Jaleho

They target chest and heart...

to kill,  not even to threat..   those bastard enjoy killing .. that is what they have been trained for..they aretrained to make money out of people bloods..

in
all the those pictures and video we have seen until now.. they shoot to
kill, not to scare off... these are evidence of how wrong and guilty and chicken are.....

they are afraid of people that have nothing to defend themselves...
they are afraid because they are guilty.. simple calculation..

Iranians. Come to your

Iranians. Come to your senses. get off the streets and tend to your lives and thank the almighty for what you got. Only God has the power to remove this fascist regime. Stop breaking your parents hearts. Mosavi does not represent you. He has a grave waiting for him just like all man. he just called for his own martyrdom which brings him to the level of the mullas. This is not your revolution. make a revolution in your heart. Trust your Savior Jesus and he'll take care of you.

....... پست تر از خاک توئی

پست تر از خاک توئی

%3A%2F%2F

-YT

Jaleho - You Hezbollahi Thug

At least another 19 more poeple killed by the fascist IRI regime that Jaleho supports.

//www.cnn.com/

You are just as responsible for these deaths that the Basiji thugs who are pulling the trigger in Iran's streets.  They use machine guns to keep the IRI in power and you use a keyboard. 

This is how Iranians "won big", like this brave girl dying on the streets at the hands of your masters:

//iranian.com/main/2009/jun/latest-protests

Rest assured, you POS.  No "aggressor" needs tp attack Iran now.  Iran and Iranians are already under attack by the biggest aggressors in the world: your bosses at the IRI.

 You are just as big a thug as they are.  SHAME ON YOU-YOU ANTI-IRANIAN HEZBOLLAHI MICROBE. 

Basiji, hezbolahi stop killing your sisters and brothers..

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gt_6fI4YhGQ

Basiji, hezbolahi stop killing your sisters and brothers..

peace & freedom

mehrban

that would be truly scary.... and it would be a sign that a move toward absolutism and dictatorship was pre-planned without any hint of consideration for the will of the people. it would cause a violent revolution.

Niloufar

What if they remove Khamenei and install Mesbah Yazdi?   I don't know which is worse.

Monda, A7

my source was moussavi's facebook page.

looks like all hell's going to break loose now. i don't see khamenei apologizing to the people. let's hope the assembly of experts will take action and remove him. it is time.

Niloufar jan

I have read more than one from home with the same report.

//www.petitionspot.com/petitions/irangooglema...

//www.petitionspot.com/petitions/irangooglema...

peace & freedom

IR blasts a bomb in khomeini's shrine

انفجار بمب در قبر خمینی ملعون .
دو نفر کشته شده.

//iranian.com/main/news/2009/06/20/bomb-blast...

-YT

Re: can anyone verify this?

Not exactly ... but this is very relevant to your question.... "In Tehran, fantasy and reality make uneasy bedfellows" (//www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/...)
---
Did we really learn anything from 1979 mistakes? I seriously doubt it!

The moment of truth

Democracy sounds great, but it is a fool's errand; it is a historical chimera for the green (pun intended), What goes as democracy in the West is actually Plutocracy. The government of the rich, for the rich, by the rich. No wonder 1% of the US population possesses one quarter of all wealth in America, a tightly controlled police state with extremely compliant Mass Media ( Are you listening America's Pravda?)
So it breaks my heart to see these young fools sacrificning themselves so foolishly. The Iranian civic society, due to cultrual heritage, has great reciprocity and flexibility. Had these young fools wanted to, as Khameni indicated, they could have engaged the system in a dialogue to evolve it over time. They are wasting that opportunity fast, mainly because they are thinking that the West will come to their aid.

Here are my predictions which are better than the talking heads of the corporate Media:

1- if the game is escalated:

a) the winner will be the West, It will have broken the stalemate with Iran as chaos spreads its wings in Iran with the central government in deep irreversible paralysis.
b)Iranian people will be the LOSERS. The bloodshed and carnage will be complemented with the humiliations of having the West set Iran's naional policies & priorities.

2-If the Iranians defuse the tension, and use this national calamity to set aside petty differences:

a) The West will be the LOSER, as Iran speeds towards weaponization of its uranium & plutonnium, hardens its positions vis-a-vis the West, makes military alliances with Russia & China (note Ahmainejad's recent trip ot Russia), pursues the ejections of the Western crusaders from the ME.
b)The Iranian people thus unified, will possess an inexorable momentum towards a Golden Age of creative powers unprecedented in human history.

I agree with you on one point (to Nilou)

ya, I agree with you on Ahmadinejad, he is expired. I don't have your optimism about Mousavi, he may be expired too, even before he is put to use/re-use.

can anyone verify this?

Yet more evidence of cheating

 //www.iran-uk.com/article.php?id=38705

Anonym7

the video certainly gives us plenty of food for thought. khamenei once again proved his incompetence and lack of intelligence yesterday by the position he took. it is likely that he felt it better to play the hard man rather than a weakling. in a way, he left himself no other option by the way he handled the affair from the beginning. had he managed to avoid partisanship from the beginning, he could have played the referee and been a part of the solution. in the process, he would have elevated his own standing tremendously and kept ahmadinajed under control.

there is a real risk of major bloodshed and a new, far more represessive dictatorship at this stage. but the system has been moving in that diection since ahmadinejad was elected 4 years ago. it is certainly true that obama should stay quiet so as not to undermine the reformers - i think we are all agreed on that.

but all of this is pure speculation. what matters is what happens today in iran a day after khamenei's moronic statements. i can see 2 scenarios: an immediate escalation of violence as of today or a quiet period that will explode later. also, the 7th and 40th mourning days for the dead are ones to watch.

i do not think khamenei would survive a major crackdown. he must realise that there are many inside the system waiting to depose him. this is where our corrput rafsanjani is actually quite useful. despite our shared distase for him, if he were to launch a challenge and succeed through the assembly of experts, he will have no choice but to push for a much more open and democratic system to replace the current one.

Peace

Jaleh jan

the nuclear issue is already settled. as you know, most powers are already ready to live with iran having the technology. all it takes now is for iran to play the good guy for a little while until all the infrastructure and a critical mass of enriched uranium is fully developed and in place. i am not sure if you agree, but my reading of the situation is that iran means to obtain the capability to make weapons but will refrain from making the bomb unless absolutely necessary. not much hard negotiation is needed and ahmadinejad alone did not get us here either. he was a part of a much longer process that included khatami's efforts that demonstrated the hypocrisy of the west. ahmadinejad's continuing participation in the process only strengthens the case of those wanting to impose harder sanctions and isolate iran further. we should avoid this, as it would only delay iran's economic development without any added value to nuclear development.

however, your (and Anonym7's) concentration on the foreign discourse on the elections misses the point. who cares what they think? Inside Iran, ahmadinejad will not have the necessary legitimacy to govern and represent iran. we are a nation obsessed with conspiracies. many people will forever believe that he stole the elections, and the next round of presidential elections might be one that people will boycott. how can people trust a recount when there is widespread belief that the votes were ignored and rigged? the damage is already done. and if we are discussing 'fear' of the 'truth', what is the ahmadinejad camp afraid of when people ask for new elections?

the survey you refer to represented the views of less than 50% the respondents (34% for ahmadinejad and 14% for moussavi) a month before the elections. even among the respondents, 27% had not made up their minds while the rest refused to respond if i remember correctly. the results cannot possibly be described as conclusive.

on the question of corruption, i would challenge your perception. moussavi is seen as less corrupt than ahmadinejad who has several of his family members in key posts. the attempt to lump moussavi with rafsanjani is a tactic of the ahmadinejad camp. to me, it does not stick. rafsanjani's efforts to oppose ahmadinejad are tied to his own ambitions.

your agree with the need for removing khamenei and the supreme leader position altogether. but this would be better served through moussavi for obvious reasons. let us not forget than such an effort would need to clamp down on the power of the revolutionary guards too.

this can be achieved much better with montazeri appointed as the leader in the first instance leading to a constitutional review and a new referendum to change the system altogether. the ahmadinejad-khamenei alliance would make this process virtually impossible.

i must respectfully reiterate: the more i think about it, ahmadinejad is a total liability.

Peace

I VOTED For Ahmadi Nejad * WHERE IS MY VOTE?

Inja kojast? INJA IRAN AST SARZAMINE MANO TO

‫

‫چو ایران نباشد، تن من مباد

It's interesting to see how

It's interesting to see how she (and others) can spin their way out of things. How quickly everyone forgets how vulgar and insulting jaleHO has always been. She agreed with irandokht on one thing so now they're big buddies. But don't worry. They'll turn on each other again when it suits them. They'll spin their way out of the hole they dig themselves into. But it's too late to forget. Some might, but not everyone. You can fool some of the people all of the time and you can fool all of the people some of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time.

That's Right -- Jaleho Only Likes To Talk About Issues!!!

The person whose every comments until a month ago contained at least one “a*s”, “s**t” or “chos va gooz”, and who goes around and calls everyone unintelligent and stupid, is crying about being attacked.  What is even more pathetic is seeing a few people who have come to believe her, have bought into her cries of victimhood and are actually dumb enough to sympathize with her. 

Jaleho’s sense of victimhood has apparently come to light now that she has realized that no one on this site believes her spin, nonsense and support for a blood thirsty regime that is mowing innocent Iranians on the streets with machine guns and with roaming bands of motorcycle riding thugs.  So, NOW, Jaleho only wants to talk about “issues”.  Before that, she could leave nasty and profanity laden comments for everyone.  But now she has received an epiphany and has become “civilized”.  Just like her masters in IRI.  How cute!   

Jaleho sweetheart: You can't escape your past and your history on this site.  That stuff is like glue.  It sticks to you!

Dear Niloufar,

I agree with all those important needs that you mentioned, except that I believe nuclear rights is the central issue! On the line, is Iran's soverignty and regional security. Without it, everything else is moot! It would be like saying maybe Mosadeq should first put the Oil Natinalisation which brings foreign wrath aside and try other things first! It is not that Iranians would die without nuclear power, it is whether few powers can impose a nuclear apartheid on countries like Iran and dictate to them what kind of progress they are allowed. Like I have said many times, we had identical international threats every time Iran was on the verge of some independent advancement: railroads, steel mills, oil nationalization, missile technology, and space technology. The sanactions imposed NOW are just a continuation of the sanctions imposed and started under Clinton regarding missile technology. You can not be compliant and earn your rights at the same time. Unfortunately, because of Iran's geopolitical position, we have to fight for every bit of our rights, no one will give it to us.

Regarding which person is a better fit for US-Iran deal, I repeat: the leader whom majority have elected. Propaganda aside, anything short of that won't be stable. Read this article from the fellow who broke out Iran Contra AAfairs, and pay attention to the part I bold face for you:

Taking Sides in Iran

Beliefs in democracy and in honest, unbiased journalism are important values. If the Iranian people really did vote for Ahmadinejad – and Mousavi’s demonstrators are seeking to overturn the will of the majority – shouldn’t the Western news media be supporting efforts to get at the facts, rather than picking favorites and rooting for one side? Asks Robert Parry.

There are lots of good reasons for wishing that the bombastic Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will be toppled by the political struggle playing out on the streets of Tehran, but there is still that troubling question of whether he actually won the election.

Many in the Western news media clearly have taken sides, favoring the more urbane Mir-Hossein Mousavi and the green-clad demonstrators protesting the official election results that show Mousavi losing to Ahmadinejad by a 2-to-1 margin.

The media’s distaste for Ahmadinejad is palpable. A “news analysis” coauthored by New York Times executive editor Bill Keller opened up with an old joke about Ahmadinejad looking into a mirror and saying “male lice to the right, female lice to the left,” a reference to his rise from the street rather than from a prestigious university.

Now, the Times editors and other Western commentators are adopting the position of Mousavi in rejecting the notion of a vote recount by Iran’s Guardian Council, which oversees elections. The Mousavi camp is demanding instead an entirely new election.

“Even a full recount would be suspect,” the Times wrote in an editorial. “How could anyone be sure that the ballots were valid?”

But the resistance of Mousavi and his backers to a partial or complete recount suggests something else, that they may fear that the recounted results would show Ahmadinejad winning. Mousavi may hope for a better outcome in a new election, especially if Iran’s powerful clerics tilt their allegiance toward him.

Despite the vehemence of Mousavi’s supporters regarding what they say is his rightful victory, they have reason to doubt their certainty. Some of the complaints about the Iranian election have become legend, but crack under objective scrutiny.

The complaint, for instance, about the hasty claim of an Ahmadinejad victory ignores the fact that Mousavi was out with a declaration of his own victory shortly after the polls closed. The partial results showing Ahmadinejad in the lead followed hours later.

Another favorite notion – that Ahmadinejad could not have carried Azeri-dominated districts because Mousavi was an Azeri – was countered by the findings of an extensive nationwide poll conducted by US experts in mid-May showing Azeris favoring Ahmadinejad by about 2-to-1.

The poll – described in a Washington Post op-ed by two of its administrators, Ken Ballen and Patrick Doherty – also noted that some of the high-tech methods of communication that have been central to the Mousavi demonstrations in Tehran are not widespread throughout the country, with only 1 in 3 Iranians having access to the Internet.

Ballen and Doherty also discovered that – contrary to widespread Western impressions – Iranian youth overwhelmingly favored Ahmadinejad, that the “18-to-24-year-olds comprised the strongest voting bloc for Ahmadinejad of all age groups.”

Generally speaking, Mousavi’s support was concentrated among the urban middle class and the well-educated while Ahmadinejad was more the candidate of the poor – of which there are many in Iran. They have benefited from government largesse in food and other programs, and they tend to listen to the conservative clerics in the mosques.

Ahmadinejad also is viewed as less corrupt than many of his political rivals, the likes of former President Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani who has parlayed his political/religious standing into a vast personal fortune.

Indeed, Ahmadinejad may have scored some important political points in the closing days of the campaign by tying Mousavi to Rafsanjani, whose wealth and power make him a figure of disdain and distrust among many of Iran’s working-class and poor.

Abrasive Figure

Without doubt, Ahmadinejad is an abrasive figure who has damaged Iran’s international standing with intemperate denunciations of Israel and the West. But that doesn’t always look the same inside a country as it does from outside.

The United States experienced a similar phenomenon in 2004 when John Kerry took the so-called “coastal states” whose better-educated voters reflected the widespread international disapproval of the cowboyish George W. Bush, but many conservative Christians and less-educated voters in “flyover America” went for Bush in defiance of world opinion.

So, despite the hopeful conventional wisdom in the West about Mousavi’s victory, the truth may be that Ahmadinejad won by getting heavy votes from Iran’s poor and its religious traditionalists over Mousavi’s votes from the more sophisticated, reform-minded middle class.

And one of the problems facing President Barack Obama as he tries to figure out the best way to respond to Iran’s unrest is that US intelligence agencies tend to believe Ahmadinejad won even if there were some irregularities.

That is one reason why even a partial recount might be helpful. Access by investigators to the ballots could help gauge how serious and widespread the election irregularities were.

By rejecting the opportunity of a recount, Mousavi – and his supporters including the New York Times editorial board – look like they’re afraid of the truth, that they would rather lay their bets on a new election than on a fair recount of the June 12 election.

From a policy standpoint, easing Ahmadinejad into retirement may make sense for the overall future of the region. His blunderbuss rhetoric has increased fears and sharpened divisions, making him a perfect foil for hardliners in Israel and neoconservatives in the United States who are itching to use force against Iran’s nuclear program and still fantasize about violent “regime change.”

But belief in democracy – the will of the people – is another value. So is honest, unbiased journalism that seeks the truth, rather than politically convenient results.

If the Iranian people really did vote for Ahmadinejad – and Mousavi’s demonstrators are seeking to overturn the will of the majority – shouldn’t the New York Times and the Western news media be supporting efforts to get at the facts, rather than picking favorites and rooting for one side?

Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories in the 1980s for the Associated Press and Newsweek. His latest book, Neck Deep: The Disastrous Presidency of George W. Bush , can be ordered at neckdeepbook.com. His two previous books, Secrecy & Privilege: The Rise of the Bush Dynasty from Watergate to Iraq and Lost History: Contras, Cocaine, the Press & 'Project Truth' are also available there. Or go to Amazon.com

Anon 111,

All she has done was to defend the people who shoot into a crowd of Iranians indiscriminately.  I mean, for God’s sake, how much s**t can a basiji brother take from this unruly crowd?  He has to use his God issued Kalashnikov at some point!! Am I right or am I right?  And sister Jaleho is only defending the brother’s right to bear arms

Where did she say or imply that specifically?

Jaleh jan

Ahmadinejad's problem is that a serious shadow has fallen on his legitimacy at home and therefore abroad. he is seriously compromised. the west plus israel will now feel emboldened in the negotiations and may push for more severe rounds of sanctions that, as you know, would hurt the people rather than him. instead of going to the table with the people's votes and support behind him, the impression will be that he has stolen an election from the people and is sitting there as a bully who does not even care about the voices of his own people. this will happen whether or not the vote was rigged. he will therefore not be able to get the best deal for iran in my opinion. 

all things said, i do not think that the nuclear issue is the biggest one for iran. there are a whole range of national and international priorities at stake, and he has no particular advantage over those issues either. women's rights as you mentioned. trade relations. foreign investments in our vast natural resources under Our control and for Our benefit. oil and gas pipeline deals that would check russia's power and elevate ours to the east and west and south. peace building in a changed world order. regional security agreements and dealing with the threat of wahhabism emanating from the saudis. helping the US get out of its mess in a dignified manner (and saving everyone the headache of permanent occupation and war). strengthening ties with the russians, the indians and the chinese. Asia is the future, but he does not have the basic diplomatic skills to carve out a strategic and respected position for iran at this crucial juncture arising from the fall of the US. yes we have done relatively well with parts of the muslim world and latin america, but that is a minority in the world. even on the nuclear issue, we have a golden opportunity to totally isolate israel in the region and elevate iran's position to an undisputed and respected regional leader and peace maker, but he gives them fodder to delay the inevitable. From this moment on, he only holds us back in my opinion.

Where is Capt Dramas? (to Nilou)

Nilou, please listen to Berzezinski ( //iranian.com/main/2009/jun/modern-iran-s... ). He addresses many things you referred to ..... the divide (percentage game), legitimacy .... etc. You will then be convinced why I said one of my favorite analysts (NP)is a bit rookie!
Where is our drama queen (the Capt Drama) to learn something!

Niloufar

‫

You see? Everyone who has a different point of view of this mojood is a (semi) idiot. And she comes here spreading false allegations as we have to accept them in the name of freedom of speech!

The blood of all martyrs who were been killed by Basijis like Jaleho don't deserve to figure out here. But the only way to show how karih are these beasts is to decorate this room by what the fantastic victory of iranians really means.

Hala yek khoordeh bekhandim...

‫چو ایران نباشد، تن من مباد

Dear Niloufar, The 7 demands,

I respectfully disagree, and believe Ahmadnejad will get the best deal for Iran in any negotiation. AND the west in particular US HAS TO and WILL accept a nuclear Iran, so better have the toughest negotiator on our side.

I also do not even like demands No.1-5 of the 7 points demands you listed, beside the fact that I believe it will be rejected on good grounds anyway. 

My demand would be instead:

1. instaed of having Khamenei replaced as supreme leader because he's not a fair supreme leader, the entire idea of supreme leader should be re-examined as the country is becoming more secure against foreign threats, and as Iranian democracy is proving itself to enter a new phase of maturation which would not need a supervision to keep it in the right path. I think time is ripe to question that particular feature of the Islamic Republic, not a particular leader, but the whole concept. At least let's negotiate its roles and try to limit its vast powers. One can demand new legal limits on the post NOW.

2-3-4-5 I totally disagree with. I never understood the fascination of people with Montazeri whom I personally consider a semi-idiot. I think the charm some people find in him is just his opposition to regime, not something that he personally is.

Instead of these items, I believe there must be made a grand bargain on some of the central issues that the opposition demanded. women's right on top of it. It should be argued that 13 million people did not just like Mousavi for his looks, their demands must be addressed as if in a coallition of different factions. Thus their specific demand on improved women's right must be put forward immediately in the next government with specifics written into law, regarding divorce, inheritance, or more  lax dress code. Same with student freedom in universities.

6-7 I agree with completely, and must be implemented immediately also. However I don't be delusional to think that some kind of riot control won't happen.

Many Iranians visiting Iranian.com are from LA and I hope they would remember the 1992 Rodney King riots which led to 58 citizens killed. That civil unrest sure didn't casue an entire change of the United State government, but certain concrete progreess with regards to people's demand were made.

Let's not waste the blood of those youngsters in Iran, and the enthusiasm of MILLIONS who hoped for a change.

NP

‫

I’ve nothing against someone’s freedom of speech. Jaleho is free to post blogs and say what she thinks as she does it frequently here, I didn’t intervene in her last or other blogs . BUT there is a huge difference between kharkardan and thinking. Don’t you think so

‫چو ایران نباشد، تن من مباد

Mahrnaz jan,

Thanks again, and NO, I won't flag any comment, in fact I like very much for the ugly comments to remain! When all emotions are cooled off, it is very useful to see what idiots have said, and it is very useful to keep these comments, even for them.

And speaking of raw nerves that you mentioned in your previous posts, I really did not mean to be "triumphant" soon after Ahmadinejad win. I have been having that "triumphant" attitude few months after his LAST election when he broke the seals on uranium enrichment facilities and re-started Iran's nuclear program, and succeeded. That's why I voted for him the first time, I have been saying for along time that I believe that was the central platform of Ahmadinejad not other things attributed as the main issues. That's why I was sure that he would get the votes of not only all of those who voted for him for a reason similar to mine, but all the others who actually saw Iran succeed in uranium enrichment and space technology would simply add to the votes he got in his first term. Add to that, an the incumbent always has a huge advantage to a first time candidate. To me the win was crystal clear way before the final count, and I have had that 'triumphant' tune which admittedly can be ugly, long before any talk of election.

Besides,  I truly found this election historical and fantastic, in particular in the light of the open debates,and was excited about it. But really not becasue of an Ahmadinejad win, but as I have wrote in that 'triumphant blog' mainly becasue of the huge turnout. In fact, had Mousavi won with such a turnout, I still would have been happy as I stated many times also. For me, so far as Khatmi who was known internationally for having made a deal to stop Iran's nuclear program, went out and Mousavi announced similar nuclear policies to Ahmadinejad, really that was an OK for a Mousavi win. except that I felt more comfortable because Ahmadinejad has already proved himself in the issue that is of outmost imprtance to me. Also, I was sure that he won't make any clandestine deals to give it up, I was not all that certain of the others. Yet, either candidate with such a turnout was a clear victory for Iranian people, internationally, and internally.

Finally, I also had the same enthusiasm for Obama's victory, and wrote an excited blog right after his election too. It is not meant to gloat, it is a reflection of the excitement of somehting you have been waiting for , and the expression of my opinion on it.