Iranians may be ready to vote Ahmadinejad out of power

i want to believe the hype.

 

Latest happenings:

Ahmadinejad has basically disappeared - hasn't been seen in a few days

The state-run media is posting more articles questioning the election and showing support for Mousavi

Some of the clerics have scheduled a pro-Mousavi rally

Parliament members questioning why paramilitary forces are attacking the university

Paramilitary forces are now covering their faces instead of openly making their attacks

We're not there yet, but the snowball is definitely building. If it's able to sustain itself and get to a critical mass - maybe as soon as this weekend - I think we'll be past the point of no return. There will be a full revolution or a military crushing of the protesters - I don't think there would be any middle ground solution at that point.

 

i wonder if he's getting lubed up. he is and always has been a puppet, he might become the sacrificial lamb. however this shakes out, it won't be good for him.

 

Iran is completely disconnected from the internet. How depressing.

 

Iranians are being urged to skip tomorrow's prayer.

I really think this will be punished harshly in the end

 

@madmonkey: I looked at that video you posted along with what the Huffingtonpost wrote. You do realize that this whole "theory" that the Iranian government is perpetrating violence is based on an anonymous Iranian-America who probably has an agenda. Now I've maintained skepticism on both sides even though you accused me of falling for this unsubstantiated propaganda. You seem to have fallen more for the other side's propaganda than anything.

Now look at this video that purports to show violence, rioting, and looting by protestors:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/fvZ5aw1J35Q&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/fvZ5aw1J35Q&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

I don't see any security forces around the destroyed property that's burning in the streets. Also, if the conspiracy theory you and others believe to be correct is accurate, how come there's no video of security forces destroying anything? We've seen pictures of everything else. I'm sure one of the demonstrators would've caught it on video and showed the world by now. They might have, but it could've been their own who has done this so that info is being suppressed because it would make them look bad. But hey people can believe what they want and we can question anything anywhere. Maybe the Iranian government did all this in a movie studio.

Furthermore, I asked you a series of questions, but you only answered a few of them. My point about bringing up Egypt was not necessarily about the US government. Yes, all governments say one thing and do the other. It was just to juxtapose Iran and Egypt and the reactions we''ve seen from the media and general public in the West. Egypt is similar in size and population to Iran, but it's a US sponsored dictatorship.

Here is the larger issue, for too long people have allowed the government to dictate who is "friendly" and who is an "enemy." In general, the media promotes the official government line and the ignorant masses just follow what they're told. This is what the West accused the Soviet Union of doing but they're guilty of the same sin. This is the cycle that dictates that Iran should be put under the microscope but not Egypt. Where is the media's and public's concern for the lack of human rights, lack of political freedom, fraudulent elections, and suffering under an absolute dictatorship in Egypt?

Where was all this concern about the authenticity of elections in Lebanon a few weeks ago or in Liberia in 2005? There were allegations of vote rigging and fraud in both of those elections, but since pro-western candidates won, the cycle mentioned above did not occur.

The same cycle ignored Joseph Muboto during the time he ruled the Congo with an iron fist for over 30 yrs while now Mugabe is being put under the microscope. Where was the concern by the media and general public when Muboto was wiping out entire villages?

The same cycle supported racism and apartheid in South Africa and is now doing so in Palestine. Where is the concern in the West over Israel's crimes?

Just look at this link: http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090629/dugard

This is also why I brought up the journalists being arrested in Israel. There's a 4 pg thread talking about 2 journalists being arrested in N. Korea and everybody is talking about lack of press freedoms in Iran at the moment, but I can barely get anyone to comment on lack of press freedom and journalists being arrested in Israel. The US government sets the debate, media act as loyal followers and promote the official view, and the ill-informed public follows along. This is what this entire Iranian election situation is about...Iran is depicted as the "enemy" by the government so the "objective" media immediately puts them under the spotlight, and the public follow like sheep while at the same time all three generally ignore atrocities committed by those the US government characterizes as "friendly." This matrix is reloaded every generation.

If the concern is about human rights, political freedom, authenticity of elections, democracy, and other values, the standard should be the same across the board. No cherry picking and selective application.

@Mathloom: I guess it comes down to what you consider a real protest. 5-10 people gathered on a street corner is a protest I guess too. I should've made my earlier statements more precise. I haven't seen any large protests outside of Tehren and Isfehan. If you have, please provide us with the info. I would add though that protests outside of Iran aren't important.

 

I'm personally beginning to lose interest, because it's obvious that these protesters make up a small % of the country's population. I can't believe such a small % wants their will imposed on the entire nation. That's the definition of a coup right there. Nobody is talking about the silent majority in Iran that elected Ahmadinejad as president. The protests will die down eventually or they will be severely repressed, and Ahmadinejad will remain as president.

Here's another video of somebody actually offering an alternative perspective on the elections:

<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/qQjjaaeLP-k&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/qQjjaaeLP-k&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>

Here's what's written in the info section of the video. Interesting stuff...Looks like despite all of Mousavi's allegations, he has no real evidence:

Mousavi has lodged an official complaint with the powerful 12-member Guardians Council, which has ordered a partial recount of the vote. The complaint's main flaw is that it passes improper or questionable pre-election conduct as something else, that is, as evidence of voting fraud.

The protest, which seeks fresh elections, is short on specifics and long on extraneous, election-unrelated complaints. The first two items relate to the televised debates that were held between the candidates, rather than anything germane to the vote count.

There is also some innuendo, such as a claim that Ahmadinejad used state-owned means of transportation to campaign around the country, overlooking that there is nothing unusual about incumbent leaders using the resources at their disposal for election purposes. All previous presidents, including the reformist Mohammad Khatami, who is a main supporter of Mousavi, did the same.

Another complaint by Mousavi is that Ahmadinejad had disproportionate access to the state-controlled media. This has indeed been a bad habit in the 30-year history of the Islamic Republic, but perhaps less so this year because for the first time there were television debates, six of them, which allowed Mousavi and the other challengers free space to present their points of view.

With respect to alleged specific irregularities, the complaint cites a shortage of election forms that in some places caused a "few hours delay". This is something to complain about, but it hardly amounts to fraud, especially as voter turnout was a record high of 85% of the eligible 46 million voters. (Ahmadinejad was credited with 64% of the vote.)

Mousavi complains that in some areas the votes cast were higher than the number of registered voters. But he fails to add that some of those areas, such as Yazd, were places where he received more votes that Ahmadinejad.

Furthermore, Mousavi complains that some of his monitors were not accredited by the Interior Ministry and therefore he was unable to independently monitor the elections. However, several thousand monitors representing the various candidates were accredited and that included hundreds of Mousavi's eyes and ears.

They should have documented any irregularities that, per the guidelines, should have been appended to his complaint. Nothing is appended to Mousavi's two-page complaint, however. He does allude to some 80 letters that he had previously sent to the Interior Ministry, without either appending those letters or restating their content.

Finally, item eight of the complaint cites Ahmadinejad's recourse to the support given by various members of Iran's armed forces, as well as Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki's brief campaigning on Ahmadinejad's behalf. These are legitimate complaints that necessitate serious scrutiny since by law such state individuals are forbidden to take sides. It should be noted that Mousavi can be accused of the same irregularity as his headquarters had a division devoted to the armed forces.

_________________________________________________________________

For now, I will leave you with the immortal words of Rasheed Wallace:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/BrOH-KHxXg0&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/BrOH-KHxXg0&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

 

Interesting...

 

Kwam-ster - if we can grab you before you lose interest completely - is it still your position that there are no logical grounds to question the official results in the election in Iran?

 

CBS already made the same point.

Obama see no difference between the two.

 

yes he does

 

Sam I am, I don't think I ever used those words. What I said is that I haven't seen any real evidence that the elections were fraudulent. It's all been speculation, assumptions, and conjecture. As the video above states, the burden of proof is on those making the accusation. You have to be able to back it up with evidence or the accusations are baseless. I have an open mind here so what you got homie?

 

I think the Iranian protestors have not made any real gains

 

You also haven't presented or seen any, by your definition, "real evidence" that the 60+% figure you claim is the correct figure is correct have you?

Because I have missed it in all your postings here which seem to make irrelevant references to Palestine, quote random editorials, inter alia.

In fact you seem to pick and choose bits of your own conjencture (and even, on occasion, manufacture some pretty awfulevidence of your own, regarding your "rural + poor=30+30" breakdown - which is really, really, really dubious - and in the light of subsequent evidence, even worse))

I think the problem is that you need to learn a few things about "burdens of proof" - I know a thing or two about such.

First, what are your grounds for claiming some presumption of propriety? Do you have any expertise in analyzing Iranian theocratic elections?

Because your previous assertions regarding Ahmadinajad's strength in rural voting seem to bely this (ask me why, please, I beg you).

If you'd studied Iranian elections, according to many, this result is simply not credible...yet, you of the circular reasoning, cite the elections themselves to justify the results.

In light of current events, that doesn't fit. The burden, thus, is on you, my friend, to explain why it should not lie upon you.

 

So you won't use the exact words but you make the same point. No difference.

 

I got excited, because I thought you had something for me. I've claimed plenty of times that I'm learning on the fly. Are you an Iran expert? I've posted a lot of stuff that claims to show that the election was fraudulent, but ultimately it's nothing more than speculation. Have you studied Iranian elections? Does Iran have a history of fraudulent elections I should be aware of? Please educate me. While you're at it, maybe you can help the Mousavi camp, because this is all they got:

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/KF19Ak02.html

Mousavi states his case

Written by Kaveh L. Afrasiabi
Thursday, 18 June 2009 13:14

Mir Hossein Mousavi, the reformist candidate challenging Iran's authorities on the result of last week's presidential elections, is a masterful tactician who wants to overturn the re-election of his rival, President Mahmud Ahmadinejad, with allegations of a massive conspiracy that he claims cheated him and millions of his supporters.

These supporters, identifiable by the color green they have adopted, have taken to the streets in the tens of thousands and on Thursday were to stage a "day of mourning" for what they say is a lost election. This follows a "silent" march through the streets of the capital on Wednesday. To date, at least 10 people - some Iranian sources say 32 - have been killed in clashes.

Mousavi has lodged an official complaint with the powerful 12-member Guardians Council, which has ordered a partial recount of the vote. The complaint's main flaw is that it passes improper or questionable pre-election conduct as something else, that is, as evidence of voting fraud.

The protest, which seeks fresh elections, is short on specifics and long on extraneous, election-unrelated complaints. The first two items relate to the televised debates that were held between the candidates, rather than anything germane to the vote count.

There is also some innuendo, such as a claim that Ahmadinejad used state-owned means of transportation to campaign around the country, overlooking that there is nothing unusual about incumbent leaders using the resources at their disposal for election purposes. All previous presidents, including the reformist Mohammad Khatami, who is a main supporter of Mousavi, did the same.

Another complaint by Mousavi is that Ahmadinejad had disproportionate access to the state-controlled media. This has indeed been a bad habit in the 30-year history of the Islamic Republic, but perhaps less so this year because for the first time there were television debates, six of them, which allowed Mousavi and the other challengers free space to present their points of view.

With respect to alleged specific irregularities, the complaint cites a shortage of election forms that in some places caused a "few hours delay". This is something to complain about, but it hardly amounts to fraud, especially as voter turnout was a record high of 85% of the eligible 46 million voters. (Ahmadinejad was credited with 64% of the vote.)

Mousavi complains that in some areas the votes cast were higher than the number of registered voters. But he fails to add that some of those areas, such as Yazd, were places where he received more votes that Ahmadinejad.

Furthermore, Mousavi complains that some of his monitors were not accredited by the Interior Ministry and therefore he was unable to independently monitor the elections. However, several thousand monitors representing the various candidates were accredited and that included hundreds of Mousavi's eyes and ears.

They should have documented any irregularities that, per the guidelines, should have been appended to his complaint. Nothing is appended to Mousavi's two-page complaint, however. He does allude to some 80 letters that he had previously sent to the Interior Ministry, without either appending those letters or restating their content.

Finally, item eight of the complaint cites Ahmadinejad's recourse to the support given by various members of Iran's armed forces, as well as Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki's brief campaigning on Ahmadinejad's behalf. These are legitimate complaints that necessitate serious scrutiny since by law such state individuals are forbidden to take sides. It should be noted that Mousavi can be accused of the same irregularity as his headquarters had a division devoted to the armed forces.

Given the thin evidence presented by Mousavi, there can be little chance of an annulment of the result.


---
Kaveh L Afrasiabi, PhD, is the author of After Khomeini: New Directions in Iran's Foreign Policy (Westview Press) . For his Wikipedia entry, click here. His latest book, Reading In Iran Foreign Policy After September 11 (BookSurge Publishing , October 23, 2008) is now available.

Source: Asia Times

_________________________________________________________________

None of this amounts to any real proof or evidence. If this is the best Mousavi can do, then I'm sorry, nobody else outside of Iran is going to be able to convince any rational observer that this election was fraudulent...probably because it wasn't. As I said earlier, if you and the "many" you talk about have more information than Mousavi himself, I really dunno what to say other than maybe you should send this information to his camp. Maybe you can tweet him:

http://twitter.com/mousavi1388

 

No, they probably don't....and this is what kills you.

Assumption on the reliability of past elections the biggest problem for your argument that it was rural voters that constituted Ahemedinajad's 60-30 victory, where rural voters constitute only 30% of the electorate, and, more importantly, where they didn't break heavily in his favor last election. Even a uniform reversal in his favor can't help you.

See above. You're welcome.
[

 

Samfisher > Kwame

 

I said rural and lower classes. The lower classes and poor people are in urban areas as well. How come the majority of Iran is not protesting? Major protests are only occurring in a couple of urban areas. Mousavi himself is not bringing up the points you raise in his official complaint to the Iranian government. Either its not an issue or you and all these taking heads on tv know more than Mousavi. As I suggested earlier, if you believe the latter to be true, I don't know what to say other than you should send this information to his camp to help them in their attempt to challenge these results.