Great article, Brad. As you point out, the best way to be certain of the accuracy of the results is by requiring the votes to be cast on paper and counted in public at the precincts on election night. Of course, if our country returned to conducting elections that quaint old way again, then it would be virtually impossible to ignore the will of the voters by continually encroaching on our civil rights, engaging in unnecessary wars, bailing out banksters, etc., and stay in office.

Unfortunately, it seems that most of those who hold power right now don't want to improve the accuracy and reliability of elections in the U.S. for some reason, and naturally, our “news” media continues to censor the truth that our votes are counted in secret by computers with no one, and often no way of, checking to make sure that those computers counted accurately on election day.

Fortunately, the “news” media couldn’t resist covering the Iranian “election,” and this coverage is bound to wake a few more people up especially since our “elected” leaders have taken so many widely unpopular actions over the last few years. Hey, maybe we need go to war to restore democracy in Iran? That might wake a few people up.

The big question is whether enough people can face reality, demand action, and continue the pressure long enough for it to make a difference.

Certainly, Brad and most of his readers can face reality, and Brad and many others have taken action to spread the real news about problems with elections in America. However, even with these continued efforts, most people remain completely clueless or unwilling to believe that American elections have been stolen.

Of course, most people tend to want to believe that they are free and that as long as they work hard and do the right thing, everything will be just fine. Yet, Goethe said, "None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." While Votaire said, "It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere." Moreover, Harriet Tubman said, "I freed thousands of slaves. I could have freed thousands more if they had known they were slaves." So, will the sheeple wake up and demand action or will they foolishly cling to the belief that our elections are fair and reliable and everything is just fine here in the land of the “free”?

Furthermore, when it comes to action, unfortunately, most of the reform organizations do not demand reform and most of the few who do realize the need for reforms do not take any actions other than donating to some pseudo “reform” organizations and sending a few emails about election integrity news to a few of their contacts. Will anyone take to the streets like the people of Iran? Would enough people even put in one day’s work to help restore democracy?

What can the few of us who can face reality, want to preserve our ability to vote bad leaders out of office, and will take action do? I’ve got an idea, and if you want to know what it is, see How to Stop Election Theft and How Not to Stop Election Theft?

If anyone still foolishly thinks that we still have the power to control our government through elections, ask yourself whether you would trust anyone to count our votes in secret, and then see what has happened now that our votes are counted in secret by reading Have American Elections Really Been Stolen? – The Proof It was a Top Scoop on Scoop for several days. See it at http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0810/S00428.htm

If anyone thinks that our government still follows the rule of law or that it wouldn’t cover up election fraud, see Would Congressional Democrats Cover Up Neo-Con Election Fraud? No Way, Right?!?! This article was also a Top Scoop on Scoop for several days. See it at http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0811/S00030.htm

At least two things in the fight for election integrity are certain. As things get worse, more people will wake up and join in the fight to restore democracy, and Brad Friedman will continue to work to expose the truth and push for reform. I hope that you support his efforts.

Yes, quite right. Elections are matters of life and death. Not only should they be pristine and fair, but the people we vote for should be voted into a system where they can't just turn around and ignore our collective will.

However, I think everybody is missing the point of the instability being fomented over the Iranian election. It is an act of war. It is being sung through the towers of liberal self-righteousness in such a manner as to vilify the leadership of Iran possibly quite enough to prepare us to support military aggression by those who are still pulling the strings for destabilizing the Middle East.

Obama is performing beyond their wildest dreams, and this covert operation is paying huge dividends. It isn't really about elections, in this case, guys. It's about American Empire.

So, while I, of course, find your inspiration here quite lucid and moving, right this very now kids in Iran are risking and giving their lives so the neocons' plan can play out unimpeded by their leadership. How do we even deserve free and fair elections when we are this heedless of human lives, this gung-ho to start another war?

Well said Brad and 99.

99 said:

this covert operation is paying huge dividends.

This "covert operation" that you allege and/or believe to be a "covert operation", of course.

It may be. But also may not be. Our speculation doesn't actually matter either way. For more, please read article above.

Fuck off, Brad.

I'm not speculating.

I'm not kidding.

It's not alleged when you've seen the same media fuckwits shit all over people time and time again Brad, it's fucking obvious, all you need to do is watch the news and see how they are taking every opportunity they can right now to portray the Iranian government as dictatorial and oppressive, no doubt to further ratchet up a reason for starting a war with them. The same assholes that bent over backwards in 2004 to avoid even CONSIDERING that election might have been fixed are now engaged in a collective circle jerk to bemoan all the same problems in the iranian election. It's a real nice touch how they describe this Mousavi guy as some kind of progressive hero of the iranian youth when the truth of the matter is that he comes from the same warmongering neocon mossad cia fascist fuckheads that have been raping the world and it's people for the last God knows how many years.

At least now I know why "twittering" has been jammed down my throat for the last 6 months or so.

(since there's no preview, I'll assume this get's mangled)

Officials in Iran have made it clear, if you don't like corruption in
government, shut up or we'll beat, gas, arrest and kill you. Where
have we seen this tactic before? DNC, RNC?, WTO?, McArthur Park?

Iran's censorship?

We'll lock up your reporters, "beat the charge, Not the ride." Nice
fascist strategy. Just ask Amy Goodman, and friends. Or are they now
on the terrorist watch list we are not allowed to see? Do we become
affiliated with terrorists by caring? Why is this list so secret? Why
was a senator on it in the first place?

And for those reporters who escape, government sponsored jamming of
signals, sever telecommunications, spy on communications, interdict,
raid, arrest. These tactics are already occurring in the USA right
now. Slightly different shades of the same fascist agenda.

In America, instead of having a religious "supreme leader" we have a
non-secular equivalent of a power structure and ultimate authority
through our various branches and agencies who absolutely control the
official results of our elections.

When I look at Iran, I see a slightly off reflection of ourselves. As
much as I wish, Iran could get it's act together for the prosperity of
it's people who actually want freedom, I have to say, I am more
concerned currently with behavior happening in my own country's
backyard with it's own set of projectile death experiments which
always seem to get bigger and eventually become a proving ground.

If we can't count our votes properly, our constitutional republic will
not survive. It will pretend to have a constitution, or pretend to be
a republic. Our founding fathers are not rolling in their graves
anymore, they're being carefully dug up and EATEN by adept ghouls
using electronics and programming as a weapon, with no honor, liberty
or justice.

Iran is a symptom of what all big governments have transitioned into.

Yeah you can still fill your Harley with a tank of gas and go for a
ride without your papers, but how much longer...? The ghouls have
their finger on the kill switch for our, monetary system, our
communications, and freedom to pursue happiness. Don't kid
yourselves.

I won't even pretend to know what is going on there. The faux outrage from the same folks that stole 2000 election here in US, created 9/11, lied this nation into a war of conquest in Iraq, stole key midterms, 2004, destroyed our constitution, economy...

Need I say more?

So why does anyone want to believe the lying liars in the mainstream media now? Why does anyone want to believe the politicians that do the dirty work here?

Brad - you can't have it both ways. If these same folks are capable of lying about everything else that matters here in the US (and almost everything blogged about here), why are these same lying liars treated like authoritative sources now?

Oh yeah - so you can blog about it.

http://www.virtualp.us/b.../2008/07/KillingJoke.jpg

lol

#10

For the small amount of time, I actually listened to media, I would have to make some obvious notes about several common weapons used.

1. Facts - Can usually be verified by checking against multiple sources for authenticity. Or simply going out yourself and finding out.

2. Lies - Can come from stuff completely made up, or from unreliable sources.

3. Spin - Is the art of taking facts, and presenting them in a way which becomes a lie, incorrect. Non Linear Editing, Specially crafted headlines, choice of dual meaning words, mixing Fact, with Fiction or with speculation. Adding in fear or feel-good can also make it more potent. At the end of the day black is white, up is down, left is right, fast is slow, clean is dirty, closed is open, shut down is sill operational.

Silence - Blacklisted topics, and people.

Errors - typo's, mistakes, etc. Sometimes used as a springboard for spin, or lies. Especially when not responsibly corrected. Example: once the dhs tells and brief's their troops and law enforcement that a "don't tread on me snake t shirt" is worn by terrorists, it sticks in the mind of the ground troops. Even though it's wrong. Even though it was later removed, or redacted. You'll still end up with a 20-30 something packing riot gear, who doesn't know the real meaning behind it.

About all you can do is filter the content you hear from all sources. Don't even trust me, verify it yourself. I've been wrong many times. Once you have a basic understanding of how to filter, you might slowly go back to the sources you have labeled as bad, and just sandbag exposing yourself to what they are saying for predictive clues to future agenda. This is how we find seed stories which are testbeds for starting new laws which remove civil rights or make life less pleasant. Lots of clues here, corporate news site threads, with majority of comments supporting one side of an argument, locking threads, over zealous feedback requiring a privacy invasion/ or a registration work flow which delays comments until they are irrelevant because of the amount of time passed, static stories with no feedback or dynamic content at all, Search engine placement, You've read things like this, you know them when you see them, or perhaps you'll be pissed off when you see them. The tricks are endless and can't really be stopped.

Where corporate media becomes a dangerous cult (As I have argued many times here) is where you start getting 8's, 9's and 10's filled in on this chart. (http://www.neopagan.net/ABCDEF.html)

The question is, how should we deal with a dangerous cult?

(a cult don't have to be religious)

It is obvious from the many different reports that there are serious problems in Iran. Just what happened, time may tell, but whether or not the media tells us is another story.

Phil has some good points. The only point I am trying to make is that for Americans to immediately jump on this story, claiming that the dominant MSM version has to be correct, is garbage.

Especially if the folks that are jumpin' on the story have shown in the past that they are fully aware and understand how the msm, powerbrokers, pundits, and politicians have lied to us repeatedly about treason, war crimes, and crimes against humanity.

I have a question. I'm in PA and under 18 years old. Last November, I wanted to video tape the votes being counted at one polling place. Unfortunately, I couldn't because you have to be 17 to get a certificate to watch the counting. Is there any good reason for that? Is there any reason why you even need a certificate to watch the counting?

Yes, Ross

The neocon/repug gestapo doesn't want to have to beat and arrest youths when they are stealing the vote.

Watching the shenanigans that brought us dur chimpfurher and the criminal cabal behind that administration is not a pretty site.

Brad,

Election Fraud did not begin with the 2000 theft.
It has been ENDEMIC since 1968.

http://www.geocities.com...ectionmodel/TheCatch.htm

In 1968, Nixon defeated Humphrey by 500,000 recorded votes. But 6 million were uncounted (net of stuffed). HHH probably had 4.5 million of them. So he won the True Vote by 2.5 million.

In 1988, Bush defeated Dukakis by 7 million votes.
But there were 10.6 million uncounted (net of stuffed). Dukakis may very well have won the True Vote.

In 2000, Gore won the popular vote by 540,000.
But there were 185,000 uncouunted votes in Florida and 5.4 million (net of stuffed) nationwide. Gore won the True Vote by at least 3 million.

In 2004, Bush won the recorded vote by 3.0 million. But there were 3.5 million uncounted votes (net of stuffed). And 5-7 million votes were electronically switched from Kerry to Bush. Kerry won the popular vote by 10 million.

There were 5 million returning PHANTOM Bush voters according to the Final National Exit Poll which was FORCED TO MATCH THE RECORDED VOTE.

In 2008, according to the Final NEP, there were 12 million returning Bush 2000 voters and just 3 million returning Kerry voters. Even if Bush won by the 3.0 million recorded in 2004 (who believes it?) how could there be 9 million more returning Bush voters than Kerry voters in 2008?

The Final 2008 NEP had to have 6 MILLION PHANTOM returning Bush voters to FORCE A MATCH to the 9.5 million recorded Obama vote margin.

Obama won the True vote by over 20 million!

Who the hell are we to be critical of the Iran election?

99 thinks this is a neo con ploy to put a western thinker in power

the folks that think pres ack stole the election have some physical "evidence"(3 hours to hand count 36 million ballots,100s of thousands protesting,ect)

maybe it is both....70 % of irans population is under 30 years old so it is easy to believe if the challenger promised more freedoms and to not constantly tick off the western world and less rigid religous policy, he might of won the vote,and it might of been electronically stolen the same way they do it here(minimizing the vote count in the cities and expanding it in the rural areas)

the real point is BECAUSE THE VOTE WAS COUNTED IN SECRET WE WILL NEVR KNOW

No, Karen, I think it's the fruit of a concerted neocon effort to stoke discontent and create the kind of destabilization and vivid illustration of repression that will create our consent for an invasion of Iran.

If we were still in control of Iran, we would know nothing at all of any mass uprisings there, but since they need us to think Obama is a saint for relieving them of the cruel clerics who make them wear scarves against their will, we are getting the full treatment.

Mission accomplished.

I'd also think that people here, at least, might grok that it could very possibly not have been any Iranian rigging the vote count, if it was rigged.

Another Joe @ 10 said:

Brad - you can't have it both ways. If these same folks are capable of lying about everything else that matters here in the US (and almost everything blogged about here), why are these same lying liars treated like authoritative sources now?

Who has treated them "like authoritative sources" here? I've reported (somewhat) what they said, but with the larger picture reported as "don't trust what they say!" There is no reason to "trust" anyone when it comes to elections and democracy. The BALLOTS tell the story *if* we're able to count them!

Everything else mere speculation, which should have no part in democracy/elections.

Ross Levin @ 14 asked:

I have a question. I'm in PA and under 18 years old. Last November, I wanted to video tape the votes being counted at one polling place. Unfortunately, I couldn't because you have to be 17 to get a certificate to watch the counting. Is there any good reason for that? Is there any reason why you even need a certificate to watch the counting?

First, thanks for giving a damn, Ross, and trying to do your civil duty in participating! There is no good reason in the world why anybody should need a "certificate" to watch the counting. That's absolutely absurd. That they add an age limit to that is even more absurd.

I hope you do what you can to change that ridiculous rule. Last I checked, you're still a citizen no matter how old you are.

Please keep me up to date if you're able to get anywhere towards changing that rule to a) allow anyone to watch, and b) remove the ridiculous requirement for a certificate!

If you're not in touch with them already, please reach out to Marybeth at VotePA to see if she may be able to work with you on such an effort! Tell her I sentcha. And thanks again!

Gos @ 8 said:

It's not alleged when you've seen the same media fuckwits shit all over people time and time again Brad, it's fucking obvious,

No. It's still just "alleged". Sorry. If you have any documented, conclusive evidence to prove your case, feel free to share it. Beyond that, you're just guessing. An "informed" guess, perhaps, but a guess nonetheless.

Always hatin' on me Brad, always hatin'. Fine, you're right, it's not proof, but it's also pretty damned obvious.

Brad - all we really know is that there is unrest in Iran, that some polls indicated we would see Ahmadinejad win big, and that the US has a long history of destabilizing that country and others in the reason.

We also know that some people in OH went to JAIL instead of complying with laws to provide minimal accountability for the outcome in 2004.

But even more important, we know that the mainstream media, pundits, and politicians have lied to us about stolen elections, terrorist attacks at home, wmd in Iraq, and almost any other issue that can be exploited to further the looting and destruction of our democracy.

I'm shocked and dismayed at the number of Bradblog commenters in these two threads viciously, venomously defending their certainty on the unknowable. Insults and expletives over what amounts to pure conjecture.

This is the worst possible time to see this terrible trend to see from my favorite blog; comes dangerously close to undermining the foundation of it's principles.

One correction: it's on purpose! It's not "needlessly" imperiling democracy, it's on purpose.

Jeannie

Maybe this will help you understand my point:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GRwUZ-u6KFo

This really is a desperately dangerous situation.

Sigh. 99 ~ At the risk of getting you all riled up again, you’re being a true ass. The core of our differences in this thread (and the last) have nothing to do with addressing the potential U.S. involvement in the events surrounding and leading up to the Iranian election. I’m not disputing the what-you-may-be-right-about’s vs. the what-I-can-not-prove-is-wrong’s.

I wouldn’t be at all surprised to find out that it all started at the C.I.A. (on a cold, cold wet day when the sun did not shine and it was too wet to play) but I don’t need you to keep yelling that at me as your only narrative. You are vehemently defending a position that I never directly challenged outside of (admitted) speculation and 'poor use of comedic phrasing without proper quotations which inadvertently lent my comment a racist, first-person narrative feel instead of the not-at-all-racist, objective third person narrative I intended.'
So sue me.

Nor am I interested in challenging your position that there is little difference between the two leading Iranian candidates. Your valid concern that Moussavi is being dangerously miscast in the eyes of the world as a Iran’s moderate reformist is shared now by...Obama! (How ‘bout that? You and Obama finally agree on something! Sit up, world, and take note!)
http://tinyurl.com/m86zmu

I’m not-at-all chaffed by these non-disputable facts, 99, the ones you seem to be arguing aren’t (or weren’t) getting any play because they subvert the CIA's dominant line of propeganda – but, in fact, they are. Your links are way behind the tweets.

In fact, much of the information you cited is being bountifully espoused, explained, discussed, and deftly distilled, by both traditional newspapers, blogs, and citizens using social networking sites combining in unprecendented ways to be the interactive media. But none ever as better, more a master than our last-livin’ Swiftian, Steven Colbert. He always gets it just right...
http://www.colbertnation.../june-16-2009/teh-runoff
and
http://www.colbertnation...f---karim-sadjadpour

As you are so fond of so often pointing out, 99, there’s not much of a difference between the two leading candidates here in the States, either. That’s not the point. I don’t give a flying, flapping, rat-crap which bad candidate the voters choose: I just want to know for certain that the bad candidate with the most legitimate votes is declared the winner. The rest is fodder for another day. No regular reader of this blog needs me to remind them how one country’s stolen election can fast become the whole world’s tragic problem.

I feel confident we agree on this: that a self governing people may evolve, self-correct, demand better candidates, or create a new system of government that is more likely to achieve those ends - is entirely a secondary matter to how the people determine and certify that consensus. And it’s clear after viewing the videos we’ve seen this week, broadcast by Iranian citizen journaliss who are risking their lives to document these events, that the Iranians far more sophisticated than we are...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CLo_6Qp1eTk
and
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AMVIwVFFDKs

They are teaching us something supremely human. On the matters of what is best for them, I will leave it for them to decide.

So at the risk of getting hammered by you once again: what you seem to be gleefully and blatantly dead wrong about, at least within the context of this scuffle, is a lot. And your tone has become oddly shrill in light all your wrong-ness.

Sigh. I'm going to say this one more time. The tweets are riddled with BALD FACED LIES that serve only to prep Americans for aggression against Iran. I've gone to a good deal of trouble to document my position extensively and it's ongoing. So if you would care to quit breaking your teeth with your kneejerks bashing you in the chin so hard, maybe you'd think about doing some studying?

Here is a good start.

And, yes, wouldn't it be nice if we left Iran to decide! They did decide, but Mr. George W. Rafsanjani doesn't like it.

...
Insisting that you know beyond a shadow of a doubt that Ahmadinejad won? C’mon, now. You’re holding on tighter than Khamenei.I’ve read every link you’ve posted and a million more you didn’t, 99, and you are now among a dwindling minority still claiming to know this definitively except and few folks like these insensitive buggers, one Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann, who have managed for the first time in my (almost) young life to give me PTSD flashbacks and nightmares with just a headline - the most brutal in recent memory:

“Ahmadinejad won. Get Over It.”
http://www.politico.com/.../stories/0609/23745.html

You’ll forgive me if I didn’t get around to reading this one, 99. Maybe because their clever turn of historical rude-i-tude made me throw up a little bit in my mouth.

Nico Pitney(who has been doing a bang-up job live blogging the events in Iran for Huffington Post, here:
http://www.huffingtonpos...ions-viole_n_215189.html)
summed it up beautifully:
“...I cannot find an argument in there that could possibly justify that headline."

I’m sure you will have an opinion on it. I’m sure you will let me know what it is.

(Note: if you have changed your position on this particular, and I have missed it, I respectfully retract this particular post in advance. I tried to be very careful to follow your posts before posting this, and other than a small qualifying “if” you wrote somewhere, I don’t think you have.)

Mullah 99 writes:

I'm going to say this one more time. The tweets are riddled with BALD FACED LIES that serve only to prep Americans for aggression against Iran. I've gone to a good deal of trouble...quit breaking your teeth...knee jerk...

Charming. For someone who said she was “disengage(herself) from the discussion” you sure have come back swinging hard with nothing but a fist of fat air.

Yes, your “Twitter conspiracy” that only you are describing as a "conspiracy" – I never envisioned I would be acting the advocate for Twitter, ever. ** But you (and others) keep being so dead wrong about it you’re giving me a goiter. So, with groans of annoyance at the number of thoughts spinning me awake at this hour, once more battling back at your lack of curiosity and seething condescension, I continue write this up for the Bradblog Archival / Historical record. A token meant in good faith (no matter how it reads) so that when future generations Google “Twitter’s unprecedented impact on World Politics in 2009” for their high-school term paper, they don’t think the most reputable, smartest election news blog in the U.S. was so out of the loop that few involved bothered to even mark it at all. That the people who risked everything tirelessly working for free and transparent elections in the U.S. missed out on THEIR moment to do the same...

Or worse that they find these pages riddled with glib characterizations like the one above of #iranelection participants world-wide as being naïve, gullible puppets; stooges inadvertantly working to advance the C.I.A.'s agenda...

No one is implying that BAD PEOPLE can't access and hack and troll and manipulate social networking sites, 99. But to imply that Twitter is any more or less prone to hacking and trolling than, say, BRADBLOG, is (as you of all people should know) is most disingenuous and suggests to me you don't know the first thing about user interface technology...

Have you even looked at a Twitter feed to see how it works?

Not that I should, in your words, stoop to "...try to give you a little primer, here, but you clearly haven't read any of my links" either.

For someone who said she was “removing (herself) from the discussion” you sure have come back swinging hard with nothing but air.

I started my Twitter account when I was working with Video the Vote in November,2008. My hope was to see it used

(cont'd)

...exactly this way. It failed us, mostly. Either it wasn't ready, or we weren't. As it turns out, we never had enough interest or momentum for it to take off and fulfill the critical role in communications and logistics that it has proven itself capable of this week.) **

NYU Professor Clay Shirky:

"I'm always a little reticent to draw lessons from things still unfolding, but it seems pretty clear that... this is it. The big one. This is the first revolution that has been catapulted onto a global stage and transformed by social media. I've been thinking a lot about the Chicago demonstrations of 1968 where they chanted 'the whole world is watching.' Really, that wasn't true then. But this time it's true ... and people throughout the world are not only listening but responding. They're engaging with individual participants, they're passing on their messages to their friends, and they're even providing detailed instructions to enable web proxies allowing Internet access that the authorities can't immediately censor. That kind of participation is really extraordinary.
Traditional media operates as source of information not as a means of coordination. It can't do more than make us sympathize. Twitter makes us empathize. It makes us part of it. Even if it's just retweeting, you're aiding the goal that dissidents have always sought: the awareness that the ouside world is paying attention.”

********************
What you are missing, and for some reason beligerently unwilling to consider, is that Twitter is proving it's capable of self-evolving. It can (we can) rise to instantly, collectively problem solve.

Just like any war of information. Do you think Brad just sprang forth fully formed? Did he show up fully vetted by Walter Cronkite and a URL and a grant? No, Brad earned us. We vetted him over time, and as he proved to be consistently first and right, we collectively confirmed him.

This is the new acting model for user generated news. The track has changed, 99, and you're a champ unwilling to leave the barn. Why? Did you have this same mistrust and reaction to the blogs in the 90's?...

..."I've gone to a good deal of trouble to document my position extensively and it's ongoing..."

Yes, thank you that reminds me. I meant to ask:

What was the deal with the link you posted re: Twitter’s brainwashing of Iranian Youth? Did I miss something? The account about how a poor young Iranian girl is feeling almost good about how the (the U.S. led overthrow of legitimate regime via populist') revolution has demolished the rigid social structure in Iran; allowing her to loosen her headscarf and a tad shout “death to the dictator” like any normal teenager her age?...
This is dangerous, how?
...Because she might brush up against middle class boys during an all night rooftop round of yelling "God is greatest"?
...Because she’s selling out her parents’ religion so she can feel normal enough to show her ankles? Because she's in danger of becoming a suicide bomber for equal rights?

And why - why with all the compelling video we’ve seen from Iran since last week – why did this one make your radar as the most compelling? How is this evidence of Twitter-mischief?

Nico Pitney's "coverage" has been outright crap from start to finish. That fact, coupled with the fact that it's headlined 24/7 for a week just about constitutes proof that you're being propagandized into pulp... and doing your share to megaphone it.

Lots safer to foment revolution in Iran than here, from here, ain't it?

The point is: whether or not there was election fraud, especially since Iranian elections sort of start out rigged, our avid support for this destabilization effort in progress is paving the way for an attack on Iran. This is way over and above the fact that Ahmadinjad almost certainly won, even by that huge margin. Bottom line: the integrity of the election is a secondary consideration when you put it up next to the acts of war we committed to create this scene and the actual war the American sheeple will be so much more inclined to support because of this apocalyptic stink out of something that is not our business.

Ahmadinejad and Khamenei have done a fantastic job of keeping us out of a war, of keeping us out of their oil fields, for whatever other things might not be as wonderful about them

I have laid down a firewall of support for these assertions, but evidently you can't concentrate beyond sound bites. That Leverett piece you dismiss off the strength of being offended at its title is packed full of facts you ought not ignore. Also linked are many other articles and audios and videos packed full of facts. But that would take a few hours now to assimilate, and how many ruh-heally impor-hor-tant tweets would you miss while taking the trouble to understand the actuality of it well enough to stop agitating to hand Halliburton its hotly desired regime change?

Do you know Thing One about the billionaire snake, Rafsanjani? Do you understand what he has to do with this? Do you get that we have had hit teams and destabilization experts and agents provocateurs and paid terrorist groups in there working on this for the last four years? Are you so pumped full of tweets you can't look at documented facts that ALL point to this being the payoff for the hundreds of millions of dollars spent supporting these thugs and assassins? Have you ANY clue about the hell we've put them through or any notion of the hell we're trying to bring back down on them?

Do you know that the MEK is very strongly supporting this whole "green revolution" thing and agitating like mad to bring down the theocrats who murdered so many of their brothers in the Revolution? They HATE Mousavi, but they're agitating for him because he can help Rafsanjani bring them down, and because the United States is paying them. Rafsanjani wants to privatize all Iran's assets, put in free market capitalism, make friends with Western corporations, and he's trying to do it with the help of Mousavi and our covert ops.

We miss the trillions we'd be making if they hadn't kicked out our puppet, the Shah, who was the most brutal dictator.

Do you know what we did to their democracy in 1953? Or is that just, like, so last millennium?

Have you got the first part of a clue about the agony you are helping to bring down on Iranians... and everyone else?

Do you think Iranian girls have it so tough? Ice cream cones on the street in Tehran, vamping for the camera in a Tehran restaurant, on the streets of Tehran in winter, on a stroll by the Caspian, and, horrors, shopping for cosmetics.... Damn those mean old mullahs! They force their women to wear gunny sacks and beekeeper suits! What matter a nuclear conflagration when a girl can't walk around in public with her pubes showing! People in Britain are calling this "The Gucci Rebellion" and it fits, it really, really fits. Maybe when I'm not dead on my feet I can dig up the slide shows of scenes of Iran that don't look anything like your ideas that they're all wrapped in chadors. They are emancipated women, well educated and in all the major professions. The more religious women, BY CHOICE wear the chadors. If their daughters chafe at these strictures, they are removed as soon as they are of age, just as it has always been with parents and children everywhere.

And, excuse me, for assuming that clearing up our misunderstanding was either going to lead to more discussion or end it. But, since it seems you just want to fill up this thread for posterity with more propaganda, I'll leave the floor completely open to you.

If I’m an accidental propagandist, you’re a paranoid alarmist. Both are dangerous and I don’t think either one of us means to incite each other with those base allegations.
Or maybe you do.
You seem incapable of respectful debate, lately.
(Were you always a name-calling, intolerant absolutist and I just didn't notice it because I usually agree with you?)

Spare me the martyrdom complex. It should not have escaped you that I, too, am working overtime to settle this dispute, as you’ve become like extended family to me over the years and I have (had) nothing but respect for you. This is why your truly nasty tone towards me (and others) has affected me enough to keep me awake at night, all efforts working to find common ground only subjects me to more insults. This is a bad way to comport yourself.

The FLOOR? Shame on you for insinuating that by responding your charges I am actually trying to run away with the thread. I'm not the one being utterly disrespectful, and if you scroll up, the record will show that you re-engaged me, 99.
I would like nothing more than for this to end.

MY POINT IS: This is a bad way to comport yourself, 99.

...is it because you hate Obama so much?