Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله


Advanced Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Kalashnikov

  1. Montazeri was a traitor. End of story. I personally have no sympathy for traitors.
  2. God forbid Iran becomes secular, not because I am religious or what not. But the "Green Movement" is not the majority of the Iranian nation no matter how much the West try hard to depict that image. Let's say this "Good secular" change takes place, what are you going to do with the Basij Militia who have been ideologically and religiously influenced, would they just stand there and take it? I doubt it. Secularism today means one thing: Divided, weak, pro-Capitalist, and a pro-Western country.
  3. Exactly, if you were Iranian. But you're not! So you're stance does not matter what so ever.
  4. Western media: Biased, one sided, spreading disinformation.
  5. First off, In 1979 this is what people chose. Second if this current political system was to be changed then the people will rise up to that occasion since the man who posted this thread said they are a "majority." Suppose you want all that change, then fight and fight as much as you can, shed you're blood, be the cause of death, or perhaps you can allow yourself to be a western tool for a machiavelli form of revolution, maybe a velvet revolution? You can do almost anything in Iran, people flirt, people get drunk and have drugs just don't go doing that in public (in some cases this does happen in public.) Neda agha soltan? Who cares really, I can recall 1000 more names who died during the Islamic revolution period. Like I said, if you want you're changes then be prepared to fight as much as you can or allow yourself to be a western puppet because the current establishment will not deplete easily. Here you can start off with how the west causes overthrow of governments by reading this book: "The Prince" by Niccolò Machiavelli good luck. I would say salam but traitors do not deserve it.
  6. WASHINGTON (AFP) — The White House posted a video on its website on Tuesday featuring a simultaneous translation into Farsi of US President Barack Obama's comments on Iran. The White House website, www.whitehouse.gov, also posted a Farsi-language transcript of the remarks about the situation in Iran made by Obama at a press conference earlier in the day. Obama opened the press conference with a statement about Iran, which has been rocked by days of protests over the recent presidential election. "The United States and the international community have been appalled and outraged by the threats, the beatings, and imprisonments of the last few days," Obama said. "I strongly condemn these unjust actions, and I join with the American people in mourning each and every innocent life that is lost," he said. About two-and-a-half hours after the press conference concluded, the White House posted a 3 minute, 24 second video on its website of Obama's opening remarks with a Farsi translation scrolling across the bottom of the screen. During the press conference, Obama also took a question from an unidentified Iranian submitted by Nico Pitney, a reporter for The Huffington Post website. source
  7. Kissinger Calls For "Regime" Change In Iran If Protests Fail Talking on BBC Newsnight Kissinger says that while the US will not intervene in the current crisis, if the coup fails and a popularly based government is not installed (ie the one he wants), then we may conclude that we must work for regime change in Iran from the outside. This is an indicted war criminal making threats against a sovereign nation. Zbigniew Brzezinski discusses "intelligent manipulation" in Iran video link fixed sorry.
  8. How the west backs a colour revolution in Iran. by Russia Today.
  9. Hey her fiance said that. I can quote him if you like. Second, if my daughter was that much of an idiot to go out where riots and protests are taking place and I have seen videos of her chanting and shouting. Yeah she can get shot. Enshallah god will not give me a stupid daughter. Third, people are saying she is a "Martyr" so they should be proud she gave her blood to the rightful cause supposedly. If they want to seek sympathy this would be a lost cause.
  10. People who know me personally know how I am. I have nothing to hide. As I said she was a sacrifice, the same way the poor gave their blood during the Iran-Iraq war. They want change? let them give some blood. Those Basijis protected the homeland where were these "Where is my vote" losers when that happened? I've seen this girls picture, some rich spoilt girl. I don't even see the reason for anyone to shoot her anyway. She was a no body, still is a no body, always will be a no body. Stop trying to make an icon out of a no body. She was some art student was into music. Elah Jahanam wa be's al maseer. Time to remember those who died fighting during the 8 years of brutality. Time to remember our brave Iraqi brethren during Saddam's tyrannical regime, during the American oppression, time to remember our Palestinian brothers, time to remember our dear brothers in Lebanon who have raised our heads with pride. Neda? There were many more braver and had more value in life than this "music" "Art" lover who died for "Secular Freedom" I'd put another bullet just to make a point. Secular Freedom is NOT welcome, foreign influence is NOT welcome.
  11. Uh, Did I ever once say otherwise? She got shot she was an idiot for leaving KNOWING people were getting kill. "Stupidity is the greatest sin" They say terrorists shot her. If it was the Basij, hey man, good shot.
  12. The ousted Shah of Iran Mohammad-Reza Pahlavi's son urges Israel to support post-election riots in Iran to bring down the government of Tehran. Reza Pahlavi, who is seen as a promising figure in pushing for a change of the government in Iran, told Maariv that Israel should back up recently sparked riots in Iran following the re-election of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as the next president of the country. The very existence of the ruling government in Iran could lead to a nuclear Holocaust, the former crown prince said but warned against an Israeli attack on the country. Under the accusation that Iran poses an 'existential threat' to Israel, Tel Aviv, the Middle East's sole possessor of nuclear warheads, has repeatedly threatened Tehran with a military attack over its nuclear work. Reza Pahlavi said that any military attack against Tehran could prompt the Iranians to stand by the government instead and therefore it would shatter hopes of any resumption of ties between Iran and Israel. Iran and Israel had close ties before the 1979 Islamic Revolution overthrew the US-backed monarchy in Iran. The two cut off all relations following the revolution with Iran refusing to recognize Israel as a state. Post-election unrests were sparked after the Interior Ministry declared Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as the winner of the presidential election. The capital, Tehran, and other cities have been the scene of illegal rallies in protest to the election results. The rallies have provoked unprecedented disorder in Iran over the past nine days. Calm has, however, returned to Tehran after the Police warned against any illegal gatherings on Saturday. Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki and the Foreign Ministry Spokesman Hassan Qashqavi criticized certain Western countries for their meddling in the country's internal affairs. Iranian officials have blamed US and British media outlets for the recent post-election turmoil across the country. "Voice of America (VOA) and the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) are state-funded channels and not privately-run. Their budgets are ratified in the US Congress, as well as the British Parliament. The two channels serve as mouthpieces of their respective governments," Qashqavi stated on Saturday. Iran says the two media outlets have been dramatizing the situation in Iran by providing extensive coverage of the country's developments and provoking the post-election violence. Over the past few weeks, the US and a certain number of European countries have expressed dismay over the recent political process in the country. The Iranian Foreign Ministry has summoned the ambassadors from Britain, France, Switzerland, the Czech Republic and Canada to warn them against interfering in the internal affairs of the country. source
  13. source TEHRAN, June 22 (Xinhua) -- Iran's security forces have arrested five European spies, the semi-official Fars news agency reported on Monday. Iranian security forces identified and arrested five European spies during the Saturday unrest in Tehran, the report said. "According to the dispatched reports, two German, one British and two French spies have been arrested during the unrest in Tehran on Saturday," Fars said without elaborating the details. In a statement released by Iran's Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) on Monday, Western countries were warned not to support the rioters in Iran. Since the eruption of a series of political protests against the results of Iran's presidential elections, Iran has incessantly accused the Westerners of interfering in Iran's internal affairs. On June 13, Iran's Interior Minister Sadeq Mahsouli said incumbent President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad won 62.63 percent of the total ballots on June 12, while his main rival Mir-Hossein Mousavi got 33.75 percent. After the official declaration, Mousavi protested "strongly" the "obvious violations" in Iran's presidential election. He also appealed to the Guardian Council for the cancellation of the election results. Mousavi's supporters have participated in several massive rallies in Tehran and other cities over the past days. The rallies have resulted in the death of a number of civilians and injury of several others. On Monday, Iran's police announced that they have arrested 457 people in the post-election violence that erupted Saturday in Tehran despite warnings against illegal gatherings.
  14. Please do. What will it change? Nothing. She was a no body. I don't even see the point of her getting shot. but life goes on anyway.
  15. OH! so he was innocent? Yet he got shot! wait If I remember, the guy got bullet riddled. I Don't even hear the mention of this anymore. But because this girl was protesting against the Iranian government shes a Martyr? LOL. What about the 4 students in Ohio state university in 1970 protesting against the Vietnam war. If I recall correctly, it was 160 bullets in a minute? I'm just saying what the western media is saying. Made my day? These people are trying to make this girl's image look like the "Tank Man" from Tienanmen's square. Even though the french protests were way worse, its not called one of the "Worst riots in history." but this is. If you're emotional then I suggest you don't really discuss this. To me she was collateral damage, she was blood that will create a greater good, similar to the "Tank Man" of China. Iran will reform, the nation will be better. End of Story, there are no more protests anyway. Note: To all of you who think you can get rid of the basij. I suggest you do not try and become bad asses or you will get a bullet for it.
  16. Her fiance came out on tv. saying she went to protest and her "aunt" told her that they are killing people and she shouldn't be out (This is what I read and heard on the news) Plus the fact that she felt "hot" so she got out of the car and got PWNED, sorry I mean shot. but.. Collateral damage. That's what you get for trying to be a bad ass and go against the basij. Besides the distance was far and he was on the roof anyway. Remember the Brazilian guy who got shot 6 times in the head point blank in the London tube? No one made him an iconic and revolutionary figure.
  17. Salam, can anyone translate åíåÇÊ ãäÇ ÇáÐáÉ in English for me please? I would appreciate it.
  18. This protest is over. People lost hope, they were talking about a "Strike" today and nothing happened. End of story, move on.
  19. source Twitter has helped spread plenty of false rumours about the protests in Iran. We should be wary of believing every tweet Here are a few of the things that we "learned" in the immediate aftermath of the Iranian elections: • The first big protest in Tehran, on Monday, numbered thee million people. • The losing candidate, Mir Hossein Mousavi, was put under house arrest. • The president of the election monitoring committee declared the election invalid. These are just a handful of data points that shot around the internet, via Twitter or the opposition-friendly blogs. And were instrumental in the early consolidation of the public opinion case against the Iranian government for undercounting the support for Mousavi. The problem is, it quickly emerged that none of these facts were true. The crowd was in the hundreds of thousands, most newspapers reported. Mousavi's own wife said he wasn't under house arrest Sunday, and Monday he appeared in person at the protest. And if the president of the election monitoring commission has gone over to the opposition, no serious reporter has reported it. One blog reported a set of "real" vote counts that were "leaked" from the interior ministry. But then a commenter said no, he had some other "real" results. One set had Ahmedinejad getting 28%, and another gave him 13%. These are just a few examples. Andrew Sullivan, who has been leading the charge in the US to try to get us all to wear green and support the opposition, says: "This event has been Twitter's finest hour." One of his commenters told him: "You are gathering information from a myriad of sources and putting it out there for a cohesive message. CNN, NY Times, et al are merely running an article about 'thousands' of protesters. Its a canned message from just a few stale sources." But instead, it looks like the internet is the medium for a lot of unfounded rumours by a lot of (understandably) passionate people in and out of Iran. This is a chaotic situation, and rumours flourish in that environment. I've been there. I remember spending a morning in Iraq, during the war, trying to track down confirmation that Tariq Aziz was killed in a hail of bullets trying to run a roadblock while fleeing into Kurdistan. Everyone was convinced it had happened. Later in the day he gave a press conference to demonstrate that he was still alive. In Serbia in 2001, as word began to spread that Slobodan Milosevic was going to be arrested soon, a crowd gathered in his backyard, and rumours spread several times that Milosevic had killed himself or that it was the CIA who was going to make the arrest. But in the pre-Twitter age, those sorts of rumours petered out quickly if they weren't true. If they were true, then journalists found out about them and reported them as fact. Now, the latter is still happening, which is why the journalists in Tehran now are writing pieces with considerably more nuance than what you see on blogs. But the former isn't true any more – rumours can have a longer lifespan on a network of sympathetic blogs, Facebook postings and Twitter feeds. At this point, we don't know if there was election fraud or not. Believers in each theory have their a set of data points, which are hard to rectify. Most attempts to figure it out, like this AP story, admit that the evidence is inconclusive. But the tweets keep coming. On Thursday, Sullivan called attention to a tweet that said "MOUSAVI asks GOOGLE to change logo to GREEN for 1 day - #Iranelection - to give hope to all Iran." Mousavi asked this to whom? To this single twitterer? No news organisation seemed to report it, though several blogs repeated Sullivan's assertion. Twitter's impact has probably been overstated in terms of organising the protests. The Twitter interface doesn't even allow the use of Farsi, and the relevant tweets have been in English, suggesting they are an attempt by opposition supporters to garner sympathy in the west. Blogs and other social media, however, are very popular in Iran – at least among the cultural sophisticates who lean overwhelmingly toward Mousavi. And they, by all accounts, were critical in organising support for Mousavi. But the same was true of Howard Dean, and look what happened to him. Without the high level of transparency of the election process and the credibility of opinion polls we have in the US, Deaniacs could have taken to the streets, too, claiming they were cheated. None of this is to excuse the behaviour of the government after the election results came out. Or to diminish the bravery and courage of the people who are out in the streets in Tehran getting beaten. But what if it's based on a lie? A net-fuelled, mass delusion of a lie? That the one third of people who voted for Mousavi convinced themselves, via a social media echo chamber that selectively picked rumours and amplified them until they appeared true, that they in fact represented two thirds of the country? And then tried to bring down the government based on that delusion? Maybe it's not the case this time. But doesn't this entire episode seem to show how such a thing could happen? And then what?
  20. As the dust settles it has become patently obvious to me that Mr. Mousavi badly misplayed his card and is simply a sore loser. The Interior Ministry has published the results in every single area and has provided the following explanation that has missed US media's attention: 1. Mr. Mousavi had some 40,676 representative at voting centers, a minimum of 2 at more than 95 percent of all the centers; 2. Mousavi was initially alloted some 45000 representatives and some were not accredited due to very late submission and insufficient information, missing photos, etc. 3. At each center, 14 observers including the candidates' observers oversaw the entire process, including inspection of empty boxes at the outset and their sealing at the end, with four locks, and then all signed a certificate of proper election, i.e., Mousavi's own men have certified the clean process. 4. the number of excess voting form 22 was actually 3 percent down compared to the previous election. 5. The official final results were announced at 4 pm the next day, 16 hours after the closure of voting. (all the other projections subject of so much media focus don't really count --KA). 5. due to summer travel/weekend, in some 50 places, mostly in resort areas of Caspian Sea, the voter turn out was more than 100 percent. There is nothing unusual about this and the official cites specific figures from a number of past elections including parliamentary elections to corroborate this. case in point, he says that in towns of Zorgan and Morv, the votes in the past presidential elections were 200 times more. Some of those areas Mr. Mousavi actually won. There were more than 60000 voting centers and therefore 50 such places is very miniscule. Unfortunately, some US media including the CNN have made a mountain of this mole by citing "official admission of discrepancy." Fact is that this all pales in comparison with how Mousavi abused the process by calling himself the definite winner one hour after closing of votes and then calling on his followers to "stage resistance." As someone who fully sympathizes with the basic demands of the democratic movement, I am appalled by the implicit US support for the hooligans who have torched hundreds of banks, some 300 buildings, etc., in the name of civic disobedience. US has failed to make any distiction and has one-sidedly criticized government's heavy-handed approach. Finally, the US media has come down hard on Khamenei, who consented to unique open and competitive elections only to see the egregious abuse of process by a self-declared reformist -- who is nothing but an unreconstructed Stalinist with atrocious record on free press and who in my opinion whose ego would not let him concede defeat. The media's Khamenei-bashing and romanticization of Mousavi and street mobs leaves a lot to be desired. None of this should be misinterpreted as condoning excessive violence by authorities however. source
  21. Iranian Elections: The ‘Stolen Elections’ Hoax by Prof. James Petras (source: Global Research) Monday, June 22, 2009 “Change for the poor means food and jobs, not a relaxed dress code or mixed recreation... Politics in Iran is a lot more about class war than religion.” Financial Times Editorial, June 15 2009 Introduction There is hardly any election, in which the White House has a significant stake, where the electoral defeat of the pro-US candidate is not denounced as illegitimate by the entire political and mass media elite. In the most recent period, the White House and its camp followers cried foul following the free (and monitored) elections in Venezuela and Gaza, while joyously fabricating an ‘electoral success’ in Lebanon despite the fact that the Hezbollah-led coalition received over 53% of the vote. The recently concluded, June 12, 2009 elections in Iran are a classic case: The incumbent nationalist-populist President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (MA) received 63.3% of the vote (or 24.5 million votes), while the leading Western-backed liberal opposition candidate Hossein Mousavi (HM) received 34.2% or (13.2 million votes). Iran’s presidential election drew a record turnout of more than 80% of the electorate, including an unprecedented overseas vote of 234,812, in which HM won 111,792 to MA’s 78,300. The opposition led by HM did not accept their defeat and organized a series of mass demonstrations that turned violent, resulting in the burning and destruction of automobiles, banks, public building and armed confrontations with the police and other authorities. Almost the entire spectrum of Western opinion makers, including all the major electronic and print media, the major liberal, radical, libertarian and conservative web-sites, echoed the opposition’s claim of rampant election fraud. Neo-conservatives, libertarian conservatives and Trotskyites joined the Zionists in hailing the opposition protestors as the advance guard of a democratic revolution. Democrats and Republicans condemned the incumbent regime, refused to recognize the result of the vote and praised the demonstrators’ efforts to overturn the electoral outcome. The New York Times, CNN, Washington Post, the Israeli Foreign Office and the entire leadership of the Presidents of the Major American Jewish Organizations called for harsher sanctions against Iran and announced Obama’s proposed dialogue with Iran as ‘dead in the water’. The Electoral Fraud Hoax Western leaders rejected the results because they ‘knew’ that their reformist candidate could not lose…For months they published daily interviews, editorials and reports from the field ‘detailing’ the failures of Ahmadinejad’s administration; they cited the support from clerics, former officials, merchants in the bazaar and above all women and young urbanites fluent in English, to prove that Mousavi was headed for a landslide victory. A victory for Mousavi was described as a victory for the ‘voices of moderation’, at least the White House’s version of that vacuous cliché. Prominent liberal academics deduced the vote count was fraudulent because the opposition candidate, Mousavi, lost in his own ethnic enclave among the Azeris. Other academics claimed that the ‘youth vote’ – based on their interviews with upper and middle-class university students from the neighborhoods of Northern Tehran were overwhelmingly for the ‘reformist’ candidate. What is astonishing about the West’s universal condemnation of the electoral outcome as fraudulent is that not a single shred of evidence in either written or observational form has been presented either before or a week after the vote count. During the entire electoral campaign, no credible (or even dubious) charge of voter tampering was raised. As long as the Western media believed their own propaganda of an immanent victory for their candidate, the electoral process was described as highly competitive, with heated public debates and unprecedented levels of public activity and unhindered by public proselytizing. The belief in a free and open election was so strong that the Western leaders and mass media believed that their favored candidate would win. The Western media relied on its reporters covering the mass demonstrations of opposition supporters, ignoring and downplaying the huge turnout for Ahmadinejad. Worse still, the Western media ignored the class composition of the competing demonstrations – the fact that the incumbent candidate was drawing his support from the far more numerous poor working class, peasant, artisan and public employee sectors while the bulk of the opposition demonstrators was drawn from the upper and middle class students, business and professional class. Moreover, most Western opinion leaders and reporters based in Tehran extrapolated their projections from their observations in the capital – few venture into the provinces, small and medium size cities and villages where Ahmadinejad has his mass base of support. Moreover the opposition’s supporters were an activist minority of students easily mobilized for street activities, while Ahmadinejad’s support drew on the majority of working youth and household women workers who would express their views at the ballot box and had little time or inclination to engage in street politics. A number of newspaper pundits, including Gideon Rachman of the Financial Times, claim as evidence of electoral fraud the fact that Ahmadinejad won 63% of the vote in an Azeri-speaking province against his opponent, Mousavi, an ethnic Azeri. The simplistic assumption is that ethnic identity or belonging to a linguistic group is the only possible explanation of voting behavior rather than other social or class interests. A closer look at the voting pattern in the East-Azerbaijan region of Iran reveals that Mousavi won only in the city of Shabestar among the upper and the middle classes (and only by a small margin), whereas he was soundly defeated in the larger rural areas, where the re-distributive policies of the Ahmadinejad government had helped the ethnic Azeris write off debt, obtain cheap credits and easy loans for the farmers. Mousavi did win in the West-Azerbaijan region, using his ethnic ties to win over the urban voters. In the highly populated Tehran province, Mousavi beat Ahmadinejad in the urban centers of Tehran and Shemiranat by gaining the vote of the middle and upper class districts, whereas he lost badly in the adjoining working class suburbs, small towns and rural areas. The careless and distorted emphasis on ‘ethnic voting’ cited by writers from the Financial Times and New York Times to justify calling Ahmadinejad ‘s victory a ‘stolen vote’ is matched by the media’s willful and deliberate refusal to acknowledge a rigorous nationwide public opinion poll conducted by two US experts just three weeks before the vote, which showed Ahmadinejad leading by a more than 2 to 1 margin – even larger than his electoral victory on June 12. This poll revealed that among ethnic Azeris, Ahmadinejad was favored by a 2 to 1 margin over Mousavi, demonstrating how class interests represented by one candidate can overcome the ethnic identity of the other candidate (Washington Post June 15, 2009). The poll also demonstrated how class issues, within age groups, were more influential in shaping political preferences than ‘generational life style’. According to this poll, over two-thirds of Iranian youth were too poor to have access to a computer and the 18-24 year olds “comprised the strongest voting bloc for Ahmadinejad of all groups” (Washington Porst June 15, 2009). The only group, which consistently favored Mousavi, was the university students and graduates, business owners and the upper middle class. The ‘youth vote’, which the Western media praised as ‘pro-reformist’, was a clear minority of less than 30% but came from a highly privileged, vocal and largely English speaking group with a monopoly on the Western media. Their overwhelming presence in the Western news reports created what has been referred to as the ‘North Tehran Syndrome’, for the comfortable upper class enclave from which many of these students come. While they may be articulate, well dressed and fluent in English, they were soundly out-voted in the secrecy of the ballot box. In general, Ahmadinejad did very well in the oil and chemical producing provinces. This may have be a reflection of the oil workers’ opposition to the ‘reformist’ program, which included proposals to ‘privatize’ public enterprises. Likewise, the incumbent did very well along the border provinces because of his emphasis on strengthening national security from US and Israeli threats in light of an escalation of US-sponsored cross-border terrorist attacks from Pakistan and Israeli-backed incursions from Iraqi Kurdistan, which have killed scores of Iranian citizens. Sponsorship and massive funding of the groups behind these attacks is an official policy of the US from the Bush Administration, which has not been repudiated by President Obama; in fact it has escalated in the lead-up to the elections. What Western commentators and their Iranian protégés have ignored is the powerful impact which the devastating US wars and occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan had on Iranian public opinion: Ahmadinejad’s strong position on defense matters contrasted with the pro-Western and weak defense posture of many of the campaign propagandists of the opposition. The great majority of voters for the incumbent probably felt that national security interests, the integrity of the country and the social welfare system, with all of its faults and excesses, could be better defended and improved with Ahmadinejad than with upper-class technocrats supported by Western-oriented privileged youth who prize individual life styles over community values and solidarity. The demography of voting reveals a real class polarization pitting high income, free market oriented, capitalist individualists against working class, low income, community based supporters of a ‘moral economy’ in which usury and profiteering are limited by religious precepts. The open attacks by opposition economists of the government welfare spending, easy credit and heavy subsidies of basic food staples did little to ingratiate them with the majority of Iranians benefiting from those programs. The state was seen as the protector and benefactor of the poor workers against the ‘market’, which represented wealth, power, privilege and corruption. The Opposition’s attack on the regime’s ‘intransigent’ foreign policy and positions ‘alienating’ the West only resonated with the liberal university students and import-export business groups. To many Iranians, the regime’s military buildup was seen as having prevented a US or Israeli attack. The scale of the opposition’s electoral deficit should tell us is how out of touch it is with its own people’s vital concerns. It should remind them that by moving closer to Western opinion, they removed themselves from the everyday interests of security, housing, jobs and subsidized food prices that make life tolerable for those living below the middle class and outside the privileged gates of Tehran University. Amhadinejad’s electoral success, seen in historical comparative perspective should not be a surprise. In similar electoral contests between nationalist-populists against pro-Western liberals, the populists have won. Past examples include Peron in Argentina and, most recently, Chavez of Venezuela, Evo Morales in Bolivia and even Lula da Silva in Brazil, all of whom have demonstrated an ability to secure close to or even greater than 60% of the vote in free elections. The voting majorities in these countries prefer social welfare over unrestrained markets, national security over alignments with military empires. The consequences of the electoral victory of Ahmadinejad are open to debate. The US may conclude that continuing to back a vocal, but badly defeated, minority has few prospects for securing concessions on nuclear enrichment and an abandonment of Iran’s support for Hezbollah and Hamas. A realistic approach would be to open a wide-ranging discussion with Iran, and acknowledging, as Senator Kerry recently pointed out, that enriching uranium is not an existential threat to anyone. This approach would sharply differ from the approach of American Zionists, embedded in the Obama regime, who follow Israel’s lead of pushing for a preemptive war with Iran and use the specious argument that no negotiations are possible with an ‘illegitimate’ government in Tehran which ‘stole an election’. Recent events suggest that political leaders in Europe, and even some in Washington, do not accept the Zionist-mass media line of ‘stolen elections’. The White House has not suspended its offer of negotiations with the newly re-elected government but has focused rather on the repression of the opposition protesters (and not the vote count). Likewise, the 27 nation European Union expressed ‘serious concern about violence’ and called for the “aspirations of the Iranian people to be achieved through peaceful means and that freedom of expression be respected” (Financial Times June 16, 2009 p.4). Except for Sarkozy of France, no EU leader has questioned the outcome of the voting. The wild card in the aftermath of the elections is the Israeli response: Netanyahu has signaled to his American Zionist followers that they should use the hoax of ‘electoral fraud’ to exert maximum pressure on the Obama regime to end all plans to meet with the newly re-elected Ahmadinejad regime. Paradoxically, US commentators (left, right and center) who bought into the electoral fraud hoax are inadvertently providing Netanyahu and his American followers with the arguments and fabrications: Where they see religious wars, we see class wars; where they see electoral fraud, we see imperial destabilization. source
  22. The exiled son of the late shah warned Monday of dire consequences if the international community allows the Iranian regime to defeat the protest movement rocking the country he left 30 years ago. If Tehran's leaders crush the uprising triggered by the results of a disputed presidential election it "will encourage extremism from the shores of the Levant to the energy jugular of the world," said Reza Pahlavi. "At worst, fanatical tyrants who know that the future is against them may end their present course on their terms: a nuclear holocaust," Pahlavi said. He left Iran a year before his father, shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, was ousted in the 1979 Islamic revolution. But the former crown prince of Iran told a room packed with reporters at the National Press Club in Washington, that Iran's Islamic theocracy is now itself showing signs of defeat, and by backing the people's revolt, the international community would help to hasten its demise. Members of the security forces have refused orders to crack down on protesters and clerics have sided with demonstrators in the streets, said Pahlavi, citing sources inside Iran. "Clerics have dressed in civilian clothes and joined the protesters... I have had reports of police forces in Tehran telling kids, 'Get away from here. If we don't beat you, our superiors will beat us.' "These are amazing reports of... people abandoning the sinking Titanic that the regime is," Pahlavi told reporters. Later, he told AFP in an interview that it was critical for the world's media and governments "to show Iranians that they are not alone in this fight and they can count on their support. "The more the world is decisive, the more likely there is to be a quicker peeling away of repressive elements of the regime who join with the people and abandon the regime," he said. International support would help to accelerate "the process of defection of elements within the regime" and shorten "the period of change" from the current Islamic system to democracy, and limit the loss of life, Pahlavi said. The former crown prince, who has lived in the United States since 1984, insisted he was not seeking political power in Iran. "My sole objective is to help my compatriots to reach freedom, to have the liberty to vote and freely choose our leaders," he said. Journalists applauded Pahlavi as he paused his prepared speech to fight back tears for victims of the "brutal violence of the regime's plain-clothes thugs against unarmed people." "No one will benefit from closing his or her eyes to knives and cables cutting into faces and mouths of our young and old, or from bullets piercing our beloved 'Neda,'" the young woman purportedly gunned down during protests in Tehran on Saturday. Her bloodied image has been broadcast around the world as she lay reportedly dying in the street, turning her into a symbol of Iranians' defiance of the country's Islamic rulers. The people who originally posted the video on Youtube and Facebook said Neda was shot by a pro-government militia member. But that information, like the fate and the identity of the young woman in the video, cannot be independently verified. Tehran's leaders have refused to bend from their position that headline incumbent Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was returned to power in this month's presidential election. Pahlavi showed AFP a photograph of Neda that he carries in his left breastpocket, along with pictures of his wife and three daughters. "I have added her (Neda) to the list of my daughters. She is now forever in my pocket," he said, again fighting back tears and stammering an apology for allowing his emotions to overcome him. According to Iranian state radio, at least 457 people were detained in street clashes in Tehran on Saturday that left 10 people dead. The official toll from a week of violence as of Saturday stood at 17. But Pahlavi said the death toll was probably higher than reported, because, according to his sources inside Iran, victims "are often dragged to places where even their own families can't recover them." source watch the here.Another source
  23. TEHRAN, June 21 (MNA) -- Former Majlis speaker Ali Akbar Nateq-Nouri wrote a letter to the Supreme Leader on Sunday in which he thanked him for defending the reputation of his family. “As a servant of the Islamic movement, I feel duty bound to thank you for your kindness toward this humble soul on Friday.” In a sermon at the most recent Friday prayers in Tehran, Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei dismissed President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s accusation that the Nateq-Nouri family is involved in financial corruption, which he made during his televised presidential debate with challenger Mir-Hossein Mousavi. “I have been obedient to the late Imam (Khomeini), and now I am at the service of the Islamic Revolution’s Supreme Leadership,” Nateq-Nouri wrote in the letter. His remarks show that the Leader is fully aware of issues, he added. source
  • Create New...