Iran's Ex-Foreign Minister Yazdi: It's A Coup

It's Saturday afternoon in Tehran, and the streets are generally quiet. But the aftermath of Iran's rigged election, in which radical-right President Ahmadinejad and his paramilitary backers were kept in office, has left Iran's capital steeped in anger, despair, and bitterness.

Last night, after the polls closed, heavily armed troops from the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps were in evidence in the streets. In one area of north Tehran, where backers of opposition challenger and reformist ex-Prime Minister Mousavi are concentrated, I saw a convoy of at least fifteen military vehicles filled with armed guards idling along the side of the road. The street in front of the Interior Ministry, where votes are counted, is blocked and heavily guarded after rumors that Mousavi supporters might gather there to protest the election count.

Mousavi himself has pledged to fight the verdict, using words like "tyranny" and adding, "I will not surrender to this dangerous charade."

To get some perspective on the crisis, today I went to see Ibrahim Yazdi, a leading Iranian dissident and Iran's foreign minister in the early days of Islamic republic. Here is the text of the interview:

What is your reaction to the results of the election?

Many of us believe that the election was rigged. Not only Mousavi. We don't have any doubt. And as far as we are concerned, it is not legitimate.

There were many, many irregularities. They did not permit the candidates to supervise the election or the counting of the ballots at the polling places. The minister of the interior announced that he would oversee the final count in his office, at the ministry, with only two aides present.

In previous elections, they announced the results in each district, so people could follow up and make a judgment about the validity of the figures. In 2005, there were problems: in one district there were about 100,000 eligible voters, and they announced a total vote of 150,000. This time they didn't even release information about each particular district.

In all, there were about 45,000 polling places. There were 14,000 mobile ones, that can move from place to place. Many of us protested that. Originally, these mobile polling places were supposed to be used in hospitals and so on. This time, they were used in police stations, army bases, and various military compounds. When it comes to the military compounds and so on, if even 500 extra votes were put into each of the 14,000 boxes, that is seven million votes.

Mousavi and Karroubi had earlier established a joint committee to protect the peoples' votes. Many young people volunteered to work on that committee. But the authorities didn't let it happen. Last night [that is, election night] the security forces closed down that committee. There is no way, independent of the government and the Guardian Council, to verify the results.

I've heard people say that President Ahmadinejad is gathering so much power that he might be able to use the Revolutionary Guard and his other allies to make a coup d'etat against the state.

A coup d'etat? They've already made one! They've created a dictatorship, in fact. Do you know that last night the security forces occupied the offices of many newspapers, to make sure that their reporting on the election was favorable? They changed many headlines. They fixed the election.

The Guards are taking over everything, including many economic institutions. The ministry of the interior is increasing its control in all the provinces.

We have information that Ahmadinejad is thinking about changing the Constitution to allow the president to serve more than two terms, to make his presidency more or less permanent.

Of course, there are strong voices in the establishment that will challenge him. It is not clear that he and the Sepah (the Revolutionary Guard) will be strong enough to overcome them. But there will be clashes over this.

Where does the Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, stand in regard to this?

The problem is that there is concern about the relationship between the Leader and the Guards. To what extent can the Leader control or moderate the Guards? This is a difficult question.

After the last election [2005], after Ahmadinejad was first elected, there were many questions raised about Ahmadinejad's effort to isolate the Leader. We talked openly about this. This time, in preparation for the vote, they isolated him even further. For instance, in years past [former President] Ali Akbar Hashemi-Rafsanjani was influential, perhaps even more influential than the leader. Now, with the slogans being used at Ahmadinejad's rallies, things like "Death to Hashemi!", they have created a deep rift. Khamenei has also lost the support of many high-ranking members of the clergy.

Many old comrades of the [1979] revolution don't trust Ahmadinejad. It is only the Sepah that supports him.

And what do you mean by "isolating" the Leader?

By monitoring and controlling the flow of information to him. Unfortunately, God will not reveal information to him directly. Where does he get his information, his data? The system works in such a way that information is very powerful. And Ahmadinejad controls the ministry of the interior, the ministry of information, the ministry of intelligence.

What do you think will happen now? So much energy was devoted to support for Mousavi, and so much hope was created. Do you think it will result in a crisis?

Certainly, we are concerned about spontaneous reactions. Iran's youth has been engaged and mobilized. Around the country, there have already been some violent clashes.

We do not agree with violence, because violence will only give the Right an excuse to suppress the opposition.

Certainly, the gap inside Iran, politically, will be widened. Our main concern is how to keep the enthusiasm that was created for the election alive, in order to monitor and constrain the power of the government. The only way to counter it is the power of the people. We need to organize them.

In this we have an experience to guide us. During the era of the Shah, there was only one moment in which the power of the people was mobilized against the Shah and to support changes in the Constitution, and that was during the era of [Prime Minister] Mossadegh. [Mossadegh was ousted in the 1953 coup organized by the CIA and British intelligence.] In that era, there was a very powerful political movement inside the country that checked the power of the Shah. Today we have to do the same. We are nor after subversion. We do not want to change the Constitution. We do want to create a viable political force that can exert its influence.

Comments (123)

1. Thank you for the on-the-street reporting from Iran.

   A sad day indeed.

   Now I await the neo-cons excuses for the vote stealing, as we know no such thing occurs. If it can't happen in Ohio, it can't happen in Iran.

   Posted by crabwalk at 06/13/2009 @ 10:09am

2. It's rather enlightening that the "left" in Iran, is trying "to monitor and constrain the power of the government" while our own Left, is doing its best to expand and deepen the power of the American gubberment....

   I've been cynical of the American Left being labeled "Liberals".....as they are today, most certainly the least `liberal' of any segment in society today....having Imus fired for blurted words while nary a peep for scripted jokes demeaning women with the only difference being political ideology.....

   Oh well, bait-n-switch is what the most devious have always practiced.....and the American Left, headed by Magic....are so very, very good at this!

   Posted by Happy at 06/13/2009 @ 10:25am

3. I fail to see the shock at rigged elections. Iran has learned from the US ever since 2000 that "elections' are a charade to make the sheeple pretend there is democracy. That's why Souter left in disgust as soon as the Democrats "won" in 2008. The US as role model also teaches the world that any "democracy" can dismiss habeus corpus and still torture and rendition with impunity while still declaring we never torture. And we still have the effrontery to lecture the world. No wonder China is reconsidering its investment in the US. We even have junior Congressmen to tell China so.

   Posted by mystic at 06/13/2009 @ 10:48am

4. if this election was rigged, Dreyfuss is going to have to do much better than what is being presented here

   one opposition figure interviewed?

   so far, it's pretty thin gruel

   so, a little more digging, please, especially given that Dreyfuss didn't come across very credibly in his black and white characterizations of the supporters of the two candidates, especially with his anxiety ridden portrayal of Ahmanijedad's <i>lumpenproletriat</i> backers, with nothing more frightening than the poor participating in politics, unless it is the poor of a Middle Eastern country

   but, with that said, evidence trumps bias, so keeping looking for it, and see what turns up

   and, don't dismiss the possibility that the middle and upper middle classes sadly remain separated from the broad base of lower middle income Iranians because of their support for neoliberal economic policies, and that the election was, as past ones have been, determined by this

   that is one of the real tragedies of Iran, the failure of the middle class to acknowledge the economic needs of the lower class ones in its political program

   Posted by RichardEstes at 06/13/2009 @ 10:53am

5. I guess the other post by Dreyfuss that was similar to this one just disappeared...

   Posted by chaoszen at 06/13/2009 @ 10:54am

6. Well anyway, It must have got shuffled around.

   Let's face it the Iranian Presidential position is just a puppet of the Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Who would never allow a more moderate president like Mousavi. Likely the election results were simply switched. That's the easiest way to do it.

   The elections were held only to mollify the people and give Iran the veneer of legitimacy to the outside world, and will now allow them to say they have a "mandate" from the people. The population of Iran is mostly people under 35 who turned out in great numbers to vote for change. They did not get it. But Hope Runs Eternal, as they say.

   The protests that are going on now were probably expected. No doubt organizers will be rounded up and either jailed or murdered. Average protesters will be beaten and threatened. The protests will end and the rest will be business as usual.

   It's not that much different here really if you replace the power of the Ayatollah in Iran with the power of Corporations here at home. Same thing, religious extremism there and capitalist extremism here.

   Most of the people in Iran are just decent people who want to live their lives in peace like most of us do.

   And then you have the assholes who post here like Happ and Benchrest who just want to toss bombs at them and kill people who are basically just like them.

   Isn't life wonderful!

   Posted by chaoszen at 06/13/2009 @ 10:12am | ignore this person | warn this person

   Posted by chaoszen at 06/13/2009 @ 11:01am

7. This was indeed defraud. At least 70% were for Moosavi. Death to Islamic Republic. Pity! I invited so many to voting! Damn me, God! A valley is made between us and the IRI regime. We will be beaten and killed...maybe...But we will not surrender to that baboon, Ahmadinejad. Now, I am waiting for Moosavi's verdict. Once I hear his order, I'll commute to Tehran and protest.

   Posted by Persian at 06/13/2009 @ 11:12am

8. I realized after reading this article that although they seem very dissimilar, Obama and Ahmadinejad are essentially cut from the same bolt of cloth.

   It's interesting that to conservatives in America, you could substitute 'Obama' for 'Ahmadinejad', and the 'United States' for 'Iran' in much of this article, and it would seem fairly accurate to us.

   Keep it in your word processor, Dreyfuss. You might be able to edit the article and sell it again in a few years.

   Posted by Elcobar at 06/13/2009 @ 11:12am

9. Without implying any sympathy for the regime in Iran,this is what happens when you get too deeply involved with political movements in societies not at all like our own. While taken by the urban, educated, reasonably or really well off and their political aspirations, Dreyfuss could never find any one who could explain support for Ahmadinejad. Not among the urban working class or rural small land owners and tenants. Never discussed was the economic and social stratification in Iran, those who have benefitted and those who have been left behind and how this could affect political allegiances.

   There is something patronizing about his identification with a "middle class" which may not be all that representative of Iran's social and economic order. Amazing the only example of popular mobilization he could come with was during the time of Mossadegh, and no reference to the run up to the overthrow of the Shah finally and for good.

   Suspect Iran's evolution will depend on their own history and the "West" may not provide a realistic template for Iran any more than it has for China, Russia, or much of South America. Do wish progressives here understood how important the democratizing movements in South America really are. Particularly because the agent of change has depended more often than not on grass roots organizing of indigenous, rural and urban poor.

   In the meantime maybe we should be more involved with our own democratic difficulties. We are still missing a Senator from Minnesota.

   Charlie M.

   Posted by cmsandia at 06/13/2009 @ 11:50am

10. Thanks, if even for the bad news. Your piece reads like it could have been written here in early 2000, after Bush and his holy minions stole the election. I guess it just goes to show that reichwingers everywhere are the same.

    Posted by DejaVu at 06/13/2009 @ 11:59am

11. By the way, I meant 2001 in my last post. Sorry, it was a long night.

    Posted by DejaVu at 06/13/2009 @ 12:04pm

12. The Supreme Leader is the only person who can decide to pursue a more conciliary policy toward the United States. Without his assent to this (or any other change in policy), it doesn't really matter who is President. Remember too that other Iranian power centers, like the Expediency Council and the Council of Guardians, are not subject to the limited authority of the President. The possibility of Mr. Mousavi's election was wishful thinking on our part - and on the part of his supporters.

    Posted by malvern41 at 06/13/2009 @ 12:26pm

13. Did I accidentally click on the New York Times site? This hysterical piece from Dreyfuss is worse than the tripe coming out of Israel. It shows an ignorance ofthe Iranian political reality and accepts the liberal bourgeois opposition's word as gospel. I am not saying that there was not some electoral fraud (after all, what election doesn't have some of that?), but Dreyfuss provides no proof of any such thing. instead, he hysterically screams stolen election and denies any validity to the Iranian reality represented by Ahmadinejad--who is a politician given to strident rhetoric but who can do very little about that rhetoric. As for those troops waiting around in case of a riot--I've seen that in the US too many times to remember. It's standard operating procedure for governments. As for the candidates--one promised personal liberties to people with food on their tables and the other promised food on the tables of those who have very little food at all. It's just like the French revolution--the bourgeoisie wanted freedom to speak, write and make money, while the poor just wanted bread.

    Posted by ronj at 06/13/2009 @ 12:38pm

14. The Dreyfuss piece lacks substance and reflects bias. It reads like the wishful thinking of the western press that longed for an Ahmadinejad defeat. Can you imagine a foreigner reporting on a U.S. Presidential election and never getting out of New York City?

    Posted by sidneyfalco at 06/13/2009 @ 12:46pm

15. It is too early to call this a "coup." Ahmadenijad is known to have wide support in the rural, poor areas and Tehran's working class districts. It would be interesting to see if there were any CIA links through front groups in Mousavi's campaign or the upper class youth movement, as are known to exist with upper class opposition movements in Venezuela and Bolivia.

    Posted by Communard115 at 06/13/2009 @ 1:09pm

16. This was indeed sad news to read. Unless some miracle occurs, Israel will now have it's pretext for attacking Iran. The boogie man Ahmadinejad and those Iranian Revolutionary Guards have pulled off a coup! I can now hear the drum beat of war...he is a madman, a dictator and he has nuclear weapons in his pockets. And, so it will go but first the American public will need to be 'informed and educated' by our corporate media. Yes, you can be assured the NY Times will do its duty as it has always done. We will be sold that Israel had to 'defend' itself and there will be a tremendous slaughter. It will be sold like one of our own little wars…'would you like some ketchup with your order?'

    Posted by dgongor2 at 06/13/2009 @ 1:18pm

17. I guess Dreyfuss needs to be a little more careful

    Dreyfuss, Tuesday, 6/9/09:

    [. . . . Picture the scene: hours before a rally held at a huge, special indoor prayer auditorium in downtown Tehran, tens of thousands of Ahmadinejad supporters began gathering for a pre-election rally. It's hot, sweaty, and dusty, and a ear-splitting sound system is playing martial music as thug-like young men chant slogans. As the crowd gathers, various speakers whip up a frenzy of anger, xenophobia, and religious ecstasy. Appeals are made about the need to honor the suffering of various, long-dead holy men of Islam, and speakers denounce the president's opponents.

    Dark conspiracies are hinted at. "The buses and subways have been shut down! They don't want you here! It's the work of Hashemi Rafsanjani!" Rafsanjani, a former president and wheeler-dealer, is supporting Mousavi, and Rafsanjani's son runs the Tehran metro system. In fact, no shutdown has happened. It's a lie, but the crowd roars: "Death to Hashemi!" You can see the hatred in their eyes.]

    con't

    Posted by RichardEstes at 06/13/2009 @ 1:22pm

18. (con't)

    Now, Reuters, 6/13/09:

    [Hundreds of the former prime minister's backers later gathered in side streets near Vanak, chanting anti-Ahmadinejad slogans and bringing traffic to a standstill. "We are Iranians too," and "Mousavi is our president," they shouted.

    The protests were a first reaction by Mousavi's supporters, who thronged the streets of Tehran nightly in the run-up to Friday's vote, to Ahmadinejad's victory.

    Some demonstrators set rubbish bins on fire and taunted riot police. Others threw stones at them. Police charged at the protesters who then fled, only to return shortly afterwards.

    "The election was corrupt. If Ahmadinejad had won where are his supporters? How come they are not celebrating? said Reza, 25. "Most people think Mousavi won the election," said another young man, Saman. They gave only their first names.

    Clashes between police and Mousavi supporters also took place in other areas of the capital, witnesses said. Reuters photographs showed a burning bus in downtown Tehran, as well as motorbikes on fire. Elsewhere in Tehran, tires were set ablaze, witnesses said.]

    But, of course, reformist middle class people who participate in politics can't be fascists, only proletarians and lumpenproletarians, as Dreyfuss explained on Tuesday are capable of that. Just imagine if Ahmanijedad's supporters were doing this, just imagine what Dreyfuss would be saying, we'd be treated to hysterical alarms that the brown and blue shirts were on the move.

    I respect much of Dreyfuss's work, but these posts are awful. They are so bad that we may eventually discover that there was extensive fraud, but his posts are so blatantly biased that they discredit the notion.

    Posted by RichardEstes at 06/13/2009 @ 1:27pm

19. DREYFUSS,

    What happened to "international election observers" in Iran?

    Were there any?

    You would think Ahmadinejad would have welcomed such observers to claim international legitimacy of the election results.

    Posted by Metteyya at 06/13/2009 @ 1:27pm

20. How dare Dreyfuss criticize the KKK! What you upper class liberals with your freedom of speech and box socials won't understand is that we poor white southerners don't have time for all that, we're trying to put some vittles on the table, and we don't need some kike from New York City who don't know shit from shinola to fly in here and tell us how to live.

    Posted by gangpapist at 06/13/2009 @ 1:27pm

21. One can only hope that the situation in Iran resolves in such a way as to minimize the violence and outrage amongst the people there. There is a real potential for loss of life. As far as the election itself is concerned, M.A. regardless of whether or not the election was rigged now has a very heavy burden - governing with a challenged mandate, as an internationally unpopular figure. This is a man who needs to make some friends. Hopefully he'll do that rather than go the route of being a hated strongman.

    Posted by syfriendly at 06/13/2009 @ 1:52pm

22. Ahmanijedad is president at the pleasure of the mullas. Of course the count was rigged - see who is doing the counting. As Stalin said, "it's not who votes that counts, it's who counts the vote".

    Posted by pyeatte at 06/13/2009 @ 1:57pm

23. Whatever the outcome of the election in Iran, one way or the other, nothing would dissaude Israel from attacking Iran, because it really its expansion to the Greater Israel that its hegemonic and demonic avarice dictates, not a peaceful nation that has never attacked another in over 300 years. JFK understood well that if he gave Israel the bomb which Ben Gurion was apoplectically demanding, the imbalance of power in the Middle East would open a Pandora's box. It is no surprise to know JFK died because of that.

    Posted by mystic at 06/13/2009 @ 2:04pm

24. Dreyfuss which side on you on boy?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k34COolbdmY

    Posted by Anti-imperialist at 06/13/2009 @ 2:12pm

25. Yazdi sounds like he's got an agenda... Kind of Chalabi-esque... We have no independent polling data... the idea that anyone can say or sure that two-thirds were for Mousavi is absurd.

    Western commentators and anti-Ahmandinejad "analysts" and expatriates might wish it weren't so, but it's pretty bold to call this thing stolen and pretty ignorant to assume no Iranians would vote for Ahmandinejad...

    Still, it's pretty clear something Florida 2000-esque is up with these results. But most of these assertions are unsubstantiated.

    And the idea of Ahmandinejad launching a coup? Give me a break. Sure, the Ayatollahs are trying to shut out the reformists, and every candidate was a reformist but him. But if he dares challenge them in any way they will smack him back into line.

    Talk of a coup is irresponsible speculation. Frankly, it's beneath you.

    Posted by tpillow at 06/13/2009 @ 2:12pm

26. This time I can prove:

    I TOLD YOU SO!!

    What did you all expect anyway ?????

    Posted by bleedingheart at 06/13/2009 @ 2:25pm

27. a response:

    http://theactivist.org/blog/ahmadinejad-triumphs

    Posted by bhaskar at 06/13/2009 @ 2:30pm

28. Oh well, bait-n-switch is what the most devious have always practiced.....and the American Left, headed by Magic....are so very, very good at this!

    Posted by Happy at 06/13/2009 @ 10:25am

    While the REST of us find it semi-humorous that our neocon friends' most formidable opponent is a not-very-often-funny and probably-over-the-hill COMEDIAN. Not an office holder, not an elected official, not a university professor, a COMEDIAN.

    Posted by schnellerheinz at 06/13/2009 @ 2:49pm

29. Posted by schnellerheinz at 06/13/2009 @ 2:49pm

    Which party is it that is verging on putting a comedian in office? Would one rather have a magician, good at illusions and tricks as Obama has proven to be, or a comedian as a leader/spokesperson?

    Posted by Happy at 06/13/2009 @ 2:53pm

30. Hey, hey, if B-actors can be Prez, I'm sure we've got room for a comedian officeholder of some type.

    Doesn't change the fact that Letterman is not such an official.

    Posted by schnellerheinz at 06/13/2009 @ 2:55pm

31. And congratulations to the Pittsburgh Penguins, Stanley Cup 2009 champs.

    Well done.

    Posted by schnellerheinz at 06/13/2009 @ 2:56pm

32. Hey, schnellerheinz....

    How do you like the bait-n-swith, or illusions if you will, of stopping Renditions? Out of Iraq? Out of Afghanistan? Gitmo closed? No tax increase for 95% of Americans? Bi-partisanship or post-partisanship (take your pick)? Era of Fiscal Responsibility? "I've always been a Christian"? Chrsyler/GM bailouts? Citi/AIG bailouts? NAFTA renegotiations? EFCA?

    Posted by Happy at 06/13/2009 @ 2:59pm

33. Posted by Happy at 06/13/2009 @ 2:59pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    Kinda early in the game for me, Happ.

    A little early in the game.

    Posted by schnellerheinz at 06/13/2009 @ 3:04pm

34. A little early in the game.

    Posted by schnellerheinz at 06/13/2009 @ 3:04pm

    Is that the attitude when our soldiers are dying for no big reason that you believe in? Or all that bi-partisanship, bringing the American people together `feel good' stuff that got Magic elected?

    Posted by Happy at 06/13/2009 @ 3:29pm

35. I actually live in Tehran and I've been to different parts of the city. There was an overwhelming momentum for mousavi everywhere. Contrary to what some of the readers here have sujested mousavi's vote was not limited to the well-offs and the elites. He was running mostly on economic platform and his performance during the war was widely popular with lower income classes. I'm not suggesting that those people did not vote for ahmadinejad but one should also bare in mind that the population in the cities are double the size of that in the rural areas. Mr Dreyfuss account is completely consistent with what I have seen in the big cities although some people might find it biased on this website.

    Posted by tehrani at 06/13/2009 @ 4:14pm

36. Get off of the box, Hap.

    Posted by ficheye at 06/13/2009 @ 4:22pm

37. Posted by schnellerheinz at 06/13/2009 @ 2:49pm

    Which party is it that is verging on putting a comedian in office? Would one rather have a magician, good at illusions and tricks as Obama has proven to be, or a comedian as a leader/spokesperson?

    Posted by Happy at 06/13/2009 @ 2:53pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    The one called Demoncrats that found over 3,000 DEAD people to vote for Franken! Such funny guys!

    Posted by BigPasture at 06/13/2009 @ 4:33pm

38. Posted by Anti-imperialist at 06/13/2009 @ 2:12pm |

    This would seem a question better directed to the troops sitting on the side of the road for Ahmadinejad, than Mr. Dreyfuss.

    Posted by snowball666 at 06/13/2009 @ 4:37pm

39. This fraud means alot of turmaiol within Iran in the next term. Pressures will ratchet up on a variety of fronts.

    But, HERE, on multiplke issues, Obama's political positions are being shown to dependon illusion and wishful thinking. I am talking about items like:

    the collision of his poorly-thought-out health care reform up against reality in things like wanting to cut reimbursements with doctors and hospitals that are already too low. The coalition slplitting of his quest for Afghan freedom. The rebellion on "gay marriage" issues. Reaction to the "Bailout State" when some of the banks and the car companies should have been flushed away. Opposition to heavy taxes against industrial states to pay for questionawble global-warming palliatives.

    John D. Froelich

    Smooth talking can only get you so far, and the STRUCTURE of events looks alot like those for Carter.

    Good chance of a strong populist Republican surge in 2010 and 2012. The underlying mood is similar to that of the election returns across Europe.

    Posted by balataf at 06/13/2009 @ 5:34pm

40. or a comedian as a leader/spokesperson?

    Posted by BigPasture at 06/13/2009 @ 4:33pm

    bedtime for bonzoids?

    Posted by frosty zoom at 06/13/2009 @ 6:20pm

41. Obviously the "establishment" in Iran did not want the running narrative around the world to be that Obama had any effect on their populace so they rigged the election results to counter that perception. But time will tell if the so called Supreme Leader, Ahmadinejad, etc., can quell the growing unrest within their own country as easily, especially amongst younger Iranians.

    Posted by Eyzwidopn at 06/13/2009 @ 6:45pm

42. tehrani at 06/13/2009 @ 4:14pm

    Don't let the bias of this site inhibit you. Tell us what you see, what is going on.

    For a more conservative and less blinkered site, relate your observations here: http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/category/contentions

    Posted by Hugo_Pirovano at 06/13/2009 @ 7:50pm

43. I wonder why half the commenters on here seem to think an American reporter can move freely around Iran and investigate allegations of election fraud by that repressive government all he likes. Honestly I'm surprised he hasn't been arrested yet.

    And it really isn't up to Khamenei what Iran does. Whoever the most powerful military commands decide to support becomes the real leader over there. If they decide to isolate and misinform Khamenei as this article suggests, then his real power is minimized.

    Posted by zmann at 06/13/2009 @ 8:33pm

44. Now I await the neo-cons excuses for the vote stealing, as we know no such thing occurs.

    Posted by crabwalk at 06/13/2009 @ 10:09am

    Seeing you ask all the easy questions Crabs here's something to stick in your pipe. Forget any vote rigging. Pre-election polls simply weren't good enough in Iran to make that call.

    Despite the sense lefties have that the working and the peasant classes are their natural constituencies, places where voting is compulsory tell us otherwise.

    Why do those classes not respond to the left's promise of more of the economic cake or why Ahmadinejad's offer of more goodies for poorer Iranians was not neccessary to get that demographic's vote?

    My suggestion is a very simple one. The peasants and their working class brothers and sisters are overwhelmingly socially and religiously conservative. Thus a candidate that even had the smell of liberal about him, was enough to send them flying into Ahmadinejad's arms.

    (You American liberals better not support compulsory voting. Not unless you want permanent conservative governments).

    Posted by lrjones4 at 06/13/2009 @ 9:05pm

45. Posted by lrjones4 at 06/13/2009 @ 9:05pm |

    Can Ahmadinejad see Russia from HIS house too?

    Posted by snowball666 at 06/13/2009 @ 9:35pm

46. (You American liberals better not support compulsory voting. Not unless you want permanent conservative governments).Posted by lrjones4 at 06/13/2009 @ 9:05pm

    Dhuh? When's the last time you read about the Repub party organizing a comprehensive national voter registration campaign? The repubs count on LIMITING/SUPPRESSING the vote.

    Posted by Sorelish at 06/13/2009 @ 10:07pm

47. Can Ahmadinejad see Russia from HIS house too?

    Posted by snowball666 at 06/13/2009 @ 9:35pm

    Fair suck of the sauce bottle mate (courtesy of PM Krudd trying to be a real Aussie ocker on TV last week).

    I mean which one is better on the eyes? Well....yeah I see the likely ambivalence....I am on a liberal site but I know which one I'd prefer from a visual perspective. Bugger (courtesy of our PM talking dinkum Aussie to our troops in Afghanistan recently) the politics.

    Posted by lrjones4 at 06/13/2009 @ 10:11pm

48. Posted by Eyzwidopn at 06/13/2009 @ 6:45pm

    I think things sometimes happen in foreign countries that don't have everything to do with whoever is potus.

    Posted by gangpapist at 06/13/2009 @ 10:24pm

49. Dhuh? When's the last time you read about the Repub party organizing a comprehensive national voter registration campaign? The repubs count on LIMITING/SUPPRESSING the vote.

    Posted by Sorelish at 06/13/2009 @ 10:07pm

    Well let me tell you they aren't too bright. Australia which has had compulsory voting, almost since federation aka the start of the country in 1901, just voted out a conservative government after it was elected for four consecutive terms (about 12 years as the PM can call the election any time he pleases after 18 months- nominal 3 year terms). The longest serving PM, Robert Menzies, was a conservative as is Howard, GW's "Man of Steel" and the second longest serving PM in our history.

    Our Lefty PM, Kevin Rudd, got in by claiming, pre-election that he was a Howard clone, economically,socially and any other way that he though might appeal to the vital working and peasant classes. Who I'm pretty sure aren't into the left's progressive social mores and agenda.

    Posted by lrjones4 at 06/13/2009 @ 10:27pm

50. Good chance of a strong populist Republican surge in 2010 and 2012. The underlying mood is similar to that of the election returns across Europe.

    Posted by balataf at 06/13/2009 @ 5:34pm

    Which country are you referring to that is rejecting its universal healthcare?

    Posted by winyahn at 06/13/2009 @ 10:55pm

51. (You American liberals better not support compulsory voting. Not unless you want permanent conservative governments).

    Posted by lrjones4 at 06/13/2009 @ 9:05pm

    Interesting point. LR, is there any conservative movement (with substantial support of the public) to increase privatization in healthcare sector in Austria?

    Posted by winyahn at 06/13/2009 @ 11:02pm

52. Interesting point. LR, is there any conservative movement (with substantial support of the public) to increase privatization in healthcare sector in Austria?

    Posted by winyahn at 06/13/2009 @ 11:02pm

    Australia? No. If you want it Medicare will cover most of your hospital expenses. Costs each salary and wages earner 1.5% of their gross income, deducted by employer along with tax , each week or month for those who get paid once a month. Once one's earnings are over $50,000 per year each taxpayer has to pay an extra 1% levy on the gross salary. eg. Those on $50,001 pay $500 per year extra.

    There about about 5 million in a work force of about 11 million who take out private health cover and for their trouble the government gives them back 30% of the costs when they file their annual tax return.

    The latest ABS survey confirmed that more than 1 million people on household incomes less than $26,000 per annum have private health insurance.

    • 2.4 million on household incomes less than $48,000 are privately insured.

    • Almost half of the insured population have gross household incomes less than $70,000. So nearly 4.3 million people with hospital cover earn less than average weekly earnings.

    (The reason for this is that Public Health care means waiting years for elective surgery and not getting a doctor of your choice etc.)

    This is from government Health and Aging Dept:

    "Why is the Government encouraging people to take out private health insurance?"

    "Prior to Government reforms such as the 30% Rebate and Lifetime Health Cover, the number of Australians with private health insurance was falling. This decline in membership numbers was creating unsustainable pressure on the public health system by substantially increasing Medicare costs."

    Posted by lrjones4 at 06/14/2009 @ 12:11am

53. "The Government is committed to easing the burden on Medicare by striking a better balance between the private and public sectors, ensuring that Australians have a choice in their health care through a viable private health industry operating alongside a high quality public system with universal access."

    "Why do I have to pay the Medicare Levy when I have private health insurance?"

    "The Government supports universal access by all Australians to public health services under Medicare, irrespective of private health insurance status. People with private insurance can therefore choose to use Medicare or private health services depending upon their particular health needs."

    "In addition, privately insured patients using private services still draw substantially upon Medicare as well as health funds. For example, Medicare provides a number of Commonwealth funded health benefits such as the 75% Medical Benefits Schedule (MBS) rebate on in-hospital medical services (for people with private health insurance), the 85% (MBS) rebate on out-of-hospital medical services (e.g. GP visits) and the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (which subsidises the costs of pharmaceuticals). On the other hand, health fund benefits cover 25% of the MBS fee for in-hospital medical services."

    "Health fund benefits may also not cover the total cost of hospital treatment, which in turn can result in an out-of-pocket expense. This out-of-pocket expense is referred to as the medical gap."

    "To remove the requirement that privately insured patients pay the Medicare Levy would therefore be inequitable. "

    Some of the joys of free Medicare for all.

    Posted by lrjones4 at 06/14/2009 @ 12:13am

54. I would hope to continue to hear from those on the ground or who have contact with people on the ground in Iran. Not the really trivial bickering on partisan politics.

    So far, identical vote counts are being reported as coming out of districts- a statistical impossibility-, vote watchers were shut down, troops stormed over areas of support for Mousavi. And most of the people posting here want to make this a really stupid argumnent on our politics? (Obama = Ahmadinejad? Wow, give me a break.)

    This is potentially a world historic moment and we need to know what is really happening. Spare us all the idiocy.

    Posted by larrys at 06/14/2009 @ 01:45am

55. I think this passage from Al Jazeera's latest reporting explains some of what has happened:

    Mehran Kamrava, director of the centre for international and regional studies at Georgetown University's campus in Qatar, cautioned that the displays of support for Mousavi were not necessarily an indication of fraud.

    "The Western media has been talking to people in north Tehran, who tend to vote overwhelmingly against Ahmadinejad," he told Al Jazeera.

    "But let's not forget that many of the urban Iranians have priorities and proclivities that are not necessarily reflected in other areas of the main cities, and those people could easily have voted for Ahmadinejad.

    "Iranian politics have proved themselves to be notoriously unpredictable and this could be one of those instances of unpredictability."

    There is evidence of manipulation, but I also think we dismiss Iran's working class and poor masses a little easily, the same as we do when it comes to Latin America.

    Posted by Communard115 at 06/14/2009 @ 01:50am

56. The idea that Ahmadinejad is somehow scheming to overthrow or marginalize Khamenei doesn't hold water. The easy explanation for the election is that Ahmadinejad won because Khamenei wanted him to. If any moderate/pragmatist clerics like Rafsanjani want to stand up for electoral fairness in the name of getting rid of Ahmadinejad, they'll have to muster some forces against the Supreme Leader too. Not impossible, but it could get ugly.

    Posted by scottbp at 06/14/2009 @ 02:16am

57. The Iranian people have spoken: Ahmadinedjad is winning and winning big, indeed. Now all of a sudden some pundits and critics of the Iran have the nerve to say that the election was rigged or stolen or illegitimate. It seems that those so-called experts habe been disappointed in the fact that the Iranian people could defy the former's whimsical analyses that Moussavi is the new voice of reform and therefore will defeat Ahmadinedjad. Not so fast! The Iranians know better that to change their leadership means to change the direction of their country in the face of global challenges. The Iranians have maintained their resolve by giving 4 more years to the President who has been able to protect their country from their enemy's onslaughts and at the same time maintain the dignity as a sovereign country.

    Congratulations to the Iranian people!!

    Posted by jakartaman at 06/14/2009 @ 03:14am

58. Mousavi, it seems from the following and his recently avowed intention of pursuing Iran's nuclear program, is hardly any more moderate than Ahmadinejad:

    Foreign Policies (of Mousavi)

    Back at the time when Mousavi was the Prime Minister -- when this office existed as the actual head of the cabinet in the 1980s - under whose direction Islamic Revolutionary Guards entered Lebanon in huge numbers and laid the framework for today's Lebanese Hezbollah and established the IRI's hold on Lebanon, for the purpose of militarily engaging and destroying Israel.

    In 1981 in the magazine Payameh Enghelab Mousavi stated that "We are ready to participate within an armed force to fight Israel… We have repeatedly announced that we are ready to have an actual, real and military presence in Southern Lebanon and on the borders of the occupied Palestinian lands…we believe that with the support of the popular forces in Lebanon we shall be able to gradually find effective and powerful bases in the area for fighting Israel …we believe if the flow of oil in Muslim Lands is in the hands of Muslims and if the ideology of Islam controls the opening or closing of the oil valves we shall be able to bring the World Arrogance to its knees, to strike Israel and to destroy it."[17]

    Now running for the elections, Mousavi has addressed activating foreign policy to boost national interest by reducing tensions with other nations. This includes negotiating with U.S. President Barack Obama if "his actions are in keeping with his words".[12] His other notable assertions were when he called Ahmadinejad's approach to the issue of Holocaust a wrong one. Mousavi condemned the killing of Jews in the Holocaust. In response Ahmadinejad revealed Mousavi's own involvement with previous anti-Israeli movements.[15]

    Posted by lrjones4 at 06/14/2009 @ 03:33am

59. Most of you have drunk the "reformist" Kool Ade it seems. The so-called polls (all from the "west") cannot be trusted for reasons mentioned above. You totally discount that Ahmadinejad has broad support of the poor, and broad support nationally in standing up to the would-be occupiers - USA.

    So far this is following the post-election NED/CIA the script used in the Ukraine "orange revolution". But it won't work here. Ahmadinejad won - just as MOST of us thought he WOULD. Why the change of heart now??? Because the obviously slanted "mainstream media", which most of you, quite rightly, usually discount, is crying foul???

    Please don't allow yourselves to be PLAYED. Don't allow yourselves to be "useful idiots" of the western propaganda machine!

    Anyone who has been following Iran for the past decade could have EASILY predicted an Ahmadinejad land slide. My god people, have you all collectively lost perspective and objectivity???

    These events are CLEARLY the work of western agencies in collusion with Mousavi and his cadre of stooges seeking to discredit Ahmadinejad. One can only guess for what pro-Israel/pro-US objectives this smear campaign will be put to use.

    What US actions will be "justified" now?

    Today, sadly, you are being taken for a ride.

    Posted by IlyaKuryakin at 06/14/2009 @ 05:14am

60. Intresting, a spokesman for the JIHADIST empire of Iran! Defenders of Islamic terrorism globally will be so proud. Hezbollah, Hamas, and good friends like Syria will soon be free to kill, kill, kill all in the name of Satans one true religion that rather than prostelizes potential conversts just kills all non-believers and representatives of other religions!

    Is anyone stupid enough to believe that Iran simply wants nuclear energy just to power the nation alternatively? (of yea, I forgot, American and Europeon leftist do) Iran's murderous intentions are only stymied by the richer Saudis, a situation Iran intends to change with nuclear threat and oil money. The truely ignorant do buy into the "western and pro- israel propaganda" rallying point!

    Posted by BigPasture at 06/14/2009 @ 05:46am

61. Well, mister BigPasture, it is ISRAEL and the US who have been waging war in the Middle East, NOT Iran.

    It is ISRAEL who DOES have nukes and a declared "Sampson Option", and it ISRAEL and the US who are making threats.

    ISRAEL is NOT an NPT signatory, Iran IS

    Iran has not attacked ANYONE in Two Hundred and Fifty Years, while Israel have been attacking everyone is sight for the past Sixty Years. It's even attacked the USA - see USS Liberty.

    HAMAS is the Legitimate ELECTED government of Palestine.

    Hezbollah is the only thing preventing ISRAEL from attacking Lebanon again and occupying even more Lebanese territory.

    Iran NEEDS nuclear power so they can EXPORT more oil and gas to make more MONEY.

    I think you need to acquaint yourself with some basic facts BP, before thoughtlessly repeating the MSM's pro-Zionist talking points.

    How embarrassing it must be for you "pro-democracy" types to see your country allied with the most fascist dictatorial states, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Apartheid Israel,etc, rather than with the most peaceful Growing democracy in the region, Iran.

    The doublethink/doublespeak exhibited by both neocons and neoliberals alike is truly Orwellian.

    Posted by IlyaKuryakin at 06/14/2009 @ 06:40am

62. The go-to guy on the Middle East is Juan Cole & he sez "fraud". From SALON:

    "A few thousand Iranian young people demonstrated in Iran on Saturday morning to protest the announcement by that country's Interior Ministry that President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had won a second term by an overwhelming margin of 63 percent. The president's rivals decried ballot fraud and many observers saw the results as a hard-liner coup. If the government really has descended to the level of fixing the presidential elections, it is a sign of deep insecurity and fear of change, as Tehran is challenged by the Obama administration's outreach and by reformist stirrings among youth and women.

    Obama administration officials were privately casting doubt on the announced vote tallies. They pointed out that it was unlikely that Ahmadinejad had defeated his chief opponent, Mir-Hossein Moussavi, by a margin of 57 percent, in Moussavi's own home city of Tabriz. Nor is it plausible, as claimed, that Ahmadinejad won a majority of votes in the capital, Tehran, from which he hails. The final tally also gave only 320,000 votes to the other reformist candidate, Mehdi Karoubi, who had helped force Ahmadinejad into a runoff election when he ran in 2005. It seems odd that he get less than 1 percent of the votes in this round. Karoubi, an ethnic Lur from Iran's west, was even alleged to have done poorly in those provinces.

    The final vote counts alleged for cities and provinces, even more so than the landslide claimed by the incumbent nationally, strongly suggest a last-minute and clumsy fraud. A carefully planned theft of the election would at least have conceded Tabriz to Moussavi and the rural western Iranian villages to Karoubi.

    Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei quickly recognized Ahmadinejad's victory..."

    Posted by PhilMcCrevice at 06/14/2009 @ 07:36am

63. To those people who think whats happening in Iran is westren propoganda I beg you to look at the numbers. Here is a good article about this http://mideast.blogs.time.com/ I must add due to mousavi's revolutionary credentials and his left leaning economic outlook he is more popular in Iran than Khatami in terms of votes.

    Posted by tehrani at 06/14/2009 @ 08:36am

64. And we in America are indignant about this - why?

    2000- Presidential election: "recount" after "recount" with disparate methods, court cases decided by partisans, settled only by SCOTUS decision upholding FL actions as states' rights

    2006 - Oregon- senate: recount after recount with disparate methods until the Democratic candidate "won".

    2008 - Presidential election: OH registering voters listing park benches as addresses. Busloads of "new residents" trucked into jurisdictions to register. ACORN fraud shenanigans including registering Mickey Mouse and football players. Citizen of Indonesia allowed to stand - and win - in violation of the Constitution.

    2008 - MN- Senate: "Recount" after "recount" with disparate methods and standards, votes "found" in car trunks, until the Democratic candidate "won".

    Hey, Iran is just taking a note from our songbook, and their strongarm tactics in arresting dissenters and protesters is what we can expect in our next election cycle, as Barry Soetoro and his Chicago thugs consolidate their own power base, while noting what other countries' dictators do when they refuse to surrender power, and practicing the day to day intimidation and coercion of the private sector.

    Posted by elephant4life at 06/14/2009 @ 08:46am

65. Here is what Robert Fisk, possibly the most knowledgeable western journalist on the Middle East has to say about the Iranian elections:

    "An interval here for lunch with a true and faithful friend of the Islamic Republic, a man I have known for many years who has risked his life and been imprisoned for Iran and who has never lied to me. We dined in an all-Iranian-food restaurant, along with his wife. He has often criticised the regime. A man unafraid. But I must repeat what he said. "The election figures are correct, Robert. Whatever you saw in Tehran, in the cities and in thousands of towns outside, they voted overwhelmingly for Ahmadinejad. Tabriz voted 80 per cent for Ahmadinejad. It was he who opened university courses there for the Azeri people to learn and win degrees in Azeri. In Mashad, the second city of Iran, there was a huge majority for Ahmadinejad after the imam of the great mosque attacked Rafsanjani of the Expediency Council who had started to ally himself with Mousavi. They knew what that meant: they had to vote for Ahmadinejad."

    My guest and I drank dookh, the cool Iranian drinking yoghurt so popular here. The streets of Tehran were a thousand miles away. "You know why so many poorer women voted for Ahmadinejad? There are three million of them who make carpets in their homes. They had no insurance. When Ahmadinejad realised this, he immediately brought in a law to give them full insurance. Ahmadinejad's supporters were very shrewd. They got the people out in huge numbers to vote – and then presented this into their vote for Ahmadinejad."

    Posted by lingum at 06/14/2009 @ 08:52am

66. Is Dreyfuss blindly following the corporate media...or he sometimes makes honest mistakes?

    "....But the aftermath of Iran's rigged election ..."?

    Six days before the election Voice of America's article predicted Ahmadinejad's sound victory over Mousavi in ratio of 2.4 to 1 (in election the win ratio was 1.8 !!)

    Check it out here:

    http://www.payvand.com/news/09/jun/1085.html

    Posted by humanist_2 at 06/14/2009 @ 09:03am

67. This election, like Chavez elections, are a foregone conclusion before voting starts.

    Allah akbahr

    Many thanks to Dreyfuss and the Nation for producing yet another birdcage liner .........zzzzzzzzz

    Best of luck to Israel on their survival or next mission

    Posted by YourJomamma at 06/14/2009 @ 09:57am

68. Best of luck to Israel on their survival or next mission

    Posted by YourJomamma at 06/14/2009 @ 09:57am | ignore this person | warn this person

    JM - in no small part Israel's militant stance against Iran provided fertile ground to cultivate continuing support for Ahmadinejad. Israel using Kurdish guerillas and Baluchistan separatists to foment trouble for Iran, as well as running their own operatives into Iran from Iraq and Afghanistan (with US support) on acknowledged mission to sabotage Iranian nuclear ambitions via assassination and terror.

    Take a look at our country. Hardliners do well with electorate when that electorate feels that their security is at stake. Iranian election results should come as no surprise to anyone.

    Posted by OneVote at 06/14/2009 @ 10:24am

69. Israeli Election Results - The Huffington Post - Hanna Ingber Win - 02/10/09 - Excerpt

    Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and hard-line rival Benjamin Netanyahu both claimed victory Tuesday in Israel's parliamentary election, but official results showed a race so close it could be decided by a third candidate -- a rising power among the hawks.

    Right-wing parties -- including Netanyahu's Likud Party -- appear to have won a clear majority of 65 seats in the 120-seat parliament, which would give Netanyahu the upper hand in forming the next government.

    Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and hard-line rival Benjamin Netanyahu both claimed victory Tuesday in Israel's parliamentary election, but official results showed a race so close it could be decided by a third candidate -- a rising power among the hawks.

    Right-wing parties -- including Netanyahu's Likud Party -- appear to have won a clear majority of 65 seats in the 120-seat parliament, which would give Netanyahu the upper hand in forming the next government.

    However, with 99 percent of the votes counted, Livni's centrist Kadima Party had 28 seats, while Likud had 27. Those results could change by a seat or two -- enough to alter the outcome -- when soldiers' votes are tallied Thursday evening.

    The winner of the election wasn't clear in part because Livni could try to form a coalition with hawkish parties. It appeared ultranationalist Avigdor Lieberman, who based his campaign on denying citizenship to Israeli Arabs he considers disloyal, could single-handedly determine the country's next leader with his decision of whom to join.

    Posted by OneVote at 06/14/2009 @ 10:31am

70. Dhuh? When's the last time you read about the Repub party organizing a comprehensive national voter registration campaign? The repubs count on LIMITING/SUPPRESSING the vote. Posted by Sorelish at 06/13/2009 @ 10:07pm |

    What do you think Op Rescue and the Charisma churches are all about?

    Posted by snowball666 at 06/14/2009 @ 10:38am

71. What do you think Op Rescue and the Charisma churches are all about?Posted by snowball666 at 06/14/2009 @ 10:38am

    Merely a maintenance factor. The disaffection happened a long time ago. Dixiecrats, reaction to social liberalism, etc. Repubs will keep these people.

    Posted by Sorelish at 06/14/2009 @ 10:51am

72. Posted by lrjones4 at 06/14/2009 @ 12:13am |

    Thanks for putting all that together. Can't believe I typed Austria! Anyway, sounds like the Australian healthcare system has the very blend that the AMA is/was freaking out about here. Where they claimed the prospect of a Medicare-for-all as unfair competition to their incestuous, beloved private profiteers corps.

    I just had a long discussion about this with two experts. Among the more interesting points is the snowball of medical-legal pressures, but more evil really is just how lobbyists such as those behind the explosion of Radiology / CT and MRI testing basically have their way.

    Posted by winyahn at 06/14/2009 @ 11:00am

73. Posted by lrjones4 at 06/13/2009 @ 10:11pm |

    http://www.livenews.com.au/feature/ kevin-rudds-fair-shake-of-the-sauce-bottle-mocked-by-tony-abbott/ 2009/6/10/209476

    "Fair suck of the sauce bottle mate (courtesy of PM Krudd trying to be a real Aussie ocker on TV last week)."

    Bazza he's not eh?

    "I mean which one is better on the eyes?"

    You'll need to appeal to Chermak on that one.

    "Well....yeah I see the likely ambivalence....I am on a liberal site but I know which one I'd prefer from a visual perspective."

    You'd better; she spent enough on the look.

    "Bugger (courtesy of our PM talking dinkum Aussie to our troops in Afghanistan recently) the politics."

    It's enough to make Dame Edna kark it!

    Okay, I'll stop before I make even your PM look well-informed, but you have to admit that there's a spooky similarity between the appeal to the masses represented by Ahmie and Palin.

    Posted by snowball666 at 06/14/2009 @ 11:00am

74. Just another MSNBC / NBC war hype / Lockheed / Lynn Cheney on Board / Dept of Defense sort of soup.

    Or the whole Bush / Clear Channel / Limbaugh legacy. Goes back to Bush's baseball days. Where Clear Channel owner Mays helped make W a millionaire with, well, million$.

    Posted by winyahn at 06/14/2009 @ 11:03am

75. Posted by winyahn at 06/14/2009 @ 11:03am |

    Yup...a $15M bonus for W after levying $193M in taxes from the people of Arlington for the 'Temple'; another 'win' for the 'dufus who fell up', but at least they didn't give the people of the city shares in the team for their sales taxes; that would be 'socialism'.

    Posted by snowball666 at 06/14/2009 @ 11:30am

76. No glibness intended, but it's starting like the Shah all over again imho.

    Posted by A_Pax_On_Your_Houses at 06/14/2009 @ 12:15pm

77. Does anyone here know whether the Carter Center or any other international election monitoring group attempted to monitor the Iran election?

    It would seem that both the international community and Ahmadinejad would have benefited from such monitoring efforts so I am surprised there is NO discussion concerning this anywhere in the MSM or alternative media.

    If they were able to monitor Hamas elections, why not Iran?

    Posted by Metteyya at 06/14/2009 @ 2:14pm

78. Posted by Big_PILE_OF_SHIT_ON_THE_Pasture @ BLAH BLAH DAY & TIME

    Speaking of elections, "BIG"...In your fevered and diseased mind, who is the Greatest American among the following candidates?

    Answer very quickly, "BIG", before the black helicopters buzzing ominously overhead land and disgorge teams of clipboard wielding ACORN activists to secure your time as a "volunteer"...

    THE GREATEST AMERICAN IS:

    __ Franklin Delano Roosevelt

    __ David Koresh

    __ Warren Jeffs

    __ Kenny Boy Lay

    __ Mark Foley

    __ James von Brunn

    __ Ashley "Backwards 'B' on the Face" Todd

    __ Duke Cunningham

    Posted by PhilMcCrevice at 06/14/2009 @ 3:49pm

79. I'm interning at a company based in Dubai that does considerable (billions of Euros worth) of business in Iran. Needles to say the office is buzzing, and we are monitoring this thing VERY closely. There's a few things clueless Americans need to understand.

    1. Nobody - even people like me who think the anti-Ahmandinejad chorus is an embarrassment to Americans - doubts that this was the opposite of a fair, transparent election. Hence the lack of objective monitoring, exit polls, etc.

    2. Despite what Americans want to think, Ahmani is not a dictator, and does have a legitimate base of support, especially in rural areas and among the working class. All the polls that suggest otherwise seem to be produced by people with reformist agendas.

    3. Nothing bolsters support for Ahmani like all this holier-than-thou criticism from the West. The fact that all the headlines in London and New York suggested fraud, without any verifiable proof, only served to undermine Mousavi's cause.

    4. The most worrisome thing about those police crackdowns is that they have the support of much of the population (Ahmani backers), and could provoke a larger backlash. Ahmani's people are rallying in the streets too. In other words, clashes in the street could spiral into something a lot more chaotic than police cracking down on protesters.

    I can see why Fox News wants to sew chaos in Iran, but the Nation? Also, I've heard rumors that Mousavi is linked to the son of the Shah, who lives in exile in the US. Anybody know anything about that?

    Posted by tpillow at 06/14/2009 @ 4:47pm

80. Posted by tpillow at 06/14/2009 @ 4:47pm

    Nice to get a completely unbiased assessment of the Iran situation. Just what do you guys sell, dude?

    Posted by Sorelish at 06/14/2009 @ 5:21pm

81. This is a good report! Apparently, in the context of Iranian political traditions, the opposition has some plans in the works to bring some pressure to bear on the government. Iranians are the ones who will have to shape their future. This is burden of self-determination!

    Posted by pjcasey at 06/14/2009 @ 7:01pm

82. tpillow, can you recommend a good iranian source to follow the news?

    i check out al jazeera once in a blue moon, and the angry arab news service, and some solid british news services, but other than that, i'm clueless.

    while i too am skeptical of american news treatement of the iranian elections, i am wondering how strong ahmadinejad's base of support actually is, and how the real rulers of iran, the mullahs, might be running the show here.

    Posted by darladoon at 06/14/2009 @ 11:30pm

83. Posted by zmann at 06/13/2009 @ 8:33pm "And it really isn't up to Khamenei what Iran does. Whoever the most powerful military commands decide to support becomes the real leader over there."

    ***

    I thought I was going to be the first on this thread to point this out.

    All bets are off in Iran right now. A11 is planning to be numero uno for life, it appears. There is serious division among the Mullahs for the first time I have been aware of it.

    Who controls the Revolutionary guard and the military will tell the story over the next few days and weeks - not to mention this popular uprising. Anybody who can accurately foretell the ultimate outcome has a better crystal ball than me. The suppression is/will be ruthless. Were it not for the cracks I am seeing in the ruling power structure, I would say that the uprising is very probably doomed.

    With so much in flux, however, there are far too many variables to make any kind of prediction with any hope of accuracy.

    Good luck to those who truly crave democracy and freedom - wherever you are. If you succeed, we are eager to welcome you to our community. If not, we will just have to wait for that - like we had to endure the last eight years here.

    Posted by UnEasyOne at 06/14/2009 @ 11:58pm

84. Posted by elephant4life at 06/14/2009 @ 08:46am

    Did you make that stuff up yourself or just copy from someone else who made it up? I sincerely hope you are not so ill-informed as to believe your own BS. Of course, that would make you an intentional liar instead of just a dupe.

    Why don't you take your factoids-floating-in-seas-of-distortion someplace where you have a decent chance of finding a sucker ignorant enough to maybe buy it, I wonder?

    Oh sure, you can pick up a cheer or two from the resident ideologues here, but I notice that they seem to have some concern for plausibility in their own posts. They know that starting a post with a provable lie just opens em up to ridicule.

    I'd work on it.

    Posted by UnEasyOne at 06/15/2009 @ 02:34am

85. Robert Fisk:

    "An interval here for lunch with a true and faithful friend of the Islamic Republic, a man I have known for many years who has risked his life and been imprisoned for Iran and who has never lied to me. We dined in an all-Iranian-food restaurant, along with his wife. He has often criticised the regime. A man unafraid. But I must repeat what he said. "The election figures are correct, Robert. Whatever you saw in Tehran, in the cities and in thousands of towns outside, they voted overwhelmingly for Ahmadinejad. Tabriz voted 80 per cent for Ahmadinejad. It was he who opened university courses there for the Azeri people to learn and win degrees in Azeri. In Mashad, the second city of Iran, there was a huge majority for Ahmadinejad after the imam of the great mosque attacked Rafsanjani of the Expediency Council who had started to ally himself with Mousavi. They knew what that meant: they had to vote for Ahmadinejad."

    My guest and I drank dookh, the cool Iranian drinking yoghurt so popular here. The streets of Tehran were a thousand miles away. "You know why so many poorer women voted for Ahmadinejad? There are three million of them who make carpets in their homes. They had no insurance. When Ahmadinejad realised this, he immediately brought in a law to give them full insurance. Ahmadinejad's supporters were very shrewd. They got the people out in huge numbers to vote – and then presented this into their vote for Ahmadinejad.""

    from independent.co.uk

    Posted by IlyaKuryakin at 06/15/2009 @ 04:10am

86. Huh. I just noticed that some people here are actually citing Freaking CNN.COM?!?! as a "source".

    Wow.

    I suggest that some of you need to get your BS meters re-calibrated.

    Posted by IlyaKuryakin at 06/15/2009 @ 05:11am

87. I think it's an interesting side-note that at the same time that all this is happening in Iran...

    Netanyahu just signalled he's not going to go along with Larry/antisoc's "Move 'em all back to Jordan" Plan for the Palestinians.

    Apparently, he's a little more scared of Obama (and holding his coalition together) than Reverand Hagee....heheh

    Posted by Mask at 06/15/2009 @ 06:05am

88. Netanyahooo scared of Obama? It's the other way around, bubba.

    Bibi Von Yahoo will just send in AIPAC, JINSA, WINEP, AEI, ADL, HF, and all the other Tentacles of Israeli Coercion (TICs) to "re-educate" His Serene Benightedness about the "special relationship", the "third rail", and the Bought-And-Paid-For Congressional water-bearers.

    Hold it...just a sec...here it comes...it's coming...I feel a "sense of Congress resolution" coming...

    "It is the sense of Congress that Israel has the inalienable right to defend itself in the face of an imminent nuclear or military threat from Iran, terrorist organizations, and the countries that harbor them."

    "It is the sense of Congress that the United States should have an active program of ballistic missile defense cooperation with Israel, and should take steps to improve the coordination, interoperability, and integration of United States and Israeli missile defense capabilities, and to enhance the capability of both nations to defend against ballistic missile threats present in the Middle East region."

    "It is the sense of the Congress that the Administration should make no concessions to the Government of Iran unless and until that government moderates its objectionable policies, including taking steps to end its support of international terrorism, opposition to the Middle East peace process, and the development and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and their means of delivery"

    "Expressing the sense of Congress regarding the threat posed to international peace, stability in the Middle East, and the vital national security interests of the United States by Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons and regional hegemony, and for other purposes."

    Posted by IlyaKuryakin at 06/15/2009 @ 06:47am

89. Mr. Dreyfuss I think Human Events Magazine is hiring.

    Posted by Anti-imperialist at 06/15/2009 @ 06:47am

90. Every newspaper article, radio story, and column I have read recently has been rooting for the ouster of Mr. Ahmadinejad. I'm sure the U.S. position on the election was put to great use by Ahmadinejad. What could we do better to assure his win? When the French or German presses were rooting for Kerry back in 2004, I have no doubt that they only helped to bolster support for President Bush and enhance his chances for reelection. Why should it be different for Iran?

    Posted by raaustin at 06/15/2009 @ 07:02am

91. Posted by IlyaKuryakin at 06/15/2009 @ 06:47am

    Yes, but of course, I'm speaking here from the Middle, Not-So-Rabid Section where neither "We need to push the Pallies out of 'Historic Israel' so the Lord can return"....nor the "Israel is Nazi Germany" side holds sway.

    And Netanyahu agreeing to SOME kind of Palestinian state is a slap in the face to the Hagee types. It's like Dubya admitting there is global warming and it IS man-made. Doesn't earn him the Sierra Club Man of the Year...but it is significatn.

    Posted by Mask at 06/15/2009 @ 07:41am

92. And Netanyahu agreeing to SOME kind of Palestinian state is a slap in the face to the Hagee types. It's like Dubya admitting there is global warming and it IS man-made. Doesn't earn him the Sierra Club Man of the Year...but it is significatn.

    Posted by Mask at 06/15/2009 @ 07:41am

    It was a PR move by Bibi that he knew would be immediately rejected by the Arabs (as they did).

    Posted by antisocialist at 06/15/2009 @ 09:00am

93. It was a PR move by Bibi that he knew would be immediately rejected by the Arabs (as they did).----Posted by antisocialist at 06/15/2009 @ 09:00am

    So Netanyahu was....lying?

    Posted by Mask at 06/15/2009 @ 09:21am

94. Posted by Mask at 06/15/2009 @ 07:41am

    Don't know which report you read Mask but it seems to the WP correspondent and going on the WP reported Arab/Palestinian reaction, Netanyahu has not moved at all toward Obama's or the European position or toward what the Palestinians would consider a two state solution:

    "Netanyahu's remarks were sharply condemned by Palestinian officials, who said the prime minister had undermined the peace process by attaching so many conditions to Palestinian statehood and drawing a hard line on other issues.

    In his 40-minute address, Netanyahu rejected the idea of resettling any Palestinian refugees inside Israel and insisted that Jerusalem would remain under the full control of Israel instead of becoming a joint capital -- issues that the Palestinians say should be negotiated."

    This is more Palestinian reaction:

    "Senior Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat said that although Obama had attempted in Cairo to mold a new future for the Middle East, Netanyahu was replaying history."

    "He is in total defiance of Obama's speech. He wants people to believe he said Palestinian state," Erekat said. "What he said was that Palestinians left in cantons on the West Bank can have a flag and a song."

    Apart from any claims, religious or historical, for Israel ‘s right to exist it seems pretty obvious that it will only continue to exist as a Jewish state whilst it has leaders like it has had in the past as well as its present leader. It is probably possible to justify a Jewish state, to secular minds in the 21st Century, on much the same grounds as Muslim states are justified. Which means it does not require unique eschatological grounds to justify its existence. One can see the problem for the secularist who needs to think carefully through that issue.

    Posted by lrjones4 at 06/15/2009 @ 09:23am

95. By Ori Lewis

    RAMAT GAN, Israel (Reuters) - Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu responded on Sunday to uncommon pressure from Washington by finally giving his endorsement -- with conditions -- to the establishment of a Palestinian state.

    But in a speech answering President Barack Obama's address to the Arab world 10 days ago, the right-wing leader's defense of Jewish settlement on occupied land may fail to dispel tension with the White House, as the two men try to set new terms for the Middle East peace process in their first months in office.

    Obama called Netanyahu's shift in position on Palestinian statehood as an "important step forward," even as aides to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas were denouncing the speech as "sabotaging" negotiations by restating Israel's refusal to share the city of Jerusalem or accept Palestinian refugees.

    Netanyahu, who has refused to back a state for Palestinians since he took office in March, said he would now endorse the establishment of a such a state -- but only if Israel received in advance international guarantees the new nation would have no army and Palestinians recognized Israel as a Jewish state.

    ((But, according to Larry, it was a big fat FIB, for "PR purposes"...okay, if that's the way you guys want it...

    Bibi's a liar.))

    Posted by Mask at 06/15/2009 @ 09:36am

96. ((But, according to Larry, it was a big fat FIB, for "PR purposes"...okay, if that's the way you guys want it...

    Bibi's a liar.))

    Posted by Mask at 06/15/2009 @ 09:36am | ignore this person | warn this person

    There you have got it - Larry acknowledging that Bibi will willingly tell lies - and we can safely assume that that is good for Bibi's historical pronouncements regarding the Iranian situation as well.

    So Larry can't quote Bibi as an authority anymore because of his penchant for mendacity.

    Good!

    Posted by OneVote at 06/15/2009 @ 10:09am

97. Posted by OneVote at 06/15/2009 @ 10:09am

    Can't be both...

    Either Netanyahu DOES believe in a Palestinian state (as he said), and thus undercut Larry's "Historic Israel" dream....

    OR Netanyahu is LYING about willingness to accept a Palestinian state (the reason is not important)....and he's a liar.

    Now...what's that "bearing false witness" Commandment again?????

    Posted by Mask at 06/15/2009 @ 10:53am

98. Suspect election in Iran / solution: have results verified by old pal Jimmy Carter... ;^) --- found a cool site; Balkingpoints ; incredible satellite view of earth

    Posted by reg373 at 06/15/2009 @ 11:09am

99. Rightwingers are panting with admiration at A-11 for being able to do in Iran what has so far been denied to Norm "SoreLoserDeluxe" Coleman, given MN's sturdier democratic institutions that have so far prevented SoleLoser from bulldozing into the office that he L-O-S-T for gathering fewer votes than Al Franken. ConservaLosers also love A-11 because he is one of them -- he's a hard right, holcaust denying freak. And A-11's continuance in office will pay dividends in formenting more confrontation and violence that other people will have to suffer, which conservaLosers viscerally adore since they are anti-human being.

    Normal people must admire the vast courage on display by everyday Iranians who, unlike run-of-the-mill conservaLosers , are putting their own selves on the line to demonstrate in Tehran in the teeth of state violence. By contrast, conservatives admire the hack, the hatchet man, and the kapo -- not the person of conviction who takes risks for it.

    More commentary from Ali Ansari, of University of St Andrew (UK):

    "Reports over the ­weekend that as many as 110 Iranian ­reformist politicians had been ­arrested late at night have given further ­credence to suggestions that more is afoot than simple ­election manipulation, and that the "landslide" election ­victory of the country's incumbent president, Mahmoud ­Ahmadinejad, is a means to a broader end.

    ­The election was never really about the two main candidates. It was about more fundamental issues of the direction of the Islamic Republic, and whether the republican elements – severely eroded since the first controversial ­election of Ahmadinejad in 2005 – should be discarded altogether as an idea which has outlived its sell-by date, or whether it should actually be given a new lease of life..."

    Posted by PhilMcCrevice at 06/15/2009 @ 11:10am

100. More from Ansari, writing in THE GUARDIAN (Uk):

     "Ahmadinejad's protestations about the free and fair nature of the recent election are, of course, par for the course. They are the standard rhetoric of the autocratic populist the world over, and the events since the results were announced belie the notion of a popular politician basking in the ­mandate of a euphoric electorate. Even if the disturbances could be put down to "troublemakers", it seems odd to move quickly to arrest opponents. Surely such an ­election ­victory and popular endorsement should be security enough?

     This is about reshaping the country in a particular image. It can broadly be defined as conservative, Islamic and autocratic. Its footsoldiers are the ­seemingly pervasive pious poor who populate the Iranian countryside, inherently conservative and largely neglected. They are juxtaposed against a diffident and socially disconnected north Tehran elite. It is a nice dichotomy, and it makes for an easy explanation, but it doesn't bear serious scrutiny. Iran for example, is now overwhelmingly urban (70:30), which means that elections are fought and won in the cities. Moreover, many prominent reformists do not reside in north Tehran, in stark contrast to their political opponents. But it is also a fact that the last landslide elections were won by a reformist, Mohammad Khatami, who, much to the chagrin of Ahmadin­ejad and his supporters, has remained a formidable and highly ­popular figure to this day. In other words, the "pious poor" are not the natural and automatic constituents of the hardline conservatives."

     Posted by PhilMcCrevice at 06/15/2009 @ 11:13am

101. Ansari concludes:

     "This myth of the conservative silent majority is one that we are all meant to swallow. But it has proved a difficult fact to fully digest in light of Khatami's persistent popularity. So now we have an election, with an exceptionally high turnout, which has finally provided Ahmadinejad with more "votes" than Khatami ever achieved. With this ­apparent mandate Ahmadinejad and the supreme leader will try to move quickly to consolidate their position. All will apparently be normal, while behind the scenes opponents will be arrested and/or intimidated into submission. This is, after all, about domestic hegemony.

     The trouble is that the legitimacy they crave has evaded them. Far from being a fait accompli, they face a ­crisis of authority entirely of their own invention. The people being beaten on the streets are not members of the "north Tehran elite" who happen to be bored. People are angry; and people feel humiliated by a government and establishment that appear to have taken their submission for granted. This is a dangerous game to play, to raise expectations and to dash them with such reckless abandon. The protests are broader – socially and ­geographically – than they have been since the revolution, but perhaps more important, they now include ­disaffected members of the revolutionary elite. If these wounds are not healed quickly and judiciously, they may not heal at all."

     Posted by PhilMcCrevice at 06/15/2009 @ 11:15am

102. This is AP's report from 30 mins ago. Again, got to admire these people 1,000% who have known excrementious right wing govt for so long:

     "TEHRAN, Iran – More than 100,000 opponents of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad defied an Interior Ministry ban Monday and streamed into central Tehran to cheer their pro-reform leader in his first public appearance since elections that he alleges were marred by fraud.

     Security forces watched quietly, with shields and batons at their sides.

     The outpouring for reformist leader Mir Hossein Mousavi -- swelling as more poured from buildings and side streets, and wearing the trademark green of his campaign -- followed a decision by Iran's most powerful figure for an investigation into the vote- rigging allegations.

     Mousavi paused on the edge of Tehran's Azadi, or Freedom, Square -- where Ahmadinejad made his first post-election speech -- to address the crowd, which was more than five miles (nine kilometers) long. They roared back: "Long live Mousavi."

     "This is not election. This is selection," read one English-language placard at the demonstration. Other marchers held signs proclaiming "We want our vote!" and raising their fingers in a V-for-victory salute.

     "We want our president, not the one who was forced on us," said 28-year-old Sara, who gave only her first name because of fears of reprisals from authorities.

     Hours earlier, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei directed one of Iran's most influential bodies, the Guardian Council, to examine the claims. But the move by Khamenei -- who had earlier welcomed the election results -- had no guarantee it would satisfy those challenging Ahmadinejad's re-election or quell days of rioting after Friday's election that left parts of Tehran scarred by flames and shattered store fronts...

     Posted by PhilMcCrevice at 06/15/2009 @ 11:20am

103. Ken Ballen and Patrick Doherty, two level headed guys, in aWashington Post column today, think the election results are about right. Three weeks ago they made an extensive, professional, public opinion survey, via phone from a neighboring country, funded by the Rockefeller Foundation, and found Ahmadinejad leading by more than a 2 to 1 margin.

     Posted by Hugo_Pirovano at 06/15/2009 @ 11:55am

104. THEY'RE NOT GAY. THEY'RE JUST "REVERSE HETEROSEXUALS", OKAY?!? SO DON'T DISCRIMINATE AGAINST THEM!

     A SOAP OPERA OF UNREQUITED LOVE: PHONE TAG OVER RONALD REAGAN.

     (Ring Ring)

     DARIN: (Panting lightly) Hello?

     REV: Darin, it's me. The Rev. How's the weather in Carolina?

     D: Oh, hi Rev. Funny you called. Hot here. Y'know…I was just thinking about…I was thinking about Ronnie

     REV: Oh?

     D: Yeah…And I was thinking about how great the ‘80s were. With Ronnie and all. I even kind of miss The Sovs too. How Ronnie used to get all…all, y'know all manly, so manly, and talk tuff to The Sovs. It's not like Al Qeada. No country (Sigh). Not the same

     REV: Pardon me for asking, Darin but…why were you panting? When you picked up the phone, I mean?

     D: (Awkward silence)...Well, you know, Rev. I was thinking about. Bout Ronnie. Ronnie Reagan. And I started to feel…a little…you know…a little excited. About Ronnie

     REV: I think I know what you mean, Darin. I feel…I feel like that too

     D: Yeah, I mean, I'm not. Y'know. I'm no…ho-ho-ho-ho…Mmm-mmmm-oo-ooo-ooo

     REV: Homosexual

     D: Yeah, that's the word. I'm not. But. I think of Ronnie (sigh). And the ‘80s (groans). And…I just fantasize about Ronnie. All those sexy wrinkles. Him grunting. Y'know

     REV: Tell me more, Darin

     D: (Starts to whisper) Not just Ronnie. Bill Casey too. And Cap. Not Papa Bush though

     REV: Yeah. Too moderate. Do you also fantasize about…James Watt?

     D: (groans soulfully)

     REV: I hear you

     D: Oh, Rev. My biggest fantasy. My biggest. It's the state-of-the union address, like 1983, after tax cuts. Ronnie is orating. I reach up. And…

     REV: To your mouth?

     D: Yessss. And he's banging on the desk real hard. Talking tuff to the Sovs. It rattles. And I'm in there.

     REV: That's so...GOP

     Posted by PhilMcCrevice at 06/15/2009 @ 12:03pm

105. Okay, again, PhilMac....

     you're at an "12"....we need you at about a "7".

     Posted by Mask at 06/15/2009 @ 12:26pm

106. ((But, according to Larry, it was a big fat FIB, for "PR purposes"...okay, if that's the way you guys want it...

     Bibi's a liar.))

     Posted by Mask at 06/15/2009 @ 09:36am | ignore this person | warn this person

     There you have got it - Larry acknowledging that Bibi will willingly tell lies - and we can safely assume that that is good for Bibi's historical pronouncements regarding the Iranian situation as well.

     So Larry can't quote Bibi as an authority anymore because of his penchant for mendacity.

     Good!

     Posted by OneVote at 06/15/2009 @ 10:09am

     No one's lying. You libs are just exercising political stupidity.

     Bibi put out an offer that he knew would go nowhere. That's not lying.

     I just keep wondering if as some have suggested if liberalism is a mental disorder?

     Posted by antisocialist at 06/15/2009 @ 12:26pm

107. Wait a minute. There's always Mighty Mouse, that is, Pahlavi Junior, ready to save the day. Any unfortunate associations with questionable figures in his uninformed youth (the Bin Laden family, Bushes, etc.) can be explained away to youthful caprice.

     On the other hand, big bucks have a way of blurring political boundaries. As another blogger asked, just where does this guy stand?

     Posted by Sorelish at 06/15/2009 @ 12:28pm

108. REV: That's so...GOP. Burn me a copy of your DVD, mine got a little sticky. Snail Mail, plain brown envelope as usual.

     D: K.

     Posted by chaoszen at 06/15/2009 @ 12:43pm

109. Bibi put out an offer that he knew would go nowhere. That's not lying.----Posted by antisocialist at 06/15/2009 @ 12:26pm

     Interesting....so if he knew it would "go nowhere"....but wasn't "lying" when he said, in reference to the West Bank (Not "Jordan") "In my vision, there are two free peoples living side by side each with each other, each with its own flag and national anthem."

     (BTW, lie or "cunning plan, Baldrick"....does this sound like something Netanyahu is doing out of a position of "strength" politically?)

     Posted by Mask at 06/15/2009 @ 1:08pm

110. FThe Iranian People Speak

     By Ken Ballen and Patrick Doherty Monday, June 15, 2009

     The election results in Iran may reflect the will of the Iranian people. Many experts are claiming that the margin of victory of incumbent President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was the result of fraud or manipulation, but our nationwide public opinion survey of Iranians three weeks before the vote showed Ahmadinejad leading by a more than 2 to 1 margin -- greater than his actual apparent margin of victory in Friday's election.

     While Western news reports from Tehran in the days leading up to the voting portrayed an Iranian public enthusiastic about Ahmadinejad's principal opponent, Mir Hossein Mousavi, our scientific sampling from across all 30 of Iran's provinces showed Ahmadinejad well ahead.

     ...

     The breadth of Ahmadinejad's support was apparent in our preelection survey. During the campaign, for instance, Mousavi emphasized his identity as an Azeri, the second-largest ethnic group in Iran after Persians, to woo Azeri voters. Our survey indicated, though, that Azeris favored Ahmadinejad by 2 to 1 over Mousavi. ad_icon

     Much commentary has portrayed Iranian youth and the Internet as harbingers of change in this election. But our poll found that only a third of Iranians even have access to the Internet, while 18-to-24-year-olds comprised the strongest voting bloc for Ahmadinejad of all age groups."

     So much for the nonsense about a "stolen" election. The fact is that ALMOST EVERYONE predicted a Land Slide for Ahmadinejad...so why the hell are the so many people now babbling inanely about fraud?

     I daresay Iranian elections are MILES ahead of US elections. At least, Iran has parties that actually DISAGREE with each other.

     Posted by IlyaKuryakin at 06/15/2009 @ 1:20pm

111. Posted by IlyaKuryakin at 06/15/2009 @ 1:20pm

     I have to admit. I have not read so much B.S. compiled into one post for quite sometime. I had to go get my hip boots on..

     Posted by chaoszen at 06/15/2009 @ 1:29pm

112. But then again what can you respect from the "Man from Uncle Khamenei".

     Posted by chaoszen at 06/15/2009 @ 1:33pm

113. Posted by Hugo_Pirovano @ 11:55am

     What's the problem with HUGUES today? Bland, innococous talk of "level headed" commentators in WaPo?

     And none of HUGO's usual tactic of screaming simple-minded rightwing bumper sticker slogans with a vehemence that is supposed to suggest to all within earshot that (teeter, guffaw) he thinks for himself?

     So, ya gotta' ask. Ya' just gotta...HUGUES, if you had a vote in the Iranian election for president (largely a domestic office) would you vote for...

     __ Dr. A-11, the rightwing shitbag holocuast-denying freak who fronts for the most retrograde religious tendencies in Iran and whose internal standing mainly comes from pretending that he is standing up for Iranians when he is actually shafting and isolating them from the rest of the world (a form of being an Iranian Bush-Cheney, aside from the egregious Holocaust denial pathology). An instinctively authoratarian figurehead standing in for others cut from the same cloth & standing in the way of betterment and progress; or,

     __ Mousavi who, while no radical, has a program in favor of expanded women's rights, curtailed religious interference in everyday life like purity patrols that spy on & harrass people about their clothing, more open media and more engagement with the rest of the world on contentious issues in this vital part of the world.

     Which is it HUGUES? And why?

     Of course, we know in your heart of hearts which it is. You're in favor of the rightwing freak who, along with being a rightwing disembling retrograde retard, will be far more likely to bring disaster onto his people & the region. That's because your rightist tribe despises progress and loooooves that violent shit, laps it up (of course, from the highly removed safety of the armchair or TV studio)...

     Posted by PhilMcCrevice at 06/15/2009 @ 3:31pm

114. "That's so...GOP. Burn me a copy of your DVD, mine got a little sticky. Snail Mail, plain brown envelope as usual.

     D: K."

     Posted by chaoszen at 06/15/2009 @ 12:43pm

     'ZEN,

     That's so...Clarence Thomas.

     Posted by PhilMcCrevice at 06/15/2009 @ 3:35pm

115. "Okay, again, PhilMac....

     you're at an '12'....we need you at about a '7'."

     Posted by Mask at 06/15/2009 @ 12:26pm |

     MASK, I'll try for 13+. Hope you thought the script was funny, did have some laffs composing it...

     As for rightwingers jerking off over Reagan's corpse, try this from Salon's GlenAllen Walken (a psuedonym for a former Bush-the-Loser-43 official):

     Most importantly, it was Reagan's achievement of building or at least maintaining a successful political coalition composed of social conservatives, libertarian-leaning voters concerned about the economy and the size of government, moderate, "birthright" Republicans, working class Democrats and voters worried about foreign policy issues that make him the enduring standard against which the party and conservatives measure their success today. The ongoing debate between many national Republican leaders and pretenders over what the party should now stand for, following back-to-back routs in in 2006 and 2008 -- ***is really a discussion of how best to replicate the Reagan model of campaigning and governance.***"

     Emphasis added. Does it sound like they're having a seance -- or what?

     Posted by PhilMcCrevice at 06/15/2009 @ 3:43pm

116. Posted by PhilMcCrevice at 06/15/2009 @ 3:43

     Don't forget "Geo. Wallace voters".

     (SJCHERMAK did.)

     Posted by Mask at 06/15/2009 @ 7:10pm

117. When can I get my country back? Rodzilla 19

     Posted by Rodzilla19 at 06/15/2009 @ 8:32pm

118. Bibi put out an offer that he knew would go nowhere. That's not lying.

     I just keep wondering if as some have suggested if liberalism is a mental disorder?

     Posted by antisocialist at 06/15/2009 @ 12:26pm | ignore this person | warn this person

     Okay Larry - you gonna BO the same license?

     Posted by OneVote at 06/15/2009 @ 9:00pm

119. I just keep wondering if as some have suggested if liberalism is a mental disorder?

     Posted by antisocialist at 06/15/2009 @ 12:26pm

     This coming from someone who thinks that we can hurry Jesus up and get him back as soon as Israel is restored to it's biblical glory.

     Posted by Shingo at 06/15/2009 @ 9:30pm

120. It was a PR move by Bibi that he knew would be immediately rejected by the Arabs (as they did).

     Posted by antisocialist at 06/15/2009 @ 09:00am

     The Obama administration also rejected it, though with diplomacy.

     Bill Clinton described the Netanyahu speech as an opening act, meaning, they know he was grandstanding to a domestic audience.

     The Obama Administration knows it has Netenyahu on the rocks and is trying to tread gently to avoid Bibbi's fragile coalition fracturing.

     The Clintons know Netenyahu very well. The last time he was PM, Netenyahu was able to sabotage Clinton by running to the Republican controlled Congress and getting them on board, and sabotage his peace process. This time around, Netenyahu hit a brick wall because Congress is under Democrat control and because Obama was ready for him.

     The Clintons have long memories and they tend to hold grudges, so the sins of Netenyahu's past appear to have returned to haunt him.

     Posted by Shingo at 06/15/2009 @ 9:37pm

121. Perhaps, but remember, in the world of Islam life is cheap...and sometimes short.

     Posted by pyeatte at 06/15/2009 @ 9:42pm

122. Ahmadinejad is a real asshole.

     Posted by gangpapist at 06/15/2009 @ 10:28pm

123. Posted by OneVote at 06/15/2009 @ 9:00pm

     I think EVEN Larry has realized how idiotic that statement is. "Netanyahu said something he didn't really mean...but it's not lying".

     So what definition of "lie" can Larry use in the future???

     Posted by Mask at 06/16/2009 @ 06:30am

Posting a comment requires registration. Click here to register

If you are already registered, login here.

Username

Password

Remember?