Iran an aw that

supernothing · 17th June 2009, 1:53am

So whos been following the Iranian election fallout? Obviously shady goings on with folk getting battered and shot etc but WAS IT A FIX?
From reading the papers you get the impression that the idea the results were faked is pretty much a fact, but there isn't that much evidence except that THE GUY THAT LOST is saying "how can this be?!" etc. I have only seen a single mention of the fact that a couple of american think tanks did fairly rigerous telephone polls of Iran 3 weeks ago and found Amedinejad had a 2 to 1 lead on Mousavi - thats consistent with the results.
Just seems this blogger-led "revolution" of the pro-western middle classes against a corrupt holocaust denying conservative is just too juicy a story to risk analysing too thoroughly for some papers.

endless psych · 17th June 2009, 6:39am

Well it might be worth considering how many people in a theocracy are going to answer truthfully on a telephone poll conducted at the bequest of the great satan but interesting none the less.

Sources?

Semprini · 17th June 2009, 6:46am

Aye, any 'evidence' I've seen of a fix is along the lines of "But Ahmedinejad isn't that popular here, how could he win this district?"

Jaemi · 17th June 2009, 8:49am

I'm still a bit sceptical.
It seems that the news are telling me:
"The guy we dont like won, so it must be a fix"

I'm not sure it's so cut and dried.

endless psych · 17th June 2009, 8:58am

It's a fairly typical "Western media" thing. Chavez possibly being another example.

I suspect it's because, since newspapers became by and large more concerned with profit then news, news desks (particularly when dealing with international news and more so hostile regiemes) can't afford to have reporters/journalists etc in much of the world. This they have to trust newswire services and official sources. Given Iranian sources are likely to be mistrusted the newspapers will default to either official sources like the Home Office or the State dept. who have their own position on Iran to push. Asides these easily accessable sources journalists will also likely use Iranian exile groups and organizations as a source who have even more of a vested interest in making the Iranian gubmint look bad.

Journalists may be reporting honestly and earnestly what they believe the situation to be but they probably don't have the resources to do so.

supernothing · 17th June 2009, 10:26am

The telephone poll was done by "Terror Free Tomorrow" a conservative washington thinktank - who incidently employ John McCain, who has been crying foul like a motherfucker. Not had a chance to look at the report properly yet but it's here http://www.terrorfreetomorrow.org/articlenav.php?id=5
Aye it does smack of the Chavez thing - I loved when they had the referendum to see if you could run for re-election indefinately and they painted it in the media like he was declaring himself president for life! What kind of crazy country lets you continue running for election eh?

endless psych · 17th June 2009, 10:29am

What a crazy country world we live in...

AWESOMEUS MAXIMUS · 17th June 2009, 10:49am

Been following it.
No idea if it was a fix or not...but somethings not right.
Mousavi was claimed to be well ahead in the weeks running up to the election...it was a massive turn around.
Is there not a recount?

I'm at the stage where I believe almost nothing reported in the western media about countries that are in the "axis of evil" (

) to the point where it wouldn't suprise me if they filmed a riot in a side street and made it look like the country was on the verge of civil war to justify an invasion.

Jaemi · 17th June 2009, 10:52am

The main complaint from Mousavi's supporters seem to be the speed at which Achmedinejad was announced winner.
I heard one burd on the radio say that 4Million votes where counted in about 3 hours.

Although again, you don't know if this is true or not.

endless psych · 17th June 2009, 11:21am

Most British electoral wards probably declare within about three hours roughly. What makes this fishy is the similarities in proportions.

However under the Iranian political system the actual result makes little odds. As their executive branch/head of state remains the same.

erithromycin · 17th June 2009, 11:23pm

The political situation in Iran was already a mess beforehand. The main reason that the media coverage is slanted so far in favour of the oppositon (as was..?) is that it's what's coming out of Iran. News values are such that they'll go in favour of the pictures, and they are the ones who are getting the news out. Also, the news from them is 'news', incumbents winning is not news as it were. Then there's the whole 'twitter' angle - it ties in to stories that have already had play, and allows them to copy and paste stuff into their newspapers and try to keep pace with the movement of text journalism into real-time.

So aye, you are right.

TSR · 18th June 2009, 2:16pm

Apparently the results were declared an hour after the polling stations closed, showing an 85% Vs 23% (from memory....though it may have been 85% voter turnout) in favour of keeping the current system, despite pre-election polls showing the opposition was favoured
Though my source on that is Jon Stewart

You do see on the news thousands (hundereds of thousands) of people taking to the streets in favour of the opposition, and those in favour of the current had to be bussed in from the farms/etc

There's 'secret police' going about arresting opposition figureheads and attacking 'the mob'
They're also attacking universities

People openly say on camera "They don't let us say what we want!"

Even educated folk like doctors in Iran are saying that it was rigged

the recount: they've offered to do a partial recount. How can you do a partial recount?...

Seems there's a stronger case that the election was rigged to me

The_librarian · 18th June 2009, 2:21pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by TSR

Though my source on that is Jon Stewart

Green Lantern Corp, getting involved with political commentary.

AWESOMEUS MAXIMUS · 18th June 2009, 2:27pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by TSR

Apparently the results were declared an hour after the polling stations closed, showing an 85% Vs 23% (from memory....though it may have been 85% voter turnout) in favour of keeping the current system, despite pre-election polls showing the opposition was favoured
Though my source on that is Jon Stewart

You do see on the news thousands (hundereds of thousands) of people taking to the streets in favour of the opposition, and those in favour of the current had to be bussed in from the farms/etc

There's 'secret police' going about arresting opposition figureheads and attacking 'the mob'
They're also attacking universities

People openly say on camera "They don't let us say what we want!"

Even educated folk like doctors in Iran are saying that it was rigged

the recount: they've offered to do a partial recount. How can you do a partial recount?...

Seems there's a stronger case that the election was rigged to me

Please provide sources to all material here.

endless psych · 18th June 2009, 3:32pm

Here lets not forget, that whatever the media/governments interests and machinations in this case, that there are demonstrations occurring against what is in effect a totalitarian theocracy.

Regardless of whether or not the election was actually fixed it's worth considering that might be a good thing.

But aye TSR you have to consider that the sources for most of what you've posted is going to be ultimatly the foriegn office or groups of either exiled Irani dissidents and current protestors. All of which have their own vested interests in portraying a certain image of the regieme in power. Not to say they can't be trusted but it's worth casting a critical eye over the information coming out of Iran.