Did Ahmadinejad Win Fair & Square – and Cheat, Too?

Juan Cole presents a compelling case that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad stole the Iranian presidential election altogether, pointing to the sheer lopsidedness of the results, both nationally and in specific areas, as proof of their absurdity. Robert Fisk, on the other hand, cites an Iranian friend arguing that Ahmadinejad’s victory isn’t really that hard to believe:

“The election figures are correct, Robert. Whatever you saw in Tehran, in the cities and in thousands of towns outside, they voted overwhelmingly for Ahmadinejad. Tabriz voted 80 per cent for Ahmadinejad. It was he who opened university courses there for the Azeri people to learn and win degrees in Azeri. In Mashad, the second city of Iran, there was a huge majority for Ahmadinejad after the imam of the great mosque attacked Rafsanjani of the Expediency Council who had started to ally himself with Mousavi. They knew what that meant: they had to vote for Ahmadinejad.” …

“You know why so many poorer women voted for Ahmadinejad? There are three million of them who make carpets in their homes. They had no insurance. When Ahmadinejad realised this, he immediately brought in a law to give them full insurance. Ahmadinejad’s supporters were very shrewd. They got the people out in huge numbers to vote – and then presented this into their vote for Ahmadinejad.”

Still, Ahmadinejad’s almost 2-to-1 victory over Mousavi is reason for skepticism. Last week, we ran a story about Ahmadinejad’s rivals complaining of too many ballots being printed, presumably for stuffing the boxes in Ahmadinejad’s favor. Is it possible that Ahmadinejad’s henchmen bought into the Mousavi hype a bit too much, cheated overzealously to avoid the predicted runoff, and then got blindsided by a much better turnout for their guy than anyone expected? That is, is Ahmadinejad’s 63% total masking a much more modest but nonetheless real majority? And will the recount reveal such a result, thereby undermining Ahmadinejad at the same time that it confirms his victory?

UPDATE: “Many experts are claiming that the margin of victory of incumbent President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was the result of fraud or manipulation, but our nationwide public opinion survey of Iranians three weeks before the vote showed Ahmadinejad leading by a more than 2 to 1 margin — greater than his actual apparent margin of victory in Friday’s election.” Read the rest.

UPDATE 2: But on the third hand…

65 thoughts on “Did Ahmadinejad Win Fair & Square – and Cheat, Too?”

  1. An Ahmadi-Nejad victory is eminently believable. For him to win against a clean candidate with a history of ‘socialistic’ policies by the same margin he won against corrupt fat-cat tycoon Rafsanjani…it doesn’t sound right.

    The official media are making a lot of Ahmadi winning more votes than Khatami. I think that is the main motive for the vote inflation. That and they feared more demonstrations in the event of a runoff…and maybe hoped to put a stake in Rafsanjani’s heart once and for all.

    Looks like it’s backfiring. Unless they manage to kill enough people to keep everything under wraps, which is about 60% probable.

  2. Did they have hanging chads too?Are we wittnessing a repeat of the coupe of against Mohammed Mosaddeq?

    1. no no no, no NGOs or other interventionist front groups involved here, nor does this have anything to do with the $400 Million Bush gave the Shadow Warriors last April.

      FREEDOM IS ON THE MARCH SILLY!!!!!

  3. Mousavi’s self-pitying claims are simply projections of the hostile policies of the United States government toward Iran. The whole affair is a creation of the puppet US media who see only the well-to-do and the well-educated as legitimate claimants to government office in any country. The stench of the banksters, the arms lobbies and AIPAC is never hard to detect. You can come out now.

    1. Well said John Lowell

      Another attempt at an engineered “colored revolution” to dispose of an elected government and replace it by one perceived to be more malleable by Western interests.

      It seems that Americans, including many so-called pundits, still can’t get it. When will we realize that we are despised throughout the world by the working classes and the poor who see us as allies of any oligarchy in their respective countries that’s ready to exploit them to the bones! Mr. Ahmadinejad did not need fraud to win an election. Simply a vote for him is perceived by a substantial majority of Iranians as slap in America’s face. Mousavi’s supporters are the designer clad set of Iran who hold the world’s record(percentage wise) in plastic surgery. This alone speaks volume on Iran’s wealthy.

      The same thing has happened in Venezuela, Chile, Argentina,Bolivia, Panama, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Ecuador, Uruguay, and Haiti right here in our own backyard. Were they all fraudulent elections? NO! Even an Aristide in Haiti did not need fraud to win over 70% of the popular vote in Haiti both times he ran. Not because he did squat for the people, but simply because a vote for him was perceived as a vote against the elite and the US. It is time you all learn this fundamental equation of popular elections in the third world.

      Stanley Laham

  4. The US has never been bothered when Mubarak bans ,and imprsions oppostion parties memebers who would certainly challange his control of Egypet if he ahd allowed them to participate in the process freely!

  5. Again, the American MSM insults what little intelligence the American sheeple have left. And who among us will ever accuse that same MSM of the ability to identify irony? We live in a country that has 435 congressional districts. In the last election less than 9% were competitive, as most seats have long ago been divvied up by the special interests, thereby rendering them useless. And then let’s look at the presidential election. Those paragons of all that is good, the MSM, decides which announced candidates are worthy to be called “serious”. Therefore, Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich, and Mike Gravel, the only guys offering anything but more of the same, are written off and marginalized by the MSM. The senate has become a place where an egomaniac can buy a seat, as long as he or she is a “go along to get along” person. These people have no idea why they are there. They think they get to vote on treaties and judges, to name just two, because they’re so smart. My goodness, look at Lindsay Graham. He’s the dumbest little buckaroo I’ve ever seen in public. The people of South Carolina should be ashamed, as should those in CT for Loserman. And after the kabuki dance of our elections, congress promptly does what it does best: run to the corner and hide, ceding all of their enumerated powers to an absolute peckerwood (executive) that has been OK’d by our rulers. Wake up, America!

    1. Anyone that really thinks parliamentary democracy is viable in the United States is an unmitigated schlemeil. From appearances, the peoples’ hope of honest expression are far more vital in Iran than the United States where corruption and political cowardice are endemic. One hopes the economic crisis these filth have created is their own undoing. Nothing would please me more than to see a Larry Summers or a Kathleen Sebelius or a John McCain or any of them, frankly, in the defense cage at an enormous show trial encompassing all politicians who now “serve” or have “served” over the last fifty years. Justice begins with the conviction of bacteria of this kind.

  6. Velvet “revolution” has FAILED, anglo-american nazis need to go back to the drawing board or intensify terrorist actions inside Iran in order to bring “democratic” change, “freedom and liberties”.

    Perhaps Iranian people would rather have the anglosphere enjoy those “freedoms and liberties”.

    American komrades can’t even get back into their country of birth without a passport, and fake/pretend citizens may as well forget about “freedom” to travel.

    1. American Do-Gooders will solve this problem, just like they’ve solved all those other problems!

  7. A few thoughts. I agree 100% with Justin’s article about how this is none of our business. If America truly cared about democracy in Iran why did it undermine a democratic government in 1953 and help usher in the despotic Shah? Funny how America’s alleged concerns for democracy in the middle east have never extended to Saudi Arabia, which is rated by FREEDOM HOUSE as amongst the least free country in the world. Then there’s Egypt which is a dictatorship in all but name. But unlike Iran these countries governments don’t challenge American hegemony in the middle east or defy the Israeli lobby. That’s all that really matters to Washington.

  8. All of you are trying to defend the undefendable. Would you REALLY like to live in a place like Iran, watching what’s really going on there? You are not progressive people. You are too proud and willing to accept that sometimes your perspective is wrong and that you may be supporting the real bad guys. Sorry, but you guys are all wrong. Time for you to look for another job. Is this a frigthening option for you guys?

    1. There is a lack of specifics in your commentary, which I feel is a fatal flaw. No, I wouldn’t particularly like living in Iran, but so what? I wouldn’t like living in Sudan or Somalia or a 100 other places either. Indeed there are some places in the USA I wouldn’t want to live. What is your point here? More precisely what do you want us to do? Send in the marines? (Although I would bet YOU PERSONALLY are not willing to die for Iranian democracy). And who are the “bad guys”? And who here is “supporting” them? Why don’t you provide some specific examples of what you propose should be done? Then they can be weighed and considered. Frankly I think America gains NOTHING by interfering in Iran, (or anywhere else) but I’m not too “proud” to change my mind, if you can provide some good reasons and logic.

  9. The goverment control of the iranean people,what a despicable and humiliating spectacle!
    Is this not enough for you? ALL of you at anti-war should be providing support for the good people of Iran. What a pathetic bunch all of you are… Shame on you.

    1. You seem to be good at name-calling but not much else. That’s not very mature Abel. Again I ask you for specifics. How exactly do you propose we support the people of Iran?

    2. You did a good job of ducking that question. I am interested in an answer. How do you propose I provide this support, and how on earth did it somehow become my job to provide this support if I did somehow agree with your plan? I also take it that you believe that one has to be an interventionist to be progressive?

      Peace!

      1. “How do you propose I provide this support”

        Think with your heart and you will see the answer is Liberal Intervention my friend! When Bush was babbling about Freedom and Democracy, they’ll tell ya he was just joshin’ ya, but when the Liberal Do-Gooders are the ones doing the Freedom Spreading, they mean it for reals!

      2. to andy,brad etal
        Guys, do you really believe in communism ? ie china, Soviet union Venez, cuba, etc…
        Is that what you call being progressive? Communism aka international socialism, and national socialist aka facism. I made my comments because you present these ideologies as symbols that can not be questioned and your articles and comments and opinions all reflect views that betray your replies to my comments. I am not ducking questions. How can you see the brutality and repression of the iranean regime and not put an opinion devastating the regime of the mullahs? Guy, i thought you guys were peacenicks doves that did not wish war under any circumstances and used you website to proclaim those ideals, but you do not conmdem at all the brutality that is happening in iran. You guys do not sympathize with the so much overwhelming (historic) opposition from the young people that are fighting an imposed regime. Yes they are young and are so because the ayatollas sent them to get murdered and thats is how iran lost their youth. Ibelieve the young generation do not want to go through that again. THese leaders are despotic, not because i say it but because their own people are shouting it!!! What can you do to help? Begin exposing the regime lack of human rights, murders, beating and terror against their own people. Definetily that would be a good start. Iam sorry if this was too long, my apologies. Well may be you guys will do something Really positive, and become interventionist as well, a little bit.

        1. The only answer you gave to my question in your long-winded reply is to “become an interventionist”. That would be the worst possible thing to do. You are a Wilsonian at heart. He was the worst president ever. I don’t even begin to understand why you think we are “communists”.

        2. Thanks for the reply and I now better understand your position.

          You believe that I should become an interventionist by condemning the actions of their leaders. Sorry but if that is a fight you wish to make go for it. I don’t believe it’s any of my business. The world is full of repressive regimes including the good old USA. What could be more repressive than brainwashing childern and sending them of to die and kill? I would prefer to spend my time protecting the only country I feel responsible for the USA.

          I am not saying in any way that I don’t hope for the best regarding the freedom of the Iranian people. However, what I and most of the other people on this site understand is that the US has a history of intervention that is devestatingly bad. Our fear is that the Government will use this as yet another excuse to bomb the living hell out of yet another country, killing and displacing many of the repressed in the process.

          As for believing in Communism you must be joking right? We are currently on our way to living in a full fledged Fascist state and that is what most of us are fighting against. Don’t you see that we are the aggressors and it’s our first and most important responsibility to police ourselves not the rest of the world.

          You should read a few more comments and try and comprehend what this site is before you jump to conclusions. Many of the people on this site are Libertarians or at least believe in Liberty and the Constitution. You might learn why intervention is evil if you do a little research.

          I don’t condone repression in any form, and intervention is repression or leads to it whether it comes from the US or anywhere else.

          As for being peacenicks you will also find that many people on this site are combat veterans who realize the horror that war is from first hand experience. In fact that is what woke me up in the first place.

          Well I guess I’ll get back to something “Really positive” and fight some more against intervention and the repression and death it causes.

          Peace!

    1. There is a famous quote from Ahamdinejad in Iran. When he was first running for presidency four years ago, some people told him that he does not have the looks “required” of a president, (thanks to American and Western idea of democracy of course). He said that may be so, but his looks are good enough for a servant of the people, which he intended to be.

      1. That reminds me of an interview with Yasser Arafat in which he was asked why he couldn’t or wouldn’t keep his people in line. He became quite upset and spluttered out something along the line of, How dare you say I should treat my people like dogs, they tell me what to do I don’t tell them.

        I can’t remember who the interview was with but it was MSM, I will not forget chearing his response. I thought at the time if we had public servants instead of rulers how much better it would be for the US and the rest of the world.

        Peace!

  10. The US and West are so upest about the election results in Iran, What a hypocracy!

    These the same governements that did not accepet and honour the wishes of the Palestnians when they voted for Hamas!

  11. The Iranian People Speak
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/14/AR2009061401757.html
    Ken Ballen, Patrick Doherty, WaPo, Jun 15 2009

    The election results in Iran may reflect the will of the Iranian people. Many experts are claiming that the margin of victory of incumbent President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was the result of fraud or manipulation, but our nationwide public opinion survey of Iranians three weeks before the vote showed Ahmadinejad leading by a more than 2 to 1 margin — greater than his actual apparent margin of victory in Friday’s election …

  12. I see that this site continues to showcase articles by the torture supporting, Pat Buchanan. You’ve gotten my last buck, believe me.

    1. I’m sorry to say that you are right. Ancient Greece had ostracism, and that is what is needed after these nauseating essays of Buchanan’s as well.
      I’m deeply disappointed by Patrick Buchanan.

  13. At the time the “informed one” wrote his article, there was no way for Juan Cole to know how many people voted in Tabriz and what was the result. So, that article is practically much ado about something that Juan Cole does not know much about. The rest of the article is even worse. For example, how many people would vote for Obama, if his entire campaign in each major city, and only in major cities, was made up of a handful of ridiculously dressed teenage girls, waving banners with “Change” written on them, in Persian? Now, he is a disgrace to Lors, who voted overwhelmingly for Ahmadinejad, and a disgrace to the clergy. Consider him, if you care to do at all, finished.

    As for Mr. Rezai, he was not much of a contender to begin with. Yet, the final blow came during the the television debate. Ahmadinejad reminded him that he has had no experience in the executive branch of the government, where Rezai shot back, “How can that be? We used to appoint mayors and governors during the war.” Ahmadinejad said, I would never dare to say what you just said. But, Rezai kept insisting that he, as the head of the Revolutionary guards, did just that. Ahmadinejad went on to try to explain that what happened during the war and what he did in that position to help the cities that were overran by the enemy, cannot be considered as experience in the management of the government, but Rezai would not budge. Rezai also explained his programs on the debate. The main crux of his ideas was that he intends to create think tanks for each, to be designated, area of the country. Ahmadinejad in the most simple and elegant way proved to him that his plans will be doomed to failure from day one, if not for the simple reason that his designated areas, do not reflect the social and economic realities across the country and that there would be resistance to his plans to the point that he would not even know where to establish the offices of his think tanks.

    The breakdown of election results for every city and province in Iran were published yesterday, by the Guardian council and the Interior ministry. Mousavi, has won in only two provinces, Western Azarbaijan which has Tabriz as its capital, and Sistan and Baluchistan. He also has the majority only in the city of Tehran, but not the entire province of Tehran. In the last election, where the Khatami government was conducting the elections, and Ahmadinejad was opposed by the same people that are active against him right now, Ahmadinejad won by almost the same margin of 10 million people over his rival Rafsanji. In the second round, Ahmadinejad won 17 million votes, and Rafsanjani 8 million of the votes.

    Ahmadinejad won fair and square. At this moment, Mr. Mousavi has not even submitted his letter of protest pointing out what were the problems that causes him to reject the results of the elections. Mr. Mousavi is a member of the expediency council. According to the law, the members of the expediency council are appointed by the Leader of Islamic republic, Ayatollah Khamenei. Contrary to what has been said, Ayatollah Khamenei has been quite consistent, when he asked the Guardian council to carefully and thoroughly address and investigate Mr. Mousavi’s concerns, which again Mr. Mousavi has not made clear what they are anyway. That is not a good sign for Mr. Mousavi and he knows it.

    Incidentally, Ayatollah Khamenei is from a family that hails from the same town that Mr. Mousavi hails from. Khamenei means “from Khamene”. Mr. Mousavi’s complete name is Mir-Hossein Moussavi Khamene.

    No, there was no cheating. It was fair & square.

  14. The poll that was talked about in the Washington Post article did not take into account two important facts: (1) It was taken from Turkey by foreigners and, therefore, as soon as the respondents found out, they would be frightened, and (2) Iranian people are notorious in hiding their real political intention, because they are always suspicious of politicians. I know this, because I am one.

    If you look at the poll described in the WP, you will see that, aside from the question of whom they will vote for, an overwhelming number of the respondents supported policies that are espoused NOT by Ahmadinejad, but by Mousavi, including relations with the US, Iran's nuclear program, Ahmadinejad's denial of the Holocaust, the sanctions, etc. So, why was it that the respondents supported all of Mousavi's positions, but said that they would vote for Ahmadinejad? It is because of what I said above.

    With all due respect to Robert Fisk, whom I respect tremendously, he is wrong on this particular occasions.

    1. Muhammad,

      Forgive me, but it’s hard for me to give someone credibility when they continue to carry on about about Ahmadenijad’s “holocaust denial.” Just because of the simple fact that he was not really denying the existence of mass concentration camps perpetrated by Hitler’s regime in Europe at all.

      To be honest, when Ahmadenijad talks about the deception of the holocaust, I agree with him. Don’t think I am saying that genocide against Jewish people did not occur, its evidence is overwhelming; however, much of the great to-do done about it, the parades, the books, etc. are creations of this mythical quality about the holocaust as though it was the only time genocide had ever happened and that everyone in the world somehow owes something to those of a Jewish descent because of it. Deny that this is the base of most holocaust references if you like, but I believe it’s really just the excuse to give emotional support to the existence of Israel and the American Empire. When people talk about WWII, calling in the good war in the US, they do so with the implication that it ended the holocaust. This is not genuine remembrance, this is not genuine mourning, it is a fake myth – the mourning and remembrance, I mean – created to justify the very policies that Hitler himself favored – empire.

      As for the substance of a lot of people disagreeing with him on certain policies, it is not always the case that the man who has the most favorable policies is the man who wins an elections.

      All you need is to represent one or two policies that the right people care most about – the second term elections of Bush was about the war and social concerns like gay marriage.

    2. Muhammad,

      I am an Iranian too. I do not know if you live in Iran or not, but I do. I am sorry to say this, but just the way you have formulated the issues, which then you go on to claim that the majority of people agree with Mousavi on, gives you away. Relation with America, Holocaust are favorite issues of American and Israel, not the people of Iran. Those are Western agandas. In other words the sound of that propaganda is not driving the Iranian people crazy. It is driving crazy only those who only listen to that propaganda, which is in abundant supply in the Western media 24-7-365. Ahmadinejad’s position on Holocaust is clear. Muslims did not have anything to do with it. Muslims are not going to pay for it. End of discussion.

      So what is Mr. Mousavi’s position on the nuclear issue? Is it anything but non-existent at this moment? Did he ever care to explain to people what he plans to do?

      What is his position on relations with America? Non-existent there also. The absolute majority of ordinary Iranians favor a mutually respectful relationship with America, not one that officially recognizes and submits to America as the Wolf and Iran as the Sheep. But the majority of people cannot believe that Rafsanjani and his little minions like Mousavi would ever allow that to happen, not to mention the American side and its imperialist agenda.

      Those issues that you talk about are Western agendas, not the Iranian people’s interests. However, since Mr. Mousavi did his best to remain a blank sheet during his campaign perhaps one would do well, to refer to his television debates. His debate with Karoubi was a revolting exercise in obfuscation and petty flattery between the two. With Rezai, it was his defense of his “wife’s honor” against the questions by Ahmadinejad of how she had managed to become a full university professor only after three years of graduation. Mr. Mousavi just insisted on driving the issue to its logical end. It was his “honor”, you know. The rest of the debate was a live exhibit of Mousavi deception, where he showed manipulated charts of The Central Bank of Iran’s figures on inflation and the gini index, for which the CBI called him a liar, afterwards.

      But it was his debate with Ahmadinejad that was the most illumating. He started with proclamations of indignation at the behavior of the Iranian government during the British soldiers incidents. He falsely claimed that the governmet had initially asserted that the arrested British soldiers who had wandered into Iranian waters must be executed. And based on that false claim he accused Ahmadinejad of capitulating to Britian for releasing those soldiers, and taking a picture with them, before their release. Ahmadinejad explained that Tony Blair had signed a letter to the government of Iran in which he had appologized to the government of Iran and also committed to making sure that such incidents never happen again, and that the letter is filed at the foreign ministry and that Mr. Mousavi could examin it if he wanted to. Ahmadinejad also explained that taking a picture with soldiers in their government supplied clothes was to show that he differentiates between the people of Britain and the plocieis of their government. But Mr. Mousavi was unmoved. He kept on accusing Ahmadinejad of being hell bent on capitualting on all fronts. He asked Ahmadinejad what is the reason that he is not sitting the Arab countries of the Persian Gulf when they do not use the proper name of the Persian Gulf. All in all, Mr. Mousavi only stopped short of condemning Ahmadinejad for failing to start a war with Britain and the Arab countries of the Persian Gulf. As far as I am concerned only a hypocrite can at the same time lament the lack of hot confrontation, while pretending to be a man of harmony and peace.

      Bollinger of Columbia university never got anywhere close to Mr. Mousavi when it came to insulting Ahmadinejad. And when Ahmadinejad showed a copy of Mousavi’s wife’s university graduations certificate, and asked him if he can ask him about the university qualifications of his wife and the process through which they were obtained, Mr. Mousavi could only reply that his wife is a true scholar becaude it has taken her wife ten years to write her Phd thesis. Of course he did not mention why such a genius who had registered simultaneously in two different universities for two differnt master degrees while holding a demanding job at the same time, suddenly could not finish her Phd in the usual 4 years. Later on Mr. Mousavi decided that his honour has been breached, and devoted most the rest of the campaign to “restoring” it.

      The fatal moment to the reform movement of Iran came when Ahmadinejad revealed during the debate that after he was elected to presidency the first time, Mr. Rafsanjani had called a Persian Gulf head of an Arabian state and had promised him that Ahmadinejad’s government will not last for more than six months. Mousavi could only mumble about how Rafsanjani is a pilar of the revolution and Ahamdinejad should not talk about him like that in his “absence”.

      The so called reform movement headed by Rafsanjani and his pathetic, decietful minions Mousavi and Khatami is finished. They know, that at the first sign of tranquility and quiet they will have to start writing their will, political will that is. So, they will try to inflame the fires of hatred and division with every remaining minute of the time that they have. The clock has started thicking for his excelency Mr. Rafsenjani.

      1. Ali, you seem to have the most knowledge on this subject that I have read on any blog or even any of the MSM sites. Thanks for the great information.

        Peace!

  15. I propose the U.S. send in a crack team of 9/11 Truthers to “investigate” this “stolen election”.

    Speaking seriously, the liberal interventionists will never get it. Even if this was the unfairest election in history, which I highly doubt it was, it still doesn’t justify U.S. aggression against Iran.

    Anybody who knows anything about meddlesome U.S. interventionism doesn’t doubt for a second that U.S. government resources are being used to fund the opposition in Iran.

    If a group within the U.S. was discovered to have similar financial ties to the government of Iran, then we can all guess how the membership of said group would be treated. They would be declared “enemy combantants”, shipped off to some off shore dungeon, whipped, electro-shocked and water boarded. And none of this would be decried by the liberal interventionists, who can’t wait to jump aboard the first Cruise Missile bound for Tehran.

  16. Correction to the above post. Tabriz is the center of West Azarbaijan. Provinces in Iran do not have capitals.

  17. And a clarification :). Mr. Karoubi’s campaign was made up of teenage girls holding banners with “Change” written on them in English.

  18. This is one time, I do not suspect Israeli or American Likudist interference – their little hearts must be glad that Ahmadinejad won. For what they want most is for America to send down a shower of Tomahawks down upon the Iranian people. The election of Mousavi would have destroyed a lot of hard work done to demonize Ahmadinejad.

  19. America/Israel are gunning for Iran–they will never give up.
    How forgetfull Americans are–few months ago congress voted million$ towards subversion CIA tactics againist Iran and worse,countless for’Israel spies caught.Who funds these 4Israel spies–Uncle Sam. Just imagine if Pat Buecanon/Ron Paul was funded by Russia or Cuba :^(

  20. OK. Knowing quite a bit about Iran, being fluent in Farsi, I kind of agree with Ali – though to a slightly lesser extent.

    I’ve spoken to many friends still in Iran right now and they say that Ahmadinejad’s support is much larger than western media in and outside Iran reported. Are the election numbers inflated? I think they possibly could be and I think they probably are – though I think almost every election has to have some corruption involved. That said, however, I also estimate that much of these protests are either neat camera tricks to replay multiple shots of the same shot, or are conflating this single issue with other more prominent ones within Persian society. Overall, it just seems that Ahmadinejad won and the west is having a hard time dealing with that. More here,

    http://leftlibertarian.org/archives/13833

  21. Hey, kids, let’s end this silliness. It is none of the USA’s business what kind of election, or government for that matter, they have in Iran. Oh, and why doesn’t someone question our masters when they spout the word ‘democracy’? Do they mean ‘democracy’ like in the 85% of the American people that were against the bailouts to the banksters? Seems THAT kind of ‘democracy’ doesn’t matter. ‘Democracy’ doesn’t mean anything, only the people in charge of defining it count!

  22. Operation Ajax

    “The prime minister and his nationalist supporters in parliament roused Britain’s ire when they nationalised the oil industry in 1951, which had previously been exclusively controlled by the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company. Mossadegh argued that Iran should begin profiting from its vast oil reserves,” according to The Guardian[4]

    “Britain accused (Mosaddeq) of violating the company’s legal rights and orchestrated a worldwide boycott of Iran’s oil that plunged the country into financial crisis. The British government tried to enlist the Americans in planning a coup, an idea originally rebuffed by President Truman. But when Dwight Eisenhower took over the White House, cold war ideologues – determined to prevent the possibility of a Soviet takeover – ordered the CIA to embark on its first covert operation against a foreign government.” [5]

    The coup was organized by the United States’ CIA and the United Kingdom’s MI6, two spy agencies that aided royalists and mutinous Iranian army officers.[6]

    CIA officer Kermit Roosevelt, Jr. carried out the operation planned by CIA agent Donald Wilber.[7] One version of the CIA history, written by Wilber, referred to the operation as TPAJAX.[8][9]

    During the coup, Roosevelt and Wilber bribed Iranian government officials, reporters, and businessmen.[10] The deposed Iranian leader, Mossadegh, was taken to jail and Iranian General Fazlollah Zahedi named himself prime minister in the new, pro-western government. The British and American spy agencies returned the monarchy to Iran by installing the pro-western Mohammed Reza Pahlevi on the throne where his brutal rule lasted 26 years. The story is detailed in Stephen Kinzer’s All the Shah’s Men : An American Coup and the Roots of Middle East Terror. Pahlevi was overthrown in 1979.[11]

    The overthrow of Iran’s elected government in 1953 ensured Western control of Iran’s petroleum resources and prevented the Soviet Union from competing for Iranian oil.[12][13][14][15] Some Iranian clerics cooperated with the western spy agencies because they were dissatisfied with Mossadegh’s secular government.[10]

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ajax

    1. Companies Legal rights had been violated, The britts had a right to defend their interest. even if Mossa did not like it.
      The possibility of a soviet take over, that question has to be answered by the cold war ideologues themselves, how they arrived at that conclusion. Listen, the soviet union was spreading communism by invading and controlling other countries thru their proxies. Communism is very bad. The Korean war was being fought at the time and the cold war was taking place. You have to look at the times with perspective. The soviet union was defeated and that is that. Took years, but some people on this website seem to like the idea of a non interventionist, isolationist US, in order to avoid war. That brought us into WWII and we realy did not cared too much to intervine until we were attacked. Iran was bound to be a Soviet Union puppet like Cuba, European eastern countries, etc… if mooosa would had been allowed to stayed in power. You can talk a lot about what happened to him and point fingers but you can not deny that those 1950’s times were driven by the cold war, frankly initiated by the Soviets and their stupid communist ideology. Nothing more, nothing less.

      1. Everything you say is wrong, wrong, wrong. The USA today should assume an non-interventionist policy with the collapse of the USSR. YOU DO REALIZE the USSR collapsed almost twenty years ago don’t you? Why do we still maintain troops in Europe and South Korea? What for? As for “isolationism” bringing us into WW2 that is a canard. If America had stayed out of the Great war in 1917 there never would have been a WW2.

        “America should have minded her own business and stayed out of the World war. If you hadn’t entered the war the Allies would have made peace with Germany in 1917. Had we made peace then there would have been no collapse in Russia followed by communism, no breakdown in Italy followed by Fascism and Germany would not have signed the Versailles treaty, which has enthroned Nazism in Germany. If America had stayed out of the war, all these ‘isms’ wouldn’t today be sweeping the continent of Europe and breaking down parliamentary government – and if England had made peace early in 1917, it would have saved over one million British, French, American, and other lives.”

        Winston Churchill 1936.

        1. Andy, The indispensable nation, the good all USA, defeated the Soviet union.We were just persistent and believed in our unique values. Period. Grant some credit where it is due. Because there are real bad actors in the world that do not cherish liberty and democracy, that is why we have our strong presence in other countries that have been challenged by their enemies. We are there because their leaders want us there. See that everywhere we have been as a nation we had brought prosperity and wealth, helping them rise their standard of living. The leader of north Vietnam once was quoted as saying that his country would have been better served by an american victor.(or was it one of his generals?) Churchill may have made those comments, but first, in european circles we were reminded that we only spent a short presence in WWI and that the britts wanted US to intervine way back before Pearl Harbor. Andy and etal, do not feel bad because we are a Great Nation. Not because we are better human beings, no, but because we defend the values that most of the people on earth relate to, and may not be able to do for themselves. We are truly the indispensable Nation, and you guys are part of that…

        2. “there are real bad actors in the world that do not cherish liberty”. Thats true and your one of them, along with Bush, Obama, etc.

          “Andy and etal, do not feel bad because we are a Great Nation”. So great we have to bomb as many nations as we can?

          “we defend the values that most of the people on earth relate to, and may not be able to do for themselves”. With yet more bombs?

          “We are truly the indispensable Nation, and you guys are part of that…”. I was once part of the bombing and occupation of a nation, is that what you mean?

          WOW I’m glad to know that we are such a indispensably great nation bringing peace and liberty to the world via bombs. What would they ever do without us?

          A few questions for you Abel Arce, have you ever picked up the pieces of the freedom loving people we just bombed? Have you heard their cries of pain and anguish? Have you looked them in the eye and seen their hatred? I can tell you straight up if you have and you still believe in intervention you are one sick sadistic piece of scum! But my guess is you have not and are just another armchair warrior who doesn’t know anything about war or even politics for that matter.

          Peace!

        3. My goodness, its been a long time since I read such drivel. America didn’t “win” the cold war. The USSR lost by default. If you think that America’s tragic intervention in Vietnam was anything other then a humanitarian catastrophe for both countries then you are truly lost. Believe me the world could get by just fine without America’s endless fishing in troubled waters. You are some weird cross between Wilsonianism and neoconservatism. America’s legacy of interventionism has been extremely negative for the world in general and America in particular. Its sad how many Americans think the way you do.

        4. You guys have no spine. People in iran are being shot by their own goverment as we write. None of our bussinness, you say. Well, sadam killed his own people as well. We did not intervine. Was not none of our bussinness either and so many other examples…
          Well, war is not desired by anybody in his right mind, but we had to do what he had to do to defend ours and finnish the wars. War has always been part of humanity unfurtunaly and waged for many reasons. I do not think they will ever be over. Very sad indeed. But lets not forget that sadam was given the choice to leave kuwait and also to leave iraq the second time around. He decided to go ahead and go to war instead of avoiding war. Because he was a bad guy, like many others that you try to defend on this shameful website, he opted to sacrifice his Own People in order to stay in power? He was a madman. He could have left and saved his whole country. He wanted to stay in power. The ayatolla in iran the same thing. You talk about liberty but i see none in any of the countries that you deal with. That is for the war part. Now, about hatred looks I never experienced that. I treat people on an individual basis. People are people everywhere. Goverments are not the same. Some goverments oppress people, ie(iran), These goverments will eventualy crash with the values and ideals of goverments that really care about their own. Here in the us, we are a nation of inmigrants. The freedoms and rights can only be dream of in other countries. We are poeple from many origins. Accept people from everywhere. New ideas. leading the world in human rights. Many object to that, but they have a say. I do not like war, but war has always existed and am afraid always will. You know that. Regime changes are bound to take place, be by us or by other goverments. Also do not put yourselves in a corner. Wilsonian, neocon, or whatever, think outside the box. When a revolution takes place like in iran, be real about being proggressive, fight the regime by using you pen and paper and let the masses know that anti-war is with them. No war, just liberty. Is not worth a try?

        5. Where were the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq? You know, the alleged REASON for the war? The Iraqi people didn’t ask to be “liberated” by Americans. In truth the war was fought largely because of the neocon agenda which is Israel-centric at heart. The war in Iraq has been a disaster. I don’t see how any intelligent person could say otherwise. Everything else you say is just vapid drivel.

        6. You do realize that your talking out of both sides of your face. No war, well may be this one is OK. War is bad but it’s neccessary etc. etc. You really are funny you know that?

          Saddam was our man don’t you get that? We wound him up and let him go. The Shah was our man same thing. Norieaga same thing. None of this has been about democracy or freedom or liberty. That’s a Red Herring and I suspect you know it (well may be not). You say intervention is good just start with your pen. Why, so we give weight to the next intervention and the next and the next which all leads to more war and repression?

          We are leading the world in human rights? Are you nuts? We have the most people both per capita and overall in prison. We have bombed so many people it’s off the chart. Free speech zones, torture, no right to counsel etc. You must be living in another country than me. Or you have one hell of a set of blinders on.

          “Now, about hatred looks I never experienced that”. Of course not (chickenhawks never do) and you don’t even have a clue what I was writting about. I have been deployed for combat twice and I can tell you that the Hatred in their eyes is not based on the color of my skin but based on what we did. You don’t win hearts and minds by bombing people. You don’t make your own country any safer by making enemies either.

          I’ll second Andy who says “Its sad how many Americans think the way you do”. You sound like someone out of 1984. Doublespeek and Doublethink.

          Why is it that so many sheeple think they have some kind of unique point of view when they are just repeating the party line?

          Peace!

        7. to andy, brad etal
          Guys, seems to me you guys are living in lala land. andi, the weapons of mass destruction were believed to be there and not only us but the whole coalition of the willing. Not a descicsion to be taken ligthly. In the 80 the osirak nuclear plant was obliterated by Israel. Would have been more trouble to (but not impossible) to get rid of that bad guy later on. He did not care about his people, but for himself. Security says not good if you have the nuke or ability to produce one and keep threatening other nations.(seems like the tyranical mulocracy in iran is following the same steps, don’t you think?)Andi, your remark about Irael is very antisemitic. seems to me that you blame these problems in the ME to the israelis. What a shame. they are our only allies in that part of the world. To brad, being an exsoldier, i would have expected more respect for your fellow warriors in the field,being killed and maimed by the very same enemies you seem to support. Sorry, reality is hard. i do not believe that you are that peaceful after all. You believe in people that murder first and do not forgive or forget. The us do not have permanent enemies. the problem with the ME is that people do not forgive one another and keep talking about stuff that happened many years ago. let it go. look at what a future can bring for ALL the people that you are trying to defend. Palestinians, iraneans, iraquis, kurds, all learn to forgive and forget. Their leaders and only those leaders were the cause of all that missery. The pride will only bring more of the same. Move on. Be happy.
          Andi, brad think about it. Sayonara…

        8. Again you say war is bad unless we do it. Your a joke.

          “The us do not have permanent enemies” again you must be joking.

          I learned how bad war is and how people don’t forgive. If you think that most people would forgive someone for killing their wife and children your wrong. That is how you make permanent enemies. Have you ever heard of blowback?

          I don’t have any problem with the nations I attacked, my problem is with the sick demented people who ordered the attacks that caused the death and destuction of both my friends and the so called enemy.

          You obviously do not have a clue and probably never will. I do hope you never have to live under the fear that comes from the bombings the US brings. However, that is most likely the only thing that would ever change your mind.

          The biggest shame is that we have created sheeple like you. Brainwashing is a truly subtle art. But I doubt it took to much work or magic to convince you. I tried to deprogram you but it is not likely to work. However, keep posting at least you give us someone to laugh at.

          Peace!

        9. We are leading the world in human rights? Are you nuts? We have the most people both per capita and overall in prison. We have bombed so many people it’s off the chart. Free speech zones, torture, no right to counsel etc. You must be living in another country than me. Or you have one hell of a set of blinders on.”

          (Puts hands over ears)

          LALALALALALALALALALALALA! I CAN’T HEAR YOU!

        10. That’s about it Obama Kool aid Drinker. I doubt he will ever listen but I like these quotes anyway, so here goes.

          “The greatest tyrannies are always perpetrated in the name of the noblest causes.” — Thomas Paine

          “The attempt to make heaven on earth invariably produces hell.” — Karl Popper

          “The trade-off between freedom and security, so often proposed so seductively, very often leads to the loss of both.” — Christopher Hitchens

          Peace!

  23. For example, how many people would vote for Obama, if his entire campaign in each major city, and only in major cities, was made up of a handful of ridiculously dressed teenage girls, waving banners with “Change” written on them, in Persian?”

    Well, it depends on hot those teenage girls are. For instance, if they were hotties like Miley Cyrus…. ;-)

    Iran!revolution!fascism!democracy!whiskey!sexy!hope!change!

    Yes we can!

    1. Great link dieselm, Ahmadinejad doesn’t look very unpopular at all and what no free speech zones? I can’t imagine any of our presidents riding around in huge crouds out in the open like that.

      Peace!

  24. Andy you wrote “The war in Iraq has been a disaster. I don’t see how any intelligent person could say otherwise”. I agree, but just think how intelligent the average person is and then realize that 49% of the people are not as intelligent as them!

    Peace!

  25. Although I respect Prof.Juan Cole greatly for his historical knowledge, he does seem to be one of those who supports, atleast non-violently, imposing Western democracy and values onto the Middle East, even if it can’t be a neat fit.

    He also seems to be starry-eyed towards Obama, as shown in his apperance on Democracy Now after Obama’s Cairo speech.

Comments are closed.