Iranian elections give Ahmadinejad massive majority; Tehran goes to shit.

Just think: If Ahmadinejad had practiced some sort of subtlety, he probably gets away with minimal protest.

Lapin wrote:

So basically, by frauding the election, and probably not for the first time, so blatantly, the government destroyed any bit of faith their people had left in them, and opened up a big can of worms?

Guess you can't exactly close the can again, huh?

Basically, but I don't want to minimize the impact, here. The unique mixture of politics and religion make this especially epic. We're not just witnessing a spot of political upheaval here. This is the sort of social and religious conflict that hasn't been especially common in the West for hundreds of years. This is more like the rise of Lutheranism than V for Vendetta.

The effects here in the West are also interesting. Compare how you feel about Iran now to how you felt last month. Been quite an experience, hasn't it? Anyone here old enough to remember how they felt watching the Russian people throw rocks at Soviet tanks?

I don't know. I know a lot of Iranians at work, so ever since I was aware of Iran in a bigger sense, I've always been scared of their government and scared for the people in the country.

I'm not a religious person, but I have no bone to pick with any of the actual religions. So I feel that if the Iranians want to be in a theocracy, that's cool, as long as the people control who is actually in charge, and nobody batshit crazy or war-mongering is put in charge. (That's more for my own hopes and fears) (I really have no say in who the Iranians feel is fit to rule.)

I think that what we will witness is that the clerics will begin to lose their power and influence, while the political classes absorb most of the vacuum of power. While I doubt we'll ever see a completely secular government in Iran, I believe that the current structure is untenable at this point. It will change, sooner or later, and we will have a strong, self-sufficient, and far less theocratic Iran at some point in the future. Some people have doubts, but I think history has already taken its course, and the result is now as predictable as the sunrise.

The last, hardest question left is, "how long will it take, and how many people must die to make it happen?"

I don't even know any of these people, and the thought of them dying so brutally is just breaking my heart whenever I think about it. I never thought a real revolution would feel so terrifying, and I'm not even involved. The stress and hardship these people are facing every day is mind-boggling.

Lysander wrote:

The effects here in the West are also interesting. Compare how you feel about Iran now to how you felt last month. Been quite an experience, hasn't it? Anyone here old enough to remember how they felt watching the Russian people throw rocks at Soviet tanks?

I am (I was 12 when the USSR fell), and it was definitely a similar feeling to what I feel watching the Iranians struggle - we tend to blur the line between authoritarian regimes and the people who live under them, so seeing them rise up and challenge that which has the might to crush them in an instant is a very potent sight.

Lapin wrote:

I never thought a real revolution would feel so terrifying, and I'm not even involved.

I know. It's funny, and it reminds me of something.

Quote :

"We must hang together, gentlemen . . . else, we shall most assuredly hang separately."

Benjamin Franklin's words are often quoted half-jokingly to inspire unity in the face of adversity.

But we forget that the man was probably seriously, literally afraid of being hanged.

I feel for these people. I'm sorry for the woman bleeding to death on the sidewalk. But, I'm not afraid. This is for the best, I think. For their best, not ours. I think I understand. They need this. It's not just about a candidate, or an election anymore. It's about the whole idea of elections, of having a say, even in a small way. To be deprived of that is . . . intolerable, don't you think? Have you ever really thought about it?

This is the first time something like this has happened and I've been old enough to understand it. I really do hope this ends well for the Iranians. They've shown their strength, and they deserve it.

Incidentally, does anybody know whether Rafsanjani's still under house arrest?

Britain are pulling out the families of diplomats from Iran (providing the diplomats took them along in the first place). Apparently we're a 'Little Satan' - which strikes me as sort of cute, like a halloween costume for a toddler - and Britain has been even more instrumental in this current rioting, with our meddlesome meddling, than America. We've been told that all British people should avoid all but essential travel to Iran. Our citizens are still allowed in the country but they're monitoring our presence closely. Which is a bit worrying.

ETA: The foreign embassies that were taking people in? Have been surrounded by armed militia.

Fitchsticks wrote:

Britain are pulling out the families of diplomats from Iran (providing the diplomats took them along in the first place). Apparently we're a 'Little Satan' - which strikes me as sort of cute, like a halloween costume for a toddler - and Britain has been even more instrumental in this current rioting, with our meddlesome meddling, than America. We've been told that all British people should avoid all but essential travel to Iran. Our citizens are still allowed in the country but they're monitoring our presence closely. Which is a bit worrying.

ETA: The foreign embassies that were taking people in? Have been surrounded by armed militia.

Wait... wait. There's other countries for people to hate besides America?

Sarcasm aside, I really hope this turns out well. It feels like a longer, messier version of when the Berlin Wall came down. Maybe not the best example, but to be a cliched American, I really hope freedom wins out here. Those people deserve it, and I'm glad I'm alive to see this.*

And... they don't have David Hasselhoff. Always a plus.





*Of course, the cynical side of me thinks that there's just going to be mass executions and it'll go back to being same-old business there.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Holy shit.

AAAAAANNNDDDD that's my new desktop wallpaper.

:suspect: Shooped? Because it looks too fucking good to be true.

gaijinguy wrote:

:suspect: Shooped? Because it looks too fucking good to be true.

I don't think the president would be waving so demurely as someone gives him the finger. Further, I don't believe those body-guards would be just sitting there to allow it to happen.
Finally, It is unlikely that someone who can conceal a weapon or explosives (the "downside" of those burkhas) would be allowed that close to the presidential motorcade.

unskilled78 wrote:

gaijinguy wrote:

:suspect: Shooped? Because it looks too fucking good to be true.

I don't think the president would be waving so demurely as someone gives him the finger. Further, I don't believe those body-guards would be just sitting there to allow it to happen.
Finally, It is unlikely that someone who can conceal a weapon or explosives (the "downside" of those burkhas) would be allowed that close to the presidential motorcade.

She is not wearing a burkha. She has PANTS.

A_Note_Chaotic wrote:

unskilled78 wrote:

gaijinguy wrote:

:suspect: Shooped? Because it looks too fucking good to be true.

I don't think the president would be waving so demurely as someone gives him the finger. Further, I don't believe those body-guards would be just sitting there to allow it to happen.
Finally, It is unlikely that someone who can conceal a weapon or explosives (the "downside" of those burkhas) would be allowed that close to the presidential motorcade.

She is not wearing a burkha. She has PANTS.

For the record I can't find anything that suggests this is real or isn't. Just people arguing back and forth over pixels.

IMO as a photoshop nerd, it's real. Look at the reflection of her arm on the chrome bar, and the reflection of her legs at the bottom. You can also see her face reflected (blurrily) in the corner of the windshield.

unskilled78 wrote:

gaijinguy wrote:

:suspect: Shooped? Because it looks too fucking good to be true.

I don't think the president would be waving so demurely as someone gives him the finger. Further, I don't believe those body-guards would be just sitting there to allow it to happen.
Finally, It is unlikely that someone who can conceal a weapon or explosives (the "downside" of those burkhas) would be allowed that close to the presidential motorcade.

She's wearing a hijab. Burkhas are the ones that cover you completely.

But yeah. That shit's totally gonna be my new facebook picture.

Freezer wrote:

Just think: If Ahmadinejad had practiced some sort of subtlety, he probably gets away with minimal protest.

Dictators usually can't be subtle. They're all about throwing their weight around.

While it has a strong fundie streak, Iran is not quite as hard-assed as other places. From what I gathered from Persepolis and news reports, pants are ok and women study at college.

Sorry to burst your bubble, people, but it's shooped - the hand is. The rest is the type of lens used, making the subjects look closer together than they are.
This doesn't mean that the people manifesting in Teheran don't have massive bronze cojones that would topple me over if I was to sustain their burden.

This is the original picture:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

The Unoriginal wrote:

Sorry to burst your bubble, people, but it's shooped - the hand is. The rest is the type of lens used, making the subjects look closer together than they are.
This doesn't mean that the people manifesting in Teheran don't have massive bronze cojones that would topple me over if I was to sustain their burden.

This is the original picture:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Your link's broken, but if it's true that's a total bummer.

Mafiosa wrote:

Your link's broken, but if it's true that's a total bummer.

Sorry about that... try following the link saying 'Twitter' in this page. I don't think it's a bummer - how many people will have done the same, but simply a camera wasn't around or the photo didn't reach the Western media? Plus, the gesture might simply be alien to their culture. I for one when pissed would make the umbrella sign, not shoot the bird.

The Unoriginal wrote:

Mafiosa wrote:

Your link's broken, but if it's true that's a total bummer.

Sorry about that... try following the link saying 'Twitter' in this page. I don't think it's a bummer - how many people will have done the same, but simply a camera wasn't around or the photo didn't reach the Western media? Plus, the gesture might simply be alien to their culture. I for one when pissed would make the umbrella sign, not shoot the bird.

From what I understand, the middle finger doesn't mean the same thing there as it does here. However, if someone were to give him the thumbs-up sign...

(I read an article once about a guy who decided to hitchhike around the Middle East to learn more about it. He didn't understand why no one stopped when he put his thumb out for a ride, until someone explained to him that you'd have as much success thumbing a ride in the Middle East as you'd have getting one by raising a middle finger in the U.S.)