News Iranian Elections: Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Wins by Landslide

[qsa]

The whole recount is a sham, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will continue to be president of Iran. Ayatollah Khamenei, the hardliners and the Council of Guardians will ensure that the incumbent still wins. They cannot suddenly just say,yes Mousavi won and we were wrong all along. Not the way a theocratic dictatorship works.

And reading the latest news, Ahmadinejad is already in Moscow and up to his usual tirades against the West.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5g6SjlVyVSwFpQUCdA_cVbU_UiACQD98RN7F00

Ahmadinejad is the winner; he represents the poor and normal working families. He was originally got elected based on his anti-establishment agenda i.e. corruption. He has made a lot of enemies at home and abroad because of the fundamental principals, power-justice to the people (everywhere) and independence from the supper-powers(the ideals of iranian revelotion).

 

[rootX]

Please keep American politics (Obama, McCain, Bush) out of this thread. I think else this will turn into another ugly American politics thread...

 

[LowlyPion]

I suspect that Ahmadinejad is discovering that there is a power far greater than the US - the internet.

From the dorm room attack:

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Ahmadinejad is the winner;

How did they count the votes so quickly. That isn't possible.

 

[Gokul43201]

From LP's post, according to McCain: the United States should support the Iranian people “in their struggle against an oppressive, repressive regime.”

Virtually every Iran expert I've heard weigh in on this has said nearly the exact opposite: that the US should try to stay detatched for as long as possible. Marrying Moussavi to the evil US may be all Ahmadinejad needs to quiet the dissent that's boiling over now.

And I bring this up, not to delve into local US politics, but rather to weigh in with my opinion on the effect of possible US actions on the situation in Iran.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Tonight: Was the election rigged?

120% say no.

- Colbert Report [comedy]

 

[math_04]

Anyway, Mousavi is not exactly an angel either. He was responsible for ordering the deaths of thousands of Iranians who protested against the absolute theocratic rule of Ayatollah Khomeini during the early 1980s. He strongly believes in the rule of the clerics, strongly favors continuing the nuclear program etc. I guess it is just choosing the lesser of the two evils, the real reformists were not allowed to even contest the presidential elections by the Guardian Council.

 

[Gokul43201]

Anyway, Mousavi is not exactly an angel either. He was responsible for ordering the deaths of thousands of Iranians who protested against the absolute theocratic rule of Ayatollah Khomeini during the early 1980s. He strongly believes in the rule of the clerics, strongly favors continuing the nuclear program etc. I guess it is just choosing the lesser of the two evils, the real reformists were not allowed to even contest the presidential elections by the Guardian Council.

More about this in the article I cited in an earlier post:

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/KF16Ak05.html

...
Who is Mir Hossein Mousavi, Ahmedinejad's main opponent in the election? He is an enigma wrapped in mystery. He impressed the Iranian youth and the urban middle class as a reformer and a modernist. Yet, as Iran's prime minister during 1981-89, Mousavi was an unvarnished hardliner. Evidently, what we have seen during his high-tech campaign is a vastly different Mousavi, as if he meticulously deconstructed and then reassembled himself.

This was what Mousavi had to say in a 1981 interview about the 444-day hostage crisis when young Iranian revolutionaries kept American diplomats in custody: "It was the beginning of the second stage of our revolution. It was after this that we discovered our true Islamic identity. After this we felt the sense that we could look Western policy in the eye and analyze it the way they had been evaluating us for many years."

Most likely, he had a hand in the creation of Hezbollah in Lebanon. Ali Akbar Mohtashami, Hezbollah's patron saint, served as his interior minister. He was involved in the Iran-Contra deal in 1985, which was a trade-off with the Ronald Reagan administration whereby the US would supply arms to Iran and as quid pro quo Tehran would facilitate the release of the Hezbollah-held American hostages in Beirut. The irony is, Mousavi was the very anti-thesis of Rafsanjani and one of the first things the latter did in 1989 after taking over as president was to show Mousavi the door. Rafsanjani had no time for Mousavi's anti-"Westernism" or his visceral dislike of the market.
...

There's probably also some more background on Mousavi in the irantracker site that mheslep linked to earlier.

 

[LowlyPion]

I have to admit that I think the BBC seems to offer a bit better coverage on Iran than the US networks.

Perhaps its fewer axes to grind, or maybe just not so anxious to sensationalize it? It's sensational as it is for goodness sakes, and they just seem to get the news out without trying so hard to goose ratings.

But whatever the reason, I think their coverage is more measured and likely more thorough than some of the Twitter and Facebook and Skype feeds that some of the others are running with.

 

[Cyrus]

More about this in the article I cited in an earlier post:

There's probably also some more background on Mousavi in the irantracker site that mheslep linked to earlier.

Thanks for that link. I honestly don't know enough about him, but I doubt he's any different that Ahmedinijad. He probably doesn't make outrageous statements, but policy wise he's probably no different.

 

[qsa]

How did they count the votes so quickly. That isn't possible.

only 4 candidates. here are your approx. numbers

40000000(votes)/10000(station)=4000 votes
4000*.3MIN=1200 MINutes almost 24 hours

not exactly rocket science.

 

[Lisa!]

Now that some people like to comment base on their imagination and they just go to the conclusion that they like them to be true I think I'd better to be out of this thread!
Good luck

 

[Ivan Seeking]

only 4 candidates. here are your approx. numbers

40000000(votes)/10000(station)=4000 votes
4000*.3MIN=1200 MINutes almost 24 hours

not exactly rocket science.

Where do you get those numbers [10,000 stations]? Also, I thought they announced within a couple of hours of the polls closing.

 

[MATLABdude]

This was the only thing I could find on Iranian electoral procedures, and where manipulation could theoretically take place (note that the byline is from June 10th, a day or two before the elections began, depending on how you reckon things):
http://www.realclearworld.com/articles/2009/06/irans_voting_manipulation_indu.html

I remember the official results came out in something like 2 hours, and hearing that these weren't supposed to be announced for 4 days.

EDIT: And the article mentions that there are 60,000 polling stations. Never mind how long it takes to count the ballots, how long does it take to count the results from these 60,000 stations?!

 

[mheslep]

From LP's post, according to McCain: the United States should support the Iranian people “in their struggle against an oppressive, repressive regime.”

Virtually every Iran expert I've heard weigh in on this has said nearly the exact opposite: that the US should try to stay detatched for as long as possible. Marrying Moussavi to the evil US may be all Ahmadinejad needs to quiet the dissent that's boiling over now.

...

For example:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124520276223621661.html"n

First, Mr. Obama should contact Mr. Mousavi to signal his interest in the situation and Mr. Mousavi's security. Our own experience with dissidents around the world is that proof of concern by the U.S. government is helpful and desirable. The administration was wise to send Vice President Joe Biden to Beirut on the eve of the Lebanese elections, and his presence there helped galvanize the anti-Hezbollah coalition. Mr. Obama's political capital in the region has only expanded since his June 4 Cairo address. If Mr. Mousavi deems talking to the American president not to be politically helpful, then he can refuse the call. But that should be a judgment for him to make.

Second, Mr. Obama should deliver another taped message to the Iranian people. Only this time he should acknowledge the fundamental reality that the regime lacks the consent of its people to govern, which therefore necessitates a channel to the "other Iran." He should make it clear that dissidents and their expatriate emissaries should tell us what they most need and want...
...
Mr. Senor is an adjunct senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. Mr. Whiton is policy adviser to the Foreign Policy Initiative. They served as officials in the administration of George W. Bush at Central Command in Qatar, with the Coalition in Iraq, and at the State Department.

I certainly don't know that this is the best approach, but the authors are clearly not stating that expressions of "concern" are the limit of US response. There are other good reasons, other than geopolitical, why it is important to hear from the US. The historys of dissidents in the former Soviet Union and Eastern Block show that it can be a very lonely thing to resist a totalitarian government; common cause from the 'last, best, hope on earth' buoyed them.

The US need not get materially involved nor attach itself to Moussavi, which I don't see McCain saying, but the US could show more common cause with Iranian protesters than 'Im deeply concerned' without being seen as interfering. As an example, and to track this discussion back towards an international viewpoint on the Iranian elections, I point out some comments from France's Sarkozy:

The President yesterday denounced the "extent of the fraud" and the "shocking" and "brutal" response of the Iranian regime to public demonstrations in Tehran these past four days.

"These elections are an atrocity," he said. "If [Mahmoud] Ahmadinejad had made such progress since the last elections, if he won two-thirds of the vote, why such violence?" The statement named the regime as the cause of the outrage in Iran and, without meddling or picking favorites, stood up for Iranian democracy.

The President who spoke those words was France's Nicolas Sarkozy.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124520170103721579.html
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/98318.htm?sectionid=351020101

 

[qsa]

Where do you get those numbers [10,000 stations]? Also, I thought they announced within a couple of hours of the polls closing.

Actually Iranian TV reported around 14000 areas and sub areas. Have you ever watched actual poll counting for any election? It’s boring. Iranian TV reported 15% after 4 hours and 35% after 8 hours, and then I had to go to bed (around 2 am middle east time).Rigging is certainly possible but Iran had mostly presidents from reformers camp and non-fair election has never been an issue in the past. And it was under khatemi (reformer) that ballistic and nuclear technologies were developed first.

 

[LowlyPion]

Actually Iranian TV reported around 14000 areas and sub areas. Have you ever watched actual poll counting for any election? It’s boring. Iranian TV reported 15% after 4 hours and 35% after 8 hours, and then I had to go to bed (around 2 am middle east time).Rigging is certainly possible but Iran had mostly presidents from reformers camp and non-fair election has never been an issue in the past. And it was under khatemi (reformer) that ballistic and nuclear technologies were developed first.

Rigging an election is easy, once you start tabulating. US elections have poll workers, of both parties overseeing all phases of the process ... and still there is the potential for abuse. The US 2000 election was quite contentious over just these concerns.

Just because the state TV would show people at tables counting ballots doesn't mean anything. Especially if the tabulators are government employees owing their jobs to the one that wins.

538.com has a pretty interesting analysis of this election compared with the past, as to the behavior in different areas, and the vote for candidates. There certainly seems to be enough to suggest that what we have seen to date is the result of some process bias.

 

[qsa]

Rigging an election is easy, once you start tabulating. US elections have poll workers, of both parties overseeing all phases of the process ... and still there is the potential for abuse. The US 2000 election was quite contentious over just these concerns.

Just because the state TV would show people at tables counting ballots doesn't mean anything. Especially if the tabulators are government employees owing their jobs to the one that wins.

538.com has a pretty interesting analysis of this election compared with the past, as to the behavior in different areas, and the vote for candidates. There certainly seems to be enough to suggest that what we have seen to date is the result of some process bias.

The analysis of 538 is likely correct on both counts. Najad has taken votes from Karoubi and Rafsanjani. Najad has put a lot of efforts during his last term in empowering the rural areas; this was the promise of the revolution. Although Iran did have al large program for that but Najad took it to a different level. Is that smart politics or does he believe it , probably both.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

The Iranian government is trying its best to shut down internet access.

The restrictions imposed by the government made such social-networking sites as Twitter and Flickr more prominent — with even the U.S. State Department calling on Twitter to put off a scheduled shutdown for maintenance.

Iranians were posting items online, but it wasn't known how much of that information was being seen by others inside the country. And although some of the posts on Twitter appeared to be from users in Tehran, others clearly were not.

Following a massive opposition rally Monday, authorities restricted journalists — including Iranians working for foreign media — from reporting on the streets. They could effectively only work from their offices, conducting telephone interviews and monitoring official sources such as state TV...

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hJV3PeXNYF8-HXBgHkLBl94HkCHgD98SFEUG0

According to CNN, many people are using proxies to get around the government shut-down of internet services.

I thought Iran was suppose to be a free country. It doesn't sound very free to me. It sounds more like a corrupt government trying to suppress public discontent.

 

[qsa]

Iran is just another third world country,still developing. It is not a democracy of the western style, the histories are different. But the government is not a dictatorship, it is been setup by the people, although there is a large (30%) strong opposition made up of right wing nationalists and monarchists (secularists). Running countries affairs can be ugly in times of crisis, especially with perceived external threats. McCarthyism for example.

 

[rootX]

Iran is just another third world country,still developing. It is not a democracy of the western style, the histories are different. But the government is not a dictatorship, it is been setup by the people, although there is a large (30%) strong opposition made up of right wing nationalists and monarchists (secularists). Running countries affairs can be ugly in times of crisis, especially with perceived external threats. McCarthyism for example.

Does a country need be developed for having a good (not perfect) democracy?
How about India?

 

[Cyrus]

Iran is just another third world country,still developing. It is not a democracy of the western style, the histories are different. But the government is not a dictatorship, it is been setup by the people, although there is a large (30%) strong opposition made up of right wing nationalists and monarchists (secularists). Running countries affairs can be ugly in times of crisis, especially with perceived external threats. McCarthyism for example.

Ha,Ha,HA. Did you forget your history that fast? Iran most certainly wasn't a third world country in the late 70s. It was like Paris. You all did a great job bringing down Iran to 3rd world status.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Ha,Ha,HA. Did you forget your history that fast? Iran most certainly wasn't a third world country in the late 70s. It was like Paris. You all did a great job bringing down Iran to 3rd world status.

More importantly, the Iranian people are just as sophisticated as the people in any advanced nation.

 

[Cyrus]

More importantly, the Iranian people are just as sophisticated as the people in any advanced nation.

I don't know any actual Iranians living in Iran to say yes to that. All the one's I've met here that have come over recently have been pretty level headed. Though, reading the stuff the government does over there, one has to wonder sometimes. The government isn't the people, but I question how much to the people actually speak out about what the government does or if they quietly support it. For example, hanging Jews and homosexuals.

 

[LowlyPion]

Iran is not a second world country. They are not aligned with either of the two super powers. (I'd think in fact the Soviet Union only barely hangs onto Second World status at times.) Iran is hardly a satellite of the Soviet Union in any event.

A third world country most definitely, and apparently a third tier power too.

For more useful information about what Third World Countries are:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_world
http://www.nationsonline.org/oneworld/third_world_countries.htm

None of that says anything about how sophisticated the people are, and I'd say shouldn't be interpreted that way.

 

[kyleb]

Ha,Ha,HA. Did you forget your history that fast? Iran most certainly wasn't a third world country in the late 70s. It was like Paris. You all did a great job bringing down Iran to 3rd world status.

Iran was a tinpot dictatorship in the late 70's, since the US backed coup in '53. Considering that history, I'm rather still weighing the evidence as to what has gone on here.

For example, hanging Jews...

It seems you are confused, there are tens of thousands of Jews in Iran.

 

[Cyrus]

Iran was a tinpot dictatorship in the late 70's, since the US backed coup in '53. Considering that history, I'm rather still weighing the evidence as to what has gone on here.

What's that got to do with what I said? The living conditions in Iran weren't nearly as bad as they are today.

It seems you are confused, there are tens of thousands of Jews in Iran.

And? Do you think they are well liked?

 

[qsa]

India itself is in a mess. Gujarat riots thousand of death (ethnic), cashmere civil war, Assam independence war, Maoists, Hyderabad riots (hundreds died ) , independent area lords, criminals of all sorts, underdeveloped country with a hardly decent district, all kinds of ethnic tensions simmering and boiling, corruption to the bone, just to name a few problems. Not to mention appalling poverty with nobody there to care. Some hotels are good though, for tourists that is. I have been there twice and I’ve seen enough. Nevertheless, their democracy is better than nothing, it is all relative. Again.
As for the issue of sophistications. People are of different levels in all countries; education, wealth ..Etc.

“Hanging Jews and homosexuals”. Have a heart. In Iran transsexual operations are legal.

Iran was like Paris for the few rich! It still is by the way.

 

[Cyrus]

India itself is in a mess. Gujarat riots thousand of death (ethnic), cashmere civil war, Assam independence war, Maoists, Hyderabad riots (hundreds died ) , independent area lords, criminals of all sorts, underdeveloped country with a hardly decent district, all kinds of ethnic tensions simmering and boiling, corruption to the bone, just to name a few problems. Not to mention appalling poverty with nobody there to care. Some hotels are good though, for tourists that is. I have been there twice and I’ve seen enough. Nevertheless, their democracy is better than nothing, it is all relative. Again.
As for the issue of sophistications. People are of different levels in all countries; education, wealth ..Etc.

“Hanging Jews and homosexuals”. Have a heart. In Iran transsexual operations are legal.

Iran was like Paris for the few rich! It still is by the way.

hahahaha! That's new to me. It's funny how places with strict rules (usually religions) have so many internal inconsistencies.

Iran, hates Jews but has Jews.
Hates gays, but has sex operations. BTW: Is satellite TV still illegal down there? I remember you used to get lashes for having one. If you're going to watch illegal satellite tv, please do NOT watch David Hasselhoff.

 

[mheslep]

“Hanging Jews and homosexuals”. Have a heart. In Iran transsexual operations are legal.

Why? There's no need, because

"In Iran we don't have homosexuals like in your country,"

- Ahmadinejad 9/2007
http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5hATGOzv6YSmgeMY1zdYbdpyrG2cw

 

[Cyrus]

Why? There's no need, because
- Ahmadinejad 9/2007
http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5hATGOzv6YSmgeMY1zdYbdpyrG2cw

Hhahaha, that goes back to my post before yours about internal inconsistencies. Anyways, I don't want to stray off topic for the OP.

 

[kyleb]

What's that got to do with what I said?

The first part was in response to your comparison to Paris, the second to your mention of history, and the third a comment on the discussion in general.

The living conditions in Iran weren't nearly as bad as they are today.

Could you please elaborate here?

And? Do you think they are well liked?

Israel's conquest of Palestine has made them the unfortunate victims of guilt by association to many in the region, but I haven't seen anything to back your claim of Jews being hanged.

 

[math_04]

Iran, hates Jews but has Jews.

Get your facts right, Iran has a fair amount of Jews. The president may be anti semitic but most of the leadership in Iran view Jews as Iranians. In fact, Iran has the largest Jewish population in the region apart from Israel.

All Ahmadinejad has done is isolate Iran internationally and attempt to invent himself as a pious, humble individual in order to gain votes from the poor, disadvantaged citizens and gain the support of the clerics.

Ha,Ha,HA. Did you forget your history that fast? Iran most certainly wasn't a third world country in the late 70s. It was like Paris. You all did a great job bringing down Iran to 3rd world status.

Iran in the 1970s, had a wide gap between the rich and poor. There was a large part of the population that was living in near poverty while the Shah and his associates built up their wealth and used it on grand but unnecessary projects. Opposition to his regime was not allowed and SAVAK (his secret police), cracked down brutally on any dissent. So I fail to see the analogy with Paris unless you lived in a rich part of Tehran.

The problem with Iran is it has experienced two extremes, a religious and secular extreme. Hopefully there can be a middle ground that can be decided upon.

 

[Cyrus]

Could you please elaborate here?

Source: Every Iranian I know that emigrated here in the early 80s, including my father.

Israel's conquest of Palestine has made them the unfortunate victims of guilt by association to many in the region, but I haven't seen anything to back your claim of Jews being hanged.

I mixed up the Jews with the Homosexuals. My fault. It's homosexuals that are hung. (Hahah, I just realized that's a horrible pun by mistake!)

 

[Ivan Seeking]

It's homosexuals that are hung.

 

[Cyrus]

Get your facts right, Iran has a fair amount of Jews. The president may be anti semitic but most of the leadership in Iran view Jews as Iranians. In fact, Iran has the largest Jewish population in the region apart from Israel.

Did I say Iran doesn't have Jews?

Iran in the 1970s, had a wide gap between the rich and poor. There was a large part of the population that was living in near poverty while the Shah and his associates built up their wealth and used it on grand but unnecessary projects. Opposition to his regime was not allowed and SAVAK (his secret police), cracked down brutally on any dissent. So I fail to see the analogy with Paris unless you lived in a rich part of Tehran.

That is all correct. However, they were also allies with the United States.

The problem with Iran is it has experienced two extremes, a religious and secular extreme. Hopefully there can be a middle ground that can be decided upon.

I'm not aware of a secular extreme there. Secular in what regard?

 

[qsa]

""The problem with Iran is it has experienced two extremes, a religious and secular extreme. Hopefully there can be a middle ground that can be decided upon. ""

this I agree with 100%, for all the moslem countries.

 

[math_04]

Secular extreme in regards to the Shah's crackdown on religious activity in parts of Iran. The Shah attempted to Westernize Iran which was a grave mistake. Iran has its own culture, identity and religion which have served well for thousands of years.His father was the same, brutally cracking down and forcing the people to accept secular values. While I am for secularism, I still believe that you cannot force people to abandon their religious beliefs and that which is deeply entrenched in their culture

 

[LowlyPion]

I found this video stunning insofar as how quiet so many people could be. This was apparently from Wednesday. I see reports of vandalism being caused by the basiji plain clothes forces, so the government can apparently condemn the protesters and attack them. This would certainly be no way to win the people over and lessen the tension. Discouraging to be sure, but for the demonstrations to be continuing, at this scale, in the face of such seemingly purposeful widespread communication outages, ... The genie looks to be out of the bottle.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CLo_6Qp1eTk

The NYT shows the same demonstration:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/18/world/middleeast/18iran.html

 

[LowlyPion]

Even the soccer players protest.

Iranian soccer players wear green armbands

http://sports.yahoo.com/sow/news?slug=ap-skorea-iranprotest&prov=ap

 

[Cyrus]

I found this video stunning insofar as how quiet so many people could be. This was apparently from Wednesday. I see reports of vandalism being caused by the basiji plain clothes forces, so the government can apparently condemn the protesters and attack them. This would certainly be no way to win the people over and lessen the tension. Discouraging to be sure, but for the demonstrations to be continuing, at this scale, in the face of such seemingly purposeful widespread communication outages, ... The genie looks to be out of the bottle.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CLo_6Qp1eTk

The NYT shows the same demonstration:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/18/world/middleeast/18iran.html

No kidding, considering what loudmouths we can be. HAHahaha.

The problem is that Ahmedinijad has equally large gatherings just across the street.

 

[LowlyPion]

The problem is that Ahmedinijad has equally large gatherings just across the street.

I don't think so after the first demonstration for Ahmadi-Nejad. There was another much smaller one yesterday, but these demonstrations in protest look to be widespread and much larger. BBC World News has been pretty good about calling it both ways.

 

[MATLABdude]

I don't think so after the first demonstration for Ahmadi-Nejad. There was another much smaller one yesterday, but these demonstrations in protest look to be widespread and much larger. BBC World News has been pretty good about calling it both ways.

This has been making the rounds... Someone with a keen eye noticed something about one of those pro-Ahmadinejad rallies:
http://boingboing.net/2009/06/17/ahmadinijad-sucks-at.html

Unverified reports (via Twitter) indicate that government employees and local people have been 'encouraged' to show up at the rallies by the Bassij.

 

[LowlyPion]

This has been making the rounds... Someone with a keen eye noticed something about one of those pro-Ahmadinejad rallies:
http://boingboing.net/2009/06/17/ahmadinijad-sucks-at.html

Unverified reports (via Twitter) indicate that government employees and local people have been 'encouraged' to show up at the rallies by the Bassij.

This wouldn't be the first Photoshopped image out of Iran. I recall their 4 or 5 rocket launch that amazingly managed identical contrail exhausts.

Today it seems the theme is black. Black for mourning those killed by the basiji. If people weren't dying, these ham-handed basiji, would be a joke for their clumsy ineptness in resorting to violence, intimidation and deception to control the population.

 

[kyleb]

I recall their 4 or 5 rocket launch that amazingly managed identical contrail exhausts.

It was four rockets with one being chopped into cover for projectile dysfunction:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/blog/2008/jul/10/iranianmissiletestsnotwhat

But hey, it's not like they have Hollywood to do moon landings for them.


(just kidding!)

 

[LowlyPion]

From the looks of things, Iran is in a bit of a pickle. Both sides are at a stand-off. The Opposition is not escalating any violence, but neither are they backing down. The government has exposed themselves with this ill-conceived, inept vote reporting. They can't admit they were wrong in the counts, or they are admitting they are frauds and not fit to rule, whatever the vote count. They can't escalate the violence overtly, or there will surely be the Devil to pay. Instead, they nibble at the edges, discouraging, heckling, provoking, threatening ... but the lessons of Gandhi and India are clear. The Government cannot remain against the will of the people forever. Making martyrs will serve the Government no good at all.

I guess the question is who will blink first.

 

[LowlyPion]

The BBC is currently reporting that arrests have escalated. That there are now hundreds arrested. As many as 800. Reform activists.

Also Iranian state sponsored hackers are apparently trying to hack the blogosphere to stifle dissent - closing access to sites, etc. But their efforts are difficult because there are so many pores that news leaks through. They can't shut down the Internet because, the country and the Government itself relies on it to function.

 

[mheslep]

The BBC is currently reporting that arrests have escalated. That there are now hundreds arrested. As many as 800. Reform activists.

...

That would be inline w/ the techniques of the Chinese security people they use: don't bust heads initially, take a lot a photographs and identify leadership; later, single them out and arrest them, disappear them.

 

[LowlyPion]

Two children of former president Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, a political opponent of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, have been barred from leaving Iran, the semi-official Fars News Agency said on Thursday.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/22/20090618/tpl-uk-iran-election-rafsanjani-sb-43a8d4f_2.html

Now comes this rubbish claim by Iran:

Iran says thwarted election day bomb plot

... It said this plot was uncovered on election day.

State television said members of the plot had planned to place bombs in polling stations in 20 districts of Tehran.

It aired statements by four people with pixellated faces.

One of them said: "We had contacts with the Americans in Iraq and they wanted to have information from inside Iran about the situation. They gave us formula to build bombs."

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/22/20090618/tpl-uk-iran-election-plot-sb-43a8d4f_3.html

Dick Cheney hasn't left the country in months.

 

[qsa]

The BBC is currently reporting that arrests have escalated. That there are now hundreds arrested. As many as 800. Reform activists.

Also Iranian state sponsored hackers are apparently trying to hack the blogosphere to stifle dissent - closing access to sites, etc. But their efforts are difficult because there are so many pores that news leaks through. They can't shut down the Internet because, the country and the Government itself relies on it to function.

If you are not familiar with Iranian politics, here is a take. Ironically, the government system is based on the US one. Both are presidency and both have two large parties. These parties are just like the US the Reformers (Republicans) cater for the rich, business (bazaar in case of Iran), affluent... etc. But in case of Iran the more liberal mined (opposite of US) have aligned themselves with Reformers although they do not strictly agree with the system. This is the Reformers sell to the system in exchange for privileges (very similar to US except Republicans sell “DEFENCE” to the system). On the other hand, Fundamentalists backed by the majority poor, lower class, rural…etc. sell “DEFENCE” to the system in exchange for more government care and power. The competition is intense but both belong to the system, just like the US. But it may take some modification to make it work more smoothly.