Ahmadinejad "wins" Iran presidential election

[zenspiderz]

Okay on the subject of mossadeq.

While the subject of mossadeq is tangentially related to this thread i didn't really want to get involved since i was pursueing more directly relevant debate but since the main action of the thread seems to have dried up much like the protests i find myself looking for some action.

Basically we are all agreed, since it is not disputed even by the CIA or the US presidency since obama's cairo speech (50 odd years of plausible deniability not a bad record.) that the CIA orchestrated and paid for the overthrow of mossadeq. Does it matter very much how much was his own fault for annoying the british by taking 'their' oil? Or whether by magic it would have happened anyway? What is done is done.

What is interesting is that the CIA are still doing it. The methodology has improved over time, practice makes perfect after all, but essentially it is the same thing. But bleeding heart moralist anti-imperialist types forget something when they condemn sponsored coup d'etat, and that is the goal of the coup d'etat. The goal is to capture the oil or the diamonds, sugar, tea or rubber or whatever it is that the target country has that is worth nicking. And if the option of coup d'etat wasn't available then they would have to take all that stuff by force of war. So if you are going to be robbed is it not better to robbed by the smooth criminal pick pocket coup d'etat or by the psycho violence of the aggravated armed robber war monger? Give me coup d'etat anyday. Call it the lesser of two evils. You get robbed just the same but at least the bloodshed is minimal.

The real downside to this failed green revolution for the iranians is that since the US has failed by sleight of hand it will have to take by brute force. How well they stand up to that storm when it comes will be the stuff of history.

 

[Whomp]

Moderator Action: How about we stay on topic or close the thread? Those of you interested in talking about Mossadeq and the CIA should start a separate thread.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Just heard on the news. The Council declared that no fraud was committed and this was actually the 'cleanest' election in Iran ever.

Whew, I was worried there for a second. I'm glad our concerns are put to rest now

 

[RedRalph]

I will play some D advocate here and simply ask why should we condemn it? If other countries had our resources they would (and often do) attempt to the very same thing to us and the rest of the world.
Simply because you find it distasteful doesnt mean its wrong.

That'c completely irrelevant. It might normalise it, but it wouldn't legitimise it. Unless you think the USSR's similar behaviour shouldn't be condemned?

 

[El_Machinae]

This damn Michael Jackson thing is dominating the news. Yesterday was supposed to be another big protest, but security forces are seizing personal communication devices. I really want to see the fallout from this, because the 'old fashioned' method of silencing protesters might just be working.

 

[RedRalph]

This damn Michael Jackson thing is dominating the news. Yesterday was supposed to be another big protest, but security forces are seizing personal communication devices. I really want to see the fallout from this, because the 'old fashioned' method of silencing protesters might just be working.

Thats actually one of the first things I thought wehen I heard about MJ dying, bad news for the protestors in Iran. Sadly, people will pay far far more attention to Michael Jackson.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Did the networks suddenly stop carrying news of the riots after Michael's death? Or are you just disappointed that the general reaction might be a bit more diluted now that they have other things on their minds?

 

[El_Machinae]

Well, the death is dominating the cycle, so, imo, it's diluting all the different important news.

 

[GenMarshall]

Jackson took errr jerbs!!!! How he took the spotlight from the Iranian protests as a corpse, I do not know.

 

[RalofTyr]

Obama scoffs at Ahmadinejad apology demand
AP

By BEN FELLER, Associated Press Writer Ben Feller, Associated Press Writer – 7 mins ago

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama scoffed at the idea that he should apologize to Iran's leaders for criticizing their violent crackdown on demonstrators and said Friday it was President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad who must answer to his own people.

Standing next to German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Obama said the United States and Germany share "one voice" in condemning the Iranian effort to crush dissent. He said Iran's leaders cannot hide the "outrageous" behavior of clamping down violently on their people.

"We see it and we condemn it," Obama said.

Said Merkel: "We will not forget this."

Obama spoke in a joint White House appearance with Merkel after they conferred privately. The two leaders have met three times since Obama took office, allies linked by such international troubles as the war in Afghanistan and a worldwide recession.

Obama said it was too soon to tell how potential direct contact between the United States and Iran will be affected by the recent events. Attempting to break from his predecessor George W. Bush, Obama has sought to loosen the diplomatic freeze with Iran, but that effort is now in question — at best.

Keeping pressure on Iran's rulers, Obama emphasized the rights of the people there.

"Their bravery in the face of brutality is a testament to their enduring pursuit of justice," Obama said.

"The violence perpetrated against them is outrageous. In spite of the government's efforts to keep the world from bearing witness to that violence, we see it and we condemn it."

Merkel backed Obama's stand. And she said Iran must be kept from getting a nuclear weapon.

Iran's violent postelection chaos has captured the world's attention and elicited increasingly sharp condemnations from Obama. Iran's ruling clergy have widened the clampdown on the opposition since a bitterly disputed June 12 presidential election, and scattered protests have replaced the initial mass rallies.

At least 17 people have been killed in a state-led crackdown on protesters.

Incumbent President Ahmadinejad was proclaimed the landslide winner over opposition leader Mir Hossein Mousavi.

Obama's comments on Friday got more direct about the two leaders.

He said Mousavi had captured the spirit and imagination of the Iranian people who want a more free society.

And he dismissed statements by Ahmadinejad, who on Thursday compared Obama to Bush. Obama said he is not meddling in Iran's affairs but rather calling for principles recognized around the world.

"A government that treats its own citizens with that kind of ruthlessness and violence and that cannot deal with peaceful protesters who are trying to have their voices heard in an equally peaceful way have moved outside of universal norms — international norms — that are important to uphold," Obama said.

State TV in Iran quoted Ahmadinejad as saying on Thursday: "We expect nothing from the British government and other European governments, whose records and backgrounds are known to everybody and who have no dignity. But I wonder why Mr. Obama, who has come with the slogan of change, has fallen into this trap, the same route that Mr. Bush took and experienced its ending."

The Iranian leader has told Obama to "show your repentance."

Obama said he doesn't take such statements seriously.

"He might want to consider looking at the families of those beaten or shot or detained," Obama said. "That's where Mr. Ahmadinejad and others need to answer their questions."

Merkel pledged an effort to identify the victims of violence of Iran — who they are and what happened to them.

"Iran cannot count on the world turning a blind eye," she said.

Obama made clear there will be no international letup in trying to keep Iran from developing nuclear weaponry. He said an existing coalition of nations, including the U.S., China and Russia, will continue to talk with Iran about the nuclear matter. As for whether there's any prospect for direct U.S.-Iran talks, Obama kept open his options: "I think we're going to have to see how that plays itself out in the days and weeks ahead."

Obama used Merkel's visit to promote his working relationship with the German leader, whose support he needs on a range of international matters.

"I trust her when she says something," Obama said.

Both Obama and Merkel promoted efforts in their nations to combat the warming of the planet. Obama's words — praising Germany's leadership and pushing the United States to show its own — came as the House moved toward a historic vote Friday on a bill to overhaul U.S. energy policy.

Merkel praised the potential congressional action, saying she would not have expected such a step in the U.S. a year ago, when Bush was president. The bill would impose the nation's first limits on greenhouse gases linked to global warming and shift the country away from some of its reliance on oil, coal and gas.

Obama said the administration and Congress are still working to create "the framework where we can help lead the international effort."

"We're not going to get there all in one fell swoop," he said.

On Iraq, Obama sought to offer perspective as sporadic but deadly bombings continue to unnerve the nation. U.S. combat troops face a June 30 deadline to leave cities there, part of a broader and gradual withdrawal that is to end American involvement under Obama's watch.

The president said bombings will continue, but overall "Iraq's security situation has continued to dramatically improve."

He said the government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki must strengthen the nation's security forces and make progress on the political "give-and-take" leading up to parliamentary elections scheduled for Jan. 30. He said he has not seen as much political progress as he would like.

Obama said Merkel has not committed to taking detainees from the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay, but the German chancellor said her country would not shirk its responsibilities and she was confident there would be a satisfactory resolution of the issue.

Obama said he respects Germany's national security concerns, and he said he has been pleased by the general response in Europe to his request that countries help take detainees so the much-criticized prison in Cuba can be shut down.

I bet Obama called Bush and asked him, "How did you deal with this nutcase".

Ahmed... is testing Obama.

The Germans are with the Americans on this. I'm sure Ahmed... is well aware of what the Germans are capable of...

 

[choxorn]

Just heard on the news. The Council declared that no fraud was committed and this was actually the 'cleanest' election in Iran ever.

Whew, I was worried there for a second. I'm glad our concerns are put to rest now

I guess that means that all of the previous elections have had even more fraud!

 

[Formaldehyde]

I bet Obama called Bush and asked him, "How did you deal with this nutcase".

Ahmed... is testing Obama.

There are those who would disagree with your personal assessment regarding our ongoing involvement in the affairs of a foreign country:

http://www.tehrantimes.com/index_View.asp?code=197207

TEHRAN (FNA) - Former U.S. National-Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski advised the U.S. administration to avoid interference in Iran’s internal affairs, warning that such attempts would backfire.

“There is a movement in the U.S. that does not believe in accompanying Iran and they misuse the current developments in Iran to attain their extremist policies against Tehran and they prefer to see a scenario in Iran similar to the one implemented in Iraq but it should be said that this is never in the U.S. interest,” Brzezinski told the London-based Arab language daily, Al-Hayat.

He further stated that the current developments in Iran are unlikely to leave an impact on U.S. position on the country.

Referring to the post-presidential election events and rallies in Tehran, Brzezinski stressed that despite protests by a limited number of the youth, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad enjoys a wide and strong support among the low and middle-class citizens.

President Ahmadinejad was re-elected the next president of the country with over 62% percent of the votes cast in Iran’s 10th presidential election on June 12.

He won over his three rivals Mir-Hossein Mousavi, Mehdi Karroubi and Mohsen Rezaei with almost 25 million votes.

Following the announcement of the election results, supporters of the defeated candidate Mir-Hossein Mousavi-who rejected the results - took to the streets of Tehran and other cities in daily rallies.

The U.S. administration has voiced support for demonstrators in a blatant violation of international rules and conventions on non-interference in other countries’ internal affairs.

Tehran has warned Washington against its interventionist approach and summoned Swiss Ambassador to Tehran, who also heads the U.S. interest section in Iran, to express its strong protest in the same regard.

And funny you should mention GWB:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2992628.stm

16 June, 2003

Iran has made a strong protest over what it calls American "interference" in its internal affairs.

The diplomatic move came after almost a week of anti-government protests, which US President George W Bush said were "the beginnings of people expressing themselves toward a free Iran".

The Iranian foreign ministry had already attacked the US for "flagrant interference in Iran's internal affairs", but a formal note has now been sent via the Swiss embassy in Tehran.

Thirty "miscreants and hooligans" are being held by police, after thousands took to the streets in a sixth night of demonstrations on Sunday.

A police commander quoted by the official Irna news agency did not say whether those detained were anti-regime protesters, or hardline Islamic vigilantes opposing them.

On Sunday an influential group of Iranian dissidents issued an unprecedented declaration defending the right to criticise their leaders.

As well as criticising the conservative clerics, demonstrators have also attacked the reformist President, Mohammad Khatami, who is accused of betraying hopes for change.

Growing numbers

The latest demonstrations were again concentrated around Tehran university's main campus.

Protesters converged on the area in cars, as they have been doing since the gathering of a few hundred students on Tuesday night grew into nightly protests by thousands of people.

Who are the vigilantes?

Hardline Islamic vigilantes, some carrying assault rifles and wearing bullet-proof vests, patrolled streets near the campus.

Gunshots were heard near the university late on Sunday but there are no reports of any casualties.

The vigilantes, loyal to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, have attacked demonstrators with clubs, knives and chains on previous nights.

Police have warned them against taking the law into their own hands.

'Heresy'

The statement from the dissidents has greatly increased the political temperature.

Signed by 248 intellectuals, reformist journalists and several clerics, it said the people of Iran had "the right to fully supervise the action of their rulers".

"Sitting or making individuals sit in the position of divine and absolute power is a clear heresy towards God and a clear affront to human dignity," said the declaration.

I have protested for six straight nights and I am not going to stop now

But reformist members of the Iranian establishment have joined the conservatives in strongly condemning US support for the demonstrations.

Some Iranian opposition groups fear that direct US support could play in the hands of the hardliners in the regime, BBC regional analyst Sadeq Saba says.

Student associations have said they will continue to demonstrate until 9 July, to commemorate the violent attack by hardline groups on students four years ago.

More on the roots of this conflict:

http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/art.php?id=7624

29 October 2005

Recent threats against Iran follow a history of imperialist interference. John Newsinger looks at how Britain and the US conspired to topple a popular Iranian government in the 1950s

At a time when Tony Blair and his partners in crime are starting to prepare British public opinion for US bombing raids on Iran, it is worth remembering the last time a Labour government prepared for military action against Iran.

This was not New Labour, but Old Labour, in point of fact, the 1945-51 Attlee government.

What provoked the government to prepare for military intervention was, incredible though it might seem, the Iranian decision to nationalise the country’s oil industry.

Iran had been part of Britain’s informal empire since before the First World War. Although not occupied and ruled by the British in the way that India was, nevertheless Iranian governments accepted that they had to govern their country the way the British wanted.

Failure to toe the line would provoke economic sanctions or intervention, either open or covert.

The discovery of oil at the beginning of the 20th century made the country all the more important to the British Empire. By the end of the Second World War, the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (AIOC), today’s BP, was Britain’s largest overseas asset.

In effect the AIOC ran the Iranian oil industry in the interests of British capitalism, with Iran’s interests not so much coming second as not running at all.

Profit

In 1950, for example, the AIOC made £200 million in profit, but paid the Iranians only £16 million in royalties, profit sharing and taxes.

It paid considerably more in taxes to the British government (£50 million) than it did to the Iranian government. Moreover this imperialist rip-off was the work of a company which was 51 percent owned by the British state.

The Iranians’ sense of injustice was compounded by the fact that their oil cost more at home than it did in Britain. And, of course, British officials, businessmen and the like behaved with the same racist arrogance as they did throughout the British Empire.

At the end of April 1951 popular pressure forced the Shah, the British-backed ruler of Iran, to appoint a nationalist government with Mohammed Mossadeq as prime minister. On 1 May 1951 he announced the nationalisation of the oil industry.

The Labour government responded with outrage. As Emanuel Shinwell, the minister of defence, warned, “If Persia was allowed to get away with it, Egypt and other Middle Eastern countries would be encouraged to try it on—the next thing might be an attempt to nationalise the Suez Canal.”

The foreign secretary, Peter Mandelson’s grandfather, Herbert Morrison, was strongly in favour of sending the troops in to seize the oilfields and overthrow Mossadeq.

He confessed to one official that he wished he “was Lord Palmerston”, longing for the days when a gunboat could be sent to intimidate the “natives”.

Like Shinwell, he warned the cabinet that “failure to exhibit firmness in this matter may prejudice our interests throughout the Middle East”. There were not the troops available to seize the oilfields though.

The Attlee government had already committed British troops to fight alongside the US in Korea, there was a brutal colonial war underway in Malaya and thousands of British troops were confronting the Egyptians who wanted their Canal Zone military bases back.

Instead, it was decided to seize the Abadan oil refinery in the appropriately named Operation Buccaneer. Hopefully this would bring about Mossadeq’s downfall.

What stopped this imperial adventure? Remarkably enough it was US opposition. The US was intent on undermining the British position throughout the Middle East and made clear that it would not support military action against Iran.

Attlee summed up the cabinet discussion, concluding that it was “the general view of the cabinet that, in the light of the United States’ attitude… force could not be used to hold the refinery… We could not afford to break with the United States on an issue of this kind.”

Once Labour lost power, Churchill’s Tory government cooperated with the US in covert action to overthrow Mossadeq.

Sanctions, introduced by Labour, had wrecked the Iranian economy and in August 1953 a CIA financed and organised coup (MI6 was a junior partner) was staged.

Mossadeq was overthrown and the Shah was installed as an absolute monarch, ruling through imprisonment, torture, execution and fear. There were no complaints about his regime’s methods from either the British or US governments.

The Iranian oil industry was placed in the hands of an international consortium in which the British found themselves with a much reduced 40 percent share as the US pushed them aside.

The US was replacing Britain as the dominant power in the Middle East and British governments were reluctantly beginning to realise that they were now US imperialism’s junior partner.

 

[Squonk]

I think Iran killed Jackson to divert attention from what's happening there :frownnod:

 

[MobBoss]

That'c completely irrelevant. It might normalise it, but it wouldn't legitimise it. Unless you think the USSR's similar behaviour shouldn't be condemned?

It simply should be countered. Which we do. May the best country win.

Who said anything about life being fair anyway? That being the reality of the situation makes it entirely relevant. Every (successful) nation of the world has influenced or attempted to influence its brother nations across the world to join them in their own particular definition of what success is. Why should the USA be held to a different standard simply because we have greater resources to do this?

 

[Squonk]

Boudewijn Roukema, a french (?) cosmologist working at Torun university in Poland, claims he's got another proof that the elections were forged. In 41 cases, the numbers of votes for Karoubi started with 7, while, according to Benford law, they should start with 1 and 2 most often. Benford law is used for detecting frauds in accounting.


I personally would like to add that most people, if they have to chose a number, chose 7...

 

[Miles Teg]

Squonk, we've been over that. To sum things up, it might be a valid proof of fraud, or it might be statistical noise. To know which would require some working knowledge of how Iran tallies it's votes that's we don't have. So basically, it's a wash at this point.

 

[zenspiderz]

Ahmadi re-pledges to fight corruption - presstv

“In parts of the society, people welcome justice but there are always a small group of people who refuse to give in to justice. They are the source of oppression and all of the country's problems,” President Ahmadinejad said in an address to Judiciary officials in Tehran on Saturday.

“The Executive branch is committed to the task of ensuring justice in a general sense… but there are always hurdles that greedy oppressors create to stop the course of justice,” he added.

By hurdles is he refering to mousavi trying to throw a wrench in his re-election?

In a fiery TV debate with rival candidate Mir-Hossein Mousavi, Ahmadinejad accused a number of Iranian figures of "graft", "financial corruption" and "money laundering."

Looks to me like rafsanjani and his cronies are going to jail.

 

[Whomp]

Last night I watched a fascinating documentary by Petr Lom. He's a filmmaker from Prague who was given access to the President. If anyone gets a chance I highly recommend watching it. There are 3 short clips on the filmmaker's website (link below).

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad – the first Iranian leader in a generation who is not a religious cleric – is one of the most controversial figures on the world stage. Though embraced by some Iranians – particularly the rural poor – as a "man of the people," he also divides opinion within his country. Filmmaker Petr Lom provides an up-close view of this complex leader when LETTERS TO THE PRESIDENT debuts WEDNESDAY JUNE 10 (8:00-9:00 p.m. ET/PT), two days before Ahmadinejad stands for reelection, exclusively on HBO2.Other HBO2 play dates: June 13 (11:00 p.m.), 15 (8:00 a.m.) and 26 (5:00 p.m.)

LETTERS TO THE PRESIDENT is one of three documentaries about Iran debuting on consecutive Wednesdays on HBO2 in June. The others are: "The Queen and I" (debuting June 17), chronicling the friendship between filmmaker Nahid Persson Sarvestani the deposed Queen Farah, wife of the late Shah of Iran, and "Be Like Others" (June 24), an intimate look at the world of Iraninan transsexuals living under strict Islamic rule.

As the only foreign documentary filmmaker granted permission to shoot President Ahmadinejad, Lom was given extraordinary access joining him on several of his populist trips to the countryside to capture the widely varying attitudes of Iranians toward their multi-faceted leader. The result is vivid snapshot of the personalities, policies and promises that shape today's Iran. In the course of his travels, President Ahmadinejad encourages people to write him outlining their misfortunes and receives letters that include everything from pleas for loans and medical attention, to entreaties for help in finding housing and jobs. In one missive, for example, a 16-year-old boy says his family has no money and goes to bed hungry every night. According to a staff member, the president has received about ten million letters, and responded to nearly three-quarters of them. The film reveals this "success" rate as largely propaganda, for very few people actually seem to get results from their letters.

LETTERS TO THE PRESIDENT visits Ahmadinejad's birthplace, Aradan, a town of 20,000, where the residents speak proudly of how he grew up to be a university professor, then Mayor of Tehran and finally President. One supporter says that some people complain about inflation and the price of rice, but would still vote for him again, observing that no one answered their letters before Ahmadinejad, while now there is a whole team dedicated to the task.

At the Presidential Letter Processing Center in Tehran, letters are sorted by the gender of the author, for only individuals of the same sex may review them. The readers are Basiji students, a religious paramilitary group that not only professes great love for their country, but are also considered trustworthy with the peoples' secrets.

Asked to comment on declarations from the United States and European Union that the elections are neither free nor fair, Ahmadinejad says, "The world's opinion is not so important. What matters is the people's decision." Some Iranians in the film echo his distrust of the foreign press, declaring that Ahmadinejad is brave, is interested in the people, gives good advice and has advanced nuclear power. They say Ahmadinejad has succeeded in foreign policy, but should focus more on domestic issues, specifically inflation. Of course, in Iran what people say and actually mean is never obvious: one man professes support for Ahmadinejad, all the while he is voting for the President's opponent.

Factions seem to divide between young and old, as well as between city and country. In Tehran, for instance, young men and women are extremely unlikely to embrace Ahmadinejad, arguing that those in the countryside write him, because they "are limited and can't see." Grievances include censorship and limits on freedom, his lack of response to women's issues, and the rules he imposes about wearing jewelry on both men and women.

LETTERS TO THE PRESIDENT had its world premiere at the Berlinale Film Festival last February and is currently screening at festivals worldwide.

Director Petr Lom's previous documentaries include "On a Tightrope," (Sundance Film Festival 2007) and "Bride Kidnapping in Kyrgyzstan." He is a former academic with a Ph.D. in political philosophy from Harvard University.
LETTERS TO THE PRESIDENT is directed, produced and edited by Petr Lom; executive producer, Behrooz Hashemian; co-producers, ARTE France and Point du Jour; consulting editors, Anna Contomitros and Jean Tsien.

http://www.letterstothepresidentmovie.com/webpages/director.html

 

[Newbunkle]

This is a bit old now, but I've only just seen it - creep George Galloway on Iranian TV:

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4

I couldn't watch this without cringing.

Also, here's some data on the election results: (click)

 

[luiz]

It'a a really interesting question if Obama will indeed isolate the fraudsters and murderers Khamenei and Ahmadinejad, or if he will go back to his attempt at including Iran back to the international community.

IMO the present crisis has shown that the West should not legitmise the criminal regime of Tehran.