Iran: The Boneheaded Coup

...to DKos.

hey

this from a trusted iranian tweeter:

saw police wear green scarfs riot man was crying #IranElection9 minutes ago from web

and

far as eye can see people in every corner people everywhere...revolution is close to end...ghandi would be proud #IranElection

she has just got back from the rally/march today. which they say is still growing. 

celia

about the footballers who did wear green bands, even if I think it was only for the 1st half. one tweeter said it will reach the villages. and I agree, I had in the back of my mind anyway what my iranian friend told me. Football/'soccer' is BIG in Iran. HUGE in fact. that tweeter felt likely people cared for their football hero's more than Amhadi. 

it also reminded me of the civil rights and the olympics with the black power salute and black scarves etc. 

From the SF Chronicle:

 

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/06/17/MN75188C6K.DTL

yep, I've seen his tweets and people interacting with him :). Think he was in touch with that young one that I posted a comment about earlier :) Protesterhelp

amazing

its not just these proxies. the tweets have been showing lots of other ingenieus ways that the tech people have been coming up with - often it seems inventing on the spot to need as it poured in :)

http://opennet.net/research/profiles/iran

seems very detailed explanation into the internet in Iran

 

More pushback on the "rural vs. elitists" meme:

Iran's Rural Vote and Election Fraud

by Eric Hooglund, a professor of politics at Bates College, Lewiston, Maine, and editor of the scholarly journal Middle East Critique.

 

From:  http://mattsteinglass.wordpress.com/2009/06/17/obama-always-stays-two-steps-behind-them/

I missed an excellent post the other day from Spencer Ackerman citing Trita Parsi of the NIAC:

It was important, Parsi said, for any non-Iranian organization wishing to show solidarity with the opposition to ensure that “anything they do is two steps behind the opposition and not two steps ahead.”

I just wanted to point out that this has always been Obama’s MO. He’s always a step or two behind where his supporters want him to be, getting pulled along by their enthusiasm, rather than out ahead of them where he might get cut off. It’s a community organizer’s MO. You never get out ahead of your constituency. Instead you shape the playing field so that your constituency’s desires flow towards where you think they should go, and allow them to carry you along behind them.

I also saw that same post and await Al's opinion. I personally thought it was a spot on description of Obama, and a great explanation as to why some on the left get so frustrated.

These photos are horrifying, terrifying, deeply saddening and yet thoroughly inspiring. Perhaps it would be best if the people had been schooled in nonviolence, but life is neither choreographed nor perfect. Events happen. History happens.

A picture speaks a thousand words, which is good because I have nothing more to say . . .

http://www.flickr.com/photos/fhashemi/sets/72157619758530748/show/

We are now beginning to see the meme that Al predicted working its way through the MSM. Journalists are now starting to write pieces calling into question whether Mousavi really did win anyway. Sometimes the work can be pretty shoddy (this piece on Slate has such shoddy statistical work that Nate Silver would probably get heartburn just reading it), but it's out there in the MSM now. The real issue, as Al has pointed out, is whether any government elected under this theocratic system can have any legitimacy to begin with. And just as Al said, people are getting sidetracked over recounts.

On the other hand, all the footage of violence, the government's heavy-handed censorship, and Obama's careful pointing out of the violence could work as an excellent counter-meme to get people back on track with the real issue.

I've just watched Henry Kissinger on the BBC's Newsnight saying, basically, that it would be best if the Mullahs' regime survives.

 

Art that has to be in a gallery to be art isn't art.

Use MEMRI for your farsi translation.  Everyone else does

Very interesting move afoot by the Iranian government right now. 

From a report by the Iranian state-run Press TV:

Iran's Foreign Ministry summons the Swiss ambassador, who represents US interest in Tehran, in protest to 'interventionist' statements by American officials on Iran's election.

The ministry also summoned the Canadian charge d'affaires to convey Iran's official protest to Ottawa over the Canadian officials' recent remarks on Iran's presidential vote.

Several European envoys were also summoned on Tuesday over what Iran's Foreign Ministry called 'malicious stance' taken by their countries toward Iran.

And yet another report from the state-controlled Press TV:

Tehran says foreign media outlets are fanning the flames of the post-election unrest with their politically-motivated coverage of Iran's internal affairs.

"The presence of hundreds of foreign media (personnel) during Friday's historic elections verifies the sheer transparency of the process," said Iran's Foreign Minister Hassan Qashqavi on Wednesday.

He urged media outlets to change their outlook towards political developments occurring in Iran.

It seems the strategy here is to, of course, blame foreigners for riling up the protestors, but the official act of raking all these ambassadors over the coals, and publicizing it, opens the door to accuse foreigners [and those they are suspected of working with inside the country, including journalists] of being spies. At least that is what I think the Iranian leadership, in part, is setting up here — an excuse it can sell to the global community to invoke draconian national security measures. 

And there is another strategy in motion as well, it seems, one which appears to paint protestors into two groups, the latter being portrayed as violent thugs.

From a Press TV report:

Iranian authorities report that dozens of saboteurs have been arrested in the recent post-election violence that erupted in some cities across the country.

"Some of the arrested individuals -- elements of vandalism in recent days in Isfahan Province -- created chaos in the public rallies by destroying public properties and setting them on fire," Isfahan Province Prosecutor Mohammad Reza Habibi told ISNA News Agency on Wednesday.

Habibi said that some 200 rioters have been arrested in the city in recent days, stressing that some of them were linked to foreign media.

It seems to be a move designed to split the movement, at least in the eyes of the world, even using the oppositoin candidates themselves as foils for accomplishing this. 

From a Press TV report:

Leader of Iran's Islamic Revolution says vandalizing public property is not related to presidential candidates or their supporters.

"Some people are against the unity of the Iranian nation and the solidarity of the Islamic system," Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei said in a meeting with representatives from the four candidates in Iran's presidential election and officials from the Guardian Council and the Interior Ministry.

… The Leader called on all political figures to take a clear position against the post-election violence and urged the Iranian nation to withstand those committing crimes in the streets.

So the opposition candidates are being put in the position of either agreeing with the Iranian government on this matter or otherwise face accusations of advocating violence.

Then, the state goes out and commits acts of violence through its paramilitary units — to be blamed on protestors [all muddied up with the occassional acts of violence actually committed by over-charged protestors] — setting the stage for more draconian, overt state action.

This is sophisticated stuff. Not certain what to make of its odds for success. But it does appear to be a strategy designed to isolate and divide the movement and to set the stage for legitimizing on the world stage a show of strength cloaked in national security. Know the enemy, right?

This does not excuse, but I suspect it explains, in part, why mainstream journalists are, for the most part, running scared. Hell, they ran scared when the Bush administration threatened to turn national security against them in the U.S. What do you expect to happen when the Iranian government pulls the same trick while those journalists are still on Iranian soil?

Only authentic journalists will stand up to that kind of pressure. But they will be the ones who could make a big difference in the outcome of this struggle, since they will be positioned to expose the propaganda from the inside out — the only way to gut a lie.

 

 

Very good analysis.

If I add some of the tweeters are getting very scared. they have been saying they have lots of reports that the Iranian Guard (I think) has said that those working with foreign media they are going to legally prosecute and ask for execution. That started in Isfahan regionally I think. People really are scared on there. And, recent reports/rumour known twitterers are being/have been kidnapped tonight. 

terrifying. 

Around May 2007 The CIA has received secret presidential approval to mount a covert "black" operation to destabilize the Iranian government.  This has been to the tune of 500 million per year.  This is what they admit, so it's probaly 3x's that.  This program has continued through the Obama administration with the latest last May when Jundallah blew a Mosque.

Now, I know that it was just a coincidence that this program was set up one year ahead of elections.  I also know that that this incredibly well financed and extension black op all took a vacation for the election and they will go back to their murderous deeds once the dust settles.  I also know that pigs fly and cats bark.

Can you explain the implication you're trying to make?  Are you trying to say that the CIA is behind the uprising in Iran?  Sorry if I'm reading too much into your comment but I have seen such comments on a number of blogs I read and I've found the idea laughable.  But then I read Bill Conroy's comment above and I'm not finding it funny anymore. 

@Jesus Reyes

I think you're referring to this "black-ops" CIA plan, supposedly leaked to at least the Telegraph in London in May 2007.

The fact that it was leaked in such detail means it was never real to begin with, or a dismal failure -- and if you look at it, the parts were all playing from outside Iran — even the Jundallah, which is based out of Pakistan.

So be wary of casting broad CIA conspiracies in this case. That's the Iranian hardliners' stance, by the way.

Besides, the intel game is a thick soup -- and Iran is Russian turf too, with a far more open door policy from the existing regime there.

That might help explain the propaganda coming out of Russia now.

From a Russian news service:

YEKATERINBURG, June 16 (RIA Novosti) - Russia, which is hosting a regional summit on Tuesday attended by Iran's leader, believes that the country's recent election is no business of other states, a senior diplomat said.

... "The issue of elections in Iran is an internal affair of the Iranian people," Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov told reporters.

Ahmadinejad arrived in the Russian Urals city of Yekaterinburg on Tuesday to participate in the summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), bringing together Russia, China and the four ex-Soviet Central Asian republics of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan.

"We consider this visit to be a reflection of partnership, neighborly, and traditionally friendly relations, which have characterized the level of ties between Moscow and Tehran for a long time," Rybakov said.

"We welcome the holding of elections in Iran, and we welcome the newly re-elected president of Iran on Russian soil... it is highly significant that the first foreign visit after Ahmadinejad's re-election is to Russia."

... Russia has consistently blocked international sanctions against Iran over i ts controversial nuclear program, which many countries believe is a cover for a weapons program. Russia is currently completing the construction of Iran's first nuclear power plant and has supplied nuclear fuel for it.

And, from another story from the same source:

MOSCOW, June 17 (RIA Novosti) - The presidential election campaign in Iran was "absolutely democratic," a Russian analyst who observed the disputed June 12 polls has said.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was reelected with 63% of the popular vote. However, his opponent, Mir Hossein Mousavi, and his supporters have alleged the polls were rigged.

... "I have been an observer at many elections, including Belarus and Moldova, but I have never seen such democratic elections as those in Iran," [Pavel] Zarifullin, [editor-in-chief of the Russian information and analytical website Geopolitika] said at a press conference in Moscow.

... Zarifullin said however that the riots had taken place in only two regions of Tehran and that the remainder of the capital was quiet. He also said it was calm in other regions in Iran because the rest of the country had largely supported the president.

Iran's state-run Press TV quoted Iranian authorities as saying on Tuesday they had arrested the ringleaders of in the disturbances, many of whom were in possession of firearms and explosives. The number of detainees has not been disclosed.

Doesn't that sound a lot like the line now being pushed by the Iranian state?

 

Jesus - The suggestion that the three million plus Iranians that go out into the streets each day risking life and limb are doing that because they must be manipulated or influenced by the US CIA, the Israeli Mossad or any other white foreign power carries with it the same kind of racist undertones as when the political class in Mexico claims that indigenous rebellions against that government must have some mysterious foreign power behind them.

In the case of Iran, it also vastly overestimates what external forces can accomplish. Really, hasn't the Iranian regime done more than its share in provoking its own people to rise up?

Even if the US CIA has targeted Iran (plausible, I'll give you) that still does not confer legitimacy on the regime. The Iranian government is responsible for its own legitimacy.

In other words, when the CIA targeted Chavez in Venezuela, you didn't see Chavez killing his own people in the streets and using that as a justification. He is the proof that the Iranian government doesn't at all need to resort to the terrible repressive and violent tactics it is using today.

I've been thinking what a change it is from many Americans seeing Iranians and violent and fanatical to now it is almost fashionable to show solidarity with the Iranian people. The movement is definitely Islamic in character, from the green (long a color associated with Islam) to the chants of Allahu Akbar (God is great) to referring to those killed as martyrs. Yet this definitely Islamic movement is now seen as something noble and good rather than a threat. After eight years of Americans being told that all Muslims are the enemy, what is happening today is truly revolutionary and we can't even predict the consequences over the long term. I am almost in awe when I really think about it.

Of when I was a kid watching coverage of the Civil Rights protests down south. The racist civic and political leaders always accused the protests  of being the work of "outside agitators" as if that explained why so many of their citizens were out on the streets. Sure, people were perfectly content before and it was only the manipulation of organizers that made them go out on the streets.

During the anti-war movement the FBI and CIA and god knows who else blamed the protests on "commies" and actively looked for Communist influence on the growing movement for civil rights, the anti-war movement, even the women's movement. All those kids were just so happy to go to Vietnam and would have quietly gone if it weren't for those "outside agitators" again.

It's one way for authorities to self-justify. The problem is not them, or their policies, its in the stars, or the mists, or a passing fancy people have to just be ornery, they insist. People can't be unhappy because of them, can they? No.....

 

 

presumably keen to demonstrate that there was no "Obama Effect" in Iran, unlike Lebanon.  If Obama had not given the Cairo speech, Ahmenadidajad would have stolen the election by a much more credible margin.

I've been thinking something similar.  It's going to be much harder to whip up support in the U.S. to "bomb bomb bomb Iran" after seeing the images of the last few days , I'd hope.