Today, those who are not YET intimidated, raided, arrested and threatened will fly green balloons in the sky. (All the above has happened to my loved ones ...)
Friday, June 26, 2009
Today, those who are not YET intimidated, raided, arrested and threatened will fly green balloons in the sky. (All the above has happened to my loved ones ...)
Israel prefers Ahmadinejad, because he is the one who gives Israel excuse for military attack on Iran's nuclear sites.
The incumbent president will be easier to isolate than reformist leader Mr. Mousavi, say some leading Israeli policymakers.
By Joshua Mitnick, Correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor
from the June 21, 2009 edition
If they were to follow the ancient proverb, "the enemy of my enemy is my friend," one would think Israelis would be rooting for Iranian opposition candidate Mir Hussein Mousavi and the hundreds of thousands of Iranian protesters who have challenged the re-election of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. But even though Mr. Ahmadinejad has threatened the Jewish state with destruction, many officials and analysts here actually prefer the incumbent president because – short of the downfall of Iran's theocratic system of government – he'll be easier to isolate. Reformist leader Mr. Mousavi, by contrast, isn't expected to alter Iran's drive for nuclear power, but he would win international sympathy.
"Just because Mousavi is called a moderate or a reformist doesn't mean he's a nice guy. After all he was approved by the Islamic leadership," says Ephraim Inbar, director of the Begin Sadat Center at Bar Ilan University. "If we have Ahmadinejad, we know where we stand. If we have Mousavi we have a serpent with a nice image."
On Sunday, Israeli President Shimon Peres waded into the debate, encouraging Iranian protestors and "courageous" women who he said were trying to "reclaim" their culture. He added that it's more important to have regime change in Iran than an end to the country's controversial nuclear program. "You never know what will disappear in Iran first – their enriched uranium or their poor government," said Mr. Peres. "I hope their poor government will disappear first."
FOR ISRAEL, IRAN IS THREAT NO. 1
It's Iran, rather than any one of Israel's Arab neighbors, which is considered the most serious strategic threat to the Jewish state.Ahmadinejad's verbal threats against Israel and his embrace of theories denying the World War II Holocaust of European Jews have prompted some Israeli officials to liken him to the leaders of Nazi Germany. Israel has argued that its nuclear program will destabilize not only the Middle East but the entire world. Though Mousavi criticized Ahmadinejad during the election campaign for hurting Iran's image by sounding off on the Holocaust, Israeli analysts claim that it was he who started Iran's nuclear program as prime minister in the 1980s. "Mousavi and Ahmadinejad are from the same school, and we have already seen Mousavi as an enemy of Israel supporting terrorist groups," said Menashe Amir, an Iranian-born Israeli who hosts Israel Radio's daily Persian language news show. "Mousavi declared during the television debates that he will not change the nuclear policy and that he won't stop Iranian support to the Palestinians."
TOP SPY WEIGHS IN
Last week Mossad Chief Meir Dagan, Israel's top spy, said he expected the unrest in Iran to drop off in a matter of days rather than escalate into a full-fledged revolt. He also estimated that the Iranians would not obtain a nuclear weapon before 2014.
"If the reformist candidate Mousavi had won, Israel would have had a more serious problem, because it would need to explain to the world the danger of the Iranian threat," he told a panel of Israeli lawmakers last week. NOT ALL ISRAELIS THINK
AHMADINEJAD IS BETTER
To be sure, some Israeli analysts dispute the conclusion of the Mossad chief that the incumbent president is preferable. "This view is very inaccurate," says Meir Javedanfar, an Iranian-Israeli who co-authored a book on Ahmadinejad, The Nuclear Sphinx of Tehran. Mr. Javedanfar acknowledged that in the short term, the incumbent candidate may serve the interests of Israeli public relations. But in the longer term, Mousavi and his allies could lobby for a less confrontational foreign policy, he says."The reformists are for more human rights inside Iran, and for a reduction in tension with Iran and other countries in the region." Calling the affinity of Israeli officials for Ahmadinejad an example of the "narrow horizons of Israeli strategic thinking," Aluf Ben, a commentator for the Ha'aretz newspaper, noted that Iran has continued unchecked despite the controversial remarks of its incumbent president. "The demonstrations offer a chance of change in Iran for the first time in 30 years," he wrote. "It would be best for Israel if there were people in the Iranian leadership who could calm things down in the region, not stir up strife."
Mousavi asks Iranians to DISTANCE themselves from all war-mongers and those who profess regime change in Iran.
Honorable Iranians living abroad,
Your widespread and energetic presence in this year’s 22 Khordad elections is indicative of your ties to our beloved Iran, and your admirable worries about the future of your country, and as I mentioned to you in my election message, Iran belongs to all Iranians and all layers of the populous are responsible for its future, and enjoy the same rights in it.
I feel obliged to thank you for your epic presence in determining the future of your country. Your widespread welcoming of these elections and your green and energetic presence at the ballot boxes was so large that it even forced the government and the organizers of the elections to admit to a 300% increase in the participation of Iranians in the tenth presidential elections outside of the country.
Your trust in this insignificant civil servant and your decisive vote for me in most of the voting stations outside of the country has placed a heavy burden on my shoulders. I would like to give you my assurance that I remain true to my existing pact with you and all layers of the great people of Iran, and using all legal avenues will demand your deserved rights that have been violated at the ballot boxes.
Unfortunately, as you witness in the international media, contrary to the letter of the constitution, and the stated freedoms in the Islamic Republic, all my communication with the people and you has been cut off, and people’s peaceful objections are being crushed. The national media which is being financed with public funds, with a revolting misrepresentation is changing the truth, and labels the peaceful march of close to three million people as anarchist, and the media that are being controlled by the government have become the mouthpiece of those who have stolen the people’s votes.
I’d like to thank you again for your peaceful objections which have received widespread coverage across the world, and would like to ask you that by using all legal channels, and by remaining faithful to the sacred system of the Islamic Republic, to make sure that your objections are heard by the authorities in the country. I am fully aware that your justified demands have nothing to do with groups who do not believe in the sacred Islamic Republic of Iran’s system. It is up to you to distance yourself from them, and do not allow them to misuse the current situation.
Mir Hossein Mousavi
Thursday, June 25, 2009
June 1896, after Naser-al-Din shah’s assassination, his son is crowned. (It took 10 years to force him decree the first elected parliament in August 1906.)
June 24, 1908, Mohammad-Ali shah put the parliament under siege and dissolved it (this initiated a wave of revolt by freedome fighters)
June 22 1909, the Bakhtiari freedom fighters reach the outskirts of Tehran, unintimidated by the Russian dn the brits who were trying to prevent them from toppling the shah.
June 4 1920, The anti-feudalist revolt of Mirza kuchak khan, intellectuals and peasants of Gilan led to formation of the Jungle Movement.
June 23 1951, the British take Iran to the World Court to reverse the nationalization of oil.
June 5 1963, Khomeini invites the people and the cleric to uprising against the Shah’s “White Revolution” (which was recommended by JF Kennedy to modernize Iran!).
June 25 1974, the Shah declares he has no interest in nuclear weapons unless other countries engage in nuclear arms race. [source: http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nukevault/ebb268/index.htm]
June 19 1977, the CIA and Kissinger are unhappy about Iran’s nuclear program under the Shah. [source: http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nukevault/ebb268/index.htm]
June 10-20 1978, several religious leaders issue pronouncements that flare up the Islamic Revolution.
June 10 1981, Khomeini ousts the FIRST democratically elected president of Iran (Abolhassan Bani Sadr)
June 28 1981, the Mujahedin bombing of the Islamic Republican Party headquarters and killing 72 members of the IRI think tank.
June 3 1989, Ayatollah Khomeini died.
June 2001, President Khatami re-elected in another landslide election
June 10-23 2003, student led protests [interesting similarity: http://www.newsandletters.org/Issues/2003/July/OLATIran_July03.htm]
June 2005, Ahmadinejad elected president
June 2007, protests erupt after government imposes rations on gas
June 2009, we are witnessing history
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
A butcher is in charge of prosecuting the "dust" particles who have undermined the GREAT Islamic Republic of Iran!!
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
A Rural Recount
It was a great weekend for picnic. Together with my mother’s friends, we headed to a village in the province of Kerman. Although it was a very fun trip, everyone was anxious to go back home because on that day, the tenth presidential election was to take place. With its heated debated, the election followed two weeks of controversial campaigning.
The bus dropped us at the end of the road. We had to walk to the village. This is a small village, most of whose population has already migrated to the cities. Those who had stayed, had stayed by force of poverty. Luckily, one of the villagers had a car, and helped us carry our stuff to some friend’s house who lived there. In the middle fo the road, the middle aged driver, who was a simple man, suddenly turned to my mother and asked: “So who would you vote for?” My mother, who was prudent in giving an answer to this question, laughed and asked: “who will YOU vote for?”
Pensively, the driver rubbed his beard and said:
“I don’t know what to say. My son who studies in a Tehran university [don’t be alarmed, in Iran university education is free, and they even pay you allowance, if you are talented] tells me to vote for Karoubi, but everyone else [in this village] wants to vote for Mousavi. So I don’t know what to do now!”
At the same time, the rapid passage of car blew a lot of shredded papers up in the air. A piece of shredded papers got stuck to the windshield. Recognizing the picture was not hard, because for four years, we had seen that face from all angles across the world media. Paper shreds were the campaign posters of Dr. Ahmadinejad, president elect with 63% of votes in the tenth presidential election …
[sorry she is not a novelist, but I just translated her note on facebook without any structural compositional editing, okey? :) ]
Monday, June 22, 2009
Sunday, June 21, 2009
In the name of God, the kind and the merciful,
People's participation is one of the grand achievements of the Islamic Revolution, which must be guarded and expanded. This magnificent presence, from all sectors and all ages and all professions, has a clear message that the people are the rightful owners of the country and teh revolution. This message must be heard today; their silent protest and civil manners during these protests is an evidence of their maturity, vigilance and responsibility and it also reflects this unequivocal fact that the people are entitled to basic and specific rights that any government is obliged to respect. Provocative and insulting propaganda against a people who have always acted independently, and blaming their rightful movement to foreigners is in itself a sign of implementing wrong politics that cause further alienation of the people from the government.
In Iran, an election was held and massive crowds of honorable people who participated in epical proportions dispute these results and are protesting it. Public trust is damaged, and to close the doors of civic protest to them is to open dangerous paths, that only god knows where will lead to.
People's rights must be protected, and while provisioning measures to prevent chaos and instability (which is far from the intentions of the people), expensive and damaging tactics such as military confrontation and violence must be put aside. We all need to mobilize to repair public trust, which is the principle basis of the government and the state.
Beating and intimidation which was sadly manifested on Saturday, and the wave of arrests of men and women and political and cultural elite of the country, starting from a few hours after announcing the results of the election until now, and prevention of peaceful gatherings which testify to high culture of compatriots adds to the problems.
Opportunities are passing quickly and are turning into threats, while I believe that paths to get out of this chaos are not closed yet, and do not need turning the atmosphere into a military and security one.
To refer people's complaints to sources who are themselves under public scrutiny is not the solution. In opening this knot, why don't we look at Imam [khomeini]'s solutions in similar situations [actually Imam did exactly what these fascists are doing now!!! He just killed the young men and women in Evin Prison, in hidden from public's eye executions!!]
Assigning a just, competent, impartial and brave delegation which is respected by the protesters, and also opening the channels of communication, which are unfortunately all closed, can soften the atmosphere.
On the other hand, we must protect people's right to civic protest and criticism. Denouncing violence and changing the atmosphere of hatred and animosity based on accusations to a new atmosphere based on truth, friendship and interaction with one another must be prioritized. It is in that case, that in spite of any cost, the regime and all its values will remain safe. People are present and are waiting, we have to respect their presence.
[some verse of koran, I think it means: do as much as you can to improve and your success is but with God.]
Seyed Mohammad Khatami, 21 June 2009
در ایران انتخاباتی برگزار شده است و انبوهی از مردمان بزرگوار که آن حماسه حضور را آفریدند نتیجه اعلام شده را باور ندارند و به آن معترض اند. اعتماد عمومی در این زمینه لطمه دیده است و بستن راه اعتراض مدنی به روی مردم به معنی گشودن راههای خطرناکی است که خدا می داند به کدام سرانجام برسد.
باید حق مردم را پاس داشت و در عین تدبیر در برابر هرگونه تشنج و تشنج آفرینی و ناامنی (که از ساحت مردم به دور است) باید از شیوه های پرهزینه و زیانبار برای نظام و مردم از جمله مقابله نظامی و خشونت فاصله گرفت و همگان در جهت ترمیم اعتماد عمومی که پشتوانه اصلی نظام و کشور است برآییم و حرکت کنیم.
ضرب و جرح و ارعاب که نمونه تأسف آور آن را در روز شنبه شاهد بودیم و موجی از دستگیری از زنان و مردان و نخبگان سیاسی و فرهنگی کشور از اولین ساعات اعلام نتایج تاکنون و ممانعت از اجتماعات آرام و باوقار مردم که از نشانه های فرهنگ بالای هموطنان است، مشکلات را افزون می کند.
فرصت ها به سرعت می گذرد و به تهدید تبدیل می شود، در حالی که بر این باورم که هنوز راه رهایی از این وضعیت آشفته بسته نیست و نیازی به امنیتی کردن و نظامی کردن فضا ندارد.
ارجاع امر به مرجع یا مراجعی که باید حافظ حقوق مردم و مجری انتخابات سالم و آزاد و ناظر بر آن باشند، ولی خود مورد انتقاد و شکایت اند راه حل مسأله نیست.
در بازگشایی این گره چرا نگاهی به روش و سیرت حضرت امام (ره) نداریم که در موارد مشابه بوده است و می تواند و باید مورد تأسی و اهتمام قرار گیرد.
تعیین هیأتی عادل، کاردان، بیطرف و شجاع که به ویژه مورد اعتماد معترضان هم باشد و پذیرش داوری منصفانه آن هیأت راهی برای عبور از این مرحله و گامی مثبت در جهت تقویت نظام و بازسازی اعتماد عمومی و نیز نشانه تصمیم گیری خطیر و گره گشا در هنگامه های حساس به نفع مردم و در جهت آرمانهای انقلاب است.
آزادی سریع دستگیر شدگان و زندانیهایی که موجب نگرانی عمیق خانواده های آنان و بسیاری از مردم شده است و نیز بازکردن راههای ارتباطی و اطلاع رسانی که متأسفانه همه را بسته اند می تواند فضای جامعه را تلطیف کند.
از سوی دیگر اعتراض و انتقاد به شیوه مدنی و به دور از هرگونه ناآرامی را که حق مسلم مردم است باید همگان پاس داریم.
نفی خشونت و تغییر فضاسازی کین توزانه و دشمن آفرین و مبتنی بر تهمت و افترا به فضای جدید مبتنی بر حقیقت، به محبت و دوستی و تعامل با یکدیگر نیز باید سرلوحه عمل قرار گیرد.
در این صورت است که هر هزینه ای که پرداخت شود نظام با همه ارزشهایش مصون و محفوظ خواهد ماند.
مردم حضور دارند و همچنان در انتظارند، این حضور را باید محترم شمرد.
ان ارید الا الاصلاح ما استطعت و ما توفیقی الا بالله * علیه توکلت و الیه انیب
سید محمد خاتمی
31 خرداد 1388
An American friend of mine just sent this to her congresswoman:
Dear Congresswoman Tsongas,
I am writing to you as a concerned American citizen who is an active member of the international community. With the recent electoral upheaval in Iran, there are many people, many friends of mine, who are caught between a rock and a hard place. They do not necessarily still live in Iran, but love for their family, country, and heritage is a huge part of their identity.
The main fear they have is that anything other than a course of neutrality by individual countries could very easily forment further bloodshed against civilians in an attempt to control protests, display power, and cultivate fear. President Obama has so far done an excellent job of maintaining neutrality, but it is concerning that various members of congress want to take a more hard-line stance, and are haranguing the president for not having done so.
As your constituent, Congresswoman Tsongas, I am asking you to please do what you can to maintain official US neutrality toward the current situation in Iran, and please do not support any bills that would involve US interests directly in this matter.
To anyone who thinks it is North Tehrani spoiled brats who are "rioting" (rioting & spoiled rich? what an oxymoron!)
19.06.2009 | Teheran Bureau | Eric Hooglund
I just heard a CNN reporter in Tehran say that Ahmadinejad’s support base was rural. Is it possible that rural Iran, where less than 35 percent of the country’s population lives, provided Ahmadinejad the 63 percent of the vote he claims to have won? That would contradict my own research in Iran’s villages over the past 30 years, including just recently. I do not carry out research in Iran’s cities, as do foreign reporters who otherwise live in the metropolises of Europe and North America, and so I wonder how they can make such bold assertions about the allegedly extensive rural support for Ahmadinejad.
Take Bagh-e Iman, for example. It is a village of 850 households in the Zagros Mountains near the southwestern Iranian city of Shiraz. According to longtime, close friends who live there, the village is seething with moral outrage because at least two-thirds of all people over 18 years of age believe that the recent presidential election was stolen by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
When news spread on Saturday (June 13) morning that Ahmadinejad had won more than 60 percent of the vote cast the day before, the residents were in shock. The week before the vote had witnessed the most intense campaigning in the village’s history, and it became evident that support for Mir-Hossein Mousavi’s candidacy was overwhelming. Supporters of Ahmadinejad were even booed and mocked when they attempted rallies and had to endure scolding lectures from relatives at family gatherings. “No one would dare vote for that hypocrite,” insisted Mrs. Ehsani, an elected member of the village council.
The president was very unpopular in Bagh-e Iman and in most of the other villages around Shiraz, primarily because of his failure to deliver on the reforms he promised in his successful 2005 presidential campaign. He did have some supporters. Village elders confided, “10 to 15 percent of village men, mostly [those who were] Basijis [militia members] and those who worked for government organizations, along with their families.”
Carloads of villagers actually drove to Shiraz to participate in the massive pro-Mousavi rallies that were held on the three nights prior to the balloting. And election-day itself was like a party in Bagh-e Iman. Many people openly announced their intentions to vote for Mousavi as they cheerfully stood in line chatting with neighbors, and local election monitors estimated that at least 65 percent of them actually did so. “Although some probably really voted for [Ayatollah Mehdi] Karubi, who also is a man of the people,” said election monitor Jalal.
Of course, the Basijis with their mothers, wives and sisters did come out in force but were quiet, apparently timid about revealing their voting intentions “because they probably voted for Ahmadinejad,” continued Jalal. But he insisted that they did not count for more than 20 or 25 percent of the vote.
By Saturday evening, the shock and disbelief had given way to anger that slowly turned into palpable moral outrage over what came to be believed as the theft of their election. The proof was right in the village: “Interior Ministry officials came from Shiraz, sealed the ballot boxes, and took then away even before the end of voting at 9 pm,” said Jalal. In all previous elections, a committee comprised of representative from each political faction had counted and certified the results right in the village. The unexpected change in procedures caught village monitors off guard, as it did everywhere else in the country.
By Saturday evening, small groups of demonstrators were roaming the main commercial streets of Shiraz, a city of 1.5 million residents, and protesting the announced results as a fraud. People refused to believe that Ahmadinejad could have been re-elected. Larger demonstrations took place on Sunday, Monday and Tuesday, beginning in the late afternoon and continuing long after the sun had set. These attracted carloads of supporters from Bagh-e Iman and other villages, including several that were 60 kilometers from Shiraz.
Although the crowds shouted slogans such as “Death to Dictatorship,” most protestors shouted “Allah-o-akbar,” the popular chant of the 1978-79 Revolution. Indeed, in Shiraz, thousands climbed unto the roofs of their homes Sunday to shout ‘Allah-o-akbar’ for several hours.
Most villagers are supporters of the Islamic Republic, but they are ready for the reforms that they say are essential so that their children will have a secure economic future. They saw hope in Mousavi’s promise to implement reforms, even though he is a part of the governing elite.
But that political elite is divided over how Iran should be governed: a transparent democracy where elected representatives enact laws to benefit the people or a ‘guided democracy’ in which a select few make all decisions because they do not trust the masses to make the right ones. This astute political insight is one that is prevalent in Iran but seems to have escaped the notice of the Western reporters who are trying to explain Iran’s political crisis with resort to simplistic stereotypes.
Eric Hooglund is professor of politics at Bates College, Lewiston, Maine, and editor of the scholarly journal Middle East Critique. He is an expert on Iran, and his most recent publication is “Thirty Years of Islamic Revolution in Rural Iran” in Middle East Report, no. 250, spring 2009.
Copyright © 2009 Eric Hooglund – distributed by Agence Global
Saturday, June 20, 2009
In the name of God, the kind and the merciful
Indeed god demands you to safe keep what people entrust in you, and to rule them with justice. [this a verse of Koran]
Respectable and intelligent people of Iran,
These nights and days, a pivotal moment in our history is taking place. People ask each other: “what should we do?, which way should we go?”. It is my duty to share with you what I believe, and to learn from you, may we never forget our historical task and not give up on the duty we are given by the destiny of times and generations.
30 years ago, in this country a revolution became victorious in the name of Islam, a revolution for freedom, a revolution for reviving the dignity of men, a revolution for truth and justice. In those times, especially when our enlightened Imam [Khomeini] was alive, large amount of lives and matters were invested to legitimize this foundation and many valuable achievements were attained. An unprecedented enlightenment captured our society, and our people reached a new life where they endured the hardest of hardships with a sweet taste. What this people gained was dignity and freedom and a gift of the life of the pure ones [i.e. 12 Imams of Shiites]. I am certain that those who have seen those days will not be satisfied with anything less.
Had we as a people lost certain talents that we were unable to experience that early spirituality? I had come to say that that was not the case. It is not late yet, we are not far from that enlightened space yet. I had come to show that it was possible to live spiritually while living in a modern world. I had come to repeat Imam’s warnings about fundamentalism. I had come to say that evading the law leads to dictatorship; and to remind that paying attention to people’s dignity does not diminish the foundations of the regime, but strengthens it. I had come to say that people wish honesty and integrity from their servants, and that many of our perils have arisen from lies. I had come to say that poverty and backwardness, corruption and injustice were not our destiny. I had come to re-invite to the Islamic revolution, as it had to be, and Islamic republic as it has to be.
In this invitation, I was not charismatic [articulate], but the core message of revolution was so appealing that it surpassed my articulation and excited the young generation who had not seen those days to recreate scenes which we had not seen since the days of revolution and the sacred defense. The people’s movement chose green as its symbol. I confess that in this, I followed them. And a generation that was accused of being removed from religion, has now reached “God is Great”, “Victory’s of God and victory’s near”, “Ya hossein” in their chants to prove that when this tree fruits, they all resemble. No one taught hem these slogans, they reached them by the teachings of instinct. How unfair are those whose petty advantages make them call this a “velvet revolution” staged by foreigners! [refering to state TV and Khameneni, perhaps!]
But as you know, all of us were faced with deception and cheatings when we claimed to revitalize our nation and realize dreams that root in the hearts of young and old. And that which we had predicted will stem from evading law [dictatorship], realized soon in the worst manifestation.
The large voter turnout in recent election was the result of hard work to create hope and confidence in people, to create a deserving response to those whose broad dissatisfaction with the existing management crisis could have targeted the foundations of the regime. If this good will and trust of the poeple is not addressed via protecting their votes, or if they cannot react in a civil manner to claim their rights, the responsibility of the dangerous routs ahead will be on the shoulders of those who do not tolerate civil protests.
If the large volume of cheating and vote rigging, which has set fire to the hays of people’s anger, is expressed as the evidence of fairness, the republican nature of the state will be killed and in practice, the ideology that Islam and Republicanism are incompatible will be proven.
This outcome will make two groups happy: One, those who since the beginning of revolution stood against Imam and called the Islamic state a dictatorship of the elite who want to take people to heaven by force; and the other, those who in defending the human rights, consider religion and Islam against republicanism. Imam’s fantastic art was to neutralize these dichotomies. I had come to focus on Imam’s approach to neutralize the burgeoning magic of these. Now, by confirming the results of election, by limiting the extent of investigation in a manner that the outcome will not be changed, even though in more than 170 branches the number of cast votes was more than 100% of eligible voters of the riding, the heads of the state have accepted the responsibility of what has happened during the election.
In these conditions, we are asked to follow our complaints via the Guardian council, while this council has proven its bias, not only before and during, but also after the election. The first principle of judgment is to be impartial.
I, continue to strongly believe that the request for annulling the vote and repeating the election is a definite right that has to be considered by impartial and nationally trusted delegation. Not to dismiss the results of this investigation a priori, or to prevent people from demonstration by threatening them to bloodshed. Nor to unleash the Intelligence ministry’s plain clothes forces on people’s lives to disperse crowds by intimidation and inflammation, instead of responding to people’s legitimate questions, and then blaming the bloodshed on others.
As I am looking at the scene, I see it set for advancing a new political agenda that spreads beyond the objective of installing an unwanted government. As a companion who has seen the beauties of your green wave, I will never allow any one’s life endangered because of my actions. At the same time, I remain undeterred on my demand for annulling the election and demanding people’s rights. Despite my limited abilities, I believe that your motivation and creativity can pursue your legitimate demands in new civil manners. Be sure that I will always stand with you. What this brother of yours recommends, especially to the dear youth, in terms of finding new solutions is to not allow liars and cheater steal your flag of defense of Islamic state, and foreigners rip the treasures of the Islamic republic which are your inheritance of the blood of your decent fathers. By trust in God, and hope for the future, and leaning on the strength of social movements, claim your rights in the frameworks of the existing constitution, based on principle of non-violence.
In this, we are not confronting the Basij. Basiji is our brother. In this we are not confronting the revolutionary guard. The guard is the keeper of our revolution. We are not confronting the army, the army is the keeper of our borders. These organs are the keepers of our independence, freedom and our Islamic republic. We are confronting deception and lies, we want to reform them, a reform by return to the pure principles of revolution.
We advise the authorities, to calm down the streets. Based on article 27 of the constitution, not only provide space for peaceful protest, but also encourage such gatherings. The state TV should stop badmouthing and taking sides. Before voices turn into shouting, let them be heard in reasonable debates. Let the press criticize, and write the news as they happen. In one word, create a free space for people to express their agreements and disagreements. Let those who want, say “takbeer” and don’t consider it opposition. It is clear that in this case, there won’t be a need for security forces on the streets, and we won’t have to face pictures and hear news that break the heart of anyone who loves the country and the revolution.
Your brother and companion
Mir Hossein Mousavi
Mousavi's trying VERY hard to prevent the blood shed ... someone else is hungry for blood ... he is a brave man, and I commend him ...
این روزها و شبها نقطه عطفی در تاریخ ملت ما در حال شکل گرفتن است. مردم از یکدیگر و درمیان جمعشان از اینجانب سوال میکنند که چه باید کرد و به چه سو باید رفت. بر عهده خویشتن میبینم که آنچه را باور دارم با شما در میان بگذارم، با شما بگویم و از شما بیاموزم، باشد كه رسالت تاریخیمان را از یاد نبریم و شانه از بار مسئولیتی که سرنوشت نسلها و عصرها بر دوش ما گذاشته است خالی نکنیم.
سی سال پیش از این در کشورما انقلابی به نام اسلام به پیروزی رسید؛ انقلابی براي آزادی، انقلابی براي احياي کرامت انسانها، انقلابی براي راستی و درستي. در اين مدت و به خصوص در زمان حیات امام روشن ضمير ما سرمایههای عظیمی از جان و مال و آبرو در پای تحکیم این بنای مبارک گذارده شد و دستآوردهای ارزشمندي حاصل آمد. نورانیتی که تا پیش از آن تجربه نکرده بودیم جامعه ما را فراگرفت و مردم ما به حیاتی نو رسيدند که بهرغم سختترین شداید برایشان شیرین بود. آنچه مردم به دست آورده بودند کرامت و آزادی و طليعههايي از حیات طیبه بود. اطمينان دارم کسانی که آن روزها را ديدهاند به چيزي كمتر از آن راضي نميشوند.
آیا ما مردم شایستگیهایی را از دست داده بودیم که دیگر آن فضای روح انگیز را تجربه نمیكردیم؟ من آمده بودم بگویم چنین نیست؛ هنوز دیر نیست و هنوز راهمان تا آن فضای نورانی دور نیست. آمده بودم تا نشان دهم میتوان معنوی زندگی کرد و در عین حال در امروز زیست. آمده بودم تا هشدارهای اماممان را درباره تحجر بازگو کنم. آمده بودم تا بگویم گریز از قانون به استبداد میانجامد؛ تا به ياد آورم كه اعتنا به کرامت انسانها پايههاي نظام را تضعيف نميكند، بلكه استحكام ميبخشد. آمده بودم تا بگویم مردم از خدمتگزارانشان راستی و درستي میخواهند و بسیاری از گرفتاريهاي ما از دروغ برخاسته است. آمده بودم تا بگویم عقبماندگي، فقر، فساد و بيعدالتي سرنوشت ما نیست. آمده بودم تا بار ديگر به انقلاب اسلامی آن گونه که بود و جمهوری اسلامی آن گونه که باید باشد، دعوت كنم.
من در این دعوت بلیغ نبودم، ولی پیام اصیل انقلاب حتی از بیان نارسای من آنچنان دلنشین بود که نسل جوان را، نسلی که آن روزگاران را ندیده بود و میان خود و این میراث بزرگ احساس فاصله میکرد، به هیجان آورد و صحنههایی را که تنها در ایام نهضت و دفاع مقدس دیده بودیم بازسازی کرد. حرکت خودجوش مردم رنگ سبز را به عنوان نماد خویش برگزيد. اینجانب اعتراف میکنم که در این امر پیرو آنان بودم. و نسلی که به دوری از مبانی دینی متهم میشد در شعارهای خود به تکبیر رسید و به «نصر من الله و فتح قريب» و «یاحسین» و نام خمینی تکیه کرد تا ثابت کند این شجره طیبه هرگاه که به بار مینشيند میوههایش شبیه به هم است. این شعارها را کسی جز آموزگار فطرت به آنان نیاموخته بود. چقدر بیانصافند کسانی که منافع كوچكشان آنها را وا می دارد تا این معجزه انقلاب اسلامی را ساخته و پرداخته بيگانگان و «انقلاب مخملين» بنامند.
اما آن چنان که میدانید همگی ما در راه این تجديد حيات ملي و تحقق آرمانهایی که در دل و جان پیر و جوان ما ریشه دارند با دروغ وتقلب روبرو شدیم و آن چيزي كه از عواقب قانونگريزي پيشبيني كرده بوديم به صريحترين شكل ممكن و در نزديكترين زمان تحقق يافت.
استقبال عظيم از انتخابات اخير در درجه نخست مرهون تلاشهايي بود كه براي ايجاد اميد و اعتماد در مردم صورت گرفت تا براي بحرانهاي مديريتي موجود و نارضايتيهاي گستردهاجتماعي، كه انباشتشان ميتواند كيان انقلاب و نظام را نشانه برود، پاسخي شايسته فراهم شود. اگر اين حسنظن و اعتماد مردم از طريق صيانت از آراي آنها پاسخ داده نشود و يا آنها نتوانند براي دفاع از حقوقشان به نحوي مدني و آرام واكنش نشان دهند مسيرهاي خطرناكي در پيش خواهد بود كه مسئوليت قرار گرفتن در آنها بر عهده كساني است كه رفتارهاي مسالمتآميز را تحمل نميكنند.
اگر حجم عظيم تقلب و جابهجايي آرا، كه آتش به خرمن اعتماد مردم زده است، خود دليل و شاهد فقدان تقلب معرفي شود، جمهوريت نظام به مسلخ كشيده خواهد شد و عملا ايده ناسازگاري اسلام و جمهوريت به اثبات ميرسد. اين سرنوشت دو گروه را خوشحال خواهد كرد؛ يك دسته آنان كه از ابتداي انقلاب در مقابل امام صفآرايي كردند و حكومت اسلامي را همان استبداد صالحان دانستند و به گمان باطل خود ميخواهند مردم را به زور به بهشت ببرند و دسته ديگر كه با ادعاي دفاع از حقوق مردم اساسا ديانت و اسلام را مانع تحقق جمهوريت ميدانند. هنر شگرف امام باطل كردن سحر اين دوگانهانگاريها بود. من آمده بودم تا با تكيه بر راه امام تلاش ساحراني را كه دوباره جان گرفتهاند خنثي كنم.
اكنون مقامات كشور با صحه گذاشتن بر آنچه در انتخابات گذشت مسئوليت آن را پذيرفتهاند و برای نتایج هرگونه تحقیق و رسیدگی بعدی حد تعیین کردهاند، به صورتی که اين رسيدگيها موجب ابطال انتخابات نشود و نتایج آن را تغییر ندهد، حتی اگر در بيش از 170 حوزه انتخاباتي تعداد آراي به صندوق ريخته شده بيشتر از تعداد واجدين شرايط باشد.
از ما خواسته ميشود كه در اين شرايط شكايت خود را از طريق شوراي نگهبان پيگيري كنيم، حال آن كه اين شورا در عملكرد خود چه قبل، چه حين و چه بعد از انتخابات عدم بيطرفي خود را به اثبات رسانده است و نخستين اصل در هر داوري رعايت بيطرفي است.
اينجانب همچنان قويا اعتقاد دارم درخواست ابطال انتخابات و تجديد آن حقي مسلم است كه بايد به صورتي بيطرفانه از طريق يك هيئت مورد اعتماد ملي مورد بررسي قرار گيرد، نه آن كه پيشاپيش امكان ثمربخش بودن آن منتفي اعلام شود، يا با طرح احتمال خونريزي، مردم از هرگونه راهپيمايي و تظاهرات بازداشته شوند، يا شوراي امنيت كشور به جاي پاسخگويي به سوالات مشروع در خصوص نقش لباسشخصيها در حمله به افراد و اموال عمومي و ايجاد التهاب در حركتهاي مردمي به فرافكني بپردازد و مسئوليت فجايع به وجود آمده را بر عهده ديگران بگذارد.
اينجانب چون به صحنه مینگرم آن را پرداخته شده برای اهدافی فراتر از تحمیل یک دولت ناخواسته به ملت، که تحمیل نوع جدیدی از زندگی سیاسی بر کشور میبینم. من به عنوان يك همراه که زیباییهای موج سبز حضور شما را ديده است هرگز به خود اجازه نخواهم داد بر اثر عمل من جان کسی درمعرض خطر قرار گيرد. در عین حال بر اعتقاد راسخ خويش مبنی بر باطل بودن انتخاباتی که گذشت و استيفاي حقوق مردم پای می فشارم و عليرغم تواناييهاي اندكي كه در اختيار دارم براين باورم كه انگيزه و خلاقيت شما مردم همچنان ميتواند حقوق مشروع تان را در چهرههاي مدني جديد مورد پيگيري قرار دهد و محقق كند. مطمئن باشيد كه اينجانب همواره در كنار شما خواهم ماند. آنچه اين برادر شما در در يافتن اين راهحلهاي جديد، خصوصا به جوانان عزیز توصيه مي كند اين است که نگذارید دروغگويان و متقلبان پرچم دفاع از نظام اسلامی را از شما بربايند و نا اهلان و نامحرمان، میراث گرانقدر انقلاب اسلامی را که اندوخته از خون پدارن راستگویتان است از شما مصادره کنند. با توكل به خداوند و اميد به آينده و تكيه بر توانمنديهايتان حركات اجتماعي خود را پس از اين نيز براساس آزاديهاي مصرح در قانون اساسي و اصل امتناع از خشونت پيگيري كنيد. ما در اين راه با بسيجي روبرو نيستيم؛ بسيجي برادر ماست. ما در اين راه با سپاهي روبرو نيستيم؛ سپاهي حافظ انقلاب و نظام ماست. ما با ارتش روبرو نيستيم؛ ارتش حافظ مرزهاي ماست. ما با نظام مقدس خود و ساختارهاي قانوني آن روبرو نيستيم. اين ساختار حافظ استقلال ، آزادي و جمهوري اسلامي ماست. ما با كجروي ها و دروغ گويي ها روبرو هستيم و در پي اصلاح آنيم؛ ا صلاحي با برگشت به اصول ناب انقلاب اسلامي .
ما به دست اندركاران توصيه مي كنيم براي برقراري آرامش در خيابان ها مطابق اصل 27 قانون اساسي امكان تجمع هاي مسالمت آميز را نه تنها فراهم كنند، بلكه چنين گردهم آيي هايي را تشويق كنند وصدا و سيما را از قيد بدگويي ها و يك طرفه عمل كردن ها رها سازند. بگذارند صداها قبل از آن كه به فرياد تبديل شود به صورت استدلال و مجادله احسن در اين رسانه جاري، تصحيح و تعديل گردد. بگذارند جرايد نقد كنند، خبرها را آنچنان كه هست بنويسند و در يك كلام فضايي آزاد براي مردم جهت ابراز موافقت ها و مخالفت هاي خود آماده سازند. بگذاريم آنهايي كه علاقه دارند تكبير بگويند و آن را مخالفت با خود تلقي نكينم. كاملا مشخص است كه در اين صورت احتياجي به حضور نيروهاي نظامي و انتظامي در خيابان ها نخواهد بود و با صحنه هايي كه ديدن آنها و شنيدن خبر آنها دل هر علاقمند به انقلاب و كشور را به درد مي آورد، روبرو نخواهيم بود.
برادر و همراه شما - میرحسین موسوی
سورس خبر :
وب سایت کلمه - ۳۰ خرداد ۱۳۸۸ ساعت ۲۱:۲
Friday, June 19, 2009
Thursday, June 18, 2009
Mansoor Moaddel, a valued colleague, is a sociologist and an important interpreter of the contemporary Middle East who has done a lot of work with polling and statistics, often finding counter-intuitive results. His response to Ballen and Doherty is therefore authoritative and since some continue to cite that op-ed in support of Ahmadinejad's claims, I thought it important to share this further view from someone who knows his way around a chi square.
A Response to Ken Ballen and Patrick Doherty’s article in Washington Post, Monday, June 15, 2009
By Mansoor Moaddel, Professor of Sociology, Eastern Michigan University, and Research Affiliate, Population Studies Center, Institute for Social Research, the University of Michigan, MMoaddel a_t_ umich d o t edu
In the June 15, 2009 issue of Washington Post, Ken Ballen and Patrick Doherty wrote that “The election results in Iran may reflect the will of the Iranian people. Many experts are claiming that the margin of victory of incumbent President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was the result of fraud or manipulation, but our nationwide public opinion survey of Iranians three weeks before the vote showed Ahmadinejad leading by a more than 2 to 1 margin -- greater than his actual apparent margin of victory in Friday's election.”
However, scrutiny of the data posted at Terror Free Tomorrow (www.terrorfreetomorrow.org) fails to support Ballen and Doherty’s interpretations. Their findings, from a telephone survey conducted four weeks before the election, are based on the responses of only 57.8% of the 1,731 people who were successfully contacted by telephone from outside of Iran. Among these, 34% said they would vote for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, 14% for Mir Hussein Mousavi, 2% for Mehdi Karoubi, 1% for Mohsen Rezaie, and 27% did not know. (These figures add up only to 78% in the Ballen report.) In other words, of 1,731 people contacted, well over half either refused to participate (42.2%) or did not indicate a preferred candidate (15.6%) While we cannot guess at the political preferences of this nonresponding/ noncommitting group, we do know from these data that just 19.7% of all those contacted indicated they planned to vote for Ahmadinejad. This polling figure is very low for an incumbent – particularly for a self-described populist candidate – and cannot be responsibly interpreted as representing a clear harbinger of election victory.
Among those who follow Iranian politics closely, another concern about Ballen and Doherty’s assertioins based on these data is that key political events occurred between the data gathering and the election, as one would expect given Iran’s relatively compressed presidential campaigning. For instance, many believe that Ahmadinejad’s June 3rd debate with Mousavi was particularly damaging to the incumbent. Rather than noting his own political accomplishments, Ahmadinejad began the debate by attacking his detractors, none of whom were among the rival candidates, and was even highly critical of Mousavi’s wife, waving a photo of her in front of the camera for emphasis. During most of the remainder of the debates Ahmadinejad appeared defensive, edgy, and even rude, in high contrast to Mousavi, who by comparison seemed professional and polite. This bizarre behavior opened the door for Ahmadinejad’s rivals to reproach him not only for his economic policies but also his erratic behavior inside the country and abroad. In the week leading up to the election, many observers noted a concomitant rise in the Mousavi’s political popularity.
So even if Ahmadinejad had an edge over Mousavi a month before the election – even if we subscribe to the interpretation that he was the 2 to 1 favorite among potential voters in mid-May – it is quite reasonable to suppose that his popularity eroded following these debates. And many believe that the erosion became a steep downhill slide. A swift sea change in Iranian politics is consistent with other events in Iran's political history--from the Constitutional Revolution of 1905, to the oil nationalization movement, the Iranian revolution of 1979, and the election of Khatami as president in 1997. In all these cases, Iranians reached national consensus fairly quickly. One month before the election, many thought that the re-election of Ahmadinejad was a fait accompli, but not because Khamenei supported him. Rather, Iranians were demoralized and uninterested in the elections, especially non-supporters of Ahmadinejad.
Keen prognosticators argued that the outcome of the election was very sensitive to voter turnout, with rates of voting higher than 65% favoring Mousavi. For a good many reasons that do not concern us here, opinion leaders inside the country and abroad reached the conclusion that the boycott of the previous election had been counterproductive and that this time participation was key to challenging the extant administration. And, because the relationship between voting rates and candidate preference had a curvilinear shape in favor of the pro-reformist candidates, a linear extrapolation from weeks-old polling numbers makes little sense. And in fact, several polls taken just days before the election showed Mousavi with a lead over Ahmadinejad – this despite government-orchestrated threats and media obstructions designed to derail the pro-reformist candidates and their supporters.
How then do we explain Balen and Doherty’s legitimization of the declaration from Iran’s Interior Ministry that Ahmadinejad prevailed with 63.62% of the votes? The absurdity of the government’s election engineering is that none of the candidates managed to get more than a fraction of the votes even in their hometowns. And the scarcely veiled threats by the Revolutionary Guards to swiftly stifle any attempt at a “velvet revolution,” the disconnection of the SMS network of mobile users, and the filtering of websites belonging to the reformist candidates – all seem more characteristic of a dictatorship staging a political coup than of a confident incumbent administration awaiting a mandate from the people. Despite the approbation of Iran’s election results by Balen, Doherty, and a number of other U.S. commentators, many controversies have marred this election and much skepticism surrounds the official results. Without an honest and objective recounting of the votes, this controversy and skepticism far outweigh any legitimacy conferred by a small set of questionably interpreted polling data.