Tehran Burning

[deception]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jun/13/iran-mahmoud-ahmadinejad-riots-tehran-election

 

[deception]

read robert fisk's take: http://www.independent.co.uk/opinio...ts-as-voters-back-the-democrator-1704810.html

-for those who dont know, fisk is considered by many to be the most respected western journalist in the region

 

[Chutney]

Khamenei orders investigation into electoral fraud allegations

That's a stark contrast from his statements immediately after the election:

But Khamenei replied that the election had been conducted fairly. He ordered the three defeated candidates and their supporters to avoid "provocative" behaviour. "All Iranians must support and help the elected president," he warned.

The day after the election, Khamenei urged the nation to unite behind Ahmadinejad and called the result a "divine assessment."

 

[deception]

these protests may end up in: 1) overturning the election results (unlikely) 2) clamping down on the existing freedoms like text messaging, facebook, etc (probable) 3) return to the status quo after the despondent electorate realizes they are no match to the state apparatus (most likely)

 

[Chutney]

Probably a temporary 2, followed by 3.

I think we can all see where this is headed. What do you think actually happened though? Was it electoral fraud? Was it legitimately a case of urban intellectual movement overestimating its influence across the country?

 

[deception]

Probably a temporary 2, followed by 3.

I think we can all see where this is headed. What do you think actually happened though? Was it electoral fraud? Was it legitimately a case of urban intellectual movement overestimating its influence across the country?

if u read fisk's article- he describes a conversation that he had with one of his dissident friends in iran who believed the results were legit. he goes on to describe one of the populist measures the government enacted- 3 million women are carpet makers in iran and they didnt have insurance so the govt purchased insurance for them. i really think measures like that in rural impoverished communities and civil servants who saw their pensions rise- reciprocated the conservative govt with their vote. however, i dont know iran well enough to truly appraise what occurred.

 

[deception]

just watched this movie today
:[video=youtube;BLQ9DbhnIRQ]


-its called the queen and i- which documents a series of conversations with the shah's widow and a persian filmmaker who once challenged the shah's absolute monarchy
-the watershed moment in the film was when the filmmaker pensively describes her humble beginnings in iran under shah and juxtaposed it with the shah and his wife's relative opulence. her "majesty" which she preferred to be called, brusquely replies that if u wrote to me, i would have helped u out
-although, the queen genuinely appears concerned about iran and comes off as sympathetic figure, particularly considering her numerous personal tragedies after being exiled

 

[deception]

fisk's latest installment: http://www.independent.co.uk/opinio...n-a-land-that-has-tasted-freedom-1706912.html

-this is a must read cause fisk has planted himself on the fault lines between two camps

 

[Chutney]

if u read fisk's article- he describes a conversation that he had with one of his dissident friends in iran who believed the results were legit. he goes on to describe one of the populist measures the government enacted- 3 million women are carpet makers in iran and they didnt have insurance so the govt purchased insurance for them. i really think measures like that in rural impoverished communities and civil servants who saw their pensions rise- reciprocated the conservative govt with their vote. however, i dont know iran well enough to truly appraise what occurred.

What do you think of this, deception? It's a pretty thorough analysis of the numbers that came out after the election. And it brings to light several unexplained discrepancies that at least warrant doubt and skepticism.

Pages 9 and 10 are particular interesting, because they address the notion that Ahmadinejad won the election because of his support among rural voters. In reality, it looks the official numbers suggest the obvious: that a legitimate victory for Ahmadinejad would mean that he enjoyed considerably more popularity in urban and suburban areas.

Despite his stellar reporting, at the end of the day, all Fisk is really giving us is an unnamed source. At the moment, I'm leading towards believing there was some form of tampering with the voting process (especially when you consider how quickly voting results were released).

 

[Chutney]

btw, what were your thoughts on Obama's statement on the whole issue? He's taken some heat from American commentators, for not taking a harder stance against the Iranian government. I actually thought what he did was calculated, intelligent, and showed a lot of foresight. The Iranian government's resorted to their old tricks of blaming the West for any problem they encounter. European countries (Britain, France, Germany, etc.) have condemned the government without realizing that they're only playing into Iran's hands. That country's greatest fear is to be faced with an unruly populace that is no longer buying their usual distraction techniques.

 

[deception]

What do you think of this, deception? It's a pretty thorough analysis of the numbers that came out after the election. And it brings to light several unexplained discrepancies that at least warrant doubt and skepticism.

Pages 9 and 10 are particular interesting, because they address the notion that Ahmadinejad won the election because of his support among rural voters. In reality, it looks the official numbers suggest the obvious: that a legitimate victory for Ahmadinejad would mean that he enjoyed considerably more popularity in urban and suburban areas.

Despite his stellar reporting, at the end of the day, all Fisk is really giving us is an unnamed source. At the moment, I'm leading towards believing there was some form of tampering with the voting process (especially when you consider how quickly voting results were released).

i agree there was some tampering. i think the two major candidates split the vote which would have created another vote because neither candidate received more than 50% of the vote. historically, reform minded candidates win the run off because all reform minded voters consolidate their support behind the reform candidate (i.e. mousvai here) . plus, they didnt want to extend the foreign press' visa which would have meant more access to the popular, peaceful uprising. although, the idea of revolution should be dismissed because ahmadinejad did receive incredible support and u simply cannot dismiss these ppl

 

[deception]

btw, what were your thoughts on Obama's statement on the whole issue? He's taken some heat from American commentators, for not taking a harder stance against the Iranian government. I actually thought what he did was calculated, intelligent, and showed a lot of foresight. The Iranian government's resorted to their old tricks of blaming the West for any problem they encounter. European countries (Britain, France, Germany, etc.) have condemned the government without realizing that they're only playing into Iran's hands. That country's greatest fear is to be faced with an unruly populace that is no longer buying their usual distraction techniques.

condemn the violence and stay hands off. thats what irianians on the ground believe and what most of the diaspora abroad advocate. getting bush-cheney would only embolden the hardliners in iran