Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
06.13.09 - 9:58 PM
Iran: Might Meets Right
Laura Secor on Iran's stolen election:
"What is most shocking is not the fraud itself, but that it was brazen and entirely without pretext."
76 Comments so far
Show AllI don't know why your'e all in a rush to condemn what is an internally driven internal revolt as being CIA-run without showing one shred of evidence. I notice people have stopped quoting Fisk all of a sudden. What happened? Did you actually read a few more paragraphs and suddenly notice what he was actually reporting?
And you know that it's an internally driven revolt somehow.
And you know that the CIA has no operations there because, what? Not an area of interest? CIA doesn't do operations now? What?
And you know that the CIA isn't involved because historically, what? They've never done that in Iran before? Peru? Or perhaps they've never done it anywhere is what you know.
You're asking for evidence?
You wouldn't know evidence if it walked up and slapped you in the face.
The only question is not if the CIA is involved, but given their certain involvement, to what extent is it involved.
And none has been provided here. Thanks for the double standard. No one is saying that they've never been there before. No one has been talking about PEru. We are talking about the situation taking place in Iran now. I don't mind if you show me they are involved, but show it. And don't talk to me about campaign colors. What political campaign doesn't pick a branding color?
There has been decent analysis talking about the voracity of evidence for or against vote frud, but at least there's an admission that some indication points the the possiblity, and that maybe the million people demonstrating in cities across Iran have a justifiable reason to do so.
I've provided links in other posts that do mention the evidence is not yet conclusive. but what's interesting here is that people will, no matter how obvious it is, disavow it out of hand while blindly makig whatever other accusations they like sans anything tangible to back it up. This is the problem. LArge swaths of Iranian people involved in legitimate protest are being written off by otherwise progressive westerners because what htey're saying doesn't fit the popular soundbyte. This level of discourse is doomed to fail people who want to make the case against US/Israel aggression.
Let's send in our heroes to flatten the place and free the Iranian people. They'll welcome us with flowers and sweets.
Sorry, Michael. The memory is a faulty thing, alas.
Clovis!
It was Dade County (officially Miami-Dade County), not Palm Beach County.
Us Miamians demand credit where credit is due.
Here's the problem:
We've had so many lies and distortions shoved down our throats by the AIPAC led media
it's only prudent to wait until we see hard evidence.
Why some people think that's unreasonable leads me to believe they are pushing the line for ulterior motives, or at least to justify unwarranted aggression.
You just have to feel sorry about the state of the US media- jumping on a story about possible election fraud in another country OMG what a travesty!
Where the F&#K were these ignorant asses during the fraudulent electionS during this DECADE in THIS country?!
So far, the President has shown restraint in commenting on the election in Iran. Iran leaders have called for a investigation into voter fraud. While the media reports this was under pressure, it was reported earlier that there is a procedure where losing candidates can request an investigation and Mousavi took advantage of that. It would be a real elevation in diplomacy if the United States simply stood on the sidelines and let the Iranians deal with the issue.
Herman Schmidt
Unfortunately, there was a precedent that could hardly have gone unnoticed by the rest of the world.... And that is irrespective of whether or not this election was rigged.
Because of the fuss raised by our news media in the UK, I was immediately suspicious of this putative election "coup", and seemingly with good reason. Almost certainly, the same kind of very rich, Western "poodle" protesters who turn out in Venezuela.
the cia at work once again calling foul when we cant clean up our own tainted elections how can we criticize and undermine iran so much for democracy
GwNorth June 14th, 2009 5:43 pm,
Rather excellent post! I'll "second" your view, if no one else has already done so; if someone else has, then I'll "third" or "fourth" the view.
I perceive a questionable thing in Laura Secor's article and it's wherein she says that President Ahmadinejad and Ayatollah Khamenei aren't and therefore haven't been open to dialogue with the U.S., for the contrary has been repeatedly the case, just that it's always on the conditional basis of there needing to be [mutual respect], which infers that there must not be hypocrisy, hegemony, ... committed by the USA trying to strong-arm or bully the Iranian government into doing whatever "Uncle Sam" (for people of the U.S.) says.
I haven't viewed the video clips yet, but am aware that there were riots, fights between voters and police and Revolutionary Guard in some areas, while not in others; and the video clips on the violent instances evidently aren't providing thorough coverage, only showing events in this selective manner. That requires a considerable amount of information in order for viewers to have a full understanding!
Anyway, given the above flaw in Laura Secor's article, I don't know what to believe in the rest of what she wrote in this particular article. I'll have to wait to read from analysts and other writers I am already familiar with and know to be very good and reliably unbiased.
Laura Secor was with Iranians in the USA and we do have a little ugly history that is related, although certainly not illustrative of all Iranians in the USA and Canada. It's when Iranians in both of these countries hit the streets to support war on Iran, the Iranian government, that is, but while the war would also be broader than only hitting the government. Simulataneously, there were protest demonstrations against war on Iran and these protesters included Iranians in again the USA (a little in Canada).
With all of this said, however, it seems certainly unlikely that ex-PM Mousavi wound up with roughly 35% of the vote, the other reformist candidate with 1%, and Ahmadinejad with over 60% when, as Laura Secor and others say, and if what they say is true, the total turnout was around 80% and many were not voting for Ahmedinejad and the cleric right-wing faction. Is it really true most Iranians who voted didn't vote for Ahmadinejad though? I don't know.
As for police state-ism, the police forces on the streets, applying police security during this Iranian election, perhaps there was more than what happened in the U.S.A. during recent U.S. elections; but Americans still don't really have much for moral bases for faulting the Iranian government much for the election just held. In the USA there isn't as much strategic need for police state tactics, given there's much use of electoral fraud with electronic voting machines, much voter disenfrancisement, etcetera.
Nevertheless, "two wrongs don't make a right", either. But then what really happened in Iran with this election? I only know what western "news" media have reported; very few of them, not having read much, yet.
hopedup writes:
"You know, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi had children..."
Yeah: but not with Queen Soraya. 'Twas the sob-story of the fifties, which reminds us that the Shah of Chicago is sure to issue a lengthy proclamation ANY day, er, moment . . .
Meanwhile...
Here we have a statement on Iran's elections from His Imperial Majesty Reza Shah II, er, Shahanshah, ahem, I mean the former Crown Prince, which chastises the Iranian government for it's (irony alert) "disregard for democratic and human rights".
http://www.rezapahlavi.org/press/?english&id=353
Our 'reporters' claim that an election has been stolen. No time to wait for proof, which might come in the form of a mushroom cloud. Let's send in our heroes to liberate the Iranian people. I'm sure they'd welcome us as liberators.
You know, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi had children...
So if this whole election fraud debacle doesn't work, we could always install his son Reza Pahlavi as the new Shah of Iran.
If that doesn't work, "all options are on the table".
Democracy! Freedom! Empire!
I am not going to continue this thread but please read my comments thoroughly before you respond:
To GwNorth:
Wow! How amazing that you use the Great Democrator's analogy in referring to the current uprisings as riots after a hockey game -- of course, he referred to them as riots after a soccer match!
I wonder if you would have used the same analogy in referring to the previous two rigged elections in the U.S? I find your attitude towards what is happening in Iran as paternalistic as that of neo-cons who shed crocodile tears for crushing of the nascent democratic movement in Iran.
I suggest you go back and re-read my comments once more; "watch the clip" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ttxINV_EF50); follow the news closely and do some more research before you continue your knee jerk support of yet another phony "anti-imperialist" who has "democratically" jailed hundreds of "soccer match rioters" and their leaders during the past couple of days!
By the way, for those of you who have misused Robert Fisk's quote, I suggest you read the article in its entirety. Although I find his analysis of the election results lacking and merely based on anecdotal evidence from a conversation with “a true and faithful friend of the Islamic Republic, a man I have known for many years who has risked his life and been imprisoned for Iran and who has never lied to me,” his depiction of the current events is very telling. Here is the link:
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/fisk/robert-fisk-iran-erupts-as-voters-back-the-demo...
>>Wow! How amazing that you use the Great Democrator's analogy in referring to the current uprisings as riots after a hockey game -- of course, he referred to them as riots after a soccer match!
And this probably the low point of your rather weak arguemnt. The analogy holds. It does not matter who sees it the same way.
Your attempt at rebuttal is like a flat earther claiming "Wow Adolf Hitler claimed the world was round too!"
>>Wow! How amazing that you use the Great Democrator's analogy in referring to the current uprisings as riots after a hockey game -- of course, he referred to them as riots after a soccer match!
I find your viewpoint lacking objectivety as evidenced by your LABELS and of lacking any EVIDENCE.
I can point to the examples of dozens of elections where people took to the street to claim fraud occurred where there was NO EVIDENCE OF SUCH.
I can give examples of people rioting in the streets burning down entire Neighborhoods in the United States of America based upon little more then rumours of a "Black man raping a woman".
The NED funded a "spontaneous uprising" in Venezuala as part of the US Coup attempt against the Victory Of Chavez.
Your responses are the ones that are knee jerk given the fact you had in your very first post on the subject the LABEL of Great Democrator applied to The winner of the election.
This showed you had an agenda and bias without even reviewing the evidence.
Given the history of MANUFACTURED evidence presented by the western Media I will withhold judgement.
Given the fact that independent polls showed Ahmandinejad ahead by the same margin that the election results showed, I withhold judgment.
Given the Fact the USA and all its television networks, including Networks in Britain, Italy and Canada showed a massive demonstration of Iraqis happily toppling the Statue of Saddam Hussein ALL OF THEM claiming this proof of their overhwelming support for the US Invasion when in fact that whole Incident STAGED I am not going to give YOUTUBE videos any credibility as PROOF there fraud.
Youtube videos of Saddams statue being toppled flooded the interent. Was that PROOF of anything?
As to the USA , A Group of people stormed Poll Counting Centers in Florida to protest the vote recount. As it turned out these were republican operatives many of them senior in the party and the incident was Staged. Is it your contention that just because they staged a riot it was PROOF that Bush was the legitmate winner of the Florida vote?
People taking to the streets is not proof of a rigged election. It as simple as that. Just as people staying in their homes after an election is not proof it was NOT rigged.
People are not supporting the anti-imperialist they are rejecting the imperial propaganda.
What are theY supposed to do with the rioters, let them burn down Tehran?
Or maybe let them create a new regime by riot ala Kermit Roosevelt?
Glenn: "What are they supposed to do with the rioters, let them burn down Tehran?"
You're right on point. Maybe they should let the handful of rioters take over the country so they can hoist the US flag while they play the Israeli national anthem.
As expected, the minute the results were in, US "reporters" were all over the re-elected leader of the Iranian revolution, demonizing the man in preparation for the eventual carpet-bombing of the people of Iran and the theft of their resources.
When Bush stole his two elections, I was out there getting shot with rubber bullets and getting my butt kicked by riot police in San Francisco. I saw plenty of "reporters" around...not one picked up the story. They simply moved their money to war stock, and zipped it.
"What is most shocking is not the fraud itself, but that it was brazen and entirely without pretext."
Good thing a brazenly stolen election could never happen here in Christianmerica...
If it did, though, I'm sure people would pour into the streets, rioting and protesting and demanding justice, too!
As president of Iran, Ahmadinejad does not control the military or the national intelligence service and, unlike our president, does not have the power to go to war. As president he has very little power. The recent election of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, a true war hawk, should be our real concern.
There might be severe delusion at work, both on the part of western liberal analysts and the Iranian middle classes. The most telling this is that even US-based opinion polls done before the election predicted similar results (Ahmedinejad getting more than double Mousavi's vote). http://www.voanews.com/english/2009-06-08-voa60.cfm
Iran also hasn't yet turfed its Presidents after the first term (Khamenei from 1981-1989, Rafsanjani from 1989 to 1997, Khatami from 1997 to 2005).
The class split seems extremely wide, and a lot of the earlier leaders like Rafsanjani are unpopular precisely because the gap between the wealthy and poor increased during their tenure.
Thanks for providing some perspective, Ceti.
"I think Iran might still remember Kermit Roosevelt and the CIA overthrow of their democracy for oil in 1953. A few planted stories - a few hired riots..."
Shame on you for your simplistic analysis in comparing the current uprisings in support of a genuine democracy in Iran to the US backed and anti-democratic coup d'etat of 1953! Your "progressive" charade is sickening! Check this video clip from an Italian news agency depicting scenes from recent demonstrations against the "democrator" Ahmadinejad!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ttxINV_EF50
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.
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.
This is a poll that was done on the Iranian Elections about a Month prior to the election date.
>>Independent and uncensored nationwide surveys of Iran are rare. Typically, polls in Iran are either conducted or monitored by the Iranian government and other affiliated interest groups, and can be untrustworthy. By contrast, our poll -- the third in a series over the past two years -- was conducted by telephone inside Iran over May 11th to 20th, 2009, with 1,001 interviews proportionally distributed covering all 30 provinces of Iran, with a margin of error of +/- 3.1 percent.
http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/iran110609.html
This poll had a significant plurality in favor of Ahmadinejad.
And this was a telephone poll, when his base is made up of people to poor and rural to have or need phones.
I really resent these recent "barely more than one-liners" "news" reports on Common Dreams, saying that the Iranian election was rigged, without quoting any sources whatsoever. Come on, CD, I expect more from you!
I read the article and was pretty shocked to see them accusing a country of rigging an elections based on a hunch. I mean...really?
Don't worry, folks. Pentagon baglady and shill Christiane Amanpour will give us the unvarnished party line on CNN.
Sad to see the possible election fraud in Iran. Thank god I live in America where elections are never rigged.
Secor is part of the USA blitz to destabilize Iran, ala Kermit Roosevelt.
I called it last week when I read of the increase in CIA funded terrorist activity in S.E. Iran originating in Baluchistan.
People here just need to admit that they have no questions about the results because the incumbent challenges the U.S. on the issues that they like to see the U.S. challenged on.
I think when we look at the different government attempts to block opposition media, access to mobile phones, the arrest of opposition campaigners and the censorship of their publications, the incredibly hard to swallow sudden turnout of Ahmadinijad voters in the lead opposition candidate's own district, weirdly uniform 50% increases across the board for Ahmadinijad in urban and rural areas.... LEt's just say, if this was Gore v. Bush just a few years ago, the tone here would be much different, and rightly so. Oh, wait. it was.
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.
Again, mixing the message is the problem. What does this have to do with the election fraud at home, corporate media, US plans to attack, etc? My point is, all these things van be wrong and yet still there could be credible signs of poll fraud.
Just because the US is wrong in its foreign policy throughout the Middle East doesn't mean that all the news coming out on Iran, much of it coming from people I know there who are actually filming it themselves, is bogus. My priorities are thus: Everyone has the right to choose their own forms of government and leaders. Not just the west where we can sit comfortably in and say, wooh hoo, look at this guy in Iran stick it to the US, while not actually having to live under that guy's regime. What are you talkign about the coup in my own country?
Why, when talking about Iran's political situation must I take time out to remind folks that the republicans rigged an election a while back and the Democrats didn't have it in them to fight it? We know that. Ancient history. This is my point. You use one set of rules for one part of the world that you won't apply elsewhere. Just because you like that Ahmadinijad sticks it to the US, doesn't make his government legitimate.
Why were we so willing to take early, specious evidence of voter fraud in the US (which turned out to be true) and yet aren't willing to be just as critical in our view of this very dubious victory?
And why are we pissed off that people in Iran are justifiably challenging it? Perhaps because in the U.S. we were to timid to challenge Bush's election "win."
Well, I have yet to see any "early evidence" of fraud in this case. All we've been getting are the bald assertions of Americans and Westerners, which we are right to doubt. The most factual coverage reports that the polls did indeed give Amhadinejad a considerable lead on the eve of the election. Show me some evidence of fraud, and I'll concede your point. In any case the stolen elections of 2000 and 2004 are not "ancient history," as they have not entered mainstream discourse. And the whole issue of governement foreknowledge and perhaps collusion in 9/11 is still being blackballed. My point is that the US has a very great deal of housecleaing to do before they can preach to anyone about "democracy." And the very same journalists who are shrieking so hysterically about Iran have been deafeningly silent about domestic election fraud and the obvious coverup in the 9/11 investigation.
It pains me to see so many "progressives" tripping over each other to praise the outcome of the "free and fair" election in Iran. But then I suppose it's because AIPAC pays my PG&E bill, and my day job is working for MOSAD.
Nobody here is praising anything, my friend. We are merely questioning the objectivity of the so-called reporting on this event. How is it that all these US journalists can make statements like "obviously rigged" in reference to the Iranian elections when they haven't yet seen a shred of evidence to substantiate the assertion and yet, when it comes to the 2000-2002-2004 US elections, for which there are mountains of evidence of fraud, they say not a word? THAT is the point. Iranian elections are the business of Iranians, not of Americans, or Europeans. Are Secor and Dreyfus and all these poor excuses for journalists so concerned that US-ally Mubarak is a ruthless dictator whose regime doesn't even pretend to be democratic? I think not. They would rather cast aspersions on the clearly democratic rule of people like Hugo Chavez.
There is no such thing as "objective" reporting, any more than there is "objective" history.All reporting is filtered through the point of view of the reporter and the organisation he or she works for.I'm a fan of Seymour Hersh and Robert Fisk.Hersh does a lot of spadework, and often gets onto things before other people do.Fisk I like for his broad perspective and great sophistication.I tend to trust Hersh on the "facts", and I like Fisk for his view.But I don't think either one of them has a handle on the truth, whatever that might be.The election in Iran sure looks like a stolen election to me, but hey, what do I know.One stolen election at a time, please.
Well, if you begin your article with a phrase like "obviously rigged election," as Robert Dreyfus did yesterday in the Nation, you're not making any attempt whatsoever to be objective. I agree with you that there's no such thing as pure objectivity in reporting, but one does at least have to substantiate assertions and accusations in anything that's going to pass for decent journalism. And my point in all this is that the American journalistic community has been indifferent at best, and obscurantist at worst, concerning the electoral abuses of recent times in the US, which should concern them far more than the actions of the Iranians.
Give me a break Drew ------- There is a huge difference between the elusive quest to capture the ephemeral truth and the obvious concerted propaganda we are seeing today.
How much press did the plane crash (assassination) of Rove's IT guru Mike Connell the Pro Lifer who electronic fixed the Ohio elections get?
And when Iran had a pro-western president begging for support the USA ignored him.
The USA purposely creates it's enemies.
"The USA purposely creates it's enemies."
It's very difficult to kill the people and steal their resources if they are our friends. That is why every developing nation with oil reserves is on our enemy list.
Was the election rigged? I don't know, but I'll accept the results for now. Regarding what the polls were indicating, consider that the ruling Congress party in India was expected to lose seats in the recent elections. Instead, the Congress increased its representation in the Indian Parliament.
On a more serious note, let us not forget that the "green" color-coding of the "moderate" (read: pro-West) Mousavi campaign is a clear indication of CIA and NED meddling, as in Ukraine ("the Orange Revolution"), Lebanon (the "Cedar Revolution") and elsewhere.
That this election was "rigged" remains to be proved. But, for the sake of argument, let us say that if indeed it was, then Americans should actually take heart. It shows that we have far more in common with the Iranians than we realized! Stolen elections, jackbooted, thuggish cops, the inability to demonstrate in public without serious risk to life and limb, wacky religious leaders with far too much political power, a manifest will to falsify history... Why, they are no less than our spritual brothers and sisters! Our mirror image! THEY ARE US! Let's make peace!
Well said!!!!!!
I wish this was lighthearted take was not so true. But laughter at ourselves might help the healing
Robert Fisk: Iran erupts as voters back 'the Democrator'
...An interval here for lunch with a true and faithful friend of the Islamic Republic, a man I have known for many years who has risked his life and been imprisoned for Iran and who has never lied to me. We dined in an all-Iranian-food restaurant, along with his wife. He has often criticised the regime. A man unafraid. But I must repeat what he said. "The election figures are correct, Robert. Whatever you saw in Tehran, in the cities and in thousands of towns outside, they voted overwhelmingly for Ahmadinejad. Tabriz voted 80 per cent for Ahmadinejad. It was he who opened university courses there for the Azeri people to learn and win degrees in Azeri. In Mashad, the second city of Iran, there was a huge majority for Ahmadinejad after the imam of the great mosque attacked Rafsanjani of the Expediency Council who had started to ally himself with Mousavi. They knew what that meant: they had to vote for Ahmadinejad."
My guest and I drank dookh, the cool Iranian drinking yoghurt so popular here. The streets of Tehran were a thousand miles away. "You know why so many poorer women voted for Ahmadinejad? There are three million of them who make carpets in their homes. They had no insurance. When Ahmadinejad realised this, he immediately brought in a law to give them full insurance. Ahmadinejad's supporters were very shrewd. They got the people out in huge numbers to vote – and then presented this into their vote for Ahmadinejad."
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/fisk/robert-fisk-iran-erupts-as-voters-back-the-demo...
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.
Poll Predicted Landslide Victory for Ahmadinejad
Does This Poll Show that Ahmadinejad Victory is Reliable?
By eCraftSpace
Who will you Vote for in Presidential Elections? Results before 12 June 2009: Ahmadinejad: 34% Don't know: 27% Mousavi: 14% Karroubi: 2% Rezai: 1%
So this poll actually shows that Ahmadinejad landslide victory is reliable. This source did indeed questioned the biased reporting of Media before 12 june 2009. Furthermore, there is no evidence that the election results are fraud. We need hard evidence, don't we? This is how we learn and do research. Please be critical! You do not have to agree, but being biased and uncritical to what we hear or read is not good for world society! We need facts supported by evidence. The media has forgotten this simple rule!
http://informationclearinghouse.info/article22829.htm
I saw that last night, it does offer some indication, though I'd like to no more on the methodology. The organization brinigng the poll forward is Terror Free Tomorrow, whose stated goal is to "undermine support for terrorism." There is, I think a whole different conversation to be had about what that means. As for the poll, according to the organization it found: "While our uncensored poll shows incumbent President Ahmadinejad in the lead with a plurality of support, the survey also reveals that a second round run off against his closest challenger, Mir Hussein Moussavi, is likely."
So, for voracity, the results were: Round one, too close to call.
A separate survey they ran in Iran last March found "Iranians also continue to overwhelmingly favor better relations with the United States, a full democracy for Iran, and concessions on the nuclear issue."
So, if these are the issues that Iranians say they are voting on, plus the record number of women voters in this election that don't tend to vote for candidates who generally want fewer rights for women, I can see why the survey actually indicated that the results would be at least too close to call and that a runoff would be most likely. So, while I do quite like information clearing house and visit them regularly, I think the "landslide" headline is a little over the top.
Aside from this, hello people. I get the skepticism here, really. And essentially, I'm making just three points. First: There is no significant evidence that indicates that either the leading opposition candidate Mousouvi ran some CIA-fronted campaign (as has been alleged in comments around this site). Second: There is significant indicators that election fraud may have taken place and is worth examination. This is not to say that there is definitive proof, or that any one piece actually by itself makes the case, but there is enough to lend credibility to skeptics who suggest that election rigging may have taken place. Third: Due to the lack of transparency in the election tallying, popular Iranian expectations of the election results, government attacks on opposition supporters and suppression of media, there is a justifiable, grassroots people-led protest, and there is no credible, verifiable evidence that these protests are being organized somehow by U.S. spooks.
The public record on U.S. meddling in Iranian affairs is clear. No one is denying that. The U.S. popping up of the Shah, sending weapons to both Iraq and Iran to fight one another, promoting dissent when it's politically advantageous, all these things are well documented, on public record and free for anyone to find. however, that does not mean that there have been no examples of internal Iranian popular revolts against current or previous regimes.
If rigging did take place, instant 100 percent rock-solid proof isn't going to be coming forward right away, if ever. Keep in mind that most traditional news outlets inside Iran were shut down by the government during and just after the results, except for state-run sources. TV, print, radio and web information sources under Iranian government control are restricted to the party line. Online social media proved to be, at least initially, just about the only method that opposition views, scenes of police brutality, news of mass arrests, etc, were getting out.
There is no reason that someone cannot look critically at these poll results, look at what is happening on the streets in Iran now and also be equally as critical about U.S. and Israeli government motives for exploiting the situation for their own gain. Being critical of one does not intrinsically translate into being supportive of the other.
I have no idea why some people on the left in the U.S. blindly assume that just because a foreign leader somewhere has been weaving some truths about U.S. foreign policy that they are not corrupt themselves, except to say it's indicative of the level of political debate across the spectrum as of late. Ahmadinejad and Khomeni have more in common with the likes of George Bush, Avigdor Lieberman, Pat Robertson, etc. As has been stated elsewhere, polls have shown that many Iranians. like many Americans. do not want to live in theocracy with totalitarian tendencies, which suggests that they may not support someone like Ahmadinejad.
I think people here are well schooled in the history of American duplicity with regards to the Middle East. I also think people are very conscious about the post-Bush irony in drubbing election fraud. But there also seems to be a certain amount of U.S.-centric chauvinism among the U.S. left's bashing of the Iranian left's protests. Why should what happened in our election, or our collective inability to bring the perpetrators to justice or at least stem the aftermath which has seen disastrous wars and the erosion of human rights throughout the world, have any bearing on whether Iranian people should accept their government's election results when they seem to be stating that there were anomalies?
Jeevee
How hypocritical can we be? Why don't we clean up our very own stolen elections before moaning & groaning about those in other countries?
Jeevee, You certainly spoke the truth there.
They use paper ballots
85% of the eligible population voted
It was a hotly contested highly scrutinized event
Where was it stolen? There is an awful lot of western press that seem to want to get a story out. This is not it. This has the same beat as WMD and Al CIAda.
Sophie Scholl-The Final Days
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.
The New Yorker has been using quality writers for years, usually very expert at what they do. They source well and write thorough pieces. Hersh is one of them, probably the best for whatever he takes on or he wouldn't. Where has Yunzer been? Reading the Post and watching Fox?
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.
I second that, Wanderer. The New Yorker is a rag dressed up in furs and unfit for any serious reading outside of doctors' and dentists' waiting rooms. Their good material (such as Hirsch and, long ago, Jacobo Timmerman) is always the exception. The poetry they publish is usually caca and the fiction too. And let us not forget that they were editorially in favor of invading Iraq.
Yeah, I see that way, too. That magazine is a bunch of high-minded hogwash.
Read Pierre Tristam instead. So far, the only sane commentary in the whole of the Western media.
http://tinyurl.com/lqanao
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)."
"...if the United States could survive the fraud of 2000"
AND 2004...
I CRY FOR IRAN: REGIME CHANGE by CIA
This is a Much cheaper insrgency without an actual involvemet of the US troops,it might work, so is th CIA's estmate!Iranians might self destroy themselves and put a newer. leaner meaner Mullah in power. CIA has done it twice!
It seems clear that CIA is pulling its Third Act in Iran. In 1952 it toppled Mossadegh with the same crowd that it put in power 1n 1979 under the banner of Islamic Republic. Now that the US seems to have crushed the insurgency in Iraq and has Afghanistan under control,obvusly it has devastated both, it seems it is Iran's turn.
This is the third time th CIA agents have almost one million Americans, Canadians, British and Australians of iranian heritage, who would love to act as its agents, translators, provocators and possible rulers. It seems that the CIA's most important assets Rafsanjani MAFIA is spporting a regime change that would keep Iran's Depedence intact.
Rafsanjani’s handpick Mousavi was not only responsible of mass murder of 7500 innocents who were murdered as Corrupt on Earth but also on expropriation of their properties, businesses. And even transferring most of Iranian Crown Corporations into the hand of few Mullahs and their so-called foundations.
In addition Rafsanjani and his gang transferred Iranian assets to Dubai, Australia, Canada and many other locations to make Iranian economy dependent on foreign Capital forever. Rafsanjani was involved with the CIA from the fall of Mossadegh to the mass murder of all new Iranian leadership that emerged under Beheshti. Rafsanjani, has ruled Iran and has tried very hard to destabilized the regime for his sinister purposes that is total dependence of Iran on foreign products. Promoting his Candidate as Iranian Obama is laughable, as both are responsible for running all crime Mafia’s in Iran from Smuggling Opium, selling it in underground market to Human trade and exporting Iranian girls as whores to the Persian Gulf. Mousavi and Rafsanjani have been involved in massive smuggling operations, in which the Iranian Oils is transferred to Arabian sea via separate pipelines, that are not under the Iranian Petroleum Co., so it could be sold in open Market in Cash payment without any control.
Therefore, although there might be skirmishes, but the Mullahs in power are not as stupid as Mossadegh and far greater organization than him. Any amount of propaganda by American Blogger, or money spend in the street to incite riots would not have long term result, as the regime would defend itself against ex-patriots and agents by mass support.
What is more important now for Ahmadi Nejad is going after the Iranian Mafia, specially Rafsanjani and blame him for all the wrong policies and corruption and economic failures.
If the regime has any will to survive, it must not hesitate to go after any and all agents who are agitating the Iranian students and encouraging riots.
If the West encourages Democracy and respects ballots, then as it hailed the victory of opposition, which was heavily supported financially by Arab Dictators, against Hezbollah, then it must support the result of the election. One cannot pick and choose, if people of Palestine elect Hamas or people of Iran elect Ahmadi Nejad then America must respect Democracy and stop agitations.
The time has come to respect the Iranian Sovereignty and instead of encouraging their dependence start helping them to become independent and prosperous by exposing the corruption of Rafsanjani Mafia and other Mullah’s foundations that are investing the Iranian assets in Factories, refineries, Food production facilities , business investments in Canada, Australia, the US , Persian Gulf’s Sheikdoms rather than Iran. America should stop agitation and let the Iranian prosper by eradicating Mousavi, Rafsanjani Mafia Drug Mafia and for once help Iranians have a say in their wealth and future; rather than forcing them to pay one billion dollars help to Pakistan and helping Iraq suppress their National Resistance so their Oil can go free of interference to the West!
If the US is successful, the real Iranians, those suffering masses life wuld become worse ad Iran becomes a ruin like Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanan and Palastine!I cry fr Iran!
Hehe ... even the "liberal" american can't help their prejudice.
There's a crocodile behind the makeup.
Ladies and gentlemen, the West ... (hawks and spits).
" Dissident employees of the Interior Ministry, which is under the control of President Ahmadinejad and is responsible for the mechanics of the polling and counting of votes, have reportedly issued an open letter saying as much. "
I'll be less skeptical when I see that letter. I'm not saying it wasn't a stolen election- I'm just saying that the anti-Ahmadinejad rhetoric of US news sources is often over the top and factually inaccurate. I'm also not saying he's a great guy. But I am skeptical of these non-sourced reports.
Your letter has arrived.
http://tinyurl.com/speedy-delivery
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!
Commondreams seem to be insistent on this issue.
Since when did The "New Yorker" become a reputable source of views on Iranian affairs?
Your bourgeois slip is showing.
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.
I guess Secor knows this because ....... she got it from her favorite Mossad agent?
Seymour Hersh writes for the New Yorker.
Yeah?
Well even a blind squirrel finds a nut every now and then.
The New Yorker is a bogus AIPAC institution.