Thay'll be talking about mass graves soon. Maybe mass graves containing the bodies of those poor unfortunate Iraqi Republican Guard who were killed by the Iranians during Iraq's U.S backed invasion of Iran.
It's enough to make you dizzy. :?
There was also a short period of time during the Iraq-Iran war where the Iranians advanced towards southern areas of Iraq. They eventually stopped and pulled back realising it was more effective to stick to their ground. Anyway my point is that will probably be used as a pretext as well. I hear it already..
"They have shown us that they are interested in occupying Iraqi land, take for example.."
I get my news out of Iran and i trust them over allegations i hear on this board. You dont want US involvement, that is totally fine. If you want to blame the media for being bias, thats fine too. Dont belittle what the people out in the streets are doing and play them out to be puppets.
Dont belittle what the people out in the streets are doing and play them out to be puppets.
No one belittled them for you to go on the defensive. The intentions of most is likely to be good but I wouldn't trust someone like Mousavi. If you go back in time and listen to what he had to say you will realise why I am saying this. Reformist, my ass, bought by the West, more likely. No one switches from being a hardcore Khomeini supporter to the opposite side in 20 years unless there was money/power involved.
I get my news out of Iran and i trust them over allegations i hear on this board. You dont want US involvement, that is totally fine. If you want to blame the media for being bias, thats fine too. Dont belittle what the people out in the streets are doing and play them out to be puppets.
The WMD comparison is not valid.
This looks like almost an exact re-run of what happened in Panama - the Western media building up an image of an evil dictator, allegations of a rigged election, protesters being beaten in the streets, e.t.c. The next thing you know the U.S will invade Iran and massacre a few thousand, or a few hundred thousand people in order to bring 'democracy' to the Iranian people.
Some people on this board criticized me for mentioning Panama, saying that it happened 20 years ago and that therefore it is now irrelevant. I say 'Bollocks!'
History is a wonderful thing. What we're seeing in Iran now is all just so fucking predictable.
I get my news out of Iran and i trust them over allegations i hear on this board. You dont want US involvement, that is totally fine. If you want to blame the media for being bias, thats fine too. Dont belittle what the people out in the streets are doing and play them out to be puppets.
The WMD comparison is not valid.
This looks like almost an exact re-run of what happened in Panama - the Western media building up an image of an evil dictator, allegations of a rigged election, protesters being beaten in the streets, e.t.c. The next thing you know the U.S will invade Iran and massacre a few thousand, or a few hundred thousand people in order to bring 'democracy' to the Iranian people.
Some people on this board criticized me for mentioning Panama, saying that it happened 20 years ago and that therefore it is now irrelevant. I say 'Bollocks!'
History is a wonderful thing. What we're seeing in Iran now is all just so fucking predictable.
Exactly. They are not puppets they have good intentions which are being used for other purposes. Mainly to demonize Iran to the world for future endeavors.
Dont belittle what the people out in the streets are doing and play them out to be puppets.
No one belittled them for you to go on the defensive. The intentions of most is likely to be good but I wouldn't trust someone like Mousavi. If you go back in time and listen to what he had to say you will realise why I am saying this. Reformist, my ass, bought by the West, more likely. No one switches from being a hardcore Khomeini supporter to the opposite side in 20 years unless there was money/power involved.
You are right about Mousavi, its like choosing btwn Cheney and Bush. but again, the unrest has morphed from protesting the results to protesting the regime.
No they wont be talking about mass graves there are plenty of marked graves in cemeteries that attest to the purging this regime did after it took over. One of them belongs to my fathers 15 year old cousin who was caught at a Communist party rally.
I get my news out of Iran and i trust them over allegations i hear on this board. You dont want US involvement, that is totally fine. If you want to blame the media for being bias, thats fine too. Dont belittle what the people out in the streets are doing and play them out to be puppets.
The WMD comparison is not valid.
This looks like almost an exact re-run of what happened in Panama - the Western media building up an image of an evil dictator, allegations of a rigged election, protesters being beaten in the streets, e.t.c. The next thing you know the U.S will invade Iran and massacre a few thousand, or a few hundred thousand people in order to bring 'democracy' to the Iranian people.
Some people on this board criticized me for mentioning Panama, saying that it happened 20 years ago and that therefore it is now irrelevant. I say 'Bollocks!'
History is a wonderful thing. What we're seeing in Iran now is all just so fucking predictable.
Remember this thread in 20 years when you read about all the atrocities committed by this regime in your history book.
I get my news out of Iran and i trust them over allegations i hear on this board. You dont want US involvement, that is totally fine. If you want to blame the media for being bias, thats fine too. Dont belittle what the people out in the streets are doing and play them out to be puppets.
The WMD comparison is not valid.
This looks like almost an exact re-run of what happened in Panama - the Western media building up an image of an evil dictator, allegations of a rigged election, protesters being beaten in the streets, e.t.c. The next thing you know the U.S will invade Iran and massacre a few thousand, or a few hundred thousand people in order to bring 'democracy' to the Iranian people.
Some people on this board criticized me for mentioning Panama, saying that it happened 20 years ago and that therefore it is now irrelevant. I say 'Bollocks!'
History is a wonderful thing. What we're seeing in Iran now is all just so fucking predictable.
Remember this thread in 20 years when you read about all the atrocities committed by this regime in your history book.
Like the U.S government, or even the people of America, give two shits about brutal regimes? If that were the case then how do you explain them installing brutal dictators and death squads all over the world?
I suppose General Pinochet was one of the good guys, right?
And Sadaam was America's friend whilst he was gassing Kurds with U.S supplied chemical weapons.
Tell the people of Guatemala that you're concerned about atrocities committed by brutal regimes and they'll laugh in your face.
Edit: Or is this just an example of how I 'disregard anything that contradicts me, making everything a moral issue with only one black and white possible answer, and believing after cursory research what I'll believe to the end, irrationally defending it against all evidence to the contrary rather than admit ting that I don't know as much as I should before making my decision'?
You are right about Mousavi, its like choosing btwn Cheney and Bush. but again, the unrest has morphed from protesting the results to protesting the regime.
No they wont be talking about mass graves there are plenty of marked graves in cemeteries that attest to the purging this regime did after it took over. One of them belongs to my fathers 15 year old cousin who was caught at a Communist party rally.
Remember this thread in 20 years when you read about all the atrocities committed by this regime in your history book.
I don't think anyone here is arguing in support of this regime. The facts are known that they liquidated everyone who was against the revolution and then went even worse by liquidating anyone they saw as a threat because they were so fearful of an attack against them. All this has already been documented by people such as Fisk in his book "The Great war for civilisation".
Its not about the election anymore its about the regime...
How can you defend this regime? Is your desire to show the US is involved so great that you would defend an absolute joke of a regime which offers its people nothing but repression?
How come you dont include Iran 1979 on your list?
This argument is similar to the one pro-Iraq war people make. Its not about the WMD's anymore its about toppling Saddam. Similar in the sense that people will keep shifting logic to suit their own argument.
I am all for change of regime in Iran but not when it stinks of Western interference.
didn't it come out a year or so ago that we were fucking around in Iran trying to cause unrest inside the country?
don't compete; coexist
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
Like the U.S government, or even the people of America, give two shits about brutal regimes? If that were the case then how do you explain them installing brutal dictators and death squads all over the world?
I suppose General Pinochet was one of the good guys, right?
And Sadaam was America's friend whilst he was gassing Kurds with U.S supplied chemical weapons.
Tell the people of Guatemala that you're concerned about atrocities committed by brutal regimes and they'll laugh in your face.
Edit: Or is this just an example of how I 'disregard anything that contradicts me, making everything a moral issue with only one black and white possible answer, and believing after cursory research what I'll believe to the end, irrationally defending it against all evidence to the contrary rather than admit ting that I don't know as much as I should before making my decision'?
you don't even need to go back that far! look at places like Colombia who we give over a billion in aid to, their military seems to have problems not raping, robbing and killing villagers and the government gives them immunity!
just look up who we give aid to and then go to Amnesty International, we support a country that banned ballet for fuck's sake!!
don't compete; coexist
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
This government does not need help being demonized. I dont see how you can put a rigged election beyond a regime that does this to its people. Everyone i hear from in Iran believes the election was rigged and none of them are connected to the CIA. As an Iranian i have no problem with the US meddling (non militarily) if it meant getting this regime removed. Its whats better for the people and the country. Im not saying the US is meddling for humanitarian reasons, i know if it wasnt beneficial for the west the US would not get involved. In this case it just happens that it is better for the people of Iran and the West. The only people who oppose change are the far right religious nut jobs who are in power and want to remain in power. You want to side with them then go ahead. You are painting with too broad of a brush.
the issue here is whether the elections were fair ... do I support this regime? ... not at the very least however, i've seen no evidence nor has anyone provided any to indicate these elections were fraudulent ...
the issue here is whether the elections were fair ... do I support this regime? ... not at the very least however, i've seen no evidence nor has anyone provided any to indicate these elections were fraudulent ...
the issue here is whether the elections were fair ... do I support this regime? ... not at the very least however, i've seen no evidence nor has anyone provided any to indicate these elections were fraudulent ...
How'd you feel about US circa 2000 & 2004?
There was plenty of evidence in those cases, in fact people have been jailed over it. as far as i know there is no evidence of voting machines 'accidentally' deleting thousands of votes in Iran like happened in '04 or lists wrongly preventing thousands from voting like in '00 or him losing the popular vote (although I know that last one has to do with our voting system and not fraud)
And please don't mistake this as i Iran's current regime
don't compete; coexist
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
the issue here is whether the elections were fair ... do I support this regime? ... not at the very least however, i've seen no evidence nor has anyone provided any to indicate these elections were fraudulent ...
How'd you feel about US circa 2000 & 2004?
pretty much what dude below wrote ... at least the pre-election polls matched the results ... you had pre-election and exit polls being completely off ...
It's interesting to me that the same people that believe in US election fraud have a hard time comprehending that something may be up in Iran.
Personally, I don't think there was a huge election fraud issue in the US. Some, certainly. And it did open my eyes more, which is why I'm interested in what's happening in Iran. I would have thought those that believed in voter fraud in the US would at least be interested in what's going on in Iran. Seems like the people over there certainly think something is up. Of course, how could I forget, that's because the US is influencing their behavior. :roll:
the issue here is whether the elections were fair ... do I support this regime? ... not at the very least however, i've seen no evidence nor has anyone provided any to indicate these elections were fraudulent ...
This is precisely what it comes down to. If the elections were fair that means over 50% of the population wanted the same regime so the protesters are still in the minority. So tough shit but best of luck to them in changing the regime or at least making it more moderate.
Open - I understand where you are coming from but the final point is the elections are still very important for the context of the argument. If they were fair you are in the minority in Iran.
Reports are coming out that Rafsanjani is currently mediating between the two sides in an attempt to solve the crisis.
Who says the elections were fair? The polls conducted by the government? The newspapers that are run by the government or the TV stations run by the government?
I understand Iraq has left everyone very cautious but again you're giving the regime way too much credit. WAY too much credit. This regime was a result of meddling in 1979 by the outside. So i understand how meddling can be bad...it definitely changed my life.
Just dont think that this regime is beyond fixing an election. Technically , they have been by allowing 0 votes for any progressive or liberal candidatel; they're not allowed to run.
We're seeing thing at different levels im looking through a microscope while your looking at them through a telescope fromfar away. Im just gonna agree to disagree.
Who says the elections were fair? The polls conducted by the government? The newspapers that are run by the government or the TV stations run by the government?
I understand Iraq has left everyone very cautious but again you're giving the regime way too much credit. WAY too much credit. This regime was a result of meddling in 1979 by the outside. So i understand how meddling can be bad...it definitely changed my life.
Just dont think that this regime is beyond fixing an election. Technically , they have been by allowing 0 votes for any progressive or liberal candidatel; they're not allowed to run.
We're seeing thing at different levels im looking through a microscope while your looking at them through a telescope fromfar away. Im just gonna agree to disagree.
Agree to disagree as much as you like but the last poll before the election that supports my argument was conducted by an American company. The other source I gave was Robert Fisk who in fact is siding with the protesters on regime change.
This is precisely what it comes down to. If the elections were fair that means over 50% of the population wanted the same regime so the protesters are still in the minority. So tough shit but best of luck to them in changing the regime or at least making it more moderate.
No candidate may run that does not get approval by the religious leaders, though. So how "mandated" the victor of the election is, is pretty open for debate. It's a pretty skewed playing field.
That said, Ahmadinejad has got a lot of support in some quarters, and probably would have scraped a win anyway, although the margin looks suspicious.
Peace
Dan
"YOU [humans] NEED TO BELIEVE IN THINGS THAT AREN'T TRUE. HOW ELSE CAN THEY BECOME?" - Death
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
It's interesting to me that the same people that believe in US election fraud have a hard time comprehending that something may be up in Iran.
Personally, I don't think there was a huge election fraud issue in the US. Some, certainly. And it did open my eyes more, which is why I'm interested in what's happening in Iran. I would have thought those that believed in voter fraud in the US would at least be interested in what's going on in Iran. Seems like the people over there certainly think something is up. Of course, how could I forget, that's because the US is influencing their behavior. :roll:
uhhh ... if you read my posts - all i keep saying is where is the proof of fraud? ... in the case of the US elections - there was plenty of proof ... i am more than suspicious that there could have been fraud however, you have to balance that out with the fact there is a history in iran of foreign meddling ...
uhhh ... if you read my posts - all i keep saying is where is the proof of fraud? ... in the case of the US elections - there was plenty of proof ... i am more than suspicious that there could have been fraud however, you have to balance that out with the fact there is a history in iran of foreign meddling ...
I'm reading your posts. You seem willing to believe what you hear from the Iranian gov't as truth, where as you question everything form the US and the media in the US. That's my perception of it, which I fully admit could be 100% wrong. I don't know how much you've looked into Iran, etc. Anyhow, I'm just surprised, it seems that people play on different sides of net depending on who else is standing there instead of basing it on principles, etc. But, liek I said, I could be 100% wrong.
I'm reading your posts. You seem willing to believe what you hear from the Iranian gov't as truth, where as you question everything form the US and the media in the US. That's my perception of it, which I fully admit could be 100% wrong. I don't know how much you've looked into Iran, etc. Anyhow, I'm just surprised, it seems that people play on different sides of net depending on who else is standing there instead of basing it on principles, etc. But, liek I said, I could be 100% wrong.
this is what i know ... mousavi had thousands of monitors at various election polls and to this day no official complaint has been filed to the election board ... mousavi was also given the opportunity to broadcast on national tv any proof he has of election irregularities - again - he has chosen not to do so ..
again - i think you are reading something that doesn't exist ... the reality is i don't see a whole heck of a lot of difference between mousavi and ahmandijad ... although mousavi is considered more friendly to the west - he's still a hard liner in many respects - it is the only reason why they let the guy run ...
uhhh ... if you read my posts - all i keep saying is where is the proof of fraud? ... in the case of the US elections - there was plenty of proof ... i am more than suspicious that there could have been fraud however, you have to balance that out with the fact there is a history in iran of foreign meddling ...
I'm reading your posts. You seem willing to believe what you hear from the Iranian gov't as truth, where as you question everything form the US and the media in the US. That's my perception of it, which I fully admit could be 100% wrong. I don't know how much you've looked into Iran, etc. Anyhow, I'm just surprised, it seems that people play on different sides of net depending on who else is standing there instead of basing it on principles, etc. But, liek I said, I could be 100% wrong.
Polaris..the factor your leaving out that the regime has no problem telling people if you object, your family will disappear. Im not making this stuff up, this is an incredibly ruthless regime. Rigging an election is like drinking tea for them.
As far as pre election polls go, its funny that people think the cia can overthrow this government but not control what pre-election polls say from an American compny. We have no idea what the cia wants, there so many factors involved Russia, the Arabs, Israel. Its not as simple as it looks.
Polaris..the factor your leaving out that the regime has no problem telling people if you object, your family will disappear. Im not making this stuff up, this is an incredibly ruthless regime. Rigging an election is like drinking tea for them.
As far as pre election polls go, its funny that people think the cia can overthrow this government but not control what pre-election polls say from an American compny. We have no idea what the cia wants, there so many factors involved Russia, the Arabs, Israel. Its not as simple as it looks.
Open - I hear ya - I would never list Iran as a beacon of political freedoms ... based on my limited readings and friends who are Iranian - i find it utterly tragic that the country has been controlled by a religious regime ... I would love to see Iran more open but my personal wishes cannot supercede those of the people who live there now ... all I am saying is that if there is fraud - bring forth the evidence and have it investigated ...
in addition - in order for this change to occur ... it has to happen at a much higher level - mousavi is not the one to bring about that change ...
caterina - keep us posted with what you have found ... today i have heard from two different "experts" on the election - both of whom are iranian who live abroad ... one says the results are fishy while the other guy seems to have an answer for all the so called anomalies ... in any case - the issue here (which i've stated in previous posts) is whether there was fraud ...
Polaris..the factor your leaving out that the regime has no problem telling people if you object, your family will disappear. Im not making this stuff up, this is an incredibly ruthless regime. Rigging an election is like drinking tea for them.
As far as pre election polls go, its funny that people think the cia can overthrow this government but not control what pre-election polls say from an American compny. We have no idea what the cia wants, there so many factors involved Russia, the Arabs, Israel. Its not as simple as it looks.
Open - I hear ya - I would never list Iran as a beacon of political freedoms ... based on my limited readings and friends who are Iranian - i find it utterly tragic that the country has been controlled by a religious regime ... I would love to see Iran more open but my personal wishes cannot supercede those of the people who live there now ... all I am saying is that if there is fraud - bring forth the evidence and have it investigated ...
in addition - in order for this change to occur ... it has to happen at a much higher level - mousavi is not the one to bring about that change ...
caterina - keep us posted with what you have found ... today i have heard from two different "experts" on the election - both of whom are iranian who live abroad ... one says the results are fishy while the other guy seems to have an answer for all the so called anomalies ... in any case - the issue here (which i've stated in previous posts) is whether there was fraud ...
that's the bottom line now
Worry not Lien, I'll keep you posted. I'm a data freak, sad but true. There's also an investigation carried out by Walter Mebane, from Michigan Uni., which should be very professional. They have one of the best departments of statistic analysis. http://www-personal.umich.edu/~wmebane/ ... un2009.pdf
Most important, however, the images I've seen from Iran are extremely disturbing and HHRR violations really bother me...
No candidate may run that does not get approval by the religious leaders, though. So how "mandated" the victor of the election is, is pretty open for debate. It's a pretty skewed playing field.
That said, Ahmadinejad has got a lot of support in some quarters, and probably would have scraped a win anyway, although the margin looks suspicious.
Peace
Dan
Good point but if most of the people really wanted change you'd think they would vote for the most moderate of the candidates presented to them.
Comments
There was also a short period of time during the Iraq-Iran war where the Iranians advanced towards southern areas of Iraq. They eventually stopped and pulled back realising it was more effective to stick to their ground. Anyway my point is that will probably be used as a pretext as well. I hear it already..
"They have shown us that they are interested in occupying Iraqi land, take for example.."
Yup sounds about right.
The WMD comparison is not valid.
No one belittled them for you to go on the defensive. The intentions of most is likely to be good but I wouldn't trust someone like Mousavi. If you go back in time and listen to what he had to say you will realise why I am saying this. Reformist, my ass, bought by the West, more likely. No one switches from being a hardcore Khomeini supporter to the opposite side in 20 years unless there was money/power involved.
This looks like almost an exact re-run of what happened in Panama - the Western media building up an image of an evil dictator, allegations of a rigged election, protesters being beaten in the streets, e.t.c. The next thing you know the U.S will invade Iran and massacre a few thousand, or a few hundred thousand people in order to bring 'democracy' to the Iranian people.
Some people on this board criticized me for mentioning Panama, saying that it happened 20 years ago and that therefore it is now irrelevant. I say 'Bollocks!'
History is a wonderful thing. What we're seeing in Iran now is all just so fucking predictable.
Exactly. They are not puppets they have good intentions which are being used for other purposes. Mainly to demonize Iran to the world for future endeavors.
You are right about Mousavi, its like choosing btwn Cheney and Bush. but again, the unrest has morphed from protesting the results to protesting the regime.
No they wont be talking about mass graves there are plenty of marked graves in cemeteries that attest to the purging this regime did after it took over. One of them belongs to my fathers 15 year old cousin who was caught at a Communist party rally.
Remember this thread in 20 years when you read about all the atrocities committed by this regime in your history book.
Like the U.S government, or even the people of America, give two shits about brutal regimes? If that were the case then how do you explain them installing brutal dictators and death squads all over the world?
I suppose General Pinochet was one of the good guys, right?
And Sadaam was America's friend whilst he was gassing Kurds with U.S supplied chemical weapons.
Tell the people of Guatemala that you're concerned about atrocities committed by brutal regimes and they'll laugh in your face.
Edit: Or is this just an example of how I 'disregard anything that contradicts me, making everything a moral issue with only one black and white possible answer, and believing after cursory research what I'll believe to the end, irrationally defending it against all evidence to the contrary rather than admit ting that I don't know as much as I should before making my decision'?
I don't think anyone here is arguing in support of this regime. The facts are known that they liquidated everyone who was against the revolution and then went even worse by liquidating anyone they saw as a threat because they were so fearful of an attack against them. All this has already been documented by people such as Fisk in his book "The Great war for civilisation".
didn't it come out a year or so ago that we were fucking around in Iran trying to cause unrest inside the country?
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
you don't even need to go back that far! look at places like Colombia who we give over a billion in aid to, their military seems to have problems not raping, robbing and killing villagers and the government gives them immunity!
just look up who we give aid to and then go to Amnesty International, we support a country that banned ballet for fuck's sake!!
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
Personally, I'm sitting back and watching Iran from a great distance and have no clue what to really think about it.
Open - thanks for your insight.
How'd you feel about US circa 2000 & 2004?
There was plenty of evidence in those cases, in fact people have been jailed over it. as far as i know there is no evidence of voting machines 'accidentally' deleting thousands of votes in Iran like happened in '04 or lists wrongly preventing thousands from voting like in '00 or him losing the popular vote (although I know that last one has to do with our voting system and not fraud)
And please don't mistake this as i
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
pretty much what dude below wrote ... at least the pre-election polls matched the results ... you had pre-election and exit polls being completely off ...
Personally, I don't think there was a huge election fraud issue in the US. Some, certainly. And it did open my eyes more, which is why I'm interested in what's happening in Iran. I would have thought those that believed in voter fraud in the US would at least be interested in what's going on in Iran. Seems like the people over there certainly think something is up. Of course, how could I forget, that's because the US is influencing their behavior. :roll:
This is precisely what it comes down to. If the elections were fair that means over 50% of the population wanted the same regime so the protesters are still in the minority. So tough shit but best of luck to them in changing the regime or at least making it more moderate.
Open - I understand where you are coming from but the final point is the elections are still very important for the context of the argument. If they were fair you are in the minority in Iran.
Reports are coming out that Rafsanjani is currently mediating between the two sides in an attempt to solve the crisis.
I understand Iraq has left everyone very cautious but again you're giving the regime way too much credit. WAY too much credit. This regime was a result of meddling in 1979 by the outside. So i understand how meddling can be bad...it definitely changed my life.
Just dont think that this regime is beyond fixing an election. Technically , they have been by allowing 0 votes for any progressive or liberal candidatel; they're not allowed to run.
We're seeing thing at different levels im looking through a microscope while your looking at them through a telescope fromfar away. Im just gonna agree to disagree.
Agree to disagree as much as you like but the last poll before the election that supports my argument was conducted by an American company. The other source I gave was Robert Fisk who in fact is siding with the protesters on regime change.
No candidate may run that does not get approval by the religious leaders, though. So how "mandated" the victor of the election is, is pretty open for debate. It's a pretty skewed playing field.
That said, Ahmadinejad has got a lot of support in some quarters, and probably would have scraped a win anyway, although the margin looks suspicious.
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
uhhh ... if you read my posts - all i keep saying is where is the proof of fraud? ... in the case of the US elections - there was plenty of proof ... i am more than suspicious that there could have been fraud however, you have to balance that out with the fact there is a history in iran of foreign meddling ...
I'm reading your posts. You seem willing to believe what you hear from the Iranian gov't as truth, where as you question everything form the US and the media in the US. That's my perception of it, which I fully admit could be 100% wrong. I don't know how much you've looked into Iran, etc. Anyhow, I'm just surprised, it seems that people play on different sides of net depending on who else is standing there instead of basing it on principles, etc. But, liek I said, I could be 100% wrong.
this is what i know ... mousavi had thousands of monitors at various election polls and to this day no official complaint has been filed to the election board ... mousavi was also given the opportunity to broadcast on national tv any proof he has of election irregularities - again - he has chosen not to do so ..
again - i think you are reading something that doesn't exist ... the reality is i don't see a whole heck of a lot of difference between mousavi and ahmandijad ... although mousavi is considered more friendly to the west - he's still a hard liner in many respects - it is the only reason why they let the guy run ...
Polaris..the factor your leaving out that the regime has no problem telling people if you object, your family will disappear. Im not making this stuff up, this is an incredibly ruthless regime. Rigging an election is like drinking tea for them.
As far as pre election polls go, its funny that people think the cia can overthrow this government but not control what pre-election polls say from an American compny. We have no idea what the cia wants, there so many factors involved Russia, the Arabs, Israel. Its not as simple as it looks.
Here's a very interesting report by Chatam House, which compares the results from the 2005 elections with the 2009 ones: http://www.chathamhouse.org.uk/files/14 ... on0609.pdf T
Also there's this site www.fivethirtyeight.com were they've been analyzing the available data (you have to like numbers, statistics and econometrics to enter frequently. However, Nate Silver made extremely accurate predictions for the 2008 elections) :
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/06/ ... ddity.html
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/06/ ... -ever.html
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/06/ ... logic.html
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/06/ ... ponse.html
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/06/ ... votes.html
This is not conclusive evidence, just food for thought...
Open - I hear ya - I would never list Iran as a beacon of political freedoms ... based on my limited readings and friends who are Iranian - i find it utterly tragic that the country has been controlled by a religious regime ... I would love to see Iran more open but my personal wishes cannot supercede those of the people who live there now ... all I am saying is that if there is fraud - bring forth the evidence and have it investigated ...
in addition - in order for this change to occur ... it has to happen at a much higher level - mousavi is not the one to bring about that change ...
caterina - keep us posted with what you have found ... today i have heard from two different "experts" on the election - both of whom are iranian who live abroad ... one says the results are fishy while the other guy seems to have an answer for all the so called anomalies ... in any case - the issue here (which i've stated in previous posts) is whether there was fraud ...
that's the bottom line now
Worry not Lien, I'll keep you posted. I'm a data freak, sad but true. There's also an investigation carried out by Walter Mebane, from Michigan Uni., which should be very professional. They have one of the best departments of statistic analysis. http://www-personal.umich.edu/~wmebane/ ... un2009.pdf
Most important, however, the images I've seen from Iran are extremely disturbing and HHRR violations really bother me...
Good point but if most of the people really wanted change you'd think they would vote for the most moderate of the candidates presented to them.