Protest in Iran

[Corduroy]

How does responding actually help your case here???

I think that many of you are capable of being respectful but in an atmosphere where people are trying to constantly one-up each other in rudeness you might need to be reminded that some of us don't want to play.

It's me giving the poster a heads up and chance to engage in a debate free of distracting petty insults. I'm new here so maybe I'm being naive about the level of debate here? Please bear with me while I get to know you.

 

[gopher]

So far I've been called on this thread ''delusional'' ''idiotic'' ''ass'' and ''certified''.

Where's the objection to that? Let's see a retraction.

 

[earth_as_one]

Ok then. The Guardian Council are the only ones who can chose who the people will vote for. Is that a free and fair election?

Statistical evidence for Iranian election fraud?

I never claimed Iran's elections were free or fair. I am well aware of the Guardian Council's interference in Iran's elections. But if everyone is aware of this and its in their constitution, then its not fraud. Its unfair. Its not free. But its not FRAUD!

The "evidence" that Iran's elections were fraudulent are based in part on statistical analysis of voting results which indicate with a relatively high degree of probability that the election numbers are human generated random numbers rather than truly random numbers.

The other "evidence" is a discrepancy between advance polling numbers and final elections results a few weeks later, indicating an unusually high number of the undecided voted for Ahmadinejad. BTW, that also happens occasionally in western democracies too.

But neither of these indicators prove fraud. They just suggest fraud is more likely than not.

Consider also that people count the ballots by hand in Iran. That means all those people at all those polling stations would have to have been in on the fraud. That would be tens of thousands of people! I'm not a statistician, but if thousands of people all know a secret, what are the odds that at least one person has a big mouth?

Here in Canada we also have people (mostly grouchy old people) counting ballots just like Iran. Grouchy old people are pretty hard to fool or involve in a giant conspiracy. I expect its the same in Iran. In the US, you have voting machines which are made by a major contributor to the Republican party. Diebold - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia At the end of election day, a number comes out of the voting machine and no one has idea if ifs been "adjusted" and the results can't be audited.

IMO, chances are far more likely that American elections are fraudulent, than Iranian or Canadian elections since I trust grouchy old people far more than machines.

I thought you said that Iran was a relatively stable place and that the last uprising was really only orchestrated by Western media. Or was that one of your other cohorts?

I never said that either RCS. What I said is that evidence exists which suggests that Western sources covertly encouraged the post Iranian election revolts.

Follow the money:

The Bush Administration’s operations in Iran : The New Yorker

Has the U.S. Played a Role in Fomenting Unrest During Iran’s Election? | FPJ

What are the odds that at least some of the hundreds of millions the US has ear marked for destabilizing Iran were used to feed the opposition movement, and fuel protests????

By the way, I support some parts of this covert US policy. I support all non-violent means to destabilize Iran's current theocracy through bogus twitter accounts, proxy servers to bypass government firewalls, funding of pro-secular democracy opposition groups, misinformation and deception. I draw the line at acts of violence and supporting organizations which use violence/terrorism.

I don't trust anything printed in the western MSM regarding the middle east. Compare how CBC and Al Jazeera report the same events:


CBC re:Egypt

Jan 29 2011
thousands of protesters tried to storm the Foreign Ministry and state television buildings, and Mubarak ordered the military into the streets to back up the embattled police.

Read more: CBC News - Canada - Canadians rally to back Egypt protests
​

Al Jazeera re:Egypt

29 Jan 2011
...Friday's demonstrations involving tens of thousands of people were the biggest and bloodiest in four consecutive days of protests against Mubarak's government....

Egypt tense after bloody protests - Middle East - Al Jazeera English


CBC re:Iran

February 15, 2011
....Tens of thousands of people turned out for the opposition rally Monday in solidarity with Egypt's popular revolt that toppled President Hosni Mubarak after nearly 30 years in power...

Read more: CBC News - World - Iran's hardliners call for opponents' death
​

Aljazeera re:Iran

15 Feb 2011
....During Monday's protests, thousands of people descended on central Tehran in support of the uprisings across Arab nations...
Deaths reported in Iran protest - Middle East - Al Jazeera English

​

​

 

[gopher]

Hundreds of thousands back Iran Revolution

BBC News - Hundreds of thousands back Iran Revolution

Hundreds of thousands of pro-government Iranians have been rallying to mark the 31st anniversary of Iran's revolution.

BBC News - Huge turnout for Iran rally to mark Islamic revolution




Thousands of people are gathering in Tehran after the Iranian government and opposition leaders called on supporters to mark the 31st anniversary of the Islamic Revolution.







While it is politically correct to report the protests against Ahmadinejad, the truth is that pro Ahmadinejad rallies have been attended by far larger crowds. That is all the proof anyone needs to affirm that the government has majority support,

 

[BaalsTears]

Naw.... he quit. It was all over the news. Rabid born-again non-smoker?

Yeah, right. He hasn't said he quit. His wife did. Obama hasn't corroborated her statement. It took a heart attack to get me to quit.

 

[EagleSmack]

I never claimed Iran's elections were free or fair. I am well aware of the Guardian Council's interference in Iran's elections. But if everyone is aware of this and its in their constitution, then its not fraud. Its unfair. Its not free. But its not FRAUD!

Come on... just admitting that this goes on makes it a fraudulent and farsical election.

 

[gopher]

It is called theocracy and it is in power by the choice of the Iranians. Everybody else is entitled to their opinions but only they (Iranians) can decide for themselves what system they want.

 

[lone wolf]

Yeah, right. He hasn't said he quit. His wife did. Obama hasn't corroborated her statement. It took a heart attack to get me to quit.

Well then, he wouldn't be quite so rabid, would he?

 

[Colpy]

It is called theocracy and it is in power by the choice of the Iranians. Everybody else is entitled to their opinions but only they (Iranians) can decide for themselves what system they want.

Which is the entire point: If only cleric-approved candidates are allowed to run, the Iranian people DO NOT have the choice to run them out.

That is so simple; Why can't you grasp it?

 

[gopher]

You simply have got to stop applying your Western ideals and biases. If they wanted anything else they would have said so years ago. The Iranians are Shiia which is a denomination that exists on theocracy. My Shiia friend from Iran told me years ago that his religion only exists under theocracy. To them that is the way it is supposed to be.

Let these people decide for themselves what the hell they want to govern them and stop being so judgmental.

 

[Colpy]

You simply have got to stop applying your Western ideals and biases. If they wanted anything else they would have said so years ago. The Iranians are Shiia which is a denomination that exists on theocracy. My Shiia friend from Iran told me years ago that his religion only exists under theocracy. To them that is the way it is supposed to be.

Let these people decide for themselves what the hell they want to govern them and stop being so judgmental.

Here they are saying so.........

Here is the clerics' reply.

****ing right I'm judgemental.

 

[gopher]

^ that url looks like spyware city so I'm not looking at it

 

[Colpy]

^ that url looks like spyware city so I'm not looking at it

It wasn't...it was me being technologically incompetent. Look below now.

 

[gopher]

Are those victims of Abu Ghraib? Or how about these deaths due to Bush's plan of democratization?

Iraq Body Count

 

[earth_as_one]

My point is that interference isn't the same as fraud.

I don't care for the Iranian system and I'd like to see it reformed into a free and fair secular democracy. But I'd also like to see Canada become a free and fair democracy too.

Some observations:

Iranians have about as much chance of getting rid of their appointed Guardian Council as Canadians have of getting rid of their appointed Senate. Notice how much progress PM Harper has made on that front since he started appointing senators... I guess that would make Harper our equivalent of Iran's Ayatollah..

Both the Liberal and Conservative party executive vet their candidates which run for office, just like Iran's guardian council. Sure if the riding association's decision is vetoed by the party executive, you can run as an independent. When was the last time an independent was elected PM? Oh that's right, we don't vote for our PM. They are elected during a party convention, most of the time. How did Ignatieff become the leader of the Liberals again??? If Ignatieff becomes PM, most Canadians wouldn't have had a say, including members of the Liberal Party...

Iran's electoral system has problems. So does Canada's.

If you are curious about the level of the Guardian Council's interference in the candidate vetting process, they rejected about 4% of the candidates in the last election, although in the past it has been as high as 12%
RFE/RL Iran Report

BTW, that's not an endorsement of the Iranian electoral system. Its just an observation.

 

[Colpy]

Are those victims of Abu Ghraib? Or how about these deaths due to Bush's plan of democratization?

Iraq Body Count

Ah yes, when you run out of sane argument, change the subject.

 

[gopher]

''Ah yes, when you run out of sane argument, change the subject.''

No, it's you who changed the subject. We were talking about the election process and the fact that the present system in Iran has overwhelming majority support. Then you present two photos which do not even begin to refute what I wrote. So why change the subject?

Where is your proof that the majority do not approve of the present system?

 

[Machjo]

''
They have a few things going against them.''

Most importantly - you forgot to include the fact that the government has MAJORITY support.

Well, yes it is true that the legislative branch of government is democratic except for certain religious communities, but the executive branch is a whole different ball game. It takes an active role in approving laws based on whether it deems them acceptable. In comparison our Queen and Governor General will agree to pretty well anything Parliament passes as long as it's deemed constitutional.

 

[gopher]

-------------------------------------------------------------------

''I don't care for the Iranian system and I'd like to see it reformed into a free and fair secular democracy.''

Why secular? Again, who is to say that it is not a fair system when it has majority support????

I have posed this question repeatedly but no one is answering my question.

 

[Colpy]

My point is that interference isn't the same as fraud.

I don't care for the Iranian system and I'd like to see it reformed into a free and fair secular democracy. But I'd also like to see Canada become a free and fair democracy too.

Some observations:

Iranians have about as much chance of getting rid of their appointed Guardian Council as Canadians have of getting rid of their appointed Senate. Notice how much progress PM Harper has made on that front since he started appointing senators... I guess that would make Harper our equivalent of Iran's Ayatollah..

Both the Liberal and Conservative party executive vet their candidates which run for office, just like Iran's guardian council. Sure if the riding association's decision is vetoed by the party executive, you can run as an independent. When was the last time an independent was elected PM? Oh that's right, we don't vote for our PM. They are elected during a party convention, most of the time. How did Ignatieff become the leader of the Liberals again??? If Ignatieff becomes PM, most Canadians wouldn't have had a say, including members of the Liberal Party...

Iran's electoral system has problems. So does Canada's.

If you are curious about the level of the Guardian Council's interference in the candidate vetting process, they rejected about 4% of the candidates in the last election, although in the past it has been as high as 12%
RFE/RL Iran Report

I'm rolling my eyes so hard, I might hurt myself.

The Senate has little power in Canada as it stands..........and is secondary to the freely elected Parliament.

The Liberals, Conservatives, NDP and Bloc vet their candidates.........for four different and opposing world views.........the Guardian Council allows only ONE view.

And who said you have to be a party member to run????????

Yes Canada has SERIOUS problems with the system...........but to compare them to Iran is MORE than ludicrous.