Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
It matters not to me who they were for. It's this little matter of the physical impossibility of hand-counting 30 MILLION plus, hand written votes BY HAND in just two hours. Or even twelve.Announcing a overwhelming landslide victory for the incumbent a mere two hours after the polls closed isn't "conjecture" it actually happened.Yeah, that's one of those things that make it look like there was fraud. There might have been. It looks like. I personally think there was. But as you both said, it's all "conjecture."
especially with a turnout of 85% voting, most against said incumbent.
Really? Take a look at what's been written since the release of the paper:
Twitter: What are you doing?
Imagine if he bothered to speak.
Well, thanks for ignoring my every point again, Annie.
Anyway, uh, what is this? It just sends me to the log-in page. Can you copy paste whatever it is you want me to see?
[And of course, please think for a second about the source you're using]
Works fine here too.Really? Take a look at what's been written since the release of the paper:
Twitter: What are you doing?
Imagine if he bothered to speak.
Well, thanks for ignoring my every point again, Annie.
Anyway, uh, what is this? It just sends me to the log-in page. Can you copy paste whatever it is you want me to see?
[And of course, please think for a second about the source you're using]
I've tried to fix the link, works for me.
He is not only LATE to the party, a statement over Twitter by one of his staffers who pretends to be him is hardly earth shattering. His earlier statements? Weak.
His statements have been weak. The Iranian people who are protesting are calling out to him, for hope, and he's partying in the WH.
Announcing a overwhelming landslide victory for the incumbent a mere two hours after the polls closed isn't "conjecture" it actually happened.Yeah, that's one of those things that make it look like there was fraud. There might have been. It looks like. I personally think there was. But as you both said, it's all "conjecture."
especially with a turnout of 85% voting, most against said incumbent.
Announcing a overwhelming landslide victory for the incumbent a mere two hours after the polls closed isn't "conjecture" it actually happened.
especially with a turnout of 85% voting, most against said incumbent.
And you know this how??
As for the link: I don't have a twitter. It'll take a while before I jump in to that one. So, can you copy paste some of these things, and tell me exactly how it matters? It's pretty clear that if you're one of the few in Iran with access to the Internet and english-language skills you're probably firmly in the Moussavi camp.
Pretty much what he JUST NOW finally said, in an actual official written statement just released.He is not only LATE to the party, a statement over Twitter by one of his staffers who pretends to be him is hardly earth shattering. His earlier statements? Weak.
His statements have been weak. The Iranian people who are protesting are calling out to him, for hope, and he's partying in the WH.
*Sigh* Ok, MM. What would YOU have said, if you were president?
Chew on this:I know that the announcement actually happened 2 hours after voting closed
Announcing a overwhelming landslide victory for the incumbent a mere two hours after the polls closed isn't "conjecture" it actually happened.
especially with a turnout of 85% voting, most against said incumbent.
And you know this how??
I know that the announcement actually happened 2 hours after voting closed. What is conjecture is that one side won or lost. We don't fucking know. Stop pretending that you do.
As for the link: I don't have a twitter. It'll take a while before I jump in to that one. So, can you copy paste some of these things, and tell me exactly how it matters? It's pretty clear that if you're one of the few in Iran with access to the Internet and english-language skills you're probably firmly in the Moussavi camp. That much we can know.
Commentary: Iran's hardliners are the real losers
Story Highlights
Fawaz Gerges: Iran's ruling mullahs forfeited their public support in the election
Gerges: Ruling mullahs are out of step with women and young voters
He says hardliners are swimming against the current of Iranian society
By Fawaz A. Gerges
Special to CNN
Editor's note: Fawaz A. Gerges holds the Christian A. Johnson Chair in Middle Eastern Studies and International Affairs at Sarah Lawrence College. His most recent book is "The Far Enemy: Why Jihad Went Global."
(CNN) -- With an apparent political coup in Iran by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his supporters over the weekend, the ruling mullahs have dispensed with all democratic pretense and joined the ranks of traditional dictators in the Middle East.
The hardliners in Tehran, led by the Revolutionary Guards and ultraconservatives, have won the first round against reformist conservatives but at an extravagant cost: loss of public support.
Widespread accusations of fraud and manipulation are calling into question the very legitimacy and authority of the mullahs' Islamic-based regime. The electoral crisis has exposed a deepening divide between female and young voters, who represent about 70 percent of the population, and a radical conservative ruling elite out of touch with the hopes, fears and aspirations of young Iranians.
The consensus in Iran, particularly among young voters, is that the election was stolen from reformist candidate, Mir Hossein Moussavi, and that the outcome did not reflect the electorate's genuine will.
After the Interior Ministry announced the final election results showing a nearly 2-to-1 landslide for Ahmadinejad (62.63 to 33.75 percent), thousands of young protesters took to the streets and clashed with police and set trash bins and tires ablaze. Shock and disbelief turned to anger and rage.
What poured gasoline on a simmering fire among the youth was a belief of widespread fraud. "It's like taking 10 million votes away from Moussavi and giving them to Ahmadinejad," said Tehran-based analyst Saeed Leilaz. That is equivalent to more than 30 million votes in the American electorate....
especially with a turnout of 85% voting, most against said incumbent.
And you know this how??
As for the link: I don't have a twitter. It'll take a while before I jump in to that one. So, can you copy paste some of these things, and tell me exactly how it matters? It's pretty clear that if you're one of the few in Iran with access to the Internet and english-language skills you're probably firmly in the Moussavi camp.
That's bs, unless of course every university student is in Mousavi camp? You may be onto something there, given the demographics in Iran.
And you know this how??
As for the link: I don't have a twitter. It'll take a while before I jump in to that one. So, can you copy paste some of these things, and tell me exactly how it matters? It's pretty clear that if you're one of the few in Iran with access to the Internet and english-language skills you're probably firmly in the Moussavi camp.
That's bs, unless of course every university student is in Mousavi camp? You may be onto something there, given the demographics in Iran.
Let me reiterate: You know most of the 85% voted for Moussavi... HOW? Where can I get access to the previledged information?
Look, I PERSONALLY think there was election fraud. There is wierd shit about the results. The speed of the vote count is one of the most suspicious parts. The huge landslide win resulting in week long protests doesn't make any sense. But the fact is that YOU don't fucking know who won! and I don't fucking know! and MM doesn't fucking know! And really, none of us have the slightest fucking clue what's going on or who won! And THAT is why world leaders can't come out immediately after an election and declare it fraudulent... because they don't fucking know! And that is why we have to wait and see what the fuck happens.
Basically, what should happen is exactly what this guy from the OP is trying to rip apart. A re-vote, with independent observers [and yeah, hopefully international observers] and panels from all candidates, etc. etc. There IS no other thing to do short of armed insurrection.
I would have come out, shortly after the announcement of the victory, on worldwide TV and said: (In the Obama Style)*Sigh* Ok, MM. What would YOU have said, if you were president?
Posted: June 20, 2009 02:57 PM
Biden-Obama Axis Shifts Biden's Way on Iran
It's a good thing when a president and vice president have constructive, creative tension in their relationship and don't see eye to eye on everything. Joe Biden has seen his role in the Obama administration as "adviser-in-chief" and for the most part has kept his differences with Obama off the record and away from public view.
One split with Obama, however, has been the president's stand on Iran. Sources report to me that recently the vice president made comments that Obama needed to speak in support of the Iranians in the streets demanding that their votes count. Biden has not wanted to inject the United States into the fray -- but he has wanted the White House to express admiration and support for the risks Iranian citizens are taking to secure democracy.
Recently, Biden said of Obama that the president always evolves in the right direction -- and that he would get to "the right place" on Iran.
Geostrategically, I agree with those who argue that no matter who ends up running the helm of Iran's political system, the United States will have to engage that leadership and negotiate over highly important strategic threats and realities that will be there no matter who ultimately prevails in Iran's current Civil War.
That said, I don't think that any president of the United States should disrespect the bravery of what is happening not just in Tehran now but throughout Iran. The election is not over -- and it should not be preempted by comments from the White House.
The president has just issued a statement now that makes clear the concern of president Obama for those trying to secure their rights and political voice.
It's a perfect statement and shows clearly Joe Biden's influence:
Statement from the President on Iran
The Iranian government must understand that the world is watching. We mourn each and every innocent life that is lost. We call on the Iranian government to stop all violent and unjust actions against its own people. The universal rights to assembly and free speech must be respected, and the United States stands with all who seek to exercise those rights.
As I said in Cairo, suppressing ideas never succeeds in making them go away. The Iranian people will ultimately judge the actions of their own government. If the Iranian government seeks the respect of the international community, it must respect the dignity of its own people and govern through consent, not coercion.
Martin Luther King once said -- "The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice." I believe that. The international community believes that. And right now, we are bearing witness to the Iranian peoples' belief in that truth, and we will continue to bear witness.
This revolution, if that is what it is in Iran, is not about us, not about Americans, or Brits, or any others. It is about the Iranian citizens who have had enough with their own government.
I don't know who will win in the end -- but those who are being brutalized in the street and risking everything to challenge Ahmadinejad and his thugs deserve our respect and our nuanced support.
Steve Clemons directs the foreign policy programs at the New America Foundation and publishes the popular political blog, The Washington Note
I meant, but agree wasn't clear, that the vast increase in voters were among the young, most likely to go for the change.
However, your language most definitely makes me want to be rational, like you. Sorry I was so disrespectful.
That's just the way I talk!I would have come out, shortly after the announcement of the victory, on worldwide TV and said: (In the Obama Style)*Sigh* Ok, MM. What would YOU have said, if you were president?
"I umm.... call into uhh-question.... Umm, the ability of any nation...... Ahh.. to count 30 million..... Ahh-votes, by hand. Ahhh-without machines or computers... in just two hours. Or even twelve. Ummm-my concern... is the physical impossibility of that...... Ahh.. unless they had about a half million...... Umm-people doing the counting.... Ahh-and started counting..... Umm... right when the polls opened. Not even our friends the Japanese..... Umm-are that efficient."
And, could have been 3-4 days earlier with it.I pretty much agree with the statement, though I think he could have read it instead of just releasing it.Statement from the President on Iran
The Iranian government must understand that the world is watching. We mourn each and every innocent life that is lost. We call on the Iranian government to stop all violent and unjust actions against its own people. The universal rights to assembly and free speech must be respected, and the United States stands with all who seek to exercise those rights.
As I said in Cairo, suppressing ideas never succeeds in making them go away. The Iranian people will ultimately judge the actions of their own government. If the Iranian government seeks the respect of the international community, it must respect the dignity of its own people and govern through consent, not coercion.
Martin Luther King once said -- "The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice." I believe that. The international community believes that. And right now, we are bearing witness to the Iranian peoples' belief in that truth, and we will continue to bear witness.
It should have come earlier. It could have been a "tear down this wall" moment for our country and for Obama. Now? It's a belated whimper.Ok, so yeah, he COULD'VE said so 3-4 days ago, but it was YESTERDAY that the Ayatollah made his "there will be blood" speech. Today has been the most violent day. Now is when it's heating up. Most of the week we didn't KNOW what was going to happen, maybe the Ayatollah would've reconsidered- it was yesterday we know we won't, and the people are still coming out. These things have to be taken carefully, people.
But hey, at least we're all on a somewhat similar page now. At least the same chapter.
If only he would take his own words to heart....it must respect the dignity of its own people and govern through consent, not coercion.
When you are sitting on the sidelines, it is easy to say Obama should be doing more. He doesn't want to give the supreme leader more reason to crack down on the protesters. If he encourages the revolt, then this is seen as a US orchstrated movement. If he doesn't encourage them, he is called spineless my the republicans. They can make many accusations, since their words mean very little.
Obama is measuring evey word he is saying. Pretty much a catch 22 position he is in. One in which he cannot win, as I see it.
