Something's Happening in Iran

.
Well. These sorts of hysterical attacks are part and parcel of the Iranian thug leadership style.
.
Good to know nothing like that ever happens here.
~

Wait – what? This can't be happening, because that weak-kneed Obama didn't come out and threaten military support for the opposition the morning after the election. This must be some Iranian dictator-guy trick I completely don't understand. We must attack now, before whatever this is has a chance to work.

America would never ever hysterical attack anyone. Nor would we allow it in our political discourse.

…if Israel doesn't strike first. Are they still pondering this? Can't we instead win Iran's hearts and minds with Coca-Cola, McDonalds, skinny jeans, Britney, and Michael Jackson tributes? Megan Fox as our new ambassador?

Can't we instead win Iran's hearts and minds with Coca-Cola, McDonalds, skinny jeans, Britney, and Michael Jackson tributes? Megan Fox as our new ambassador?
-
You know what's funny? That's actually working in China and Viet Nam, to a degree. When we drop our guard and stop being the big bad Amerikuns, we actually, you know, look human, and therefore at least understandable. China gets money. Notice how they've copied our economic system down to the decimal point but are still "officially" Communist? It's just a basic appeal to our nature as humans, political ideology be damned.

" .. leading reformers like Mir-Hossein Mousavi and Mehdi Karroubi in Kayhan, .."

A disgruntled loser in elections in USA who persists in juvenile, anti-social histrionics (against a system they would embrace is they won) would not be termed "leading reformer" by JK.

And JK would not term ours a 'military dictatorship' if our security forces brutally crashed such bitter losers who wreak destruction to property and human life.

Some Americans who voted for McCain in 2008 may not believe that he did not win.
It may be inconceivable to JK that Ahmadinejad won the elections in Iran.

Should the world and Iranians unduly pay heed to what JK's wants - and those of USA's Israel-centric MSM - are?

yutsano 6:41 pm: " .. Notice how they've copied our economic system down to the decimal point ..."

Which economic system - the one going down the drain to the decimal points?

Didn't someone say that we are busy going socialist/communist - with our USA government an owner of means of production and the largest and most powerful player in the, eh, free market!

Oh, and of course a major suppliers of free socialist benefits/services to lazy citizens.

[...] Joe Klein in Swampland Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)Foreign broadcasters walk a fine line [...]

cfukara- do you ever pause when writing your anti-JK screeds to consider that he was actually in Iran during the election, while you were dutifully manning your post at the 101st keyboard squadron? Please feel free to bring up Al Gore in your answer.

Related, interview with Iranian reformist Ayatollah Mohsen Kadivar (h/t Juan Cole).

Joe,
-
What the he11. This Iran story was like so three weeks ago. Don't you know Micheal Jackson died? And Sanford went to Argentina? And Palin quit? And Steve McNair died? How can you still be writing about some random people in Asia and their priest problems? Silly JK, reporting on big important events and following relevant stories that don't conform to a hyperactive 2day cable news cycle. Dood, if you keep doing that you'll never get a guest spot on TMZ.

No TMZ, agreed, but how about “Morning Joe”? JK could ponder future Iranian market reforms. Yutsano pointed out China's success; once (if?) Iran is stabilized they could try something similar in their own way. Of course, JK could debate while ONLY looking deep into Mika's eyes, making her blush, and ignoring Scarborough. I'm still waiting for Scarborough to totally lose it on the air.

Once Rafsanjani questioned the election something happened for sure.

Is Kayhan the Iranian version of Fox News? They've got that crazed fanatic air about them too.

anon76 Says: " ... cfukara- do you ever pause when writing your anti-JK screeds to consider that he was actually in Iran during the election, .."

Lets see how that works: JK was in Iran during the elections, so that makes his long-standing, extreme anti-Iranian demagoguery and agitation on behalf of anti-social rabble rousers admissible.

Well. Millions of hillbillies were in USA during the presidential elections of 2008. Not each one of them is an expert on the happenings (despite having lived here all their lives) and don't take their views for granted - unless you are thus predisposed.

All those gosh darned anti-social rabble rousers belly-aching about an unpopular president getting more votes in cities than said cities' populations, getting shot by the poleese and such. Darn tooten' cfukara. Fight the powa!
.
...oh, wait.

Cfukara: Your point about how this would be reported if it were taking place in the U.S. is well-taken, but what is it that you object to? The consensus view that the election was in fact stolen, or the media portrayal of the reformers as brave, righteous champions of freedom fighting against the evil Iranian dictators?
.
The latter I would understand and would not disagree, but I think the evidence supporting the claim that the election was stolen is pretty conclusive. You are right that if something similar occurred in the U.S., the forces trying to obfuscate that evidence and prevent that conclusion would be much more powerful, but that doesn't mean that they would be right to do so.
.
But perhaps I've misunderstood. Do you really think that the election results were legitimate (or close enough), and that this narrative of a stolen election is being promoted solely (rather than only in part) because it supports a negative portrayal of Iran's current leadership that is desirable to certain parties? If so, how do you respond to the arguments made by Juan Cole and others?
.
http://www.juancole.com/2009/06/stealing-iranian-election.html

"who never thought very highly of him as a religious thinker"
.
Now you've picked my attention. Do expound.

Joe - you've got a typo to fix. Qom is in Iran, not Iraq
.
It's very good news that "something's happening in Iran." How fortunate that Obama had the good sense to stay out.

Now you've picked my attention. Do expound.
.
It is my understanding that Khamenei was not not an ayatollah prior to Khomenei's decision to name his as his successor as Supreme Leader. He was in fact a junior cleric, more of a pitbull for Khomenei, not a great religous scholar. The way the Constitution was written, the position of Supreme Leader was reserved for a Grand Ayatollah, so Khomenei had to force a change in the language to allow his Khamenei to be elevated. Khamenei was eventually promoted to ayatollah so he could take the job of Supreme Leader, but he was never looked upon by the clerics in Qom as a real heavy weight in Islamic thinking -- he got his position by knowing the right people.

Remember, the actual rejection of the Shah took a couple of years. Not everything happens overnight. The Iranian people are in for a long and tragic struggle, but it is their struggle. The less outside interference the better. I really hope there is a new thread or two when I wake!

kathy 7:37 am: " .. It's very good news that "something's happening in Iran." "

"good news"!
Yea, some live for chaos and mayhem.
They even find it exciting when it happens closer to home - as in the 60s.

redraven93 2:26 am: " .. All those gosh darned anti-social rabble rousers belly-aching about an unpopular president .."

We know about the "unpopular president" Obama.
And the millions who get their news (and cues) from FOX News Network and the Limbaugh harangue on radio rue the day the mullahs of USA thrust him into the presidency.
What did you say about "darned anti-social rabble rousers belly-aching"?

Commenter 2B 3:19 am:
" .. The consensus view that the election was in fact stolen, "

We have no idea what 'consensus' - or 'fact' you are looking at.
Or should we take your assertion in the same vein as a once widely-held 'consensus' among millions (of viewers of FOX Network News) that Iraq 'in fact' had WMDs or a once popular 'consensus' that we had found WMD in Iraq?

[For sure, USA's MSM (of the USA's ruling elites) have ideas rooted in their imperial designs ... And the lowly unemployment-averse media scribes exercise due self-censorship.]

Conversely, when we ACTUALLY 'steal' elections on behalf of our lackeys in foreign countries, like Kenya2007, then it is all good.

.

Or is yours a "conjecture" - an "hypothesis"? If so, it was put to the test - by a recount of a sampling of the ballots. Even when the sample was skewed/chosen to favor your anti-social, traitorous rabble-rouser (by selecting the precincts/neighborhoods he contested as his strongholds) he came out the ignominious looser.
Case closed.

.

" .. or the media portrayal of the reformers as brave, righteous champions of freedom fighting against the evil Iranian dictators? "

I have heard about mangy protesters, flea-bitten agitators and common rabble-rousers in USA described in similar terms by their supporters. And of course our MSM of our ruling elites don't go along.

And we have heard similar terms used by their supporters to refer to the Taliban, Al Queda, maoists, communists, zionists, socialists, islamists ... crusaders. ... frenchmen...
.

" .. but I think the evidence supporting the claim that the election was stolen is pretty conclusive. "
"evidence"? "supporting"? You ARE wet in the area of polling and sampling.
"but I think"! Keep on "thinking" - and you may just be wrong.
The sovereignty of a nation cannot be predicated on your "thinking" - nor on a siren song's fatwas.

"but I think" Like the father(USA) who 'thinks' that HIS toddler(Mousavi) is the cutest in the world - and has bundles of pictures in his wallet to prove it to all and sundry.

Interesting that you use the first person plural, cfukura. Who exactly are you speaking for?
Other than Iranian government reports, and an Iranian government-run recount, you have no more evidence on your side than those you accuse of supporting rabble-rousers. The bottom line is that there is no independent verification, mainly because the government that you support acted in as guilty-looking a manner as possible to insure that no external observers were present.

The basic facts, which even the Iranian government has not denied, are that many cities reported more votes than there were voters, the election was called before polls closed (in an election where ballots are hand counted rather than machine counted), and where the percentage of the electorate that turned out greatly increased since 2005- at no point in the history of democratic elections has there been such a large increase in turnout to re-elect an incumbent by such a wide margin.

You have been unable to address any of these basic points, instead trying to muddy the waters with false analogies and attacks on the protesters themselves, as well as an increasingly shrill tone. I don't think you're changing many people's perception of the events with such tactics.