Like the rest of the world, I’ve been half interested in the Iranian elections, not for anything specific, but I guess it’s a good gig to while away the time with. If you think this is endeavor – the elections – are “the real thing” then please be reminded that this is The Middle East. Rule is either by force, charisma, religion or preferably a combination of all three even if the last trait is by proxy. Iran and its leaders has plenty of all three, and then some.
Listening to the big kahuna on BBC News as I type this, and I have been doing so for the best part of an hour so far, what I surmised is the following:
1. It’s a zionist conspiracy. Iran is pure.
2. Shut the fuck up and accept Mahmoodi as my chosen puppet and your president.
3. Everybody else is a liar.
4. You’re simple people and don’t understand. Keep the thinking to us turbanned lot.
5. It’s the Jooze who want the destruction of Islam.
6. They also want to destroy the illustrious Islamic Republic of Iran.
7. My, I have a lot of sheep in front of me whom I can command on a whim.
8. The Amerikans are arrogant and bad and want to destroy us.
9. The Islamic Republic of Iran is the soundest, most democratic and most pure country on earth.
10. But those Zionists are putting out reports that we are corrupt, we are not (stomps feet and thumps lectern).
11. The elections were a-okay and you should trust me, believe me for I am your leader! (on cue, crowd’s fists thumping the air, look into the camera lens and shout Allahuakbar)
12. Islamic Republic will not cheat and will not betray the people election mechanism allows no cheating. (cue cards up, fists thump air again etc)
bla bla bla ad nuseum.
Time to flick the channel.. I wonder what other entertainment is in store for me in other Islamic channels, they’re a hell of a lot of fun to watch.
Mehhh, I’ll quote what someone else posted on a forum about the very same subject:
“- The Ayatollah today said that the victory was by 11 Million + votes, which couldn’t all be attributed to rigging, unless it was a super-duper conspiracy. He’s also saying that after today if protests continue then they’ll be consequences…
Why the incumbent won:
– The current president is on a hotstreak due to his social programs aimed at the poor and unemployed (Though those numbers have stabilized, they’re are still a lot of them) Their voting block is fairly significant, and when combined with the conservative vote can be tough to beat.
– He’s currently supported by much of the G-Council and The Ayatollah, such endorsements are pretty hefty.
Why the other guy lost:
– Mousavi had been in office previously as PM and had a lackluster performance in comparison to other members of the Reform movement. (Why Khatami stayed out of this election I don’t know, he would’ve mopped the floor with everybody)
– Reform candidates often do better in harder times, the present situation for Iran is better than it has been relatively, thus people are less willing to take change presidents.
Now the losers in Iranian elections have been poor sports in the recent past. Rafsanjani (Reform party) lost to Ahmadinejad back in the first term, and cried foul for at least a week before giving up. To me this just seems to be poor sportsmanship that’s gotten out of hand.
IMO Anybody who fights it after this isn’t really upset that their candidate lost, but are probably trying to stir shit up. and for that you can expect an ass-kicking coming their way. And the response of the Basij, and relative inactivity of the Guard is surprising. Even after the Basij Campus got hit by arsonists, the Revo’s didn’t budge. Of course the Basij shot a few people, but when they’re trying to light your ass on fire you’d reach for a gun too.
Mousavi may have been a strong candidate, but he picked a bad time, also he’s tarnished his career by not coming out to try and control the situation. He just sat back and let the folks go nuts. For that he may get benched politically or worse. In general the reformist party does well when people are looking for a change of pace, but the incumbent is on a roll, and will likely remain popular despite the blemish this episode makes.
The bottom line to this one is: When a Mousavi supporter asks, “Where’s my Vote?” The answer is; Right there next to two Ahmadinejad votes.”
To be pretty honest, it doesn’t make much sense that Mousavi isn’t doing anything to stop the violence, just sitting back and bickering how he lost the elections, Ahmadinejad is not doing a better job by gloating, but neither of them are right, and everyone is to blame.
It has to be said. Ahmadinijad’s victory was by a huge a margin. So if there was tampering it would have to have been pretty blatant. Yes this is the ME, but I still think its possible that the guy won fair and square.
Anything is possible, heck, a bunch of moronic Americans elected Obama……….yes, anything is possible no matter how ill conceived
“8. The Amerikans are arrogant and bad and want to destroy us.”
Most Americans couldn’t find Iran on a map. And if we wanted to destroy Iran, why should we want to kill an enemy nation when it is committing suicide? We’ve outsourced the job of destroying Iran to the mullahs.
Before the Iranian Revolution, US universities were full of Iranian students. Aside from a few idiot yahoos, the Persians came across as good people, polite, cultured, well-intentioned. And they’ve got some good-looking women, which always speaks well for a nation. And they were the only Muslims after Sep 11 who held demonstrations in sympathy with the American dead while the rest of the Muslim world danced in the streets. Keenly noted and long remembered.
There’s not really any bad feeling that I’ve encountered here in America for Iranians. The hostage crisis was too long ago for anyone under fifty to remember, the Iranians didn’t kill any Americans, and it was mostly a bunch of student radicals to blame with Khomeini coming in after the fact. We think the mullahs are nutty and bad, but they’re mostly hurting their own people, not us.
The US media is altogether too charmed and hopeful for these protests. There’s a feeling that this is the counter-revolution that deposes the mullahcracy. People have a bogus notion that Mousavi is some sort of democratic reformer. He looks like more of the same-old, same-old to me.
I predict this will end with a whimper, not a bang.
Pretty much, western media sources are blowing this wayyy out of proportion though, I wouldn’t be surprised if US Jackals are behind the entire spring of violence that has happened. However one thing is for sure: Neither Mousavi nor Ahmedinejad are doing a good job by provoking the other side, Mousavi is not doing anything to stop the violence, and Ahmedinejad is in Russia or something right now on a scheduled visit.
I generally have this policy when it comes to these political/religous figures. The longer the beard the more bullshit they spew. Ahmadenajad one by 1 vote and its the only vote that matters Khamenei’s, and its obvious to everyone. So Mahmood can pretend to be the lovelable cuddle president of iran for another 4 yrs and share his bed with a half dosen homeless people while the economy of iran is in shambles and its international image turns to a steamy pile of dung.
Robok says: “Pretty much, western media sources are blowing this wayyy out of proportion though, I wouldnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t be surprised if US Jackals are behind the entire spring of violence that has happened.”
Looks like you were too smart for us American Jackals, Robok. You figured it out. You caught us. It was Americans who ordered a hundred thousand Iranians onto the street with our secret radio transmitters. It was us who ordered the Basiji to beat protestors to death. I’m pretty sure it was Obama who ordered the Basiji to shoot into the crowds, because, as everyone knows, it couldn’t possibly be the Basiji to blame, those lovable lugs. As every Muslim knows, when Muslims start butchering their own people, somebody else is to blame. If not the Jews, then the Americans. I surrender to your brilliant analysis.
I kinda sorta agreed with your first post, but your second is a little disingenuously sarcastic. If I’m not mistaken, you are expressing a strong belief that the US has nothing to do with the protests in Iran. According to our own Western newspapers, what you’re saying is highly unlikely:
On May 23, 2007, Brian Ross and Richard Esposito reported on ABC News: Ã¢â‚¬Å“The CIA has received secret presidential approval to mount a covert Ã¢â‚¬Å“blackÃ¢â‚¬Â operation to destabilize the Iranian government, current and former officials in the intelligence community tell ABC News.Ã¢â‚¬Â
On May 27, 2007, the London Telegraph reported that Ã¢â‚¬Å“Mr. Bush has signed an official document endorsing CIA plans for a propaganda and disinformation campaign intended to destabilize, and eventually topple, the theocratic rule of the mullahs.Ã¢â‚¬Â
On June 29, 2008, Seymour Hersh, the man who broke the Mai Lai and Abu Ghraib scandals, reported in the New Yorker: Ã¢â‚¬Å“Late last year, Congress agreed to a request from President Bush to fund a major escalation of covert operations against Iran, according to current and former military, intelligence, and congressional sources. These operations, for which the President sought up to four hundred million dollars, were described in a Presidential Finding signed by Bush, and are designed to destabilize the countryÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s religious leadership.Ã¢â‚¬Â
This is all part of a pattern of behaviour that goes back through the 20th Century, most notably expressed in 1953, with CIA’s Operation Ajax and the unseating of Dr. Soroush Mossadeq. In that operation, as they are doing today, they sought – and received – help from the mullahs in Iran.
I agree that many militant Muslims are all too quick to see the “kaffir under the bed”, but you cannot say that America and Iran are somehow hermetically sealed from one another and that America has never stuck its nose in Iran’s business.
Disclaimer: Iranians cannot deny sticking their noses in either. Their commitment to “exporting the revolution” is a matter of record.
Pretty much Annony said what I wanted to say, I wasn’t blaming it _entirely_ on the US government, nor was I implying that _everyone_ who was out in the riots was working with/directed by a western player, no, I was simply saying that US ‘Jackals’ (that’s not an insult, that’s the word I use for Black Ops) have had their history with toppling government and assassinating presidents in the past, and it wouldn’t surprise me to find their involvement here too. If you want examples, just watch The Zeitgeist: http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com
Zeitgeist is all a bit too tinfoil-hat for me. There’s enough background from ‘reputable’ sources.
It’s interesting. I have vague memories of reading exerpts from a diary from the President Ford administration. I cannot remember whose diary it was. Apparently Operation Ajax was getting nowhere until they got the support of the Mullah network in Iran. They got this support once Ayatollah Kashani turned against the secularist Mossadeq. Once the go-ahead came, Operation Ajax was workable. So the Mullahs got rid of someone who didn’t fit into their power structure and America paid for it all. The same thing appears to be happening again, although this time Ahmadinejad is as popular, if not more popular, than the big religious heads of Iran, who are seen as being corrupt and out of touch despite their aura of religious power. So it’s not easy to see what will happen. Not for me anyway.
“If you think this is endeavor Ã¢â‚¬â€œ the elections Ã¢â‚¬â€œ are Ã¢â‚¬Å“the real thingÃ¢â‚¬Â then please be reminded that this is The Middle East. Rule is either by force, charisma, religion or preferably a combination of all three”
I don’t know much about Iranian politics either, and I don’t know if what happened in the ballot boxes. Those elections could have been fraudulent or maybe not, I haven’t seen any “proof” for either side of the story. However, I fail to understand what you’re implying in the paragraph above. Are you saying that because these elections are in the Middle East, therefore that is a reason enough to think they are fraudulent?
There are things that are fundamentally wrong with the regime in Iran, but I think everyone is confusing that with the “results of the elections”. The ruling by religion is one amongst many, but that itself does not support nor oppose the argument of elections being fraud. They are two separate things.
I read the English summary of the sermon you wrote, and I listened to the sermon with Arabic subtitles as well, and the two don’t resonate well. It could be your sarcasm but I think you at least got the tone wrong. It seemed more of like an emotional appeal to people, rather than a statement of threat. Not that this is great, either, but I think it’s what it seemed he was doing.
No, that paragraph just refers to my own and that of millions who are frustrated with the status quo.
As to my translation, this is my interpretation which is largely shared by most of the news channels I watched who all concluded that his speech was a clear threat to use violence which has been heeded by his militias.
I agree, I what I mean to say regardless of ballot counts, there are so many things fundamentally wrong with the regime. Right or wrong count they need a change, soon. Mousavi, like all other candidates was approved for by the Council of Guardians. It’s not a matter of election fraud, at least not entirely.