again pouring into Iran to challenge the result of such a clear victory . Again CIA agents and America News media are supporting Mousavi, who actually supervised the massacre of 7500 Iranians in 1979 and executed the US policy of fighting a proxy war with Iraq that devastated Iran's economy. He also, is the protégé of Mullah Rafsanjani, the gangster whose Mafia is mainly responsible for the economic bankruptcy of Iran. They are the same crooks who have have made Iran 80 per cent dependent on imported Gasoline!
It is unfortunate that almost two millions of Americans, Canadians, Germans, Australians, British who, speak Farsi now act as proxies for US policies, paid or unpaid, have become freedom lovers and are pushing for regime change in Iran, which meas nothing but preservation of the American and British interest in Iran!
America failed to impose Mullah Rafsanjani's hand picked candidate on Iran, despite massive financial, organizational agitation and propaganda by CIA, the Voice of America and all its radio and television Networks! So what! Mousavi is a fraud and he did not get the vote! America should not have double standards and should shut up when talking about human rights and democracy while occupying Iraq, murdering freedom fighters in Afghanistan, having one million Palastinians in Gaza Concentration Camp ans is supporting Mobarak and Faisal. Mousavi, has been promoted as Iran’s Obama by the US despite his supervision of massacre of 7500 Iranians under the guidance and approval of the CIA’s official and General Huyser in particular in 1979.
The result and margin of victory was so devastating that proves the effectiveness, organizational skill and popularity of the regime among the masses of Iranians. By any standard 63 percent is great enough to slap American agents and millions of ex-patriots, who now under different nationalities, different flags, different passports and citizen-ships are working against the Islamic Regime.
Unfortunately, these ex-patriots, have become the corner stone of opposition in Iran and are hand in hand with American and British agents to destabilize the regime, which is under economic pressure. The question is who and what agency can be hold responsible for the devastation of Iranian Economy. The single most agent responsible for everything bad happening in Iran is Rafsanjani Crime Family, there are obviously others, who has been running Iran and setting Reagan’s liberalization policy that has led to massive unemployment and devaluation of Iranian Rials, despite oil revenues.

THE SAME NONSENSE AS Before!
IRANIANS, I mean te majority of the real Iranians who live inside Iran, not the flagbearers of the West, who speak Farsi and claim to be Iranians, would be the actual victims of the CIA's Regime Chage in Iran.
It seems that there is a massive effort to change the regime in Iran for the benefit of Israel and Americans. If Iran is devstated so be it!Who cares!
American and the CIA bloggers in Iran operate under specfic plans. The now Iranians ge ther news frm BBC. Radio Israel ad the Voice of America so they easily use meda for spreadng liesas truth, the same way they did in 1979.
The also follow up this time with Special Ops, and start destroying tagets by local aets, Mujahedns and many trained prfessionals. They have perfected their techniques in Iraq to start sabotage!
There is nothing in it but destrucion and servitde of Iranians for another 30 years. It seems CIA likes to reshape Iran every quarter of century or so, and now is the time to switch some characters wthout changing the economic structure of Dependecy!
A real chage in Iran would come when Mullah Rafsanjani, whose Mafia Family has controlled Iran ecnomy would be put on trial.Tha would not happen!
That is why I cry for Iran!

Your letter has arrived.

http://tinyurl.com/speedy-delivery

Thanks for the link, Lupita. It's good to see there are still few responsible journalists about, to put things in their proper perspective. Here's a few key paragraphs of Tristam:

"So why was the West so self-deluded, both about Mousavi and the outcome of a foregone conclusion? I wish it was about misplaced hopes. No. It's something less honorable than that. It's about misplaced projections. It's about presuming that the West's agenda for Iran can somehow muscle its way over the agenda Iran reserves for itself. It's about reverting to pre-1979 assumptions that Iran would be as the West would want it to be. Which is to say that 30 years of history have taught the West next to nothing about Iran. That ignorance, those attitudes, those presumptions, are precisely why Iranians are still ready to vote for a man like Ahmadinejad, because for all his anti-Semitism, his belligerence, even his apparent stupidity on more than a few matters of state, he is the embodiment of an Iranian identity that brooks no imports, that needs no one else, certainly nothing western, not even (and above all not) Barack Obama, to define it. Mousavi would likely have been no different ideologically, but why chuck off a known quantity?

Reactionary editorial pages (what pages are left, anyway) will fold all over each other to claim that Iranians have embraced hate, that they've endorsed the destruction of Israel, that they've made their hostility clear. Stupid judgments, as I see them, if excusably America-centric: they're meant well. But they miss the point.

The point never has been for Iran to get a leadership the United States can deal with. That's the American perspective that's led nowhere for 30 years. The point is to get a leadership in the West willing to deal with whatever leadership Iran chooses for itself, on its own terms.

So here's where Obama's Norwuz message will prove its worth (or not). Here's where Obama gets to show the Iranian people that he meant what he said. That he wants a dialogue, not just with the Iranian people, but with the Iranian leadership. Especially one chosen by the Iranian people. (At some point all those allegations of fraud are going to have to make way for the reality: if the United States could survive the fraud of 2000, so can Iran in 2009, though chances are Iran's fraud is less obvious than that of Bush v. Gore)."

I really can't stand the New Yorker anymore, except for the back page, which is slightly above mediocre.

It's another NY Timesian diffuse the left institution.

It's for liberals who like to ingest their right-wing propaganda with SAT words.

Thank you, Sophie. Let us all not forget the recent articles posted here, Counterpunch, Fromthewilderness, etc. that demonstrate how US Govt. are helping to foment internal disruption through our various agencies. This election hype is about an excuse to do AIPAC's bidding. As other posters have said, we have 2 beams in our eye (2000 and 2004) in comparison to a possible mote in theirs. I'll take their paper over our electronic ether any day.

Jeevee, You certainly spoke the truth there.

Nice cherry-picked quote. An Ahmadinejad fan says the result was correct? Whoa! I guess that settles that. Reading Fisk's entire piece does not give the impression that this stand out comment does. Fisk, a fantastic journalist, goes to great length to give a sweepign view of what's going on. You might just as well quote:

"'Ahmadinejad,' the headline read, '24 million votes. People vote for Success, Honesty and the Battle against Corruption.' Not the obvious headline that comes to mind. But Mousavi's Green Word newspaper allegedly had its own headline dictated to it by the authorities – before they shut it down yesterday: 'Happy Victory to the People.' And you can't get more neutral than that.'

Even the opposition gets its headlines dictated by the government.

I wish this was lighthearted take was not so true. But laughter at ourselves might help the healing

Well said!!!!!!

And what, exactly, is your point, Drew? That we should care more about the subversion of the democratic process in distant countries than at home? How about those thugs the Republicans sent to physically prevent the recounting of votes in Palm Beach County Fla.? (Which, incidentally, was but one of many successful attempts to impede the legal right to recount ballots culminating in the Supreme Court fiat.) How about all the sudden last-minute increases in votes in republican districts in 2000, 2002, and 2004? How about all the studies by university professors of statitistics pointing out the virtual impossibility of the statistical spikes and anomalies in the voting irregularities in all three of those years? Eh? Nobody has yet had the time or the opportunity to present such evidence in re Iran, but you're already willing to forget or ignore the coup d'état that occurred in your own country so you can self-righteously point your finger, along with the corporate media, at a country that the warmongers have long been itching to bomb? Get your priorities straight, sir.

And this was a telephone poll, when his base is made up of people to poor and rural to have or need phones.

Shame on YOU. Any group can riot whether they legitimately won the election or not.

For goodness sakes the Fans of the Vancouver Canucks "rioted" when their team lost in the Stanley cup finals in 1994. It hardly meant the series was "rigged".

Rioting in the streets is no proof an election was rigged.

The video certainly shows disturbing police behavior but, from what I see here, it's still not as harsh as US police tactics of recent years, where we've seen rubber-coated bullets fired in to small peaceful crowds, mounted police charging with their horses into crowds, sometimes with their vehicles, people herded into pens and then clubbed, and so on down the line. Actually the Iranian police on their little motorbikes look rather quaint. And at least they let the demonstration get as big as it did, something that would not have been allowed in today's US.