Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Transportation]

I hate him, too, and don't think he should be in power, but I haven't seen one tangible shred of evidence that he stole the election, and the only thing going on the Mousavi side is that they simply refuse to believe that he could fairly win.  While I support revolution against an unlawful government, if Ahmadinejad was fairly elected these people simply will be rebelling against democracy.

What standard of proof are you using? Mousavi (an Azeri) lost his home province of Tabriz (in East Azerbaijan) by a decent amount (I will scour for numbers later) despite the Azeri demographic voting lockstep with their ethnicity.

And some other shenanigans while I'm here:

Al-Jazeera
BBC

tl;dr is that it's a matter of demographics dictating that winning by 62.6% is hilariously impossible. There are lots of second hand accounts pouring in that I think seal the deal (voter fraud, for example), but I'll stick with the numbers for the moment.

And this is important because Iran's pretense of democracy is an important valve in keeping dissent quiet and for various propaganda purposes.

[Arc]

There are few Western sources that believe the far - too - quickly tabulated & ratified numbers to be at all legit. The release of the tabulations themselves came in six waves, all of which were statistically improbable, increasing exactly in proportion to one another with each release. Sloppy work.

100,000 people marching for Mousavi is not half the country.

Yet, one million (stretching five miles long) marching for him and to have their votes counted while being told they're breaking the law, is monu-fucking-mental.

Remember, this is the age of Twitter and the internet.  Those two things can amplify the voice of a majority.

The days of absolute media control are dead anywhere outside of North Korea, with these events being the prime example. Twitter? Facebook? Fucking SMS? Shutdown for a period of 36 hours throughout the country, with major crackdowns on foreign press. All the same, word and images from the streets were still scattered and published, while the leadership scrambled out their goons with sticks on bikes.

More photos @ tehranlive.org, and coverage @ NYT Lede.

[Saturn]

sad to say that this is probably the first time twitter has ever been used for something useful

[Royal☭]

tl;dr is that it's a matter of demographics dictating that winning by 62.6% is hilariously impossible. There are lots of second hand accounts pouring in that I think seal the deal (voter fraud, for example), but I'll stick with the numbers for the moment.

Yes, the numbers look fishy, but as I said that is not the same thing as fucking proof.  The numbers mostly don't add up to Mousavi supporters, who are angry, angry, angry that their guy didn't win.  But not one of them can provide actual evidence of what they claim.  And it also comes down to a bunch of western media outlets trying to control a narrative, and ignoring that Ahmadinejad was popular.

I'll admit that those links don't exactly exonerate claims of fraud, but the people claiming fraud need to step back and actually think for a moment.  Are they claiming fraud because an actual denial of justice was carried out, or just because they lost?

Now, of course, if the Ayatollah decides to come back and declare that, oh look at this, Mousavi had won all along what a coincidence then surely Democracy will have be properly executed and it's not like the Iranians would have been voting in a sham election for a relatively powerless figurehead in the first place.

There are few Western sources that believe the far - too - quickly tabulated & ratified numbers to be at all legit.

Good for Westerners, who are all clearly quite versed on Iranian culture and politics.

Yet, one million (stretching five miles long) marching for him and to have their votes counted while being told they're breaking the law, is monu-fucking-mental.

One million, Arc?  You want to back that up?  Nearly every source I'm reading says that 100,000 marched in Tehran.

[Arc]

Time fer sum quote boxin'!

Yes, the numbers look fishy, but as I said that is not the same thing as fucking proof.

It isn't just the numbers presented, but how they were presented. Overseas ballots weren't flown out before the results were reported, Karroubi lost his home province, Rezaee's vote count went down during counting, and the count itself was twice as fast as 2005.

It was like saying "No worries, we counted the votes before election day!"

The numbers mostly don't add up to Mousavi supporters, who are angry, angry, angry that their guy didn't win.

... And had their faces beaten in for saying otherwise. The immediate shutdown of communications, presence of force, and blocking of foreign journalists was amateur hour for the leadership.

Populations around the world have their candidates lose all the time. They don't, however, have such a terrifying collection of absurdities and abuses thrust on them in such quick succession. A response such as we have seen appears more logical by the hour.

But not one of them can provide actual evidence of what they claim.

Funnily enough, neither can the government.

And it also comes down to a bunch of western media outlets trying to control a narrative

The Western media, over the weekend, had done a damned fine job of ignoring the dispute, and even today labels one the winner and one the loser, despite mass pleas from Iranians to temper their conclusions.

Ahmadinejad was popular.

More so than this week, to say the least. The articles also happen to clash with one another. The foreign phone poll in the first article doesn't match up with the domestic phone poll in the last article, which is dismissed due to calls being 'difficult in the country'. Cute. The sample time from the first, from May 11th to May 20th, is also not conclusive, as the surge in support (and crowds) for Mousavi's campaign came in the last month. They also claim that polling by the government can never be trusted, and yet backup the alleged vote count.

The second article is a fun collection half-truths. It laments on and on about 'Iran experts', and yet immediately asks of the reader to trust the authors, who admit to there being vote tampering all over the country. Then it boasts Ahmadinejad's 'final' victory in 2005 as proof he has been popular. Final victory, you ask? You see, in 2005, then mayor of Tehran Ahmadinejad wasn't that popular. He had two opponents leading him, and during the runoff election, he pulled ahead due to the opponents of one voting for him to spite the other. The poll from the first article is referenced, and then voting trends from Mousavi's district are thrown out, claiming that an expected win there was 'not grounded in reality'. Oh, OK.

Further, the article claims that in comparison to the clustertastrophe that was the 2000 United States Election, this one looks good. Super. Glad they have the hard numbers to backup such an assessment, because the collateral damage looks far worse. Lastly, the authors attempt a wrap-up by claiming that Obama should 'get serious' with Iran. Ooooook, good to know.

The third article is fine, but could be speaking for the minority.

it's not like the Iranians would have been voting in a sham election for a relatively powerless figurehead in the first place.

They would have been. Now? The blowback has gone further than the leadership contemplated. Calls for Khamenei to step down are circulating, which is in itself some crazy shit, mang.

Good for Westerners, who are all clearly quite versed on Iranian culture and politics.

Well, yes. The talking heads brought out have either been born in Iran, lived in Iran, studied Iran, or worked against Iran. The country isn't exactly a cypher. We have 750,000 of its former residents living in our own country.

One million, Arc?  You want to back that up?  Nearly every source I'm reading says that 100,000 marched in Tehran.

Police were reporting to journalists even higher numbers, and I see now every headline carries 'hundreds of thousands' in the title. Outside of the highly planned inauguration, our own President never attracted such a large gathering. That's power that doesn't just slump away and disappear.

Ahmadinejad has 'fled' the country, Khamenei has backpedaled and called for an investigation, and a bullshit recount has been enacted while further crackdowns on the media ramp up. Fun in the sun.

[Royal☭]

Time fer sum quote boxin'!

Fun times for all!

It isn't just the numbers presented, but how they were presented. Overseas ballots weren't flown out before the results were reported, Karroubi lost his home province, Rezaee's vote count went down during counting, and the count itself was twice as fast as 2005.

It was like saying "No worries, we counted the votes before election day!"

And it's almost like Mousavi was claiming election fraud days before the election!  What a convenient situation he offered: Either he wins because of the will of the people, or the other guy won because he cheated!  It's win-win!

I freely admit to their being certain discrepancies in the results, but nothing that actually confirms that Mousavi had an election stolen from him.

... And had their faces beaten in for saying otherwise. The immediate shutdown of communications, presence of force, and blocking of foreign journalists was amateur hour for the leadership.

There are also counter-protests which, while no where near the size, the state is also trying to keep from being broadcasts.  While brutality was present, it ignores the fact that the first protests involved street riots, lighting property on fire and general mayhem. 

Populations around the world have their candidates lose all the time. They don't, however, have such a terrifying collection of absurdities and abuses thrust on them in such quick succession. A response such as we have seen appears more logical by the hour.

You cite Bush v Gore later, which had Republican sponsored "riots" attempting to close down and stimy attempts to recount the election. This then led the case all the way to the Republican controlled Supreme Court which confirmed the candidate of their party to be the victor despite not even having the popular support.

But not one of them can provide actual evidence of what they claim.

Funnily enough, neither can the government.

Except for those pesky election results, which detractors only accuse of falsities because they don't agree with their own concept of reality.

The Western media, over the weekend, had done a damned fine job of ignoring the dispute, and even today labels one the winner and one the loser, despite mass pleas from Iranians to temper their conclusions.

What media have you been listening to?  NPR had been running stories about the election and possible fraud as early as last week.  Also touting not-really reformist Mousavi as the Jesus of Iran, who united the tech savvy portion of the population, which only accounts for 34.9% of the country.  I've mentioned amplification before, but everyone who supports it just kind of brushes it off.   

More so than this week, to say the least. The articles also happen to clash with one another. The foreign phone poll in the first article doesn't match up with the domestic phone poll in the last article, which is dismissed due to calls being 'difficult in the country'. Cute.

Schrodinger's Fascism: Fascist when the data supports me, not-fascist when it doesn't. 

The sample time from the first, from May 11th to May 20th, is also not conclusive, as the surge in support (and crowds) for Mousavi's campaign came in the last month. They also claim that polling by the government can never be trusted, and yet backup the alleged vote count.

So you're saying a dark horse candidate managed to take a significant lead in the last month of the campaign against a popular incumbent?

The second article is a fun collection half-truths. It laments on and on about 'Iran experts', and yet immediately asks of the reader to trust the authors, who admit to there being vote tampering all over the country. Then it boasts Ahmadinejad's 'final' victory in 2005 as proof he has been popular. Final victory, you ask? You see, in 2005, then mayor of Tehran Ahmadinejad wasn't that popular. He had two opponents leading him, and during the runoff election, he pulled ahead due to the opponents of one voting for him to spite the other. The poll from the first article is referenced, and then voting trends from Mousavi's district are thrown out, claiming that an expected win there was 'not grounded in reality'. Oh, OK.

I'll grant you that, but the shakiness of his argument doesn't actually bolster yours.

Further, the article claims that in comparison to the clustertastrophe that was the 2000 United States Election, this one looks good. Super. Glad they have the hard numbers to backup such an assessment, because the collateral damage looks far worse.

Lastly, the authors attempt a wrap-up by claiming that Obama should 'get serious' with Iran. Ooooook, good to know.

A dumb quote, to be sure.  But Neocons and other warhawks would love to find an excuse to "get serious" with Iran, really.

The third article is fine, but could be speaking for the minority.

And I could be an 8 foot tall lizard man who shoots fire from his eyes.

They would have been. Now? The blowback has gone further than the leadership contemplated. Calls for Khamenei to step down are circulating, which is in itself some crazy shit, mang.

Here's the part you seemed to have missed: People can call for Khamenei to step down all they want, but in the end he has no obligation to do so.  He's been a lenient Ayatollah compared to Ruhollah Khomenei, but that's not saying much.  In the end, he is the Supreme Leader and the president simply acts by his will.  If the Iranian people want any change against him, a presidential election will do little.

Police were reporting to journalists even higher numbers, and I see now every headline carries 'hundreds of thousands' in the title. Outside of the highly planned inauguration, our own President never attracted such a large gathering. That's power that doesn't just slump away and disappear.

However, several anti-Bush, anti-war protests were carried here that more than dwarfed that number.  Although, I do love how you dance around my calling out of your bullshit one million number only to confirm my 100,000 thousand number, which still ignores that neither in anyway makes half a country in rebellion.

And this is where the crux of my entire argument is rests.  The allegations of fraud began before the election, amplified during the election and has not been able to provide any kind of proof (mostly because nobody can get hold of the actual results, which is a different matter entirely).  Mousavi had the support of a minority group with internet access, and is playing passions to stage what may be a coup simply because this group is unhappy with the results.

Ahmadenijad may have committed fraud, but until we can get some hard numbers to see what the actual results were, it cannot be stated one way or the other.  This is compounded by the fact that in the case of fraud, the Mousavi camp claims the only option is that he had the election stolen, and not merely that Ahmadenijad may have simply increased his own margin of victory.

It's a tricky situation, and since the Iranians have come this far I'd like to see actual evidence one way or the other before things get uglier.

Ahmadinejad has 'fled' the country, Khamenei has backpedaled and called for an investigation, and a bullshit recount has been enacted while further crackdowns on the media ramp up. Fun in the sun.

I wouldn't exactly call Ahmadinejad going to Russia on a meeting he'd scheduled before the elections - and which he actually postponed because of the elections - "fleeing".

[Mongrel]

People can call for Khamenei to step down all they want, but in the end he has no obligation to do so.  He's been a lenient Ayatollah compared to Ruhollah Khomenei, but that's not saying much.  In the end, he is the Supreme Leader and the president simply acts by his will.  If the Iranian people want any change against him, a presidential election will do little.

Precisely. I'm fairly certain that the the mentality here can be comedically equeated to "I am a benevolent God. Don't Push It."

Khameni's stating that there will be an 'investigation' means little more than an acknowledgement of the size of the protests. It provides an immediate response to the angry citizens ("See? We're doing something!"), it will take any number of months, so that when all this passion has dissipated we will see a bland report indicating a small amount of fraud (not enough to affect the outcome election, of course), or perhaps none at all.

I wouldn't exactly call Ahmadinejad going to Russia on a meeting he'd scheduled before the elections - and which he actually postponed because of the elections - "fleeing".

Not only that, Ahmadinejad keeping his appointment is a subtle way for the government to dismiss the protests as nothing more than a tempest in a teapot. "This is not important enough for me to cancel my travel plans. Sorry. Back in a few days - have fun!"



Apart from that, all I see is a HELL of a lot of speculation and conjecture from non-residents, be they of Persian descent or no. There's very little that's concrete about all the post-election kerfuffle.

[Catloaf]

Constantine makes a decent argument, but I still have the lingering question on my mind:

IF THERE WAS NO FRAUD WHY THE HELL DID THE IRANIAN GOVERNMENT GO TO SUCH LENGTHS TO MAKE IF LOOK LIKE THERE WAS BY SHUTTING DOWN COMMUNICATIONS AND GOING AFTER FOREIGN JOURNALISTS!?  THERE IS NO REASON TO DO THAT SORT OF THING OTHER THAN TO COVER UP BLATANT FRAUD.

[Brentai]

There's a misconception that an entity that has nothing to hide is somehow immune to negative propaganda.

Iran is probably not such an entity, but the point stands.

[Transportation]

That's not necessarily odd. Politicians manufacture riots in Thailand all the time and the Party in Power sometimes pre-empts them.

I somehow doubt we'll be getting any real objective proof out of this anyway.

The truth of the matter will be decided by the breadth of the compromise (if there is one). If it is fraud then whoever did this is an utter retard and clearly did not do this with any kind of plan in mind; suggesting some kind of power struggle instead of a grand conspiracy. Two Grand Ayatollahs are calling it fraud and there are house arrests up the wazoo, so there will be some house cleaning either way.

[SCD]

From my travels in Syria, I can also point out that the governments of arab states do love to create mass protests in the oddest of places, although I've only seen it first hand with Syrian and HA in S lebanon. 

[Zaratustra]

why are you dudes defending the poor little troublemaking government against some mean people on the internet

[Mongrel]

IF THERE WAS NO FRAUD WHY THE HELL DID THE IRANIAN GOVERNMENT GO TO SUCH LENGTHS TO MAKE IF LOOK LIKE THERE WAS BY SHUTTING DOWN COMMUNICATIONS AND GOING AFTER FOREIGN JOURNALISTS!?  THERE IS NO REASON TO DO THAT SORT OF THING OTHER THAN TO COVER UP BLATANT FRAUD.

Never underestimate the desire in some nations to just crack some skulls sometimes.

Bust up some troublemaking young punks! It's the feel-good event of the month!

[Mongrel]

From my travels in Syria, I can also point out that the governments of arab states do love to create mass protests in the oddest of places, although I've only seen it first hand with Syrian and HA in S lebanon. 

Iran might lie in the geographical Middle East, but it is not an Arab state. 

Or, in a more western context. The relationship between Arabs and Persians could best be compared to the longstanding 'friendliness' between say... the Irish and the English.

...unless you were implying that the unrest is the product of foreign agitators? Which seems kind of unlikely.

[Pacobird]

Source claiming to be a disgruntled interior official claims that Moussavi actually beat Ahmeninahfwen;q 5-to-1.  Waiting on proper sourcing.

ps



You could totally count 50+ million votes in 2 hours!  Honest!

[Arc]

Fun times for all!

Intended to reply sooner, but: Ghostbustahs.

And it's almost like Mousavi was claiming election fraud days before the election!

Sounds juicy. Link?

There are also counter-protests which, while no where near the size, the state is also trying to keep from being broadcasts.

The post-election, pro-Ahmadinejad rallies? The ones described by the press as 'nicely orchestrated'? If these were ever excluded from broadcast, I'd wager this was due the collateral of keeping reporters off the streets (read: arresting and confiscating) altogether.

While brutality was present, it ignores the fact that the first protests involved street riots, lighting property on fire and general mayhem.

... Provoked by the initial groups of skull-cracking police forces, hitting the streets just as the results were released. As if the leadership understood how much of an upset they were about it initiate.

You cite Bush v Gore later, which had Republican sponsored "riots" attempting to close down and stimy attempts to recount the election.

Riot? A dozen plus easily identifiable goobers shouting a bit, in contrast to millions hitting the streets and demanding their votes be counted. Again, not even comparable.

Except for those pesky election results, which detractors only accuse of falsities because they don't agree with their own concept of reality.

... Which are now falling into doubt among the clergy, as claims of millions of votes missing arise. But as you say later, who has seen these results?

What media have you been listening to?  NPR had been running stories about the election and possible fraud as early as last week.

NPR has been an outlier, even during the Bush regime, for decades. Colluding National Public Radio with the whole of the cable nets and central networks is the equivalent of tossing in Telltale Games as an example of all Western production studios. The handling of the story last week, before the election, wasn't even the point. The handling after the election? Abysmal during the three-day weekend, lacking both insight, quick to jump to conclusions, and given equal time to far lesser stories. Monday's & Tuesday's coverage vastly improved, and yet still hilariously lacking compared to online sources. No surprises there.

Also touting not-really reformist Mousavi as the Jesus of Iran, who united the tech savvy portion of the population, which only accounts for 34.9% of the country.

Wading beyond the hyperbole, I assume you mean the 23 million plus internet users? Which doesn't include text messaging? Is there a shadow of doubt that the opposition is the far more tech-savvy? That the past five days have been fueled equally by ground movements and twitter? Who later rescheduled their maintenance due to a gigantic outpouring of requests to the otherwise?

The greens have the upper-hand in this regard. They are not, however, limited to only this group and are falling prey to confiscations and blockouts day after day. Sure would be swell to have those resources.

Schrodinger's Fascism: Fascist when the data supports me, not-fascist when it doesn't.

I'm not the one dismissing polls here, unlike the linked article.

So you're saying a dark horse candidate managed to take a significant lead in the last month of the campaign against a popular incumbent?

Mousavi has been in and out of the arena for three decades, and again, Ahmadinejad's popularity was incorrectly attributed to the 2005 election results.

And I could be an 8 foot tall lizard man who shoots fire from his eyes.

Which is all fine and dandy, but you hadn't linked to such an article stating such a premise. :)

Here's the part you seemed to have missed: People can call for Khamenei to step down all they want, but in the end he has no obligation to do so. He's been a lenient Ayatollah compared to Ruhollah Khomenei, but that's not saying much.  In the end, he is the Supreme Leader and the president simply acts by his will.  If the Iranian people want any change against him, a presidential election will do little.

Correct. Totally. Agreed.

This monumental backlash has done more to undermine his power than allowing the election of yet another 'reformist'.

However, several anti-Bush, anti-war protests were carried here that more than dwarfed that number.

... With weeks of planning and organization compared to a few hours notice. OK? Super?

Although, I do love how you dance around my calling out of your bullshit one million number only to confirm my 100,000 thousand number, which still ignores that neither in anyway makes half a country in rebellion.

The country is larger than Tehran, and shit has been hitting the shit fan all shitting day today all over the shitty place. However, if we're going to ignore police estimates and play the press's numbers game, then we'll have to agree that the crowd was larger than 100,000. Hundreds. Plural.

Mousavi had the support of a minority group with internet access, and is playing passions to stage what may be a coup simply because this group is unhappy with the results.

Minority? Playing the passions? The man, along with the two other candidates, were placed under house arrest. Communications shut out. He canceled Monday's rally, and hundreds of thousands turned out, against lawful orders. These aren't the playing of passions. These are the resistances to authoritative brutishness. An anger that has been boiling for at least two decades.

This is compounded by the fact that in the case of fraud, the Mousavi camp claims the only option is that he had the election stolen, and not merely that Ahmadenijad may have simply increased his own margin of victory.

Those could be one in the same, as a margin of 50% eliminates a pesky runoff election to be held one week later.

I wouldn't exactly call Ahmadinejad going to Russia on a meeting he'd scheduled before the elections - and which he actually postponed because of the elections - "fleeing".

Hence the quotes. It has been said that Khamenei ordered him to leave, and that his absence allowed the militia to fight dirtier (bloodier), but the appearance is negative all the same.

I somehow doubt we'll be getting any real objective proof out of this anyway.

The truth of the matter will be decided by the breadth of the compromise (if there is one).

I perceive no better outcome for the greens.

[SCD]

From my travels in Syria, I can also point out that the governments of arab states do love to create mass protests in the oddest of places, although I've only seen it first hand with Syrian and HA in S lebanon. 

Iran might lie in the geographical Middle East, but it is not an Arab state. 

Or, in a more western context. The relationship between Arabs and Persians could best be compared to the longstanding 'friendliness' between say... the Irish and the English.

...unless you were implying that the unrest is the product of foreign agitators? Which seems kind of unlikely.

Close.

I'm implying that I wouldn't be surprised if the incumbent's personnel are feeding and possibly accomidating people in the countryside into tehran. 

[Pacobird]

From my travels in Syria, I can also point out that the governments of arab states do love to create mass protests in the oddest of places, although I've only seen it first hand with Syrian and HA in S lebanon. 

Iran might lie in the geographical Middle East, but it is not an Arab state. 

Or, in a more western context. The relationship between Arabs and Persians could best be compared to the longstanding 'friendliness' between say... the Irish and the English.

...unless you were implying that the unrest is the product of foreign agitators? Which seems kind of unlikely.

Close.

I'm implying that I wouldn't be surprised if the incumbent's personnel are feeding and possibly accomidating people in the countryside into tehran. 

Actually, they're bringing in Hezbollah from Lebanon, and the realization of that, that Ahmadinejad and the clerics would have the gall to call in Arabs to beat the shit out of fellow Persians, was approximately the moment at which shit got truly real.

[SCD]

That sounds juicy, if true. 

Where did you run into that nugget?

[Mongrel]

That sounds juicy, if true. 

Where did you run into that nugget?

Yeah, that would be a hell of a tale, with HUGE implications.

Source?