About two years ago in 2009 there was a presidential election in Iran. Perhaps everyone knows about the fraud claims before and after the polling day. Although four candidates were running for presidency, however it was actually a two man election, as three of them were united in doing anything to prevent the re-election of the fourth candidate.
Today I cam across an article, which in my opinion is one the best articles written on this subject by two non-Iranian, American authors titled: “WHY THE MYTH OF IRAN’S “STOLEN” ELECTION STILL MATTERS” which is published in the raceforiran.com site.
I am not going to copy that article here, and any one interested in it, can read it by following the above links. However, I jut quote few phrases of that article along with an interesting comment by one of the readers of that article to claims raised by another person (sassan):
- “Following the election (actually he started the day before), Mousavi advanced a wide array of allegations about the electoral process which, he claimed, had produced a fraudulent result. But Mousavi never documented a single one of these allegations.”
- “Contrary to widespread Western misconceptions, ballots were counted at polling stations, not in Tehran; in 2009, for the first time, the Interior Ministry published the results from all 45,696 polling stations online. Mousavi never identified a single polling station for which the vote totals published by the Interior Ministry differed from the results attested by his observers on official forms (copies of which were kept by all observers).”
- “Mousavi’s allegations implied at least two alternative theories of how electoral fraud had been perpetrated: either massive numbers of fraudulent ballots had been placed in ballot boxes (before the boxes’ placement in polling stations and/or when they were allegedly not being properly observed), or the real votes were never counted but replaced by “pre-cooked” results manufactured at the Interior Ministry in Tehran. If Mousavi’s real aim had been to demonstrate, with actual evidence, whatever evidence he had would have led him to emphasize one theory or the other. “
- “But Mousavi never had any evidence to substantiate either of his theories. And, one suspects, his game plan all along was to throw out multiple accusations to discredit the election in public perceptions and marshal sufficient public pressure on Khamenei and the Guardian Council to compel them to annul the results and hold a new election, in a manner that would discredit Ahmadinejad.”
- “It was Mousavi, not Ahmadinejad, who first declared victory on election day, while polls were still open, Iranians were still voting, and not a single ballot had actually been counted. If anyone was out to steal the election, it was Mousavi, not Ahmadinejad.”
- “Mousavi failed in this enterprise. But he seems to have made a lasting impression on the thinking of those Westerners who are perpetually on the look-out for a Yeltsin-like figure who will catalyze the Islamic Republic’s transformation into a pro-Western, Israel-friendly secular democracy. Continued attachment to the myth of the stolen 2009 election matters, because it continues to keep the United States from coming to terms with the Islamic Republic as it is, not as so many Westerners fantasize it might be.”
As Mohammad beautifully answered you, I would not write much in response to your twisted mind. Every single scientific evidence is against you and still you have the audacity to personally attack me. This tells more about you and your state of mind. Not only that but also this tells more about the people you claim to represent. As I said the ideology of green movement is based on lie. You and your movement has failed to present a single scientific evidence to back your claims. Further more, Iran is definitely a democracy in the same sense that France is a democracy. You see, there is absolutely no chance that a French Muslim president is ever allowed to reach office. The same way, I do not think it is a bad idea for Iran to stick to Islam when choosing their president. You can compare the same to US of A and other countries. Expecting a Christian or an atheist president to come to office in Iran a nation whose 90% of population is Shia is idiocy. Even Shah never claimed to be an atheist and regularly visited mosques and shrines. In addition to these facts you have to remember that Iranian president is much more powerful than perhaps many western presidents who have to take into account lobbies more powerful than their government. As for supreme leader question, who himself is democratically elected through a parliamentary system (Assembly of experts), I have to remind you that he is not as powerful as you like to imagine. If he was why is all this fuss going around with his little fights with Ahmadinejad and Khatami during their respective times as presidents of Iran. During Rafsanjani’s time actually supreme leader was silent all the time. The supreme leader has very little executive power and if president was powerful, why on earth people like you take so much interest in him and his election? If he is a puppet then your greens should not even have opted to stand in election. Your lies can not get you anywhere. Let science and evidence guide you not your emotions and hatred. Finally, Iran is not only Tehran and afew big cities. 67,000 villages and people who live in them are as much Iranian as you are if not more. You might have contempt for them in your heart but nonetheless, in a democratic system they are equal to you and anyone else. Days are gone when during Shah’s time a foreign delegation had visited a photo gallery in Esfehan and there on the wall hang a picture of rural Iran with people in traditional dresses. The Museum had put an explanation under the photo, saying: These pictures are antiques and Iranians no more wear such stupid clothes. The contempt that pro-western Iranians living in North Tehran have for those villagers borders on fascism. I am sure alot of those villagers voted for Ahmadinejad the only president/ruler in Iran who regularly pays visits to them. Also they might have voted for him just to piissss you city dwellers off. This is called democracy. Learn to handle it. Those who can not accept their defeat in a democracy are only dictators.