* Official Iranian Post-Election Thread *

[TranceNRG]

Hello,

I thought it is much better and more efficient if we keep all of the related news/issues in one thread. This way all views and perspectives could be gathered in one place.

Currently, there's much happening in Iran, as you all know by now.

Such events are unprecedented... no doubt.
However, there are so many factors and agents at play right now that make the situation very complex. Often, simple explanations are false.

So, let's keep calm and examine the situation carefully from all perspectives.

Thanks

[ZenBowman]

Sup brah, what is your view on the election result?

Also, you should rename your thread to ** Official Iranian Post-Election Thread **

One star is not official enough

[dabbmw2002]

Sup brah, what is your view on the election result?

this, should be an interesting thread

[kappakai]

you think ayatollah khamanei might have spoken a little too soon and put himself in danger? and what implications does this have for the entire system, or is the islamic republic relatively safe?

[TranceNRG]

this, should be an interesting thread

What is happening on the ground is "interesting" as well.

Sup brah, what is your view on the election result?

Also, you should rename your thread to ** Official Iranian Post-Election Thread **

One star is not official enough

haha...

My view so far...

Unprecedented campaigning
Unprecedented Presidential debates
Unprecedented voter turnout
Unprecedented post-election reaction

Was it fair or rigged? At this point, due to the events on the ground, the answer depends on who you ask.

you think ayatollah khamanei might have spoken a little too soon and put himself in danger? and what implications does this have for the entire system, or is the islamic republic relatively safe?

Firstly, I must say, the problem with certain factors who wish destablize Iran is that, they emphasize too much on the "supreme" leader. The fact on the ground is that much did change in Iran when Khatami was in power, and much would've changed if Mousavi would have been elected. So, it's complete nonsense to claim that supreme leader controls all, and nothing would've changed. There are certain issues that would not be affected much, however, much would have been.

At this point, it is quite early to make assumptions about why Khamenei did what he did. Both sides have their own answers, which they wish to believe. I've heard some even say that initialy Khamenei accepted Mousavi's win but later for no apparent reason he changed his mind. So, there's simply too much unverified information in the atmosphere right now, and depending on where people stand, they choose to randomly pick these "news" that favours their point of view.

Some points that are not mentioned much is that, these protests are mainly (not only) happening in Tehran, and Iran is not Tehran. Secondly, these protestors did in fact injure police officers with their rocks and did burn public buildings and properties. So, such crimes were in fact done by the protestors. Mousavi, in all of his letters is urging the protestors to stay non-violent. Thirdly, massive numbers did show up to the celebration for Ahmadinejad and massive number of people in Iran do in fact support him, and it is in fact quite ignorant to judge what is happening in Iran based on what is happening in north of Tehran.


As I said in my initial post, the Iranian situation is very complicated and simple answers are often false.

[kappakai]

From my understanding (limited) of Iranian government, I figured as much. Khamenei still has to answer to the Assembly of Experts, and I believe he has to deal with Rasfanjani as well. And, I'm aware (via photomasterx and my classes) that Ahmedinejad is still quite popular despite what we are led to believe. And that's half the problem. Being here in the west, whether we are aware or not, we suffer from our own tainted news. The various foregin NGOs, NDI, and western media will all have their say on the news coming out of Iran.

Anyway, this will be something I keep an eye on. I learned about Iran's political system earlier in the view, so I can understand the happenings somewhat better.

[1devil]

What is happening on the ground is "interesting" as well.



haha...

My view so far...

Unprecedented campaigning
Unprecedented Presidential debates
Unprecedented voter turnout
Unprecedented post-election reaction

Was it fair or rigged? At this point, due to the events on the ground, the answer depends on who you ask.




Firstly, I must say, the problem with certain factors who wish destablize Iran is that, they emphasize too much on the "supreme" leader. The fact on the ground is that much did change in Iran when Khatami was in power, and much would've changed if Mousavi would have been elected. So, it's complete nonsense to claim that supreme leader controls all, and nothing would've changed. There are certain issues that would not be affected much, however, much would have been.

At this point, it is quite early to make assumptions about why Khamenei did what he did. Both sides have their own answers, which they wish to believe. I've heard some even say that initialy Khamenei accepted Mousavi's win but later for no apparent reason he changed his mind. So, there's simply too much unverified information in the atmosphere right now, and depending on where people stand, they choose to randomly pick these "news" that favours their point of view.

Some points that are not mentioned much is that, these protests are mainly (not only) happening in Tehran, and Iran is not Tehran. Secondly, these protestors did in fact injure police officers with their rocks and did burn public buildings and properties. So, such crimes were in fact done by the protestors. Mousavi, in all of his letters is urging the protestors to stay non-violent. Thirdly, massive numbers did show up to the celebration for Ahmadinejad and massive number of people in Iran do in fact support him, and it is in fact quite ignorant to judge what is happening in Iran based on what is happening in north of Tehran.


As I said in my initial post, the Iranian situation is very complicated and simple answers are often false.

What are your thoughts on the Iranian media censorship (both local and foreign) in the wake of the election. Does this not suggest there is somthing to hide?

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/mi...957321161.html

[kappakai]

What are your thoughts on the Iranian media censorship (both local and foreign) in the wake of the election. Does this not suggest there is somthing to hide?

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/mi...957321161.html

is this censorship new? or run of the mill for iran?

[1devil]

is this censorship new? or run of the mill for iran?

That's actually a very good question?? Even if it's a reflection of existing policy,it sure seems magnified by the current events in that country.

[TranceNRG]

What are your thoughts on the Iranian media censorship (both local and foreign) in the wake of the election. Does this not suggest there is somthing to hide?

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/mi...957321161.html

The concept of censorship is nothing new in Iran.
Do I agree with it? It depends.

As I mentioned earlier, there are many groups and agencies outside of Iran that always attempt to meddle in Iranian affairs. Such groups twist facts, spin reality and present nonsense to rally the already-biased crowd behind them.

For example, an image of an injured protestor often gets played over and over and over again to strike a cord of hatred amongst the viewers, yet the vandalizing actions of these protestors, throwing huge rocks at the police officers, burning public properties and etc. are often either not shown or shown very briefly to minimize thinking from both sides.

The Iranians in turn, seem to try to limit the images that leaves the country in order to limit such lies and partiality. However, this in turn works against them, because it can be used and thought as if they are hiding information.

Remember post-9/11?
How personal liberty began to fade at a rapid pace, and the excuse of security was being employed for such actions? Similar mindset is often used in Iranian politics. They are constantly "watching out" for the enemy from all sides.

Therefore, we can't be certain whether they are sincerely concerned about the security or simply hiding facts. Again, the answer always depends on which side the people stand on.

Or even more recently, the Gaza war. Remember how the IDF prohibited any foreign journalists from entering Gaza for independent journalism? or how they prohibited independent investigations? Were they hiding something? As always, it seems "the answer" depends on what side people are on.

[AltCtrlDel]

Ayatollah Khamenei and his allies are clearly aware of the potential threat all this poses to the regime. Regular elections are the one safety valve they allow for discontent. The result of the presidential poll announced on Saturday, however, shows the limits.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...hrew-away.html

[1devil]

The concept of censorship is nothing new in Iran.
Do I agree with it? It depends.

As I mentioned earlier, there are many groups and agencies outside of Iran that always attempt to meddle in Iranian affairs. Such groups twist facts, spin reality and present nonsense to rally the already-biased crowd behind them.

For example, an image of an injured protestor often gets played over and over and over again to strike a cord of hatred amongst the viewers, yet the vandalizing actions of these protestors, throwing huge rocks at the police officers, burning public properties and etc. are often either not shown or shown very briefly to minimize thinking from both sides.

The Iranians in turn, seem to try to limit the images that leaves the country in order to limit such lies and partiality. However, this in turn works against them, because it can be used and thought as if they are hiding information.

Remember post-9/11?
How personal liberty began to fade at a rapid pace, and the excuse of security was being employed for such actions? Similar mindset is often used in Iranian politics. They are constantly "watching out" for the enemy from all sides.

Therefore, we can't be certain whether they are sincerely concerned about the security or simply hiding facts. Again, the answer always depends on which side the people stand on.

Or even more recently, the Gaza war. Remember how the IDF prohibited any foreign journalists from entering Gaza for independent journalism? or how they prohibited independent investigations? Were they hiding something? As always, it seems "the answer" depends on what side people are on.

Would you agree that those examples of censorship caused more harm than good to the US and Israel???

[The Coon]

we should send in a CIA team, assasinate this ******* Ahmadinejad, put in power.... the guy the Iranians want and GTFO and done game...

[Kumquatv1]

Close to the election the Iranian government started censoring social networking sites I would assume because they were helping Mousavi quite a bit. They blocked off Twitter, ********, etc.

[SkinnyWR009]

I heard the iranian government actually slowed down the internet connection

[...Rousseau...]

Is a 2nd Iranian Revolution beginning? (yes too soon to say I know.)

[TranceNRG]

Would you agree that those examples of censorship caused more harm than good to the US and Israel???

The anti-Israeli lobby used it in a negative way against Israel, and the pro-Israeli lobby viewed it as a very logical and right thing to do.

[BO$$]

Footage of gunmen firing onto groups of protestors

http://www.iranianuk.com/article.php?id=38535

[TranceNRG]

Footage of gunmen firing onto groups of protestors

http://www.iranianuk.com/article.php?id=38535

I just viewed this video as well.
A couple of questions and comments that naturally rises.

The crowd prior to the police man shooting, threw rocks at him, burned buildings, disobeyed the law and clearly ignored the warning the shots.

There were more than 10 bullets shot "into" the crowd, and there was a massive number of people present. Yet we only witnessed one injured person being removed. If 10+ bullets were shot "into" such a packed crowd, shouldn't have the outcome been worse?

At this point, God knows best.
There's too much disinformation coming out.

[TranceNRG]

I think this may help a bit.

[photomasterx]

Footage of gunmen firing onto groups of protestors

http://www.iranianuk.com/article.php?id=38535

The crowds attacked an offical Basij goverment building.

This is the equivilent of an American rioters storming an American military base and setting it on fire and throwing stones at the American soldiers.

I guarantee you if American rioters did this then the US goverment would give orders to the soldiers to shoot dead the rioters.(fact)

In fact I can pretty much guarantee that if a group of rioters stormed pretty much any military related facility in any Western country they would be shot dead on site.

Those rioters got exactly what they deserve in that video. They commited an act of treason and got the punishment.

Oh by the way what they don't mention in that video is that when the crowd was shouting that the Basij killed people earlier that those people got exactly what was comming to them as well. They shouldn't have been throwin molotov cocktails at city buses, cars and banks.

[SkinnyWR009]

The crowds attacked an offical Basij goverment building.

This is the equivilent of an American rioters storming an American military base and setting it on fire and throwing stones at the American soldiers.

I guarantee you if American rioters did this then the US goverment would give orders to the soldiers to shoot dead the rioters.(fact)

In fact I can pretty much guarantee that if a group of rioters stormed pretty much any military related facility in any Western country they would be shot dead on site.

Those rioters got exactly what they deserve in that video. They commited an act of treason and got the punishment.

Oh by the way what they don't mention in that video is that when the crowd was shouting that the Basij killed people earlier that those people got exactly what was comming to them as well. They shouldn't have been throwin molotov cocktails at city buses, cars and banks.

aren't there over like 3million basij?

[George Carlinian]

A-jad isn't exactly the man for the religious leaders (not sure if 'mullah' is hte right word, though its used a lot in the US media). The 'reformists' seemed to be a bit areligious though (secular). They maintain supreme power in Iran and I think, in the long run, their power will be threatened.

In the short term, from what I understand, outside of Tehran the whole nation is very conservative by choice. I don't think the election was fixed, but instead, those in Tehran got too excited about the new "revolutionary" leaders and have sour grapes over their loss. Instead, they should have spread their message to the rural areas and cities that are more conservative.

Overall, no matter who is in charge, policies will stay the same in Iran, the US, and most other 'democracies'...but what the election does accomplish is more important- it tells the ruling elite that the masses want/need something in another direction.

Lest we forget, the US re-elected dubya, and it was a much closer margin, and much fewer people protested that election. In that sense, Iran > US

[TranceNRG]

A-jad isn't exactly the man for the religious leaders (not sure if 'mullah' is hte right word, though its used a lot in the US media). The 'reformists' seemed to be a bit areligious though (secular). They maintain supreme power in Iran and I think, in the long run, their power will be threatened.

In the short term, from what I understand, outside of Tehran the whole nation is very conservative by choice. I don't think the election was fixed, but instead, those in Tehran got too excited about the new "revolutionary" leaders and have sour grapes over their loss. Instead, they should have spread their message to the rural areas and cities that are more conservative.

Overall, no matter who is in charge, policies will stay the same in Iran, the US, and most other 'democracies'...but what the election does accomplish is more important- it tells the ruling elite that the masses want/need something in another direction.

Lest we forget, the US re-elected dubya, and it was a much closer margin, and much fewer people protested that election. In that sense, Iran > US

You may very well be correct on that.

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showth...hp?t=117015841

[MantisShrimp]

I just viewed this video as well.
A couple of questions and comments that naturally rises.

The crowd prior to the police man shooting, threw rocks at him, burned buildings, disobeyed the law and clearly ignored the warning the shots.

There were more than 10 bullets shot "into" the crowd, and there was a massive number of people present. Yet we only witnessed one injured person being removed. If 10+ bullets were shot "into" such a packed crowd, shouldn't have the outcome been worse?

At this point, God knows best.
There's too much disinformation coming out.

I agree that the whole accusation of the "Baseej firing into a crowds" is more a tale of a single frustrated soldier acting out.
But the repression of news media, ********, Twitter, etc is much more broad in policy, scope, and context.
That's clear minded people sitting in air conditioned rooms, calmly deciding to oppress human beings.

Can't get behind that, sorry.

[TranceNRG]

I agree that the whole accusation of the "Baseej firing into a crowds" is more a tale of a single frustrated soldier acting out.
But the repression of news media, ********, Twitter, etc is much more broad in policy, scope, and context.
That's clear minded people sitting in air conditioned rooms, calmly deciding to oppress human beings.

Can't get behind that, sorry.

I responded to a similar post in this thread.

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showpo...1&postcount=10

[TranceNRG]

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showth...hp?t=117048121

[TranceNRG]

Masses Celebrate the Election Results in Tehran

[MantisShrimp]

I responded to a similar post in this thread.

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showpo...1&postcount=10

Cross comparing instances of other countries, particularly western, engaged in FUD and security theatre does not excuse or exhonorate Iran from the charge of violating basic human rights.
If you are going to compare, you have to consider the outcomes.

For instance, American oppression occurred as a result of a very natural overreaction to terrorist crisis, and has been since remediated. Security was always the pretext.
Iranian oppression occured as a result of....religion? lulz? amusement? sadism? Control was always the pretext?

I welcome you to come up with a way to portray it as rational.
I won't claim that we don't have our own freedom issues, but we certainly never venture into that all important are of "What is and isn't in the sky."
Forcibly interpreting the meaning of one's consciousness for him or her is the ultimate humanitarian offense.

[TranceNRG]

Cross comparing instances of other countries, particularly western, engaged in FUD and security theatre does not excuse or exhonorate Iran from the charge of violating basic human rights.
If you are going to compare, you have to consider the outcomes.

For instance, American oppression occurred as a result of a very natural overreaction to terrorist crisis, and has been since remediated. Security was always the pretext.
Iranian oppression occured as a result of....religion? lulz? amusement? sadism? Control was always the pretext?

From their perspective, their initiatives are very natural reactions to their surrounding environments. Security is always the pretext.

I welcome you to come up with a way to portray it as rational.
I won't claim that we don't have our own freedom issues, but we certainly never venture into that all important are of "What is and isn't in the sky."
Forcibly interpreting the meaning of one's consciousness for him or her is the ultimate humanitarian offense.

I sense that the underlying issue in your post is rather your problem with the presence of theocracy in Iran and not necessarily with the recent censorship? Am I correct in think that? If not, please correct me.