Buzzflash
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Mixx it!
RedditUPDATE Thursday, July 9--Clashes erupted today between at least a thousand protestors in Tehran and baton-wielding security forces. Demonstrations took place all over Iran -- according to one report, in 400 cities.
In Iran, a supposed sandstorm is being used to create its own "fog of war."
The Iranian opposition called for a three-day general strike to demonstrate their rejection of President Ahmadinejad, and in response the Iranian government ordered the shutdown of all banks, businesses, and universities because of a sandstorm.
And Thursday could be the start of a new street confrontation, if reports of a planned march that day are true. The Los Angeles Times reports that the opposition has called for a protest march on Thursday, to commemorate the tenth anniversary of the 1999 regime crackdown on student protestors. The call comes after a prolonged period of relative calm in the streets, and that they are urging marchers to carry roses:
Keep quiet under all circumstances, the circular advises those planning to march in Thursday's unauthorized demonstrations in Iran cities."The heaviest weapon to carry is one rose in the hand," it says.
As Iranians prepare for what could be another violent day of confrontations Thursday between demonstrators and security forces, including pro-government plainclothes Basiji militias, supporters of opposition candidate Mir-Hossein Mousavi have distributed instructions to try to keep any anticipated violence to a minimum.
The Wall Street Journal reports:
The three top leaders of Iran's opposition joined forces on Tuesday and their supporters began a three-day national strike, signaling a resurrection of protests. ... Opposition candidates Mir Hossein Mousavi and Mehdi Karroubi, joined by former President Mohamad Khatami, met to plot strategy and issued their first-ever joint statement, calling for an end to the government's arrests and what they called "savage, shocking attacks" on their advisers and supporters. ...Simultaneously, Iran's government on Tuesday announced an unexpected public holiday for 48 hours due to emergency level of pollution and a dust storm covering the capital. Some speculated that it could be an attempt to mask the impact of the public strikes.
The government ordered all industries and businesses in the capital to remain shut and only vehicles with emergency business to come out, though Tehran often faces high-level pollution and the dust storm is reported to be worse in cities to the south and east.
The nightly shouts of "God is great!" and "Death to the dictator!" continue to echo from rooftops, in what has become the opposition's signature protest, and there are reports that the leaders of the opposition are calling for other steps, too, including spraying green paint on walls around the capital. (Green was the color chosen by Mousavi's campaign to rally its supporters.)
At the Monday meeting with Karroubi and Khatami, Mousavi declared that the "the government [of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad] lacks legitimacy as it does not have the nation's vote," according to Iran's PressTV. But Mousavi and his allies are wary of provoking a showdown in the streets, and he added: "We should make every effort to pursue the case of our opposition by moving within a legal framework."
Karroubi, speaking to campaign supporters, added: "A government which takes over the wheel of the country without popular vote has no legitimacy and this reality gets more and more evident day by day."
As the opposition stands firm, the centrist bloc led by Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafansjani seems to be standing with them. One day after Rafsanjani met in public with relatives of those arrested in the post-election crackdown, his political party issued a defiant statement:
"We declare that the result is unacceptable due to the unhealthy voting process, massive electoral fraud and the siding of the majority of the Guardian Council with a specific candidate."
Share this article
Robert Dreyfuss
A chronicle of America's adventures in foreign policy and national security.
RSS
The left would never admit it as it would give G.W. Bush credibility on democracy theory, but one writer ask a poignant question;
"Did the overthrow of the Saddam Hussein regime, and the subsequent holding of competitive elections in which many rival Iraqi Shiite parties took part, have any germinal influence on the astonishing events in Iran? Certainly when I interviewed Sayeed Khomeini in Qum some years ago, where he spoke openly about "the liberation of Iraq," he seemed to hope and believe that the example would spread. One swallow does not make a summer. But consider this: Many Iranians go as religious pilgrims to the holy sites of Najaf and Kerbala in southern Iraq. They have seen the way in which national and local elections have been held, more or less fairly and openly, with different Iraqi Shiite parties having to bid for votes (and with those parties aligned with Iran's regime doing less and less well). They have seen an often turbulent Iraqi Parliament holding genuine debates that are reported with reasonable fairness in the Iraqi media. Meanwhile, an Iranian mullah caste that classifies its own people as children who are mere wards of the state puts on a "let's pretend" election and even then tries to fix the outcome. Iranians by no means like to take their tune from Arabs--perhaps least of all from Iraqis--but watching something like the real thing next door may well have increased the appetite for the genuine article in Iran itself."
Thik about it if you even can?
Posted by BigPasture at 07/08/2009 @ 11:40am
Posted by BigPasture at 07/08/2009 @ 11:40am
So, given your theory and the facts that Saddam was overthrown in 2003 and elections were held in JANUARY 2005, RIO...
why did Ahmadinejad win re-election easily in AUGUST 2005?!?!??!?
"delayed reaction to the blossoming of democracy like a thousand flowers"?!?!??!??
LOL
Posted by Mask at 07/08/2009 @ 11:53am
Unlike leftist like mAsKeD some people value and thrill at the example of freedom and liberty without big brother or nanny state big government oversight through dicatorial totalitarian regimes. Apparently some slaves like the comfort of decisionless existence!
Posted by BigPasture at 07/08/2009 @ 1:25pm
Posted by BigPasture at 07/08/2009 @ 1:25pm
Just as valid to attribute it to Obama's speech.
Think about it if you even can?
Posted by !immutable at 07/08/2009 @ 1:30pm
You must mean the rousing support the Obamanation that makes desolation gave the Iranian uprising over the election and crackdown? Yea, he came out big TEN day after it all began placating the Iranian President! Wonderful example of a clueless gutless fool!
Posted by BigPasture at 07/08/2009 @ 1:38pm
No, the Cairo speech.
What you think a gun can do, I think words can do.
Posted by !immutable at 07/08/2009 @ 1:40pm
As Robert Spencer wrote on Jihad Watch; No strike on Iran. No sanctions. Just diplomacy -- with a genocidally-inclined and fanatically intransigent regime. It is no mystery why many wonder which side the NIAC is really on. But as long as it wields such influence in Washington and holds the ear of Barack Obama, the freedom fighters on the streets of Tehran don't stand a chance.
Posted by BigPasture at 07/08/2009 @ 1:44pm
BigPasture:
The Iranians were well aware of the democratic process before the US invasion of Iraq. They were well aware of it when we overthrew their democratically elected leader in 1953. They were well aware of it when the US armed and supported Saddam Hussein through the 1980's. They were well aware of it when Jay Garner was fired and the CPA led by Paul Bremer preceded to unleash a free market nightmare on Iraq.
The fact of the matter is, had Cheney gotten his wish and the US or Israel attacked Iran, these demonstrations never would have had the opportunity to take place.
Democracy and freedom blossoms from the ground up. It can't be imposed. Your ideology is morally bankrupt and your theories have been discredited.
Posted by pntognnss1759 at 07/08/2009 @ 2:22pm
Dreyfuss: considering that the inevitable outcome (I believe) of the disaster in Iran is going to be a regime in which Ahmadinejad/Khamenei rule with a discredited regime, is it a good thing for Moussavi et al to continue to encourage people to march in the streets? The only result will be more dead, injured, and jailed people.
Given that, had Moussavi been elected, the basic structure of the Iranian government wouldn't have changed, and Khameini would have still been in his position, and the Revolutionary Guard still the same, what has been lost in this election to the point where having a sustained eruption in the streets that causes death and injury is warranted?
The election was about a new president, not a new government structure, or the end of the Ayatollahs.
Posted by syfriendly at 07/08/2009 @ 2:47pm
Posted by BigPasture at 07/08/2009 @ 1:25pm
You didn't answer my question, RIO.
By your "Dubya did it all" theory....why did it take FOUR YEARS for the Iranians to notice all that democracy going on over the border?
Something good on TV?
Posted by Mask at 07/08/2009 @ 2:55pm
Also, Dreyfuss: was the announcement Rafsanjani
" ... We declare that the result is unacceptable due to the unhealthy voting process, massive electoral fraud and the siding of the majority of the Guardian Council with a specific candidate ..."
issued only in English to Western journalists, or was it issued also in Farsi to Iranian press?
Posted by syfriendly at 07/08/2009 @ 3:22pm
To immutable: yes, I think Obama's speech was an important factor. At least that's what Iranians told me. For what it's worth, not a single Iranian mentioned the influence of democracy in Iraq. Most people in the region consider Iraq to be a catastrophe of occupation and civil war, so they're not enthused.
To syfriendly: I don't know if it's "good" or "bad" that Mousavi et al. are asking people to come out into the streets, but I do admire their bravery. (As for Rafsanjani: yes, it was issued in Persian.)
Posted by RobertDreyfuss at 07/08/2009 @ 4:41pm
Posted by RobertDreyfuss at 07/08/2009 @ 4:41pm | ignore this person | warn this person
Thanks for the clarification and response. For my part, I am trying very hard not to see the tragic events unfolding in Iran through the lens of my Western eyes, or as a thing that is about me and the Western world I live in. I don't know what "freedom" means in Iran because I don't have a visceral sense of what living in Iran means minus "freedom", as is apparently the state of affairs there judging by the writing of Western journalists. However, I *do* know that I would like to hear of fewer deaths, injuries, and jailings there amongst working people who more than anything else are concerned about putting food on the table, the same as anyone else. And history shows us that power-hungry politicians, be they despots or "reformers", happily use working people as a pawn in their power games.
Posted by syfriendly at 07/08/2009 @ 5:38pm
Certainly when I interviewed Sayeed Khomeini in Qum some years ago, where he spoke openly about "the liberation of Iraq," he seemed to hope and believe that the example would spread.
Posted by BigPasture at 07/08/2009 @ 11:40am
Talk about desperation. The Bush dead enders are manically trying to salvage the Bush legacy and performing contortions of unparalleled degrees to frame anything that happens in the Middle east as a positive outcome of Bush's deranged policies.
So while the massacre in Southern Lebanon, the killed 1,300 civilians was birth pangs of democracy, any disaster in Iraq was proof that things were improving, because we all know things getting worse is a sign they are getting better.
Posted by Shingo at 07/08/2009 @ 6:59pm
You must mean the rousing support the Obamanation that makes desolation gave the Iranian uprising over the election and crackdown?
Posted by BigPasture at 07/08/2009 @ 1:38pm
You tell em BigPasture. Big brave Bush would have given a nasty speech and then done nothing. That would have showed them how tough we are.
Posted by Shingo at 07/08/2009 @ 7:01pm
As Robert Spencer wrote on Jihad Watch; No strike on Iran. No sanctions. Just diplomacy -- with a genocidally-inclined and fanatically intransigent regime.
Posted by BigPasture at 07/08/2009 @ 1:44pm
Genocidally-inclined implies Iran committed genocide. When did Iran commit genocide?
"But as long as it wields such influence in Washington and holds the ear of Barack Obama, the freedom fighters on the streets of Tehran don't stand a chance."
The freedom fighters are asking the Us to stay the hell out of their business. You Bush dead enders like to believe you know what's best for everyone else. No wonder the right has become irrelevant. At least you'll have a good 12 year to reflect on your failures. In the mean time, watch and learn.
Posted by Shingo at 07/08/2009 @ 7:05pm
bigpasture-Obama could have done what McCain and other republicans did and give Iran a stern talking to while assuring them that they will not do anything about it.That would teach those Iranians.Talk loud,but carry no stick.
Posted by i'm nobody at 07/08/2009 @ 7:18pm
With Obama its speak softly and carry a BIG telepromter!
Posted by BigPasture at 07/08/2009 @ 8:21pm
So while the massacre in Southern Lebanon, the killed 1,300 civilians was birth pangs of democracy, any disaster in Iraq was proof that things were improving, because we all know things getting worse is a sign they are getting better.
Posted by Shingo at 07/08/2009 @ 6:59pm | ignore this person | warn this person
????? That is your HAT isn't it that you are speaking out of!?!? Well..., lets at least hope that maybe that is were your totally unrealated off the deepend corrolaries are deposited from!
Posted by BigPasture at 07/08/2009 @ 8:34pm
Unlike leftist like mAsKeD some people value and thrill at the example of freedom and liberty without big brother or nanny state big government ...
Posted by BigPasture at 07/08/2009 @ 1:25pm | ignore this person | warn this person
And, PALLETS of U.S. currency flown in on C-130's, to boot!
Posted by schnellerheinz at 07/08/2009 @ 8:34pm
Now, THAT'S what I call "spreading democracy".
Posted by schnellerheinz at 07/08/2009 @ 8:36pm
The freedom fighters are asking the Us to stay the hell out of their business. Posted by Shingo at 07/08/2009 @ 7:05pm | ignore this person | warn this person
Odd just where do you find verification that Mousavi and the Iranians have indicated or even said such a thing or intimated they desire this? Again your hat is talking.
Posted by BigPasture at 07/08/2009 @ 8:47pm
And, PALLETS of U.S. currency flown in on C-130's, to boot!
Posted by schnellerheinz at 07/08/2009 @ 8:34pm | ignore this person | warn this person
I didn't recognize you Mask, Odd how you left out the best part, guess it touched a nerve?
"Unlike leftist like mAsKeD some people value and thrill at the example of freedom and liberty without big brother or nanny state big government oversight through dicatorial totalitarian regimes. Apparently some slaves like the comfort of decisionless existence!"
Posted by BigPasture at 07/08/2009 @ 1:25pm | ignore this person | warn this person
Posted by BigPasture at 07/08/2009 @ 8:53pm
big pasture-It is better to carry a teleprompter than nothing,like you republicans wanted to do.
Posted by i'm nobody at 07/08/2009 @ 9:19pm
Odd just where do you find verification that Mousavi and the Iranians have indicated or even said such a thing or intimated they desire this? Again your hat is talking.
Posted by BigPasture at 07/08/2009 @ 8:47pm
Have they asked for help? No and for a very good reason. The very suggestion of receiving help or support from the US is the kiss of death to legitimacy in Iran, even among the Mousavi supporters.
Posted by Shingo at 07/08/2009 @ 9:25pm
No, no, no, you said;
The freedom fighters are asking the Us to stay the hell out of their business. Posted by Shingo at 07/08/2009 @ 7:05pm | ignore this person | warn this person
Odd just where do you find verification that Mousavi and the Iranians have indicated or even said such a thing or intimated they desire this? Again your hat is talking.
Posted by BigPasture at 07/08/2009 @ 8:47pm
So, just at least attempt to verify your information sourse since you are tight with Mousavi and his supporters?!
Posted by BigPasture at 07/08/2009 @ 9:38pm
you republicans wanted to do.
Posted by i'm nobody at 07/08/2009 @ 9:19pm | ignore this person | warn this person
So Sorry, married one, but not one making the insult futile at best!
Posted by BigPasture at 07/08/2009 @ 9:56pm
bigpasture-Find out what an independent is.Your views are 100% partisan republican and you repeat their talking points constantly.
Posted by i'm nobody at 07/08/2009 @ 10:42pm
Last time a demoncrat won in our state Gilligan was just starting his 3 hour tour in the minnow!
Posted by BigPasture at 07/08/2009 @ 11:16pm
thats 1964
Posted by BigPasture at 07/08/2009 @ 11:29pm
Last time a demoncrat won in our state Gilligan was just starting his 3 hour tour in the minnow!
Posted by BigPasture at 07/08/2009 @ 11:16pm
That's what I love about the Republicans. In their mind, fiction and reality are the same thing. that's why they take their understanding of history from the Bible.
Posted by Shingo at 07/09/2009 @ 12:21am
Sorry, RIO, did you answer my question?
Why did Ahmadinejad win easily in August 2005....when "Bush-inspired democracy" was occurring in Iraq in JANAURY 2005???
Posted by Mask at 07/09/2009 @ 08:01am
<i>Posted by Mask at 07/09/2009 @ 08:01am </i>
Hmm...that is true. I forgot that all causes are instantaneous...
Posted by Thrawn at 07/09/2009 @ 9:22pm
New Showdown in Iran? Robert Dreyfuss on 07/08/2009 @ 11:02am
Nice that you're responding to some posts here. And I'm thrilled and encouraged with the brave Iranians taking once again to the streets. In terms of inspiration, maybe this is hubris or narcissistic, but I think there's a strong argument not for the whole of the Obama campaign - many elements, the idealism of a nobody taking on the entrenched & powerful, the whole people power / grass roots facet combined with the internet components, and of course all this on the backs of the Cheney-Bush Middle East living nightmare.
I was wondering what you might think of something like this - The Nation starts a "DiaBlog" option below country-specific articles, to cultivate a back-and-forth between (in your case) Iranians citizens and others - like us.
The possibility of the sort of folks you've been talking to basically talking directly with us readers seems pretty cool. I am sure one can find it elsewhere, but there's a certain gravitas which only The Nation holds. Responsible diabloggers could serve as moderators to temper some of the off-topic and ad hominem content.
Iranian citizens could straighten us out just as you have, for ex., regarding the marvels of W's 'spread'n democracy in Iraq'.
Would hope for similar format for pieces specific to a select set of countries / locales - Burma, Palestine, Syria, Lebanon, Israel.
I bet we posters could raise some $ and find folks to do some pro bono programming. One issue, for ex., would be maximizing the chance that folks claiming to be living in the select country/locale is legit. Seems like a set of established moderators from each area could formulate some questions (in the local language) to serve this goal. Hope others chime in on this.
Posted by winyahn at 07/09/2009 @ 10:31pm
Darn - - strong argument not just for the Cairo speech, but for the whole of the Obama campaign...
Posted by winyahn at 07/09/2009 @ 10:35pm
Last time a demoncrat won in our state Gilligan was just starting his 3 hour tour in the minnow!
thats 1964
Posted by BigPasture at 07/08/2009 @ 11:16pm
That's what I love about the Republicans. In their mind, fiction and reality are the same thing. that's why they take their understanding of history from the Bible.
Posted by Shingo at 07/09/2009 @ 12:21am | ignore this person | warn this person
I realize that actually discussing FACTS and TRUTH is totally foreign to you, but the state is Oklahoma. Try looking it up for yourself instead of looking the total FOOL as usual!?
Posted by BigPasture at 07/10/2009 @ 12:32am
Sorry, RIO, did you answer my question?
Why did Ahmadinejad win easily in August 2005....when "Bush-inspired democracy" was occurring in Iraq in JANAURY 2005???
Posted by Mask at 07/09/2009 @ 08:01am | ignore this person | warn this person
The really big question is why waste the time with your insidious foolishness? If you have a position and theory let us know!
Posted by BigPasture at 07/10/2009 @ 12:39am
It is going to take a lot of pretzel logic to resurrect G.W. Bush's miserable reputation.
It's typical,backpedal on prior postitions and lies then concoct new favorable scenarios for which Bush can take the credit.
Bush called Iran part of the axis of evil and Cheney wanted a war with Iran. I'm sure these facts will be qualified by the Kool-Aid guzzlers to match their new affection for the Iranians.
The Suprem Leader did a terrible job fixing the election. The results were so conspicuously fake that it sparked the reaction.
Posted by koroviev at 07/10/2009 @ 02:54am
The Suprem Leader did a terrible job fixing the election. The results were so conspicuously fake that it sparked the reaction.
Posted by koroviev at 07/10/2009 @ 02:54am | ignore this person | warn this person
Yea, thats just how we feel about the Obamanation that makes desolation, the Demoncrats, and ACORN! I'm with you buddy!
Posted by BigPasture at 07/10/2009 @ 07:39am
Posted by BigPasture at 07/10/2009 @ 12:39am
I'm asking YOU to defend YOUR theory, RIO.
And you can't.
Posted by Mask at 07/10/2009 @ 08:08am
<i>Posted by Mask at 07/10/2009 @ 08:08am </i>
And...the only reason you've given for that so far is one that doesn't make sense because it relies on a really bizarre notion that causality is either instantaneous and total or nonexistent.
Posted by Thrawn at 07/10/2009 @ 12:13pm
Posted by Thrawn at 07/10/2009 @ 12:13pm
Thrawn, if somebody makes a hypothesis, shouldn't they also be the ones to offer evidence and logic to support it. AND to explain why their effect was "delayed" for 4 years?
What if I said "The Soviet Union collapsed thanks to JFK, because Kennedy embarassed Khruschev over the Cuban Missile Crises" and then offered up no reason why it took 27 years later for the Berlin Wall to be torn down?
OR to explain why "Soviet expansionism increased in the 70s" in direct opposition to my theory?
RIO wants "Dubya did it by freeing Iraq" for Iran....but then can't explain why it's only NOW that folks are protesting Ahmadinejad over a re-election? Especially with the added fact that al-Maliki, the democratically elected leader of Iraq, had Ahmadinejad over for tea.
I know you fancy yourself as the rhetorically-gifted "public defender" of your fellow right-wing posters, but.... I wouldn't take this case.
Posted by Mask at 07/10/2009 @ 12:28pm
<i>Posted by Mask at 07/10/2009 @ 12:28pm </i>
Haha, thanks. Just to be clear, I'm not fully defending their argument because I think it's limited at best.
What I am saying is that your response has to be more thorough than it has been if you want to beat their argument. Here's one possibility: public moods and perceptions rarely change instaneously. Instead, new ideas or new realities often take place more gradually. However, it's also possible to set them off with a sufficiently powerful spark (ex: an election of lies).
A better response to their arguments would be to suggest that the Iranian democracy movement has existed for some time, and that the spark merely activated something which had been in the works and was not caused by the invasion of Iraq.
I think there IS room, however, to suggest that the US' efforts to replace Saddam's government with a more democratic system gave the democracy activists more hope that the US would stand in their favor. I don't mean they expected the US to send troops or anything like that; most Iranian NGO's have explicitly said they don't want that. What they want is for us to say "what Iran's government is doing is wrong." Perhaps our actions gave them more hope that we would do so.
Posted by Thrawn at 07/10/2009 @ 3:07pm