Did Iran have a legitimate election, your opinion.

[gosub]

ch750536 -Apart from farsi being one of the principle languages of the internet and the demographics of the country making it a young country.

I would agree that I don't think the protest was initially pro opposition (self selecting advocates playing a part in painting it that way to Western onlookers), think was caused by a fuck up on the number of ballot papers, accentuated by establishment spinning figures that bore no relation to the truth. Now though the mask has slipped.

 

[ohmyliver]

God I love U75!

If this were a thread about the 2004 American Presidential election being fair or not hundreds would've voted "not fair" without caring about the evidence or owt like that - guilty even if proved innocent!

But Iran! Well, they oppose America therefore they are to be supported, therefore there can be no unwarranted criticism and there needs to be documented proof of any wrong doings (like Amajiniddiajsdsaijdasdad calling a press conference to admit he cheated to the whole world!)

um this thread suggests otherwise
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=93480&highlight=2004+american+election

 

[JHE]

Ahmadinejad is anti capitalist and as socialist as you're going to get in Iran.

You mean that since the Islamist bastards murdered the left, we'll just pretend that this Islamist bastard is a socialist?

Nice move.

Shall we also pretend that the fucking Taleban are in the forefront of educating girls? After all, they kill the girls' teachers.

 

[poster342002]

The controlled nature of "elections" in regimes like Iran make the question rather irrelavant.

In Iranian elections the voters have to vote in front of state officials (no polling booths). That's before you take into account that only state-apporved candidates can even stand for eelction in the first place.

They're little better than the farcical elections that were held in the communist bloc.

 

[Sasaferrato]

Don't know don't care....

Given Iran's role in the sponsorship of terrorism, and their agreement that a world-wide Islamic state is desirable, perhaps you should care?

 

[purplex]

Did they fuck!

 

[pocketscience]

Given Iran's role in the sponsorship of terrorism, and their agreement that a world-wide Islamic state is desirable, perhaps you should care?

All of which are completely irrelevant to the poll question that DRINK? honestly answered.

Your democratic point?

 

[Bernie Gunther]

Well, there are some academic psephologists e.g this guy (pdf!) looking at the polls but they're pretty inconclusive for a whole lot of reasons (not least being sent some of their data by random guys on the internet)

My impression so far is that there's no clear cut case for the results being bogus, but there are various more or less plausible grounds for suspicion.

 

[ch750536]

You mean that since the Islamist bastards murdered the left, we'll just pretend that this Islamist bastard is a socialist?

Nice move.

Shall we also pretend that the fucking Taleban are in the forefront of educating girls? After all, they kill the girls' teachers.

Not at all, in the scale of left to right with regards to treatment of the underclass he is about as left as you are likely to get in Iran.

Like I said before.

 

[JHE]

They KILLED the fucking left, you daft Islamophile! The left were left dangling from fucking lampposts!

 

[butchersapron]

They KILLED the fucking left, you daft Islamophile! The left were left dangling from fucking lampposts!

...and who was busy getting his hands bloody as PM during these mass killings of the left? Why it was that nice Mr Mousavi.

 

[Andy the Don]

Ahmadinejad is anti capitalist and as socialist as you're going to get in Iran.

Try telling that to the Tehran bus drivers who organised a union, took industrial action and found themselves arrested and imprisoned on some total bogus charge of something like "subverting the revolution". But he hates America and Israel so that makes him one of the "good guys" in the eyes of the daft left.

 

[ch750536]

They KILLED the fucking left, you daft Islamophile! The left were left dangling from fucking lampposts!

Struggling to read are we...

 

[JHE]

Don't forget to hail Dinnerjacket as a hero of Gay Liberation. The regime only executes an average of about two homos a week. Liberal or what?

 

[phildwyer]

My impression so far is that there's no clear cut case for the results being bogus, but there are various more or less plausible grounds for suspicion.

As opposed the the two US electıons stolen by Bush, where the results were clearly bogus and wıdely known to be so.

Then everyone sort of shut up about ıt whıle he ınvaded everywhere.

 

[ohmyliver]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/global/2009/jun/17/iran-election-rigging

"Iran election turnouts exceeded 100% in 30 towns, website reports
At least 200 polling stations across Iran had participation rates of 95% or above, say sources of centrist Auyandeh site"

 

[derf]

I'm still unsure but I voted 'no' as the Iranian government is acting like they have something to hide.
All they need to do, if it was fair, is ask international monitors to investigate. Instead they kick out foreign press.
It has been my experience that if it smells like shit, it's best not to lick it.

 

[dylans]

The argument that the demonstrations are only an expression of middle class/urban disatisfaction has been made by many here (including myself). The assumption being that Ahmedinajad's base is rural and under the radar of western journalists. Here is an interesting article on the rural vote

http://tehranbureau.com/2009/06/17/irans-rural-vote-and-election-fraud/

 

[littlebabyjesus]

As opposed the the two US electıons stolen by Bush, where the results were clearly bogus and wıdely known to be so.

Then everyone sort of shut up about ıt whıle he ınvaded everywhere.

Ha ha, you've lost your 'i's again.

The point, as others have said, is that the accuracy of the count is rather beside the point. This is not a democratic process, and the election is solely concerned with determining which of the two state-approved candidates will run what will necessarily be the same regime.

Now you can, of course, level the same charge against the likes of the USA. The US system is stitched up by the rich and powerful, without whose approval no president will be elected. But the likes of Shirley Chisholm, for instance, can stand for election if they wish, and everyone is more or less free to publish whatever political views they see fit. There is a qualitative difference between the two processes.

 

[tangentlama]

This is not a democratic process, and the election is solely concerned with determining which of the two state-approved candidates will run what will necessarily be the same regime.

Again, you could easily be talking about a UK general election.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Again, you could easily be talking about a UK general election.

Except that, as I said above, candidates proposing real regime change can stand. They won't receive equitable media coverage and they won't win, but they can stand and shout what they believe as loudly as they like.

This is fundamentally different. There is a qualitative difference between totalitarian regimes such as Iran's and those of the so-called 'liberal democracies'.

 

[goldenecitrone]

Not at all, in the scale of left to right with regards to treatment of the underclass he is about as left as you are likely to get in Iran.

Like I said before.

Erich Honecker was considerably more left-wing than Ahmadinejad.

 

[tangentlama]

Ha ha, you've lost your 'i's again.

The point, as others have said, is that the accuracy of the count is rather beside the point. This is not a democratic process, and the election is solely concerned with determining which of the two state-approved candidates will run what will necessarily be the same regime.

Now you can, of course, level the same charge against the likes of the USA. The US system is stitched up by the rich and powerful, without whose approval no president will be elected. But the likes of Shirley Chisholm, for instance, can stand for election if they wish, and everyone is more or less free to publish whatever political views they see fit. There is a qualitative difference between the two processes.

Except that, as I said above, candidates proposing real regime change can stand. They won't receive equitable media coverage and they won't win, but they can stand and shout what they believe as loudly as they like.

This is fundamentally different. There is a qualitative difference between totalitarian regimes such as Iran's and those of the so-called 'liberal democracies'.

Iran doesn't have a totalitarian regime. Stop trying to pretend it has or I shall think you've taken a leaf out of the Bush/Neocon commentators:

Evil (as in, axis of), totalitarian — such words trip easily from the mouths of officials in Washington, but they do not always accord with reality. Here, in "totalitarian" Tehran, I can sit in a shared taxi and hear five people, all strangers to each other, lambasting the hypocrisy and venality of their rulers. Iran is often described as a "religious dictatorship," but it is nevertheless possible to buy surrealist novels that refer to drug abuse and homosexuality (I am now reading such a book, Sadegh Hedayat's classic, "The Blind Owl").

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Iran doesn't have a totalitarian regime. Stop trying to pretend it has or I shall think you've taken a leaf out of the Bush/Neocon commentators:

Try telling that to the relatives of the dead opposition leaders, murdered by the state.

Try walking the streets of Tehran distributing leaflets that criticise the Supreme Leader.

Iran is a Theocracy. Theocracies are, by definition, totalitarian.

Is it the most totalitarian state in the world? No. But then again, I didn't say it was.

 

[butchersapron]

Amazing - everyone who doesn't agree with tangentlama today is a neo-con. If you want to play that game tangentlama then you're an apologist for homophobic state execution, murder and persecution of leftits, unionists and radicals, murders of dissenting journalists, the forcing of oppostion into exile and so on. Stupid ganme ain't it?

 

[ohmyliver]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/blog/2009/jun/18/iran-unrest
the guardian are reporting:
"The Conservative candidate Mohsen Rezaei has asked those who voted for him to send in their national ID numbers, according to a contact in Iran. So far he said to have received 200,000 more numbers than the votes he won in the official results."

 

[tangentlama]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/blog/2009/jun/18/iran-unrest
the guardian are reporting:
"The Conservative candidate Mohsen Rezaei has asked those who voted for him to send in their national ID numbers, according to a contact in Iran. So far he said to have received 200,000 more numbers than the votes he won in the official results."

Interesting.

 

[ohmyliver]

this is also interesting
http://www.iranian.com/main/node/67598
a claim that voting numbers actually dropped for one candidate during the election

"The election patch-up was so unconvincing and amateur that while the Islamic Republic Television was supposedly tallying via live computers, the number of votes for Candidate Rezaii suddenly DROPPED by about 45,000 people from 633 thousand to 578 thousand! (See the still photos above that were taken from the recorded TV program at 9:47 am at 30 million total votes and 1:53 pm at 34 million votes!)"

 

[tangentlama]

this is also interesting
http://www.iranian.com/main/node/67598
a claim that voting numbers actually dropped for one candidate during the election

"The election patch-up was so unconvincing and amateur that while the Islamic Republic Television was supposedly tallying via live computers, the number of votes for Candidate Rezaii suddenly DROPPED by about 45,000 people from 633 thousand to 578 thousand! (See the still photos above that were taken from the recorded TV program at 9:47 am at 30 million total votes and 1:53 pm at 34 million votes!)"

Even more interesting. Looks like a brand new election is a distinct possiblity and maybe preferable to a recount.

 

[Streathamite]

Try telling that to the relatives of the dead opposition leaders, murdered by the state.

Try walking the streets of Tehran distributing leaflets that criticise the Supreme Leader.

Iran is a Theocracy. Theocracies are, by definition, totalitarian.

Is it the most totalitarian state in the world? No. But then again, I didn't say it was.

surely it is an authoritarian regime rather than a totalitarian one.
And theocracies aren't, "by definition, totalitarian".
After all, the Dalai lama's Tibet was a theocracy, but that wasn't totalitarian in any way whatsoever. ditto, the Abbasid Caliphate.