Industrial Cracks

This blog is a glimpse into the mind of a history nerd sitting behind a laptop screen. Enjoy a series of ideas he hopes to be thought provoking.
I am quite proud of my Contemplations and Discussing Islam pages. Feel free to contact me anytime.
Iran offers condolences to Venezuelan government, nation over Chavez’s death
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has expressed the Islamic Republic’s deepest condolences to the Venezuelan government and people over the death of President Hugo Chavez.

Ahmadinejad said in a message to Venezuelan Vice President Nicolas Maduro on Wednesday, “I express my sympathy over the sad incident to the great nation of Venezuela, the respected family of Hugo Chavez and to all nations in the world.” 

“Indeed, he is a martyr [who lost his life] in the path of serving the Venezuelan people and preserving human and revolutionary values,” the Iranian president stated.

Chavez passed away at a military hospital in the capital, Caracas, on Tuesday after a two-year battle with cancer. 

Hours before his death, the Venezuelan vice president stated that someday there will be “scientific proof” that the socialist leader was infected with cancer by “imperialist” enemies. “We have no doubt that commander Chavez was attacked with this illness.” 

“The old enemies of our fatherland looked for a way to harm his health,” Maduro stated. 

The Iranian government has declared one day of national mourning for the death of the late Venezuelan leader. 

On February 18, the 58-year-old Chavez returned to Caracas from Cuba, where he had undergone cancer treatment. 

In late March 2012, Chavez began radiation treatment in Cuba after an operation in February 2012 that removed a second cancerous tumor from his pelvic region. Chavez’s first tumor was removed in June 2011, and then he received chemotherapy. 

Chavez became involved in revolutionary movements within the armed forces in 1977. 

Chavez won his first presidential election in 1998. He also won the presidential elections in 2000, 2006, and 2012. 

The Venezuelan leader founded the Bolivarian Revolution movement to establish popular democracy and economic independence and the equal distribution of wealth in Latin America. 

Understanding The Rial’s Freefall

Iran’s economy is not on the verge of collapse

The sharp drop in the value of the rial in the last two weeks has created much excitement in Iran and abroad, but mostly for the wrong reasons. In the parallel (or free) market for foreign currencies, the rial fell by 15% in one day this week, reaching its lowest value ever — 35,000 rials per US dollar — down by more than 50% compared to a month ago and 300% to last December when international sanctions tightened against Iran.

What all the related excitement overshadows is that this devaluation is not comparable to those in other countries where large devaluations caused severe shocks to the economy, such as those that swept through Asia in 1997-98. That’s because in those situations all prices were affected because all foreign exchange was traded at the same (rising) rate. This is not the case in Iran because nearly all foreign exchange is earned by the government, which has decided to sell most of it at a lower rate for the import of goods and services that it deems essential.

The rial devaluation that has created the media excitement is actually taking place in a narrow market that is shrinking in size and diminishing in importance. Iran’s Central Bank has classified a long list of goods into categories with priorities 1 through 10, leaving it to the parallel market to take of all other needs. Priorities 1 and 2 are food and medicine, receiving foreign exchange at the official rate of 12,260 rials per dollar, followed by other categories with lower priorities, which are mostly intermediate goods used in industrial production.

The government has been promising to do something for the import of these non-essential but important commodities, which account for about two-thirds of Iran’s imports, offering them some sort of preferential treatment. But the Central Bank was slow to respond and those producers who did not want to wait bought their currency needs in the parallel market, competing with speculators and people taking their money out of the country. The uncertainty about the sanctions, bewildering pronouncements from government officials in Iran, and hype over a possible Israeli attack, all combined to throw this market into chaos.

To protect Iran’s producers from what the government considers the consequences of “psychological war”, the Central Bank set up a “Currency Exchange Center” and invited licensed importers and exporters to trade their foreign currencies there, hoping that the auction rates reached there would be more stable and lower than the parallel market rate. When the Exchange Center opened just two weeks ago, the volume of transactions quickly jumped from $10 to $181 million per day, with most of the supply likely coming from the Central Bank. The Exchange Center diverted some of the supply of currency away from the parallel market, which I believe caused the rate there to soar.

Curiously, the Central Bank had predicted the opposite: that by arranging trade in the Exchange Center it would help lower the rate in the parallel market. This miscalculation added to the confusion and fear that the government did not know what it was doing. While the Exchange Center has produced a lower rate than the parallel market and can potentially shield producers from the worst psychological effects of sanctions and war, the shock to the parallel market has caused a serious political if not economic crisis for the government of Mr. Ahmadinejad.

Does all this mean that Iran’s economy is on the verge of collapse, as Israel’s Finance Minster reportedly said?  The answer is no, because most of the economy is shielded from this exchange rate, though not from the ill effects of the sanctions, which will continue to bite for a while. Would it cause sufficient economic pain that would push the Iranian government to make concessions in its nuclear standoff with the West?  The answer is not likely.  The multiple exchange rate system, as inefficient as it is, will protect the people below the median income, to whom the Ahmadinejad government is most responsive.

But the government can ill afford to ignore millions of Iranians, mostly upper income Iranians, who are affected by the gyrations of the parallel market. Among them are millions of people who are seeking a safe place for their savings, parents who send money to their children for education abroad or need to travel there to see them. They are not all importers of luxury items or those who want to take their money out of Iran. In allocating its limited — perhaps shrinking supply of for foreign currency — the government has a difficult time balancing the needs of the lower middle class and the poor with those of upper income Iranians that it cannot rely on for political support.

- Djavad Salehi-Isfahani is a professor of economics at Virginia Tech and a nonresident senior fellow at theBrookings Institution

Veterans For Peace Meets With Ahmadinejad


Members of Veterans For Peace, along with other U.S. peace activists, met Tuesday night with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Veterans For Peace President Leah Bolger addressed the meeting, stressing VFP’s commitment to doing everything possible to prevent a U.S. or U.S.-assisted attack on Iran. VFP hopes to send a delegation to Iran in October.

leah_bolger_w_flag.jpegBolger’s full prepared remarks follow:

“Good evening. Salaam alaikum President Ahmahdinejad, Honored Government Officials of the Islamic Republic of Iran, distinguished guests and colleagues.
“I am most pleased and honored to be in attendance with all of you, and to be able to represent Veterans For Peace—an organization of men and women who draw upon their experiences as military veterans to oppose war and militarism. By educating the public about the true costs of war, we hope to reveal its senseless immorality and to bring enough pressure to bear to end it.

“It is no secret that this meeting carries some controversy—but the truth is that this gathering is really quite remarkable—what other head of state is having meetings such as this? While you, Mr. President, have invited dozens of people to come together for discussion and dialog, the U.S. government has denied visas for 20 high-level Iranian diplomats and government officials. Veterans For Peace believes that open dialog is critical, and is very much appreciative of the opportunity this evening.

“Veterans For Peace is gravely concerned by the bellicose language coming from the government of Israel and the U.S. regarding Iran, as well as the words that President Obama is NOT saying—and that is, that the government of the U.S. will NOT support a military attack on Iran by Israel. We believe that without a specific denial of support for such an attack, that Israel will interpret this as tacit approval.

“We note that Iran has been a signatory to the NPT since its inception in 1968, even though it does not have a nuclear weapons program. Israel, on the other hand, which is NOT a signatory to the NPT has a fully developed nuclear weapons program, but does not acknowledge that it exists.
“We also note that Iran fully supports a “Nuclear Weapons-Free Middle East Zone,” yet this proposal has been dismissed out of hand by Israel, and has been virtually ignored by the U.S. media.

“In 1928 the United States and Persia signed the largely forgotten but still binding Kellogg-Briand Pact that outlaws all war. Iran and the United States and 79 other nations are parties to this treaty according to the U.S. State Department’s website. Furthermore the UN charter makes it clear that even the threat of war is a violation of international law.

“The point of everything I have just said is to note that it is not the government of Iran that is beating the drum for war.

“As veterans, we understand the true damage that is caused by war, and as Veterans For Peace, we feel it is our obligation to use our unique voice to point out ways in which war may be averted. We know that it is much more difficult to end wars once begun, than to prevent them from the beginning; therefore we are doing our utmost to stop this one before it starts. With regard to the current situation between the U.S., Israel, and Iran, we believe that the following actions would be productive measures in averting a war with Iran:

  1. The U.S. should announce that it will revoke the $3B it gives Israel every year in military aid, should Israel attack Iran.
  2. Insist that Israel be held to the same standards of openness and transparency that it demands of Iran with regard to its nuclear program, to include allowing IAEA inspectors into Israel, and signing on to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
  3. Remove its Carrier Battle Groups, loaded with dozens of nuclear weapons, from the region. Discontinue “military exercises” in the area.
  4. Express full support for the Helsinki meetings in December, and the “Nuclear Free Middle East.” Pressure Israel to attend this meeting, which is scheduled for this December.
  5. Stop using U.S. veto power to protect Israel from being held accountable for its actions by the UN.

“The main point I am trying to make in these remarks is that no matter what political differences of opinion we may have, the government of Iran, and more specifically, the people of Iran, have done nothing to warrant military action by either Israel or the U.S. The Iranian government maintains some policies with which we may disagree, but that disagreement does not justify the collective punishment of the people of Iran with economic sanctions (which VFP considers immoral and a violation of international law) and it most certainly does not justify military actions. One of the tenets of the Veterans For Peace statement of purpose is to prevent OUR government from interfering overtly or covertly in the affairs of other nations. VFP supports the self-determination of all peoples.
“Veterans For Peace wishes to acknowledge Iran on its recent assumption as the leader of the Non Aligned Movement, and the successful summit held in Tehran just weeks ago. Our organization seeks opportunities to work with organizations within NAM countries to resist and oppose war and militarism.

“Veterans For Peace will continue to resist our country’s propensity for war—we will be demonstrating in the streets, we will be lobbying our Congressmen, we will be speaking out, we will be arrested and we will be jailed. We will study the cultures of others, and learn from them and we will seek every opportunity for dialog and relationship-building with those our government labels as our quote, “enemy.” VFP seeks the opportunity to send a delegation to Iran at the earliest opportunity. There is a strong interest in our organization to meet with veterans of other nations because military veterans understand the reality of war—the deaths, the physical and mental injuries of our own military as well as those against whom we have fought. We know the Iranian people suffered greatly when Iraq chose to attack Iran in the long, eight year war and that you too have programs to help your veterans deal with the horrors of war. It is my hope that such a visit may be organized in the very near future.

“Thank you.”

Veterans For Peace was founded in 1985 and has approximately 5,000 members in 150 chapters located in every U.S. state and several countries. It is a 501(c)3 non-profit educational organization recognized as a Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) by the United Nations, and is the only national veterans’ organization calling for the abolishment of war.

(via nolandwithoutstones)

An amazing speech by an amazing man. I don’t care much for the uploaders comments. Yes, Ahmadenijad went with a large entourage, and yes it was necessary for him to do so to really show the power of the Islamic Republic so that his words will carry weight. The expats and dissidents will always find something to complain about.
Anyways, an amazing speech point at specific issues that the American media tries to ignore as much as possible. 

Tehran reaches out to Egypt’s Morsi

This is a development that holds the potential to shake up Middle Eastern politics — Iranian vice-president visiting Cairo. The two countries pulled down the shutters following the Iranian revolution in 1979 and a dark period continued right till the end of the Hosni Mubarak era. The revolution on Tahrir Square one year ago heralded a thaw, the first sign of which was the permission granted to an Iranian warship to cross the Suez Canal to visit Syria.

Low-key contacts followed, including a meeting between the two foreign ministers on the sidelines of theNAM meeting in Bali, Indonesia in May last year. Iran pressed hard for the resumption of diplomatic ties. Egypt sought more time. Tehran didn’t press, either, comprehending the complexities of the Egyptian situation.

Meanwhile, the military junta permitted a second Iranian warship to cross the Suez Canal, disregarding the stern rebuke by the United States and Israel (and the annoyance of Saudi Arabia). On its part, evidently with the acquiescence of Cairo, Tehran began inviting a series of Egyptian goodwill delegations from the civil society in a sustained effort to reach out to the various sections — especially the Islamist forces — of Egyptian society.

To be sure, a critical mass of opinion began accruing in Egypt, including within the Muslim Brotherhood, regarding the restoration of normal ties with Iran.

Enter Saudi Arabia!

Taking advantage of the economic crisis in Egypt, Riyadh offered economic assistance, but with strings attached. The bottom line for the Saudis is that Egypt shouldn’t dilute Riyadh’s regional campaign to “isolate” Iran. The main worry for the Saudis is that if Egypt, the biggest and most powerful Sunni Arab country, mends fences with Iran, the entire geopolitical thesis built around a contrived Sunni-Shi’ite sectarian schism which the US-Israeli-Saudi axis has been expounding as the centre-piece of the Arab Spring, would flounder.

The stakes are indeed very high. Therefore, Saudi Arabia invited the newly-elected Mohammed Morsi of the Brotherhood to visit Riyadh last month. The Saudis hoped that Morsi would play footsie on the Sunni-Sh’ite front and get Egypt to play its due role in the Syrian crisis. But, reading between the lines, one is getting the impression that Saudis are pretty much unsure how to handle Morsi. Prominent Saudi commentators have been all along leveling harsh criticism at Morsi and the Brothers [1]. Even after the meeting between King Abdullah and Morsi last month, critical reportage is continuing in the Saudi establishment press [2], even pitting the Brothers against Egypt’s Al-Azhar in a clever ploy to divide the islamist camp in Egypt [3].

The point is, Riyadh has the utmost to fear from the Brothers — the spectre of the Brothers spearheading a ‘regime change’ in Saudi Arabia at some point haunts the Saudi rulers. The equations between the Saudis and the Brothers have been a troubled and often-violent one with the former Crown Prince Nayef using brutal methods to smash up the activities of the Brothers on Saudi soil.

This is where an Egyptian-Iranian rapprochement at this point becomes a major setback for the Saudi regime. If the Iranian news report carried by Fars is to be believed, Iranian vice-president Hamid Baqayee may visit Cairo to personally hand over the letter of invitation from President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad to Morsi to attend the forthcoming NAM summit meeting in Tehran.

Ahmedinejad had telephoned Morsi last month to extend the Iranian invitation and a conversation followed, which evidently prompted the follow-up mission by Baqayee. Indeed, Tehran is making a big gesture in protocol terms — deputing a vice-president to visit a country with which it has no diplomatic ties. The conclusion must be drawn that the probability of Morsi traveling to Tehran is rather high.

To be sure, an engrossing chapter is opening in the chronicle of the Arab Spring. Iran has throughout maintained that the Arab Spring will inevitably work in its favor in political terms. From Tehran’s viewpoint, Islamism is a common bond that will ultimately tie Iran with the democratic regimes that emerge in the Arab world led by Islamist parties — be it Tunisia, Libya or Yemen — as time passes, no matter the manipulations by third parties.

That is to say, Iranians estimate that these Arab Spring regimes will come under compulsion sooner rather than later to pay heed to the popular opinion on the so-called Arab Street, which will favor pan-Islamic policies, since the Arab will see through the politics of sectarianism that the West and its regional allies like Saudi Arabia and Israel have propagated in the interests of their self-preservation or for the perpetuation of their hegemony over the Muslim Middle East. The Iranians are of course taking a longterm perspective in terms of the social and political forces being unleashed by the Arab Spring in the stagnant Arab world.

This is where Egypt’s stance becomes crucial. Egypt is the heart of the Arab world and it is manifestly aspiring to reclaim the role it lost in the period since the Camp David Accord in 1979 to the Saudis. All three protagonists — Saudi Arabia, Iran and Egypt — know that Riyadh conclusively loses the ideological war if Cairo refuses to play sectarian politics in the Muslim Middle East, and Tehran will then be a net gainer.

If Morsi travels to Tehran at the end of this month, it becomes a defining moment in regional politics. One would like to be a fly on the wall if Morsi were to meet Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei [4].

[1] “Mursi and his clan”, by Adel Al Toraifi, Asharq Al-Awsat, 27 June 2012.

[2] “Mursi and Al-Azhar on a collision course”, by Waleed Abdul Rahman, Asharq Al-Awsat, 31 July 2012.

[3] Al-Azhar is Egypt’s religious establishment.

[4] “Iranian VP to Visit Cairo”, Fars News Agency, 6 August 2012.

God knows i would love to be that fly.

Ahmadinejad calls for fresh global economic order
Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has described the failure of the existing global economic system as a historic opportunity to develop a new economic management model for the world.

“Today, the economic order and the capitalist administration dominant over the international arena have failed,” said the Iranian president during a Tuesday meeting with visiting Kyrgyz Finance Minister Akylbek Japarov in Tehran to discuss a further expansion of ties between Kyrgyzstan and the Islamic Republic. 

President Ahmadinejad also expressed satisfaction over the recent developments in the Central Asian country, which led to the “rule of the people” and said, “The move towards progress by the government and nation of Kyrgyzstan is clearly evident.” 

Referring to the historical, cultural and civil ties between the two nations, the Iranian president underlined that there is no limits in the way of expanding relations between Tehran and Bishkek. 

For his part, the Kyrgyz finance minister made a reference to the existing agreements signed by authorities of both nations and expressed optimism that the volume of bilateral trade would reach a billion dollars “within a short period.”

Japarov further described the Islamic Republic as “a great and influential country in the region and the world” that can be an ‘appropriate model’ for other nations in many fields. 

He also stressed on the need to use local currencies in bilateral trade deals between Tehran and Bishkek, adding that the global economic crises demonstrate that the financial policies dictated by the dominant powers are no longer relevant. 

In a separate meeting on Tuesday, the Kyrgyz minister also met with Iran’s Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi to discuss means to boost Tehran-Bishkek ties. The two sides especially discussed ways for Kyrgyzstan to access international waters through Iran for its transit of goods. 



Ahmadinejad on Jews and the Holocaust - Larry King

I’m not sorry when I say he speaks the truth about who the Zionist’s truly are.Zionism is a new movement having been created about 1889 with one man’s idea of establishing a state based on Zionism.Zionism goes against the Torah .I know I’m am a lone solider when I state I find President Ahmadinejad an intelligent man,now I don’t know his exact views on the Holocaust but for my self having been and seen a concentration camp I can personally say its a part of history we should never let happen again.

(via nolandwithoutstones)

Cuba: Castro trusts Ahmadinejad to stand against the U.S.

Ahmadinejad met with Castro on Wednesday. They defended “the right of all states to the use of nuclear energy for peaceful ends.” (Iran’s Presidential Press Service)

Channel: Latin American AffairsPolitics

Every now and then, Cubans play around with the alleged news of Fidel Castro’s death. It’s a cruel joke indeed – to exiles, to supporters, to anyone intrigued or caught off-guard by it – but as Twitter is an open place to express oneself and perhaps rabble-rouse, the complete silence from the government fosters speculations … until reality strikes back.

Recently released photographs show a very vital Fidel Castro leading lively conversations with Iran’s Mahmoud Ahmadinejad during his Wednesday visit to La Havana. Castro looks thinner than before, his aging more intense, but he was quick enough to share his thoughts about their anti-U.S. rendez vous.

“(Ahmadinejad) is absolutely relaxed and calm, completely indifferent to yankee threats,” Castro wrote. “He trusts his people’s capability to stand up against any attack and trusts the efficacy of weapons they produce by themselves for the most part.”

According to Iran’s presidential website, Castro and Ahmadinejad “reviewed major international and regional developments,” during their meeting.

“Since capitalism has reached the end of the road, the two great nations of Iran and Cuba now shoulder a heavy responsibility to establish a new world order based on humanity and justice,” Ahmadinejad reportedly said.

As previously reported by Univision News, soon after arriving in La Havana,Ahmadinejad said something similar: “Thankfully we are already witnessing that the capitalist system is in decay. On various stages it has come to a dead end — politically, economically, and culturally.” 

Official Cuban newspaper Granma declared the commitment between the two controversial governments “to the defense of peace, international law, and the principles of the United Nations Charter, and the right of all states to the use of nuclear energy for peaceful ends.” Of course, they were also quick to opposethe implementation of “unilateral economic sanctions.”

At a time when Iran’s ties with Latin American powers are under close scrutiny after Univision’s The Iranian Threat documentary revealed Iran’s attempts to infiltrate and attack several U.S. targets with official help from Venezuela and Cuba, Castro saluted Iran’s “‘outstanding position’ in resisting the arrogant powers, and described the Islamic Republic as ‘the beacon of hope’ for the world nations,” the Iranian press release states.

Ahmadinejad pictured next to Ecuador’s Rafael Correa. “We do not believe in making atomic bombs.” Correa insisted. (Iran’s Presidential Press Service)

On Friday the 13th, Ahmadinejad was already in Ecuador, sitting next to president Rafael Correa in Quito.

“Latin American people possess culture, civilization, dignity, and a good future,” the Iranian leader said. His visit to the country has been severely criticized by observers both in the outside and on the inside.  

“Ahmadinejad’s stop in Ecuador illustrates a growing strategic partnership between Rafael Correa and the regime in Tehran,” U.S. Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) said about the issue. “Over the last five years, Iran’s economic investments in Ecuador have been effectively used to secure a loyal ally within our Hemisphere that could help Iran circumvent U.S. and UN sanctions. Iran’s deepened alliance with Correa also facilitates Tehran’s ability to access Ecuador’s uranium deposits.”

Ahmadinejad contested these concerns: “Iran’s nuclear program is not a problem for the hegemonic powers; they’re not pleased with Tehran’s progress and independence,” he said. “The nuclear question is a political excuse. They know that Iran is not looking to make atomic bombs. We do not believe in making atomic bombs.”

We’re [Iran and Venezuelan governments] not war mongers, we haven’t invaded anyone, not Iran nor Venezuela… we haven’t dropped bombs on anyone, we’re not the ones who have killed defenceless people, who have invaded, who have used chemical warfare…against whole peoples, we have only been attacked and we continue to be attacked

—    Hugo Chavez (via agavebuzz)

(via agavebuzz)

After Iran, Venezuela?


By Mike Whitney, Counterpunch

Naturally, Chavez’s progressive policies have raised a few eyebrows in Washington where his successes are seen as a threat to the established order. Corporate mandarins regard Chavez as a troublemaker and they’re doing whatever they can to get rid of him ASAP. This is why one never reads anything positive about Chavez or his accomplishments in the US media, because the corporate bosses hate him, as they do anyone who diverts money from the 1 percent at the top of the economic foodchain to the 99 percent at the bottom.

I think Iran’s turn came after Venezuela’s had already come in 2002 coup. But since the empire failed in enacting their foreign policy (regime change) in that country, they moved on and gave Venezuela a break. It isn’t hard to believe that they will come back to Venezuela. But there is only one problem i have with this article:

I don’t think there will ever be an “after Iran”. 

Iran: 2009 elections were not rigged.

Different elements raised DOUBTS about the recent Elections of Iran (2009). Let us analyze them one by one.

Objection 1: How it is possible that some Areas got more than 100% Votes?

This is “The Biggest” proof which is presented in order to blame these elections to be rigged.

Iranian Government confirmed it and then made it clear the reasons why some areas could have more votes than 100%. Unfortunately Western Media all together neglected this clarification and put false words in Iranian Government’s mouth that it accepts the rigging of 3 million votes. This is absolutely a lie and disinformation by Western Media. Iranian Government never said that it is Rigging, but it gave the valid Facts and Reasons for this phenomenon.

Let us leave these Satanic Propaganda tactics of West, and let us concentrate on the reality. Following are the Valid Facts why some areas could have more turnout than 100% Voters:

1. Even according to Western Media, the total turnout in these elections was 85% countrywide. 

2. Iranian Presidential Elections are not held on “Area” bases. 
Any voter could vote any where in the country, and it is not obligatory for him to go back to his “Registered Town” in order to cast the vote. 

3. There were two reasons of presence of over 100% Voters in few Areas. Firstly due to Summer, and secondly due to week-end many people (/Tourists) went to resorts which are mainly situated near Caspian See (and these were mostly the areas where turnout was more than 100%)

4. Please also note that in some of these Areas (with more than 100% turnout), Mr. Mussavi got the majority votes.

5. Please also note that parts of Population from “Undeveloped Areas” migrate to “Developed Areas” for jobs and earnings. So, although they stay in Areas where they do their jobs but they are not registered there but in their home towns. 
Therefore, let us use two terms (1st) Local Population, which is registered in that respective town (2nd) Non-Local Population, which is not registered in that respective town.

6. What does 85% turnout means? It is an “Average" of total votes casted countrywide.
It means that in some Areas “Local Population” casted 60-70% Votes (less than 85%), while in other Areas “local Population” casted 90-95% votes (more than 85%)
Now let us consider those Areas where “Local Population” casted 90-95% votes. Now add in it the numbers of “Tourists” and “Non-Local Population” which stay there for jobs and earnings. This simply shows there is nothing to wonder if turnout was more than 100% in some Areas. 

7. You remember that at the end of election time, there was a lack of Ballot Papers at some places. It means numbers of voters came to cast their votes on that day was almost equal or more than the registered voters in that area. Voting times had to be extended 4 times in some areas. 

8. In Elections of 2005, the turn out was only 59.6%. Even then in Areas of “Zorgan” and “Morv” turn out was more than 100% in last elections.

9. Iranian Government offered the other Candidates for recount of 10% Ballot boxes. It means there could be recounting in all these 50 alleged areas where claims are being made of rigging due to the fact of more than 100% voting.

10. Even much more to this that first time in last 30 years Iranian Government issued the complete list of number of vote per box after which opponents are left with no lame excuse for going for Road Politics. [Link].

Objection 2: It is impossible for Ahmadi Nejad to get 24.5 Million Votes

This propaganda is done by some of “Western Professors”. They claim themselves to be experts of examining election results on bases of scientific methods. One such professor is Dr.Walter R. Mebane who prepared the following data on bases of his Scientific Voting Techniques and claimed that it is impossible for Ahmadi Nejad to get 24.5 Million Votes.

With respect to Dr. Walter and other Western Professors, let us bring down the things from “Mathematical Equations” to “Real Ground Realities”. And this ground Reality says there is absolutely no problem in Ahmadi Nejad’s getting 24.5 million votes.

The best way of getting answer to this question is to look at the results of Elections of 2005. Following Table is taken from wikipedia.

Posted Image

The present Elections of Iran resembles very much to the 2nd Round Eelctions of 2005 while right from first day it was clear that real competition was only between Ahmadi Nejad and Mussovi. From 2nd round elections of 2005, it becomes clear that:

1. Ahmadi Nejad got 17.3 million Votes in last elections [While Mussave has got only 13.3 million votes in present elections]. Here you could see for yourself who could be the possible winner.

Note: Last elections of 2005 were conducted under the reformist government of Khatami and Ahmadi Nejad got no power to do any type of rigging, but still he got 17.3 million votes.

2. The turn out in last elections was only 59.6%. But despit this low turn out Ahmadi Nejad got 17.3 million votes. In present Elections, the turn out is huge 85%. This means that it is 25.4% more turn out in present elections.

Therefore, if we add 25.4% to 17.3 million votes of Ahmadi Nejad, then it gives us the figure of 24.6 million votes (and this is the same number approx. which Ahmadi Nejad got on the field in present elections)

3. People of Iran knew Ahmadi Nejad & his Policies much better in these elections as compared to last elections. Now question is how does it effect the votes? In order to get answer to this, let us once again look at the last elections of 2005. 

In first round elections of 2005, people knew very less of Ahmadi Nejad and his Politices. So in first round he got only 19.4% Votes (i.e. 5.7 million votes only). But till 2nd round things changed and People knew Ahmadi Nejad and his Policies better and therefore we saw a huge jump in his support and it raised to 61.7% votes in comparison to 19.4% (i.e. 17.3 million votes as compared to 5.7 million votes). 

4. So, situation is this that after 4 years of government of Ahmadi Nejad, people saw how much Ahmadi Nejad did for the poor people of Iran and how his policies directly benefited them. We are not going in details of his work in this area, but simply due to policies of Ahmadi Nejad and his simple way of living, he got not only votes from religious people, but also from the poor classes of Iranian people. 

So, there is nothing to doubt if Ahmadi Nejad got 24.5 million votes in present elections.

Objection 3: Pre-Election Surveys showed that Ahmadi Nejad was not leading the race

This objection is not true. Even the foreign neutral pre-election surveys showed that Ahmadi Nejad was leading the race with 2 to 1. Let us quote briefly from Washington Post, which writes:
[indent]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. 
[/indent]You could read whole article where they are presenting their DATA based on scientific sampling from across all 30 of Iran’s provinces (i.e. not only Tehran). It should be an eye-opener to those who still blame these elections to be rigged and for fraud. 

Objection 4: Mr. Mussavi submitted a List of Pre-Election complaints

This is a funny objection. 

A counter question to Mr. Mussavi: “Why didn’t he object upon these pre-election irregularities before Elections? Instead of objecting and presenting these complaints before elections, he actually claimed victory only after one hour of closure of voting. And afterwards within few hours (even before ending of official counting and results) he directly called his followers to “Stage Resistance”. 

Upon complaint of Mr. Mussavi, the Iranian Guardian Council Authorities launched the investigations and after complete investigations they say:
[indent]“After 10 days of examination, we did not see any major irregularities,” Guardians Council spokesman Abbasali Kadkhodai told the state IRNA news agency, rejecting opposition allegations that have brought hundreds of thousands of demonstrators onto the streets. “We have had no fraud in any presidential election and this one was the cleanest election we have had. I can say with certainty that there was no fraud in this election.”
[/indent]Fact is depites so much crying from Mr. Mussavi & Western Media, they are still unable to bring even a single reliable proof of any type of Rigging.

Actually, they themselves know it very well that Ahmadi Nejad has won with such huge difference that there is absolutely no DOUBTS in his victory. Please also note that:

  • Mr. Mousavi got almost minimum of 2 representative at more than 95 percent of all the centers.
  • At each center, 14 observers including the candidate’s observers oversaw the entire process, including inspection of empty boxes at the outset and their sealing at the end, with four locks, and then all signed a certificate of proper election, i.e., Mousavi’s own men have certified the clean process.
Objection 5: Elections were fraud while Results were started to be announced after only few hours

Please note that the official final results were announced at 4 pm the next day, 16 hours after the closure of voting. Nevertheless, it was true that results started coming just few hours after the closing of voting. But does it really constitute a proof of Rigging?

There were a total of 45,713 ballot boxes that were set up in cities, towns and villages across Iran. With 39.2 million ballots cast, there were less than 860 ballots per box. Why would it take more than an two to three hours to count 860 ballots per poll? After the count, the results were then reported electronically to the Ministry of the Interior in Tehran.

Objection 6: Ballots ran out at some places and not every one got the chance to vote

This is again misleading objection.

There was huge turn out and it’s “Average" was 85%. This means in some areas there were 70-80% votes (less than 85%) and in some areas 90-95% Votes from Local Population. And while Non-Local Population was also allowed to vote anywhere in any polling center, therefore at some centers turn out was over 100%. This is the main reason of running out of ballots. So, the educated West could now please tell us how it constitute Rigging? It may be termed as not sufficient measures for preparation of elections, but certainly not as Rigging.

Secondly, even if all the people who did not vote, had actually voted for Mousavi (a virtual impossibility), that would be 6.93 million additional votes, much less than the 11 million vote difference between the top two candidates.

Objection 7: How Ahmadi Nejad did well in Sunni Areas?

It is a misconception that there are any kind of Shia/Sunni problems in Iran. It is only Saudi backed Wahabi Media which normally propagate such disinformation. There is only minor problems along border of Pakistan, while in remaining whole Iran Ahle-Sunnah have very brotherly ties with their Shia brethern. 

Let me quote once again from the poll carried out by a western news organization. It was jointly commissioned by the BBC and ABC News, and conducted by an independent entity called the Center for Public Opinion (CPO) of the New America Foundation. (This is same report of Survey which has been mentioned above by Wahsington Post and which predicted 89% voters turnout in recent elections and 2:1 lead for Ahamadi Nejad). On Issue of Shia/Sunni in Iran, it’s survey says [LINK]:
[indent]Iranian Shiite Muslims Think Favorably of Sunni Muslims, 
Christians, Americans and others 

… For Iranian citizens of the Islamic Republic, 87 percent of who in our survey 
identified themselves as Shiite, views of both Sunni Muslims and Christians were 
overwhelmingly favorable—with only 8 percent voicing an unfavorable view of 
Sunnis and 11 percent of Christians. (Opinions on Jews were divided, though 
more are favorable than unfavorable.) 

Indeed, Iranian views of Sunnis and Christians, as well as non-Iranians generally, 
are quite accepting—more so than the corresponding views of their neighbors, 
such as in Saudi Arabia, according to our TFT survey there. 

Iranians clearly distinguish between countries and policies they do not like (US 
and Israel), and people they do like (Christians, Americans, Arabs, Sunni 
Muslims and Jews). Iranians are favorable to Christians by a 6:1 margin, Sunni 
Muslims by a 9:1 margin, Americans by a 2:1 margin and Jews by a 5:4 margin. 
In fact, Iranians are as favorable to Americans as they are to their Arab 
neighbors. The high favorability of Sunni Muslims among Iranians (higher than 
for Arabs generally) demonstrates that Shiite/Sunni issues are not the primary 
force driving a wedge between Iranians and their Arab neighbors.

[/indent]Objection 8: About Azeri Province and Tehran

Rigging is also claimed while Ahmadi Nejad got more Azeri Votes than Mussavi. This is not strange while Irani-Azeries is a very religious soceity and religion plays more role here than race. Secondly Ahmadi Nejad lived in this province for several years, worked hard, got good relations with Top people there and could also speak the Turkish-Azeri language without any problem. And he ran a very good election compaign here. Contrar to Ahmadi Nejad, his rival Mr. Mussavi has not been to these areas for a long long time and ran his election compaign poorly.

Another fantasy theory is how Ahmadi Nejad got more votes than Mr. Mussavi in Tehran. It is not complete truth. Mr. Mussave actually won the elections in main Tehran City. But there are poor neighbourhoods around Tehran and here Ahmadi Nejad got huge majority of votes. 


There is not a single “Hard Proof” of any rigging in elections. All the proofs that have been presented, they are based only and only upon “Conjecture Theories”. Opponents & Western Media trying it’s best to encourage the unrests and Civil War in Iran by doing a lot of biased coverage and neglecting the realities. They want Iranian poeple to solve their differences on the roads instead of sitting down on the Table and look at things rationally on bases of ground realities.