Ahmadinejad Wins Iranian Vote

Status
Not open for further replies.
A Supreme Leader Loses His Aura as Iranians Flock to the Streets

TEHRAN — The Iranian police commander, in green uniform, walked up Komak Hospital Alley with arms raised and his small unit at his side. “I swear to God,” he shouted at the protesters facing him, “I have children, I have a wife, I don’t want to beat people. Please go home.”

A man at my side threw a rock at him. The commander, unflinching, continued to plead. There were chants of “Join us! Join us!” The unit retreated toward Revolution Street, where vast crowds eddied back and forth confronted by baton-wielding Basij militia and black-clad riot police officers on motorbikes.

Dark smoke billowed over this vast city in the late afternoon. Motorbikes were set on fire, sending bursts of bright flame skyward. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the supreme leader, had used his Friday sermon to declare high noon in Tehran, warning of “bloodshed and chaos” if protests over a disputed election persisted.

He got both on Saturday — and saw the hitherto sacrosanct authority of his office challenged as never before since the 1979 revolution birthed the Islamic Republic and conceived for it a leadership post standing at the very flank of the Prophet. A multitude of Iranians took their fight through a holy breach on Saturday from which there appears to be scant turning back.

Khamenei has taken a radical risk. He has factionalized himself, so losing the arbiter’s lofty garb, by aligning himself with President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad against both Mir Hussein Moussavi, the opposition leader, and Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, a founding father of the revolution.

He has taunted millions of Iranians by praising their unprecedented participation in an election many now view as a ballot-box putsch. He has ridiculed the notion that an official inquiry into the vote might yield a different result. He has tried pathos and he has tried pounding his lectern. In short, he has lost his aura.

The taboo-breaking response was unequivocal. It’s funny how people’s obsessions come back to bite them. I’ve been hearing about Khamenei’s fear of “velvet revolutions” for months now. There was nothing velvet about Saturday’s clashes. In fact, the initial quest to have Moussavi’s votes properly counted and Ahmadinejad unseated has shifted to a broader confrontation with the regime itself.

Garbage burned. Crowds bayed. Smoke from tear gas swirled. Hurled bricks sent phalanxes of police, some with automatic rifles, into retreat to the accompaniment of cheers. Early afternoon rumors that the rally for Moussavi had been canceled yielded to the reality of violent confrontation.

I don’t know where this uprising is leading. I do know some police units are wavering. That commander talking about his family was not alone. There were other policemen complaining about the unruly Basijis. Some security forces just stood and watched. “All together, all together, don’t be scared,” the crowd shouted.

I also know that Iran’s women stand in the vanguard. For days now, I’ve seen them urging less courageous men on. I’ve seen them get beaten and return to the fray. “Why are you sitting there?” one shouted at a couple of men perched on the sidewalk on Saturday. “Get up! Get up!”

Another green-eyed woman, Mahin, aged 52, staggered into an alley clutching her face and in tears. Then, against the urging of those around her, she limped back into the crowd moving west toward Freedom Square. Cries of “Death to the dictator!” and “We want liberty!” accompanied her.

There were people of all ages. I saw an old man on crutches, middle-aged office workers and bands of teenagers. Unlike the student revolts of 2003 and 1999, this movement is broad.

“Can’t the United Nations help us?” one woman asked me. I said I doubted that very much. “So,” she said, “we are on our own.”

The world is watching, and technology is connecting, and the West is sending what signals it can, but in the end that is true. Iranians have fought this lonely fight for a long time: to be free, to have a measure of democracy.

Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the leader of the Islamic revolution, understood that, weaving a little plurality into an authoritarian system. That pluralism has ebbed and flowed since 1979 — mainly the former — but last week it was crushed with blunt brutality. That is why a whole new generation of Iranians, their intelligence insulted, has risen.

I’d say the momentum is with them for now. At moments on Saturday, Khamenei’s authority, which is that of the Islamic Republic itself, seemed fragile. The revolutionary authorities have always mocked the cancer-ridden Shah’s ceding before an uprising, and vowed never to bend in the same way. Their firepower remains formidable, but they are facing a swelling test.

Just off Revolution Street, I walked into a pall of tear gas. I’d lit a cigarette minutes before — not a habit but a need — and a young man collapsed into me shouting, “Blow smoke in my face.” Smoke dispels the effects of the gas to some degree.

I did what I could and he said, “We are with you” in English and with my colleague we tumbled into a dead end — Tehran is full of them — running from the searing gas and police. I gasped and fell through a door into an apartment building where somebody had lit a small fire in a dish to relieve the stinging.

There were about 20 of us gathered there, eyes running, hearts racing. A 19-year-old student was nursing his left leg, struck by a militiaman with an electric-shock-delivering baton. “No way we are turning back,” said a friend of his as he massaged that wounded leg.

Later, we moved north, tentatively, watching the police lash out from time to time, reaching Victory Square where a pitched battle was in progress. Young men were breaking bricks and stones to a size for hurling. Crowds gathered on overpasses, filming and cheering the protesters. A car burst into flames. Back and forth the crowd surged, confronted by less-than-convincing police units.

I looked up through the smoke and saw a poster of the stern visage of Khomeini above the words, “Islam is the religion of freedom.

Later, as night fell over the tumultuous capital, gunfire could be heard in the distance. And from rooftops across the city, the defiant sound of “Allah-u-Akbar” — “God is Great” — went up yet again, as it has every night since the fraudulent election. But on Saturday it seemed stronger. The same cry was heard in 1979, only for one form of absolutism to yield to another. Iran has waited long enough to be free.

Hang in there, Iran! We will support and help you gain your freedom from tyranny that have long made your country hateful and evil!
 
Guardian Council: Over 100% voted in 50 cities

Iran's Guardian Council has suggested that the number of votes collected in 50 cities surpass the number of people eligible to cast ballot in those areas.

The council's Spokesman Abbas-Ali Kadkhodaei, who was speaking on the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting (IRIB) Channel 2 on Sunday, made the remarks in response to complaints filed by Mohsen Rezaei -- a defeated candidate in the June 12 Presidential election.

"Statistics provided by the candidates, who claim more than 100% of those eligible have cast their ballot in 80-170 cities are not accurate -- the incident has happened in only 50 cities," Kadkhodaei said.

Kadkhodaei further explained that the voter turnout of above 100% in some cities is a normal phenomenon because there is no legal limitation for people to vote for the presidential elections in another city or province to which people often travel or commute.

According to the Guardian Council spokesman, summering areas and places like district one and three in Tehran are not separable.

The spokesman, however, said that the vote tally affected by such issues could be over 3 million and would not noticably affect the outcome of the election.

He, however, added that the council could, at the request of the candidates, re-count the affected ballot boxes, and determine " whether the possible change in the tally is decisive in the election results," reported Khabaronline.

Three of the four candidates contesting in last Friday's presidential election cried foul, once the Interior Ministry announced the results - according to which incumbent President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was declared the winner with almost two-thirds of the vote.

Rezaei, along with Mir-Hossein Mousavi and Mehdi Karroubi, reported more than 646 'irregularities' in the electoral process and submitted their complaints to the body responsible for overseeing the election -- the Guardian Council.

Mousavi and Karroubi have called on the council to nullify Friday's vote and hold the election anew. This is while President Ahmadinejad and his Interior Minister Sadeq Mahsouli have rejected any possibility of fraud, saying that the election was free and fair.
 
Iran 'world's biggest prison for journalists' - RSF
PARIS (AFP) - With 33 Iranian journalists and bloggers in jail, Iran ranks alongside China as the world's biggest prison for journalists, the press rights group Reporters Without Borders (RSF) said Sunday.

The Paris-based organisation voiced alarm after several high-profile journalists were arrested including Jila Baniyaghoob and her husband Bahaman Ahamadi Amoee, who were taken from their Tehran home on Saturday.

Baniyaghoob, winner of the Courage in Journalism prize awarded by the US-based International Women's Media Foundation, ran a news website focusing on women's issues and her husband Amoee wrote for various pro-reform publications.

The couple was arrested by "intelligence ministry officials in plain clothes who searched their home and then took them away to an as-yet unknown location, probably the security wing of Tehran's Evin prison," said RSF in a statement.

Also arrested on Saturday was Ali Mazroui, head of the Association of Iranian journalists, it added.

RSF also said that Mohammad Ghochani, editor of Etemad Meli, a newspaper owned by an opposition candidate, was arrested on Thursday and blogger and human rights activist Shiva Nazar Ahara was taken from her Tehran home last Sunday.

"The Islamic republic of Iran now ranks alongside China as the world's biggest prison for journalists," said RSF.

"Iran now has a total of 33 journalists and cyber-dissidents in its jails, while journalists who could not be located at their homes have been summoned by telephone by Tehran prosecutor general Said Mortazavi," it added.

The press freedom watchdog said that jailed journalists were under pressure to make filmed confessions and that there were allegations of torture.

"The regime has been visibly shaken by its own population and does not want to let this perception endure. That is why the media have become a priority target," said RSF.

The organisation called on the international community to speak out against the media crackdown in Iran following the disputed June 12 presidential election.

Keep criticizing, McCain! Bring down that hammer of justice! :mad2:
 
Keep on truckin', Obama, keep on truckin'! :lol:
 


Also there are two more important factors that you should know:

This year's voting turnout in Iranian Presidential Election astronomically raised to around 80 percent from about 50 percent from the last Presidential Election. That sounds very fishy.

And, most importantly, Ahmadinejad beat Moussavi in Moussavi's district. Coincidence? No friggin' way!
 
Also there are two more important factors that you should know:

This year's voting turnout in Iranian Presidential Election astronomically raised to around 80 percent from about 50 percent from the last Presidential Election. That sounds very fishy.

And, most importantly, Ahmadinejad beat Moussavi in Moussavi's district. Coincidence? No friggin' way!

there you go. I don't support either candidate but that's not up to me. It's up to Iranians. The whole point of my stance and the American stance on this issue is the very democratic principle of "election" that is at stake. So is free speech.

What's the point of election if they're rigging it?
 
1. Has Israel threaten anybody including Iran with nuke?



Israel threatening Iran with ‘nukes’


2. Has USA threaten anybody with nuke?



http://www.nukewatch.com/Quarterly/20062summer/page 1.pdf


3. Who is more likely to threaten with nuke? Iran or USA?

I am not fan of Ahmadinejad and disagree with his policy system but...

It would more likely to threaten with nuke is the USA IF McCain is president of the USA. Thank God, McCain lost his election to Obama.

I´m glad and relieved that Obama is president of the USA because most of his policy system is more safety to me.
 
I already posted about more information on nuclear weapon in other thread that has same topic about Iran.

I have admit that you don't have experience about nuclear weapon, you need talk to nuclear specialist because nuclear weapon shouldn't used in countries that where government is unstable, including Iran and Pakistan made big mistake with nuclear weapon because terrorists would have any chance to takeover the nuclear faculty and attack against other countries.

If you think you know everything then is fine. :)

Short answer is no, Iran shouldn't have nuclear weapon, period and our government don't confirm about Israel want attack against Iran, that's full of bullshit and get fact before you make up the stories.

You should check with me first instead of jump on me.

I am total surprised that you didn´t know that Israel want to attack Iran since 2006. It look like that US Media and TV news never told you about this.

Revealed: Israel plans nuclear strike on Iran

Revealed: Israel plans nuclear strike on Iran - Times Online

Israel asked US for green light to bomb nuclear sites in Iran

Israel asked US for green light to bomb nuclear sites in Iran | World news | guardian.co.uk

President George W Bush backs Israeli plan for strike on Iran


President George W Bush backs Israeli plan for strike on Iran - Times Online

I know since 2006 about Israeli´s threat.

That´s why Iran has right to use nuclear power to defend/protect his country.
 
If you think you know everything then is fine. :)



You should check with me first instead of jump on me.

I am total surprised that you didn´t know that Israel want to attack Iran since 2006. It look like that US Media and TV news never told you about this.

Revealed: Israel plans nuclear strike on Iran

Revealed: Israel plans nuclear strike on Iran - Times Online

Israel asked US for green light to bomb nuclear sites in Iran

Israel asked US for green light to bomb nuclear sites in Iran | World news | guardian.co.uk

President George W Bush backs Israeli plan for strike on Iran


President George W Bush backs Israeli plan for strike on Iran - Times Online

I know since 2006 about Israeli´s threat.

That´s why Iran has right to use nuclear power to defend/protect his country.

Liebling - You are gravely confused so let me help you understand - Do you know why Israel is saying all those? Because Iran wants to have a nuclear weapon program that will threaten Israel. Israel's statement was a response to Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapon program.

Israel did not threaten to attack Iran with nuke but BOLDLY stated that they will keep nuclear option on the table of Iran choose to pursue nuclear weapon capability and to threaten with nuke.

btw - you might want to review the source you just provided me. It said Bush rejected the plan. :)
 
It would more likely to threaten with nuke is the USA IF McCain is president of the USA. Thank God, McCain lost his election to Obama.

I´m glad and relieved that Obama is president of the USA because most of his policy system is more safety to me.

WRONG ANSWER!

1. None of previous Administrations including GWB has never ever ever threaten anyone with nuke.
2. McCain is not the President of United States so your answer is invalid
3. Even if McCain is the POTUS - he wouldn't threaten with nuke.
 
1. None of previous Administrations including GWB has never ever ever threaten anyone with nuke.

Don't think they were never capable of it or never thought about it. One previous Administration (not sure which) was prepared to kill of Prime Minister Trudeau in order to get to Castro. If the US government was once willing to almost annihilate Canadian-US relations over Castro, who's to say that they wouldn't be capable of throwing a nuke on Iran? The US government is much smarter than the Irani government and wouldn't threaten a nuke, they would just do a surprise attack.
 
Because they didn't yet have the technological or military ability. They are now getting closer to that ability.

Iran repeated that they have no interesting for want to have nuclear weapons but nuclear power/techonological.

Iran is a member of the Global Wind Energy Council.

Wind power in Iran - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I see why not if Iran want to have one to protect his country toward Israel´s threat.


Iranians did attack the U.S. Embassy in Iran, which is politically the same thing as attacking Americans on their own soil.

U.S. Embassy in Iran was being attacked by anti-american terrorist group, not the people from Iran Government.

It's about stupidity.

Can you please clarify what you try to tell me?

Why should we get rid of our defensive weapons and allow other countries to attack us?

Where have I say that only US should rid of weapons? I only see that I said that every country including the USA has the right to defend their country. Please re-read my posts carefully.

It about fair because every country want to protect their people and country.


Should all the police get rid of their guns first and hope that all the criminals will do the same?

Ridiculous.

[SIZE="3[FONT="Century Gothic"][/FONT]"]:confused: Sorry, your post make no sense... Like what I said before that EVERY country has the right to defend/protect their own people. The USA has no right to forbid other country for use weapons when the USA have one.

:roll:[/SIZE]


I've personally known Iranian people who lived in the USA.

Yes, I also, too.

I beg your pardon? Who said that the US military "hates" Iran?

Please re-read why I response someone´s post instead of pick on me and misinterpreted my post.
 
Don't think they were never capable of it or never thought about it. One previous Administration (not sure which) was prepared to kill of Prime Minister Trudeau in order to get to Castro. If the US government was once willing to almost annihilate Canadian-US relations over Castro, who's to say that they wouldn't be capable of throwing a nuke on Iran? The US government is much smarter than the Irani government and wouldn't threaten a nuke, they would just do a surprise attack.

nuke and a political assassination are completely different. beside - back in old time, the political assassination was sanctioned. since 1976 - President Ford issued a decree that we no longer do political assassination which is why we cannot assassinate Osama bin Laden when our special force had him in their sight.

and plus - with political assassination... you have a plausible deniability whereas... you don't with nuke. and a political assassination is the elimination of one person while nuke kills thousands.
 
Liebling - You are gravely confused so let me help you understand - Do you know why Israel is saying all those? Because Iran wants to have a nuclear weapon program that will threaten Israel. Israel's statement was a response to Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapon program.

Israel did not threaten to attack Iran with nuke but BOLDLY stated that they will keep nuclear option on the table of Iran choose to pursue nuclear weapon capability and to threaten with nuke.

btw - you might want to review the source you just provided me. It said Bush rejected the plan. :)

:laugh2: You denied to defend Isreal...

No matter what...

Yes, Isreal DID threat Iran, period.

Bush stop Iseral.

We know since 2006 that Isreal want to attack Iran. I´m sorry that you refused to see it.

 
Liebling - You are gravely confused so let me help you understand - Do you know why Israel is saying all those? Because Iran wants to have a nuclear weapon program that will threaten Israel. Israel's statement was a response to Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapon program.

I do not need your lecture, thank you.

I know what I am saying.

You do not need to defend Israel but the fact is Israel WANT to attack Iran
.

Israel did not threaten to attack Iran with nuke but BOLDLY stated that they will keep nuclear option on the table of Iran choose to pursue nuclear weapon capability and to threaten with nuke.

Yes, Israel threat Iran.

btw - you might want to review the source you just provided me. It said Bush rejected the plan. :)

Of course I know... I can read the title " President George W Bush backs Israeli plan for strike on Iran"

I posted that link because Foxrac said "our government don't confirm about Israel want attack against Iran"


I already said at earlier that Bush stop Iseral.

What´s your point?
 
nuke and a political assassination are completely different. beside - back in old time, the political assassination was sanctioned. since 1976 - President Ford issued a decree that we no longer do political assassination which is why we cannot assassinate Osama bin Laden when our special force had him in their sight.

and plus - with political assassination... you have a plausible deniability whereas... you don't with nuke. and a political assassination is the elimination of one person while nuke kills thousands.

Nope. Just hundreds. :P
 
WRONG ANSWER!

1. None of previous Administrations including GWB has never ever ever threaten anyone with nuke.
2. McCain is not the President of United States so your answer is invalid
3. Even if McCain is the POTUS - he wouldn't threaten with nuke.

Simple is we most know that McCain is a warmonger and song "bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran".

McCain think it´s funny but we don´t...

We do not trust McCain as the president of the USA. It´s very scary to have him as the President of the USA.
 
Simple is we most know that McCain is a warmonger and song "bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran".

McCain think it´s funny but we don´t...

We do not trust McCain as the president of the USA. It´s very scary to have him as the President of the USA.


who are WE? In your country? just wonder.
 
who are WE? In your country? just wonder.

WE most which mean is Most people including myself.


Most people from many countries around the world including Germany (myself) favor Obama - plenty of links everywhere in Election 2008 threads.

I am sure that you remember that many countries around the world are excited and relieved after learn that McCain lost his election to Obama. They have big party to honor him.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top