It Begins
AP reports that Iranian riot police have deployed tear gas and water cannons against protesters who were gathering for another big demonstration in Tehran.
Aljazeera is reporting that a suicide bomber blew himself up near the shrine of Imam Khomeini. Hard to interpret, since I don't take the reformist camp for seedy terrorist types. My guess, if its true, is Mojahedin-e Khalq or MEK or something very like it (which, if true, would be bad publicity for the reformers, since MEK is universally hated in Iran.)
Iran heading to conflict, instability.
End/ (Not Continued)
posted by Juan Cole @ 6/20/2009 09:54:00 AM
|
Facebook
13 Comments:
MEK denied involvement.
*PS: Not MEK supporter
As soon as I heard about this, I thought that the regime did it to justify violent repression and to try to weaken support for the demonstrators. But that's just me.
Will the "reformers" flee or will they fight? The numbers alone do not tell the tale. In most revolutions there tends to be a vanguard of truly commited, and its not a given the revolutionary guards are necessarily going to be the most committed, or that they are necessarily a monolithic force.
The question here will quickly become one of commitment, and for people of conviction, the means justify the ends. Are the Northern Tehran/educated/progressives (wherever they may live) going to WANT to have it their way more than the status quo and its minions? In these matters there tends to be a huge proportion of people who´ll be fence-sitters, waiting to see which direction the wind blows. And that gets down to who is going to have the net commitment, in terms of the quality and quantity of followers who are going to do what it takes for their vision.
A lot of video has been taken in the last week or so. I would encourage the new wave to find different beds, friends and patterns, for the duration. The game, as they say, appears to be on and I suspect there will no do-overs for an awful lot of people, regardless of their personal involvment. Serious stuff.
Juan, check this out:
The Devil Is in the Digits: Evidence That Iran's Election Was Rigged - washingtonpost.com ? http://tinyurl.com/l5cchn
I disagree. I mean it is possible that the US army would allow them to leave Ashraf base and enter Iran to sow chaos. But my money's on Sonnite Jundullah, who slaughtered more than 30 civilians in Zahedan last month. After all what more symbolic an attack than on the shrine of the father of the 'rafidi' state, Imam Khomeini?
Damn those evil Iranian tyrants, just when we were prepared (and many, I suspect, hoping) for a massacre, they used water cannon and tear gas. Today is a sad day for Democracy.
Ahmadinejad and Khamenei need to realize that they are doing the neo-cons' dirty work when they use force to suppress peaceful protest.
I've heard some internet theorizing that the government either made the story up or planted the bomb itself to discredit the reformists. I know its just speculation, but do you think there's any chance it could be true or (probably more importantly) come to be believed by the majority of Iranians?
Another scientic article about possible election fraud:
http://images.derstandard.at/2009/06/19/0906.2789v1.pdf
Remember the unrest following the Rodney King videotaping? For kicks, do a google search on "rodney king news". Look for what is used to describe the unrest. The word I found repeated was "riot".
Now compare with the word that is repeated over and over in our media to describe the current unrest in Iran, seems the most common word is "protest".
Makes me wonder.
And before anyone tries to claim that the unrest has been peaceful in Iran, there are many videos, posted to show the "regime's brutality", that show our peaceful protesters throwing rocks at uniformed Iranian Police and others, a few videos showing the throwing of incendiary devices, and other cases indicating violence done by the so called peaceful protesters.
(1) The Interior Ministry has begun publishing the results from all the individual ballot boxes (in Persian: http://www.moi.ir/Portal/Home/Default.aspx?CategoryID=832a711b-95fe-4505-8aa3-38f5e17309c9).
This is the first election in which they have publicized the results in such detail. Their data could be compared with the data from Terror Free Tomorrow to see if they're broadly similar.
(2) The government has agreed to reccount, in the presence of representatives of the candidates, a random selection of 10% of the ballot boxes.
(3) This is in addition to the earlier promise to reccount all disputed ballot boxes in the presence of representatives of the candidates.
(4) Mousavi and Karroubi did not bother sending representatives to discuss fraud and verification issues with the Guardian Council. Only Reza'i did so. This is unfortunate.
I usually respect Prof.Juan Cole's view, but this time, it is less likely that MEK had been involved in the suicide bombing at Khomeini's tomb. I guess the culprit might be a seriously disillusioned ex-Basiji or ex-Revolutionary Guard member.
I am keen on the point how Mr. Mousavi would react to the Supreme lerder's words saying the elction was rightly done. Can Mousavi dismiss the Supreme leader's words? or can he accept it? His attitude could be decisive for the future current.
Wladimir van Wilgenburg said... MEK denied involvement.
I don't believe them. OTOH, I can't say I KNOW them, but I KNOW what they are.
From a short thread on a mail list I subscribe to (names of posters changed), I start the thread after a posting on the shrine attack:
"Juan Cole speculates MEK...
http://www.juancole.com/2009/06/it-begins.html
CIA merc Iranian paramilitary who did most of the "Kurd Killing" for Saddam Hussein since they were the ones infiltrating the Iranian border during the Iraq/Iran proxy war, and have recently been turned over to the Iraqi authorities after being under US military protection for 're-grooving'... at least the ones in Iraq have been turned over... turned... whatever they call it in 'spookworld'."
"Bill" replies: "Mercenary suicide bombers?"
My return: "I know it seems strange from a Western frame of reference where merc work is all about the $$$, not ideology. But a paramilitary army fighting another nation which is supplied with weapons and materials to fight on 'our side' by the CIA IS 'mercenary' (or proxy, if you would), who's agenda for war-making is in sync with Western interests (or we wouldn't be supplying them), but the 'interest' on their part doesn't necessarily have to include survival, or the US military code of conduct, or even money as a primary motivation.
Child soldiers are an example of what I'm describing... There's a tendency towards nihilism.
http://trunc.it/hzov
Nice field pack on this kid.. Do you think he cares whether he lives or dies?
Da' Buffalo"
That's my gut feeling explaining the gist of my skepticism regarding their disclaimer.
Post a Comment
<< Home