20 Comments

1. Ed Poinsett:

The mayor will mix easily with the Guardian Council that elected him.

Jun 24, 2005 - 6:36 pm 2. Kevin P:

Roger:

I think this is a positive development in the long run. The media has been trying it’s hardest to dress up Rafsanjani as a “moderate”, enabling them to call for calm reasoned diplomacy, (translation- give Iran every economic carrot we have in the shopping cart and then act suprised when they announce they have the Mullah bomb). Now the world and the press know they have a theocratic fascist in charge. No more talk about understanding and the lovely Iranian democratic experiment.

It also tells the Iranian bloggers that as long as the Guardian Council exists in it’s current form any talk of reform is a joke. The GC wants no reform and they have all the power to squash any reform that they choose. They could even give a little for PR purposes and then take it away. sometimes it is better to know what you are facing instead of a mirage.

Kevin Peters

Jun 24, 2005 - 7:17 pm 3. Ron Wrght:

Hey folks – help Dr. Zin NOW!

The MSM is ignoring the importance sig of the Iranian people boycotting this election.

The Blogos now has the power to report these stories directly to the American people.

Please repost Dr. ZinÔøΩs request.

The Mad Mullahs of Iran are blocking his IP address and also have system blocks to filter news coming in from the outside world.

If we all link to these messages the Mullahs canÔøΩt block them all and the Iranian people can see that the free world is support of the struggle for freedom!

The Iranian people will effect their own regime change if they know the American people and the free world will support them in their struggle for freedom.

The strategic consequences of the Mad Mullahs of Iran going nuclear are unimaginable. See this thread at Winds of Change.

Here and Here

Help Dr. Zin Here Now!”

Jun 24, 2005 - 7:46 pm 4. Barry Dauphin:

I saw part of the BBC news program on PBS today. The BBC reporter was virtually a shill for the Iranian regime and acted like this “election” was all on the up and up. Well, at least they’re consistent. Maybe they had practice covering the Soviet “elections.”

How soon before Reuters and the BBC blame the “election” “results” on the US and evil Bush Chimpler?

Will the “election” of this guy stir local discontent sooner – a mullah miscalculation? Let’s hope it does.

Jun 24, 2005 - 7:46 pm 5. Jamie Irons:

Roger,

The piece by Michael Ledeen was superb, as always.

Pass on my congratulations to his son! Mazel tov!

Jamie Irons

Jun 24, 2005 - 7:51 pm 6. Dan Darling:

Not to worry, Barry, I’m sure Juan Cole’ll have the obligatory blame Bush post up by the end of the night. He already engaged in his faux moral equivalence by claiming that Ahmadinejad is just the Iranian analogue of Perle, Cheney, and Feith … maybe he can explain how many political opponents the latter trio have killed over the years.

Jun 24, 2005 - 7:54 pm 7. Kyda Sylvester:

Has Jimmy Carter put his stamp of approval on this election yet?

Jun 24, 2005 - 8:07 pm 8. uranari:

It does bring things to a head, so to speak. Good. Between the Mullahs and this thug (I mean “revolutionary”) there is no daylight. Not that there was much with the last guy or his opponent, but with the others there was enough for the Clintons and Coles of this world to have an easier time of lying (appeasing, spinning, profiting–your pick). Annan’s in trouble, good. Use him for half a year. Europe is also floundering, good. Use this fact too. France is capable of anything, even good things. Rare, though, that this is. China too is at a crossroads and trembling, which is one reason for the MSM’s “mighty China” meme currently in play. Ahh but their economy! They’re buying Maytag, washer and dryers everywhere. Precisely. For the its the economy stupid crowd, I concede, in tyranny an improving economy is a mortal threat. But most of all it strikes me that the Iranians themselves have to make a decision now. The problem with having a revolution not so many years ago is that it is still fresh in the conscience of the nation. The how is known. Plus everyone has mobile phones these days. And additional templates and templates from the late eighties and early nineties, and very recently, for the copying. Same is true in China. And then there is North Korea. Where things are starkly different.

A good friend of mine, talking about studying languages, told me when he found himself tiring and not making a lot of progress in one, more a kind of feeling than anything based in reality, but debilitating no less, the best remedy for him was to start learning another language. I believe the Axis of Evil that Bush outlined was correct. But now is the perfect time to do more not less. Surprise us again Bush. Ratchet up the pressure. With regards to North Korea, the Japanese are on board for economic sanctions. (China and South Korea will never budge unless America is teaming with Japan to pressure North Korea, which they support, ultimately.) Looking forward to learning about Bush’s speech.

Jun 24, 2005 - 8:24 pm 9. neo-neocon:

So, what I want to know is this: do the folks at Reuters actually believe the drivel they write? Or do they purposely lie through their teeth?

If the former, how can they be so stupendously ignorant? If the latter, to what purpose? Even if they are anti-American anti-Blair anti-Bush leftists, exactly how does whitewashing the Iranian theocracy serve their cause?

Jun 24, 2005 - 9:02 pm 10. j.d.:

But which is more evil to Reuters, the mullahs’ candidate being an “ultra-conservative”, or Pope Benedict XVI being an “arch-conservative” (as Reuters dubbed him upon his election).

Jun 24, 2005 - 9:05 pm 11. Rick Ballard:

NNC,

Think of the OneWorlder Internationalist MSM as snake handling fundamentalists who speak only in tongues and have had a revelation that Bush is the anti-Christ.

Every word they write has to be read with that understanding. If you do so, it’s all very clear.

j.d.

Reuters fears B16 more than Bush.

Jun 24, 2005 - 9:12 pm 12. ShrinkWrapped:

A

Here is how the New York Times mis-reported this mornign on the Iranian vote:

“TEHRAN, Iran (AP) — The winner of Iran’s presidential election, whose landslide victory dealt a setback to reformers, said Saturday he seeks to make his country a ”modern, advanced, powerful, and Islamic” model for the world.

…

The results, announced on state television, gave Ahmadinejad, currently Tehran’s mayor, 61.6 percent of the vote over Rafsanjani’s 35.9 percent. The rest of the ballots were deemed invalid.

Nearly 28 million ballots were cast, or more than 59 percent of Iran’s approximately 47 million eligible voters. In last week’s election, the turnout was close to 63 percent.”

I read the entire article (my new motto: “The New York Times: I read it so you don’t have to!”) and surprisingly enough (NOT) there is no mention of the empty polling places that Dr. Zin has pictures of. After the first vote, reporters admitted they only were taken to a very few select polling sites, weren’t allowed out of sight of their handlers, and had no real idea of the turn-out, despite which they knew there were lots of irregularities.

This election was a vote by the ruling Mullahs to tighten up their fascist state; Ledeen comments on some street fighting between some of the bad guys and some of the worse guys. It is unlikely to make life better for the Iranians.

And now the MSM shills for another group of neo-Hitlerians; the MSM continue to disgust me with their suicidal pandering.

Jun 25, 2005 - 6:40 am 13. Buddy Larsen:

“…the MSM continue to disgust me with their suicidal pandering.”

Maybe the message is, “It’s worth anything to get rid of Bush, and we want the American voter to understand that either you dump the whole lot, or we will commit suicide–and take you with us.

Look into Curt Weldon, and read an excerpt from his book.

Jun 25, 2005 - 7:13 am 14. Snippet:

… a modern, advanced, powerful, and Islamic” model for the world.

Sorry big fellah.

You can have “modern and advanced”

or you can have “Islamic”

but you can’t have all three any more than you can square a circle.

And when the spiral of failure and frustration picks up speed, guess who will get blamed?

It’s like watching a car accident unfold in slow motion.

Jun 25, 2005 - 8:02 am 15. Mark Poling:

I’m afraid that by “modern and advanced” he merely means “nuclear powered”.

Sigh.

Jun 25, 2005 - 8:59 am 16. David Thomson:

ìSo, what I want to know is this: do the folks at Reuters actually believe the drivel they write? Or do they purposely lie through their teeth?î

Are they nice to stray cats and spend time with the elderly and others needing comfort? Do they consciously lie or are just intellectually confused? The hell with the abstract argumentation. I donít primarily care to debate the state of their souls. We should merely focus on the the need to marginalize these people as quickly as possible. They are, on the practical level, our enemy. Thatís ultimately all we need to know.

Jun 25, 2005 - 9:55 am 17. Anthony (Los Angeles):

What’s almost as appalling as the farcical election itself is the cliched “analysis” of the MSM, pigeon-holing Ahmadinejad as a “hardliner” or “ultra-conservative” and Rafsanjani as a “moderate.” In the case of Iran, that’s like trying to distinguish between moderate and hardline Nazis — they’re still Nazis. The lazy reporting in the MSM misleads people by using words like “conservative” and “moderate” to which most readers will apply their own American understandings.

On the other hand, I read an interesting analysis (i.e., non-MSM) the other day –was it one of Ledeen’s?– arguing that the surprising rise of Ahmadinejad may not have represented the pre-determined decision of the Guardian Council, but a power-play by radicals within the Revolutionary Guard and other para-military groups. Ahmadinejad himself was once head of the Guard. If so, we may be watching the external signs of a palace coup.

Jun 25, 2005 - 9:58 am 18. Buddy Larsen:

Better fuel up the KC-135s and dust-off the Bunker-Busters.

Jun 25, 2005 - 10:27 am 19. neo-neocon:

David Thomson: I agree with you that the state of their souls isn’t really the point. But I can’t help but wonder, if only out of deep curiosity. After all, as a former liberal Democrat (now neo-neocon), I used to actually trust these people, and believe they were interested in seeking the truth.

Dummy me, I guess. But I still speculate as to whether they are willful liars or simply, as Rick Ballard points out, people whose quasi-religion at this point is Bush-bashing.

Jun 25, 2005 - 11:19 am 20. David Thomson:

ìBut I still speculate as to whether they are willful liars or simply, as Rick Ballard points out, people whose quasi-religion at this point is Bush-bashing.î

I adamantly encourage you to continue speculating on their motives and state of mind. We must thoroughly understand these people. Thatís not my point. I just want to make sure that we realize that our first duty is to marginalize them. They must be rendered harmless.

Too often in our society everything is suppose to be overlooked as long as someone has good intentions. This is nonsensical. One can also be well meaning person—and do a hell of lot of destruction.

Jun 25, 2005 - 11:50 am

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: