View From Tehran

KT, Any news from Joe?

tantef: Thanks for asking. Not that I have seen in the traffic that is available to me. Also, commenters should be aware (and as I’m sure they suspect) that there is a lot of rumor out there as to what is happening and who is behind it. You can see much of it on Twitter. However, given the situation, it is very difficult for news organizations to confirm much of it to the level where they feel comfortable reporting it.

I’m heading over the CNN in a few hours. It will be interesting to see what the chaos is like in their shop.

At the very least, hopefully this sends a message to the neo-conservatives here and in Israel that the majority of Iranian people want change and are not their enemy.

So, did anyone expect a new Democracy being born?

@kt,
You might wqant to adjust your link. I don’t know who ‘stumbleupon.com’ is, but I’d prefer that they not sit between me and the ‘Time.com’ article.
.
Having said that, I want to second mmchampion’s point. When we work hard to demonize countries without regard to the makeup of their contents, we engage in a common but avoidable evil.
.
There’s no doubt that much of what went wrong at Abu Ghraib was due to the inability to separate out attiudes toward a regime from those towards its citizens…..

thanks, PD. i had noticed that too when i first put this up at 7 a.m., but there wasn’t another link. wonder what that was all about. anyway, it’s fixed now.

That is wack.

[...] View From Tehran – Swampland – TIME.com By Shakespeare in GA View From Tehran – Swampland – TIME.com [...]

[...] here and [...]

.
mmchampion Says:
Sunday, June 14, 2009 at 8:41 am
.
At the very least, hopefully this sends a message to the neo-conservatives here and in Israel that the majority of Iranian people want change and are not their enemy.

.
I’m going to guess that neo-cons here and in Israel are already certain that Iran is their enemy, and needs bombing. Preferably by the U.S., of course. So they’re no doubt happy with the election result.
.
Here’s some commentary on NYT coverage of Iran’s nuclear program:
.
“As has been reported in previous reports, the Agency continues to verify the non-diversion of declared nuclear material in Iran.”
.
Okay, so much for Iran being in complete compliance with its NPT-related IAEA Safeguards Agreement.
.
…as a consequence of the deliberate refusal by Bush-Cheney-Bolton to allow the Brits-French-Germans to even acknowledge – much less accept — the March 23, 2005 confidential offer by the Iranians to go far beyond even the terms of the Additional Protocol in return for security guarantees by the Brits-French-Germans that Bush-Cheney-Bolton wouldn’t be allowed do unto Iran what they had been allowed to do to Iraq, the Iranian Parliament not only refused to ratify the Additional Protocol, but directed Iranian authorities to henceforth comply strictly with only the provisions of the original NPT-related Safeguards Agreement.
.
Hence, ElBaradei’s frequent lament that Iran is no longer implementing provisions of the Additional Protocol, including the “early provision of design information.” Your quarrel, ElBaradei, is with Bush-Cheney-Bolton and the Brits-French-Germans, not the Iranians.

.
~

Thanks so much for linking to this report, KT.

This is as big as Tienanmen Square. Yes Twitter has to be taken with a grain of salt. At the same time though, it is providing leads for journalists to follow up on. Even in the glory days of foreign bureaus, when could you get real time live updates from the 10th largest city in Iran.
.
Perhaps this will be an indication of things to come.

Here’s a report from Salon.com that seems to confirm the observations of Hahid Siamdoust.

Oh, and KT tell Joe not to write a book in Iran called General Election Colors about a feisty president who threw an election and is a bit loopy. They may get touchy about it.

Prof Cole makes the case that the situation does not significantly change the Obama Administration’s Iran strategy.
.
One aspect driving Prof Cole’s suspicions of fraud is this:

Nor is it plausible, as claimed, that Ahmadinejad won a majority of votes in the capital, Tehran, from which he hails.

, but this seems odd, given that Ahmadinejad is the former mayor of Tehran. Is it really that unlikely that a majority of Tehranis voted for him?

As the news unfolds we may end up having to the the changes neede in Iranian to the Iranians. The US has to get into the habit of dealing with the govt in Tehran even if its legitimacy is open to question. Our Western reporters have had lots of access to the opposition and much of the report reflects that. JK may have something to say about the rural vote.

KT: saw you on CNN. I don’t watch State of the U most Sundays. I was struck by the people talking about health. Everyone was either the recipient of company or government paid health care. But there was no one on to talk about the public funding option. Instead of having lunch with three guests in various US locales perhaps King should sit down with three people without health care or who have had to go into bankruptcy over their bills. It may add another dimension to the discussion.

Extremely high youth turnout would suggest to me that Ahmadinejad would have a tough time winning a majority in Tehran. When you consider the economic woes on top of that, it’s pretty incredible that he would win an urban center, even one he was mayor of before.
.
A plurality I can buy. The whole issue seems to be that they were too brazen. A controversial president in bad economic times does not win a 4 way race with 62% of the vote. This even tops the landslide LBJ had over Goldwater in 64 here in a two way race. If they claimed a 51 to 39 to 6 to 4 race, it could at least be barely plausible.
.
To suggest that Moussavi lost badly, in his own region, with his own ethnic group was just really dumb of them.

Oops: sorry: “to leave the changes needed in Iran to..”

I think I have decided that the race between Ahmadinejad and Moussavi would be like having a choice between Pat Robertson and Rick Warren and being very offended when the election was stolen by Mr. Goofy.
.
They did a dumb thing here. Moussavi would have extended the revolution, by putting a nicer faces and a few modern touches to it. Hubris…

Perhaps they’re claiming the wide margin not to simply insure their victory but to make it unmistakenly clear to every observer that the ‘elction’ does not, in fact matter…..

Spectacular link. Front-lines journalism at its best. Thanks for passing it along, KT.
-
I think that the best case scenario is the regimes’s loss of legitimacy among Iranians, and the worst-case scenario is Tiananmen II. The regime has as much to do with Islamic revolution as China does with Marxist revolution. They’re a ruthless, cornered animal, unafraid of using force against its citizens. I don’t see any way that the election is ever made to count.
-
I very much hope that I’m wrong.

Thus far, everyone appears to be drawing conclusions on mere hearsay and circumstantial evidence. While there certainly appears to be a great deal of confusion and questionable irregularities, I am hardly convinced by the emotional rhetoric of those engaging in violent rioting in the streets. Verifiable facts are nearly non-existent at this point. Allegations are all based on the expected outcome not conforming to the official outcome; overlooked, of course, is the fact that many Ahmadinejad supporters may well be hesitant to admit their votes during this period of unrest and violence; jamming of radio and tv signals and blocking of internet access, could simply be a misguided attempt to quell violent dissent, not to hide the truth, but to prevent false propaganda from inciting emotional responses from the youth.
.
I am not saying that any of this is accurate or verifiable in its own right, but we should at least consider these possibilities rather than make a leap to conclusions based on pure speculation and emotion. Calmer heads prevail…

Lets really examine this…
What would Khamenei have to gain by rigging this election? Considering that Iranian policy would be unaltered under a Mousavi victory as the President is simply the mouthpiece of the Ayatollah, why would Khamenei care who wins? In fact, it would easier for Iran if Mousavi were victorious, because he presents a softer image and thus lessens the capacity of the west to demonize Iran. Certainly it would problematic for Netanyahu to continue down his warmongering path with Mousavi representing Iran on the international stage. So, again, why would Khamenei engage in fraud to keep in power a man who is problematic for Iran’s image?
.
Iran is a country where is is plausible that those speaking out would be shut down, as in the case of news outlets, but for propagating falsehoods, not for speaking the truth. In the US those who present falsehoods are ignored, it is those who speak the truth that are silenced or discredited. In Iran, those who speak the truth are generally allowed to, while those spreading rumors and lies are the targets of government censorship. It just doesn’t make any sense if the allegations of rigging the election are true. It serves no purpose for Khamenei.

“In the US those who present falsehoods are ignored”
Not even close. Look at the legs the birth certificate, socialist ties and paling around with terrorists lies exhibited. They are not ignored, they become the news that drowns out serious debate. In 2004 we had a candidate that was awarded three Purple Hearts and a friend of Bush bankrolled the Swiftboat Veterans for Truth. Kerry was portrayed as the one who was unpatriotic while a guy who skipped out on his natinal guard service and his five times deferred VP were portrayed as the patriotic ones. I think you got this one backwards. Off to work now.

Sacred-
I am not talking about those types of falsehoods and campaign manipulations. I am talking about government cover-ups. When these allegations are made, and are factually sound, there is usually an attempt to quiet them. When, however, baseless accusations of a government conspiracy are made, usually not much attention is given to the commentary…

KT, Any news from Joe?
-
I was wondering about that as well KT. I hope if things get too heated over there he’ll get to hide out in the Swiss embassy until matters settle or he can be evacuated if necessary.

Iran is a country where is is plausible that those speaking out would be shut down, as in the case of news outlets, but for propagating falsehoods, not for speaking the truth.
-
You have this exactly backwards N-R. Iran does not have a free press and as far as I am aware are not guaranteed a free press under their laws. There have been many instances of journalistic institutions being shut down or harassed by the government (which is a cautious thing to label in Iran as the government there is byzantine and penetrates many parts of their lives) simply for speaking out against the main party line. The mullahs decide what information the people should and should not see, it’s only by leaking and the Internet that Iranians are aware of the life outside of their country.

Yutsano-
You should know that the western media gets its reports from the opposition press in Iran. It is not objective by any means. Therefore, I give little credibility to their assertions that they are unduly shut-down. Iran has a rich history of public protest and opposition press. The Iranian authorities seek to censor those who are willfully propagating lies, but honest oppositional discourse is allowed. Iran, in fact, much more resembles western democracy in its openness than most Muslim states. Contrast it with Egypt or Saudi Arabia for example. I absolutely disagree with your assertion that Iran is a closed-society resembling in North Korea in its isolation from the outside world. You should verify what you read in western press….

KT, hoping to hear Joe is safe as well. A very good time and a very bad time to be a journalist in Iran. Hopefully he’ll get out of there safely with some good stories and an intact hide – taking shots at him is the job of the Swamplanders.

Thank you for the hard work and for the Joe report. Mmchamp. is correct, taking shots at him is our job.

Pierre Tristam has an intriguing piece up:
~
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/06/14-5
~
And GG, who admits he doesn’t know enough to venture an opinion (my own feeling), but makes this solid observation:
~
“In Brazil, if you ask middle class, professional and/or educated Brazilians what they think of President Lula da Silva, you would conclude that he is an intensely despised figure, when — in reality — he is profoundly popular among a majority of Brazilians largely due to the deep support from that country’s poor and under-educated population (much the same way that you’d get vastly disparate responses if, in 2004, you went to Manhattan and then to rural Kansas and solicited opinions of George Bush). Dickey suggests that the same dynamic exists in Iran.”
~
Universally true, urban vs. rural voting patterns (i.e. liberal vs. conservative, to use a tired binary).

http://www.torontosun.com/comment/columnists/eric_margolis/2009/06/14/9791376-sun.html
~
And this is a great take on the elasticity of America’s commitment to “democracy” in the region.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_diaspora
~
Finally, remembering past lectures, here’s a helpful breakdown of the Iranian diaspora. A la Cubans in South Florida, it’d be hardly surprising if perspectives about conditions on the ground or support for this or that political force vary wildly between Iranians ‘over there’ and those who fled or felt compelled to leave the nation behind. Again, this doesn’t mean that someone like Cole isn’t spot-on.

You should know that the western media gets its reports from the opposition press in Iran. It is not objective by any means. Therefore, I give little credibility to their assertions that they are unduly shut-down.
-
So no Western media outlet does any independent fact verification in Iran? Really? They’re all just stenographers for the opposition press? Is Christiane Amanpour reporting with an opposition voice whispering in her ear as she’s talking live on CNN? C’mon man. The Western press often gives conflicting reports as to what is happening in Iran, this is as much true now as what has happened in the past. If they were simple stenographers there would be more or less uniform reporting about the Iranian state and politics.
-
Let’s just declare that we don’t know what’s happening right now beyond Twitter feeds and random phone calls and let the Iranians figure out what future they want on their own.

Finally, remembering past lectures, here’s a helpful breakdown of the Iranian diaspora. A la Cubans in South Florida, it’d be hardly surprising if perspectives about conditions on the ground or support for this or that political force vary wildly between Iranians ‘over there’ and those who fled or felt compelled to leave the nation behind. Again, this doesn’t mean that someone like Cole isn’t spot-on.
-
Here’s why I think this might just be different JC-san: the innediate reaction after the election this time around versus previous Iranian elections. What could possibly have made so many different classes of people react so violently to these results, especially since previous elections were relatively peaceful? I know for a fact the Iranian diasporsa is going to be slanted, but also consider how many of them were willing to vote in this election. There is for sure something big happening here, we’re just not entirely certain what it is yet and the Iranian leadership for now doesn’t want anyone to know about it.

You may well be right Yuts, and that’s why I just threw the ideas out there. I can’t come to any sound conclusions. Just have to continue to read around. I respect Cole and Tristam but they’ve come to v. diff conclusions (thus far). However brilliant/informed they might be, they have built-in biases. Tristam’s view of western views (media and gov’ts alike) may well be very sound, but Cole’s view that a coup did take place may be accurate. If that’s the reality (and we don’t know as yet), I’d hate to allow my own built-in ideological biases get the better of me. One thing is true: when I sort through such debates, anyone who sounds absolutely cocksure is immediately raises my skepticism.

Yutsano-
No, of course there is independent reporting, albeit sporadic. However, my point is that this caricature of an oppressive, closed-society led by an authoritarian Iranian regime that muzzles media outlets at the first whiff of an oppositional view is wholly inaccurate. I tend to believe that the diaspora and many opposition news sources have painted an unrealistic picture of Iranian society and the western media is all too happy to but into these reports, generally, but not unequivocally, without independent verification.
.
I agree, though, that none of us know what has occurred over these past few days. My assessment may well be entirely off base, but it seems irrational for Khamenei to vote-fix this election when he knows that there will be no change to Iranian policy based on who wins this election. Furthermore, it would be in his interest if Mousavi were to win, because he softens Iran’s image and makes it all the more difficult for Israel to justify a strike against Iran. The facts are not in. So we do not know. While it certainly appears that something is amiss, I cannot fathom the benefit Khamenei would obtain from rigging this election…
.

Joe Klein is in Tehran – why haven’t we heard from him at all this weekend. Is he OK?

No, of course there is independent reporting, albeit sporadic. However, my point is that this caricature of an oppressive, closed-society led by an authoritarian Iranian regime that muzzles media outlets at the first whiff of an oppositional view is wholly inaccurate. I tend to believe that the diaspora and many opposition news sources have painted an unrealistic picture of Iranian society and the western media is all too happy to but into these reports, generally, but not unequivocally, without independent verification.
-
I view pretty much all news with a skeptical eye ever since the Iraq occupation. I recognize that may set me in the minority, but to suggest there aren’t reporters out there doing the grunt work and just letting opposition news sources feed them would make the entire press sound like a bunch of Judith Millers, and I think KT would beat you senseless for that.
-
I agree, though, that none of us know what has occurred over these past few days. My assessment may well be entirely off base, but it seems irrational for Khamenei to vote-fix this election when he knows that there will be no change to Iranian policy based on who wins this election. Furthermore, it would be in his interest if Mousavi were to win, because he softens Iran’s image and makes it all the more difficult for Israel to justify a strike against Iran. The facts are not in. So we do not know. While it certainly appears that something is amiss, I cannot fathom the benefit Khamenei would obtain from rigging this election…
-
It’s funny how this whole situation is proving both of our points. NO ONE outside of Iran (and probably quite a few who live inside it) completely understand the ins and outs of the Byzazntine political loyalties that run through the Iranian political system. It’s also tough to divine how much of this complexity is by design or simply just organically grew out of the Revolution. We should both be looking with skeptical eyes but we should at the very least evaluate what comes out of Iran now because right now it’s spotty at best.

“I view pretty much all news with a skeptical eye ever since the Iraq occupation.”
~
I wonder why? Could it have something to do with this?
~
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/
~
And here’s Norman Soloman from around the last time Iran had an election:
~
“Voluntary Amnesia in the Service of War”
~
http://dissidentvoice.org/June05/Solomon0623.htm
~
Sorry, I may hope Joe Klein goes unharmed, but he’s a leading example of this selective contextualization.

Sorry, I may hope Joe Klein goes unharmed, but he’s a leading example of this selective contextualization.
-
I am of the personal conviction that you can dislike a man’s works but still have respect for the man JC-san. If that’s some weird twist on “Love thy neighbor” so be it. Either way the silence out of the JK camp is at the very least disconcerting.

Speaking of traffic, Sully’s blog is absolutely BOGGED right now. My guess is his site has been linked to over and over for the latest information about Iran so he’s getting trafficked very heavily and it’s starting to hit the Atlantic’s servers hard. At least that’s been my experience every time I’ve been trying to check in there lately.

Yutsano-
I view pretty much all news with a skeptical eye ever since the Iraq occupation. I recognize that may set me in the minority
.
No reason why that should put you in the minority, journalistic standards have been declining continuously for decades and have become and more agenda driven. This has been a pattern well before the Iraq occupation.

Apparently Joe Klein picked the wrong week to buy a new hookah.

If they get Joe Klein, we will free him. You have my word.

trifecta55 June 14, 2009 at 12:55 pm: ” .. Extremely high youth turnout would suggest to me that Ahmadinejad would have a tough time winning a majority in Tehran. ..”

Should we assume that there are no young people who support Ahmadinejad and their government in Iran? There are conservative as well and liberal youth in USA. Why do you expect the youth in Iran to conform to your view of what they should be? Are there patriotic youth in Iran? If they feel threatened by foreign forces and internal saboteurs, would a significant proportion of them rally around the leaders and country?

Despite the big fuss made about the youth and their vote in our presidential elections 2008, they were NOT a significant determining factor at the ballot box. BHO’s vote from whites/democrats was comparable to that of Gore in 2000. What made the difference for BHO was the large turnout of the Latino-Americans and African-Americans.

” .. this even tops the landslide LBJ had over Goldwater .. To suggest that Moussavi lost badly, in his own region, with his own ethnic group was just really dumb of them. ..”

To use examples of American elections IN 1964 to discuss elections in Iran ‘today’ makes us wonder about your skills.

So you don’t want us to suggest that Moussavi lost badly everywhere in Iran. Can you give us a good assurance that it is OK to take your word – say, the actual vote tally in the regions?

.

mmchampion Says: ” .. KT, hoping to hear Joe is safe as well. ..”
He is. he must be. Look at it this way: If Joe knew that it is not safe in there, then why did he go in there? Does he really expect us to worry about him and his foolhardiness if any?
[I have an impression that you will be shocked if you read a minute by minute body-pool-type account of Joe's exploits.]

—-
Do you have a Pesky-foreign-reporter problem? Harken to the purveyors of ‘Democracy’ and ‘Free press’! Iranians take note: This is how best to take good care of those reporters ..
http://www.slate.com/id/2100403/

persianadvocate Monday, June 15, 2009 at 1:03 am: ” .. If they get Joe Klein, we will free him. ..”

Why?

If the situation becomes unstable .. or JK somehow imbeds himself in the front of the march of these people bent on creating mayhem ..

Free him? That is, if he doesn’t count as ‘collateral damage’ – a tag that JK uses now and then – quite cavalierly.

—–
Did we maliciously throw a bomb at those Al Jazeera reporters?
—–

A sub-story of this episode is the extraordinary failure of mainstream news coverage to behave as if there were an unbelievably important (and dramatic) story going on in the world.
.
One can understand the Obama Administration’s ambivalence and hesitation, certainly. But it’s odd how the press corps is essentially behaving the same way –as if they need our government to tell them how to cover what’s going on. That’s wild speculation, to be sure, but the appearance of “When will government officials tell us who the bad guys and who the good guys are?” is striking.
.
In the meantime, there is a situation that is reminiscent of Myanmar. Did the US press corps display the same strange hesitation and avoidance during the regime’s press shut down/protester crack down recently in Myanmar? Of course not…which is why this strange lack of attention is so obvious.
.
It reached total absurdity last night when CNN went with “Breaking News” about fears of a riot…due to rowdy Lakers fans. They then cut back to professional imbecile Larry King’s non-interview with Ahmadinejad –#cnnfail, indeed.

It should be noted that the print media and online are doing an admirable job. The network and cable news are pretty much falling down on the job making it very clear that the wrong part of media industry is failing and the million dollar stars are worthless in informing the public. As a matter fact they don’t even think its there job to do so.
.
CNN with its Larry King reruns, HLN with the tabliod reruns and MSNBC seeming to be incapable of figuring out that locked up and prison stories got old after the first one is particular frustrating.
.
What is the point of having a 24 hour news cycle if you are not going to use it effectively and call someone in when something major happens in the world?
.
Beyond that we need an understanding of what’s happening and we are not to get that from Joe Scarborough, Mike Murphy or any other 2 or 8 talking heads who are only capable of seeing the box score aspect of any major story. This is way beyond ridiculous.

Dead threads are so sad. So much going on. So little being said.

[...] Check out commentary and links on this Swampland post.  Also, see this chart from Andrew Sullivan’s blog. Possibly related posts: (automatically [...]

” .. the press corps is essentially behaving the same way –as if they need our government to tell them how to cover what’s going on. ..”

Can it be that what has been referred to as the USA’s ‘ruling elite’ also count the MSM in their portfolio?
If so, then that willfully cautious behavior by the journalists has often been referred to as “self-censorship” – or “a dog does not bite the hand that feeds it”.

BTW, congrats to Rusty for making the front page of Time.com’s politics section with his (albeit typo-laden) “featured comment”.

Rustydog:
.
Congrats on making “featured comment” (for what it’s worth).
.
I think that you should view your selection as impetus for a thorough preview of grammar and spelling, lest you misrepresent your side in the debate.
.
There seems to be a “viewers email us with their opinions”-style of picking out commentary by MSM (at least on cable news) that at worst tends to highlight their vast contempt for the supposedly illiterate volk, and at best advertises the (self-)importance of their role as educated-class mediators between the population and its government.
.
They’re particularly disdainful of the populist right at the moment, Rustydog, so don’t let these supercilious bastards get away with making the Commentariat out to be illiterates and dunces –whatever our political agendas. Believe me, I understand that cable news producers and magazine editors have less than zero respect for ordinary people on the left, too.
.
I’m not telling you this to say anything about your politics or to undercut the statement you made in any way –this is from one fellow Swampland commenter to another.
.
OK, Rustydog?

RE: Rusty’s Front Page mention.

I was hoping is “Obama is the anti-Christ” post would have made the front page.

sqr1, June 15, 2009 at 11:59 am: ” .. congrats to Rusty for making the front page of Time.com’s politics section with his (albeit typo-laden) “featured comment”. ..”

Rusty seems to straddle the ‘real’ world and his faith-based, make-believe world with ease – as if they are one and the same.

Note:
Rusty’s world of angelic choirs: ” .. “Israel most certainly (?) along with the vast majority of Americans (?) believe that a nuclear armed Iran is not only NOT in the best interests of the United States, but also Israel. If you are fool enough to believe this will not come with the full recommendation from most all Jews and Christians from both the United States and Israeli, then you are sadly naive as hell.” ..”

.

The world we live in – the ‘real’ world – the world of the ‘foolish’ and the ‘naive as hell’:
“Most Israelis could live with a nuclear Iran” – Haaretz, June 14, 2009.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1092691.html

Sadly, someone at TIME (and sqr1) takes Rusty’s dim-witted twaddle seriously enough to put it on a pedestal and congratulate him.

Sadly, someone at TIME (and sqr1) takes Rusty’s dim-witted twaddle seriously enough to put it on a pedestal and congratulate him.
.
You attack my honor, sir! I demand a retraction!
.
In all seriousness, if you want to attack Time for legitimizing a deranged commenter who routinely spouts the “Obama-is-the-anti-Christ” wingnut nonsense, be my guest. But don’t shoot the messenger. I just noted it because I assumed it might liven up a dead thread. You might want to dial back the indignation a notch.

Nothing has changed in Iran, nor will it ever. It is a simple case of “more of the same” to repeat Carter 1979. Obama is there to serve his second term for him and Tehran will run circles around him as they did with Carter. Joe Stein lost his head long time ago in any event, so why worry where he is. What a joke?

Cfukara-
Not sure which poll is accurate, if any, but BBC also published a poll yesterday suggesting that over half of Israelis are supportive of a military strike Against Iran.
.
Now, in no way does that acquit Rusty from his nonsensical argument, but I would contend that his statement does bear some truth in relation to Israel. The Israelis, unlike most Americans, Christian or otherwise, are gradually losing the will for peaceful negotiations and more and more willing to follow the right-wing Netanyahu’s goosestepping towards destruction path.
.

Rusty’s comment has been there for around three weeks. Either they really, really like it or else nobody else has said anything worthy of dislodging it. Nah.

Or they are simply ridiculing him by leaving it front and center for all to view….

Or else they are ridiculing us.

neorationalist86 June 15, 2009 at 1:43 pm: ” ..Not sure which poll is accurate, if any, but BBC also published .. “

During the period that the christian crusaders/neo-cons and the MSM were drumming up popular support for our ill-adviced, bloody aggression in Iraq they conducted numerous ‘polls’ – with many of them apparently aimed at determining the talking points and the agenda.
AOL was active in that regard.
A poll framed as “Shall we win in Iraq?” “Yes” or “NO” pre-empted any questions or discussion regarding justification for the adventurism.
Many polls were aimed at finding what the populations’ points of resistance were and what, eh, lies would provide the tipping point for a popular support for the carnage.

.

The language or poll design can determine the outcome of a poll.

.

I looked at the poll you refer to.
Suppose the poll question was framed as follows: Should Israel attack Iran even without the military, diplomatic, media and humanitarian cover from USA or Europe and the rest of the world?
Then what would be the dominant response of those belligerent, flea-bitten, “Feed Me!” settlers in ward named Israel be? the world may never know.

sqr1 June 15, 2009 at 1:32 pm: ” ..You attack my honor, sir! I demand a retraction! .. “

I most humbly and sincerely retract my charge that you would under any circumstance and in any fashion or form, congratulate Rusty, the village idiot.

[...] View From Tehran [...]

Cfukara-
And that is precisely why I generally do not put an ounce of stock in polls; not sure why I pointed out that particular BBC poll, other than it appears that all polls aside, Israelis do seem to have moved further to the right than in any other period I can remember. A top member of the Likud Party has actually called for sanctions against the US! Ha! He asserts that since the Israelis can no longer trust us, they should boycott our military weapons, proliferate our intelligence data to our enemies, and invite some of our nemeses (Russia, China, etc) to play a larger role in Israeli affairs.
.
I say we take him up on his offer…

“sanctions against the US”
I love that! Batsh!t crazy and not afraid to show it. We might not respect it, but we’re sure entertained by it. I say we retaliate by naming Joe Lieberman as ambassador.